001e e e I acknowledge that the land the city of an arbor occupies is the ancestral traditional and contemporary lands of the Anish Shin including Odawa oju and bwami and wendat peoples I further acknowledge that our city stands like almost all property in the United States on lands obtained generally in unconscionable ways from indigenous peoples The Taking of this land was formalized by the Treaty of Detroit in 1807 knowing where we live work study and recreate does not change the past but a thorough understanding of the ongoing consequences of this past can Empower us in our work to create a future that supports human flourishing and justice for all individuals thanks Aon um will you do the roll call now yes uh council member Amman here Ann Arbor Vice chair Brown I'm here n Arbor
002chairperson Curtis here Ann Arbor uh commissioner Dale here Ann Arbor council member dish will be a little bit late uh commissioner Graham I'm here thank you commissioner guber here and and arper commissioner Marson here in an arbor commissioner mki here in an arbor uh commissioner Mitchell here in an arbor uh commissioner nedrich here in an arbor uh new commissioner Peters wood here and Arbor thank you m new commissioner Smith Karen an arber and commissioner way Arbor thank you so I think we well meet the Quorum requirements um next is the agenda does anybody want to make changes to the agenda not is there a motion to approve the agenda so moved and by commissioner mki and seconded by Vice chairman Brown all in favor of approval of the agenda raise your hands say I I
003I looks 100% uh does anybody want to make changes to the minutes from last month's meeting there a motion to approve the minutes seconded by commissioner Mitchell all in favor raise your hand say I I I okay so next is um public comment this is opportunity for people to speak up to three minutes please call 888 78899 enter meeting ID 66543 to raise your hand press 9 to unmute press star 6 City staff will select callers who have raised their hand one by one using the last three digits of their phone number when speaking please move to a quiet area and state your name and address at the beginning of the comments Aaron do we have any callers online I do not see any no okay so I think the next is uh new members
004introduction of the new environmental commissioner so um we have two new people joining us new Commissioners for this month Olivia Smith and Hank Peters wood so I asked them each to do a sh just a verbal introduction of themselves themselves um Olivia would you like to start and you're on mute happens every time uh my name's Olivia um I am from Chelsea Michigan but I came here for school so I've been living in an arbor for seven years now um I went to the University of Michigan and I work in commercial due diligence right now as an environmental consultant and also do a lot of Brownfield work in southeast Michigan thank you um commissioner Peters Woods hi my name is Hank um I am currently a dual degree graduate student at the University of Michigan
005studying public policy and law and I'm also working in the governor's office as a public transportation policy fellow and I'm really excited to join the commission here well we're glad both of you are here thank you thanks uh next business is the uh comprehensive plan review by Brett Leonard um you want to show your screen or you want Erin to show the presentation or or you want to answer the questions we sent you or what would you like to do um I'm happy to share the presentation so um thank you very much for uh having me uh I would like to I think uh Aon uploaded the presentation the packet but I would like to go through that briefly and then um you sh shared uh Aon shared a few of your questions with me
006um that uh I have a couple of thoughts on that we can maybe go over uh afterwards and then generally I just want to make sure that um if there's any other questions but um as well welcome your feedback your thoughts on any of these topics um this is a great opportunity for us to hear from from you um and augment the wide public dialogue that we're having about this comprehensive planning process um I also before I pull up the presentation I want to introduce Jamie Granger uh Jamie is a member of uh our lead consultant team interface Studios who is uh helping us lead this work so let me see if I can Master the zoom can everybody see my super exciting title slide yes all right okay so uh just to set the
007stage to make sure that uh we're all clear on what we're talking about we're talking about the comprehensive plan and the comprehensive plan is the city's land use policy document it in itself changes nothing it changes no laws it changes no requirements it changes no activities but it articulates what our Visions are what our goals are and actually puts together an implementation approach for us to achieve those goals so it it is uh broadly our to-do list about what we want to do going forward so that our community evolves into the community we want it to be uh it looks on a long-term Horizon uh 20 or 30-year Horizon and this plan uh has been specifically directed to uh focus on three values affordability sustainability and Equity um some of you might um have heard
008the term master plan uh it is the same document however we have shifted away from the terminology of master plan that can um invoke uh perceptions of slavery or paternalism and it also suggests more of a sort of a finality that um isn't isn't not appropriate because like a lot of other public policy documents comprehensive plans are intended to evolve over time so that's why you hear the term comprehensive plan use instead of master plan if that's something you're more familiar with uh because our beloved city council is passionate and wanted to make this job even harder for the planning department not only did they say uh make sure that we're delivering a plan that is achieving a sustainable affordable and Equitable future but they gave us some extra uh goals to accomplish as well
009um they want us to be careful to consider an Implement Those portions of the a20 living carbon neutrality plan um that plan is not part of our current land use policy documents it's obviously been adopted and invested in but when we're talking about a comprehensive plan it goes through a very specific process for adoption which that plan did not do and so this is an opportunity for us to take Those portions of that plan that are really relevant to land use and integrate them into our land use policies and regulations going forward uh we are a largely developed City so make recommendations for adding new homes and densification in single family zoned areas I'm going to have a couple of maps that show why that's really important uh develop recommendations and policies that promote fewer
010zoning districts or categories and contain more flexibility for reuse and adaptability over time uh we are not unique as a community that we have our regulatory framework has grown and expanded over time uh we've been Zoning for a 100 years here in the city and we've gone from seven pages in four zoning districts to over 300 pages in 34 zoning districts and with that can come uh challenges to allow the evolution and adaptability of properties and and uses in the city uh we're look we are challenged to develop a proposed land use framework that seeks to emphasize values over specified land use limitations and that is in short recognizing that even over a 20 to 30e Horizon this plan will not anticipate every evolution or need or change or decision that we're going to need
011to face and what this plan is going to attempt to do is if it can't solve all of those questions at least provide us with the decision Mak framework so that when we're faced with new challenges be it in geography or policy we have agreed about some of the important questions and standards that we should bring to that question so that we can collectively make that decision consistent to meet the goals that this plan identifies and then specifically to recommend policies that undo or seek to repair past land use policies and regulations that resulted in the exclusion of people based on race income or other characteristics um while we I have not yet found the examples of a specific zoning regulatory Authority here in the city we have definitely uh been involved in as a
012as an institution the city government and policies that have resulted in displacement of people of color uh in our community and this is an opportunity to not only make sure we don't do that in the future but what are the some L policies that we could look at to undo some of the harms of the past so we are largely wrapping up a lot of community engagement uh we've had a lot of conversations over a lot of format but a big piece of that was sharing some of the findings that we have found um relative to our plan so to start um our population has really slowed its growth compared to our surrounding area between 1970 and 2020 uh the county grew almost 60% we grew almost 25% um much much more uh th modled
013growth rate if you if you will and a big part of that growth in fact is students at the University of Michigan so the sort of permanent resident growth is probably even less uh more more of a severe uh difference between the surrounding area and more recently this is a 20y year Snapshot from 2 to 22 we are becoming a less familyfriendly Community um as the demographics would show us uh we are having significant increase is in our 65 and older population and in our College age 18 to 34 population but our under 18 and 35 to 64 sort of household sizes those are decreasing over that time period um again it's only a 20-year period but it's showing some very specific Trends about the makeup of our community going forward and that sort of
014notion of being familyfriendly has been coming up in a lot of different a lot of our engagement opportunities we're becoming a more diverse City uh the Asian and Hispanic populations are growing the white and black populations are declining as a percent of the total population um and 18% of the city uh is foreign born um so again that's I think logically that probably has a lot to do with people coming to the job center and the education center at the University of Michigan but some shifting demographics that we need to be aware of going forward going specific spefically to population uh this is just a couple of snapshots from 1960 to 2020 and the more intense colors here are the higher percentage of black population in those geographies of the city so on the left
015in 1960 you're seeing the KY town area and the what was the west side and now is referred to as water Hill that was the predominant black neighborhood in the city you can see as of 2020 that's been dispersed through a wide variety of factors some of those were initiatives of the city some of those were economics I sure some of that was actually those households sort of uh seeking some of the same frankly suburbanization that a lot of people were in communities across the country but it's a it was clearly um breaking up a a cohesive neighborhood to dis separate parts of the city and further out from the core of the city for sure we talked about uh the impact of the university and uh when we're talking about employment and jobs it
016is obviously the the the big influence we have 94,000 jobs in the city 37% of those are tied to the University of Michigan we are the fourth most economically dependent uh community on anchor institution employment in the country and more than three times the national average um we that is from a you know if I were to nerd out and go back to my planning education the first reaction that an urban planner has to that is we should really look at diversifying our economy you look at uh communities impacting like we did the loss of fiser when you have so much of your economic power tied to a single IND industry and that industry fails or leaves that can have a devastating impact on the community I don't think that's as much of a concern
