Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

So, I'm going to go through with the public hearing on this one first. No public hearing is necessary. Great. Okay. Not right now. Public comment is actually what I meant to say. Um because we're doing it after every item, right? Public comment. Yeah. But usually after our discussion, after we're done. Okay. I'll start it off if it's help. Yeah. Go ahead.

So, as everyone knows, I'm against both of these. Okay. I don't like option one or but I hate option two as written. Uh, in my experience, um, these conditional resonings have pretty much been used as ways to appease neighborhoods, neighbors, nearby residences because a reasonzonings basically allows everything to happen. And by this says basically besides a developer coming in and promising to do, you know, to do A and then they come back and do B, they don't care because if it's not in writing, it doesn't exist. This makes them put their promises in writing and allows them to get what they need. And it could be extras, you know, density, the ability to connect buildings to go up a little bit higher um or not but not all the way up. Um lots of examples of that. Um and basically by um and it's a way for them to appease the neighbors um and not have them and it's that's really what it's been used for. What you're doing in this option two is basically saying neighbors, guess what? Those restrictions, they're gone. And we're now giving a path for these people to come back and take them away. You're basically undermining promises the city commission and the planning commission have made to the neighborhoods about what won't happen and what can happen. And that is I think it's just a horrible policy to go forward to basically revoke what was promised in writing to them. Um you know the neighbor and the current one that's out there. It's, you know, I mean, his

restrictions, the way I looked at it, and I wasn't on the planning commission at the time, but I looked at it, I looked at this as this is a standard. This should be reszoned. But the neighbors had a lot of concerns. And as a result, the applicant made concessions to the neighbors, not to the planning commission, but on behalf of the neighbors. So, the neighbors didn't object. They didn't endorse, but they didn't come out and really object to it. So, that makes life easier for everyone. So, that's my belief. That's why I think it's still useful tool to keep conditional resonance. Um, you know, you look at the tar city attorney's letter. It's basically her the her biggest complaint about it is that she feels it leaves open the possibility of either the planning commission or the city commission or staff negotiating which is not allowed. Okay. So in other words, if we violate the law and that's the main issue. So I'm not for one, I hate two. So I think two is really bad the way written. So, um, if I could ask a follow-up question to that. If two were rewritten

such that any prior approvals, including those in process that haven't been realized fully yet, uh, remain in effect, would that change your mind? Or you still don't like to you still want to leave the opportunity in the future open?

Well, I like it better that way. Okay. And it's but that's a different question because I'm looking at what's being proposed and I'm against what's proposed. I'd have to give it some thought. I'd be much better. It's at least it's direct and not as wishy-washy as the leave it open and let's make up as our own rules as we go forward. But again, I just think right now with our zoning ordinance being rewritten, maybe that'd be a better time to strike it. That's my thought. You know, if you're going to strike it out or not leave it in, um there's just a lot of wonky things in our ordinance. So, again, that's my advocacy for it, but we've kind of moved past that. So you know

any other Yeah. Jerry so like when we started this conversation it was mostly about the timing right or like the time requirement. Yeah. But now not that I don't like to use this term nuclear but but now it's gone to well either we're going to stay silent or just prohibit it. And that was through all of our discussion. Right. But So, we kind of went from how do we address the timing to let's nuke it. Mhm. Okay. I'm just trying to remember all the comments.

Yeah. Yeah. And we did vote and it was narrow um to get these two options to be the available options to come back. Um, in terms of what you just mentioned, Brian, the only concern that I have is it does feel like I don't they can be really beneficial and they can be helpful. I've I live in a building that has one and I hear the attorney's concerns that like what if that is not applied the same if the makeup of one commission looks a certain way and we get a conditional reszone and then the makeup of the commission changes and they are interpreting everything differently. I could see where that I mean that's inevitable. That would happen with everything, but especially with conditional reszones, they can be hairier

if we don't have a clearly outlined process.

