Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

No, my son's still posted early 24. Oh, really? Hey, it's six o'clock. Carol. All right. I call the PL to commission meeting to order. Wednesday, April 15th, 2026 in the city hall community room. Um, roll call Demer here. Freed. Meridian here. Moss here. Newman here.

Paul here. Robson present. Smith here. Okay. Approval of minutes for March 18, 2026 by Commission Ger. I make a motion to approve minutes. No further. No. Okay. Ted makes the motion. Max. Max makes the uh second. All in favor of approving. I I all have approved.

All right. Public comment. This is an opportunity to the public to speak on items not on the meeting agenda. I would like comments to be limited to three minutes. Would anybody like to speak about something that is not on the um on the agenda tonight? Okay, moving on. We uh have a public hearing case number RZ0126. Consider a request to reszone 224 Michigan Street from OS Office of Service the BTV mixed use corridor. John, you want to? Um, yes. Oh, they do? Yeah.

Okay. Would you like them to give those? Should we do that before the public hearing? Okay. The Oh, yes. The applicant, would you like to make a presentation? Oh, sure. Is this your slideshow? Yes, it is. Okay, perfect. I wasn't sharing that at what point that meeting. Right. This is Lindsay Dodson. She's the owner. See if it'll let me make it bigger. But there we go.

Okay. Thank you. Good evening. Thank you for your time. My name is Lindsay Dan and I am here on behalf of the Bell Power Project at 224 Street. We are requesting resoning from office to a 2B mixeduse corridor so this historic building can be reused in a way that better fits both the building itself and the downtown adjacent location. Next slide, please. Maybe it's not. There we go.

This is an adaptive reuse and historic preservation project. The building was originally constructed as a church and still retains the form and character of an assembly space with a large open main level, high ceilings, and a layout that is not particularly practical for traditional office use. The current zoning does not reflect that reality. while the proposed mix to use the zoning does. Slide number three. I'm keeping my comments brief because you all went through the packet already. Um, our goal is to reactivate the property as a flexible community centered space for small events, performances, classes, workshops, wellness programming, and other compatible uses that enhance downtown activity. This is not about introducing something out of scale. It is about allowing a historic building to function in a way that is realistic, sustainable, and beneficial to the community. Next slide.

Oh, is that it? Yeah, I think so. Sorry. No, that's okay. It's it's not going any further. So, I'm guessing this request also makes sense in context. The property is near downtown in a walkable area, close to public parking, and surrounded by mixed activity. In that setting, a mix of mixed use designation is simply a better fit than office only. Even though I know repeat limited to offices, next slide. Oh, now we're not looking at it. It's okay. There weren't anymore. That's all it Oh, you went through it faster. Okay, sorry. If just quarterly, there were three.

Rehabilitation requires significant investment. And if the zoning does not allow uses that match the building's design, it becomes much harder to make preservation and reinvestment feasible. This resoning creates a practical path forward. I believe this is a reasonable request that supports preservation, reinvestment, and community use. And we respect we as in myself and my partner respectfully ask for your support. I also um I'm just going to comment now so I don't have to come up here again. Appreciate your consideration of the related parking present district item. Because this property is in a walkable downtown adjacent setting with public parking nearby, requiring on-site parking would create a major barrier to reuse without meaningfully improving parking outcomes. Including this area in the parking exempt district would better reflect the site's realities and support practical reinvestment in this smart building. Thank you. Okay. Ch.

Yeah. Uh, in your packet in the, uh, agenda memo regarding this this application, as Lindsay's mentioned, she's kind of giving you the history of the building. The building is is on the National Register of Historic Places. Uh the the resoning request is to go from OS office to a B2B mixeduse corridor. And I took a look at the 2021 livable Paskki master plan future land use map and it states that neighborhood mixed use can be used for older commercial districts or former industrial areas that have but residential neighborhoods that could face redevelopment in the near to medium term time periods. uh table 51 which you have a copy on your table uh which comes from the master plan itself. If you take a look at mixeduse neighborhood as a future land use category the B2B mixeduse category is consistent with that that land use designation. uh chapter 4 of the master plan which talks about local economy. There's some bullet points in there that I think are applicable to the case for planning planning commission consideration. One is that downtown Paskki is m maintained and enhanced as a regional economic hub. That economic development is encouraged and supports a variety of natural and historic cultural resources and redevelopment of vacant properties and empty storefronts is encouraged and facilitated. I wanted the planning commission to be aware of the potential uses that go into a B2B mixeduse category. So there is a on page two there is a table that lists the OS

office service uses which include office buildings, medical use, banks, credit unions, personal services, churches and similar uses. Those are also allowed in the B2B. However, the B2B also allows things like a bakery, a brew pub, health and fitness, public assembly. And I think that's one of the things that in Lindsay's presentation she had mentioned primarily because the church is a public assembly uh that is allowed in the B2B district.

There are a lot of consistencies with the master plan. Uh, one of the areas that I think is part and parcel to this is the fact that in conjunction with this resoning, they also applied for an application to designate the property as parking exempt primarily because the building is pretty much built on the lot. There is no room at all for off- streetet parking. So, that's kind of part and uh goes with this in terms of the applications. uh you're really only presented two options since this is not a special land use. There's no conditions. This is either you approve the reasoning uh based on the findings or you deny it based on the findings and what your uh observations are. So in a nutshell that's the uh that's the case. Uh there are like I said I'll summarize. There are parts of the master plan that would support this. Uh, however, there are also some potential impacts associated with the conversion from office to B2B that allow for some uses that are not necessarily allowed in the office district. Those would be like a boo pub and public assembly. So, just wanted to point those out to you.

Okay. Okay. Um, I guess we'll go to the public hearing now. All right. Uh it is 609 and I open the floor for the public hearing. Um is anyone online? No. Uh all right. Please address the chair when speaking. State your full name and address before you begin. Please keep comments brief and only make comments directly related to this proposal. If questions are raised, we will make note of them. If appropriate, we will include them during our submission discussion. At the end of the meeting, there'll be an activities with policy feminine items on the meeting agenda. Okay. So, I'm opening up to public.

I'm Riley Turkat. I own the professional desk professional arts building that is directly um one small piece of property behind the uh uh former church. Uh when we put up our building uh we required to buy it proper to put in parking. The park the plan that I object to is the parking. Um my lot is from their front door approximately um 50 large steps but stepped it off. The city parking lot which was mentioned is you go to the corner and over is 60 steps away. Mine parking lot does not have meters in it and I highly suspect that I would be quite sure that there'll be a very large swallow of parking for any event that's held, be it a wedding, be it a concert in my parking lot. One of the excuses is, well, it's empty anyway. Well, my car sits in a driveway and if someone says, could I use it while you're not using it? I try to point out all the extra cost that I have this past year, which was exceptional. I spend $150 per parking spot to plow my lot. Average year, I'm spending with capital improvements factored in approximately $400 a spot to maintain my lot. So, it's not inexpensive. And I really don't I talked briefly. They said, "Oh, we'll we'll tell people not to park there." Well, it sounds like a very nice idea, but I somehow doubt that they'll be out there saying, "Oh, please move during this wedding. You're in somebody else's parking lot." So, I would I do oppose the parking exemption. The land use thing is a separate issue. It's the parking that I'm concerned about. Thank you.

