Engage and Represent
A mother from Traverse City shared the following email she sent to the Planning Commission concerning the 2013 reconstruction of Washington St.:
I live on 700 block of Washington Street. Hope Street dead-ends into my driveway. I spend a great deal of time watching the traffic around F&M park. I have a young child who loves to play out front. Our city is safe, but Washington street is not. I have to watch him while he plays in our front yard or when he walks 20 feet from our yard to the park.
Here are a few observations of Washington Street for the planning commission.
- The streets surrounding F&M park are dangerous.
- Cars constantly speed down the street. They rarely go 25.
- Washington is a really wide street. Yet, we aren’t allowed to park our cars overnight on it. One of the reasons cars zoom down Washington is because it’s too wide and open.*
- 3 school buses load and unload children in my driveway.
- There are not ANY safety measure to help the children travel to and from the bus stop.
- We do not have crosswalks, bump outs, narrow streets, on-street parking, speed bumps or any other traffic calming measures.
- F&M is a huge community park. It’s full of children playing every day of the year. Yet, we do not have crosswalks to access it?
- The streets surrounding parks need to properly address the additional pedestrians (frequently children) traveling to and from the park. The streets surrounding parks should always have up-to-date safety measures.
Here are my questions:
- Why are safety measures absent from a major park that serves as a hub for many Traverse City families?
- How can we have so many school children traveling to this spot during the early morning commute with zero safety measures in place?
- How are you going to change it?
Washington Street is supposed to be a safe street. I cannot imagine what the city would experience if a child gets injured here. Every week I see multiple close calls. Since starting this email I’ve heard 3 different parents yelling at their children to, “wait for me to cross”, “get away from the road”, and “wait, no, wait….come back here!”
Please feel free to contact me if you have specific questions or would like more feedback.
The City is requesting citizen feedback on all 2013 street projects before the planning commission reviews them on August 7.
The streets slated for attention are mostly small sections of low-volume streets. Western St., Fern S., Grove St., Cypress & Xavier are all now gravel and will be paved. Street projects also include some much-needed attention in the Orchard Heights Neighborhood, Wayne St. and the work around F&M Park in Boardman Neighborhood. These projects are funded with $1 million of general fund money as established through the infrastructure policy (PDF).
In the past 2 years citizen input has altered original designs, namely on Elmwood Ave. (narrowing for speed control, completing sidewalks), S. Barlow (adding sidewalks), and even Hannah St. (a sidewalk connection). The idea is to not only maintain status quo, but while streets are tore-up asking the question, “are there improvements that could be made while we are there?” I’m not sure we are there on some of these projects, but still need to find time to review them. Certainly, there are some detail improvements that would go a long way in high-traffic areas like Washington St.
What are you seeing in the proposed projects?
Street Name: ___________________________________
□ I support the project as proposed.
□ I support the project, but have some minor (or major) suggestions/comments: ____________________
□ I do not support the project as proposed. Comments: _______________________________________
* For the record, Washington St. is 30 feet wide and Hope St. is a whopping 36 feet wide (a freaking landing strip).
Dissolving road commissions
~ by guest contributor Rory Neuner
Bicycle and pedestrian advocates in Michigan have reason to celebrate legislation signed into law by Governor Rick Snyder in February. Public Acts 14 and 15 allow county boards of commissioners to dissolve and take over the duties of county road commissions.
Dissolving road commissions has been applauded as a way to reduce costs and the redundancy in the number of units of government in Michigan. After all, Michigan has more layers of government than the layers of clothing one might don on a cold, snowy day in Houghton.
This legislation is an opportunity to remove the biggest barrier to implementing complete streets in Michigan counties. It opens the door for bicycle, pedestrian, transit, and place-advocates to work with their county governments to rethink the way they are providing transportation services. It will help establish a more value based approach to designing communities.
I’ll spare you the full history of county road commissions in Michigan (PDF), however, here are the basics: road commissions came to being in 1893, based on Bay County’s 1883 Stone Road District. Each of Michigan’s 83 counties has a county road agency. In most counties, the road commission is the agency responsible for building and maintaining county roads.
Prior to PA 14 and 15, counties had no authority to manage roads. That was the job of the road commission. And in most Michigan counties, the transportation planning that’s gone on at the road commission has focused solely on moving cars; not people.
