Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

It's 7 o'clock. We'll go ahead and call the meeting to order. We'll start with the pledge of allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Happy birthday, dear.

Okay. So, let me welcome everyone to the November meeting of the Union Township Planning Commission being held in pitch dark because it's 7 o'clock in November. Um, roll call, please. Branchaw here. Brown here. here. Lab here. McDonald here. Boulder present. Shingles here. Present as well. Quadr here. Okay, everyone is here and we're happy to welcome Tara back even if it's only temporary. Um, yay.

Let's see. So, we had pledge of allegiance. We had roll call. Approval of the agenda. So, you have tonight's agenda in front of you. There are one, two, two new business items and then the master plan. Uh, anybody have anything else that they're aware of that needs to be on tonight's agenda? Any corrections to the agenda? Move to approve. Second. Motion by Olver, second by lap to approve the agenda as prepared. Any further discussion? If not, all in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed?

Okay. So the agenda is approved. Next item is approval of the minutes. We last met on October 21st. So you have the October 21st minutes starting on page four of the packet. Any corrections to the October 21st minutes

to accept the minutes from the October 21st meeting support. Okay. Motion is by shingles. The second was by Bradshaw to approve the minutes of last month as prepared. Any discussion? All in favor, please say I. I. I. Any opposed? Okay. So, the minutes are approved. Uh, next item is correspondence, board reports, and presentations. We always start at the top with Commissioner Thearing with updates from the board of trustees.

Thank you. On our 10:22 meeting, we held a public hearing for our fiscal year 2026 recommended budget. Uh we also adopted a resolution of intent to participate in the 2026 National Fitness Campaign for installation of an outdoor fitness court studio at Jameson Park. Very similar to the one you see down here. Um that is what I have for the 22nd and that's just in the beginning stages. We just kind of get started with that on that fitness part. Um on our 11 12 meeting, we approved the fiscal year budget for 2026. We also renewed the manager's contract and we had a resignation of uh trustee Jeff B Brown. Uh that will I believe Jeff's last meeting will be next week. Um so anyone interested it has been posted on our website uh what you need to do to apply for that open position or soon to be open position. And that's what I have

questions for Commissioner Thering. Does the uh appointed person serve the remainder of that term? Yes. It'll actually they'll be until the end of next year. I believe it's until 2026. November 2026.

I'm sorry. I think it said in the uh in the listing online that it was until serve until November 20th, 2026 and then that person will need to run for election again for the November 2026 general election. That was what was posted on the

challenge with Brian Smith. How did that why was what was different about that? So it's it's the timing of of things that uh if uh if if the res if the resignation were taking place after uh the date in April, that's the filing deadline for for 2026 elections, then the person would serve all the way to 2028, but uh under the state law because of the timing, they would have to run for office regular 2026 general election cycle. Thank you, Mr. Nandy. My apologies. I I just kind of in my mind had it that they would finish till the end.

No, I think same thing came up in Mount Pleasant this year as well. They had a resation right off it and I think the person that was elected in November will be running again in 2026. Thank you for the correction. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions for uh Commissioner Thering on board of trustees related items? Okay. If not, well, thank you. Um, now I feel like I need a drum roll or a rising crescendo of music because the next item is Commissioner. Thank you, Commissioner McDonald. Updates from ZBA and the ZBA Matt. Yes. All right. So, the floor is yours.

Uh, it was really interesting. So, I I mean, it was a very long meeting and a lot was discussed, but if you're interested in it, I would suggest going the next time because it was titillating. But anyway, so we had um

Great. the election of officers. We got through that and then there was two items of business. Um, one was uh concerning a property on River Road. And if I get any of these specific wrong specifics wrong, you'll help me. But um we discussed it for what close to two hours. It was quite a debate. So bas the basic gist of it is is that um someone wants to add on to their business building um in a much much larger square foot than it's allowed for their amount of acreage. And the business itself was built 20 years ago um without permission and kind of not following zoning rules already. So they were given kind of a special after the fact um I don't remember what we call what it was called the

special use permit.

Yeah. The special use permit for the home occupied business. Yeah. So now you know they've been able to operate like that. They want to expand um pretty liberally and it's right in a residential area where there's a bunch of duplexes which they own and then a neighborhood on River Road. So the general consensus was that everybody wanted them to be able to follow through with their project. There wasn't any reason for anyone to not want them to, but there were eight standards that they needed to meet in order for us to grant them the variance. And after much I wouldn't say arguing, debating and back and forth and investigating the issue, uh it was finally determined that they did not meet those eight um standards. The other thing was that they were also given an option by the staff and given information about requesting for reszoning of that area. Um, which they are not want to do. Um, and I'm not really sure what their reasoning was. It was they may want to build more duplexes in the future and reszoning it out of the was is it RA R2A um could make that difficult for them in the future. So, they were not very happy, but they do have options, which is the reasonzoning or reimagining the addition to their building um or coming up with some better arguments for why that variance could be granted. Did I miss anything? Okay, there was a lot going on. And then the the last thing was which we had spoken about I believe in our September meeting August or September was the variance for Sacred Heart um for their parking area for the batting garage building whatever they're calling it. And that one was easy peasy. And we finished up with that in just a few moments. And they did take our recommendation, which was the I believe it was B, we were calling it, plan B, um to have a 25 foot variance rather than the 50. And that was the route they

chose to take. And so they'll be able to move forward with that project. And that was it.

Great. Any questions for um Commissioner McDonald? Okay, thank you for that report. Appreciate it. Uh, and thanks for doing that nice long meeting. Makes gives me uh kind of nostalgic for some of our marathon meetings that we haven't had in a while. Um, next item is the community and economic development monthly report, which you always have in your packet. Uh, and so, uh, we give commissioners an opportunity to ask any questions that they might have on anything you saw in that report. did have on page three of the report, page 10 of the packet, you'll see the zone administrator's report on his final site plan approval. Actually, the two projects that you've seen uh that did receive administrative approval of final site plan under older builders, the accessory building dealership and and also the H real estate group. for that parking lot expansion both fully comply with ordinance and site.

Do you know if they either project anticipates moving forward immediately or are they waiting till spring?

Uh well both have been interested in moving forward. uh both uh I suspect the H real estate group will at this point have to wait for the spring simply because the the asphalt plants are closed but they certainly could prepare the site if they wish uh the the other group could do really move forward as they are largely because of the type of project you know one point I'll bring up um top I guess point three on page nine of the report said held a closed session under section BB uh 81D of the open meeting act to consider purchased of real property. Is that for just I mean I don't know what specifics you can get into because it was in a closed session but is that for like property for the township?

So this is our economic development authority board. Uh this is the board that manages our two DDA districts and they were uh looking at the possibility of purchasing property in one of the DDA districts. So that's a item that can be discussed in close session.

Any other questions from folks? Okay. If not, thank you for your questions and we'll go ahead and move on. Uh, are there any other reports and/or correspondence that anyone has, commissioners or staff, that need to come in front of us tonight? Okay, hearing none, we'll move on. So, we've reached the first public comment of the meeting. This is the uh public comment that is restricted to non-aggenda items. So, if anyone who is either here or online wants to address the planning commission on any item that's not on tonight's agenda, you're invited to do so at this time. If you're in the room, 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 for public comment. So, this public comment on non-aggenda items is open at 7:13.

Nobody.

Okay. We don't have anybody online tonight. And folks who are here in the room are are probably here for other purposes. So, uh, last call for public comment at this point. Okay. So, we'll go ahead and close that back up. There'll be an extended public comment later in the meeting. There'll also be a uh public hearing on an on a specific agenda item. So, with that, we're ready to move to our new business. And the first item is a text amendment to the zoning ordinance. PEX 25-02 uh to add firearms dealer as an allowable home occupation activity subject to to uh specified limitations. So uh I can turn it over to Rodney for an introduction. Then we'll move to the public hearing and then we will deliberate and act.

