Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Present tonight are Chairperson Young, Vice Chair Carroll, Fosdick absent, Mayor Morrow.

Aye.

Council Member Gierbaugh?

Here.

And Commission Member Laforte? Here. Staff present tonight are Community Development Director Atkin and Reporting Secretary Katnick. Is there a motion on the table to approve the agenda as distributed unless there are amendments?

Second.

All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Is there a, wait, I said agenda 1st, right? Yep. Okay. I'm sorry. Just having a night. Um, is there a motion on the table to approve the meeting minutes of August 12th, 2026 as submitted so moved as submitted Madam chair. All those in favor aye. All those opposed motion passes public comment under the open meetings act. Any citizen may come forward at this time and make comments. The person is requested, but not required to state their name and address for the record comments will be limited to 3 minutes per person. Seeing no comments from the audience, unfinished business tonight, we have none. So we'll start with the public hearings. Number 26-06, application from Hannah Smith, Huron Valley Volleyball Club for a special land use amendment to hold weekend volleyball tournaments at 815 Woodland Drive East. Parcel number 18-12-31-205-018. In our packet, we had a memo dated September 2nd, 2026 from Community Development Director Atkin.

I'll let you start. Sorry, no worries. So, yeah, this is the hearing. Bailey's been using the facility up there for a little over 20 years. And when we got the new fire marshal this year, they were checking on certificates of occupancy. And when they went in there, excuse me, they, they were against, uh, there's some fire code violations and building code violations. Now, when they got the original, um, special land use. Put it in there 2010. I can't remember 2011 or so 2010 sorry. Yeah. Um. And it was not part of it done. It was under a different person, and there were some requirements, conditions that needed to be met. And for whatever reason, they weren't followed up on. So earlier this year, they had to vacate the property, all the practices elsewhere.

And in the meantime, they got an architect and

CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY NOT TOO LONG AGO, AND NOW THEY'RE LOOKING TO AMEND THE OLD SITE PLAN, EXCUSE ME, SPECIAL LAND USE TO NOW ALLOW TOURNAMENTS ON THE WEEKENDS. SHE AND I HAVE GONE BACK AND FORTH FOR A WHILE, BUT WE'RE THE BEST POSSIBLE WAY TO DO THIS. WHAT COULD WORK, WHAT WOULDN'T. OBVIOUSLY, THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH ONSET with the neighboring property to the immediate coordinate that with DPW or find out who can do that. And then also put up some temporary signs on event day on the from the property. I have no City Council for the approval with the condition.

Thank you. Looking at page 5 of 6 of your memo, there is the crosswalk as you recommend it. Are there curb ramps in that area?

Going on to Woodland?

Would you Would you make curb ramps a requirement as part of a crosswalk? Is there any need for that? And the only reason I ask is because if you asked for attorney recommendation.

I didn't consider that because the ADA parking is on the other side.

We ran into a problem with the crosswalk on Woodland down near the Methodist Church, which wasn't at a Yeah, it's in the middle of the roadway and everything, how that was set up. I just want to make sure we don't create the same problem we had down there in this type of situation too.

Yeah, my consideration was that these are going to be on the weekends. Woodland on that, woodland east isn't going to be as heavily traveled as what west is because that's going to be more of a cut through, pass through. It's far enough away from the intersection and from the curb where there's enough line of sight for any traffic that's oncoming.

I would think that we'd want to have would require a ramp as your state stating on the. Would be the South side of woodland in order to make sure that you can come up on the curve. If there's a handicap.

Individual, I don't know if there's one that's existing.

I doubt it because that's right across from a curb cut.

Can I just ask a quick question about the there's 2 parking agreements in the record and 1 of them is already for, like, 82 parking. I'm assuming that's on the same side.

