Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Is there a reason not to include R4 even though places of public assembly are included in R4 but the application doesn't include R4? I was thinking that when they were talking I didn't necessarily see a comma. residential districts. Are are you excluding multifamily out of this or I was wasn't quite sure how to read that sentence because our four could be a residential district.

Yeah, I did specifically leave that out. just we don't have a lot of our four in the in the and I I figured if we're we should reserve those spaces for for multif family housing which we don't have much of. Right. Understood.

That was the logic there. And we don't have churches within that district either. But we're we're just we're not eliminating the other listed facilities in public assembly places of public assembly based on our zoning ordinance. So like what about neighborhood commercial if I mean is it is it I don't remember if a neighborhood commercial district not on here. Yeah, we wouldn't change we're not changing that at all. They are a special l a daycare center is a special land use in the neighborhood commercial district. Oh, it is already. Okay.

So, beyond just commercial, we're expanding it into several other zoning districts. Correct. I'm sorry. We were I was communicating with someone in the audience because we're trying to figure out if we're other than commercial. We are now considering expanding this use the special use into other zoning districts.

Correct. Oh, and and and one thing to keep in mind, too, is that the the state also um there's there's two different types of daycare facilities that are permitted. One is a family daycare or let's see remember that there's two different up to six. Families up to six group is up to 12 up to 12 with a special land use.

Yeah. So those can happen in single family homes throughout the residential districts um in those processes. So so there there those are embedded within our communities already that are there. So um so we do have those that are that are just you know we don't just have daycare centers that are the large ones per se. We do have a lot of them that are um the the the family daycare that are six or less. We don't have too many of the the group daycare homes, but so one of our options would be to ask for a text amendment language that we could consider next month. and we would then potentially recommend that to the board for their approval. What kind of specific um guidelines would you like us to provide? Um I I' I've read the applicants um suggested language and um I I don't have a a problem with a much of it but there are some that I don't necessarily think that is applicable here but I I would prefer as we had been discussing um or the um language I'm looking for again special use.

So would you need anything beyond that in our instructions? Should we make a motion? No, I mean because all you're doing is asking us to draft something which you may totally reject next month. So you have full uh leverage to do whatever you want to whatever we draft. So you just give us if the direction is to draft it as a special land use, we'll give you something to take a look at and you can revise it, reject it, recommend it, whatever you want to do.

So does this need to be a motion or are we reaching consensus? I' I'd be okay with consensus. The cleanest way would be a motion to direct us to prepare a zoning text amendment to add daycare centers as a special land use in designated zoning districts. Oh, sounds like that would be [laughter] an excellent um I'll make a motion of what Ron said. [laughter] We have motion and support. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. All right. Do you have your marching orders, Ron? Cassandra, was it you that seconded? Thank you.

Lucas and I fight about who does the first draft. Sounds like it's going to be me. [laughter] [snorts] All right. Item F, Paramount Development Corporation. This is a site plan and special land use for a new private road at 16549 Taft Road. So, would the uh applicant like to come forward and um describe what you would like to do?

Good evening. I'm John Tempus with Drezing Gun Associates. I'm a civil engineer for the project here representing Paramount Development. Uh so we are proposing a uh land division on this roughly 28 28 acre parcel on Taft uh between Spring Lake Road and 168th. Um with that land division, we are proposing to construct a private road and that private road uh would require a special land use approval from uh the commission. Um the property is currently zoned egg. There is an existing home and barn on the property and the the bulk of the property is wooded. Uh to the north and to the east, the adjacent parcels are zoned agricultural. To the south and to the west, they're zoned rural residential. Uh we're proposing seven single family lots ranging from roughly 2.2 acres for the smallest lot to um about 7.8 8 acres for the largest and uh so all of those exceed the twoacre minimum allowed in the egg zone. And the layout of the site really was um developed in order to minimize impact to the wooded areas on site to minimize changes to topography and really preserve the natural character of the site and and provide um natural buffers between the homes, between the lots. Um, so the you can see there's a fairly large hatched area on the lower right corner. That is a regulated wetland. We are avoiding that entirely. There are a couple other small pockets toward the interior of the site that are non-regulated wetlands, but we are avoiding those as well. Um the existing

home and barn are proposed to stay and then there would be new homes constructed on the remaining six lots. The private road is roughly a/4 mile long 1300 ft. It would be contained in a 66 foot wide easement. Uh we did get comments from the fire marshall regarding the width of that road. The the design as drawn is 22 feet wide with a 4ft gravel shoulder on each side. We understand that the fire marshall has asked for that width to be revised. Um and we're prepared to make that revision. So we would expect that any approval we get would be conditioned upon meeting the fire marshall's requirements and we're prepared to do that. Um we have met all private road standards with the design. uh we really endeavored to again minimize tree clearing, minimize impact to the natural features on the site and preserve the topography, preserve the wetlands and to provide a safe and unimpeded route for travel in all weather conditions with this road. uh slopes and grades are compliant with standards to minimize erosion and um storm water would be provided via roadside swailes or ditches. Um the site's very sandy so uh providing those ditches alongside the road is going to allow the runoff to be captured and infiltrated into the ground. So there would be no off-site discharge as a result of this development. And then uh finally, I just wanted to kind of go through a few conditions that we anticipate would be uh included in this approval and the developer is prepared to comply with. Uh so we know we're going to have to get road commission approval for the connection to Taft. Uh we know we're going to have to get water resource commissioner approval for the storm water. And then uh any lighting provided would need to be dark sky compliant. Uh the wetland delineation would need to be verified by

