Comments on: 413 E. Huron: 9-Point Booklet http://annarborchronicle.com/2013/05/10/413-e-huron-9-point-booklet/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=413-e-huron-9-point-booklet it's like being there Tue, 16 Sep 2014 04:56:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.2 By: Lynns http://annarborchronicle.com/2013/05/10/413-e-huron-9-point-booklet/comment-page-1/#comment-249183 Lynns Tue, 14 May 2013 18:00:35 +0000 http://annarborchronicle.com/?p=112299#comment-249183 “Look what they’ve done to my town, Ma
Look what they’ve done to my town
Well it’s the only thing they could do half right
And it’s turning out all wrong, Ma
Look what they’ve done to my town”
When these buildings are 50 years old and empty are they going to be turned into Senior Living Facilities?

]]> By: Tom Whitaker http://annarborchronicle.com/2013/05/10/413-e-huron-9-point-booklet/comment-page-1/#comment-248934 Tom Whitaker Sun, 12 May 2013 16:55:25 +0000 http://annarborchronicle.com/?p=112299#comment-248934 With regard to Item 8, the City of Ann Arbor’s Land Development Regulations, which are referenced in the City Code, specifically require the detailing of all fences and walls on a site plan. Clearly it is in the public interest that these elements be evaluated at the site plan approval stage since they are often the most prominent eye-level feature of the completed project. In many cases, such as this one, the wall or fence is close to, or right on the property line which, at a minimum can raise boundary questions or at worst, if the wall structure is significant, could cause concern over potential structural impacts on neighboring properties. This is why this requirement is in the development regulations and should not be ignored by staff or deferred to the building department.

Planning staff also deferred to the building department on several issues on the City Place project and the result was two buildings installed 12″ higher in elevation than the approved site plan, a fence on the north and east sides that was not on the approved site plan, and a boundary dispute (compounded by the elevation change) on the north that resulted in a legal claim.

In the case of site plans, City Council and the Planning Commission are supposed to represent the public interest and provide a check on staff to ensure that staff interpretations of laws, codes and regulations are complete and accurate, and that those interpretations comport with the intent of the code and regulations as described in our master plans.

In the case of 413 E. Huron, there is a retaining wall indicated to be installed immediately adjacent to the foundations of Sloan Plaza, but the height and type of construction of this wall was not provided in the site plan submission and therefore did not receive the necessary scrutiny of staff, the owners of Sloan Plaza and their hired experts, the public, nor the planning commission. I raised this issue at the planning commission meeting, but was ignored.

Because of this omission, it is not possible for City Council to now declare that this project meets all of the requirements of the code, nor can Council determine that the project would not have a detrimental effect on Sloan Plaza.

From the Regulations:

Section 1:4: Site Plan and PUD Site Plan Requirements. Applications for site plan and PUD site plan approval shall include 15 copies of a development program, a community analysis, a site analysis, and general information as required for an area plan and PUD zoning district above in Section 1:3, together with a detailed site plan drawn to a scale of one inch = 50 feet or larger, which includes the following:
……

(7) Placement, height and type of construction of all fences and walls, in compliance with Chapter 104 of the Ann Arbor Code of Ordinances.

]]> By: Vivienne Armentrout http://annarborchronicle.com/2013/05/10/413-e-huron-9-point-booklet/comment-page-1/#comment-248801 Vivienne Armentrout Sat, 11 May 2013 12:32:05 +0000 http://annarborchronicle.com/?p=112299#comment-248801 I don’t think that they were “all quoting from the same script”. Rather, they coordinated delivery of a very complex and many-parted argument which was itself a team effort that involved many different perspectives and voices. The intent was to highlight all the facets of the proposal that violated some portion of the planning code or of community expectations for the planning process. The same material was in printed form, but it is well understood that Council’s ability to absorb volumes of printed material may be circumscribed by the heavy burdens placed on them.

I thought it was a stunning presentation, and I was so proud of my fellow citizens in their multitude of voices.

]]> By: Edward Vielmetti http://annarborchronicle.com/2013/05/10/413-e-huron-9-point-booklet/comment-page-1/#comment-248772 Edward Vielmetti Sat, 11 May 2013 04:24:31 +0000 http://annarborchronicle.com/?p=112299#comment-248772 I remarked at the time that one way to get around the 3 minute speaking limit is to divide your time among a dozen plus speakers who are all quoting from the same script. It was quite a performance.

]]>