Mar 04, 2025 Township Board

[1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]

[00:02:08]

FIRST ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING IS THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

FOR THOSE WHO ARE ABLE, PLEASE RISE AND JOIN US FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS ROLL CALL, DEPUTY CLERK GORDON PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON HERE. CLERK DEMAS HERE.

TREASURER DESCHAINE HERE. TRUSTEE LENTZ HERE.

TRUSTEE SUNDLAND HERE. TRUSTEE WILSON HERE. TRUSTEE TREZISE HERE.

ALL BOARD MEMBERS ARE PRESENT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS ITEM 4A, IT'S A THE PRESENTATION ON OUR DEER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.

[4. PRESENTATION]

OH HOW DO I CLICK NEXT. JUST ASK YOU. SURE. YEAH.

THANK YOU.

HELLO, BOARD. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME HERE TONIGHT TO TALK ABOUT OUR DEER MANAGEMENT PROGRAM.

I KNOW THAT SOME PEOPLE ARE NEW THIS YEAR, WE HAVE A NEW TOWNSHIP MANAGER.

I KNOW SOME OF YOU HAVE HEARD A LITTLE BIT OF OUR OVERVIEW OF OUR PROGRAM, BUT BEFORE I TALK ABOUT ALL OF OUR SUCCESS FROM THIS PAST YEAR, I DO WANT TO DO A QUICK OVERVIEW OF THE ENTIRE PROGRAM BECAUSE IT'S A BIG ONE.

WE HAVE BEEN RUNNING THIS SINCE 2010, AND BACK THEN WE HAD ONLY 7 PROPERTIES AND 25 HUNTERS.

FAST FORWARD TO NOW. WE HAVE 67 VOLUNTEER HUNTERS AND 42 TOWNSHIP PROPERTIES AND 30 PRIVATE PROPERTIES THAT WE MANAGE AS PART OF OUR PROGRAM, SO IT'S REALLY GROWN A LOT. THIS PROGRAM WAS BROUGHT ON DUE TO CONCERNS OF DEER CAR COLLISIONS, PROPERTY AND LANDSCAPE DAMAGE, DISEASE WITHIN THE DEER HERD, AND ALSO ECOLOGICAL IMPACTS.

I WISH I COULD GET THEM TO EAT INVASIVE PLANTS, BUT THEY DON'T.

AND SO ALL OF THESE THINGS HAPPEN WITH OVERPOPULATION.

AND WE DID CCWD COME INTO THIS AREA VERY HEAVILY IN 2015.

AND DURING THAT TIME, THE DNR ACTUALLY BROUGHT IN USDA SHARPSHOOTERS TO BRING THAT POPULATION DOWN.

SO WE'VE SEEN THAT, YOU KNOW, DISEASE IS VERY MUCH AN ISSUE WITH OVERPOPULATION.

SO IN 2020, WE HAD A VERY INCREDIBLE EFFORT FROM OUR TOWNSHIP BOARD AND FROM OUR STAFF TO COME UP WITH A MORE OUT OF THE BOX APPROACH TO SEE IF WE COULD REALLY MANAGE THE HERD MORE EFFECTIVELY.

SO WE GOT MORE GENEROUS FUNDING FROM THE TOWNSHIP BOARD, WHICH LED TO THE PURCHASE OF A WALK IN DONATION COOLER,

[00:05:04]

SO THAT WAS A REALLY BIG PUSH FOR OUR PROGRAM TO GO IN ANOTHER DIRECTION AND IT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL.

SO THIS IS JUST A QUICK SNAPSHOT FOR YOU TO SEE.

WHEN I TALKED TO OTHER COMMUNITIES ABOUT THIS PROGRAM.

WE REALLY HAVE THE BEST LAYOUT FOR THIS. WE HAVE A LOT OF GREEN SPACE, WHICH IS ALSO WHY WE HAVE DEER IN OUR BACKYARDS.

WE PURCHASED PROPERTY RIGHT NEXT TO THESE SPACES AND AND THEY'RE THERE.

SO WE DO HAVE, LIKE I SAID, 42 TOWNSHIP PROPERTIES.

WE HAVE 30 PRIVATE PROPERTIES, INCLUDING DELTA DENTAL, WHICH IS A REALLY GREAT PARTNERSHIP.

SO YOU CAN JUST SEE WE DO HAVE HUNTERS PLACED AT ALL THESE PROPERTIES.

WE REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, OUR PARKS AND OUR PRESERVES THAT WE ARE MANAGING DEER AT STAY OPEN ALL THROUGH ARCHERY SEASON, WHICH IS OCTOBER 1ST THROUGH JANUARY 1ST.

SO WE LIKE TO BE VERY TRANSPARENT WITH PUBLIC.

WE POST EVERY SINGLE PROPERTY. ALL OF OUR HUNTERS ARE REGISTERED.

THEY HAVE TO BE TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS, AND THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROFICIENCY TEST AS WELL AS MANDATORY TRAINING BEFORE EVERY SEASON.

SO EVEN RETURNING HUNTERS HAVE TO REPEAT THIS EVERY YEAR.

SO IT'S VERY HIGHLY MANAGED. WE MAKE SURE THAT EVERY SINGLE HUNTER CHECKS IN AND CHECKS OUT FROM THEIR PROPERTIES TO ENSURE SAFETY AND HIGH COMMUNICATION WITH EVERYONE. SO THERE'S A LOT OF, OF PEOPLE AND THINGS THAT GO INTO THIS.

SO WE DO LET PEOPLE KNOW TOO, THROUGH PRESS RELEASES, POSTS ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND LETTERS TO TO NEIGHBORHOODS.

THE PERMITS THAT WE OPERATE OFF OF ARE CALLED DEER MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE PERMITS.

AND THOSE ARE REALLY IMPORTANT. SO THE DNR APPROVES EVERYTHING IN THIS PROGRAM.

THEY'RE THE ONES WHO GIVE US THESE PERMITS. AND THE IMPORTANT THING ABOUT THESE IS THAT THEY GUIDE AN ANTLERLESS HUNT, WHICH IS REALLY IMPORTANT WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT DEER MANAGEMENT.

THOSE ARE THE ONES IN THE POPULATION WHO GIVE THE MOST TO THE POPULATION.

THEY PRODUCE 2 TO 3 FAWNS A YEAR. SO THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT.

THIS IS WHAT SETS US APART FROM JUST RECREATION, IS THAT WE'RE VERY MUCH FOCUSED ON REMOVING DOES.

AND THIS YEAR BOTH OUR ARCHERY PROGRAM AND OUR POLICE CALL, WHICH THEY DO ACTUALLY RUN UNDER DIFFERENT PERMITS.

OUR POLICE MIRRORS WHAT THE USDA SHARPSHOOTERS DO AND PERFORM OUT IN THE FIELD.

AND THEY DO USE FIREARMS. AND SO THEY DO HAVE PERMITS THAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY HARVEST ANY GENDER DEER.

BUT AGAIN, WE'RE GOING ANTLERLESS BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO GIVE US THE BEST RESULTS FOR OUR MANAGEMENT.

SO THESE ARE THE PERMITS THAT WE GET APPROVED FROM THE DNR, AND WE MEET EVERY YEAR.

WE REASSESS THIS PROGRAM EVERY SINGLE YEAR. AND THEY HELP US DETERMINE A NUMBER OR A GOAL THAT WE WANT TO REACH.

SO THIS YEAR, AS WELL AS LAST YEAR, THAT NUMBER WAS SET AT 300 DEER.

SO OUR ARCHERS COME IN AND THEY DO WHAT THEY CAN.

AND THEN, YOU KNOW, IF WE HAVEN'T MET THAT 300 MARK, THEN OUR HIGHLY TRAINED TEAM OF POLICE OFFICERS COMES IN AND MAKES UP THE REST. OUR PROGRAM HAS BEEN EXTREMELY SUCCESSFUL.

THERE ARE JUST SO MANY REASONS WHY AND WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A SURVEY AGAIN THIS YEAR, BUT IN 2021, WHEN WE TOOK A COMMUNITY WIDE SURVEY, THERE WAS 80% SUPPORT FOR THIS PROGRAM.

SO THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO US. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE THE MAJORITY OF FOLKS BEHIND THIS.

WE KNOW WHY WE NEED TO DO IT, BUT THE COMMUNITY SUPPORT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO US.

OUR CAR, DEER COLLISIONS IT'S KIND OF INSANE WHEN I CALCULATED THE NUMBER THIS YEAR.

WE HAD THE LOWEST REPORTED DEER CAR COLLISIONS.

AND SO SINCE 2011, WHEN WE STARTED KIND OF GATHERING INFORMATION ON THAT THAT HAS DECREASED BY 49%.

AND REALLY A BIG ATTRIBUTE IS WHEN WE UPPED ALL OF OUR EFFORTS IN 2020.

SO THAT IS DEFINITELY A BIG SHOW OF SUCCESS THERE.

AND THEN AS YOU KNOW, ONE OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS OR A FEW CAN ATTEST TO THE BIGGEST SUCCESS IS THE VENISON DONATION FROM THIS PROGRAM, WHICH IS WHAT MIKE ELLIS COORDINATES AND DOES EVERYTHING FOR.

HE LITERALLY HAND DELIVERS EVERY SINGLE PACKAGE OF MEAT TO AND FROM ALL THE FACILITIES.

AND THIS YEAR WE WERE ABLE TO HAVE 7,468 POUNDS, WHICH IS STILL CURRENTLY BEING DONATED BY MIKE.

THEY'VE DONE A LOT OF DELIVERIES THIS PAST WEEK.

THE DNR MANDATES THAT WE GET EVERY DEER THAT WE DONATE TESTED FOR CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE.

AND WE PASSED WITH FLYING COLORS. BUT WE DO HAVE TO WAIT ON THOSE TEST RESULTS.

[00:10:01]

BUT SINCE 2020, WE'VE DONATED WELL OVER 35,000 POUNDS OF VENISON, WHICH IS A SUPER SUSTAINABLE LOCAL AND A LEAN SOURCE OF PROTEIN. AND WE, MIKE, HAS NURTURED RELATIONSHIPS WITH ANYWHERE FROM 14 TO 16 DIFFERENT FOOD BANKS IN THE AREA, AND IT'S JUST GREAT WORK. IT'S VERY MUCH A WONDERFUL PART OF THE PROGRAM.

WE HAVE ALSO OBSERVED, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF OUR WORK IS OBSERVATIONAL.

WE'RE OBSERVING THAT THERE'S FEWER COMPLAINTS IN OUR AREAS WHERE MANAGEMENT OCCURS.

THAT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE. AND, YOU KNOW, MY ROLE IS STEWARDSHIP COORDINATOR WITH THE TOWNSHIP AND, YOU KNOW, OUR STAFF AND OUR VOLUNTEERS WHO WORK REALLY HARD TO PLANT NATIVE PLANTS IN OUR PRESERVES, WE ARE SEEING A DIFFERENCE. BUT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO MORE FORMAL DEER BROWSING, VEGETATION SURVEYS.

AND SO THAT'S ALL THOSE ARE ALL THINGS WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO BUILD ON AND GET OUR DATA AND INFORMATION.

SO THIS IS A REALLY GREAT OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAM OVER THE YEARS.

SO YOU CAN SEE THAT IN 2020, THAT'S WHEN WE GOT MORE FUNDING FROM THE BOARD.

AND JUST REALLY THAT WAS OUR HIGHEST HARVEST YEAR FOR OUR DEER HUNTERS.

AND THAT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE FOR THAT. WE DO ALSO TRACK DEAD DEER PICKUP, BECAUSE THAT GIVES US THE WHOLE VIEW OF THE MORTALITY OF DEER IN THE TOWNSHIP MORE THAN JUST WHAT WE TAKE OUT OF THE TOWNSHIP.

AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A SERVICE THAT DPW AND OUR PARKS UTILITY WORKERS PROVIDES, WHICH IS REALLY GREAT FOR RESIDENTS.

SO WE GET A BETTER SENSE OF OF WHAT'S BEING TAKEN OUT.

SO OUR OUR TREE HARVESTS THAT NUMBER IS ACTUALLY INCORRECT.

IT'S 147 FOR THE ARCHERY SEASON AND THEN OUR POLICE CALLED 153 DEER.

SO I DO WANT TO END JUST BY SAYING THAT AGAIN, WE ARE SO GRATEFUL THAT THE DONATION COOLER HAPPENED IN 2020.

BECAUSE IT HAS COMPLETELY CHANGED HOW OUR MANAGEMENT PROGRAM IS RUN.

IT REALLY ALLOWS OUR HUNTERS, YOU KNOW, BEFORE THEY WERE KEEPING WHAT THEY COULD, THEY WERE FINDING FAMILIES LOCALLY TO DONATE TO AND IN THIS WAY, THEY JUST BRING THEIR HARVEST TO THE COOLER. AND MIKE TAKES CARE OF EVERY OTHER LITTLE STEP, WHICH IS A LOT OF STEPS. AND SO THAT'S THAT'S BEEN REALLY INCREDIBLE.

AND ACTUALLY, I WONDER, CAN I GO BACK? YEAH. SO YOU CAN SEE ON THIS TABLE HERE THAT OUR HIGHEST HARVEST YEAR WAS 150 DEER.

AND THAT WAS WHEN OUR HUNTERS COULD BAIT. AND THEN THE VERY NEXT YEAR, CHRONIC WASTING DISEASE SET IN.

AND THEN THE DNR DID NOT ALLOW BAITING ANYMORE.

AND YOU CAN SEE IT HAD A REALLY BIG IMPACT ON THAT MANAGEMENT NUMBER.

AND AS SOON AS WE HIT 2020 AND WE GOT THAT COOLER, THAT NUMBER JUMPED UP HIGHER THAN IT'S EVER BEEN.

SO I JUST WANT TO SHOW YOU HOW AMAZING THAT THAT COOLER HAS BEEN.

AND OF COURSE, I DO WANT TO END ON A VERY GOOD NOTE.

AND YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE BEST PART OF EVERYTHING IS WHEN WE GET TO TO SEE WHAT THE VENISON DONATION IS DOING FOR THE COMMUNITY, WE RECEIVE LETTERS. I JUST GOT FLOWERS TODAY IN OUR OFFICE FROM OKEMOS FOOD BANK.

SO IT'S REALLY SOMETHING. AND IN THE PAST, MICHIGAN SPORTSMEN AGAINST HUNGER FUNDED ALL OF OUR PROCESSING, WHICH IS A REALLY BIG BILL TO FOOT. BUT THIS YEAR IT IS THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, AND THEY ARE ALSO THE ONES WHO TAKE CARE OF ALL THE FUNDING FOR ANY OF THE TESTING THAT HAS TO BE DONE THAT WE'RE MANDATED TO DO.

SO WE'RE VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THEM. I JUST WANT TO REALLY QUICK TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO OUR MSU DEER RESEARCH TEAM.

SO THEY'RE FROM THE FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT AT MSU.

WE'RE STILL WORKING WITH THEM. WE STARTED WORKING WITH THEM IN LAST YEAR OF 2023, AND THEY ARE REALLY STUDYING, YOU KNOW, THE POTENTIAL OF RELIEVING THE TICK BURDEN ON OUR WILDLIFE POPULATIONS AND PEOPLE.

AND THERE'S A LOT WITHIN THAT STUDY THAT I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS SEPARATELY.

BUT THEN LAST YEAR AND THIS YEAR, THEY'VE BEEN COLLARING FAWNS TO STUDY FAWN MORTALITY RATES.

SO THAT AND WE'RE LEARNING ABOUT THE DEER'S HOME RANGE THROUGH THIS WHERE THEY LIKE TO BE, WHERE THEY LIKE TO BED DOWN. THIS IS ALL REALLY HELPFUL FOR US BECAUSE AS WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN PAST BOARD MEETINGS THAT YOU'VE BEEN AT, IT'S REALLY HARD FOR US TO KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY DEER OUT THERE IF WE CAN'T TACKLE EVERY SINGLE ONE AND MARK THEM, SO WE JUST HAVE TO DEPEND ON GATHERING AS MUCH INFORMATION AND OBSERVATIONAL INFORMATION AS WE CAN.

SO THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT PARTNERSHIP. SO I DO BEFORE QUESTIONS I JUST WANT TO SAY AGAIN THE COLLABORATION BETWEEN THE TOWNSHIP BOARD, OUR DPW, AND PARK STAFF, OUR HUNTERS, THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, MSU, IT JUST IS REALLY COOL TO SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE

[00:15:06]

SO, SO THANK YOU AND LET ME KNOW IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BOARD MEMBERS ANY QUESTIONS? TREASURER DESCHAINE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU EMMA.

AND I THINK THE DONATION OF TONS AND TONS OF VENISON TO THE FOOD BANKS IS JUST SPECTACULAR.

IT'S WORTH THE WHOLE PROGRAM RIGHT THERE. AND OVER THE PAST TEN, EIGHT YEARS ON THE BOARD, I'VE HEARD WE'VE HEARD LOTS OF ESTIMATES ABOUT HOW MANY DEER THERE ARE. ONE NUMBER I HEARD WAS UP TO 10,000, ANOTHER ESTIMATE WAS 3,500 TO 7,000. SO EVEN IF WE GET A GOOD YEAR, 3 TO 400, WE'RE JUST GETTING ABOUT 10%.

AND I THINK WE WERE TOLD YOU'D HAVE TO TAKE OUT ABOUT 30% OF THE POPULATION TO REALLY REDUCE THE HERD.

AND WE DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES FOR DOING THAT.

BUT I THINK ONE OF THE UNINTENDED SIDE EFFECTS IS WE'VE CLEARED OUT THE NATURAL RESERVES WHERE WE CAN HUNT AND PARKS, BUT IT'S ALLOWED THE POPULATION AND NEIGHBORHOODS TO REALLY THRIVE, AT LEAST ANECDOTALLY.

I'M HEARING FROM PEOPLE THAT ARE THERE MORE NUMEROUS THAN EVER.

SO I HOPE YOU'LL ADD TO YOUR SURVEY QUESTIONS.

NOT ONLY DO YOU SUPPORT THE PROGRAM, BUT DO YOU SEE LESS THE SAME OR MORE DEER THAN YOU DID FIVE YEARS AGO? LET'S FIND OUT WHAT OUR RESIDENTS ARE EXPERIENCING IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS.

YES, AND THIS YEAR WE WILL HAVE A DEER REPORTING FORM THAT WILL BE ABLE TO BE FILLED OUT ONLINE IF RESIDENTS WISH TO DO THAT.

RIGHT NOW, I JUST TAKE CALLS AND EMAILS INDIVIDUALLY AND IT IS INFORMATION THAT WE TRACK.

ALSO, WHEN OUR HUNTERS CHECK IN AND CHECK OUT, THEY ANSWER HOW MANY DEER THEY SEE IN AN AREA AS WELL.

SO AGAIN, THAT'S A NUMBER. THAT'S ANOTHER NUMBER AND PIECE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO BRING IN TO OUR MANAGEMENT BECAUSE IT IT IS DIFFICULT.

WE CAN'T GET INTO A LOT OF THESE AREAS SAFELY.

YOU KNOW, SAFETY IS THE FIRST PRIORITY. THERE'S ALREADY A LOT THAT WE HAVE TO MITIGATE IN THIS PROGRAM.

AND SO WE'RE DOING THE BEST WE CAN WHERE WE CAN GET TO.

AND REALLY WE'RE NOT WE'RE STILL WORKING ON WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, WHAT THAT PIECE LOOKS LIKE.

BECAUSE THERE'S JUST NO WAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT SOMEONE IN THE MIDDLE OF CORNELL WOODS NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO IT'S DIFFICULT. YES. THERE'S SOME AREAS GETTING MORE PRESSURE, BUT IF WE COMPLETELY STOP THE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM, WE'RE NOT REALLY SURE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN. SO YEAH.

AND IT'S NOT ONLY OUR PROBLEM. VIRTUALLY EVERY SUBURBAN COMMUNITY IN LOWER MICHIGAN, OR CERTAINLY SOUTH OF MOUNT PLEASANT, EXPERIENCING A SIMILAR PROBLEM. YOU'RE 100% RIGHT.

I TALKED TO PEOPLE ACROSS THE STATE AND EVEN IN OTHER STATES ABOUT THIS PROGRAM, AND IT IS A HUGE PROBLEM FOR SO MANY.

YEAH. SO WE'RE REALLY GOING TO WORK ON TRYING TO GET TO THOSE AREAS.

WE PROMISE YOU RESIDENTS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR REPORT.

OTHER QUESTIONS. TRUSTEE WILSON. I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION, BUT A COMMENT THAT SHOUT OUT TO MIKE ELLIS, WHO APPEARED YESTERDAY MORNING AT THE DOWNTOWN LANSING FOOD PANTRY, WHERE I VOLUNTEER FOR MANY, MANY YEARS, AND I HAVE A DEAL WITH MIKE AND HE BROUGHT US 700 POUNDS OF VENISON.

ALL OF IT WILL BE GONE IN TWO MONTHS MINIMUM, BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY HUNGRY PEOPLE TO FEED.

SO IT'S A WONDERFUL CYCLE OF SAFETY AND HAVING CONSUMPTION OF GOOD QUALITY MEAT FOR PEOPLE WHO CANNOT AFFORD TO BUY IT.

SO THANK YOU TO BOTH OF YOU FOR THE PROGRAM. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. TRUSTEE LENTZ. NOT A QUESTION, BUT I WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.

I'VE SPOKEN WITH NON MERIDIAN RESIDENTS IN THE AREA, AND THEY HAVE NOTICED THAT MERIDIAN IS ONE OF THE COMMUNITIES THAT DOES PARTICIPATE IN THIS. AND THEY HAVE ASKED LIKE, CAN YOU TALK TO LANSING TOWNSHIP ABOUT HOW TO IMPLEMENT THIS HERE? AND SO THAT'S BEYOND MY JURISDICTION.

THINK, FOUR CRASHES WITH DEER AND, YOU KNOW, THE REDUCTION IN VEHICULAR DEER YOU KNOW, ON THE ROAD, IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S A VERY SERIOUS ISSUE. SO THIS IS A GREAT PROGRAM.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU.

TRUSTEE SUNDLAND. YES. THANK YOU. AND YOU KNOW, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT DEER DO NOT HAVE A NATURAL PREDATOR.

YOU KNOW, ALTHOUGH I HAD A COYOTE IN MY YARD ONE TIME, BUT AND IT WAS AN INFAMOUS AN INFAMOUS COYOTE SIGHTING BACK IN THE DAY. BUT ANYWAY, THERE'S NO NATURAL PREDATORS FOR DEER, SO THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE DO THIS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YEAH. VERY GOOD POINT TO MAKE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 5.

[5. CITIZENS ADDRESS AGENDA ITEMS AND NON-AGENDAITEMS]

MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO ADDRESS OUR AGENDA, OR ANY ITEM NOT ON OUR AGENDA, MAY DO SO HERE AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MEETING, AS WELL AS NEAR THE END OF THE MEETING. THOSE WHO DO WISH TO ADDRESS THE BOARD MUST COMPLETE A GREEN CARD,

[00:20:04]

WHILE IT'S NOT REQUIRED, IT IS HELPFUL FOR THE SAKE OF OUR MEETING MINUTES IF YOU CAN PROVIDE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AT THE BEGINNING OF THE REMARKS.

CITIZENS ARE REQUIRED TO LIMIT REMARKS TO THREE MINUTES.

AN AUTOMATED SYSTEM WILL KEEP TRACK OF THE TIME, AND AN AUDIBLE BEEP WILL ALERT YOU WHEN YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.

MEMBERS OF THE BOARD DO VALUE COMMENT FROM THE PUBLIC.

OUR MEETING FORMAT AND RULES, HOWEVER, DO RESTRICT BOARD MEMBERS FROM ENGAGING IN CONVERSATION WITH COMMENTERS OR ANSWERING QUESTIONS DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.

QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS MAY BE ADDRESSED BY BOARD MEMBERS AT A LATER TIME, OR REFERRED TO A MEMBER OF THE TOWNSHIP STAFF TO FOLLOW UP ON.

PLEASE ADDRESS ALL COMMENTS TO THE BOARD'S CHAIR AND NOT INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBERS.

AND WITH THAT SAID, OUR FIRST GREEN CARD THIS EVENING IS FOR KRISTINA KLOC AND THEN PEGGY ANDERSON YOU ARE UP NEXT.

HELLO. KRISTINA KLOC 4538 SENECA DRIVE. SPEAKING TONIGHT IN OPPOSITION OF ORDINANCE 2025-03 BEFORE YOU.

IN THE COMING WEEKS, THE RESIDENTS OF THE TOWNSHIP WILL DEMONSTRATE TO THE BOARD WHY THE CRITERIA FOR REZONING HAVE NOT BEEN MET IN MR. FEDEWA REZONING PETITION, AND WHY THIS REZONING IS NOT GOOD OR NECESSARY FOR THE COMMUNITY.

WE WILL ALSO SHARE THE EXTENSIVE HISTORY OF THIS REZONING REQUEST, WHICH BEGAN IN 2019.

THE EXACT SAME DENSITY PROPOSAL, WHICH ACTUALLY HAD MORE SETBACK STIPULATIONS AND LESS UNITS THAN WHAT MR. FEDEWA WILL BE PROPOSING TO YOU TODAY, WAS DENIED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES ON JANUARY 7TH, 2020. ACCORDING TO THE MINUTES, IT WAS DENIED 6 TO 0 QUOTE "TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPER TO COME UP WITH A NEW PROPOSAL THAT WILL PROVIDE AFFORDABLE, SMALLER STYLE FAMILY HOMES TO BETTER MATCH THE CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOODS." END QUOTE.

THIS WAS CLEARLY IGNORED BY THE DEVELOPER BECAUSE HERE WE ARE TONIGHT.

I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT YOU CAREFULLY CONSIDER ALL OF THE DATA WHICH WILL BE SUBMITTED BY THE COMMUNITY, MUCH OF WHICH WE CAN'T PRESENT VERBALLY IN OUR ALLOTTED THREE MINUTES OF TIME.

I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO READ TO YOU DIRECTLY FROM PAGE 23 OF THE MASTER PLAN.

THE SECTION IS TITLED FUTURE LAND USE MAP. QUOTE THE NORTHERN ONE THIRD OF THE FAITH LUTHERAN PROPERTY AT 4515 DOBIE ROAD IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED INSTITUTIONAL, CONSISTENT WITH PAST PRACTICE FOR ALL SCHOOLS, CHURCHES, AND SIMILAR FACILITIES. THE CHURCH HAS REQUESTED THE TOWNSHIP CHANGE THE DESIGNATION OF THE NORTHERN THIRD OF THE PROPERTY ONLY TO MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, CONSISTENT WITH THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH.

THIS WOULD ALLOW POTENTIAL REDEVELOPMENT ON THE VACANT ONE THIRD OF THE SITE.

WHEN MR. FEDEWA GOT THIS NORTHERN THIRD, WHICH IS ABOUT 2.9 ACRES OF UNDEVELOPED FORESTED LAND, ADDED TO THE MASTER PLAN, HE DECIDED IT WAS NOT ENOUGH.

HE NEEDED TO INCREASE THE SIZE BY 50% TO MAXIMIZE HIS PROFITS.

THIS ADDITIONAL ACRE AND A HALF IS DEVELOPED LAND, WHICH IS USED DAILY AND IS CLEARLY AND INTENTIONALLY EXCLUDED FROM THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MASTER PLAN. THE REZONING REQUEST BEFORE YOU SHOULD BE DENIED, BASED EXCLUSIVELY ON THE FACT THAT IT IS INCONSISTENT WITH, AND IN DIRECT OPPOSITION TO, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND MASTER PLAN.

ADDITIONALLY, THE NEIGHBORING HOMEOWNERS WILL BE PRESENTING AN ABUTTERS PROTEST PETITION TO THIS REZONING REQUEST WITH THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES IN ACCORD WITH MCL SECTION 125.3403 OF THE MICHIGAN ZONING ENABLING ACT.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

PEGGY ANDERSON AND THEN DAVID KLOC, YOU ARE ON DECK.

PEGGY ANDERSON, 4504 SENECA DRIVE. I'M A 32 YEAR RESIDENT.

I'M HERE TONIGHT TO OPPOSE ORDINANCE 2025-03, SEEKING TO REZONE THE SUBJECT PARCEL FROM RAA TO RD.

HOW MANY TIMES AND FOR HOW MANY YEARS DO YOU EXPECT HOMEOWNERS TO OPPOSE THE SAME OR A SIMILAR ZONING REQUEST FOR THE SAME PARCEL? THIS PARCEL HAS HAD REZONING PROPOSALS IN 2019, 2023, 2024 AND NOW 2025.

THE 2019 REQUEST WAS DENIED BY THIS BOARD. AND KRIS, JUST READ YOU THE SAME MINUTES I HAVE IN MIND WHERE YOU ASKED FOR A PROPOSAL FOR SMALLER SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THE 2024 REQUEST WAS DENIED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND PULLED BEFORE IT EVER GOT TO THIS BOARD.

[00:25:01]

I'M NOT HERE TO REPEAT THE CONCERNS AND THE DATA PRESENTED AT ALL THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS, IN ALL THE PREVIOUS PACKETS, AND FOR MULTIPLE YEARS. I TRUST THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO DUE DILIGENCE.

I TRUST YOU TO FACT CHECK. I'M TRUSTING YOU TO LOOK AT THE DATA AND THE PREVIOUS DECISIONS.

WHILE THE ADJACENT HOMEOWNERS WERE NOTIFIED ON THE THREE ZONING REQUESTS, THEY WERE NOT PARTICIPANTS IN THE MASTER PLAN DISCUSSIONS.

THE ONLY PRESENTATIONS WERE FROM FAITH LUTHERAN CHURCH, THE PROPERTY OWNER, AND FEDEWA BUILDERS, THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPER. WHY WOULD THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE THOUGHT TO LOOK IN ANY KIND OF ANNOUNCEMENT THAT YOU MIGHT BE HAVING A MASTER PLAN REZONING FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP? WE KNEW YOU DENIED IT IN 2019. IF APPROVAL RELIES ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, THEN THE ONLY THE NORTHERN, UNDEVELOPED AND VEGETATED 2.9 ACRES ARE INCLUDED ON THIS MAP.

THE ADDITIONAL SOUTHERN 1.4 ACRES OF THIS PARCEL ARE NOT ON THE MASTER PLAN, AND INCLUDE THE CHURCH'S LAWN AND NORTHERN DRIVEWAY.

THIS ACREAGE CANNOT BE DESCRIBED IN THE TITLED ORDINANCE YOU HAVE TONIGHT.

YOUR ORDINANCE TITLES THIS VACANT DOBIE ROAD PARCEL AT 1.4 ACRES IS NOT VACANT.

A DECADE OF SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH CONFIRMS THAT TRUST IN INSTITUTIONS CONTINUES TO ERODE.

IN YOUR DECISION MAKING CONSIDER OUR TRUST IN YOU AS OUR BOARD.

THE SENECA AND DOBIE ROAD HOMEOWNERS HAVE ALREADY HEARD THE TOWNSHIP DENY AN RD PROPOSAL ON THIS PROPERTY.

HAVE NEVER SEEN THE REQUESTED SINGLE FAMILY HOME PROPOSAL.

WERE NOT PARTICIPANTS IN THE VERY CLEVER BUSINESS PROPOSAL SUBMITTED FOR RC ON THE LAND USE MAP.

AND WE TRUST THAT WE'RE GOING TO RELY ON YOUR TOWNSHIP GOAL TO PRESERVE THE CHARACTER OF EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. DAVID KLOC AND THEN CECILIA KRAMER, YOU ARE UP NEXT.

HI THERE. DAVE KLOC, 4538 SENECA DRIVE. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO SPEAK THIS EVENING REGARDING THE REZONING REQUEST FOR PARCEL ID 33-0202 - 22-454003. AND I REITERATE WHAT THE TWO PREVIOUS SPEAKERS SPOKE ABOUT.

ONE THING I WANTED TO DRAW PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO WAS NOT BEING INVOLVED WITH IN THE DISCUSSION IN THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

AND THE OTHER THING WAS, IS YOU GOT 4.28 ACRES OF LAND THAT'S WOODED, AND YOU'RE GOING TO TEAR THAT DOWN AND BUILD, THE REQUEST IS FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY UNITS.

WELL, THAT ALL SLOPES TOWARDS OUR BACKYARDS, WHICH IS THE LOWEST POINT ON SENECA DRIVE.

SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT 4.28 ACRES OF WATER PURPOSELY NOW DIVERTED TOWARDS THE LOWEST POINT ON SENECA DRIVE, WHICH IS OUR BACKYARD. SO IF THAT'S ONE MORE THING THAT YOU CAN LOOK AT AND CONSIDER, I'D APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. CECILIA KRAMER, FOLLOWED BY BETH BECHTEL.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS CECILIA KRAMER. I'M A RESIDENT OF FOREST HILLS 4560 OAKWOOD.

BUT I'M HERE TONIGHT TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE FAITH LUTHERAN CHURCH, ABOUT THE PROJECT ON DOBIE ROAD. THE NUMBER HAS CHANGED TO 25-03, 2025-03. AT ANY RATE, A COUPLE OF ISSUES. THERE WAS CONCERNS ABOUT WATER.

AND SO LET ME TURN MY HEAD A BIT AND DO MY DEPUTY DRAIN COMMISSIONER I'M A RETIRED DEPUTY DRAIN COMMISSIONER.

IF THE WATER ISSUES ARE ON THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY THAT IS IN THE SPROSS DRAIN.

ACTUALLY THE WHOLE PROPERTY IS IN THE SPROSS DRAIN, AND THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THEY SHOULD TAKE UP WITH THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER.

I KNOW THAT THE PROJECT WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH A REVIEW OF STORMWATER AND HOW IT'S BEING HANDLED THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT.

THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO DUMP ONTO ANOTHER PROPERTY THAT'S AGAINST THE DRAIN CODE, SO THAT WILL HAVE TO BE HANDLED THAT WAY.

IF THE WATER THAT IS BEING GENERATED AND YOU SAID THERE WAS, SOMEBODY TOLD ME POOLING ON THE ON THE STREET OF SENECA THAT AGAIN, ESPECIALLY DOWN AT THE LOWEST POINT, WHICH IS THAT THE EMPTY STREET THAT NEEDS TO BE THAT IS THOSE ARE DRAINS IN THAT IN THAT PARCEL. THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT THAT.

HE CAN SEND OUT A MAINTENANCE CREW. THEY CAN CLEAN IT OUT, GET THE SCHMUTZ OUT OF IT, AND THEN IT'LL FLOW BETTER AND PICK UP THE WATER.

[00:30:08]

BUT THAT'S A TOWNSHIP GOING TO BE TOWNSHIP INVOLVEMENT BECAUSE THAT'S PART OF YOUR PATHWAY SYSTEM.

AND SO THEY'LL HAVE TO GET THE TOWNSHIP INVOLVED.

AND I'M HAPPY TO MEET WITH THE NEIGHBORS AND WORK WITH THROUGH THAT ISSUE, BECAUSE THAT IS GETTING TO BE A PROBLEM THERE.

BACK BEFORE 2019, LET ME TURN MY HEAD AGAIN, TALKING MORE DIRECTLY ABOUT FAITH LUTHERAN'S POSITION.

FAITH LUTHERAN TURNED OUT TO BE THE DIRTY BIRD IN ALL OF THIS.

FOR SOME REASON, OUR INTENTIONS WERE VERY HONORABLE, BUT SEVERAL YEARS PRIOR TO 2019, THE CHURCH DECIDED TO SELL A PART OF OUR PARCEL, OUR TEN ACRE PARCEL TO TRY AND PAY OFF THE MORTGAGE ON THE SANCTUARY. AND THAT WAS FINALLY ACCOMPLISHED.

AND SO THAT TOOK CARE OF THAT PROBLEM FOR US, BUT HAS OPENED UP ANOTHER A NUMBER OF CONCERNS.

AM I DONE? YES, MA'AM. THEN YOU WON'T FIND OUT.

BUT ANYWAY, WE DO SUPPORT HAVING THE PROJECT TO THE NORTH OF US, AND WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO WORKING WITH AND THE DEVELOPER IN GETTING ANYTHING SQUARED AWAY.

OUR DRIVEWAY WILL BE MOVED ONTO OUR PARCEL DURING THE CONSTRUCTION.

THAT WAS PART OF THE SALES AGREEMENT, AS WELL AS OUR ABILITY TO USE THE 50 FOOT EASEMENT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BETH BECHTEL, FOLLOWED BY JOHN LEONE.

BETH BECHTEL, HASLETT, MICHIGAN. DEAR TOWNSHIP, BOARD MEMBERS, FIRST, I RESPECTFULLY ASK THAT THERE BE FURTHER ANALYSIS AND SERIOUS CONSIDERATION OF THE SUBMITTED SENIOR CENTER ADVISORY BOARD'S MORE REASONABLE REQUEST OF A SENIOR CENTER ONLY, NO GYM PROPOSAL AT 14,500 TOTAL SQUARE FEET. CURRENTLY, THE TASK FORCE IS NOW MOVING FORWARD WITH THE TWO MUCH LARGER AND MORE EXPENSIVE PROPOSALS AS FOLLOWS. NUMBER ONE, THE SENIOR CENTER ONLY NO GYM AT 20,007 TOTAL FITNESS, TOTAL FINISHED SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS DOUBLE THE SIZE OF THE CURRENT SENIOR CENTER AND BEYOND WHAT THE SENIORS REQUESTED AND WANT.

NUMBER TWO, A MUCH LARGER COMMUNITY CENTER. ONE GYM AT 53,784 TOTAL FINISHED SQUARE FEET, WHICH IS 37% 37% LARGER THAN THE BOARD VOTED NO ORIGINAL YONKERS PROPOSAL. SECOND, I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT COMMUNITY CENTER ANNUAL RECREATION MEMBERSHIP FEES FOR BOTH RESIDENTS AND NONRESIDENTS ARE USUALLY VERY NECESSARY AS INCOMING REVENUE IN ORDER TO OFFSET THE MUCH BIGGER COMMUNITY CENTER'S LARGE OPERATING COSTS.

SIGNIFICANT ANNUAL RECREATION MEMBERSHIP FEES, ON TOP OF SIGNIFICANT ANNUAL PROPERTY TAX INCREASES FROM AN ADDITIONAL TAX MILLAGE, ARE BOTH SUBSTANTIAL AND WOULD BE PLACED UPON THE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP RESIDENTS TO BEAR THIS BURDEN AND PAY FOREVER INTO PERPETUITY.

PLEASE NOTE THE SENIOR ADULT RESIDENT ANNUAL RECREATION MEMBERSHIP FEE RANGES AT VARIOUS MICHIGAN COMMUNITY CENTERS AS EXAMPLES.

CITY OF EAST LANSING HANNAH COMMUNITY CENTER $175 TO $255.

CITY OF FARMINGTON HILLS COMMUNITY CENTER, $238 TO $270.

CITY OF HOWELL OSCEOLA COMMUNITY CENTER, $165 TO $220.

AND THE WILLIAMSTON COMMUNITY CENTER AT $125 TO $200.

MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP CITIZENS WILL LIKELY PAY ANNUAL RECREATION MEMBERSHIP FEES AS WELL TO USE THE COMMUNITY CENTER ONE GYM, JUST LIKE PAYING ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP FEES TO LOCAL NEARBY PRIVATE COURT ONE, THE MAC, ETC..

AS A RESULT, A LARGE COMMUNITY CENTER, ONE GYM WILL POSSIBLY BE DUPLICATING SERVICES AND COMPETING WITH LOCAL NEARBY PRIVATE BUSINESSES.

ADDITIONALLY, SEVERAL MICHIGAN COMMUNITY CENTERS HAVE STRUGGLED WITH LARGE ANNUAL OPERATING LOSSES SINCE THESE OPERATING LOSSES ARE NOT SUSTAINABLE IN THE LONG TERM, THEIR MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENTS MAY BE FORCED TO GO BACK TO THE CITIZEN VOTERS FOR ADDITIONAL TAX MILLAGES, CONTINUALLY INCREASING FEES AND OR GETTING OUTSIDE INVESTOR FUNDS TO REDUCE THE ANNUAL LARGE OPERATING LOSSES THAT ARE BEYOND THE ORIGINAL TAX MILLAGE.

AGAIN, I RESPECTFULLY ASK THE BOARD MEMBERS TO PLEASE REMAIN STEADFAST AND CONTINUE TO PLACE PRIMARY AND UTMOST IMPORTANCE ON BEING FISCALLY AND FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE TO THE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP CITIZENS. PLEASE ALSO CONSIDER THE NEED OF FURTHER ANALYSIS OF THE SENIORS MORE REASONABLE REQUEST THE SENIOR CENTER ONLY NO GYM PROPOSAL AT 14,500 TOTAL SQUARE FEET. THIS VERY IMPORTANT DECISION MADE ON THIS NEW FACILITY PROJECT WILL FOREVER SIGNIFICANTLY FINANCIALLY IMPACT THE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP CITIZENS NOW AND INTO THE FUTURE FOR PERPETUITY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, JOHN LEONE.

AND THAT ACTUALLY IS THE LAST GREEN CARD WE HAVE.

IF ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC WISHES TO ADDRESS THE BOARD, PLEASE FILL OUT A GREEN CARD AND TURN THAT IN AT THIS TIME.

[00:35:06]

I LIVE AT 4544 DOBIE ROAD RIGHT ACROSS FROM I'M GOING BACK TO ITEM 13A THIS DEVELOPMENT BY PROPOSED BY FEDEWA HOLDINGS. I'VE PASSED OUT A LETTER AND THIS STUFF HAS BEEN EMAILED TO YOU.

I DON'T EXPECT TO GO THROUGH MUCH OF THE DETAIL AND YOU'VE HEARD THERE'S A LONG HISTORY HERE ABOUT WHAT THIS THE LETTER AND THE MATERIALS THAT HAVE BEEN EMAILED TO YOU ALSO.

TOUCH UPON THE LONG HISTORY BUT THERE'S A CURRENT THERE HAS BEEN, YOU KNOW, MANY, MANY ITERATIONS OF THE PROPOSAL.

BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS, I THINK WE PUT OUT SEVEN ITEMS THAT WE THINK ARE BOTH SUBSTANTIVE.

ONE OR THE OTHER SUBSTANTIVELY WASN'T REVIEWED WELL ENOUGH BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THERE'S SOME PROCEDURAL ISSUES IN THERE.

I NOTICED SHE LEFT CECILIA. I AFFECTIONATELY MEAN THIS AFFECTIONATELY CALL HER THE CHURCH LADY.

EVEN USED THE WORD IT'S BEEN A SANCTUARY FOR FOR MANY YEARS.

SO BUT IT COMES DOWN TO WHAT ARE THE CURRENT PROPOSAL AND WHAT ARE THE PROPER FACTORS AND HOW THEY'RE TO BE WEIGHED.

AND WE JUST THINK THE PLANNING COMMISSION KIND OF TOOK EVERYTHING AT FACE VALUE THAT WAS OFFERED.

SO THE TOPICS ARE THERE IS THERE WAS AN AMENDMENT TO THE MASTER PLAN, WHICH WE UNDERSTAND IT'S IN THE LETTER WAS DONE PROCEDURALLY.

FINE. THE NOTICE GOES, I GUESS ONLY INTO THE CITY PULSE, WHICH IS FINE.

I GUESS THAT'S THE STANDARD. WE HAVE A VERY DETERMINED AND ORGANIZED GROUP HERE ON THIS ISSUE FOR, JUST SO YOU KNOW THAT. IT'S NOT KNOWN WHETHER IT'S PUT ON THE WEBSITE.

THE, THE SO THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG IT APPEARS PROCEDURALLY, BUT AS A PRACTICAL MATTER, IT APPEARS THAT ONLY THE DEVELOPER AND THE CHURCH WERE INVOLVED IN MAKING THE CHANGE. AND OF COURSE CHANGING AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AS I'M LEARNING ALONG THE WAY THE MASTER PLAN AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS NOT A REZONING, WHICH IS THE PHRASE USED OFTEN, AND I'M SURE THE BOARD IS AWARE OF THAT.

SO I'LL JUST TOUCH ON THESE. JUST REALLY, I'M NOT GOING TO READ ANYTHING BUT THE TOPICS.

HUGE ISSUE IS TRAFFIC AND PUBLIC SAFETY. THE KEY ISSUE THERE IS THAT THE NEW DEVELOPMENT SEEMS TO BE BEING IGNORED.

THAT'S JUST NORTH. WHAT'S IT WHAT'S WHAT'S THE NAME OF IT AGAIN? THE HUGE DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S JUST. YES. AND IT'S UNDERSTANDABLE PROCEDURALLY TECHNICALLY WHY THAT'S DONE.

BECAUSE IT WAS COMMERCIAL. THERE WERE NO RESIDENTS THERE TO GET THE NOTICE, SO THERE WERE NO OBJECTIONS THERE. BUT TO NOT CONSIDER THE REALITY OF THE THE HUGE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT WILL BE COMING FROM THERE. I SEE I'VE GOT 30 SECONDS SO AGAIN, ALL THE DATA, MUCH OF THE DATA HAS BEEN SENT TO YOU. THE WE PROPOSED THAT THE REZONING DOES NOT SATISFY THE ESTABLISHED HOUSING NEEDS.

THERE'S ERRONEOUS INFORMATION ON THE THAT'S BEEN ADDRESSED.

ON HOW MUCH ACREAGE INVOLVED AND WHERE PROPERTY LINES ARE AND THE WATER DRAINAGE PERIOD THERE'S A BUNCH OF STUFF SENT TO YOU ON THAT.

THERE'S SOMETHING PHRASED AS A CONDITIONAL REZONING AGREEMENT, MAYBE THAT'S STANDARD ISSUE, BUT WE'VE NEVER SEEN THAT OR KNOWS WHAT IT IS. THERE'S A CONFLICT OF INTEREST. WE BELIEVE, THAT'S UNRESOLVED WITH JEFF WOMACK, ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS.

AND WE'RE JUST ASKING THAT PART OF THE HISTORY IS THE PRIOR WAS FAR MORE INVESTIGATIVE.

THE PRIOR PLANNING COMMISSION. SO WE ASK THAT IT EITHER BE DENIED OR AT A MINIMUM, SENT BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE BOARD AT THIS TIME? SEEING NONE. PUBLIC COMMENT IS CLOSED AT 6:36 P.M..

NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 6, THE TOWNSHIP MANAGER REPORT, MANAGER DEMPSEY.

[6. TOWNSHIP MANAGER REPORT]

COUPLE HERE ARE UPDATES FROM PRIOR COMMUNICATIONS.

THE CELEBRATE MERIDIAN TEAM THAT'S WORKING ON THAT EVENT FOR THIS YEAR, AS YOU KNOW HAS BEEN LOOKING AT THE IDEA OF, INSTEAD OF DOING FIREWORKS, DOING A DRONE SHOW.

SO THEY'RE GETTING CLOSE, I THINK, TO FINALIZING THAT, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE HEADED IN THAT DIRECTION.

SO WE JUST WANTED PEOPLE TO BE AWARE OF THAT. WE THINK ADDRESSES SOME ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, BUT IT DOES PROVIDE A PRETTY GOOD WOW FACTOR OVERALL.

THE OTHER ONE IS THIS FEMA SWIFT CURRENT. THIS IS A PROPERTY ON THE NORTH END OF ALGONQUIN.

IT'S ADJACENT TO ONE OF OUR LAND PRESERVES. WE HAVE SUBMITTED THROUGH THE MICHIGAN STATE POLICE GRANT FUNDING TO POTENTIALLY ACQUIRE THAT PROPERTY.

IT'S THE ONLY ELIGIBLE SWIFT CURRENT PROPERTY IN THE TOWNSHIP, MEANING THAT IT WOULD TYPICALLY FLOOD IN A SIGNIFICANT RAIN EVENT.

SO WE ARE ABLE TO LEVERAGE SUBSTANTIAL FEDERAL FUNDING.

IT'S A 90% FUNDED PROJECT. WE ONLY HAVE TO PROVIDE 10%.

WE ARE EXPLORING TWO OPTIONS. IT WOULD EITHER BE THE LAND PRESERVE FUND BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S ADJACENT TO A PRESERVE, OR IT COULD BE GENERAL FUND DOLLARS AS WELL DEPENDING ON HOW YOU WANT TO POTENTIALLY UTILIZE THAT PROPERTY GOING FORWARD IF WE WERE TO WORK WITH THE DRAIN COMMISSION ON THE DRAIN PROJECT THERE, AND THAT LAND COULD BE VALUABLE FOR THAT, WE MAY WANT TO HAVE FLEXIBILITY.

THAT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DETERMINED AT THIS POINT, BUT WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE BOARD AWARE THAT IF WE ARE SUCCESSFUL WITH THAT FUNDING

[00:40:01]

AND THEN THE LAST ONE ARE YOUR LISTENING SESSIONS FOR 2025.

SO AS WE START TO DEVELOP THE CALENDAR FOR THESE, WANTED TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL DATES.

LAST YEAR, THE THREE SESSIONS WERE HELD DURING THE EVENING IN THE MONTH OF JUNE AND ALL HERE IN THIS ROOM TO DO THAT.

SO WE WERE THINKING ABOUT MAYBE SPREADING THOSE OUT A LITTLE BIT MORE THIS YEAR, POTENTIALLY LOOKING AT THE FIRST HALF OF MAY AND THEN DOING ONE IN SEPTEMBER AND THEN POTENTIALLY NOVEMBER. WE COULD CERTAINLY HOLD THEM HERE IN THE SAME LOCATION, OR IF WE WANTED TO DO ANY IN A DIFFERENT LOCALE OR FORMAT, VIRTUAL, FOR INSTANCE, TO EXPAND THAT. CERTAINLY OPEN TO DO THAT.

SO JUST INTERESTED TO GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD ON ON THAT.

WE DON'T HAVE TO DECIDE THIS EVENING, BUT THINK ABOUT WHERE AND WHEN YOU MIGHT WANT TO TO DO THOSE AS WELL.

SO WITH THAT, I'M ALL SET FOR THIS EVENING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR MANAGER DEMPSEY? I THINK LET'S LET'S PUT THE LISTENING SESSIONS ON FOR DISCUSSION AT OUR NEXT MEETING.

AND THEN WE CAN TALK THROUGH WHAT THE WHAT THE BOARD THINKS IS A GOOD PLAN FOR THAT.

AND WE'LL GET THOSE SQUARED AWAY FOR YOU. SOUNDS GOOD. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. NEXT UP IS AGENDA ITEM 7 BOARD MEMBER REPORTS OF ACTIVITIES AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.

[7. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS OF ACTIVITIES AND ANNOUNCEMENTS]

YEAH. I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE WHO ACCOMPANIED ME YESTERDAY.

I SPENT THE DAY WITH MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP STAFF, SO IT WAS A WHIRLWIND DAY WITH, I THINK TEN MEETINGS IN TOTAL.

SO GOT TO SPEND TIME WITH MOST OF THE DEPARTMENTS AND HOPE THAT THE ONES THAT I DID MISS, I WILL GET TO SPEAK MORE TO.

BUT YOU KNOW, REALLY, AS A NEW BOARD MEMBER, WHAT I WANTED TO ASK THEM WAS, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT THAT WE ON THE BOARD MIGHT NOT BE TALKING ABOUT, ESPECIALLY OVER THE PAST FEW MONTHS AS I HAVE BEEN SITTING HERE AND THE VARIETY OF RESPONSES WERE GREAT.

I APPRECIATE THE THOUGHTFULNESS THAT EVERYONE HAD IN ANSWERING THAT QUESTION, AND, YOU KNOW, GIVES ME A GOOD FRAMEWORK FOR HOW I WANT TO BE A GOOD TRUSTEE FOR THE STAFF HERE, IN ADDITION TO THE VOTERS OUT IN MERIDIAN.

SO, YOU KNOW, REALLY, I WALKED AWAY WITH THAT FEELING THAT OUR STAFF DO CARE IMMENSELY ABOUT THEIR WORK.

AND, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO ADJUSTED THEIR SCHEDULE AND ALLOWED AND DROVE ME FROM BUILDING TO BUILDING.

THANK YOU TO DAN AND CHIEF HAMEL OVER THERE. AND YOU KNOW, AND OF OF COURSE MANAGER DEMPSEY.

SO, YOU KNOW, IT WAS A GREAT DAY. PERFECT. YEAH.

THANK YOU. OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? TRUSTEE SUNDLAND.

OH, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT PHIL AND I HAD A CHANCE TO ATTEND THE MICHIGAN TOWNSHIP ASSOCIATION MEETING TODAY.

I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO FULLY DIGEST EVERYTHING WE TALKED ABOUT TODAY, BUT IT WAS A GREAT SESSION.

LOTS OF RELEVANT TOPICS, AND I'M REALLY HAPPY THAT WE ATTENDED THAT TODAY.

PERFECT. THANK YOU. TREASURER DESCHAINE. YES, WE DID ATTEND IT WAS A VERY GOOD CAPITAL CONFERENCE. MTA IS SUPPORTING THREE REALLY BIG THINGS; ONE IS THE MAINTENANCE OF STATUTORY AND CONSTITUTIONAL REVENUE SHARING.

IT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT SOURCE OF OUR FUNDING, AND IT OFTEN HAS BEEN CUT BACK BY THE STATE, PARTICULARLY AS WE GO INTO TIMES OF LOWER REVENUE, WHICH WE MAY BE AROUND THE CORNER.

THEY ALSO OPPOSING STATE INITIATIVES THAT TAKE AWAY LOCAL CONTROL OR LOCAL REVENUE.

ONE OF THOSE BEING THE STATE, ALLOWS FOR 100% PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR DISABLED VETERANS, AND THOSE ARE PEOPLE THAT DESERVE TO HAVE THAT.

BUT THERE'S NO REVENUE REPLACEMENT FOR THAT AND INCREASING NUMBER OF COME TO OUR ASSESSOR FOR THAT AND OTHER TOWNSHIPS.

SO IT'S CREATED A REALLY DECENT HOLE IN THE FUNDING FOR MANY SCHOOLS AND OTHER LOCAL OPERATIONS, AND THE STATE HAS DONE NOTHING TO ADDRESS THAT.

AND LASTLY, THE MTA SUPPORTING MODERNIZATION OF TOWNSHIP ACTIVITIES, SUCH AS BEING ABLE TO PUBLISH OUR MEETING NOTICES ELECTRONICALLY WITHOUT HAVING TO PRINT THEM IN PAPERS, FUNDING FOR CLERK'S OPERATIONS, WHICH IS A VERY DIFFERENT CLERK'S OPERATION THAN IT WAS A FEW YEARS AGO, AND EVEN CHANGES THE OPEN MEETING ACTS ALLOWING FOR LIMITED REMOTE ACCESS TO THOSE.

SO MTA IS IS REALLY ON THE CUTTING EDGE. WE'VE GOT GREAT REPRESENTATION WITH THE CAPITAL AND CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THEM.

THE OTHER THING I WANT TO MENTION IS FRIDAY WAS THE LAST DAY FOR LOCAL PROPERTY TAXES, AND THE UNPAID TAXES GOT TURNED OVER TO THE INGHAM COUNTY TREASURER, BUT WE RECEIVED 98.6% OF THE $130 MILLION IN TAXES WE BUILD PRIMARILY FOR SCHOOLS WE RECEIVE 98.6% OF THAT. JUST A REMARKABLE NUMBER, ONE OF THE HIGHEST IN THE STATE.

SO THANK YOU TO OUR RESIDENTS WHO PAID IT ON TIME AND ALLOWS US TO FOCUS ON OTHER THINGS.

[00:45:01]

THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? TRUSTEE WILSON. THE CRC, THE COMMISSION, I'M BLANKING RESOURCE COMMISSION, WHICH ADDRESSES THE NEEDS OF THE LOWER INCOME PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY, PUT ON A FABULOUS PROGRAM LAST WEDNESDAY THAT I WAS HAPPY TO ATTEND.

OH. KATIE LOVE, WHO IS OUR HUMAN RESOURCE SPECIALIST, BROUGHT TOGETHER 40 NONPROFITS THAT SERVE MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP IN MANY CAPACITIES.

FOOD AND SHELTER AND ASSISTANCE WITH VARIOUS NEEDS, MEDICAL NEEDS AND ALL KINDS OF THINGS.

AND IT WAS SO ENLIGHTENING I HAD NOT BEEN IN A ROOM WITH SO MANY PEOPLE THAT REALLY DO TREMENDOUS WORK IN THIS COMMUNITY, SO IT WAS A VERY EXCITING EVENT. AND I'LL ALSO POINT OUT THAT WE ON THE CRC, I'M THE LIAISON TO THE GROUP, IS RUNNING A BABY BOTTLE BONANZA RIGHT OUTSIDE THAT DOOR.

AND IT'S A CUTE IDEA THAT WE CAME UP WITH THAT YOU CAN TAKE ONE OF THE BABY BOTTLES AND FILL IT WITH YOUR CHANGE, OR PUT A CHECK IN THERE OR WHATEVER, AND JUST BRING IT BACK TO THE TOWNSHIP.

AND WE WILL MAKE USE OF ALL THAT MONEY TO MEET THE NEEDS OF INDIVIDUALS WHO DON'T HAVE AS MUCH IN THE COMMUNITY.

SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO THAT WHEN YOU LEAVE THE ROOM.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. TRUSTEE TREZISE. YES. I ATTENDED THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEETING SINCE OUR LAST MEETING HERE.

THE ONLY ISSUE WAS THE THIRD TIME WE'VE LOOKED AT A REQUEST FROM GRAND RESERVE IN THE LAST THREE MEETINGS.

[INAUDIBLE] GRAND RESERVE IS A DEVELOPMENT OFF CENTRAL PARK, AND THERE'S A LOT OF WETLANDS THERE.

THEIR REQUEST WAS, ON THE SURFACE, QUITE MINIMAL.

THEY HAD ABOUT 7 OR 8 POSTS PER DECK. THAT WILL INTRUDE ON THE WETLAND SETBACK, SETBACKS 40FT FROM THE WETLANDS SO IT'S A LONG WAY FROM THE WETLANDS THEMSELVES.

BUT WE WERE HAVING SOME ISSUES BECAUSE AS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED AND APPROVED BY OUR PLANNING COMMISSION OR THE THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, THEY HAD NOT REQUESTED ANY OF THOSE VARIANCES OR AND THEY HAD PUT DESIGNS TOGETHER THAT AVOIDED THEM. SO THEY WERE ASKING US TO GIVE THEM A ZONING VARIANCE TO DO THIS.

WE DISCUSSED IT WITH THEM AND MEETINGS THREE IN A ROW, AND THEY DID MAKE SOME MODIFICATIONS TO MOVE BUILDINGS THAT THEY HAD SET AT ONE PLACE IN THE DESIGN FORWARD TO MOVE THEM OUT OF THE WETLANDS BUFFER.

AND THESE ARE ONLY 4X4 POSTS, BUT STILL THEY'RE INTRUDING IN THE WETLANDS BUFFER.

AND THAT'S IMPORTANT TO THE TOWNSHIP. SO WE REACHED AN AGREEMENT WITH THEM AND APPROVED THAT THEY CAN PUT SOME POSTS INTO THE WETLAND BUFFER ZONE ABOUT AT THE MOST WAS ABOUT 4 FEET INTO THE BUFFER.

SO IT WASN'T A SEVERE INCURSION, BUT IT ALLOWS THEM TO BUILD THEIR DEVELOPMENT.

THERE ARE A LOT OF WETLANDS ON THAT PROPERTY.

SO DESIGNING IT WAS A TRICK. AND I THINK IT'S A VERY GOOD COMPROMISE.

AND WE APPRECIATED THE WORK THAT THE BUILDER AND THE DEVELOPER DID TO ACCOMMODATE SOME OF OUR NEEDS.

SO THAT WENT FORWARD. THANK YOU. OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? I ATTENDED THE SENIOR AND COMMUNITY CENTER TASK FORCE MEETING LAST TUESDAY.

THIS IS OUR PENULTIMATE MEETING AHEAD OF OUR MARCH MEETING, WHERE WE'LL BE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION, TWO RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS BOARD ABOUT POSSIBLE PLANS TO MOVE FORWARD ON A SENIOR AND OR SENIOR COMMUNITY CENTER.

THAT MEETING FOCUSED MOSTLY ON OPERATIONS AND THE COST OF OPERATING.

I'M PLEASED TO REPORT THAT THE BOTH PROPOSALS SAW SIGNIFICANT OPERATIONAL SAVINGS COMPARED TO THE YONKERS PROPOSAL THAT WE VIEWED BACK IN AUGUST. I THINK IT WAS ABOUT 30% SAVINGS FOR THE SENIOR AND COMMUNITY CENTER AND ABOUT 70% SAVINGS FOR THE SENIOR ONLY CENTER.

SO BIG, BIG CHANGES IN THE NUMBERS. WE HAVE TO RESPOND SORT OF INDIRECTLY TO OUR RESIDENT WHO WAS HERE SPEAKING EARLIER. WE HAVE ASKED THE ARCHITECTS TO COME BACK AT OUR MARCH MEETING WITH SOME SCALED BACK PROPOSALS ON IN TERMS OF THE SIZE OF BOTH THE SENIOR AND SENIOR AND COMMUNITY CENTER TO REFLECT SOME OF THE REQUESTS THAT WE HEARD FROM OUR OUR

[00:50:03]

ONCE AGAIN, THE TASK FORCE'S MISSION IS TO MAKE TWO RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD.

ONE FOR SENIOR ONLY, ONE FOR SENIOR COMMUNITY CENTER.

WE EXPECT THAT NO MATTER WHAT PATH WE CHOOSE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THERE WILL LIKELY NEED TO BE A BALLOT INITIATIVE OR TWO IF WE DECIDE TO SPLIT THEM ON THE AUGUST BALLOT. SO WE'LL BE DISCUSSING THOSE AT OUR MEETINGS IN APRIL, AND I BELIEVE WE'LL BE HAVING A SORT OF A TABLE SETTING CONVERSATION AT OUR NEXT MEETING ABOUT OVERALL TOWNSHIP MILLAGE PICTURE, SO WE CAN HAVE A DECENT FINANCIAL UNDERSTANDING AS WE APPROACH THAT.

SO JUST A HEADS UP THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'LL BE COMING ON OUR NEXT COUPLE OF AGENDAS IN THAT REGARD.

ALSO SAT IN ON THE DDA MEETING I'M A STATUTORY MEMBER OF THE DDA, ON MONDAY.

AND IN ADDITION TO THEIR NORMAL BUSINESS, INCLUDING AN UPCOMING SIGN REPLACEMENT TO THE WELCOMING SIGN TO DOWNTOWN OKEMOS THEY DISCUSSED WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN TERMS OF ACTION MOVING FORWARD ON THE VILLAGE OF OKEMOS PARCEL, WHICH IS, OF COURSE, THE LARGEST SEGMENT OF THE DDA AND IS AN AREA OF MUCH CONCERN TO EVERYONE IN THE TOWNSHIP, BUT ESPECIALLY THEM. I WANT TO MAKE YOU AWARE THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS FLOATED, AND WE'RE GOING TO SEE, I GUESS THE STAFF WILL WORK WITH THE DDA TO IDENTIFY WHAT IS ACHIEVABLE.

THEY HAD ASKED FOR A REDEVELOPMENT WELL, REDEVELOPMENT READINESS PLAN TO BE PUT TOGETHER.

AND THE IDEA OF THAT WOULD BE TO PUT TOGETHER AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS THAT WOULD NEED TO OCCUR FOR VARIOUS PROPOSALS.

SO ESSENTIALLY, WE COULD HAND THIS TO A DEVELOPER OR A SITE OWNER AND SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE KNOW WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN FROM A FROM A DOLLARS AND CENTS PERSPECTIVE TO MAKE THIS A PARCEL THAT YOU CAN WORK ON. NOW, OF COURSE, THERE'S ALL KINDS OF NUANCE TO THAT BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WOULD NECESSARILY USE IT FOR. BUT BASED ON WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE USES THAT COULD BE THERE, WE CAN PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER, MOST LIKELY. THERE WAS ANOTHER IDEA FLOATED TO ATTEMPT TO DO THIS AND THEN PURCHASE THE PARCEL FROM THE TOWNSHIP'S PERSPECTIVE AND THEN DEVELOPMENT AND THEN DEVELOP IT AND THEN OWN IT AND LEASE IT OUT TO ANYWHERE BETWEEN 10 TO 20 DEVELOPERS.

THIS RECEIVED SOME PUSHBACK FROM ME AS A LIKELY UNTENABLE, LIKELY UNTENABLE OPTION CONSIDERING THE PURCHASE PRICE AND THE ONGOING COSTS WOULD BE IN THE TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

AND WE DON'T HAVE THAT KIND OF MONEY TO THROW AROUND JUST OFF THE OFF THE JUMP.

