Ann Arbor Planning Commission 10/17/23

001welcome to the October 17th regular meeting of the Ann Arbor Planning Commission for detailed information on meeting procedures please review the full printed meeting agenda provided mix Kelly will you please call the role chair Lee here Vice chair aons here secretary W here commissioner Mills here commissioner hamers Schmid here council member dish here commissioner sa here commissioner Clark commissioner wetherby here you have a quorum thank you um moving on to approval of the agenda may I have a motion to approve um first by commissioner Mills and seconded by council member dish um all those in favor please say I I I any opposed motion carries um uh minutes of the previous meeting May I have a motion to approve the minutes of October 3rd moved by commissioner uh abens and seconded by commissioner um Mills

002any discussion all in favor I any opposed all right a motion carries next up are reports to the Planning Commission and written communication council member dish do you have anything to report I [Applause] do where is my document I think I remember it so last night city council voted to Annex the two Parcels on Riverside Avenue or drive whichever it is and we also um voted to approve the development agreement for the plat Road Town Homes and I think that's all thank you mix Kelly do you have a report I do on the 12th of October there was a Plymouth Road area rezoning public meeting for the rezoning to tc1 at the traverwood branch of the Ann Arbor Public Library there were about 40 attendees including council members song and Watson uh robust debate and

003uh we look forward to ALS advancing that to the Planning Commission table uh next month and uh also next month targeting mid November pending a location we'll be scheduling the uh the um complimentary meeting for the Wasa Corridor so there will be uh forthcoming information about a tc1 wash Avenue area rezoning public meeting forthcoming also the comprehensive plan steering committee interest survey closed yesterday with over 100 applications and manager Leonard will be sending notice for a comp plan subcommittee meeting uh this week to review next steps but I can tell you that that meeting will be taking place of the uh usual orc subcommittee ordinance revisions committee subcommittee and so it will be next Tuesday from 7 to 9:00 p.m. thank you do other commissioner officers or committee liaison have anything to report uh written

004Communications are included in today's packet we're going to move on to public comment this is an opportunity for persons to speak up 3 minutes about an issue that is not listed as a public hearing on this agenda we'll first call on individuals present to address the commission then remote participants to speak during this public hearing remotely please press nine a star nine if listening by phone or use a raise hands feature of viewing through the web link for phone access please call 87785 35247 and enter meeting ID 977 66 341 1226 City staff will select callers who have raised their hands using the last three digits of their phone number or by name if available for those accessing through the web link you'll hear an automated announcement that the host is allowing you to speak

005when speaking please move to a quiet area mute any television or background s sound so that we can hear you clearly for either method of participation please state your name and address at the beginning of your comment and is there anyone present that would like to speak at this time seeing no one um is there anyone that would like to address the commission remotely Pina ramaswami you have permission to address the commission for three minutes hello um I live in the neighborhood directly behind this proposal and I a community leader Community have spoken and written to the plan at each of these proposals presented by you excuse me I'm so sorry uh this is regarding items that are not on this agenda so you'll have a chance to speak on this particular matter um in

006just a few minutes okay thank you thank you just giving it one moment yeah yeah no problem there was one other hand rais but it looks like they have lowered their hand so uh with that I believe that we have no hand raised unless um Pina you don't have a do you have a general public comment to make or are you raising your hand for the public hearing later the public hearing okay in that case there are no hands raised thank you we'll move on to public hearings for the next business meeting um [Applause] staff a public hearing on the in items will be held by the Anar Planning Commission on Wednesday November 1st at 700 p.m. there is a revised notice for 3874 Research Park Drive a site plan for City Planning Commission approval

007um this was erroneously noticed for city council approval and so it is Ren noticed it is a proposal to construct a 11,800 ft office research and lab space as the second phase of a 241 ,100 ft project uh there is a new 77 space parking lot also proposed on This research district and offer office research limited Industrial District zone site which totals 16.9 Acres the uh Second and final item notice for public hearing is the Plymouth Road Transit Corridor District zoning the N Arbor Planet commission will hold a public hearing to hear all those interested in a proposed rezoning which is an amendment to the zoning map section 5.10.25 unified development code to rezone Parcels in the Plymouth Road area to tc1 Transit Corridor District before making a recommendation to city council the city of

008an arbor is considering action to rezone approximately 136 Acres including at least 99 addresses and text Parcels in the Plymouth Road area more information is available at plan. a2gov.org tc1 corridors thank you we're going to move on to item 8A unfinished business uh this is 3520 Green Court uh plan unit development text Amendment for city council approval the proposed amended supplemental regulations will expand the permitted principal uses of the Pud the permitted principal uses would include medical dental offices which are currently prohibited and would expand the definition of Hotel currently restricts Hotel developments to Extended Stays with 100 rooms maximum capacity and would permit development of multif family residential housing which is currently excluded this PUD District includes 35.262781 if that they are still uh considering the commission's feedback uh with the the owner group

009of the other Parcels in the PD and are not um would appreciate the postponement got it understood thank you um this is public hearing this is an opportunity for persons to speak up to three minutes about the proposed PUD amendments we'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 a rais hand feature of viewing through the web link and for phone access please call 877- 85352 47 and enter meeting ID 977 66 34122 6 City staff will select callers that have raised our hands using the last three digits of the phone number or by name if available uh you'll hear an automated announcement that the host is allowing you to speak and when speaking please

010move to a quiet area and mute any television or background sound so we can hear you clearly and again for either method of participation please state your name and address at the the beginning of your comments is there anyone here that would like to speak at this time Mr Garber yeah I just have a procedural question um yeah I've already spoken on this project last time um will there be an opport a public Hearing in two weeks when this comes back um uh typically the Planning Commission does offer A Renewed opportunity for public comment and I would expect this same thing okay cuz it's going to be a new plan anyway so that makes sense all right thank you that's my question thank you is there anyone else present that would like to address the

011commission not seeing anyone is there anyone that would like to address the commission remotely there are no hands raised Mr chair thank you there's three proposed Mo uh there's a motion to postpone the November 1st uh regular session um do we have a motion uh motion by council member dish seconded by um commissioner Mills discussion of the proposed motion all right let's do a Voice vote uh without objection um or should we do a Voice vote for this uh I think it would be fine to say uh without objection that motion passes if someone has an objection um when that is phrased it would be appropriate to raise an objection thank you without objection that motion passes all right it is postponed to the November 1st regular session we're going to move on to uh

012regular business section 9A this is 3874 Research Park Drive sorious Phase 2 um this is a site plan for Planning Commission approval we did just Ren notice this based on the ER erroneous um noticing that this would be for city council approval this is actually for City Planning Commission approval this is a phase 2 proposal to construct 11 10,800 ft uh building addition to an existing building and 77 new parking spaces with two new curb cuts off of Research Park Drive um we are looking to uh postpone but the first we will go to public hearing this is an opportunity for persons to speak up to 3 minutes about the proposed site plan we'll first call on individuals present and then remote participants if listening by phone please press nine or use a raised hand

013feature viewing through the web link and then phone access please call 877 85352 47 and enter meeting ID 977 66 341 1226 uh City staff we select callers that have raised our hands using the last three digits or by name if available U you'll hear an automated announcement that the host is allowing you to speak and when speaking please move to a quiet area and uh mute any television background noises so we can hear you clearly again please state your name and address at the beginning of your comments is there anyone that would like to speak at this time thank you CH Lee K Garber 28 H Hill Court um again procedure we're not going to have a um petitioner presentation or staff report proceeding the public hearing uh that's correct um it's going to

