Joining us for the Planning and Economic Development Standing Committee on today, Thursday, March 26th, 2026.

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Councilmember Letitia Johnson.

Present.

Councilmember Gabriela Santiago Romero.

Present.

Council President Pro Tim Call me on the second.

Yeah.

I'm sure you have a quorum.

Thank you.

Having a quorum present.

We are now in session.

Good morning, colleagues.

Is there an approval of the minutes?

Motion.

There's a motion to approve the minutes.

Hear no objections, that action shall be taken.

We are going to move into public comment, noting that we will provide one minute for public comment.

We do have a public hearing on our agenda this morning.

Um and also just want to remind everyone that we have until 10 o'clock.

10 o'clock, our budget hearing starts.

So if there is anyone in the committee of the whole or virtually who's joining us virtually, if you'd like to make a public comment, please raise your hand.

Please raise your hand if you're joining us in person or virtually.

Public comment shall be cut off in three seconds.

If you'd like to make a public comment, please raise your hand.

All right.

Public comment has now been cut off.

Good morning, Ms.

Gray.

How many hands do we have raised virtually?

Good morning, madam chair.

There are four hands raised for virtual public comment.

Okay, thank you.

We do not have any hands raised in the committee of the whole.

So if we can please get started with our first virtual caller again, you will have one minute for general public comment.

Our first caller is William M.

Davis.

William M.

Davis, you have one minute for general public comment.

Good morning, young people.

Can I be heard?

Good morning, yes.

Okay, I like to say I think that Josh explore the feasibility of having the land bank whenever they sell the property.

In so much that the city, you know, that's a strange relationship where the city is cutting the grass, broadening up and doing a whole lot of work related to that, but not getting anything for it.

You know, it's good that they if they can expedite, you know, the the process of getting the paperwork cleared quicker, but the city should get a rebate on everything they sell.

And I think that would be helpful to help helpful to developing uh projects in the neighborhood, you know.

At least we get a better return on our our time and our money.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next caller.

Our next caller is Betty A.

Varner.

Betty A.

Vernon, you have one minute for general public comment.

Uh good morning to all within the sound of my voice.

I'm Betty A.

Brown, the president of the Soda Elsewhere Black Association.

Uh, if you are a caregiver and you need some assistance taking care of your loved one, please call a Mrs.

Deborah A.

Royal at 313-484-3808.

She is the executive director of community solutions.

She has a program called Helping Hands.

And the caregiver, you can get some help with the things that you are providing, the uh the services you are providing to your loved one.

Also, the caregiver can also receive services, and you get a relief.

You they do massages, you can get your uh nails done.

Uh they go on uh trips, they go out to eat, and it's just a way for you to get some relief and relax.

313 484 3808.

Reach out and get some help taking care of your role.

Thank you.

The next caller.

Our next caller is owner Papa.

Owner Papa, you have one minute for general public comment.

Uh good morning through the chairman.

Good morning, yes.

I agree with Mr.

Um Williams.

Uh absolutely we should get money because we're spending out a lot of money and we're not getting anything back.

7.11 is a farce.

Um the the Detroit land bank could never participate in Newcena basement when it comes to uh occupied homes.

The the at the very act says that they cannot.

710.

Um uh DBL questions relationship.

Yeah, that was them that you know Wayne County was sending over houses that were already um should have been demolished, but they sent them over to Detroit for us to demolish.

That's usually how we're being treated.

I just heard on the news this morning that they're gonna have uh you have to pay to see the the the are you guys gonna have a deal with channel 10 so that the people in the city of Detroit who actually you know supplement these these uh stadiums uh that we it will be able to see the uh the sports because it's it's too expensive for us to afford.