AND OF COURSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S BUT IT IS CREATIVE THINKING IN TERMS OF WHAT WHAT WHAT COULD BE DONE.

AND WE WANTED TO EXPLORE ALL OF OUR OPTIONS, SO WE'LL MAKE SURE WE DO SO IN A, IN A COST EFFECTIVE WAY.

BUT THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, I THINK IS AN INTERESTING NOTION THAT WE MAY WANT TO THAT THEY WANT TO PURSUE.

SO BE AWARE OF THAT. AND LASTLY, AND THIS IS NOT TOWNSHIP RELATED, BUT I DID GET TO ATTEND THE BENNETT WOODS SCIENCE NIGHT WITH MY SONS AND MY WIFE ON WEDNESDAY OF LAST WEEK, AND THE KIDS ARE GOING TO BE ALL RIGHT.

THERE'S THE PARKING LOT WAS NEVER MORE PACKED THAN THAN FOR SCIENCE NIGHT.

AND THEY HAD A BLAST. ALL LOOKS LIKE LOOKED TO BE THAT ALL OF THE KIDS THERE AND THEIR PARENTS HAD A VERY GOOD TIME.

THEY HAD I CAN'T TELL YOU HOW MANY EXHIBITORS THERE.

I CAN TELL YOU A COUPLE, THOUGH, WERE FROM OUR TOWNSHIP, POLICE DEPARTMENT AND FIRE DEPARTMENT DOING SOME FORENSICS AND ALSO CPR DEMONSTRATIONS.

SO THANK YOU TO OUR TOWNSHIP POLICE AND FIRE FOR HAVING A PRESENCE AT THAT.

WE CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE COMMUNITY OUTREACH.

AND MY KIDS FINGERPRINTS ARE NOW ON FILE SHOULD ANYTHING SHOULD ANYTHING COME UP AND I EXPECT A PHONE CALL PLEASE.

AND THAT CONCLUDES MY REPORT. WITH THAT WILL MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM 8, WHICH IS APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA.

[8. APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

ANY DISCUSSION ON THE AGENDA? SEEING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE AGENDA, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. NEXT UP IS AGENDA 9, OUR CONSENT AGENDA.

[9. CONSENT AGENDA]

[00:55:04]

WE DID RECEIVE THE COMMUNICATION FROM MR. LEONE IN OUR EMAIL TODAY.

THAT WILL NOT BE IN OUR PACKET THAT GOES UP FOR THIS MEETING BECAUSE IT WAS RECEIVED AFTER THE PACKET DEADLINE.

HOWEVER, THE AGENDA ITEM THAT IT IS REFERRING TO WILL BE BACK ON OUR AGENDA AT OUR NEXT MEETING, AND SO IT WILL APPEAR IN OUR NEXT BOARD PACKET.

SO YOU CAN KEEP AN EYE OUT FOR THAT FOR THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING THERE.

AND THAT'S ALL FOR THE CONSENT AGENDA. TREASURER DESCHAINE. I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED.

SUPPORT. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY TREASURER DESCHAINE AND SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE WILSON. ANY DISCUSSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA? SEEING NONE, WILL DEPUTY CLERK GORDON PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. CLERK DEMAS.

YES. TREASURER DESCHAINE. YES. TRUSTEE LENTZ.

YES. TRUSTEE SUNDLAND. YES. TRUSTEE TREZISE. YES.

TRUSTEE WILSON. YES. SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON. YES.

MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT.

NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 10 QUESTIONS FOR THE ATTORNEY. WE HAVE NONE.

ITEM 11 HEARINGS. WE HAVE NONE. ITEM 12 A THE BOARD POLICY UPDATE FOR THIS WE HAVE ATTORNEY CARSTON.

[12.A. Board Policy Update ]

THANK YOU, MR. SUPERVISOR. THANK YOU, MR. SUPERVISOR. GOOD EVENING BOARD MEMBERS, MATT KUSCHEL HAD A CONFLICT TONIGHT, SO HE WASN'T ABLE TO MAKE IT. SO I ALLOWED MATT TO DO ALL THE LEGWORK TO GET HERE AND I INTEND TO TAKE ALL THE CREDIT WHEN WHEN WE GET THROUGH THIS.

SO I APPRECIATE YOU HAVING ME. I THINK WE JUST HAVE A FEW ITEMS TO CLEAR UP IN THE, THE BOARD POLICIES, THE FIRST OF WHICH, AS THE SUPERVISOR ALLUDED TO ON PAGE FIVE THERE IS AN ADDITION AND I APOLOGIZE I'M NOT SURE WHY IT'S IN MULTIPLE COLORS, BUT THERE IS AN ADDITION PROPOSED THE MIDDLE OF PAGE FIVE.

SO FOR CONTEXT, THAT AROSE OUT OF A CONVERSATION.

I WAS ON SITE ON THURSDAY TO DISCUSS PERSONNEL POLICIES WITH HR DIRECTOR TITHOF AND MANAGER DEMPSEY.

WITHIN THE PERSONNEL POLICIES WE'RE PROPOSING WILL BE SUGGESTED TO THE BOARD WHEN IT COMES TO THE BOARD, A REVISED ANTI-DISCRIMINATION POLICY IN LINE WITH UPDATED FEDERAL GUIDANCE ON THE SUBJECT.

ONE OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES WITHIN THAT IS SORT OF AN ASSURANCE THAT NO MATTER WHO A COMPLAINT IS AGAINST WITHIN THE TOWNSHIP, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE SOMEBODY IN CHARGE OF AN INVESTIGATION OR PERFORMING AN INVESTIGATION WHO IS NOT PLACED IN A POSITION THAT THEY WOULD BE INVESTIGATING OR IN CHARGE OF AN INVESTIGATION OF SOMEONE SORT OF HIGHER ON THE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

SO GENERALLY IT WOULD BE PERFORMED BY HR, IF NOT HR, THE MANAGER, SO ON AND SO FORTH.

WITHIN THAT POLICY, THERE WAS A PROVISION THAT ESSENTIALLY SAID IF THERE WAS A COMPLAINT MADE AGAINST A BOARD MEMBER, HERE'S WHAT HERE'S WHAT THE PROCESS WOULD BE.

MANAGER DEMPSEY SUGGESTED THAT SHOULD ALSO BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE BOARD POLICIES, BECAUSE THE PERSONNEL POLICIES DO NOT STRICTLY SPEAKING, APPLY TO BOARD MEMBERS, OR AT LEAST THERE'S A VERY NARROW BAND IN WHICH THEY DO.

SO I THINK HIS SUGGESTION WAS WELL TAKEN AND SO THAT IS WHY WE HAVE THAT PROPOSED LANGUAGE IN PAGE FIVE.

AND SO I THOUGHT THAT ADDITIONAL CONTEXT MIGHT BE USEFUL TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE HAVE SUDDENLY INCLUDED IT HERE.

IT ARISES SIMPLY TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS SOME, SOME PROCEDURE, IF THERE WERE TO EVER BE A COMPLAINT OF ANY TYPE AGAINST A BOARD MEMBER TO ENSURE THAT FOLKS ARE AWARE OF THE PROCESS. SO HAPPY TO TO FIELD ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT OR TAKE ANY SUGGESTIONS AS TO POLICY LANGUAGE.

BOARD MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS? CLERK DEMAS. YES.

IN REGARD TO THAT CHANGE. I SEE HERE THAT IT SAYS IF THE COMPLAINT INVOLVES THE SUPERVISOR, THEN THE CLERK SHALL RECEIVE THE COMPLAINT. IS THERE A PROCEDURE IF IT INVOLVES ALL BOARD MEMBERS OR BOTH THE SUPERVISOR AND THE CLERK? YEAH. SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE COULD HAVE KIND OF CONTINUED OUT THAT CHAIN ON DOWN THE LINE.

I THINK IF IT WERE TO INVOLVE ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS AT A CERTAIN LEVEL, YOU WOULD ALL JUST HAVE TO BE INVOLVED BECAUSE THERE WOULD BE NO ONE ELSE TO TO BE INVOLVED IN THAT PROCESS. AND CERTAINLY WE WOULD LOOP IN THE MANAGER, I THINK THE TOWNSHIP'S ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WOULD WOULD BE INVOLVED IN ANY CASE.

IF IT INVOLVED BOTH THE CLERK AND THE TREASURER, I THINK WE WOULD TRY TO BE FLEXIBLE IN THAT REGARD.

I DON'T KNOW THAT SPECIFICALLY WE WOULD HAVE TO ADDRESS IT IN THE LANGUAGE JUST SO IT DOESN'T GET A LITTLE UNWIELDY, BUT I THINK THERE WOULD BE FLEXIBILITY FOR THE BOARD TO TO HAVE SOMEBODY ELSE BRING THAT FORWARD AND, AND DISCUSS IT. THAT MAKES SENSE, THANK YOU. SO I'LL PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE ON THIS.

YEAH. THIS BOARD IS CAPABLE OF INVESTIGATING, BUT THERE IS NO REAL CAPABILITY AS I UNDERSTAND IT GIVEN

[01:00:08]

RIGHT. THAT REMEDY LIES WITH THE PEOPLE OF THE OF THE JURISDICTION.

CORRECT. AND SO THIS IS FINE, RIGHT? WE'RE HAPPY TO RECEIVE AND INVESTIGATE.

AND WE DON'T WANT TO, YOU KNOW, IMPLY OTHERWISE, IS THERE? AM I AM I CORRECT IN THAT ASSUMPTION, OR IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU KNOW THAT THE OUTCOME OF THIS WOULD BE OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE RELEASED OR NOT RELEASED OR WHATEVER? YEAH, I THINK THE CONTEXT THAT IT'S PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT.

I MEAN, IT'S IMPORTANT IN ANY CONTEXT IN WHICH THERE WOULD BE A COMPLAINT, BUT SPECIFIC TO ANTI-HARASSMENT, ANTI-DISCRIMINATION, THERE'S A LEGAL DUTY TO ENSURE THAT AN INVESTIGATION TAKES PLACE.

AND IN THAT CASE, SORT OF REGARDLESS OF THE FACT THAT THE TOWNSHIP IS IS UNABLE TO DISCIPLINE OR TERMINATE A MEMBER OF THE TOWNSHIP BOARD, SO IT'S STILL IMPORTANT TO HAVE A PROCEDURE IN PLACE.

AND CERTAINLY YOU WEREN'T SUGGESTING OTHERWISE. BUT BUT THAT IS SORT OF A LEGAL REQUIREMENT, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT MEMORIALIZED THAT THERE WILL BE A PROCESS IN PLACE FOR THAT.

FOR OTHER COMPLAINTS I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE IS LEGALLY NECESSARY.

AND AND YOU ARE CORRECT, THERE IS NOT A MECHANISM FOR THOSE OF YOU ON THE BOARD NECESSARILY TO HOLD ONE ANOTHER ACCOUNTABLE.

YOU'RE ALL ACCOUNTABLE TO THE VOTERS OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, CENSURES OR SORT OF STATEMENTS AT BOARD MEETINGS.

BUT THERE'S NO THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL SANCTION THAT CAN BE IMPOSED.

THANK YOU. YEAH. YEAH. OTHERWISE, I HAVE NO ISSUES WITH THAT CHANGE.

OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? TRUSTEE TREZISE. I THINK IT'S A GOOD ADDITION TO THE PROCESS WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT IF A COMPLAINT IS AGAINST THE SUPERVISOR AND THE COURT RECEIVES THE COMPLAINT SIMILAR TO ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBER, SHE WOULD DISTRIBUTE IT TO THE REST OF THE BOARD.

SO I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO BE ADDED, BUT IT'S IMPLIED THERE IN MY MIND, RIGHT? OKAY. THANK YOU. CAN I ASK WHY IT'S JUST NOW BEING INTRODUCED? YEAH. SO IT WAS A RESULT OF AS I, AS I MENTIONED, A CONVERSATION I HAD WITH MANAGER DEMPSEY AND HR DIRECTOR TITHOF AND IT SORT OF OCCURRED, OCCURRED TO MANAGER DEMPSEY THAT THIS THIS WOULD BE A GOOD ADDITION.

AND WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT MEETING TO GO OVER PERSONNEL POLICIES UNTIL LAST THURSDAY.

SO I DO APOLOGIZE THAT IT WAS SORT OF LAST MINUTE.

AND I KNOW THAT OTHERWISE THIS WAS VERY CLOSE TO TO ITS COMPLETION.

BUT THAT'S YEAH, THAT'S THE NATURE OF THE TIMING.

OKAY. WELL I AGREE THAT IT'S A GOOD ADDITION.

TRUSTEE TREZISE I CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION TO AN EXTENT, ANGELA.

WE DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF COMPLAINTS AGAINST BOARD MEMBERS BUT ON THE POLICY COMMITTEE, SIMILAR TO WHAT SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON SAID, WE COULDN'T FIGURE OUT WHAT A RESULT WOULD BE.

SO IT MAY HAVE GOTTEN TABLED TOO EARLY AND WE SHOULD HAVE COME BACK TO IT.

BUT AT THAT POINT, WE DIDN'T HAVE A QUICK RESPONSE TO WHERE WE SHOULD GO WITH IT.

SO THAT'S WHY I CAME IN LATE AND I'M GLAD IT DID.

TREASURER DESCHAINE. I'M GLAD IT CAME IN AS WELL.

LESS THAN FIVE YEARS AGO, A FORMER BOARD MEMBER WAS SUED BY A FORMER EMPLOYEE, AND WOULD HAVE BEEN STRONGER IN DEFENSE OF THAT WITH THE POLICY OF THIS IN PLACE.

NOT THAT WE COULD HAVE PREVENTED IT, BUT IT CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE BEEN MEMORIALIZED, AS YOU SAY, THAT THIS IS NOT BEHAVIOR THE BOARD WILL ENDORSE OR ALLOW, EVEN BY ESPECIALLY BY ITS OWN MEMBERS. SO I'M GLAD WE'RE ADDING THIS.

RIGHT. I THINK THAT'S THAT'S A GOOD POINT. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE TOWNSHIP WOULD POINT TO IN DEFENSE OF THE TOWNSHIP OR IN DEFENSE OF AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, OR JUST TO CLARIFY THE PROCESS IS TO SAY WE DO HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE.

IT IS NOT AS IF WE ARE HANDLING THESE SORT OF AD HOC OR, YOU KNOW, RECKLESSLY.

WE HAVE A PROCESS IN PLACE AND, YOU KNOW, IN THE FUTURE, THIS IS THE PROCESS WE INTEND TO FOLLOW.

THAT IS A GOOD FIRST LINE OF LEGAL DEFENSE FOR THE TOWNSHIP.

THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SO HOW DO WE HANDLE THE THE DOCUMENT BEFORE US AND THE PACKET THAT WE RECEIVED. DO WE JUST REVIEW THE REVISED BOARD POLICY MANUAL.

AND WE'RE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE ARE REFERRING TO THIS IN FRONT OF US.

YEAH I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE CORRECT.

MANAGER DEMPSEY CAN CORRECT ME IF HE HAS A DIFFERENT UNDERSTANDING OF HOW TO PROCEDURALLY HANDLE IT, BUT THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING. YEAH, I THINK WE ACKNOWLEDGED THE PROVIDED REVISION IN THE MOTION.

THAT'D BE FINE. AND THEN WE WILL INCLUDE THE UPDATED VERSION ON THE BOARD PACKET LATER.

ALL RIGHT. VERY GOOD. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON THIS ITEM.

TRUSTEE TREZISE. I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE THE PROPOSED BOARD RULES, POLICY AND PROCEDURES MANUAL FOR THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES WITH THE ADDITION OF A PARAGRAPH INVOLVING COMPLAINTS AGAINST BOARD MEMBERS OR SUPERVISOR,

[01:05:08]

OKAY. IS THAT THE MOTION? SUPPORTED BY SUPPORTED BY CLERK DEMAS.

ALL RIGHT. THE QUESTION. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS MATTER? THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS ON APPROVAL OF THE REVISED BOARD POLICY MANUAL ON OUR PLACES THIS EVENING.

I THINK WE CAN DO THIS BY A VOICE VOTE. I DON'T SEE WHY NOT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK.

AND THANK YOU FOR THE RECOGNITION. NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 12 B MDOT EXTENDED WORK HOURS,

[12.B. MDOT Extended Work Hours]

GOOD EVENING, SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON AND BOARD MEMBERS.

SO, AS YOU WILL RECALL FROM OUR LAST BOARD MEETING WE DID APPROACH MDOT AND SPEAK WITH THEM ABOUT THE GRAND RIVER AVENUE BRIDGE OVER THE RED CEDAR PROJECT, WHICH COMMENCED ON FEBRUARY 3RD. THAT PROJECT IS SCHEDULED TO BE OPEN TO TRAFFIC, OR THE NEW BRIDGE IS SCHEDULED TO BE OPENED TO TRAFFIC IN SOMETIME IN DECEMBER OF THIS YEAR. HOWEVER, AS WE ALL KNOW, WITH PROJECTS OF THIS MAGNITUDE THAT COULD GO INTO JANUARY OR FEBRUARY OF 2026. SO AT THE REQUEST OF THE SUPERVISOR, WE DID TALK TO MDOT ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO WORK BEYOND THE HOURS THAT WE ALLOW FOR IN THE ORDINANCE.

SO THE ORDINANCE RESTRICTS CONSTRUCTION HOURS TO 7 A.M.

TO 7 P.M. MONDAY THROUGH SATURDAY, HOLIDAYS EXCLUDED.

AND AS WE DISCUSSED AT THE PREVIOUS BOARD MEETING, ONE WAY IN WHICH WE COULD GIVE MDOT A LITTLE BIT OF FLEXIBILITY TO MAKE UP SOME RAIN DATES WOULD BE TO ALLOW THEM TO WORK 7 A.M. TO 7 P.M.

ON SUNDAYS. WE ONLY ANTICIPATE THAT THEY WOULD MAKE USE OF THIS MAYBE A HANDFUL OF TIMES THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT, BUT IT COULD HELP THEM MAKE UP A FEW RAIN DAYS OVER THE COURSE OF THE YEAR.

AND SO BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS A MOTION THAT I PREPARED TO THAT EFFECT, BASED ON THE FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD AT YOUR PRIOR MEETING.

MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BOARD MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS? TRUSTEE LENTZ. I REALIZE I MEANT TO ASK THIS DURING OUR LAST MEETING, BUT CONSIDERING, LIKE YOU SAID, THE POSSIBILITY OF EXTENDING INTO JANUARY AND FEBRUARY AND THE REASONING BEHIND THIS BEING RAIN DELAYS POTENTIALLY, IS THERE ANY POSSIBILITY THAT A DELAY BEGETS ANOTHER DELAY BECAUSE OF THE COLD WEATHER, OR.

I'M JUST CURIOUS IF WE GET INTO JANUARY AND IT'S UNUSUALLY COLD, IF THESE PROBLEMS COULD POTENTIALLY WORSEN AND MAKE THIS ACTION EVEN MORE PERTINENT FOR RESIDENTS? THE ONLY FACTOR THAT WEATHER WOULD PLAY IS IF WE DO HAVE AN EARLY WINTER, AND THEY STILL HAVE CONCRETE SUPPORT FOR ARCHES OR THE BRIDGE DECK THEN WE COULD RUN INTO ISSUES.

SO LONG AS THE CONCRETE GETS POURED AND CASTED BEFORE THE COLD TEMPS ARRIVE, WE SHOULD BE GOOD.

OKAY. ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE DID HAVE OCCURRED DURING THE OKEMOS ROAD BRIDGE PROJECT WAS THAT THE CONTRACT DID NOT COMPEL THE CONTRACTORS AND THE SUBCONTRACTORS TO WORK DURING THE SEASONAL SUSPENSION PERIOD, WHICH RUNS NOVEMBER 15TH TO APRIL 15TH. THIS CONTRACT FOR THIS PROJECT DOES ALLOW MDOT TO COMPEL THEIR CONTRACTORS TO WORK THROUGH THE SEASONAL SUSPENSION PERIOD UNTIL THE PROJECT IS COMPLETED.

THANK YOU. I THINK THIS IS AN EASY THING FOR US TO WORK.

I'M HAPPY THAT THIS WAS BROUGHT FORWARD TO US AND I FULLY INTEND ON SUPPORTING THIS.

THANK YOU. TREASURER DESCHAINE. I, TOO SUPPORT IT.

ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO ASSIST THIS PROJECT. IT'S ALREADY HAVING AN IMPACT.

I MEAN, THIS IS GRAND RIVER THAT'S BEING CLOSED HERE. AND ALL THE EAST WEST TRAFFIC IS PARTICULARLY IN THE EASTERN THIRD OF THE TOWNSHIP IS IMPACTED BY THIS.

SO I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE THE MOTION. I MOVE TO WAIVE SECTION 50 - 84, SUBSECTION 4 A IN THE TOWNSHIP CODE OF ORDINANCES TO PERMIT THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND ITS CONTRACTORS WORKING ON THE GRAND RIVER AVENUE OVER RED CEDAR RIVER BRIDGE REPLACEMENT PROJECT TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION WORK HOURS MONDAY THROUGH SUNDAY, EXCLUDING HOLIDAYS, BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7 A.M.

AND 7 P.M. UNTIL JANUARY 31ST, 2026. SO MOVED BY TREASURER DESCHAINE DO WE HAVE A SUPPORT? SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE LENTZ. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I'LL SIMPLY CONCUR THAT THIS IS INDEED, I THINK, A WORTHY THING FOR US TO DO, EVEN IF IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE INTENT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF VERY OFTEN. EVERY DAY CAN COUNT WHEN THE WEATHER STARTS TO TURN ON US.

[01:10:03]

I THINK ANY DISCOMFORT THERE IS FOR A COUPLE OF DAYS OF CONSTRUCTION WILL BE MITIGATED BY THE SPEEDY COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WITH THAT SAID, I'LL THE MOTION IS TO WAIVE SECTION 50-84.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. YES. THIS REQUIRES A ROLL CALL VOTE BASED ON THE PROCEDURE WE JUST ADOPTED.

OH. DOES IT? LOOK AT THAT. LOOK, WE'RE IMPLEMENTING OUR BOARD RULES ALREADY.

THAT'S WHY WE NEED OUR ATTORNEY HERE. OUR ATTORNEY HAS VACATED QUICKLY.

SO WE'LL ORDINANCE OR AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT.

I'LL RESCIND OUR I'LL RESCIND MY THANKS FOR HIS HARD WORK, THEN, SINCE HE ABANDONED US SO QUICKLY.

TREASURER DESCHAINE. YES. TRUSTEE LENTZ. YES.

TRUSTEE SUNDLAND. YES. TRUSTEE TREZISE. YES. TRUSTEE WILSON.

YES. SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON. YES. CLERK DEMAS.

YES. MOTION CARRIES. I'M GOING TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS AND RETRAIN MYSELF A LITTLE BIT.

THANK YOU, DEPUTY MANAGER OPSOMMER. OH, WELL, YOU'RE STILL THERE BECAUSE ITEM 12C IS A DNR GRANT APPLICATION RESOLUTION AND YOU'RE HERE

[12.C. DNR Grant Application Resolution]

SO BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS THE NATURAL RESOURCE TRUST FUND GRANT THAT DIRECTOR WISINSKI AND HER STAFF HAVE DEVELOPED FOR 5280 OKEMOS ROAD.

SO THIS IS THE PROPERTY THAT THE TOWNSHIP ACQUIRED BACK IN 2022.

IT HAD AN OLD FARMHOUSE ON THE PROPERTY WHICH WAS SINCE DEMOLISHED.

THERE IS A POLE BARN, A SMALL POLE BARN ON THE PROPERTY THAT WE HAVE RETAINED AND KEPT FOR STORING VARIOUS EQUIPMENT AND MATERIAL.

AND SO CONCEPTUALLY, WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT DOING IS CREATING A TRAILHEAD, BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY IS AT THE NORTH TRAILHEAD FOR PHASE TWO OF THE MSU LAKE LANSING TRAIL. AND IT AND WE HAVE PHASE TWO B OF THE MSU LAKE LANSING TRAIL THAT RUNS ALONG THE PROPERTY FRONTAGE OF THIS PROPERTY.

THE GRANT APPLICATION IS FOR $400,000, WHICH IS THE MAXIMUM WE CAN APPLY FOR THROUGH THE NATURAL RESOURCE TRUST FUND, AND THE AWARDS WILL BE ANNOUNCED IN OCTOBER OF 2025.

THIS GRANT DOES REQUIRE A 25% LOCAL MATCH, WHICH WE ARE PREPARED TO PROVIDE.

AND THE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING IS TO SUPPORT THE APPLICATION TO THE NATURAL RESOURCE TRUST FUND.

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU. BOARD MEMBERS, ANY QUESTIONS? TRUSTEE WILSON.

WOULD THE SOURCE OF THE 25% LOCAL MATCH COME FROM PARK MILLAGE? IT COULD COME FROM ANY COMBINATION OF PARK MILLAGE AND PATHWAY MILLAGE.

OKAY. BOTH ARE POTENTIAL FUNDS THAT WE COULD DRAW FROM.

I THINK THIS IS A GREAT IDEA. 100% SUPPORT. AS THIS IS AN FY 2025 LOCAL MATCH EXPENDITURE, WAS THIS BUDGETED FOR? I CAN'T RECALL.

WELL, WE WOULDN'T EXPEND THE LOCAL MATCH UNTIL WE GET TO CONSTRUCTION.

SO 26 OR 27 DEPENDING ON HOW LONG IT TAKES FOR DESIGN.

GOT IT. I DIDN'T KNOW HOW THAT WAS ENCUMBERED. VERY GOOD.

AND THEN I HAD HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE CONFIGURATION OF THE ROADWAY.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE IF YOU HAD LEFT AT THE LAST MEETING WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THAT, THERE WAS A CONVERSATION AT SOME POINT ABOUT RECONFIGURING THE ENTRYWAY INTO NANCY MOORE PARK. AND I HAD RECALLED THAT MAYBE THERE WAS SOMETHING ABOUT THE TRAIN CROSSING THAT WAS CAUSING PROBLEMS AND MAY NOT ALLOW THAT.

DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THAT? YEAH.

SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT DIRECTOR MAISNER AND I DISCUSSED BEFORE SHE RETIRED.

SO THIS IS THE SITE IN QUESTION RIGHT HERE. THIS IS THE SERVICE CENTER.

AND SO TODAY, IF YOU'RE GOING TO NANCY MOORE PARK, IF YOU'RE TRAVELING NORTHBOUND ON OKEMOS ROAD, YOU WOULD MAKE A RIGHT HAND TURN ONTO GAYLORD C. SMITH COURT.

THE TOWNSHIP DOES HAVE ONE OF OUR NEW PARK SIGNS RIGHT HERE AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION TO HELP WITH WAYFINDING.

AND THEN WE DO HAVE A NEW WAYFINDING SIGN HERE, WHICH DIRECTS MOTORISTS TO TURN LEFT FOR NANCY MOORE PARK.

AND THEN WE HAVE A NEW WAYFINDING SIGN HERE DIRECTING MOTORISTS TO PROCEED STRAIGHT.

SO WE HAVE IMPROVED THE WAYFINDING SIGNAGE. WHEN DIRECTOR MAISNER AND I LAST DISCUSSED THIS, SHE WAS COMFORTABLE WITH IMPROVING THE WAYFINDING SIGNAGE AND THE PARK SIGNAGE OUT ON OKEMOS ROAD AND SEEING HOW THAT ASSISTED MOTORISTS AND PEDESTRIANS IN FINDING THE PARK.

AND BUT CONCEPTUALLY, THE PARKS DEPARTMENT AT ONE TIME WAS CONCEIVING OF POSSIBLY A CURB CUT HERE NEAR THE JUST SOUTH OF THE

[01:15:08]

SO WE DIDN'T GO SO FAR AS TO WORK THROUGH THAT WITH THE ROAD DEPARTMENT.

WE CERTAINLY COULD INQUIRE WITH THEM ABOUT THEIR STANDARDS FOR IT.

BUT WHEN WE LAST DISCUSSED THIS WITH DIRECTOR MAISNER BEFORE SHE RETIRED, SHE WAS COMFORTABLE PROCEEDING WITH THE NEW SIGNAGE AND THE WAYFINDING SIGNAGE ON GAYLORD C. SMITH COURT AND THE SERVICE DRIVE TO KIND OF DIRECT THAT TRAFFIC.

MAKES SENSE. YEAH, THAT MAKES SENSE. I HADN'T THOUGHT ABOUT. THIS IS WHY OTHER PEOPLE THINK ABOUT THINGS MORE THAN I DO IN THIS CASE. THAT MAKES TOTAL SENSE ABOUT THE TRAIN TRACKS AND THE QUEUING. THIS SIGN, WE'LL SEE IF IT STILL, YEAH SO THIS USED TO BE THE SERVICE CENTER SIGN AND IT IT IS AGAIN NOW. SO THIS SIGN, THIS MONUMENT SIGN HERE HAS A NEW SIGN ON IT FOR THE SERVICE CENTER BUT IT WAS KIND OF TAKEN OVER AS WAYFINDING SIGNAGE FOR NANCY MOORE PARK. SO WE'VE KIND OF RECTIFIED ALL THAT.

NOW THERE IS A NEW WAYFINDING SIGN, JUST LIKE THERE ARE IN THIS CAMPUS RIGHT HERE.

AND THEN THIS HAS BEEN RESTORED TO BE THE MONUMENT SIGN FOR THE SERVICE CENTER.

SO WHAT HAPPENS IF THE GRANT IS APPLIED FOR AND WE DO NOT RECEIVE IT? DO WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, A BACKUP PLAN FOR HOW TO FUND A PROJECT LIKE THIS, OR DO WE ATTEMPT TO APPLY FOR ANOTHER GRANT DOWN THE ROAD? WE CERTAINLY COULD APPLY FOR INGHAM COUNTY PARKS AND TRAIL MILLAGE FUNDS, AND I THINK INGHAM COUNTY WOULD SUPPORT US IN THAT APPLICATION.

THE ISSUE THAT WE WOULD HAVE IS ONE OF TIMING.

THE GRANT FUNDS, THE MILLAGE FUNDS FOR THE INGHAM COUNTY PARKS AND TRAILS MILLAGE, THE MILLAGE WILL BE RENEWED IN 2026, WHICH FUNDS 27. IN FUTURE YEARS, IT'S A SIX YEAR MILLAGE, SO PRESUMABLY THEY'LL RENEW IT FOR SIX YEARS.

THEY'VE ALREADY DEDICATED THE FUNDING FOR AT LEAST 27 AND 28 AND PART OF 29.

SO THE TIMING PROBLEM. YEAH. THE EARLIEST WE WOULD EXPECT TO GET FUNDING WOULD BE 29 TO 31 THROUGH THE INGHAM COUNTY PARKS AND TRAILS MILLAGE. THANK YOU. OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? TRUSTEE LENTZ. YEAH. THANK YOU FOR ALL THE EXPLANATION SO FAR DAN, AS SOMEONE WHO WAS ON THE INGHAM COUNTY PARKS COMMISSION, I GOT TO SEE FIRSTHAND JUST THE THE BANKING ON FUTURE MILLAGE APPROVAL.

SO YOU KNOW, APPRECIATE YOU ELIMINATING THAT.

MY QUESTION IS AND APOLOGIES, MY LAPTOP DIED, WHICH HAS ALL MY QUESTIONS.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF THIS WAS ALREADY ANSWERED, BUT IS THERE EVER GRANTS THAT ARE APPROVED FOR LESS THAN THE APPLIED AMOUNT, MEANING WE MIGHT ONLY RECEIVE $200,000 AND THEREFORE NOT HAVE THE FUNDS NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THIS PROJECT.

AND. SEND THEM BACK OR MAKE A DECISION ABOUT OUR DOLLARS GOING TOWARDS THIS.

THAT'S CERTAINLY A POSSIBILITY THEY COULD CHOOSE TO AWARD IF THERE WERE A LOT OF GRANT APPLICATIONS AND THEY THEY MIGHT CHOOSE TO AWARD FOR LESSER AMOUNTS.

