Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Meeting of July 15th to order and take a roll call. And we can start with Linda on the right. Linda Novak, present.

Paul Bregman, present.

Pete Allitt, present.

Sarah Greslick, present.

Trevor Warner, present. Very good. So I'd like to adapt the agenda unless anybody has any comments or changes they would like to make. We get a motion. So moved. Second. Anybody? I'll second.

Well done.

Sarah seconds.

So motion passes.

We will adapt the agenda. Anybody see any issues with the minutes?

Negative.

Yeah, I thought they were really well done. So we need a motion to adopt the minutes.

Motion to adopt the minutes as presented.

I'll second.

All in favor? Aye. All right, very good. So I guess council liaison, I was not present at the meeting, but David, would you care to enlighten us a little bit?

Yep. I have to jump in. So we had our initial review, our first reading of the blight ordinance that was referred up to us. All positive feedback on that. We'll have a more substantive conversation around the second reading. However, we want to show our appreciation, and I think there's collective alignment amongst council to make the correction to the ordinance to kind of remove the restrictions around commercial markings on vehicles, recognizing that you know, we don't want to interfere with people's livelihoods. So again, all of it, the work greatly appreciated. And we look forward to kind of the next phase that y'all are working through. The other thing is we referred the Padel matter to look at the fencing ordinance. I'm not sure if there's anything else that's really tied to that, but that matter to the Planning Commission, but with the collective understanding that we still want to run in parallel or prioritize the new system abatement, keep the momentum there while being able to also resolve this other issue. The last matter is we did the appointments for the Planning Commission. There were three open spots, and we did the appointment of Sarah as well as Dr. Cassius Drake, and there remains one open. So anybody who's interested to apply, please do. That will be it.

Thank you. Good. Thanks, David. So any commissioners have any news to report?

I just want to make mention of something that came up at the meeting the other night in case, for those of you that weren't there, which was shockingly sad news about the passing of both Roger, our former.

Yeah. Oh, no.

And Dana. And Dana Hughes. Oh, dear. Within like a week of each other.

What happened to Dana? Okay, we'll talk about it. We'll talk about it.

Very unfortunate.

And they were both really wonderful and helpful to us.

They were. They were very kind people and devoted themselves to their jobs. Very sad to hear. Thank you, Linda, for sharing that.

I would say, so from Main Street Franklin's view, the block party is coming up. It's on the day of actually our next meeting. So we did talk to Stewart about that Monday evening, so we may have to adjust our next planning meeting because it's going to be difficult down here in terms of all the stuff going on.

That's a good point. What time does it start?

I think it starts at 5. Well... I don't know we're sponsoring part of it so I think it's like 5 30 until 8. yeah 5 8 30. so yes okay so um so we will revisit that but I did want to throw it out there so I I didn't forget about it yeah that's a good point can we look at some other dates now or

We could do a Tuesday meeting or a Thursday meeting. Anybody have any preferences?

A lot of it's gonna depend on you guys.

Of course, yeah.

Why don't you throw some dates out to us and we'll yay or nay it. I know it's a lot of power.

Can't do August 10th because that's the council meeting. Yep.

Is it the 12th or the 19th?

The next meeting? The 19th. Okay. You could do it the 12th. It would be the same week as council, which I guess is true.

I'm not available on the 12th.

You are or not?

I'm not available on the 12th.

How about the 18th?

I'm available then. Anybody with me?

OK, yeah, we'll just push it back.

Alright double pencil that in. I guess Evan is that fair?

Alright.

I'll make a motion to change the date of the next meeting to Tuesday, August the 18th so as to not interfere with the Franklin block party.

I will second.

All in favor? Aye. All right.

Can we make sure we get an email out to the people not present? Yes. Thank you.

Very good. I guess I would just add that there's also a 5K race, I think, on the 18th the FCA is hosting. I noticed that.

It's also on Saturday.

Yeah. So, um, all right. Any zoning activities, Linda?

Um, well, yes. And it's here in front of us tonight. So, um, we did have a meeting and it was, um, an appeal for a homeowner wanting to, uh, well, it was actually a couple of variances. One was a fencing variance. And the other was a variance to do a higher fence and to do a different material than we would normally allow. There was also grading. And basically what happened is it became evident that it was not going to pass. And so he withdrew his application. But the reason he came to us and he said that there are he personally knows of five or six other people that want to put in these pedal courts um that he he felt as many of us that the fencing um laws that we have right now are pretty archaic. I mean, they deal with tennis courts, and since that, so many other things have evolved, sports courts and pickleball courts, and now the padel courts that we- What is that?

Can you share with us?

Glad you asked. Okay. I've got actually a photo of what it would look like, and they are 13-foot walls that are glass.

Cross between pickleball and squash.

Kind of, yeah. You play against the glass wall, and then it does have some screening material at the top. But because it's glass, there's no, you know, if we go through that current description, we don't have any allowance for glass. I mean, certainly as far as the opacity rules, it would pass, but it's just not a material. So he was hoping, and it was suggested by zoning that we review the whole, Fencing ordinance.

That's interesting.

Oh, yeah.

Oh, yeah. I mean, certainly we've done that a couple of times. I think we've done pretty thorough ones, but this seems like just a new instance where it might be worth discussing. Absolutely. So would you propose putting it on our agenda? It is on our agenda.

It's our agenda.

Under what?

This is the one that was added, yeah.

Yeah, it was added to that.

It is review. and discuss amending village code of ordinances for fences. Now, I'm not sure that it's only fences. Does that not also talk about what's allowed, like the tennis courts and stuff, or is that only under fencing?

It would be just under fencing.

Even right now, the tennis court fences... whatever they're at, the ones we have over here, whatever ruling we have, those are grandfathered in because they predate our new ruling that we made for this ordinance.

But there's a category under fences that deals with tenants.

Yes, but I'm saying even if those are out of, they're grandfathered in. They're non-compliant, grandfathered in.

Well, until they do the repairs on it that they want to do. They don't need to do repairs on it.

Yeah, I was just going to say, so Fair question. When I saw the agenda, I wasn't sure if it was specifically related to the PDEL. What I will say is that my assumption is that is why it's on here. And that to the extent that we need to expand it beyond fences, I think the objective is like sports courts and PDEL. And so if there's other areas, one of the things that we talked about at council is we're not even sure when the sport court law opens. our ordinance was passed originally and so there's probably been several enhancements so there's probably multiple considerations including is the moving a fill because i know there's restrictions about how much you can change the um the grading and your removal of dirt so all of those things may not fall within the fence ordinance but still may be worth revisiting

Yeah, because the grading, that was also part of that application, but it was because they were asking to change the grading by more than a foot. And I mean, they were doing it for all the right reasons. I mean, they were trying to create a berm. So it wouldn't even be visible from the road. But I think part of it, and we've talked about this before, is that we have nothing in our code as far as regulating building materials, other than saying that a tennis court can have a chain link fence. It's probably time that we look at that. We had the issue with, I'm sorry. We had the issue as far as the artificial turf, which I think is still out there because I think that it's a lot, not all of it, but a lot of the artificial turf is very questionable as far as leaching into the ground and here we are on well water. You know, I just think it's going to be a big bite to look at this, and it's going to take a while, but I think that these all fall together and have to be reviewed because it's going to keep coming in front of zoning.

