Planning Commission 11-20-18

001the Tuesday November 20th 2018 City Planning Commission meeting we will begin the meeting with a roll call Commissioner Ackerman gave Commissioner Briggs Commissioner give Randall here commissioner Mills Commissioner Milstein here commissioner sauvé Commissioner Trudeau yeah Commissioner Weatherby Commissioner was almost a full house with a quorum great thank you moving on to introductions do we have any introductions this evening nope all right approval agenda do I have a motion to approve move by Commissioner millisecond by Commissioner Sauve any changes or comments regarding the agenda seeing none all those in favor please say aye aye opposed it's approved moving on to minutes of previous meeting and we have two sets of minutes for a review from our July 17th and November 7th meeting I would like a motion for both of them together move by Commissioner Sauve

002seconded by Commissioner Trudeau are there any comments changes regarding the minutes seeing no one all those in favor please say aye aye opposed they are approved we are now reports from city administration City Council Planning Manager Planning Commission officers and committees written communications and petitions starting with our city councilor presenta Commissioner Ackerman Thank You mr. chair because of the timing of the November general election there have actually been to City Council meetings since we've last met the first meeting which occurred on November 8th three items of relevance the Midtown condominiums the 260 some low-rise mid rise condos being built at the corner of maple and Pauline the parcel formerly of the grace bible church has moved forward and past 73 the 132 Hill low-rise student apartment building had passed I believe unanimously and then additionally

003a resolution directing this body to re-examine our use accessory dwelling units ordnance in order to see if there are any low-hanging fruit to make these a bit more approachable since 2016 when the city adopted or amended our zoning ordinance to allow accessory dwelling units or smaller units that are secondary to a single-family home that can be rented to family members or tenants there have been a number of people interested to permits applied for but zero constructed which was not our goal we were hoping to get about 15 a year and we've fallen short of that in the last two or three years so hopefully we can as a body try to while respecting character of neighborhoods try to find a way to make these a bit more approachable to the residents who want them and

004the future tenants who need them then last night on November 19th we had a meeting it was the first session of the new city council there's been a turnover for members last night we got out at 1:30 a.m. so I am peachy to two items of immediate relevance first this body cares and discusses affordability and environmental sustainability a great deal and actually those two came together in a great way last night City Council voted to fund the Ann Arbor Housing Commission to the tune of over $200,000 for the redevelopment of our affordable housing project on Broadway to become hopefully Michigan's first Net Zero affordable housing development and in addition to that there they're also another forty to sixty thousand dollars I can't remember how the final numbers shook out of additional sustainability funds sent to

005our new office of sustainability which will be responsible for implementing our climate action plan which was passed in 2012 but to date has not been implemented there remains disagreement amongst City Council the long term funding source for that office of sustainability which will be a conversation as we head into the budget season which Coleman in May finally as this body may be aware Transportation Commission and City Council put forward a request to do a transportation or mobility study of the Lower Town area of Ann Arbor just over the Broadway bridge from where we sit today we expanded the scope to also include the Pontiac trail corridor as we know we get a lot of commuter traffic as well as there are a few new private developments being built and the University continues to expand the

006Medical Center and their parking garages in that area we hope to partner with consultant to redesign and better plan how we get people in and out of that area of our town that contract was postponed for approval and will be coming back hopefully after a renegotiation with city staffs first choice green Thank You mr. lonar do you have a report for us this evening I'm very brief I'd like to thank the Planning Commission for your accommodation with the cancellation of the working session on the 13th I was able to attend the American Association of Retired Persons livable communities conference which I'm really excited to share at a future working session and particularly as we saw talk about starting to update our master plan potentially I think there's lots of opportunities to incorporate the principles of

007that program while it is coming from AARP the principles within it are fantastic for all members of our community so I'm really excited about what I learned in the opportunity to bring some of those principles in our community going forward and then for those on the ordinance revisions committee meeting I anticipate do you anticipate a meeting after the Thanksgiving holiday that packet will be going out sometime in the next few days we will be diving into detail on some of the list of unified development code 2.0 potential amendments to start giving a more in-depth discussion on those generally my intention with those is to make some progress on numerous the numerous potential amendments and then probably early in the new year figure out a good community engagement strategy so we can share some of that

008work before we go from the ordinance revisions committee on to a full public hearing thank you are there any Planning Commission officers or committees that like to report Commissioner Mills it's not one of our formal subcommittees but because it was before us before I thought you might like to hear this the there's a subcommittee of the Energy Commission that's doing the dark skies lighting ordinance that group has been a couple of those folks and Erica and I have been working together to look at an ordinance I think we're about halfway through so that I'm thinking will come before either Oh RC or will ask to have it on a working session agenda in the next month or two I think that's reasonable thank you any other Planning Commission officers or committees to report write written

009communications and petitions we have a couple of items so please take a look at that when you have an opportunity and then we are now at audience participation this is a time for the audience to address the Planning Commission in regards to any item that is not on the our agenda for this evening so if there's anyone that wishes to address the Planning Commission and regards to an item that is not on our agenda please step forward you'll have three minutes to address us seeing no one we will move on to public hearing scheduled for our next business meeting mr. Leonard upcoming meeting for public hearings for the December 4th Planning Commission will be one new public hearing four to six six zero Apple way this is an annexation and zoning for City Council approval

010to annex this 0.5 to acre parcel from Ann Arbor township and zone at r1b not a new public hearing but a continued public hearing I also anticipate that the Lockwood senior housing development on Jackson Road would be returning for continued continuation of the previous public hearing on that same agenda great thank you moving on to unfinished business which we have none and then regular business which we have four items this evening so we will begin with 10a which is 1550 wash on Avenue Zeta Tau Alpha addition site plan for Planning Commission approval our procedure for this evening will be for the petitioner to make a up to a 10-minute presentation then we'll move on to staff report a public hearing and then discussion so if you don't mind just seating your name and address for

011the record that'd be great and then you are free to start when you're ready Thank You Toby heading house I'm an architect with a great design group in st. Louis my address is 64 Sunset Hills Drive in Edwardsville Illinois it's you all but let you introduce yourself my name is sue Dickinson I'm with Midwestern consulting here in Ann Arbor civil engineer for the site and my address is one three six zero Nita Street and I'll talk very briefly about the architectural side of this project and lets you talk about the improvements were making on the site it's a pretty straightforward project the the project is the Zeta house it's a sorority house where they were wanting to improve a few different things inside actually to do they want to improve their dining area can replace

012their obsolete kitchen that's currently operating there and then they also wanted to expand just very in his very small way their house managers apartment so as we started laying this out it became apparent that it wasn't all going to fit in the area we were given so it resulted in a small addition where we're gonna push the kitchen out the back it's about 450 square feet 455 I think and then by moving the kitchen out the back that allows us to kind of reconfigure some things in the first first floor in doing that we also decided to make it a put a full basement addition underneath that addition so we are expanding the basement by that same square footage that allows us to move the laundry that's currently in that area out to the new

013addition and free up space for bike storage inside so this projects already been through HDC we have made a number of changes through that process but they were all great good changes I think for the project but really architectural I think that's about it so see you want to thank you I think the best thing about this project besides the new kitchen is that it's in almost two acre site with over 20 landmark trees on it and most of it is going to remain as it is the front that faces the rack the only change to that is we are adding an accessible sidewalk that goes right to the front door of the house and we're adding a few understory trees because we're needing to mitigate for one landmark tree that that currently they're actually

014parking on its roots so we're not we're we're mitigating for it but we're going to keep it in place we just had to build the sidewalk and build the driveway redo the driveway and a couple parking spaces too close to the landmark tree so we're mitigating for it even though we're leaving it in place and then there was one tree that was in very poor condition that we're removing so that's some of the improvements so the other very important improvements that I see that we're doing for this is that we're rebuilding the sidewalks both out to Washington ah and to Hill Street we are organizing the parking lot that existed to the rear of the building we're actually decreasing the vehicular parking spaces and we're providing covered bike parking as well as bike parking inside

015in the basement area we're adding a dumpster enclosure and stormwater management is vastly improving currently there is you know nothing structured on-site and we are storing the 100-year storm event for the disturbed area in a storm chambers underneath the new parking lot and that will be discharging out to Hill Street and one other item is that unfortunately if we were in an area that didn't have adequate hydrant coverage so the the the project is also adding a hydrant along hill street to provide adequate hydrant coverage so those are the improvements that the site improvements that are proposed great thank you very much and now we'll move on to the staff report mr. Kahn is located near the corner of Washington Avenue Hill Street in the Malick's Creek watershed the the petitioner proposed to construct a

016455 square foot kitchen addition at the northwest corner of the building which is the back of the building city code does not require sororities fraternities to obtain a special exception use permission when proposing kitchen additions of less than 10% of the floor area a basement is proposed to be constructed underneath the kitchen to accommodate a laundry room and some storage new dumpster enclosures proposed to be provided on the north side of the site and access from an improved shared access drive to Washington Avenue the petitioner proposed to handle a 100-year storm in an underground system beneath the rear parking lot the reconstructed parking lot with van accessible very free space is proposed at the rear wet of the building Buhler asus access will continue to be provided from an access point between Washtenaw in hill

017street which accesses a seven space parking lot in front of the building an additional existing access point from washington will be enhanced and will provide access to a 13 space parking lot in the back of the house a shared access easement will be established over this access drive to allow shared access between Zeta Tau Alpha and Chi Phi Fraternity the property to the north staff recommends approval of the site plan because it complies with applicable local state and federal laws ordinances standards and regulations limits the disturbance of natural features to the minimum necessary to allow a reasonable use of the land and does not cause a public or private nuisance and does not have a detrimental effect on the public health safety and welfare thank you at this time I will open up the public

