[0:27] This is the previous meeting minutes.

[0:33] to turn this one off. >> Let me see.

[0:36] » I just put new batteries in it.

[0:53] » We need to start. >> Well, normally you hold it down for a

[0:56] while. Okay, you got it on. Okay,

[1:02] » it's not working. Um, >> never mind. We need to start.

[1:05] » Somebody Somebody wants to talk to you. >> Have them stand up to the mic.

[1:11] » Okay. >> Okay. Yes.

[1:12] » Good. >> Now 6:35.

[1:15] I'm calling the meeting to order. Um, let's have a roll call. Lee Abernathy

[1:21] present. >> Dixie Kovage present.

[1:24] » Yep. Dave Marshy, present. Okay.

[1:28] » Um, let's see. Next thing we need to do is

[1:32] » Oh, yeah. I'm sorry. >> Yeah.

[1:35] [clears throat]

[1:37] » I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the

[1:43] republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and

[1:48] justice for all. Thank you for reminding me.

[1:52] Did that. We should have done that first before the roll call. We already did.

[1:55] They were open. >> Okay.

[1:57] » Okay. Um, do I have a motion to accept the agenda

[2:02] as it's as it's been handed out to everybody?

[2:05] » Okay. >> I will make a motion we accept the

[2:09] agenda >> as is.

[2:11] » That's >> I second it.

[2:13] » Okay. All those in favor? Uh, Dave >> I Lee I Dixie

[2:21] » I >> Okay.

[2:23] Um the agenda for this is first thing we're going to do what

[2:28] » with the prior minutes there. >> Yeah. Next thing is the previous

[2:32] minutes. So has everybody had a chance to read the previous minutes?

[2:36] » Yes, I did. >> August 24th. I think it was August 24th

[2:40] 20 October 28th of 2024.

[2:44] » 24th 20. I knew there was a four in there someplace.

[2:46] » Yeah. >> Okay. I I did read it and I believe that

[2:50] there's a correction on it under um finding a fact number eight. It says

[2:55] that Lee Abernathy moved to deny the variance requests for George and Barbara

[2:59] Deeos for section 3.03 3 um for the setback of the zoning ordinance and it

[3:05] should not say to not remove because we said to remove

[3:10] » to remove. >> Yes. Demolish the 8 by32 porch because

[3:15] the standards were not met per finding of facts.

[3:18] » Okay. Any discussion on that change? >> Um Dave,

[3:22] » no, >> I don't have any discussion. You have a

[3:27] you did you get it recorded? >> Yep.

[3:29] » Okay. So, do I have a motion to approve the minutes as amended?

[3:37] » I'll make that motion. >> I second it.

[3:39] » Okay. >> Okay. Dave, how do you vote?

[3:42] » Yes. >> Yes.

[3:43] » I vote yes. >> Yes.

[3:45] » Yes. Okay. >> Okay.

[3:47] » Lee, sorry. Uh, we actually do need to add election of officers to the agenda.

[3:52] » Yeah. Um, so when we get the agenda, we should have actually amended them to add

[3:58] the election of officers. >> Yeah.

[4:01] » And we would actually do that right now. >> Okay.

[4:05] Okay. So, >> so [clears throat] the election

[4:09] currently I'm the chairperson. Dave, you're the secretary. You're the vice

[4:14] chair. Okay. Because you feel you that's that's what's currently the question is

[4:20] do we want to change that? We want to I don't have a problem with changing if

[4:23] you would like to be present. >> I'm I'm fine with the way it is.

[4:26] » Dave, >> Right.

[4:29] » So, somebody's got to make a motion to to retain the officers as they stand

[4:33] right now with Abernathy being president, Dixie being vice president,

[4:38] and Dave being secretary. We have a motion for that.

[4:42] » I'll make that motion. >> I second it.

[4:45] » Okay. The motion stands for Abernathy to be president, Dixie to be vice chair,

[4:50] and Dave to be secretary. >> Dave, how do you vote?

[4:55] » Yes. >> I'll vote yes.

[4:57] » Yeah. >> Yes. Okay.

[4:58] » Who actually made the motion? I'm sorry. >> Dave made the motion. Dixie seconded.

[5:02] » Okay. Thank you. >> Okay.

[5:05] » Okay. >> Okay.

[5:08] » Um Okay. Do we do the are we going to do

[5:12] the communications now or are we going to We are going I think close.

[5:17] » Yeah. Well, that's not that's not on your set of of of agendas, but on the

[5:27] secretary, >> we're talking about going into close

[5:31] sessions. >> Um then we need to amend the agenda.

[5:34] That's not on there. >> It is on the

[5:36] » It was on It was on It was on the first agenda that I got.

[5:40] » Well, it's been revised several different times.

[5:42] » Yeah. >> So, the one that was going

[5:45] uh from has >> has has the one that I'm operating on

[5:50] here not this week

[5:55] » has it right here going into close session

[5:58] » correct I don't think I have >> okay

[6:01] » I think okay

[6:05] » okay we need we need to have a motion >> um here let me if I may approach I'm

[6:10] going to I have some specific motion language for you guys And if you don't

[6:14] have this in front of you, I just want to make sure that we're reading that

[6:18] correctly. Um, so here is the motion language right there that you're going

[6:24] » Okay. I'd like to move to enter and close session at um

[6:29] » 641 >> 6:41

[6:32] um p.m. to consider material exempt from discussion or disclosure by statute

[6:37] under MCL 15.268H. 268H

[6:43] specifically identified as attorney client privilege written legal opinion.

[6:50] Do I have that motion? Did somebody >> You need a second and then you'll do

[6:54] roll call vote. >> Okay.

[6:55] » Okay. That was a motion. I'll second it. >> Okay. You second it. I made the motion.

[7:00] You seconded it. Roll call. David. >> I vote yes.

[7:04] » Yes. >> Okay, guys. We're going to go into close

[7:07] sessions and soon as we come out, we're going to go in the other room. You guys

[7:10] stay here. >> Yeah,

[7:12] » you guys stay here. >> Yeah,

[7:14] » I guess I don't need >> I don't need any of the stuff. I'm going

[7:18] to take this stuff. >> No,

[7:23] we're just going to go and >> Thank you.

[7:28] » You guys No, I hear

[7:31] » No, that's okay. >> We're going off the same agenda. So,

[7:34] [laughter]

[7:37] There's

[7:42] two as long as you're not fighting.

[9:20] Oh yeah.

[9:46] I don't

[10:26] What is it?

[11:53] But then each She's

[11:57] already

[12:02] for some purple.

[12:05] It's very

[14:35] Okay. Okay.

[16:08] Yeah, sure.

[22:35] Yeah.

[35:06] Thanks, guys.

[35:48] You already got You already got stuck up.

[35:50] » Thank you so much. I appreciate it.

[35:59] » Don't mind. I was drinking it on the way up here. Thank you.

[36:04] » I'm parched. Thank you.

[36:17] Okay, we're going to reopen the meeting at 711.