The County Road Association of Michigan (CRAM) makes no secret about this bias. CRAM (what a name!), which represents county road commissions in Lansing, was one of the only groups to oppose Complete Streets legislation successfully passed in 2010. And CRAM’s legislative priorities routinely include eliminating the Act-51 requirement that agencies spend 1% of their funds on non-motorized (PDF).
Aside from CRAM’s politics, dissolving road commissions is an opportunity to move our county governments away from auto-centric planning and maintenance toward a people-centric approach to transportation.
Ingham County (mid-Michigan) is home to the first serious dissolution effort, and it’s a great case study in what an opportunity this is for bicycle and pedestrian advocates. Back in December, the Ingham County Board of Commissioners began the process of absorbing its road commission. This week the County (LSJ) will hold its second public hearing and the board will take a final vote in late April.
For the last several years, the Ingham County Health Department has been working to encourage communities across the county to adopt complete streets ordinances. The Health Department is overseen by the Board of Commissions, which passed its own resolution encouraging complete streets. But until PA 14 and 15, counties couldn’t manage their own transportation infrastructure. As Todd Scott pointed out over at M-Bike.org (MB) “(c)ounty governments (could) manage parks, human services, health departments, airports, water supply, refuge collection, lake improvements, libraries – but not roads.”
So despite the best efforts of the Health Department, complete streets was going nowhere at the County level. In the middle stood the Ingham County Road Commission, with its own priorities that didn’t include complete streets. If the Ingham Board of Commissions moves forward with dissolution, its hopeful that new Ingham County Department of Transportation will tackle complete streets.
The location of this new Department should also mean better coordination between transportation spending and the other services counties provide. It improves the chances that connections are made, for example, between a county park trail system and a bike lane on a county road.
A Platform for Local Funding Options?
In the future, embedding transportation in County governments may also set up the structure necessary for counties to pursue a local revenue option to fund improved transportation services. Among the dozens of transportation-related proposals Governor Snyder has outlined over the last year is a plan to allow counties in Michigan to levy their own vehicle registration fees to fund transportation improvements. Under Snyder’s proposal (T4MI), voters would get to decide at the local level whether to raise vehicle registration fees, money that would be used for road and transit spending in that region.
Counties that act now to consolidate their road commissions and move toward a 21st century vision for transportation services may be better positioned to put such options in front of voters, and in turn, build safe, vibrant, healthy communities focused on providing access to goods and people for all modes.
Please, ask your neighborhood County Commissioner what he or she is going to do about it. *
UPDATE: Tonight’s meeting is at 7:00 P.M. in the Commission Chambers at the Governmental Center, 2nd Floor
Tonight’s planning commission meeting will address the request by CVS for conditional zoning at the property at the NE corner of Front and Division St. The plans submitted by CVS Pharmacy are for a store footprint of 13,225-square-feet drug store and a 56 space parking lot. In addition, the company is looking for a variance to accommodate a drive-thru window. They will also need an allowance for the larger footprint than is now allowed.
The City has no strong zoning to restrict parking lot size in this area, however, a trade-off for a reduced parking lot footprint to allow a drive-thru wouldn’t be the end of the world. I’d recommend that the City really demand some proof that a 56-space lot is necessary for more than marketing schemes. CVS, and other large box-store pharmacies, prefer large empty parking lots in part because it gives the impression that people can quickly stop into the store and complete their errands; they aren’t meant to fill up. Large parking lots are, however, a deterrent to walkability.
Tonight is the introduction to the planning commission, followed by a public hearing on the conditional rezoning requested on or around January 3rd. Sometime after that, the City Commission will review the planning’s decision.
If you are interested, and want to better understand this project and voice your perspective, it is important that you attend as many of these meetings as you can and/or communicate with the commissioners on planning who are reviewing this project. Communities do have choices and may influence developments; it is not anti-development to do so. The negotiation with the community begins with the planning commission.
Traverse City isn’t tied to the corporate model…what would you prefer?
Above: Different CVS models in Ann Arbor, Detroit and, at the bottom, Spring Hill. The latter is by no means perfect, but the residents of Spring Hill, MI were successful in gaining compromises in the design (AI.com) by being engaged from the beginning of the project. The Detroit CVS parking lot is, obviously, something that we want to avoid at all costs.