018hearing if there's anyone in the audience wishes to address the Planning Commission regrets this item you may please step forward you'll have three minutes to address us if you don't mind speaking your name and address into the mic and see nobody I'll close this public hearing and move on to reading the motion the University Planning Commission hereby approves the Zeta Tau Alpha site plan conditioned on recording a roadway easement for the portion of the public street and sidewalk that encroaches onto private property and recording a shared access easement with the Chi Phi fraternity to provide shared access to the parking areas and dumpster area do you have a commissioner that moves Commissioner Mills seconded by Commissioner gear and all we are now in discussion anyone commissioner Mills this is a question for staff so the

019code says that you don't have to do a special exception use if it's 10% addition for a kitchen but what I heard that was that they want to redo the kitchen but there's also an apartment as part of this and so how does that work into interior to the building so they're doing a slight renovation underneath the kitchen and the kitchen is at the ground level is a basement space and typically we don't call back you know count basement spaces that include storage or in this case laundry as square footage so the size of the building is quite large it's over 14,000 square feet and so the 455 square foot addition is well within within that zone I'll let the architect describe a little bit more about the renovation for the apartment the apartment is

020also very small I think the main reason for the change they all were doing really is just moving her bathroom outside our current footprint so that we can have a sitting area and a bed so that they're not all in one space so that's the only difference got it okay thanks the other question that I have is it feels like forever ago for us but perhaps not so long for City Council there was a change that was made to the ordinance about that that had to do with fraternities and sororities I can't remember all of the details about that but can you refresh our memories on that and then because I know that effectively it wasn't retroactive it was only going to apply to tourney's and sororities that came before us subsequent to that that's

021a great question the the change was to add language to our code that requires a fraternity or sorority to have an affiliation with a higher educational institution with a campus in the city so if the scope of this work were to require a special exception use amendment then they would have to comply with that those requirements seek an amendment to their special exception use that exists on the property and they would as part of that code change they would have to demonstrate that they have an affiliation with the University of Michigan in this likely instance because of the scope of this doesn't kick in a special exception use requirement there's really no implication of that change to this petition thank you and thank you for telling us how that all fits I'm assuring Gabe Randall

022could you bring up this site plan so I'm a little curious just because I know that there's some kind of shared uses going on here just so I understand what's happening so I see I think a property line on the lower left part of the screen here and I see it like two parking spaces that are look like they're new and those are not part of the the main sorority here but those belong to the neighbors is that the case no those two spaces will be for the sorority they will be for the sorority yes so this drive basically straddles the property line yes I see yes the driveway is shared I see okay so and this may be a staff question I see some what looks like screening if you move a little again

023north is a little weird here if you there's like a shrub bed you know that looks like that's happening and I don't know if that's a screen or if that is just landscaping but I'm just wondering about screening at the parking lot from the street dude could Steph tell us like what's going on like dude what are they required in this area where they see some but I'm not sure if they've required it and they're just throwing that in or right it's supposed to go all the way across right currently there are vehicles that park in this vicinity so my understand is what the sorority is intended to do is to create slightly more formal spaces the other thing I wanted to point out is that in order to constitute a an official parking lot

024it has to be more than four spaces or 1,200 square feet and in this case it's less and it's also existing I suppose the petitioner would be willing to provide some additional landscaping if if requested I'll let them speak to that and I guess I'm just a little confused so the other so they're all these other spaces you know they're a little bit further over to the right are those access from a different direction or those all it's a little unclear to me sort of how all the spaces that are in the backside yeah the of the building itself are accessed from Washington ah okay and this is a shared drive which also accesses a parking area for the fraternity just just to the I guess I should say just to the west and so

025yes it is a shared drive that's accessed from Washington okay so they're not required screening even though they're kind of formalizing it and giving new pavement they're ripping the whole thing up because there's gonna be a storm you know detention thing underneath it they're not required to screen the parking my understanding is that they are and that they did sued you want to add anything to that I would like to look at the landscape plan a little bit closer but I'm sure that Tina fix is the one that prepared the landscape plan and I know that she looked at the vehicular use area I guess what I would I would request is that there could be as there is a little bit further up from there that that some screening could be provided for these

026additional two spots as well just thinking about the view from Washington ah mm-hmm and the fact that you know all of these landmark trees are being left which is fabulous and it's like this lovely site it really is it would be nice just I mean with most site plans you know we get some screening with the parking you know so if there could be some extension to those additional two spots so that when you look in you know and that would also help screen the dumpster a little bit to you know from that side view very um so I think it would be nice to be able that bolster that a little bit more and it just extend it further down okay I don't hopefully not a you know huge change and certainly nothing that

027would hang us up at this level something that could be easily changed in between now and city council sure um so again I'm not saying I'm not going to vote for this because of that it's more that I think that there could be just a little bit you know and then added and then I think it could you know just help give some more screening to an area that you know it's hard to dress that area right and she may not have put it in there just because she knew that we were so close to those landmark trees but if we're excavating for the for the parking lot and the curb we can excavate for a few small shrub right right I agree right okay okay that sounds good and then the only other thing

028was I'm always curious as a landscape architect myself what your species were and this drawing referred to another sheet which then didn't have them on it so it said C sheet 17 for additional details and things like that and she's 17 didn't seem like it was a right 122 had a bunch of landscape details but it didn't have the list okay I may not have been I look through the whole thing but you know it's not my drawing set so I'm not gonna spend two hours looking through it to see but anyway it would just be nice to know what is actually I'm sure that our forests are reviewed them they have to be somewhere somewhere in there she's seven she's seven that's the landscape plan correct but is there a list on that plan

029yes I didn't get it when bottom bottom right corner because with the one that we had the link online I didn't see it there's a schedule listed on mine that has the trees and the shrubs and the names yeah I see it sorry about that that's okay okay yep okay for some reason the one I was looking at who knows so thank you clarifying energy Brandel just to quickly point out so this this is not going to City Council this is for our cool Oh God so well this this stops here well hopefully it goes forward but saying body on this so then I guess did you want to add something along those lines if that is a condition that you'd like to apply we are certainly happy from a staff perspective to work with

030the petitioner to develop a screening for those two spaces if if that's a condition you would like to see I would suggest adding it as a condition just to any potential action and then we would ensure that that gets incorporated prior to the final plan set there discussion or I'm an amendment to the motion let's see so can you help me with some of the wording here so conditioned upon additional screening to again North is a little wonky here so additional screening to the northwest is that correct got this to the left is that what's happening of the two additional spots to continue oh okay now that really is not good language for mr. Leonard screening from watching I have correct really that's the intent additional screening from watching I add for for new parking

031spaces mr. Leonard is feverishly writing right what is happy time tactful is really great language to add to this so mister honor a potential amendment could be to add to the motion to provide shared access to the parking areas and dumpster area and vision of screening of landscape screening to screen the new parking spaces from washing off for to the planning staffs requirement that sounds great that does give us the authority to ultimately come to some what we deemed to be an appropriate level in comparison with the ordinance requirements we probably benchmark it against the larger parking lot requirements but I think I'm sure we can come up with something that's great and to be clear if there is potential some to some impact to landmark trees in that in that area clearly we would

032likely work with the city Forester just to make sure we're doing the best screening we can without adversely impacting anything yep that's great thank you so that's been moved do we have a second second by Commissioner Mills any discussion on the amendment all those in favor please say aye I you want to pose all right we're back to the new motion or the amended motion any further discussion all those in favor please say aye opposed it is proof thank you moving on to ten b200 one devarnè Road Phoenix substation expansion plan project site plan for City Council approval we'll begin with the petitioners ten-minute presentation good evening thank you to the Planning Commission thank you to staff for having me here tonight my name is Adolphus care some area manager with ITC in local government

033and Community Affairs just to give you a little overview on ITC we're the nation's leading a transmission provider we were formed we were in the business of electrical transmissions if you look at the screen we're the blue shaded area so we deliver the bulk energy from the generation source which could be a power plant or wind farm so the electricity flows over the high voltage transmission lines and towers then it goes through a distribution station where the voltage is reduced and then it's delivered to your homes and businesses from your local utility in your area you have mostly lady T energy we were formed in 2003 and March so in this slide our service territories 15800 circuit miles we have four subsidiaries in eight states the blue shaded area that's our IDC Michigan company which

034comprises IDC transmission and Matt C then we have ITC Midwest which is primarily nyaah but there are some parts of Minnesota as well part of Illinois and then we have ITC Great Plains which is mostly Kansas and Oklahoma we're also we have over 700 employees and as of 2016 we required by Fordyce which is a company that's based in Canada and your brochures and I believe I didn't give you has a project profile for our apex to Phoenix transmission line project which is currently wrapping up construction and that was that's over two miles of underground transmission which connects the new substation new substations actually apex substation which is on Hubbard to Phoenix substation that's the reason why we're here today which is an Devoran and it's 120 kV it will increase the reliability and the

035capacity of the electric grid in the region and especially in Arbor and as I said construction is wrapping up we're actually just pulling cable on both substations and that's why we're here tonight to ask for the existing substation expansion and Phoenix substation has actually as existing has been here since 1968 and it's located on two thousand one Devoran and as a result of the project that I just mentioned we need to expand the existing fans and then as a result of the fence expansion there will need to be a retaining wall and as a result of this work it will impact natural features and the expansion that we're proposing which is in the next slide it's minimal its compared to the overall area of the substation it's pretty much the red one is a conceptual

036of what it would look like and it's 18 feet by 228 and the existing fence is 7 foot fence so it's 6 foot and then has one foot of barbed wire we're adding a new 5 foot sidewalk for city's request and the retaining wall that's a picture it's it's not the actual but it will most likely look like that so it'll be a 4-foot retaining wall and the as far as the disturbance of natural features is a total 304 inches and we are mitigating for 326 inches which is seven percent more than the requirement and also we will install a monopole which will be a hundred foot tall and that's to allow for the two new line positions they're coming to the substation so it'll be where the underground goes overhead and connects with the

