Erica Briggs is ending her term on the Ann Arbor planning commission at the end of June, and is not seeking reappointment. At the June 5 meeting, she lobbied unsuccessfully to postpone a DTE Energy project, arguing that the community needs a broader discussion about whether providing unlimited energy fits the city’s long-term goals of energy reduction.

The estimated $10 million project by DTE to build a new electrical substation was met with caution by commissioner Erica Briggs, who urged her colleagues to postpone the proposal. DTE is building the substation to meet increased energy demands in the city.

The project – called the Buckler substation – had previously been discussed at the commission’s May 15, 2012 meeting, which Briggs did not attend. When the item came up again at the June 5 meeting, she argued that a broader conversation about the community’s energy needs is needed. It’s a rare opportunity for that, she noted, given that projects like this don’t occur frequently – the last Ann Arbor substation was built in the 1960s. She used an analogy to transportation: If a proposal came in to widen all the roads in the community, that idea wouldn’t automatically move forward – because people would stop to discuss whether this is what they want for the city. The DTE project will essentially widen the energy capacity for the city, she said, at a time when the community is talking about the need to reduce its energy use.

As examples, Briggs noted that the city is moving forward with sustainability goals, as well as with a climate action plan. Later in the meeting, the commission unanimously recommended approval of 16 sustainability goals, including three that relate to climate and energy. One of the goals calls for the city to “reduce energy consumption and eliminate net greenhouse gas emissions in our community.”

Briggs made a motion to postpone the substation proposal, but it died for lack of a second as none of the other commissioners at the meeting were supportive of another postponement. A possible ally on the issue – commissioner Bonnie Bona, who works for the nonprofit Clean Energy Coalition – did not attend the June 5 meeting. The project was approved on a 5-1 vote, with Briggs dissenting and three commissioners absent. It does not require further approval by city council.

Another proposal that had been postponed from an earlier meeting in May – Maple Cove Apartments & Village development – was taken up again on June 5. The two apartment buildings and seven single-family homes are proposed at 1649 N. Maple, north of Miller Road between North Maple and Calvin Street on the city’s west side. Safety concerns over two planned entrances off of North Maple had caused the previous postponement, but planning staff reported that the entrances conform to city code.

Two residents of Calvin Street spoke during a public hearing, both of them objecting to the project. Several commissioners also expressed disappointment in the project, as they had at earlier meetings. But they noted that because it conforms to the city’s ordinances, they had no choice but to approve it. Briggs said it pointed to the need to reexamine some problems in the city code that led to this situation. The commission’s unanimous recommendation of approval will be forwarded to city council for consideration.

The vote on a project located near Maple Cove – a proposed Speedway gas station at the northeast corner of Maple and Miller – was postponed by commissioners. City planning staff had recommended postponement, to allow the owner to make requested revisions in a landscaping plan and traffic impact statement.

Two other requests were approved, both related to rezoning of land acquired by the city: (1) two parcels for an expansion of the Bluffs Nature Area, and (2) a site adjacent to the Bryant Community Center. In both cases, commissioners recommended that city council rezone the sites to PL (public land).

DTE Buckler Substation

Following a postponement by the planning commission at its May 15, 2012 meeting, the site plan for a new DTE Buckler electrical substation at 984 Broadway near Canal Street was on the agenda again for the June 5 meeting.

The project entails building the substation in the utility company’s Ann Arbor service center – to provide an increase in electrical power to the downtown area due to increased demand for electricity. The project will include two 15.5-foot tall electrical transformers and related electrical equipment on raised concrete pads, and a new power delivery center (PDC) – a 630-square-foot, 12.5-foot tall steel structure. A new six-foot tall perimeter chain link fence will be built, with one foot of barbed wire and a concrete block retaining wall. The source of power will be transmitted through underground sub-transmission cables in an existing manhole and conduit system.

Because of floodplain issues, DTE has proposed to build raised transformer pads by bringing in 800 cubic yards of fill. To mitigate that impact to the floodplain, DTE plans to remove 1,155 cubic yards of earth on the MichCon site at 841 Broadway. [MichCon is a DTE subsidiary.] The proposal also calls for removing a building on the MichCon site, which will give the company an additional 55 cubic yards of  ”floodplain mitigation credit.” The proposal for that MichCon portion of the project received unanimous approval by planning commissioners at their May 15, 2012 meeting.

DTE Energy Buckler substation site plan. (Links to larger image)

The project also needs a variance to the 15-foot conflicting land use buffer requirements along the east side property line, adjacent to Riverside Park. DTE requested a variance that would allow 33 trees and 38 shrubs to be planted along the far western side of Riverside Park instead of on DTE property. The city’s park advisory commission recommended approval of that variance at its Feb. 28, 2012 meeting.

Planning staff had previously requested a postponement to resolve some outstanding issues with the site plan, which were addressed by the June 5 meeting.

The June 5 approval came with several contingencies, however: (1) obtaining variances from the city’s zoning board of appeals for the conflicting land use buffer and storm water detention requirements; (2) obtaining a Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) permit for work within the floodplain, prior to issuance of building permits; (3) relocating a fire hydrant and construction of its associated water main, prior to the issuance of building permits; (4) completing the required footing drain disconnects, prior to final inspection approval; and (5) executing the contract for water main easements, prior to final inspection approval.

DTE Buckler Substation: Public Hearing

Only one person spoke during the public hearing. Mike Witkowski, DTE planning engineer for Washtenaw County, thanked the planning staff and said he wanted to reiterate the critical nature of this project. As he’d done at the May 15 meeting, he noted that from 2009 to 2011, summer peak loads were up 12% for the Ann Arbor area, and 17% for the mile radius around the nearby Argo substation, located across Broadway at the intersection with Swift. Without this project, there is an increased risk of brownouts or blackouts, he said. DTE has already upgraded its infrastructure somewhat to combat that, but the new substation would allow the company to serve new businesses and address future demand.

Witkowski thanked the staff and commission for getting the project back on the agenda. The company needs to order a $500,000 piece of equipment soon, he said, in order to ensure delivery by January or February of 2013. If that window is missed, they’d likely have to wait until April of 2013 to install it, and that puts DTE’s ability to serve next summer’s loads at risk.