All right. Definitely, I guess we can address it when we get to it. I guess we're ready for any public comments, which obviously I don't think we're going to have tonight. So I see we have a new format for our budget. I found it fairly unremarkable. We're almost at the end of our financial year. Anybody have any observations or comments on the budget?

I, while I really, I like the individual breakdown, I think it's harder, I liked also the other view we had, too, that was like your, like, year scale of, like, what, you know, was going on. So, like, I could always see something, like, jump out of, like, oh, I got to double check that.

That's okay.

This view, I mean, is very, I appreciate the detail, but this one took me a little while earlier.

Yeah, because it shows year-to-date, but it doesn't show year-over-year or what was.

Month-over-month. Month-over-month.

It's allotted, yeah.

It's nice. I see, yeah, I like it.

The new format? Paul? Good, good.

I mean, I look at it all the time.

What are your feelings, Evan? Do you have any involvement? Right, right. Yeah.

I mean, right.

I mean, I just like the novelty. You know, it's a different way of looking at it. And I think there's value in doing that. It makes you see new things.

I did have one question. And that was a charge for a title search for an individual property for 25001 River Drive. Why would that be in our budget?

That was done on October of last year.

I know that there was an issue as far as two neighbors on River Drive, but I don't know why we would be bearing the cost of a title search.

That is a good point, good point.

Yeah, I think that's on the flag and just make sure that that's.

And this is why having to individualize things are good.

Yeah, that's true.

Good catch.

Yeah, yeah. I'm trying to recall what that might have been or.

Only tag on there is vendor.

Stop signs. That was a little while ago. Well, a question worth looking into a little bit, see if we can get an answer. All right, any other comments on the budget?

Very good.

And we will continue. So we have new business, our weed and grass growth control. And we do have a write-up on that. Chris, can you walk us through it?

Sure. I was asked to investigate how the village regulates the growth of noxious weeds and tall grass and compare the village's regulations to other communities. In terms of Franklin, Chapter 1479, which is titled Weed and Grass Growth Control, addresses this topic in the village code. And Generally, it indicates that weeds and grass must not be allowed to grow taller than eight inches above ground level if one's property is within a planted subdivision or single-family residential condominium, within 100 feet of a planted subdivision or single-family residential condominium, or within 100 feet of any public street or road. And the village administrator is charged with enforcing this particular ordinance, or he or she can designate that responsibility to somebody else. And the way that the village administrator does that is if they detect a problem, they would send a letter, certified letter, to the village administrator address to the problem owner and notify them that they have to cut the weeds within 10 days. And if they don't, the village can hire a contractor to do it, put a lien on the property and have a 20% administrative fee. There also is an option, which I don't know whether the village does this or not, maybe you know, to publish a notice in the newspaper during the month of March indicating that weeds not cut by May 1st may be cut by the village and the owner would be charged. We do publish that notice. You do? Oh, okay. So all these enforcement procedures closely follow the procedures in what's called the Noxious Weeds Act, which is Michigan Public Act 359 of 1941. That act, though, just deals with weeds, noxious weeds. It doesn't deal with grass. So in the village of Franklin, we added on lawn grass. In addition, Franklin's ordinance differs from that act in that it deals with something called exotic invasive plant species, native species, and naturally landscaped areas. And then on the second page of my letter, I summarize what I found in looking at about eight other communities and what they do. You can see that most of them adhere to that eight-inch limit. Although Canton Township is more aggressive, they only allow your grass to grow to five inches. Southfield, it can be 12 inches, except if you're a vacant property, it can only be eight inches. I don't know why that is. And then in terms of who's the administrator, that varies all over the place. In some communities, like Bingham Farm, it's the clerk that has that responsibility. And in terms of whether a mail notice goes out or a published notice is the way to go, it varies from one community to the next. Franklin is, they all have the provision when community has to go out and do the mowing themselves. They place a lien on the property, but Franklin is sort of stands out in that it charges a 20% administrative fee on top of the lien. So the only other community, I guess, well, there's two other communities. Bingham Farms has a 1% admin fee. And Birmingham, they don't call them admin fee. They call it a penalty, which is 15%. All the rest of the communities don't have that sort of thing. So let's see. In terms of my comments down at the bottom of page two, I think that certain definitions need to be revised. For example, exotic invasive plant species is sort of conflating two different definitions. Exotic plants are typically non-native plants that are moved to a new area intentionally. So like tomatoes and potatoes are considered exotic plants, and they're OK. But the problem ones are the invasive plants. And those are the ones that are destructive subset of exotic plants that spread and aggressively destroy native species and wildlife habitats. So I think what we need to do there is just eliminate the word exotic and revise the definition a little bit and just stay with invasive. and then the definition of natural landscaped area needs to be revived revised for some clarity the definition of noxious weeds needs to be revised the state act was revised in 2025 to note that milkweed is not considered a noxious weed so it should add that to our ordinance. And also we should note that our list of noxious weeds comes from section two of that act. And then number two on page three, I just suggest that the planning commission may want to discuss whether the inch limit is appropriate or not. It seems like that's the general trend among the communities I surveyed, but you can go lower, you can go higher. And also, I think I forgot to mention that we also have a provision in our ordinance that says that noxious weeds shall not be allowed to reach a flower bearing state. which is different from what the act says. The act says that they should not be allowed to go to sea. which means that they can flower, but they can't go to the next step, which is going to seed. So in that sense, Franklin's regulations are a bit more restrictive or aggressive than the state act. So that's another thing to discuss whether you're comfortable with that. And then, let's see, number three, I suggested that you look at the naturally landscape premises regulations. They indicate that plants in these areas basically could have a maximum height of 18 inches. And they may not extend closer than two feet to the property line. So if you're comfortable with that, that's fine. But I think it's worth discussing. And then item four in my letter, I talk about section 147904B, which deals with placing a lien on the property. The language in that second section is very awkward. It needs to be cleaned up a little bit. And then finally, Canton Township's ordinance contains a regulation that gives a timetable for cutting that goes beyond just the May 1st. I thought it was really a good regulation. I think we should include it in the Franklin ordinance. So that completes my recommendations.

I have some questions. First thing that's striking me is just the description of where this pertains to. And it says within a platted subdivision or single family residential condominium. Well, there's only two small condominiums in all of Franklin. And not all of Franklin is a planted subdivision. Not everything has a subdivision in Franklin. Some of them exist solely on legal description.

Oh, okay.

So I think that needs to be addressed. But the other thing is that it says within, you know, this would pertain to the properties that are not planted within a hundred feet of any public street or road. You know, some of these are two lots are huge. So you're saying they only have to. cut the first hundred feet and the rest can be a jungle of weeds. Yeah, so I think those are all really important things to look at.

Yeah.

Those are really good points.

Yeah.