037equipment and the site plan complies with all applicable local state federal ordinances and we have been working with the city staff since July and there were a few revisions that of the site of the existing site plan and there were comments from the city which we have addressed and in closing I just want to say that we're not just in the business of electrical transmission we're also a partner in the community were heavily involved in Washington our County were in the a to Y Regional Chamber were involved within our spark with here on River watershed Council with the Big Brothers Big Sisters of Washington our County food gatherers the stewardship Network we're currently helping with a stiltgrass invasive species working group and I thank you for your time please let me know if there's any

038questions thank you very much we will now move on to our staff report mr. Cohen thank you the site is located on the north side of Duvall Road east of Pawnee trailmen traver Creek Watershed the site is currently used as the DT substation a 12.8 seven acre site ITC holdings an electric transmission line company would like to increase reliability of a transmission line between the Phoenix substation here and the apex substation located at the intersection of here on Parkway and Hubbard Road by constructing two underground transmission lines the modifications will include the addition of two new line positions at the Phoenix substation to accommodate lines from the apex substation ITC intends to construct a new 100-foot tall monopole near the southwest corner of the site and expand the footprint of the existing substation at the

039southwest corner the monopole will be located approximately 135 feet from devarnè Road and a new four foot tall retaining wall will be constructed to accommodate the expansion of the substation on the south edge of the substation a sidewalk is proposed to be constructed along the devon road frontage and the petitioner has agreed to provide 17 additional feet of frontage along Devon as right away the petitioner is proposing to remove a woodland on the southwest corner of the site consisting of 112 trees I'm sorry containing 112 trees consisting primarily of invasive species such as normally maple and black locust additionally the petitioner is proposing to remove ten other trees from the southern edge of the existing station site including two landmark trees to mitigate these removals the petitioners proposed to plant 164 native species of trees

040entirely on site three other landmark trees will remain on the site undisturbed a total of 304 caliper inches of trees is required to mitigate the loss of the woodland and landmark trees a total of 326 caliper trees will be provided so three hundred four inches remove three hundred and twenty six inches provided the petitioners proposing to provide a temporary timber bridge over traver Creek to provide access for the for construction equipment and has received a drain use permit from Washington County and that's going to be a temporary bridge the city does not require a wetland use permit for temporary encroachment into the wetland staff recommends approval of the planned project site plan because it complies with all applicable local state and federal ordinances standards and regulations it will not cause a public or private nuisance

041and it will not have a detrimental effect on public health safety or welfare staff further recommends approval of the planned project modifications because the project is consistent with the standards of approval for planned projects in the unified development code thank you will now open up the public hearing for anyone to address the Planning Commission and regards this item is there anyone in the audience who wishes to address the Planning Commission please step forward I'll state your name and address for the record and you may speak for up to three minutes I'm not a real good speaker I'm Douglas Miller and I live at 2 to 9 1 Canyon court and so my bedroom overlooks the substation substation and I've lived there for 20 years and it gets sort of gets worse every year and one

042of the things is that when I heard about this there's no information about what it looked like it's a monopole and then H something or other and it's going to be a hundred feet high which is much higher than anything that's there now and so I'm thinking yeah I walked from my house down across the railroad track up the food gathers to get the bus and it's a nice woodsy area and then there's a substation that's heavy industry right there and I go up to food goes and the way back home there's this really high up substation with nice big pine trees that screen it to walk up a little farther and there's the big industrial thing heavy industry I mean this is big trucks gigantic transformers it's loud it's lights on all night so

043it's you know it's a real deal and so this will remove those trees that screen it now in the past they've had screening treaties here and there on the slope behind my house they've died and they don't replace them and so they're going to plant however many trees in a couple years they'll all be dead and it'll just look like awful there because the there does not seem to be any requirement that they replace the trees anyway and then the thing is when you're walking across the railroad that crash you look the substation it's high up the flat area must be 50 feet higher than the road and then that's going to be right there with all the trees removed another hundred feet up and it's just I just can't envision what that's going to

044look like and it won't be screened at all and so I think that it would be worthwhile just reviewing the the landscape plan that they have here because there's just it's just not enough and especially not enough unless they're required to replace trees that die that's what I had to say thank you is there anyone else in the audience who was just to address the Planning Commission where it's on this item all right seeing no one I will close the public hearing and read the motion the in Harbor City Planning Commission hereby recommends that the mayor and city council approved the ITC Phoenix utility substation plan projects I plan to allow a hundred foot tall monopole a 70 foot tall lightning mast in a 65 foot tall H frame structure consistent with the plan project

045standards for approval the petitioner is providing setbacks in excess of what code requires - out - sure or do I have a commissioner who will move this move by commissioner gear and I'll seconded by Commissioner sauvé we are now in discussion mr. Ackerman I just if I could during the public comment the speaker discussed the trees that died just as a reminder for the Planning Commission you may recall this site was one of about I want to say eighteen or twenty sites that were City initiated annexations a couple of years ago so this particular site was never site planned in the city prior it was previously in an adjacent Township so to be clear as part of the city site plan requirements we do in fact require maintenance of any proposed landscaping at minimum over

046a short term period to ensure that the plantings get established but over a long-term plan a longer term it's not to say that we are proactively out inspecting all these sites but ultimately if it is raised to our attention we do then have the ability to go and compare the site to the approved site plan and it would be able to work with a property owner to make sure the site plan becomes into compliance by replacing any dead material so just wanted to frame that one particular issue track a minute I just have a quick question of the petitioner he said I think will help our discussion here so what is a DA what is a monopole what is a lightening mass and what is a aged framed structure I just wanna make sure that

047I have the right images because that I don't okay so can you describe or if you have images of it can you just give us a quick overview of what those three items are absolutely and I actually have a design engineer here with us so he will be able to give you a better technical description but those are all necessary to be able to have those two new line positions coming to the substation so that's the purpose of the monopole I'm looking for what does it look like oh I'm sure I've seen it I just want to know what exactly it's right there each frame is something similar to this this is the transmission each friend will have a substation aged friend okay and smaller in diameter monocles I would imagine are actually probably not

048terribly to someone from a typical cellular tower monopole they probably have different antenna arrangements but they're just that a single pole as opposed to sort of a more ironwork latticework type of tower okay thank you Commission Ackerman Thank You mr. chair so when looking at the site man attached to here would page six be the closest to an elevation it's the looking north section a a sheep yeah it'd be page six in the site plan on each racket which reads looking north section a that one okay so that's from devar and so that would be the closest to an elevation that we have here as the best way to visualize it yes is there anything in this image that would be a good point of reference to better understand scale I can visualize a hundred

049feet fish so the chain-link fence is on there at seven feet tall it's the line that goes to the bottom okay and so your closest neighbors would be on the east side of the property to the north to the north to the east it's the Fox fire West Park yeah so your see if a buffer of parkland to the north but the most the closest property lines would that fair to say be to your cheeriest yes thank you thank you and so the installations of the the area that has the built environment now we're looking to place the monopole and accessory structures okay southwest of the site okay thank you okay and then so could you quickly talk us through your screening plan it seems like when you have a industrial facility adjacent to residential

050areas that's probably what we're gonna hear most now is just hoping to get an overview of what plantings are going where how it's going to be improved as you expand these structures and then what your long-term maintenance plan is and we can tackle each of those one on one by one if you'd like yeah that's on our natural features plan woodland trees so we have a woodland tree classification table Westpark also added new trees to the south of station five more screening to Devoran road so to the east it looks like four different species of plantings for the most part yes talk us through what those are it looks like white oak path or new I ring Doug wood tulip tree our Bert bait a service berry so I'm seeing six in here okay and

051so I'll actually probably refer to another Commissioner to better assess if those are gonna be appropriate quickly and year-round and then maybe if I could return to some questions around stormwater I'd be grateful but if we could start with screening yeah commissioner give Randal so quite a few of those species are quite short except for the White Oaks and I guarantee you that your arborvitaes will be eaten down to nothing in the first winter when you go through the deer that are in very thick in this area so I know that the city requires you to use native species this is something that perhaps with a little bit of work with the city forester who I'm sure understands the pressures of deer that are very real part of even in the extreme interior of our

052city but definitely even more in the exterior of our city I would really consider changing those out to a different evergreen that also is a little wider taller in stature to be able to address some of the screening concerns especially from a second-story window I don't think Ann Arbor vitaes is really going to be able to address the their real issues with the screening that will happen in that area the flowering dogwood and service berry are all pretty small stature as well and so you might consider swapping some things out with just bigger species that would do a better job of screening and I think it's important to have a mix of deciduous and and evergreen but I I think the deer issue is going to be a big one out there for you and

053again your numbers are all probably fine it's more just thinking more carefully about the species so that they're not eaten and so that the stature works better with the screening but the neighbor one one question I had just as an extension of that that was unclear to me there was no plan that I could see where it was really clear what was existing to remain and what you were adding is is so is this like are there trees because there's quite a few trees on the slope that are there now yes and so those are staying yes so on the landscape plan all the trees that aren't in the tree planting table would be the ones that are staying there are ones up by the fence line that are exit out or those are the

054ones okay okay so in other words there basically are and and again it's hard to see on the screen here there's very few existing trees on that east side it's only on the kind of Burma at the front so yeah so on the side there are a few existing trees but actually when you go further up there's already a existing buffer I noticed that there were some but I still think being a good neighbor in a residential area and considering that you're now part of the city and not part of the township anymore it's kind of a different deal in terms of the expectation I think to be able to coordinate with city code so it seems like with some minor changes in terms of species that that that the neighbors could have a more