DTE Buckler Substation: Commission Discussion

Erica Briggs started off by saying she’d missed the May 15 meeting, but she had watched it on video and had noted that one big question hadn’t been raised. “Brace yourself,” she added – it’s a little radical.

Briggs expressed concern that the commission hadn’t done its due diligence with respect to looking at the city’s long-term energy needs. It’s great that DTE is trying to be proactive in meeting its customers’ energy demands, she said, but the community of Ann Arbor has a different agenda. The last time that a substation was built in Ann Arbor was in the 1960s, she observed, so these discussions don’t arise frequently.

The city is moving forward with sustainability goals, Briggs noted, as well as with a climate action plan. [Later in the meeting, the commission unanimously recommended approval of 16 sustainability goals, including three that relate to climate and energy. One of the goals calls for the city to "reduce energy consumption and eliminate net greenhouse gas emissions in our community." .pdf of sustainability goals]

Briggs drew an analogy to road expansion – if someone proposed to widen all of the roads in Ann Arbor, people would see the need to take a step back and have a broader discussion about that, she said. There are parallels to energy use. One way to limit the community’s energy consumption it so limit the supply of energy, she said. Briggs added that she realized it’s not entirely in the city’s control. But she’d recommend postponing action on this project in order to have a broader conversation, even though they ultimately might arrive at the same conclusion.

She also asked whether there had been discussions along these lines that she might not be aware of, regarding future energy needs.

Planning manager Wendy Rampson replied that there have been discussions about greenhouse gas emissions, and DTE has been at the table with the city’s energy commission and others on that issue. The electrical grid for the downtown area has been discussed for more than a decade, she said, regarding the city’s growing energy needs to support downtown density. The energy commission has understood that this project would be moving forward, Rampson said, and while she didn’t know the details of that discussion, no one told DTE “don’t do this.”

The climate action plan will look at reducing energy use and using cleaner energy, Rampson said, but she hadn’t heard any discussion about limiting energy availability. Rampson noted that planning commissioner Bonnie Bona serves on the climate action plan task force – but Bona did not attend the commission’s June 5 meeting. A draft of the climate action plan will be coming to planning commissioners in the fall, Rampson said.

Briggs said she recognized that she was asking to postpone a $10 million investment in Ann Arbor’s energy infrastructure. But if the goal is to significantly reduce the amount of energy that the community is using, this is a tool to do that, she said. It concerned her that they hadn’t talked about it, and she wondered what other commissioners thought.

From left: DTE staff Mike Witkowski and Paul Ganz.

Tony Derezinski told Briggs that she’d made some good points regarding future planning, but the problem is that this project is in front of them today. He said he heard her angst. He recalled that when the mayor of Tübingen, Germany, had visited Ann Arbor last year as part of a delegation from that city – one of Ann Arbor’s sister cities – energy use had been one of the topics they discussed.

But this DTE project has a timeframe that’s very urgent, Derezinski said. He agreed that this issue should be discussed, and said he hoped to do it at an appropriate time.

Eric Mahler felt that DTE had laid out its needs, but he asked whether the company’s representatives could talk about its renewable energy efforts. He agreed with Briggs to some extent. On the one hand, there’s a sense of pride because Ann Arbor’s economy is growing again. On the other hand, there are concerns about future energy use.

Paul Ganz, DTE’s regional manager, described the situation as a convergence of two issues. One is the distribution grid’s needs, which are entirely separate from green energy needs. The Argo substation has grown to its maximum capacity, he said, and now DTE is trying to fill a 26 megawatt “hole” that has grown in the middle of the area that the substation serves – from hotels, restaurants, and other developments, and the University of Michigan medical center, to some extent. That is driving the need for a new substation. Projects that have previously been approved by the planning commission are adding to that energy demand. The company is responding to that need with an $8-10 million investment, he said.

That’s separate, Ganz added, from DTE’s goal of generating 10% of its energy from renewable sources by 2015, or from its $4 billion investment in wind farms.

Briggs said that obviously there’s a need for green energy, but the other question is about the amount of energy that the community uses. That’s an issue of sustainability. The problem with delaying a conversation on this topic is that there hasn’t been an opportunity like this since the 1960s, and it might be another 40 years before another opportunity arises, she said. ”This is our opportunity, so I don’t want to let that pass by and rubber stamp something because a large piece of equipment needs to be purchased.”

Briggs again used a road analogy. In communities that don’t have a lot of traffic congestion, there’s no need to talk about alternative transportation – it’s not an issue. In Ann Arbor, people talk about alternative transportation because they don’t want to build another expensive parking structure. The same thing is happening with the city’s energy infrastructure, she said, and the community needs to think about that. Maybe a few blackouts will make people recognize that they have a responsibility to do something about it.

Acknowledging that she didn’t sense much support around the table, Briggs made a motion to postpone.

Outcome: No one seconded the motion to postpone, so it died without moving to a vote.

Wendy Woods said she understood what Briggs was saying. Some discussions are taking place at the energy commission, she noted. Woods suggested that for future projects, perhaps the planning staff memo can include a paragraph indicating how much energy would be required for each project. Her understanding was that the energy from the new Buckler substation is already half “used up” from pent-up demand. She pointed to the needs of the University of Michigan as another factor.

Mike Witkowski of DTE clarified that UM serves about 90-95% of its energy needs from its own system. The Kellogg Eye Center, for example, is served by the university’s power facilities.

Outcome: The project was approved on a 5-1 vote, with dissent from Erica Briggs. Three commissioners – Bonnie Bona, Evan Pratt and Kirk Westphal – were absent. The project does not require additional approval from the city council.

Sustainability Goals

The planning commission was asked to recommend that a set of 16 sustainability goals be incorporated into the city’s master plan.

The sustainability goals are in four categories: resource management; land use and access; climate and energy; and community. The goals were culled from more than 200 already found in existing city planning documents, as part of a project that began in early 2011. It’s been funded by a Home Depot Foundation grant. [.pdf of sustainability goals]

This work by city staff was initially guided by volunteers who serve on four city advisory commissions: park, planning, energy and environmental. Members from those groups met at a joint working session in late September of 2011. Since then, the city’s housing commission and housing and human services commission have been added to the conversation. A series of panel discussions on each category topic was held earlier this year, as was a public forum to solicit input.

