Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Please rise for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. This is the Selen City Planning Commission meeting for Wednesday, September 10th, 2025. Will the recording secretary please call the role? Young here. Carol here. Bosik here. Marl here. Here

uh staff present tonight are community development director Atkin, recording secretary Katnik, and OM advisers MC Morates. Uh, additionally, others present tonight will be Adrienne Wy from the Ann Arbor Observer. Um, he will be they will be taking pictures. I just wanted to let you know um that that will be happening. Um, if you haven't already, please sign on on the back um the back table and there are agendas back there. Um, is there a motion on the table to approve the agenda as amended unless they're distributed? Unless there are amendments. Move to approve as distributed. Madam Chair, second. All those in favor? I. All those opposed? Motion passes.

Is there a motion on the table to approve the meeting minutes of August 13, 2025 as submitted unless there are amendments? Second.

All those in favor? I. All those opposed? Motion passes. Public comment. Under the open meetings act, any citizen may come forward at this time and make comments. The person is requested but not required to state their name and address for the record. Comments will be limited to three minutes per person. Seeing no comments, uh there is unfinished business number 25-09. Application from Danny Berry of Leavonia Builders for a final planned unit development and resoning at 865 North Ann Arbor Street, Selen, Michigan48176, parcel number 18-13-36-301-00001. In our packet, we have a memo dated September 4th, 2025 from community development director Atkin and a revised memo dated August 12th, 2025 from MC Morris of OM. Mr. Atkin.

Yes, thank you. Uh, so the site plan that's in your packet, it's the same as the one that was last month. I didn't ask for any revisions at this time, just in case there was anything else that came up. Um, so the memo provided on page six in your packet, I believe, uh, I went through and itemized the issues that were brought up at the last meeting, uh, to be discussed.

The first section are, uh, words in the questions and those will be addressed by MC. And then uh at the bottom, excuse me, the second half of those were in the uh staff review of the site plan. Um again, nothing that shows on there, but things that will be in at final submission uh in detail. Nothing that's going to affect the proposed layout or or any uh in site plan. So we at this time uh you know based on planning commission satisfaction of everything uh we do recommend planning commission make a recommendation for approval to city council with the conditions or others that may come up tonight.

Great. Thank you. MC anything to add? Yeah, I'll I'll add just briefly um after after the last meeting um the there were three pending engineering items. One of them was to make sure that the city engineering department had a chance to review everything that they were on board. The timeline was a bit rushed last time. Um so Tesa and her team have had a chance to to go over this. Um the second item was regarding um the sidewalk that runs along Ann Arbor Seline Road. Um there's a sidewalk that runs north south along Ann Arbor Seline Road. Uh there's also an existing water mane um and a proposed swale. All these things kind of run north south. And there was a question last time by the planning commission of whether or not that sidewalk could be moved closer to the roadway, closer to the to be within the right ofway. Um, currently the sidewalk is closer to the town homes and has uh an easement uh over it. Um, and at that meeting I I let folks know that there were initial conversations with the DPW where there were talks about maybe that not being a good idea with the water man being there, you know, them wanting the swale um in place in case there was a water mane break so that things didn't flow right into the the houses. Um but further discussions with uh with the DPW and with the city engineering department that is not a concern that they think is uh big enough that it should impact where that sidewalk goes where those wheels go. So essentially from city engineering and from the DPW wherever that sidewalk needs to be is is fine. It doesn't impact their utility. Um and then the third thing was the biggest um pending item which was about the traffic study for the area. Um and going over things with Tesa and the city engineering

department um reviewing again the scale of this site um and kind of the scale and scope of the traffic challenges in this area. Um they were in agreement that it will not fall on this development and this developer to do that traffic study, but it's something that's going to be a longer term um a longer term project to look at and and solution to to work out at a at a kind of a larger scale to the city. Um so those are my three updates from last time. If there are any questions on any of that, just let me know. Thank you. Any questions for the community development director or from engine for engineering? Yes, Mr.

