[15:46] of the Mount Pleasant Planning
Commission is now called to order. Miss
[15:49] Paviko, will you please take a roll
call? Commissioner Dei here.
[15:53] Commissioner Farley here. Commissioner
Frederick here. Commissioner Havvel's
[15:58] here. Commissioner Irwin here.
Commissioner Kingsworthy here.
[16:02] Commissioner Leash absent. Commissioner
Martinez here. Commissioner Ortman here.
[16:09] We have a quorum. Thank you. The first
item on our agenda is the approval of
[16:15] the agenda. Does anybody have any
changes that you would like to make?
[16:19] Move to approve the agenda. Second.
Second. All those in favor?
[16:25] Opposed? Motion passes.
All right. Uh the next item on our
[16:30] agenda is the approval of the minutes of
the May 1st, 2025 planning commission
[16:35] regular meeting. Does anybody have any
changes that you'd like to make?
[16:42] Move to approve. Second.
All those in favor? I
[16:49] opposed. Motion
passes. The next item on our agenda is
[16:55] the approval of the minutes from the May
1st, 2025 planning commission work
[16:59] session. Does anybody have any changes
that you'd like to make?
[17:04] I want to move to approve.
Second. All those in favor? I I
[17:10] opposed. Motion
passes. The next item on the agenda is
[17:14] the zoning board of appeals report. Mr.
Hell's Madam Chair, we did not meet.
[17:20] Thank
you. The next item on our agenda is the
[17:24] communications. Uh Miss
Povo, did we receive any communications?
[17:29] Yes. Um so you've received
communications related to three cases
[17:33] for tonight. The first one was an email
received in opposition to
[17:39] SUP-25-08 for the short-term rental at
105 East Broadway. The second case for
[17:45] the gas station at 802 North Main
Street, you've have received for SP 259,
[17:51] you have received 63 letters in
opposition and one additional letter in
[17:56] opposition. Um, both received today. And
then the third case um the next case
[18:02] that we received opposition letters uh
is regarding Z the resoning 25-2 for
[18:08] 1104 East Chipua. There w there was one
letter with 12 signatures that have been
[18:14] received on June 4th and one email
received uh today in opposition as well.
[18:20] Thank you.
The next item on our agenda is the
[18:26] public hearing for um our first one is
SUP
[18:31] 258, a request for a special use permit
for short-term rental. Miss Podiko, if
[18:35] you'd please introduce the item. Sure.
So, first I apologize for the slide
[18:40] saying sup5. I meant 258. So, the first
case that we have here tonight is uh the
[18:47] applicant Rich Swohhurst on behalf of RJ
Downtown Investments LLC is seeking
[18:53] approval for a short-term rental located
at 105 East Broadway. The goal is to
[18:58] convert the two existing dwelling units
into short-term rental units to bring
[19:02] more tourists to downtown Mont Pleasant.
The existing building is a two-story
[19:07] mixeduse building. Midori restaurant is
located at the ground floor level and
[19:11] the second story has a total of
1,672 square ft. It contains a
[19:17] one-bedroom unit with approximately 500
square ft and twobedroom units with 750
[19:24] square ft. There is no parking on the
premises. However, there are several
[19:29] public parking spaces at the town center
and Jockey Alley parking lots. Overnight
[19:34] parking is also available at the Jockey
Alley parking lot. The two dwelling
[19:38] units already have a valid rental
license through the fire department for
[19:42] a family or up to two unrelated
occupants in each unit. The applicant is
[19:48] not proposing any building or site
alterations at this time, but has
[19:51] indicated that he would do general unit
improvements to market them as
[19:55] short-term
rentals. So, this is a map of the
[19:59] location of the site. As you can see on
the map on the map, we have on the north
[20:05] uh the restaurant Pitanelo. It's a
commercial establishment. On the east, a
[20:09] mixeduse building. On the south and
west, also mixeduse buildings. The
[20:14] future land use designation contained in
the 2015 master plan says mixeduse high
[20:19] for the surrounding parcels. And the
districts of the parcel and surrounding
[20:24] parcels is CD5 urban center character
district with the residential
[20:29] restriction at the ground floor level as
a special requirement.
[20:35] So, this is a picture of the current
conditions viewed from Broadway looking
[20:41] northeast and the conditions viewed from
the back of the property looking
[20:49] southwest. When analyzing the general
standards that apply for any special use
[20:55] being proposed, I have not seen any
issue with this proposal.
[21:01] When looking at the specific conditions
that apply to short-term rentals only,
[21:06] um the se the there are several of them
that are not applicable to this case and
[21:11] then the ones at the bottom uh are
applicable and the applicant complies
[21:15] with those
[21:18] requirements. Regarding public comment,
we've have received one email in
[21:22] opposition. It has been delivered on
June 4th, 2025 and the letter was sent
[21:27] to the planning commissioners before the
meeting and it has been placed at the
[21:30] dis for your reference as
[21:35] well. So the attached written response
that the applicant provided to the
[21:39] special use criteria was able to
demonstrate the proposed use is
[21:42] consistent with the character of the
area and the future land use identified
[21:46] in the master plan. More specifically,
staff observed that the proposed
[21:50] short-term rental will help bring more
tourists to downtown Mount Pleasant. The
[21:53] use will help local businesses. The use
will help attract more temporary stay
[21:58] options in downtown. We do not have a
hotel, unfortunately. So, that would be
[22:02] a way to get tourists into downtown. No
outdoor gathering spaces are provided.
[22:07] Therefore, the proposed use will not
lead to noise disturbance in the area
[22:11] for long-term residents. And the
building is located close to a public
[22:15] parking lot that allows overnight
parking. So no impacts on traffic are
[22:19] expected. So with the findings and
analysis in this report, the staff has
[22:23] recommended that the planning commission
approves
[22:28] SCP-25-8. That concludes my
presentation. Thank you. Thank you. Uh
[22:32] do any members of the planning
commission have any questions for Miss
[22:39] Pyo? Okay, seeing none. Uh if the
applicant is here and you would like to
[22:45] speak, you're welcome to come forward up
to the
[22:48] podium. And if you could please state
your name and your address for the
[22:52] record. My name is Rich Swindle. Um my
address is 110 West Michigan Street. And
[22:58] um appreciate you guys hearing out this
uh request. Um essentially, uh my family
[23:04] has had this building for I think it's
been about 16 years now and the upper
[23:09] units um are just kind of tired and
would like to improve the space and
[23:15] unfortunately the rent levels in Mount
Pleasant or at least downtown are pretty
[23:18] low right now. Um and doing uh some
analysis on short-term rental um seems
[23:25] to be a way that we could afford to um
improve the space. Um we are in the bar
[23:31] and restaurant business in town and seek
any and all ways to increase traffic and
[23:36] more tourism downtown. Um as well stated
unfortunately we don't have a hotel and
[23:43] so our goal is to kind of get any and
all tourists that we can towards the
[23:48] area. Um if you have any questions for
me I'm happy to help answer.
[23:54] Any members of the planning commission
have any questions for the applicant?
[24:00] Okay, thank you. Thank you.
Now, I will open up for public comment
[24:06] related to this case. And if there's any
members from the public that wish to
[24:11] speak, you're welcome to come up to the
podium. Um and just um for uh a reminder
[24:18] that um each person is allowed to speak
once per um proposed item during of a
[24:25] hearing and that um you have a maximum
of five minutes for
[24:33] speaking. Okay, seeing no one from the
public here. Is there anyone
[24:37] online? I don't see anybody online. If
there's anyone on Zoom that would like
[24:41] to speak, please raise your hand. Um, so
I can call your name. U, meanwhile, I'm
[24:47] looking at email and I don't see any new
emails coming in tonight.
[24:52] I don't see anybody on Zoom. Okay. Thank
you. I will close public comment and
[24:57] open discussion.
[25:01] Move to approve SP 258. Second. All
those in favor? I opposed.
[25:09] Motion
passes. Okay. And the next item on our
[25:14] agenda is the public hearing for SUP
25509 and
[25:19] SPR25, a request for a special use
permit and site plan review for a new
[25:24] gas station and convenience store. Miss
Podiko, will you please introduce the
[25:27] item?
[25:31] The applicant KC Atanasov on behalf of
Christrist Oil Company is seeking
[25:36] approval for a special use permit and
site plan review to build a new gas
[25:40] station and convenience store for food
mart at 111 Palmer Street. The current
[25:46] address there is 802 North Main Street,
but just to clarify, the address will be
[25:51] changed to 111 Palmer Street to address
and reflect the convenience store
[25:55] location to comply with the zoning
rules. The proposed scope of work
[26:00] includes the demolition of the existing
14,213qt building located at the corner
[26:06] of Maine and Palmer Street and the
construction of a new
[26:11] 6,50T convenience store with eight
vehicular and four bicycle parking
[26:16] spaces. The gas station will provide
eight pump stations and four electric
[26:20] charging stations which are to be
installed in the
[26:24] future. This is a map of the site's
location. The current use of the site
[26:30] immediately to the north across Pickard
Street is DTE Energy. The on the east we
[26:36] have a liquor store and a single family
home. On the south a duplex and a
[26:43] triplex and on the west a post office.
The future land use on the north is
[26:50] industrial and mixed use medium.
Mixed use medium on the east, mixed use
[26:56] low and residential on the south, and
mixed use low onto the
[27:03] west. Actually, I'm going to make a
correct. Oh, no, that that's the future
[27:06] land use map. That's correct. Um, the
zoning is what you see on the map. It's
[27:10] SDI, industrial special district on the
north, city, general urban and city
[27:16] suburban character districts on the
east. And then on the south, we have
[27:20] again city 4 and city 3. And on the west
side we have a civic zone designation on
[27:25] the post
[27:28] office. So these are the current
conditions viewed from the corner of
[27:32] Palmer and Main Street looking
northeast and the conditions view from
[27:38] Picker looking southwest. And I'm just
going to make a note here that this
[27:42] corner has been referred to the
community as the gateway to downtown
[27:46] Mleas Pleasant and it has been vacant
for decades. So it is one of the
[27:51] priorities for the community for a long
time to see that corner looking much
[27:56] better than what it does today. Um so
just wanted to put that as a historical
[28:00] background to
everybody when looking at the general
[28:05] standards that apply to all special use
permits. We do see one item that we want
[28:12] to highlight here for the commission.
So, as with gas stations, we understand
[28:18] that usually applicants would like to
keep the lights on. This gas station in
[28:23] particular, they're not anticipating
opening 24/7. They would be closed
[28:27] during the evening. And any new lighting
that's added to the site has to comply
[28:32] with the city code lighting standards,
which does not allow light to uh go
[28:37] beyond the property lines. We have a
foot candle measurement at the property
[28:41] lines that they have to abide to.
However, uh because we know that this
[28:45] could be different than what people
experienced. It's currently dark.
[28:48] There's nothing going on on that site.
We have uh done the review and the
[28:53] building safety official um basically
provided a comment in his comment sheet
[28:58] that I referred to in the conditions as
well to have the applicant once uh the
[29:03] electrician installs all the lights come
to site and measure the property lines
[29:08] uh the basically with a light meter to
make sure that the site complies indeed
[29:12] with the city code uh ordinances. So
that is what you see there the condition
[29:17] of approval. The next one uh is related
to the same one and it's just a
[29:22] different uh section of the ordinance.
Both of them are really trying to get
[29:27] into nuisances and how uh special uses
could potentially impact surrounding uh
[29:33] sites which include potential noise,
light, traffic, intensity of the use
[29:38] itself. Um so again light uh kind of
raised to to the top and we are putting
[29:42] that as a
condition. And then uh going to the
[29:47] specific requirements for gas stations
all of those items have been met by the
[29:51] applicant. I would also say that we
worked with the applicant for a very
[29:55] long time on this proposal. They have
come to the city a few times uh trying
[30:01] to develop and they couldn't comply with
the rules. uh we worked with the
[30:05] architect on this particular site plan
inter iteration for I would say around
[30:11] five months at this point um to get them
to a site plan that complies with the
[30:16] ordinance. So that's why you can see
here um all the proposals complying with
[30:20] the special
use. So for site plan review I'm going
[30:24] to go through what they submitted. Um
they submitted a larger packet but I'm
[30:29] putting here the drawings that are
relevant to the zoning ordinance. So you
[30:32] can see here on the left side is the
proposed site plan. Um one thing to note
[30:38] about the site plan is that the building
placement mattered a lot. Pickard is a
[30:44] high-speed road. It is a hightraic
highcapacity truck traffic area.
[30:51] Therefore it was much better to have the
pumps oriented to that side. Um because
[30:57] those who are traveling and through
Mount Pleasant, they may need gas. So,
[31:01] it is good to be visible on that end,
but also we do not want the pumps to be
[31:06] too close to residential properties,
even though we do allow gas stations in
[31:11] any CD4 district here in Mount Pleasant.
The other uh item is that the
[31:18] convenience store uh is then oriented
completely along Palmer to have that 60%
[31:25] frontage along Palmer and really screen
the the gas station uh from the
[31:30] community or from the residential
neighborhood. There is only one narrow
[31:36] uh driveway opening at the southeast
corner of the site on Palmer that is
[31:42] going to be an exit only. So we're
trying to disincentivize traffic through
[31:47] Palmer. And the only reason why there is
an access there is for trucks to be able
[31:52] to come to the site from Pickard or
Maine, unload, and then come unloaded
[31:58] and exit through Palmer uh unloaded. So
we're not also adding a lot of um you
[32:04] know heavy loads onto Palmer, which is
not designed as a traffic route uh to
[32:09] protect the asphalt. Um the other thing
to mention is regarding the landscaping
[32:14] plan that you can see on the right. We
have uh made sure that the applicant
[32:19] complies with the streetscape standards.
So you can see a lot of new trees that
[32:22] are going to be planted on the site. And
um the building is set back uh 20 ft
[32:28] from the street um to give more wiggle
room for landscaping. And uh one thing
[32:34] to note is that along Pickard Street,
the current sidewalk is immediately
[32:38] adjacent to the curb. There is no
landscaped strip in between making it
[32:44] very difficult to walk on that stretch.
It feels very unsafe. So the applicant
[32:49] has electively so they're not required
to but they are going to be improving
[32:55] that whole sidewalk and bringing that
sidewalk from the right of way into
[33:00] private property and providing an
easement to the city uh for access on
[33:04] that sidewalk. Um and then they're going
to be adding street trees in between uh
[33:08] the sidewalk and the curb as well.
[33:13] So regarding the phototric plan, they
already submitted a phototric plan, but
[33:17] it did have this language that the
phototric evaluation is not for
[33:21] construction. So that's why I put as a
condition of approval that they do apply
[33:25] with uh final uh lighting uh plan with
the specifications for the lighting
[33:30] that's being proposed and uh the
photometrics plan, which is what you see
[33:35] here indicating the foot candle
measurements on site.
[33:41] And then the architecture team has also
completed elevation drawings indicating
[33:46] compliance with our facade standards
which include a lot of glazing. So you
[33:51] can see how all elevations include a lot
of glazing compliant with the zoning
[33:55] ordinance. And the building is uh pretty
varied in terms of materials and push
[34:00] and pulls to break that facade and not
create you know straight facads.
[34:07] This is the elevation on Palmer Street
and you can see how the there is a
[34:11] public entrance onto Palmer Street which
is a requirement of the zoning
[34:15] ordinance. So pedestrians are not having
to go onto parking lots to access the
[34:20] building. It's actually in fronting the
[34:23] street and this is the east elevation
which basically will be in fronting the
[34:29] house uh right next door. Um, so it will
be set back beyond the driveway and
[34:35] that's the facade that's going to be the
side
[34:39] facade. The applicant has shown uh this
picture as well just to ask if we would
[34:45] allow a shed like this as an enclosure
um a type of enclosure for their um
[34:51] waste. So they submitted that to
us and then going through all the
[34:58] requirements I did not see any issues
with the ones that you see here on this
[35:01] slide and I'm going to stop when there
is an underline which are the times in
[35:06] which I saw an inconsistency and have a
condition of approval here again
[35:10] building standards all
cleared more building standards since
[35:16] it's a new build so you have all those
rules that we have to look
[35:20] for regarding private landscape caping
the site plan shows the first slot layer
[35:25] exceeding the minimum 30% landscaping
requirement which is great. So there's
[35:29] more landscaping than required. Uh the
landscaping plan shows street trees
[35:34] within the street the tree the three
right ofways but it does not show the
[35:38] area where the building is set back
further than 15 ft complying with one
[35:42] tree per every 50 ft. So we both require
trees between sidewalk and curb and we
[35:48] require trees between sidewalk and
building facade if the building is set
[35:53] back more than 15 feet which it is.
Therefore I have that as a condition of
[35:57] approval to comply with that
[36:02] rule. Next uh off streetet loading
storage drive-thru trash receptacles uh
[36:08] requirement. The proposed garbage shed
does not clarify if the space will
[36:12] accommodate waste and recyclable
materials. So the applicant would need
[36:16] to provide more information regarding
their waste management and if recyclable
[36:19] materials will be stored within the shed
or within the building. Uh this the
[36:23] recycling is a requirement for every
type of use in the city of Mount
[36:27] Pleasant. Uh it is a requirement in the
city code aside from being a requirement
[36:31] in zoning
ordinance. Lighting um I already
[36:34] mentioned lighting so I'm not going to
repeat myself here. So we have that as a
[36:38] condition as
well. Regarding public comment, we as I
[36:43] mentioned we've received a total of 64
letters in opposition delivered today.
