2026-09-22 - City Council

05:16Good evening everyone and welcome to the

05:18September 22nd meeting of the Ann Arbor

05:20City Council. If you're able,

05:23thank you. Mic needs to be on.

05:27If you're able, please rise and join us

05:29for a moment of silence, followed by the

05:31pledge of allegiance.

05:45I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

05:48United States of America and to the

05:50republic for which it stands, one nation

05:53under God, indivisible, with liberty and

05:55justice for all. Would

06:00our clerk please call the role of

06:02councel?

06:05>> Council member Dish

06:06>> here.

06:07>> Council Harrison

06:08>> here.

06:09>> Council Watson

06:10>> here.

06:11>> Council Malik

06:12>> here.

06:13>> Council Medina

06:14>> here.

06:14>> Council Gaziwa

06:16>> here.

06:16>> Mayor Taylor

06:17>> here.

06:18>> Council

06:19absent.

06:20>> Council Aman

06:22>> here.

06:22>> Council bricks

06:23>> here. Council Cornell

06:25>> here. We have a quorum. May

06:27>> I have a motion, please, to approve the

06:28agenda? Moved by council member here,

06:31second by council member Gazi Edwin.

06:33Discussion of the agenda.

06:36>> All in favor? All opposed? The agenda is

06:40approved. Are there communications today

06:41from our city administrator?

06:43>> No. Mayor,

06:44>> we have uh a single introduction today.

06:46The pleasure of a report from the

06:48downtown development authority. Miss

06:50Thompson, you have the you have the gun.

06:54>> All right. We'll do what we can. Thank

06:55you.

07:06>> Wait for my presentation.

07:22Oh yeah, mine works now.

07:27I think they're back. They're just

07:30waiting for a present. Does she have a

07:31presentation?

07:34>> All right. Thank you. [snorts]

07:57It is probably in there

08:03test.

08:30It's building up the suspense. It's

08:31going to be

08:32>> It's going to be great.

08:34your expectations.

08:52Its 2020 2025 state of the downtown

08:55report and that's calendar year 25. And

08:58I also have just a few slides to share

09:00some information on the first two

09:02quarters of 2026.

09:05Uh so the visitation data that we use is

09:08from Placer AI. Uh Placer AI uses cell

09:12phone data which they extrapolate using

09:15an algorithm that is able to do

09:18estimates of people in any given place

09:21at a particular time.

09:23um they do adjust that algorithm

09:25routinely as they get new information.

09:28And I point this out only because if you

09:31looked back to our 2024 state of the

09:33downtown report, you may see some

09:35variation in the numbers, not in the

09:38trends, but just in the numbers. Um just

09:41there are some small discrepancies from

09:44year to year based on when we pulled the

09:46data.

09:49Um so overall uh positive news um

09:53activity downtown continues to exceed

09:56prepandemic levels and that is um

10:00despite the fact that our employee

10:02visits still have not recovered from

10:05prepandemic levels.

10:08So when we're talking about downtown

10:10visits and the downtown population,

10:12we're talking about three categories. So

10:15we have resident visits and those are

10:18residents who live within the DDA

10:21boundary. So that's not Ann Arbor

10:23residents, it's Ann Arbor residents who

10:25live within the DDA boundary. Um our

10:27employee visits, those are employees who

10:30work within the DDA boundary. And then

10:32visitor visits are everyone else who

10:35doesn't either live downtown or work

10:37downtown.

10:38>> [snorts]

10:38>> Um so you can see at the the top bar

10:412025 like I mentioned we have exceeded

10:44preandemic visits. Um our resident

10:48visits are up 12% from preandemic. And

10:52when you think about the amount of um

10:54development that we have had downtown

10:56throughout the pandemic, it makes sense

10:58that you know a lot of these places have

11:00now come online and we have people

11:01living in these um buildings. Again, our

11:04uh employee visits are down 11%.

11:08Um and our visitor visits are up 6%.

11:13So visit, this is visitor visit trend.

11:16Um so looking at 24 compared to 25 on a

11:20month-by-month basis, pretty much every

11:22month is up compared to 2024. Um overall

11:27uh we're up about 460,000

11:31visitor visits um in 2025.

11:36So this is looking at visitor at visits

11:39and and major event calling out major

11:41events. Um and a couple of things and I

11:43I'm pretty sure I've shared a similar

11:45graph uh with council previously. Um,

11:48but if you look at this graph, you're

11:49starting in January through December,

11:51and it really is in complete alignment

11:54with U of M's calendar, right? So, if

11:56you look from January through May, you

11:58can see that activity level, which then

12:01from May to August really um, you know,

12:04lowers when U of M is not in session,

12:06picks back up at the end of August. And

12:08then some um, some of the event

12:10highlights. Um in the beginning of the

12:13year we had a really great um basketball

12:16game that drew a lot of people. Um Hash

12:18Bash is has always been a very popular

12:21event and prior to us um collecting this

12:25visitor data just through parking

12:26information we we knew Hashbash was

12:29always really busy. Um of course U of M

12:31graduation goes without saying. And then

12:33you can see in the summer we get our art

12:35fair bump which is needed. Um, and then

12:39fall, great time of year, downtown

12:41activity really picks up, students come

12:43back, we have our football games. Um,

12:45and then that brings us to the holiday

12:46season where Midnight Madness, and we

12:48should have called out Kindlefest on

12:49this. Um, really brings a lot of people

12:52to our downtown at a time when um, we

12:54need those visits.

12:57So, here's employee visitation. Um, as I

13:00mentioned, we still have not recovered

13:02from to preandemic levels. We're down um

13:07about 500,000 visits. Uh we do know that

13:11some um federal policy changes uh

13:14through those federal policy changes, U

13:16of M um their employee base has dropped

13:19on central campus by 14.5%.

13:22So, you combine that with employers

13:25still having um a lot of generous work

13:28from home policies in place um and you

13:31can see why our employee visits, you

13:33know, haven't haven't quite recovered.

13:35Um but what that means is we really need

13:38to think about our daytime economy

13:40because for businesses that rely on foot

13:42traffic during the day, um it's it's

13:44difficult.

13:47So now just to look at our um area

13:50associations or our shopping district.

13:52This map um the blue is the DDA district

13:55and then the four area associations are

13:57overlaid. So you have Kerry Town, Main

14:00Street, State Street and South

14:02University. So in looking at the

14:05visitation to our area associations, it

14:08makes sense that our two largest

14:10shopping districts, Main Street and

14:12State Street, did welcome the most

14:14visitors in 2025. Um, but when you break

14:17it down by area, the neighborhoods

14:19closest to campus draw the highest

14:21visitors. So, State Street and South U,

14:24um, have, um, the highest visits per

14:27acre. Uh, and when you think about South

14:29U and the increase in residents, um, in

14:31that very small neighborhood, um, that

14:34makes sense.

14:35And then I just wanted to touch on uh,

14:37business openings and closings um, in

14:402025. I know we hear a lot about

14:43businesses closing in Ann Arbor and we

14:45never want to see a business close. Um

14:48we don't hear as much about businesses

14:50opening. Um so in 2025 the yellow are

14:54closures, the brown are openings and

14:56clearly we did have more um closures

14:58than openings. Um however it's really

15:02important to think about the time it

15:04takes from when a business closes to a

15:07new business when new business can come

15:09in. Um there are oftent times

15:13renovations that are necessary. Um so

15:15what we're looking at here is from

15:17quarter 4 of 2025

15:20um permits for interior renovations

15:22downtown. So I think this just sort of

15:24illustrates there there is there is

15:26demand for retail space downtown. Um and

15:29there is you know a lag time between a

15:32business opening and closing.

15:35And then just to touch on bike and

15:37pedestrian data, uh we have bike

15:40counters along our four bikeway streets

15:42which are um William Division First and

15:45Miller Catherine. Um those counters

15:48count cyclists and pedestrians. Uh in

15:512025, our um bike traffic is nearly the

15:55same as 2024.

15:57Um for pedestrians, we were up about 11%

16:01along [clears throat] that corridor.

16:04And then public transit. The um DDA

16:07funds the go pass for downtown employees

16:10that allows downtown employees to have

16:11free bus rides on AAATA um fixed route

16:15service. Um we should have had it on

16:17here 2019. So pre- pandemic we were

16:20probably a little bit over 600,000

16:24rides. Uh we're now in 2025 at 313,000.

16:28So, it's significant dip, but in

16:31alignment with when you think about the

16:32downtown employee visits, um, you know,

16:35this all makes sense. Um, I will point

16:37out that in 2026, so when Dunar Tower

16:41opened in February, we have a pilot

16:44program with Dunbar Tower where we're

16:46supplying go passes to Dunar Tower

16:48residents. Um, and that so far program

16:52is going great. We are seeing really

16:54high usage, which is fantastic. And

16:57we're going to do the same thing um with

16:59the housing commission's project at 350

17:02South Fifth.

17:05Uh and now just a couple of slides on

17:072026. So again, first quarter, first two

17:10quarters. Um I just want to point out,

17:12you all know this, our boundary changed.

17:14Uh we expanded in April, but the data

17:17that I'm going to show you tonight for

17:19first first two quarters of 2026 is just

17:21the original district. Um so just wanted

17:25to um throw out the um daily population

17:28that same graph for the first half of

17:30the year. You can see that same pattern

17:32that we saw for the full year. Um and

17:35for this half of the year we've welcomed

17:38about 10.9 million people downtown which

17:40is just about the same um as 2024 or as

17:452025 I'm sorry.

17:47Um and then we pulled out this slide. Uh

17:49this is July. July was up 5.1% over

17:542025. And the reason that we pulled it

17:56is um just to point out that that Morgan

17:59Wallen concert, the Saturday night

18:02concert, um that surpassed our highest

18:06visitor day in 2025. So, just to say

18:09that those um concerts that U of M is

18:12putting on certainly do um help the

18:15downtown economy.

18:17Um and that is all I have. And I realize

18:19I should have said this when I had my

18:21time. I just wanted to make an

18:22announcement. Um, tomorrow evening, the

18:25DDA is hosting um, uh, public uh, open

18:29house for the division street bikeway

18:31extension project. Um, the information

18:33at that meeting tomorrow night will be

18:35focused on the DDA portion of that

18:38project which is from Catherine on

18:40division on Catherine Street to the

18:43Broadway Bridge. So all are welcome from

18:445:00 to 7:00 at our offices in Kerry

18:47Town. Thank you very much.

18:49>> Thank you very much. We now come to

18:51public comment reserve time. Public

18:53comment reserve time is an opportunity

18:54for members of the public to speak to

18:56council and the community about matters

18:58of municipal interest. To speak at

19:00public comment reserve time, one needs

19:02to have signed up in advance by

19:04contacting the city clerk. Speakers in

19:07all instances will have three minutes in

19:08which to speak. So, please pay close

19:10attention to the time. Our clerk or the

19:13time clock will notify you when 30

19:15seconds are remaining and when your time

19:16has expired. When your time is expired,

19:19please conclude your remarks and seed

19:21the floor. Our first speaker today is

19:23Katie Dotto.

19:29>> All right. Good evening, council. My

19:31name is Katie Dodto and I live at 1408

19:34Irakcoy. We agree Ann Arbor needs

19:37housing. The comprehensive land use plan

19:41that you all put together so well sets

19:44clear targets but also sets principles

19:46to ensure density is balanced with

19:49equity, affordability, and displacement

19:52mitigation. The plan explicitly directs

19:55us to achieve density on vacant lots,

19:58surface parking, and commercial

19:59corridors while protecting middle tier

20:02households from direct displacement. The

20:05proposal for Woodberry Gardens does the

20:07exact opposite. The proposal is a plan

20:11for 342 units built on 5.2 acres. Yet,

20:16it's paired with reszoning to grant TC1

20:18with conditions to all 41 acres. Voting

20:22yes approves direct demolition of a

20:26current functional middle tier

20:28affordable housing. We heard the

20:30counterargument in July that displacing

20:3330 households to add 300 is an

20:35acceptable trade-off for regional supply

20:38and that those displaced would have

20:40access to other Woodbury units. I

20:43respectfully challenge that logic.

20:45Woodbury Gardens currently provides

20:47homes to accessible middle-income

20:49families at rents reflective of our

20:52median income. While the developer

20:54hasn't published final prices,

20:56comparable new podium construction will

20:58rent for 25 to 55% more. This isn't

21:03expanding affordability. It's actively

21:05replacing affordable homes with highcost

21:08luxury units. And in the developer own

21:11words, this is phase one. There will be

21:13more development.

21:15It's easy to look on paper and see

21:19proximity to bus lines to calculate unit

21:22counts, but density on paper carries a

21:25human cost on the ground. Commissioner

21:28Mills warned us in July that zoning

21:30stays with the land. If you grant TC1

21:33across the entire 41 acres, it creates

21:37legal right and economic engine to

21:39systematically dismantle one of the last

21:42remaining family-friendly town home

21:44communities in Ward 4. So, I ask you

21:47tonight between today and the second

21:50reading, personally visit Woodbury, walk

21:53it, see it, meet the people, and then

21:56make yourself reflect personally. Do you

22:00agree that we should trade off

22:01demolishing existing affordable housing

22:04for highrise density luxury housing? I

22:08personally don't believe this trade-off

22:09is worth it and I encourage you to vote

22:11now. Thank you.

22:13>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Mark

22:15Pearlman.

22:17[applause]

22:20>> Good evening, council. Mark Pearlman,

22:221306 Irakcoy Place. Um we've lived there

22:26for 36 years.

22:28We were glad to see council come

22:30together unanimously behind the

22:33comprehensive land use plan. We share

22:35its goals. More housing, more

22:37affordability, a city that works for its

22:40people. And Arbor has always had two

22:43populations. One is here for a few years

22:45by design. Undergraduate and graduate

22:48students, medical residents and fellows,

22:50junior faculty. That's part of what

22:52makes this city work.

22:55The other stays for decades and many

22:57raise their kids here. Three of our four

23:00children wanted to stay in the city and

23:02raise their own kids here. They

23:04couldn't.

23:06Part of that is cost and part of that is

23:09what's actually being lost here.

23:12Woodbury Gardens today is two and three

23:14stories, walkable interior streets, a

23:18dog park on site, and Fryzinger Park

23:20right on its edge with a playground and

23:23ball fields.

23:24That's where a young family can afford

23:26to start. TC1 zoning doesn't fully

23:30protect that. Even under the applicant's

23:33own conditions, parts of this same

23:35property can still rise to about 10

23:37stories

23:39with no future vote required. That is

23:42what this zoning allows.

23:44We're not against adding density here.

23:47We're against losing what works to get

23:50it. Club doesn't call this a site a hub.

23:54That zoning tier is reserved for

23:55downtown scale development. It calls it

23:58transition, a step down from hub, not

24:01equal to it. Kup's own zoning chapter

24:05says in black and white TC-1 itself is

24:08classified as hub, not transition hub.

24:12So this vote is not applying transition

24:15level zoning to a transition level

24:17neighborhood. It's applying hub level

24:20zoning to a neighborhood club says isn't

24:22hub at all. And this doesn't necessarily

24:26stop here. The next interior parcel

24:28towards Burns Park could make the same

24:30case. So could parcels on towards Hiron

24:33Hills. TC1 creeping into established

24:36neighborhoods club never intended it to.

24:40We're asking you to decline to advance

24:42this on first reading. TC1 doesn't fit

24:45here. not by the ordinance's own

24:47eligibility standards and not by club

24:49zone classification.

24:51The plan itself calls for a new zoning

24:54tool built for transition areas like

24:56this one with height limits that don't

24:59depend on what an applicant is willing

25:01to offer. Let that work happen first.

25:05Please get it right. Not just for this

25:07parcel, but for every neighborhood this

25:09vote could reach next. Thank you.

25:12>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Trisha

25:14Hackne.

25:34Good evening, Trisha Hackne at the

25:36crossings of Ann Arbor. Last Tuesday,

25:39September 15th, anniversary city council

25:41voted to proceed with the sale of the

25:43Klein Smith lot, ignoring decades of

25:45public opposition. The city paid half a

25:48million dollars to a Detroit broker for

25:51pocket listing the Klein Smith lot for

25:53over $3 million less than it appraised

25:55for. Appraisals are notoriously less in

25:58the property's market value, too. So,

26:01the f so far, the deal exceeds $8

26:04million of another corporate giveaway of

26:06taxpayer monies. The loss of public land

26:09for corporate gain and very high-end

26:11housing is egregiously irresponsible as

26:14the PA includes motivation to build

26:16fewer but higherend properties, thus

26:19higher taxes for Ann Arbor and a lower

26:21price for the investors. Some will say

26:24that's progress

26:26or theft if you live in a transition

26:29zone with already existing affordable

26:31housing.

26:32For more perspective, I'd like to quote

26:34Barbara Mcuade's The Fix. McUade is a U

26:38of M law professor and former federal

26:40prosecutor for the Eastern District of

26:42Michigan. In her book, she talks about

26:44Robert Moses, NYC's public works and

26:48parks commissioner who systematically

26:50created his own mobstyle leverage to

26:52yield power.

26:54From page 22, I quote, "He shaped New

26:57York City and its suburbs into the image

26:59he personally conceived," writes Carol,

27:02who was Moses's biographer. Without the

27:05input of the people or even of the

27:08engineers who disagreed with his

27:09opinions, he built a city with no regard

27:12to democratic accountability. In

27:15configuring the New York City we know

27:17today, Moses ruthlessly dispossessed

27:20250,000 people from their homes, tearing

27:24apart neighborhoods and communities. His

27:27highways flooded the city with cars as

27:30Moses was systematically starving the

27:32subways and commuter railways, leading

27:34to the traffic jams that New York City

27:37still battles today.

27:42By bullying his way past public

27:44oversight, Moses ended up overpaying by

27:47$40 million on a single project. He had

27:51used the power of money to undermine the

27:53democratic process of the largest city

27:56in the world to plan and build its

27:58parks, bridges, highways, and housing

28:01projects on the basis of his whim alone.

28:04New York served as a model for other

28:07cities, many of which replicated Moses's

28:11mistakes.

28:13My hope would be that Ann Arbor can

28:14learn from Moses's mistakes and not

28:17repeat them. No more ambulances that

28:20can't get to the hospital ER due to

28:22clogged traffic, which the added bike

28:24lanes would exacerbate.

28:30Thank you. Our next speaker is James

28:33Ashton Miller.

28:40Good evening. My name is James Ashton

28:42Miller. I've lived in Ward 4 for 43

28:46years and I'm ameritus professor of

28:49mechanical engineering at the University

28:51of Michigan. I'm speaking about

28:54ordinance 261463,

28:57the Woodbury Gardens reszoning. In

29:00engineering, a design that conflicts

29:03with the specifications is fundamentally

29:06flawed. This proposal conflicts with the

29:09city city's comprehensive land use plan

29:142050.

29:16First, there is a mismatch of scale. The

29:20plan reserves TC1 high-rise density for

29:25regional hubs. Woodbury Gardens,

29:28however, is designated as a transition

29:31zone intended to provide a step down

29:34between major corridors and lowdensity

29:37neighborhoods.

29:39The proposal limits height to 35 ft

29:42within 300 ft of residential boundaries,

29:45but then allows buildings up to 83 feet

29:48or seven stories

29:50near near 20ft homes. That is not a

29:54meaningful transition. It is an abrupt

29:57change in scale.

30:00Second, growth should be planled, not

30:03petitionled.

30:05Some argue this proposal can help define

30:08transition because the plan does not

30:10specify every dimension. But allowing an

30:1483 ft building and a five-story parking

30:17garage to define transition would erase

30:20the distinction between a transition

30:22zone and a highdensity hub.

30:26>> [snorts]

30:26>> Citywide planning categories should be

30:28defined through the public master plan

30:31process, not case by case through a

30:34developer's reasoning request.

30:37And third, the parking structure exposes

30:40an internal contradiction.

30:43The applicant says a fivelevel 369 space

30:47garage will prevent spillover parking.

30:50But if this site is transit oriented

30:53enough to justify sevenstory buildings,

30:56why does it need such a large garage?

30:59Garage shows that the development will

31:02remain heavily dependent on private

31:04automobiles traveling through streets

31:06shared with surrounding neighborhoods.

31:09I therefore urge council not to approve

31:13this reasonzoning in its current form.

31:15Please require a proposal that respects

31:18the transition transition designation,

31:21provides a genuine step down to nearby

31:24homes, and aligns its scale and parking

31:27demand with the comprehensive plan.

31:30Thank you.

31:31>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Joe

31:33Summers.

31:41Good evening. My name is Joe Summers and

31:44my wife Donna Ainsworth and I have lived

31:46on South Boulevard next to Woodbury

31:49Gardens since 1991

31:51and I'm here to strongly encourage you

31:53not to approve the Woodbury Gardens area

31:56Gardens area being reszoned TC1.

32:00First, one of the main reasons for the

32:02city's adopting a new land use plan was

32:04to facilitate the city creating more

32:06affordable housing. The idea that

32:09building more expensive housing will

32:12reduce housing costs by increasing

32:14supply seems to me ludicrous when it

32:17fails to recognize the economic

32:19disparities that enable wealthier people

32:21to own multiple homes, including those

32:24who just want to live here for the U of

32:25M football season as we are seeing uh

32:29happening more and more in our city.

32:32My fear is this if this area is

32:33reszoned, it will eventually reduce the

32:36amount of affordable housing in the city

32:38by tearing down some of the less

32:41expensive family housing in the city to

32:43put up more expensive smaller

32:46one-bedroom and studio units.

32:49Simply creating more affordable housing

32:51will also not happen if as housing ages

32:55it is replaced by more expensive housing

32:57which is what seems to be is going to be

33:00the result of reszoning this area.

33:04Secondly, it also doesn't make any sense

33:06to me for the city to grant TCI zoning

33:08to this 41 acre parcel when the owners

33:11of Woodbury Gardens are unwilling to

33:13grant an easement to the city to

33:16complete a water loop at the end of

33:17South Boulevard.

33:19When we moved on to South Boulevard in

33:221991, we were told this would be done

33:24within 10 years. It's now been 35 years

33:28and we still don't have a water loop. In

33:31the meanwhile, we've been paying the

33:33same water rates as everyone else in the

33:35city, but we've had to live with

33:37dishwashers, kitchen sinks, sprayers,

33:39showerheads, water filters, and toilets

33:42periodically having to be fixed or

33:45replaced because of all the sediment

33:46that builds up in them. We continue to

33:49have to deal with our sinks and bathtubs

33:51being stained by all the rust that comes

33:53through our water because of our being

33:55at the end of the water line.

33:57Though the city has claimed our water is

33:59safe to drink, we've also paid to

34:01further filter our water for the sake of

34:03the health of our family. This is

34:06despite the fact that the city has done

34:08all it can do to ailarate this by giving

34:10us water filters and in storing a

34:13flushing hydrant at the end of the

34:14street. Having to flush out the water

34:17multiple times a week seems both like an

34:20enormous waste of water and staff time

34:23when this would all be unnecessary if

34:24the water loop was installed.

34:27I believe we're the only place in the

34:29city where this problem exists and this

34:31seems to be because Woodbury Gardens has

34:33not been willing to grant the city this

34:35easement.

34:37Lastly, we were told the water loop was

34:40going to be put in before South really

34:44that's 30 seconds. Anyway, we were told

34:475 to 10 years uh the water loop would be

34:50put in. Woodbury refused. They paved. Uh

34:54>> thank you. They anyway, our street

34:56didn't get paved. Then they paved it um

34:59without the water loop being put in. Now

35:01the same thing's going to happen on

35:03Coler, which is enormously expensive. Um

35:06so please support affordable housing,

35:08not this project.

35:09>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Rita

35:12Mitchell.

35:22>> Hello, I'm Rita Mitchell. I live at 621

35:24Fifth Street. I am a former six-year

35:27member of the environmental commission

35:29and a part-year member of the new

35:31sustainability commission. I want to

35:33thank the sponsors of agenda item DC3,

35:35the resolution to address deer

35:37management. I strongly support your

35:39passing the resolution because we need

35:41to address an imbalance in our local

35:43ecosystems.

35:45It's not easy being green or being a

35:47member of the wildlife community or

35:49being a plant that can only thrive in a

35:52unique location with specific

35:53requirements for light, soil, and water.

35:56Here's a small example. Professor of

35:58entomology Doug Talamy studied chickity

36:01pairs who delivered up to 8,000

36:03caterpillars to their chicks during a

36:05single nesting season. Each caterpillar

36:07was found on nearby native trees,

36:09shrubs, and plants. Was brought back to

36:12a nest of five to eight little ones, and

36:14in less than 3 weeks, the chicks flew

36:17off to search on their own for the same

36:18kind of food. Think of making thousands

36:22of grocery trips to feed your loved

36:24ones, mouthful by mouthful. It's not

36:27easy. If the plants that support the

36:29caterpillars and adult insects are gone,

36:31the birds will struggle to survive.

36:34that's happening in the natural areas

36:35and yards in Ann Arbor and in all of

36:37southeast Michigan. I'm here to advocate

36:40for the diversity of wildlife that

36:42remains around us. That includes deer in

36:44proportion to spiders, caterpillars,

36:47butterflies, bees, hawks, hummingbirds,

36:49vos, foxes, and other animal species as

36:52well as the plants that provide su food

36:54for the insects and other wildlife. We

36:57are all connected. We benefit from

36:59biodiversity, the mix of species that

37:02place checks and balances on one

37:04another. When a prey species such as a

37:06deer lacks predators, their population

37:09soarses. They eat available plants to

37:12the point that the plants cannot

37:13regenerate and deer themselves struggle

37:15to find food. Then birds that need the

37:18insects that feed on the missing plants

37:21cannot survive.

37:23Ann Arbor has a rough history of

37:25divisive interactions among people who

37:27disagree about deer management. The 2015

37:30to 2019 deer call was effective in

37:33reducing the deer population. We

37:35subsequently saw fewer deer car deer

37:38accidents. Studies in natural areas

37:40showed encouraging regeneration of key

37:42plant species that had previously been

37:44overbrowsed by large by the large deer

37:47population.

37:48>> [snorts]

37:49>> We can use the information from prior

37:50work in Ann Arbor and seek related

37:52information from other communities to

37:54support our plan of action as outlined

37:56in the resolution. We can use data to

37:58guide actions to avoid ongoing loss of

38:01food and habitat and risk of disease for

38:03humans and animals. Let's work together

38:06to support a resilient ecosystem. It may

38:09not be easy being green, but it is worth

38:12working toward a future that avoids

38:14favoring one species over all others.

38:17and to be kind to each other as we do.

38:19So, thank you.

38:21>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Kathy

38:24Straen.

38:31>> Caller is on Zoom.

38:39>> Call number ending in 828. Go ahead.

38:45Um, my name is Kathy Strachen and I live

38:47in Ward One and I'm calling to ask you

38:50to support the DC3 resolution to develop

38:53the recommendation regarding the

38:56regional deer management program. Um,

38:58the last deer management program was

39:00January of 2020.

39:03So, there's been no program in place for

39:05the last six Januaries. So, it's very

39:08likely the deer population has

39:10increased.

39:12um the actual number would be a

39:14beneficial data point, but I personally

39:16have experienced it all the flower

39:18vegetation destruction. Last year, a

39:21deer headbutted my fence over, knocked

39:23over the netting, and collected me of

39:25all the tomatoes on those plants. Um

39:28we've had the auto damage from a deer

39:30hitting our car, not us hitting the deer

39:32for $4,000 damage. But that aside, my

39:36biggest concern

39:38is the deer's role in being a vector

39:41with Lyme disease. Now, I know there are

39:43other wildlife, squirrels, mice, fox,

39:47possums, I mean, they can also be

39:49vectors for it, but the deer's body

39:52surface area is so much larger. And just

39:55for a reference point, and this these

39:57are numbers from the county health

39:59department. In 23 there were 192 cases

40:03of Lyme disease. 24 was 143. Last year

40:07was 237.

40:10And this year January through August has

40:13been 197.