014be held all together at the next meeting NE next regular meeting okay well I'll say my piece now then thank you um last month the German Parliament um passed a law requiring all new construction to be to have to have 65% renewable energy component this project obviously would not even come close to getting there um so is a German company um I want to push back on the notion that certain medical and lab buildings can't go all electric yes there's a problem with air exchange frequency and the need to heat or cool all that incoming fresh air um Bill verer who's a consultant to Sartorius told console back in April that these lab buildings work 24 hours a day they never go down they never have an offseason they basically are functioning at full air

015flow all the time to get the air changes per hour that are required by the code yes you have to design for that but Osa regs do specify 4 to 12 air changes per hour for active Fume hoods but nothing in oer regs that says you have to run these hoods all the time unless they're storing toxic substances what we heard 247 operation is now considered outdated practice and highly wasteful some of the new practices are one Venturi valves which reduce air flow to a minimum when the hoods are not in use two turning down the air flow in labs when they're not occupied putting the ventilation system into vacancy mode uh Hood hibernation where the Venturi valves control fum hoods individually instead of banks of them and ductless fum hoods um where instead of

016sending the fumes outside they run through a filter um and then recirculate not all of these Solutions can always be used but if they're designed into the building they can greatly lower energy use and reduce the need for constant air exchange um I don't know that Sartorius has considered or is even aware of these Innovations um but other new lab buildings and cold climates are doing this and some have been able to go all electric using geothermal coupled with heat pumps these include St John's University Health Sciences Center in New York uh the Integrated Science facility at Carlton College Minnesota and others yes doing this is more expensive upfront but Sartorius is getting a lot of help from taxpayers a 12year 50% tax abatement that I calculate should be worth about 3 million 2.7 million

017in Brownfield funding of which 2.6 million is for non-environmental activities and an madc Grant to Sartorius of 1.2 million uh as an incentive to locate here so this project is a wash in public subsidies the least it can do is meet our community standards for clean construction thank you is there anyone else present that would like to speak at this time seeing no one else is there anyone that would like to address the commission remotely there is not thank you I'm going to read the proposed motion um the motion is to postpone this to the November first regular section uh session um moved by commissioner Mills and seconded by commissioner Weatherby discussion of the proposed motion just wanted to clarify again this is for procedural purposes to make ensure that there is sufficient of public

018notice and the corrected one so thank you for the uh patient patience of the petitioner um without objection the motion passes all right we'll move forward we're on to regular business section 9B this is 2935 Plymouth Road this is the UVM Credit Union a proposal to demolish the existing office building in constructing a single story 4,7 90 ft Credit Union building in this o office District zoned site subject dividing this site um staff recommendation is approval and we will move on to petition or presentation hi good evening um deian Ramos for the University of Michigan Credit Union um I just wanted to say thank you for um all of your guys' feedback previously um and the communities hopefully um what we have to present tonight you'll find the adjustments um appropriate and just to let

019you know the University of credit uh Michigan Credit Union is here to provide choices to our members giving them options um of where they like to do their financial services we're here to invest in the community um we partner with several local um institutions around the the communities we service and we really do want to provide financial success for all of our members um their success is really critical and important in a very big core value for us um so we are here to really partner with the community so I just wanted to make sure um that I presented that and then I will turn it over to both Ted and Tom to go ahead with the presentation thank you deian uh I'm Ted hir with Midwestern Consulting here with uh Tom Phillips of Hobs

020and black thank you Commissioners for uh being here tonight um so I think uh most if not all of you were here at the last iteration of this project and um uh let's get this off the screen um so uh we we'll kind of go through this presentation and if you'll recall from several months ago there's probably not a whole lot that looks a whole lot different um uh we we did remove the drive-thru um kind of heard loud and clear that uh that was something that was uh kind of a major sticking point for the project and um went back to the drawing board and um have the project in front of you tonight so uh again I'm just going to kind of graze over a couple of these slides um you know I

021think everyone's pretty familiar with the the location of the site um on Plymouth Road and uh pray Street um the existing location that um umcu has outgrown um and looking to kind of move down the street and provide uh more opportunity as uh Miss Ramos had stated uh for uh their clientele um so um a couple of the highlights here about the project characteristics uh the same as before um the project is uh being pursued under the existing office zoning um no rezoning no variances and now no special exception use for a drive-thru are being requested uh we still do have the same uh land division proposed and the landscape modification for Street tree placement uh so here's an updated site layout um again pretty much uh what you had seen before um with the

022driveway remove moved a couple of um pavement uh access parking uh kind of adjustments um we've still kept uh The Divided parcel to the West will be just raised and reeded um we're still keeping the rain Garden kind of central to the uh to the site to provide a little bit of extra green storm water infrastructure in addition to the detention system um in the previous iteration there was a a little bit smaller solar array proposed on the drive-through canopy um in this re-evaluation of the project uh it's been now um considered that this solar array can be placed on the main building roof and um so that's what we have in front of you tonight um the access uh criteria are remaining the same the the existing curb cut on Plymouth Road is going

023to be taken out of commission and shifted over to the east um which allows for um a little bit better um traffic flow uh with uh the land division um and any potential future development on the west parcel um to be accommodated uh the existing curb cut on Prairie Street will remain um and then there is a a bus stop that gets shifted over to the east um as a result of the shifting of the curb cut on Plymouth um utilities uh again pretty much the same as what you've seen before the storm sewer The Collection detention system um gets conveyed to the North End of the site and then Outlets to an existing storm sewer in Prairie Street um all of the service connections to the building for water and sanitary happened directly east

024uh of the building uh to existing Mains in Prairie um the biggest notable change with regard to utilities is now that uh the credit union is committing to uh fully electrified HVAC and mechanical systems um there is a a backup generator proposed um that will uh use natural gas but again that's just for backup situation and uh that's pretty much everything uh that's changed with the site so I'll hand it over to Mr Phillips to talk about the building hello uh Tom Phillips uh uh 100 North State Street Hops and black Architects so um the building it we've heard feedback from the community also that in terms of the height of the building that it is one story but it is a tall one-story building it's 22 ft tall to the edge of the roof

025and the peak is 26 ft so we're going to have a little more height uh along Plymouth Road than a typical one-story building otherwise it's a a very um well insulated building that exceeds all the energy code requirements for insulated construction and um the uh it follows many of the lead principles uh that that we incorporate into all our projects these days and they typically exceed the energy code on almost pretty much every level um as Ted mentioned we uh we have a space on the white roof for solar panels and that's that would be designed into the project from the beginning and and we're happy to take any questions thank you um and then I think we go to staff presentation do you have anything to add Mr Chang uh yes as they had

026previously stated this was heard back at the April 4th Planning Commission meeting where it was denied and then came back for reconsideration at the April 18th meeting and it was again denied so they have come back with essentially the same Project without the drive-through Lanes there is the conflicting land use buffer that was mentioned that will screen from the neighbors to the north um it is subject to a land division it's a 1.7 Acres sites this is approximately one acre I think the vacant site will be approximately 7 Acres uh they are also adding some EV installed parking um and some capable spaces on site but otherwise it is it's what you saw you know back in April got it thank you uh we'll move on to public hearing uh this is an opportunity for

