All right.
and of course, I'll put my account away. Okay.
I'm on it. I will call the april 13th, 2026 regular meeting of the meridian township planning commission
to order and we will go through roll call. Commissioner nahum? Here. Commissioner brooks?
present. Vice chair mccurtis? Present. Commissioner shuesberry? Present.
commissioner snyder? Here. And commissioner mcconnell? You're here. And the chair is here,
so we have a full board today. And at this moment, I can move to item three on our agenda,
which is policy. Mr.
shirky, do we have any remarks? There are no remarks. There are no remarks. With that, I will move
to item four on the agenda, which is approval of today's agenda. Do we have any additions,
deletions, or amendments to the april 13, 2026 agenda? We do not.
hearing none, I would move for a... Uh move for or it asks
for approval of today's agenda so move second so moved by commissioner mcconnell seconded
by vice chair mccurtis uh also note commissioner nahum was also willing to do so um all in
favor aye aye any opposed very well we will consider today's
agenda approved and with that we will move to approval of the minutes
from the march 23rd 2026 meeting item 5 in the agenda are there any amendments
changes deletions to the minutes from our march 23rd, 2026 meeting.
okay, hearing none, I would entertain a motion
to approve the minutes from the march 23rd agenda. So moved.
moved by vice chairman curtis. Second from commissioner shuesbury.
all in favor, aye. Aye. Opposed? And the minutes are approved.
with that, we'll move to number six. There is a communications from ben. I'm going to go
with ugarhide. Probably butchered it. Regarding the zoning amendment
26002 that is in your packet, and then I handed out an email from a resident also
about zoning amendment number 26002. I will note there's an email
here from nancy, nancy7654 at gmail.com, which we've been handed.
can I ask a question about that? Commissioner brooks.
for when we get communications, so when somebody comes... Before the commission make a
public comment, they usually have to say their name and address
at the podium. So in email communication, is that also required to be
considered an official comment? No. So we could get an email?
I save all the emails that I get on everything. They're all foiable. I keep them all
in the appropriate folder. And I don't think they're required to give their name and address.
it's just we ask them to do so. Oh, okay.
all right. I'm just curious about the differences. No, it's a good question,
but no, I keep all emails. Okay. That would make sense,
because you are foia-able. All right. Thank you.
anything further on communications item six on the agenda?
there is not. Okay. That's a no-action item. We'll just note that we have
the two emails noted, and then we can move on to public hearings. The first being sup 26007,
tailgaters, special use permit. Mr.
torkey. Thank you. Oh, this is amazing.
okay. Does this one work better?
yes. It's an ec2. Okay.
special use permit number 26007, tailgaters. To construct a tailgaters gas
station and convenience store should also say a drive-thru at 1614 and 1622 grand river avenue and a vacant parcel on
central park drive. Not a lot to say
on the first page. It is zone c2. These are all c2 uses.
dimensionally, dimensional regulations, not a problem with it.
I'm going to skip right to... This page here.
item three.
so we are making a move toward digital submittals. In our office.
so the site plan that came with the application that you have in your packet is the second
version of it and not the most recent version of it.
the 11 by 17 in front of you is the current site plan and the one that should have been
in the packet, it was mislabeled in the folder.
it is part of the learning curve of moving to digital files. Staff apologizes
for any confusion. But the upshot of it is their parking does comply with our
with on the current plan. It complies
with all our ordinances. There is one small thing that
staff has noted in the update to the latest and greatest site plan.
they didn't update their bike parking. I've had a conversation with the applicant.
they're going to give us two more bike parking spaces. They do not have to request a variance
for parking. However, the standards
for gas stations in the c2 zone state that you can have no more than 10 vehicle fueling
stations. Now, a vehicle fueling station is not the pump. A pump has two stations
by definition in the ordinance. They have eight pumps.
for this site plan to go through as proposed, they'll have to concurrently,
if they get the site plan approval, they'll have to concurrently apply
for a zoning variance. For the six extra fueling stations.
so any resolution of approval that might happen, that'll be a condition of approval.
other than that, staff points out they did submit a traffic study.
the study will have to be approved by both the ingham county road department and by
michigan department of transportation. The study does have a series
of suggestions. Those are shown on the site plan.
other than that, staff really has no comment. We've been talking
to the applicant for a while. They've heard all of the,
they've taken our suggestions. The plan is, you know, whatever
environmentally sensitive areas of the subject property there are, they're working
around them, they're following our ordinances. They just need the one variance
and the two parking spaces.
they are represented, and I can answer questions, or you can hear from the applicant.
questions for mr. Shorkey?
is this the same parcel that we had previously looked at for a potential storage unit
facility? Yes, it is, and a marijuana dispensary.
um, can you pull up the location and like the parcel here? I just want to see where the
closest residences are. Absolutely. I am remiss. I should have thought
of that. Oh, mabson's g.I.s.
it is... If you'll give me a moment,
I'm going to shut some of this stuff off.
thanks trains and local roads
it is yeah, yeah because it
comes out on central park drive, thank you it's this
piece and these two pieces so on the site plan hold on the
site plan is oriented with north to the left, so if you turn it sideways, the
detention area is shown as proposed on this, so they're
not proposing any development up here off of central park drive.
they do have a drive coming out here, and that's why the ingham county road department will have to get involved.
they do show an ingress-ingress on central park drive. The development, the the
convenience store, gas station, etc.
comes up in this area here, so you don't see any development here in just kind
of the general overview.
thank you. Of course. Shrewsbury.
on the plan that we have here at appears to connect to the
street at the north side with the neighborhood.
say that one more time. Like, if you turn it this way,
where it says everwood lane private, is that going to connect to this little stub
here? I'm going to, they, my understanding, and I'll let them talk
about this, my understanding is that they've approached grand reserve about making that connection.
I don't know if that's set in stone yet at all. They can answer questions
about where they stand on that. And it's not a connection that the township's requiring, it's
one that they're proposing. So it's not required for public safety? It's not, no.
they have two ins and outs on the site. Thank you.
commissioner mcconnell. Looks
like there's also another stub on the northwest, or is that
like a turnaround thing? We can hear from the outskirts,
I'm sorry. Yeah. Yes, that's not going to go in some place.
not as far as I know. I haven't heard of any other
development proposal going in that direction, but it's
simply just a potential turnaround for emergency vehicles,
I assume. Okay, thanks. Mr.
nagel. Apologies for my interruption. Sure, sure, sure.
are the neighbors informed? Like the 300 feet? Of course they are. They are?
okay, so the fact that they aren't here means they were informed. Sorry, I don't mean to...
sorry. Yes, yes. This is a public hearing. Public notification laws apply.
in the case of grand reserve, it is technically one big parcel, I will say this.
they did receive a copy of the legal notice and was
told to hang it up in their office. And that's standard procedure
for apartment complexes and things like that. I have two questions.
so additional gas pumping
stations, I know you said that would require a variance.
is there any concern about that, given the amount of additional? Because right now is what is
zoned for, what, you said eight? Ten.
the zoning category c2 allows up to ten fueling stations,
five pumps. We'll just talk in terms of
pumps. ...allows five pumps. They want eight pumps.
there's no concern from it from a zoning perspective, and their traffic assessment has
taken that into account when they've looked at potential traffic
on the site. So they want five pumps. I mean, it's zoned
for five pumps, but they want an additional... They want three more.
and by definition, that's six additional fuel stations. Because each pump has two
stations. Two sides. Yes. Got it.
that's what I was trying to figure out. Yep. My second question was
about the traffic. Because of the additional fueling stations and it's
coming off grand river just like speedway does. Get that. But just what does the, has the
traffic assessment been done and what, you know? Yes, it has. And those kind of,
those are not packaged. It. It makes the recommendations,
as bullet pointed in my memo here, these are shown on the plan.