Additional background on the Ann Arbor sustainability initiative is on the city’s website. See also Chronicle coverage: “Building a Sustainable Ann Arbor,” “Sustaining Ann Arbor’s Environmental Quality,” “Land Use, Transit Factor Into Sustainability,“ and “Final Forum: What Sustains Community?”

Jamie Kidwell, who has served as the staff point person for this project, reported that four other commissions have already recommended approval of the goals. The housing commission will vote on a recommendation later this month. If approved, these relatively general goals would be fleshed out with more detailed objectives and action items.

No one spoke during a public hearing on the goals.

Sustainability Goals: Commission Discussion

Tony Derezinski said he regretted that Bonnie Bona wasn’t at the meeting – because this was a challenge that she had taken on over the past few years, he noted, and she accomplished what she set out to do. [Bona served as chair of the planning commission when the sustainability effort began.]

Evan Pratt thanked planning manager Wendy Rampson and Matt Naud, the city’s environmental coordinator, for taking the initiative to apply for the Home Depot Foundation grant, which provided $95,000 to pay for staff support of the project. He also pointed to the city council’s role, saying that councilmembers see this as a visionary document.

Outcome: The commission voted unanimously to recommend that the 16 sustainability goals be incorporated into the city’s master plan. The recommendation will be forwarded to city council.

Maple Cove

For the third time, the planning commission considered a site plan for the Maple Cove Apartments & Village development. The project is located on 2.96 acres at 1649 N. Maple, north of Miller Road between North Maple and Calvin Street on the city’s west side.

The plan calls for combining two sites – 1649 N. Maple and 1718 Calvin – and demolishing an existing single-family home and detached garages there. Two 3-story apartment buildings would be built with a 64-space parking lot and eight bike spaces. The project also includes building a private street to serve seven new single-family houses near Calvin Street, but with an entrance off of North Maple. The apartment complex would have a separate entrance, also off of North Maple.

The project has a somewhat unusual history. Planning commissioners originally approved it at their March 20, 2012 meeting. But that vote was rescinded because Scio Township residents on Calvin Street had not been included in an original public notice mailed out for the commission’s March meeting.

Several residents attended the commission’s May 1, 2012 meeting to protest the development. Although there were no changes to the plan in the interim period between March 20 and May 1, commissioners voted to postpone action to get more information from the traffic engineer about whether the proposed two separate entrances to the property created a health, safety and welfare hazard.

According to city planning staff at the June 5 meeting, the city’s traffic engineer raised some concerns, but he subsequently confirmed that the site plan – with two entrances off of North Maple – does conform to city code.

In giving the planning staff’s report, planning manager Wendy Rampson said that if the two entrances cause problems in the future, then the traffic engineer could decide to close one of the entrances. But it can’t be pre-assumed that the two entrances will cause a problem, she said.

Maple Cove: Public Hearing

Two residents of Calvin Street spoke during a public hearing on the Maple Cove project, both expressing concerns about its impact on their neighborhood. Other residents had spoken against the project at previous planning commission meetings on March 20 and May 1.

Several representatives of the owner  – Muayad Kasham of Dynasty Enterprises – attended the June 5 meeting, but did not address the commission.

The entrance to Calvin Street, a private road off of Miller Road just west of North Maple.

Minda Hart had emailed commissioners before the meeting. [.pdf of Hart's email] At the hearing, she began by saying she was dismayed by this project. Obviously the planning commission intended to approve it, she said, but why wasn’t there any planning or attempt to address concerns of residents on the street? It’s a very rural street, not like any other street in the area, she said. [Calvin Street is a private dirt road, with one entrance/exit off of Miller Road, just west of North Maple.] Hart said she’s lived there for 18 years, and some people have lived there for as long as 47 years – the street’s residents are not transient.

Hart said she learned about the Maple Cove project from one of her neighbors – there had been no warning that it was happening, she said. When she had taken courses on planning at the University of Cincinnati years ago, Hart said she’d learned that people are important in the planning process. But it seems like the Ann Arbor planning commission isn’t taking residents of Calvin Street into consideration.

Noting that there are many trees along the street, Hart said it seems the developer will be taking down a lot of large trees, and that’s upsetting to her. When a project had been proposed for the same site several years ago, it had been for an office building, she said, and nobody had objected to that. Now, it’s for a high density apartment building, when there’s already a lot of vacant housing in Ann Arbor, she said. The additional traffic will be touch-and-go, down a street that’s traveled by students going to Skyline High School. Traffic will increase on Miller too, she said, and it’s already difficult to turn out of Calvin onto Miller.

Another resident of Calvin Street, Cheryl Shavalia Brown, noted that she had spoken to commissioners at a previous meeting. She wanted the developer to be aware that Calvin Street was private, and that there would be no construction traffic allowed on the street. She said she’d be outside with her notebook and camera, and would contact the police if anyone trespassed. She’d be keeping a close eye on things. Brown also said that residents would appreciate some kind of fencing along the property line that backs up to Calvin Street.

Maple Cove: Commission Discussion

Erica Briggs pointed out to the owner – Muayad Kasham of Dynasty Enterprises – that there’s been a lot of disapproval about the project, and that’s a shame. It points to the need for better planning. Perhaps there are some issues that couldn’t be resolved, like the project’s density. But she felt the smaller issues could have been worked out. It’s a shame that there’s already animosity in the neighborhood, Briggs said, even before construction has started. She suggested that the developer sit down with the neighbors and work on some of these smaller issues.

Briggs also felt it was a “failing on our part” not to properly educate residents about the implications of the previous zoning change, which later allowed for this residential project to take place. Neighbors had supported the office project, but hadn’t been aware that the rezoning would permit for residential development too. Going forward, it would be good to educate residents about the full spectrum of zoning issues, she said.

Further, the project points to problems in the city’s zoning code, Briggs said, as well as Chapter 47 of the city code, which relates to streets and sidewalks. She hoped the commission’s ordinance review committee would look into it.

There are a lot of problems with the Maple Cove project, Briggs concluded, ”but I don’t see a way around [approving] it.”