Just to clarify, you've received a formal report back that from our city engineer that clarified all your issues. Uh I met with Tesa twice um and she also reviewed um this this letter, the one that you've got that's got the red print um that went past her before it went to to Chris. And I think Chris, you were CCD on all those um on the communication as well. I don't believe that Tesa prepared anything written for tonight. No, there was nothing submitted to directly from engineering to my department outside of uh the communications on the that are in that report.

Okay. And you feel comfortable with that, Mr. Atkins? I do. Additional questions for community development or for engineering hearing? None. Madam Chair, I'd move to acknowledge receipt of the memo dated September the 4th and August the 12th. Second. All those in favor? I. All those opposed. Motion passes. Uh applicant developer comments limited to 10 minutes. If you'd like to come to the podium, please make sure the light is illuminated. May I Good evening, commissioners. May I So these are a couple of the I'll explain to you what they are. They're the same document, Danny. Yeah. Okay. Exact same. Great. Thank you.

So, the plan that you have, I'm going to address the sidewalk issue. That's what that's all about. The plan that you originally have in your packet was dated in June when we submitted for the final. Since our conversations with the sidewalk, we had some revisions with the county. We discovered that there is well there's not a crosswalk on the north side of um Selen Waterworks Road and the reason there's no crosswalk there is because the slope on that road is at 6% and for ADA compliance it has to be 2%. So we've removed that little connection point because there's no connection on the other side and Seline Waterworks doesn't meet ADA. It be a complete revision of that road. So that sidewalk really is more like a private walk than a public walk. So being closer to the building really gives it that more private setting. There's never been a crosswalk there on north side other than going across arbor because that can that's really the only thing I wanted to add. I do have color samples on their way here. I apologize. cuz I had him last time but I didn't bring them this time.

Any questions for the applicant developer? No. Okay. Thank you very much. Madam Chair, I'll move to open the public hearing affording the public an opportunity to speak to this issue at 709. Second.

All those in favor? I. All those opposed? Motion passes. Uh all public comment to be heard. Limit of three minutes per person. Good evening. Name is Michael Ass. I'm at Brooken Village to Lancaster Court. And I got a couple of questions. One, I guess I don't understand why he doesn't use the existing curb cut on the waterwork road that's already there across from the driveway. It's coming from the north. I mean, it was it would satisfy much more satisfy the road commission, I'm sure, because they like to have clean intersections directly across. The other thing I guess I would like to do, I'd like to invite the the petitioner again to talk to the homeowners association about landscaping on condo property at his expense after we see what the grading does to the existing native growth that's there. I suspect there's not going to be much left because there certainly isn't any, excuse me, any room on his property that I can see that he could put landscaping on the south side of the road. So, and any to landscape at all, it would have to be on condo property. So, anyhow, thank you.

Thank you. Is there any additional public comment? Move to close the public hearing at 7-Eleven. Second. All those in favor? I. All those opposed? Motion passes. Uh comments, questions from planning commissioner members, either to community development, engineering, or to the developer. If I may, Madam Chair, um Mr. Atkin, community development director Atkin, for the uh benefit of the public, specifically the gentleman who just spoke, can you address the issue about the curb and the the jurisdiction or lack thereof the Washington County Road Commission?

Uh that's uh Sling Waterworks in that portion is city road. Uh they did go do a an analysis on that and they did MC would be better. Sorry, please engineering standpoint.

No, no worries. It Yeah, it is it's a city road in that chunk. Um and it would be very difficult to have a site entrance um from where the existing curb cut is right now because of how steep the site is um sloping down to the county drain. Um and there's also a DTE easement that requires them to stay 10 feet off of um it's an overhead I believe. Yes. Um, so it's not and it's, you know, there right now there's a lot of trees on site, so it's not necessarily easy to see if you're just driving by. Um, but those were the main constraints that forced this design to shift that that entrance. Thank you.

Thank you. for the landscaping on the south side there. Uh the applicant will be I think you said you're going to shift landscaping onto that south side to provide a barrier more of a barrier.

Yeah, in the last meeting I think the last meeting was it you that I was okay. I had addressed or somebody had addressed that last time. I'm not sure if it was this gentleman or not. And I agreed I don't have any problem putting stuff. I will have to have an agreement with their condo association because I can't go on their property. But once we get it all cleared and all figured out, we'll throw some pine trees in there to help on the neighbors that are that are backing right up to that um that side street or the street that backs up the I don't have any problem doing that. All I have, Madam Chair. Thank you. Thank you. Yes.

