Rendering of proposed hotel at the northeast corner of West Huron and Ashley. The One North Main building is visible to the east.

The proposal calls for a six-floor, 88,570-square-foot building with a ground-floor restaurant or retail space and an extended-stay hotel on the upper five levels. The hotel will be operated by Marriott.

The current site at 116-120 W. Huron includes a Greyhound bus depot and a one-story building that houses the Ann Arbor Convention & Visitors Bureau. Both of those buildings will be demolished. The bus depot facade will remain in place as part of the new building’s design. [.pdf of staff report]

The main hotel entrance is proposed for the building’s west side, facing North Ashley, while the main entrance for the restaurant or retail space is proposed to face West Huron, on the building’s south side. The site is zoned D1, which allows for the highest density development in the downtown. According to the staff memo, five off-street parking spaces are required.

First Martin has secured a letter of commitment from Zipcar, a car-sharing service, for two vehicles. Parking spaces for those cars are proposed at the northeast corner of the site. For purposes of the city’s parking requirement, the two Zipcars would count as eight off-street parking spaces, and would satisfy the requirement. The two existing curbcuts – on North Ashley and West Huron – will be closed, and access to the two parking spaces, loading dock and trash/recycling would be from the mid-block alley to the north. The alley is currently one-way, and will be converted to a two-way alley and repaved.

The current site at 116-120 W. Huron, looking north. One North Main is the building on the right. The city’s Ann Ashley parking structure is visible in the background.

Streetscape changes will include curb bump-outs on North Ashley, on the north and south ends of the site for passenger drop-off. Nine bicycle parking spaces are required for the project, and would include two bike hoops in the North Ashley right-of-way and two in the West Huron right-of-way, for a total of eight bike spaces. Three more hoops are proposed for the Ann Ashley parking structure, with First Martin paying for labor and materials. The city of Ann Arbor and Downtown Development Authority would assume responsibility for maintenance of those hoops.

Construction is estimated to cost $13 million. In giving the staff report to the planning commission, city planner Alexis DiLeo noted that the Greyhound bus depot has been at that location since 1940, and the site has been a transportation hub since 1898.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron.

Mike Martin of First Martin Corp. answered questions from planning commissioners at their May 20, 2014 meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

Issues included blocked views, noise from rooftop mechanicals, and problems with egress from One North Main’s underground parking. But even people who raised these concerns applauded the project, saying a hotel there would help bring vitality to that part of town. The site on the northeast corner, owned by First Martin Corp., now includes a building that houses the Ann Arbor Convention & Visitors Bureau and the bus depot for Greyhound, which will be relocating next month to the city’s Fourth & William parking structure.

First Martin’s proposal includes a six-floor, 88,570-square-foot building with a ground-floor restaurant or retail space facing Huron and an extended-stay hotel on the upper five levels, with an entrance off of Ashley. The hotel will be operated by Marriott. The bus depot facade – including an iconic art moderne sign – will remain in place.

The project will be forwarded to the city council for consideration.

Also heading to the council with a recommendation of approval is an expansion of the Bank of Ann Arbor’s downtown building at the northeast corner South Fifth and East Washington. The plan involves reorienting the main entrance – moving it from the center of the bank’s South Fifth Avenue side to the corner of Fifth and Washington. A 9,179-square-foot third-floor addition would be constructed over the rear of the building’s east side.

The bank has an existing drive-thru teller window on its north side, which will not be altered. The site’s D1 zoning requires a special exception use for drive-thrus, which the planning commission granted in a separate vote. Because the project is going through a site plan approval process, the requirement for a special exception use was triggered. Special exception uses do not require additional city council approval.

Commissioners amended the special exception use to limit the drive-thru to a financial institution, so that it can’t be used in the future for other businesses – like a pharmacy or fast food restaurant. That amendment, put forward by Sabra Briere, was approved on a 6-2 vote, over dissent from Wendy Woods and Eleanore Adenekan. Briere also proposed an amendment that would restrict the hours that the drive-thru could be open. The concern was that vehicles pulling out from the drive-thru onto Fifth Avenue could cause a threat to pedestrians and bicyclists in the evening. But after discussion – including some comments from Hans Maier, a senior executive for the bank – Briere withdrew that amendment.

Two other special exception use requests were granted during the May 20 meeting – from companies selling seasonal Class C fireworks for the July 4 holiday. Phantom Fireworks will be putting up a tent in the parking lot of the Maple Village Shopping Center, across from Veterans Memorial Park. In previous years the business operated in the parking lot of Colonial Lanes on South Industrial. Patriot Fireworks will be selling fireworks in the parking lot of the Twin Valley shopping center at 2750 Jackson Ave., west of the I-94 overpass. Both special exception uses were amended to limit the sales to fireworks only – not other seasonal items – and to put specific limits on the days of operation.

One item was postponed by commissioners on May 20 – a site plan for Mark Condominiums on West Liberty, brought forward by developer Alex de Parry. The postponement was based on a recommendation from the planning staff, to allow time for a public water system issue to be addressed. City staff determined that the six-inch water main along Liberty needs to be replaced with a 12-inch main. De Parry told commissioners that the development team had just recently been informed about this issue, and they are now analyzing the budget impact and alternatives they might pursue.

Downtown Hotel

The site plan and development agreement for a new downtown hotel at the northeast corner of North Ashley and West Huron were on the May 20 agenda.

Rendering of proposed hotel at the northeast corner of West Huron and Ashley. The One North Main building is visible to the east.

The proposal brought forward by First Martin Corp. calls for a six-floor, 88,570-square-foot building with a ground-floor restaurant or retail space and an extended-stay hotel on the upper five levels. The hotel will be operated by Marriott.

The current site at 116-120 W. Huron includes a Greyhound bus depot and a one-story building that houses the Ann Arbor Convention & Visitors Bureau. Both of those buildings will be demolished. The bus depot facade will remain in place as part of the new building’s design. [.pdf of staff report]

The main hotel entrance is proposed for the building’s west side, facing North Ashley, while the main entrance for the restaurant or retail space is proposed to face West Huron, on the building’s south side. The site is zoned D1, which allows for the highest density development in the downtown. According to the staff memo, five off-street parking spaces are required. First Martin has secured a letter of commitment from Zipcar, a car-sharing service, for two vehicles. Parking spaces for those cars are proposed at the northeast corner of the site. For purposes of the city’s parking requirement, the two Zipcars would count as eight off-street parking spaces, and would satisfy the requirement.

The two existing curbcuts – on North Ashley and West Huron – will be closed, and access to the two parking spaces, loading dock and trash/recycling would be from the mid-block alley to the north. The alley is currently one-way, and will be converted to a two-way alley and repaved.

The current site at 116-120 W. Huron, looking north. One North Main is the building on the right. The city’s Ann Ashley parking structure is visible in the background.

Streetscape changes will include curb bump-outs on North Ashley, on the north and south ends of the site for passenger drop-off.

Nine bicycle parking spaces are required for the project, and would include two bike hoops in the North Ashley right-of-way and two in the West Huron right-of-way, for a total of eight bike spaces. Three more hoops are proposed for the Ann Ashley parking structure, with First Martin paying for labor and materials. The city of Ann Arbor and Downtown Development Authority would assume responsibility for maintenance of those hoops. The installation of hoops in the city’s right-of-way will require city council approval. The planning commission was asked to make a recommendation on that as well.

Construction is estimated to cost $13 million.

In giving the staff report, city planner Alexis DiLeo noted that the Greyhound bus depot has been at that location since 1940, and the site has been a transportation hub since 1898.

Downtown Hotel: Public Hearing

Four people spoke during the public hearing about this project. Changmin Fan told commissioners that Ann Arbor is expanding, and he was impressed by the proposed hotel. But there are also challenges. The city needs to consider how to maintain a dynamic downtown, he said.

This hand-drawn alternative site plan proposed by Todd Sachse representing One North Main was passed out at the May 20 planning commission meeting.

Todd Sachse represented One North Main, the office and residential building east of the hotel site, on the northwest corner of Main and Huron. They were happy to see a development on that site and the hotel will be a great contribution to downtown, he said. However, the current design will block about half of the windows on the west side for the commercial condominiums. So he proposed an alternative plan that would shift the building about 12-15 feet to the west, and extend the building to the north. To do this, it would require cooperation from the city and from First Martin. The alternative plan would result in the same amount of square footage and rooms, Sachse said. He thought that if the city cooperated quickly, it could be accomplished in a way that would be a win-win-win for the new development, the city, and One North Main.

Stephen Ranzini introduced himself as a resident of One North Main and president of University Bank. He thanked First Martin for proposing a hotel on this site, saying it’s an excellent building. He cautioned against doing anything that would damage the value of the adjacent property, however.

In addition to the issues Sachse had mentioned, Ranzini warned against noise generated by mechanical systems on top of the hotel. There needs to be baffling of air-conditioning systems and elevators, he said. Residents on the upper floors of One North Main, on the west side, enjoy the amenity of their outdoor balconies, he noted. If the noise from the hotel is loud, that would be damaging. Ranzini criticized the city for ignoring noise coming from the top of the nearby KeyBank building. “This is a good example of bad planning leading to persistent bad results, right?”

Todd Sachse.

Another issue is the exit from the underground parking at One North Main, Ranzini said. It’s very valuable to have parking underneath your downtown building, he noted – each resident has two spaces. But people illegally block egress, he said, and there’s concern that the hotel will exacerbate that situation. It’s important to preserve the value of existing investments, he said, while new investments come in. He also complained about the signs on the Ann Ashley public parking structure, saying that they’re inadequate to indicate entry and egress.

Richard Broder spoke on behalf of the One North Main condominium association, which includes both residential and commercial condos. He thought the hotel proposal was right for the community, but he shared concerns of previous speakers. He hoped planning commissioners would consider issues related to the back alley and the separation of the buildings.

Downtown Hotel: Commission Discussion

Sabra Briere asked First Martin Corp. representatives – Mike Martin and Darren McKinnon – to answer some questions about the concerns raised during public commentary by residents of One North Main. What’s been done in the design phase to address those concerns?

Martin replied that the design team has met with representatives of both the residential and commercial condo associations. Prior to submitting the hotel proposal, Martin said they worked with the city to make two-way access and egress off of the Ann Street alley. Having more ways to get into and out of that area is important, he said. One problem in the past has been dumpsters, he noted. They’ve worked with city staff and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development to potentially designate some parking spaces for delivery vehicles. Martin said they share concerns about having a functional alley, so they’re working to improve the circulation and plan to enforce “good parking behavior.”

Briere was also interested in the issue of noise from rooftop mechanicals. What has the hotel design done to baffle sound?

McKinnon replied, saying they’d talked to Ranzini about this issue. They brought an acoustic consultant on board as part of the design team, and there will be screening on the roof for both visuals and sound, he said. They’re making every effort to limit the impact, he said. Martin added that each hotel room has VTAC (vertical terminal air conditioning) units. Because there’s not a central system, the amount of equipment on the roof will be greatly reduced, he said.

Briere asked the staff if the city has looked into dedicating two of the metered spaces in the city-owned Ann Ashley parking lot for delivery. Not yet, Alexis DiLeo replied, but that’s something that could be explored. Responding to another query from Briere, DiLeo indicated that other issues related to the midblock alleys, including better directional signs from the parking area, could be discussed. Martin noted that First Martin has contributed to the cost of installing a security camera so that Republic Parking, which manages the city’s parking system on behalf of the DDA, can monitor the area.

Alexis DiLeo of the city’s planning staff.

These issues are moving in a positive direction, Briere said. Her biggest concern is that as new buildings are added, there are all these other “moving pieces” that need to be considered. She referred to additional issues raised in an email from Kathy and Angelos Constantinides, who are One North Main residents. [.pdf of Constantinides email]

Kirk Westphal asked staff to describe what’s allowed, in terms of noise and air rights. He also asked for an explanation about the building separation issue, noting that sometimes people wonder why some projects have a blank wall with no windows – it’s because another building could be constructed right next to it, he said.

Regarding building separation, DiLeo explained that the One North Main project was a planned unit development (PUD). When it was built, it received a variance from the city’s building board of appeals to have windows on its west facade at the property line. Normally, windows are either prohibited or the size is greatly reduced because of issues like fire penetration and the fact that an adjacent building could also be built up to the property line. DiLeo was under the impression that the variance indicated the windows would need to be closed if another building was constructed adjacent to it. “So they enjoyed 30 or 40 years of windows,” she said.

Regarding noise, the city code is a bit antiquated in terms of noise decibel level, DiLeo said. It worked well when there were no residents downtown, but now it doesn’t seem to adequately address noise for residents. The staff has worked with the developer to voluntarily include noise buffers and other design aspects that minimize noise, she said.

Diane Giannola asked where the mechanicals would be located, in relation to One North Main residents. McKinnon replied that air-conditioning compressors are notoriously the loudest mechanical systems. “There’s none of that on the roof whatsoever,” he said. Most of the rooftop equipment will be for ventilation of the hotel’s public corridors.

Diane Giannola.

Martin added that there are two floors of vertical separation between the hotel rooftop and the residential floors of One North Main. The hotel is six stories, and residential units of One North Main begin on the eighth floor. From the audience, Ranzini said: “The noise goes up.” That’s a valid point, Martin replied, but it’s a couple of floors down and also offset from the property line. Martin hoped that the design and less noisy new equipment “would win the day” in terms of reducing noise.

Giannola asked if the window units would make noise. McKinnon replied that when the units are on, it makes about as much noise as the compressor of a home air-conditioning unit. They don’t run all at once, he noted.

Ken Clein pointed to a relevant section in the development agreement, which states: “(P-11) To design, construct, repair and maintain this development in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 119 (Noise Control) to ensure that any noise emanating from said development will not impact nearby residents or businesses. In addition, PROPRIETOR shall review existing noise sources surrounding said development and incorporate necessary design and construction techniques to ensure that future tenants will not be exposed to noise sources in violation of Chapter 119.”

Westphal asked staff to explain who residents can contact if construction noise becomes a problem. DiLeo said she can give contact info to the One North Main condo associations. Typically, the responsibility for enforcing issues related to construction fall to the city’s building department or the police department’s community standards unit.

Clein asked about the at-grade pedestrian passageway between One North Main and the hotel site, leading back to the parking area. He knew it wasn’t First Martin’s responsibility, but wondered if they planned to enhance it in any way. Martin replied that there will be some lighting and landscaping, to give it a “softer edge.” He also thought that having more people in that area would help that entire corridor.

Responding to another query from Clein, Martin said they don’t yet have a tenant identified for the retail/restaurant space.

Wendy Woods asked about the car-sharing service. Martin explained that the Zipcars would be available to anyone who had a membership with that company – it wasn’t just limited to hotel guests. The hope would be that someone could take the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority’s AirRide from the Detroit Metro airport to Ann Arbor, then use Zipcar to get around town.

Eleanore Adenekan.

Westphal asked how comfortable Martin was that the space fronting Huron would be leased to a retailer or restaurant. He was very confident, Martin replied. They’ve had some conversations with local restauranteurs, and have signed up with a commercial brokerage to show it. Early indications are very positive, he said, but they haven’t signed anyone up yet. Martin said he expected they’d end up with a restaurant there that would complement the hotel.

Westphal asked if that’s something that First Martin would be willing to include in the development agreement – a commitment to restaurant or retail uses? Martin indicated they’d be willing to talk about that. The ground floor of the hotel will be an extremely active use, he noted. However, he’d like to have as much flexibility as possible in the development agreement. Twenty years ago, no one would have said that a brokerage firm would be an active retail use, he noted, but now it is.

Westphal clarified that he didn’t want to see office or any kind of financial use there, which elicited a laugh from other commissioners. [Westphal has been vocal about how banks and other financial institutions with storefronts create dead space along a street.]

Jeremy Peters asked whether the hotel would have valet service, to help some of the issues related to drop-offs, traffic and parking. Martin replied that they’d talked with Art Low of Republic Parking, with the intent of working out an agreement for valet service to use some of the nearby public parking spaces.

Briere noted that the draft development agreement mentions footing drain disconnects. She was under the impression that First Martin was working on an alternative to footing drain disconnects. McKinnon said he’s met with city staff on this issue, and is planning to take some ideas to the citizens advisory committee for the sanitary sewer wet weather evaluation study. He hopes to participate as the committee develops recommendations for city council.

Ken Clein.

Martin added that they’re certainly willing to mitigate, but they’d like to have language in the development agreement that would provide for some flexibility, if the footing drain disconnect program changes.

There was some back-and-forth between Briere, Martin and McKinnon about the two different types of city programs – a residential footing drain disconnection program, and a developer offset mitigation program. McKinnon noted that the two programs are different, but related.

Woods referenced the hand-drawn alternative design that Todd Sachse had distributed during his public commentary. She urged Sachse to discuss it with the First Martin team. Kirk Westphal asked Martin about that alternative design in relation to the city’s mandated citizen participation meeting.

Martin replied that the One North Main representatives were having “off-line” conversations with First Martin about this alternative design. “We evaluated it,” he said. “We came up with a number of reasons why it did not work for us in our development.” The primary reason is that the alternative design would require getting easements from the city, he added. It’s uncertain that the city would grant the easements, and unclear how long the process might take.

