001welcome to the March 5th meeting of the regular meeting of the an arbor Planning Commission for detailed information on meeting procedures please review the full printed meeting agenda provided uh M Kelly will you please call the RO can you make yourself louder yes I'll try to speak closer thank you chiee I'm here Vice chair AB brand here secretary W here commissioner Mills here commissioner hamers Schmid noted as absent this evening council member dish here commissioner Clark here commissioner Weatherby here and commissioner Adams you have a quum great uh may I have a motion to approve the agenda uh motion by commissioner um weatherbe and seconded by commissioner Mills all those in favor please say I I all those any opposed seeing none the motion carries may I have a motion to approve the minutes of
002the February 22nd 2024 moved by commissioner or council member dish and seconded by commissioner Mills uh is there any discussion of the minutes may all those in favor of the motion please stay I any opposed seeing none the motion carries uh next up are reports of the Planning Commission and written Communications um I will first go to staff um any report from Council council member dish I again failed to prepare but um it was not a big meeting last night and I don't remember anything and I am getting a second from yay Mr Leonard gotcha thank you um staff and uh manager Leonard yes good evening commission uh two items that I want to draw your attention to one for the work session next T Tuesday um we have a concept discussion for a site
003plan at 2854 South State this is uh a little over 10 acres it's a proposed mixed use develop vment uh it's the site of the 777 building and proquest building this would be a a proposed a pretty large scale proposed development in our tc1 district so they're going to um um be coming to the Planning Commission I am also um going to be uh recommending that we that's the only item on that agenda that we alter the uh starting time of that work session to 8:00 the reason for that is to give all of you a little bit more cushion for the first uh and members of the public of three dates of public workshops that will be held next uh week uh we are doing a series of joint public workshops at the downtown
004library uh the workshops will be held on Tuesday March 12th at 4:00 to 7:30 with a presentation at 6:00 p.m. a at March 13th from 10:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. and on Thursday March 14th two sessions 10:30 to 1:00 p.m. and then 4:00 to 7:30 p.m. with a presentation at 6:00 p.m. at all these workshops members of the public and will be allow will be provided an opportunity to learn more and provide feedback on multiple uh City Planning initiatives one is of course the comprehensive plan uh the second is the downtown area circulation study and also the Downtown Development Authority development and Tiff plan so we're really excited um to provide this kind of three-in-one opportunity for the public thank you do other commissioner officers or committee Liaisons commissioner abon I just wanted to report
005um as the chair of the ordinance revisions committee that we did not meet last week uh the meeting was postponed to allow us to have more time to have a substantive discussion about uh zoning so we will meet again in May and just a reminder that our monthly meetings are now every other month to make room for um comprehensive plan subcommittee thanks thank you do other committee leasons have anything to report seeing none um um written Communications are included in today's packet we're going to move on to agenda number six which is public comment this is an opportunity for persons to speak up to three minutes about an issue that is not listed on this agenda so if you you will have an opportunity to speak on every single agenda as they come up uh
006we'll first call on individuals present to address the commission then remote participants to speak during this public hearing remotely please press star9 if listening by phone or use the rais hand feature if you're viewing through the web link for phone access please call 85352 47 and enter meeting ID number 977 663 41226 City staff will select callers who've raised their hand using the last three Gs of the phone number or by name if available you'll hear an automated announcement saying that the host is allowing you to speak and when speaking please turn off any uh move to a quiet area and turn off any television or background noises so that we can hear you clearly for either method of participation please state your name and address at the beginning of your comments is there anyone
007present that would like to address the commission yes please uh thank you um I I want to first thank the all of you for your work and Leadership of the city and for uh letting us come and speak today my name is Brian Donovan actually don't live in in Arbor I live in high Park Michigan at 206 Moss Street uh but I work in in an arbor I manag the I'm the general manager for the inter Cooperative Council which is a student housing Cooperative got started in 1932 and we incorporated in 1944 to buy our first building today we own 19 properties in and around the University of Michigan with with houses and all but one of the different Council Wards um monthly charges for our 550 members uh who live in our properties range
008from 493 for a shared room in north campus to 1370 for a two bedroom apartment on Kingsley and all contracts include utilities as well as highspeed Internet um affordability is a top priority for the ICC and we know it's important to the people of an arbor too uh we have researched how several cities enable group living cooperatives like us uh to prosper and grow that we will share with you um their zoning and use codes uh from those cities we're also interested in innovations that provide permanent or very long-term affordability for residents whether they're living together in a large house or not and I want to particularly highlight work done in Washington DC Austin Texas and Cincinnati Ohio um in Washington DC the tenant opportunity for Purchase Act has been in place for 40 years
009and it allows it requires notice when a landlord is going to sell a property to the tenant with the tenant have a chance to put together a bid there's more than 16,000 properties that have been affordable properties that have been created or preserved through the topa in the last 40 years the second one is the University neighborhood overlay this is in Austin it started in 2004 it's their most successful affordable housing program providing more units than all of their other programs combined all for students uh it's a optional up zoning that requires longterm affordability as well as a fe andl if you don't go to more deeply affordable units the last thing I want to mention is from Cincinnati that's called renter Equity it's developed by um uh renting Partnerships uh they put it together
010when they were managing a low-income housing tax credit project and it's a property management system that allows tenants through tenure through and participation in maintaining the building and attending me meetings for the organization to build equity and they can earn up to $10,000 over 10 years uh if they pay on time and do all of their work all of this is actual savings so they're they're budgeting for regular Property Management costs but because they're not turning over and helping out they get a share of that money um so uh we're interested in the comprehensive planning process excited to be able to share with you tonight thank you thank you um hello members of the Planning Commission uh my name is Brian Pagan um I'm a resident of 1507 wasal Avenue which is also known as
011um soier n truth Cooperative house it's in W to a student run Cooperative House part of the inter Cooperative Council and as my colleague mentioned the ICC is a cooperatively run nonprofit housing Corporation where the members own and collectively managed operations of the organ organizations we collectively set utility charges and provide services to our members um it's a place where people can become Cooperative leaders and stewards of their community and where you not just buy a place to live but you buy a place into a community and into a larger Cooperative Vision years ago um I joined the ICC in order to complete my undergraduate at U ofm and I stay in the ICC now because I want to continue to contribute to the Cooperative movement and I want to help steuart its growth however
012in the pursuit of our mission we Face many real challenges the current zoning code makes it difficult for the ICC to Steward our properties and continue to expand student cooperatives are not permitted in any residential zones except by special exemption use in either the r2b or R4 zones to get a seu Within These zones there must be 8,500 ft of lot area 5,000 ft of floor area and 350 ft of lot area per occupant um many of our properties have been grandfathered into their neighborhoods nine of the 18 ICC owned properties are non- compliant with the zoning code disallowing us from prolonging the lives of our houses and each year as our houses get older it becomes more and more important that we're either able to make the necessary changes to prolong their lives or
013to purchase new properties and in order to do so we ask you consider um the following recommendations to bring the existing ICC properties and Zoning compliance we recommend eliminating the minimums for lot size and square footage for student cooperative and housing uses for the R forc zone and to enable ICC expansion densification we recommend permitting student cooperative housing and residential zones by right this will put the ICC on a Level Playing Field with investors and absentee landlords as the ICC has to Endo extra cost and delays to be allowed to provide affordable units in residential zones and the ICC also requests to be permitted to operate group housing in R1 r2a and R3 Zones near the university and Transit hubs and we also strongly encourage the city to eliminate the maximum number of unrelated people
014that share a unit in house um thank you all for listening to our considerations today and we look forward to working with you all as an organization in the comprehensive planning process thank you is there anyone else present that would like to speak welcome um hello I am Alex zlan I live in Ward 2 on Washington Avenue also at truth house um in the ICC um and though the ICC is primarily made up of U ofm undergraduate students we also serve many graduate students students from WCC and Eastern and non-students the ICC has also begun identifying and prioritizing applicants who demonstrate Financial need during contract signing the ICC and house charges typically amount to about $800 $820 a month for socialized housing utilities groceries and educational and Leadership opportunities we also provide need-based charge reductions
015to those who qualify and I'm speaking with you all tonight to share our struggle to expand affordable housing options in an arber so historically the ICC is expanded by purchasing single family homes and student rental properties and internally densifying them as group housing however about half of our properties are grandfathered as they are not compliant with the current zoning use standards set for student cooperatives primarily floor area and lot size minimums set in place so that way we may only operate homes that resemble large Greek life houses um we can't operate a new non-p client property with more than six unrelated residents making many expansion opportunities infeasible if we wish to remain below the market rate and we're also unable to find new properties to expand into that meet our zoning use standards as group
016living and are routinely forced to reject opportunities to expand into non-compliant properties on the market even if we were to find a compliant property conditional use requirements Force us to jump through additional hoops and expend resources before even knowing if we'll be allowed to operate a new property um and if these zoning restrictions had existed in 1930 then we would have never been established or exist today so we do have a list of asks to make our properties compliant and to make our expansion feasible namely eliminating the minimum size requirements for our zoning use eliminating the maximum number of unrelated residents who can live together in a home and also investigating the university neighborhood overlay ordinance from Austin Texas to collect fees and L to support um affordable student housing and to investigate the tenants
017opportunity to purchase act from Washington DC to give tenants the right of first refusal to purchase their home from their landlord um I've passed out info packets to everyone um with with more information for you all would love to meet and talk more about this and answer questions thank you for your time thank you is there anyone else present that would like to speak to the commission all right do we have any remote callers there is one hand raised phone number ending in 534 you have permission to address the Planning Commission good evening this is Tom stalberg calling from lower toown in N oror the Pud or not to tud that is the question tud is a useful tool in our zoning code the UDC it can be used or abused later this evening we
018will discuss the resoning from C1 AR to PUD but for now let's review some of the uses and abuses here's a quote PUD should not be used when there's an appropriate zoning category and in this case there is one C1 a r end quote no I'm not talking about the five corners application on Patrick Street on tonight's agenda council member Lisa dish said that on September 5th 23 it was about the application for Southtown on South State Street she was correct on the first half of that statement and incorrect in the second half but that was only one of many errors that led to that project inappropriately being approved as C1 AR with variances and conditions had the exact same project been approved as a PUD we would be getting 33 units of affordable housing
019or about $3 million in affordable housing funds perhaps later tonight Lisa dis will reconcile that statement with tonight's application consistency is vitally important in zoning law I won't go into all the details right now I don't have time about how the city helped to develop a cheaply affordable housing fund out of $9 million or 93 units by mimicking a PUD at lowertown in 2017 I will remind people that voices were very loud bent claiming puds were not viable so just a month or two later the city approved the Pud nearby and that contributed about a half million dollars to the affordable housing fund consistency is vitally important in zoning law there were two other projects that were approved later as teds in that area both providing affordable housing units or dollars then there was the
020inap appropriate use of a PD at 415 West Washington let me read you a citation from the UDC that I raised when that was up about a year ago with regard to 415 the UDC says that a PUD shall not be allowed where it is thought primarily to avoid the imposition standards and requirements of other zoning classifications for other city regulations and give you site the article on that we have been very Inc consistent with using and abusing or inappropriately avoiding puds we need to reconcile our MTH thank you thank you do we have any other remote callers there are no other hands raised to this time thank you uh with that I will close out public comment on Section six uh we're going to move on to agenda number seven this is the public
021hearing SCH sched for the next business meeting staff there's uh no public hearing scheduled at this time the Tuesday March 19th 2024 regular session has been cancelled uh the reason for that is because we're working through details with petitioners of which we do have many active petitions but we want to bring clean proposals to the table without the need for adding conditions to your motions um so to give us time to do that we um we made some decisions to uh cancel tentative items so there are no public hearings at this time thank you uh moving on to section 8A which is unfinished business there are none so we'll move right on to regular business um I'm going to introduce a petition this is 503 Miller Avenue special exception use uh you for Planning Commission
022approval this is a request to allow a child care center limited to 47 children and 15 staff the existing um 3200 ft structure is to be renovated and no new development is proposed the site size um is 8,447 the zoning designation is r2a to family dwelling and the staff recommendation is approval we will move on to petitioner presentation with um hello hi welcome thank you good evening my name is ETA Heisler I use she her Pro ouns and I'm the executive director of Apple play schools I'm here with Bob overhiser of Architects Design Group Ted hirh of Midwestern Consulting Mr Tom myy representing New Hope Baptist Church building owner and from Apple play schools I'm joined by Jeff Wilkerson the chair of our board of directors as well as Britney Muro our development and Communications
023coordinator who's sharing some images online our nonprofit organization Apple play schools currently operates three licensed Early Childhood centers in Arbor including Manzanita Spanish Immersion play school and green apple Garden outdoor immersion play school as well as Apple Scouts Community immersion summer camp program we're requesting approval of special exception used to open and operate a child daycare at 503 Miller AB shown here at the corner of Miller and chapen Street 503 Miller as wanm stated is currently zoned r2a and special exception use was granted previously to operate an adult daycare and Community Health Clinic at this site we have been operating Child Care Center under a similar special exception use just on the street at 511 Miller Avenue since 2014 if seu is approved our plan is to renovate the existing building at 503 Miller to
024bring it up to code particularly state code regarding fire safety and egg grass for child care centers and provide 47 new child care spots with approximately 10 to 15 adult staff present daily we've worked with the landlord New Hope Baptist Church for nearly a decade when we started exploring ways to better meet the dire need for child care in our community the church leaders recommended we renovate the building and put it back to use for the community after sitting mostly unused for several years several key businesses are located right on this corner which anchors the neighborhood Knight's market and big city small world Bakery as well as the church which has Decades of leadership in the community and we believe a child care would add to that for Apple play schools 503 Miller's proximity to
025these businesses as well as to West Park Argus Farm stop on Liberty the farmers market Miller nature area the downtown library means we have bus and walking access for children to be out in the community being immersed in community is an is an essential part of our curriculum as a Regio Amelia inspired Center but it's also just good for kids there's ample off street parking both in the auxiliary lot we currently use just to the south of the property and across the street at New Hope which is accessible by the crosswalk across Chap and at Miller and there's proximity to several different public transportation lines as well as the future Tree Line urban trail um which support both the cities and apple play schools sustainability goals this location is accessible readily to the families and