Tony Derezinski said he agreed with Briggs. He also pointed to the caveat that planning manager Wendy Rampson had mentioned – that if a traffic problem emerges, it can be addressed. There were many other issues that had been raised in a heartfelt way, he said. He noted that the developer had sent the commission a letter, pledging to make sure the project complied with all of the city’s ordinances. If the project meets the city’s requirements, it can move ahead, Derezinski said. So because it conforms to city code, Derezinski said he’d support it.

Perhaps some of the city’s ordinances do need a review, he said – that is happening with the R4C/R2A zoning. [An advisory committee has been reviewing the R4C/R2A residential zoning districts. See Chronicle coverage: "Planning Group Weighs R4C/R2A Report."] Derezinski reported that he had visited the Maple Cove site and walked around the property – “I did not trespass on Calvin,” he quipped. The site could use some improvement, and this project does that, he said. It’s hard to predict what might happen in 10 or 12 years. You make your best judgment, he said, and right now, the project complies with the city’s ordinances.

Wendy Woods said she still had concerns about the two entrances/exits onto North Maple, but she understood that the developer could move forward with this site plan. Even so, she encouraged him to reconsider. This project would likely move forward for city council approval, she said, and it would help to compromise, even just a little. Like Derezinski, Woods pointed to Kasham’s letter, noting that he says he cares about Ann Arbor. From the letter:

We want you to know that the developers are a team of siblings, all born and raised in the great city of Ann Arbor and are end products of the Ann Arbor Public School system. My family and I have a strong vested interest in the community, as we too are longstanding members of Ann Arbor. We have made a commitment to remain in this great community to raise our families and invest in it.

We want you to be reassured that we are working very hard to ensure that this project serves in the best interest of the community while addressing the market needs for both single family and apartment living space. We have selected a team of local and reputable civil engineers and architects to work on this project in an effort to ensure best methods/techniques and advancements are utilized to facilitate the plans of the project. [.pdf of entire letter]

Woods noted that Kasham might have additional opportunities to look at this project, and she hoped he would. In the long-run, she concluded, compromise works better than holding a stick.

From left: Senior assistant city attorney Kevin McDonald and Eric Mahler, chair of the Ann Arbor planning commission.

Eleanore Adenekan said she would support the project too – the city’s competent planning staff has recommended approval, she noted, and the owner is in compliance with the law. But she was disappointed that the project had been considered three times, and the owner hasn’t changed the project, cooperated, or responded to the neighbors’ complaints.

Eric Mahler was the final commissioner to weigh in, saying he remained dismayed over the lack of a sidewalk along the private drive leading from North Maple to the single-family homes. The developer dropped the ball on that important safety feature.

But Mahler took issue with criticism that had been levied against the planning staff and commission during the public hearing. There had been three meetings with opportunities for public input, he noted. The planning staff had taken into account everything that was said, and Mahler said he was proud of what they’d done. The project is not what it could be, he concluded, “but it is what it is.”

Outcome: The commission’s vote was unanimous, with six of the nine commissioners present. Absent were Bonnie Bona, Evan Pratt and Kirk Westphal, The commission’s recommendation will now be forwarded to the Ann Arbor city council for its consideration.

Speedway Gas Station

An agenda item for a project just south of Maple Cove was a site plan for a Speedway gas station at 1300 N. Maple. The project is located at the 1.39-acre site on the northeast corner of Miller and North Maple roads. The proposal also included a request to rezone a portion of the site from PL (public land) to C3 (fringe commercial).

Site of a proposed Speedway gas station at the northeast corner of Maple and Miller.

The plan calls for demolishing an existing 1,500-square-foot vacant service station building, which was built in the 1950s, and constructing a new 3,968-square-foot, single-story gas station and convenience store with five pumps. The gasoline pumps will be covered by a 28-foot by 121-foot canopy. Fourteen parking spaces will be provided next to the convenience store, and six bicycle hoops will be located on the south side of the building, adjacent to a sidewalk leading to Miller.

According to a staff report, underground storage tanks have been removed and an environmental analysis of the site is underway. If any environmental contamination is found, the owner will be required to remediate the site to meet requirements of the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality.

The rezoning relates to a previous site plan that was approved in 1972 but never built. That plan provided a 30-foot dedicated public easement along the eastern and northern sides of the site, intended as a greenway for the adjacent Garden Homes neighborhood. However, even though the strip was zoned as public land, it remained in private ownership. The easement for public access will remain, despite the rezoning.

The planning staff recommended postponing action on the site plan and rezoning, to allow more time for the owner to address issues related to landscaping and the traffic engineer review.

One person representing Speedway – Kevin Foley of Grand Rapids – spoke briefly during a public hearing on the item. He introduced himself and said he was available for questions.

Speedway Gas Station: Commission Discussion

Tony Derezinski said he felt obligated to ask a question of Kevin Foley, since Foley had traveled all the way from Grand Rapids to attend the meeting. Derezinski asked if there are any time constraints related to the project.

Foley replied that it’s budgeted for this year, and the company would like to start in early September and finish before winter weather hits. But to get everything in place to everyone’s satisfaction, he acknowledged that it sometimes takes many months.

Derezinski asked if Foley saw any insurmountable problems in getting the requested revisions to the landscaping plan and traffic impact statement. No, Foley said. He hoped that the outstanding issues could be resolves so that the proposal would be placed on the planning commission’s June 19 agenda.

With that, Derezinski made a motion to postpone.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously voted to postpone action on the Speedway site plan, based on the planning staff’s recommendation.

Rezoning for Bluffs Nature Area

On the June 5 agenda was an item recommending the rezoning of two parcels that were recently acquired for expansion of the Bluffs Nature Area at 1099 N. Main St., north of Sunset Road.

The entrance to the Elks lodge on Sunset. The drive leads to a parking lot behind the lodge, with access to a trailhead to the Bluffs Nature Area.

A 1.12-acre parcel to the north of the Bluffs – connecting the existing parkland to Huron View Boulevard – is currently zoned O (office), and had been donated to the city by a nursing home near that site. A 0.57-acre addition to the south connects the existing parkland to Sunset Road and is currently zoned R4C (multiple-family dwelling). It had been purchased by the city from the Elks lodge, using funds from the open space and parkland preservation millage. Both parcels were recommended to be rezoned as PL (public land).