All right. Any other public comment? I will just add you state your name. I'm Matt McCartney and yeah

my family has the dancer building which is the corner of GSI and Emma Street stayed in streets. We have a parking lot right across the street from the zip building. They have their own parking lot. I can tell you that we taking right point we have the problem with people going to the zip building want to park in our parking lot because it's the closest thing to the front door. So it's one it's a constant problem we have of telling the people particularly the mo the reserve the military recruiting station cannot park in our parking lot you have a parking lot it's on the other side of the building so I could I sympathize with Riley's point about the fact that can't it's difficult to police that issue so recognize that then I guess being I don't understand this is a so I understand I tuned into one of your meetings two two months ago I believe and you're talking redistricting of some parts of the city. You're revisiting that issue. So in something like this, you have a residential community. I grew up in that area. I can tell you that. So it's a slippery slope, isn't it? You sort of reszone one thing for more bar. You used to have a group hub that let's say you have yes, you can serve liquor because you got you got a wedding reception there, but then what happens to the neighbor next to them and then sort of just go down the street. So from a standpoint of a comprehensive approach, are you wanting to convert that whole block then to something that's less residential because my understanding that you're trying to issue reach protecting and preserving downtown residential areas. So to me it's a problem that obviously in your wisdom you're going to figure out whether you want to go in a broader pay with water rush residential. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other public comment? Oh yeah. And state your name. Yeah. My name is Suzanne Perry.

I'm a resident of Harbor Springs, but I'm a frequent of Dontown. I just wanted to speak in support of what Lindsay had to say, although I missed it. I imagine um whatever she needs to do to pave the way to for the success of her project. This is going to bring a lot of uh I think there's total niche need here for this kind of space. You must know that our uh downtown area is devoid of meeting space and it prohibits us from competing with um you know other other destinations for things like conferences and small meetings and you know the weddings of course help the entire economy. So um whatever she needs to pave the way I imagine she's looked at that quite a bit. Been living in a city a city of some kind my entire life. I've navigated just like everyone else in the world parking lot signs that say all visitors will be towed. You know, they you have a problem with parking, put up a sign. Um, so that's it. Thanks.

All right. Thank you. We have Lindsay on line. Okay. Lindsay Walker, does she want Yes, she raised her hand. Okay. Lindsay Walker.

Hi friends. Yeah. 1312 Emtt Street. Um, I'm totally in favor of Lindsy Dodson's proposal for the bell tower. I see a functionally obsolete, pretty ugly structure that hasn't been used in decades. The community support, outreach, and mobilizing of artists and the community that Lindsay has done um in a short period of time. I feel very inspired by. I am hopeful that we would consider reszoning this so she could move forward with her project and bring more art, creativity, and community involvement to the bell tower. Thanks.

Thank you, Lindsay. All right, I think that any any more comments? All right, I close the public hearing at 6:15. All right. And I bring it to the table. Commissioners discuss the district's questions. Oh, you know what? We have the other public. No, this I I need to uh maybe I wait till the next one because it's about parking. Okay. Okay. Just the the agenda has both the public hearings and then discussion.

Oh, you want to Okay. You stand with me. You know what? You're right. All right. In that case, I will open the public hearing. That's 16 for the second uh case number RG 0226. Consider a request to expand the parking exempt district 4 Michigan Street and possibly 302 and 304 Michigan Street. You said you didn't want to talk come back up and talk, right? Yes. I I haven't prepared additional I can I can take it. That's fine.

The the applica the applicant has well she Lindsay put in an application for a text amendment to the zoning code to exempt 224 Michigan. uh well to include 224 Michigan as part of the parking exempt district pursuant to section 1704C uh which then uh provides an exemption that they don't have to provide off- streetet parking as I mentioned in my previous presentation the church basically occupies the entire lot there is no parking on site in discussion with Lisa uh she had mentioned that the former office use. The person that owned it for an office was supposed to build a parking lot across the street on Michigan. The lot is now owned by Matt Fedic. Uh so that never happened. Uh so you know there is there is some sort of you know uh application here relative to the parking exempt district. When I took a look at the area, I also noticed that the dry cleaner, which is on the opposite side of the street, and the bank are relatively smaller parcels, and they really don't have any parking. The bank has two parking stalls in the back. The uh drive-in, the dry cleaner, based on the current parking code, should require 18 parking spaces. they have about five. So these parcels, if they're ever subject to redevelopment uh my position is or my observation is that it would be preferable that the the lots be developed for building and uses and not consumed by more off- streetet

parking because of the parking lot across the street, which does in the summertime get pretty busy. But, you know, six months out of the year, seven months out of the year, it's it does okay. Uh, so I my thought was looking down the road, if we're going to amend the ordinance to include this lot, let's take a look at the dry cleaner and the bank as potential redevelopment sites. Uh, Lisa has informed me that Mr. Hooker, who owns the dry cleaner, contacted her after he got his letter saying that he's in favor of the parking exempt district uh for his property. Uh we did not hear from the bank. Uh I don't know if they would have any objections to it. I have to believe that because they only have two parking spaces that some of their employees, if they have more than two, park in the public parking lot already. So, so that's again wanted to present both sides of it. Again, this is a one of those motions where either you approve it or deny it. There's no approval with any conditions attached to it.

Can I ask you a question, John? The applicant um had a proposal for parking exempt for this particular property. Yeah. But not the other two, which you noticed and explained. Um, is it possible there's a motion for like the applicants and not the others just to ask the question or does it have to be doesn't have to be all three. I'm recommending that we if we're going to do it, we do all three. But if the planning commission just wants to uh do the the church, that's fine. Okay. But, you know, taking a look at the at the area, I thought maybe at this point it would beneficial to include the other two. Yeah. That's that's planning commission disruption. That's all I have.

Okay. All right. I bring it back to the planning commission for this stuff. Or is it public? Sorry. You already you already opened it, so you just need to That's on top. All right. I I'm open for public. Does anybody have any public comment on a second? On the second. Well, pretty much what they said. Do you want to just say Yeah. Nobody commented on the

park. You know my sign somebody pointed out says I've tried to avoid towing. Um he I haven't towed anybody in 15 years. Not that I've had had many opportunities. But when you tow someone, they're mad at me. And that's what is going to happen. If I dare tow somebody, they'll never see that so in his office again. So I in the tried not to tow and I really had very little choice when when they parked there. So if I same reason I would be opposed to the second. Yeah.