A description of tonight’s discussion begins on page 38 of the Planning Commission’s packet (PDF)
Last year, Ann Arbor passed a crosswalk ordinance that become the model Traverse City used for its recent crosswalk ordinance (TC’s Uniform Traffic Code Section 410.03). It requires all vehicles (including bicycles) to stop for pedestrians in unregulated crosswalks that are marked and posted.
If you haven’t noticed, it is in effect. Any reports from the streets?
Front side of a postcard campaign by Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition
Driver Behavior Remains the Issue
Ann Arbor has had issues with compliance of their law as the privilege associated with driving a car is difficult to change. People behind the wheel are still not readily stopping and there has been an uptick with fender-bender rear ends when someone stops too quickly. Ann Arbor is attempting to improve that with stricter enforcement, enhanced warning systems and perhaps with a slight clarifying of the ordinance language to clarify that a stop is only required if “a pedestrian is stopped at the curb or ramp leading to a crosswalk.” It avoids the vague term of “when approaching” a crosswalk.
Still, authorities in Ann Arbor are discovering that the biggest obstacle to compliance has nothing to do with the ordinance or pedestrians; the biggest issue remains driver behavior. Namely, distracted driving and driving too fast. There is state law to help reduce the former and the latter requires that the city focus on design of the streets to restrict speeds, but also to protect pedestrians with greater use of bump-outs, medians and narrow streets. It appears from the comments by council members, that Ann Arbor’s council is supporting continued improvement in street design guidelines to achieve those ends. Ann Arbor is also attempting to raise the awareness of the ordinance through postcard and ad campaigns, as well as continuing to provide video footage of the experience on the street.
Want to Help
Forces are coming together in Traverse City to begin a PR campaign for our new ordinance, both through the City Planning office and through citizen effort. If you’re interested in lending a talent, an idea or being filmed as you navigate the streets, you can send me a message or contact the planning department to be plugged in. TC resident Marya Tyler is also interested in putting together some short PR videos that will air online and public access. If interested, email at: email@example.com
The following video was effective in helping to get A2′s ordinance passed. (If you need a bit of a pick-me-up in your attitude before your daily walk commute, watch this video).
“We can have a community where we no longer feel invisible as pedestrians– where motorists stop to allow children to cross the street.”
- Go Team! Policy Changes Need Love Too
- A Stop at Crosswalk Ordinance is Only One Needed Treatment
- Word of the Day: Crosswalk Creeping
- City May Pass Ordinance Requiring Stops at Crosswalks
Tonight the City Commission will hold a study session concerning the 2012 construction project at Clinch park, including the fate of the mini-steam engine train ride. If you have a concern about what the direction that this space will take over the next 40-50 years, please consider attending or sending an email to the commissioners. At this point, they need to be reminded that people have high expectations for a re-imagined waterfront. For a few, that may include keeping a train ride, for many others it does not.
You can view the City Commission packet here or embedded below.
Same train, two views
Also on the agenda and of interest is a discussion of major projects and a 2-year strategic planning process…I know these two topics don’t jump out at you with excitement, but it is an opportunity to see the direction of staff and the commissioners.
If you want to help get the Bayfront project back on a path towards something great, please take a moment today to contact the City Commissioners. They need to be shown some love and support for a waterfront that City residents can be proud of.
UPDATE: 4pm, 11/17- Correction, the City Commission will consider the 2012 Clinch Park plan at their November 28 study session. Formal action on the park design by the City Commission may occur on December 5. Still, between now and then they need to hear from people who want something great, not merely adequate.
Help support bold progress for the Bayfront Plan
In the last decade area citizens have been asked to dream big about our community. Perhaps we can blame it on the national press the area receives (or, perhaps it is something in the water), but when area residents are asked to vision, like they were for the Grand Vision as well as the original Your Bay, Your Say, they dream big. In both of the above cases, they did so in large numbers.
Traverse City’s waterfront has come a long way. Growing up here over the last 39 years I’ve seen surprising transformations. That there really used to be a working coal plant right downtown on West Bay remains difficult to believe.
