Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Well, good evening and welcome to the Tuesday, May 2026 work session of the Ann Arbor City Planning Commission. For detailed information on meeting procedures, review our full meeting agenda which is available in Legisar at aggov.legislar.com select calendar then city planning commission then May 20 or May 12th, 2026. My name is Donnell White. I'll be chairing tonight's meeting. This meeting is being recorded and broadcast publicly as a work session. There will be no formal decisions or votes made this evening. The purpose of our time together is for discussion, learning, and feedback. First up is public comment. Do we have No, we have no non-commission participants. Okay. If that changes, let me know. So, we'll go straight to uh our presentation. Um, are we starting with the presentation from the fire marshall or are we starting with a framing for why we asked them to join us? I'm not sure what the procedure is tonight.

Uh, well, at this point, I would welcome I didn't realize that we wouldn't have any public comments, so I'll invite um the fire marshall and chief Kennedy if he desires to come back on. If you're just listening tonight, Mr. Kennedy, that's fine. Um, I think framing would be great. Would you like to do it, Mr. Chair?

Sure, I'll try. And um if I get something wrong or I've missed something, uh Manager Kelly, please uh add in. Uh so, hi, welcome. Uh at our most recent uh regular meeting, we had an SEU come in and part of uh this SEU uh as we were unpacking it like the placement of the building, um some of the parking uh that they had on their site plan, uh it seemed that those were requirements that were coming from various departments within the city, of which one was waste management and the other was fire. And so then that prompted some questions at the table that I don't believe could be readily answered. So uh I think I asked or someone else asked that we see if at an upcoming work session we could have a conversation with the fire marshall. And let me just say uh before I got into any of this I thought the fire marshall was the fire chief but I'm glad that you both are here because you are not the same person. uh the roles are different and I just want to say that out loud for people who are going to be watching this later because I was talking to someone at the building Michigan communities conference today about the fact that the fire marshall was going to be here and they're like oh the fire chief he's really great like this this will be a lovely conversation. I was like I I assume the fire marshall is great as well but they are actually different people and so um as a part of this conversation one of the things that we are learning is um a lot of this intersects with building code. So a lot of building code inside the city requires certain types of things both state and then the international code if the state adheres to that and a lot of multi-unit and multif family development um is fire suppressed and so the um the

idea that there were additional requirements around the fire um equipment um was I think surprising for some of uh the commissioners. and especially in this property that we're looking at because it has a steep grade. And so because of that grade, there was um additional driveway that was going to be in place. And because of that, that changed the nature of um the development. And I'm going to pause just for a second cuz I see we have an online participant that has joined Manager Kelly. And I do want to give that participant the opportunity to give public comment if they'd like. and then I can pick up where I want unless you advise me not to do that. I'm waiting for either.

Sam Hman, are you interested in making a public comment or are you just observing this evening? Raise your hand if you'd like to make a comment. Great. Thank you. No hand raised, Mr. Chair.

Okay, great. Thanks. I'll keep going. And Sam, we're glad you're here. I just wanted to make sure that you knew you had an opportunity to speak at the beginning cuz we did that already. All right. Um, so yeah, so we we wanted to come and understand um how uh you as the fire marshall intersect with some of the multifamily uh developments uh that we're seeing the city, the requirements uh that you have. Um and your memo that you uh put into our packet was helpful. So I assume and you should assume that the commission has looked at that memo and uh have an un a generalized understanding of what you included there. So I think that's everything. I'll just check at the table just to see Mr. Leonard.

Um I'm going to go out on a limb here and uh so I I wasn't at the meeting on Oxford but I watched it on mustsee TV. Um, and I just I want to add just a little bit of maybe philosophical context and uh, Commissioner White, the commission, please validate or disavow me of this. Uh, for the benefit of uh, Fire Marshall Redmond and Fire Chief Kennedy, I think an in addition to what you had outlayed there, I what I hear from the planning commission over the last couple years is looking for ways to reduce obstacles particularly for housing development. And so I I want to put maybe a little bit finer point on it as as you're talking about some of the standards. And I know um just to be clear, planning staff works with with Marshall Redman a lot. We we're very familiar with trying to balance competing um outcomes and desires here. But I want to just make it clear for representatives from the fire department that I think a subtext of all the specifics here is that we're the this commission is interested in removing barriers and whenever we're having to add more paving um more impervious surface um adding to the cost of development. I know that that's not an excuse from complying with fire, but I think that that is also to be fair something that this commission is interested in learning. what are our opportunities or levers that we could make housing development more attainable and affordable? So, I just wanted to add a little bit broader context. Again, Commissioners, disavow me if I'm off base on that. No, I don't I don't I don't think there's um Yeah, I I concur with what you are offering. Does anyone else want to weigh in before we open up our conversation with the fire marshall? Yes. Uh, Commissioner Norton, I

I think I was the one who asked the most pointed question during the session and I would like to begin by saying it's very helpful to see the memo that you provided in the in the background. I understand that and I'm not um I want to say this. I don't want to suggest that we do anything that diminishes reasonable safe sound fire protection. I'm not looking at for that just to jump to the chase. The my frustration was um somebody I don't know I guess that was the fire marshall um instructed the developer to allow for a firet truck to turn around on site which forced them to push the development in exactly the worst possible place in terms of impacts to natural features and impacts to the neighboring property owners. And I just couldn't understand. I totally get fire safety reasons. It's all going to be fire suppressed. So, I understand being close to a fire hydrant. I understand being able to get the truck in. I just I was having a hard time seeing why um why it was necessary to be able to turn a a truck around on site. And when I asked them, "Why are you pushing it there?" They said, "Because we couldn't figure out any other way to put it and still satisfy." It wasn't just the fire department to to acknowledge. It was also the solid waste turn on time. So, I it's a difficult it's a challenging site to work with cuz it's peaked in the middle and I I get the topography, but yikes, it just was such a such a huge impact on all the neighboring property owners. That was that just gave me pause. So, I was I was asking that question during the meeting. That's that's where I'm coming from. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Norton. Commissioner Mills,

and my apologies to keep bouncing us back and forth between the Oxford project and just general philosophical things, but I think this comes up historically an awful lot too because one of the things the planning commission has been trying to do is reduce imperousness. And so very often like that is a tension um that we see is like how much paving is there or like this is where we ask and I I've been planning commission for a while like if that access point is needed can it be with like some sort and but only for the rare occasion can it would be with impervious pa or with um pvious pavement or something like that. So, I think that that's a also it's not just the like build more housing, but I think also like how much of that site is going to be put to pavement is something that we regularly grapple with and that's not a new thing. So,

all right, so that we don't overwhelm everybody, I'll pause there. Uh check in with uh the fire marshall. You can introduce yourself. um you can open with any of the things that have come out to the table or if you want to just um allow us to ask questions and you respond to it, whatever your preference is. Um we're happy to have you here and we appreciate your time.

Well, and I appreciate you for having me here. Um I thank you to all the commissioners on on the planning commission to have me here tonight. I think it's a great opportunity anytime I get to share life safety code with anyone because I think anyone that understands it a little bit better makes Ann Arbor a little bit safer place. So, um there I will try to address some of the things that already came up. Um I will start off by saying 805 Oxford is very unique. It's one of the more unique developments just because of the the size of it. Um and I will say say this that um I do not design I do not tell the architecture developers how to design. All I do is tell them what the codes are. So um that was not if if there was a statement made I I I would like to clarify that that I do not at any point tell the architects or developers how to design what they're paid to do and they do the job. I just tell them if it's compliant or not and tell them if it's not compliant what the code is with clarification for the code. Um, one of the things that's unique about Oxford and I could I could talk a few different things and try to answer some questions for you is right now my understanding was it used to be a uh a fraternity or sorority then it went back to a private ownership which was a one and two family dwelling um and then it was sold again to go back to that. So when you get into a fraternity or sorority, it becomes a commercial property and it's a considered a multif family unit. So the full Michigan building code applies and all the fire codes apply to it. What was unique is they put and this was not by me asking to do it, but they put the actual structure in the back corner of the parcel. Had that building been more and and this is where I if if they consulted me to help design these things, I could definitely do we could do a lot