40:15And um these are just the ones that the

40:17health department has documented. So

40:19there's likely more than that. Um so I

40:23really feel that the deer management

40:25program is going to help address a

40:27public health concern. Um, I don't know

40:29if you've ever had a family member with

40:31Lyme disease. My dad had it many years

40:33ago and it was uh not a very fun

40:35experience. So again, I'm asking your

40:38support for supporting this resolution.

40:41And Mr. Dehoney, if you could please put

40:43this in next year's budget, that would

40:45be greatly appreciated. Thank you.

40:48>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Sam

40:50Hullman.

40:55>> Uh, hello. I'm Sam Hullman. I live at on

40:58the little street at the end of Woodbury

41:00Gardens to the east. Uh I'd like to

41:04start by thanking council member Aman

41:05for corresponding and working with staff

41:07to get the text the resoning ordinance

41:09corrected. Um specifically uh the

41:12conditional including the conditional

41:13resoning on the townhouse area to

41:15restrict the uses to townouses. Uh

41:17without that conditional use, I would be

41:19strongly opposed to this because that

41:21townhouse area is a fairly unique and

41:23fairly special place. Um, and I would

41:25not want to see that changed. Um, in

41:27terms of the reasoning in general, I'm

41:28fairly ambivalent about it. I I do think

41:30the center block of Woodbury Gardens is

41:32an appropriate place for a fairly

41:34high-rise tower. I don't like the

41:37parking garage there, though, and it's

41:39going to be pretty bad for the uh

41:41supportive housing that's going to b

41:42right up to. Um, I would ask that the

41:46council exclude the parcel that's zoned

41:49public land PL from this resoning. It

41:51runs along Woodbury or I'm sorry,

41:53freezing our park there. Uh it was I

41:56believe zoned that way just to kind of

41:57make it functionally part of the park.

41:59Uh there is no site plan for that and

42:02without uh having a site plan uh I I

42:06don't see a reason to reszone it. It

42:07doesn't affect the heights that the rest

42:09of the build the things are going to be

42:10able to build to because it's not

42:11residential. Uh so

42:14it's just a a wonderful place that

42:16people like to tailgate on football

42:18Saturday. So, I would ask that that just

42:19be left well enough alone without a uh

42:23site plan there. Uh, in terms of the

42:24zoning, I really don't like TC1. I can

42:26live with it with the conditions, but I

42:30I do think that that 120 foot zone

42:32you're seeing along industrial there is

42:34going to be replaced with a 10-story

42:35hotel because that is where you could

42:37build a hotel that would cater to

42:38football games there. uh on if you're

42:41changing the uses from mixed use to

42:43residential. Do I personally care? But

42:46it is something that you guys should

42:47bear in mind. Uh, and I would also say

42:51that this resoning to TC1 really speaks

42:54to the failure of the one zone many

42:57stepbacks model of TC1 and that a D1 D2

43:00multiple multiple zones multiple heights

43:02approach would be much more preferable

43:04where you could just have some sort of

43:06say an R4 max zoning and zone that

43:09center block for an 85 ft building like

43:11this. Um, and then the final thing

43:14because I walk through this site every

43:16day and think about a lot. Uh there are

43:19a number of crosswalks at Woodbury and

43:20Ator and Woodbury and Wisteria that are

43:22only partial crosswalks where there are

43:24two crosswalk. They form a T and there's

43:27crosswalks on one side, one on the other

43:28side, but they're missing the third one.

43:31Um so I would ask that just the little

43:33curb cuts be put in there uh to complete

43:36those crosswalks.

43:38Uh just particularly in the winter, it's

43:41quite annoying not having those. So

43:43yeah, if you want to go ahead with this,

43:44go ahead with it. But the moving it to

43:47mixed use is going to have some

43:48consequences.

43:49>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Kit

43:52Fuller.

43:54>> Hi everyone. I'm Kit Fuller. I live at

43:561403 Irakcoy. Um you've heard all of the

44:00rational logical reasons about why my

44:02neighborhood is opposing where we are

44:04with this. So I'm going to give you a

44:05much more personal one. I am not the

44:08oldest person on our house been in my

44:11family the longest. My parents moved in

44:13in 1959 when my dad was living, our

44:17family was living on about $5,000 a year

44:19of a pastor's salary and I grew up in a

44:21neighborhood of people who could afford

44:23to live there and go to Burns Park and

44:25live among other families in that area.

44:28And I think that's what's most important

44:30here is that we need to be focusing on

44:32keeping the area affordable for the

44:34people who live and work in this town.

44:38Um, I grew up playing um, in the old

44:41botanical garden before it got turned

44:42into Woodbury. Um, and that was great.

44:45We had to deal with our sorrow over

44:47losing that and having Woodbury go in.

44:49But it has turned out to be a really

44:51lovely multifamily

44:53um, development where people can afford

44:56to live when they're young students here

44:58just coming here for grad school when

45:00they're older single folks. And if we

45:02lose that or if we lose part of those

45:04people who live there, that's going to

45:06be a big loss.

45:07Um, we definitely need more affordable

45:09housing, but as I understand it, this is

45:11not going to help us get there. And I

45:13think we need to back up and look at

45:15what our real purpose is here.

45:17What makes Ann Arbor so special is that

45:21we live in a place where students and

45:24young families with babies and people

45:26with teenagers who can babysit for those

45:28babies and pastors and social workers

45:31like myself and doctors and teachers and

45:34professors all live alongside each other

45:36and we make a community. And I'm hoping

45:39to live on that street the rest of my

45:41life because there's a community there

45:43that can support me. And I fear that by

45:46going ahead with a continuing to push

45:48development like this that focuses on

45:50high-end development, we're going to

45:52lose what makes Ann Arbor most special,

45:54which is these communities. So, please

45:56take a step back. You've heard all the

45:58really good reasons. Take a step back

46:00and think about the human part of this.

46:02Thank you for listening.

46:03>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Kathy

46:05Griswald.

46:15Good evening. My theme for tonight is

46:17imbalance. You've already heard that

46:19word [clears throat] used at least once.

46:21We we seem to have an unhealthy

46:25imbalance in our community in many ways.

46:28Uh the first way is I looked at the

46:31agenda and it was wonderful. We are

46:36going to put a sidewalk in on Dexter and

46:40get an easement. That is a major project

46:43and I fully support it. But what

46:46happened to the sidewalk on Maiden Lane

46:49that I have asked for that I have shown

46:51video of students having to walk in the

46:54street because the cars are parked right

46:56up to the curb. Everyone around there,

46:58Ron Mucha, the owner of the car

47:02[clears throat] repair place, people

47:04across the street at North Side Grill,

47:06there's no one who disagrees. The

47:08problem is Ann Arbor either does big

47:12projects or we do sidewalk gaps in

47:15neighborhoods. What's missing? We have

47:18no operational expertise in our

47:21transportation department.

47:24I'll say that again. no operational

47:27expertise in our transportation

47:29department. No one understands how our

47:32city operates. They don't understand

47:35what's critical. We just if there's

47:38money for a project, let's do it. If

47:40there's not money for a project, be

47:42damned. Let those people walk in the

47:44street. So, why do we have the highest

47:46pedestrian crash rate ever? I don't

47:50know. People have been saying, Kathy,

47:52you're wrong. You're wrong. I've been

47:53criticized. Well, guess what? I was

47:56right. And we do have the highest

47:58pedestrian crash rate. And we have to do

48:00things differently.

48:03We don't know if all these bike lanes

48:05are the answer because we don't

48:07understand our transportation network.

48:10It is critical that we have this

48:12operational expertise. Council passed a

48:15resolution, but Mayor Taylor when he

48:18makes a decision,

48:20he follows that path regardless of the

48:22additional information. and I am asking

48:25him please reconsider and bring in some

48:29operational expertise into the

48:31transportation department.

48:34So I have a list of

48:40action items. I've said them many many

48:42times. I won't repeat them right now

48:44other than to say you absolutely must

48:47work with the University of Michigan.

48:50You absolutely must work with the Ann

48:52Arbor public schools. We need to be

48:54looking at the 2050 plan. We need to

48:57understand how traffic moves. The green

49:03uh bike lanes. I looked at those. I

49:06said, "I'll approve them if you make

49:08certain improvements." Those

49:09improvements haven't been made. We're

49:11putting them in anyway. I predict

49:13someone's going to die within a year.

49:15Thank you.

49:16>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Edward

49:18Fmedi.

49:32Hello, council. Hello, Mr. Mayor. Hello,

49:34Mr. City Administrator. Um, I'm here to

49:38comment on the Downtown Development

49:41Authority minutes of August uh 2026.

49:44This is the most recent minutes that

49:47have been published to uh to council. Um

49:50I'll start on page one. This is all in

49:52your packet. Um unless you were there,

49:55you might not have read the minutes that

49:58have come up. So this this some of this

50:00might be new to you. Um the first call

50:03to agenda for the uh first on the agenda

50:06for a board meeting is a roll call of

50:08the members present and absent. And I

50:11was surprised and disappointed to see

50:15that the DDA in August only made quorum

50:18by the barest of margins. Six members

50:21were present, five members were absent,

50:24including you, Mr. Deon. Um, I don't

50:26know the circumstances. I don't know if

50:28it was a planned vacation or what, but

50:31you weren't there. Um,

50:34uh, the DDA is sometimes a hard

50:36organization to follow. uh they no

50:39longer meet at their offices. They meet

50:41in this chamber. Uh they no longer meet

50:44at noon. They meet at 11:00. Um they

50:47might be meeting in

50:50uh they might be meeting for a regular

50:53board meeting in November. Uh but it's

50:55not listed on the legisar calendar. And

50:58I guess it was on election day was their

51:00normal meeting. And so that's not clear

51:02whether they're going to actually meet

51:03that day or not. Um so I I would point

51:08to an organization uh with with strong

51:12um executive director um that

51:15accomplishes a lot that has a

51:17substantial budget and just uh by

51:22inspection of the minutes might not have

51:24a functional board. Um and I would

51:27encourage you Mr. Taylor, in your role

51:29as board uh appointinter

51:32uh and any subsequent mayors who might

51:35get elected uh in future years to look

51:39very carefully at this board and try to

51:41activate the board so that we have a

51:45board that uh makes quorum every time

51:47and not just by the barest of margins.

51:50Thank you.

51:51>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Kirk

51:53Westfall.

51:57Thank you.

52:07>> Good morning. Uh good a good evening

52:09council. Take three. Kirk Westfall 3505

52:12Charter Place. Um first I want to

52:15acknowledge uh the survivors of traffic

52:17violence as well as the uh victim's

52:18families who are here tonight. It means

52:20a lot. Um and I just wanted to give a

52:23word of thanks. Um we're here after more

52:26than 10 years of plans and resolutions

52:28and as mentioned last year was uh the

52:31most dangerous time in recent recorded

52:33history just to walk in Ann Arbor. Um

52:36but the plans continue. Uh we have to

52:38keep fighting them one by one. We've got

52:40uh Division Street Bikeway which looks

52:42like it'll at least go to the bridge but

52:44then we don't know what happens next. Um

52:47this can't be delayed. Uh we need

52:50guaranteed safe biking and guaranteed

52:52safe walking. It's really troubling to

52:56watch community high school students

52:57trying to navigate that double threat

52:59crosswalk, two sets of them at the

53:01bottom uh of the bridge. And there's no

53:05better evidence for that than looking at

53:07the banged up uh stop for pedestrian

53:10sign um in that crosswalk.

53:14Uh it's been several years since you

53:16told the city administrator to start the

53:17process of getting control of state

53:19roads because they're too fast and

53:21dangerous. I know these things don't

53:23happen quickly, but it would be good to

53:25know what the status is as we saw

53:28another critical injury right in front

53:29of city hall 10 days ago. Uh we also

53:32appear to be putting a lot of stock in

53:34A2R2, which is looking at all the

53:36dangerous roads uh that the city already

53:38controls. Um I ask that you make sure

53:41that staff only consider proven safe

53:43designs for those and also to budget the

53:46money in advance to implement safe

53:49designs immediately. And I just want to

53:51remind you, I was here a couple years

53:53ago um just showing how cities can

53:55simply build things. Um there was a

53:58widely public publicized uh dash cam

54:01video from San Mateo, California, where

54:04a driver narrowly missed uh a girl on a

54:08scooter. Um everybody was okay, shaken

54:11up, but within days um they removed the

54:14lane because they realized the speeds

54:16were too high.

54:19There's other cities who

54:22just paint their own things and try

54:24safety pilots. Uh Jersey City does

54:26roundabouts with paints and posts and a

54:29recycling bin with little roundabout

54:31signs on it. Uh Detroit does it too.

54:33Lots of cities

54:35do their safety pilot experiments. I did

54:38a little shopping. Uh there's a machine

54:40that grinds up lines. It costs about

54:42$14,000.

54:44The Graco Grind laser pro. You can grind

54:46up lines and and repaint them. This is

54:49the gr the line laser V3900. Um and this

54:53is retails for about $11,000. Um street

54:57legal paint. We can we can do these

54:59things quickly. Um our transportation

55:02plan says we'll never place the speed

55:04and convenience of cars above the safe

55:07movement of people and we just need you

55:09to stand behind that promise. Thank you.

55:11>> Thank you. [applause] Our next speaker

55:13is Mark Scurbo.

55:20Mark Scurbo, 2017 Fair Street. I want to

55:22acknowledge the safety improvements the

55:24city has made recently. I used to bike

55:27commute on Liberty between Stadium and

55:28Maple, and now I drive there every day.

55:31Uh the painted buffers are a good start

55:33towards a safe street, especially for

55:35the future residents of the hundreds of

55:37affordable homes coming to that area.

55:39One day, I hope they'll be able to cross

55:41a narrowed street uh to visit some of my

55:43favorite restaurants in the area. So,

55:45quick shout out to Pilars, Chayas,

55:46Helas, and hearsay. Um, I'm also really

55:50glad the green road will get a better

55:51crosswalk. When I lived in the Chapel

55:53Hill neighborhood, I ran across that

55:55five-lane street between speeding cars,

55:57but our neighbors shouldn't have to do

55:59that.

56:00These are the easy right sizing

56:02projects, and we're running out of easy

56:04projects. Now, you're being forced to

56:06trade off driver convenience with the

56:08health and safety of residents. I'm

56:11asking you to strongly state safety

56:13comes first. We can debate what to do

56:16with the excess road space that we

56:18wastefully installed decades ago.

56:20Sidewalks, bike lanes, planting trees,

56:22or adding street parking. If AATA says

56:26they could use a bus lane there on the

56:27Broadway Bridge, let me speak of a

56:29member of the all powerful bike lobby.

56:32We support bus rapid transit, but we

56:35cannot wait around to implement a

56:36perfect solution. Reclaim the space.

56:39install flex post now and switch the

56:41bike lane to a bus lane when the ride

56:42has the capacity to do so. Let me be

56:45clear, it doesn't matter to me if the

56:47bike way goes on the Broadway bridge

56:49road or on the side path, but something

56:52must take the place of those extra wide

56:55car lanes. 34 people were seriously

56:58injured and killed last year, and most

57:00of them were drivers. Multi-lane roads

57:03cost lives.

57:05More than two years ago, you asked

57:07administrator Dehoney to take over

57:08MDOT's multi-lane roads. Where has that

57:11negotiation stalled out? Even when MDOT

57:14has the best of intentions, like with

57:16the diet and uh bus lane project, they

57:19fear controversy. Letters of support

57:22from city council, tripleATA, and more

57:24than 90% of the public engagement

57:26respondents weren't enough to keep the

57:29project on schedule. And now yet another

57:31person has been seriously injured in

57:33front of city hall on MDOT's roads while

57:36we do business as usual. Would you want

57:39to be the woman in her 60s hit while

57:41crossing the street? Would you want to

57:43be the child of the 87year-old driver

57:46knowing you should have persuaded dad to

57:47take away his keys?

57:50Lives shouldn't be ruined by individual

57:52mistakes. Safety can't wait. Thank you.

57:55>> Thank you. [applause] Our next speaker

57:58is Cassandra Sheami.

58:07Good evening, council and neighbors. Um,

58:08my name is Cassandra Shammy and I am a

58:10lower town resident of Ward 1. Tonight

58:13is my first council meeting ever and

58:14what brings me here is my passion for

58:16biking safety and to share a little bit

58:18of my own experience. I've lived in Ann

58:20Arbor for over 19 years and in that time

58:22I've never owned a car. I commute to

58:24work, shop, and support our local

58:26businesses exclusively by bike and bus.

58:28Because I live on the north side and

58:30travel downtown daily, the division um

58:32division street and the bikeway bridge

58:34corridor are my lifeline and currently

58:36they are perilous.

58:37When the protected bike lane ends

58:39heading north, cyclists are dumped into

58:41a bike gutter alongside speeding traffic

58:43and then further pinched against the

58:44curb making speeding cars, potholes, and

58:47road debris extremely hazardous. Making

58:49that turn onto Broadway, cyclists

58:51compete with drivers turning onto or off

58:53of carry and high streets. Drivers uh

58:56frequently cut across the bike path at

58:58high speeds, often unable to see the

59:00northbound cyclist due to the street's

59:02grade. There is not a safe way for

59:04cyclists to then exit the bridge's

59:06shared path into a turning lane, meaning

59:08that you have to use it as if you were a

59:10pedestrian. Heading in the other

59:12direction, the cityside crossing is

59:14routinely ignored by motorists. Um and

59:16drivers regularly disregard the

59:17crosswalk. As Kirk said, that's um

59:20proven by just the consistent battering

59:21of those those crosswalk signs there.

59:24Last month, my husband and I visited the

59:26Netherlands, and seeing its multimodal

59:28infrastructure, I wondered how Dutch

59:29society became so accepting of it when

59:31many in our community seemed so uh

59:33openly hostile. It turns out they

59:35weren't. In 1992, Amsterdam's historic

59:37lowcar revisions barely passed with a

59:39razor thin majority. With fierce

59:41warnings of things that we've heard,

59:43economic ruin, complaints about parking,

59:45and fears about increased car traffic,

59:47urban planners call what happened next

59:49the revealed preference loop. Initial

59:51public support for removing car space

59:52was low, around 35%. But once built,

59:56that fear evaporated. Support more than

59:58doubled because businesses saw that

59:59cyclists are more likely to shop

1:00:01downtown and families feel safer and

1:00:03drivers enjoy less gridlock. We are

1:00:06seeing that exact psychological curve

1:00:08right now in Ann Arbor. Skepticism

1:00:10always peaks right before construction.

1:00:12The argument that no one rides here is a

1:00:13fundamental misunderstanding. We don't

1:00:15measure the demand for a bridge based on

1:00:17how many people are currently swimming

1:00:18across the river. Data shows that when

1:00:21cities build connected, protected

1:00:22networks, cycling traffic nearly jumps

1:00:24by 50%. People want to bike, they just

1:00:27don't want to feel in danger. In fact,

1:00:29the moment I heard about plans for this

1:00:31protected corridor, my very first

1:00:32instinct was go to sick transit and

1:00:35invest in some winter riding gear so

1:00:37that I could um you know, I without even

1:00:40with icy conditions potentially, I would

1:00:41feel more safe with a protected bike

1:00:43lane. The resistance we hear in Ann

1:00:45Arbor today isn't a sign that we're

1:00:47doing the wrong thing. It's a sign that

1:00:48change is hard. If we pause due to

1:00:50front-loaded anxiety, we lock Ann Arbor

1:00:52into permanent car dependency and

1:00:54cyclists into danger. I urge council to

1:00:56maintain your courage, look look past

1:00:58the predictable skepticism, and lead us

1:01:01toward a safe, vibrant infrastructure

1:01:02that our community deserves. Thank you.

1:01:04>> Thank you. [applause]

1:01:07>> Our next speaker is Pedal Sand Castle.

1:01:14>> You should try that corridor, by the

1:01:16way.

1:01:17>> [laughter]

1:01:17>> which is my favorite drug of choice. I'm

1:01:20just kidding. Um, hi. My name is Pedal

1:01:22Sandcastle and tonight I want to speak

1:01:24to the 18-year-old version of myself.

1:01:27Ricky Herbert, the kid who came here

1:01:30believing the brochure, thought Ann

1:01:32Arbor was this little pocket of the

1:01:33world where maybe people had figured

1:01:35some things out. Where education meant

1:01:36curiosity and liberation and government

1:01:39meant service, where difference was

1:01:41something to be curious about, where if

1:01:43something was broken, you organized, you

1:01:45voted, you protested, you spoke truth to

1:01:46power and eventually the system moved. I

1:01:49spent a very very long time trying to

1:01:51make that true to believe. But I don't

1:01:53think it is. And I don't. It's a

1:01:56well-kept lie that's unraveling more

1:01:57every day. And maybe we'd all do well

1:02:00with accepting the difference between a

1:02:02system and the people living inside of

1:02:04one. A system isn't just a building. It

1:02:06isn't Republicans or Democrats. It isn't

1:02:08government, capitalism, education. Those

1:02:10are results, the fruit. A system is a

1:02:12pattern. It's what gets repeatedly done,

1:02:14rewarded, tolerated, feared, funded, and

1:02:16eventually called normal. And in

1:02:18physics, a system doesn't need a villain

1:02:20to maintain the pattern of itself. It

1:02:22needs reinforcement. Nobody has to sit

1:02:25in a room and say, "Let's keep doing

1:02:26this."

1:02:28The pattern reproduces itself, amplifies

1:02:30itself. That's resonance. Discordinate,

1:02:33dissonant, resonance. And human systems

1:02:36do something remarkably similar. Fear

1:02:38produces fear. Scarcity produces

1:02:39scarcity. Shame produces shame. Binaries

1:02:41produce binaries. Red needs blue. That's

1:02:43the game. Us versus you. And eventually

1:02:45we stop asking the harder question. What

1:02:48if the game itself is producing the

1:02:50world we say we don't want? What if what

1:02:53we call reality is really rearranging

1:02:55deck chairs on a sinking Titanic? What

1:02:57if it doesn't have to be this way? And

1:02:58what if we don't have to go extinct? As

1:03:01someone who has started several

1:03:02brickandmortar businesses in this town,

1:03:04a 501c3 nonprofit, as someone who's

1:03:06partnered with dozens of orgs and

1:03:08produced over 1500 free events, I can

1:03:10say and is not a unique story of a

1:03:11people silenced and displaced, of

1:03:14beautiful things getting absorbed by

1:03:15institutions addicted to the benefit

1:03:17they bring without ever seeing the

1:03:18people who made it all underneath.

1:03:20[laughter] Let me say there was a

1:03:21particular strand of reality dissolving

1:03:24grief that comes with realizing you've

1:03:25been knocking on the same doors for

1:03:27years that were never connected to the

1:03:30rooms and people you thought were behind

1:03:32it. So, I'm here to make peace with the

1:03:34brochure so I may change what I

1:03:35reinforce.

1:03:37I'm withdrawing my labor from systems

1:03:39that cannot safely hold, but many of us

1:03:42are building and trying to build. And

1:03:44I'm moving on with a simple request.

1:03:46Make it easier for people you don't yet

1:03:50understand.

1:03:51Make more room for what exists and what

1:03:54is being built outside of this existing

1:03:57institutional pattern. Because not

1:03:59everything needs to become a grant, a

1:04:00committee, a city program. Sometimes

1:04:02people are already building the thing,

1:04:03being the thing. No stump speech

1:04:05required, no Bible. Sometimes the most

1:04:07useful thing an institution can do is

1:04:09stop making the new thing prove that it

1:04:11belongs. Maybe the new pattern isn't

1:04:13revolting or resisting or suturing the

1:04:14burning house. Maybe it's catching

1:04:16flying shards, the knowledge, the

1:04:18relationships, the art, the children,

1:04:20the skills, the imagination, the people.

1:04:24Thank you.

1:04:26Thank you. [applause and cheering]

1:04:31>> Our next speaker is Adam Jesus.

1:04:41Hello, my name is Adam Juskevich and I

1:04:43live in the Dickin neighborhood of the

1:04:44fourth ward. Happy World Carfree Day.

1:04:48This is a day that tells us to imagine a

1:04:50better world and work hard to achieve

1:04:51it. And Arbor's comprehensive

1:04:53transportation plan sets out to do just

1:04:55that. Chapter 5 asks, "What could our

1:04:57streets look like?" and goes on. Meeting

1:05:00the ambitious goals of zero traffic

1:05:02deaths and injuries and zero emissions

1:05:04from our transportation system will

1:05:05require rethinking how we design our

1:05:08streets and the priorities that guide

1:05:09our decision-making. Ann Arbor's number

1:05:12one priority when it comes to our

1:05:13streets is that they are safe and

1:05:15accessible for everyone. We will never

1:05:17place the speed and convenience of cars

1:05:19above the safe movement of people.

1:05:22That's a big vision and it will take

1:05:23hard work to achieve. According to

1:05:25crashes in Ann Arbor, 2025 was our worst

1:05:28year on record with 21 serious and fatal

1:05:30crashes involving people outside cars,

1:05:32most on our multi-lane roads. A driver

1:05:35hit and critically injured a woman in a

1:05:37crosswalk earlier this month right here

1:05:39in front of city hall. This is a crisis.

1:05:42I'm glad to see progress being made. The

1:05:44Miller bike way is a great success. Now

1:05:46extended along Catherine to the medical

1:05:48campus. The changes the DDA has been

1:05:50doing downtown. Curb extensions,

1:05:52protected bikeways,

1:05:55restoration of two-way traffic are huge

1:05:57safety improvements. Bike lane upgrades

1:05:59were recently done in my neighborhood on

1:06:01Liberty near Maple and Stadium, and

1:06:02sidewalk gaps are getting filled on

1:06:04Dexter, Brockman, and Pair. All this is

1:06:06great, and they've improved the safety

1:06:08at those locations, but we clearly have

1:06:10a long way to go. I'm very excited about

1:06:12several things in the pipeline. The A2R2

1:06:15project works to finally reimagine our

1:06:16multi-lane roads, our most dangerous, to

1:06:19reduce speeds, eliminate double threat

1:06:21crossings and add infrastructure for

1:06:22people outside of cars. MDOT is working

1:06:25to reconfigure part of which would add

1:06:27dedicated bus lanes for a stretch north

1:06:29of stadium, improving transit

1:06:30reliability on one of our busiest bus

1:06:32corridors. The division bikeway

1:06:34extension seeks to fill this missing

1:06:36link in our bike network while improving

1:06:38safety for everyone. We know road diets

1:06:40work. It's great to see more happening.

1:06:43Under the Safe Streets for All program,

1:06:45streets such as Seventh, Liberty, and

1:06:46Packard will receive quick build

1:06:48interventions to reduce speeds and

1:06:49improve pedestrian visibility and

1:06:51crosswalks. A north main redesign is in

1:06:54the works that will be transformative,

1:06:55creating a safe and welcoming gateway

1:06:57into our community. And the city is

1:06:59working to take over MDOT corridors,

1:07:00which would give us more control over

1:07:02safety improvements on Hiron and North

1:07:04Main. I ask that you put your full

1:07:06support behind these projects and make

1:07:09sure to prioritize the safe movement of

1:07:11people rather than the speed and

1:07:13convenience of cars. Staff experts have

1:07:15been doing a great job with community

1:07:17engagement, but they need your help and

1:07:19encouragement. And contrary to what some

1:07:21write on social media, please remember

1:07:23that transportation safety is not a

1:07:25special interest. Everyone uses our

1:07:28roads and everyone deserves to get

1:07:30safely to their destination whether they

1:07:32choose to walk, drive, bike or bus.

1:07:35Safety can't wait. Thank you.

1:07:37>> Thank you. [applause]

1:07:40Uh we have now heard uh 45 minute plus

1:07:43of public comment. As folks know, we do

1:07:46have public comment overflow towards uh

1:07:48towards the end of the meeting. The way

1:07:50the public comment works is we hear the

1:07:51first 15 with certainty and then uh if

1:07:54we have uh more time left before that

1:07:5645minut mark we hear uh additional

1:07:59public speakers. We now have had an

1:08:01additional public speaker and we have

1:08:02run through those 45 minutes and so the

1:08:05balance of folks who have signed up for

1:08:06public comment will have an opportunity

1:08:08to speak um at the at the tail end of

1:08:10the meeting in public comment overflow.

1:08:13Uh are there communications today from

1:08:15council council member Briggs?

