001the October 16th City Planning Commission meeting we will begin the meeting with roll call commissioner Ackerman commissure Briggs Commissioner Gabe Randall here give us your Mills Commissioner Milstein here commissioner so they come a stretcher down your Commissioner Weatherby here Commissioner woods yeah we have quorum moving on to introductions do we have any introductions this evening approval agenda do you have a commissioner who will move the agenda move by Commissioner Mills seconded by Commissioner get Brandel do we have any discussion or changes all those in favor please say aye aye any opposed moving on to minutes of previous meetings this evening for us we have the October 2nd 2018 meeting minutes as well as March 20th 2018 meeting minutes are there any changes or actually do I have a motion move back miss your survey seconded
002by Commissioner Weatherby any changes taken together all those in favor please say aye opposed moving on to reports from city administration City Council Planning Manager Planning Commission officers and committees written petitions and communications starting with City Council which we don't have a report this evening or at least not yet planning manager thank you I do not have any updates for this evening we'll have a update for you next meeting Planning Commission officers and committees written communications and petitions we have a healthy stack of communications that we received so please take a look at it when you get a chance and also a lot of material regarding food trucks so please take a look when you get a chance moving on to audience participation are there any members in the audience who wish to address the
003Planning Commission regards to an item that is not on the sea beings agenda if you'd like to discuss something that is not on please step up to the podium seeing no one will move on to public hearing scheduled for the next business meeting this is hot off the press we have the following items before us at our next meeting which will be on November 7th at 7 p.m. right here the dancer annexation to 861 Stone School Road and Zoning for City Council approval to 251 West Liberty Street special exemption use in site plan for City Planning Commission approval three seven eight six and three eight zero two plat Road rezoning and area plan for City Council approval to one one five South State Street special exemption use for medical marijuana provisioning Center incidental to a
004medical marijuana processing center for Planning Commission approval and 309 North Ashleigh Street site plan for City Council approval so we will have a full agenda at our next meeting seeing that Commissioner Ackerman is here would you like to give us an update from City Council thank you only one update despite and the only one thing of immediate relevance for this body which is we voted in favor of approving the master deed agreement with course basis for the property at the library a lot it's the final of three agreements with course basis that builds the framework of our legal relationship with them moving forward of course there will be a referendum on the ballot in in November that deals with the library a lot property but I think you know despite this issue being left to
005the people better to have all of our eyes dotted and t's crossed before we reach that finish line thank you moving on to our regular business number ten first item before us is 70 tene Heather way annexation and zoning for city council approval we'll begin with the staff report thank you as mentioned this is the 715 heather way annexation and zoning it is a request to annex from Ann Arbor township and zone a property r1 a property is located at the southeast corner of Heather way and Gettys Avenue it is it is just shy of one acre and it contains a single-family home staff report mentions it was built in 1970 but it was actually built in just for the record for posterity it is proposed to be zoned r1 a it will be contiguous
006with a large area that's also zoned r1 a south of get easily staff is recommending approval thank you at this time we will open up a public hearing if anyone in the audience wishes to address the Planning Commission give me a step forward to the podium and address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes seeing no one I will close this public hearing and we will begin to or actually I will read the motion the Ann Arbor City Planning Commission hereby recommends that the mayor and city council approved the 715 either way annexation and r1 a single-family dwelling district zoning you have a commissioner who moved moved by Commissioner Mills seconded by Commissioner woods we will now begin discussion seeing no one all those in favor please say aye opposed it is approved thank
007you I think during my time as chair those the quickest we've ever voted on an item so thank you and thank you for the great staff report moving on to 1750 Plymouth Road special exemption use with site plan for City Planning Commission approval thank you as mentioned this is the 1750 Plymouth Road special exception use for a medical marijuana provisioning Center it is located the I'm in a shopping center that is just on the south side of Plymouth Road just west west of upland and Murfin this is shown here in the aerial photo it's also shown here on a Google map there's not a great street view for it hmm the petitioners are asking to occupy a about a 2,000 square foot space inside of this existing shopping center there's a fairly long motion with
008the findings that we have for special exception use approvals as well as we've has suggested some conditional some conditioned approval as is standard for special exception uses first condition is obtaining and maintaining a state and city license operating the business within three years we addressed occupancy to no more than two hundred and two thousand two hundred forty square feet which is the tenant space they have requested and we addressed the hours of operation as a condition this is a twelve thousand square foot shopping center there are 52 parking spaces available which is seven more than a current maximum permitted for a shopping center they can remain as is unless the center is entirely redeveloped the staff report goes through the special exception use standards those general standards as well as the specific standards for a
009provisioning center applicants have provided an operation statement a safety and security plan a description of odor control waste disposal and hours of operation staff has found that the request is consistent with the general special exception new standards as well as the specific standards for provisioning centers I will note that the staff report mentions that there is a still outstanding traffic review traffic review our traffic engineer has looked at the additional information so far to be frank she still has some additional concerns she is she is recommending conditional approval or just she is recommending approval but know that it is not an ideal traffic situation the traffic cues from the Murfin upland traffic light this might provide a little bit better right here is that traffic light the queue does back up and can back up
010past this shopping center entrance and the peak hours of a provisioning center coincide with the peak backup hours for this outbound Lane and it is there it is a concern but she is not recommending that she's just flagging that concern for you but staff is recommending approval because it does appear to meet the standard the general and specific standards for special exception uses can answer any additional questions and I believe the applicant is here as well thank you at this time we'll open up the public hearing to members of the audience wish to address the Planning Commission in regards to this petition I will close the public hearing and read the motion bear with me it's long the city the Ann Arbor City Planning Commission after hearing all interested persons and reviewing our all relevant
011information including an accompanying site plan finds the petition substantially meet the standards in Chapter 55 unified development code section 5.2 9.5 dot d special exemptions and section 5.1 6.3 G medical marijuana facility and therefore approves the 1750 Plymouth Road special exemption used for medical marijuana provisioning Center this approval is based on the following findings 1 the proposed use will be consistent with the C one local business district which provides for commercial retail uses as well as office and residential uses to the proposed use will not adversely Packt traffic pedestrian bike bicyclist circulation or road intersections based on the location plymouth road provides access to the site and the proposed use is consistent with other surrounding uses traffic impact 3 a site plan documenting the existing conditions of the site has been submitted as part of