Alexis DiLeo, the city planner who gave a staff report on this item, told commissioners that the parcels make the nature area more accessible. Though there is frontage onto North Main, there’s no easy access there for pedestrians or cyclists.

No one spoke during a public hearing on the rezoning.

Rezoning for Bluffs Nature Area: Commission Discussion

Diane Giannola asked if access was immediately available through the parcels. DiLeo replied that the deeds have already been transferred to the city – the city owns the property. She wasn’t sure about the long-range plans for these entrances, in terms of signs and additional infrastructure. That will be handled by the city’s parks staff.

Giannola observed that there aren’t many access points to this nature area. Is there a path that can be accessed from these new parcels?

The parcel near the Elks lodge has a trailhead adjacent to a parking lot. There had previously been an informal arrangement with the lodge that people could use the parking lot to access the trail, DiLeo said. Erica Briggs indicated that people can access a trail from the north parcel as well, off of Huron View Boulevard. Briggs said she’s glad to see the property rezoned, and called the nature area a “hidden park in our community.” She hoped that it now could become better known.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to rezone the parcels for Bluffs Nature Area. The recommendation will now be forwarded to the Ann Arbor city council for its consideration.

Rezoning for Bryant Community Center

Commissioners were asked to recommend rezoning of an 0.2-acre site at 5 W. Eden Court from R1C (single-family dwelling) to PL (public land). No one spoke at a public hearing on the proposal.

This land was recently purchased by the city for $82,500 using funds from the city’s open space and parkland preservation millage – a purchase approved by the Ann Arbor city council at its Sept. 6, 2011 meeting. The site is located next to the city’s Bryant Community Center in the Arbor Oaks neighborhood off of Stone School Road, north of Ellsworth.

During her staff report, city planner Alexis DiLeo said the property contains a single-family home that will be used by the community center to expand its operations. Eventually, the center would like to renovate the interior and build an addition to connect the two buildings, she said. The center is managed under contract with the nonprofit Community Action Network.

Outcome: With no discussion, commissioners unanimously voted to recommend rezoning of the property. The recommendation will be forwarded to the city council for its consideration.

Present: Eleanore Adenekan, Erica Briggs, Tony Derezinski, Diane Giannola, Eric Mahler, Evan Pratt (arriving at 8:10 p.m.), Wendy Woods.

Absent: Bonnie Bona, Kirk Westphal.

Next regular meeting: The planning commission next meets on Tuesday, June 19, 2012 at 7 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date]

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the city planning commission. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to plan on doing the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

The plan calls for demolishing an existing 1,500-square-foot vacant service station building and constructing a new 3,968-square-foot, single-story gas station and convenience store with five pumps. The gasoline pumps will be covered by a 28-foot by 121-foot canopy. Fourteen parking spaces will be provided next to the convenience store, and six bicycle hoops will be located on the south side of the building, adjacent to a sidewalk leading to Miller.

The rezoning relates to a previous site plan that was approved in 1972 but never built. That plan provided a 30-foot dedicated public easement along the eastern and northern sides of the site, intended as a greenway for the adjacent Garden Homes neighborhood. However, even though the strip was zoned as public land, it remained in private ownership. The easement for public access will remain, despite the rezoning.

The planning staff recommended postponing action on the site plan and rezoning, to allow more time for the owner to address issues related to landscaping and the traffic engineer review.

This brief was filed from the second-floor council chambers of city hall at 301 E. Huron, where planning commission meetings are held. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Developer Jeff Helminski speaks to Ann Arbor planning commissioners about his project, The Moravian. In the background are commissioners Wendy Woods and Diane Giannola. (Photos by the writer.)

About two dozen residents attended the meeting. All but one of the 16 people who spoke during time for public commentary opposed the project, some vehemently.

Opponents’ main concern is that the five-story, 62-unit building is out of scale and out of character with the neighborhood, which has older homes, but is not protected by an historic district. [The neighborhood also is on the edge of an industrial area – The Moravian is planned on a lot across the street from the Fingerle Lumber complex.]

But in approving the requested planned unit development (PUD) zoning, commissioners cited a range of public benefits, including the 12 units of affordable housing within the building – a benefit that neighbors dispute. The project will now be considered by city council at an upcoming meeting.

Residents vow to continue fighting it. “We’re going to redouble our efforts,” Beverly Strassmann, president of the Germantown Neighborhood Association, told commissioners after their vote.

Separately, planning commissioners approved a rezoning request for a gas station on Packard Road, with some stipulations.

The Moravian

The Moravian is the latest incarnation of a project that began its life as The Madison. Originally designed as a 14-story building with 161 units, The Madison also went through different versions, scaling back in response to city staff and neighborhood concerns. [See Chronicle coverage of a December 2008 meeting between neighbors and developer Jeff Helminski and Newcombe Clark of Bluestone Realty: "The Madison Redux"]

The Moravian was brought forward in 2009, coming before the planning commission in October. At that time, commissioners postponed action on the project, asking the developer to get additional feedback from the staff and neighbors, and to incorporate that feedback into the design.

Staff Report on The Moravian

Alexis DiLeo of the city’s planning staff gave a report on The Moravian – the staff recommended approval of the PUD zoning district and site plan. [The complete staff report (a 32.9 MB .pdf file) is available to download from the city's website.]

The PUD approval hinged on public benefits, and the staff report cited three: 1) innovation in land use, 2) efficiency in land use and energy, and 3) expansion of the city’s affordable housing supply.

In the case of The Moravian, the 12 units designated as affordable would be offered at rents accessible to people earning no more than 80% of the area median income (AMI).

Later in the meeting, in response to questions from commissioners, DiLeo elaborated on those benefits. The innovation in land use relates to the use of underground parking, rather than surface parking, she said. Efficiency in land use and energy includes the proposed LEED certification and the use of geothermal energy – a renewable source. The project includes 12 units of affordable housing, she noted, or 19% of the total units in the building. That was a benefit, especially given the location near downtown.