Still, the waterfront has a lot more potential. It can be an expression of the community’s commitment to protecting and connecting to the water. As JRW likes to say, “Michigan…It’s the Water!” and nowhere should that be more of the case than in Traverse City. Currently, we are separated from it by an aggressive highway and, in the case of Clinch Park, a space that does little to capture people’s imaginations. It is a place to pass through, not linger.
The Your Bay, Your Say and last year’s Bayfront Planning process were the latest attempts to remedy that situation. Planning is important and there has been plenty. Unfortunately, we continue to have reluctant City Commissioners who are unable or unwilling to take bold actions when needed to implement those plans.
Each member of the current City Commission has somewhere along the way said that the Bayfront is a priority. They have also voted at least 3 times in the last year to move forward with a vision for excellence. They have done so because it makes economic sense for a city celebrated for its high quality of life to invest in its most visible public spaces. They have also done so because they know the countless hours and energy that hundreds, if not thousands, have given to the cause over the last 5,10, 20 years.
Moving Forward with the 2012 Bayfront Construction
Last spring an RFP went out for a first phase centered around the eastern edge of Clinch Park. This is the most coveted part of the park. It is the area where the majority of activity wants to take place; people gravitate towards the water’s edge. The firm hired for this phase produced an adaptation based off of the 2010 plan as expected. A sub-committee consisting of 3 Parks and Recreation Commissioners (myself included) and anywhere from 4-6 City staff members worked with them over the summer to approve a design recommended by the Parks and Recreation Commission for review by the Planning Commission and finally the City Commission. The latter needs to sign off before construction begins. Their next opportunity will be at their
November 21st November 28th meeting.
It has been a difficult summer concerning the plan. The majority of the voices that the city has heard lately have been extremely negative in tone and extremely short-sighted in the level of investment required to honor the public process. Apparently it is working, as one City Commissioner has even expressed that perhaps the entire plan be scraped and that the City start over with a smaller expectations. As an appointed advisor to the City, I strongly recommend the opposite. This is the time to be raising the expectations, not taking them backward.
This is no time for small thinking and cold feet; the City Commission needs a reminder of the support they have for being brave. Please, email City Commissioners before their next meeting and remind them to be bold, visionary and inventive.
After starting with $0 last year, the City has $1.3 million dollars pledged to phase 1 at Clinch Park (note: phase 1 does not include all of what is shown above). Over $400,000 is from private, local donors committed to the 2010 Bayfront project. There is also $480,000 from the Natural Resources Trust Fund that is matched by the Traverse City DDA. With just under a year to go, we are short anywhere from $375,000 to design/construct new bathrooms or up to $2-mil if we attempt to do something more special in 2012.
With commitment and full engagement to the cause, I’m confident that our current City Commission can work with staff and other City boards to find a solution that honors the vision of the community for a newly imagined waterfront.
They need to be reminded that city residents support a project that is bold and that honors the effort put in over the last decade. Please send a brief, supportive message to that end.
As a former mayor once said about the Bayfront plan just before the 2010 planning:
“We can do something average, or something great.”
I prefer great. You?
There is now a MyWHaT email resource page, but for convenience below are the emails for City Commissioners, Planning Commissioners, and Parks and Recreation Commissioners. Please paste into the email as a BCC.
firstname.lastname@example.org, “Mary Ann Moore” <email@example.com>, “Jim Carruthers” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “Jody Bergman” <email@example.com>, “Barbara Budros” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “Michael Estes” <email@example.com>, ”Jeanine Easterday” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “Ben Bifoss” <email@example.com>, “Russ Soyring” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “Andy Andres” <email@example.com>, “Jody Bergman” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “Jennifer Jaffe” <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, “Mary Ann Moore” <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,“Lauren Vaughn” <LVaughn@ci.traverse-city.mi.us>, “Missy Luick” <email@example.com>, “Keedanlex@gmail.com” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “Brian Haas” <email@example.com>, “Traverse City Parks” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, email@example.com, “Arianne Petersen” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “Robert Cole” <email@example.com>, “Sheila Dodge” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, <email@example.com>
Parks and Recreation
This from local dog park champions:
Hello Fellow Dog Park Enthusiasts!
This Thursday, 11/17, Traverse City’s Parks and Recreation Commission is holding a special meeting to consider recommending a location for the City’s first dog park. They are holding this meeting seeking public comment before they make a motion to pass this on to the City Commissioners. The meeting will be held at 6:30pm in the basement cafeteria of the Government Center on Boardman Ave. Please attend this meeting to support the positive move forward on a dog park for Traverse City and join in on the discussion for the location.
