Ann Arbor hiring outside consultant to facilitate downtown zoning review
A review of Ann Arbor's downtown zoning is getting ready to shift into high gear with an Oct. 1 deadline for completing the review looming.
City Council Member Sabra Briere, who also serves on the Planning Commission and pushed for the review in response to the controversial 14-story development at 413 E. Huron St., said the Planning Commission's executive committee is interviewing potential consultants Tuesday afternoon.
This site at the northeast corner of Huron and Division streets in downtown Ann Arbor, where a Papa John's Pizza restaurant stood until recently, is being prepared for a 14-story apartment project targeting graduate students and young professionals.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
The executive committee includes Planning Commissioners Kirk Westphal, Wendy Woods and Bonnie Bona.
They're interviewing Carlisle/Wortman Associates and ENP & Associates. The contract is worth $24,000 and the city hopes to have a consultant hired quickly so work can begin next week.
Briere said she's expecting at least two larger public meetings as part of the review process, including one in August, and one in September.
"There will also be a number of smaller meetings with property owners in and near the downtown to talk about the impact of D1 zoning," she said.
Briere said there also could be an online survey, either through the A2 Open City Hall website or SurveyMonkey.com.
"Because the timeline is that all this work must be done by the end of September, it's going to be going very quickly," she said.
She said there's expected to be a series of smaller meetings with concerned stakeholders throughout July, then a larger community meeting in August.
"And then the consultant working with the Planning Commission's ordinance review committee will look at those issues … and move quickly in August to draft some means to address those issues — then they'll have another public meeting," she said.
The 413 E. Huron St. apartment building, controversial because it will tower above a historic neighborhood to the north, met the city's zoning requirements and so the City Council had no choice but to approve it, argued the majority of council members who OK'd the project in May.
The 13-story Varsity student high-rise on Washington Street in downtown Ann Arbor is nearing completion.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
D1 is the core downtown zoning district that allows buildings up to 180 feet tall — or in special cases like the 400 block of East Huron, up to 150 feet tall.
Some have argued D2 step-down zoning with a 60-foot cap would be a better fit for areas like the 400 block of East Huron and other parts of downtown — especially edges that abut residential neighborhoods and historic districts where there's more potential for conflict.
The Planning Commission has until Oct. 1 to complete the review and report back to council with its recommendations.
The council is asking the Planning Commission to address whether D1 zoning is appropriate for the north side of Huron Street between North Division and North State (the area of the 413 E. Huron project) and the south side of East William Street between South Main and South Fourth Avenue.
The council also is asking the commission to consider whether the D1 residential floor area ratio (FAR) premiums effectively encourage a diverse downtown population.
The council also is asking the Planning Commission to consider rezoning a parcel on the south side of Ann Street — adjacent to the north side of city hall — that is zoned D1.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's email newsletters.
Comments
Barzoom
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 4:39 p.m.
It's not at all clear to me how increasing population density within the city makes the city more "green". Seems to me that it makes the city more "concrete gray".
M.Haney
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 3 p.m.
It would seem the administrators within the City and City Council members should be able to handle these discussions on their own. Someone needs to step up and take the lead on this issue. It appears when the tough decisions are to be formulated the group responsible steps backwards so they can always disavowal any involvement if it should come back to bite them. Is there anyone in this group who takes personal ownership of issues anymore?
Tom Whitaker
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 2:56 p.m.
Many of us argued that the design guidelines, which were intended to temper the negative effects of new D1 and D2 projects, ought to have been mandatory rather than optional, but those running the City chose to spread the urban myth that Ann Arbor was perceived as "toxic" to developers and decided we shouldn't do anything but lay out the red carpet for them. As a result, we've allowed national real estate interests to use our city as a blind investment vehicle, treating it more like a Monopoly board than a place that people live and care about. It's time we regained some control over the aesthetics and the future of our city. I agree with others who are skeptical that current planning commissioners are the appropriate ones to be selecting this consultant or that a consultant is even necessary. What the City should do instead is go back and take a look at the report that came out of the original downtown zoning study committee before it was hijacked and altered by the Density Squad, also known as the Planning Commission. The report called for D2 along the north side of Huron which was entirely logical and consistent with the master plan. Recently, the planning commission tried to also gut the R4C recommendations which would have limited large projects in these areas, but Council wisely chose to reconstitute the citizen study committee rather than bring in a consultant. I hope there's enough will on Council to continue to stand up to the "build baby build" planning commission and certain members of Council on both of these matters. The people have been spoken loudly and strongly in both cases and it's time our local government began respecting and responding to that. Enough already with ideologues and matchbook professors of urban planning. We want our city back!