I'm glad you caught that. I didn't read it as that, but as soon as you said it, I was like, oh, I'd be so mad. But I really appreciated, Chris, the graph, the grid you did of all of the comparison. I think that just makes it so much easier for my brain to process, so reading through that made it so much easier, so thank you on that. It sounded like when you went through it that we are actually pretty aggressive on a lot of the things we're doing, which hasn't always been the case, so it was kind of interesting to see. Yeah.

See, I'm in the same boat on that. Cause like, as it stands, like how I've been doing my yard and lawn and everything for the past 25 years, like I'm not, as far as I know, not breaking any laws or ordinances, which why for me, I'm in the situation of why, why are we fixing something that's not broken? Cause I guess it's cause what's not broken doesn't apply to me, I guess. And I'm trying to figure out how I can help make it apply to everybody, you know? Um, because with the natural, where was it? The natural growth.

Landscaped area.

Yeah. I have a lot of that because I'm on a hill. Like my grass is, I don't have any flat part of my property. So... Like, I only have maybe, I saw, what was it, 18 inches somewhere. I don't have it that high, maybe one or two spots, but it's because it's in a massively wooded area and it's part of the natural landscape.

And a lot of these homes have these kind of natural areas between the houses. So, I mean, that's got to be, I think, sort of singled out and brought to light

And I can tell you right now, I definitely don't wait for my grass to hit eight inches. I cut it at five every time, not realizing I could have gone to eight. I could have saved a week.

Something I know. So this is a weird thing.

So

i have a lot of snowbirds in my neighborhood and so then when it gets to be time where they're not there their gutters are full of weeds and this happens in my neighborhood a lot and i like i just sort of live with it and it doesn't really concern me but i know like i'm like this is only on the ground and i'm like i don't know how we put that like well if it gets if it gets to eight inches if it gets to eight inches you report it to evan and There have been giant things growing in their gutters because of the trees that drop all of the stuff in the spring, and then they're not there to care for it, and the lawn care company doesn't get there. But those are also things that I'm like, oh, if that was my neighbor's house, I could see why I would be really mad about that. So that's also something I'm thinking of. How do we also recognize that it's a 360 view and not just...

Yeah, that's a good point. They're like Eve planters, right? It's like window boxes for your roof. That's right.

I'm not sure that would come under like ornamental garden.

That is blatant ignorance of ignoring the gutter.

All right, well.

which isn't a lawn so any other i think we can go through some of the things that we just brought up anybody else have any other things that come to mind um so yeah please maybe the opposite end of the spectrum but i know a lot of townships are going on these kind of managed meadows where maybe there are some areas that we could allow to grow over the eight inches for the butterflies and carbon recapture and things of that nature. So I don't know if we want to move towards more of a Southfield 12 inch rule.

Yeah. And I know that like Stuart, who's not here, always follows no mow, what is it, no mow? No mow may.

No mow may. Yeah.

It's no shave. No mow may. Right. No mow may.

It would be, I agree with you, and I think that there's a way to do that, but I think that would have to be captured in, like, the natural landscaped area, so that way it's not getting, like, someone can't just be like my entire yard is a naturally landscaped art area because i could see if we don't clear it into like some sort of divided time but that could just be like that's their loophole so i guess but i agree with your point on it yeah yeah but people will take advantage of the way the loophole and be like i'm just gonna grow so yeah i mean we could require like strips of it being cut around property lines or something like that so it doesn't look as bad but

All right, the other two issues there, and it's a good point about, you know, I'm aware of some where, you know, you got an acre of ground that that never gets cut. It's not especially unsightly, but I guess why don't we talk about that a little bit and just see how we feel about, I guess, managed meadows and lots that may be appropriate to not treat like a lawn. I GUESS IT OCCURS TO ME. I MEAN, WE STILL DON'T WANT THE WEEDS GROWING THERE, I WOULD THINK, BUT, YOU KNOW, THESE WEEDS THAT WE DON'T WANT TO GO TO SEED. BUT RIGHT NOW, YOU KNOW, THAT KIND OF THING IS TECHNICALLY NOT ALLOWED. What are your thoughts? Anybody? Obviously.

Would there need to be like a border or like a defined area? Because I'm thinking like.

I don't think you can do a defined area.

Well, there's two scopes for me. I know people do it, have chunks of their yard where they just leave it and have it ornamental more. And then there's areas in which people are clearly pollinator-friendly. And then there's also the other area of, hey, I know... dear hot topic in this village but like in the springtime you know when all of the baby fawn are born like yeah people leave like a you know like if they know that they're going to be there they leave like a circle around them so that way they're hidden and that so there's like multiple pieces

to it but like how do we clearly define an area but also not have a boundary yeah it's it's tough i i think that i'm having the week where i'm having difficulty with this is trying to find a common ground because uniquely franklin has different types of property all over and it's very hard to define okay here's the property example we have what do we want to find for this and all of a sudden we go to the next one and it's not doesn't fit in that cookie cutter so i think this is a larger scope and we actually need to look at it by uh district uh zoning type as well that's a very good idea um otherwise we're just we're gonna dig yourself a hole later down the line seems like well i can't do this because it's part of my property we're gonna get more complaints i think in the long run because we're going to hinder people from doing something that they used to be able to do to fit in this mold that never existed before because of other issues elsewhere.

Again, we have to keep in mind, it is only a problem when somebody reports it as a problem.

Yes.

or the person in charge of it goes by and perceives it as private. So, you know, we don't, we do these guidelines not for everyday stuff. Correct.

Correct. But we try to make it uniform across the line so we don't have a lot of things to.

I don't know how we possibly could in Franklin. There's nothing uniform in all of Franklin.

That being said, you bring up a good point. Evan, is there any chance by next month I could find out how many lawn maintenance requests, reports have we gotten out of being, just to give us an idea how often stuff like that's reported?

I think so too. You think it's what?

Under five.

Under five.

Right. I think so, too. But I just want to, so we have the numbers for it, to figure out how widespread an issue this actually is. More than just three people that are very vocal in the community complaining about something that is only a problem to them and trying to make it everybody else's problem.

I would also, if on that scope, if we can see if that's just like also individuals no longer like occupying, because I could see that being the majority. Like I could genuinely see like it just being like a situation where.

If it's a vacant home or a home that's owned but forgotten about.

Yes.

Yeah.

So if that's the case, then I think we have a very different conversation than trying to manage our neighbors on some versus like clearly seeing specific challenges.

We want people to be conscious of the neighbors, but we also want neighbors also snitch on everybody and complain about it because it's not a community. That's not a home. We need to at least talk to each other before we get to this stage here and be like, now we have to make a law about something that apparently five people complained about the past 20 years.

Well, so that has to do with cutting of lawns or just complaints in general?

I'm talking about complaints in general. If there's complaints about lawn grass or unkempt yards, that's a completely different thing. If it's five complaints, in how many years, like, yeah, what are we doing?

Right.

That would be a graph I would actually read. Oh, I want to see this one. No, in genuine, when we're talking about these large-scale ordinance reflections, what is the breakdown of where the areas are that we can, if we do have a lull time or something, what are the things we can actually look at?