1:08:20Yeah, thank you. And thank you to

1:08:22everybody for being here. It's lovely to

1:08:24see a full house. Um, and I'm I'd like

1:08:28to I know a number of folks are going to

1:08:29be speaking at the end, but you know, if

1:08:31you're here to speak for transportation

1:08:32safety, raise your hand.

1:08:36So, thank you. I appreciate you being

1:08:38here. I appreciate the rally that

1:08:39happened in front of city hall um before

1:08:41our council meeting. It's important.

1:08:43It's important to show up. It's

1:08:45important to tell us that um tell us

1:08:47your stories and to continue to push us

1:08:51um to be to be um moving forward with

1:08:54our plans.

1:08:55You know, I have too been um

1:09:01honestly disappointed with what I am

1:09:03hearing in social media and um in our

1:09:06community right now. Um gas, if you just

1:09:10care about the pocketbook, is 4.88 88 a

1:09:13gallon caused by us um in the wars that

1:09:16we're waging. Uh greenhouse gases are

1:09:20near record high

1:09:22are at record highs. Um our global

1:09:24temperatures are at near record highs.

1:09:26Um climate change is something that I

1:09:28think I would suspect everybody in this

1:09:30room believes in. Um and we recognize

1:09:33that we are causing that. We've heard

1:09:35folks talking about safety and the

1:09:38crashes that we are seeing here in Ann

1:09:40Arbor. That's not unfortunately. We're

1:09:43not alone. In Michigan, bicycling and

1:09:45pedestrian fatalities are rising. In

1:09:462025, while overall roadway fatalities

1:09:49declined 3% as compared to 24, bicycle

1:09:53fatalities increased 21% and pedestrian

1:09:55fatalities declined 18%.

1:09:58Um, between 2020 and 2024, pedestrians

1:10:01and bicyclists were involved in less

1:10:03than 1.5% of crashes in the state while

1:10:06disproportionately accounting for 20% of

1:10:08the fatalities. The work that we're

1:10:11trying to do here in our community is

1:10:13important.

1:10:16It is it is about saving lives. It's

1:10:19about creating access to our community.

1:10:22Um and I am proud of of the work that we

1:10:25are doing as a community, but we do need

1:10:26to do it faster. Um

1:10:30I encourage folks to um submit comments

1:10:33to Michigan's long range transportation

1:10:34plan which is due. Comments are due this

1:10:36Friday. Um, it says a lot of great

1:10:39things. I've been reading it. Um, a lot

1:10:41of good work. There is an active

1:10:42transportation plan. Um, but it is a

1:10:44little short on how we're going to get

1:10:46there would be my shortand um on that.

1:10:49Um, so

1:10:52again, when it comes to the Broadway, I

1:10:54know folks have been talking about that.

1:10:55I I too support a continuous safe

1:10:58network across that corridor. um that's

1:11:00essential and as is our um work to

1:11:03reconfigure our our streets to make sure

1:11:05that they are serving all of our

1:11:07community safely. So, thank you

1:11:09>> council member.

1:11:19>> Thank you. Okay.

1:11:21Um yeah, I just I also want to thank

1:11:24folks for coming out tonight. I have to

1:11:26say um [snorts] you know it it I agree

1:11:30it's been disappointing to see the level

1:11:32of push back in our community against

1:11:35bike lanes against transportation

1:11:37safety. I was at an event yesterday

1:11:40evening that had absolutely nothing to

1:11:42do with city council or transportation

1:11:45for that matter and all evening I had

1:11:48people from the community coming up with

1:11:50me to me complaining about bike lanes

1:11:54and

1:11:55um I don't understand this. Um this is

1:11:59about equity. It's about safety. Not

1:12:02everyone can afford to have a car in our

1:12:04community. Everyone

1:12:07deserves to have a safe way to get

1:12:10around our community.

1:12:12And um if it takes us a little longer

1:12:16because we're driving and we have to be

1:12:18careful, we have to take a corner a

1:12:20little more carefully because there's a

1:12:22bumpout or because there's a pole that's

1:12:26protecting pedestrians and bicyclists.

1:12:29That's the way it is. And um

1:12:34I I'm not sure what more we need to do

1:12:36to communicate that to folks, but um I

1:12:39just want you to know that I'm dedicated

1:12:41to it and when I'm out in the community

1:12:45and I'm being asked these questions, I

1:12:47am um I'm fighting that fight. So, thank

1:12:52you.

1:12:53>> Further communication from council.

1:13:01>> [laughter]

1:13:04>> Further verbal communication from

1:13:05council.

1:13:08I'd like to re recommend confirmation

1:13:10for the following reappointments that

1:13:11were presented to city council September

1:13:138, 2026 to the employees retirement

1:13:15system board of trustees Anthony Diovani

1:13:18and Jordan Shrier. May I have a motion

1:13:19please? Moved by council member Cornell.

1:13:21Second by council member Dish.

1:13:24Discussion.

1:13:27All in favor? All opposed? That is

1:13:30approved. I'd like to request

1:13:31confirmation of the following

1:13:32appointments that were presented to city

1:13:33council on September 22, 2026.

1:13:38Uh this is going forward. They were

1:13:40presented to No, I think these were

1:13:41presented earlier.

1:13:43Uh to the public market advisory

1:13:45commission, Helen Bunch to the Downtown

1:13:46Development Authority, Diana Marsh, to

1:13:48the renters commission, Ryan Calhoun, uh

1:13:51and Andrew Robbins. To the zoning board

1:13:53of appeals, John Jordan. These were

1:13:54presented at our prior meeting. Also I

1:13:56believe on the 8th moved by council

1:13:58member Adena seconded by council member

1:14:01Harrison. Discussion.

1:14:04All in favor? All opposed. They are

1:14:07approved. May I have a motion please to

1:14:09approve the consent agenda. Moved by

1:14:10council member Cornell. Second by

1:14:12council member Malik. Discussion please

1:14:14of the consent agenda. Council member

1:14:16Cornell.

1:14:19>> Very briefly. I'd like to call attention

1:14:20to CA1. um seems like a routine street

1:14:24closure, but it's actually pretty

1:14:26awesome. Um one of the things that the

1:14:28city supports, uh actually the county

1:14:30supports via um a state initiative is to

1:14:34develop and grow and retain companies in

1:14:37our high-tech space here, which is huge

1:14:39given that R&D is such a huge base for

1:14:42our economy. And so, um Tech Trek is an

1:14:45opportunity for folks in the community.

1:14:47It will be from 6:00 a.m. is the street

1:14:50closure, but please don't go go out

1:14:51before noon um until until I believe

1:14:558:00 p.m. that evening, but it's a

1:14:56chance to see all of the companies that

1:14:58are growing here. Innovation that is

1:15:00spinning out of the University of

1:15:01Michigan. Companies that are young and

1:15:04are also growing and attracting

1:15:06investment here. Um spoiler alert for

1:15:08anybody who I know is going to be up at

1:15:108:00 on Thursday morning to watch the

1:15:12LDFA meeting. Um there have been over

1:15:15300 companies that have been served and

1:15:18grown in this c in this region by the

1:15:20local development finance authority in

1:15:22the last year. They have created 76 jobs

1:15:25and they have um attracted over $2

1:15:28million in investment and they are so

1:15:30eager to show off for you exactly what

1:15:33they are incubating, what they are

1:15:35growing, what they're innovating and the

1:15:36type of technology that is growing here.

1:15:38And I think um when we talk about

1:15:40businesses growing here and being here,

1:15:42it's more than just Main Street. These

1:15:43are the companies that are actually um

1:15:45downtown every day as well in our

1:15:47incubator space on Liberty Street and

1:15:49are contributing to the vibrancy of our

1:15:51downtown and I hope folks will come out

1:15:52for it. Thank you.

1:15:54>> Further discussion on the consent

1:15:55agenda.

1:15:58>> All in favor?

1:16:00All opposed. The consent agenda is

1:16:02approved with 11 council members

1:16:03present. All voting the affirmative,

1:16:05thus satisfying the 8 vote requirement

1:16:07with respect to,

1:16:09CA4,

1:16:11CA7,

1:16:15and CA9.

1:16:17We now come to a set of public hearings.

1:16:20Public hearings are opportunities for

1:16:21members of the public to speak to

1:16:22council and the community about the

1:16:24specific subject matter of the public

1:16:26hearing. To speak at a public hearing,

1:16:28you need not have signed up in advance.

1:16:31But your speech must relate to the

1:16:33specific subject matter of the public

1:16:35hearing. That is to say, the specific

1:16:37item on the agenda to which the public

1:16:40hearing relates. Speakers in all

1:16:42instances will have three minutes in

1:16:44which to speak. So, please pay close

1:16:45attention to the time. Our clerk or the

1:16:47time clock will notify you when 30

1:16:49seconds are remaining and when your time

1:16:51is expired. When your time is expired,

1:16:53please conclude your remarks and seed

1:16:55the floor. Public hearing number one, an

1:16:58ordinance to add uh title 11, tenants

1:17:01bill of rights and chapter 150, tenants

1:17:03right to organize to title 11 of the

1:17:05code of the city of Ann Arbor. Is there

1:17:07anyone in house who would like to speak

1:17:08at this public hearing? You just just

1:17:11come on up.

1:17:20>> Hi, Adam and I'm just here again from

1:17:21the fourth ward. In a housing crisis,

1:17:24housing supply crisis, landlords hold

1:17:26the power. Tenants compete for housing.

1:17:28Landlords don't compete for tenants. I'd

1:17:30love to see more supply flip that

1:17:32relationship, but regardless of that

1:17:34happening or not, you're going to need

1:17:35to continually work to support the

1:17:37rights of tenants as rent seekers find

1:17:39ways to abuse the relationship. Few

1:17:42rights are more fundamental than the

1:17:44right to organize without retaliation.

1:17:46This is a common sense ordinance and

1:17:48it's long overdue. I'd also I also like

1:17:51that this creates a tenants bill of

1:17:53rights title in the city code and hope

1:17:55to see several more additions to it such

1:17:57as the right to council. Please pass

1:17:59this tonight. Thank you.

1:18:00>> Thank you.

1:18:02[applause]

1:18:04>> Mark Gerpo 2017 fair street. Um I also

1:18:08encourage you to vote uh in favor of the

1:18:10tenants bill of rights. Um, I've spoken

1:18:12at this uh dis before about um my

1:18:15experience in rental housing with plants

1:18:17going through the walls um with leaky

1:18:19windows with uh very old homes that were

1:18:23not maintained because the landlords in

1:18:25the city can afford to charge high rents

1:18:27and there's so much demand and not

1:18:28enough housing that there's no option.

1:18:31You get what you get. Um so I'm really

1:18:33excited to see this bill of rights. uh

1:18:37um reading the language a small thing

1:18:39that is not worth getting stuck on. Uh

1:18:42there's language about tenants at the

1:18:43premises um meaning I think only tenants

1:18:48who are at the same site might be able

1:18:50to organize and I would just I would

1:18:51want to make sure the language allows um

1:18:54folks who live uh at many different um

1:18:57places be able to unionize together,

1:19:00right? especially if a landlord owns

1:19:01multiple um single family homes but has

1:19:05treats them all the same way. I'd hope

1:19:07that those tenants can work together. Um

1:19:10and then secondly, I'd like to make sure

1:19:12um so there's an enforcement provision

1:19:14in the language and that's great. Um but

1:19:17also legal enforcement is often ownorous

1:19:20for um especially for tenants. Um, and I

1:19:24would hope that the Bill of Rights makes

1:19:26it so that uh tenants don't have to get

1:19:29to, you know, go into the courts to

1:19:31claim their rights. Um, and part of that

1:19:33could be better city enforcement of uh

1:19:37of code and of our rental housing

1:19:39ordinances. Um, I've heard from a lot of

1:19:41people um about uh very musty basements

1:19:45that flood and windows that don't seal

1:19:48and apartments that are unable to

1:19:49maintain temperature. Um, and I think

1:19:52that there is an enforcement mechanism

1:19:54um for tenants to report uh their

1:19:56housing conditions, but I would love to

1:19:58see kind of more focus on that and

1:20:00trying to more consistently get um

1:20:02better living conditions for tenants um

1:20:04especially if that can be partnered with

1:20:06education about all the amazing programs

1:20:08that the SEU is running to improve the

1:20:11energy efficiency of our rental housing

1:20:13market. So, thank you.

1:20:15>> Thank you. [applause]

1:20:19Uh, good evening, council. I'm Kathy

1:20:22Chow from W 4. I'm here to support the

1:20:25tenants right to organize ordinance. Um,

1:20:28because tenants depend on landlords to

1:20:30fulfill a human need. They don't have a

1:20:32lot of negotiating power. Um, one year

1:20:35my room and I signed a lease and sent

1:20:37our security deposit only to be told our

1:20:40landlord wanted to give the apartment to

1:20:41someone else and we'd have to settle for

1:20:43some different apartment. Um, we briefly

1:20:46push back, but how much power can we

1:20:48really have when a landlord is holding

1:20:50our future housing in their hands? Um,

1:20:53that fear is real even if you luck out

1:20:55with a good landlord.

1:20:57So, one way to shift this inherent power

1:20:59imbalance is something you're already

1:21:01doing, building more housing, which

1:21:03gives tenants the option to walk away

1:21:05when bad landlords don't hold up their

1:21:06ends of the deal. But another way is to

1:21:09empower tenants to raise concerns

1:21:11together instead of going it alone.

1:21:14It's scary to confront landlords by

1:21:16yourself, especially if you're shy or

1:21:18used to sucking things up. Sometimes it

1:21:21takes a neighbor showing you there's a

1:21:23better way and that they've got your

1:21:24back. Strong communities start with

1:21:26people lifting each other up without

1:21:28fear, without retaliation. That's

1:21:31fundamentally what this ordinance

1:21:33protects.

1:21:34I believe in secure, abundant,

1:21:36affordable housing for all. And secure

1:21:38housing does not exist until we have

1:21:40strong tenant protections. As Anna moves

1:21:42towards more housing, which I fully

1:21:44support, we should continue to make

1:21:46everyone feel safe and secure in their

1:21:47homes. Thank you for considering this

1:21:49and I hope you vote yes tonight.

1:21:51>> Thank you. [applause]

1:21:57>> Hi. Uh my name is Sheila. I'm with the

1:21:59Ann Arbor Tenants Union. Um and I'm here

1:22:02in support of the right to organize. Uh

1:22:05as in any other city in America, housing

1:22:08in Ann Arbor is a business. Major

1:22:11corporations and outofstate developers

1:22:13take on large loans and they cut costs

1:22:15to maximize their profit margin.

1:22:18Skeleton maintenance crews and staff

1:22:20that can't keep up with repairs, cut

1:22:23corners, and ignore city codes meant to

1:22:25protect the health and safety of tenants

1:22:27in this city. A leaking toilet becomes a

1:22:31broken one. One cockroach becomes a

1:22:34yearslong infestation. Poor humidity

1:22:37becomes black mold on your bathroom

1:22:40ceiling and a worsening cough for your

1:22:42child. [snorts] Rent goes up while you

1:22:45file reports to the city. Yellow tags

1:22:48appear, then they turn red. You stay

1:22:51with your family and you hope that

1:22:53repairs will be made, but by then

1:22:55private equity has recognized that it is

1:22:58already sucked up what money can be

1:22:59found here and they file for bankruptcy.

1:23:03By the time a tenant story is told, the

1:23:06money paid for a moldinfested apartment

1:23:08is busy building interest in some

1:23:10outofstate bank account for somebody who

1:23:13has never stepped foot in the city of

1:23:15Ann Arbor. How do we tell this story

1:23:18before it is too late? How do we address

1:23:20the issue before they can cut and run?

1:23:23Ensure that tenants are centered in

1:23:24their own struggles for safe housing in

1:23:27the state of Michigan. If that mother

1:23:29with black mold knocks on her neighbor's

1:23:31door and brings a widespread issue to

1:23:33management, it is illegal for that

1:23:35landlord to retaliate against her. Two

1:23:38years ago, this legislation started with

1:23:40one of our organizers being told they

1:23:42were given notice for immediate eviction

1:23:45related to organizing activities. One

1:23:48year ago, management refused to leave a

1:23:50meeting held by tenants and tenant

1:23:52organizers. They threatened myself and

1:23:54fellow organizers from returning to

1:23:56advocate for better living conditions.

1:23:59Since then, we tasked ourselves with

1:24:01writing this ordinance. And I want to

1:24:03thank Travis Redina for your steadfast

1:24:06support and helping us create the first

1:24:08ever legislation in the state of

1:24:10Michigan protecting the rights of

1:24:12tenants to organize. Thank you.

1:24:14>> Thank you. [applause]

1:24:22Good evening, council. My name is Hannah

1:24:24Larsenes. I am a resident of Ward 1 and

1:24:27I am the chair of the Ann Arbor Renters

1:24:29Commission. I'm here to express support

1:24:32for the ordinance to add title 11 tenant

1:24:34bill of rights and chapter 150 tenant

1:24:37right to organize to the city code.

1:24:40Ann Arbor ten tenant union organizers

1:24:42have faced threats of legal action and

1:24:44eviction for attempting to organize

1:24:45tenant associations. This ordinance

1:24:48offers important legal protections,

1:24:50allowing tenants to work together and

1:24:52collectively bargain for better living

1:24:53conditions.

1:24:56The success of the right to organize

1:24:57ordinance will largely depend on

1:24:59enforcement. Many renters may have a

1:25:02hard time finding an attorney to pursue

1:25:04civil action, making city enforcement of

1:25:06this ordinance crucial for protecting

1:25:08tenant rights.

1:25:10I ask that reports of complaints of

1:25:13right to organized violations be

1:25:15regularly shared with the Ann Arbor

1:25:16Renters Commission so that we may

1:25:18monitor the effectiveness of this

1:25:20ordinance.

1:25:22The creation of a tenant bill of rights

1:25:24in the city code paves the way for

1:25:26future work in assuring dignified living

1:25:28conditions for renters in Ann Arbor.

1:25:31The Ann Arbor Tenants Union and the

1:25:33Hiron Valley DSA have already begun

1:25:35working on a right to repair deduct to

1:25:38promote improved habitability conditions

1:25:40and a right to council to help the most

1:25:43vulnerable members of our community

1:25:44avoid eviction.

1:25:47Additionally,

1:25:48information transparency may be improved

1:25:51by including all code violations in

1:25:53stream so that tenants can easily find

1:25:56information about their home without the

1:25:57need of a foyer request. I urge you to

1:26:00vote yes on this ordinance and I look

1:26:02forward to continue working together to

1:26:04improve tenant welfare in Ann Arbor.

1:26:05Thank you.

1:26:06>> Thank you. [applause]

1:26:13>> Hello, I'm Alesia. I'm a member of the

1:26:17Ann Arbor Tenants Union and a renter

1:26:19here um in Ann in Arbor. Um I'm

1:26:22commenting on the vote to include the

1:26:24right to organize ordinance into city

1:26:26code. Um, I'm glad to see this ordinance

1:26:28being brought to a vote and I commend

1:26:30members of the city council,

1:26:32specifically council member Readina, who

1:26:34have worked with tenants and organizers

1:26:36to bring us one step closer to a

1:26:38comprehensive tenant bill of rights. The

1:26:40right to organize should be a

1:26:41fundamental right for every tenant in in

1:26:43Arbor. Too many residents have been

1:26:45harassed and retaliated against because

1:26:47they dare to talk to and organize their

1:26:49neighbors to fight for better living

1:26:50conditions and hold their landlords

1:26:52accountable. This ordinance, if enforced

1:26:55strongly, would be a big step in

1:26:57building tenant power. However, this

1:26:59ordinance alone does not address all of

1:27:02tenants needs. Right to council, right

1:27:04to repair and deduct, and right to

1:27:06eviction protections, to name a few, are

1:27:08protections included in the tenant bill

1:27:09of rights that the Ann Arbor tenants

1:27:11union and the Hiron Valley DSA have been

1:27:13working on for more than a year. I ask

1:27:15members of the of the council to vote

1:27:17yes to include right to organize into

1:27:19city code and to work with organizers to

1:27:21institute the rest of the tenant bill of

1:27:23rights. Thank you.

1:27:25>> Thank you. [applause]

1:27:28Is there anyone else in house who would

1:27:30like to speak at this public hearing?

1:27:32>> I just want to ask one question. Um I

1:27:35found out recently that the city could

1:27:37leverage up to a billion dollars of its

1:27:39kind of loan from itself to build public

1:27:42housing. It's I'm afraid that this is

1:27:44out of order for a public hearing.

1:27:46>> Okay. I don't know if people don't know

1:27:47that.

1:27:48>> Thank you very much. A billion dollars

1:27:50from the

1:27:51>> Thank you very much.

1:27:52>> with global comments.

1:27:53>> Thank you.

1:27:55>> Is there anyone else in house who would

1:27:56like to speak at this public hearing?

1:27:59>> Interest free.

1:28:04>> Is there anyone online who'd like to

1:28:05speak at this public hearing?

1:28:11Mayor, we do have some callers online.

1:28:15Nathan Kim, do you have a comment?

1:28:18>> Uh, yes I do. Um, hi everybody. My name

1:28:21is Nathan Kim. I'm an organizer with the

1:28:23Ann Arbor Tenants Union. Um,

1:28:26uh, tenants and landlords face a

1:28:27constant struggle against each other.

1:28:29Um, but as other people have said, it's

1:28:31an unequal struggle. Landlords have

1:28:33always had the legal right to attack

1:28:34tenants. They have had the right to

1:28:36attack tenants by threatening eviction

1:28:37and to put tenants out onto the street.

1:28:40They have the they have had the right to

1:28:41distribute slum housing. They have had

1:28:43the right to raise rents without limits.

1:28:45Um tenants of course have no such

1:28:47weapons to attack landlord's livelihoods

1:28:49and in any way in you know remotely the

1:28:52same way. Um and we have few tools to

1:28:54even protect ourselves against those

1:28:55tactics that landlords um use. Today

1:28:58that narrow set of rights to defend

1:28:59ourselves will be expanded to the right

1:29:01to organize which which is something

1:29:02that uh tenants all over all over Ann

1:29:05celebrate. But the unequal terrain

1:29:07between tenants and landlords requires

1:29:09much more. Tenants organized under the

1:29:11Ann Arbor tenants union will be back

1:29:13here several more times over the next

1:29:14year to to fight for rights to fight for

1:29:17the rest of the rights outlined in the

1:29:18tenant bill of rights. Um which you can

1:29:20see on annover tenants.org. Um so these

1:29:23include the right to rent control, the

1:29:24right to eviction protection, the right

1:29:26to counsel, the right to truth and

1:29:27renting, right to housing access, the

1:29:29right to repair and deduct, and the

1:29:30right to a fair lease. Um thank you.

1:29:33>> Thank you.

1:29:46Janet Wang, do you have a comment?

1:29:59>> Janet Wang. Go ahead.

1:30:03Hi, I'm Janet Wang. I'm a renter in Ann

1:30:06Arbor and I wanted to call in and voice

1:30:09my support for this ordinance um coming

1:30:13to the table along with the tenant bill

1:30:15of rights. For too long, renters in Ann

1:30:17Arbor have faced skyrocketing rents,

1:30:20poor conditions, and unresponsive

1:30:22landlords who at the very best will

1:30:25ignore our complaints at the very least

1:30:27threaten to or actually evict us. Uh,

1:30:29passage of this ordinance would greatly

1:30:31support renters's right to organize and

1:30:33build stronger rental communities in Ann

1:30:35Arbor and passage of other rights from

1:30:39the tenant bill of rights would further

1:30:40strengthen the power of renters in the

1:30:42city and improve the community's

1:30:44well-being. Thank you.

1:30:46>> Thank you,

1:30:51>> Mayor. I don't have any other callers

1:30:52online for this hearing.

1:31:01Seeing no one in this public hearing is

1:31:02closed. Public hearing number two,

1:31:04resolution to approve fees for the fire

1:31:06department ambulance transport with

1:31:07advanced life support. Is there anyone

1:31:10in house who would like to speak at this

1:31:11public hearing?

1:31:19Is there anyone online who would like to

1:31:20speak at this public hearing?

1:31:23Mayor, I don't have any callers online

1:31:25for this hearing.

1:31:34Seeing no one, this public hearing is

1:31:36closed. Public hearing number three,

1:31:37resolution to approve amendment number

1:31:39one to the brownfield plan for the

1:31:40village of Ann Arbor. Is there anyone in

1:31:43house who would like to speak at this

1:31:44public hearing?

1:31:47>> Mark Scarbo, 2017 Fair Street. I'll be

1:31:49honest, I was just looking at this

1:31:50before. I didn't know this was on the

1:31:52agenda. Um, this is an area of town that

1:31:56um is currently kind of a beautiful

1:31:58woods prairie. It's maybe private land,

1:32:02but I and many other people have biked

1:32:03through there. It's a really lovely

1:32:04place to bike. Um, so part of me will be

1:32:07sad to see it go. Um, but it's also

1:32:10providing much needed housing in the

1:32:12city. Um, and I just want to highlight

1:32:14that this is the cost of not building

1:32:18denser housing in other places. Um the

1:32:22housing plan that will go here is I

1:32:25don't know I call it maybe medium

1:32:26density. Um it's not as dense as I would

1:32:30like to see it. Um for the same reason

1:32:32that um we get sprawl outside of the

1:32:35city, we kind of get sprawl inside of

1:32:36the city when we get uh low-rise

1:32:39development. Um, and so I would just ask

1:32:42that folks who are um, mourning the loss

1:32:46of kind of forested land, even a forest

1:32:49that might have grown over a former city

1:32:50dump like this site is, um, would

1:32:53consider that if you oppose tall

1:32:56buildings in other places, the result

1:32:58you get is short buildings in places

1:33:00that you might want to be greenery. So,

1:33:03thank you. Thank you.

1:33:13Hi. Uh, Rich Fine, Ward Five. Uh, I'm

1:33:18here to request, uh, that council vote

1:33:20to withhold approval of the amendment

1:33:22number one for the Village of Ann Arbor

1:33:25Brownfield plan until the developer

1:33:27agrees that the 480

1:33:30rental units will be built with all

1:33:33electric heat and hot water. If we're to

1:33:36take our carbon neutrality goals

1:33:39seriously, we must choose to encourage

1:33:41developers to build all electric when we

1:33:45have the choice to do so and not reward

1:33:48them when they don't build all electric.

1:33:52While I acknowledge the public benefit

1:33:55of this development, it's important to

1:33:57also look at the public harm that this

1:34:00development will cause by using natural

1:34:02gas. The impact of using gas to heat 480

1:34:06units is significant. It equates to

1:34:093,000 metric tons of CO2 per year.

1:34:153,000 [snorts] metric tonses. That's

1:34:18about the same emissions as driving 7

1:34:20million miles per year or putting 700

1:34:25more gas powered cars on the road. All

1:34:28while we're trying to reduce emissions.

1:34:32Those 480 units will be burning natural

1:34:35gas for 15 to 20 years while the

1:34:37electric g grid is already cleaner than

1:34:40burning gas for heat. And the grid is

1:34:42getting cleaner, even more cleaner. A

1:34:45few weeks back, I attended a meeting

1:34:49with the office of sustainability to

1:34:51discuss the city potentially buying

1:34:53carbon offsets

1:34:56to help

1:34:58achieve its carbon neutrality goals. Um,

1:35:02I support that. But think about it. The

1:35:05city is going to be buying carbon

1:35:08offsets to offset the gas that the

1:35:12villages brand new rental units are

1:35:15going to be burning. They're going to be

1:35:18we're going to be paying more taxes

1:35:21for those units burning natural gas

1:35:26taxpayers.

1:35:28And this is happening because Robertson

1:35:30Brothers, the developer, has made

1:35:33distorted claims that utility bills will

1:35:36be unaffordable or put the village at a

1:35:39competitive disadvantage if they were to

1:35:42heat the units with electric heat pumps

1:35:45instead of gas. But with the exception

1:35:47of the village,

1:35:49all new, medium, and large multifamily

1:35:53developments that have been approved in

1:35:55Ad Arbor over the last two plus years,

1:35:58except for the village, they all have

1:36:01their living units heated with all

1:36:04electric. Why is that the is it that the

1:36:08village can't do this when everyone else

1:36:11can?