Um can we address the intersection issue? Um, if this sidewalk's not going to be able to connect with the other sidewalk on the other side of waterworks, my biggest issue is if there's kids and individuals living here, as we talk about connectivity in our city and all of that, how will you cross the street in a safe manner in order to get people to schools? I mean, it's almost like we need to set up another crosswalk like we have north of that intersection. I agree. Um it's something that we can discuss. I mean as the process goes on. I don't expect anybody walk further west down Sling Waterworks where it flattens out back up to Ann Arbor. Maybe something further south of Ann Arbor or Seline Waterworks Road would be viable because I know there's a one further down on the south getting mixed around on the north side of Ann Arbor.

We add it as a clean road that crosses north Ann Arbor, excuse me. Can we add it as a condition of this site plan that something has to be resolved? Okay. So

does does the road where they have the uh driveway between the condos going into Sling and Waterworks is it sling waterworks flatten out there? It just looks like about 12. It looks like it's pretty consistent as it goes down. I don't recall what the distance is, but they have the one foot contours on there and it it slopes for uh pretty consistently for jog probably almost to the back side of the property there west side. What's the eventual likelihood eventual likelihood that there is going to be a change in that road that would allow for there to be crossing like a c you know a ADA compliant crosswalk over Selen Waterworks Road because there is a I mean they put a sidewalk on the other side of that I guess with the anticipation of you know future connectivity. So it feels, you know, like we shouldn't be, you know, pigeon putting ourselves in a hole if we're, you know, to not have it ready for the eventual eventuality of it actually getting graded in a way that allows for ADA compliance.

Yeah, I don't think that there's the any new grading in the road would take place anytime in the near future that would correct that that slope. Um, which is why adding another crosswalk somewhere on Selen and Arbor Road would be uh a lot of quicker solution possibly. Um, yeah, it's I I just that'd be a total rebuild of that road to to level it out. Does the eventuality of something sometime in the future make any difference in terms of like why whether we have that sidewalk closer to the buildings or further out in the road? I mean, I wasn't here at the last meeting, so I you know, I know that there might have been some conversation about that, but it feels like again, if we're still thinking that this is going to be a sidewalk that's going to exist for a long time.

Yeah, I maybe I missed it. Is the sidewalk going to remain in its current location or is it going to be moved uh east towards in we got that clarification that it can be moved east so it's consistent with the other ones and that it's in the cities right away not necessarily in the eastment.

Correct. And on the uh plan sheet that Mr. Vy just handed out on sheet uh plan sheet 03 um it moves the sidewalk to the west to make it more of a private walk. Um it also doesn't tie into the crosswalk that is crossing Ann Arbor Seline on the south side of um south side of waterworks. So there's no conductivity now. It's internal circulation. Yeah, I I think at this point to make that a condition and then for something to review administratively through with with DPW and engineering would be the best course of action. U [Applause] there there is an existing comment um that we've had on the last couple reviews to clean up the ADA cross slopes on the existing ramps. Um, so if that were to be modified to include a connecting ramp, um, we could at least make sure that the ramps meet ADA requirements, but I mean, like Chris is saying, it's not going to the the roadway itself is not going to be compliant. So,

yeah, and I wouldn't want to put in a the idea of a crosswalk that is out of compliance. So, that would be a major liability for the city. agree that it and I feel like it's kind of north Ann Arbor. Yeah. And it is of the theme of like, you know, the the scope of what a developer is responsible for on on their site and their parcel and then if there are kind of broader issues with the kind of the surrounding infrastructure, it's tough to put that on a specific developer to to address.

That makes sense. So, so, but at least the idea, so even without the stub, the idea was at least the last at the last meeting was that the sidewalk was going to be pushed further towards the road. Correct. But this current that plan that we have, it's not showing or the one the sheet that we just got from developer. It's not showing that it's showing that it's right up against us. Yeah, because there's a water main run between where the sidewalk that you see and the curb, right? But they but the engineering said they could put it can't be moved. Okay. DPWs are the sidewalks. Okay.