I do like the idea of when we review this, reviewing it by the different zoning classifications because I think lot sizes do make a difference. Oh, a huge difference. I think that people are going to notice a house that is totally, I don't want to use the word unkempt, unmaintained,

decrepit in no but not the the lawn is not cut like in the like a golf course historic you know right yeah so well again that's yeah that's part of the i think what is part of the village's charm is we don't we have a naturalization of like landscaping we have a lot of the natural look of things and it's i've even driving through i've only seen one property that has been a mess and a nightmare and that's all i used to wrote And the only reason I see that is I drive by it every day. We don't even know there's a car in there. I didn't know there was a house there for 10 years.

Yeah, yeah. So I guess the, yeah, I think, you know, the idea of there are people who leave parts of their yard natural and... I think you're exactly right that trying to treat all of Franklin in a similar manner is challenging. But I guess one thing is the no mow May. It is a policy or it's an idea that had been floating around and right now we have this weeds not cut by May 1st.

Even then it's hard to come by May 1st because of all the mud.

It could still be snowing.

It's mud season April. We have eight seasons in Michigan.

That's why I could see that moving to May, you know, the end of May. Generally at the end of May, you know, a lawn can get pretty tall by then.

Why is it even a concern except... You know, June through September. I don't understand.

Well, by the end of May, your lawn will be over eight inches.

It really focuses in on these noxious weeds that are in the ordinance, or in the state act. I think the state act is the one that, yeah, it's the state act that has the May 1st deadline.

Okay.

And these noxious weeds of which there's, probably a dozen that are listed in the State Act and are also listed in our ordinance. I think they're the ones that typically go to seed by May 1st and shortly thereafter. So I think that's the basis.

Do you know what the merits of no more may are all about? I assume there is some value to it or it wouldn't have been.

Isn't it to also address the water table?

I think it has to do with, well, go ahead.

Yeah, this was even something that I had raised I'm not particularly passionate about this. It didn't get high on my ranking, but one of the things that I said is if we address it, I would like to see it get pushed back. So the motivations of no mome are slightly on the water table, but it's to allow for pollinization with bees. So it's specifically around bee pollinization.

Like Royal Oak, like actively, I think they have it like a, hey, this is not part of our ordinance, but this is acceptable for May. So like they call it out. So I know that it's like city by city can do their own thing.

But we're sort of dealing with two different things here because we're dealing – with weeds that are before May, and then we're dealing with lawns that are, let's say, May 15th to October 15th. So maybe we need to break that down and look at it in two different groupings.

I'm on board with no mow May, specifically. I was on board with the water table, but now I'm definitely with now mentioning bees. Yes, oh my god. Like, we need more bees. Like...

I guess it really does, for me, have a lot to do with how tall can a lawn get by May 30th. And it can get well over eight inches. It can be 15 to even more in a real hot, rainy spring.

I was wondering if like that intention though wasn't necessarily about that deadline but more just like we want to see that someone's investing in this before it gets to the like summer really ramps up like I wonder like that was my thought was maybe it's more about the intention of Someone's here. Someone's taking care of it. It will be addressed kind of thing instead of more like the hard deadline. Because I think Michigan weather is so hard to predict and it's only getting more unpredictable that like it's hard to like put like a, yeah, this is the day where we're going to have no snow and our lawn is going to be ready to be cut. Like that just may not be reality.

And I guess, boy, it has so much to do with the location of the property, too, it seems to me. If you're in the middle of a fairly standard area of Franklin, your neighbors probably aren't going to receive that very well. But there are so many places where it can be a nice and desirable thing to do. Yeah.

Well, are there a few of these that are easy for us to start? Look at like the exotic one, I think was a good one that maybe we can start with while we have Evan gather the more information and we can just go back and review that. Does that feel like a fair way to do it? Well, can we make some progress?

We certainly can, can review the issue of, the description of the properties, you know, as far as the condominium and the, um, the public road, the public road one.

I'm so glad you pointed that out. That's yeah.

Yeah. There's probably, um, what do you think? Dozens of properties like that? I was trying to think of where I live is actually planted. I think it does have a name.

Cause I was looking up a property a couple of weeks ago and I was, you know, turning in my sheet on it. It's like, there's no sub. There is no sub name here. It's strictly legal description. And there's quite a few like that.

It does seem like it may not be relevant for us. I mean, just take the three bullet points out. What are your thoughts, Chris? Do you see this? Is this common to see?

No.

Right.

This is for like site condominium developments that, you know, they're single family homes, but they were developed as site condos just because it was quicker and easier for the developer to do it.

Well, it's almost like something you would expect in the country or something where you have... Not really.

Well, I think it's really for more regulated developed.

It's for regular development.

Well, well, clearly it's saying that, you know, so there may be individual lots that are not near a platted area. Um, But I do think they're not many. They're not many. I'm trying to think, 100 feet, you're going to back up to a neighborhood pretty close. But my point was, it shouldn't matter whether you're near a platted neighborhood or not, right?

Well, right. I mean, we're talking about the village of Franklin, so it's the village of Franklin. And even saying condominiums is kind of redundant, because the condominiums have their own center. um you know ccrs and as far as what they're going to allow and they're responsible for the maintenance so that sort of makes it move we only have eight condos in franklin no that's not true that's why that's what i'm asking we have there's 21 in crestbrook oh and the ravine there are the ravines so okay yeah but the ravines doesn't really have any

So I mean would anybody object to removing these three bullet points? Okay.

No objection.

All right. So there's other things that we can I think were Chris's recommendation that I thought were all appropriate. We could just do a little discussion on those. So the milkweed change, I think people understand that's monarch butterflies, I believe. Anybody have any issues with making that an exception?

No.

Fair enough.

No, no issue.

The other thing that I'm not sure I see in here, and I'm far from being the gardener, I'm more of the brown thumb, but I know that that, what's it called, mustard garlic, garlic mustard, whatever that is, that it has become a really invasive species. And, you know, everything I read says pull it out and get rid of it immediately. Is that in here? Yes. Oh, it is. Okay. So that's under the mustards or, okay. I wasn't sure.

Are there any good invasive species? No. That anyone knows of? Okay.

I think by definition, no.

Maybe like something that kills.

I was going to say, you know, gray wolves are going to basically.

Or one that cures cancer.

Right, or kills mosquitoes. I was thinking of that, too. Right. So that, you know, clarifying this exotic, We're removing exotic from the, you know, the language I think seems appropriate. The eight inch height question seems very common that that's in the table pretty consistently with a couple of little differences. I think that number seems to be reasonable. We have the 18 inches or less, and Paul, you brought up a good point about wooded areas. There's lots of wooded areas all around Franklin, and they're on property owned by people. And there may be an 18-inch plant growing there somewhere.

I'm speaking from experience. Yeah.

What do you call those areas between?

Property mines?

No, no. It's just like the natural areas between.

That would call into this natural area. That would? Yeah.

So we don't have to call that out specifically?

No, no. So this is what this language is made for, this natural area.

Naturally landscaped premises, right? Because it does seem like, I mean, they are basically the woods. I have woods all around my house, and you just don't know what's growing in that woods.