027persons to speak up to three minutes about the proposed site plan we'll first call on individuals present to address the commission and then remote participants so to speak during this public hearing please press star9 if listening by phone or if viewing through the web link please use the raised hand feature and for phone access please call 877- 85352 47 and enter meeting ID 9776 6341 1226 City staff will select callers that have raised our hands using the last three digits of the phone number or by name if available um you'll hear an automated announcement that the host is allowing you to speak and when speaking please do move to acir area so that we can hear you clearly and for either method of participation please state your name and your address at the beginning of

028your comments so is there anyone present that would like to address the commission at this time This is highly embarrassing um I feel um like I'm some kind of outcast or um someone who just isn't familiar with uh the normal procedure by coming up here every time there's a public hearing but um on this project I want to thank the petitioner for going all electric um however um I just took uh before coming here I just took a look at the OSI sustainability review the latest one and they they conditionally recommend approval of this project um you may have seen this um that petitioner is sort of um not committing on um several recommendations from OSI including uh pairing onsite solar with onsite energy storage um they say they're exploring that OSI wants more specifics

029um the business about uh a gas connection for a backup generator OSI objects to that and so do I um propane would be uh another solution even better would be on-site battery storage in my um wildest fantasies I envisioned in an arbor where um fossil gas is no longer used to heat anything and all the existing lines will have been capped and I think we have to anticipate that with new construction and not extend these lines there have been some projects that have changed their minds so to speak and promised to go all electric and then ended up um converting back uh to gas I guess um Alek apartment is the most well-known of these so let's not put in a gas connection to begin with um uh passive house certification OSI asked for that

030um and uh petitioner needs to specify a demolition Waste Management plan so um I guess um yeah those are those are the things that uh OSI really wants to see and I do too um I know there's been a discussion around this table that developers can't commit to a lot of these things um because is uh we're just at the site plan stage and um Mechanicals and uh other plans come later in the process um but I believe that for new construction it should be um assumed from the concept stage of a project that is going to go all electric and if possible Net Zero Energy at this stage of the a20 plan and of the ongoing climate crisis so um I don't think it's unreasonable to ask petitioners to come in come in with

031concrete plans um for this kind of building right up front right here at the commission even though the UDC does not give you the power to enforce that thank you thank you is there anyone else present that would like to speak this time all right seeing no one else um is there anybody that would like to speak remotely there are two hands raised Mr chair the first is Pina ramasami again you have permission to address the commission thank you again apologies for earlier my name is Pina Rami I'm at 2831 running for Street I live in the neighborhood directly behind this proposal and I'm a community leader we in the community have spoken and written to the Planning Commission and each of these proposals presented by umcu with over 50 engagements with zero favor since

032the last proposal where the Planning Commission requested umcu to engage with the community there has been no attempt since the pro still end location is a prime location and has a potential for meeting the direction of the transportation Corridor or also known as tc1 project which a Planning Commission will be reviewing on November 1st I understand that this proposal Falls within the current zoning requirements however in just a few days those requirements will likely change but won what won't change is that the building designed if approved will be here for 50 years plus with the tc1 University of Michigan 2050 plan and the expansion of th elementary aaps school that will become a two-story building housing 600 students we need to think longer term we ask the corridor better plan for the future of this

033gr that we see I ask the Planning Commission to please encourage umcu to come up with a plan that better better matches the Future Vision of this important Transportation Corridor and serves the community to if it does proceed I ask that they work on improving their interior design to serve the community better a supposed Community conference room that closes at 5:00 on a weekday or community park bench that faces pth wood which was sest by the UNC Representatives at the last Planning Commission is just lazy and not solution based it was also mentioned that the design is a standard branded marketing building that's the huge billboard rather than a community for the a bank for the community or for the their member base it also has limited accessibility for buses and walkability from the new

034proposed location compared to where it is now and the parking lot is in the front and in the back uh not like the tc1 requirement that requires it to be on the uh sidewalk if the design of the current uh for the current zoning is approved I ask that do a better job of utilizing this mask footprint that you're taking with its four or five employees inside perhaps a separate entrance for businesses that they're offering loans to for meetings after hours or for community space um perhaps food Tru relies on the weekend to think bigger utilize this space better with the tc1 transportation Corridor in the University of Michigan's 2050 plan along with the thirst Elementary APS building the two-story building um on in 2027 there's a greater opportunity here I ask this important and

035take this risk short back for a longterm Vision we need to do better with density and usability lied City lastly please consider the traffic Prairie Street it is cently very high and will only get bigger with the school expansion and tc1 andc thank you two more hands are raised our next caller is Jacob kitsman you have permission to address the commission for three minutes all right thanks um thanks for hearing me my name is Jacob kman our family Liv Street the same neighborhood as this proposed F so despite the environmental improvements this proposal is fundamentally the same as the previous versions which the council considered and rejected I Believe It suffers from the same flaws really fails to add benefit to this part of the city we already have almost kind of a comical excess

036of retail banks with a mile including the existing umcu Branch so adding another one is is kind of absurd especially in an area or in an era rather where nearly any banking function can be done by app on your phone Community is not asking for retail Banks but would help promote our community members financial success would be to develop more affordable more Transit adjacent housing for people to live in furthermore the addition of a driveway on streets under bring additional traffic from a high Road right on furry Street near our school where there's already a lot of congestion at drop off times both car congestion and kids and parents on foot so I really think that a low density drive up retail development here would be a very shortsighted use of a prime parcel in

037what as has been mentioned May soon be a tc1 Zone Rec not only that it would be completely inconsistent with the city's State goals in the vision Zer and a20 plans I think I think another major issue is that this proposal leaves a vacant uh nearly 3/4 parcel to its West so in evaluating this proposal the commission should consider what's the fate of that PL going to be what type of future development is going to be feasible and cost effective to put there given its really narrow profile I think we should consider that it's highly likely that that that lot will for quite some time and that is inconsistent with neighborhood character and Aesthetics which believe are criteria that the commission can factor into their decision so this development would fragment one of our most

038precious and limited resources development ready land it could be used for housing or mixed use development and it would promote sort of an outed current intensive pedestrian unfriendly mode of Transit which which the city's stated goals say we should be doing less with so I urge the commission to use your discretion to this unneeded and unwanted development or to at least postpone it until it can be better integrated with the evolving vision for this area of the city it's 2023 and we have to do better than this thank you thank you the next hand raised is Christy Watkins you have permission to address the commission thank you for your time this evening uh my name is chrisy legal named Christina Watkins I reside at 2960 Sheffield Court uh I live approximately a quarter of a

039mile from this site um and I walk my dogs uh every day through this neighborhood um so I'm again pleased as other callers have mentioned to see that umcu remov the drivethru LS and has Shi energy used to um to Electric however I'm actually very disappointed to see that umcu did not think bigger as other callers have noted um I was really expecting by the fact that there were two sort of denials back in April that um we're going to go back to a much sort of um rary drawing board and to think much more broader about the larger situation of Indian Harbor to think about mixed use buildings think about affordable housing to think about um the vision zero as other callers have mentioned um you know in light of the fact that this

040summer we had you know significant number of climate incidents and so forth like these are the things that we need to be thinking about is not just uh getting all um you know energy usage um off of uh problematic fossil fuels but also more density as the tc1 or Transit corridor plan that is coming up in just two weeks is going to potentially bring to fruition so I'm just a little bit disappointed um that University Credit Union of which I've been a member for over 10 years um since I moved to this State um had not kind of done a little bit more engagement with the community and a little bit broader thinking so I do hope that the commission can take those thoughts into account thank you for your time thank you do we