So that was the original and they were going to have parking on the West side of the. Billing to the West, but there was no access sidewalk that goes from 1 property to the other. So the agreement. I TALKED TO YOU ABOUT THIS LAST WEEK. IT IS ONLY FOR THE EIGHT PARKING SPACES ON THE EAST SIDE OF THAT BUILDING. ON THE EAST SIDE OF THAT BUILDING. OKAY. SO IN THERE SHE SUBMITTED, I BELIEVE I CONNECTED IT THERE.

SO YEAH, THE PARKING THAT YOU SEE HERE, THESE EIGHT SPACES ARE PART OF THAT FIRST PARKING AGREEMENT BECAUSE THE OTHER STUFF IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BUILDING AND YOU CAN'T GET THROUGH BECAUSE THERE'S NO SIDEWALK.

On the property, this was all 1 or so some time ago, prior to almost in 2007, it was split. That's why this property lines here.

I know that, like, the regulation is like 1. Parking spot for every 4 seats. Okay, so, and is there, like, I mean, okay. So, and that and obviously that is that's covered by the 56 that she has and that's inclusive of the 8 of the. 56 that the property has is that inclusive of the 8 that's on the same side.

Okay. That is all. The way I broke that out, I'm just trying to.

No, that's fine. I just double checking.

Yeah, 56 spaces.

Will the spaces that are at the bowling alley be delineated for this just because, you know, they're allowing 25, but just making sure that they're, I don't know, taped off, signed, anything like that? I don't know. They didn't express any need to do that. Okay. I think they have plenty of parking. I just didn't know if they were okay with it being straight in the front. Frankly, we've never needed overflow parking, so I doubt we would be able to do that, to be honest. Excellent. Thank you.

So, that's all.

And the use of the 25 spaces won't impact the requirements for the bowling alley their minimums. Okay.

Additional questions for community development director again.

Madam chair and move to acknowledge receipt of his memo dated September the 2nd.

2nd, all those in favor. Hi. All those opposed motion passes applicant comments limited to 10 minutes. If you'd like to come up here and talk, you can go to the microphone. to make sure that the green light is on, please.

I doubt we need the mic, but hopefully you can hear me. I'll keep it super short because I think the packet more than covers our application sort of say we've been practicing and slain for about 16 years now. We're very happy to be part of the community again. We're not looking to make any site changes. It's the same building, same exterior, same footprint. We feel that the proposed land use is in line with kind of the existing family oriented recreation use that is in the industrial space. And then the bowling alley we mentioned are kind of similar use cases. Um, we think that volleyball tournaments can be a great value add for local businesses. Um, tons of families travel in for these tournaments. Um, hopefully they populate, you know, local restaurants, especially on a Saturday, which is activity that, you know. It wouldn't see without volleyball tournaments as it is. Um. Yeah, we appreciate everyone's help Chris, especially. Thank you. Thank you to the city attorney for helping us work through this. Um, and hopefully you guys are willing to recommend approval to counsel. So I'm happy to answer any other questions you guys have. Thank you very much.

Any questions for the applicant?

Just 1, if we require the installation of a cement ramp for that crosswalk, are you all willing to. Cover that cost.

So, in this, we don't own the person on the South side of woodland drive, so I can't necessarily commit to that. And on our side, we do have an existing curb cut that goes into kind of a drive there.

The city would own the, I would believe the city would own the extension. So it would be the cost of putting the city right away to accommodate that. Because I'm very concerned to put a crosswalk in that is not compliant. Yes.

We would so we are a very small club. We are a nonprofit club. We would prefer that. We didn't have to pay for it, but if that's what allows us to do tournaments, then we would be willing to look at it. Okay.

Thank you.

And I will again, just mention, we have been hosting tournaments kind of against our. You know, occupancy allowance in the past, and we've never had to use overflow parking. Um, so. I don't know if that helps anything at all, but just want to mention that typically we don't get into the 202 50s. That's the maximum occupancy of our application.

So, if if I'm sorry, during the tournaments, where did the extra people park next door?

Um, I think we've always had space in our current lot. Those 52 spaces that are referenced.

