[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:17] Welcome, and thank you for attending the August 13th, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. We are calling our meeting to order if I could ask for roll call please.
[0:31] Commissioner Willet-La Roy,
[0:35] Gatsen.
[0:36] Here.
[0:37] Taylor Garza, President, Cypher, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here,
[0:47] Blake, here in the Senate.
[0:55] Hi, I'm going to make a motion to approve minutes for working, I get a motion to approve
[1:00] minutes for July 23rd, 20, our regular meeting on July 16th, 16th, 26th, and the special
[1:06] meeting on July 23rd, 20th, 26th.
[1:09] So second.
[1:16] All in favour?
[1:17] All in favour?
[1:20] We are going to move one to public hearing.
[1:24] Hearing case 202616, request to amend the Plan Unit Development at Harvard to Narrow
[1:31] Condemniam Association, Partial 6124425, 000000 to reduce the amount of sidewalk to be
[1:45] I'm going to defer to Commissioner Mosaic for comment.
[1:52] Thank you, Madam Chair.
[1:54] I live in Halbert Island.
[1:56] I want to disclose that.
[1:58] The city attorney has previously defined that I do not have a conflict of interest,
[2:03] relative to this issue.
[2:05] But nevertheless, I intend to abstain from voting on this matter.
[2:09] Thank you.
[2:10] Thank you.
[2:12] Can we get staff to report out on this public meeting?
[2:16] Yes. We'll also need to approve the minutes, but we can do that.
[2:19] You're just, I'm sorry.
[2:21] Yes.
[2:21] We're going through this stuff.
[2:22] Yes, I'm sorry.
[2:25] You're going to get a publication.
[2:28] This may be for funding manager.
[2:31] Given that it's not a technical, conflict, interest, and it's a discretionary
[2:36] abstinence of staining from the process that is not triggered then the requirement that it be uniform
[2:44] of the remaining members who's want to confirm this the case not at the planning commission level
[2:50] This is just a referral to the this is just recommendation. Yeah, so and that
[2:55] This will be a question really becomes within the mind at the city commission level. I'm curious about that
[2:59] If someone's discretionary that's staying you shouldn't trigger the requirement that it's unanimous by the remaining members
[3:07] And if I'm a manager and then just for another clarification, no matter how the vote goes tonight,
[3:12] this does get referred to the city commission. So whether it's an affirmative vote or like a group of denying the application,
[3:18] it still goes to the city commission. So just want to make sure that's clear.
[3:23] So.
[3:23] One of that.
[3:25] Okay. If we can have staff report out please.
[3:28] Sure.
[3:28] So in August, 2024,
[3:30] a harbottom kind of any misociation applied to amend the planning and development to allow
[3:35] an additional 10 buildings which would include 28 new units total on vacant lots that are
[3:42] located on the west side of the development. The amendment was approved with the following conditions.
[3:49] A turnaround must be incorporated at the end of channel view points. An additional fire hydrant must
[3:55] be at a long channel view point. We have since worked with the fire marshal and determined
[4:00] that is not actually necessary. The storm water premise must be obtained from the engineering
[4:05] department before construction commences, which is standard. Landscaping plan is provided.
[4:11] They plan on doing that when the individual homes are applied for. That's fairly standard
[4:16] as well. And number five was that the sidewalks through harbour town circle. East and West
[4:22] are installed within two years
[4:24] from the commencement of construction.
[4:26] Harvard Town, Condominious Association,
[4:29] has been unable to find a way to finance the installation
[4:32] of the new sidewalks throughout the entire development.
[4:34] So they are now proposing a scaled-back version
[4:36] of the sidewalk connection, which would include
[4:38] a new sidewalk from full-and-street entrance
[4:41] to the Indian-estreet entrance as depicted on the map.
[4:44] That's included in the packet.
[4:47] The engineering department reviewed the plans and had some comments about the sidewalk proposal.
[4:58] They suggested that a crosswalk will need to be incorporated at Indiana Street, including accessible ramps.
[5:05] The existing sidewalk on Indiana Street that this will connect to is on the south side.
[5:11] So there will be need to be a connection from the north side that leads to the sidewalk on the south side.
[5:16] While the city is engineering group or consultant, whatever ends up designing this will be able to make the highlighted route work.
[5:24] Several of the driveways on the east side of harbour town west harbour town circle will get quite a bit of steeper near the roadway.
[5:31] He noted that some residents may be unhappy with the results as the steepness of the driveways may cause bottoming out or a lumpy ride.
[5:40] He was able to provide a sketch that I have handed out to everybody.
[5:45] We should have in front of you about how that would look and why the increase of steepness to the driveway would happen.
[5:54] Also noted that grading easements will be needed outside of the existing right away, particularly along the east side of the street.
[6:00] If not obtainable, retaining walls may be necessary, driving up costs.
[6:04] grading easements for the driveways will be absolutely required and are necessary for
[6:08] project as proposed and improve sidewalk ramps. Require and grading easements and
[6:15] possibly requiring permanent easements will be needed at the full-and-street entrance
[6:20] to make this sidewalks ADA compliant which is a requirement for public sidewalks when
[6:25] upgraded and
[6:29] we also have a recommended motion below which includes those comments.
[6:40] Thank you.
[6:41] If the applicant is available, you have
[6:43] opportunity to come out if you like.
[6:47] Actually, actually, before we do that, I do have a question for staff.
[6:52] Okay.
[6:54] So the.
[6:56] The sidewalk concerns.
[6:58] That engineering brought up about.
[7:00] The the mumping or so whatever in the.
[7:03] Approval that we previously did, it was for.