[36:48] The letters were sent by email and are
placed at the
[36:53] dis. So the staff analysis is that the
redevelopment of this site of as an
[36:59] important corner of Mount Pleasant will
be helpful. It has remained vacant for a
[37:04] long time. So, we're looking forward to
see the site redeveloped. It will
[37:08] utilize city resources more efficiently
through an infield development in an
[37:12] area with existing
infrastructure. Provide a design of a
[37:16] gas station that is more pedestrian
friendly. Improve the streetscape uh of
[37:21] all street frontages, but especially
improving the sidewalk along Pickard.
[37:25] providing convenience and food market
option to the surrounding neighborhood
[37:28] residents and create 20 new jobs in
Mount Pleasant and new employees will be
[37:34] splitting through three shifts.
Therefore, the amount of proposed
[37:37] parking seems to be sufficient to
accommodate staff and
[37:40] customers. So, the staff recommendation
is for the planning commission to
[37:44] approve
SUP-25-9 and
[37:48] SPR-25-05 subject to the following
conditions. One, the applicant shall
[37:52] submit A, a revised site plan with final
sidewalk layout approved by the city
[37:57] engineering department. B, a revised
landscaping plan showing four trees
[38:02] within the front law layer along Palmer
and another two trees within the front
[38:06] law layer along Main Street. C, a
revised phototric plan. The lighting
[38:11] installer shall certify lighting values
at or below the values shown on the
[38:15] final compliant plan prior to the
issuance of her certificate of occupancy
[38:19] by the building safety department. Two,
the applicant shall submit more
[38:24] information regarding waste management
showing compliance with one of the
[38:27] following. A, the proposed garbage shed
shall include a dumpster or rule cards
[38:32] for recyclable materials or B. Space
within the building shall be reserved
[38:36] for the storage of recyclable materials
until collection by a commercial hauler.
[38:40] Three, the applicant shall comply with
the additional requirements of public
[38:43] safety, building safety, and public
works. That concludes my presentation.
[38:47] Thank you. Thank you. Do any members of
the planning commission have any
[38:51] questions for Miss Plug? Uh, two quick
questions. Um, do you know if they're
[38:57] going to be using dimmable LED lighting
and why specifically do they need a
[39:03] special use?
Yes. So, the I'm not sure about the
[39:08] lighting. U maybe they can answer to
that question. Um regarding the SUP, so
[39:13] every gas station requires a special use
permit in Mount Pleasant. Uh if they're
[39:19] being placed on the mixeduse district,
in this case, City4. Okay. So, it's only
[39:24] because it's a mixeduse district.
Exactly. Okay.
[39:29] I had a couple questions, too. Um you
had mentioned that um they wouldn't be
[39:34] open in the evening. Do you know what
hours they're proposing to be open?
[39:37] Yes, I can find that information
[39:46] here. So, it's going to be so 6:00 a.m.
to midnight. So, they're going to be
[39:52] closed from midnight to 6:00 a.m.
[39:57] Okay. I have a follow-up question to
that. If they decided down the road to
[40:04] be open 24 hours, is there any type of
ordinance that would prevent that? No.
[40:10] Okay. Um, and then I also had a question
around the timeline of the project. Do
[40:17] you happen to uh I'm not sure. Hopefully
the applicant can shed a light on that
[40:21] question.
I had another one, Manuela. Oh, sorry.
[40:24] That's okay. Uh, so the driveway on
Palmer, is that absolutely necessary for
[40:30] trucks to get in and out of there? It
was hard to configure with the truck
[40:35] turns. Um, it was very difficult, I
think. Um, with the building location
[40:41] and building size that we require it. It
was a tight site. Okay. Thank you.
[40:48] Was there any like community engagement
or anything done
[40:53] before like with the neighborhood
surrounding the site? No, I don't
[40:58] believe the applicant has uh discussed
with the neighbors. Maybe they can speak
[41:02] about that. Um the way it works with
public hearings, we are required to
[41:07] notify the residents within 300 ft of
the site. So residents have been
[41:13] notified according to state law uh
through mail and uh they we also place
[41:17] the len use sign on the property so once
people are walking by they know that
[41:21] there's a land use action coming
in thank
[41:28] you okay any further
questions seeing none if the applicant
[41:34] is here uh and would like to speak and
present your case uh please come to the
[41:39] podium
So, the applicant is online. Um, so I'm
[41:44] going to give the cue for Mac TV to put
them on the screen. Seth, you can go
[41:48] ahead.
All right. Good afternoon. My name is
[41:52] Seth Matech. I work for Wickwire PC. We
are the engineering consulting firm for
[41:57] Chris Doyle that uh has been working on
the project with them.
[42:01] Um, we are just applying today because
we are uh have we've been looking at
[42:09] this property for a long time within the
city. Um, I've been working with Manuela
[42:13] for the past three or four months on
developing a site plan that the city
[42:18] would find uh would find acceptable. Um,
we feel that the development here is
[42:24] going to boost the local economy and
really stir develop more development in
[42:28] the area. It's going to redevelop a
currently vacant lot, as Manuela said,
[42:33] right in the um right in the downtown
area of Mount Pleasant, right as right
[42:38] as people are entering the main street.
Um it's going to provide local products
[42:43] to the local community such as food,
drink, gasoline.
[42:49] Um the the lighting in the city has been
or the lighting in the store area has
[42:54] been designed in a way to limit light
escaping the lot. Um we've used fencing
[43:00] and landscaping to shield that
residential lot um adjacent to the
[43:05] property to shield the residential area
from any light. The uh lights on the
[43:10] property are going to be LED directional
down lighting to also limit um to also
[43:16] limit some light pollution from the from
the area. At the Crystal Oil stations,
[43:21] there is no music played or intercoms
from the uh canopies. So, there is no
[43:27] noise disruption of the nearby
neighborhood
[43:31] whatsoever. During the construction of
the project, the city sidewalks would be
[43:36] maintained or replaced as necessary to
uh to develop the driveways to the site.
[43:41] And as Manuela said, we I worked with
her on
[43:45] um designing the site in a way to to uh
make the sidewalk along Pickard meet the
[43:53] city streetscape uh requirements. And
that would be a part of the project that
[43:58] Christoily is willing to
include.
[44:02] Um, one thing that uh, Manuel and I was
mistaken on my application, the uh, the
[44:09] hours of operation for the store would
be from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., not not
[44:13] 12:00 a.m. And the store would never
look to change their hours to 24 hours,
[44:21] uh, 24-hour openings. And then Manuela
and I had spoken. I uh sent in a phase
[44:27] one phase one environmental study to her
as part of the application which did
[44:31] find some contamination on the site. But
as part of the process of the project,
[44:38] if it was approved here tonight, we
would move into a phase 2 environmental
[44:42] study to further examine the the uh
contamination on site and the site would
[44:47] be cleaned up completely as part of the
uh of as part of the project. That would
[44:52] be part of their uh part of their
development would be to decontaminate
[44:58] the site. And another question that was
brought up regarding timeline for the
[45:03] project, they would be planning to
perform the demolition on site after the
[45:08] first of this year or after the first of
the year this coming winter with uh
[45:11] development of the property following
that. And uh if the commission has any
[45:17] other questions for me, I'm here to
answer them.
[45:22] Thank you. Uh, do any members of the
planning commission have questions for
[45:26] the applicant?
[45:29] Yeah, I have one. Um, just kind of
reading through everyone's, um, letters,
[45:34] I see, you know, a lot of common themes
for concerns from the public. Um I guess
[45:39] in your experience um have you you may
not know this, you may you may not but
[45:46] um for noise complaints I mean in your
experience have these locations created
[45:52] a lot of disturbance and loud noises in
the area?
[45:57] No, not in uh not in our experience with
uh operating these stores and getting
[46:02] new developments up and running.
Um I think that there might be uh
[46:08] concerns about that at a lot of
locations and then once the stores are
[46:11] up and running it turns out that um a
majority of the time there is never any
[46:16] issues as far as noise once the uh once
the store is operational.
[46:22] Thank you.
[46:26] Hey an additional question. So you
mentioned the existing site has or
[46:32] there's some existing contamination on
the site. Um are there environmental
[46:36] plans um to mitigate any potential
future contamination or emissions
[46:41] issues? So there uh there would
uh future potential for uh for
[46:51] contamination is minuscule. It's almost
nothing. the uh tanks they use for fuel
[46:57] storage are certified by the state of
Michigan and and uh other governing
[47:04] bodies. They're doublewalled to ensure
that there are no leaks. They're
[47:08] regularly maintained. So, um the risk
for future contamination is
[47:14] uh next to nothing with these
developments.
[47:18] Seth, would you like me to answer answer
jump in and answer this question? Yes,
[47:21] sure. I have uh I have a member of Chris
Doyle here also. Hi, my my name is uh my
[47:26] name is Casey. Um I'll be acting as the
general contractor if this uh project
[47:30] was was to come to fur rotation. Um as
far as the environmental contamination
[47:35] on the site, um our goal is to clean
that site up to to the optimal state
[47:40] standards. um whatever the the the DNR
and um uh the other other uh associated
[47:47] industries advise us to do once that
contamination is discovered, we're fully
[47:52] equipped to follow those that protocol.
Um as far as the environmental um uh
[47:57] safeguards that are in place, uh it's
going to be a a double wall system. Um
[48:02] meaning double wall tanks, double wall
uh spill containment underneath all
[48:07] penetrations, double wall pipe. Um it's
continuously monitored. Um so no no no
[48:13] matter at at any given time uh there's
sensors in the tank that are monitoring
[48:18] uh contamination levels and even if
there were were a failure of the primary
[48:22] layer, it goes into the secondary layer
layer and alarms go off where we're
[48:26] we're compelled to react to that. Um
it's maintained. It's um it it's audited
[48:32] by by not only the state every 3 years,
but we're required annually uh to go in
[48:37] and perform different different
tightness test to prove that the system
[48:40] is 100% integral. So, as far as future
contamination, um there there there's
[48:47] very very minimal risk that this would
these systems work. They've been in
[48:51] place for the better part of 15 years.
Um and uh no no not notable um uh issues
[48:57] with them. uh even uh uh states have
adopted those regulations and forced uh
[49:03] operators to convert over to these
things uh with new development and
[49:06] existing developments. So it's a very
very safe system. Uh in addition to
[49:10] that, the storm water uh if there's any
type of surface spills, there's going to
[49:14] be a secondary leak. Uh it's going to
have a oil water separator installed.
[49:18] That oil oil water separator is going to
make sure that none of that
[49:20] contamination enters um the uh you know
the groundwater or the uh or the earth.
[49:27] So, um I think as far as an
environmental p uh uh perspective, I
[49:32] think it's going to better the site and
safeguard the community in the future.
[49:36] Thank you, Casey. Could you for the
record please state your full name? Uh
[49:40] my name is Casey Atanis.
Thank you.
[49:46] That brought up another question that I
have. Um you had mentioned before that
[49:49] you've done some environmental testing
already at the site and there's you
[49:53] found contaminants. Can you tell us what
those were?
[49:57] I don't have the exact contaminants uh
in front of me at the moment. It was
[50:01] done as part of a phase one
environmental study. We enlisted Mina
[50:05] Environmental out of uh Paskki to
perform those. I believe there was there
[50:11] uh the previous use of this was like a
hardware store for the oil the oil uh
[50:17] field equipment from the oil fields in
Mount Pleasant. Um,
[50:22] and the current owner believes that
there were some spills there at some
[50:28] point during uh when when it was in use
as that hardware store and maintenance
[50:32] shop. Um, as part as part of the project
moving forward, a phase 2 environmental
[50:39] study would be done to further flesh out
what those contaminants actually are.
[50:44] Okay. Thank
you.
[50:48] Any further questions for the applicant?
Okay, seeing none, I will now open up
[50:56] public comment for comments related to
this proposal. Um and just as a friendly
[51:02] reminder, um we welcome our our
community to come up and come to the
[51:08] podium to please speak your full name um
and your address and that there is a
[51:14] limit for one speaking time uh per
proposal and a limit of a maximum of
[51:20] five minutes. Um and just for our
understanding of how the public speaking
[51:26] works is that we are we very much do
want to hear your um you know your
[51:33] thoughts and your concerns and your um
you know your think your interest in
[51:38] this project. Um but please understand
that this is un this is not a um
[51:43] dialogue that we will hear you but we
will not be commenting or answering
[51:48] questions. Okay. Okay.
[51:55] Hello, my name's Alicia Horman. I live
at 113 East Palmer Street with my mother
[51:59] and my brother. Uh, so I have a lot of
concerns about this going up right
[52:05] there, living there my whole life. This
is the only place I know. I have grown
[52:09] up in Mount Pleasant my whole life at
113 East Palmer Street and I have always
[52:14] seen that building vacant and I've
always wished something to go into it,
[52:18] but I'm really concerned with it being a
gas station with knowing the area even
[52:23] though we are adjacent to a police
station, all that. I have had many
[52:28] friends who have gotten in severe
trouble around that area. I'm not sure
[52:31] if a gas station coming helps that out.
As long as uh bringing in the gas and
[52:38] the convenience and the food, I don't
believe we need that. Down the road
[52:41] there is a sitco, there's a meer gas
station, and right there there's the
[52:45] empty keg. So, I would love love love to
see something go right there, but I am
[52:52] not interested in seeing a gas station
go there. I live with a deaf dog who I'm
[52:57] very concerned about something happening
to. I have black cats or stigmas. I have
[53:01] a lot of animals. We have a lot of
family. And with the destruction of the
[53:06] building, I'm concerned of how that'll
affect my house. The property lines are
[53:11] very close between each other. When you
see on the sketches and you look at the
[53:15] pavement, that is this close to my
house. So, I'm concerned for the parking
[53:21] with my cars. We have three cars in that
driveway and we all fit in our own
[53:24] driveway. But if there's semiis going
through, there's already that tire shop
[53:28] that's down the road. The semiis down.
How am I going to be able to access the
[53:32] road to go to my house? Or even when
it's being built, how can I access my
[53:36] house and go inside?
[53:40] That's all. Thank you. Thank you.
[53:46] My name is Carol Horman. Um I live at
113 Palmer. I'm going to keep it short.
[53:52] My daughter pretty much got it to the
point. We are not looking forward to a
[53:56] gas station there. We would love to see
some improvement there. That'd be great,
[54:01] but um a gas station I think is just
going to bring all sorts of stuff to the
[54:07] neighborhood that we don't need. Thank
you. Thank you.
[54:14] I have three additional.
Okay. Um, if you'd like to bring them
[54:19] over to our our staff.
[54:28] My name is True Mashinski and I live at
721 North Fans. I am on the corner of
[54:37] Palmer and
Fans. I'm very
[54:41] concerned. Our area is the old north
end. It's
[54:47] historic. Palmer Street has always
protected the outline of the city of the
[54:56] old north end. Main Street also up to
Mission and
[55:02] Broadway. I'm concerned about traffic.
When Mission and Pickard were having
[55:08] their corners redone, we ended up with a
taste of the influx of people using our
[55:17] street as a service
drive, semis included, to get to where
[55:23] they needed to be.
And it was
[55:29] congested. It was noisy. There was
additional litter.
[55:35] We do not need a gas station. I realize
something needs to be done with the old
[55:41] trains
building, but something other than a gas
[55:47] station. We the area that we live in,
they're starter
[55:53] homes. Palmer
Street, Bennett Street, as I walked to
[55:59] talk to my neighbors, and we do know our
neighbors. It's not a neighborhood that
[56:05] you go into and you don't know who lives
around you. I'm fortunate to live in an
[56:13] area where we know the block or the
block across the street and we're there
[56:19] for each other.
In the neighborhood on Palmer and
[56:24] Bennett, we had four new families that
moved in, young married
[56:32] people. They've had their first child.
Um, these four people individually on
[56:39] between uh Bennett and uh
Palmer, three-month-old kids, four
[56:46] month, six month, they're happy to be in
the neighborhood. We have a very very
[56:53] quiet
neighborhood. The old adage of saying
[56:57] the streets roll up 9:00 our
neighborhood is quiet. There's you have
[57:04] kids that might be riding their bikes.
You have neighbors that are walking
[57:09] their dogs. People stop and talk to one
another. Um you meet new people. It's
[57:16] the same. We we recognize our neighbors.
So, a gas
[57:21] station would be detrimental to our
neighborhood because when Palmer Street
[57:29] will get all that extra traffic, what
will happen is then Bennett will be the
[57:34] street that has to hold the old north
end. And then when more more
[57:42] commercialism comes through, then where
does it stop? and you're going to lose
[57:48] really decent homeowners that they're
affordable homes. They're smaller homes
[57:55] and these are starter families and they
want to be in the neighborhood and I ask
[58:01] each and every one of you to I don't
mean to drive by and look at the old
[58:06] trains corner. We're aware that train's
corner has protected our neighborhood.
[58:14] We realized you do need to put something
there, but it needs to be something that
[58:19] is low
impact. the
[58:25] um we you just my question is and I know
you can't answer me but I know you drive
[58:34] but walk through our
neighborhood walk down all the way down
[58:42] to Kenny school on Palmer Street meet
the neighbors do Bennett do fans Lancing
[58:49] Franklin University these are people
that take pride in their homes. We have
[58:56] landlords that are there that make
affordable housing for
[59:02] people. They take care of their yards.
So, please reconsider what you're
[59:10] doing. Thank you. Thank you.
[59:20] I'm not sure where I'm supposed to face.