Well, thank you. U appreciate that. For those that watch the video, we we've seen this before, but uh this is a proposed zoning amendment. It came out of discussions with with some residents that are that are interested in in being a firearms dealer uh doing this activity out of their home. Uh many firearms dealers, you know, do all their work essentially over the internet. Uh they may not even have any activity coming or going from the house. Some do, some don't. U, but it's a fairly innocuous activity when it does happen as a home occupation. U the challenge that that we have here at the township is that right now our zoning ordinance regulates them as a gunsmith. That's the term in the current zoning ordinance. Um, and it requires a special use permit. And special use permit, it requires a public hearing from planning commission. And that also means that that everyone within a certain distance 300 ft of the property are notified by mail. We also publish notices in the newspaper and and on our on our website for that. So uh a large number of people significantly can potentially uh learn that that that a particular home may soon have or may already have uh firearms in it. And so it creates a potential safety challenge for for folks that would like to to have this kind of federal firearms license. The the licensing process requires a local sign off from uh for zoning approval. So there's no there's no way around this. There's no way to simply operate quietly in the shadows, you might say, without any without getting a little zoning approval. Um so the discussion was uh to is there a way that we could approach this where we could set set up uh a potentially expand the home occupation rules to allow some of

the firearms activity firearm sealer activities uh in a manner that would not require a special use permit. And so that's what this proposed amendment does. Uh it's tied very uh closely to the the uh federal firearms licensing rules that we we use their definitions. Uh and in the ordinance we we cite some activities that are that are very licensed activities at the federal level but that we do not want to have as occupations. Uh things like for example anything involving destructive devices explosives. Uh so that's excluded as occupational activity. Uh so the uh that's the proposal. Uh the the effect of the amendment if if adopted uh would allow someone to to operate uh and receive an administrative uh sign off from zoning administrator to confirm they comply to the zoning ordinance and operate a firearms dealer activities on occupation as long as they they maintain it within the rules that we've established in the proposed amendment. that I'm happy to answer your questions if you come up.

Okay. Any immediate I mean we've looked at this before, but any immediate questions for Rodney?

Okay, I think we're good. Thank you. So, now we will move to the public hearing. As Rodney noted, this has been published in the newspaper and it's been on the website and so on. So, we want to give everyone who wants to speak on this issue an opportunity to speak. Uh we'll do it in an orderly fashion. So once we open the public hearing, uh individuals will be uh welcome to come to the podium if you're in the room. Give us your name and address for the minutes. Uh limit your at least your initial comments to three minutes until everybody who wants to speak has had an opportunity to speak. Uh address your comments to the planning commission. If you're online, make your presence known and we will recognize you to uh speak on this topic. So, the public hearing on uh the text amendment proposal 25-02 is open at 7:18.

Still nobody.

Okay. There's nobody online right now. Um I'll ask as I usually do, were there any written or email comments received by the office? Okay. So, nothing in writing. We always listen for the sound of squealing tires. We want to make sure anybody who wants to speak has an opportunity to speak. Second call. Any public comments on uh at the public hearing on the text amendment uh 25-02? and final call for public comments. Okay. So, if we do hear the squeal of tires, we'll do our best to squeeze them in, but let the record show that no public comments were offered either electronically or in person, and the public hearing is closed at 7:19. So, now we move to commission deliberation and action. Our action will be to recommend make a recommendation to the board of trustees to either adopt, reject or if we want to to adopt with revisions uh the uh the text amendment or postpone it if we chose to do that. So it is before us open for discussion, open for a motion. We have we saw this last month I believe. Uh and so um we may or may

not have much discussion but it is open for discussion. I'll go ahead and make a motion. Uh, under the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act public act 110 of 2006 as amended, the planning commission has responsibility to hold a public hearing on proposed amendments to the zoning ordinance or official zoning map and to make any recommendations for final action to the board of trustees. Following the public hearing review and deliberation, I recommend that the planning commission consider taking action by motion to recommend to the board of trustees that the proposed amendment to sections two definitions. Three, zoning districts and maps. And six, standards applicable to specific land uses of the zoning ordinance number 20-06 to add firearms dealer to the list of allowable home occupation and homebased limited business activities subject to the limitations. to revise the definition of gunsmith and to add new definitions for firearm destructive device, federal firearms licenses and firearms dealers to be adopted as presented.

Support. Okay. So, there was a motion by Brown with support by Bradshaw. Um, I guess I'll just uh sub suggest that in the tech in the wording of the motion substitute the word recommend with I move. Okay, because that's what he was doing. He was making the motion. Well, actually, I recommend that I I move that the planning commission take action by recommending something like that. Make it active. Make sense? Yes.

Okay. So motion has been made to make a positive recommendation to the board of trustees that they adopt the text amendment and it's been seconded. Any discussion from commissioners?

If not I will ask for a roll call vote please. All righting. Yes. Bradshaw. Yes. McDonald. Yes. Yes. Brown. Yes. Shingles. Yes. L. Yes. Yes. And Haze. Yes. Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. And this was a this was a township initiated action, right? It was something you brought to us. That is correct.

Yeah. So, thank you for your work on that. And I think it I think you did a nice job addressing the problem and at the same time doing it in such a way that didn't raise undue concerns about that action. All right. So we are ready to move on to item B. Item B is a uh what is PRP? I'm blanking on is it? It's it's a new acronym because we haven't had this before, right?

This one was this acronym was essentially made up by our BSMA software. It's a rough one to try to try to say. So, I'm sorry about that, but it is a new This is the first time we've seen this kind of project. Yeah, now that I rec I mean P RPA, private road permit application. I got it. Okay. So, this is our first private road permit application. It's for a road to be uh named Magnolia Lane, which is off St. Andrews Drive. Uh the applicant is Terry Somerville. We will have introduction by Rodney. Then we will hear from the applicant. Then we will uh if there's any questions, we'll ask them and then we'll deliberate and act.

Thank you. Uh I should have a copy of our report dated November the 10th. Uh, as was said, this is a the first time we've had a a priv private road permit application come in under the the current private road ordinance. It was adopted 2024. Uh, the uh uh we we included a link to the ordinance in the in the front of the packet there. I thought about including the ordinance in the packet, but the report actually basically details the ordinance. It's covers all the relevant portions. So, uh we did not include the text of the ordinance in the packet. Uh but the uh this is a a new private road, Magnolia Lane. Uh it is a a short short road. It's an area that that actually had there were some lots created. You see on the plan there were there were a number of existing lots created next to the golf course. There's essentially a twotrack uh drive that goes back there. Uh it in some some uh records there's even a easement on it as if it was intended to be a road but uh neither the applicant nor the township could find any record that there was ever any formal action taken to approve any private roads in that space. Uh the the closest the township took to an action was uh uh a water line was extended back into that space. uh but there was no record of any prior private road approval. So we asked the applicant to to follow our our current ordinance uh to simply get approval under that for uh for what they needed to uh to get the road frontage for the lot that that they would like to create. This would serve one house uh as currently done although it could be extended to serve more in the future. Uh but for the moment it's it's proposed to to serve as the one house. And so that's why you see the

length that's proposed uh that's basically go back far enough to create the minimum required growth frontage for the lot that they the estate lot they proposed to create. Uh so in our in our report as I said we we go through uh all the various requirements that apply. Uh, one item we noted at the beginning is simply that there is a need for a land combination. Uh, in order in order to create the road frontage for the lot, the house where they would like to build the house, they basically need to combine all those lots back together again. Uh, and so we simply need to have that land combination activity, land commission application completed. Uh, prior to the start of the construction on the road. Uh the uh my understanding is that that's already in process. U the uh the project itself the the road configuration that probably meets all the applicable requirements. There are a couple of details u that need to be addressed. One is if you look on page five of our report page 42 of the packet uh in the in the ordinance there's a table that that has some specific design standards in it. And one of them in that in that table talks about the type of gravel material that's allowed for private road construction. And it refers to two types of uh M dot standard gravel um either the 22A or the 21A as being appropriate for private the private road construction in this case. But it also says that that that the applicant can propose an alternative that as long as the township engineer finds acceptable can be used. They proposed 23 uh 23A gravel on that will be reviewed by our country engineer. Uh the this project although this is a one-step approval for the planning commission for a private road permit. Uh there are some kind of engineering things that will need to be

approved after the uh they will need to uh have our engineer take a look at at the drainage on it and also be taking a look at this particular just confirming whether this particular road will be acceptable. Um the uh so those those will happen after your your your approval but prior to starting construction. Um the other item is is uh related to recording of the the rightway the easement and maintenance agreement for the road that also takes place after your approval. So we simply noted that the requirement in the ordinance uh out here knowing that they can conform with that. Uh and so with that in mind uh we're pleased to present this to you. U we found that everything was in good order. uh the uh design of the road as with these these items that these details that need to be addressed by the engineer uh is in good order. Uh I think there was one other comment as I was looking at this that they have proposed to to not center the road in the right of way uh that proposing to offset it a little bit from the right of way and that's simply because of some uh lowline areas there trying to to minimize impacts on on surrounding environmentally sensitive areas and so that we have no objection to that but we felt that was a very good solution uh to uh to create what they need to create but also be consistent with the ordinance. So, as I said, we're happy to recommend the project to you. We have included three conditions. U they're essentially housekeeping items. Just what we talked about land accommodation in Jer's acceptance to the gravel 23A gravel. The engineer doesn't accept it. They simply would move on to one of the choices or u and then the third one is is simply to address the remaining outside agency approvals that that are needed prior to the start of

construction. those listed in the uh report. Uh for that, happy to answer your questions as we go. Is the parcel combination part of this vote as well? I think you're saying as part of this it was multiple lots that we're going to pull together. Are we doing that as part of this proposal here or is that No, that's a great question. The land combination is an administrative permit. Uh it's uh it's a uh that operates under the state land division act in our land division ordinance and it's actually administratively reviewed and approved by the contract assessor and also Arizona

and the current plan is to put all parcel one parcel two and then where the setback for that proposed house will all be one unit. That that is the plan street is to essentially create one lot out in that space and if in the future this would not preclude creating additional lots in the future they simply have to extend the road to provide the road training lots.

