Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

We'll go ahead and call the meeting to order and we'll start with the Pledge of Allegiance. Okay, so welcome everyone to the July meeting of the Union Township Planning Commission. Roll call please.

Here. Here. Here. Here. Good evening.

Here.

Here.

Okay, so we have a quorum, so we will proceed. Next item on the agenda is approval of the agenda. So you have tonight's agenda in front of you. There are three new business items on it. They're all final site plans. Any concerns with the agenda?

Move to approve the agenda as written. Support?

So there was a motion by Bicking with a second by Oliver to approve the agenda as prepared. Any further discussion? All in favor of approving the agenda, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay, so the agenda is approved. Next item is the minutes. We last met June 16th. So we have the June 16th minutes in your packet, starting on page four of the packet. Are there any corrections to the June minutes?

Motion to approve last month's meeting minutes.

Second. You got it.

It was a motion by Hayes with a second by Bradshaw to approve the June 16th minutes as prepared. Any further discussion on that? If not, all in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay, so our June minutes are approved. Next item is correspondence, board reports, presentations. We always start with our representative from the Board of Trustees, Commissioner Olver. Your update.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So in a weird fluke of the calendar, the board actually meets tomorrow night. So the last two meetings date back to the 24th of June. So it feels like not new information. But at that board of trustees meeting, we had the introduction and first reading of the rezoning request for 4080 South Whiteville Road from Ag to R2A. That got a second reading and approval from the Board of Trustees at the meeting on July the 8th and passed unanimously. Also on the 24th of June, there was a change order number eight to the J.R. Heinemann with J.R. Heinemann for the Eagle Drinking Water State Revolving Fund. That's been ongoing as we do the water treatment plant expansion projects. And then everyone's favorite topic, some policy governance review. We do that once a month. On the 8th of July, we approved Ordinance 26-04 Sanitary Sewer System Revenue Bonds for $6.52 million through the State of Michigan Clean Water State Revolving Fund. We also approved a project construction contract resolution to Fisher Contracting for two screw pumps and a second sludge storage tank. These are words I never thought I would use before I joined the Board of Trustees. And discussed board meeting frequency and timing. That's a question that's sort of come up. Are we meeting too often, not often enough at the right time of day? So the board is just sort of taking a look at its meeting schedule going into next year. And then some policy governance reviews regarding cash flow and our cash flow is is strong and steady in all of our funds right now, so Those are our updates and I'll have more for you after tomorrow night Okay, any questions from commissioners for Commissioner over on trustees related matters Okay, thank you

let's see next item is Commissioner Thompson updates from CBA I know you met in June but you probably haven't met since then because I think you only meet quarterly right yield to no activity okay any questions though for Commissioner Thompson on CBA related matters Okay, thank you. Next item is the Community and Economic Development Monthly Report, which you also have an update to on your desks here with really the good stuff in it, the code enforcement stuff. But in any case, are there any questions from commissioners on anything you might have seen in the monthly report?

I had a quick question. I'm not sure if it might be. It was just on the rental service inspections coming up. I saw that there's a new rental housing information web page that was just updated. It says here, sharing with contacts about our updated rental housing information web page, as well as sharing information for office items, other departments in sight. Does that website include the number for someone who has a complaint against, like an apartment complex for living in? I ran into a couple of people this last week that were complaining about various issues that they had. They live in Union Township, and they were just wondering, like, who do they reach out for these complaints? heat or, you know, the windows aren't sealing correctly. And I didn't know if this, just seeing it here, had that information present on it.

So the rental housing website, part of our township website, does have a good bit of information on it. As there is on every page of our site, there's actually two places where you can access the same form. either contact us or submit a request. Those buttons up at the top of the page will get you to a form where you can provide a compliment, you can make it complete, you can just send a request for something. That form is there and you can decide who you want to send it to. One of the choices is our rental inspector. So I would recommend that you use that form.

What's the name of the form again?

It's on our website. There's actually, as at the top, there's a couple buttons. One says submit a request. Another button says contact us. So we're under the submit request. Yep, either one will get you there. It's just an online form. It comes into the email for the person you send it to. And they'll respond. What I will say generally when it comes to landlord tenant items is our rental inspector wants to see that there has been a valid effort to work with landlord and a lack of response you might say. We've had a few cases where folks have come to the rental inspector first, and after he's checked into it, he's found out they haven't been told the inquiry yet. And he said, now, go work with the program, and if you don't get a response, let me know, and we'll try to help you with that.

So we're trying to push them to it if it's something where they feel like they haven't been able to resolve the issue. Amicably. What's the word? I'm sorry. Amicably. Amicably, thank you. It's sitting on their tongue there between the two of the parties. All right, thank you. I appreciate it.

Any other questions from commissioners about the monthly report?

I had a couple. On page two, on the top of page two, where are they going to put more outlet spaces in Indian Hill Shopping Center?

There's not a formal lot created. What the Indian Hill Shopping Center, the parking lot is far larger than it needs to be. It was designed for a different era, it was designed for different users, and so there is plenty of land available where they could create at least one out lot, maybe more, within the existing parking lot. There is also land to the east side of the shopping center, it's really behind Dick's Sporting Goods, They have a long strip of vacant land there that is also available for development. So you can call that an outlaw for several outlaws as well.

Okay. My next one, where do you think it lands with the roundabout at Somerton and M20?

MDOT has money, that's usually the biggest battle, and they have identified the resources for that. This is safety money that MDOT has available to improve intersections. And they have set aside money from that state program for this intersection. As I understand it, and nothing's finalized yet, but as I understand it, they're kind of aiming at the 2028 construction season. that things will flesh out if we continue to go forward, but they do have the financial resources, and that's the biggest part of that.

I have one more. On page seven. Significant items of interest for longer term. The last one. Can you share what the boundary details are or not?

It's like a second line. A lot of Enterprise Drive. So this is a lot. It's on the corner of Enterprise Drive and M20. It had a small office. It's old house was on it, but it had been used as an office. A number of years ago, the township bought it because our sewer pump station number one is on that property as well. And we wanted to update that station. It had a very small easement associated with it. And as part of the work, we wanted to also relocate that sewer pump station to the south end of the property. It's right in the middle of the property, which is awkward to be able to do anything with the land. And so we wanted to relocate it to the south end of the property. And tried to work with the owners, but at the time they were not interested in talking about easement or anything, but they were selling the property. So our East EDA district ended up buying the left property. And did the work on the sewer pump station. And as part of the due diligence before we bought the property, we found a number of challenges related to lot boundaries. There were some things that were done that didn't seem correct. And so we've been working with our engineer, doing the title work, and identifying those things. We fixed all but one, and that one is actually, if you drive by there, you see the Enterprise Industrial Park sign that's up there. It's an older sign, it was put up in the late 70s. It's definitely beginning to show its age. And for some reason, the developer of that property, that industrial park, created a cutout for that sign. He sold the lot off to have it developed, used, but he created a cutout and he kept ownership, or control anyway, of that sign. So there's a whole five foot wide I don't know, about 15 feet long or something, piece of land that has ended up since being shown as part of the Enterprise Drive road right-of-way. So it's not a lot. It's never been taxed. But as far as the due diligence found, it really is a piece of property. And certainly the Road Commission did want it, and they said it's not in their right-of-way. And so what we've been doing is working on solving that and getting that incorporated back into this lot and then having an easement put on it that would allow the East EDA district to continue to make, actually to be able to maintain that sign. Right now we don't really have the ability to maintain it because Ownership is the question. So we may end up, we're working on it. We may be able to solve it without doing this, or we may have to do a more formal, quiet title action to solve it. That's where that is.

Thank you. That's all my questions.

As one who was established himself in the mid-70s, I take exception to starting to show signs of age.

Ah, but you are well-maintained. Thank you. Nobody has maintained this sign in a very long time. Actually, it's in great shape for not being maintained.

Not ready for replacement just yet. The other day as I headed to Menards and then to Tractor Supply, I was pleased to see progress on a number of our past projects, noting the new restaurant is under construction now on Bluegrass, and the Mid-Michigan College Events Center is taking shape and coming together nicely on Somerton. And then that trailer that caught our attention along Pickard between the auto dealerships is now gone, and that lot is being leveled and developed. So kudos to your team for moving those projects along.

