[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.]

[0:00] As thoughts did, communications and force funds. I have received none, but any that hasn't been published.
[0:06] All right, moving on. We have no presentations, so I'm going to open public comment at 601.
[0:15] And this is for anyone who would like to address the planning commission on items that are not in the public hearing.
[0:20] So anything except growth of CO, and we ask that any oral presentations be limited to three minutes unless you're representing a group and an organization will have five minutes to address the commission.
[0:37] With that is there everyone in touch a poll that would like to address the commission on something other than growth of CO.
[0:46] Okay? Seeing no one will move to anyone online. These phrases have been made.
[0:54] No one has raised yet.
[1:01] No one has raised yet.
[1:04] Okay. And I'll entertain a motion to close public comment.
[1:09] So I can move by more to the second five lecture.
[1:14] Any further discussion? All those in favor please say aye.
[1:17] Any opposed? Okay. Public comment is supposed to six or two.
[1:21] Moving on to approval of the minutes of 810-26,
[1:31] I'm a approval of the minutes by brand support by hide, any further discussion.
[1:39] Those in favor please say aye.
[1:41] Aye.
[1:46] Then the minutes are approved as submitted.
[1:50] Right.
[1:50] We'll move on to our public hearing.
[1:53] All right, the public hearing this evening is for O-A-25-O-12, PSP-25-017-Groves of
[2:02] SIO and its new use development. With our public hearing, generally the agenda is
[2:08] we hear from the applicant. We have any clarifying questions, and then we hear for our
[2:15] engineer, they reuse and then we open it up to the public. So, and with that, if the applicant wants to introduce yourself and if he would be able to get.
[2:35] Yeah, just a second. I said it was sheer square.
[2:38] Yeah, that's fine.
[2:47] Yeah.
[2:47] Oh, these are.
[2:49] Oh, we put that one in.
[2:50] The photo is also way.
[2:52] OK.
[2:52] And we have a little pen as well.
[2:54] Yes, it's very bossy.
[2:56] Sally is here.
[3:03] What's up?
[3:04] I'm ready. Yes.
[3:05] I'm getting everyone on Briggs County with both of the holes on the outside.
[3:08] I go score, both the holes, and matte bush with parallel engineering, presenting on our
[3:13] rooms of style applications.
[3:15] So, I wanted to start off with aerial image of the location right now, we're on the southeast corner of Jackson and Zebe right now, there's an existing industrial building, and for some history on the site, they went through a planning commission and board of trustees planning review.
[3:34] Ultimately, it was declined. It was composed of hotel office, and there was some mixed comments.
[3:43] Ultimately, a lot of the feedback was, they liked this location more so for residential, and so
[3:50] Broward, for its faulty, and his coordinating with us on the residential aspect.
[3:55] So, our proposal here tonight is, part of the whole mixed use of commercial residential development.
[4:01] We are just the residential element aspect of it.
[4:06] So touching on some of the master plan recommendations,
[4:08] we are in the Jackson Road sub-area
[4:11] and the mixed-use commercial area for the digital land use map,
[4:15] which recommends infill residential density
[4:18] on the part of the mixed-use development with the BUD,
[4:21] which we are looking forward to.
[4:27] And this is at the end of the master plan.
[4:30] However, I didn't want to highlight some of the multi-modal
[4:33] sustainability recommendations where a lot of the efforts being made in this community
[4:38] have the intersection of Jackson and Z as a highlight for multi-multi-multi sustainability
[4:45] activity and it does highlight this intersection as part of a central township area where
[4:52] we'll be providing an anchor of residential density as well as more commercial.
[4:57] And just...
[5:00] We've got John some of the land use goals from the master plan. It's talks about supporting growth and infill with residential density, for the mixed use commercial, particularly infill with that identity residential, Jackson wrote sub-area again, it's this common theme of infill, mixed use, high density residential. And also it's sustainability, bringing that in, and areas, service quality utilities, and infrastructure. This is within that service of water area of the Jackson River corridor.
[5:30] Then, especially here on the surrounding area, to the west, we've seen residential development proposals.
[5:37] We see the identity of around 2.5 to 5 units per acre.
[5:42] We're coming in at 6.5 units an acre, so a little bit higher residential density than what we've seen a little bit to the west along Jackson.
[5:51] So moving into the site plan, it is 125 units, so the boundary between the commercial aspect
[6:01] and the residential is this line right here with Jackson Road to the north.
[6:07] This section, so 125 townhold units, we have two access points, one on Jackson Road, one on Z Road.
[6:16] All of our roads will have sidewalks on both sides of the street.
[6:21] We have two detention funds proposed, one here, one here on our portion.
[6:27] The commercial will also have detention funds along Jackson Road.
[6:32] Some of the other elements, we have a central corridor with a park, a gathering area for people to hang out.
[6:38] have benches there. We have a ring guard and it's proposed and then maintaining the wetlands
[6:46] on the eastern portion of the property as well as preserving as many trees as possible along
[6:52] that section. Can you tell me where the park is? Park is. So when you turn to the access
[7:01] plane off of Jackson Road you can travel through the commercial aspects and when you enter here
[7:08] We have this terminating best as it's front and center as you go from the commercial space
[7:15] to the residential space and so we're inviting and you see the social activity there.
[7:22] As I've been saying, it makes these development in field development with sub-ground fluid
[7:27] remediation.
[7:28] We do have a representative and we've been talking more about that here with us as well.
[7:32] We also wanted to highlight the pedestrian connectivity to Jackson and Z and that's where
[7:37] is an anchor of four-sale town units on this central corridor where you can walk to
[7:43] my ear in the different commercial aspects and restaurants and breweries around that area.
[7:49] We also wanted to highlight 52 percent open space, so that calculation is for our residential
[7:53] portion. We are, the total is, I think, 24-acre sites. We're about 19 acres and there's about
[8:01] 10 acres of open space for our portion of the development.
[8:10] I linked some of the amenities, and they said,
[8:12] we'll have that attorney VISTA coming in the entrance.
[8:14] They'll be the playground.
[8:15] They'll be park benches there, floral arrangements,
[8:20] decorating up typical pool tea, playground for that section.
[8:27] We'll have three rain gardens scattered throughout,
[8:30] And then we'll also have a nature path passing along from the southeast to the eastern section.
[8:40] And so people will be able to, you know, go for a walk and travel on a loop as they go from sidewalks to on the pathway to the trees.
[8:49] On one this border of the
[8:56] sustainability initiatives.
[8:57] We're carrying the same approach we had with our embergrove in that you'll have an optionality for an all-electric appliance down home with the
[9:08] weather heat system and you'll have that that optionality
[9:14] As they go through the purchase process and again, the EV ready outlets solar roof ready
[9:21] recycled pavement materials water sense fixtures for all of
[9:26] those aspects and then a sustainable development pattern too for higher density along your
[9:31] main jacks of the road corridor as well.
[9:37] Some of the elevations.
[9:43] AT&T and our square feet
[9:44] town homes, three-bed, two-and-a-half baths. So these are typical and representative
[9:55] onto
[9:56] the public benefits so we are offering.
[10:00] A $50,000 contribution to the township for utility infrastructure, $50,000 to the silent township, fire department.
[10:09] There will be a brownfield remediation representative here if you have questions about that tonight.
[10:17] A pedestrian accessibility and connectivity, so I will talk about the street connecting to the sidewalks on Z, Jackson and connectivity beyond.
[10:24] that satisfies master-point goals for residential
[10:27] density for diversity of housing.
[10:30] We also find that the mixed youths
[10:33] residential commercial development is more optimal
[10:35] that the existing industrial site is there now.
[10:39] And finally, the open space and natural future preservation
[10:41] with 52% open space.
[10:45] With that, I leave it to you with any questions.
[10:51] I'm there clarifying questions.
[10:59] So that's mentioned in the planner, Mimmo and Squirrel, about diversity, diverse housing options.
[11:08] All of the residential component is town homes.
[11:15] So what's the diversity?
[11:16] Sure.
[11:16] And I think that that's applying to the silo township as a whole is predominantly single family,
[11:22] homes, larger yards, and so I think we're coming at this approach of the town home, I think
[11:28] when you hear a missing middle oftentimes you can find rental apartments or a single
[11:34] family home on a 60-70 foot lot, and oftentimes in town which is just a family that's
[11:39] hard to find that the kind of mid-range square footage, opportunity for sale or for rents,
[11:45] which typically is cost a little bit more than a apartment, but cost a little bit less than
[11:51] I think we're looking at the big picture of science out there.
[11:54] And are there EVs, EV parking stations?
[11:58] Not EV parking stations throughout the sites like up next to the park per se,
[12:03] but you can accommodate your garage to have an EV charging station.
[12:07] Yeah, EV ready, EV ready.
[12:08] EV ready, garage, yes.
[12:10] And I didn't see in your plan, I probably couldn't tell.
[12:17] What are the town homes, ranch town homes, or are they...
[12:21] Two story towns.
[12:47] Thank you.
[12:49] This was revised and when it originally came to the board, it had more diversity in it.
[12:59] It didn't have the power of the project.
[13:01] Yeah.
[13:03] Yeah, it was a hotel in office, kind of, on the day of housing at all.
[13:06] But the...
[13:07] I didn't know how to tell.
[13:09] I didn't know how to tell.
[13:10] I didn't know how to tell.
[13:10] And then, and then it was the board, trustees, the requested, you know, more of this
[13:16] town home.
[13:18] No, that was denied.
[13:20] It didn't go.