I will make a comment. Obviously you have your wisdom. You know what the direction you're going to take but all of a sudden it's so sponte that you're looking at the hook building. We all know there's some chemical issues there right? It's it's a waste. It's a problem. So, whoever buys the property, they're going to have to do some excavation, take off some of the bad soil. So, they could put some underground parking there. So, I don't say I guess maybe I'm just sort of thinking today, but why in the world are you going out of your way to address a piece of property that the applicant did not ask for and she's not going to park there? Um, so it's always been a problem at that that corner and nobody wants to use the property for Mr. Hooker because of the chemical issues. So therefore, if this if the requirements for for parking for office space is now too aggressive, then change that regulation for everybody, just don't say, well, it's just tough for this property. Let's let's give them a break here and they don't have to have parking. But if they're going to develop it, they're probably going to they could they're going to have excavate, so why can't they have $100 parking? Then do you want to short change yourself by by requiring them to park somewhere else? My only thought is require them to have their parking later on if somebody actually is the applicant that they can come in and make bonafide request. Thanks.

Okay. Thank you. Um yes, I would add u there convenience of providing park team. Mr. McCardney mentioned to me that when he redid the dancer building to turn into office space, he didn't have any park either. How many homes did you have to buy? Three. In order to buy parking, there wasn't a choice. He had to provide parking. Any other public comment? I close this public hearing at 6:43 and bring it back to the planning. So, which item are we going to start with? Yeah, we should probably start with

Yeah. Well, it's in it's in the agenda.

Okay. In response to Ed's comment about including two other properties along with the applicants properties that it shouldn't it be potentially up to the applicant to decide whether you know the discussion and the voting should revolve around three properties and not just hers. I mean we that could affect both decision. You can separate said we can separate. Yeah. Okay. Well, I think that would be the appropriate thing to do myself. Okay. I I unless unless somebody has some other reason not to do it. Okay. I thought

I I would like to have closure on this and then we'll come back to it. So the um for that second public hearing about the the exempt free parking, Charlie Redat owns property there and and wrote us a letter concerned with the um with the parking. He says, "I have monitored traffic and parking in these environments for decades and I believe that granting the cap would worsen the plant parking in the area year round and especially during the warmer months." He suggests that we conduct a study during the warmer months to confirm what was reported. Put like that into the record. All right. We close the public hearing for that that and now we're back to discussion. So you were saying maybe we should divide it up.

Well, it looks like we generate a we do the res. Yeah. Right. So case number RZ0126 consider a request for the zone 224 Michigan OS office service to B2B Muse corridor. Is there anything else you want to say John? Really planning commission deliberation at this point. Right. Couple of questions maybe. Um but so um when this property was bought, was this kind of the plan? I just was curious or is it evolved?

Our initial plan was to somehow add housing to the property. Uh

um and the plan shifted slightly when you should mention uh some contamination concerns arose because of the Hooker property next door. uh which meant we didn't know if it was safe to move forward with that. So, while we figured out what our next steps were going to be and Eagle's been involved with our project, they're monitoring uh contamination of of the basement right now. Um we we've actually had this uh very organic beautiful thing happen where members of the community have come to us with a need. Um and it has shifted the the business model if we were to be allowed to have more than 50 people on um but it's not solely reliant like we are flexible and we will eventually aim to add residential units to the property. Um so yeah that's that's been the goal from the getgo. Um I had a question about so did was there some exterior work it looked like it started because it looks like some started scripping paint but then that so that's in the neat process of

going it is okay um so and I was trying to understand your plan now more clearly reading through this couple different things could you just tell me again what what the plan is about what you would like to do

so essentially it's going to be a a longterm kind of project. Um, but right now because office use is allowed, we are working on getting the lower room level, which let's say there's full basement under the building converted into studio spaces, which we already had a few tenants recruiting for that, which is notable, and we have property put that out for advertisement. Um and then the main floor or the original church sanctuary um to be used for a variety of community demands whether it's meetings, small events, yoga classes, um weddings, but because of the size of the space, they are never going to be larger than say 75 people. Um so yeah, that's the plan because there's a lot of demand. I mean, there there's a lot of places to do things in the area, whether it's observe, you know, a local band play at a bar or obviously tons of places to get married. But we're still hearing from the community members that they are looking for something that's a little more accessible for um as far as pricing and also scale. So hopefully they can fit a lot of needs. Community groups and nonpsents are already engaging with us this fall. So,

thank you John. So, what is um what are the main elements just currently that you really think it couldn't work in OS district? What we're talking about? Uh the assembly. So, the a church was obviously allowed that's different than churches are usually allowed in in the residential districts, right? Uh but the type of assembly they want like small event, small conference facility that is not a quasi public kind of church-like. It's really a right it's a meeting facility venue. So that's that's what's allowed under the B2B specifically.

So they could do housing, they could currently they could do small offices. Housing they could do OS small offices, medical offices, professional. Yeah, those that could do it but not evidence. But not events. And currently because it's been there so long that she says it's currently over the list. Is that correct? Yeah. So parking is not an issue because of the grandfather. We currently put out the new city. There's no problem.

Well, the discussion Lisa and I had, the former owner that did the office building in there, the office office use, I guess, was required to provide parking across the street in the vacant lot, but that vacant lot has now been sold to another party who plans on building a residential type structure on it. So there is no parking attached or associated with that property. Now the previous owner owned it for 35 years and never provided parking. Yes. Should it have had for the offices? It wasn't should have

it was supposed to. Well, yeah. The other thing too is look historically look back when it was the uh when it was a church, right? It obviously had parishioners, right? and they didn't have parking, right? So, I it's it's kind of one it's uh you know it's the same thing that we grappled with a little bit over on Madison and Engles with the church there converting it into child care.

A lot of these churches don't have you have to come up with adaptive uses for them. So uh the interesting thing about this though is if you look at the future land use map that whole corridor is really set aside for mixeduse corridor which is residential business you know cultural a variety of uses. Uh the church is caddy corner from the darling parking lot so it's really close to the downtown. uh the economics involved in doing historic preservation on a structure of that size. You're it's going to require a mix of uses to provide the revenue stream to do it. I'm not saying that's a justification for the reasonzoning, but that's just part parcel of what happens with these older adaptive reuse buildings. So, you can't put any restrictions on it, but the planning commission needs to know the uses that could go on it. And the ones that I saw that I think are a little bit different than the OS is the public assembly and the brew pub. Um, I'm not really concerned about a church being converted into a brew pub because there's a really nice one down in the city of Dwit in their downtown that was converted into a brew pub and community really rallied around it. But they can be used for different uses, adaptive uses. That's the point I'm making. Um,

no, we we're focusing on whether to reszone um from OS to B2B mixed use. I think it's a good idea.