[7:05] Was sidewalks to be on both sides.
[7:08] Or was it to be on one side or the other?
[7:09] It was to be on one side or the other, but we hadn't actually picked out the route yet and we did note that it could cross the screen a couple of times to maybe try to avoid situations like this or other situations that would arise.
[7:24] So with or without making any changes there would so potentially be the same challenge.
[7:28] Correct.
[7:31] Yeah, if you keep it on one side, I believe you're going to run into some steepness challenges, whether or not you're crossing over back and forth.
[7:40] There is potentially going to be some issues before this.
[7:43] Thank you.
[7:45] Thank you, Manager.
[7:48] Anyone else?
[7:50] On the dial.
[7:51] I have anything else to say before we bring up
[7:57] the applicant.
[8:01] Is the applicant here?
[8:02] Well, you please be so kind and state your name and address.
[8:09] Good afternoon.
[8:10] My name is Mark Schultz and I'm here representing the Harvard Tellen
[8:13] Condo Association.
[8:15] Many of my comments would be repetitive of what Director
[8:20] Fransic just said.
[8:22] I do want to add with regard to the engineering drawings.
[8:26] We would intend to hire a civil engineer to detail all of the
[8:30] during requirements meet the city codes and ADA codes so that we don't do anything wrong in this situation.
[8:39] Again, many of my comments have already been heard by Director Fransik so we'll be able to answer any questions that you may have.
[8:51] Anyone have any questions for our applicant?
[9:01] If you have anything else to say, you can feel free to answer it.
[9:05] Thank you.
[9:06] Thank you.
[9:07] welcome. Now we're going to open up for public comment. If anyone is out there in the crowd,
[9:13] that would like to have something to say, please come up to the podium and state your name
[9:18] in your address.
[9:22] Yes, ma'am.
[9:25] Arbor Azulaf, I live at 3440 Pitch and Hill Court.
[9:31] The financial aspect of this project is that to be born by harbour founders, the city going to
[9:38] provide the paving and then the maintenance.
[9:44] I should press that for a developer.
[9:46] Usually not question in the answer time.
[9:48] Yeah, it's a public area.
[9:50] We're interested in the question they received.
[9:55] We have anyone else that would like to speak.
[9:59] Good evening or afternoon.
[9:59] My name is James Fox.
[10:00] I don't live in the association, but I'm on the back side
[10:03] of an analysis street.
[10:05] And I'll be affected a little bit.
[10:07] My home sits up a little bit higher.
[10:09] But we have what I consider a pretty good doing area behind our home.
[10:12] and nobody there today and one of the buildings is going to be placed behind that
[10:17] and I'm just curious how that will react with the doom and the grass lands and the woods
[10:22] behind our own.
[10:23] Thank you.
[10:26] We have anyone else in audience?
[10:35] My name is Kim Privy, I live at 1473 West Cargertown.
[10:40] I'm not familiar with all the rules of overtime, but I know that within our rules uniform
[10:45] is one of the things that we stress.
[10:49] For instance, if I wanted shutters on my building,
[10:52] I can't give shutters because everybody
[10:53] have to.
[10:54] If I wanted to paint my garage door,
[10:56] I can't do that because everybody would have to.
[10:59] This sidewalk that's proposed right now
[11:01] is starting basically at Indiana Coins North to Folgan.
[11:08] I have friends and other people that live on East Harbour
[11:11] Town Circle that presently walk for exercise,
[11:14] walk to go to Bowdocks, walk to go to the lake. They're walking on the street. They don't have a sidewalk.
[11:22] My vision is, if we have to have a sidewalk and we have uniformity rules and herpertone,
[11:28] and a sidewalk should be provided with everybody. These people are walking in the street. They have no choice.
[11:33] I talked to some of these people and we also have a slight concern and nothing against the
[11:39] docs, but we believe that the docs proposal as like emergency entrance or something
[11:45] from their property to our property, but a lot of residents to go to Botox, to go to the
[11:52] lake, may use that exit to walk in the harbour town, likewise, they will be walking on
[11:58] hypertoncircle in the row, to the original sidewalk. So I feel that it's uniformity,
[12:05] excuse me, has to be done, with a sidewalk for the whole property. The other thing I'm
[12:10] concerned with with the proposals right now, I drive beach-free, I drive the ovals. I drive up to
[12:18] these pedestrian walkway signs. I'm diligent and make sure there's no residents, but I've also
[12:25] walk til throats, and many times there are vehicles that don't buy by those signs.
[12:33] They just drive right through, even though they're supposed to stop from me.
[12:38] This new sidewalk proposal that we have starts on the west side of the street, from Indiana,
[12:46] to the proposed first unit that's going to be built.
[12:49] And then I'm assuming it's going to be a crosswalk that goes across West Harbour Town and I'm
[12:57] guessing again that the other thing that you're going to be able to do is to put a pedestrian
[13:01] walkway sign there because there's no stop lights and that means it's a problem because
[13:09] of what I encounter every day by the beach.
[13:12] Our Paton every month, our newsletter is talking about, note, it's 25 mile an hour speed limit.
[13:21] Don't speed. We're not going to have potentially 28 more vehicles. If you do one per unit,
[13:28] 56 of you go for two driving through there. Come on to bow to Oxford and order their residents.
[13:35] We've been concerned about speed. Now we got more traffic going through there.
[13:39] I just don't see that one that plan is already out there is feasibly because of that.
[13:45] If we're going to have a sidewalk, make it from Indiana.
[13:49] I don't know how you would do it, but make it from Indiana.
[13:52] Across to the west side.
