001to the July 16th 90 Planning Commission meeting we'll begin the meeting with a roll call Commissioner Milstein here commissioner Mills Commissioner get Brandel here commissioner aprons Commissioner Ackerman here Commissioner Briggs Commissioner hammerschmidt Commissioner sauvé Commissioner woods we have a quorum thank you and our next item is introductions today we're joined by two new commissioners Commissioner Abrams welcome and Commissioner hammerschmidt welcome yeah do you have any other introductions no approval of the agenda do have a commissioner he'll move move back mr. Mill's I can by commissioner get Brandel do we have any changes to the agenda please say aye opposed it's approved before us this evening we have three three sets of meeting minutes from the May 21st 2019 June 4th 2019 and June 1829 teen do I have a commissioner they'll move all three move
002by Commissioner so they seconded by Commissioner give Randall any discussion on the minutes before is this evening Commissioner Mills I always googled four I always search for my name to make sure that what I say sounds quasi intelligent and this one was less intelligent than even normal I think there's like verbs missing on May 21st page 14 the second full sentence if it can say Mills encouraged pilet to quantify the number of Brown lot surface parking spaces being lost showing how this addition blah blah blah all right make that change thank you any other changes to the minutes all right all those in favor please say aye opposed they are approved moving on to reports from city administration City Council Planning Manager Planning Commission officers and committees written communications and petitions we first have a
003report from our City Council representative Commissioner Ackerman Thank You mr. chair city council met last night a few updates of note the city in the state have reached an agreement about the Allen Creek railroad opening this is an exciting project that would open Depot Street to Bandemer Park and Argo Pond connecting both the pedestrian walkway on Depot to the border to border trail but it'll also serve as a stormwater outlet to to the river as well so a win-win for the city and exciting that it's moving forward 3:25 east summit also known as the garnet which this body passed on to City Council with a recommendation for approval moved on from first reading to second reading although there were some comments of opposition with respect to the zoning type that is being used 2705 newport
004road was zone from township to r11 of the are ones I think are one a and a number of UDC amendments that were corrections that were incorrectly transitioned from chapter 55 into the UDC or moved forward last night as well and then finally three special assessments for sidewalks on Pontiac trail on Scio Church and on Devoran all went forward so we'll be getting some new sidewalk gaps filled throughout the city great Thank You mr. Leonard you have a report for us no report this evening Planning Commission officers and committees written communications and petitions we have received quite a bit of written communications so please take a look at that audience participation this is a time for members of the audience to address the Planning Commission and regards to items that are not on our agenda
005for this evening so if you are here in regards to an item that is not on our agenda this is your time to speak to the Planning Commission you'll have up to three minutes to address the Planning Commission anyone seeing no one will move on to public hearing scheduled for the next business meeting no new public hearings are scheduled for the next business eating meeting we anticipate a couple returning items the anticipate the return of the affordable housing premiums and potentially the sign ordinance both of those have already had previous public hearings thank you unfinished business the first item under unfinished business is two eight five seven Packard Road Planned Unit development site plan for city council approval the petitioner will have up to ten minutes to address the Commission followed by a staff report
006then we'll have a public hearing and then we'll go into discussion and vote a good evening Commission my name is Tom covert I'm with midwestern Consulting I'm here with Jim Heisler the developer and a couple of members from the design team which includes our traffic engineer Michael cool and our project engineer Tyler Smith as you will recall from previous meetings I'm just going to do a quick contextual overview of where we're located where the projects located it's a short distance to the west of Platt and Packard intersection were across from the new Grace Church in Mary Beth Doyle Park we're on the north side of Packard Road bit east of bird park you'll see there to the left of the image and we're surrounded by the green Lee Kensington Farms neighborhoods you will recall from
007our last meeting that the project is a proposed PUD with 51 units detached single-family homes around the perimeter attached home units in the center block we maintain the conditions of the r1a zoning classification we preserve additional natural features by proposing this PUD versus the previously denied site plan we have a utility layout that remains the same for the project we have a stormwater solution that still over treats I'll say but it collects stormwater that had historically flowed by past the site and pounded on neighbors yards the home stylings will remain the same since our last meeting we had the opportunity to meet with the natural area of preservation folks review our maintenance plan in a bit further detail and provide some edits to that for some clarity and definition to that maintenance plan so those
008revisions are before you we also completed some planting plan revisions which will allow thee or the goal would be to reduce deer browse on some of the the plants that are proposed there the proposed home character is what you see here there'll be some single-story ranches and some do two-story homes from the last meeting we understood that the comparison chart on sheet 26 was of particular interest so I'm just gonna summarize a few things here this evening the current plan the PUD that's before you preserves 13 landmark trees the area plan that was previously approved to preserve 14 landmark trees for comparison the denied site plan had preserved seven lam our trees the current PD plan that's before you preserves 0.89 acres of woodlands the area plan was point seven nine acres of woodlands and
009the denied site plan was point three acres of woodlands the this current PUD plan preserves five hundred and eighty four inches of Woodlands the area plan was that three hundred seventy six inches and the denied site plan was a two hundred sixty six inches so with this what you begin to see is that the PUD was very or is very consistent with what the area plan had called for with preservation and that natural features we see the benefits of the PUD being a diverse housing typology for the in Arbor housing market it puts attached units and mixes those with single-family detached homes we are providing natural features preservation and a maintenance plan to help protect those natural features with the development we have a stormwater management plan that exceeds stormwater management requirements we're addressing the