more and and and I could definitely could see helping them out. And I don't mind having the conversations during presubmitts and and stuff like that to try to help them out. But because that building was set so far back from the road, it made a lot of the codes for fire access have to come onto the parcel itself. Had that structure been closer to the roadside, it would really cut down on the the surface that they have there, whether it's concrete or asphalt. Um, they were not directed by me to put the structure in the back parcel or the corner of the parcel. So, um, but because they did that, it made it unique in the sense of what it had to comply with. Um, I'm sure you're all familiar with and but I won't take it for granted the difference between Michigan residential code and Michigan building code. And there's so many things in fire code that um deal with access and water supply that it's it's hard because each development becomes so unique and for compliance in the height of the building, the square footage of the building, the access to the building. Um, one of the questions was or one of the things I I heard that was brought up was that we needed a turnaround. That's common for the um, solid waste and for us there is a fire code that says we can't travel over 150 ft um, without having a turnaround. So, the fact of that they put the building so far back and then there's there's other access codes of having a having the building within access of 150 ft where the truck stops all the way to all the exterior portions of the building and and please and you can stop me at any time too because I this is stuff I deal with. It's just in my head. It's there. Um but there's so many codes that go together. Um, but the the one thing that with the turnarounds, I will say there's a code that says we can't

back up and it's very dangerous when firet trucks back up. Um, they're big trucks. There has been multiple incidents where firefighters or people have been hurt or even killed because they've been hit by the truck or backed over. Now, our department being Ann Arbor, we're a great fire department. U, we have a lot of SOPs in place that we would have things to avoid that. We have people outside of the truck. They back up with the truck. They have visual eyes besides the driver. They have communication with the driver. But I still can't get around the code that says 150 ft. So as we traveled into the 805 Oxford when we got 150 ft in, they had to provide a turnaround for us. And and much of that is the same stuff. I can't speak for solid waste. I don't know where all their compliance comes from. I'm not well verssed in it, but it's the same concept. You got a big truck, it needs to back up, and you want to limit how far it has to back up. Um, so that's one of the things that plays into the surface of having the truck have to back up and and having a proper turnaround. Um, a simple one and two family dwelling there's usually never an issue with. Um, a lot of the codes may not even apply to it. It's more so when you get a a bigger development with multiple maybe it's town houses that still could be under MRC or commercial multif family dwellings. And a lot of them it just depends where they built. Um, and I've worked with developers to work within the code. Um, and what that's why I put that one sheet out. I I wanted you all to kind of understand it and to get inside my head as complex as it can be at times was that when I'm looking at it, it's it's just not a hard stop. Like this is the code. If there's exceptions written to the code, they exist. And then beyond that, we look at the intent of the code of why it was written, how it applies to where it's at. And then there's also commentary books. And the commentary

explains the intent of the code writer when they wrote it. So there is times, and I I don't have all the examples, but over the years there has been times where I've worked with some of the developers to where the intent of the code was compliant and it didn't have to meet the full full spectrum of what it was. Um, if that makes sense to you. It does. Um, and and an SOP is a standard operating procedure. Uh, for anyone who heard that acronym or didn't know that

No, I've been learning things and so anytime I I hear something that I've learned, I try to share what I've learned. Uh, we'll hear uh now from Commissioner Bassuni and then uh Chief Kennedy and then Manager Leonard in that order.

Yeah. Um, hi everyone and Fire Marshall Redmond. Thank you so much. This is very helpful. I'm learning a lot. Um, just in the context of this conversation, I wanted to I had two specific clarifying questions. You mentioned the um fire truck or the fire engine can't travel more than 150 ft without a turnaround. Um, so hopefully I heard that correctly. And the questions were one is which code is that referring to given that you just introduced a couple more like the Michigan Residential Code and others. So that 150 ft designation, which code is that under? Okay.

Um and then my other question is also hopefully quite straightforward, which is um that 150 ft is that linear 150 ft or does like a curb linear I was just curious about how that is measured.

Absolutely. And that's a great question. So the the codes that I I fall under are 2021 IFC, which is International Fire Code. Um it is a code that's legally adopted in the city by city council. Um it follows um building code. So our building official follows the state. Um when the state changes code, the building official changes code. So recently um I believe it was back in May, April or May, we went to 2021 Michigan building code. At the same time when building code changes, in order for building code to stay the same, fire code has to stay the same. So 2021 Michigan Building Code and 2021 International Fire Code were adopted this year. Um, and with that, so that's that's the code it comes out of. There's multiple chapters, multiple different things for fire access, water supply, fire suppression, sprinkler system, alarm systems. There's a everything in in one big book. Um, and then to answer your question as far as the travel distance, it's actually the the travel distance itself. So if it's a curved surface, it follows the curve around. So it's the actual travel distance of the fire apparatus.

Awesome. Thank you. Can I throw in a quick sub question? Um you you still have the floor. Amazing. So um I was doing the Ann Arbor Community Academy this year. So thank you uh Fire Chief Kennedy. It was really informative the tour. And I learned on the tour that um I think Ann Arbor uh has some new fire engines potentially um in the future that we'd like to get to make sure our firefighters can actually do some really great work. So that 150 foot turnaround distance, does that change depending on how big a fire engine is? So I yeah, I I'm aware there are different sizes, but

um no, that that doesn't change that. That's still a travel distance of a fire apparatus backing up. that would hold true to even one of our ambulances being a fire department apparatus that that shouldn't back up over 150 ft. Um, what you're referring to though, I would say does have a uh, if you're referring to a tiller truck, which is an awesome thing. It has a uh a better turning radius, which can also help in surface area because when you get into a turning radius, a a long 40, 50 foot long truck has a greater turning radius than something that we look stuff some of the stuff that Chief Kennedy is looking at for us. um which would be very beneficial even for some of the the concerns that the planning commission has. So um

so hopefully that's great. You're welcome. Thank you. Um Chief Kennedy,

hi there. Good evening. Um, I just kind of wanted to maybe zoom out for a second and not wanting to get too elementary with stuff, but also just kind of outline the process and um, kind of where where we're at and and obviously there's a I think Oxford started this conversation. Um, but certainly understand there's a lot of other kind of fundamental questions with development in the city of Ann Arbor that hopefully we're able to kind of deal with. Um, so from a a structure perspective, um, the position I hold as fire chief, I report to the city administrator, Mr. Deon. Um, we have some assistant chiefs underneath us and then, uh, fire marshall Redmond is in the the the it's a fire union position and so he's our our chief code official for for the city. The fire code references two positions. It's the fire marshall and the fire chief. um we are daily interacting on on a whole host of issues. Um we're very lucky to to have his level of of professionalism. Um and so that that's kind of the the city structure. I will receive a lot of questions direct from um either council members or developers about a interpretation that uh the fire marshall did and then kind of I think looking for some sort of appeal or how how things can can be worked for with um with us adopting that international fire code and and this is a very standard thing. This is not unique to the city of Ann Arbor. it it's truly the international fire code that is adopted across the US and and international. So um this if you were to go to other communities that this is a very standard standard approach. So I kind of want to set that landscape that we aren't doing something that's either more or less restrictive than I guess a national best practice.

What you will find is that other communities can have different versions. So, we jumped from 2015 to 2021 last year. And the reason we did that is because the Michigan building code, excuse yes, excuse me, the Michigan building code went to the 21. And so the fire code and the building code are very much handinand glove. So had we not gone to that more current um iteration of the building code, there would have been some complexity on both the fire and building side for that crosswalk between the two. There's actually a newer code that's out 2025 is out and so we are behind and we could potentially go to that on a fire code perspective, but again it it then creates that challenge. Um, and Brett could probably speak to this better, but Michigan is very challenging that the state does not allow local municipalities to do something beyond the Michigan building code. That is a very weird and unique thing to Michigan outside my lane, but just so so as a municipality, we can we can not in theory, but we can adopt whatever building code we excuse me, whatever fire code we want. So to clarify, as a local municipality, we can adopt whatever fire code we want. It would be very challenging if we were to move to the current iteration of the international fire code because it doesn't have that quite it's not quite as in sync at that point. If if we were at the 25 building code and then excuse me 24 and then um building was still at 21. So trying trying to have those in alignment is is helpful. Um I know I've said a lot. Any any questions before I Sir Oh, okay. Um

no, we'll we'll come back. We we can circle back to you. Um if that's okay.

