Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay. Okay. We'll call this meeting to order. This is the regular meeting of the Garden City Planning Commission. It's Thursday, November 13, 2025 at uh 6:32 p.m. Our first order of business is the pledge of allegiance to the flag. Everyone rise. 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.

Thank you. be seated. Okay, we need approval of the agenda. Can have a motion. Could we do a roll call? Oh, we can do that, too. Thank you. Chairperson May here. Commissioner Steamberg here. Commissioner Walls has asked to be excused. Commissioner King here. Commissioner Williams here. Commissioner Bosi has asked to be excused. and Commissioner Daniels here. You do have a quorum with five members present. Thank you. Now we'll entertain a motion to approve the agenda.

I'll make a motion to approve tonight's agenda for Thursday, November 13, 2025 as presented. Support. Motion's made and supported. Any questions or comments on the motion? Take the role, please. Yes. Commissioner Williams. Hi, Commissioner King. I, Commissioner Daniels. I, Commissioner Steamberg. I, Chairperson, May, I. Motion does pass. Uh, next, approval of the minutes from the regular meeting of August 14th, 2025. I'll make a motion to approve the meeting minutes from the regular meeting on August 14th, 2025. Support.

Motion's made and supported. Any comments or questions on the motion? Hearing none, would you take the role, please? Yes. Commissioner King, I. Chair Commissioner Williams, I. Commissioner Daniels, I. Commissioner Steenberg, I. Chairperson May, I. The motion does carry with five.

Uh, next item is public comment on non-aggenda items only. If there's anyone here who wishes to speak on a non-aggenda item, this is your opportunity to come forward and do so. This is non-aggenda items only. Okay. Seeing no one, we'll move on to our business items. First item, CPZ25-00007. This is a request for a special land use and site plan approval to establish an agricultural production use on two vacant lots on the east side of Garden Avenue south of Henipin Avenue in the R1 one family residential zoning district. Would you get us started off?

Yes. Uh good evening uh ch commissioners. Uh tonight we're considering a site that's in the R1 uh one family residential zoning district. Uh this site is located on the east side of Garden Garden Avenue um and uh south of Henipin but also north of Marquette. And it's actually comprised of two lots uh which combined are 135 ft in width along Garden and then 110 ft in depth off of garden. So, it's for a total of approximately 14,850 square feet. Um, the applicant is proposing to operate an organic and medical uh herbal farm on these vacant lots within the R1 district. The zoning ordinance does indicate that the use of a parcel for gardening or the production of agricultural products uh is a use that requires special land use review and approval uh for for the operation to continue. So as a special land use uh we look at uh the gener the general requirements for approval in addition to any specific requirements for that particular type of use. Uh the zoning ordinance does not have any specific requirements for agricultural or gardening uses. So we just have to look at the the u the general requirements for any type of special land use. And the most important of those are one of the the first one listed I should say is compatibility. its compatibility with adjacent uses. Um so this site as noted is zoned R1 uh single family. It's surrounded by single family. Um and it's also uh and also used on all the adjacent lots in the area as for single family residential homes. Um so um I I feel the question with regards to

compatibility does come down to um whether uh this proposed method proposed use in this location and on this size of a lot is capable of being compatible with uh the adjacent uh single family homes. Um now the applicant has has indicated that they they would be utilizing it for organic farming and uh for medicinal and herbs and as proposed the those um those items do seem modest in nature. uh one one aspect with regards to agricultural uses and farming I would stress that if any approval were to be granted or considered to specify exactly what is or isn't allowed on the site mainly because allowing a broad agricultural use on the site could open it up to any other type of agriculture use even to eventually some type of uh some animal uh husbandry or you know keeping of animals on the site if it wasn't specified. Now the applicant has specified what they're going to what they would like to do. Um so that's important. Um the information before you he the applicant has has has provided you a plot plan showing the location of the uh areas that are going to be designated for the actual growing of the product and then a separate area for the for equipment. Um no further detail has been provided as of yet with regards to the method of storage for the equipment. um and and how the uh the organic nature of their farming would necessarily um result in the final product. And I'll be honest, I I'm unfamiliar with the final uh product and and and its uh appearance and its uh size and scale on the site. You know, would appear that it would be small and small in nature like you know, small plantings. I don't believe they grow to

a large size. So, it's not like they're going to be extensive in nature, but um but the potential is there. So, in the end, compatibility, I think, comes down to how it would be operated and whether uh the size and scale of it is appropriate for um given the amount of uh residences that are in the immediate area. Um my letter and my review letter and comments in front of you are based the based on the notion on the uh premise that the the there is the potential for this to be incompatible with adjacent uses if it was operated in such a way that was very large in scale have a high high level of activities I mean to a certain degree at certain times. I mean there obviously has to be the time for the for the plants to grow and that and that the crops to grow I should say. Um so it's really about I believe getting additional information to the spec and being very specific as to what is being grown how that will uh be in relation to the the adjacent property and to what uh extent that could be or should would be compatible with the with the adjacent residence or not. While I know there are no uh additional structures in immediate vicinity to the property lines on the east, south, and west, there is a home directly to the north. It is approximately only about 60 ft away. Um and while they're not currently occupied, the uh the the residential areas on the east and south, there's the potential for them to be utilized by by those property owners for residential purposes. Um so that's the main reason I I brought up in my review letter the idea of what type of screening would be needed if any. Um so to get into further aspects of that uh you know with regards to the master plan uh the site and all adjacent properties are designated as garden residential and the master plan

states that uh garden residential is appropriate for plan densification actually due to the available li land and the size and scale and its proximity to downtown. Um, we know this plan isn't necessarily uh something that uh the planning commission is is uh has considered to be 100% in line with the current standards. It was appropriate at the time whether we we're looking at this designation and seeing if that's appropriate to allow for densification in these areas or not. Um, so whether the proposed use is compatible with the master plan is is is something to consider. Um, and really the other aspects of compatibility are all about that. Uh, excuse me, all other categories that you're looking at with regards to special land use and whether it's appropriate is about compatibility. It's whether the use of adjacent property would be impacted by this uh proposed use. uh because the intent is to make sure that it does not interfere with the use and enjoyment of adjacent property. So whether gardening would impact that uh and as I mentioned it's all about the size and scale of the of the operation and if it was the potential to grow to a point where it could be incompatible or if it was going to be kept in a modest size and scale and kept in in a uh conditions and operations that would be compatible. Um some other notes uh just uh in conversations with the applicant in terms of public service and the need for water uh I was unaware but it's also possible for vehicles to have just a water uh delivered to the site in a in in large scale and the applicant will provide more detailed information about it. uh with regards to uh uh basically a trucks like a small small scale two axle

truck just dividing um water barrels basically and then uh with regards to impact on traffic there would be no impact in terms of uh the number the volume or the scale of the traffic. However, the uh the um the need for the vehicles to access onto the property, in my opinion, would require a curb cut in order to make sure that it's done appropriately and done as with any other residential property that will require. So in the end with regard to the special land use uh question, you know, the establishment of an agricultural production facility on a modest size lot surrounded by and in close proximity to single family homes uh would be very unique in the city at this time. U as a fully developed urban city as we are now in comparison to when we were established uh it's important to ensure compatibility uh between these adjacent uses. Uh so we would recommend any approval uh or any consideration of uh this use be be substantiated by findings of fact that support uh compatibility of this use with adjacent uh uses. And then real briefly I'll touch on site plan comments. Once again it's it's related to the operation and how it will how it will uh uh impact how those tasks will impact the adjacent property. Uh as a one uh administrative note uh they are two lots as one use. We would recommend that they just be combined into one lot. If for example this the storage of equipment is located on one lot and it's not on the other. It just probably it would be we always are requiring now that any use any aspects of a use that are split along two different lots be combined into one to ensure that they are all under common ownership. With regard to parking, I just mentioned

the idea about having a curb cut to make sure that they meet the um have the ability to a vehicle to easily and effectively access the site. Um and then uh I do have a comments regarding screening because as once again as note the size and scale of the operation could get to the point where screening would be beneficial but it's a matter of determining if it's going to get to that point if it's going to be so such extensive use that it's going to negatively impact uh property owners and thus require screening. Not negatively but impact property owners and then require screening. Uh so with regards to site plan review um we do believe that it would be necessary to address those issues prior to uh granting any approval.

So I will take any questions at the appropriate time. We have any questions sir? I do. Is there a limited amount that has to be planted on the property? Like is there is there do we have a you've got to plant threequarters of it. You could plant a 10 x10 area and it could be considered architectural or arch. Yeah.

Um no we don't. That's the thing uh with regards to agricultural uses. It's listed in this location but nowhere else. So there there are no other standards within the zoning ordinance for how much should be used or could be used. There are no standards for parking. There are no standards about to address compatibility. So [clears throat] I believe that's why it's listed as a special land use but then there's no other ordinance requirements applied. But as a special land use, planning commission does have the authority to uh uh request uh conditions of that would make sure to ensure compatibility.

So my second question is even though there's no structure proposed at this time with uh agricultural, are they allowed to have an accessory building on there without a main residence being occupied? Um, unfortunately our zoning ordinance doesn't have a specific standard uh that other ordinances tend to have uh that say um a accessory structure is only permitted when there's a principal structure on the site. Um well actually forgive me that is what we say right now that we say right now is that you must have a principal structure on the site before you can have a um accessory structure. Uh what I was trying to refer to was the fact that in other communities that are more agricultural in nature, those like rural townships, rural townships do have standards that say as long as of a principal use established. So if someone established on on a piece of property a use but not a principal structure, then they could have an accessory structure to support that other use. for this exact reason. If in a in a uh in a rural area, uh there was a large lot or there was a lot. There was just a lot, they didn't have a residence on it, but they did have a it was being used and generally it's always for agriculture. Then they're allowed to have uh accessory structures, but our ordinance doesn't speak to it. So, it's kind of in a in a it's in a loop. It's in a issue that hasn't been addressed effectively by the ordinance. So whether they would be allowed to have one, I would say if we if you I think it's something that would need to be addressed during this review. And if you did if the special land use didn't allow for the construction of an accessory use, then it probably would not be allowed uh without your approval tonight for some type of structure in the future. They

would not have one unless they came back for uh consideration. Since that's prohibited in other sections of the ordinance, would they be required to have a variance to put up an accessory structure?