010historical flooding concerns in the area and the PUD what that allows us to do is achieve the attaching of the units in the center back of the plan for additional natural features preservation our goal for this evening is to respectfully request action on the project the developer will not be making any further changes to the plans or offering any further revisions we do and how our week I should say we have received County Water Resources Commissioner's Office approval of the plans and we've wrecked we have received staff recommendations for approval as well and we've revised the plans as I noted for the last Planning Commission meeting thank you thank you we'll now head over to mr. Chang for a staff report I believe the petitioners covered all the topics we did add a couple of
011items in this staff report regarding floor area including the basements as part of this PUD if you have additional questions regarding the natural features maintenance plan I'm sure the petitioner could answer those questions also thank you alright we are moving on to a public hearing at this time anybody wishing to speak in regards to this project this is your time to speak you'll have up to three minutes to address the Planning Commission please state your name and address for the record sure can you hear me okay with this mic as it is my name is Dan village I live at 27:19 Cranbrook Road it's kind of uncomfortable to be here because I always like to speak well of people and I need to be critical of this but anyhow please forgive me my ignorance about
012the zoning business and about the developing business I'm just a citizen trying to understand so Mr property owner has a lot with big beautiful trees on it and by the way a little beautiful historically important house to mr. bilder says to the city and I paraphrase here those sure are nice trees that mr. property owner has on that lot I want you to change your zoning rules to facilitate me making a bunch of money building on that lot and by a way by the way it would sure be a shame if something bad happened to Mister property owners trees I'll get you my pretties and the little house too last time I came to one of these meetings a fellow citizen accused the Builder developer of blackmail the dictionary tells me that blackmail is when
013someone demands money excuse me or another benefit from someone in in return for not revealing compromising or damaging information about them this is not blackmail it's not what we're talking about I think the word that my fellow citizen was looking for was extortion the same dictionary says extortion is quote the practice of obtaining something especially money through force or threats now I don't want to accuse mr. bilder of extortion because I don't like to speak ill of people and I have no expertise in the law here so I will make no such accusation however I do know that as a citizen of Ann Arbor and of my neighborhood sure feels like extortion sure does so I make no accusation but I will ask you members of the Planning Commission and the city's legal staff if
014this isn't extortion can you please explain the distinction to US citizens and tell us what actually is going on here and if it is extortion what is the proper legal jurisdiction for the city to file a criminal complaint thank you very much thank you good evening my name is su Symington two six four nine carmel i am the one who sent you the attachment with the photo from bur park and this was in March where there was a sanitary sewer overflow at the entrance of BIR park and Easy Street and this this has been a concern of mine from the get-go regarding this particular project and I feel in this city we pay for consultants and surveys all the time and I'm the one who I respectfully request moratorium on building in this particular area
015because of recent events with the PF us where's our sewage overflows our areas been prone to this in the decades I've lived in that particular area I feel strongly that we should hire a consultant to study our citywide sewage problems or review them so we can make decisions that won't affect people who are already living there in the future because that's going to be a costly endeavor if anything else happens in our city I'm not sure where we're headed with us as far as the city goes I'm going to pay attention at the City Council meetings on the sewage overflows but that's been my concern with this project and I encourage people at the last meeting to walk the property to look at the grading of the property I'm not sure if that's going to
016be taken care of my neighbor's gonna have that retention pond in his backyard and we're just I'm just fearful for for that I appreciate you listening to me and thank you thank you hi I'm back so Karen white and I live at 27:19 Cranbrook adjacent to this beautiful site okay so what I want to say I have been coming to these meetings for a while now because I want to do the right thing by this site and I needed to educate myself and find out how a citizen is supposed to be involved and I've seen a couple really horrible things and a couple of really good proposals and most recently the Veridian proposal which is also adjacent to our neighborhood it's much more environmentally sensitive or the roxbury group's proposal for Broadway where they know
017how to communicate with community members and take their feelings into account that hasn't been happening here I would urge you to put this on hold I know that there's gonna be development on this site I know it but we don't have the luxury of any more bad development and this is bad development I have been talking to my neighbors about this quite a bit I understand that staff has recommended approval and I think I understand their reasoning I'm late to this party and the laws are in place I would say that the staff thinks half a loaf is better than none and I I have to use a different metaphor I think the better metaphor is that we all share a single home maybe a multi-unit building I don't know but we're all in this
018together and the house is on fire it's on fire and we may not through it and the developer would like to build a small fire in a part of the building that's not yet a flame so he can roast s'mores get his profit he doesn't believe in global warming anyway and what could have 300 year old tree do to mitigate the effects of global warming we're just in Arbor I think we deserve enough time to really work this plan over and make it better we all know it could be a lot better and I think we should demand that and that's our responsibility as planning commissioners and the citizens thank you thank you good evening my name is Chris Crockett and I live in a historic neighborhood I'm also a member of the Michigan Historic
019Preservation Network and I'm secretary at the Ann Arbor Historical Foundation I'm tonight but I've been asked by Ellen Thackeray who is the deputy director for the Michigan Historic Preservation Network to read a letter to you but before I do that I'd like to just say that this project is a PUD and one of the requirements of a PUD is that there be a public benefit in exchange for the suspension of the zoning rules for that particular parcel since before the death of Louisa Piper who is well known for all of her work in Ann Arbor on behalf of Historic Preservation but a number of us have been read a meeting about the preservation of the Greek Revival farmhouse on the property I went to a meeting at Tappin where I asked the owner of the