Correct. And yes, it's one of the less commonly used aspects of our zoning code, but your building and uh the other conditional reszones that have come before us, they chose to exercise that option specifically and there were conditions that would not have been otherwise permitted. they could have decided to just uh change the zoning class or try to change the zoning classification overall for their property or for um several adjacent properties. So when we spot zoning or they could have asked for a text amendment that would allow the specific type of development at that specific location that they were looking for. But no, in these uh few cases, they opted to go the route of the conditional reszoning because they wanted to work within the framework of an existing zoning classification, but have some changes to it. And as I've said before, I think that it allows both more flexibility and it allows them chance to get a developer to work with the surrounding neighborhood with the broader community to figure out uh how they can make their project work without uh engendering undue backlash that would affect not just the developer but also this commission as a whole. There's nothing with prohibition though that says that a developer can't do that.

Right. Correct. Like they can't hold a town hall with the neighbors and you know the neighbors are like, "Hey, we don't want this there. We don't want bars there." Developers are like, "Great. You got it." To Brian's point though, I get it. They don't have to do that. Yes, I get that. But a small community, it's not that small. And once it's reszoned, it's reszoned. And anything allowed under zoning can go in there. True. And it happens. Um, you know, and ownership changes and ownership changes. You know,

I think I think about it from a a consistency standpoint like very few other cities have conditional reszoning

in our immediate area in general that I have seen. So, that's just it's just a that's my perspective. at the end of this conversation, I'm going to make a vote just so I can get some some eyeballs like because I think you want more just like I don't want to have you have to come back with two drafts again. Um, that's my personal opinion. So, and so I'm looking at people that haven't said anything yet just to see because I think right now I don't really we have like a two to one and then a unknown. So,

I'm more in support of option one. If we're distilling down to one option, I would I would call back option one and maybe try to clean up the language on um existing cases if possible. Here's the thing, like Brian said, we could also come back to this again when we do a rewrite. If we are still like if this is nagging in somebody the back of somebody's brain, they're like, "Wow, I really was not happy with the way we went with that." Who's to say we can't just come back to it when we do a rewrite? Just if that gives anybody peace of mind,

we can. But this was all brought up with the existing applicant, you know, and that's how we got into the timeline discussion. You know, what does that how does that impact him? I think we already moved on that. Okay. Yeah. This is now separate. We pulled construction though. No. And his time's running out. He's not going to make his extra year. No. So, and that was his second one. I think it was I don't think you get one or I'm I'm sorry. His first extension the second time he came to us on that specific reason. Yes. I don't think you get a second extension. You don't. So, he's going to be back to us and he's going to ask for a straight reszoning eventually. Yeah.

And then we're going to go through this all over again.

Yeah. This one is so much fun. I can tell by the looks on our faces that we're It's hard. I'm torn. I came in wanting number two and now I'm kind of like, well, waffling a little bit. I wanted number two just because it was so limiting. I have seen what it has done to my building, the aftermath of it, the fact that they didn't do it in a very particular way. They came back to ask for a change and the makeup of this body denied that request. So I had abstained obviously. Um but it is it can be really helpful and it can be really limiting. Um, so I have seen both sides of it because I do agree that like without that the space wouldn't exist and also at the on the other side of the coin the space could probably be more optimized. I believe if they didn't think that that was a really great option. I think this is this is um a route I believe that requires an attorney's consultation. It doesn't it's not just something that like a citizen can I I think look at the planning the zoning and be like oh yeah I'm going to definitely go after a reszone that makes sense. I think it requires the consult of an attorney and I think that um that's not always accessible. That was my reasoning for two and then now I've heard

one and I'm again back in the middle. So, I hear everybody's brains. Like, I I hear that you're all thinking about it the same way that I'm thinking about it, which is it's a challenge. We table it for a rewrite. When it's time to rewrite, we could also do that. I I would personally feel a little bad that we made you come through with two drafts,

you know. Um, if you're look, I mean, that's fine. That's our job. That's okay. Um, at least we will have had the conversation and when we're in the middle of a big rewrite and going through lots of things, you know, at least we will have this in our back pocket with some information and some hopefully memory of this these discussions. But I also feel like, you know, you have a master plan, you have zoning for a reason. If if when you go through this rewrite and you take a closer look at all the districts and where they're applied, where they're located. If there are some tricky areas where it feels like you need some intermediary district that has restricted uses, maybe you create that district. You know, ideally there would be support for that in the master plan, but maybe because we don't always have this matrix of uses staring us in the face, maybe we have overlooked some steps, you know, gradation of zoning districts um where, you know, a middle ground um should exist but doesn't exist. But I also and you know to that point I feel like maybe if you fix that if there is indeed a problem maybe you don't feel as obligated to offer the conditional reasonzoning because it should be really really really exceptional for very strange cases