Um so the other part too, and this is where things get confused a lot, is that the role of the fire marshall is to review submitted plans and determine compliance with the adopted fire code. His his view is very binary. it's compliant or it's not. There's there's not a well if if you do this or you do that because quite frankly then at that point we're doing the the role of a professional architect and um Fire Marshall Redmond has all all of the certifications that you can possibly have in the state of Michigan under fire inspection. He has all of those. So we we could have no greater professional do this review work for us, but he serves as a gatekeeper for the city of is this compliant with the code and that's a yes or no answer. It's not a how can I tell the developer how to change things and a huge level of frustration for us is as you all know there's a lot of a lot of the same names come across the desk of developers and builders in this community and we routinely deal with people submitting things that quite frankly they know better and it it it creates a lot of frustration for myself it creates a lot of frustration for fire marshal Redmond because I think they're under the pressure from the builder developer, whoever's owns that property to do something and then have the city be the bad guy. And the issue is it's like, oh, the fire marshall said that we can't do that. That is disingenuous is a polite term because they designed something that they knew wasn't compliant and we become the bad people. And that's a role that if we have to take that, it it it is what it is. But then the owner, property owner, who whoever thinks, well, the architect,

they they designed this great this great thing and the architect knew full well that what they submitted was never going to pass. And that becomes a very significant source of frustration for me because these are trained, paid professionals that quite frankly know better and then we become the bad guys with that. So, so with Fire Marshall Redmond then he he lacks the ability and we lack the ability to just kind of like well we're not going to apply this code and a lot of the times we'll get well this is a very and of course I'm sure as all you know all parcels are unique and all property is unique. Well, everybody always wants an exception because they have the most unique thing that's ever happened. And number one, we don't have a legal ability to just like, well, we're not going to apply that part of the code, that that freedom does not exist to us. And then number two, if we the second we did that, then all the developers and builders all talk to each other. So then it instantly becomes a me too issue. Well, you did that for that one or in 1989 and we hear that all the time. Well, in the 80s we built this thing and you all allowed it. Well, that was four additions of the fire code ago. Thing we we've adopted new codes. Things have changed. So, the fact that you were allowed to do something in the 80s, be grateful you got away with it in the 80s. It's 2026. We're 40 years later. It's a very recent argument we just had to have with somebody. So the and and I would say fire marshal Redmond does an extraordinary job and sometimes exceeds what I would expect him to do to try to do the work of an architect for them because the role of an architect is to to submit a plan that meets compliance and that's as as he had indicated with his Oxford property had they moved it up to the road our aerial access goes away the impervious access issue goes away um

to cover the impervious is uh so the other part just real quick um there have been several prosecutors across the country that have attempted personal criminal prosecutions against fire inspectors and fire marshals for not doing their job. And so that is a that's a real issue and that's also part of and now a lot of the time come depending on the state governmental immunity and and kind of how far they were but um the the fact that it's now created this national atmosphere that us as public safety officials are at risk of being named. I mean any prosecutor can decide that they want to file charges against you. I mean that that's the simple reality and there have been several times where different prosecutor's office across the country have gone after and a lot of times it deals with inspections but it it it's kind of put a role it it it's it's made all of us have to reflect to make sure that number one we're we're doing our jobs within the legal guidelines that that we have to avoid quite frankly personal criminal liability for this. And so that's also a national atmosphere that we're that we're dealing with. To jump to the impervious surface, that is an incredible challenge in Michigan because of snow. And that's used a lot of other places across the country. Um we dealt with it with that project off of Plat Road and they ended up deciding to pave half of it anyway because of a variety of issues out there. But um when we do deal with that, that's our number one issue is that how is that going to be maintained? Um o over because a lot of times and you go to other more warmer climates, they'll actually have grass or something that's actually it's uh it's it's that same honeycomb reinforcement. Then they put grass on top. In our climate in Michigan, that's incredibly challenging because how are they paving

that? Excuse me. how are they plowing that in the winter and not destroying that grass area. So, we we've looked at that. There are a lot of compliant things that are out there. Um, but the snow in our climate creates a lot of challenge for that being accessible 365. So, um, anyway, appreciate the opportunity. Same as Mr. Redmond. Just wanted to try to provide some he he's definitely the technical expert. I can kind of talk bigger picture on the policy side. So,

sure. And thank you uh for that. And uh for those of you who are listening or may watch this later when Chief Kennedy referred to that project on Plat Road, I think it was the Vid Vidian project on Plat Road uh where they do have some impervious surface in the honeycomb uh style. Um so that uh was what he was referring to there, Mr. Leonard. And then uh Commissioner Nord, and then I'd like to jump in.

Thank you. Um, so I just want um, Commissioner Bas Bassuni sort of um, preempted me, but I just want to clarify another acronym that the fire marshall mentioned was MRC, which is the Michigan Residential Code. And I just I just want to make sure that we're coming from a shared understanding. I think this is one of the factors that came up with the with the recent review of the sorority is that it's a very residentially context area, but it is not a single family home. It is not a two-family home and it is not a townhouse development. Therefore, it is subject to the Michigan Building Code, not the Michigan Residential Code, which is the MRC. Um my question to Marshall Redmond is one of the recent um recommendations out of the comprehensive plan that was adopted, maybe you've heard of it, is that we would like to expand the opportunities for housing in a lot of our former single family area neighborhoods. Along the lines of what I just described, I just want to make sure I'm understanding. If somebody is to build a trip, a stacked triplex, that would be under the Michigan building code and would definitely be subject to the restriction that a firetruck cannot back up more than 150 ft. Am I if it is uh three town homes? I just want to be clear. Does the Michigan residential code also have that requirement or that would no longer apply? So in the case otherw in other words would three town homes on a site under the Michigan residential code not have that backup requirement that a three stacked flat would?

Um so the that code's going to apply the only time the 150 foot travel distance for backing up fire apparatus does not apply um is when we're technically not entering the parcel. Okay. So building code or resial code. Well, because and that that was the hardest part for me to try to prepare something for all the commissioners here was as much as I wanted to prepare something, there's so many different codes and so many different scenarios and so many different developments of how it could play out,

um that one code is needed after another code's applied. Um the the one thing that I think Brett what you're referring to um there is a 150 ft hose lay code that doesn't apply to one to two one and two family dwellings on one site. There's an exception for that and that's kind of why I I kind of went the way I did when I tried to prepare something for everyone to let them know there's exceptions written to code that are in the code that still make it compliant. Um the 150 foot, it's called 150 foot deadend fire lane. That's when we can't back up past that. That pretty much applies to any scenario, any situation where when we need to make access to that building for any other code that we don't back up over 150 ft.

Okay. Does that make sense? Yep. Thank you. I just want um I appreciate that clarification for my benefit. Sure. No problem. Thank you, Mr. Leonard. Commissioner Norton and then we'll go to Commissioner Hammer Schmidt and I'll I'll go after Commissioner Hammer Schmidt.

Yeah, I want to reiterate again um Chief Kennedy and Marshall Redmond how how helpful this is and I know um we're c we're always caught in this situation where we have these formal processes and the way we interact with petitioners and now with you is pretty clunky. Um and it would have been nice to sit at a table and work around this and I know that you you do that when you meet with petitioners. I totally I would never ask the fire marshal to come up with some way to get somebody out of a fire following the code or do an exception. I'm I'm a little frustrated when I asked the project proponent here, why are you putting it far back in the corner like you are? Well, because we have to make room because the fire department told us we had to have a turnaround. Never said because we're 150 ft away from the road. Okay, there's a standard there. Um, and maybe you did this with them. I don't know or do this regularly, but um I wish they had I wish they had figured out how to move it closer in than 150 ft so that that thing would have been tripped. I mean, there's there's like these points of disconnect um that on a project like this might have solved the problem. And I I don't know I don't know that it's possible on this project because we're it's already so far down the road. But um I totally get what you don't want to be the project's architect and and landscape planner, but and I wouldn't want you to say, "Well, I'm going to give you a break this time cuz I like you or anything." Never never do that. But you know, you know, if you moved your building 5t closer this way, I then you wouldn't be hitting this requirement. And and I'm just kind of throwing that out there. That's kind of what I'm the process that I'm going through.