1:36:14It's my understanding that council has a

1:36:16choice to apply additional requirements.

1:36:20>> So I ask postpone

1:36:22>> the amendment until they build with all

1:36:25electric. Thank you.

1:36:26>> Thank you.

1:36:40Thank you. Mayor Taylor and console. Ken

1:36:42Garber, second ward. This is the sixth

1:36:45time I've been here to um address uh the

1:36:48village project dating back to 2022. Um

1:36:51I've all every time I've said I like

1:36:53this project a lot like Mr. Scurbo, we

1:36:55need the housing. Um

1:36:58but uh I've only ever asked one thing

1:37:01and that's the same thing that Mr. Fine

1:37:03asked that. Um all 616

1:37:06units here be heated with heat pumps,

1:37:09not gas furnaces. Um,

1:37:13so, uh, I don't know why that's so hard.

1:37:15We had, as he mentioned, we've had

1:37:17almost two dozen projects in a row that

1:37:19we've approved all electric.

1:37:21Um, now we all love the SEU and the

1:37:23Bryant project. And, um, later tonight,

1:37:27I hope you'll approve the 2.4 million

1:37:29for the SEU coming from the Klein

1:37:32proceeds.

1:37:33But decarbonizing the 260 homes in

1:37:36Bryant will be completely negated if we

1:37:39approve gas for these 480 apartments. Um

1:37:43it'll for the from the point of view of

1:37:45the climate, it'll be as if Bryant never

1:37:46happened. The climate only cares about

1:37:48one thing, the raw physics um of

1:37:52greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Um I

1:37:56hope we don't hear tonight that gas will

1:37:57be offset by lower commuter emissions.

1:38:00It won't be. And anyway, we need both

1:38:02green buildings and fewer commuters. Or

1:38:05that the city has no discretion here. It

1:38:07absolutely does. This isn't a byright

1:38:10sight plan. This is a brownfield plan.

1:38:12Or that were bound by the previous

1:38:14approval. This is a completely different

1:38:16plan with non-environmental costs going

1:38:17from 5 million to 26 million

1:38:21or that the county fuel the county

1:38:23brownfield board approved it. Um that

1:38:25advisory board was contingent on your

1:38:27vote, which should have come first.

1:38:30Um, I do give Robertson Brothers a lot

1:38:32of credit for making a difficult site

1:38:36buildable. Um, but they're still

1:38:38violating the city's brownfield policy,

1:38:40which states that non-environmental

1:38:41costs require affordable housing or fee

1:38:44in L. Staff waved this in part because

1:38:46of developers promising rents from 80 to

1:38:48100% of AMI, which is not really

1:38:51affordable housing or fee or um,

1:38:55you know, and is not binding either. Uh,

1:38:58if we're waving affordable housing,

1:38:59let's at least require all electric

1:39:01appliances for all units. Um, I see that

1:39:05staff in this response memo again cites

1:39:07the sustainability benefits of this

1:39:10project, such as they are. As if the

1:39:12forale home heat pumps and the clubhouse

1:39:14and street light solar were volunteered.

1:39:17No, that 2.9 million is part of the

1:39:18brownfield plant. We're paying for it,

1:39:20not Robertson. So using that to justify

1:39:22the affordable housing waiver is

1:39:24circular reasoning. To conclude, we can

1:39:27have the housing uh without sacrificing

1:39:30our climate goals. This project can be

1:39:32all electric. Make that a condition of

1:39:34Brownfield plan approval tonight. You

1:39:37have complete discretion on that. Thank

1:39:39you.

1:39:39>> Thank you.

1:39:41[applause]

1:39:45Is there anyone else in house who would

1:39:46like to speak at this public hearing?

1:39:53>> [snorts]

1:39:53>> Is there anyone online who would like to

1:39:55speak at this public hearing?

1:39:58>> Mayor, I don't see any callers online

1:40:00for this hearing.

1:40:10>> Seeing no one, this public hearing is

1:40:11closed. Public hearing number four,

1:40:12resolution to approve amendment number

1:40:14one to the Brownfield plan for 300 312

1:40:16East Hiron Street. Is there anyone in

1:40:19house who would like to speak at this

1:40:20public hearing?

1:40:32Thank you, Mayor Terber again. Yeah,

1:40:34brownfields are my thing lately. Um,

1:40:37this is the hotel across the street that

1:40:40recently opened for business. Um, this

1:40:42developer, like the last one, decided

1:40:44the city's climate action plan doesn't

1:40:46apply to him. um but still has his hand

1:40:48out to the city. Um the hotel's common

1:40:52areas, 30% of total square footage, use

1:40:54gas for heat, even though OSI and

1:40:56residents like me asked them to go all

1:40:59electric.

1:41:00Um by the way, planning commission

1:41:02recently approved the all electric

1:41:04Spring Hill Suites Hotel near Brierwood.

1:41:06No fossil fuels, even for backup power.

1:41:09It can be done. Um but they insisted on

1:41:13gas. Now, they're coming back for

1:41:15another 338,000 in non-environmental

1:41:18cost reimbursement. And like the last

1:41:20project, this one violates the city's

1:41:22brownfield policy by not paying a fee in

1:41:24L for affordable housing. We've been

1:41:27favoring this development from the

1:41:29start. Hotel construction was well

1:41:31underway when he first applied for

1:41:33brownfield funding. Application should

1:41:35be filed before breaking ground. That

1:41:37way, if the city decides the project

1:41:39doesn't um have benefits worth the tiff,

1:41:43it can hold out for something better uh

1:41:46on the site. In this case, we were faced

1:41:48with a big hole in the ground across

1:41:49from city hall. So, you approved the

1:41:51$750,000.

1:41:53Um so, we bent the rules once and now he

1:41:55wants us to do it again to bail him out

1:41:58after construction delays and cost

1:42:00overruns.

1:42:02Property development is a tough business

1:42:04and I sympathize with this developer,

1:42:06but it's not the job of taxpayers to

1:42:08bail him out or any private developer

1:42:11when things don't go as planned,

1:42:13especially when he decides that the the

1:42:16city's climate goals don't align with

1:42:18his.

1:42:20Um, staff estimates that the delays and

1:42:23other problems have lowered his internal

1:42:25rate of return by 2.2%.

1:42:28I don't understand why it's the public's

1:42:30role to make up that difference.

1:42:33Um, that is socializing business risk.

1:42:36Remember, this isn't affordable housing

1:42:38or even housing. It's lodging for

1:42:40tourists. Um, finally, I don't

1:42:44understand why we're also on the hook

1:42:46tonight for 388,000

1:42:48more in admin costs and local brownfield

1:42:52revolving fund. These go from local

1:42:54units to the county. Um, this big

1:42:57increase begs an explanation. There may

1:42:58be a good one, but the staff report

1:43:00didn't provide it. Um, so the total

1:43:03amount of tax cap tax capture on the

1:43:05table tonight is well over $700,000.

1:43:08Um, maybe Mr. Vote from the county is

1:43:11here. He can explain the the large

1:43:12increase. Uh,

1:43:15in any event, I know you're going to

1:43:17approve this amendment tonight, but I

1:43:18hope you discuss this very unusual

1:43:21process that we've seen from the very

1:43:24beginning and explain why taxpayers

1:43:26should be on the hook for these

1:43:27non-environmental costs at this very

1:43:30late date. Thank you. Thank you. Is

1:43:33there anyone else in house who would

1:43:35like to speak at this public hearing?

1:43:43Is there anyone online who would like to

1:43:44speak at this public hearing? Mayor, I

1:43:47don't have any callers online for this

1:43:48hearing.

1:43:57>> Seeing no one, this public hearing is

1:43:59closed. We have before us the regular

1:44:01meeting minutes of September 8, 2026.

1:44:03May I have a motion, please, to approve

1:44:04these minutes. Moved by Council Member

1:44:05Watson, seconded by Council Member

1:44:06Adena. Discussion of A1

1:44:11All in favor? All opposed? It is

1:44:14approved. B1, an ordinance to add title

1:44:1711, tenants bill of rights in chapter

1:44:19150, tenants right to organize of title

1:44:2111 of the code of the city of Ann Arbor.

1:44:23Moved by Council Member Adena, seconded

1:44:24by Council Member Harrison. Discussion,

1:44:26please be one, Council Member Adina.

1:44:29>> Uh, thank you, Mayor Taylor. Uh tonight

1:44:31I am incredibly excited that Ann Arbor

1:44:33once again has the opportunity to lead

1:44:35our state in expanding legal protections

1:44:38for renters. By adopting an ordinance

1:44:40guaranteeing a tenants right to

1:44:42organize, Ann Arbor would become the

1:44:43first city in Michigan to establish such

1:44:45a right and critically would be adding

1:44:48another vital protection to our

1:44:49everexpanding tenants bill of rights.

1:44:52adding to already established legal

1:44:53protections like right to renew, just

1:44:55cause eviction, the early leasing

1:44:57ordinance, fair chance access to

1:44:59housing, and bans on pre-teny fees and

1:45:01rental junk fees. This action tonight is

1:45:04especially meaningful because, as we all

1:45:06know, the majority of Ann Arbor

1:45:07residents rent their homes. And too

1:45:10often they are denied a meaningful voice

1:45:12in the safety, affordability, quality,

1:45:14and condition of the places where they

1:45:16live. Tenants are too often at at a

1:45:20[clears throat] significant disadvantage

1:45:21when dealing one-on-one with a landlord

1:45:22or property management company. And as I

1:45:25mentioned during first reading, the

1:45:26power and information imbalance

1:45:28experienced by tenants is especially

1:45:30pronounced in in a housing market like

1:45:32ours where limited supply, high costs,

1:45:35and likely price fixing can make it

1:45:37extremely difficult, if not impossible,

1:45:40for tenants to simply pack up and move

1:45:42elsewhere when problems arise. Many of

1:45:44the challenges that renters face are not

1:45:46isolated to a single apartment or home.

1:45:49Unsafe conditions, delayed repairs, poor

1:45:51maintenance, unfair policies, and other

1:45:54propertywide issues may affect dozens or

1:45:56even hundreds of residents who have no

1:45:59way of knowing what their neighbors are

1:46:01experiencing, if their neighbors are

1:46:02experiencing the exact same problems

1:46:04that they are. And it is far too easy

1:46:06for a single renter to be dismissed,

1:46:08retaliated against, or pressured into

1:46:10backing down. But an organized group of

1:46:13tenants speaking together in a single

1:46:15unified voice is much harder to brush

1:46:17aside or ignore. When tenants are able

1:46:19to communicate with one another, form

1:46:21tenants unions, select representatives

1:46:23and tenants agents, and advocate

1:46:25collectively, it gives renters an

1:46:27opportunity to identify common concerns,

1:46:29seek needed safety and maintenance

1:46:30improvements, develop solutions

1:46:33together, and engage their landlord from

1:46:35a stronger and more informed position.

1:46:38If if effective, the right to organize

1:46:40may help to improve living conditions

1:46:41and rental properties all across our

1:46:43community. I would like to once again

1:46:46thank our renters commission, the Ann

1:46:48Arbor tenants union, the Hiron Valley

1:46:49DSA, city staff, and renters throughout

1:46:52the community for their hard work,

1:46:54partnership, advocacy, and support in

1:46:56getting this ordinance across the finish

1:46:57line. Thanks to those who also came

1:46:59tonight to share their personal stories

1:47:01and to speak out about why this is so

1:47:03important. Uh this work matters and so I

1:47:06urge all of my colleagues to support

1:47:08this and vote to establish another

1:47:10critical right to protect renters in our

1:47:12community. Thank you.

1:47:13>> Further discussion.

1:47:18[clears throat]

1:47:23>> Well, a lot of us had some things to say

1:47:24at uh the uh the first uh the first

1:47:28reading. Council member Dean of course

1:47:30uh you know said it uh said it

1:47:31eloquently in this context. would like

1:47:33to uh extend thanks from uh to the folks

1:47:35me mentioned by council member Adena. Uh

1:47:38to the folks on council who have worked

1:47:39on this. I know council member Gazi

1:47:40Edwin, council member Adena, council

1:47:42member Harrison, members of the renters

1:47:44commission uh and the various uh tenant

1:47:46organizations that have advocated for

1:47:48this crucial right. Uh the power and

1:47:52balance between renters and tenants uh

1:47:54and and their land and their landlords

1:47:56uh is uh is a chasm. Uh and we have an

1:47:59opportunity here at the council to do

1:48:01something about it. Uh we've taken great

1:48:03steps over the course of years. We've

1:48:05done it. We're making an important step

1:48:06tonight and I'm uh confident that the

1:48:08council uh will continue uh going

1:48:11forward. Uh we have uh it is our uh our

1:48:14obligation and our pleasure to support

1:48:16uh tenants in the city of Ann Arbor. Uh

1:48:18this is a great step moving forward.

1:48:20Thank you. Further discussion.

1:48:24All in favor? All opposed? It is

1:48:27approved.

1:48:30[applause]

1:48:33C1, an ordinance to amend chapter 55

1:48:36zoning reszoning of approximately 41.292

1:48:40acres from R3 multif family, R4 multif

1:48:42family and public land districts to TC1

1:48:45transit Carter with conditions 1310

1:48:48Wisteria Drive. Moved by council member

1:48:51Cornell, seconded by council member

1:48:52Dish. Discussion please of C1. I

1:48:54understand we have some staff

1:48:55introductions.

1:48:57Good evening, mayor and council. Um, uh,

1:49:01we had a few questions relative to this

1:49:03that I will address and then I'll be

1:49:04around if you have any additional

1:49:05questions.

1:49:08The, uh, the first was for finding a

1:49:10question that the site does not fit the

1:49:11purpose statements of the TC-1 district.

1:49:13It is not located along a bus route and

1:49:15not an established commercial or office

1:49:16site with deep setbacks and vast surface

1:49:18parking. Um, this just as a note that

1:49:20the site is near two bus routes. The AAA

1:49:23number six is on South Industrial and

1:49:25the number 64 is on East Stadium. Uh,

1:49:29please explain the purpose statements in

1:49:31the unified development code. Purpose

1:49:33statements are provided as the most

1:49:34generalized character or desires for a

1:49:36zoning district. They can be utilized to

1:49:38help interpret when the specific

1:49:40regulations for a district may be

1:49:41difficult to inter to interpret, but do

1:49:44not include the specific requirements of

1:49:46use or dimension that is required to

1:49:48measure compliance with a zoning

1:49:50district.

1:49:52Is TC1 an appropriate zoning designation

1:49:54for this project? Uh [clears throat] the

1:49:56area proposed for zoning is designated

1:49:58as transition in our community land use

1:50:00P plan. Uh the proposed resoning is

1:50:02appropriate with as proposed with

1:50:05proposed conditions. Uh it provides uh a

1:50:08couple of provisions that it meets from

1:50:09the comprehensive plan is it provides a

1:50:11mixeduse area with a flexible blend of

1:50:12residential, commercial, and industrial

1:50:14employment spaces. TC-1 does allow for a

1:50:17mix of land uses as opposed to strictly

1:50:19residential. Uh the comp plan calls for

1:50:21transition zones to support moderate to

1:50:23higher density housing to enhance

1:50:25walkability, encourage transit use, and

1:50:26strengthen commercial activity in key

1:50:28nodes. And the plan support to uh

1:50:32identifies for transition areas to

1:50:33support a physical scale of development

1:50:35with the offered conditions um uh with

1:50:38the offered conditions the proposed

1:50:40scale of development and zoning here uh

1:50:42regulates the height of a development in

1:50:45the TC1 to when it's close to

1:50:47residentially zoned property.

1:50:49Uh, another question was, "Please

1:50:51elaborate on the height limitations

1:50:53provided by developer offered

1:50:54conditions. Is this TC1 in name only?"

1:50:57Um, I'll get to the detailed height

1:50:59regulations, but uh, the only conditions

1:51:01proposed for the TC1 district are the

1:51:03height limitations and permitted and

1:51:05accessory uses in the areas north of

1:51:07Wisteria Drive and east of Aster. Um,

1:51:11all other use regulations, setbacks,

1:51:13parking buffers, and other regulations

1:51:14of TC-1 would apply to the property if

1:51:17reszoned to TC1.

1:51:19Uh please explain the differences

1:51:21between the conditions of what TC would

1:51:23allow if unmodified by the conditions.

1:51:25Uh the differences include a lowering of

1:51:27height uh from a distance of within 80

1:51:30ft of residentially zone property.

1:51:32Normally TC1 would allow 55 ft. This

1:51:34proposed would only allow 35 ft. A

1:51:37reduction in maximum height from 75 to

1:51:4035 ft for any portion of the site within

1:51:4280 to 300 ft of residentially zoned

1:51:44property. and then a reduction in

1:51:46maximum height from 120 to 85 feet from

1:51:49any portion of the site between three

1:51:50and 600 feet from residentially zoned

1:51:52property. Um there's no change in the

1:51:55farthest reaches of the TC1 to the

1:51:57proposed resoning. Uh additionally, in

1:52:00the area north of Wisteria Drive and

1:52:02east of Aster, those permitted and

1:52:03accessory uses would be limited to those

1:52:05set forth in the R3 zoning. They would

1:52:07not be uh the full range of uses that

1:52:10are provided in the TC1 zoning.

1:52:13uh please explain what proportion of the

1:52:14proposed project is affected by the

1:52:16limitations provided in the conditions.

1:52:18Uh amongst my uh old planner I I would

1:52:21estimate approximately 2/3 of the site

1:52:23is subject to the limitations proposed

1:52:25by the TC1 conditions.

1:52:28The question do these conditions bind

1:52:30only this developer who has offered

1:52:31them? What would happen if the developer

1:52:33sells the parcels? Zoning runs with the

1:52:35land. So any conditions that are in

1:52:37place for this would also uh bind any

1:52:40future purchasers or future owners of

1:52:42the land.

1:52:44Please address the concerns that the

1:52:45reasonzoning applies to the entire 41

1:52:47acre site when the forthcoming site plan

1:52:48covers just phase one of the project. Um

1:52:52property owners can certainly petition

1:52:54for resoning. In this case, I I

1:52:55anticipate the petitioner is trying to

1:52:57set the stage for future redevelopment

1:52:59and thus the wider area of resoning. I

1:53:01think it's also noteworthy for us to

1:53:03consider the connection of TC-1 uh in

1:53:06its entirely to connect to those transit

1:53:08districts uh adjacent to the site as

1:53:10well. TC1 allows a question TC1 allows

1:53:14for encourages mixed use. Could this

1:53:15project in phase one or future phases

1:53:17include commercial development? Yes.

1:53:19Although that the applicant has proposed

1:53:21a condition that limits commercial uses

1:53:23in the areas north of Wisteria and east

1:53:24of Aster, all other areas would remain

1:53:27the full flexibility for TC1 uh uses

1:53:30with a variety of commercial and

1:53:32residential uses.

1:53:34A question about a TC1 aiming to reduce

1:53:36car dependence. Uh the project includes

1:53:39a fivetory parking garage that replaces

1:53:41and reduces existing parking. Um this

1:53:44was discussed at the planning commission

1:53:45meeting. the proposed site plan when uh

1:53:49when reviewed by the planning commission

1:53:50and presented to you, we find that it

1:53:52does meet the standards of the TC1 uh

1:53:54maximum parking uh for the proposal. Uh

1:53:58question, a development agreement for

1:54:00this project was also discussed at the

1:54:01planning commission. Are there

1:54:02noteworthy features in that agreement?

1:54:04How are development agreements in force

1:54:06and on whom are they binding? Uh in

1:54:08addition to standard provisions of any

1:54:09development agreement, this is expected

1:54:11to contain provisions confirming the

1:54:13developer's contribution of $25,000

1:54:15towards a pedestrian crossing on East

1:54:17Stadium as well as $195,000

1:54:20worth of park improvements for either

1:54:22Frisinger or Woodbury Park. Development

1:54:24agreements are contracts between the

1:54:26city and a developer. Uh they bind the

1:54:29developer and any future owners as well.

1:54:31and enforcement of development agreement

1:54:33would be uh under enforcing any contract

1:54:36uh under contract law.

1:54:39Question, does the developer have a plan

1:54:41to manage displacement of current

1:54:43residents? What is that plan? Is there

1:54:44any way for the city to ensure the

1:54:46developer complies with it? The

1:54:47petitioner has not shared any proposed

1:54:48displacement plans with us, nor do we

1:54:50have an ordinance requirement that they

1:54:51do so.

1:54:53And then finally, can you describe the

1:54:55rationale for reszoning land currently

1:54:56designated as PL to TC1 with conditions?

1:54:59The proposed area for reszoning from PPL

1:55:02to TC1 is approximately a 1 and a half

1:55:04acre strip of land running immediately

1:55:05west and parallel to Woodbury Drive. No

1:55:08proposed change in zoning is proposed

1:55:09for either Fryinger or Woodbury Park. Uh

1:55:12public land zoning has no maximum floor

1:55:14area setbacks or maximum height

1:55:15restrictions. Uh TC1 does provide more

1:55:19flexibility in uses but also brings uh

1:55:22dimensional standards to any future

1:55:23development of that property. That's why

1:55:25staff in the planning commission

1:55:26recommend that resoning.

1:55:28happy to answer any additional questions

1:55:29that you have.

1:55:32>> Are there

1:55:35council member?

1:55:38>> Thank you, Mr. Leonard. That was

1:55:40amazing. Um, so I want to thank everyone

1:55:44who came out to speak on this

1:55:47uh proposal. You raised thoughtful

1:55:50questions in debating the comprehensive

1:55:52land use plan. We spoke about the role

1:55:54that market rate housing can play in

1:55:56relieving an affordability crisis like

1:55:58ours, one that is based in scarcity. I

1:56:01don't want to reopen those debates, but

1:56:03I do want to say that cities across the

1:56:05US are adopting land use regulations

1:56:08like Ann Arbor's transition category, a

1:56:11category that allows middle height

1:56:13buildings four to eight stories tall in

1:56:16proximity to bus routes and that taper

1:56:18up against uh residential areas.

1:56:21According to the Harvard Joint Center

1:56:23for Housing Studies, the nation has

1:56:24achieved its greatest gains in housing

1:56:26opportunity in this category. Not in

1:56:29single family neighborhoods, not even

1:56:30via downtown highrises, and rental rates

1:56:34are declining. Now, this is a transition

1:56:37project. Transition is a new land use

1:56:40category approved when city council

1:56:42adopted the club uh the comprehensive

1:56:44land use plan, excuse me. It is for now

1:56:47a category without a district because we

1:56:50have not yet zoned the comprehensive

1:56:52land use plan. The developer proposed

1:56:55TC1 and volunteered to accept conditions

1:56:58that make this proposal consistent with

1:57:01the transition category in the ways that

1:57:03you have just heard from Mr. Lenn

1:57:06Leonard. Now I would like to say um how

1:57:09this is not TC1. These are really very

1:57:12strict height restrictions where

1:57:14portions of this site adjoin a

1:57:16residential zone. Within 80 feet of a

1:57:19property zoned residential, you may not

1:57:20build higher than 35 ft. Uh within 300

1:57:26ft of a property zoned residential, you

1:57:28may not build higher than 35 ft. TC1

1:57:32would allow you to go up to 75 within

1:57:34300 ft of a residential zone. You may

1:57:37build 85 ft, roughly eight stories only

1:57:41on a parcel higher uh more excuse me

1:57:45than 300 ft from a residentially zoned

1:57:48property. You may not build higher than

1:57:5085 ft. So in that that at that distance

1:57:55these height limitations plus the

1:57:57prohibition of mixed use from the areas

1:57:59north of Wisteria and east of Aster as

1:58:01Mr. Leonard said affect over twothirds

1:58:03of the entire site. the entire site.

1:58:05That is to say that more than half of

1:58:07this property will not be taller than

1:58:09three stories.

1:58:11Um and only uh I won't say that anyway.

1:58:14So um he said all that. So and I just

1:58:18want to emphasize why it is important to

1:58:20reszone the public land. It isn't well

1:58:22enough alone. It is open to anything if

1:58:25left alone. Um PL

1:58:29is

1:58:31the the designation PL can apply to

1:58:33privately owned land. That's a little

1:58:35bizarre. You would think that it's

1:58:37publicly owned land, but it's not. It's

1:58:39privately owned land. And so this zoning

1:58:42designation, as it currently stands,

1:58:44does not prevent development of the

1:58:46parcel. What it does is it

1:58:51Yep. Okay.

1:58:53>> Thank you. Uh, Council Member Aman,

1:58:57>> thank you and thanks everybody who came

1:59:00out tonight. Um, this neighborhood is

1:59:02one of those ones that's in my ward and

1:59:04I didn't discover it until I was

1:59:06knocking on doors four years ago and

1:59:07it's uh very cute. I was happy to

1:59:09discover it. Um, so I supported the

1:59:12comprehensive plan and its direction

1:59:14toward more housing and greater

1:59:15intensity in transition areas, which has

1:59:18been stated repeatedly this would be in

1:59:20in our future land use plan. [gasps] The

1:59:23plan expressly contemplates greater

1:59:25intensity and redevelopment of suburban

1:59:28family sites. So my concern isn't

1:59:30necessarily that this neighborhood

1:59:32should not change or add housing, but

1:59:35it's whether TC1 is the right zoning

1:59:37framework for this property.

1:59:39The plan is explicit that the future

1:59:42land use plan or you land use map is not

1:59:45a zoning map and um

1:59:50transition is defined as a future land

1:59:52concept. We have not yet adapted or

1:59:54adopted the zoning standards that will

1:59:56implement this category. Throughout the

1:59:59comprehensive land use process, I

2:00:02repeatedly told people that the

2:00:04regulatory details would be worked out

2:00:06later and we have not done that work yet

2:00:08for this category. So that to me makes

2:00:11the choice of TC1 rather important. Um

2:00:14this is an existing district that the

2:00:16plan associates with hub not transition

2:00:19and the staff report itself acknowledges

2:00:21that its existing purpose language is

2:00:23quote problematic here because it was

2:00:25not designed primarily for established

2:00:27R3 R4 multif family communities. I do

2:00:30appreciate uh that there were many

2:00:33attempts made to address the mismatch

2:00:36through conditions particularly on the

2:00:38height that's been talked about in

2:00:40detail so I won't mention that again. Um

2:00:43but height I don't think is the whole

2:00:44question of what transition should look

2:00:47like. So the existing zoning requires

2:00:50substantial open space and building

2:00:51separation. As I understand it, TC1 does

2:00:55not have minimum open space requirements

2:00:57or building spacing requirements. Um I

2:01:00don't think we should necessarily be

2:01:02preserving the existing what I think is

2:01:0440 to 65% open space requirements here.

2:01:07Those might not be the right tool uh for

2:01:09the transition category. But my concern

2:01:11is we're eliminating them before

2:01:13deciding what if anything should replace

2:01:15them in transition zoning. I think the

2:01:17scale also matters. This is reszoning 41

2:01:20some odd acres, not simply the current

2:01:23proposal. Um so I think we're

2:01:25establishing a framework for how this

2:01:27entire multif family community could

2:01:29develop over time. And as we heard

2:01:31tonight, uh only twothirds of the parcel

2:01:33is subject to the conditions that make

2:01:35it suitable for this location.

2:01:38Um so for me the comprehensive plan

2:01:40gives us a direction but it doesn't

2:01:42answer this particular zoning question

2:01:44and I would rather we implement the

2:01:47transition category through standards

2:01:49that address not only density and height

2:01:51but also the open space and so I will

2:01:53not be supporting this.

2:01:55>> Council member Red.

2:01:59>> Uh thank you Mayor Taylor. Um I have I

2:02:02think a at least one more question. Um I

2:02:05I don't know if it's for you Mr. Leonard

2:02:07or um someone else, but I I wonder if

2:02:09you could address the concerns that were

2:02:11raised during public comment um with

2:02:13respect to the water loop easement and

2:02:15if that was something the city requested

2:02:18um for this project.

