Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

All right. I call this meeting of the planning commission for Wednesday, September 17th, 2025. A regular meeting in the city hall community room um in session and roll call. Demer here. Freed. Moss. Oh, sorry. Um Meridian here. Newman here. Robson here. Smith here. Wilmont here.

Okay. Approval of minutes for August 2nd uh joint planning commission August 12th. Let's get the CI be second. All in favor of approving. Everyone approves. And then moving on to August 20th, 2025. I know the minutes.

Makes the motion. Rick second. All in favor of approving. I

This is the time for public comments. If anybody wishes a speech about something that's known on the agenda.

All right. Uh we'll close public comment because there's none. And I now open the public hearing at 6:01 p.m. Please propose amendments to article 17 general provisions and article 20 board of appeal section 20 o. Lisa.

So, at the um August 20th meeting, the planning commission was presented with proposed zoning ordinance amendment language that was um sent to them from the zoning board of appeals for consideration. And the commission had made the recommendation to change the um time period that a zoning permit is valid for from 12 months to 18 months from the date of approval. You'll see in your agenda memo, I did do some research on neighboring communities to find out what their time frame was just to kind of maybe put some minds at ease. They're anywhere from 6 months to two years. So, we definitely fall on the higher end of of that scale. Um, and then also wanted to let you know that the zoning board of appeals did discuss um, architectural drawing requirement for new construction and that sort of thing because I know there was concerns expressed about the time frame it takes from approval of a variance to then actually getting those final drafts completed. Um, so another factor just to let you be aware of that that is something that they had considered requiring when someone presents it. So, not necessarily approving the variance at that first meeting, but requiring them to maybe potentially come back with those drawings.

Is there is there language in the current ordinance this allows them to request site plans? They can. I mean, they're that is something they can ask for. Okay. To review, so it's not something that has to be itemized. Um, would be required, right? But are they saying they're not required? They're not requ well depending on what the request is. Yes, a site plan typically, but they're talking architectural for specifically for new construction and those types of projects where you'll need to see what that looks like. Um, we're not we're not required conceptual drawings. Conceptual, sorry, conceptual drawings. But because that's basically what they would be making that Yes. Yes. Not final. Yeah. But

but that doesn't have anything to do. It doesn't have anything to do with this you know over to consider correct tonight. I just didn't know if that meant that we needed to do more language. No, I just wanted you to know because those were things that came up at the last meeting that I wanted you to be aware of. And then so attached to this is the draft language that the planning commission recommended the change of 12 months to 18 months. The city attorney did review this and did approve it. So, um, were there any comments about the time frame from the city attorney? No, that's okay.

All right. So, this is the public content time and then I don't think there's any public here to speak. So at 604 I'm proposing the public hearing and moving on to old business 5A proposed amendments to article 17 general provisions and article one board of appeal section 207 for our consideration. So any discussion I move that we recommended language to council second that. Okay, Charlie makes the motion. Caroline seconds. Any other discussion? Um, roll call vote. Wilmont, yes. Deur, yes. Reed, yes.

Meridian, yes. Newman, yes. Robson, yes. Smith, yes. Okay.

Yeah. Oh, well, if you don't mind, I'm going to log into this so they they can get out and then we'll take. All right. So the next thing is uh new business number 6A site US SBR702 Stamish Avenue Worth Venture LLC parking lot paving. Yep. Uh the uh Oh wait before we start this is Wayne Seager. He's the engineer and this is Wade Worth. He's the owner. And you know we can ask them questions and they'll be part of the discussion. Okay.

Property is located over at 1702 Standish. It's currently zoned I2 industrial and it's just shy of an acre. On the staff memo on page one, I've got the property outlined. You can see that it's got several buildings on the property and it's got some areas that have been improved and some areas that have not been improved for parking. There's a couple of photos in the packet. I think the best way to explain some of the site plan concerns is that if you take a look at page six, I've noted them on the site plan and I'll go through them. Number one is under city code, uh commercial and industrial curb cuts are limited to a maximum of 25 ft width. uh this curb cut is 50 feet and the south curb is 33 feet. So both of them uh are they exceed the 24 ft that's in the current code. Terms of number two, there's an area in front of the uh building that has concrete. Uh there's really no landscaping at all in front of the building. Uh it's located about 7 ft from the right ofway. Um, it'd be nice to get some relief in the way of landscaping along the front of the building to help screen it a little bit. Number three is if you look in the very northwest corner of the parking lot, the way that the angle parking is set up, I think it's going to be awful difficult for anybody to get out in and out of two of two or three of those spaces, especially if they have to back out. So, I think that from a design point of view doesn't necessarily work. Number four,

the one parking lot with the with the uh the markings really creates like a an empty triangle, but it also prevents any any circulation through the site if cars are parked the way that they're proposed to be parked. So that's that's something that I just thought was kind of odd based on the amount of asphalt that we have going on in the project. And then number five is uh there is an existing sidewalk that's located against the curb. Uh it's kind of disrupted in several ways by the large driveway. Uh I don't necessarily know know if it needs to be replaced, but when you take a look at it and you're out there and if you did a site evaluation, it you can see that it it it just kind of doesn't function well. Other than that, the city engineer was okay with the drainage plan. Uh the way this is set up, it's there is an easement on the property. We included the easement document. The easement is the very uh south piece If you look on page one, you can see that there's a small rectangular area uh that is in in purple. That's the easement location that's shared with the property owner. Uh that's at lot 200-039. So, they do have a a shared easement. Part of the parking lot that's being proposed will be paving that part of the easement. So, that's the the site review. I know that the project engineers here if you have any questions then included in your packet were the were the drawings for the uh that were submitted along with site plan. Go ahead.

Paper up here to a little bit. So, I guess I just wanted to just introduce a few things and then to address some of of the comments that have been made. Um, so first of all, this is just a paving project. That's the intent. uh way has um asphalt here and then gravel here. He uses all of it and he just wants to clean it up um and pave it. And then real quick, just a visual sheet is the the size of the drainage detention area that exists right now uh is we're greatly expanding that as you can see on the proposed plan. So, um, just to emphasize again, it's just a paving project that was intended and, um, so I just want to just tell a couple things just and they have reason why it'll make sense here in a second. Um, Wade, uh, wanted to keep this area gravel. It's gravel now. It's in the back 40. It's adjacent to the railroad. He wanted to keep that gravel. Um, when it was submitted, the ordinance requires everything be paid. So, okay. And we'll we'll pave that. Um, and then also there was parking here. Perfect place for accessible parking. Right here is where it was. We had a spot over here to for a customer to go into this. We had a spot over here for customers. Over here, I mean, there's there's two buildings, bunch of garage doors. Um, so we had that. Well, we can't put parking in the 50ft setback. And so that was moved back here, hence some of the um a little more squeaked in which you know there are customers that have cars here for maybe overnight and these are you know more apt for those types of vehicles that are going to remain. Um, so anyway, the reason why I'm bringing these up is it's

challenging for your industrial zone. If you go up and down the street gravel on any of the parcels in the industrial zone, we know that when you do improvements, you're opening up, you want to get in conformance, conformance with all of the current ordinance, and that makes sense. That's a great way to do business. Um, so yeah, the gravel back here, even though Wade did not want to do that, he's accepting that. Getting the parking lot, the parking spaces out of the 50 yard front setback made some little bit of weird configurations, but we were able to do it. But it's a shame actually. And like I say, there's a places along your industrial corridor that not even close. I don't think they'd ever be able to. And then it gets to the first. So then that that's kind of the the prelude into the um the third kind of big one. Um the the entrances um you know there's some this drawing here shows the turning movements of the property based on a lot of garage doors or businesses a lot of garage doors. So there's turning movements into here, turning movements into here. So, this is coming right out of the and then in here. So, two entrances. Um, you know, there was discussion of getting rid of one of the entrances and it's tough and even squeezing them down. It greatly expands the scope of this project. Now, we're going to get into all the sidewalk, take out the curb, maybe cut here. and and that's one thing you know pay that's a financial thing but the actual turning movements that are required to service all these it it really it works well right now and so you know for something that was initially looked at as just trying to clean up the the area and and you know

put some fresh pavement down um we kind of felt that that exceeded and then it kind told you those other things about your corridor of industrial. I'm not sure anybody needs that as far as this 24. That's great for residential or commercial or, you know, office space, but that's tough for your industrial district. And if you take the little wiggly guy on Google and drop him on street view and run up and down your whole industrial district, um, there aren't many that would have that criteria, the 24 foot wide. So, we ask that you allow a way to keep the entrances as they are um and the two of them due to the fact that it's it it would greatly affect his his business and um not to pick on your ordinance, but you know, it is kind of tough for those industrial people to abide by that. So, I worry for the next one who comes through and wants to do some improvements and has to buy that. Can I make a comment on the entrances?

Yeah. So on the there is a garage door that is facing Sandish Avenue on that building there, you know, we have to have access in and out of that door. Um and then you know if one of the entries say was to be shut off um you know the the other building um yeah keep going the the Ters building up there right there. So, you know, if that was shut off, let's just say that whole entry, you know, there would be no way to get in and out of that building. This was shut off,

right? So, you know, that that's why we're proposing that the entrances stay as is. You know, we have some rates that come in there that are 50 to 60 ft long between a truck and a trailer. And there's just no way to do it without two entries in my opinion. So much. So that kind of truck can maneuver with where you have parking currently. Well, no. The new parking will the trucks be able to maneuver?

Yes, because not I mean not every parking spot's going to be full at one time. I can tell you that because they're going to be in a work base, but uh absolutely where we have it now, we can we can get through there and snake from one entry around with truck and trailer to the next entry as an entry exit. That's correct. I don't see I don't see how you could do that with proposed parking. Wow. Where is the engineer?