012this application for through documentation through documentation submitted by the petitioner regarding waste disposal inventory tracking security and other methods of operation of the facility the provisioning center will be operated in the manner that will not have an adverse impact on the neighboring properties or area and will not have detrimental impact on net on natural features the special exemption use approval is based on the following conditions 1 the petitioner obtaining and maintaining both the state of michigan medical marijuana license and a city of Ann Arbor medical marijuana permit and providing documentation to the planning services within a 3 years of the city planning approval of this petition the petitioner I'm sorry to the petitioner operating a medical marijuana business at this address within three years of the City Planning Commission approval date of this petition 3
013the special exemption used may occupy no more than two thousand two hundred forty square feet of the development at this site for the special exemption use may only be open for business between 11:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and noon to 7:00 p.m. Sundays and the complaining and that the Ann Arbor Planning Commission approves the attached site plan which demonstrates compliance with applicable state exemption I'm sorry with applicable special exemption use standards as no physical development of this property is proposed move by commissioner woods seconded by Commissioner Weatherby mr. Ackerman Thank You mr. chair in response to many of our medical marijuana petitions I think we focused primarily on hours of operation site plan and Wow it's gonna be a slow night for my brain and the third factor maybe I shouldn't go
014first in any case use me impacts de neighbors and I think in this case impacts de neighbors is most you know not to life through the traffic impact I have a question for mr. Leo if I could as we talk about traffic studies and medical marijuana uses we ascribe our are used to kind of like traffic behavior with a general professional standard correct and does medical marijuana under that standard different any way to other retail uses I'm not a traffic engineer but I can speak in layman's terms about this because I am also a layman the traffic engineers there is an institute of traffic engineers and they that society produces a manual it's a big phone book looking thing that is their trip generation manual they take many most land uses perhaps every land use
015and they provide a trip generation manual they provide the rate at which you can expect chips two trips to be generated and they do this based on actual their studies so for example they'll study pharmacies in urban settings and suburban settings in rural settings and I'll have this manual and then you'll find on the chart how many what's the size of your pharmacy use the right table you can predict what your the chips will be they have a code in that manual for provisioning centers most of the data comes from states that already have her have had legal medical marijuana facilities longer than Michigan so most of the data comes from California and Colorado and but they have this professional man manual that provides guidance for traffic engineers nationwide to evaluate and predict what the
016trip generation will be I think ultimately my question is and I appreciate that background that was perfect explanation ultimately my question is does the trip generation from medical marijuana provisioning center differ practically from another retail use um this manual provides a whole variety of retail uses understood meta provisioning centers are among the highest trip generators along with ports for example bars restaurants have a very high trip fast food and bars they have a very high trip generation rate per square foot it's just pulling data from Colorado and California skew it to recreational type uses versus medical that I can't speak to I think it's possible I believe that traffic engineers are studying that now that this as more data rolls in we can find out it is Michigan higher low relative to those but and
017that could all change again yes but it is the it is the manual that the traffic engineers use but like I said I I have come to learn that provisioning centers actually they're at the high end of the retail uses of a retail use like a seamstress is has a low trip journey three so provisioning centers do have a fairly high rate I specifically asked our traffic engineer this provisioning center is supposed to replace the bagel Freegal I know but relative to the bagel Franko how is its trip generation rate and the traffic engineer it told me that they actually have similar peak hours peak trips the difference is the bagel fraggles peak hour is much more towards the morning and a provisioning centers their peak hours are at the evening rush hour so while
018they have I'll just make it up but for discussion purposes they'll generate a hundred chips in an hour but the bagel fringo does that at 8:00 a.m. a provisioning Center would do that at 5:00 p.m. and so that's where the are concerned with the queuing on Plymouth Road there in the morning traffic goes inbound there's not a that the light doesn't back up and block that cross traffic in the evening traffic is outbound so if folks are leaving this site and want to go inbound they're gonna have to cross that they may have to cost that backup and it's just uh it is a fact and it's a concern but it is not and necessarily a it's just just know just know that and I can zoom in later it's so in terms of the
019curb cut itself in the driveway turning lanes I do not believe that this there there's no demarcation now I don't think it is not there's no Dean of our kitchen you can see it is fairly wide you might be able to get that one inbound and the two out it also shares a driveway with the gas stations so there's a little more wiggle room than other shopping centers did traffic engineering speak it all about signage you know limiting left turn movements in evening danger they did not specific to this application you know and they were just focusing on this application and this one particularly on land use there are other tenants here there are other tenants I mean doing that this is not the only traffic generator for that site so so understood understood that
020it's not the only traffic generator but if we know reliably that making inbound left-turn movements is gonna be difficult in an evening rush hour regardless of what activity is happening on site right there there is just gonna be outbound rush hour traffic was there any exploration of limiting left turn movements during an evening rush hour - yep I don't think we got that far I think the concern was noted but it would depend on if it was a shared concern was that okay I'll leave it there for now I'm happy to listen of their colleagues for their discussion Commissioner Gabriel mr. Li I wonder if you could tell us what what give this an example of what could really be done in terms of conditions here like something like mr. Ackerman is is providing as
021an option or like what I mean like I meant in that sense I didn't mean sort of a conditional approval like add conditions I think she meant that she meant she recommends approval maybe with reservation okay or just wanted to know that it's not an on call it's not a unqualified it is a it can meet the standards but she did want that noted and so basically what the the kind of worst case scenario that I hear you describing is outbound traffic is backing up there in that middle lane which is a turn lane there and then there's two lanes on either side they would be waiting in that middle turn lane not necessarily backing up traffic from the inbound but just hanging out there for two minutes or whatever until the traffic clears for
022the outbound that would be the concern they're not stopping up traffic is I guess what I'm but what you're describing right because there's a turn lane there so that free movement could happen they're just hanging out there for a long time waiting for the traffic to clear because those are very different scenarios to me you know in terms of like stopping up everybody else versus I just have to wait here for a long time for the light to go before I can get in I honestly I think both from my understanding both of those scenarios might occur the the backup might be the backup might be so far that that center turn lane is actually full of maybe full of cars full of cars and so you can't get to the center turn one I
023see but then also maybe the backup is not so far and they just need then wait in that center turn lane to me that mm-hmm I think it is probably it depends on the date depends on what events are going on and that's why it's not necessarily a 24/7 right it is not that at all times this is a traffic hazard there may be times that this is not that this does not operate perfectly Fisher woods just a couple of questions one is the petitioner here hi would you mind coming forward great did you want to introduce yourself to us alec riffle 1729 Cummington Drive hi hi so are you located in Toledo because I'm just looking at the information so I'm representing the petitioner okay hello hi Martin used to ax Berkeley to Ohio