[36:21] » Have a motion to close close session. >> Oh, okay. Do I have a motion to close

[36:25] close session at 711? >> I'll make that motion.

[36:28] » I'll second it. >> Dave, how do you vote?

[36:30] » Yes. >> I vote yes.

[36:32] » Yes. Yes. >> Okay.

[36:36] Um, okay. We already did the previous minutes. We went into close session. Now

[36:41] we're at the uh public meeting public hearing portion of this meeting. Um,

[36:48] we're going to do that at 7:11. We're going to uh

[36:52] » Well, first, sorry, Lee. Um, we're going to have Tasha and then the applicants go

[36:55] up, then you can open it to public comment.

[36:58] » Yeah. Well, yeah, I would say. Okay. I'm sorry.

[37:01] » You got it. >> Okay. So Tasha, could you please present

[37:04] your finding or facts or whatever it is? >> Um, on June 30th, I sent the applicant,

[37:10] the builder, Road Scope Construction, a letter denying the construction plans

[37:13] due to not meeting the required minimum exterior width of 14 ft of 410 C.

[37:22] Um, before the letter, I had email exchanges

[37:26] with the owner to go over the ordinance language and how that I interpreted. And

[37:32] those emails are part of the packet. Um, so we did go over the design and I've

[37:40] had a few discussions before. I've been

[37:46] uh the home is not a typical 14 by 70 or 24 by 40. The home is a T-shaped. So,

[37:53] it's a not your normal, not that any home is normal, but you know, most homes

[38:00] are boxes or rectangles or this one. Um, the dimensions are 12.5x 43.11

[38:08] and 12.5x 23. Um, it's kind of two sections, kind of a

[38:14] T slightly allsided T-shaped. Um, at first glance, not each exterior

[38:21] width is 14 ft. Three exterior widths are only 12.5.

[38:26] Um, I did try to think outside of the box to try to create in four sides of

[38:31] the 14 ft. Uh, but only three of them had 14, but that was an internal

[38:38] dimension and not exterior. >> The ordinance says external exterior

[38:43] width. Um I interpret the exterior width at any side any exterior wall to be not

[38:50] less than 14 ft but also knowing that all all homes are square or rectangle

[38:55] boxes and that is why I denied the home. That's my two cents.

[39:04] » Now Trevor

[39:06] » yeah for everyone just record you this is Ben and Trevor is here with me. Um,

[39:11] we're here to appeal and essentially request that board reverses the denial

[39:17] and uh corrects the interpretation and applies uh our building permit or

[39:23] accepts our building permit. The reason for this is you may have noticed there

[39:28] was no mention of side elevation. Um, and the ordinance clearly talks about

[39:33] side elevation and that's an important word to reference. Um each ordinance,

[39:39] every word, clause and sentence in an ordinance is intended to be specific and

[39:45] lack interpret room for interpretation which there was admission of

[39:50] interpretation in [clears throat] the findings here on

[39:53] page 25. Also um in Michigan um any part courts

[40:01] must avoid uh construction that renders any part of

[40:06] the ordinance as extra or unnecessary which means that each word in this

[40:10] ordinance is important. Mhm. So that is why we're here to appeal that um because

[40:16] a side elevation by definition plain and ordinary language is from an outside

[40:21] looking in the width from end to end and not any single wall segment whether

[40:28] there's a protrusion or depression. So that is why I work there.

[40:37] » I'd like to ask some questions. You okay to talk to them now? Yeah, you can ask

[40:40] that question sir. >> So you said go back to that last part

[40:44] where you said the >> interpretation is it's any wall. I mean

[40:48] what is what is what is that based on? >> So

[40:53] um the zoning ordinance says a minimum or an exterior width at any side

[40:58] elevation. It doesn't specifically say an exterior wall segment

[41:04] on the side elevation. So, our interpretation and everyone that we've

[41:08] talked to, our builder, our contractor, local contractor here, um the architect

[41:13] of the home is interpreting it as the exterior width at the side elevation,

[41:19] which would be a 2D. You're standing outside of the

[41:22] » two dimensional look at that >> flat distance from one point to the

[41:27] other regardless of any that's been said protrusions or depressions in the lid

[41:33] bone.

[41:37] I have more questions, but we'll go. You >> Oh, no. Keep going.

[41:42] » Any questions? >> I understand what you said.

[41:46] » Okay. >> Okay. So, let's uh we do have some

[41:51] outside input. Is this >> Yeah, I would open it for public

[41:53] hearing. >> But

[41:56] » yeah. Okay. If there's anybody here, I don't see anybody else in

[42:00] » but you can go ahead and >> if you have correspondence. Yes. Um

[42:05] » we have um correspondents. >> Can you guys hear? Okay.

[42:07] » Yes. >> From Karen Gruss.

[42:10] » She said um I don't think that I can attend the ZBA meeting, but want to

[42:14] weigh in on the subject property 0157850th

[42:19] Street, parcel number 80630435.

[42:25] There appears to be a disagreement in terminology. I don't think the zoning

[42:29] vernacular necessarily has to match designer interpretation. When I read

[42:34] zoning text of in quotations and minimum exterior width at any site elevation of

[42:40] 14 ft end quote, I took it to mean each slashall sides as the zoning

[42:47] administrator did. In architectural design, a building elevation is a flat

[42:52] scale drawing that shows only one viewpoint of a vertical surface of a

[42:57] building. Jogs and overlaps can cause elevation drawings to hide important

[43:01] details, which in part of the reason that other drawings such as floor plans

[43:05] and sections are also needed for a more complete picture. I personally like

[43:10] their design, but they essentially joined a narrow appendage onto another

[43:15] rectangle, creating seven side wall planes, three of which are 12 and 1/2

[43:21] ft. So, I agree with the ZBA determination. It appears that our

[43:26] zoning administrator directly gave more weight to the actual building structure

[43:30] than to mere depictions used by a designer. Respectfully, Karen Grass

[43:36] 08164 51st and a half street, Van Junction,

[43:39] Michigan.

[43:43] » Any other comments from the public at all?

[43:46] » Did you write down kind of what you just read for

[43:51] » I would like to have a copy that >> written in.

[43:54] » It's reported down. Sorry.

[43:58] » That kind of was how you just defined your side. Is it like written in the The

[44:04] definition of a side elevation. >> No, like the whole like your whole side.

[44:09] Know how I kind of read mine and you read yours?

[44:12] » I'm sorry. >> So for the record,

[44:17] » we could take it off from the owl. >> That's in the in the meeting minutes.

[44:21] You can now note that. >> Yeah. Um but if we're done, I think

[44:25] we're done with public comment and stuff like unless there's other

[44:28] correspondents. So let's close the the public hearing portion then. There are

[44:32] no other com public comments that I know of. No other correspondents. Have you

[44:36] received anything else? Read all the notes.

[44:39] » Okay. Then uh if if that's the case, I'd like to close the public comment

[44:44] » session of this at [clears throat] 7:19. Okay.