Well, the proposed parking is based on your ordinance. Again, um he's been able to do, you know, the work. Everything is there. This is this is showing that there's enough available parking on that property for everything that happens there in a full it's the full team, everybody there all at once. That's what that's based on. So way is saying is not everybody is there all at once. There might be, you know, the electrician might have guys out and out we may have vehicles in each work bay. You know, each business has so many work bays. So those vehicles will be in a work bay. They will not be in a parking spot at all times. You know, how many parking spots is it? Wait,

33. 33. 33. So, we're not going to have my point is we're not going to have 33 vehicles parked in all those parking spaces and that, you know, have have things coming and going. It's it's just not the way we operate. I mean, it's, you know, some things are going to be there at certain times and other times they're not. So, when a job's completed, it'll be put in parking spot gets picked up. So it's it's shown accordingly to meet the ordinance to meet the numbers, but what we is saying is that if he's got to maneuver a larger rig in there, he's going to show cars. Absolutely. We we do it now. Max,

so are you probably not going to stripe it and it'll just be vehicle storage? I would hope not to. If I have to, I will, but I would hope not to in an industrial area. I don't I would you know it's not that big of a deal in in he's demonstrated here that he can get the required number of parking spaces. Yeah. Even though it may seem a little impractical the way it's laid out. Well, it's totally practical the way it's laid out. But in addition, I I'll bet you dollars the donuts there will be cars parked within the 50 foot. There were the other day when I

There always are. I I'm there twice a year to get my car details. There always are. But he can't he can't he can't show any there to meet the ordinance. But as a practical matter, there's a tremendous amount of parking expense there. We can't encourage it. Pardon? So we can't encourage it. No, I'm not I'm not encouraging it. I'm just saying as a practical matter, if he paves all of that, uh, you know, uh, we could we could start doing football games again at the old stadium. I don't think we were I think the analysis was that we weren't necessarily concerned about the two access points but the ordinance says that drive approaches in a commercial industrial area the maximum is 24 ft wide.

Well, I have another question about that though that just makes it non-conforming from today today. So there's so much about this property that is nonconforming and all he's trying to do is pave it. Yeah. So but when you pave you bring things into conformity. But we can't bring setbacks into No, but it's an improvement to the property. So, we're saying that's a Yeah. I mean, yeah, but it's impossible to bring this entire site plan up to code in that regard. So, the question is how do we deal with that? But he just wants to pay that. I'm I support that, but he can't bring everything up to code.

Well, we don't expect them to move the buildings because those are non-conforming. They're in the set. Well, but but you know, technically you can have two entrances, but the the zoning code says commercial and industrial access points need to be 24 ft wide. You got one that's 50 and the other one's at 33. And you're you're improving the lot. So, this is the opportunity that you meet some of the code standards. So, but is the entrances and the exits, is that per property or per business? because there are multiple businesses at this site.

Yeah, but it's propri. I mean, if like like fast food restaurants, McDonald's has two. Panera Panera has two. I mean, there's a lot of businesses in town that have two two entries. That's not the issue here. The issue here is we just point out that the two the two driveway aprons exceed the code. this would be a good time to at least get that to comply with the code understanding that the building that fronts onto Standish is non-conforming and there's not much we can do about it. So, is that meaning that you would have to close off the garage door at three facing Standish Avenue? No. No, we're just talking about the driveways.

That that is the driveway that is the drive cut goes into that door. That's right. curve cut goes the entire way, but that's Yeah. What we looked at was the 33 feet on the south side of the building. No, that one that distance there and then 50 ft to the north. Right. So, so there could be a curve break. Yeah. At the corner of that building. Correct. You have a door here. Yes. Okay. To go out this door. If you if you put curve here, he won't be able to go out that door. I'm not I'm saying he can do that because he's got a garage door. I'm talking about the 33 feet below that this this hole closing this hole. No, I'm not saying closing it. I'm saying just reducing it to 24 feet.

So, there'll be like a medium. So, you'll have 24 ft then a then space then a curb cut again for the garage door or the curb cut and then 24 ft and then the curb cut would be to the on the south property line in the easement area. But I have another question about the easement. So, first of all, wait, do you own the property? No, I was I was afraid maybe it was a tenant. We needed an owner's authorization. Do we need authorization on the easement? We got a copy of the easement. We got a copy of the easement, but do we have authorization? Well, the easement is authorization because the to allow them to pave it and improve it. Okay. Long as they don't build on it. As long as they don't build on it.

Yeah. Well, I think it was stated that that you know the applicant didn't really want to pave the parking back there but would prefer to leave it gravel. So what what in the scope of work is triggering a site plan review uh the uh the fact that he he has to build a 33 car parking lot and building a parking lot requires in the commercial area cycling. What's requiring him to build this park? Is he changing the business or expanding the building or they came in with a pavement plan? But I thought I heard um Wayne Wayne say that they didn't really want to pave the back.

No, just that back corner. This corner right this triangle right here. But you have to in order to meet the 33.

Yeah. The point I was making is that we're doing a lot of things to bring it up into compliance to be in to you know this was nonconforming gravel. He did not want to pave that, but he has going has agreed to to bring it into conformance. He has agreed to show that he can meet all the parking requirements of 33 spots without being in a 50 foot setback. He's coming into conformance even though nobody else on that. I shouldn't say nobody. That's that's absolute. But if you like again, you don't even have to do it with a driveby. You can do it right from Google Earth or YouTube. There's all kinds of that. Well, we're just asking that these curb cuts in the manner that the business is being used be allowed to remain because the building is actually only one foot off the rightway. It's 7 foot off the sidewalk.

Mhm. But one foot off the rightway. So, it's tight. So, we want to have that movable space to make these turning movements. And if you I like I said I I think if you try to apply that standard up and down your street you be impossible. So so the applicant wants to pay part of the existing gravel and that's what's triggering a site plan review. No what triggers the what? He needs 33 parking spaces. Okay. And why is that being required? But a parking space needs to be paid. He wants to pay part of the

he he needs 33 parking spaces and according to the ordinance a a parking space needs to be a hard surface. So it requires him to pave more of the lot in order to meet his 33 parking. Yeah. But what change is happening to the property that requires it to be paved in the ordinance? And and Lisa pointed that out that if you if you remove parking lot material to replace it with new parking lot material that triggers site plan process. So just to repave just to pavement.

That's the only that's the only way that we can get the city can get parking lots into conformance is when they start repaving and reconstruction. That's the only that's the trigger that the city then has to make sure that the parking lots then are brought up to conformance. So, just so I'm clear, the reason that we need 33 spots is because of the ordinance. Correct. That's correct. That's correct. Okay. So, because we're hoping, like I said, that that back 40 triangle there, the Yeah. over there, we're hoping that I mean, we were hoping to leave that graph as is as it is now. But if we have to cater to meet the parking spots in this awkward setup, then then I'm open to doing that. The ordinance requires that. That's

because it's a combination of number of employees. It's the facility. The other part of it is that the way the current code is set up, which we've talked about in the zoning committee, there is no there is no waiver allowed by the planning commission. It's it's a set number. Whatever that number is, that's the number. There's no opportunity for the planning commission based on circumstances under the current code to say we recognize that we don't need 33. We we you know we don't

33 is what we need and in order to get 33 he has to pay the part that he doesn't need to pay. Okay. And he's willing to do that but what he really wants from us is to allow the same curb cuts if possible. That's a planning commission decision and and we also have latitude uh in exchange for that to maybe ask for a little landscape. Correct. But there's not much there's not much sight available for land very often because it's very this is actually the building. This was um correct on here was 7 ft up in the rightway. This is actually about one foot.

Yeah. Butt sidewalk. So that would be requiring him to put landscape in right away. Rest of the site is just all people do that all the time. So, I don't think that would be an issue, right? They heard that accidentally. Well, no. People plant in the right. Yeah. And and the guy next door, if I'm not mistaken, a landscaper. So, you got a landscaper. That's your neighbor. That'd be a part landscape. You consider that bushes, grass, all the above? Bushes, grass. Yeah.

Yeah. Roes there. Nice. Um, the other thing that seems logical to me is since the building is where it is and it screens a portion of that 50 foot parking setback anyway. It seems logical to me to allow parking behind the building with within the L-shaped area there. That would be our that's when we put the that's where originally had the accessible of the handicap spots were here and then two more and then actually one here that was staging for this garage door but setback doesn't allow setback

but because the building is there and it's a non-conforming situation it seemed logical to me to allow parking behind the dome maybe not that one that's in front of the building up there but yeah the ones behind well then that less you know remove the offer that would allow the back to be cleaned up there and make it more usable back there. But what what we're left with is do we abide by the orders? Do do we go with logic? Well, well, I think I think you can mix both. I think I think what Rick is saying is you already have a non-conforming use, right? Yes. And the ordinance allows you to maintain. It doesn't allow you to expand the nonconformity, but the building is not expanding,

right? Nor is the curb cut. No, it's the curb cut. But the but I I agree with Rick because when we looked at it, I thought, well, that put put four spaces behind the building to get rid of the spaces up in that weird corner. Yeah, that that was that was planning. Yeah. Yeah. So the the point you know we're talking about here is that what way wants to do work on his property. We've met the ordinance in all the but one and even the city engineer indicated that the width when his in his comments about detention he felt the widths were acceptable for based on what was going on. So, I mean, we could we could circle around and that's really the only thing because we've been able to demonstrate that we can get

I think the other issue that we you can talk that we can talk about. Okay. And I don't have my zoning code in front of me, but how many stalls are in the two buildings? There's one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. So, there's nine doors, right? and and you know we were talking work base with Lisa you know that the the bigger building towards Sandish there you know there was three there's four doors on that building but there's actually five works because that's what we can fit in the building double this area that's correct so yes there's nine stalls

nine doors

nine doors there's nine doors and slightly more workace 11 or so so So, I'll just finish real quick and then um the uh I think Oh, the landscaping. Yeah, that's tight. Um just wanted to clarify that it's only about put up the rightway. Uh and then the parking the north, we talked about why that's the way it is. This is snow storage, you know, to be able to put some stuff there with that triangle we're using. And then lastly, um the existing sidewalk, you know, again, we just like to keep it as it is, but also so that's probably answering questions. All right, any questions? All right, bringing it back to the planning commission. So Matt Miller, PE, city engineer did say, I feel their continued use is talking about the curb cuts that ex are existing to be allowed. I think it's to allow both driveways to remain. Um, I like Carolyn's idea that you would put in a drive for the Standish Avenue door and then maybe um close up the the southern entrance to the 24 ft.