020property and developer if they could move that farmhouse to the cobblestone farm parent property they've shown an interest as part of the public benefit and I don't think that this is too much to ask so I'm here tonight advocating for that but this is Ellen Thackery's letter she tried to send it to you but it was too late dear Planning Commission planning commissioners my name is Ellen Thackeray and I live at 1510 Martha in Ann Arbor and I serve as the deputy director at the statewide historic preservation nonprofit the Michigan Historic Preservation Network I'm a member of that also I am writing to you regarding the proposed plan development at 2 857 Packard I would respectfully request that if this project will be recommended to City Council for approval that a condition of the approval
021be that the existing circa 1850 farmhouse be left on the site for 3 to 6 months so that the house can be viewed and structurally assessed for put for a potential move the current owner has indicated that potential buyers can assess the house in late July and a group of interested residents have been meeting to discuss the possibility of moving the house I would hate to see the house demolished before reasonable alternatives could be explored thank you very much for your consideration thank you thank you is there anyone else in the audience who wishes to address the Planning Commission regard to this petition seeing no one I'll close the public hearing and I will read the two motions that we have before us motion number one the Ann Arbor City Planning Commission hereby recommends that
022the mayor and city council approved the Weber rezoning petition from our 1e single-family residential to condition I'm sorry with conditions to PUD plan unit development district and supplemental regulations motion number 2 States the Ann Arbor City Planning Commission hereby recommends that the mayor and city council approved the Weber PUD site plan and development agreement do I have a Commissioner they'll move both of these move by commissioners of a second in by Commissioner Briggs we are in discussion mr. Ackerman Thank You mr. chair we've been discussing this off and on since in that time various plans have come before this body and on to city council the courts have been involved and it has been a saga in that time a lot of questions have been asked and answered a lot of questions have been asked
023and not answered and a few of those items that we asked for weeks ago or left unanswered it is reassuring to see that there is a natural resource management plan in place it looks to be a five-year plan that's been reviewed and developed with our staff experts in the field and that's reassuring to me but there are a number of open questions left I did I guess three three areas come to mind as we discussed this again I first want to turn to stormwater this spring and summer you know I think has been eye-opening for a lot of people of what are the realities of the changing climate in terms of our day to day lives and the increase in rain water is what the Midwest season feels most immediately and we've been no exception
024and I was just wondering I understand the the plans and the engineering to help capture stormwater that would otherwise run off into neighbors properties but is there through the county or local folks is there a measure of the amount of water that would otherwise be bypassed that is supposed to be caught on-site if so what is that measure and then in turn what is our enforcement mechanism to ensure that those standards are being met I don't know if that's a staff question or I don't have the specific calculation I think that my understanding is part of the water resource commissioner review they do calculate estimated flows of the site based on the topography of the site what portions of the grade are draining onto that I think they do look at projected volumes to to
025determine if they are going to be retained on site is that designed to accommodate that or under the code if they're just bypassing the site through a swale that has to also be designed in such a way that can accommodate that proposed flow but I don't know if Project Engineer has more detailed information about what that calculation is for the specific site Thank You mr. covert with regard to stormwater management for the site we are meeting the water resources Commissioner's Office standard including stormwater and filtration so we have we're not only treating the quality but the quantity of flow at the site you'll recall when you first saw this plan back in I believe 2016 with the with the area plan was about the same time they were changing their standards and part of that
026change in standards included calculations which accounted for some of the increases in rainfall that the county had been observing through data on rainfall for the area so we are treating the 100-year storm event at our site well let me back up we are treating all storm events but the maximum storm event is the hundred year storm event so we're treating the smaller storm events with greater frequency we're treating those by treating the quality mainly we're providing for quality treatment within our basins with the proposed natural vegetative areas and the infiltration that will happen at the site we're fortunate our site has the opportunity to infiltrate at rates greater than what would be allowed by the calculations however to have some level of protection that if something were to happen like they got silted up or
027something like that we do have the opportunity for these basins to outlet to underground pipes that connect to the Packard Road system so there's a protection and the fact that the calculations have been updated there's a protection and the fact that they don't allow us to use to the full extent of what we can what we can infiltrate in the site so we have those protections and then from a maintenance protection standpoint the site will have a drainage district set up through the county which will be a separate second set of documents that will also be included in the master deed and bylaws and the exhibit me drawings which so I appreciate them that gives me reassurance that the properties on the site won't flood and I guess to be a little more transparent what
028I'm trying to grapple with is what is the public benefit that a PUD allows or I guess provides and and the biggest one that I can put my thumb on is the stormwater right that under these plans hopefully neighbors flooding is reduced right and and that that's that's the one I can even start to put my thumb on and so if you could help me understand the degree to which that stormwater will be reduced from neighboring properties and then what the enforcement mechanism would be for us to hold so essentially what happens at our site the surrounding neighborhoods were developed at a time when the stormwater rules were different than what they are today so with regard to the rules we have to collect and detain for the stormwater that basically a drop of water