[44:50] So, we are now at the point where we get to discuss this. Ask anybody anything.

[44:55] Right. >> So,

[44:56] » okay. >> Well, who would you like to what would

[44:58] you like to talk about? How do you feel about it? Well, I I did some research on

[45:03] this. >> Okay, feel free.

[45:04] » And and and based on my research, it seems like

[45:10] um per their application, it's the interpretation of the minimum exterior

[45:15] width of any site elevation of 14 ft. Correct.

[45:19] » That's what so that's what I concentrated on. And within our zoning

[45:24] ordinance, it does not have a definition for that. So I went to a standard

[45:29] definition of the dictionary and so from American heritage dictionary it says a

[45:35] side is a line bound bound bounding a plain figure. So a plane mean like a

[45:42] geometric plane. Okay. So then I went to the definition of a plane from um Marian

[45:48] Webster dictionary. plane is a surface in which any two points are chosen a

[45:53] straight line joining them lies wholly in that surface. So therefore that would

[45:58] mean a side would be you go from this side to this side and the line has to

[46:02] touch all the way across is how I interpret that to me.

[46:06] » So then I went on and and I read like the architectural things where there's

[46:11] like front elevation, side elevation, rear elevations, interior elevations,

[46:15] there's all different types of elevations. So then what I did was I got

[46:20] into um architectural. There's this one um

[46:24] uh thing out on the internet and it said four types of elevations and

[46:28] architecture, a complete guide. So I went through and I read that and um it

[46:35] it goes into like front elevation, side, rear, interior, same thing again. and it

[46:42] it defines them as to what they are. And so

[46:49] when I read our zoning ordinances, it said any side elevation. So to me, what

[46:56] it means is from point to point. So then I said, okay, well, this is not um most

[47:02] houses aren't necessarily square where they have four sides. So they have a

[47:05] front and a back and a side and a side. So, I said, "Okay, well, let me let me

[47:09] see what they have for an octagonal house." Okay. And what they pulled up is

[47:15] that an octagon has eight sides. So, our zoning ordinances any side, they're

[47:21] saying an octagon has eight sides and it says that it's um it goes like

[47:27] elevations one through eight. It says the the front elevation side one, right

[47:32] elevation side two, rear rear elevation side three, you know, so on and so

[47:36] forth. going down. So, it defines with a definition each one of these sides. So,

[47:42] then I um decided, okay, well, let me let me see what if Lshaped house, what

[47:49] what are what are those sides? And I said, yeah, that breaks down into six

[47:53] sides. They have um two long outer sides, two short sides, and two short

[47:59] inner sides. So, um based on architecture,

[48:04] it defines a side. And I can see why our zoning ordinance would not have said um

[48:11] like four sides where why it said any side because you could have an L-shaped

[48:15] house, you could have an octagonal house, you could have a square house,

[48:17] you could have an oblong house, you could have all kinds of different

[48:20] dimensions. So how are you going to put that in the zoning ordinance with by

[48:24] using the word any? You're taking all of them into consideration.

[48:30] That's that's my interpretation. >> Dave G. [clears throat]

[48:35] So these are two 12 foot wide sections that come on wheels.

[48:40] » Am I correct? >> It's a modular one. Yes. So it gets

[48:43] built offsite and it gets attached on site. Yes.

[48:47] » So there's is there some reason why you chose 12 and 1/2 ft instead of 14.

[48:53] » That's standard from the builder. Um and they chose that. That's what they sell

[48:59] across the country. Um, they chose that because it reduces shipping costs and it

[49:03] they don't have to worry about road clearance and all of that as they make

[49:07] burns throughout the country. >> Okay. And permits and such.

[49:11] » Okay. >> Yeah. To follow along with his is his

[49:15] question. I mean, um, regardless of whether or not they're going to how they

[49:19] transport it and all that, is there a reason why they did it in the is there a

[49:24] reason why that it's built in the way that it is? I mean, literally, this

[49:29] whole argument is over a foot and a half. You know what I mean? They they

[49:32] offset that L shape a foot and a half and and for the life of me, I can't

[49:37] figure out what that serves. I mean, my question to you is is I

[49:44] presume you talked to a builder and said, you know, why do you do that?

[49:48] » Multiple times. Yeah. And they wrote their letter, so their information's in

[49:52] the packet. Um, we can't speak on behalf of the builder. They chose these

[49:57] dimensions. Um, we >> when we were decided to move forward

[50:01] with this, >> we did read the ordinance.

[50:05] » We felt like it qualified and met the standards, which is why

[50:10] » we already prepped our land and our property,

[50:13] » put a deposit down, >> applied for the building permit, and

[50:16] that's why we're here. Mhm. So, >> um I do also want to highlight that any

[50:21] verse call um because I think you bring up a fair point. It says any side

[50:25] elevation. Um it doesn't say all side elevations either. So when we look at

[50:30] this ordinance if you look at it in plain and ordinary language that could

[50:36] account for with your example five of the eight octagon sides. So again,

[50:42] there's also some there's a lot of interpretation happening with the

[50:48] ordinance because it doesn't say all side elevations,

[50:51] » but when it says any, any means any side, which would include all

[50:56] » two of ours in the way that some people are looking at the ordinance. Actually,

[51:01] four of ours meet this out of the six. So depending

[51:05] » what way when you say that, but in what way?

[51:07] » Yeah, I'll show you. >> Because we have

[51:09] » Yeah. Yeah, >> based on certain definitions that are

[51:12] being used, >> right? So, this one does not and this

[51:16] one does not. This one does. This one does. This one does. And this one does.

[51:23] See what I'm saying? >> Yeah, I see what you're saying, I guess.

[51:26] So, >> yeah, I agree with that.

[51:27] » Thank you. >> Also, I know this wasn't a question, but

[51:30] I would like to um highlight this. So, the the builder of this home has

[51:34] actually done um eight homes in in northern not northern Michigan, but up

[51:39] near Traverse City. And at that time, they were working in a similar situation

[51:44] like this against a 20 foot minimum side elevation.

[51:49] And this home was specifically designed, redesigned in this L-shaped way to meet

[51:56] that minimum up in Em. So, I mean, I appreciate the like enthusiasm around

[52:04] asking questions about, oh, can they just make it 14 ft? Like, this is

[52:07] something that, you know, we found that fit this

[52:11] » according to us and and the architect and the builder. So, that's why we

[52:16] decided to move forward not having honestly any expectation that we were

[52:20] gonna end up here right now. So, >> um

[52:25] I mean it's the Would it make sense to like easily be

[52:30] able to just modify it? Yes. But that's not an option for us.

[52:34] » It's not an option. >> I mean it's this is something that

[52:37] they're like this is designed. It's already got state of Michigan stamp

[52:41] approval. >> Yeah. I I went on their website. It's

[52:44] one of their standard homes, >> right?