2:02:20>> So um I don't have a lot of specific

2:02:23knowledge that is typically a

2:02:24requirement of our engineering and fire

2:02:27protection to make sure loops do require

2:02:31multiple sources in the event that

2:02:32there's some failure so we can still

2:02:34provide those. But I I am not the one to

2:02:36answer detailed questions about that. I

2:02:38could certainly follow up with any

2:02:39detailed questions prior to second

2:02:40reading, though.

2:02:41>> That would be helpful. Thank you. Um

2:02:44I also I'll I'll say I share a number of

2:02:48the concerns that Council Member Aman

2:02:49laid out. Um I'm I'm not going to go

2:02:51through the process of repeating them.

2:02:53Um I do I guess have a question coming

2:02:55out of it. Um you know, I respect the

2:02:58developers request to reszone the full

2:03:0041 acres to TC1. um maybe through a

2:03:04desire to set themselves up for future

2:03:06development. Um but is it typical sorry

2:03:09I do have one more [laughter] um but is

2:03:11it typical to reszone this much extra

2:03:14area without existing plans to develop

2:03:17and is there any benefit to the city to

2:03:18reszone this now? And conversely is

2:03:21there something we could be leaving on

2:03:22the it on the table if we resone it all

2:03:24now?

2:03:25>> Well there's definitely times where the

2:03:27city over time has reszoned larger

2:03:29[clears throat] areas. Um, we've done

2:03:31that in residential areas, but you're

2:03:33right, the vast majority of resonings

2:03:34that you see tend to be more sight

2:03:36specific. Um, we definitely provide the

2:03:38flexibility to do that. Um, as talked

2:03:40about, part of the implementation of the

2:03:43comprehensive plan is going to be not

2:03:44only a a new zoning code, but it's going

2:03:47to be a new zoning map. So, that'll be

2:03:49an example where a lot of resoning is

2:03:50going to happen without specific

2:03:52development tied to it. Um, I wouldn't

2:03:55say it's atypical. Um, it's not

2:03:58inappropriate. Um, as to the question,

2:04:01um, I think whenever you're considering,

2:04:04uh, whenever we're as the city, we're

2:04:05considering a re a reszoning at at the

2:04:08core, what we want to be doing is

2:04:10thinking about um, the zoning applied to

2:04:13that land because even when it is um,

2:04:16even when you do have a site plan on

2:04:17that agenda,

2:04:20another site plan could come. And that's

2:04:21why the consideration of the zoning is

2:04:23really important. Um that's why we in

2:04:25this case were considering you know uh

2:04:27as a lot of discussion happened with the

2:04:29modifications we think it does meet the

2:04:31the transition goals. Um as far as

2:04:35answering

2:04:37what is the benefit

2:04:39um I mean ultimately it's a response to

2:04:41the petitioner. I would say that in

2:04:44[clears throat] this case because of the

2:04:45phasing I do think it's important to

2:04:46consider the connection of that

2:04:48development to the transit routes and

2:04:50some cohesive regulatory framework such

2:04:53as a similar zoning. Um but apart from

2:04:57that I don't sit here and say like it's

2:04:59critical that all of that zoning

2:05:00happens. If if you if we weren't going

2:05:02to consider that, it might be worthwhile

2:05:05reconsidering at planning commission

2:05:07because it would no longer have that

2:05:09direct adjacency to those transit routes

2:05:12with that district and it and it might

2:05:14be it might be worth their

2:05:16consideration.

2:05:18>> Thank you,

2:05:19>> Council Member Malik.

2:05:22>> Thank you, Mayor. Uh Mr. Leonard, I

2:05:25think you should stay there. Um

2:05:27[laughter]

2:05:28um I think council me council member

2:05:30Dish was about to get to this before her

2:05:32time ran out, but uh my questions are on

2:05:34the public land portion that is included

2:05:36in this reszone request. Um could you

2:05:39explain a little bit more about what the

2:05:42public land designation is generally in

2:05:44our UDC? Um, and then as a follow-up

2:05:47question, why is the public land segment

2:05:51included in this resoning and what are

2:05:54the practical implications of switching

2:05:56from public land to TC1 in this case?

2:06:02So public land um typically is reserved

2:06:05for shockingly publicly [clears throat]

2:06:07owned land. Um and thus our zoning

2:06:12regulations don't constrain don't

2:06:15[clears throat] uh they don't spend a

2:06:17lot of time constraining it because uh

2:06:20our code itself actually provides a lot

2:06:22of flexibility to us as the

2:06:23municipality. Um and so we don't spend a

2:06:26lot of time with the public zone saying

2:06:28that parks or city hall or um uh schools

2:06:35which we also don't have land use

2:06:37regulatory authority over to the same

2:06:39extent as private property. We don't

2:06:42have any required setbacks. We don't

2:06:44have any required height limitations. We

2:06:46list the uses that are typically um

2:06:51public uses. though they tend to be

2:06:53recreation, schools, correction

2:06:56facilities. Um we have also um gone so

2:06:59far as to add housing into that for like

2:07:01housing commission property investments

2:07:03and the like

2:07:05this particular property and again I

2:07:07just want to emphasize we're not talking

2:07:09about Frisinger Park. We're not talking

2:07:10about Woodbury Park. Um,

2:07:14I suspect at some point it was zoned PL

2:07:17because it felt like a very logical

2:07:19natural extension of Frizzinger Park

2:07:21across the street. There's no public

2:07:23easement that in that provides public

2:07:26access to that. It is not part of the

2:07:29public park and just because it is

2:07:31designated as public land, it does not

2:07:33prohibit development of that property

2:07:35owner from seeking something. if they

2:07:37were to come to us and say I want to

2:07:38build something there, it would be

2:07:40considered under the public land zoning

2:07:43regulations which as I said said don't

2:07:45have any area height placement. So by

2:07:47reszoning it to TC1 with conditions we

2:07:49would be bringing setbacks, we'd be

2:07:51bringing design standards to it. I want

2:07:53to be clear the TC1 district has a lot

2:07:55more uses listed in it than the public

2:07:57land district does but it also has those

2:08:00dimensional requirements. That's why I

2:08:01think and the planning commission echoed

2:08:03that we think it's appropriate to give

2:08:05it a p a typical zoning designation um

2:08:08rather than public.

2:08:11>> Thank you. And I guess one last kind of

2:08:13quick question. It seems like it's an

2:08:15odd little offshoot of the parcel. Why

2:08:18is this little nugget included at all?

2:08:21>> Uh just part of the common ownership

2:08:24of of the development.

2:08:27>> Council member brakes.

2:08:33Thanks and thanks for all the the

2:08:35answers to this this point. I a few

2:08:37questions um remaining for me. Um so if

2:08:40we

2:08:43if we reszone the entire 41 acres um

2:08:46obviously there is a proposal in front

2:08:48of us. Um, I respect the desire to not

2:08:51um

2:08:53that we need to um identify kind of how

2:08:56to move forward with a particular site

2:08:57plan in the absence of having a

2:08:59transition district. And I think that

2:09:00the conditions that were put in place do

2:09:02a good job of trying to address that. Um

2:09:05my larger concern is for that that area

2:09:08that's not within um that site plan and

2:09:11and there isn't a project necessarily

2:09:12identified yet. So that will become

2:09:15non-conforming

2:09:17um at some point in time when we do

2:09:19identify what the

2:09:22condition you know what a new transition

2:09:24district looks like. Um,

2:09:28one of the things that got brought up in

2:09:30public comment, I think, was

2:09:32the suggestion that

2:09:37our approach with this um area is going

2:09:40to influence our thinking about what the

2:09:43future transition district should look

2:09:45like, which is, I think, a logical leap

2:09:49um in terms of how we approach it. And

2:09:50so I'm curious from your perspective,

2:09:52how much you would think that that might

2:09:54influence how we proceed when it

2:09:56becomes, you know, 41 acres, we're

2:09:58talking about issues like open space and

2:10:00setbacks and, you know, um, things like

2:10:03short-term rentals and, you know, a lot

2:10:05of things we just haven't had the

2:10:06opportunity to really discuss and dig

2:10:07into yet.

2:10:10So, um, [clears throat]

2:10:14one thing you didn't mention this, but I

2:10:15just I just want to be clear, maybe this

2:10:18is embedded a little bit in your

2:10:19question, is um, sometimes there's a

2:10:21question about precedent, like would

2:10:23there be some sort of expectation or

2:10:25obligation in a similar ask somewhere

2:10:28else that we would have to therefore

2:10:30consider the same reasoning?

2:10:33um

2:10:34one a project of this scale and its

2:10:38proximity to the transportation network,

2:10:40its proximity to commercial uses and the

2:10:42like. Um that is not something I'm

2:10:45concerned about. We um we go through a

2:10:48really robust consideration of all

2:10:50reasonzoning applications and they're

2:10:52very contextual. We are you know part of

2:10:55the conversation that's happening here

2:10:56is because we're looking at the map.

2:10:57What does the map say for this? You are

2:10:59right. As we implement the comp plan,

2:11:01we're going to have to face some of

2:11:02these decisions. For example, one of the

2:11:05benefits of the TC-1 [clears throat] in

2:11:07relationship to what the transition zone

2:11:09calls for is allowing a lot more

2:11:11flexibility of uses, shifting from a

2:11:14strictly residential district for much

2:11:16of this area. Our new comp plan says we

2:11:19want to we want to provide fewer

2:11:20districts with more flexibility of use,

2:11:22specifically commercial uses. So, one of

2:11:25the things that a TC-1 does for this

2:11:27site is it opens up a lot more

2:11:29flexibility of uses for the entire

2:11:31balance of it, not just the um office or

2:11:34industrial zone property along South

2:11:35Industrial.

2:11:37Um, so I I think that

2:11:43and then the the other thing that's

2:11:45going to bring it into consideration is

2:11:49this because this is a conditional

2:11:51zoning. Again, it at I I want to be

2:11:54clear, absence these conditions, I I

2:11:57don't sit here I'm not going to speak

2:11:58for the planning commission about what

2:12:00would have happened there, but I don't

2:12:01think we would have had the same

2:12:02recommendation. I think that because the

2:12:04petitioners voluntarily offered these,

2:12:07they're responding directly to some of

2:12:08the things that the transition district

2:12:11calls for in our comprehensive land use

2:12:13plan, recognizing that we might not have

2:12:16the best tools, zoning tools right now

2:12:19that meets our goals. And um

2:12:24I I think we will have some proposals

2:12:27over the coming

2:12:29years while we are going through that

2:12:32work that we're going to have to

2:12:33reconcile along a similar lines because

2:12:35we don't quite have our dream tools yet.

2:12:38But I don't think we're really

2:12:39interested in just halting progress

2:12:40either. And so um

2:12:44so I do think it's going to bring up

2:12:45some of the issues. It's not precedent

2:12:47setting, but it's going to bring up some

2:12:49of the issues about um I think we'll

2:12:51probably learn from it when we get to

2:12:53some of that zoning work, frankly, as to

2:12:55how this was realized. Are there things

2:12:57about it that if it's approved that we

2:12:59liked about it, that we didn't like

2:13:00about it? And if it doesn't get

2:13:02approved, we're going to take that as

2:13:04part of our work to say like, okay, how

2:13:06do we start thinking about those

2:13:07districts so that this type of

2:13:09development is not permissible?

2:13:12Um

2:13:15so I think we are it is going to bring

2:13:18issues that as our comprehensive land

2:13:21use plan again it's not a status quo

2:13:23plan. It really envisions a lot of

2:13:26simplicity and flexibility for us going

2:13:28forward. And so over the next two years

2:13:32we're going to have to consider

2:13:35proposals that want to build while we're

2:13:37building that ship a little bit. Again,

2:13:40to just reiterate, I think this is a

2:13:42very reasonable um use of our existing

2:13:45tools to get to a lot of the goals of

2:13:46the transition land use category.

2:13:50Feel like I really talked around your

2:13:52question.

2:13:54Yeah, that's all you're going to get.

2:13:58[snorts] Further discussion.

2:14:05Uh I'm going I'm going to be supporting

2:14:08the uh the petition at least on first

2:14:11reading. I do have uh continued

2:14:13reflections upon uh well what the

2:14:17consequence of the conditions only

2:14:19applying to the balance of the site. Uh

2:14:21for example, that's something that I'm

2:14:22going to uh continue to key in on. Um I

2:14:25do have questions also about the uh the

2:14:27open space and building spacing

2:14:29identified by Council Member Briggs.

2:14:31something also uh uh worth uh worth

2:14:34thinking through with a with a little

2:14:35more depth. Um but for the time being, I

2:14:37think it's appropriate to move forward

2:14:39and I look forward to the ongoing

2:14:40conversation both um at the table and of

2:14:43course uh folks uh speaking at council

2:14:45here directly and communicating um

2:14:47online as um as indeed they do.

2:14:51Further discussion.

2:14:56>> Is this a discussion?

2:14:58>> Oh, Council Member Adena.

2:14:59>> Sorry. I guess I guess just very briefly

2:15:02um

2:15:02>> not at all.

2:15:04>> Sorry.

2:15:05>> Oh no, no, you're good.

2:15:06>> I think very briefly just for the for

2:15:08the sake of of expressing similar

2:15:10thoughts. I'm going to support this

2:15:11tonight, but I also have a number of

2:15:12questions before second reading. Um and

2:15:15so um particularly the one you know

2:15:17you're getting back to us on, but

2:15:18similar questions that have been raised

2:15:20by colleagues. Um, I think, you know,

2:15:24as has been stated, I will support this

2:15:26tonight, but I am I'm not sure yet that

2:15:27I've decided that I'm going to support

2:15:29it as second reading.

2:15:30>> Council member Briggs,

2:15:34>> um, [clears throat]

2:15:35one thing that you um suggested, Mr.

2:15:37Leonard is that if we wanted if we were

2:15:40considering um simply wanting to approve

2:15:44what where the site plan was as opposed

2:15:46to the entire you know 41 acres

2:15:49um that you might suggest might but how

2:15:54uh sending it back to planning

2:15:55commission for further further

2:15:57consideration. Is that something you

2:15:58would like to reflect upon a little bit

2:15:59more between first and second reading or

2:16:01is that a strong recommendation at this

2:16:03point?

2:16:05>> Could you repeat that? Yes. Louder.

2:16:08>> Yeah. So, I'm asking if we decided that

2:16:12we only wanted to approve this the area

2:16:14where the um reszone the uh area where

2:16:18there's a site plan as opposed to the

2:16:20entire 41 acres. How strongly would Mr.

2:16:23Leonard suggest um that we send this

2:16:27back to planning commission for full

2:16:28review versus

2:16:32is that something he wants to

2:16:33contemplate a little longer? Does he

2:16:34have a strong, you know, is it would he

2:16:36leave that more to our discretion? I

2:16:38mean, I know it's our discretion, but

2:16:40just your recommendation.

2:16:42>> Um, I I I lean towards a strong

2:16:47recommendation. Um, the reason for that

2:16:50is the nature of these conditions would

2:16:52start impacting the development

2:16:54potential of the site because right now,

2:16:56considering it in total, it's all keyed

2:16:58to that residential area. And if the

2:17:01conditions, for example, are only

2:17:02offered over a portion of it, that might

2:17:04very well change what the development

2:17:06potential is on the future phases

2:17:10because the reasoning being considered

2:17:13may not be the same conditions. It may

2:17:15may not be the same. And so

2:17:19I think it would be worthwhile if if

2:17:24um

2:17:25if the city council were to reject it,

2:17:28that might be a sort of a relication

2:17:32that the petitioner seeks to do. And

2:17:35again, we could reconsider how those

2:17:38conditions would it would change the

2:17:40development potential of the site. I

2:17:41think it would probably increase the

2:17:44development potential because if you're

2:17:46limiting the conditions to phase one and

2:17:50we don't know what's going to happen on

2:17:52the other, you know, we have a voluntary

2:17:55offer of conditions now. I can't predict

2:17:57that the same will definitely hold true

2:17:59in the future.

2:18:01Councelor

2:18:04Riddish,

2:18:07>> I would just like to observe that

2:18:12however many years ago we asked the

2:18:15deputy city administrator to write an

2:18:17economic development plan or report,

2:18:20sorry, not a plan. And in it, he talked

2:18:24about how process

2:18:26makes housing in Ann Arbor more

2:18:29expensive. And I would like to point out

2:18:32that

2:18:34planning commission worked on this site

2:18:38extensively

2:18:40and 10 minutes ago I heard this sentence

2:18:43from Mr. Leonard.

2:18:46Unless we want to h process uh progress

2:18:48in the interim,

2:18:50we will see more of these instances.

2:18:53Unless we want to say we're not going to

2:18:55do any transition projects until we have

2:18:58zoned. And you said also, excuse me, I

2:19:01shouldn't address you as you. Mr.

2:19:02Leonard said, "Also, I think this is a

2:19:03very reasonable use of our existing

2:19:05tools to realize some of the goals of

2:19:08the transition land use category. This

2:19:11community is in a housing emergency. We

2:19:13hear every time we meet that we are not

2:19:16moving fast enough to rece to relieve a

2:19:18scarcity crisis. We have uh on planning

2:19:23commission last week we approved 400

2:19:27units of affordable housing brought to

2:19:30us by a private development which is

2:19:33remarkable. We are doing our job on that

2:19:37end. We also need to do market rate.

2:19:41I really don't want this to go back to

2:19:44planning commission. I feel like we do

2:19:46this over and over again and we are

2:19:48getting in our own way.

2:19:52>> Further discussion on first reading.

2:19:55First reading. Council member Aman.

2:19:59>> As far as I know, we've passed every

2:20:01reasonzoning that's come across this

2:20:02table. Um, and while I appreciate the

2:20:07comments that we don't want to stop all

2:20:08progress until we have every detail

2:20:10ironed out, I also heard many people,

2:20:15including myself, on this body and in

2:20:17the city during the the comprehensive

2:20:19land use process repeatedly tell people

2:20:21that we would work the details and the

2:20:23zoning categories out later, that the

2:20:25comprehensive plan was not a resoning.

2:20:28Um, so with all due respect, I know

2:20:31we're in a housing crisis. uh we've

2:20:34reszoned many acres of the city to TC-1.

2:20:38I uh and I think it's completely

2:20:41appropriate to look at these things with

2:20:43a degree of skepticism and I will

2:20:46continue to do so.

2:20:47>> Further discussion

2:20:50roll call vote please starting. Council

2:20:51member

2:20:55>> council member

2:20:56>> yes.

2:20:58>> Council member Gazi Edwin.

2:21:00>> Yes.

2:21:00>> Mayor Taylor.

2:21:01>> Yes. Council Ay,

2:21:03>> yes.

2:21:03>> Counor Aman,

2:21:04>> no.

2:21:05>> Council Briggs,

2:21:06>> yes.

2:21:06>> Council Cornell,

2:21:07>> yes.

2:21:08>> Council Dish,

2:21:09>> yes.

2:21:10>> Council Harrison,

2:21:11>> yes.

2:21:11>> Council Watson,

2:21:13>> yes.

2:21:13>> Counor Malik,

2:21:14>> yes.

2:21:15>> Motion carries.

2:21:16>> C2, an ordinance to amend section 2413

2:21:19rate schedule to chapter 35, sustainable

2:21:22energy utility, title 2, utilities and

2:21:24services of the code of the city of Ann

2:21:26Arbor. Moved by council member Dena,

2:21:28second by council Gazi Edwin. Discussion

2:21:30please of C2.

2:21:36All in favor? All opposed? It is

2:21:39approved.

2:21:45[snorts]

2:21:47DS1 resolution to approve fees for the

2:21:50fire department ambulance transport with

2:21:52advanced life support. Moved by council

2:21:54member Watson, second by council member

2:21:56Adena. Discussion, please of DS1.

2:22:02All in favor? All opposed. It is

2:22:05approved. DS2 resolution to approve

2:22:07amendment number one to the Brownfield

2:22:08plan for the village of Ann Arbor. Moved

2:22:10by Council Member Cornell, seconded by

2:22:12Council Member Briggs. Discussion please

2:22:14of DS2.

2:22:18Council Brdish.

2:22:22Uh so

2:22:24council approved this project in March

2:22:27of 2023 and it is an unusual infill

2:22:30project as I believe we heard earlier.

2:22:32It creates housing opportunity on land

2:22:34that had been sitting empty because it

2:22:36adjoins a capped landfill. The property

2:22:39currently generates approximately

2:22:41$50,000 annually in property taxes and

2:22:45is estimated to generate more than $6.1

2:22:48million annually following completion of

2:22:50the brownfield reimbursement period. I

2:22:52[snorts] want to because this has been

2:22:54around for a while. I want to tell the

2:22:55story of this project. So when it first

2:22:57came in, there was no electrification

2:22:59and the developer agreed to electrify

2:23:01the forale homes and this is back in

2:23:03like 2020 actually when these first

2:23:06negotiations were going on. They also

2:23:08agreed to make a $1.2 million

2:23:10contribution to a much needed roundabout

2:23:12at Duvar and Pontiac. They agreed to

2:23:15provide solar street lights. And um even

2:23:18before this project came to staff, the

2:23:21developer had invested in a lot of

2:23:22research to determine whether and how to

2:23:25build housing next to a landfill. Eagle

2:23:28initially approved what the developer

2:23:30came up with. CPC and CC that's us and

2:23:35planning commission approved the project

2:23:36for 564 residential units and then Eagle

2:23:41updated and introduced more stringent

2:23:43requirements related to methane

2:23:44generating sources i.e. landfills. This

2:23:47required additional testing and

2:23:49ultimately a redesign of the site plan

2:23:51and by redesign of the site plan I mean

2:23:54in lay person's terms pretty much back

2:23:56to the drawing board and all of the

2:23:57expenses associated with that. Tonight,

2:24:00we are not re-reviewing the project. We

2:24:02are considering an amendment that

2:24:04responds to the additional expenses that

2:24:06the developer incurred due to Eagle's

2:24:08updated methane regulations inflationary

2:24:10cost increases since the original

2:24:12approval. Um, and there are so the

2:24:16amendment is um an increase of 7.6

2:24:20million in the Brownfield TIFF. There's

2:24:22also however an increase in residential

2:24:24units because in the meanwhile the

2:24:26developer acquired some more land. Um,

2:24:28so there will now be 613 total units,

2:24:31still 133 forale homes, but 480 rental

2:24:36apartments. There's also an increase in

2:24:38the taxable value expected from the

2:24:40revised project. And this is great news

2:24:43because the increase in taxable value

2:24:46offsets

2:24:47the increase in reimbursement by which I

2:24:50mean that it reduces the anticipated

2:24:52capture period by one year even though

2:24:55more revenue is being captured. So the

2:25:00capture period is anticipated to be 15

2:25:02years. It's allowed to go to 20.

2:25:05In short,

2:25:07there will be more housing and the city

2:25:09and other taxing entities will start

2:25:11collecting revenue sooner. The amendment

2:25:14is all we are asked to approve. In my

2:25:17view, tonight is not an opportunity to

2:25:19reopen elements of the project that this

2:25:21council has already approved unless we

2:25:23think it is right to go back on our

2:25:25word. Um, and that's all I had to say.

2:25:28>> Council member Cornell,

2:25:32>> way to go, Council Member Dish. you you

2:25:34took a lot of my notes, which I'm very

2:25:35excited about. Um, as as council member

2:25:37Dish explained, this is a really

2:25:39complicated site. Um, as we learned in

2:25:41the Brownfield Authority meeting last

2:25:43week, there are houses and all kinds of

2:25:45weird stuff on that soil. And this is a

2:25:47this is exactly the type of property

2:25:50that the brownfield policy um was

2:25:53created for by the state. So, as council

2:25:55member Dish explained, the proposed

2:25:57resolution would approve an amendment to

2:26:00the brownfield plan. it's already been

2:26:02approved by this body on March 6th. The

2:26:05real positive result of this um that I

2:26:08don't think can be understated is that

2:26:10as a result of this specific site,

2:26:14the state developed a methane policy for

2:26:16all brownfield authority sites. And I

2:26:19see Nathan back, Mr. Vote back there,

2:26:20and I hope I get this right. With these

2:26:23new requirements related to methane

2:26:25brownfields, the developers are now

2:26:26required to do additional testing. The

2:26:29more important thing is that this

2:26:31applies to all future sites in the state

2:26:34that have um methane contamination. And

2:26:37what I learned at Brownfield is methane

2:26:39is kind of like Swiss cheese. So it

2:26:40appears in pockets. So versus other

2:26:42contaminants which can pull underneath

2:26:44the surface and are easier to find,

2:26:46predict, and identify where they are. Um

2:26:49this is really important to make sure

2:26:51when we remediate these sites that we

2:26:52take care of all the pollution on the

2:26:54site and make them healthy for re

2:26:55redevelopment.

2:26:57uh to underscore something that council

2:26:58member Vict said that despite the

2:27:01increase in the reimbursement, the

2:27:03anticipated capture period is actually

2:27:05reduced by one year due to the higher

2:27:08taxable value expected from the resite

2:27:10from the resolve the revised project.

2:27:13This was approved on uh last week by the

2:27:15brownfield authority and I'm excited to

2:27:17approve it tonight.

2:27:18>> Further discussion,

2:27:21>> council member brings.

2:27:26So, I came in feeling pretty comfortable

2:27:29with my vote um because I have voted on

2:27:33this once before and had a few

2:27:35conversations um leading up to this. But

2:27:38I do appreciate when folks come in and

2:27:40give us public comment because it gives

2:27:42us an opportunity to to reflect on you

2:27:45know and challenge our own thinking. Um

2:27:47and one of the pieces that I am

2:27:50struggling with um is [snorts] the fact

2:27:52that this

2:27:54um is an increase in um

2:28:00in rental units that are going to be on

2:28:02the site. And you know, one of the

2:28:04things I firmly I I love brownfield. I

2:28:07think it's a great tool. Um, but I think

2:28:09of it as a way I mean we as council

2:28:13member Cornell mentioned it's an

2:28:14opportunity to be able to clean up and

2:28:16deal with pollution that's on the site.

2:28:18Um,

2:28:20we also need to be contemplating what

2:28:22pollution we're creating on the site as

2:28:24well. Um and so the fact that

2:28:27in between since the first time we've

2:28:29done approved this and this time we've

2:28:32had a lot more experience with housing

2:28:34in our community [clears throat] and um

2:28:38and we've seen a lot of a lot more all

2:28:41electric um projects and so I am

2:28:44struggling um with this arrangement now

2:28:49um now that it's being brought back to

2:28:50us and I appreciate the conversation

2:28:52around offsets and you know connecting

2:28:54this all together. We We do need to do

2:28:56that. And so, um,

2:29:04I guess I I guess I have a question for

2:29:06maybe for Mr. Vote if he would like or

2:29:09somebody from

2:29:11staff that would like to respond to this

2:29:13question. I don't know who you know.

2:29:16[snorts]

2:29:17>> Yeah.

2:29:18>> Good question. I like Derek. Okay.

2:29:20somebody um [laughter]

2:29:22I'm trying to articulate what my

2:29:24question is while somebody is appearing.

2:29:25Um

2:29:28in terms of if we were interested in

2:29:30shifting um uh the requirement around

2:29:36um this being an all electric

2:29:39development um obviously that might

2:29:41shift um it shifts the project costs

2:29:43there's a lot of implications of doing

2:29:45something like that um to the

2:29:47development team. I'm curious to the

2:29:49degree that um this would allow for sort

2:29:53of changes and sort of uh eligible

2:29:56expenses and you know what the

2:29:58implications of that might be. [snorts]

2:30:01>> Joe Giant development director um when

2:30:05developers come come to the city a lot

2:30:08of times it'll be one of their first

2:30:09calls and a lot of times one of the

2:30:11first things I would say to them is it's

2:30:13going to be an all-electric development.

2:30:14you're you're developing in Ann Arbor.

2:30:16That's just sort of like the fabric.

2:30:18Know know the community. They've been

2:30:20working on this for seven or eight

2:30:22years. Um it's I say it's a dump. Um

2:30:25it's literally redeveloping it.

2:30:27[laughter]

2:30:27>> Redeveloping a dump. The project is

2:30:29designed so it's plumbed so it can be

2:30:31converted to all electric in the future.