The Parks and Recreation Commission considers the lawn space between Division St. and the tennis courts at Veteran’s Park to be a favorable location for Traverse City’s first dog park. Those of us who have been working to move this project forward support the Parks and Recreation Commission on this preference given that there is already water, parking and bathroom facilities at this location. Additionally, it is very accessible for many city residents and it may be one of the least expensive sites to develop.
Once we have a location and the approval of the City Commissioners, we will begin raising funds to help pay for the park. If you would like to be part of the effort to have a dog park in Traverse City, Community Partners for a Traverse City Dog Park needs your help. Please join us Thursday evening at the Government Center to sign up or if you can’t make the meeting, please email us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Thank you for your support.
Jami Moore & Ginger Schultz
for Community Partners for a Traverse City Dog Park
The Parks and Recreation Commission is committed to establishing a dog park in 2012. It is in our 5 year goals and objective and we are working closely with community partners to build support, a timeline and a budget. If we pass the current recommendation it will go to the City Commission for a likely study session on 11/28 and from there, I trust, a move to approve it at the following meeting on 12/5.
The Park and Recreation’s working mission:
Our mission is to establish a fenced in, off-leash City dog park:
- where well-behaved dogs will socialize in a clean, safe and welcoming environment.
- where pet owners will engage with fellow neighbors and visitors to the area.
- where park visitors without dogs will visit to enjoy the benefits of a healthy, active community and the interaction between humans and canines.
It will be a well-maintained space that is self and peer regulated according to clear user guidelines. The park will contribute to both the quality of life and economic vitality of the City. As such, the Parks and Recreation Commission is committed to a partnership with community partners to design, construct and maintain a park that satisfies the needs of dog owners and non-dog owners alike with a shared goal of increasing the enjoyment of our public spaces.
Dog parks have been discussed for many years. They have started to become the norm in other communities around the entire country. It needs to be emphasized, the urban dog park brings people together just as much, perhaps more so, than dogs. I think this is an excellent placemaking feature that Traverse City is finally ready to embrace.
Parks and Recreation will meeting Thursday night at 6:30 in the basement cafeteria of the Governmental Center.
Engage & Represent
Go Vote…It will take you 5, maybe 10 minutes.
Who are you meeting at the polling station?
I prefer visiting the polls compared to absentee voting. Here in Traverse City, I’ve rarely had to wait more than 10 minutes. Also, it is a shared experience, however brief it might be. It is communal. I also prefer walking as it adds more of a sense of ritual. In a pinch for time, I’ll ride a bike. Either-way, I often start meeting neighbors en route to the my polling station–Precinct 8 (Can I get a shout out? P-8 Baby!)
At the polls I run into neighbors I haven’t seen in months. Years. I see old classmates. I have intelligent discussions with complete strangers. In 2002, a serendipitous encounter at the polls led to the adjunct position I’ve had at the college now for 9 years. This suggests that voting pays off, even if your candidates aren’t successful.
Pour a mug of coffee. Go to the polls. Vote. While you’re there, chat someone up.
Share your story here: who’d you meet?
Polls are open in Traverse City precincts 7am-8pm.
If you aren’t sure where you vote, plug in your info here.
For MyWHaT election coverage, search “TCVote”
Well Put & Well Served
… the system of governance we should strive for is the one we would accept without knowing what our role would be – whether we would be a renter or a homeowner; whether we would own a business or bag groceries at the supermarket. Whether we’re a city commissioner, a member of the parks board, or someone in the audience of a meeting. Whether we’re a senior on a fixed income or a young family with kids at TCAPS.”
~ Mayor Chris Bzdok, A Theory of Governance, 2010 Great Lakes Bioneers Conference
Put another way, run a City where the process is inclusive, information is readily available and digestible, and all feel welcome to participate and contribute. A system of governance where we engage & contribute despite knowing that the outcome might not go our way, but knowing that the process will reflect a shared vision and that the outcome will likely prove to be better because of a broad scope of input and diverse opinions. This is the style of governance that Mayor Chris Bzdok has brought to the Traverse City City Commission over the last 5 years, the last two years as Mayor. Tonight is the last night of this run. His leadership will certainly be missed (mayor wanted).