029on our site has to go through our stormwater system before it leaves the existing conditions at the site have an area that flow from off site from the subdivisions I'm looking at sheet 14 if you look at those gray areas 1.62 Acres 0.29 acres 0.39 acres with the current rules and standards that's that's not necessarily the stormwater of the site that stormwater that we could build a swale or a pipe system and bypass our site what we're doing is we're taking those areas if you look at sheet 14 the proposed site drainage plan those areas that are on the top of the page shaded in gray those areas at the bottom of the page which are cross-hatched we're taking those areas and we're collecting them on our site and instead of bypassing the site we're
030putting it through our stormwater system let us catch up with you sure so if I'm reading this is the bottom figure on 14 bottom left yeah and then it's the houses off Carmel and Cranbrook and then the arrow points in the direction of your Basin is that so what is that demonstrating that even in a hundred year storm event the water on those properties moves towards that basin is captured and treated yep so so let me back up so those polygons that are outlined by the thick line with a small dot in it those are drainage areas so the drainage areas of the site as existing are on the top of the page graphic and at the bottom of the page they're the proposed graphic so what happens is we are collecting the area in
031the gray on the top graphic sorry in the ground the top graphic that stormwater flows through our site on the bottom graphic that same area with the cross hatching we're collecting that on site we're showing that the drainage areas the drainage areas the thick line with the dots all correspond with one of our stormwater elements for example along Carmel Street you see the crosshatch with the arrow going to the pond that's at the northeast corner that drainage area is now going to that detention pond instead of bypassing or flowing across our site into the neighbor's backyard okay so it's more about the water coming down grade from easy through the site conventional design today would have the Lots on Easy Street in Carmel have similar to what we're proposing by having pipes or ditches in
032their backyard to take that water from those yards and then go to their detention basin okay so it's that since I don't have detention basins which we by current standards we could bypass that flow and let it back out in the neighbor's yard which wouldn't be a good solution obviously they're experiencing flooding now okay thank you I want to move now Thank You mr. burrows my last question for you in the staff report there was reference to an application to move the the 1840s farmhouse I was wondering what I've been trying to educate myself a little bit about the house and the process to move a historic home what is that application in the process by which it begins who is the applicant what party is the applicant where is that application so regardless of
033the historic significance of the structure is not in a protected and regulated local historic district so that means that there are no additional city regulations that would prohibit moving it or alterations to that structure that said anybody could apply to move the structure to any location that would obviously it has done been done before in the city and it is it can happen structures can be moved it's a it can be a pretty significant obviously logistical challenge to physically accommodate that through everything from the right-of-way to utility lines and the like nonetheless any property owner could initiate that as a building permit and the corresponding permits that would be necessary to traverse the public right-of-way to do so I think in the context of this discussion both reference and the staff report more generally there's
034been discussion about placing the structure on a city-owned facility specifically referenced a cobblestone farm to be clear the city has not received any sort of formal proposal saying we would like to move this structure to cobblestone farm and located at this specific location for the following purposes generally speaking from a staff perspective that would might be challenging to move it onto the cobblestone farm homestead because that is a city regulated prop of historical significance that we currently control it might be challenging to add a structure to that that would compromise the integrity of that district however Paulo stone farm is surrounded by a large expanse of City parkland that could potentially potentially be utilized similarly though no formal presentation has been made to the city particularly to the parks Advisory Committee and ultimately the City
035Council who would have to make a determination to say yes we want that structure on that site we have an identified plan as to how that's going to be financially accommodated how it's going to be maintained and any long term maintenance or programming associate suit if any house and it's actually sounds like it there may be more opportunity considering it's not historically protected there issues with that if it was going from currently private property to a different private property that would be dealt with through an application process yeah largely building permits and right-of-way permits okay where the city and council would get involved is if that second location was city-owned correct got it okay thank you - with respect to the sanitary sewer I just want to give a little bit of background and then
036I do have a question but we hear you the sanitary sewers are leaking and they're getting into the river and that's not how it's supposed to work that is not how how local government is supposed to take care of its natural assets and it's it's physical assets the pipes themselves there's been a lot of work in the last two decades to fix that problem the biggest and most expensive was a hundred and forty million dollars invested into the sanitary sewer plant the processing plant which is brand-new state-of-the-art the the issue that that now remains is how do you get sewage from people's private property public property to that state-of-the-art plant and that's an aging piece of infrastructure it's 365 miles of underground piping an infrastructure that's you know as much as a hundred years old
037and it's it's failing in a lot of ways there was a question specifically about why can't we hire a consultant to get a better plan of how to handle this and actually fortunately we have hired a consultant to do that they're putting together an asset management plan which will be a ten step process by which we plan the long-term capital needs of our different infrastructure systems we've already done this for our roads so you may have heard some buzz about a new roads plan that came out in 2016 and this is one of our our final infrastructure systems that desperately needs this and we're finally doing it which I'm glad glad that we are another piece is you've probably heard some drama in like around 2014 about footing drain disconnects and and some pumps a
038lot of controversy that surrounded that debate before my time in public office but essentially stormwater would flush through people's houses get into the sanitary sewers and then flood the sewers flood sewage out into people's properties into the streets and that program is disconnecting homeowners footing drains from the sanitary sewer to avoid that type of problem so there's kind of three different areas there's the treatment plan itself which is state of the art now fortunately there's the infrastructure that sits below our streets which is 365 miles that needs serious work and we're finally putting together a plan to attack it and then there's the the issue at the source at people's homes which was you know was dealt with about a half decade ago so progress is being made but not as fast as it needs