2:30:33We're try we're treating this as an

2:30:35amendment to an approved project. We're

2:30:36not trying to come in and renegotiate

2:30:37the project. If we were if we were to

2:30:40say, "Well, we're going to require that

2:30:42this be all electric." It would increase

2:30:44the project cost. The tiff ask would be

2:30:46structured differently. It would be a

2:30:48different thing before you tonight.

2:30:49We're trying to treat this as an

2:30:50amendment to a project that did go

2:30:52through

2:30:53several rounds of review and lots and

2:30:56lots of discussion. So, yeah, if they if

2:30:58they had come to me come to us today, we

2:31:01we probably would have said all

2:31:02electric. just with the context with the

2:31:04fact that this site will not be

2:31:06redeveloped without Brownfield support.

2:31:10Um we're we're comfortable just treating

2:31:12this as an amendment as as an amendment,

2:31:14not a not a renegotiation of the deal.

2:31:18>> Council member,

2:31:20>> could someone from staff help? Uh I

2:31:23understand that the percentage of

2:31:26environmental cleanup changed primarily

2:31:28because of the reclassification.

2:31:31understand can somebody help like why

2:31:33did that happen and

2:31:36>> if we're if we were

2:31:38>> brownfield specialist to answer that one

2:31:40though

2:31:47>> I'm Brett Stunts I'm with the

2:31:50environmental consultant on the project

2:31:53um the eligible costs for this the

2:31:56categories are the same as they were

2:31:59before the cost just gone up. And the

2:32:02other issue that we ran into was the um

2:32:07policy that Eagle put forth uh forced us

2:32:10to move development that once was over

2:32:14methane generating areas outside of

2:32:16those areas. And so [snorts]

2:32:19some of the earthwork costs and the

2:32:22specialized foundations that you have to

2:32:25um those costs that you have to incur in

2:32:29order to deal with the bad soils that

2:32:31were dumped in place um become

2:32:35approvable

2:32:36not as environmental costs um just under

2:32:39this policy but as non-environmental

2:32:42costs. So, for example, specialized

2:32:45foundations, a lot of the actually all

2:32:47of those costs previously were lined up

2:32:50for approval um excuse me

2:32:53[clears throat] by Eagle as

2:32:54environmental costs, but because of the

2:32:57redesign and the policy change um at

2:33:00Eagle, we have to have those same

2:33:02specialized foundations just approved as

2:33:05through MSF as non-environmental costs.

2:33:08So, the categories are the same. um in

2:33:11the Brownfield plan. It's just because

2:33:14of the redesign and the policy changes

2:33:17um we had to shift those same costs over

2:33:22to the non-environmental side of the

2:33:24ledger. And that has everything to do

2:33:26with which state agency will approve

2:33:28them. It doesn't mean there's any change

2:33:31for what the developer is going to do.

2:33:32They're still going to have specialized

2:33:34foundations. They're still going to have

2:33:35the same earth work, but at the state

2:33:38level, there's more that's approved

2:33:41through MSF and less that's approved

2:33:43through Eagle now.

2:33:46>> Okay. Thank you.

2:33:48>> Further discussion,

2:33:51>> council member brakes.

2:33:54Can somebody share what the difference

2:33:55in um rental apartments are between the

2:34:00number of rental apartments between when

2:34:01we approved this in the first first

2:34:04brownfield and now?

2:34:10>> So the initial proposal was uh

2:34:15133

2:34:16for sale homes and 480 rental

2:34:19apartments. No, I believe that is that

2:34:22flipped it around. Uh the original was

2:34:25564 rental units residential. You know

2:34:28what?

2:34:31Would you mind getting the facts

2:34:32straight for me? Apologize.

2:34:35>> Hello. Good evening. Tim Locker with

2:34:36Robertson Homes. Good to see you all

2:34:38again. Um yes, the first of all, thank

2:34:41you for your time today and um it's been

2:34:43a very long road. I think um the staff

2:34:45report was really well done. I

2:34:46appreciate everybody's comments on this.

2:34:48Um yeah, there was uh 244 I believe um

2:34:53town homes

2:34:55and um the rest were um apartments. Now

2:34:58there's 133

2:35:00um and really that was just a function

2:35:02of what we had in the center portion

2:35:04where we could not build on any longer

2:35:06um because of the the methane heads that

2:35:07were on there. Those were really our

2:35:09two-story town homes. Those were the

2:35:11probably the more they were the more

2:35:12expensive units, the the larger units.

2:35:15um we had to basically make that a park.

2:35:16So we have a lot more open space because

2:35:18of that. I think we've had like 65% open

2:35:20space now um overall and we basically

2:35:22shifted those units to um you know the

2:35:25smaller units which would be more

2:35:26apartments which would be obviously more

2:35:27attainable.

2:35:28>> Mhm.

2:35:29>> So just to repeat those numbers it was

2:35:31it was originally 244

2:35:34um for sale

2:35:35>> for sale and then the remaining were or

2:35:38>> 320 were apartments. Yes.

2:35:39>> 320. Okay.

2:35:46Thank you. Um,

2:35:52and this is I think

2:35:55for me there was there's a piece of this

2:35:57that feels like this is a different

2:35:59project in terms of the amount of

2:36:00greenhouse gas emissions that we're

2:36:02facing. And so, um, and those kind of

2:36:06that balance that we were trying to

2:36:07strike, which it was not a comfortable

2:36:08balance the first time. Um it's a really

2:36:11it's a it's a much different balance

2:36:14now. Um,

2:36:20>> I will see if there's any support for

2:36:22postponing this um to bring back a um a

2:36:27revised uh brownfield agreement uh

2:36:31brownfield plan that is for [snorts] all

2:36:34electric recognizing that that would

2:36:36require a change in the amount of tiff.

2:36:40If I could just interject real quick

2:36:42because I I appreciate the comments and

2:36:43and I understand.

2:36:44>> I'm afraid not, sir.

2:36:45>> I'm sorry. Okay.

2:36:45>> No worries.

2:36:46>> Of course. Of course.

2:36:48>> I don't know if there's even a second

2:36:49for this. So,

2:36:50>> is is there a second? Second by

2:36:51councelor Aman. Uh discussion of the

2:36:54post postponement too.

2:36:58You need a date. Uh

2:37:03>> I have no idea what an appropriate date

2:37:06would be to set for this. How much time

2:37:08would it take before the this the

2:37:11concept of an all-electric development

2:37:12or an additionally electric development

2:37:14would need to be fleshed out in

2:37:16>> two seconds

2:37:19if that's the question

2:37:23if I can answer um I I don't know we'd

2:37:26have to run all the numbers again and

2:37:28look at everything I would say this has

2:37:29been a very long road um we we've tried

2:37:32to negotiate in good faith we've gone I

2:37:34think a long way um it it it certainly

2:37:37would take at at least a month, two

2:37:39months, 3 months. I don't know because I

2:37:40haven't thought about it. Um, but I will

2:37:42say is we are on a very tight timeline,

2:37:44which I know developer whining about

2:37:46that. But, um, there's only so long I

2:37:49can extend with our with our sellers

2:37:50and, um, thank God they've been, um,

2:37:53supportive to this to this point. Um,

2:37:55but we really are kind of at the the

2:37:57leading edge of this project and ready

2:37:58to go.

2:37:59>> Thank you. Uh, is there a date certain,

2:38:02Council Member?

2:38:05I am going to

2:38:10to try to address a I'm going to suggest

2:38:13the second meeting in October

2:38:16>> the month

2:38:17>> a month for now.

2:38:19>> Discussion on the postponement. Council

2:38:21member Cornell,

2:38:23>> I I'm not sure if this is for Mr. Vote

2:38:25or for Mr. Giant, but that was the

2:38:28developer's answer to bring a proposal

2:38:29back. Can you talk about the due

2:38:31diligence on the municipal side that

2:38:33would add to that timeline please or on

2:38:35the brown as well as the brownfield

2:38:36authorities review?

2:38:38>> Yeah, it's probably an answer that both

2:38:40of us could give. We look at kind of

2:38:41different things. Nathan looks at it

2:38:42from the more technical side making sure

2:38:44that the the brownfield authority, the

2:38:46committee, the plan meets all the

2:38:48statutory requirements, all the eligible

2:38:49activities add up, the tables are

2:38:51structured correctly. We would look at

2:38:53it to make sure that the project meets

2:38:54the you but for analysis. Um, so that

2:38:57would just require them creating a new

2:38:59proforma, us submitting it, you know, us

2:39:01reviewing it, submitting it to the

2:39:03treasurer to make sure that it, you

2:39:04know, passes muster, making sure that

2:39:06the costs are reasonable. I mean, it

2:39:09this, as Mr. Laughlin said, this is a

2:39:12priority. We would want to move it as

2:39:13fast as we could, but there is a lot of

2:39:15work that goes into reviewing the the

2:39:17numbers that are in here, so it wouldn't

2:39:18be an easy lift.

2:39:22into that.

2:39:25>> I guess what I'm struggling with is I

2:39:26don't know that with brownfield

2:39:28authority review, which would have to

2:39:30come first, that it would could come

2:39:32back to council in the timeline that

2:39:34council member Briggs is requiring or

2:39:35asking, I'm sorry, requesting, that's

2:39:37the word I meant,

2:39:39>> right? I don't I mean, I don't even

2:39:41fully understand what this reopens and

2:39:44what review it would require and what a

2:39:46new plan would even look like. Um, so

2:39:49right, so we have our subcommittee that

2:39:52reviews amendments and and then Joe and

2:39:54I at a staff level review them. So a

2:39:56month is probably not enough time be my

2:39:59guess

2:40:06for my part. I'll be appre appre

2:40:09appreciating the issues at play. I'll be

2:40:10voting against the postponement.

2:40:14Further discussion of the postponement.

2:40:19>> Roll call vote. Please start with

2:40:20council member.

2:40:21>> Council memberino.

2:40:22>> No.

2:40:23>> Council Gazi Edwin.

2:40:25>> No.

2:40:25>> Mayor Taylor.

2:40:26>> No.

2:40:27>> Council.

2:40:28>> No.

2:40:28>> Council Aman.

2:40:29>> No.

2:40:30>> Council Briggs.

2:40:31>> Yes.

2:40:31>> Council Cornell.

2:40:32>> No.

2:40:33>> Council Dish.

2:40:34>> No.

2:40:35>> Council Harrison.

2:40:36>> No.

2:40:36>> Council Watson.

2:40:37>> No. Councilor Malik.

2:40:38>> No.

2:40:39>> Motion fails.

2:40:40>> Further discussion of the main motion.

2:40:46Uh, roll call vote, please. Starting

2:40:47with council member.

2:40:54>> Council member,

2:40:55>> yes.

2:40:56>> Council Gazi Edwin,

2:40:57>> yes.

2:40:58>> Mayor Taylor,

2:40:58>> yes.

2:40:59>> Council er,

2:41:00>> yes.

2:41:00>> Council Aman,

2:41:01>> yes.

2:41:02>> Council Briggs,

2:41:03>> no.

2:41:03>> Council Cornell,

2:41:04>> yes.

2:41:05>> Council Dish,

2:41:06>> yes.

2:41:06>> Council Harrison,

2:41:07>> yes.

2:41:08>> Council Watson,

2:41:09>> yes.

2:41:09>> Council Malik,

2:41:10>> yes.

2:41:11>> Motion carries. Uh I will also observe

2:41:14uh as I omitted DS1 passed with 11

2:41:17council members present. All voting the

2:41:18affirmative thus satisfying the 8 vote

2:41:20requirement. DS3 resolution to approve

2:41:22amendment number one to the brownfield

2:41:24plan for 300 to 312 East Hiron Street.

2:41:27Moved by council member Cornell. Second

2:41:29by council member Gish. Discussion

2:41:31please of DS3. Council member Cornell.

2:41:36>> Okay. First of all I wanted to um

2:41:38address a comment that was made earlier.

2:41:41Um since the time that this was approved

2:41:43uh originally the brownfield authority

2:41:46has added uh an increased fee capture

2:41:48for its work. It was finding that due to

2:41:50the volume and complexity of the

2:41:52projects coming for the body um

2:41:54administrative um support for it was

2:41:58lacking and um not certainly for the

2:42:00fine professional Mr. Vote who does that

2:42:02work um but he needs support. So, um,

2:42:05the original brownfield plan for this

2:42:07property was approved in 2024 and

2:42:09included only environmental activities.

2:42:11Obviously, this construction project has

2:42:13been complete and it has met all of the

2:42:15brownfield plan requirements. This

2:42:18amendment adds $550,000 in eligible

2:42:21expenses based on guidance provided by

2:42:23the Michigan Economic Development

2:42:24Corporation, specifically public

2:42:27infrastructure improvements. This is

2:42:28good for the city, paid by the developer

2:42:31that benefit our entire community. These

2:42:33are utility extensions into the public

2:42:35rightway, sidewalk pavers, street ca

2:42:38street streetcape enhancements, and the

2:42:40installation of an urban storm water

2:42:42management system. These additional

2:42:45activities were discovered as

2:42:46possibilities during the construction

2:42:48phase. And despite without reassurance

2:42:50that they would be reimbured for, the

2:42:52developer did move forward with them to

2:42:53better our community. These uh this

2:42:56amendment to the Brownfield plan is

2:42:58originally approved has been re uh

2:43:00reviewed uh both by a subcommittee of

2:43:03the Brownfield Authority and the

2:43:04Brownfield Authority itself and it was

2:43:06approved last week for uh coming forward

2:43:09to this body and I will support it

2:43:10tonight.

2:43:12>> Further discussion of DS3.

2:43:15Council member Malik.

2:43:18>> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I did have a

2:43:20question for staff on this one if I

2:43:23could be indulged. Um, I'm normally a

2:43:27pretty big believer in tax increment

2:43:29financing as, uh, Council Member Briggs

2:43:31alluded to herself earlier as well. Uh,

2:43:33especially in Brownfield TIFFs

2:43:35specifically. Um, they're really

2:43:38important, powerful tools for for

2:43:40economic development. Um this is

2:43:42primarily because of the but for

2:43:44argument that says these projects would

2:43:47likely not happen but for the tiff

2:43:49support. In this case this project is

2:43:52already complete. So the but for

2:43:55argument does not play a role with this

2:43:57amendment. So my question is how typical

2:44:00is it for amendments to come after a

2:44:03project has already concluded?

2:44:08How common is it for a project to come

2:44:10after it has already been completed?

2:44:12>> An amendment to the Yeah. to a

2:44:13brownfield. Oh,

2:44:17>> I've been here for 18 months. This is

2:44:19the first one that we've had. Um is

2:44:21obvious obviously not [laughter]

2:44:23this guy.

2:44:24>> I've been here 10 years. This is the

2:44:25first time we've done it. And we've done

2:44:26it in both instances with this project.

2:44:28It it was an outlier. Um and there was

2:44:31mitigating circumstances throughout the

2:44:33project. It was actually staff who came

2:44:35and and worked with the developer to

2:44:38find ways to offset those those

2:44:41instances that were and the developer

2:44:43has been a good partner in that project

2:44:46and in those asks. So it was actually a

2:44:48staff driven process to say if you're

2:44:51willing to work through these issues

2:44:53with us, we are in this instance willing

2:44:56to recommend that you be uh that there

2:44:59be a a tiff plan put in place to help

2:45:02offset some especially the time it took

2:45:05for the developer to address the issues

2:45:07that were brought up by us and this is

2:45:09just a continuation of the process. But

2:45:11to answer your original question, this

2:45:12is the first time in 10 years I've done

2:45:14that here.

2:45:15>> Thank you. love some good institutional

2:45:17knowledge. Appreciate that.

2:45:20>> Further, Council Cornell.

2:45:26>> That is an excellent question, Council

2:45:27Member Malik. It was discussed in the

2:45:29workg group and I I think how I thought

2:45:32about it was um really well explained by

2:45:34Mr. Delicort is that for the TIFF, these

2:45:38the developer didn't have to do these.

2:45:40And what I worry is that if we find

2:45:42opportunities for developers to fully

2:45:44improve their site to benefit the

2:45:46community and then help them to get this

2:45:48reimbursement because it truly is a

2:45:49community benefit which matches the

2:45:52definition of the brownfield, right? Um

2:45:55I worry about the precedent that it sets

2:45:57but on the opposite side of it. So just

2:45:59to I I think have a counterargument to

2:46:01your thinking but I I appreciate the

2:46:03question.

2:46:04>> Further discussion.

2:46:07All in favor? I'm sorry. Council Dish.

2:46:11>> Yeah.

2:46:13>> Um I I think could you just do the list

2:46:16of public benefits? I'm sorry you were

2:46:18speaking quickly which is great because

2:46:19we have time limits and it's getting

2:46:20late but I'd love to hear them again.

2:46:24These are utility extensions into the

2:46:26public right of way, sidewalk pavers,

2:46:29streetscape enhancements, and the

2:46:31installation of an urban storm water

2:46:33management system.

2:46:37Further discussion.

2:46:40All in favor?

2:46:42All opposed? It is approved. DS4

2:46:45resolution to allocate proceeds from

2:46:47sale of 309 South Ashley Klein's lot and

2:46:49to establish the strategic property

2:46:51acquisition fund and to appropriate

2:46:53funding moved by council member Cornell.

2:46:55Second by council I discussion please of

2:46:57DS4. Mr. Doney.

2:47:00>> Thank you mayor. We received a couple of

2:47:03questions on this item I'd like to

2:47:06address.

2:47:08Uh question, I was under the impression

2:47:12that closing on the Klein lot

2:47:16uh still might be a few years away. This

2:47:19list suggests that these funds will be

2:47:21appropriated to the FY27 budget.

2:47:25How can we appropriate any funding prior

2:47:28to closing?

2:47:30The closing will occur 9 to 12 months

2:47:34after the purchase agreement. That's

2:47:37typical and that's what we expect to

2:47:40occur here, which would make that be in

2:47:43calendar year 2027.

2:47:47Uh there had also been some community

2:47:50interest and questions and speculation

2:47:54over what the administration would

2:47:57recommend relative to the proceeds.

2:48:01Uh the administration believed that we

2:48:03needed to be completely transparent on

2:48:06what we were recommending and that's why

2:48:08we're bringing it forward. Now, [snorts]

2:48:12uh, question. The final item on this

2:48:14list of priorities, number 12, is to

2:48:17prioritize $550,000

2:48:21for the Ann Arbor Saline Road light uh,

2:48:24street lighting project to install 39

2:48:27new street lights and replace existing

2:48:30solar crossing lights. undoubtedly an

2:48:33important project, but can staff share

2:48:36more background on why this item has

2:48:38appeared on this priority list over

2:48:42other infrastructure needs and what

2:48:45might the impact of not funding this

2:48:47project through this resolution.

2:48:50So if you go to this area of Ann Arbor

2:48:54Saline Road uh today,

2:48:58it is near uh two senior housing

2:49:02developments and the Oakbrook

2:49:04condominium development.

2:49:07uh morning, noon, and night you will see

2:49:09differently aabled uh people

2:49:12uh walking up and down uh the Saline

2:49:16Road area, crossing the street, going up

2:49:19and down Oakbrook.

2:49:21On the corner

2:49:24today is a vacant lot, but the Crescent

2:49:27development has been approved for that

2:49:29site. So on the corner of where this is,

2:49:33there will be nearly 300 apartments and

2:49:36an associated uh underground parking

2:49:39facility to accommodate the units.

2:49:42When it was passed, there were people

2:49:45here from the community expressing their

2:49:47concern about the danger uh of

2:49:50pedestrians going up and down in that

2:49:53area. And so the administration

2:49:56uh chose to support this project to make

2:49:59the Crescent development safer

2:50:02particularly for the seniors that live

2:50:06right down the street from it. Uh many

2:50:09of whom are disabled at various levels.

2:50:15uh given the recent announcement that a

2:50:17portion

2:50:19Oh, and

2:50:21the question about what would the impact

2:50:23of not funding the project be, it simply

2:50:27wouldn't happen. Uh we

2:50:31the administration felt like since the

2:50:34crescent had been given the green light

2:50:36to go forward that was only going to add

2:50:38to the

2:50:40potential um concern about the seniors

2:50:45moving about and we we felt like it

2:50:48needed to happen

2:50:50given the recent announcement that a

2:50:52portion of the B2B trail will be closed

2:50:55indefinitely due to the deterioration of

2:50:58three storm water culverts under the

2:51:00trail. We have a new unbudgeted high

2:51:04priority infrastructure need that is

2:51:06critical to maintaining safe east west

2:51:08non-motorized access.

2:51:11Understanding that project costs are not

2:51:13yet fully understood, but that there

2:51:15will be short-term temporary access and

2:51:18longerterm permanent repair costs. Does

2:51:21the city have any sources of funding

2:51:23identified for these new multiple

2:51:25project phases? Uh that answer is no. Uh

2:51:29we have not fully identified exactly

2:51:32what the fix or fixes will be for the

2:51:35covert issue. Uh as we continue to

2:51:39identify that and then vet uh what the

2:51:42cost will be, we will then have the

2:51:44chore or responsibility of making some

2:51:47recommendation for funding. But we have

2:51:49not yet done that.

2:51:53And those are the questions.

2:51:55discussion of DS4. Council member

2:51:57Cornell.

2:52:02>> Thank you, Mr. Dhoni, for answering

2:52:04those questions. Um, so the allocation

2:52:06of these proceeds uh will not only

2:52:08benefit the city's reserves, our

2:52:10sustainable energy utility, the housing

2:52:13commission, Alpha House, Shelter

2:52:15Association, our throne public restroom

2:52:17program, but the lighting project that

2:52:20uh Mr. Dehoney just spoke to. But one

2:52:22that is um probably not as um warm and

2:52:26fuzzy is the strategic property

2:52:28acquisition fund. And this is a result

2:52:31of conversations that have been

2:52:33happening at the EDC here at the city.

2:52:35And under Mr. Giants leadership. There

2:52:37was a creation of a committee to look at

2:52:39some of the feedback that we have heard

2:52:41repeatedly in the committee or in the

2:52:43community around how does the city

2:52:46position itself to be competitive when

2:52:47land becomes available and we are

2:52:50consistently outbid because we do not

2:52:51have cash available to bid against

2:52:53University of Michigan on these even to

2:52:55show um earnest money because that's not

2:52:58the type of reserves that the city has

2:53:00available. That is exactly what the

2:53:01strategic property acquisition fund

2:53:03establishes. This enables proactive

2:53:06acquisition of parcels for strategic

2:53:08reuse without obligating to the city to

2:53:10a specific use. And so for me, I think

2:53:12the benefit of the thinking and strategy

2:53:14behind this is that it allows for

2:53:16flexibility for what is most necessary

2:53:18at the time when property becomes

2:53:20available. So, I think it's over it's

2:53:22easy to overlook that as being something

2:53:24um that one responds to community

2:53:26feedback that we've heard over and over

2:53:28and over again, but is really difficult

2:53:30to accomplish when within a budget with

2:53:32a lot of different competing priorities.

2:53:35And so, the sale of uh the proceeds from

2:53:37the sale of that lot really um allows us

2:53:40to position ourselves better and more

2:53:42competitively in the future for land

2:53:44acquisition. And I think when we look at

2:53:47scarcity of property that that is a

2:53:49priority that we all share and something

2:53:51that is a community we should be

2:53:52investing in. So I'm excited to see

2:53:54that.

2:53:54>> Council member Gazi Edwin.

2:53:57>> Thank you mayor. Um you know I want to

2:53:59echo some of the sentiments of my

2:54:00colleague uh council member Cornell and

2:54:03I want to thank um administrator Dehoney

2:54:06and staff for thinking about potential

2:54:09benefits and allocation so thoughtfully.

2:54:11I would like to point out that, you

2:54:13know, when our county is currently

2:54:15experiencing the highest increase in

2:54:16homelessness we've ever seen, some of

2:54:19these potential allocations, 250,000 to

2:54:21Alpha House, Alpha House is currently

2:54:23our only family shelter in the county.

2:54:26Um, shel 500,000 to the shelter

2:54:29association of county. It is our

2:54:31county's highest use shelter over

2:54:33capacity and these fundings would

2:54:36potentially provide um the ability for

2:54:38them to build a second muchneeded

2:54:40shelter in our county. We've all seen

2:54:42folks camping outside of Delanis all

2:54:44year round. Um and then 2,500,000 to our

2:54:49amazing Ann Arbor Housing Commission.

2:54:51And I think we are so lucky to have our

2:54:54own housing authority, especially at a

2:54:56time when we see state and federal

2:54:58government cutting funding to

2:54:59homelessness response and to housing.

2:55:02Um, and they'll continue to with this

2:55:04funding, you know, purchase property and

2:55:06build housing that's affordable all over

2:55:07our county. So, I want to thank you, Mr.

2:55:10Deon, for your thoughtfulness in this

2:55:11and to staff. Thanks,

2:55:13>> Council Member Harrison. [clears throat]

2:55:16>> Thank you, Mayor. Um, I want to speak to

2:55:18one part of tonight's resolution that

2:55:20matters a great deal to me. Uh, the

2:55:22proposed $2 million dollars for a new

2:55:25police records management system. In

2:55:282023, I brought a resolution to council

2:55:30because I was troubled by a basic

2:55:32problem with our police data. The Clemus

2:55:35system could record only one reason for

2:55:37a stop and one outcome,

2:55:41even when more than one was applied. If

2:55:44a stop led to both a citation and an

2:55:46arrest, the record could leave part of

2:55:48that story out. We cannot make sound

2:55:51decisions about policing if our own

2:55:53records do not show us what happened. I

2:55:56am proud um that the concern I raised

2:56:00has helped bring us to this point.

2:56:02Tonight, we have an opportunity to

2:56:04invest in a system that better serves

2:56:06Ann Arbor. I have long advocated for

2:56:08police reform. To me, reform means being

2:56:11willing to look honestly at what is

2:56:13happening, including patterns we may

2:56:16find uncomfortable.

2:56:17Residents deserve reliable information

2:56:19about stops, enforcement, and outcomes.

2:56:23Council needs that information to make

2:56:25policy and evaluate whether it is

2:56:27working. Our police department needs it,

2:56:29too. Officers and command staff should

2:56:32have records that accurately reflect

2:56:35their work and help them identify where

2:56:37practices need to improve. As Ann Arbor

2:56:40builds unarmed crisis response and uh

2:56:43co-response services, we should also be

2:56:45able to understand which calls receive

2:56:48um which calls we receive, which

2:56:50response and what happens afterward.

2:56:53That will help us make better decisions

2:56:55about how to keep people safe. A new

2:56:57system alone will not create trust. It

2:56:59will have to be developed carefully,

2:57:01protect sensitive information, decide

2:57:03what data must be recorded, and make

2:57:06meaningful findings available to the

2:57:08public. But we cannot do that work well

2:57:10with a system that limits what we can

2:57:13see. This investment is a practical step

2:57:15towards the transparency and

2:57:16accountability our community has asked

2:57:18for and I'm proud to support it and I

2:57:20want to thank um administrator Dhoni for

2:57:23uh allocating or proposing this

2:57:25allocation for the records management

2:57:27system. Thank you

2:57:29>> council member.

2:57:32>> Thank you. [snorts]

2:57:34Um so when these numbers were first

2:57:37floated, we um heard from some housing

2:57:40advocates, specifically affordable

2:57:42housing advocates questioning the um

2:57:44strategic acquisition fund in

2:57:46particular. And um so I just I want to

2:57:49speak to that for just a minute in the

2:57:51context of housing and affordable

2:57:53housing specifically. Um this is this

2:57:56fund is something we've been working

2:57:59towards since council passed our you

2:58:01know series of economic development

2:58:03resolutions in 2024 using [snorts]

2:58:06Klein's lot proceeds for this purpose

2:58:08was introduced publicly more than a year

2:58:09ago during the budget process and since

2:58:12then the city secured an $82,000 grant

2:58:15to develop a site acquisition strategy

2:58:17which council approved in February. Um,

2:58:20this the goal of all of this is to use a

2:58:23one-time asset to create a long-term

2:58:25funding engine that can support housing

2:58:28and other priorities over time. Right

2:58:30now, the city is at a disadvantage when

2:58:32it comes to acquiring land. Over the

2:58:34past couple of decades, as we all know,

2:58:36the University of Michigan has steadily

2:58:38acquired property across the city,

2:58:40taking it off the tax roles and limiting

2:58:42future development opportunities. So

2:58:44without a dedicated fund, we can't

2:58:46compete or act quickly when key sites

2:58:49become available, which means fewer

2:58:50opportunities to shape outcomes,

2:58:53including creating more housing. The

2:58:55fund is designed to be revolving with

2:58:57proceeds from future sales and new tax

2:58:59revenue generated by redevelopment,

2:59:01replenishing the fund, and supporting

2:59:03ongoing priorities. If we don't reinvest

2:59:06strategically, those one-time dollars

2:59:08from the Klein lot sale are spent and

2:59:11they're gone. City staff conducted a

2:59:13nationwide review of peer cities and

2:59:16found that all of them use land

2:59:17acquisition as a core development

2:59:19strategy, making Ann Arbor's lack of

2:59:22having a fund an extreme outlier.