Um, I'm Kathleen Martin and I live at
[59:25] 401 East Palmer Street, three blocks
from the post office, three blocks from
[59:30] the building. Um, I just learned about
this whole development plan two days
[59:38] ago. I'm horrified. If id have had a
little bit more time, I could have
[59:43] prepared something just a little bit
more coherent. But this is a quiet
[59:49] neighborhood. If you think that it's not
going to destroy the old north end by
[59:54] putting in a gas station and convenience
store, you are delusional. There will be
[59:59] a whole lot more traffic going by. We
have plenty already on Pickard. We don't
[1:00:04] need more on Palmer. We've got young
children that just pop out in the middle
[1:00:08] of the street. I mean, they're kids.
that's what they do. But um the foot
[1:00:12] traffic that will be increased by having
a convenience store there is going to
[1:00:17] increase. We already have trash thrown
in our yards all the time. Every every
[1:00:22] week, sometimes daily, I have to go out
and pick up cans or slushy uh cups. It
[1:00:27] It's ridiculous. But it's going to be
way worse if they are going for a a a
[1:00:33] convenience store. Um, it also means
that there'll be more foot traffic of
[1:00:38] uh kids that probably shouldn't be in
the neighborhood wandering. We have
[1:00:44] enough problem with that as it is. Um,
you're not going to put in a a a speaker
[1:00:49] for for music. That's lovely. Do you
think that these uh cars that go through
[1:00:55] aren't going to have their music on?
It'll be loud. The neighborhood will be
[1:00:59] disturbed. It's already loud when the
motorcycles go down Palmer Street with
[1:01:04] their music blasting. They travel, it's
25 miles an hour. They travel through
[1:01:11] there at at least 40, if not faster,
from fans, making it all the way to Main
[1:01:17] Street. They don't even look at the
yield signs. Somebody's going to get
[1:01:21] killed. And if there's more traffic, the
chances of that is increasing. Yes, that
[1:01:26] building's been an eyesore. It has been
neglected. that hasn't been maintained
[1:01:30] or taken care of. But a gas station is
not the answer. We have seven gas
[1:01:36] stations within a half mile on the
corners. It'll put the empty keg out of
[1:01:41] business. There's no way. There's a
business that has been there a long
[1:01:47] time. It's not right. If you want a good
spot to put in a gas station, go down to
[1:01:52] Lincoln and Picker. There's a there's an
empty lot down there that might be
[1:01:58] better suited. We do not absolutely do
not need a gas station at that corner.
[1:02:03] It's a bad idea. And I don't know why
the neighbors weren't notified about
[1:02:09] this. You indicated that uh the
neighbors had letters sent out. No, they
[1:02:14] didn't. Absolutely not. So, bravo for
keeping this a well-kept secret. I am
[1:02:20] appalled.
[1:02:28] Hi, my name is Norma Bailey. I live at
222 East Andre. So, I don't live on
[1:02:33] Palmer, but when I heard about it, I
felt I wanted to speak my mind also
[1:02:37] because I walk those neighborhoods. I'm
an older person with a dog. I walk those
[1:02:42] constantly, morning, afternoon,
evenings. See lots of kids, see lots of
[1:02:47] dogs, see lots of people. I stop and
talk. I heard that this was going to be
[1:02:51] an entryway entering into the downtown
off of Pickard down to Main Street. That
[1:02:57] makes no sense to me whatsoever. People
can gas up down at the sitcom. They can
[1:03:02] gas up down at the uh speedway, but I
just don't understand why that decision,
[1:03:08] even though I understand that that's an
eyesore. I walk by the eyesore for 25
[1:03:12] years and keep on saying I wish somebody
would do something with that but I don't
[1:03:16] think that a gas station is the right
answer because of all the things that
[1:03:20] these people have said will occur. So
thank you for your
[1:03:34] time. Good evening. I'm John Dquilla. I
live at 219 Bennett. It's about two
[1:03:41] blocks from the proposed site of the
Chris Grass station. Uh like some of my
[1:03:46] neighbors have said, I heard nothing
about this till 3 days ago. I don't
[1:03:50] know. Um you know, well, contacting the
local community about some kind of
[1:03:57] development like this. Baloney. That's
all I can I can say about that. I have
[1:04:01] no time to really prepare for this. I
could prepare for this a lot better.
[1:04:05] lot, you know, and
[1:04:08] sound more concise than you have and
you. As for oil separation from
[1:04:17] non-point runoff pollution that this
station will
[1:04:21] have, it has been proven that benzene
contamination is going to continue to go
[1:04:27] into the ground soil. Do you even know
what
[1:04:31] nonpoint water pollution is? runoff,
water
[1:04:34] pollution. I have a bachelor of science
degree in national science with um uh
[1:04:40] resource development. I'm also a
registered nurse, been working with uh
[1:04:43] in human health for 40
[1:04:48] years. Like I said, I wish I had a lot
more time to this. Let's talk about some
[1:04:52] of these problems. I reading about uh
special usage conditions. they're
[1:04:56] talking about as long as the surrounding
uh uh usage within 300 ft of the
[1:05:04] proposed site is not anything past that
is not going is um I guess just not
[1:05:10] considered. You know 300 ft past the end
of the property. Uh as long as
[1:05:16] um you know it's not going to upset the
neighborhood uh then it's it's going to
[1:05:21] be fine. Well, the neighborhood goes a
lot further than 300 ft. There's things
[1:05:25] here that you talk about that are in the
proposal that you know are not limited
[1:05:31] by 300 feet, 600 ft, 6,000 ft. The
noise, we've talked about the noise
[1:05:39] already. Uh the I don't think the police
department you will uh um uh reinforces
[1:05:46] noise ordinances in this town. It's it's
insane the the the loud noises we have
[1:05:52] in this neighborhood. is a beautiful
neighborhood. My house, the original
[1:05:56] part of my house was built in
[1:06:00] 1868 and there's beautiful homes in this
neighborhood and it's a family
[1:06:04] neighborhood and there's children out.
Now, you say, "Well, this gas station's
[1:06:08] going to be, you know, up in that corner
and it's going to be out of sight and
[1:06:11] and the light, you talked about the
lights. There's a lot more to it. The
[1:06:15] odors, the hydrocarbons that are escape
constantly when anyone comes in and
[1:06:21] fills up their cars. I talked to you
about the benzene pollution which is not
[1:06:25] going to be controlled by your oil
separation system.
[1:06:30] Uh the uh transient traffic is
ridiculous. Motorcycles, loud trucks,
[1:06:37] people who aren't from the
neighborhood. We don't need
[1:06:41] that. Now the corner is needs maybe some
development though. I see that ivory,
[1:06:47] you know, the ivy on the side of the
building that is stands there and I see
[1:06:50] that as a nice cushion just like like TR
was saying, it's a nice buffer on that
[1:06:56] corner for our neighborhood. And that
part of Pickard is not that developed
[1:07:02] that it it is actually really quite nice
compared to heading east on Pickard,
[1:07:07] which looks horrid. Or how about
Mission? You want an ugly gas station
[1:07:11] like this and this odious gas station. I
I saw the one that was built out Pickard
[1:07:17] east on Pickard and you got more
concrete there than
[1:07:21] a than a football field and it you know
we don't need that here. You want that?
[1:07:28] Put that crap down on mission south on
mission where that horrible sprawl is.
[1:07:34] What do you want Mount Pleasant to look
like? Some kind of ugly, you know,
[1:07:40] suburb of Flint or something? You got
these beautiful old neighborhoods, these
[1:07:44] Victorian homes. You got these um uh
family areas. This We don't We really
[1:07:51] don't need What do you want? A a 18th
18th gas station in this
[1:07:57] town. I'm Yeah, I'm kind of upset about
this. I really am. To the point that if
[1:08:03] this continues, I'm going to start
protesting. You start protesting at the
[1:08:06] construction site. put together the
community and we'll we'll close this
[1:08:11] down if the city commissions don't think
they already got the guts to do it.
[1:08:19] Thank you. Oh, and this is a 65th letter
of opposition. Who would like it?
[1:08:35] Hi, my name is Brenda Dazilski. I live
at 722 North Lancine and the side street
[1:08:40] is Palmer. I'm here to tell you it took
me three years to get a flag at that
[1:08:44] intersection because people would run it
every day. And somebody's going to get
[1:08:49] smugg and you add more traffic, it's
horrendous. I'm here to tell you I moved
[1:08:54] here from Traverse City to work at the
state home. It was a quiet town and when
[1:08:59] I go home to Travers and see all the
changes that are made all the time, it's
[1:09:03] not fun. It's not pretty. And that's
what this is making me think of. If
[1:09:07] that's the gateway to downtown, then put
a statue or a monument saying, "Welcome
[1:09:11] to Mount Pleasant. Why do we need a gas
station?" As far as I'm concerned, it's
[1:09:16] a holy mess. And I moved down here and I
enjoyed it. But if that comes in, I'm
[1:09:20] seriously thinking about moving and I
will go back
[1:09:23] home. That's all I have to say. We just
don't need it in our neighborhood.
[1:09:42] Hello, my name is Chris Wendelhurst
again at 110 West Michigan. Um, I just
[1:09:47] uh I guess have a little bit differing
take on it and um would like to speak in
[1:09:52] support of the project. Um, I've seen
that eyesore of a site there for decades
[1:09:59] um, living in this community and I guess
I just want to caution that I don't
[1:10:03] think that um, there's a whole long list
of lineup of better opportunities
[1:10:08] coming. Um, and I commend the staff's
efforts on producing a project that um,
[1:10:16] not only meets but exceeds the uh,
standards required in our community.
[1:10:21] Thank you.
[1:10:29] Okay.
[1:10:40] Um, my name is Dan Herrera, 113 East
Bennett Street. I've lived there for
[1:10:47] going on 10 years.
And uh I live right on the corner of
[1:10:52] Bennett University and there's a lot of
people that walk their dogs and walk
[1:10:57] their kids and carriages and stuff like
that. People running up and down Bennett
[1:11:01] Street and University. There's people
that come from this courthouse that
[1:11:06] takes walks down university because I
see them every day. They walk down the
[1:11:10] street all the way to Pigger and back.
And with traffic going through there,
[1:11:15] it's gonna be hard for anyone to be
going out for walks and running and
[1:11:19] walking a dog and their kids and stuff.
So, and I do the same thing there, too.
[1:11:25] I walk around the block and stuff like
that, you know. But, uh, I just want to
[1:11:30] say just I'm opposed to having a gas
station there cuz it's going to congest
[1:11:35] the area because you got the mailbox,
the mail post office right there. And
[1:11:40] that's going to be a congested area
right there going into Pickard and
[1:11:44] Maine. How that road is not going to be
big enough for all the traffic going
[1:11:48] into the gas station and coming out on
Main Street. So they'll start cutting
[1:11:53] through the
neighborhoods. So I really don't think
[1:11:57] that's a good idea to put a gas station
there. Thank you.
[1:12:13] Okay, seeing no further um public Oh,
[1:12:21] my name's Chloe Mercer and I used to
live in the north district at anyway my
[1:12:25] current address is in Bammer Woods, 1840
Woodland Drive. I also own a piece of
[1:12:29] land out on the Chipua. No one's really
thought about the impact that this is
[1:12:32] going to have on the Chipua River. It's
going to be the closest gas station to
[1:12:35] the Chipoa of any of the others in town.
The ramifications that that could have,
[1:12:40] there's a lot of children that play in
the chip island parks right down the
[1:12:43] road. I guess I would just encourage all
of you to think about the environmental
[1:12:47] impact it might have not only on the
direct buildings and things like that,
[1:12:50] but the people that live here, the kids
that play in that water, the kids that
[1:12:53] are, you know, floating down the river
in the summer, canoeing with their
[1:12:57] parents, fishing, all these things that
are going to definitely be impacted.
[1:13:00] Having something that close to a major
source like that is just something that
[1:13:04] I think deserves a little more
consideration than 20 minutes of
[1:13:06] anyone's time.
[1:13:16] Thanks. And no one else here in person.
Are there any anyone from the public
[1:13:21] online? I don't see anyone online with
the hand raise feature nor on email.
[1:13:29] Thank you. I will close public comment
and open discussion. And as we enter
[1:13:34] into this discussion time, I just want
to do a friendly reminder of um that I'm
[1:13:41] very thankful and I think we all are
very thankful for our public to our
[1:13:45] community to um make your voices heard
and share your your thoughts and your
[1:13:51] concerns of support and opposition and
just um and letting us know how how you
[1:13:57] feel about this project. Um but and that
being said, I do want to do a friendly
[1:14:02] reminder also with our commission that
as we are moving into discussion that um
[1:14:07] per state law, our job as the planning
commission is to make sure that we are
[1:14:11] making our decision on um whether this
proposal does or does not meet
[1:14:18] compliance and our decision is not based
on our personal opinions.
[1:14:26] So with that to understand um with that
understanding um
[1:14:32] we'll open discussion.
[1:14:38] I will want to say that that corner uh
man picker should be a prime corn uh
[1:14:44] corner uh but nobody has touched it for
25 years. It's been an economic
[1:14:48] wasteland for 25 years. I so badly want
to vote for us for this. But 65 to
[1:14:55] nothing, that's hard to argue with
myself. I'm going to vote
[1:14:59] no. But the people should realize they
might be stuck with that corner empty
[1:15:03] for another 25
[1:15:12] years. Can I ask a question, a follow-up
question that popped in my head as I was
[1:15:18] listening to people?
Um, I understand the reason for meeting
[1:15:22] the one-way exit on Palmer is there, but
it's primarily supposed to be for the
[1:15:28] like trucks, I'm assuming delivery
trucks. Could there be like a gate put
[1:15:33] there that with like an electronic
opening so that the only time that exit
[1:15:38] on a Palmer would be for
um
[1:15:43] trucks? Is that is there further
anything else that we can do or that
[1:15:48] could be done to mitigate that effect on
Palmer that traffic
[1:15:53] effect? So yeah, so we did ask the
applicant to do a right turn only. So
[1:15:59] basically would have to exit out of
Palmer and then go to Main Street and
[1:16:04] then take the signal to go east or west
of town. Um or obviously you can go
[1:16:08] north south of Maine. Um the the only
thing I can think of um to make sure
[1:16:16] that folks comply with that right turn
is to really design that opening in a
[1:16:22] way that does not allow a left turn. Um
but the applicant is already committed
[1:16:28] to put signage. Uh it, you know, not a
way in, it's only way out and it's only
[1:16:34] right turn. But I I haven't seen any
projects with gates or anything like
[1:16:40] that. Yeah.
Thank you.
[1:16:46] I'm thinking about I'm leaning towards
voting yes for this for three big
[1:16:50] reasons. It um it meets the
standards. It's a development of an area
[1:16:56] that's of a parcel that's been
undeveloped. And I'm concerned that
[1:17:02] anytime we have a development project
now, we have huge amounts of people
[1:17:07] coming from in or outside of that
neighborhood to object to something and
[1:17:11] now we're going to be shutting down
development opportunities. I don't want
[1:17:15] to get to the point where we now are in
the habit of of just shutting everything
[1:17:21] down that meet standards that meet the
requirements that we've set forth in our
[1:17:27] plans and in our discussions as a
community. So, I'd like to hear if other
[1:17:34] people have comments adjacent to that.
Yeah, I'd like to echo that sentiment. I
[1:17:40] I do appreciate everyone's cander here
today. Obviously, we had a lot of uh I
[1:17:45] mean, I could tell this is a tight-knit
community. I mean, 60some letters in
[1:17:49] opposition. Um, and I appreciate
everyone's time over here, but I mean,
[1:17:53] this does meet the criteria. Um, I
understand everyone's concerns. Um, but
[1:18:00] I believe the engineers and everyone
involved will make sure that, you know,
[1:18:05] hopefully we'll quell these concerns and
there will be no accidents and noise
[1:18:09] complaints. And so that is why I'm going
to vote yes on this.
[1:18:14] Thank you.
[1:18:17] Okay.
Would anybody like to make a motion?
[1:18:27] Move to approve
SUP-25-09 and
[1:18:33] SPR-25-05 subject to the following
conditions. One, the applicant shall
[1:18:37] submit a, a revised site plan with final
sidewalk layout approved by the city
[1:18:42] engineering department. B, a revised
landscaping plan showing four trees
[1:18:48] within the front lot laying along Palmer
Street and another two trees within the
[1:18:54] front lot laying along Main Street. C. A
revised phototric plan. The lighting
[1:19:00] installer shall certify lighting values
at or below the value shown on the final
[1:19:07] compliant plan prior to the issuance of
a certificate of occupancy by the
[1:19:13] building safety
department. Two, the applicant shall
[1:19:17] submit more information regarding waste
management showing compliance with one
[1:19:22] of the following. A, the proposed
garbage shed shall include a dumpster or
[1:19:27] rolled cart for recyclable materials, or
B, space within the building shall be
[1:19:33] reserved for the storage of recyclable
materials until collection by a
[1:19:38] commercial hauler. And three, the
applicant shall comply with the
[1:19:42] additional requirements of building
safety, public safety, and public works.
[1:19:51] Second.
All those in favor? I I All opposed.
[1:19:59] Opposed. Roll call. Uh, do we need a
roll call with It was two opposed.
[1:20:08] Okay. Yes, please. Okay. Will you please
call a roll call vote?
[1:20:17] Commissioner Dei, I. Commissioner
Farley, I. Commissioner Frederick I
[1:20:22] Havvel's hi Irwin nay nay Kingsworthy I
Leash absent Martinez nay Ortman
[1:20:35] I motion passes motion pass. Thank you.
Okay.
[1:20:42] Yes. Yes.
civil discon.
[1:20:49] The next item on our agenda is public
hearing for
[1:20:55] Z2501. It's a request to reszone the
properties for CD4, a general urban
[1:21:00] character district to CD5 urban center
character district. Miss Pediko, if you
[1:21:07] could please introduce the item. Yes, if
Mac TV could put the PowerPoint on the
[1:21:12] screen and then I'll
start. Thank you so
[1:21:20] much. The applicant new the applicant
new yellow Marty on behalf of Great
[1:21:26] Lakes Bay Properties LLC is applying for
reszoning from city 4 general urban
[1:21:31] character district to city 5 urban
center character district for the two
[1:21:35] parcels located at 221 West Michigan.