One other problem is that if the hotel is taller than six floors, it would require compliance with the city’s high-rise code and also affect First Martin’s agreement with Marriott. “We’ve been on record with [Sachse] telling them it’s just not something we can do,” Martin said.

Briere asked for clarification about where hotel patrons will be dropped off. Martin replied that the drop-off, loading and unloading will be along North Ashley. There might be some sort of outdoor cafe space in front of the hotel, and a couple of on-street parking spaces. He confirmed for Briere that the hotel will include front-desk concierge service to contact taxis for customers.

Planning commissioners Paras Parekh and Sabra Briere.

Clein noted that the commission’s packet on this project includes comments from the city’s design review board. He wondered which suggestions were incorporated into the hotel design. Martin indicated that there hadn’t been unanimity of opinion among design review board members. The main takeaway was that the style of the bus depot was art moderne, not art deco, he said, “so our wrists were slapped.” He also said that board members suggested the design should be simplified a bit.

Martin noted that the site is located on the first block created within the city of Ann Arbor, so they’ve encountered a lot of “fun” issues dealing with easements and title searches for the back alley area, he said. Related to the site’s historic nature, the design review board thought it would be good for the Huron Street facade to tie into the cadence of an original city block, which was 66-feet wide. The board also wanted to carry the horizontal element of the art moderne style from Huron Street and wrap it around to the Ashley side too. It was difficult to balance all the comments, Martin said.

Clein thought the revised design was an improvement. He noted that it wasn’t the planning commission’s purview, but he thought the light-colored materials proposed for the top of the building felt a little heavy. He suggested having the brick continue up to the cornice, which he thought would make the cornice stand out more.

Regarding the bus depot facade, Clein noted that some preservationists would want to save more of the building behind it, “but in reality, there’s not a lot of integrity behind the facade.” He thought First Martin’s approach of protecting it in place during construction is preferable to dismantling it then reinstalling the facade later. He clarified with staff that this preservation qualifies the project to get premiums (a 50% floor area “bonus” of an additional 4,352 square feet) for historic preservation. “Where do we draw the line to say that allows you to qualify for premiums?” Clein asked.

Kirk Westphal.

DiLeo replied that premiums are awarded for historic preservation when a project preserves something that’s eligible to be on the National Register of Historic Places. The bus depot facade is eligible, she said, but she’d have to consult with the city’s historic district coordinator for more details about the building behind the facade. At one point, the Ann Arbor historic district commission approved a “facade-ectomy,” DiLeo said, adding that “if it’s good enough for the HDC, it’s good enough for the premium.” She clarified that getting a premium for historic preservation doesn’t require review or approval of the HDC.

Woods indicated that requiring HDC review or approval is something the planning commission might consider in the future. She also thought it might be an opportunity for Ray Detter to install an historic street plaque.

Woods also asked about whether the Greyhound bus services would be relocated to the Blake Transit Center. DiLeo replied that apparently it would be easy to relocate the passenger service to BTC, located on South Fourth Avenue north of William Street. However, Greyhound handles a significant amount of freight, and that’s becoming difficult to coordinate. The Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority, which operates the transit center, is working with Greyhound on that, she said.

Wendy Rampson, the city’s planning manager, reported that the Ann Arbor DDA has approved a plan to accommodate Greyhound at the Fourth & William parking structure, at least in the short-term. [At its May 7, 2014 meeting, the DDA board authorized its executive director to come to terms with Greyhound on a two-year lease that would cost Greyhound $1,525 a month, which works out to $36,600 for the two-year period. Buses would not pull into the structure, but would stage on Fourth Avenue. The lease would include about 400 square feet of office space in the structure, which would be finished out by the DDA for Greyhound. The lease rate works out to about $40 per square foot.]

Woods wondered when Greyhound would move. Martin indicated that the move would probably occur in mid-June. Woods noted that Greyhound is used by University of Michigan students, and she hoped the relocation would be widely publicized. Martin said it would be a more convenient location for students. [The Fourth & William structure is closer to UM's central campus, and across the street from BTC.]

Joe Fitzsimmons, a resident of One North Main, attended the May 20 meeting but did not formally address the planning commission.

Giannola asked why First Martin decided to build an extended-stay hotel, rather than a traditional hotel. Martin said the decision was based on business and market reasons. They did a market study, and one thing missing from this community is hotels with larger rooms and flexibility for longer-term stays. With the university and other organizations in town, an extended-stay hotel seemed to make the most sense. People who have family members in the hospital also need extended-stay facilities, he noted.

Martin explained that each room has a small kitchenette. The hotel won’t provide room service, but breakfast will be provided. If the retail space becomes a restaurant, there might be an opportunity there, he noted.

Clein noted that this project epitomizes the challenges of downtown development. The project is doing some great things, like bringing more activity to an area that needs it, he said. The building is handsome and the preservation of the bus depot facade is good. But there are issues with the neighboring building, so it’s a balancing act, he added. Similar issues will arise as the city gets more downtown development, Clein noted.

Clein said he was empathetic with the neighbors’ concerns, and he hoped First Martin would be proactive in trying to address them. He was supportive of the project, however.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously recommended approval of the site plan and development agreement, as well as for the plan to install required bicycle parking within the North Ashley and West Huron rights-of-way and the Ann Ashley parking structure.

Downtown Hotel: Public Commentary

During the time for general public commentary at the end of the meeting, around 10:45 p.m., Stephen Ranzini spoke again.

Stephen Ranzini.

He told commissioners that he’s been a resident at One North Main for 14 years, and has observations about things “that clearly some of you are not aware of.” He thought development agreements were really important, and should be carefully negotiated. The problem in Ann Arbor, he said, is that after a development agreement is reviewed and approved by planning commissioners and the city council, “the city staff has – and often do – change it completely at will.” Projects change radically, he said.

Ranzini said he has suggested to the city attorney, mayor and councilmembers that any material changes to development agreements should require a new approval process. “You’re giving city staff way too much authority to change at-will things,” he said. As an example, he said changes were made for the Ashley Terrace project that related to parking and the number of bedrooms in units. He said the staff will make changes “when the developer cries poverty or economics, which downsize and dumb down the project.” Many projects in the city look awful because of that, he said.

He then brought up issues related to enforcement of existing regulations. He talked about calls he’s made to city police regarding decibel-level violations. Construction repeatedly begins at 5 a.m. when the law requires a 6 a.m. start. He said the police never respond to complaints. Road cleaning occurs at 1 a.m. or 2 a.m., with the noise coming into his windows at more than 120 decibels. “The police response time? Never.” He cited a Huey chopper on Sunday morning – without a permit – generating 200 decibels in his home, as it installed air conditioner units on top of an adjacent building. It was so loud “that my teeth were literally vibrating so much that I was afraid my teeth would come out of my mouth, ok?” Still, the police didn’t respond, he said. Other examples Ranzini cited were bagpipes and city garbage trucks.

Mark Condominiums on Liberty

A site plan for new condominiums at 318 W. Liberty was on the May 20 agenda. Planning staff recommended postponement, however, to allow time for a public water main issue to be addressed.

Rendering of Mark Condominium proposal, as viewed from West Liberty next to the former Moveable Feast building.

The proposal from developer Alex de Parry of Ann Arbor Builders Inc. is to demolish an existing car wash and build an 11,910-square-foot structure with seven residential condominiums – five two-bedroom and two three-bedroom units. One unit would face West Liberty, with the others facing east.

Each condo would have its own two-car tandem garage for a total of 14 parking spaces, although no parking is required.

The lot, on the north side of Liberty, is east of the historic Peter Brehme house at 326 W. Liberty and located in the Old West Side historic district. The historic district commission issued a certificate of appropriateness for the project on March 13, 2014. The property is also within the boundaries of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority district. It backs up to the surface parking lot at the city-owned 415 W. Washington.

The property is zoned D2 (downtown interface).

The project would require two footing drain disconnects, according to a staff memo. In addition, the existing six-inch water main in West Liberty Street would need to be upsized to a 12-inch water main. The six-inch main wouldn’t have the capacity to handle the additional development, particularly the building’s fire-suppression system. That was the reason for postponement. [.pdf of staff memo]

The project is expected to cost $2.7 million.

No one spoke during the public hearing for this item.

Mark Condominiums on Liberty: Commission Discussion

Paras Parekh asked staff to elaborate on the water capacity issue. Planning manager Wendy Rampson explained that for every proposed project, the city’s systems planning unit does modeling of its impact on the city’s infrastructure for sewer and water. Typically, the only problems that are encountered are with sewer capacity. But in this case, because this part of the city had been developed with a more residential character, the water main is currently six inches in diameter.

Developer Alex de Parry.

The developer must provide fire suppression for the new building, which would require upsizing to an eight-inch water main. However, the city doesn’t upsize in two-inch increments, Rampson said. So the city is requiring that the water main be upsized to 12 inches. The developer can take on that cost if they want to move quickly, she added, or they can wait until it’s incorporated into the city’s capital improvements plan (CIP).

The upsizing needs to run from Third Street to First Street. The city’s project management staff has said that the developer’s responsibility would be to pay for the upsizing from Third Street to the front of 318 W. Liberty. This requirement emerged just a few days prior to the planning commission meeting, and the developer is now exploring the cost implications of that effort, Rampson said.

Jeremy Peters asked to hear from a representative of the project. Alex de Parry replied that they’re analyzing how to possibly change some construction methods and exploring other options. “We’ve only known about this for about two days,” he noted.

Steve Rojeck of Perimeter LLC, who is also working on this project, added that they’re also evaluating the cost of the upsizing. It could be a substantial impact on the project’s budget, he said.

Sabra Briere asked if the project will include any streetscape improvements. She noted that the site is located within the DDA district, and that the DDA is working on a streetscape project. De Parry replied that they’d received some feedback from residents who attended the project’s citizens participation meeting about adding trees in front of the property. He said they’re working with the owners of the adjacent property to the west – where Moveable Feast restaurant was formerly located – to make sure the grading of the two properties is smooth in front.

Rampson reported that the DDA has asked the developer to coordinate the construction to minimize impact on the parking patrons at 415 W. Washington. The DDA manages the lot as part of its agreement with the city to oversee the public parking system. Rampson added that as far as she knew, there are no streetscape improvements proposed as part of this project.

Kirk Westphal noted that the proposed condominiums will be about half of the proposed density that would be allowed under D2 zoning on that site. De Parry replied that D2 zoning would technically allow for a project that’s up to 60 feet high, but since the site is also in an historic district, there are limitations on height and setbacks.

A car wash is currently located at 318 W. Liberty.

Rampson explained that the historic district commission has purview to limit the size of the building. The project went before the HDC two times, she said, and as a result it had been scaled back.

De Parry said it’s not a high-density development, with just seven units. So doing a major water main replacement for that is “problematic,” he told commissioners.

Westphal observed that in some cases, the planning commission moves projects along with the stipulation that certain issues must be addressed before going to the city council for approval. De Parry supported that approach, but Rampson noted that this was a big issue and the kind of thing that the planning commission typically addressed before recommending a project. It would likely change some aspects of the development agreement, she added, including a potential cost-sharing arrangement.

Wendy Woods was in favor of postponing, with the hope that it could be brought back to the commission as soon as possible. She said it seemed like the developer was almost in shock, “and understandably so.” Other commissioners agreed regarding postponement.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to postpone action on the project.

After the vote, de Parry asked whether it was a two-week postponement. Rampson replied that it will come back to the commission as soon as the issues are worked out. It could be two weeks, but it could be longer. The commission’s next meeting is June 3.

Bank of Ann Arbor Expansion

An expansion of the Bank of Ann Arbor headquarters in downtown Ann Arbor was on the May 20 planning commission agenda.

Architect Scott Bowers with a rendering of the expanded downtown Bank of Ann Arbor building and reconfigured entrance, at the northeast corner of Fifth and Washington.

Commissioners were asked to recommend approval of a site plan that involves reorienting the main entrance – moving it from the center of its South Fifth Avenue side to the southeast corner of South Fifth and East Washington. Existing doors will be replaced with windows. A 9,179-square-foot third-floor addition would be constructed over the rear of the building’s east side. In total, the building would be 32,651 square feet after construction. The project is estimated to cost $4.2 million. [.pdf of staff memo]

One outstanding issue relates to a tree that’s needed in one of the landscape islands in the parking lot.

According to the staff memo, the design “seeks to transform the current style from contemporary to traditional by replacing the yellow brick façade with brown and red-colored bricks and limestone-colored stone accents and trim and creating a brick and glass tower at the street corner to create a prominent entry.” The original two-story building was constructed in 1965, which included the drive-thru window. An addition was completed in 1999.

The project was evaluated by the city’s design review board on Jan. 14. The board suggested making the entry structure taller and more closely aligning the bank’s design features with those of the adjacent Ameritech building to the east.

The site is zoned D1, which allows for the highest level of density in the downtown area.

D1 zoning requires a special exception use for drive-thrus, which the planning commission considered on May 20 in a separate vote. Because the project is going through a site plan approval process, the requirement for a special exception use was triggered. Special exception uses do not require additional city council approval. The bank has an existing drive-thru teller window on its north side. No changes are planned to that configuration, however.

In giving the staff report, city planner Alexis DiLeo said if the drive-thru were used more frequently, staff might suggest additional design features, like a more clearly marked crossing or differentiated surface materials. But because there are only 20-25 transactions per day at the drive-thru, and given the “successful history” of the existing drive-thru, staff is comfortable with it remaining as is, DiLeo said.

Modifications to drive-thru regulations are in the works, but not yet enacted. The planning commission approved new drive-thru regulations earlier this year. Amendments to Ann Arbor’s zoning ordinance related to drive-thrus received initial approval at the council’s May 5, 2014 meeting, and will appear on the council’s June 2 agenda for final approval.

Bank of Ann Arbor Expansion: Public Hearing

Scott Bowers, an Ann Arbor architect, introduced his partner, Susan Bowers – both are working on this project. He reviewed details of the project and showed renderings of the proposed building. A tower will be added to the northeast corner entrance, giving it more excitement and movement, he said. The use of glass on the tower will allow pedestrians to see into the lobby. He noted that the issue of the tree in the parking lot landscape island will be addressed.

Bank of Ann Arbor Expansion: Commission Discussion – Site Plan

Sabra Briere noted that there’s a lot of construction underway downtown. Residents have complained, she said, especially about the fact that they can’t walk past projects. She wondered if there was any way for the bank to allow pedestrians to walk on sidewalks while construction takes place.

Bank of Ann Arbor building at the northeast corner of South Fifth and East Washington. The proposed renovations will create a “tower” entrance into the building at this corner.

Scott Bowers said they’d have to see if it could be worked out with the contractor. It probably couldn’t happen during heavy construction periods, he added, but perhaps at other times.

Ken Clein asked whether infiltration would be possible for the stormwater system. Bowers replied that there is infiltration, as part of a water charging system.

Clein clarified that the windows would allow people to see inside the building. He said that’s a benefit, both for the business and for pedestrians. He also confirmed with Bowers that the building’s mechanical systems would be located on top of the new addition. There will be screening around that equipment, Bowers said.

Kirk Westphal asked if the rebricking will look like full-depth brick. Bowers explained that actual brick will be used, after the old yellow brick is stripped off. There will also be stone accents around the windows. Westphal noted that even though it’s not in the planning commission’s purview, it’s nice to see how the architect responded to feedback from the design review board. That information is included in the planning commission’s meeting packet.

Wendy Woods noted that the project is located in the Midtown Character District, and she asked the staff to explain what that means. Alexis DiLeo explained that there are eight character districts. The Midtown Character District is a bit of mishmash now and needs to be more defined, she added. Now, it’s “mostly a government and utility-type feel” with several vacant parcels.

DiLeo also read excerpts from the written staff report:

Midtown Character District – Architectural styles in Midtown include some 19th century wood-framed residential (mostly converted to office use), by stylistically, the district is dominated by an a range of late 20th century mid-rise office and governmental facilities.

The primary north-to-south street in Midtown is Fifth Avenue. It can be considered Ann Arbor’s “civic corridor,” anchored to the south by the Ann Arbor District Library’s Main Branch, the Blake Transit Center and the Federal Building. To the north, directly across E. Huron Street from Midtown, are the Ann Arbor municipal Center and the old and new fire stations and Hands-On Museum.

With the exception of the Library, the buildings in Midtown have limited hours and are used primarily during the business day. Since Midtown is surrounded by character districts with evening-use venues, it often serves as a passage, in particular the west-to-east blocks between Main Street and State Street. Pedestrians seem to be focused on getting from point A to point B and would benefit from more opportunities to linger.

Future development should find opportunities to establish an identity for Midtown, increasing its vitality and expanding its offerings. Primary pedestrian access to buildings along the civic corridor should be from the corridor street.

Jeremy Peters wondered if this expansion would change the hours that the bank would be open. Not at this time, Bowers replied.

Outcome on the site plan resolution: It was approved unanimously. The recommendation will be forwarded to city council for consideration.