2:59:25Strategic acquisition and redevelopment

2:59:27can create new housing and other

2:59:29development that adds taxable value to

2:59:31the city for decades. That new property

2:59:34tax revenue in turn directly supports

2:59:36our affordable housing fund, creating an

2:59:38ongoing source of funding for affordable

2:59:40housing rather than spending a one-time

2:59:42asset one time and having it disappear.

2:59:47>> Council member Aman.

2:59:50>> I'm good. Thanks.

2:59:52>> No further discussion.

2:59:56[snorts] Council member Watson,

2:59:58>> just, you know, um my colleagues did a

3:00:00great job of u outlining the um

3:00:05the impact on uh social services of

3:00:07these allocations and I just wanted to

3:00:10mention on the alpha house allocation.

3:00:14Um that came from direct engagement from

3:00:18city staff and a few council members um

3:00:21with Alpha House specifically touring

3:00:23the property, hearing about their

3:00:25capital needs and seeing their needs and

3:00:27also seeing the the shelter in the

3:00:29context of you know it's not located

3:00:31within city limits but it serves the

3:00:34whole city and I think it's a it's a

3:00:36testament to the collaboration.

3:00:38Similarly with the shelter association

3:00:40money, I mean we know that uh we need

3:00:44more than just a shelter downtown if

3:00:46we're talking about sheltering uh

3:00:48sheltering people in need and the the

3:00:52money to kind of provide seed funding

3:00:54for a new shelter is so important and it

3:00:56requires thinking bigger um than than

3:00:59what's been done before. And so this

3:01:01this these allocations each one really

3:01:03moves the city forward on a on a lot of

3:01:05goals. And um you know as as the housing

3:01:08commission liaison as well I'm excited

3:01:10about the uh 2.5 million to the housing

3:01:12commission. We've seen the extraordinary

3:01:14ability of the commission to leverage

3:01:16funds to to make each dollar go further.

3:01:20Um and when you also think about the

3:01:24fact that housing and money for

3:01:27permanent supportive housing has been so

3:01:29challenged at the federal level, this is

3:01:31a really important stop gap measure to

3:01:34insert uh this money into the housing

3:01:36budget at this time. So uh thank you for

3:01:40for all who have supported this and and

3:01:42staff for bringing these uh allocations

3:01:44[snorts] forward.

3:01:45>> Further discussion.

3:01:49Uh I too would like to uh echo uh the

3:01:53enthusiasm for the various

3:01:56uh allocations uh articulated in this

3:01:59resolution. I'd like to uh very much

3:02:01thank uh thank staff uh and Mr. Dehoney

3:02:04uh and and and all who uh uh and all who

3:02:06have worked on this. Uh the set of needs

3:02:10of the city is broad. Uh our available

3:02:12resources is limited. Um the resolution

3:02:15here uh

3:02:18has a a broad scope. Uh the city's job

3:02:21is to improve basic services and enhance

3:02:23quality of life. Um and this uh set of

3:02:26allocations uh works to accomplish that

3:02:28goal. Um obviously it'll be uh important

3:02:31uh support uh for the city generally u

3:02:35with the support for our reserves

3:02:36strategically for the uh creation of the

3:02:39acquisition fund. Uh it'll advance our

3:02:41sustainability goals, our housing goals,

3:02:43uh and our livability goals. Uh as well,

3:02:47uh as addressing needed infrastructure

3:02:49improvements uh it's a worthy set of uh

3:02:53of allocations, and I'm grateful for

3:02:54staff for having identified them.

3:02:56Further discussion?

3:02:58All in favor? All opposed. It is

3:03:01approved with 11 council members

3:03:02present, thus satisfying the eight vote

3:03:04requirement. DC1 resolution to appoint

3:03:07Mark Brandt Meer, Sheena Long, and Chris

3:03:08Maddox to the Independent Community

3:03:10Police Oversight Commission. Moved by

3:03:11Council Member Harrison, second by

3:03:13Council Member Watson. Discussion please

3:03:15at DC1.

3:03:18All in favor? All opposed. It is

3:03:20approved with 10 council members

3:03:22present, thus satisfying uh all voting

3:03:24the affirmative, thus satisfying the

3:03:25seven vote requirement DC2 resolution to

3:03:28appoint Council Member Cornell to the

3:03:29Local Development Finance Authority.

3:03:30Moved by council redina, seconded by

3:03:32council member Watson. Discussion,

3:03:35please. DC2.

3:03:38All in favor? All opposed. It is

3:03:41approved. DC3 resolution directing the

3:03:43city.

3:03:45Person who's not at the table gets

3:03:47appointed to the to the 8:00 meeting.

3:03:50Um, it's been requested that we take

3:03:51five minutes. Uh, and who am I to deny

3:03:55uh deny a bathroom break? Um, it's 9:59.

3:03:58Let's meet back at 10:09.

3:14:08Harrison

3:14:39We are back in open session a after a

3:14:44short break. Uh DS3 resolution directing

3:14:48the city administrator to develop

3:14:49recommendations.

3:14:51Did I say DIA? DC3. Thank you. DC3, not

3:14:54a staff item. Not a staff item at all. A

3:14:57council item. DC3. Resolution directing

3:15:00the city administrator to develop

3:15:01recommendations regarding a regional

3:15:02deer management program. Moved by

3:15:04council member Malik. Second by council

3:15:06member Dish. discussion, please of DC3,

3:15:09Council Member Malik.

3:15:12>> Thank you, Mayor. Uh, I want to thank

3:15:15the numerous individuals and groups that

3:15:17have reached out to provide feedback on

3:15:19this topic tonight. Um, I've had a lot

3:15:21of conversations over the past few weeks

3:15:23on this resolution specifically, and

3:15:26then many, many conversations over the

3:15:28past two years on deer management

3:15:30broadly. Um, it's important to know what

3:15:32this resolution would do tonight should

3:15:34it pass. It directs our city

3:15:36administrator and city staff to research

3:15:39the current state of deer in Ann Arbor

3:15:42and provide that data back to us. It

3:15:44also suggests it also requests options

3:15:47for regional deer management including

3:15:50costs, effectiveness, feasibility of

3:15:52these options and so on based on past

3:15:55experience in the city, experience in

3:15:57current efforts in surrounding

3:15:58communities and from local experts. It

3:16:02does not presuppose an outcome, but all

3:16:05options remain on the table, including

3:16:08from doing nothing to both lethal and

3:16:10non-lethal alternatives. The resolution

3:16:13requests administrator Deon send this

3:16:15gathered data and information to the

3:16:17city's sustainability commission for

3:16:19review within 180 days before coming

3:16:21back to this body for further

3:16:23consideration.

3:16:25Should this resolution pass tonight, I

3:16:27look forward to the data. I look forward

3:16:29to reviewing all options on the table

3:16:31and most of all I look forward to the

3:16:33conversation. Thank you,

3:16:35>> Council Member Cornell.

3:16:41>> Uh, thank you and thank you to Council

3:16:43Member Malik and thank you to um the

3:16:45Sustainability Commission for um

3:16:48receiving and having a really thoughtful

3:16:50conversation around um deer population

3:16:54management um research that it has done.

3:16:56It is based on data that it has actually

3:16:59gathered from cities in Metro Detroit

3:17:01that are doing this right right now. Um,

3:17:03Southfield, Farmington, and Farmington

3:17:05Hills. Um,

3:17:08I think the discussion that followed

3:17:09that that was the April I believe 29th

3:17:12meeting, the last meeting of April of

3:17:13the sustainability commission um was

3:17:15really for anybody who's interested in

3:17:16understanding the research that's being

3:17:18done, the experience and the work that's

3:17:19being done that this um that inspired

3:17:21this resolution. Um, there's a lot of

3:17:23really smart people on that commission

3:17:24who asked really great questions. And so

3:17:26I would recommend that as reference. Um

3:17:29what council member Malik explained

3:17:30before council tonight is a resolution

3:17:33just asking for whether or not there is

3:17:35is a deer population problem. Um and if

3:17:38so what is its effects on our existing

3:17:41green spaces, the health and the safety

3:17:43of our residents and quite frankly our

3:17:46pets, our lawns, everything. What is the

3:17:48environmental impact? That's a holistic

3:17:50look that requires data for us to

3:17:52determine. Finally, when staff comes

3:17:54back to council, it will include

3:17:57associated costs as well as

3:17:59recommendation on best practices. I

3:18:01think it's really important. We we just

3:18:03talked about budget implications and um

3:18:06how we have to um sometimes try to

3:18:08stretch every dollar and I think that

3:18:10that's a very important um consideration

3:18:12as uh good stewards of our tax dollars.

3:18:16This resolution does not advance or

3:18:18suggest any next steps. It just merely

3:18:20authorizes research. Staff could very

3:18:22well come back and say that deer have

3:18:24not had any impact on vehicle

3:18:26collisions, tick populations, damage,

3:18:28damage to forest understories, etc., and

3:18:31recommended that and recommend to us

3:18:33that population management is not

3:18:34indicated. As someone whose idea of a

3:18:37really great time is being in the woods

3:18:39and sleeping under the stars, I strongly

3:18:41support and will advocate for ensuring

3:18:43our green spaces throughout the city are

3:18:45protected and all wildlife therein are

3:18:47protected. I support a datadriven and

3:18:49humane approach which is specifically

3:18:52called out a few times in this

3:18:53resolution. Again, balance. We want to

3:18:55coexist with our natural environment,

3:18:57which is what this resolution aims to

3:18:59accomplish. I support asking questions

3:19:01and learning what we don't know, and

3:19:03that's what we're asking for tonight.

3:19:04The body to approve here.

3:19:07>> Council member Adena.

3:19:10>> Thank you, [clears throat] Mayor Taylor.

3:19:12Uh several years ago, I voted against

3:19:14continued funding for Ann Arbor's deer

3:19:15management program. Uh at the time the

3:19:17data did not in my view demonstrate a

3:19:19strong enough ROI. Uh as I recall

3:19:21despite several years of deer management

3:19:23there had been a s statistically

3:19:25insignificant impact on the rate of deer

3:19:27vehicle collisions and arbor was largely

3:19:29acting in a vacuum to manage what I

3:19:31believe to be a regional challenge and

3:19:33without collaboration from the count

3:19:34without collaboration from the county or

3:19:36other municipal partners. Additionally,

3:19:38the state had issued a temporary

3:19:39moratorium on non-lethal deer

3:19:41sterilization programs, leaving us only

3:19:43with the option of lethal removal

3:19:44instead of more comprehensive uh

3:19:46potential options. Since then, the

3:19:49state's ban on non-lethal deer

3:19:50management permitting has expired. We

3:19:52have continued to hear from ecological

3:19:54experts warning us how deer

3:19:55overpopulation can alter natural

3:19:57habitats, devastate native plants,

3:19:58prevent forest regeneration, and trigger

3:20:01declines in biodiversity. We also know

3:20:03that Michigan is experiencing a sharp

3:20:04and documented increase in tick

3:20:06populations and related tickborn

3:20:08illnesses and that deer are the primary

3:20:10hosts of ticks throughout their life

3:20:11cycle. Lyme disease cases in Michigan

3:20:14have nearly quadrupled between 2022 and

3:20:162025 and other tick related illnesses

3:20:18are also on the rise, including one that

3:20:20can result in developing an allergy to

3:20:22red meat spread by the Lonear tick,

3:20:24which is relatively new to Michigan

3:20:25thanks to climate change, but has seen

3:20:27its population explode over the last

3:20:29several years again with deer as its

3:20:31primary host. Over the last couple of

3:20:33years, we have also seen a rise of

3:20:34regional the rise of regional

3:20:36partnerships to address this problem, an

3:20:39approach that I have always preferred.

3:20:41Those are options like the Kent County

3:20:43Deer Connection and a much more

3:20:44comprehensive Southeast Michigan Urban

3:20:46Deer Coalition, which spans seven

3:20:48counties and over 30 communities in

3:20:50collaboration with USDA Wildlife

3:20:51Services to manage local deer

3:20:53populations. Due to all of these factors

3:20:55and potential options available to us, I

3:20:57will support this resolution tonight.

3:20:59But I do want to be very clear. I still

3:21:01do not believe that it is the

3:21:02governments or taxpayers's

3:21:03responsibility to protect ornamental

3:21:05largely non-native landscaping or

3:21:07flowers from being eaten by wildlife

3:21:09which is one of the most frequent

3:21:11complaints that we hear. I also want to

3:21:13acknowledge that we al often hear from

3:21:15residents and members of the this body

3:21:17about the desire to main abundant trees,

3:21:19green space, parks and natural areas

3:21:21throughout our community. is important

3:21:23for all of us to remember that if we

3:21:24value these things, if we view them as

3:21:27integral and important parts of our

3:21:28community fabric, that wildlife is

3:21:30naturally inseparable from that vision

3:21:32of our city. So, while I will support

3:21:34this resolution tonight, any potential

3:21:37recommendations that are returned to us

3:21:39from it in 6 months, we'll need to

3:21:40recognize these realities and propose

3:21:42meaningful regionally collaborative and

3:21:44cost-effective solutions to resolve the

3:21:46real ecological, public health, and

3:21:48public safety risk posed by deer to earn

3:21:50my support. Thanks, Council Member

3:21:52Briggs.

3:21:56>> Thanks. Um, appreciate it. Uh, Council

3:21:59Member Malik, you mentioned in your

3:22:01comments that um that the

3:22:04recommendations would be built off of

3:22:07sort of our past experiences. And I

3:22:09noticed that um while that's included as

3:22:11a whereas clause, it's not included as a

3:22:13resolved clause. That that is what the

3:22:16city administrator's recommendation

3:22:17should address. And so I would like to

3:22:20request inclusion of another bullet

3:22:23point um that includes the efficacy and

3:22:28um

3:22:30uh results and data from past deer

3:22:33management

3:22:37efforts in the city

3:22:38>> that you're sending around.

3:22:40>> No, [laughter]

3:22:42but I could

3:22:49Try that again on the fly and we'll see

3:22:51whether

3:22:53>> fourth

3:22:54>> where as claused a resolved clause

3:22:56resulting from the fourth whereas clause

3:23:00>> yes

3:23:02there a second on that

3:23:06is that friendly to the body

3:23:10>> that uh I'm sorry uh who did second that

3:23:13uh Aman discuss uh that's friendly

3:23:16Thank you, Council Member Brings. You

3:23:17still have the floor.

3:23:18>> Yeah, thank you. And I appreciate the

3:23:19inclusion of that. Um,

3:23:23I am not going to be supporting this

3:23:24tonight. Um, but I

3:23:29based largely off of our um

3:23:34sort of just a a sense of

3:23:37when we ask the administrator to do this

3:23:39work, it's substantial and it takes

3:23:41takes time and effort and energy to do

3:23:43that and to invest in this. Um and I

3:23:46based on our previous experiences with

3:23:48this both as a community as large and a

3:23:50council um we have seen that

3:23:54um what happened over time in previous

3:23:58uh

3:24:00uh our previous deer management program

3:24:02was that public support declined. Um and

3:24:06that it takes we know that it takes

3:24:08sustained multi-year efforts to make a

3:24:12difference. If you're talking about a um

3:24:14any deer management program, um even in

3:24:17the 3 years that we experienced it,

3:24:18although we saw regen plants regenerate,

3:24:20we did not see them regenerate to a

3:24:22level of um sort of sustainability um in

3:24:25terms of our native plant habitats. And

3:24:27so um this is a long-term effort that

3:24:30our community would need to invest in.

3:24:32Um and you know, I also saw impacts to

3:24:37our community's access to outdoor areas.

3:24:40Um, for example, Bird Hills was was

3:24:43closed half the day um during the month

3:24:46of January. Um, and

3:24:50there are other implications around

3:24:51this. So based on our previous

3:24:53experiences, recognizing

3:24:56that there's a lot that we can learn

3:24:57from this, but just um looking to the

3:24:59future on this, I I just don't

3:25:02anticipate myself necessarily supporting

3:25:04an effort these efforts moving forward

3:25:06based on um

3:25:10based on our our community's experiences

3:25:11and and the public's sort of very

3:25:14differing views around deer management.

3:25:17Um and I think that's going to be that's

3:25:19going to be with us. I don't anticipate

3:25:21that going away that there's going to be

3:25:22very strong strong feelings on both

3:25:24sides of this. Um,

3:25:28so I appreciate the work that's been

3:25:30that's gone into this. I think it's, you

3:25:32know, it's a thoughtfully crafted

3:25:33resolution, but I'm just going to

3:25:37say no now rather than later.

3:25:40>> Further discussion. Council member

3:25:41Watson.

3:25:44Um, I'm a co-sponsor of this resolution

3:25:46because the issue of deer management is

3:25:48especially important to W 2 residents

3:25:50given the predominance of suburban

3:25:52patterns of development in the ward.

3:25:55When my constituents ask me about

3:25:56whether the city can better manage its

3:25:58deer population, it has been difficult

3:26:01not having recent data or staff

3:26:03analysis.

3:26:06I trust that city staff understand the

3:26:08scope and sensitivity of our community's

3:26:10relationship to its deer population and

3:26:12I trust city staff to come back with

3:26:14databased recommendations and not to

3:26:16presuppose outcomes. I want to [snorts]

3:26:18thank my uh fellow co-sponsors for their

3:26:20hard work on this and I hope my

3:26:21colleagues will join me in supporting

3:26:23this resolution.

3:26:25Further discussion

3:26:28council

3:26:31>> I won't say much. Um

3:26:34this is an issue that I have worked on a

3:26:36lot um increasing in initially in a

3:26:40public way and uh learned very quickly

3:26:43just how divided the community is on

3:26:45this topic. Um, and uh,

3:26:53[clears throat] I just want to thank uh,

3:26:56the folks who I think Council Member

3:26:59Cornell and and Malik got this ball

3:27:01rolling from the sustainability

3:27:02commission, which is terrific. Um,

3:27:05council member Watson, I'm glad that you

3:27:07mentioned the the reason, [snorts] you

3:27:10know, the this is a very concentrated

3:27:12problem in Ann Arbor. It's really awards

3:27:14one and two

3:27:16and um that is because deer love

3:27:18suburban landscapes and they like

3:27:20smaller patches of forest cropping up

3:27:22alongside open space and so um parts of

3:27:25Ann Arbor are really perfect for them.

3:27:28They also do better in warmer winters

3:27:30and all of humanity is giving them

3:27:31those. So um we uh

3:27:37for me this is an ecosystem problem. I

3:27:39would say more about that, but uh Miss

3:27:41Mitchell gave an extremely great

3:27:46summary of what we are talking about.

3:27:49And while ticks are an important reason

3:27:52to look at this and deer vehicle

3:27:54collisions are important, trees,

3:27:56caterpillars, bugs, native plants,

3:27:59pollinators, everything that enables me

3:28:02to eat and go to the farmers market are

3:28:04also really important. Not that we

3:28:06presuppose the outcome, but this is why

3:28:08we need to look at this. So I feel that

3:28:11um it's a good time to propose looking

3:28:14at it and

3:28:17I hope people will hear that there is no

3:28:19outcome presupposed because there was

3:28:21really a lot of email in our inboxes

3:28:25that seemed to feel we had started to

3:28:28sell the meat already or give it away.

3:28:31So sorry it's late. Um, I will obviously

3:28:35sponsored it and will support it.

3:28:38>> Further discussion,

3:28:42>> Council Member Harrison.

3:28:48>> Thank you, Mayor. First, um, I want to

3:28:50thank everyone who has contacted council

3:28:52about this resolution. I've heard from

3:28:55residents who are deeply concerned about

3:28:56damage to gardens, our natural areas,

3:28:58and safety on the roads. I've also heard

3:29:01from residents who do not want to see

3:29:02deer killed. I take both sets of

3:29:05concerns seriously. I understand that

3:29:07tonight's resolution does not authorize

3:29:08a call. Uh it asks city administrator to

3:29:12study a regional deer management program

3:29:14and being bring recommendations back to

3:29:16council. But I also know where Ann

3:29:18Arbor's last year management program

3:29:19led. Deer were shot and parks were

3:29:21closed while that uh work took place.

3:29:24This resolution leaves that path open.

3:29:26And for me that matters. A call means

3:29:28killing animals that many residents

3:29:30value as part of this community. It also

3:29:32asks residents to accept the cost and

3:29:34disruption of a lethal program without a

3:29:37clear showing today of what conditions

3:29:38exist in each affected area or what

3:29:40other steps could address them. I'm not

3:29:43dismissing the damage deer can cause.

3:29:46The city has documented harm to young

3:29:48trees in our natural areas. We should

3:29:50keep measuring that harm along with

3:29:52collisions and other impacts so we know

3:29:53whether our efforts are working. I want

3:29:56us to put real efforts into protecting

3:29:58vulnerable plants, helping residents

3:29:59prevent damage, and um and improving

3:30:02safety where deer and drivers cross

3:30:04paths. We should also examine whether

3:30:07any fertility control options are lawful

3:30:09and practical here. If this resolution

3:30:12assured me that the work would lead to a

3:30:14humane, non-lethal approach, I could

3:30:16support it. It does not. For that

3:30:18reason, I will be voting no.

3:30:20>> Council Gazi Edwin.

3:30:24Thank you, Mayor Taylor. Um, this is a

3:30:27hard one. This is a hard one. You know,

3:30:29I think that I'm not going to be

3:30:31supporting this tonight, not because I,

3:30:34you know, am refuting the environmental

3:30:36or the public health um consequences of

3:30:39deer overpopulation.

3:30:41But I also want to defer to some of my

3:30:44colleagues who have been here and have

3:30:45seen the outcomes of former um you know

3:30:49calls and the fact that non-lethal

3:30:52sterilization is no longer an option in

3:30:54the state asking the city administrator

3:30:56and staff to mobilize significant

3:30:58resources to research this and the

3:31:01outcome most likely will be a call

3:31:03which I wouldn't vote for. Granted I

3:31:05won't be here when it comes to council.

3:31:08Um it it feels disingenuous if if I if I

3:31:10vote for this now, but would not vote

3:31:13for it if a call was recommended. Um

3:31:17and I want to uplift some of the

3:31:18concerns that, you know, Council Member

3:31:19Briggs stated that it takes a long-term

3:31:21effort. It doesn't actually when it

3:31:24comes to the efficacy and what it

3:31:25actually does. Um it's not as helpful as

3:31:28we think it is. It limits our access to

3:31:30outside areas.

3:31:32And I also think that, you know, in our

3:31:35interactions with animals, we have to

3:31:39think about how is the infrastructure

3:31:40that we're building

3:31:42encouraging these fatal interactions.

3:31:45For example, reducing sprawl and

3:31:47investing in safer multimodal

3:31:49infrastructure could help limit habitat

3:31:52fragmentation and reduce human deer

3:31:55conflicts. I'm not saying that's a

3:31:57absolute solution, but I think we have

3:31:58to be a little bit more conscientious

3:32:00about how we build, where people live,

3:32:02and how we move around the city. Um, so

3:32:05I'm not going to be supporting this

3:32:07tonight.

3:32:08>> Further discussion?

3:32:14>> Uh, for my part, I'm uh I'll be voting

3:32:16against the the resolution. um as the um

3:32:19as as the institutional knowledge uh as

3:32:22having experienced the uh the deer call

3:32:25from uh beginning to end the last cycle

3:32:27uh you know I've I've seen this movie

3:32:29before and it is not a good movie. Uh

3:32:33I do not gain say the uh the challenges

3:32:36and frustrations that people experience

3:32:39as a result of uh of their interactions

3:32:41with deer throughout uh throughout our

3:32:44community. Uh that's real and it is

3:32:46heartfelt. Um, and it is impactful on

3:32:48people's lives and they experience it um

3:32:51with with with earnest and good faith

3:32:53negativity. Uh, earnest and good faith

3:32:55uh negativity. They don't like it. And

3:32:59um, as they describe it, they have

3:33:01reason to. Um, it is also true uh,

3:33:04speaking of good faith uh, but not

3:33:06negativity. U, uh, good faith positive,

3:33:07I want to express uh, my gratitude to

3:33:09the sponsors of the resolution. they

3:33:10have put forward something that is

3:33:12thoughtful um something them that is

3:33:14good faith and seeks uh data information

3:33:17and I do not believe that in their uh in

3:33:19their in their heart of hearts their

3:33:20brain of brains that they have a pres

3:33:22that there is a a result presupposed

3:33:25uh

3:33:29at the same time uh

3:33:32this is uh this path rhymes with the

3:33:35path that we trod back in the teens um

3:33:38and it resulted in a call and the call

3:33:42created and uh you know heart pain in

3:33:45the community in a way that is um is

3:33:49super real

3:33:51and is also uh [clears throat] has it

3:33:55has an impact and in a way that was

3:33:57entirely asymmetric and then

3:34:02the benefits of the call even to the

3:34:05people who supported

3:34:09And so, however you one thinks that the

3:34:15condition of deer in the community ought

3:34:17to be addressed, um the cost of uh of

3:34:24deer management,

3:34:26lethal, non-lethal

3:34:28call

3:34:30exceeds the benefit

3:34:34from a real world from a real world

3:34:37result from a heart pain uh result all

3:34:41of all these measures. There are some

3:34:43things that we just with our limited

3:34:45resources and limited abilities have a

3:34:47hard time fixing.

3:34:50Dear is one of those things.

3:34:53Uh

3:34:54I'm going to be voting no on this.

3:35:00Further discussion

3:35:05roll call. Please start with council

3:35:06member.

3:35:08>> Council member,

3:35:09>> yes.

3:35:10>> Council Gazi Edwin,

3:35:11>> no.

3:35:12>> Mayor Taylor,

3:35:13>> uh, no.

3:35:14>> Council Ayer,

3:35:15>> no.

3:35:16>> Council Aman,

3:35:17>> yes.

3:35:18>> Council Briggs,

3:35:19>> no.

3:35:20>> Council Cornell,

3:35:21>> yes.

3:35:22>> Council Dish,

3:35:23>> yes.

3:35:23>> Council Harrison,

3:35:24>> no.

3:35:25>> Council Watson,

3:35:27>> yes.

3:35:28>> Council Malik,

3:35:29>> yes.

3:35:32>> Motion carries. We have before us the

3:35:34clerk's report of communications,

3:35:35petitions, and referrals. Can I have a

3:35:37motion, please, to approve the clerk's

3:35:38report? Moved by council member Cornell,

3:35:40seconded by council member

3:35:44Hackman. Discussion, please, at the

3:35:45clerk's report.

3:35:47All in favor? All oppose. The clerk's

3:35:50report is approved. Do we have the

3:35:52pleasure of a closed session today? Oh,

3:35:54I forgot to ask about a close session.

3:35:57H,

3:35:59>> that is devastating. Uh, do we have the

3:36:01do we have the if you'll forgive the uh

3:36:03the out of order, do we have the

3:36:04pleasure of communications from our city

3:36:06attorney, aside from the fact that I

3:36:07missed the cl the question about the

3:36:09closed session.

3:36:11>> All right. Uh, we do have public comment

3:36:15overflow. Uh, to refresh your

3:36:17recollection, public comment is an

3:36:18opportunity for members of the public to

3:36:20speak to council and the community about

3:36:21matters of municipal interest. One need

3:36:23not have sign one must have signed up in

3:36:26advance to by contacting our city clerk.