017for us if we're going to be a company town you could do a lot worse than the University of Michigan that as an institution is going to be more stable probably going to weather recessions better but it just does it's obvious that there's a lot of economic Reliance on that as an institution in our community and of those 94,000 jobs if everybody in our community of working age were to work in those jobs we still wouldn't have enough people to fill all those jobs and we experience that on a regular basis uh 76,000 people come in to work to the city each day 18,000 leave each day and about 177,000 live and work in the city and so this is something that we're really um really focusing in on with from a scenario perspective we
018think this is a great opportunity to sort of test out not only some of the densification uh policies that we could be evolving in our city how those relate to sustainability particularly around Transportation opportunities um but these numbers also I anticipate to go up as you if anybody if anybody's paying attention to recent plans released by the University of Michigan for example they're proposing a lot of new growth on the University and a lot of new impact so I would fully impact these numbers to continue to climb and when we think about what our opportunity is from a land use policy I think it's really resonant that the city council was really having a lot of foresight recognizing that one of the pl places that we can sort of help to mitigate some of this
019impact is to provide a lot more housing opportunities in our community not everybody wants that doesn't live here and works here wants to live here but based on some survey data that we've been looking at about half of the people um anecdotally it's not scientific have expressed that yeah they would like to live in the city if they could but there's a lot of barriers for them then doing that affordability is uh probably Chief among them we are also a built out City uh so we have a couple of factors that really um drive us to really be thoughtful and creative and make decisions about every resource that we have available 42% of our partial acreage is tax exempt um the university is only about a third of that a little less than a third
020of that so that's that 42% is inclusive of not only the university but city parks uh Public Schools um that is a Big Slice of our property and not included in this presentation but what it means is our residential tax base really has to carry the water for services in this community because so much of that remaining land is residential land and so when you take out like if we were to take out R1 and R2 zoning and some of the other restricted property such as historic districts and flood planes and public RightWay that leaves us with about 133% of our land in order to have a lot of significant Redevelopment potential that's why it's really important that we look at all of our zoning districts uh one of the common conversations that we're happening
021a lot is that that directive of us looking for densification opportunities across the city Den city is sort of a loaded word and it means 10 different things to set in different people um and so what we're talking about is we are talking about every zoning in the city how can we add more housing opportunities how can we add more development opportunities that doesn't mean the same scale as aopo in every single District densy can take a lot of different forms from an accessory dwelling unit to a duplex or forel to uh town homes and you know condo buildings that were built in the 1920s and 30s and cities systematically sort of regulated them away in favor of just downtown core apartments and single family house housings over most of the city so it's really
022important that we look at all of our property um coincidentally when you look at this map the 133% that is sort ofe more prime or more perhaps appropriate for higher density development you're going to see a lot of overlap with recent changes that the city did in its regulatory framework to create and reone corridors to our Transit Corridor District this map highlights a lot of those areas where we have rezone them to emphasize few uh restrictions on vehicular parking and higher density and development potential particularly along our existing Transit routes in the city um so there's uh in addition to of course the downtown district which is highlighted here uh engagement as I said we've been going through engagement for the first half of this year uh we've had uh late last year for that
023matter this is uh uh the green Fair we had uh partnership with University of Michigan group for a house party week in September um we've held a series of meetings in the downtown library this was a really great opportunity for us to really focus not only on the comprehensive plan but some planning efforts that the Downtown Development Authority um had going on it was honestly one of the few times in my planning career where I was grateful that people walking in the door could provide input on multiple plans instead of just one plan um so I think it was a great success you see the a great turnout here represented in this at one of the one of the presentations that was held that week um we've also had a series of workshops in uh
024uh libraries across the city with some of the similar content um and we've heard um some similar themes through some of those so this first one is really focused on a lot on um I believe a lot of this rollup was from some of our downtown workshops and it's consistent with some of the directions that city council uh identified um more affordable and accessible housing um I think one of the really interesting things that's happening from an affordable housing perspective is that one of the reasons that I came to work for the city of an Harbor is that I was really excited that this was a community that has invested deep and and for a long time in affordable housing and for the majority of that time it was really focused on the lowest uh
025income levels or um 60% area immunity income and below is a common Target and what's happening over time is that more of uh I dare say more of you my peers um people and more employees at the city and and working in the city we are having more and more first uh direct uh anecdotes or connections or experience with housing affordability problems starting to push higher into income banss than they maybe traditionally did in the city and so that's great it's it's cultivating a lot of conversation and a lot of momentum to figure out what we can do on the supply side to help address that um whenever we're doing housing in the city I always tell people I can't guarantee a housing unit or a home built in the city is going to result
026in somebody riding their bike to work but it gives them the choice it gives them the choice to ride their bike it gives them the choice to walk gives them the choice to ride Transit that is not options available to somebody who is pick your direction of the city and building building or residing uh in a home however many miles away from the outside of the city um balancing our protection of trees and natural areas the city has a robust a natural features protection system there's no desire to diminish that um protections and the type of housing not only affordability but recognizing that for a long time uh communities built single family housing almost exclusively and recognizing that that's not a that's not always the right form that's going to work for everybody to be
027able to meet their housing goals or to even age in place um and we uh need to do a really good job of reaching out to people that we don't always hear from um there are members of our community that it's very easy for them to show up to a city council meeting or a Planning Commission meeting and there are those that it's really hard for them so we got to be very uh intentional and thoughtful to make sure we're hearing from A diversity of people when we're formulating these goals for the city this is uh organizing some of those those similar thoughts around those values affordability equity and sustain sustainability again these were primarily from the downtown um one of the things that we asked as part of the downtown uh exercises we it's
028kind of hard to see from this but you can vaguely see a couple of circles around the downtown and one of the exercises we asked uh participants at our downtown workshops was how do you envision these areas around downtown evolving should they be built up a lot built up little or stay about the same and you can see the breakdown the majority of people thought that they should be built up a lot these are great opportunities for us to realize more housing opportunities more housing typologies and in a great place in the downtown um close to job centers close to campus close to the most uh public transit choices uh and the coraly to this that I think is going to be a uh something that we need to address as part of the plan
029is when we start thinking about the downtown there are certain amenities and investments in infrastructure that has to happen with that on the public side that H cultivates that type of density and success thinking about uh effective sidewalks Planters uh adequate bike infrastructure those take uh public Investments and public maintenance Investments that is hard for the city to do across the board it's hard for the city of course to maintain 10 foot wide sidewalks everywhere in the city just to promote pedestrian friendliness so one of the things that we're really going to have to figure out is part of some of the land use recommendations that happen in and around the downtown are what are our strategies in order to also cultivate that infrastructure so that as the new dorms are being built on El
030the old elbel field what is the connection to downtown what is that infrastructure because it likely needs to evolve from a typical residential sidewalk to accommodate a much high volume of people and how are we going to fund that if it is deemed desirable Citywide we heard very similar themes more housing is really important again I think this goes hand inand with more and more people exp experiencing affordability challenges more bike lanes and pedestrian walkability there's a lot of conversation and recognition about and appreciation I would say for the success that the city has in building out some of the downtown low stress bike Network now I think it's appropriate for us to start prioritizing thinking about connecting that to other areas of the city uh for connectivity um how do we incentivize affordable and
031and and some of those missing middle housing for those that aren't planner nerds like me missing middle is just that it's uh something maybe in between uh uh an apartment building and a single family home maybe it's uh condos uh in a small building or row houses or a courtyard apartment just um a lot of uh the opportunity to sort of reintroduce things like duplexes and for plexes to neighborhoods that a lot of communities us included spent a 100 years making sure that you couldn't build in many of our neighborhoods anymore uh a livelier Riverfront and expansion of the downtown footprint that is uh something that we heard Citywide and similar to those that specific ex exercise I shared preservation of historic districts and green spaces the city has a an abundance of natural features
032and Parks um how do we protect those uh better public transit and accessibility for Mobility uh density actually drives this as well um we have a great great public transit system and it's responsive to the desire so when we're making land use decisions that help drive more demand and connection to Transit that will increase the opport that will increase the opportunity that that service will be augmented in frequency or span of service or timeliness uh more small businesses and neighborhood retail options again that is absolutely hand inand with density when you're looking at businesses the sort of well I will say the Romantic ideal of the neighborhood coffee shop or Corner Grocery Store or you name it neighborhood bar those depend on H rooftops and households and the more households that we bring to different
