[00:00:02]
>> I WILL NOW GO AHEAD AND CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER.
[1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER ]
TODAY IS WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 2025.THE AGENDA SAYS 2024, [INAUDIBLE].
[LAUGHTER] I KNOW IT'S 2025, THOUGH.
WELCOME, EVERYBODY, HAPPY NEW YEAR.
I WILL NOW CALL THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING FOR THE CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF MERIDIAN TO ORDER.
NOW, GO AHEAD AND TAKE OUR ROLES.
WE KNOW WHO'S HERE TONIGHT. MEMBER KOENIG.
NEXT UP IS THE APPROVAL OF TONIGHT'S AGENDA.
[2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA ]
OTHER THAN THE DATE, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ELSE.ALTHOUGH I WILL SAY ON THE PACKET.
>> [LAUGHTER] THE PACKETS, CORRECT. IT'S JUST AT THE TOP OF THE AGENDA, BUT THAT'S OKAY. I DON'T KNOW.
I JUST NOTICED IT NOW BUT I WILL MOVE TO APPROVE TONIGHT'S AGENDA.
>> SUPPORTED BY MEMBER TREZISE.
>> MEMBER KOENIG, THIS IS A VOTE TO APPROVE TONIGHT'S AGENDA?
>> THE CHAIR VOTES YES. TONIGHT'S AGENDA HAS BEEN APPROVED.
NEXT, WE HAVE MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 18, 2024'S MEETING.
[3. CORRECTIONS, APPROVAL AND RATIFICATION OF MINUTES ]
HOPEFULLY, WE WERE ALL THERE.HOPEFULLY, WE ALL GET A CHANCE TO READ OVER IT.
THERE WAS NOTHING I SAW THAT WAS A CONCERN OR NEEDED TO BE ADJUSTED.
I HOPE [INAUDIBLE] CHARACTERIZED CORRECTLY.
>> I MOVE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM THE DECEMBER 18, 2024 MEETING AS PRESENTED.
>> ANY DISCUSSION ON THOSE MINUTES? THIS IS A VOTE TO APPROVE THE MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 18, 2024. MEMBER KOENIG.
>> THE CHAIR OF VOTES YES SO THE MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 18, 2024 HAVE BEEN APPROVED.
NEXT UP IS COMMUNICATIONS, THERE IS NONE LISTED, SO WE'LL GET DIRECTLY INTO UNFINISHED BUSINESS,
[5.A. ZBA CASE NO.: 24-11 (Grand Reserve), Mayberry Homes, 1650 Kendale Blvd. #200, East Lansing, MI 48823 ]
WHICH BRINGS US BACK TO ZBA CASE NUMBER 24-11.GRAND RESERVE. YES. MEMBER KOENIG.
BEFORE WE HAVE KEITH STAFF TALK ABOUT THIS, I REALIZED THAT LAST MEETING WHEN I MADE THE MOTION AND NOTICED IN THE MINUTES, I MADE THE MOTION TO TABLE THIS, AND I BELIEVE.
>> YOU NEED A MOTION TO REMOVE.
>> TECHNICALLY, THAT WAS THE WRONG TERM.
I SHOULDN'T HAVE SAID TABLED, I SHOULD HAVE SAID POSTPONED 'CAUSE I DIDN'T REALIZE IT, BUT THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN ROBERT'S RULES SO IF YOU TABLE SOMETHING, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION TO TAKE IT OFF THE TABLE BEFORE YOU CAN TALK ABOUT.
>>.FANTASTIC. WELL, THEN WOULD SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION?
>> I MOVED TO REMOVE IT FROM THE TABLE FOR DISCUSSION.
>> GREAT. THIS IS A VOTE TO REMOVE ZBA CASE NUMBER 24-11 FROM THE TABLE, TO OPEN IT BACK UP FOR DISCUSSION AT TONIGHT'S MEETING. MEMBER KOENIG.
>> AND THE CHAIR VOTES YES, SO NOW WE CAN OFFICIALLY DISCUSS ZBA CASE NUMBER 24-11. THANK YOU FOR THAT.
>> APPRECIATE THAT. MR. CHAPMAN, IF YOU'D LIKE TO GET US BACK INTO MAYBERRY HOMES CASE HERE.
>> THE APPLICANT PREVIOUSLY HAD REQUESTED A VARIANCE TO CONSTRUCT THAT'S ENCROACH INTO THE WETLAND SETBACK.
THIS WAS TABLED AT THE DECEMBER 18 ZBA MEETING, AND THE APPLICANT IS BACK TO WEIGH IN MORE ON THIS REQUEST.
>> WOULD THE APPLICANT OR THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE LIKE TO COME ON UP? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD, SIR.
>> YES, MA'AM. MY NAME IS JOE SCHROEDER.
MY ADDRESS IS 4116, PRESIDENTS WAY, DEWITT, MICHIGAN.
I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT BEING AT THE MEETING LAST MONTH.
I WAS OUT OF TOWN ON VACATION.
I WAS HOPEFUL THAT IT WOULD GO THROUGH.
AFTER TALKING TO NATE WHO IS HERE REPRESENTING US LAST MONTH, IT SEEMS LIKE THE BIGGEST THING THAT WAS LOOKED AT, IT WAS JUST AN AESTHETICS THING.
DTN IS SUPPOSED TO JOIN ME HERE THIS EVENING, BUT THEY'RE NOT HERE QUITE YET.
BUT THE BIG THINGS I'D LIKE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION IS JUST I TALKED TO MATT DIFF FROM THE INITIAL ENGINEER ON IT.
THIS WHOLE LAND WAS DELINEATED AT ONE POINT IN TIME.
FROM AN UNDERSTANDING WITH HIM, IT WAS AN OVERSIGHT THAT THE DECK SHOULD HAVE BEEN PART OF THAT FEATURE.
BUT WITH THE UNITS 23,24, WHAT IS IT, 51,52,53,54,59,60, THEN OUT OF THE WRENCH IS ITS UNIT 53.
THE BUILDINGS THEMSELVES, WHICH IN MY DEFINITION OF A STRUCTURE, ARE OUTSIDE OF THE WETLAND BUFFER.
[00:05:03]
MOST OF THEM IT'S JUST ONE POST, AND SOME OF IT'S JUST TWO.IF YOU LOOK AT THE ORDINANCE, OR I'D LOOK THROUGH THE ZONING SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS, IF YOU LOOK, BRIDGES, DOCKS, PIERS ARE EXEMPT, ARE PERMITTED WITHIN THE WETLAND BUFFERS, AND ESSENTIALLY, THAT'S WHAT I THINK THIS IS HERE.
I JUST THINK IF YOU GO TO THE AESTHETIC STANDPOINT, IT DOES, I THINK, AFFECT THE RENTAL VALUES FOR DTN, BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE SHIFTING A DECK AND YOU'RE MOVING IT TO THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING, WHICH BECOMES LESS DESIRABLE.
BUT THE BAD THING ABOUT IT, THE REASON I THINK WE'RE PRESERVING ALL THESE WETLANDS IS FOR THE VIEW, SO PEOPLE CAN ENJOY THEM.
NOW WE'VE GOT SOMETHING THAT'S RIGHT THERE THAT ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S OFF TO THE SIDE.
I THINK IT CONTRADICTS THE ORIGINAL INTENT.
THEN IF YOU LOOK AT THE OVERALL DISTURBANCE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A POST AND JUST WHETHER IF IT WAS A BRIDGE, A DOCK, A PIER, THOSE POSTS ARE ALLOWED, IF IT WAS A BIRD FEEDER, IT'D BE ALLOWED.
IT'S JUST I THINK IT IS DENIED BECAUSE IT COMES UNDER THE TERM STRUCTURE.
I THINK THAT'S WHAT IT'S GOING BACK AND FORTH ON.
IF YOU CAN VISUALIZE THESE HOMES.
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LIKE AN ON GRADE DECK A DAY LIGHT OR A WALKOUT.
ALL OF THESE HOMES ARE DAYLIGHT SO THAT MEANS THERE'S ABOUT 4.5' FROM THE DECK DOWN TO THE GRADE.
AS FAR AS VEGETATION AND ANYTHING IN THERE, THAT CAN STILL GROW UNDER THE DECK, THAT CAN STILL BE MAINTAINED.
AS FAR AS CONSTRUCTION OF THESE, WE'D BE WILLING TO HAND DIG THOSE POSTS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DISTURBS AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE.
BUT TO PRESERVE THE OVERALL INTENT OF THE COMMUNITY, THE CONSISTENCY WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AND JUST THE OVERALL I THINK DESIGN THAT WAS INITIALLY APPROVED, I THINK IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO JUST HAVE ALL THE UNITS CONFORM.
>> IF YOU DON'T MIND. JUST FOR SAKE OF THE MEETING JUST CONTINUING, WHY DON'T WE, MR. SCHROEDER?
>> WHY DON'T WE GET INTO OUR BOARD TIME AND IF THAT REPRESENTATIVE IS ABLE TO JOIN US DURING OUR DISCUSSION, WE'LL BRING HIM UP AND GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO DISCUSS.
I WILL HAVE YOU STAY HERE THOUGH DURING OUR BOARD TIME JUST SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A CONVERSATION AS WE GO ON.
IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO TALK ON THIS CASE TONIGHT, THAT'S THE AUDIENCE HERE, AND IF NOT, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GET INTO BOARD TIME.
YOU CAN STAY RIGHT WHERE YOU ARE.
>> THAT WAY JUST MAKES IT EASIER AS WE START ASKING SOME QUESTIONS.
GENTLEMEN, ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY'D LIKE TO BEGIN WITH? EVERYBODY HAD A CHANCE TO TAKE A LOOK.
I'LL JUMP IN AND SAY, FROM WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING, THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY ADJUSTMENTS MADE.
WE'RE JUST GOING BASED ON WHAT WAS PRESENTED BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE WERE WITH TABLING, WAS GIVING DTN MAYBERRY A CHANCE TO GO BACK AND.
>> WE WORK SOMETHING, SO THAT'S WHERE I'M AT.
I WAS HOPING TO SEE A LITTLE BIT OF ADJUSTMENT, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. MEMBER KOENIG, GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THE REASON WHY I HAD REQUESTED FOR A POSTPONEMENT OR TABLE, SAME DIFFERENCE, WHATEVER, FOR THIS MOTION IS BECAUSE THE FIRST GENTLEMAN THAT CAME UP AND SPOKE, HE HAD MENTIONED THAT I BELIEVE THE IDEA WAS TO HAVE ALL OF THE BUILDINGS.
THE INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS THEMSELVES, WHETHER DUPLEX OR THE SINGLE BE AT THE SAME MORE OR LESS HAVE THE FRONT OF THOSE BUILDINGS BEING AN ALIGNMENT SO THAT THE DISTANCE BETWEEN, LET'S SAY, THE ROAD FEATURE IN THE FRONT OF THOSE BUILDINGS WOULD ALL BE AN ALIGNMENT.
BECAUSE THAT WAS A QUESTION THAT I HAD WAS, IF YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THESE, THEY'RE ONLY 5', 6' INTO THE WETLAND.
IF THE DECKS NEED TO BE ON THE BACK INSTEAD OF SHIFTED ON THE SIDE, WAS THERE A WAY TO BASICALLY PULL THAT BUILDING FORWARD? BECAUSE THERE'S SILL ENOUGH ROOM IN THE FRONT?
>> WE'RE CURRENTLY SET AT THE MINIMUM SETBACK, SO THERE'S NO ROOM TO SLIDE THEM FORWARD.
IF THAT WAS THE CASE, WE WOULD HAVE PULLED THE M FORWARD AT THE BEGINNING, BUT PRETTY MUCH ALL THE UNITS THROUGH THERE ARE SET AT THE MINIMUM SETBACK.
>> BECAUSE I SAW A VARIANCE, A COUPLE OF THEM WERE 26 FEET, COUPLE OF 32.
>> THAT'S JUST THE TURN IN THE ROAD AND JUST THE WAY THAT GOES.
BUT WITHIN THESE, CURBS TWISTED AND TRIED TO GET THOSE TO CONFORM AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
I THINK IN TERMS OF 23,24, I THINK WE'RE A FOOT INTO IT AND THAT ONE WAS TWISTING IT AND PULLING IT FORWARD SO 2'.
>> BUT LET ME ASK A QUESTION THEN.
[00:10:03]
I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT.BUT KEITH, CAN YOU TELL ME, JUST TO CONFIRM, WHAT IS THE SETBACK IN THAT AREA?
>> BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT 23, 24.
>> IT'S A CONDO DEVELOPMENT, SO IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT, GOING TO BE MULTIFAMILY.
>> THE FRONT STEP BACK TYPICALLY IS ON THE REGULAR PARCELS FROM THE RIGHT AWAY OR THE ACTUAL PROPERTY LINE.
THIS IS ONE HUGE PROPERTY WITH ALL THESE BUILDINGS BEING INTERNAL.
>> THE PROPERTY LINE IS WAY ON THE OUTSIDE.
>> BUT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THEIR OWN RULES TO FOLLOW HERE, THAT'S THAT'S WHY I'M CURIOUS BECAUSE THAT MAY HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND.
>> I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T MEAN TO SPEAK OUT OF TURN, MS. CHAIR.
>> ABSOLUTELY NOT. I'M WITH YOU.
I THINK THAT'S WHERE I'M AT ALSO WITH WANTING TO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT MORE BECAUSE I KNOW I WAS HOPING WHEN I SAW THIS, LIKE WE'D HAVE SOME A LITTLE, ESPECIALLY THOSE ONES THAT ARE THE 2'.
LIKE CAN WE? FRONT YARD IS SETBACK.
>> IF YOU TAKE UNIT 23, 24, FOR EXAMPLE.
ACCORDING TO THE PICTURE FROM, WELL, IT'S A CURVED PART OF THE ROAD, BUT IF YOU GO STRAIGHT ON TO WHERE THE MEASUREMENT SHOWING, IT'S 32.6'.
RIGHT NOW, THAT IS SITTING 2.58', I BELIEVE, IS WHAT THE AMOUNT OF THE VARIANCE IS 2.58, WOULD THEY BE REQUESTING FOR UNIT 23.
IF YOU MOVE THAT 2.58, LET'S SAY, GRANTED, YOU DON'T REALLY KNOW WHERE THE BUFFER IS FOR THE WETLAND.
IT'S NOT LIKE ANYTHING OUT THERE IS SHOWN, BUT THAT'S THE BEST GUESS BASED ON WHEN IT WAS IDENTIFIED.
EVEN IF YOU MOVE AT 2.5' OR 2.58', YOU'RE STILL WITHIN 30 FEET FROM THE FRONT OF THAT ROAD. THAT WAS MY [INAUDIBLE].
I KNOW THE GENTLEMAN WHO WAS THERE LAST TIME, HE COULDN'T REALLY ANSWER THAT QUESTION SO THAT I WANTED TO BE FAIR TO THE APPLICANT THEMSELVES AND LET THEM TAKE THAT INFORMATION BACK.
HE WAS GOING TO TAKE THAT INFORMATION BACK.
THAT'S THE REASON WHY FOR THE POSTPONEMENT OF IT TODAY.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT HE HAD MENTIONED OR ARE YOU GUYS ENTIRELY HAD NOT MENTIONED?
>> HE HAD NOT MENTIONED THAT, BUT MY CONVERSATION WITH KEBS IS THEY ARE SET AT THE MINIMUMS. BUT I'M LOOKING AT THE PLOT PLANS RIGHT NOW, JUST ON MY PHONE, AND THEY DO NOT HAVE THE DOTTED LINES THAT I'M TYPICALLY USED TO SEEING FOR MINIMUMS. I DON'T KNOW.
>> I'M LOOKING AT IN OUR PACKET, AND I'M SEEING ON UNITS 23 AND 24, WHAT I'M SEEING IS A 32.6 SETBACK AND THEN ON 49 AND 50 FROM THE CORNER OF THE UNIT TO THE CURVE IN THE ROAD, 29.8.
AGAIN, THAT GIVES A GOOD 4' OF SPACE.
AGAIN, UNITS 51 AND 52, I'M SEEING 32.
I GUESS THE DIFFICULT PART IS, IT BEING A DEVELOPMENT AND THIS IS MAYBE MORE A QUESTION FOR KEITH.
DID THEY HAVE ENOUGH ROOM THERE IN A DEVELOPMENT? HOW STRICT IS THAT SETBACK? I THINK I GUESS IT'S GOT TO BE UNIVERSALLY APPLIED, CORRECT?
>> YEAH, IT'S FOR ALL THE UNITS.
>> FOR ALL THE UNITS, AND IT'S 25 FEET, IS WHAT WE'VE GATHERED.
>> THE QUESTION IS, WHERE IS THAT MEASURED FROM?
>> WHERE'S IS THE 25 FEET MEASURED FROM?
>> I THINK THAT'S A SIDE SETBACK, ISN'T IT?
>> THAT'S DISTANCE BETWEEN BUILDINGS SO THAT SIDE.
BUT FRONT YARD, MINIMUM FRONT YARD SETBACK.
NO LESS THAN 25 FEET, THAT'S THE COVERAGE OF THE LOT.
>> DO YOU MIND IF I CALL MY SURVEY COMPANY?
PLEASE. IS THIS YOUR FRIEND FROM DTN?
>> HOW ARE YOU DOING? [LAUGHTER]
>> I REMEMBER YOU FROM DOT HILL, RIGHT?
>> IF YOU'D LIKE COME ON UP TO THE PODIUM PLEASE.
[00:15:03]
>> WE GOT STARTED WITH MR. SCHROEDER, BUT WE WERE GOING TO WAIT FOR YOU TO JOIN US.
>> I APOLOGIZE IF ABOUT BEING A COUPLE OF MINUTES LATER.
>> NOT AT ALL. IF YOU COULD JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD AND WE CAN BRING YOU INTO THE CONVERSATION.