It probably would take some type of interpretation by the ZBA as to how the ordinance could be applied. Yes. because um our our forgive me I I'll double check the exact wording but based on my uh recollection you would probably require some type of variance because it does explicitly state that um a principal structure is required in order to have an accessory

uh being as being as how we're doing this or reviewing this under a special land use permit. Can't we establish the parameters of that? Uh I don't think we I don't think we can uh go against what the ordinance says though. Correct. If it if it says X, we can't ignore that. Okay. So, you're still looking at it from the standpoint it would have to go to the ZBA. Yeah, it would either for an inter- interpretation or a variance, one of the two.

Now, I'm wondering being as how it appears that the nature of this is fairly small scale, would he be allowed to have a small shed of some sort or another? Well, that would be an accessory structure. even if it wasn't high enough because they make these plastic storage units that are like only four feet tall to put like a lawnmower or garbage cans in. Would that be Yeah, even even for the smaller structures while they might not require a building permit, they still do require zoning compliance and a zoning permit. So then it falls into that section where it does explicitly say um it would still be accessory in nature.

Yeah, it still be accessory to a principal structure. So, uh, yeah, I upon further consideration that that would be the approach for the applicant to take because as correct as correctly stated by chairman May, uh, your special land use approval can delve into aspects of the operation that um that you feel are warrant compatibility, but you can't grant any kind of extra approval that would go against the zoning ordinance. you have they still have to comply with all other aspects of the zoning ordinance. Things like hours of operation, you know, typically on other special land uses, we delve into hours of operation. Uh uh you know, size and scale of of parking that exceeds the standard, you know, those things that are um not in compliation of existing zoning standards. That's what that's the area in which you can have um criteria conditions of approval on the use.

I go ahead question. So, as far as like off-road parking, I know our current ordinance is like 360 square feet of paved off-road parking.

Is that something that would required here because agricultural could they able to do some other kind of gravel or something, a permeable surface, or are they required to do like the same thing as a a residence? uh since it's a zoning standard, they would be required to what is permitted, what is listed in the zoning order, which is hard surface at this time. So they would have to once again obtain a variance from that standard if they wanted to go natural in keeping with the organic nature of the use. Yeah, it's a zone it's a current zoning ordinance requirement to have paved surface for parking. Any other questions? Um,

can we hear from the Yeah, we can hear from the applicant now. I think we got one over there. I had I had a question, too. We can hear from the applicant first. Okay. Sorry. Yeah, go ahead. So, something to just bring up um given that it's in residential area, the potential odor would be something to maybe consider too to the local residents. Yes. depending on in terms of compatibility. Yeah. I mean, we do have um uh we call nuisance standards that that deal with uh odor, dust, uh um well, that's noise, I should say, noise.

And so they they could operate it as long as they're in compliance with those standards. And it's if only for anything rise to that level. And uh and honestly I can uh give you the verbiage in a second here about what it states with regards to that but it is it can tend it can become somewhat of an enforcement issue at times. Yeah. But it is [clears throat] but we do have we do have a standard on the books. I know composting there's ordinance on composting I believe. Um not in the zoning ordinance but it might be a general law one. I don't know. Could be. I'm not sure. Well, not only composting, but but manure, whatever.

Since we're looking at planting garlic, I believe garlic can be have quite an odor when it's being grown. So, onions and some other plants have a strong odor and I'm wondering what the impact on residences around that would be. But uh maybe uh the applicant can shed some light on that. Is there anything else? Yes. All right. Could you come forward and introduce yourself, sir? Huh? Would you introduce yourself? I'm the corporation.

Anyway, um address the There is no curve there. There's so there's no curve. There's no curve there. So I told him that. So I don't see what the curve cut thing is. But when I first applied uh for this application, I did it because I got a a ticket for something. I don't know. Um, and I went for the judge and he said that since I was filed for special use that that ticket would be uh left alone until you all heard uh you know to see if I get my special annuals. Well, lo and behold, um that was uh that was back with Judge Hammer June 13, June June 11th, sorry. Okay. Then, um on September 6th, I was offered half the value of my property. Then an honest complaint started again. September 10th, an informal hearing was heard. Judge Hammer did not even listen to me and uh charged me with three things, three uh violations um that officer Deich ticketed me for and uh I was under under the impression that I wasn't going to be getting harassed in tickets until y'all heard heard me out and see if I was going to get my sust. So anyway, since that happened, September [snorts] 16th, I post a $600 bond to appeal with the um Wayne court. So that's on Monday. All right. So I I wanted to be able to get the special use so I could put uh you know, a small building on there to dry my

garlic because I'm taking it to my condo right now and drying it, you know. But that's fine. I'm flat. I'm glad I'm fine with that right now. And uh people keep on stealing stuff off my property and I find beer bottles around there and everything. So I posted up signs and have surveillance cameras now. Um anyway, uh I spoke with um Michigan right to act right to farm act that was enacted in 1981 uh to protect farmers from nuisance lawsuits related to their agricultural practices. So uh the right to farm act protects farmers who follow generally accepted agricultural management practices from nuisance lawsuits. It covers various agricultural activities. Um says uh the right to farm act preempts local ordinances that conflict with its provisions particularly those attempt to regulate farming practices. uh local government cannot enforce regulations that would restrict farming operations if they comply with camps. So I had, you know, the inspector come out. There's only three of them in the whole state of Michigan. And he came out, he looked at my lot. He said, "I'm camp compliant and I can I can farm on there." you know, I told them I'm not bringing any any any manure or any artificial pesticides, you know, and I'm utilizing pretty much the whole lot now cuz I'm planting uh red clover by the fence line. And I had I just planted um a hedge of elderberries cuz I took clippings. If you plant them in the ground, you know, they'll get wishy by next year. So, those are on the south side. The center part I have garlic and then I have liies in the middle and then garlic on the other side because the deer ate all my liies last year. I've been I've been farming there for three years now

and I had any problems until people tried to buy my property. You know, they offered me half of it was worth. This guy called me up. I think it was Let me see what day was it? September 6th. Yeah. No, wait. Not not September 6th. Oh, September 14th, I received a call. I heard you're getting trouble from city hall. I'll take the property off your hands for 20,000. Our property is worth like 50. Okay. But under the right to farm, I didn't even even have to apply for the special use if I'm gam compliant. So, I'm basically thinking, why don't I just get my money back? You understand what I'm saying? And the only reason I did this is so that I could put a accessory building up there to dry my garlic out. You know, a small build. I was like maybe 10 by 10. But if you guys don't want to approve it, then I'll just get my money back cuz I'm compliant. I have a question for the applicant. Go ahead.

Sorry. So, I have a question for you. Um, on your plot you have farm tools, but I drove by your property today and you've got a boat, a trailer. The trailer has all my equipment in it so it doesn't get stolen. What about the boat? The boat I take out to go fishing. Okay. I have a boat. Well, it says farm tools. That's why I asked the question. Okay. Well, I do have a boat. And then the the other trailer. You saw my tractor out there then, right? I did.

Okay. Yeah. I just I just did all that stuff. Okay. Um because you have to plant at the end of September for garlic and lilies. So that's why I did that. Then in the spring I'm going to be harvesting the elderberry flowers because people make I have a tea lady that buys all this stuff. You know like the red clover. I I'll be har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har har harvesting that all year. I got a pound bag of seeds I'm planting in the spring and you know that's low growing but you know if I'm game compliant then I I should be able to you know do my farming. I'm not bothering anybody. I don't make a lot of noise. the guy next door to me to the east, he always comes over and visits me to ask me how I'm doing. He's a real nice guy, you know. So, I mean, if there's any questions, I mean, as far as like water coming in, I have 120 gallon tank on a trailer that if there is a drought, well, with garlic, you usually don't have to worry about cuz that's sufficient. That's why I planted that kind of stuff cuz I'm in a wheelchair and I I'm not going to be doing a bunch of high maintenance stuff and liies and garlic are low maintenance. The elderberries are self-sufficient and the um clover and violets are all self-sufficient. So, I don't really need to bring any water in, but if there is a bad draw, I'd want to do it at least for the for the liies. So, I I do have that and I can fill that up in my condo. Yes, Mike.

Um, under the uh property owner registered name, you're listed as Northwest registered agent. Who are you? And that's the agent that if in case anybody wants to assume you, they have to send it to them. It's what? It's it's it's the uh agent. Yeah. So technically he he does have an LLC and then with an LLC limited liability corporation we ask for who their registered agent is so that we know the name of the person responsible. So that's and most LLC's are that's who gets my if there's ever any issues that's who gets it. I mean I regular stuff like from here I get right to my condo.