026staff we serve currently 20% of our families and staff um at the 511 location bus W bike or walk walk to school we plan to add at least six Class B bike parking spots at our sister site 511 as part of this project and um at our citizen participation meeting we heard concerns from Neighbors about the noise during our weekday business operations and to address this we will include some plantings and have other ideas to create Visual and sound buffer between the outdoor play areas and the neighboring properties and we're happy to consider other input as we figure figure out how best to be good neighbors we're required to install a new hydrant for these operations as well as indicated in our plans and we plan to run the lines for the hydrant off um
027or across chapen street thanks Britney before I end I want to provide some important context for the project and our special exception use request in addition to my work at Apple play schools I also serve on the Livingston washna Child Care planning Coalition which formed last year to study the child care crisis in our area and develop solutions for our community and I don't use the words Child Care crisis lightly here in Wason County there are only enough licensed child care spots for one out of every seven children under the age of five only 40% of families in our area have access to child care that meets their needs and child care costs here are the highest in the state families are paying more than $10,000 a year per child to have the care that
028they they do have even if it doesn't meet their needs this lack of child care is keeping people out of work and impacting their earning capacity over time at best this is a seismic loss to our local economy in fact the Michigan Chamber of Commerce estimated last fall that Michigan loses nearly $3 billion dollar in economic activity every year due to lack of child care at worst this crisis widens the already massive Gap in racial and gender Equity by pricing caregivers of color and women out of child care services and thus out of opportunities to work to advance their careers or to build assets for their families meanwhile child care workers in Wasau County earn a median wage of $12.23 an hour startling $34 below living wage that's just not good enough for professionals who
029are providing skilled labor that the rest of the community depends on to work the child care we propose to open at 503 Miller will not only provide more child care spots and allow us to increase scholarships to the community but it will also allow our organization to continue improving compensation to our teachers creating highquality jobs and attracting new child care education talent to our area with over 40% of an Ann Arbor households falling below the Alice threshold expanding Child Care access and priori child prioritizing childcare Workforce Development are essential steps that we must take towards meeting the city's goals for equity and economic development thank you so much for your time and for considering our requests for special exception use we look forward to answering any questions you may have about the project thank you
030uh moving on to staff presentation Miss Thatcher thank you what you do public com oh we will do public comment right after staff presentation thank you Miss sasher I'm going to put back on your screens the uh aerial photo of the site this is the one that's in the packet but um I wanted to briefly touch on a couple of things um there's no off street parking required by code on this site nevertheless it has a lot of parking and since it's got it and they use it I wanted to make sure that um you were aware of it um so this is 503 Miller on the corner um this is a privately owned residential home next door and next door is at 511 is um an an apple play schools existing preschool they use
031the empty lot at 5:15 which is over here as their playground um it's a little bit hard to see here but 515 wraps all the way around the back of 511 and the neighbor 507 and a buts here uh the 503 Miller that's at the corner that we're talking about tonight um there's a small parking lot right behind 503 Miller that is not proposed to be used for parking um I assume that that will be used for for kids for a playground area right now parents are and caregivers are going into the parking lot down here that's owned by um new Baptist Church that uh abuts West Park a little bit F farther to the South you can park here where you see these cars parked and walk right up this path through the back
032to get to uh Apple play school is the existing location so this is really convenient um to keep kids um off the street as much as possible there are also however good sidewalks um in front of along Miller and along chapen there are marked crossw walks uh at the the intersections um so really in terms of both parking drop off and pedestrian friendliness um this is a pretty good site for that um uh we should Let's see we should note that at the citizen participation meeting there were three neighbors um I'm sorry three members of the public who attended I'm not sure if they were all neighbors or just some of them um there were noise concerns raised um um and the the the owner or the occupant of the the house that would be
033sandwiched in between the two preschools had some concerns about adding more kids to the mix um this is a pretty uh busy Street there's quite a bit of traffic it's close to very close to Spring Street where we have Knights and a bakery and the church is right down here so there's a lot going on on this corner and um I've talked to representatives of uh Apple play schools to Eta who presented to you tonight um she has assured me that they want to keep working with the neighbor that would be in between the two preschools and do what they can they've already taken some steps to mitigate some noise that they had going on um and they're looking at what else they can do um that's not codified on this of course but um
034we have had those conversations um meeting the seu standards for approval um like I said this is a pretty intense neighborhood and I don't think that this is out of character with that neighborhood um turning movements will remain unchanged um the last thing that I want to talk about is bike parking there there's there's no development proposed with this so there's no site plan there are sort of civil engineering plans attached only as for information um because we we ask for some sort of existing conditions plan with an seu that doesn't have development proposed um so as such there isn't bicycle parking required on the site but um I strongly uh suggested that they provide it because they do have people that bike now to their site and uh they were very amenable to that
035took an inventory of both sites and thought that the best place to put it would be behind the existing preschool but to be shared by both preschools if the new one is approved um it is on the existing conditions plan that they would provide this by September of 2025 um after they get the 503 Miller um in better shape and uh there would be six Class B spaces there shared between the two it's a little bit strange to put your bike parking on a different site that you don't own but since this is a special exception use it's I don't think that that it's detrimental since they'll be using both properties and going between the two quite freely um should somebody else want to occupy this building that we're talking about tonight in the future
036and there special exception you says you have to go to 511 Miller for bike parking obviously that's not going to work at that point we would have to update the special exception use or just have them provide it on the 503 Miller site the class B um spaces that are required and who knows what will be required by that time we might want to update the whole thing so staff does recommend that the special exception use be approved with conditions the conditions are that the child care is provided for no more than 47 children and no more than 15 caregivers and that the sixth Class B bicycle parking spaces will be provided by September 30 2025 at 511 Miller for shared use with 503 Miller thank you thank you with that we will move to
037public hearing um this is an opportunity for persons to speak up to 3 minutes um about this particular item we'll first call on people that are present and then on to the remote participants to speak during this uh public hearing remotely please press star9 if listening by phone or user raised hand feature of viewing through the web link and for phone access please call 877 853 5247 and enter meeting ID 977 6634 1226 uh City staff will select callers that have raised their hand using the last three digits of the phone number or by name if available um you'll hear an automated announcement saying that the host is allowing you to speak and when speaking please move to a quiet area so that we can hear you clearly for either method of participation please state
038your name and address at the beginning of your comments and with that is there anyone present that would like to address the commission please I thought the three minute limit was only for things that were not on the agenda but my name is Lori lsbury I live at 507 Miller Avenue I have nothing against children I have two of my own and three grandchildren but this location will add they already have 30 children on one side of me and I don't know how many teachers this will put almost a 100 people all the way around me if you looked at the map they had they're going to have the children playing behind my house that means 100 people completely surrounding me all the time as it is right now I can no longer use my
039backyard they like to have the kids outside all year long which I'm good with having kids outside but I can't use my backyard it's so loud they're and they're little kids they're little tiny kids screaming and yelling all the time the teachers are allow to my biggest problem is that this I bought this house 20 years ago this is all I have this is my life savings this was my retirement plan to stay there and let the equity appreciate this will immediately destroy all the value in my house no one would buy a house wedged in between a 100 people a 100 people 70 of whom will be loud children so I will be ruined devastated I will lose everything I have with this everything I did my due diligence when I bought my house
040that house next door did have a special exception permit for an adult daycare I don't think that ever went to fruition if it did I never saw a person coming and going when I bought my house the daycare next door was for six or eight little children it wasn't a big deal then Apple came in and it immediately became 30 kids outside all year long H chapen Street is extremely narrow I've seen so many cars get sideswiped on that street I've seen a city bus sideswipe cars on that street I've seen the neighborhood with Miller Manor that corner is kind of unsavory and I think we all remember a woman got murdered 100t from this place these little children I'm all for playing outside like I said but in the summertime they play out there
041in full View of West Park or any of the people walking around there and they are wearing nothing but their little Underpants boys and girls out there in the summer that seems like a formula for trouble big trouble they're outside all the time all the time they are always making noise their website says it's an outdoor immersion exploring natural landscapes Eda said something about the community and being in the neighborhood I've never seen them leave there this will ruin me this will destroy me ruin me my house won't be worth anything I'm sorry up I'll be done thank you thank you is there anyone else present that would like to address a commission about this particular topic welcome hi I'm Francis todoro Hargreaves I am the impact investing manager for the an arbor Area Community
042Foundation the impact investing program has been in the foundation for about 3 years the committee has three priorities that it's set for itself it's affordable housing small business and child care and as part of that child care Focus I have also participated in the living wash County childcare Coalition that Miss Heisler spoke of um we communicate and keep up to dat with uh decisions in Lancing on how to handle this crisis and we have been working with uh the team at Apple for the last four months on this project the committee is supportive of this project and so we're hopeful that you will be also and we look forward to working on this in the future thank you thank you is there anyone else that would like to address the commission at this [Applause] time
043is there anyone remotely that is looking to address a commission there are no hands raised okay give it a few more moments okay seeing no other I'm going to read the proposed motion which is the an arbor City Planning Commission after hearing all interested person in reviewing all relevant information including an accompanying site plan and finds a petition substantially meets the standards in chapter 55 unified development code section 5.29.18 point2 pointb child care center and therefore approves the 503 Miller special exception use for child care at 503 Miller Avenue this approval is based on the following findings the proposed use will be consistent with the r2a multiple family dwelling District which allows single and two family residential uses and Child Care Centers by special exception proposed use will not adversely impact traffic pedestrians bicyclists circulation
044or Road intersections based on the location Miller Avenue and shapen Street provide access to the site and the proposed use is consistent with the existing and other surrounding uses traffic impact the subject site meets the use specific standard of at least 7500 ft of lot area and finally the site plan documenting the existing and proposed conditions of the site plan has been submitted as a part of the application the special exception use is approval is based on the following conditions Child Care is provided for no more than 47 children by no more than 15 caregivers six class be bicycle parking spaces will be provided by September 30th 2025 at the 511 Miller for shared use with 503 Miller and that the an arbor Planning Commission approves the attach site plan which demonstrates compliance with the
045applicable special exception use standards as no development which would otherwise require site plan approval have been proposed moved by commissioner Mills and seconded by council member dish we are in discussion would anyone like to kick us off commissioner Adams yeah um so the legal standard for something like this relates a lot back to impact on the neighborhood it's compatibility with the neighborhood so this is my neighborhood um I think the expansion of this project isn't just compatible with it I think it's it's going to be the the the the center as expanded is going to meet a dire need for Neighborhood Child Care in this neighborhood um beyond that I I I think that the adverse impact on neighbors here has to be viewed in the context of you know two streets that support a
046significant amount of daily traffic a very vibrant park that's right behind the property a corner grocery store a bakery a dispensary a church I mean this is a very active as staff pointed out a very active and busy neighborhood in that context I think the noise the incremental noise increase that we're talking about really falls into the same category as the stuff that's already there so when we're talking about consistency and impact I really feel like this use is very consistent with what's already present there and I fully support this and I'm excited to vote Yes on it thank you council member dish thank you um I wanted to say thank you to staff because the staff report does a great job with its table checking off the UDC requirements that are met by this
047uh project and I'd like to elaborate on the first of these which is consistency with objectives of the comprehensive plan and as staff notes the proposed Child Care Center provides an essential service for those living and working in the city um it it it is not an exaggeration it is a actually empirical fact that was county is considered a child care desert there is only one license spot available for Kids 1 to five and this is what should really give us all pause that close to 20% of the licensed spots are sitting empty because people cannot hire staff because Child Care wages are so low Apple play uh pays its staff over the median wage of Wasa County they pay them close to $16 an hour they also provide 50% infant and toddler and 50%
048preschool care their expansion that they are bringing before us is necessary for them to be able to continue paying at at what is almost a living wage and yet we are happy about it and that they are able to continue to provide that kind of ratio many places just cannot afford to provide infanto care because it is so expensive to do so and so without this expansion they are not able to continue this important service of offering infant and toddler care um this is not merely I mean these issues of child care are also issues of equity because they hit women and women of color hardest so in terms of the crucial services that this child care center will provide I think that the project checks those boxes I have uh immense Sympathy for the
049frustration that uh Miss Lounsbury expressed I cannot imagine that Apple play school wouldn't be willing to talk to you about noise mitigation we already have in the staff report evidence that they have responded to concerns about a piano on the front porch by moving that so I bet there are ways to talk about that um I also can't imagine any house in an arbor having no value so I understand that there may be a loss but um there may also be uh there are many gains thank you um commissioner Mills I think you were next unless um commissioner Weatherby uh this is not my neighborhood but my niece and nephew went to we wisdom which was in 511 Miller back in the day one's now in college one's a senior in high school um and
050this was a fabulous spot it was just so amazing their parents could walk them to and from school if something happened we could rush in because we worked downtown at the University it was just a really great spot and um I it's it's very exciting to see more opportunities there for child care because it is a huge problem and what we you know the thing that is most dangerous for our kids is driving them everywhere and to be able to be in a neighborhood where not everybody would have to drive their kids and drop them off and leave them you know have big lines of cars I love the bike parking I think that's a really important piece um I am sympathetic to loud children um I live in a neighborhood where the children are
051older but they are still loud and they are loud later at night um but it's our community and that's our society and we have that and and um our our houses are have gone up in value no matter what sometimes you might think how could a How could a house next to a you you know terrible student house go up in value and yet they've doubled in value um and so I I am sympathetic I know that's not going to help that that we're sympathetic um but I think that uh this is a great location for a child care and an expansion that is you know it's on a park it's it's just in a really great space and it's been used as a child care center for you know the area has been child