041have any other callers that was the last caller Mr chair thank you all right I'm going to close public hearing on that so so I'm going to read the proposed motion the Ann Arbor City Planning Commission approves the umcu site plan subject to demolishing the existing structure on site dividing the subject parcel from the parent parcel and a landscape modification for the location of Street trees to be outside the public right of way as required in 52010 of chapter 55 moved by commissioner Mills second by commissioner aons we are in discussion would anyone like to kick us off commissioner Mills um thank you for rethinking um this particular site I uh am no longer concerned about the impacts that the site will have on traffic um I think um it's certainly there's going to be

042more coming and going than before but kind of queuing and um concerns about traffic safety associated with the drive-through Lanes I have are irrelevant now um I also appreciate kind of thinking more about sustainability I would encourage you as you move the project forward to think about whether it's actually cheaper long term to not have that natural gas connection and the hookup fee that you're going to have to pay for it and the infrastructure part of it um and provide propane instead for the rare reare chances where you need that backup power um I don't know all of the building code rules don't get me wrong but um I don't know that that there are that many opport there that many times when it will actually be needed you don't have an elevator because you

043are obviously one story right so um and um so I don't know that even when the power is out how important it is that it is operating at full capacity is what I would say and so that seems to me like it uh it would not require very much by way of um by backup power I think I hear community members um Rec and recognize that we're contemplating transition along this Corridor I also think that this meets the standards my my feeling is it meets the standards of of what the zoning currently allows um I appreciate moving to a single curb cut along Plymouth Road and the way that it's aligned so that something that can go on that narrow parcel may not require parking on site we don't H and I would encourage you

044to think about whether there might be opportunities for redevelopment of that site to share your parking I mean I I would hope that I would expect that I mean this is already a walkable area as you have more people living there more of your customers are going to be able to walk and so I would hope that whatever gets developed on the western parcel is built lot to lot or whatever the zoning allows there and that you don't have parking at all on that site our code does not require that um and I would strongly encourage that so um things to consider as you're kind of thinking overall about this um about this project thanks thank you council member dish thanks very much um happy to see the electrification elements um I'm interested in your

045answers to commissioner Mills uh I mean I'm yeah I'm interested in hearing what you want to to say um to her suggestions about propane and also had you considered batteries and would battery backup do enough of what you need in a in the inevitable I shall say power outage um so I I also want to say that I appreciate the comments that residents have taken the time and thought to prepare and I understand that this bank is not resident pre preferred use for this parcel but you MCU owns the parcel and the city doesn't have the ability to tell Property Owners what to do with the parcels they own if the uses they propose are consistent with what the current zoning allows and this one is and while it is true that we are now

046quite close to tc1 resoning along this Corridor that changes nothing for a project that's already under consideration and has been under consideration for more than a year um so we are not able to change the rules of the game in the course of the game so we need to work with what we have in front of us I noticed in the notes this is a question to the petitioner that you stated you are prepared to discuss the traffic concern that's been raised about Prairie Street and I'd like to invite you to do so I think at our last meeting we spoke a little bit about um how whereas uh this this new facility may not generate additional trips and that people will not be deliberately leaving their homes to come to it it is going

047to create more traffic as people drive by and say oh yeah I wanted to deposit this check or oh I need to pick up some cash so if you had further thoughts about Prairie Street um I mean since the notes say that you did I invite you to share uh what those thoughts were um I want to ask you straight out if you have thought about plans for the 3/4 of an acre a joining parcel if that's something that you're thinking of selling if it's something that you have a an idea of what your use might be for it um and yeah I think those were the two yep those were the major things thank you okay um so I'll try to take those one at a time first um being the thing that I

048can speak a little bit to um as a civil engineer um in regard to the traffic so uh commissioner dish you did um mention like we talked about at the first um meeting for this that um part of the evaluation of the trip generation for this type of use is acknowledging the fact that there are um passer by trips that are generated where it's not the original destination um and and I apologize I don't have the the revised traffic impact numbers in front of me but um if I'm recalling correctly those generation numbers did get reduced um with the elimination of the the drive-thru um and I think at the the initial um the onset of this project our our position and the the findings from our traffic team was that the the level of

049service of um Prairie Street wouldn't be degraded as a result of the the project with the drive-through and come to the same findings um with the elimination of the drive-thru and even more so and and that's with comparison of the existing use um to what's proposed now um I think I'll hand it over to Mr Phillips for um discussion on the the generator uh good evening um we typically the the two sources of fuel for generators are diesel and um natural gas the diesel is considered to be worse uh in terms of being a a fuel that has oil as a component of it um the propane is a is a different technology that this the generator really is determined by the size and type of generators determined by its use and what it's going

050to back up in this case um the uh the credit union has to remain in operation uh through a power outage so that operating the building implies a load and in fact making the building all electric can even increase that load to some extent so that's going to drive the type of generator it is and propane is is not a common in our experience generator fuel but that's something we can look at and and batteries are frankly quite new and so that they have to be looked at in the in the scale of the power they need to to provide so those are things we going forward would take a look at but we haven't gotten into engineering yet at this point hi to answer the third question as far as use on the um

051adjacent parcel um we do not have specific plans for that we're trying to make it through phase one of the project um before determining what the use of that parcel would be but of course whatever zoning was in effect at the time that we did we would certainly consider that um as we were to move forward so thank you any other Commissioners Comm commer hamers Schmid I just have a follow-up question to something um I'm just I'm curious why does a credit union need to remain operational during a power outage is it security like Vault issues or um in in order to um service the membership base um the computer systems the HB system all of that and then our camera system our alarm system um does need to operational in order for us to

052keep the doors open but it is it is for security a big portion of it okay I security and comfort of the team and the members yeah I mean the bank the it's not open 24 hours a day I assume you have power 24 hours a day I mean the argument I guess to me that like a credit union would need to remain in operation during a power outage it's not like a critical piece of Civic infrastructure so so during the pandemic we were actually considered um critical and so we all had to report to work um I don't know if you guys are aware of that or not but financial institutions are considered a critical um component amongst the government and for us to service our members like any other business um and be

053able to be there at the needs of our members um we have experienced several power outages and unfortunately we've experienced several of them have been on Plymouth Road to be honest with you so our current location in the strip mall is probably one of our locations that goes down in power most often due to um several factors I I you know we lease that space so I don't have all of the details um so having the backup in order to be able to continue um business is important for us um but again as um both Ted and Tom had mentioned with the generator I mean we're certainly willing to look at what we can do to kind of offset that if there are things we can do so with the the newer technology the batteries

054the I mean we'll we'll definitely look into that and we work they work directly with um specific Engineers that electrical engineers that tell us what we can run and can't run off of a generator so okay I'm glad to hear that you're willing to look into it guess absolutely as far as the second parcel is concerned I think commissioner s last time you did some like quick math to see what would even fit given it's resoning to tc1 I mean I guess I would just say at this point I don't think we're going to convince you for your current parcel but if if that second parcel is rone tc1 and you sort of find that like nothing is developable on that parcel I would highly consider rethinking this current parcel to see where stuff could

055be shifted around because to one of the caller points it would really be a shame to just have a vacant parcel sitting on an active Corridor absolutely thanks thank you commissioner W uh a couple things uh one thanks for uh hearing the comments and moving towards electrification I think Mr Garber um made a a valid point around um the lack of recommendation from OSI so you started in August with their sort of tentative approval and then on their September 8th uh memo they recommended not approval because it still uses fossil fuel and I think this is the conversation that we're currently in uh so other than the fact that your current I want to say this correctly uh design team doesn't have experience with this technology is there another reason why um you're not moving