so on grand river specifically, they have a right in, they're proposing a right in,
right out. Yeah. Which makes a lot of sense. I wouldn't want to try
to make a left turn out of that. Commissioner neal?
another question. So are we supposed to be evaluating the site plan with the expectation that they
will get this variance, or are we supposed to be evaluating it? Under the...
no, go ahead and evaluate the site plan. So the site plan as is, as before.
yes. Mr. Shorkey, can you, because we've done a number
of different kinds of things that were like special use permit recently,
but weren't exactly a special use permit, I feel like,
can you walk us through why is this a special use permit
rather than something else? We're just not even requiring a
special use permit. We require a special use permit for gas stations
in the c2 district, and we require a special use permit for all drive-thrus in the township.
so then, so if, so since this looks like three parcels.
it is. If it wasn't a gas station or wasn't a drive-thru, then there
could be this building that would take up, that would go
across all three parcels. Yeah. Yeah, we'd probably require
them to combine the parcels as part of the site plan approval.
we've done that with other people. I don't know why they'd want
to, but I leave that up to them. I don't have a problem
with that. If, yeah, okay.
typically, in a multi-parcel,
like grand reserve is a good example, right? They had to join those parcels together,
and that's one big parcel now. Does the planning commission, I
just, I'm sorry, this is a basic question. Does the planning commission get involved when?
multiple parcels have to be joined? No, that's a land combination. That's an administrative
function. Thank you. I just can't remember if we'd ever done that or if I had done
that. Was there any consideration
regarding the parking in here and the possibility of
the ordinance changes that we're currently looking at? I looked at the changes.
so we're not proposing any changes
to the parking standards. We already did that last year. Right.
so the parking numbers are the current parking numbers.
as far as the parking layout, I don't see any problems in terms of any
of the proposed changes. Okay. Even for like the buffer zones?
yep. Yep.
that's a good question. At least I have one. Would hate
to create a nonconformity on this. I thought I was just trying to,
like, just saying. Okay, thank you.
of course. I think I know the answer
to this, but when we see the right term taper, I mean it's just cut in a way where you can only,
to prevent folks from doing this left term thing. Coming out. Right.
it kind of cuts to the right so that you can get over and then out
of the main line of traffic. Yes. Oh, I see. Okay.
to enter. Okay. So the exit though, because you don't want
to have a no left turn sign. Right. Right now, like where bank of
america is, you can only turn here I can show you the way that is cut even though I see
people who go back sometimes. They do have fun. It might be one of those people
and we don't want to be judged. No judgment. This is, yeah, this is not.
it doesn't have the arrows. This doesn't have it as clearly
delineated as the plan in front of you,
but the basic idea, you have this taper here going
in here, this would be a right turn in, and then the right turn
out would, you'd. You'd have to get in, I think, yeah, you'd have to get into the traffic.
yeah, that makes sense. But, I mean, that's a configuration that we see around the township
in places. Thank you.
of course. I don't know. Commissioner brooks?
was there any discussion about not having any entryway off of grand river?
no. There is a current. Curb cut there.
yeah. They're just widening it and utilizing it.
okay, so it's not, there's no additional curb cut. Correct.
it's happening across all the two partials that are on the south side.
no, there is an access. They're keeping their access in the same location.
yeah, yeah. Why?
actually, maybe they're not. There is one access.
it would have gone to this house that is shown on our parcel viewer that's
since been demolished. They're moving the act.
you know what? Rather than guessing, give me a second. I'll show you how to do this.
here, turn on the imagery. Okay. Please do. There we go.
this is... Come on up and introduce yourself. They're going to ask questions
of you anyway. So my name is jeff haddad. I'm from tailgaters, 1622
west grand river. To clear this up, I believe there's two current curb cuts,
and we're proposing to go down to one. So for all intents and
purposes, you'd be sharing with bank of america? No, no. That's a completely different
site. So there's the two old homes that were demolished on the site.
there was, each one of those was serviced by its own drive. Oh, okay.
thank you.
this may be for mr. Chorky. Is there the possibility that
we would just consolidate the curb cuts? I mean, so in this drawing
here, the paper one, there's already two curb cuts.
we're going to replace the one on the left with a bigger one,
but there's already one just to the west of that on the other parcel.
there's two cuts. That's their property.
yeah. But it's still just a main entrance to a c2 space.
yeah. So is there any way that we can just have used that and so we
don't have multiple curb cuts in that same area? You don't have multiple curb
cuts. They're going from two to one. No, I know.
I'm saying if we think about this as a collective area, it's not.
just those two parcels. Oh, you mean like with bank of america, etc.?
we can't make them connect. No. We can't force an access easement
on an adjacent property. Yeah, I'm not proposing that, that we can force anyone. But I don't, I mean,
we were just talking
about the traffic, and we were talking about how there's going
to be more traffic, and there's going to be requirements for people
to turn off and on into this developed space. Yeah. There's already a developed
space right next to it. Why do we need two entry points to commercial area?
I don't understand the question. So you've got this access here
that goes to this site. You've got this access that goes to the sparrow. There are two drives
on the property right now. Think of it as one property, although it's just two parcels.
they're proposing to take two. Drives and make one out of it,
albeit a larger commercial. We can't force interconnectivity between
private landowners. I don't understand the concern. It looks like they have a road
connecting the two parking lots, if I'm reading the site
line correctly. Yeah, you're right. They have a proposed road that
would connect the two. You do have a proposed road. Can you explain?
no, I believe that was required by the township, if I'm not mistaken.
but we certainly don't need it. Is there not an ordinance that
calls for it? I'd have to go back and look
to see. That might be a requirement of the corridor improvement.
there's a corridor improvement overlay district. That's going on here has to do
with access, but they still need their own entrance.
like that's a connection. It's only 25 feet wide.
I mean, a little follow-up on this is mdot,
I've worked extensively with mdot over the last year as we've looked at this site.
they're well aware of the traffic study. The way the the approach is
designed right now was right out of mdot's book. They sent me a book
of designs and said, use this design. Here it is.
this is what you get. Yeah, I appreciate that. And I can understand that as well.
and I'm trying to think outside
the box slightly here and saying that one
of the underlying goals is to reduce curb cuts. And because the more curb cuts
we have, then the more entry points there are, where there's more
people slowing down on grand river, where you're going
over 45. So if there's a place that's getting ready
to be developed, and there's almost no development on it,
and there is already a curb cut, that according to this design,
it can't be... Well, I don't know how far away it is.
it may be 20 feet away on the west side.
I don't really see why there couldn't be a possibility of a shared entryway
into these areas. We can't make bank of america share their entrance.
they're required to have their own entrance. It's grand river avenue.
I understand we can't make them do it. I get that.
okay. So I'm throwing this out there. And the public hearing as a
possibility.
in the meantime, I think, commissioner mcconnell, you've
been waiting. I think you had a comment. I feel really picky now that
I've focused my eyes enough to see that that's a concrete pathway running very faintly
through the drawing. So I found my pathway.
you found your pathway. Yes. Pathway is shown on the plan
thank you we show a pathway from the grand reserve as well as from grand river as well we love sidewalks I would love
to hear you explain circulation on this site is that something we can move to yes I will say
and whatever else you'd like to yeah perfect a little history about me is I operate
the other four tailgaters in the lansing area we've got a fifth one under construction here
in williamston I've been in the business for 26 years now I started in high school,
grew up here in meridian township, lived the first 32 years here in meridian
township. I've always loved this community, always wished
to have a store somewhere in here, and this looks like a great opportunity here.
so your question about the circulation of the site, this site is very,
very similar to the last two sites that we've done.
the building size is going to be just under 10,000 square feet again, I think 9,800.
same number of fueling stations as the last two that we've
done. So the delta township project that opened in 2025 also had
the 16 fueling stations. And then same with the one in williamston.
that one's also being built right now with 16 fueling stations.
that's what helps make the site economically viable for us. Anything less than that and it
would become cost prohibitive. The cost of building nowadays is...