055solid screen that's that's happening in there and again the stature so that's that's that would be my two cents missioner Ackerman on the on the landscaping piece I appreciate them you know staff in the petitioner taking diligent notes and at the end I'd love to discuss the best process for how to make sure some of that's codified so I appreciate that the other part was a long-term maintenance plan for your screening we heard from one of your neighbors about seeing paintings coated and died and I just wanted to hear what your landscaping plan is because we will hold you to compliance cynthia some regional manager this is a dallas first planning commission running solo on here so kudos to her for so the DTE has owned the substation so for since 1968 dt has owned

056and operated when ITC was sold in 2003 from DTE we got the high voltage transmission assets so DTE the previous trees are under ownership of DTE so when those sites plan was built from Ann Arbor township back in the day certain trees were there some of those trees have died we completely agree because we wanted to remove those trees so those trees have been removed from the ones up front some of those were the dead ones and then in looking at this some of the heights and statures are because of the assets so that's where like where you say some of them we can only have so many certain tree types by a substation or by transmission lines or even by distribution lines or what is coming out underground or overhead so a lot of

057those tree species are articulated specifically because of what assets you have there and then working with Kerry Grey trying to meet the needs of the city but also meeting the needs of DTE and ITC so how we maintain absolutely if we plant a tree we don't want it to die either because we are biggest fans of right tree right place and that's where those trees if you notice everything is shifted to the east because you have a transmission line coming in from the West and that's why they're not planted on that west side because we can't have trees underneath our power line so the trees are shifted to the east to allow for that so we would be responsible for that in partnership with DTE but if we commit to have them planted they will

058be there long term maintenance and if Brett calls or Kira calls or Jeff calls and says hey what's going on we'll go out there and we work with all the contractor agreements you have to agree to certain agreements all of that happens our contractors thank you for that commitment I think as we discuss about what the most appropriate plantings are to go in first to really be successful we just say be successful long-term I think that'll be great and mr. Miller to you in the audience at the end of this happy to kind of show you what it looks like in the plan so you know what to expect should this pass and then give you the contact information of the person to reach out to it the city if you ever feel as though

059it's not meeting those expectations I'm sorry unfortunately it's not the forum for that but happy to talk to you after so so I want to turn to stormwater I did note that the site is handling a hundred year storm on site and maybe it's just top of mind because of California and and the the controversy surrounding Pacific Gas and Electric in you know as our climate is changing in a natural disaster happens more and more often and here it's that we're getting more and more rainfall and I just wanted to better understand how storm water is hitting the site now how that will change as this is redeveloped or expanded and then start to hear some sense of whether or not that that meets the appropriate expectations so the storm water system is being proposed

060to mitigate a 100-year storm storm water that is not infiltrate through the existing gravel pad will migrate to the new retaining wall at the southwest corner of the substation and the all runoff will filter down the back of the wall through the MDOT 6:8 crushed gravel access runoff that does not infiltrate behind the retaining wall will discharge through weep holes in the retaining wall that are spaced 20 feet apart the storm water that flows through the weep holes will be captured by an infiltration trench below the retaining wall and the infiltration trench has capacity to infiltrate a 100-year six hour storm and we came up with the solution also working with a Washington County water resource commission and I believe the storm water infiltration trench plan that's page 11 has better oversight is this standard

061practice for your stations around the state through the crushrock if it's extremely wet site we do tend to put retention ponds or whatnot outside of the station this being a retention or wall retaining wall I think is one of our first times doing this so it is a new practice for us doing the wave holes in the infiltration trench okay and use your standard practice around the state to plan for up to 100 year storm yes okay has that changed over time in any way have you noticed any stopping have you noticed any interruptions from to service because of increased rainfall to either the transmission lines are to the substation itself so if we have had again just to clarify so you're asking if the water doesn't run where it's supposed to run what hat

062what do we do yeah maybe before that elsewhere in the state we're seeing more rainfall than we have ever before and you've had this site since 68 or at least DTE has and probably conditions have change pretty dramatically since then and I'm wondering you know the last thing we want in a major storm event is substation failure so I just want to iron up stand thank you okay thank you so typically in working with the professionals whether it be sorry thank you usually not a quiet one so typically in working with the professionals what city staff county staff whomever their drain requirements and then our consultants outside meet what everybody believes to expect 100 year flood 500 year flood whichever criteria based upon the flood plain that we're in if there is found that some

063of the substations begin to have water pooling then the design engineering team works with the local consultants to determine why so if we have a substation that has been around since the 40s or 60s and we find there to be water then we work with the local jurisdiction to figure out why often it's because of the developments around the surrounding area that way it's being infiltrated in and so we look at to mitigate that differently but we do constant inspections of our assets and that is also a priority for us to maintain that safety reliability and we do have one that is currently under inspection now but in the past 15 years I've been at ITC we've had to do a couple of different drainage options to ensure the water is running off in two

064different areas or but negatively impacted residents but specifically a whole substation no because they construct them to where they they are higher up so you don't have that concern thank you and then to staff knowledge and maybe that's not fair and perhaps the petitioner knows but a number of substations are having worked on throughout the city are all I mean obviously this is a unique site but are all built to similar specifications in terms of stormwater is this fairly standard practice this particular substation is existing and it's since 1968 and it was its dte owned so we cannot really say that all substations the ones that are constructed by us they follow a standard procedure and there's their specifications that we keep it consistent but if it's you know if it was built or constructed

065by somebody else that's we cannot really comment on that okay thank you and from our perspective thinking about south state yeah I don't recall specifically but we couldn't hold that information to a company should this proceed to City Council we could include the information to see how this storm water approach compares to that as a reminder within our unified development code we do look at substations very specifically we specifically require substations to go through a site plan review process where a lot of other components of utility services such as distribution are deemed essential services with a lot of exemptions from development requirements so in but in short because of this the code requiring and mandating site plan review I would fully expect that both South State and this while the technique may be different they're

066meeting the same standard of stormwater requirements the Washington County Water Resources Commissioner and any future substations would that went through the process would have to meet that standard as well okay thank you I think that's all my questions for now I still want to return to Commissioner give Randall's points around screening and figure out the best way to codify that as we take next steps right Commissioner Gabe Randall so I get that you've got this gravel layer on top are you are you basically capping things that are there with more gravel or there's existing gravel and you're like the thing that I'm confused about so I look at old aerials and I see erosion on that west slope it's steep and it goes down to traver Creek and it's right there it's the creek is

067right there there's not a lot of buffer going on there so when I look at that I see that it's pretty hard to be able to control the subgrade underneath that 6a that you've got you don't really know where it's coming out of that hillside you don't really know where it's coming out of that gravel pack right unless you're scraping that whole thing and regrading the whole thing so it's all going down to that south side it's pretty hard to tell so my question is how do you really ensure that that whole I mean it's got to be an acre at least of area is pitching towards the south towards your wall how do you make that happen I wasn't an existing site that's hard to do at this point yeah all we can do

068is try to you know for our expansion here is to do the best that we can to get the stormwater often in appropriate manner so but how do you even direct it towards that south like how are you saying that there's a hundred-year pitching towards there and without doing major regrading of that surface at the top or is it almost better just to try to create something around the entire thing that is more of a buffer e something because if I'm seeing erosion on old aerials and clearly something's happening there so is there a way through like even just I mean that's just stabilization that's not even like stormwater being retained anywhere or detained any way or infiltrating anywhere that's just an erosion issue but it just tells the story that something is going on

069there and that it's not really being controlled in the way that we're hoping that it would be now that you are in the city and that we really try to stay on top of these things and the creeks again it's the creek you know it's right at the bottom of the slope right and that floodplain extends up to the extents of the hill there so any cuts around there would be into the existing right so there's not a lot of options in that area we have looked into that and it's guess that the floodplain goes right up to the base of the hill so so what did the Water Resource Commissioner's Office say - like how did they how like I'm just curious what kind of direction they gave you to be able to try

070to control this when it's something that is so difficult to be able to really control so I was not present at those meetings we had proposal floodplain management to the Washington County water resource commission and they need their comments we addressed every comment that was given by all of the reviewers there were viewers included city staff and also the Washington County Water Resources Commission and we addressed all those comments and we had our floodplain management what all of this information has been uploaded each racket so and we did come up with a with a flood management that was that was accepted by them and we did fulfill all of the requirements in terms of what could happen in the future I do understand her concern and we have to try to you know address all

071of the issues and also try to to be compliant by all of the ordinances and even when we were looking at the monopole we looked at the alternatives analysis and per city's suggestion we kept their monopole out of the flood plain so that was one thing that we did and we went on three different revisions of the site plans that you're seeing you see in front of you and if there are you know certain things are beyond our control we've been trying to work really hard with the city and try to address all these issues we've also we're also working with DTE in terms of you know trying to wrap up this project in the city so maybe I mean clearly things have been reviewed by agencies but perhaps one of the things in terms

072of staff following this in the future is that you're not just looking for weather trees have lived or not but you're looking on that west slope too to see if there's active erosion that's still happening because even just shifting some of the species along there in terms of their deep rootedness and things like that could help slow some of that because it is I mean that's why I was wondering like how they're doing this because it's a hard it's a tough nut to crack but what they're trying to do here but I'm not entirely I'm really not very confident that it's actually addressing what we want it to and so if there's some way to be able to follow whether erosion is continuing to happen that then there could be some sort of plan B