056to a completely sustainable model uh for this development cuz I think what I heard from um hobin black was it batteries are new propane is new which I'm hearing is we don't have experience with it so we don't know how to do the thing that we would later consider so I mean you can just abuse me of what I'm hearing but yeah yeah I I I apologize for for that uh that implication not at all uh what what I was referring to was past experience so uh Tech uh as you know construction is a lengthy process and so projects are planned and engineered and and designed and constructed through significant amount of time so when things come out of the market that change that they they integrate relatively slowly into the into the construction process

057and battery is one of those at this scale so if this was a you know you hear about uh batteries at home all the all the time but we haven't had a uh an entire building backed up with a battery yet but it's something that that is our Engineers are familiar with it and and is something that we would evaluate um and again that goes to the size of I'm sorry if I just need to make sure I'm hearing you correctly I worked for IBM for 5 years and in 1997 at our data center the entire building was uh supported by actual what looked like car batteries uh to deal with power outages to make sure that the power never went off so that they could deliver for their customer so am I hearing you

058when you're saying that there is no technology that would allow a what a 7,000 ft building to operate on a battery or am I misunderstanding how much uh your misunderstanding sorry 4,000 square foot which is that's that's not what I'm saying a modest sized house sorry sorry again um that's not what I'm saying I'm saying it's something that we would evaluate and our Engineers are experien with it another question uh so given all of the community comment about this Bank uh sort of tying up this property as tc1 is coming uh can you just help me here at the table as well as uh the community that surrounds the bank why you decided to stay in this kind of design configuration as opposed to moving towards tc1 which I think uh everyone that has called

059in would say gosh like you're hearing us that would sort of indicate that you were um really interested in community investment and sort of trying to activate this space I understand uh council member dish has already stated you own the land it's zoned office you get to follow that rule uh or that zoning as you see fit but just sort of hearing all of the feed back cuz this is our third time at the table absolutely uh it it just seems no I was going to I was going to share this with you guys I'm not quite finished to me it it doesn't feel like that that feedback is being considered and so wanting to just give you another opportunity to help us understand um why why this 4,000 ft building in on this two

060acre sort of plot that's coming to it an area that's going to be redeveloped as opposed to something that I think you could have done that would have been still in keeping you with the design of your bank and the kinds of designs that you do but could activate and sort of say to the community hey we're a partner we see where things are going and uh we're coming towards you yep absolutely we we did actually consider doing larger than a one-story building um we the design team uh we all got together along with our internal team and looked at it um we are in the business of buying and selling money it's what financial institutions do um supporting the communities we live in or we service and helping the members with their financial success

061um unfortunately sometimes it does not always generate the right Revenue to pay for the building to go higher when that's not our specialty um you know you guys talk about multi-use housing all of that stuff that is not our Forte um we did look at doing Conference Centers things on uh multiple levels um unfortunately it just didn't give us the return um as a business that would make smart business decisions so we did go back to the drawing board and look at that uh so if it were do had been zon tc1 then are you saying you wouldn't have decided to go forward with this project because you wouldn't have been able to meet that zoning requirement on this specific project I we I don't know that I can answer that because it wasn't tc1

062and so we looked at doing a multistory building and at that point based on how we were designing it and the use we were looking at for it it did not give us the return as a a smart business decision um for our members Investments right thank you you're welcome thank you any other Commissioners all right thank you for all your comments and feedback and at this point I think uh we're good to go with a roll call vote um the motion is presented chair Lee yes Vice chair abon and reluctant [Music] yes commissioner W secretary W yes commissioner svi fine I yes commissioner hamers Schmid yes commissioner Clark yes commissioner Mills yes commissioner Weatherby yes and council member dish yes that motion carries thank you site site plan is approved we're going to move

063on to other business uh we're on to section 10A uh this is the Planning Commission work program discussion um and with this we going to start with a staff presentation Mi Kelly let just give me one moment yeah sure thing and a big thank you to whoever brought the chocolates I think that was commissioner Aon so and D oh and council member Dash thank you Ki clutch we have a whole bag too much chocolate s do you want some chocolate oh boy um it's here now uh oh potato yeah so uh the uh work program is adopted on an annual basis and uh currently the commission has a 2022 to 2023 work program but not the follow on for 2023 to 2024 um there was a uh a healthy discussion on an update and what

064it would include and look like at your October 18th uh 2022 regular session um however there was not a a final resolution to adopt a new work program and and so uh we' Revisited that at the July 24th 2023 ordinance revisions committee and in updated work program was uh proposed to reflect the October discussions uh update many of the the status statuses that uh had transpired uh since October of 22 and also identified work which probably should be channeled through the comprehensive plan process since that is such a significant undertaking um the orc draft and also what is carried forward uh today is a draft that attempts to also match the level of effort of the U matching hopefully the Ambitions of the Planning Commission with the Staffing that we have available and also uh

065offering opportunities for staff to get involved in so many of the things we would like to Channel Through the comprehensive plan process so uh we can walk through those but as we go along please keep in mind you can um uh adopt the motion as proposed to accept what's before you there are two copies in your packet one has red lines showing what's changed from the your current work program the 2022 to 2023 work program you can uh decide to uh make changes in um uh I'm sorry so you could continue under your previous work program if you like it you could adopt what's proposed today or you could propose further amendments and say okay this still needs some more work so what is in the packet and what is on the screen um are

066two versions as I mentioned a Redline version red just means it was moved around either to a subsequent year or it was added new and then there is a uh kind of a clean version of that that has the red lines removed and the items that were at the very bottom that said they were totally removed because they're being Advanced through another process for example um that would be the version that staff are proposing to adopt so uh you can see that there are a number of things that were uh requested to be worked through that have already been completed that's good news um that includes things uh in from 2022 like tc1 rezoning of state and Eisenhower r2a lot sizes site plan review thresholds and updated storm water regulations and many things in 2023

067although they may be complete for the Planning Commission table there's still uh staff work that has to be done behind the scenes advancing it to the council table uh in the case of tc1 rezonings of washon and Plymouth um preparing uh public meeting materials and the like for uh Community engagement so uh please keep that in mind as you're looking at these uh if you think oh that's cleared the orc or we've seen that at the table there may still be a lot of activity that has to happen in the department to move those forward um so 2024 is the lightest year uh uh and that is because it coincides with so many things from the comprehensive Plan update and we've tried to identify and separate out things that we would like to tackle um

068comprehensively as part of um one effort through that plan using the orc um as a sound board and also the comprehensive plan subcommittee as a sounding board I am happy to entertain any questions that you have or or speak to other items that are in The Proposal thank you and so to clarify the proposed motion would be that the Ann Arbor City Planning Commission hereby adopts the 2023 2024 City Planning Commission work program um so I'm looking for a move by commissioner Mills move by seconded by commissioner white um we're into discussion commissioner white all right I wanted to I just asked staff about um moving the unzon which is something that I have advocated for since I've sat at the table uh into our work year for next year I um is there is

069it just staff capacity to start um targeting unzon that is um that has it placed in 2024 as opposed to um maybe the remainder of this year actually that is the current tentative topic that staff proposed for the November orc meeting so we are imagining those discussions to start this year uh since we're on an every other month schedule right now making time for the comprehensive plan subcommittee which shares two members with the orc um really the November discussion is just going to be wrapping our head around it how to chunk out sections divide work think about it okay so essentially it will be starting in 2023 but it's not uh it's going to be more administrative in nature I'm smiling behind my math okay I see smiling ey thank you I wanted to bring