I mean, you probably know it's extreme, so that just adds to the bottom line
for us. I'm also super curious
about the business itself. When I hear drive-thru,
what sorts of products can you pick up drive-thru? So we pride ourselves
on being a one-stop shop, whether it's grocery, convenience items.
at some of our other locations, we've got a full-service dunkin' donuts with a drive-thru.
we have not identified the restaurant user at this site yet, but it'll be a national brand,
somebody that you're familiar with, somebody that you'll be proud of, and obviously you'll hear
about that when we go to site plan approval. You do sell liquor?
we do, yep. The pack is out the front door. What was that? Does that drive
through as well? No, it's a packaged liquor inside sales only. Yeah, the michigan liquor
control commission would have their work. They would now like that.
I think a buddy of mine grew up someplace where that was a thing. But if you could talk more
about the connectivity that you were talking about, the pathways and stuff. Yep.
so we're a big fan of sidewalks, and we've got a sidewalk coming from grand river for any
of the guests that want to visit us from the apartments
across the street. We have not reached a deal with the property owner of the grand reserve,
but we've reached out to him and suggested the pathway and the access agreement
with the road. We don't think it'll be a problem, but we're working
with him. Is that the everwood lane? It is, yep.
and then you can see that we've got an access drive to central park as well.
so just like mdot, I've worked very closely with
ingham county road
department, giving them preliminary looks, asking
for feedback on what the approach should look like, and we've incorporated all of those things
into that approach as well. Commissioner mcconnell? And the other small step that we're thinking might be a
turnaround, is that like for snow clearance or something? It's just keeping an open mind to what that might be
in the future. There's no plans whatsoever for that vacant piece.
along central park, but just keeping our options open. Cool.
so you compared this a little bit to the delta township new
build from a couple years ago? Yep.
it seems different. If I'm remembering the delta township one, there's not a ton
around that one. There's kind of, you've got a freeway, right,
and that's just kind of you guys right there, right? Yes.
so to me, this is a little markedly different because it's in...
a pretty high traffic area already, so I don't know if I'm necessarily asking a question, but I guess I'm just
challenging the idea that it's similar because it is, to me, just geographically different.
so when the traffic study was completed, the same engineer that did that traffic study was the one that did the traffic
studies for all... All three of our previous locations.
so he's very familiar with the traffic counts that we generate and took everything like that into consideration.
I was with the commissioner mcconnell who's our resident traffic study because as the
understand this but I keep I was at the front there's two traffic studies
there's a study and then there's a or in the ordinance there's a traffic assessment
assessment and then there's a study and then if the assessment shows that a lot
that they propose if the potential traffic rises to a certain level that whole blown
study that goes to a study. Okay, we did it in a more tech you went right
to study we went right to the study because I reached out to them for preliminary guidance and they said do the
study study the what I usually do in your packet to keep the pages down.
I take all the appendix is out there this was a this was a full study.
yeah. Yeah I say that all saying that I wouldn't understand, like I
can read the traffic studies as many times as I want. I don't come out with any greater understanding.
commissioner shusberry. I'm looking at the memo and it says it's two parcels.
is that actually three parcels or is it two? There are three parcels. I'm sorry about that.
that's okay. But the acreage, the 2.4?
accurate is the 2.4 just the two that front on grand river and the um...
no, this is 8 something. Can I address something that was brought up earlier that
pertains to that question? Yes. Okay.
so earlier it was talked about the three parcels and yes we intend to combine all three into one parcel.
and that's going to be the total of 8.665 acres or something right
in that ballpark. And then I know you mentioned...
you may. You don't have plans yet for
that back parcel up front onto central park, but for mr.
shorkey, if they do combine those three parcels and then decide to build,
I see it's sort of faintly the setbacks are listed in that back part there.
would that be considered like one development and the total square footage would need
to be considered for usage, or is it? Two buildings, one parcel.
combining those parcels, would that put any constraints on what could be developed? Right.
so if they're going to move parcel lines around, they can go to three to two.
if you went to three to two, then it would save them the land division in the future.
and the setbacks would be calculated from the one of the
setbacks that you're seeing on there is the required 100-foot
setback. From residential, that's a
constraint that's inherent to the c2 zone.
that's still going to be there, but other than that...
and my apologies, you did bring up a good point. We do intend to split this into
two parcels and not one parcel. The grand river and the central park.
exactly. That makes sense. But it's a simple administrative process
to do that. Okay. But the detention area would span across the two parcels
right now combined no no no that would stay fully
on our parcel but we are building a little extra into our detention pond
for a possible for whatever that land might be at some point commissioner oh
yeah a number of small things so um you have here everwood lane um is that the same as elmwood road
on the parcel viewer because I just want to make sure that, um...
where are you? North.
um, so if you, um, if you zoom
out a little bit, it's,
um... And if you turn on the, um... Yeah, let me get rid
of the... Because it looks
like the offshoot from woodland way is...
that's... Okay, yes, yes, thank you. Yeah, so there's elmwood road.
okay, there's elmwood road. Right. Okay, and in the site plan, it's called everwood.
everwood. You've got everwood. Okay. Not a big thing.
I just wanted to make sure that those are the same thing. Yeah, simple fix. Another thing is, so
on the connection to grand river, hamilton road is, like, directly across
from your entrance. Are you expecting people to come from hamilton road and
go straight across? Grand river and access your property? So I'm not too familiar
with that, but that is exactly where mdot required the one entrance we were permitted.
that was just a hard, you get it here and that's take it or leave it.
right. Now, my question was concerning because right now the entrance
from grand river, you don't have like a large triangular median
to like force right turns as the only access. I'm just worried that without that, people from
hamilton may try to like just beeline across
grand river. They would be crazier than I am.
so just to clarify, we are permitted a left turn into the site as well from
grand river. And that's why it's not completely like a pork chop shape
like you see some. Okay, right. You've got a left turn movement here.
exactly. Okay. From the center turn. Exactly.
okay. And then kind of the last question I had is, can you speak to why you need
10, or sorry, yeah, 10 pumps instead of... 16.
yeah, sorry, 16. Eight pumps, 16 stations instead of 10.
so just based on market research that we've done from other...
from our other stations. You know, I work inside each of the locations every day. I'm in boots
on the ground. I look out the window. I see how many vehicles are fueling.
you guys have a great community here. I think this is going to be a busy location for us.
I think anything less than 16 fueling stations would be underserved and really detract
from the economic benefit of putting a site here. Thank you.
what's the economic benefit for putting the site here?
just because it's good, I believe it's going to be a good location.
I think the community is going to benefit from it. I think a lot of people
like our services. We provide a clean, bright, well-kept establishment,
the best landscaping, the best facilities. I think your community would
embrace it. I think there's a reason why there's nobody here not
supporting or showing. I intend to come back to that question. One of the benefits that the
township does see in this, and I think I noted in the staff report,
this is the first gas station on the north side of grand river between williamston and
east lansing. So at the moment,
if you're traveling west on grand river and you need to stop for gas, every one of
those movements is a left turn. We see it as a tremendous benefit
for travelers that they're going to be able to have a north side access and make a
simple right turn into something. I don't want to get
into specifics. They're not the only ones thinking about this. They're just the first one
through the door. So, mr.
strick, I have one. This is probably better for you because this goes back
to what I'm going to call the notice provision you kind of mentioned. So you noticed...
grand reserve by probably noticing the management company, right? Because that's an apartment
complex. I sent it to their main office on site. On site.
oh, right. So their office on site.
oh, yeah. Were there any other residences, homes, things that were within that
300 foot? How about this? Let me try this another way.
how many letters did you send out? Offhand in the... Wall to 15.
yeah. 300 feet out. You can see that that's one,
that's one, two, three, you
know, it's sparrow, drain commission.
yeah. Yeah.