073in terms of figuring out how to stabilize that Westside because when I look back through time and the old aerials it's just there it's just there it's a steep slope and it's probably all just running off and it's been a gravel parking that for a long time and it doesn't like stay open forever all those fines get in there and it just starts acting like a normal old you know we'd like to think that gravel roads infiltrate but really in a really infiltrate you know and that's been there since 1968 so I guess it I would just like to have eyes on this as an as an issue that could be followed and that they petitioner would be open to having some sort of mitigating plan to try to deal with erosion on that west

074side because again it's traver Creek right there people and that's like that very northern extent of traver Creek that we can do anything about so if we're just hitting it with sediment and junk at the very start it's gonna be hopeless for there down so we really need to do what we can in the areas where it hits the city line to try to keep it as clean as possible further discussion mr. Mill's I'm just curious I mean in doing a search within the UDC I didn't see if there's anything specific to substations I know we we do require site planning as opposed to other kind of electrical infrastructure but there's there's no specific requirements right for substations okay in terms of the screening I know we're really focusing on the section that's new right

075to this but does the entire site now and the screening that's required meet the ordinance of our code like they're being asked to bring this all up to current standards is that right are you free to the screen well screening or general like Land Use you know how sometimes sometimes there's a trigger of pulling everything up to current standard versus only dealing with the sex that you're talking about and so can you give us a sense of whether yes we we look at the site holistically okay so the the screening the landscape screening came from specific requirements for replacement since there's not a parking lot per se on the site we didn't require any parking lot screening but we did need to find places for vegetation to be planted and it made sense that since

076the northern stretch of the site is a is a wooded city park and that the western side of the site includes a lot of these transmission lines that most of those trees need to go on the southern side and on the eastern side as a buffer to the Fox for our neighborhood to the to the East got it okay I know that our code doesn't currently talk very much about lighting but this is something that we are starting to talk about and my husband designs electrical substations so I know that there are lighting requirements and that there are different lighting requirements on different things I've just encourage you because this is something that we do care about as a city to light it to the minimum standard possible I mean it it's good for everybody

077it makes you a better neighbor it's better for electrical use you should care about and and I would anticipate that hopefully this is something that the city will be looking at in the future and so because you're in the city you would be in the future expected to follow any ordinances that we have on that so just as a heads up because I know as your neighbor also said lighting is something on a substation you know that that can be a nuisance to surrounding properties sure Briggs one of the letters to us was that the monopole be camouflaged and so I'm curious if this is something that ITC has experienced with in terms of camouflaging pools when I do a Google search it looks like palm trees and pine trees or the the camouflage options

078I think you can rule out one option here but but I don't know if that's something that you have had experience with and other in other places or you know if you if something you evaluated for this this site as my manager Cynthia said earlier what when mitigating when doing the landscape screening we have to keep and we have to keep in consideration the safety of our electrical equipment unfortunately trees don't go well with powerlines but in terms of camouflaging we will provide all the screening possible I'm not sure whether so I appreciate your research what you've found those are probably more cell phone towers so you'll see the coconut I call them the coconut trees when my kids call them the coconut trees I click up transmission towers themselves really aren't there either the

079mono pool which are the steel we call them the steel monolithic steel poles in some parts of the country they use a different color pole but the standard in ITC is the monopole the steel because it has actually found that because Michigan has more gray days that fee steel blends into the surrounding atmosphere more but no we don't paint the poles different colors or anything that because there is a standard that's base for the design so unfortunately we don't paint them or do anything it's just the standard mono pool so that's not something you have experience with Oh recommend for me more attention to but we do light some of our poles for Christmas now these diets yeah commissioner Sylvain I'm Jeremy Kuhn I'm the project manager for this the the temporary bridge would be

080installed for the access across trailer Creek for the construction access to put in the monopole and then remove any vegetation that needs to be removed the the timeline for that would basically be that it would be installed as soon as we were approved to move forward with the project and then I would not imagine that it would stay in place the in-service the in-service goal for this project is the end of February so it would be removed ahead of that there would be no need to keep it in place once the once the pole was wasn't in place and all the wires removed over two or three months probably what other sort of conditions are you taking are you putting on gravel or are you guys just driving over to grass like the taking mud

081pits through tires no I mean anything that we think would would create ruts or you know a situation where you're gonna have a mud pit we would mat that and that would be on our on our DQ permit there's gonna be no gravel installed we're not proposing to cut into the hill or anything like that the impacts to the hill will be as minimal as they can be Commissioner woods part of the communication that we received it talks about the fact that the site is noisy and busy so can you explain a little bit about the noise and is making these increase in the height and everything is that going to increase the noise level or give us a sense as to what neighbors should expect so our Edition won't add any additional noise the

082noise typically comes from transformers and the hum from them those are the DTE owned at parties on that sub so what we're adding will not add any any additional noise okay so you you're making the distinction from time to time about what DTE owns and what you own so is it is it now you or is it still DTE and it's a split you substation split use it has a transmission so this particular sorry this existing substation will have transmission level equipment and the existing distribution equipment so it is shared with DTE because the voltage will have as I explained to my presentation earlier so electricity flows through our high voltage transmission lines then it has the voltage has to be reduced so that's a distribution part which is DTE in order for it to

083be delivered to your homes and businesses so it's it's a shared so it will be a collaboration of both ITC and DT so is the hope that the these improvements are going to mean that residents on that side of town are going to get better service that's the goal of the project to improve the capacity and reliability which translates in less outages I'm assuming that the noise from the hum from the trans mistranslates is that's meeting our noise standard mister the city's noise chapter does talk about decibel levels and decibel levels typically that exceed 60 decibels would be would need to be regulated noise during construction is also regulated in terms of time typically 7 a.m. to and p.m. this this project does not come close to hitting that kind of decibel level so we

084would not it would not be triggering any kind of regulation okay but if residents should think you know wow what's going on over there it's really really loud can mr. Miller and his neighbors called DTE or ids or who do they call or community standards it depends on what the condition is but certainly we'd be happy to talk to them about what their concern is community Sanders can certainly investigate but it might be also good to get a kinetic contact information get counting information from DTE as well as ITC okay and we do have a customer line so we take into consideration enquiries from residents and we have a 24/7 line where they can call and those concerns will be addressed and we have done in a couple other projects we have had an engineering

085subject matter expert who has gone out in the field has measured the noise level and it was found to be in compliance in terms but we do have that available okay and and so this is to connect this substation with I think it's one called Phoenix or something near Hubbard Avenue Hubbard Street or something so has the construction the underground construction from those sites already happened or is that is that part of what happened as Plymouth Road was torn up so months ago or is this something that's still - we have actually we're almost wrapping up construction so construction is nearing completion right now and we have completed work in Duve arund and I believe it was a Nixon Road so and restoration has been completed and what's left right now it's pulling cable at

086both substations so it'll be Apex the one that's on Huron Parkway in Hobart and then also this existing substation that were mentioning tonight which is the Phoenix on Devoran and we're expecting completion by either end of this year or early next year okay thank you alright so I have a couple comments I guess more importantly Commission gave Randall you brought up a really good point with regards to what's happening there and how that's affecting Traver Creek and I in good conscience to support a project that will further potentially cause damage to the creek and all that stuff that's going down I mean just looking at the aerials this evening was the first time that I actually looked at the aerials of the site and it is you know going back to the 90s through 2018

087that the ground I mean it is coming into the creek and so the only way that I would feel good about supporting this is if we add a condition to this motion that IDC addressed that issue I don't know the maybe the the correct language if you can help me with that but I I definitely think that that needs to be a part of this because this is our only opportunity we're not gonna have another opportunity to fix this so if you don't mind maybe coming up with some language that we can add to this motion I would appreciate that I think it's really I think we probably don't have a lot of hope of a really addressing infiltration in the goal that we have but I do think that we have a good chance

088of being able to control the erosion so that we don't have sedimentation just flowing off that hillside and going into the creek so the water will likely still be going there but at least the ground will be more intact because there just isn't enough it's too steep to be able to create some sort of shelf you know where it can sit and infiltrate you know that's the hard part about these really steep slopes so I think that I think that there's a I mean it's without going out there exactly seeing what's going on looking at aerials I think that at the very least let's go for serious erosion repair and control of that area and that so give me a second let me see if I can it sounds good but I'm by ordinance already

089over my code writing hat Commissioner of your Brandel is looking that Sherwood's it sounds like this is complicated enough that it's not something that we can really address sitting around the table right now I mean I'm I'm wondering whether or not it needs to have more staff input as well as the Washtenaw County Water Resources Commission Commissioner yeah losing a per second because I think Commissioner give Randall has raised very serious concern and I would be in favor of postponing it until and giving that kind of input and then perhaps that would make a little bit more sense because it does sound pretty complicated so while she's contemplating something I would be in favor of a postponement and poor and mr. Leonard has more more information to give to us what are your feelings on

090postponement versus hashing this out this evening well ultimately that's at the discretion of the Planning Commission if you I guess along those lines to your point Commissioner woods I I don't know that we I agree I don't know that we can solve it however if you were comfortable we could ask ITC to provide that detail that would give staff the opportunity to sort of vet what their approach is as this because this particular petition is progressing to City Council we can ensure that that is addressed so it would to that point you wouldn't I wouldn't be able to tell you this evening what that plan is but you could consider a recommendation to City Council conditioned upon them incorporating into their plans a long term so there they already have to comply with soil erosion

091under the soil rezoned sedimentation act so they will have to do it during construction this would be taking it a step farther to require that they do soil erosion repair and long term maintenance and measures to ensure that that is mitigated over the long term so I guess my my gut and preference would be if Planning Commission were comfortable to put some language as a condition that says you as part of the Planning Commission's recommendation to City Council you believe that that should be incorporated in the plan as it progresses to definitively answer that question nodding yes so my colleague can work on that but I think that's exactly the kind of thing that I'm thinking and I know that Commissioner Ackerman will no doubt make sure that he looks at it when it gets