I did a quick Yeah. And then we'd have much more green space which would be lovely. So you could just create a green lawn space on the other side of the door. And then we had a new curve cut off the corner. So if you did that, would that make that area would it qualify for the 24? Yeah. Yeah. Well, that seems like a really fair solution. M I agree. But isn't the ordinance written so it's only allows two 24T curb cuts and you're creating three? No. Well, I guess three inlets. That's one of those where

it's conditional and then you're blocking off the existing over the existing. I know. Yeah. Be minimizing our overall Yes. the expansive

provide landscaping opportunities. Yeah, that area because of the new apartment complex um that area needs to be cleaned up. So the any opportunity we can have to improve with landscaping um putting in combin cut um that's all things we need to do to improve that area. So with Carolyn's then number one south would would be in compliance. Correct, John? Yes.

All right. And then since they have that turn to get into the the building on the north entrance where it has to make a sharp left turn to get in. It seems like leaving that 33 ft. That's 50. Might make the property more. It's 50. 50. Oh my god. Does it need to be 50? The ordinance says 24, but it's 50 right now. Right. But I mean, practically speaking, it doesn't need to be 50. Well, the owner is saying yes. Very good.

But typically, commercial and industrial curb cuts on new construction projects are 24 ft. And that's which allows for Yeah. Well, I think if they uh stuck with the opening on the north north side and then went in 25 ft, they'd be able to make that that sharp left turn. Does that make sense to everybody? No.

All right. I mean, if I could just make a point hypothetical turning turning radius the one positive is a driveway. So, you're like semi go in and then both sides. Take a look at page two. Page two is is a picture of that north driveway. You can see that it's it's it's it's very long.

Yeah. And but you can see the the you know the rationale for it is to some degree is you got the garage door and the the yellowish building and then to the far left you can see the green building which has another garage door. So, you know, I can see the practicality for it, but I just want to point out that uh and I agree with with you, Madam Chair, that with the investment that's going on further north with the uh Maple Block, we should make every attempt to try to enhance these properties on that corridor. So according to the when we did the plan review, I guess maybe an option for the PC would be to take a look at would be that on the site plan if you leave the curb cut the way that's on the drawing, but then in some of this area over here, make that into a landscape area. It's kind of like that already. It's got grass there now and they're they're recommending on paving. I don't see a need to really pave it. Maybe that's an opportunity to enhance it with some more landscaping

that you're going to do on the other part of the site to really give it a little bit of a more of a curb appeal. That would help a lot. So, since we're not going to, you know, the the current plan does not allow a car to be parked in front of that garage like was originally proposed. Mhm. That fence there is, you can see it from the photo. The the fence is is is it it's not in good condition. So that Thank you. But that adds to the uh you know the situation but uh that's not that's not No, I would just said it's still still ugly but it's

that would that would be my suggestion. We want to leave the curb cut seems to make some sense because of the all of the garage doors in that location, but there is an opportunity to kind of clean it up a little bit and put some landscaping on that one area then which would match then on the south side of the building that Carolyn's proposing. Right. And there would be no parking. No parking there. So basically you would do like a driveway cut going into this garage. Yeah. And then that is that would not sure how that would work pen to show her maintain the existing north cut

because it looks like the grass follow originally probably went straight back to the belly and it's just deteriorated over time and fall into the gravel. Yeah. So I'm saying I think you're saying we maintain that and take the asphalt to an edge that goes straight back to that door. Yeah. Bring you to the Yeah. I don't have a here, but I'll have to come right back. I got a ruler with me. I'm not that good of a designer, but I thought you would cut into where the yellow building is and then you jog over to the door so you could maintain. You got the garage door here. Here's the garage door is right here. Uhhuh.

You have an opportunity basically to do something that's kind of like that, right? where you can fill that in with landscaping and still provide a wider access into the lot. So, we wouldn't be uh short or how would you say it? Making it less wide. Well, you would would kind of be if you filled in this. No, we're not doing it. No, I'm just saying leave this 50 foot. Leave the curve saying if you look on the drawing of the photo, this is already correct. Oh, no, no. I'm talking about on this end of the keep it the same way to keep it 50 ft.

Yeah. But what I'm saying is you want to conform it 24 ft. You should No, we have to recognize you have a turn movement in here in one and I can see that, you know, the 24 may not work because of these two opposing garage doors, right? But there's an opportunity to go up and install some. And then down here, you maintain the curb cut for this door that's here. Although that door is not shown, but then you take a look at Caroline's drawing. So you've got plantings here, here, and there. And you could do something here, too, if you want. So

you have any extra bushes in your yard if you want to plant them? All right. So I don't I think we're giving you an to make your radius based on the curve cut the same north. Yeah, it it actually would. So this would would stay the width. Yeah, the curve cut that's shown on page two, the the photo. I'm not recommending that it change. I'm just They're on page Yeah. on the second page. It's just the way that the curve cut is set up. you've got this opportunity here to kind of clean it up a little bit. And uh

All right. And then uh we we think it's a good idea to put sharking next to this building in the Lshape and that could be handicapped. So it's close to a building. But since he's meeting the requirement with the other outlined spots, we don't need to address that. He can just do it. Well, no. I mean, it's not in compliance. So, I think we need to give But there no lines there in the need to have like marked handicap. Yes.

I think that it's fine. I mean, there are I don't know if there's own residential, but across the street and to the north, there are two places where people obviously live. And I feel like the building and its location is screaming that parking behind it. I think it should be useful as a non-conforming condition. Yeah.

Okay. I've got modified the south driveway to 24 feet with additional landscaping adjacent to the building and then I've got landscaping along the north property line rem remove parking space parking needs. Yeah, landscaping along the north property line and uh maintaining the uh the green space that's currently showing on the photo. and then uh basically just leave the balance the way that it is.

Okay, I'll take a motion. Carolyn Carolyn, I'll make a motion to um approve the site. Sorry, I'm just going back language here. um approve the proposal to construct a parking lot on the property located outside the Goss Avenue um with the outlined amendments that John just filled out.

Yeah. And then can you just add one other condition that the I know Wayne will make the adjustments on the plan, but that the plan gets resubmitted for to the city planner for review prior to the chairman sending signing off on the plan. Okay. Could you read those again?

Uh number one is modify the south driveway to 24 ft with additional landscaping adjacent to the building. Number two is landscaping along the north property line. maintaining the current green space, but kind of cleaning that up with landscaping. And then the third one was when you get the plans revised, submit them back to Lisa. Lisa and I will review them to make sure those those conditions are met and then we'll send them over to Cynthia to have her sign it. Um, we forgot about lightning. Yeah. I Well, hold on. Before we do that, the drive that we're going to allow into this this one. Yeah,

that's going to have curb and then this is going to be landscape to the driveway, right? So, does that need to be included in I think we're just maintaining that curb cut into that garage anyway. So, no, it doesn't have to. But is it going to get as Carolyn show that's yes it says with additional landscaping adjacent to the build. All right. So now lighting they didn't submit photometrics I and some industrial they have lighting there now two yeah utility poles

yeah it matches the street light the same fixtures as the ones the whole you can see it on the photograph there's a light on a a DTV like a standard consumer's Oh yeah. Well, we don't have the our new lighting. We don't have the new lighting yet. So, you get out of that one for now. You come back. I do have a question about the partly spacing. You now are you saying that the area the little nook on the building right up at the rightway should be considered for four to five spaces right there?

The nook. Yeah. In the up. So, can we like not pave a little bit in those really awkward spots in the back corner there? I don't care. Like I mean, I'd rather see less paving. Yeah. Yeah. Because it it added to the drainage, everything. So, if we were to say what we could fit here, we could knock off there and maybe square this up. Yes. Not pave that. Right. Right. But could it become grass? Well, he still uses it for staging. He st Yeah, he still he still uses it. gravel. It's not a drain. It's currently Yeah. And it's way back there. Nobody sees, right? How much does it cost to use the planting grid that you can drive on that grass can grow up there?

If I'd rather just just leave just leave just leave a gravel untouched. Yeah. Because it it functions well right now and and it's kind of like the back 40, you know, for sure. But it's not like weeds growing through. No, no. It's it's got pretty compacted. Wade's business is to make cars beautiful and so mud puddles are not conducive to that. He does the best he can to keep the been a long time of dust and dirt and trust me we're over it. All right. Is that complete? Yeah, that's complete. Say it. I I just have a motion. I don't have the support. Right. But I guess she finished and to your side.

Okay. Okay. So Carolyn makes the motion. support. Darling makes the second and uh Ro call. Demer, yes. Reed, yes. Meridian, yes. Newman, yes. Robson, yes. Smith, yes. Wilmont, yes. Harris. All right. Um the um Yeah, we're good. Yeah, I think we seems like it's a good com. Yeah, I appreciate that. When you get when you get your plans done, Wade, you send them over to Lisa.

Yes. Yeah. Yeah. So Wade wants to know once they land in Lisa's hands and she approves that they meet the conditions of tonight then Wade only has essentially the well he'll have to get a curb cut permit city. He's just wondering what else he has to do zoning permit. He'll get the zoning permit as and get permit will come from the engine. We're just going over time frames. We're trying we're trying to make this happen this year. Oh you that time frame is not going to be this year. We can we can pretty fast. As soon as you get us plans, we'll we'll walk it through. Okay. So, he can tell his contractor

um so the lightning we just let that go, right? It's right now it's conforming, right? Okay. Once once you go through, is it going to have to change or not performing just only when changes only when changing same rules? Yeah. if if the new lighting ordinance gets approved.

All right. All right. Now, we'll take a little booty dinner and we have inve re re-uping and so they're there are serving a three-year term. And I just wanted everybody in the room to remember that when your term ends after three years, you need to reapply. So, you need to get in that form that's on online if you want to continue serving. So, just a friendly reminder about that for future. And if you want to know how long you've been on, it's on the website. You go under planning commission and then all of our names are there and it tells when we were um what when our term started and when it allowed.

So, okay. So, Re, do you know everybody? Uh, I don't think so. Okay. John Michael Angelie the city planner. So, you want to tell any more about yourself? Not really. I think the less people know the better off. He's a very good city planner and I'm I love working and he lives basically next door. Yeah. He doesn't want anyone to know. Go ahead. I said he doesn't want anyone to know.