and then of course the public notice. The public. Yes.
yeah. Yeah. I grant that.
it's. It sounds like you fully complied with the notice requirement,
but I was just thinking a little bit like, yes, I notice. When you put something
in a department complex, you put it in a place where you expect residents to go.
it's not an individual notice to each resident. Right.
and there really is no other truly residential area. No. Okay. Commissioner mcconnell.
my first question to the applicant was poorly phrased. Planner shirky, could you pull up the site plan again,
please? I'll pull it up. It's old, but it's okay. I think it'll still work. Okay.
kind of zoom in on kind of the main building site that shows
the entrances and exits. Zoom out just a little bit more, please.
okay. You or the applicant could help
us understand how a car comes in southbound on grand river, or westbound on grand river,
and gets gas and then goes through or goes through the
drive-thru. And how it then leaves that
would really help I think because this is small and I think I understand it but I don't.
so everything on our site is tailgater sizes I like to say these are not 24 foot wide dual way dual traffic
everything on the site is designed to be big and comfortable and
spacious there's plenty of room to turn around everywhere you look most drive
aisles on commercial developments are 24 feet they try and pack
everything in there so tight and and save space. That's not the way this site is designed.
this site is designed spaciously, and I don't think it's too much space.
it's just the right amount. If I might interrupt you. Yep.
if I'm coming down this map, coming into east lansing or into meridian township, and I
turn right off of grand river and go to the drive-thru,
can you? I think I see like six cars stacked at the drive-thru.
is that correct? And then there's a service station that shows one car,
and then there's a pass-through for people who aren't using the drive-through,
who are just leaving the site. Am I understanding that correctly? Sorry, I'm having a little
trouble following where you were going with that. Can I? Yeah.
I think you're reading it right. So you come in and you get your gas, right?
you're going to come around this side of the building, so this would be the east side
of the building. You'd get in line here. And then you see this... I think that's actually the
exit. No. Okay, sorry. This is your pickup.
so you come here... This is drive-through stacking space. Right.
right there. That's where they're stacking, waiting for their... Well, no,
this is landscaping. This is the building.
okay, that's the pickup right there. It is a dual drive-through, just like mcdonald's has,
where you can order from two different points. Does that help? Thank you very much.
yeah. Because that makes so much more sense for how you would then leave the site.
if I had to go in the other way, you'd be driving in circles. No, that makes thank you.
vice chairman curtis? Yeah, so if I'm traveling east on grand river, what is the
best way to enter? You can turn right in or you can turn left in
from the center lane. Right. But the way that, so the
entrance, because you got the exit lane that's cut where
you're leaving, you're forced to make a right turn.
so this right here, if you can see the cursor,
is the exit onto grand river. Right.
and then if you were coming east along grand river, heading up this way, you can turn left in here, same as somebody
turning right. Okay.
and that's exactly what I was looking at. I was just making sure that the way that you're traveling west
and you're turning right, that that's not just for the people turning right.
you're turning left. You need to have, is that going to be big enough for folks to turn left?
it is. Not at the same time, obviously.
you've got to wait your turn. But the reason I'm asking that question is because, and I know you all don't have anything
to do with this, but like the bank of america site. That's awkward when you're
trying to turn in left. Yep. And so that's what I was
asking, is that awkwardness is going to be there?
I don't know if bank of america, you can turn left in there. Yeah, I don't think it's
allowed at bank of america. Yeah, well, allowed versus done are two different things. Right.
I may have done that today. It's traffic. I mean, when people drive going traveling west, east,
am I saying that right? Yeah, traveling east on grand river.
in to bank of america, I gotta go to the bank. And then you gotta turn left. I mean that, you know, I've done it.
so, um... I hope mr. Shurkey you do not release
these videos to the meridian township police department. The police chief is not
watching. Because you're stuck. You're like, okay, left turn,
you're in the center lane. Anyway, you answered my question.
thank you.
I watch people turn left out of meyer on a rapid rate.
I have another question. Commissioner brock. For the, can you, so you're,
I'm concerned about the parking and the, that you want to have,
that this is going to be a spacious space. And the reason is not because I
think, I don't want to dictate what is
on this spot, but because some of the goals in our master plan are to
maintain our environment here locally and so the more parking
lots we have, that leads to more runoff from asphalt.
and so my goal is to try and reduce parking by as much as possible.
so this next question is, for the other tailgaters that you have around the lansing area,
what is the utilization of the parking lots that you have?
so dewitt is 106. Holt has 101.
delta township has 65, but delta township also has a much
larger parking lot with impervious surfaces. The okemos location I didn't
even count just because it shares a lot with culver's, and that would be a lot harder
to judge off of. But those three sites are just a restaurant user,
a tailgaters gas station, and that's why I included those.
and so we are proposing 80 here, and I believe that's justified because this is a
much busier corridor. I think that this location will
generate more traffic than those other ones.
yeah, so there may be more traffic than the other ones, but my question, though,
is what's your utilization of the parking at the other locations?
so how often is that parking lot actually full to the maximum capacity?
so I feel regularly enough to dictate putting in 80 spots. Asphalt's expensive.
it's expensive to store the water that that impervious surface generates.
I don't want to put in any more parking spots than I need. That's why I suggest 80.
it is expensive, though. Yes?
my name is emily johnson.
come on out here. You've got to say your address. My name is emily johnson.
I'm also with tailgaters. I've worked at tailgaters for 10 years, and I've worked at every single location.
I can tell you very confidently that 80 spaces will be utilized, hands down.
on a busy saturday, we can employ between 15 and 20 people, peak hours.
so that's just employee. That's not even customer.
and on top of that, if you come for breakfast, I don't know if any of you have ever come
for breakfast to any of our locations on a weekend. They're busy.
every spot is full. Every gas pump is full. The parking is justified, I can promise you.
if not, we could even benefit from more. That's my take on it. Can I, I know this is not
relevant, sorry I'm not a good public speaker. You're doing great. Thank you.
can I touch on the benefit to the community that was asked a little bit?
so I'm not from here, but I lived at hamilton trace for four years.
I went to college here too in east lansing. I'm a big bike rider.
I know what it's like to be a college student, and I think there's a lot
of college students in the area. When I lived there, there's gas stations, but there's nothing like a
tailgaters. There's nothing like going to a tailgaters, being able to find your lunch, have a place
to do your homework, get a coffee, get a job. And for people that live at
grand reserve, I kind of think back to my childhood. I used to go on bike rides
to go get ice cream with my mom. I see people doing that with grand reserve.
I can totally see families saying, hey, let's get on our bikes, let's go to tailgaters
for a special treat tonight. Let's do that. And I see the huge benefit to a community here.
you know, we're more than just a gas station. We're big family people,
too. Jeff got into this as a result of his father, who's been
in the business even longer. We're really family-operated. Every single store is operated by a family member.
we're obviously out of family members at this point.
but him and I still go to every store.
maddie over here, she's worked with us for just as long. We hired her as a high school
student, and we would love to hire more high school students. It's a great employment opportunity for a lot
of people in the area. I mean, especially for high school kids
in this area, college kids in this area, who can take the bus, who can walk
from their house at their apartment nearby, or ride their bike from grand reserve.