the township's consultant and we're willing to work with Lucas and his consultant to do that. Um again, the private road requirements would be met. Uh there was one requirement uh spelled out by the fire marshall after some consideration of fire code uh whether or not this it was it was not clear early on whether this would need public water or not. uh based on the discussion with the fire marshall, public water is going to be required in order to provide the fire hydrant coverage that the development would require and we're prepared to uh incorporate that into the development as well even though that is not shown on the drawings. Um and then as mentioned the the road width and culde-sac diameter we would uh comply with the fire marshall's requirements there as well. And I think there was one final comment regarding the timing of tree clearing. Um, and so we're prepared to comply with that requirement as well. So I'm happy to answer any questions um you might have. So just a nuance, I was looking at the uh construction of the roadways and it looks as though that a top coat is going to be not done under this contract. Is that the way I'm understanding the buminous you're going to put a what was that? A

I can't read it. There's a thickness of the base. Yeah. Plus a top coat is typically done providing that.

Well, what we would be doing there there would be a top coat eventually. Um what we like to do uh with these developments is actually provide a slightly thicker base coat initially so that during the construction of all the homes, all of that construction traffic for the homes is actually on that base course and that's a a slightly thicker uh course that would be able to handle that traffic. But then um closer to the occupancy or around the time that homes are actually becoming occupied, the developer would put in that top coat so that the road is a nice clean top coat. It's not something that would be delayed, you know, years down the road. It would be toward the end of that development. So, uh, with our construction plans, we do identify that as happening in a separate contract that would be timed later, um, so that it's not done right at the, uh, you know, with the construction of the rest of the roadway because we don't want all the construction traffic for the homes to beat up that surface. So, it's the intention of the developer to um, put forth the capital for that cost. This is not Yes. something that's going to run through an H.

No, no, the the developer will fund that. It'll just be in a separate contract. Um, you know, the the plans are set up that we're going to, you know, go out for bid and we don't want the contractor to be um, you know, not knowing exactly the timing of that. We don't want them to commit to a price now uh, for that top coat um, when we know the the prices for things like that are fluctuating wildly right now. Okay, understood. Thank you. Yep.

I I could help with that too a little bit in that when the when they apply to actually construct the road and if the road is not 100% complete when they decide to pull building permits, then at that point in time, we would look to establishing a performance escrow. So, that wouldn't be returned until the road was completed. Excellent. I was just a little concerned. Didn't know what somebody else's contract meant. Yep. And that that escrow is common in other municipalities as well. We're happy to comply with that. Understood. Thank you. Any other questions? Um I would there they own two properties,

big one. And then they have another one there. Are you acquiring the second one too? The second one. As you would come into where you would put your road, the house right there is also by the same owners. Mhm. Are you acquiring that piece of property too or just the So this this the 28.2 acre parcel. Okay. So it's just that one, not the other one that's Yeah, it's just that one. And are you It doesn't look like you've acquired it. Are you contingent on this process before you complete that?

Yes. Okay. With the current trees and wooded area that's there, what do you estimate the tree removal? How much will be removed? How much will be able to stay?

So, obviously, we're going to have to remove a a corridor for construction of the road and the water man, and we're going to try and keep that as narrow as possible. It's it's hard to say exactly, but you know, 40 to 50 feet perhaps. Um the developer's goal is to try and keep as many trees as possible and even for the construction of the homes. Their intent is to um you know minimize tree clearing for construction of the driveways and the homes themselves. And actually as as we're looking at home placement, they're going to be looking at the the trees that are on the property and you know making sure that we're not putting a a home right where one of the you know large signature trees on the property is. They're going to try and place those in areas where they can minimize the the removal of the mature trees.

Mr. Chairman, I would also add that once the private this is just for the private road. It's not for the land divisions. The the land division process is an administrative review process only because it's seven. It meets the state requirements. It's under the the eight or more lots that would trigger the PUD process. So this would be administrative for that aspect. Yep. About how far off the road like do these lots begin.