024okay great and so is the name of this facility tree city because it seems like that's one that we've had before at least it sounds familiar I'm just trying to yeah that's the plan right now to be branded as a tree city provisioning senator okay um do you know mr. land do we already have one called tree city or is that the part of this consortium um there have been two s use approved 27:30 Jackson Ave and industrial highways in its south industrial highway location yeah we kind of just used the brand name as like a placeholder but this is Martin's provisioning center so it as a right now it could be branded a tree city it could be branded something else time a line it just depends on how he wants to proceed okay
025so so it's a placeholder so how does the city know or or how do we know what what's the name of it it is that through signage or do you have to file something before you actually oh yeah yeah before we put up any signage the final decision as to what the brand name will be will be made apparent but as of right now it's it's true setting we don't really have any plans of of changing it but in the event that Martin doesn't like the name Tree City down the line of course we'll go through the you know appropriate approval channels for getting signage approved and you know a DBA change or something along those lines whatever we have to do we will okay so this isn't currently a facility right now no that's
026not so this is one as mr. Leo is this one of the newer ones that sort of made it through the process to be yes it is okay all right thank you and then I just had a question as I was just looking at the paperwork in the back where it it was indicating the notary and then it was sort of crossed out state of Michigan and Ohio's in there and County of Washington I was crossed out for Lucas so mr. Leo is that all aboveboard that that is acceptable to do okay all right okay I just had some questions about that yes I'm moving to North Flint Michigan shortly so I'm not gonna be Ohio resident very long much longer I'm building the house right now I know it's not an arbor but welcome
027and that's good to know why not in our he's building houses up here I'd like to speak a little bit to the traffic scenario one potential remedy to it would be to expand the hours so if we go like 9:00 to 9:00 it may not push our or may not push max traffic to like I don't know what the traffic I'm sure she's had like five to six or something like that's right repeat traffic hours are we spread at 9:00 to 9:00 we could potentially kind of mitigate that traffic jam also this is a new business the first day we opened the doors there's gonna be one customer hopefully for us to get to like a hundred hours a day or whatever maybe I'm sorry it may take three years or so if the business
028is successful so no matter what the numbers we punch in to the manual however we run them they're not totally accurate because it's gonna be really slow me speaking from experience the 2730 Jackson have location has been up for almost five years now and we have about 100 cars a day or a hundred patients a day so I would have to assume that the business that's there now has at least that or more and it took us five years to get to that point so right now we don't have anything and the first day that we opened we're gonna have hopefully one might be awesome but we don't really know so I think the generation report was like at what is seem to be the worst case scenario which I don't thinks reality but those
029are standards that we have to go by so I understand I'm just trying to better inform your decision making mm-hmm thank you I'm just another question in terms of the turning in and out of that facility or even turning from that middle lane and some locations I've seen signs where you're only permitted to do turning a certain time of day and I don't under whether or not our traffic engineers had considered anything like that or if we were to pass it as is today is that something that a traffic engineers could come back and say later on we are really backed up and we're gonna have to limit it if you know the neighbors find that it really is problematic and that looks cases I feel that is something that our traffic engineers continually look
030at throughout the city to keep to keep operations both smooth and safe okay thank you it's a possibility to like okay I take a doughnut shop for example they only make X amount of doughnuts right once they sell out a doughnut for the day they sell out a doughnut through the day so if this turns out to be like a really serious concern for the throughput of our traffic here in the city we want to make it as efficient as possible that's your you know it's all of our goal here if it turns out to like there's there's a point for which the traffic breaks and it actually is a problem we could correlate that to the amount of patients that we're seeing a day and we could say like okay look we know that
031the traffic breaks here at 200 patients now and then we just say look sorry we're out of doughnuts for the day so that is a possibility I don't want to throw any like numbers out there because we don't really know but we can be proactive and kind of address that as a way to occur that sounds reasonable okay great I wonder how we can hold you to that just I was being honest you know let's make sure we got that on tape no I appreciate that but I think those aren't certainly the kinds of things that because you want your business to be successful and we want the whole community to be able to function that that's that's really important thank you mr. chair and thank you Commissioner woods for the line of questioning and
032you know that's the general rub of it right there's business owners and you know hoping to be good corporate neighbors you promise something but our job is to look at the models and try to plan for any scenario because once we grant this use it doesn't matter who the property owner is it matters who is operating a provisioning center or the provisioning centers operating and and that's the weird and tough job we have is dealing with any scenario we can't predict that said I if if we have the assurance is that our traffic engineering staff looked at every possibility including signage and and that while this use may produce some additional movements that aren't exactly ideal for rush hour but is within the realm of safety and you know reasonableness I'm inclined to you know
033support the findings of our traffic engineers because we all know I'm not one and so that's I think where I am you mentioned operating hours and I'm curious usually as we come to an emotion that's right before the Planning Commission operating hours or something that's mutually agreed-upon and could you just these operating hours were the first that I've seen that you know where perhaps even more restrictive than I was expecting sure how are these how are these developed hours you know was just us being conservative you know so I mean 99 seems appropriate I think it would help kind of spread out the mass at rush hour because okay look if people are headed to work they may be more so inclined to pick up medication beforehand as opposed to rushing out of work and
034picking up at 5:00 so I think that that will help with the traffic scenario a bit but oh the first hours were selected there's really no rhyme or reason they're just kind of standard business hours Monday noon to 7:00 but I'm just trying to look for like solutions to a problem that have arisen yeah I appreciate that the only complication and I do appreciate that and I mean you've been there with your previous positions very generous with what you've offered in terms of trying to take care of infrastructure and yeah as a neighbor I appreciate that just knowing that these hours of operation will ultimately land with the land you know that they will be stuck with the land because this isn't special exemption use they're not specific to your business and your operation and
035ownership I certainly hear that no honest doing internal contributions well if I may well you process a bit we provided supplemental traffic reports we use Midwestern very reputable firm and they sat out there with stopwatch at peak hours and he recorded the movements I don't know if you were provided that's something on a report but he concluded that there really wouldn't be any adverse traffic impact so obviously you know we have to trust the city appointed official a that's an unbiased review first are for higher retail but Jim does a good job and he's an honest and ethical guy and he said that you know it looks good so are there concerns here I believe so can it be mitigated absolutely so I just hate to see something like this kind of get in the