052care centers for a long time so um I think I think it's great I did have one question for staff do we need to add the fire hydrant to the motion or is that just part of it we do not the the fire hydrant is um required by building code okay and so the Fire Marshall is taking care of that okay yeah thank you thank you thank you you any other Commissioners commissioner Mills this is my neighborhood um I looked at Apple play school and I actually have a question about how the two centers will operate um this is not my children are blessedly now in elementary school so I not paying for daycare um but I remember that I would need to take them to two different centers because of the age Gap so
053is the intention um age How would how will this operate I so wish the intention was to consolidate infant toddler and preschool Care on one site so people didn't have to drive up and down Miller Road but sadly that is not the intention um no the intention is that the new center at 503 Miller will be only for children 30 months and older that's for two reasons one is because of the State child care licensing rules and fire safety and egress um it's not appropriate to have infant toddler care in most of the spaces at 503 Miller um because of what's required to make sure that kids who can't walk can be moved safely by their caregivers out in the case of a fire so to sort of alleviate any issues around State Licensing we
054decided to stick to 30 months and older there um the second reason is because as council member dish mentioned we currently provide infant toddler care um at the building up the street as well as at manzanas um that constitutes 50% of our enrollment and the margins on infant toddler care are negative they we run those spots at a loss um in order to accommodate the community's need and the older the the tuition we can charge for the older spots will allow us to offset that cost spread our overhead among more families in order to better compensate our staff great well the uh I can speak from experience the need for child care is great um it would have saved me from I mean one of the reasons is we try to not drive and couldn't
055handle both drop offs on bike that's a hill to go up on but anyway um but um even so I mean I I think one of the things that's great about this site is the compliment AR complimentarity of the parking with the church use um in terms of using the infrastructure the time that it would be used is are always off peak right and so even if there is a a church event kind of in the middle of the day that's not during drop off time so again I'm literally just across the park in Lor Terrace's backyard and so like I can see what's going on like how often that that parking lot is full and I mean it's it's it's super complimentary in terms of those uses and in terms of a neighbor right
056it is it's it's silent at night kids go home um and on the weekends and also you know that's complimentary with this with the church use so I I think this is a great use of the infrastructure that we have this is like the Hub of kind of the lower water Hill Neighborhood um there's a there's a hub of activity here and so um and bus stops just across the um just across the intersection at chapen so um I think that this is um is appropriate as the staff report points out I think it meets all the criteria the question that I have and this I think is for staff is um in the UDC there's a a th foot spacing from a dispensary to a private school and I'm curious if this counts or
057not this does not count because the dispensary is already there okay so a child care can open within that th000 ft but a new dispensary say on the other side would have to then be 1,000 ft away from the new CH it you know right is this going to put the is this going to put the dispensary I'm sorry I have to I okay child carees are not counted the same way schools are you don't have to be a th000 feet from a child care okay that I couldn't couldn't remember if daycare counted as it's it's Elementary end up well and I would just say again my kids are in the park all the time like this is a happening place to be and actually the more activity that we H like I I like
058the activity that's on the street um so I just wanted to make sure that we weren't putting another special exception use in a weird spot um in case there was a conflict and it sounds like there's not so um great I this is I'm excited to see this thank you commissioner Clark um yeah I just want to I express that I'm looking forward to supporting this um and thank you for bringing more child care to an arbor I know from experience that we very badly need it and um it's very difficult for child carees to get to a scale where um it's profitable expand so thank you for doing that um also I just think it's a great location it's right by a public park and um children I strongly believe children have a right
059to exist in the city use our public amenities and I think it's wonderful that you have the children outside um that's an absolutely fantastic amenity and I think it's really matter of um perspective whether it's a benefit or not you know on a personal level for the homeowners but I would say that again um we're fortunate enough to live in a city where property values are pretty stable and there will you know be a market for that so well I I guess I can be sympathetic to neighbor concerns on that um children do have a right to exist in the city so thank you thank you any other Commissioners commissioner white just a question for staff about um I was looking up the property ownership it looks like the church owns yes 5503 511 and
060515 that's correct okay so then the property that they're sharing across 503 and 511 actually run from 515 across and back according to your staff report lines let me look at the map sorry make sure I got the numbers straight and I guess I'm I I just have a general question about the the need for the because the church is not operating it and they're leasing the space that's why it's coming in cuz the church would have flexibility to do what they want it to in that space within certain restrictions the church would also need a special exception use to operate a church-based child care okay yeah okay all right those are my questions thank you any other Commissioners all right um with that I'll just add my two cents I was at a spark
061Economic Development uh meeting a few days ago which we did talk about the lack of child care and the the impacts that it has on Talent attraction as well as retention I certainly hear you um as far as frustrations with respect to uh noise um bordering on what could be considered nuisance looking at the overall context of the the concept of Economic Development as well as as as the other Commissioners eloquently put children do have a right to place in our city as well um I'm in support of this overall in consideration um that being said I would also say that your particular property is also perspectively also possible for a special exception use as far as conversion goes but that that's um neither here nor there um all of that said I'm in support
062and I think any other Commissioners with final Thoughts with that we'll go to a roll call vote thanks staff commissioner Adams support commissioner WEA be yes commissioner Mills yes commissioner Clark yes council member dish yes commissioner W yes commissioner aons yes and commissioner Lee yes that passes motion carries thank you moving on to regular business this is 416 Longshore Drive site plan for City Planning Commission approval I will give a quick um this is a proposal to construct a new four-story 15 unit Condo building next to an existing office building the site size is 1.66 Acres zoning destination is office um due to a noticing error this petition is requested to be moved to the April 2nd 2024 meeting agenda we will still hold a public hearing since it was posted but we'll be Ren
063noticing and holding a new hearing on April 2nd uh I need a motion to postpone and Voice vote after the public hearing and so oh well we'll do that right after uh yes after the public hearing so we're going to go on to we're going to go to public hearing with respect to 416 Longshore Drive um this is an opportunity for persons to speak up to three minutes about this item we'll first call on individuals present and then those remotely um to speak during this public hearing remotely please press star9 if listening by phone or use a raised hand feature of viewing through the web link for phone access please please call 877 85352 47 and enter meeting ID 9776 1226 City staff will select callers that have raised her hand using the last three
064digits of the phone number or by name if available you'll hear an automated announcement saying that the host is allowing you to speak and when speaking please move to a quiet area mute background noises so that we can hear you clearly and for either method of participation please state your name and address at the beginning of your comments do we have anyone present that would like to speak on 416 Longshore Drive yes please before I start could I ask why it was postponed again just it was a noticing error perspectively staff you want to no the yeah noticing error okay yeah the we uh take several steps to notice uh a public Hearing in a variety of ways and one of those steps wasn't completed apparently for this one so to make sure that everybody
065receives that notice that's our rescheduling it for the April meeting okay makes sense yeah no no sweat um my name is Kyle Troutman I live on 5:30 Detroit Street in North Central um and I want to bring up two points that I had about this development the first of which is that I took a glance at the mitigation plans or the site plans and I think that the overall plan for mitigation for this is more or less like design-wise and otherwise unacceptable um I understand that there are Landmark tree requirements and that this is taking out a swath of a nice chunk of woods in the area but to kind of disillusion yourself into thinking you can place what I think they said is 95 trees in this now extremely cramped lot is just not
066doable by any stretch of the imagination if you take a glance at it there's essentially just these circles overlapping one another it'll look nothing short of an orchard and is just a little bit silly so I would implore there to be a different way that to think about how do we mitigate for all of the landmark trees and the Woodland trees that are being removed in this development project um one thing that I know is that oddly enough the little chunk of woods to the west of this is actually a very high quality birding hot spot in the ant Arbor especially within the downtown realm and I think this is due to it being you know it's a proximity to a the downtown but it's also a Flyway it has proximity to Quality Riverfront and
067there's just a host of birds that migrate and and reside in this little swath of woods here so perhaps there's a way to make the mitigation instead of just plopping 95 useless trees in an orchard Style on this cramped office and now residential property maybe there's a way to have some sort of habitat and E ecological Restoration in the chunk of Woodland there perhaps there's a way to maybe not just restore but also better that area and the habitat um I think this is difficult and would require some thinking on the end of the developer or you guys but um there needs to be a metric you can't just say you're restoring something and have that be it there needs to be a way to actually document and ecologically monitor what's happening there and show
068an increase in species and habitat um so that would be my first point um would be to reinvestigate what mitigation means for this because if you take any close look at the site plan I would consider it unacceptable and it shows that there was no design thought put into this at all and it was just required 95 trees plop plop plop plop plop which is just not okay in my opinion um the second point I'd like to bring up which is less of a um ask of anything of you but would just to say an argument that I'm sure you've heard a million times which is why is there another luxury condominium extreme wealth oriented development going on in an arbor um I myself am a young professional a recent college graduate it and I
069just look at the plans for this and know that I would have zero chance at affording something like this and I consider myself well off and quite privileged in a lot of ways and I know no one like myself or within like a similar situation to my own could really think about affording to live at a place like this um and I'm sure this is something you've heard a million times and the developer is allowed to have Luxury Condominiums here but I would ask why is it so easy to continue having projects like this and why is there nothing to maybe de incentiv as the developer to having these you know it's it's 15 luxury condos on a 40 something, square ft um building so to me it seems like there's maybe something missing there
070um I walk through this area every day to work and it's a unique part of Ann Arbor it's a unique neighborhood it's proximity to the medical center it has proximity to bike trails and a lot of awesome outdoor recreation and I just think the people that would want to live here are not going to be the people that are going to live in this place it's going to be people that are very wealthy and are driving their car into the big parking ramp and are leaving every day and are not using the space the way it could be used um yep that's it thank you yeah appreciate your comments is there anyone else present that would like to speak on long short drive yes hi my name is Judy Nikolai I live at 517 Longshore
071Drive uh we are a condominium Community right across the street I really have more I guess a comment and a question having lived there for 10 years I'm quite aware of what the neighborhood is like on weekends and sometimes during the week between Memorial Day and Labor Day day when the Argo Cascades are a huge attraction in the neighborhood I personally don't drive but I know that my neighbors have plenty of trouble already with access to their own parking lot because of all the activity you have people walking down the street in bathing suits carrying tubes and kayaks it's kind of a fun neighborhood in that regard but it's really difficult for me to imagine this neighborhood with 15 multi-million dollar Condominiums it doesn't suit the neighborhood energy at all I I it's hard to
072square that Circle for me um I also wonder a lot of the area that's going to be developed here is used for parking for the Argo Cascades and I wonder what the plan are to replace that parking assuming that people will still want to be coming to the Cascades to canoe and kayak and do their tubing down the river so those are my questions and concerns I will confess that I have not had time to do much research on this project but from the point of view of someone who lives in this neighborhood those are the kinds of things that my neighbors are talking about in addition to the fact that we're all rather puzzled that people who can afford that kind of a property want to live right next door to a freight train
073track where trains come by at all times of the day or night um so I have more comments than than anything else thank you thank you is there anyone else present that would like to speak on Long Shore Drive is there anyone remotely that wish to address the commission there is one hand raised one moment phone number ending in 534 you have permission to address the commission hello again this is Tom stalberg this is my neighborhood I live a couple blocks away from here um I want to address the what the last speaker just said about parking so I know it's not an obligation of the developer here the landowner to provide parking for the Argo liery um but it would be very nice if the city would realize that uh this parking which has
074been very helpful to have because the popularity of the Argo Cascades and in the livery uh if the city can come up with a plan uh more than what exists as the current plan uh to help alleviate the concerns of the neighborhood um from losing this parking again it's not any obligation of developers to do this but it would be nice if the city who runs Aro liery uh would think about uh a plan for that so that's an ask I also have an ask for the developer and again this is just an ask so I assume the developers going to follow the mandatory sto water uh I'm sure they are require of our city and county uh right now the impact of global climate change on our region have a very large impact on
075the severity of storm events and the frequency of severe storm events so this building like all other buildings not unique to this one but essentially what we're designing for right now and what we can mandate right now is going to be pretty obsolete pretty quickly this particular site is uh the topography situation puts it uphill of a woodland and then into AR liery this is just a simple ask to the developer if you're able to oversize your storm water retention so that you can add 10 20% uh that would be really wonderful and I'm hoping that that's something that we can look at in terms of all developments uh I know right now there's no storm water mitigation from this site at all so whatever happen Happ there's an improvement but looking forward to what
076is going to be the reality uh for our region uh it' be very nice in particular for this uh developer who's next to this Woodland which could uh be greatly impacted if there's more runoff than in in five years than is currently planned for thank you very much for considering that good night thank you Mr stalberg do we have any other callers there are no more hands raised at this time all right with that we'll close public comment I am looking for a motion to postpone uh this hearing to um April 2nd uh move by commissioner Mills and seconded by council member dish uh this just requires a Voice vote um all those in favor say I I I all those opposed motion passes all right this is postponed for the April second hearing we're
077moving on to section item number 9 C the 732 Packard Street PUD zoning District uh and supplemental regulations and site plan for city council approval this is a request to rezone 1.27 Acre Site from C1 campus business residential to a PUD plan unit development and adopt supplemental regulations to allow development up to 450,000 Square ft 14 stories and a site plan to construct a 14 story apartment building with optional ground floor commercial proposed beneficial effects of the Pud District include affordable housing by payment in Li enhanced sustainability and open space as proposed the building has 376 Apartments 82 vehicular parking spaces 392 bicycle parking spaces and includes Street skate improvements the site includes 12 Parcels 722 726 732 736 and 740 Packard Street and 917 921 923 925 927 931 and 933 South State Street
078the zoning designation uh that's recommended is PUD we'll move on to Petition of presentation welcome thank you uh good evening everybody uh my name is Andy seavoy um coming to you from Chicago 1647 North Milwaukee Chicago Illinois uh I'm here to ask for your support for um a proposed mixed use Housing Development that will help to alleviate the housing crisis here in ant Arbor and have has some serious um public benefits and environmental benefits to boot um I'm with a company called core spaces we are a national um university anchored housing developer based in Chicago uh We've um developed close to 30,000 beds across the country and this will be our third project in an arbor uh we are uh we do have a partner for this deal Jared shank of shank realy who's sitting