Um you know I'm not sure what that distance is. Those if I can believe 435. Yeah there's a pretty small dimension there. kind of hard to read, but it's several hundred feet back. Yeah, roughly, you know, 400 to 43 5T. So in the the existing barn that's there would become nonconforming once the private road was was placed. So we're asking that a variance be obtained in advance of installing the private road um to maintain the building in a what what would now become a front yard. So um that's a that's a zoning board of appeals matter. So there's but there is a potential that the building would need to be removed. We were kind of talking about that a little bit before the the meeting today and that you know as you run through the variance criteria it might be a tough one to to approve. Um, but you know, this setting is a it's a it's a different setting, let's say, than your typical residential neighborhood that's on a grid system or like in Arcadia or whatever where you definitely don't want a shed out in in the front yard, you know, in a traditional neighborhood, but this is kind of an estate setting and it's it's a nice building, but at the end of the day, that decision will be up to the zoning board of

appeals and go through that criteria and see if it if it can if it can pass there. If there's no other questions, I'd like to open up the public hearing. I just have one on the sides of the road that would go in. Will there be will there still be tree coverage against those property lines or will that be wide open? There will be tree coverage to the extent that there are existing trees in those corridors along the edge. We're going to again try to save as many of those as we can. Regarding tree coverage, you've looked at the three section 353, the tree protection. Okay.

Yep. Familiar with that? We're all set. I'd like to open up the public hearing, please.

Right. Joanne Johnson, 16162 Coventry Lane. Um, I do have I ran off on there a draft about the agreement of maintenance and repair of private roads. And on the second page with snow removal, it talk first of all private company, but it says once 4 in or more of snow has fallen, then they need to plow. in my HOA it's two inches. I believe also in uh the county does two inches. So I have concern over that. Um secondly, there are also uh homes along a road off of West Spring Lake Road where you have multiple homes and they have they don't have it much wider than a driveway. Whoops. So I I also have concern about that and if you looked into that um I'm pretty sure the one is Dawn Road that has eight homes on that I believe and you can't you I mean think they have a pulloff area where you can get around cars if you know when the cars coming in the other direction. So I think with only seven homes on there I think that needs to be considered rather than making that wide wider road. And then um also and I I spoke with uh one of the neighbors who was directly next to one of the of the driveway, the current driveway they're talking about to extend and um he he was not sure if he got the mailing on that. So I did give him a copy of the mailing about the um the public hearing and I left it at the other ones on their door. Um, so I don't know with we've had a lot of male issues since the snow has fallen and I know

there was um someone was out retired, someone was out with a surgery and then just sickness. So I think we have to make sure before any decisions are made that the neighbors did hear about it. Thank you.

Thank you. Hello, James Moroi. Uh, 16680 Taft Road. Um, just have a few questions, clarifications about order of operations. So, I mean, I need some education here. the I understand that the uh item is for the road, but the language that's being used currently as this this development has been approved already. Is that correct that the land use going from single family residential has already been approved in our eyes that we're that we're allowing seven or six additional parcels on this piece of land? That's the way I'm understanding the language today.

That is correct. It has been approved. It l Can you explain it's not necessarily something that just got approved. Understood.

So the the the zoning is not changing. The zone district is not changing. So, what's what's on deck tonight is the private road itself. The land divisions that are attached to that private road have um will not need to go through any sort of public review process like with the planning commission or township board. That'll be an administrative review process um per the land division act which gives a property owner certain land division rights under the law

that um are basic basically the bundle of rights that come with that and in Spring Lake Township. Um, if you if you are doing a development or land divisions that equate to seven units or seven lots or less, sure,

then you don't need to go through what's called the plan unit development process. Um, so in this case, they've got seven. If they were doing eight, then we'd go to the PUD and be looking at it as a an entirely an entirely different manner. We'd be looking at the lot configurations and things of that nature. But tonight really um those lot configurations that you're seeing here are really not set in stone. The you know the owner could still modify those lot lines but at the at the end of the day each one of those lots within the zone district would have to be at least two acres twoacre minimum the the within that district. So, and all of those at least preliminarily, you know, looking at those, they do meet that two minimum minimum two acre minimum lot size. So, um, does that answer your question?

Yeah. So, the drive the drive, let's say the drive gets approved, the private road gets approved, developer decides, I'm not happy with seven. I'd really like 10 lots. does that there is language that I have seen in some uh I think it was one of the reports that that's available online that does offer the ability for the developer to make a change at any point. Um there I can't remember page four paragraph three or something like that somebody pointed out where there is some language in there that it does give the developer the ability to make a change without approval. So once the road is approved, the site is approved, but if the developer makes a change next week that they now would like 10 lots, does this get reintroduced to the community for input, I guess, is my my question.

So yes, it would then need to go through the PUD process at that point. it would need to be provided with, you know, municipal water and sewer, which probably, you know, sewer is is a long ways away. It's probably too far away to make it feasible, uh, quite frankly. U, but it would trigger an entirely new review process. New notices would go out and and with a PUD, there's a thousand foot notice requirement as well versus 300 feet. So, okay. Thank you. Appreciate. Thank Could I ask you a question? Did you receive a mailing for the public? Are you far enough just outside? Yeah. The 300 foot mark.

Anyone else?