092to Council but but it's probably helpful for it to happen before it gets to Council so that you can work it out so thank you sure I'd say in this is well the first substation expansion of ITC within the city of Ann Arbor I believe staff and council can commit to the communication that ITC has had on all of the actions that we've done on any of whether it be our underground transmission line or a future overhead line on the southern part our due diligence and our efforts are we pride ourself on being best-in-class and so we reach it out from the water resource commission and all the staff and if there are recommendations to make it better we really will try and when Adele talked about the different things we're involved in the communities

093we're not going to leave we are truly involved and we do support the efforts and while our staff person who was with the water resource commissioner was not able to be here tonight I'm texting her frequently like you know can you help us and she that we have worked with staff in the water resource commissioners actually had the same type of questions said and so the result of what our designers worked with with the trenching and the different channels that was to help meet the needs of what some of the questions was to because it's the first time since you know in 45 years my math off a little bit it's been addressed so if there is concern you know we would ask also that would be work or we could work it through with

094staff to manage that because it's a whole group of design people that have to sit down and do that I believe that's your background all right so I mean that's what we have those people look at that to make sure because we don't want to impact Traver Creek any more than anybody else and it would be in partnership with DT and I respect there is that well how does it still work with DTE and ITC and because there is that jo-ann ownership the whole reason for the project is because they want to serve their residents and their businesses so they would be at the table as well from the substation design side as well as the project side as well as the community affairs side DT ITC water resource commission and staff have been all

095fit together to meet those needs but we would to meet the need of the reliability concerns if we could ask to do an amendment to move it forward it would be helpful to make sure the right designers can try to get to what the goal but we're trying to get to I would just add is another frame to this keep in mind this as a planned project site plan and I think that in the staff report we've talked about the reduction of stormwater runoff this money this kind of provision while you're adding it would actually probably also further the satisfaction of the requirements for planned project I think this would be going above and beyond the minimum Washington County has a lot of resources standards potentially and our steep slope standards potentially and so that

096would also be potentially another justification that both you could consider in the planned project modifications as well as ultimately for City Council's consideration Commissioner Brown Brandel because I kind of have the intent and through here and I can feel like your wording will be better and it might be better just to shape what you've got then so I would like to hear what you've got and then we kind of shape a bit so I have that you'd amendment motion that ITC provide details on the plans that address soil erosion repair and long-term maintenance of such measures to reduce soil erosion and sedimentation impacts to Traver Creek I think that sounds good the only thing I would add is if if it's going back to the table then I'd say we also look at the potential

097for redirection of storm water towards the proposed storm water infiltration system because I think that there could actually be just I mean it's not my job to design this but I could see some ways that they might be able to along that western edge with some creative thinking be able to redirect it towards the area where they are controlling it and I think they it just hasn't you know been thought through enough to be able to to do some creative thinking around that so I think that at the minimum we restabilized that that that slope but I think there also is some potential for redirecting the storm water as well so that if somehow the potential for redirection of storm water towards the proposed stormwater management system that could sneak its way in there too

098I think that would that would work and then the other thing is yeah I think that gets at it to control erosion that that's gonna cover it really okay and then I guess while we're talking about potential amendments to the motion there was some discussion about visiting revisiting species particularly on the eastern problem line is that mostly they are providing they it's yes yep there are variety and then you know you do have a bunch of White Oaks though and those are no small things and I know they're on the east side but perhaps and and I'm a you're you're getting you're pulling on my heartstrings does ask my absolute favorite tree so I can't believe I'm saying this but perhaps you could swap a few of those out with some larger evergreens they get

099just as big as the White Oaks to be able address the concerns I understand what you're saying I don't want to mess with your lines and so I get that you need to have shorter species as you get closer to the transmission system that you have but you do have I mean white oaks can get massive over time so clearly there you've you've reached some sort of safety zone as you're getting closer to the eastern edge that you might be able to put in some larger scale evergreen trees that are not deer candy so so we have a motion let's move by assuring herb Randall do we have a second I'm sorry if that amendment we have an amendment to the motion seconded by Commissioner Mills do have discussion on the amendment just to clarify

100was expanded to include the species that's documented thank you any other discussion on the amendment all those in favor please say aye pose all right moving back to the amended motion Commissioner Briggs if I saw correctly on previous picture there was its a chain-link fence of sorts that's surrounding it right is there a reason for the chain-link fence to be sort of transparent for example art as opposed to having like a green green fence that sometimes used to provide a little bit of well I don't think it would necessarily affect noise I know maybe it would help a little bit but it provides that sort of look of greenery when it's when there's none there particularly so I'm just curious if there's a need for it to be transparent or if that's something that has

101been utilized in certain locations be transparent it's just our standard chain-link fence that we use so security wise yes yeah so there are many people who love to see what's inside who got inside of our substation so yes so our security and again DT put the original fence up but from an ITC acetone if there is a fence we have to maintain to make sure there was nobody trying to access that fence trying to impact the equipment in any way okay I thought that might be the case thank you for the discussion okay I'm all ready for evolved all those in favor already mr. Mill's I was just not sure if there was actually a if we were letting staff sort this out or if there was a motion to postpone I couldn't quite follow

102that before I don't think we put that on the table we talked about it but we just amended the motion got to put it in staff's hands before it against the City Council got it and to clarify our intention would be to try and answer these questions both about the species along the eastern side and the storm water potential along with stabilization of the soil erosion so that when it progresses to City Council we have those answered per year directions so I want to be clear that our intention would be to answer those before this plan progresses forward not to necessarily just wait till keep those conditions flowing all the way through the process right yeah no I get that I'm just wondering if I just wasn't sure I like to keep things moving but

103particularly like if it's sort of already been thought of the erosion business and it's just hard I I want to make sure that this is an opportunity I mean and I do think that this is the the planned project benefit and so maybe that's just that and now it's going in the notes that I see that as the primary trade-off in a plan project in exchange for meeting some of the criteria we give some leeway over what our ordinance is typically allow so we typically have a height limit they're asking to exceed that and so in exchange there are a range of criteria one of them has to do with natural features protect of natural features and I think that being a better steward of traver Creek is is the primary benefit here there's some

104you know there's an argument about setbacks but it is where it is like they're not gonna move that substation up to the road let's be honest let's be honest I think that the primary benefit here is a natural features one and so I think I think it's really important that we not just do the easy thing but we do the right thing if it's if it is possible it should be done so if you as staff feel like you can convey that on to City Council and push along the way I'm in favor of moving this forward tonight otherwise I think I like that we have a planning Commissioner who has expertise I'm like how you might stabilize and so so that's just my two cents absolutely it's a great great point while it's not

105incorporated in the motion I would we would forward that along with the pros motion that really the emphasis on the offset of the of the plan project modification would be the opportunity to improve traver Creek so with us the motion so the the proposal IDC is in front of tonight is for the Finch expansion and as an essential service so with it being a since existing substation so the runoff that has been has been but what we're doing is not increasing the runoff so could it also be that the expansion de ghin to meet the real liability need of the project because if we if the project does not move forward the the customer of our is DTE can then not service the need of the residents in the area could there would be a

106look at yes for this exact need to bump the fence out by 18 feet which is not going to impact the soil erosion through all of the permits that we've gotten through the drain Commission any soil erosion permits in the DEQ that would be considered because that's what we're in front of today knowing then that as the larger scale now that this is now in city of Ann Arbor that there needs to be a larger partnership project of what's going to happen with traver Creek because with this 18 foot it's minimal impact and that's through all the calculations that have been submitted through all the agencies to look at it because if it's a longer concern the commitment is there and I believe that's on both sides it's just that that because this specific project

107is not impacting that and all the calculations that have been done for that is not through the 18 foot expansion so to be clear I don't think you are saying this but to be clear we're not certainly not I don't think the expectation is ITC solves Traver Creek it is but I think the expectation is that this is an opportunity for you to solve it along your parcel and it is a shared parcel with DTE and because you are asking specifically for some modification from the requirements that's where the standard comes from so so even though the from your perspective the the sort of intensification of that use might be relatively minor it does require this modification from our standards cuz it doesn't meet the base standards and therefore that's that's why I think that's

108where Planning Commission is making this finding so even though it's a relatively modest impact there are aspects of it that are actually significant compared to our standards that's why I think it's warranted does that make sense I'm not in might not be satisfactory but further discussion commissioner Brandel one other piece I would say council and they will be an excellent resource and perhaps even in this process of some potential techniques that you may use for what is especially happening at the Creek edge and perhaps even up up the slope from it so if you're if you're a partner with them then I'd say bring them into the discussion because they have a lot of experience with these things so that might they might be part of the dialogue as this moves forward and then then

109you'll really be partner and and if I could just I think we're also also struggling we don't have the petitioner petitioners revved up as part of this conversation nor the Water Resources Commissioner here I just want to make it clear it's it's quite possible that there are plans to already address these issues as part of the plans presented I think if it's not we'll work to incorporate those appropriately if it is we will do a better job to make sure that that we're explaining that as it progresses about how it will accomplish those goals right and I would just say that they may end up mitigating that in terms of how they're handling the stormwater regardless there is erosion on that slope that is clearly visible and that needs to be addressed so further discussion

110all those in favor please say aye opposed it's prudent thank you moving on to 10 C proposed text amendments to chapter 55 UDC mr. Leonard thank you so these next two agenda items are to staff initiated proposed ordinance amendments the first the first being mobile food vending services so as some background the reason that we as staff have initiated this proposed amendment is that over recent years we've had numerous inquiries for food trucks and in similar services in the community and our ordinance while beautifully reformatted into the unified development code still has a lot of content from long ago and so if you recall we have a few what I would say are clunky and restricted temporary use provisions their more emphasis on whether or not it is the owner of the property or not