BUT WE CAN SCALE OR PHASE THE PROJECT. SO THE PROJECT WOULD BE PUBLIC RESTROOMS WOULD BE THE LARGEST TICKET ITEM SURFACE PARKING LOT, SMALL SURFACE PARKING LOT, SO THAT FOLKS FROM ACROSS THE REGION OR EVEN IF YOU'RE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE TOWNSHIP AND YOU WANT TO PARK AND TAKE YOUR BIKE OUT ON THE MSU LAKE LANSING TRAIL, YOU COULD DO SO USING THIS AS KIND OF AS YOUR JUMPING OFF POINT.

SO BIGGER TICKET ITEMS, YOU KNOW, WE COULD REMOVE ONE OR BOTH OF THOSE AND COME BACK AND DO LIKE THE RESTROOMS AT A LATER DATE, FOR INSTANCE. THE SMALLER TICKET ITEMS, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY, ARE THE SIDEWALKS WITHIN THE SITE POSSIBLY A SHADE STRUCTURE, DRINKING FOUNTAIN, BICYCLE REPAIR STATION, THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

SO WE COULD LOOK AT THE LARGER TICKET ITEMS AND ELIMINATE ONE OF THE TWO AND PROBABLY ADJUST.

YEAH. OKAY. YEAH. FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, I'M INTERESTED IN, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER WE CAN DO MOVING FORWARD.

BUT IF THERE IS A LESSER AMOUNT, YOU KNOW, PUTTING IT TOWARDS THAT BICYCLE REPAIR STATION SHADE FOR ANYONE WHO WANTS TO USE IT, I THINK IS A, YOU KNOW, GREAT PLAN FOR, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF WE DO NEED TO PIECEMEAL IT.

OTHER BOARD MEMBERS? ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THIS?

[01:20:02]

THERE'S A 25% LOCAL MATCH REQUIRED FOR THE APPLICATION.

SUPPORT. MOVED BY TRUSTEE TREZISE AND SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE WILSON.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE DEPUTY CLERK GORDON PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

TRUSTEE LENTZ. YES. TRUSTEE SUNDLAND. YES. TRUSTEE TREZISE.

YES. TRUSTEE WILSON. YES. SUPERVISOR. HENDRICKSON.

YES. CLERK DEMAS. YES. TREASURER DESCHAINE. YES.

MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU ALL.

NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 12D, THE ANNUAL EMERGENCY PLAN UPDATE.

[12.D. Annual Emergency Management Plan Update ]

THANK YOU AGAIN. I'M BACK. TWO WEEKS AGO, I BROUGHT IT TO YOU AND YOU HAD ONE REQUEST, WHICH WAS TO CHANGE THE NAME, WHICH IS NOW STORY PORT POINT IN EAST LANSING, SO THAT WAS DONE.

AND SO IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS, I MOVE TO APPROVE IF YOU WOULD DO THAT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BOARD MEMBERS, ANY DISCUSSION OR MOTIONS TO BE MADE? TRUSTEE WILSON. JUST THAT THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT, THESE ARE MINISTERIAL CHANGES THAT YOU'RE MAKING TO THE DOCUMENT AND THAT'S ALL. YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. CLERK DEMAS.

I MOVE TO APPROVE THE 2025 UPDATES TO SUPPORT TO THE SUPPORT EMERGENCY OPERATIONS PLAN.

IT'S BEEN MOVED BY CLERK DEMAS . TREASURER DESCHAINE. I SUPPORT THAT MOTION.

SUPPORTED BY TREASURER DESCHAINE. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR FOR THE EFFORT ON THIS.

WE APPRECIATE THAT. APPRECIATE IT. DEPUTY CLERK GORDON WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? TRUSTEE SUNDLAND. YES. TRUSTEE TREZISE. YES. TRUSTEE WILSON.

YES. SUPERVISOR HENDRICKSON. YES. CLERK DEMAS.

YES. TREASURER DESCHAINE. YES. TRUSTEE LENTZ.

YES. MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS ACTUALLY. LET'S TAKE A FIVE MINUTE RECESS, AND WE'LL COME BACK TO THIS SINCE WE'VE GOT A COUPLE OF THINGS TO GET INTO HERE.

WE'LL SEE YOU BACK AT 7:25. 26. SO ITEM 13A ORDINANCE 2025-03 TO REZONE VACANT DOBIE ROAD PARCEL FROM RAA TO RD.

[13.A. Ordinance 2025-03 – Rezone vacant Dobie Road (parcel ID #33-0202-22-454-003) from RAA, One-Family, Low Density Residential, to RD, Multiple Family Residential, up to 8 units per acre, Subject to a Conditional Rezoning Agreement ]

SO WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU THIS EVENING IS A REQUEST TO REZONE THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ON DOBIE ROAD FROM THE CURRENT ZONING OF RAA, ONE FAMILY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO RD, WHICH IS MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, UP TO 8 UNITS PER ACRE, SUBJECT TO A CONDITIONAL REZONING AGREEMENT.

AND I KNOW THERE'S BEEN SOME CONFUSION ABOUT THAT. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THAT'S BEEN OUT THERE ALL ALONG.

IT'S PART OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION. THERE ARE TWO CONDITIONS.

IT'S INCREASE THE REAR YARD BUILDING SETBACK ON THE WESTERN BOUNDARY FROM THE REQUIRED 40FT TO 100FT, MORE THAN DOUBLING THE REQUIRED BUFFER BETWEEN THE PROJECT AND THE NEIGHBORING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES . AND RESTRICT THE ALLOWABLE TYPE OF UNITS TO TOWNHOMES, A TOTAL OF 4 BUILDINGS WITH 32 UNITS, OR A TOTAL OF FOUR BUILDINGS WITH 8 UNITS PER ACRE EACH, WITH THEIR OWN FRONT DOOR AND GARAGE ACCESSIBLE FROM THE OUTSIDE. SO FUNCTIONALLY, WHAT THE DEVELOPER HAS PROPOSED HERE IS TO LIMIT THE PROJECT SCOPE AFTER THE REQUEST WAS MET WITH SOME CONCERN IN 2024.

AND SO THEY HAD PREVIOUSLY HAD A REQUEST TO A HIGHER DENSITY TO RC, WHICH WOULD HAVE ALLOWED MORE UNITS ON THE SITE, DIFFERENT SETBACKS. PLANNING COMMISSION DID NOT LOOK UPON THAT AS FAVORABLY.

THE BOARD DISCUSSED IT AT ONE MEETING AND THE APPLICANT OPTED TO WITHDRAW THAT REQUEST AT THAT TIME TO TRY AND WORK ON THE THE PROPOSAL. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU THIS EVENING. IS THAT MODIFIED SORT OF COMPROMISE PROPOSAL, LIMITING THIS TO 32 UNITS PER ACRE, INCREASING THE SETBACK TO 100FT AND REZONING IT TO A LOWER DENSITY MULTIFAMILY PROJECT.

THE PLANNING COMMISSION DID HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ON JANUARY 13TH, 2025.

DID RECEIVE CONTINUED NEGATIVE FEEDBACK THAT YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD, SOME OF WHICH THIS EVENING CONCERNED LARGELY ABOUT DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY IN GENERAL, THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC POTENTIALLY AS A RESULT OF THIS AND COMPLIANCE WITH THE MASTER PLAN.

AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION THEN REVIEWED IT AGAIN ON JANUARY 27TH AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL TO THE TOWNSHIP BOARD, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE OFFERED. THE ENTIRETY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION PACKET IS IN YOUR PACKET THIS EVENING, ALONG WITH THE COMPLETE TRAFFIC STUDY, WHICH IS ALSO IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION PACKET ON JANUARY 13TH.

I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CONCERN AND QUESTION ABOUT SOME OF THE THE DRAINAGE AND SETBACKS AND LIGHTING AT ONE POINT CAME UP AND THE DRIVEWAY TO FAITH

[01:25:09]

THIS IS A COMMON REFRAIN YOU'VE HEARD FROM ME IN MY TIME HERE THAT ALTHOUGH WE ARE VERY AWARE OF THE ISSUES, BUT THEY ARE NOT REZONING RELATED ISSUES. WHAT IS IN FRONT OF YOU THIS EVENING IS THE PROPOSED ZONING, AND IN THIS CASE, THE CONDITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN OFFERED BY THE APPLICANT.

GIVEN THAT THIS IS SOME MEMBERS FIRST OPPORTUNITY AND DEALING WITH THE CONDITIONAL REZONING, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT CONDITIONAL REZONING IS UNDER THE STATE IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ARE ENTIRELY AT THE BEHEST OF THE APPLICANT.

THERE'S NO GIVE AND TAKE. THERE'S NO NEGOTIATION.

IT'S NOT IF YOU DO THIS, WE'LL APPROVE IT. THIS IS WHAT THEY OFFER, AND WE CAN TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT.

THAT IS HOW THE STATE SET THIS UP SEVERAL YEARS AGO AND THIS IS THAT'S HOW IT SORT OF RUNS.

THE OTHER THING I WANT TO BRIEFLY TOUCH ON IS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

RIGHT? AND SO THAT'S THE THE CRUX OF THE ARGUMENT, THE DISCUSSION PREVIOUSLY, WHEN THE BOARD DID DENY A HIGHER DENSITY REQUEST THAT CAME FORWARD BEFORE THE MAJORITY OF THE DISCUSSION DIGGING INTO THAT WAS AROUND THE FACT THAT IT JUST DIDN'T MATCH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, SO IT WAS DENIED. SO, FRANKLY, A VERY EASY DECISION AT THE TIME BECAUSE IT DIDN'T MATCH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

FAITH LUTHERAN CHURCH, TO THEIR CREDIT, WAS INVOLVED WITH THE MASTER PLAN UPDATE THIS TIME.

VERY FEW PEOPLE WERE DESPITE OUR EVERY ATTEMPT TO GET PEOPLE INTERESTED IN PLANNING IN THE COMMUNITY.

BUT THIS WAS ONE OF THE ONLY CHANGES THAT WAS MADE.

AND I WILL TELL YOU, AS A PLANNER, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT 90% OF PLANNERS HATE IS PUTTING PROPERTY LINES ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, BECAUSE YOU HAVE A SITUATION LIKE THIS WHERE WE DIDN'T KNOW ANY BOUNDARY LINES AT THE TIME.

AND SO IT WAS ROUGHLY A THIRD OF THE PROPERTY WAS DESIGNATED FOR MULTIFAMILY, AND THE REMAINDER WAS DESIGNATED TO CONTINUE AS INSTITUTIONAL, WHICH STAFF WOULD LIKE TO GET RID OF WE DIDN'T HAVE TIME THIS TIME AND IN OUR NEXT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE, PLEASE KNOW WE WILL BE GETTING RID OF THE INSTITUTIONAL DISTRICT BECAUSE IT CAUSES NOTHING BUT PROBLEMS IN THE LONG RUN.

BUT IN THIS CASE, THAT WAS ROUGHLY WHERE THE LINE WAS DRAWN.

THE INTENT IS CLEARLY WAS CLEARLY TO ALLOW THE NORTHERN, UNDEVELOPED PORTION OF THAT SITE AND BY DEVELOPED, I MEAN WHERE THERE ISN'T BUILDINGS TO BE DEVELOPED AS MULTIFAMILY PROJECT SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

WE DON'T ALWAYS ALIGN PERFECTLY WITH PROPERTY LINES ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP THAT'S WHY WE HAVE REZONING DISCUSSIONS, BECAUSE THAT'S SORT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION STEP OF THE PLAN.

BIG PICTURE PLAN, SMALL PICTURE REZONING, EVEN SMALLER PICTURE SITE PLAN.

SO THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT THIS EVENING. I KNOW THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND PREPARED TO ADDRESS HAS A BRIEF PRESENTATION AND IS PREPARED TO ADDRESS QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS.

AND OBVIOUSLY, AS ALWAYS, I AM HAPPY TO ADDRESS ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS THAT THE BOARD MIGHT HAVE AS THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. JUST AS A BEFORE WE GET INTO THAT, WE OFTEN GET TEMPTED TO BE SIDETRACKED BY AN ACTUAL PROPOSAL AND THAT, YOU KNOW, A SITE PLAN, YOU KNOW, PICTURES AND THOSE ARE OFTEN INCLUDED BY APPLICANTS IN ADDITION TO WHAT IS REQUIRED OF THEM.

BUT WHEN WE CONSIDER REZONING, WE GENERALLY ARE NOT ABLE TO CONSIDER ANY PARTICULAR SITE DIAGRAMS OR ANY PARTICULAR PLAN OF ACTION IN TERMS OF WHAT IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE BUILT ON IT.

WE ARE MERELY MEANT TO CONSIDER WHAT THE REZONING ALLOWS FOR ON THE NEWLY ZONED PARCEL.

IS THAT AN ACCURATE STATEMENT? WITH THE ONLY CAVEAT BEING IN THIS CASE, THEY HAVE OFFERED IN THEIR APPLICATION TO SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AS PART OF THAT APPLICATION. RIGHT. I GUESS MY POINT IS, AS A GENERAL RULE, THOUGH, YOU ARE AS A GENERAL RULE, YOU KNOW, FEDEWA HAS PRESENTED OR HAS AN IDEA IN MIND FOR HOW THEY WANT TO REZONE OR HOW THEY WANT TO DEVELOP THE PARCEL ONCE IF A REZONING IS APPROVED. BUT THEY COULD REZONE THIS PARCEL TO RD AND THEN TO COMPLETELY ABANDON IT, AND IT WOULD BE LEFT FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO COME IN WITH A TOTALLY DIFFERENT PLAN, PERHAPS. AND AS LONG AS THEY FOLLOW THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE MADE AS A PART OF THIS PROCESS.

YEAH. THE, THE CONDITIONS ARE THE ONLY WEIRD PART OF THIS IS THAT THAT WILL RUN WITH THE LAND WITH AN ADDITIONAL CAVEAT IS THERE'S TYPICALLY A REVERTER CLAUSE IN THESE. SO IF SOMETHING DOESN'T HAPPEN AFTER A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME, WE WOULD REZONE IT BACK SO THAT IT'S NOT JUST HANGING OUT THERE IN PERPETUITY LIKE A VARIANCE.

A VARIANCE IS SOMETHING THAT TRULY RUNS THE LAND. CONDITIONAL REZONING IS INTENDED TO SPUR THE DEVELOPMENT SPECIFICALLY IN THAT WAY.

[01:30:01]

I DIDN'T WANT TO SAY IT UNTIL I PULLED IT UP.

GIVE ME JUST A COUPLE OF MINUTES AND LET THE APPLICANT PRESENT. I WILL BE ABLE TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT. MR. FEDEWA I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE HERE TO SPEAK TO YOUR APPLICATION.

YES. PLEASE APPROACH THE PODIUM.

MY NAME IS DAVID FEDEWA I'M AT 278 HASLETT ROAD AND I WANT TO THANK THE BOARD FOR LETTING US SPEAK TODAY. SO TO INTRODUCE OURSELVES, WE ARE FEDEWA HOMES.

WE'VE BEEN BUILDING HOMES AND MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP FOR 44 YEARS.

WE ARE FAMILY OWNED AND OPERATED. IT'S MY MOTHER, MY FATHER, MY THREE BROTHERS, MY AUNT AND MY SISTER IN LAW.

WE WENT TO HASLETT SCHOOLS, OUR KIDS GO TO HASLETT SCHOOLS ALSO.

I SAY THIS TO SHOW YOU THAT WE'RE NOT A BIG DEVELOPER FROM OUT OF THE AREA THAT HAS JUST LOOKING TO BUILD WHATEVER AND MAKE AS MUCH MONEY AS POSSIBLE AND LEAVE.

WE'RE HERE TO BE PART OF THIS COMMUNITY AND WE WILL BE FOR A VERY LONG TIME, WE'RE HERE TO BUILD IT UP.

AND I WANT TO SHOW YOU EXACTLY HOW WE CAN COME TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY TO BRING NEW FAMILIES INTO MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP AND MAKE THIS PROJECT HAPPEN.

WE HAVE LISTENED TO OUR FELLOW NEIGHBORS, WE HAVE MET WITH THEM AND THE TOWNSHIP PLANNERS TO DESIGN AN AMAZING PROJECT.

IN THE PROCESS, TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE TOWNSHIP AND THE COMMUNITY WANTS, WE PROPOSE THIS PROJECT THREE TIMES.

IN DOING SO, EACH TIME WE GOT A DEEPER UNDERSTANDING OF HOW WE CAN BETTER SERVE OUR COMMUNITY.

BASED ON THE FEEDBACK FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD MEMBERS, AND OUR NEIGHBORS, WE'VE REVISED THIS PROJECT.

HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROPOSE THIS THREE TIMES HAS HELPED US ZERO IN ON EXACTLY WHAT THIS COMMUNITY WANTS AND NEEDS, AND I WILL WALK YOU THROUGH THE IMPROVEMENTS OF THE PROJECT OVER THOSE PROPOSALS.

THERE ARE FIVE CORE POINTS OF THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL HELP YOU UNDERSTAND WHY THIS, WHY WE NEED THIS IN OUR COMMUNITY.

DENSITY, PROXIMITY, DEMAND, FUTURE LAND USE MAP, AND TRAFFIC.

AS FOR DENSITY, WE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED THIS AS A 60 UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IS A BIG DEVELOPMENT.

BUT WITH 4.28 ACRES, A 60 UNIT DEVELOPMENT MAKES SENSE ON THAT SIZE OF PARCEL AND IS THE SAME DENSITY, THE SAME RC DENSITY OF THE PARCEL ADJACENT TO THE NORTH.

IN LISTENING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND OUR NEIGHBORS, WE HAVE SCALED IT BACK TO 40 UNITS.

AS WE CONTINUED IN THE PROCESS OF WORKING WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND OUR FELLOW NEIGHBORS, WE FIND FOUND THAT THEY FELT 40 UNITS WAS TOO MANY TO THE NOW PROPOSED 32 UNIT DEVELOPMENT.

WE FEEL THIS FITS IN WELL WITH THE COMMUNITY, WHICH IS SUBSTANTIALLY LESS THAN THE DENSITY OF THE SURROUNDING MULTIFAMILY, BUT MAKES IT A BETTER TRANSITION FROM THE HIGHER DENSITY MULTIFAMILY OF 14 UNITS AN ACRE TO THE NOW 8 UNITS AN ACRE.

THIS IS A MISSING MIDDLE PROJECT, EACH HAVING THEIR OWN FRONT DOOR, TWO CAR GARAGE, CREATES MORE OF A RESIDENTIAL FEEL THAN AN APARTMENT BUILDING THAT REQUIRES YOU TO GO IN THE BUILDING THROUGH A SINGLE PRIMARY DOOR TO GET TO YOUR APARTMENT.

THE SECOND TOPIC IS PROXIMITY TO THE HOMES IN THE REAR OFF SENECA.

WHAT WE'RE DOING IS MOVING OUR DEVELOPMENT FORWARD TOWARDS DOBIE ROAD TO REDUCE THE IMPACT OF THE HOMES OFF SENECA.

WE HAVE MOVED TO THE REQUEST WHEN WE MOVED TO THE REQUESTED ZONING OF RD.

WE HAVE A 40 FOOT SETBACK. WE LISTENED TO OUR NEIGHBORS AND THE CONCERNS ABOUT HOW CLOSE IT IS TO THEIR HOMES.

SO WE ARE PROPOSING A 100 FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK, DOUBLING THE REQUIRED DISTANCE, AND WE HAVE REMOVED AN EIGHT UNIT BUILDING FROM THE PREVIOUS DESIGN TO ACCOMMODATE THIS SETBACK. THERE ARE LOCATIONS IN THE TOWNSHIP, SPECIFICALLY NEWTON POINT, WHERE THE BUILDING IS 50FT TALL AND 220 UNITS THAT IS 66FT OFF THE PROPERTY LINE, AND MULTI-FAMILY BUILDINGS IN THE SAME DEVELOPMENT THAT ARE 30FT OFF THE PROPERTY LINE TO RESIDENTIAL HOMES. WE ARE PROPOSING A 32 UNIT COMMUNITY OF TWO STORY BUILDINGS 100FT OFF THE PROPERTY LINE.

THIRDLY, DEMAND TO UNDERSTAND THE DEMAND IN THE MARKETPLACE, YOU EITHER NEED TO BE IN THE BUSINESS OR HAVE RELIABLE DATA TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS TRULY HAPPENING. WE UNDERSTAND OUR TOWNHOMES PROVIDE A PROVEN COMMUNITY NEED TO NEW FAMILIES MOVING INTO THE TOWNSHIP.

[01:35:02]

IN THIS ANALYSIS, THEY DETERMINED THAT WITH RENTAL VACANCY RATES DOWN TO 4.5% AND THE EXISTING HOME SALES VACANCY RATE TO 0.9%, THAT THIS IS A NEED WITHIN THE MARKET AND THEY WOULD FUND THIS PROJECT.

THIS ANALYSIS ALSO INCLUDES ALL THE UPCOMING UP AND COMING PERMITTED PROJECTS AS VACANCIES IN THEIR DATA.

WHEN SOME PEOPLE HEAR NUMBERS, THEY DON'T NECESSARILY FEEL OR CAN RELATE TO THE DATA BECAUSE IT'S NOT PERSONAL.

BUT I THINK A GOOD WAY FOR EVERYONE TO UNDERSTAND THE NEED WITHIN THE COMMUNITY IS TO GO HOME TONIGHT AND SEARCH ONLINE FOR A 3 OR 4 BEDROOM RENTAL IN OKEMOS SCHOOLS WITH A TWO CAR GARAGE. I LOOKED THIS MORNING AND I COULD FIND SIX AVAILABLE RENTALS IN VARIOUS CONDITIONS.

WHAT IS CURRENTLY AVAILABLE DOES NOT SUPPORT THE CURRENT NEED OF A TOWNSHIP OF 44,000 PEOPLE.

WE CURRENTLY HAVE 18 UNITS IN OKEMOS WITH 0 VACANCIES.

WE HAVE A REAL ESTATE AGENT THAT REACHED OUT TO US LOOKING FOR 30 TOWNHOMES FOR RENT BY THE START OF THE SCHOOL YEAR.

WE COMPARED THE PRICE PER SQUARE FOOT OF OUR CURRENT RENTALS TO OTHER UNITS IN DEWITT, HASLETT, AND OKEMOS. WE ARE PRICED BELOW MARKET RATE EVEN AS A BRAND NEW BUILDING COMPARED TO BUILDINGS BUILT YEARS AGO.

WE DO THIS TO OFFER REASONABLE RENT TO THE COMMUNITIES AND FAMILIES, TO THE COMMUNITY AND FAMILIES DO STAY WITH US LONGER.

IN THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP THIS PARCEL ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP WAS REVIEWED AND UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED AS MULTI-FAMILY BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION, THEN UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED AS MULTI-FAMILY BY THIS BOARD IN 2023.

THE SURROUNDING MULTIFAMILY PROPERTIES ARE RC AT 14 UNITS AN ACRE, AND WE ARE PURSUING A LOWER DENSITY THAN THE SURROUNDING MULTIFAMILY HAS 8 UNITS AN ACRE.

LASTLY, TRAFFIC, WE ALL DRIVE AROUND OUR TOWNSHIP, SO WE SEE WHAT TRAFFIC IS LIKE AND WE ALL HAVE OUR OPINIONS.

SO FOR MOST PEOPLE, TRAFFIC AND TRAFFIC VOLUMES IS JUST THAT, AN OPINION.

WE NEED TO LOOK AT TRAFFIC THROUGH THE DATA TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON.

SO WE INVITED A CERTIFIED TRAFFIC ENGINEER, SOMEONE THAT STUDIES TRAFFIC PATTERNS AND VOLUMES ALL DAY LONG, TO DO AN ANALYSIS SO THAT WE CAN TRULY UNDERSTAND HOW THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL IMPACT THE TRAFFIC FLOW OF THIS AREA.

SO LET ME INTRODUCE ROBERT MATKO. HE'S OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER.

SPEAK FOR A MINUTE. ROBERT MATKO 13060 US HIGHWAY 27 DEWITT 48820. GOOD EVENING SUPERVISOR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. AS YOU HEARD, I WAS RETAINED BY FEDEWA TO LOOK AT THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS FOR THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. AND SPECIFICALLY YOU ALL HAVE THIS IN YOUR PACKET.

BUT WHAT THE ANALYSIS, WHAT WE LOOKED AT WAS COMPARING THE CURRENT ZONING VERSUS THE PROPOSED ZONING.

AND WHAT I'M GOING TO DO IS JUST BRIEFLY WALK YOU THROUGH THE ANALYSIS.

AGAIN, NOT TO TAKE UP TOO MUCH TIME, BUT I'LL KIND OF HIGHLIGHT, YOU KNOW, JUST HOW THE ANALYSIS WAS PERFORMED.

AND OF COURSE, THE THE RESULTS. SO IN ORDER TO CONDUCT THIS TYPE OF ANALYSIS, WE HAD TO GET EXISTING OR CURRENT TRAFFIC VOLUMES. WE WERE ABLE TO GET THE TRAFFIC COUNTS FROM MDOT [INAUDIBLE] TCDS SITE FOR DOBIE ROAD.

WE THEN TOOK THAT COUNT AND WE INCREASED THAT COUNT BY A 1% GROWTH RATE JUST TO ACCOUNT FOR, YOU KNOW, BE CONSERVATIVE AND COUNT FOR SOME SOME ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC.

AGAIN, THE COUNT WAS A 2024 I BELIEVE OR I'M SORRY, 2023.

SO WE INCREASED THAT BY A PERCENT AND WE INCREASED IT AGAIN TO ACCOUNT FOR 2025 TRAFFIC.

WHAT WE THEN DID IS WE CALCULATED THE TRIP GENERATION, HOW MUCH TRAFFIC THIS DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO GENERATE AND HOW MUCH TRAFFIC THE EXISTING OR CURRENT ZONE YOU KNOW, USE WOULD GENERATE.

AND YOU CAN SEE IN OUR TABLE ONE, THE CURRENT SITE, IF DEVELOPED IS TEN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WOULD GENERATE A TOTAL OF 9 TRIPS IN THE AM PEAK HOUR AND 11 TRIPS IN THE PM PEAK HOUR.

THE PROPOSED YOU KNOW, USE THE MULTIFAMILY USE, WHICH IS ZONED RD, WOULD BE A TOTAL OF 23 TRIPS IN THE AM PEAK HOUR AND 34 TRIPS IN THE PM PEAK HOUR, SO THIS RESULTS IN A NET INCREASE OF 24 TOTAL TRIPS OVER AN HOUR AND IN THE PM PEAK HOUR 23 TOTAL TRIPS. SO IF YOU IF YOU KIND OF BREAK THAT DOWN OVER THE COURSE OF AN HOUR, YOU KNOW, WE'RE ESSENTIALLY LOOKING AT AN ADDITIONAL TRIP EVERY 10 MINUTES INBOUND AND THEN EVERY 3.3 MINUTES OUTBOUND DURING THE A M PEAK

[01:40:10]

SO AGAIN, NOT NOT A LOT OR SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN TRAFFIC.

SO WHAT WE DID THEN IS WE ADDED THOSE TRIPS TO OUR EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES THAT WERE GROWN TO YEAR 2025.

AND WE CAME UP WITH OUR BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES.

NOW WHAT WE DID IS WE CAME UP WITH OUR BUILD TRAFFIC VOLUMES FOR THE EXISTING OR CURRENT ZONING AND THEN THE PROPOSED ZONING.

AND THE WHOLE ANALYSIS REALLY COMPARES THOSE TWO.

SO WE TOOK IT EVEN A STEP FURTHER, AND WE RAN WHAT YOU CALL AN ANALYSIS OR A CAPACITY ANALYSIS ON THE ACTUAL SITE DRIVEWAY.

AND THIS IS DONE BY USING A TRAFFIC SOFTWARE PROGRAM NATIONALLY ACCEPTED, IT'S CALLED HIGHWAY CAPACITY SOFTWARE.

BUT ESSENTIALLY WHAT IT DOES IS IT FIGURES OUT YOUR DELAY PER VEHICLE AND DELAY IS MEASURED IN LEVELS OF SERVICE, A BEING VERY GOOD F BEING VERY POOR, KIND OF LIKE A LETTER GRADE IN SCHOOL.

AND WHAT YOU CAN SEE IS THE CURRENT ZONING, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING OPERATES AT A B OR BETTER LEVEL OF SERVICE.

AND WITH THE PROPOSED ZONING, SAME THING, EVERYTHING OPERATES AT A B LEVEL OF SERVICE EXCEPT FOR THE EASTBOUND LEFT RIGHT, WHICH IS THE OUTBOUND MOVEMENT THAT WOULD OPERATE AT A LEVEL OF SERVICE C, WHICH IS STILL, YOU KNOW, WIDELY CONSIDERED ACCEPTABLE. SO WE THEN ALSO LOOKED AT LEFT AND RIGHT TURN LANES.

EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A MINIMAL DEVELOPMENT, WE WANTED TO DO AN ENTIRE COMPLETE ANALYSIS.

SO WE DID LOOK AT LEFT AND RIGHT TURN LANES USING MDOT CHARTS.

AND OF COURSE THE TURN LANES WEREN'T WEREN'T EVEN CLOSE TO BEING WARRANTED.

SO IN CONCLUSION, YOU KNOW, WE FOUND THAT THE NET INCREASE IS MINIMAL.

AS STATED, THERE'S A NET 23 TOTAL TRIPS OR, I'M SORRY, 24 TOTAL TRIPS IN THE AM PEAK AND 23 TOTAL TRIPS IN THE PM PEAK. SO WITH THAT, AGAIN, WE STATE THAT THE ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT THE REZONING OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL FROM RAA TO RD HAS VERY LITTLE IMPACT ON DOBIE ROAD.

I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO MR. FEDEWA. AND AGAIN, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU ROBERT AND I WILL ASK I KNOW YOU'VE GOT A WHOLE PRESENTATION, BUT IF YOU COULD, WE WOULD PROBABLY WANT TO GET INTO THE ACTUAL DISCUSSION PRETTY SOON.

SO IF YOU COULD JUST I GOT A QUICK WRAP UP HERE. SO IN CLOSING THIS PARCEL IS DESIGNATED AS MULTI-FAMILY ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

IT IS WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY ON THE PATHWAY MASTER PLAN WITH BUS STOPS RIGHT IN FRONT, WALKABLE, CLOSE TO SHOPPING, AND FOUR MINUTE DRIVE FROM CORNELL ELEMENTARY, FIVE MINUTES TO CHIPPEWA MIDDLE SCHOOL AND FIVE MINUTES, NINE MINUTES TO OKEMOS HIGH SCHOOL. IT IS A WONDERFUL INFILL PROJECT WITH DIRECT ACCESS TO MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP WATER AND SEWER AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH HELPS BALANCE GROWTH WITH ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVATION.

ONE OF THE MAIN GOALS OF OUR MASTER PLAN IS TO HELP OUR COMMUNITY GROW IN THE RIGHT WAY.

SEE HERE ON PAGE EIGHT. DO YOU HAVE PAGE EIGHT? ONE OF THE MAIN GOALS OF OUR MASTER PLAN IS TO HELP OUR COMMUNITY GROW IN THE RIGHT WAY. SO HERE ON PAGE EIGHT OF THE MASTER PLAN, IT ASKS FOR MORE DIVERSE HOUSING OPTIONS. THE COMMUNITY IS ASKING FOR NOT JUST SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, BUT DUPLEXES, TOWNHOMES AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, BUT MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING.

THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT WE ARE WORKING TOWARDS IS EXACTLY THE DEFINITION OF MISSING MIDDLE HOUSING FOR THIS COMMUNITY.

IN THE MASTER PLAN, PAGE NINE, A PICTURE WAS USED THE TYPE OF DIVERSE HOUSING OPTIONS THAT OUR CITIZENS WANTED MORE OF.

THE EXAMPLE PICTURE USED IS OUR BUILDING THAT WE BUILT ON CHIEF OKEMOS CIRCLE IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

OF ALL THE EXAMPLES THROUGHOUT THE TOWNSHIP OF DIVERSE HOUSING OPTIONS, YOU CHOSE OUR BUILDING.

THE PROJECT WE ARE PROPOSING WILL BE VERY SIMILAR TO FULFILL THE DESIRES OF OUR COMMUNITY.

WE LITERALLY LOOKED AT AND READ WHAT IT IS THAT THE COMMUNITY IS ASKING FOR, AND NOW WE ARE PROPOSING THAT EXACT PROJECT.

AFTER LISTENING TO THE TOWNSHIP AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS ON SENECA, WE HAVE DRASTICALLY LOWERED THE DENSITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OVER DOUBLED OUR REAR YARD SETBACK, BROUGHT IN GOVERNMENTAL DATA TO SHOW DEMAND, DISCOVERED THAT TRAFFIC HAS AN ALMOST UNNOTICEABLE IMPACT.