Can you just remind us this is necessary because uh in the ordinance they have to have it it has to be accessible to to like fire and those sorts of things. And then also you mentioned the front edge,

right? Yeah. The the zoning ordinance requires that each each lot residential lot created has to have a minimum amount of direct frontage on either a public road or an approved and constructed private road. And uh so that that's one piece of we we adopted the private road ordinance to provide that option. This is this this uh what you see is if they were trying to adop build this as a public road, it would be much more substantial uh to meet the the county road commission standards.

Challenge there is road commission probably would not accept it. They do not want more small local private public rooms in their system. So, we adopted the private road ordinance to give uh give property owners the ability to to do this kind of project uh in easiest way possible uh while providing for as you said emergency vehicle access. And uh that's that's really the key is is safety safety factor that that uh for fire trucks and other emergency equipment to be able to get to a property and know where that property is frankly by address. And so in this case, if they they be able to get to get back there, the wide turnaround is is designed to uh to accommodate maneuver maneuvering the fire track if it needs to turn around in that space, but they also can then go down the driveway from there to the house. That is important safety on involved in this. Ronnie, you said the ordinance was created after the county became kind of hesitant towards approving these or you said is that just kind of get a little clarity there like was this ordinance created after like we you saw like a uptick in denials from the county on these types of roads and and maybe can you like me to what their reasoning was maybe behind not passing these as much? So uh not quite not quite as as said don't want to give a mis misinformation there. Um

the uh we actually had a private road ordinance uh prior one was adopted in 1999 I think something like that 2000.

Um and there are a few roads that were built under that old ordinance. Uh it it some challenging. It had it was not clear how it operated really. it was not not very well set up. Uh but it did exist and and the the the reason for a private road ordinance is because uh our our public roads are county road commission roads. They they maintain them. They control them. Uh and of course every mile of of county road is an expense that the county road commission has to take care of. They have to for a gravel road they have to make sure it's maintained properly. Uh they have to plow it in the winter if it's a public road. Uh and uh and certainly they have to to take care of any repairs if they come up. Uh so the grow commission has only a certain amount of money. Uh they they have only certain sources of income and uh and so they they they have a hard time taking care of the existing local streets that we have. Uh you may have seen on board trustes agenda various times in the past requests for special assessment districts for road improvements. We just did one uh for the Fox Meadow subdivision just up the road here not too long ago um where uh the subdivision agreed to assess themselves to tax themselves essentially uh to pay for repaving of those local streets because although the county road commission does plow them in the winter they had no resources to or they not have enough resources to to pay for the the repavement of the roads. So that that's that's the challenge and and so they the road commission and this is where the case anywhere in the state road commissions generally do not want to have new local public streets brought into their system

keeps it off the books. Yeah. Thanks Ry. I appreciate it. So I have a question. uh if if they are planning on combining these parcels and you say that our ordinances require that there be a certain amount of frontage on a public road or or any road. Um what is preventing there to be such a frontage when the parcels are combined? Well, if they were combined, then the frontage would be created on the road because the the new lot comes all the way up to uh the uh the one side of Magnolia Lake and so it's the road Magnolia Lake creates the road.

Well, no. I mean, so what I'm looking here on I don't know which which page number this is. Um but this is the one of five of the uh of like of that and um you're uh so they're they're suggesting that parcel one and parcel two be combined and I mean if if that were just to be a driveway instead of a private road like is there not frontage on the uh what is that Andrew St. Andrew Drive. Like I guess I'm not understanding like what what is the requirement that prevents that from counting. There is no frontage on St. Andrew's Drive. Okay.

The frontage would the those existing lots have no frontage on any public or private road right now. The existing lots back there uh they were created a very long time ago under a very different ordinance. Gotcha. And uh and so the goal here is to to set this up so that the house can be built on on the site where they'd like to build it uh relation to the golf course. And uh so the path to do that was to combine the the parcels together, create one lot that would then have furniture. Okay.

There is as I said the the family uh there's a substantial amount of additional land in this area that's vacant that that could be developed. has said they even in the future develop additional lots out of this this large parcel if they chose by splitting it again or or doing a subdivision plan. There's a number of ways they could create those lots in the future if they chose to. Okay, I think we're good for now. Thank you. So, we'd like to hear from the applicant. Pete Loren's luren surveying and engineering. Um, just one thing I think I'd like to maybe explain a little bit more on the whole parcel of combination thing. I think that maybe has created a little confusion from what I've been u hearing. If you go to sheet four of the plans on your packet, I think that will explain the whole situation a little better for you. Um, you'll notice that there's a bunch of parcels in there with the tax identification numbers on them. Those are all existing parcels right now. Currently, those parcels are all going to be combined to a resultant of parcels one, two, and three as shown on page four. So, the main parcel that we're trying to get gain this access for is parcel 2. And the house is going to be built all the way down on the end of the tax

parcel ending in 10 and 11 down at the bottom of the finger there. So by combining that extending this private road up to the north end of that finger parcel there's how we will gain our access or frontage. Um as far as the conditions go um I don't think the applicant has any issues with the conditions. um that we're proposing. Um the division itself, we've already prepared the parcel descriptions. We've surveyed them. We've got an application. We're ready to go. As far as the um accommodations go, um the 23A versus 22A, 23A is just better suited in my opinion for a road that is not going to be paved. we were going to pave the road, I would be on board with the 22A recommendation. If the township engineer comes back and says it has to be 22A, not a deal breaker for us. It's just my opinion that and it complies more with specifications being 23A than 23A. Um outside agency approvals, we've already uh talked with the fire department. Um they're fine with the plan. Road commission had me make uh one small revision to the plan. They have said they will approve it. I don't have a final approval yet, but I don't foresee any issues there. That's pretty well all I have. Anybody has any questions?

Well, I have to admit I didn't go out and attempt to drive this, but um is the is the golf course that is being referred to on here is that actually the north side of Riverwood?

Okay. sort of it took me a long time to figure that out. But in any case, and then I guess my only other question is the the house is a fair distance from this private road. It marks it's it's at the end of what's referred to as an existing drive. Just out of curiosity, is that an existing drive such that a firetr would be able to get in there if it needed to? Okay. Other questions? Questions from commissioners. Jessica is looking at me, so I guess it's my turn. I move to approve the PPRPA25-00001 private road permit plans dated October 28th, 2025 for Magnolia Lane, a 24 foot wide gravel private road located off of St. Andrews Drive in the northeast corner quarter of section 19 and in the R1 rural residential zoning district finding that the proposed private road can comply with the requirements of the private road orient ordinance number 24-01 subject to the following conditions. One, approval of a land combination application for the eight existing lots shall be required prior to the start of construction for the new private road. Two, township engineer acceptance of the applicant's proposal to use M.23A gravel for the road surface in place of the ordinance standard 22A or 21A gravel. And three, conformance to the remaining requirements of section 12.0

outside agency permits and approvals of ordinance number 24-01 prior to the start of construction for the new private road. Okay. So, the motion was by Olver with a second by Theing. Any further discussion?

Okay. If not, we'll move to a roll call vote, please. Yes. Sport, yes. Brown, yes. Jingles, yes. Barry, yes. Bradshaw, yes. Yes. McDonald, yes. Motion here. Okay. Thank you. So, good luck with your project.

So, we will move on to our third agenda item. It's under other business. This is the master plan update. specifically the draft of the plan for housing section of the uh of the new master plan. So, I'll let Rodney introduce his work here and then we'll uh go through it. Thank you. So, this uh said this is the housing plan section. uh all the work that that that we're currently doing on draft elements of the master plan is based on the framework uh kind of policy framework that the plan commission discussed and finalized a while back. Uh this is this is definitely a policy based plan. Uh this uh there there will be an additional element that will will apply. as well. What our future land use plan? Well, we have a map and and we show in detail where various uh land use activities should be in the future, various the township that that should be developed, some areas that should be preserved. Uh but this kind of sets the policy direction for uh future housing development in the in the township. Uh it's divided into several uh subsections kind of just based on subject. You'll see in there some specific items about about housing the aging in place housing issues also also for home homeless I did want to change that commissioner shingles I did uh I think I left the word homeless in there I realized as I was looking at today that uh that I did not use the wording that commissioner shingles had mentioned we certainly can do that uh talk about is unhoused if I recall. But uh anyway, uh the the goal here is

that is to make sure that that what what uh we put together u as administrative function matches or still matches the the uh the goals and priorities that that you as a planning commission have as it relates to housing development. Uh on our for the township side, you'll see some of the the policies here related to utilities. Uh obviously we provide water and sewer service to to parts of the community. Uh that those systems have uh have certain capacity levels especially on the sewer side. Uh you know as pumping pump stations and transmission pipelines have have capacity limits. And uh so you'll see that that language used here several times where it talks about tying the intensity of any future development to the availability of existing infrastructure. U some places where we have very good capacity other areas where we have much tighter capacity. So with that in mind, I said I'm happy to answer questions and looking for feedback. Uh there's where we got it right. are there where we think we need to do better or make changes. Trying to just make sure this is your document.