033areas of the city will increase the chances that those neighborhood scaled businesses will be able to succeed or to succeed long term of the this was highlighting some of the data from the uh not in the downtown workshops are around the city workshops 75% of respondents were supportive of two to four units per parcel in single family areas uh some were not supportive of adding more density um and these are some of the comments we heard uh concerns about parking you know how is that going to impact on street parking and accessibility of that to existing property owners um is that somehow going to change the character of neighborhoods not having them feel me feel familyfriendly anymore I'm not sure exactly what that me means um and would that potentially encourage developers to play a
034bigger role in neighborhoods um yeah May it's possible but then that's going to provide more housing opportunities for people to live in the city uh full stop uh one of the other things that's happened a lot when we're talking we've we found this is a common uh sort of feedback that we get or observation when we're talking and engaging with the public people see the Housing Development that's happening in the city and it doesn't feel like it's meeting our goals it seems like it's maybe very student focused um maybe it's very expensive condos and it can be very frustrating because when we you see that happening you're like I thought we cared about affordable housing none of these are affordable to me or none of these are places that I would necessarily live as a
035family here in the city um we're trying to find ways to communicate that that actually does have a positive impact when you think about a new uh 14 story student uh apartment building being constructed on South viu and say it has 350 bedrooms in it uh those 350 heads and beds are in our community they're here and without without that building spread those 350 students amongst our housing stock it does have Ripple effects it does have uh supply and demand effects on the cost of housing on the availability of housing on where that housing is located and so part of this is also having a lot of Education opportunities and just dialogue with the community about um how things how those products that don't seem like they're meeting our goal um actually can positively impact
036our goal beyond the fact that they're supporting things like the ability millage the sustainability millage and other things this is the overall project schedule here we are in summer uh we are like I we have spent you'll see most of the early this late last year and early this year has been focused on input and we are shifting into some ideation and Drafting and starting to develop the actual document um this summer we're going to be doing some focus groups one of them will be uh we anticipate being focused on natural features you're all going to have to probably arm muscle or something to figure out uh cuz we're going to want some representative of this group certainly to participate in that as well as others from across the community um generally speaking our goal
037is to be have a draft plan uh near the end of this year um I said you know public engagement was sort of the brainstorming the the goals the fears the Big Ideas the second half of this year is starting to be translate those into what are those implement M ation steps that we want to accom accomplish what are the specific recommendations that is also going to be validated through a lot of public engagement this in if I haven't emphasized it enough this is the community's plan it's not the planning Department's plan it's not the environmental commission's plan it is the community's plan and so we're going to be keeping opportunities all along the way for feedback and input on that process and then everything going according to my dream schedule plan that will pos
038position Us in an opportunity early next year to actually start the adoption process of the plan and that goes that is a process unto itself in addition to uh public hearings it will require uh approval by the Planning Commission who is the official author of this document and then they deliver it to the city council where the city council um gives it a a yay or nay um and becomes at that point the if if approved the official policy document of the city I will stop there if you have any questions or um and then if um barring any or after we resolve those I did receive those questions I said I'm happy to go through those with some thoughts I have on those but maybe it's a good time here to pause first sure
039uh commissioner Brown you have a question oh yeah thanks Brett that was a great presentation I think it touched all the bases but um when I think of affordable housing I think of three things um that is um you know um adus um co-ops which were very successful here in the 60s it looked like and um and boarding houses I was shocked to hear that boarding houses are illegal here in an Harbor so what can the city do to Ena well okay that's great if it's not true but um what can the city do to better enable um these kind of mechanisms well uh accessory dwelling units let me start there uh since 2016 when we first enabled accessory dwelling units uh the city council has made uh I think two subsequent modifications to that
040each time making it them a little bit less restrictive to hopefully encourage more um but uh we are at around 50 in the community since that time so we have I think we've had some success in progressively making those a little bit more more real but I think there's a lot more opportunities for us to look at that uh we recently actually submitted a a grant proposal that we haven't heard from but part of that is actually is a goal of that is to develop pre-designed and building department approved accessory dwelling unit plans that any property owner could just download uh you know you could apply for an Adu permit click I want I want Adu permit a it's been it's been already validated to me code still obviously some specific site standards that would
041have to be applied to that but we think that is another opportunity to maybe reduce the barrier of Entry uh for that um and then other communities have gotten into financing opportunities that's not really land use policy but that would be another opportunity for us to explore to see if there's some opportunities if it's not the city maybe partnering with local banks to try to uh reduce some of that burden as it relates to the co-ops and uh boarding houses uh part of that 100-year history of zoning is this a lot of our regulatory framework got very anti- student a lot of our regulations became very protective of keeping students in parts of the city and not letting them move to other parts of the city and part of that was taking uh land uses
042like fraternities and S sororities and Cooperative housing and restricting where and how they can be located in the city um and so yeah we've had a lot of conversations I think that uh we're fortunate here in the in our community to have an active and successful Cooperative housing uh organization um and I fully anticipate that to be part of it it it can be challenging because when we're doing land use regulations we try to be very a agnostic between when you're talking about sort of the ownership Arrangements that is a house is a house I don't care if it's rented I don't care if it's own or occupied a house is a house likewise a uh Cooperative is group housing like a boarding house is group housing like a fraternity or sorority is group housing
043and we've regulated those in that same way but because of them being lumped together I I can't speak for all all the previous planning Commissioners and city councils but I think that's how we got to our regulatory framework because they look alike on paper from a legal regulatory perspective and there was a fear of fraternities and sororities expanding into too widely throughout the city but um I it's definitely on the table and I I think that it's an opportunity for us to look at oh thanks what about boarding houses uh same thing they're uh they're group housing they're restricted in the same way we require uh special exception uses for them um we really restrict the geography of where they can be located for all of those uses thanks commissioner Gruber thank you Brett this
044is really great information and this is an area where I admittedly have a lot to learn and I think I learned a lot so thanks I'm excited about this got a lot to learn too my question is um if you have thoughts on you you mentioned the familyfriendly N decreasing and we're losing families and I am a mom so I'm part of that population and I'm curious how you if you have thoughts on how the Ann Arbor Public School system challenges that are happening right now the financial crisis how that might compound this and if you are bringing aaps to the table to have them I don't know I don't know what that how that would work but I worry that that that challenge will mean fewer families coming to an arbor and more families
045leaving an arbor um well let me I think there there is opportunity let me let me sort of let me sort of skater on your question more broadly I think it's natural to ask how are we partnering with Anar Public Schools how are we partnering with the University of Michigan and I want to be clear this plan doesn't have a lot of shared goals in it those are entities that each have their own sort of focus missions and my mission is land use regulation you know my mission is I want this document to give me the to-do list over the next three years of immediate moderate and long-term things that we want to do to make sure that the things that are getting built and the infrastructure that's getting installed in our community meet our
046goals as it relates to familyfriendly I don't know time will tell it it is it is hard to know because I would say from a planning perspective for a long time an public schools have actually been a source of driving the unaffordability of our community and I know that there's some challenges there now um I suspect that there are going to be some short-term pain or moderate term pain but at their core it's a a functional organization with resources that probably a lot of other school districts would give a right eye for that don't have um so I suspect that it could impact that I I can't speak for those families but the one thing that is additionally impacting that now is even if that's not a barrier for you it's hard for you to
047find a home that you can afford at times in the city now so that's a place that I can work on I'm not that could very well be a challenge but at a minimum I think this opportunity is more about what are we doing about our housing stock so that we don't have two barriers if it ends up being one the short is I don't know it could but we've got other policy issues that I think we should work on to address to make sure we're not duplicating those challenges long term thank you commissioner mky thank you Brett and thank you Jamie for joining us this evening um just one question for clarification purposes I might have some comments later depending on time but the 133% of land that's available for redevelopment does that I
048I took your comments earlier to mean that that includes the tc1 uh areas um that's basically all of our commercial Industrial Research districts everything but R1 R2 and public land so that includes also then the surface parking lots and things like that as well uh those would be that's a good question probably depends where they where they are depends on where they are most of we over time we've rezone a lot of our we have we actually have a parking District uh we used to like parking so much that we created its own district with that's the only thing you can do in it um and we've rezoned some of those but then in the downtown some of the the public parking that the city has actually been focused on to sort of reapply for