RUKiddingMe
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 1:35 p.m.
"city staff and planning commissioners "are too close to the process for them to effectively lead a public meeting, and so they'll be bringing in someone outside to provide that outside view" So then what process/decision is council EVER capable of making? Isn't city staff ALWAYS too close to city goings-on? What kind of lame, poorly-thought-out justificiation is this? With this logic, what issue will they be able to act on/resolve without consultants? None; they're too close to the issue. There is no excuse for the complete inability of this council to operate. Why don't we just pay consultants to serve as council? Cut out the middleman council; seems like we've got consultants pretty much on permanent retainer anyway. Criminy.
cindy1
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 1:18 p.m.
Ms. Briere is so often quoted by Mr. Stanton. His reporting would be more credible if his city council sources were more diverse. In an election season, by seeming to favor one source, it calls into question Stanton's and the news site's neutrality.
Sam S Smith
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 12:05 p.m.
Another consultant, another six figure bill. Thanks Ann Arbor!
timjbd
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 11:57 a.m.
For that kind of money, you could probably get Léon Krier to come here for a couple weeks and do a study. The problem with that is- he would not tell the zoners (developers) what they want to hear.
PSJ
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 11:45 a.m.
Could new zoning rules prevent the construction of buildings like one of the city's ugliest .... the new city hall?
glenn thompson
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 10:44 a.m.
Commenters should read the article more carefully. The consultant is to facilitate the meetings. That means control the meeting, limit the speaking times etc. Essentially buffer the interaction between the staff and the public. For $24,000, the consultant is not going to provide information or solutions. This has become a common city and county technique to avoid facing unhappy and sometimes hostile citizens. It is exactly what should not be done. Perhaps if some of the staff and commissions experienced how unpopular their decisions are they would be more sensitive when making the decision.
Dirty Mouth
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 10:15 a.m.
An "outside consultant" is about as useful as a Republican doing a little happy dance on the roof of the League.
Charles Curtis
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 3:19 a.m.
More government waste. Ann Arbor wants to be more green, which means high density development. I see this the same as the whole habitat issue, where habitat's occupants can't afford the local taxes, so there is very little habitat low income housing. Downtown was zoned for the big buildings, there is no way you can change it after projects are submitted, or city will get sued and more of our tax money goes by by. The consultant will not do anything to change zoning, that would be planning commission and city counsel. The officials that got elected and appointed figured out earlier work on zoning was flawed now that developers want to build. Maybe the officials ought to think a bit more when changing our local laws and stop with the well intended laws without giving any thought to how the laws may be viewed, interpreted and enforced. But in Ann Arbor officials can hire a consultant instead of doing the job they got hired to do, all at our expense. People need to hire (vote) for new officials.
Goofus
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 3:11 a.m.
Why not hire someone who knows the area, what works, what doesn't, because they've lived and worked and seen the area in all seasons over a lifespan, rather than some hopped up consultant from New York, or worse, Portland Oregon, to tell us how we can be hip to the latest trend?
My2bits
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 2:35 a.m.
Planning Commission and City Council have failed the citizens of Ann Arbor, resulting in multiple bad projects being approved for fear of lawsuit. If a consultant can bail them out, and give us a better zoning downtown, it will be worth it.
Dog Guy
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 1:16 a.m.
Rather than paying a CYA fee, bring a Magic 8-Ball to the public meetings.
annarboral
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 12:49 a.m.
The city of Ann Arbor has a massive level of administrators as shown but the endless stream of "managers" mentioned every time a new issue comes about. It also has a planning commission. So you either use the resources you're paying for "OR" you hire consultants. There is rarely a valid reason to do both. I strongly suggest that every time the city hires another consultant that the fees are paid for by reducing the money made availabke for staff positions (people costs of any kind) in a like amount.
lefty48197
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 11:54 p.m.
When political leaders don't want to make tough decisions, they hire consultants and then blame the consultant if the people get upset. Either way, Ann Arbor DOES need to change it's downtown zoning. Find places to allow tall buildings and explicitly limit the sizes in other areas. Then get out of the way and let the developers go to work.
nickcarraweigh
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 11:30 p.m.