Okay. Thank you. I'm going to suggest that we take it section by section because that's how it was written and that might make it a little bit more organized. Uh so as we go through each section, if you have something on that section, you know, by all means speak up. Um, I wanted to ask, so on the I want to start with the the very beginning, the gray box. I have two two things. Well, one you've already addressed about homeless, although I'd like to ask uh Commissioner Shingles. I understand what he said about using the word homeless as an adjective to apply to people. You also use later on in the document, you use the word homelessness to describe the condition. Is there the same stigma attached to the word homelessness?

No, not at all.

Okay. So, just to clarify that. And then my other question, and I guess I asked this with more interest than I might have earlier in my life because I'm close to this now. You several places you use senior and elderly. And I guess my question is, are those recognized as different things? Uh they are uh you know in terms of housing for for our older residents there they're are great agents. They're certainly independent senior living uh folks that are very active and and blatantly independent but but want to live in environment with other seniors or want to live in an environment there services uh aimed at that population. Uh there's uh what you might call depend dependent care uh or assisted living uh where where again they're they're they're largely dependent but they may need some additional services. Uh some may still be going out doing their own shopping or visiting or traveling but but uh they want to have additional services or meals and other things done uh housekeeping done. Uh and then there's there's truly dependent care memory care type operation nursing homes. So there's various gradations. Uh the term elderly housing probably is aimed more at that dependent care, the memory care side. Uh we could add definitions if you like.

Well, it's just what I was really asking was in that like in the gray box it says housing options for our senior and elderly residents. Are senior residents and elderly residents describing two distinct groups of people? I I would say so the the u I don't I don't recall the the uh the customary time frames are but you might think of of seniors as unfortunately those of us that have reached that range of age of was it 55 I think where I can get a senior discount at culver now u uh that might be a senior citizen uh senior and then the elderly typically move more 80s let's say seven high 70s 80s 90s where you are reaching to a point where uh there's some things that are no longer working as they used to and perhaps you're you're not as mobile or not as independent as you once were.

Yeah.

Okay. Well, I mean, if they're recognized terms of art, then I'm not, you know, I'm okay with it. I just was curious because I hadn't really thought about it that much. All right. So, anyway, let's let's take up section A, Housing Development Infrastructure Coordination Policy. So this is on page one and two of the report. It lists uh or the of the document here. The plan lists uh a series of of u things that the township will do. Did anybody have any any questions about those or or comments concern? Do I I'd like to understand the number one when it it says direct new residential development and then it later on it says away from areas not currently served by both municipal water and sewer. And there's lots of words in between there. So, I'm just trying to when I I look at direct away from I'm trying to I want to make sure I understand exactly what you mean by that.

Okay.

Uh the uh it is awkwardly worded. I think this is actually out of the current master plan, but uh uh you'll see elsewhere where it talks about about directing higher density development toward into areas that are already served with these utilities. Uh we have an existing um service area for our water system. We have an existing service area for our sanitary sewer system. They're not the same actually. We we have water lines that go further out um than than the sanitary sewer does. U and it's really the the su sanitary sewer district that determines where development activity is going to take place. uh because uh if you if you don't have access to the sanitary sewer uh system then you're you're working with the private uh septic system and in order to have private septic system you need a substantial amount of land uh you need to have the right soil types and even then you have some significant limitations on how big of a house or how many bedrooms how many bathrooms you can put in that house based on what the capacity of that system can be. Uh so the the goal here is to is to uh is to encourage new development to take place in those areas we've already planned for it and already extended and provided for our water and sewer system. Both systems do extend in areas that that are pretty rural right now. U they're they're intended to be developed. They're zoned to be developed uh and planned to be developed in our current master plan. uh but uh the land has not yet been developed in new housing. Uh so we we'd rather have that new de development take place in those areas where where where those utilities are rather than have a developer require or request extensions of those utilities further out.

Would it be possible for somebody to let's just say own 40 acres for and they want to develop a subdivision. So I would consider that an intensity greater than low density but has neither water or sewer. Is that something you would discourage?

Well, that's that's what the plan Yes. The proposed frankly our current master plan discourages as well. Um the ch here's the challenge is that that land that already has utilities is more expensive than land that doesn't. And so there are some developers that deliberately seek out the cheap land that's beyond the end of the the pipe. Uh it may be well beyond the end of the pipe sometimes because it's a lot cheaper to buy that and then run the pipe to it. U but when you do that you you first of all you you create kind of scattershot development. Uh you also create very significant challenges for maintaining that system. Uh the township system u it is an expensive one to maintain. Uh the township surrounds the city of Mount Pleasant. Our utility systems surround the city of Mount Pleasant. In some cases it goes they go through the city of Mount Pleasant just as there are some places where city pipes go through the township. But but to a large extent our our system is is is a circle around the the city. That is not the most efficient way to have a to have manage system but it is it is a system that works for this community. Um but it always we want to make sure that that uh whatever extensions that we make to the system are done in a way that that minimizes the m the amount of maintenance minimizes the cost of maintenance of the future. So if we're extending sewer out into the areas that are planned and proposed to be remain rural, uh we are also then having to maintain that you know 5 10 20 years from now at longer. So uh the goal is is to really to operate within the system we have um and to maximize the use of that existence before we look at any further expansion. We have on the residential side we have plenty of land

available. Uh if you remember the the housing study that that that we looked at a little a while back that was done by the Bowen research group uh there there are a large number of parcels I don't remember the total acreage but it was a very significant acreage uh hundreds and hundreds of acres uh available currently zoned and planned uh for residential development and uh and with utilities in place for that development. So there really is no need to to expand the system further until these areas that are already planned for it have have been have been been developed out.

But if it's I guess Thank you. I I guess what I'm looking for is somebody that doesn't care if you expand it. They have a 50 acre parcel. It's not anywhere near sewer or water. And so therefore, their parcels could be big enough to however you, you know, for sewer. That's what I'm getting at. Is that something that they could be No, you're not. They wouldn't necessarily be allowed for that project. Are you talking about developing a private sewer system? No. No. You're talking about building well and septic then? Yep.

Oh, okay. Sure. As long as they're they're following the ordinance requirements that anybody can build on well and septic. And you certainly can have a rural subdivision uh where you might have two acre lots or 5 acre lots or whatever that might be. Uh that uh that where the lots are served by water and sewer. Absolutely. I'm sorry. One septic. They're served by one septic. Okay. Yeah. Then just the word you know uh

that that that would be I mean the term that low density rural residential this is a this is a term that's in the master plan. It's in the future land use section of the master plan. uh it it will be in the future landing section of the new master plan as well and and so that that term in the master plan is is kind of defined as rural residential. Is that what you're talking about?

I mean I have no issue with propo or letting somebody know all the options and and I think that's a that's great. I'm just I wanted to make sure that that wouldn't prohibit somebody from uh proposing a project and it's not going to based on what we're saying. So, anytime I see like, you know, directing and away, I'm thinking maybe they wouldn't it wouldn't be they wouldn't be able to, but you've kind of cleared that up. So,

yeah. Yeah, the one thing that would mention is that there have been some developers uh haven't seen a lot of it recently, but certainly was very active in this area 5 10 years ago. uh developers want to do a big project like you're talking about take 1500 acres uh and simply build their own system. So we will have our own water community well. We'll have our own private uh package sewer plant and it will be run by the homeowners association. We will be self-contained. We we don't need your sewer. You know if your sewer is 2 miles away, we don't need it. We're going to have our own. And that's really one of the things this is attempting to avoid is to say that's that even that's not appropriate. that if you're going to be developing at that more dense level, small lots, lots of homes per acre, then you need to be on municipal water, municipal,

but this um Thank you. I this really goes a little bit further than that though in my mind because the the plain language there basically says you're trying to uh the goal is to steer that type of development away from certain areas and as a result to certain areas uh and some of it relates to infill and and you know density and all that sort of thing. My question is what the word direct is pretty direct. It's it's an active verb. What form would that take? Who would do the directing? How would it happen?