Max, uh yeah, look at the zone map corridor in the uh current that So yes,

right. It's between a rock and a hard place to turn to us. If we don't allow something takes up that whole space less I hate to see well it's already falling down because So that's what that's probably my cohort my you know we required a church in the west side do all kinds of things I'm still

okay I think we need to support this I think Paskki needs this times 10 we have historic properties all over um and we need to allow some flexibility in this redevelopment uh arena. Um and so I I wholeheartedly support it. Okay. Todd, did you have any more? Quite a few comments. Um I think these church conversions that I've read about that's a difficult thing to do

certainly and you hate to see a structure like that not be used. I mean, we're talking about parking and obviously as we look at this proposal for the history, they didn't actually have cars in 1891. So that's why they didn't have parking. Um, so you understand though times have changed since 1891. I think these conversions are difficult. I think uh obviously this obviously I think that what's kind of the vision the applicant has sounds reasonable to me. I am I do have a comment a few comments. I thought some of the um some of the discussion of the master plan um I think there's a little more to it. Um one thing that came through in some of this stuff was that that this was a better fit for their master plan and I would would actually disagree with that and that's why I wanted everyone to have a table in front of them neighbor neighborhood mixed use has OS in it as well as B2B. I think these are both compatible future land use. So, I don't think this is a better, it's a different. So, I I did want to just make that distinction. Um,

I I did want to um I had a comment on uh uh the future land use plan because there's only a few of us who worked on that. I did and Cynthia did and I think Rick Rick did. Um and um you know, some time ago, five years ago. But anyway, there is a statement in there in the in the master plan on page 60 that this does not provide specifics on use regulations. Um, in other words, it wasn't that hard of a thing about that. So, I pointed out that it doesn't do that, that OS is compatible with the future land use as is this. They're both compatible. Mhm.

Um and um it describes the master future uh land use describes neighborhood mixed uses, you know, mixed uses that complement adjacent neighborhoods. And that's if there's any raw concern, it might be the adjacent neighborhoods, which is basically right next door. Um so I always think when you talk about master plan and things, you don't get to pick and choose. You don't get to take one little spot and say, "So that's supports it." I mean, it's the whole thing. So, on the on the business side and the use side, it's compatible. I I I like that. Um, you just have to be be concerned about impact on neighborhoods um and that kind of thing because that's also in the master plan. So, sometimes when we talk about business and people come, we don't want to talk about that and neighborhood um neighborhoods for all master plan. high quality safe residential neighborhoods that are maintained and preserved infield development and redevelopment is compatible with enhanced existing residential areas. So we have that kind of two things going on here. Um so I I I like really the idea that this building could be used in some way. I think the sensitivity is to what kind of impacts there would be on the on the neighbors next door. Um, so that was what I was trying to ask and think about, you know,

million dollar question. Who knows, is the office service going to give the kind of uses that would be less, they seem less impactful on the neighborhood than the B2B, some of the B2Bs, the the Rub, the hotel, the this, the that. Uh, so some of those things are a little bit off from my taste. And that's what we get in these things. It's not a discussion on a project. What the applicant wants to do, it's a reasonzoning. So, this could be sold in a month. You don't know what's going to happen. So, so we have to look at the neighborhood, too. And that's why I'm having a little trouble is do I want these

all these B2B uses in that spot. Um, which also gets back to the realities of the parking situation, which is essentially zero. um you know so so that's I'm a little bit conflicted about liking a lot of things about this but wondering if it's too intense for that neighborhood right there especially because it doesn't have any parking that's the problem with the intensity one of them is the parking impacts on the traffic and

um besides potentially hours of use and what it was like before so churches are allowed in a lot of places they be pretty specific defining times their people are there. Um so anyway, so those are some thoughts I don't anybody else have comments about the impact on the neighborhood. Um I would like follow up on that saying that I don't want this to have other similar buildings that we have in question for also be reszoned if you think about other similar town.

Yeah. So it's it's not standing the same. Well, I could set a precedent, but I I think each property is unique and we need to think about each property individually. And to me, the proximity to downtown um and the parking lot across the street, it makes sense to try to support a historic building that's important to our community. And so I'm definitely favor

uh this is maybe related but you know we're in the process of condensing many of these or some of these and so it appears to me that these two categories are going to go into one. I mean maybe that's a little oversimplification but it's going to be neighborhood business or something like that John.

Yeah. Um and so you know uh maybe that that distinction between OS and and B2B is a little moot if then uh 3 months from now or whenever that goes through. We're not going to have those. Uh it's they're going to be combined into Well, we we've got a graph right here. We got OS in it. We have OS. But I think where what Reg is saying is that the B2B, the B2s, the B1's, they're going to be converted into basically the business, right? We're keeping the OS keep we are keeping the OS.

Yeah. I stay corrected. Yeah. But it it at any rate just see

but it's a good discussion about that's what going to be the in that discussion about these borderline areas. Um you know I just have to it's out of it's the next vote. But for for me the parking is is interesting too. For me it relates to this discussion because the more intense the use the more the parking is a problem. If there's a couple people there running some kind of office thing and there's no clients and people, it's not very intense. If it's a hotel or a brew pub, that's kind of a different thing. So, these two things kind of go together, the lack of parking used. That's why um I mean, it's hard to conceive of how that building can be used in the future if there's they had to provide parking for just about any use, right?

Yeah. So if you don't parking exempt it or do something, it's going to be basically condemned to a unusual. So that's where I'm at, too. That I think they relay the the more intense we use, the more the parking is an issue for the neighborhood of which this site doesn't have. So like if I were inclined to say, I I like this historic structure. I don't want to see it go. I want to see it use. Um but I'm probably going to have to consider parking exempt. The last thing I want to do is put more intense uses in this thing. I'm likely the thing might need to be parking exam. So that's a Okay, Albert,

just the impact on the neighborhood. There's a lot of the parkies place in Michigan are taken basically 8 to 5 every single day by our very important downtown workers. because they don't want to have to pay community parking. But then I've heard from people that live there, they sure would like to use the parking space in front of the house. And so um that's you know that's so I mean the discussions are going we have two two items on the agenda but they're so interrelated it's hard for me to separate one from the other.

Yeah. I was actually expecting more residents on the street to show up in Lua um business owners. So, I was prepared a little bit more to defend that you don't own the space in front of your home. Um, and while it's a historic structure and I'm going to change in um the preservation of this structure, I think that point is me um because it in my head it aligns with um the master plan and uh that there's you know I empathize with you for having purchase lots and bulldoze portions of historic Paskki and I hate to see that happen.