Bank of Ann Arbor Expansion: Commission Discussion – Special Exception Use

Diane Giannola confirmed with planning staff that the drive-thru isn’t new, and that the only reason a special exception use is now required is that it’s not automatically grandfathered in, and the need for approval is triggered by the site plan process. Alexis DiLeo explained that the city began requiring special exception uses for drive-thrus in 2009, as part of a broader zoning overhaul known as A2D2 (Ann Arbor Discovering Downtown).

Hans Maier, Bank of Ann Arbor’s senior vice president of specialty banking, and architect Susan Bowers.

The drive-thru now is considered a “legal non-conforming use.” It had been legally established initially, but the zoning code changed, she said. If the bank wasn’t seeking site plan approval, there would be no need for a special exception use.

Responding to a query from Wendy Woods, DiLeo said that if the city council approves amendments to Ann Arbor’s zoning ordinance related to drive-thrus – which were recommended by the planning commission – then any new drive-thru could not be located between the building and the street. Because the bank’s drive-thru is located on the side of the building, it would conform with that future code, she said.

Ken Clein was concerned because it’s an area of “reasonably high” foot traffic. He wondered if the drive-thru would be open beyond normal banking hours. Hans Maier, the bank’s senior vice president of specialty banking, replied that it’s open during regular banking hours on weekdays, and from 9 a.m. until noon on Saturdays. Maier joked that the traffic downtown in the evening isn’t coming to do banking.

Kirk Westphal said this isn’t the kind of use that the city wants to encourage downtown, so he shared Clein’s concern. He wondered if there was an intention to expand the drive-thru hours in the future. Maier indicated that he didn’t think so.

Westphal asked if the special exception use can apply to a different tenant at that location. DiLeo said it could be used as a drive-thru for other types of businesses, not just banking, unless a condition is put on the special exception use. Restrictions could include hours of operation and type of business. Westphal wondered if the condition could restrict the number of people who use the drive-thru daily. DiLeo replied that it would be difficult to enforce that kind of restriction.

Jeremy Peters.

Westphal said he wouldn’t be comfortable for this drive-thru being used for another purpose, which might mean longer hours or more traffic.

Sabra Briere proposed an amendment to limit the drive-thru to use by a financial institution. She also asked about time restrictions: Would 7 p.m. be a reasonable time to limit drive-thru operations? Maier told commissioners that the banking business changes, and he indicated that it’s difficult to anticipate what might happen in the future. The bank has been at that location for 18 years, he noted, and hasn’t yet used extended hours. Maier added that given the angle of the curbcuts, it’s not possible to move straight forward from the drive-thru window to the street – there’s a slight curve. Briere said she worried about drivers who aren’t paying attention on Fifth Avenue.

Briere proposed limiting the hours from 8 a.m. until 7 p.m., saying it struck her as “perfectly generous.” She expected in the future, there won’t be a “human attendant” at the drive-thru, so the customers could get out of their car and walk over to the building.

Jeremy Peters asked that Briere separate those two issues – use and hours of operation – so that the amendments could be voted on separately. Briere agreed.

Outcome on limiting the use to financial institutions: The amendment passed on a 6-2 vote, over dissent from Wendy Woods and Eleanore Adenekan. Bonnie Bona was absent.

The commission next considered restricting the hours of operation to between 8 a.m. and 7 p.m.

Paras Parekh wondered if the drive-thru hours would be limited even if it was an automated teller. Sabra Briere said her big concern is the exit onto Fifth Avenue at night.

Jeremy Peters was concerned that if the drive-thru becomes an ATM and there are restricted hours, it would force the bank to turn off the ATM. He thought it would also be hard to regulate, and he hesitated to regulate the hours that a business can be open.

Kirk Westphal asked if a walk-up ATM would be accessible. Hans Maier replied that a walk-up ATM already exists on the same side of the building, near the corner. He noted that the bank’s competitors – including the nearby Comerica and KeyBank branches – wouldn’t have these same restrictions.

Looking east across Fifth Avenue at the Bank of Ann Arbor building. Toward the corner is the green awning of the walk-up ATM. Further east is the awning for the drive-thru teller window.

Diane Giannola said to her, limiting hours of operation seemed like overkill. Cars that parked and used the walk-up ATM would also be driving out that same exit, she noted. Eleanore Adenekan agreed, saying there shouldn’t be restrictions on hours.

Westphal replied that he didn’t want it to be perceived that the planning commission was picking on this bank. He said the same concerns would exist for drive-thrus anywhere in town.

Ken Clein said that trying to legislate the hours of operation might have unintended consequences. He’s comfortable with the amended language that restricts the special exception use to financial institutions. With that, the amount of traffic in the evenings would be much less than if it were a fast food restaurant or pharmacy.

Wendy Woods said she’d vote against regulating hours. She voted against the previous amendment because she wouldn’t have a problem with another drive-thru use at that location – like a pharmacy. “Indeed, it might be an attraction for some people,” she said. She was concerned about restricting the use.

At this point, Briere withdrew her motion, saying “I’m disinclined to vote in favor of the motion myself.” She thought it had been worth the discussion.

Outcome on main motion for granting the special exception use, as amended to limit it to financial institutions: The resolution passed unanimously. It does not require additional approval from the city council.

Fireworks

There were two requests for special exception use related to the sale of Class C fireworks. This is a standard request for this time of year, when temporary sales of fireworks take place. The special exception use can be granted by planning commissioners and doesn’t require additional approval from the city council.

According to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Class C fireworks include “shells and mortars, multiple tube devices, Roman candles, rockets, sparklers, firecrackers with no more than 50 milligrams of powder, and novelty items such as snakes, airplanes, ground spinners, helicopters, fountains, and party poppers.”

Fireworks: Phantom

Phantom Fireworks was requesting a special exception use to put up a temporary 40×40-foot tent and an 8×40-foot storage container in the parking lot of the Maple Village Shopping Center at 205 N. Maple, across from Veterans Memorial Park. The purpose would be for the temporary outdoor sales of fireworks, for 10 days around the July 4 holiday – from June 26 to July 5.

Rick Tapper, regional manager of Phantom Fireworks.

The shopping center is in Ward 5.

The tent and container would be set back 44 feet from North Maple Road, and traffic to businesses wouldn’t be impacted, according to city planner Alexis DiLeo, who gave the staff report. The location would be open from about 10 a.m. to 10 p.m., with extended hours depending on sales and demand.

The tent would occupy about 21 of the shopping center’s 1,500 parking spaces. Generally, there’s a lot of available parking there, DiLeo said.

A special exception use is required because this vendor isn’t a permanent tenant of the shopping center, and isn’t being sponsored by any of the tenants.

Approval of the special exception use would allow the sale of fireworks and seasonal products at this location annually, as long as the owner obtains a permit and inspection from the city’s fire marshal each time the tent is put up.

No one spoke during the public hearing for this item. DiLeo reported that no concerns about this proposal have been received. [.pdf of staff report]

Fireworks: Phantom – Commission Discussion

Eleanore Adenekan asked if there’d be extra lighting in that area. Alexis DiLeo replied that the tent will rely on parking lot lighting for the site.

Rick Tapper, regional manager for Phantom Fireworks, came to the podium to answer additional questions. He noted that the company has operated in Ann Arbor for the past two years, but previously were located in the parking lot of Colonial Lanes on South Industrial.

There’s a minimum of two employees in the tent at all times, Tapper said, and at night there are a minimum of three employees. There will be lights inside the tent, run by a generator. The products will be stored at night in the storage unit next to the tent, which is fireproof.

Planning commissioners Wendy Woods and Jeremy Peters

Jeremy Peters asked about the duration of sales: Was that Phantom’s choice? Yes, Tapper replied. He noted that 80% of sales take place during the last three days of business.

Wendy Woods asked about the permanent nature of this special exception use. DiLeo clarified that it would also allow for the sale of “seasonal items” at other times of the year, though that hasn’t been proposed by Phantom Fireworks. Other examples might be gear for Red Wings or University of Michigan sold during football and hockey seasons, respectively. She noted that if the operation is discontinued for three years, the special exception use would be voided.

Wendy Rampson, the city’s planning manager, said that if planning commissioners have concerns about the operation, they should state those issues in the conditions of the special exception use.

Tapper stressed that Phantom Fireworks doesn’t intend to operate at any other time than the 10 days indicated around the July 4 holiday. He was open to the commission striking the phrase “seasonal items” from the special exception use.

Woods moved an amendment to strike the phrase “seasonal items.”

Outcome on amendment: It passed unanimously.

Woods then suggested inserting language to refer to sales during specific dates. Tapper asked that the reference to dates be somewhat general, because the timing of the sales depends on when the weekends fall around July 4.

Peters proposed adding “for a period of up to 15 days total in the months of June and July.”

Outcome on amendment: It passed unanimously.

Kirk Westphal said he assumed this special exception use couldn’t be transferred. DiLeo clarified that it actually could be transferred to another Class C fireworks vendor.

Woods noted that a new skatepark is opening across the street from this shopping center, at Veterans Memorial Park. So she thought it was important to have a few extra conditions on the special exception use.

Outcome on granting the special exception use, as amended: It passed unanimously.

Fireworks: Patriot

The second special exception use request came from Patriot Fireworks, to put up an 8×40-foot temporary unit and 20×20-foot tent in the parking lot of the Twin Valley shopping center at 2750 Jackson Ave., west of the I-94 overpass. It would be set back 45 feet from Jackson and use 5 of the 75 parking spaces.

Robert Horvath represented Patriot Fireworks.

The business would operate from the Memorial Day weekend through the July 4th holiday, from about noon to 7 p.m., with possible extended hours.

Staff received one call from a resident in the Lakewood neighborhood, located southwest of the shopping center. The resident was concerned that children would cross Jackson Avenue at unsafe locations to get to the fireworks.

Alexis DiLeo of the city’s planning staff reported that staff looked at the site with regard to that concern. She noted that state law restricts fireworks sales to anyone under age 18, so unaccompanied minors wouldn’t likely be crossing Jackson Avenue, she said. “It would be a fruitless cause for them.”

The site is located in Ward 5.

Fireworks: Patriot – Public Hearing

Only one person spoke during the public hearing. Robert Horvath told commissioners that Patriot Fireworks was a local business, with a warehouse on Jackson Road in Scio Township. They sell fireworks at about 40 locations. They’ve been selling fireworks for over a quarter-century, he said. Horvath noted that he’s a “fireworks attorney,” and had sat on the committee that developed the state’s fireworks safety act. “So I’m involved both on a business level, but also on a legal level,” he said.

Fireworks: Patriot – Commission Discussion

Ken Clein asked about plans for signs at this location. Alexis DiLeo replied that businesses are allowed two square feet of signage for every foot of frontage. Since the tent is 20 feet, Patriot would be allowed 40 square feet of signs attached to the tent. They would need a separate city permit for the signs.

Eleanore Adenekan asked how many employees would be on site. Robert Horvath said there would be at least one employee. He described it as more of a “modified store” than a tent, with doors, shelving, lighting and a more controlled environment. It’s also a relatively small area, he noted. They carry about 300 different items.

Jeremy Peters clarified with Horvath that only fireworks would be sold. Horvath didn’t object to striking the term “seasonal items” – as commissioners had done with Phantom Fireworks. But Patriot planned to be open for a longer time than Phantom, he noted.

As she had for the previous special exception use request, Woods moved an amendment to strike the phrase “seasonal items.”

Outcome on amendment: It passed unanimously.

Peters moved an amendment regarding the time of operation, to add the phrase “for a period from three days in advance of Memorial Day, to three days after the July 4th holiday.” Sabra Briere proposed changing “three days after the July 4th holiday” to “July 7.”

Further wordsmithing ensued. Diane Giannola proposed “for a period beginning four days before the Memorial Day holiday and ending four days after the Fourth of July holiday.” Kirk Westphal suggested from May 20 to July 10.

Paras Parekh then proposed “the Thursday before Memorial Day to July 7.” Peters accepted Parekh’s amendment as friendly.

Outcome on amendment: It passed unanimously.

Outcome on granting the special exception use, as amended: It passed unanimously.

Present: Eleanore Adenekan, Sabra Briere, Ken Clein, Diane Giannola, Paras Parekh, Jeremy Peters, Kirk Westphal, Wendy Woods. Also: City planning manager Wendy Rampson.

Absent: Bonnie Bona.

Next meeting: Tuesday, June 3, 2014 at 7 p.m. in council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the city’s planning commission. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

Rendering of proposed hotel at the northeast corner of West Huron and Ashley. The One North Main building is visible to the east.

The proposal, brought forward by First Martin Corp., calls for a six-floor, 88,570-square-foot building with a ground-floor restaurant and an extended-stay hotel on the upper five levels. The site currently includes a Greyhound bus depot and a one-story building that houses the Ann Arbor Convention & Visitors Bureau. Both of those buildings will be demolished. The bus depot facade will remain in place as part of the hotel’s design. [.pdf of staff report]

The main hotel entrance is proposed for the building’s west side, facing North Ashley, while the restaurant’s main entrance is proposed to face West Huron, on the building’s south side. The site is zoned D1, which allows for the highest density development in the downtown. According to the staff memo, five off-street parking spaces are required. First Martin has secured a letter of commitment from Zipcar, a car-sharing service, for two vehicles. Parking spaces for those cars are proposed at the northeast corner of the site. For purposes of the city’s parking requirement, the two Zipcars would count as eight off-street parking spaces, and would satisfy the requirement.

The two existing curbcuts will be closed, and access to the two parking spaces, loading dock and trash/recycling would be from the mid-block alley to the north.

Nine bicycle parking spaces are required for the project, and would include two bike hoops in the North Ashley right-of-way and two in the West Huron right-of-way, for a total of eight bike spaces. Three more hoops are proposed for the Ann Ashley parking structure, with First Martin paying for labor and materials. The city of Ann Arbor and Downtown Development Authority would assume responsibility for maintenance of those hoops. The installation of hoops in the city’s right-of-way will require city council approval, and was recommended by the planning commission.

Construction is estimated to cost $13 million.

During a public hearing on the project, three people spoke representing owners of residential and commercial condominiums at One North Main, on an adjacent site east of the hotel project. Concerns included blocking views, noise from rooftop mechanicals, and problems with egress from One North Main’s underground parking.

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

From left: Jeremy Peters and Paras Parekh cast their first votes as Ann Arbor planning commissioners on July 2, 2013.

The proposal for a Hampton Inn at 2910 Jackson Ave., across the street from Weber’s Inn and next to Clarion Inn, had been postponed at the commission’s June 18, 2013 meeting. The owner was asked to address concerns over pedestrian access within the site.

A June 28 letter from Andy Wakeland, the project’s civil engineer, outlined several changes that the design team made in response to commissioners’ concerns. [.pdf of Wakeland’s letter] The changes include building a wood chip path with a picnic table area along the front wooded area of the site, connecting to two previously proposed entrances from Jackson Avenue. The plan now also includes an alternate pedestrian route at the west entrance, crossing the front parking lot in a more direct route to the hotel’s front door. Several commissioners praised the changes and thanked the development team for being responsive.

In other action, commissioners followed the planning staff’s recommendation and voted to postpone a proposed $1.2 million expansion to the U-Haul business at 3655 S. State St., south of the I-94 interchange. Commissioners spent about an hour raising concerns and asking questions, many related to landscaping, site visibility, and how the site will look from South State Street after the changes are made.

This was also the commission’s annual organizational meeting, when officers are elected and bylaws are reviewed. Kirk Westphal and Wendy Woods were re-elected chair and vice chair, respectively, and Ken Clein was elected secretary, replacing Bonnie Bona. Planning manager Wendy Rampson introduced staff recommendations for changes to the bylaws, including an item regarding the provision of special accommodations for the public, such as a sign language interpreter. The proposed amendment would change the advance notice required for special accommodations from 24 hours to 48 hours. This change is consistent with recent changes adopted by the city clerk’s office, according to Rampson.

July 2 was the first meeting for two new planning commissioners: Jeremy Peters and Paras Parekh. They were appointed last month by the Ann Arbor city council for terms ending June 30, 2016. The former commissioners whose seats they filled – Tony Derezinski and Eric Mahler – were on hand to receive recommendations of appreciation. Derezinski said he was reminded of an old saying from law school: Whoever loves good laws and good sausage should observe neither in the making. “Well, we made a lot of great sausage here,” he said.

Hampton Inn

The first major agenda item was a “planned project” proposal to build a new Hampton Inn at 2910 Jackson Ave., across the street from Weber’s Inn. Commissioners had discussed the proposal at length during their June 18, 2013 meeting. Ultimately, they unanimously voted to postpone action at that meeting, instead asking the developer to address concerns over pedestrian access within the site.

A drawing of the proposed Hampton Inn on Jackson Avenue – next to the larger existing Clarion Inn – was shown to commissioners at their July 2 meeting. The design includes improved pedestrian features.

A June 28 letter from Andy Wakeland, the project’s civil engineer, outlined several changes that the design team made in response to commissioners’ concerns. [.pdf of Wakeland’s letter] The changes include building a wood chip path with a picnic table along the front wooded area of the site, connecting to two previously proposed entrances from Jackson Avenue. The plan now also includes an alternate pedestrian route at the west entrance, crossing the front parking lot in a more direct route to the hotel’s front door. Overall, the changes are intended to improve pedestrian connectivity within the site, as well as with areas surrounding the site.