[52:47] » Yeah. [clears throat] And it's not a mobile

[52:50] home. Like I understand that, you know, the 14 foot clause in here

[52:56] » is specific traditionally to prevent mobile homes from being placed where

[53:01] they shouldn't be. >> Yeah. But, you know, um, from the

[53:04] standpoint on on the website that that where you're where you're getting the

[53:09] home from, they have different, um, checklist for you to go through as to

[53:15] what needs to be done prior to actually ordering the home.

[53:20] » So, they give you options. >> Well, no, no, they're saying like um,

[53:24] check with the zoning, do, you know, whatever. I mean, so that was

[53:27] » so they recognize it as a potential problem, right?

[53:29] » Yes. they're saying that, you know, we want to be sure that it'll be able to um

[53:34] be acceptable for the zoning in the area that you're going to take it to. So,

[53:38] that was one of the first checkpoints that they had to go through prior to

[53:42] ordering it. >> So, okay. So, you ordered it after she

[53:47] denied it? >> No.

[53:50] » No, they won't release the blueprints until you put a deposit and you need the

[53:54] blueprints to submit for building. >> Say that again. lost. You lost me on

[54:00] that one. >> You need to put a deposit down to get

[54:04] the blueprints because from a business standpoint, they don't want people

[54:08] running off with their >> Yeah.

[54:09] » blueprints. So, you have to put the deposit down and they will give you the

[54:14] blueprints and the blueprints are what are needed

[54:17] » in order to go to the center. So, then they they really don't care what the

[54:21] zoning is. >> They do.

[54:23] » Did we get did we get blueprints or just what's off from their website? And they

[54:27] provided the plans in that packet. But yes, I

[54:30] » Oh, the actual blueprints. >> The actual blueprints. But

[54:33] » but they had to purchase those blueprints, right?

[54:36] » Packet. He they provided the plans in your packet.

[54:39] » Yeah. Yeah. Saw that. >> Right. Yeah. But they they had those

[54:42] exact same plans on the website. >> Yes.

[54:44] » Uh just less detail. Yeah. So we actually had to have those plans the

[54:50] specific plans for us where the microwave was, where the

[54:53] » uh washerd dryer is going to be. They had to go to the state of Michigan to

[54:57] get approved and stamped and that has our

[54:59] » You mean for them? Not you? >> No, for our building or our specific

[55:03] drawing. >> So the state of Michigan requires that

[55:06] any modular home go through the state for stamping prior to um the building

[55:12] permit process. >> Correct. Correct. Yes.

[55:15] » The state has already approved this. >> Yes.

[55:20] Modulars are stick built homes that are approved by the state and then they

[55:24] » but that's separate from zoning deter determined

[55:33] » so so you're saying um that and this is just a side thing. So, you're saying

[55:39] that um a a builder, a a modular home builder, they don't have their standard

[55:48] home certified by the state of Michigan. Every time that someone wants one of

[55:54] those homes, it keeps going back to the state. Even though it's the same cookie

[55:58] cutter, >> each of them are individually approved.

[56:02] Yes. after after they they've a purchase piece, they have to put a deposit down

[56:08] in order to get the plans to get it approved. So, they're they're stuck.

[56:14] » Well, given this scenario, in order for you guys to build this place, you have

[56:19] to lay money down on the table in order to get the plans to take it to the

[56:23] zoning administrator to say, "This is a this is good." That's

[56:29] I I have no comment on that. Oh man,

[56:35] » that is the catch 22, isn't it? >> Yeah, it is. It really

[56:40] » I mean that's crazy. >> So the builder, if this were to be

[56:45] denied, would the builder refund your money?

[56:47] » No, they were on the hook for getting the state stamp, which we did, and we

[56:51] were all in agreeance. I think you can see it in the packet that our general

[56:55] contractor's opinion and the builder's opinion is that we were in compliance

[57:00] with the ordinance. >> And did they read our zoning zoning

[57:05] ordinances? They read our zoning ordinance, but they used the

[57:09] two-dimensional view of it. that you just

[57:12] » um they measured from point to point from the outside

[57:15] » the two dimensional the two you just look from the northsoutheast west

[57:19] » instead of what it says there which is >> instead of looking at wall segments

[57:23] » huh >> instead of looking at wall segments they

[57:26] were looking at the whole side >> election so they chose to ignore that

[57:30] any >> that's not written no the any

[57:34] » no >> because technically ours has four side

[57:37] elevations >> well it says it's six

[57:40] » if you look prints. There's four in the architect

[57:43] diagrams. There's a north, south, east, and west.

[57:46] There are not. >> Well, yeah, that's again that's the two

[57:48] dimensional. >> That's a view.

[57:49] » Yeah, it's a view. Not not >> it's the side elevation based off of

[57:53] architect standards >> based on their their interpretation.

[57:56] » No, based the st the state stamped it. >> The state I'm sorry. Say that again.

[58:02] » Yeah, I think we're just we're kind of getting slightly confused. I think

[58:06] they're saying the same thing. Um I don't think that the state necess the

[58:10] state didn't approve your interpretation of the zoning ordinance. That's that's

[58:14] all. Yeah, >> they approved the inter the um structure

[58:18] of the building. >> So they they approved all the blueprints

[58:22] which let's say were 20 pages. >> Within those 20 pages are four pages or

[58:27] two pages because there's the north, south, east, and west. And they are

[58:31] actually called out as side elevation >> in the blueprint.

[58:39] Yeah, you guys just want to make sure that our your findings, whichever way

[58:44] you go, we're focusing on your specific interpretation of your zoning ordinance.

[58:50] » Certainly, you can take those things, you know, into account, but I just want

[58:53] to make sure we're staying >> focused,

[58:57] » right? And

[59:01] » and I I I know I know what you're saying because you know like some of this

[59:06] » um when I when I look at this um

[59:09] architectural it does front [clears throat] rear side side. Yes.

[59:13] Okay. And interior and and those are elevations. But when when our zoning

[59:19] ordinance, in my opinion, says any side, it's taking into consideration, no

[59:24] matter what shape your building is in, we're going to be measuring every side.

[59:29] Any side, whether it's octagon, hexagon, square,

[59:34] rectangle, L-shaped, whatever,

[59:39] » because we could conceivably have a an 8 foot wide. If it was L-shaped, it would

[59:44] be okay. >> An 8 foot wide. What? Like two eight

[59:49] foot wide sections like two long skinny 8.

[59:53] » That would not that would not join side, you know, in a T-shape. Anything in the

[59:59] T-shape would be okay. >> Well, no. Well, no, it's not because

[1:00:03] » say this this is what their house looks like.

[1:00:06] » Yeah. >> Okay. This side meets it. This side

[1:00:09] meets it. This side meets it. This side. This doesn't. And this doesn't.

[1:00:13] » So, it fails. >> Yeah.

[1:00:14] » In my opinion. >> Okay. Well, yeah. Okay.

[1:00:18] » But those 12 foot six sides could very easily be 8 foot.

[1:00:24] » Well, they they need to be 14 ft. >> They need to be 14 ft.

[1:00:28] » Yes. >> Yes.

[1:00:29] » But it would never pass with an eight foot sign.