>> OF COURSE. MY NAME IS RAJI UPPAL WITH DTN MANAGEMENT COMPANY AND THE OWNER OF [INAUDIBLE] GRAND RESERVE, AT LEAST THE MANAGER OF THE PROJECT.
>> I LIVE IN KALAMAZOO, MICHIGAN, NOW.
I USED TO LIVE HERE FOR ALL MY LIFE, BUT NOW I'M DOWN IN GAL LAKE, SO I'M DOWN THERE IN GAL LAKE.
>> WILL YOU JUST SPELL YOUR NAME FOR ME, SIR?
>> U-P-P-A-L. THE FIRST NAME, IF WE'RE GOING TO GO LEGAL IS RONALD, BUT I GO BY RAJI, R-A-J-I.
MR. APPLE, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND DISCUSSING OR TALKING TO US BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO TALK TO YOU LAST TIME ON THIS CASE.
DO YOU WANT TO GIVE US ANY BACKGROUND INFORMATION?
>> YES. LET ME SEE IF I CAN HELP A LITTLE BIT.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS PROJECT IN THE TOWNSHIP HERE FOR IT FEELS LIKE A REALLY LONG TIME.
I CAN'T EVEN TELL YOU THE EXACT DATE THAT WE STARTED THIS, AND I SHOULD KNOW THAT THE CUFF, BUT I WOULD TELL YOU WE'RE PUSHING SIX OR EIGHT OR 10 YEARS OF US WORKING ON THIS PROJECT WITH YOU GUYS.
IN THAT PROCESS, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENED IS THE CODE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT WAS ADOPTED FOR MULTIFAMILY TO ENCOURAGE THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT.
DURING THE PROCESS OF A BUILDING IT ALSO, THE INGHAM COUNTY DRAIN COMMISSIONER DEFINED SOME NEW RULES IN INGHAM COUNTY THAT HAD TO DO WITH RETAINAGE OF WATER, NOT LEAVING OTHER SIDE LOTS.
I'M SURE YOU'VE PROBABLY HEARD SOME OF THESE TOPICS BECAUSE IT'S IMPACT DEVELOPMENT.
WE'VE BEEN JUST TRYING TO JUGGLE A LITTLE BIT.
THIS PARTICULAR WETLAND THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, NOT THAT IT'S RELEVANT, BECAUSE WE DEMARKED IT AS A WET LAND AND OR CALLING A WET LAND, WE'RE NOT ARGUING WITH IT.
BUT WHAT HAPPENED WAS BACK IN THE DAY, AND PEOPLE TELL ME NOT TO SAY IT BECAUSE THAT MEANS SOMEONE MADE A MISTAKE IN THE PAST, BUT THAT'S NOT MY POINT OF IT.
I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE YOU THE HISTORY OF IT, SO IT'S NOT POINTING FINGERS AT ANYONE.
IF ANYONE TAKES IT THAT WAY, I APOLOGIZE.
ROGER DROBNEY, FROM HDI HOMES WHO BUILT A LOT OF HOMES IN THIS AREA, OWNED THE LAND WITH MARTHA MERTZ, AND THEY'VE OWNED THAT LAND, AND THEY HELPED BUILD A LOT OF THAT STUFF THAT'S GOING ON DOWN THERE, AND ORIGINALLY, WHEN THESE ROADS WERE PUT IN, THERE WAS SOME CONDITIONAL THINGS THAT THEY PUT THIS ROAD IN, THEY GET CERTAIN ZONING, AND THEN THERE WAS IT'S A LONG HISTORY OF 30 SOMETHING YEARS OF THIS THING.
BUT THE LONG AND THE SHORT OF IT IS THAT HE SOLD OFF THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, WHICH IS AN ASSISTED LIVING HOME THAT'S ADJACENT TO IT.
WHEN THEY DID THAT, THEY BLOCKED WATER WITHOUT REALIZING THEY WERE BLOCKING WATER.
IF YOU LOOKED AT A SURVEY THAT HAD ON THIS LAND PRIOR TO THAT BLOCKAGE, THE WETLANDS WERE VERY DIFFERENT THAN THEY WERE BY THE TIME WE FOUND IT AND TRIED TO DEVELOP IT.
WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO MAKE, I CALL IT LEMONADE.
WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE LEMONADE OUT OF LEMONS AND MAKE IT WORK FOR THE COMMUNITY AND DID WHAT WE DID.
ORIGINALLY, WE HAD 300 HOMES AND 300 APARTMENT HOMES PLANTING THIS THING.
THROUGH THIS PROCESS, BECAUSE IT TOOK SO LONG, THERE WAS ALSO ADDITIONAL ISSUES THAT CAUSED CONSTRAINTS ABOUT RETAINAGE OF WATER.
WE'VE BEEN JUST TRYING TO JUGGLE AND MATCH AND DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO DELIVER THIS PRODUCT, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION.
I'M GOING TO TELL YOU IN THE LAST 120 DAYS OR SO THAT SOME OF THESE BALCONIES AND STUFF WERE SITTING IN THE EASEMENT OR IN THE WETLAND BUFFER AREA, AND THAT WE NEED TO COME BACK AND ASK FOR FOR A VARIANCE.
I JUST WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU, WE'VE BEEN DONE EVERYTHING WE CAN TO DO THIS, BUT THIS SITE IS REALLY TIGHT.
WHEN YOU START ASKING, IS THERE 26 FEET THERE IS OR THIS OR THAT? WE'VE BEEN JUGGLING IT SO TIGHT TO TRY AND MAKE THIS TOTALLY WORK.
I COULDN'T ANSWER EVERY SURVEY QUESTION FOR YOU BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE OUT OF MY LEAGUE OR IT'S MORE THAN I KNOW, BUT I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING THE DANCE TO MAKE THIS WORK FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
AND I HAD NO IDEA THAT THERE WOULD BE AN ISSUE WITH THE DECK IN THE SURVEY AREA, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY'RE SAYING, HEY, WE GOT TO MOVE IT.
WHY I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT I'M TRYING TO JUST PROVIDE NICE HOMES FOR PEOPLE.
WHEN I THINK OF A BUFFER AREA, I THINK IT'S AN AREA THAT YOU WANT TO GO LOOK THROUGH AND SEE THROUGH.
SOME OF THE ANSWERS WERE, HEY, MOVE IT ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE, AND THE CONCERN AND THE HARDSHIP THAT WE HAVE WITH THAT IS THE FLOW OF THE HOME WON'T WORK THE WAY IT WOULD.
IT WON'T BE AS A MARKETABLE HOME.
IT'LL BE HARDER FOR US TO RENT IT.
I'M GOING TO HAVE SOME ONE OFFS THAT I PREFER NOT TO.
I'D PREFER TO KEEP THEM THE SAME, AT LEAST AS SIMILAR AS I CAN, THROUGHOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT.
ALL WE'RE REALLY ASKING FOR, AND IF YOU LOOK AT OTHER THINGS, AND AGAIN, I'M TALKING OVER MY SIDE.
IF I'M NOT TRYING TO OFFEND ANYONE, SO IF I'M SAYING SOMETHING WRONG, I APOLOGIZE.
BUT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, I'VE SEEN OTHER THINGS DONE WHERE YOU COULD PUT DECKS AND WALKS AND THINGS IN THESE WET LANDS BECAUSE WE'VE DONE IT, AND THEY'VE ASKED US TO DO THIS THING.
ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS PUT THESE DECKS IN THESE WETLAND BUFFER AREAS, WHICH IS UNIQUE TO MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP BECAUSE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP AND ONE OTHER TOWNSHIP IN THE WHOLE STATE HAS THESE EXTRA WETLAND RULES, AND WE WE'RE TRYING TO COMPLY TO BE FRANK WITH YOU.
[00:20:02]
COULD I DISCONNECT THE DECK, AND THEREFORE, IT'S NOT PART OF THE STRUCTURE, AND THEN THEREFORE, WE'RE GOOD.WAS A THOUGHT, BUT HE SAID, HEY, LISTEN, THAT'S NOT GOOD FOR THE HOUSE.
YOU'RE NOT PUTTING ANYTHING MORE IN THAN TWO POSTS IN THE DARN THING.
WE'RE TRYING TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION TO TRY AND MAKE THIS WORK SO THAT I CAN FINISH UP THIS DEVELOPMENT.
WE'RE COMMITTED TO MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.
WE BUILT 100 HOMES OR 100 APARTMENT HOMES UP OFF OF NEWTON.
I'M TRYING TO BUILD ANOTHER 130 OF THOSE HOMES UP THERE.
I'M TRYING TO BUILD THIS, AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO IT IN A TOUGH ENVIRONMENT WHERE INFLATION IS DIFFICULT, INTEREST RATES ARE DIFFICULT, AND I'M TRYING TO BUILD AS AFFORDABLE PLACE AS I POSSIBLY CAN FOR THE PEOPLE.
NOW, THESE ARE NOT CHEAP HOMES BECAUSE IF YOU WENT TO BUY THEM TODAY, THEY'D BE NORTH OF A HALF $1,000,000 TO BUY THE SAME TYPE OF THING THAT WE'RE RENTING.
BUT WITH THAT SAID, I'M TRYING TO MAKE A VALUE TO IT.
I'M TRYING TO MAKE IT NICE, AND I'M TRYING TO MAKE IT SUCH THAT THERE'S THIS SET OF PEOPLE THAT CAN'T AFFORD THE DOWN PAYMENT OR MAYBE AREN'T READY FOR THE DOWN PAYMENT YET OR AREN'T READY TO COMMIT TO THIS COMMUNITY FOR THE FIVE YEARS YOU MIGHT HAVE TO OWN A HOME, BUT HAVE EXACTLY THE SAME NEEDS, WORK AT THE FRIB, WORK AT OTHER PLACES AROUND HERE, WORK AT GM, WORK AT THE CAPITOL, AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE THAT AND MAKE THIS A BETTER PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE AND WORK AND ENJOY LIFE.
WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS TO JUST PLEASE LET US PUT OUR DECKS IN THIS BUFFER AREA, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS IMPACTING ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAN A DECK OR A WALKWAY THAT WE'VE DONE ON THESE THINGS IN THE PAST.
AGAIN, EVEN AS I GO DOWN, I WAS JUST DRIVING DOWN OAK ROAD TO GET HERE, AND I'M LOOKING AT THE BRIDGE, GOING THROUGH THERE.
THAT'S GOOD FOR THE PUBLIC USE THAT'S THROUGH MAYBE EVEN A WETLAND DIRECTLY.
ALL I'M TRYING TO SAY IS IF THERE'S ANY WAY WE COULD MAKE THAT WORK, WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE THIS BETTER.
COULD WE LIVE WITH THIS? WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT? BUT THE TRUTH IS IT'S NOT AS NICE A HOME, IT'S NOT AS NICE A VIEW, IT'S BLOCKING THE BUFFER MORE.
THERE'S LOTS OF REASONS THAT I COULD SAY THAT THIS ISN'T A GOOD THING, AND WE ARE JUST TRYING TO BALANCE WITH A LOT OF RULES THAT CHANGED WHILE THIS DEVELOPMENT WAS GETTING APPROVED, SPECIFICALLY, THE WETLAND STUFF.
WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE AND HONOR WHAT MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP AND PROTECT THESE WETLANDS.
THAT HAS BEEN THE INTENT OF THIS, AND THAT'S WHY WE WENT FROM A MUCH HIGHER DENSITY PLACE TO DUPLEXES AND HOMES, AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE'RE BUILDING.
I THINK THAT HELPS TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.
>> IT DOES CERTAINLY GIVE US SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION THAT WE WERE [LAUGHTER] LAST TIME.
IF YOU GUYS JUST WANT TO STICK CLOSE, I'M GOING TO GET BACK INTO OUR BOARD TIMES.
I'M GOING TO REOPEN BOARD TIME AND OPEN THE FLOOR UP TO OUR BOARD MEMBERS HERE. MEMBER TREZISE GO AHEAD.
>> ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE HAD AT THE LAST MEETING WAS THE FACT THAT YOU HAD A SITE PLAN APPROVED WHICH INCLUDED PUTTING THESE DECKS ON THE SIDE OF BUILDINGS, THESE PARTICULAR DECKS TO AVOID THE WETLAND BUFFER.
NOW YOU'RE COMING BACK AFTER THAT SITE PLAN WAS APPROVED THAT YOU PROPOSED AND ASKING US TO WAIVE SOME OF THE RULES AND ORDINANCES AS FAR AS THE WETLAND BUFFER.
THAT PUTS US IN A STRANGE POSITION TO TRY TO FIT WITH THE DETERMINATIONS THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE.
>> YOU'RE NOT WRONG. THE HONEST ANSWER IS, I'VE LOOKED AT THESE THINGS, AND WE DID SUBMIT HIM, AND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
WE SUBMITTED HIM, AND THE ENGINEER SHIFTED HIM ASIDE, AND IF I'M HONEST WITH YOU, I DIDN'T SEE IT.
WHAT HAPPENED IS, ALL OF A SUDDEN THEY'RE SAYING, YOU'RE PUTTING DECKS ON THE SIDE OF BILL AND I SAID, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED, AND IT IS ALL ON ME. WE DID SUBMIT.
I MADE A MISTAKE, OKAY, OR ELSE I WOULD HAVE FIXED IT THEN.
IT WASN'T TO HIDE ANYTHING. IT WAS THAT I DIDN'T CATCH IT.
PART OF THE REASON I DIDN'T CATCH IT IS WHY I'M SAYING THAT HISTORY IS THAT WE WERE TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE SO MANY THINGS, LIKE RETAINING THE WATER ON PROPERTY AND THINGS ALONG THOSE LINES, AS JUST AN EXAMPLE, THAT IT WAS SHIFTING ENOUGH THAT I JUST LIKE, ARE WE GOOD? THEY SAID, YEAH, YOU'RE GOOD, BUT THEY DIDN'T TELL ME, LOOK AT THIS DRAWING, AND IF THEY HAD, AND I WAS A BETTER ENGINEER THAN A DEVELOPER OR AN OWNER OF A COMPANY, I'D HAVE CAUGHT THIS.
I MESSED UP AND DIDN'T SEE IT.
I CAME BACK TO HIM, AND HE WAS THE ONE BASICALLY, JOE CAME TO ME AND SAID, LISTEN-.
>> JOE CAME [LAUGHTER] BACK TO ME AND SAID, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THIS.
I DIDN'T KNOW YOU KNOW, WHY WOULD YOU EVER PUT IT ON THE SIDE? THIS ISN'T GOING TO WORK WITH THE HOUSE.
WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A PLAN DRAWN FOR THIS.
TO LITERALLY DRAW A PLAN, I'M GOING TO BE MOVING KITCHENS, I'M GOING TO BE FIGURING THIS OUT, AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BE AS NICE A PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO LIVE.
I ALSO THINK, TO SOME DEGREE, IF I PUT THE DECKS ON THE SIDE, IT'S BLOCKING THE VIEW OF THE WETLAND.
IF THE INTENT OF THE BUFFER IS TO LET PEOPLE SEE IT.
TO SOME DEGREE, PUTTING IT BEHIND IT IS MORE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.
AGAIN, NOT DEFINING THE RULES OR PRETENDING I KNOW THE RULES.
I'M TALKING MORE AT A CITIZEN OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP TRYING TO DO THE BEST WE CAN.
>> DOES THAT HELP ANSWER A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSE A LITTLE BIT?
[00:25:04]
>> IT EXPLAINS THE BACKGROUND.
IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE SITUATION PARTICULARLY.
>> YES. MEMBER BROOKS, GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. IN THE PHOTOS THAT YOU SHARED IN OUR DECEMBER 18TH MEETING IN THIS MEETING, YOU'RE ASKING FOR VARIANCES ON CAN I USE THE WRONG WORD? NO. VARIANCES FOR THESE SPECIFIC DECKS.
BUT THERE'S OTHER DECKS THAT ARE IN THESE PHOTOS THAT ARE ALSO ON THE SIDE OF THE HOUSE AS IT LOOKS LIKE.
NO. I'M ASKING FOR EVERYONE'S ON THE SIDE TO PUT IT JUST BEHIND THE HOUSE.
WE DETACH IT AND MAKE IT A STANDALONE, NOT A STRUCTURE PART OF THE HOUSE.
YOU COULD PROBABLY FIGURE OUT A WAY TO DO THAT, TOO, IF THAT HELPED.
BUT IT'S PROBABLY NOT AS STRUCTURE SOUNDS.
YES, THERE IS SOME DECKS THAT ARE ON THIS SITE PLAN THAT ARE ON THE SIDE.
>> I'M SAYING I DIDN'T REALIZE. THE ONLY REASON THEY'RE ON THE SIDE IS BECAUSE BECAUSE THEY MOVED HIM TO THE SIDE BECAUSE THEY WERE ON THE BUFFER, AND NO ONE TOLD ME WHAT HAPPENED [OVERLAPPING].
>> SO 151 RIGHT NEXT TO 51 AND 52.
>> THAT'S 49 AND 50 ARE BOTH THEY'RE ASKING FOR VARIANCES FOR 49, 50 ON THE BACK.
HE'S LOOKING AT 49, 50, AND THEN 51 AND 52.
AND 51 AND 50 ON THE ORIGINAL SITE PLAN HAVE THEM ON THE SIDES.
BUT THOSE ARE ONES THEY'RE ALL ASKING FOR THEM TO BE-.
>> WE JUST WANT TO MOVE THEM BACK SO THAT I CAN BUILD THE FLOW SO THAT IT WORKS THE SAME THROUGH ALL THE HOUSES.
OTHERWISE, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO RE ORCHESTRATE A KITCHEN.