036way of you know being a great contributor to community here so sure yeah I I think I'm I'm not a medical marijuana user but I certainly have a pharmacy and I think about my usage and more flexibility gives me time to go outside of rush hours when I have to and from work right so I definitely hear the argument about more flexibility being better for traffic just as someone who goes to CBS I think for now I'm comfortable with the motion as presented with the hours as presented but if there are commissioners who you know do you feel compelled that more flexibility would provide for better traffic mitigation I certainly will hear that argument and adjust accordingly I think commissioner Weatherby one thing and I know we've had this on other petitions our bike racks
037and this is sort of indirectly related to transportation are there any bike racks in this little area install it if there's not one two there so if you want to make that condition will definitely had those in there okay cuz I would like to if there isn't because that's something that we've we've been pretty consistent about and the others and we still about earlier already before you mentioned it we're going to do that regardless okay so it is required on the Madhu's required and there are there are bike racks on the approve site plan and so we can vouch it they're still there but there should be bike racks out there okay all right thank you gonna shut you down just to add a little anecdotal data here I when I had regular access to
038a car I would frequently pickup pizzas from this site so I have a lot of experience coming in and out during that evening rush hour and it and it kind of sucks trying to especially if you're trying to turn left onto Plymouth but given the gas station there and the volume of cars coming in and out of there the the number of trips coming in and out even at the party store will seem less to me so it's already a mess of cars I don't think this is gonna make a big difference either way I don't think we're you know it's not the straw that broke the camel's back here so I'm pretty comfortable approving this even given the concern excuse me there's listening to the numbers in terms of the high traffic business that
039it's classified as fast food 100 cars per hour is that least I'm sorry was that what you said mrs. well I may have said that but just as an example and provisioning centers are up there high traffic generators like a fast food as compared to a Hallmark store I'm just looking at numbers with the current stores a hundred patients a day all day it's still different than 100 cars per hour I mean just sure numbers further discussion commissioner Mills Thank You commissioner Weatherby for asking the question about bicycle parking because this is a place where a lot of people are cycling up and down Plymouth so making sure that that's installed if we need to make an Alexis do we if it's on the site plan and we don't have a pictures right now which
040of what the circuit current site conditions are but if it's on the site plan is that like does somebody go up and check and make sure that it's actually there before we just sign on the dotted line okay so we don't need to make that as one of the additional conditions is that correct installation if it's not because it's on the approved site plan it would be a site compliance issue okay you can make it a condition you can make anything relevant into condition if you want however it would be part of the issuing the permits and getting their zoning compliance permit will do us like compliance check got it so you physically go there okay great so if that's the case as long as we have the bike coops that are on the plan
041I'm okay with that the other thing that was going to add was about the hours I wish we had a list of what they all are because we have put them on a lot my sense is that this is next to a gas station in the liquor store and not necessarily immediately abutting neighborhoods or given the existing uses that it would be closer to what we've put with when we have things next to gas stations or 7-elevens or that kind of thing so nine starting at nine and going until nine does not seem ridiculous to me I think keeping the hours on Sundays shorter because I know that has been our practice makes a lot of sense but my two cents worth is it I just if we have allowed other things in a similar
042type of location to be 99 I don't see why we can stream them just because that's what they asked for but if we don't have because we don't have the table to be able to see what we have already done I feel like I'm at a loss for being able to do that so my feeling here is any times we've any time we've changed the hours it's been because the petitioner has asked for an exorbitant amount and we've shrunk them down at this point the petitioner isn't asking for that and what they've asked for I have no issues approving it so why should we interfere with their business practices if we agree that it's not so I don't I know we're talking about ours but I don't think ours are really a thing that we
043should discuss with this because we're agreeing with the petitioner in the ours they've given us commissioner woods sorry I just wanted to indicate that on the site plan it does indicate that there are some existing bicycle racks two of them required and those are the minimum so so it is there are two already there and I mean if we have an issue with our hours we'll just come back before the Commission and just kind of say okay here's issues and you know you guys agreed on no problem I mean like I said we're just gonna be opening right in the beginning it's not like we're gonna hit capacity so I think our hours are fine and beginning but if you do we can always come back and expand our hours further discussion I'm sure so
044they so I appreciate all the discussion I think I'm just gonna reiterate you know a few things in terms of my concerns I think traffic doesn't concern me because I see instances similar to like Lakeshore Drive on North Main Street as an issue and those signs went up to say no left turn at certain hours and so there is kind of continuous regulation if that becomes an issue so things like the left turn could be signed and regulated later if it came an issue so I don't think it's something that needs to be added here three of the stores within this retail center go till 10 o'clock so 9:00 to 9:00 seems reasonable to me some of the changes I do recall we've done we've done changes at the table for hours before and the
045reference point has usually been the other retail in proximity so as much every single time we say we wish you had a chart so we can compare to other bears well I don't facilities at the same time the chart is actually about proximity more than it is about others in the same use so I think we can do that pretty quickly right here and look that the sushi restaurant the pizza rest and the liquor store all go closed at 10:00 so doing 9:00 to 9:00 is still within a lot of the bounds of operating hours is that a motion so I would make a motion to actually include to adjust those operating hours $2.99 seconded by Commissioner acraman discussion on the motion to extend the hours Commissioner Gabe Randall work but it's like we're not
046addressing the issue that we're trying to solve here by extending their hours if they're I'm I'm inclined to agree with Commissioner Ackerman because I just feel like it's not what they've asked for and it really doesn't the change is based on solving this traffic issue and this does not solve the problem the the problem is that the end of the day and they're open then so I I'd rather keep it simple a question for staff can to you and we ask this I'm sure every time what does the permitting ordinance allow in terms of hours of operation what is the maximum accent or to the petitioner if they know zone the ordinance does not address the permitting ordinance does 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 and we actually did request 7:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. yes we
047did address nine to nine but I don't want to do that again we did not or we actually did request it but it's like at the midnight horror I was like two days ago because I know - once the staff report was actually officially published it was a typo on our end but mr. super busy so I just probably was overlooked is it a deal breaker first now but will we come back down the line and request it probably could we save the Commission some time from adding it to the agenda at a future date probably but if it's a serious concern of course you know we will address that suit I'll see if I could commissioner keep Randall if we are trying to address the problem that we're trying to address which is peak
048evening rush hour turning movements would an earlier start time address that yeah that yes I feel like that's the issue could I write you've morning me not not the later could I recommend an amendment to the amendment and see if it's friendly I'm putting that on you sure okay yeah no that's fine and especially given the that it was a typo or whatever and it wasn't pretty a business plan that's helpful to know too even though you guys should get your stuff in time you know I didn't we have deadlines for a reason but I feel like the eight o'clock may address and you know some of the traffic issues I don't think it's gonna solve them all sure but I think it may you know shave a little bit off and I also have