Okay. Uh, another question. Um, I don't know the, uh, details of the Farming Act, um, because we haven't had a whole bunch of that in Garden City since 1925. But, uh, your property is zoned in R1, a residential single family residential area. So, uh, when I hear organic and natural, I'm reminded that hemlock is natural and it's also a deadly poison. So, I live next door to a farm in Southern California that grew flowers

for uh various uh people around the city. and um they used an organic fertilizer which was basically sterilized manure. Now that took care of all the biological and bacterial agents of that product to make it safe, but it sure did not reduce the odor. So, four times a year for about two to almost three weeks, uh, they would fertilize their fields and it was you could not open the window in Southern California, which

I'm not going to be fertilizing anything because that soil has not been uh touched in like freaking since the subdivision was built. I I understandable. My stuff grows right away. It's it's vacant land. I'm looking at if we approve this tonight. Uh what could happen in the future? That's what we always look at, especially with the special land use. Uh

I'm not planning on doing any big noisy production. I'm just planning on doing my garlic and millilies in the middle, my clover's to the north, my white clover and um violets on the front in front of that tree line I have there in front because they can handle the shade and elderberries on the south side. That's all I'm planning because I don't want to do a lot of work. I go out there for like an hour a day because I I can't work that long on the farm. Gotcha. you know, uh, what are the three things that you were cited for in the tickets?

Um, I was saved for Okay. offense. Uh, case number 25, GC 9140. Um, read this so small. Excess refu. Okay. Okay. And when he did his ticket, I had just pulled up my weed barrier so I could till it was behind my trailer. Nobody could see it. And that's why he gave me a ticket cuz there's a picture of it. And then the other one was [clears throat] high grass. And I explained to him that I go around with a weed whacker and I cut down anything that's high. But I And he said, "No, you have to mow." I said, "No, I can't m because I'm going to kill all the ladybugs. I'm going to kill all the praying masses and they are the are my natural predators against any bugs in my garden." You know, I have like about a dozen of them I saw last year living on on the on the farm. And then the last one was parking violation cuz he said he told me two years ago that either my trailers had to be the wheels had to be on cement or gravel. So, I got I went and got these 18 by8 cement patio blocks and put them underneath all of them because he said that he had to do that so they wouldn't sink. So, I did that to all my trucks. And then he gave me that ticket. He said, "No, you had to put it in a driveway." Like,

I'm just curious about what the name of the three tickets are. Not uh That's what they said. Okay. Says 25GC 91138 is parking violation. Okay. Parking violation. I went by your property uh today and uh a little while ago. Um there's a lot of items on the property that don't appear to be uh farming items. Uh the

two tractors are the tow is because I have that's what I move the box the box blade or the other thing with the um plow. And the enclosed trailer is where all my equipment is because I don't want any of my stuff getting stolen all the time. Sure. Sure. That's understandable. And my boat, my boat's my boat cuz I like to go out on a boat and if I own property, I should know I have a boat. Uh-huh. Okay. Um All righty. I'm good. That's it. Did you have anything else that you wanted to point out, sir? If you got any questions, that's it. I mean, I explained that I'm GA compliant and I'm getting

the letter. I talked the guy emailed me today from um Michigan Department of Agricultural and Urban Development and said that he's going to get me a PDF file before Monday so I can show it to the judge with the appeal. I'm camp compliant with the state. That means I have a right to farm. Okay. Well, we're not here representing the state. I understand. All right. If you have nothing else, then uh we'll uh discuss it. Yeah, you can uh relax for a minute and we'll move the discussion to the planning commission here.

Oh, do we have any comments or questions? So maybe a com at least the way I'm interpreting this is it's not so much about whether the property owner can I'll say farm garden whatever word you want to use it's really this is more of a zoning question right this is a this is a residential single family zoned area and the applicant is asking for an alteration to the R1 I think the the biggest issue is the possible impact on the neighbors

right I guess what I'm what I'm saying and maybe you all can check me on this. As a planning as the the a planning commission, we are not making a determination on whether somebody can plant vegetables on their property. We're being asked to decide on whether we want to make a variation to the zoning ordinance.

Correct. Well, um the way the way the the ordinance is listed is that uh principal uses within this particular zoning district within the R1 one family zoning district by right people have certain uses such and in this district the number one is establishing a single family home and as in every other zoning district we do have a list of special land uses which could be established in these districts provided they comply with the approval criteria of the zoning ordinance. Sometimes we have specific criteria for like gas stations. They have to have meet certain things and then they're allowed in those those other districts, not here. But in this case, it's specifically listed in the zoning ordinance that says uh agricultural um agricultural uh the use of a parcel for gardening or the production of agricultural products requires special land use approval. So you're basically determining if this propo this application before you meets the criteria of the zoning ordinance to allow for it to be established in this location. And and as my note summarizes, it really is about an issue of compatibility. If you feel like this would be compatible with the other uses in this location.

Yes, sir. You had your turn. So just wait. I I'm kind of curious with like what Frank was going off of. This house had a primary residence on it. We wouldn't even be discussing this. That's correct. No, they could have a garden in the backyard. They could have whatever size garden they wanted to have in the backyard, but they would still have to park their vehicles and trailers on a driveway, in the fence, behind the driveway, whatever. Just Yeah. And we wouldn't be looking at a larger scale operation which might have more of an impact on the neighbors. And if they became a nuisance, then that would be another issue. I mean, I've seen some halfacre lots with corn. So, but it's got a primary residence on it. Yeah. Exactly. Yeah.

Yeah. That is exactly correct because in those situ every other situation, the single family residence is is the principal use permitted by right in that district and then all the gardening and and even of corn and that sort of thing is accessory to that. And so that's why those are permitted in the residential. It is because there is no principal structure on this site that we're the applicant had to go this route.

Personally, I think that this could have an impact on the neighbors. I think the uh the product he's planting the the garlic could have an odor problem for the neighbors. I think uh if he does any kind of fertilizing that could have a impact on the neighbors. Uh he talking about organic and like you pointed out uh manure is organic sterilized and that can have but not odor free

quite an odor. Yeah. And there's no there's no screening either to uh screen the neighbors from whatever activities I uh I don't I'm just not sure this is compatible with the neighbors being as close as they are.

I I think you're right. If if there was a principal structure on here that abided by the R1 criteria, we wouldn't be talking about this except we're looking at a special land use. He's already been cited for three different uh items. I think what he's doing is fabulous. He's a farmer. Uh we need farmers. We need lots of them. Uh, but we're looking at a special land use in a a dense R1 area. And by the very nature of a special land use, we're looking at compatibility and compliance and adjacent property use. And that's the the items specifically that he's been cited for. and the more than likely the reason that the ordinance officer was drawn to that area is because of the existing neighbors. So I I think we have to look at this as being a great use but not in this area.

I kind of agree. Well, my only thing that I'm I'm trying to to understand here is if he had a 400 foot tiny home on that residence, he could do all this and he wouldn't even be in front of us. Unless there's no unless I've never seen anybody in the city of Garden City told to stop their garden. If you were to put if you were to live next door to this property and you used manure several times a year to augment your soil, um there's a potential for the neighbors to complain about that and that's where we're at today. That's why we're having this.

No, I I agree. I'm just saying. So, you know, even even if you had a house on it with a garage and you parked your boat in the garage or on a concrete slab, if you fertilized your garden with manure, you'd probably get a visit from the ordinance officer. And that would be that would be a valid concern. You know, if you were to do that in an R1. Now, if you're out in the country, it would be less of a concern with the houses much further spaced apart. So, he had that certain.

So, although this is a great idea and we need farmers, it's I think we have to question the compatibility all across the board. the compatibility in an R1, that compatibility of uh uh what potentially can go on the property so far as manurs, so far as uh but even if even if we approve this, let's just say for argument sake, okay, he could still get a call the ordinance officer out there if he used manure for the ogre just as I could or you could if we plant a garden in our own backyard. I don't I mean I don't see well he's already had a visit from the ordinance officer so it's already become problematic to the neighbors right which

I think that's more of

which is the compatibility part that uh I think is key here because when we look at item B it's compatibility with master plan item C compliance with regulations uh uh item D use of adjacent property Um, you know, it it just looks like it's uh violating the the nature and intent of a special use permit. And it's further enhanced by the fact that he's already been cited under these items by the ordinance officer and that the ordinance officer was drawn to that property more than likely by complaints from

surrounding. And I may be wrong, maybe I misunderstood. Sounds like he was cited for high grass, not parking on paved uh concrete pavement and I don't know the other one. That's refuge. This is compatibility, right? Which I mean if I let my grass grow high in my backyard, I can say it's or my milkweed I let it get six feet tall. Uh, I know it's great for the butterflies and butterflies uh do um I guess you know they do the same job as bees and stuff.

I guess my question is I would look at surrounding residences around there and see of them if any of them have gardens that back up to where his property's at. There's other residences there that are one have residents and they have gardens that back right up to where he's at. Then maybe it is a little compatible. are the the two houses that back up on either side, neither of them have a garden. Yes. I just want to reiterate my point. I don't know that I care about who has a garden. To me, the question is whether or not we think this is appropriate special land use in an R1. That's what's on the table. That's in my mind the decision here. Correct.

Uh [snorts] why don't we hold on to that for a minute? I kind of skipped over it because of lack of anybody here that wants to be in the public hearing, but we should open the public hearing just to say that we had it. Okay. So, it's uh 18 and uh we'll open the public hearing if anybody cares to come forward to speak on this item. Ask again, does anyone care to speak on this item? Uh, no one's coming forward. So, uh, do we have any written communications of this? There are none. There are none.