Planning intern Katy Ryan presented the project, describing the changes that had been proposed since the commission’s June 18 meeting.

The proposed four-story hotel, located on an 8.8-acre site north of Jackson and south of I-94, would include 100 bedrooms and 51,608 usable square feet. A 163-room Clarion Hotel is on the same site, east of the proposed new hotel.

A previous site plan for that location had been approved in 2008, and a Super 8 motel there was demolished. The foundation was laid for a new Hampton Inn, but the project was never completed and the building permits and site plan expired.

The owner is seeking planned project status so that the existing foundation can be used. In 2008, no maximum front setback had been required. Now, however, a maximum front setback of 50 feet is required on at least one of the site’s three front property lines. A planned project status would allow that requirement to be waived. The existing foundation is set back 72.4 feet from the north property line.

A public benefit is required in order to secure the planned project status. The owner originally cited the benefit as using the existing infrastructure.

Several members of the development team – as well as the owner, Akram Namou – attended the meeting, but no one spoke at a public hearing on this item.

In addition to a request to recommend approval of the planned project site plan, commissioners were asked to recommend approval of an amended development agreement and modifications to the city’s landscaping requirements.

Hampton Inn: Commission Discussion

For the benefit of the two new commissioners, Bonnie Bona briefly described the proposal’s history. She said commissioners didn’t have any issues with the requested landscape modifications. That request was to modify requirements of Chapter 62 – the city’s landscape and screening ordinance – which requires that at least 50% of the site’s interior landscape area be depressed bioretention and used for stormwater management. Instead, this site plan proposes 39% bioretention in one large area in front of the Hampton Inn.

Andy Wakeland with Giffels-Webster Engineers of Washington Township, Mich., is the civil engineer for the Hampton Inn project. He attended the planning commission’s July 2 meeting.

Bona noted that the main concern from commissioners related to the request for planned project status. She explained that a planned project is a special request to deviate from the requirements of the city’s ordinances, in exchange for providing a public benefit. In this case, the deviation is the front setback, which is required so that buildings are built closer to the front street. Being closer to the front street is important to improve access for pedestrians, Bona said – although in this location, it doesn’t really make a difference.

She commended the developer for improving pedestrian connectivity and making up for the fact that the building will be located at the back of the site. Some of the changes are subtle, she said – like straightening the path on the east side of the site. But the changes make it seem like pedestrians are intentionally being accommodated. The change to the sidewalk on the site’s west side is a significant improvement, Bona said. Now, pedestrians don’t have to cross the drive multiple times.

Bona said that although the picnic area in the back and the wood chip path in the front might be minimally used, “I hope they do provide a benefit for the people who stay at the hotel.” Finally, she called the small improvements at the Clarion Inn site “icing on the cake.” She concluded by saying that she appreciated the changes, especially considering that this is located in an auto-centric part of the city. It will be a long time before these properties are changed again, she said. When more pedestrians start using that area and public transit increases, “this site will be ready for it.”

Jeremy Peters said he echoed Bona’s comments. Given that the setback is so far back, the changes that were made help mitigate that as much as possible, he said.

Ken Clein appreciated that the development team had been responsive and quick in addressing the commission’s concerns. They had done a good job with the location, he said. Kirk Westphal also thought that the changes had enhanced the site.

Sabra Briere asked if the city had received any response yet from the Michigan Dept. of Transportation regarding the crossing across Jackson Avenue, from the Hampton Inn site to the tip of the Weber’s Inn property, then across eastbound Jackson to a relocated bus stop south of Jackson. Planning manager Wendy Rampson reported that it had been part of the previously approved development agreement with the site’s owner, and that the agreement called for the owner to install the crossing. That would be a major improvement, she noted – because the city wouldn’t have funds to install a crosswalk there anytime soon.

Later in the meeting, Rampson reported that at the end of April, the city had received a communication from MDOT about the site plan stating that the locations of the sidewalk, sidewalk ramps and crosswalks were still acceptable.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously recommended approval of the Hampton Inn planned project site plan, amended development agreement and modifications to the city’s landscaping requirements. The project will next be considered by the city council for approval.

U-Haul Expansion

On the July 2 agenda was a proposed expansion to the U-Haul business at 3655 S. State St., south of the I-94 interchange.

Aerial view of U-Haul site on South State Street, indicated with crosshatches.

The current site includes a 8,861-square-foot retail/service building and four self-storage buildings, ranging in size from 3,000 square feet to 5,250 square feet.

The expansion calls for building a 1,246-square-foot addition to the front of the existing retail building, facing South State. The project also includes a new 4,994-square-foot, one-story warehouse and an 11,696-square-foot, one-story self-storage building. Both of the new buildings would be toward the rear of the site – currently a flat grassy area – and would not be visible from South State Street. The warehouse building will be used to provide storage for items that customers don’t need to access on a frequent basis. Unlike the self-storage facility, the warehouse will be accessed only by employees, to store or retrieve items for customers.

The project will bring the site up to code regarding landscaping, with additional right-of-way buffer vegetation, four new landscape islands, 22 new trees and shrubbery.

A detention pond was built in the early 1990s as part of a previously planned expansion that was not completed. That former site plan has expired. The pond will become part of an upgraded stormwater management system designed to meet current city standards.

The overall project is estimated to cost $1.2 million.

A staff memo noted that this site was part of the area covered in the South State Street corridor plan, which the planning commission had voted to add to the city’s master plan at its May 21, 2013 meeting. That corridor plan calls for office uses at that location in the future. Currently, the property is zoned M1A (limited light industrial district), and no rezoning is being requested. The corridor plan also recommends “enhanced non-motorized access to buildings, and aesthetic improvements recognizing State Street as a gateway corridor to the City,” according to the memo.

In order for the corridor plan to be added to the city’s master plan, the city council would also need to approve taking that action. However, councilmembers postponed action on that at their July 1, 2013 meeting, after Marcia Higgins said she had some concerns.

A concern related directly to this project came from a nearby property owner, Zakhour Youssef. He had sent an email to the commission complaining about the upkeep of the site, and indicating that the property would be better used for an upscale development. [.pdf of Youssef email] He owns properties at 2750 and 3776 S. State. From his email:

It seems like adding more shabbiness to the existing [U-Haul building]. Whatever is visible from the street should be made attractive especially in view of the fact that both Ann Arbor and Pittsfield Township are making admirable efforts to gentrify the South State Street corridor from I-94 to Michigan Avenue.

I believe that the highest and best use for the entire U-Haul parcel and adjacent parcels is upscale developments: attractive hotels, restaurants, office building, etc. We are seriously considering demolishing our 3776 South State Street building and have an upscale development on the four and half acres on the N.W. corner of South State and Airport Boulevard. The area is ready for upscale development.

City planner Matt Kowalski gave the staff report at the July 2 meeting. He noted that some issues raised by the planning staff have been addressed in revisions that the owner submitted on Friday, June 28, but there hadn’t been time to adequately review those changes.

The city’s planning staff recommended postponement so that the owner can address outstanding issues that had been raised by planning and engineering staff members. The site plan is also awaiting approval by the county’s water resources commissioner.

U-Haul Expansion: Public Hearing

The only speaker at a public hearing was Samantha Keating, principal planner in the construction department of Amerco Real Estate Co. of Phoenix, Arizona. She spoke briefly, saying that she was representing the owner, U-Haul International. They are interested in upgrading the site in order to offer more services to customers, she said, including more storage options and moving supplies. She felt all of the issues that had been identified by the planning staff had been worked through, and the company had come up with a plan to make everyone happy. She was on hand to answer any questions.

U-Haul Expansion: Commission Discussion

Commissioners had a wide range of questions, mostly focused on landscaping, lighting, site visibility, and how the site will look from South State Street after the changes are made. For this report, the discussion is organized thematically.

U-Haul Expansion: Commission Discussion – Lighting

Wendy Woods had questions about lighting and windows within the self-storage facility. If there are interior passageways, then she wanted to make sure that fire safety and egress issues had been addressed. City planner Matt Kowalski said the owners recently submitted a revised photometric plan, which shows exterior lighting on the site. The site plan meets the city’s standards for emergency egress, though he noted that those issues are dealt with in more detail at the building plan stage.

Samantha Keating, representing U-Haul, explained that for the interior, all hallways are lit overhead and the building meets code for lighting and egress. Many of the lights are on motion-activated timers for energy efficiency. Customers will have an access card to enter the building, which will activate the lights. Woods asked to see photos of similar U-Haul storage facilities, to give commissioners an idea about the width of the hallways.

U-Haul Expansion: Commission Discussion – Appearance

Noting that the commission had received an email from a nearby property owner, Woods expressed concern that the site doesn’t look like it’s been as well-maintained as the city would expect on one of its major entryways. She asked staff how they could encourage the owner to address this issue.

Ann Arbor planning commissioner Wendy Woods.

Kowalski replied that the planning staff had expressed some concern about temporary U-Haul signs that had been placed in the city right-of-way in front of the site, and he felt that those would be taken care of. The owners are investing a lot of money in the property, he noted, and will be doing a lot of landscaping in the front. After the upgrade is completed, it will be a matter of enforcement for the city, he said, adding that it’s a very visible site.

Right now there are only a couple of “scraggy” pines on the site, Kowalski said. A continuous line of shrubs will be planted as part of the city’s required right-of-way buffer, and about a half dozen trees will be added to the front of the site as well. There is also a berm along the front that will help mitigate the view of the buildings, he said.

Sabra Briere said she was trying to reconcile this project with the recommendations of the South State Street corridor study. According to the corridor study, that area should be zoned for office use, she noted. If this project moves forward, how will that vision for the corridor be realized?

Kowalski observed that the current master plan calls for research and light industrial uses in that area. The new corridor plan, which hasn’t yet been adopted by the city council as part of the master plan, does recommend office use if the ownership of the site turns over, he said. However, it wasn’t intended to push out existing businesses, he added. The value of the corridor plan for this property now is to guide pedestrian and facade improvements, for example.

Jeremy Peters requested a rendering of the site as viewed from South State Street, to help commissioners envision how it would look with the proposed landscaping. Briere expanded on that request, asking for the rendering to put the site in context with the rest of the area, as well as showing the contours of the land. “Sometimes two dimensions aren’t just enough for me,” she said.

Kirk Westphal wondered whether U-Haul would consider masonry on the retail building addition. Keating replied that it had been discussed, but her concern is that it would not seem cohesive with the existing metal building. She also noted that the company has a bottom line for this project that it’s trying to work within.

Ken Clein said that as an architect, he didn’t have an issue with using metal on the addition, given the existing building. “I don’t want to use the lipstick analogy that got President Obama in trouble,” he joked, referring to Obama’s “lipstick on a pig” comment in 2008. Using nicely finished metal and some detail on the front would make a better addition to the building, he said.

Ann Arbor planning commissioner Ken Clein.

Responding to a query from Diane Giannola, Keating noted that there is an existing permanent U-Haul sign at the entrance. It will remain in place, and will be part of a landscaped island. Paras Parekh confirmed with Keating that U-Haul isn’t interested in changing its main sign. He said he’d driven by the site recently, and it was challenging to even see that it was a U-Haul operation. The site isn’t attractive in any way when you’re driving by it, he said.

Keating responded by saying that the landscaping improvements and retail addition will give the site more of an identity from the street.

Parekh also asked Keating how she would characterize the comments from Zakhour Youssef regarding the U-Haul property. She said she had talked to Youssef by phone, and most of the conversation consisted of his thoughts regarding the highest and best use of the site. “His suggestion was that we should sell the property so there could be something else developed there,” she reported. But U-Haul has been at that location for more than 30 years, she noted, and isn’t planning on moving.

Parekh clarified that he was primarily interested in Youssef’s concerns regarding the appearance of the property. Keating indicated that those concerns would be addressed with the landscaping and other site improvements.

Giannola wondered whether the new landscaping would hide the U-Haul sign and trucks, making it less clear that the business was located there. How will people know where to turn into the site? It’s not a place that people go to frequently, she noted. What does the city code require? Parekh added that the sign wasn’t lit when he drove by in the evening.

Planning manager Wendy Rampson said the city’s sign ordinance tries to address aesthetic issues. There are requirements for setback, height and size. The current sign, which is relatively old, looks like it complies with current code, she said, though it might be a little taller than what’s currently allowed. “But if they touch it, they have to bring it into compliance,” Rampson noted. “If they take it down, the new sign would need to meet code.”

A foundation-based sign might draw more attention to the business and would be a little more pedestrian-oriented, Rampson said. She added that sign design typically is addressed at the building permit stage.

U-Haul Expansion: Commission Discussion – Parking, Pedestrian Access

In response to a question from Briere, Keating indicated that people who use the self-storage building tend to park as near to the door as possible, to unload or load their belongings. There typically aren’t a lot of people in the building at the same time, so U-Haul hadn’t planned to indicate formal parking spaces in that area, though Keating said it would be possible to do that.

Detail of U-Haul site plan, showing the entrance off of South State and a diagonal pedestrian crosswalk to the retail showroom.

Clein expressed concern with a proposed diagonal crosswalk between the South State sidewalk and the retail building, crossing the entrance driveway. He wondered if the new addition could be reconfigured so that there would be room for a walkway next to the building, rather than angling the crosswalk across the driveway. It would have the added benefit of creating more of a street presence for the building, he said.

Kowalski reported that the planning staff had struggled with the crosswalk location. He said he’s not a fan of the diagonal crosswalk, but it’s problematic unless the entire building or curbcut is shifted to provide more room, given the access needs. He indicated interest in exploring Clein’s suggestion regarding a reconfiguration of the front addition.

Bonnie Bona wondered how much of the existing front lawn will become parking. Keating replied that the front parking area is closer to the street than the existing lot, but there will still be about 20 feet of grass.

Bona agreed with Clein about the configuration of the retail addition, saying she didn’t think U-Haul would want the building to be so close to the driveway. The business deals with people who don’t typically drive trucks, she noted. She’d prefer that the public sidewalk would be used to cross the driveway, and not to use a diagonal crosswalk.

Woods referred to Youssef’s email and the concerns he raised about trucks parking on the front grass. How would that problem be addressed? Keating said either a concrete curb or a curb stop would be installed to prevent parking on the grass.

Woods also asked about the handicapped parking spaces, wondering why those spaces weren’t located next to the retail building. Keating replied that there’s a significant grade difference between the retail building entrance and the parking that’s directly next to the building. The handicapped parking needs to be on a level surface, she said.

U-Haul Expansion: Commission Discussion – History of Site

Clein pointed out that the site has a history, dating back to 1984, of plans that don’t come to fruition. He wondered why. Keating said she couldn’t speak for all previous site plans, but one of the challenges for that site is bringing it up to current code, which requires a significant investment. Perhaps that’s why the other site plans didn’t move forward, she said. The project is slated for U-Haul’s construction budget in the coming fiscal year, Keating said, “and we’re ready to start working.”

Clein hoped that U-Haul was sincere about moving forward with the plans this time.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to postpone the U-Haul proposal.

Election of Officers, Proposed Revision to Bylaws

The city’s fiscal year begins on July 1. So at the first meeting of the new fiscal year, planning commissioners handle organizational matters, including the election of officers.

From left: Planning commissioners Diane Giannola and Kirk Westphal, and planning manager Wendy Rampson. Westphal was re-elected to a second one-year term as the commission’s chair at the July 2 meeting.

Kirk Westphal was unanimously re-elected to serve as the commission’s chair, and vice chair Wendy Woods was also re-elected to serve another year in that position. Ken Clein was elected as secretary, replacing Bonnie Bona. None of the officer elections were contested. These three positions comprise the commission’s executive committee.

This is also the time of year when the commission’s bylaws are reviewed. Planning manager Wendy Rampson introduced staff recommendations for changes to the bylaws.

One change would amend Article VII: Meetings, Section 16 – an item regarding the provision of special accommodations for the public, such as a sign language interpreter. The proposed amendment would change the advance notice required for special accommodations from 24 hours to 48 hours. This change is consistent with recent changes adopted by the city clerk’s office, according to Rampson.

Another change related to the order of business in the commission’s agenda, which Rampson characterized as not a substantive change. It’s being recommended to reflect the agenda template in a software program used by the city. [.pdf of planning commission bylaws, with proposed revisions highlighted in red]

Bona questioned the change regarding special accommodations. The additional time seemed to add a burden on the public, she said, and she wondered why it had been proposed. Rampson said it’s a change implemented by the clerk’s office, so she’d need to check with them about the logic behind it. As an example, she noted that there are very few sign language interpreters who are readily available. The clerk’s office has experienced some difficulty in securing interpreters for city council meetings within 24 hours. She indicated that it’s not a good idea to give people the impression that there will be an interpreter available, if that’s not possible.

Rampson noted that agendas and public hearing notices are generally published well in advance, so if someone is really interested in a topic, they would have plenty of time to make a request for special accommodations.