Jeff Ferguson, 18629 West Spring Lake Road. Um, one of the properties directly to the east of this development. Um, this is a nice piece of property. Uh, Kelly, you brought up a really good point. May I approach

catched in what this looks like. That's where that turnound is. So that curve is convenient to the existing driveway of the property. So um this is zoned agricultural. Uh we can't go backwards with agricultural property. So whatever we do with this piece of property, it's never going back to agricultural. I'm not a fan of that. So we've had these uh areas of agricultural zoned for a reason. I vote we don't go backwards. Thank [clears throat] you.

Thank you. Appreciate it. Dave Pipple uh 16495 Taft got a question about the pond that's there. Are they going to dig on that pond for fill for them houses? Because that's all low ground in there. Uh, and if they do, do they have to have a state permit, county permit? How they do that? If they dig in that pond, is that going to be enlarged? I'm not prepared to answer that.

I can help if you'd like.

Okay. that just from a the pond selection um basically no regulated wetlands could be modified without a permit from the state of Michigan or t and township. So the likelihood of any digging in the pond would be very would be slim to none especially with all the upland areas that are on site and available. um doesn't mean that that um something couldn't happen maybe adjacent to that that would enhance that space, but to um regardless when you go through a wetland permit process, you you look at the prudent and feasible alternatives and and the the first one you look at is what can you do to lessen the impact or avoid it alto together. And in this case, there's plenty of upland to disturb that wouldn't require a permit. Thank you. Does that answer your question?

Appreciate it. Thanks. Appreciate it. Thanks. You're welcome. Any other questions? I I do have just one question and I was looking at the uh the the grades. I'm done. Did you want to close the [laughter] Did you want to close the public hearing or have a motion for that or? Yeah, I guess we probably could. What we're saying is all part of record anyways. So, I'll entertain a motion to close public hearing. I'll make a motion to close public hearing. Motion and support. All those in favor signify by saying I. I

opposed. Okay, we're closed. Um, I was wondering about fill and it looks as though that uh you are not neutral in the um amount of fill that it's going to take to grade the the road that the way that you have it. So, are you planning on fill? Is the fill coming from the property or is it being brought in? So, and I guess I'll preface that if you'd like me to answer a little bit more about the pond, I could I could give you an answer there. They're kind of tied together. Um, we are not planning on expanding that pond in any way. Um, we're planning on trying to preserve it in in as much of the existing condition as as we can. Um so with regard to you know overall um impacts and earthwork we are going to probably have a small net import of material that would come from offsite. We're not planning on excavating from one part of this property to fill in another part with the exception of the road corridor itself. That's all I had. Any other questions?

Just looking at the Google map of the existing drive, um how much wider would you be getting from what it is today during construction and completion? So, it it will have to be wider. Um fire marshall requirement is that that driveway be 26 feet wide and the existing drive is probably on the order of 10 to 11, I would guess. though it's going to be notably wider. You know, this is going to have to be wide enough um you know and graded so that it can handle you know fire trucks and emergency vehicles and so forth. Um so it, you know, it'll look like a roadway. It will not look like a driveway as much as we would actually, you know, prefer to keep it maybe 16 or 18 feet wide that doesn't meet fire code requirements.

So yeah, I'll be honest, that's the part I don't like. um it just is an odd fit and those houses are really close right next to it. So I I just think we need to look closer at that of what that would look like because looking at this neighborhood just doesn't seem to fit a 26t road and what looks to be a small lot next to two houses. I'm struggling with that.

Yeah, I think it's a Uh it's a common struggle um in the sense that we have um you know from a from a aesthetic standpoint and minimal impact certainly would be great if it could be you know a 20 foot wide road or or less. Um but yes, when it when it comes to the the fire code and and you know that's it's a challenge because they they want large roads, they want large culde-sacs, they want amazing accessibility to the site um to two large vehicles being able to pass anywhere along uh the roadway. So yeah, it's it's a it's a it's a tough, you know, it's the the give and take unfortunately of this and and you know, when work with the fire department and, you know, they they look closely at the fire code and that's just like the same with the the water man issue. That's a very expensive in investment. But we were just running some some some numbers too that the water main versus putting in private wells for that many lots and um and the maintenance and everything that goes with those. It's probably, you know, it's still a difference, but um ultimately these are going to be large estate homes. Municipal water is probably going to be a better bet for them. Um, so yeah, it's it's um I don't have a good answer for you except that's that's what really the fire code calls for and I I

Does fire code require that whole easement to be clear?

No. So, a potential to mitigate a little bit of that could be some uh creative landscaping. That's something that um we can encourage, strongly encourage. Um yeah, I think there's especially if you're looking down on the the south end that you know the piece that comes through um that's something I think that could be considered um as part of the special land use. I mean the important aspect here is looking at those criteria uh and and you know the general criteria and the specific criteria for private roads and maybe there's a a a way to make that more attractive uh through that section and I think you know planting some trees um along that section you know maybe it can have that estate feeling when you come in you know especially in the maybe the first 100 feet or so. Um, that would create some of that privacy. So, that's certainly something that that you guys I think would be a reasonable condition to to consider.