079right behind me uh as well as my entire team uh the architect and engineering team is back there to help me answer any questions you might have just some photos of our projects around the Midwest this will be our third in town we have one built one that's kind of in the permitting process and this would be our third so the site we're here to talk about um this is uh 12 Parcels about 1.3 acres in the Triangular block between State and Packard we have Frontage uh on two bike Lanes uh Northbound on State Street Southbound on Packard and we also have direct Frontage uh to a city park foresight Park you see some images there of the street view uh and what you're going to see tonight is a 15 story uh mixed use
080Tower um mostly apartments with some retail on the ground floor 376 units we have 82 parking spaces most of which are underground um and then we have a collection of um town home units along Packard that kind of mimic the use in that direction and we have retail and kind of an open auto Court along state so the the idea is to provide very active Street Scapes on both sides of the project and we would be um shooting for groundbreaking in December of this year to deliver in 27 Q2 so this is uh so the the project will involve uh several off-site improvements I'll start with those and then work my way in so right now there are 11 curb Cuts along the frontage of the property we would be proposing to change that to
081only two curb Cuts one for our vehicular access from State another which is kind of a pulloff area from Packard so that Uber drivers and such can pull out of the street uh to make their drop offs we're also going to be adding a crosswalk at Hoover inate the second uh substantial offsite Improvement is we're proposing to um invest up to $250,000 in uh improvements to foresight Park to the South and that scope would include refinishing the basketball court new lighting new benches all to be coordinated and approved uh with City staff and thirdly we're proposing uh investing approximately $1.6 million in the DTE infrastructure in town actually several blocks away uh as we were exploring ways uh that might result in uh better kind of all El electric prospects for this project they came
082up with a plan where if we were to update a circuit by church and Willard from 4.8 KV to 13.2 KVA then they can move buildings off of the circuit that currently serves our site freeing up capacity to serve Us in an all electric way we can talk about that more later but we are proposing to make that investment as part of this project starting with the plan and moving up um we have uh our parking level in the basement we have 17 uh EV installed spaces proposed here that's 20% double the um requirement this is the uh ground floor you'll see retail uses our main amenity um level is here we have Town Homes proposed along Packard um and we also have back of house spaces and bike rooms so this Auto court that
083you're looking at is our main entry to the lower level garage but we've also designed it to be able to accommodate the movements of a trash truck so trash could be collected interior to the site nobody has to stop in the public way or back up onto the public way and it could also be programmed for from time to time resident and public events with food trucks Etc because it does kind of line up exactly with Hoover and it's a nice Court there uh kind of an urban space there are two bike rooms labeled here A and B Bike Room a fronts right onto that Plaza and we're thinking of that as kind of a bike bar type scenario where you have front of house type uh finishes and um kind of a very presentable
084space there's also Bike Room B also accessible from the plaza both of these bike rooms have automatic door openers they have uh Frontage directly onto the plaza with windows that allow natural light so all together we're proposing 332 class a bike parking spaces that's 4.4 times what's required this is the me res level you'll notice there are some uh trees noted on our plan those are Landmark trees that we're proposing to save uh as we go up through the plans it becomes kind of a typical Corridor building but note that we are proposing some Kinks and undulations to really break up that facade to avoid any overly long stretches of building there are several step backs that occur as you go up the building and then on top there is a amenity Deck with a
085pool as far as the elevation as far as the materiality goes we are proposing high quality materials on all four sides uh in the upper tower that is a a mixture of cementitious cladding and a metal Panel System you can kind of see how that's used in the rendering to the right and then for the podium element the ground floor element we have uh a warm brick uh with wood inlays for the um entry areas uh this is uh just kind of shows you how the building gets broken up by those undulations we have several different heights for different parts of the building because of the step backs so on the right you can see the height that's proposed is 116 ft on the left it is 162 ft and then behind it's even it's
086one floor taller uh we are in the PD language uh the proposed height limit is 200 ft inclusive of all rooftop equipment these are the renderings this is uh basically looking South on Packard um this is looking at that auto Court from Hoover uh the left image here is looking North on backer so fory park would be directly across the street from you to the left and then the Right image shows uh a shot looking down state um of the building this starts to talk about what that pedestrian experience is like up on state we have this brick element with these kind of warm wood inlays for the entry of the building similar language along Packard where you have these Town Homes but you still have these wood inlay sections that kind of communicate an
087entrance to the building so our sustainability plan includes providing a lead silver building we are proposing a mostly electric um building with auxiliary gas backup for hot water generation however we will invest the $1.6 million in the DTE upgrades and uh the plan would be to basically ve out that duplicative hot water generation if they can Del the power in time uh so that would be by January of 25 if not we have to have an escape hatch because it would be a disaster to deliver a building that you cannot serve um uh along with that there are other um noteworthy uh parts of the sustainability plan we are providing rooftop solar that would generate 125,000 kilowatt hourss of capacity um we are providing the standard lowf flow appliances specking low E materials we're providing
088five times the required Class A or 4.4 times the required class a bike parking uh double the required EV installed parking spaces um and uh a compost room for residents uh so there's a lot here that we're doing notably um the investment in the grid and so as a conclusion I can't believe I got through all that so fast um we are providing a whole slew of public benefits with this project so uh not only we increasing the housing stock and implicitly uh helping to alleviate the housing crisis um in town uh we're providing sustainable lead silver con construction uh we're increasing that real estate tax base we're creating jobs um we're adding active uses at the ground floor so um that's retail that's town homes that is uh this open kind of uh Auto
089Court um we're removing nine curb Cuts uh making the investment to the DTE grid $1.6 million 250,000 in the adjacent Park we're pro uh proposing to invest 1% more into the affordable fund than would be required so that's $413,000 for each percentage Point um and then we will coordinate with the fire department to allow them to conduct a training within our uh property line to the extent uh we can before we demolish those buildings on the way up so with that that closes me out thank you for the time appreciate it um and then we'll move on to staff presentation uh thank you I'll cover a few mundane details and then I'll move into our staff analysis um I think as mentioned but I'll um make sure it's clear that this is a site that
090consists of 12 Lots it has 11 buildings on it currently and all are zoned C1 a/r um that is a district that is intended to quote or mostly quote intended to encourage the orderly clustering and placement of highdensity residential and complimentary commercial development near the campus business district it allows up to 300% floary ratio um and has no minimum lot size um staff report um goes um relists The purported Beneficial effects of a plan unit of this particular plan unit development these are also listed identically in section three of the draft supplemental regulations um I think highlights were well the actual purported beneficial effects were well covered by uhu Mr seo's presentation real high level The Beneficial effects include lead standards integrated solar power additional electric vehicle charging infrastructure electric ready building uh increased density
091reduced sprawl and vehicle miles traveled um affordable housing uh housing diversity Street ESC Cape activation and neighborhood park improvements staff report talks a little bit about a comparison of the current and proposed zoning districts in summary the intent and permitted uses are similar the dimensional aspects of the current and proposed zoning are regulated in opposite manners but it's my opinion at the end of the day they kind of they kind of they are similar but the current zoning district is regulated by floor area ratio without a high limit and the proposed district is regulated by a height limit without a floor area ratio um and also includes building coverage and open space standards um so both are trying to get at massing in different ways and then finally the development standards like parking sustainability and
092affordable housing are generally more stringent in the proposed um PUD District uh keep my pages organized uh um uh we have gone through also an analysis of the Pud zoning District review standards there are seven right nope sorry there eight there are eight of them I won't go through them all but in we staff we have found that this proposal meets the Z meets the standards of approval I'll point out the first standard is that the uses physical characteristics design features or amenities proposed have a beneficial effect for the city um staff field that the zoning District requires lead certification integrated solar panels additional electric vehicle charging stations limits on natural gas connections increases and requires a certain house a certain density requires affordable housing and improvements to public parks and streetscape activation and these
093are design features and amenities on site that will have a beneficial effect for the city we've also found for standard number two that this beneficial effect could not be achieved under any other zoning classific ification is not required to be provided by the existing standards we have found that other zoning classifications either do not require the beneficial effects listed or they don't require it to the degree proposed um and um I've gone through um several points in our staff analysis I won't repeat them tonight but I will point out that as a package The Beneficial effects of this 32 Packer PUD better achieve the overarching goals of the comprehensive plan which have been accepted as encouraging more dense development with a particular emphasis on more housing overall and a wider range of housing types and
094encouraging more sustainable developments and living arrangements with less or no Reliance on personal vehicles and reduced vehicle miles traveled than the underlying district and given that the underlying c1r District um designation of the site and surrounding area the development standards of this proposed PUD are in keeping with the generalized goals and strategies of the land use element that emphasize the orderly transition between higher density commercial and uh residential neighborhoods the design and massing of this project um sufficiently aligns with the potential character of the surrounding remaining c1r District um we also have a site plan the site plan analysis in the staff report um site plan has been reviewed by our staff team and we find that it meets all of the applicable standards um there are a couple minor um clarifications and little tidbits
095that need to be taken care of on the site plan that will be taken care of prior to city council approval should should this move on um the staff report also goes through some of those specific development details like the reporting of what is the floor are ratio the number of dwelling units and the range between apartments and town houses height and setbacks and so forth um and provides information about um the access plan landscape plan storm water management and sustainability features there are two proposed motions at the beginning of the staff report and staff recommends approval and supports both happy to answer any follow-up questions as well thank you um now we're going to move on to public hearing uh this is an opportunity for persons to speak up to three minutes about the
096item we'll first call on the individuals present and then uh remote participants to speak during this public hearing uh remotely please press star 9 if listening by phone um or if a raised hand feature of viewing through the web link for phone access please call 877 85352 47 and enter meeting ID 977 66 341 1226 City staff will select callers that have raised their hand using the last three jits of number or by name if available you'll hear an automated statement uh saying that the host is allowing you to speak in when speaking please move to a quiet area uh mute background noises so we can hear you clearly for either method of participation um please state your name and address at the beginning of your comments is there anyone present that would like to
097address the commission good evening I'm Dan tra I'm an attorney representing the neighbor is 716 Packard U my address is 350 South Main at Cony filbrick here in an arbor um you've seen some renderings of this property and uh you will note that my client structure is not actually shown in those renderings um my client is the owner of the building where the Domino's Pizza is currently located so I think you all I'm sure know this intersection it's a very important and vital intersection in the city of Ann Arbor um this development is coming in under PUD because under the current zoning it can't go beyond 300% in floor area ratio The Proposal will take it to 795 per. so that's more than two and a half increase it's quite a substantial increase in density
098one of the standards for this increase in density which can only be done via a PUD is to show that you don't have a detrimental impact on neighboring property that's the third Criterion in the list for PUD considerations um in this case we contend there's been no consideration at all of the impacts on my client's property uh we have been in touch with the city we've been in touch with the least people associated with the developer uh I sent a letter on behalf of 716 Packard back in February 20th uh but we've really gotten nothing uh to uh no attention to the potential impacts on the adjacent property it is our contention that you just can't do this you can't rubber stamp a PUD without actually going through and giving material consideration to each of
099the eight factors so in this case we're going to have something that is 2.65 times more dense than what is permitted under the current zoning uh District um right on the property line it's going to be 200t high and granted there's no current height restriction but you know if you were limited to 300 F 300% you you wouldn't be able to build what they're proposing it would be different so what they're doing is maximizing density it's going to have impacts on our property in terms of shade in terms of wind and snow um it's going to basically dump things down onto the current structure and limit what we can do in the future so I understand there's a lot going on here I understand it's a big project but at the end of the day
100you're supposed to go through these criteria and say that they have been met and if not you should be recommending the city council that they not approve this plan or alternatively table it and have them do a shade study or Shadow study uh to show the impacts of my client's property and to mitigate those and only then consider making a recommendation to city council so it's you know I understand there are a lot of factors here but you're supposed to say that each and everyone is met there has been no analysis no study no nothing to show that my client's property won't be impacted and in fact we believe it will be impacted quite severely and I just want to close aesthetically what you're seeing is not what's really going to happen my CL CLI
101property with the dominoes is still going to be there and the profile of this is going to be not what you're looking at and being asked to approve this evening thank you thank you do we have any other folks present that would like to address the commission please hi my name is Lynn Kelly I live at 1912 Anderson um I Am pro development clearly we need to have more density I'm I'm not opposed to that however 14 stories or maybe 15 well before I say that it seems to be a very thoughtful design I appreciate the sustainability I apprec appreciate the Aesthetics I appreciate trying to set back different parts of it it different ways so it's not a huge mass on the sidewalk I wish it didn't have to be CL you know 5
102ft setbacks but I get it if you're trying to ram a lot of apartment in there you have to have a lot of floor space a big footprint but 14 stories or I think I heard you say 15 stories in a neighborhood where the prevailing uh structures are three or four stories that just seems to me to be not in keeping with the character of the neighborhood um I understand that the staff is recommending this and I also understand that I'm Davey against Goliath here but it just seems like a seven story apartment building there would be great it's a great place to develop I'm I assumed that Domino's was part of this I'm a little surprised to hear that Domino's isn't one of these Parcels but that seems to be another issue I guess
103I'm I'm arguing for can't we cap it it seven stories that's already massive thank you thank you welcome he uh my name is Bella mazeres and I live at 7-Eleven Arch Street uh my apartment building along with a collection of houses and a park will remain on this block on the south side of the proposed development these exist in a high foot traffic area popular with students the proposed elment has a lot going for it and you've heard about that and we'll hear about that today in lights of previous comments about the use of PS let's talk about how we can put this one to work in a unique way this PUD includes a stipulation that the developers pay for improvements to foresight Park which I have been hoping to see since I moved here