Additional questions or comments? Question. Yes, Danny. Um, I have a question regarding the concern from the Reckon Village folks. Um, this the six unit building on uh the south edge of the property. Yes. Did you ever consider putting that on the north side of the property, which would leave more open space next to Breen? The the building currently sits on the north side of our road. No, putting on the north side of the property. So, it' be on the south side of SL water where the pond is.

Well, just move the pond. You You're going to have to dig the pond. Well, the ground goes like this over there. I mean, the topography on this is is crazy. I mean, like I said, the road is 6%. That just gives you an idea how fast that that land drops. So, I guess initially I would say no because I I would I don't know how we would have even been it would have been like San Francisco, right? A building stepping like this. It would have been a challenge to put something there with the way that that ground drops.

Okay. All right. Just curious. Um I know that last time there was a lot of discussion about the no lefts out of the development onto Seline Waterworks. That is a condition that engineering stands hard and fast by. Correct. It was no left into but not you could come out of the development and go left.

Okay. And then also installing a sign on the south the south entrance egress that doesn't allow for left turns on that boulevard section. Correct across from Harper. I'm just trying to find the signing plan.

Yeah. What was recommended was um from that from Harper Street from let's see if you're if you're leaving Harper Street if you're what westbound um that you could only go left or right onto Ann Arbor Seline Road. You couldn't go straight across and go into that was the that was the undesirable movement that was recommended to be prohibited at all times. The site plan set the most recent one that I'm looking at just restricts that during peak hours. Um, but basically OHM traffic was like just just put the kaosh on that at all times.

Thank you. That would be the same going the other direction too, right? From the exit from the east and west, right from the exit of the of the the neighborhood cross to Harper. The only traffic restriction sign would be on the westbound Harbor. Okay. There's not the same concern crossing the other way from the development to Harbor. There is not because they're lined up. Oh, I see. Okay. Yeah, that makes sense.

Is is my understanding and I defer to I know there is a a greater traffic mind here here in this very room. But we did when we ran um when we ran these uh the proposed traffic control measures by our traffic group um they their only recommended change was basically to bump it up from peak hour restrictions to all the time. Yes.

So we it's not going to be a concern of turning left out of the the new roadway heading north. I I just feel that that intersection might be an issue that it would be better that that's a right-hand turn only and you're forced to drive out to Waterworks if you want to make a left-hand turn at the intersection of Waterworks. Yeah, the and I I hear you. Um the by the book the traffic count and the the number of trips that this site generates isn't high enough to meet that threshold. Um the site's quite small of 51 units. Am I right? 52 51 51

51. Um and so because of because of the volume of this site, it doesn't trigger that kind of traffic measure. But I understand I mean I think I said this a few times last week or last meeting as well that you folks know your city that's based on looking at just this site but you know we don't have traffic counts for Ann Arbor Seline Road included in this and so you know I I'm I'm not going to sit here and say that it's not going to be a problem but what the traffic group was able to look at is just the volume generated by this new development and it doesn't meet that threshold for that traffic control measure.

How would we address that in the future? I mean, this is a private road leading into a public road. If we don't do it at a site plan now, can we do it in the future? I'm not sure, but I know this was part of the conversations with city engineering about this area of town in general. Um, having a lot of traffic and especially during the school year, um, that those traffic flows are very different than they are in the summer, which when Chris was pulling the SEMCOG data, that's they took their counts and I think it was like early August. Yeah. Mid June.

Yeah. which does not reflect the reality of the situation. Um, so there might need to be a a wider strategy for how to manage flow in this area that the city would need to look at more broadly. Um, well then that would be should we put a condition on this that it shouldn't necessitate a change in flow of traffic coming out of here? Um, I in the future can we adjust for that? Yeah, you can put a condition with a timeline on it, you know, after guess it's at 100% occupancy or CO has been issued. Okay.

Uh to observe that my fear of forcing everything to the north is you're going to have a little bit of gridlock there, people turning right and traffic that's coming up Selen Ann Arbor Seline Waterworks Road. I think for me is it's a hope that should the other developments and stuff happen to the west, this intersection gets resolved and and determined whether or not a signal and everything would go in there and that would then allow at that time to address this at this other intersection because not knowing where the crosswalk is going to be either at the north or the south to accommodate now

um starts a whole another question about having pedestrians in a crosswalk or left turn. So great. Okay. Additional questions or comments.