The towering dorms and dorm look-alikes thrown up in and near downtown the past couple years have a collective architectural style not unlike a Strength Through Joy NSDP youth camp on the Baltic Sea in 1938. If it takes a consultant to stop anything so inappropriate and so hideous ever receiving city council approval again, hire a consultant.
Veracity
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 10:46 p.m.
Having Kirk Westphal, Wendy Woods and Bonnie Bona select a consultant to consider a change in zoning laws is like having the fox select the guard to the hen house. Kirk Westphal, for one, is an urban planner by profession and a strong proponent of high density construction downtown. He befriended the mayor while taking a course at U-M taught by the mayor. As a result he has been Chairman of the Planning Commission for years. He and mayor were mostly responsible for passage of the present zoning ordinances in 2009 which includes the controversial D1 zoning ordinance. Kirk Westphal is intelligent and an accomplished communicator. I am sure that he can convince his cohorts on the selection panel to choose a consultant who will favor D1 zoning. IMHO, the mayor, Kirk Westphal and the director of the DDA hope that the consultant's favorable decision regarding D1 zoning will avert criticism directed at them from most Ann Arbor citizens who object to the metropolis plans unsuited for a small college town which wants to retain its charm and heritage.
timjbd
Mon, Jul 8, 2013 : 1:31 p.m.
Veracity, My understanding is that "Westphal Associates" is a one-man shop and I'd say he produced that video himself, by the looks of it. http://westphalassociates.com/about/ http://annarborchronicle.com/2010/12/17/active-use-of-work-space-film-premiere/ In any case, there is a fallacy circulating amongst urban planners that "density" can only be increased with the addition of tall apartment blocks. This can be remedied with a trip to Chicago. The problem is- the money comes into a city from big building developers, not the voices of moderation. If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail and hammers (developers) also fund schools of urban planning- U of M's Taubman School of Architecture and Urban Planning being one example.
Veracity
Thu, Jul 4, 2013 : 8:59 a.m.
timjbd - "After earning his master's in urban planning in 2006, Westphal opened Westphal Associates on South Main Street." (from http://annarborchronicle.com/2010/08/30/know-your-kirk-public-servant/ )
4 Real
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 12:06 p.m.
Ann Arbor is no longer a small college town. UM is not a small Midwestern college. It is an international powerhouse driving the local economy. Growth will happen. It is up to us to manage how we want that growth: urban density or suburban sprawl. That has been and should continue to be the discussion.
timjbd
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 12:04 p.m.
Kirk Westphal lists his profession as "film maker." He made and sells this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3b7GiaRC78 Do the quality of this video, and its advice plucked from the pages of established new urbanists, qualify him as an urban planner (let alone a film maker)? He basically highlights all the best parts about the streets of Ann Arbor and then, in his day job on the planning commission (A2D2), seeks to do the opposite. None the less, I have seen him referred to many times as a professional urban planner. Perhaps that will be one of the questions he addresses as he runs for city council.
Veracity
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 12:50 a.m.
I agree. Perhaps a consultant exists who has previously decided in favor of density for some municipalities and against it for others. A biography should be included in evaluating consultants which includes previous decisions and recommendations. Furthermore, City Council members may be best at selecting a consultant because the City Council is divided in its support for D1 zoning. I hope that the RFP and individual consultant responses will be available for public scrutiny.
leaguebus
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 12:12 a.m.
So we need to hire a consultant that does not favor high density? There are two sides to this story, neither side should be looking for a consultant who will push their side.
DJBudSonic
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 9:49 p.m.
You should add a little background to this article - Ms. Briere, who sits on the Planning Commission and City Council pushed for a review of the very zoning she helped bring to the city - I guess she is trying to fix her mistakes, small consolation to the 413 neighbors and the rest of us. What good is this planning commission if they cannot even act without outside help? Hundreds of people told the City Council what they wanted at the Public Hearings for 413, (D2 or smaller) and what did it get them? A D1 building approved, and their public speaking time trimmed by a third. Good Job, everyone.
Sabra C Briere
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 10:16 p.m.
Oh, please, DJ. Must you? I didn't sit on Planning Commission when this rezoning was considered. I didn't push for it, either. But I did vote - more than once - to amend it before the zoning was approved. I even tried to get D2 zoning for East Huron - but not successfully. And of course, I voted against the project at 413 E. Huron both on Planning Commission and on Council - and I initiated the review of D1 zoning before the vote on 413 was taken.