070up site plan light I think at this table we've talked about the utility of that that is in 2025 and I certainly want to be mindful of the amount of work we're going to have to do for the comprehensive plan and actually at the beginning I did say hey actually let's be measured and re reasonable about the amount of targets reset but of the ones in 2025 I think that one sticks out to me as one that I want to at least get the ball rolling to see what the framework could look like um that being said I do recognize that the comprehensive plan is going to entail um quite a lot of UDC updates you know as as they prescribe certain normative ways to update that so just wanted to throw site plan light

071up there see if it has any kind of interaction with folks that may want to see that um I do see that as being a pretty measurable step into allowing Property Owners to have incremental improvements without triggering you know such large large scale updates so just throwing it out there commissioner abon thank you um that comment makes me have a question maybe about sequencing and timing so my understanding is that the comprehensive plan the majority of the work of drafting and adopting the comprehensive plan happens in 2024 which then I would assume that 2025 is there's a lot of work uh affecting the changes which are suggested in the comprehensive plan right like adopting the plan doesn't actually mean there's no ordinance revisions that happen then so in some ways I'm wondering like wouldn't we

072have space in 2024 to be doing things while the comprehensive plan is coming into being knowing that 2025 we're going to be very consumed with enacting the plan if that makes any sense as opposed to clearing 2024 out to work on the plan so maybe my other question is how much of that is going to happen on Tuesday evenings um if that makes any sense or is it about staff capacity in 2024 to be doing anything other than the comprehensive plan make sense my question makes sense I would say uh in crafting this staff capacity was a huge consideration um we would love to tackle so many things in partnership with the commission that are on this list and that say 2025 plus but um it has been uh challenging with the I mean one

073one thing that's good is and I know is a of so much importance to this body is increasing new housing in the community we have a large volume of development review right now and uh staff are we actually have uh expanded a Professional Services contract that was on call to help to pick up some work um anel to that you you all know that we are actively hiring to replace retired uh planner Kahan um so uh being able to meaningfully engage staff in the comprehensive plan with a very high workload was the primary consideration in readjusting these various items and in particular site plan light was discussed as being a heavy lift which is why it was moved so uh this it's a discussion I'm I'm open to your feedback I do think that what

074is before you today reflects what staff think is still in a stretch space but realistic and gives the opportunity to engage meaningfully in the details of comprehensive plan discussions adding additional uh rearranging stuff we can try it but I'm uh want to make sure that what we have on paper is something that you the commission can feel confident about as well as staff thank you the context helps um and even just hearing that there's a high volume of development proposals in the pipeline um I'm also noticing that in the comprehensive plan list is analysis of affordability plus City development requirements plus regulatory flexibility which I feel like site plan light sits in there anyway like there are certain aspects of site plan light that hopefully will be part of the comp plan process as well

075so I think that even though the spreadsheet has cells with boundaries that these things are going to actually mix quite a bit so thank you ccil member dish I just wanted to say that I was happy to see Corridor design standards in the comprehensive plan list because I wasn't aware that that was going to be able to be meaningfully part of the comp plan because it seems like it's a big thing and that it might in some cities it has a plan of its own and so do you have any idea how extensive that discussion might be I know that we are entertaining a separate scope that would be uh through the same consultant team but as an add-on to the comprehensive plan to dive into um what a uh buildout of tc1 corridor standards

076and improvements could look like picking one Corridor and having a more robust Corridor Vision in addition we have also asked as part of the comprehensive plan scope to identify a modal hierarchy and some basic um Street design principles that would apply to all streets that may not be captured in the moving together toward Vision zero plan which identifies a lot of strategies but does not place them into uh okay these streets try these but these ones probably not uh which um hits different modes as priorities and sometimes you just can't do it all some you have to divide your network to meet a lot of different needs so uh Beyond those two things identifying um modal priorities and hierarchy Beyond downtown and Beyond the separate scope for tc1 um uh Corridor Vision starting with uh

077you know a quar or two be determined we would have to have uh further discussion on how robust or how detailed we get if we're going to ask for a guide that's kind of a separate deliverable outside of scope so I'm it could be considered outside of scope but I know that there is a lot of interest in that because development is moving beyond large development is um coming before this table moving outside of our traditional DDA boundaries so we are having discuss s with the DDA uh as they're coming up on their renewal talking about um how to sync conversations around greater downtown streets what is expected design wise in coordination with the comprehensive plan so I hope that that answers your question yeah it's helpful um I'm delighted to hear that you're entertaining

078the possibility of a separate cont contract to go into more detail but it sounds like we'll begin to get some systemization of the judgments that we're making more responsively and reactively to individual projects which is what is uncomfortable so I think it's great that we're starting to move towards standards there one thing that may also make sense is in one and I can suggest this to manager Leonard is in one of the near-term subcommittee meetings for the comprehensive plan subcommittee of the Planning Commission to take a look at this list of items did I take your Thunders commissioner Mills and and just talk through how and exactly in what ways these items that are of priority to the Planning Commission would be tackled throughout the process you took my thunder that's I I was curious

079what the order of operations was like if this had been compared to their scope of work it's great I think that when we were putting this together over the summer we saw commonalities but if the Consultants don't know that this is what we hope to that that the engagement process we're hoping to inform these kind of things I would just want to make sure of that and if there are things that need to be pulled out as separate contracts because to the point that commissioner abon made too like I don't I kind of thought that when we P this over to the side here we thought this would allow us to hit the ground running a lot better in 2025 like it's not that each of these takes a really long time we're sort of

080doing a lot of the development for this stuff in 2024 while it's fresh in our head too and so I think it I'm not on the subcommittee for the for the comprehensive plan but I think it would be worth that conversation about how you do that um and and which of these things are realistic in their existing scope the other thing that I would just add is I we're almost done with 2023 and we don't have dates for any of these things and some of these things have been in here since January the one that strikes my eye is solar and I did throw us under the bus again at the Michigan Association of planning conference because it's crazy we still don't allow with separate rules for solar than for ground mounted or than for

081any other accessory structure and that's tricky to do so that's but that's not the only one that's been here for a while so I'm just um hopeful yeah M I believe that the solar Readiness just has to have some uh language and materials prepared to advance to the city council um my understanding is that's already been discussed and cleared through through this body so that is an example of some of the administrative tasks that can uh put long lists of items in the weeds and uh they I that particular item I I'm happy to take that feedback back to the team I've emailed a couple times so we're we have actually reviewed that item and its status as recently as yesterday so it is not forgotten um um thank you um commissioner white uh one

082thing that would be helpful for me uh that if you are open uh to this is um some kind of estimate of Staff time per item because to for without knowing it it's sort of a black hole so you know I'm looking at for instance student representation on commission how much staff time is that is that a bylaws change could we just have a hour conversation about it and then here at the table make a recommendation through a motion at the table and then it goes off to legal and they come back and say yes you can do this no and then it goes to council or is there something that is not clear about that conversation that needs staff initiation time research presentation in order for it to come to the table so um

083those kinds of things so like you know going through the list I feel like there are things we could cherry pick out that we could do at the table but I don't know what I don't know which is what um the staff component of that item is or what Staff feel like their obligation to that item is and so I don't want to get ahead of like I'm an optimist I look at things and I go every problem is solvable and then you say it is with unlimited resources and time so any insight on that as we look at these would be helpful and I'm also thinking about that Visa the uh Capital Improvement plan which is a document that we are responsible for and that we sent Dawn so I see that it's coming