The specific case I'm bringing up is on my property, I do mow. along wellington road there going down but i can only mow in about a foot and a half two feet and then i get to my trees but right next to the trees maybe about three six inches in I know I got 18-inch grass there, but I can't cut it and I can't weed whack it.

Yeah.

Because it will destroy the machine.

It just seems like a... Get it going. Yeah. Only that we could...

Turn your button. I'll get a deer. You just call him, right?

Yeah.

We need to get some kind of grass that has a flavor that deer like, and then we won't need to cut our lawns anymore. Oh, man, that would be great. So I do think that should be exempted out of the naturally landscaped premises. I mean, I could see the idea of two feet from a property line. But if it's like a shared natural area, then that wouldn't be appropriate. But yeah, I think that's an ordinance that you have a very hard time living up to.

Well, and it says that naturally landscape provided the plants are cut to 18 inches or less. They're not in those barriers between houses. Not even close. I don't know if there's still sumac. There used to be, you know, like the wild sumac and stuff. If you drive, I have it between every neighbor on my block has it between houses.

Well, or make a As long as it's not invasive, it should allow it to grow to its natural height.

With the exception of natural barriers between property lines.

I think there seems to be consensus on that. The 18-inch requirement should be removed from the naturally landscaped areas.

Is there any argument of going over 8 inches and going to 12 inches for the grasses to allow them to allow some of those butterflies and pollinators?

Right. If the pollinators specifically need 12 inches, I'm not against it. But if they're okay with 8, why change it? You know what I mean? Is that 12 inches specific?

Well, some of the grass, as they grow, they get the white stuff on it, which will help some of the pollinators.

I'm not against it. And also, I realized as we're sitting here, if we do adopt no-mow-may, that actually might help the deer probably eat plants and they could eat more grass.

You gotta put some kind of seasoning on your grass to make it appealing to the deer. So the idea being 12 versus eight, and boy, again, it's so conditional on where your house is and where your neighbor is. Because 12, eight, I think eight's very long. Yeah, I do too.

Well, again, I think eight's long.

That's, I mean, this is eight inches.

This is 12.

This is eight. That's pretty long grass. I'd lose my dog in there.

This is how tall the grass would be.

I would say almost no one in the village, you know, lets their lawn go to eight inches.

My grass gets, I cut it here. Five. Yeah, I cut it when it's there.

And one is grass and one is other natural landscaping. I mean, I'm okay with that.

We need to do more insight on this because we need more of a village opinion. I don't feel comfortable making a decision based on multiple factors.

Yeah, there's a lot of that. You're right. This is a little bit of a delicate one to call.

Because again, I'm okay with 12, but I'll never let it go to 12 because that's just me. That's how I keep my property. But I also don't want people to use that as an excuse. Like, oh, I can go. Next thing you know, we're putting these at houses because it's at 18 inches for no reason.

Yeah, I'd be opposed to 12. I think it would look a little much. But I also live in a very flat neighborhood. So if I was driving down, that would be the standout neighbor. And I could see that making that neighbor.

Yeah, that's what we're talking about when it's subject to neighborhood. Yes, for sure. You're saying, yeah.

Yeah, and you're right. It's not just the zoning classification. It's the actual neighborhood that you're in. So I guess we have a lot of things to think about. I will say the language change about the lien. I think, Chris, what you were referring to,

It's just the awkward language.

The village shall have a lien. Is that right? That doesn't make sense.

The village may place a lien.

Right.

Yeah. I think the . Place a lien on the property.

Isn't the correct wording they may lien the property?

there's some other enhancements that are required there. I don't think we need to discuss that. I can take care of that offline. Going back to the two feet from the property line in number three, do you think that should be removed? Because what I'm hearing tonight is that people allow the landscaping, the natural landscaping to go up to the property line in certain cases where it meets natural landscaping on the joint property. So maybe we should eliminate the two feet

Maybe it's just to not remove the 2P from the property line, but leave it to the road. Yeah. Potentially. Yeah. Yeah. The road should be easier. I'm thinking that as well.

Advise plants could be provided further than natural landscape and not extend closer to past the property line.

Okay.

Are we going to get involved with things like right-of-way? That's what I was just wondering.

Well, right-of-way.

For utilities?

If you're doing natural landscaping, you're not doing anything.

You're responsible. Even though there's a utility easement, you're still responsible if it's on your property. Right. No, you're not going to-

Doing natural landscaping to the property line does not affect easements because even if there was an easement necessary needed, they would still just tear down that natural landscaping regardless because they need that easement. So it wouldn't affect that at all.

So I'm thinking of like when we all had those big storms a few years ago and DT cut through like all of the backyards trying to, they did those awful tree trimming. But like that is all in our wooded area in our subdivision. So like it's hard to maintain those areas because they're wooded areas. So like that's where I was worried. Well, that's why DT comes out. Well, that's what I thought because that's speaking between properties. I have it on the side of my property and the back of my property. So I think then it becomes like how do we protect ourselves as villagers but also make it so it's clear. I think that's where it gets tricky too. We really just really need to look at the naturally landscaped areas and just get a real definition at some point that encompasses it.

Like between this meeting and the next meeting, we can all...

Yes, I like that idea. Yep, do a little research.

Yeah, you know what? Take a few pictures.

We can call the cycle bar downtown and come out here and we can just ride around.

I also think I think Chris did a good job of pulling

areas nearby but i feel like we have a such a unique landscape that maybe it would be interesting to have someone with more of a wooded like to pull out like someone's example of like a wooded area that's kind of like ours where we have these like wooded areas between our houses to like figure out what their guidance on that like naturally landscaped area could be because i don't know what i can say some areas in farmington hills right now like are just like us

There's Farmington Hills has flatted, like platted neighborhoods. And then across the big, across like 14 mile, it's a fully like wooded neighborhood.

Okay, maybe just pulling out a couple of those in terms of that perspective, because I think that's where I keep, I run into the areas of just the variances of all of us and our neighborhoods and our style of houses and our style of backyards and where is it at on your frontage of where you're, like, how do you navigate that? So I just want an example as well. Right.

It's okay, it's a lot. That's why we're taking it slow.

I know, my brain on this one is.

All right, so I think, you know, something similar to this tabular comparison here.

Just the idea of the naturally landscaped area with that, yeah.

Right, right. I think that's a good idea. If you're able, if you could do something like that, Chris, we could learn a little bit from it. I mean, I'm curious about the managed meadows too, how that's treated. where people have areas that they don't cut. All right, well, all right. We've got something to think about and do a little research on and we can revisit it at our next meeting. So our... And take pictures. Pardon me? Take pictures. Yeah, sure. Pictures, bring in...

Show and tell. All right, so item B is review and discuss the village code of ordinances regarding vacant properties. And Chris, do you have a letter on this?

No, I don't have a letter on this because there wasn't enough time. Right, okay. In fact, I need some information. I'm not sure what the issue was here. Okay. Was this the Lombard Council?

Yeah.

Was this related to the Lombard Council of just like moving up that timeline?