Well, in this case, the township will direct. The township will say that's where you need to be. Essentially, if if somebody's, frankly, this is something that that we do regularly when we're talking to folks. We we want to help each people be successful. They they have a project, they have an idea, they have something they looking to do. our our goal in in working with this, let's let's see if I can I can help you make that happen. On occasion, we have to tell people, we'd love to have you do that, but that won't work. It's not the right zoning district or we don't have utilities in that area. But if you go over here, there's land, there's utilities, there's proper zoning for it. Just need to get a site plan approval and you're on your way. So sometimes we do redirect people when we need to. Um even in the case of the the project that you just had uh we had conversations with the applicant about various options. They asked about do we what if we didn't combine the lots and so we gave them direction on what what they might need to do for a private road in that case as if we would have been a longer road.

Uh and uh and so we that word direct is really just that it's just say over here go this way. know, but that because we're talking about housing, unless somebody wants to build a big apartment complex, we don't really see it. It's done. That's they come to they come to the township office, right? So, they're you're basically saying you might under certain circumstances simply decline to give somebody a building permit to do something. what we're talking about when we're talking about housing development are projects that you would see for the most part um we're not talking about building one house on on one lot. If if a lot exists in the township that was lawfully created uh in in in the zoning district, the zoning district allows a house to be built on that lot.

We simply give them a building permit. Uh so what we're talking about is really a new subdivision, a new site condominium development, uh new apartment community. It's a it's the type of project that you would see. Okay.

So, I have something to say, but I just think I kind of have to back up a little bit to when we were talking about the gray area um before we get any further. So, one thing that I know firsthand is really lacking in our township is um housing for disabled adults. And I noticed there's like a small mention in the beginning, the purpose of the plan uses the word inclusive and uses the word abilities. And while I love that we're focusing so much on senior and elder unhoused um family student, I just see a really big lack of focus on affordable housing for individuals that need specific, you know, ADA housing. So, you know, for example, a lot of apartment complexes in town um will have mostly two-story units. Um and then they'll be required to have one accessible apartment per x amount of, you know, non-accessible units. Well, the waiting list is unbelievable. Not to mention the inaffordability, especially when you get into a private landlord situation. Um, so I just really think that's something we should consider if we're looking if we're truly looking to provide inclusive housing. I think that needs to be thought about.

Yeah. So item item B u talks about universal design and aging in place. That section talks a lot about senior housing and elderly housing

but but the universal design is is exactly what you're talking about. Uh it is a design concept uh trying to create the circumstance for all housing whether it's a single family home that that in any circumstance that the designer is thinking about the needs of all types of potential residents including those with different abilities. U and and so that section does talk about that. I said it does focus still largely on senior and elderly. Yeah, and maybe it's a semantics thing that I'm being too sensitive about, but I just really think it glosses over, you know, young adults, middle-aged adults that could live independently if they had affordable places to live that were accessible. Um, so to me, it feels pretty feels kind of like it's excluded, especially in the language. Um, and also when specific properties are labeled as senior or elderly or rehabilitative, it really uh limits the ability of who's able to apply for them or rent them or live in them. Because if you're a 26-year-old, you know, person who uses a wheelchair full-time, you're not going to go live at the senior housing community on Broomfield. So, I'm just I'm wishing it was just a little bit more inclusive and and thoughtful in that manner.

I I support um Commissioner McDonald uh McDonald's um plea to why don't we just make the language a little bit more broader if especially if it already meets the standard. It's just now articulating that. So, if I'm if I don't fall in the senior category, I realize that this still applies to me if I fall in that category. So I think it's just broadening the language a little bit and I think it'll it'll it'll it'll support. See lots of nodding heads. I'm happy to do that.

Yeah. If I could say like Ryan brought up in part B does like one thing to maybe to bring into that gray box you guys are talking about is I feel like he does make it very clear there that advocate design for all products to be built in environment aesthetic usable to the greatest extent possible by everyone regardless of age, ability or status in life. You know, those are all terms I think that we're all kind of feeling here, but maybe just bringing that more into the into the front piece there might make it feel like rather it's buried a little bit further down. But also to touch on M uh Commissioner McDonald's point, um I think it's great to see the support for these type of things in the language here, but like she was saying, when the weight list is off the books and we only have a requirement that's what is it one out of every

I'm not sure the numbers, but it's it's kind of like how we look at parking lots and you know if you have and I'm just making these numbers up here. You know, if there's 100 parking spaces, two of them have to be you know accessible. So, it's the same way with apartment buildings or housing units. If you have a 100 units, two of them are but I these are numbers I'm making up, don't quote me, have to be accessible. So, there's a very very very low number and the waiting lists are years and years long.

Yeah. So, maybe I mean maybe is that something to consider that our requirements maybe need to be adjusted? Maybe is that something that we need to get more teeth in our enforcement when it comes to this stuff? you know because obviously if we're seeing such a big swelling of need for this it's not being met by private developers you know as the current regulations are set maybe it's just something to look into you know do we need to adjust that to I think make those make those things encourage more available units that fit these requirements that we're promoting in the language

and it sounds like you would like to add that as a specific additional policy statement to to uh to to adjust our ordinance requirements, maybe add some incentives to prioritize uh having more more units that are fully accessible for the new development. Is that would that be accurate? Yeah. Is it possible for us to get um some information on what is required? You know, Commissioner McDonald said, "I'm making up,

right? I didn't I don't know the numbers. units, you know, just so that we can be a little bit more educated to be better inform the the narrative within here because that's what we're communicating. But then, you know, maybe that's strengthened by some policy as well that helps to move that that needle, especially if the demand is as obvious as it appears to be.

Yeah. You know, it's it's interesting. Uh it's a moving it's a not a moving target, but uh it's a difficult target to pin down what's required. because it it really depends on on on the project uh and the sources of funding. You know, if federal funding or state funding is is involved in a project, let's say some type of affordable housing, low-income housing, then then certain either federal rules or state rules come into play in exchange for that that that funding. There are strings attached and those strings often include what we're talking about. uh if this is a a simply a private development project let's say you know for example there's certainly a single family subdivision for no requirements

right u so that would be some place that if we want to add maybe some incentives if they go that route for example that might be the place to have incentives to say if you do design with this in mind that you you might benefit in some way either additional units or something something else uh uh on more the on the multifamily side u that that's an area where we might be able to have some requirements that that are more specific u and it's something we need to do some research on but but in terms of as typically in terms of what might be required now it typically involves some some government assistance federal or state funding that that triggers that

okay well I think we we moved into B which is perfectly fine I think that was the next one. So, uh, let's let's officially move into B. And if you have questions on the earlier part, you can continue to voice them. Um, I guess I had a question about uh, so we're in B item three, right? You're talking about u the, the last part of it where it says accessory uses such as smallcale retail, dining or personal services. Is that are those where that would be limited to the residents people within the that community?

Um that that would be the intent and uh this is this is essentially putting a foundation under some language that's in our I believe it's in our zoning right now. Yeah.

That I believe the regulation does talk about to residents. Uh we we could add that here though. Well, but I mean the the last part where it says provided such uses are internal and not externally visible. If it's if it's a restaurant or or a a or a you know a smallcale retail that's only serving the residents, you can understand why that might be desirable. But I guess I was wondering, we spend so much time talking about mixeduse developments and where you would have commercial on the first floor and and residential up above and all that stuff. Has anybody has does it has anyone ever thought of trying to do something like that with a targeted community? Like you would do that with senior citizen housing or you would do that with with, you know, diverse housing, something that was gonna, you know, attract all kinds of of ages and abilities and all that sort of thing because there you would want the you would want the the commercial operations to to be visible, not to be hidden.

Right. So that's still that's all I was thinking. Yeah. Well, I we I will tell you that I'd be perfectly happy to delete that part about it not being visible to the public so that we could have that option. It's a great option, frankly, to to do that kind of a project. So, if you're comfortable with it, one of the ch one of the challenges is that that this type of housing uh is allowed in our residential zoning districts. So it which are zoning districts are not really intended or set up for for substantial commercial activity, you know, general commercial activity. So that that's kind of the uh I think I I suspect that's a reason why the language was

but it does not have to be. If you would prefer to keep that a little broader and just eliminate that that provided such uses are not are internal that last clause happy to take that. I could see where that type of thing belongs in the zoning ordinance, but not necessarily in this. I've seen some nodding heads again. We'll take we'll take that up.

I just wanted to just add quickly uh based on what you mentioned, Rodney, about incentivizing. If you look at B5, that's incentivizing. you're you're you're working in in in partnership opportunities to potentially provide funding and other incentives, whatever those incentives are. I don't know what's legal, but that really speaks to um helping seniors to say stand. It can be the same with abilities. But I think that that statement is a good start point for where you might start with other incentivized language in other areas because it it it speaks to specific um examples and potential outcomes. So it might be something worth um looking at in other areas as well.