[1:00:32] » No, >> it would. Well, according to them, it

[1:00:36] would. >> No.

[1:00:38] » No. No. >> If if I may.

[1:00:40] » According to them, it would. >> According to them, it would.

[1:00:44] » If I may. Uh we we would prefer if we don't get stuck on wall segments

[1:00:49] » because >> that's a tripping point here though.

[1:00:51] » But that's not in the ordinance. >> It is.

[1:00:54] » No, it doesn't say wall segment. It >> says the ZBA is interpreting section 410

[1:01:01] C. >> Yeah.

[1:01:02] » Which meth references >> Yeah. Yeah. I know. Minimum exterior

[1:01:08] width of any side elevation of 14 ft. So that's what we're right.

[1:01:12] » Yeah. But we have to that term not defined. So you guys today are just are

[1:01:17] interpreting that. Yeah. >> How you how it is in the zoning

[1:01:20] ordinance based off of the zoning. >> Okay.

[1:01:24] » What's been the history? What what has the zoning administration have how how

[1:01:29] has the zoning administrator interpreted it? Is it just the way you just you

[1:01:34] you've interpreted the past fail on this thing is based on the fact that you

[1:01:39] looked at any side meaning any piece or section no matter what the side view is.

[1:01:46] » Correct. >> Okay.

[1:01:48] » Yes. >> So for add infin item we've been doing

[1:01:51] it that way. >> Point B of of all the

[1:01:56] of all the the sides. >> Yeah. for

[1:02:01] » and that's been going when was do we have any idea when when this zoning when

[1:02:06] this inter interpretation has been >> in place [clears throat]

[1:02:12] » the zoning admin has been in her role since 2024

[1:02:15] » pardon me >> the zoning admin has been in her role

[1:02:18] since 2024 so I don't think anyone can speak to 2023 or earlier

[1:02:23] » but I could speak when I was the zone administrator before for three years

[1:02:28] prior to the year and a half I was gone

[1:02:35] » in this zoning this this version of the zoning ordinance was adopted in 186.

[1:02:42] » It's been in there since I invented this.

[1:02:46] » So this has been in place since ' 86. Is that what you're saying?

[1:02:50] » I don't know when it was fully I don't know. I don't know the

[1:02:54] » it's been it's been a long time >> since I've been

[1:02:56] » since since you've been since you've been the zoning minister. Yeah.

[1:03:01] » Which has been again how long? Say that again.

[1:03:04] » 2018 to 21 and then I was gone and then came back in 2014.

[1:03:14] » The zoning ordinance was adopted in 82 major revision in ' 07 and then there's

[1:03:19] been subsequent amendments. Um, but I don't know specifically with regard to

[1:03:24] section 410 C. >> Yeah.

[1:03:32] » Well, let's continue talking here. I

[1:03:39] » my personal uh my personal feelings on it is is these are the interpretations.

[1:03:45] I mean I I read this as any one wall. any any any one wall on this thing,

[1:03:52] » right? >> And I understand the view, but that's

[1:03:54] not the wall. That's not the >> I I' I'd have I'd be hardressed to vote

[1:04:00] against what the don't like the way it's written, but I'd be hardressed to vote

[1:04:07] against what the zoning press administrator has done to this point.

[1:04:12] And I don't know whether we we can go back to the planning commission and

[1:04:17] recommend but we we can't do anything about that at all. your decision solely

[1:04:21] today is interpreting as the appellet body and reviewing the decision and

[1:04:26] seeing yeah that's >> see I I personally have no issue with

[1:04:31] the way it's written because um you don't know what's what the shape of a

[1:04:36] structure is going to be and when it says any side elevation it's taking into

[1:04:41] consideration every type of building that would be coming into the township

[1:04:46] whether it be a stick built a modular or mobile whatever cover and so I I can

[1:04:52] understand why the terminology is as the terminology is.

[1:04:56] » Yeah, I think that term elevation is probably confusing in this set in this

[1:05:02] situation >> because elevation is an architectural

[1:05:07] term. >> Yes.

[1:05:09] » And if you look at wall segments, you could think of a chimney protruding from

[1:05:12] a house and you would have to count that if you're learning based off of a wall

[1:05:16] segment definition. You would also have to do an entrance door dwarmer if you go

[1:05:21] based off a wall segment definition. So that's why we're pushing hard about the

[1:05:25] side elevation in a complete term because there are houses there's one

[1:05:30] across the street with a sun room that has an indent that is less than 14 ft.

[1:05:38] » So this town already has those houses. >> Not to be argumentative. I mean, I I

[1:05:45] understand where you went with that, but you know what I mean? A door and a walls

[1:05:49] a door, you know what I mean? And and the chimney, I would never view a

[1:05:53] chimney as a wall. >> You have a sun room across the street.

[1:05:58] » The left hand side of it is less than 14 ft.

[1:06:01] » I If I may ask a question. Can we go all to page 18?

[1:06:06] » Can you say speak up? >> Page 18.

[1:06:08] » What? 18. Do we have page numbers? has page

[1:06:13] numbers at the bottom.

[1:06:22] » So using the three examples that are written here or printed here in the

[1:06:27] middle. So let's apply this concepts. Wait, let's let's make sure we're all

[1:06:33] we're >> I just wanna I just want to clarify just

[1:06:37] because ZBA for statutory purposes, you can only review what was provided at the

[1:06:44] time the decision was made. So I just I hadn't I just want to see I just wanted

[1:06:48] to see what >> I don't know what page I page. Can you

[1:06:52] get >> I have a page 18 but I but it's

[1:06:57] » this was their application >> minimum with requirements refer their

[1:07:02] CPA packet this was not in the building for that okay well if if their building

[1:07:08] um this

[1:07:12] » can we see can we see what >> can we see

[1:07:16] » that's not what I have for page 18 >> on 18

[1:07:19] » no I have let's Show that. Hold that up again.

[1:07:22] » Yeah, >> I think that's page 19.

[1:07:29] » Okay, >> there's three boxes.

[1:07:31] » Yep. >> Yep. No, I this

[1:07:33] » I saw it. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

[1:07:34] » Yeah, that's page 19, not page 18 >> in our packet. Sorry, that's the

[1:07:40] » Do I >> You might have like two cover pages

[1:07:42] then. >> Do I have that?

[1:07:44] » Yes. Take no think you have it better. >> Keep keep ask

[1:07:54] for a second. Back up for a sec. I think you had it here. Here's

[1:08:00] » there. >> No, that's Yeah, that's the one. That's

[1:08:04] the one we have. That's the one they're looking at. That's the one they're

[1:08:07] referencing. It's this one. >> Thank you.

[1:08:11] » Page 19. >> Yeah.