104the park is neglected and walled in from the neighborhood as it exists now what I would like to see as part of his contribution is public pathway on the south side of the property connecting state to Packard this would increase access to the park and Residences like mine along the south side of the property for pedestrians meanwhile this would also directly connect to the new bicycle facilities along South State Street and 's athletic facilities and the proposed building's front entrance a public path along the south side of this development would be a wonderful contribution to the street skate every day I see people using the parking lots behind my building to cut through the block right now I think the developer proposes to fence this area off once the building is up instead a public
105path could allow this flow of pedestrians to exist in a safe welcoming environment PS are a give and take this is a small but impactful way that developer can make a major contribution to the public good and the character of the neighborhood my balcony looks right back at this proposed development and I would much rather see a welcoming space there than a wal off Alleyway all I ask is that this 14-story apartment building that will soon rise above my home include this small Improvement to the built environment as part of its contribution to the city under the Pud thank you thank you is there any anybody else that would like present that would like to speak to the commission Mr Moore are you on behalf of the petitioner or be I'm on behalf of me
106okay all right although I am working with the petitioner um okay I just wanted to uh bring uh some of the planning Commissioners who weren't here during our PUD conference up to speed and kind of refresh the memories of those of you that were on that pre conference um we've Incorporated many of the suggestions from that pre conference that you'll see in this design I believe commissioner white you had been concerned to put the number of curb Cuts onto Packard where there's a bike lane approximate to our building so we've eliminated the one curb cut that went to our underground parking combined it to the State Street curb cut so now we don't have that potential conflict U with the bicyclist I believe it was commissioner Gibbs Randall who wanted us to enlist in arborist
107to to determine which of the landmark trees on the site had the greatest chance of survivability and those are the two of the four that are there the two we've shown as remaining were the ones that are arborous said had the highest likelihood of being fine they are sandwich between the foundations of two of the existing buildings and so once those buildings are removed high capacity high quality soils can be replaced and nurture those trees so they have the highest likelihood of surviving um I believe uh commissioner Mills is one of the uh of the Commissioners that talked about the fact that high quality design is a public benefit and that we should really key in and focus on The Pedestrian experience on both of the streets so we've added the townhouse units and you'll
108see we have spent a lot of attention to the streetcape and how the pedestrians interact with the project and you'll see that in our renderings so that's just by way of saying we have been responsive the comments we've heard from the pening commission before thank you for your time thank you do we have anybody else present that would like to speak to the commission do we have any remote callers there are no hands raised Mr chair okay I'm sorry one two hands were just raised all right that's why we give it a moment thank you Adam yuskevich you have three minutes to address the Planning Commission hi this is Adam dusevich calling from Las Vegas driveing Fourth Ward I would like to support staff recommendation that this rezoning site plan and development agreement be approved
109for all the reasons outlined in the staff report including the additional housing and density in a walkable area close to student destinations affordable housing a20 sustainability standards Park improvements and more this project meets our standards and will provide significant benefits to the city and to the neighborhood we are in a housing crisis and in a climate crisis and adding a significant number of housing units in an area where most of the residents will have no need to to drive a car will go a long way toward addressing both of these we're also in a traffic violence crisis and eliminating curb Cuts will significantly improve pedestrian and cyclet safety along two major corridors I also want to support a comment that council member dish made earlier but the format of Staff reports I've seen in this
110meeting makes it a lot easier to see where a project does and does not meet the requirements of the UDC thank you for making this change I hope that you pass this tonight and I look forward to seeing it built I'd also like to mention that The Dominoes is going to sell a hell of a lot of Pizza Thank you thank you Michelle Hughes you have permission to address the Planning Commission hi um I was just going to say I lived in that neighborhood for 10 years and was at um what used to be called the Lester house Co-op and it's now uh and it's now called the siia Rivera and Mara P Johnson house it's uh one of the IC co-ops and um in my experience from living in that neighborhood what is needed
111is more housing um the people who live there there's a lot of students in that in that neighborhood and they're just crammed into these old houses and um it's it would be better to have DSE housing than the type of crowded housing that's in there right now um and you know I I think that a neighborhood that you know is generally three stories right now it can't become a neighborhood but everything is generally 17 stories until someone does it first so let this be the first one cuz CU that'd be great um I I also hope that one day the uh the co-ops can build big in that neighborhood because I'd love to have more co-ops but fair than that I'd love to have more neighbors of co-ops thank you thank you do we have
112any other callers on the line caller with phone number ending in 194 you have permission to address the Planning Commission hello can you hear me yes we can hello good thank you hi this is Rita Mitchell calling from um 621 fth Street and the old death side and um my concern with this project as pres presented has to do with one additional element that hasn't been discussed this will be a very tall building in an area that's really at most two story region in in that particular part of town and it'll be raising a lot of window space that will be a risk for um birds in the area and I would ask that the developer strongly include bird safe glass which is Fred um small dots 2 in apart across each window to prevent
113bird strikes the best possible other wise we can anticipate um a fair number of dead birds unfortunately um around the building that would be quite unpleasant for the birds and for the public um I also would comment that I appreciate the attention to the park nearby foresight park has been ignored for a long time and it's great that this developer um is paying attention and um preparing to support improvements in that Park um so that's really all I have to say but I'd also like to call out that as as a developer in the the Chicago area the attention to birds should be something that would be quite um familiar because of the many bird strikes that happen in that city thank you thank you there any other callers on the line yes Adam Goodman
114you have permission to address Planning Commission hi this is Adam Goodman speaking to you from the Fifth Ward uh I think this is a fantastic project I hope you'll approve it I had one small concern which is the bike parking uh it looks to me like 100% of the bike parking spaces are class A this is generally something that's allowed by our code our code presumes that class A is always better than Class B and Class B is always better than Class C however uh and I think I've brought this to your attention before I don't believe that this is actually true in in reality because Class A spaces are generally locked up and so in in a building like this they would only be available to Residents um I would prefer to see in
115in this project and projects like it a mix of Class A spaces for residents and then Class B or or C spaces for visitors to the building um I I hope this is something that youall can maybe explore with the developer tonight but regardless of that that's a minor point I overall think this is a fantastic project and hope you'll approve it thank you thank you Mr Goodman any other callers there do not appear to be more callers okay all right we'll give just one more second okay with that I'll close public comment I'm going to read the proposed motions to take them together unless there is strong opposition to take them separately okay okay all right I'm going to read the uh motion the Anarbor City Planning Commission recommends that the mayor and city
116council approve the 732 Packer PUD zoning zoning district and supplemental regulations and the second motion being that the Ann Arbor City Planning Commission recommends that the city and mayor uh city council and mayor approve the 732 Packard site plan and development agreement subject to outstanding um addressing the outstanding comments from staff moved by commissioner Mills and seconded by commissioner W we're in discussion council member dish thank you chair Lee um I want to talk about the things that I appreciate about this project um I think it's really important that the intent and permitted uses of this PUD are similar to the existing C1 underlying uh districting both are designed to encourage orderly clustering and placement of highdensity residential development near campus the Pud will achieve this by coordinated development of 12 Parcels into a more
117efficient 14-story residential development than what is currently there yes the height increase is significant relative to what is there but rather than focus on height I'd like to speak briefly about density and efficiency the project will be 2.6 times the underlying density and it will deliver 376 dwelling units which is more than 10 times the number of dwelling units that the parcels currently provide which I understand is 33 that is a very good ratio of density increase to housing unit increase I'm not going to go over uh the benefits because they've been sketched out a couple of times and they are numerous and exciting I'm um I'm really interested to see how the invest of 1.6 million in DTA DTE infrastructure works out it sounds like you were doing this without a clear guarantee that
118capacity the capacity that you need will be available when you need it so if it isn't uh will you will you have some gas infrastructure that will become sort of what is it extraneous that's the what I'm looking for yeah so the intent for the Bas case would be to permit this building as a hybrid building with a gas boiler for auxiliary hot water generation if within 18 months of when we intend to deliver we can get away with value engineering that out of our price we will but before we say we're going to do that we need to make sure that we can get the power to actually serve the building as all electric and reduce the need for that boiler okay so are you providing water heat that's correct so uh we would
119have a gas boiler for water heat not only for the the retail portion but for the residential portion as well that's the the element that takes the most electricity and it's hard to do that when the grid is overloaded particularly in the winter uh and so that's when that would primar the the boiler if we were to build that building with the auxiliary boiler that's when the boiler would be most active would be during the winter months um if we can get the power to not have the boiler we certainly don't want to pay for it so we would rather not build it given that we have already paid DTE to extend power to our site um So the plan would be to uh have the ability to do the boiler if we need it
120without coming back to city council or plan commission um and then try not to and then you can heat you can heat a building using essentially radiators with electricity you can heat the water with electricity right so w that's cool it's a water sourced heat pump system so that's very cool um thank you I'm trying not to be too slow but just wanted to spill it all out so I can explain it um okay so that is great thank you very much I was going to ask you about compost but you mentioned that there will be a compost room for residents and that's great um OSI suggested that you pair solar with batteries I don't know if that's advantageous to you so I throw that back out you need to you can come back and
121answer everything later that everyone asks you I wanted to ask staff to pursue um two really good ideas from the public comments and one was the idea of bird safe glass um and I'm asking staff to pursue this I'm not trying to open a conversation um and then um I've I thought that Bella maer's suggestion about a public pathway on the south side of foresy Park Park to improve improve connectivity to um and bike and pedestrian Transit was something worth um exploring and I don't you know if you at the end want to speak to any of that but I'm asking staff to you know that's okay I have noted those two follow-up requests okay commissioner white uh so thanks for bringing this project to us thanks for listening to us in the prepu uh
122thanks for offloading the uh deliveries into your auto Court though I would try to think of a better name for that um one thing that I persistently see as a biker in the city is in spite of there being driveways in development delivery vehicles still try to wedge themselves into the bark uh the bike facilities so I don't know if there is a way to de de um incentivize that with poles that are closest to the entrance because what I see them doing um they did it today or yesterday at uh University Tower there's a driveway where they can go in to do their delivery but they sit a quarter way into the bike lane so you still have to move around them and if there's two-way bike traffic that creates a problem so I
123under I've seen I I think we talked about this at 333 um Williams development where they were going to put poles right before the cutouts so that the delivery trucks couldn't just wedge themselves in in such a way cuz they don't want to go into your auto Court to do their delivery because then they have to turn around or back out or something like that so they still want to stay parallel to the building so they can jump out do the delivery and jump back in but that creates a hazard uh for bikers so if there's any way for us to look at that just at the cutouts I think if we did that like polls at each side of the cutout I think that would deemphasize that and would be safer for bikers um
124I also want to thank you for hearing me talk recently about cargo bikes and noting it on your site plan that you plan to do that I count 12 Class C bike spaces that are available to the public is that correct on your site plan that is correct okay and then everything else is Class A inside the building there isn't any transporting of bikes uh up a level or down a level it's all on ground floor that is correct and then uh you note it but didn't note in your benefits that you were also planning to do uh ebike charging as well I would ask that you put that on your sheet to say that you're creating facility for ebikes and that you're cre creating facility for them to be charged uh cuz I think
125that that is also helpful and then um what was my other question I lost my other question when it comes back to me I will ask it thank you um and just a quick reminder um please speak into the mic because otherwise it won't be picked up um when you are responding uh so everybody that's listening outside can hear so we appreciate that any other Commissioners I commiss it's for staff it's just a technical question so that I can understand something that I read that I did not understand at one place in one report it felt like I was reading that the affordable housing wasn't required because of the underlying zoning and then in another place it was it was required and so I just wanted to understand the the Delta from uh c1r to
126to the Pud with the how we would treat the um affordable housing quoti because I was just confused in what I read um because in one place it was like we didn't have to do this and I was like but you did and then you're now saying you're only did a 1% more so just Clarity for me yeah well um yes it is all about 1% um in standard number five it there's a number five talks about when residential uses are proposed and it exceeds the underlying density then um 15% of the floor area must be dedicated to um affordable housing dwelling units and so projects that propose 15% affordable housing we are not going to say no thank you to however that is the standard of approval but that standard is 15% this project
127is proposing 16% and they don't have to so we would like to give credit where credit is due and um when you have a project of this sides that 1% you know is significant and um they are requesting a payment in Li um so that is a lot of extra dollars um and so we would like to acknowledge that they are um proposing and then we have codified that um 16% is required in this District so I and just if you could bear with me for a second so it is not the case that they are not required to do the 15% that is that was required is it correct standard of yes a standard of approval is 15% um affordable housing because this is more than 300% F because of the F but it's
128not based on like when we were looking at the Pud for 7-Eleven church and it was r4c to the Pud and it was a 10 times the density because of the units per acre we don't have a units per acre density here we're using f instead well that project too we had that project too they had tried they that project was also required to have 15% affordable housing and um they were trying they were saying that that was a purported benefit and staff was saying that is a standard of approval and because they remained at 15% at the table we moved at the table it moved to 177% correct um but it is an entirely different project here the minimum standard is 15% and like I said we would not we would say thank you
129very much but that is not a benefit of the P of this PUD to just meeting the 15% but they are proposing 16% and that's something that we cannot require I don't know if I'm just in my reading it was it was hard to track all of that because at one point it felt like it wasn't required and then it was like oh and we're just doing this and then it was no we're just doing 1% so like that I think I think I am understand what you're saying now is because they are doing 1% more than is required you acknowledge that as a public benefit in the staff report yeah as a public benefit that we could not get otherwise okay so again for the developers on that sheet that you created of all
130the the benefits the 15% is just a given because of the density so it's really just the 1% and I think that would be a little clearer and it would be a little more honest in the report in especially since this has to go to City Council and will U be subject to another um public hearing and then uh I also wanted to uh support is it Bella was that okay Bella's suggestion for the um sidewalk to come on the south side of the building uh through foresight Park to connect um packerton state so if the developer is agreeable to that um and that can go into the $250,000 Park Improvement I'd love to see that there thank you any other Commissioners commissioner Weatherby all right so I just have kind of a set of