039to be thank you for bringing that up question for staff we talked about sanitary sewer a long time ago I remember the conversation I don't remember the details of it can you share the process by which staff reviews developments impact on sanitary sewage and the system and what the course of action would be if this property is is permitted yeah we do have an engineer on staff that does look at the sanitary sewer mitigation to see sized correctly I'd have to go back and look but if it's gotten to this stage we know that there's so many if they're adding sanitary to the system there you can either they could probably either pay their way out or mitigate for it to get out of the sanitary sewer mitigation issues I could go back in and
040look at this that is the staff report see if the pipes are indeed sized correctly but they will be providing some type of monetary mitigation for the sanitary or the flow that's being added to the system but I don't recall that there was any issues with it but I can look while we're discussing it further the petitioner may even know off the top of his head what you know what those comments were yeah either way it's fine and that was the the last question for now from me so happy to hear other colleagues thoughts and questions as well as mr. covert if you have an answer happy to take it now and while he's coming up I would just tack on as it relates to you the source challenge that you referenced the policy of
041the city now is is that those are financial contributions that the city uses towards capital improvement programming to help this is the system in a larger basis so while that source reduction is still occurring it is now occurring through a more sort of centralized and prioritize process than in the past where it was more more scattered throughout and implemented by on a property owner of a property owner method thank you so with with regard to this project the city engineering staff had the opportunity to take basically the number of homes that were adding to the site or adding to this property and putting that into the model for both water and wastewater sanitary sewer and through that model what they have shown is that there isn't areas that would need to be upgraded off-site that
042would allow the site and the whole infrastructure as it sits today to work better it works properly the addition of this would not cause issue we have determined through the calculations that Brett refers to with regard to sanitary sewer mitigation that we have to mitigate about fifty-four gallons per minute and we would be participating in that program Thank You further discussion I'm sure Commissioner sobei I think two small questions one is for the developer timeline if this is proved foresight work to go on because I know there's a request you know to hold off so that there could be maybe work done in the background to sort out this historic home so what's your projected timeline for work on the site well given the constraints of just the general time I would assume if it
043would go through the normal process whatever your recommendation would be tonight it would be sent on to Council it's two readings there there's a couple months and then it goes once it would be you know assuming it would be approved there and you probably have three to four months of design before we could be ready to pull any permits so you're probably six to eight months so you haven't started building permit preparation for drawings no no and if you know again just so everyone's clear I do not control that house that's not part of this whole my purchase agreement not part of what's going on here but the owner of current owner the property which I have an agreement with has talked to some of the people and is willing to work with them to
044a point on it and I just so I don't see why something like that if the someone that wanted to do that move it was serious they'd have to get moving but I don't see where that would cause a problem at this time but I'd also like the nomenclature this is not an historic house there's no designation may no one's inspected it no one's done anything it is an old house been modified many many times over the years so it is very disingenuous to say it is historic house and compared to anything that is controlled by a historic Commission thank you one more question for you so looking at kind of the proposed vernacular of the homes on site yes at their previous correspondence that asked about solar ready and one of those things that's
045just roof orientation to the south so that if homeowners in the future wanted to put solar panels on it there there was at least a higher use area to use you know solar gain and so I guess my question is in the housing typology proposed a lot of those roofs are kind of pitching east-west instead of north-south so limited southern gains so I'm wondering in terms of that typology are those what specifically we're expecting or do you maybe have other housing typology within your kind of design wheelhouse that you could look at more southern exposed roof structures at this point what is you know showing on there is what to build yes now there's several different ways you can get exposure to the south with that but there's also things that you can't just you
046have a lot of other regulations in the city of how I have to orientate lot sizes setbacks roads distance between roads I didn't write those rules city did I'm trying to follow and that's we've got you know the connected units in the middle that and that's where we actually have the least amount of shade and so understanding that roof structure and solar game and so I'm just trying to get an understanding of where where you might have flexibility where we have kind of a longer narrative about timeline to know if there's opportunity beyond tonight you know where those conversations go well we are looking at anything that makes sense that is for the general public to purchase the house yep a good market and someone that wants to live and in there is good and
047good for everybody including us I sure can't make any guarantees of how they're going to be orientated or that I'm asked to live by the rules that were put before me which is what I did if they want to look after something is approved and moving forward I'm sure willing to talk because it makes sense but at this time I'm sure not going to commit to something that I don't know if we put solar you know soul orientation like do you see any conflict with any other rules on this PUD adjusting roof lines substantial deviations no I don't think I don't see barriers the only barriers I would see was any any sort of potential conflict with the preserved woodlands or landmark trees those are also often in conflict but there's nothing inherent and from
048my lens that you know the petitioners right we we specify a lot about how the physical development happens nonetheless I think that I presume that there's probably a lot of flexibility and how the actual roofline is realized on those structures some certainly may be more costly and thinking about the attached units you know a shared Ridge that spans over multiple units versus something that has the southern exposure might be more challenging but no I don't in short I don't see inherent conflict other than potentially where those roofs might have a limited solar exposure because of the natural resources we're trying to preserve that's right so I just have a follow-up question in regard that you don't own the house and presently you don't own the property that's correct I have an agreement i meant to