So, I'm Max. Uh I'm Max Breed uh registered architect has uh I uh work for Spicer Group of Trevor City and own my own uh firm here. So nice to meet you. Likewise.

So Re Smith uh I was born and raised in Paskki. Uh up until recently I was part of the Stafford's ownership group uh that had the Perry Hotel, the Baby Win, uh Crooked River Lodge, uh the Weather Bane and Charlavoy and the Pier in Harbor Springs. We recently sold that by myself with all this time. Well, you know what? You look so relaxed and I you learned lesson. So, I think it's doing doing maybe it's a good good time to sell. It's a tough business to be in right now. So Oh yeah.

But that's my my background was uh I was primarily uh running the Perry Hotel for our our family business. Charlie Wiln been here since 2013 and Pasi member of the planning commission. This is the fourth year and uh the apparent city council person for war II assuming nobody does an active writing campaign on November 4th. Right. Carolyn Carolyn Demer. I was born here in Pasi and raised and I live on Michigan Street and I have a home office. Um I do building design and my husband works for students and I have the 11th grader at the high school

and I've been on science commission for five years. Right. And he's a skilled, right? He's a skier. Second in the state for GS and third for Wow. Yeah. You went all the way to Colorado and did Yeah. to Nor and so we don't always have her here because she's missing this be doing fist which is the uh super beater to the Olympics to ski division one in college so wonderful

well I know Rich I've known Rich for quite a few years he's a roast beef slicer working here. Lots of CL Cynthia Lyn Rosson. We know each other. Yeah. So, lots of lots of city time. Yeah. Yeah. I guess I didn't mention I was on the uh downtown management board for a number of years. The chair for two, three, four years. Pardon? Rich. I'm Rich Merian. I've been in the area for about 20 years. and on the planet commission for five years, six years at least. Six years.

Well, it's probably six years because you just Yeah. And retired orthotist and uh I just wanted to get involved in what's going on in the city. And then behind me, Lee, if you know Ted, I do. He's on our zoning ordinance committee um rewriting that. So, he's a big part of what we're working on right now. I I did take the time to kind of review the videos and things going on. So, hopefully I'll come up to speed pretty quickly. I appreciate that. All right. Welcome. Yeah. Welcome.

Very much so. All right. The next new business is item 6B, election of officers. So it didn't it didn't end up in our packet but Lisa may printed the um so you probably have a sheet in front of me that describes it. So this is for the election of officers um pursuance planning commission bylaws officers are elected annually. Oh we can wait. I said I said if he leaves the room now I'm gonna get elected.

What we always used to do in family reunion. Wait till he left the room. Well, at least you have family reunions. Well, I think this went pretty good. compromise on the uh Stanish Avenue. Yeah.

But it does illustrate how you know you design the zoning ordinance. But especially with historic properties, you have unintended consequences and you know there needs to be some flexibility built in to the to the process to accommodate for that. Yeah. went away particularly, you know, of course improvements which we certainly did. We did property. We did. So, what are all I know there's some detailing and the window tinting and ceramic ceramic coating

coating and then apparently there's an independent business that does upholstery upholstery and sewing and sewing. Okay. Oh, yeah. Yeah. So is that all for cars and vehicles? No, not necessarily. No, you can do other upholstery there. I didn't want to say anything, you know, at the time, but there are a lot of signs there, but the the native the nature of the number of businesses that are there, they need a number of signs, but if we looked at conformance, it's probably not conforming to the sign at all. Well, would that have been appropriate to someone? No, they're already there.

All right, we can get back to work. Sorry. Oh, no.

All right. So, I'm going to the duties of the chairperson. The chair shall proide at all meetings, appointment committees, and perform such duties as may be delegated by the commission or city council. The chair may establish committees once commission membership as needed and shall have the right to appoint new committee members at any time to fill a vacancy. And then the vice chairperson secretary the vice chairperson secretary shall act in the capacity of the chairperson and his or her absent and shall serve as a liaison between the commission and the designated staff member responsible for the execution of documents in the name of the commission. So current officers I'm the chair and is the vice chair. So, um I have a little form for how we proceed and it's based on the um Robert's rules of order and the process currently used for the Pasco board of conventions city council candidate nominations. Um this format is being suggested because the regular election procedure is not specified in the bylaws. So the se suggested candidate selection rules are chair chair opens the floor for nominations. A person can nominate themselves. Any board member can nominate another board member. Nominations for officers do not need a required second. A member can decline the nomination during the nomination process. Not hearing any further nominations, the chair will declare the nominations closed after confirming there are no more nominations forthcoming. And then the suggested voting procedure is if candidate for office is unopposed, a simple voice vote is allowed. If there's more than one candidate for an office, it will be a ballot vote. If in the first ballot process, no one has a majority. We repeat the voting until one candidate receives the majority of votes. The office is built when one candidate receives the majority of votes. Any questions?

There's two people. I say that's okay. Well, those could be 10 potential candidates, right? Oh, well, but we still Yeah, but Cynthia doesn't want to step out. Well, I am very willing to continue serving. Well, that was my that was my How about you? You're willing I'm willing to. Yeah, but I wouldn't play on this for sure. I basically my duties are to are to review the minutes each month and right make sure that they accurately reflect what our discussion was. So it's you do that. You'll get a if you think something's missing, you'll get a call.

All right. So I'm going to open the floor for um nominations. I nominate Cynthia Robinson as chairperson. Robson. Robson. Sorry. That's okay. does something. No, I I was thinking too fast and uh Well, wait. You do them one at a time. So, one at a time. Yeah. Okay. So, I'm not Thank you. Yes. Any other nominations for chair? All right. There's no other nominations for chair surprise. So, all in favor? I I All right. Everybody voting I.

All right. Then we move on to the vice chair and I'll nominate the vice chair Rick and u any other nominations. Um, all right. So, I'll close that nomination. Everybody in favor of Rick. I I back to work. Made me real nervous. They said something. I told you not to leave the room. Okay. All

right. Okay. mine up. We are uh oh I lost my agenda. I have plenty here. Oh, here we go. All right. Moving on to zoning ordinance updates 7A article 6 site development standards. So this is in your packet. So what did you want to do tonight?

Well, we wanted the PC to take a look at it to see if they had any questions, concerns, potential revisions. Just to give you those that are not on the committee kind of an update. Uh the zoning committee spent six meetings on article six. Um this was the site development standards includes parking. Uh anything that has to do with site development is included in this one chapter. So it's it was pretty extensive and it's most of the stuff that we talked about this evening relative to the site plan would would fall under article six. So that's why we went through it in great detail and uh thought the committee did a really nice job of uh thoroughly vetting it. The one thing that we did do, uh, I think we talked about it at the last meeting, was that when we got to the exterior lighting component of article six, we decided to take that out al together from the zoning code, put that in the city code like the signage sign ordinance and the zoning committee has been working on that as well. So,

and that should be ready for review soon. Yeah. I I sent it today to Shane to ask ask the manager if he pass it on to the city attorney. Oh, very good. Okay. So, for those that are not on the committee, I think most of everybody here on this side's all on the committee. We did submit the lighting ordinance to the Dark Sky Association for review. They gave us an initial review. The committee got together. We made some additional tweaks to it. We submitted it for a second review and we got back notification. I think it was either Friday or Monday

that if the ordinance is passed based on the latest revision, it would be certified by dark sky as a dark sky ordinance. Would be the first one in the country actually. Yeah. We we'd be the first city to be recognized as a dark sky lighting. Yeah. So, uh, that would be a problem. It would be. So, I sent it to the manager to ask if Laura would take a look at it. I figured I'd rather by the time it gets to city council. I'd rather have it that it went through planning commission, it went through dark sky review, and it went through city attorney. I agree wholeheart.

So, that hopefully we'll have that we'll have the lighting ordinance on the next planning commission agenda for the month of October. But let's get into article six. So yeah, do you want to highlight any changes? I mean, I think we think we updated and made some good changes on the landscape section, Cynthia. Um, rooftop decks were previously not allowed and they are. So that's there and commercial bus. Yeah. And I think we might have tweaked the noise ordinance a little bit. We did. Those have been some things that came to mind.

And then we we tried to standardize the parking requirements to make them more user friendly. Right. So the parking requirements changed from what was currently in the ordinance. Ted is correct. We we included we also have bicycle parking in here, right?

Where we give folks a a break on regular parking depending on how much off bicycle parking. We've got a provision on non-motorized transportation. We did do quite a bit on the uh landscaping in terms of consolidating and what we found which was interesting in the current zoning code a lot of the landscaping is only relative to the B3 district if I'm not mistaken and it doesn't apply to some of the other districts in the community. So that was one of the big changes that the landscaping provisions are now part of the site design standards for all districts. Uh so we made that that change. uh storm water uh we've got storm water management in here and we did make as Ted mentioned uh we did refine the noise levels uh to uh conform with uh some of the acceptable standards and we did include a section on building scale mass and design and rooftop decks uh which we didn't have before and then wall screening. So, we pretty much covered under section article six includes everything that somebody would need to incorporate into their site plan uh all in one chapter not spread throughout the entire code. So, uh but in addition the noise for instance applies generally not just to site plan.

Oh yeah. Generally throughout this yeah it becomes a almost a police. Yeah. Yeah. So these everything in here are the standards we would use when you're doing you know plan review and deciding whether it's um you know up to par or or if somebody came in for example wanted to put a rooftop deck in the downtown they don't have to go through site plan review but they have to meet these code requirements kind of like what Lisa does now. Yeah. So he evaluates

but again the rooftop debt only applies to commercial does not apply. That's correct. So say you have a residence that you've designed the roof lines to a point where there is no visible guard rail. It's almost the roofing comes up and creates the guardrail in and of itself. So you're in the parapit. There's no, you know, it wouldn't change the neighborhood characteristic, but it allows you to still occupy outside. Yeah. Like an airing deck. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That's considered a deck. That's an airing deck. Okay. Yeah. Like a widow's

airing deck. Under you guys know what it means. I mean, it's like on the second floor of a building, you may have a door with a deck. That's not a roof. That's just a That's part of the building component. A rooftop deck is in the downtown would be literally structure on the roof on the roof. But you said residential. It does not apply to if this is true. But he's residential. Could you have that?