not to you know provide this um secondary option to almost everybody. You know, I I think you created those districts for a reason. You know, they have uses within them for a reason, and you should be standing behind those districts. That's my opinion. And, you know, once you start um allowing someone to go to the next district, but you don't really want them to be at it. Well, then maybe you need to look at your master plan again. And, you know, where's the support for that? Maybe it's like in 10 years there'd be more support as more development happens around that area, but in the short term there isn't support to go to that higher district. But I feel like this is a a fix for not having done the pre-work. And so I hate in a way to have this option out there and so available and so cumbersome to administer on the back end unless it's really just to address some really unusual situations. But that's my opinion. So

no, I think that's great. Yeah, I wouldn't agree. Well, I know staff's been against this from the get-go, and I I understand it's, you know, it's not a very well-ritten ordinance, and um but so this isn't like it's not like we created the zoning ordinance. I mean, in the example of the property where you reside, using rooftops for recreational purposes, for gathering spots, it may be a common in other communities. It was almost unheard of in Traverse City. Yeah. It was one of the first rooftop spaces.

I think that's true. Yes. Um and we really couldn't we our ordinance still doesn't address that. um how people can build up and they'll use their make reasonable use of the rooftops by allowing you know and providing access. And we had a text amendment that allows that in specific hotel uses but it didn't change it to allow it throughout the city. So you know it's just one of those things and it is a you know so I mean I understand that I think that if you know this ordinance our ordinance is old.

Yeah. had a lot of changes in trying to address these things. Peace meal is where we're at. I think it's still a good option. It's not a perfect option. I think it's still a good option. Um, you know, and like I said, uh, like for the one in front of us, you know, if staff really felt it wasn't necessary, maybe you did make that argument, but, you know, the planning commission still approved it. So did the city commission. Um I wasn't here. I don't think you were here then either. I was, you know, to accommodate the neighbors. Yeah.

It was, you know, if that's a concern or an issue, then you know, you can weigh that going forward. Yeah. Um so I'd like it as you know, for right now, I'm sort of with a let's just table it and move on. Okay. And it's we know what's out there and we can come back and if there's an issue with the current, you know, with the current applicant who's got one, his choices are either let it expire and come back and ask for a full resone or he could he can come and propose a text amendment to accommodate his needs. Okay? And then we can just vote on his text amendment up or down. Okay? And we have something we have to decide,

right? So, we'd have to decide it if he wants more time and he can make it a simple thing and we'll get into all of this. Um, you know, and kind of go forward from there. And I think the point that you bring up is like rooftops are now a hot commodity and they are a frequent item and they are missing from uses. So, like that is a perfect example of just getting the rewrite and maybe that addresses it and the rarity will come through in a conditional resone. Um, yeah, Mitch,

so getting to Miss Sikman's point about uh are we dealing with gradations between our zoning categories? We're actually trying to work within it. We have been going through a general yearslong trend as is actually standard practice with a lot of communities of reducing the number of zoning codes. Like uh a while back we compressed what had been three different classifications of varying density for multif family residential into one category R3. I can see a future where we u collapse R1B and R1A into a single R1 category. Uh perhaps also we could uh change the C4 from three different AB and C into a single category that might have an overlay district uh covering part of it. But if we are going to continue this trend of reducing from a large number to a smaller number. Um then that does potentially um have more changes I mean more opportunities for a gap between one category and the next zoning category that a conditional reszone could fit in that gap. Okay, bringing it back to the topic at hand. Um, okay. Now,

I'll make a motion that we table it in depth. Definitely. Great. Second. Okay. All those So, there's now a motion on the floor that we table the consideration of recommend regulations relating to conditional resoning. All those in favor? I. All those opposed. It's okay, Jerry. As long as you're not opposing, that's okay. Um, so great. We're tableabling this. We'll readress during our rewrite. I'm looking at every single one of you to remember that when we get to that point. Um, uh, one thing. Yeah.