Um did you say one of them was your well the I grew up in 30 was 307 right next to the brick building was still there. There were there were our house with a little bit of empty space on the corner getting electricity for free but then meals. So there were four houses you know now we have a lack of house to put the football. So I I that's why I'm struggled with all this because it's it's just

yeah as a person who moved here from Ann Arbor years ago I have thought for years that you know we we require too much ping everywhere in the last and you know for the Turkot family to have to bought houses and that that happened I think just before I moved here but it was really felt bad when I know we're going to talk to your dad about that and uh you know houses had to be purchased and knocked down and then Abbott had to do the same thing with the dancer building real shame to have to buy houses and tear them down

and so I think that sort of pulls back to John's proposal of reszoning the dry cleaners in the bank as well. Um I thought that was a good suggestion or being proactive. Um I'm in favor of that because we could extend our downtown corridor even down the greenway and all the way to the Maple Clock apartments and redevelopment continue. Otober. Any more discussion?

Uh, somebody like to make some motions. I'll make a motion that we uh approve the request to uh reszone. Uh, I guess this would be case number RZ0126 uh from uh OS uh office service to B2B mixed use order.

All right. Uh for the record, you'll do the whole to reszone parcel 52-cl.

Yeah. Why didn't you? Uh, so I move to recommend to the Paskki City Council approval the application from Great Lakes Housing Preservation LLC to reszone parcel 521906278013 located at 224 Michigan Street from OS Office Service to B2B mixeduse corridor because it is consistent with the goals of the livable Paskki master plan and future land use that. All right. Re made the motion. Supports the motion. Okay. And Rick makes supports the motion. Any more discussion?

Roll call vote. Smith. Yes. Newman. Yes. Robson, yes. Paul, no. Moss, Meridian, yes. Freed, yes. Deur,

yes. Now we move on to page number RZ0226. Consider request to expand parking exempt district to include 224 Michigan Street and possibly 302 and 304 Michigan Street. How would the commission like to handle that? Do they want to separate it or do you want to do it as all three? Max,

no. My I'm sorry. My goal in my previous comment was to also address uh the first proposal, but I realized that I now blocked them all together as I was going out. So, I apologize for that. I have a question. district. That's a good question. Let me see if I can find it. You know, it actually is our future zone. Yeah. Do we have an overlay for the parking exempt parking street? We have a park.

So, this is just going to be part of the and not an parking exempt overlay. Yeah. part of the district already because they already had the legal description for the district group, right? We'd either include one lot or three lots or if I looked at these we have OS already in OS properties. It's not by the zone other you don't have a district. We have we have other properties that are in separate. So it's not the zoning of apartment district completely separate.

It's completely separate. I while I'm in favor of making them exempt, I think it's important that like you said um Rick that uh this be singled out because of its historic uh not if that makes sense. So, so you're saying so if you made a motion to pass it that you should include that it's the historic preservation cherrypicking this property because of its historic. Okay. And I think that the drive winners in the bank should have to approach us at a later point.

Oh, I see what you're saying. Yeah. Albe I'm in favor of that of making those properties uh parking sense as well but because of this historic nature I don't want it to weigh on it in a negative light that makes sense okay so what if we were to just separate them we'll decide on 224 and then can we revisit the other two wait for a motion Okay. Someone can make a motion for one or all three. If someone doesn't like that motion, they can All right.

Make a motion to film questions. So if if it wasn't marketing, what does that leave? They have to get a variance. So they So what would that give them if they have to vary it? We don't know. It depend on what the zoning board of appeals decided. So they can ask for a parking variance.

Well, there you know if if you have to give them relief. I mean there's a building that is basically consumes the lot. And this is the problem that we have in Basky is gets to Rick's point. Lisa and I have probably had to tell more people than none that what they want to do they can't because they can't provide parking. Okay, that's been a big dilemma here is that everything has to have parking associated with it. So the only you know if if you don't give them the parking exempt, then they'd have to go to the zoning board of appeals and make an appeal and construct the appeal to say that they have a hardship. If the ZBA says, "Well, you really don't have a hardship because the use we had the offices, you know, didn't have part." I don't know how it would play out u to be honest with you. So,

you kind of things granted the CDA. Yeah. So, I mean, I'm just saying,

you know, I think you just have to kind of be practical about it. And that gives me this time. I I also think the bank the banks of the diplomacy might make perfect sense at some point to allow them to be part of the fiscal but I really like this state of 24.4 Michigan. He says that's what came before us and we have a rationale for the we know we use that but you know without some parking because no there's no place to put a parking spot without tearing down building a parking spot. So I I I would also make the motion think about isolating defund for Michigan then if the property owners of banking want to come to us and and ask for added

well Mr. Hooker already said that he didn't have a problem with the district if it was not his problem.

And and I'll just, you know, give you some insight, and Shane's been involved in a lot of environmental stuff, too. Dry cleaners are probably the worst uh uh issue relative to contamination, but based on my experience of working on a variety of environmentally distressed properties, there is really not a high likelihood that Eagle would allow them to put underground parking. The last thing Eagle does is they don't want to disrupt the the the contamination any more than what they have to. I mean, a great example is right down the block with the Water Street condos, which are built on top of the old Paskki manufacturing. That's a super fun site. Those are all built on slat. Eagle did not want anybody digging around on any of that property. The remediation there is vapor intrusion. So underneath the buildings, they have vapor systems that evaporate any of the fumes. So the houses are all pretty much clean, but that's probably what would happen with the dry clean. So you're not going to have underground parking on that piece of property. Um, I guess why I was looking at it as a redevelopment ready community trying to be proactive and position the sites that if something ever happened relative to the dry cleaner or the bank, we would already know that those are exempt and we would prefer to have building on it, not parking lots. That was the only reason.

Ted,

I just kind of agree with Albert. I mean, I appreciate John bringing this forward and I think it's a legitimate discussion. I just normally would expect a little more. I know where it, you know, makes sense because we're talking about this parking exemption that's right there, but yet I don't have the site in front of me. Uh John said Mr. Hooker would like to It's just not, you know, we're talking about legal and all this kind of stuff here and I don't have anything on this. We're just kind of So I I think it's a legitimate discussion too, but I'm a little more inclined to deal this applicant's provided information on their specific situation. We've looked at it. We have pictures and drawings and stuff and I've considered it more so I've considered that at a much different level than these other two properties. So I understand why we're talking about it but I'm a little more inclined to vote on things I've got a little more information on.

Any more discussion? All right. Somebody ready to make a motion? Well, are we going to discuss more on I thought we were just discussing whether we were going to do 22 24 itself, right? Well, I think the person who makes we can decide that, but I I think probably you can have discussion with the motion. Yeah, discussion until you have a motion. Okay. So, I'll make a I'll make a motion, but I didn't see it printed like the other one because it's a zoning code. Okay. just make a motion that

I'll make a conclusion that we expand the parking district to include uh 224 Michigan Street. That's fine. That's good enough. Okay. I have a motion to include 224 in the exempt parking district. Do I have a second? Okay. and Rich Sack. Any more discussion?