Yeah. When we started this meeting, the commentary was it's not permitted, which I noticed that. So it made me go looking for it. I think we did talk at the at at the review committee that we didn't want to have rooftop decks in the residential area because of the potential for noise. Yeah. In lighting and everything else that would be a nuisance to maybe the adjacent property own. But right now we don't have that. We don't have that. I can think of one property with the garage is a flat road. Yep. And so yeah, it's on

State Street maybe down here over here. There's one but anyway so that book which is adopted but he doesn't seem out of place. No no so Oh well the the house on the corner on Mitchell. Yeah that all the way up the hill people have rooftop decks. Yeah. including four like you know Williams and uh accessory structures not

well yeah but that particular residence has a fire pit an outdoor kitchen and a hot tub. So, the one I'm talking about on Mitchell and the white, it was a historic. It was historic. I knew someone who lived there. It was a beautiful house. It still is. Yeah. The neighbors who are next to it were massively impacted by that rooftop venture. They changed their whole Yeah. But again, this does not deal with residential. Right. Yeah. How would you in terms of parking? I I think there was I think we had things that we added that were just not there. I I recall that.

Yeah. I think there was a I think the review committee took an opportunity to try to make things more coherent and more consistent across the lines for how we were considering um parking issues. We didn't change it dramatically. Um, I didn't fail. Did you, Charlie? In general, no. But we did make a lot of tweaks that were We We did like for example, we did, Ted. You're right. Under under the general provisions of parking, we have things in there now where parking services can be constructed with the pvious or pvious hard surface materials,

right? Uh and uh we've got drainage where we're we're practical low impact drainage. Uh we have uh snow storage is a requirement. Uh then we talked about parking duration and then we took the driveway requirements which were scattered in different parts of the existing ordinance and brought them all together. So we have driveway requirements for one and two family residential and we have ones for parking uh and driveway requirements for parking uh for commercial and then uh of course the downtown is exempt from any off- streetet parking requirements. We have minimum and maximum we now refer to that as required parking. Uh and we do have uh like I said we modified the the spaces uh significantly based on updated parking requirements uh depending on the type of land use. So

John did we put in gratitude for the planning condition to take these boards um well that there were elability to modify them. I thought we did. We did. Yes. Yeah. kind of to Charlie's point that about right it says the planning commission may based on lot configuration dimensional requirements restrictions and or neighborhood development characteristics grant an increase or decrease in the required parking right what line are you on that would be line 128

that that was kind of I think an attempt to not say equival pushing to go to the CPA, but it was ability to have some ability for the commission that Well, it would have been would have been a perfect example. Yes. I was going to ask you what's in here that would have helped us. That right there would have been there. And the multiple uses in one parking lot reduced it by 30%. Oh, yeah. I don't remember John. Yeah. say and the other I think the other part of it is what our current ordinance doesn't allow it but this would give the planning commission the flexibility when you deal with businesses like we did tonight which has nine parking bays we should be able to give them credit

yes for the parking bay because people you know people are coming there to do business and then their car is moved into a parking bay service bay yeah service bay so you're it's we should be able to give a a property owner some credit yes for that which would then reduce the amount of pavement and therefore reduce the amount of storm water. Of course, the flip argument would be that the use may change and the buildings are there. So, right now they're kind of parking in buildings, but some of the calculations Yeah. But with with the use change zoning permit, Lisa would recalculate it. Okay. Yeah. Yeah.

And trust me, she takes it down to the decimal point. I appreciate it, Lisa.

So, that's that's article six. Um, it it's really all site development stand. This was like the last major article before we get into this the zoning discerns which Yeah. John, would you prog, tell them what we've done and where we're going with it and what the intent is once once the planning commission looks at these these sections. The we've got 14 new chapters in the zoning code. The planning commission started out with the easiest ones first, which were ones that are based on state statute, zoning board appeals, uh, uh, severability and amendments, uh, all that kind of stuff, the responsibilities of the zoning administrator. Then we went into the the kind of the regulatory part of the ordinance, which was general conditions that apply throughout the city. We got that out of the way. And then we went into site site design uh site development uh and then we also did overlay districts. So we kind of reversed engineered the zoning code rather than start out with zoning districts and what the uses are in the districts. We took a look at the provisions of the code that really apply throughout town regardless of what zoning district you're in because the zoning districts are going to be the really where the the planning commission's really got to roll up their sleeves, have a community conversation and get into the the granular part of the zoning in terms of what districts do you want, what's going to go in the districts and where the districts are going to be geographically located in the city. So, we saved the best to last, but we got a lot of the regulatory stuff out of the way.

So, to back up just a little bit more than that from the very beginning, u I think most of us were under the impression that we were going to work with existing zoning ordinance and make modifications to it. Uh but it became pretty apparent pretty quickly that uh we really had to start fresh and write a whole new ordinance with a whole new table of contents, a whole new organization to it, something you could follow as opposed to what you have now, which is if you're looking for something in the existing ordinance, you have to read all 80 pages of it or whatever in order to find it.

So, uh things changed along the way. it became a bigger project and the whole thing was initiated, correct me if I'm wrong, uh by a couple of city council people who wanted very specific wanted the planning commission to address very specific changes in terms of setback and density in particular and u it's kind of grown since then.

Yeah. The old the current code was adopted in 1972. So, it's it's 50 years old and over the years it's been amended and modified and as Charlie mentioned, it's we actually had one developer that specifically called for a meeting with Lisa and I because he said, "I gave up on reviewing the ordinance. I need you guys to help explain what I can do with my property." So it's you have to be really Lisa is probably the most familiar with the code because she works with it dayto-day but it is kind of convoluted in some areas. Charlie's right when we got into it was like we're just going to rewrite it and

because a lot of it was just simply not conforming to Michigan. So, and some of the things we just, you know, I can't remember, one of them was electric vehicle things. We just did that. We just did that. Yeah. So, that just got transferred over because that's So, the original intent was to deliver to city council chapter by chapter for review and commentary. But we did that once and then we stopped. Correct. Because you explained that part of it. The first three or four chapters that we sent over to council to get review and get their comments individually, I only received comments from

one council person and they really weren't specifically revisions. It was more or less cons concepts or policies that they thought we should include. Uh so from that point on it was decided by uh that we would just proceed at the committee level and at the planning commission level and then when we got the full book put together then we would make a consolidated presentation to council on what what was all included and what we did and that'll probably take a special meeting a joint meeting between the planning commission city council

and John had sent uh I think some chapters to each individual, you know, council member got do you have comments? And then there was a problem. Some of the problem was that they might comment individually, but they kind of have to act as a body, right? So, it wasn't that helpful because one council member could say we really animated about something, but that doesn't you don't know what the filing say, right? And I got that impression on Monday night. Monday night. It was a service. Oh, really?

I just fine. Once the planning commission finishes with its work, city council will start all well well yeah for certainly uh and not not certainly don't but one of the council members you know Tina was against me would would have liked to have the old code and then this if you change a red line to red line and it makes sense on one level and I I I like that idea. I wish it would have been a better ordinance we had, but it just had too much, right? It had too much stuff in different places. It had things missing. You'd have to become an expert that red line.

It wasn't going to work well. And now you're that having been said, each one of the articles as it goes to the website has red lines attached to it. If you choose to go back and read them article by article, you can follow along. But that's not the current sentiment. I I think we had a spirit of idea. It's a big task. But as John goes forward and makes presentations that and like I tried to ask what were some of the highlights of site development standards tonight that he's going to like there's a few things that were brand new. So he's going to tell people these things are brand new. We made a few park so people can at least if they want to focus, you know, that's what a lot of people want to know. What did you change? What was the that's exactly

now? Did you change a period or in a hospital or something? But you know, but if they all honesty, you have to say, well, we changed everything. Yeah. But but Charlie's right. If you go to the website, project website, it's it's got it's got the meeting minutes. It's got the agendas. It's got every red line that we've done. somebody wants to spend the time, they can see all the work that the committee has done over the last year so far. So there's there's a I think there's a website for all that. If you go to the if you go to the city's website, there's a link on home page. On the homepage, it says zoning ordinance. It'll take you to the project website and all of the all of that stuff is there. It's just

so you can see the other chapters that we finished. A lot's there. So when when the chapters are brought to the PC, um it's after the zoning ordinance review committee has gone, right? We're we're making a recommendation. We are making a recommendation to you two guys by Henry. No, but I guess what I'm asking is so so if there's any discussion that happens on that particular chapter at that time. Yes. and and so hopefully we all, you know, reach a consensus and then yeah, that's how it works. But of course, this all precedes

more of a public presentation. I mean, it's it's out there and certainly a city council, but absolutely if you guys have commentary to integrate, change, just integrate it. We're listening. We'd love we'd love to have that input. There'll be a lot more involvement when we get to set bags. when that was the decision that was made was when we get to the setbacks, density and uh redistricting. Yeah. The the zoning ordinance review committee technically is now finished. The rest of it is up to the planning commission. You'll you'll convene at the end when we do a definitions, right? But yeah, right now I mean, yeah, from now on it's the full board going to be working on this

so that when the planning commission gets it, they know when the uh council gets it, they know the full planning commission has weighed in on those issues. Yeah. Uh it would seem again based on Monday that that the parking requirements are going to be a hot button for one or more individuals, I would say. What what parking issues did they discuss Monday? They don't want any. I'll tell you the commentary of one board, one council of person was look, private homeowners and private developers know what they need. Just let them do what they need.

Yeah, that's way too vague. Well, but I'm just telling you I'm not I'm not agreeing with that. I'm just telling you what we're up against. Right. Some communities are that's a slight exaggeration, Charlie, but slap, but maybe only slightly. Parking is always a very contentious issue. Yeah. Well, it's the same attitude about density. It's the same attitude and you want with parking.

Same attitude about density, some setbacks and redistricting. Now voices will change in January but right there are still voices. Well it rolls us into our next topic which is more voices. Yeah. So but and hopefully the council will realize when there's some big changes, you know, re redis redoing zoning districts, maybe it's heights, maybe it's parking that the public will weigh in too. So yeah, I'm always curious when some council members think it's so important what they think going into something when their view should be what does the city want.