[13:21] I didn't see it.
[13:22] Right.
[13:23] But they also, it pressed fun, then what they wanted.
[13:28] I think that correct.
[13:29] And that was also from the Planning Commission, too.
[13:35] I think there was a preference for more residential than the hotel.
[13:40] Is that recall at the planning commission?
[13:43] No, it was sort of a normal residential.
[13:48] Yeah.
[13:49] Any other clarifying questions?
[13:53] Yes.
[13:54] So the entire site is part of a PUD, right?
[14:00] But you're saying that you're only dealing with the residential tonight.
[14:05] Are you?
[14:09] So we're not doing a sci-fi interview for that.
[14:12] The PUD, the commercial component, is part of the overall PUD.
[14:16] And we can speak to that.
[14:18] Yeah, I'm here to discuss the commercial part.
[14:20] Okay.
[14:21] Have any questions about that?
[14:22] There's no reference to a request for a tip.
[14:27] Has that gone away?
[14:29] You're not seeking a tip.
[14:32] Yes, we are.
[14:33] I don't see that that in the heart of the materials tonight.
[14:38] Well, the Brownfield application has been submitted on a number of occasions in the project.
[14:44] We've been very clear from day one on this project then.
[14:48] We also need you to.
[14:50] If you could just for the record, yeah, come out and introduce yourself.
[14:53] That'd be great.
[14:54] Thank you.
[14:55] Steve, for our representative RSP.
[15:00] So we've been here a few times with various projects. When it came to light that the township would prefer to make use potentially, but this residential, the project, in order to do that, we have to have a brownfield in order to demolish the building and clean it up. We would very clear about that from day one, that these things go hand in hand.
[15:25] this, the approval of the PUD goes hand in hand with the approval of the Brownfield.
[15:30] Right, so yeah, I've been in some of those meetings, I was aware of that, but these materials
[15:37] don't call out that there's also a tiff part of the plan, it's not in the narrative.
[15:43] It does say Brownfield, but it doesn't directly address that there's a request for a tip.
[15:49] So that's why I'm asking the question.
[15:52] Okay, well, we'd like to say, we bet here numerous times with the county, with Nathan, with
[15:58] AKT to say, look, this project needs a Brownfield to go forward with it.
[16:04] I want my fellow commissioners to realize that this is included, because it really is not
[16:10] highlighted in the doctor's, and I think from our perspective what's happening is we're trying
[16:17] if I identify that little non, rather than coming to the end of the game,
[16:22] I don't know what I'm going to tell you,
[16:23] see what's going to happen.
[16:24] Great.
[16:24] And my advice, we've been very clear from day one,
[16:27] that this was a chip project.
[16:30] It's a problem with the chip.
[16:31] Yeah.
[16:31] And we've done all the legwork with the count.
[16:35] That meets their criteria to be approved.
[16:40] It's at the stage now, where if it's going to move forward,
[16:44] It's part of the side of the town to the board to take action on the tip and conjunction with this thing's moving forward, right?
[16:51] But it's not. We're not doing them separate.
[16:54] Everything's been done.
[16:56] Nathanics said has been here to represent that it's ready to go.
[17:01] But it's at that point where it's the balls in the township's court.
[17:08] Terials would need to go with these in order to pass it on to the board,
[17:12] so that that was seen at the same time.
[17:16] Well, you said it sequentially, which is what you said.
[17:20] You've been here before.
[17:21] You've been very clear when it's not part of the
[17:27] pact.
[17:28] Maybe they'll convince it.
[17:32] Well, also, just to clarify, the planning commission
[17:35] doesn't get involved in the granting of the tint.
[17:38] I agree that it hadn't knowing that that's a part of this
[17:41] is important information, but the planning commission doesn't.
[17:46] We don't approve that.
[17:48] We don't approve that.
[17:49] What's been happening with a couple of different projects, a TIF has never been involved, where there's several meetings with us, and then they get to support the trustees, which rightfully so they get their ones to decide that.
[18:01] But I think there's been a curtain if I'm wrong, anyone in fact, there's been a bit of a... taking by surprise that...
[18:09] And it's saying you happen to see it, it sounds like it hasn't happened with you, but on our part, there's a concern about knowing about that request, at the last, at the end, when you have a valid source to you.
[18:24] Not you, but...
[18:25] I think there's a reaction.
[18:27] That's happened too.
[18:28] After we, it's gone through site plan approval, then all of us, I think, come back and ask for a chance.
[18:34] That's why there's a little sensitivity.
[18:35] And that's fine. I only point is we have not taken that approach, right? We've been very forthright for the last two years that this isn't a tip project
[18:46] And so I want to move on see if there are any other
[18:49] kind of questions short question before. Okay, I'll found a question. I know we had some problems with the Z-Broad entrance
[18:56] Is that all being cleared up with the road commission improved?
[19:00] We've been in conversations with them
[19:03] And we updated our traffic study for right-end right-out off of the scene, and the continuing conversations.
[19:11] Wait on the final final, waiting to hear from, okay.
[19:15] And in your conversations, sorry, one more.
[19:19] In your conversations,
[19:22] do they seem to be,
[19:27] because at one point I think there was some mention that it could only be an exit or something,
[19:31] But in your conversations, are they good conversations?
[19:35] Do you think that that's that the real commission is taking
[19:39] the request in?
[19:41] I have my head in the airspace, I don't know.
[19:45] I don't know what, I don't even know what I'm talking about.
[19:47] I'm talking about these assures, because there's not a secret.
[19:50] I'm not going to share about this.
[19:51] You know, there we go.
[19:53] The conversations have been positive.
[19:55] They've been asking for things that aren't necessarily
[19:58] It works is about a traffic study.
[20:00] We have been discussing with them, and we have, of course, a good way to report to negotiating and neighbors, further requests, so we will still acknowledge being its preliminary right now.
[20:09] But thank you very much.
[20:13] Sir, thank questions, right?
[20:14] Yeah, I have one more clear thank questions.
[20:17] Are all the units identical?
[20:20] No, there's, I would say, identical or close to identical, in terms of square footage, but then the design options on the exterior have different opportunities.
[20:30] opportunities for optionalities. There's some, there's some, there's some, there's some difference in the floor plans, too.
[20:37] So the design, the exterior, and some of the interior floor plans are a little bit different.
[20:45] There's a cottage, farmhouse, farmland options, different floor plans, similar with the size.
[20:52] So could you three bedroom two-and-a-half bath, but several different kind of configurations of that?
[21:00] Any other clarifying questions?
[21:02] This mine was similar to Kim's about the traffic, because along Z-Broad and back, the particular
[21:07] spot, traffic is really bad and you add in the truck traffic, and I know there's been
[21:13] fatalities over there, so that was my question as well, how's the increase in traffic
[21:19] going to match?
[21:20] And I find the materials said something about the possibility of having the exit at the
[21:34] I don't think some of us we need to discuss with you as opposed to making it clarify.
[21:42] Yeah, so we can get through.
[21:45] Hi, Mr. Park.
[21:45] Okay with that, Doug.
[21:47] Do you want to go through the highlights of your report?
[21:53] Yes. Hello.
[21:58] So as I was mentioned, this is a, we have to remember, this is a preliminary
[22:02] PUD. I'll talk a little bit about the process real quick. So there's a two-step process
[22:09] with all PUDs, a preliminary PUD, stage and a final PUD stage. So the preliminary PUD
[22:16] stage is where we're at right now with a public hearing. This will go to the planning
[22:22] commission and the township board. It will then come back to the planning commission
[22:26] for final PUD. Final PUD would be similar to a final site plan with all of the detail
[22:34] filled in or the fourth or the plan and then that final PUD would actually go to the
[22:41] township board after planning commission. So, best case scenario for an applicant, they're
[22:48] looking at four separate meetings to the planning commission to the township board and then if
[22:53] there's any postponement or tabling, you know, we add on add on from there.
[23:00] At the preliminary PUD stage, excuse me, the planning commission should be trying to determine
[23:07] if the project meets the PUD qualifications and standards for a project so that PUD project
[23:16] eligibility and POD qualifications.
[23:20] Within those qualifications and eligibility criteria
[23:26] are quite a few site-plan type issues.
[23:30] But again, just to emphasize that right now what we're
[23:33] really trying to do is determine if this site is eligible
[23:37] as qualifies as a proper location for a mixed use,
[23:41] commercial, residential project, of the density proposed.
[23:46] All the nitty-gritty detail site plan will occur at the final site plan stage of review.
[23:52] That said, our review is 14 pages long and I will summarize if that's okay with everybody.
[24:04] And if you have any questions about the review itself, please ask and I will try to answer those.
[24:10] So,
[24:14] one of the first things we try to do is try to determine if the intent of the
[24:18] PUD district is matte and the intent talks about things like flexibility, maybe providing
[24:24] a project that we wouldn't normally get.
[24:27] I mean, that's really the whole point of a PUD is that we're getting something that we couldn't
[24:31] normally get under straight zoning or straight project.
[24:34] and so that can maybe be asking for some deviations. In this case, I know of only one deviation,
[24:41] and that's the setback of the commercial building. The eastern most commercial building on the eastern
[24:46] property line. There's a minimum 50 foot PUD buffer. The applicants requesting, I believe, 30 feet
[24:54] and so that will require a PUD deviation. I don't believe there are any other
[25:00] Reservations are non-requested by the applicant.
[25:04] And so the first thing we have to do is determine the planning commissioner and does this project meet the intent of the PUD and why we even have a PUD ordinance.