The parcels are currently vacant.
[1:21:41] Previously, there was a building that
was used by a beauty shop and a resale
[1:21:45] sporting goods store. If the resoning is
approved, the applicant plans to build a
[1:21:50] mixeduse building with space for office
and retail uses on the ground floor and
[1:21:55] four stories of residential uses on top
with approximately 16 dwelling
[1:22:00] units. This is a image of the site's
location. The land uses and zone in the
[1:22:06] surrounding property as are as follows
on the slide. On the north, we have a
[1:22:10] vacant building. On the east side, we
have a vacant building.
[1:22:16] owner uses for storage. On the south
side, there is a single family home and
[1:22:21] on the west side a multiple family
building. The future land use
[1:22:25] designation for the whole area is mixed
use sorry on the north side is mixed use
[1:22:30] high and then the surrounding sites are
mixeduse medium. The zoning is city5 for
[1:22:36] the north side and with the residential
dwelling unit restriction and city 4 for
[1:22:41] the surrounding sites. The subject
properties viewed from the corner of
[1:22:45] Michigan and Pi looking southwest. Uh
you can see how we have streetscape and
[1:22:51] it's a vacant parcel and you can see the
building that's vacant sitting right
[1:22:55] behind the vacant
parcel. And here the subject property is
[1:23:00] viewed from West Michigan looking south
west to the alleyway. The alleyway is
[1:23:05] currently not paved. It's gravel and you
can see here what it looks like today.
[1:23:12] So, regarding the resoning designation,
um we can see here how it's currently
[1:23:17] zoned CD4. City4 limits development to
no more than two stories and it allows
[1:23:22] for mixeduse developments, residential
or commercial only developments. And
[1:23:27] then the reasoning request is to do CD5
and allow the building to go up to five
[1:23:34] stories um similar to Broadway lofts
that you see here next to city hall.
[1:23:41] So this is the reasonzoning map
proposal. So you can see a little bit
[1:23:45] more regarding the adjacency of the
surrounding sites and zoning
[1:23:50] designations. So city5 would be at the
corner of Michigan and Pine and across
[1:23:54] the street is where we have other CD5
[1:23:59] designations. So any reasonzoning must
meet criteria for the map amendment
[1:24:04] that's being proposed. So these are the
criteria that the applicant has provided
[1:24:08] answers to. Um and then I read the
criteria and then based on the responses
[1:24:14] of the applicant I do see that the
applicant is consistent with the list of
[1:24:19] criteria in the zoning
ordinance. And these are the other ones
[1:24:24] that are uh noted here. And as you can
see, the planning commission or city
[1:24:29] commission um subsequent to the planning
commission review could have other
[1:24:33] factors that they would like the
applicant to tackle as part of the
[1:24:38] application. So we placed none at this
time since it's under review right
[1:24:44] now. Regarding the master plan, this is
the document that guides us through any
[1:24:49] reasonzoning request. Basically, the way
it works is if any applicant calls city
[1:24:54] staff and proposes a reasonzoning that's
inconsistent with the master plan, I
[1:24:59] tend to say that we are not going to
support it because it's likely going to
[1:25:04] get a denial. When we do have applicants
that proposed a reasonzoning that is in
[1:25:08] alignment with the master plan, that's
when I take the project forward to the
[1:25:12] planning commission and make sure that
the applicant has a complete application
[1:25:16] to support the application. So in this
case the master plan calls for those
[1:25:21] sites um as mixeduse medium designation
under book one sustainable land use. You
[1:25:28] can see how the future land use map gets
assigned specific zoning districts for
[1:25:33] mixed use medium. So you know that all
mixed use designated areas are split
[1:25:37] into low, medium intensity and high
intensity. For medium intensity we do
[1:25:42] have the option to have city 4 or city 5
as its zoning designation.
[1:25:48] on book three focus redevelopment. We
have further goals that I thought were
[1:25:53] in um related to this case. So the first
one is regarding focusing our efforts to
[1:25:59] reduce the vacancy and utilization of
properties in downtown Pleasant where we
[1:26:05] have obviously a lot of infrastructure
that's already built. It's centrally
[1:26:08] located and easy access of residents and
the broader community. It also uh asked
[1:26:14] that we focus on downtown success and
growth by increasing the number of
[1:26:18] people living and visiting downtown
which this project uh proposal to add
[1:26:23] more stories on the mixeduse building is
only going to be able to have uh an
[1:26:28] increase in residential units and
therefore residents in downtown
[1:26:31] Pleasant. As I mentioned, City4 limits
developed to two stories. So City 5
[1:26:35] would allow the city to better achieve
its
[1:26:39] goals. So through the analysis staff
finds the proposed conditions are
[1:26:43] consistent with the character of the
area and with the future land use
[1:26:46] identified in the master plan. First,
the new mixeduse building will help
[1:26:50] activate this portion of downtown that
has not seen much investment within its
[1:26:54] surrounding blocks. Two, the residential
units will add much neededed housing in
[1:26:59] downtown particularly to those seeking
smaller units in a more urban walkable
[1:27:04] setting. So those could be senior single
person households which we're seeing an
[1:27:08] increase. It's a trend not just here in
Mount Pleasant but everywhere in the
[1:27:12] nation. And then as well as graduate
students who I've been hearing a lot
[1:27:16] from uh CMU and uh the other colleges,
they tend to not want to live in
[1:27:22] apartments with other students. They
tend to have and want a quiet space. Uh
[1:27:27] some of them have families too. So this
could be a good option especially for
[1:27:30] those who do not own a vehicle.
Residents will contribute to the local
[1:27:34] economy bringing more clients to
existing businesses.
[1:27:38] and new retail and office spaces that
will be provided as part of the mixeduse
[1:27:42] building will help offer opportunities
to existing businesses to expand,
[1:27:47] relocate, and would also provide options
for new retail owners and service
[1:27:51] providers to locate within downtown if
they choose to do so. So with the
[1:27:55] findings and analysis in the report that
was shared with the planning commission
[1:28:00] staff recommends that the planning
commission recommends that the city
[1:28:04] commission approves
Z-25-1. And this is a image of the
[1:28:10] proposed ordinance that goes together
with the reszoning application. That
[1:28:14] concludes my presentation. Thank you.
Thank you. Do any members of the
[1:28:19] planning commission have questions for
Miss Paulo?
[1:28:25] Okay, seeing none. If the applicant is
here, would you and you would like to
[1:28:31] speak? Thank you. Please state your name
and your address. Sure. Hi everyone. My
[1:28:36] name is Neil Yalamari. Um I'm based in
Sagena, Michigan, 3766 Nugget Creek. I'm
[1:28:42] the developer and owner of this project.
I'll keep it quick, but um been working
[1:28:46] on this concept with Manuela and her
staff for the past couple months and
[1:28:49] very excited about it. Um, I think this
has the opportunity to fill a lot of the
[1:28:54] housing needs, commercial needs downtown
and just serve the broader purpose of,
[1:28:58] you know, helping bring more economic
activity and revitalization to the area.
[1:29:04] Um, my manual has my contact information
if anyone needs to reach out to me. I'm
[1:29:08] more than happy to chat about this
project. Thank you. Thank you. Um, do
[1:29:13] any members have of the planning
commission have any questions for the
[1:29:16] applicant?
[1:29:20] Okay, seeing none. Thank you. Um, I will
now open public comment for any comments
[1:29:27] related to this case.
[1:29:35] Um, not to bother you guys with all your
all my time here, but um, please restate
[1:29:40] your name. My name is Rich Hurst at 110
West Michigan. Um, I also own the uh
[1:29:45] neighboring property to the north and um
would like to speak in support of this
[1:29:50] project. Um, it's been a vacant lot for
quite some time and uh the proposed
[1:29:55] plans similar to the uh building just
west of here I think would be fabulous
[1:30:00] to be added to our downtown
neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you.
[1:30:09] Um I don't see any more people from the
audience um in person. Any Is there
[1:30:16] anyone online? No one is online. Thank
you. I will close public comment and
[1:30:22] open discussion.
[1:30:25] I move to recommend that the city
commission approve Z2501.
[1:30:30] Second. All those in favor? I all
opposed. Motion
[1:30:38] passes. Next item on our agenda is
public hearing for
[1:30:44] Z2502. A request to reszone the property
uh from CD3 a ser a sub urban character
[1:30:52] district to CD4 general urban
characteristic with residential dwelling
[1:30:57] use only designation. Miss Paviko, if
you could please present.
[1:31:02] The applicant Scott Ebell on behalf of
Laughen Associates is applying for
[1:31:06] reszoning from CD3 suburban Character
District to city for General Urban
[1:31:10] Character District with the residential
dwelling use only. A special requirement
[1:31:15] for the parcel located at 11:04 East
Chipa Street. And just to clarify and
[1:31:20] pause, it's the proposal is not to allow
commercial uses on this parcel. Um I
[1:31:26] noticed that some of the communications
uh referred to that. So this will be a
[1:31:30] residential only
resoning. The current use for the
[1:31:35] property is a single family residence.
If the resoning is approved, the
[1:31:40] applicant will be proposing to demolish
the house and build a development
[1:31:44] similar to Palmer Place with multiple
forplexes on the
[1:31:48] property. So the land uses and zoning of
the surrounding premises are as follows.
[1:31:54] As you can see here, the whole uh area
is zone CD3 suburban character district
[1:32:00] and the light yellow on the east side is
a large suburban character district
[1:32:06] CD3L. On the north uh of the prop
property, you have a forplex and a
[1:32:11] single family home. On the east, there
is an office, Central Michigan Care. On
[1:32:17] the south, multiple family complex and a
single family house. And then onto the
[1:32:22] west a house and an accessory dwelling
unit. And the future land use
[1:32:27] designation on the north is residential.
And then both east, south and west or
[1:32:33] basically this whole block where the
site is
[1:32:37] located. Um and the again the master
plan flags it for um missing middle
[1:32:42] housing development. So the city for
resoning is consistent with the master
[1:32:46] plan. Regarding the resoning
designation, as you know, right now we
[1:32:51] have the parcels on city 3 suburban
character district, which basically
[1:32:55] allows for single family homes and then
uh duplexes or accessory dwelling units
[1:33:01] pursuant to a special use permit. When
mentioning the surrounding uh uses of
[1:33:06] the site, uh there are a few triplexes,
duplexes, ADUs, um some of which, you
[1:33:13] know, all of them have been built prior
to the ordinance. And so there are some
[1:33:18] that are existing non-conforming
structures today. The reasoning to city
[1:33:23] 4 will continue to be limited to
residential due to the special
[1:33:27] requirement that's also being proposed.
And the change is into the residential
[1:33:33] typologies that can be built. So aside
from residential, you could do duplexes
[1:33:38] as a right, accessory dwelling units as
of right, and then multiple family
[1:33:43] dwellings as a right. All of those uh
are trying to reach what we call the
[1:33:48] missing middle housing typologies. So,
anything between single family and
[1:33:53] multiple family buildings will be able
to be built including town homes, um,
[1:33:57] forplexes, triplexes,
etc. So, this is what the map looks
[1:34:03] like. The reasoning of the parcel from
city 3 to city 4. While all the
[1:34:09] surrounding parcels, although flagged in
a master plan for the CD4 designation,
[1:34:15] are not being proposed as part of this
application because this applicant
[1:34:20] obviously can only propose a resoning on
their own site. If the city would like
[1:34:25] to undertake a resoning of the whole
block, that is something that would be
[1:34:28] consistent with the master plan. And
another thing to mention is that it's
[1:34:33] not considered spot zoning when
[1:34:39] All
[1:34:41] right. So, regarding the criteria for
map amendment, again, uh the applicant
[1:34:46] has provided uh information about each
one of these criteria and it is
[1:34:53] compliant. And again, there is no
additional uh requirements of the
[1:34:58] planning commission at the time of the
application. Therefore, none at this
[1:35:03] time. Regarding the master plan, here
you can see what the map looks like. Our
[1:35:07] future land use map that has been
adopted in 2020 flag this whole block
[1:35:12] for attached residential designation in
the map. So everything that you see in
[1:35:17] orange is eligible and um the future
land use designation in book one
[1:35:24] sustainable land uses uh is site. Um and
then we have a house. Um and then this
[1:35:31] is the the home that has you know three
dwellings basically in one parcel. Um
[1:35:38] yeah and this is the parcel in in
question. So this configuration of this
[1:35:43] large block with really deep long lots
is very unique in Mount Pleasant and
[1:35:49] that's my indication of the reason why
the consultants and the my predecessor
[1:35:56] previous city planner selected this
whole block for a reasonzoning because
[1:36:00] it is a good area for infill that can
actually achieve greater density than
[1:36:06] elsewhere. Uh, for example, one could
not do a subdivision and include several
[1:36:13] single family homes due to both law with
minimums that we have, but also
[1:36:17] subdivision laws that have a ratio
requirement. You can't create a really
[1:36:22] long and skinny parcel. It's against the
legislation. So, you can't add density
[1:36:28] elsewhere or in another way basically on
this parcel.
[1:36:38] Okay. Uh, any further questions for Miss
[1:36:44] Pyo? Okay. At this time, does anyone
have any questions for the
[1:36:52] applicant?
Okay. All right.
[1:36:57] Um, now I will open for public comment
for comments related to this case. If
[1:37:03] there's anyone uh from the p from the
public that would like to speak, please
[1:37:08] come to the podium and speak your name
and your address. And as before, we
[1:37:14] limit speaking to once
per proposal and you have a 5m minute
[1:37:20] maximum.
Thank you. My name is Megan Moreno. I
[1:37:25] live at 201 North Brown Street, a
property that my husband and I have
[1:37:30] owned since 2007. Uh we are both
lifelong residents of Mount Pleasant. Um
[1:37:37] myself essentially born and raised here
through Mount Pleasant school public
[1:37:41] schools, Central Michigan University.
And we have chosen to remain here and to
[1:37:46] invest our family's uh life and time
here and have invested in our property
[1:37:52] which is our home and has been our home.
Um I have several concerns regarding
[1:37:58] this. The first of which uh was very
clear in the map that when we purchased
[1:38:03] our home, we purchased a home in a
neighborhood of single f primarily
[1:38:06] single family residential homes. That's
what we're surrounded by. Um there's a
[1:38:11] reason why we chose this neighborhood.
There's a reason why others who continue
[1:38:16] to buy and why people remain in this
neighborhood is because of the character
[1:38:20] of the neighborhood which is single
largely single family homes. Um we do
[1:38:26] live on a unique block. It's very
appealing. It's very nice and we would
[1:38:30] like to keep it that way. Um,
additionally, the construction of a five
[1:38:37] building apartment, five buildings of
apartments directly behind our property,
[1:38:43] which is to the east at the south end.
So, what is currently the open green
[1:38:48] space would then be altered to uh 20
units of dwellings and 40 parking spots.
[1:38:56] No one is going to buy our house should
we ever decide to move with that
[1:39:01] compared to what we have now. Um,
additionally, it will affect our
[1:39:05] property value. So, both the viability
of sa future sale, which we don't intend
[1:39:11] to move, but should this move forward,
you know, we might have to to rethink
[1:39:16] that. Uh, and we we don't want that. It
would also increase noise, increase
[1:39:21] traffic. Um, and like I said, we I I
understand that there's potentially a
[1:39:28] need for housing and housing um in this
capacity, but my feeling is that it's at
[1:39:34] the expense of people that have invested
their lives into properties that are our
[1:39:40] homes. I took the initiative um to go
around the neighborhood and yes, it was
[1:39:46] 12 property owners that signed. I did
get um signatures from multiple, you
[1:39:52] know, people living in the dwelling,
not single owners.
[1:39:58] Um but every person that I mentioned
this to immediately said, "Oh, no. We
[1:40:04] don't want that. We don't want that."
So, the entire neighborhood, I canvased
[1:40:09] Brown Street, Chipoa, and Broadway, that
whole entire block. And I did not
[1:40:14] encounter one individual that was in
favor of this. And I'm really kind of
[1:40:20] shocked to hear about the master plan
because some people didn't feel they
[1:40:26] were notified about this request for
resoning. I certainly do not feel that I
[1:40:31] knew that my entire block and my
property is on the master plan to
[1:40:36] potentially be CD4. And that's a little
upsetting to me. And I think we need to
[1:40:42] um maybe look at how these things are
communicated. And I understand after
[1:40:48] listening to the other comments that um
we have an opportunity to state our
[1:40:52] concerns, but it seems like they don't
carry a lot of weight. I hope that this
[1:40:56] will because I do think while we maybe
need more housing for some, we should
[1:41:01] also value the people that have made
this their long-term home. This is our
[1:41:07] community and these are homes. Thank
you.
[1:41:22] We survived a truly unfortunate
distraction. Uh I'm Chuck Kresby. I live
[1:41:29] at the east end of that Chipoa
neighborhood at 111 Russell Street.
[1:41:35] Um, it's really a delicate balance
trying to build a perfect community and
[1:41:40] serve the interests of of all the
constituents who live in it. And I we
[1:41:44] understand that that's a significant
dilemma. The challenge we in that Chipoa
[1:41:49] community face is much as Megan
communicated.