I DON'T THINK THE UNITS ARE GOING TO BE AS NICE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE IT AS NICE AS I CAN FOR THESE PEOPLE TO LIVE IN THERE AND NOT COMPROMISE THE WETLAND BECAUSE IT IS IN THE BUFFER AREA, SO I'M NOT TRYING TO COMPROMISE OR WE'RE NOT TRYING TO COMPROMISE THE WETLAND.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE THIS A NICE, LIVABLE PLACE FOR SOMEONE WHEN THEY COME TO LIVE IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.
>> WELL, SO WHAT I WAS SAYING THOUGH IS THAT 49 AND 50 ON THE SITE PLAN.
>> AND 49 IS NOT LISTED AS ONE YOU WANT TO CHANGE.
>> WELL 49 AND 50 AREN'T LISTED IN THE ACTUAL DOCUMENT.
>> IT SHOULD BE 50 IS LISTED, 49 IS NOT.
>> IN THE VARIANCE APPLICATION SUPPLEMENT, SUCH YOU'RE DISCUSSING?
>> THAT IS AN ERROR ON OUR PART.
>> I THINK 49 FEETS AND 50 DOES NOT.
>> I THINK NOW YOU CAN SEE THE POST. THEY PULLED IT OFF.
>> I'M BACK TO THE QUESTION, AND I ABSOLUTELY UNDERSTAND THAT NEITHER OF YOU ARE THE KEBS SURVEYORS OR ENGINEERS.
BUT WHEN I'M LOOKING AT THIS, AND WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT WHEN MR. CHAPMAN WAS ABLE TO PULL UP THE CODE, IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS 32.6 FEET IN FRONT OF THE HOUSE.
AGAIN, I'M ALSO NOT AN ENGINEER [LAUGHTER].
BUT IN LOOKING AT THESE DRAWINGS AND THINKING, IF WE TUCK THAT IN TWO FEET, WE BRING THE WHOLE THING AND WE KEEP THE AESTHETICS, WE KEEP OUT OF THE BUFFER, WE KEEP THE SAME, YOU DON'T HAVE A UNIFORM DRIVEWAY LENGTH.
IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE GIVING EVERY DRIVEWAY IN THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT, THE EXACT SAME LENGTH.
BECAUSE LIKE YOU SAID, IF 49 IS FINE AND 50 ISN'T, YOU BRING IT IN TWO FEET.
>> I'M GOING TO LET HIM ANSWER.
I'M WHERE THE FOUNDATION SIT, SO I'M TALKING OUT OF TRUTH.
>> THAT'S THE THING. IS THAT WHERE WE'RE AT WITH CONSTRUCTION?
>> A LOT OF IT JUST HAS TO DO WITH THE ENGINEERING.
I CALLED KEBS A SECOND AGO, AND SHE SAID THAT DIFFERENT ENGINEERING DID THESE AND THAT THE SETBACK IS WHAT WAS APPROVED BY THE TOWNSHIP.
I GUESS WE COULD PROPOSE ANOTHER VARIANCE TO ASK TO MOVE THE SETBACKS ON THOSE BUILDINGS BECAUSE SHE SAID THE BUILDINGS WERE APPROVED AT THE SPECIFIC LOCATION THEY'RE AT.
>> THAT'S THE CYCLE. KEITH'S GOING TO TELL ME.
>> KEITH TO MR. CHAPMAN [LAUGHTER].
>> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT I DON'T SEE THE NUMBERS LISTED ON HERE, BUT THE WAY OUR ORDINANCE READS, THEY HAVE 25 FEET FOR A FRONT YARD SETBACK, SO THAT WOULD BE THE FRONT FACE OF THE HOUSE TO THE STREET.
[00:30:01]
>> IS IT THE BACK SIDE OF THE CITY WALK OR THE STREET?
>> THE STREET. BECAUSE TECHNICALLY, THERE'S NO PARCEL. IT'S ALL ONE PARCEL.
>> THE WAY THE ORDINANCE READS, IT HAS TO BE FROM THE STREET. IT'S ONLY 25 FEET.
>> IT NEEDS TO BE. THAT'S THE CLOSEST POINT OF THE FRONT OF THE STRUCTURE TO STREET.
THAT'S WHY SOME OF THEM, YOU SEE THE MEASUREMENT FROM THE ANGLE THAT'S THE CLOSEST POINT.
>> BUT AGAIN, THEY STILL ROOM SPEAKS.
>> MY QUESTION FOR YOU, THEN, KEITH IS, NOW, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING FOR.
BUT WILL EACH INDIVIDUAL UNIT REQUIRE, FOR INSTANCE, 23 AND 24, WILL THEY REQUIRE A BUILDING PERMIT TO HAVE THOSE BUILT?
>> WHEN THEY SUBMIT A BUILDING PERMIT, DO YOU HAVE STAFF THAT GOES OUT AND DOES, LIKE A ZONING, WHAT DO YOU WANT TO CALL IT?
>> SURVEY BUT LIKE AN INSPECTION?
>> YES, OUR BUILDING INSPECTION.
>> DUPLEX WE'LL GO OUT AND HAVE SOMEBODY INSPECT IT?
>> IF SOMEBODY GOES OUT AND INSPECTS THAT UNIT AND THEY NOTICED THAT THE WAY IT WAS BUILT WAS NOT MATCHING THE SITE PLAN, WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE FOR THAT THEN? WHAT HAPPENS?
>> WE WOULD CONTACT THE DEVELOPER, WHOEVER SUBMITTED THE PERMIT, TELL THEM THAT WE THINK SOMETHING'S WRONG AND THAT LIKELY A SURVEY WOULD NEED TO BE DONE TO BASICALLY DETERMINE THAT SETBACK OR WHATEVER THE ISSUE WAS TO BE RECTIFIED.
>> CAN THE DEVELOPER COME IN AND AMEND THAT SITE PLAN?
>> BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT'S A BINDING APPROVED SITE PLAN THROUGH THE PLANNING BOARD OR I'M NOT SURE HOW, WHO REVIEWS.
>> IF THEY WERE TO MAKE CHANGES TO THIS-
>> TO THE ACTUAL FULL SITE PLAN, CAN THEY AMEND THAT FULL SITE PLAN?.
>> YES. THEY COULD DO IT LIKELY BE A MINOR AMENDMENT.
>> THAT'S JUST AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS.
>> YES. LET'S WE LOOK AT THAT IN HOUSE, BASICALLY.
>> WE HAVE A POINT ON THAT, THE SURVEYOR JUST SENT ME A TEXT THAT ON 49 AND 50, AND 51 AND 52, IF YOU MOVE THOSE FORWARD, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO PARK A CAR IN THE DRIVEWAY WITHOUT BLOCKING THE CITY WALK.
>> THE REASON WE PUT THEM WHERE THEY WERE, AND I THOUGHT THAT AS HE SAID IT BUT I SAD WITHOUT KNOWING.
THE REASON WE'RE DOING IT IS WE'RE ALLOWING PEOPLE TO PARK TWO CARS BEHIND THE GARAGE.
IF YOU HAVE A GUEST, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PARK ON THE ROAD, YOU CAN PARK SOMEONE BEHIND YOU. YOU HAVE A KID.
>> TWO CARS DEEP BEFORE YOU HIT THE WALK, BASICALLY.
>> NOT TWO DEEP, BUT ONE CAR DEEP SO IT GOES GARAGE, ONE CAR WALK.
>> ONE CAR ON THE DRIVE WALKWAY.
BECAUSE THAT'S IMPORTANT INFORMATION.
I APPRECIATE THAT FROM [INAUDIBLE] BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THAT QUITE VISUALLY ON SURVEY OR ON [INAUDIBLE]. MEMBER BROOKS.
>> BUT IF THE 25 FOOT SETBACK IS FROM THE HOUSE, SO THAT INCLUDES THE GARAGE, RIGHT, KEITH?
>> IT'S 25 FEET FROM THERE TO THE STREET SO THEN HOW WIDE IS THE SIDEWALK, FOUR FEET?
>> FIVE FEET PLUS SOME BUFFER LITTLE SO 10-12 FEET THAT'S WHY THEY'RE GETTING CLOSE TO 25 AND A CAR'S 22 PICK YOUR NUMBER.
DEPENDS IF YOU GOT MY WIFE'S EXHIBITION, MAX, OR IF YOU GOT SMALLER AUTO.
>> HOW LONG IS CAR ON AVERAGE?
>> TO BACK OFF FROM THE GARAGE.
>> WHEN YOU DO A GARAGE, WE ALWAYS SAY 20-22 FEET FOR A GARAGE INSIDE.
I TRY AND GIVE AN EXTRA FEET TO PUT THEIR TRASH CAN.
I THINK 22 FEET WHEN I THINK OF A GARAGE, SO I'M ASSUMING THE CAR IS 20.
>> ON THE GENEROUS SIDE, A TWO FOOT BUFFER, A FIVE FOOT WALK, THAT SEVEN FOOT.
>> THEN THERE'S A LITTLE ROOM BETWEEN THE WALK AND THE ROAD.
A GRASS, IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE IF I LOOK AT THAT DRAWING.
>> THAT'S HELPFUL TO ME, ANYWAY, AS FAR AS SPACE PULLING THOSE.
>> IN ALL HONESTY, I DON'T WANT TO BE IN FRONT OF YOUR TIME AND TAKE UP YOUR TIME TO DO THIS, AND I'M SORRY THAT WE MISSED THIS STUFF WE DID NOT MEAN TO.
I'M DOING THE BEST I CAN AND MAYBE I'M MANAGING TOO MANY PROJECTS. I'LL TAKE IT.
BUT THE TRUTH IS, I'M DOING THE BEST I CAN, AND I THOUGHT WE WERE ALL GOOD AND IT WAS A SURPRISE.
IT WAS REALLY BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION WHEN WE STARTED BUILDING.
HE SAYS, WHY IN THE WORLD DO HAVE THESE ON THE SIDE? I SAID, I DON'T HAVE THEM ON THE SIDE, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? THAT'S HOW THIS STARTED.
>> MR. SCHROEDER WAS LOOKING AT THE SIGHT.
>> HE'S DOING HIS JOB LIKE HE SHOULD BE, AND I MISSED IT.
>> ONE LAST QUESTION, MADAM CHAIR.
>> DID YOU GUYS HAVE ANY ON STREET PARKING? DID YOU INCLUDE ANY ON STREET PARKING?
>> WELL, THERE IS A WAY TO PARK, I THINK ON THE STREET, IF YOU WANT TO, BUT WE WERE TRYING, THERE WAS A LOT OF REQUESTS,
[00:35:02]
ONLY HAVE IT ON ONE SIDE.THERE WAS A LOT OF REQUESTS THAT WE TRIED TO ACCOMMODATE AND ONE OF THE REQUESTS, IF I REMEMBER RIGHT NOW, REALIZE, AGAIN, THESE ARE YEARS OLD, SO I COULD BE SCREWING THIS UP A LITTLE BIT AND GETTING A FEW CONFUSED.
BUT IF I REMEMBER RIGHT, THEY DIDN'T WANT US TO PARK ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET AND ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET, SO YOU COULD GET A FIRE TRUCK THROUGH.
WE'RE JUST TRYING TO SPACE CLEAR SO THAT IF YOU HAVE AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE, GOD FORBID, WE HAVE AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE COME THROUGH, THAT THEY HAVE THE ACCESS AND THE CAPABILITY TO DO IT.
THAT'S ALL. WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP THE PEOPLE PARKING ON THEIR.
AM I TELLING YOU WHEN THEY HAVE THEIR GATHERING AT CHRISTMAS THAT SOMEONE'S NOT GOING TO PARK ON THE ROAD, THEY PROBABLY WILL, AND WE MIGHT HAVE TO SIGN IT AND DO WHATEVER WE GOT TO DO.
BUT THE INTENT WAS TO TRY AND KEEP THAT FREE.
>> IF THERE'S THE PARKING SPOTS, THEY BLOCK.
>> WE ADDED SOME WHEREVER WE COULD.
>> PROBABLY VISITOR PARKING BE MY GUESS. IT'S PRETTY COMMON.
>> WE ARE ALREADY PUTTING WALKWAYS THROUGH THERE SO WE ARE PUTTING WALKS THROUGH THIS WE ARE BEING ASKED TO.
WE'RE TRYING TO BE CAUTIOUS WITH IT, IT'S NOT PERVIOUS AS AN EXAMPLE, THAT STUFF.
BUT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, AND IF YOU SAID TO ME, HEY, DIFFERENT TYPE OF SOME MATTER OR ANYTHING, WE'RE ACCOMMODATING, WE'RE JUST SAYING, I GOT TO PUT TWO POST HOLES IN THIS THING.
>> ONE, I LIKE HIS ANSWER BETTER, BUT I'M GOING TO GO WITH TWO BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT.
AS A DUMMY, I UNDERSTAND THAT AND AS A SMART GUY OVER HERE, HE'D PROBABLY TELL YOU ONE WILL DO IT, BUT ONE AT EACH CORNER, TIE IT TO THE BUILDING.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, AND WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP THESE FLOOR PLANS THE SAME.
THIS WAS A HARD PROJECT. THAT'S ALL I'LL SAY.
>> I WILL SAY, ESPECIALLY SEEING THIS, AND NOW I CAN SEE, ESPECIALLY ON SOME OF THESE SITE PLANS, WHERE SIDEWALK IS.
I DO UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION OF HAVING THE SITE PLANS ALREADY HAVE BEEN APPROVED, THAT THAT'S A PROBLEM.
THAT WOULD BE MY FIRST AND FOREMOST, FROM OUR BOARD TO YOU AND WE HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER A LOT.
HERE'S THE THING, THESE THINGS ARE ALWAYS BETTER IF WE CAN DO THEM BEFORE WE GET TO THIS.
>> YOU THAT, DON'T WANT TO BE HERE.
>> I DON'T WANT TO BE HERE AND I DON'T WANT TO WASTE YOUR TIME TO BE HONEST, I SCREWED UP.
>> I WILL CHALK IT UP TO AN HONEST TO GOD A MISTAKE, BUT IT'S A MISTAKE THAT I THINK WHAT MEMBER TRUSS WAS POINTING OUT IS SOMETHING THAT IF IT BECOMES A HABIT IS WHERE THE TOWNSHIP IS REALLY GOING TO GET IN TROUBLE.
WE CAN REALLY FIND OURSELVES BEING IN POSITIONS WHERE, WELL DTN GETS TO GET LOOSE WITH SLIGHT PLANS.
OH, WE JUST FIGURED YOU WOULD JUST, LET IT SLIDE OR LIKE MEMBER KAINE WAS ASKING WHAT'S THE PROCESS. OH, JUST AMEND IT.
BUT WE'RE DOING THIS THE RIGHT WAY WE'RE IN FRONT OF THE ZBA NOW.
THIS IS A SMALL AMOUNT OF WORK TO GET A LARGE AMOUNT OF HOUSING.
>> FOR KEITH, WOULD YOU PLEASE PULL THE SITE PLAN DOWN A LITTLE BIT SO THAT WE KNOW THE OTHER WAY, SO I CAN SEE 58.
>> NO. PULL IT DOWN. THERE WE GO.
>> I COULDN'T SEE THAT DECK AND COULDN'T SEE IF IT WAS INTRUDING OR NOT, BUT IT ISN'T ON THE LIST, SO I THOUGHT WE TAKE A LOOK THERE, THAT'S FINE.
>> I THINK THAT WAS ONE OF THOSE THAT WE THOUGHT ABOUT LAST TIME TOO THAT IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS GETTING AWFULLY CLOSE.
BUT SEEMS LIKE IT'S JUST THAT 59 AND 60 WHERE THEY WERE ON THE SIDE THAT NEEDS TO COME BACK.
THEN ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IT THERE.
>> IT LOOKS LIKE 49 AND 50 ARE PULLED TOWARDS THE STREET A LITTLE BIT IN THE SITE PLAN AND 47 AND 48 IS A LITTLE BIT FORWARD.
>> I AGREE WITH YOU, IT LOOKS LIKE THE DRIVE IS A LITTLE SHORTER ALREADY BECAUSE HE WAS SQUEEZING IN THERE.
HE JUST DIDN'T TELL ME, MY ENGINEER DIDN'T TELL ME.
>> YOU CAN'T TELL THE BUILDING WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE BUFFER SO HE PULLS THAT FORWARD TO GET THE ENTIRE BUILDING.
>> THEN THERE'S SOME OTHER PLACES WHERE IT LOOKS LIKE THE DRIVEWAYS ARE SHORTER IN OTHER PLACES.
>> IF I'M NOT WRONG, THERE'S SOME THAT ARE SHORTER AND LONGER.
>> WHERE THEY ARE IN THE CURVE, PROBABLY?
>> WHERE MOST OF THESE VARIANCES OR IT SEEMS LIKE AT LEAST FOR 51, IT SEEMS LIKE THE PLACE MAYBE IT CAN'T BE PULLED BACK, BUT I JUST DON'T KNOW THAT I BUY THE ARGUMENT THAT THE DRIVEWAYS ARE THAT LONG.
I LOOKED UP THE AVERAGE LENGTH OF A VEHICLE IS 14.7 FEET IN THE US,
[00:40:05]
AND A MINI VAN, WHICH IS WHAT I DRIVE IS 16-18 FEET, WHICH IS ONE OF THE LARGEST VEHICLES YOU CAN DRIVE.THERE'S OTHER PLACES IN THIS DESIGN WHERE IT'S LIKE THE DECKS HAVE BEEN MOVED SOMEWHAT.
>> WHICH ONES ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT?
>> LOOK AT 39 AND 40 MOST OF THESE DECKS ARE ON THE OUTSIDE CORNERS, AND HERE THEY ARE BOTH ON THE INSIDE.
I GUESS THE QUESTION IS THAT THE SITE PLAN JUST WORKS TO GET EVERYTHING IN AS MUCH AS YOUR ENGINEER COULD GET IN AND THEN WE'RE GOING BACK AND LOOKING AT AND SAYING, WAIT, 39 AND 40 DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, WHY ARE WE PUT IN THE DECKS THIS WAY WHEN WE'VE GOT ALL THE DECKS ON THE OUTER CORNERS?