[25:15] there are a number of criteria within that, within trying to determine intent, there's
[25:23] recognizable benefit that has to be demonstrated by the applicant and recognizable benefit.
[25:32] We've talked a lot about in the past, you know, what does that exactly mean?
[25:36] You know, it could mean additional open space, wetland protections, it could mean contributions
[25:46] to the fire utilities as the applicants proposing.
[25:49] So there are a lot of items that could be considered benefit to the township.
[25:58] We point those out in our review.
[26:00] the app can also points those out in their material.
[26:05] And I'm sure the Plenty Commissioner will have
[26:07] a spirited discussion if the meeting
[26:10] is recognizable benefit.
[26:13] So that's one of the big items for the PUD
[26:18] for this stage of the PUD review.
[26:20] And then we look at things like does the project,
[26:23] does the density proposed, result in an unreasonable impact
[26:27] on the need for public services, facilities and utilities.
[26:32] As I was mentioned by the applicant, and our report, this project, is within the township's municipal service area, so sewer and water is provided to this site.
[26:43] The capacity of sewer and water I will leave up to the discussion of the township engineer, but this is within the sewer and water district within south township.
[26:55] Another criteria is that does the project as a consistent with the public health safety and welfare of the community.
[27:03] As was mentioned during the applicant's presentation, there are a number of locations in the master plan.
[27:11] Both in the mixed use commercial designation of the master plan in the Jackson Art overlay district part of the master plan.
[27:17] that talks about high density residential as a part of commercial projects and this project is proposing high density residential.
[27:28] It's interesting to note that the master plan discusses two different types of densities and this project is not to there.
[27:39] The applicant is not proposing the maximum density.
[27:41] I'm just so that's made clear that this is proposed in kind of a middle of the road density for the project.
[27:51] We are also supposed to ensure that the project minimizes a negative environmental impact for the project itself.
[28:01] And when we think about environmental impact, in this particular case, we think we have to be cognizant of the fact that this is the former site of the Malois lithographing facility, which was an industrial facility, a long time industrial facility here in Sao Township.
[28:20] I believe now the building, or at least last, I was aware the building was being divided up into
[28:26] kind of warehouse suites for multiple users, kind of a kind of turned into a multi-tenant
[28:33] industrial facility.
[28:35] But if you've driven by the site and I'm sure you've all driven by the site many
[28:39] many times, as it has, have I, there's a very large industrial facility here.
[28:45] So natural resources to a certain degree are limited to the southern part of the property and the eastern part of the property
[28:53] that is preserving a fair amount of the all the large wetland on the eastern part of the property and some of the trees located within the southern
[29:05] any storm part of the site. We know that with regard to natural features and we
[29:11] mentioned this a couple of times in our review, we would really like the applicant to
[29:18] provide a greater number of trees to be preserved on site and if trees can't be preserved
[29:26] and there's a calculation provided for replacement trees that the applicant supply
[29:34] as many replacement trees as possible on this site, I know the other option of not proposing
[29:41] trees on site is to contribute to the township's tree fund, but it's always preferable to,
[29:48] actually the most preferable obviously is to preserve as many trees as possible on site,
[29:52] particularly landmark trees, and to, and if you can't do that to provide trees on site.
[30:00] We did review this project back some time ago, eight months ago or so. And that was one of our comments back. Then an applicant has made an effort to preserve some additional trees than we initially saw.
[30:14] But we would still like that comment to go forward, particularly to move forward into the site plan stage review. So that when this moves into detail, then generic, that they can perhaps try to adjust grading to preserve additional trees on site.
[30:29] So, and, as was mentioned by the whole group, you know, because this was maloid, lithographing for so long, a printing operation,
[30:38] the applicant indicates that Brownfield remediation is desired on this site, and it might be helpful at some point.
[30:47] I think the applicant said that there were someone on their team here this evening that might be able to discuss what that means,
[30:55] And what they would be looking for for the Brownfield remediation, I might be helpful discussion to have because frankly I don't fully understand the Brownfield remediation that is being proposed.
[31:07] The, we are moving on we're supposed to determine that the development minimizes impact on surrounding properties.
[31:16] We provide a table earlier in the review that indicated that pretty much surrounding this property or other commercial or office type.
[31:24] businesses. I'm directly south of the project is our some additional residential units.
[31:32] On Zebrot, on the east side of Zebrot, but primarily directly around this site is mostly commercial
[31:38] and industrial type uses. We don't believe that this site would have a negative impact on strong properties.
[31:46] We're supposed to make sure that the project is consistent with the goals and policies of the Township Master Plan.
[31:51] As was discussed by the applicant, and discussed in multiple parts of our review,
[31:57] we believe that there are certainly goals and policies touched on,
[32:01] and both the mixed use commercial part of the master plan and the Jackson Road
[32:05] overlay district part of the master plan.
[32:08] That would certainly be addressed or be consistent with what the applicant is proposing.
[32:17] Next, we move on to project overall project density,
[32:20] And I alluded to the fact that the applicant is proposing some more kind of in the middle of the density that could be allowed here.
[32:31] There's what's discussed is MR-2 and MR-3 multifamily zoning.
[32:37] The MR-2 provides eight units.
[32:40] breakers, MR-3 provides 10 units breakers, breakers, the
[32:44] app transaction providing 6.5 units breakers, actually a little bit on the low end
[32:48] of what might be might occur here, so slightly less density than what we would
[32:53] normally allow, or you know, if it was MR-2 or MR-3 zoning. We've talked a lot
[33:00] about the master plan in our review on page 6.7 and 8 of our review.
[33:08] We believe generally speaking that the project certainly can meet the criteria and the goals
[33:16] and policies of the township master plan.
[33:21] We do note that there is a sustainability summary that the applicant provided in their
[33:27] response letter that talks about some of the things that they want to do or they're proposing
[33:33] to do with sustainability measures and we would like that those things actually listed on the
[33:39] cover sheet of the site plan and not just in a response letter. And that's something that certainly
[33:45] could happen at the final site plan or the final POD stage review. Getting into some minor
[33:51] kind of site plan issues now, as I mentioned, the area width height and setbacks, we find that
[33:59] standards of the area with height and setbacks can be met with the exception of the eastern edge
[34:09] of the commercial building as it abuts another commercial building to the east and the
[34:15] app can is requesting a waiver. It's they're proposing 30 feet oh no what are they're
[34:24] I thought it was 35, that may have definitely clarified that, but they're asking for a waiver on that one.
[34:32] I don't see it in my report handy, but it's supposed to be 50 and they're not meeting the 50.
[34:37] We had talked about natural features before, so I won't repeat that.
[34:42] If any of you have questions, I can try to address those.
[34:46] Again, if applicant can preserve additional landmark and protected trees, that would be our goal.
[34:54] And hopefully some additional trees can be preserved at the final stage of review.
[34:59] That can't-
[35:00] President has open space in excess of what's required by a PUD for a PUD plan. PUD plan requires 30% open space. The applicant has indicated they are proposing 52% open space and there's some caveat to that.
[35:19] to that. If you're including storm under detention in your open space, you have to landscape
[35:25] those storm under detention basins and the basins have to be shaped in kind of a natural
[35:32] configuration.
[35:34] Years and years ago we haven't seen many of these in a while, but we used
[35:38] to get these cigar shaped storm under detention basins with a fence around them. And obviously
[35:43] those aren't natural in any way shape or form, and so if in the applicants detention
[35:48] basins do look from what we can tell kind of natural shaped, but as long as that can
[35:56] be demonstrated clearly, then those can be included in the open space.
[36:00] We have no issue of the bill in location and citerangement.
[36:04] site access and circulation was alluded to by one of the planning commissioners and
[36:11] that item remains outstanding. As far as this plan is concerned, it's understanding that
[36:18] the applicant, the zebraode, entrance is the is the bona contention here and the applicant
[36:23] is proposing a right in right out on Z, at this point. That may change. That's some point, but I
[36:34] Oh, OHM can address that in more detail, but I believe some conversations are ongoing
[36:41] through a commission and that needs to be determined exactly.
[36:46] We will defer to the touch engineer and the road commission with regard to the traffic study
[36:54] that the app can have provided.
[36:58] And that is about it. There are, we list a number of items
[37:04] that the Pliny Commission should determine on page 13 of our report. We have seven items.
[37:11] All of these are in direct relation to the standards and the zoning ordinance that talk about,
[37:17] you know, does the project meet the eligibility criteria of a PUD. And so each of those items
[37:22] one through seven, the planning commission should spend a little time on to determine if each,
[37:29] you know, each of these criteria have been met. And hopefully you can use the comments of our
[37:34] report to support you with those decisions. And if you have any questions, I'll try to help as best
[37:41] I can. And then also with the site plan, we provide seven items that should be addressed as part
[37:49] site plan, we also note that those seven items certainly could be, you know, if the planning
[37:54] commission were to move this along to the township board for preliminary POD approval,
[38:00] these seven items could be addressed at a final site plan stage. Those are our comments
[38:07] and I would be happy to answer any questions that you might have.
[38:13] Thank you, Doug. Any specific questions for Doug, because we'll have a chance to talk also
[38:18] and some discussion I do.
[38:22] So Doug, just that last part that you mentioned about the site plan items to be addressed,
[38:27] the seven items that you said could be dealt with in a later day.
[38:31] When our motion today, if we do that, moving the branch of the line,
[38:41] that motion would
[38:42] need to say that specifically in there.
[38:45] Yes.
[38:46] Just the reference to your memo is enough.