I see a lot of benefit here for a lot of people.
that's my two cents. Commissioner neumann? Yeah, two questions.
so I don't see any additional signage listed on your site plan. Are you going
to only have signage attached to the building, especially the fueling canopy, I presume?
there will be signage on the building, the fuel canopy, and then there should
be a monument sign proposed, and that might just not be shown on your, if you look
on the 11 by 14 that you were handed. You can see a tiny little dot
right in the front of the site. That's more visible and called out on other site plans that
are probably not in your packet, but you've got access to them.
it's there. The other question is, is there any electric vehicle charging
at any of your tailgater locations? Is that something you would consider?
so not at this point, but we do have conduit installed underneath the concrete for
future use should the need ever arise. Right now we just haven't seen the benefit or the payoff,
so we haven't done it yet, but we do have the ability at some of the locations to install that.
yeah, because if people are coming there for meals, I can imagine that there might be demand for that,
but yeah that's something yep, you're right on. Do you intend
to put that same, I'm going to call it an outlet, an outlet to build out
at the site? You said you mentioned having the evs.
you have evability at other sites, right? Is that what you were saying?
but you need to build it out to get there. Exactly. We have to install the
infrastructure underground. We've got extra capacity on our transformer and things of that nature.
but, no, we have not actually pulled the trigger on any infrastructure yet. Okay.
same intent here, or are you saying this is... Same intent here.
we haven't seen the value in installing it just yet. Yeah, yeah.
but we're always evaluating and not opposed to it in any way. Okay.
commissioner mcconnell? Please come back and talk more
about bike racks. Seriously, more of a suggestion.
I very much see an uptick in my own neighborhood.
a mile away in kids and parents riding bikes.
more and more and more electric. So as you build out that infrastructure,
probably a good idea to think about where they'll put those vehicles when they get there.
it's getting people out and about, and that's great. Yeah, brian brought that up
right before the meeting, and we agreed to install eight bike racks instead
of whatever's on the plan at six. Fantastic.
two for me, ms. Johnson was it? That was a great story. So keep your public speaking
up. You had me at the biking to get ice cream.
I think that's a wonderful way to do it. And then I don't know if mr.
shirky told you, sir, I get big on restaurants. So you say a national
recognizable restaurant, keep it in the back
of your head, maybe something local, god help us. I say that not for you
to answer, but I'm just putting it out there. You really want to see jeff's
chicken shack? We have enough chicken shacks. If I'm opening something, it's going to be like a ci
bowls because I think there's a market for that. But not, you know, no.
I keep asking for better restaurants. So any other questions,
comments from the commissioners? I have one.
commissioner snyder. So the only sign that you mentioned,
the only monument sign is off of grand river, no additional signage off of central park to direct people in
off that entrance? Good point, yes. We would be proposing one somewhere along central park as
well, as long as that's, I'd have to check with the sign folks, but yeah.
all the signage, of course, would be finalized during the site plan review, but it's a good question,
something to keep in mind. Obviously it makes sense, you know, direct people off of central park.
central park rather than turn on the grand river to find it. Now that you put the idea
in my head, the other place I would crave would be to have a sonic.
of all things. I really want a cherry limeade in the worst way, like daily.
should we all put in our suggestions? Yes. And then vote.
restaurants from a hat, we'll just put them in there and we'll pull. Sir, I thank you for your time
and answering the commissioner's questions. And I understand uh this is just the initial public hearing
and we have to bring this back at the next meeting sounds good I I appreciate everything and
uh yeah I think you'll be pleased with the development in particular you uh jeff mr uh
bomb back I think I think we're we will not disappoint you you will not disappoint me and I
hope this uh yeah that's all I want to say thanks, brian. Of course.
you'll be pleased. Okay.
is that a hint? Can you get a limeade?
you going on the way here every day? I'm all about cherry limeades.
yeah, they got one in lansing, right? They got the sonic in lansing, didn't they?
no? No. I thought there was one in lansing. No, there isn't.
oh, alright. Shows you what I know. Um, moving on. Typically, you give staff some
direction. You don't make a formal vote. Oh, yes, that's right.
um, so this would be, this is what we call a soft, or a... Straw bowl.
straw bowl. Straw bowl. All right, so, because I do have to write a resolution
for your next meeting. So, a straw poll for those commissioners that would be voting to approve the special
use permit for 260.
have you been tailgaters? No. Strawpole, sorry. Are we putting yes? Yes.
yes. Fine. I'm not going to say, you know,
planning commission indicated by strawpole. Yeah. Yeah, and I'll write a
resolution. That's all the minutes will say. I'm still learning this job,
mr. Scherke. Yeah, that's okay. That's why I'm here.
with that we can move to... You guys don't have to. We welcome you
but you don't have to. But thank you. We really appreciate it.
thank you. And with that we can move to b under public hearing. I'll be in touch.
za26002, chicken. Unless you want to talk about chicken ordinances.
okay.
this is pretty self-explanatory. There's no changes from the
draft. I do have some numbers I want to share,
though. I was curious about the effect
of adding districts. So we currently allow backyard
chickens in our raaa, raa, and ra zones.
that's on the books, okay? We currently have roughly 08,770 parcels that our
ordinance applies to. That they're eligible to apply
for backyard chickens. Note that that's over half our parcels
in our township. Those don't change. If this passes in its form,
you'd be adding the rb and the rx districts. That's another 1,800 or so
parcels.
so you'd go from 87.7 to
10.6. Again, that's not, I thought that would be interesting to see, you know,
is this a lot of effect, is this not a lot of effect?
rough math, is that 15, 17% somewhere in there? What?
the expansion. So you're talking about adding 800 to 8700.
I'm doing some... It's about 15 to 18%. Yeah.
using parcels, though, is the math a little difficult,
though, because they're different sizes. So it's probably maybe more
interesting to see what the actual space ramifications are.
the 800 number was 1,000 acres, and then this additional group
raised that 1,000 acres to 02,000 acres.
I'm not saying that is the outcome. They can only put chicken per acre.
this was a quick and easy calculation. Chicken per acre? I hear what you're saying,
but... Yes, the math is a lot harder.
I would turn it over to our gis
professional and ask them to do some kind of analysis at that point, but this was a
quick and easy question. Mr.
cherky, as a rb and rx on a comparative density
to raa and ra, are rb and rx more dense or less dense?
they are more dense. More than. Single family in both
of those districts is 8,000 square feet. The ra is the closest.
the minimum lot size in the ra district is 10,000 square feet,
and then it goes up from there. Okay.
go ahead. Sorry. Nope. Didn't mean to interrupt you.
so the rv district,
is that what we were proposing for the... Large area that was just north
of the tailgaters property that we just looked at, or north and east. The I development?
the I development. We were proposing that that was going to be an rv district. No, that was a multifamily
district.
so it's less dense than that. Well, it's more dense because it's multifamily.
it's multifamily. Yeah, it's rd multifamily, right?
yeah, that I development on central park development, that was a multifamily density.
this is not including multifamily districts. The property that is already...
...developed adjacent to the multifamily proposal,
that's zoned rb, is that correct?
that is zoned...
this is a quiz. Well, that is zoned ra. Ra, okay.
yeah, so already allowed there. Yes, yes. And, I mean, for me here, those
houses look pretty close together. Yeah.
you'd be allowing... Chickens in a on a smaller lot than that yeah yeah that was
partially the same the same standards apply though right
you have 10 foot side setbacks for chicken coops and they got you know you're limited
to four and they've got to be enclosed and all of the things uh one
of the points that was raised at our last conversation is if the standard thank you.
if they can meet the standards, you know, even if it's a smaller lot,
you know, we have a standard in place. Oh, so like even if the zoning allows it,
can you practically do it on your... Yeah, right. If you can't meet that 10-foot
setback, then we're not going to give you the permit. I do want to point out,
at the beginning of this conversation, we've since revamped our website.
you I did come across, you know, we do permit, we do have a permit.
we have a permit that has to be sent in. So somewhere we must have a
record of how many legal chickens we have in the township.
this is not a conversation I've had in a long time. Maybe more extremely hungry in legal chickens.
but this just, but you're not going to get
your permit if you can't meet the setbacks. You're not going to get the permit if you can't put them
in a, whatever other restrictions there are. You're not going to get a
permit if your homeowners association doesn't allow it. That is correct.
my question is, how many homeowners associations even allow chickens?