Sure. And that that's understandable. And I I there's how would I say it? It's I try to be helpful and I will give them ideas, but it's never and and more specifically 805 Oxford, I never told them to put it back. That's how that project was designed from the very get-go before I even put eyes on it. Yeah. So when I put eyes on it, I said, "You got some code compliance issues here you need to address." Yeah. So, and they have they have they obviously had other codes that could have been corrected that created probably more financial

um a greater financial burden upon the project by keeping it back that far was because that building also had a suppression system that had a fire department connection that they were too far away from the fire hydrant. So that was a whole another issue and the way they had to correct that was putting a freestanding one which without trying to explain all that is a lot more costly than having a fire department connection on a building. Yeah. So that okay I get that. Yeah. Yeah.

So thank thank you so much and and and Chief Kennedy I also very much appreciate your observations about the dynamics and the way this all works and um totally understand. I'm sorry that you're being used as the the whipping post if people aren't happy with what what they're requiring. I just I very much hope that we can figure out whenever possible not to break the code or not to give exceptions but to design things in ways to minimize conflicts. Yeah. Thank Thank you.

That could be something that's worked on to be honest with you. I I could try to be a little bit I try not to because the the moment I step out to say why don't you do this I actually become part of the design. But it's not that that doesn't happen either. I mean, because there's a lot of times after a presubmitt or even after the site plan's been reviewed once or twice that the developer is asking for a one-on-one teams meeting where we sit down and and we'll talk about it and there is things that come up and I'm in in all honesty I will say there you have some options that you can look at but I don't want that to be misconstrued with me telling them how to design or doing the design work for them if that makes sense.

It does. Thank you. Uh, Commissioner Heammer Schmidt,

thank you. Um, I also want to thank you both for being here. The complexities of these codes, like my brain is spinning. I don't know how you keep these straight. Um, and it's a little honestly frustrating to hear that with the Oxford project, they had that building where they had it before you even gave your feedback because I don't think that's the impression that we got in our meeting. Um it's just it's interesting that you that fire solid waste and DTE always seem like the scapegoats for reasons why developers aren't being a little more creative maybe. Um I just wanted to clarify something on the Vidian pvious pavement because I was part of that. Um the I think that the the owners would have wanted to do the whole thing with the eco roster that was used. It actually it's survived two winters. It's been plowed. It's working really well. The reason that that it's a concrete ring is because Avalon was not interested in um attempting the eco restster. So to make it cohesive um and you know not like a very very um abrupt distinction between the two owners um that the decision was made for that whole vidian circle to be concrete. Um, but I'll just I'll just comment that the eco raster when properly filled because there is some still out there that is not filled with the gravel has been holding up um a lot better than the concrete. There's a lot of the cracks and concrete as everyone knows concrete and asphalt crack. So, I'm hoping that um Ecarest is a fairly new product that's being used in the US, but I'm hoping that more things like this come out that are acceptable um from engineering, from fire standpoints that can give us more options for pvious pavement rather than just the concrete asphalt.

And and I will say I was honestly skeptical at first of that. Um I I went into that very skeptical because of the codes and um the imposed weight load and then the all weather surface. That's what Chief Kennedy was referring to is our very brutal winters and heavy downpours. I would say that that I I honestly believe it is has proven itself. Um I I do think part of the other problem was my understanding though with that circle too was the sewage and and the uh the the manholes that go in there

that trying to bring that up around that. They had problems with some of our civil engineers on that design too. So, um, but that that type of surface I I don't have an issue with now watching that and seeing how it's held up. Um, one of the things I I will be honest with all of you is I I don't like when they put the grass in there because the dirt that's in there and the grass and let alone if they do plow it, the aesthetics of it looks terrible. Um, I mean, because the honeycomb supports the weight, but it's it's really just also the aesthetics of it, too. And I I can't imagine anyone wants something the way that would look after tearing it all up through a winter and the upkeep. But the Vidian project did a very good job with what they did with that with the the

That makes me so happy to hear you say that, Mike, because I know No, that's fine. I I I will stand corrected. Don't don't don't mistake I I don't draw a hard line. I mean when when something proves itself but that was kind of I wanted to look at as our test for that to come into the city and it has proven itself. It really has. Well, thank you both. Thank you. Uh Commissioner Bashuni, you can go ahead of me.

Oh yeah, if you're sure. Um so I did. So two questions. Um, for fire marshall Redmond, I think you mentioned a little bit ago a hose lay code and I wanted to confirm what that is. Is that quick Google uh was like how long it takes between let's say the fire engine or the fire hydrant to the destination and so that code I think you were saying is 150 ft as well. Is that correct?

Yeah. So I'll explain that real. I'll try to make it break it down for you. So that's why in the packet I did include the Oxford review. So, it showed the codes that I looked at for that specific project and that's one of them that's in there. That code, the actual intent of that code is that wherever the structure is on the property that when we talk of fire lane of where our fire truck will actually stop from that point of where the truck stops, if we go clockwise or counterclockwise around a building, we should be able to reach all the exterior portions of the first floor of that building within 150 ft. Gotcha. And that's okay. This is really interesting. Okay. Gotcha. So, it has to be the first floor. Um, and then not to go back to my previous question, but we might as well. So, that's the travel distance essentially. The hose, right? It's

the travel distance is the hose. Yep. And the the starting point is the fire truck where our actual firefighters would grab a hose from the truck and then that from that point when they take a hose and what it's designed to do is anywhere there's an access point um windows and doors and it goes around once again the the ground or first floor of the building um of all the exterior portions of it. Awesome. Thank you. Yeah, I didn't realize the counterclockwise. It makes sense when you say

yeah it goes both ways because it wouldn't be fair to go one travel distance. So when you stop, you can go actually both ways around for the measurement. Um, and what's nice about fire code, and that's why I I did bring up commentary books because the commentary books give you the insight and the intent of the code, and they actually give a lot of illustration and diagrams. And, you know, if if you any of the commissioners ever wanted, you know, a code reference or something, there's always more information I can get to you.

Fabulous. That's that's a very dangerous offer because I'll probably talk to you about it, but that's perfect. Thank you. And then my other question was um I think for both of you. So I think going back to my notes from the um fire department tour from community academy um fire chief Kennedy you'd mentioned and correct me if I wrote this down wrong but that the University of Michigan is its own governmental entity. So I was quite struck that my understanding is while they have their own like internal police force and other departments they don't have their own internal water or fire department. So they rely on the city of Ann Arbor. So I was curious trying to understand this ecosystem of codes um international fire code Michigan etc for the university out of curiosity where does it fall like does it have to adhere to all of the codes that you've listed like the international fire code the Michigan residential code Michigan building I'm just curious like if they're building a dorm or something what does that look like in contrast to like a sorority in this specific case

so anything that is on a U of M parcel We have no ability for review and we have no ability for enforcement. So

we we have a the city has a very good relationship with the university. So what what I'm this this is not dayto-day stuff and the same challenge we have Michigan State and East Lansing have and the city of Detroit and Wayne State have. So when you have these universities that have any sort of board of regents, that's when this kicks in. So I think there's four or five schools in the state of Michigan that are have statewide elections with either regents or whatever the individual institution calls them. So the role that the Ann Arbor Fire Department plays is for operational response to fire or other life safety emergencies on campus. Quite frankly, they could build an oil derek on the middle of the campus and we have no ability and I'm being facicious but like zoning any of that we we have no control over that. So, um they have and in fact the university has more fire inspectors than we do with the city. So, they have they have their own fire marshal. So, there's a a counterpart to Fire Marshall Redmond. They have their own adopted code. They have they do their own inspections. Um, we I if I got a report, and again, I'm being extraordinary here to kind of just make a point. If we got a report that they were chaining the door shut of a residence hall, there's there's a public act 207 that would give us the legal authority to go on campus and address an immediate life safety concern. That's the extent of our kind of legal enforcement on campus. We couldn't go in and inspect to say like what we would for like a normal resident or a normal business would be uh compliant extinguishers, exit pass, the the normal things that that our inspectors do

throughout the city. We lack the legal enforcement to do that on campus. again if if we became aware of something that was extraordinary and to the use credit they would address that anyway that I I I really can't imagine a a time where we would need to do to do that but um the stuff like the the huge residence hall that the Wolverine Village that was not a Fire Marshall Redmond review they do that internally there there is a bit of a crosswalk and and uh uh Brett or Hank can probably talk about this on the civil engineering side. Obviously, at some point, the pipes need to connect with the city. So, there's there there is a handoff there, but to answer your question specifically, they do whatever they want and we have no reviewer input on that.