IN A COMMUNITY OF OVER 44,000 PEOPLE WE NEED MORE THAN FOUR RENTALS AVAILABLE IN OKEMOS SCHOOL DISTRICT.

[01:45:01]

SO WE ASK YOU TO LOOK AT THE FACTS AND VOTE YES FOR THIS PROJECT TO HELP OUR COMMUNITY NOT ONLY GROW, BUT GROW IN THE RIGHT WAY. THANK YOU FROM THE FEDEWA FAMILY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. JERRY WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING VERY BRIEF.

IF YOU COULD. I'LL BE QUICK.

MIC] THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBERS. JUST TO REITERATE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP HERE, IT'S PRETTY WELL CENTERED, IS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH OR THE LUTHERAN CHURCH.

AND OFF TO THE NORTH IS THE LAND THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

AND AND ALL THE WAY TO THE WEST YOU'LL SEE SENECA AND YOU'LL SEE THE HOUSES IN SENECA.

AND IT IS A VERY, VERY THICK WOODS RIGHT UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE, VERY THICK, VERY THICK WOODS TO THE PROPERTY LINE.

WE'RE PLANNING ON BEING 100FT FROM THAT PROPERTY LINE.

AND ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS TO NOTICE. OH, GOOD.

ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS TO NOTICE IS THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL IS THE MISSING MIDDLE.

IT'S A FOUR ACRE, NEARLY FOUR ACRES, 4.28. BUT JUST TO THE NORTH HERE IS SHOPPING.

AND AND SO IT REALLY IS WALKABLE TO SHOPPING.

AND THE THING IS, IS, IS THAT. AND WE'RE LEAVING THE BACK 40 VACANT AND IT'S AN INFILL PROJECT.

AND IT REALLY IS NOT VERY CONDUCIVE TO DEVELOPING SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES.

IT'S JUST IT'S KIND OF LIKE IT'S IN THE MIDDLE OF TRYING TO DEVELOP SINGLE FAMILY AND OR MULTIFAMILY.

SO WHY THAT'S PROBABLY ONE OF THE REASONS PLANNING REZONED IT.

MULTI-FAMILY IS BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A LOT YOU CAN DO WITH IT AS A SINGLE FAMILY FOUR ACRES OF SINGLE FAMILY SO CLOSE TO SHOPPING.

SO AND, THAT'S REALLY ALL I WANTED TO POINT OUT.

AND I KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN A LONG NIGHT AND THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. AND WE MAY CALL YOU BACK UP IF THE BOARD HAS QUESTIONS ALONG THE WAY.

BUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. MR. SCHMITT. CIRCLING BACK TO YOUR QUESTION, THAT IS THE THE ONE CAVEAT THAT YOU ARE ALLOWED TO SET THAT SPECIFIC CONDITION IS THE TIMING OF THE PERIOD IN WHICH THE CONDITIONS APPLY TO THE LAND.

AND SO HISTORICALLY, AS I'VE SEEN THIS USED, IT'S YOU HAVE IT CONSISTENT WITH YOUR ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR IN THIS CASE SPECIAL USE PERMIT, WHICH IS TWO YEARS. THAT'S WHY THE TWO YEARS CAME TO MY MIND. GOT IT. THANK YOU.

OKAY. WELL, BOARD MEMBERS, THAT LEAVES US TO DISCUSS THE REQUEST AT HAND.

CLERK DEMAS. YES. JUST A QUICK NOTE DURING THE PRESENTATION.

JUST FOR RESIDENTS, ESPECIALLY AT HOME. THIS SHOULD BE IN THE BOARD PACKET ON PAGE 125.

AND THEN FOR THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS THAT WILL BE ON PAGE 143.

SO I KNOW THAT THAT WASN'T QUITE UP THERE. BUT IF YOU WANT TO LOOK BACK ON THAT TO REVIEW THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS.

OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. FURTHER DISCUSSION.

WELL, TRUSTEE WILSON. TIM, I WOULD LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THE TWO PARCELS AND WHAT THEIR ZONING IS CURRENTLY.

SO THE NORTHERN PARCEL IS ZONED. EVERYTHING IS ZONED RAA ONE FAMILY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.

INCLUDING THE 50 FOOT ADDITIONAL PARCEL. EVERYTHING IS CURRENTLY ZONED RAA.

OKAY. SORRY . I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS A PERMANENT EASEMENT.

COULD WE MAKE THE MAP A LITTLE SMALLER, PLEASE? OR LARGER SO WE CAN SEE THE DETAIL? THERE'S A HOUSE THAT IS INHABITED JUST BEHIND THE CHURCH PARKING LOT THERE.

YES. THAT ONE. I UNDERSTAND IN CONVERSATIONS WITH A MEMBER OF THE CHURCH THAT THEY HAVE, THE PROPERTY LINE IS ONLY TEN FEET NORTH OF THERE. IS THAT CORRECT? LET'S GET TO THE RIGHT SPOT HERE.

THE NEW PROPERTY LINE. LOOKS ABOUT RIGHT. IT SOUNDS RIGHT BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE THE SETBACK ON THE 10.4.

YES. CORRECT. OKAY. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT FAITH LUTHERAN HAS BEEN GRANTED A PERPETUAL EASEMENT WITHIN THAT 50FT OF

[01:50:08]

A 50 FOOT INGRESS EGRESS EASEMENT TO THE NORTH INTO THE PROPERTY THEY'RE SELLING.

SO USING THAT HOUSE AS THE EXAMPLE, AS THE TOUCH POINT, 10 FEET TO THE NORTH, IS THIS PROPERTY LINE THAT EXISTS NOW AND THEN FROM THAT 10 FEET, 50FT TO THE NORTH, FAITH LUTHERAN HAS MAINTAINED AN INGRESS EGRESS EASEMENT.

SO WOULD ANY UNITS. I DON'T WANT TO STRAY TOO FAR INTO SITE PLAN, BUT WOULD ANY UNITS BE CONSTRUCTED IN THAT 50 FOOT BUFFER, IF YOU WILL? I DO NOT HAVE THE PROVISIONS OF THAT INGRESS EGRESS EASEMENT, BUT I'VE NEVER SEEN ONE THAT ALLOWS A STRUCTURE TO BE BUILT IN IT.

OKAY. I THINK THAT THE SETBACK OF 100FT IS NECESSARY IN THIS CASE, BUT THERE IS WATER RUNOFF OFF THE PROPERTY. THE NEIGHBORS HAVE. I WAS OUT WALKING THIS PROPERTY SEVERAL MONTHS AGO WITH ONE OF OUR NEIGHBORS OVER THERE, AND THEY THEY SHOWED ME WHERE THERE IS AN UNBUILDABLE LOT ON SENECA THAT DOES HAVE A DRAIN THAT RUNS THROUGH IT.

ABSOLUTELY. AND THEN THE WATER POOLS, JUST BECAUSE OF THE TOPOGRAPHY, THE WATER POOLS ON SENECA DRIVE, APPARENTLY.

ON THIS PROPERTY SO THAT IT DOES NOT ENCROACH ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD? I NEED TO REQUIRE NOTHING. THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER IS GOING TO ABSOLUTELY REQUIRE IT.

OKAY. THIS PROJECT WILL NOT GET ANYWHERE UNLESS THEY CAN SHOW TO THE DRAIN COMMISSIONERS DESIRE THAT IT IS MEETING ALL OF THE STANDARDS, WHICH DOES NOT. WHICH INVOLVES RETAINING AND DIRECTING ALL OF YOUR STORMWATER IN THE APPROPRIATE MANNER, NOT JUST DUMPING IT ON THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. OKAY.

I THINK I THINK MORE LIKELY WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO FIND IS SOME OF THOSE REAR YARDS DO GET WET, BECAUSE NOW THE WATER THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY RUNNING ONTO THIS PROPERTY IS NOT GOING TO MAKE IT ONTO THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE IT'S BEING PUSHED BACK.

I THINK IT GOES THE OTHER WAY. BUT THAT WAS MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS ENCROACHING ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

I KNOW THAT IT'S NOT ALLOWED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, BUT WATER SEEKS THE LOWEST POINT.

ABSOLUTELY. I WANT TO BE SURE THAT IF THIS PROJECT IS APPROVED FOR REZONING, WHAT THEY CAN BUILD ON IT WILL NOT BE A HAZARD TO THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOOD. THEY WILL HAVE TO PROVE THAT TO US DURING THE SITE PLAN REVIEW, AND THEY WILL MORE IMPORTANTLY, HAVE TO PROVE IT TO THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER. OKAY.

THANK YOU. TREASURER DESCHAINE. THESE DRAIN ISSUES CONCERN ME TOO.

AND EVERY TIME YOU MENTION THE DRAIN, COMMISSIONER, I SHUDDER BECAUSE IT'S THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER. BUT ALSO BECAUSE HE JUST DID THE DANIELS DRAIN, WHICH IS ABOUT 500FT TO THE EAST OF THIS.

OKAY, CORRECT. HE CAME IN $1.5 WAS WHAT HE TOLD THE BOARD IN 2016 AND THEN WE DELIVERED THE PROJECTS SIX, SEVEN YEARS LATER IT WAS OVER $8 MILLION. SO MY CONCERN IS WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A SENECA DRIVE DRAIN PROJECT, BECAUSE ONCE HE GETS IN HERE, I FEAR HE'LL SAY, WELL, THIS STANDING WATER, WE NEED IT.

WE NEED SOME REAL A NEW DRAIN PROJECT HERE. AND THESE RESIDENTS ALONG SENECA AVENUE COULD LOSE IN TWO WAYS.

ONE IS THEY COULD HAVE THIS LARGE MULTIFAMILY PROJECT IN THEIR BACK YARD, AND THEY COULD HAVE A NEW DRAIN ASSESSMENT FROM THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER.

AND SOME OF THOSE RIGHT NOW, THE DANIELS DRAIN WON, 2 OR $3,000 FOR THE RESIDENTS OF FOREST HILLS, THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOOD. SO IF WE INVITE THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER IN, IT'S IT IT COULD BE A REAL HARDSHIP AND A HUGE NEW TAX BILL FOR THE ADJACENT, ADJACENT NEIGHBORS. HOW MANY SINGLE FAMILY HOMES COULD BE BUILT WITH RAA IN THIS 4.1 ACRE PARCEL.

JUST ONE SECOND.

BALLPARK.

ONE [INAUDIBLE] 10 TO 12. OKAY. NOT LAYING OUT INFRASTRUCTURE OR ANYTHING.

THAT'S KIND OF A ROUGH. THAT'S A ROUGH GUESS.

AND IF HE WAS ASKING FOR RD HE COULD GET UP TO 20 UNITS FOR MULTIFAMILY TOWNHOMES.

IS THAT CORRECT? SO RD

[01:55:05]

SPEAKERS]. IF YOU BACK OFF THE MAP, YOU'RE A LITTLE BIT YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE IS A MULTIFAMILY TO THE NORTH, BUT ALONG DOBIE ROAD THERE, THERE'S NO MORE MULTIFAMILY ALL THE WAY TO JOLLY ROAD.

SO THERE IS A KIND OF A LINE THERE WITH ARROW TREE AND CHIEF OKEMOS CIRCLE AND BUILDING FURTHER SOUTH BRINGS THE MULTIFAMILY FURTHER SOUTH. REGARDING THE TRAFFIC, I DRIVE DOBIE ROAD 2 TO 4 OR 6 TIMES A DAY, AND YOU WANT TO STAY OFF ADOBE ROAD BETWEEN 7 A.M.

AND 9 A.M. AND 4 P.M. AND 6 P.M. BECAUSE IT'S CURRENTLY BARELY HANDLING THE TRAFFIC THAT'S GOT NOW.

SO ANY ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ON THERE IS GOING TO MAKE THE SITUATION WORSE.

AND THEN IF YOU GET SNOW, ICE, RAIN, IT SLOWS IT DOWN EVEN FURTHER.

DOBIE ROAD IS, IN ITS CURRENT STATE, IMPOSSIBLE TO EXPAND.

THERE'S NO SHOULDER OR CURB. IT'S A IT'S A RELATIVELY NARROW ROAD THAT CARRIES A HUGE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC RIGHT NOW.

SO ANY ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ALONG DOBIE ROAD WOULD BE A CONCERN FOR ME AND THE PEOPLE LIVING ALONG DOBIE ROAD.

NOW. IT'S VERY HEAVILY TRAFFICKED AND REALLY NOT BUILT FOR THE CURRENT TRAFFIC IT HAS, LET ALONE MORE.

I UNDERSTAND THE DEVELOPER IS PROPOSING RENTS OF ABOUT $2,500 PER TOWNHOME.

IS THAT THE NUMBER THEY'VE SHARED WITH YOU? THAT IS THE NUMBER THAT THEY HAVE SHARED.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHEN WE REVIEW A REZONING REQUEST.

WELL, MISSY TALKS ABOUT HOUSING TYPES AND NOT APARTMENT, NOT SINGLE FAMILY, BUT SOMETHING IN BETWEEN TOWNHOMES.

BUT THIS PRICE RANGE IS ANYTHING BUT THE MISSING MIDDLE.

YEAH, THERE'S SOME MSU FAMILIES. PEOPLE COME [INAUDIBLE] PROFESSORS ARE VISITING PROFESSORS COMING IN THEY COULD AFFORD THAT.

BUT MISSING MIDDLE WOULD BE SOMETHING MORE IN THE RANGE, IN MY MIND, OF BETWEEN $1,200 AND $1,500 A MONTH.

FURTHER, IT SEEMS THAT WE'VE GOT MISSING MIDDLE ALREADY IN NEWTON POINT TO THE NORTH THAT'S BEING DEVELOPED NOW, AND EVEN THE GRAND RESERVE, WHICH HAS ALLOWED THE SAME TYPE OF HOUSING CURRENTLY BEING BUILT ALONG CENTRAL PARK DRIVE, WHICH IS IF YOU CONTINUE ON DOBIE ROAD, THAT BECOMES CENTRAL PARK DRIVE.

AND CAN YOU REFRESH MY MEMORY? HOW MANY UNITS ARE BEING BUILT AT THE GRAND RESERVE? GRAND RESERVE HAS 102, 120, I BELIEVE. AND APPROXIMATELY HOW MANY UNITS AT NEWTON POINT? 236. OKAY, SO ABOUT 350 UNITS ABOUT TO COME ONLINE WITH THIS MISSING MIDDLE. SO THE DEVELOPERS RIGHT THERE IS A NEED FOR ADDITIONAL HOUSING IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP.

WE ALL BELIEVE THAT. BUT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC AND I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE DRAIN ISSUE HERE.

AND PEOPLE ARE STILL UPSET AND STILL PAYING HUGE TAX BILLS FOR THE LAST DRAIN FIASCO AT THE DANIELS DRAIN.

AND I REALLY SCARES THE HECK OUT OF ME TO BRING THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER IN AND LOOK AT THIS PARCEL, BECAUSE WE COULD BE DEALING WITH ANOTHER BIG DRAIN ASSESSMENT.

SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER IS GOING TO REVIEW ANY DEVELOPMENT ON THIS SITE AND IT WILL DEVELOPMENT ON THIS SITE WILL NOT LEAD TO A SPECIFIC DRAIN PROJECT BECAUSE THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR THEIR WORK.

RIGHT? IF THERE'S A DRAIN PROJECT COMING, IT'S AS A RESULT OF AN EXISTING CONDITION.

SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR. THAT'S MY CONCERN.

THEY'RE GOING TO SEE THE EXISTING WATER THAT'S ALONG SENECA DRIVE AND DECIDE WE NEED A NEW DRAIN PROJECT HERE.

MAYBE WE SHOULDN'T HAVE TIPPED HIM OFF AT THIS MEETING, BUT I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT ADDITIONAL DRAIN PROJECTS. THANK YOU.

OKAY. TRUSTEE LENTZ. YEAH. THANK YOU. YOU DID ADDRESS SOME OF MY QUESTIONS EARLIER WITH YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT THIS BEING A GIVE ME JUST ONE SECOND. YOU KNOW, IN RELATION TO THE SITE PLAN REVIEW.

SO WOULD IT BE CORRECT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE PLOT PLAN ON PAGE 142 OF OUR PACKET, I BELIEVE. SORRY IF I'M LOOKING AT AN OLD PACKET, BUT THAT IS PURELY AUXILIARY AND VERY WELL COULD END UP NOT BEING AT ALL WHAT THIS PROJECT LOOKS LIKE.

I'M SPECIFICALLY THINKING ABOUT THE THE AREA WHERE A DRAINAGE DITCH WOULD BE PUT, MAYBE ASKED TO BE PUT IN BY THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER ON THE WEST WESTERN PART OF THIS PARCEL.

SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT THAT IS SORT OF THEIR INITIAL CRACK AT A LAYOUT HERE TO SHOW THAT THEY'VE AT LEAST THOUGHT

[02:00:09]

WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THAT IS PROBABLY THE ROUGH LAYOUT YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IF THIS MOVES FORWARD.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SO YOU AND YOUR EXPERIENCE AND AGAIN LEANING ON MY NAIVETE, YOU YOU WOULDN'T EXPECT TO SEE MASSIVELY DRASTIC CHANGES, ASSUMING THEY HAVE DONE THEIR HOMEWORK AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT THIS, YOU KNOW, PROJECT PLAN SHOULD BE. I THINK THAT'S A FAIR STATEMENT.

YEAH. OKAY. AND MY YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION I HAVE ABOUT ZONING IN PARTICULAR AND TRYING TO FOLLOW THE STEPS THAT NEED TO BE FOLLOWED FOR THESE TYPES OF DECISIONS IS ZONING DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ISSUES LIKE DRAINAGE RUNOFF OR ESTHETICS OF AREAS THAT DON'T SHARE THE SAME ROAD.

CORRECT? IT ZONING IS MUCH MORE BASED OFF OF THE, IT'S NOT BASED ON THE SPECIFICS.

IT'S BASED ON THE MORE GENERAL, I GUESS, IS WHAT I WOULD SAY.

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT IT DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE ESTHETICS OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, BUT YOU'RE KIND OF LOOKING AT THINGS FROM A BIGGER PICTURE AS OPPOSED TO WHEN WE GET INTO SITE PLAN, WE START TALKING ABOUT THE SPECIFIC DRAINAGE. WE START TALKING ABOUT THE SPECIFIC SETBACKS, THINGS LIKE THAT BUILDING HEIGHT, BUILDING ROOF PITCH, ALL THAT JAZZ.

OKAY. ARE THERE OPPORTUNITIES FROM THIS, THIS BODY AFTER, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY THIS IS APPROVED AND NEW INFORMATION IS BROUGHT TO LIGHT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DRAINAGE RUNOFF OR CHANGES TO THE PLOT PLAN FOR US TO BE INVOLVED IN APPROVING OR DENYING? OR IS THIS THE ONE SHOT THAT THE BOARD HAS TO HAVE SOME INPUT INTO WHAT'S HAPPENING MOVING FORWARD HERE? OH, JUST IF I'M MISUNDERSTANDING THE ROLE.

NO, I'M JUST TRYING TO THINK THROUGH ALL THE SCENARIOS HERE.

I DO NOT BELIEVE THE BOARD WOULD SEE THIS PROJECT AGAIN.

OKAY. ONCE THE ZONING IS IN PLACE, PART OF THIS DEPENDS ON SOME FACTORS WE DON'T WE DON'T KNOW YET. BUT THE ONLY POTENTIAL WAY THIS COMES BACK TO THE BOARD IS THE SIZE OF THE BUILDINGS.

THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT'S TRIGGERING IN MY HEAD RIGHT NOW. OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR EXPLAINING THE SCOPE. THAT WAS AN AREA THAT I THINK I'M REALLY TRYING TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND, SO I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. SO I HAVE A QUESTION ON PERHAPS IF YOU CAN I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN PULL UP THE PACKET ONTO THE MONITOR. ABSOLUTELY. ON PAGE 142.

OKAY. I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS A PRELIMINARY LAYOUT, AND I'M NOT GOING TO GET TOO DEEP IN THE WEEDS ON IT, I HOPE, HOWEVER THIS WAS PRESENTED TO US AS A 50 FOOT PERPETUAL EASEMENT TO THE FAITH LUTHERAN CHURCH FOR, PRESUMABLY, THEIR DRIVEWAY. IS THAT ACCURATE? THAT WAS THE REASON FOR THE EASEMENT, AS WE UNDERSTAND IT.

THAT IS I MEAN, CERTAINLY WHAT I WOULD BELIEVE THE REASON TO BE.

OKAY. HERE'S WHY I ASK. THE 50 FOOT EASEMENT IS INDICATED HERE BY THE AREA BETWEEN THE DARKENED LINE ON THE LEFT AND THE DOTTED LINE DIRECTLY TO THE RIGHT OF THAT.

CORRECT. SO THEIR DRIVEWAY DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THAT 50 FOOT EASEMENT.

CORRECT. AND THEIR CURB CUT DOES NOT FALL WITHIN THAT 50 FOOT EASEMENT.

CORRECT. AND THE CURB CUT TO THE PROPOSED NEW DEVELOPMENT IS NOT VERY FAR FROM THE EXISTING CURB CUT THAT THE CHURCH IS USING FOR ITS DRIVEWAY.

ABSOLUTELY. SO I'LL ASK MY QUESTION TO THE ROOM THAT CONTAINS BOTH YOU, OUR DEPUTY MANAGER, WHO WORKS WITH THE ROADS QUITE A BIT, AND THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER FOR THE DEVELOPER.

WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? AND IS THIS IS THIS NOT GOING TO CAUSE THE ROAD DEPARTMENT TO COME DOWN AND VETO THIS PLAN AS WELL? YEAH. THIS PROJECT HAS NOT BEEN AT ALL VETTED BY THE COUNTY AND EITHER ROADS OR DRAINS.

I MEAN, I CAN SAY WITH SOME CERTAINTY THAT THEY'RE GOING TO RECEIVE SOME SERIOUS PUSHBACK FOR THAT LAYOUT, WHICH IS WHY TO TO MEMBER LENTZ TRUSTEE LENTZ'S POINT THAT THAT'S NOT THE THE FINAL LAYOUT, RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT. YEAH.

THIS IS THIS IS A PROBLEMATIC PICTURE FOR SEVERAL REASONS.

ONE OF THOSE BEING THE ROAD LAYOUT IS IS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN.

[02:05:04]

MR. FEDEWA, ACKNOWLEDGING THAT THIS DIAGRAM IS NOT GOING TO BE WHAT IS FINAL.

CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE T IS BACK ON THE BACK PORTION OF THAT THE THE I GUESS IT'S THE WESTERN PORTION THIS THAT IT FALLS WITHIN THAT 100 FOOT SETBACK THAT YOU'VE DESCRIBED.

THE T IN THE BACK? YES. THAT'S A FIRE DEPARTMENT TURNAROUND.

FIRE DEPARTMENT TURNAROUND. OKAY, SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS IT'S 116 FOOT SETBACK FOR THE BUILDINGS, BUT NOT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF ANY KIND. WELL, I WOULDN'T CALL THE DRIVEWAY.

IT'S A WE DON'T LET PEOPLE PARK THERE. IT ACTUALLY IS A FIRE DEPARTMENT TURNAROUND.

I MEAN, IT'S ESSENTIALLY A CONCRETE BLOCK, RIGHT? OR A... NO, IT'S A BLACK BLACKTOP DRIVEWAY. IT'S BLACK ASPHALT.

YEAH. ASPHALT DRIVE. RIGHT. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IN PRACTICE, YOU CAN YOU CAN SAY PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO PARK THERE.

THEY MIGHT. THEY DON'T. OKAY.

AND THAT'S FINE. I GUESS MY POINT IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 100 FOOT SETBACK, BUT IN REALITY, THEIR TREES ARE COMING DOWN AND ASPHALT WILL BE PAVED IN THAT PORTION.

SO TELL ME, IF YOU COULD PLEASE TELL ME WHAT THE ACTUAL SETBACK IS FROM THE NORTH END OF THAT, OR THE WEST END OF THAT T THAT THE TURNAROUND IS AT TO THE PROPERTY LINE.

GOOD QUESTION. I PROBABLY CAN. I MEAN SO THE THE RD SETBACK LINE, THE DASHED LINE RIGHT ABOVE THE T IS 50FT. AND SO I'D SAY IT'S GOING TO BE 60FT OF TREES.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE YOU KNOW, THIS DIAGRAM WILL CHANGE I UNDERSTAND THAT.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE BEING AS UPFRONT AS WE CAN ABOUT WHAT THE SITE WILL ACTUALLY LOOK LIKE.

WE'RE LOOKING AT ESSENTIALLY 40 TO 60FT OF TREES, FOLLOWED BY THIS TURNAROUND FOLLOWED BY THE BUILDINGS.

RIGHT. OKAY. WHICH I TRIED TO POINT OUT IN THE SATELLITE VIEW OF THE TREE LINE THAT'S EXTENSIVE, EXTENSIVE TREE LINE. UNDERSTOOD. THE OTHER POINT THAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IS THE CHURCH DRIVEWAY IS MOVING TO THE SOUTH. OKAY. IS MOVING TO IF WE CAN GET THAT YES, WE'RE MOVING IT INTO THE 50 FOOT BUFFER.

OKAY. SO THAT'S THE REASON THIS HERE IS MOVING OVER TO OVER TO HERE.

AND THE CURB CUT WILL MOVE AS WELL. YES. OKAY.

OKAY. SO, YEAH, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY THIS WILL HAVE TO IF THIS PROJECT MOVES FORWARD, IT WILL HAVE TO UNDERGO INGHAM COUNTY ROAD DEPARTMENT SCRUTINY AND IT CERTAINLY WILL.

I DO ALSO SHARE TREASURER DESCHAINE CONCERN ABOUT THE THE WATER AND, OF COURSE, THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER.

YOU KNOW, FOR EVERYTHING THAT WE COULD SAY ABOUT THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER HE IS VERY HE AND HIS OFFICE ARE VERY CLEAR ABOUT WANTING TO ENSURE THAT THESE DEVELOPMENTS DON'T NEGATIVELY IMPACT WHEN THEY COME IN AS BEST AS THEY CAN.

WE HAVE BUILT FIVE OF THEM. FIVE. THANK YOU.

SORRY. SO CERTAINLY THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER WILL WILL WEIGH IN ON THIS.

AND I THINK TO MR. SCHMITT'S POINT, YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION OF WILL THERE BE A DRAIN PROJECT OF SOME KIND? I'M ASSUMING THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A DRAIN PROJECT SO LONG AS MR. LINDEMANN REMAINS IN OFFICE. YOU KNOW, I THINK THE BIGGER CONCERN FOR WILL THERE BE A DRAIN PROJECT IS IF THEY GET PHONE CALLS FROM RESIDENTS ON SENECA SAYING, WE'RE SEEING STANDING WATER IN OUR ROAD OR IN OUR IN OUR YARDS, THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN THERE'LL BE AN INVESTIGATION.

AND THAT WILL CERTAINLY THAT MAY CERTAINLY LEAD TO SOMETHING DOWN THE LINE.

SO JUST TO THE RESIDENTS IN THE ROOM, BE AWARE OF THAT.

RIGHT. BUT, YOU KNOW, I WAS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN 2019.

AND THIS WAS, I THINK, ONE OF THE FIRST, ONE OF THE FIRST REZONINGS THAT I LOOKED AT.

AND IN PREPPING FOR THIS MEETING, I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT WHAT MY THOUGHTS WERE AT THE TIME.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE SEE A LOT OF THESE, AND SOMETIMES THEY BLUR TOGETHER.

AND I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE DENSITY OF THE PROJECT AT THAT TIME, AND ALSO THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

AND I DO WANT TO GIVE CREDIT WHERE IT'S DUE TO MR. FEDEWA AND HIS AND HIS COMPANY FOR ACKNOWLEDGING THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE BACK IN 2019.

AND GETTING INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS IN THE RIGHT WAY TO WORK WITH THE TOWNSHIP TO IDENTIFY AN EXISTING ISSUE WITH THE MASTER PLAN

[02:10:10]

AND, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS AN INTERESTING YEAR FOR FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND STRATEGIC PLAN PLANNING BECAUSE WE HAD COVID AND A LOT CHANGED.

AND SO ULTIMATELY THERE WERE ONLY A FEW MINOR CHANGES TO OUR FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND THE STRATEGIC PLAN AS A RESULT OF THAT PROCESS, THIS BEING ONE OF THEM. NOW DIRECTOR SCHMITT IS CORRECT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE LAND USE MAP IS NOT A PERFECT AND PRECISE DIAGRAM. IT'S USING A SHARPIE INSTEAD OF A FOUNTAIN PEN WHEN WHEN MAKING THOSE CHANGES TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

SO WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE RESIDENT'S POINT, MR. LEONE'S POINT ABOUT THE PORTION OF THE PARCEL THAT HAS THE DRIVEWAY ON IT NOT BEING DIFFERENT, YOU GOT TO ZOOM IN TO SOME LEVELS THAT PROBABLY WEREN'T EXPECTED ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU CAN SEE THAT.

BUT ULTIMATELY IT WAS CHANGED AND IT WAS ADDED AND THIS BOARD DID DO THAT AS A PART OF THEIR ADOPTION OF THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IN THE STRATEGIC PLAN LAST YEAR.

BY MY COUNT, WE'VE REDUCED BASED ON THE ACTUAL REQUESTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE FOR RC ORIGINALLY, THEY COULD HAVE FIT ABOUT 60 UNITS ON THAT PROPERTY, GIVE OR TAKE.

AND THE CURRENT ZONING WOULD ALLOW FOR, WITHOUT CONDITIONS, 34 UNITS, WHICH HAS BEEN VOLUNTARILY CONDITIONED DOWN TO 32.

AND SO OVERALL, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THROUGH THE COURSE OF THE PROCESS AND THE APPLICANT MAKING ADJUSTMENTS REDUCED BY ALMOST HALF THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT WOULD PROPOSE TO BE ON THIS PARCEL.

YOU KNOW, I'VE SAT THROUGH PROBABLY A DOZEN ZONINGS AND REZONINGS WHERE NEW DEVELOPMENT WAS COMING INTO AN EXISTING PARCEL, AND NONE OF THEM HAVE BEEN EASY. RIGHT? A LOT IN ALMOST EVERY CASE THE RESIDENTS OF THE NEARBY NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE BEEN UNDERSTANDABLY CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT DEVELOPMENT WILL LOOK LIKE AND WHAT IT WILL DO TO THEIR WAY OF LIFE AND THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE.

AND THOSE ARE TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. IN MY OPINION THIS ONE HAS MADE ENOUGH SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE ORIGINAL PROPOSALS THAT HAD BEEN MADE THAT I FEEL MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE WITH A REZONING OF THIS KIND. I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, THE POINT IS WELL MADE ABOUT THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, NOT INCLUDING THE GRAND RESERVE PROPERTIES THAT HAVEN'T COME ONLINE.

AND WE HEARD ABOUT THAT IN THE COMMUNICATION THAT WE ALL RECEIVED EARLIER TODAY.

BUT YOU CAN'T YOU CAN, I SUPPOSE YOU KNOW, LOOK AT WHAT HASN'T BEEN DONE, BUT YOU CAN'T GENERATE TRAFFIC REPORTS BASED ON DATA THAT DOESN'T EXIST YET. YOU CAN GUESS AND MAYBE THAT COULD BE INCLUDED.

BUT I HAVE FOUND OVERALL TRAFFIC ANALYSIS TO BE AN IMPERFECT ART BECAUSE OF A NUMEROUS FACTORS. AND I TAKE ALL OF THEM WITH A GRAIN OF SALT.

NO OFFENSE TO OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER HERE. I TAKE ALL OF THEM WITH A GRAIN OF SALT.

SO THAT'S A LONG WINDED WAY OF SAYING THAT I AM MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE PROPOSAL THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT BEFORE US TODAY THAN THE ONE THAT WAS BROUGHT BEFORE US IN 2024, AND EVEN MORE SO THAN THE ONE THAT WAS BROUGHT BEFORE THIS BOARD IN 2020.

TRUSTEE TREZISE. I SAT THROUGH A COUPLE OF THOSE HEARINGS WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO, AND I THINK INITIALLY THE DENIAL WAS BASED SIMPLY ON WELL, FIRST OF ALL, IT WASN'T AS MUCH LAND.