111the owner of the property and if it is not the owner of the property then it requires a special exception use which is a pretty tall standard for a temporary use and furthermore we have seen sort of I would say some level of market demand for these we do actually see them functioning at times and at office locations and sometimes at special events and so in response to sort of a shifting desire to for this relatively new use our intention was to amend our code to provide an opportunity for them to basically be legal and more easily legal within the community so this has been through a couple of discussions already at the ordinance revisions committee and then it was also benefited from a working session discussion by the full Planning Commission I'll go through

112it and try to highlight a couple of the changes that have been incorporated since the last time the Planning Commission has seen it first of all under the mobile food vending service definition based on some conversations with the Washtenaw County in Public Health Department they recommended adding under the Michigan food law of 2000 that is the base statutory requirement on which such vending units would be licensed there are numerous ways they can be licensed under that there's different classifications and categories but that is a broad designation of mobile food vending vendors and probably appropriate for us to set the stage that we expect when these uses are being realized in our community that they're going to follow that basic state law so that's the definition and then when we get into the actual provisions these

113would be new provisions to accessory uses we'd be I'm proposing that this would be an accessory use to all mixed use and non residential special-purpose districts you will recall originally that you proposed accepting the downtown districts the d1 and d2 from this based on your feedback from prior discussions that is now included so this would be an approved accessory use in those districts I'm going through the requirements we had a fair kind of a lot of conversation about where they might be located on a property the first is that they can't be located less than 10 feet to any public right-of-way or within any required sight distance triangle as a reminder we want to keep intersections and streets free from visibility for both vehicular non motorized and pedestrian safety and we also want to provide

114that there is some on-site opportunity for use and queuing so that a vending service for example isn't up at the sidewalk where people might be obstructing the passageway of other users of that public right-of-way on a property adjacent there was a lot of conversation about how they might relate to residential zoning districts y-you will recall we started with sort of a a pretty significant one that we highlighted in the in an early draft that we didn't think it was appropriate but was worthwhile to discuss what this language does is essentially says the setback requirements of the zoning district where the proposed vending services located when it is adjacent to a residential district would have to be followed and that's significant because sometimes owning districts have an additional standard when adjacent to a residential his own

115property if it's not adjacent to a residential his own property it could so go anywhere on the site relative to that there's a kind of there was a requirement that it has to be a compliance permit would have to be sought there was discussion about making sure that there was a possibility to amend that over the term we envision this being annual so if you as a vendor came in and you have first identified one property but then you wanted to add another or specifically providing the opportunity to be able to amend that permit and as opposed to starting over and per a question mmm it all food vendors do not have to be licensed by the Washington County Health Department but they do need to be licensed by some Health Department under that food

116law technically they are supposed to notify the Washington County when they are licensed under another Health Department but operating in Washington County my impression is that that happens spotty a spotty basis having this in effect might help us to communicate to them what permits we're getting that might actually help to advance that cause going forward so I think they were excited about that partnership trash and recycling it seems the same we have to provide trash within ten feet from the vendor another suggestion from the Public Health Department was to expand our responsibility of the vending service for removal of waste I'm specifically they suggested inclusion of both solid and liquid waste and more specifically making sure that we were incorporating wastewater grease and oil so I think when our preliminary discussions were frankly more focused

117on customers and and sort of wrappers and litter but it's really important too that they're not just dumping wastewater or grease out into a parking lot so this makes sure that there's an expectation that they do that properly there's obviously more specificity about how that occurs from the food law and waste requirements but we just wanted to make sure that people are expected to follow it there is I think some ultimately some I didn't have direct sense of where we wanted and as far as density so what I'm proposing in this language is you could have a one food serving service vendor upped for every ten parking spaces you'll recall at the outset we had originally sort of just had a couple of categories there was some talk about whether we should have any limit

118so I hope this is somewhere in the middle of where the discussion was I think it provides a fairly high frequency but still some balance of expected accessibility of a business as long as along with such vendors and then finally it can't present any parking traffic or the last one is kind of a catch-all you just can't violate any laws and make sure that it sort of links it to any expectations of operation so it has this has been as we said through a couple of different versions it's scheduled for a public hearing this evening barring ultimately any tweaks or consideration either further discussion by you or after your favorable recommendation or not it would progress to City Council thank you at this time we'd like to open the public hearing on this is there

119anyone the audience wishes to address the Planning Commission in regards to this amendment to the UDC seeing no one I will close the public hearing and read the motion the Planning Commission recommends that the mayor and city council approved the event this mayor and city council approve amendments to the chapter 55 ud sikh code as presented do I have a move by Commissioner Trudeau seconded by Commissioner Mills discussion Commissioner Ackerman Thank You mr. chair and thank you mr. Leonard for capturing a lot of our thoughts that have gone a bit all over the places we've learned about this industry speaking of the industry early in the process we got some pretty impassioned feedback about the initial draft we examined I was just curious what outreach we did to to those individuals who came in our

120first couple meetings sure at the ORAC meeting we did put together a list about a dozen folks provided names and email addresses I notified them of this appearing on the agenda tonight um we also as is typical for any ordinance amendments we notify all commercial of associations and all neighborhood associations in addition to the the notice in the publication based on that I heard some questions from downtown Association but never received any feedback and then from one individual was very expressed a lot of I would say skepticism that that staffs intention was to somehow penalize local businesses that they were specifically asking about the operation of an existing facility and were asking questions about whether that was what would be compliant under these proposed provisions the short answer is I don't know it I hadn't

121done that analysis and conveyed that you know my intention wasn't to legitimize one but rather to find the ordinance language that might accommodate these uses appropriately in the city so so that's the feedback that has been conducted leading up to this in addition to of course the working session and Orsi discussions thank you so I appreciate that I just asked because the crowd has dwindled as this process is God usually it's the other way around where not a lot of people are engaged early in the process and then get engaged now but okay I I I'm grateful you know I think a lot of the enquiries that staff has gotten about these are perhaps folks who are operating within the city and want to do so in a legitimate framework and I guess I am

122a little bit nervous about zoning them out of compliance and so I just wanted to get your thoughts on that and perhaps other colleagues thoughts but overall I think this is a great framework and I'm comfortable with it because I understand the conversations have gone into it I'll leave it there commissioners on the second part of that but from my perspective keep in mind the intention was that they're not really provided for now so I in fact we wouldn't be rendering any out of compliance as as the particular question about this individual I had raised rice wood which is associated with Morgan York site I think that again I think it would be compliant I haven't looked at a specifically site plan but that's a circumstance where it's not it's happened this being a parcel

123that is not adjacent to any residential so it's at the rear it's not it is there's actually a the parcel is but the zoning district that parcels actually has a split zoning district where the buildings are commercial and the parking lot is parking my recollection is that's actually on the commercial side so there's actually a whole zoning district buffering from the residential so there'd be no setback requirements the important thing is I think see convey is I haven't done at each other analysis of that one or any facility for that matter commercial breaks there isn't anybody in the audience anymore I do think that this is reflective of a strong public process I mean people were very angry and about what was being initially proposed and I think this sort of signifies especially if they've

124been notified that there that there isn't that sort of negative reaction to to what's in the what's being proposed so as a point of clarification so kudos to staff at me I think you've it's been a it's been a good process with moving kind of slowly so that there's been ample time for feedback would the now that there's this new process with the past existing process that that that has been used to allow fer food trucks is that still an existing route that could be utilized yeah any site could seek outdoor sales through a special exception use so you wouldn't have to go through this provision if you wanted for to look for the uses that comply with some different set of criteria for example I frankly don't know why you would I don't know

125why you would either I'm just curious I am and that provision would still apply to things that are mobile food vendors so if you wanted to do a mobile piercing studio that might be the avenue for that or just the last outstanding point which I think was the density I think that sliding scale the linear sliding scale makes a lot of sense so I'm grateful for that recommendation commissioner Mills I agree with everything that was said process Park you know sliding scale I know one of the questions that I had was about we distinguish between residential zones but residential uses and I think we're talking about whether there's anything else where if it's a residential use within a mixed otherwise mixed juice whether there's a setback my scan of the UDC shows that we don't

126accept screening for trash receptacles and alleys or parking lots or something like that that seemed right as it relates to parking lots and conflicting land-use buffers I think it is residentially zoned or use properties because it's not a setback distance instead it's talking about what you're planting along the way which I don't think that that makes sense I am very comfortable with what we have here just but just to kind of close the loop on that one it looks like we're ready for a vote all those in favor please say aye opposed thank you moving on to 10 D proposed text amendments to chapter 55 unified unified development code article 4 development standards section 5.18 special dimensional and site layout standards of the city or Ann Arbor city code I don't think I was supposed

127to read all of that but here we are mr. Leonard uh Thank You Ann also another staff initiated proposed code amendment over the past decade the city has heard via the Zoning Board of Appeals probably around 50 petitions for front porch her front yard setback variances for front porches the convergence of standards that lead to this frequency are that we established the front yard setback by any component of the structure so whether it's sort of the what I will call the principal wall that has windows and the door entry door into this structure or a open porch off of that off the front of that whatever is farthest forward establishes the front yard setback established front setback of that property over time many property owners in the city have desired to take advantage of what

128we now consider to be a pretty fundamentally positive community design principle the notion of open interactive space with the public right-of-way the notion of interacting more with your fellow neighbors and I literal eyes on the street from safety perspective and so many property owners have sought to alter their properties to construct an open porch and many many of them over time have found that they didn't have that ability because they the setback requirements didn't give them that space so this proposed amendment would provide a specific exception where you an unenclosed porch deck or platform it would require to be covered by a roof or canopy so it couldn't just be an open deck or an uncovered porch it also has to be unenclosed and cannot be more than one story could it extend up to