[13:55] So just one crosswalk.
[13:58] A side to foot from Indiana to foot.
[14:01] As we eliminate this, walk in the middle of the road with pedestrian walkway signs.
[14:08] That is going to, you know, to me, that is a danger, because I, I sort of lived pretty
[14:13] near where that crosswalk is going to be, and I'm watching cars go by every day.
[14:19] There is no 25 mountain horse to be there.
[14:21] I'm watching people that are walking, they don't, they don't heed those cars.
[14:26] I've also talked to people that lived on the East side, or East Harbor Town Circle, that
[14:30] when they walk, they've told me, when they come to Indiana, they're not going to walk
[14:35] across to the west side of the street to get on to your sidewalk.
[14:40] They're just going to keep right on walkin',
[14:42] which means they're going to walk to that first unit
[14:45] that's being constructed until the sidewalk starts.
[14:49] So that has a limited part of the traffic.
[14:51] I think I'm going to hear me walking.
[14:54] That's my point.
[14:55] Thank you for your comments.
[14:56] If we have anyone else in the audience that wishes to speak right now,
[14:59] You're going to...
[15:00] I should have said this before, handsop, apologize. To keep your comments limited to three minutes.
[15:08] Glenquist, I have a 1639 West Habitat on Circle.
[15:13] But there, in the complex and and on a private house, for the last 15 years, walked three times a day through the neighborhood,
[15:20] and they had not a need for an sidewalk ever.
[15:23] So, look, concern about previous plan where it said all the way through the development goes through my yard.
[15:30] I don't benefit from that financially or because it don't walk there anyway.
[15:38] So I'm not sure that we've put the issue to bad with regard to through the complex,
[15:42] but I'd like to see that we have sure that it's not going to happen.
[15:47] Thank you.
[15:48] Thank you.
[15:50] Do we have anyone else in our audience that wishes to speak?
[15:55] If not, we're going to move to the phone lines. You can call in at 2 3 1 7 2 4 6 7 2 1. Again, open up the phone lines. Call in at 2 3 1 7 2 4 6 7 2 1.
[16:26] I'm going to give that just a few more seconds here.
[16:29] It's not even done to you yet.
[16:31] Oh, forget us the delay.
[16:35] You're just now announcing it.
[16:56] No calls yet.
[16:59] So we have no cause, I am going to move that we close the public hearing.
[17:11] Yeah, I got it.
[17:14] You want the whole thing or just go over here, I know.
[17:19] I moved to close the public hearing.
[17:22] Second.
[17:25] We're close.
[17:25] That public hearing, if we have anyone that would has, by the words.
[17:31] Oh, I'm going to move.
[17:32] Yeah, go to the public hearing.
[17:34] We need, can we vote one?
[17:36] The calls in the public hearing, please.
[17:41] All in favour?
[17:42] Aye.
[17:44] All opposed?
[17:47] The occult in the public hearing case 20 2016.
[17:51] 2026-16.
[17:53] Do we have any comments from Commissioner?
[17:56] One more comment.
[17:58] We did receive two emails that I've placed in front of everybody.
[18:02] You may want to take a minute or two to read those.
[18:05] Both of them will lose.
[18:07] being residents in harbour town that would like sidewalk throughout the
[18:11] development.
[18:19] I'm sorry, one of them is not in harbour town. They are in Nelson.
[18:36] Nelson Street or Nelson Street. Nelson Street. Nelson Street. The the longer one that
[18:41] resident Charlotte is from the Nelson neighborhood.
[18:50] Has everyone had
[18:51] opportunities to read both emails?
[18:55] Yes.
[18:58] Commissioner.
[19:00] Or do we need a little time?
[19:03] Anywhere?
[19:04] Yes.
[19:47] Give just a few more seconds for commissioners to finish reading those emails.
[19:54] Then open up for any comments questions concerns that commissioners may have.
[20:12] There are any commissioners that have any comments concerns.
[20:15] questions please feel free to yes I'm before determining what motion to make
[20:26] we permit the applicant to come back with voting for questions yes I
[20:32] applicant Mr. Schult would you please come back to the podium thank you
[20:40] good afternoon Mr. Schult hi could you give us some background history in
[20:46] in terms of, what is transpired since the Commission took action in, towards the end of
[20:51] 2024, with transpired with the housing association, in both you've taken as an organization,
[21:00] discussions, examinations of costs and the, like, you could just kind of bring us up to speed
[21:03] as to what is transpired on your end since then.
[21:05] We did have a vote of the co-owners, and that was concluded on April 11th, 2025.
[21:10] that vote was not successful.
[21:13] There were 96, yes, 69, no, and 30 people did not submit a ballot.
[21:21] And that equals 190 co-owners.
[21:25] And by the bylaws of Harvard Town and Canada Association,
[21:29] the ballots that were not returned are considered a no vote.
[21:32] So basically, the motion to proceed with the PUD failed.
[21:38] We think that mainly the no voters were opposed, well, we did not have a lot of information
[21:49] about the sidewalks at that time.
[21:53] During that time period of the vote, we had already sent out the ballots.
[21:57] The city gave us an estimate of $400,000 for the sidewalk.
[22:01] And then the county assessor came along and said that she would only assess the people
[22:07] where the sidewalk abutted in front of their units.
[22:10] If you happen to live across the street from that particular unit,
[22:14] you would not get taxed, but the people that abutted the sidewalk,
[22:18] they would bear the tax burden.
[22:20] That tax burden would fall on maybe 50 to 55 of our coal owners
[22:25] as compared to spreading the cost of the project to all coal owners.