049purchase the prowlers tell you i have enough money in it i will be buying it all right so the question is in regards to does your contract state that the house must be removed I D seller prior to closing is that something that's stated and I don't remember the glass is not prior to closing no okay I think the agreement is he can do with the house whatever he chooses as long as it is gone before I break I think the wording was cannot hold up site development so not closing it's not a closing so when you closed on the property you know if all goes well and you get city council approval you close on the property technically you own the house at this point other than you may have a rental agreement or
050some sort of an agreement it's correct put in place okay thank you further discussion Commissioner Gabe Randall I would like to move on to the to the natural features portion of this so first for staff so when I went through the the drawing set and all the notes it's talked about a three-year plan but in your staff report is set a five-year plan and I'm just wondering if you can clarify if there's things you know in terms of how they're defining construction period and then when maintenance starts is that the discrepancy or if you could clarify how that's working features maintenance plans and a couple of other projects and they refer to three years that we have done I did talk with the Forester who did the review she was comfortable with a five-year maintenance
051plan so I think we could be a little flexible on that and we could I've got some language that we could add to the development agreement so they've stated three which was approved by Knapp and Forrester said five but I think we have some flexibility in there okay go ahead if you have a comment I was president or president all those meetings and basically it went from two to five years we're happy with any of it because we're gonna write it in there but what what they're trying to come up with something dynamic to review it and they have wanted to look at it and say oh it's working it isn't working or this is work now we're on to stage two because what you do in the first two years is not what you
052if you're one and two of the plant were three and fourteen should change right or hopefully change if one and two didn't quite work you might be another year or two until you get into a little more mat or plan so we're open and we kicked it back and forth to how to memorialize that in writing and part of it is a condominium you know they'll be documents and it'll be very clearly written in there and we've done that in other developments but we think it should be dynamic too because again just what's good and year one and two might not be good in year ten yeah I'm really glad to hear that because I totally agree with what you're saying is that we don't really know until you get going on it to see
053how things respond and it looked like when I read all the notes and the plans that there is quite a bit of flexibility in there and that the city was being informed in a consistent way at the end of every year to be able to review and to be able to check things out so that and I'm also glad that you sat down with nap because they do this all day long so they have a lot of expertise with that so that makes me feel a lot better about the ability for this to be able to keep evolving in the way that it needs to to be able to have those Oaks and walnuts and things like that regenerate so I'm glad you sat down with them I wanted to kind of understand the discrepancy
054piece but in your notes it still gave a lot of flexibility for how it might evolve even further into the future it didn't kind of shut the door on that so I was glad to see that as well and all of the notes within what would happen with the homeowners association in terms of what they would be responsible for their reports hiring a qualified contractor things like that defining more kind of targeted herbicide regimes things you know could because again you don't really know until you get in there to see how things how things would be working so I feel comfortable right now with where their natural features portion is in terms of your ongoing management and stewardship of those areas if this plan goes forward according to way that the notes are there because
055I think there's a lot of flexibility and still city kind of oversight to a certain extent not a lot of you know management week-to-week or something like that but you know that they have to they check are checking in once a year to see what's going on so I think some real work was done between the last iteration that we have and the iteration that we have now so for me this is a big part of this PUD in terms of what we are getting out of this and for me the it's attached units allow these areas to be saved and not just saved but restored and that's the piece that means I think the most to me as somebody who does this for a living is that it takes management basically we have to
056be involved in order to be able to have these things evolve in healthy ways because there's just so many invasives out there and the plan as I see it accommodates that in terms of the human involvement over time the checking that is going to be required by the city and the involvement of Knapp who really is an expert in all of this and has done this a whole lot in this area so I'm comfortable with that portion of it in terms of the PUD benefit I'm also comfortable at the stormwater portion of the benefit cuz ordinarily they week they could just bypass you know everything that's that's flowing on to them and instead they're taking some of the problem areas of the neighborhood and taking it on to their site which is highly unusual you
057know that's just not what's required at all so those two pieces for me push it into the public benefit piece for me the historic house I think it would be fabulous if Oh do we need to head to the basement just a flash flood warning just a flash flood okay we're up in the second floor we're gonna be just fine in terms of the historic structure I think it would be wonderful if some private person wanted to take this on to be able to move it to private land I think it's would be a lot for the city to be able to take this on and put this into it into a park and pay for all of that and manage the house and you know restore it it's a lot of budget to do
058something like this I would love it if somebody wanted to take this on as their project and make it into their home and to be able to restore in that way that would be wonderful I I mean obviously the city process would have to play itself out if there is will and you know city council sees its benefit and there's enough citizens that are willing to be able to kind of say it's worth my taxes to be able to do this kind of thing then then that's great but I also see that these historic structures take a lot of time and money and effort to be able to maintain - it's not just getting them there it's fixing them and maintaining them and having them interpreted and all those things there it's you know it