So, what about the applicant? Because I feel like that's gotten lost. Isn't like does he not have any? I think this was separate. I think we already approved his extension. Okay. And then we started to derail and talk about the timelines. Yeah. It wasn't like um the old town discussion where we decided to take the applicant and then roll it into a broader thing. Yeah. We pulled it out separately knowing. Um so that's taken care of. But thank you. So that's why I said if he wants to, he could bring it back in front of us and ask for a text amendment or he can just if he still wants to do this project, he can just come back and ask for straight up reszoning once this or maybe extension uh expires.

Yeah. My guess is if he breaks ground, the city's not going to say boo to him about it. Correct. Okay, closing that door. We're moving on to old business item number three, public office hours, which again looks like we're going to have to come up with some answers here, folks. So, um, Katie, is this your item? Kind of. Yeah. Yeah. You want to take it away? Yes. So, it was just, you know, we had talked about doing like a noon and an evening

and I just wanted to make sure that was good, but also is this just like once a month, twice a month. Okay. Um, and if so, like what you know, a day if it's once a month, is it like the, you know, the week after the planning commission on Wednesday or something or um, just, you know, guidance with that. Okay. And again, this is optional. Brian doesn't think anyone's going to come. That's fine. You could take Brian doesn't think he's likely to come.

Okay. Um, I definitely think once a month. That was I think I felt that way last time, but I don't remember if anyone else remarked on that. Does anyone want to do it more than once a month? No. Okay, great. No. Consensus for once a month is fantastic. So then do we like I'll do one more time a month than Brian does. Well, if we do once a month, we're like good for half a year, y'all. So um Okay. So then if if staff come if the staff member in attendance buys me a cup of coffee, I might go every month. I think that that's I think that would be the the doable. Yeah. Coffee.

Brian's going to be there all the time. He's twice as much. So now that we established that Brian is attending all of these. No, I don't think so. Um do we like before the meeting? Do we like after the meeting? Uh, I don't really have a I don't want to do it same day. I think that's too much. I kind of think I don't want to do it Mondays either because I think city meetings that makes it that's too much. I was envisioning like a Wednesday, Thursday, but I don't know what anybody else's thoughts are on that. Wednesday is good for me. What does staff think?

You're asking for us. You were asking us for Sundays. Yeah, I don't I doubt that. Uh, so we like Wednesdays so far. And do we like um I like consistency. So do we like first of the month? Do we like middle? Because that first of the month we're also going to be we're going to have a Tuesday. Yeah. Except for when we meet Wednesdays. That's true. It's true. You just throw a wrench in the system. So maybe like the week after that. Yeah. That middle round. We would never have a planning commission meeting on the second Wednesday of every month. Okay.

The second Wednesday following the first planning commission or the Wednesday following the regular planning commission meeting. Oh, the day after the planning commission meeting or the week, sorry, Wednesday of the week following the planning commission meeting. So once you get like the plan, do you plan to have like a signup sheet then? Like since it's optional, then like people just plug in where they will go.

When we did this for um master plan, we there was just a Google sheet and people signed up for any and all events that they wanted to go to. Um yes. Okay. So I forgot about time now. So now we have to go we have to talk about time. Um, personally, I don't want it always at noon. I want like I would like every other month if we're doing once a month, once to be during the day, noon. Great. Then the next one is the evening. So that way you're getting a sprinkling of accessibility. Yes, Brian.

That wasn't the question. They just asked for the days. Said office hours once a week. Rotating. I read the word rotating and was like, "We got to come up with a time." What would you like? Well, I thought rotating between noon and six. To me, that was once a month. Office hours once once a month rotating. Yeah. It would be like one month it's at noon, the next month at 600. Yeah.