So, and in that case, um, I am not a landscape professional. I would like to see a proposal and there's nothing here to uh to really decide upon. So, um if this was the only sticking point for our board, and I'm not saying that it is, um would we consider um reviewing and approving a plan after conditional approval? or should we be looking at having this plan to approve before we give the final? So my suggestion I mean you know I'm just looking at section 940 uh subsection 5 which is states whether the private road will be um constructed in conformance with special conditions deemed necessary by the planning commission such as green belt green belts landscaping lighting and other similar items consistent. So, I think you've got the the muscle here, so to speak. And so, it really depends. We could add a condition here that that states, you know, we lean on Pam Blau as a landscape architect quite a bit for for these types of questions. And so, you know, we could look and try to say something similar to how we we buffer our parking lots in the commercial areas with, you know, certain number of deciduous trees and coniferous trees, uh, things of that nature to to create that. So we have a stand, [clears throat and cough] excuse me, we have a standard that we could um provide to uh guide them through the process and

then are you saying that would be administration or Pam to um to say yes, this meets our criteria? I think we could do that it um with Pam and the township and the and the applicant and work together to come up with something that that's suitable. And at the end of the day, if if for some reason we couldn't come to to terms, we could come back to the planning commission for dis more discussion.

Okay. Well, um P5 has proven themselves to uh to be very considerate of this kind of stuff. So, move forward with with that. In parallel of that, Lucas, could we maybe have a conversation? I'm sorry, wrong one. um with Chief Staler cuz when we had a land split that ended up not going through on Frooport Road, he was a little bit amanable about recommending the driveway to try to work with the the owner of that property. Um if there was any consideration of kind of keeping existing length so you get past those homes, I think would be a nice discussion too and then going to the 26 ft or if he's a little bit flexible. I know he's shown that in the past to try to help um those areas that with some tight driveways

that idea too if there is that flexibility. Yeah. So the yes when when there's existing conditions um where let's say there's there's an existing nonconforming shared residential driveway or private road um you know in those circumstances and you know there's there are cases where there's wetlands involved and things of that nature that make it pretty difficult to actually expand the road. Um, but I can certainly throw that out there and say, "Hey, is there is there maybe a portion of this that

Yeah, he's got to safely get his trucks back there in the event that something happens." And I I want he's got to be comfortable with that before I would ever say yes to any sort of modification. But he has shown a willingness to kind of go out there and look of like what can be done and, you know, kind of serve the neighborhoods the best way. It would, you know, the the good news is there's going to be a there's going to be hydrants out there. So, we're not they won't be running a hose from from Taft. So, that's a that's really good news. And then they won't be blocking the roadway with with with fire hoses. So, that might offer some ability to allow some Yeah, I thinking since we have to go through this, it's

usually me and a discussion. If he tells me no, totally get it. But he's he's always willing to have a conversation, I think. Absolutely. Yep. So, if you're so inclined, I did provide an example motion or for you, possible motion, but I did and if you'd like, I can read through all of those. Mr. chairman. Um I I'm on board and so long as you do plan on adding a landscape plan. Got it.

Okay.

So the motion uh the suggested motion it's not suggested much is just a draft motion for your consideration. Uh motion to approve the site plan and special land use for Paramount Development Corporation at 16549 Taft Road as presented as the application meets all criteria and the applicable sections of the zoning ordinance with the following conditions. The applicant will comply with all verbal and written uh representations. The Ottawa County Road Commission approved the driveway connection to Taft Road. Stormwater permit be obtained from the Ottawa County Water Resources Department. Any new street lighting shall be dark sky friendly and approved by township staff in advance of installation. Wetland areas shall be verified by the township wetland consultant in advance of construction. No impacts to township regulated wetlands or wetland setbacks are permitted. F all items required by section 940 be completed and approved by staff including the township attorney and engineer. What's that what that is referring to is getting back to those um looking at the bylaws and the for the development not necessarily the bylaws but the um

association rules and as well as the maintenance agreement. Make sure that is uh meeting all of those requirements. G um if required by the 2021 fire code. We we know that it's not if it it it does require um municipal water main with fire hydrants and locations approved by the Spring Lake Fire Department and Township Engineer. They'll be looking to provide utility easements as well to adjacent properties uh just in case that water main can be looped to an adjacent pro parcel. Uh the width of the private road and culde-sac be modified to meet fire code requirements. We're going to have a discussion on that one um as well with with staff. Due to Oakwell concerns, tree clearing shall be avoided between April 1st and August 1st. and adding J which is um require a top coat escrow um if necessary um as per our discussion which is basically um you know and the escrow would be needed in advance of of issuing building permits for any new homes. K landscaping um would be required along the that let's say south 100 ft of the private road um as approved by staff the township landscape architect and applicant. I think that covers it. Thank you. One of our longer motions. So Lucas, if we approve this, we won't have the ability to look at that landscape plan. You guys will handle the approvals and

we can um if you'd like to approve it with the condition that you want to see that and approve that separately, we can do that. I believe Oh, I personally would. I don't know how you guys feel, but comfortable just waiting to see it. I would be there too. W2 planning commission approval. Okay.