Okay. Did you have any specific conceptions of what six would entail? I know we've talked about it because we've we've talked about the fact that we have all these low occupied uh uh you know student developments that were built in the 90s and early 2000s and and whatnot. And I know you mentioned that specifically elsewhere in the plan, but because when I read that, I was thinking of of seniors at keg parties and playing disc golf and things of that nature, but I don't think that's really what you meant.

I actually see it the other way. I've not seen it myself. I've I've simply read about seen seen some video news piece or something on it. Um, and it's actually the other way around where they where a a assisted living facility um they had some space and and uh they were looking they somebody came up with this idea and said why don't we invite some students come in that could help us maybe some students that are thinking about going in this career

and they can live here and they they would provide some service time essentially uh and simply sit with residents eat with them that sort of Uh so that that's what they did was that was they they brought the students into the senior housing into the assistant living and uh there's some remarkable things happening as a result of that for both students and for the seniors. I I I'm not sure if it would work as well bringing the the seniors into the student housing. Uh but but all things are potentially possible.

Okay. No, I think it's very aspirational and it's a good idea. other things on B. We'll open it up to C which is housing development design and proximity policies. The these uh largely are intended to put a foundation under our zone requirements. I'll tell you that that's so I mean we have residential design standards for single family housing uh and two family housing. We have design standards for multifamily housing for accessory bling. So these these are essentially the policies that underly those those ordinance regulations.

Okay. I did see something on item number three on page four of the document page 48 of the packet and I'm not sure if I'm just not reading it right or if it's a typo. says an ADU may be developed and uses of on a lot in the township. Uh that should say uh and I guess and used I think it was probably the intent. Yeah. Yeah, that's what I thought. No matter how many times you proofread used if or used developed and used

used on I would think just used on developed and used. Okay.

Well, the thing is too that that's spellch check won't catch it because they're both valid words that are not misspelled. The AI might, but if you're just using spell check, it would. Well, in this case, uh, we had, uh, we had spell check, of course, but, we also had two sets of human eyes that that read through this in detail of this stud. So, I'm glad that we have that's that's one of the reasons why we have nine sets of eyes also looking and catch these guys. Okay, I'm going to I mean I don't I don't want to rush people, but I actually think that we might have people might have more comments on some of these later things like like item D uh homelessness and supporting h supportive housing policies. We just had the discussion last month with the with the little little homes folks. And so a question would really be uh do people see the right things here in terms of you know what you think the township should be doing to encourage and to facilitate those sorts of things? I sorry I can bring up um I wasn't here last month so I'm familiar I looked over the notes and what was brought up last time I'm probably familiar with the proposal that came about

and um one thing I noticed here and I feel like it's been maybe a hiccup in this development process and could I could see coming up in future development processes is that in this case and what I see in a lot of regional kind of homeless solutions stuff like or different projects that are dung out, they don't necessarily fall within the zoning and planning legations for the township and different townships have been looked at creating their separate ordinances for how um unhoused developments. Some of them will look towards you know like I think what was maybe coming here which would be review processes coming through for each different variants like in these not having structures that are connected to municipal water or um uh sewage I think for them. Um I guess I just wonder is that something that we should look at or have the township review like where have we seen success in these type of development projects? what type of zoning variances have they put in and requirements they put in where they've not only seen success with these type of projects but also where we've seen the best laid intentions not come through for the people that they're trying to aid and I guess that's what I'm saying versus and I think what's the wording in here which is just that all must comply with our current zoning standards and regulations. So, I I just want to make sure I know what you're talking about because I was sat on the board of the Isabella County Restoration House for 5 years and just recently resigned. Um, and while I was there, we worked on the project to stop using the rotating shelter design and move into a permanent building. So, one of the big problems, and I think this might be what you're talking about, is that it did it kind of fell through the cracks as far as what it's considered. So, it's not considered a multifamily, you know, dwelling because it's not they're kind of all living

together, but it's not a group home either because it doesn't meet those definitions. So, that was a pretty big impediment as far as like trying to get that the wording correctly so that it, you know, certain things could be approved in time and permits and um it all worked out, thank goodness. But maybe it would be beneficial to have a word that is already included in our master plan. So we wouldn't have that problem if another shelter wanted to be or you know came about in Union Township or and it very well could have. We were looking for property all over the place and that one just ended up fitting our needs the best. that

I thought that the PUB which we talked about the last time was identified as the best option just because of the flexibility of it and that the basically if you present a rationale within that would it be better to like define it though a little bit or just leave it for interpretation when it comes up

the uh I mean they the the prospective applicant that presented was at a previous meeting had had expressed a desire that we have a a essentially have a zoning district where where what they would like to do would be allowed by right I think somebody come and get site plan approval for it uh and what what I've shared with her what's been shared with her by others as well is that if the township were to write an ordinance that tried to to create conditions where we have a zoning district we have a set of standards that that would allow the scope of activities that she's proposing. Uh we have to look beyond what she's proposing. We have to look at more comprehensive ordinance. We have to consider all the possibilities uh that might come into play there. You you mentioned some examples of others. There's not really a there's not a pattern yet. I would say we're really still early in the game. Tremendous experimentation going on around the country uh in this particular area. Uh lots of very innovative ideas. Some are working, some are not. Kazoo just had one that didn't work for them and they u so

might might be working for Lancing though which they procured a lot of those those same projects. Uh but lots of experimentation. So not not a not a time really to be able to say okay we have kind of set standards standard ideas we can work with.

U but definitely time of innovation. Um the uh the challenge with writing an ordinance like that is we're actually going to end up far more restrictive than what might come in and be approved if they do follow the planning and development process, the PUD process, because then we're only looking at what they're proposing to do. Our scope narrows down. We're looking specifically at the activities they're proposing, the site they're proposing on. How does thatffect affect those neighbors around it? What services or or infrastructure is needed to support that project? And so our our scope comes way in. We're not talking about all these other things. We're not talking about we're not talking hypothetically about well what about this? What about that? What about these right down on on what's on this plan? Uh the PUD uh many communities I think I mentioned this before many communities for the plan development was added to the state zoning act back in the 1960s. it was added to it for exactly this idea, you know, to do a have a way for a developer to propose something innovative that didn't fit into the zoning boxes. Uh, but nonetheless, might be a great addition to a community. Uh and uh over the years in many communities as they've had projects where maybe it didn't turn out the way they wanted or maybe had a developer that abused the process uh or uh took advantage of the of a community took advantage of that flexibility. Um often PUD rules get more and more complicated. They they oh we can't have that happen. So they add restrictions and pretty soon you have essentially a mini zoning ordinance that that is as complicated as maybe the the regular zoning ordinance is. Uh our PUB regulations are deliberately designed to be flexible. They're deliberately designed to allow exactly what what they're proposing. Put it on a plan. Uh and if if there are things that don't meet the regular

requirements, setbacks or height or land use, whatever it may be, there's a provision in there. It's titled regulatory flexibility where they can put right on the plan. This is what the ordinance requires. This is what we would like to do instead and this is why it's better because that's what we ask for is how how is how is the alternative the flexibility? How will that make the project better essentially? uh how would that benefit the community? How would that benefit the project? And they just put it right on the plan. And and if the plan is approved, those that flexibility, those changes become part of the zoning of property. Whatever is on the plan is the zoning of that site. Uh once once the the beauty plan and reszoning is adopted. So it is the method to do this and it allows us to be especially for something like this. It's so specific u and not not broad. We're we're very unlikely to going to have five or 10 of of these types of facilities in our community. We're very likely to have one. U maybe at some point we might have two. There might be another homeless shelter or a different kind of facility might but we're never going to have 10. U so it's it with such specificity the PUD is really the best approach because it gives the ability to propose it gives you the ability to look at it and consider it and and uh to work with them. um how would this work and and and actually see it and actually for the neighbors to also see it. You normally the reasonzoning uh you know you're going from one zoning district to another going from from residential to commercial and and there's a lot of unknowns. Well, what what are you going to put there? Well, we're simply reszoning the property commercial. We can put anything that your commercial district allows. Uh with the PUD, it's specific. Neighbors can come in and see the plan. They can see the changes that are proposed that I

think the ordinance calls them limited deviations. U they can see exactly what the use activity is going to be because it's going to be written right on the plan. Here are the land uses allowed under this plan. U so there are there's much less uncertainty in that that arrangement. Uh and so that's that's really why and that's why the policy statement here down at the bottom of page five of the u of this pine note on page 49 the packet that's why it says exactly what commissioner lab said that that the PUD is the appropriate uh way to consider innovative project.