059takes it's a chunk further for the city to be able to take that on if people feel like that's how their tax dollars want to be spent I'm fine with that but I also think that it would be easier and cleaner perhaps for a private person who wanted to be able to take it on themselves because I just think it would go a lot faster and probably be a lot cleaner process so those are my that's my read on the on the three big chunks for me of what is kind of left to discuss on this project commissioner Mills Thank You commissioner get Brandel because I had lots of questions I'm like is this particularly on the natural features because I do think that that's the primary benefit or one of the key benefits and
060so I appreciate that I think for everyone else and I don't want to put you on the spot but I'll put staff on the spot instead to talk through what would be required what's the basis that's required as part of our code and so how does this exactly go above and beyond what we require of any new development well the natural features mitigation plan isn't required on other other projects per se but for the pewdie they needed a public benefit so as part of that which was already previously mentioned with both the open space at 54% along with the mitigation plan and the storm water detention this was trying to beef it up as much as possible to get into greater detail other than trying to preserve the existing natural features maintaining them and getting
061rid of invasives I would have to defer to the to the petitioner as far as getting into the specifics of the of the natural features mitigation plan yeah that would be helpful I mean I'm assuming like when if you say you're not chopping down the tree right you're not chopping down the tree but in terms of removing the invasives like is that what's added yeah so our current code basically manages the trees but it doesn't manage the kind of ecosystem of the woodland so much so if he were to he could just have lawn around all those trees like if he were just saving some landscape you know some some landmark trees he wouldn't be required to have any kind of ecosystem piece of it no small trees are ever going to grow and along
062that's being mowed every week you know in the summertime so our our current system is set up just to save trees not to save a system and so that's part of what is different about this plan is that they're trying to save a system and to manage it and steward it going forward there's nothing in our code that talks about that we want people to save Woodlands but when it comes down to it in terms of our code they could put lawn all around all those trees that they're allowed to do that there's nothing in our code that says you'd have to leave it as a forest floor and you have to manage invasives and there's nothing that that that asks people to do that specifically okay and the lat so that one of the
063things that as I was reading through it with the laypersons I write that mentioning I know one of the things I've mentioned a lot is the little burr Oaks that are growing there that's only mentioned a couple times and and what I'm hearing you say is that the flexibility to deal with that like and all of these other things about dealing with the invasives are what is going to keep those little burr Oaks coming up like have a chance of becoming big burrows is that right right perhaps I could be correct if I'm wrong but through all that discussion it was pretty enlightening I learned about it too but that's that was one of the big topics where I don't know if it was brought up here they rather I bought I believe it was
064and they go well that's great to have them and say you're gonna do this but you have to manage them as they get big you don't want 8 2 inch ones 2 feet apart you want to be able to be dynamic and eventually unfortunately the big one will go some point in times natural disaster you know like something's gonna happen and they want it do not dynamic enough at something far enough away is growing it has a potential to grow big enough to 200 years down the road replace a type thing that's kind of grandiose but it's that management style of you have to look at the woodlot as a whole basic like you're managing a woods but you're looking at we talked about yeah it's not gonna be a lawn you're gonna have to
065keep you can't just sit there and spray it we round up every day you know every three months to manage the weeds right you might do an act of the first couple of years to get the new stuff started then you get the native species and and I'm sure not an expert on it but I get the just of it and this is far more detailed in that but management than it is in a I want to say beauty management or landscape and something you're looking at from the road this is more of the actual ecosystem that necessarily what looks pretty and hopefully they're wanting the same but what I saw in the plans is that in the very beginning there's quite a thorough assessment with Knapp to understand where the little babies are you'll
066be able to manage around those to be targeted about the invasives that you are removing some of which you may spray some of which you may cut some of which you may pull and that the first couple of years are pretty intensive in terms of trying to get those invasives out of there and managed and then going forward little one still may come up and that's what some of that kind of flexibility piece comes in and where they're reporting to the city every year to be able to see what's happening and the city has the ability to come out and check to see overtime I think your biggest challenge is going to be you don't know who's gonna move in here who's gonna be your your president of your homeowners association and I think it
067just has to be very clear from the start you know that that is their responsibility they are a steward of these things and the only reason those houses are there or because of that and that has to be like because you get the wrong the person with the kind of wrong aesthetic that really wants to mold the whole thing down you know that's this is why this development can happen the way that it is and so that has to be made really clear because we don't know who that personality is and that personality is going to change over time people are gonna move you know so somehow the kind of mantle of responsibility and stewardship for maintaining this somehow delivering that message which I saw in your text but still like the emotional piece like
068really huge you understand what you're taking on here you know that that's I think going to be the the biggest possibility for slippage in terms of that but the city is still observing as it goes along and so if some Yahoo goes in there who really wants to be all lon that would get caught in the process you know if that were to happen so I think you said in on the discussion because that that was definitely part of it because I actually was talking about that because I've got through 30 plus years of working with associations and presidents after we leave and former homeowners and that is a concern is you have to have whoever your president is takes on the most forceful personality of that Association so Knapp and actually us because we're