Thank you. Any other comments on the monthly report? Okay, good discussion, thank you. Any other reports or correspondence that commissioners or staff are aware of that needs to come before our attention? Okay, hearing none, we'll move on. Next item is public comment. We always have a public comment at the front end of our meeting, which is on items not on the agenda. So if there's anyone here who would like to address the Planning Commission on an item of interest that's not on tonight's agenda, The three site plans are not public hearing items. The applicant will have an opportunity to address them in turn. And there's no public comment on those, but if anyone has anything that they'd like to bring to our attention, public comment will be open at this time. We ask you to come to the microphone, to the podium, give us your name and address for the minutes. and limit your comments to three minutes on any non-agenda item. Public comment is open at 7.16. Okay, we don't have anybody in the electronic room. We have a relatively large audience tonight, but we'll assume folks are here for other purposes. Any public comments? Okay, we'll go ahead and close that. Also at 7.16, there's an extended public comment towards the end of the meeting. So if anything sparks your interest, you can speak to that. So we'll move on. We have, as I said, three new business items. All three are final site plan applications. The first one is P final SPR 26-01. Final site plan application for the city of Mount Pleasant water treatment plan upgrades at 4195 South Lincoln and 1775 East of Broomfield. We'll have an introduction from Rodney, we'll hear from the applicant, and the commission will review, deliberate, and take action.

Thank you. You should have a copy of our report dated July 15th. It starts on page 21 of the packet. As was said, all three items are final site plan items. The other two were items that we knew were coming back to you. This one almost, it came so close to being able to meet administrative approval. Unfortunately, there was just kind of one detail ultimately that kept it from being able to be approved by its own administrator as administrative action. And that's sort of included in the impact here instead. This, as was said, was for improvements to the city's water treatment program, water treatment plan. You saw the preliminary site plan earlier this year. It really involves two sites. Most of the project is related to the water plant on Lincoln Road. but there's also what we call the island site where basically some things were removed that has an address in Broomefield that's actually down by the river. So anyway, you have the plan before you. As we said, we're talking about two items. related to sidewalks. We talked about that thing with the preliminary site plan, this one. They did add a request for temporary relief from sidewalk construction, and they did provide the reason for that. It's consistent with our adopted Board of Trustees policy. So we have no objection to approval of the final site plan with that request on it. The site is consistent with that policy. And so approving the final site plan would address, in this case, would address the temporary waiver as well, or temporary relief from sidewalk construction as well, without having conditions or anything like that, since it's on the plan. The one item that is outstanding is the lighting plan. This, of course, is an existing site, but they are proposing some new exterior lighting, and so that lighting has complied with Section 8.2 of our zoning ordinance. It came close. There was just one area where the illumination levels were over our maximum of 10-foot candles, which is quite bright for the area. It's certainly a very reasonable standard. And unfortunately, we had one area that was over 11, I almost got it, and it should be relatively easy to fix, but it did mean that the plan could not be administratively approved since Peter does not have the authority to approve with any kind of conditions. So with that in mind, we're happy to make a recommendation for approval of this plan subject to two conditions. One is to fix the photometric plan to make sure it fully complies. and then to submit a revised final site plan for administrative review and approval. So with those two conditions, we're happy to recommend this for approval.

Any immediate questions for Rodney while he's up there?

Out of curiosity, what is the key difference between ten foot candle, and eleven foot candle? What's the context there?

Ten percent.

Yeah, essentially.

I mean, certainly, 11 is obviously brighter than 10. If we showed you both, you would be able to tell the difference. It's not huge. But unfortunately, the ordinance cuts it off at 10. And 10 is a very reasonable and very common standard for exterior lighting requirements in a zoning ordinance. And again, it's one that could easily be solved here. Most of the lighting today, the LED fixtures are programmable. You can simply make an adjustment. They just need to... Tell us what they're doing and show it on the plan. Then we can prove it.

How close is the nearest residential site? to the island.

I'm sorry, say that again?

How close is the nearest residential land or site to the island?

Well, the island site is at the end of a residential street, but it's actually somewhat separated from the neighborhood there. It's McGurk Street, it's at the end of McGurk Street. But that site really, although it had some tanks on it, it would have very little on it now. I should say very little above ground. We'll have underground infrastructure. And so the lightning we're talking about is at the WTP site? That's correct, yes. I apologize. I should have said that. Yes, it's all about the treatment site.

So it looks like closest residential is 100 feet away almost. Oh, yes.

It usually is there, probably. Yeah.

So they would probably like the lighting to be less at night, for sure.

I would.

Is anyone from that project here tonight? They are, yes. So any other immediate questions for Rodney? OK, thank you. So if the applicant would like to come up and just address anything you'd like with regard to the plan.

Yep. So we, I think I was here two months ago for the preliminary kind of talk through the project. Not much has changed. Um, we did address all the preliminary comments in the sidewalk. It was one of those big ones. Um, and we are actually changing the lighting as we speak. I sent it right off to my electrical engineer and said, you got to fix this. Um, and then also to kind of, um, so we also do like the foot candle measurements at the property lines and those are all zero. So like definitely no spillage over, the property lines too. Yeah, I mean, pretty straightforward. We didn't make any big design change. Still three tanks that will be on the water treatment plant site, and then we'll be commissioning the two tanks that are on the island site. Doing some rehab on the wells that are on the island site, but that will then be pumped over to the water treatment plant site, and all of the storage will be at that plant site.

or fresher, what are you going to do with the old tanks?

Yeah, they'll be like crushed down and then backfilled. And then topsoil and seed restoration.

So one question I had, because I don't recall seeing it in what we looked at in the preliminary, but maybe it was there. The maintenance of traffic, the C901 page. So if I read this correctly, Broomfield is going to be closed at a certain point, and you've got a fairly lengthy detour from Lincoln all the way to Mission up to 20. The reason that Broomfield has to be closed is what?

So a couple of the utilities that are, so the main 24 inch water main that connects from the island site back to the plant and being distributed is on the north side of the road so we have to cross that we have to cross the road with the new pipe into that existing name that is over there um so we did go back and forth a lot with the road commission because they also i think that road was done in 19 so they were not fond of us also open cutting um but some of the other big utilities that are in there and you know one of those suggested Construction methods is to like bore it under the road, but the water main is right on like the gravel edge. So even making that connection, we would still be in the road to open cutting it. So we're able to improve kind of their configuration on the current catch basins that are on the side of the road too. Because when they did that, we had some water main that they had to work around. So now kind of working together, we're able to make their system a little bit better and then connect our water main and essentially those living areas in.

How long is the road going to be closed?

It shouldn't be closed for too long, you know, three to four weeks maybe.

Is it just as long as is needed to complete that work or does it tie into the other project?

Nope, just as long as it takes to cross the road with the water main and then they have to test the water main so sometimes that takes two to three days and then once they test the water main they can connect it once that's connected then they'll repave it and get on top of the road they don't want it closed longer than it has to be

Well, that's what people say, but just so people realize, that's one of the main arteries for the whole southwest part of the township into Mount Pleasant. And as you pointed out, it was already closed for several months, like five years ago, or even less than that, I think. Yeah, yeah, so four years ago. And plus we've had two or three closures of Lincoln, So there's been a lot of detours in this area, and you're talking about a, I don't know, a three-mile detour or something?

Well, and the reason that we have to assign it that way is for the truck traffic, because we can't detour some of the other truck traffic on, like, more local roads.

Well, there aren't any options because nothing's a through street in this area because of the river. So all I can say is I really hope people are going to be true to their word and really try to make it as minimal an amount of time as possible because it's a tremendous inconvenience for the public.

I'll definitely pass that along to the construction managers and reiterate that the township And public too is really striving for a short closure. And I know, again, I know the county road too is open to check up.

What's the time frame for starting construction that would be opening up the street?

So I don't have the exact duration for that particular... part of the project. In general, the project will start in October, but more of like setting their construction entrance and kind of getting their mobilization going and working on site. I would anticipate that not to be until summer of next year.

Will Mission be under construction then next summer too? I know right now they're doing some repaving on Mission. There's been talk about doing other like movements to expand it, maybe change the front. I'm just wondering, as Phil's bringing up here, How would having Broomfield shut down for a long period, or this road shut down for a long period, coincide with other maybe projects that are going on? Like a concern of like, when do we reach a point of development where we're starting to lose?

Could there be a detour of the detour?

We're in a detour in mission right now, and I know there's been a lot of discussion with the planning board there about doing a lot of substantial work, whether it happens or not.

Okay, yeah. I mean, nothing has been brought up from our review with the road commission or other conversations with the township of coinciding projects. We definitely try not to route one onto another. So I'm not sure if you're aware of anything else that time frame. And we can share this schedule maybe once we get the – so the contractor has – they have to put a full schedule together and their sequencing of what makes sense, and then we look at it and approve it too. So we can definitely coordinate with you just to check, you know, here's the duration or the time frame, you know, early spring, late fall, kind of, and just to see what other projects are going on. We could do that. Yeah.