No, yeah.

And like if we need an ordinance for that?

Is this on the agenda? This is on our agenda.

It is. Item B. Item B regarding vacant properties.

This one would not, it would have had to have come from the administration, not from council directly. Okay. For context, we passed a resolution that supports allowing at the county level, you can accelerate, if somebody's in tax foreclosure and a property has been certified as abandoned, then it will accelerate the clock to take action on a tax foreclosure from going from three years to two years. So it accelerates it by one year. So I'm wondering if in review, they're looking for further clarification on what constitutes a tax certification or sorry, not tax certification, abandons a certification of abandonment. That's the only thing I could think of.

So you don't know off the top of your head, how many like abandoned homes do we have in Franklin?

NO, THAT WAS ACTUALLY ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WAS ASKED. AND THE ANSWER IS BECAUSE, WELL, ONE, I DON'T THINK THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF ACTIONS THAT WE CAN TAKE FOR ABANDONED PROPERTIES. THE ONLY ONE THAT I CAN THINK OF OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD IS THE ONE THAT WAS KITTY CORNER FROM THE LIBRARY. that was eventually cleared out but that's a perfect example of like homes can sit years upon years vacant and abandoned right okay um i can think of a couple off when they actually become officially vacant or abandoned i mean is there a timeline right and i think that's what i i think we would want to I think I would imagine the structure of the law and the ordinance would be county would be a baseline and then a local municipality could probably be more restrictive because council actually has to do the certification of abandonment through that tax acceleration. So what I would imagine is like, I think we should start at a baseline of what does Oakland County consider to be abandoned and then from there we can figure out whether or not we wanna be more restrictive.

Yeah, fair enough. The other reason I asked the question about how many, if you know about Franklin and how many are abandoned is because I can only see in this kind of neighborhood, like the other reason someone's currently abandoned is someone passed away and currently the estate's fighting over something. And that's why it's vacant and abandoned, but it's being taken. I'd rather find somebody for not taking care of it

There are actually several that are vacant and have been vacant for some time.

My little street has two separate ones. We have one that is fully maintained and it was an instance where it belongs to the family, became inherited. There just wasn't really an intention to occupy at the present, but an intention to do so in the future. So they do maintenance of that property.

I wouldn't consider that abandoned. Correct. Yeah.

That's a vacant house, but it's not abandoned. The other thing you have to consider here is there's no back taxes. This only gets implicated when they're not current on taxes. And then there's another property on our street that seemingly is abandoned. It's not.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT.

IT'S BEEN YEARS SINCE THEY'VE LIVED THERE.

THE DRIVEWAY LOOKS HORRIBLE. IT LOOKS BAD.

THE OTHER ONE WAS AN INSTANCE WHERE THE CITY DID TAKE ACTION AROUND LAWN MAINTENANCE, THAT IT WAS SO OVERGROWN THAT EVENTUALLY THERE WAS NOTICE THAT WAS PROVIDED. SO IN THAT ONE, I DON'T THINK IT HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE passing of a family member.

Well, I'm only trying to get to it because I don't want it to be one of those things where we make it more difficult for somebody who's trying to pay those taxes and get back on their behind.

That's what council said at the meeting. The goal isn't to do that. It's to say, hey, this clearly isn't that scenario. And that's why it goes to council parts.

That's why I want to make sure.

There are prescribed methods for people who are not current on their taxes. And I mean... You can't do anything for a minimum of six months.

Yeah, because that's why, like, if somebody's losing taxes, it's like, I just lost my job.

And there's a whole redemption period. So, I mean, that's, I think that's different.

Yeah, it is. So I view this as, like, three different kind of social policies for protection. So the first one is that it has to be abandoned. So it's not the person who lost their job and can't pay the taxes because they're not occupying the property. Okay. The second one is, I can't remember what the second one is off the top of my head. I think it's just the fact that it's now gone into a foreclosure. So it's not a I've abandoned and still paying taxes. So it's not like just because I'm not occupying the property, you're trying to completely evict me out of it. And then the third one is, is that it's on council to ultimately make the determination on whether or not to certify. So that was one of the other things that we talked about is like, we would want to provide, there are certain notice requirements, but I think we would want them to make every effort for them, avail them an opportunity to make their case.

So the end goal is no matter what, council will always have to be the one to declare a house abandoned.

Correct.

So are they looking to us to create

I have no idea. That's where I'm just providing the context. I think it may have come from potentially Rachel. I don't know if you know, Evan. Yeah. So the only thing that I could think is that if in the passing of it, we looked at and said, ah, we probably need to figure out and develop a process around how we would handle that situation.

That's why I just wanted to step on my toes and like try to figure out and like not again, don't like rushing into things like breaking it down and making sure we're doing it right but if that's how what you're saying is how it wants to go and council makes last decision about abandonment i am all for that let's let's at what point does it become a nuisance and a hazard you know a health and safety hazard i think that's that's the biggest concern yeah again it comes down to like every other ordinance uh neighbor complaints like that's what it is it's like hey neighbor come in and say hey no one's i realize no one's been in this house for six months like can we get somebody to go look at and that's when the police will go over do wellness check check everything out and then if no one's there then yes then we start the two-year process and but that's even an estimate that they're due on taxes right like if you even get there they would have to but that's when we do the fines of hey we have a 20 fine because it'll lean on the house because you haven't cut your grass in a month

So from what I recall from the council meeting, I think, so this doesn't go in effect, like this wouldn't affect us, I think, until like March of next year. Like that's when, like, I think that's when council, if they approved everything, then that process would start for the county for tax season next year. So I think... clarifying what what is needed here and then having that i think we have some time built in to figure that out but also get them what they need to support council so they can make a choice if they have to yeah fair enough and maybe chris could do a little follow-up on it and all right see clarification so no motion needed to table it for now no okay thank you

So this is the item you talked about last time, Chris, the review of the site plan review process?

Right. Just to refresh your memory, for normal site plan review that doesn't involve special land use or rezoning, in Franklin it goes to the Planning Commission first. Planning Commission has to hold a public hearing. Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the Village Council, and the Village Council has the authority to make the final decision. Let's see. The ordinance does not contain any special provisions for review of an amendment of approved site plans. So no matter how minor an amendment is to a site plan, And to give the example of last month with the ice cream shop, technically, according to the ordinance, that should have gone to the planning commission, the planning commission should have had a public hearing, and it should have gone to council, if you look at the ordinance. I think it's necessary to have provisions in the ordinance to streamline that process, to allow amendments to go through an accelerated process. And I think it's also worth considering whether the whole site plan review process should be overhauled to streamline it. I looked at, I think about eight other communities again, probably the same ones that I did before. And none of them require a public hearing related to just a normal site plan review. So Franklin stands out there as the only one that requires public hearing. And I think there were only two out of eight, if I recall properly, that the plan commission makes recommendation to the chief governing body. of the township board or the city council. In all the other cases, the decision rests with the planning commission on a normal site plan review. Now that's different, of course, with special land use or rezoning. Those always require public hearing and generally go to the chief elected officials. So to make a long story short, On page three of my letter, I present four alternatives. You can leave the process the way it is, which I think, in my opinion, is burdening applicants beyond what they should be burdened in the review process. You can amend the process to eliminate the public hearing requirement at site plan review. um the site plan review process can be amended to remove the village council from the process and maybe trustee sally can give an opinion on that or the site plan review process could be amended to to have an accelerated process for review of amended site plans. And that would involve perhaps just planning commission review instead of village council review if the village council's still involved. Administrative review by the city planner building official or some other city official. or maybe even a site plan review committee consisting of like three planning commissioners to review an amended site plan. So those are four options. And all of these options have been used in other communities. So it's not like we're reinventing the wheel here. It works in other communities, so.