[38:53] Yeah, I think the reference to my report is enough, and you might, you know, if that was the way the planning commission want to go, you might want to say specifically the seven
[39:06] site-plan items noted in the Carla Wartman report.
[39:14] Yeah, I have a question, Doug.
[39:16] Can you give me a refresher definition of open space?
[39:20] What, when you fully grade a site?
[39:25] And, but you leave it unoccupied after you've graded it and whatever you want to call it,
[39:34] it can qualify as open space, correct?
[39:38] Yes.
[39:46] because we allow open space to be recreation space.
[39:53] So you can have like you could, you know,
[39:56] technically a playground or and that's,
[40:00] Typically a playground would be graded and cleared. And so we allow parks and open, you know, playgrounds, those sorts of things are also included in the open space calculation.
[40:14] It doesn't have to be left natural in order to qualify.
[40:17] No. No.
[40:20] It says active outdoor recreation purposes can also be included.
[40:27] Thank you.
[40:30] Any other clarifying questions for Dr.
[40:33] All right.
[40:34] I do.
[40:36] Sidewalks.
[40:37] I know that these groups mentioned that there was sidewalks on both sides.
[40:43] is that throughout the, throughout the, okay, he's saying yes. And then, um, the, the water
[40:52] looping, can somebody explain it to more, can I hear from the open space? Okay. And I've heard
[40:59] three different open space. Uh, our ordinance is 35% you said 50% or you said 50% or you said 50%
[41:12] So, how is the open space?
[41:18] I'm going to have 52 based on our site.
[41:20] 52 now, okay.
[41:22] On the front page, more than 30.
[41:26] Yeah.
[41:26] 52.
[41:27] And the POD standards 30.
[41:30] If I said 35, that was incorrect.
[41:32] It's 30.
[41:34] And I am going on the top my head on 52.
[41:36] But my notes says you said 52.
[41:38] Okay.
[41:41] All right.
[41:42] And we'll go ahead and move on to Sally.
[41:44] Good
[41:58] evening everyone. It looks like I am audio only, but that's okay. I will be short and
[42:04] sweet here for you tonight. We had a couple of preliminary PUD comments. They have been
[42:10] touched on a little bit. The discussion negotiation approval of the proposed public benefits.
[42:18] We defer that to the Township Staff, Township Attorney and Township Board of Trustees. However,
[42:22] We do recommend that our office be involved in any review portions of the PUD agreement that relate to the infrastructure improvements.
[42:30] And then, as has been mentioned, the road commission review of the road is still underway.
[42:38] We do know that the questions we need to have been held as the applicant has said, but we have no final approval of that yet.
[42:45] So, we are waiting on those comments and requirements as that may change a little bit of the site layout for the connection to the road, but that's pending yet, so I'll leave that up to the planning commission.
[42:58] And then we had three minor preliminary site plan comments.
[43:02] We had strong water management, the certificate's outlet needs to be signed and sealed
[43:06] by a registered engineer in the state of Michigan.
[43:08] And then two things for site grading and site layout, we do recommend that a passenger vehicle
[43:15] turning template is provided to demonstrate that there is sufficient space for the units
[43:21] that are near the dead end turn around.
[43:23] So it appears a few of those driveways are very close to the end of that pavement.
[43:26] we just want to make sure that those residents have enough room to back their cars out
[43:30] and get point to down the road in the right direction without running into the grass or the curb.
[43:35] And then the proposed nature path, we do recommend from an engineering perspective that those are
[43:42] paved due to ease of future maintenance and accessibility. We have not had great luck with
[43:48] wood chip paths on other projects as of late. We are looking for the planning commission to wait in on this
[43:55] And note that should it remain wood chip the applicant shall provide a definitive maintenance schedule on the plans as well as
[44:03] Frequency and who will be responsible for that maintenance. I
[44:06] Happy to answer any questions you may have.
[44:17] Yeah, for which I would be involved in any route and field discussions
[44:24] Generally not unless we are specifically asked to be
[44:40] are and the two that won't be filled in on this drawing it would help.
[44:46] The well ends, I believe B&C or approximately here,
[44:54] especially in the third big one we're
[44:56] staying out of is.
[45:01] Why do there's no building there? Why do you need to fill in the wetland?
[45:09] Only that's my idea. Are we still in questions with a judge engineering?
[45:14] Or did you want to pivot to?
[45:16] Well, we can do. I mean, I mean, they're clarifying some things.
[45:22] So, yeah.
[45:25] Yeah, yeah.
[45:25] Yeah.
[45:25] Yeah.
[45:27] So there's a lot of them, like, right there.
[45:29] Small isolated, not directly interconnect with that.
[45:33] That's the key to take away.
[45:34] We need to do a sort of a, like, this management.
[45:37] There's not a right way to do that.
[45:38] It doesn't have to buy a building to be in.
[45:40] Small, that is the way to do it.
[45:41] And we're staying somewhere.
[45:43] And we're not impacting the larger.
[45:45] What happened to that come to the students, but I'm sorry.
[45:47] And it goes on.
[45:48] I'm even there too.
[45:49] So that's the same.
[45:53] So I'm looking at your diagram on page 6 and it's perfect if I'm wrong you need to fill
[46:00] that in because that's where you're didn't.
[46:03] It's a great envelope.
[46:04] So it's going to impact it.
[46:05] That's a great statement.
[46:09] Jan's statement of mine.
[46:11] We must fill that small, isolated weather, because the storm water management is.
[46:18] I have a couple questions that have to do, and I know you don't review the traffic studies
[46:25] unless you're asked, but in this case, most of the recommendations are signal changes,
[46:35] and it's sort of a compliance thing.
[46:37] How do we know that the road commission actually does the signal changes that are recommended
[46:45] because it's not something the project can do. Correct. That is, they are the road agencies,
[46:53] so there's not really a way to verify, but in my experience with them, we've never had an issue
[47:00] with them not doing recommended signal changes. They wanted to operate as well as possible just like
[47:07] the township wants it to operate, so I wouldn't, I don't have concerns with that being an issue.
[47:13] And then the other thing that I noticed in the traffic impact,
[47:19] they had some very specific safety sort of recommendations
[47:27] for the intersection.
[47:29] And I'm just wondering if how silo can highlight those
[47:36] for the road commission and as they're reviewing this,
[47:39] maybe get a commitment or feedback on implementing those.
[47:44] A couple of them are signal recommendations and another one is extending some of the dual turn guidelines on the road to going south and I'm wondering because you're not in those meetings but how do we push that a little bit and at least get a response from the road condition?
[48:10] I would have your operations director reach out to them directly to talk with the Road Commission about those items.
[48:18] Kathleen, can we work on that?
[48:23] Okay.
[48:26] Then I wanted to get a comment sort of your thoughts on when I was thinking through those dead ends.
[48:36] You know, you talked about making sure there was enough turning radius for cars to back out.
[48:42] But I'm thinking about they're probably going to have carts for trash and recycling.
[48:47] So you've got these big trucks coming down.
[48:51] I know those trucks don't like to back up.
[48:54] And then all the delivery trucks like Amazon and FedEx and so forth.
[48:59] One of them is pretty short, but the other two dead ends are pretty long.
[49:03] It's pretty dangerous having those trucks backing up in that area unless they happen to have
[49:11] an open driveway that they could turn around in. Any thoughts on that?
[49:17] So we really look at it in terms of fire department and garbage trucks. So far the fire department
[49:25] has not notified us of any major concerns with those dead ends and the fire trucks are longer
[49:31] than a garbage truck, so short backups, I mean most of them are relatively short.
[49:39] I don't
[49:40] see any concerns with trucks having to back up a short distance just to make that swing out
[49:46] again.
[49:48] The fire trucks don't pull down those dead end portions according to the diagrams. They just
[49:55] it within so many feet of each unit and how I good enough.
[50:00] So, it's not like their garbage truck. It's like Jan's right. We probably should see that down show how that's going to be handled on your diagrams too.
[50:12] And what would stop people from parking in that area because there may be limited parking by the unit they're going to. Oh, it's at the end. I'll park right here.
[50:22] Yeah, we could, yeah, we'll get into that a little bit more deliberation. I just wanted to ask Sally if she had some, you know, when they're reviewing it, how they look at that. Okay.
[50:34] I have a question.
[50:35] Any other questions?
[50:36] This is the water moot redundancy question for me now.
[50:42] So Sally, educate me, what is the water moot redundancy? What is that about?
[50:47] So what we look for with water looping is in a development like this we look for two points of contact, so that or two points of connection I should say.
[50:57] So that if there is a water main break on either one the whole development is not out of water.
[51:04] So they do have a connection off of both Jackson and Z. So that is the redundancy we're looking for there.
[51:11] At least there is an alternate supply line if one of those connection lines were to have an issue temporarily.
[51:20] Thank you.
[51:22] And fire didn't have any projections.
[51:28] So with that, I'm going to go ahead and open up public comment or anyone in.
[51:37] Yeah, time should fall for this particular project.
[51:42] I guess I'm first in my career.
[51:43] Okay, yeah.
[51:44] And if you want to come up and introduce yourself,
[51:46] that'd be great.
[51:47] And you guys will be back, so.
[51:54] Yes, please.
[52:13] Thank you very much.
[52:14] My name's Peter Paul.
[52:16] I'm here as a resident.
[52:21] Pretty much a body.
[52:22] You plan the site plan or the development.
[52:28] I don't know how familiar all of you are with the surrounding areas.