[22:30] This is actually in conflict with the state of Michigan condolences
[22:34] in regards to that this sidewalk would be placed on a common element of the condo association in the State of Michigan Condo
[22:42] Log indicates that any improvement on a common element is shared by all condo owners not only the one set of buck this.
[22:53] In addition, the county assessor also said, and I have to back up here as I'm sorry.
[22:58] The sidewalk, if we go all the way on East and West
[23:02] Harbour Town Circle, there are plots of land that do not belong to
[23:06] Harbour Town.
[23:07] There are other privately owned, some owned by the Sandocks,
[23:11] some others are owned by individuals.
[23:14] The county assessor said, on those particular parcels
[23:17] that are owned by the Sandocks and the other private individuals,
[23:21] adding a sidewalk would not improve the value of their property.
[23:25] And so those people would not share in the cost of this sidewalk going through all of East and West
[23:32] Tableton.
[23:34] So that, there again, we never did go back to the coloners because we knew that if we said,
[23:41] hey, we have a section of the sidewalk, which would have been about 10% of the sidewalk, that we
[23:48] would have to pay rather than the owners of the property.
[23:51] So we did not proceed down that road.
[23:56] We did have some conversations.
[23:59] And we talked with the mayor and the city managers
[24:03] see forth.
[24:04] And in December, we said, could we consider
[24:07] this shortened version of the sidewalk?
[24:11] We have talked to our developer,
[24:14] who is Mike Boschcraft, a bosscraft home in Holland.
[24:17] He is willing to front the money for the sidewalk.
[24:19] and then deduct that money from the proceeds that the condo association would receive from the building of the 28 units.
[24:28] So we have the funding element in place, and so now we're just looking for the city to approve the short and sidewalk version.
[24:35] If in fact the city goes back and says, sorry, we need to have sidewalks in the whole condo,
[24:42] social, both East and West, however, tone.
[24:45] This proposal will die.
[24:46] We will not construct the 28 units.
[24:49] It's, it's that simple.
[24:51] So Mr. Schultz, the vote that happened in April of 2025,
[24:55] that was after hearing from the county session's office
[24:59] so it informed that it were not comfortable assessing
[25:03] every property of the kind of association in Hamilton.
[25:08] Did, was the county session aware of the law
[25:11] you referenced the regulating condos associations and that.
[25:15] Yes, the ultimate element.
[25:15] Yes, the R attorney of an Alexander of make-aware and several names, they're located
[25:22] in Permanent and Hills, and actually they're from helped write the condo law for the state
[25:29] of Michigan.
[25:31] So yes, R attorney reached out to the county assessor and said, by the way, you're in conflict
[25:38] with the state of Michigan Condol law, but the county of Sussur decided to go over
[25:43] our own way and said, sorry, this is my ruling.
[25:48] So the Sussur was not persuaded.
[25:50] No, that was that law.
[25:51] It's not persuaded.
[25:52] There were, and you mentioned meeting with the mayor myself in the city manager, and
[25:57] you've had many conversations with our DBW director as well.
[26:01] One of the meetings, one of the earlier meetings, not the one in December of last year,
[26:04] But one of the earlier meetings, there was conversation around trying to work out a development
[26:11] agreement with the city where the city would front the money and then assess individually.
[26:17] But it would be a contractual agreement with the condos association.
[26:21] It would not be a formal assessment of every property owner.
[26:25] So it would be up to you all to work out how you're paying that back.
[26:29] Was there any discussion amongst you and your residents around going that route potentially?
[26:35] And I'm raising this because after our meeting in December of last year, you know, it was
[26:39] comfortable with this modification.
[26:41] I was the one that originally advocated for sidewalks for the continuous sidewalk throughout
[26:46] Harbour Town, East and West of Harbour Circle.
[26:51] But hearing the issues and the flights and the struggles with being able to make the happen
[26:56] and also the fact that my original advocacy was predicated on the belief and the understanding
[27:01] that the original P.D. had for Harvard Town had required a sidewalk, but it was never implemented
[27:08] in North enforcement happened. And so that's why I was so such an advocate of, okay, now
[27:14] it's before me, I'm not going to pass this up. We're going to follow us through and get
[27:18] a sidewalk in there. I understand. Come to light. Since then, there can be no one can
[27:23] find any actual records or documentation of the original P.D. requiring that sidewalk.
[27:30] And
[27:31] So, for a moment, I still personally prefer, you know, a sidewalk going with the length
[27:36] of that for a number of different reasons, you know, complete streets and coordinates, part
[27:40] of our city policy, but was understanding and willing to be flexible, but I'm hearing some
[27:45] of the folks that have come tonight as well as some emails that are focusing your community
[27:49] that do want the sidewalk throughout the entirety of that street.
[27:54] So I'm just trying to understand what conversation has been happening and you're in with your
[27:58] numbers and if what has been explored and if because it sounds like that vote, it
[28:07] will be counted the 30 apps of staining as know, even that, that's pretty close.
[28:13] 96, yes, 99, we would have needed two thirds vote, which is like 127, yeses, okay, you
[28:19] need two thirds, got it. We were about 30 short. And that was based on the belief that only
[28:26] some properties could be assessed, not all properties.
[28:28] It's not going to understand why people might vote no on that, you know,
[28:31] than here unfairness.
[28:31] And even some of those 60 no voters, we think we don't know for sure,
[28:37] but in conversations after the fact, we found that they voted no
[28:42] because of the ambiguity of the sidewalk cost and who was going to pay for it
[28:48] or what the route was and how it was going to be funded.