So that would be a condition. You would just change that. Say the the landscaping plan um be submitted and approved council or the following meeting if that's your desire. I'm good with that language. We want to adjust H could to say or augmentation by fire chief. Y

that part. Got it. Nice. [clears throat] Thanks. You guys took notes. I didn't. So, somebody's got to make the motion with all the amendments. Well, I think we have a motion. Well, we don't have an official motion. We have language for a motion now. I need the motion.

I'll make the motion. Lucas pay for us. Good. Okay. Thank you. We have motion and support. Roll call vote. Could I just add for Mr. Ferguson's benefit? We're not doing a resoning. This is allowed in the agricultural district. I So I we all understand that, but I didn't think he necessarily understood that. Okay.

Well, Understood. So we have motion in support. Andy, yes. Sandra, Greg, myself, yes. Kelly, no. Russ, yes.

Motion carries. Next item on our agenda is P5 land development and this is a zoning ordinance text amendment. It's request to allow wetland mitigation banks in agricultural districts. Um, I should clarify that our language includes rural residential along with that agriculture. Is that correct? So, uh, open that file up real quick, Mr. Chairman.

Correct. Uh, the the the draft language prepared by Mr. Boli does include as and R. Yes. Yes. That one threw me. Yes.

Any uh comments? We um had public hearing on this um last month. We asked for amendment language. It has been presented. questions concerning that. Keep in mind too if the if if you did recommend that up to the township board, they can they still have an opportunity to make changes. They could also if there if they were changes of major substance, they would probably need to come back down here and then have another hearing and things of that nature. So, um, but there's still opportunities for for changes and consideration.

Right. Thanks.

On any commentary from your draft? Um, no, not really. Um, I'm happy to answer any questions, but um, um, basically the draft follows the um tenor of the discussion from a month ago. Um I I know Michael made the comment that nothing in the zoning ordinance prohibits this. Um that's true, although um I wouldn't be inclined to say that we allow uh wetland mitigation banks unless we put language into the ordinance because it is a designation of property. it takes it out of circulation at least to a significant degree. So I would not consider it to be an allowed use right now. Um I think we consider it allowed only if we add this.

I think my only hesitation well few hesitations but there's a lot of pros to this and some negatives but not a lot of townships have adopted this yet. So, it's like, do you want to be part of the early adopters or do you want to wait and see how these play out in other communities? Are they maintained? Um, do they live up to those expectations? See good from this, you know, preserving the land. Uh, Russ made, I thought, some great arguments on it uh last month. That's where I'm at of like do we do it now or is it something we wait on and see how it goes and continue to gather more information and review it and look at other communities where it's gone well or not gone well. But there's just not a lot of data on that and [snorts] they're still in kind of their infancy. So it's my only struggle. I also see this as um our community is saying we don't want develop we want open space and this is a great way of um a very positive way of creating permanent open space. You're not taking away people's property rights to do it. uh you're it's it's a very positive way of creating um a uh an open space that benefits our community. It takes a lot of um construction cost to uh to put one of these back to its original state. So, it's like to me it's very beneficial to our community and there's nothing stopping any developer from going and buying these mitigation points from anywhere else in our um our drainage area. So, it's like why why wouldn't we encourage taking advantage

of this? Yeah, I think that's kind of the blood diamond situation for me. It's like you're building this to go destroy other wetlands and whether it's in your community or not in your community. So, we have a lot of wetland regulation that I think we're very proud of that we go to great lengths to protect our wetlands. So, it's like yes, you pay a lot of money to restore it, but then you're just going to go take those credits and apply it somewhere else. And I think the benefit of the acreage you get to the acreage you can destroy is a positive. But there's a cause and effect here of like we have to acknowledge.

So in in if I may um in in that light one of the things that that Mr. Pennington pointed out in his session and is that the impacts the wetlands that are impacted are unavoidable. So what I mean by that, I mean that if I guess the classic example is if if I need to go from the public street through a wetland to get to an upland area to build on this, the state and the township are going to permit that. There are going to be impacts and we could even look at 231 bridge. there were major wetland impacts that occurred there that were unavoidable um to to construct that bridge and so they they actually MDOT bought property to mitigate those wetlands. So so the the permitting process has to fully play out and the state and the township would have to determine those impacts are unavoidable in order to give that person reasonable use of their property otherwise it would become a taking. So, it's it, you know, it's it's I I I I'm not sure it opens the door. It makes it easier to get through that permitting process. I don't think it does. It it just gives them an opportunity to mitigate that impact somewhere else. And what is and what I've seen on the ground is is in developments where they've mitigated wetlands. They have a five-year process of of monitoring that site and after five years they're done and those wetland areas become overrun with invasive species and they become dumping zones for leaves and and things of that nature. mode for people's backyards.