This is why one of the things we have to do is make sure that the public engagement because they will not have public engagement without jurying period. They're not going to have public hearings or charettes or anything like that. That's up to us. Yeah. And I we are planning to do that. We'll definitely have community open. Yeah, for sure. Once we once we get through chapters or articles two and three in terms of what districts we're going to have and what uses. Yeah, we need to have a public open house. Yeah.

John, can you just refresh me again? Hey, I look at this and I can tell this like in terms of the noise section of site development standards. Why it's in a section that's says site development standards, but it really applies. It's a general kind of more of a general noise ordinance. Um, we we talked about a future for we do have noise in the general provisions. I believe we also have a in the general provisions there is a a reference to noise. Okay. Yeah. Is the language consistent? Yes. Yeah. We cross that. All right. All right. So, are we ready to move on to the question there?

Sure. Max. Okay. I'm just reviewing it right now. I'm glad you're not chair. Oh, wait. No, no. You want to go through it? Yeah. Page five. Well, I want to go through it because, you know, the zoning committee kind of we went through a couple of iterations of this, but you know, this is this is where the community starts weighing in on what they think are community characteristics and things they like and they don't like.

So, yeah, I think it's important that we go through it. So, what we're looking for is if you have other things we should be paying attention to. If you think there's other issues that we should ask about, we want to hear about that. If you think a question is not clear or you think you could get glean more information if it was asked differently, we want to hear about that. Or you don't understand why it's being asked, right? But I think number one is self-explanatory, but the intent is to give us feedback so we can jump into this next round of what we do. Correct. And what we're going to then I'll be interested to know, John, on question number one, are you going to wait if they fill in the third circle, are you going to weight that differently?

No. If they fill in if they if they if they indicate that they reside in Bay Harbor or they do not reside in the city and they hit next, it takes them to the end of the surveys. Thank you very much for your participation. Oh, it does. All right. Yeah. Yeah. And it says and it and there's a line in there at the very end, I think on the last page, it says that it reminds people that live in Bay Harbor that their zoning is regulated by resort township, not by the city. And then for businesses, it says basically they don't get a vote. They don't get they don't go they don't get to serve. So

John, just as you're saying that, it didn't strike me when we discussed this, but you know, I know in some election campaigns there were people who thought they were voting for certain people and they they really thought they lived in the city of Pasi, but they didn't because they're in a Pasi postal zip code. Yeah. Yeah. So yeah. So they I mean just for what it's worth, there were people who who are sure they live in the city of JH who don't Yeah. And that may happen, but I tried to glean the other. You think most Yeah.

They just don't get they don't get what these lines are. like but they don't know what's you know a lot of people like they might be in the Powensky school district I would right well if you live like for example I would I did work I do work up in Bman Township now that's that's 10 miles north of Harbor Springs right and their mailing address is Harbor Springs so you're at Breadman Township you're about in the middle of nowhere and it's Harbor Springs so yeah I get where you're going There will be some. But I have a correction to make then. I was born and raised in Springville Township.

There you go. But you were always in always in the 4977 zip code. Yeah. Yeah. 616. And qu question two is kind of self. Are you a homeowner? We want to know year round, seasonal, renter, business owner, etc. Um, and then we want the age. Again, are you going to weight things differently as a result of those? No, I I I kind of stay it allows me to, but I stay away from the waiting. Okay. I want to see what the what what the raw numbers are. So, if you're a business owner in Pasi, yeah.

Is there a way of But you don't live in Pasi. Don't we want They already got thrown out if they don't. Yeah. So they so they get I mean I would like to hear from the business owners that work in in town. Yeah. Like they got here today where he lives. Well maybe they maybe they there should be a way to bubble. Well they would write they would already have put down that they live in earlier. Well I can do under number one I I can put I am a business owner own business. Number two. You can change number. You could say business owner and then you could have a second option business owner but not resident. He's going to add business owner to question number one. Yeah.

Okay. In the city of So number one would be I reside in the city. Number two I own a business in the city of Paskki. Yes. Or would say I reside or own property or business. I wouldn't say necessarily business. own property. Okay. So, so you can reside or you can own property. Well, what if it's a lease differentiate between residential? Well, they're affected by zoning. So, but you don't own the Well, they don't live. They don't own the property. But if you own a business and you're conducting it in the city of Pasi, I'd like to hear from them.

Sure. Tell them. So, you could say I reside in I own property. I own a business. I I got the I'll I'll work it out. Okay. I got So, do you need business owner then on question number two since you've already established that? Uh, no. I probably don't unless at some point you were curious and wanted to run it run cross tab. I I

Okay, we're going to run a cross tab on it. Um, ages are based on the census stuff. That way I can compare the age distribution on the survey to ACS to see what the uh matches up or not. Number four is how long have you lived in your neighborhood? So, I guess if you're a business owner, they just don't answer. They don't answer. I do have a question on the age thing. someone who is in that youth council or in the school like they're you know under 18 like should we know what they want for their future like their community like they think of their neighborhood where they live now

that's part of the master plan is to retain youth less than yeah 12 to 18 something okay

I'll put less than Nobody doesn't know. And on question number four, why don't you add a fifth bubble that says not applicable? Uh, why would that not? They might be a business owner. Oh, well then you How long would you It's not applicable. So at least because he you just said, "Well, they don't they won't fill anything." Well, yeah. They required to fill everything in. So we got to give them something. And again to do that with several. Yeah. So like number five. Yeah. [Music]

Oh yeah. Okay. Number five is what ward then number the next p there'll be a map. They select what ward they're [Music] going back to going back to number five. condition not applicable. That's great. A lot of people aren't even going to know. Don't know. Can you put don't know? That's a good one. That must be a six. Well, they they should know. Well, they have a map. Look at the map. All right. It's much easier to see. I guess we can give them a blank.

Okay. And then number six, you know, we live in I love it. Yeah, we'll start looking it up. I want to I have looked at mine and I forgot. So then seven is what do you find attractive about your neighborhood? This is comment boxes. Type in as much as you want. Number eight is what do you find unattractive? Number nine is what could you what could be done to improve the character of your neighborhood? And number 10 is there's something that you would like to do on your property that isn't allowed under our current zoning ordinance. Chickens.

Number 11 is characteristics. Please evaluate the following as it relates to your neighborhood. Three choices. Too much, about right, too little. We asked the square footage of homes, the height of homes, the house set back from the street, home landscaping, lighting levels at night, street trees, and on street parking. Can anybody think of anything else? I just wondered uh I just as I'm sitting here, I don't know how to say it, how close homes are. Oh, right. Some sense of spacing um indirectly related to me. You have we have to keep it what can we do this short

distance between us how set back from use the word set yeah that set is from the street no they're set back from next door neighbor I think something more people understand different spaces between houses uh for the size of home for the square footage Would it make more sense to ask lot area coverage or do that? Wait a minute. So square footage. Yeah. Isn't that blew up?

I I don't know. I'm having a hard time with that because I would be more concerned with lot area coverage versus square footage. I ask both. You would you would but I don't think most people would know what their liaric I was surprised often when I look at my property and look at properties it's you probably do understand it better than most people but maybe maybe you say something like the size of the lot because that sort of fits we have that lot size well I like lot coverage but it's do people know that print lot size

house center. Yeah. Hey, I'll put down spaces space between houses and I'll put down lot size. Oh, street trees. That's beautiful. I see that. Yeah. You know, one of these concepts. What did you say? Off just a minute. Off street trees. You're happy about street trees. Yes, that's a question. Yeah. All right. Okay. John, sorry. One of the concepts I mean this should also help to educate as well as collect opinions. Right. So one of the con the most difficult concept I think for anybody to understand it's going to be density

and it's going to be a hot button at the council. So the question is how how and where can we ask a question to get feedback on the concept. That's where the size of the lot could come in. Small lot. Well, yeah. But the picture 12 number 12 starts getting into density. What what houses or starts getting into density? Yeah. What housing type would be acceptable?

You know, I I I have a little beef with the pictures. Those are all, you know, fabulous places. And I I've never seen a Forplex or whatever you call it that looks that nice around here. What? Like those town houses you mean on the middle right? He's talking about the middle middle right but but it does give you the it does convey the quad blocks. But maybe you'd want examples from the city. No. Then I we run into problems with property owners

high properties. But I I think for instance a hlex uh people might check that off saying well that looks nice and or they might the quadlex is pretty obvious that you've got four units but um I think it well should you have a caption under each of these pictures? Oh I thought we weren't that if it comes up the caption I I looked is when they tabulate the results it'll say ranch house. Oh, you know, because the the tabulation is not going to show the picture. It's going to show and you put right for the purposes of the person filling it out. Just put a caption on, right? No, it's all visual perception.

John is our our later question. We had some question about um do we delve into and this is a question that all looks design standards. Uh remember we have a question later about I think should there be regulations residential right? Yeah commercial. So does that get to that answer about like maybe someone that doesn't mind quadplexes but they don't want them to look like crap? Well later on when you ask them should there be design standards in residential areas I would think they would say yes. Well, there's got to be later on. There is a question that's

they might this question. Well, they might be type of just say which house type which type of house type. Yeah. Okay. Which house type? Okay. Yeah. All right.

Okay. 13. 13 is how high should a new house in your neighborhood be? This gets at the uh height of the stories. And I guess we're just kind of assuming that that's pretty clear. Most people think of a twostory house with a typical pitched roof and that's what they're imagining. So, I think that's pretty clear.

Number 14 is kind of a fun question. I tried to make it interactive. It says, "Use the sliding scale. How far back from the sidewalk should the house be located?" So, you can go from zero to 50. Just slide the scale wherever you want it. How does that take going back to 13? Could you put four? What? So, are we talking about this is neighbor? This is residential. This is residential. I'm aware of that. John, now that we talked about there is to know what their answer is. Oh, that now that we're talking about this one, John, it just occurs to me you said twotory 20 25 ft. Yeah.

That you're I mean, isn't our Well, our two and a half story is what 37 feet. What's our Is it? No. Yeah. That could only be 20 ft if it had a flat roof, right? How about I got two architects and architectural designer. You guys tell me what feet you want in you. Do you like a twotory house, but what should you put for feet? Should it be 20 to 25? Like I thought that's what I was thinking, Rich. 20 is like a flat road. I think it should be 25 to 30. And then the two and a half story portion bigger as well. 30 to 35 right

so what give me the numbers guys but then people don't know how he calcul you think that is what are the numbers two story for John 2 and a half two and a half is 30 to 35 or do you need do you need the heights in this John or do you just want to people know they No. Yeah, let's get rid of the height. Resonate the heights and just Well, Rich suggested up two and just the tops.