[28:51] Relative of the question that you raised about if the city contracted with Habitown Condo
[28:58] Association and then the Association said, okay, 190 co-owners, you're going to get
[29:06] to assess you X amount per year for the 10 years or 15 years at home over that agreement
[29:11] with Workout.
[29:12] We thought about that, but this situation with the Sandox owning part of the property and some
[29:20] individual co-owners where the burden would be all on harbour town for that approximately
[29:25] 10% of the linear feet of the sidewalk, which might be 500 feet or so in that
[29:31] vicinity. Again, we thought, well, co-owners are not going to be willing to pay for the
[29:37] sidewalk on property that does not belong to us. And when the county assessor took
[29:43] first stance that, you know, it was all on a harbour tone, and particularly all on just the co-owners set about at the sidewalk, again, that kind of blew this whole thing out of the water.
[29:56] Pardon my expression.
[30:03] I appreciate that additional insight and background. One more one more question to understand your process and I guess you're by-laws perhaps.
[30:10] What did it require for you as the to petition for amendment to PUD, with just a vote of your board? Did it have to go to the every property owner to say yes we support pursuing the PUD amendment?
[30:23] Yeah, if the planning commission approves this and goes under the city commission and then the second reading of the city commission
[30:30] And then we would have an approval for this short and version of the sidewalk
[30:34] Then yes, we would have we would go back to our developer because we have some other issues with him mainly on the exterior look of the proposed buildings
[30:43] And he's indicated he's willing to make the buildings look exactly like harbour town is today
[30:49] He what he did is supplied as some of his stock photos of prior work that he had done and he's
[30:57] This was a third-generation contractor
[31:00] He's built several condo communities up and down West Michigan West Michigan shoreline. So he's very
[31:08] credible in this area
[31:10] So he said, yes, I can build these buildings with my foot print, but put a harbour town look on him and all he did was give a stock photos of his
[31:18] prior buildings and not have his CAD people do their work to make it look like carbotons.
[31:25] So we intend to go back to him and get some revised drawings, not drawings and think of
[31:34] the right word, the correct view of carbotone, so that we can then proceed on with a second
[31:41] boat to our co-owners and say, now we have the sidewalks defined, we have the funding defined,
[31:47] We've got the exterior look of the buildings defined, and we believe now that we have a project that we can go forward with.
[31:56] Thank you.
[31:56] Appreciate it.
[31:57] Thank you Mr. Mayor.
[31:59] Any other questions?
[32:01] I do.
[32:03] Two.
[32:04] So if the sidewalk will, if we don't vote for sidewalk.
[32:10] That's correct.
[32:11] If you don't plan on going through with the development.
[32:14] That's correct.
[32:16] It's financially not in our interest to do it if we don't get the shortened version.
[32:21] Okay.
[32:22] And again, just so I have a, it's wrapped around my head.
[32:27] Even the individuals who are part of the HOA that will not have the sidewalk,
[32:32] they still will have to pay for the sidewalk.
[32:36] That's correct.
[32:37] Okay. Thank you.
[32:38] It's an equally shared deal according to the state law of Michigan, the state condo law.
[32:42] we can not do an improvement to a common element and only assess certain co-owners.
[32:49] It's one or all. It's all, basically. We cannot say, well, these 10 over here have to pay,
[32:55] and these 10 over here don't have to, it doesn't work that way. That's the state law.
[33:01] Yes.
[33:02] Michelle, should this pass and eventually you prevail at both this level and from the electives?
[33:12] would you continue to have the conversation about what is potentially possible as far
[33:21] as sidewalks through the entire development as part of a different conversation?
[33:29] We would be willing to have that conversation.
[33:31] It would be difficult to fund it because of the way that the county assessor has stated
[33:37] her position.
[33:39] So that, unless the city absolutely says you have to have sidewalks on this portion that
[33:46] we're not talking about today, it would have to be a city tax basically.
[33:55] Yeah, so that the option that we put out there as Mr. Schultz was talking about was essentially
[34:04] the city would pay for the sidewalks to go in and then there would be a contract with the
[34:10] and then they would have the dues associated with that and the HOA itself would be responsible for paying us back over probably a ten-year period.
[34:21] So, and that's just to be consistent with city ordinances when sidewalks go in are replaced in front of a home.
[34:28] It's the responsibility of the homeowner unless there's some exciting circumstances, which there's a couple of situations.
[34:34] So,
[34:38] that's that was sort of the agreement that we were trying to lay out that would have gotten around the concerns from the county assessor.
[34:46] And she and I did have a conversation when she initially came through with her position on it and it's been well over years since that conversation.
[34:54] I don't remember the details of it, but essentially there were some state court rulings that she was looking at
[35:02] that she felt didn't give her the authority even taking into consideration the condo law
[35:08] and that that's why she wasn't comfortable rolling an assessment across all the properties,
[35:13] which is another way that we pay for those sidewalks as well. And again, in that case, the city
[35:19] would still be paying the upfront cost and then we'd be recouping them through the special assessment over time.
[35:24] So the contract option was essentially a similar option just with a contract with the HOA as opposed
[35:31] to, on the individual properties.
[35:41] I, you know, of a mind to vote,
[35:44] guess, on this particular option.
[35:49] And one reason, that one of the big reasons is,
[35:55] I think it'd be Shane and Miss Out on,
[35:57] you know, additional housing within the city.