So, this hearkens back, I guess, to a couple things if I may. Sorry. Um, many years on the downtown management board. I mean, parking is like the issue there. Um, one is what I have found is that everyone's going to be a little mad because everybody has to park. Everyone's an expert and you're never going to make everybody happy. So, if everyone's a little bit mad, you probably done the right thing. I think it's um you know past practices where you did have to purchase these houses and things like that.

That does not mean that's the best practice now. And in fact, it it I think we've seen the error of our ways. Um, you know, from personal experience at the Ferry Hotel where we had to have a parking lot for our our guests, you know, there are just flatout businesses uh and and land uses where if you don't have your own parking, it's just not practical. And so you you do pay more for that. And you have to control that if if that's required of of the business. There are many ways to control parking. I've I've had to do that. And and you know, I think that that that's not you know, if it's that important to your business, then it behooves you to control what is yours. Um and that that is that that parking lot. However, if it's gates, if it's passes, if it's monitoring, whatever whatever you have to do. Um, and I think a lot of downtown when you look at restaurants for instance, I mean, they benefit from the fact that they don't have to have, you know, downtown. And I guess the other thing that we see in that corridor is employees that park there during the day, you know, and that kind of raises another thing to me is I believe that business owners, uh, you know, if they value their employees, then they maybe need to provide some kind of, you know, compensation or other, you know, a parking pass or something like that. Those are all options that are available. Um, you know, the bottom line is parking has to be managed, you know, especially down in in the downtown area. So, I think um uh but again, I I believe that this historic um restoration needs

to be supported by us in any way it can and um making it part of the uh parking exempt, particularly because you've got the biggest parking lot in the city that's corner, you know, that that's 60 steps away or whatever it is. um you know merits our our support.

Okay. Correct. Uh the other thing I would would say too is I'm guessing that whether it's this applicant using the property or some future applicant that might might do some of these other uses that would now be allowed in the next corridor ET use that a lot of these functions would happen weekends and evenings as opposed to during the business days when parking on Michigan Street and locally is is more likely to happen. So, I think it's compatible both with the public parking lot across the street and with the street parking because the kind of events that would happen are less likely to happen probably during the day than even those parking downtown is a big issue.

I would agree with Re certainly that you know unfortunately that concept of ripping down homes to the park is probably not the best type of thing. in the city. Um, unfortunately, that was that was found, you know. Um, yeah, and I don't see how this uh I wasn't is in favor of intensifying the use, but I don't see how this current structure exists without some kind of parking exemption. Um, so I guess if I support that, I'm going to have to hope that some of the more intense uses are not going to happen. And we I know talked about this at times before. there is there's always some governor or control on what can go into a place because you can't just if if you set up an impossible situation for the business it's not going to work either or what they're trying to do. Um so there is hopefully I would have kept it OS but hopefully that the break of the governor on that is there's some reality to what you can do with the parking that's available. Right.

No matter what this property is going to be used for they would have stayed or changed as the commission um decided to do I understand it but you can do this. So everybody need we have to necessarily expand the district or is this just a an exception but it's there the motion is just for this property. I know but I mean I think it just seems weird but he's saying is there a way to make it parking exempt without expanding the parking exempt district? I don't know that there is.

It's not like a special No. Otherwise, you have to change the whole

There's a motion. No one there. No support. Yes. Was there Rich? It was Rich. Okay. Yeah. So, are we take a vote? You ready for a vote? We're okay. Okay. Smith, yes. Meridian, yes. Demer, yes. Freed? Yes. Moss, yes. Newman, yes. Paul, yes. Robson, yes. Motion carries.

Oh. Um, we're old business article 2 zoning ordinance district from this is just the revised the planning commission already looked at all the districts and it was in agreement. The the zoning committee went through and made some word smithing. This is just the version uh post committee review. Just wanted to make make sure the planning commission all had a copy of it. Okay. John, does anyone aware this that there were two but the two hospital districts went to the one? It was in it was in the cover memo. It was in the cover. Yeah.

Yes. You know, uh there's just one industrial district. Just one industrial. We got rid of the uh the uh the H1, I think. Yes, we got rid of the H1 which is the Denver building which is the Denver building which was the old lock there the hospital site property the villa not yet. Yeah. So that's that was just up to so we don't have to work. Thank you. Um are these are these these plants statements they don't districts? Yes.

That's been shown at this point. No, they're subject to for reviewing a review. Look at that. Well, we we can't again we we did weren't that's why you bring it. Oh, you know what? You weren't that that might have been the media. That is it. No, but we're bringing it here for the whole thing. Well, and that's why I'm saying should I make my comments sure now or should I make friends later? No, you can make enough. Okay. So,

I'm afraid I might have made too many following on just about every not correction but proposed revision. So, uh, residential suburban I would I I said that the history was, you know, saying it's the most restrictive of the residential districts. Well, every district is restrictive at whatever way in which it's trying to preserve or create the district for it. Well, I I wondered if the term rather than saying most restrictive should say least intensive because it is the least intensive of the residential business and a lot of the discussion on other districts relates to you know the level of development which is the intensity of development you know single family versus two family. Well, I just wonder uh Rick, it's least most restrictive in terms of uses. I believe that's what we're talking about.

Yeah. So, I think when you say intensity, you're getting at a similar idea. Would it be more clear if we said most restrictive in terms of uses or something like that? I don't know because I don't know that intensity. I mean, it means a lot to you, but to a lot of people, I don't know. Yeah, maybe that's the wrong word. So we could say most Yeah, abuses in terms of abuses. Yeah, because I mean every to me every district is in the plan. It was the land used. Yeah. Yes.

Okay. um and residential neighborhood are only I wondered if we shouldn't add on the end of that um smallcale commercial and civic uses that reflect for this historic pattern of residential development because really the residential neighborhood designation is is meant to kind of reflect for this part pattern most of our residential neighborhoods And so I think that it's important to kind of incorporate into that definition the historic pattern of residential development.

Can you just read the what the wording would be again? Well, after the period. Yeah. Uses that reflect the historic pattern of residential development.

That's funny. I had a question um just wanted for the for this whole group here. We did discuss um residential suburban had terms suburban which we were wondering if there was a better word because we don't really feel like we have suburbs but you know different ways to take that word John did you we I don't what else Caroline does anything come up you were there so Rick we were we were trying to think of an alternate uh word.