Yeah, I think actually, if after those 52 people are going to park next door 1st, and then. Across the street 2nd, so I'm not even sure if we, there'll be people. Parking across the street.

That would be my assumption as well. Yeah. I mean, we plan to put up the sign that says no volleyball tournament parking, but is it enforceable? It's not our property. So it's hard to say it's currently vacant.

She's gone through the appropriate steps and got the documentation and things like that. And if they put the sign up there, no parking for volleyball. I don't know what more we can do. Um, we're not, we're not just part there anyway. Yeah, we're not approving for people to part there. It'd be. It would be an approval based on, you know, what's been submitted.

I mean, the company doesn't have a problem. What's the company doesn't have? We don't know that.

Oh, that way you had permission the 1 to the East though. She doesn't have a part of an agreement.

The 1 to the West. She has an agreement, but not the 1 to these, but that's likely where more people are likely to park.

We unfortunately, we're not able to contact the owner to the East. So I don't know how they feel about it.

Thank you very much, ma'am.

Sure. There's nothing further for the applicant. I would move to open the public hearing before in the public an opportunity to speak to this issue at 715.

2nd, all those in favor aye. All those opposed motion passes. All public comments to be heard limit of 3 minutes per person seeing no public comment. I will vote. I will move to close the public hearing at 716. All those in favor all those opposed motion passes comments questions from planning commission members.

Any additional questions after hearing the memo hearing from the applicant just for the applicants benefit and of course, mine, assuming the motion passes tonight or an amended motion passes. This will be an enumerated action item on the new business portion of our agenda on September the twenty first. Correct.

Yes, my question would be, should you make the cross work contingent on whether or not they actually use that? Um. I mean, if we should indicate that at some point in time, it gets to the point where they're actually using it and require that put in, I hate putting a crosswalk in if we don't really need to use it because you're going to have issues with people wanting to stop and.

Yeah, I mean, we do that, you know, just kind of keep an eye on it and see how many people do park over there and how much it's used. Like I said, there's 80 accessible.

I guess, for me, it would be somewhere in that we would make that a contingency that the crosswalk would only be at the request of the city. If the additional parking spaces to the South are used. Yeah, we can make that as a, at that time at that time, it would be an accessible crosswalk that we would install.

Would it be easier to make it such that, like, that the onus to figure out if it's being used or not is on the. Club and not on the city to figure out like that. It's a club recognizes that people are noticing that people are actually using those extra spaces or they get like a higher occupancy than they, you know, like a generously higher occupancy than they've been getting.

Or is it, I mean, you could do that, but generally, if it's an issue, then the city has the power to actually make it happen.

Well, right, I just was saying, like, it is a city bound to, like, monitor every volleyball tournament to figure out if it's happening or not.

That'll be a complete Saturday Sunday. It's more of us down. You know, and it's been great to work with. No, I know. I'm sure she'd tell us. Hey, we do have a lot of it's in nobody's interest to have somebody get whacked on the road.

We also see the pedestrian paths, foot traffic. Well, you'll see that. I mean, people go like water. You see, they find the shortest path. Yeah. So.

Mr. I think what we did for the town homes up on North Ann Arbor, but the left hand turn or something. Yeah, we had to keep that was obviously with more.

I would move to approve it with the conditions, although modifying the 1st condition to say map and install crosswalk. Um, upon. Direction by the, uh, you're you're.

The turn the season starting up here real soon, isn't it?

Yeah.

Yeah. So, I mean. She can check back in in a couple of months that give her. Seven to eight tournaments.

I think it was suspect. Mr. Gearbox thinking a little longer term than that. I mean, put words in your mouth, but, um, I mean, I, I, you know, I'm, I'm like, yeah.

Assuming it becomes an issue a year or two from now, five years from now.

Yeah. Just learn about it. Cause somebody gets hit. Right. Yeah. Um, yeah. It's up to you.

Dependent depending on further assessment by the city and advocate within the next 2 years.