049affordable housing development those are offen Zone D1 D2 so um generally speak yeah generally that what that represents is pulling out the tax exempt it's pulling out flood planes historic districts sort of areas that add a scarcity or a limitation to what can be realized and then meant to also emphasize that most of our city is zoned R1 and R2 that's single family and duplex and for us not to look at that as an opportunity to change we're we're putting a hand behind our back to reach our goals yeah okay thanks very much yeah I'll just add Jamie did you know on the zoning categories that were included yeah so you know that that 13% is like a very rough calculation um but the the way that analysis was done it was using zoning categories
050so if parking happened to lay in one of those categories that was included it would be in it um which you know honestly most of the park surface parking lots are probably in one of those commercial districts and not necessarily in a residential district so the answer is yes and no did just quickly the uh the county has a couple of surface parking lots are those would that be included like in the 133% or would that be some some other zoning area they probably are based on their location okay thanks you have a line there to have something done there commissioner Mitchell uh thanks for this Brett um I want to um start our Direction into talking about some natural features kinds of things but before then um I I just want to um get
051a sense from you how the comprehensive plan will relate to the a20 plan and measures of carbon emissions yeah that's uh one of the specific directions that city council tasked us with um the a20 plan has what I would say are some very relevant to land use policy and planning recommendations and it has some that are not what we are what Our intention is to make sure that we are incorporating those appropo to land use fully into our comprehensive plan so that we have the benefit of appropriately using those for our land use policym going forward I don't anticipate just well let me back up this is a community document I am not sitting here drafting it I don't anticipate it just being like let's add that as appendix a to the plan I do
052anticipate us spending some time to identify those specific land use relevant you know for example the the city uh a recommendation for the city to um bulk purchase EV Chargers in order for to reduce the cost and accessibility for those that is us making Financial incentives to that that is different from what is our desire for when a development happens how many EV Chargers are required if any regardless of the mechanisms of funding them we would never put a land use category in there that says if if the city happens to have some in a warehouse you are required to do three EV Chargers so that's bifurcating the we want EV Chargers and those have been Incorporated in our regulations but that recommendation of the a20 plan is probably not comprehensive plan worthy that is
053an incentive a financing mechanism the comprehensive plan will say how are we doing on EV parking do we want to go further on that do we want to back off because we've had challenges so it the I I Envision taking the pieces out of that plan that are core to land use policy and Regulation and fully incorporating those into the comprehensive plan which they are not today not sure that meas that matches the carbon measurement but go ahead that's fine thanks so Erin do you want to bring up the list of questions on natural features and we can just kind of go through those I know Brett kind of answered some of them during the conversation but I think that might just have them if it's okay I could if I could just go through
054them and yeah that works okay great uh so uh the first question was what is the timing the process of the natural features section um I we we talked about this with the calendar it's no different than the plan um I anticipate from basically the summer to the end of this year we're going to be drafting we are going to be drafting the entirety of the plan and so natural features is going to be part of that we are not and we are trying very hard to think about this holistically when we're talking about natural features we are not going to be doing that independent of what does that mean for Equity what does that mean for sustainability what does that mean for adding densification so um we are very intentionally trying to bring this
055plan together at the same time so specifically the timing and process drafting through the rest of this calendar year with the hopes of a draft ready to start considering for adoption in early 2025 I'll keep going unless somebody yells at me all right uh how uh that relates to the question about how are we going to build time in the work plan to update the natural features element I I want to be clear this plan is intended to replace five documents that are currently part of our comprehensive plan currently the city has eight plans that have all been ad adopted as our comprehensive plan that's about I don't know 800,000 pages eight different documents that have inconsistencies in them and so for you as a resident or a property owner or a policy maker it's
056really challenging for you to say does this meet our goals or not well let me first go through these eight documents to see what if it does or not and where there might be a question of interpretation which one do I go with so a big part of this is trying to consolidate that Canon of policy documents into a smaller accessible for not only you for the council for the Planning Commission for the public to understand what the city's priorities are so I want to be clear when we're talking about a natural features element or updating the natural features plan it is going to be a comprehensive plan it will address natural features it's going to address land use it's going to be it's going to address transportation to some regard uh it's going to
057address a lot of things and our goal is to make that an ex again a smaller singular accessible document that still articulates our goals still articulates our priorities for how we're going to achieve those goals but it's something that is less burdensome than going to the website now and having to click through eight documents don't even get me started on our 28 approved resource documents John mki I think one of those documents is the sustainability framework is that correct that's right this one's anticipated to be replaced okay so that would be then replaced by or incorporated into the new comprehensive plan is there any element of that that right now seems to be um Less in favor uh than what it was at the time of adoption or we not at a point yet where
058we have really sort of force ranked some of the the priorities or anything like that well the sustainability framework it some of you are probably here I was not when that was adopted but I read the sustainability framework as as intending to be an organizing structure for other plans rather than a document policy document unto itself I I don't think anything there has fallen out of favor but I think a lot of those things lack specificity um I I will tell you when we are um having Community conversations about tc1 zoning and the opportunity to add more housing along corridors I can I could reference in the sustainability framework well this calls for more a variety of housing types it's a pretty broad statement that doesn't always resonate with the people on the other side
059of that conversation who might be really scared about the changing conditions of their neighborhood so um I don't think anything there is out of favor but I don't think it provides much specificity for us to be making regulatory changes to advance them yeah I will just add at least my understanding of sustainability framework is it it almost in a ways does what Brett was just describing and that it was trying to take goals and values about sustainability across a variety of plans and compile it into one area so I think it could be useful for us to kind of look at it from that lens and think about like what are some of these broader goals that kind of apply to all these plans that that Brett's been talking about oh the next question I
060had was what jurisdictions have exemplary natural features protections built into their code and comprehensive plan uh n Arbor is actually pretty strong um the work of of my predecessors and you and your predecessors have resulted in a regulatory framework that is pretty robust um I we have not I I don't sit here and tell you that I have my eye on the city of bold or the city of Seattle as the model for it um I will say that uh from my experience on the development side um we have we protect a lot of natural features a lot of Natural Resources um I don't come to this with the intention that we need to back off that I don't hear that um you know there's members of city council here I don't think that was
061part of their Direction not that they can speak for the entirety of the council um um I I don't think that there's intention to uh lessen the protections that we have in place um likewise I want to be honest I don't hear a lot of intention to advance or protect more um that is that is a balance of meeting a lot of these goals around sustainability and new housing density and the like and so um so in short I don't know what those plans are if but I would sort of turn that around if there are plans that you think are particular particularly um excellent that you think that you would like us to make sure that we're referencing um that's why we're we're here to listen um there was a reference to the Seattle
062streetscape plan uh I don't know if that where that note came from um I happen I I am familiar with that because we actually looked at that when we were doing our tc1 zoning and some of our um trying to find the right balances of how we uh protect or use right of way in order to accomplish long-term multimodal which is really challenging in a built out Corridor um but tell us if you have them now um we'd love to have those resources tell us which ones are great and ideally why they resonate with you what is it about them that is it a format is it the way it uh communicates why it's important is it the areas of focus um happy to look at those and you don't have to tell me now
063you can um Aaron literally pull up my teams and bother me as much as she wants as those come in to her was the protection of natural features and the increase in biodiversity or ecosystem Services communicated as a priority by for the higher consultant it wasn't but I this question really got Jamie and I sort of thinking a lot and one of the it it could be it could be a a way that we frame our natural resources PRI prorities going forward um but it's interesting that it got us thinking about we're hearing choice and diversity in a lot of threads of the comprehensive plan you know you just listen to me drwn on and on about choice and diversity of housing um our transportation plan has choice and diversity of Transportation options um we
064are uh we as part of our consultant team we have uh retail strategist and economic analysis there's a lot of talk about the diversity of businesses I think people are seeing uh while not unique to n Arbor sort of the chain ification of a lot of downtowns ours included um there's a desire for diversification of businesses and so um the short is no it wasn't directed to us as a priority um but again if that is a a framing of how we should be thinking about that I think it's in line with a lot of the other subject areas of the comprehensive plan um that we'll be wrestling with over the course of the year related did uh the city council direct any specific policy requirements to natural features no um neither to relax them