Bona wanted to get information from the clerk’s office about how many people have made requests too late to be accommodated. She couldn’t recall the planning commission ever using a sign language interpreter. [Bona was first appointed to the commission in January 2005.] Rampson said she’d do more research on the issue.

In addition, Rampson asked for feedback on the citizen input flyer that the planning commission uses. [.pdf of citizen input flyer] The staff would like to refresh this document, if commissioners had any suggestions.

Commissioners also were asked to complete a raft of paperwork related to the annual organizational meeting, including a disclosure form for their employers and other affiliations. Rampson said the commission hasn’t done this regularly in the past, but the bylaws state that these disclosure forms should be updated each year. The information is used to flag any potential conflict of interest on projects that come before the commission.

None of these proposed changes were a voting item on July 2. The process is to bring the recommendations forward on the first meeting in July, then vote on them at the next regular meeting on July 16.

New Members, Resolutions of Appreciation

Two new commissioners attended their first meeting on July 2: Jeremy Peters and Paras Parekh. They were appointed last month by the Ann Arbor city council for terms ending June 30, 2016.

From left: former Ann Arbor planning commissioners Tony Derezinski and Eric Mahler at the commission’s July 2, 2013 meeting.

At the start of the meeting, commission chair Kirk Westphal asked them to introduce themselves. Peters said he moved to this area in 1998, coming to attend the University of Michigan and deciding to stay. He works at the Ann Arbor firm Ghostly International and its affiliate Ghostly Songs, an American label music publishing company founded in 1999. “I essentially put songs in television shows and commercials, taking care of all the intellectual property rights,” he explained.

Parekh told commissioners that he grew up in and around the Ann Arbor area, and has moved back now with his family. He is the marketing director for the University of Michigan Alumni Association.

Peters was appointed to replace Tony Derezinski, while Parekh replaces Eric Mahler.

Both Derezinski and Mahler were on hand to accept resolutions of appreciation from the commission, which were presented by Westphal. [.pdf of resolution for Derezinski] [.pdf of resolution for Mahler] Commissioners had said farewell to the two attorneys at their last meeting on June 18.

Derezinski, a former city councilmember, served on the commission from November 2008 through June 2013. The resolution highlighted his work on regional planning and collaboration, and age-friendly communities. On July 2, he thanked commissioners, calling his work “a labor of love.” He stressed the need for collaboration, and commended the commission and planning staff for focusing on that approach. He said he was reminded of an old saying from law school: Whoever loves good laws and good sausage should observe neither in the making. “Well, we made a lot of great sausage here,” he said.

Derezinski said that trying to manage change was one of the most important things he did on the planning commission. When he originally ran for office, he said, his campaign motto was “Let’s make our great community even better.” That’s still a good goal to have, he said.

Mahler’s service on the commission spanned six years, from July 2007 through June 2013. He was chair for two years during that time. The resolution of appreciation cited his leadership in economic development, sustainability and regional collaboration, as well as legal and organizational expertise, calling his work on the commission “patient and pragmatic.”

Mahler joked that he wanted five minutes of public commentary time, as the official representative of the planning commission alumni association. [Public commentary is normally three minutes per speaker, but representatives of organizations get five minutes.] He noted the commission’s “staggering” work program, and thanked commissioners for moving it forward. Mahler said that even though he’ll now be on the board of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority, he’ll be watching the commission closely. If he has a legal opinion, he said he’ll text it or email it to commissioners. [Mahler and Derezinski are both attorneys.]

Both men received a round of applause from commissioners.

Communications & Commentary

During the meeting there were several opportunities for communications from staff and commissioners, as well as two general public commentary times. Here are some highlights.

Sabra Briere, who serves as the Ann Arbor city council’s representative on the planning commission.

Communications & Commentary: City Council Update

As the city council’s representative on the planning commission, Sabra Briere updated commissioners about council actions that related to planning issues. There had been several items on the council’s July 1 agenda: (1) rejection of a rezoning request for 2271 S. State St., which the planning commission had recommended rejecting; (2) initial approval of rezoning for Kerrytown Place on North Main and North Fourth, which the commission had endorsed; (3) re-establishment of the R4C citizens advisory committee; and (4) postponement of adopting the South State Street corridor plan into the city’s master plan. The planning commission had voted to adopt the South State Street corridor plan at its May 21, 2013 meeting, but it also requires council approval.

Communications & Commentary: Upcoming Projects

Planning manager Wendy Rampson highlighted two back-to-back public input meetings for projects in downtown Ann Arbor, set for Wednesday, July 10 starting at 6 p.m. at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave.

The first citizen participation forum, from 6-7:10 p.m., is for a proposal by the owners of the Running Fit building at 121 & 123 E. Liberty. They hope to add two stories of apartments to the existing one-story building, as well as a rooftop patio and penthouse occupying a partial fourth floor.

The second forum, from 7:10-8:30 p.m., is for a project at the Towne Center – the former Montgomery Ward building at 210-216 S. Fourth Ave. The project would add up to three stories of apartments above portions of an existing two-story building. A new facade is planned for the building.

Both projects are in the D1 zoning district, and would conform to design guidelines for the Main Street Historic District.

In addition, public hearings will be held at the planning commission’s July 16 meeting for these projects:

• Glendale Condominiums site plan: A proposal to build eight two-family dwellings and 26 parking spaces on a 2.64-acre at 312 Glendale Drive. Two single-family homes would be demolished as part of this project, which is located in Ward 5.
• A revised PUD (planned unit development) zoning and site plan for the Shell station and Tim Horton’s at the corner of Ann Arbor-Saline Road and Eisenhower Parkway. Proposed changes to the supplemental regulations for this 1.44-acre site would allow for a drive-thru restaurant, including the construction of a 109-square-foot drive-thru window addition and access driveway on the north side of the existing building. The site is located in Ward 4.
• Glacier Hills parking addition: A proposal to put in 31 new parking spaces along the north driveway for this senior living community at 1200 Earhart Road. The property is located in Ward 2.

Communications & Commentary: North Main Huron River Task Force

Bonnie Bona, the planning commission’s representative on the North Main Huron River task force, reported that the group is working on its final report to present to the city council by the end of July. One more meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, July 17 from 5-7 p.m. in the second floor council chambers at city hall. The meeting is open to the public and includes opportunity for public commentary.

Communications & Commentary: Sustainable Building

Ken Clein encouraged commissioners and the public to take an online survey that the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign is conducting, focused on the Ann Arbor municipal center – which includes city hall and the adjacent Justice Center building – as a model of sustainable landscape design. The intent is to help understand how new ways of landscape design could help improve the environmental quality of public spaces. The 10-question survey is open until July 19.

Clein said he was glad the project is being studied for its sustainable design. “As I had a little something to do with that,” he joked, “I’m pleased that it’s happening.” Clein, an architect and principal with Quinn Evans Architects, was project manager for the Justice Center construction and city hall renovations.

Communications & Commentary: Planning Intern

A new planning intern, Katy Ryan, introduced herself to commissioners at the start of the meeting. She recently completed her first year in the University of Michigan’s masters degree program in urban planning. She’s originally from Massachusetts.

Present: Bonnie Bona, Sabra Briere, Ken Clein, Diane Giannola, Paras Parekh, Jeremy Peters, Kirk Westphal, Wendy Woods.

Absent: Eleanore Adenekan.

Next regular meeting: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 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 survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the city’s planning commission. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

A June 28 letter from Andy Wakeland, the project’s civil engineer, outlined several changes that the design team made in response to commissioners’ concerns. [.pdf of Wakeland’s letter] The changes include building a wood chip path with a picnic table area along the front wooded area of the site, connecting to two previously proposed entrances from Jackson Avenue. The plan now also includes an alternate pedestrian route at the west entrance, crossing the front parking lot in a more direct route to the hotel’s front door. Several commissioners praised the changes and thanked the developer for being responsive.

The proposed four-story hotel, located on an 8.8-acre site north of Jackson and south of I-94, would include 100 bedrooms and 51,608 usable square feet. A 163-room Clarion Hotel is on the same site, east of the proposed new hotel.

A previous site plan for that location had been approved in 2008, and a Super 8 motel there was demolished. The foundation was laid for a new Hampton Inn, but the project was never completed and the building permits and site plan expired.

Commissioners recommended approval of the “planned project” site plan, amended development agreement and modifications to the city’s landscaping requirements. The project will next be considered by the city council for approval.

This brief was filed from the second floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

From left: Tony Derezinski and Eric Mahler attended their last meeting as planning commissioners on June 18. Mahler has been appointed to the board of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. Derezinski was not re-appointed to the commission, and is expected to be replaced by Jeremy Peters. Mahler’s replacement is Paras Parekh. (Photos by the writer.)

Commissioners had been asked to recommend approval of a “planned project” site plan, amended development agreement and modifications to the city’s landscaping requirements. This kind of project requires a public benefit, and commissioner Bonnie Bona argued strongly that the benefit should be a site that’s pedestrian- and bicycle-oriented. It’s especially important given Ann Arbor’s standing as one of the top 10 cities in the country for bicycle use, she said, and given that demand for pedestrian amenities will only increase. But as designed, sidewalks are an afterthought and their configuration within the site doesn’t make sense, Bona said. “There has got to be a better way.”

Bona said she couldn’t support this project unless the site plan addressed that design deficit. She proposed postponing it so that modifications could be explored, and other commissioners agreed – despite urging from the design team to recommend approval.

The meeting’s other main agenda item entailed adopting a master plan resolution and list of resource documents used to support the master plan. This is part of an annual evaluation of the master plan that’s required by the commission’s bylaws. Commissioners had held a public hearing on suggestions related to the master plan at their May 21, 2013.

Bona again brought forward a pedestrian-oriented issue, proposing to amend the list of resource documents to include the Allen Creek Greenway task force report from 2007. Commissioners unanimously approved that addition, along with two others: (1) the Downtown Vision and Policy Framework (known as the Calthorpe study), adopted in 2006; and (2) the Huron River Impoundment Management Plan (HRIMP), as adopted in 2009. [.pdf of resource document list]

In other action, commissioners approved a work plan for the fiscal year starting July 1, identifying short-term as well as long-range projects. [.pdf of FY 2013-14 work plan] One high-priority project is the review of A2D2 zoning as directed by the city council, with a deadline of Oct. 1 to deliver recommendations to the council. The primary focus of that directive is the downtown D1-D2 zoning – especially in light of the controversial 413 E. Huron development, which the council recently approved. The plan is to bring in a consultant to manage that zoning review.

June 18 was the last meeting for planning commissioners Tony Derezinski and Eric Mahler. Mahler has been appointed to the board of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, and attended his first board meeting for that group on June 20, 2013. Commissioners praised the two attorneys, citing their combination of practicality and forward thinking. “I feel like our ballast is leaving,” Bona said.

Mahler will be replaced by Paras Parekh, who was confirmed by the city council at its May 20, 2013 meeting. Parekh attended the planning commission’s June 18 meeting as an observer, and will be joining the group after July 1. Jeremy Peters has been nominated to replace Derezinski, and is expected to be confirmed by the council on July 1. Peters works in creative licensing and business affairs with Ghostly Songs.

Hampton Inn Proposal

The June 18 agenda included a proposal for a new Hampton Inn at 2910 Jackson Ave. Commissioners were asked to recommend approval of a “planned project” site plan, amended development agreement and modifications to the city’s landscaping requirements.

Aerial view of the proposed Hampton Inn site (outlined in black) on Jackson Avenue, adjacent to the eastbound I-94 entrance ramp. Weber’s Inn is located nearby, just west of the Jackson Avenue split. To the east is the former Michigan Inn site.

The proposed four-story hotel, located on an 8.8-acre site north of Jackson and south of I-94, would include 100 bedrooms and 51,608 usable square feet. A 163-room Clarion Hotel is locaded on the same site, east of the proposed new hotel. The entire site would include 337 parking spaces for both hotels, as well as 10 new bicycle parking spots for the Hampton Inn and 8 at the Clarion. A driveway into the Hampton Inn would be across Jackson from the entrance to Weber’s Inn, which is located to the west.

A previous site plan for that location had been approved in 2008, and a Super 8 motel there was demolished. The foundation was laid for a new Hampton Inn, but the project was never completed and the building permits and site plan expired in 2011. The site is zoned R5 (hotel district).

The developer is seeking planned project status so that the existing foundation can be used. In 2008, no maximum front setback had been required. Now, however, a maximum front setback of 50 feet is required on at least one of the site’s three front property lines. A planned project status would allow that requirement to be waived. The existing foundation is set back 72.4 feet from the north property line.

A public benefit is required in order to secure the planned project status. The developer cited the benefit as using the existing infrastructure.

According to a staff report, a pedestrian crossing on Jackson Avenue is proposed from the Hampton Inn site to Hilltop Drive, which runs parallel to and south of Jackson and is separated by a landscaping island. The Ann Arbor Transportation Authority plans to relocate a bus stop on eastbound Jackson Avenue to be near this crosswalk, which would be just west of Mason Avenue.

Because Jackson Avenue is under the jurisdiction of the Michigan Dept. of Transportation, MDOT must review the plans for this development. The planning staff memo also states that footing drains of 10 homes must be disconnected to offset the project’s increased sanitary sewer flow.

In giving the staff briefing on June 18, city planner Jill Thacher noted that a large berm runs the length of Jackson along the site, creating a steep hill with nine landmark trees and other landscaping. Over 200 trees stand on the site, she said. Stormwater management is handled through a series of three ponds, with a spillway onto the MDOT right-of-way along I-94.

Thacher also noted that the draft development agreement will need to include language related to the new crosswalk and sidewalks, indicating the responsibilities of the Hampton Inn for snow removal and maintenance.

Also requested was a modification to requirements of Chapter 62 – the city’s landscape and screening ordinance. That ordinance requires that at least 50% of the site’s interior landscape area be depressed bioretention and used for stormwater management. This site plan proposes 39% bioretention in one large area in front of the Hampton Inn.

The city’s planning staff recommended approval of the project.

Hampton Inn Proposal: Public Hearing

Andy Wakeland – the project’s civil engineer with Giffels-Webster Engineers of Washington Township, Mich. – introduced himself and others involved with the project, including Jeff Ryntz of Victor Saroki & Associates Architects of Birmington, Mich.

Akram Namou of A&M Hospitality is owner of the Hampton Inn project on Jackson Avenue.

Wakeland reviewed the project’s history, noting that the foundation had been put in place just as the “economy tanked” in 2008, leading to a suspension of construction. The intent was always to continue when the financing became available, “and now is that time,” he said. Wakeland reviewed other aspects of the project, including parking and bioretention.

Ryntz brought a rendering of the hotel and a sample board of masonry and other materials that they plan to use. He described the design and explained how the project goes beyond the standards that are required by the Hampton Inn franchise.

Akram Namou of A&M Hospitality and Executive Hospitality introduced himself as the owner. The project shows his firm commitment to the city of Ann Arbor, he told commissioners. Several years ago because of the recession, there was no financing available. Even so, with his own personal funds and personal loans, he started the project, hoping he would be able to continue it with other financing. Unfortunately, that didn’t happen “and I had to take a break,” Namou said. Now, however, he has secured financing to pursue the project. The Hampton Inn, which is owned by Hilton, is an upscale brand, he said, and it will make a nice addition to the area.

The final speaker was Steve Beisheim, an Ann Arbor resident. It sounds like a good project, he said, but he had some concerns about walkability. He urged commissioners to think about who uses the sidewalk, and about the impact of the parking lot in terms of pedestrians and the quality of life for everyone who lives in that area. He understood that parking needs to be located somewhere, but would it be better to have it out in front or out of the way? It might sound trite, he said, but those kinds of things add up. The planning commission needs to put these things into their rules, he said, because people won’t come up with it themselves unless there’s some kind of guide.

Hampton Inn Proposal: Commission Discussion

Diane Giannola started by raising a concern about the driveway into the Hampton Inn, noting that it was directly across the street from the entrance to Weber’s Inn. She asked if it was considered better planning to align the driveways this way, or to have them offset slightly. Jill Thacher replied that it’s better to align driveways, to create fewer conflict points for freeflowing traffic. Giannola worried that drivers would try to go straight across Jackson Avenue from Hampton Inn to Weber’s, and that the configuration would encourage them to do that. Thacher noted that the Hampton Inn exit onto Jackson would be right-turn only, but she could envision people trying to cross over into Weber’s.

Sabra Briere asked several questions about the sidewalks. She first asked what kind of sidewalk maintenance would be required in the development agreement. Thacher said it would entail keeping the snow shoveled in the winter, and keeping it open to pedestrians year-round. She noted that a section of sidewalk is on the MDOT right-of-way, so the development agreement would need to clarify “who’s responsible for what, and where.”

Thacher also clarified that the sidewalk doesn’t connect to other sidewalks. On the site’s east side it stops at the eastbound I-94 ramp, and on the west side it stops at the property line, adjacent to a vacant parcel. Briere asked whether a sidewalk would be required on the vacant parcel when it’s developed. Yes, Thacher replied, if the property is in the city.

Responding to remarks made during public commentary, Ken Clein noted that the sidewalk is close to the road, between the road and the parking lot. Because of the landscaping there, he didn’t think the parking lot would have a big visual impact on people who used the sidewalk. Clein, an architect, also asked some clarificational questions about the building materials that would be used, as well as the building’s design.