131things I think I'll Focus primarily on uh kind of bike Lanes pedestrian access um Can is there can someone show me like where entrance Ingress egress to this building will be for pedestrians bicyclists like like where are the stairwells where are the where's the I mean I saw the lobby is kind of in the middle um in addition to their response um in the packet there is an attachment called uh architectural plan I believe yeah and on uh page four of 22 um there are some triangles at each of the entrance right the the entrances are denoted by triangles um on sheet four of 22 okay so the image you're looking at now you'll see black triangles everywhere where there's an entrance and so the main entrances are both from State and from Packard Street
132you see these triangles yep uh and so you would enter into kind of an interior circulation Zone uh where there would be doors actually out to both streets there's also uh an exit here out to that Court um and then you'll see uh other kind of exits and entries into the bike rooms uh notated on the outside of the plan by a black triangle okay so if I'm living in this building and I call to get pizza delivered all right pizza maybe is a bad idea I call to get a sub delivered um Pizza will just walk down go around the corner um where where would you expect that delivery driver I'm getting groceries delivered let's go with that um where would that delivery driver where would I tell that delivery driver to stop so
133you would want to tell them to stop along Packard in the cutout uh which is shown at the top of the screen here yeah so there is a curb cut out there specifically for standing vehicles to get them out of the street and our Packard Street entrance is right there and so that's and so that's a that's a nice entrance that's not just like the bottom of a stairwell that is main that is where the that is where the building address is that's what it's 32 Packer okay and we do have an image of that coming right up it's right here okay and so because uh certainly as I walk down Main Street and I walk by 615 South Main the yard um it's a very similar position where there is a uh private company
134that's not part of the building that has a parking lot at the end of the street and there's a lot of conflict with that and there's always people in the bike lines parking for deliveries and for so so I'm really happy that is a spot that is designated for this and does not interfere with the bike lane does not interfere with the sidewalk right I mean I'm nod okay I know we did we did the yard and I know the delivery vehicles Park in the bike lane it's just the most convenient place for them to park so this is a dedicated space for drop off and it is near the cuz one of the things with that one has a lot of space but it's not near the front entrance where people are going to
135come in and out and feel safe and comfort and so this has a designated area and is there going to be some sort of buzz in for delivery or um so that packages aren't just left out on the street is there yes so we we would have on-site management during delivery hours that would handle that we have a system called Butterfly MX which um we could arrange for entry into the building uh through that system okay that would be at both main entrances uh particular the one you're talking about is shown there you see that actual curb cut is about 20 ft away from the actual entrance okay perfect just cuz this is a really big issue with a lot of buildings in town and in this spot which is extraordinarily heavy traffic of all
136types on both sides right um it could really be a big problem so I'm glad that that has been discussed and thought about um let's see uh just another um I like the mixture of the apartment sizes I think that's a really good good thing for this we we don't always see that um bird safe glass it sounds like a silly thing but it's actually a big deal so another another point for the bird save glass um and then the other question so I know you're going to work on the are you adding a crosswalk at Hoover or moving the crosswalk from the south side to the north side of Hoover and state the orientation and location of the crosswalk is is essentially the same we're moving some ramps around a little bit to accommodate
137some poles but we're putting a uh we're upgrading the signal there because actually the exit from the courtyard is will be a signalized exit it'll be actually a four-way uh stop uh stop light as opposed to a three-way right now so there's just generalized improvements there cuz there's not a crosswalk on the north side of that intersection there's only a crosswalk on the south side of that intersection is it I thought it was just the opposite but there's only one I used to be it was now it was switched okay because the north side didn't work the South Side had to yeah there there's one and I I won't debate which side it's on I know there's one right now yeah okay and then um a a point for the city maybe that is probably
138not your responsibility but the that whole intersection um not the the state Packard Arbor intersection is a really intense intersection and when we we're adding a lot of people right on that corner and uh there's a lot of bikes and there's a lot of it's a it's a hard one to kind of get across it's kind of a scramble so I don't know if we can do something to make that maybe it just appears unsafe as a pedestrian um and maybe it's fine but that is something that I'd like if you know the trans trans somebody could take a look and see if there's something because if we're adding a lot of people right at that corner um and a lot more like I'm not at all concerned about the vehicle the car use from
139that building I don't think that's going to be an issue car use to that building and away from that building and bikes and people is just going to add a lot of intensity to that whole kind of wild intersection there and and so I just if if there's any way that we can kind of have somebody taking a look at that separate really from your responsibility but but just in general to make sure everybody can safely get to campus and downtown and um with this up upgrade but other than that I think it's a great building I think there's a lot of good things about it it's definitely a change it's going to be a big change um and that's what we need so well thank you I appreciate that thank you other Commissioners commissioner
140aprons I just wanted to ask a clarification question about the building electrification um we received a communication from a Community member who was concerned about the retail SL restaurant space uh having a gas hookup and I wondered whether you your kind of conditional commitment to building electrification based on the upgrades to DTE would include the retail space as well I would prefer to have the flexibility to offer a gas connection to a potential tenant in that space uh if it comes down to prohibiting that it's a small enough piece of the development that I could live with that um it would be better though to offer more options for potential tenants so I would prefer uh to keep that option on the table for a gas Conor ction for a retailer in that 2,000t retail
141space so the so the in your mind the ideal scenario is the the DTE upgrades happen in time and the building is all electric except for that retail space that's correct and the what's that and backup generator got it thank you thank you commissioner Adams does that work with the supplemental regulations that are on the table which as I'm reading them only contemplate a natural gas connection for auxiliary hot water generation that's what we would ask for for our base case uh we would have to add language in there about actually making that DTE payment to make sure that that process gets set in motion that was a late email um after the staff report was compiled so uh but in a base case we would want the ability to use a supplemental boiler to
142provide auxiliary hot water generation just in case DTE cannot um stick to their schedule because the scenario in which we deliver a building of this size to uh in a way where it can't be served by electricity is very very bad so we need to have that approved and on the table chair quick followup yeah yeah go ahead please the um what I so I understood in the last exchange though that you intended to potentially offer a gas connection to the resta potential restaurant tenants in those spaces am I did I mishar you that is correct and what I was asking is is that is that intention consistent with the regulations that we have on the table in front of us tonight or is that is that something that needs to be amended as part
143of the regulations I would defer to you I thought my understanding was that auxiliary gas connection for for retail uses was in there but maybe I Mis it says auxiliary hot water generation okay uh you are you are correct that um the the draft language would not cover that option for the restaurant um and I would encourage the the Planning Commission to discuss whether that would be um acceptable revision to the to the draft I'm fine either way I just heard something that seemed inconsistent with what I was seeing on the page and if that's going to if that's going to leave those spaces dark then that's a problem right so I just wanted to flag it thank you any other Commissioners um commissioner Mills I want to follow up a little bit on that
144in part because it seemed like maybe staff wanted to say a little bit more and I was curious about what staff maybe wanted to add on this um just that in addition to the option for restaurant um it doesn't currently provide for gas for um backup power the Lang the language it right and that's that was in the so that was in the staff report too that that was the intention behind this so I was curious about that within the supplemental rigs I feel like 99.9% accurate is good enough but no but joking as said um um I can take ownership for that I think that in our in just the very last minute this is a draft um maybe our signals or communication cross paths um we have the opportunity to um to revise
145it now we would just so you know as a course of action we also provide the an applicant one last um opportunity to re to review and revise both the development agreement document and the supplemental regulations if it differs from this version tonight going to city council and you are not aware we have not previously discussed it we would make it abundantly clear to city council that this is a change um and like I said I think that we may uh Mr zoo and I may have a cross path in our communication and our reviews of these of these documents um this draft was finalized last Wednesday I believe yeah I know if I could jump into and share um my perspective and a conversation that we had as well um I was really excited
146because I saw an email that at the time I think the approach was as the petitioner indicated this building is going to be designed with a heat Source in such a way that the source of that heat Source I think you said heat pump I that can be fueled either with natural gas or electricity that technology exists that that adaptability is they're planning on that for that sign I got really excited when we got an email saying hey we might have a solution to actually do this with fully electric as that I know that's an interest of the plan commissioner and the city council um based on our conversation um I maintained that excitement but I also cautioned him that there's a lot of ifs in that for us to put a requirement in the
147supplemental regulations that it has to be electric at this point for that source is in that case him putting this Project's delivery and realization on Decisions by DTE that will be out of their control and so my advice was to retain this language as it is be upfront with the Planning Commission um I really appreciated them being really transparent about some of the cost factors and the challenges with that but I just want to also add that context that is why I don't recommend at this point that this this say it only the only restriction would be allowance would be natural gas for the retail spaces as well as uh emergency power backup it's that that's up to you if that is a critical benefit that you want to see that then you have additional
148information here for that but to memorialize that requirement building wide for electrification I just want to be honest and let you hear from the petitioner that that is putting decisions that they are willing to facilitate and invest in but it is there's time associations and realization of those that will be drastically out of their control I I is that okay okay I was going to say I get that and I'm probably going to say something that people is going to shock people first of all the presentation that included this 1.6 million wasn't right like it wasn't in any of the stuff that we saw and so that actually gives me a whole lot more Comfort behind the language that's in here about because it's not achievable because we hear over and over again it's not
149achievable this seems to me to be like a good faith effort the reality is I I mean again because it's not in anything that we have we can't make we're taking your word on it and so coming in here I was like we know but the G we've been told multiple times oh sorry that's crazy we've been told multiple times that the grid can't handle electric generally for many buildings right and so is this really going to happen and it seems like there may well be path towards that so I leave it up to staff honestly in the next iteration to know what our goals are here and to write it and then again like this is not your first building here this will not be your you this it sounds like this you don't
150want this to be your last building here we remember yeah that's correct I mean that's that's the reality like we remember I remember at least try to remember what people tell tell L and then what actually comes to be so I am comfortable with staff working that out and however however that comes I I don't love it when people like tell us something that like H we're not holding your feet too because I want to if you tell us that you're working with DT and making this investment of $1.6 million if you don't do that that's just poor form anyway so okay so I'm thinking on the sustainability I think that that is definitely making good faith effort and so I'm trying to think about again how is this different like what are the community
151benefits associated with this different I appreciate the pedestrian experience I think that that the the uh Western facade along State Street having the cutout to accommodate the large existing trees is amaz like I think that that's really going to change that experience and I think that that's definitely something that the underlying zoning doesn't require and so I think that's great I'm curious about what your plan is to make sure that you don't kill the trees in the process of demolishing everything else he's best to answer that so I actually met with Bill Lawrence um the former city Forester who our arborist on site to discuss that process um the two homes which flank those two trees left and right um will be uh demolished and then the basement's pulled away from the trees and then
152he's designing a backfill mix um because of the species they are it has to be well drained you don't want to a lot of water sitting up against those roots because it kill the tree so it's going to be a mixture of sand and LOM and lifts that get put back into the voids that are created by the removal of the foundation system and then you'll notice we have um uh protection zones outlined around each of those trees so once that new soil is put in there the protection methods were putting even outside what's required by the city you'll see two dash circles there one is the minimum requirement for the city and the second one is where we intend to make sure there's a no Drive zone so that all that new soil doesn't
153get compacted and then he's also coming up with a watering schedule to make sure that the trees get enough water for the first two or three years as the roots are gr into that new uh soil that's being placed there great sure that's specifically yeah sure go ahead so I'm watching uh 2 2270 be developed and there are some ancient trees that line there's a Grove of them that line and I'm watching the trucks decimate the branches of that tree and I've watched them take out one of our trees in our easement they are so can you just just say a little bit more about how you are planning to protect that you know with the no drive like is that well so there there'll be onsite construction management the beer barriers will be erected
154um and as as regards the canopy if there has to be some selective pruning where the branches may go outside of that area where there might be a crane swing coming into plant then the arborist will direct The Selective pruning of the of the canopy um that actually can help the tree survive sure and then a followup to staff if those trees are harmed they'll have to remediate that yes okay well they're a central feature of our of our pedestrian we understand I'm I'm just following commissioner Mill's uh lead here with like are we going to do what we say and just I mean you know this but for everybody else's benefit who only follows the project that's in their neighborhood there's it's not just the normal mitigation metric that you have to pay if
155you take out a tree that you say you're going to save there's a penalty in the unified development code so it's it's we do take it seriously um again for the TV friends out there um okay so I see again I see that that is something that is unique to this particular district and I don't I don't see that it's really in the supplemental RS and I don't know how people feel about putting it in the supplemental RS but I think that that's a real big benefit and if there's a you know I don't we to change things at the table I'm just saying I see that as a benefit um let's think the other a question about the benefits that are shown and this is just for my owne reminding me the park improvements
156is that as a result of the Pud or is that just as a result of development because we require payment to Parks when you add more housing um it may be semantics but is perhaps the planning department can correct me we don't require it we ask so what we've been doing um rather than it um going into some amorphous fund we've actually been we've hired a a a landscape architect who's done City Park work and we've been working with the city parks department to identify those areas of that Park which need the most help and and so we would be participating uh in replacing those elements the rotting benches the the street lights the Park lights that don't work till we hit that threshold so we're actually the you're seeing those improvements happen as the
157buildings being built got it all right super and but that that multiplier is roughly what we ask of to make sure that the our investment in our Parks is commensurate as we're adding people that our parks are keeping Pace with that okay great um let's think of public path in the South I also just want to say I think the location of the bike rooms alone is something that we don't like we don't require but I think it's great that it's at surface like that they are easily accessible that there's an entrance into the rest of the building from them I think that that is inspired and I I'm intrigued by this bar in the Bike Room and very intrigued um so in summary one of the things that I think about is is like