>> HONESTLY, I RELIED ON [INAUDIBLE] EVERYTHING AND YOU'LL SEE SEE THOSE LITTLE SQUIGGLY LINES.
THOSE ARE THE SWELLS AND STUFF THAT STARTED GOING IN THERE TO RETAIN THE WATER, BUT THAT MAKES IT LESS USABLE ON THE BACK YARD FOR THE RESIDENTS BECAUSE THEY'RE HAVING A LITTLE SWELL IN THERE.
I'M JUST TRYING TO GIVE THEM A PLACE TO RELAX AND ENJOY THEMSELVES.
>> THAT'S AN ERROR. ALL THE DECKS ARE IN THE SAME SPOT SO 39.
>> I GUESS I ALSO FEEL LIKE WE TALKED THROUGH A LOT OF THE STUFF LAST TIME AND THEN WE'RE SEEING THE SAME THING THIS EVENING.
THEN THE REQUEST IN THE ACTUAL PACKET IS FOR THE WRONG UNIT.
>> WELL YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE ONE IN THERE THAT YOU'RE REQUESTING, WHICH IS 49.
>> IF YOU LOOK AT THE PAPERWORK SUBMITTED, KEBS WAS TO EDGE OF THE DECK GOES IN, BUT THE POST IS OUT OF THE BUFFER SO THAT'S WHY THEY WITHDREW THAT ONE FROM THE APPLICATION.
BECAUSE IT'S AN OVERHANG NOT THE POST.
>> BUT THERE ARE OTHER ONES THAT WORK ON OR REQUIRE VARIANCE THAT ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS PACKET, 54.
YEAH I HAVE POINTED THAT OUT AT THE LAST MEETING AS WELL.
>> THEN THERE'S SOME THAT YOU'RE REQUESTING VARIANCE ON IT, NOT OTHERS, I DON'T FEEL LIKE THAT SUPPORTS THE ARGUMENT THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE.
SINGLE FAMILY 54. 54 ON ONE OF YOUR PAGES IN HERE, IN THE PACKET IT APPEARS IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO REQUIRE A VARIANCE AS WELL.
>> IT'S HARD TO TELL. IT LOOKS LIKE THAT HITS THE CORNER OF THE DECK.
THE POST IS BACK A LITTLE BIT SO I DON'T THINK THAT.
>> WE'RE SAYING ON KEBS ENGINEERING SERVICE.
>> YOU ARE SAYING WE DON'T HAVE THIS RIGHT, IS WHAT YOU'RE TELLING US.
>> WE'RE SAYING YOU'RE GOING TO POTENTIALLY HAVE MORE.
>> SEE THE ONE THERE ON THE LEFT.
>> WE THINK THERE ARE SEVEN TO DO AND IF WE GOT OUR PAPERWORK SCREWED UP, WE SHOULD FIX THAT.
I AGAIN, APOLOGIZE, I WASN'T TRYING TO MESS UP.
>> I CAN COUNT SEVEN, BUT I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE IMPORTANT FOR OUR APPROVAL IF WE DON'T HAVE IT RIGHT NOW, WE NEED TO.
>> I'M FAIRLY CONFIDENT IT'S RIGHT.
I THINK IT'S JUST A MATTER OF AS YOU OVERLAY THE PLOT PLANS WITH THE INITIAL PLOT MAP SOME OF THEM WERE WITHIN INCHES, BUT JUST BECAUSE THE EDGE OF DECK, THEY WENT THROUGH ALL THE POST WALL PLACEMENTS, AND THAT'S WHAT CHANGED.
THAT'S WHY ON THE ONE WITH [INAUDIBLE].
>> LIKE IN THE INDIVIDUAL HOUSING UNITS SO YOU CAN LOOK UP ON THE BOARD THERE BACK TO THE PACKET KEY.
ON THE LEFT HAND SIDE OF THAT, WHERE IT SAYS UNIT 53, PROPOSED UNIT 54, WHERE THAT DECK IS. DO YOU SEE WHAT I'M LOOKING AT?
>> IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S CLOSE 100, THERE.
[00:45:08]
>> SEE 53, AND THIS IS A PROBLEM WE HAD, IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE A DECK LISTED ON IT.
>> AGAIN, IT WAS AN OVERSIGHT, BUT 54, FROM THE SURVEY DRAWING, IS EVEN DIFFERENT THAN THE SITE PLAN.
BUT IT LOOKS LIKE BECAUSE THE DECKS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE IN THE SURVEY?
>> NO. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT IT, I DON'T HAVE A RANGE PLAN WITH ME, BUT ALL THE DECK SHOULD LINE UP BEHIND THE DRIVEWAY SO IT'S CONSISTENT.
>> I THINK THE SURVEY IS WRONG.
>> THAT'S HELPFUL. THEN I COUNT SEVEN, WHICH IS WHAT IS PROPOSED.
>> THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN SEVEN.
MEMBER BROOKS, DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER.
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO COMMENT THAT AS THINGS CURRENTLY STAND, I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE TO APPROVE THIS AS CURRENTLY IS SUBMITTED AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
>> THANK YOU FOR SHARING. THOUGHTS ON CRITERIA.
>> MY ONLY OTHER THOUGHT WOULD BE, I KNOW THERE'S SOME CONFUSION BECAUSE EVEN THE SURVEYS DON'T MATCH WHAT THE SITE PLAN IS BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME ERRORS, AND I CAN APPRECIATE THE BACKSTORY IN THE HISTORY.
I THINK WHAT YOU GAVE HELPS PAINT THE PICTURE OF THIS AND THAT.
I KNOW THAT IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT IS THE VARIANCE REQUESTS AND NOT DEALING WITH THE SITE PLAN.
BUT I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND, PER SE, THAT DEVELOPER GOES BACK AND TRIES TO UPDATE THAT SITE PLAN AND AMEND THE SITE PLAN TO MAKE IT MATCH, SO THAT WHEN WE HAVE THESE VARIANCES IN FRONT OF US, AT LEAST WE CAN SEE THAT MATCHES THE SITE PLAN.
SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A PRETTY SIMPLE PROCESS IF IT'S JUST ADMINISTRATIVE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PUBLIC HEARING AND ALL THAT.
BUT WHAT THAT SAID WE'RE STILL STUCK ON THE VARIANCE AND IT'S HARD FOR ME.
I DON'T KNOW IF I'M TO THE POINT WHERE I'M READY TO, SAY YES OR NO, PER SE, AS ONE OF THE OTHER MEMBERS ARE, BUT I'M STILL STUCK ON THIS ISN'T A MATCHING THE SITE PLAN.
I WOULD HATE TO HAVE YOU GUYS START BUILDING THESE THINGS AND THEN YOU SUBMIT FOR A BUILDING PERMIT AND THE CITY COMES BACK AND SAYS, OH, THIS DOESN'T MATCH, YOU GOT TO DO SOMETHING.
SORRY, YOU GOT TO TEAR THIS OUT OR YOU GOT TO COMPLETELY MOVE THAT STRUCTURE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T MATCH A SITE PLAN.
TO ME, THAT'S WAY WORSE THAN COMING IN FOR A VARIANCE.
OTHERWISE THEY'RE NOT EVEN GOING TO APPROVE THAT BUILDING PERMIT, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BUILD THAT THING.
>> CASEY DOES A WONDERFUL JOB AT THAT, THEY WON'T ISSUE BUILDING PERMIT SO IT WON'T EVEN GET TO THE POINT OF BEING ABLE TO BUILD THE STRUCTURE.
I HATE TO HAVE THAT HAPPEN SO THAT'S WHY I WAS RECOMMENDING AT A MINIMUM IF YOU COULD COME IN AND AMEND THAT SITE PLAN, SO AT LEAST IT MATCHES WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING AS FAR AS THE VARIANCES, SO THAT THESE INDIVIDUAL UNIT PLANS OR SITE PLANS MATCH THE OVERALL SITE PLAN.
I THINK THAT WOULD LESSEN SOME OF THE CONFUSION.
HOWEVER, THAT'S NOT WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT.
>> I GUESS, IF I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY, IF THIS IS APPROVED, WE CAN GO THROUGH AND HAVE THE SITE PLAN REDRAWN TO REFLECT THE CHANGES, BUT RIGHT NOW THE SITE PLAN IS DRAWN THE WAY THAT IT'S APPROVED SO AS FAR AS RESUBMITTING, IF THIS IS APPROVED, WE CAN HAVE THAT REDRAWN AND GIVEN TO THE BUILDING AND PLANNING DEPARTMENTS.
RIGHT NOW, IT'S NOT APPROVED, SO THAT'S WHY IT IS THE WAY THAT IT IS.
>> EVENTUALLY ONCE THIS WHOLE PROCESS IS OVER, WE'LL GET AN AS BUILT FOR HOW EVERYTHING IS BUILT AS IT IS.
IT MAKES IT MORE CONFUSING FOR THIS.
>> IT MAKES AN ISSUE FOR THIS PROCESS. MEMBER TREZISE.
>> WELL, THE OTHER THING THAT IF THEY DO A REVISED SITE PLAN AT THIS POINT, OUR BUILDING PEOPLE CAN LOOK AND MAKE SURE AND IDENTIFY EXACTLY WHERE THEY NEED VARIANCES.
BECAUSE WE STILL GOT SOME CONFUSION LOOKING AT THE EXISTING SITE PLAN IS WHERE SOME OF THE VARIANCES MIGHT NEED TO BE.
WE CAN GET IT RIGHT IN ONE MOVE RATHER THAN COMING BACK AGAIN.
>> BECAUSE THESE BUILDING PERMITS, MOST OF THEM ARE HELD UP BECAUSE IT WAS NOT CONFORMING.
[00:50:01]
WE HAVE ALL THE PAPERWORK IN, BUT THEY HAVE NOT RELEASED THE BUILDING PERMITS BECAUSE WE WERE WAITING FOR THIS HEARING TO SEE IF WE COULD GET THE VARIANCE APPROVED.>> I'M GOING TO TOUCH ON CRITERIA BECAUSE I KNOW WHERE MEMBER BROOKS STANDS, BUT BECAUSE WE HAVE A FORM MEMBER BOARD AT THIS POINT, THE OTHER THREE OF US HAVE TO AGREE OR IT DOESN'T, THAT'S OUR QUORUM.
WE HAVE TO AND I THINK IT'S ONLY FAIR TO THEM ALSO TO GO THROUGH THE CRITERIA AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE BEING JUST IN THAT WAY.
I THINK THAT THAT'LL HELP US TO STEER THE CONVERSATION IN THE WAY THAT IT NEEDS TO BE STEERED SO WE CAN FOCUS ON WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO BE ABLE TO APPROVE OR TO DENY.
CRITERIA NUMBER 1, IS UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST THAT ARE PECULIAR TO THE LANDER STRUCTURE THAT ARE NOT APPLICABLE TO OTHER LANDER STRUCTURES IN THE SAME ZONING DISTRICT, AND THESE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT SELF CREATED.
[LAUGHTER] I KNOW THAT I APOLOGIZE FOR THE LAUGHTER MY CANDOR IS GETTING THE BEST TO ME TODAY.
BUT SOME OF THESE ISSUES ARE SELF CREATED.
WE KNOW THAT MISTAKES GET MADE.
I ABSOLUTELY I AM NOT GOING TO EVER SAY THAT MISTAKES DON'T GET MADE.
THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS WITH A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS.
HOWEVER, IF WE FOCUS BACK ON THIS PARCEL OF LAND, BUILDING ON THIS PARCEL OF LAND, AND THE UNIQUE WETLAND SITUATIONS, THE BUFFER ZONES, AND THE THINGS THAT WE'RE BUILDING AROUND TO MAKE THIS PARCEL A BUILDABLE PARCEL.
THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING TO FOCUS MY ENERGY BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT WE CAN ABSOLUTELY HAVE MORE CHALLENGES WITH.
CAN I MEET UNIQUE TAKING OUT THE SELF ADMITTED MISTAKES OF OUR SITE PLAN AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT AS FAR AS MATERIALS? I CAN MEET A UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE.
>> I HAVE DIFFICULTY WITH THAT IN THIS WAS EMPTY LAND.
BUT THEY COULD DESIGN ANY WAY THEY WISHED WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THE ORDINANCE.
THEY PRESENTED A SITE PLAN WHICH DOESN'T COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE, OR IT DOES AS PRESENTED, IT DOESN'T WITH THE VARIANCE.
TO AN EXTENT IT IS SELF CREATED FROM THE BEGINNING.
I APPRECIATE THE DIFFICULTY YOU'VE HAD DOING THIS.
BUT I HAVE A DIFFICULT TIME NECESSARILY MEETING A UNIQUE, NOT SELF CREATED ISSUE.
>> I ABSOLUTELY AGREE THAT THE SITE PLAN AS PRESENTED IS WITHIN BUFFERS, WERE CONFORMING TO THOSE [OVERLAPPING].
>> AS PRESENTED IN THE SITE REQUIREMENTS.
WHY THEY PROVED SITE PLAN IS WITHIN WAS WAS CONFORMING WITHIN THOSE.
>> SETBACKS. YES. THAT IS I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU ON THAT BEING SELF CREATED, WHICH I THINK IS THAT'S WHERE I CAN SEE WHERE THE SITE PLANS THEMSELVES, ABSOLUTELY SELF CREATED.
I GUESS I'M INTERPRETING THE PECULIAR TO THE LAND VERSUS THE STRUCTURE.
YES, CAN THEY BUILD WITHIN THE LAND? ABSOLUTELY. CAN THEY BUILD DIFFERENTLY TO BE CONFORMING, AND YES, THEY CAN BECAUSE THEY DID.
WE SAW IT ON THE APPROVED PLANS.
BUT I DO THINK SOME OF THESE CHALLENGES BETWEEN LAND AND STRUCTURE BEING I CAN SEE CHALLENGE.
I CAN SEE WHERE YOU WANT TO KEEP THE VIEW.
YOU GOT TO KEEP WITHIN THIS SETBACK.
YOU GOT TO HAVE THIS AMOUNT OF FEET IN THE FRONT OF YOUR HOUSE.
YOU GOT TO HAVE THIS AMOUNT WALKWAY, I CAN SEE WHERE THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS,
[00:55:02]
AND IT'S A BIG DEVELOPMENT.THAT'S A LOT OF PARTS TO JUGGLE.
BUT AGAIN, THAT'S NOT THE ONE I HAVE THE HARDEST TIME WITH.
THIS IS UNIQUE. IT'S NOT THE PARTY AUTHORITY TO SAY WITH.
>> WELL, EVERY PIECE OF LAND IS UNIQUE.
>> YES. BUT WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT ONE THAT THEY'RE ATTEMPTING TO PUT A LARGE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS.
WE'RE LOOKING AT BEING ABLE TO STILL HAVE WATER FEATURES AND ACCESS AND WETLAND VIEWS, BUT STILL MAINTAINING ENOUGH DRAINAGE, EMERGENCY ROAD ACCESS.
ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT WHEN YOU ARE BUILDING A BIGGER DEVELOPMENT, GET MORE CHALLENGING THAN BUILDING A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON A CHALLENGE.
I GET IT THAT'S THE ONE I HAVE A HARD TIME WITH.
>> I'D JUST LIKE TO REITERATE ONE POINT THAT I BROUGHT UP EARLIER.
I THINK IT COMES A LITTLE BIT OF SEMANTICS, WHAT WE CALL IT.
IF WE WERE TO LABEL THESE THINGS DOCS INSTEAD OF DECKS, IT APPLIES WITHIN YOUR ZONING ORDINANCE.
IT'S A STRUCTURE WITHIN THERE.
THIS IS NOT A STRUCTURE THAT HINDERS DRAINAGE.
THIS IS NOT A STRUCTURE THAT YOU CAN'T GO AROUND.
>> WOULD YOU PULL UP, THAT'S HOW YOU'RE LOOKING AT THAT ORGAN.
>> YEAH. I DO APPRECIATE THAT.
I THINK THAT TO ME APPLIES A LITTLE BIT MORE TO ANOTHER ONE OF OUR CRITERIA.
I THINK WHEN I THINK OF THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES CRITERIA, IT IS A LITTLE BIT MORE GENERAL TO ME.
I LOOK AT THAT CRITERIA A LITTLE BIT MORE GENERALLY.
BUT TO ME, THAT WOULD DIRECTLY PERTAIN TO A MINIMUM ACTION.
>> STRUCTURE IS ANYTHING CONSTRUED.
IT DOESN'T EXPLICITLY EXEMPT A DECK. THAT'S THE ISSUE.
>> BUT BECAUSE IT'S ATTACHED TO SOMETHING HAVING A PERMANENT LOCATION ON THE GROUND.
IT'S ATTACHED TO THE HOME SO THAT'S WHY.
>> WE CAN SAY THEY START WITH A DN OF THE K, BUT THEY'RE SIMILAR.
>> THE DEFINITION HOSTILE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WHAT ELSE IS EXEMPT FROM THAT?
>> I CAN PULL UP THE, LET'S SEE.
>> YOU GUYS, I AM EMBARRASSED THAT WERE UP IN FRONT OF YOU AND I APOLOGIZE ABOUT IT.
THAT WAS NEVER OUR INTENT, WAS IT TO COME AND DO THIS.
>> YOU WORK WITH THE TOWNSHIP. THE HARDEST PART ABOUT THIS IS, AND ESPECIALLY WITH OUR WANTING TO PRESERVE AND PROTECT THOSE [INAUDIBLE] IS A VERY LARGE PART OF OUR CURRENT DANCE.
THAT'S SOMETHING WE HAVE TO TALK ABOUT AND YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH A LOT.
>> WE VALUE THAT, WE HONESTLY VALUE AND TRIED TO HONOR IT BUT IT SCREWED UP.
>> IT IS PART OF WANTING TO BUILD AND HAVE THAT BE A FEATURE FOR HOME.