049some concerns about like restricting the left turning when if it were just this business but it's not just this business that would affect the gas station and all the other restaurants there and so I feel funny about like them tipping the balance towards the end of the day and then all of a sudden you know we say oh it's over the nor the line and that means that you know all these other businesses are gonna suffer for that too so I would rather address it by opening up earlier in the morning and being able to you know for the people that want to tag it onto their work that he would be a little before could I offer an amendment to the amendment and see if it's friendly could I suggest 8:00 a.m. yeah 8:00
050a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and keep the weekend hours as is you second it so if she was friendly to the body commissioner so van C so clarified in the petition Monday through Saturday is all the same hours right now so would we do 11:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Saturday Shh as per the original so the amendment to the amendment would be the spectral exemption use service to clarify this would be conditional for the special exemption use may only be open for business between 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Monday through Friday 11:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Saturday and noon to 7 p.m. Sunday I'm friendly yeah yeah discussion commissioner woods I'm just curious how the petitioner feels about this that means you gotta hire people earlier in the morning is that okay
051yes yes as it were we would have to have two chefs so like if you go over ten hours for one chef here it's pretty abusive on employees so we'd like to break it up a bit so it it works gonna shoot you down so so just to make sure my understanding is correct so these are the permitted hours of operation not over not required hours of operation correct it's going to land but not necessarily be so they could they could operationally have shorter hours that they fit their staffing needs or demand just one make sure I just promise not to limit our hours to 5:00 p.m. Commissioner Mills but also I think that it's important to note like we you know it's very possible that they would be open from 11 to 8 we
052need to know that voting but I I am in support of giving that flexibility so traffic becomes a problem that they can then shift to allow for that and I would encourage it this seems like a good location for people to stop on the rate of the work so I'm in support of the hours and also appreciate that we are thinking about daytime and commuting or weekdays separate from weekends I think that that is why so I'm against this motion and it has something to do with the business or the hours that we've set forth it is the process that we are not allowing the public to comment on this because we were changing the hours pretty drastically you know three hours in the morning and several hours in the evening without having public comment
053the staff report came out before the weekend on Friday I believe was when I came out so the public had an opportunity to review this report and maybe looked at it and said yeah well happened seven not a big deal you know and Sunday I'm sorry I love him to eat not a big deal Monday through Saturday and the noon to seven was not a big deal but the process about it that we're negotiating this at the table and we're not just limiting the hours this time we're expanding the hours is the reason why I am against him and I will vote against this on them into the motion commissioner of survey I guess I just asked the table if they have recollection I think I believe Wolverine we did a similar yeah exercise at
054the table and so I guess that's a question maybe maybe a request of staff to create but yeah I guess that's where this has been a change at the table I just want to see if the body also it does recollect those different variations all right any other comments on the amendment to the motion with regrets of the hours all those in favor please say aye aye opposed to - nay did we do a real call I think we're good without a roll call I believe I'll call that that was a vote in favor all right back to the original motion no other comments all right all those in favor please say aye aye opposed we're approved thank you thank you thank you very timely moving on to 10 C signature club parking lot improvements
055landscape modifications for City Planning Commission approval actually I forgot we have a minor change and that is we are actually going to hear from the petitioner first followed by a brief staff report then public comment and then discussion so yes sure you have up to ten minutes to address the Planning Commission this evening all right good evening my name is Rachel Juan mocker I'm a civil engineer for midwestern consulting and I'm here tonight to represent the signature club we're asking the Planning Commission for a landscape modification request the signature club apartments are south of Eisenhower between Ann Arbor saline and State Street's and were built approximately 25 years ago and they are looking to make some modifications to their clubhouse I have here a graphic from the architect they're looking to create some gathering spaces
056at these patios with some grilling areas and some seating and they're looking to change their pool area to increase the number of chaise lounges provided in order to do this then they're looking to reroute the current access drive over to signature Boulevard and remove some parking spaces as shown in my hatching here so that they are actually removing impervious surface as a result of these changes what we're requesting from the Planning Commission tonight is that the the landscaping that was approved on the previously approved site plan is no longer in compliance with current code we are asking that we limit the changes to bring it up to code to the area immediately surrounding the clubhouse and not the rest of the site thank you turn to staff thank you thank you for thank you for
057describing the petition staff we have reviewed the plant the project and we can confirm they are asking for a landscape modification because the existing conditions of the site no longer meet code it is a code requirement that when you submit a site plan that the all codes and regulations are addressed appropriately and the code does say that when you submit a site plan that triggers the need for compliant landscaping the landscaping does comply with their approved signature Club site plan on file but the code has changed since then specific to the wet needing to tie in the Interior parking lot landscaping to the stormwater management system with depressed Islands they comply with the other aspects of the code requirements the our city's forestry and natural resources coordinator has reviewed the petition and does support the
058request to allow the other areas of the parking lot to remain as is and not be retrofitted to comply with the current landscaping standards planning staff concurs and we are recommending approval for this project I can answer additional questions if need be or the applicant can as well also I was scrolling through a little bit here we have aerial photo of the site this is a street view of the site right now the clubhouse area is behind these trees here clubhouse is behind this berm here it's kind of over in this area this is the existing site plan you can see the clubhouse happens to be circled here other buildings are shown in the gray the part there's extensive parking lots and car ports and they are landscape and the site plan is not to
059to old or the development is not to to old 25 years and it complied with the requirements at the time and here's again details of what they are removing and then what they are proposing to do thank you at this time I'll open up the public hearing is there anyone in the audience who wishes to address the Planning Commission regards to this petition seeing no one I will close the public hearing and read the motion the Ann Arbor City Planning Commission hereby approved signature club apartments landscape modification petition to maintain and continue landscape elements which are a part of a previously approved site plan as non-conforming do I have a motion to approve move Becca mr. Ackerman seconded by Commissioner so they we are in discussion Commissioner Mills I think this sound sensible I think
060in particular the fact that they're removing and hurt like overall there's a net loss of imperviousness this suggests to me that that's an improvement and that this particular section would be brought up to code is great so while generally speaking I think it's a good practice that our code calls for bringing everything up to snuff when you're making changes I think that this is an incremental movement in the right direction and so I would support it except we're ready for a vote all those in favor please say aye opposed it is approved moving on to 10 d 1505 White Street alley vacation for City Council approval that the alley is going on vacation yeah we all begin with staff report thank you I am not as familiar with this project but I'm sure I can