In her presentation, DiLeo described several ways in which the current version of the project differs from the one presented in October. Among them:

• Affordable housing units were increased from nine to 12. The units designated as affordable entail all of the project’s nine one-bedroom apartments and three efficiency apartments.
• The total number of units decreased from 63 to 62, with 150 total bedrooms and “flex” rooms.
• There were changes to the three- and four-bedroom units. Previously, all bedrooms in those units were paired with bathrooms. In the current design, one bedroom in each of those units is designated a “flex” room, with no bathroom attached. So a previous four-bedroom unit is now described as a three-bedroom with flex room, and a previous three-bedroom unit is called a two-bedroom with flex room.
• Several architectural changes were made, including the addition of cornices, sills and other features, with changes in the exterior’s color, material and plane to make it a better fit for the character of the neighborhood, according to the staff report. Windows were increased in size and grouped, rather than placed at regular intervals.
• Outdoor terraces were added to the fourth floor, for use as “active” open space.
• To reduce the impact on the neighboring house at 543 S. Fourth Ave., a mansard roof was eliminated on that side, and outdoor terraces on the fourth floor were added to create a “step-down” effect.
• A maximum size was added to the description of live/work units – spaces designed for residents who are also small business owners, artists or sole practitioners (though non-residents could lease this first-floor space as well). There will be a minimum of two and a maximum of six live/work units, with each unit having a maximum of 1,200 square feet and a total maximum of 3,000 square feet for all live/work units.

Final approval of the PUD site plan will be subject to adoption of new flood maps being developed by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). DiLeo said those might not be completed for six months or so. Drafts of those maps show altered boundaries of the floodway, with the result that the floodway no longer includes the Moravian site. The project would still be located in the 100-year floodplain of Allen’s Creek. According to the staff report, the proposed development would provide about 29,900 cubic feet of flood storage in a stormwater management system, an increase of about 74% compared with capacity of the existing site.

Walt Spiller, center, talks with Shirley Zempel, right, and Beverly Strassmann, president of the Germantown Neighborhood Association. Spiller's two-story home would be an immediate neighbor of the five-story Moravian.

Public Commentary: Pre-Vote

Sixteen people spoke during a public hearing on the project, which lasted about an hour. Many comments touched on similar concerns. Here’s a sampling.

Beverly Strassmann, president of the Germantown Neighborhood Association, said she represented residents and that there was “massive opposition” to the project – opposition that’s documented in petitions from residents, she said. It was incredible that the turnout for this meeting was as high as it was, she said, given that they’d just learned of the public hearing two days prior. She described the building as “an offense,” totally out of scale with other buildings in the neighborhood – 25 times bigger than the largest house, for example.

The public benefits cited are illusory, Strassmann added, noting that 19 units of affordable housing currently on the site will be eliminated, replaced by fewer units that are smaller. LEED certification – cited by staff as a benefit – can be avoided by paying penalties, she said.

Strassmann also expressed concern that what was being characterized as workforce housing would become housing for students, saying that vacancy rates show there’s not a need for that. She argued that the project is being pushed through without regard for the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood or the city. “Please do not show us contempt,” she said. “Please protect our fundamental rights as citizens.”

Kim Kachadoorian described the Germantown area as the last intact near-downtown neighborhood, and said it was disheartening to see it dismembered for more student housing. There’s already a glut of housing for students and young professionals in the city, she said. And when the University of Michigan opens North Quad, a large student dormitory at the corner of State and Huron, she predicted there will be a significant increase in rental vacancies in the near-downtown area.

Kachadoorian also had concerns about parking. Though the project includes 90 parking spaces, most of them in an underground garage, there are enough bedrooms for between 150-300 people, she noted. Already there are cars parked illegally in that area every day, she said. Kachadoorian concluded by saying the project would be perfect for Ann Arbor – just not at that location.

Ellen Ramsburgh, a member of the city’s historic district commission, said she supported previous comments by the neighbors. She reminded commissioners that there were two relevant study committees whose work had not yet been completed: 1) the R4C & R2A zoning district study advisory committee, which is looking at possible ordinance changes in these residential districts, and 2) a study committee appointed by city council in August to explore whether an historic district would be appropriate for an area along Fourth and Fifth avenues – which could include the site of the proposed Moravian. [See Chronicle coverage of the historic district study committee: "Fifth Ave. Project to Meet Historic Standards"]

Ramsburgh said she hoped the commission wouldn’t approve anything that’s not within the framework of those studies. Even though historic homes in that neighborhood aren’t currently protected under an historic district, she concluded, tearing down those homes would be just as much of a loss.

This elevation rendering of The Moravian shows the home of Walt Spiller to the north of the building. (Image links to larger file.)

Walt Spiller owns a home on Fifth Avenue that sits directly next to the site, to the north, where The Moravian would be built.  He also owns several rental properties in the area. He asked commissioners that residents near The Moravian be given the same consideration that was given to residents near the Packard Road gas station, a rezoning request discussed earlier in the meeting. [See below – commissioners added restrictions related to noise on the site.]

Spiller pointed out that the large tree depicted in the developer’s schematic of the site for The Moravian actually stood on his property. But his main point was an objection to how his remarks had been characterized by the developer in a report to the planning staff. He said the comments attributed to him in the report – which stated that his response to the project’s conceptual plan were “encouraging” – were a complete misinterpretation, and he wanted them to be stricken from the report. He said that in this case, PUD stands for “planning upside down,” given the scale of the project.

Ethel Potts, a former Ann Arbor planning commissioner, acknowledged that the project had been tweaked, but said that she saw no major changes from its previous version. The building’s height and mass don’t fit the area, she said. The affordable housing benefit cited by staff should be discounted, given the greater amount of affordable housing that will be displaced because of the project. Further, she said, PUDs are not supposed to grossly violate the underlying zoning – but this one does.

Potts also objected to the entrance for vehicles on Fifth Avenue, citing traffic concerns. And she noted that the building would be in the floodplain, and that a structure across the street – now occupied by the University of Michigan – regularly floods. In general, she said the project departs from the city’s central area plan and R4C residential zoning, and she urged commissioners not to approve it.

Jeff Helminski, developer for The Moravian, was the only speaker in favor of the project. He said the project had been altered in response to feedback from the city staff and neighbors, and that he hoped the commissioners would evaluate it based on the balance they’d achieved between the level of zoning variance requested and the level of public benefits.