[1:41:53] We live in basically single family
dwelling units and then taking for
[1:41:59] example we live in I live in and many of
my neighbors live in one acre lots with
[1:42:05] one house. So to see a oneacre lot
turned into a a residence for 20 people
[1:42:11] in that immediate community with again
40 parking spots dramatically changes
[1:42:16] the nature of the community. that the
traffic would absolutely double on that
[1:42:20] on that street with 40 40 houses in
there. So there there is a and Lord
[1:42:26] knows we appreciate the master plan and
the intention of that. But one of the
[1:42:30] criteria for reszoning is that the
effort be profitable for the for the
[1:42:37] people who are supporting it. And
clearly there are opportunities within
[1:42:41] CD3 to turn that property into a viable
profitable operation without putting 20
[1:42:49] units there, 40 parking spots and an
enormous change in the nature of that
[1:42:53] community and still maintain a
profitable operation for for the
[1:42:57] sponsor. So uh that is basically our
concern. We believe that there's an
[1:43:02] opportunity for that program to go
forward as CD3 without having to be zone
[1:43:07] CD4 and just in a much more modest
fashion. And we humbly beseech you to do
[1:43:14] that. Thank you.
[1:43:27] Hello, I'm Chelsea Tenwaldi. I live at
11:05 East Chipua, which is directly
[1:43:32] across the street from 11:04. Um,
something that really kind of uh hit
[1:43:38] home for me was the future of the area
comment. Um, I the single residence
[1:43:43] homes that um I see a lot of my
neighbors out here. Uh, I consider us to
[1:43:49] be the future of the area. Um, I bought
my house in
[1:43:53] 2012. Um, didn't have any intentions on
headed out anywhere. So, um I really
[1:44:00] hope that the future of the area remains
uh single resident homes. Uh putting an
[1:44:06] apartment complex in like Palmer Street,
Palmer Street, is that what it is?
[1:44:10] Palmer Place. I'm familiar with that
area behind Wendy's Tim Hortons. Um to
[1:44:16] me, they don't look like houses. They
look like apartment complexes, which if
[1:44:20] you're a Mount Pleasant resident, you're
very familiar with the CMU college side
[1:44:26] of town. um that sure looks like
something that belongs in the college
[1:44:30] side of town. So when you have, you
know, people who have lived in these
[1:44:34] houses for years and years and have no
intention on leaving, it just seems
[1:44:38] extremely out of place for the area. Um,
and much like the two previous people
[1:44:43] said, um, you know, having five
buildings with four units
[1:44:48] each, at least 20 people, if there's a
couple people, 40 people, kids, there's
[1:44:54] one entrance and exit from that from
that facility, I guess you could call
[1:44:59] it. And that one exit is directly onto
Chibi Street, uh, which is literally
[1:45:05] directly from my driveway. We've always
felt very safe where we are with
[1:45:10] traffic. Uh people do drive too fast,
but uh it's, you know, going away from
[1:45:16] the houses. This is now going to be
coming right at our house. Um so it it
[1:45:21] it just seems so so out of place to me.
Um like I kind of mentioned, you have a
[1:45:27] what I think is a distinct uh you know,
area of campus versus you know, old
[1:45:33] school Mount Pleasant. And this is this
is definitely turning it into a very
[1:45:38] gray area and it seems very out of
place. Um, one other thing that I did
[1:45:43] want to mention, um, it seems like
there's some people who have talked
[1:45:46] about rental units and how traditional
apartments are maybe I mean there's a
[1:45:51] ton of them here and people want to be
creative about new housing. Um, this
[1:45:55] just seems like a standard apartment
complex. What makes this unique? Why do
[1:46:00] we need this? um dorm capacity at CMU is
down because enrollment's down at CMU.
[1:46:06] It just seems like we don't need more of
the same thing, especially in the area
[1:46:10] that it's being proposed in. It's going
to ruin our neighborhood. So, that's all
[1:46:16] I have to say. Thank you.
[1:46:32] Hello, my name is Patty Strong. I've
been before this board in the past to
[1:46:37] protect my property. This time it's um
down the street the other way. I live at
[1:46:43] 906 East Chipua
Street. I was hoping Dave Lapen would be
[1:46:48] here since he's a local to see what the
comments are about his proposal.
[1:46:56] I found out about this development from
a Brown Street neighbor four days
[1:47:01] ago. We were floored by the size of this
proposed development and not being
[1:47:07] notified. My husband Max and I have
lived at 906 East Chipa Street for 45
[1:47:12] years. He's lived there his entire 74
years. I've been before this body in the
[1:47:20] past. Our homestead shares a property
line with Graph Graph's Mission Street
[1:47:26] Auto dealership. I fought battles with
the city to protect us from the the
[1:47:31] expansion of the Burger, then Shaheen,
then Graph dealerships. Most recently,
[1:47:37] Graph was allowed to put in a
significantly large multi-bay car wash
[1:47:42] facility on the north side of their
building. We had to put up with many
[1:47:47] months of construction polluting our
land with noise, cement dust that
[1:47:53] polluted our backyard, including our
white pines and garden. And the result
[1:47:57] of the car wash addition doubled the
noise and litter. I have to endure daily
[1:48:02] as I work from home. My husband Max is a
third generation owner of our homestead,
[1:48:07] which originally originally was a farm
on a dirt road. We live on four lots. I
[1:48:13] should mention that. Same size as uh
Darcy Lapsom's property. Our East Chipua
[1:48:20] neighborhood is unique in that the south
side of the street has several homes
[1:48:25] with double or quadruple lots that go
south around 360 ft sharing property
[1:48:33] lines with the Broadway Street homes.
There are no fences and it's a safe
[1:48:38] place to play and enjoy.
We have four lots just like Darcy has.
[1:48:45] Darcy and Dave's father used to play
Santa for Max and other neighborhood
[1:48:50] kids back in the
50s. We have zero apartment buildings on
[1:48:55] our street. It's a quiet neighborhood
except for the pixie traffic which has
[1:49:00] lots of drivers blaring their engines
and music.
[1:49:06] We still re we still predate that, but
I'm I'm cool with it. The two duplexes
[1:49:14] on the north side of Chipua about
halfway down the block added 8 to 10
[1:49:18] more vehicles a day, but that seemed to
be
[1:49:22] a a good use of that property, which
used to just have an old cement block
[1:49:27] building on it that used to be storage
for pipelines or
[1:49:33] something. Our neighborhood does not
need five apartment buildings on a lot
[1:49:38] the size of my property. We don't have
any C4 properties on East Chipwa Street
[1:49:44] other than those on Mission Street.
None. Michael and Rosemary's Gay's
[1:49:52] apartment building on the southwest
corner of Brown and Chipua brick
[1:49:56] building. I had I talked to Rosemary
earlier today. She's owned that building
[1:50:01] since 1974.
It has three apartments. Next to it is
[1:50:06] an office building that's been a
chiropractor or similar business since
[1:50:12] I've lived
[1:50:16] there. One
guy where I lost my place here.
[1:50:24] Oh, one guy said earlier tonight, why
have the plants Why have these plans if
[1:50:29] they're turned
down projects that meet all the
[1:50:34] requirements? Well, I have an answer for
that. The city planner claims we're
[1:50:39] under a rent crisis. I call bull crap. I
don't care if this proposed project
[1:50:45] crosses the tees and dots the line of a
master plan. I don't care if it checks
[1:50:49] all the planners boxes. Master plants
don't tell you what to do. By the way, I
[1:50:56] drove by Palmer Court and Palmer Place
and I was
[1:51:01] disappointed. The building sagging was
moldy. I saw a broken window on one of
[1:51:06] the apartments. It's just not the same
situation. Right across the street is
[1:51:12] the Pickard Street businesses. It's all
commercial. Not a single residence or
[1:51:17] apartment building. Nothing like our
block. Every single apartment complex
[1:51:24] has signs on it that say, quote, "This
condominium for
[1:51:30] rent." The planning commission and city
officials need to keep residents
[1:51:34] informed and listen to
us. I don't like, you know, if it wasn't
[1:51:40] for Mrs. Mareno, I wouldn't even have
known about this and I wouldn't be here.
[1:51:44] And that's wrong.
[1:51:49] You want to increase density, do it
somewhere else. Addie, I want to thank
[1:51:54] you for your time. We've meet met the
five minute limit. I made it all the
[1:51:59] way. Thank you for your time. Thank you.
[1:52:09] Get them.
[1:52:14] I'm Sally Rose. I live at 301 North
Brown. It's the corner of Brown and
[1:52:20] Chippoa. And I too had hoped that Dave
Lapam would be here tonight because I
[1:52:26] wanted to commend him in some respects.
He was my landlord at one time and I
[1:52:32] found him to be very friendly, very
thoughtful. Um,
[1:52:38] but I wish I'd written a letter because
I like that much better than public
[1:52:43] speaking. I've lived at my home for
probably 30 years and I've seen some
[1:52:48] change when the duplexes went in to
replace the the really ugly kind of
[1:52:54] storage facility. But I also wanted to
say that I feel like it's like two
[1:53:01] American dreams kind of at cross
purposes. The American dream of owning
[1:53:06] your own home and the American dream of
being an entrepreneur. And Dave Lapam is
[1:53:12] a wonderful entrepreneur. He's done a
lot of good for the community. But this
[1:53:18] is one time where I think, wow. When I
saw the plan for five buildings, I just
[1:53:24] was floored. I could not fathom
that that would be a good use for that
[1:53:32] property. I assumed at some point
something would happen to it when Darcy
[1:53:37] died because it is a wonderful big lot.
But I also went to this um a friend went
[1:53:46] to the census reporter and pulled up
some stats because my initial feeling
[1:53:51] was wow don't we have enough apartment
buildings in Mount Pleasant. But the
[1:53:56] census report said of
13,572 units housing units that the
[1:54:05] occupancy rate was actually a little bit
higher than what I anticipated. the
[1:54:10] vacancy rate. Um there are
vacancies and um of those units that are
[1:54:20] occupied, 68% of them are rentals. And
I'm thinking there are federal programs,
[1:54:28] or at least there used to be, for
helping young
[1:54:33] families achieve that goal of owning
their own home and having something that
[1:54:39] they felt like they were really
investing instead of plunking all that
[1:54:43] rent money and having nothing in return.
I assume there will be some kind of a
[1:54:49] compromise, but I really hope that uh
five quadro, you know, fourplexes is not
[1:54:59] the solution because it really is
something when people say there will be
[1:55:06] more traffic, there will be more noise.
Um why do we need it right there in that
[1:55:13] specific place? it would be very easy
for you to say, "Yes, it meets the
[1:55:18] criteria. Let's do it. Let's go for it."
But you're not living there. And I think
[1:55:23] that's something that is
really useful for you to know that um
[1:55:29] not every place is the right place for
five additional units with 41 parking
[1:55:36] spots on a seemingly quiet street. If I
could pick up my house and move it off
[1:55:43] of Brown Street, I would because I love
my house, but Brown Street is a main
[1:55:50] thoroughfare for everyone that is smart
enough not to use Mission. Um, I'm
[1:55:56] really concerned with what will happen
on the other street, Chipawa Street, and
[1:56:01] I hope you take that into consideration.
Thank you.
[1:56:17] Hi, I'm Rosie Gray. Um, I used to live
at 913 East Broadway. In 1977, my
[1:56:26] husband and I bought our first home on
Broadway Street and we lived there for
[1:56:31] 27 years before that. So, I have both
spectrums of how it is to live there.
[1:56:38] Um, before that, we bought the apartment
uh triplex on the corner of Broadway or
[1:56:46] Brown Street in Chipoa and we lived in
the first floor of that building. That
[1:56:53] was 51 years ago. We still own it. I
know what it's like to be a homeowner
[1:57:00] and a first time owner homeowner. Um,
and I also know what it's like to have
[1:57:07] rental
property. I have several rental
[1:57:10] properties in town. Um, my husband and I
own Grace Furniture in downtown Mount
[1:57:18] Pleasant and we also have the apartment
buildings.
[1:57:22] I feel so strongly
about taking away that safe haven for
[1:57:30] all the people that live on Broadway,
Brown Street, and Chipoa. Cuz when we
[1:57:37] lived on Broadway Street, Broadway is a
very busy street and it's even worse now
[1:57:43] than it used to be. And I remember
thinking, what would we do if we didn't
[1:57:49] have that back lot that was empty? We
owned that back lot. We kept it up and
[1:57:55] it was our safe haven to get away from
everything else that was happening. And
[1:58:01] you felt like you were almost in the
country.
[1:58:05] When we lived in the apartment building,
it was still the kind of the same way
[1:58:10] because we own the extra lot between
Megan and our
[1:58:16] apartments. Um, and the people that live
in our apartments right now love it
[1:58:21] because it's a quiet place. We keep it
up and that extra lot that we own, um,
[1:58:30] we don't plan ever to build on it. We
just wouldn't do that to the community.
[1:58:34] We wouldn't do that to the neighbors.
That lot we've had for 51 years as well.
[1:58:40] We could have built something on it. Um,
but we chose not to because it would
[1:58:47] change the whole dynamics of the
neighborhood just like what they're
[1:58:54] trying to do with that property that
they want to put the five buildings on.
[1:59:00] I think we'll have our first traffic jam
in an apartment complex because if
[1:59:07] you're renting that to I don't know how
many people would be living back there,
[1:59:13] but they would all be young families and
all young families have to have a job
[1:59:18] and to try and squeeze all those cars in
and out in the morning to go to to work.
[1:59:24] I just can't even imagine it. And I
don't even know why anybody would want
[1:59:28] to take a
perfectly great idea and stuff it full
[1:59:35] of buildings instead of letting that be
a green
[1:59:39] space. Um I know
that it's it's an easy well it isn't
[1:59:47] easy anymore. it used to be. I mean, 51
years of rental properties, I have a lot
[1:59:53] of experience with how things are done
today because it's not like it used to
[1:59:59] be. It used to be very easy. We never
had to put an ad in the paper to rent
[2:00:04] any of our properties. They always
rented
[2:00:07] continually. Today, there's so many
people I just wouldn't rent to because
[2:00:13] they don't take care of it. And we have
had and you can check with the city
[2:00:17] inspectors or the firemen or whoever it
is that comes in and
[2:00:21] inspects.
Um all of our apartments have been
[2:00:26] totaled by people renting them and we
had to gut every one of them and so we
[2:00:32] are just now finishing up with all the
remodeling. It's a very tough business
[2:00:38] to be in and it's it's a hard business
to keep track of everything and we don't
[2:00:44] own a ton of rentals anymore. Um but
even the ones that we still have, it's
[2:00:52] still hard. Somebody breaks a window,
they don't tell you about it, you don't
[2:00:56] know about it, starts to look bad. I
make sure that I go around and tell my
[2:01:01] tenants constantly, please, if something
happens, let me know right away so I can
[2:01:06] take care of it because I don't want to
look bad for the neighbors either. So to
[2:01:12] put that many buildings in such a small
space and take that away from the
[2:01:19] community, to have that as a safe haven,
to take our green space away and and for
[2:01:26] somebody else to profit. And I I look
around town and I know that there are so
[2:01:31] many apartments that are not rented. And
um I don't know why we need more. I
[2:01:38] honestly don't know why we need more.
It's hard for us to even rent ours. And
[2:01:43] I'm very particular now because I don't
want them to wreck my buildings. I try
[2:01:48] really hard to give it to them as I
wished I had it, but so many times you
[2:01:54] don't get it back that way. So, I just
want to say I support the people in that
[2:02:00] community right now on Broadway, on
Brown Street, and on Chipua. And I hope
[2:02:06] that before you make a decision, you
really think about what if that was in
[2:02:11] your backyard? What if that was
happening in your backyard? How would
[2:02:15] you feel? Think about that. Okay. Thank
you. Thank you.
[2:02:32] Good evening. My name is Anthony Marino.
I too live at 20 North Brown Street with
[2:02:38] my wife. Um, we've lived there
for 17 years. 17 years. It's a little
[2:02:46] home, but it's our home and we love it
dearly. It means a lot to us. This is
[2:02:52] not just where we live. It's our
community. It's our
[2:02:56] lifestyle. What this proposal is doing
is taking away all of our lifestyle that
[2:03:03] we've come to love in our
[2:03:06] neighborhood. What I'm hearing a lot
from the beginning of this
[2:03:11] proposal was about renters. Renters,
renters. Renters come and go. What about
[2:03:17] owners, property
owners of people that have enjoyed a
[2:03:22] peaceful way of life? It's quiet. It's
green. It's
[2:03:30] beautiful. That lot, but she didn't show
in her pictures up there. She showed the
[2:03:35] house and she showed some of the other
buildings around the area. She didn't
[2:03:40] show my house. My house will go directly
up to that property that would have five
[2:03:47] buildings. And let me tell you this,
that whole field back there, I don't
[2:03:52] know how it would fit five
buildings. If you guys can see this
[2:03:57] picture, this is a view from my house.
This is that field where there'd be all
[2:04:03] this building's 40 parking spots.
God knows how many cars and noise coming
[2:04:09] at all hours of the night with lights,
loud
[2:04:15] noises. And this thing is to me, this is
about one thing
[2:04:19] only, profit. He owns property all
around town, apartments all over. This
[2:04:26] is was his brother's property. This is
an opportunity for him to make even more
[2:04:32] profit at no expense to him for buying
the piece of
[2:04:37] land. If you go around town and you look
at some of the other properties he owns,
[2:04:42] they're not very well
kept. I don't want to see that in my
[2:04:47] backyard. I don't think any of my other
neighbors want to see that. I look at
[2:04:53] Sally. I see her all the time out
working with her flowers in her garden
[2:04:58] on Chipela
Street. Sometimes she gets pretty close
[2:05:01] to the
road. That could be very dangerous for
[2:05:05] her. People that rent these kind of
places, they don't pay attention. They
[2:05:11] don't really even care about who lives
around
[2:05:14] them. But us owners, we care greatly
about our lifestyle and our peace of
[2:05:22] mind.
[2:05:26] just I really hope and pray that that
doesn't get taken away from us because
[2:05:32] it would be a shameful shameful thing to
do. Thank you.