IT'S JUST NOW, HOW DO WE WORK WITHIN IT AND AROUND IT IN A FUNCTIONAL WAY THAT ALSO PRESERVES AND PROTECTS.
>> KEITH, YOU DON'T HAVE A DEFINITION OF A DECK, DO YOU OR A DOCK VERSUS A DECK? IN YOUR DEFINITIONS.
>> I DOUBT IT, BUT I CAN LOOK.
>> ALSO I WAS CURIOUS WHAT A WATER FEATURE SETBACK MEANT VERSUS A WET LAND.
>> SORRY. WE PUT MY CHILD RIGHT TO SLEEP BECAUSE FOR GUYS [INAUDIBLE] SORRY GOOD TO HELP.
>> WE'LL PUT A PIN IN CRITERIA NUMBER 1.
CRITERIA NUMBER 2 IS THAT 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.
I KNOW THAT IS THE ONE I ALWAYS STRUGGLE WITH BECAUSE ARE THESE DWELLINGS HABITABLE WITH DECKS ON THE SIDE THAT ARE IN.
>> THEY ARE ON THE SIDE? YES. ARE THEY AESTHETIC?
[01:00:04]
NO. BUT DOES THAT MEAN THEY CAN'T BE CAPITALISM IN THIS?>> IT CHANGES THE FUNCTION INSIDE THE UNIT IS THE ISSUE.
IT CHANGES THE VIEW, IT CHANGES THE FUNCTION, IT CHANGES THE DESIRABILITY OF IT.
>> WHAT IT DOES NOT DO IS PREVENT THE OWNER FROM USING THE PROPERTY FOR A PERMITTED PURPOSE. RIGHT.
>> THAT'S THE HARDEST ONE FOR ME.
IF THE PERMITTED PURPOSE FOR A SINGLE FAMILY OR WHETHER IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY HOME RENTAL UNIT IS GOING TO BE HABITATION.
CAN YOU LIVE THERE? IS IT FUNCTIONAL? YEAH. IS IT AS DESIRABLE? I DON'T KNOW.
I WOULD PROBABLY STILL WANT TO LIVE IN A NICE, NEW BUILD.
BUT DOES IT PREVENT THE OWNER? IN THIS CASE, D TAN AND MAYBERRY AT THIS MOMENT FROM USING THE PROPERTY? [LAUGHTER]
>> THESE GUYS ARE NOT GIVING ME ANYTHING.
>> I WOULD ARGUE THAT IT DOES NOT.
THAT THE OWNER STILL COULD USE THE PROPERTY FOR A PERMITTED PURPOSE, WHICH ONE OF THE OBVIOUS USES THAT IT'S ALLOWED ON THERE IS MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
IT STILL COULD BE USED FOR THAT. AS YOU ARGUE.
BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF UNITS, WHICH LORD KNOWS, I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO SEE HIGHER DENSITY.
BUT THAT'S JUST ME BECAUSE OF THE DENSITY THEY'RE PUTTING ON THERE AND BECAUSE OF THE STATS WITH THE DECK GOING BACK TO NUMBER 1, THAT'S VERY GREAT.
UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE FOR THE PROPERTY? MAYBE IT HAS AN EXCESS AMOUNT OF WETLANDS THAT CREATE DIFFICULTY.
>> YES. I TRULY BELIEVE THAT PROPERTY COULD BE USED FOR THE PERMITTED PURPOSE.
>> THAT'S CRITERIA 2 IS WHERE I'M GOING TO STRUGGLE.
CRITERIA 3 IS GRANTING THE VARIANCE OF THE MINIMUM ACTION NECESSARY THAT WOULD CARRY OUT THE SPIRIT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, CURE PUBLIC SAFETY AND PROVIDES SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE.
FOR CRITERIA 3, I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.
WE GOT POSTS IN THE GROUND, GUYS.
LIKE, IS THAT AN ISSUE? IS THAT A MINIMUM ACTION? I WOULD ARGUE, YES.
I KNOW THAT I'M PROBABLY GOING TO HAVE.
>> MR. SCHROEDER SAID, WE CAN HAND DIG THOSE POSTS, GUYS.
WELL, WE COULD PUT IT IN THAT VARIANCE THAT WE CAN HAND DIG THOSE POSTS.
WE COULD ADD THAT AS PART OF OUR REQUIREMENT. THAT I CAN MEET.
CRITERIA 4 IS GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND OR THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE VICINITY OF THE PROPERTY.
I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO ADVERSELY AFFECT THE ADJACENT LAND.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE DESIRABILITY.
WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HOW THIS WOULD AESTHETICALLY FUNCTION AND MAKING THIS DEVELOPMENT IN AND OF ITSELF A DESIRABLE PLACE TO BE AND POSITIVELY AFFECT THAT AREA THAT HAS SINCE 30 YEARS BUT UNDEVELOPABLE.
CRITERIA 5 IS GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL BE GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH PUBLIC INTEREST AND THE PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THIS CHAPTER.
>> ARE WE MEETING THE PUBLIC INTEREST, WHICH IS PROTECTING THE WETLANDS FOR THE SAKE OF THE STATICS.
>> MY ISSUE THERE IS THE INTENT OF THIS CHAPTER.
THE TOWNSHIP DOES ENCOURAGE DENSER DEVELOPMENTS.
THIS WILL LEAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE IN THEIR OVERALL DESIGN BECAUSE OF WET LANDS, BECAUSE OF OPEN LAND.
TO THE EXTENT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THE BUILDING CODE AND THE DESIRES OF THE TOWNSHIP, I THINK THIS PROBABLY MEETS THAT.
BUT IF WE'RE RESTRICTING IT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCES, THAT MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT.
>> THAT MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT TO MEET.
>> I HAVE A COMMENT HERE, TOO.
>> I THINK THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS INTERESTING BECAUSE THESE ORDINANCES ARE SPECIFICALLY PUT IN PLACE, AND I AGREE THAT THEY'RE JUST POSTS IN THE GROUND LARGELY.
BUT IT'S THE COMBINATION OF THAT.
[01:05:02]
THAT WE DECIDED TO PUT THESE ORDINANCES IN PLACE AND THE COMBINATION OF NUMBER 1, WHERE THESE APPEAR TO BE SOME SELF CREATED ISSUES.THERE MAY BE UNITS IN WHICH THESE VARIANCES MAY NOT BE NECESSARY BECAUSE THE UNIT CAN BE MOVED SLIGHTLY, OR THERE'S OTHER THE SITE PLAN ISSUES THAT WE TALKED ABOUT THAT SEEM TO BE SELF CREATED.
IT'S THE COMBINATION OF THOSE TWO THINGS THAT I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH.
>> REALLY NUMBER 1 AND NUMBER 5, WAS WARRIER.
NOT ABLE TO MEET THE CRITERIA.
WELL, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
>> I WILL BE FRANK, WHAT I'M HEARING AND WHAT I'M SENSING FROM MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS IS THAT THIS LIKELY IS NOT GOING TO PASS TONIGHT.
IN THE INTEREST OF KEEPING THIS MOVING, IS IT A SITUATION OF TAKING SOME MORE TIME, FIGURING OUT WHAT WE CAN DO, WHAT CAN BE SHIFTED OR WHAT CAN BE ARRANGED SO THAT WE CAN COME BACK AND SAY, OKAY, LET'S TRY THIS AGAIN? FOR ME ANYWAY, THAT'S WHAT I WAS HOPING FOR TONIGHT, WAS THAT WE HAD THIS PRETTY SIMILAR DISCUSSION THE LAST TIME WE MET ON THIS CASE, SIMILAR.
WE'RE MORE IN THE WEEDS NOW THAN WE WERE, SORRY, WETLAND PUN NOT INTENDED.
WE DIDN'T SEE ANY ACTION, I GUESS IS WHAT I'M SENSING. THERE WAS NO ACTION TAKEN.
ABSOLUTELY WHERE I AM COMPASSIONATE TO SAY THAT THE SITE PLAN WAS A MISTAKE.
GUESS, YOU GUYS APPROVED IT, BUT IT WAS A MISTAKE, AND WE NEED THESE THINGS, AND HERE'S WHY.
BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT IS THERE MORE THAT WE CAN DO TO GET THIS TO MEET A MINIMUM AND TO MEET AND ADDRESS THE ISSUES IN HAND? WITH THE LACK OF ACTION BETWEEN THE TWO MEETINGS, I THINK THAT'S WHERE I'M SENSING A LOT OF NOTHING CHANGED, SO WE'RE STILL IN THE SAME SPOT WE WERE IN. MEMBER KOENIG.
>> MY ISSUE GOES BACK TO THE WIGGLE ROOM BETWEEN HAVING THOSE DECKS IN THE WETLAND AND I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED IT, THE PARKING.
BECAUSE I LIVE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, I LIVE IN THE TOWNSHIP OVER OFF OF TOWNER AND GRANT, MY NEIGHBORHOOD WAS BUILT IN THE 1970S AND '80S.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT NOW THAT IF MY CAR IS PARKED UP AGAINST THE GARAGE AND MY WIFE PARKS BEHIND IT, SHE'S GOING OVER THE SIDEWALK.
IT'S NOT A LOT OF ROOM, BUT IT DOESN'T HAPPEN THAT OFTEN.
BECAUSE WE DO HAVE TWO CAR GARAGES.
NOW IF WE HAVE GUESTS, WE TELL THEM PARK ON THE STREET BECAUSE WE LIVE IN A CUL-DE-SAC AND WE COULD DO THAT.
THEY DON'T HAVE A CUL-DE-SAC HERE.
I KNOW THAT YOU WANT TO HAVE THE TWO CARS BEHIND EACH OTHER.
YOU STILL HAVE THE GARAGE, AND YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THE TWO CARS ON THE DRIVEWAY, ONE BEHIND THE OTHER.
IS THERE ANY WIGGLE ROOM TO GIVE THAT UP AND LOOK AT IT AS ONE CAR PARKED ON THAT DRIVEWAY? TWO CARS SIDE BY SIDE INSTEAD OF HAVING FOUR CARS, TWO CARS, AND TWO CARS.
BECAUSE HOW OFTEN IS THAT REALLY GOING TO HAPPEN? NOW, I CAN'T SPECULATE THAT SOMEBODY CAN MOVE THERE AND USE THAT GARAGE FOR STORAGE TO WHERE THEY CAN'T PARK IN THE GARAGE.
NOW THEY GOT TWO PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE TO PARK ON THE DRIVEWAY.
THAT'S A TOTAL DIFFERENT STORY.
BUT TO ME, THAT IS THE WIGGLE ROOM THAT GOES BACK TO WHAT YOU WERE SAYING IF THE CODE SAYS THEY HAVE 25 FEET, I STILL THINK THEY HAVE AN OPTION TO MOVE SOME OF THOSE BUILDINGS AWAY AND CLOSER TO THAT 25 FEET TO BE ABLE TO GET THOSE DECKS OUT OF THE WETLANDS.
OR IF THEY WERE AT THE 25 FEET, I WOULD MUCH RATHER GRANT A VARIANCE FOR THEM BEING CLOSER TO 25 FEET THAN BEING IN THE WETLAND, BECAUSE THE INTENT OF THE CHAPTER.
BUT IT'S OBVIOUSLY NOT UP TO US.
IF THEY COME BACK TO US AND SAY, WE'RE STEADFAST, WE WANT TWO CARS IN THERE AND NOT GOING ON THE SIDEWALK, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BUDGE, THEN WE HAVE TO BASE THE DECISION ON WHAT'S BEING PRESENTED.
BECAUSE THE FIRST THING I THOUGHT OF WAS I THINK WE COULD POSTPONE THIS AGAIN AND SEE IF THEY'D BE WILLING TO DO THAT, BUT I DON'T WANT TO KEEP DRAGGING THIS OUT FOR YOU GUYS.
>> BY THE WAY, HE HAS TO KEEP BUILDING, SO I'M NOT HERE TO DISPUTE THAT, BUT WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE LEMONADE IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO DO WITH YOU GUYS.
WE'RE TRYING TO WORK WITHIN THE CONFINES OF MAKING LEMONADE.
[OVERLAPPING] I STOOD UP AND I OWN WHEN I MAKE A MISTAKE.
I'M NOT PERFECT, AND I DO MY BEST.
>> I AGREE TO THAT. MR. SCHROEDER, GO AHEAD.
>> HE HAS A GREAT POINT. I THINK A COUPLE OF THOSE LIKE 23,
[01:10:01]
24, AND I DON'T HAVE THE OTHER LETS IN FRONT OF ME.I'M SURE WE CAN SLIDE THEM FORWARD A COUPLE FEET WHERE IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT, BUT IT'S LIKE UNIT 53 OF THE RANCHES, AND I THINK IT WAS 51, 52, THERE JUST ISN'T THE SPACE TO PULL FORWARD.
>> BUT ASKING FOR WATER TWO IS DIFFERENT THAN SIX AND SEVEN.
>> YES. >> PROPOSAL. IS THERE A WAY TO STRIKE A COMMON GROUND WHERE WE CAN KEEP THEM? BECAUSE THE BIG THING I'VE BEEN BUILDING HOUSES FOR A LONG TIME.
THE BIGGEST THING THAT I HEAR IS IT'S NOT THE ONE THAT MOVES IN THAT HAS ALL THE INFORMATION.
IT'S THE SECOND AND THIRD HOMO WHERE THEY'RE LIKE, WHY YOUR BUILDER DO THIS? THEY SCREW THIS HAPPEN LIKE ALL OF A SUDDEN, YOU NEVER GET AWAY FROM IT.
IT'S JUST LIKE I JUST WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
I THINK OVERALL FOR THE COMMUNITY, HOW IT LOOKS, AND I THINK IF WE ALL JUST GET ABOVE IT ALL AND LOOK AT ALL THE DIFFERENT ANGLES, THE BEST THING TO DO IS PULL A COUPLE FORWARD AND GRANT US A FOOT OR SO IN A COUPLE OF THE OTHER ONES BECAUSE SOMEONE MORE THAT BUFFER IS RIGHT UP TO THE BACK OF THE BUILDING, WE'RE STUCK.
>> TO ME, THAT FEELS LIKE THAT'S ACTION.
I GUESS THAT'S WHAT WE WERE [OVERLAPPING].
>> WE WERE HERE FOR THE FIRST MEETING OF THE BOARD, SO I PROBABLY DIDN'T HELP.
>> EXACTLY. BECAUSE IF WE HAD THIS CONVERSATION WITH THE TWO OF YOU, LAST MEETING, WE WOULD HAVE SAID THIS, AND WE WOULD COME BACK THIS MEETING AND SAID, OKAY, WE CAN SEE WHERE IT WAS SHIFTED.
I GUESS I'M EITHER LOOKING FOR OR TRYING TO FIND A SOLUTION.
I DON'T LIKE HAVING A LOT OF UNFINISHED BUSINESS.
I'M NOT REALLY ONE FOR UNFINISHED BUSINESS.
I'D LIKE TO WRAP IT UP AND EITHER APPROVE OR DENY.
I GUESS I WOULD ASK MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS IF THERE WAS MORE ACTION TAKEN, IF THERE WAS MORE MOVE TO CREATE CHANGES.
>> I GUESS I CAN ANSWER. IF THEY CAN REDUCE THE NUMBER OF INCURSIONS INTO THE WETLAND, IT'S SOMETHING TO LOOK AT.
>> IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER.
>> I WOULD AGREE. THE THING I RAISED AT THE LAST MEETING AND YOU WERE HERE IS I'M SOMEWHAT CONCERNED ABOUT PUTTING TREATED LUMBER INTO A WETLAND BUFFER ZONE AS OPPOSED TO A DIFFERENT TYPE OF POST THAT MAY NOT DEGRADE AND CAUSE POLLUTION TO THAT WETLAND AREA.
JUST FOR SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WOULD BE, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE THAT COULD BE USED THAT MIGHT BE A LITTLE LESS INTRUSIVE OVER TIME THAN A TREATED LUMBER.
I'M NOT SURE OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
>> THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING FOR YOUR CONSIDERATIONS.
>> WE'RE HERE TRYING TO WORK THE BUT WE CAN.
THAT'S THE TRUTH AND I WAS TRYING TO FALL ON THE SWORD BECAUSE HONESTLY, THE END OF THE DAY, THE BUCK DOES STOP WITH ME, BUT I DO WANT TO MAKE IT BETTER, AND WE'RE ASKING FOR HELP TO DO THAT.
OUR INTENTION WASN'T TO COME IN HERE.
THIS WAS NOT A, LET'S PUT THEM ON THE SIDE, GET IT APPROVED AND COME BACK HERE.
IT TOOK A LONG TIME TO GET THIS JOB DONE AND MAYBE MY ATTENTION DRIFTED AT SOME POINT.
>> I CAN CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THAT.
I THINK THAT WE'RE ALSO TRYING TO FIND A SOLUTION.
>> TRYING TO COME UP WITH A WAY THAT WE CAN SATISFY THE CRITERIA THAT WE HAVE, BECAUSE ULTIMATELY WE'RE HELPED BY THAT.
>> BY THE WAY, WE'RE PROUD OF WHAT WE'RE DOING IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.
WE HOPE WE'RE MAKING IT BETTER.
PART OF THE REASON WE DON'T HAVE IO DENSITY, SOME PEOPLE ASKED US NOT TO.
THEY ASKED US TO HAVE HALF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
THAT'S WHY HALF OF THEM ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
ALL WE WERE DOING WAS JUGGLING ALL THAT INPUT AND TRYING TO MAKE SOMETHING WORK, AND NOT WALK FROM THE COMMUNITY, BECAUSE WE STILL BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A GOOD USE FOR THIS COMMUNITY, WE STILL BELIEVE THAT THIS IS GOING TO HELP PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE AND WORK HERE AND EDUCATE HERE, AND THAT WAS OUR INTENT.