Thank you for serving, Chris.
I invite MyWHaT readers to show your gratitude to Mayor Chris Bzdok in the comments section below. Shower him with love or roast him, your preference. Either-way, let’s show him appreciation for guiding the community with unparalleled dedication and a commitment to raising the level of engagement across a broader swath of citizens.
Dear Mayor Bzdok,
The community is a better place because of your commitment, grace and ability to articulate that critical nugget to surprisingly complex issues. You brought a calming to City issues. Personally, there were several moments in the past two years where I came to you at the height of frustration, what hair I have left in full fury and flames, regarding a particular matter of the City. You didn’t talk me down or explain how I was overreacting, instead, you explained the options for a path forward and promised, not as much an outcome as a course of action that would attempt to douse the flames. For that, I thank you Mayor Bzdok…and, don’t think that because you are no longer mayor that I won’t be showing up at your doorstep seeking similar council.
Thank you for your service!
What’s your message for the Mayor?
Let’s Keep BATA Rolling Forward
Will BATA keep its buses rolling over the next 5 years? We think so and MyWHaT readers can be part of that by going to the polls to vote YES on the County Proposal for Continued BATA services on November 8.
As families experience the pinch at the pump, we’re seeing overwhelming support for more transportation choices. To us, the choice is clear; we’re voting yes.
Over the past 10 years, 75% of transit millage requests around the country have been successful. In Michigan this year, 10 out of 11 transit millage requests have passed. And in this region, we’ve seen citizens, local leaders, and groups show their overwhelming support for the system that, in our opinion, keeps on improving.
There is good reason for the broad support. Transit systems provide safe and affordable options for people who need to get around, they add to the economic vitality of the community, they save families money, and its good for the environment.
- BATA is becoming more efficient. Though a recent restructuring effort, BATA managed to save $250,000 in capital and operation costs.
- BATA is switching to routes that are more reliable and more attractive for commuters and visitors. Through the transit subcommittee of the Grand Vision, we’ve been working with BATA, Munson Hospital, and other community stakeholders to find opportunities for park and rides and fixed-routes that will help commuters become less dependent on their cars.
- BATA worked with Wexford county to install a bus transfer station in Buckley. And, they are now looking at transfer centers in Interlochen and Acme – crucial, cross-region connections.
- Suttons Bay Schools was able to save 4 teaching positions by allowing BATA to take kids to school.
- BATA is working on GPS and mobile data connection technology so it can become more efficient and plan routes better.
- BATA had a 14% increase in riders in Spring of 2011 compared to Spring of 2010.
To many in the region, BATA is a lifeline to community. It provides a crucial link to jobs for our vulnerable families who may be financially or physically unable to own a car, as well as, to many seniors, people with disabilities, and students who depend on the system to get around.
Towns that make transit a priority are able to prevent sprawl, attract talent, and are likely more bikeable and walkable. It’s your community connector. Let’s keep moving this town forward.
Let’s move this town forward. Vote Yes for BATA on November 8.
The 2009 conducted BATA Survey identified a latent demand for ridership. Cost savings and convenience were the top two choices for looking toward BATA as an option. You can read the final report by Kriosconsulting here: BATA Survey.
2011 Ballot Language:
BATA CONTINUED SERVICES
This proposal will allow BATA to continue public transportation services by renewing the previously approved millage.
For the purpose of reauthorizing the same total millage levy approved by the voters in 2007 for public transportation purposes and to allow BATA to continue operations, shall up to .3454 mills for a period of five (5) years (2013-2017) be levied on all taxable property in Grand Traverse and Leelanau Counties?
This is a renewal millage of the .35 mills rolled back to .3454 mills under the Headlee Amendment.
If approved and levied in full, this millage will raise an estimated $2,305,190 for public transportation purposes in the first calendar year (2013).
By law, a portion of the BATA millage raised will be distributed to other governmental entities which capture property taxes. These are the City of Traverse City Downtown Development Authority, Grand Traverse County Brownfield Redevelopment Authority, Grand Travers County Land Bank Authority, Leelanau County Brownfield Redevelopment Authority and Leelanau County Land Bank Authority.