[36:00] Secondly,
[36:03] I've given this situation,
[36:09] I would hate to put an impediment in, you know, front of the ownership
[36:16] for use of their property. Now, through almost 40 years of not 40 years, we have a situation
[36:24] here that if indeed there is a deficiency meaning the sidewalks won't put in. But the mayor
[36:33] even mentioned a hard time finding if that was ever really a requirement. Now we've gone through
[36:43] how many developers in the first developer with Dick Anderson, John Dearing picks up
[36:53] the project. And then, you know, now, now we have, you know, ownership in the form of
[37:03] Okay, I knew it so she's right. How many, how many administrations or even times that the sidewalks came up,
[37:14] you know, in front of the elected and basically it was pushed off. We've had 40 years
[37:25] of either inability or unwillingness to bring enforcement of some sort to force the sidewalks.
[37:39] but that was never done. The kind of the topic of the sidewalks had come up at least once
[37:49] back when I was still on the commission with you, Mr. Mayor, and it didn't go anywhere, you know,
[37:58] the discussion. So now we have the condo association with, you know, practical difficulties to
[38:08] circumstances that are unique to this property for the current ownership. This was not
[38:19] self-created.
[38:23] And you know how many current residents were residents at the time in the
[38:30] 1980s when this even came up. Maybe 50%. Okay. And to your point about the transfer of ownership
[38:38] from Dick Anderson to John Darion. I believe I'm not sure on this, but we did find some
[38:45] records that in early 1990 or early 1990s there was a sidewalk boat and at that time
[38:55] John Darion still owned a greater than 50% of the parcels. So he had a boat of yes or no. And so
[39:02] obviously he voted the down because he had power over the empty parcels at that time.
[39:08] So, we think that's probably why that boat failed, is that he didn't want to put in the sidewalks at his expense.
[39:17] I'm guessing there.
[39:18] I'm not sure.
[39:21] Again, I'm going to vote in the affirmative, because I believe that this is a good option.
[39:28] Thank you.
[39:30] We'd hate to see the development of additional housing in the city of Michigan,
[39:37] stymied and also your ability as ownership to be denied, you know, the use of your own property.
[39:50] One of the benefits there, and then, you know, somebody's got a nail down, you know,
[39:57] just the deficiency actually exists. And, you know, if it does, then we do have
[40:04] legal bearing including you know court case to say build these different things or you
[40:11] continue on you know as a body as a corporate body you know the residents and find some work
[40:21] around assessors and whatever else because there is a call for sidewalks by some of your
[40:36] ownership, but I understand that and it's it's the funding element that is
[40:40] it is and there was a question asked you know tonight who pays for this he better
[40:46] be clear on that one because it seems like you know some people aren't clear
[40:49] that and all the cities not going to come in and put inside walks they don't we
[40:53] wouldn't do that and any neighborhood you know the it's either going to be a
[41:04] neighborhood in this city. On the short and version of the sidewalk, the developers are going to
[41:09] pay the upfront cost and just deduct it from our proceeds. So that's why we have the funding
[41:14] element in place for the short and version. If we were faced with the extended version all the way
[41:20] from Pulton Street all the way to the end of East Harbor Town Circle,
[41:26] we have a problem that we don't
[41:34] because after 40 years of head scratching as to where the heck are the sidewalks who
[41:42] pays for it and are you really required to, I'm not going to hold up the development of
[41:49] additional housing in the city of Michigan or deny your corporate body, the residents
[41:57] there, an opportunity to use their own property.
[42:01] Thank you, sir.
[42:03] One other point I'd want to make on the 28 additional units.
[42:08] All of the infrastructure is already there.
[42:10] The roads are there, the utilities are there.
[42:13] The water insurers are there.
[42:15] We're not like the Sandacks.
[42:17] We're not like the Savvy property that have to still put in all of these infrastructure elements.
[42:22] So if we do receive approval, and perhaps early 2027,
[42:28] we might be able to see something go up.
[42:30] But I'm not committing to that, but we have a lot of the infrastructure already there so that it's not a stumbling block.
[42:41] And that would be nice to have additional people living there to actually pay the cost of maintaining that infrastructure.
[42:47] Thank you.
[42:50] I was going to add a note that Head Conversations to DBW about how can we engineer, how can we do this the different ways.
[42:59] And one of your residents has to post can't you do something in the street itself instead of having a sidewalk.
[43:05] And so I did convert with their city manager and our DW director on that.
[43:09] Is there a way to have a marketed walking path out of the roadway that exists?
[43:16] And DW director did review that and it's not.
[43:20] He would not recommend that given the current with the roadway.
[43:26] That's the problem, is the road is just not widening.
[43:29] A little bit wider, then you're talking a little bit about each side.
[43:33] And basically then you would make Harper tell a circle of one lane road.
[43:37] Yeah. So if we're just a little bit wider, then it could have been able to accommodate both the
[43:40] two-way traffic and separate. We would have loved to have that.
[43:46] Which is unfortunate, because I would have been the cheapest option.
[43:49] So really, by far, and make everyone happy, most everyone's having, you're not going to get universal happiness.
[43:54] You work for a fire. We make a long ways towards making everyone happy.
[44:01] Mr. Rindig.
[44:04] Can you confirm with regard to the search for any documentation
[44:10] with regard to any side block requirement,
[44:15] predating the commission action in 2024?
[44:19] As I recall, there were some meeting minutes that referenced it,
[44:22] There was we couldn't find any actual documentation of the PUD requiring it or any minutes of motions that spoke to it.
[44:30] That's a really good question and I brought it up more during the first go around.
[44:36] We had some of the literature there that we found. Unfortunately for whatever reason we don't really have zoning files that predate 1990.
[44:44] They were tossed at some point.
[44:47] So we don't have the original plan, there's some pieces of it but it doesn't exactly show
[44:52] a sidewalk, but looking through the files around 1997 and in 2004.