158again what are our what are our standards for approval of a PUD um and also one of the things that didn't come up in this discussion of a PUD quite as much although it came up just a little bit is is are kind of the public benefits that are offered commensurate with kind with the base um of what is there right now now and there's some measures for that for example for affordable housing contribution but I that we that is a standard but that this Balancing Act my sense is it is like this is a com it's not any one thing I would say that this maxes out on um the you know it's not like it's 100% maxing out on sustainability it is providing additional affordability or affordable housing contribution but it's not like
159knocking it out of the but I think that there's a combination of things and again what this entire block could allow is something that's half the height but covering the entire thing and I think that that the arrangement of this building and the and the thinking about how many curb Cuts there are is really thoughtful and so I think collectively it is providing that benefit so um this is something that I'm excited to support and again thank you the staff report was really helpful um in in laying out what's there now and how this is the same or different thank you commissioner Mills any other oh U commissioner Adams so um I want to Echo commissioner Mill's comments about the staff report I thought it was excellent and thoughtful careful um I agree with the
160analysis in it I I intend to vote to recommend approval um I ALS but I do want to stop and note the objection filed by Mr tra um I agree with the claim that the UDC requires a consideration of whether the development will have a detrimental impact on neighboring properties and I want to take a moment to address the issues raised in his letter and explain why I'm voting to recommend approval in spite of these effects um so the UDC requires that we consider whether there's a detrimental impact it doesn't Define that um but it also doesn't require and this is contrary to the claims in the letter that we quantify or investigate those those those effects we have to consider them as part of our analysis and I think I think we are um
161the letter identifies four potential impact shade uh redirected precipitation sources additional wind and the location of due dumpsters um I think interpreting detrimental effect in the UDC to mean that a PUD cannot change the direction of the wind cannot impact the way the precipitation flows cannot block the sun cannot generate new uh refu receptacles would mean that could functionally never be approved or could only be approved with a kind of analysis that the law by its terms doesn't require um and I think when we look at the prevailing zoning on the site that only underscores this conclusion um a project could be built on this site today by right that although not as tall as this project uh could still be quite tall tall enough to generate all of the effects listed in the letter
162to sum or perhaps all of the degree that this project would and I don't think it's reasonable to interpret the UDC to forbid the approval of a PUD District because it might generate these things in this manner particularly again with the prevailing zoning Define the way that it is um so with that again I I just want to say that this is a fantastic project um the you know I think the corridor here has struggled for years for lack of density um when I was a student I lived across the street from this project on State and it's it was astonishing to me at the time that restaurants and bars couldn't stay open on this on these streets and that's because there weren't enough students there's too much low density housing in this area to
163support viable restaurants bars the kind of things you see in South University so I'm happy to see that we're going to have additional density finally uh in this area um a personal note as well I want to note that there was a u ofm student killed across across the street next to where I lived in a run down building that's not terribly unlike the buildings that are being bulldozed to make way for this project and I think it's fantastic that we're finally replacing some of this Legacy house housing stock with new buildings that are safe and to code um and I think if my kids end up going at attending the University of Michigan if I'm lucky enough to have kids that attend I want them living in buildings that are safe so um I'm
164happy to see this project and happy to vote to support it thank you Council M dish thank you charlee thank you commissioner Adams I was hoping you would address that um I wanted to come back uh to the question of the public benefit that uh commissioner Mills raised um in a I think that this is what I was trying to say in my comments um that the public benefit needs to be proportional to the increase that's asked for and if we think about the increase in terms of height alone it feels like oh this is a very big increase but if we think about this increase in terms of density and if we think about what we are getting for the increase in density for a 2.6 times increase in density we are getting 10
165times the dwelling units and so that's what I mean to say that what the developer is asking for and what is being delivered in terms of one of the things that we want which is density is in an appropriate balance and I agree with you very much and you a beautiful job commissioner Mills uh teasing out further the real benefits of this project um that perhaps ought to be memorialized in the supplemental rugs but we'll leave that to the staff um there are many benefits in this project that taken together I think we are getting really quite a lot and I'm extremely excited about the project thank you any other Commissioners I'll add some of of my comments um I think when this first came to PUD here uh I think we gave some feedback
166that this seemed um I think the word used was brutal um if I recall but I feel like a lot of that has been addressed I think it came in originally at 17 stories if I recall correctly and we felt that it was a rectangular block being fixed into a you know what could be a triangular kind of um a beautiful building with with a visual Plaza that I think coming down State Street what does the experience of the user feel like and so feel like a lot of those elements have been addressed I I do think that there are some hard angles still um so as far as we've addressed um proportionality I have I'm going to start actually with something a little more kind of detailed this one's dedicated towards staff there are
167develop I'm sorry so this is in the Pud language itself in the dimensional standards um there is it says it's a minimum of six stories and then a Max of like a feet and so my the the minimum Building height six stories the maximum Building height shall be 15 stories and 200t do we have a standardized like what is one story like what is the minimum of six stories so this is like a you know I mean I know that sometimes like the first story is you know 18 ft as prescribed by you know code but is there a particular reason that the dimensional standard isn't just like 72t or what's what's the minimum Building height conru kind of a stickler sorry it's a very detailed pit nit picky question um it is my professional
168opinion that having a minimum number of stories will get at what we want better than putting in a number of feet um I think it's very clear here and and we only include this because they are saying that a benefit is increased density sure so you know although there are a lot of reasons why that why they they cannot then get the Pud approved and then probably come in with a one-story building yep but never less I I feel to be holistic I do want to add a minimum number of stories and this is I think it's very clear six stories they would have the option then to make those stories 9 feet tall if that's maybe the minimum building code or 15 foot stories right right um so they could do that I I
169am going a little bit of Faith but um I feel that with a minimum number of feet there's not then the I think the expectation is less clear and if we want density and if that is a purported benefit of the site I think that six stories and it could be um that is maybe open for a debate but I think six stories is um a very clear expectation for if you're saying it it's increased density well then it needs to be at least six stories got it thank you for the clarification um okay again that was kind of like a very detailed level question uh I'm going to go a little more broader again kind of the applicability of PUD I think we've discussed so encourage Innovation and land use variety of design layout
170um I I do think that the kind of paracity or the pockets with the setbacks that creates you know additional kind of pedestrian interaction is helpful um I'm also going to Advocate again I think it was um commissioner G Randall who said this is like the worst intersection ever and so we need to do our part in the right of way to try to make this a more uh friendly intersection I've spent a lot I'm sorry go ahead I did just circulate an email email to the commission but uh looking in the capital Improvement plan in 2025 There is almost a million dollar ear marked for this area that does include crosswalk improvements um to get more details on uh if there's any anticipated delays or anything we would need to confer with our colleagues
171in transportation but it appears to already have been identified and some dollars set aside perfect thank you for that um I think we need to do our part in making sure that the intersection is more legible to the users and so um aside uh in in addition to that we've spent a lot of time looking at the retail so I do recognize the grilled cheesery has been closed for quite some time um one of the one of the uh most Salient variables to retail success I've said here is clustering and so um I would love to see some you know heavy emphasis at you know monetizing through retail uh storefronts um but also I will also add that I was at the Michigan restaurant Lodging Association meeting a few weeks ago um I had a
172chance to talk to a lot of operators from around the state and asked hey would you lease a fully electric space most of them gave me a pretty unequivocal I need gas in my kitchen and so that's been an interesting kind of that being said I've talked to some Architects that have given examples of kitchens that have worked with induction stoves and that have worked and so um just wanted to give those kinds of like you know two different standpoints the The Operators the people that you want to lease to have said I don't want to lease that space and so giving the flexibility I think is um responding to a market demand um looking at PUD encourage Innovation land use variety and design layout I think that's been um that's check uh to achieve
173economy and efficiency in use of land I think again that's a check in the use of land natural resources energy and the provision of public services and utilities I think that's uh done um encourage the provision of open space protection of natural features I think that's also uh been accomplished here providing adequate housing employment shot opportunities um yes particularly through to the needs of the residents of the city uh we did get the uh comprehensive Plan update that said that uh what 75% of the growth in the last 40 years have been actually predominantly students so they are a big part of the city uh expanding the supply of affordable housing uh $6.5 million I think um again we appreciate the extra point um added to that we have discussed very specifically the the portion
174about um proportionality and I think that was a big discuss with respect to the Church Street and so um but I think you're right that it isn't a kind of a combination of uh items in a holistic fashion uh I'm not going to read the entire list the one thing that I am going to kind of mention is accommodate developments with um I'm sorry the Improvement of existing sites and buildings that will be developed in a compatible way with surrounding uses and so one of the things that I actually noted that I didn't necessarily see here and some of the other PU ones we've seen how larger taller buildings when you're working against a grade right so let's say that it's the grade coming down from Packard and fourth and fifth coming down to like
175the the lbell field for example we've seen how developments harness the overall grade we didn't really see that here and there there is a great difference here right so it's it's coming down from right uh from State uh State and Hill down towards there's a minor amount of f maybe 5T from Packer state but nothing like that the four oh sure um well when I think of like walking down from the Ford school down to like Hoover I've also biked up there so I I know for sure yeah right right but I'm kind of talking about the visual Plaza as a students's kind of coming down that way what what are they kind of met with that that student experience is something that I think a lot about the compatibility with the surrounding uses I
176do want to give credit to the comment about the seven Stories the surrounding buildings I think the tallest one if I can recall is about five stories and so it was particular that we didn't see the comparison of the overall building relative to the the other buildings that are kind of near by and so I do want to make a minor point that the scaling still does somewhat nagg in my mind um but given the you know the housing crisis that we have as as well as the proportionality of things being offered we have to take that into consideration as well so overall um what I wanted to say was from the 17 to the 14 um I think this isn't quite as brutal but that it still does feel somewhat out of still a
177little out of scale but we also know that construction costs are high and we have to be able to scale in order to make these projects work so all of that to say um I appreciate everyone's thoughtful comments here procedurally speaking this is a recommendation to city council not a site plan by right that is getting approved here so whatever we vote here is a recommendation so with that do I have any other Commissioners that want to profer thoughts comments uh petitioner as well yeah how about Mr Moore my client would just like a little clearity um from Commissioner Adam scet um I believe what you're saying is that in order for the suppl EGS to jve with what our clients have disc discussed it would have to say auxiliary backup hot water heat comma
178restaurant use comma emergency power generation yes we would view that as a we would view that as a friendly Amendment or we could just fix it with staff between now and Council whichever you want we just want to know which what we're supposed to do I'm just flagging it if you want to fix it with staff go ahead I'm happy to approve recommend approval of what you've proposed but given the given the comments I heard I didn't want to let the night go without mentioning that I saw an inconsistency between the uses I was hearing and what was written in the law that will apply to the district plan to Le yeah I just staff's happy to work on that language but I would like just absent a modification to the supplementary regulations I want
179to set the stage to make sure that we can represent the planning commission's perspective on this change I am not seeing concern about modifying that language to specifically except the retail spaces and emergency backup power so um if I my clarification is if that is not the case I would I would suggest that you make a motion to modify that language as you would like to recommend it to the council got it okay thank you for that feedback would any commission commissioner aons um it's not a big enough factor to change my vote but I just want to log my dissatisfaction with those additions um I was excited coming into this that uh we were being kind of maybe offered the possibility of an all El electric building period and then we're going to leave
180the table with a a maybe all electric building except for these three big things so um I don't yeah I don't sense that there and I heard the petitioner say that he could live with actually no no gas in the retail space but I don't sense from my fellow Commissioners that there's an appetite to change that but I just wanted to voice that thank you I would entertain other Commissioners thoughts on that matter m um I'll just point out that the development agreement is a document where we memorialize um offers made by applic by applicants it it serves as both um it reflects needs that are offsite that are not that do not show up on the site plan and it um memorializes offers made in a different sort of development um we do have
181Park contrib contributions that we request if a developer agrees to provide that that's where we memorialize it and then it becomes binding um note that the developer has offered to contribute $1.6 million and I can follow up with very specific details but they have offered to do these particular upgrades this is not something that shows up in the develop I'm sorry on the site plan but they've offered so I would amend U and this is a late ad relative to the draft date of the development agreement this would be something I would be adding to the development agreement to memorialize the offer so um they're going they've offered I will hold them to that now this would be further work needs to um further revisions need to go into the supplemental regulations um to allow
182them to do the gas to operate for emergency power emergency generator or to gas power the the the restaurant but I think that you can have some Assurance they've offered to make grid improvements and we will memorialize that in the development agreement we can't I don't think it's fair I don't think we can require them then to make sure that those improvements come in on time Rel on time but um I think I I did want to point that out that there um there's probably a little more Assurance um we can make make sure that they facilitate those improvements and I do want to recognize and give them credit for that I don't know if we can make sure that they happen in time relative that but we can there is a way to codify
183that outside of the supplemental regulations Mr Leo just a quick clarification question is there's nothing that I saw in the development agreement with respect to the $1.6 million grid is that int there is not because because development agreement was written before I knew about this cool all right so I would just say that this would be another offer that they have made and I would thank them for it and then add it in to the development agreement okay understood commissioner Mills thank you uh commissioner Adams right I got your right last name okay for doing the detailed reading like um I certainly I came in having read the staff Report with the expectation that there were the carve outs for these couple of things I am the person who usually says let us not hook