065nor to expand them so again I want to reemphasize my interpretation of that is this is a community that values natural features we have a robust protection I see that as the base um I am not we have not heard a lot of we need to double that or triple that I want want to be clear with our public conversations but no there was not specific and I don't think that that means that it's not valuable to the planning commissioner of the city council I think it's a recognition that it's something that has to be considered in the balance of all the other goals that we're looking for here so Brett you missed a question uh what groups will be included in the natural features group meeting um I don't know yet but as I
066mentioned you are going to be included in the National features focus group uh we're anticipating focus groups around natural features around sustainability and around equity and am I missing one Jamie um we're thinking maybe like affordability or housing something housing yeah yeah so these will be groups that um I am I'm going to be appointing them to sort of help advise this process they'll probably be in the 8 to 12 people they'll probably meet three times over the course of summer to fall and those will be places those will be groups that we will be reaching out to to say all right this is this is how we think natural features affordability sustainability these are some of the important points that we think need to be included in the comprehensive plan it's not going to
067be deciding that but it's going to be helping us to frame that to draft it to edit it so that when we start those Community conversations they are uh well thought out they're logical and they seem to reflect important priorities for us to go forward um I I will tell you that I have been sort of thinking about some names I'm welcome welcome for suggestions on this um but a representative from this group will definitely be a part of the natural features focus group the one I missed that's it yeah thanks all right uh uh the next I'm putting I've sort of pulled two questions and I'm answering them at the same time um When developing the new natural features section can we use improving biodiversity as an overall guiding principle I sort of addressed
068that before but also invasive species removal possible credit or other incentives uh yes on both um one of the things I I talked about biodiversity could be a part of that it's like I said it's consistent with how we're thinking about a lot of different facets of our land use policy um invasive species removal um you the question was about possible credit or incentives I'd be curious what you mean by that um I I will tell you one of the things that's been happening at a staff level and this I think will be vetted with the focus group once that's established is we have a we have a lot of suburban Antiquated old uh uh land use regulations that emphasize open space um we have districts that require 60% open space and not always but
069a lot of times that results in lawn area and one of the things that we've started to talk about just at the consultant team table with um is is that really important that important to us like all of you probably know this better than I do but my training tells me that a mode Lawn isn't much better than a parking lot when you when you come to when you're talking infiltration and and ecological impact and so we recently had a project where as part of the requirements for it was to maintain a portion in a truly naturalized area um it was an area that had a very significant Bur Oak there was a lot of seedlings there and so part of that plan was let's actually protect that in a very naturalized area when we
070say you're keeping that open we don't mean you're going to seed it we mean you're going to keep it as a naturalized area and so one of the things that I think we are exploring is maybe it's not so much about the quantity of the open space but rather the quality of the open space um and so uh with that I don't know if that is resonant with you but I'm curious when you're talking about invasive species removal that seems very um component to that part of that would be the maintenance making sure those areas don't get overrun with invasive species but I curious just to hear a little bit more I don't know if that was anybody particular what was that kind of what was driving the question and more specifically what would you
071envision for credits or incentives if that were achieved well I came up in the biodiversity work group and we know there's a a cost today if people take out trees during development and they were're trying to figure out what do we do with invasive species so if we can have a cost for a tree we can give them a credit if they take out a Buckthorn tree you know maybe the same type of formula based on diameter something like that we're not we didn't get into the details how that credit would work or anything like that but it was just kind of a you know in the biodivers work group we talk a lot about invasive species in our parks in our nature areas we also know our parks in our nature areas are a
072small percentage of the land in the city so how do we address the big percentage of the land which is property residential property development things like that so this was just a something we could look at on that side that would go that way you you're right as far as turf grass is equal to Asphalt yeah yeah so you might I don't want to say you might be surprised but often with our development proposals actually as part of a requirement of approved site plan is invasive species do have to be removed as part of that that is often part of the approved plan if we identify that um I will be honest the long-term maintenance of that is probably less successful but it we actually pretty frequently at the time of completion that is one
073of the things we're often verifying is that has uh has invasive species identified been removed uh from that so um so sometimes that's just required as part of our development review process but I appreciate that I think it sounds like sort of what the staff conversation is probably pretty consistent with that question is like how do we get a how do we find ways to incentivize and ensure longer term maintenance of quality ecological areas as opposed to superficial uh if F like lawn areas yes exactly yeah um will the format of the new uh naal features section follow the format of the existing National features master plan document or the format in the current UDC probably not either um the UDC is a regulatory framework the N 204 uh natural features master plan I think
074not speaking to contact content it that document led us to where we are now with uh pretty robust tree cover compared to other communities a pretty robust flood plane uh regulatory framework that puts us in a good position relative to comparable communities um but I think to my point about being a more accessible more understandable more clear document I don't anticipate it looking like the 2004 document but again if there are documents that speak to you as commission members that you think man I wish we could do something like that send them our way this is the time where we're starting to marry content with format both are important so that we do end up with a document that not only says what we wanted to say but it it's understandable and it conveys the
075information to a wide audience so um so no but that's where we're at now this a great time to post the question if you see examples we want to we want to see them we want to hear from you about what they are uh will the content in the new current natural features master plan and the UDC natural features section be included in the new document um to be determined again I I want to be clear I'm starting we're starting from the framework that we have a very robust natural features protection framework don't anticipate uh reducing that so at a minimum yes you're going to see though that reflected there um that could be wrong I could be wrong we could go out to the community and they say I don't I don't care about
076Woodlands you know screw it um I don't think that's the case this is a community that's always valued those natural features so at a minimum you are going to see some of those same categories reflected but again this is an opportunity if there's something not there um that's tell us what's missing out of that if that's reflected in other plans that's something we can look at as we start looking at natural features though I just want to be honest that I think that's where we're going to we're going to have to as a community process how does that relate to our other goals of densification how does that relate to our other goals of affordability and sometimes we can't have it all sometimes we have to find tradeoffs we're finding that a lot with development
077as it relates to sustainability features having an affordable development that is also fully electric or that is geothermal those can add challenges one to another they're possible but sometimes we can't have it all and so part of this is if we want to start adding more robust natural features protections than what we do or new categories that's where I think we're going to have to have a lot of the conversation about how holistically it balances with some of our goals uh you specifically talked about uh to that end I think uh Native Forest fragments qualified Urban Woodlands Heritage trees rare and threatened species again the question is evolving what protections we have versus adding new ones rare and threatens we have endangered species we have Landmark trees versus Heritage trees um there's also a couple
078questions relative to applying those standards to single family or fourplex properties um not currently considering that uh those natural features come into play when we're doing site plan review that does result in some natural features that are not protected at the single family and fourplex level um that is not it's not something that I'm actively looking at um so it would be a very consistent application of those protections as we exist today going forward but again that's part of this conversation going forward uh would a woodland management plan be required for any development that requires removal of a native Forest fragment or qualified Woodlands I don't know I think that we don't require it now we could I think if we are going to get in the business of trying to cultivate higher quality areas
079rather than quantity of areas we will need some sort of mechanism whether it's wood Woodlands or other areas so I do see that there's going to be an opportunity to do something in that realm if we identify a natural area we're going to have to find the mechanism to make sure it's not a one-time removal of invasive species but an ongoing removal of invasive species and we're actually going to be talking there is talk about how this impacts public property we're actually going to be sitting down uh next mid July with that team because we're going to we need to learn a lot about some of the frankly the cost implications of that we're going to sort of try to dive into what is the cost to establish and maintain a a unit of lawn
080versus a unit of forest fragment that is routinely removed of invasive species we're going to have to wrestle with that if we also want to wrestle with things like affordability so I don't know about specifically a woodland management plan but as we try to cultivate more higher quality spaces whether it's a plan or regulations we're going to have to figure out a way to make sure that we're achieving that uh in order to be successful so I think it'll it's probably something very similar to a woodwind management plan but it might have broader implications than just uh Forest fragments it might just be other natural features that are of concern to us uh the new storm water management regulations reduced the emphasis on vegetative methods of storm water management in the city right of way
