PH-3 21-0771 Resolution to Approve Valhalla Ann Arbor Site Plan and Development Agreement, 31, 50, 57, 77, 97, 98, 107, 145, 147, 151, 155, 159, 163 Valhalla Drive and 2065, 2099 South Main Street (CPC Recommendation: Approval - 8 Yeas and 1 Nay)
Valhalla development. Building more multifamily housing helps people who would otherwise live in neighboring communities live close to downtown.
Valhalla supports the goals of the MASTER PLAN & key city policy & planning objectives:
Provide pedestrian, bicycle & transit connections & amenities to encourage alternatives to vehicular access by increasing travel choices.
Locate high residential densities near mass transit routes near commercial, employment & activity centers.
Sustainability: higher density, preserve existing natural features, stormwater management practices, LEED Silver standards, vegetated/green roof systems, & solar photovoltaic systems. Install significant public utility infrastructure at no cost to the city.
Generate significant monies for the city park system, the city general fund & AAPS; provide permanent affordable housing & contribute to the affordable housing millage.
On the one hand I'm glad that new development goes though such an extensive planning and vetting process before final approvals.
On the other hand it's incredibly anxiety provoking for me (and I have to assume for the developers too) that all that work can be threatened with site plan denial after months or even years of difficult, expensive effort.
Please vote yes on this.
Let's get some more dense multi-family housing built in Ann Arbor!
Even without the affordable housing units provided within this development, any additional housing in A2 lowers pressure on housing price inflation. This spot seems ideal relative to other locations that have been proposed in the past due to its proximity to a major road, walkability to grocery and other shopping, and limited impact to neighboring communities. I strongly urge the council to support this development, as you are unlikely to find a more suitable location outside of downtown and outward sprawl for an increase in A2 housing stock.
As I said in PH-2, I'm excited to see this happen. It's an ideal place. It might not be perfect (nothing is) but we need the housing and I think it'll do great here.
Traffic
The three-road Main/Ann Arbor-Saline intersection is already challenging. The proposed Valhalla access on Main isn’t aligned with the Scio Church intersection. Neither access point is signalized, which will increase congestion and decrease safety.
The northbound access on Main requires a 180° turn; it will add to congestion, frustration, and accident potential.
The Huron Valley Professional Center will have a south-only egress. Northbound tenants and customers will turn across traffic into the Busch’s complex to head north.
Neither the developer’s traffic study nor any staff analysis considers the known and potential additional traffic-generating developments to the south, which will place additional demands on the intersection.
Utilities
At 454 units on 9.8 acres, the Valhalla project places extraordinary demands on storm and wastewater utilities (pumping required). While all-electric sounds green, more than 67% of DTE power is still generated by fossil fuels.
Much about this project is right: increased density, reduced dependence on fossil fuels, green space. But the red flags are too many to ignore: increased traffic combined with dangerous traffic patterns for egress/ingress, and ends-justify-the-means spot zoning allowing such an unprecedented number of units that the site will require its own pumping station(s) and backup generators for water runoff and sewage. This is in addition to all-electric units and car charging stations in an area with a history of power outages and brownouts. As proposed, Valhalla will be so overbuilt that it teeters on the brink of infrastructure disaster. The expense of all-electric heat/appliances will push the units to the high end of market rate. How does this address the housing needs of mid-range income workers the City purports to want to help? I urge council to vote no, reduce the density to a manageable size for the site, and incorporate measures which better address the City's socio-economic goals.
Please let this project go forward, if traffic impact can be addressed completely. I trust that your professional staff will continue to pay close attention to this, and I feel that the traffic studies so far have been accurate.
It's a great location for many people, it's blocking nobody's view, it's not encroaching on an existing neighborhood, and I hope it will loosen the housing market a bit. I don't think there is a better location for this kind of density in the city, and we do need the density.
As being considered, I firmly oppose approving the Valhalla development. To avoid repetition of already mentioned concerns, I will simply submit that, as proposed, I have grave concerns regarding the inevitable increase in traffic along S. Main (by Scio Church) which will jeopardize the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and other motorists along the corridor. Additionally, the projected density of the project far exceeds what is reasonable for the neighborhood. I am concerned that the decision to proceed has already been made and that the people who will be impacted by this development are not genuinely being heard. This is not what I expect (nor respect) from Ann Arbor's government.
to stopvalhallaglen
I live two blocks west of Michigan Stadium, so I am not strongly affected by this new housing, should it be approved. However, I drive through the area frequently and can't imagine a new influx of traffic right there being a good idea. Main Street is heavily traveled all the time. There is a lot of high school traffic already. There is commercial traffic from shopping nearby. There is neighborhood traffic at Scio Church Road.
I'm all for increasing our stock of housing in Ann Arbor, but not in this already congested area. There must be other possibilities for this development. Please do not approve this development.
Adding such a big community in that small space will reek havoc on an already condensed and congested roadway infrastructure. The area surrounding the proposed Valhalla project is physically unable to support such an increase load on community resources. In addition, the proposed Valhalla community does not support A2's vision for affordable housing and sustainability impact.
Rezoning this piece of land goes against the City's master plan and should be automatically vetoed.
This proposed development of 454 units and up to 1,000 people and cars is too dense for this area and presents traffic and safety issues. For example, the proposed development's entrance / exit on Main Street is not aliged with Scio Church Road and Main Street intersection (which has signals). Furthermore, vehicles can only turn right and go north from the Main Street entrance. I believe many people will do a U-turn at Pioneer High School or turn around at Scio Church Road dental office's parking lot (Wennersten Dental) to go south. This is already a very congested traffic area with two very close and busy intersections (Main Street & South Main Street and Main Street and Scio Church Road). This high density development should not be approved until these traffice and safety issues have been adequately resolved.