Okay. Just because I would like to see. [clears throat] So, having uh no one here and no written communications, we'll close the public hearing at uh 7:18 and go on with the uh like this picture. planning commission discussion. So gentlemen, do we uh so I I want to just bring up Yes. Um so it is called Garden City

and [laughter] so I just wanted to say I mean there are a lot of lots in this area and I and I live on a halfacre lot and I have raised garden beds and I plan on expanding that myself. Um and give out to family, give out to friends, consume for myself. Um, I think gardening is a cr you know, historically critical part of our community. Um, it's also good for, as you said, butterflies, but the environment, the bees, other neighbors who have gardens produce sunflowers or corn or whatever it is. So, it helps balance things out as, you know, Ford Road gets urbanized and as it grows, there's fewer and fewer green spots. Um, so I think having natural habitat within the community is also nice to have and especially since it's only two lots. Um, the citations he had I don't think could happen to anybody. Um, my neighbors across the street, they let their grass grow really high. I mean, it doesn't matter what kind of land use it is, it can go higher. got we have the driveways that are there's no grass anymore in the front yard too, right? So, there's people who have taken advantage of those things. But to the the future when uh this land maybe changes ownership to protect it from being abused um as recommended to try and lock it down. Um, so I think ironing out some of those details and not letting him just be open, I think this would be compatible, especially if neighbors aren't complaining and he has a good relationship with his neighbors. Um, I would like to have details on that farming act um for that in order to remain compliant and maybe those included into some of these rules for the special land use. Um, he had said he doesn't use manure. Um, maybe that's

something we could put into the SP special land use. No delivery of commercial manure or other pungent fertilizers. It would be good to know how that act impacts our zoning ordinance. Yeah. Yes.

Um, I have had experiences with uh the use of the right to farm act. uh it generally has been in rural townships and and typically what it does uh and the intent of the act is to ensure that um that a local ordinance doesn't restrict uh outright agricultural practices. uh when those practices are done under what's called gamps, these generally accepted agricultural management practices and services, the the state the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development does uh establish um what is uh the proper way to do things such as fertilizing and every and other aspects of farming to make sure that they are uh acceptable and and to make sure that they are appropriate. Um and so but uh now I'm not an attorney but in my experience as a as a urban pl as a city planner and a and a planner to rural townships because I've done that as well. Um, typically the right to farm act and and lately the m the department MDARD has has inst uh institated some de uh determinations on these uses that if they are in compliance if they are commercial farm if they are applying to g complying with the gamps of the area then they uh then they would be considered um a use that is in is consistent with the right to farm act. In my my personal experience, when they have that designation, then the intent is that it that it is a method of defense when they are brought a nuisance suit to a a court of law. So, it's not a permit, it's not a license, it's something in which a they they point out as a statement of fact in their defense when a nuisance lawsuit is brought

against them. And so, that's typically how it's been operated in the past. I haven't dealt with that in the last year or two, but in the past that's how it works. Another specific aspects of the uh the right to farm act is that that one it it's definitely it's usually applied in a community in which they're prohibiting agricultural activities. Garden City isn't prohibiting local architectural agricultural activities. We're just saying the process to to do agriculture activities on their own. You know, once again, we don't prohibit them when there's a principal single family residential structure on site, then they can do any kind of agriculture activities. We permit that and we also permit them through this process. So, we're not restricting them. We're just saying that they have to meet a certain level of criteria, which number one is compatibility. And then two, um, based on on some of my, uh, just summaries of of of the act, it does appear that the act does not give a farm a right to establish itself in a residential area where the local or zoning ordinance does uh, is is in compliance. There's some other standards with um that are specific to livestock farming and even livestock farming if they meet the specific requirements that and forgive me I don't have them in front of me but MDARD has specific designations for when when a certain number of homes is when within a certain distance uh of uh a livestock activity then that's considered predominantly residential. then they designate that area predominantly residential and from what I've known in my experience that predominant residential standard is can be found in rural townships in which you're dealing with f you know 3 5 10 acre lots or more uh so if a certain number of homes and I want to say the number is eight is within a a certain

distance and unfortunately I don't know the distance then it's considered MDARD considers it predominantly residential and then therefore the the right to farm act doesn't then you can't establish a farm in that location. Uh so but I will say that you know I'm not a I'm not an attorney. I don't know the the act uh that thoroughly. Um and I do I don't know um the those other specifics as to what is an actual commercial farm like what qualifies as a commercial farm is not and such but it's a very complex issue when utilizing right to farm act and I like I said I think it's and uh it's generally for those instances of when a lawsuit is brought against a person undertaking these things. So, not sure. I I believe it's a tool that the property owner has as a can avail of themselves and use if they feel they've been agrieved by a decision, but that's, you know, a different situation, I think, than

Okay, I got a question. Yes. Being it's on two lots, how is would this be any different than like an urban garden? You go into other cities, they have urban garden areas where it's small one, two lots. They tore down a home. Now they're doing this.

They and in those areas, uh, to the best of my knowledge, that it's a use that's listed either as a permitted use by right or a use that requires a special land use approval. Uh, you know, this the local community, you know, goes out goes um, reviews their zoning ordinance and then states, "Yes, we want urban gardens in this district and these areas under these locations." and either they give it by right to people or they ask them to go through a special use process. So that's why we're here once again that's why gardening city council and the planning commission in the past has determined when there's no principal structure and the principal use of the site is going to be gardening this is the process they go through.

Yes. Um, we're not here to litigate this farm act from the earlier part of the century here. Um, we have a special use uh application in front of us and although you're correct, Garden is in our name and for good reason. Um, if I have my dates correct, Garden City became a township in 1925, 100 years ago, and we became an incorporated township in uh 1927, almost a 100 years ago. We became an incorporated city in 1933, many years ago. Um, we're now a residential city. 92% of our tax base is from the 11,400 homes that exist here. Uh we're not a farming community any longer. We were a 100red years ago. We're not today. So if we look at this on the merits of a special use permit, it doesn't qualify. My my only argument is we have had proposals in front of us and we've asked more commercial buildings to put in more green spaces, put them on roofs if they could do them because we want more green spaces. But now we're going to possibly not approve a special land use because we're not taking away green space and putting a primary residence. Kind of contradictory.

Yeah. I did look up uh garlic. It can have a strong odor, but if you process it, the odor is significantly stronger. So, I think one of the if we were to try and move forward with this, restricting the processing of the goods, agricultural goods would probably I think when it's growing, it can also have an order.

It did online. It did say that it could. So, being in the center of the lot, I don't know how much the odor would drift. Um, especially surrounded by halfacre lots and the nearest home, uh, I forget what the distance you said was 16. I don't know the distance. Oh, in terms of the current one, yes, the 16. Yeah. So, I don't know how I don't know how far that would really get into a house if it was centered. But even even Yeah. I don't think we just have to look at where the how far away the house is, but people like to use their yards, too. And if there's a strong odor in the yard that prevents them from using that, that's

not right either. Uh, a number of years ago, we had u we had an issue about somebody raising bees in their backyard. Mhm. U, and we need we like honey. We need honey. That's great idea. Only problem is our neighbors couldn't use their backyards. Yeah. Um and therein lied the problem.

Even Even though let's say we take garlic off the table, wouldn't that be an ordinance issue? Even if we gave special land uses, he chose to do garlic the first year, neighbors called and complained. Wouldn't that be an ordinance issue to get him not to grow it if there was a a strong smell? no different than the

if it might be except we have a special land use on the table tonight and that's what we're debating the special land use. Does it qualify? Is this something good for not only the applicant but the surrounding areas and that goes back to the compatibility issue. I mean, sure, you can have bees in your backyard, no problem. But if your neighbors can't use their property in the normal fashion that you would use in an R1 application, then it's a problem. So, if you if you come before asking for permission to have a use that uh creates a problem for your neighbors under a special land use, then we have to say no. If you can raise your bees and it doesn't become a problem for your neighbors and it's just an ordinance thing, that's something totally different. But we're asking to codify something that is already a problem [clears throat and cough] to the neighbors. So I I agree with your your premise about the you know the green spaces and that but there's already three tickets that been written and taken in front of our local magistrate uh because of this and that's why we're talking about a special land use. So, I don't think we want to um I don't think we want to go against the ordinance officer and the complaints of the surrounding people by saying this is all fine. Well, unless somebody has something new to add to the conversation, um I think maybe we should consider a motion at this time.

I think the applicant is raising a floor. Yes. You have something else to say, sir? Yes. Um Okay. my property. The reason I'm trying to make uh lemons out of lemonade, the property is uninsurable because there's no fire hydrant on that street and there's supposed to be a fire hydrant in the street to be able to get insurance on that property. That's why I'm gardening. If the city put the uh water light in there, then I'll be all all set. I can build a house there. That's why I'm trying to make lemons up. Lemonade lemonade lemons. The property is just pretty much worthless garden. That's it. Thank you. Okay.

The motion maker does make a motion. I just want to remind you to um state the findings of fact in the motion, please. Yes. And I think we can refer to the special use recommendations.

Anyone care to make a motion? What we're looking at is a motion for a recommendation for the the council for the special land use. We're not denying or approving. We're recommending one way or the other.

I'm not to belabor just one other question. Do we are there other special land uses for this purpose in an R1 today? Do we know to the best of my knowledge? No, we don't have any.

Should we recommending uh to go to C for it to go in front of council for special interest that we doing? They would approve it. It would just be our

well they would either approve or deny it or or take our recommendation. [clears throat] Then we also have to look at the site plan see if we approve or table or deny. Well, I'll make a motion to deny. Um, and I'm I'm sorry. Uh, my concern is that with the R1, it's meant for people that are living there or primary residents. It is not meant for, uh, owners to, uh, uh, garden or farm the land. Um, so I will reference Mr. Ortega's letter um citing the purpose use is incompatible with the adjacent resident uses due to the size of the site, scale of the equipment operations and proximity to adjacent residences. That the proto the proposed use will interfere with the use of adjacent property due lack of screening and buffering distance. That the lack of information regarding the ability to provide water and or other necessary public services. Although I will acknowledge that the applicant did reference a water truck in the event it's needed. Uh number four, the resulting agricultural production use will be an isolated use within a residential neighborhood. And number five, that the lack of a demonstrated need for the proposed use.