The only project that we're able to do. Okay.

Other questions from commissioners?

Am I correct that it's relatively unusual to have this, like the detour map in a project like this? I mean, I don't know that I've seen one like this before.

No, it's not required for a site plan review. So I'm sure this is simply because it's part of their construction plan. But it was helpful to have it.

Yeah, no, it's very informative. I just was curious about its status with respect to the site plan.

My question is, so why the 11 candle lights instead of 10? Why was that originally? I think it was just missed.

So those two particular locations are right at the egress doors and the overhead doors. So there's two wall-mounted, and I think maybe one's mounted higher. I think it just happened to be two of them right there. But I am having him change it so that it meets the ordinance.

I was just curious of why it was 11, so thank you.

Other questions?

Okay. Well, I think we're going to deliberate, but you'll hang out. And if we have any more questions, we'll definitely ask. Thank you. So this is before us. It's up to us to deliberate and take action. If you looked ahead, you know that whoever makes the motions on the other two is going to have their work cut out for them. So this would be a good one to move on at some point.

i'd like to make a motion to approve uh p f-i-n-a-l-s-s-p-r-2-6-0-1 final site plan for improvements to the city of mount pleasant water treatment plant at 1495 south lincoln road pid 14-0-2-8-10-0-0-1-0-4 zoned r1 in the northwest quarter section 28 at their associate island site, located at the north end of McGurk Street, 1775 East Broomfield Road, PID 14-020-40-00-300, zoned R-2A in the southeast quarter of Section 20, finding that the site plan dated May 19, 2026, can comply with applicable zoning ordinance requirements for the final site plan approval. including sections 14.2.p. required site plan information and 14.2.S standard for site plan approval subject to the following conditions. One, revised a photometric plan to demonstrate that maximum illumination levels do not exceed 10 foot candles. And two, submit their final updated site plan addressing their conditions of approval to the zoning administrator for review and action per section 14.2.L.2 limited authority for zoning administrator approval for the final site plan.

Second.

OK, so the motion was made by Hayes and was seconded by Bicking to approve the final site plan with the two stated conditions.

We have a friendly amendment to change the address to 41 rather than 1495. I think you can reverse those numbers.

Oh, sure, sure, sure.

It's correct in the printed materials, but he did say 14, I think. I'm sure the people at 1495 South Lincoln don't really want a water treatment plant.

Too late for them. Right. Luckily, the secretary is here to catch me.

All right. Motion's been made. Any discussion?

Okay. roll call vote please support support support support support

And we will move on to our second business item, which is P final SPR 26-02, final site plan application to establish the Central Michigan Christian Academy Private School at 3433 South Lincoln Road. We will follow our usual protocol. So we'll first hear from Rodney, and then we'll hear from the applicant.

Thank you. As we said, everybody should have a copy of our July 16th report. It starts on page 63 of the packet. We've provided some extra reading material for you. It's a little longer, as was recommended. I'll try to hit just a few of the highlights. We talked about this when the preliminary site plan was before you earlier, that because this is a school, that there's a, in state law, there's a partial preemption of local authority. We have authority over the site plan. We don't have authority over the building permit or occupancy process. All that's handled by the state of Michigan. Essentially, they work with the state from there, and we just verify that they do the things that are on our site plan. But normally, we kind of coordinate the building permit process. For example, if there's things that need to be done before a building permit can be issued, we can have a condition that simply says that. But with this time around, the conditions, there are no conditions. to that. So we do have an item right on page two of our packet that will come up in the conditions and that's a land combination. Most of the property is a large lot but there's a small about one acre property that is in the middle of the parking lot and it's part of their maneuvering process or their pattern for boundary between those two. It doesn't affect the church at all, and in fact it may be helpful in the future if that's all went well. So that will be, you'll see that as a condition of approval that will be done. On page three of our report, we just want to talk about the traffic management plan, traffic safety plan. The applicant did provide an updated traffic safety plan when we met, There were some concerns that were reflected in your motion for the preliminary site plan approval. And right in the middle of this page, those three, conditions three, four, and five, were all about updating that plan. And I can report that the staff review, we found they updated the plan at the date of July I think it's very well put together, very well thought out. You'll see, and I'm sure you saw it and read through it, that it's kind of staged based on their activity level. As they get more students, the activities will change and expand. But as we're very pleased with it, we would recommend that you find that the plan is in good order. And so you'll see that change. The ultimate recommendation as well is essentially a finding that is a good order as presented. The site plan had some items that need to be dealt with, and these are details that can be dealt with. Unfortunately, there are a few. One item that truly is a detail is, I believe on the preliminary site plan there was a note, a longer note, related to sidewalk relief. And it addressed the Board of Trustees adopted policy related to grant contemporary relief. It also addressed the sidewalk and pathway ordinance, noting that an easement, as recorded easement for the sidewalk along Lincoln Road would be provided to the zoning administrator. Unfortunately, that note fell off of the final site plan. Somewhere along the way it got lost. And so we've added that. Unfortunately, it's one of the conditions of approval. So we'll address it that way instead. But they do need to provide that added recording easement. We did find that their reason for the relief is quite reasonable. This sidewalk, as we go along Lincoln Road to the south, goes into a wetland area associated with the Chippewa River. It doesn't make any sense to run a sidewalk down to that space. And so the staff, we recommended that they take the approach of running the sidewalk partly along that frontage, is actually outside of the right-of-way, and then simply turn it to come to the edge or enter into the edge of the Lincoln Road right-of-way at a point along that path before it starts to slip down into the wetland area. The plan you have shows that. It did exactly what we suggested. We're very pleased to recommend that framework to you where they're going to construct part of that walk and then the rest of it they're proposing to have that temporarily. There was, for the interior sidewalk, because our sidewalk pathway requires a connector sidewalk coming into the property. On the original plan, there was a connector coming into the church, front door of the church. There was an existing sidewalk there in front of the church. And then they proposed to use the existing parking lot asphalt basically doing some lane striping to create a pedestrian pathway to come back to the school. We recommend that they do other pathway that met the requirements of the sidewalk and pathway rules. The plan that you see provides that. They show now a concrete sidewalk going back to the school site. They have left the lane striping there, which is fine, creates added safety, added separation. And the only detail we have there is there were, I believe, a note on two different sheets that still referenced that lane striping as the pedestrian walkway. I think the notes were just as a condition that those kind of errant or outdated notes be reviewed. We had the exterior lighting plan that was reviewed. It did not meet our ordinance requirements. It was incomplete and unfortunately illegible. So we have asked that that be updated and corrected. That also you will see as a condition of threatening condition for approval. The page five of a report that on the bottom, item eight, there are outdated notes on the site. I think this is the first time I've actually put this, we put this on a report. There are some notes on the plan about the traffic safety and operational note and traffic safety measures. These notes were intended, I think, to coordinate with the previous version of the traffic safety plan, the June, the Monday in June. They don't really coordinate well with this version. And so what we're recommending, they're really kind of outdated at this point, and we're simply recommending that they be removed. Or if the applicant would like to have the notes on there, that they be removed. Better coordinate with the traffic safety plan and also with any conditions of approval that you may impose if you approve the plan. This plan, normally we don't bring plans to you that don't have all the outside agencies either approved or the language of the ordinance is that the outside agency permits should be in hand. are essentially reasonably assured that they will be approved, that there might be some housekeeping details to take care of. In this case, we have two outside agencies. Our stormwater review, which is done by our township engineer, I quote outside in quotes because both of these are really township entities. We treat them as outside agencies for site plan approval. The stormwater review is not complete yet. We're not concerned about it being able to meet the requirements of our stormwater management ordinance. These are really just technical details at this point, but that's still outstanding. We do not believe that any of the remaining details will affect the site design in any way. It's just getting the work done. The other item is public services for water and sewer. The school will be connected to our public water and our public sewer system. They do show those connections on the plan. Our public services departments, they're also working with public services on those details. Here again, we do not have any concern about the plan, the site design as you see it being altered by that. But they do not yet have that public services approval. In this case, we felt that it was worth going ahead and bringing this to you and having those be conditions of approval. We don't do that very often, but since we frankly already had some items we had to deal with, and because we're confident that the site design, as you see, will not be altered by the remaining details they need to address, we're confident in recommending the plan to you. with those items still to be finalized. So with that in mind, we are happy to recommend approval of the plan subject to parcel of conditions. The first two are actually really, we call it findings and conditions. The first two are really findings. One is a finding that the traffic safety plan, as presented, is an integral part of the approved site plan and essentially provides a minimum standard for traffic safety on this site. And we use that language, by the way, to provide a language and a condition that it be founded as the minimum traffic safety management standard for this land use on the subject site. We use that language because this plan, I expect, will be updated. As they use it, they will tweak it, they will adjust it, they may add to it. The idea is that this is the minimum. So they certainly can adjust it, they can alter it. as long as essentially the core of what you've seen remains in place. And we're very comfortable with that language to be able to give them the ability to continue to update and amend it as they operate and as they grow and as they learn through the process of the school growing and succeeding. So that's the reason for that language about it being a minimum standard. The second finding is about the sidewalk temporary relief. We're very comfortable in recommending that the temporary relief be granted as they've shown it on the plan for the reason they stated on the plan. Basically, by doing that here, that will grant that relief and ensure that that's resolved. The other items aren't just details. They need new address. The address item is one that normally we deal with through a building permit. We simply say before you get a building permit, you need the address from the county community development department. Because we don't have a building permit process for this item, we've simply made a condition for approval and asked for it to be done before occupancy. So we talked about the outside agencies, land combination, sidewalks. And so on page eight of our report, the last page, you'll see the three, number seven, eight, and nine, those are the three kind of site plan corrections that need to be done. And then finally, number 10 is that catch-all to have an amended, updated final site plan submitted to... So it's a lot. I wish we didn't have that many conditions. As I said, it's a lot to read in the motion, but I would recommend, we're happy to recommend approval of the plan subject to those ten items.