SonnyDog09
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 9:11 p.m.
One thing that Mayberry and Ann Arbor have in common is the belief that a thirteen storey building is a "high rise."
Jonathan Blutarsky
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 10:20 p.m.
The International Building Code (IBC 2000) and the Building Construction and Safety Code, NFPA 5000TM-2002, define high-rise buildings as buildings 75 feet or greater in height measured from the lowest level of fire department vehicle access to the floor of the highest occupiable story - See more at: http://www.ecmag.com/section/your-business/high-rise-requirements#sthash.SWhPwCRn.dpuf
Vivienne Armentrout
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 8:59 p.m.
I'm in favor of the review and of hiring consultants to help facilitate it. I'm not in favor of using Open City Hall and SurveyMonkey to gauge public opinion. They are much too limited and self-selected.
Solitude
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 3:16 a.m.
@Tom Teague, that is a pathetic indictment on the effectiveness, capability, objectivity and professionalism, or lack thereof, of the people involved. Anybody who can't gather public comments without injecting their own opinions or provoking confrontation is incompetent and should not be a part of representative government.
Tom Teague
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 10:53 p.m.
The Commission is right to bring in an outside party that can help facilitate discussion and review. The cycle of defensiveness and confrontation that can result from governing/decision making bodies running their own public meetings is not conducive to meaningful public participation or gathering thoughtful input. It is difficult to break the cycle once it starts. I also agree with you that the informal, self-selected survey instruments do little except add confusion to the process.
Peter Eckstein
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 7:44 p.m.
City Council created this review because it was (at last) dissatisfied with the existing zoning and had some specific concerns over height and the bases for going beyond the standard numbers to go bigger and higher. The majority on the Planning Commission have been happily working within the existing standards, and Council, not the Commission, should be picking or at least giving marching orders to the consultants.
Kafkaland
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 7:42 p.m.
If spending 24k on a consultant effectively prevents disasters like 413 Huron and City Place from happening, it's money well-spent. I recall folks here arguing that even a potential multimillion dollar judgment against the City would be better than the 413 Huron development. The catch, of course, is that the consultant has to deliver a solution that works, and city council has to stand by it. And neither is guaranteed, unfortunately.
Brad
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 7:38 p.m.
Outside consultant = inside political cover?
Seasoned Cit
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 7:37 p.m.
City Council, who's considering limiting citizen's input at meetings, seems to have no problem spending more tax money on consultants. Wonder if they could put an earmark on the contract to get an opinion on where the water light post at City Hall could be moved so it doesn't remind everyone driving by how much money was shipped off shore on this public "art" .
djm12652
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 7:34 p.m.
I find it a bit strange that there is a hoopla over this building but not the ones on the other side of the block....The Varsity is 13 stories and close to this "historic" nimby err...neighborhood...I don't get it... :o/
Tom Whitaker
Wed, Jul 3, 2013 : 12:41 p.m.
There was opposition to the Varsity, much of it based on the design of the Huron side (mostly just a gaping garage entrance) and its crowding of the adjacent historic properties. The lack of first floor retail and the narrow passage between the building and the church were also issues that were raised, but not adequately addressed. I think there was general agreement in the community that D1 was OK on that side of Huron, but there was also an expectation that the City and developers would abide by the design guidelines and character areas in order to produce new development that was sensitive to its surroundings. Instead, the City allowed the developers to ignore the guidelines, avoid certain zoning requirements, and even gave them reserved parking spaces in the City-owned structure across the street.
Veracity
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 10:17 p.m.
There were opponents to the construction of the Varsity, not only because of its size and unattractiveness but also because of its purpose. I was among those who expressed indignation in comments to articles about the project published at annarbor.com. But the mayor, the chairman of the planning commission and the director of the DDA do not listen to the "common folk."
Jonathan Blutarsky
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 7:08 p.m.
"Consultants - If you're not a part of the solution, there's good money to be made in prolonging the problem."
jim
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 6:46 p.m.
Just who in Ann Arbor government has a brother-in-law who is an "outside consultant?" Millions of dollars spent on consultants yearly. If we agree with the results, we uses them as the basis of new policies. If not, we ignore the reports. But the consultants get paid either way.
arborani
Tue, Jul 2, 2013 : 6:53 p.m.
Congrats, Jim - you figured it out.