I'll second. Okay. Motion's made and supported. Are there any comments or questions on the motion? Would the secretary take the role, please? Commissioner King. I, Commissioner Steberg, I. Commissioner Daniels, A. Commissioner Williams, A. Chairperson, May, I. Motion does pass 3 to two to deny the [clears throat] special land use. Recommendation to the council.

Okay. Uh since if you could clarify this for me since we've denied the recommendation uh should we still go through the uh site plan approval process? Um I think at this time you would table it would be the best I think table it. Do you agree Mr. Artega? That is definitely an option. Um it would it would require the applicant to come back uh should they get the approval from the city council, but it would not require any kind of special public hearing at that point. It would just be normal approval.

I think I think probably tableabling at this point would be the most appropriate action. Someone cares to make a motion. I'll make a motion to table this. The site plan. The site plane. Yes. Support. Any questions or comments on the motion? Take the role, please. Commissioner Steinberg, I. Commissioner King, I. Commissioner Daniels, I. Commissioner Williams. Hi. Chairperson May. I. Motion passes 5 to zero to take.

Okay. Your uh site or your uh special land use goes to the city council. Our recommendation is to deny, but it's up to them to decide uh finally whether or not they want to go ahead with it. And if that's true, then you would come back here to go through the site plan with us.

Thank you for your time.

[clears throat] Okay, next item. PPL25- 0012 requests for a special land use and site plan approval to construct a gas station and convenience store building with a drive-through restaurant at 31406 Ford Road in the C3 General Business Zoning District. And Mr. Ortega, want to start us off here?

Yes. Um, for you tonight, uh, is a revised site plan from the applicant. This is our third review of the special land use and the site plan. Uh so the site plan set dated October 31st, 2025 uh in brief summary has been substantially uh altered to to address the the comments from our previous discussions and review. But to specifically talk about the special land use uh issues number one um when it comes to uh compatibility with adjacent uses just to reiterate the point on page two uh that uh the applicant uh is required to have the building 40 ft away from any residentially zoned property. They have proposed the building to be 30t away from the residentially zoned property to the west. So therefore, and but they've also modified this site plan to state they would be installing a new six- foot tall masonry screening wall along that western property line. That's a modification on on their part. Um so I just wanted to point that out that as any kind of approval uh would require the applicant to obtain a variant a 10-ft variance from the zoning board of appeals. Uh and if they don't receive that variance, then they would have to come back to with a modified plan in compliance with that 40 foot setback requirement. Um and then going through, you know, in general, just a reminder that uh this site was is uh has been reszoned to C3. It is uh in the master plan uh designated general commercial and it does and the master plan does state that gas stations and restaurants are two examples of uses that are intended for this district. um other ways in which they've uh addressed some of the previously issues issues we we've discussed when it comes to the impact on traffic. Um they have provided some revised uh access points

and ingress and egress configurations on Ford Road and on Marban Road. Um they also have provided communications they've had with uh Michigan Department of Transportation. Um, and the applicant uh right now is proposing a right turn egressonly driveway approach onto Ford Road. So, it would only be exit out making the traffic go to the right on Ford Road. And based on the email provided from the applicant uh from MDOT, they state that there are no issues approving the right turn ingress only. Excuse me. And then similarly with regards to um Marman Road, they have provided a reconfiguration um and it shows a two-way ingress uh egress drive on Marman uh that is approximately 89 ft from Crowder and then a right turn egress only driveway on Marman Road uh that's about 25 ft from the Ford Road intersection. Then they provided communication from Wayne County uh stating uh the preliminary review has been conducted. Now that you know just to reiterate these are just communications. They're not any kind of official approvals yet from either MDOT or Wayne uh Wayne County. And we would point out while my I just want to alter my uh underlying text there under paragraph E stating that um that because this is an M dot road and because this is a Wayne County road um any access onto those those two a those two roads uh is is the purview of those two agencies. And so any kind of approval would be any any changes of that configuration should be left to the agencies that have that authority and the agencies that are experts in what's uh creates the most safest configuration. just wanted to point that

out that they the I believe your reasoning to have the applicant go to these agencies is to obtain their expertise and so I think any kind of further discussion on that would hinge on just ensuring that they get the approval from those agencies and it seems like at this point there is a way forward for them to get some type of access in and out that would be acceptable to both of those agencies. So focusing on leaving uh MDOT and Wayne County to to grant that approval is is probably most appropriate. Um and then um looking at some of the specific requirements for special land use of uh special land use requirements for automobile filling stations or gas stations. Uh you know they're still in compliance with minimum lot area, minimum lot width. Uh they have revised the canopy locations to be in compliance with our 20 foot setback from Marman Road. Uh they are in compliance with our ingress and eress uh with configurations and they have added notes uh as required by the uh zoning ordinance regarding that they will not allow any outside storage on the site and there will not be any vehicle sales on the site. So, the site plan before you is in compliance with the gas station special land use standards. And then also with regards to the drive-thru special land use standards, um they have uh um revised a site plan to show uh that the driveway approaches are in compliance is another criteria there. Uh the one aspect that does need to be addressed by the applicant uh would be that the details on the type of speakers u proposed including the details on the sound level uh should be specified on the site plan. They have been relocated to be the furthest points away from the residential property. Uh but that one

last standard uh spec specific to drive-throughs is still outstanding. So in the end, when it comes to special land use, if the planning commission determines that the site meets the standards of approval for special land use, we would rise that any recommendation of approval to the council you grant be contingent upon the applicant obtaining a 10-ft variance. Uh the applicant providing details of the speaker system. Uh that the applicant receive site plan approval. And then the applicant receive uh approval from for Ford Road and Marman Road from MDOT and Wayne County. Then also of course city engineer and fire marshal approval.

Those are the special land use criteria. We could speak to those or I could go site as well. Are there any questions about the special land use? Uh one uh concerning uh state of Michigan uh looking at this uh from the center live center line of the driveway on the east side uh to Ford Road. What is that distance there? And is the state of Michigan okay with left turns on uh southbound or northbound traffic as well as um

the right turns? The right turns of course would not be a concern, but the distance from Ford Road to the center line of that driveway uh being as how that's only two lanes. Um I'm curious what their thoughts on that uh are me for MD dot on Ford Road or for the Mar County Mar. you're traveling uh northbound on Marman Road. Um your uh only access point is on the east side there, right?

Are they I'm curious what that distance is. Is it I see 120. Is that from the center line of the approach on the east side to Ford Road? I haven't made that measurement. I do know that from my own measurement the from Crowder Road Curb uh down to the northern edge of that ingress drive is about 89 ft. So there's that.

So using that scale I think the 120 is probably center line of that uh approach on the east side to the edge to the edge of Ford Road, not the center line. Is that correct? Uh this one right here from the edge of Ford Road to the center line of the approach on the east side. He's referring most points to me. That's the the the 120 you're seeing is the width of the median. Okay. Width of Marram.

Yeah. because you have you have 30 ft regularly on this and then you have another uh 25 ft to 120 ft. Okay. My my concern doesn't have to do with that. My concern is if you're traveling northbound on Marman Road, you only have one ingress point to the property and that's on the east side here.

And how far is that from Ford Road to that area? because if it backs up traffic going into your uh facility, uh there's only that only leaves one lane. Now, Marman Road is the second busiest road on third busiest road, excuse me. Uh the first busiest uh on uh north south is Middleb Belt uh intersection at Ford Road. The second busiest is Canton Center and the third busiest is Marment. It's also the main um main way into Metropolitan Airport, but that would be heading southbound. So, I'm curious about the northbound traffic and what the stacking distance is going to be because that only leaves one lane open and uh

100 ft. Yes, Mr. Ortega, what do you have? Um, I just wanted to point out that uh the communication from uh Wayne County uh roads um indicated that they um while the approach seems acceptable at this point, they are going to require the applicant to obtain a traffic impact study. So I I would imagine that would uh indicate that it's probably going to be utilized so they can deter I think probably we should let their traffic experts decide. I agree. Yeah, that's what And so I think that's the point of that, isn't it?

Yeah. The one thing I think we should insist on though along with this is signage. We need to put up signage on people exiting saying right turn only and we need also a couple of signs saying exit only on the other side. Absolutely.

Yeah. And I would think I would think any um any signage that that reinforces the configuration that is eventually approved by MDOT and Wayne County would be the way we phrase it. Whichever configuration MD dot and Wayne County have the applicant can just provide signage that just reinfor you asked for. We did label it and we complied with everything that everybody's asking.

I I don't want to restrict uh people getting into your business. Um uh but I I I I see the potential for Wayne County possibly restricting left turns into the property and I just want to know that before we approve it. Um if they our our approval would be contingent on their approval. Okay. If they're okay with it, I'm okay with it because that's your only ingress and egress or

Yeah. The only thing I can say, you know, as far as me being a customer over there, not an architect or anything like that, I mean, if we just uh prohibit also that last approach, um, I guess, you know, there's no way to get into the site, but I don't think, you know, this lands are created that way. I mean, houses have the the potential of having a drive off a certain road. I know in our neighborhood, you know, off of Ford Road, there's a lot of homes that have, you know, have two uh driveways sometimes for a circular drive to circle in and out.

I mean, if they're allowed to do that, I mean, a business has to have the right to have at least one approach. And that's what I know. and that and and if um I was an attorney or something or I could fight it or maybe it was more passionately my property, I would I would fight for a ess I'm I'm against. Um and this prohibits left turns because it's too close to the intersection. I would have at least had them allow us to have a right hand in and a right hand out with a little island in the middle. I mean, it helps. I'm Why are we opening a business floor? And you know, it doesn't make sense. Okay, just a second.