I don't have any idea. I'm guessing not many. I would guess that,
but I do not know. It seems like the increase is marginal
at best. In terms of going from 8,000, whatever, 100, to 10,000,
whatever. I kind of feel that. I mean... This is a good example.
yes, technically the zoning says it's allowed. I would suspect they've got a homeowner association that
says, no, you're not, and that would trump. Anyway.
commissioner shuspert. The communication that you
handed out today seems to take a different interpretation
of the number of restrictions than I did as we were
discussing this, saying that you know, it only counts chickens
of egg-laying age, and therefore if they got too old to lay eggs, then you could
have as many as you wanted, and they wouldn't count. That's not going to happen.
I didn't believe so. There's a minimum age we count them, and then we continue
to count them. Do you feel that there's any need to clarify that? No.
so an egg-laying age, I mean, I didn't take it that way, and as long as the permitting people are not taking it that
way, or the, you know. Code compliance people. I feel very confident that we
understand that once they're... That instrument needs for that person. Yeah.
that's not what was intended. No. Thank you. Here's where I personally get
caught because, as I've mentioned, I just left the presidency of my hoa board,
but I consistently pointed to ordinances trumping hoa board rules.
if we were going to go forward with this, I know this is probably late
in the process, but I would have something that just says, you know...
this ordinance is subservient to any hoa. Like, put it out there specifically.
I don't need to. It doesn't have to say it, because it just is.
and I hesitate to put something like that in black and white in an ordinance.
I don't want to get the wrong impression, you know,
because if our ordinance is more restrictive, then, you know.
because it's like, I'm just thinking somebody files for their chicken permit,
they get... Their permit for the chicken permit. They walk to their hoa and they
say, hey, I'm putting chickens in. I've already got my ordinance
permit. Our bylaws for where I live do not specifically prohibit chicken coops.
they do have regulations around structures. One of the suggestions at the very beginning
of this conversation is, should there be a requirement that if you live in an hoa that your
application come with a letter, email, or some kind of communication
from your hoa saying it's okay? And you didn't want
to do that. That seemed okay,
not a problem. We don't do this in a vacuum.
vacuum, right? So we're going to look at the address that you're
going to put on your application, and we'll tell you, you're going to have
to go check with your hoa, but here you, you know. In that case, I do feel like it
is not the township's responsibility
to enforce hoa policy. Correct. Agreed. You would get your permit
because you're legally allowed in the township to have this. If your hoa to which you
subscribed and agreed to their bylaws or their covenants whatever says you can't and
then they're responsible for taking action
against you so I don't feel like we should have
to be understanding the nuances of an hoa no we'll give them a warning to go check their hoa
but we can't hold up a one of our permits over an hoa yeah I mean I think it would be kind
and nice to people who are applying for a permit to say you may also want to check with your
hoa because we have policies that may also apply in addition to the permitting that you need
to do with us. But I don't want the township to be in the business of enforcing it.
no, we are not. We are not. I'm sorry. Don't come out.
no, I like what you did there. Okay, thank you.
commissioner mcconnell. I have always understood the process
of keeping chickens legally to be a matter of notifying the township.
that I am aware of the rules and that I'm going
to abide by them and I sign my name and that is a notice
of registration. I've not heard before that a
permit as such is issued. I'm using a word. My understanding is that when
there's a complaint, right, the code enforcement officer then
says, do you or do you not, did you or did you not notify us?
and if you did, are you actually complying with the rules you signed on to?
right. And if you're not, you can't do this anymore. I'm going to cut a weird thing
because now I'm rethinking again and this is my fault. When you say, when I heard the term permit,
that's one thing. That's the, here. Yeah, let's look at it.
okay. Putting into the test with a
new website. I know right. This is a thing.
it's not like it though. I think I like the way it works and still got the great content.
chicken and rabbit registration application. Okay.
and there you go. See, here's name, address, telephone, email, and then
here's all the things and like commissioner mcconnell was saying, you're going to sign
you've read and understand the regulation sign and date.
but it does specify what zones? Yes. So this would have to be
updated to include the rb and rx. Thank you. Here's the line I'm potentially
drawing here. There is, in my mind, a difference between a permit and a registration process.
because a permit, to me, is an active process by which the township would have
approved a chicken versus a
registration, which is just, I'm telling you I have these and I'm going to comply.
okay, but you're getting to the same place. You're giving us a piece
of paper saying that I'm going to follow these rules. Right. I mean, I'm sorry if I use a different word.
no, it's okay. I admit I'm nitpicking. This isn't a brian. This is a jeff thing.
okay. Because I'm just thinking what would happen in my subdivision if somebody's going
to come back with, if somebody comes in with a permit from the township, that's one
thing, right? I have a permitted thing to do x versus.
I registered with the township and then I would agree that the
hoa could take separate action. You still could. You get to the same place.
if the hoa says you can't have chickens in the backyard,
I don't care if you got a permit from us or not. A building permit.
sure. You know, you can come in and get a building permit and say,
okay, I'm going to build this garage. Well, no, it's too big. By our rules, you need
to make it smaller. And I've seen that happen a lot in my career. Okay.
it's just not a chicken.
somehow I think chickens might be more controversial than an oversized garage, but we'll take that
for another day. Any other questions or questions for mr.
sharkey?
did I hear you volunteered to have the gis folks do a per acre calculation?
no, I didn't volunteer. That's what I heard.
mr. Brooks asked for it.
I'm just kidding. So at this point would we be,
so this is unfinished business, theoretically we would finish this business today with a vote.
no, this is a public hearing. Yes. I will come back to the next meeting
with a resolution if that's okay with you. And we can move this forward.
seeing no public comments. With that,
we will close the public hearing at 739.
not sure I ever opened it with a specific time, but we'll do that at 7.39, and
then we can move to parking ordinance updates under our insurance business.
okay.
I watched the meeting really close.
I tried to give some information where it seemed like you needed it.
I didn't hear a lot of questions.
I did note this on the thing about the parking maximums.
since our last meeting, I did
attend the dda meeting and they raised these points.
you know, initiating a parking maximum will increase number of variances.
we discussed that. New parking maximum will create several non-conforming uses.
we've discussed that. Developers and business people generally know how much traffic
to expect. We've discussed that, etc.,
etc. Then I made this point.
we already have a parking maximum for a lot of our developments.
this is not new language. This was in our parking ordinance,
and then it was still in our parking ordinance when we updated our numbers last year.
we have for... What we did update were the
size of the centers. We went from like four or five business centers to two.
that was changed. But the numbers are basically five to five and a half spaces
for 1,000 feet, or for the larger ones, over 25,000 square feet,
which are a special use permit, by the way, four to four and a half spaces per
01,000 square feet. That is why trader joe's had
to get a variant. I am not in a position
to make recommendations to you. However, staff no longer sees a
need for the 20% maximum. We have this mechanism
in our ordinance, and we've got two boards that are not
in favor of it. Having said that, it is your
ordinance, not theirs. I have no other comment
on this ordinance at this time, and I'm open to more questions.
questions for mr. Torky.
commissioner brock. I appreciate all the effort that's been taken and looked
at this, and definitely talking to the dda and cia, and I
appreciate all the work that's gone into it, so thank you.
I'm going to be slightly annoying probably with my comments, but hopefully
not too annoying. So I hear the argument
against the parking maximum,
and I think that most of the points against the
parking maximum can also be made about parking minimum. So whenever we change the
parking ordinance, it's going to create non-conforming properties, right?
changing the ordinance by
changing the maximum or minimum is going to change the variances potentially
on the number of variances that we get. In some ways, putting in...
an ordinance creates a certain
level of slowdown, and so people have to make a decision about whether or not they want
to push back against that or not, and many people don't. It happens the same thing
with the sign ordinance. So we have sign ordinances, and some groups ask
for variances and some don't, and they just move on with it.
the point that developers and business people are generally
know how much traffic to expect and are capable of
determining how much parking they need, I think I've addressed that as well
regarding the parking minimums. There are communities that are getting rid of the minimums,
and the same thing could be said for the maximum. But the purpose
of a maximum is to have an ordinance mechanism
across the board that would basically allow us
to create a barrier to the
parking because we have limited space here in the community and we're
built in a swampy area. And so the idea
of limiting the asphalt seems like a good long-term thing to try and do.
and at least in my mind,
the parking maximum at this point seems like a reasonable way
of doing that. The limitation on the developer
constructing extra parking
in case of future expansion, I think that's still
on the table if they need to request a variance.
the point about stringent environmental regulations
for this area, I think some of those things do come from the drain commissioner's
office and we also have our own.