[45:00] There were discussions about it, and those emails referenced that the sidewalks needed to be installed. It didn't say where they were.
[45:09] Both sides of the street, one side of the street throughout the entire development or not. It just looked at some point that there was a requirement that a sidewalk should be put in, but we can't find exactly where that would be located.
[45:24] One comment on the original PUD in our discussions in the past two years or so, we have reached out to John Darian.
[45:36] He's still with us and he lives in the Trevor City area.
[45:40] He had indicated that he does not have any of the PUD documents also.
[45:45] So we went down the same road that Director Francis was that we were in search of the same
[45:51] documents and he said, no, I don't have them.
[45:54] Whether he did or not, I'm not sure, but that was his answer.
[45:58] Thank you.
[45:58] Thank you.
[45:59] Thank you.
[46:00] Have any further questions, comments?
[46:04] I was going to address a couple of the questions that came up but then also kind of give
[46:08] my position to, so a question came about the open areas and how that's going to be impacted.
[46:12] So that was a dress, they've already had approval for the expansion, and that was a dress in that last public hearing by the PUD.
[46:21] But they would need to meet all Eagle permit requirements as well for anything with Dune grass and things like that.
[46:29] So those things have been addressed.
[46:33] I keep looking at this and thinking about perfect mean the enemy of good and our goal here is to have more sidewalks.
[46:40] If we don't allow this change, we're guaranteed not to have more sidewalks.
[46:45] If we allow this change, there's a possibility that we'll have sidewalks and the co-owners
[46:49] will have the opportunity to vote on it.
[46:51] And that's really what this process does is it gives the co-owners in hard recounting the
[46:56] ability to go back and vote on the situation.
[47:00] So Lake Commissioner Garran, I'm also going to support the amendment because I think it moves
[47:04] this in the right direction.
[47:05] It's not perfect.
[47:06] It's not the way that I would want to see it.
[47:08] would want to see more sidewalks, but we're guaranteed not to have the sidewalks if we don't
[47:12] make the change.
[47:17] Yes, Mr. Man.
[47:18] As you can see, I move the request to amend the Planning and Development Harvard Town
[47:21] County Minimum Association to reduce the amount of sidewalk being installed as required
[47:25] as part of their plans to construct additional housing.
[47:27] You recommended the City Commission for approval with following conditions.
[47:30] One, a turnaround must be incorporated at the end of the channel view point.
[47:32] Two, a stormwater permit must be obtained from the engineering department before construction
[47:35] commences.
[47:36] Three, a landscaping plan is provided.
[47:38] for a crosswalk will be installed at the end of the street.
[47:41] Five grading easements will be needed outside this existing right away,
[47:44] particularly among the east side of the street.
[47:46] If not obtainable retaining walls may be required.
[47:49] Six improved sidewalk ramps and requiring grading easements
[47:52] and possibly requiring permanent easements will be required
[47:55] at the fault and entrance to make the sidewalks ADA compliant.
[47:59] I had a friendly amendment for clarity and note that the requirement
[48:03] for a fire hydrant is removed, because sometimes I can create questions in the future if there's
[48:13] a condition in one and then not in the next. So note that that is the reference to the fire hydrant
[48:19] requirement previous version has been stricken from this version. Second.
[48:28] Motion is again.
[48:29] move by our mayor, Kim Johnson, and this is a part of a commission government.
[48:38] Can we have a vote?
[48:40] Well, I'll just say the final thoughts.
[48:42] I will support the motion that's on the floor.
[48:45] As our manager said, ideal, the ideal would be there to be sidewalk among the entirety
[48:51] of that road.
[48:52] That's still my personal preference,
[48:56] and I'm going to continue to advocate for sidewalks
[48:58] We're responsible in our city, so we have complete streets, which is a city policy of ours.
[49:04] However,
[49:07] the exciting way of circumstances here, and there was good faith effort made on the city's
[49:12] part and the kind of socials part to find a way to be able to fund and install the sidewalk and do
[49:18] to fiscal constraints, engineering constraints, topography constraints, determined that it's just
[49:24] not feasible at this time.
[49:30] I still would like to see that find a, still to find a way
[49:34] to make that happen.
[49:36] However, if we were going to get a sidewalk
[49:38] at all here, I think this is a very important section
[49:40] of the sidewalk, connecting Fulton to Indiana,
[49:44] street.
[49:45] And by extension, connecting Harvittown Beach
[49:46] through Indiana to Pirmarket,
[49:49] is important.
[49:51] And you all have sunk in costs already
[49:54] and these vacant lots and I understand this is an important development not only to help
[49:59] get more residents to help shoulder the cost of maintaining your condo association and your
[50:05] facilities and common areas but also the development process is going to be significant and
[50:09] help support your association and condo residents as well. So I will support this maybe a little
[50:19] of a grudgingly?
[50:21] I mean, grudging might not be the right best words,
[50:27] but saddened, maybe, we couldn't find a way
[50:30] to ensure that there's going to be a continuous sidewalk
[50:33] on either side of that street.
[50:37] That would have been part of the preference of the ideal,
[50:39] but has the manager said sometimes the perfect
[50:42] can be the enemy of the good.
[50:45] And those are my thoughts.
[50:49] Yes.
[50:49] Just as a disinformation, under planning law and under planning developments,
[51:01] there is indication of separating a new amended proposal from the existing and reading through my notes from our training.