>> I SEE THAT, AND I THINK THAT IT DOES FEEL LIKE WE COULD COME TO.
>> I THINK IF THE DEVELOPER WAS WILLING TO AT LEAST LOOK AT SOME OF THOSE BUILDINGS AND MOVE FORWARD EVEN TWO, THREE, FOUR FEET, I THINK THAT WOULD EVEN STRENGTHEN NUMBER 3 AS FAR AS THE MINIMUM ACTION TAKEN.
>> NOT THAT IT DOESN'T MEET IT NOW BECAUSE I THINK NUMBER 3 WAS THE ONE THAT WE PROBABLY ALL CAN AGREE ON OR AT LEAST THE MAJORITY OF US CAN AGREE ON, BUT I THINK THAT WOULD STRENGTHEN THAT ONE EVEN MORE BECAUSE IT WOULD REDUCE THE NUMBER OF THOSE VARIANCES AS NUMBER 2, SAID SO?
>> BUT I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PROPOSAL.
OBVIOUSLY, THE TOWNSHIP DID AS WELL BECAUSE THEY APPROVED THE SITE PLAN.
OBVIOUSLY, THEY LOOKED AT THIS AND SAID [LAUGHTER] THIS IS SOMETHING/.
>> SOMETHING WAS IN THE [LAUGHTER].
>> AGAIN, I WOULD HATE TO KEEP POSTPONING AND
[01:15:01]
POSTPONING ALREADY POSTPONED THIS ONCE. I'M LIKE YOU.I DON'T WANT TO BECAUSE IT IS TIME AND TIME IS MONEY, ESPECIALLY TO A DEVELOPER LIKE THIS, BUT TO ME, THAT IS AN EASY SOLUTION TO ALLOW THEM TO NOT ONLY THINK OF WHICH ONES THEY CAN DO, BUT ALSO MAYBE TO LOOK INTO UPDATING THAT SITE PLAN AND AMENDING IT TO MAKE THOSE ALL KOSHER WITH THE INDIVIDUAL SITE PLAN DRAWINGS THEY HAVE FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL BUILDING AS WELL SO THAT IT MATCHES. GIVE THEM THE TIME.
>> WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT. MAKES SENSE.
>> I AGREE. I DON'T WANT TO PROPOSE THIS.
YOU MAKE A MOTION TO PROPOSE TO THE NEXT MEETING.
I DON'T KNOW IF A MONTH WOULD BE ENOUGH TIME FOR THEM.
>> GENTLEMEN, THE BOARD HAS DISCUSSED WHAT WE THINK WOULD BE A FAIR COMPROMISE HERE FOR US AND FOR YOU.
WOULD POSTPONING TO THE NEXT MEETING, IF THAT'S FEBRUARY, BE ENOUGH TIME? THAT GIVES YOU A MONTH, AND THEN WE'LL PICK IT BACK UP.
>> I GUESS JUST SO IF I FOLLOW IT CORRECTLY, LIKE IF I WE CUT I DON'T KNOW, HALF OR A FEW OF THEM OFF, LIKE JUST AND MINIMIZE IT.
THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING TO SEE?
>> I WOULD SAY LIKE IN ALL HONESTY, AS MANY AS YOU COULD REDUCE WOULD BE GREAT.
EVEN EVEN REDUCED SIZE, BECAUSE I THINK IF WE'RE LOOKING AT SIX AND WE'RE LOOKING AT ONES THAT HAVE, LIKE, ONE FOOT, TWO FEET. THOSE ARE ONES THAT I'M LIKE-.
>> THOSE I THINK WE CAN GO AWAY.
>> IT'S WHERE IT'S THE ENTIRE DECK OR THE ONES THAT I'M CONCERNED WITH, BUT-.
>> THE ENTIRE DECK IS WHERE WE'RE GOING.
>> YOU CAN MOVE THE POSTS IN CLOSER TOO.
>> YOU CAN LEAVE IT MORE. I'LL GET WITH THE ENGINEER, AND I'LL GET MOVE.
>> JUST SEE WHAT WHAT CAN BE MINIMIZED? WHAT CAN BE PULLED IN? WHAT CAN WE DO TO LESSEN THAT DEPTH.
>> DOES IT CONSIDERED AN IMPROVEMENT IF SOMETHING'S AT SIX RIGHT NOW AND IT GOES TO TWO?
>> ABSOLUTELY. BECAUSE IF WE'RE LOOKING AT SIX OF THEM-.
>> I THINK HE WAS TALKING ABOUT INCURSIONS OF SIX FEET AS OPPOSED TO TWO FEET.
>> ABSOLUTELY, THEN I WOULD SAY, I THINK HAVING AN ANSWER FOR MEMBER TRUSS'S QUESTION, WHETHER OR NOT MATERIAL IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE DISCUSSED, BECAUSE THAT MIGHT SAY THAT EVEN THOSE ONES THAT ARE IN THAT SIX, SEVEN FOOT RANGE, BUT LOOK, [NOISE] NOT ONLY ARE WE ONLY PUTTING POSTS.
WE'RE GOING TO HANDLE THESE POSTS.
WE'RE ABLE TO USE MATERIALS THAT ARE GOING TO BE-.
>> YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE ME USE BRAZILIAN WELL UP BEFORE WE'RE DONE HERE BY FULL FIGURE IT OUT.
[OVERLAPPING]. WE'RE GOING TO DO WHAT WE CAN.
WE'RE TRYING TO DO THE BEST WE CAN FRANKLY.
GUYS, LET'S SEE WHAT WE CAN GET CREATIVE WITH.
THEN, I DO THINK THAT HAVING OUR SURVEYS AND ON OUR SITE PLANS WHERE WE CAN SEE THINGS THAT ARE MORE ACCURATE IS HELPFUL BECAUSE THAT WAY, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THINGS LIKE SINGLE UNITS 53 AND 54, WE'RE GOING, OH, OKAY, 54 IS ACTUALLY THE DUCKS ON THE OTHER SIDE.
[LAUGHTER]. JUST HAVING OUR DUCKS IN THE ROOM, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.
THOSE WOULD BE MY NOTES, SO TO SPEAK.
>> ONE LAST THING I WOULD HIGHLY RECOMMEND IF THERE ARE OTHER UNITS THAT YOU KNOW YOU'D HAVE TO REQUEST A VARIANCE.
WE CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY VARIANCES TO SUBMIT.
WE CAN'T SAY, OH, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HEAR UNTIL YOU CAN IDENTIFY FIVE OTHERS AND BRING IT.
BUT IF THERE ARE OTHER ONES THAT YOU KNOW FOR A FACT THAT YOU MAY NEED TO HAVE A VARIANCE TO IDENTIFY THOSE IF YOU DON'T BRING THEM NEXT MONTH, THAT'S OKAY.
YOU CAN DO IT AGAIN IN THE FUTURE.
>> IF WE GET SOME PULLED OFF, WE SHOULD REVISE THE REQUEST TO BEFORE THE NEXT MEETING.
>> I WOULD JUST LOOK AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY OTHERS THAT YOU MAY-.
>> WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NO NOTES.
>> SEE IF THERE'S ANY OTHERS THAT YOU COULD POTENTIALLY PULL AS WELL.
>> I WOULD AGREE JUST TO BE ON THE SAFE SIDE THAT HEY, I THINK, IT APPEARS TO ME THAT WE'RE ALL TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
TRY TO DO THE THING. THOSE WOULD BE MY NOTES.
>> I SAY, THIS IS GOING TO BE A GREAT DEVELOPMENT. [OVERLAPPING]
>> BY THE WAY, IF I LIVED IN THIS AREA, I WOULD LIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY, AND I MEAN IT.
BY THE WAY, I LOVE LIVING IN OUR COMMUNITIES BECAUSE IT MAKES ME MAKE THE NEXT ONE BETTER.
[LAUGHTER]. IF I'M HONEST WITH YOU, THAT SOUNDS WEIRD, BUT IT'S THE TRUTH.
THAT WHERE YOU KNOW HOW TO MAKE A COMMUNITY BETTER IS WHEN YOU LIVE AND EXPERIENCE IT, AND IT'S AS SIMPLE AS, HEY, I WALKED MY DOG DOWN HERE AND IT'S DARK, IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE A LITTLE LIGHT AROUND HERE.
YOU DON'T KNOW UNTIL YOU'RE THERE AT 7:00 P.M. WHEN YOUR DOG'S WALKING DOWN THING AND YOU CAN'T SEE.
[01:20:01]
>> I AM WILLING TO APPROVE SOME OF THESE VARIANCES DEPENDING ON IF IT'S REQUIRED.
IF YOU CAN TAKE AN ACTION TO NOT REQUIRE VARIANCE, I PREFER THAT ON/OFF CLEARLY.
BUT I GUESS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS NOT I DON'T WANT US TO HAVE TO ASK THE SAME QUESTIONS AGAIN AND SO, LIKE ON UNITS 11 AND 12, I JUST NOTICED THIS.
BUT BOTH THE DECKS ARE MOVED OVER IN UNITS 11, AND 12 IN THE UPPER LEFT CORNER.
>> THOSE ARE SLIDE ON GRADES, 9, 10, 11, AND 12 ARE SLIDE ON GRADES.
>> OH, OKAY. WELL, THERE'S THIS, IS STILL SHIFTED, THOUGH AND SO THE ARGUMENT THAT YOU CAN'T MOVE THINGS, LIKE IT DOESN'T MATCH WHAT WE SEE ON HERE.
I'M NOT WILLING TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT ISN'T ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT, LIKE, IN THE CASE OF, IF YOU LOOK AT 59 AND 60 ON THE SAME DRAWING IN THE UPPER RIGHT CORNER RIGHT THERE, 59, 60, IT LOOKS LIKE THE WETLAND COMES RIGHT UP AGAINST IT.
MAYBE IN THAT CASE, IT ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE.
BECAUSE YOU COULDN'T ACTUALLY FEASIBLY MOVE THOSE DECKS TO THE POSITION THAT YOU NEED THEM IN.
BUT I'M ONLY INTERESTED IN THINGS LIKE THAT TO BE MORE EXPLICIT IN WHAT MY EXPECTATIONS ARE.
>> CAN WE JUST POSTPONE WITHOUT A MOTION?
>> YOU GOT TO HAVE A MOTION. IF YOU POSTPONE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO TAKE IT UP.
>> WE DON'T HAVE TO UNTABLE IT, BUT WE STILL NEED MOTION.
>> THAT WAS MY MISTAKE LAST TIME I SIT ON TABLE.
>> THAT'S ALL RIGHT. WE'VE USED THAT BEFORE SO [LAUGHTER] IT'S JUST ANOTHER ONE EXTRA STEP. ONE EXTRA VOTE.
>> I GUESS I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO POSTPONE ZBA CASE NUMBER 24-11 FOR THE GRAND RESERVE MAYBERRY HOLMES UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, WHICHEVER MEETING WE HAVE, WHATEVER MONTH THAT IS NEXT AVAILABLE MEETING THAT WE HAVE BECAUSE WE MAY NOT HAVE ONE NEXT MONTH.
>> WELL, WILL BE NEXT MONTH. THE NEXT MEETING.
>> THIS IS A MOTION TO POSTPONE TO ZBA CASE NUMBER 24-11 TO FEBRUARY 2025 MEETING.
>> TECHNICALLY, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN DISCUSS A POSTPONE, YOU CAN DISCUSS IT TO ME, YOU CAN'T DISCUSS A TABLE. SORRY.
>> I'M ALL SCREWED UP. [LAUGHTER]. I LOOKED A ROBERT'S RULES THIS MORNING. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THIS IS A VOTE TO POSTPONE.
ZBA CASE NUMBER 24-11. MEMBER KOENIG?
>> THE CHAIR VOTES, YES. YOUR CASE HAS BEEN POSTPONED UNTIL FEBRUARY 2025.
I WOULD TELL YOU THE EXACT DATE, FEBRUARY 19TH. THANK YOU.
[LAUGHTER] MI GOOGLE CALENDAR DID NOT POP UP THIS.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND I APOLOGIZE ABOUT COMING BACK.
>> WE LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING A CONVERSATION AND APPRECIATE YOUR WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH US.
>> WE'RE TRYING TO DO THE BEST AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP.
[6.A. ZBA CASE NO.: 25-01 (Playmakers Inc.), 2299 West Grand River Avenue, Okemos, MI 48864]
>> LET'S GO TO OUR FRIENDS OF PLAYMAKERS. OH MY GOODNESS.
I GOT TO GET ALL THE WAY UP TO THE TOP THERE.
ZBA CASE NUMBER 25-01 PLAYMAKERS 2299 WEST GRAND RIVER AVENUE, OKEMOS, MICHIGAN 48864. KEITH, GO AHEAD.
>> THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO EXTEND THE EXISTING OFF STREET PARKING AND DELIVERY AREA ON THE SUBJECT SITE.
THIS CONSISTS OF THREE PROPERTIES LOCATED ON SCHOOL STREET, INCLUDING ONE UNADDRESSED AND 5691 AND 5707 SCHOOL STREET.
CURRENTLY, THERE'S TWO EXISTING BUILDINGS THAT ARE 6,541 SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS THE EAST BUILDING AND 3,438 SQUARE FOOT WEST BUILDING ON SITE.
ACCORDING TO OUR MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP ASSESSING RECORDS, THE EAST BUILDING WAS BUILT IN 1974 AND THE WEST BUILDING IN 1920.
THESE BUILDINGS ARE PROPOSED TO BE USED FOR PROCESSING CENTER OR OFFICE AND WAREHOUSE STORAGE.
THE SUBJECT SITE IN TOTAL IS 2.28 ACRES IN SIZE AND A ZONE C-2 COMMERCIAL.
WHAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING IS TO EXTEND
[01:25:02]
THE PAVED PARKING AREA THAT'S ADJACENT TO SCHOOL STREET.THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE WILL BE CLOSED, AND A NEW PAVED DRIVE TOWARDS THE SOUTH OF THE SITE WILL SERVE AS THE ONLY POINT OF ACCESS.
PAVING WILL BE ADDED TO THE NORTH OF THE PARKING LOT TO ACCOMMODATE DELIVERY TRUCKS TURNING AROUND.
SECTION 86-756-11 REQUIRES THAT A 20-FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER CONSISTING OF A VERTICAL SCREEN, MASONRY WALL, PLANT MATERIAL, A LANDSCAPE BERM OR COMBINED THEREOF IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE SITE AND LESS THAN THREE FEET IN HEIGHT SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO SCREEN THE PARKING AREA FROM VIEW ALONG THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THIS BUFFER STRIP.
THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO PAVE UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE, SO A VARIANCE OF 20 FEET IS REQUESTED.
>> DID THAT COME FROM THE CABS OR FROM THE SITE PLAN? BECAUSE FROM WHAT WE SAW ON THE SITE PLAN, IT'S A 9'8'' BUFFER IN BETWEEN.
ALL UP THERE. I'M SORRY YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT UP THERE.
>> YEAH. RIGHT HERE IS 9.8, HERE IS 0.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAPMAN.
WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO GIVE HIS NAME AND ADDRESS TO THE PUBLIC RECORDS? HE'S READY. LET'S GO.
I'M ONE OF THE CO-OWNERS OF PLAYMAKERS.
I LIVE AT 6499 PERRY ROAD IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP IN HASLETT.
THANK YOU, GUYS FOR PROVIDING THE TIME AND ENERGY FOR THIS VARIANCE REQUEST.
THANK YOU FOR KEITH FOR WORKING WITH US AND ALONG WITH KEBS ON CREATING THIS PROPOSED EXTENSION OF OUR DRIVEWAY AT THE PROCESSING CENTER.
I GUESS, A LITTLE BIT OF BACKSTORY ON THIS, YOU GUYS KNOW THE STORY ABOUT THE THREE PROPERTIES.
ONE NOTE ON THE THREE PROPERTIES, WE ARE IN THE PROCESS RIGHT NOW OF COMBINING THOSE INTO A SINGLE PROPERTY.
I BELIEVE KEITH SAID THAT HAS ALREADY PASSED THE TOWNSHIP AND HAS BEEN PASSED ON TO THE COUNTY.
THERE WAS SOME EASEMENT ISSUES WITH THAT, AND IT WAS SUGGESTED BY KEITH AND BRIAN SHORKEY THAT THAT WOULD BE IN OUR BEST INTEREST JUST TO HAVE ALL THREE PROPERTIES AS A SINGLE UNIT.
PLAYMAKERS PURCHASED A SCHOOL STREET FACILITY IN DECEMBER OF 2023 AND TURNED IT INTO OUR PROCESSING CENTER ALONG WITH USING OFFICE SPACE AND INTERNAL MEETING ROOMS. WITH REGARDS TO THE PROCESSING CENTER, WE RECEIVE OUR BUCK SHIPMENTS OVER AT THAT LOCATION, PROCESS THEM FOR OUR VARIOUS SALES CHANNELS, AND THEN PASS THEM ALONG TO THOSE CHANNELS.
PART OF THIS PROCESS IS OFTEN RECEIVING FREIGHT.
A LOT OF TIMES IT COMES ON LIKE, IF YOU THINK ABOUT A 26-FOOT RENTAL PENSKE TRUCK, SOMETHING THAT SIZE, AND THE CURRENT DRIVEWAY HAS ROOM FOR THAT SIZE TRUCK.
WHAT WE'RE FINDING MORE AND MORE IS WE ARE ACTUALLY RECEIVING IT ON A FULL SEMI.
THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY AT THAT LOCATION CANNOT ACCOMMODATE THAT FULL SEMI.
WHEN WE GET A FULL SEMI DELIVERY, THAT SEMI PARALLEL PARKS ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD, IF YOU THINK ABOUT SOMEONE DOING A DELIVERY DOWN IN EAST LANSING AND ON GRAND RIVER, WHAT YOU WOULD SEE DOWN THERE.