I'm not disputing that we have those in place in order to protect the community and also to support the master plan's
initiatives. And then the last point about
mandatory parking requirements based on other regulatory requirements and the conflict
there, that is also possible and can
also, I think, be said about any other ordinance that we would determine to put
in place. If there are specific ones that
need to be addressed, I think that would be...
worthwhile to explore, but I don't know of any one specifically.
so with all that being said, I hear what folks are saying, and I think that the 20% could
be moved up or down. I think it is a good mechanism
to have in place. I like the 20% myself. So I just wanted
to make those comments. Mr.
mcconnell? I, too, scratched my head a bit about other regulatory requirements.
are we aware of any other regulatory requirements? The concern was brought up
by the owner of... I'm sorry, the hair place
in the okemos area. Douglas j. Douglas j., thank you,
thank you. They're licensed by the state,
and they have to have a certain number of parking spaces per chair.
it turns out they have 22 chairs right now. Is that also common to medical
license? I don't know. I don't know that. But it might be.
I've never heard that before, but apparently it's a thing. Now, in her specific case, they
have a big shared parking. That's not an issue for her per se,
but it might be for another. And I don't know where those
regulatory requirements would be. I do not work for lara.
I'm not being cheeky. I've never heard of that before, but now that
it's something I have heard of, I don't know where else that might crop up in the future.
I mean, is it possible that there could be a statement in the ordinance that says
something to the effect of, if
state or federal level parking requirements push up the
maximum or go beyond the maximum percentage, then staff may act accordingly?
this maximum may be waived if more parking is required by
outside regulatory agencies. Yeah. I think so, yes.
that's a possibility.
commissioner shusbury. Getting to the very last note, not the
bullet, but the text below the bullet where it noted that several commercial
developments, including retail uses, fall under the general commercial category and that
it's already there. How many commercial uses
wouldn't necessarily, because we'd be regulating on the margins if we did this.
talking about the chickens, does it add, we're covering just a small percentage more,
because most of them are already covered by this?
so tailgaters is a good example. They're a multi-use.
facility, right? So you have to do the parking separate and add it together.
so there is a standard for restaurants, and that is part
of their calculation, but the convenience store is this, and that's where they got the five
to five and a half for that part of their calculation. So any retail store is going
to be this. Restaurants have their own
standard.
commissioner nguyen. So just to make sure I understand the big picture,
so we are proposing changes to the ordinance that would then be brought
to the township board for them to pass into law, correct? Correct.
so I spoke with one of the board members at their last meeting, and they
aren't aware that we're doing any of this discussion. Is this something that we want to solicit their feedback on?
no. No. We don't need that. No.
okay, now I want to make sure I understand. No, there's a process. Okay, that's how it works.
no, we have to make all the other boards mad, and then we make them mad. Okay.
it's a very strict process. I wasn't sure if we solicited
any... I see where you're coming from, but no. Okay.
no. They'll get their turn at bat.
okay. Any other questions, comments, concerns?
so it sounds like we have a request for at least one more, what I would call a pro forma amendment.
if it's the will of the planning commission, I can write that caveat into the
ordinance and then bring it back.
are you ready for a resolution with that change?
there are no other questions. You are not bringing up, I'm not throwing shade, but
you're not bringing up other questions. Is it worth that draft going to
the folks who gave us the input to see if we... No, you are the approving body.
and that was actually mentioned at one point during the dda meeting. It was like, at the end
of the day, it's your ordinance. These are their comments. Alright.
I retract my question. Are you sure that the state
requires minimum spaces? No.
I am going off what I am told. I just find that really hard to believe.
I do, too. And ai is telling me otherwise.
I still think it's kind of a good safety net.
what made me think of, like, huge medical establishments that force you to park
in a paid parking garage. Like, it seems like this day would regulate that, too.
if you need medical care, you shouldn't have to pay to park.
like, you know. I don't know, but I found that. Senator singh is retiring.
let's see if you can ram that through before you dial, right? Thanks for coming.
you can't have your car back because you're broke. Exactly. Nor can you get in.
we don't care if you're bleeding out. Yeah, and I just want to, I appreciate that research as
well, because I want to reiterate that any language I would say is, I'd be willing to
support language that supports or pulls in state.
level regulatory guidance,
not just sort of like any sort of licensing bodies that are
non-profits or private or anything like that. Well, license, yeah, okay.
so, at the state or federal level, then what you're saying.
yeah, okay. Yeah, because you could technically go to the...
the county can get a business license, I guess. I was going to say that's where licenses come from, but we do
get business licenses. Okay, that's a clarification. We were just talking about how, you know, if
something... Supersedes something else it doesn't have to be explicitly made mention
of in the ordinance like it doesn't really seem necessary if state regulatory agencies
have a standard then that's the standard just like
with hoas you know like right and I'd hate
to have to make them go through the variance process for that just
to get a rubber stamp because of right this gets them out of
that process I do not know that this is going to happen. I'm going to be really honest.
I do not know that I'm going to face this again. However, I threw it out there
because I appreciate the feedback and I'm also willing to compromise with groups and
to try and make things amenable to everyone.
but I think that you both are making good points about it. Whether or not this is
necessary. It made me think of the ada
compliance. Don't we have accessibility code that's listed in there,
which technically isn't required? What do you mean it's not required?
we have to follow ada standards. Correct.
but I'm saying I thought there was a conversation that we didn't have to expressly list those.
oh, I see what you're saying. That is correct. That is correct. So that's what I...
a lot of... By reference. Yeah, you can do it by reference, and then during
building permitting process, they'll look at do you have enough handicap spots and things like that.
yeah.
so let me ask this one. Sorry, I'm recalling something I said in the last meeting. The idea being it would give...
the township some leeway
to make things faster for developers to not go through these processes?
I think I may be able to back and forth about this. Yes, that is true.
as proposed, does the amended ordinance empower the township
to do so under what we have in front of us?
did that make its way in? No, I can't build a mechanism
in to get you around. A very, like,
the 20% applies unless we don't like, I mean, unless we feel
like it's okay. Yeah, okay.
I can't. I'm just, like I said, I'm going through, remembering.
yeah, we did have that conversation. I can't.
yeah. Or we would have to stipulate specific property types similar
to the parking minimums where they're all listed out. Which I don't want
to propose, to be clear. Yeah.
so would this be another instance where we would do the straw poll?
the question as I'm hearing it right now is,
are you as a body okay with a 20% number, 20% maximum
with the language that says... This is waivable if necessary
because of state or federal regulatory rules.
I'll phrase that. You know that. But, okay.
I'm good with that. Other, yeah, yeah.
I will bring you a resolution and finish ordinance. Mr.
sorkin, please bring us a resolution that reflects this conversation. You have a question.
oh, I saw it. Does it require swap votes? Should we do that?