[2:05:42] [Music]
[2:05:51] My name is Sue Yoder. I live at 10001
East to Andre and my concern is I work
[2:05:56] at Poland Elementary School and if you
but an apartment complex there there's a
[2:06:02] lot of kids who walk to Poland and they
will be affected by that traffic. Plus
[2:06:06] there will be families moving there who
will come to Poland and right now Poland
[2:06:10] is bursting as it seems. We cannot hold
anymore. We are the largest. We have the
[2:06:15] most population at of elementary schools
in Mount Pleasant. We are have 75 more
[2:06:21] than the next one closest to us. If you
have families come in and they bring
[2:06:25] their fa and they bring their kids and
they have to send them to our school. I
[2:06:29] don't know where we could put them. We'd
have we don't have the room and we don't
[2:06:32] have really have enough staff that we'd
have to hire more people which we
[2:06:35] probably couldn't do right now. So, and
that like that's one problem people have
[2:06:39] not looked at is how it would affect the
school that is one block away. And I see
[2:06:43] kids walking to school. I drive to
school. I go down there. I see the kids
[2:06:46] walking every day and all that traffic
is going to affect them and these are
[2:06:50] kids who only go up to second grade. So,
they're going to be affected by this.
[2:06:55] The school will be affected by this. And
I just wanted to bring that because no
[2:06:59] one brought that to anybody's attention
that that's something that could be
[2:07:01] affected. Thank you.
[2:07:17] Good evening. My name is Scott Bell. I'm
the applicant. Um I didn't feel a need
[2:07:21] to step up here before. And while it did
a wonderful job of presenting the
[2:07:26] argument, um our our intent with this
property was to provide housing for that
[2:07:33] missing middle. Um there's plenty of
student housing in this area. Mr. Lapam
[2:07:37] owns a good deal of that student
housing. That market is pretty much
[2:07:42] saturated. this was intended to be um a
use of his brother and former partner in
[2:07:48] all of his apartments uh to utilize that
land as as is something that could help
[2:07:54] build the the area and provide housing
that's needed. Um I just wanted to come
[2:08:00] up here and say that Mr. Lapam is not
here because he has me here to represent
[2:08:04] him. Um that's what we do at Lapam
Associates.
[2:08:09] I feel that this is uh a good project
for what is in your master plan. It's
[2:08:17] what is called for there. It's a good
area. It's close to schools. It's close
[2:08:20] to the main road. The intent is to
market to younger professional families
[2:08:25] that are more inclined to walk and ride
bikes. Yes, there will be an increase in
[2:08:30] traffic. No question. With 20 units,
there will be multiple cars there. But
[2:08:34] uh the point of its location being very
close to the downtown, the main main
[2:08:39] district or the main business district
is that it has close proximity for
[2:08:43] families to walk to or ride bikes to.
Um the plan that we have proposed is
[2:08:51] very
conceptual. The concept uh was one that
[2:08:55] Dave and Darcy both enjoyed the the
quadplex with having two units on the
[2:08:59] ground level and two units on the upper
level.
[2:09:05] they just felt this was a good spot for
that type of a development. Uh and that
[2:09:08] is why uh Mr. Lapam has has pursued
that. Um and if there were any questions
[2:09:14] from you, I'd be happy to answer them.
But at this time, I'll move it over to
[2:09:18] the next level. Thank you for your time.
[2:09:29] If there's no further public um coming
up for public comment, then um are we at
[2:09:36] a point that we can check if there's
comments online? Zoom. Yeah, Zoom is
[2:09:40] back. Uh I don't see anybody here and uh
not on email as well. Okay, thank you.
[2:09:46] Um then at this time I will close public
comment and open for discussion.
[2:09:58] I'm just going to say I I'm I am going
to vote against this reszoning because
[2:10:03] it's quite clear that nobody wants it in
the neighborhood.
[2:10:08] Um maybe if at some point the city
reszones the whole block so everybody
[2:10:13] could take advantage of it and sell
their property as needed or develop it.
[2:10:16] But as as it stands right now, I'm not
I'm not going to vote for this.
[2:10:22] Yeah, I I share Glenn's concerns,
especially since the property in this
[2:10:27] instance is right in the middle of CD3.
If it
[2:10:31] was on a border or it touched another
CD4 or CD5,
[2:10:37] um I think it would be an easier case
um to support it, but and the traffic
[2:10:43] too. I do think that we're a couple
times. I do think that's going to be an
[2:10:47] issue on that street too.
I mean, you're not you're used to a
[2:10:51] single family home there with just one
person or a couple coming out,
[2:10:57] but potential of 40 cars to seem like an
awful lot there. So, and if the city
[2:11:02] doesn't want to reszone the whole thing,
I also agree with Glenn that the city
[2:11:05] should do it as a whole block rather
than just one in the middle.
[2:11:12] Yeah, I'm struggling to be really
transparent. Um because I
[2:11:18] completely empathize with everybody
here. Um and I live very closeish to
[2:11:24] this um myself.
Um, but I also my background is in
[2:11:31] housing and affordable housing and I
work every day
[2:11:36] um around and um interacting with the
numbers around the missing middle
[2:11:44] housing. And so that is a major concern
of mine um and one of the reasons I did
[2:11:50] join the planning commission. But I have
to also concur that this may not be the
[2:11:55] exact um right place for that. Um so I
like I said I'm I'm of two minds on this
[2:12:03] but I am also leaning towards not voting
to approve this. But I had a
[2:12:09] question. What happens if we vote to not
approve something that's consistent with
[2:12:15] the master plan? And I apologize I
didn't have that question before now.
[2:12:21] So what happens if the planning
commission denies a this motion that is
[2:12:25] because it's consistent with the master
plan that's asis.
[2:12:30] So the correct procedure would have been
to flag issues with the master plan when
[2:12:35] the master plan is under review. It
currently is and it was presented to you
[2:12:39] all and no changes were required in the
future land use map regarding this area.
[2:12:46] So it is a problem to a a bad precedent
to set to deny a motion that's
[2:12:53] consistent with the ordinance and
policies that have been approved. Um may
[2:12:58] may I ask about that? Because doesn't
the master plan want the whole block
[2:13:04] changed? It doesn't particularly want us
to do the a shotgun approach to it, does
[2:13:10] it? It does flag the whole block
eligible for city 4. Yes. At the same
[2:13:18] time, it doesn't
really like the city has to take action,
[2:13:22] right, on block size or area wide
resonings and we just don't have time to
[2:13:30] do that all at once after the master
plan is amended or is adopted. The whole
[2:13:36] reason behind ma master plans and future
land use maps is to signal to the
[2:13:41] development community what can go
where development wise. So in this case
[2:13:48] we have a future land use map that tells
this block any any parcel in this block
[2:13:54] can is good for growth and so applicants
can property owners have the right to
[2:14:00] apply for
reszonings on a single parcel by single
[2:14:04] parcel basis.
[2:14:08] So, we have the issue, right? It's a we
have the city of Mount Pleasant. We need
[2:14:12] housing and we flag the areas in which
we want to transition out of single
[2:14:17] family low density to higher density.
So, we're one of them. The master plan
[2:14:23] does not prevent Swiss cheesing of
zoning then. No. So, uh we call maybe
[2:14:29] you're we're getting into spot zoning
grounds. Spot zoning would have been if
[2:14:33] an applicant wants to change a parcel
zoning designation inconsistently with
[2:14:39] the master plan future land use map. If
we were to approve something like that,
[2:14:43] it could be challenged in court. It
could be configured as a spot zoning.
[2:14:48] Anytime there is a single parcel that is
eligible for a reasonzoning applying for
[2:14:53] the reszoning, it can be approved. It's
not spot zoning. It's not inconsistent.
[2:14:58] It's not okay incorrect.
When did when did we adopt our master
[2:15:04] plan? Was it 2020 2020? 2020. Yeah. So,
it's a precoid master plan
[2:15:12] that's not really focused on reality
anymore.
[2:15:17] If that's the case, you could have
brought it up when the master plan
[2:15:21] amendment was presented just a few
meetings ago. And if there are massive
[2:15:27] issues with the master plan and it's not
reflective of reality today, then the
[2:15:32] planning commission should direct staff
to change the master plan and the master
[2:15:37] plan has been presented. The changes
that we have proposed are related to
[2:15:42] mission street are related to
demographics and are continue to support
[2:15:46] housing. I I did work and missing middle
thingy. So yeah. Right. So, so if there
[2:15:51] is anything else that is not reflective
of reality, it should be flagged at that
[2:15:57] time and not when applicants are coming
here and proposing something that
[2:16:02] complies with the document that has been
approved in 2020 with all public
[2:16:08] outreach and planning commission, city
commission support. I'm just I'm just
[2:16:12] saying it's obvious it as it stands
right now, this does not reflect the
[2:16:18] character of the neighborhood. Is that a
valid reason to vote against it? So, so
[2:16:24] no, because zoning zoning is a long-term
game. So, anytime that we were we were
[2:16:31] talking about growth is because we don't
have it. So, there's always going to be
[2:16:35] the first larger building that gets
built in a low density area. It's always
[2:16:41] going to be that way. The only
difference is which communities have
[2:16:46] enough connections to be able to shut
that down and say not in my backyard and
[2:16:51] which communities don't have those
resources to be here tonight fighting
[2:16:55] against apparently a project that's not
please them. Uh but the planning
[2:17:01] commission I just want to restate that
our job as pl as myself the city planner
[2:17:08] and the planning commission is to pass
forward policies that have been adopted
[2:17:14] as a whole community. It's not even my
policy. I wasn't even here in 2020. I'm
[2:17:20] bringing something that has been adopted
and again confirmed just a few meetings
[2:17:26] ago with the master plan amendment
process. Yeah.
[2:17:31] Okay. And I just kind of want to harp on
this. I think the applicant said it's
[2:17:36] like meeting in the middle, right? I
think we had a case uh the school,
[2:17:40] right? Um and everyone said, "Well, we
need, you know, middle, you know, that
[2:17:44] middle class housing, right? So, we
don't want the school." Well, we have we
[2:17:48] have this at our table right here. And
now we're saying no.
[2:17:53] So, it's I'm just having a hard time
saying no to this when we've had
[2:17:58] communities say we want we want this
now. Some communities saying we don't
[2:18:02] want this. It's in the master plan. We
it it came up a couple meetings ago. We
[2:18:07] did it. And it's I get it. I get it. You
know, feelings are high. I get it. I
[2:18:13] really do. But I mean, we're here to
plan and grow. And I feel like every
[2:18:20] meeting here, we just have people
saying, "No, no, no, no, keep it vacant.
[2:18:24] Keep it vacant." And we're just, you
know, just stunting this growth. And
[2:18:29] that's not what aligns with our our
planning, our master planning. So, and
[2:18:34] that's why I asked the question about
the master plan because that is really
[2:18:39] kind of a deciding factor for me is that
we have um these notices posted
[2:18:45] regularly on the city website. Um, and
anybody has the option to come and um,
[2:18:52] submit input on those plans. Uh, and it
only seems like when something isn't
[2:18:59] going, you know, that you don't agree
with that then you want input on. Um, so
[2:19:05] I think it really is important um, to be
engaged at every level and not just when
[2:19:10] something impacts you.
Um and so that that is really why I
[2:19:17] asked that question is because we have
gone through that and I know you have
[2:19:21] put a lot of intentional work into that.
Um as has the entire commission and the
[2:19:27] city commission. Um and so that really
was the deciding factor for me I think
[2:19:33] and that that it is consistent with our
with our master plan
[2:19:39] and we don't make the ultimate decision
anyway. Yes, city commission who the
[2:19:44] city commission who has a different
remmit for how they engage with the
[2:19:48] community has to make the actual
decision to resone and then after that
[2:19:52] the applicant has to make an actual
submission presumably it might have to
[2:19:56] go through the plan it has to go through
the planning process we might be
[2:19:58] reviewing it again before we give our
acquiescence or opposition to it right
[2:20:04] yeah those are also really good points
so thank you for that clarification I
[2:20:10] really appreciate it.
[2:20:16] Okay. Uh, we are still open in
discussion. Is there are there any
[2:20:20] motions? Going to move to recommend that
the city commission approve Z-25-02.
[2:20:28] All those in favor?
[2:20:33] Second.
All those in favor? I I. All those
[2:20:39] opposed. Opposed.
[2:20:44] Will you please call a roll call?
Commissioner Deainy. I. Commissioner
[2:20:49] Farley. I. Commissioner Frederick. Hi.
Commissioner Havll's I. Commissioner
[2:20:54] Irwin. Nay. Commissioner Kingsworthy.
I. Commissioner Leash is absent.
[2:21:01] Commissioner Martinez. I. Commissioner
Orman. I. Motion passes.
[2:21:10] Okay. Uh, the next item on our
agenda is the public hearing for
[2:21:19] Z2503, a request to reszone the
properties from CD3, suburban character
[2:21:24] district to CD4, general urban character
district with residential drawing use
[2:21:29] only designation. Miss Paul Vidiko, if
you would please introduce the item. All
[2:21:34] right. So the last resoning that we have
is a city-led action. So that is a time
[2:21:39] in which the city of Mount Pleasant is
putting forward a reszoning application
[2:21:44] um to the planning commission for
review. So we are applying for reszoning
[2:21:49] from city 3 to city 4 within with the
residential dwelling unit only special
[2:21:55] requirement for the two parcels located
at cross lane street. The properties are
[2:22:00] currently vacant. it um sums up to
around 12 acres. And if the resoning is
[2:22:06] approved, the city will be able to seek
partnerships and apply for
[2:22:09] infrastructure and in housing
development grants to aid with the
[2:22:13] construction of attainable owner
occupied housing units as well as
[2:22:16] affordable rental
units. So this is the picture of the
[2:22:21] current vacant land um at cross lanes.
The land use here is um the existing
[2:22:28] site immediately to the north is a
commercial property. On the east side we
[2:22:33] have Mary Maguire Elementary School. The
south we have single family residences
[2:22:38] and on the west we have duplexes and
single family residences. the future
[2:22:43] land use. We have the Union Township uh
regulating the use all around the north
[2:22:49] and we east side of the city of the site
and then we have residential uh zoned uh
[2:22:55] or flagged in the future land use map
for the south and west portion. The
[2:23:00] residential category is basically for
single family and then duplex CD3
[2:23:05] designation which is the current land
use of the area.
[2:23:10] the zoning um it's CD3L on the south and
CD3 on the
[2:23:18] west. So these are the subject
properties viewed from cross lanes
[2:23:23] looking
[2:23:27] northwest and this is the subject
property view from main lane looking
[2:23:31] east. It's hard to see we have uh
vegetation covering the site. The site
[2:23:36] seems to be fairly flat and uh here is
the where the street would eventually
[2:23:42] continues if we are able to get uh
grants um to help with the
[2:23:48] development. So the reasoning
designation again we're with a resoning
[2:23:53] petition from city 3 to city 4. Um it
would continue to be only housing
[2:23:58] development and it's a typology and
density change. So going from city 3,
[2:24:04] six dwelling units per acre, single
family homes to city 4, 35 up to 35
[2:24:10] dwelling units per acre, mixeduse
building or missing middle buildings um
[2:24:15] all the way from duplexes to uh
triplexes, forplexes, accessory dwelling
[2:24:21] units, and multiple family dwellings not
exceeding two stories in
[2:24:26] height. This is the proposed zoning map.
Um so you do have the city4 designation
[2:24:33] in the very end of town um being
proposed for this
[2:24:41] site criteria for amendment. I provided
you with answers. Historically, I looked
[2:24:46] into previous packets of city lezonings
and staff used to not provide answers,
[2:24:51] but I did provide it to uh help just,
you know, have a comparison between
[2:24:58] actions and there's several of them that
are not uh applicable in this case.
[2:25:04] [Music]
Um and then going through the master
[2:25:08] plan. Um this is the most important
part. So the future land use map
[2:25:13] designation flags this parcel also as
attached residential. So for more
[2:25:18] density the book one sustainable land
use flags attached residential
[2:25:23] designations or city 4 as the underlying
district. City4 limits development to
[2:25:29] two stories helping ensure the character
and scale and development pattern will
[2:25:32] be compatible to the existing
neighborhood. And then the future land
[2:25:35] use plan places an importance on
creating housing which meets the need of
[2:25:40] households today and into the future and
it furthers targets the construction of
[2:25:45] missing middle
[2:25:48] housing. So for this proposal we believe
that the proposed resoning will help
[2:25:54] enable denser yet contextual forms of
housing development in this area in
[2:25:58] alignment with the master plan future
land use goals. Um just regarding
[2:26:02] contextual forms of housing development,
obviously it has a big range of building
[2:26:07] types that are allowed in city for this
was done by design both with the zone or
[2:26:12] master plan. But the one we're really
interested in seem on pleasant is a
[2:26:16] typology that we do not have. We call it
bungalow courts which are small detach
[2:26:22] houses around shared courtyards and open
spaces. It is a typology that uh was
[2:26:28] very common in the 20s and 30s, 1920s,
1930s and it is a typology that can help
[2:26:35] provide uh cheaper ownership
opportunities and also great for seniors
[2:26:40] wanting to downsize. Um so I have been
working with the housing commission
[2:26:44] habitat in listening year in trying to
create something that we see the need in
[2:26:49] the community. Um we don't have funds to
do that ourselves. So it's highly
[2:26:55] reliant on grants. Therefore, the
resoning is the first step towards that
[2:26:59] direction. Um the sizable land is one of
the few areas located within the city
[2:27:04] limits that provides the potential for
Mount Pleasant to growth in a larger
[2:27:08] scale and have helped tackle the housing
shortage pointed out in state and
[2:27:12] regional housing needs reports. Um, so
there is a state report that says the
[2:27:17] city of Mount Pleasant is in short of
approximately 80 owner occupied units
[2:27:21] and over 700 renter occupied units. And
then I was just taking note of the draft
[2:27:27] report that I have from MCOG from the
regional association here saying that
[2:27:32] Isabella County has a really low vacancy
rate of 0.6% 6% of non-conventional
[2:27:38] rentals which are rentals that are not
in large gigantic multiple family but
[2:27:44] are in what we are calling missing
middle housing which is completely it's
[2:27:48] extremely low based on a healthy market
that needs four and between four and 6%.