084in December there are some things that um are on my sort of wish list to go into the CIP and so if there is already a pre-existing procedural document to help me get prepared for that meeting I can do my work and then bring that to the meeting to say hey here are the three things and I've done this little bit of research to help this move along uh cuz we do have a lot of things that we need to do and it does feel like it's taking a while but I appreciate the Insight that you're giving um with staff constrained time uh I yes I totally appreciate that feedback um just taking the example of student representation on the commission uh in my mind not consult primarily it's planard de Leo and myself Staffing

085the orc who are talking through and advancing some of these things and then we bring in other members of the team as needed uh and manager Leonard is also um pretty involved but for student representation on the commission um my uh assumption would be that planner de Leo and I would look at examples of other youth representation and other committees we prepare a memo or other materials to discuss at the ordinance revisions committee um try to reach a consensus of what to do with that item to bring it to the full body and then uh further materials are are prepared to do something specific and and and longer lasting um uh discussion at the table um uh it you could just have a quick discussion at the table but I guess it depends on what

086level of depth and what expectations the Planning Commission has for these items too because we if it's on the list we take it pretty seriously and we want to uh approach them all independently with the the unique research that each requires so for that one we would probably want to do a peer review uh see if there're a literature brief literature review maybe from American Planning Association or similar so uh something like that I would imagine might take in addition to preparing for subcommittees or for this committee like 10 hours of Staff time it depends if also it may implicate changes to your bylaws it might be something that for some reason or another has to be modified at the council table sometimes that happens when we start to get into things related to bylaws

087um I wish that some of these were simpler but even a small a seemingly straightforward item like that can uh quickly become many hours of multiple planners and staff work so um maybe we need to clarify with in a working session with the Planning Commission what is intended for the various items that are on here maybe we haven't gone as in depth about your expectations for some of these or at least since I've joined the Department yeah sure uh I app I really appreciate uh your response and and I think to come towards you without creating a lot of work colors work great so this thing is going to take 10 hours or less and it's a color this thing's going to take 20 to 40 hours and it's a color and this thing's going

088to take more than 40 hours and then you could um intensify that with the number of of planners that go into it just so that looking at it I don't make assumptions that you have embedded knowledge on and then I think I appreciated your clarification that we haven't talked about what our sort of responsibilities are because I imagine with the collection that we have at the table we could do a peer review you know we could roll up a quick uh subcommittee on student participation and we could do all that you know maybe five to seven hours of that leg work and then give it to you and then you take our effort and then come back to us and say based on the peer review from the subcommittee these are our three recommendations so

089something like that which seems fun H doesn't seem like super difficult to me again I'm an optimist is something that I could say like oh I'd be up for um adding 7 hours to my volunteer time to the Planning Commission to help move that one along so that it comes off our work plan and we also get it done that kind of thing so just a like a since we're talking about this one and and I have a lot of unzon ones that I would love to do with that too but um I might be belaboring that point thank you um and I I do appreciate the the depth of research and consideration each point goes into um I think the by virtue of 2023 is anything that doesn't really like get completed this year

090we'll literally stack on a 2024 I kind of look at the 2024 heading being kind of at the top of the 23 so uh being mindful uh I have no proposed changes at this point to the work plan does anybody else have any proposed changes if not I would like to um all those in favor of the motion um please say I I I any opposed motion carries all right we're heading on to other business section 10B um this is the pro housing Grant letter of support um starting with a staff presentation M Kelly uh if if I may chair just on the previous item uh staff are happy to revisit this more regularly or have a renewed discussion with orc and I appreciate the the comments uh relative to the pro housing Grant letter

091of support in tonight's packet you'll find a proposed a letter of support for Huds uh uh Pro housing Grant funds um we'd like for the Planning Commission to consider endorsing the city's application for this pot of funding there is about $85 million being made available federally for municipalities and units of government we are asking for approximately five million of that the opportunity closes at the end of the month um ipsan city council is meeting tonight to decide if they will be joining the city of an arbor in our application uh both communities intend to review zoning to encourage more housing we're also partnering partnering with the Anor Housing Commission some of the proposed uses of the funding um uh application include implementing the recommendations from the comprehensive plan uh in investing in pattern book housing

092for accessory dwelling units and duplexes updating at least for Ann Arbor and iilani the information that came out of the 2015 Wasa economic equity analysis we'll also be looking at improving development review processes to facilitate easier build of housing uh infrastructure assessment support and um remaining funds to would be allocated to funding affordable housing on City owned properties there is an undetermined match at this point if you match it at least 50% you get the maximum amount of match points uh however there's no minimum match but the city uh application uh the the team is U proposing to maybe match at a 3 to5 million level so a 50 to 100% match and that funding will likely come from an affordable housing millage uh uh potentially other financing available through the an arbor house in

093commission so we request that you consider uh the motion to authorize secretary W to sign and send this letter of support thank you the proposed motion is motion to support the application of the city of Ann Arbor for PR uh housing funds and authorize the secretary to sign the letter on behalf of the Planning Commission moved by commissioner Mills and then council member dish a second um is there any discussion council member dish I'm catching some typos so in can I do this nitpicky or you want me to do it later or okay so as a representative of the city of an arbor Planning Commission we support efforts to increase the number of accessible and available housing units in our community I'm not sure as a representative yeah um or even in the actual letter

094yeah this is in this is a second sentence yes um it does not quite make sense to me you could end the motion to um well because the motion says support the application and to sign um the letter on behalf of the Planning Commission you could say um I I think typically that's in inclusive of scrier Errors I did not personally prepare this item yep but so I familiarize myself with the language not not throwing anyone under the can I flag the scrier errors for you and then you figure out what's trying to be said one what would make it uh more um update that for you something it's just as a representative we support I mean talking about being on beh of the as a member of this group we support or as a

095representative of group X we support we support but I could go either way mhm what what are your other erors there was one more um barriers yeah that's possible oh third pet paragraph in the surrounding County are that's okay s there was one other yeah it's barrier whereas it should be barriers thank you Sarah um Sarah Commission hamers I'm sorry so perhaps as representatives of the city of Van Arbor Planning Commission we support I I could go with that that that sounds better so change as a representative to as representatives of I think so I mean it's like the yeah because commer wife is signing it but he's signing it on our behalf right yes you are yes that's what you're doing you're authorizing me to send this letter on our behalf yes cuz I

096can't speak on behalf of commission unless we tell you you can unless you tell okay the other way to do it the other way to do it would be as a representative I affirm that we support efforts we could put that in as a representative of the city of an arbor Planning Commission I affirm that we support efforts and then as commissioner hamers Schmidt identified third PA of second sentence it should be remove barriers to affordable housing because surely there's more than [Laughter] one just one just the one it's you know one of those wooden ones we can definitely make those changes I I don't think that it would be necessary to specify that in the motion but we're happy to make those I just wanted to yes oh I get it I'm I'm really

097into editing myself do it all the time um commissioner hamers Schmid I just have one quick question since I'm putting myself in commissioner White's shoes and pretending that I'm the one signing this and wanting to make sure that it makes sense because I caught the barriers one I'm assuming in the application it's it's indicated that we are going through a comprehensive planning process and that is described because reading the letter it was just sort of like thrown out there with no context it is it's um spe specifically one of the funding requests is to implement outcomes of the comprehensive planning okay perfect I just wanted to make sure I thought so by looking at the PowerPoint but I just want to make sure we could make it clear in the letter if you'd like I