081will the natural feature section be enhanced to make sure that there isn't a gap I don't know exactly what you mean by Gap but the right of way and the private property will continue to be regulated separately our land use uh our UDC applies to private property not public property but the comprehensive plan does advise not only on private property but on infrastructure Investments so um that is something that we can look at I know you guys have had a lot more conversation on that than I have um but uh generally we have uh very robust uh storm water as it applies to private property um I'm sure you're aware we have I think we're the second only to Midland is as far as in the state of Michigan our community rating system so we
082have we are we have done a lot of work as a community in the storm waterer realm uh and it's reflected in some uh benefits to community members particularly who are in the flood plane uh if um develops metrics to check improvements in biodiversity would Ann aror considering partnering with um on the metrics yes yeah of course it's just a question of resources and who's going to do it but um yeah you know those things take commitment but of course um um i' love the opportunity to partner with u ofm more on land use policy but and we've had some successes and we've had some what's the opposite of successes uh but um yeah of course um I think there there's great opportunity I I I don't say that because our missions are different that
083there's animosity there or that we don't find Partnerships we do we partner with them on on a lot it doesn't always relate to single unified policy goals around land use and development um but yeah that'll be we talked about uh single to uh fourplex um will there be protection for natural features not prop not as currently proposed right now not we're not envisioning any change to that again the plans in its development stage that could evolve but I think that if we are going to be trying to particularly look at single family uh and duplex districts for opportunities for infill that could manifest and allowing multiple units in those District it could manifest in different lot sizes um I do think that that could result in some loss of trees um but that's one of
084those that's one of those trade-offs that we're going to have to wrestle with as a community do we want to provide more opportunity uh for that development to happen um and The Sweet Spot is of course to make sure that we're providing a lot of flexible options so that we're providing the most flexibility so we can achieve both you know it maybe it's not just duplexes and fourplexes maybe it's Cottages you can develop a single family lot into small cottages and they can be arranged around a sensitive natural resource but but generally um right now I don't Envision a change to that so no and I think that is the end of the questions other than not going through every all the specific um current natural features plan sections so who else has questions for
085Brett while we have him here commissioner Mery if I may thank you Brett I'll speak for myself uh I think the city both with a small c and a Capital C is fortunate to have you so thanks for all your work um I uh have maybe two comments um that you can respond to um the first is uh when we talk about affordability you talked about affordability for example sustainability and affordability one of the things that is never included in those calculations almost never is the social cost to carbon and and that's just I don't know how we address that but it's it you know when we talk about uh natural natur gas versus all electric or any other kinds of choices we we almost never include the social cost to carbon and I don't
086know if Council can address that uh I know that the university in its uh pccn recommendations is looked at um applying some type of uh carbon fee or carbon cost in in in uh its activities I don't think it's gone anywhere but it just seems to me that's a big gap um across the board and that's not limited to to the city of an Harbor um second comment I want to pick up on you mentioned uh what's going on down at elbow field earlier I think it's great that that's being considered I mean that could be when it's all built out another 4,000 beds down there or 5,000 maybe even um and I just hope uh and maybe this is again something Council can influence that the university in the city really have formal processes
087um that ordinate their campus plan and the city's comprehensive plan it seems like there's so many opportunities for win-win um particularly for example just in transit whether it's biking or walking um River Crossings um What U ofm is planning with their um uh what do they call their their their people mover thing that's going to be a monor rail or something like that bus Rapid Transit and it just it just seems to me that that's something that uh is really really important so you can respond to those but I just wanted to emphasize those two points and that's all from my side for tonight thanks uh I don't profess to be an I know I will just say after a20 we we have explored numerous ways to try to I don't want to say gamify
088but make it easier to understand the tradeoffs with carbon as it relates to developments and I'll be honest we can't always that's not always a factor and whether it meets our code or not but it's it's really challenging I've I've had several conversations with our OSI staff who I greatly respect and the answer is always it depends um so um I I can't provide anything else on that as it relates to the University of Michigan yeah I agree and I don't want to over emphasize we do have a lot of Partnerships you know when you're talking about transportation we are making we're having a lot of conversations about the use of public right of way and and how those were used and when they're reconfigured whether it's Bridges to the hospital or the presence of
089a brt operating on the street there are a lot of conversations so um I would generally say I I don't profess that I've had a 20 or 30y year history here in this community but I see a lot of Partnerships happening I see it improving I see it as a slow a slow build and um we're probably better now than we were 5 years ago than we were 10 years ago but yeah I I I think if we could if we were just to all sit on our back porch and sketch out why isn't this happening more collaboratively it's it's probably still short of that commissioner Mitchell thanks um I just want to uh ask one specific question and then a broad kind of thing and that is um is there any plan to assess
090excuse me heat island effects relating to the development that um is planned with the densification um and that could be across the city things I assume will be changing we um I think that is it's not something that we've done analysis on but we could definitely look at it I mean we've had we've had some regulatory changes over time I think sort of obtusely relative to that we started uh measuring our parking areas and when you have parking areas we require So Much landscaping now and trees within those parking areas so I think that's probably it's it is probably a good thing for us to analyze is that still the the right way to approach that um it is it is hard to not impossible but how does how does how do those policy decisions
091Urban heat Islands going to have an impact across the city how do we translate that to what's happening on this one parcel um that can be challenging but yeah I think it's something we can take a look at for sure sure and I think that is probably um not only near and dear to this group but also uh the sustainability framework as well thank you yeah I saw um some information about using GIS to map you know so that could be done progressively right and you could track it over time um so the the last thing my broad thing that I um found as I was trying to get ready for this meeting is that this really resonated with me as just a quote from a group called Geo designing nature into cities um and
092that is nature is not optional it's absolutely essential to Leading a meaningful and healthy life and I think that's what you want to plan for us right that that the city wants to have a a place where it's comfortable and nature is definitely a part of that and will be part of keeping people in an area part of what becomes you know our lives so that's that's all I don't necessarily expect you to comment but want to toss that out there commissioner Graham thank you Mr Leonard I'm very happy you came and talk to us I I wanted to listen to you for quite some time actually well I never hear that um you have couched um the protection of natural Fe features as kind of a zero sum game but it really hasn't been
093anywhere long has it uh I don't I I don't mean to say it's a zero some game I mean to say that I think that we have achieved a level of protection of natural features that is um I use your term adequate remarkable successful um and I don't think that there is any intention to uh compromise that at least speaking from my my team's perspective I think that as we consider going further um be it in categories or uh extent um I do think that they weren't really challenging conversations as it relates to a lot of goals in the city and so um maybe that's the definition of zero s that's not how I intend it it's it's to recog I I wanted to um I'm starting from the perspective of my experience and talking
094with petitioners that we have a robust framework um that has resulted I think in a lot of the nature that uh commissioner Mitchell was referencing um and just like sustainability measures there are there are trade-offs and balances that we're going to have to consider if we want to go further along those but it's never been true actually that we have essentially asked petitioners to identify the natural features on their site and then you shall not touch it's always been true that in the planning process we have balanced what they have um agreed to keep with what they've uh needed to take yeah and that balancing process has included lots of other considerations yeah and what then is required is mitigation at a modest cost actually we've never had a procedure in an arbor where there's
095a big tree and you can't touch it ever right that's correct yeah and I think so let me ask you if the greatest number of valuable trees and let's call them Landmark or Heritage are being lost on single two and four Family Properties without any mitigation then does that change how you balance things and by being unintended yeah single family house gets torn down a new house that's larger gets built there's a perimeter of that footprint I I think no regulatory no regulatory application where trees that aren't taken for the new footprint are protected unlike commercial property I think it's a balance I think if we were to say if if your house has a landmarker or Heritage Tree on it and you want to um you desire to build an addition maybe you want
096to build an addition because maybe you just want an addition because you want uh a bigger kitchen maybe you want to build an addition because you have a family member that can no longer go upstairs and they need an at grade H and so for us it is a policy decision for us to say um if if that addition requires you to remove that Landmark tree right now you can remove it because it's single family and it's not required for us to add that that is a policy decision that's going to add uh a mitigation cost to that same project so in that case in one case you can remove it and accommodate your desired Improvement of your property in the other case you can do the same but it's going to be more costly
097and so I think the balance there is how do we balance affordability with the remov of that resource and there there there is a tradeoff there for sure modest one yes but the real issue is the six trees that are outside the footprint of that addition they get killed by the builders because there's no regulatory framework that requires them not to kill them this is what's happening and uh I appreciate you don't want to more complicate natural features parts of your life but um uh stuff's going on out there that needs balancing and uh I want to be clear a lot of unintentional loss yeah I am not I'm not writing it now thank you this part of it is we want to hear that perspective what I'm hearing from you I don't know if