Wendy Woods asked how the two hotels would work together. The owner, Akram Namou, noted that he’s been in this business for many years. Based on his experience, these two hotels will complement each other perfectly. The Clarion is a full-service hotel, with meeting rooms, banquet rooms and a restaurant, he explained, while Hampton Inn is a limited-service hotel for strictly transient and corporate business. There are economies of scale for management, staff and marketing, he said.

Woods also noted that there are bicycle parking spaces planned for the site plan. Would bikes be made available for guests? she asked. Andy Wakeland replied that the bike spaces are required by city code. Normally, he said, there would unlikely be many pedestrians or bicyclists coming to the site. Planning manager Wendy Rampson added that it’s likely those bike parking spaces would be used by the hotel staff.

Ann Arbor planning commissioner Wendy Woods.

Woods also asked about the AATA bus stop that would be located on the south side of Jackson. How would traffic be handled, so that people could cross the street between the bus stop and Hampton Inn? She wondered if MDOT would put in a crosswalk signal there – like the high intensity activated crosswalk (HAWK) traffic signal at the intersection of Chapin and Huron. Thacher indicated that MDOT isn’t planning to do anything like that, other than installing pedestrian crossing signs.

Woods said her concern is that this is one of the worst places she could imagine a pedestrian trying to cross, given the entrance ramp to I-94, which she felt would cause people to increase their speed. Other factors include people coming off of I-94 onto eastbound Jackson, and people trying to turn into Weber’s. She indicated that it might be one of the first issues that Eric Mahler will take up as he moves from the planning commission to the AATA board. Wakeland responded, saying the location of the proposed crosswalk was the best possible place for it, because it goes to a center island between westbound and eastbound Jackson – rather than going across all lanes at once. He ventured that people might actually slow down to turn onto the I-94 ramp.

Bonnie Bona clarified with Thacher that only one public benefit is listed in the staff report because that’s the only public benefit claimed for the project. That category of benefit is: “An arrangement of buildings which provides a public benefit, such as transit access, pedestrian orientation, or a reduced need for infrastructure or impervious surface.” Bona wanted to know what the other possible benefits might be, in order to qualify for a planned project.

As outlined in Chapter 55 (Zoning) of the city code, in the section regarding planned projects:

(b) The proposed modifications of zoning requirements must provide one or more of the following:

1. Usable open space in excess of the minimum requirement for the zoning district. Where no minimum usable open space standard is required by the zoning district, a minimum usable open space standard shall be established by the approval of the planned project.

2. Building or parking setback(s) in excess of the minimum requirement for the zoning district. Where no minimum building or parking setback is required by the zoning district, a minimum setback standard shall be established by approval of the planned project.

3. Preservation of natural features that exceeds ordinance requirements, especially for those existing features prioritized in the land development regulations as being of highest and mid-level concern.

4. Preservation of historical or architectural features.

5. Solar orientation or energy conserving design.

6. An arrangement of buildings which provides a public benefit, such as transit access, pedestrian orientation, or a reduced need for infrastructure or impervious surface.

7. Affordable housing for lower income households.

8. A recorded conservation easement or similar binding instrument providing for permanent open space of 20 percent or more of the planned project, in any residential zoning district allowing 3 or fewer dwelling units per acre.

Bona voiced concern about pedestrian and bicycle access to the site. The site plan looks like a lot of emphasis was put on vehicular circulation, “and the sidewalk is an afterthought,” she said. Bona accepted that it makes sense to put the building on the existing footings – it was a benefit to the property owner. But when the list of public benefits provided by a planned project mentions infrastructure, it’s referring to the city’s infrastructure, not the infrastructure of private landowners. “So I’m not going to take this as a benefit. I’m going to try to get something else instead,” she said – transit access and pedestrian orientation. “There has got to be a better way.”

Ann Arbor planning commissioner Bonnie Bona.

Ann Arbor is one of the top 10 cities in the country for bicycle use, as a percentage of the population, Bona noted. So she didn’t want to hear excuses about how no one would use the sidewalk along Jackson. It might take a while for the rest of the sidewalk connection to be built, but there are a lot of cyclists, she said. Ann Arbor also has a growing retiree population too, and the need to use the bus services will only increase. Bona said she was setting the stage for putting more emphasis on the sidewalks. She clarified with the owner that the building is expected to last more than 20 years, and noted that pedestrian and bicycle use will only increase during the hotel’s lifespan.

Bona suggested that the site plan could be designed first by looking at the best ways to incorporate pedestrian walkways, then looking at how to work in parking around that – rather than the reverse. For example, how would a pedestrian get from the Clarion to the Hampton, or from the bus stop to the main entrance of the hotels? She expressed skepticism that pedestrians would actually use the proposed sidewalks, indicating that they’d likely just cut across the parking lot since that’s a more straightforward route to the hotel.

Wakeland noted that Hampton Inn officials would be reviewing the site plans too, and would want to reduce liability by making the pedestrian walkways as safe as possible. Bona argued that constructing sidewalks along routes that people would actually use is a safer approach. “If [pedestrians] are going to cut across anyhow, you’ve created an unsafe situation, because you have not provided a [sidewalk] where they’re going to walk,” she said.

Bona said she didn’t see a benefit in the site plan, so she wouldn’t be able to vote in favor of the project. She suggested postponing the item, with direction for the project team to design sidewalks “that make more sense” for everyone, including employees.

Bona also wondered why the proposed sidewalk along Jackson Avenue did not run next to the parking lot. When Wakeland indicated that they were trying not to impact landmark trees, Bona replied: “I don’t know when someone decided that you can’t put a sidewalk somewhere because of a landmark tree, but you can take landmark trees down for a building … or parking lot.”

Briere noted that it was a good thing to be talking about sidewalks, because it showed that commissioners were concerned about future access to the site. Sidewalks aren’t decorative, she noted – they’re useful. And if they’re going to be useful, they need to actually lead people somewhere.

Responding to queries from Briere, Namou indicated that the Clarion has about 5,000-6,000 square feet of conference space, and a conference might draw 200-300 people. It’s important to make traveling between the two hotels as attractive as possible, Briere said. She urged Namou to consider making the sidewalks attractive as an amenity – for exercise, or to take a break during a conference. As designed now, the sidewalks don’t lead anywhere, she noted. In order to be an amenity for the city, the sidewalks need to serve a purpose.

Wakeland made a suggestion for changing the sidewalk configuration to include a sidewalk that would lead to the Clarion entrance. He hoped the commission would give approval contingent on working with planning staff to make those changes.

Mahler wondered how the sidewalks would be lit, especially from Jackson Avenue. Wakeland noted that the lighting will be on the hotel site – and the city code prohibits light from spilling off site.

Mahler said Bona had posed an interesting challenge, to make the site pedestrian-oriented rather than car-oriented. He’d support seeing some alternative designs. He joked that he wouldn’t mind postponing, especially since he wouldn’t be here to deal with it later. [It was Mahler's last meeting as a planning commissioner.]

Giannola and Clein also weighed in to support postponement to address pedestrian issues. However, Clein urged commissioners to keep in mind the site’s location – between an MDOT business route [Jackson Avenue] and I-94. Although it might be different in a future world that doesn’t have cars, he said, the site now doesn’t connect well with other things. Most people don’t walk to a hotel, he said. “It’s not a downtown site. It’s a car-oriented site.”

Kirk Westphal, chair of the Ann Arbor planning commission.

Kirk Westphal said he was struck that the proposed sidewalks don’t acknowledge that people might want to walk from the Clarion or Hampton Inn over to Weber’s. People will probably want to do that, he said. Wakeland noted that a sidewalk such as one that Westphal proposed would need MDOT approval, since it would be partly in the MDOT right of way.

Wakeland reported that the site plan design had gone through several iterations, in part to make the sidewalks as amenable as possible. “I’m a walking fan myself, and a biking fan as well,” Wakeland said. “So I get what you’re going for.” He noted that this area is for a hotel use, and again hoped commissioners wouldn’t postpone the project. He offered to work with city staff on alternatives, and hoped that the commission would recommend approval contingent on that.

Responding to a question from Westphal, Rampson reported that the city has no standards for parking lot layout other than the aisle width and parking space size. Nor are there standards for pedestrian configuration within a parking lot. So the planning staff tends to look for the safest pedestrian crossings, with factors like visibility, the least amount of traffic and turns, and logical connections. Regarding sidewalk access to the Weber’s site, Rampson noted that the entrance into Weber’s off Jackson is not a clean turn – it’s a slip ramp. It’s something that the staff can continue to look at, she said, regardless of the commission’s decision on postponement.

Bona said she appreciated Briere’s perspective. Bona stays at hotels often when she travels – driving to the hotel, then going for a walk or a run after she’s there. She could imagine someone going for a run in the residential neighborhood south of Jackson. The idea of making a pleasant pathway through the hotel site was appealing to her, and she suggested that it could be made of asphalt, which would be cheaper than concrete. She stated that if the owner wasn’t interested in changing the site plan, she’d just vote against it.

Woods suggested looping the sidewalk through the landscaped area, so that it could be a kind of nature path – that might count as a public amenity. Wakeland cited issues with the steep grade and landmark trees.

When no commissioners put forward a motion to vote on the project, Wakeland said if the project was postponed, he hoped it could be put on the agenda for the commission’s next meeting, which falls on July 2. When Woods expressed concern that the project still needs MDOT approval, Bona pointed out that the only thing requiring MDOT approval related to the crossing on Jackson. Clein added that anything in the MDOT right of way – including landscaping or sidewalks – would also need approval.

Wakeland reported that MDOT has already reviewed the plan and has indicated that the plan is “approvable,” although the agency won’t officially sign off until it sees the final civil engineering plans.

Bona made a motion to postpone.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to postpone action on this proposal.

Master Plan Review

Planning commissioners were asked to adopt a master plan resolution and list of resource documents used to support the master plan. This is part of an annual evaluation of the master plan that’s required by the commission’s bylaws.

Commissioners had held a public hearing on suggestions related to the master plan at their May 21, 2013. That hearing drew six speakers on a range of topics, including development in Lowertown, a park in downtown Ann Arbor, and adequate sidewalks, cleared of vegetation, so that kids can walk to school safely. On May 21 commissioners also had discussed possible revisions, primarily related to supporting documents. However, on the advice of planning staff, commissioners postponed action until their June 18 meeting.

From left: Ann Arbor planning manager Wendy Rampson and planning commissioner Diane Giannola.

Seven documents constitute the city’s master plan: (1) sustainability framework, adopted in 2013; (2) parks and recreation open space (PROS) plan, as adopted in 2011; (3) land use element, as adopted in 2013 to add the South State corridor plan; (4) downtown plan, as adopted in 2009; (5) transportation plan update, as adopted in 2009; (6) non-motorized transportation plan, adopted in 2007; and (7) natural features master plan, adopted in 2004.

In briefing commissioners on June 18, planning manager Wendy Rampson noted that changes to the master plan include updating the date for the land use element from 2009 to 2013, to reflect this year’s addition of the South State corridor plan.

In addition, the June 18 resolution stated that in the coming fiscal year, the planning commission will: (1) complete the non-motorized transportation plan update; (2) continue to develop a corridor plan for Washtenaw Avenue and begin to develop a corridor plan for North Main Street to address land use, transportation and economic development in these areas; and (3) assist in developing a sustainability action plan, in coordination with the energy commission, the environmental commission, the park advisory commission, the housing commission, and the housing and human services advisory board.

There is also a list of resource documents that are used to support the master plan. [.pdf of resource document list]

The June 18 recommendation from staff, based on feedback from the May 21 meeting, was to adopt a revised list of resource documents, with two new additions: (1) the Downtown Vision and Policy Framework (known as the Calthorpe study), adopted in 2006; and (2) the Huron River Impoundment Management Plan (HRIMP), as adopted in 2009.

Earlier this year, on March 5, 2013, the planning commission had voted to add the Connecting William Street study to the list of resource documents – a move that generated some controversy.

Master Plan Review: Commission Discussion

Bonnie Bona noted that at the May 21 meeting, she had indicated interest in adding the 2007 Allen Creek Greenway task force report to the list of resource documents. She proposed to amend the resolution updating the list of resource documents. Her rationale was that work is being done that affects the greenway, including proposals for the city-owned site at 721 N. Main, which will have a pathway through it.

Planning manager Wendy Rampson explained that the greenway task force report covered three city-owned properties, including 721 N. Main. Bona noted that the other two sites – 415 W. Washington and property at First & William – are still undeveloped. “The major piece is the concept of connectivity along that path,” she said. That concept is also incorporated into the city’s parks and recreation open space (PROS) plan, Bona noted.

Bona thought the greenway report would be useful for discussions about how property that’s adjacent to the greenway gets developed – especially related to the floodway. The report included a lot of public input, she noted.

Wendy Woods and Sabra Briere both indicated support for adding the greenway report. Briere cited the usefulness of the report, primarily to inform zoning and planning of the areas adjacent to the greenway as it begins to form. Right now, much of that area is zoned for a certain type of residential development, she noted. But some people are looking at the area of a future greenway for commercial or higher-density housing, she said. It would be valuable to incorporate the greenway report along with the Calthorpe report, which also touched on the idea of a greenway. “How the city interacts with a proposed greenway will be a very valuable thing for us to think about as we keep our master plans refreshed,” Briere concluded.

Responding to a query from Kirk Westphal, Rampson described the greenway report’s recommendations as a starting point for discussions about modifying the master plan. She noted that the master plan is the official planning document, which can be informed by these supporting resource documents.

Outcome on amendment: Commissioner unanimously approved the amendment adding the Allen Creek greenway task force report as a resource document.

The remainder of the discussion was brief. Woods asked whether the resource documents were available online. Rampson replied that the documents can be downloaded from the master plan’s website, and that she would update that site with the added documents.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the master plan resolution and master plan resource document list, as amended.

Planning Commission Work Plan

At their June 4, 2013 working session, planning commissioners had discussed a work plan for both staff and the commission in the coming fiscal year, which begins July 1. Commissioners had identified projects and issues to tackle, as well as longer-range goals. [.pdf of FY 2013-14 work plan]

The most pressing of those short-term projects is the review of A2D2 zoning as directed by the city council, with a deadline of Oct. 1 to deliver recommendations to council. The primary focus of that is the downtown D1-D2 zoning, especially in light of the controversial 413 E. Huron development, which the council recently approved. The plan is to bring in a consultant to manage that zoning review, because the planning staff right now doesn’t have the capacity to take it on.

In addition to the A2D2 zoning review, other short-term efforts in the work plan related to master planning and ordinance revisions are:

• An action plan for the city’s sustainability framework. Completion target: September 2013.
• Implementation of sustainability action plan. Completion target: To be determined.
• Evaluation of the citizen participation ordinance. Completion target: October 2013.
• The non-motorized plan update. Completion target: October 2013.
• Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Reorganization (ZORO). Completion target: December 2013.
• Capital improvements plan (CIP) – second year update. Completion target: December 2013.
• Amendments to R4C/R2A zoning. Completion target: March 2014.
• Floodplain ordinance/flood insurance impacts. Completion target: March 2014.
• “Redevelopment Ready Communities” certification. Completion target: March 2014.
• Amendments to the land use element of the city’s master plan for two corridors plans – Washtenaw Avenue and North Main/Huron River. Completion target: June 2014.
• ZORO Phase 2. Completion target: June 2014.
• Sign ordinance amendments. Completion target: June 2014.

Several longer-term efforts are on the commission’s work plan too, including amendments to the city’s accessory dwelling unit ordinance and neighborhood outreach.

Bonnie Bona asked if the planning staff could support this schedule, and wondered what the challenges might be. Planning manager Wendy Rampson said the major challenge is the unknown of development reviews and permit reviews – it’s difficult to know what projects might be coming forward. For example, a project on a 54-acre parcel on Nixon Road will be coming in August, she said. That will be a fairly substantial review. And the staff has already started a Traverwood Apartments review, which is another substantial project.

“If we only have one of those a month, that’s fine,” Rampson said. But if three or four major projects are submitted each month like in “the old days,” she said, then that will limit the staff’s time that can be spent on items in the work plan. It’s possible to use consultants when appropriate, she said, although someone on staff would still have to manage the project. For example, the city staff doesn’t have the expertise to handle the sign ordinance amendments, so that’s probably a project that will require a consultant.

Rampson noted that when city planner Alexis DiLeo goes on maternity leave, the city will hire a temporary planner during that period. Even though there will be a learning curve for that person, she said, at least the staff will have the same number of people.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the FY 2013-14 work plan.

Appointments, Farewells

June 18 was the last meeting for planning commissioners Tony Derezinski and Eric Mahler. Mahler has been appointed to the board of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, and attended his first board meeting for that group on June 20, 2013.

Planning commissioner Diane Giannola talks with Paras Parekh, who has been appointed to the commission to replace Eric Mahler. Parekh attended the June 18 meeting as an observer, and will join the group after July 1.