069trying to if we say we're going to do what we're trying to put it in there right and that was how to get the expert and you know we figured a year was about right you know however you set it up if it's in the spring and when stuff starts so whoever that president look here's your report for the year here's what's going to happen so they have and they have to hire a consultant it's not just their homeowners association president that's out there figuring out what are seedlings you know so there's a consultant that's built into this too as like a restoration consultant which of which there are several and the Ann Arbor area so there's plenty of people to be able to do that so there's another way to kind of build in
070security with that as part of that discussion was nap didn't want to get involved in dictating the plan they want to react to a plan that is current and dynamic and with whatever the best practices of the day are and they didn't want to be the developer and the police they want to hopefully it gets developed they approve it and it gets done and they're you know actually then they're addressed the police they didn't want to be both sides right thank you because I read it and I you know didn't know exactly how it was so that's really helpful from your perspective mr. Chang was there anything else that nap wishes this would include because yeah I'm not aware of any of the additional information but I did look up some language that I can
071add into the development agreement that would address some of these issues also thank you very much I think that including that making sure that the development agreement is clear on that and enforcement of this going forward is really important I had two more short questions one is of regarding the solar orientation we've talked a lot about the detached structures on the outskirts I didn't see I mean I do have the elevations for the attached structures I just maybe you went over them in the presentation I didn't see it there wasn't elevations of the attached structures but they anticipate the units being similar to these just attached together okay got it is that typical for us to not see elevations for the attached structures at this site plan level we typically do have elevations and it's
072something that we could add before it goes down to City Council if we want to get you know something more concrete yeah I mean we always see elevations and so yeah in particular the thing that was in my mind was I if they were you know duplexes or something that are attached if they have a flat roof they should be solar ready I would not that's like non-negotiable my that is it should be Sol already and so that we don't know I can't imagine that flat roof would fit in this vernacular but even so we do see some cash that have flat roofs so yeah the other thing that got brought up that you went over very briefly in your remarks and I just wanted to address was the square footage and whether or not
073basements count if that is how we interpret r1e that basements count for that I think that the the plan is to continue enforcing that that basements count towards your square footage it's in all zoning districts that it would be counted I would I speaking for myself I couldn't not imagine changing that in this yeah go ahead so I just want to make sure so the squirt is above great so there's a difference between and below great square footage I believe the are wanting the square footage that we have is only above great square footage is that correct that's right no we measure all floor area we in the UDC we have we rely on a definition that is more specific now that we have specific things we exclude but it includes floor area both above
074and below grade so a these structures under the r1 II would have to meet the two thousand square foot threshold the prayer definitions inclusive of square footage in the basement my understanding is that they are proposing to specifically exclude the basement square footage from calculation of that 2,000 square feet it is that written somewhere or yes but since this is being rezone or being proposed for reasonable for PUD it's in the Supplemental regulations that would that would not count the basements towards that square footage that's correct I was also highlighted in the updated the staff report as a notable yes exactly which I don't I think that that one I didn't realize that before and since that would change how square footage is calculated here versus everywhere else I appreciate you bringing that to our
075attention the reason for the are 1e to be clear cap on square footage is so that we try to diversify our housing stock and get some small ish units 2,000 square feet is not small but smallish units and to potentially allow the square footage this could then you could finish your basement and it could become 3,000 square feet that is counter to the intention of the existing zoning district and would run counter to the one of the public benefits of diversifying housing types so thank you I I'm happy for other comments but I will be making a motion to amend to strike that from the development agreement yeah well I just want to make sure that I just want to make sure they were the planning commissioners clear the four area under the code requires
076measurement of all floor area be it above or below grade so under the normal a normal floor area calculation specific to the r1e we would count the basement in this case they are specifically proposing to exclude that from the calculation that could result in a thirty thousand square foot house but I will but I also would note that this would still have that two thousand square foot area limit on the house even if it were only applying to above grade which is not a restriction in any other district I agree I mean I think what you're wrestling with and I think it's valid is that I think the intent of the r1e was to try and incent very modest size structures that if only by their sheer size might be potentially more affordable and provide
077some more flexibility so I want to be clear that this is probably not meeting that original r1e intent however it's still including a square footage cap unlike every other residential zoning district in the city that is if it were zoned to anything else there would be no cap you could put a 5,000 square foot home it is provided and met the setback requirements but the current zoning just to be clear that we're going from right now where it is currently zoned r1 II correct which does have a square footage cap correct and and this is rezoning so this is the chance to if if somebody wanted to make this R 1 D or r1 a they would have to which would lift that cap correct they would have to come before us in the same
078process and we would have to assess whether it meets the standards that we've set forth to warrant a rezoning so yeah so just to be clear on that topic so the Builder can put up a 2,000 square foot house and not finish the basement month afterwards after closing the home new homeowner can finish the basement and had another thousand square feet and that would not be there'd be no restrictions against that and that's exactly the issue that we wanted to make sure that everybody was clear on going forward because we will get requests to finish those basements that is one reason why we clarified our definition in the past we had we had had a much more complicated definition that you recall referred to areas that could be made habitable we have clarified that too
079it includes all square footage except for vertical chases fire