THEN WE WILL DRIVE OUR FORKLIFT FROM THE PROCESSING CENTER OUT AND UNLOAD IT ONE PALLET AT A TIME.
SAFETY IS OUR MAIN CONCERN HERE.
WHEN WE GET THAT SEMI, WE PARK IT IN A SPOT AS CLOSE TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AS POSSIBLE.
WE PLACE CONES AND DESIGNATED SPOTS TO ALERT THE CARS THAT WE ARE ACTIVELY UNLOADING.
CARS CAN STILL GET BY US, BUT WE ARE DRIVING A FORKLIFT OUT INTO THE ROAD PULLING PALLETS OUT ONE AT A TIME, CROSSING THE SIDEWALK EVERY TIME THAT WE GO BACK AND FORTH WHEN WE DO THIS.
AGAIN, SAFETY, THAT'S OUR MAIN CONCERN.
SAFETY CONCERNS FOR THE PEDESTRIANS UTILIZING A SIDEWALK.
WE ARE RIGHT NEXT TO AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, WE ARE NEXT TO A MIDDLE SCHOOL AND NEXT TO A HIGH SCHOOL.
FROM MY STANDPOINT AS AN OWNER OF PLAYMAKERS AND OUR OWNERSHIP TEAM, ALL OF US, ACTUALLY, WHAT WE CALL OUR THIRD GENERATION OWNERS WE ALL HAVE KIDS IN HASLETT SCHOOLS SO WE KNOW VERY WELL THOSE CONCERNS.
SAFETY CONCERNS OF VEHICLES DRIVING, THAT IS WHY WE UTILIZE A CONE.
WE DRIVE A BIG YELLOW FORKLIFT.
WE HAVE AN AWESOME TEAM, AND WE REALLY TAKE THEIR SAFETY TO HEART.
THEN FINALLY, UNLOADING IN THE ROAD CREATES AN EXTENDED TIME THAT THAT SEMI IS ON SITE.
IT DOES TAKE LONGER TO UNLOAD IT THAN IF IT WAS CLOSER TO THE BUILDING.
FROM A PLAYMAKER STANDPOINT, WE'RE EXTREMELY MINDFUL OF THE STUDENTS AT RALYA, THE MIDDLE SCHOOL AND HIGH SCHOOL AND PLANNED DELIVERIES AROUND THOSE PICK UP TIMES.
WE DO NOT ALLOW DELIVERIES EARLY IN THE MORNING AND AFTER 2:00,
[01:30:04]
WE'VE PRETTY MUCH STOPPED DELIVERIES AT THAT POINT AS WELL.WE HAVE A PRETTY TIGHT WINDOW, AND THAT IS TO AVOID ANY SCHOOL CONFLICTS AND TO AVOID KIDS WALKING BY THE FACILITY.
BEING ABLE TO EXTEND OR DRIVE WOULD BRING THE SEMIS UP ON THE PROPERTY.
WE WOULD NOT OBSTRUCT THE SIDEWALK, AND WE WOULD NOT BE DRIVING OVER IT.
THAT'S ONE OF OUR MAIN POINTS RIGHT THERE IS WE JUST WANT TO GET THE SEMIS ON THE PROPERTY, UNLOAD THEM.
THEY WILL BE IN AND OUT QUICKER, AND IT WILL BE MUCH SAFER.
I KNOW WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE PROPERTY ITSELF.
I THINK THE PROPERTY WE HAVE TO TALK A LITTLE BIT.
KEITH, CAN YOU ZOOM OUT A LITTLE BIT.
A COUPLE KEY THINGS ON THE PROPERTY, MAYBE.
JUST BEING ABLE TO UNLOAD, DO THIS AT SOME OTHER POINT ON THE PROPERTY, WE HAVE THE RAILROAD TRACKS THAT RUN ON THE NORTHWEST SIDE.
YOU CAN'T REALLY DO ANYTHING THERE.
WE HAVE A VERY SMALL SEGMENT ON HASLETT ROAD, BUT THAT INTERFERE WITH THE RAILROAD CROSSING.
THEN FINALLY, WE HAVE AN AWESOME WOODLAND.
THIS PLOT DOESN'T REALLY SHOW IT, BUT THERE'S PROBABLY AN ACRE OF WOODS IN THE BACK THAT IS A GREAT BUFFER BETWEEN OUR PROPERTY AND RALYA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, AND MAYBE EVEN MORE IMPORTANT, IT PROVIDES A REALLY GOOD BUFFER, A GREEN BUFFER BETWEEN RALYA AND THE RAILROAD TRACK.
WE LOVE HAVING THAT GREEN SPACE, AND WE REALLY HOPE THAT THAT STAYS AS A GREEN WOODED LOT FOR YEARS TO COME.
THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY WE ARE COMBINING ALL THE PROPERTIES JUST TO PROTECT THAT AREA BACK THERE AS WELL.
WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BUFFER, THE GOAL IS TO BRING SEMIS IN COMING DOWN FROM THE NORTH.
THEY'LL PULL UP, WE WILL UNLOAD THEM, AND THEN RIGHT NOW, WHEN THEY'RE PARALLEL APART, THEY TYPICALLY JUST CONTINUE SOUTH DOWN SCHOOL STREET, AND THEN THEY WORK THEIR WAY BACK OUT TO MARSH ROAD.
THEN, AGAIN, SPECIFICALLY, WHEN WE TALKED TO KEITH AND BRIAN SHORKEY AND WORKED WITH KEBS, WE REALLY ARE TRYING TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF THE DRIVE EXPANSION, TRYING TO MAKE THAT BUFFER AREA AS BIG AS POSSIBLE.
BUT REALLY, IT IS TIGHT OVER ON SCHOOL STREET.
THE SIDEWALK ISN'T FULLY ON THE EASEMENT.
THE SIDEWALK LANDS ON OUR PROPERTY ABOUT 2.5 FEET AND THEN THE BUILDING, WHICH, AGAIN, WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1974, JUST 47 FEET OFF OF THE ROAD.
WE'RE REALLY DEALING WITH A PRETTY TIGHT SITUATION OVER THERE.
WE BELIEVE THAT GREG AT KEBS DID A FANTASTIC JOB OF TRYING TO MAXIMIZE THE BUFFER, MINIMIZE THE DRIVE, AND PROVIDE A SAFE EXPERIENCE FOR EVERYONE.
>> MR. MARSH, WE APPRECIATE THAT.
I AM ACTUALLY LOOKING AT GOOGLE EARTH WHILE YOU'RE TALKING BECAUSE I'M FINDING THIS KEBS TRYING VERY DIFFICULT TO SEE WHERE SCHOOL STREET IS, WHERE THE SIDEWALK IS, AND THEN WHERE THE PROPOSED DRIVE IS.
THANK YOU, KEITH. I APPRECIATE THE KEBS DRAWING FOR WHERE WE SEE PROPOSED PAVEMENT.
THERE WE GO. PERFECT. THAT'S GOOD. GO AHEAD.
>> BASICALLY IF YOU LOOK OVER HERE, THERE'S A LITTLE SPOT HERE WHERE THERE'S A PARKING LOT UP HERE AND THEN A SIDEWALK AND THEN A LITTLE GRASS AREA.
THAT SECTION WOULD BE PAVED AND THEN WE WOULD JUST EXTEND THIS DRIVEWAY ALL THE WAY DOWN.
WE HAVE LIKE A FRONT PARKING LOT HERE AND A BACK PARKING LOT.
YOU'D CONNECT THE TWO, AND THEN WE WOULD REMOVE THIS LITTLE SECTION, PART OF THIS ROAD ACCESS RIGHT THERE.
WE WOULD TECHNICALLY GO FROM THREE ROAD ACCESSES DOWN TO TWO ROAD ACCESSES ON THE PROPERTY THAT ALREADY EXIST.
BUT IT WOULD JUST EXTEND THIS DRIVEWAY.
IT WOULD EXTEND IT BY ABOUT 70 FEET RIGHT THERE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. MARSH. WOULD ANYBODY ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE THIS EVENING? ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO GO IN THIS CASE THIS EVENING? IF NOT, WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GET INTO PART TIME.
I ASKED A QUESTION BEFORE WE GOT TO PART TIME.
THAT WAS MY FAULT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. MARSH.
MEMBER KAINE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO AHEAD? WOULD YOU LIKE TO GET STARTED?
>> SURE. FIRST OFF, I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR TAKING SAFETY IN CONSIDERATION.
I THINK I'VE DRIVEN BY THERE BEFORE.
I'VE SEEN THAT TRUCK PARKED OUT THERE AND I'M LIKE, THAT'S AN INTERESTING SPOT FOR A TRUCK TO BE PARKED THERE, AND I DIDN'T SEE ANY FORKLIFT IN THAT, BUT JUST SEEING A TRUCK PARKED ON THAT ROAD JUST MADE ME WONDER,
[01:35:02]
HOW WAS THAT GUY GETTING AROUND AND GETTING THROUGH THERE? WITH RESPECT TO THAT, WE REALLY TRY AND MINIMIZE THAT TIME THAT IT'S THERE.FROM WHAT A NORMAL FACILITY MIGHT DO IS LIKE, TRUCK ARRIVES, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR TIME.
WE TYPICALLY TRY AND PINPOINT EXACTLY WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO ARRIVE.
WE'RE TALKING WITHIN 20 MINUTES AND ACTUALLY HAVE STAFF WAITING TO UNLOAD THEM, SO THEY WOULD BE IN THERE, AND THEIR GOAL IS ONCE THAT TRUCK ARRIVES, GET OUT THERE AS QUICKLY AS CAN AND UNLOAD IT OUT THERE.
>> I CAN PEEL IN, UNDERSTANDING HERE AND THERE.
IT STILL IS A HAZARD BECAUSE SOMEONE CAN FLY AROUND THAT CORNER AND NOT PAY ATTENTION AND RUN RIGHT INTO THE BACK OF THE TRUCK OR GOD FORBID HIT ONE OF YOUR STAFF.
I TOTALLY AGREE THAT SAFETY BEING ONE THING, THIS WILL BE A HUGE IMPROVEMENT TO SAFETY IN THAT AREA.
THE QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU THOUGH IS SEMIS ARE BIG.
FROM THE FRONT OF THE ENGINE TO THE BACK OF THE TRUCK COVER, THOSE THINGS ARE 50-53 FEET.
CAN YOU WALK ME THROUGH, HOW WOULD ONE PULL IN AND HOW WOULD ONE TURN AROUND? BECAUSE IF THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING IS ONLY 40 FEET AWAY FROM, LET'S SAY THE ROAD TO THE PROPERTY LINE, THAT THING'S GOING TO BE ALMOST HEAVY.
IT BACKS UP FROM THERE. IT'S GOING TO BE HANGING OVER THE EDGE OF THAT PROPERTY ALMOST INTO THE STREET.
>> REALLY, AND MAYBE THE TURNAROUND PORTION IS WHEN KEITH WAS EXPLAINING AT THE VERY BEGINNING, WHICH I DON'T ANTICIPATE THEY WOULD TURN AROUND.
RIGHT NOW WHEN THEY COME IN FROM THE NORTH, THEY BASICALLY PARK ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE ROAD, THE BACK OF THEIR TRAILER RIGHT THERE, AND WE DRIVE A FORKLIFT OUT AND JUST UNLOAD AND GO BACK AND FORTH.
WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS THAT SEMI WOULD COME AROUND THE CORNER PULLING HERE, SO NOW THE BACK OF THE TRAILER IS RIGHT THERE, THE FRONT OF THE SEMI IS HERE, AND INSTEAD OF TURNING AROUND, THEY WOULD PROBABLY DO WHAT THEY'RE DOING RIGHT NOW AND JUST CONTINUE DOWN SOUTH.
>> ENTRY FROM HASLETT ROAD, EXIT BACK DOWN SOUTH SCHOOL ROAD TO MARSH ROAD?
>> INSTEAD OF TRAVELING THIS MEANS TO TURN AROUND?
>> MY QUESTION WAS, ARE THEY TRYING TO DO LIKE A FULL K TURN? THEY'RE JUST GOING TO BASICALLY PULL IN, CONTINUE STRAIGHT, AND JUST PULL OUT?
>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE LEARNED FROM HERE IS WE HAVE A LOT OF DISCRETION WITH THE DELIVERY DRIVERS WHERE WHEN THEY'RE GETTING THEIR BOL, BILL OF LADING, THEY ARE ALSO GETTING INSTRUCTIONS FOR US, AND WE GIVE THEM THE INSTRUCTION OF COMING UP HASLETT AND TURNING DOWN GOING SOUTH ON THE SCHOOL STREET.
>> I JUST NEED TO CLARIFY A MISTAKE THAT I MADE.
THE VARIANCE IS FOR 9.8 FEET, NOT ZERO FEET BECAUSE THAT'S TECHNICALLY A DRIVE.
>> WORKS IN YOUR FAVOR. MR. MARSH.
>> WE LIKE ANYTHING THAT WORKS IN OUR FAVOR.
>> WE LIKE WORKING WITH YOUR BRILLIANT MIND TOO.
IT'S BEEN A ROUGH NIGHT SO FAR.
I HAVE A QUESTION, AND THIS WOULD PERTAIN TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND THIS IS BEING A MORE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE, BUT CAN YOU ALWAYS PREDICT EXACTLY WHEN A TRUCK IS GOING TO PULL UP?
NOT ALWAYS, BUT WE ARE PRETTY GOOD AT IT.
>> FOR PUBLIC SAFETY PURPOSES, IT'S VERY POSSIBLE THAT A TRUCK SOMETHING HAPPENED, THERE'S AN ACCIDENT, THERE'S A SNOWSTORM, THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COMES UP, THERE'S A TRAIN STUCK ON THE TRACK.
THEY PULL UP AT 2:45 PM, AND NOW YOU'VE GOT RALYA ABOUT TO LET OUT, THE MIDDLE SCHOOLS ALREADY LET OUT, HIGH SCHOOLS LET OUT, THERE'S KIDS AND CARS EVERYWHERE.
BLOCKING OFF SCHOOL STREET WITH A SEMI AT THAT TIME WOULDN'T BE IDEAL, BUT SOUNDS LIKE IT WOULD BE PRETTY TOUGH AND A PRETTY BIG HAZARD GENERALLY SPEAKING.
I CAN ALREADY LOOK AT THIS AND MEET THAT CRITERIA THAT THIS MORE THAN ANYTHING IS A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE.
SCHOOL STREET, IT'S A VERY NARROW ROAD, AND IT'S NARROW FOR TWO CARS, LEVEL FOR A SEMI AND A CAR.
THAT'S JUST WHERE I STAND WITH PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES AND WITH PUBLIC SAFETY, SO WITH CRITERIA IS TRAINING FOR.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS MEMBERS PRESENT?
>> I WOULD ASK MR. CHAPMAN IF THIS BEING A DRIVE RATHER THAN A PARKING LOT, IF THE SETBACK IS DIFFERENT, THE BUFFER ZONE.
>> WITH A DRIVE, THERE'S NO SETBACK OBVIOUSLY BECAUSE IT HAS TO HIT THE STREET.
BUT WITH THE NEW PAVEMENT TO THE SOUTH THERE, IT'S STILL 9.8 FEET,
[01:40:01]
SO THAT'S STILL A PARKING LOT BUFFER.>> A 20 FOOT PARKING LOT BUFFER SEEMED AWFUL BIG TO ME.
>> THAT'S WHAT OUR ORDINANCE SAYS FOR-
>> IT SEEMS TO ME THAT A LOT OF OUR PARKING LOTS ARE MUCH CLOSER THAN 20 FEET FROM A ROADWAY OR FROM A PROPERTY LINE.
>> HOW KEBS HAD IT DRAWN AND EXPLAINED TO ME IS THE PARKING LOT PORTION WOULD ACTUALLY BE 12.32 FEET OFF OF THE PROPERTY LINE.
THE CHALLENGE ON SCHOOL STREET IS THAT SIDEWALK STRADDLES THE PROPER STREET LINE, SO IT WILL BE A LITTLE BIT SMALLER, THE ACTUAL GREEN SPACE BUFFER THAT WE'RE REQUESTING BECAUSE OF WHERE THE SIDEWALK IS.
>> THE SIDEWALK, IT'S HARD TO SEE IN HERE.
I'M ASSUMING THAT THE SIDEWALK IS STILL GOING TO RUN NORTH-SOUTH THROUGH HERE, AND ALL THAT FITS WITHIN WHAT WE WOULD EXPECT GIVEN THE DRIVEWAY COMMENT AS WELL.
BUT DOES A DRIVE IMPACT THE SIDEWALK DIFFERENTLY?
>> NO. THE SIDEWALK WOULDN'T CHANGE THE LOCATION. THAT'S THE SAME.
>> I'M LOOKING AT IT HERE, TOO.
I'M LOOKING AT IT VIA GOOGLE EARTH, WHICH HELPS.
LOOKING AT THE [INAUDIBLE] DRAWING, IT'S HARD FOR ME.
>> BUT MY OTHER COMMENT HERE IS THAT I THINK THIS MAKES SENSE.
YOU HAVE A BUSINESS NEED HERE, AND THIS IS AN INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY SITE, AND IT MAKES SENSE THAT A SEMI WOULD BE NECESSARY TO DO THIS.
IT SEEMS MUCH SAFER TO BE ABLE TO PULL IT IN RATHER THAN LEAVE IT ON THE ROAD, SO HOWEVER WE NEED TO DO THAT.
IF THIS IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE THAT WE CAN GRANT TO DO THAT, THEN I THINK THAT THAT MAKES SENSE.
>> REALLY, I'M TRUSTING [INAUDIBLE] IN THIS STANDPOINT OF WE ASK THEM TO DRAW THE MINIMUM SIZE REQUIRED, A LITTLE BIT FINANCIALLY BECAUSE MINIMUM IS GOING TO COST US A LITTLE BIT MORE, BUT ALSO MORE IMPORTANTLY, MINIMALIST FOR WHAT WE TRULY NEED IT FOR.