[52:30] I live on Hunter's Trail, which is a one-block cul-de-sac,
[52:35] heading north of Park Road, just east of Zebe.
[52:41] And our street on the west side of the street
[52:45] of Butts and Children's Center, you know what that is.
[52:48] But they go again to the end, where there's a cold sack, some of the properties of
[52:56] blood right on to the wetlands, and our property, including a couple of other houses,
[53:03] but the ordinary area, which is just sort of west of the wetlands and the findings of
[53:10] soil kind of development. So we are in this area, which could be indirectly, you're not directly
[53:20] affected by the development. And I was also going to ask this a couple of questions and maybe
[53:27] the presenter would answer. Go ahead, why don't you go ahead and, yeah, we can go ahead and
[53:33] we can go ahead along. I mean, as you, I have this not really a new thing, but I guess you could go
[53:38] that it's how much of a buffer is going to be remaining
[53:42] to eat your project and Hunter's Trail, which you can't see,
[53:47] unless you were to expand it.
[53:51] It's just, you see, just there on the right.
[53:53] Oh, I'm not sure if that's that.
[53:55] That might be CIO condos.
[53:57] Oh, you see, right there.
[53:59] That's right there.
[54:00] Well, that's, that's, yeah, that's Hunter's Trail right here.
[54:07] All right.
[54:07] So, I guess the question is, what's the distance between a southern end of your development and our cult of the second?
[54:19] And how much woodlands will be preserved there in woodlands?
[54:22] So all these woodlands would be preserved outside in the other line, just for visual scale.
[54:28] It's about 50 feet. I mean, again, this approximate graphic, about 50 feet from the back.
[54:33] this line to the yellow line, so say 50, 100, 100, so 300 feet.
[54:40] I think more than two-foot-ball fields you think, between development and 3L's,
[54:48] about 250, 300 feet based off my quick little fuzzy scale bar.
[54:52] But yes, it's roughly around that.
[54:54] And how much of the wetlands are you actually going to be working on?
[55:02] I was curious about the east end there where you have that indication that I thought that it was wetlands, but maybe a lot.
[55:13] It was tough.
[55:14] No, no.
[55:16] You inside be able to line up on the top of the river.
[55:19] Yeah, that was tough.
[55:20] You're not touching that.
[55:23] Is that helpful?
[55:24] Well, it's helpful. I was wondering why it was considered part of the project, but it's not going to be touched.
[55:29] The other point that I got, not a question, I'm very concerned about, I think, an entry point on C.
[55:40] Brodo.
[55:40] I'll know this is the central intersection, basically the off-site attention, and there's a lot of traffic there.
[55:48] I'm not sure where they plan to make the entryway, but if it's where the units are, I'm not sure how much room there is actually for the Egress.
[55:58] Egress, I also heard that this is going to be a right in right out only and seems to be the only way that that can be enforced.
[56:07] The bill, a concrete divider in the middle of the sea road, to prevent people from turning in from the sick from sick bounce of the road.
[56:16] Otherwise, this is going to work, you know, fearless but not in practice.
[56:21] because people will make left turns and it's right in front of the
[56:26] edge of the fire. So I force you lots of problems, unless in fact I guess
[56:34] the road commission is responsible for deciding to put a divider in there.
[56:38] Or even approving whether that's-
[56:41] Well obviously yes, I mean, I'm not, I'm not, I'm not position is that it should not be approved.
[56:47] If they need to have more aggressive egress, it could be on Jackson Road and maybe there could be another cutout.
[56:55] You know, so people coming west on Jackson would be able to turn directly in.
[57:00] I'm not sure how that would work.
[57:01] Rather than have to make the mission to new turn.
[57:05] Oh, no, it's not changing.
[57:07] Any intersection is a mess right now.
[57:10] Yeah, but any of these are comments.
[57:12] And yeah, we appreciate those.
[57:16] And as Doug said, this is like a preliminary approval.
[57:22] And we haven't heard back from the vote commission.
[57:26] I mean, one more quick point.
[57:27] OK.
[57:27] The presenter initially said that this project would have a public benefit
[57:32] by promoting diversity.
[57:35] And then he sort of, I don't know, backtrack with clarified
[57:39] that an anniversary of housing in general in silent action.
[57:43] As far to point out, as you will know, the side of condos are very, very similar to what's being proposed to you.
[57:50] So that is not adding to diversity.
[57:53] That's just building more of the same condos in the, basically at the major intersection of the
[58:04] Mr. President, I think the diversity comes in smaller units, the purchase prices would be a bit better, is it correct?
[58:16] Mr. Merck sir.
[58:17] It's not sure about purchase price, but I know the units that are being posted are very similar to what's already in the soil.
[58:23] The word diversity is a little misleading, but I hear you.
[58:26] Thank you very much.
[58:27] Thank you for coming.
[58:28] I appreciate it.
[58:29] Is there anyone else in the Hampshire poll that would like to address the planning commission?
[58:37] Anyone online?
[58:41] At least 30 seconds.
[58:54] I'll enter into your vote.
[58:56] Entering a motion.
[58:57] Move to the closed public room.
[58:59] Move to the commissioner more.
[59:00] It's a part of my commissioner's letter.
[59:02] Any further discussion?
[59:04] All those in favor of the CI?
[59:06] I'm going to post a complaint.
[59:08] Thank you.
[59:10] But hearing is closed at seven o'clock.
[59:12] So, we've got, we don't have any unfinished business, so we're moving on to new business,
[59:19] which is possible action, 0.25, 0.12, PSP, 25.017, grows of silo, new misduced development.
[59:36] So, as Doug said, this is a preliminary meeting, so, you know, kind of focusing on
[59:45] one the criteria, and also then addressing some items that if it moves forward that we want the petitioner to include as it is.
[1:00:00] It goes to the next step. So with that, open it up for comments. Concerns, this is probably a talk.
[1:00:13] Not that you have that's all friendly.
[1:00:18] I just want to understand. I can start from the vote on something I don't quite understand.
[1:00:22] We want to address that. Yes, fully interesting.
[1:00:28] Well, I'll start that nobody seems to be jumping in the bed. I'm very happy to see that this parcel is moving forward.
[1:00:36] I know, I've talked with Mr. Broward before I thought that, so I'm glad to see it's looks like it's shaping up.
[1:00:43] And in particular, I'm happy about the residential piece.
[1:00:48] We need more residential housing, and I'd
[1:00:53] not dissuade by the commercial on Jackson.
[1:01:00] In fact, I think the commercial makes sense on Jackson.
[1:01:03] I think before we were looking at a hotel, that would have been on.
[1:01:07] And I mean, we were on about the student.
[1:01:08] But that hotel in your proposal is going to be on Z for all.
[1:01:15] So anyway, I'm really happy about that site,
[1:01:22] board with some potential housing.
[1:01:26] So I would be in favor of this project,
[1:01:29] but this preliminary P&B museum,
[1:01:32] and I look forward to hearing about what the final slide.
[1:01:37] And correct me if I'm wrong, I thought that if I misunderstand you, because I heard you say this about the property that you're looking at developing it, Jackson and Parker, about the smaller units are more affordable.
[1:01:53] and that those are the 1800s square feet as a sort of smaller than what you were looking at
[1:02:00] 20 something square feet out. I mean 2000 plus something out in a parker, but
[1:02:07] so let me ask you this, what are these units, what these units be going for?
[1:02:14] What's the space price would be in a force and then based on optionality, you can see them deliver
[1:02:19] for the Vives.
[1:02:21] Okay, well, I'll quickly switch.
[1:02:25] Thank you.
[1:02:27] Thank you.
[1:02:27] We were depending on the Canadian
[1:02:28] Tariff Sunwood.
[1:02:31] Oh, sorry.
[1:02:34] Sorry.
[1:02:37] Sorry.
[1:02:38] You know what part of the narrative
[1:02:40] do said, it could go up to seven.
[1:02:43] For people who are picking, I guess, premium.
[1:02:48] I chose to go up.
[1:02:49] Poltians and Michigan.
[1:02:51] They won't go up.
[1:02:52] That would be, that would be a rarity.
[1:02:53] And in fact, our preference is to keep the price point down, okay?
[1:02:59] There's a real problem with housing affordability and housing insecurity.
[1:03:05] So that from poultry's perspective, like it has to be penciled,
[1:03:10] and the financials have to make sense.
[1:03:12] But our general problems would be to keep the price points in the fours, okay?
[1:03:17] Now, people like options and upgrades.
[1:03:20] And there's going to be some nice arguments relative to this plan.
[1:03:23] So it could go into the five depending, but that's what we're seeing for this project.
[1:03:32] I just spoke the 700.
[1:03:34] That must have been, that's what we said in the narrative.
[1:03:39] I apologize.
[1:03:40] That's it.
[1:03:41] In here, that would be quite extraordinary at the time of the year when the 700.
[1:03:46] It's a lot of options.
[1:04:00] I'm not against this project. I would just be concerned that we are moving trees,
[1:04:08] close to heritage trees that maybe don't need to be. I have concerns with the two
[1:04:16] degrees of traffic going in and out of the road, and I would be I would want to see that
[1:04:23] halfway that it's being proposed, paid, not wood chips, from someone who is a disability,
[1:04:29] issues with mobility for self-mobile guns, paid with even better but the traffic on Z-Rode is
[1:04:38] attention getting for me, I live on Z-Rode, I know what we're talking about here.
[1:04:50] Even with the right end, right out.
[1:04:52] If it could be made to work, but I agree with the resident who spoke that there needs to be
[1:04:57] something that is more difficult.