IT WAS ABOUT TWO ACRES LESS. AND IT WAS JUST EVERYTHING REALLY, AT LEAST IN THEIR DRAFT PROPOSAL, JAMMED IN THERE. AND SO THEY HAVE REACTED TO THAT FORCEFULLY.

SEVERAL TIMES THEY'VE DOWNSIZED THIS, AND I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE LAND ITSELF AND RECOGNIZE THAT THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IS A DOWNSTEP, FROM RESIDENTIAL TO MULTI-FAMILY TO VERY LARGE MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS. SO IT DOES PROVIDE A TRANSITION PERIOD OR TRANSITION BUFFER ZONE FROM ONE TO THE

[02:15:04]

AND THIS IS A LAND USE ISSUE, IT'S NOT THE DESIGN ITSELF.

WITH THE LIMITATIONS PLACED ONTO THIS, I CAN SEE THIS BEING A VERY NICE DEVELOPMENT AND A BUFFER ZONE FROM THE CHURCH PROPERTY DOWN TO THE HIGH DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY. TRUSTEE LENTZ. YEAH. IF MR. SCHMITT COULD COME BACK, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR HIM.

I APPRECIATE YOU GENTLEMEN BEING THERE. OKAY. SO YOU DID SOME QUICK CALCULATIONS ON AND SAID THAT YOU BELIEVE IT WOULD BE BETWEEN 8 AND 10 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

YOU KNOW, AND I GUESS I'M CURIOUS WHERE YOU GOT THAT NUMBER.

AND YOU KNOW WHAT? YEAH. JUST GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY.

NO YOU'RE FINE. EXISTING ZONING REQUIRES 13,500FT² MINIMUM LOT AREA.

THE LOT IS 4.2 ACRES, ROUGHLY. SO QUICK MATH AT 4.2 ACRES GETS YOU. SORRY, I HIT A BUTTON.

ROUGH MATH 4.2 ACRES GETS YOU ABOUT 14. GOT TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ROAD AND POTENTIAL LOT LAYOUT.

TO BE COMPLETELY HONEST WITH YOU THE ANSWER ONCE YOU START LAYING IT OUT, IT'S PROBABLY CLOSE TO 7 OR 8, BUT 10 OR 12 IS A GOOD NUMBER TAKING OUT WHAT YOU WOULD NEED TO TAKE OUT FOR THE ROAD.

RIGHT. AND SO I GUESS MY THAT WAS SUPPORTING WHAT I WAS PLANNING ON ASKING NEXT, WHICH IS THAT IN YOUR OPINION AND YOUR CAPACITY WITH THE TOWNSHIP, YOU WOULD IMAGINE, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING JUST HOW IN DEMAND HOUSING IN MERIDIAN IS THAT IN SPITE OF WHAT TRUSTEE TREZISE SAID, YOU WOULD EXPECT THIS TO BE DEVELOPED AS SINGLE FAMILY AT SOME POINT? OR IS THAT TOO DIFFICULT TO SAY? OH, I MEAN, IN THEORY, ANYTHING WILL EVENTUALLY DEVELOP.

BUT YEAH, I MEAN, TO I THINK TRUSTEE TREZISE POINT, IT WOULD BE AN ASTRONOMICAL NUMBER ON THE SALARIES.

AND AT WHAT POINT DOES THE AT WHAT POINT DOES THE MARKET JUSTIFY MILLION DOLLAR HOUSES ON ADJACENT TO EXISTING TOWNHOMES? I UNDERSTAND, YEAH. YOU KNOW, I THINK THE, THE NOTES ABOUT RUNOFF ARE COMPELLING TO ME. WITH THAT SAID, I WOULD IMAGINE THAT ANY DEVELOPMENT THAT HAPPENS HERE WOULD RESULT IN RUNOFF AND THUS TRIGGERING AN INVOLVEMENT BY THE DRAIN AND ROAD COMMISSION IN A SIMILAR WAY TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NOW.

AND CONSIDERING THE THE BUFFER THAT IS BEING PROPOSED BY THE DEVELOPER IN TERMS OF SEPARATION FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS COMPARED TO IF THIS WAS EVENTUALLY DEVELOPED INTO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, THOSE HOMES WOULD BE POTENTIALLY EVEN CLOSER TO THAT LAND.

I AM INCLINED TO SEE THE MERITS IN THIS AND ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING IN MY CAPACITY ON THIS BOARD.

MEMBER OF THE TRI-COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION.

YOU KNOW, THEY THEY SAY THAT THEIR DATA SHOWS THAT WE NEED 1,652 UNITS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS IN ORDER TO KEEP AT OUR CURRENT GROWTH PACE. YOU KNOW, THIS WOULD BE A BIG STEP TOWARDS THAT.

AND A RENT CALCULATOR THAT I'VE DONE PUTS THIS ON THE HIGHER END OF WHAT IS AFFORDABLE BASED ON THEIR DATA AS TO HOW THE DEMAND WILL BE FOR HOUSEHOLDS EARNING UNDER $80,000, THIS WOULD BE ON THAT HIGH END.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS DOES FILL THAT NEED. WHILE A BIT ABOVE WHAT I WOULD HOPE TO SEE IT, IT DOES FIT THE

[02:20:07]

AND I'M, YOU KNOW, INCLINED TO SUPPORT THAT. CLERK DEMAS.

YEAH. SO I'VE BEEN HEARING SOME CONFLICTING PERSPECTIVES REGARDING THE DISCUSSED PLAN, WHICH HAS BEEN SHOWN DURING THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION AND FROM SOME CONCERNS BY OUR RESIDENTS. AND THAT'S REGARDING TRAFFIC AS WELL AS THE MASTER PLAN SO I'M HOPING DIRECTOR SCHMITT IF YOU COULD HELP CLARIFY SOME OF THESE ISSUES BROUGHT UP REGARDING THOSE TWO ISSUES.

YES, MA'AM. I AM HAPPY TO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTION YOU MIGHT HAVE. YEAH. SO FOR TRAFFIC WE SAW THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS STUDY AND AND IN THE BOARD PACKET, IT TALKS ABOUT A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY, AND I SEE I THINK IT'S ON PAGE 169 THAT THIS DOES NOT REQUIRE A FULL TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. HOWEVER, WHEN HEARING RESIDENTS CONCERNS IT SEEMS LIKE TRAFFIC COULD BE AN ISSUE.

CAN YOU TALK MORE ABOUT THAT? YEAH, SO THEY DID.

YEAH. SO THEY ENDED UP AT THE, THE, THE SLIGHTLY LESS DETAILED REPORT, THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, WHICH IS LOCATED ON PAGE 143 OF THE PACKET AND WAS PREVIOUSLY PROVIDED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

WHAT THAT DOES IS ESSENTIALLY COMPARES EXISTING VOLUMES WITH BACKGROUND GROWTH AND DOES BOTH A NO BUILD ANALYSIS AND A TRIP GEN ANALYSIS BASED ON THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND THE CURRENT ZONING.

RIGHT. AND SO I THINK, AS THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER SPOKE ABOUT PREVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, THERE IS OBVIOUSLY SOME GROWTH THAT WOULD COME AS A RESULT OF THIS.

AND I THINK THE MAJORITY OF TIME, I THINK THE HIGHEST WAS WEEKDAY AM PEAK EXITING WOULD INCREASE BY 18% UNDER THE PROPOSED BY 18 TRIPS UNDER THE PROPOSED ZONING. WHAT YOU'RE SEEING, I THINK IN, IN THE REPORT IS THAT THERE'S NOTHING THE PROJECT IS NOT BIG ENOUGH TO REALLY JUSTIFY TURN LANES OR SHOULDER ENHANCEMENTS OR LIGHT CHANGES TO LIGHT AT DOBIE AND HAMILTON OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

AND THAT'S REALLY I THINK THE, THE CRUX OF THE CONCLUSION IS THAT THERE'S A NET INCREASE.

IT'S NOT VERY LARGE. AND THE LEVEL OF SERVICE SHOULD NOT CHANGE MORE THAN A SECOND OR TWO AT MOST BASED ON COMPUTER ANALYSIS. NOW, OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, IN PRACTICE THAT CHANGES, RIGHT? THINGS SOME DAYS IT'S GREAT. SOME DAYS IT'S NOT.

SOME DAYS SOMEONE'S DRIVING 30 MILES AN HOUR DOWN DOBIE ROAD, AND THE NEXT DAY THEY'RE ALL DRIVING 50.

SO THIS IS ON PAPER VERY LITTLE NEGATIVE IMPACT FROM THE TRAFFIC STUDY.

NOW, OBVIOUSLY, IT'S ANY THERE ARE SOME FOLKS, SOME RESIDENTS THAT HISTORICALLY HAVE DEALT WITH THAT HAVE BELIEVED, YOU KNOW, ANY TRAFFIC IS BAD TRAFFIC. AND THAT'S THAT IS A POSITION.

BUT ANY DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO CREATE TRAFFIC, WHETHER IT'S SINGLE FAMILY OR MULTI-FAMILY OR COMMERCIAL OR WHATEVER, AND MAYBE NOT A SERVER FARM, BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKELY THERE.

SO I THINK THAT FROM A TRAFFIC PERSPECTIVE, REALLY, THAT'S KIND OF WHERE WE'RE AT MINIMAL MINIMAL IMPACT, MINIMAL MINIMAL CHANGE, YOU KNOW, ONE TRIP EVERY TEN MINUTES PROBABLY IS THE CHANGE.

AND FOR THIS PROPOSED PLAN WHAT WOULD THAT MAKE A DIFFERENCE? WOULD TRAFFIC CHANGE DEPENDING ON WHAT IS PUT IT IN THE PARCEL, LIKE IF WE HAVE HOUSING THERE VERSUS A SINGLE FAMILY, MULTI-FAMILY STRUCTURES. YEAH. SO I MEAN, I THINK WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN TERMS OF THE ANALYSIS AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE EXISTING ZONING AND THE PROPOSED ZONING TO SORT OF SHOW THEY THEY ANTICIPATED 10 DWELLING UNITS UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING.

SO I WASN'T TOO FAR OFF IN MY ESTIMATE. STILL ADDING TRAFFIC, STILL ADDING 122 CARS A DAY OVER ALL HOURS VERSUS THE PROPOSED ZONING WERE AT.

AT 32 UNITS A ACRE AT 280 CARS TO THE TO THE WEEKDAY TRAFFIC OVER 24 HOUR PERIOD.

AND SO I THINK WHAT YOU SEE ON A RESIDENCE, ESPECIALLY ON A RESIDENTIAL SIDE, WHICH YOU SEE IN TRAFFIC GENERATION, IS IT'S A PURE DENSITY NUMBER, RIGHT? AS THE NUMBER OF UNITS GO UP, THE NUMBER OF TRIPS GO UP.

[02:25:02]

IT'S A FAIRLY STRAIGHT LINE IN MANY WAYS. UNTIL YOU ONCE YOU JUMP INTO OTHER USES, THAT'S WHERE YOU REALLY START TO SEE.

IF WE WERE TALKING ABOUT A REZONING COMMERCIAL, WE HAVE A MUCH DIFFERENT CONVERSATION, RIGHT? BECAUSE A RESTAURANT IS X AND A WALGREENS IS Y AND A GAS STATION IS Z, RIGHT. THIS IS STRICTLY REALLY A DENSITY NUMBER THAT'S DETERMINING HOW MUCH TRAFFIC IS GOING TO COME AS A RESULT OF IT.

OKAY. AND SO ABOUT THE MASTER HEARING FROM RESIDENTS HERE DURING PUBLIC COMMENT THAT IT DOESN'T FULLY MEET WHAT'S IN THE MASTER PLAN. AND THEN DURING THE APPLICANTS PRESENTATION, IT SEEMS THAT SOME THINGS ABOUT THE PROPOSED PLAN DOES, SUCH AS DIVERSE HOUSING OPTIONS. IS IT FAIR TO SAY BOTH ARE TRUE OR.

OH, ABSOLUTELY. I MEAN, THERE ARE UPWARDS OF 60 GOALS IN THE MASTER PLAN.

50 GOALS AT LEAST. AND I CAN, ON ANY GIVEN PROJECT, PROBABLY FIND 1 OR 2 IN THERE THAT SERVE THE PURPOSES OF ANY PROJECT.

AND I COULD PROBABLY FIND 1 OR 2 THAT MAYBE PEOPLE DON'T THINK IS A REASON WHY THAT IS NOT MEETING THE PROVISION, THE PLAN. THE PLAN IS OVERARCHING BIG PICTURE, TRYING TO SET BROAD GOALS IN MOST CASES FOR THE TOWNSHIP.

AND SO CERTAINLY I WOULD NOT TELL SOMEONE THEIR OPINION IS WRONG HERE BECAUSE THEY PROBABLY CAN DO AN ANALYSIS THAT SHOWS IT'S NOT FULLY IN COMPLIANCE WITH THEIR VERSION OF THE MASTER PLAN. I THINK WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS, I THINK WHAT THE APPLICANT IS SAYING IS CERTAINLY THAT IT DOES.

AND I THINK WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS BOTH PARTIES CAN BE RIGHT AT THE SAME TIME.

OKAY, GREAT. THANK YOU. TRUSTEE WILSON. I STILL CONTINUE TO HAVE ISSUES WITH THE SETBACK.

AND LOOKING AT THIS POTENTIAL DRAWING, THEY'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT A 50 FOOT SETBACK BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE AN IMPERVIOUS SURFACE THAT WILL BE WHICH WILL GENERATE ADDITIONAL ISSUES RELATED TO WHERE THE WATER FLOWS.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT SETBACK, DO YOU ALLOW A PARKING AREA LIKE THIS OR A PARTY AREA LIKE THIS, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK IT WOULD LIKELY BE USED FOR? YEAH. SO YES, PARKING HAS A DIFFERENT SET OF SETBACKS IN EVERY CASE THAN A STRUCTURE.

HOWEVER, IF IF IN THE CONDITIONS THE DEVELOPER IS SAYING WE WILL HAVE 100 FOOT SETBACK, IS THAT A TRUE SETBACK? LET ME PULL UP THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE REAL QUICK.

OKAY. THANKS. YEAH. SO WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT SPECIFICALLY IS THE REAR YARD BUILDING SETBACK. THE CONDITION THAT THEY'VE OFFERED IS INCREASE THE REAR YARD BUILDING SETBACK ON THE WESTERN BOUNDARY FROM THE REQUIRED 40FT TO 100FT.

AND SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE POINT.

WHAT THEY HAVE, WHAT THAT DRAWING SHOWS DOES MEET THAT CONDITION.

I UNDERSTAND. I STILL THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A PROBLEM IN THAT IF YOU DO HAVE WATER, SURFACE WATER AND THERE'S A REQUIREMENT, THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER COMES UP WITH A REQUIREMENT FOR A RETENTION POND ON THE SITE.

WHERE DO YOU PUT IT? IT CAN'T BE IN THAT 50 FOOT EASEMENT.

WOULD WE THEN SAY THAT WOULD THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER RULE IN WHAT THE CONDITIONS HAVE TO BE BEFORE THE SITE PLAN WOULD BE APPROVED? SO THE SITE PLAN REVIEW WITH THE DRAIN COMMISSIONER AND OUR STAFF IS GOING TO GO SIMULTANEOUSLY.

OKAY. AND SO THIS IS CERTAINLY A SITUATION WHERE WE MAY NEED TO HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH THEM ABOUT HOW THAT GOES.

AND I THINK CERTAINLY THIS CONVERSATION AND ALL THE OTHER CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE HAPPENED ARE BEING HEARD BY THE APPLICANT, AND THEY SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THEY NEED TO TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT WHEN THEY'RE ENGINEERING THE SITE.

THEY'RE EASIER APPROACH BY FAR IS TO ENGINEER THIS SITE IN SUCH A WAY THAT THEY UTILIZE THE DANIELS DRAIN EXTENSION THAT IS JUST TO THE NORTH OF THE SITE IN THE DOBIE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY.

I THINK THAT MUCH IS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR BECAUSE THAT PIPE EXISTS AND THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO UTILIZE IT.

GOING TO THE DRAIN WITHIN THIS WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE THAT I AM BLANKING ON THE NAME OF BECAUSE IT'S AN ODD ONE.

THE SPRASS STREAM. THANK YOU. IS A MORE CHALLENGING ENDEAVOR FROM THEIR REGARD.

CAN WE MAKE A REQUIREMENT? WE CANNOT. PARDON ME? WE CANNOT. OKAY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. TRUSTEE TREZISE.

I FORGOT WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY. TREASURER DESCHAINE.

[02:30:04]

SO IT WAS A HUGE NUMBER THAT REALLY WASN'T SHOULDN'T HAVE EVER BEEN TAKEN SERIOUSLY 30 IS BETTER.

I THINK WE CAN FIND A COMPROMISE HERE THE DEVELOPER BOUGHT THIS AT TEN ACRES OF HOUSING OR TEN UNITS OF HOUSING FOR THIS ACREAGE BASICALLY A SINGLE FAMILY RAA, RD WOULD GIVE US 20 UNITS, WHICH SHOULD MEET HIM HALFWAY BETWEEN THE 32 UNITS HE WANTS.

MORE ROOM FOR THE SETBACK HE PROMISED. AND TO TRUSTEE WILSON'S POINT, THEY'VE GOT TO FIND ROOM FOR A RETENTION POND.

AND RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO SPACE FOR THAT MEANS MORE TREES WOULD COME DOWN TO MAKE FOR THIS RETENTION POND THAT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE PART OF THIS PROJECT.

ARE THE 20 UNITS, RATHER THAN 32, WOULD BE LIKELY MORE AGREEABLE FOR THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOOD, MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY APPROPRIATE FOR THE SITE, AND IT IS A RELATIVELY SMALL, NARROW SITE.

IF YOU DRIVE DOWN DOBIE ROAD YOU'RE NOT LOOKING FOR THE SITE, BOOM, YOU'RE RIGHT PAST IT.

IT IS NOT THAT BIG OF A FRONTAGE, IT'S DEEP. BUT I THINK IF YOU MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD DRIVE BY IT, YOU'LL BE SURPRISED BY HOW QUICKLY YOU GO PAST IT.

IT'S NOT THERE'S NOT MUCH FURNITURE. IT GOES BACK DEEP.

AND THAT'S WHY THE NEIGHBORS ON SENECA ARE CONCERNED, BECAUSE IT'S IT'S STRAIGHT BACK, RIGHT INTO THEIR BACK YARD.

SO WHEN WE COME UP FOR A VOTE FOR THIS, I'M GOING TO PROPOSE THAT WE APPROVE IT FOR RDD, WHICH WOULD BE, I THINK, A GOOD COMPROMISE IN BETWEEN WHAT THE APPLICANT WANTS AND WHAT THE NEIGHBORS WANT.

IT STILL GIVES THE DEVELOPER THE ABILITY TO DEVELOP A LOT OF HOMES ON HERE, BUT NOT 32 UNITS.

THAT TO ME, 32 UNITS SHOULD BE THOUGHT OF AS THE FIRST PROPOSAL, IT'S THE FIRST SERIES, THE ONE THAT DIDN'T GET SHOT DOWN RIGHT AWAY.

THE 60 WAS NEVER A SERIOUS PROPOSAL. THIS IS A SERIOUS PROPOSAL.

AT THIS POINT, WE I THINK WE CAN TALK ABOUT A COMPROMISE, NOT FROM 60 UNITS.

THANK YOU. I GUESS FROM A PROCEDURAL STANDPOINT, ARE WE PERMITTED TO MAKE A DIFFERENT, TO REZONE IT TO A DIFFERENT DESIGNATION THAN WHAT WAS REQUESTED? I WOULD LIKE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THAT WITH THE TOWNSHIP ATTORNEYS.

OKAY. AND FURTHERMORE, I GUESS AS YOU DO SO, I THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL BECAUSE IT IS A CONDITIONAL REZONING WITH RESTRICTIONS ON THE NUMBER OF BUILDINGS AND THE NUMBER OF UNITS PER BUILDING.

IF WE'RE REZONING, IF THAT IS THE DIRECTION THE BOARD WISHES TO GO FORWARD WITH, THAT CONDITION TO ME IS UNTENABLE. THEY ARE NOT PERMITTED TO BE ATTACHED TO A TO A CHANGED REZONING.

OKAY. SO I'M NOT ENTIRELY. I NEED TO DISCUSS WITH THE ATTORNEYS.

OKAY. OKAY. AND THAT WOULD AFFECT BOTH CONDITIONS OR JUST THE ONE OF THE CONDITIONS.

ALL THE CONDITIONS. ALL CONDITIONS. SO JUST WORTH POINTING OUT THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? WELL, IT SOUNDS LIKE MR. SCHMITT HAS SOME HOMEWORK, ABSOLUTELY WITH THE TOWNSHIP ATTORNEYS.

AND WE WILL SEE THIS BACK NEXT MEETING. AND WE WILL BRING ASSUMING WE CAN GET SQUARED AWAY AND I THINK WE CAN, WE WILL BRING FORWARD BOTH A PRO AND CON RESOLUTION FOR INTRODUCTION.

OKAY. OKAY. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL, SINCE IF WE'RE IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A SEPARATE ZONING DESIGNATION, IS IT POSSIBLE TO GET A WORKUP LIKE YOU WOULD FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THE VARIOUS IMPACT OF A REZONING TO AN RDD DESIGNATION AS WELL.

I ASK BECAUSE THERE'S A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT GO INTO THOSE, AND I DO LOOK BACK AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION PACKETS AND HAVING LIKE THE LOT SIZES THAT, YOU KNOW, COMPARISON CHART AND THE, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S POSSIBLE TO LOOK AT TRIP GENERATION FOR RAA VERSUS RDD, IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TOO. JUST SOMETHING VERY TOP LINE AND BASIC AT THE VERY LEAST SO WE KNOW WHAT WE'RE COMPARING APPLES AND ORANGES TO. WE'LL DO WHAT WE CAN DO. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YOU'RE WELCOME. OKAY. THANK YOU BOARD MEMBERS.

NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 13B FEDERAL CDS AND STATE FUNDING REQUESTS AND DEPUTY MANAGER OPSOMMER IS HERE TO TALK TO US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT.

[13.B. Federal (CDS)/State Funding Requests ]

[02:35:05]

THEY'RE DUE BY MARCH 17TH, WHICH IS PRIOR TO YOUR NEXT BOARD MEETING ON MARCH 18TH.

AT THE REQUEST OF THE SUPERVISOR, WE REVIEWED ALL OF THESE PROJECTS LISTED HERE.

THESE ARE ALL PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED IN SOME SHAPE OR FORM HERE IN THE TOWNSHIP IN THE PAST.

AND SO WE REVIEWED THE HANDBOOK AND GUIDELINES RELATIVE TO THESE PROJECTS.

AND AT THE CONCLUSION OF THAT, AND AFTER SEVERAL ROUNDS OF QUESTIONS TO SENATOR PETERS PETER'S OFFICE, WE CONCLUDED THAT THE ONLY PROJECT THAT WE BELIEVE MAY BE ELIGIBLE AT THIS POINT WOULD BE THE SOLAR PROJECTS.

WE BELIEVE THE PROJECT BEING GRID TIED AND OR HAVING BATTERY STORAGE CAPACITY WOULD MAKE IT ELIGIBLE.

AND SO THE PROJECT THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING TO YOU IS THE SOLAR CONCEPT PLAN THAT WE DEVELOPED FOR THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING, WHERE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BUILDING, WHICH INCLUDES ROOF TOP MOUNTED SOLAR ARRAYS, AND THEN ALSO A CARPORT SOLAR ARRAY AT THE HORSESHOE PARKING LOT TO THE NORTHWEST OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING. ONE SIDE NOTE SENATOR PETER'S OFFICE RECOMMENDED THAT WE REVIEW SOME PROJECTS THAT HAD BEEN FUNDED IN PRIOR YEARS THROUGH THE CDS PROGRAM, ONE OF WHICH WAS A SOLAR PROJECT FOR A POLICE DEPARTMENT BUILDING.

SO WHEN WE WERE WE KIND OF NARROWED IT DOWN TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING AND THE MUNICIPAL BUILDING CONCEPT PLANS THAT WE'VE DEVELOPED, AND WE LEANED IN FAVOR OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT PROJECT, JUST SEEING THAT THERE WAS A PROJECT THAT WAS NEARLY IDENTICAL TO OURS THAT WAS FUNDED IN A PRIOR FISCAL YEAR. THAT WAS MORE OR LESS KIND OF A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH THUS FAR IN VETTING THESE PROJECTS.

AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE ON THE CDS REQUEST.

THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBERS. SO YES, THIS WAS OBVIOUSLY A QUICK TURNAROUND ON THIS THIS IS WHY WE'RE HERE TONIGHT. WE'LL ASK US TO WE'LL ASK OURSELVES TO SUSPEND OUR RULES IN A MOMENT TO TAKE ACTION ON THE RESOLUTION THIS EVENING.

I THINK GIVEN THE FACT THAT ALL OF THE OTHER PROJECT IDEAS THAT WE HAD FLOATED WERE UNTENABLE LEAVES US IN THE THE ENVIABLE POSITION OF HAVING REALLY ONLY ONE CHOICE TO PURSUE AT THIS MOMENT. I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SET FOR OURSELVES IN OUR STRATEGIC PLAN AND ALSO IN OUR GOALS, SOME VERY LOFTY GOALS IN TERMS OF SUSTAINABILITY.

AND AS DEPUTY MANAGER OPSOMMER POINTS OUT IN OUR PACKET MEMO OUR GOAL IS TO GET TO 50% OF ELECTRICITY IN TOWNSHIP OPERATIONS FROM RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES BY 2025, AND EVENTUALLY 100% FROM RENEWABLE SOURCES BY 2035.

AND WHEN I JOINED THE BOARD, I SAW THAT GOAL AND AND SORT OF CHUCKLED TO MYSELF BECAUSE IT SEEMED LIKE TOTALLY UNREACHABLE.

AND SO AT YOUR PLACES THIS EVENING, I BELIEVE YOU'VE ALL RECEIVED A DOCUMENT THAT SHOWS OUR CURRENT SOLAR PRODUCTION VERSUS OUR CURRENT ENERGY USAGE, WHICH AT THE MOMENT IS AT 28.3% AS OF, I BELIEVE WHAT, AT THE END OF LAST YEAR? YEAH, CORRECT. SO AT THE END OF 2024 THERE ARE A COUPLE OF PROJECTS THAT WE HAVE IN THE WORKS, INCLUDING THE NORTH FIRE STATION, AND WE INTEND FOR THAT PROJECT TO SUPPLY ABOUT 100% OF THE POWER AT THE NORTH FIRE STATION WITH SOLAR. THAT'S ANOTHER $30,000. THIS SOLAR PROJECT THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS EVENING WOULD BRING OUR PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING UP FROM THE 17.91% THAT'S AT CURRENTLY TO 100% WHICH IS A HUGE GET.

I DID SOME, SOME MATH IN ADDITION TO WHAT DEPUTY MANAGER OPSOMMER PROVIDED THAT WOULD PUT OUR TOTAL SOLAR PRODUCTION AT 575,000 KILOWATT HOURS.

WHICH BRINGS US TO THE GRAND TOTAL OF 53%. AND SO IF WE WERE TO BE SUCCESSFUL WITH THIS, WE'D BE MUCH, MUCH CLOSER TO OUR, OUR GOAL. AND WE WOULD BE NOT VERY FAR BEHIND THE 50% GOAL THAT WE HAD SET.

SO I WOULD ASK THAT WE SUPPORT THIS RESOLUTION THIS EVENING WITH ONE CHANGE.

AND I HATE TO HAVE TO DO THIS. BUT THE RESOLUTION THAT'S ON PAGE 185 OF THE PACKET REFERENCES

[02:40:05]

AND I ABSOLUTELY BELIEVE THAT IS A LAUDABLE THING TO FOR US TO DO.

HOWEVER, GIVEN THAT THIS THIS REQUEST WILL BE MADE OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION'S STANCE ON THE PARIS CLIMATE ACCORDS, I WOULD ASK THAT WE CHANGE THE LANGUAGE OF THAT WHEREAS TO READ MERIDIAN RESOLVE TO ACHIEVE THE GOALS OF INTERNATIONAL CLIMATE AGREEMENTS AND ADOPTED A CLIMATE SUSTAINABILITY PLAN.

SO WE DON'T GET THROWN OUT JUST FOR THE LANGUAGE OF THE RESOLUTIONS.

SO I WOULD ASK THAT WE MAKE THAT CHANGE IF WE CHOOSE TO MOVE FORWARD.

OTHERWISE, I THINK THIS IS AN EXCELLENT PROJECT TO PURSUE FUNDING FOR.

AND I WOULD URGE THE BOARD'S SUPPORT FOR THE RESOLUTION THIS EVENING.

TREASURER DESCHAINE. FIRST OF ALL, DAN, THANK YOU FOR THE QUICK TURNAROUND ON THIS WORK AND BRINGING THIS TO US IN SUCH A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME AND LETTING US KNOW THE DEADLINES THAT WE WOULD OTHERWISE BE MISSING IF WE DIDN'T ACT TONIGHT.

I MOVE THAT WE SUSPEND OUR RULES AND TAKE ACTION ON THIS ITEM NUMBER 13, 13B, 13B TONIGHT.

SUPPORT. IT'D BEEN MOVED BY TREASURER DESCHAINE AND SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE WILSON TO SUSPEND OUR RULES.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF SUSPENSION OF THE RULES, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES.

TREASURER DESCHAINE TO MOVE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP'S FISCAL YEAR 2026 CONGRESSIONAL DUTY DIRECT SPENDING GRANT APPLICATION THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY TREASURER DESCHAINE.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SUPPORT. SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE WILSON.

ANY DISCUSSION ON THE RESOLUTION? SEEING NONE.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND THEN ON TO THE STATE.

YES. AND BEFORE I MOVE ON TO THE STATE I JUST ALSO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT IT WAS A TEAM EFFORT TO GET THROUGH EVERYTHING ON THE CDS APPLICATION MATERIALS DIRECTOR MASSEY ASSISTED WITH ALL THE COMMUNICATION BACK AND FORTH WITH SENATOR PETERS OFFICE, AND MANAGER DEMPSEY ALSO WORKED ON THAT.

MOVING ON TO THE STATE BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST FOR FISCAL YEAR 25-26.

MANAGER DEMPSEY DID PARTICIPATE IN A CALL WITH OFFICE, THE OFFICE OF SENATOR, STATE SENATOR SARAH ANTHONY RECENTLY.

AND THEY DID HIGHLIGHT THAT THERE WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY $283 MILLION OR $282 MILLION AVAILABLE IN DISCRETIONARY FUNDING FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 25-26 BUDGET. TO PUT THAT IN PERSPECTIVE, THERE WAS ABOUT $283 MILLION THAT WAS ALLOCATED IN THE PRIOR FISCAL YEAR BUDGET JUST FOR LIKE THE LANSING REGION IN GENERAL. SO THE DISCRETIONARY SPENDING HAS BEEN CUT SIGNIFICANTLY.

SO JUST KEEP THAT IN MIND RELATIVE TO PREVIOUS SUCCESSES WITH THE STATE BUDGET AND APPLYING FOR GRANTS.

OBVIOUSLY, THE STATE BUDGET APPROPRIATION PROCESS IS THE MOST FLEXIBLE.

JUST ABOUT ANYTHING THAT SERVES A PUBLIC PURPOSE WOULD BE AN ELIGIBLE EXPENDITURE THAT THE TOWNSHIP CAN MAKE WOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO BE APPLIED FOR.

HOWEVER, SOME PROJECTS ARE GOING TO BE MORE. PALATABLE TO THE STATE LAWMAKERS THAN OTHERS.

AND WE DO HAVE SPLIT CONTROL IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE NOW.

WE ARE ACTUALLY JUST RECOMMENDING THAT WE ESSENTIALLY PROVIDE THE SAME APPLICATION TO OUR STATE LAWMAKERS AS WE DID IN THE PRIOR YEAR, WHICH IS THE CENTRAL FIRE STATION DORM ADDITION PROJECT.

WE APPLIED LAST YEAR, WHICH WAS ONE YEAR AFTER RECEIVING THE $5 MILLION GRANT FOR THE SENIOR AND COMMUNITY CENTER.