IT'S NOT LIKE WE HAVE THIS CONSTANT STREAM OF SEMIS COMING IN THERE.
IT IS ONCE OR TWICE A WEEK, USUALLY, WHERE WE HAVE THESE DELIVERIES.
IT IS RARELY USED TO THAT EXTENT, BUT WE DO WANT THAT DRIVER TO FEEL SAFE PULLING IN AND COMFORTABLE LIKE THEY HAVE ENOUGH ROOM.
>> THE OTHER COMMENT I WOULD ADD BASED ON THAT IS THAT GIVEN THE AGE OF THE BUILDING CREATES DEFINITELY UNIQUE SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES FOR WHY THIS VARIANCE IS NECESSARY.
>> I WOULD AGREE WITH MEMBER BROOKS.
I WOULD ALSO ADD THAT LOOKING AT THE PARCEL ITSELF AND THE FUNCTIONALITY OF WHERE YOU COULD PULL IN AND OUT REALLY LEAVES YOU WITH ONLY ONE OPTION.
I THINK, MR. MARSH, YOU CAN PROBABLY ATTEST TO THAT.
YOU PROBABLY HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT HOW COULD WE DO THIS, ANY OF THE RICK? YOU GOT THE RAILROAD TRACK, YOU GOT THE SCHOOL, YOU GOT A NARROW ROAD.
YOU'RE REALLY PINNED TO ONLY ONE SPOT.
>> CAN YOU GET YOUR SHOES DELIVERED BY RAIL? [LAUGHTER].
>> THEY JUST THROW IT OFF THE CAR.
THAT COULD BE A WHOLE NEW STREAM OF EXTREME SPORTS.
>> MAN, I'M NOT SURE IF PEOPLE WOULD WANT THAT TRAIN TO STOP AND BLOCK THAT HAZARD.
>> WHICH WAY IT'S COMING FROM.
>> THAT'S JAKE, ONE OF MY CO-OWNERS OVER THERE.
WE ARE NOW VERY AWARE OF HOW MANY TRAINS YOU'VE SAT, THAT TRACK A DAY.
[OVERLAPPING] THAT IS WAY MORE THAN I EVER KNEW, SO IT'S A LOT.
>> THE THIRD LOT YOU HAVE, THAT IS THE ONE SOUTH OF HERE THAT GOES ALL THE WAY OVER TO THE FORESTED LAND?
>> YES. BECAUSE THAT WOULD REALLY BE THE ONLY OTHER SPOT YOU COULD GET A SEMI IN AND TURN AROUND, BUT YOU WOULD BE CARRYING [OVERLAPPING] A ONE-ACRE WOOD LOT, BASICALLY.
>> IT'S NOT IDEAL. THE ONLY THING THAT WOULD ALLOW IS SOMEONE TO EXIT AND TURN LEFT ON SCHOOL STREET AND GO UP TO HASLETT RATHER THAN GOING DOWN BY THE SCHOOL.
>> YES. [OVERLAPPING] TURNING LEFT TO HASLETT WOULD BE INTERESTING. [OVERLAPPING]
>> COME ON UP. YOU GOT TO GET UP THERE.
YOU GOT TO GO ON RECORD IF YOU'RE GOING TO TALK TO US.
>> THERE IS AN ILLEGAL LEFT TURN. [OVERLAPPING]
TELL US YOUR NAME SO THAT YOU CAN GET ON THE MINUTES.
>> JAKE CROWE FROM PLAYMAKERS.
>> LIVE IN HASLETT, BUT THERE'S AN ILLEGAL LEFT-HAND TURN THERE, SO YOU CAN'T GO NORTH AND TURN LEFT.
>> NOT EVEN A CAR, LET ALONE A SEMI TRUCK THAT WANT TO GO LEFT TURN.
>> THEN I IMAGINE THAT'S PROBABLY FOR SAKE OF NOT ONLY SAFETY,
[01:45:04]
BUT ALSO THAT RAIL TRACKS RIGHT THERE.>> I'M THINKING, A SEMI TRUCK CAN'T REALLY MAKE THAT RIGHT-HAND TURN, NOW THAT THERE WERE THE WALL AND THAT BUILDING.
>> ABSOLUTELY, AS TIGHT AS THAT IS.
I FEEL PREPARED TO TAKE A LOOK AT CRITERIA.
>> I WILL JUMP STRAIGHT INTO CRITERIA 1, 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-CURATIVE.
>> CRITERIA NUMBER 2 SAYS 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.
WE HAVE A COMMERCIALLY ZONED BUILDING THEY CAN'T GET TRUCKS TO, OR WE CAN GET TRUCKS TO, BUT WE'RE ENTERING INTO A VERY UNSAFE AND VERY CHALLENGING TYPE OF SITUATION.
>> YOU DON'T THINK AN EIGHT-FOOT DRIVEWAY THROUGH THERE IS WIDE ENOUGH FOR A SEMI?
>> [LAUGHTER] IT DOESN'T SEEM TO HAVE BEEN WORKING SO FAR.
>> NO. I AGREE WITH THAT ALSO.
>> I CAN ABSOLUTELY MEET ANY CRITERIA TOO EASILY.
CRITERIA 3 IS GRANTING THE VARIANCE AS THE MINIMUM ACTION NECESSARY THAT WOULD CARRY OUT THE SPIRIT OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, SECURE PUBLIC SAFETY, AND PROVIDE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE.
AGAIN, FROM A PUBLIC SAFETY STANDPOINT, I CAN MEET THIS ALL DAY.
THIS JUST MAKES SENSE, IT REALLY DOES.
I THINK THEY'VE TAKEN GREAT CONSIDERATION TO KEEP IN MIND WHAT THEY COULD DO TO HELP MINIMIZE THE IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD AROUND IT, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THAT AS WELL, LIKE THE HASLETT SCHOOLS SET.
>> IT'S THE ONLY WAY I SEE THAT THEY CAN GET THE TRUCK OFF THE STREET.
>> I DON'T KNOW HOW ELSE YOU COULD, AND GETTING THE TRUCK OFF THE STREET IS ESSENTIAL.
>> IT COULD BUILD THE 20 FOOT BUFFER THERE.
IT WOULD JUST HAVE TIRE TRACKS RUNNING THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF IT.
>> [LAUGHTER] YOU HAVE A SEMI PARKED THERE TWO OR THREE TIMES A WEEK.
>> THE GRASS AND FLOWERS WILL BE CROSSED [INAUDIBLE]
>> VERY EARLY ON, WE HAD A SEMI DRIVER PULL UP AND THROUGH THE GRASS LIKE THAT.
>> IT MARKED ITSELF. THERE YOU GO.
>> NUMBER 4 WOULD BE GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND OR THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPERTY.
I THINK ALREADY, WE'VE NOTICED THAT THEY'RE KEEPING THAT GREEN SPACE BEHIND, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT I KNOW A LOT OF US FEEL VERY PASSIONATELY ABOUT.
IT SEEMS LIKE THEY ALSO FEEL VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT.
I THINK THIS MINIMIZES THAT IMPACT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ALSO REALLY PROTECTS PEOPLE. MEMBER KOENIG.
>> I WOULD THINK JUST GETTING THAT TRUCK OFF THE STREET WOULD BE A BENEFIT TO THE NEIGHBORS.
>> BOOST. CRITERIA 5 SAYS GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL BE GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH PUBLIC INTEREST AND THE PURPOSES AND INTENT OF THIS CHAPTER.
AGAIN, I CAN MEET THAT CRITERIA.
>> IN THAT CASE, WE HAVE A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION.
I WANT MOTION TO APPROVE ZONING BOARD OF CASE NUMBER 25-01.
LET ME GO BACK UP TO THE AGENDA.
PLAYMAKERS INC., 2299 WEST GRAND RIVER AVENUE.
>> SUPPORTED BY MEMBER TREZISE.
ANY COMMENT ON THE MOTION AS PRESENTED?
>> THE ONLY COMMENT I WOULD HAVE IS THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS TO US.
I THINK IT'S A VERY BENEFICIAL CHANGE TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND SAFETY OF OUR STUDENTS THERE.
>> YOU'RE WELCOME. I THINK ROGER, WHO SPOKE BEFORE, ACTUALLY, I WROTE DOWN ONE OF HIS QUOTES AT THE VERY END.
YOU DON'T KNOW A COMMUNITY UNTIL YOU LIVED IN IT, AND WE REALLY FEEL THAT PART.
EVEN ON SCHOOL STREET, WE'VE LEARNED SO MUCH ABOUT THAT AREA.
WE'RE GLAD WHEN WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY OVER ON SCHOOL STREET.
PLAYMAKERS VERY MUCH WANTED TO STAY IN THE TOWNSHIP, STAY IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO OUR STORE.
MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP IS OUR HOME, AND WE'RE REALLY GLAD WE MADE THAT CHOICE JUST OVER A YEAR AGO NOW.
>> IT JUST HAPPENED TO BE THAT ALL FOUR OF THE NEW THIRD GENERATION OWNERS, OUR KIDS WERE IN THE SCHOOL RIGHT NEXT DOOR, SO IT'S BEEN AWESOME JUST TO BE REALLY CLOSE.
IF SOMETHING WERE TO HAPPEN, WE CAN RUN RIGHT OVER THERE.
WE DO THE FAMILY FUN RUNS OVER THERE AS IT IS, SO WE'RE AT THE SCHOOLS ALL THE TIME.
IT IS JUST VERY CONVENIENT TO BE CLOSE TO THE WAREHOUSE, WHICH IS ALSO RELATIVELY CLOSE TO PLAYMAKERS HOME BUILDING AND THEN OUR OWN HOMES.
>> THAT'S WHAT COMMUNITY IS ABOUT, AND THAT'S WHAT MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP WANTS TO BE AND PROPOSES TO BE ABOUT.
[01:50:03]
AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, THAT IS THE ABSOLUTE INTENT OF THIS CHAPTER.[OVERLAPPING] MEMBER BROOKS, GO FOR IT.
>> MR. CHAPMAN MENTIONED DURING A COMMENT THAT THE BUFFER WAS 9.8 FEET. IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID?
>> NOT THE ZERO. [OVERLAPPING] THE VARIANCE IS NOT FOR ZERO FEET.
>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE. [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT IS PART OF THE MOTION.
>> CAN HE AMEND HIS MOTION TO ADD THAT? [OVERLAPPING]
MY MOTION TO APPROVE WOULD BE TO APPROVE AT 10.2 FEET VARIANCE AS NOTED BY STAFF.
>> I WILL SUPPORT THAT. THANK YOU, MEMBER BROOKS.
>> THIS IS A VOTE TO APPROVE THE MOTION FOR ZONING BOARD CASE NUMBER 25-01, INCLUDING A 10.2 VARIANCE.
>> THE CHAIR VOTES YES, SO YOUR VARIANCE HAS BEEN APPROVED.
THANK YOU GUYS VERY MUCH FOR [OVERLAPPING] WHAT YOU DO FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND FOR ALWAYS TAKING THE STEP TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND COMING TO US AS OPPOSED TO JUST DOING IT.
WE APPRECIATE WORKING WITH YOU, AND KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. [OVERLAPPING]
>> ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. YES.
>> IN THAT NOTE, GOING BACK TO OUR AGENDA,
[7.A. Election of 2025 Officers ]
WE HAVE SOME OFFICIAL ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS BUSINESS, TO ELECT OUR 2025 OFFICERS.WITH THAT, MEMBER KOENIG? [LAUGHTER]
>> I SPOKE WITH STAFF, MR. CHAPMAN, EARLIER AND IT SOUNDS LIKE MEMBER BENOIT HAS RESIGNED BECAUSE HE'S NO LONGER LIVING IN THE TOWNSHIP.
SOUNDS LIKE THERE IS A NEW MEMBER GOING TO BE COMING ON, BUT THEY'RE NOT OFFICIALLY SWORN IN THROUGH THE BOARD YET.
YOU WILL SEE THEM AT THE NEXT BOARD MEETING, BUT SINCE THEY'RE BRAND NEW, I THINK THAT JUST LEAVES YOU AND I. I WOULD MAKE THE MOTION TO NOMINATE MS. MANSOUR AS OUR CHAIR FOR THE ZBA FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR.
>> CAN THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER BE NOMINATED?
>> YOU REALLY DO FEEL GOOD. [LAUGHTER]
>> OTHERWISE, I'D BE OUT IN THE STAIRWAY.
>> YOU WOULDN'T BE HERE TODAY.
>> HE WOULD BE IMMEDIATELY ABSENT.
ON THAT NOTE, THIS IS A VOTE, YES?
>> VOTE TO SUPPORT MS. MANSOUR AS CHAIR FOR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2025. MEMBER KOENIG.
[OVERLAPPING] DO I HAVE TO VOTE FOR MYSELF?
>> I WILL VOTE FOR MYSELF AND HUMBLY ACCEPT.
>> BUT I THINK I HAVE TO STILL DO THAT WITH CLERK DEMAS, I BELIEVE.
>> BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT YOU HAVE TO DO IT.
>> I DON'T THINK, TECHNICALLY.
>> I THINK THAT I DID IT ON ZOOM LAST TIME.
>> I WOULD NOMINATE MR. KOENIG AS VICE CHAIR OF THE ZBA FOR 2025.
>> I DO NOT ACCEPT. [LAUGHTER]
>> [LAUGHTER] THIS IS A VOTE FOR VICE CHAIR KOENIG FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2025 FOR THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS.
MEMBER KOENIG, WOULD YOU LIKE TO ACCEPT?
>> I'M PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH THAT.
ON THAT NOTE, WE HAVE COMPLETED OUR DUTIES, AS FAR AS THE AGENDA GOES.
I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR TO PUBLIC REMARKS.
I WILL QUICKLY CLOSE THE PUBLIC REMARKS UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY, YOUNG LADY.
[01:55:03]
NO? I WILL GO TO BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS.[9. BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS ]
BOARD MEMBERS, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY? SPEAK NOW OR SPEAK AT THE NEXT MEETING.>> I CONGRATULATE YOU AND THE BOARD FOR THE DISCUSSION WITH REGARD TO MAYBERRY HOMES AND DKN.
I THOUGHT IT WAS VERY INFORMATIVE, AND IT MAKES IT A PLEASURE TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD.
>> THANK YOU. I WOULD DEFINITELY AGREE.
I WELCOME THAT EVERYONE HERE IS WILLING TO LISTEN AND EVERYONE HERE IS WILLING TO TRY AND FIND A SOLUTION.
WE'RE NOT ALWAYS GOING TO FIND A SOLUTION.
SOME HOMEOWNERS, SOME APPLICANTS ARE JUST NOT GOING TO WANT TO HAVE A SOLUTION TO A PROBLEM, THEY WANT WHAT THEY WANT.
BUT I THINK IN GENERAL, WE ALL HAVE THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE TOWNSHIP IN MIND, WHICH IS WE KNOW THAT THESE THINGS ARE COMING. DEVELOPMENTS ARE COMING.
HOW CAN WE BEST KEEP THEM WITHIN THE ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN AND WHERE OUR JOB COMES IN? HOW CAN WE GRANT VARIANCES? THEY'RE NECESSARY, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS.
HOW CAN WE DO OUR JOB TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY WITH STAYING WITHIN THAT IDEA AND THE INTENT? I THINK WE DID A GREAT JOB. I'M PROUD OF US.
HOPEFULLY, THEY COME BACK [LAUGHTER] HAVING DONE SOME WORK BECAUSE THAT'S REALLY WHAT I WAS HOPING FOR, BUT I APPRECIATE THAT THEY WERE WILLING TO LISTEN TO THE FEEDBACK.
LET'S HOPE WE HAVE A PRODUCTIVE MEETING NEXT MONTH. YES, MEMBER KOENIG.
>> ONE LAST THING, I DO CONCUR WITH MEMBER TREZISE'S COMMENTS, AND I ALSO WANT TO SAY, AS LONG AS YOU ARE AVAILABLE TO BE THE CHAIR, UNLESS ONE OF THESE TWO WANTS TO STEP DOWN FROM THEIR POSTS AND BE JUST A REGULAR MEMBER FROM THE TOWNSHIP, I WOULD SUPPORT YOU BEING THE CHAIR BECAUSE I THINK YOU DO A FANTASTIC JOB.
>> YOU ALWAYS HANDLE YOURSELF VERY PROFESSIONALLY, EVEN IN TOUGH SITUATIONS.
THIS WASN'T THE TOUGHEST SITUATION. WE'VE HAD WORSE.
>> THANKFULLY, WE'VE HAD WORSE.
>> NO, I THINK YOU HANDLE YOURSELF VERY WELL AS THE CHAIR, AND THAT'S WHY I HAVE NO PROBLEM NOW MAKING YOU AS A CHAIR AGAIN.
>> THANK YOU. I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT VOTE OF CONFIDENCE, GUYS. IT'S A LOT OF FUN FOR ME.
>> JUST DON'T MISS ANY MEETINGS.
>> I'M GOING TO TRY. THIS YEAR SHOULD BE A LOT EASIER.
LAST YEAR WAS A LITTLE TRICKY.
THIS YEAR SHOULDN'T BE A PROBLEM.
WE MIGHT HAVE AN EIGHT-YEAR-OLD IN THE AUDIENCE, BUT IT'S OKAY.
SHE'S LEARNING A LOT ABOUT WHERE SHE LIVES.
>> AT LEAST WE CAN SAY WE HAVE A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC AT EVERY ONE OF OUR MEETINGS.
>> YOU CAN ALWAYS GIVE A PUBLIC COMMENT BECAUSE YOU ARE ACTUALLY A CITIZEN OF THIS TOWNSHIP.
DID YOU KNOW THAT? WITH THAT NOTE, I WILL CLOSE THE BOARD COMMENTS, AND I WILL SAY THIS MEETING IS OFFICIALLY ADJOURNED.
>> THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.