[1:05:00] I'm going to do, and it's going to be a problem, and I know there's been fatalities along there. My sister was just hit recently with a granddaily in the car. Some lady coming out of the car wash didn't even see her and drove by. I'm writing this side of her. Pulling out of the car wash, my sister had to write away. So, it's going to end with the gravel trucks, it can get interesting.
[1:05:20] So I do a question about that barrier, did I redirect it into a sea and it's a two-foot-wide
[1:05:30] half-foot-tall barrier to the other, and then I'll have the reflector barriers as well to
[1:05:37] delete it.
[1:05:38] Do we have something vertical above?
[1:05:40] This is not.
[1:05:41] Okay, because it doesn't show what you're going to do with that.
[1:05:44] That can speak to you.
[1:05:44] But at least I didn't see other things.
[1:05:48] No, there's not, there's details.
[1:05:51] where the barrier curve is going and where it was negotiated as a I guess I'll call it
[1:05:56] alternative plan with the road commission but yeah there'll be more details
[1:06:00] provided during it will be more than just to step this step by the road commission has
[1:06:06] done this in other places around the area and so it will probably most likely follow
[1:06:10] suit that it will be an actual barrier and it'll be an actual curve to apply six
[1:06:16] just to all sounds about right, finally, tell us how you're right, that was in the years
[1:06:20] somewhere.
[1:06:28] Any comments on the deviation of commercial building is the other commercial building, any concerns,
[1:06:34] but that's on the eastern, the commercial building on the eastern, you know that that other business
[1:06:39] has no problem with it, that's that I'm a furniture place, if they don't, then I don't have a problem with them,
[1:06:46] If they aren't a computer of it, then maybe, so they're looking at less, they're looking to instead of having them.
[1:06:54] Or I see, you're looking for more room closer to the existing building, business that's there now.
[1:07:02] In the reason given was that it's typical of the area, I forget how you put it.
[1:07:12] But this is the PV, so it has larger setback requirements.
[1:07:17] Right. Okay, so the other ones didn't. Well, I just sort of liked to know what the other ones and that would be a question for Doug
[1:07:30] So with it were a typical not a p.d. What would the semifinals be for
[1:07:38] Yeah, for C2. Let's see here I've got my ordinance
[1:07:43] I mean, the only thing cited was due to similar use.
[1:07:47] That was the word.
[1:07:48] Yeah, what is that?
[1:07:50] Give me a second.
[1:07:52] Doug, while you're looking, I just wanted to see that I saw on their
[1:07:56] cover sheet, I think it was, that the 50 foot was going to go to
[1:08:02] 30 foot for the building, 28 foot for the driveway and 45 foot for the
[1:08:11] parking will set back. So it's all in that area, but it's three different
[1:08:16] summers. Yeah, I just pull the site plan you're right. It varies between the
[1:08:21] building and the parking. So let's see. So C2 zoning has a 20 foot side
[1:08:30] yard setback for buildings and it would be a 10 foot side yard. There's 10
[1:08:36] that back for pavement in relation to parking. So what the applicant is proposing as you
[1:08:46] had mentioned as a 31 foot to the corner of the building and 28 feet to the edge of the parking.
[1:08:55] So if it was owned C2, this would be conforming.
[1:08:59] So it's like JN said that it's because it's a PUD.
[1:09:06] Yes.
[1:09:07] And the rest of the universe, the commercial units along here are not.
[1:09:16] Sometimes PUD projects are, you know, have some feature that might not exactly be conforming to the neighbors, like maybe there's additional density.
[1:09:26] And so we have that minimum 50 foot setback that can actually be increased at the recommendation of the planning commission in the township board
[1:09:34] But a minimum 50 foot setback to provide some buffering between, you know, uses that might not be similar
[1:09:43] But in this particular case, you know, the commercial building and the, you know, the furniture place are, they would be very similar.
[1:09:54] It would be, if it was being developed as zoned, they would be...
[1:10:05] I'm moved to vote that we, uh, can I ask a question before it's moving? So I want to make it looks like the commercial buildings are on better on Jackson Road, are close to the road. Is that correct?
[1:10:20] It's hard for me to know what's, do you know what the, well, they also have a line where the parking lot is behind the commercial building.
[1:10:28] That's for sure.
[1:10:29] Because this is the right place.
[1:10:31] It looks like the parking is in front.
[1:10:33] So the parking is behind and, and would you say it's within 5 feet from the side?
[1:10:38] Oh, the buildings are more than 50 feet off the road.
[1:10:41] There goes there is 60 to 70 feet off the road to the face of the building.
[1:10:45] Do you are there entrances for pedestrians to come to these retail places often off of Jackson
[1:10:51] Rob or
[1:10:53] I mean
[1:10:53] Obviously
[1:10:54] I don't know
[1:10:59] So I presume there's an interest coming off the parking lot
[1:11:02] Tell me what they yes
[1:11:04] And then the second question is are there entrances for pedestrians to come in off Jackson
[1:11:08] There are doors facing Jackson, but the goal is to get them to
[1:11:14] What's Harper Businesses have two front entrances, right?
[1:11:17] So the main entrances would be facing to the south,
[1:11:21] but doesn't mean a business couldn't have an entrance,
[1:11:23] because there is a door on the north side.
[1:11:25] There has to be a huge building code.
[1:11:27] See, we've got a problem with that pedestrian thing.
[1:11:30] I don't know if you'd like to go down there.
[1:11:33] All right.
[1:11:33] Just for the record, I get 12,000 steps a day.
[1:11:36] So I'm good enough.
[1:11:38] You're a pedestrian, you're lying, son.
[1:11:41] OK.
[1:11:42] All right.
[1:11:42] Well, I'm seeing that.
[1:11:43] You know, part of what our vision projects in Rome is pedestrian friendly, and the reason
[1:11:51] I bring this up is because we would like people in the neighborhood that live a little
[1:11:56] bit that way, or a little bit that way, to be able to access the retail and put it right.
[1:12:02] Maybe you think about that.
[1:12:03] Well, we look at the sidewalks that have happened to be able to do that business chose
[1:12:07] to have, and then it's facing north.
[1:12:12] It's hard for those smaller units to have two hardware stores for their customers to come in.
[1:12:19] Not that they can't do it.
[1:12:20] It's just not typically like one of myers, right?
[1:12:23] Those the entrances are all facing towards myers,
[1:12:26] springarts, they don't face the ports.
[1:12:29] All right, we can bring that up at the final pd.
[1:12:34] Bob, we had something else.
[1:12:35] I did. In one of the response letters,
[1:12:40] there were things mentioned in one was the tree preservation
[1:12:44] in areas east of the units 11 and 11 and 11, and 11 was the greatest adjustments in
[1:12:51] the south and the earth forces to try to save more trees. Can you describe what you've done
[1:12:57] in those areas?
[1:13:01] Yeah, so the majority of the modifications to the plan and the pulling
[1:13:06] The units out of this area, there was a large, very more dense than the rest of the site group being in this area, so we moved to the unit.
[1:13:16] This is the area that we moved to.
[1:13:18] You moved to the trees.
[1:13:20] I mean, I mean, the water, some water, all the things we just did.
[1:13:27] Can you say more trees in this area?
[1:13:30] I just have some comments that are not, I mean, I want to say that I like having the
[1:13:39] residential and the commercial along Jackson Road, I think this is a very, I support this
[1:13:46] PV. I think I'd like to see more density, you know, but you know, from a marketing standpoint,
[1:13:54] I think the chances are probably something that markets well in our area and with you comments is going to be doing more of the apartment style.
[1:14:08] I'm glad to see that there is a changes in floor plan and so forth because I was a little worried about having like 125 identical units that can get a little tiring.
[1:14:21] So I just want to make sure that that continues.
[1:14:27] And I think that's comments are really important around really looking at the grading and the trees.
[1:14:34] I would like to also see, you know, we talked about multi-modal connections.
[1:14:39] I think the plan needs to have show the public bus stops, where they are, how the pathways,
[1:14:46] for how, where the crosswalks are, et cetera, for people to be able to get into the
[1:14:53] complex.
[1:14:56] I think, you know, you know, the other.
[1:15:02] I think, you know, sort of really understanding how public transit is accessed and how to get into my, uh, should be shown on the site plan. Also, to reiterate with our, uh, new or landscape ordinance, there's the, um, really reducing turf grass to where it's, um, uh, functional and, uh, using, you know,
[1:15:29] more of a naturalized, you have a very natural sight, it would be nice to bring that forward.
[1:15:36] I really liked all the parking behind, not having parking on both sides of the, or having parking
[1:15:42] right off, Jackson Road. I think that's a real advantage. As you get tense, it'd be nice,
[1:15:49] you know, if you're going to have any restaurant tenants to include some outdoor spaces, it
[1:15:53] options for that. I also think there needs to be a pedestrian link all the way through.
[1:15:59] You've done a nice job with putting the recreation space in there, but I think it needs
[1:16:07] to connect all the way through that complex so folks that are on the far end don't have to
[1:16:14] walk all the way around the sideway. They're going to cut through the grass area anyway, so having
[1:16:20] a pack there probably makes a lot of sense. I would also look at the capacity of that, you know,
[1:16:29] with three-bedroom units, it's probably going to have a reason there might be, you know,
[1:16:34] some younger kids, and just look at the capacity of the place structure. And it might need
[1:16:40] two, you know, one for the real younger ones, because the place structures are designed by age,
[1:16:46] and there might need to be a couple of place structures to really include like the toddlers.