Yeah.

I would second that. That seems reasonable to me.

So there is a motion on the table moved by your boss second by moral to Recommend to the city Saline City Council to approve with conditions the special land use amendment at 815 Woodland Drive East parcel number 18-12-31-205-018 Conditions that are mentioned our applicant provide a temporary signage directing spectators who use station 300 parking area to the cross and

No, there's an issue. Yeah. With the second one. Yeah.

Yeah. That would roll into, I think what Dean was saying.

Okay, perfect. So upon within a two year period, just monitoring the traffic and how that goes, the two conditions that are noted on the memo. Do you have the motion? You're good to go?

Yeah.

Okay.

We good? The condition that Dean said was applicant to install ADA crosswalk dependent on further assessment from city and applicant within the next two years.

Sure. That's awesome. All those in favor?

Aye.

All those opposed? Motion passes. See you here on the 25th. New Business 2626-07 application from Cambridge Real Estate LLC for phase one final site plan for commercial development at 1080 East Michigan Avenue, lot 20A, parcel number 18-12-31-480-020. In our packet, we had a memo dated September 1st, 2026 from Community Development Director Atkin and a report dated August 31st, 2026 from OHM Advisors.

MY BEST TO WORD IT. SO ONE OF THE ISSUES OR ITEMS TO ADDRESS WAS A FENCE ON TOP OF A RETAINING WALL. SO UP HERE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE WHERE THIS ROAD COMES IN, THERE'S A RETAINING WALL THERE NOW. SO THE TOP OF THE RETAINING WALL AND THE SIDEWALK ARE WITHIN A HALF INCH OF ELEVATION OF EACH OTHER ON THE Backside of the retaining wall There's a difference about four feet In between the sidewalk and the retaining walls less than two feet enough room for somebody to Trip off a bike or fall or something like that.

So recommendation is to put some sort of fence fencing up their guard just just to alleviate that

And then there's the other retaining wall if you remember from the first one there was a significant grade change This wall here runs the entire way The grade change was due to the detention detention basin the small lake that they Now running the entire length of that it's difference of two inches from the parking lot side to the other. But as you get down here to where the detention basin is due to the grade change that is going to be required for that, that also will have a retaining wall underneath. I'm not entirely sure why, but it didn't change anything.

They put a turn radius in there. OHM requested they put at least give a diagram showing what the size of the vehicle is that is in there. Traffic flow and circulation are still the same.

Depending on what tenants that get in there, they're still willing to defer Two guaranteed or three now?

We have three.

Three, okay. So that remains to be seen. I mean, if they have enough parking to occupy all four buildings. Now, one thing that was brought up yesterday, late yesterday, is there's communication or some, I don't even want to say it to be, DISCUSSING OF THIS EASEMENT DOWN HERE. NOT SURE IF THAT WILL MATERIALIZE IN THIS PHASE, THAT PASS THROUGH. IF IT DOES, GREAT. IF NOT YET, MIKE IS WILLING TO LABEL THAT AS A FUTURE DRIVE. IT STILL HAD ACCESS OFF THE EAST MICHIGAN AVE, BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS TO OFFER ANOTHER WAY FOR THE COMMERCIAL TO EXIT OVER ONTO INDUSTRIAL. THEY KIND OF HAD AN IMPASSE RIGHT NOW OF GETTING HAVE ANY IMPACT ON THE SITE ITSELF.

THEY DID GET A TRAFFIC STUDY DONE.

MIKE SENT THAT TO ME YESTERDAY. and stuff. The comments at OHM gave more clarifications and just some

I was actually just going to ask that question because there are comments that are in here about the water the utilities for water main routing whether it be a looped system or how it ties in and then the sanitary sewer routing obviously it won't affect that layout but the utilities going throughout is that something that the applicant would be willing to make changes for Well, no, just because there are comments in here, I know you said that there are clarifications from, and I believe your recommendations or your notes say that they must respond to comments applicant to provide responses to comments 9 through 17 and the report. So this is number 11 and 12 as far as the water.