Yes. I drove around, we gave you guys a kind of a hard time about right-hand turns. I drove around to Ford Road in Ingster, Ford Road in Venoi. A lot of the uh approaches are closer than we're permitting him at Ford and Ingster. It's pretty much right after the light you turn into that gas station at for Venoi. It is immediately I don't think there's 20 feet. So for him, some of them may not be according to our current code. Some of them may have upgraded since our current code which they become their code.

Their drives their drives weren't changed at that point though. I I'm just saying I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be able [snorts] to have an access going westbound on for road onto that property. Well, then we That is not our determination, though. Commissioners, I do want to I do want to reiterate that um we're going to territory that we don't have the authority to comment or or to um make as this is this is strictly up to the We asked that they um get something to comply and this is what will comply at this time to MDOT. Yeah, we had our approval is contingent upon a subsequent approval. Okay.

MDOT approved. If they can get two in and MDOT approves it, I don't feel that the planning commission has the right and the city doesn't have the right actually to do that. They would probably have to appeal to the state in order to change the approval that they have now is the process. And it's their process, not our process. So I just want to keep us out of the weeds of of of that so that we focus on really the matter at hand really of the land use not the accessibility is not for us. So my concern has already been addressed by the county and the state andor the state about potential left turn. Yeah. I'm good then.

Yeah. I mean what I can tell you just so you could uh feel better is that we had extensive talks with Wayne County and MDOT. We had multiple times communicating with them to see if we can um do something a little different like what I just said on the idea of a right hand turn in.

You see what my potential concern is if the traffic backs up, it could potentially back up uh to Ford Road, which when the light turns green going east and westbound on Ford Road could create a hell of a problem. and the fact that you have three separate businesses here. They may all be one owner, but you have a drive-thru for food, you have a a a Minute Mart uh store, and you have a gas station. So, I don't want to see us create a major headache on Ford Road in Marman. But if Wayne County, we're not the ones creating any headache. It's up to the state and the county.

So, okay, good. So, yeah, I mean the outcome was, you know, we were satisfied with the right-hand turn out on Ford Road with MDOT and um all and then eventually we spoke to Wayne County and they gave us an official letter actually, not an email. This was an official letter too. It was a letter actually. Forgive me. Yeah, that was a letter from Wayne County. Yeah, that was an actually letter um uh deleting the one way in and one way out which we never wanted. We wanted uh one way in from Marram. I mean, for the people that are coming southbound, I don't think it causes any harm there. A little harm there,

but um they just wanted the right turn and we we we're living with that. Uh the owner's living with that. And then um and then that one approach that we have north of Forb Road is the only approach that we have uh for uh in for for actually no one's really going to make a left turn. I don't know if they're going to attempt to make a left turn. It's the people we're we're trying to grab the people now coming uh south on Marramman toward road. Those are really the main people that are going to hopefully go in there or or the regulars. There is there is a left turn lane there that if there's not traffic backed up to it, they can get into the left turn lane,

but typically during rush hours, traffic backs up a long ways at that light. Yeah, most people are just going to avoid it. I mean, I I would avoid it. I mean I I I get in those situations a lot and most of the time I just take a right and then do a whole different route. Yeah. So hopefully you know the people that gas station will do the same on Mr. Ortega were you finished? Oh yes. Okay. I think Chairman Daniels might have an issue. Uh is this still is this an appropriate time to ask questions about the layout or is that going to be the site site? Uh why don't we hold off for the site plan? Okay. Yeah. Yeah.

Then I have nothing. Okay. Uh did you have anything else you wanted to say about So yeah, we we uh worked hard with Mario and we complied with everything. I mean it wasn't something that we did overnight. You could see that it took uh last time we've been here what a couple months uh I think in August.

So we wanted to comply with every single question. I mean, if you found something, you know, of course, I mean, in his report, of course, we found something after the DTE. Um, uh, the biggest issue was the DTE, and we got approval on that 100%. It's going to cost them about $31,000, but uh that's what they're going to have to swallow uh to reroute the electric lines northbound uh around around the building on uh through Croer. How do you spell and and and then back around where where the pole is? Um so they did their study, DTE gave us a letter and they gave them the the fee and it's good to go

uh once we get this. Good. So, but by doing that um you know Mario did on his report ask for uh to relook at the species of the of the trees and make sure they don't grow a certain uh uh height so they don't interact with the lines and we'll take a second look at that. Okay. Yeah. Tell me that that would be a contingency that we'd have to insist on because we don't want to create future problems, you know. Did you have something? Is the electrical site plan or is that special use? Uh, I had it under sight. Is that is that on the site plan or Yeah, I had it under site plan. Okay. Yeah, site plan.

I did have I think I I think it applies to this uh for the drive-thru. There was a comment about the study for the radius going around the corner. Yeah. where the length of the vehicle was 15 feet 6 in. Um, isn't that a little short for trucks and large SUVs? Would they be able to make it past that corner? If that was the study, sure. I I thought that was sufficient, but um, see, I believe trucks, we had we had turning radiuses for fuel tankers,

uh, fuel truck tankers, uh, dump trucks. There was on SP-8 um there's a turning radius for the drive-thru as well. Garbage truck and Yeah. Yeah. Uh for the vehicles through the drive-thru itself, there's a turning radius on that turn. Um I just I just want to pose a question if the study takes into account larger passenger vehicles, trucks, and SUVs. Like if a fuel truck I would think that a fuel truck ain't going through the drive-thru. Yeah, I'm talking specifically the drive. He's not talking about the fuel truck or the garbage truck. No, he actually Yeah, I believe Daniels is referring to the fact that yeah, about some of the larger

uh going through trucks to be about 20 ft. Just look Yeah. [laughter] Ford F-150 is the 290 to 250 in length. You can't get up to a little bit over 20 ft. So, that might be something that needs to be tweaked as well. Yes. Okay. because we did have that as a concern under it was under site plan but it's a good thing to point out that uh the applicant has addressed all the majority of the other issues with terms of vehicle circulation the fuel truck will work the the uh we can get into the garbage truck now later I was going to bring up the drive-thru because I thought it was the special you don't have the turning radius drive through though

no but now he he correctly brings it up now because it's the drive-thru is a special use and to make sure that it functions appropriately it would be necessary to ensure that vehicles can exit or enter and effectively. So yeah, it might be necessary to tweak those radi and and then then the size of the location of the building footprint and the uh the northeast corner of the building is the only spot that you correct wide drive that Mr. Christine Brooks plans. Oh, thank you. [laughter]

I thought you were growling at me. Might warrant to do a turn in from if somebody is driving from the north and turning in as well. Oh, yeah. You're right. Yeah, that's right, too. Northwest is showing 19. Looks to be about the same. What are you referring to exactly? Not addressing it. So, so basically he's indicating that uh the vehicle used to study the turning radius is about 15 feet in length whereas if you get uh some of the other vehicles they're more about can be up to 20 feet in length. This is 20.

And so um this is the the graphic used uh at the northeast corner of the building when a car is driving through the parking lot through the drive-thru. when a car is driving through the drive-thru and he's making that left first left turn behind the building, it's a little tight already with the 15 foot. So, probably the the it should be uh revised to accommodate a 20ft vehicle length uh and would use whatever radius is determined. So, that would just involve I would assume involve uh modifications to the building footprint in that location just to provide more clearance for vehicles. right now they chamfer the corners and he is showing that there's a 19.2 two radius almost a 20 foot radius right there

right and I'm not an engineer but I believe the radius is what's the cur the design of the curb to allow for the vehicle but that 19t radius is based upon a 15t long vehicle so they need to have the re so it would just be about confirming I would consider this an administrative site plan to make sure that uh to just re to rec to confirm with your uh engineer well we'll recon with the engineer and um And at the same time, yeah, if we have to chamer a little bit more, then we will

that that would be the only thing I think it would be a little bit additional chamfering, but it's important to make sure because we're discussing the drive-thru special use and we want to make sure that it functions and if it doesn't function, if a vehicle can't fit through it and most of them are 20 ft long, okay, they don't want them to tear up the building as they're trying to navigate. No, they don't want problems. I mean, if a person's going to have a problem turning one time, they're not going to come through that drive-thru anymore. That's right. [clears throat] So, no, I'm glad you brought it up. But the guys in the trucks eat a lot more, too. So, they'll be ordering a lot more food. Yeah, those trucks are just getting too big, man. They got to downsize them a little bit. Yeah. Get bigger all the time.

All right. Uh well where are we in the discussion on two number uh two maybe moving to number three I don't know if there's any more questions so business item two subset A2

to our public comments. Okay. Uh did uh did you have any other comments you wanted to make before we I mean I the the most concerns that we we think that you guys had you know I think we addressed them. Other than that something like landscaping can always be changed. uh lighting. I think he mentioned something. Couple notes. But um other than that, there's nothing else that I seen in here, you know, that would uh that would concern you guys. Concern anybody to concern the public, concern yourself. We're just hoping that you guys are going to approve this according to us complying with everything.

Well, we may have we may have some contingencies that you would be able to work out with Mr. Ortega. Yes. Yeah. No, I've seen them on here. She has special land use first, right? Okay. Okay. So, were you done with uh your comments? I'm done. Yes. Okay. Now, you know, there is one. I'm sorry. There is one. Now that I I'm looking at the the list. Um the color of the You didn't You didn't like the fact that there was gray some gray on the building. You wanted all the block was gray. Earth tone.