Valhalla development. Building more multifamily housing helps people who would otherwise live in neighboring communities live close to downtown.
Valhalla supports the goals of the MASTER PLAN & key city policy & planning objectives:
Provide pedestrian, bicycle & transit connections & amenities to encourage alternatives to vehicular access by increasing travel choices.
Locate high residential densities near mass transit routes near commercial, employment & activity centers.
Sustainability: higher density, preserve existing natural features, stormwater management practices, LEED Silver standards, vegetated/green roof systems, & solar photovoltaic systems. Install significant public utility infrastructure at no cost to the city.
Generate significant monies for the city park system, the city general fund & AAPS; provide permanent affordable housing & contribute to the affordable housing millage.
On the one hand I'm glad that new development goes though such an extensive planning and vetting process before final approvals.
On the other hand it's incredibly anxiety provoking for me (and I have to assume for the developers too) that all that work can be threatened with site plan denial after months or even years of difficult, expensive effort.
Please vote yes on this.
Let's get some more dense multi-family housing built in Ann Arbor!
Even without the affordable housing units provided within this development, any additional housing in A2 lowers pressure on housing price inflation. This spot seems ideal relative to other locations that have been proposed in the past due to its proximity to a major road, walkability to grocery and other shopping, and limited impact to neighboring communities. I strongly urge the council to support this development, as you are unlikely to find a more suitable location outside of downtown and outward sprawl for an increase in A2 housing stock.
As I said in PH-2, I'm excited to see this happen. It's an ideal place. It might not be perfect (nothing is) but we need the housing and I think it'll do great here.
Traffic
The three-road Main/Ann Arbor-Saline intersection is already challenging. The proposed Valhalla access on Main isn’t aligned with the Scio Church intersection. Neither access point is signalized, which will increase congestion and decrease safety.
The northbound access on Main requires a 180° turn; it will add to congestion, frustration, and accident potential.
The Huron Valley Professional Center will have a south-only egress. Northbound tenants and customers will turn across traffic into the Busch’s complex to head north.
Neither the developer’s traffic study nor any staff analysis considers the known and potential additional traffic-generating developments to the south, which will place additional demands on the intersection.
Utilities
At 454 units on 9.8 acres, the Valhalla project places extraordinary demands on storm and wastewater utilities (pumping required). While all-electric sounds green, more than 67% of DTE power is still generated by fossil fuels.
I strongly support the Valhalla re-zoning and development. As a fourth-ward resident I look forward to seeing additional density in this area.
Much about this project is right: increased density, reduced dependence on fossil fuels, green space. But the red flags are too many to ignore: increased traffic combined with dangerous traffic patterns for egress/ingress, and ends-justify-the-means spot zoning allowing such an unprecedented number of units that the site will require its own pumping station(s) and backup generators for water runoff and sewage. This is in addition to all-electric units and car charging stations in an area with a history of power outages and brownouts. As proposed, Valhalla will be so overbuilt that it teeters on the brink of infrastructure disaster. The expense of all-electric heat/appliances will push the units to the high end of market rate. How does this address the housing needs of mid-range income workers the City purports to want to help? I urge council to vote no, reduce the density to a manageable size for the site, and incorporate measures which better address the City's socio-economic goals.
Please let this project go forward, if traffic impact can be addressed completely. I trust that your professional staff will continue to pay close attention to this, and I feel that the traffic studies so far have been accurate.
It's a great location for many people, it's blocking nobody's view, it's not encroaching on an existing neighborhood, and I hope it will loosen the housing market a bit. I don't think there is a better location for this kind of density in the city, and we do need the density.
As being considered, I firmly oppose approving the Valhalla development. To avoid repetition of already mentioned concerns, I will simply submit that, as proposed, I have grave concerns regarding the inevitable increase in traffic along S. Main (by Scio Church) which will jeopardize the safety of pedestrians, cyclists and other motorists along the corridor. Additionally, the projected density of the project far exceeds what is reasonable for the neighborhood. I am concerned that the decision to proceed has already been made and that the people who will be impacted by this development are not genuinely being heard. This is not what I expect (nor respect) from Ann Arbor's government.
Meg Crawley <megcrawley5@gmail.com>
Sun, May 30, 3:03 PM (5 days ago)
to stopvalhallaglen
I live two blocks west of Michigan Stadium, so I am not strongly affected by this new housing, should it be approved. However, I drive through the area frequently and can't imagine a new influx of traffic right there being a good idea. Main Street is heavily traveled all the time. There is a lot of high school traffic already. There is commercial traffic from shopping nearby. There is neighborhood traffic at Scio Church Road.
I'm all for increasing our stock of housing in Ann Arbor, but not in this already congested area. There must be other possibilities for this development. Please do not approve this development.
Adding such a big community in that small space will reek havoc on an already condensed and congested roadway infrastructure. The area surrounding the proposed Valhalla project is physically unable to support such an increase load on community resources. In addition, the proposed Valhalla community does not support A2's vision for affordable housing and sustainability impact.
Rezoning this piece of land goes against the City's master plan and should be automatically vetoed.
This proposed development of 454 units and up to 1,000 people and cars is too dense for this area and presents traffic and safety issues. For example, the proposed development's entrance / exit on Main Street is not aliged with Scio Church Road and Main Street intersection (which has signals). Furthermore, vehicles can only turn right and go north from the Main Street entrance. I believe many people will do a U-turn at Pioneer High School or turn around at Scio Church Road dental office's parking lot (Wennersten Dental) to go south. This is already a very congested traffic area with two very close and busy intersections (Main Street & South Main Street and Main Street and Scio Church Road). This high density development should not be approved until these traffice and safety issues have been adequately resolved.
Oppose such large/dense development