[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