Mr. Very, I believe your colored samples have arrived. Can you all see it? Or if I put it here? Yeah. So there's the stone sample that we're using on the stone. There's I'll put up here. There's the brick. This is the color siding do with that. And then the roof sample. I'm currently using these on a project that we're doing down in uh New Wood Haven and they look really sharp. I was looking for a picture of it, but I don't have one of the completed.

Thank you. Additional questions or comments? Hold up the one. This one. There's the siding, the brick. It's a little dusty, but there's the siding, the brick, and the stone. Is it good? I can't see. additional questions or comments?

Um, just the one I think we're we had mentioned about the back of the building and how that was going to be finished. Does that come out in the final site plan review? Chris, I'm sorry. Um, we've talked about Yeah, I know you're choking there. Um, we're talking about the back of the building and how, you know, the designating of that it wouldn't be a solid sighting that it would have a break in that. Is that part of this final site plan or how does that address? Yeah, I believe that the there's going to be some brick on there. It's not going to be 100% vinyl all just want to know that. Thanks.

Okay. Uh seeing no additional questions or comments. Thank you very much, Mr. Berry. Uh, is there a motion on the table to recommend to Selen City Council to approve, not approve, approve with conditions, the final planned unit development and property resigning at 865 North in Arbor Street. Can we talk about all the conditions?

Absolutely. Um there are conditions that recommendations um that are listed on page six of our of Mr. Atkins report. There are comments that are listed on OM report um for final construction plans starting on page two. Um so I guess we can go through one at a time.

If I may, Madam Chair, Mr. Let's defer to the the the the the person who handles these issues on a day-to-day basis. Based on the the memos uh and the memorandum that was provided to planning commission uh at this stage and juncture, what what conditions enumerated in the report do you think should be added to this agenda? Then we can get to what was what was made uh what was referenced uh at tonight's meeting. with the conditions number two and three um at the very bottom. Uh number one being revised to uh a location for another crosswalk including uh one for the sign at the south uh access point. Um, you know, putting a timeline on that and sidewalks been relocated, turning issues, whatever. Believe unless I'm missing something that that's it.

Does the recording secretary have that? Yes. Okay. And I believe the other one is addressing the crosswalk. Yeah, I Yeah, you mentioned thating there. It says here Sleen Waterworks Road, but I think it's addressing the crosswalk. before I knew that with the the slope and stuff. So, it just uh for a alternate location for a crosswalk across uh North Ann Arbor Street and we have that and the other one being the condition of landscaping on the south side is in there too. Just clarify

the agreement with the condo association. Is that a condition that we are able to enumerate? you can put that in there and then once they get that figured out, I I don't necessarily need a final landscape plan until they know where that's going to go. But as long as we understand that that's uh going to be addressed between the association and the applicant, that's fine. And then the revisiting of the traffic issue on the south side that we just talked about signage. Yeah. The future revisiting it. Yeah. Okay. observing uh you guess accidents, accident reports or any issues that could arise from that.

And then what about moving the sidewalk closer to the road? Yes. No, not that's been agreed to. That's been agreed to. I guess I deferred back to the recording secretary if she got all that. God bless you, Danica. Um maybe you could reread read it back to to the the the commission uh prior to uh proceeding with the motion.

Okay. So, we've got the sign at the south access point addressing the crosswalk, landscaping on the south uh side, the agreement with the condo association, and we've already handled the last one that Jessica just brought up. So, let's see number two and three as part of your recommendations. In addition, agreement with the condo association for landscaping with final landscaping plans, sidewalk location uh closer to the roadway rather than uh more like a private drive. Um the timeline on signage for to restrict movements to the left and that will be uh reviewed with the CO, the final certificate of occupancy. And then is that it? Did I get them all?