Great. We already did that one. Yep. Thanks, Brian. Um, okay. And then location. I've had some thoughts about location. Um, I like the consistency of the same location. I like consistency of not here. Um, to make it more accessible and just more uh, yeah, more accessible, maybe more friendly than like a stuffy meeting space. Does anybody have thoughts about location? I like a downtown location. I mean, I thought Katie's list was pretty

good. It was extensive though, so like you would like a city owned building with a coffee shop. Clever. But it's too small compared to the space that it used to be. Yeah. I mean, I did put it on there, but tables are a bit more at a premium than they were before. And I guess I think that they're open now until 7, but you know, if we do want to have this the same location for every place or for every meeting, then we'd have to take the times into consideration. You know, like Horizon is definitely going to be open all those times. Some other places will, of course, but

what if you did like coffee shop at noon and then like a place that maybe does like nobo like beer and coffee. So then maybe you'll get like a different younger group that will be like, "Oh, I want to chat about this." And I that like Yeah, I did think that the maybe maybe still easy to remember, but like the daytime meetings would be at one place and then the evening meetings could be at another place. I like that. But but you know, up to you guys and I don't I don't want to just pick the places on my own without input from you guys.

That's fair. So downtown areas are fine except like during the day, you know, at noon, people who want to come into town who drive, parking is an issue and that will discourage people from turning up. I remember we did an open house for something. Everyone loved it except we did it at 3:00 in the afternoon in the open at the opera house and people came in and it was in the summer and nobody could find a parking space. Yeah, summer. I hear I hear in the summer. So if you're going to stay in the same spot, you probably find a place that's sort of more on edge of downtown.

Although if you recall, Brian, I did take a page out of your book and suggest summer's off for this. June, July, August was off just because of So this was just other seasons. Yeah. But still I mean too, right? Color season's off, holiday season's off. So like January and February, spring break season's off. Okay. So then what do we think about a space that that that's not an issue? What about like Mundo's on Garfield? Well, it's not in the city. It is. It is actually in the city. It's in the city. It's just there's usually parking. I feel like there. Oh, that's true. I did also think about like Reuno.

That was my first thought is like ETH is like city city but has they have a big parking lot. They also have residential parking. They have drinks. Are we now going to argue about the venue? No. I think I think we're doing is fine. I'm not gonna I don't think we I don't want to pick a spot. One, you got to make sure that whoever's you want to pick is agreeable to it. Yeah. So, I think you just give, you know, stamps got some guidelines and come up with something that works. Yeah. Place that has good coffee. Okay. Yeah. And uh accessible and is accessible. Yeah. You know, and easy to find. Yeah.

So, with space and is willing to do it, that's kind of however that works. Yeah. So, we can pick from a couple options. Um, I guess here's an added challenge. Do the people that get to sign up pick do they get to talk about it with their staffer for that day and they pick the location or is that too much of of a tight list of Okay. Okay. Okay. We have a tight list of places. Yeah. Just No, just one place for lunch, one place for dinner. Same place.

Great. So, you know, and if you have one of those days that works best for you, then talk to staff and get your choice. You like nights or even more afternoons? I don't really care myself. Is this enough? Can the whiskey company open a coffee bar? Did we want Are those for the 6 p.m. as well? I think I like Nobo for the 6 p.m. A place during happy hour. Yeah, that works. That's why I liked Nobo. I thought that was a good idea. And I don't think enough people are going to that space. They'd be happy to have us there. So then the daytime one space on 8 Street. I'll be there every time

at noon. I mean you could do Common Good there. Yeah. I don't I don't know what time they That's a good idea. Oh, they have different hours later. Common Good will be they'd be open at noon, but they close I think at 3 now. Okay. So they would work for the new Okay. Okay. Sounds like decided. So wait, Mundo, Runo, and Common Good. You were thinking for noon? No. I don't know. Then we just landed on Common Good. Period. Oh, that's what we just negotiated. All right. And then but we have other options if common good says no.

Yeah. And then thinking agree that we'll let staff work this out and interested parties because again you guys can we can name four places and all four say no way. Yeah that's fair. It's conf it's going to conflict with this and then you're like we're going to be back here next month picking him again. How about you take Mundo's reduno? Yeah. Yeah. I'll check with those. Yeah. Yeah. I think they'd all welcome anybody and like what we'll probably have like the most like five people. Yeah. Max. Yeah, Max. I think they'd be like, "Please come. It's winter." Yeah. Okay. I feel like we've covered this topic.

Yeah. Compared to Verduno um has hosted 15 people for the North Borman Lake Business District. That's true. That happens often. Um and Common Good has hosted the Triangle Neighborhood Association.