129eight feet into a required front yard setback so the intention here is regardless of front setback restrictions to provide basically every r1r2 a and our foresee homeowner the opportunity to do a covered front porch or deck that would be no more than eight feet encroaching into a required front yard setback it would not be closer than five feet to the right-of-way and when this standard is invoked it does not move the front setback of that property we still consider the principal wall of the structure to be the established front setback thank you well now open the public hearing is there anyone in the audience who wishes to address the Planning Commission and regards to this agenda item please speak to the microphone for closed captioning seeing absolutely nobody in our audience I will close the

130public hearing and read the motion the Planning Commission recommends that the mayor and city council approve amendments to the chapter 55 unified development code as presented do have a Commissioner that I'd like to move Commissioner Mills second in BEC Commissioner woods and we are now in discussion and I will actually start this off I had the honor of chairing the Zoning Board of Appeals for four years and serving on it for a couple more years before that and this was on our agenda on a very regular basis so I'm very happy to see this this was elite this will alleviate a lot of anxiety and financial burden that's put on our residents who want to just make their homes beautiful and who want to be a part of the neighborhood and more part of the

131neighborhood so I am very supportive and I think this is long overdue and I'm so happy that staff has come forward with us Richard out things I've been quiet tonight you've all been very thorough I have two questions one is was there discussion of and reasoning for not including our to be and other our four districts I'm just curious yes I think that there were my perception and I I don't profess to have this long history with the city is that in some of the other districts there might be more about prevalence of high-density or group housing and I think that there was frankly just trying to find a balance of where these petitions come from I guess I don't fundamentally have a problem but we have we seem to have less requests for variances

132from group houses and fraternities and sororities and r2bees and the like so I think it was just intended to be probably in the districts that are probably more prevalent with lower density single family and and the types of petitioners that we've been seeing at the Zoning Board of Appeals not a more comprehensive analysis than that just sort of instinctual and sort of land-use pattern yeah any underlying reasonable place to start it sounds like if this is where zba is hearing them that's the problem we're trying to solve so that makes sense the other question I had is it was a little bit unclear to me when I was reading the language with the the last sentence says four premises on which such enrichment couric occurs it's not clear to me whether the encroachment it's referring

133to is the the overall like eight foot into the front setback or whether it's the encroachment into the five feet from the property line I'm pretty sure it means the first one in but it seems it seems ambiguous to me yeah I appreciate the intention is that so the intention is that if you if your front for I'm gonna use front door for your established front set front setback if your front door zap at your front setback requirement the intention that this would provide up to an eight-foot porch if your front door were two feet away from the required front setback this would provide up to six feet encroachment into the required front setback again we're saying you you deserve an eight foot deep porch but you have to sort of maximize the ability within

134the required front setback and so the encroachment I'm talking about could be anywhere from one to eight feet into the required front setback the five foot is an absolute that would say that if you're for example if your establishment setback happened to be eight feet from the property line this wouldn't help you unless you only wanted a three foot deep porch way and I think I think what would actually clarify this entirely for me as we switch the last two sentences I don't know that it that affects anything though that's why only because it it's it seems like it could be implying that in some case a property might encroach into that five feet by putting that sentence last and if we just switched the order then it would be very clear that the encroachment

135and that last sentence was referring to that eight foot guideline which is otherwise very clear to me and I think I understand the intent but that was that was the only thing that was sort of somewhat ambiguous in my reading of it so you mean put the last sentence would become no unenclosed porch decker flavor so it'd be located with five feet yes okay I think that would work fine it's that friendly to just move in second commissioner Mills this actually follows up on that's very same issue so you noted that currently when we calculate what the average shrimp setback is we treat everything together so on enclosed porches are also it's the front of the unenclosed porch as well does this change all of that or is it only for new ones that want

136to be built I just don't want to create like a nightmare for you guys in calculating how you figure out what the front porches are because I feel like we should be the consistent yeah we talked about this and it I believe it is imperfect the intention is that it would apply to sort of any new construction that is invoking this because otherwise we wouldn't be able to permit it but at the same token we were trying to find the balance so that it didn't just start overtime Ranchi driving that setback forward if this property owner does it and it moves eight feet and then this property owner that didn't seem right either so the short answer is the intention is that it would apply to new structures we would have some record of them

137because they would have to invoke this this standard as part of our approval or it would just be after the date of adoption and it could change well it probably wouldn't change the setback because I'm those then they're still going to be governed by that average and then that would at worst sort of give them the ability to perhaps build up to a porch line that was already compliant with the setback and then this would give them the potential to extend further into the required that make sense let me try that again well I mean I was the one who raised this right yeah of the whole idea of it are we just slowly gonna get closer closer but I kind of I know I raised it but I almost feel like our five foot

138minimum front yard yeah effectively is our safeguard against things being right on the sidewalk yeah and I just don't want to make it I don't want to make your life more difficult when you need to go it's already a pain to go out and figure out what the average front setback is and so why add to this a complicating factor of like okay we need to figure out all of those properties within a hundred feet if they were if those porches were built before or after this particular date that just seems like really complicated yeah no I it's a good question probably the ultimate answer to that would be to actually go back to that original provision and say no porches don't count that that might have the impact that would have the impact of

139changing the front yard setback requirements of a lot of properties in the city generally probably moving them further back right I guess it seems to me that with some perhaps this isn't well-crafted enough yet but with some language that tries to acknowledge that the intention is not to drive them forward the worst if this is a bad thing is that you might have two feet right you might say you have an 8 foot porch on your house now and 2 feet of it is IR is outside the required front setback it encroached it's it encroaches technically you might be able to then build out your living room to 6 feet further out and then still extend another 8 feet out from that but again as long as we have that 5 foot safeguard this is

140sort of acknowledging that in that circumstance we're not seeing that is necessarily a terrible thing to neighborhood character I was gonna say I mean the whole idea behind this and the way that we're pitching this is that we generally think this is a good thing we want people have porches right and so I again but we also want to make sure that safe sidewalks are safe and that if if the sidewalks are getting so much use that we want to make them wider that we have some wider so we've given ourselves that with a five foot I'm just I think I would suggest and I'd be happy to make amendment to just strike that entirely to make compliance easier and measurement easier for you because this is something that you guys calculate on a regular

141basis yeah so if I understand so your intention would be that if your neighbor takes advantage of this they would be effectively they would be altering their structure so that the average front setback for the neighboring properties are impacted as well right I mean that's what that's what currently our current code has that effect and let's continue to have that effect and if if at all it's probably going to reduce that setback it's gonna get closer and our setbacks and Residential's are not maximums they're minimums so it's off the cuff I don't think that would have necessarily a detrimental impact yeah Commissioner and Gabe Randall are the steps leading up to the porch part of the calculation or no no currently our ordinance allows steps to be located anywhere on the property so we sort

142of just were silent on them and just that's great absolutely yes I do anything right up to yeah that's what I wanted to make sure because you know you shouldn't be punished because your your house is four feet above your finished lawyers four feet of books are great and you need eight steps which then takes up oh right here I so don't know if you can do that in five feet but but right so that would be that right right okay I just want to make sure that right right exactly right right right and just out of curiosity why eight feet I'm just curious point six seemed too small and 10 seemed too big I mean we were you know this was again as a staff initiate we spent a lot we you know and

143to be clear like there's I think there's staff there really on my team that are concerned that is this going to somehow drastically change the character and physical appearance of structures you know we have you know for example take a kind of a sixties ranch neighborhood it's it's easy to see front porches on turn-of-the-century homes and the historic districts how might this manifest in a in a 60s neighborhood I think there's a way I can but it it just they might evolve but it's part and then as part of that we were just thinking about size and just at the actual dimensions of what's the right dimension should to have room for chairs and table and maybe passage and trying to find a balance of something that seemed plausible and usable but not too excessive

144that it was driving too far into from an encouragement perspective yeah it when I just look at aerials in the Old West Side it looks like it's kind of in that zone when I compare it to the five foot sidewalk you know so not not precise but I was just curious you know where to be clear we we did not look at aerials it was more about our project our perceived usability of dimensions further discussion I'm just curious where we're at in terms of that was a friendly so your change was the friendly amendment so this is the actual we are we striking that sentence correct I would support I don't know actually don't know who made the made the the proposal for the amendment cuz I don't think I moved it it was so

145it was friendly okay so the striking we have not is that friendly yeah why don't why don't we since there's some questions so the motion would a proposed motion to amend might be to strike the last sentence that is for premises on which such a concurrent occurs the principle for an elevation will continue establish the existing front setback move back mr. Mill's seconded by Commissioner Trudeau discussion on striking that sentence I got moved that now we're gonna strike all those in favor please say aye all right it's the change has been made so we've stricken the sentence that sergeants with four premises on which such any further discussion all those in favor please say aye those opposed all right that's proof thank you the CBA is probably watching right now live cheering this I will

146make sure to call chair Breer to let her know all right it still goes to City Council that it at least passed the Planning Commission yeah right you all don't have that much power maybe one day no not at all you know moving on to audience participation is there anyone in the audience who wishes to address the zone I'm sorry Planning Commission seeing no one will move to Commission proposed business and I will be the first to say Happy Thanksgiving everyone including those of you who are watching at home Happy Thanksgiving and my apologies to Commissioner Ackerman for not paying as much attention to you since you're the only one on this side at this meeting so I apologize and in my apologies the monitors just weren't working that's for the lopsided arrangement I will

147follow up on my request after the last meeting to see if we can re repair them thank you is there any other Commission proposed business do I have a motion to adjourn move by Commissioner Mills seconded by Commissioner Briggs we are adjourned thank you you