I think if you got rid of the heights, it would just there would be no question. Yeah. Okay. Right. Trying to figure out where I'm very into houses and when I was what's my what's my table at? I had to measure it. I mean, I was It's very hard for people. You're saying but just keep the heights on. No, get rid of all the parentheses. People don't understand that zoning height is halfway between the right and the E. All right. That's what I kept trying to figure out as we're doing this.

Okay. Number 15 is if the new zoning clo zoning code included site and building design standards such as height, entry, location, building materials, and architectural compatibility for triplexes, which are three units, or quadplexes, would these building types be acceptable in your neighborhood? That's it, right? Okay, good. Oh, wait. If a zoning code, it's the new zoning. The new zone. the news

a zoning code. Make it theoretical. If you haven't introduced the fact that this is all about the possibility of a new zoning code, it's not a cover sheet or just get their feeling on whether a zoning code should include this. Oh, it it's I have it I have it on the thing. Many of the characteristics can be codified into rules and regs in the city's zoning code. Yeah. Doesn't say we're doing a new zoning code. I don't doesn't bother me one way or the other. I'm just we we learned a little bit from the parks survey.

Well, you could say if the zoning code includes we have to say new, right? That's right. The word new is the one that Well, but or is it good because we don't currently allow this kind of thing, right, John? Correct. So, it's it's reemphasizing the point that this is a new thing. If in the new zoning code we allowed that's how I was taking it.

It's like oh that would be new trip boxes crop. So it's a new thing but is it okay if we put in these design standards? It's not a thing we currently do. It's it's not in our current code. I think it's ridiculous rule. Ask the question, how much of a site should be covered by a house? People can pay 50% of it.

Oh, that's 75% of it. Right now it's like 33 to 39%. I don't know how you There's like some sort of a diagram like a square within a square. What percentage of what maximum percentage of could be covered by there's a lot of people that aren't visual thinkers so they don't picture I think that's useful if you could do it like saying a box but then expand or make the box. Not on survey monkey. If I had qualrics, I could do some other interactive, but not survey monkeys. Not that because I don't think people are going to really get the percentages.

Well, if they can slide, they can see the percentages on slide, you know, it's not that you're like that much. I think it'd be a good question to ask. And it's just going back to maxes. I think that's an important part for density. People understand. Okay. What percentage of a residential home should occupy structures? So it's not just the home would be include the ADU and detach garage, detach garage, garden shed.

I'm afraid that with this scale um that they're going to select like 50% which is not going to be appropriate and then that's going to circumvent here. Well, then when we have our community outreach night, we can ask people like you said 50%. We can have a diagram up and be like, is this do you really want 50%. Like this is what it would look like. Well, it doesn't say percent. People assume that's percent. Do you think people care? Do you think people care so much about that percent or what they really care about is this issue of sideyard setbacks, how close things are to them. You know what I mean?

Yeah. We did add that question. How somebody could space between if we didn't have a 30% allow lot coverage and everyone just did their buildable area, right? That would be over 30%. It would be similar to Birmingham ran into that. With the McMansion, Jimmy. Yeah. Where they maximize their lot coverage and that towers over the bungalow next to them. Yep. That's where Pal. But what kind of setbacks did they have? We got a 25 yard. Oh, I love Oh, they're very similar. I compared the daylight planes ordinances to so it shows um it enables people to get sun in their windows where another house can't put them in the shade

247. So guys what do you want with this percentage of of well alternative the way you did the photograph you could do two or three boxes that show different percentages filled in thing. Okay, I'll follow that. It does bring up the point where percentage like how would they know is that percentage and then it's also the same like is that feet percent symbol or something? Yeah. Well, the number 14 is feet. Doesn't say that. Where say feet,

but you assume it using a sliding scale. How far back from the sidewalk should be next to people.

Okay, I'll try to come up with a number new number 15, but keep with the number so we're all on the same page. Number 16 is please evaluate the following as they relate to your neighborhood. Street width, traffic volume, on street parking availability, bike friendly street. We do quality of street material. I don't want to go down that road. It's not Can you give them a comment period to elaborate if they choose to? Uh yeah, I can say other there'll be a comment box. Another one.

Okay, we have 26 of these submitted. So, okay. 17 is using the scale. Tell us your opinion on preserving views of the bay or historic landmarks. This the Albert Pomoria question. Yes. Weren't you going to reverse 18 and 17? Uh yes. I thought I did already, but maybe I didn't. So 17 becomes 18 and 18 becomes 17. Is that what you're talking about? The last time we had it the other way. We asked you guys told me to put reverse it. So, we were talking about the bay and historic landmarks and the number 18 was do you have a view of the bay

after they've answered it? Yeah. Okay. Yeah, you're right. Right. Okay. So, all right. Then number 19 is development standards. Which type of development should have a higher level of standards related to their activities? Mhm.

The standards would include such items as lighting, noise, hours of operation, traffic, off- streetet parking, and outdoor storage. Please select all that apply. And we talk single family, detached, attached, apartments, ADUs, mixeduse, restaurant, bars, entertainment, retail or shopping, automotive related, public, industrial, and home occupations. I think it's good, John. This is just jogging my mind now that Brett said something about Monday night's meeting. Do we have a specific Do we have a specific enough question? Do you think in general that there should be parking requirements for

residential? Another question. Oh, first I mean should should we have a standalone on that so we can get feedback from what the citizens think? Yeah. Uh it's number 22. It is. Yeah. Number 22 says in your opinion should the number of off street parking be based on the type of use mandated by the code or should the property owner business owner decide how much parking they Okay. Yeah. We did. So we'll get we'll get we'll get that information. All right. So, do we want to add anything to 20? I'm good.

Um, on 19 comparing 19 and 20, you've got um under 19 you have the word activities while you bold it, which is sort of the purpose of that one. But under 20, you don't have exterior appearance bolded. Don't you want to bold that? Oh, yeah. Mr. First, you want to comment on can

and then uh 21 is how should the quality of new commercial apartments or mixed uses uh improve in the future? Uh and then we have improved landscaping, building construction, parking lots, sidewalks, bicycle, wayfinding, and what do you mean? New commercial, new buildings. Yeah, new commercial apartments, mixeduse buildings. The bus, improved building, construction material, commercial building, apartment. Okay.

And then 22 is about parking if we need it or not. 23 is please identify any issues or concerns you have regarding residential districts. 24 is commercial districts and 25 is industrial districts. These are all comments. So Caroline you the quality do you think that's a better I don't know like if that's the right yeah we're talking about what 21 so improved building construction materials that was the first thing that I thought of um should be develop characteristic

character people really know what character means So people like I guess would we say architectural character appearance I like the parents. Yeah. Okay. So how would you how would in how would you fit that in there? Should the appearance of new commercial herbs or mixed use be improved in the future? Yeah. Well, aren't they just gonna pick Aldron?

Developers probably won't. I think some people will really hit their big I can I can tell you what I can do is I can turn this into a ranking. Oh, so they have to they have to rank them one wherever the number is 1 2 3 4 5 6 1% they have to rank so we can find out what the top top. So appearance is so subjective though and building construction materials is specific um because you can have a very pretty building that is all vinyl. So here we have two. Yeah.

We got to you got to think about we all we all come from different specialties. You have to think about how the how the a resident that is not from a design profession or a planning profession is going to read this and what they're right. And they're focused on we're focused in this question about a parent. It's about a parent. So if the vinyl looks better, they're going to vote for it. Okay. And do they really know what the quality right so the objective for a lot of people

and then the other last four are just comments and they're not required. It's like you got anything to tell us about residential, commercial or industrial districts? Anything in particular? I was wondering in the marriage number one we had a box if they wanted to fill in they could put in their address put their address

yeah I don't want to get into trouble when you fill it out my son

I'll make the changes all Great. So, uh, this is kind of like chapter six just keeps on discussing. You don't you don't say what's going to happen to the results or when it'll be available than this. At the very end, you might want to say something, you know, check back periodically to the city of Paskki website for or a summary of results. invite them to the open house or email them register for the weekly newsletter. We do that in here. Would you want to have a Yeah. Where they could register for the

week? No. No. We send out. Well, John, in your city uh since you Yeah, I've registered three times. I still don't care. But John, in your intro on on page one before question one, do you want to include something? These results will be tabulated and will be available on the front on the city's website. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I think some information to Yeah. more aware

and that and you also have an opportunity to sell them some if you want to sell them some meaning engage in the process. Well, we we on the city website, project website, if they want to get notified, they can they give us their email. We got about 60 or 70 people that gave us their emails. So, every time we have an a meeting, they get a they get an email. Every time they have meeting minutes, they get an email. So I can put at the bottom the last part of the if you want to keep in be in kept informed of the progress on the zoning ordinance insert your email and then we'll harvest that. Great.

Okay. Thanks. It'll be fun. I'm interested to see what this comes out. Yeah. Been a lot of fun. If All right. The only question I have is how do we want to distribute it? Well, do we want to wait another month to see the next iteration or is I think we should get it out. We should should I I'll send it out I'll send it out to everybody on the PC the next revision and then anybody that's got any questions can just comment individually. Don't reply all. Yeah.

Is there anyone outside of the planning commission that ought to be consulted on this before? That's not something the lawyer needs to see. No, you talking about city council. City Well, city manager city council. I'll show this the city manager. Obviously, there was such a negative push back on the parks and wreck survey. I just think the more everybody's on the same page, the happier everybody will be. What was the park and rec? the one the one that went out with the examples of the two examples of what do you want for your local park. Okay.