That's really helpful. Thank you. I I didn't know that. Um, so that makes sense. So if I'm understanding correctly, so the university operational response or sorry for the university any fire department operational response they rely on Ann Arbor fire department and then anything else like you were saying review enforcement they have internal fire code inspectors, fire marshals um that are kind of like a parallel system to the one we have for Ann Arbor City. Excellent. This is great. I'm learning so much. Thank you.

You summarized that perfectly. So Mr. Leonard, did you want to make a comment? Um, Chief Kennedy addressed it, but I just wanted to be clear. This University of Michigan, as said, we don't have authority over them, but they do follow codes. They adopt a fire code. Um, as noted, they have their own inspectors. So, I didn't want to give the impression that they are, you know, chaining doors to residential structures. Never meant to indicate that. I extraordinary. Thank you for the clarification.

So, while we don't do that, they do follow codes. They actually have they inspect their own projects, but my understanding is it's through kind of like a really intentional division of labor. So they literally have separate project managers and designers managing the project from those fire marshals from building inspectors. So I just wanted to make it clear they're actually following the the same codes. I think they've they probably on the 2021 fire code as well.

Thank you, Mr. Leonard. Commissioner Weatherbe. Yeah, just to um and I know nobody implied anything otherwise, but having been on the receiving end of several of those inspections in the university library or in other places where I've worked, they are just like the city very, very, very serious about what they do and don't do. And as lovely as all fire people are, nobody jokes about fire who works in fire and and they do take all those very seriously just like the city does because I think everybody who works there has seen things they'd rather not see. So um yeah, I you know they inspect all their fire extinguishers and in the at the university and all those things. So we are collectively in good hands throughout the city. Thank you, Commissioner Weatherbe. Okay, I think I can ask my questions. Uh, one, let me um start where we just end it, which is inspection. So, um, does the inspection of commercial or non-residential properties because I know um, the fire only inspects that at build. It's not um just an ongoing inspection like I've had my house for 20 years and a fire marshall hasn't come in and inspected anything in my house. So I think that's correct. Okay. Um but uh for commercial uh is

actually I want to clarify we we don't do resident the fire marshall has no review of like a a single family or duplex never hits fire marshal Redmond's desk. Oh. So in addition to it not coming to the planning table, it also doesn't go to the fire uh table. Okay, that's uh helpful to know. It stays on at the on the building department. So if it doesn't generate a site plan or special exception like that, it doesn't come to me and that that's a good distinction because um everybody understands site plan review versus non-sight plan review. Thank you for that clarification.

Absolutely. Um so then in uh the other spaces, is it the case that most businesses uh have third-party inspections and then they report those inspections to the fire department and then the fire department or the fire marshall reviews those. Is that accurate?

Um not not necessarily. So I'll give it a little bit more clarification on it. So, in the municipal code of ordinance where we adopt the the IFC fire code, it also spells out the type of occupancies that we inspect and when we inspect them. Um, most of them are on a yearly basis. Other ones are every two years. Um, most of your commercial properties, whether it's an assembly, you know, your restaurants, your bars, um, we do inspect churches, um, retail stores, just anything that's commercial. Um we I have inspectors that go out um we schedule them. We try to get in there every year to inspect them. Um the smaller businesses where they don't have a inventory uh an insurance company somewhere where it's just office and desks um we do them every two years. And then a lot of Ann Arbor and especially as you go through the downtown area um and its older buildings, but it's and even with new construction now with a lot of our highrises, you'll see you'll have ground floor retail and then you'll have so many floors of residential above it. They will be put in the system to be inspected. The the main reason they're put in the our system to inspect it is because of the commercial space that's part of it. And because of the commercial space that's involved in it, we will do all what's called all the common area, which is all the hallways, stairwells, and everything except the actual residential dwelling units because that would fall back on the housing department. Um, and just as I say that, I will make a note that in 2017, we started to inspect the sororities and frats after we had a couple deaths. So council approved us that besides housing, we do inspect the sororities and fraternities, which is one of the more I don't want to say odd residential circumstances we inspect because we usually don't inspect residential.

Um, now I'm trying to think what your other question was because you had another another point in there I wanted to kind of make sure I I clarified for you. Um it was uh third party inspectors like for uh smoke um detectors, fire extinguishers, hoods and kitchens, etc.

Yeah. So in in the international fire code, it sets the standard of how things are designed, how they're installed, and what you need for it. And then it sets the standard of maintenance and testing. So whether you have a fire alarm, a fire suppression system, which could be a sprinkler system, your fire extinguishers, emergency lighting, exit lighting, um your restaurants that have hood systems or hood ventilation systems, all that's spelled out in the international fire code of how often it should be maintained, tested or serviced. My inspectors will go out and look at that. Um they make sure that the businesses are being compliant to keep up on it. But that part of it, the person doing the maintenance and testing is a third-party company. They're a private fire protection company that does the work.

Okay. Thank you. Um so then my um questions, and you may have already answered them, so forgive me if um you feel like you've answered it already. Um but my first question was to to ask you to help me understand whether the limiting factor for fire access requirements is the pumping capacity itself or it's just the physical size of the apparatus and and then that will take me to my second question.

Um so the for the surface that's needed is how close we need to be to the building. So when you think of fire access, you think of actually the the actual fire truck making access to the building. So um you heard me explain the 150 foot hoseway.

That's that's one of the big ones that puts us within 150 ft of the structure that makes sure we can get clockwise and counterclockwise around it. Um, I believe you heard Chief Kennedy mention um aerial access and that's for buildings over 30 feet tall that for one side of the building we need to have access for a ladder truck or tower truck to be able to access the roof. Um, that's for ventilation purposes and also for rescue operations. Um, and I I love to explain code so I will say that where that 30 foot when when fire code creates these numbers there's a reason behind it. The height of a 30 foot is the tallest ladder we carry on our apparatus cannot reach any higher than 30 feet. So when you get a building that we our ground ladders that you take off and set on the ground and you extend up and you climb up when we can't reach past 30 ft, that's when it requires to have a ladder truck or a tower truck.

Okay. And then u and this might be more for the chief than for you, Marshall uh Redmond. Uh, has the the city or the fire department evaluated use the use of smaller or more maneuverable fire apparatus as we move towards a more dense urban infield. So, we're going to probably see more cases of urban infield as we implement the comprehensive land use, which means we're building inside an already built uh environment. And so would it be possible or have has it been considered to use smaller than 40 or 50 foot fire apparatuses so that you can more nimly um reach those infield developments? Is is that something that has been considered is under review or has been um considered and rejected?

Yeah, so uh get that question a lot and we have been working towards that. Um, so a lot of the times we're compared to European nations, which we could spend several hours talking about building differences and a lot of reasons why in in Europe they have smaller designed fire apparatus than the US. Um, this is not a Ann Arbor issue. Um, so to just kind of put things in comparison, um, we're we're addressing this two ways. um are newer spec. So in an engine or pumper, those terms are are used interchangeably. That's what most people would think about of a of a fire engine. Um for us, it has three people on it. It's got water, it's got a pump, and it's got hose. And so that that's what goes and that's our primary fire apparatus. Um, in uh my tenure, we've moved towards a spec that is on par with both San Francisco and Boston. And in fact, an engine that we're going to be taking uh delivery of this summer has is is basically it's a Boston spec pumper. So, for people that are familiar, Boston's about as tight as it gets. So we are as um we're doing as much as we can within the United States for cities that have exactly as you just mentioned tight turn radius those other sorts of things. Um so the smaller the the radius between the excuse me the the shorter the distance between the front and rear axle is what achieves that tighter turn radius. So for our engine companies um we're on par. So, we've literally just used the Boston spec. Um, also have been evaluating what San Francisco does. And so, our they they they have about as

compact rigs as you can get with those two cities. And obviously, San Francisco is similar in terms of density. Um, along with similar ideals of of trying to have increased density. U, the other thing that we have on order is, as Fire Marshall Redmond had talked about, is what's called the tiller truck. Um, Ann Arbor actually had one back in the 1930s and they moved away from them and that's where you have a driver in the rear. Um, so also San Francisco, that is the ladder, that's the only type of ladder truck they have there. Um, Washington DC, a lot of urban departments with with tight density have that and that uh affords a dramatic reduction in turn radius. Um that also gets into like pedestrian safety and curb bumpouts and bike lanes and and all the things that we're seeing in the downtown. Um that uh tiller apparatus is is going to be a gamecher for us to be able to maneuver all of the various um uh enhancements that obviously density and pedestrian safety and and all these things that that we're uh navigating through the downtown. So, uh, so long answer to your question is is we've been working on that for several years. And, um, within the United States, I I feel very proud to say we're doing if if you were to look at what we're doing and and and those some of those those big east and west coast departments that that have those tight turn radiuses, we're there. So, um, within the US market, we're doing what can be done.