184up things to the natural gas lines because it makes it then harder for us to get off of natural gas like 100% [Music] um certainly the addition to the supplemental or not to the development agreement gives me a whole bunch more comfort that there is more than a good faith effort being taken to try to make this not as on this I still with these car folks I would say this is not sustainability like number one priority but it's again within a suite of things so I am really personally comfortable changing the supplemental r to memorialize what's in the staff report and then adding into the development agreement what we heard here at the table tonight like that's the the balance right so allowing the supplemental RS to allow for the restaurant cooking and backup
185generator but knowing that there what we are hearing about the DT contribution is is something that is real I think when we make such changes like this though again I I think that this seemed friendly with based on what you were saying I just want to make sure that that's okay okay yeah yeah please go ahead say I agree with that I'm fine putting the working on language to go into that development agreement okay it's um commissioner Weatherby um I you said so I think for me in this case um I want that retail to be successful and we've had a lot of um large apartment buildings where there is no retail tenants and so whatever we can do to make that retail as successful as possible sorry um retail and yeah the retail I
186want that retail um but also uh the gas line goes right by this PL this building we're not running new gas lines across fields and like this is just going to be sort of a off the the side so I don't think we're doing having some gas here is not as big a deal as sorry as if we were you know if it's a electric building with these carve outs out in a field somewhere so thank you so so it seems like we are in need of a motion to amend the supplemental regulations to include restaurant cooking or retail space to the exception except yes I think the motion is to amend the regulations to include the language from the staff report on page four subpart four under electric ready building following the comma and
187except for a natural gas emergency backup generator restaurant cooking and auxiliary hot water generation only during periods when demand cannot be met by the available Electric Supply that I think encompasses The Proposal that the petitioner makes and will conform the regulations to their intended use do I have a motion yes I'll make it do I have a second council member dish we're in discussion of the proposed amendment to include a subsection 4 electric ready building the the addition of except for a natural gas emergency backup generator restaurant cooking and civy hot water generation only during periods where DeMent cannot be met by the available Electric Supply to the rags commissioner aons weren't we also discussing is it a different motion the um $1.6 million that's that's going to be a separate motion yeah modifying the
188supplemental regulations that's more uh appropo to the zoning um the development agreement actually um oh sorry I got confused between supplemental Rigs and development agreement never mind any discussion commissioner Mills I agree with all of that I would only make a slight amendment that the the second half of what's in in currently in the supplemental regs which is not achievable given the capacity of the Grid in the area is the better potential end of the motion and I don't think that those are in compatible I think you they could be spliced together I would just say that that gets at the idea that like hey we particularly for the backup hot water auxiliary hot water generation like that's the thing that you're trying to avoid right that's like the $1.6 million is trying to avoid
189that um the other two will go no matter what even if DT gets all their ducks in a row so yeah oh okay staff do you have Clarity on that okay got it um any other comments I don't I don't have any I don't have any concerns about that okay got it sounds good um Mr Leo will you just for the clarification of the commission will you just read that one section the amendment language I don't have it written down but I have it in my head so I'm going to say it slowly and we're going to record this yep but it would be um to amend the supplemental regulations to state that um no natural gas connection except for restaurant cooking and emergency backup generator and auxiliary hot water generation only during periods when
190demand cannot be met by the available Electric Supply okay um do we we need to do a a Voice vote or do we need a roll call vote um for an amendment I think a Voice vote is fine and if it gets hard to track we can move to roll call okay gotcha all those in favor say I I I all those against the amendment passes we're back to the original motion now um with respect to the Pud zoning District supplemental regulations as well as the recommendation that the mayor and City Planning city council approve the site plan and development agreement so any uh any other additional thoughts commissioner Mills is this where should there be a motion for the development agreement that's separate because that's in the second motion okay so if I can
191move to add the cont the contribution whatever whatever you want to call it the 1.6 million to try to make this almost all ready almost all electric um to the development agreement yeah I just want to be clear I I don't that's not language that I would suggest you craft but you direct us to incorporate into the development agreement the memorialization of that intent investment and intent to uh work with DTE to achieve that capacity to enable full building electrification thank you for making a much clearer motion does that require a motion for Amendment or is it just a Direction that you're getting from us for just for my edification yeah I I mean the development agreement ultimately is approved by city council it's a contract right um honestly could go either way but since
192the motion was made I don't think I don't think it hurts just to clarify that that's something that you are communicating to the city council and then when we memorialize it we can tell them hey this was language that the Planning Commission wanted to see memorialize is to follow up on that commitment to that the petitioner is making okay how exactly do you by which mechanism are you recommending I would recommend a motion to modify the development agreement as commissioner Mills indicated to that directs staff to ad language that includes the commitment of investment in the electric grid estimated at $1.6 million to build the adequate Electric electric capacity for this building if that passes staff will work with the petitioner to make sure that that language is appropriate it's going to be um a
193little bit unique because most of our development language is tied to a milestone with the development process I don't know that we be able to do that the same way with this so just that direction to include to task us with that crafting of language then we will communicate that to the city council okay got it understood is the petitioner friendly to that particular motion to direct staff to work with you on uh language and the development agreement yes okay got it easy enough I'm looking for a motion to um what we said oh oh um council member dish second need a second sure um commissioner white uh we're in discussion with respect to the motion of what Mr lonard said uh respect to uh directing staff to work with the petitioner uh regarding the
194DT contribution to improve electrical infrastructure and circuit at the church and Willard um on that circuit any discussion I'm going to call for a Voice vote all those in favor say I I all those against motion passes we're back to the original motion is it yes as amended twice um are there any other further final Thoughts with respect to This I Promise agre commissioner Mills I just wanted to let you know I did do the normal comparison that I do about how the height of this and setbacks compare and it's it what's in the supplemental regulations is very very close to what is there so I don't think that even if this building doesn't go forward anybody else would have to build something that looks pretty much like this building thank you let's go towards
195a roll call vote on the motion as presented with the two amendments to first to the supplemental regulations and secondly directing staff to uh make modifications to the development agreement chair Lee Yes Vice chair yes secretary W [Applause] yes council member dish yes commissioner Clark yes commissioner Mills yes commissioner Weatherby yes commissioner Adams yes that carries motion carries good luck at city council gentlemen than you very much all right with that we are moving on to other business which there are none we're moving on to agenda number 11 which is public comment this is a second opportunity for persons to speak up to 3 minutes about any issue that is not listed as a public hearing on this agenda we will first call on individuals present uh then remote participants to speak during this uh
196public hearing remotely please press star9 if listening by phone or use the raise hander if viewing through the web link for phone access call 877 853 5247 and enter meeting ID 977 663 41226 City staff will select on callers that have raised their hand using the last three dig of the phone number or by name if available you'll hear an automated announcement that the host is allowing you to speak and when speaking please mute background noises and move to a quiet area so that we can hear you clearly for either method of participation please state your name and address at the beginning of your comments is there anyone present that would like to address the commission at this time do we have any remote callers there are no hands raised Mr chair thank you give
197it just three more [Applause] seconds with that I'll close public comment we're on to agenda number 12 is there any commission proposed business commissioner W just a a quick followup from my earlier question about churches and the special exemp or use exemptions I was not as clear as I want it to be because I forgot that this is only required in residential or in some of our zoning categories not in all so churches require a special exemption across multiple districts but if they're granted that like an office a child care center is automatically permitted by code so that's what I was trying to clarify was could the church do the daycare center without the special exemption and the answer is no because the dwellings are zoned in R where they would need the special exemption
198is that correct yes okay great that was it thank you thank you are there any other commission proposed business yes commissioner Mills I'm wondering if on our list of potential future things that orc should consider we should we might reference the public comment that we've received today and the list of potential changes associated with um super yeah Cooperative housing yeah happy to look into that um one of those was a contribution that I fear might be an impact fee um I don't know that I haven't researched it yet but it seemed to be indicated that it was a fee that is required by developments to pay into a fund that has realized a lot of housing that would um I've again I've got a lot to learn but my very cursory looking at the description
199of that suggests to me that it might not be a VI a legally viable tool available here in Michigan um but yeah um and um I I do think that there's going to be a lot of questions along that through the comprehensive plan process what recommendations do we want to make about a variety of housing types you know the city council um very specifically wants us to look at ways to increase our housing Supply and densify and I think um looking at group housing models will be part of that conversation yeah in particular I mean I think it starts with the things that are more squarely in our wheelhouse uh reducing or eliminating minimum lot sizes and square footage requirements like I think that that's um and again it's not just for this and so
200maybe that's one that can specifically call out and also talking about the zones in which this is an allowable to use I think is something also that is part of there um the number of unrelated people in in a unit and then the next two I think the next one that's on the this memo that is what you were talking about the impact fee and further the tenant opportunity to purchase I don't typically see that as something that Planning Commission would do but I it seems a bit to me like other um it could be a city council action um that's obviously planning adjacent but that is not a a UDC change yeah I I think we brought I think I've addressed this before with the the the occupancy limits and that's also something I
201think that's appropriate for us to talk about with the comprehensive planning process but I do just want to remind the commission our entire regulatory residential um scheme is based on that unit it's not to say that that is the only way that it has to be or that we can't modify it but I just I just want to remind that that is how our ordinance is constructed that definition of family which is inclusive of occupany units when we find ways to allow residency that isn't maybe a traditional related family um that is a building block of our scheme of how we regulate housing so I just as a reminder totally appropriate conversations to have I think with the comprehensive planning process going in that direction depending on the methods that you do might be very
202much a drastic restructuring of our ordinance so I I just want to equate those it's not it's not necessarily just simply going in and striking that or easily adjusting it that would have a lot of um a lot of impacts throughout the balance of our ordinance that we just have to be thoughtful about what those are and how we wanted to deal with them yes council member dish yeah uh I just want to acknowledge that um I think this memo is in some ways a followup to the series of conversations that mix Kelly Miss Deo and I had with the IC and I think that there may be interest on Council in just having another meeting to review this memo and see if there's anything I think they tried to reduce their asks and from
203their perspective these are small from my perspective from the conversations we had maybe one of them is small but some of them are very large and so it might be helpful before kind of putting it on a orc or Planning Commission working list if we could just circle up again and and see where we where we stand following what we had already talked about sure thank you yes commissioner W so Mr Leonard if I'm understanding you correctly you're saying if we change section 516 use specific standards subsection one residential uses paragraph a or title a residential occupany point two limits on occupancy of dwelling units that that changes all of the code yes if that is the case can we get some legal advice from our attorney to understand this because I when I first
204sat at the table I asked about this and it's come up a couple more times um I would love for it to be in our unzon but it sounds like you're saying it's an unintended consequence or it has a tree it's not yeah I don't mean to say it's an unintended it's it's a very intended consequence we um every District that we regulate by dwelling units that is a that is a way that we Define what a dwelling unit is and so I I'm not trying to say that you can't eliminate that but when we say that you have a uh whenever you see anything in our district that is regulated by a den density a number of dwelling units that's all of our our districts that is based on a dwelling unit that definition
205goes to Define what we mean by that alternately if we didn't have that I think you know one scenario would be to say we don't we don't care you know if you have uh if you are in an R1 Zone currently under our current without that definition it means maybe you could have a 60 60 bedroom home as opposed to a four or five bedroom home within that or six-bedroom home depending what zoning District you're in and so that is that was that was a framework that when our ordinance was crafted those two things were used combined as um they've had an impact on massing they've had an impact on dens density of population and so I I don't mean to say that it's not intentional it's very intentional in fact um that definition has
206had repercussions for better for worse across the state because it is kind of how you define a family can be really challenging from a legal perspective ours ours was sort of the case law that sort of that set a lot of that stage so to to eliminate that or modify it it's just to recognize that has implications to every time you see a number of dwelling units anywhere else in the code not that not that there's not changes I just I just want to bring that up that that is it is very foundational to how if you were to strike that now our entire zoning framework would be very different right now in what could be achieved and can't be achieved yeah so I think I would like if it's possible for us to get
207either a memo or one of those privileged conversations so that we can understand the implications of this because I don't know that it needs to be privileged but we can I don't know I'm not a lawyer um and so I cuz I would you know to me when I sat at the table I was like what is this for like why are we trying to keep six people as the minimum and then we've seen how that's affected um development because then we get these six-bedroom units that got developed to fit the standard because of where it is and so if we can get some guidance um on this that is more than sure you know that would really help us understand how it would impact our code thank you um yes Mr Leo yeah I
208do want to mention I I think the right solution we can follow up with that as well I think though the right solution is to sit down again with the student Cooperative um inter Cooperative Council I think their heart is absolutely in the right place and I agree with their goals but they are um um they are not interpreting the zoning ordinance correctly and there if you look down same page their the occupancy standards um do not apply to group housing fraternities authorities student Cooperative housing Emergency Shelters or convalescent homes yeah so they have a i i it's worth uh part of my part of my assignments and responsibili just to make sure that everyone understands the zoning parameters especially before you suggest changes I I don't think that the solution to their ask um
209and I I is is their suggestion but we can still help them meet their goals got it thank you appreciate the clarification um I'm just going to make one clarification on the record for one of my comments that I said during the Apple play care uh discussion which was I had said hey it's possible for you to also petition for the special exception use I just wanted to make on the record clearly that what I was referring to was one of the criteria for approval um because of the allegations that that would be detrimental to the economic value and I was simply trying to clarify that I wasn't necessarily 100% convinced that that was factual um based on kind of what was being said so I want to just on the record clarify that aside
210from that any other commission proposed business seeing none I'm going to move to adjournment seconded by commissioner whes all those in favor say I I hi hi we are adjourned thanks