[2:27:55] Um so just to give some parameters on
that and then the gap analysis that has
[2:28:03] been done right now it's extremely flash
and a fresh and in draft form also says
[2:28:08] that Isabella County has a rental
housing gap of
[2:28:12] 1,936 units. So there's a long way to go
here. Uh the proposed CD4 designation
[2:28:18] allows for a variety of housing types
especially those classified as missing
[2:28:22] middle housing which means one the range
of buildings types that fall between
[2:28:26] single family and multiple family and
two that have historically been and
[2:28:30] still are able to provide more
attainable housing options to middle
[2:28:33] inome households even without tax
abatements pilots laex and all those
[2:28:40] programs. So staff finds that the
proposed conditions are consistent with
[2:28:44] the character of the area in the future
land use identified in the master plan.
[2:28:48] This is a large parcel. It is in close
proximity to the elementary school which
[2:28:53] can help attract family households uh
which are currently increasing the city
[2:28:57] limits. You may recall the demographics
chapter um that we drafted as part of
[2:29:02] the master plan. We are seeing an uptick
of uh populations between 30 and 44
[2:29:06] years old that need housing. The
proximity to commercially zoned land
[2:29:11] along Pickard can help support existing
business and perhaps even change a
[2:29:15] little bit the nature of the surrounding
commercial properties to be more uh
[2:29:19] service um related and retail related.
And the city is currently unable to
[2:29:25] apply for grants prior to the
reasonzoning proposal. We do need to
[2:29:29] have a reasonzoning approved in order
for us to seek grants. Um the state does
[2:29:33] not like to approve. So we will not be
competitive enough if we still have to
[2:29:38] go through a reasonzoning process for
that. Uh therefore this is the first
[2:29:42] step. Um so with all of that uh staff is
recommending that this the planning
[2:29:47] commission recommends that the city
commission approves
[2:29:51] Z-25-3. That concludes my presentation.
Thank you. Thank you. Uh do any members
[2:29:56] of the planning commission have
questions for
[2:30:03] Midiko? See none. Uh if the applicant is
we don't need to for the applicant the
[2:30:08] applicant is myself.
All right. Uh so um now I will open this
[2:30:14] up for public comment for comments
related to this
[2:30:25] case. Thank you. And as before, if you
could please state your name and your
[2:30:30] address and um that um speakers are we
limit one speaking um per um proposal
[2:30:39] and you have uh a maximum of five
minutes. Okay, that'll be enough. Um my
[2:30:44] name is Jane Fox. I live at 103 West
Drive in Mount Pleasant. I've lived
[2:30:51] there about seven years and it's a
wonderful neighborhood.
[2:30:55] If you come down Broadway, which is
well, say this is Broadway, okay? You
[2:31:01] have to take William Street to go east
or to go west. I'm right here on West
[2:31:08] Drive. My neighbor right across streets
on East Drive. Now, all these people
[2:31:14] that want to go way down there off
Broadway are going to come by my house
[2:31:21] and my neighbor's house. and all the
people on West En drive to go to where?
[2:31:28] I don't even know. I never got a letter
about this. Why not? I know you can't
[2:31:34] answer me, but this is my home and this
is my neighborhood and they're wonderful
[2:31:42] neighbors and I never got a letter. And
as anybody I've talked to here, they
[2:31:49] didn't get a letter either. Why not?
[2:31:53] Don't you give letters? Don't you mail
letters to people who live in those
[2:31:59] areas that will be impacted by these
decisions that you are
[2:32:05] making. I wouldn't want to be in your
shoes. I I will tell you
[2:32:09] that. But none of us were notified. And
you can ask everybody here if they were
[2:32:14] notified. We weren't. I wasn't. Anyway,
to make a long story short, what is
[2:32:21] going to be over there? I really don't
know yet. Has any did that explain what
[2:32:28] they're going to do over there? Are
those going to be apartments? Are they
[2:32:31] going to be
condos? Are they going to be lowincome
[2:32:35] houses, highincome
houses, more family
[2:32:39] units? We I haven't heard anything about
this and I wish I would have. I would
[2:32:47] have written a letter if I would have
known known more about it. But I got no
[2:32:52] no letter on it. How can we we as
property owners have anything to say
[2:33:00] when we don't know what's
[2:33:04] happening?
So I I
[2:33:08] guess it sounds like probably we speak
tonight and it's probably not going to
[2:33:13] make any difference.
That's the way I feel right now. I don't
[2:33:19] feel like we're going to be listened
to and I'm very
[2:33:25] disappointed as all my neighbors are and
all my
[2:33:29] friends. The children walk around. We
have people walking east, west, grand,
[2:33:35] east, south, whatever. They walk it
every day. They come from across
[2:33:40] Broadway and walk in our little area.
That traffic is going to be I see all
[2:33:46] the traffic that goes on East Drive,
West
[2:33:51] Drive, Grand, East Grand, and they'll
end up over there on cross
[2:33:59] lanes and the the the traffic will
be
[2:34:06] terrible and it's a nice quiet
neighborhood
[2:34:09] now. And I'm so
[2:34:13] disappointed. I love Mount Pleasant, but
right now I am so
[2:34:34] disappointed. My name is Kurt Mey. I
live at 417 East Drive.
[2:34:42] Um, the outlet for
the land that we're talking about is
[2:34:48] right I'm right on that corner right
there. We've talked about the elementary
[2:34:54] school. You're talking about the west
drive and the east drive where it comes
[2:34:58] together. It's like a fork. You got what
one outlet for that land and you got the
[2:35:03] other outlet east and west. It comes
together on a fork with a stop sign to
[2:35:09] where?
Broadway, which is going to be very,
[2:35:13] very difficult to get the outlet to go.
And then the the rest of the traffic is
[2:35:18] for the school, which is in Union
Township, I believe. But it's still you
[2:35:22] have a lot of kids that are
walking.
[2:35:27] And I don't understand why the city is
asking to reszone. As far as I could
[2:35:35] tell, the owner hasn't asked for it. A
uh developer hasn't asked for a request.
[2:35:43] We didn't ask for the request. So, what
are we doing? What what what's I get the
[2:35:49] master plan, but if you don't have a
request, then why why do it? And I have
[2:35:55] to look at the worst case scenario.
Say you do reszone it and you go to
[2:36:01] these
fourplexes with the amount of acreage
[2:36:06] there. Worst case scenario, what do we
got? Two 300 rental units in a single
[2:36:14] family residential area.
I have to
[2:36:19] say I don't recommend reszoning for that
purp. If it would have been if somehow
[2:36:26] you could go single family, make the
lots a little smaller, it'd be one
[2:36:30] thing, but you're opening up a whole can
of worms with this forplex,
[2:36:36] triplex, so on so forth. So, it's I
would have to vote against it.
[2:37:01] Good evening. My name's Don Betha. I
live at 407 West
[2:37:05] Drive. I did get a letter. Thank you
very much. My neighbor did, too. He came
[2:37:10] over to talk to me about it. and um we
just wanted to know what you are going
[2:37:15] to do. Um nobody seems to be able to
tell
[2:37:19] us. I understand it's going to be
reszoned, but are you putting in
[2:37:24] compartment complexes? Are you putting
in, you know,
[2:37:29] forplex? And is it going to spill onto
cross lanes or is it going
[2:37:35] to go out the other direction towards
Pickard? I know that's I it's got to go
[2:37:42] through businesses to get there,
but we're just kind of wanting to
[2:37:46] understand what you're doing. Um,
putting in apartment complexes right
[2:37:51] there is is weird there. Yes, I get that
there's a school right there, but that
[2:37:58] is a, you know, basically
single family home residential area. Um,
[2:38:06] if you go down east in West Grand,
they've got some duplexes and they fit
[2:38:11] right into the neighborhood beautifully.
I can see developing that property and
[2:38:16] putting in homes, but apartment complex
would be really weird. Um, you're just
[2:38:23] trying to pack people in and that never
really works very well.
[2:38:29] But I also understand that you guys have
already made up your minds and we don't
[2:38:33] get to say any anything about it anyway.
But I just thought I'd put my two cents
[2:38:37] worth in.
[2:38:54] Hi. Uh my name is Rod Lamers. I live at
516 East Grand Avenue. uh my property
[2:38:59] backs up to this lot or one of the two
lots. Um I just like to just say that um
[2:39:04] I've lived there for about four years. I
notice a lot of uh residents in the
[2:39:07] neighborhood using it sort of informally
as a park. Um and I I would say that we
[2:39:12] sort of have a um most of the parks are
not in this area in town. Um so I think
[2:39:17] that would be it's a good amenity for
residents in that area. So, um I realize
[2:39:22] this would probably be better at the um
master plan approval stage, but just to
[2:39:27] put a plug in for um this lot does
provide some value. Um and even if it is
[2:39:32] redeveloper homes in the future, having
at least part of the property maybe set
[2:39:37] aside for a small park to to serve the
residents, I think would be very
[2:39:41] valuable. Thank you.
[2:39:52] Okay. Um, seeing no one else.
[2:40:05] Oh. Yeah. I'm uh Don Hubble. I live at
504 East Grand. And as I witnessed
[2:40:14] tonight, I heard a lot of
uh about the owners having to ask for
[2:40:22] reasonzoning. And then I understand that
with this case, we don't have an owner
[2:40:27] doing that. Or is the city trying to own
it? That's one big question. And I just
[2:40:36] uh I'm not in favor of it. So that's all
I have to say.
[2:40:51] Okay. Um, seeing no one else from our
present audience. Um, do we have any
[2:40:59] comments online?
No one online. Okay. Thank you. At this
[2:41:05] time, I'm going to close public comment
and open discussion.
[2:41:09] A quick thing on the discussion. Uh
going from CD3 to CD4 will
[2:41:15] allow grant applications that could not
be made now. Is is that is that the
[2:41:21] story? Yeah. So, um basically there
aren't grants out there that I'm aware
[2:41:27] of for housing that would support a
simple subdivision or a single family
[2:41:32] home development. All because grants
that are placed by the state, MISTA in
[2:41:38] this case, I'm looking at the my
neighborhood program, they are trying to
[2:41:42] help us tackle the creation of more
housing and housing that's
[2:41:47] attainable. So, um when we get into that
discussion and look at development
[2:41:53] options for creating attainable housing,
we have to move away from single family
[2:41:58] home developments.
So the one way to do that is to look at
[2:42:02] Bungalow Courts which is a type of
single family development. It's just
[2:42:06] smaller single family which then gets
into higher density of units per
[2:42:12] acreage. But that that's um so that's
something I cannot do without the
[2:42:15] reszoning.
And that's granable that that is
[2:42:19] granable. Exactly. Okay. So
I got it's not huge a huge zoning
[2:42:26] change. I mean, that land has been empty
since they passed the swamp act. Um, I
[2:42:31] don't
know. I think I will vote yes on this
[2:42:34] one.
[2:42:38] Go ahead. Go ahead. I just have a
clarifying question. There's currently
[2:42:41] no plan. This is just like the very
initial baby stage of potentially maybe
[2:42:47] someday having a plan. Yeah. Yeah. So,
um, I don't have the resources right now
[2:42:53] to hire engineering firms. architecture
firms to create a beautiful plan. Um
[2:43:00] staff has done a lot already with the
tools that we have and time that we
[2:43:05] have. So we did have the engineering
department putting at least the through
[2:43:09] fairs to complete the streets that are
missing there. So I put that in my
[2:43:14] application. And you can basically
create three city blocks uh with the new
[2:43:18] uh infrastructure and they have
calculated the amount of funds that we
[2:43:23] would need to build the streets the
public infrastructure which would then
[2:43:27] incentivize housing development. Uh but
we
[2:43:31] cannot it's like a chicken and egg
situation.
[2:43:35] Um yeah. Okay. That was what I thought
and I'm very familiar with the my
[2:43:40] neighborhood program. So yeah, and I
can't really sell the idea of uh
[2:43:44] bungalow courts, um duplexes, forplexes,
you know, so maybe some courtyard
[2:43:52] buildings. I can I can't try to get
developers without have being zoning
[2:43:57] ready. Um and the Habitat for Humanity
has been a great partner on this one.
[2:44:03] They are more on the owner homeowner
ownership model. So their purpose is to
[2:44:10] serve the kind of minimum income range
and have attainable ownership options
[2:44:16] which we really desperately need. Um so
that has been my priority with this
[2:44:22] potential project and um the
infrastructure funding from the mid
[2:44:27] neighborhood program is one that only
local jurisdictions can apply. So, a
[2:44:32] developer could not apply for the infra
the infrastructure cost or the the
[2:44:38] funding to build the infrastructure for
a large piece of property like that. And
[2:44:42] we have I didn't mention that, but we
have this one. We have another 12 acre
[2:44:46] site south close to Isabella Citizens
for Health. Um, and then we don't and
[2:44:52] then we have uh maybe 20 25 acres along
um the west side of town on Bradley. Um
[2:44:59] but then we don't have anything beyond
that. Um and then we we do have the
[2:45:05] Crawford broom field, but we don't we
just have those like four leftover large
[2:45:12] parcels and no one no developer is
building right now because it's so
[2:45:17] expensive to build. They can't if they
would to put infrastructure, build
[2:45:21] single family homes, create a
subdivision, houses are going to have to
[2:45:24] be sold at 350, 400K if not more by the
time that that is done. So, but the city
[2:45:32] is trying to fill those gaps because we
are eligible for grants that developers
[2:45:36] are not in order to really try to tackle
our housing crisis.
[2:45:43] And I I think it would me you mentioned
on here like these bungalows are more
[2:45:46] targeted towards people downsizing
correct. So like people are kind of
[2:45:51] retiring and things of that nature.
Yeah. Yeah. Definitely. Deerfield 2.0
[2:45:55] right on the other side of that. So
yeah, we don't need student housing. So
[2:45:58] we would be terrible business for the
city to you know get into student
[2:46:02] housing construction. Um I think we all
and we feel that from applicants too.
[2:46:07] People are seeing that our need is with
long-term residents, is with workforce.
[2:46:13] Another statistics is we only have 11%
of our top 35 occupations in Isabella
[2:46:21] County. Only 11% of those workers are
able to afford housing. 11% of the
[2:46:28] majority of the occupations and
workforce that we have. So yeah, we we
[2:46:34] are trying to fill those gaps as we can.
And uh Mr. Fight, the owner, um he um
[2:46:41] had indicated to me back in 2022. He
came to um to meet me when I was
[2:46:49] starting here and he said that he wanted
to see something good come out of his
[2:46:54] property. Um at the time the city was
not willing to do anything. We didn't
[2:47:00] know of grants that, you know, we were
not uh ready to do anything uh in terms
[2:47:04] of owner, you know, potentially
acquiring property and getting to
[2:47:08] development. Um I've been kept that
property in mind for a while and uh Mr.
[2:47:13] Five passed. So now I'm talking with the
the son and he is supportive and has
[2:47:20] provided a authorization which is
required. So I do have the owner
[2:47:25] authorization for this reasonzoning
request.
[2:47:29] Yeah, thank you.
[2:47:37] Uh, we are currently are in discussion.
So, if there's anyone who would like to
[2:47:41] make a motion, going to move to
recommend that the city commission
[2:47:45] approve Z-25-03.
Second.
[2:47:50] All those in favor? I
opposed. Motion
[2:47:56] passes. The next item on our agenda is
the public hearing for
[2:48:04] TC25-01, a multiple buildings within the
same lot, a proposed text change to
[2:48:09] table
[Music]
[2:48:12] 154.45.A of the zoning ordinance to
remove the one principal building per
[2:48:17] lot restriction within CD4 general urban
character district better accommodating
[2:48:22] phase developments. Miss Povido, if you
could please introduce the item. Yes.
[2:48:27] So, you already tackled the introduction
of this, so I appreciate that. Um, I
[2:48:32] would also say that aside from um
enabling multiple buildings in the same
[2:48:37] parcel, the proposed amendment would
also include a clarification on number
[2:48:41] of accessory buildings allowed. Um, so
we would be one per principal building
[2:48:45] since we would be moving towards
allowing multiple buildings in the same
[2:48:48] parcel. and a new screening requirement
that I'm proposing to help buffer
[2:48:54] principal buildings that are located
within the third law layer um since that
[2:48:58] is could be a little bit of a change but
I'll go through my presentation to talk
[2:49:03] a little bit more about rear setbacks.
Um so the background on this is that um
[2:49:10] at the April 3rd 2025 meeting we have uh
presented the master plan and the part
[2:49:17] of the master plan had uh the suggestion
from the progressive companies
[2:49:23] consultant on proposed amendments
especially to city4 regulations to allow
[2:49:28] for phase developments and allowing
multiple buildings in one parcel is a
[2:49:32] way to accomplish that. Aside from that,
I would also add, oh, and this is, yeah,
[2:49:38] sorry, I should have flipped the slide,
but this is where in the amendment of
[2:49:42] the master plan, you can find that
information about removing the one
[2:49:45] principal building per lot restriction
to accommodate phase developments. At
[2:49:49] the master plan, it does say that uh
it's something for us to discuss if we
[2:49:54] wanted to do that only on Mission Street
or citywide since the scope was mostly
[2:49:59] focused on Mission Street. The reason
why that I'm proposing this on a
[2:50:04] citywide level, so this tax change will
affect every zoning city for zoning
[2:50:09] designation on the map today is because
aside from not allowing phase
[2:50:14] development like you see here on the
diagrams on the bottom corner of the
[2:50:18] slide, we are also not currently
allowing forms of missing middle housing
[2:50:24] typologies. Our master plan is
hyperfocused on creating missing middle.