Thank you. And just uh for clarity um because it I just want to be clear. I wasn't thinking of Europe. I was actually uh thinking I actually when you said that I was like oh that didn't even occur to me. It was uh in in the research that I was doing it it was US cities. And so like I there there's a growing number of US cities. And I think um what I what my research uh revealed to me is because there's like um a limited number of manufacturers of the fire apparatus, what happened was a number of cities took possession of smaller apparatuses because they couldn't get the traditional 40 or 50 while they were waiting. And so that's what um jumped out to me. And so then I wanted to know um is that something we had on our horizon as we do more infill development. So just to be clear, you're did you uh indicate that the city of Ann Arbor is purchasing a Boston pumper or we already have one or I I wasn't clear uh in that explanation.

We've we've taken delivery of of one and that's our newest one that's actually at at Vets Park. And and the key here is that that the shorter the turn the that that the shorter the wheelbase gets you the tighter turn radius. And um again there there's some limiting factors with with how tight that can be. But if you were to look at the spec that San Francisco uses um but literally we used a spec of B I mean it's obviously going to say Ann Arbor on the side, not Boston for clarification.

That's okay. Uh I I I refer to the Boston uh bike racks all the time as a as a thing for developers to do because it's a it's a circle with a spoke in the center and um it it's very uh legible. Um and then maybe one more followup uh before we go uh to Commissioner Mills. Um what's the is there a um is it just the turn radius or is there also a length um um opportunity that we see there? Is it is it 40 or 50 ft but it has a better turn radius or is it a smaller truck with a better turn radius? The turn radius is the driver. So on that that tiller truck that's actually got a 60 ft bumperto-bumper length.

Okay. But that rear that rear steer capability actually puts the turn radius it almost drops it on par of what the smaller engines are. So right now what what Fire Marshall Redmond was kind of referring to is our our ladder truck that we have downtown. Um that's a 45 foot straight axle and just with the front just with the front steer tires as you would normally see. So that thing's like trying to get a battleship through the downtown and um so when you have a straight frame rail that that's where that problem becomes. So to direct answer your question, it's the wheelbase, not so much the length is the more determinant. Correct.

So then with that, how are you measure measuring the turn radius? Are you do you have a standard? Is the straight axis the standard that you use until that fleet would be replaced with um Yeah. Once once we get Okay. Yeah. Once we get that tiller truck, that turn radius is going to drop. And then, um, just one more question because I know we're down a station while it's under repair. Um, how many fire apparatuses do we have, uh, in the city currently?

So, each day we have three engine companies and two ladder companies. That's that's what we have staffed every day. We also have an ambulance and a battalion chief, but in terms of fire suppression. And then we have two additional rigs that we use to to rotate in and out. They're we call them reserve, but they're usually in service more than they're not. Um and that's just for for standard repair. So when one goes out, we don't have to close a station. So um Okay. So So we have we have five suppression companies, which are kind of the traditional either engine or ladder truck on duty every day. And then you're um waiting for another order cuz one got damaged uh when you were responding to a call uh on 94 or something. Is that

that's just getting repaired? Yeah, that's Yeah, we're the the one that we're going to be taking delivery of this summer is replacing a 2006. So that's just part of our standard fleet replacement. Standard fleet replacement. Okay. Yeah. And then Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. this as uh Bassuni uh Commissioner Bassuni has already said is is quite informative. Uh Commissioner Mills,

I want to go back sorry to the um to the comment that was made prior to your questions about the 30-foot ladder. Um and I think that this is kind of paired things. Um that 30 ft is that to the very top of the building or is that to the floor? That's my first one. Okay. So that that code addresses it and it depends on the construction of the building. If it is a pitched roof and has an eaves, it's to it's measured from the average grade to the eaves and not to the top of the peak.

Okay. If it's if it's a flat roof and it has a parapit, it goes to the top of the parapit. So, and and as we talk this, this has been one of the things that I have worked with developers and architects to try to help them out because if they don't need a flat roof and if they can put a pitched roof on it with an eaves, sometimes that eliminates that the need for aerial aerial access because they can come in at 29 feet 8 in to the measurement to that eaves and they don't need it. that the code doesn't kick in. So, there has been a lot of projects that have been done that way. A lot of town houses um and various other projects where that so that 30-foot measurement depends on the roof type.

Okay, got it. You need to be able to get on the roof, which may mean climbing over the parapit if it's flat or just getting to the bottom part of the this kind of Yep. So, the thing is then we throw what's called a roof ladder on there and that roof ladder takes us to the peak.

Got it. Okay. This is then um referencing the last planning commission meeting where we were learning about uh when you go to the high-rise construction code within the codes and because you're the codes guy, I don't know. Um and so I there um maybe you know the answer to this. Um there was a reference about 55 feet to the floor I think. Uh like how what is that? And I is that associated with the fire code part of things?

So you you're taking me deep into this now. Okay. So I have become pretty wellversed in Michigan building code which I nor I don't enforce Michigan building code but and and Chief Kennedy has elaborated quite a bit about how Michigan is. So Michigan is the only state in United States that views a high-rise at 55 ft. And I'll explain that 55 ft in a second because every other state and even the code that I use, International Fire Code, says 75 ft. Now, that measurement is taken from the from the lowest access point of where our fire apparatus stops. So when you think of a fire lane, depending on how close that fire lane, if it travels all four sides of the building or if it only travels two sides of the building, whatever that lowest point is, and it's the that's where the measurement starts. It goes up to an occupied floor that's above and I'm going to use the Michigan building code 55 feet now which means you can bring that floor itself could be at 54 feet 11 in but when your feet when the person's feet and this and this is why technically this question should be answered by Mike Lemieux who's our building official but I've been in enough meetings with him to know how he answers it is when your feet on that floor are above 55 ft. And it was supposed to be, and this is once again a well, I I don't want to point fingers or talk bad about our state, but when the 2021 code was written, it was supposed to address that issue. And there's two places in Michigan building code where that shows up. One's a definition and one's under highrises. They only corrected one place. So, one of them they moved it to 75 and the other one they left it at 55. And even our building official Mike Lemieu has addressed the state on it and they said sorry.

So they said you enforced the most stringent. So it went right back to 55 ft. So we're in a holding pattern. Um I like I said me and Mike Lemieux have a lot of weekly every other day communications because of the nature of the closeness of building code and fire code. um when we and and it could be 6 years from now unfortunately, but when the state changes the next building code, they'll probably bypass 2024 and the state will probably go to 2027. They always seem to skip a year. Fire codes rewritten every 3 years whether it changes or doesn't change. Um so I would expect when 2027 code comes out, it'll be addressed in there and that's when that'll go. Everything will be at 75 ft. But Michigan is once again a unique state that we're in that has some unique things.

So actually then I want to get you at the 75 feet. That's part of your thing because maybe some hopefully hopefully soonish in the grand scheme of things that will be addressed. Is that 75 feet to the where my feet are or is it it's the same definition and so it is wherever the carpet it like so long as the carpet is under 75. Okay.

Yes, absolutely. And I I will say this, while they are two different code books and there is stuff that's in building code that's not in fire and there's stuff in fire code that's not in building code, when they do have the same same code, the verbiage that's in there is pretty much identical. So the the definition of a high-rise is identical um with the exception of how they apply the height. Okay.