Okay, thank you. Any questions from Commissioners for Rodney while he is up there?

Ronnie, when we're looking at this plan and you brought up like these things are kind of traffic, safety concerns, stuff like that, what kind of advice would you give us when it comes to looking at, I guess, the impact off the site, like on the street? That's kind of where my main concern was is how is it going to lead to, could it lead to backup? Could it lead to traffic issues at that time? I saw some things in the plan, like I guess I wanted to ask the applicants too, but I guess yourself as well, is like what, what uh plans or what studies or what do we have to look at when it comes to like traffic flow to know how much this road this road is actually used going into it so that when i'm looking at you know i'm looking at the high end here and i'm saying okay you guys are doing great we're five years six years down the road you guys are up to 120 students you've done great funding so then we kind of pick up at 3 40 how many cars we're going to have lining up to make that right hand turn How long is it going to be? How many can we fit in here? Those type of flow studies, and I'm thinking about just how this is going to impact people that are driving there every day. Same type of things we're running into when we're looking over on Isabella Road and the academy over there. Obviously, it's a bigger school, bigger road, but I guess you can give me some guidance on looking into that and how can I assess or negate those concerns based around this plan.

So one thing to keep in mind with all of this is that we don't control the road. That's the County Road Commission controls the road. The County Road Commission has indicated that they don't want or need any improvements to that road. If they chose to, they could require a left-hand turn lane. They could require acceleration, deceleration lanes. They chose not to do that. require anything and in reality this site they're using an existing driveway and so there's not a whole lot that need to be changed but the changes are all in the in the traffic safety plan they are they are uh following what we've asked them to do related to as they grow uh moving to the writing and write out only for pick up and drop off drop off periods and both they i think they've done a great job of both education how they're going to educate their parents and how they're going to manage it on site. And so that's a key element, is that right in, right out element. Because it's actually not the right turns that are going to cause trouble here. It's the left-hand turns that are going to create the backups. In terms of stacking space, this site has excellent stacking space. You see, of course, on the plan that they've created the multiple lanes in front of the school. So they have a plan for how to get kids safely in and out of that space. So they have space there between the second legs of the school, but also the very long access drive coming in. And also, of course, the access drive going out. They have a lot of room there to stack cars. That's the difference between this site and Renaissance Academy. Renaissance Academy has very little room to stack colors. And so that's why they end up getting stacked out into the road.

Is there a lot smaller than Renaissance, larger than Renaissance's?

This is actually much smaller than Renaissance.

Renaissance... No, I mean a lot, the lot, the entrance lot there. Because Renaissance has a long lot coming in, but I know, and I'm not sure how they kind of... Renaissance is wide, but shallow.

The lot is wide but shallow, so they just don't have as much room to stack vehicles out of the road compared to what this site has. So we've looked at it, obviously the applicant's looked at it, And we are very confident, based on the numbers, based on the plan, that we're not going to be seeing cars stack up because they can't get into the pick-up-and-drop-off arrangement.

Do you have a number of how many cars you think they could stack up?

I don't have it right in front of me now. We did some notes on that as we were looking at the preliminary site plan, but I don't have that number right in front of me.

I'm just trying to guess if it's like... say at best case you have 120 students and half of them are driving together, so we'll cut it to 50 cars. Because I've seen that line up on Isabella running out when they have maybe a similar amount of cars. They actually have quite a few more cars. They have about 400 students.

The scale is completely different for Renaissance Academy, but also, as I said, this site has much more room offsite than Renaissance does. One thing I'll mention, actually, about Renaissance, the township has been actively part of an effort to solve the problem at Renaissance Academy in cooperation with the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe. and the other stakeholders there, the school, and also the Isabel's Forge Place, and Discovery Museum, that's a different one. The tribe actually provided, we applied for it, the tribe provided funding to the township to do a preliminary engineer for a plan to create a new pick-em-and-drop-off pattern using the existing driveway for the sports flex and some land the sports flex had that wraps around the school site. So we're actually working on that one. I've heard the sports flex guy ain't too happy about paying for it. Oh, no. Well, no, they wouldn't be, actually. Actually, so far, the tribe has given a significant sum of money to the school to help fund the next stage. And the next stage for us is we'll be updating that plan, that engineer plan, and then moving forward with putting the funding sources together. But that actually looks like it's going to be ultimately a very good solution to that problem. That's a whole different scale for this site. Even at its peak, this school is much, much smaller than the Grand Science Academy is now.

Speaking of peak, what's the highest period of activity in that? I see here it's listed as that it's been strategically scheduled to occur outside of the highest periods of local traffic activity. But I'm looking at the pickup times, 245 for drop-off, 840. That's the same time my kids are getting out at Fancher down the street. getting dropped off a venture down the street so i know it's kind of corresponding with what i guess i would perceive as high traffic times when other school buses are out other schools are operating at the same time do we have a a firm idea of when the highest period of local traffic activity on that road is this this project does does not require a traffic study we didn't ask for one uh the road commission didn't ask for one

So we don't have the numbers for that. I mean, anecdotally, of course, the Township Hall is not far away. And I would say that, first of all, the road is a busy road. Lincoln is just a busy road. But that's not a peak period. I would say peak period is actually a little later related to the rush hour for businesses rather than rush hour for the schools.

You mean like a 9 to 10? type of time frame?

It's really the 8 to 9 time in the morning and the 4.30 to 6 in the evening would be busier time.

This says it's pickup is at 8, you said 8 to 9, 8.30 is when pickup and 8.40 is when drop-off is, so wouldn't that be in that time?

So that one is in that space, but the drop-off, the pickup is not in that kind of time frame.

Okay. Thank you, Ryan. I appreciate it.

Any other immediate questions for Rodney while he's up there? Okay, thank you. We'll go ahead and bring the applicant into the discussion here.

Good evening. My name's Tim Deeby. I'm with Central Michigan Surveying and Development here on behalf of the applicant. There were some questions that were posed and I'll see if I can answer some of them. Approximately 30 cars can be parked between the entrance and the three stacking lanes so we're not opening up all three of those those lanes until farther into the development but you would ask how many if you said all 360 cars are coming in we can house about half of them all at once They are going to stage through that. Not everyone is going to show up exactly at the same moment. The other thing that we provided was parking spaces immediately adjacent for if, in fact, we had an issue with stacking, they would be directed to those parking spaces. When we hit the higher volume, we have someone out at the entrance directing. So we've tried to build that into the traffic safety plan so that there's not only the signage and the room to stack, but we also have the personnel to direct.

Because you're saying, I know on the plan it said that Parents aren't getting out? Parents staying in their cars?

Unless they come to one of the parking spaces. Those parking spaces are for the overflow and for parents who are walking their children in.

So say if all three... Oh, so is that probably like for the preschool that they'd be walking, that the parents would be walking in?

They could be walking in for the preschool. We've set up two different areas for parking. One that is on the north side of the site so that they have a walking path to come through. The other is for the overflow parking. So if in fact they're starting to fill up that queue line, they can be directed to go in and park and wait. Is it a staggered release, like by classroom? Or are they planning to still do the classroom? Say you're at max. I need some help on that one.