[1:16:54] So I kind of look at that too. And maybe if you connected it all the way through,
[1:16:57] there was an opportunity for that. So those were more or less by comments going forward.
[1:17:04] And I think putting all your, I really appreciate the water sense fixtures because, you know,
[1:17:10] being the REU's at 300 gallons per household, it's probably going to be a hundred, you know,
[1:17:17] with the water sense extras and so forth. So that really helps out us as, you know,
[1:17:27] stretching
[1:17:27] our agreement. So anyway, those are my comments from a lot of those I'm just moving forward.
[1:17:34] How would additional seating like for restaurants work outside when there's the detention
[1:17:40] I think they just have to, or it could be on the sides, you know, and that's a lot.
[1:17:47] Well, it would be setbacks.
[1:17:49] Well, I mean, that's part of the S.A.
[1:17:51] Or would you want it to go into the parking lot?
[1:17:54] No, I think the parking lot would be.
[1:17:56] So the restaurants would have to be on the S.
[1:17:59] And the one in maybe has, because the detention fund comes towards it too.
[1:18:04] So it's just such a limited space.
[1:18:07] But as they look at it, one other thing was, be sure that there's enough room for recycling
[1:18:14] and waste if you're entertaining restaurants.
[1:18:19] We're also looking at doing some food waste collection in Saia Township.
[1:18:23] So that would be, you know, some cards or...
[1:18:28] But if we don't have the space to begin with, it's very difficult to do that.
[1:18:33] Sorry.
[1:18:34] Go ahead.
[1:18:34] So I want to reiterate some of the comments about the trees.
[1:18:42] There's anything we can do to save more trees, especially on the south boundary.
[1:18:50] I know it would be hard to do, but those two buildings, I think, take out a fair amount of trees.
[1:18:58] And also, I would ask that on your tree survey.
[1:19:01] I would ask that you take a look at this because there's inconsistency in naming.
[1:19:08] This is on page 4, we'll page 5, it refers to Norway's spruce in north, where naples,
[1:19:15] those are two different species and you have the same, you have the maple species name in there.
[1:19:23] So if it really is Norway's spruce, it should have a different name.
[1:19:27] As far as I'm concerned, you get rid of well the Norway maple, so they're invasive.
[1:19:35] And part of the problem with Norway maple is they have a very shallow root system, and they easily fall over.
[1:19:43] All of us from the inside, DTO, presentation on the Nokia power.
[1:19:51] So yeah, clear feature corporates.
[1:19:53] Clean that up.
[1:19:55] Also with, it looks like you're going to have 300.
[1:20:00] Residents in this, the township is very much focused on transit and funding for transit. I don't think
[1:20:11] your contributions are enough, and I would think that the township would want some contributions
[1:20:18] for transit, which goes along with what Jan is saying about where are the bus stops. This is a
[1:20:26] item in Seattle Township right now. What the bus is going the way is staying. How much is
[1:20:33] a cost of Western Iowa Ford and how can people get in and out of there to get tools
[1:20:40] public transit along Zeevo or JetBoard Jackson. I think that's very important. Right. I think
[1:20:46] where the town was. The town houses feels a walk in and out easily and see oh I can go this
[1:20:52] papers of our staff, even if it's paint on the pavement that shows there's a
[1:20:59] cost of driveway kind of thing. Now we'll go with the road.
[1:21:02] Does anyone know if the close to Jackson and Zeeb is there a bus stop there?
[1:21:08] I'm a myerside.
[1:21:10] Yes.
[1:21:11] But I don't know.
[1:21:11] There's a bus stop on Jackson.
[1:21:13] I think one Zeeb, yes.
[1:21:14] I think just east of the Zeeb, I say.
[1:21:17] So where these townhouses are, the fastest way to the Myers bus stop, which is the same as grocery shopping, they have to cross the road, that's going to be their direct line.
[1:21:32] And there's a few of the whole signs along Jackson as well that would be a quick access.
[1:21:37] Sorry.
[1:21:38] Could be the bus stop.
[1:21:40] The bus stop signs along Jackson would be...
[1:21:44] That's probably the most...
[1:21:45] Depending where you're going.
[1:21:47] But we can get them out, get that on there, and move forward with that.
[1:21:52] We can have that.
[1:21:52] Because it is the same thing.
[1:21:55] Whether people are walking for...
[1:21:58] To get to grocery restaurants.
[1:22:05] So, is there someone that would like to take the motion?
[1:22:11] I moved the move to the group list, but with the planners comment.
[1:22:16] Do you want to read the...
[1:22:18] Yeah, I just didn't know if you guys wanted to read it.
[1:22:20] Do you want to hear it before we...
[1:22:21] Oh, just so we're okay.
[1:22:23] Well, we're all prepared.
[1:22:24] Okay.
[1:22:25] All right.
[1:22:25] Happy to help.
[1:22:26] Good deal.
[1:22:27] All right.
[1:22:27] The groves of silo.
[1:22:29] The seminary PV, OADPV, number 25012, and PSP number 25017 suggested motion, the groves of
[1:22:40] soil preliminary PD.
[1:22:42] Based upon the information received from the applicant and reflected in minutes of this
[1:22:47] meeting, the planning commission finds that the groves of soil preliminary PD plan received
[1:22:52] by the township meets the qualification for consideration as a PD as outlined in section
[1:22:58] 36-245C of the zoning ordinance.
[1:23:03] Based upon the information received by the applicant
[1:23:05] and reflected in minutes of this meeting,
[1:23:08] the planning commission finds that the groves of sale
[1:23:10] preliminary PUD plan received by the township on May 26,
[1:23:16] 2026 meets the findings per cent to section 36-2490
[1:23:22] of the zoning ordinance and recommends approval
[1:23:25] to the township board for action
[1:23:27] on the preliminary plan in making this determination
[1:23:30] of following additional conditions shall apply.
[1:23:34] This sarns noted in the planar's review dated June 24th,
[1:23:37] 2026, concerns noted in the engineers review dated June 24th,
[1:23:43] 2026, paving the pathway, which I have been to also agree on.
[1:23:50] I do really like and have enjoyed the pay of the fee to be put on path.
[1:23:56] It's very nice.
[1:23:58] You don't trip, et cetera.
[1:24:00] So, caving the nature path?
[1:24:01] Yep.
[1:24:01] Paving the nature path?
[1:24:04] Adding trees would be a wonderful benefit.
[1:24:09] We would always like that.
[1:24:12] You can add on those nice again.
[1:24:16] Okay, so we could highlight the,
[1:24:19] Especially after the planners review, especially the preservation of the landmark trees and adding
[1:24:29] the trees on site.
[1:24:32] Maximizing you all one of the bus overlays, I think you guys understand some of the notes.
[1:24:39] So the multi-modal, multi-modal
[1:24:45] connectivity.
[1:24:46] Yeah, so we're already on the plant and then also we have to deal with the deviation.
[1:24:53] Oh, I'm off of proving the deviation for the building.
[1:25:00] No, I don't think so, I would just add in the deviation for the 50-foot sub-bathletes.
[1:25:06] And also for the parking lot, all the deviations are A, O, K, by us.
[1:25:13] Do we need to have any language? I think the motion itself says concerns, noting in the planners' review.
[1:25:20] That's an insufficient note to deal with that list of seven.
[1:25:23] Okay, well there's there's two sections to that too actually there's the seven plus there's a six
[1:25:31] Everything probably better off just noting addresses seven site plant items. No, this is fine
[1:25:37] And and does that it's fine by saying just the planners review
[1:25:43] I need to go through every one of those there's 15. Oh 14. Oh, no, I wouldn't expect
[1:25:49] I would say
[1:25:55] I mean, I'm fine without it because doesn't say it's fine.
[1:25:59] Also, where did you set it?
[1:26:00] Planners, or is there a plan that I don't need to be interested in?
[1:26:02] Yeah, they don't.
[1:26:07] Sure, it's just the first item.
[1:26:09] Mm-hmm.
[1:26:11] We're being part of it.
[1:26:14] Go ahead.
[1:26:14] Yeah, it's right.
[1:26:16] It's a patient of landmark trees and...
[1:26:18] And they maximize the number of...
[1:26:22] Replacing trees, I'm sorry.
[1:26:24] Okay, okay.
[1:26:25] Thank you.
[1:26:28] Nice roll.
[1:26:30] Second.
[1:26:31] Okay, okay, a second.
[1:26:33] Mr. Moore.
[1:26:34] Mr. Moore.
[1:26:34] Mr. Moore.
[1:26:35] Mr. Moore.
[1:26:38] Okay. Well called out.
[1:26:47] Yes.
[1:26:47] And more.
[1:26:49] More.
[1:26:51] Well, yes.
[1:26:52] What's your name?
[1:26:52] Yes.
[1:26:53] Friend.
[1:26:54] Yes.
[1:26:55] Hi. Yes.
[1:26:56] Hold words on.
[1:26:56] Yes.
[1:26:58] I'm pushing.
[1:27:05] I'm pushing.
[1:27:05] Can we hear from the road to the ocean?
[1:27:08] Yes.
[1:27:08] We're not.
[1:27:09] I mean, they're ears.
[1:27:10] starting a big plan, sir. I'm from my understanding, I'm from the road to the mission for this evening to just really, you can get on with this, you know, they know, yeah, they know, it's moving, it's possible also to be able to show them all, it's a great challenge.
[1:27:25] The moment we've been meeting with them, because there's some other things that we need to be with them on.