Yeah. I mean, he they want they they do want to match. Maybe she maybe Sue could talk to that. They want station look exactly like that. They want to match that same look because all their stations have the same look, but I mean uh for them to to change the color of it or if you approve it according to what they have on Henry Ruff and Ford Road, you know, this is up for discussion, I guess, and then you can speak to the owner's representative on that. Yeah, your your comments recommended either tan or beige or brown. Yeah, typically they Yeah, they're a little bit better. Uh it's just

what we normally see uh some community technically we don't have any specific uh design standards in this C2 district. So, it's more of just a point of discussion if that was a concern of the planning commission. Just a point to bring up. But if there's a method for the for [snorts] the color, it's just, you know, yeah, gray gray tends to present like a less finished appearance. Uh more of a, you know, old school concrete block and those split front face blocks are available in different colors, right? Yes. Yeah. So, what's chair person may go? Do you want to entertain a motion for the special land use so we get through that and then

Yeah. Is this is this item in your site plan? Was in a site plan. Yeah. So, why don't we why don't we go ahead with the special land use and uh we'll talk about that issue when we get to the site plan.

Okay. So, I will make a motion to recommend to the city council that we approve the special land use uh with the conditions that the county and state approve the ingress egress. That the applicant get site plan approval today and that the applicant confirms the turning radius of the drive-thru. and items uh one through five in Mr. Ortega's letter. I'll second.

Okay. Motions made to recommend approval of the special land use and supported. Any comments or questions? Hearing none. Would you take the role, please? Commissioner Kane. I. Commissioner Steamberg. Hi. Commissioner Daniels. I. Commissioner Williams. Hi, Chairperson. May I? The motion does carry five to zero. Okay, moving on to the site plan.

Um, concerning that color, don't we want to let them maintain their corporate branding as we've done in the past with such stores as Wraid with the the unusual shaped windows with the blue and all that? Uh, I don't think it races to the same level of corporate branding. The They've got another gas station that has that color, but I don't think there's that kind of connection. Oh, okay. Personally, I mean, but gray or tan? Uh, I mean, tan is a warmer color.

That's about all I can say about it. You know what I say? just suggest I mean her approval is that how about if we maintain the three sides the side on Marramman the side on the the back because the back wants you we want it to be presentable uh even though it's the back of the building and the the side of the residential which is on the driveway drive-thru side where they pick up their food. We could uh make those all um uh the the red brick that they they use on there. And then on the front, if you allow him just to use some of that split face block according to what they have uh designed right there. I'm I'm okay with that. That's

I mean, if that helps. How does everybody feel about the the color? That sounds great. I don't see the a problem with the one the way it looks at Henry Ruff and Ford Road. I think that one looked good. So, okay. I'm okay with that. I don't I don't mind either way. I I think we can stick with your gray. No problem. We'll try to design it any way. The other the other lot more brick than Right. The other sides of the building are all red brick, right? I mean, the building at for No, we don't want it to be all red brick, but you know, maybe at the bottom some split face and then the and then a limestone uh sill and then the then the the rest of it is brick. So like maybe 30 30 to 36 inch of the of that limestone

on that split face. Can you get that in in uh different colors or do you have to spray it? So, yeah, they do have uh uh colors that can be baked those colors, but we don't you could spray it. I did spray buildings like that, but it's nicer if you just buy it already baked in, you know, through right through the probably more durable if you buy the baked in. Yeah. No, I didn't do a lot of buildings like that, by the way. And I just was mentioning it to her. So, she said, you know, we'll bring it up uh to the doctor and and see if they can just tweak the the colors, but keep it all earth tone in a sense. Sure.

Okay. So, we'll play with that a little plan.

Chairman may go. Um we've already discussed uh approached some of the site plan issues that it was about the brick and it's whichever they prefer. I didn't know the uh the corporate uh effort. But then one other thing I just wanted to point out in terms of vehicle circulations on the site is the uh the dumpster [snorts] location. uh the way the dumpster location is proposed uh it can it can be accessed accessed by a dump truck but then it's just when the that dump it the turning movements on the graphic end they don't show how the the vehicle would exit so meaning they'd have to back up more and I don't feel there's enough to back up basically into a park

park car exactly so I think if they just flip some of the parking spaces with the uh with the uh that are adjacent to the dumpster enclosure the dumpster enclosure at the far end of the lot. Yeah. Or maybe give it at least a couple more cuz you don't necess I mean you could put it at the far end of the lot. It'll be adjacent to the residence at that point. [clears throat] So that's why I was saying well we would have to extend the uh the wall down that far anyway. True. Yeah. No, that's true. But just something to make sure that it functions effectively. So just making So my my comment was mainly to ensure that the location of the enclosure functions for a

drive. If it was moved down to the end, it would be able to back into the drive-thru lane rather than the parking area. And even if there was a vehicle parked at that drive-thru window, there's still an extra 20 ft between where a parked car is in front of the building versus where that other vehicle that's at the window. So they get the extra 20 ft even if the dump truck is at there during a time when the customer is available. So you know um yeah bring up another another radius question uh for the fuel truck coming in. It looks like um it coincides with the dumpster footprint. Oh, okay. Um

and it's already turning underneath the canopy. Now, there's a note that there's a canopy clearance, so I'm not concerned about that. But if there's a car at that pump and they're trying to make that turn, that's a very tight turn to make. So, to your to your point, moving the dumpster to another location would help alleviate. Yeah. Alleviate that. Oh, that's a good point. Yeah. You know, the front of the dumpster to the parking spots to the north, which is about in the building, that you have you have 35 ft. 35 ft is a is a lot of room. Usually they're 20 foot aisleways. We got 35. We got an extra 15 almost.

Well, I was specifically referring to the fuel uh truck coming through on its radius, the path that you've listed here on uh page SP-8. Uh it conflicts uh with the dumpster footprint. So it actually it overlaps. Um, oh, he's Well, the thing is, you know, they don't both come at the same time. Usually the dump trucks dumpster trucks come only one time. He's saying he conflicts with the location of the dumpster enclosure wall. Yeah. The wall of the dumpster enclosure. Yeah. Yeah. It's very tight. If we give up a parking space, we could But it would be the added benefit if you just flip them a little bit.

I don't think you'd have to give up a space. You just flip it. So there's a space at the at the end and moved the dumpster enclosure further to the west. But even if we gave up one parking spot and turned this because I told them to always turn it on a 45° angle or some kind of nice I mean angle that would help the the truck to come in and pick up. We'll give we'll we're willing to give up one space if we could put it on a 45 and move it in.

Would that be even better? I think that so my dad owns property uh commercial strip in Leavonia and he just redid his lot and he had a lot of tear up on the ashalt from the dumps dump trucks making very tight turns. So I don't think you have to but I would probably recommend it um just so that it improves the life of the ashall in the parking lot for for the owner. Yeah, that's that's what I wanted to see. And I know most uh cities uh prefer uh an angled uh you know um pickup and and delivery and stuff like that.

But I do think your configuration here uh with a with a 90° it it works like you said it works for access. It's just that exit. So you could either if you could revise the graphic that shows that a dump truck can effectively exit out of that configuration. That's fine. Uh, Commissioner Daniels is just pointing out that you get the added benefit when you flip it or like just scoot it down a little bit. You get the added benefit of giving a little bit more freedom to your vehicle delivery truck so that they can get there a little bit just that little bit extra room. We will Well, either either one that that should be corrected. It should either be angled or move down a little bit. Oh, that's a good point. Yep. Either one works.

Oh, no. I see what you're saying. would need to see it one way or the other. Yeah. No, I see your point too that Yeah. I have a question about the electrical. As far as feeding the building, are you doing that by overhead or by a transformer pad that would be placed next to the building? As far as I know now, we're uh overhead. I mean, that's what DTE was saying. Just show I don't Okay, go ahead. Well, from the from the letter, it said that uh when I reroute the pole, I will need to install a pole at the same time to feed the underground transformer. Uh then he wants a transformer or some kind of underground.

So then my question is if you're going to put a transformer pan, they usually sit pretty close to the building sometimes. Where are you going to put it on this lot? Um we have so much room on this west side. Uh but um it's uh Huh. It's going to be in the way of the drive-thru, wherever you put it. That's why I question you. I just thought with with this layout, I thought you might be doing it from overhead.

Yeah, but he's he's asking for a transformer and I and now I I think I remember when I read that letter a while back. Um, I don't know why my engineer didn't address that, but uh, we want to try to design these things because with these kind of gas stations and stuff, we can get get away, I think, without a uh a transformer. We they want underground, but we can provide enough uh electric without having a transformer. I mean, I have a bigger gas station than this with a carry out. Uh they turned it into a coffee house actually um in Dearborn East Dearborn on Michigan in uh Greenfield and we don't have a transformer uh we have underground but what I remember there it just uh you know we provided the PVC right to the pole.

I mean well we provided the PVC right coming out of our building and then DTE did the rest. Uh, I would probably say this kind of falls under under Wayne County and uh, MDOT where we would leave it to DTE based off the load calculations to advise us on what and you what is supposed to be done and reasonable. Um, I don't think if there's a transform we can it would be nice to see it on the drawings.

Oh yeah, that's my only thing is they don't have a place next to the building to put it with the current layout. Um we got a yeah the only other place is in this corner um the the north west corner where we can provide like a little landscape island. Um and yeah there and then we got to uh abide by certain setbacks for that transport. Right.

But we have we have a lot of room in that corner right here. This west end now is like kind of empty because we're 40 ft away. So we have a lot of space in that sense. Okay. Uh, one other thing you had. U Okay, we talked about the the landscaping and changing those trees. I did notice on SP page SP-2 it says that you have 22 parking spaces. Um

Oh, but then in the letter um from Tega uh it says uh you need it says 20 spaces are being provided. I just or is that just a requirement that you need 20 spaces? I'm just getting clarification. Uh the the minimum off off street requirement is is 18. Okay. Provide beyond that. Okay. 16 excuse me 16 16. Yeah. 10 for the convenience store and six for the carry out restaurant. Okay. So then the number Okay. So the minimum required is 16. They are now providing 18. That's good to have. So they they have two extra spaces.