Helminski noted that the project followed the guidance provided by the city’s office of community development regarding the affordable housing component. The Moravian will improve the character of this area, he said, as well as add $200,000 annually to the city’s tax base. During a time when the city and schools face a budget crisis, with possible layoffs of firefighters and teachers, the increase to the tax base should be an important factor, he said.

Commissioner Deliberations

Jean Carlberg began the discussion by asking a question about the flood maps – she wondered if the fact that the site plan approval is contingent on adoption of the flood maps meant that the project would be on hold until then. DiLeo explained that staff had discussed the issue with the developer, who understood that constraint. Building permits wouldn’t be issued until the new maps are adopted, but if the site plan were approved, the developer could move ahead to line up financing.

Planning commissioner Jean Carlberg, a former city councilmember, reviews documents during the Jan. 5 planning commission meeting.

Tony Derezinski, who is the city council’s representative to the planning commission, asked DiLeo to respond to several residents who had raised safety concerns about traffic at the Fifth Avenue entrance.

DiLeo said that city traffic engineers had evaluated a traffic impact study that was done for the previous, higher-density proposal. They found that the location of the driveway met all the necessary requirements, she said. [From the staff report: "Vehicular and pedestrian circulation is well defined and access is safe. The traffic impact study provided for a previous, more intense development on this site concluded there would be no congestion in or near the district as a result of the rezoning. The previous traffic impact study conclusions continue to be valid for the currently proposed, less intense uses."]

Bonnie Bona, chair of the commission, asked for a response to some of the residents, who during public commentary had said that a computer-generated image of the building, from the perspective of an aerial view, was misleading. They contended that it appeared to show the five-story Moravian at a height level to a three-story building across the street.

Developer Jeff Helminski explained that the three-story building at the northwest corner of Fourth and Madison – used as offices by the University of Michigan – had a higher floor-to-floor span than The Moravian. That meant that the three stories reached the same height as the fourth floor of The Moravian, he said.

Erica Briggs clarified with Helminski that the fourth-floor terraces of the proposed Moravian were open to all residences – they are, he said. She also asked for a breakdown of the number of different sized units within the building. Here’s the breakdown:

• Three-bedroom plus flex room (formerly four-bedroom) = 6
• Two-bedroom plus flex room (formerly three-bedroom) = 36
• Two-bedroom = 8
• One-bedroom = 9
• Efficiency = 3

Briggs also cautioned the city’s planning staff to avoid making its report sound like a marketing brochure for the developer. She specifically cited the tone of the report’s section on supplemental regulations.

In characterizing her response to the project, Briggs said she was impressed by the tweaks that the developer had made. The project isn’t horrendous or monstrous, she said, and it fits with the city’s efforts to increase density downtown. However, it’s significant that the entire neighborhood opposes the project, and she was especially disturbed to hear that Walt Spiller’s remarks had been misrepresented by the developer. In addition, she felt the building was out of scale with the neighborhood, and that it would attract students, not young professionals.

Kirk Westphal echoed Briggs’ concerns about the marketing language in the staff report, and asked that all references to the types of people who might be living there be eliminated from the report before it goes to council.

Westhpal also clarified that the stormwater management system would be upgraded from the existing site – DiLeo confirmed that was correct.

Aerial view of The Moravian, looking northeast. A computer-generated image of the proposed project is located in the center of this picture – the U-shaped building. The South Main Market complex is in the foreground; Perry School, now used as offices by the University of Michigan, is to the upper right. (Links to larger image.)

Bona said she had struggled with this project, wanting to be open to creative ideas while at the same time protecting neighborhoods. Complicating the decision is the fact that this site is at the boundary between two zoning districts – to the south, the Fingerle Lumber property is zoned D2, a “transition” category that still allows for greater density than the residential zoning of R4C.

It carries some weight, Bona said, that The Moravian is down the hill from the residential neighborhood. Another factor: the Fingerle property, because it’s in the floodway, won’t likely be densely developed in the future – there will probably be a lot of open space on that site, she said. It’s important to look at the entire area, not just the neighborhood to the north.

Bonnie Bona also cited several of the public benefits as weighing in the development’s favor, including the use of renewable energy, the underground parking and the LEED certification. She noted that penalties written into the PUD for not complying with LEED were significant, so the developer would be more likely to comply.

“It’s not perfect, but I think I can imagine it being a good addition to the neighborhood over time,” she concluded.

Tony Derezinski agreed. He said it was significant to him that the project had earned staff approval – he takes their recommendations seriously, he said. Though opponents had shown up to the meeting, Derezinski said there are many people cited in the report who do approve of the project. He also noted that many of the people speaking against the project don’t actually live in that neighborhood. The project provides more low-cost housing and goes a long way toward improving that area, he said, and warrants approval.

Evan Pratt thanked everyone who had participated in the discussion about the project over the months, saying that their input had made the process rigorous, resulting in more benefits for the city. He offered an apology, on behalf of the city, about any notification problems that might have occurred, and said he hoped city staff would improve on that in the future.

Jean Carlberg said the project had definitely improved, saying the design was now reminiscent of row houses. The building did not seem out of scale to her, compared to the three-story structure nearby and the taller Perry School building just up the street. She said she had checked city records and found that there were only six owner-occupied homes nearby, out of 37 properties, so it was fair to characterize the neighborhood as primarily rental already.

The additional residents in the neighborhood would benefit the city’s downtown commercial district, which would be within walking distance. She said she’d been in favor of the development before, and was even more so now.

Diane Giannola took issue with what appeared to be a pejorative view of having housing for students in that area. She said whether students or young professionals, most people in their 20s had roommates. The project was perfectly within scale for the area, she said, and she supported it.

Both Erica Briggs and Wendy Woods responded to Carlberg’s comments about rental housing, saying that it shouldn’t matter if the houses in that area were owner-occupied or rented. Some renters take better care of their houses than homeowners, Briggs said. She added that the building seemed to fit from the perspective of the south side of that area, but she didn’t think they should dismiss the neighbors who were looking at the project from the perspective of their homes to the north.

Woods thanked residents who had voiced their concerns. She said it might sound corny, but it was important to remember that both sides of the debate are just trying to make the city a better place to raise their families.

