The online Comment window has expired

Agenda Item

C-1 24-0362 An Ordinance to Amend the Zoning Map, Being a Part of Section 5.10.2 of Chapter 55 of Title V of the Code of the City of Ann Arbor, Rezoning of 1.06 Acres from R4C (Multiple-Family Residential District) to PUD (Planned Unit Development), 711 Church PUD Zoning and Supplemental Regulations (CPC Recommendation: Denial - 2 Yeas and 5 Nays)

  • Default_avatar
    Dan Berland 7 months ago

    You have a Planning Department that has recommended against this bait and switch project. Who among the Mayor or City Council is more expert than your Planning Department? Further, when will the City actually follow through on its promises for more affordable and green housing when City leadership continually permits profit-seeking developers to evade or buy out of zoning, set-backs, size, parking, and anything else? Why is that? Construction of more luxury housing, student or not, while permitting the University spreads into the tax base of the City is not working to preserve City finances, or to accomplish some of the above-described goals. Do we really need Chicago-like density everywhere? Are our City leaders going to build affordable, accessory housing units in their own back yards? As for the University, if it wants to continue its unplanned and unchecked growth, it should house its students, not destroy the City. Learn from what they did at Clemson.

  • Default_avatar
    Ellen Ramsburgh 7 months ago

    "Luxury" student high rises in major university towns like Ann Arbor have become a hot sector for the national real estate market.
    Investors have recognized that students are a captive market and that the cost of rent is factored into eligibility for federally guaranteed student loans.
    The costs that these out-of-scale buildings impose on residents and the community does not matter to asset managers as long as profits accrue. They do not care about the impact of a 17 story building on Towsley Children’s House, or that the building is 10 times the current zoning, does not qualify for a PUD, or meet our sustainability goals. They do not care that this profit driven business model is increasing the debt burden on student renters.
    Please read: https://www.wsj.com/real-estate/windowless-rooms-and-town-gown-battles-how-student-housing-got-expensive-5b5413ad?st=2525c7iligei067&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
    And vote No on this Rezoning.

  • Default_avatar
    Eleanor Jones 7 months ago

    I strongly oppose this for several reasons: 1) the subversion (hello?!!!) of the legal process for approval, 2) the size is far too large, should be more aligned with size and style of existing area houses and apartments, the Residential college, etc. fewer than 5 stories, 3) the increase in population in this neighborhood would be insupportable; all our infrastructure is *already* failing with the current existing load on sewer, water, electrical, parking, street traffic; and 4) the destruction of what makes Ann Arbor, and specifically this area, a great place to live: walkability, greenery, mature trees, lack of crowding, and architectural styles. I have lived in Ann Arbor 50 years now, including on the near block of S. Forest, and have been paying high property taxes for 30 years. I do not want to see yet another high rise completely changing the character of our city.

  • Default_avatar
    Bruce Block 7 months ago

    The proposed structure is completely out of place and character at 711 Church Street. I urge that this amendment to the Zoning Map be rejected forthwith. As a graduate of the University of Michigan and a 30-year resident of this area, I deplore the profit-over-livability trend that is destroying our once fine campus area.

  • Default_avatar
    Emily Blunt 7 months ago

    I understand that there is a lot of development happening in Ann Arbor and that it is helping to address issues such as the shortage of housing and the declining tax base. However, I agree with another commentor that the developer need to follow the correct process for re-zoning. I don't think that re-zoning should be taken lightly; it's possible that a mixed zoning designation might work well on this particular block, so that the building of new apartments can be complimented by retail or other commercial space, rather than just a PUD. In addition, I think even if the zoning is changed to allow the PU, it's important that the height of this new building be similar to or lower than those around it. There is a new building going up on Forest that will be 12 stories and there is an existing building on Church and Willard that is also 12 stories. The development at 711 Church fit in better if it is also a similar height to those buildings.

  • Default_avatar
    Tom Stulberg 7 months ago

    There is a proper route to take for those wanting to approve this project. Complete the comprehensive plan revision to determine if the community’s vision has changed, specifically if changed to desire this AREA to support such developments. Approving it now would presuppose the outcome of a process that is now underway. If the comprehensive plan revision determines this AREA is not appropriate for such a development, then it should not be approved later either. Should the results be supportive of extending southward where this type of development would be appropriate, then this project likely should be approved THEN.

    To do otherwise defies the intent of the law and proper process and is a bold statement to the citizens that the they will be disregarded in the comprehensive plan revision process.

    In summary, there is a right way to go about this. Complete the process that is underway. Approve or deny the project after that based on the results of the comprehensive plan revision.

  • Default_avatar
    Katherine Lawrence 7 months ago

    I am concerned that the existing number of high-rise apartments in downtown Ann Arbor has already altered the comfort and atmosphere of the city. High-rises create unwelcoming, shadowy sidewalk areas and decrease the appeal of the city when walking around. I have spent time in parts of Royal Oak, MI, that have corridors of high rises, and the areas are literally dead, compared to the lively, lower-profile downtown area that Royal Oak is known for. Ann Arbor is like Royal Oak in its quirky, unique, welcoming downtown, filled with local businesses. The areas with high rises risk becoming similarly unwelcoming and "dead," and this is particularly a problem around the university's Central Campus.

  • Default_avatar
    Dawna McCowell 7 months ago

    o Whom It May Concern:
    I am the President of the Alpha Gamma Delta-Alpha Beta House Association which is the non-profit organization that owns the Alpha Gamma Delta Fraternity (sorority) house located at 1322 Hill St. This site is far too small to allow this building. The developer is skirting zoning regs using a PUD rather than regular zoning regs. As a neighbor to ADPi (on Forest) and understanding the importance of Greek Life/continuing membership, I also feel this would harm future growth or interest in ADPi- since their home which has been on Forest much longer than this proposed building and the new high-rise across the street - would be in the shadows of both this proposed building. This neighborhood is now "high-rise central." This lovely, long time college neighborhood is being quickly lost by greed and over development. I strongly urge you to vote down this PUD proposal and development.

    Dawna Phillips McCowell
    President, Alpha Gamma Delta-Alpha Beta House Associaton

  • Default_avatar
    Lisa Jevens 7 months ago

    A group of concerned citizens are sending City Council members and the Mayor a petition in their a2gov.org email with 200+ names of people urging you to VOTE NO on 711 Church St at your April 1 meeting. The signers are people who live and work in the area, and support the NO vote by Planning COmmission for the reasons stated. Signers are from multiple neighborhoods, serve on boards of organizations in the area, and/or send their children to the Towsley Children's House adjacent to the Church Street site. We urge you to look carefully at what we all say and to vote against it as well.