Now, are all these plan reviews specifically for residential or would that include stuff like on Franklin Main Street here where they would still have to go through council because those are businesses because it's on its own?

No, it involves all types of site plans.

Okay, so it's all site plans without council. David, go ahead.

yeah um i can only speak for myself and not for all of council i personally want to see an accelerated process as much as possible not only are we encumbering more than other communities based off of what you said i think we're also a little bit unique as a community that we only meet once a month so that also becomes another significant barrier for people seeking a site review in the sense that they could be waiting multiple months just out of how we administrate and so I personally support that I think one thing that we would want to look to is if Council were not to review what an appeals process would look like so I'm less concerned about approvals and maybe more concerned about if somebody were to denied a site whether or not there's an appeal in the involvement of counsel then but defer to all of you. I definitely agree that we need to be, we need to streamline it.

All right. Yeah.

I think that's a great idea. I think that's like, we make provisions for, for an appeal process and then take it in front of the council.

Yeah. Only kind of when needed.

Yeah. That makes a lot of sense.

I think we did that with the solar panels where we kind of, yeah.

And I think having, um, the public hearings how you know we could probably go back and look at the public hearings and the number of how many hundreds of people have come public yeah i mean that's it's a huge waste of time well it's not just essentially the funds it's waste of the month because we have to do the public here we have to wait about here delays it another month yeah um i agree to get i wouldn't i would not mind removing the public hearings process

Anybody else? Go ahead.

No, I think we can remove the public hearing. I would say maybe even we go to this kind of remove the village council unless it's appeal needed and even accelerate a review for some of these non-easy 4B or 4C.

Sarah, any thoughts on that?

I I really like 4B. I think these are clearly very professional people we have entrusted in their roles. Unless it's something that I feel like they have such knowledge. Oh, it's raining.

It's been pouring.

I think that's a great way to do that. And I, I also agree with Chris is like going through everything and looking at how this just in terms of how we know that our master plan does so much about like economic development and stability, but yet our ordinances are actively working against that. And so you bringing it to attention, I think it, this is just one of many things i think we can look at us through that lens um because i think there are ways to streamline things significantly and also trust the people we've entrusted to do their jobs like to do that again with the part of the measure plan i do also like b as well um but my only concern is the planner the building official and the city official not be

That's just for amendments, right?

Just for amendments. Correct.

Yeah.

Oh, it's just for, oh.

Yes.

It's just for what?

The amendments.

An amendment, right. Then, yeah, never mind. We're good. But, I mean, you, it's a good.

I was going to, what I was going to finish saying, if it wasn't just for amendments, was. Like, I don't want a plan to come in to be approved by a committee of three people that may forget that with the master plan that you have to have a certain building materials and aesthetic to the property to maintain the image of the village. I think we only have like two or three buildings in the village that I'm aware of that made it through that process without getting caught. Having a more modern as opposed to a more personal one.

That's why I think the building official is even more the person. It's the person who knows.

I guess, what is our role as a planning commission? It talks about

you know, these other municipalities try to keep the politics out of it, but you still also have to represent the people of the village in some way. So to me, it brings up the question of, you know, what is at stake in the amendment? And I'm not quite sure how you would go about differentiating these amendments that have very little impact versus something that we think the village should have some say in. What are your thoughts on that, Chris? I guess an amendment could be something like totally invisible or it could be something significant.

Why don't I put together some language? Because there's a lot of examples that I can pull from. And I've got a flavor for what you're looking for now. Why don't I come back next month with some sample language that you can critique?

All right. Because, yeah, I think... Sarah, we want to support our businesses. We don't want people having to wait long periods of time. But at the same time, if there's stuff we should be doing, then we want to maybe separate some things out of it.

Or maybe to your point, and I see where you're coming from on that, maybe It could also be like a hey, if they don't feel comfortable making this choice, like if we say the amendment, obviously they don't feel like

They can't come to a consensus.

They can't come to a consensus. Maybe then it comes to us. I feel like that is also appropriate. That's a good point.

I like that.

Because then we can have the public comment section. There can be voice. So I think that's a good solution to that problem.

Are amendments ever require letters be sent out to neighboring people?

Mm-hmm. Offer an amendment to a site plan?

Yeah.

Not usually, no. I've got thoughts on, you know, when you're appointed to do a job and make decisions. Some ordinances, they call for stuff like that where you seek decision making by neighbors. And I think that's the wrong way to go. the wrong way to go.

I absolutely see it, but it's making sure that you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater kind of thing. Because I agree that I'm all for it. As a builder and someone who does this, you hate these long, drawn-out processes. You want to streamline them as much as possible. okay so we will await your thoughts on that and revisit that next month so um all right here we are on our fences and um why don't we um give it some discussion i guess another thing that probably got added a little later but um So in my mind, I guess I would, it's mainly driven by these new fangled fall courts, I guess, and You know, what would we have to do to allow this kind of thing in our ordinance without rewriting the whole ordinance? I would hope, I would think we could do it with a fairly small, you know, amendment or addition. Does anybody have especially strong thoughts? Paul?

Yes. So Trustee Siler brought up a very good point This is more of a sports structure than it is a fencing issue in my opinion, so I feel like dealing and rewriting the fencing ordinance with this. It's not a, because I don't consider this a fence at all, because it's an enclosed structure from specific purpose.

No, but it is, just like, that's the issue.

But they're using it as a wall, not a fence, because they're hitting the ball off the wall.

No, it's an enclosure.

It's an enclosure, but it's not a fence. So I think it should be a different order.

What's addressed in fencing is height, opacity, allowable materials. And so those are the three things we have to, glass is not one of them.

Correct. It can't be one.

So it would have to be amended. to add it, but it's also the height, because the height required for this is greater than the current height restrictions that we have for tennis courts.

Which is why I don't believe it's a fence. It's a structure building for a purpose. A fence is for an enclosure to keep things in, and they're actively using, that'd be like me taking a 15-foot wooden fence and bouncing the wall off it for a sport, but this is glass, so it's okay. no this i don't think it's it's not all glass either it's got another material this is this is a square that is set in a specific ordinance for a specific purpose not to keep things in other than a ball it's the same vein as a tennis court which is dealt with yeah which is that which is a sports structure but that means do we have a copy of the ordinance But then wouldn't we want to reclassify the tennis courts as a sporting enclosure?

That's fine if we want to call it a sporting enclosure, but I mean for purpose of... Actually, I'm sorry.