It's and they they get mowed and filled and so on. And you know that's one of the things that a benefit of the of the uh mitigation bank is that they are monitored forever. And um and they're they're larger sites too, so they're more functional um and far as ecology and ecosystem function versus these smaller pockets. So, um, just wanted to share that. Thank you. Appreciate it. I think I can piggy back on that in doing my homework. Um, what I found, what Eagle said that only one out of five of those sight specific wetlands is successful

after 10 years. So, the bank does

at least monitored and will be a successful wetland. And I I also just did a very rough estimate and looking in the township for other areas that would qualify just you know so and what I heard from from Eagle is that they're really looking for older farm land areas that were more than likely wetlands uh before they were farms. And so we don't have much of that really left here in our community. And so um I don't see a major proliferation of wetland mitigation banks in in the township. Um and it those sites are highly scrutinized by Eagle and so um there might be a couple other ones but at the end of the day is you know what it I I think the stars almost have to come into alignment for for something like this to work u based on Eagle's pretty um pretty heavy review and and requirements. So, but I, you know, I can't guarantee that, but it just doesn't seem like it would it's something that's just going to take off. It's, you know, we don't have a lot of them.

I don't think we're see boom of these, right? Like, yeah. In Ron, in the definition of wetland mitigation bank, F says a wetland mitigation bank shall provide adequate access and parking commensurate with the uses allowed parking. I I'm just having a trouble visualizing parking. Do we want to say adequate access and takeout parking? Um

I guess I don't envision parking on a wetland. not on the wetland, but um there was a concern about access for the public. I if public can go there, we want to make sure that we're accommodating the public. I mean, I'm not imagining any significant parking area, but something that's off off off road right away and safe.

So, I just want to make sure there's something adequate. Um I Yeah, that's that's not to envision a parking lot. is just to envision a safe way for people to access it and leave their vehicle to the extent public access is allowed which is going to be an issue that would be discussed with the state. One of the other things that have has come up is the discussion about requiring that site to become public in the future at some point and and allowing, you know, access to the site for trails and things of that nature. So, um I can't remember what Ron's answer was to that one, but u maybe maybe you recall that, but it's, you know, I I don't know if if we can require that necessarily, but I think it's something that could be negotiated with a municipality or the township to say, look, you know, we're we're done. There's there's a a fund at the at the community foundation that's there forever that'll cover the money to to monitor it and but we'd like you to have it and but I think there's there's it might be even quite restrictive as far as trails and things of that nature. I know Matt McGregor is here um with

Well, you did ask me that, Lucas. Yeah. Michigan administrative rule rules allow mitigation wet wetland mitigation banks to be on public or private lands and they require a wetland bank mitigation plan which may consider recreation. Those are the administrative rules. Are those administrative rules either approved or declined by Eagle through their application or do we have a say so? These are the Michigan administrative rules under which Eagle operates.

Okay, perfect. Questions, concerns? I did put a list of three options for you. [clears throat] Memo for February 9th. So, you could table the matter if desired. Uh for more information from consideration uh in the March meeting, you could recommend approval of the language to the township board. Uh of course, there's always an option for denial as well, recommending denial to the township board. Well, I'm inclined for approval. So, if there's um countering, please.

Yeah, I think um we've done public engagement. I think there was a very good dialogue with that. We've done a public hearing. We've had this on the agenda a couple times. We've had a session at the township board. I would say it has not been overly negative. um a lot of good dialogue unless you saw something different at the public engagement sessions you did, but I just I'm not seeing a huge backlash towards it. So So do you want consensus or do you want a uh vote? You got a vote.

Yeah. Okay. So I'm going to need a motion and support. I'll make a motion to recommend approval of the draft language to the township board.

I'll second. Yep. Okay, we have motion in support. Roll call vote. Andy, yes. Cassandra, yes. Myself, Greg, yes. Kelly, yes. Russ, yes. Passes. Was there a second on that? Thank you, Andy. Get to talk about this next month at the board. Thanks. Thank you. Okay. Well, that concludes the bulk of our agenda items. So, now it's uh commissioner comments. Township board.

Um pretty easy meeting. uh approved some renovation bids for the DPW building. Um trying to improve that area with some office space, some lunching uh actually under budget, which would be good. Um Ron settled uh or is in the process we gave him authorization to settle some litigation that we've had ongoing for a while. So he's in progress on that. Um and then we set our budget public hearing which is required uh for our bylaws March 9th, 2026. And then our annual meeting which is required as our township as well for March 23rd at 6 p.m. um Supervisor Rabidu just uh appreciates it when other boards show up and show support and ask questions. Uh he usually gives kind of a state of the township. So he just wanted me to extend an invite to you guys to come and join if you can. That's it. Thank you.