I think that the way I read it was the recommendation just for easier servicing in the future, I understand. In the sanitary, that was over on the...

So in the packet, it's C5.3 and C5.2, which has a DPW sanitary layout and a DPW water main layout.

This one here is a sanitary, right?

I guess tying into that is just how will this affect any residential development of the remaining property or any development of the remaining property easements or that's an existing easement.

Okay.

Yeah, that's nothing happening here will be impacted by whatever's developing on it, including the, if you remember the original 1, they had a couple of buildings.

THE ROAD WAS BEHIND IT AND I THINK THERE WAS ONE BUILDING TO THE SOUTH WITH A STREET GOING IN BETWEEN. THAT IS AN EXISTING SANITARY EASEMENT THAT GOES THROUGH THERE. REMEMBER THIS ONE WAS ALL BETWEEN THIS ONE AND LOT 12. THEY WERE PRETTY WELL CHOPPED UP WITH MULTIPLE TYPES OF EASEMENTS, WATER, STORM MAINTENANCE, ALL UTILITIES AND ELECTRICAL. NO, THAT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY IMPACT.

And just following up on the access to the other entrance or exit. I mean, so there will be no residential connection coming up out through this commercial.

No way that it was originally planned was to try to separate commercial traffic from residential traffic.

Um.

SO NOW, WHEN THE RESIDENTIAL DOESN'T HAVE ACCESS ON TO BEACH COURT AND ON TO BEAMUS, THERE WON'T BE ANY INTERMIXING HERE.

SO EVERYTHING WILL BE GOING OUT BEAMUS OR IT WILL BE GOING OUT ON INDUSTRIAL DRIVE. CORRECT. OKAY.

THAT'S CORRECT, YEAH. THIS STILL MAY HAPPEN. LIKE I SAID, MIKE JUST FOUND OUT ABOUT IT LATE YESTERDAY. I'm not surprised that's been an issue for many years.

The only other concern, it mentions about fire suppression in the building and everything in front of the fire department. Is that any concern or issue?

I think the fire marshal wasn't aware of the square footage or something and Denny.

According to building code, since these will have restaurants, there'll be suppression systems required as a result that are needed in a kitchen or something of that nature and suppression systems and things like that.

Yeah, that all come at the building.

There's no questions to acknowledge the seat of the memo from community development director Atkins and the memo dated August 31st from.

All those in favor aye all those opposed motion passes applicant developer comments limited to 10 minutes if you'd like to come up and talk. Thank you.

Well, I want to thank you guys for taking a look at the final version of this plan. It's been a long time in the works. Chris has been a great help and getting this across the finish line. We wanted to bring a phased plan that included the residential altogether at once due to kind of some of the other developments and doing our best to take our time, plan the residential portion and Work with the property owners to the South along road to really develop the, the residential plan. We weren't able to get everything in all at once. So we're here today with the commercial portion. And as Chris mentioned, we had a little bit of a curve ball with the proposed easement. The, we are still willing to to install it, but with the permission of the adjacent property owners. We don't think it's going to impact the development one way or another. We've worked with Fishback Engineering to do our traffic impact study and have gotten the appropriate design for the Michigan Avenue entrance. And we think we adequately circulate the site. And we're excited to get it started.

Thank you. Thank you. Just 1 quick question. I'm not going to hold you to it, but I'm much like my colleagues. I'm very eager to see the, the residential component of this development come forward. When do you hope to have that submitted for review?

Um, we have, uh, depending on how this, uh, this access road, uh, kind of plays out. We have a little bit more engineering to do a little bit more tweaking, but, um, we hope very soon. We, you know. Within the next, uh, I'd say 60 days we'd have a submittal.

Great. Okay. So we could be looking at something 4th quarter this year.

As far as the preliminary submittal. Yes. Great. Okay. Very good.