[51:18] It was not only desirable but was a lot, you go ahead and handle the new proposal without
[51:34] dropping any perceived efficiency that had existed, you know, from the past and you would
[51:42] still pursue, you know, that, but we're not even sure, you know, if there is a deficiency
[51:53] or a breach in, you know, existing contractual PUD language,
[52:03] but there is, that's part
[52:05] the mechanism, under planning law, that within an existing unit,
[52:14] you do address a new proposal
[52:19] without dropping the need to address the pre-existing situation.
[52:24] So, that's just an aside.
[52:28] Any other comments?
[52:31] Just a clarify, given we just heard from Commissioner Garret, I think the event that we're
[52:38] documentation were to surface that was a requirement of the original POD. No action being taken
[52:46] here, undo that previous requirement. If it were to be found, if we found out that side was
[52:52] re-required and this didn't pass, no no I'm saying if this were passed because we're talking about
[52:57] just one, we're talking about taking away a new requirement that we added in 2024 or a condition
[53:06] for an amendment. And so we're removing that condition to that amendment of just one area
[53:10] that's being developed. If you were, if you were, if documentation were to surface that the
[53:16] original PUD had required a sidewalk that is not now negated because we simply are
[53:22] mending a condition for these additional housing. I would kind of tough to answer. I guess I would
[53:31] say no, it wouldn't because the conditions are about the expansion and not about what is existing
[53:38] there at the time. So, and that's also why I made that from the amendment to add the striking
[53:44] of a hydrant in there to make sure that it's clear on what is changing. So, this is strictly
[53:48] related to them being able to do the expansion that's in place. If we found out that the original
[53:54] requirements were not met, that would be a different discussion. Now, I don't know if it would be
[54:01] that discussion. If that was discovered, but I would see these as two separate things.
[54:06] Okay, thank you.
[54:09] You went out.
[54:13] I'm going for a vote again.
[54:18] Commissioner Keener. Yes.
[54:21] Go around.
[54:21] Yes.
[54:22] Say for? Yes.
[54:24] It was Garza. Yes.
[54:26] In Johnson.
[54:31] So we have a guest on hearing case 2016.
[54:36] I'm going to move on to unfinished business. Do we have any unfinished business?
[54:41] I'm going to get a confirmation, but that come to the City Commission August 25th, or that
[54:47] be in our September, and should the August 25th?
[54:51] So just for folks in the audience and your neighbors know that this will become the City Commission
[54:55] on August 25th, and that's when the City Commission will be considering the planning
[54:58] commission's recommendation.
[55:00] And there will be public comment available at the beginning of the commission meeting
[55:05] before the Commission deliberates and votes.
[55:08] Thank you for clarifying.
[55:09] If you want to open a business, do we have any unfinished business, no unfinished business?
[55:18] Well, I just wonder, when are we going to have a joint city planning commission meeting?
[55:24] That's a good question.
[55:25] We could schedule one.
[55:29] We probably wanted to decide what the topic would be.
[55:33] Because we were supposed to be doing one every once in a year.
[55:36] Yeah.
[55:37] to read the moment.
[55:38] Yeah, that would be true.
[55:40] So, I guess for each of us to decide, I would respect the bodies on the particular topic
[55:45] so I want to discuss one of which is what we've been having.
[55:50] There's a broad board previously, which is around public access.
[55:53] Waterfront public access.
[55:54] And so there was some little discussion here, deferred back to staff to get clarification.
[55:58] And it had popped up on our agenda for a close session discussion at one point.
[56:03] that didn't happen, and I haven't seen it returned,
[56:07] some prompts that's a topic that can be addressed
[56:09] by the Planning Commission and the City Commission together,
[56:12] considering it was the City Commission that had given direction
[56:14] to move forward with the zoning change to support more water
[56:20] from public access.
[56:23] Do you know about when?
[56:26] We would have to figure out.
[56:29] Yeah, we'd have to figure out dates that would work
[56:31] I think every the last time we did it, we just combined it with a city commission meeting
[56:36] or if we want to have a special meeting in a different location or something like that
[56:39] that could accommodate everybody.
[56:41] Thank you.
[56:43] Any new business?
[56:50] Move on.
[56:50] Any other business?
[56:56] So, with that being said, we want to open up to general public comments.
[56:59] Any about there?
[57:00] Any one out there?
[57:00] That has anything.
[57:02] Any general public comment?
[57:04] Please feel free to come to the podium.
[57:06] Yes
[57:12] sir. Well we're waiting can I ask your question of Mike Pramp's in the last public
[57:19] hearing there was discussion about or made mention about the docks. Do you have any new
[57:26] information about the status of that project that you could share with us? I do not. I'm not sure
[57:33] if the city manager has any. I believe there's working through the permitting process with the state.
[57:41] I heard that there was, I'm sure we all want to hear this, but I heard that there may be another request coming back to the planning commission for another adjustment to their PUD.
[57:55] You heard that.
[57:57] No.
[58:00] Thank you.
[58:05] active general public comments seeing us how we have no one out in the audience
[58:09] we've got one down there no one that looks want to give public comment we're
[58:17] going to move to recognize your presence thank you we're going to move to the
[58:22] fold lines again that number is two three one seven two four six seven two
[58:28] Again, that's 2, 3, 1, 7, 2, 4, 6, 7, 2, 1, 4, any general public comment?
[58:59] Because we don't want to do it.
[59:02] Because we don't want to do it.
[59:26] What else?
[59:27] We have no cause.
[59:28] I am going to move to make a motion for a giant minute.
[59:32] So move.
[59:33] Second.
[59:35] Move by Mayor Kim Johnson.
[59:38] Seconded by...
[59:40] That you, Commissioner.
[59:41] down.
[59:42] Mr. Steve.
[59:45] Thank you.