061do a fine job this is the in the project file this is called the 1505 White Street alley vacation it is a slight misnomer because it is not associated with anyone address really it is associated with block 7 of the Hamilton rose and she ins Edition on your screen in front of you is a is the original plat and there's a red arrow for that alley to be vacated however after this was plaited and approved way back in the day Stadium Boulevard was cut through and here you can see where the plat was has already been amended and some portions have been vacated hence the vacation some areas have already been vacated the portion that we're talking about tonight is highlighted in yellow but technically speaking we're not talking about that entire length of the
062yellow we're talking about the two ends of it that were not vacated when Stadium Boulevard came through I think this shows a little bit better here the green areas are city parks so when Stadium Boulevard came through some of the Lots some of the parts of the app the public right-of-way is there and the alleys were vacated some Lots were acquired by the city to to assemble and make that city proud or perhaps a state because stadium Boulevard at that time was m17 I believe anyway but there are two remnant pieces of that alley in block 7 that are left and one is adjacent to 505 White Street one is adjacent to 1516 Park Place on the other side of the screen so the request tonight is to vacate those two pieces of the plat
063standard procedure when alleys are vacated or any right-of-way is vacated you take a line down the center line and then half goes to the to the each abutting property at each brother poverty I believe that staff we have checked in with all of the various city departments to see if anyone has any objections to the alley vacation and they do not it can be vacated and turned over to private property staff is recommending approval to vacate the entire 16-foot wide 429 footlong alley on block 7 I believe that wording has to make a very must be that clear up some past past language but the functional parts would be the two bookends I think I already mentioned this but staff is recommending approval and I'm happy to answer any additional questions thank you at this
064time I'll open up the public hearing is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak and routes this alley going on vacation seeing no one I'll call if you can step up to the podium state your name for the record 906 Rose Avenue and I'm not sure but I think the mailer that got sent out included the alley behind my properties being part of the vacate vacation I'm not sure because that's the reason I came because it's behind my garage and that area is also if it's no-man's land basically so I may not have any standing with this particular motion but if indeed the mail that was sent out was incorrectly marked I'd like to least have my comments noted that I came assuming that that was the case if it's not I'll
065take my lickin's and go home if it was missed marked I would like to have that area added to the vacated plot and added to my property frankly it's back there its bums have hung out back there my son of this neighbor found beer cans and ashtrays and whatnot back there and today I've cleaned it up we've got in pretty good shape I think I've maintained it for quite a while and I was oh okay thank you well I'm sure we'll address that and when we're in discussion anyone else in the audience wish to address the Planning Commission in regards to this petition seeing no one I'll close the public hearing and move on to read the motion the Harbor City Planning Commission hereby recommends that the mayor and city council approved the vacation of
066the entire 16-foot wide alley in block seven of the plat of Hamilton rose and sheehan's Edition plaited s 429 feet in length and extending from White Street to East Park Place to have a commissioner moved back mr. Ackerman seconded by Commissioner Weatherby we are in discussion Commissioner Randall given the the statement from the audience according to what we have in front of us it doesn't look like the vacation would go to the property for 9:06 it looks like it's part of a part parcel am I correct about that mr. Leo I agree it looks like that but I knowing our GIS and relative to the parks boundaries I'm I'm not willing to commit to say that which is accurate the motion is very clear that your we are vacating the entire 16-foot wide alley for
067the length of this block as shown on the original plan so I think it may be a detail that to be a detail to be determined I can follow up with Chris Chang as well as the Attorney's Office and I believe they had a hand in preparing these documents Planning Commission is a recommending body and we can certainly clarify that clarify that the standard procedure is to vacate the center line of any right-of-way and then half goes east abutting property minus the park situation that would happen and you would get 8 feet you would get an additional 8 feet the complicating factor is the park boundaries and I just would need more advice on that before being definitive okay I would just like so that he knows what's going on and then obvious and then
068clearly you know that there could have been some inconsistency in terms of notification around that in terms of what we're seeing is that it is it an issue that the postcard went out saying his address on it but we're not seeing inheritors and not really does it not really matter because it's the Alley and it doesn't didn't really affect things but sounds to me like what he would have gotten a postcard and everyone within 300 feet would have gotten a postcard for notification purposes and the postcards generally have a disc written description as well as a little map and the description would likely match the sack report saying the entire length of the block is being vacated which you can see does the 906 which I believe is right here you know so he probably
069could see plainly on the graphic on the graphic I'm not sure if that graphic had this green or not so he can clarify okay this isn't this isn't the time right now I want to meet commissioners may bring this up mr. Ackerman Thank You mr. chair in response to that is it your understanding Ms Leo that there is kind of a parcel by parcel breakdown of where the 16 feet will go I am assuming that okay so with that assumption and I would trust that assumption as well I think I would be comfortable moving this forward from Planning Commission and just sir because you're in the audience and you you came specifically to speak to 906 Rosen so what ultimately whatever the vote is this is a recommendation to City Council so in the matter
070of weeks this would if passed tonight would go to City Council or we'd make an ultimate determination and in that time if you would give us your contact information we could give you some some closure as to what the result would be if you'd be comfortable and and I think that would allow us to move forward with this process that makes sense but also make sure you have the information you need but then also make sure that as it's passed on to City Council that we have a firm determination of parcel by parcel who's getting what I'm not a property or not does that be my preference I'd like to vote it through tonight and talk about it again at City Council and make sure that you in particular get get some closure that you
071need to understand what's going on overall I just want to say this was a piece of annarbor history I did not know and we as planning commissioners we as residents of Ann Arbor we as neighbors to other neighbors we're striving to try to build communities we're trying to build neighborhoods that feel like a community and here was this plot of land something that was developed as a neighborhood and then through you know the wisdom of decades past a bypass Stadium Boulevard cut right through this neighborhood through people's backyards and separated neighbors I had no idea and it's just illustrative of you know the work we're trying to do and recovering the sense of neighborhoods past I think it's a you know a fascinating story that I didn't realize and I'm proud even more to do
072our work today to try to bring back that feeling of of the neighborhood that you know bodies like this in the past once you know really destroyed by by driving roads right through them railroads right through them highways right through them Commissioner Weatherby so mr. Leo could you put go back to the don't want the next yeah that one yeah well one back so one of the things I'm concerned about is and I don't I know there were some other people here in the audience for this who love but I'm kind of concerned about 15 16 and 1508 Park Place I know there's there's like a drive that kind of goes behind or next to both of those and what I'm concerned about is do just making sure that all the homeowners there understand that