Well, I think the pattern does reflect what we find in suburban. That's right. Yeah, I think it's a I think it's a town, you know, for those. Okay. Um, and then the next other flexible

So, we went for you just Oh no, I'm on the wrong page. Sorry. Yeah, I'm on that next. Um I would suggest adding after blended fosters a blended residential neighborhood and then at the end the same provides options for different life stages within the same neighborhood incorporating single family, two family and multifamily residential types. just to try to get in the definition the idea that there are these blended neighborhoods

have these other types of these other residential types. Yes. So that's actually built into the definition. So incorporating single family, multiple family, two family and multiple family pipes. John, what was the Oh, sorry. What was the residential flex formally kind of that area? Was that the RM2? Yeah. Yeah, that sounds

I think what John was getting at is that you would have uh family starter homes, um family homes, uh retirement homes, you know, like so you could live in the same neighborhood and age through the neighborhood is what I think we originally had. Right. So that that would incorporate a bunch of different housing housing types,

right? So we were actually focused on housing, which I guess this does. Okay. Residential multif. I'm suggesting that we the second line down after less intensive non-residential districts comma residential flex districts because he pointing back to the one before and then going on to what it's stated. So in other words after non-residential districts less intensive non-residential districts comping residential flex districts comma and then the last sentence this district could accommodate daily could accommodate large multif family resident developments just to be more just to be kind of a broader so to speak

that's Pretty that is pretty broad though. This district could accommodate large multif family residential developments. It says the same thing but but it but okay. Yeah. Yeah. So you want to So it's non-residential districts, residential flex districts, comma, and lower density single family development.

All of them stay the same. Okay. Uh, business neighborhoods. Right at the end, I just thought about the idea of more intensive commercial corridors, comma, and as islands of convenience. What is a kind of convenience stores? Islands of convenience. Maybe that's Yeah, I don't know. That's a little strange. Maybe I think the islands is a little different. Peninsula. All right. So, we're not going to do that.

The business downtown line down where it says building the character of the historic commercial. I thought we should put in there and civic centered because you know there are quite a number of civic facilities that characterize are commercial centered so I think those should be reflected in definition and civic centered right that's good because civic doesn't need to be kept building space itself

right and rather to say perpetuate the pedestrian oriented. I would say support to support the pedestrian orientist. I kind of like perpetuate but I go with sport. Well, yeah. Um, no. Our definitions of different street types isn't one of them binary.

Yes. And so I wondered if on the next one business corridor BC rather than say or major streets should you say major thorough affairs and primary streets. We do have major streets though. We do have major minor major. Well, then should is thoroughare the right word? I is there thoroughare type? Does a program say major streets? Maybe they should eliminate the major before thoroughares. We have the major street designations. Do those include the high window or not? Yeah. Are those just I know.

Is that called a major terms that are major street? You may call it arterials or or major streets. The state roads are usually classified as arterials. So do we want to say properties fronting arterials or major streets or major streets as I might not know what that meant if I was reading it. Use the word street without reference. mod. No, they're identified as what's in the definitions. No, not in the definition. But we do have

I know it's an accepted term of materials, but I don't know if a lot of people you can say I think the business corridor is only really on US 31 and US. So you could just say that the business corridor is designed for properties fronting on US 31 and US 131. I can't think of anything that's not on along the walk.

Right. So we're still we were discussing at the subcommittee level this issue of where these uh business downtown district or business yeah business corridor was um because Elbert's correct there was the highways and then there was some of that area along the rail corridor was in that former B3s um business. So we had a map where it was shown as business corridor and I was bringing up is that really corridor or is it corridor really just the highway I think. Yeah. We didn't finish that. We finished it. The map is actually behind that white board. Yeah.

Well just saying we have a district for downtown. Oh no. I thought major zero versus major streets was planning. I just thought it should reflect the official terminology that we have in our street plan because there are official names to just hire up these streets. Well, let me take a look. There's the uh the functional classification of highways or streets that we have. I I can figure out what US 3131's called that

national terms. So I I stand corrected Caroline. It does identify some of the streets. There are examples but not necessarily all of them. So principal arterial street would be US 31 and 131. But the problem is, you know, Rick's I I get what you're trying to do, Rick, to be really accurate, but I don't know that most people would the term arterial, principal arterialist means. We were having trouble site if we know what. So, it's very clear US 31 and US 131. And I don't think those will ever be renamed.

I don't know. So, you know, there wouldn't have to be an update because H1, we're talking about making that part of the business corridor and that's along Yeah, that corridor would be checking out.

I'm checking it out. See here interstate freeways, expressways, other principal arterials is number three. Number four is minor arterials. Yeah. Number five is major collectors. Number six is minor collectors. So they're collectors. Yeah, that's functional highway classification system. Do we need to use that in this? No,

let's say we stick with US 31 and 131 and major streets because I think major streets is going to be is a what we use major highways or well US major streets are part of the act 51 the state how the state divies up money. Uhhuh. So the city will have a map that has major streets and minor streets, right? So if you say US 31, US 131, and major streets, you pretty much covered all the big ones. Yeah. Okay. All right. Officer under industrial. Oh, we skipped one.

Yeah, I could go back and read it again. Uh I'm suggesting after warehouses on the first time maybe we want to extract some services. There seems that that seems to be an important use that seems to happen in the industrial districts. And then on the beginning of line three there where it says in no manner in a detrimental way kind of to me. So I thought that should be replaced by do not detrimentally affect the surrounding districts. What would be the district and do not detrimentally affect any of the surroundings under public quasi public The third line it says without disrupting residential wealth about public would it would seem more positive to say instead of without disrupting to say to support and not retract from.

Okay. Where what line are you on now? say public here. What without disrupting?

Oh, okay. to say to support and not detract from under hospital that's accommodate for the hospital's district is to accommodate health and medical services comma in the form of to include because we got the word health doesn't show up.

So medical are accommodating health and medical services in in the form of and then continue on with everything else. I I think that it's it's a given that medical centers, hospitals are related to health services. So I don't know that we say that

college say what line those line three the creation. Okay. So let's do can you see these numbers? So line 88 sorry 88

where it says through the creation of I just this specialized zoning district strike the city just say this specialized zoning district recognize valable contribution but I would strike nevertheless and say as such Okay. Thank you for So, nevertheless, no. What are you suggesting? Nevertheless, is it coming on the city? You want to get rid of that?

As such, I suggest we need to opportunity here. We need to accept these reports of the commission. Now, we've been getting them all along, but we really never specifically take action. I know they also have to go to a lawyer to go back to us. So, but I mean, even if we just said we accept the report because of all the changes were made. I just know as a process and I'm not I'm not saying that we should or shouldn't I'm just asking

you're going to accept it when you accept the draft. We'll have enough minutes of this meeting to know that we discussed few changes. So, was that all right? Thank you. Um I just wanted to point out that this the thing you added about um vacated line. Okay. We're talking about line 120 to 123. Yeah. It's about the vacated property, right?

Well, it shows up as C and then it shows up as um E. So, I don't know which place you want it, but one of them is duplicated. I'll just take slightly different. Is it slightly different? Yeah, it is. Yeah, it's automatic. Okay. Well, which one do you want? I'll just let you choose the unless you need it makes sense to have both of them in there. I felt like the same take you out. Okay. Keeps more detail. Yeah, seasonal detail.