And the reason So that's really helpful. I mean, it just for giving you a little bit more context, this was brought up the other night because W was in um in the context of a of a conditional zoning where it was an unlimited height situation, but they mentioned that there is an economic practical limit of not wanting to exceed the going into high-rise territory. And so if for right now it's 55 feet which actually means that the total height of the building like being 65 right m makes sense to allow you to so your head is also counted in that right um I think that that's helpful and I would also just say what's I'm taking away from this is like maybe in the future that practical economic limit will actually be 75 ft plus the rest of that floor

there there's a lot of developers a lot of architects that were waiting on the 2021 code to be written to come out because it was supposed to be addressed in both both places and it wasn't. So it was you whether it was a oversight, a mistake, call it what you want, it wasn't properly corrected as what was talked about to happen. So as of right now it's still we're still in a holding pattern under building code which you know and same same reason where I'm at in in fire code. like the muse that in building code where right that 55 PD has to call it a high-rise, right? Okay. Thank you so much. That was really helpful. You're welcome. All right, Commissioner Bassuni.

Awesome. Thank you. Yeah, I can only imagine how frustrating that discrepancy is. But my question was hopefully a quick clarifying one. Uh, Fire Marshall Redmond, you just mentioned that the fire code is rewritten every three years. And I just wanted to confirm which fire code is that the international fire code um state of Michigan etc etc.

So actually there's it is the international fire code is written every rewritten every three years. Um and so international fire code there is international building code but as chief Kenny explained in Michigan you can't get away from being under Michigan building code. So Michigan building code does mirror international building code because the the I'll call it the parent of codes is IC um international code council they are the ones who responsible for international fire code international building code and all the international codes all of them are rewritten every three years Michigan will rewrite Michigan building code every three years but they won't adopt it every three years and then there's another code set of codes it's national NFPA National Fire Protection Association. Um they rewrite theirs every 3 years also. And most of Michigan is under IFC because it's all within one condensed book. And then what IFC does for very specific code topics will reference the NFPA publications because there's probably oh gosh I I couldn't even guess maybe 50 to 100 different NFPA publications out there. So it it's easier to have one adopted code book which is international fire code and then that book in of itself when needed because you can't have everything in one book will reference a specific NFPA. So by us adopting international fire code we also adopt certain NFPA applica or NFPA publications by reference from IFC if that makes sense if you followed me.

I think I did. I won't try to summarize it, but they're all written every they all are rewritten every three years. Whether a code changes, doesn't change, whether they take something out or add something new, it's always rewritten every three years. Oh, gotcha. So, yeah, it's a guaranteed cadence of every three years it is being rewritten and the other aspects are dependent. But, okay, that's great. Lots of literature. Um, and I'm sorry to make you say code so many times, but I appreciate it. Thank you.

You're welcome. Uh, great. Anyone else? Uh, before I ask another question to start to wrap us up. So, I wanted to go back to Mr. Leonard's earlier framing around uh one of the things that the commission is interested in doing is figuring out we can enable more housing and given these code compliance which are either yes you're compliant with code or no you're not compliant with code and that most of that code compliance is out of the loc local jurisdiction because it sits at the state and in an international council. What things um if you had a magic wand uh that you could do? Would it be uh getting more uh fire apparatus that was more nimble? So if you had unlimited budget, you'd replace all of the fire apparatus and then that would give you the most versatile equipment to um enable more housing. Um, I know some jurisdictions in the United States are permitting single single stair multi-unit developments. I know those are not currently um allowable in you in Michigan. um like would something like that be something you would wave a magic wand in Michigan and say yeah if if there was advocacy at the state level because the planning commission can reach out annually to the city of Ann Arbor's lobbyists that lobby the state on behalf of the city and we could include some of these things which would be enablers of additional housing because it lowers the cost the development costs for a developer to build a single stair as

opposed to a multistare or a I guess a elevator uh situation. So if if anything in that realm, if you had any thoughts that you were willing to share with us, I in particular am interested in what you have to say and if you don't have anything, I understand.

Well, I I'll go first and I'll let Chief Kennedy go. I I not one particular thing comes to mind. I mean to answer some of your questions though is um the each one would have a benefit I guess if we went there. If we talk about apparatus when you get a truck that has a tighter turning apparatus that helps out in in for multiple reasons within our city and within our design and and where our city wants to go. Um but it's that's only one aspect. There's always another aspect to it. Um, one of the things that's been very helpful and one of the reasons code is always rewritten every 3 years is because as code develops, it's exactly what you're talking about and and each code book has a committee that sits on it. They either rewrite code or don't write it or bring people bring ideas to it. Um, I don't have one particular one, you know, I got a a headful of codes, right? Um, but I have one particular thing of change, but I I would say this is one of the the things I was waiting for for and I I this is the one time I I tried to help the city out too is I jumped ahead from 2015 to 2021 knowing we were going to legally adopt it was in appendix D for high-rise structures. Um, when I talk about listed exceptions, there was a listed exception for the aerial access which basically outlined what a high-rise is normally built out of. Anyways, it's usually type 1 A, 1B, 2A construction, smoke removal system, NFTA 13 system, um, a stand pipe system. These are all normal features of a high-rise. And that's just the I say common sense catching up with fire code to say, you know, we've thought about this now and we've seen just as we talk about Vidian, we've seen what has proven itself, what's done and what remains safe. Um Hank sent a great video to me.

I don't know if that was sent to anyone else, but it it talked about how new construction really is a lot safer now. Um but we still have the existing codes that still exist. So I don't have one particular thing to say other than you know as we keep moving forward with code it's it's progressive it's always changing it evolves and some of the stuff evolves removes some of the more stringent stuff because of the greater protection you have. So I I wish I had a better answer for that one for you but I don't. I don't know if Chief Kennedy does.

Thank you. Yeah, very thoughtful question. I appreciate the opportunity. So, I'll kind of address it a couple of ways. Number one, on the policy level. Anytime you're a state and you're the only one that does something, you generally are either really good or the opposite of good. And you probably see where I'm going with this. We in Ann Arbor have have decided as a community that that that we have goals and we we we have goals and ideals of what we want the community to be as as demonstrated with all the work this group and many others did with the comp plan. Um the fact that we are unable to to to kind of move in a in a quicker fashion than the rest of the state is is just not helpful. And that is that is not a national best practice. And so getting the state to allow us to adopt a a newer building code, I mean that that by itself is is going to take away barriers that that are currently there. Um from a fundamental um perspective, if you're like state of Maryland, very very progressive state when it comes to fire code. If I want to build a single family or or duplex in the state of Maryland, I have to have residential sprinklers. The reality of it is residential sprinklers save more fires than any firefighter ever will. That that that is a proven fact. And the building industry has been um I I'm very passionate about quite frankly lies that have been put out by the building industry about fire sprinklers. Residential fire sprinklers deal with the same piping that goes to a toilet that goes to a sink. So, this idea that fire sprinklers are going to create all this water damage or going to add this cost. Well, you're running the pipe for a toilet, you're running the pipe for a sink, you just drop a sprinkler head in

there. This is not a big engineered system like you would have for a high-rise building. So, if we want to build a and for all this building that's looking at coming to Ann Arbor, um this is the perfect time for us to build as Fire Marshall Redmond mentioned and Hang shared that video like new construction, safer construction, but we we as a city are not able to require fire suppression in one and two family fires or one and two family dwellings, which is the m majority of where our fire deaths happen at. And so that so if if there's that advocacy and we really want to get the state to allow Ann Arbor to be the community that all of us want it to be allow us to to have destiny of what we want our codes to look like and not be restrained by the state of Michigan. So from a policy perspective far and away that's the most powerful thing we could do from a operational perspective. Um, and I I council member Dish is on here and and next week we'll be addressing the budget. Um, but the reality of it is the city of Ann Arbor had more firefighters on duty in 1996 than we do in 2026. And as the fire chief, that's a problem. And I've had this conversation with Mr. Deon with council. We I I'm all about density. I'm all about vertical growth, but fires are very, very labor intensive issues. And our ability to frontload staffing to get an issue while it's small is huge. And there there's there's I I completely understand and support bike lanes and speed bumps and all these things to calm traffic, but what that also does is it makes it very difficult to get fire apparatus across the city. So, what we need to then do is we need to have essentially more firefighters

spaced throughout the city so we can get there quicker. A lot of our stations are in really good locations. We just need more firefighters at those stations is is one of the things that we're dealing with. And so, as we support growth, we just need those those core services. And it's if you talk with Chief Anderson, it's the same with law enforcement. you talk with um uh Jordan Roberts is the same with waste management and DPW. So, we just as the city grows, we just need to have the city staff to to support that and um that is a that that's a challenge for us and um and I get to it. Staff staff cost money and that's that's a challenge and especially for the fire department with kind of our structure um to to add a company. I'll be upfront. It's it's $1.6 million a year if we were to add an additional fire crew. And that's an awful lot coming out of general fund. And and I I appreciate the financial strain that that puts, but we we need to be able to get crews there quickly to get a ahead of an emergency. So that's as as we grow, that really needs to be part of the conversation of do we have the in the public safety in infrastructure to support what's going on. So, but thank you for the opportunity for that question.