098the balance of the group is of agreement of that but what that comment is is we should regulate all natural features or just trees on all properties well if there's a wetland in somebody's backyard and they build their addition right up to the edge of the Wetland they're really intruding on that natural feature we don't have adequate buffers so I mean we can get into the rest of them but the main deal in an arbor are trees and especially Heritage trees that means native large trees and they're very fragile about how things happen on their Roots so I I you know there is never been a natural features ordinance in an arbor what we have done is in a very balanced way tried to conserve them and The Balancing Act is a modest mitigation charge
099if you don't want to it's never been no just setting the record straight thank you very much thank you commissioner Dale let's move on I want to like be clear that what I'm saying is not a solution to what Christopher commissioner Graham is saying um but and it's just a comment not a question but I think understanding they would take a lot of resources I think ultimately I really think it would be fantastic to have some sort of um comprehensive inventory of all of our ecosystem services not just you know trees or whatever including on private land and just have like a very fantastic map that basically allows us to say these are the areas that are high priority because of the ecosystem Services they provide or you know it actually helps affect our resiliency
100of our communities and I don't know if there like you know like people are talking about having something that is a you know incentive base or just Community awareness I don't know how how it happens in implementation but I I think starting with something that is like a very good a very good mapping resource that actually can relate to being something that ends up being almost like a quality index that can be use in the decision-making Matrix when it comes to any property um and how that is implemented I don't know but I think it speaks of what you're saying about like all green space is not is not equal and I think that there's this false tonomy between density and affordability and maintaining some of those nature-based uh Solutions you know for storm water
101and everything else that that I don't think it needs to be but I think that it's starting to look at how do you prioritize the very high quality areas and take that into consideration in sort of a formalized way um and I don't know if that that's something that's already being done to a greater degree than I'm aware of but well I don't want to suggest that it's always incompatible but they they can be incompatible and so finding that regulatory framework um when we're talking about that and identifying sensitive areas uh we we can do that we have to Define why we would regulate your home different than Mr Grahams home based based on that and so that that can be done um and as it relates to the mapping I don't think it's all
102the resources this group might know more than I do but I think that the city has made some progress on an urban forestry plan I don't know if that's just publicly uh owned inventory trees or all but um I mean I think that's um but I'm I'm certain it's not all natural features for sure does anybody else have questions and while you're thinking about Brett you mentioned the um the environmental commission would have somebody at the focus groups is that one person or how many people are you thinking one for now I'll get back to you if I'll open it up okay you all talk together if I one you'll share right oh yeah we all have the same opinion all right all right I'm going to pick though you guys gotta figure that out
103we'll take care of that part anybody else have questions while he's here and thank you very much Brett for a very good conversation uh my pleasure well if anybody's thinking for last questions um as I said uh share any thoughts ideas Mr Graham I'm just telling you sort of where I'm at I I take that feedback thank thank you I'm just uh that's part of this process where we want to listen to folks um uh if you have examples of plans that resonate with you please share them we want this is going to be the community's plan and um I'm I'm trying hard to deliver that but uh and we're talking to a lot of people and you're part of that so if you have examples please do share those if you have other thoughts
104please don't hesitate to share them you can always easily uh share them with Aaron or even easier right to my hot little inbox planning a2gov.org um all of your thoughts wishes desires questions planning related can always be uh addressed there and I would be remiss uh council member man and Dish I hope I didn't uh misattribute any of your tensions of uh comprehensive plan resolutions um thank you thank you all right thanks Brett thank you Brett and Jamie so our next agenda topic is to review the um questions about the anerobic digestor presentation that went to the energy commission and I know I sent some to Aaron and I know Bridget sent some to Aaron um are there other questions that people would like to get answered and then we can just consolidate that and
105move on uh Lisa dish commissioner council member dish yeah I I forgot to do this but um I really did want a more thorough answer to the question that commissioner Mery asked which is that um you know if we took the financial piece out of the picture um which of the which of the energy prod you know production outcomes benefits us more and I'm thinking of this especially right now because we're um debating the Southtown project uh Amendment and if we had a a a source you know of energy from waste from you know the endless and ever expanding source of we that this would be that would be a real alternative um that would benefit a number of green projects like this and so I I'm I think Mr mki you you asked your
106question better than I could possibly reiterate it so I'm really hoping that and I felt like you got an answer but it wasn't as deep because the question was complex and so I don't think the person could answer on their feet so I I would I'm very curious to hear more about that commissioner mki uh I think Lisa you you rephrase my question well I mean I think um this is um certainly an opportunity I mean humans we humans generate waste and the question is what is what is the best use of that waste and um I I think my without having studied this but just as a gut sense and having sat through the presentation this is um a good option maybe even the best option um this differs from other waste um as
107uh you and I were in a in a in an email thread related to Southtown um and I think this is you know certainly differentiated from Kayo waste um you know that that's that's completely different um I have two concerns that I expressed in the other meeting that I want to make sure uh the group that's evaluating this process addresses um first of all relates to one topic that we've addressed in this group and that is the question of P so we all recall that it was like in December of last year we had a presentation um from public services where we agreed with um their intent to stop taking waste and distributing it on agricultural Fields because of concerns about pasas and it is now being land filed and so the question is um
108if we go to a biodigestor what happens to P that's obviously in that waste I mean we know it's in there right now that's why we took the action that we took and does that indiscriminately then um simply re-enter the environment and what are the consequences of that and frankly what what are the better Alternatives and the other question that I posed that to me is really important I posed a number of them um was question of space so the the city has evaluated a biogest desert twice in the past um at uh at the current facility um at the current wrrf facility and one of the reasons for not pursuing it in the past only one was space there was another one where because of space The Proposal was to truck the waste offsite
109to an off-site biodigestor which would have added a lot of cost but I'm concerned that given what we just talked about given the University's plans which we also talked about which includes a lot of new housing both down in the eel field area as well as proposals for housing along Plymouth Road and potentially along Fuller Road that um if the city indeed does grow and we said we didn't have enough space in the past how do we have enough space now for a biodigestor so uh I may have mentioned that uh that one one process apparently has been um dropped and that has created some new space at the facility but I hope that the city investigates both of those very very closely as well as the one that you mentioned I mean what do
110we do with this waste um that is sustainable in all regards where we're maybe hopefully generating energy um we're we're doing it with a waist stream that we otherwise don't know what to do with but we have to address that in a way where we also uh capture and address the concerns related to P who else has questions or comments commissioner Mitchell you're on mute you're muted sorry um I the I'm going to send in some of my minor kind of questions but I think I want to understand even consistent with what commissioner mki was asking just the the financials relating to this um and one it's like because it appears that this can be a revenue stream related to the um the biog gas so it' be helpful to understand that um and I
111want to understand also whether there is a safety risk at all for running a biod digester because it is a gas um that can be um explosive as I understand um so that along with assuring um that if it is used that the hyip lines don't leak the methane which we all know is a serious um greenhouse gas Rita when I look at the um Financial models it looks like the RNG scenario cost about 7 million more but generates more annual profit from selling the natural gas but we can have make them clarify that that's what it looks like uh commissioner Brown um yeah you know I missed um well um I did was able to look at the recording of the energy commission presentation and um you know my impression is just that there's
112a the devil of cours is in the details here because there are various issues that John mery's already brought up and um I just think it's going to require a little bit more deliberation on everybody's part so I mean I have some questions but I think there would be I would have better questions if I had a clearer understanding of what's being proposed and what the you know what the risk and benefits are for each of these um for each of these concerns so I mean it's clear to me in general we should capture whatever methane we're generating ourselves we should capture that um because it's either going to you know it's 14 times or 20 times the greenhouse gas potential of carbon dioxide it's all going to end up as carbon dioxide eventually you
113know whether it's composted whether it's in a landfill or whether it's um you know burned in a car or or or in a you know gas furnace or a gas stove so I think I think it's it's a good principle to just capture whatever CH you know methane that you're making and then um and then converting it and then and then the other question is well with that methane that you captured say in the solid waste in the wastewater treatment PL how much of it you really need on site both to for generating you know heat and electricity and how much are you going to be able to export and how difficult is it to really manage that because um I've done enough like online searching to see that it's um it's a complicated process
114it's going to be fairly difficult to manage you know without flaring there's going to be have to be a certain amount of flaring going on on the site and um and there's a lot of balancing you have to do with the bacteria you're using in an Anor robic gesture you know that the bacteria can get all out of kilter it's a really complicated like bioreactor system that's um prone to um destabilization so it requires requires a lot of fine tuning U just to keep it safely operating and um and there is the space limitations um that's clear to me that um that it would have to be there you know there's no point in trecking it to the landfill like what the previous proposal was in 2017 and um it was good to see that