All right. So, did you have No, that's okay. All right. Uh, that was I don't think we need to do a zoning ordinance update. That was it. Okay. Pretty much.

All right. Um, I've said that if you at the end of the meeting, we would open up for public comment. So, this is the time if anybody wants to make a comment. Nobody wants to make a comment. All right. Then we'll go back to commissioner comments. So I guess just a question on the public comment. You take comment at the beginning for any public comment that's not on the agenda items and then you take public comment at each. Well, okay. Yeah. Just in case people, you know, wanted to talk about the results of what we voted on. Yeah, because I want to.

All right. So, any commissioner comments? Oh boy, do I. But I'll hold on. Okay. So, this conversation largely I revolved around party today and um help but wonder you know uh and this is my understanding and I'm not actually as ashamed um about this. So there was there were funds and I use this term loosely misappropriated for the use of a parking structure that the DVA moved to support their mission. Um where does that stand today? because it's my understanding that there was something like $3 million that I don't know where where they did go. There was no transfer of funds. They increased parking rates in anticipation of a potential parking structure at the DAR lot. We've had number of studies that have been presented uh could never find consensus to move forward on an actual structure. So the decision was made to essentially address our flat municipal lots because those have been um not addressed for many many years and they were in pretty bad shape. They're looking beautiful. So we did civil lot last year. Um we're doing park garden lot right now. So really try to activate that addition those additional resources into our flatline infrastructure right now because we really couldn't find consensus on the structure. So instead of waiting till consensus magically appeared, we thought we really need to address our uh flat

parking lots in a way that we haven't done at least for many many years. So, so, so Shane to follow up that So, the money for those comes from the parking revenue. Yeah. Okay.

Yes. They increase I don't remember what year specifically they've made that determination to increase parking rates, setting that money aside into a fund that would potentially go toward a structure. So, that never materialized obviously. So, we're reallocating those funds to um address that in our capital improvement budget using using those resources for our municipal lots across the city. Shane, one followup too. Some time ago when a couple managers ago, Dan Rally was at the DBA and they were discussing he was discussing with them since they had this parking they had money for meters from parking that they and they they were in control of several lots was there a plan like a maintenance or long-term

needs assessment and I think at that point they if they didn't have it they developed it. Is there kind of such a thing then? Yeah, they do have a maintenance plan. So, we have a a plan on I forgot what lot which lot um but we do have a priority plan for capital. Yeah. Look at that capital need.

So, those monies just came back to us as we see fit right now and they're not being put aside sort of dissipated. No, we're activating those funds to address our infrastructure within our municipal lot. So those funds have been activated in in this fashion at this point because then didn't feel like it was correct just to sit on um resources um and not really put them back to our community. And it's almost cost prohibitive to do with structure which I completely understand. Yeah. It just it continues to circle back over and over and I think that we have an abundance of service law parking and I would just hate to see that continuously expand

right and plague. Yeah. businesses though. And a lot of our we didn't hear that tonight, but a lot of private businesses do do open their lot and you know, you see that where if it's beyond their business hours, they're open for people to use just in the evenings or on the weekends. Um many many businesses, you know, allow that. So, you know, some take a different approach and that's their prerogative. But, um, yeah. So, it's really just a reappropriation of parking funds, right? Parking is used parking fun,

which is why I said I use the term loosely. Yeah. I don't believe anything was ever legally binding to say, look, this has to be for a a parking structure. I don't Somebody mentioned the resolution way back when and I I don't know if there's one out there or not, but um it was talked about when that increase was approved at city council that that those percentages or that amount would be allocated into a capital improvement or a structure. I think there was a time when they were thinking about buying a fire truck with it to be hon. Oh, really? Yeah.

Yeah. backs on that before they did public safety. Well, and then there isn't a mechanism, right, to fund some kind of parking improvements with tax increment financing, right? Yeah. The DBA at the same point. has never generated any money because the hole never got right. So exactly if that ever went ahead. Is there a need? Like what is the need right now? Is there some sort of a study? Oh yeah, there's several studies. We have parking studies. Yes.

There's less of a need now that you don't have a J C Penney. You don't have, you know, a bunch of empty buildings. Sorry, there's I live downtown so I walk. Yeah. Um but you know during the summertime I have the luxury to walk. Um you know whereas people are parking all the way down division uh of portions of Winter Park and things like that. Uh so there there is parking available. I'm just wondering I guess would it be a waste to continue to develop more lots, you know, and a structure.

The only thing I would say about a structure that could be desirable is if you have more residences downtown to have sheltered parking could be desirable.

But whether that's really the city's problem or not, that's sort of debatable. But um you know that you know you to be able to have your car parked in a sheltered you know overnight lot or something like that if you live downtown could be could be a nice thing to have maybe could support but like Savannah and other cities I've been in um they have large hotels downtown that have parking lots, but the parking lot is actually Kazoo is a good example. Parking lot um is kind of run by the hotel built by the hotel with the hotels on top of the parking lot. So they the city has certain parts of that land and those lots and then a hotel on top lot would be to put a hotel on top of park. Well, that's what a couple schemes for the whole would want to do.

Right. Yeah.

And I I personally see parking as a more of a seasonal challenge. Um, and I think the city has made great strides in making our community a walkable community. And you know, sometimes I get frustrated when I hear complaints of parking. And walk. I mean, park your car. If you go to Walmart, what do you have to do? you're going to have to park and walk a certain distance to go into the store and you're walking within Walmart or whatever big box you're going to. Sometimes we feel like we have to park right on top of where we're going and that's that's really not the model that we have here where we try to promote walkability. Um, you know, and it's obviously great exercise. It's good for us all to do that from a health standpoint. Um, you know, I drive by the Darling Lot all the time because it's on my way home and, you know, I I glance to see how many open spaces there are at all times and I very seldom see that lot full

even in the even in July, August, it you can likely still find spaces in that lot. So, I personally don't think we have a shortage of parking um in the city um even even during the peak of the summer. um especially my own view but uh well I agree because I think we can hear from Ann Arbor you know I couldn't believe people talking about parking problem even at the height of the summer

but I will say in the summer there is a reality and it's older people when that sleep there is I there's a lot of people here in the summer who just walk up a couple blocks it ain't going to work you know so Yeah, that's being a hilly town is Yeah, that's your Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Thanks. Uh updates. The only update I have is the lighting ordinance is going to be on the city council agenda. Is it scheduled Monday? Monday. Monday. Okay. First read. First read. Have you gotten any feedback?

It just went out today. The packet. So, okay. Okay. All right. I'm done. Were you planning on being there? Yeah. And I'm going to make a present. I have a power right. So, it is 7:38 and this meeting is adjourned.