Okay. Regardless it's fine then. You got Okay. Uh lighting. Uh did we clear up the uh notes for lighting? Uh our recommendation is that a note must be added stating that the fixtures shall be full cut off pointed directly downward and that there also must be a note stating that no light fixtures shall be mounted on the roof of the fuel canopy or any structure. See? So, I might have missed it. I thought I didn't I didn't see it. Oh, you didn't see it? If it's there, it's great. Uh, we have a phototric plan here.

Yeah. No, I know. Yeah. And the phototric plan is great. It's just those two notes cuz I know nothing is proposed, but we just want to ensure that no lights are mounted to the roof of the canopy. Okay. Like the BP on Ford Road and it's not on the site. No sight plan either. Huh? Yeah. He's not going to find [clears throat] it. So,

yeah. When I do the, you know, I mean, I do these site planes. I I'm the one that kind of designs it first, but then on these bigger projects, I give it to my engineer to finalize. And it seems like because at one time I did put a note for all the lights to be shielded down, but I didn't put a note for that that extra note for the lights that are going to be projecting. We usually I mean, I can't say that, you know, I've seen some people put in that projection lights. Yeah. But we will comply and we will uh put those notes on. Maybe the lawyer Jeff got turned off or something. Okay. Uh next, the sidewalks must be inspected. The existing sidewalks just to make sure they're in good repair.

Yes. So Oh, all the sidewalks are going to be new. Uh there's no sidewalks up Marman, is there? No. Well, I think there might be, but those the Marman ones are not in good condition. I think the Crowder one was okay, but I think there may be on Marman. not good, but yeah, all that'll be tore up during the construction be new when you're done anyhow. So, okay.

All right. Well, is there any other uh comments, questions? I did just a a note. Um, I did notice on SP-4 it looks like there might have been a change at some point, the dumpster detail, enclosure detail. Um, because on that page it doesn't show the oil uh [clears throat] Oh, yeah. oil canister. So, that's a good one, too. Well, can you repeat that again? I Oh, yeah, no worries. uh on the detail on SP-4 for the dumpster enclosure. It doesn't it's not updated to reflect the change in dimensions and the addition of the oil

uh canister the standard 10 foot wide rather than one that rather than the revised one that is wide enough to hold the oil. I'll make sure we revise it according to the site plan because we need uh we need that extra space for that dumpster closure because of that uh grease trap.

Y I was just I just noticed a a variation on the pages. So I just I wanted to bring it up. Um, and then the last thing I had was uh the door from I think what page is it? The on the a-1 the the back room door on the northeast corner opens up into the driveway [clears throat] and into the drive-thru. So just a note for you know employees and personnel in there that that might be hazardous. Um I don't have any recommendations to make just making

yeah the has to swing with egress it's show code compliance but um I just wanted to point that out that it it opens up into potentially traffic. So yeah I mean if the building inspector when they finally review he approves it coming in it would be it would be better but no I don't think it's going to happen. Um, it's just for emergency purposes. I think that one because deliveries look seems like are going to come through the front. Uh, it's hard to come from the back. Yeah. I don't think what's going to happen, but [laughter] we can take that up with the building official. Yep. I just actually two doors that are doing that into the back.

Yeah. And recently we we had to build like a small hallway to where that door opens from the outside into a an egress coming back into the building. So it doesn't you know what we can do um the building. We can if we Yeah. I mean I've seen it in a lot of places. I mean they we can build you know just um carve out the building right where the door comes in. Yeah. Yeah. There's a vestibule area. Yes, we could do that. That That would make it a little safer for the people coming outside if they had to. Right.

Yeah, that would help. Uh, also Yeah. So, you know, the gas station owners don't dent anybody's car and be right. Yeah. Okay. I think we have everything. Uh the rerouted electrical lines are on the new plan. Is that correct? So they don't they don't have to be added to recommendations.

And then a normal one that I tend to bring up is uh trash bins outside just so we don't have your lot getting dirty and trash blowing into residents on the by the island. There's always another Okay. All right. I just didn't see a note. If you had it on there, then I just missed it then. Yeah, I usually don't label that. But no, they're going to be turn.

Okay. Are there other any other comments or questions about site plan? Oh, that's good. Yeah. Yeah. Nice. Anything else? Mike? No, I'm all set. Okay. I think we turned every rock over.

We could uh entertain a motion contingent on uh those recommendations. Yeah. I move to uh approve uh with uh conditions. Um might need a little help on listing all those conditions. Yeah, we just need to make it uh contingent on recommendations uh one through five. Okay. I move to approve uh with conditions the recommendations one through five.

Support made and supported. Any questions or comments on the motion? Hearing none, take you. I'm sorry. The only one item that I was going to I don't know if we would want to add it, but just the signage on the Yes. the entrances and exits. If we if we want to amend the motion to include this, I know you're going to do it anyway, but just so for our records, want to add the uh item or for signage on the uh egress directional signage is directional signage. Uh correct. right turn only on the M side and I thought that was already on here.

It is I would maybe phrase it as directional signage at to comply with final approved configuration from MDOT and Wayne County. What he said uh to add uh condition uh directional signage as approved by MD dot fi pending final uh traffic survey. I support again. Thank you. [laughter] Motion paid and supported. Any comments or questions? Sorry. Take the role. Yes. Commissioner Daniels I. Commissioner King. I. Commissioner Williams. Hi. Commissioner Steamberg. I. Chairperson May.

I. Motion does carry five to zero. Okay. Your uh site plan is approved. your uh special special land use is uh recommendation. It has to go to the council for their approval and u then you can get together with Mr. Ortega to uh proceed. Yes. All right. Thank you so much. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Your drawings are well done. I review drawings for my normal 9 to5. This these are nice. I know this. [laughter]

I thought we were going to do an extensive review. No, that's fine. I'm glad you brought it up. Those are good. Thank you so much. Good luck. Thank you. Have a good night. Have a good night. Have a good one. Good night. You too. Hi. Maybe I make it. Okay. Other business. Uh we have a 2026 meeting schedule. Yes, sir. For approval. [sighs] It's coming. Whether we like it or not, [laughter] the same always, right? Yeah. All right. Seems like we're just doing this for 2025. Yeah. Jeez.

So, I did follow the kind of our our general pattern uh for the most part. Uh actually, we're in good shape. The ZBA we will have tonight. I think we will have uh a few move dates because of the holiday. But um Florida the plan commission we will uh continue to hold that second Thursday of each month. Okay. Okay.

We need a motion for approval. I I move to approve. Any comments on the motion? Take the role, please. Yes. Commissioner Daniels. Hi. Commissioner King. I. Commissioner Williams. Hi. Commissioner Steamberg. I. Commissioner May. [clears throat] I. Motion does pass 5 to zero. Okay. Mr. Ortega, do you have anything else for us? Uh, nothing at this time.

Okay. Mr. Daniel, anything you wanted to bring up? No, I'm all set. [laughter] Mike, um, the town houses on Partardo, uh, I think they'll look very nice when they're done, but I'm very disappointed looking back at the original conceptual drawings. They're not going to look absolutely nothing like the initial three iterations of drawings. Absolutely nothing. Yeah. Um, it's kind of disappointing.

And that's disappointing to me because those initial additional or initial uh drawings uh pointed out to a future look that's very popular now, not to the traditional look that it's going to end up being. Um, I hope that we can do everything in our power to make sure that it doesn't end up happening again because I'll do everything in my power to make sure that it doesn't. I think all we got to do is not pass anything through here that says proposed on it. Right. Right. Got us is when it said proposed.

And some of this will fall on you, Mario. uh when when in the baton gets passed for you to make the uh decisions after we vote uh on the minutia, you you've always done excellent, but in this particular case, I I'm I was really looking forward to that look because it's a very updated, modern look. Um, that building is going to blend in with every single other apartment building on that street from Henry Ruff to Marman. It'll be there's nothing exceptional about it. Nothing. This won't stand out.

That being said, uh, do we have any uh new items on the horizon? I see families doing good and and the uh previous bar is doing good. Uh, but also with the town houses, it appears to be stalled right now. Do we have any information on that? There hasn't been anything done in five weeks. Today there was something done. They were working on the connection to the water and sewer lines and the permit was paid for today. Okay, that's good. See digging galore. Did I say it right? Do they have the HVAC condenser lines going out the front by the front doors? That's where the units will be.

That's going to be attractive. They're screening landscaping. [clears throat] There are heat pumps,

right? Um, just on the uh master plan. I know we talked about it earlier this year and I know we were um you were touching on like the Orin property and that. Where are we on the master plan? We're getting very close to having a f a first draft for you. So, that's going to be the next month or two. the next month or two. Okay. But definitely it'll be coming for for your for your consideration. Thank you. That's all. Nothing today. Okay. Matt, anything?

Don't have anything. My only question is how's the uh plan development moving along? And I understand they're still trying to arrange financing. Yes, they're arranging financing. They're doing their due diligence with regards to Wayne County there that's involved with uh utilizing TIFF funds uh and brownfield authority and uh director Miller is uh intimately aware of all the steps going on to for that. So he might have a more detailed analysis. Okay. And uh in relationship to that uh I talked to one of the principles in that recently. That's uh going to be about a $22 million development.

Yes. Sounds about right. That's very significant investment. Significant. And I think it's going to spur a lot of other development. I I I really believe that. Yeah. Because the areas to the east and the west on that I think are currently somewhat underdeveloped in pockets. Right. So, I think that will uh Yeah, really looking forward to it. Yeah. $22 million. Wow. Big time.

Okay. Other business. Our uh 2026 meeting schedule. We did our next meeting is Thursday, December 11th, 2025. And uh we'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. Make a motion to adjourn. Motion made and seconded. All in favor? I I Motion's carried. Meeting's adjourned.