I'm going to open public comment on this item. Public office hours. Okay, closing public comment on public office hours. Moving on to new business goals and objectives progress progress update. Lesie, uh so at your last meeting there was a request uh for kind of an accounting and a you know midyear little past midyear check on uh where we are with this year's goals. So, um, I just went through all of the goals that we had talked about. Some of them you probably didn't know. There's some work being done. It's been kind of started. Some research has been done, uh, but we haven't talked to you about it yet or haven't brought it to you. Um and then you know we knew that there would be other things that would come in uh you know requests and if somebody you know we do we're obligated to um provide uh or consider a request that comes before you for due process. So those kind of take precedence. Uh so there's a list of all of those that have come up and that we've taken on and then additional just so you know because sometimes I think I don't think they know what goes on in our office. So some other things that we've worked on other uh committees and um uh other groups that we either attend meetings or staff those meetings and prepare all the reports and uh coordinate like next week we have a joint planning commission meeting and that is the

uh that's the um basically the planning commission that covers the the comments. Um, so I guess we're not really looking for any input or if there are certain things that you think, "Wow, I forgot we've had that on our goals list. We should really jump on X, Y, or Z." Uh, because we may not make it before the end of the year, you know, please let us know. Well, under additional requests considered by the planning commission, we can now mark H as completed. So, that feels like a win. That was tonight's um text amendment.

Okay. Nope. I'm sorry. It's I. Okay. Yep. Yep. H and I actually check those boxes. Yeah, that feels great. Um I don't know about anybody else, but when I read through this, like we've never had this. We've never had a check on the goals that we've created. Um, and our goals are always really like large, lofty. It's always housing. Like there's never really anything that we can constructively go back and mark that we've moved the needle on. Um, we just have to kind of remember it. And this was fantastic to see. I don't know whose idea it was to put it in red. That was a little like jarring.

Yeah. I mean it just felt like we were back in school and you're seeing red remarks. Although when you seeing I know I know but when you see complete in red it was a little bit of a mind trick but it did feel really great to see that many items completed or in progress. Um that that is how I felt when I reviewed this. Yeah. I also really like the I don't know if it's a Gant chart, but thanks Jerry. Did you like the colors, Jerry, or did you just like Yeah, not so triggering. Yeah. Um I tricker,

for some reason had entirely forgotten that we'd already handled short-term rentals. Just had like completely dissociated already. Discussion about them. Whether it's handled, I'm not sure we'll ever be. Well, we moved it forward what we could to the city commission. Um, so there were items that I was reminded of that we've accomplished this year. Any other thoughts about this document? I think it's great. I think it's good practice to do it every year. Yeah, it was a good suggestion with green text, of course. With green text, orange if it's in progress and red if it's not started.

Stoplight text is even better. Yeah. Yeah. I'd like brighter, bolder colors instead of the pastels and the chart. Oh god. You've got some notes, Leslie. Um, sounds like in general we all very much appreciate this. Very much appreciate it. It was really, really helpful. And it's listed in the planning department on the whiteboard, right? Yeah. Oh, it had always been, I think. Right. Well, uh, a couple months ago, we put them up, um, on the whiteboards just to have it right in front of our faces all the time, so we're

reminding ourselves. Is this on the website somewhere? Can it be on our website? Can it be I mean, obviously, it was posted in the meeting minutes, but can we just slap it on a page on the website so that way we can Yeah, I think the chart would be kind of nice. Um, we will be working on, if you read very carefully, we'll be working on some uh requirements to comply with our next with the next round of um certification for redevelopment ready

uh communities. And part of that is kind of a um not a revamp, but kind of having more thorough uh web page and information that is helpful to the general public, but mostly most specifically to developers to know what the process is, how they go about it, you know, help them get moving and on their way and not, you know, be too intimidating. Um, so I think um as part of that revamp, it would be nice to have this information there, too. Yeah, I think that's great. Okay, I'm going to open public comment on the goals and objectives progress update. Okay, I'm going to close public comment. Um, okay. Reports update from the city commission. Mitch, it's you.