It does say tennis court enclosure in the ordinance. Okay.

But it's still part of the ordinance, so we have to deal with it in that ordinance and You know, according to the building department, the denial was, I mean, I've got that. Private tennis court may include, here, I've got the ordinance. Denial per the Village of Franklin zoning ordinance. Tennis court enclosures. A private tennis court located on a residential lot may include a chain link fence enclosing each end of the court and extending toward the net no further than the midpoint between the baseline and service line. The chain link fence may have a maximum height of 12 feet and the opacity of such fence shall not exceed 50%. Further section 1268.28 before height is used in this section the height of a fence is measured from the surrounding surface and not from any structure or localized raised surface on which the fence is situated. Further, the fence area above is requested to be glass for use as part of the pedal ball function. The fence request is for a pedal ball court, which has been administratively interpreted as being the same as a tennis court or sports court.

Okay, so I'll concede to that point. I'll say, okay, let's consider it a tennis court. glass in under residential property has more that's just glass and not a fence has other issues besides just being completely see-through it can it be seen can anything they have they can't be seen from the road right this wouldn't have been okay the fact that it like Again, going back to the master plan about natural preservation on properties and making things coincide, wouldn't this fall into that of a violation being it is a modern looking structure in the middle of the yard?

No. We don't base anything on things being modern looking or not modern looking unless it's something in the historic district. No.

It's in the master plan. Plenty of them. Not even just in the historic district. You have to have a uniform look throughout the entire village.

How big are they?

I've got information on that. They're 32 feet 10 inches by 65 feet 7 inches typically. How tall? 13 feet. 13 feet.

And right now, we only allow up to 12.

Now, they were actually... Plus something on top of it? Plus something over there? No, that's the tall height.

And in this particular case, they were going to sink it down a foot to bring it to the 12-foot height. But still, because of the materials, it wasn't allowed. You know, you're still dealing with... the permeable surfaces versus the impermeable surfaces. And you're only allowed, according to zoning, to have a certain percentage of your property covered by impermeable services. Now, this didn't pertain in this case, because this is a huge lot. This wasn't going to make a difference with that. But I think, and this was something, I think it was David Goldberg, when I talked about that. simply what we've got is really dated and it needs to be reviewed.

Should we have Chris look at what other townships are doing for fences? Yeah, that's a good one. I don't know if, oh, you guys did that?

Is it sweeping the nation? How popular is this?

I'm just thinking some animal's going to run into that thing, shatter the glass all over, it's going to be all over the yard.

It's not that kind of glass.

I can tell you I work with a couple of lake communities and glass fences are very popular. They put them around swimming pools and they put them on decks because they don't want to lose their view of the lake. Sure.

They're very expensive.

They're very expensive, yes. I looked at it for our house and they were not cheap.

so i looked at this after the council meeting and i actually saw many places all over the world that are actually like outlawing these because of the wildlife issues oh really yeah so spain um and i think was it norway um a couple just because of um the birds yeah the birds were my big concern also um i get worried about sunshine, glass, glare, all the, it does, like, if it's, well, not even that, like, it just presents a unique hazard that's gonna be very hard to understand or write, like, unless I'm not looking at it, and I think it's very specific to the yard it's in and all of that.

Certainly from the rendering. You know, there's really two glass walls and a portion of the other, and then the rest of it is other material. And, yeah, like a fencing material. And the glass appears to be tinted. And it's broken up between, I don't know what you call the pieces that actually join.

Oh, the framing.

well whatever whatever these are so you know millions yeah we i i think it's important that we review this i you know we are an upscale and progressive community and the last thing that we want to do is turn people off and have some really old. But I think what you're talking about, it may be in the master plan, but there are certainly plenty of contemporary modern homes that are constructed of all kinds of material. And we have no say over building that.

I fully understand that. That I understand. The... It's, I guess, I will say, it's wildlife. Thank you, Sarah, for bringing up the birds. I was thinking deer running into it as well, but birds is 100% accurate. But with being tented, that's fine. I understand. But when I look at this entire thing, I have PTSD from the golf cart conversation again.

I don't, I mean.

Yeah, that's what I'm, that's where I am.

Yeah, like some radical change, right? That's fair, it's fair. And I think it's all something that we can.

If that's an necessity where we're going, then okay.

But it's no different than if you had a tennis court. All right.

I mean, unless anyone has an objection, I think maybe, Chris, this would be another one where we could do a little research, find out where in the ordinance that we would want to address it.

If there's any possible way, because I am by no means an expert in sports construction. not something i went to school for um to have one of these interested parties like have someone who has more knowledge so when we are if we do go ahead and make the ordinance like we are being thoughtful of what are the things we need to even consider that i wouldn't know to consider would be like to come and educate in some capacity or give us some information that would be great because i genuinely like i'm also I think of the ice rinks that pop up. I think it's just more than just this court. I think this could easily spiral into other things. So if we're going to do it, I want to do it the right way.

What are the other things we have to consider? We don't. It's really size-wise, any idea, Chris, the difference between this and a tennis court or a basketball court, if somebody put that in?

It's smaller. Smaller than tennis.

Probably closer to basketball court. Smaller than a basketball court.

Different is not necessarily bad. It's different.

It's not different. It's not the difference that I'm being abrasive about. You're worried about glass? I'm worried about glass as a building material.

But we have glasses in our house. I got birds slamming into my windows all day.

But I consider this more of a permanent structure than a fence. Unfortunately... Because you have the foundation to put the court on.

Well, you would have to move sports courts, tennis courts, all of them, out of the ordinance and create a separate ordinance.

And I think that's better than rewriting a fence ordinance just to change a fence to glass. That way you can say you have a sports court and approved material for a sports court can't be glass. But people are using glass for fencing now.

I sold another house in Franklin that the entire...

The entire back wall is a fence.

The entire, no, but the entire patio wall.

That's a ramp. Yeah, we have a lot of greenhouses that are monthly. If you want your fence around a pool, I mean, we should allow glass.

Yeah, I mean, aesthetically, it's much better looking. I'm not disagreeing. Yeah, somebody might fly into it. On the other hand, we've got fences where deer are impaling themselves. I just want to be educated.

I just want to know that we're doing it the right way.

That's all I'm asking. Is this like a one-time thing that is going to fade away and never be a thing again, I guess? If it is, I mean, it's still a little bit of ink we can include it.

It's pretty popular. It's becoming very, very popular.

It's crazy. What's the paddle? What's the other one?

Pickleball? Pickleball.

Pickleball, yeah.

Yeah, I'm only playing about 18 hours a week.

That seems to be here to stay. Yeah, yeah. So, all right, let's plan to go into this at our next meeting. Okay. Anybody have anything else they need to say?

Do we need to make, do we need to do a vote to change the next meeting since it's on here as an agenda item?

We did do it, yeah. So, yeah, I guess we'll be planning on it being August 18th unless we hear otherwise in the meantime. And I think with that, we can get a motion to adjourn.

Motion to adjourn. Every time.

You need a second? Somebody? Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. All right. Very good.

Good job.