[1:27:30] So, I want to make sure that they, because they know people are going to be crossing their
[1:27:38] everything.
[1:27:40] We're going to, we're going to, we're going to, I think they're going to add.
[1:27:44] I think they're going to add.
[1:27:45] So we're talking about the whole, we think of Jackson Role, and they've got to start considering
[1:27:50] if we add more of a residential density, how do you make this so that it isn't risk-
[1:27:58] As always, yes, they don't want that risk either.
[1:28:02] No, no, and it's still the interior of that to close at 94.
[1:28:17] Okay, so moving on to reports and commission activity, anything from OHM Sally,
[1:28:26] no report
[1:28:26] from me to me, okay, anything else from Carlisle, what rendog?
[1:28:31] Nothing else from me to report.
[1:28:35] I don't have any additional chair report items.
[1:28:41] BOT.
[1:28:45] CBA.
[1:28:49] TPP.
[1:28:50] We're just roll.
[1:28:51] I know.
[1:28:53] We go update.
[1:28:56] ESTF.
[1:28:59] No more additional update from last week.
[1:29:02] Okay, WWE, Craig.
[1:29:06] I attended that meeting in the first
[1:29:12] half to seeing.
[1:29:13] Jim, that that was quite an interesting group.
[1:29:17] It is, and it seems like to me as the new person in the room,
[1:29:25] that they're still trying to figure out what their goals are,
[1:29:28] and because the mayor of Chelsea is sounds like she's trying to expand it beyond housing
[1:29:37] and transportation focus and get into how to help the communities, right grants,
[1:29:51] funding is
[1:29:51] available for that purpose. She's trying to schedule meetings with other groups to see how
[1:30:00] May the down river community conference of any right into the whole thing of
[1:30:11] municipalities, I'm not sure what it was.
[1:30:14] And so she's trying to set up meetings at you and the attendants.
[1:30:18] Thank you.
[1:30:19] Thank you.
[1:30:21] I was asked if I would probably need to put on the...
[1:30:33] So it sounds like they're pushing to get the whole western side, combined summer, and others are saying that's not going to happen because some of the north west and south west are not really trying to go in the same direction.
[1:30:54] So I don't know what that's of a new admission, we went from Thursdays to Wednesdays because that group in the south had their own meetings that conflicted with Thursday meetings.
[1:31:06] But only one representative from Sharon has come to a couple of emails.
[1:31:10] So it's hard to get that engaged.
[1:31:12] It's hard to get the engagement.
[1:31:15] That was actually something a suggestion that came out of representative Dingles.
[1:31:21] Yep.
[1:31:23] And she was there, the representative was there at this meeting, and she goes to the other meetings, and she would try to help facilitate that through the meeting.
[1:31:32] What they could make sense, because one of the things is, how do we lobby the commission?
[1:31:39] and the state for what we want and the more we're together, the more obviously we're going to have differences, priorities, etc.
[1:31:51] But you need to kind of support each other's in a way.
[1:31:55] They are not necessarily forthcoming saying, hey, what do you think about that's either?
[1:32:00] So yeah, yeah, I think there's been sort of a long standing sort of whatever, you know, urban role issues and yeah.
[1:32:13] I'm being funny.
[1:32:15] MTC just briefly looked at some other options of decreasing some services by wave and again
[1:32:25] the feedback was it had to do with primarily the Parkland Plaza area and the feedback again
[1:32:35] was resoundingly please don't do that that's I think 25% of there were some statistics around
[1:32:43] but use and it represents, you know, 25% of some of the ways, you know there was a difference between the door to door and the door to door to door.
[1:32:53] Yeah, the door to connector and so forth. But there's a lot of use in that parking plaza and it is more of a three quarters of a mile for many of the users
[1:33:03] to walk all the way to the bus stop on Jackson Road walk.
[1:33:07] to get out. Yeah. And I'll fill. That's a good point. I mean, it was good because I think the
[1:33:14] due diligence is to look at what the savings are and so forth and what the impacts are.
[1:33:20] And certainly, we got off. So anyway, the report was reaffirming that we should continue with the
[1:33:30] existing services for the next year and continue to look at, you know, raising
[1:33:36] other funds and, you know, other funding options because of the critical aspects of the way that the bus services.
[1:33:47] So anyway, pre-eprotation Commissioner Moore, you're on for September.
[1:33:56] I'm on October and Walsh's November and Hyde is December.
[1:34:03] I may need just depending on how things go, radiation therapy, I need some food, but it's not supposed to be so bad.
[1:34:12] I can help cover you for September, possibly if you need it, but I can't help with that in forward.
[1:34:18] So, good to know.
[1:34:18] So, I think, I mean, the first, I'm on stamina.
[1:34:22] I'm just giving me a page.
[1:34:25] Okay.
[1:34:29] Okay.
[1:34:30] And Mr. Hyde is going to cover me the last part of the month.
[1:34:34] Oh, okay.
[1:34:35] But I will be out of box all of October.
[1:34:39] I don't know, so I'm kind of shut my calendar down.
[1:34:43] Okay.
[1:34:44] In terms of coming to meetings and stuff.
[1:34:46] You have a lot of me to put that in there.
[1:34:48] Keep the meetings.
[1:34:49] I suppose if I feel well,
[1:34:52] I would say that not if you can't pay me,
[1:34:53] but to speak.
[1:34:54] Yeah.
[1:34:55] Yeah.
[1:34:55] I'm sure you recover correctly.
[1:34:58] Yeah, right because that's
[1:35:00] That's the biggest issue. That's the most important thing.
[1:35:04] Yeah, okay. I think that's also open up public comments at 7.36. There's no one in town to call. Is there anyone online that would like it?
[1:35:16] It's very interesting.
[1:35:19] Well,
[1:35:26] hello. I want to wish everyone well with their surgery and their treatments.
[1:35:31] And I just want to make time that about Stephen Jackson road traffic area as some of you know,
[1:35:42] I was severely injured there and the road commission did know that they needed a light there.
[1:35:49] And I'm very concerned about people in that area.
[1:35:55] But people don't want camera, they run the double red light, and when they turn into CVS,
[1:36:03] it's very dangerous.
[1:36:04] And historically, you know, Myers paid people off.
[1:36:09] Many people were hurt there, somebody was killed there.
[1:36:11] Before they put a light in, wrote the mission new.
[1:36:14] Same thing, entrance at the gas station, when traffic wasn't so bad, they waited until
[1:36:19] multiple accidents.
[1:36:21] you're going to have a round about on park. And people are going to want to go across there.
[1:36:28] They never like to slow the traffic down, but I see it as a very dangerous situation.
[1:36:36] And because having living there,
[1:36:46] it's a daily, it's a daily problem driving down that section.
[1:36:54] So whatever they do, they better look at it closely and I thank you all and have a good night
[1:37:02] Thank you
[1:37:04] Who
[1:37:09] close public comment second, okay, and that was a more and
[1:37:17] Now get it as hot
[1:37:20] Okay, yeah, thank you very much, Sally. Thank you very much
[1:37:30] Do we vote on? No, we did not. Okay, any further discussion, all those in favor of closing public comment, please say aye
[1:37:37] Any opposed? All right, public comment is closed at 7.30.
[1:37:41] And I did have one more announcement that it meant to me. And that was at Michigan.
[1:37:46] Hey Greg.
[1:37:47] Can you put that?
[1:37:48] I got a question for you. You know any roofers around here?
[1:37:52] Yeah, she doesn't realize you're fine.
[1:37:55] Okay.
[1:37:55] Thank you. Thanks.
[1:37:56] The Township Association, the Michigan Township Association, is having a webinar Wednesday
[1:38:05] on data-centered zoning ordinances.
[1:38:08] And so they are presenting what should go into an ordinance.
[1:38:13] I thought I would attend just to be anybody to attend.
[1:38:21] We knew things.
[1:38:22] It's Wednesday.
[1:38:23] So do you you'd have to go to the township this was MTA's web page and you can sign up for it?
[1:38:32] It's this Wednesday. Two days for now
[1:38:35] On the 26th from noon to one and they also have on their web site sample
[1:38:43] Ordinance and I just thought if we review it to see do we miss anything?
[1:38:47] They
[1:38:52] were a step ahead of
[1:38:55] us to discuss it in
[1:38:59] that way.
[1:39:02] Yeah.
[1:39:02] They were talking.
[1:39:03] Some people were talking about having
[1:39:09] post-poment.
[1:39:10] What is it called?
[1:39:11] Monterey and Monterey.
[1:39:13] Monterey and Monterey and Monterey.
[1:39:13] Limeo just did that with that.
[1:39:15] Yeah.
[1:39:16] I think it's a power plant.
[1:39:18] We might still want to consider what it is.
[1:39:22] I know I can't do it.
[1:39:23] I got a board of way forward meeting and I got lunch.
[1:39:27] Okay.
[1:39:28] So that's Wednesday.
[1:39:31] I mean, yeah, you can notice and I think I've got a couple of notes as we start going into the zoning ordinance because I think Laura made the comment that we may want to do a review of review kind of thing because it's been a while since we've really looked at the ordinance.
[1:39:51] So, you know, catching even with some of the newer things.
[1:39:57] Now that's the time to keep your notes.
[1:40:00] So to adjourn, okay? Commissioner Moores, there's a report from Fletter. All right. Any further discussion? All those in favor? You say aye? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. We are adjourned at 741. Thank you, everybody. Wow. That has got to be a question. Have a great night, everybody.