098think it's okay unless other people have thoughts I just wanted to make sure that was like specifically addressed in the application it will be it's a core uh piece of the funding request thank you uh overall I think this is great personally so I would be in full support of this and so other than the you know small kind of um clerical cleanups and we just want to help you make it as best as possible so we can succeed in the Endeavor um so with that um I suppose are there is there any further discussion all those in favor of the motion say I I any opposed the motion carries we're going to move on to section 11 uh this is a this is public comment this is a second opportunity for persons to speak

099up to 3 minutes about any issue that is not listed as a public hearing on this agenda we'll first call on individuals present to address the commission then remote participants so to speak during this public hearing remotely please press star n if listening by phone or use a rais hand feature of viewing through the web link for phone access call 877 85352 47 7 and enter meeting ID 9977 66 341 1226 City staff will select callers that have raised their hands using the last three digits of the phone number or by name if available you'll hear an automated announcement allowing the 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 your name and

100your address at the beginning of your comment so is there any person that would like to speak at this time there are no hands raised remotely either oh great oh sorry I was seeing no one we are moving on to I'm closing public comment um is there any commission proposed business commissioner W I just have a question about um how we are doing our public comments about tc1 and as a maybe an indicator of how it might come forward for the comprehensive plan and I wondered um how to do that uh so the November 1st tc1 uh public hearing for Plymouth will follow a similar format to other public hearings that come before this body I'm sorry uh let me clarify I meant uh the ones that we do in the community okay how are

101those being managed yes so the uh recent October 12th meeting that was at the traverwood branch library uh was an openhouse format with a uh scheduled presentation so there were maps that were printed out in large format put on easel there were uh three staff members available to answer questions we were in the meeting room early and we stayed after the presentation we fielded uh questions from the community and also offered opportunities for them to follow up with us in between the public hearing and also announcing the um upcoming public hearing so we uh gave opportunities through phone email and directed them to the project website that is the general format for wash chov there were I think areas that we identified for improve that we would like to uh do differently as staff coming

102up on the Wasa meeting we are looking at uh incorporating more of an interactive exercise if possible and um thinking about uh just having different ways for people to interact with the information um yeah I think um my question was is there a way to provide feedback to staff about that is open and what is the mechanism to do that do I do it at the table uh I don't I don't know how the open meetings Acts affect any Communications and things like that so I just wasn't sure what the right format was to provide that feedback but thank you for telling me how it all went sorry for misunderstanding no no it's okay and I didn't want to interrupt you um any commissioner is welcome to write staff with comments on anything planning department

103related okay but does it it doesn't get shared um unless I send it to if you're sending it as an official communication to be considered by the Planning Commission then we would include it in the packet as relevant for the upcoming public hearing if you say this is an official public comment then it just stays something out and then you tell me what I should do differently okay I mean you can get comments to us at at the table uh what I'm trying to figure out is in this part how do I give feedback for what's coming and I don't think we have a mechanism for doing that and I would like the feedback that I'm giving to be present to the rest of the commission so that if others agree or disagree they can

104weigh in and I know there are rules about having a bunch of Commissioners responding to an email because it then becomes a violation of the open meetings act if more than six of you respond because now it's a meeting there is a comp plan subcommittee meeting coming up next Tuesday that's in advance of the but it's not in the comp plan cuz it's in the T one too many things in my head right now why did I even say that I mean if you're saying do it at the work session I I will hear you and do it at the work session yes so the if you would like us we have not yet prepared the content U I'm so sorry you're okay should eat the Halloween candy that was that was given so I'm

105just pulling up the list of what we have tentatively scheduled for your various meetings and the next work session is November the 8th according to my records um yep so on November 8th we have a CIP overview a presentation about the C P process and a draft of the the CIP if it's available by that date by Kayla Coleman and we also had tentatively scheduled a presentation on building efficiency and uh some other related things from the O from OSI office of sustainability and Innovation we can add to that agenda so in right now during commission proposed business you would like to offer feedback yes on format however um we are scheduling in the was tc1 meeting for Mid November it's very likely the staff will have thought through the format for that meeting by

106the time of the breaking the rules so want it to defer to both sides of the table sure sure no I just wanted to be clear about what the Salient commission proposed businesses which is clarification in procedural conduct for giving feedback to the tc1 on Plymouth so I can do it right now it's super quick okay 20 seconds the the format of the presentation with the audience um being able to either interrupt the presentation or um hijack the presentation I think defeats the point of what we are trying to convey and so I wonder if there's a different way we can present the information whether it's at tables where we would have staff at tables talking about the impact and then people can move like a sh process where they can move from one table

107to another table as opposed to an upfront presentation to an audience with questions because there's plenty of public hearings there's going to be a public hearing at uh this table there'll be two public hearings at the council table but the conveyance of this information is helpful to everyone that's in the room and the format that was adopted um from the traverwood one prevented staff from completing presentation because of time in that space and I think that then does a disservice to our community because we can't actually talk about the things that we want to talk about so I just wanted to do that but I didn't know how and whether it was here at the table so now that you know what I want to talk about if there is a way to give that

108kind of feedback in the future um if you can advise me on that I'll follow that program if this was in a apprpriate so thank you you can make that a formal public comment and it would be included in the packet okay under the communications to the commission um that way you communicate it both to your colleagues the public and staff if you just want staff to see it you can email us anytime and we're happy to take the feedback um however if you want to ensure that it's available um for broader like visibility then uh letting us know that in addition to sending us the email it would be you would like for it to be included as a communication to the commission would be the mechanism to do that and I can let

109you know that we're of a similar mind so thank you for those um Improvement suggestions we would also like to make improvements along those lines yes and it wasn't a criticism it was just an observation it's okay that it's a criticism it's not it's not you do a great job thank you you is there any other commission proposed business commissioner abens I just have a question I just wanted to confirm that next Tuesday the orc meeting is being replaced for the comprehensive plan subcommittee meeting yes thank you and can I confirm that I should be assuming that every other fourth Tuesday which is a really amazing Cadence every other fourth Tuesday I should be holding for the plan subcommittee I can pass on to manager Leonard that you uh that you and other members of

110that subcommittee would like a regular Cadence and ask him to communicate and um and uh work that out I'm not sure exactly of the scheduling in okay so did I did I miss something that I was supposed to know that next Tuesday was the subcommittee meeting this is I may not have been copied on all of the email exchanges so I can't say for sure but if is is that an inconvenient day for you no it's not inconvenient but I have very few open evenings and I scheduled a constituent coffee hour for that thinking that it was an open evening now I'm going to reschedule that hour or I'm going to be 5 minutes late to the subcommittee meeting and I'm going leave a half hour early from that coffee hour um and in the

111future I will make the coffee hours at a time where one person has complained they could not attend which is 5:30 to 6:30 but it's just things are so insane that uh and I feel terrible that I was not present for what sounds like a really delightful meeting in pth because that is my w but I was out of town I mean on a pre planned thing that's not at all relevant but it's just so hard to be at everything uh which you know because you have to say hard and finding a time for every and I mean so it would be convenient if we wanted to do every other fourth Tuesday I can certainly bring that back and suggest that but I would think we need to need more frequently than that uh given

112the amount of work we have I don't know but if if we want to do that I'm I I will totally block those off I just need to know um about it I will ask for um some attempt at more regular Cadence and advanced notice for those thank you any other commission proposed business other than being everywhere all at once uh if nothing else I'm going to move to the last item which is adjournment moved by commissioner Mills seconded by commissioner white all those in favor say I hi I we are adjourned