DBA, you want to do the honors? Uh sure. I'd be happy to. Um really exciting. And last month we we had a public hearings scheduled but unfortunately we did not have a quorum which is a rare occurrence but um some of it was weather related. Um and so some some others were were ill and we only had two members that were able to make it. So we basically pushed everything here into February 26. So, the good news is we didn't add any additional applications because we already had four on the agenda that night

which is yeah is a heavy load but um uh so we'll be looking at those rec committee this month no meeting till March so what's happening March 5th there's a public [laughter]

that's okay I'll fill in for you Russ uh March 5th there's a public hearing for a Michigan natural resource Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund grant to um because the township would like to submit a development grant for um the Petty's Bayou uh waterfront park. So that would include features such as like the parking lot, the kayak launch, fishing dock, um the little pavilion, bathrooms, things of that nature. So, we're still working on exactly what all would be on that site, how much it would cost, and you know, at the end of the day, the township board's going to have to, you know, submit um the application with those improvements. And so, we're anticipating it being somewhere in, you know, like a $500,000 um job to do things right. And it might be even phase one. But if you're interested in the park and you want to submit comments and see the the the draft plan because it's it's being modified right now, we're looking at the street crossings and things of that nature, but that'll be here um it'll be live streamed on on March 5th uh before the wreck committee. So that's that's the exciting stuff they get to do. So

very nice. Yeah. So where are we at? Community engagement, corridor improvement.

Yeah. So, in community uh community engagement really the the community ambassadors continue to be an asset to to us and you know and the staff and the township and and you know looking at at you know different I mean we talked about things that were coming before the planning commission um and just you know getting you know more feedback and say you know is this is this something that's that's going to be high on the temperature scale or low and and you know who are the stakeholders holders that might need to be, you know, we might need to reach out to that we're forgetting things of that nature. So, um,

I so appreciated them sponsoring that um, gathering for Eagle so that I could actually learn a little bit about um, mitigation bank. So, that that that was great. I I would love to be able to see more stuff like that. And so, yeah, there's there's uh there's some members that are that are quite active and and in including Joanne Johnson who's here and and you know, she gets out on the on the ground and and you know, make sure like you like you heard making sure people get notices, things of that nature. So, it's it's a it's a great thing to have for us. And I think I think our our policies will probably begin to to change a little bit because I think in some cases we might want to do more noticing and engagement than that's than than what is required by law. So if we do that, we want to be consistent and that's the challenge I think we'll have over time. the corridor improvement authority. Uh you know, it's been a great year for those guys, but uh they they were looking at a uh at three proposals for a new corridor improvement plan for the M104 corridor. And um as of yesterday, they're leaning towards uh recommending u progressive companies to to do that work for us. are also doing work here in the village um with their corridor here through town and some other areas on exchange. So, that'll be an exciting one-year process to go through an in-depth corridor plan. And you guys will be involved as a planning commission because it's really kind of looked at as a uh sub area plan for the master plan. And so, there'll definitely be some collaboration with the planning commission, township board, um, and business owners and MDOT and the road

commission. So, it'll be it'll be interesting, but it'll at the end of the day, we'll have a nice list of all of the high priority items that the community wants to see along M104. And then we'll have some cost estimates and then we'll start chasing those and and you know, obviously go for some lowhanging fruit first. And of course, the roundabout's always a discussion item. And so we'll hopefully when we get through this, the there'll be a solid yes or no on on the roundabout effort. Um, and so, but really kind of thinking about that gateway concept, you know, like, hey, you're coming down M104, you've arrived to the lake shore, and now this this place feels like you've arrived somewhere. It's not just another corridor. there's something special about it and um so it'll be you guys will be involved and and let you know as things proceed.

That's I think I've covered everything [sighs] I can cover. Just a general question. Sure. Um there's a certain cadence to reviewing master plans and it's been a little while since we've really gotten deeply involved in master plan. What does that look like as far as when do we review and

Yeah. So, we're we're we're probably we're pushing uh the time frame to where, you know, every five years we we at least need to open the book and say, "Okay, do we want to do something more?" Um, you know, to to an extent, you know, doing this corridor plan could almost count in that realm. Um but you know a holistic look and say yeah we need to make some changes or we're good. Um you know I I'm going to recommend that we follow you know the master plan u requirements of state law as we do the corridor plan. So we're inviting you know adjacent municipalities to get involved like Crocker Township and Harrisburg and so on. But um the um so yeah I you know putting that on the radar screen would make a lot of sense. Um you know it might be something that is triggered after the corridor plan is done. You know maybe finish that up. I don't I don't I wouldn't want to have those going at the same time necessarily. But

um we will be looking at at land use along the corridor and within the corridor district. The other thing that's come up is uh signage because the Yeah. So that'll be, you know, when we talk about signage, I just want to leave the room and come back in and have have you guys have it all figured out. But it's never easy. It's a little aesthetic, you know, it's an aesthetic issue which is can be challenging, but um the I I can I can tell you that the corridor improvement authority was really excited to see the digital sign out in front of the community center. So, we'll we'll kind of see how that plays out. [laughter]

Thought that might raise a nightbro. Yep. Yep. Yep. That's it. But we'll see. All right. Well, if there is nothing further, I would entertain a motion to adjourn. Make a motion to adjurnn.