I mean, I'm... Yeah, typically there is an informal vote. Alright.
it's a show of hands kind of a thing. Informally, show of hands,
who would be willing, who would be voting in favor of
such a resolution? I think you have your numbers, mr.
farfee. Okay. Thank you. Move on to other business,
number nine on the agenda, mass timber construction discussion. Yep.
here we go.
at our last meeting, we brought this up for discussion,
and two points were raised. You asked for information on
mass timber. I did insert a couple
attachments and I gave you two different websites to check out.
here's what it is. Here are the benefits. Things like that.
and then you ask for suggested updates.
it is pretty easy to put this
into an mpud ordinance or a commercial planned unit.
planned unit development ordinance, those have amenities, lists
of amenities, and it would be easy to put this in there.
you know, you do this and we'll give you a waivers list, okay?
going beyond that is a longer process. Like, you'd have to create a
process. Like, if you said, I want it in all c2 zones,
mmm. I'm going to have to sit down and think about how
to do that. This gets to a lot
of what was concerned with,
but staff is prepared to go in whatever direction you want on this.
commissioner mcauliffe? Thanks. I think I support the idea
of dipping our toes in the water. Under the pud ordinance, it seems fairly straightforward
and probably one of the spots where it's most likely to be utilized.
so thanks for doing that. And I would support that change as a first step.
and if we want to keep scratching our heads about how we do it in other zones, then we can
keep scratching our head. Commissioner shusberg? Just so I understand clearly,
we would be doing this to incentivize its use. There's nothing...
currently that prevents its use in any construction. It's just we're looking
at ways to try to encourage the developer to consider it.
yeah, so an mu-ped comes in, hazlet village,
for instance. One of their amenities is,
what are they, like art? Oh, the trailhead, yes,
the trailhead. Ok, we would be adding two
amenities. Mass timber construction. Of course, specifics have
to be banged out. Like I noted in my memo, there's three levels of amenities.
where does this fit? What percentage of the building has to be? Things like that.
there's conversations to be had, but staff can...
we'll bring the list to you and take it
from there, I guess. Mr. Shusbeck?
I'd be really curious to see if there are other places in michigan or elsewhere
that have done this successfully, like put it into their code and how they've done
it. Okay. You know, if they've done something
like what we've tried to do. I believe east lansing did,
and that's what got it on the cia's...
east lansing did. They, they... They put it in an ordinance that isn't really analogous
to ours because it's for downtown redevelopment and allowing extra stories on a downtown building, you
know, so it's not exactly, I can't just cut and paste that, but they did amend their
ordinance to allow mass timber construction as a benefit,
as a way to get extra space. Okay, thank you.
sure, I can look more indefinitely into that. There are places that are kind
of cutting edge or doing it successfully. Sure. And like, we tried this,
it didn't really bring in what we thought, so we did this, you know, anecdotally.
I will look into that. I'm trying to remember if it was here.
we heard about a residence hall being built in grand rapids,
the biggest mass timber
building in the state. It was over that direction.
I brought it up. It's in my previous memo.
I think it was an eight-story residential building.
it was not grand rapids exactly, but in that area. On bowery street.
yeah, something like that. And the idea here then is still
that the pud or the mupud can be done along the grand river
corridor, right? Yeah, you can do an mpud
anywhere you've got the
appropriate zoning for it.
okay. Okay, so then a follow-up question to that
for the next time we talk about this would be is, because the cia was interested
in this, does that include all of the grand river corridor? No, no,
and that's the point I made. To put this into the mup, the ordinance as an amenity,
is one thing. That's an easy fix. Not, I don't want to say fix,
it's an easy addition. Right. To say...
everything in the corridor, to make it an amenity, to make it like an incentive
in the corridor, that's going to take more work because
what's the tradeoff? There is no mechanism in place for amenities and waivers,
like in the mupd ordinance. I'm not saying it can't be
created, but that is creating something.
and that's a bigger job. Potentially, you know,
more discussion. Yeah. Okay. Others?
what's your name?
so, yeah, looking at the mpud ordinance, I think,
yeah, throwing it in at maybe level two seems really reasonable to me.
yeah, so if I had to vote on something right now, that's probably where I would think would be a reasonable place
to put it. Yeah. Can you show us those three levels?
yes.
where do you see codes and ordinances? Here we go.
86, 440.
yeah, so before I get there, where is it located?
mupd projects are permitted in the c2, c3, cr zoning districts.
and permitted po and c1 when adjacent and there's conditions.
just to give you an idea, that question came up.
amenities, so project features
count as three amenities. So I think I called these level three amenities during the
haslitt village. Leed certification, multi-level
parking decks. 20% total units,
affordable housing. You get down here, these count as two amenities.
75% of all buildings, natural materials on their facades, green roofs,
ev stations, outdoor seating plazas, and then these are
single amenities. Green space, e-scooter parking,
wireless access points. Things like that.
so yeah, adding under this,
adding 10 mass timber construction, and then
on what percent of the buildings, et cetera, things like that.
that's a conversation worth having, rather than just saying mass timber construction, kind
of nailing it down a little bit.
I'm guessing the folks at msu would be happy to suggest draft ordinance language.
maybe. I can reach out to them and ask.
so this is other business. Nothing would then require a vote tonight, right?
no. And do you have the guidance that you need? Yeah.
I'll come back with... These amenities and a bullet point and updated memo.
I mentioned that we have amenities in the commercial
planned unit development. Frankly, we haven't had any. I don't know that we have
anybody use that. But if we're going
to open the hood, I'll put those there too because why not?
that sounds right. And then if you want to take this further,
we can. I'm going to bring this back. Not at the next meeting,
but the meeting after that. So just so you know. Very well.
thank you, mr. Sharkey. Of course. So with that, we can move on
to 10, reports and announcements, township board update. Yep.
april 7th, under consent agenda, the township board did an
appointment for the brownfield. Did appointments for the
brownfield redevelopment authority and the environmental commission.
I'm sure you can talk about that more specifically. Board discussion items included
the capstone project on hanna boulevard and the jolly
road-texandani rezoning. And they also discussed data
centers and battery storage facilities moratorium.
the draft agenda for the next meeting shows the capstone and
the texandani rezoning moving forward.
okay, well liaison reports.
I forget who liaises at this point. I liaise with the dba, but the dba didn't meet this month.
any other liaison reports? At the last meeting of the environmental commission,
thanks for throwing me under the bus, we heard that there might be some new appointments to be made, but we
also reviewed applications for the green grant program funded
by the board. I and another commissioner were recused from
the conversation because we were both members of homeowners associations who had submitted
applications for financing green infrastructure. And
interestingly enough, a criterion applied
to past applications from hoas was that the area where the
project work was done would be accessible to the public. And
we shall see how that plays out with those hoas. He says ominously. If I might,
my hoa has some... Archaic
restrictive covenants. As far
as I know, they're not really illegal as some others, but they are. And our practice
is regularly to defer to township ordinance because there's a code enforcement
officer. You can go knock on the door. Rather than going and filing a suit and hiring
somebody to be served and try and take them to court, which
different groups have different processes. Ours is...
in great need of reform. My hoa
bylaws, where I live, have not been rewritten since 1986. And ironically, that's
when they were written the first time. If anybody wants
to geek on homeownership, hoa restrictive covenants, I'd be happy
to do that offline. Any other liaison reports? Project
updates? I believe I did not see a project update. No, nothing this month. Nothing
coming through. Public remarks? There are no members of the public. Commissioner
comments? Commissioner nahum? So a quick thing about the discussion from the
township board about the possible data center moratorium. The discussion
seemed to be the case that they were considering a moratorium
to give time to consider what is the appropriate sort
of regulation for data centers and battery storage centers within the township. And I
presume that sort of regulation would probably be coming to us
to have to come up with that. So just something to keep on your agenda that we may have
that coming towards us. My
resignation will be shortly before that. Commissioner
newham, do I recall that we were waiting to see if you were going
to be dad by this meeting? Yes, I am not dad by this meeting, but I expect to be tomorrow. I expect
to be tomorrow. Well, congratulations. Any other commissioner comments? Hearing
none, I will entertain a motion to adjourn. So moved. Second. We have moved by commissioner
brooks, second by commissioner mcconnell. I think I heard first. All in favor,
aye. Aye. Opposed? Yay. That vote should be yay. Yay.