Yeah. And I'll just follow up uh quickly uh here hopefully, which is the the challenge of uh traffic because we don't want to pit fire safety against pedestrian safety. I feel like that that somebody loses on either side of that. and traffic calming, reducing speeds, um creating um protected bike lanes, which I utilize. Um they they allow me to move through the city safely, which which I think we all um agree is important. I wonder though, um cuz you didn't address it. You you went to the personnel side, which I think is uh uh key because you want to advocate for more personnel. And I heard you at the budget meeting and I heard the city administrator talk about this at his presentation to uh council as well. So I I know you're doing a good job with your advocacy there cuz it's been noted. Um but what about fire apparatus? Like if you if it is it possible that smaller apparatus just in this hypothetical could allow you to achieve what you want if the budget was available to replace those uh the five uh units that you currently have. Um would that have any demonstrative impact or is it still still just staffing? Um from your point of view

it's really a staffing issue. I mean, obviously, we need we need the apparatus to get the the people there. Um, and in fact, one of the future purchases for us is actually a one of those pumper trucks that actually has a um I don't want to get too technical, but that if we were to lose a a pump in a high-rise that essentially it could take over for that, which is more powerful um volume and pressure of pump than we currently have. And like New York City has these like high-press pumpers. Now granted, we're not going 100 stories, but to get water up to that 30s story building that lost its pump, that requires a pretty significant um uh pump for us to have on on our rigs. So um uh but to answer your the um the struggle that we deal with just in the downtown area um is just with the volume of traffic um just even for us to navigate around. And that's that's one of the big reasons for that tiller truck is that's going to really allow us that that uh increased navigation um to kind of get to that smaller apparatus point and then along with those those smaller wheelbased engines that that ability to navigate more. So we we are attempting to address that um and and that again we we've we've been going down that path for a couple years now. So

Okay. Well, thank you. Um, I'll do one last call for commissioners with any questions. Yes. Uh, Commissioner Norton, I think you'll probably get the last word here.

Oh, yeah. Thank you for that. Um, again, I I want to just repeat myself and and say to to Chief Kennedy and and Marshall Reban how helpful this has been. It's it's um tremendously helpful. And I I I'll say again, I I don't ever want you to give a special break to somebody. Um, but I would ask that as as you're looking at site designs, if you see something like, you know, if you moved your building 10 ft that way, you could solve a whole lot of troubles, just to um, you know, don't don't be the advocate for the developer or their site designer, but um, please be mindful of that because that might help us then push on them to say this could be a better design if you did it this way. So, I would ask if you could just kind of keep that in the back of your mind is when you're working with project proponents, that would be really helpful. So, thank you so much.

I will do that, sir. I will do that. All right. Is there anything um u fire marshal repman or chief Kennedy that you want to say to the planning commission that you haven't had a chance to? We're all here with the exception of one of our colleagues. Uh and we are um listening.

Um I I just want to say thank you. I've never had the opportunity to actually first of all meet most of you. Um, so I wanted to thank you for the opportunity, the the invite. And like I say, I'm I'm always willing and half the time you would probably think I wouldn't shut up or I wouldn't stop talking because I always feel an educated person's a good person when it comes to life safety because one more person knows has, you know, knows what it is, it makes it just that much better out there. So I I just want to thank you all for the time tonight. No, thank you for your time. Um, it was uh very helpful for us. Uh, Chief Kennedy, sorry.

No, I I would just echo um again, appreciate the opportunity. Please know that we're always able to kind of reach out and and provide some background and hopefully this kind of provided some of what we can do along with some of what we kind of can't do uh when when it comes to to these these reviews. Um, and just fundamentally too, uh, I planning commission might be one of the most thankless jobs in the entire city. So, um, thank you all for for doing this. And the other part too, and I I try to remind myself of this of most communities would be grateful for what we consider a lot of our problems are with growth. And um, I a very good friend of mine is the chief of Sageno and it's just when I compare what what he deals with versus what we deal with, he would trade what we consider our growth problems in a heartbeat along with other communities. And I think sometimes it's just grounding of um truly how fortunate we are that these are the conversations we're having versus some of the the real issues that that other communities have and um Ann Arbor is a very cool special place and and I'm grateful to work here and and thank you for your work. So appreciate it.

Well, thank you and uh we appreciate your work uh keeping us safe uh applying our codes. Yes. No, very clear. We got that. no wiggle room. Uh, and I think the information that we heard tonight will be helpful in our future deliberations and we appreciate your generosity both with your time, your expertise, your knowledge, and your willingness to engage with us in the future. So, with that, if no one else has anything, I'm going to adjourn our meeting because we don't have a closing uh uh public comment. No, there actually do need to be two public comment periods for every planning commission meeting. Yes, it's in the bylaws. Sorry,

but it's not it's not on my agenda. It's not on my agenda. There's only one attendee. So, uh Chris Miller, if you are interested in talking, you can raise your hand. Well, Chris Miller didn't raise their hand, but Commissioner Weatherbe did. Yep. Commissioner Weatherbe. Uh I was just wondering if we're not going to do I saw that there were things the staff solid waste. Was that we were not going to do that or were you just doing the public for the this piece?

We didn't have a presentation. It was just the memos because we didn't have anyone from um solid waste to join us. Was going to do a presentation or not. Uh Mr. Leonard did not indicate that when we talked at the very beginning of the meeting. Would you like this same conversation solid waste specific?

I mean, personally, I would appreciate uh some conversation cuz at least two developments uh have had some challenges because of solid waste. So, I'm thinking of Robertson Brothers on uh Scio Church, the 75 units that were there. This was also a fire issue as well because they had to um put in a second curb cut so that the fire apparatus could make a loop uh through the development. And my sort of naive opinion was could they at their own expense park a fire apparatus there so that it didn't have to uh necessitate one and could that be a better solution. But um uh that's a conversation for another day. Uh but I know that in that uh case, solid waste required because it was a multifamily de um development even though they were attached uh town homes that they have a single you uh pickup and the developer wanted to sort of replicate a um a typical uh house street structure with uh carts and Solid Waste said they wouldn't be able to bring a truck in to uh pick up everything. And so and then the developer even offered to do it at their own expense, but the city has rules about um third parties um collecting um waste. I guess they have a contract with one provider uh for waste like waste management and then compost and recycling is done by the city itself. So that was a no-go as well. So I think those kinds of conversations um would be helpful because I think they do impact things. though they had to, you know, they could have put three more town homes uh in potentially in the space that they had to dedicate for solid waste uh if they could use carts. I'm just postulating. I don't know that that's true cuz they didn't draw it. But that those are the kinds of impacts that I think are helpful for us to understand as we continue our march towards infill development because that's what we're

going to be doing uh because there's not uh a lot of undeveloped land in the city. So this is all going to be largely township islands or infield development and understanding what those constraints are and how they're going to impact our goals I think are very helpful for us uh to consider as we are talking with developers at the table. So yes if we can get a conversation with solid I would appreciate it

100%. So, um I think um I should have done this precursor. We intended to bring both. We couldn't arrange it with solidway staff. So, that's why we want to get you the least for the written materials and their excellent work in serving the safety of the community. Chief Kennedy and Fire Marshall Redmond are just blah blah blah about the fire. So, I think it would have been hard to get both of those topics in anyhow. Um so, we will endeavor to uh get uh solid waste uh for an upcoming work session for um the same conversation. Great. Well, with that and the permission of uh Deputy Manager Kelly. Go ahead.

Uh well, you do you do I mean you could formally announce the public comment and see if the individual who's here wants to raise their hand. We did. We did that already. All right. Um this is a second opportunity for public comment. If you'd like to address the planning commission on any issue, please use the raise hand feature in Zoom. There it is. All right. So, with that, I will adjourn our meeting. Thank you everyone. Have a great evening. Thank you.