3:36:28Speakers in house and online will have

3:36:30three minutes in which to speak. So

3:36:31please pay close attention to the time.

3:36:34Our clerk or the time clock will notify

3:36:36you when 30 seconds are remaining and

3:36:38when your time is expired. When your

3:36:39time is expired, please conclude your

3:36:41remarks and seed the floor. Our first

3:36:43speaker today is Elliot Algass.

3:36:52And I thought I was going to get in the

3:36:53previous public comment time like three

3:36:55hours ago, but uh thank you all for

3:36:58being here. And I wanted to talk about a

3:37:01bit about roadway safety. So I'm not a

3:37:03resident of the city of Ann Arbor

3:37:04currently. I live in Selen, but I work

3:37:06in the Perry building near downtown Ann

3:37:08Arbor. And uh I have commuted there for

3:37:12a couple months. And

3:37:15I originally started doing this commute

3:37:16just driving every day. So, I go Ann

3:37:18Arbor Seline, that's the main route, and

3:37:20to Main Street and then over. But then

3:37:22recently, I've also acquired an ebike,

3:37:24and I've been trying to do my commute

3:37:26more via ebike. And I've discovered some

3:37:28important things. One, the roads outside

3:37:31of the city are actually pretty good.

3:37:34Obviously, this isn't something the city

3:37:35can do anything about, but like

3:37:36Pittsfield Township has built a lot of

3:37:38non-motorized pathways. And two is that

3:37:40the roads in the core of the city,

3:37:42they're not perfect, but they're also

3:37:43pretty good. uh there's lots of bike

3:37:45lanes, then the speeds are pretty slow.

3:37:47But the roads that get from around the

3:37:49borders of the city, sort of the more

3:37:51outlying areas, more suburban areas of

3:37:53the city and especially across our

3:37:54freeway loop uh to get into the city are

3:37:58really unfriendly to bicyclists and also

3:38:01pretty unfriendly to pedestrians, but

3:38:02most people aren't walking 10 miles. And

3:38:04I think one thing the city should look

3:38:06at is on those arterials trying to

3:38:08figure out lane reductions, bike lanes,

3:38:11stuff like that that really makes it a

3:38:12possible thing to do because biking 10

3:38:14miles, especially if an ebike is very

3:38:16achievable for the vast majority of

3:38:17people who work in downtown Arbor and

3:38:19commute from even outside the city. And

3:38:21that could really help reduce a lot of

3:38:22the traffic people are worried about and

3:38:24reduce carbon emissions and save people

3:38:26money. I mean, have you seen the price

3:38:27of gas? It's ridiculous. But like

3:38:30reducing a road like Ann Arbor Seline

3:38:32down to one lane each way and same thing

3:38:35for a road like uh Hiron or a road like

3:38:38Broadway which has been the subject of

3:38:39so much discussion. Uh what I think

3:38:41could be really helpful and we can see

3:38:43that it doesn't have a huge impact on

3:38:45traffic and slowing people down. The

3:38:46main capacity constraint is

3:38:48intersections and it's not like the

3:38:50inter like if you only drive you think

3:38:53the road's always full of cars but if

3:38:54you bike you know the road's mostly not

3:38:55full of cars. road is mostly empty cars

3:38:57that let all the cars bunch up. So when

3:38:59you're in a car, you think they're all

3:39:01you think it's everything, but really,

3:39:02you know, if we can get people flowing

3:39:04more uh [snorts] through intersections

3:39:06better, you don't need to worry as much

3:39:08about how many lanes the road has.

3:39:11And that especially [clears throat]

3:39:12applies to roads like Ann Arbor. We know

3:39:14this because when the road was closed

3:39:17for a couple months, when a lane was

3:39:18closed for building the new multi-use

3:39:21path on the east side of that, which I'm

3:39:22very appreciative of, uh, traffic didn't

3:39:25really back up that much more. Like, it

3:39:26was a little bit more, but it wasn't

3:39:27that bad. And if you have that, you

3:39:30know, be permanent and go even further

3:39:32back, maybe things would back up a

3:39:33little bit more, but I think it would be

3:39:35so much worth it. And if you can get a

3:39:36couple more people out of their cars,

3:39:38which I think you would if you have bike

3:39:39lanes like that, then I think that would

3:39:41even further reduce uh the traffic

3:39:43volumes uh and make people safer,

3:39:46pedestrians, bicyclists, and even

3:39:48drivers who would be going slower and

3:39:50having fewer potential conflicts,

3:39:52difficult intersections, etc. Thank you.

3:39:54>> Thank you. [applause] Our next speaker

3:39:56is Peter Hope.

3:40:04Greetings, council members. I'm Peter

3:40:06Hul. I'm on the transportation

3:40:08commission, but of course, tonight I'm

3:40:10speaking only for myself. Um, Michigan

3:40:12Traffic Crash Facts has released their

3:40:142025 crash data, and you can find my

3:40:17summary of the pedestrian and bicycle um

3:40:20crashes at the crashes in an crashes in

3:40:23Ann Arbor blog. I want to share um some

3:40:28numbers from this year's data set. Uh in

3:40:31Ann Arbor in 2025, 15 pedestrians were

3:40:34seriously injured in crashes and two

3:40:37were killed. Also, uh 15 motor vehicle

3:40:41occupants were seriously injured and two

3:40:43were killed. Those are the same numbers

3:40:45for pedestrians and vehicle occupants.

3:40:4815 serious injuries and two fatalities.

3:40:51Another similarity, um, 59% of the

3:40:55crashes that injured and killed

3:40:56pedestrians were on multi-lane streets.

3:40:59Uh, and 59% of those serious and fatal

3:41:02crashes, uh, for motor motor vehicle

3:41:05occupants were on multi-lane streets.

3:41:07That's the same percentage for

3:41:09pedestrians and vehicle occupants, 59%.

3:41:13So, uh, adding in bike rider crashes to

3:41:16include all serious and fatal crashes

3:41:17for all the modes, the percentage on

3:41:19multi-lane streets is still 59%.

3:41:22That's 22 people seriously injured or

3:41:24killed last year on our multi-lane

3:41:27streets um in all of the different

3:41:29modes, bicycle, pedestrian, motor

3:41:31vehicle. Those multi-lane streets only

3:41:33make up about 7% of our city streets.

3:41:37Um, but last year 59% of all the serious

3:41:39injury and fatality crashes happened. on

3:41:42streets that look like Plymouth and

3:41:44State Ann Arbor Seline and yes that look

3:41:47like Broadway.

3:41:497% of the streets are configured like

3:41:51Broadway but 59% of the serious and

3:41:54fatal injuries happened on streets that

3:41:56are configured like Broadway and like

3:41:59Washington.

3:42:01So what are we pausing if uh we halt the

3:42:04reconfiguration of Broadway or of

3:42:05Washington? We're pausing the changes

3:42:07that will help to prevent 22 serious

3:42:09injury crashes from happening next year.

3:42:11or the year after that. Those are

3:42:13streets that we know how to improve and

3:42:14make safer for everyone who walks and

3:42:17bikes and drives on them or across them.

3:42:20We have an obligation to follow through

3:42:22and make these streets safe for everyone

3:42:23who uses them. So, council [snorts]

3:42:25members, now is the time for you to

3:42:26follow through on your commitment to

3:42:28Vision Zero, which this body has

3:42:30affirmed and reaffirmed many times and

3:42:32unanimously. In light of the crashes we

3:42:34experienced in 2025, anything less than

3:42:37your continued fullthroated support for

3:42:39A2R2,

3:42:40the Broadway reconfiguration, and the

3:42:43reconfiguration would go contrary to

3:42:45your previous approval of the vision

3:42:47zero goal, making sure your constituents

3:42:49can use our streets and get back to

3:42:50their families without a serious injury.

3:42:53Now is the time for you to be patient,

3:42:54but firm and unwavering as you explain

3:42:56why these reconfigurations are the right

3:42:58thing to do to keep people safe. And if

3:43:00you ever find yourself at a loss for

3:43:01words to explain it, just remember 59%

3:43:04of the serious crashes were on just 7%

3:43:08of the streets. 59 and seven. Thank you.

3:43:12>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Megan

3:43:14Miselle.

3:43:19>> Hi, my name is Megan Miselle. I live at

3:43:23uh 2017 Fair Street. And I first wanted

3:43:26to say thank you to um Briggs and Ayer

3:43:30for uh saying that bike lanes are not

3:43:34the problem that we really need to focus

3:43:37on safe streets here and thank you for

3:43:40your commitment everyone. Um, I hope we

3:43:45can all embrace change as a different

3:43:48speaker said earlier and that if we move

3:43:51forward, everyone in the city will be

3:43:53able to embrace change too if we put in

3:43:56more bike lanes and make our streets

3:43:58better. Um, I'm not on Facebook or

3:44:01Reddit or wherever online people are

3:44:03complaining, but there were so many

3:44:05people here today and I'm biking every

3:44:08day and that's shows that this is

3:44:09something I really care about. I wanted

3:44:12to put in some positives. I was biking

3:44:15up Liberty the other day to go to my

3:44:17dentist and I was so excited they were

3:44:19um putting the paint on for the new

3:44:21lanes there. That's a regular route for

3:44:23me. Um I used to have to go on the

3:44:25sidewalk then hop back off. So I'm

3:44:27excited to just be able to be in the

3:44:30road and not um have to weave in and out

3:44:34of traffic. Um and then I also lead an

3:44:38organization called Ann Arbor Joy Rides.

3:44:41It's a chapter of cycling without age.

3:44:43We have a large tri taw, large ebike

3:44:47with a seat on the front. We take older

3:44:49people, mobility impaired people for

3:44:51rides. And I was riding down Liberty

3:44:54today to take a couple on a ride on the

3:44:56B2B. And the the Liberty lane was wider.

3:45:00Our bike could fit there. I felt way

3:45:02safer. And that's also my daily commute

3:45:05to Michigan Medicine. And I see more and

3:45:08more people all the time putting their

3:45:10bikes at Michigan Medicine, biking to

3:45:13work. It's expensive if it's expensive

3:45:16to live in Ann Arbor. I don't own a car.

3:45:19I think if I did own a car, it would be

3:45:21much harder to live here. Um and and

3:45:25many other people are in the same

3:45:27situation as me. Biking to Michigan

3:45:30Medicine, biking to North Campus up to

3:45:32Vision. Um, and I just really urge you

3:45:35to not pause the construction on bike

3:45:38lanes and to take in consideration the

3:45:42uh road diets and slowing speeds and

3:45:45hopefully we can go towards vision zero

3:45:49and making uh safer streets for

3:45:51everybody. Thank you.

3:45:53>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Carvin

3:45:56Connor Author.

3:46:01>> All right. Thank you, Mayor Taylor. and

3:46:03um the city council. My name is Arvin

3:46:04Kharin and I'm representing the Theta

3:46:07Zai fraternity at 1345 Washington Avenue

3:46:09and our over 120 members. Uh today I'm

3:46:12seeking permission to request to host a

3:46:15community music event in our back lot

3:46:16throughout the school year. I recognize

3:46:18the city's concerns regarding large

3:46:20gatherings and the absence of a

3:46:21supporting public ordinance. As a

3:46:23certified firefighter EMT myself, I

3:46:25respect safety policies and I'm

3:46:27committed to following them. And our

3:46:29goal is to work with the city to ensure

3:46:30this event is conducted properly. We are

3:46:33requesting permission to host a few

3:46:34three-hour events for approximately 100

3:46:36to 200 attendees throughout the school

3:46:38year and will ensure to implement safety

3:46:40measures including established crowd

3:46:42capacity limits, designated emergency

3:46:44exits, on-site first aid provision, and

3:46:47coordination with local emergency

3:46:48services. These precautions are intended

3:46:50to ensure compliance with the public

3:46:52safety guidelines throughout the event.

3:46:54This isn't going to be a spontaneous

3:46:55event. It is going to be planned,

3:46:56organized, and we're very open to

3:46:58working with the fire and police

3:46:59departments to make this event a

3:47:00reality. I have reached out to the fire

3:47:02marshall's office recently and requested

3:47:04help to review our back lot to ensure it

3:47:06meets all safety guidelines of Ann

3:47:07Arbur's fire code chapter 111 title 9. I

3:47:11have also drawn up a basic emergency

3:47:13egress and lane access diagram that I

3:47:15have requested to be inspected by the

3:47:16marshall and the city for approval and I

3:47:18have copies for all of y'all if yall are

3:47:20interested in looking at it later. I

3:47:22will also reach out to our neighbors for

3:47:23noise compliance plans and setting an

3:47:24end time and we will ensure that no

3:47:26alcohol service or usage is on our

3:47:28grounds. I believe that community events

3:47:30can strengthen our neighborhood. And

3:47:31even though the obstacle of an inability

3:47:33to pass a public gathering ordinance

3:47:35this summer stands in our way, I still

3:47:37believe this opportunity is too great to

3:47:38pass on. We're asking for a chance to

3:47:40demonstrate responsibility with the

3:47:42city's oversight and help. We're

3:47:44prepared to submit our full safety plan,

3:47:46coordinate with fire and police

3:47:47departments, and meet any other

3:47:49requirements y'all set. Thank you guys

3:47:50so much for considering my request.

3:47:52>> Thank you.

3:47:54Our next speaker is Susette Wikoff.

3:48:00Good evening, city council. Uh, my name

3:48:02is Susette Wanoff and I live on the old

3:48:05west side of Ann Arbor. I live car-free

3:48:07and I commute by bicycle every day up

3:48:10Division Street in the bridge in the

3:48:11Broadway Bridge. I'm deeply grateful for

3:48:13the many improvements that you all have

3:48:15made throughout the decade I've commuted

3:48:16there. In particular, I really love the

3:48:18southbound bike lane on Plymouth Road.

3:48:21But I'm here tonight because there's

3:48:22more to be done. I carry the memory of

3:48:25my brother Patrick, a 25-year-old school

3:48:28teacher who is hit and killed by a cell

3:48:30phone distracted driver while riding his

3:48:32bicycle.

3:48:33I know viscerally what it means for a

3:48:37two-tonon vehicle to strike a human

3:48:39body.

3:48:41If I were to tell you the next victim of

3:48:43traffic violence would be your brother,

3:48:45what would you change?

3:48:47Pause and think about that person, the

3:48:49little things that make them so magic to

3:48:51you.

3:48:53If you could change a policy, put in a

3:48:55bike lane, saloon, put a road diet that

3:48:57would save that person, would you do it?

3:49:01The council here is committed to vision

3:49:03zero. We have strategies in our

3:49:05transportation plan. But that progress

3:49:08is too slow, and policy choices like

3:49:10that cost lives. Right now, there are

3:49:13three critical initiatives that can

3:49:15change this direction. Ann Arbor Road

3:49:18right sizing to calm traffic. the

3:49:21Division Street bikeway expansion to

3:49:23prevent vulnerable road users like

3:49:24myself and my friends. The transfer MD

3:49:28trunk lines, roads that were sites of

3:49:30six serious crashes and a fatality last

3:49:32year. Please honor your commitment to

3:49:36save lives. Make our streets safe enough

3:49:39so no other family has to endure what

3:49:41mine has. Thank you. [applause]

3:49:44>> Thank you.

3:49:47>> Our next speaker, Eric Avanic.

3:49:51Mayor, this caller is on Zoom.

3:49:54Eric Avanchic. Go ahead.

3:49:58>> Uh, thank you. And I especially like to

3:49:59thank the previous speaker. Uh, my name

3:50:02is Eric Avonich. I'm calling from the

3:50:03third ward and I'm here to support the

3:50:05city's efforts to make our streets

3:50:06safer. On September 10th, a pedestrian

3:50:09was critically injured crossing Hiron at

3:50:11Fifth Avenue. And on May 5th of last

3:50:13year, a man using a wheelchair was

3:50:15killed crossing that very same

3:50:17intersection. Tragically, that

3:50:19intersection is working exactly as

3:50:22designed. Four and five lane roads are

3:50:24hard to cross safely and harder still

3:50:26for older residents than anyone using a

3:50:28wheelchair or a crutch. These outcomes

3:50:31are not bad luck. They are the

3:50:33predictable result of the road we have

3:50:35built. In August 2024, city council

3:50:38directed the city administrator to

3:50:40pursue taking over the MDOT trunk lines

3:50:42within our city so we could redesign

3:50:44them for the safety of the people who

3:50:46live here and visit. That directive is

3:50:49now 2 years old. I'm asking city council

3:50:52for two things tonight. A public update

3:50:54on where that effort stands and a firm

3:50:56push to bring it to a close because

3:50:58while we wait, people are being

3:51:00critically injured and killed.

3:51:03I also strongly support the redesign of

3:51:05North Division Beaks and the Broadway

3:51:07Bridge. And I thank our transportation

3:51:09staff for moving this project forward.

3:51:12The 2022 lower town mobility study found

3:51:16that speeding on division, speeding by

3:51:18drivers on Division and over the

3:51:20Broadway bridge makes it exceptionally

3:51:22difficult for pedestrians to cross

3:51:24Division and Beaks safely. I'm told that

3:51:27the people on the second city hosted

3:51:29project walkabout watched as high school

3:51:32age students struggled to make those

3:51:34crossings.

3:51:36Going from four lanes to three would

3:51:38calm that traffic and it also happens to

3:51:40make room for a protected bike lane over

3:51:42the bridge separate from the people on

3:51:44foot. I urge every member of council to

3:51:48support that design and not to undermine

3:51:50it. When drivers routinely speed on a

3:51:53street, that is not something we can

3:51:55lecture away. It's a design outcome. If

3:51:58we want drivers to slow down, we have to

3:52:00build streets that slow them down. So,

3:52:03let's move forward with the Division and

3:52:05Broadway Bridge safety redesign and

3:52:07let's take over the MD trunk lines and

3:52:09redesign them for safety. People's lives

3:52:12literally depend on it. Thank you.

3:52:15>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Julie

3:52:18Ritter.

3:52:24Wow, I made it to 10:47.

3:52:28Julie Ritter, old fourth ward. Right

3:52:30now, there is a small storm brewing

3:52:32around the transportation department

3:52:33plan to put the Broadway Bridge on a

3:52:35road diet and add a two-way bike lane.

3:52:38Problems with this plan, including

3:52:40routing traffic onto the bridge through

3:52:42Kerry Town and past Singerman's and up

3:52:44to the two to three,000 plausible

3:52:46passage per day onto and off of the

3:52:48bridge from the Roxbury project, not

3:52:50including the thousand person event

3:52:52amphitheater. These things are being

3:52:54heatedly discussed on social media.

3:52:57There's another problem. The lack of

3:52:59clear rules as to how anyone and

3:53:02everyone using this transfer station

3:53:04transportation infrastructure is to

3:53:06safely utilize these facilities and all

3:53:09similar infrastructure throughout the

3:53:11city. Pedestrians, bicyclists, scooters,

3:53:14uniwheelers, motorists, skateboarders,

3:53:16motorcyclists. I've seen all of these in

3:53:18both the roadway and in the dedicated

3:53:20bike lanes. And I see bikes everywhere

3:53:23in the bike lanes, on the sidewalk, and

3:53:24in the roadway. Even if there is a bike

3:53:26lane, it's a free-for-all. You've built

3:53:28this infrastructure and in some parts of

3:53:31town, it's very complicated to

3:53:33understand. But you have not put in

3:53:35place any rules or regulations

3:53:37or laws, very much signage or any

3:53:40enforcement of how these lanes are to be

3:53:42used safely. Who has the right of way?

3:53:44In what situation? Is non-motorized

3:53:47transportation supposed to follow

3:53:48regular traffic laws or not? Examples

3:53:51are endless. If there's a bike lane, is

3:53:54the cyclist supposed to be in the

3:53:55roadway or the sidewalk or in the bike

3:53:58lane? If there's a stop sign, are

3:54:00non-motorized transportation required to

3:54:02stop? We've heard for years how European

3:54:05countries excel at supporting their

3:54:07cyclists. In some cases, up to 27% of

3:54:10trips are made on bicycles. Cars have

3:54:12not been eliminated. European countries

3:54:15have strict, enforcable, and well-

3:54:17enforced laws that govern all

3:54:19transportation. You owe it to everyone

3:54:22to come up with clear, wellelained rules

3:54:24for these new lanes. You need to study

3:54:26what has been done in the places that

3:54:28you extol. In some cases in Europe,

3:54:31sidewalks legally accommodate both

3:54:32cyclists and pedestrians and have signs

3:54:34to this effect. In other places,

3:54:37cyclists are required to get off their

3:54:38bikes and walk them through dense or

3:54:40dangerous places. Clear signs. Electric

3:54:43bikes are treated differently depending

3:54:45on how fast they are going. above a

3:54:47certain speed requires them to travel in

3:54:49the roadway along with the cars. Bikes

3:54:51are legally required to be licensed to

3:54:54have lights and they have to have a

3:54:56ringer or another sound alert measure.

3:54:59Right now, no one knows what to expect.

3:55:01There's no guarantee of anything.

3:55:04Without clear, enforcable rules, we're

3:55:06going to continue to have conflict

3:55:07between cyclists and others because no

3:55:09one feels safe because it is not safe.

3:55:13Cars are already heavily regulated. It's

3:55:16time to expand this regulation to other

3:55:18forms of transportation for the safety

3:55:20of all. Thank you.

3:55:22>> Thank you. Our next speaker is Jamie

3:55:24McGara.

3:55:30>> Good evening, council. It's 10:50 just

3:55:33like old times, right? So, um, for folks

3:55:37that heard, [laughter] uh, I'm sure

3:55:39you've heard about what happened 12 days

3:55:41ago, uh, right outside here, and you

3:55:44know that there was an event, uh, that a

3:55:47tragic event last year in terms of

3:55:49someone's life there. What you may not

3:55:51know is that 3 years ago in March 2023,

3:55:55um I was actually hit in that

3:55:57intersection in the exact same spot as

3:55:59the person from 12 days ago. Uh and my

3:56:01arm was broken and I suffered um

3:56:06bones heal. the image of someone driving

3:56:08into you while you're walking across a

3:56:10crosswalk and you have the right of way

3:56:12in the crosswalk and they're completely

3:56:14blank uh in their demeanor uh will never

3:56:19leave you. Uh

3:56:22we have incidents there all the time.

3:56:24It's something that needs to be

3:56:25addressed and that is addressed through

3:56:27good planning. We can talk about rules

3:56:29and regulations. We can talk about um

3:56:33you know making uh we can try to define

3:56:35who was right or who was wrong.

3:56:37Ultimately good planning good

3:56:39infrastructure is what separates people

3:56:42out in such a way that they can travel

3:56:44in their mode and have the least amount

3:56:47of chance of collision of crashes and

3:56:51the the most efficient way for people to

3:56:54travel. And one of the challenges that

3:56:58we have is that there is not an

3:57:00understanding of the history of people

3:57:04having equal access to our roads. And

3:57:08you can look back into late 1800s, early

3:57:111900s, and there was equal access for

3:57:14pedestrians and for bikes and for

3:57:17eventually cars. But it was actually

3:57:19bicyclists and the League of American

3:57:21Wheelmen who fought to get roads paved

3:57:25and maintained for people for safety

3:57:27reasons. And so I would encourage

3:57:30council to to keep going with these

3:57:33efforts. It's important to point out if

3:57:34you look at the information at crashes

3:57:37in Ann Arbor, that list of crashes,

3:57:41the ones that if you look through that,

3:57:43none of those crashes are related to any

3:57:45of the places where there's been road

3:57:47reconfigurations. So, you may hear, oh,

3:57:50it's because of the road

3:57:51reconfigurations, and you may hear, um,

3:57:54you know, the bike lanes are causing

3:57:55this or whatever. The data doesn't

3:57:57actually show that the places where

3:57:58there have been road reconfigurations

3:58:01are safe. So those are success stories

3:58:04and you will hear people talking about

3:58:07you should stop because of emergency

3:58:09vehicles. Cities have found ways to

3:58:11address emergency vehicles getting

3:58:13through areas where there are bike

3:58:15lanes. You will hear about congestion

3:58:17and people saying you should stop

3:58:18because of congestion. The reality is

3:58:20that the congestion in Ann Arbor is

3:58:22during a very narrow band of time two

3:58:25times a day. The rest of the time the

3:58:28roads are very not active. So, please

3:58:32stay on the course. Thank you.

3:58:34>> Thank you. [applause]

3:58:36>> Our next speaker is Adam Goodman.

3:58:46>> Good evening, city council. Uh like many

3:58:48others, the event that drew me here

3:58:51tonight is that the Thursday before

3:58:54last, a driver critically injured a

3:58:55pedestrian who'd been crossing Kiron at

3:58:58Fifth, right outside of City Hall in the

3:59:00crosswalk. And in fact, I was actually

3:59:03at city hall that day, so I had the

3:59:04dubious uh privilege of being able to

3:59:08see the aftermath of that crash with my

3:59:10own eyes. I'm not saying I enjoyed that.

3:59:14And this crash comes a bit over a year

3:59:16after a driver hit and killed Robert

3:59:17Murray in a wheelchair in the crosswalk

3:59:20one block west at Fourth Street. So,

3:59:22what do these crashes have in common?

3:59:25Fur Street. It's a dangerous multi-lane

3:59:28road. We now have officially certified

3:59:31data for crashes in 2025, which shows

3:59:34that it was the worst year for serious

3:59:35and fatal pedestrian crashes since 2004,

3:59:39which is the entire time that's

3:59:41available to query online on the state

3:59:44crash database. And as Pete said, 59% of

3:59:47the crashes last year were on multi-lane

3:59:49roads, even though those roads

3:59:51constitute only 7% of the streets in our

3:59:54city.

3:59:56Ann Arbor has done some great work on

3:59:58transportation safety and it has showed.

4:00:00Um, according to the DDA, serious and

4:00:04fatal crashes along the downtown streets

4:00:06with bikeways dropped dramatically after

4:00:09those bikeways were built. And I'm

4:00:11talking about crashes across all users,

4:00:13not just people walking and biking, but

4:00:15drivers, too.

4:00:17But where we have largely not taken this

4:00:20decisive action is where it is most

4:00:22urgently needed on our dangerous

4:00:24high-speed multi-lane roads. So tonight

4:00:27I am once again I have been here say

4:00:29with this message before. I am once

4:00:31again urging you to do this. Take

4:00:33action. Make our roads safe for all

4:00:36users now. Not 5 to 10 years from now

4:00:39after an unending pile of studies but

4:00:42now.

4:00:43And that brings me to another one of our

4:00:45dangerous multi-lane roads, which is

4:00:46Broadway. And I actually spent several

4:00:50years commuting over that bridge kind of

4:00:52in in both directions um by basically

4:00:56every trans every service transportation

4:00:58mode. I biked, I walked, I took the bus,

4:01:00and I drove. And I would say that that

4:01:02bridge did not particularly did not

4:01:04serve any of those modes particularly

4:01:06well, except maybe drivers who want to

4:01:09go at an exceptional rate of speed down

4:01:11division.

4:01:14It may be that when that bridge was

4:01:16built, it was intended to serve all

4:01:18modes, but the design was compromised

4:01:21and it does not. The design was

4:01:23compromised, I would argue, in order to

4:01:26prioritize vehicular access over all

4:01:28other users. We need to not make that

4:01:31same mistake again.

4:01:33And this is I would say it's not an

4:01:36exaggeration to say it is the most

4:01:38egregious gap in our all ages and

4:01:40abilities bikeway network at the moment.

4:01:43So please do not delay this project.

4:01:46Move it forward as quickly as possible.

4:01:48Thank you.

4:01:48>> Thank you.

4:01:50Our next speaker is Nishan Kipal

4:01:57mayor. This caller was supposed to be

4:01:58online.

4:02:00Um, if there is a caller with the phone

4:02:02number ending in 574,

4:02:05press star six to raise your hand or

4:02:06star 9 to raise your hand.

4:02:13I don't believe this caller is online.

4:02:29May I have a motion to adjurnn, please?

4:02:30Moved by councelor Cornell, second by

4:02:32council member Briggs. Discussion. All

4:02:33in favor? Opposed? We're adjourned.