Okay. Um when we were having the discussion last month, uh I remember one of the points of contention was that she wanted the the models that from down south there's a communal bathing building so that the individual units don't have to be built with full baths. Maybe you just have the toilet and a sink, something like that. And you know I think the response what I remember your you know your response well it's awful cold here in the winter that doesn't seem very practical. So in item two we talk about the site development that are consistent with the mid Michigan climate. So I wonder if that's a way to kind of reinforce the point you were making and and I still you know I think we you know we left that discussion I think happier than when we went into it but I still don't think we answered the question with any certainty as to you know if they do go through this uh PUD process but they come with a site plan that shows a bunch of individual units and a communal bath house what the response is going to be. So I I I don't and I don't I want to say I don't know what the right answer is but the but it's the question is going to be how restrictive should you be versus do we really want this in our community? Are we willing to be flexible and where should we be flexible and that type of thing?

Yeah, that that is a question you see that we did we we could be specific. We could put right in here that each unit should have its own bathroom, home, shower, and all. We could as a policy. Um I I agree with you. We there was not a there was not direction from the commission on that during that discussion, not a consensus. Anyway, it is a serious issue. It is, I think, going to be one of the the uh the items that might require a number of hours of deliberation like that appeals meeting because it is one that they clearly want. They've talked about it over and over again that that is needed. Um and what what we've told them was if you're going to propose it, put right on the plan how this is going to work and why this is the best possible approach and why it's necessary. put put your put the statement, the argument, the pol right there on the plan. How you put it all right there, like said an operation plan. How is this going to work so it doesn't become a problem? That kind of thing. How's it going to work so that that folks in January can take a shower and and uh and and not end up with pneumonia. U walk you back to their their uh their home. Uh all those elements, just put it right on the plan. How you going to make this possible? It it makes the plan longer. makes there's a lot of text in the plan. We do that, but it's necessary really to put that argument right on the plan so that if the plan is approved, there you go. This is why we did it. It's right there. U so uh I I did leave it open. I I agree. Number two was put on there specifically to say you be thinking about the climate. It also from a policy perspective, if this is adopted, becomes a foundation for decision- making you may make. if you if you choose to say look that's not consistent with our policy. So I'm sure that that's going to be a significant item of deliberation as we

if they ever do apply for

Okay. Okay. Well, I do think that's an important part of this uh whole thing is how we we deal with that uh that topic. So definitely continue to think about that. Any other comments on D while we're here? Okay. Uh E is student and workforce housing policies. This is where you talk about the the rehabilitation of aging student housing, which I think is good because I think it's a real issue that we're going to be facing. You see there item five there. You see the the echo of the item we talked about under the aging in place. kind of carried it over here. Little different language but but essentially the same idea.

Okay, we can also expand to F housing development policies for rural agricultural areas. Um, I believe there's a typo top of page seven. I believe it should say the third line. It should say within areas designated.

Uh, yes. Thank you. I mean, even though I'm f finding a couple of these things, I mean, the bottom line is that the thing was really pretty nicely written and had obviously been gone over carefully and was was in good shape by the time it came to us. housing affordability policies.

Is there any room for the township to expand the subsidized low-income housing?

This is an interesting area. Uh so uh uh under the current rules that that uh the current state rules for uh for this they call it LITC LIHTC low-inccome housing. Um we are most of the township is considered to be an urban area. Uh they they adopted a map a while back. It's a US Department of Agriculture map that that simply shows rural areas, urban areas and so uh for for for Midland for example, the existing city boundaries of Midland are urban, but everything outside of those existing city boundaries are rural. Uh it includes some areas of relatively urban actually. Uh but uh from from Isabel County, they they took a different approach and it's one of the few places where they took this approach. They drew a big rectangle and that rectangle includes the entire city of Mount Pleasant and it includes uh our township to the east border uh over to Summerton Road and up um past River Road uh to the north and down to Deerfield Road and then the the west boundary of that rectangle is right out front here, Lincoln Road. Uh and everything within that giant rectangle they call urban. Uh and while that does include almost our entire sanitary sewer district, almost all it incl also includes some areas currently are very rural. Uh u and u anyway but what they call urban is really basically if if you're declared urban you are competing for tax credits with the city of Detroit, Grand Rapids, Warren, Kalamazoo, the very large communities. uh which we are not. If you're rural, you you are competing with

other small towns and townships and rural counties. Uh it is much easier to get those tax credits on the rural side, frankly, because most of those rural communities don't have sewer. So, they have very little capacity to build, you know, significant projects. Uh but on the urban side, it's nearly impossible to get those tax credits. especially what they call the 9% program. That's that's more the more lucrative tax credit. It it uh uh it it more easily fills the gap uh that's that uh that is needed needed to fully fund these local housing developments. U and uh so the the challenge is is uh that most of the township is currently declared urban because of this map. The state is looking at that issue. They're looking at at how they can they can resolve some things like this. U but for right now uh every low-inccome housing developer that we've talked to uh has been looking either to be west of Lincoln or south of Deerfield. Uh and in both cases there are very small stubs of our sewer line that that cross there's sub that crosses Lincoln Road serves us and serves the the uh uh the development down Lincoln Road here, Commission on Aging and the rest. uh but it has very little capacity in it. Uh they might get 50 units based on u on a analysis that was done u and it just wasn't workable for for a project. Uh south of Deerfield is is even worse. There's really not capacity down there. Um so right now we we're we're needing a change and that's really what the policy language talks about that there needs to be some change. Uh we certainly are actively supporting our existing low-inccome housing. We almost lost all

of them. We have four existing uh so low-inccome housing tax credit developments. All the all of them uh were developed in around 2007208 2009. Um there used to be one more and actually two more. One one uh has actually become you might call very low-inccome housing that fell out of this particular tax credit program and now is considered a different way. U but uh another one was made market rate housing and and the thing is the developers can simply make that change. They don't need to come to the township. uh we get notified by MISTA that they've decided to to transition out of the low housing. They can do that after 15 years. Uh and all the all of our projects are in that space now. Uh and we had one that just as I was starting here, they were in the middle of of transitioning out of that and they're now market rate. So the other four u uh were uh new owners bought them and uh started the process to transition them out and make a market rate. That was their business model was to uh take these older sites, turn them into market rate housing, do some rehab on them and uh obviously raise up the the uh you know the the amount of income coming from them. Um and u we found out about it. I found out about it and and uh uh contacted them and and explained to them how important those were to us and that we didn't want to lose them and talked about that we can't build new because their first thing was we just build new. Can't do it under the current rules. And so we were able to work with them and this language here talks about actively working to support the township uh especially our township board of trustees actively supported keeping those projects. We we adjusted our there's a payment l of taxes formula u

for these developments where they they do pay something to the township and ultimately other taxing jurisdictions. U it's fraction of what the taxes would normally be for market rate housing but but something to help pay infrastructure costs and we took that number and and cut it by more than half. uh that uh cut cut that percentage, cut them either 9% or 10% and they're now down at four or five or something like that. Uh and that was done board trustees chose to do that to help fill the gap to make sure those would stay uh as low tax credit housing. So that's kind of where we are in that that side of things. I was really surprised by the first sentence of that section that Isabel County has been the only federally recognized persistent poverty county in the state. When I think of the counties to our north and northwest

and that none of those others were on that list, it it just surprises me. Ross Common's close. Yeah. Yeah. We don't want to be like casting aspersions on our neighbors, but Lake Lake Lake County I always thought was one of the poorer ones around. Michigan itself is one of the hardest economic uh areas when it comes to high income jobs. Just does not have them. Yeah.

But I was curious. I mean the the the kind of conventional wisdom has always been that that Isabella is anomalously high because of the student population. because any student that lists, you know, as their home, lists this as their home is likely to have a lower income than than, you know, a non- studentent. Um, any sense of is that a is that a a not a not a valid view of that or is there Well, I I tell you what I would suggest. uh everybody should have a copy of that housing study that Bowen research did

and and in that study they do look at the demographics pretty extensively and so I don't think they refer to the persistent poverty statement that that comes from a different source but but uh that' be my suggestion take a look at what they found in their analysis of that I I really couldn't speak I don't I don't think there's a easy answer I I don't think students are the easy answer necessarily I think there's a number number Well, I didn't I'm not saying that. I mean, you just have to go outside of really outside of our Mount Pleasant in the township to really see what's going on in the rural areas of the county, but but I just thought that it skewed a bit higher because of that. And again, I could be wrong.