SO OBVIOUSLY, LAST YEAR BY AND LARGE, OUR STATE LAWMAKERS WERE LOOKING AT OUR OTHER NEIGHBORING JURISDICTIONS WHOM THEY REPRESENT AND TRYING TO HELP THOSE COMMUNITIES AS WELL. AFTER SUPPORTING US SO MUCH IN THE FISCAL YEAR 23-24 BUDGET.

SO WE'RE LOOKING AT REAPPLYING HERE A SECOND YEAR FOR THIS AND SEEING IF WE CAN HAVE BETTER LUCK.

AND THEN ADDITIONALLY FIRE CHIEF MIKE HAMEL HAS BEEN TALKING FOR, I THINK, GOING ON ABOUT TWO YEARS NOW WITH ALL OF THE FIRE CHIEFS IN THE REGION AND OUR OPTICOMS, WHICH ARE THE SIGNAL PREEMPTION THAT FIRST RESPONDERS CAN USE TO EXTEND A GREEN LIGHT OR TO CONTROL THE SIGNAL FOR PRIORITIZATION FOR OUR FIRST RESPONDERS ARE AGING.

WE ACTUALLY PAID OUT OF THE GENERAL FUND APPROXIMATELY $21,000 LAST YEAR TO REPLACE THE OPTICOM AT THE CENTRAL PARK DRIVE OKEMOS ROAD INTERSECTION.

[02:45:03]

SO THESE COSTS ARE GOING TO BE INCURRED ONE WAY OR ANOTHER.

IT'S A MATTER OF, ARE WE GOING TO FIND GRANT FUNDING TO HELP US ON A REGIONAL BASIS, REPLACE THOSE OPTICOMS. SO CHIEF HAMEL IS WORKING WITH THE OTHER JURISDICTIONS HERE IN THE GREATER LANSING REGION, AND THEY'RE LOOKING AT A REGIONAL APPLICATION.

WE WOULD NOT BE THE LEAD APPLICANT IN ALL LIKELIHOOD.

I BELIEVE IT WOULD PROBABLY BE THE CITY OF LANSING WHO HAS THE MOST SIGNALS AND THE MOST OPTICOMS IN THEIR JURISDICTION.

SO WE WOULD KIND OF HAVE A TWO FOLD APPLICATION, ONE FORMALLY FROM THE TOWNSHIP AND ONE THAT WE ARE A REGIONAL PARTICIPANT IN.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO THE BOARD.

AND THEN OF COURSE, THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU THIS EVENING FOR THAT REQUEST.

LAST YEAR, I BELIEVE WE REQUESTED $750,000 FOR THE DORM PROJECT.

WE WILL PROBABLY COME IN AROUND THE SAME NUMBER.

RECOGNIZING THAT THE GRANTS HAVE GROWN SMALLER OVER SUBSEQUENT YEARS SINCE THE STATE SPENT DOWN ITS ARPA FUNDING.

MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU. DEPUTY MANAGER OPSOMMER. TRUSTEE WILSON I SAT IN ON THIS CALL, ALSO WITH SENATOR ANTHONY AND IN THE CONVERSATION, A PUBLIC SAFETY SEEMED TO BE AN EMPHASIS, AND I ALSO HEARD HER SAY THAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE CONCRETE, TANGIBLE ASSETS. AND ONE OF THE MEMBERS WHO WAS PARTICIPATING WAS FROM CHARLOTTE, AND THEY GOT FUNDING LAST YEAR FOR A FIRE TRAINING CENTER, WHICH WE DO NOT HAVE HERE.

SO I THOUGHT THE WHEN THINKING ABOUT WHAT WOULD BE AN APPROPRIATE PROJECT, THE DORMITORY SLASH STORAGE FOR THAT CENTRAL FIRE STATION SEEMED LIKE A LOGICAL FIT. SO I WOULD ABSOLUTELY SUPPORT THAT.

VERY GOOD. I DO WANT TO POINT OUT A SMALL TYPO IN THE LAST WHEREAS OF THE RESOLUTION, WHICH IS ON PAGE 188, THE LEAST COSTLY OPTION IS TO BUILD A SMALL ADDITION, NOT EDITION TO THE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE EXISTING BUILDING.

SO WHEN WE MAKE A MOTION AFTER WE SUSPEND OUR RULES FOR.

I GUESS WE ALREADY SUSPENDED OUR RULES FOR 13B.

SO WHEN WE MAKE A MOTION ON THIS IF WE COULD MAKE THAT SMALL TYPOGRAPHICAL CHANGE, APPRECIATE THAT.

BUT YES, ON THE SUBJECT MATTER AT HAND, CERTAINLY WE KNOW THIS IS A NEEDED EXPENSE.

YOU KNOW, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THIS MAY BE A LONG SHOT, GIVEN THE RETRACTION AND THE AMOUNT OF MONEY AVAILABLE, BUT NOTHING VENTURED, NOTHING GAINED. ALL RIGHT, ANYTHING FURTHER ON THIS? OR ANY MOTIONS TO BE MADE? TRUSTEE TREZISE. EXCUSE ME.

I MOVE, MOTION TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP FISCAL YEAR 25-26 STATE BUDGET CENTRAL FIRE STATION DORM ADDITION GRANT APPLICATION SUBJECT TO A CORRECTION OF SPELLING ERRORS IN THE RESOLUTION ITSELF.

SUPPORT. IT'S BEEN MOVED BY TRUSTEE TREZISE SUPPORTED BY TRUSTEE WILSON.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? MOTION BEFORE US IS IN SUPPORT OF THE STATE BUDGET CENTRAL FIRE STATION DORM ADDITION GRANT APPLICATION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ALL RIGHT. LAST ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM 13C. AND IF IT PLEASES THE BOARD, CAN WE TAKE A FIVE MINUTE TO REFILL OUR WATERS AND COME BACK.

WE'LL SEE YOU AT 8:58. ALL RIGHT. I'LL CALL US BACK TO ORDER AT 8:59.

OUR NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 13C THE HOUSING TIF AND FOR THIS WE HAVE DIRECTOR CLARK.

[13.C. Housing TIF]

THOSE PLANS THAT REQUEST THE USE OF SCHOOL EDUCATION TAX DOLLARS.

THE SCHOOL EDUCATION TAX DOLLARS ARE APPROVED FOR THOSE PLANS AS POTENTIAL CAPTURE FOR PROJECTS THAT REQUEST THE USE OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING.

ESPECIALLY TAX INCREMENT FINANCING, TO CONSTRUCT HOUSING UNITS.

THE PROGRAM HAS SHOWN PROGRESS IN APPROVING PROJECTS AROUND THE STATE THAT HAVE FINANCING GAPS.

MANY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECTS HAVE FINANCING GAPS BASED ON THE ECONOMIC FACTORS AND OTHER CONDITIONS.

THE HASLETT VILLAGE SQUARE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT HAS BEEN STALLED DUE TO INFRASTRUCTURE ISSUES AND GAPS IN FINANCING, AND WITH THE DEVELOPER'S RECENT REQUEST TO REALIGN THE PROJECT WITH PROJECT INCENTIVES THAT WE PROVIDE HERE IN THE TOWNSHIP.

WE WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS TONIGHT WITH THE BOARD THE POSSIBILITY OF UTILIZING THE MISHDA OUR MICHIGAN STATE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HOUSING

[02:50:10]

WE HAD A FEW QUESTIONS, THE PROGRAM WAS NEW. WE'RE HERE TONIGHT TO ANSWER THOSE.

THERE'S NO BOARD MOTION IN YOUR PACKET TONIGHT SO WE'RE TRYING TO GAUGE THE BOARD'S INTEREST IN PARTICIPATING IN THIS PROGRAM.

IN BASIC TAX, INCREMENT FINANCING IS A FUNDING MECHANISM.

IT'S A TOOL TO BE USED TO FINANCIALLY SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SITE WHERE TRADITIONAL FINANCING IS NOT GOING TO MAKE THE PROJECT FEASIBLE.

LOOKING AT THE VALUE OF A SITE AND MAKING THAT CURRENT CONDITION OF THE SITE ITS BASE YEAR, A DEVELOPER WILL CALCULATE THE ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE PROJECT AFTER IT IS COMPLETED, WITH IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDED.

THE FUTURE VALUE LESS THE BASE VALUE PROVIDES YOU THE INCREMENTAL INCREASE.

USING ROUND NUMBERS. IN OUR EXAMPLE ON THE BOARD, $100,000 IS THE BASE VALUE IN THE START YEAR.

$400,000 IS THE ESTIMATED VALUE AT THE END OF THE PROJECT COMPLETION.

SO WHEN ALL IMPROVEMENTS ARE COMPLETED. $300,000 WOULD THEN BE THE INCREMENTAL INCREASE.

HOUSING TIF UTILIZES THE SAME MECHANISM. BASE YEAR IMPROVEMENTS LESS THE FUTURE VALUE.

THE CHANGE IN THE AMENDED ACT, WHICH IS NOW PUBLIC, ACT 90, ALLOWS FOR ELIGIBLE HOUSING EXPENSES, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES AS LONG AS THE SITE WILL PROVIDE HOUSING UNITS AT A SUBSIDIZED FOR SALE OR RENT COST FOR INCOMES NO GREATER THAN 120% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME. THE ACT WILL ALLOW ELIGIBLE ACTIVITIES FOR HOUSING CONSTRUCTION FOR PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE, DEMOLITION AND RENOVATION, SITE PREPARATION, RELOCATION AND FINANCING GAPS.

THE MICHIGAN STATE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY HAS PROVIDED AREA MEDIAN INCOME STARTING AT 120% FOR EACH COUNTY IN THE STATE.

IN INGHAM COUNTY ONE PERSON MAKING $77,640 A YEAR WOULD BE ELIGIBLE TO PARTICIPATE AS A RESIDENT IN EITHER A FOR SALE OR RENT A UNIT THAT IS SUPPORTED THROUGH THIS PROGRAM.

WE'VE PROVIDED CURRENT TOWNSHIP POSITIONS AT SALARIES AT OR BELOW 120% ON THE SCREEN.

THAT IS THE ACTIVE DPW RECORDS MANAGER P OSITION, UTILITY BILLING SUPERVISOR, RENTAL HOUSING INSPECTOR, POLICE OFFICER, AND MECHANIC. THE DETAILS OF THE HOUSING PROGRAM WITH MISHDA, THE REQUEST FOR HOUSING ASSISTANCE MUST BE PROVED PROVING A NEED FOR HOUSING AND ALIGNED WITH A HOUSING ASSESSMENT, SO A DEVELOPER MUST PROVE THIS THROUGH A HOUSING ASSESSMENT.

TRI-COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING HAS CONDUCTED THAT HOUSING ASSESSMENT FOR THE THREE COUNTIES. MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP IS SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED IN THE INGHAM COUNTY REPORTS.

WE ALSO HAVE THE 2018 HOUSING STUDY THAT WE'VE CONDUCTED, WHICH ALSO ALLUDES TO THIS INFORMATION THAT THE TRI-COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING CAME UP WITH.

SECOND FASTEST GROWING AGE GROUP IN MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP OF 25 TO 34, MAKES UP 16% OF ALL OF OUR TOWNSHIP HOUSEHOLDS AND INDICATES A NEED FOR DIVERSE HOUSING OPTIONS. ASSUMING OUR CURRENT RATE OF GROWTH IT IS ESTIMATED FROM TRI COUNTY PLANNING THAT WE NEED 1,652 HOUSING UNITS OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. THIS IS SUPPORTED WITH THE SAME REPORT FROM 2018 THAT ESTIMATED BY 2030 WE NEED 2,500 HOUSING UNITS, AND IN 2023 WE HAD ONLY INCLUDED 1,500 NEW UNITS.

AND THAT INCLUDED A NUMBER OF PROPOSED PROJECTS.

SO ALL OF THE UNITS AT THAT TIME OF CALCULATION, THEY ARE NOT EVEN AVAILABLE.

50% OF THOSE UNITS, AS ASSESSED BY THE TRI-COUNTY PLANNING STUDY, NEEDS TO BE AT OR BELOW 120% OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME TO SUPPORT NEW AND EXISTING RESIDENTS.

THIS PROGRAM SUPPORTS THE BENEFITS TO ACCRUE TO THE DEVELOPER.

SO THAT WAS A QUESTION THAT SOME OF BOARD MEMBERS HAD.

IS THAT THE DURATION OF THE PLAN ENDS WHAT HAPPENS TO THE END USER? SO THE END USER RECEIVES THE ANCILLARY SUBSIDIZED RENT OR FOR SALE COST UPFRONT.

THE DURATION OF THE PLAN, IT WILL BE DETERMINED BASED OFF OF THE LOCAL AUTHORITY BY OUR TOWNSHIP BROWNFIELD AUTHORITY AND THE TOWNSHIP BOARD.

TOWNSHIP IS NOT AT RISK FOR SHORTFALLS. SO THAT WAS A CONVERSATION.

[02:55:02]

SHOULD THE DEVELOPER COMPLETE ALL THE APPROVED ACTIVITIES AND THERE'S A VERY STRANGE ECONOMIC DOWNTURN, THE TOWNSHIP IS NOT ON THE HOOK TO REIMBURSE THE DEVELOPER FOR THAT.

THE PLANS ALSO REQUIRE MISHDA TO APPROVE ANY PLAN THAT IS GOING TO PROVIDE HOUSING IN BROWNFIELD.

SO THEY WILL REVIEW THE PLAN AND IF THE DEVELOPER IS REQUESTING SCHOOL EDUCATION TAXES, THAT HAS TO BE APPROVED THROUGH MISHDA.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE MASTER PLAN A COUPLE OF TIMES TONIGHT. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT HOUSING A COUPLE OF TIMES TONIGHT, CONVENIENTLY.

THESE ARE THE 2023 MASTER PLAN GOALS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH HOUSING AND SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFIED ON SEVERAL PAGES.

STRENGTHENING AND EXPANDING RESIDENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES, THE TOPOGRAPHY, THE AFFORDABILITY, THE LOCATION, INFILL. AND MY FAVORITE, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SUBSIDIZED HOUSING, IS CREATING INCLUSIONARY ZONING STANDARDS SO THAT ANYONE WHO'S GOING TO BE IN THESE UNITS DOES NOT HAVE TO LIVE IN SUBSTANDARD HOUSING, AND THAT NONE OF THE UNITS LOOK DIFFERENT. SO EVERYONE HAS THE SAME LIFE EXPERIENCE AT AN AFFORDABLE COST.

THOSE ARE THE PROGRAM DETAILS, AND I AM PREPARED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

TREASURER DESCHAINE. FIRST OF ALL, THIS IS A REALLY EXCITING PROPOSAL.

OF ALL THE NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENT WE'VE SEEN, I'VE SEEN IN THE PAST EIGHT YEARS, ONLY ONE WOODWARD WAY, 49 UNITS HAS BEEN AFFORDABLE HOUSING. EVERYTHING ELSE HAS BEEN MARKET RATE, AND WE'VE SEEN THOSE MARKET RATES GO HIGHER.

FOR THOSE WHO MAKE THIS WOULD REQUIRE 50% OF THE UNITS TO BE OFFERED AT 120% OF AMI.

CAN YOU RESTATE THE END OF THAT QUESTION? SO ACCORDING TO THIS PLAN, THEY WOULD HAVE TO OFFER 50% OF THE UNITS AT 120% OF THE AMI INCOME LIMIT. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS, THAT IS NOT THE REQUIREMENT.

MISHDA WILL NOT SET THE STANDARD FOR HOW MANY UNITS OR WHAT THE AFFORDABILITY TARGET NEEDS TO BE THAT WILL COME FROM THE DISCRETION OF THE LOCAL BROWNFIELD AUTHORITY.

AS LONG AS THE PROJECT SUPPORTS INCOMES AT 120% OR LESS OF THE AREA MEDIAN INCOME, IT QUALIFIES AS AN ELIGIBLE HOUSING EXPENSE, ACCORDING TO MISHDA. WELL, WE DON'T SAY WHAT NUMBER OF THE UNITS HAVE TO MEET THOSE REQUIREMENTS.

ARE THEY EXPECTING THEM ALL TO MEET THAT HALF OF THEM? WHAT IS WHAT ARE THEIR EXPECTATIONS? IT'S ENTIRELY UP TO THE BROWNFIELD BOARD.

IT YES. YOU WILL PROVIDE THE BROWNFIELD LOCAL BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WILL CREATE A WORK PLAN IDENTIFYING THE HOUSING WHATEVER SPECIFICATIONS OF HOUSING. IF A DEVELOPER IS PROPOSING A CERTAIN NUMBER OF UNITS, THEY WILL LIST THE NUMBER OF UNITS, THE INCOME LIMITATIONS THAT THEY ARE GOING TO MEET.

AND THAT WILL ALL BE IN THE PLAN. IF THE LOCAL BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY SAY THEY AGREE TO THIS PLAN, MISHDA WILL REQUIRE US TO HAVE A REDEVELOPMENT AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THAT PLAN.

IN THAT PLAN, IT SHOULD DETAIL HOW THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO LIMIT THE INCOME, MONITOR THE INCOMES, AND MANAGE THE PROGRAM THROUGH THE LIFE OF THE PLAN.

SO IF IT'S A 20 YEAR PLAN AND WE REQUIRE THAT THE INCOME LIMITATIONS ARE SPECIFIED FOR 20 YEARS, THE DEVELOPER WILL NEED TO PROVE AND CONFIRM IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT HOW THEY ARE GOING TO MEET THAT.

WHAT AGENCY ARE THEY GOING TO USE FOR THIRD PARTY CONSULTING? YOU KNOW, ANNUAL REPORTING, ALL OF THESE THINGS WILL BE REQUIRED.

BUT YES, DIRECTLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. THE SPECIFIC PARAMETERS OF THE PLAN ARE ADDRESSED AT THE LOCAL BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.

DOES MISHDA HAVE TO APPROVE THAT BROWNFIELD PLAN? YES. OKAY. SO THEY DO HAVE AND PROBABLY THE LIKELIHOOD OF THEIR APPROVING IT WILL BE BASED ON WHAT GOALS WE'RE HITTING.

THEY WILL NEVER APPROVE A BROWNFIELD PLAN THAT IS NOT FIRST APPROVED BY THE LOCAL AUTHORITY. LOCAL AUTHORITY HAS TO APPROVE THAT FIRST AND THEN WE SUBMIT TO MISHDA.

LAST QUESTION. DEVELOPER CURRENTLY HAS A TEN YEAR TAX FREEZE ON THIS PARCEL.

THAT'S LIKE TWO YEARS OLD NOW, WE AGREED TO KEEP THEIR TAXES AT A FLAT LEVEL I BELIEVE STARTING IN 23 FOR 10 YEARS.

IS THAT CORRECT? THERE IS AN ABATEMENT ON THE PROPERTY.

HOWEVER, IT HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED BECAUSE THE ABATEMENT ALSO INCLUDES THE REDEVELOPMENT.

SO AT THIS TIME, THE ABATEMENT. AND I DON'T WANT TO CONFUSE TOO MANY OF THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS TOO, ABOUT THE SPECIFICS OF HASLETT VILLAGE SQUARE .

TRYING TO JUST FOCUS ON HOUSING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING AS A PROGRAM TO DIRECTLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, SINCE THE ABATEMENT IS NOT COMPLETED WITHOUT THE MULTIFAMILY HOUSING UNITS ON IT, WE'RE STILL IN LIMBO AND WORKING THROUGH THAT ABATEMENT RIGHT NOW.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SO I'M SORRY, JUST TO CLARIFY YOU, THERE'S A BROWNFIELD PLAN THAT'S ACTIVE ON THE SITE.

[03:00:01]

THOSE TWO THINGS ARE SEPARATE, RIGHT? THEY ARE SEPARATE.

CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO WE'RE INTO YEAR TWO OF THE COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION.

HOW FAR INTO THE BROWNFIELD PLAN ARE WE? THEY HAVE NOT BEGUN CAPTURING OFF THE PROJECT YET FOR BROWNFIELD.

OKAY. OKAY. YEAH I AGREE WE DON'T NEED TO GET BOGGED DOWN NECESSARILY.

I DON'T THINK IT'S. YEAH. I WOULD NOT SUGGEST THAT'S GETTING INTO THE DETAILS OF THE HASLETT VILLAGE SQUARE.

I'M SORRY. SINCE IT'S THE REASON WHY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS, IT'S WORTH AT LEAST UNDERSTANDING THAT WE DO HAVE A MEMBER OF THEIR DEVELOPMENT TEAM HERE, IF THERE ARE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT HASLETT. BUT I DO WANT TO FOCUS ON THAT. UNDERSTOOD. YEAH. THANK YOU.

SO I APPRECIATE YOUR ADDRESSING THE THE WHAT HAPPENS IF THINGS GO WRONG, BECAUSE THAT WAS AN ISSUE THAT GAVE ME A LOT OF PAUSE AFTER OUR LAST DISCUSSION.

REALLY COLORED HOW WE HOW WE I THINK HOW I APPROACHED IT.

ANYWAY SO A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS HERE. FIRST OF ALL, CAN THE LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT SET THE RULES FOR THE BROWNFIELD AUTHORITY FOR WHAT WE WISH TO SEE THEM APPROVE OR NOT APPROVE? THE WAY YOU HAVE SET UP YOUR AUTHORITY, THE BROWNFIELD WILL NEED TO ADJUST THEIR POLICIES.

WOULD LIKE THE APPROVAL OF THE BOARD FOR THAT.

WE'VE TALKED WITH THE BFA MEMBERS BEFORE ABOUT THIS.

YES. OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, IF THE BOARD WANTS TO SEE 35% OR 50% OR WHATEVER, WE CAN FIND A WAY TO MAKE THAT THE WHAT, WHAT OUR LOCAL BROWNFIELD LOOKS FOR WHEN THEY DO THAT.

CORRECT. THAT'S WHY MISHDA DIDN'T CREATE THOSE PARAMETERS. IT'S EACH COMMUNITY'S AFFORDABILITY SHOULD LOOK DIFFERENT. YES. AND THAT'S HOORAY FOR MISHDA.

SO WITH OTHER TIF DISTRICTS THAT WE HAVE SET UP IN THE TOWNSHIP, WE HAVE HAD TO GO BACK AND BEG APPROVAL FROM A DOZEN OTHER TAXING JURISDICTIONS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY AND GREATER LANSING REGION.

WOULD WE HAVE TO DO THAT AGAIN WITH THE HOUSING TIF EACH TIME? AIRPORT AUTHORITY. AIRPORT AUTHORITY. LIBRARY.

YEAH. LCC, ALL OF THOSE. THE WAY THAT WE SET UP THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE CIA REQUESTING TAXING THE TAXING JURISDICTIONS, PARTICIPATION IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. BUT YOU DO WE DO.

IF WE WERE TO APPROVE A PLAN USING THE MISHDA HOUSING TIF, WE WOULD HAVE TO NOTIFY THE TAX JURISDICTIONS THAT THIS PLAN IS GOING TO BE DISCUSSED AT A PUBLIC HEARING. GIVING THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, BUT NOT NECESSARILY IMPACT.

IF THEY WISHED. IT IS A PART OF THEIR APPROVAL.

IT IS A PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS TO NOTIFY.

LET ME REPHRASE SO IF I MAY, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE ANY ABILITY TO OPT OUT.

OKAY. SO THIS JUST HAPPENS TO THEM AND THE ONLY OPPORTUNITY THEY HAVE TO SAY ANYTHING IS AT A PUBLIC HEARING.

THAT'S CORRECT. OR IN WRITING. RIGHT. SO THEY CAN CONVEY WHERE THEY STAND ON THAT, BUT THEY CANNOT OPT OUT UNDER THE BROWNFIELD ACT, SO. OKAY. UNLIKE THE OTHER ACTS THAT DIRECTOR CLARK ALLUDED TO BROWNFIELD DOESN'T HAVE A DISTRICT IN MERIDIAN, THE PROPERTY IS ELIGIBLE OFF SPECIFIC PARAMETERS OF THE CONDITION OF THE SITE OR DEVELOPMENT. BUT IT DOES IT DOES HAVE IMPACT TO THESE OTHER TAXABLE JURISDICTIONS.

SURE. SURE. THEY JUST CAN'T OFFICIALLY OPT OUT OF IT SO.

CORRECT. OKAY. YEAH. I'M MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS AS IT'S BEEN PRESENTED THIS EVENING THAN THAN BEFORE.

THE ONLY THING THAT I'M GOING TO QUESTION IS THE LENGTH OF TIME WE ALLOW OURSELVES TO BE CAPTURED AND EVERYONE TO BE CAPTURED WHEN AND THE PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABLE USE UNITS THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED OR REQUIRED IN EACH PROJECT.

I THINK THOSE TO ME, ARE THE TWO FACTORS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE SET PARAMETERS AROUND FOR OUR BROWNFIELD AUTHORITY, SO THAT WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT WE DON'T HAMSTRING THE TOWNSHIP FINANCES BY PUTTING OURSELVES INTO A BOX IN THAT WAY.

TRUSTEE TREZISE. YEAH, I HAD IF I UNDERSTAND THE WAY THIS WORKS, IF A DEVELOPER COMES IN AND WANTS TO BUILD A 200 UNIT APARTMENT, IF HE OR SHE SAYS I WILL SEEKING TIF FUNDING THROUGH THIS PROGRAM, FOR 50% OF THOSE, THEY CAN ONLY RECAPTURE 50% OF THE TAX INCREMENT. SO IF YOU'VE GOT A $400,000 EXPECTED GROWTH, THEY WOULDN'T GET $400,000 BACK THEY WOULD ONLY GET $200,000.

THE CALCULATION IS BASED OFF OF A RENT LOSS CALCULATION.

SO THEY'RE GOING TO PROVE WHAT IS THE MARKET RATE FOR THAT UNIT.

AND THEN WHAT IS THE SUBSIDIZED RATE THAT THEY ARE GOING TO OFFER FOR THAT UNIT.

[03:05:04]

I ALSO HAD LAST YEAR WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS, WHAT RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LESSOR, THE DEVELOPER, TO ASSURE THAT APPLICANTS FOR THESE 30 RENT SUBSIDIZED HOMES QUALIFY IN ANY WAY, AND THAT THEY MAINTAIN THAT QUALIFICATION THROUGHOUT WHATEVER THE PERIOD OF THE TIF IS? IT'S A REQUIREMENT OF MISHDA TO THAT FOR THAT INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT? OKAY. BECAUSE THAT WASN'T CLEAR A YEAR AGO WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS.

CORRECT. AND IT LOOKED LIKE THEY COULD RENT IT TO SOMEONE AT A LOW INCOME BASIS FOR SIX MONTHS, AND THEN SOMEONE WITH HIGH INCOME COULD COME AND CONTINUE AT THAT LOWER RATE.

BUT THIS THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MONITOR THEIR CLIENTS.

THEY THEY WILL. OKAY. THEY WILL. THAT WAS ONE OF MY CONCERNS A YEAR AGO.

AND I'M GLAD TO SEE IT'S BEEN ADDRESSED BY MISHDA.

YES. IF I COULD BUILD OFF OF THAT WHAT YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY A THE MISHDA BROWNFIELD HOUSING TIF IS IN A IS IN PLACE FOR 10 YEARS, AND A NUMBER OF PEOPLE MOVE IN TO THESE APARTMENTS AT THE SUBSIDIZED RATE.

WHAT HAPPENS IN YEAR 11? THAT WILL BE UP TO THE TOWNSHIP.

SO I WILL JUST READ YOU AN EXCERPT VERY SPECIFICALLY FROM MISHDAS FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS.

MISHDA WILL NOT REQUIRE A DEED RESTRICTION OR AN AFFORDABILITY AGREEMENT TO BE RECORDED AGAINST THE PROPERTY.

HOWEVER, MISHDA WILL RECORD A NOTICE OF THE PUBLIC RECORD THAT REFERENCES THE REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT OR REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE MUNICIPALITY, LOCAL BRA, THE OWNER OR SLASH DEVELOPER OF THE PROPERTY, AND STIPULATES PRICE AND INCOME MONITORING FOR RESIDENTIAL UNITS.

THAT AGREEMENT WILL BE MEMORIALIZED IN PRICE INCOME RESTRICTIONS IN THEIR THROUGH THEIR DURATION.

THE LOCAL MUNICIPALITY/BRA WILL HAVE AFFORDABLE REQUIREMENTS AND VARIOUS MEANS OF ENFORCING THOSE, AND MISHDA HAS SAID THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE SPECIFICS OF THE INCOMES THAT ARE GOING TO BE SUPPORTED, HOW THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO TRACK THOSE INCOMES, AND WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE WHERE THE DEVELOPER WILL DEED RESTRICT THE PROPERTY FOR THAT TERM. SO IT HAS TO BE IN THE SO IN THE REIMBURSEMENT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, ESSENTIALLY THE DEVELOPER IS SAYING WE'RE GOING TO DEED RESTRICT THESE PROPERTIES FOR THIS TERM. I WOULD IMAGINE OUR BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WOULD NOT ALLOW A PLAN THAT DOES NOT DEED RESTRICT FOR THE DURATION OF THE REIMBURSEMENT, RIGHT? SO IF IT'S A 20 YEAR PLAN, MORE THAN LIKELY IT WOULD BE A 20 YEAR DEED RESTRICTION, WHICH IS A VERY LONG TIME FOR A PROPERTY TO STAY AT 120% INCOME LEVEL RIGHT NOW.

THAT BEING SAID, YOUR 2021, THERE ARE NO STIPULATIONS FOR WHAT HAPPENS AFTER THAT, RIGHT? IT IS THE DEVELOPER THAT ACCRUES THE BENEFIT, NOT THE TENANT.

SO THE TENANT RECEIVES THE BENEFIT AS THE ANCILLARY IS A ONE TIME OR THROUGH THE LIFE OF THEM RENTING, THE ACCRUED BENEFIT IS TO THE DEVELOPER. I SUPPOSE IF WE'RE JOTTING DOWN THINGS THAT I'D LIKE TO FIND A WAY INTO THEIR ANNUAL NOTICE REQUIREMENT TO THE TENANTS, WE'RE SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT HOW MUCH TIME REMAINS ON ON THAT SO THE SUBSIDY, WOULD BE WOULD BE HELPFUL SO THAT AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR, IF THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, REQUIRED TO PROVIDE NOTICE ON WHAT THEIR RENT IS FOR NEXT YEAR, INCLUDE ON THEIR BY THE WAY, YOU KNOW, THERE'S EIGHT YEARS LEFT AND THAT GIVES EVERYONE AT LEAST A ONCE A YEAR HIT OF LIKE THAT'S GOING TO RUN OUT.

I WOULD IMAGINE EACH UNIT WOULD HAVE TO CONTINUE TO HAVE ANNUAL MONITORING, BECAUSE YOU'D WANT TO KNOW THAT THE INDIVIDUALS IN THAT UNIT MEET THE INCOME LEVELS.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO BE CHECKING EVERY UNIT? SURE.

NO I UNDERSTAND. I'M SAYING THAT'S. YEP. AS A PART OF THE DUE DILIGENCE ON THE INCOME LEVELS, I'M SAYING WE WANT THE OTHER WAY TOO, WHERE THEY'RE GETTING PROACTIVE NOTICE ABOUT THE PRICE OF THEIR HOUSE, THE PRICE OF THEIR, YOU KNOW, RENT. RENT. YEP.

THE HOUSE, THE HOUSE, THE RENT. THE RENT. RIGHT.

YEAH. TRUSTEE LENTZ. I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS HERE.

FIRST, JUST TELL ME IF I'M MISUNDERSTANDING THIS, BUT.

OR LET ME REPHRASE THAT. WOULD THE END OF THE AGREEMENT EVENTUALLY COMING DOWN INCENTIVIZE FOR ANY REASON A DEVELOPER TO PUT UP A ROUGH SHOT FOR 20 YEARS AND THEN NOT REALLY REPAIR ANYTHING FOR THE LAST 5 AND THEN ON THAT 21ST YEAR, IMPROVE EVERYTHING IN EVERY WAY AND QUADRUPLE THE RENT.

OR ARE THERE BOUNDARIES IN PLACE BY MISHDA TO ENSURE THAT IN 20, 40, 15 YEARS AND THIS IS STILL A REASONABLE PLACE TO EXPECT TO CALL HOME. SO I THINK YOU'RE ASKING WHAT HAPPENS IF THE DEVELOPER DOES NOT CONSTRUCT THE PROJECT? NO. SO IF THEY DO CONSTRUCT THE PROJECT, IS ARE THERE IS THERE A FRAMEWORK IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT THAT DEVELOPER CONTINUES TO

[03:10:05]

IT'S IN LINE WITH THE CHARACTER OF NORMAL HOUSING IN THE AREA.