Just got some information. Well, they got hung up an email, but he's working through with, uh, Washington county brownfield redevelopment and for the housing tip and things like that.

I just.

Got my hands on it late this afternoon because I was caught up and.

No big deal. And I think your acquisition of a lot formerly owned by Bank Supplies was advantageous. I think will make your subsequent portion of this project better, adjoining it directly to another single-family development, Berwick Park.

I tried to explain to them, because the housing types changed, can you give

So, uh, we're looking at a connection on to be miss road, uh, working its way north, uh, with, uh, on the, uh, former big supply. Uh, plus property, the idea behind the development is to introduce, um. one bedroom, two bedroom, and three bedroom product type to give a good mix. The one and two bedrooms would be more of a conventional apartment style. The three bedroom would be the townhouses that were originally sort of designed. That would start at road, working its way north to accommodate all of the town homes. The 1 and 2 bedroom units would then be along the southern portion of this property here. Next to the retention. Are they all rentals? This would be all. Okay.

If this road, this access, cross-access easement that you're talking about doesn't materialize, is that just going to kind of knuckle off there? Like, I'm just wondering how that little tail that's there is not going to be. How would that look? This one here? Yep.

It might change that area a little bit. Yeah, it remains to be seen. Okay, thank you.

Additional questions for the applicant?

I pulled this up so you could see the easement and how they designed around it.

So, even if, you know, in this situation where in this development doesn't occur where you have that access across there, it would be helpful to make sure that we maintain that. He's meant for any kind of potential future access to that. Yeah.

Yeah.

So, whatever we do, I think that should be dedicated for. That area or that strip of land should be dedicated for any kind of access going on the on the north side of that.

Yeah. And I think that's what the antennas should always continue to be.

So, for any time in the future, should it be requested or anything just like they did on the other side for the Oaks?

They left space there for future access. Perfect.

Well, isn't that access necessary for those 4 or 5. THREE UNIT BUILDINGS?

NOT NECESSARY. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TALK TO THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ABOUT IT BECAUSE THE ONLY ACCESS, THE CLOSEST ACCESS FROM THERE WOULD BE OFF OF BEACH COURT AND THEY'D HAVE TO LOOP ALL THE WAY AROUND AND THERE'S A DISTANCE, YOU KNOW, THEN THERE HAS TO BE AMPLE SPACE FOR TURNAROUND. IF IT'S CALLED A SACK OR EVEN IF THEY PUT A T IN BACK THERE JUST SO THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO TURNAROUND.

Could there be an emergency one put straight down from the commercial property to that residential? Because it doesn't look like there's anything there.

There's a building here.

No, I'm sorry. Up farther, Chris. Right where the drive, the two-way arrows are right there, just before the retention point. Yeah. Some type of an emergency type situation. Oh. Not necessarily that would be paid, but that would be allowed for that because I know we've done that for like Brecken and whatever. Yeah, I mean, solve that issue of being able to get emergency vehicles to that if that doesn't suffice.

I mean, it's reasonable, I think.

Is an option to just something to consider if we don't get that road in there. So, yeah. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Madam chair, I would move at 738 to open the public hearing, affording the public an opportunity to speak to this proposal.

2nd, all those in favor. All those opposed. Oh, she passes all public comments to be heard. Limit of 3 minutes per person.

No, 1 in the audience or any other response. I moved to close.

2nd, all those in favor all those opposed motion passes comments questions from planning commission members.

So, a couple of questions and 1, 1 was on page 2, where it says normally more detailed. So, investigations are conducted prior to construction. Is that just like, not relevant to this. So, yeah, it's not at this point because the eagle is going to, they're going to have to get an eagle.

That would be for the water.

Um, no other 2 questions I have 1 is, uh, on the thing on the on the proposal to accept. By responding to, like, 9 through 17, I'm wondering if I get, I mean, I just think responding kind of feels very vague. It's like, just, you know, in terms of, like, are any of these things things that they just actually have to do rather than just respond.