Take a look at that study. It has some good information in this area. If I could give a number that I think can delay any questions that it's just focused from student populations. If you look at our numbers for childhood poverty, these are people under 18. These are people who are not in college, not coming into that, we are still far and above the national average. I think our childhood poverty rate under 18 is hovering between 23 and 28%. You Isabella County Isabella County and that and that is staggering amount. So when it comes to the uh common term of like oh the reason we have such a high poverty rate is because of students in CMU it's not

okay I pull back on one note I saw on an earlier piece is that okay just on part F uh part portion two division of farmland acreage and other form lots of agricultural preservation areas shall be limited to clustered non-farm res residential development and to maximize the conservation of land with sufficient lot area to configure to support agricultural use. Do we allow or what are our policies into taking like say a larger 100 acre 150 acre area of land and then subparing it down into smaller agricultural things 10 10 acre parcels for agricultural development or 40 acre parcels versus really just looking towards reclassifying those areas. when it comes to a development wanting to come in and turn into housing.

Can we just have a bill go through the state house on that? I know I hear a lot of concern about people about lack of agricultural or loss of agricultural land here. And I guess I'm just wondering like in that play we see two sides of that. we see very large consortiums of land ownership in Isabella County and Union Town or in and Union Township, but then a kind of sucking and closing of those kind of smaller farmlands. So, I guess I just wondering what are what's our policy when it comes towards looking at subdevelop divisions of larger farmlands into smaller farmlands versus just for housing. Yeah.

Thought those the state controls that, don't they? We just had a bill go through the house on parceling dividing up the land. Yeah, the land division act and you're right. Amendments to land division act have been going to the state legislature that would kind of put division division process on steroids. The land division act u uh it's interesting law. It doesn't work it doesn't play well with others. It doesn't play well with zoning. Um it it allows a certain amount of actually I better let's go back to the old days. The old days where if you wanted to divide property, you did a subdivision. you you came in, you got a subdivision plat. Uh you drew it out, you you put the markers out. Here's all your lots and and ultimately that plat was recorded with the state of Michigan. Uh approved by the local government is recorded with the state of Michigan. You can still get those old plats from the state. U and that's how divided property. And at some point along the way, there was a a desire to be able to simplify that process. that process like anything starting to get more complex. And so they created this the land division act uh unflatted lots the opportunity to do meets and bounds land division where where where you you describe each lot with a legal description u 300t in this direction 600t in that direction and you end up with a follow the directions you end up with a lot boundary. uh and the land division act under this process they they tried to to limit it. They they they wanted this to be kind of a little relief valve in state law uh allow a small amount of these kinds of divisions with the idea that most things will still take place through the planning process. Um and more they did it, more people liked it. They kept expanding that capacity. They expanding the number of lots could be created and that that sort of thing. uh and and

where it sits right now. You can create a modest subdivision through the land division act uh where where you meets and bounds describe everything including the road rights of way u and uh and you actually avoid this process. You you avoid talking to the plan commission. You avoid doing a subdivision, a plat or a site condominium development. Uh those lots that were created uh years ago that you saw were created that way and meets and bounds land division. Um they were created with very little oversight by anybody. Nobody looked at that. I said there were no roads. They just were created. Person had this idea that they someday they might want to develop something. Uh and uh that that the problem with that is that you you end up with a circumstance where unintended consequences are magnified. U well they're about the state legislature right now in these bills and I I I don't know exactly where the bill is right now but u

I think it's gone to the so don't NTA's been talking about it a lot. I think it's I think they're about to vote on it in the state senate. Yeah, I think maybe they've gone through the House and the Senate.

Uh that would more than double. I don't remember what the number is, but it's they would already the number of lots that can be created is pretty substantial and they would greatly increase that number of lots. So, you're essentially going to have more ad hoc subdivisions created. uh if the bill becomes law, uh I think part of the bill uh as was written the last draft I saw uh included the ability for local government to have tighter restrictions and so I can almost guarantee that we'll be bringing to you something that will clarify that because that that process is really troublesome. It creates a lot of as said a lot of unintended consequences. I don't have any problem with with the meets and bounds land division. there's perfectly appropriate thing to be doing. But essentially what they're doing with this bill is is completely undercutting as I said subdivvision plat condo development where where we're actually looking at all these issues at once. Uh and uh considering infrastructure, roads, all these details all get looked at on a plan rather than simply looking at at lines, you know, lines created essentially on on a blank slate and then after the fact trying to figure out how to deal with all those infrastructure issues. Uh so that that's that. But this uh this this item uh here is really talking about trying to preserve farmland. Uh when you see and and the idea of clustering residential development, there's a provision in state zoning act that I think it's just open space preservation development something like that. the idea that let's say in a type actually so type of development that commissioner was talking about let's say you have 100 acres and you want to let's say under the zoning you can create u say it was 10acre lots so under 10 acre lot zoning so you create 10 lots out of that 100 acres but you didn't really want to just divide up into 10 acre lots you want to have 10 home sites but you really wanted

to preserve as much of the farmland as you could well under this open space development provision in the state law, you can reduce the size of the lots by 50% but down to 5 acres. Uh provided you can still meet the setback requirements, all the things that apply to normally u and provided that you put an easement conservation easement on that remaining acre. So now you have 50 acres of land that you have just conserved that will be permanent farmland and you have 10 5 acre home sites. That's actually allowed right now. It's a it's allowed in our zoning ordinance. that's a lot of the state zoning act and that's what really what this clustering is talking about is you said if you're going to do that kind of project that commissioner ferry mentioned cluster the sites to preserve the farmland as much as possible okay um any any comments on the remaining couple sections well actually there's really one remaining section and then a kind of a conclude some concluding remarks um each other housing related policies Um, at the end you mentioned the future land use component which obviously is a piece of this. Should we anticipate that you are eventually going to bring us some recommendations on any changes that we might want to consider for the future land use map?

Yeah, that you you you absolutely can uh plan on that that will actually be coming uh after some more policy type stuff. We have we have a plan for agriculture and rural character preservation. Uh we have of course the commercial area plan uh industrial uh we bring back to the industrial economic development element uh in its full form. Uh those those are all the kind of the policy elements that will then inform what we do with the future land use map but but that yes that will absolutely be coming back to you will be kind of you might call it the keystone of the master plan. That's what that is. Okay. Any other comments from folks?

I was trying to channel your editing chops and I thought I found it when I got to H because it looked like the tabs were off on the headings and I went back and I looked. They are. And then I realized it was center justified. So, it is consistent all throughout. If you like I can I can do something different. I I think we just originally I did not have the A for H in there. I I prefer left justified, but I think that's maybe nitpicky on my part. I leave it up to you. Which would you prefer? Just you have you have more of a designer's eye than I do. I did not notice that. Is there a preference among this? I like it the way it is, but I would be more concerned with what that color is eventually going to be.

Oh, I don't know. Actually, they're what you see is the color. Right now, it's just gray. Yeah. Yeah. But I'm assuming in the printed plan, it's going to be some color. Of course. Of course, we're probably not going to print very many physical copies of the plan. Maybe maybe just for us and a few other people. Stuff doesn't get printed anymore. It's kind of sad. That's a good thing.

All right. Um, so if you do have any further thoughts about the housing one, uh, you know, hold on to them, write them down. We'll definitely want to, uh, take them into account as we go through this. So, moving towards the end of the meeting here. Um, we've given you some feedback and and we look forward to seeing the those additional pieces. Um, extended public comment. Anyone who's out there, whether they're in the room or online, is invited to address the planning commission on any item, whether it's on tonight's agenda or not. Extended public comment is restricted to five minutes on any issue. Just give us your name and address for the minutes and comment away. Extended public comments open at 8:53.

Nobody online. Nobody online. Our audience departed some time ago. So we'll go ahead and close extended public comment again until December. And then uh final board comment. Any comments from board members? Thank you for your work, Rodney, and uh the rest of the staff on getting this together for us today. Thank you. I have one before we close. Okay, I'll recognize Rodney. So, this is a just an item for you to your enjoyment. The holiday lighting on Picker Road is going up tonight. So, tomorrow night, you will be able to enjoy it. Or if you're up at 3 in the morning, you can enjoy. They will be working on it during the overnight hours.

Uh, but holiday lighting will be up all along Picker Road starting tomorrow. We're looking forward to see Oh, I should I should add one. I'll see you at at 4 o'clock. I should add one. This is in uh Union Township at Mount Pleasant is hosting on December 6th their downtown Christmas extravaganza. Uh over at the Broadway Theater, we're going to be hosting Letters to Santa and some free movies going on all day. So, if you're out and about in Kohl's, feel free to stop by the theater and warm up for a little bit. Okay. And Rodney, I want to thank you for pointing out that Culver's can discriminate against me for at least five more years.

I was horrified when they offered me to see your discount. I said, "Really?" Said, "Yeah, 55 or older." And he of course like, "How did you know I was 55?" Right? Really discounts weird. Yeah. All right. So, we've completed our agenda and uh we'll stand adjourned until December. Happy Thanksgiving everyone. Happy