Say we're at max capacity of 120 students. He mentioned that, you know, not everybody would be approaching it once for that pickup. I want to know how that was facilitated. Is it that people know, like, okay, you pick up your child at 3 o'clock? Or, I'm sorry, you know, just say, okay, pick up to 345. Classroom A is at 345. Classroom B is at 350. Or do they all get released at the same time?

I think when we totally get a composite of the grades that we'll be enrolling in the school, then we'll have a better idea in terms of do we take some times and do a staggering time. I think some of that decision-making would have to be until we know exactly what the enrollment's going to look like. If we did the staggering, then it would have to be by grade level so that, you know, children would start all at the same time.

You have to stagger in the morning, too, for the starts there.

Right, that's what I mean.

I worked in an elementary school that used to be three lanes with about 1,400 kids in the elementary school. So, like, I've seen schools do this and just street parking. I've seen streets do this with three lanes that are all dedicated with, like, half a dozen staff. It can go a lot of ways easily. That's probably why you're going to hear my concerns because I can see how it is.

No, I appreciate that. I think... Pre-planning really makes a difference. I know I've been involved in some terrific drop-off, how they snake through, where it's very well organized, you know, it's quick, and they really do have the ability to stack a lot of cars at one time. What Tim was saying, you really have to look at the parking lot feature as well. We believe, you know, we're going to be able to get the students in, safely, and obviously safety is a huge concern for us. We'll have the right personnel out there. But we also have that ability, what Tim was talking about, for parents to park. And if there are too many in the line, we can accommodate that. And it is a large parking lot which will allow us to do that safely with the children.

I'm sure scaling up will be easy. There's not going to be issues that are going to come up in the first couple of years. I know we're approving you not for just the two years, not as you're building up, but for as long as you guys want to do it, as big as you can try to grow this thing. That's what my mind says.

We want to look long term. I think the verbiage that talked about strategically scheduling to occur outside the highest periods, we were thinking of the business traffic specifically, going to work maybe at 8 o'clock in the morning, leaving work, you know, at 5, usually 8 to 5 hours. So we were looking at the business traffic.

I appreciate that, but there's other traffic going on, especially with other schools that kind of match up at the same time.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

Did anyone else, I was trying to address his concerns, but did anyone else have any questions?

Not for you, but for the applicant. Okay. When are you all looking to get started? Obviously, if we do this today, it's still going to go through a few more stages. Are you looking to get started for this school year coming up? So this is all for next year. Yeah.

So right now, we...

had indicated that we were looking at a limited launch in January. A limited launch would be a handful of students just kind of, we don't call it a test run, but just to get our feet wet, get things going, probably less than 15 students, 15 to... school year realistically depending on how fast we can move things forward fundraising everything there are a lot of dynamics that go into it we are definitely looking at a fall 2027 start, and we feel that things could be in order by then. Modulars could be set up and all the municipalities in, going through the Michigan Department of Education, all of those approvals. It's like you have a lot of dominoes that you're working with, so until you get this domino in, this one can't fall, so as soon as we can obtain a final approval, then we can move forward with different bids and so forth. So realistically, be great if we could do a soft launch in January, but realistically we're probably looking at fall of 2027. Okay.

I know that was one of the big questions, is all of those things that you were talking about, just stacking all of them up, that was the concern, not wanting to delay this at all, because it might delay your launch even further.

And we appreciate that. I mean, that's very considerate, and it's been an exciting journey. We're excited about the possibility of getting things moving forward.

Sure. Other questions from commissioners for the applicant or the applicant's representative?

I was looking at this plan, and these are temporary buildings, right? Those are modular buildings.

Do they all have, I remember I asked this question last time, do they all have individual plumbing on each one? Yes. Okay, so now the kids aren't going to be running outside to go to the bathroom.

We all have a bathroom right there. Okay.

There's two bathrooms in the office and a bathroom in each.

I was just checking because I was looking at the plan and I saw that there was one site that said, I'm not sure if I was missing it or not, but when I was describing it, it said that there was another plan, instead of a plan A1, it was B1. Sorry, I'll come back to that. I apologize. It just came to my head and I don't have it right in front of me.

I was just curious as to why temporary buildings, not a permanent building.

Because we are still looking for

These things are fairly permanent too.

I went to school and they were permanent for 20 years. I've watched them float away before. So I just had a little bit of concern with that.

Floor pan. This is on sheet number 4B. It says refer to floor pan on sheet 4A for non-restroom units. Is that just left in? Other non-restroom units or elevation here. I wanted to say I didn't know if there were other plans that had non restroom units in them.

None that we are using. This is this is a pre file plan from them. Okay. Thank you.

I wasn't sure if I had something. These are on cinder blocks. Are they, like, raised? Yes. Or are they secured in? They'll be on public sewage, public water.

They'll vary from 18 inches to 32 inches as they move from front to back.

I don't have a question I just wanted to say I really appreciated the detail of the safety plan and all of the the visuals so as a visual person that was very helpful to see the levels of how many students you think as you get them how the traffic will flow so thank you for that Anything else?

Okay, we seem to be satisfied at the moment. So again, this is in front of commissioners. It is up to us to deliberate and take action. So, on the floor.

I think they've done some great work. I really appreciate all the detail they put into this plan here, showing how they're going to scale up and do the ramp up for the school. I think personally I'm still a little concerned about not maybe knowing just what the average traffic flow is, how much of an effect this is going to have. If I knew for sure that there wasn't going to be flow over I could feel 100% on this not affecting us in a similar way that we got on Isabella Road. I think I'd be 100% because they've done some great stuff.

How often are you on Lake End in that area?

Time to time. I mean, I live right up here on Bamber, so I cut down through there and I see it cutting across and I'm going to Fancher. I'm usually not heading that way personally myself. I go that way almost every day.

I don't think there's that much traffic on that section of the road at the times I'm driving.

And you get to avoid mission. I'll go to it. But that intersection down there is one of the most, I've seen more accidents there than any other part of the town.

Well, I do understand the concern about closing that intersection, basically, because it is a main artery. But I don't feel that it's going to be an undue stress on Lincoln with the amount of traffic that they're proposing. I mean, as with any business, I mean, I think the seven below, is that what it is? Not seven below.

Seven brew.

Seven brew on mission is much more problematic than I think this potentially would be. Also, right, people, if they get stuck once, they change their schedule if they can, right? They just avoid that space at that time and adjust.

Well, for me, that Lincoln is the only real artery going north if you're coming from those apartments that are on Broomfield and then to try to get up to Fancher if you're going to school there. It's a vital road to a lot of people that are going to school there.

Are you talking about Ganyard or are you talking about Fancher?

Ganyard and Fancher. Ganyard is there but also Fancher because it's a primary elementary school that suits I know people that are Plenty of people that are in Union Township on those Brookfield apartments there that have to take Lincoln North to get up to that at the same time. So again, maybe I'm a little bit more keyed into it because I've got two kids that are in third grade and fifth grade, so I'm like, I'm all about elementary and how they see these build-ups every day. You can see every school is kind of backing up. I'm sure, Tom, you see it over at Sacred Heart, too.

Could I just ask for clarification? This site, this site, how big could the school ever get? Is 120 the upper limit?

At this time, you know, with four modules, we are going to keep class sizes fairly small. I would say less than 20. So I would say less than 100. Okay. More around 100. Probably 100 would be...

For the site or for what you guys are planning on? Because you guys are still looking, again, this is like you said a couple of times, it's temporary with the understanding that you guys are going to approve from Mount Pleasant to do, to deal with that site, I'm guessing south of Bamber. But if that doesn't fall through, what were your original goals for size for the Bamber site? Like how high do you picture the school getting there?

It's not there. It's the one on Bloomfield. Sorry, Bloomfield. Yeah, the one on Bloomfield. I would say, you know, our desire is to see a K-12 school. with soccer fields and ball fields and things like that. So we would estimate maybe about 300 at that site, 350 as a K-12.

Yeah, but my point is at this site that's before us, this thing, it's never going to be at the scale of Renaissance or even close.

Correct.

And you won't be offering drive-through coffee service, correct?

As a parent, you know. I think Renaissance, if I remember correctly, I think it was at 452, right around there, 450. And this You know, CCA is looking at 100, 110. We would be thrilled. But again, we are not going to have large class sizes. The modulars could accommodate, I believe, about 30, 32, but we're not looking at having large classes. That's really one of the features of the school is that it would be a small class size.