[1:08:14] » Okay. Now that we all have that page, do you guys have that page that they're

[1:08:17] referencing? So, okay, what was your point again? I'm

[1:08:21] » This is the um portion of the our documentation that we provided that was

[1:08:26] provided by the builder, a letter >> by the builder. So using these three

[1:08:30] examples in here. So you're saying that on all of these examples, every

[1:08:35] individual wall, you guys would consider a side elevation in every example here,

[1:08:42] » regardless of if there's any front door entryways or

[1:08:47] » Well, you can have bumpouts. >> Well, I which there there's a definition

[1:08:53] for those and just like um a porch. I mean that is um I forgot what I what the

[1:09:01] technical term for something like that is um so that that is common and and

[1:09:07] it's acceptable but I think that

[1:09:11] it seems like the way I read it is like when you have your support walls that

[1:09:18] that that's where the measurement goes is based on what those support walls

[1:09:22] are. And so you could have like let's say a bay window that comes out that

[1:09:25] doesn't have a foundation underneath it. >> Well, yeah. So where Trevor's referring

[1:09:31] is probably like the third example. Um so you see how that shape of the house

[1:09:37] is not a perfect square, >> right? Yeah.

[1:09:39] » So your ordinance right now, I respect the bumpout phrase. That's not in the

[1:09:45] ordinance. So we all have to come to an agreement on what a side elevation is.

[1:09:49] And that third example would mean that it would not qualify even if it was

[1:09:55] 3,000 ft of a house would not qualify because some of these size are less than

[1:10:00] 14.

[1:10:06] » CDA is just is interpreting. You don't have to necessarily come to an an

[1:10:10] agreement. Just you guys are interpreting your ordinance. Um, okay.

[1:10:17] » Just for sake, >> I I

[1:10:20] » I would interpret that that >> the major part of the house has to be 14

[1:10:24] ft, >> right?

[1:10:26] » Major portion has to be at least one side.

[1:10:30] » Well, I outsides >> an outside side.

[1:10:33] » Exterior side. >> Exterior side has how many? all four or

[1:10:37] or >> I I think every every exterior site has

[1:10:42] to be. Now, granted, you can have like a bump out that is like an addition to a

[1:10:49] room that doesn't have a a foundation underneath that. That's

[1:11:00] and and and it's been customary within the township that we have at least

[1:11:06] minimum of 14 ft. >> Yeah, that was my point with with

[1:11:12] » Yes. I mean that that that's what we've had

[1:11:27] You guys have presented a real problem. >> I don't think it's a problem.

[1:11:31] » Okay. >> I don't looking at precedent in the

[1:11:34] state of Michigan based off my legal research. There are two standing

[1:11:38] examples. Uh one in Fremont and one in Welch where

[1:11:43] » they have the same sounding laws as we do.

[1:11:45] » They do not. But the judge ruled in the litigation that Michigan law must

[1:11:51] interpret in favor of property owners if there is any ambiguity.

[1:11:58] » Say that again. >> Michigan law. There are two cases where

[1:12:04] » we have do we have the cases that we can refer back to?

[1:12:06] » Yeah. Fremont Township versus McGuire or McGarvey

[1:12:11] » and Barowski versus Welch. I don't know necessarily if I agree with this the

[1:12:16] broad contention that it has to favor again here and and I'm just here to kind

[1:12:22] of funnel what today's decision about is your interpretation of 410C whether you

[1:12:29] agree or disagree that's your decision but when you're making that

[1:12:33] interpretation decision you're looking at your zoning ordinance we're not

[1:12:38] really looking at I mean you can use outside things like research to help you

[1:12:42] with prime your interpret retation when a term like this is undefined. Um, but I

[1:12:47] I wouldn't rely necessarily just on case law that you have to find. Again, what

[1:12:51] you're doing here today, whichever way you go, you're interpreting.

[1:12:55] » Yeah.

[1:12:59] » So, so I would interpret or only that there's two units here. They have to be

[1:13:06] 14 wide. Not 12, not eight. They have to be 14 wide.

[1:13:16] I think that's I think that's the whole intent of the zoning ordinance is to get

[1:13:21] » 14 wides and not 12 wides or eight wides or right

[1:13:25] » shipping containers. >> Yeah,

[1:13:27] » they aren't they're ask question. >> Good.

[1:13:31] » So in that interpretation then would you agree or disagree that you're inserting

[1:13:36] the word wall segment into the minimum exterior with

[1:13:40] » wall segment? No, I No, I I think from the the just the interpretation of the

[1:13:45] language within our zoning ordinance, this is

[1:13:48] » at any elevation and that terminology means measuring each wall in a straight

[1:13:55] line. In my interpretation, based on um the dictionary definition since it's not

[1:14:00] defined in our zoning ordinance, >> based off of what the state stamped,

[1:14:03] they agree that there's only four side elevations for house. They would have

[1:14:08] required additional side elevations. again. Go ahead again. I'm sorry. I'm

[1:14:12] I'm an old guy. >> That's okay. I'm sorry. Um the state

[1:14:16] would have required additional drawings if they didn't see side elevation as

[1:14:20] four sides. >> Well, there's a difference probably

[1:14:24] between state law and Columbia or >> but not side elevation.

[1:14:30] » The ZVA has the sole authority to interpret its own ordinance at this

[1:14:35] stage. That's what you're doing. >> Yeah.

[1:14:40] So, correct me if I'm wrong here, but we've interpreted it as to being our

[1:14:45] inter our zoning laws to being a wall, meaning it has to be a contiguous 14.

[1:14:51] » Can you provide evidence of that? >> Pardon me.

[1:14:53] » Can you provide evidence of that? >> What do you mean evidence?

[1:14:58] » That is how it's been for interpreted since I think we said ' 89 82.

[1:15:06] all the um approvals or disapprovals has been based on that.

[1:15:10] » Can we see examples of that? >> Um that's not a threat still.

[1:15:14] » Yeah. Yeah. I >> Yeah.

[1:15:19] » That allows for inconsistency and you just have anecdotal evidence at

[1:15:24] this point.

[1:15:28] » I have a question. When somebody comes to you with a a 12 foot wide trailer, do

[1:15:33] you deny them? I would. Yes, >> you would.

[1:15:37] » And uh the building inspector would not allow it.

[1:15:41] » Well, the zoning goes first. So, it doesn't

[1:15:44] go to the building. >> But if the building inspector saw

[1:15:48] somebody pulling in a a 12 wide, you would

[1:15:52] » deny that like a stop work or something.

[1:15:56] » The zoning. It's a zoning ordinance requirement, not a building code requ.

[1:16:01] » Yeah. >> Just one quick procedure thing, too.

[1:16:03] It's okay to ask questions and kind of have but this is your time to you know

[1:16:06] you definitely can ask questions your time to make decisions but interruptions

[1:16:10] probably from either side randomly you can direct questions but

[1:16:14] » it's a small enough it's a small enough group that I'm allow I'm allowed

[1:16:18] » no I just wanted to yeah you can do that's your view but

[1:16:25] » then make a motion >> I make a motion that we deny uh the

[1:16:30] interpretation and uh we go with the interpretation by from our zoning

[1:16:35] administrator. >> Um, but okay,

[1:16:39] » just quick, sorry, I've been taking notes, but can we clarify some of your

[1:16:44] findings? You can do this in your motion, but just make sure so that I can

[1:16:48] get this written down. >> Okay,

[1:16:51] » the findings. >> Okay. Yeah,

[1:16:53] » go ahead. >> As to your as to your interpretation.