[2:50:29] It's very much what the state is calling
for with what every single municipality
[2:50:34] I know of is trying to do. It's reading
the planning field. American Planning
[2:50:39] Association is asking city planners to
work on it. Right now with the one
[2:50:43] principal building per per lot, we are
hurting the ability to create bungalow
[2:50:49] courts and the courtyard
apartments. Uh so basically multiple
[2:50:54] apartments around the courtyard or
single family homes around the
[2:50:57] courtyard. uh those forms of development
are more historically uh more
[2:51:03] historical. We tend to not see a lot of
developers doing those today and that is
[2:51:09] the main reason why there has been a
push to develop those back because it
[2:51:13] can again tackle more attainable housing
options. So they also help create that
[2:51:19] density that's more into context than if
we would to build you know buildings
[2:51:24] that are have large footprints have uh
double loaded corridors with several
[2:51:30] apartments it does help create that
density in a more contextual form.
[2:51:36] So one thing uh the reason why I'm
bringing this right now um I know that
[2:51:42] the master plan is not yet adopted um
and that suggestion is in the master
[2:51:47] plan under review but it is again to
help support the grant applications um
[2:51:52] so it is it goes alongside of the C the
Z2503 resoning action um to allow what
[2:52:00] we're calling pocket neighborhoods in
Mont Pleasant and then Um adjacent to
[2:52:06] that we have the developer proposing um
five forplexes at 11:04 Chipua which
[2:52:14] will be related to the reszoning
Z2502. So a text this check tax change
[2:52:20] will help basically both uh
developments.
[2:52:25] Um, and then I wanted to get a little
bit more into zoning and how this change
[2:52:33] uh relates to the other rules that we
have. All the other rules will continue
[2:52:37] to apply. So for instance, density
restrictions. We're not allowing more
[2:52:42] units. We are continuing to allow the
same number of units per acreage. Um, so
[2:52:47] this change would basically instead of
encouraging a large multiple family,
[2:52:52] let's say a oneacre site in under city
4, you could build one gigantic multiple
[2:52:58] family building that is double loaded,
has units next to each other, occupies
[2:53:04] almost 100% of the lot because we only
require 3 ft of a rear setback, and you
[2:53:10] could have your 35 units that way.
Alternatively, you could break that
[2:53:14] density down into smaller buildings
around a common space, which is much
[2:53:20] more into context than a gigantic
footprint in the middle of a
[2:53:24] neighborhood, right? Um, so this is
basically what missing middle is. It's
[2:53:29] exactly it's the premise of it. Um, 60%
buildout requirement continue to apply.
[2:53:35] So buildings will still have to be
closed to the streets and provide that
[2:53:39] um you know streetscape um parking
location rules will continue to only
[2:53:44] allow parking in the back. So you're not
going to have ocean of parking that you
[2:53:48] can see from the street and then
buildings that are embedded within the
[2:53:53] ocean of parking. You're going to see
landscaping. You're going to see a
[2:53:56] sizable or frontage and then you're
going to see parking in the back and
[2:54:00] then you may see more buildings behind
it.
[2:54:03] uh landscaping, streetscape, we continue
to apply. And then in terms of
[2:54:08] distancing between buildings, we I had a
conversation with the building safety
[2:54:13] official to make sure that I understood
the rules. Building code will continue
[2:54:17] to apply. So spacing between buildings
will be regulated by building code which
[2:54:22] is based on construction method method.
So fire rating and amount of windows. So
[2:54:27] if you do provide more windows um you
have to set back further and um usually
[2:54:35] you would need a lot of windows
especially if you're doing multiple
[2:54:38] building multiple units right so um so
that is how the kind of separation would
[2:54:45] uh exist as well as to ensure safety
through fire rating standards. So um
[2:54:50] building code by itself is uh already
helps regulate and ensure that folks are
[2:54:55] not putting buildings closed together
because otherwise they will have to
[2:54:58] spend much more into the building
engineering to make sure that that fire
[2:55:02] rating walls um are not uh potentially
you know sending um fire hazards from
[2:55:08] one building to the other in case of a
fire. So that's just wanted to restate
[2:55:12] that um city 4 already allows more than
one dwelling unit per parcel by right
[2:55:18] through use regulations. So we allow all
those typologies and it already allows
[2:55:22] buildings to occupy most of the reard as
I mentioned. We have only a three-foot
[2:55:28] reard setback requirement in every
single zoning district today. So you can
[2:55:33] create lots that are very shallow and
homes that occupy most of the lot and
[2:55:39] all we require is the three-foot
setback. Um that was not my policy. It
[2:55:44] is what we have in the book since 2018.
So with that um I'm putting also this
[2:55:51] slide from a recent American Planning
Association Michigan chapter
[2:55:55] presentation on pro housing and uh this
is exactly the slide I took a screenshot
[2:56:03] of uh the talk and put the the link
there. Um you can see uh the
[2:56:08] presentation but this particular uh
slide was uh related to this topic. So
[2:56:15] they say replace minimum lot widths
typically for infill should not require
[2:56:20] someone to own more than one lot
otherwise project will not pen fill out.
[2:56:24] And then they have the illustration
showing the missing middle typologies.
[2:56:28] And then the cottage court is right
there in the middle showing how you can
[2:56:31] have you know small footprint homes that
are more attainable and maybe a little
[2:56:36] you know multiple family in the back um
to get a different typology
[2:56:42] into. And then I wanted to also look at
Mount Pleasant and see what are the
[2:56:48] types of developments that exist already
and that we actually do not allow them
[2:56:52] anymore. Those things uh if someone
wanted to build the Rosewood condos
[2:56:57] today and get approval from the planning
commission and the city planner, they
[2:57:02] are not going to be able to propose that
because we don't allow multiple
[2:57:05] buildings within the same lot. So this
is one of
[2:57:09] them. This is just another example.
Franken Village at Gaylord. It's uh
[2:57:14] multiple uh aplexes. So we have six
aplexes in one parcel. And you can see
[2:57:21] how uh in this one the applicant
configured you know the buildings are
[2:57:25] you can see the spacing between them. Um
all based on previous ordinances and we
[2:57:30] currently do not allow
that. We don't allow B prey which is a
[2:57:35] fantastic neighborhood. I wanted to live
there myself but units were kind of
[2:57:39] expensive. Um they are a compilation of
multiple single family homes with a few
[2:57:46] duplex units in one
parcel. And then there these are
[2:57:51] examples of developments that we
currently do not have in Mount Pleasant
[2:57:55] and the ones that I've been exploring
for the five property or maybe other
[2:57:58] vacant parcels in Mount Pleasant uh
which are the bungalow courts. So this
[2:58:03] is an example of one that won tons of
awards out there in the design field.
[2:58:08] It's called Dennis Grove in Kirkland.
It's fully built. You can see the Google
[2:58:11] map view of it. And they have 15 single
family homes in one parcel. And that
[2:58:17] green space in between is great for what
some of the public comments were about
[2:58:23] about open space and
community. Um, and this is another one
[2:58:28] which uh we don't allow which is in uh
Montana. Uh, it has a different name.
[2:58:35] Let me see. Yeah, I didn't change the
name. I apologize for that. Uh let me
[2:58:38] see if I can find it. Riverside
crossing. Thank you so much. Um and they
[2:58:44] are it's a new development. So I wanted
to show another uh pocket-like
[2:58:48] neighborhood. So you can see it's
basically a pocket over here on the top
[2:58:52] and then a pocket here and then there is
a private street that goes around it for
[2:58:57] uh vehicle access. But the building
frontages are really around the court to
[2:59:02] increase that community building. And
this one is under development and they
[2:59:06] are almost all sold out. It's a
cooperative model. They have seven
[2:59:12] designs that you can choose from and
then you can basically take ownership of
[2:59:16] a portion of the whole development if
you um opt in. And it's usually co-ops
[2:59:22] are better at keeping affordability in
the long run. Um and I've seen tons of
[2:59:26] them in in my um experience back in New
York. um communities that co-ops that
[2:59:31] have been been there for like 100 years.
Um so anyhow, so this is my recommended
[2:59:37] action for the planning commission to
um approve or recommend that the city
[2:59:43] commission adopt tax change to
C-25-1. And here you can see the
[2:59:47] overview again of the particulars of the
tax change
[2:59:53] proposal. Thank you so much.
[2:59:57] Okay, thank you. Um, does any member of
the any members of the planning
[3:00:02] commission have any questions for Miss
Pyo? I
[3:00:05] do. So, those slides you just showed us,
those are were not currently permitted,
[3:00:10] but they would be with this text change.
Yeah. Okay. Second thing, um, the
[3:00:14] bungalow style too, would that permit
tiny houses in the city? So, we don't
[3:00:19] have any minimum square footage
requirement in the zoning ordinance. if
[3:00:23] that's something that the planning
commission is interested in, you can let
[3:00:26] me know. But we don't regulate footprint
or size of homes. So, um it's really
[3:00:34] dependent upon compliance with building
code. But yeah, just as a basis, we have
[3:00:39] the accessory dwelling unit. It has to
be at least 400 square ft, which is
[3:00:43] pretty high actually. Um I've had an
applicant trying to do something smaller
[3:00:48] but couldn't. Um and then uh we don't
have anything else for So you could do
[3:00:54] small homes. So you're saying yes. Yeah.
So you can do it already now. Yeah.
[3:00:59] Okay. Thank you. Except it's all on one
parcel. Then you can't do it. No, you
[3:01:04] could on one parcel. On one parcel. So
you have to do multiple parcels. So for
[3:01:09] instance, city 4, you could I say the
bungalow style though cuz that's all on
[3:01:14] one parcel, is it not? So uh bungalow
would be one parcel. Yeah. So, you can
[3:01:19] do the bungalow style, but those could
all be tiny houses.
[3:01:24] Yeah, they could. Yeah, that was my
question. Thank you. Okay.
[3:01:28] Is So, you're saying that somehow back
in 2018 or 2019, we accidentally zoned
[3:01:34] out condominium developments. Mhm. And
and nobody noticed that. It seems like I
[3:01:40] spoke with the city attorney to make
sure I wasn't missing anything. Um, and
[3:01:46] the way it is written right now, the
interpretation is that a unit conominium
[3:01:51] would not be allowed. You could do a
subdivision-l like conominium. So, you
[3:01:56] could sell parcels with buildings, but
you couldn't be able to sell just the
[3:02:02] drywall to drywall, which is pretty
common here and very popular. Yeah. Like
[3:02:07] quadplex condominium would not. Yeah.
Okay. I got it. I got it. Yeah.
[3:02:12] Embarrassing. Okay.
[3:02:17] So these type of houses obviously could
um go up in like some of the other
[3:02:23] applicants that we got today, right?
Those areas. Yeah. So this change would
[3:02:26] affect um the potential project that
we're trying to pull off bungalows and
[3:02:32] then also the previous applicant that
went to do five forplexes. So without
[3:02:36] this tax change, they could only put
more than one building. if they were to
[3:02:42] do some sort of subdivision within that
site, um they wouldn't be able to do um
[3:02:47] multiple forlexes in one parcel. So,
basically, we allow the density, but you
[3:02:53] can't really build it. I kind of wish
some people stuck around for that one,
[3:02:56] but
do we have to have a Is this a public
[3:03:00] hearing one? Yeah, we do have a public
hearing.
[3:03:07] Right. Um any further questions? No.
Okay. And then um with this, do I open
[3:03:16] it up for public comment
[3:03:21] then? Okay. See no one present from the
public wishing to comment. Is there
[3:03:27] anyone online? No one on the line. Okay.
Thank you. Um at this time, I will close
[3:03:32] public comment and open discussion. re I
move that we recommend to the city
[3:03:37] commission that it adopt text change
25501 second.
[3:03:42] All those in favor I all opposed. Motion
passes.
[3:03:48] All right. Uh next item on our agenda is
public
[3:03:57] comment. Seeing no one here wishing to
comment from the public. Anyone online?
[3:04:03] Okay. Thank you. I will close public
comment. Uh, next item on our agenda is
[3:04:09] staff report administrative reviews. Mr.
Toby. All right. So, we have two site
[3:04:14] plans that were approved
administratively. The first one is 509
[3:04:18] industrial drive. Um, it was approved on
May 12
[3:04:23] SPR-25-04. And it was a proposed impound
yard at 509 Industrial Drive which
[3:04:28] includes a fenced area behind the
existing building for vehicles.
[3:04:32] Improvements to the gravel drive, the
addition of a sidewalk along the
[3:04:35] property frontage in the street of
Brightway, parking striping and layout
[3:04:39] on the existing concrete area, bicycle
parking, street trees, and planting
[3:04:43] forest
[3:04:46] screening. The next one is
SPR-25-06 for 315 West Locust. Um it was
[3:04:54] approved on May 21st and it was a very
small scope project. Um I may get back
[3:05:02] to all of you to see if we can wave some
of these and just send to the building
[3:05:06] department. Um it was simply an
enclosure behind an existing staircase
[3:05:11] so they can have storage in their uh
three-unit rental
[3:05:15] home. Um and that's it. Oh, sorry. And
then I have you don't have to call for
[3:05:21] this one. And it's another staff report.
So, as you may have realized, we have a
[3:05:26] new planning commissioner here today. We
are uh full now. We have our nine seats
[3:05:32] taken. Fabin Martinez started uh just
today here at the planning commission
[3:05:37] and we did go through
[3:05:41] the shortest meeting you're ever going
to see. We did a presentation on May
[3:05:46] 14th. And do you want to share anything
about yourself?
[3:05:51] Today's your last day.
[3:05:56] I mean, it's been exciting so far.
But I've been here for almost a year. I
[3:06:02] really like Mount Pleasant and I really
like the direction it's going.
[3:06:06] Appreciate you, Fabian. Thank you.
Welcome. Welcome. They are not always
[3:06:11] three hours long. So you So you
understand? Yes.
[3:06:16] I got a normal thing. No, that concludes
my effort. Can I can I just like say
[3:06:21] just one thing? I guess I
just I don't know if I'm probably
[3:06:26] talking to nobody, but I guess this goes
to like just everyone who showed up. I
[3:06:29] really appreciate it, but I just wish
and I I pray and just hear hear us out.
[3:06:36] Hear what's being implemented. And don't
just think, oh, something new is coming
[3:06:40] in. This is terrible. Like, there goes
the freaking neighborhood. Because if
[3:06:45] they stuck around and saw what we're
kind of proposing to build these
[3:06:49] beautiful bungalows so people who are
aging can downsize and all of these
[3:06:55] things to help, you know, close this gap
in a rental and housing crisis, they
[3:07:00] would understand. And I just I'm talking
to nobody and I don't care because just
[3:07:07] please just open your ears. I understand
it's it's frightening. change change is
[3:07:13] uncomfortable, but please, please,
please just hear everyone out. And
[3:07:18] there's my TED talk for the day. Thank
you. I I do want to also say I I really
[3:07:24] appreciate the bringing forth of that
option, housing. I think that that is
[3:07:30] something that a lot of people do look
for of having in a sense their own home.
[3:07:36] They don't need a McMansion. They're not
looking for that, you They're looking
[3:07:40] for um home ownership that's not an
apartment, especially with young
[3:07:44] families or young professionals. And um
that would allow for so many people who
[3:07:51] are seeking housing to have that kind of
opportunity. And I think it greatly fits
[3:07:57] in with our existing neighborhood model.
It's it's almost like here's just
[3:08:02] another little courtyard building like a
build addition to the existing
[3:08:09] neighborhood more than as we all know
and we agree we we don't need any more
[3:08:15] student housing building you know so I
think um I think that allows for us to
[3:08:19] greatly support that vision and denser
housing and grow denser growth improves
[3:08:25] the tax base way more than single family
housing does. Yes. It's just a fact. And
[3:08:29] so like maybe we should encourage those
kinds of growth as opposed to well and I
[3:08:34] also think around young families there's
a nice um yes for our aging population
[3:08:40] but also for young families having that
kind of village almost um create you
[3:08:46] know being created in some communities.
I can see that being really um you know
[3:08:52] something that young families could
value as well speaking as a first house.
[3:08:57] I mean, we were in Metro Detroit. We I
we didn't have a nice little grassy
[3:09:01] courtyard, but we had this little
offshoot road that was an add-on to a
[3:09:07] neighborhood and we all had these little
bungalow houses and it was amazing. I
[3:09:13] had this
wonderful elderly neighbor and you know,
[3:09:18] she made us baklava and we helped her
when her grandson flushed toys on the
[3:09:23] toilet. I mean, it was was a great
neighborhood. It was uh you know, but it
[3:09:28] was it was just this one little
like courtyard of of small little
[3:09:32] bungalow houses. It was it was really
great. Commissioner Bartman, that was so
[3:09:36] eloquently said. I don't think we can
say anymore. So, I'm going to
[3:09:39] move second.
Second. Second. All those in favor?
[3:09:46] Also, thank you, sir, for sticking out.
Thank you so much, brother. Thank you so
[3:09:52] much, man.
[3:09:57] Whoa. Shout out to
[3:10:02] God bless you, bro. God bless you.
I need a sticker or something.
[3:10:13] Brother, normally it's like I think my
first meeting was like maybe 30 minutes
[3:10:18] long maybe.
[3:10:31] So, you're going to have to be the bad
guys. Good job.