Ron, you say things have to pivot for them because things don't work out in Mount Pleasant, and this becomes their primary site. Would any additional buildings or anything like that be possible, or is this site kind of maxed out?

This site does not have the room to put that facility on, not even close.

I will say this, that first of all, whenever we're looking at a site plan, we look at it as being permanent. It doesn't matter to us if their plan is that this is temporary and they're going somewhere else. We look at it, if this is here, still here 30 years from now, is it going to work? And it does, it works. As I proposed it, it works. We'd love to have them in Union Township. I do agree that this site is, unless the church went somewhere else. If the church went somewhere else, then they have the room. But we don't want that either. So we'd love to have them in the township, but my expectation is they're going to be located there. But in the meantime, we'll be happy to have them here.

We bought a nice three-bedroom that had great space for two boys. Then we had two more boys. What did we do? We bought a bigger house, right? Yeah. Hopefully it grows. And congratulations to you and your team for doing such a wonderful job with this. Very excited to see this move forward.

We really appreciate the questions and the kind comments. Thank you.

And I'm hopeful that one of my colleagues will begin reading soon.

I think you're all just delaying, waiting for me to get started here. So I will. I move to approve PFINALSPR 26-02 final site plan to establish a private school and to construct modular units for office and classroom space for Central Christian Academy on the Central Michigan Christian Church premises at 3433 South Lincoln Road in the R1 Rural Residential Zoning District. And in the northwest quarter of section 21, finding that the site plan dated July 14, 2026 can comply with the applicable zoning ordinance requirements for final site plan approval, including sections 14.2.P required site plan information, and 14.2.S standards for site plan approval, subject to the following findings and conditions. One, the updated traffic safety plan dated July 2026 is approved as presented as an integral component of this approved final site plan and as the minimum traffic safety management standard for this land use on the subject site. Two, the request for temporary relief from sidewalk construction for the southern portion of the proposed sidewalk along South Lincoln Road as highlighted on sheet 6 of 11, is approved because of the need for the sidewalk to otherwise be constructed through regulated wetland and because the adjacent land to the south is in the Chippewa River floodplain. Three, a new school address is required as assigned by the county with address numbers prominently and legibly displayed on the front building wall near the main entrance prior to occupancy. Four, confirmations from the township engineer and the public services director that the site plan fully conforms to all applicable water and sewer utility standards and requirements of the stormwater management ordinance number 23-03 shall be provided to the zoning administrator prior to submittal of an updated final site plan for review and action. Five, submit the necessary land combination application for the two parcels to the township assessor for approval prior to the start of any construction or installation of site improvements on this site. Six, provide a copy of the South Lincoln Road sidewalk easement documents as recorded at the Isabella County Register of Deeds Office to the zoning administrator prior to the start of any construction or installation of site improvements on the site. Seven, remove the outdated traffic safety and operational note on the cover sheet and the associated traffic safety measures notes on sheets 3 of 11 and 6 of 11, or revise them to be fully consistent with the updated traffic safety plan. dated July 26, and the findings and conditions of this final site plan approval. Eight, remove the errant pedestrian walkway labels and arrows at the southeast corner of the parking lot and school access drive from the final site plans sheet six of 11 and eight of 11. Nine, add the missing manufacturer's name, picture, or sketch of each proposed exterior light fixture and an elevation detail of the proposed pole lighting with the height from grade level to the top of the fixture to the photometric plan. And 10, submit an updated final site plan addressing all conditions of approval to the zoning administrator for review and action for section 14.2.L.2, limited authority for zoning administrator approval of a final site plan.

So the motion was made by LAB, support by OLVR. Look for it in your favorite audio book supplier. Any discussion from commissioners?

Just one thing that came up. On item two, it says it's south, adjacent land to the south is in the Chippewa River Front Plain. Is that gonna be, Is there going to be any threat to the school if for some reason there's a, you know, there's a flaw of some sort? Okay, I'm just making sure because I saw that and it may cause some concern. If we get 15 inches of rain in 24 hours, then everything is threatened. Of course. That's my insurer.

Could it happen?

You don't get hurricanes here. You're fine. Good point.

May I ask a quick question about the land combination? How difficult is that to get approved? Are there many steps, or is it a fairly straightforward application?

It's a very straightforward application. Because of the survey work that was done for this, I'm sure they already have what they need to apply. The approval process is administrative.

Peter reviews it, and our township assessor reviews it, and ultimately the township assessor

Any other discussion from commissioners? Okay, a motion has been made to approve the site plan with the 10 stated conditions. Roll call, please.

Townsend? Yes. Hayes? Nay. Bicking?

Yes.

Bradshaw?

Nay.

Bolivar?

Yes.

Quattrido?

Yes.

Black? Yes.

I believe the vote was four to two, is that correct?

Five? Five to two. Maybe you need to go to the school to learn how to count.

No, I was just thinking.

So the motion was carried by a vote of five to two. So good luck with the project. We'll move on to our third and final business item. This is P Final SPR 26-03. Final site plan application for the expansion of the previously approved Heirloom Grove Agritourism Facility at 5297 South Whiteville Road.

Thank you. We have a copy of our report dated the 13th of July. It starts on page 96 of the packet. This is a final site plan for the early growth of tourism. As noted earlier, this is another one where we have quite a number of additions. The plan does not fully conform as it's currently drafted to the information requirements. But we felt here, again, somewhat similar to the last one, that it was in a position of sufficiently complete for your review. And if you choose to, it's sufficiently complete for a conditional approval action. that can be addressed that are not things that would alter the site design significantly. So a few of those details that we said, we've done with the dumpster enclosure, There's a detail on the plan, and there's a drawing of the dumpster enclosure, or what we assume it is, on the sidewalk, it's not labeled, but we assume that's what that is. The two don't match, the dimensions are not the same, so we need them to match how they do that, and then label it on the plan. Sidewalk, there was a request for relief, but not a reason, and so we just need the reason to be put on the plan. So you see there's a completely valid reason. There are no sidewalks anywhere nearby that area of South Whitefield Road. The Township has no plans, although we'd love to see pathways down Whitefield Road. It'd be great to go all the way down to Carson City, but there's no time for that right now. There's no funding for that right now either. So it's completely valid to grant the temporary relief. We just need to have the reason on the plan consistent with our board policy. Parking, there's, back in 2022, the Planning Commission granted relief from the pavement standards for parking under our Agritourism Section Resilience Ordinance. There's a provision in there that allows the Planning Commission to grant relief to allow a gravel parking lot for agritourism facilities. In that circumstance, we still require that they take care of the barrier-free parking, that barrier-free parking and access all be paid. which they have done. It was on the 22 plan, it's on this plan. Unfortunately, this plan, there was a request for a waiver of that pavement, but they did not provide the required detail. In that section, agritourism section, it talks about confirmation on the site plan that the dust will be controlled, that there's measures for dust control. I have no doubt that they have measures for dust control. They just simply didn't address it on the site plan. So that's just adding a note. The exterior lighting, similar to the others, our exterior lighting plan, photometric plan, did not fully meet the requirements of the ordinance. It was incomplete. It was partially illegible. So it just needs to be updated. And I'm sure here again that it can comply with all of those. It just needs to show their details. This one is the last one that we'll talk about outside agencies, hopefully for a while. But the public service is not involved in this one. There is no water and sewer down that way. But at this point, the stormwater review is not complete. The plan's been submitted, working through the process. Here again, there's plenty of room on the site. We have no concern that they'll be able to comply with the requirements for stormwater approval. But it is not yet finalized. So with that, we're simply inviting you to provide that confirmation of approval for the stormwater. This is another one where I, as staff, we believe that this approval is assured, that they have the space, they have the, I think the design is proper in terms of the amount of space they need for stormwater management. They just need to do the details to get that engineer's approval, the township engineer's approval. So with that, noted out here, it's not a plan that can be approved administratively. We are comfortable with presenting this plan to you, and if you're inclined to approve, we're comfortable with recommending an approval subject to a number of conditions, findings and conditions. This is another one where, because of the modifications, the landscaping modifications on there, very perfectly valid, it makes good sense what they've done with landscaping, but our ordinance requires the Planning Commission to act on that, so we're recommending a finding that the proposed landscaping modifications are consistent with section 10.7. which addresses that essentially that the landscaping be consistent, the alternative design be consistent with the objectives of the landscaping section. And in this case, we believe that they are. Similar modification was approved by the Planning Commission in 2022. And so this would just be continuing that for the expanded operation. Second item is another finding related to the non-barrier-free parking, a lot of the gravel. and requiring that confirmation of the dust control plan to be added. Item number four is the temporary relief. So this is simply granting the temporary relief subject to that provision in the Board of Trustees Policy Statement. and subject to the qualification that if in the future sidewalks should become available nearby, that this section would be constructed within a year. That's part of the Board of Trustees adopted policy. The rest of the items are just a couple of corrections that we already discussed, and then that stormwater approval, and finally, once the plans are ready, that they be submitted for administrative approval, review approval by the sub-administrator. Sorry that we have a long list, but if you're comfortable with it, we're comfortable with recommending that the plan be approved subject to that.