He’ll be replaced by Paras Parekh, who was confirmed by the city council at its May 20, 2013 meeting. Parekh attended the planning commission’s June 18 meeting as an observer, and will be joining the group after July 1. He is director of marketing and membership for the University of Michigan alumni association, and received his undergrad degree in economics from UM. He has worked in marketing for about a decade, and spent two years as a legislative aide in the U.S. House of Representatives working for Congresswoman Lynn Rivers.

Derezinski, a former city councilmember, had been expected to be reappointed. His name had appeared on the list distributed to the council at its June 3 meeting as a nomination to the planning commission, but mayor John Hieftje did not read Derezinski’s name aloud that evening as a nomination. Instead, at the June 17, 2013 council meeting, Hieftje nominated Jeremy Peters to replace Derezinski, whose term ends June 30. Peters works in creative licensing and business affairs with Ghostly Songs. A council vote to confirm his appointment will take place on July 1.

On June 17, the council did vote to reappoint planning commissioner Bonnie Bona. Also reappointed was councilmember Sabra Briere, who serves as the council’s representative on the commission, for a term through Nov. 7, 2013. At that point the membership on the new, post-election city council will be settled. Briere is running for re-election and is unopposed in the Aug. 6 Democratic primary, but might face opposition in November from independent candidate Jaclyn Vresics. Vresics has taken out petitions for the Ward 1 seat but has not yet filed them with the city clerk’s office. The deadline for independent candidates to submit petitions is Aug. 7.

Near the start of the June 18 meeting, planning commissioners and staff said farewell to Mahler and Derezinski. Kirk Westphal, the commission’s chair, said the commission was honored by their service and saddened by their departure.

“I feel like our ballast is leaving,” Bonnie Bona said.

There are a lot of idealists on the commission trying to get things done, Bona noted, and the two attorneys have provided a lot of common sense practicality that’s useful – especially when some commissioners “wander off into areas that are more of our personal desire than something we can actually do,” Bona said. She’d miss that quality, and said their absence would likely make her become more practical.

Diane Giannola appreciated their “forward thinking,” especially regarding the Washtenaw Avenue and South State Street corridor studies. They’ve been more future-driven, she said, rather than “trying to just have the city stay the same. Even though sometimes that’s unpopular, I for one as a resident have always appreciated that.” She also said their legal orientation will be missed.

Wendy Woods agreed that the commission would miss the “wise comments that you gave to us, even if we didn’t always agree with you.” She thanked them for their service, and looked forward to seeing them in their future endeavors.

Sabra Briere acknowledged that she never really got to know Mahler, although she got to observe him across the table. She hoped to get to know him better as he continues his service to the city on the AATA board. However, she did get to know Derezinski, she said, because she sat next to him for four years on city council. The fact that there are different voices and viewpoints at the table, all trying to do the best for the community, “is what makes this board so rich, this community so wealthy,” she said.

Westphal highlighted Derezinski’s emphasis on collaboration. It seems to be getting more difficult to do these days, he said, but Derezinski has always “stayed the course.” Westphal appreciated Derezinski’s “quiet work” outside of the commission, citing the Reimagine Washtenaw project and issues related to aging. Those efforts bear great fruit in the long run, Westphal noted, but it takes a lot of work to get there. He cited Mahler’s service as planning commission chair as helping Westphal’s current tenure in that position. Westphal also appreciated Mahler’s ability to keep the commission on task and ensure that projects moved forward, as well as his legal expertise.

Sabra Briere, an Ann Arbor city councilmember who also serves on the city’s planning commission.

Westphal said commissioners would miss both Mahler and Derezinski, “both faithful co-pilots of the Blue Tractor as well” – a reference to the fact that some commissioners go to that local bar after meetings adjourn.

Planning manager Wendy Rampson told Mahler and Derezinski that she had valued their leadership on the commission. It’s a citizen body that demands a lot of its members, she noted, meeting almost weekly. She knew that sometimes Mahler wanted things to move forward more quickly, “but you are eminently patient.” It will be great to see his service continue on the AATA as that agency grows and becomes more important to the region, she said.

Rampson noted that Derezinski is “always good for a new idea.” Sometimes, that would cause her to brace herself when she saw him approaching, Rampson joked, but he brought enthusiasm and commitment to all his work. His emphasis on regional planning was a great vision. Both of them will be “sorely missed,” she said.

Derezinski told commissioners that he had to leave the meeting early for a family responsibility, “so I’m leaving not with a bang but with a whimper.” He thanked commissioners for the pleasure of their company. The commission is unique, he said, in that it works on tough decisions and respects each other. Strong feelings never escalate to personal, ad hominem attacks – it’s always been collegial and civil, he said, which is important. He recalled the ritual that he and Briere had on council, when they would bring each other coffee. Little things like that helped bridge the gap when they disagreed on issues, he said. It’s the kind of thing that makes government work well.

Derezinski also praised the city’s planning staff, saying that they were incredibly smart and hard-working. That’s not an accident, he said – it’s the result of leadership, goodwill and friendship. He thanked everyone for the wonderful time he’s had on the commission over the last four and a half years.

Regarding their gatherings at the Blue Tractor, Derezinski said they should remember the words of a poet whose name he couldn’t recall [A. E. Housman]: “And malt does more than Milton can. To justify God’s ways to man.”

Mahler thanked everyone, saying he enjoyed every minute on the commission. It’s mind blowing how much has been accomplished over the last six years, he said. He’s proud of that work, which was done respectfully and collegially. His work takes him around southeast Michigan and the state, and people envy Ann Arbor, he said. That envy in large part reflects the results of work by the planning staff and commission, he said.

Other commissioners gave the two outgoing members a round of applause.

Communications & Commentary

During the meeting there were several opportunities for communications from staff and commissioners, as well as two general public commentary times. Here are some highlights.

Communications & Commentary: Public Commentary

Steve Beisheim spoke during the first opportunity for public commentary. He’d been reading a book called “Suburban Nation,” and watching a lot of videos by the authors. It’s mind-blowing, he said. The way that cities have been built out, the tax base doesn’t cover cost of the infrastructure. Even if federal funding is available to build infrastructure, local governments can’t afford to maintain it. From what he’s read, all the cities are doing things the same way, with regard to zoning, he said. That’s why every gas station is the same across the country, he said. There are other options, even though people tend to go against their best interests. He told commissioners that he’s trying to educate himself and see how they work, and hopefully he can be a positive influence in the future.

Present: Bonnie Bona, Sabra Briere, Ken Clein (arrived at 8 p.m.), Tony Derezinski, Diane Giannola, Eric Mahler, Kirk Westphal, Wendy Woods.

Absent: Eleanore Adenekan.

Next regular meeting: Tuesday, July 2, 2013 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 survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the city’s planning commission. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

From left: Julie Grand (Ward 3 challenger), Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3 incumbent), Jack Eaton (Ward 4 challenger), Mike Anglin (Ward 5 incumbent), Kirk Westphal (Ward 2 candidate), and Sabra Briere (Ward 1 incumbent).

In the Aug. 6 Democratic primary, only two wards offer contested races. In Ward 3, Democratic voters will choose between incumbent Stephen Kunselman and Julie Grand. Ward 4 voters will have a choice between incumbent Marcia Higgins and Jack Eaton. Higgins was reported to have been sick and was unable to attend.

The format of the event eventually allowed other candidates who are unopposed in the Democratic primary to participate: Mike Anglin (Ward 5 incumbent), Sabra Briere (Ward 1 incumbent), and Kirk Westphal, who’s challenging incumbent Jane Lumm in Ward 2. Lumm, who was elected to the council as an independent, was in the audience at the forum but didn’t participate. The event was held at the Ann Arbor Community Center on North Main Street. The Chronicle’s coverage is presented in a multiple-part series, based on common threads that formed directly in response to questions posed to the candidates, or that cut across multiple responses.

More than one question posed to candidates was explicitly designed to elicit views on downtown Ann Arbor. Taken as a group, the questions prompted responses that formed several discrete subtopics related to land use and planning: planning in general; planning specifically for city-owned properties; and planning for a hotel/conference center.

Another general theme covered the role of the downtown in the life of the city of Ann Arbor, with additional subtopics that included: the appropriate balance of investment between downtown and non-downtown neighborhoods; who should and does benefit from the downtown; and the role of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.

This report includes candidate responses on these issues.

Part 1 of this series focused on the candidates’ concept of and connection to Ann Arbor, while Part 2 looked at their personal styles of engagement and views of how the council interacts. Part 3 reported on the theme of connections, including physical connections like transportation, as well as how people are connected to local government. Chronicle election coverage is tagged with “2013 primary election.”

Planning

Several of the candidates’ remarks related to themes that could be grouped together under the notion of planning.

Planning: Zoning, Density

Julie Grand noted that people have concerns about changes in the downtown landscape. And the 413 E. Huron development really seems to be the building that represents those concerns the best, she said – due to its proximity to a residential neighborhood. She attributed part of the concern to a sense that this change has been very rapid, and “very jarring.” “We wanted density in the downtown,” she said, but it wasn’t anticipated that it would involve adding mostly students in the downtown. “Those who supported density didn’t think it was going to be blocky buildings and students,” she said. Rather, they thought density was going to bring boomers and young professionals – and they were going to live in architecturally interesting buildings.

Grand indicated she was pleased that the city’s planning commission is now reviewing the D1-zoned properties – especially those parcels that are close to residential neighborhoods. [D1 is the zoning that allows for the highest density development.] She remains in favor of density in the downtown, and feels that there are now some opportunities, especially with the city-owned properties downtown, to “get it right” and to build buildings that are really consistent with what the community wants.

Jack Eaton thought the 413 E. Huron project needs to be considered in the broader perspective of the A2D2 (Ann Arbor Discovering Downtown) zoning. Radical, broad changes to downtown zoning were made, he contended, that didn’t comply with the city’s master plan. He agreed with the idea of creating an area in the core of the city that is dense. But the master plan calls for buffers – between that density and the nearby neighborhoods. And on that, he continued, “we failed miserably.” He had opposed the A2D2 plan at the time for that reason. When the 413 E. Huron site plan came forward, there was a proposal to impose a moratorium so that the city could go back and make the zoning compliant with the master plan requirement for buffer zones.

Eaton characterized his opponent in the Ward 4 race, Marcia Higgins, as one of the driving forces behind the A2D2 zoning that was flawed with respect to its incorporation of buffers, he said.

Stephen Kunselman said the 413 E. Huron project had resulted in a distrust of the whole planning process. He’d participated in the Calthorpe process back in 2004 when mayor John Hieftje appointed him to the planning commission, he said. He was very supportive of downtown density and efforts to bring residential living downtown. But he said it’s been a little discouraging that recent projects had all been geared toward student housing. He added, “You know, we’ll see how it plays out.” Kunselman called for cleaning up the periphery so that the example of 413 E. Huron is not repeated.

Mike Anglin said the hardest topic the council has addressed has been development. Every time a big, contentious development has come before the council, it’s taken an “inordinate amount of time,” Anglin said. He indicated some frustration about the fact that planning staff and the city attorney’s office should be directing the council on zoning issues. He characterized the long A2D2 zoning process as not being very effective. He observed that the council obviously was not unanimous about the 413 E. Huron building. [The project had been approved on a 6-5 vote at the council's May 13, 2013 session.]

Planning: Hotel/Conference Center

Jack Eaton stated that he’s not opposed to a downtown hotel or a downtown conference center. But he’s opposed to the city subsidizing either of those kinds of projects. He thought if there’s a market for a downtown hotel, a hotel company will come in and build one. As for a downtown conference center, he expressed confidence that there is no market for one. And any community that has engaged in subsidizing a downtown conference center has found itself throwing money into a hole for decades, Eaton contended: “It just doesn’t work.”

The Valiant Partners, who had proposed a downtown hotel and conference center, expected the city to pay for building it and expected the city to operate it forever, Eaton contended. He said we shouldn’t spend our tax money in that fashion. If there’s a market for those things, we should let it happen, he allowed. Certainly in the D1 zoning district downtown, somebody can come downtown and buy a parcel and do those things. But the city government should not involve itself financially in those opportunities, he concluded.

Julie Grand agreed that if there is going to be a downtown hotel and convention center, then the city should not pay for it. When the city had solicited proposals, it had been “a learning process,” she said. But she felt the city council had heard loud and clear from residents that they did not want to pay for a downtown conference center. If there is such a center, and it’s successful, then that’s great, she said. Grand was definitely not opposed to a new hotel space being built downtown. She’d heard over and over again that there’s a lack of hotel space downtown. A downtown hotel could bring more people to the downtown and help with positive activation of downtown space.

Grand said she’s interested in the question: How do we make our downtown spaces more active, safer, and in line with the community needs? If there is a hotel and conference center that someone wants to build, then she thought that needed to be considered carefully – adding that the city should not be using tax dollars to pay for it.

Stephen Kunselman said it’s great to know that other candidates at the forum agreed that public subsidies shouldn’t be used to promote a downtown conference center or hotel. He counted himself in the same camp. He pointed out that during all the discussions of the last couple of years, two new hotels have been built out at Briarwood. That showed that the private sector knows when it needs to build a hotel and knows where to put it. Briarwood had been chosen because that’s where parking is available, he said, and it provides easy access to the expressways.

“We can pontificate all we want about the need for a hotel downtown, but those of us who grew up in Ann Arbor remember the story of the Ann Arbor Inn which sat empty for many, many years,” Kunselman cautioned. If there was truly a market for it, somebody else would have taken that risk. And obviously they are not choosing to do so at this time, he concluded.

Planning: City-Owned Properties

On the subject of balancing development, Julie Grand questioned the idea that people want development throughout the city. That’s not necessarily what she’s hearing out in the neighborhoods, she said. There are some very dense neighborhoods in Ward 3, where she lives. Residents don’t want dense development – they feel it’s already dense enough as it is, she said. Grand noted that it’s important to build density in those places where people want density. And one of the ways that can be done – an approach over which the city council has a lot of control – is by using the downtown city-owned properties as an example.

By way of background, five of those downtown city-owned properties were the subject of the Ann Arbor DDA’s Connecting William Street project: (1) the Kline parking lot (on the east side of Ashley, north of William), (2) the parking lot next to Palio restaurant (northeast corner of Main & William), (3) the ground floor of the Fourth & William parking structure, (4) the former YMCA lot (on William between Fourth and Fifth), which is now a surface parking lot, and (5) the top of the Library Lane underground parking garage on South Fifth, north of the downtown library.

Grand described herself as a big believer in education through success, saying, “success breeds success.” If the city wants to show a good example of successful development – one that’s consistent with the values of this community – then the city-owned properties are a place where the city has to take charge and make sure that happens. If we want a building that’s not boxy, she said, that might mean we have to be “a little forward thinking as leaders in this community and not just necessarily accept the highest bid for a city property.” But Grand cautioned that it’s important to make sure that the debt is covered.

Commenting on the redevelopment of city-owned properties downtown, Stephen Kunselman said, “we have a horrible, horrible track record of participating in the development arena.” The former Y project [an allusion to William Street Station] was a good example of failure by a local government that came about because it was trying to do something it wasn’t capable of doing, he said. A local government is supposed to provide for public safety, health and welfare. When you engage in speculative development, by partnering with a developer, all they want to do is “suck on that public dollar,” Kunselman said. That’s not going to work.

Kunselman gave the previously proposed Lower Town development as one where the city started participating in that project – but now it’s going to be a blight on the community for years, he said, because it is so over-leveraged in debt that the owners aren’t going to be able to sell it. He ventured that nothing would happen to that property unless the University of Michigan bought the land, which he hoped would not happen. He said the city needs to do everything it can to prevent the university from purchasing it, but he wasn’t sure that was possible.

“We need to step back and understand what the limits are of what we can do as a local government, and focus on those core issues and on those core services and on public safety, health and welfare – and let the private sector take care of development,” Kunselman said. Good development can be encouraged by having a good site plan process and a good planning commission, he said, and by adhering to the city’s master plans and enforcing the city’s zoning ordinances. That’s what our neighbors expect of the city council, Kunselman added, and that’s what he thought would breed a better community and redevelopment in our community.

Grand responded to Kunselman’s negative assessment of the city’s past involvement in development projects. Just because the city council made mistakes in the past about how to spur successful development, doesn’t mean that they can’t get it right in the future, she ventured. She didn’t think that city councilmembers have been perfect in the past, but thought, “we can actually learn from our mistakes.” One of the things she thought she’d done fairly well as chair of the park advisory commission was to work toward public engagement. It’s something that she does as a volunteer, it’s part of what she teaches, and she thinks we can learn from the mistakes of the past.

For the city-owned properties, Grand said, the community should not be left out of those decisions, but “we just have to be smarter about how we involve the community.”

About the old Y site, Kunselman said it’s obvious that it would not be sold until the prospective buyer has a site plan approved by the city council. Nobody’s going to buy on speculation – not with that kind of money involved, he concluded.

Role of Downtown

Another theme that emerged during the candidate forum could be grouped under the notion of the role of the downtown in the community.