And didn't and said it implied choose one or the other cuz you're going to get one of these. Oh, okay. It was not clear that this was simply an idea conversation. So yeah, sooner we can get out. So it did it did more harm than good in the end. But John, at some point, I mean, how many people can you create this survey? I mean, this is a pretty good group. Yeah. This is like a a manageable group. I think we start throwing a draft out saying, "Why don't you comment, you comment, look, we're get beyond the draft. We're we're never going to get beyond the draft." I I understand. I think some of the questions that I know council's concerned about,

Jane may be very sensitive to if he wants somebody else's feet. I I'll certainly He has that prerogative as city manager. Yeah. Okay. Commissioner Palance. Okay. What were your impressions of the council meeting? They were slightly different than mine in terms of the zoning. Well, they couldn't even like the parking thing. They could not get past that this was a temporary thing for this particular site. I mean, you know that that

Well, here here's an and refresh. Thank you. Refresh my memory. We have a business that has come to the city to take out a zoning permit. Who? It's a pizzeria. They have no suits. And based on our current code, they're not required to provide any parking for their employees. Correct.

And that's exactly what we told council. What we thought could happen is that some of these new businesses now don't have any seating. They don't want seating. They want they want the ability of people to come and pick it up or they're going to have Door Dash take it to your house. And we we just got one of those businesses the other day and that they're already under construction. And by the way, I didn't want to say this to city council, but they are probably going to have at least one delivery car. Probably. Sure. Okay. Well, if we only require them one employee parking space, they may have three spaces they need for delivery vehicles.

But although chances are people with those Door Dash things, you provide your own car. But you need you need you need to start. Well, you're right. You're right. You're right. Yeah. So, we we we said it was coming and it it's come. I mean, Leah Lisa got the zooming and she called me up and said, "Jen, just want to let you know we got a business that has no seating and therefore they're not required to have any parking." So, that's fine. No. Well, my fines like that. Yeah. But this is a new pizza. Well, Jimmy, it's not pizza. No, it's cottage in Oh, pizza. This is a different location from Ann Arbor. Yeah. Oh,

location. They're going in where the Dolce Vita uh uh salon used to spot to get in and out of. What's that? No. Right over on That's a terrible spot to get in and out of. Right there by the marathon station. Right. Right there. Yeah. They got they got the vent out there. They're That's a nightmare to get in and out. They're Hey, the current code allows it. No parking. They don't need any parking because right now it says if you don't have any dining space, you don't need any parking.

Well, the attitudes at city council on Monday night, and Re will check me on this. Um maybe it was a slight exaggeration, but there was one council person who said that if I I trust that business owners know what they need, let them do what they need. That was one. Another one was simply don't want to even consider this because I'm two of them so pissed that uh we aren't further along with this process. This is a band-aid and we don't want band-aids. We want fixes.

And then there was the the other point of view which is we're going the wrong way in Tataski regarding parking. The rest of the country is doing away with parking limitations and that's the direction we should be headed. I'm voting no. Most of the communities are going to midmax which we have here already required number set number which confused the hell out of them max. Yeah. Uh there's only one community that I know of maybe there's more but the latest community that went no parking was city of Denver about a month ago. After 10 years

of quibbling about it they finally said we're not going to have any parking requirements anymore. don't care. Build build whatever you want. You don't have to provide. And if I could, John, you know, it has to be pointed out that just because someone did something doesn't mean it's a good idea. They don't know the implications how that work. Like you said, Denver just did that, but it took them 10 years. So, five or 10 years to go through all that. They'll know what happened. It doesn't mean it worked out. And it doesn't mean maybe after maybe after two years it won't work out. Pretty accurate, right? Okay.

Yeah. So, it's it's interesting, but you know, the bottom line is I don't think people appreciate the amount of work that the zoning committee has put into this because I've recorded every meeting and I can we have five people. I have all the numbers. Every meeting goes at least two hours. We've spent the zoning committee has spent hundreds of hours writing writing. You say it's not only the meeting time, but it's, you know, we all do a lot of research. They appreciate it, but not in a positive way.

Well, he wants to get it. He's off the commission. Well, first of all, he wants he wants it, but he said he could basically he hadn't said this, but if you just done what Lindsay and I asked for to begin with, it had been done a year ago. Well, yeah, we're doing a new code. We're doing it methodically. We're doing it with a lot of conversation, a lot of forethought. I've been very comfortable with the progress. I know that when it gets to council and the community, they're making some different attitudes that go on. I'm expecting it,

but I can honest I can honestly say that we have done a really good job doing our homework to date. we really so I would urge you to give some more consideration to uh some kind of clerical review of the two documents to try and draw uh the points together because one one of one of the continuing board members said uh one of the continuing uh council members said to me that without such a document they cannot they don't have the time to do their due diligence and put in the number of hours that Zork did and therefore they're going to vote no.

Well, that's good. They they should they should vote no because my my my position is this. As a former mayor and a former council person, you rely on the people that you appoint to your commissions to do a good job. You don't second guess them. Especially when this group has spent hundreds of hours. The council should be appreciative of that. Now, if they listen to this, they may get upset with me. Don't care because that that's the missing link that's going on in local government

between the commissions and the elected officials. You guys get appointed by you guys submit your applications. They know you in the community. They should have respect for the amount of time that you put into these these work tasks. Yeah. So when you deliver something to them, they should be assured that you guys put your time into it without second-guessing everything that you do. Like the rental ordinance. Like the rental ordinance. Why are they sitting? No idea. Charlie, I hope you can point out when you're on too what a huge disservice it would have been to take this zoning ordinance from the 1970s 2025 and not do a thorough review of the whole thing. Right. I mean, unthinkable,

Charlie. I I'm just I'm just telling you what I'm and I'm just telling you what my experience of 40 years in local government has been. The elected body appoints the commissions. They should have respect and what their junior commissions bring to them. There shouldn't be all this second guessing that goes on and re-reoes, more than one voice there that feel that this should have been rewritten by the council. Oh, that's ridiculous. And what are they going to I understand that that that that that's that's litigation waiting to happen. Let let's get the lawyers lined up with the briefcases outside ready to go. Now come on.

I mean that that in fact you know the bottom line is that is not the role and responsibility of the city council. Um yeah, we get educated. So um I have my citizen planner master citizen planner certification. So I have taken I don't know many many classes. I take six credits a year. So for the city council to try to tackle this, this board gets educated so that we actually know Yeah. Well begin to have an understanding and then we have the guidance of our city planner and the zoning administrator that works with it on a day-to-day basis. Oh yes. Yeah.

Yeah. You can't discount the amount of uh ex expertise that Lisa brings. Yeah. Oh, to the zone. This October training thing that's coming up will be universal for the planning commission. And I apologize for my retirement, but I'm not apologetic about a You don't need to apologize. I just think that there's a disconnect between what what the elected officials do in any community and what their commissions are doing. Same thing's happening in Harbor Springs. Oh, God. Yes. Their planning commission this last year has quantified that they've worked over 1,700 hours. Yeah. On the zoning ordinance and the city council over there is probably still going to vote it down. I mean, it's this is this is systemic what's happening now in local government.

It doesn't take very many voices to steer it that way either. No, it does not. So, just takes a lot of voices. Put it this way. Yeah. the process working with the committee and working with the planning commission and I'm sure working with parts of the community has been very very desirable and I think it's been very it's been very easy in terms of how we've all communicated together and the input that we've received. Am I expecting it to go that easy when we get to the city council and community? No.

And you shouldn't either. But I am going to require when I will use the word require that when the ordinance is on the meeting for the first reading at city council, I want the entire planning commission there as well as Ted who worked on the committee in the audience helping make the presentation. It's not my ordinance. It's our ordinance and it's the community's ordinance. That's correct. You know,

so well it doesn't got I I was asked countless times as well as being chastised on the record um when we thought we would be putting it forward to city council and I was not encouraging that they would see it this year. My target was December, but based on the fact that it's we have to get the survey out yet and have the open houses, they're probably not going to see it probably until January or February. That was mine. Charlie, wasn't there some sense that the mayor didn't really want to discuss it with council changes over at the first of the year?

So, rephrase your question. What did my understanding I thought that the mayor actually was hoping to have the discussion more after after the first year? Well, in other words, if there's someone at council one of five who's not even going to be there, but yeah. Well, logic would dictate that it should be a little bit smoother sailing after the first. Yeah. But, uh, there's no intentional purpose on anybody's part to hold it up. Yeah. No, it's just consist. It's just the timing of it.

It's the timing of it. We wanted to wait until school was in session. People got settled back in after the summer to start the community, the survey and the open houses. So, we weren't competing with vacations and getting kids back to school and everything. So, it's, you know, I think the process that we've been using has been pretty thoughtful for the community. The seasonal people will Okay. All right. So, I wasn't making I apologize. I just say this has been a rioting conversation. Um it's 10:12. Do you have any updates? I gave you the update on the uh on Kotten on the what? Kotten,

right? And depending on how the council where the location, it's cottageen is over on kind of the confluence of Madison and Mitchell in that small little Oh, direct location. Okay. Yeah, I said before. Yeah, it's right right kind of I used to take my wife to air place to get in. They only have three stalls or maybe two, but that's the spot and that's where they're going. If you go there now, there's a dumpster out front going.

Yeah. uh don't know how the parking issue is going to come out with council, but we do have a we will be probably seeing in October you'll be seeing a site plan for a new Jimmy John's over on uh on Mitchell Street where the on Mitchell across from McDonald's. No, it's by the quick right next to the right to the quick. Yeah. where it's like readily available.

It's just more quick access to readily available affordable foods downtown. Yeah. And I I agree. I was disappointed, but it's going to just make more of a traffic mess. Well, the new own the new owner. It's not the former owner. Oh, it's the guy that had the franchise, my understanding, did not want to continue it. So, a franchisee down in the Grand Rapids area has been looking at Paskki and when that opened up, he decided he but his his franchises had to drive through. Well, that would have been beautiful if it could have remained. Yeah. And that was a great

uh an argumentative part of the discussion on that that side on Monday night. Well, the bottom line is though that kind of discussion about if we need to amend the parking shouldn't be done in the context of the idea that location individual it should and you also shouldn't say on the matter of public record that Bob Burton needs to be thrown out of town. I mean, whoa. Did that get set? Not not this Monday night, but couple of Monday nights ago. Yeah. Wow. I've been missing.

So, you made that that I'm I'm 90% sure that that site plan will be on your October meeting agenda. Okay. The gym agenda. The gym agenda. All right. Okay. So, it is 8:15 and this meeting is adjourned. All right. He says it's a big red flag. It's not too late. read it once. I see.