Any immediate questions from commissioners for Rodney while he's up there? Okay, thank you.

How's the traffic on Whitewood?

So hear from the applicant now.

We went through the list. I don't think any of these things are anything we can't do. Just some touching up on the plans and stuff really. A couple things that got missed. But the only thing that we had, I guess a question or maybe something to talk about real quick is on It talks about the... Temporary leave for the site. Yep, but it also put in there, yeah, it's on the second page, it also puts in there that a food truck was shown in the preliminary plan area, and it got removed on the area where it was, and then it says a separate administrative zoning permit approval would be required later if a food truck location is proposed for the site. I guess I want to bring it up and talk about that a little bit. We did move a spot. Instead of calling it food truck, we labeled it vendor. I think it's called vendor area out in front. I guess that's what we were assuming, vendors, food trucks, I guess in that area. But I guess the bigger question is really, Are we required to have the exact spot where a food truck may end up for every potential event, I guess? Because we're going to be, this is a pretty large parcel, right? Fifteen-some acres. If there's an event up front, you know, doing something, the food truck might want to be up front. Or if we're having a graduation party by the new pavilion, well, the food truck might want to be located in that concrete space by the pavilion. they're clear out back and the orchard cutting flowers and they want the food truck closer to the back right so i don't know is that something is that a requirement that we have to show exactly where i guess every food truck maybe we can add that i i just didn't want to i guess i didn't like how it was worded where it mentioned something about basically having to come back in and reapply for like a food truck um as a separate administrative zoning permit that would be required later for that. I just wanted to make sure we kind of nip that right now if we could.

The city has a process where they certify the truck. We do not have separate food truck ordinance. What we do is, this is how we developed to work with the food truck vendors, is we actually provide a zoning permit zoning permit to be in that park. We do these zoning permits by season. So basically it's an annual permit for the location. And it will then allow that truck to be at that location whenever they choose to be there. It's pretty basic and I'll let Peter talk about what we ask for in the zoning permit and what the fee might be. It's very minimal. But I can say in this case, that essentially we'd be looking for in zoning permit that indicated that the food truck would be on this property during the season. And you might have some language about where. There might be these various places, but we're not looking for a specific location. It's just that it would be a food truck there for events.

So when it comes to a food truck, to help the vendors out a little bit, and it sounds like for this project or for this development, they'd be interested in having more than one food truck. Instead of having all the food truck vendors come and get a permit for this location, what we have is the landowner actually apply for it, and it's good for a year. And what they can do is, and so I notice here in the vendor area, but if there's any other, what you can put on the permit after the site plan is all the areas that you may have, you know, set aside for a food truck, whether it's used or not, it's dedicated as, you know, if we have two food trucks, this is where maybe another one will go, or if you want to have them all clustered together in one area. But basically, I'm looking for, you know, it's not impeding any kind of flow of traffic for vehicles, dust drains, it's not blocking any kind of access. Typically, in a parking lot, it will take up parking locations, and so I'm looking at how many parking spots maybe it's going to be taking up. Can't have anything in the road right away, so it's not a difficult review.

Peter, is it the vendor that applies for the permit?

A vendor can apply, but the issue with that is, so these food trucks, of course, they will have multiple locations that they usually want to go to, and so if they're, and more into that location. And so the vendor can come in and apply, but they would have to apply for every location. So what I typically do is work with the actual landowners where they're going to have hot spots, and they just apply, and then a food truck comes to them and says, I'd like to set up shop here, and they go, yep, right there, it's approved.

So if he's going to apply, he can get open usage for people, food trucks that want to come in, and he's designated the area for the season. Versus having to say, like, hey, do you want to work with me? Say it's a taco truck. Hey, taco truck, do you want to come for me for three dates? Can you apply? I'll let you on with a fee. So he can apply to you directly and then get use on the land for any trucks he wants to bring in for the season. Yep.

Okay. That sounds fine. Do we want to, should we label that then? I guess if we're going to make, obviously, a couple, you know, small changes here anyway, will that something we'll want to put on this plan, or is that something you could just come in later to do?

When you do the zonium permit, you could really take that small version of the plan and just highlight it.

Here. Here. Okay. And that will basically prove us for one year or whatever, and what's the cost on that?

I want to... I don't think it's $50 or anything, it's $25. I think we're right, I think it's $25. I think it's $25.

Okay, I just wanted to clarify that. I didn't know what that all meant as far as having to come back in and reapply for some zoning approval, you know, and we did that, so, okay. Yeah, I think that was really the only, the only thing we had, I guess, as far as that goes, for the announce on there that Rodney went over, I don't think we'll have a problem getting fixed up on the plans and stuff, so. Anybody have any other questions?

Other questions for the applicant?

So you get approval, what's the time frame looking for?

Yeah, we're ready. We got building plans into the engineering stuff right now, trying to get engineer drawings and stuff done for building So we would like to get going on the building portion, at least the barn ASAP. We've still got some building season left. And then it'll be obviously phased out a little bit as we get up and rolling and stuff. Come for a warm winter. Yeah, yeah.

Can I ask again, are you seeing the barn being used year round, or are you looking at really three seasons on that?

Three seasons for the barn itself, yeah.

Other questions? How tall are the sunflowers right now? Knee high? All right.

Mine are over my head, so I don't know.

Are you only knee high? Is that what you're saying?

No, no. My sunflowers are, like, hitting the roof. But I only got three or four. These guys are on a different scale.

Again?

No, I'm just thinking that John and Jessica both did their effort, so I'll pitch in this time. Unless there are other questions, I just want to make sure that we were good before.

Thanks.

Here we go. I move to approve P final SPR 2603 final site plan for the proposed Heirloom Grove Agritourism expansion on 80.01 acres of land at 5297 South Whiteville Road. PID 14-032-10-006-02. In the northwest quarter of section 32 and in the agricultural zoning district finding that the site plan dated June 23, 2026 can comply with the applicable zoning ordinance requirements for final site plan approval including sections 14.2.P required site plan information and 14.2.S standards for site plan approval subject to the following findings and conditions. The landscaping modifications as depicted on the final site plan are approved based on a finding of consistency with the conditions cited in section 10.7 modifications. Number two, the request for a waiver of non-barrier free parking and driveway paving is approved as depicted on the final site plan based on a finding that the expanded gravel surface parking and access drives will be adequate to handle the anticipated level of traffic. Three, add the required confirmation to the site plan of the measures that will be taken for dust control while the parking areas are in use. Four, the request for temporary relief from sidewalk construction is granted based on a finding of consistency with the Board of Trustees adopted sidewalk and pathway construction policy authorizing this action in cases where less than 50% of the surveyed sections of the township along the road fronting the proposed development have sidewalks. subject to the Board's qualification that, once the threshold has been met, all parcels will be required to construct sidewalks within one year. 5. Add the reason for the request for temporary relief from sidewalk construction to the Final Site Plan consistent with the Board's policy and qualification statement. 6. Add a label for the dumpster enclosure on the Final Site Plan and correct the dimensions to match the detail depicted on Sheet 9 of 9. 7. Add an accurate, complete, and fully legible photometric plan that demonstrates full compliance with section 8.2 exterior lighting standards and provides all required details to the final site plan. 8. Confirmation from the township engineer that the site plan fully conforms to all applicable requirements of the stormwater management ordinance number 23-03 shall be required prior to submittal of an updated final site plan for review and action. Submit an updated final site plan addressing all conditions of approval to the zoning administrator for review and action per section fourteen point two point L point to limited authority for zoning administrator approval of a final site plan So the motion was by over and the second was by Bradshaw's all right.

All right.

He had the easy part You're welcome

Any discussion from commissioners?

It does seem like you would do dust control when the parking lot is not in use, but I think that's just a word choice there, right? It's a word choice. Yeah, okay.

There's no need for dust control when the parking lot is not in use.

Sure. Yeah. Well, and you don't want to be blowing dust all over people's cars either.

And just make sure you put the S on conditions. Yeah.

Okay, roll call, please.