[1:16:56] » Okay. Um, >> I think I have some, but I just want to

[1:17:00] make sure The um

[1:17:05] application is asking the zoning board of appeals to interpret the definition

[1:17:12] or the um minimum exterior width at any site elevation of 14 ft. And some of the

[1:17:20] finding of facts is that the um term any means all sites because we don't know

[1:17:29] what the site what the structure of the building is going to be. So it takes

[1:17:33] into consideration all buildings that come before the zoning administrator.

[1:17:39] uh also that because it's not defined within our zoning ordinance that um we

[1:17:46] go to the definitions and American Heritage dictionary defines it as a line

[1:17:53] bound bounding a plain figure and a plain figure is a surface in which any

[1:17:58] two points are chosen a straight line joining them

[1:18:01] » sorry can you slow down [laughter] >> okay a plane is a surface surace in

[1:18:09] which any two points are chosen. >> I might have missed Did you say the line

[1:18:13] part already? >> Yeah, I said a side is a line bounding a

[1:18:17] plain figure and that's from the American Heritage Dictionary.

[1:18:27] » Okay. >> Uh a plane is a surface in which any two

[1:18:33] points are chosen. A straight line joining them lies wholly in that

[1:18:39] surface. >> Sorry. A plane is any two points are

[1:18:44] chosen. A straight line joining them lies wholly in that surface.

[1:18:53] And that's from Miriam Webster dictionary

[1:19:04] and that um there are many many um definitions of

[1:19:10] elevation and uh if you look at just side you're

[1:19:16] not taking into account rear and front.

[1:19:24] So therefore, the term any means all sides.

[1:19:32] » I think I have the rest that I'm putting to a resolution. Let me just

[1:19:39] » read and see if this um looks good. I have just some basic factual

[1:19:49] information. So I'm not going to read that out loud, but I will read what I

[1:19:53] have your notes as including. Um uh so whereas the ZBA finds that section

[1:20:00] 14C is uh ambiguous because it does not expressly identify a measure method to

[1:20:08] be measured or define the term whereas a side is a line bounding a plane

[1:20:16] and that's from the American heritage dictionary

[1:20:18] » correct >> and whereas a plane is a surface in

[1:20:25] which any two points are chosen along a straight line.

[1:20:31] » It's I I have down here a straight line and I underline that joining them lies

[1:20:36] wholly in that surface. >> So a plane is a surface in which any two

[1:20:39] points >> are a straight line.

[1:20:43] » Yeah. >> Joining them lies wholly

[1:20:46] » in that surface >> in that surface. That's from structure.

[1:20:51] » Yep. and that there are many different types

[1:20:55] of elevation. >> Um, and then other notes that I had for

[1:21:01] your uh was I think we talked about this already the

[1:21:05] any side elevation versus simply um side that it applies to multiple side

[1:21:11] widths and not solely overall. Um and then also uh discussion on how it

[1:21:20] doesn't merely the section doesn't merely establish minimum floor

[1:21:23] requirement but also minimal dimensional standards um for dwellings within the

[1:21:28] township >> and and also um in architecture

[1:21:33] um they have types of elevations. They have front, side, rear and interior. So

[1:21:38] when when we have just the word side in our definition or in our zoning

[1:21:44] ordinance, we're not taking into >> you have side elevation in the zoning

[1:21:48] ordinance. Yeah. Yeah. Which >> and they're saying that there's four

[1:21:51] types of elevations in architecture, front, back. So therefore, if you're

[1:21:56] only looking at the sides, you're not taking into consideration the front and

[1:22:01] the back if you were having, let's say, a square house.

[1:22:05] » Okay. So therefore I yeah I think I have >> and and I I think that that's how come

[1:22:12] side doesn't necessarily mean looking at a side because it's not taking into all

[1:22:19] the various northeast south and west in architecture.

[1:22:24] » Okay. So since you're making the motion and those are your findings I'll let you

[1:22:28] guys go forward. If that does get approved, I will probably have you print

[1:22:33] this and then adopt and sign it. >> Okay.

[1:22:36] » But that's just depending on the vote. So, sorry. I think we have your motion.

[1:22:40] » Okay. >> Or finish your motion. I think I

[1:22:42] interrupted beforehand. Sorry. >> Um, so you you have that down.

[1:22:46] » I have it down in a resolution format. So, there's a couple like factual things

[1:22:52] in there that are just kind of um but then I put your findings specifically in

[1:22:57] there. And then depending on this motion and the vote, I will finish as

[1:23:03] necessary. >> Do you have the motions?

[1:23:06] » So you you want me to start from the >> you you can just um you don't

[1:23:11] necessarily have to go through all your findings. Say I make a motion to adopt

[1:23:17] the resolution as prepared by Okay. >> Yeah. Um I make a motion to adopt the

[1:23:23] resolution as prepared from our current discussion

[1:23:27] » and then sorry clarify what your um >> this will be denying.

[1:23:32] » Yeah clarify your that it's your interpretation and then what your

[1:23:36] outcome is. Sorry >> the interpretation is that that the

[1:23:39] zoning minister operated in the in the in the letter and spirit of the law.

[1:23:43] Okay >> that we just say

[1:23:46] » we agree with the zoning administrator or we disagree. We're what I'm going to

[1:23:51] have you guys do if the vote passes is you I'm we have capabilities to print

[1:23:56] here. Do we? >> I don't know.

[1:23:58] » Okay. I'm not sure if there's a printer or there wireless.

[1:24:02] » I I I'm ready to make a motion. I I make a motion that we accept the

[1:24:09] interpretation of our zoning administrator where uh

[1:24:15] » 41 >> that that the um the terminology um any

[1:24:20] site elevation means um looking at each side

[1:24:25] » you Yeah. And you Yeah. Okay. Good. That works for me. And then you'll need a

[1:24:29] second and you guys will have to vote on it and then hopefully we can

[1:24:33] » You want to second it or not? Sure. I'll second that.

[1:24:36] » Okay. We ready? Are we any other questions? Are we ready to vote on this?

[1:24:41] » We will get it written.

[1:24:45] » Yeah. >> Is there any further discussion?

[1:24:47] » Yeah. >> Any more discussion?

[1:24:49] » No. >> Okay. Any more input? I'll I'll give you

[1:24:52] guys another chance. >> Okay.

[1:24:55] » Been shown. So, I think

[1:24:59] » Okay. I'll go first. I'm voting for the resolution to as the uh what the zoning

[1:25:07] administrator has has denied the zoning permit based on the finding of facts

[1:25:12] that we've had here. I'm voting yes. That's a yes to in other words I'm

[1:25:19] agreeing with Tasha. >> Okay.