Westphal said he still had reservations about how the project comports with the central area plan. Regarding the PUD, he said he was on the fence about this project more than any others he’d encountered. He was also disappointed about the number of affordable housing units, and the fact that they were all one-bedroom and efficiency apartments. However, he said, the city staff are the experts, and their recommendation sets the bar higher for dissent.

Outcome: The commission voted to approve the PUD zoning and site plan for The Moravian, with Erica Briggs dissenting.

Erica Briggs was the only planning commissioner to vote against The Moravian. She cited concerns from the neighbors in explaining her decision.

Public Commentary: Post-Vote

Eight residents spoke during the meeting’s final public commentary time, berating commissioners for their decision and vowing to continue fighting the project. They commended Erica Briggs for her lone vote against it, one man tipping his hat to her in a dramatic flourish. Beverly Strassmann thanked Briggs for her integrity and for being the “lone, honest voice” on the commission.

With his voice raised in anger, Richard Jacobson verbally slammed commissioners, saying “you guys voted on a lie,” referring to the computer-generated rendering that showed the height of the five-story Moravian on par with the height of a neighboring three-story building. He said if the commission knowingly accepted a lie, that made them corrupt. Bonnie Bona, chair of the commission, repeatedly asked that he lower his voice – she had no gavel, but tried to restore order by tapping her nameplate on the table.

Another speaker attacked the commission’s professionalism, saying that their discussion of the building’s height centered on the computer-generated rendering, not on the actual elevation numbers. “You discussed this like children looking at a coloring book,” he said. He also criticized their discussion of hydrology, noting that the project’s storm collection system, which is designed to retain stormwater runoff for up to 24 hours, would be immaterial during a 100-year flood event. These points, among others, made it clear that commissioners had made up their minds before coming to the meeting, he said, and he hoped that they hadn’t reached their decision in a dark room with the developer.

Strassmann said that city officials couldn’t get away with this, and she urged residents to not lose hope. Because of the late notification about the public hearing, residents weren’t able to turn out in full force, she said, but anyone interested in continuing the fight should check out the Stop the Moravian website for updates. “We’ve seen bad things in Ann Arbor,” she said, “but this pretty much takes the cake.”

At the end of the commentary, Briggs said she could appreciate the fact that there was a lot of anger in the room, but that the tone of the public commentary had been disrespectful. She knew her colleagues to have integrity, she said. Her remarks prompted immediate outcry from those residents still gathered around the speakers podium, at which point Bona called for an adjournment of the meeting.

Gallup One Stop Gas Station

A far less contentious public hearing was held for a rezoning and site plan request for the Gallup One Stop gas station at 2955 Packard Road, just west of the intersection with Platt. The hearing and subsequent discussion was held prior to the public hearing and discussion on The Moravian.

Todd Quatro explains the renovation plans for the Gallup One Stop gas station on Packard. The owner, Charles Gallup, attended the meeting but did not address the commission.

Todd Quatro, who’s handling the project for the station’s owner, Charles Gallup, spoke during the public hearing in support of the request, and was on hand to answer questions from commissioners. Only one other person spoke during the hearing, wondering why the site needed to be rezoned and asking for clarification regarding setbacks and runoff into the Mallets Creek watershed.

Quatro told commissioners that the owner was trying to spruce up the station – which sells Citgo gas – in hopes of returning it to a profitable status. In response to a query from Jean Carlberg, he said that two nearby gas stations were struggling as well.

The request for rezoning from a C1 (local business district) to a C2B (business service district) is related in part to the site’s history. Jeff Kahan of the city’s planning staff said that as far as they could tell, there’d been a gas station at that location for 43 years, before the property was annexed into the city. It is currently non-conforming with the area’s C1 zoning, so the station can’t be expanded or altered without special permission. Quatro said they were following the city staff’s recommendations in seeking C2B rezoning.

The plan includes making a 464-square-foot addition to the existing 1,835-square-foot convenience center, creating 14 parking spaces and two bicycle parking spots, relocating the gas pumps, and installing a new canopy with recessed lighting. In addition, the project will entail landscaping – including 25 new red oak, red maple and white spruce trees – some minor regrading and a new stormwater detention system. Regarding landscaping, Erica Briggs urged Quatro to make the pedestrian experience along Packard – where bushes will be planted – as pleasant as possible.

Briggs also asked whether it would be possible to add a sidewalk from the sidewalk on Packard to the front of the convenience center. Because of the configuration of the site, the setbacks required and the location of the stormwater detention system, that would be difficult to do, Quatro said.

Charles Gallup, owner of the Gallup One Stop gas station on Packard Road, has been in the business more than 60 years.

Part of the reason for the reconfiguration is to improve the maneuverability of the large fuel trucks that pull into the station, Quatro said. They had consulted with one of the drivers about where to relocate the pumps, he said. The change also means that the pumps will be farther way from the apartment building on the east side of the site.

Many of the questions from commissioners related to the station’s impact on nearby residences. Bonnie Bona said she liked the proposed recessed lighting in the new canopy – she had stopped by the Citgo near Briarwood Mall, which has similar lighting. She described it as casting bright light in a directional way down on the pavement, but that it’s otherwise dim.

Several commissioners asked staff to add restrictions on the station’s hours of operation, which will be set at 6 a.m. until midnight. Also added to the proposal was a restriction limiting the use of exterior speakers to communication between customers at the pump and the station employees in the convenience store. This restriction was to address neighbors’ concerns over noise from the station – though several commissioners noted that they couldn’t control noise – including loud music – coming from the customers’ vehicles.

If approval is gained from council, the project will likely begin in April, Quatro said.

Outcome: The commission voted unanimously to approve the rezoning, site plan and a special exemption use. The project will next be considered by city council.

Present: Bonnie Bona, Diane Giannola, Erica Briggs, Evan Pratt, Jean Carlberg, Kirk Westphal, Tony Derezinski, Wendy Woods

Absent: Eric Mahler

Next meeting: Thursday, Jan. 21, 2010, in city council chambers, 2nd floor of the Guy C. Larcom, Jr. Municipal Building, 100 N. Fifth Ave. The meeting is pushed back from its usual Tuesday date because of the Jan. 18 Martin Luther King Jr. holiday. [confirm date]