Vicki.

Yes.

Hayes. Yes. Lapp. Yes. Thompson.

Yes. Oliver. An enthusiastic yes.

Bradshaw. Yes. Squash-Rito.

Yes.

So with the proviso that enthusiastic yeses count the same as regular yeses, motion is approved by vote of, what did we say, seven to nothing. Thank you. Okay, so congratulations.

Look forward to seeing the final result.

And I hope you all enjoyed the Lumineers concert as much as we did.

Oh, you were there today?

Somebody not there.

Saw them two rows ahead of us, I think. Full family, it looked like. Yeah. Cool.

Put her on the hill. There you go.

It's a good show. So we've completed our three business items. We have a few more items to finish out the meeting. One is extended public comment. So this is the big public comment that we have that's not on any item, regardless of whether it was on the agenda or not. We invite you to come to the podium. Give us your name and address for the minutes. If you're online, make your presence known, and we will recognize you to speak so extended public comment it's open at 8 41. folks were just hanging out for the benefit of our company all right um hearing none we'll go ahead and close extended public comment until next month then we move to final board comment any comments from commissioners for the good of the order

have a question for commissioner over um have there been any applicants for the open planning commission seats at the last meeting it was indicated that there was but uh it was not entertained so i suspect that will be on tomorrow's agenda yeah not sure if you are aware of anybody or or not at this point but no i have not heard back He doesn't like to have those appointments made when there's not a full board.

He has to nominate them. All the others, anybody can nominate, but the Planning Commission, the supervisor must do the nominating.

So stay tuned. Yes, that will come when it comes. Any other comments from commissioners?

I had some questions about Blue Grass Road. Before, I was on the Commission, is there something that is approved between what I think is Leo's Coney Island and the oil? Establishment? There is something.

There's another restaurant, isn't there? The Leo's Coney Island Project had two restaurants, I would say. Okay. And the other restaurant, unfortunately, the original restaurant that was going to be there had financial difficulties. The chain disappeared.

The shacks. Yeah, the shacks.

The big chicken. That second building, though, is being built. It's actually a restaurant. It's not being built as a retail restaurant building. It has both the restaurant site and a couple of retail spaces that will be there, retail office spaces. We have a building permit, two separate building permits, one for each building. And in fact, that second building, the building permit, was issued yesterday. So they are working on it. They're already doing foundation work. But that whole site is being developed with those two buildings.

They're still currently looking for a new leaseholder for them? They are, yeah. So the concrete that's been poured is Leo's?

Well, there's... I have been there today, so I know they're working on things. I know they poured leos. I don't know if they poured the other one. I know that our building inspector, a building official, was out there today doing a footing inspection for the second building. So I don't know yet if they poured concrete on it. But he was out there confirming that everything was in good order to be able to pour concrete.

So is there another lot between... The oil in this?

There is a, it's called basically a half a lot that will be left over between this Leo site and the Valvoline site. So there will be one vacant lot there. It's sort of half of the original width. I will say this, it's kind of weird. We tried desperately to avoid this circumstance, but part of the owners of that land helped to create it. Valvoline is, they own essentially a whole lot, but they only developed half of it. Now, they put the sidewalk in all the way across, but they're only using half of it. And so there's the other half, about an acre or whatever it is, that is currently undeveloped and available for another user. Next to that will be this kind of half-vacant lot that will be left over that will still be owned by the original property owner, the original developer unit account. And then you have the new site. So there's room out there for something more to happen in between Valvoline and the current development.

Okay, so now I'm going down a rabbit hole. Why do they not have to keep that clear and clean like people that own yards, property? All those trees and everything. Why is that allowed to do whatever?

What we do, we have a noxious weeds ordinance. And this ordinance is based on a state law that has not been amended since 1940-something. Okay. For example, it refers to distance in terms of rods. I kind of like it, actually, for that part, being a rod. But that's a very old measurement for how you measure things. But it's literally never been amended. I don't know why, but it hasn't. So it is somewhat challenging to work with from an ordinance perspective. But it allows local governments to have a noxious weave ordinance that addresses noxious weeds, and also tall grass, excessively tall grass. But it has kind of a tight box around what we can regulate. It also has some odd things that require some interpretation. Our ordinance is set up, and our interpretation of the law has been set up so that vacant lots like these commercial lots along Bluegrass, we have required them to go back a certain distance that's based on the state law, based on our ordinance, and they can leave the interior part grown tall. They can mow it if they want to, but we only require them to mow back a certain distance to basically keep the road clear, keep the frontage clear. So you see that there. We just had a similar case from Broomfield where we had to help a property owner resolve that, and they did mow it back further than they originally had. They originally had just mowed a small section, but they got to mow further. But that's what we do for vacant lots. We'll also note that in the rural areas of the township, the ordinance does not apply. So we don't regulate in the rural areas. It's really more of the urban environment. Smaller lots, essentially.

Okay, I got one more. On down Bluegrass, across from the apartments, I don't know what they are, but before you get to the Ale House on that side of the road. Is there something going in there?

Collegiate Way? Yes. Opposite side of Collegiate Way from Hunter's Ale House is the hotel project that you reviewed a preliminary site plan for. You might not have been at that meeting.

I think you weren't at the meeting.

It's a four-story hotel, 106 rooms. It's a Hilton brand, but I think it's called Home Suites, I believe. Home Suites, yeah. Home Suites, yeah. But I remember the four-story in the other six rooms, so I guess I'm doing something. That's good. But in fact, I'm glad you brought it up because we just received the final site plan for that project. Nice. It is likely you will not see it. So far, everything is looking good. Okay. And so we're expecting that that one will be administratively approved. So you'll see a note in our next monthly report about it. But they are very interested in moving that forward to the main event. I suspect you will likely see construction.

They had on that plan a future restaurant.

Yeah.

A lot of restaurants going. But not with the first stage of the building. Okay.

I don't have any other questions. Thank you.

All right.

Thank you. Any other comments from commissioners?

I got a question so when you went over and were last month showed us preliminary lookup of possibly changing the zoning ordnance sizes the one thing that that I heard about is and it reminded me of that thing was you were wanting to be able to compress the sites down but still keep the same number of houses or occupied buildings per acre.

The density per acre, right?

And I'm assuming that's because the sewer system, the township sewer system just can't support more. Is that correct? Or is it more for the ones that aren't on that sewer system? Yeah.

was designed and installed based on the existing pattern zoning at the time that the system was put in. And it really, for residential development, that really hasn't changed. There's not really been significant alteration to that design or those densities that were allowed at the time. So pipe size, where the pipes are, all that capacity, the downstream capacity for the sewer was all designed based on existing zoning. And so with that in mind, with this particular project, which was really, first of all, focused on reducing some of the setbacks, make it a little easier to develop some of these, or expand, improve some of these older properties, we didn't want to make a big alteration in terms of the density. As part of the master plan project, if you decide, as part of the master plan, as we continue to talk about housing and residential, if you decide you would like to increase density in areas, that's the place that we would do it. It's hard to deal with the master plan, It would also be, you as the Planning Commission would approve that plan. The State Act gives the Board of Trustees an option to have a final approval of that plan if they choose to. But anyway, once that plan is approved, then we would look at doing something with the zoning to coordinate with it. Just with this project, I didn't want to mess with that density. It doesn't mean we won't mess with it in the future. But we'd do that through the master plan first.

okay yeah because that would be my my question is can we get a a denser one and that's more of like the urban housing that you see in the city and then you have a almost a suburban one kind of like the other ones here so it's those two different zones one is a more urban one more suburban and then you have of course ag the thing is if

upsize things than in other areas. Right. And so that's part of what we'd be looking at and working with the public services department, asking them to take a look at our plans because they can give some direction as to whether or not that's being practical to upsize in a particular area we're identifying. Some days we're talking, I'm going to do my best to let you know, I mean, for example, right here in lincoln road is the end of the sewer pipe okay we have just correct down the road here there's a pipe that comes across the road and it ends over here um there's it ends just down the way a little further so if this is about as far away from our sewage treatment plant as you can get well that means it's more expensive than outsize that equipment because there's four that all that goes into and then goes over to the plant. In other areas of the township, it might be easier to upsize. So we'll certainly look at that. That's one of the next items on our list is to deal with future land use throughout the township. And I know that's a topic that this commission has a lot of interest in. And I'm happy to discuss it and happy to support raising densities. I think there's value in it. But let's do that through the master plan first. And whatever comes out of that will then work to make the zoning consistent.

Okay. We have completed our agenda, so we'll stand adjourned until our August meeting.