[1:25:22] » That's late. Yes. I agree with Tasha. Yeah. Yes.

[1:25:27] Yeah.

[1:25:36] Okay. So, I have a resolution that I will want us to fill out.

[1:26:14] Ben and Trevor. Um, >> hold on just a second everyone. Sorry.

[1:26:19] I'm just gonna

[1:27:17] We have checklist

[1:27:22] » once we've done that we public comments and then we meeting.

[1:27:27] » Yeah. Sorry. >> I don't want to let her finish. Let's

[1:27:30] just do it here.

[1:27:44] It isn't, but we could email it and then Ken could print it. The printer. Oh, is

[1:27:50] he here? Okay, that would be great actually instead of me handbreing this.

[1:27:56] [clears throat]

[1:27:58] Sorry, I just got to keep the meeting open for you guys to

[1:28:03] fill this out.

[1:28:07] » I'm emailing it. Can you remind me his supervisor at Columbia? I think TWWP.

[1:28:17] Okay.

[1:28:21] Okay. I just emailed it to them.

[1:28:52] and then Dave, are you the secretary?

[1:28:57] You'll fill out the um resolution. >> I can help you. There's blanks. It's

[1:29:03] very You just have to

[1:29:07] » sign it. Put your name

[1:29:11] Record.

[1:30:17] Thank you. Do you have a pen up there, Dave?

[1:30:19] » Y >> just in case.

[1:30:24] » Thank you.

[1:30:29] So you'll just record the names of who's present here today of the board members.

[1:30:36] Um, and then it was offered by >> and supported by I don't remember who

[1:30:44] gave >> Dave

[1:30:45] » Dave gave the second >> and then I typed it out there and then

[1:30:50] you'll just do how many yays, how many nays, your name.

[1:30:54] » You'll have to give the resolution a number. This is your first meeting of

[1:30:57] the year, so I guess we can be number one.

[1:31:00] » Um, and then last page, you sign and type your name.

[1:31:12] have questions, let me know. >> While he's doing that, can we

[1:31:15] » Yeah, you can. >> This is again, it's open to the public

[1:31:19] here to to comment. I don't know whether you guys want to say anything, but but I

[1:31:23] want to say something before you leave. Okay. I mean,

[1:31:27] » um, can I spell your last name? K

[1:31:33] O V is in Victor. A C H

[1:31:42] » last Leroy is my given name. Leroy L E R O Y. Don't laugh.

[1:31:50] » Last name is Abernathy. A B E R N A T H Y.

[1:31:58] » Okay. Thank you. You can continue. >> Huh?

[1:32:02] » You can continue. What's >> Okay, Ben and Trevor here. This is what

[1:32:07] I'd like to say to you guys. I'm sorry it didn't go the I'm not

[1:32:13] You didn't get the outcome that you wanted. Okay. But we definitely need

[1:32:18] folks like you. When I say you, I'm talking about people who are willing to

[1:32:23] step up and do what they think is the right thing in the township. And I truly

[1:32:28] hope you you find the right thing that passes the zoning thing and you're

[1:32:32] living in the community at some point in time because it's important

[1:32:36] » for for younger folks to step up here other than us old people and and it's

[1:32:41] really important for you to be involved in the community and there's all kinds

[1:32:45] of places that you can get involved in this community and you can get on a

[1:32:50] planning commission, right? [laughter]

[1:32:53] I've been there, done that. Don't want to do it again. Okay? But there are

[1:32:57] opportunities. There are opportunities to be involved and and and I truly hope

[1:33:02] you do. You do do that. Do do that. >> That's Lee Abernathy talking for this

[1:33:08] township. Been living there for 20 years now. 20 plus years.

[1:33:12] » Believe it or not, this is the longest place I've ever lived in my life.

[1:33:15] » Oh, really? >> This place right now is the longest

[1:33:17] place I've ever lived in my life. >> So, um, do you have any Do you guys have

[1:33:22] any comments? Yeah, I I'm I'm really sorry that you had to go through the

[1:33:26] state and pay money there and then get certified. That just blows in my mind,

[1:33:32] you know, that you know, you >> taken all these steps down the road and

[1:33:36] then, you know, come to this um decision.

[1:33:41] » Yeah. I'm sorry. Oh, yes. >> Yeah. So, unfortunate.

[1:33:45] » Go it'll go with the minutes. and then whatever other business you guys can

[1:33:50] finish out your agenda. I don't know anything else.

[1:33:54] » No, I think they're in public comment. >> Okay,

[1:33:56] » just we're doing public comments. If you guys want to say anything,

[1:33:59] » you want to call us names, feel free. [laughter]

[1:34:04] » Yeah, obviously we want to thank everyone for being here.

[1:34:07] » Did not expect any of this to happen. Um, so you know, like I said, we've said

[1:34:13] from the beginning, we've been working with a team of people that have all been

[1:34:16] interpreting this this way. And so it's unfortunate

[1:34:19] » that it's not being interpreted this way. We still do disagree.

[1:34:23] » Um, there might be more of us with this. Okay. I'm, you know, I'm not going to

[1:34:30] make any promises or um but yeah, I mean, we

[1:34:36] strongly feel like we presented a a good case. And I would say if there's any

[1:34:40] room for there to be >> um ambiguity in this, then, you know, I

[1:34:47] would hope that it would move in the direction of having someone build a a

[1:34:52] home. >> So, all I would say,

[1:34:55] » oh, we thank you. We really do. Thank you. Okay. We do appreciate. Do you guys

[1:35:00] have any other business that we need to take? Can you guys think of anything?

[1:35:04] » No. >> Is there anything else you can think of,

[1:35:06] Tasha? We need to do >> and should I get a motion to adjourn the

[1:35:10] meeting at 8:09? >> I [laughter]

[1:35:15] » Okay, I'll make the motion. She said Dave, you have you vote on that? All

[1:35:19] right. I [laughter]

[1:35:28] » motion refers to >> Yeah, we Well, I don't know if I

[1:35:31] necessarily put it in the minutes, but it should. You should keep it keep it

[1:35:34] with it, but it doesn't

[1:35:41] » You can keep it in there. >> However, normally keep those things on

[1:35:48] records. do that. We've never done >> Okay,

[1:35:53] » we do the best of finding that's translating.

[1:35:58] » Yeah, this is basically the same thing. It's just a different

[1:36:02] » I'll go ahead and say something to

[1:36:11] » my eyes.

[1:36:16] Well, it was nice to meet you all. >> Yeah, no problem. Thank you.

[1:36:21] » I really appreciate it. >> No problem at all.

[1:36:30] » Oh my god.

[1:36:36] » Chicago. >> I don't know.

[1:36:40] » I'll go tell Ken that we're done so we can talk.

[1:36:43] » Is she still in there or what? Yeah, it goes there.

[1:36:47] I think Rof will change them.

[1:37:05] He's

[1:37:19] ready.

[1:37:48] Yeah.

[1:37:59] Oh

Zoning Board of Appeals - 24 Aug 2026

Transcript