We had a meeting yesterday. Okay. Um, not much that directly pertains to planning. Great. Okay. Lesie, any update from planning department and Katie? Anything that we haven't already covered? Um, I don't think so. Cool. Um the Grand Traverse Commons joint planning we're meeting next week. I think that's our update. Um any update from the Board of Zoning Appeals? Has of we just canled the meeting for next week because there was nothing nothing great. That's a good sign.

People are working within our zoning code. Love that. Must be well written. Yeah. Update from the repairarian buffer committee. I think we're still waiting for a rewrite, the newest update to that. Yes. And I have been working on that. And I do have a couple of questions. Okay. Uh so I was kind of wondering if it would be okay if I um sent a couple of emails one on one to a couple members just to clarify. Yeah. Some things. I'm fine with that. Okay. looked at all the members on the committee and I think

was an actual discussion. Yeah. Great. Um, okay. Update from Grand Traverse County. Um, just a a couple of items. First off, I want to apologize. My my voice is going, but um, but you are not.

I am not. Uh the the first item would be our our zoning atlas project. I'm sure that you you may be aware that um the uh the county's economic development corporation helped fund uh housing north housing north um zoning atlas for Grand Traverse County. Um that phase one of that project is completed. Um, you can view the the zoning atlas uh online at zoningatlas.org and uh search um by a number of different factors and see what's allowable um by right um throughout the county. Uh currently we're uh undertaking phase two of that project which is uh looking at corridors throughout the county that could sustain additional uh uh housing denser housing development and and modeling that um as far as you know what what sort of housing development might be supported in in a given uh growth corridor. So, we're hoping to have a public event uh demonstration of of that work in December uh before the end of the year. Uh so, I'll be bringing you some more information uh on that in the coming months. Uh the other project I I just wanted to make mention of because it's happening here in in Traverse City. Um earlier this year, the county received uh close to a million dollars um in fund in funds from the MEEDC's uh RAP grant program for improvements uh at the civic center.

And uh those improvements are going to entail uh the construction of a a bicycle pump track, which is like a skate track for bicycles. um at the northwest corner of the property and uh the renovations of what we call the south building which is the bathroom facilities um adjacent to the the playground on the south part of the park in order to make them universally accessible uh and and generally um improve that facility. So, uh, this is a a a project that we we partnered with, uh, Norte on, um, obviously with with the bicycle track and some plans that they have on the site. Um, but I just want to make mention that that's that's a cool project that that we're working on. Um, the the plan is for these activities to be completed within the next two years.

Great. That's awesome. Um, sorry, I did have a couple things that I just thought of. Um, one is that we haven't decided yet, but there is a possibility we might cancel the next meeting. I know Debbie's going to be gone. You are going to be gone. I will be gone. We will be leaving the next day for the conference of Sean and Leslie and I. So, um,

that we'll just have to look. I mean, if something comes up that um you know, soon that we would need to take action, but I think Leslie at this moment there wasn't anything. So, that could be coming. And then, um the housing summit, I know I've emailed you guys about it, but the housing summit is coming up the week after that, Monday and Tuesday, October 27th and 28th. I believe that there's a zoning atlas presentation or a session at that. Um, so if you would like to attend, there are one or two day options. Um, you know, just let me know and I can sign you up for that. Thank you. Um, okay. Receive and file. Can somebody explain to me? Do I just need to read it out loud? Like what do I do for that section? I think it's just noting that Garfield Township is updating their master plan.

Right. So that's uh that's a required uh notification to adjacent communities that they are undertaking uh an update to their master plan. So we're kind of on notice and if we want to reach out to them and ask them to coordinate especially along our boundaries or where their decision making impacts the city. uh it's an opportunity and an invitation to coordinate um and just kind of have it on your radar. So, can I just say that notice of intent to plan is the most unironically funny memo title I've

It's Yeah, it's the way that it's um worded in the law and I never really thought about it, but it is seems a little um redundant. Yeah, a little. Um, okay. Moving on to general public comment. This is on any topic that we didn't already cover. Okay, I'm going to close public comment. Seeing none. And this meeting is adjourned. Almost made it in that hour. Good job. Yeah. Sorry, I should have talked less and then we can have a shorter meeting. No, I think we have a lot.