THERE WAS A COMMENT IN THERE RELATED TO THE DETENTION BASIN AND A 20% PENALTY. I BELIEVE THE P.A. IS WORKING ON THAT NOW. AND THAT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE ANYTHING OTHER THAN THEY HAD TO CHANGE THE VOLUME.

WHY IS THE CITY DIFFERENT THAN THE COUNTY ON THAT?

THAT WAS NEWS TO ME. I DON'T KNOW. I HAVE NO IDEA. I THOUGHT EVERYTHING FELL TO WASHINGTON COUNTY.

Yeah, because they took over our stuff a long time ago, so I was thinking that was kind of odd.

That was a surprise to me, too. I don't know.

Could it just be, like, comply with 9 through 17 rather than responding?

I'm sorry.

I know that's kind of picky, but... Yeah, I mean, there's some things in there.

Sanitary where they're looking for an actual response. Yeah, and things like that. And, uh. You know, once they meet engineering satisfaction, ours back for signature.

Okay. And then the last thing is that the last the 5 on the last page, that construction plan review. That's also not something that happens right now.

Okay. All right.

Have you heard anything back from him that yet? Or hasn't that been submitted yet for their understanding?

You still, uh, from him dot, um, I can't remember his name. He was then a communicator.

Yes. Yes. Modern.

Yeah, they're, um, working through the design with.

They haven't made any comments or opinions on the access. From our concern is the amount of traffic and everything going in and out of there of course with the other curb cuts so close to that Found no issue or concerns But they didn't warrant any concern or any issue at this time from that Just the acceleration lane as you mentioned

Question Chris. The land slopes from Michigan Avenue down to Bemis. Did you look at all about the possibility of putting a trench in so all the water sloped or ran down to Bemis and it could be pumped up to the watershed on the other side of the area?

That's why we have the tension basins.

So, I didn't look into it because they are putting that detention base and then water feature as well.

So, they wanted to keep a lot of that on site. So, that's that I got into that. Well, if we could direct to the water, I mean, eliminate some of the detention base and requirement. Yes, you would have to get ego involved. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. But, you know.

The requirements have gotten significantly stringent. Haven't they?

Yeah, I don't know. It sounds like you want some of the, there's an aesthetic value to that. Detention that probably has benefit to your development.

Correct? So when you get to the yeah.

Sorry about that. You're good. Yeah.

Sorry. The detention basin on the plan is designed to remain wet. So we are looking to use that as an aesthetic feature for the residential around it. And you'll see in the next proposed phase, you'll see a walking path that's going to be extending around it and down to Bemis Road. So it is designed to remain wet. And there are two other proposed detention ponds that will be required because it's such a long run from Michigan Avenue to Bemis. So There are going to be 2 other ones that are proposed in the phase 2.

Okay, this is for the only other question I haven't said, does it make sense for us to add a condition here about the. Peace in here that's just not currently in here.

Yeah, I think I, I think that was 1 of the.

Number 4 is permit for our right away work, but it doesn't indicate what the actual impact you could enumerate.

I'm done on that. Yeah. Yeah.

Wouldn't be problematic change because I, we had similar.

So, the final, the conditions that are here, there's numbers 1 through a. Enumerated the number 8 says, if the applicant fulfills items 1 through 7 above, I think that number 8 should be implementing. Recommendations from traffic impact or from fish back traffic impact study.

And then number 8 would become number 9 and says items 1 through 8 are fulfilled and I would just say adjusting to to providing responses or any requested materials to comments. That sort of covers both. Providing responses or or any requested materials.

Good with that. Are you good? Yeah. Okay. Is there a motion on the table to approve not approve or approve with conditions to approve it with conditions? All those in favor aye. All those opposed motion passes. Thank you discussion items tonight. The downtown gathering space.