I'M SORRY. I'M KIND OF DRAWING A BLANK. OKAY. SO I THINK I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT THE ESTHETICS OF SUBSIDIZED HOUSES BASED OFF SUBSTANDARD HOUSING.

YES. AND I THINK YOU MEAN WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IF THOSE WERE PART OF THIS.

NO. I'M IMAGINING AN APARTMENT THAT IS POORLY MAINTAINED, AND NOT THAT I'M ACCUSING ANYONE OF DOING SO, BUT POORLY MAINTAINED BECAUSE THERE IS AN INCENTIVE TO INCREASE THE CURB APPEAL, CHANGE THE PIPES, WINDOWS, THINGS LIKE THAT. OR ARE THOSE INCENTIVES IN PLACE VIA THIS TIF FINANCING SO THAT ON THE PROPERTY OWNERS AND IT IS IN EVERY WAY MAKES SENSE FOR THEM TO CONTINUE TO IMPROVE AND MAKE THESE NICE HOMES.

SURE. I THINK WITH A MULTIFAMILY BUILDING, I THINK REALLY YOUR QUESTION IS HOW DO WE MAINTAIN THIS? THE TOWNSHIP'S GOT A GREAT CODE OF ORDINANCES, AND WE ARE VERY GOOD AT MAKING SURE ANY PROPERTY OWNERS UNDERSTAND THE WAY THAT THE THE BUILDING OR THE FEEL OF IT. SO THAT'S THE MULTIFAMILY.

SO IT IS ON THE TOWNSHIP THEN TO ADMINISTER TYPICAL BUILDING CODES OTHER THAN ANYTHING AUXILIARY.

OKAY. CORRECT. AND ANY OTHER WAY. THE SINGLE FAMILY.

ANY SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT WOULD BE BUILT UNDER THIS PROGRAM, THE END USER WOULD BE THE OWNER.

AND THEN AGAIN, TOWNSHIP ORDINANCES WOULD BE APPLICABLE TO HOW YOU MAINTAIN YOUR HOME.

GOTCHA. AND MY SECOND QUESTION IS, YOU KNOW, CONSIDERING WHAT YOU'VE ADDRESSED.

AND THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THE POINT ON, YOU KNOW, TOWNSHIP NOT BEING ON THE HOOK FOR SHORTFALL, YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE OF POTENTIALLY HOLDING BACK LAND THAT YOU MIGHT WANT TO DEVELOP FOR SOME OTHER PROJECT OR JUST NOT WANTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN YOUR COMMUNITY. IS THERE ANY OTHER REASON WHY A COMMUNITY WOULDN'T WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS BROWNFIELD TIF, OR AM I JUST NOT SEEING SOMETHING BECAUSE IT FEELS LIKE A NO BRAINER IF YOU ARE TRYING TO BUILD HOUSING AND DON'T HAVE ANYTHING BIG AND AMAZING LINED UP THAT WOULD OTHERWISE TAKE THAT SPOT.

AN EXCELLENT QUESTION. I THINK COMMUNITIES THAT ARE SMALLER MIGHT FIND, ESPECIALLY IF THEY DO NOT HAVE AN EXISTING BROWNFIELD AUTHORITY AT THE LOCAL LEVEL, MAY FIND PARTICIPATING IN THIS PROGRAM A LITTLE CHALLENGING, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT ANY COMMUNITY WOULD NECESSARILY SAY NO.

OKAY. THANK YOU. AND IF I COULD JUST ADD SOME CONTEXT TO THOSE LAST TWO QUESTIONS.

YOU KNOW, I THINK ON THIS LAST ONE, TYPICALLY WE HAVEN'T HAD TO SUBSIDIZE HOUSING, YOU KNOW, IN MICHIGAN OTHER THAN TRULY AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

BUT WE'VE SEEN THE ECONOMIC PRESSURES MOVE ALONG THAT SPECTRUM OF INCOME QUALIFICATION SO NOW WE HAVE THIS MISSING MIDDLE INCOME AREA, THIS 80 TO 120 THAT PEOPLE CANNOT AFFORD TO BUY HOMES.

THE RENT RATES ARE SUCH THAT THEY'RE HAVING A HARD TIME AFFORDING EVEN RENTALS.

AND THEN GETTING BACK TO THE ISSUE ABOUT WHEN THE PLAN RUNS OUT.

I MEAN, THIS IS THAT'S SORT OF A LARGE ISSUE FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT.

YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT A LOT OF HUD FINANCE MULTIFAMILY PROJECTS.

WHEN THE 30 OR 40 YEAR TERMS OF THOSE LOANS THAT FINANCING ENDED, WE'VE SEEN A LOT OF PROJECTS ACROSS THE COUNTRY FLIP TO MARKET RATE BECAUSE MARKET RATE THEN BECOMES SO MUCH MORE PROFITABLE.

SO THERE'S ALWAYS THAT ELEMENT OF RISK. D IRECTOR CLARK ADDRESSED THE MAINTENANCE ISSUE IS ON US TO ENFORCE, BUT THERE IS POTENTIALLY AN ECONOMIC INCENTIVE 20 YEARS OR 15 YEARS OR WHENEVER THAT TIMELINE RUNS OUT ON THE TIF TO TURN IT TO MARKET RATE.

SO IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT THE TOWNSHIP WOULD WANT TO DO THERE, THEN YOU MIGHT WANT TO THINK ABOUT LONGER VERSUS A SHORTER TIF.

BUT THEN IT'S THAT WHOLE GIVE AND TAKE OF, WELL, THEN WE'RE GIVING UP MORE TAX REVENUE, WHICH IS PROBLEMATIC ON THAT SIDE TO THE SUPERVISORS EARLIER POINT. BUT OUT OF ALL THIS, I THINK IF THERE IS A SENSE FROM THE BOARD ABOUT DURATION, WHAT IS COMFORTABLE BECAUSE 30 YEARS IS THE MAX.

WE HAVE A TEN YEAR PLAN TODAY. I THINK THE DEVELOPERS GO, YOU KNOW, THEY WANT TO GET NEAR THE MAX, POTENTIALLY, BUT THAT MIGHT NOT BE A TIMELINE.

AND THEN THAT PERCENTAGE OF UNITS IS AGAIN TOTALLY DISCRETIONARY, AS DIRECTOR CLARK INDICATED.

BUT THINKING ABOUT WHAT SEEMS REASONABLE THERE.

AND OF COURSE, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE DEVELOPER WILL DECIDE WHETHER THAT ECONOMIC PUZZLE FITS BASED ON THE PARAMETERS THAT WE CREATE.

[03:15:01]

THEY'LL USE A SIMILAR PROCESS HERE, REQUIRING THAT BUT SECTION 42, WHICH IS THE TAX CREDIT PROPERTIES, AREN'T SECTION 8 EITHER.

THERE'S NO TENANT SUBSIDY. IT'S ALL ON THE PROPERTY.

BUT THEY STILL REQUIRE THE ELIGIBLE TENANTS TO GO THROUGH AN ANNUAL INCOME CERTIFICATION.

THEY WOULD DO A SIMILAR THING HERE. IS THERE A MISHDA DUTY TO DO THAT, OR DID YOU SAY THE DEVELOPER? THE DEVELOPER NEEDS TO DETAIL HOW THAT WILL HAPPEN.

MAYBE THEY WERE ASKED MISHDA TO PROVIDE THAT.

YOU KNOW, MAYBE THEY HIRE A DIFFERENT THIRD PARTY THAT HAS TO BE DETAILED HOW THEY'RE GOING TO DO THAT.

OKAY I UNDERSTAND. SO SAY THAT WE RUN INTO A CIRCUMSTANCE WHERE ONE PARTY DEVELOPS THE PARCEL AND ANOTHER PARTY AND THEN SELLS IT, OR THEN TRANSFERS IT, OR THEN SOMEONE ELSE COMES IN AND TAKES OVER.

THEY ARE THEY ARE SUBJECT TO ALL THE SAME RESTRICTIONS THAT THE DEVELOPER ENTERED INTO AS A WAY TO GET THE TIF.

YES. PROPERTIES THAT HAVE APPROVED BROWNFIELD PLANS WILL THEN ASSIGN OR BASICALLY ASSIGN OVER THAT PLAN TO THE NEW DEVELOPER, AND THEN YES, THE NEW DEVELOPER WILL BE HELD TO THAT SAME STIPULATION.

OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THE NEW DEVELOPER REQUIRED TO ACCEPT THAT, OR CAN THAT DEVELOPER OR OWNERS SAY, I DON'T WANT TO PARTICIPATE NOW AND I WANT TO PUT EVERYTHING AT MARKET RATE.

SO WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST ON BROWNFIELD, NOT THE TOWNSHIP, BUT OTHER COMMUNITIES HAVE DONE, IS THEY'VE REQUIRED IN THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT TO MAKE THAT A REQUIREMENT OF ANY TRANSFER OR SALE.

THERE ARE SOME TIMES ON COMMERCIAL ONLY TYPE PROJECTS WHERE COMMUNITIES HAVE ALSO DONE THE OPPOSITE, WHERE THEY SAID, LOOK, IF YOU SELL THIS, YOU CAN GET OUT FROM THE PLAN REQUIREMENTS, BUT THEN YOU'RE ALSO NO LONGER GETTING THE TIF REIMBURSEMENT.

SO THEY GIVE UP A VALUABLE FINANCIAL ASSET, BUT YOU CAN'T REQUIRE THAT IN THE REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT.

OKAY. I'M JUST AFRAID IF SOMEONE IN THAT SCENARIO DECIDING I'M GOING TO MAKE THIS ALL MARKET RATE AND THE PEOPLE THAT WE FAIR ENOUGH SUPPORT THE TIF FOR ARE OUT IN THE COLD. SO I FEEL VERY, VERY INSPIRED BY MISHDA SUPPORTING DEED RESTRICTIONS ON THE PROPERTY. THAT IS AN INTERESTING. THAT THAT SAYS A LOT TO ME.

IT SAYS THAT THEY'VE ALSO THOUGHT ABOUT DIFFERENT CONDITIONS THAT MAY HAPPEN IF DIFFERENT OWNERS CHANGE.

AND AS WE'VE SEEN WITH THE AMERICAN HOUSE MERIDIAN PROJECT THAT WAS ORIGINALLY A PINE VILLAGE BROWNFIELD PLAN, THE PLANS ARE SIGNED, WE CLEAN IT UP AND WE KEEP THE PROJECT MOVING FORWARD.

OKAY. TRUSTEE WILSON. CAN A DEVELOPER LAYER MULTIPLE INCENTIVE PROGRAMS? SAY WE PUT THIS PROGRAM IN PLACE AND HAVE IT AVAILABLE AT THE LOCAL LEVEL.

CAN THEY LAYER ON SOMETHING LIKE THE COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION ACT? YES. OKAY. IS THERE SOME LIMIT TO HOW MANY TOOLS THEY CAN USE? I HAVE NOT SEEN A LIMIT AT THE STATE LEVEL FOR HOW MANY TOOLS A DEVELOPER CAN USE TO FINANCE.

THANK YOU. HOW DOES THAT FUNCTIONALLY WORK? BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THIS COMMERCIAL REHABILITATION IS, AT ITS CORE, A TIF AS WELL, IS IT NOT? SO HOW YOU'VE CAPTURED YOU'VE YOU KNOW, THEY'RE CAPTURING THE TAXES ALREADY UNDER THAT PLAN.

HOW CAN THEY ALSO DO THIS? SO THE CRA WOULD START.

IT'S A 10 YEAR ABATEMENT AND IT'S APPLIED ONLY TO THE COMMERCIAL.

AND AT THE SAME TIME, A SEPARATED PARCEL IS JUST CAPTURING AND KEEPING TRACK OF THE MONEY FOR THE LAND IMPROVEMENTS ON THE BROWNFIELD SIDE.

ONCE THE CRA FINISHES AT ITS 10TH YEAR, THE BROWNFIELD PICKS UP THE REST OF THE CAPTURE AND CONTINUES FORWARD FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE YEARS.

THAT IS HOW THE PLAN IS DESIGNED RIGHT NOW. SO WE HAVE A 10 YEAR CRA.

AS THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE MADE, THEY SAVE THE MONEY AND AS THE IMPROVEMENTS ARE MADE TO THE LAND, THAT VALUE INCREASES. AT THE 11TH YEAR WE WOULD HAVE PAID OFF THE BROWNFIELD PROBABLY COMPLETELY BY THEN, BROWNFIELD PLAN WOULD HAVE BEEN DONE. AND ANY REMAINING REIMBURSEMENT TO THE DEVELOPER WOULD CONTINUE FOR 20 YEARS.

THAT WAS THAT IS IN THE CURRENT PLAN AS APPROVED.

AND THAT'S A LOCAL AND STATE PLAN. SO WE HAVE SET DOLLARS APPROVED THROUGH THE MSF FOR HASLETT VILLAGE SQUARE RIGHT NOW WITH OUR LOCAL ON THAT PROPERTY.

GOT IT. OKAY. OKAY. YEAH. YOU CAN'T GIVE THE INSTRUMENTS AWAY MORE THAN THE TOTAL TAX INCREASE.

BUT IT DOES EXTEND THE YEARS WITHOUT THE INCREASE.

SO YOU NEED TO WEIGH THOSE AND FIGURE OUT WHERE THE BREAK EVEN POINT.

I'M NOT SURE THAT'S THE CORRECT TERM, BUT WHERE IT DOESN'T HANDICAP THE TOWNSHIP FOREVER FOR A SINGLE DEVELOPMENT.

YEAH, I THINK IT MAY ALSO HELP THE BOARD WHEN OR IF YOU CONSIDER A PROPOSAL FROM HASLETT VILLAGE SQUARE USING SET TO

[03:20:01]

THAT MAY HELP TO EASE YOUR CONSIDERATION, AND A VERY COMPLICATED SPREADSHEET THAT SHOWS YOU HOW THIS IS ALL LAID OUT.

YEAH, I THINK THAT WOULD NOT THAT WE'RE GETTING IN THE WEEDS ABOUT THIS ONE PARTICULAR PROPOSAL, BUT IT WOULD HELP TO CONTEXTUALIZE THE, THE ABSTRACTNESS OF OF THIS PROCESS .

BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT A SIMPLE QUESTION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT THERE'S A BROWNFIELD, THERE'S A CRA. THERE COULD ADDITIONALLY BE NOW THIS NEW BROWNFIELD HOUSING TIF.

YOU KNOW, NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOW MANY YEARS ARE WE LOOKING AT OF THAT INCREMENT NOT BEING CAPTURED BY THE BY THE TOWNSHIP.

AND YOU KNOW, WHEN WE AGREED TO THE FIRST TWO, WE WEREN'T THINKING ABOUT THERE BEING A THIRD ONE.

SO I WOULDN'T THINK OF IT NECESSARILY AS THREE.

THE MSF APPROVED AND LOCAL APPROVED BROWNFIELD WOULD PROBABLY BE TERMINATED, AND WE WOULD REINVIGORATE WITH A NEW PLAN COMBINATION.

EVEN STILL, IT'S WE GOT TO LOOK AT IT WITH EYES WIDE OPEN ABOUT THE DURATION OF TIME THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE TO TRUSTEE LENTZ QUESTION ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHY WOULDN'T EVERY COMMUNITY DO THIS? IT'S BECAUSE SOME COMMUNITIES CAN'T AFFORD TO NOT CAPTURE THE GROWTH IF GROWTH OCCURS.

AND BECAUSE YOU KNOW THAT TAX INCREMENTAL GROWTH PAYS FOR THE SERVICES OF THE NEW THINGS THAT ARE THERE.

AND SO YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING WE'RE NOT GOING TO CAPTURE THE VALUE OF THAT INCREASE FOR A LONG TIME, AND THAT THAT COULD BE PROBLEMATIC. AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY SOMEONE MIGHT BE TREPIDATIOUS ABOUT SETTING UP A POLICY LIKE THIS.

BUT ALSO, WE WANT THERE TO BE DEVELOPMENT IN THIS PARCEL.

AND HOW MUCH ARE WE WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, TO WANT THAT? YEAH. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT POINT. THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

AND I THINK THAT IF I'M UNDERSTANDING CORRECTLY, THAT WOULD EXPLAIN WHY SOME OF THOSE OTHER TAXING AUTHORITIES LIKE THE AIRPORT MIGHT COME DURING PUBLIC COMMENT IF YOU WERE TRYING TO REDEVELOP 10,000 UNITS OF HOUSING AND THEY AREN'T GETTING THAT, THEY WOULD ALSO THEN HAVE THAT ISSUE. SO I UNDERSTAND.

I CAN THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION.

SEEMS LIKE WE'VE GOT TENTATIVE INTEREST IN, IN PURSUING AND LOOKING INTO THIS FURTHER AND MAYBE PURSUING THIS A LITTLE BIT FURTHER ON.

SO WE'LL SEE YOU BACK SOON PERHAPS. WOULD YOU PREFER STAFF TO ADDRESS HOUSING TIF POLICY FIRST, OR WOULD YOU PREFER STAFF TO BRING FORWARD A PROPOSAL FROM HASLETT VILLAGE SQUARE FIRST? I THINK WE CAN AGREE TO THE POLICY BEFORE WE HAVE TO AGREE TO THE HASLETT VILLAGE.

I MEAN, EITHER WAY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DO HASLETT SECOND TO THE POLICY, SO WE MIGHT AS WELL LOOK AT THE POLICY FIRST, AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE AT A LATER TIME.

SO BROWNFIELD AUTHORITY WILL MEET NEXT WEEK. WE'LL TAKE YOUR COMMENTS TO THEM AND BRING BACK SOMETHING HOPEFULLY WITHIN LESS THAN 30 DAYS OR SO.

OKAY. VERY GOOD. WE'LL SEE YOU IN A LITTLE BIT.

ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 14 COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC I DO HAVE A NUMBER OF NEW GREEN CARDS.

[14. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC]

SAME RULES APPLY AS BEFORE, SO I WON'T GO THROUGH THAT WHOLE SPIEL AGAIN.

KRISTINA KLOC, YOU ARE FIRST AND PEGGY ANDERSON, YOU ARE SECOND.

KRISTINA KLOC, 4538 SENECA. I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS.

I WANTED TO ADD AN ADDRESS. THE FIRST BEING THAT THE NEIGHBORS ARE NOT AGAINST DEVELOPMENT WE ARE AGAINST THE DENSITY OF THE DEVELOPMENT AS IT STANDS BEFORE YOU.

AND I WANTED TO POINT OUT A COUPLE OF OTHER AREAS OF THE MASTER PLAN WHERE THIS REZONING WOULD CONFLICT.

THE FIRST BEING A GOAL OF PRESERVING THE CHARACTER OF EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS.

THIS DOES NOT DO THAT. IT IS ONLY MULTIFAMILY ON ONE SIDE OF FOUR.

AND NUMBER TWO, SENECA AND SHAKER, PARALLEL, DOBIE AND HAMILTON I'M NOT SURE HOW FAMILIAR YOU ARE WITH THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT THERE'S NO RIGHT HAND TURNED ON HAMILTON ONTO DOBIE, SO TRAFFIC FREQUENTLY BACKS UP THERE AND CUTS THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

SENECA TO SHAKER BACK OUT ONTO DOBIE. SO THAT HASN'T BEEN ADDRESSED.

AND I'M SURE IT WILL IT WILL INCREASE TREMENDOUSLY.

WE DON'T HAVE SIDEWALKS. WE DON'T HAVE STREET LIGHTS.

AND IT IS A DANGER TO THE RESIDENTS. PEOPLE DO JUST FLY THROUGH THERE TO CUT THROUGH BECAUSE THEY'RE IN A HURRY.

IF THEY CAN'T WAIT TO TURN RIGHT AT A LIGHT, THEY'RE CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO OBEY THE SPEED LIMIT GOING DOWN OUR STREET.

SO THE RISK TO RESIDENTS FROM THAT IS GREAT. THE OTHER THING IS THE TRAFFIC STUDY OR THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS.

I GUESS IT WAS NOT A FULL TRAFFIC STUDY. ASSUMED THAT THERE ARE ALREADY TEN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES THERE.

[03:25:02]

WHICH DOESN'T SEEM REASONABLE, GIVEN THAT THE FACT THAT THERE ARE NO LIMITS ON THE NUMBER OF UNRELATED PEOPLE WHO CAN LIVE TOGETHER IN THE TOWNSHIP TO MY UNDERSTANDING.

SO THE TRAFFIC IMPACT WILL BE GREATER THAN INDICATED.

ON THE SECOND MASTER PLAN GOAL IS TO INCREASE THE AFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING.

THE AVERAGE RENT, ACCORDING TO U.S. CENSUS DATA FOR MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP, IS $1,149.

RENT THAT STARTS AT $2,500 AND GOES UP FROM THERE CERTAINLY DOES NOT SEEM TO MEET THAT CRITERIA.

IT'S THE RENT WILL BE 2 TO 3 TIMES THAT, WHICH TO ME IS NOT THE MISSING MIDDLE.

PRESERVING GREEN SPACE. THIS DOESN'T DO THAT.

WHICH THEN LEADS TO THE WHOLE DRAINAGE ISSUE.

WHENEVER YOU REPLACE THREE ACRES OF WOODS WITH BUILDINGS, YOU'RE OBVIOUSLY GOING TO NOT ALTER THE NATURAL HABITAT AND ECOSYSTEM, AND THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT THE DRAINAGE. WE ARE THE HOUSE THAT SITS AT THE VERY END OF SENECA.

SENECA DRAINS DOWNWARD. WE LIVED AT THAT IN THAT HOUSE FOR 25 YEARS.

THAT DRAIN WORKS PERFECTLY. WE HAVE NEVER HAD A DROP OF WATER IN OUR BASEMENT IN 25 YEARS.

SO I DO WANT THAT TO BE A MATTER OF PUBLIC RECORD, BECAUSE IF SUDDENLY THIS REZONING OCCURS AND I HAVE A DRAINAGE ISSUE, IT WILL BE A DIRECT RESULT OF THIS REZONING. IT WILL NOT BE MY ISSUE.

AND I DON'T WANT TO BE PART OF ANOTHER DANIELS DRAIN ISSUE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. PEGGY ANDERSON AND THEN DAVID KLOC.

PEGGY ANDERSON, 4504 SENECA DRIVE. MY FIRST ONE IS INDEED THE DRAIN ISSUE.

I DO NOT WANT TO BE FOREST HILLS 2.0. AND ON THAT ISSUE WHERE WE TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT YOU'VE NEVER BEEN ON SENECA AND YOU COME IN FROM EITHER WAY, AND THERE'S THAT REALLY LOW POINT. I WAS OUT SHOVELING MY DRIVEWAY TEN DAYS AGO, ABOUT NOON, PAT LINDEMANN GOES BY WITH ANOTHER STAFF MEMBER IN HIS LITTLE PICKUP TRUCK.

I DON'T KNOW WHO CLUED HIM, BUT HE WENT DOWN TO THAT LOW SPOT WHERE ONEIDA AND SENECA DO THE LITTLE V.

THEY GOT OUT OF THEIR TRUCK WITH TOOLS AND BANGED AND BANGED AND BANGED ON THE MANHOLE COVER THAT WAS THERE WITH NO SUCCESS.

THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR. THEY WENT UP NORTHBURGH'S DRIVEWAY RIGHT THERE, KICKED SNOW AROUND, COULDN'T FIND WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING FOR.

WENT UP THE DRIVEWAY ON THE OTHER SIDE. THEN THEY WALKED A LITTLE BIT DOWN ONEIDA KICKING SNOW AND LOOKING AT THE STREET.

AND THEY NEVER DID FIND THE DRAINS WHICH ARE OUT IN THE GRASS.

AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE THEY WERE LOOKING FOR, BUT THEY LOOKED AND LOOKED AND LOOKED AND FINALLY GAVE UP AND LEFT.

SO WE'RE ALREADY THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SOMEHOW ON PAT LINDEMANN'S DRAIN NOTICE AND YOU START DRAINING MORE WATER OFF THAT HARD SCAPE RIGHT DOWN WHERE THOSE DRAINS ARE. AND WE WILL BE FOREST HILLS 2.0 AND IT'S GOING TO BE MY TAX PROBLEM.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE SECOND ONE WOULD BE EXACTLY WHAT KRIS SAID ABOUT TRAFFIC.

IF YOU'VE NEVER AGAIN BEEN DOWN SENECA TWO LANE, VERY NARROW, NO CURB, NO STREET LIGHTS.

IF YOU PARK ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET, YOU HAVE TO KNOCK ON DOORS BECAUSE THERE'S ONE PARKING SPOT AND ONE DRIVING SPOT.

IF ANYBODY PARKS ON THE STREET, IT'S VERY, VERY NARROW.

I AM THE FIRST HOUSE AS YOU GO. IF YOU COME DOWN WHERE YOU DO THIS, CUT THROUGH AND THEY CUT THROUGH.

WE JUST HAD A POLITE CONVERSATION ABOUT MERIDIAN TOWNSHIP HELPING US OUT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

ANYTIME YOU DO ANYTHING ON DOBIE ROAD WHERE THEY HAVE TO PUT UP THE NO.

THROUGH TRAFFIC SIGNS ON SENECA AND SHAKER, I'VE CALLED, THEY'VE COME AND BABYSAT BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE RACING DOWN AROUND THE NO THROUGH TRAFFIC SIGN. WE'VE HAD THE SPEED LIMIT SIGNS PUT UP ON SENECA, BUT I'M THE FIRST HOUSE WHERE YOU DO THE FIRST FOUR HOUSES ON OFF SHAKER ON SENECA, AND THEY'RE THE NEW NEIGHBORHOOD WITH CURB AND STREET LIGHTS, AND THEN THE WHOLE REST OF THE STREET IS OUR 1950S-60S NEIGHBORHOOD.

I'M THE FIRST ONE. I'VE HAD MY MAILBOX TAKEN OUT DOZENS OF TIMES.

I HAD MY MAILBOX HIT IN DECEMBER. I HAD IT HIT AGAIN IN JANUARY.

IT IS COVERED IN REFLECTOR TAPE, BUT I'M THE FIRST NARROW STREET HOUSE.

YOU'RE PUTTING MORE TRAFFIC ON A STREET WHERE SOMEBODY'S GOING TO HIT THE KID ON THE BIKE, THE MOTHER WITH THE STROLLER, THE OLDER PERSON WALKING WITH THEIR WALKING STICKS.

IF YOU'RE TAKING OUT MY REFLECTORIZED MAILBOX ON A REGULAR BASIS, YOU DON'T LIVE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU'RE CUTTING THROUGH MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND DID THAT.

SO AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO BE FOREST HILLS 2.0 AND HAVE THAT TAX BENEFIT.

THANKS VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, DAVID KLOC AND THEN JERRY FEDEWA.

I'LL BE BRIEF. DAVE KLOC 4538 SENECA DRIVE. AND AGAIN, WE AREN'T AGAINST THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY.

[03:30:04]

AND AGAIN, THAT DETENTION POND IS AT THE LOWEST POINT ON SENECA.

SO AGAIN, I KEEP BRINGING UP THE DANIELS DRAIN 2.0.

BUT FROM A PREVIOUS SITE THAT'S TEN FEET FROM OUR BACKYARDS.

SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JERRY FEDEWA AND THEN GREG FEDEWA.

THANK YOU. BOARD MEMBERS, I WILL BE QUICK. I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LONG NIGHT WHAT I JUST WANTED TO SAY IS, IS THAT THIS PROJECT STARTED OUT AS 60 UNITS AND WE WORKED TO GET IT REDUCED DOWN TO 32.

OKAY. AND AS YOU REDUCE THE NUMBER OF UNITS, YOU HAVE TO INCREASE THE PRICE.

AND THAT IS ABOUT WHERE OUR BREAKING POINT IS, IS ABOUT 32 UNITS AND IT'S 113FT OFF THE THE BUILDING IS 130FT OFF THE BACK PROPERTY LINE. BUT ALL THE DRAINAGE DISCUSSION, EVERY PLACE WHERE THERE IS BLACKTOP, THERE ARE DRAINS THAT DRAIN TO THESE CATCH BASINS.

AND SO ALL THE WATER THAT'S ON THE BLACKTOP IS CAPTURED, RUNS TO THE DETENTION AND RUNS OUT TO THE STREET.

ALL OF IT, 100% OF IT. THERE'S NONE OF IT. EVEN IF THE EVEN IF THE EVEN IF THAT THE DETENTION IS TEN FEET FROM THE PROPERTY, WHICH A LOT OF THEM THERE ARE THAT CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINES, BUT THEY'RE SO HIGH UP, AND THEN THERE'S A DRAIN INSIDE IT. AND WHEN THAT DRAIN FILLS UP, IT POURS INTO THAT CATCH BASIN INSIDE DETENTION, AND IT RUNS TO OUT TO THE STREET. SO IF ANYTHING, WE'RE PROBABLY IMPROVING THE DRAINAGE BECAUSE THE DRAINAGE FROM OUR PROPERTY IS GOING INTO THE CATCH BASINS RUNNING TO THE STREET.

SO TWO POINTS I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE. IF YOU'RE TRYING TO REDUCE OUR NUMBER OF UNITS BELOW 32, IT BECOMES VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO RUN, OPERATE OR BUILD THE MULTIFAMILY PROJECT.

SECONDLY, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING SINGLE FAMILY THERE AND IT'S 312FT WIDE LOT IN THIS CATEGORY IS 180FT DEEP, PUBLIC ROAD IS 66FT WIDE.

THERE'S ONLY ROOM FOR HOUSES ON ONE SIDE OF THE STREET.

THEN YOU HAD IF IF YOU ARE RUNNING 90 FOOT OF FRONTAGE AND IT'S 600FT.

WELL, YOU HAVE TO BE ABLE TO TURN AROUND AT THE END.

SO IT'S PROBABLY MAYBE 5 SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES.

SO AS YOU PUSH OUR DENSITY DOWNWARD TO LESS UNITS, IT MAKES IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR US TO DEVELOP THE PARCEL. SO PLEASE, WE WILL PUT FENCING UP.

WE'LL PUT MORE TREES UP, WHATEVER THAT WE NEED TO DO TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEIGHBORS.

WE WILL DO THAT. AND THROUGH SITE PLAN REVIEW WE'LL MANAGE SITE PLAN REVIEW AND OPERATE ACCORDINGLY TO WHAT THE TOWNSHIP WANTS.

SO I WOULD JUST SAY, PLEASE DON'T PRESSURE US INTO FEWER UNITS BECAUSE IT MAKES IT INFEASIBLE TO DO THE PROJECT.

I MEAN, WE GOT TO MAKE THE NUMBERS WORK. AND JUST ONE OTHER POINT.

OUR GAL, OUR GAL HERE FROM MISHDA, HAD THE THREE BEDROOM UNITS AT $2,900, RENTING FOR $2,900.

YOU PROBABLY ALL SAW THAT SLIDE THAT SHE PUT UP, BUT THANK YOU.

YEAH THANK YOU. GREG FEDEWA AND THAT'S THE LAST GREEN CARD I'VE GOT AT THE MOMENT.

A COUPLE OF QUICK POINTS. AND ON PRICE, OUR UNITS ARE 2500FT², WHERE MORE TRADITIONAL APARTMENT APARTMENTS ARE LIKE 800FT². SO OURS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY BIGGER. THEY ALSO HAVE THREE BEDROOMS AND A TWO CAR GARAGE.

SO COMPARING PRICE APPLES TO APPLES, IT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE SENSE.

ALSO THE NEWTON POINT PROJECT THERE, THE 66 FOOT SETBACK BETWEEN THE 4 STORY BUILDING HAS A DRIVEWAY FOR THE 226 UNITS THROUGH THAT SETBACK. SO IN COMPARISON TO OUR TURNAROUND FOR OUR FIRE TRUCK, THEY HAVE A DRIVEWAY THROUGH THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT.

[03:35:02]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SEEING NO OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME, WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AT 9:46 P.M.. NEXT ON OUR AGENDA IS ITEM 15 OTHER MATTERS AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS.

ANY OTHER MATTERS AND BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS THIS EVENING? WE'VE TALKED QUITE A BIT.

ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO OUR LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ADJOURNMENT. DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? SO MOVED. MOVED BY TREASURER DESCHAINE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECONDED BY TRUSTEE WILSON. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF ADJOURNMENT, PLEASE SAY AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AND WE STAND ADJOURNED AT 9:46 P.M..

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.