073you know like I don't know who does their snow removal I don't know who does but that I think there's some confusion about who gets what and how does that kind of end up getting communicated and there's tax implications and there there's a lot of you know fence implications and things that that how how does this get communicated because I also think in addition to 906 then probably also 902 and then 1508 and 1516 because we know it it affected 1505 so those other Hut like how does that I mean I'm happy enough to approve this but I don't want to end up you know messing with these people without them knowing that suddenly they have a bigger tax bill or have to do snow removal or on a piece of property they didn't know
074that they owned I can we don't do enough vacations this is true yeah to have to have sort of a standard procedure but also become so I'm not sure that you know exactly what communications have occurred I don't believe we have forms or form letters that go out however also because we don't do this very often it is not unreasonable and I will commit and I can assure you that we will there we will contact these property owners individually and assure that they understand the implications and when this moves forward to Council and they know about the dates and so forth because I was not the planner who coordinated this there's a chance that we have been in communication with them and they were clear the others have been clear but there's a chance not
075but I can commit that we will make sure that there has a mutual understanding and a common understanding about the snow removal and things I do understand that these have never been maintained by the city as alleys so I don't think we are doing any snow rule there are they aren't alleys like the downtown alleys are they're not used like that so I think that for functional purposes they have been private they're probably being privately maintained kind of as separate as either separate or maybe people don't even realize they are technically alleys right so but we can use that lack are in frequency to both it to our advantage as well okay yep just that would be good because you know I'd hate to suddenly cause a big problem where say 1516 thought that hall
076driveway was theirs and now it turns out half is their neighbors who puts a fence through it or you know there are some potential issues here yes I don't want to contribute to if we can if one of the if one of the commissioners wants to bring it will bring you out they can at that point mr. woods I'd like to bring forward the gentleman here sitting on the front row if you could enlighten us as to what I'm not a contentious person and the resolution is boarding am a 429 foot Ally the full length of that block and the map that we've been talking about apparently excludes certain sections of that 429 feet so I think what you're voting on is not what your map is showing it's just a discrepancy that you needed
077to have apples to apples if you're gonna vacate the entire reality you should vacate the entire valleys you're going to only vacate sections of the alley less than 429 feet the resolution should say that it should say the ends of each alley excluding those portions beneath 906 and whatever the particular addresses are that would be excluded just so what the map matches the resolution so the next guy buys my house or whatever next hundred years has accurate and consistent information thank you thank you in the surgery yes sir did we get your name I know you are Brian white yeah that's already great Thank You commissioner no that's it Commissioner Mills I don't you wish mr. chain we're here tonight the planners we have I don't know how many planning staff there are six five
078five and they take turns coming and sometimes they you know they get to represent all of their own projects and not always okay so in terms of the question about the length is this what I understood you to say that we know that there's a part of it that is public right-of-way but it's written to vacate the entire thing so how does that work because we thought clearly don't want to vacate so as the attorney looked at this like do you know how that works now I am confident that the attorneys have been involved to this point with deed research plat research and so on and so forth I'm rereading the staff report again and it there it talks about how we are proposing at this time to be crystal clear the to vacate the
079full length 400 and some feet 429 feet of 16 feet wide alley in this block seven apparently we have not been and I'm reading from the staff board staff has not been able to locate evidence that the alley was fully vacated City Council passed a resolution in 1999 that appears to have intended to vacate a hundred and seven foot length of the alley from East Park placed West so that portion between 508 five and 516 as well as behind 908 and 902 rows but the resolutions language is not fully cleared so that's my men in that case to be crystal clear about what we are vacating we are intending we are asking them for the full length of block seven to be vacated and then again I sort of as I mentioned previously removing the
080park situation in that case half goes to they split it down the middle and everyone gets a half I don't know sitting here how the park designation and this would only affect 902 and 906 rows I don't know how that played how does that complicate things if anything if the park goes to the south side of the alley well then the park gets half and the northern properties get half if the park goes that's a piece I just don't know I if you remove the park piece I am confident in my and what would happen so we'll just make sure that mr. Wagner and his adjacent property owner will get to the bottom of that and we'll make sure it's clear when it goes to Council but he's he is right the there it appears
081like there's a discrepancy between what we're doing it does appear actually we're just trying to clean it up and make it very clear that after this procedure there will be no alley ever again and I'm yeah well now that I said that too if you vacate it to the property owner the property owner is publicly and it's the city street right so you're vacating the alley that runs through to the public land and it just stays the same I understand that the easterly park parcel is the one that this gentleman you know we need to get more information can you just to make sure on the 1505 which is what brought this whole thing to us in the first place right currently so the the eight feet on the north side of the alley Wilson
082is currently being used as City Park and will stay there way or what's how's that working the 16 feet wide there the southern half will presumably go to 1505 and do you know what's happening on the northern half my reading of the staff report indicates that the northern 8 feet will go to the city will not go to parks but will come to the city and then the city will enter into a license agreement with that private property owner to put their driveway on top of that publicly owned but not park land designated land I sort of remember this from when we although although parkland is publicly owned not it's a one-way street in that sense not every publicly little mound is park right needs to be in the pros plan which is the parks
083recreation and open space plan for it to be parkland good example right here City Hall it is publicly owned this land is owned by the city but it is not a park wheeler park right it's publicly owned but it is designated as a park and pros doesn't plan to take this over right and so this 8 foot piece from the alley 1505 White Street will get 8 feet because of the vacation automatically and then that there will be an 8 foot strip that will be just publicly owned adjacent to but not part of the I think it's called rose white Henry Park ok Thank You commissioner so they so I'm gonna actually go back to the 1508 and 15/16 division because it looks at least from the aerial view that it's a shared Drive so
084vacation of 8 feet on either side I'm not sure if that's on a centerline or you know if it's one way or the other at all of a sudden there's a five foot driveway and an 11 foot driveway and one neighbor decides they're gonna put a fence up in the middle of that asphalt that becomes a concern to have that shared driveway gets you that's what I'm seeing from aerial so between the kind of clarification requirements for 9:06 and kind of the concerns of a shared driveway because there's parking in the back I almost want to make a motion to postpone for more information because this seems to be affecting a good handful of residents that we don't have the information for that could really make a big impact is that emotion that's emotion emotion