Nothing to do with this point. There will be a presentation or a revised plan and a public presentation at a work meeting this coming Monday the 14th beginning at 6 PM. So you're welcome to attend or tune in and then a subsequent proposal will be presented for your consideration.

Is there an extension of the MEDC grant? I know we've talked about that before.

Sounds like the petitioner has been working cooperatively with and they'll allow for some extended time to execute the project.

Number 2, zoning ordinance amendments. It's been a busy month.

Passed with some other duties, so I had to prioritize some things understandable.

Fair enough.

Any additional discussion items for zoning ordinance amendments? We want to try to get consensus on that. Maybe at our October meeting.

Um, yeah, we can try. Okay. And I'm also going to bring for review. Data center ordinance. Oh, yeah.

Thank you. She's gonna say about a moratorium and then the data center update.

Yeah. When I spoke with, uh. The city attorney, I think it was last week or two weeks ago, I don't recall, talked about the moratorium coming up and he said, you know, if it comes down to needing an extension or extending the moratorium, if we can show that we've been going through the process, because I think the last time I talked about this, I don't know if I talked to planning commission about it, I would say it's probably about 85% done and just kind of hit a stone wall because most of the THAT ARE OUT THERE NOW FOR DATA CENTERS ARE FOR TOWNSHIPS. SO THERE'S SOME OTHER THINGS IN THERE THAT I'M TRYING TO FIND AND COME UP WITH, YOU KNOW, SETBACKS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, SOUNDPROOFING, TRAFFIC.

We've mentioned this before, and shame on me because I should have sent this message last week. I'll try to copy you in on an email to Trish Riley, my counterpart in Pittsfield Township. Pittsfield's a little different. Obviously, they are a township, but they're a full-service township. And they actually engaged Foster Swift, so separate from their standard legal team, to draft the necessary ordinances. And Supervisor Riley, I believe they're at the point of adoption now. She said we'd be happy to share. any and all of the material that we compiled to draft our corresponding ordinances.

Tony Chubb had some example ordinances, too, that he was going to share with us.

Was that adopted in January or February of this year? January. Okay. So we still got a little bit of time.

Yeah.

I would not be adverse if we wanted to do another 90-day extension or 120-day extension.

Yeah. It's pretty cut and dry. Okay. acreage, height.

Water usage.

There is some language in there about they have to provide studies for water and sanitary volumes. Sound. Yep, different types of dampering systems. And this, I defined it DATA CENTER, BUT IN DATA CENTER TO INCLUDE, AND I PRETTY MUCH LISTED EVERYTHING I COULD FIND IN THERE. ANYTHING THAT'S RELATED TO IT, BE IT ACCESSORY BUILDING OR utility or anything like that. So it's pretty much a catch-all to date. I mean, it could change next week. Who knows with these things. But I think it's pretty, right now, pretty comprehensive. It's just getting it across the finish line. I think a lot of it came down to buffers, I believe, which obviously in township, buffers are going to be A lot more more room to work with and what we have.

Right.

So awesome.

I'm going to forward to you today. Chris was talking about the FCC is trying to address something related to how cities manage telecommunication infrastructure and public right of ways wire lines and all that and how that may impact us.

So, yeah, I haven't had a chance to read through it. I did get the email for that earlier this morning from. ACTUALLY FROM MML REGARDING THAT, BUT I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO DIG THROUGH IT.

DO WE HAVE ANYTHING MORE JUST LASTLY ON THE CAR WASH, ADVANTAGE CAR WASH? SOMEBODY MIGHT.

NOT YET.

OKAY. I believe that is received a full request behind track through supply.

With all due respect, we've been down that you recall from when you were a planet, we've been down the road of this is going to sell and let's extend the site plan numerous times. So, yeah, I'd love to see it sold, but I'm always. Dubious. Madam Chair, if there's nothing further to be brought before the Planning Commission this evening, I would move to excuse the absence of our colleague and friend, Scott Fosdick.

All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Is there a motion to adjourn at 7.52? So moved. Second. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Have a great night.