Role of Downtown: Balance with Neighborhoods

Stephen Kunselman allowed that investment in the downtown is great. And downtown Ann Arbor is the wealthiest area in the community, he said. But out in the deeper areas of Ward 3, property values have decreased by 30%. There is no investment, and those areas are not getting the kind of needed investments it takes to raise the value of those neighborhoods. How important is that? To illustrate the kind of positive impact that city investments can have, Kunselman gave the example of a Ward 3 neighborhood – Arbor Oaks. When you look at their brand-new roads and brand-new water mains and sidewalks – their neighborhood looks fine, Kunselman said. And if you talk to the people out there, crime is down and the perception of their neighborhood has improved dramatically. And that’s what the city needs to do for all neighborhoods, Kunselman said. He’s tired of walking along the street with potholes and listening to people complain that they are not getting services, when the local government talks about cutting services.

Julie Grand said she wanted to point out that she does care about investment in the city’s neighborhoods. She felt that she and Kunselman disagreed about whether there’s more of a symbiotic relationship between downtown and the neighborhoods. She believes that development in the city’s neighborhoods actually does contribute to the downtown. She acknowledged the fact that property values went down in some neighborhoods. But she didn’t think that has anything to do with the DDA, or a focus on the downtown. She thinks that people want to come to the city and want to move into the neighborhoods, because they want to have a downtown. A downtown actually supports core services and the value of our neighborhoods, she concluded.

Kunselman stressed the idea that infrastructure is what keeps property values stable and improving. But there’s been a lack of infrastructure improvements over the last decades, he said – because the city had been saving money for the East Stadium bridge, or the DDA is capturing tax revenue that could also be used to spread out to the neighborhoods. That’s the kind of thing he’s been talking about. It’s his purpose as a representative of Ward 3 on the city council to distribute the wealth to those that are more in need, he said.

In its neighborhoods, Ward 3 has some of the highest concentrations of low-to-moderate-income families, Kunselman said. There are abandoned homes, he said, giving as an example Platt Road, where there are at least three homes where the properties aren’t being mowed, and it looks bad. That translates into no investment, he said. Property values are not coming up, and there’s no infill development. A lot of housing is being built downtown, Kunselman said. But there aren’t single-family homes being built in the neighborhoods. And that’s what we need, he contended. That would be his purpose for the next two years, Kunselman stated – to help reestablish priority back on our neighborhoods and not downtown.

Jack Eaton allowed that the roads in Ward 4 are a mess. But in the Lawton neighborhood and in some of the Dicken neighborhoods – and everywhere downstream, apparently – there have been significant flooding problems. Eaton attributed that to the fact that the city’s stormwater system has been neglected for decades. Fifteen years ago, the city had hired a consultant to study the flooding problems, he noted. The city received a report but did not act upon it – because it was simply too expensive, Eaton said. Another study process has been started, which is going to take a year and a half or more just to come to some recommendations.

So Eaton didn’t really think that the most pressing issue in Ward 4 could be resolved in the next two years. But he would certainly try to push it along – to get some relief for the people who live in neighborhoods that get flooded every time a heavy rain falls. One of the things that the current study is not addressing is the harm that the city has done in houses through its requirement that they disconnect footing drains and install sump pumps, he said. In houses where there’s never been a problem before, they now flood every time it rains, Eaton said. While the city is studying its water systems, nothing is being done to alleviate the harm that has already been done to the homeowners – and he thought that’s just outrageous.

Eaton pointed out that the DDA received about $4 million in TIF (tax increment finance) revenues last year, but it also receives several million dollars from the public parking system. So there’s a lot of money in the downtown area that could be used for other purposes – additional police, additional attention to the city’s infrastructure. But because it’s the DDA that is contracting with Republic Parking rather than the city, the money first goes to the DDA, he said, and then the city gets a little bit of a return on that. [The city receives 17% of gross parking revenues.] Eaton thought more of the money that the DDA takes in should be spent on the general welfare of the whole city, especially the neighborhoods. At every door he knocks on, people complain about the city’s roads. At every door he knocks on, people are concerned about safety services. Those are appropriate spending priorities, Eaton said, and if it means that the DDA’s revenues need to be constrained, that’s fine with him.

Kunselman took the liberty of rephrasing one of the questions from the moderator as follows: What can we do as a local government to encourage redevelopment in our neighborhoods? The first thing, Kunselman said, is that we need to start pushing back on some of the policies that were put in place by [former city administrator] Roger Fraser and [former public services area administrator] Sue McCormick – which raised the cost of utilities, improvement charges and connection charges. Some of these things were just outrageous, he said. Those polices stymie and stifle infill development in our neighborhoods. A new house won’t get built in a vacant lot in his neighborhood when the lot itself costs less than $20,000, but the improvement charge is $40,000. “It’s not going to happen – the economics don’t work,” he said.

So those kinds of policies have created a stifling effect on neighborhood development, Kunselman said. But downtown is seeing lots of development, he noted. That’s why there’s such a disparity between downtown wealth and the lack of wealth in the city’s neighborhoods. So the council is now taking a new direction by starting to repeal some of those policies that Sue McCormick and Roger Fraser had put in place, he said. Those policies would never have been imposed in a place like Detroit, Kunselman ventured. But it had been assumed that Ann Arbor is so wealthy that people would be able to pay those $40,000 improvement charges. That had been an attempt to use the utility system to generate revenue – which was the wrong direction to go and we need to repeal that, Kunselman said.

Jack Eaton said that when there’s talk about expanding the tax base, it’s important to consider where development is taking place. If it takes place in the DDA TIF capture district, then the tax base is not actually adding to the municipal tax base by an appreciable amount. TIF districts capture taxes and divert them from the local government, Eaton said. The increased population will create new demands for police and other services, but the new tax revenues are diverted to the DDA, he said. So Eaton would take a close look at how much money is diverted to the DDA. Eaton said he would be especially skeptical about forming new TIF districts on the State Street corridor, on the North Main corridor, or the Washtenaw Corridor. [This is an allusion to the possibility of forming a corridor improvement authority (CIA), made possible by relatively new legislation.] We shouldn’t be skimming money off the general tax revenues, Eaton said, when we are trying to improve the city at large, and not just these districts.

About the idea of a corridor improvement authority (CIA), Grand didn’t want to comment on State Street. But she noted that she serves on the North Main Huron River corridor task force. And a CIA is something that the task force has considered as a way to develop properties along the river. But she characterized that as a long-term approach. She also stated that new development does contribute to the tax base, even if some of the additional taxes go to a TIF authority. All of that money goes toward schools, she contended, and a lot of that money goes to pay for core services.

Role of Downtown: Who’s the Downtown For?

The question that prompted comments along the lines of who the downtown is for seemed to include the premise that downtown Ann Arbor had become a tourist trap. Julie Grand began by saying she disagreed with the premise of the question. Ann Arbor has for a long time had events that have brought people to the community. Part of providing amenities for residents is having places that draw people from the outside, too, she said. “That’s what successful cities do, and what successful downtowns do,” she said. Grand reported spending a lot of Saturdays with a lot of people “in a big bowl” – at football games. When 112,000 attend a football game, they are coming from the outside, and it’s nice to be able to recapture those dollars and have them stay at hotels and have places to eat – that provide jobs and taxes, and that fund core services in our community.

So Grand doesn’t mind that Ann Arbor has a vibrant downtown that attracts people from the outside. She attributed that to the fact that the DDA is doing its job. She hears that some residents feel that “the downtown is not for me.” She didn’t agree with that perspective, but she did hear people who have that perspective. She felt it was important to talk about development in downtown that is for the people who live in the downtown. The downtown park subcommittee of the park advisory commission had taken a walk recently, to look at some of the development as well as existing parks and open space, she reported. And the idea had been discussed that maybe Main Street is for people who come from the outside. But there are some really great things that are happening in other parts of downtown – like South Ashley – that might be described as a “townie corridor.” Grand liked the fact that “people want to come in from the outside and see what a great community we have.”

Stephen Kunselman gave his perspective on Ann Arbor, having grown up here. He’s seen the changes to the downtown from the 1970s. In the 1960s, as a toddler, he and his mom lived where Liberty Plaza is today, at Liberty and Division. In the 1970s, as a young teenager, he came downtown frequently because that’s where everybody used to come and hang out. There’s been a significant change, he said. Retail businesses have gone out to Briarwood, and it seems like nothing but restaurants are back-filling those spaces. Borders bookstore has been lost, along with all kinds of flagship stores that previously brought the older residents into the downtown. That’s not happening as much anymore, he ventured.

About himself, Kunselman said, he’s not coming into downtown to hang out with a bunch of 20-year-olds anymore. He just turned 50 and – as much as he wanted to maintain his youth – he indicated he wasn’t going to be visiting downtown in the way he did when he was younger. He didn’t think we should be trying to change the downtown back to the way it used to be, with department stores like Jacobson’s: “I don’t think that’s within our ability and I don’t think that’s something we should worry about.”

The dynamic of downtown is bringing in outside dollars, Kunselman said, and it is supporting our economy. And people are coming to town to cultural events, primarily that the university provides. He thinks that’s great – as Ann Arbor does have an older citizenry that still loves culture. It’s those people who are going to come downtown in the evenings to go to Hill Auditorium and go to Michigan Theater, and to go to the Power Center and then go to some restaurants.

But if downtown Ann Arbor becomes nothing but a food court, that’s not going to be sustainable, he cautioned. Kunselman pointed out there’s always been a tension between residents and outsiders. Back in the 1980s, there had been a banner on Division Street on somebody’s front porch during the art fairs, which stated: “U.S. suburbanites out of Ann Arbor.” That tension between townies and those that come in and participate in Ann Arbor’s great cultural events has been there for a long time, and we are not going to solve that, Kunselman concluded.

As far as Ann Arbor being a tourist trap, Jack Eaton allowed that it might seem that way – because there are a lot of restaurants and bars. But he felt that’s part of any college town. About the DDA’s possible role in that, he thought the DDA does have the intent to diversify downtown, by bringing in empty-nesters and young professionals to live there. They want to attract new businesses downtown so that the downtown area has jobs. But Eaton expressed some doubt about whether the DDA had been successful at that yet. Still, the goals of the DDA are pointed in the right direction, Eaton said. We should be making efforts toward a good diverse economy downtown – so that it isn’t just a series of coffee shops, bars and restaurants.

Unfortunately, Eaton said, a lot of that effort has resulted in student high-rises, which he characterized as counter to the purpose of the goal. If you get too many students living in a neighborhood, Eaton cautioned, you’re not getting the empty-nester or young professional to live there, too. Eaton didn’t think there’s anything the DDA has done right or wrong to cause downtown to just be bars and restaurants. It’s a reflection of where the economy is right now. As retail has moved out, other things replace it. Because rents are so high in the downtown, Eaton ventured, the replacements will be chain stores like CVS or expensive coffee shops with high prices. If we can develop some new office buildings, and if new residents can be added to downtown, we might see some other changes, Eaton concluded.

Role of Downtown: Downtown Development Authority

Jack Eaton said he believes Ann Arbor has a good downtown development authority, and the DDA serves an important function. But the parameters for funding the DDA are laid out in the city’s ordinance. What disappoints him about the Ann Arbor DDA, Easton said, is that the DDA has interpreted the city ordinance related to TIF capture that is at odds with the interpretation that the city had provided. And the city council has just allowed a subordinate body to tell the city council how to interpret its own ordinance, Eaton said. “I think that’s outrageous.” He attributed the unusual assertion of that kind of authority to the fact that people have been allowed to serve for so long on the DDA board that they believe they know better about public policy than the city council does. Eaton would support Stephen Kunselman’s effort to rein in the amount of TIF capture the DDA receives and to impose reasonable term limits on service on the DDA board.

Julie Grand allowed that she’s heard concerns about the DDA out in the community. But regardless of your opinion about the DDA or the downtown, “we all benefit from what the DDA does,” she said. Everyone benefits from a vibrant downtown that attracts new residents – that supports our local businesses and helps our economy, Grand said. As someone who grew up in a small town that witnessed emptying storefronts, and as someone who has witnessed efforts that have not always been successful because that town didn’t have a strong organization like the DDA to rebuild the downtown, she appreciated the DDA’s efforts.

Grand feels that the current system of funding actually works pretty well. The fact that the DDA is receiving more money is a reflection of the DDA’s success, she said. The DDA’s purpose is to encourage investment in the downtown, and the fact that more money is being generated shows that the DDA is doing its job. She thought the council had exercised its right to ask questions of and communicate with the DDA about how some of that additional money is spent. Overall, Grand appreciated the DDA’s efforts that contributed to the city’s tax base.

Acknowledging that there were a number of DDA board members in the forum audience, Kunselman ventured that everybody knows there’s been some tension between himself and the DDA board over the interpretation of the city ordinances – about how the DDA operates and its responsiveness to the community as a whole, not just downtown. That had been a big issue in his 2011 election. He’d heard from the neighborhoods – the voters that put him in office – that there needs to be accountability. And Kunselman contended that there’s been a significant change in how the DDA operates since he’d raised those issues over the years.

As an example of that, he gave the fact that this year the DDA had adopted its budget after the city council had approved it [with changes made by the city council, compared to the budget previously adopted by the DDA board] – according to state law. That had never happened before, he said. He felt that the DDA provides a significant benefit to the community. But he also contended that because of the leadership he’d shown on DDA-related issues – despite the political intimidation, he said, and the character assassination that the DDA orchestrates against him – it was apparent that the DDA board members are not the leaders of this community: “We, the elected officials, are [the leaders].” Kunselman said it’s important that the relationship between the city and the DDA works for the community as a whole.

In discussing improvements of infrastructure in the neighborhoods, Kunselman took the opportunity to criticize the DDA – by saying the DDA doesn’t know how to spend its money. He pointed out that the DDA is not contributing to the Fourth Avenue project downtown, which includes installing new water mains and a new road surface. Now the DDA is talking about replacing light poles on Main Street, Kunselman said – which the DDA had the whole past year to plan for, but didn’t. He stressed that no one has ever called for the dissolution of the DDA. Kunselman ventured that the DDA is now being responsive to the community needs, whether they like it or not.

Grand said the city is fortunate to have volunteers in the community [DDA board members] who help formulate policy on downtown issues. As someone who serves on a commission herself as a volunteer [the park advisory commission] and who spends a lot of time at that, she appreciated the efforts of those volunteers who are working to better our community and who are doing it because they really care about the community. That’s why she serves on the park advisory commission.

Responding to Grand’s description of the DDA as successful, Kunselman allowed that since its establishment in the 1980s, the DDA has been tremendously successful. Our downtown is thriving, he said. He stressed that he’s not talking about dissolving the DDA. But the intent of the law that was drafted in 1981 was that when you’re successful, when the time is up, then dissolve the DDA and move on. That’s never happened, he said. Out of the roughly 200 TIF districts across the state, only four have been dissolved, he thought. So he was not calling for the dissolution of the Ann Arbor DDA.

However, he was saying that the DDA really needs to focus. The 2003 TIF plan gives the DDA a lot of different directions to choose from – and the DDA is “all over the place.” Kunselman pointed out that the city council had changed the DDA’s budget to put more money in the DDA’s housing fund, but the DDA was now complaining there are no affordable housing projects it can support with that money. He said that Miller Manor – an Ann Arbor Housing Commission property – would be a good project. “We’re trying to get the DDA to be more focused.” Any project the DDA wants to undertake should be in the city’s capital improvement plan (CIP), Kunselman said. That way, the community would also get to participate in that discussion.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Aerial view of the proposed Hampton Inn site (outlined in black) on Jackson Avenue, adjacent to the eastbound I-94 entrance ramp.

The proposed four-story hotel, located on an 8.8-acre site north of Jackson and south of I-94, would include 100 bedrooms and 51,608 usable square feet. A 163-room Clarion Hotel is on the same site, east of the proposed new hotel. A driveway into the Hampton Inn would be across Jackson Road from the entrance to Weber’s Inn, which is located to the west. The Hampton Inn construction cost is estimated at $800,000.

A previous site plan for that location had been approved in 2008, and a Super 8 motel there was demolished. The foundation was laid for a new Hampton Inn, but the project was never completed and the building permits and site plan expired.

The development is seeking planned project status so that it can use the existing foundation. In 2008, no maximum front setback had been required. Now, however, a maximum front setback is required on at least one of the site’s three front property lines. A planned project status would allow that requirement to be waived.

According to a staff memo, a pedestrian crossing on Jackson Avenue is proposed from the Hampton Inn site to Hilltop Drive, which runs parallel to and south of Jackson and is separated by a landscaping island. The Ann Arbor Transportation Authority plans to relocate a bus stop on eastbound Jackson Avenue to be near this crossing.

Because Jackson Avenue is under the jurisdiction of the Michigan Dept. of Transportation, MDOT must review the plans for this development. The planning staff memo also states that footing drains of 10 homes must be disconnected to offset the project’s increased sanitary sewer flow.

The commission’s discussion primarily focused on sidewalk issues, with Bonnie Bona in particular criticizing the plan for not providing pedestrian access that made sense. Bona suggested that demand for pedestrian amenities will only increase in the future, and she couldn’t support this project unless the site plan addressed that design deficit. She proposed postponing the project so that modifications could be explored. The vote to postpone was unanimous.

This brief was filed from the second floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow: [link]