085postponed seconded by Commissioner Ackerman and mr. Ackerman discussion yeah we do have a very busy agenda at the next meeting question to staff does a delay of you know four weeks fact anything practically if we were to delay till the meeting after next I don't know however if the Planning Commission votes to postpone it is what it is and it will not affect it so could I suggest that to put a date on that postponement it not be the next meeting because we do have very long agenda but it be the meaning after to give it the full attention it deserves so that would be the calendar the November 20th meeting November 20th so just just to clarify if this postponement passes to the interested party in in the audience we would bring this topic
086back up on the date of November 20th at which time we would hopefully have more concrete answers for your questions and the questions that were raised tonight so I see you pulling for your calendar I can't promise how the vote will go but just so you know further discussion on the postponement Commissioner woods I'm in favor of postponing it and getting more clarification about about what Planning Commission is doing before we send it forward because I think because vacations are so rare that it is important for us to understand that before we send it forward and we might not know exactly what happened so I supported hmm I have a message that staff does not recommend postponing because 505 white street needs this piece and then needs to be able to answer in needs to
087be able to answer answer enter into the License Agreement in order to get their certificate about is that a Housing Commission property no and at what time did we pass for five point 1505 wait I feel like it was last year yeah yeah as abundant in clarification why just as a part of process why is Planning Commission and the determination of a commission recommend if we can take a 10-minute recess I think we might be able to get some answers on all this so if everyone's okay for if we take a 10-minute recess to get this answers all right so let's take a 10-minute recess you thank you I believe that I to the questions that have been raised thus far about what is going on with the west side of the alley and then
088the East alia can they be treated separately and what neighbors have been contacted and so forth I will defer those questions to a city attorney staff member Chris Frost so just happened to be watching this to myself I know the answer to all of these questions so I should probably help out so first with respect to the portion between 1508 1516 that was vacated in the resolution from the 90s the only issue with that resolution there was some type of graphical errors in it we think so that's why we recommended redoing the whole thing but that section as far as I know is already on the tax rolls as separated so whatever arrangement they have for the driveway that's been that way for 20 years so there shouldn't be any change there with respect to
089906 and 902 the map is not correct the park does not go all the way to the edge of the alley it should still show his open alley I think the problem was that at some point in the past it was decided that this alley had been vacated but our search of the records and the register deeds found no evidence of that so I think there was an assumption probably from the tax rolls that it had been vacated but it had not so that is why we're recommending kind of redoing the whole thing so 906 and 902 would get 8 feet the North 8 feet the city would get the South 8 feet there and then on the other side it was as described the city would get the north east feet and 1505 would
090get the South 8th feet and will clarify and make sure to clarify in the resolution that Stadium Boulevard is not going to be vacated it's just the planted alley so there any other questions I'm happy to try to address them and the reason I would not recommend postponing this is because 1505 will be looking for cos shortly and so this is kind of a long process once it goes to council there's a month of notice time and then a hearing and then council decides so from this point it would probably be you know another six to eight weeks commissioner survey so I just clarification for 1508 in 1516 yes records are that it's already been vacated loosely possibly with some but the new property lines have already been drawn firmly for those two parcels yes
091so those two property lines are drawn firmly there might be some overlap right now about some loose designation of alleys that we're going to clarify tonight to say that it doesn't exist but the property lines are still there from 20 years ago right functionally the reason we're doing this is because and as you can see from the way the map is it was assumed by I think everybody including assessor that this alley had been vacated and it really had not so this is really just to kind of bring it into conformance with the way people have been treating it that helps I think everything else seemed very clear I just want to make sure what the loose verse is very clear property line for those two properties yeah that that line between 1508 and 1516
092as drawn on the GIS we believe is corral feeling okay thank you okay so we have a motion to postpone that should be maybe withdrawn or someone may want to withdraw the motion to postpone I just wanted to corroborate that there the legal description does include the vacation so mr. Ackerman before vote to postpone is withdrawn or voted down just want to make sure that property owner helped us highlight the issues understands you just understands what's what's going on and now that does clarify the mechanics of the of the gryzzl resolution certainly that does also give me some more property and I'm wondering what implications does that mean when one inherits vacated property I guess against their own will or whatever this may be with my own well but what does it mean in terms
093of property taxes and whatever we can um I can set up a staff meeting for you um come on in or we can talk on the phone okay with the the assessor's office city planner and I can get you in touch with their crime people and if it is something I'd rather not do could we could I defer my right to receive the vacated half slice and just have it be all park I mean that may be something I would want to do I don't know also interesting we can find that out for you right and we have your contact information off I have no idea who made the motion it's Commissioner something then would you like to I withdraw the motion to postpone and I believe come attract of a new second it are
094you friendly it's been withdrawn further discussion on the main motion Commissioner get Brandel just one thing and that is we pulled up the thanks to Commissioner Mills thank you for the use of your Chromebook here we pulled up the Washington County mapping site the GIS stuff and it's so much more clear and through here and so I guess I would just request for a staff for the future if we have issues around the big vague yellow line you know the Adobe highlighting tool is maybe not appropriate for something like this where it's property lines and people really trying to figure things out and I know this the parcel viewer isn't perfect but it's a whole lot more accurate than what we have in front of us and so I would just appreciate for future reports
095where we have you know some serious implications for property lines and how it's being used and things like that that we have this whole other tool that is available to our use in perhaps we could have that for our reports so that we can then have a more informed discussion about what we're actually doing so thank you further discussion we prepared for a vote all those in favor please say aye opposed it's approved moving on to audience participation anyone in the audience may address the Planning Commission for up to three minutes is there anyone in the audience who wishes to address the Planning Commission at this time so please purchase a podium state your name and address for the record and you have three minutes to address the Planning Commission seeing no one jumping up
096I will move on in our agenda to our Commission proposed business commissioner Mills I would like to thank city staff who came from the back I don't well it's encouraging to know that we have viewers and that you could make it here it is time so thank you very much for answering our question so that we can move so thank you may your performance evaluation reflects hopefully mr. post Emma is also watching mr. vo for doing her very best thank you any other proposed business I also want to I also want to thank the neighboring the neighbor who came this evening it's good to know that when those postcards go out people do read them and do decide to come down and to figure out what's going on so we appreciate that yes thank you
097thank you all right seeing no other Commissioner proposed business to have a motion to adjourn move by Commissioner Trudeau second by Commissioner Mills we are adjourned thank you you