That would be the observations would begin after the final CFO. Okay. Yes. I I just want to make sure I understood you on the sidewalk. Is it staying where it is on that drawing that you guys want us to put it closer to the road? That's what I'm correct hearing is we want to move it east rather than closer to the backs of those uh those units. So the the plan sheet that you gave us tonight, plan sheet three would move it east. Um so you want it to be more of a city walk. We want it to be more of a citywalk, less of a private walk. Okay.

And also to connect to the crossing that's on the south side that crosses Ann Arbor Street because on the drawing that you uh procured this evening, it doesn't have the tie in. You want to put it the tie in even and we'll put our handicap ramp to ADA standards, but the road won't be at ADA standards. Not the north side, not across Selen Waterworks across Ann Arbor Street. There's currently a side there's currently a crosswalk there. Yeah, we would like to tie into that. Uh tie in that that's on the that's north of Selen Waterworks Road. I thought it was on the they were talking about Oh, I'm sorry. I misunderstood.

Right. But that was but that was the idea is we were going there was going to be eventually another crosswalk possibly here. So do we want to tie it in now or or do I mean that's the problem. It's like we can't really unless somebody tells us exactly where it's going to be. I think it's No, I think wasn't your recommendation earlier to make that a condition that would be evaluated in the future. Yeah. Excuse me. Uh engineering DPW would have to evaluate. So it be added as a condition. Yeah. An additional crosswalk to be evaluated in the future by engineering and DPW. Correct. Okay. So then so we are still moving the the sidewalk to the east. Are we are we evaluating? So we're not putting the connection to Seline Waterworks. No. No. We're going to keep it like that is but pushing it out. Correct.

And obviously we have the one down at the south end that's connected to other Bridgewater. Correct. And if engineering in DPW deems that one needs to be put in on the south side of Seline Waterworks Road crossing Selen and Arbor Road, I I would assume that the developer might be on hook for a an ADA ramp at that point, but I'm not sure. Mr. Atkin, do you have a suggestion? No. Yeah. an ADA sidewalk would have to be put in uh when that time comes, but it will be by it would be an engineering DPW decision on that one. Okay, we good. We got it all.

Wanted to make sure. No, I just it's a lot. Assuming you're Yeah. Can the recording secretary reread the mo reread the recommended language for a motion to approve with conditions?

Okay. To include all the conditions we just discussed. Yes, ma'am, please. All right, we've got [Applause] uh to recommend to the Selen City Council to approve not approve or to approve with conditions of final pinion development and property resoning at 865 North and Arbor Street, Seline, Michigan with the following conditions number two and three from page six of the community development director's conditions and recommendations report the sign at the south access point with a timeline to be reviewed after the final CFO. The crosswalk to be evaluated by engineering and DPW landscaping agreement on the south side to be made with the condo association and the sidewalk location to be moved closer to the roadway east.

East. Those are the four that I have. Does anybody Are we all in agreement with that? Thank you, Danica. Thank you very much. And with that, I will move that motion to approve with those conditions. Second. Any additional discussion? Oh, yes. Yes. I just wanted to recommend we had some minor comments in the letter. Um they're all under comments for final construction plans. I would recommend that addressing all of those be a a condition as well. I don't think they need to be listed individually. It's just some it's some things to clean up in the and to include the conditions um or the recommendations from OM's report comments for final construction plans in OM report enumerated as numbers 1 through six.

Yep. Are you okay with that motion? All right. Any additional discussion? Just for the public's benefit. Mr. Atkin, can you confirm this will be an enumerated um action item on our next council agenda? Our meetings are backtoback in September because of the Labor Day holiday which means city council will consider this proposal on Monday um this coming Monday at 7 p.m. here in council chambers. So if there are citizens interested parties who care to comment further or address any questions concerns to city council they should attend um in just a few days on 15. Very good. All good. All those in favor.

All those opposed. Motion passes. Uh, seeing no new business, uh, only one thing I would like to add is I would like to, uh, formally say hello to Mr. Swallow, city man city manager Dan Swallow, uh, who's kind enough to attend our meeting tonight. Um, any additional discussions? Madam Chair, then I'd move to adjourn this regular meeting of the Seline Planning Commission at 7:38. All those in favor? I. All those opposed? Motion passes. Oh, no. No absences tonight. Adjourn 7:38. Thank you. Um