115there was some experience about particularly you know the Grand Rapids the City Grand Rapids efforts you know to try to implement something like this so I think so I don't think we're going to be able to do much of anything tonight but I what I would propose is that we we organize some kind of a public hearing where we all do some homework we maybe have some background discussions and let's have people from the you let's have Keith Sanders present let's have Missy present somebody from OSI uh people from the U energy commission the environmental commission who are interested and people from Weare Denali too because you know one of the things that's not clear to me is I'm sure there's methane being generated in the current wastewater treatment plant that's hard to avoid a
116lot of um in Europe you know where prices are a lot higher for gas and things like that and electricity both um um you know these wastewater treatment plants are already capturing their methane under their secondary treatment you know as a dome over their secondary treatment facilities so I wouldn't I would believe that there are um also other way ways of doing this instead of engineering you know a super super highly engineered anerobic digestor on a smaller footprint and is ideal um you know on a location that's close to a hospital as well as close to the Heron River so I just think I just think this deserves a little bit more deliberation and I'm not sure what the deadline is for making a decision here so that's all I wanted to add right now
117but I did find I did a lot of literature searches till I got crosseyed and I did find one paper here that was published two years ago um about p and poly focal substances in the atmosphere of Waste Management infrastructures so PS are clearly a problem but as usual it's um the biggest risk is by the U people working at the wastewater treatment plant but um there will be other emissions but they're not so different um what the posos emissions will be by heat and you know you can measure P emissions around landfills because of legacy and you know burial of biosolids and landfills you can measure it anywhere there are a couple of papers from China but they're all um measuring um posos in the air around manufacturing plants and um other such facilities
118there's not a whole lot of data out there is what I'm saying so I haven't had the chance yet to look at grants.gov or of the okay Steve if you've got more questions we can just get into Aon and we can ask the Consultants to answer all those questions I think it's a little premature to have a workshop but because I don't think they're I didn't get the impression from the first presentation they're getting ready to Source or anything they don't have money yet so it's there's still time no I understand that but this is like a um a technical challenge yes the needs to have input from a number of different that could benefit from the input from a number of people that are fairly knowledgeable and um and I would just say that
119so that's I don't want to take up any more time on this okay uh John mki yeah very quickly I think you're both right um this is just a plinary study um the city's not on the verge of making a decision I think Steve suggestion is a good one and I just wanted to address one comment that you made um Brooks and that is um the one scenario where um the city would sell the RNG that's taking advantage of some Financial incentives um and there's a possibility of additional to changes to the Regulatory and incentive structure that would make the other scenario um let's say nearly as favorable as as that scenario so you this is this is evolving and I think if we were to do something like this it behooves us to um
120maybe uh consult expertise um at Eagle and to look at some of of the other cities it's not just um Grand Rapids that just started up theirs but there's a couple of other biodigesters that are operating in the state of Michigan and certainly in the region so um I I think it's great that this has been brought to both uh commissions and I think it's great that uh the city and council is listening to these comments so I appreciate it anybody else have any topic questions on this or comments okay I think our next item on the agenda was reports from committees or other commissions Council and chair so uh for the biodiversity work group what we accomplished last month was pulled together a list of questions that Brett Leonard went through and that's pretty
121much all we did uh circular economy um yes John cart was leading that and he is not on the commission anymore so there's been some back and forth um Anya and I were discuss we're discussing it with Brooks and I think Anya is a little busy now so I'm going to step into John Kart's role so I'm looking forward to the next meeting but I'm not sure when that's scheduled Aon yeah I um I can follow up with Sarah on that I'm not sure when those occur either so I can follow by the solid ways folks that I know attend those a water quality oh I guess that's me again yeah I was out of town since May 15 so U we didn't have a meeting as far as I know does anybody else know
122Sarah Rita okay okay uh energy commission we talked about what we talked about tonight the anerobic byest proposal that was basically the the entire meeting okay uh Parks hi we met on Tuesday um we only had one item um we actually lease Mary Beth Doyle Park from the county and we renewed that contract hey uh Council I think can oh sorry yeah go ahead okay um I think maybe council member can help me but I think since the last time that this group met we passed uh incentives uh sustainability incentives is that Lisa is that news or is that not news I don't remember okay well I'm sorry if I've reported this before but recently within the last council meeting or two uh we passed a package uh uh you know uh budget allocation and
123um agreement with the company that's going to help us run the incentives program for things like um increasing the efficiency of your home uh air source heat pumps uh ebikes things like that and so look forward to hopefully that's going to be rolling out this summer um that's the main sustainability thing that I can think of that Council has done recently he report for chair um thanks last month voting for myself as chair and Steve for vice chair I appreciate the vot of confidence um next meeting will be inperson meeting it's going to be mostly a working session meeting um Aon is there going to be a zoom option for people that are out of town or do you know yet I think in theory we can do hybrid meetings um yes so the make
124sure I choose the correct room yeah so the hybrid is for people who are out of town and not for people who are in town who are trying to not come so I know we'll have at least one person who will be well out of the state so that's what the hybrid's for um the primary focus will be discussing what the work groups are going to be working on during the year what we should be doing with the environmental commission what are our prior priorities for the year um what agenda topics do we want to talk about what questions do we have for the presenters things like that so um that that'll be the general focus of that meeting and I will say in tonight's presentation with Brett Leonard I thought there was a really
125good conversation from a number of different Commissioners ask asking questions so I think that helps make for better meetings also and that's all I have let's see our next schedule meeting is July 25th and public commentary I think is next uh so oh sorry I missed did we get Planning Commission update if there was one we don't have anybody from the Planning Commission we don't have a Planning Commission rep right it's true council member dish has has been reporting out for us yeah yeah and I cannot remember anything I'm sorry I did not prepare to do this I was out uh canvasing before this meeting um I don't I nothing is well we did Planning Commission did discuss the CC1 wash TOA resoning um and it poses a couple of puzzles so where we might
126need to um where we're not putting uh tc1 fully along the the full length of the corridor because it's just that it's a very oddly configured Corridor it turns out but um that will have another discussion so we haven't voted on it yet so yeah oh no yes we did sorry no no no it's coming to council it's coming to council sorry about that yeah we did that and I guess um I did just want to say because the in-person meeting is different like there's flexibility around the time um if 7M works because that's already on your calendar that's great but we have a lot of flexibility to do a working session um so I guess let me know or we could chat about it now um or let me know at a later time
127but we're assuming we're all good to go at 7M unless we here otherwise does anybody have a problem starting the meeting at 7M on what date July 25th yeah our next okaywhere where the location is where what I was going to ask oh it's going to be a city hall I currently have two rooms reserved I need to do some reconnaissance to see I haven't actually seen them so I just need to make sure before I decide but it'll be in City Hall very good thank you so I think public comment is next so public comment is welcome and we'll be via telephone only to speak at public comment call I uh this information is available on the published agenda public Noti section of the city website and broadcast of this meeting on CTN Channel
12816 AT&T channel 99 and online at a2gov.org watchv do we have anybody that called in Aon we do not okay is there anything else people want to talk about or should we have a motion to adjourn I um so I usually do a staff update but I did submit a written um update so you can look at that but I did just it's basically a reminder that the neighborhood swap is on June 29th on Saturday um at Pioneer High School sounds really cool I can't make it but um sounds like a really um unique and great event um where you can come and bring things to swap or which is not necessary but you can also find other great things so the you know the goal being not to put things in the landfill or
129to divert items from the landfill um and then from Environmental Services um there was a um a state hosted public hearing on June 20th uh regarding the draft discharge permit for Gman and so the city did make um verbal comments on that which was kind of a reiteration of written comments that we had already been submitted um so that is also in my notes thank you thanks Aaron commissioner Gruber I just want to share um some brief news about the University of Michigan uh they the regions just approved shelanda Baker to be our vice Provost of sustainability and climate change might be the title and that's probably of interest to a lot of you so if you want to check that out and follow it I I'm excited because she will be seeing over seeing
130the Graham Institute which is where I'm working so that's some news in this space at the University of Michigan what's her background Bridget she was at the doe Anya you probably know a lot more about this she was doing some really cool Equity energy Equity work At Doe appointed um working with Biden's office so she's got a lot of experience in external engagement and working with with communities and so she's going to bring that with to the table which I think is really exciting so hopefully that means more service and more Community engagement that UFM will do in the sustainability and climate space quickly she she was Tony or she has been Tony Ream's boss a lot of people know Tony Reams and I think he was probably instrumental in convincing her to consider the
131position thank you anything else is there a motion to adjourn so moved okay that's seconded by Chris Graham so thanks see everybody next month thank you thank bye bye everyone bye bye