says that they cannot 710 um uh db l questions the relationship yeah that was them that you know wine county was sending over houses that were already um should have been demolished but they sent them over to detroit for us to demolish that's usually how we're being treated i just heard on the news this morning that they're gonna have uh you have to pay to see the the the the are you guys gonna have a deal with channel 10 so that the people in the city detroit who actually you know supplement these these uh stadiums uh that we it will be able to see the uh the sports because it's it's too expensive for us to afford we've been cash you know we we're we're a poor city the music hall is not our problem and absolutely no bonds thank you thank you did does that conclude general public comment madam chair there is one additional caller um noting that there were two callers that raised their hand after you cut off public comment our last caller is marguerite maddox thank you miss maddoc good morning you have the floor good morning good morning how are you doing well thank you good morning can you hear me yes we can can you hear me okay thank you um I would like to think yeah please please think it back with we uh we all need to live the bus comfortably and sure that the new development includes and development and shoot the door uh item door open and make sure that the uh device height the button should not be number of them three both yeah at least they let's say everyone knows that we pay us up so you can clause shot the abandon card in the shot driveway and anyway the a vehicles the a pop at the bus stop and not be not do not the person to the coat up at vehicles at the bus stop please we need to make a nothing at the bus stop and thank you very much thank you miss maddox we appreciate you all right that now concludes our general public comment and we are going to move through the agenda prior to calling the public hearing to order at 920 we'll get started with unfinished business and line item 6.1 line item 6.1 is the status of council member Letitia Johnson submitted memorandum requesting LPD to draft the resolution in support of Michigan House Bills 5660 and 5661 is there a motion to receive and file line item 6.1 noting that the resolution is in a subsequent line item motion there's a motion to receive and file line item 6.1 hearing no objections that action shall be taken line item 6.2 status of council president james tape this is a request for a public notice distance requirements 300 foot rule

Is there a motion to receive and file line item 6.1 noting that the resolution is in a subsequent line item?

Motion.

There's a motion to receive and file line item 6.1.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Line item 6.2 status of council president James Tate.

This is a request for a public notice distance requirements, 300 foot rule.

The legislative fiscal and ordinance interaction review.

Is there a motion to receive and file line item 6.2 motion?

There's a motion to receive and file line item 6.2.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Line item 6.3 status of council member Letitia Johnson submitted memorandum requesting report on the community outreach ordinance.

There is a request for a two-week bring back.

Is there a motion?

Motion.

There's a motion to bring line item 6.3 back in two weeks.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Line item 6.4 status of council member Scott Benson.

Submitted memorandum regarding the M4 Green Buffer Text Amendment.

Timeline and process.

There is a request for a one-week bring back.

Is there a motion?

Motion.

There's a motion to bring line item 6.4 back in one week.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Moving on to new business in line item 7.1.

Line item 7.1 is contract number 600707.

This is a lease revenue that the city will receive to provide for a lease of 127 Campbell from the City of Detroit for the Gordy Howe Bridge, Gordy Howe International Bridge, Project Staging.

Contractor B and A Constructors USA.

Colleagues, is there a motion to approve or discuss?

Motion to discuss.

Discussion.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Just wondering if we can discuss this item.

Just I'm wondering if this is a new lease or if we're extending a current lease.

Please introduce yourself for the record.

Through the chair, this is John Trump to Real Estate Division with housing revitalization.

Um we should be joined by Kenneth Cassell as well as Grant Hilbers and Derek Wilson.

Um through the chair to Councilmember Santiago Romero, uh, if you could repeat the question, there's always that blackout period when we get uh promoted.

Yes, good morning.

Good to see you.

And my question is just I'm wondering if this lease is retroactive or if this is a new lease, because this has been going on for a while now, um, and it looks like we're extending it for a year.

But I'm just wondering if this is a new lease or if we're extending the time from a previous one.

Technically, this is a new lease.

There was a previous lease in place from the original negotiations that involved you know quite a few more locks between uh the EDC, the city, the land bank, uh, and B and A.

Uh, this um because that original lease expired, we had to enter into a new one exclusively for this parcel alone.

So technically from a contractual standpoint, this is a new one, but effectively um it would be a continuation of the construction staging needed for the Gore Powell project uh until the end of the year.

Understood.

Okay.

Thank you.

That answers my question.

I just wanted to um to note that I guess um whoever could answer when did the last lease end?

When did that contract end?

Oh, it says December 31st of 2025.

Is that correct?

That's correct.

Okay, understood.

All right, those are all my questions.

Thank you.

Thank you, madam chair.

Thank you.

Any additional questions?

Is there a motion?

Motion to approve.

There's a motion to send line item 7.1 to formal with the recommendation to approve.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Thank you.

All right, colleagues.

We are going to move to the 920 public hearing.

I'd like to call the 920 public hearing to order.

The 920 public hearing is to amend chapter 50 of the 2019 Detroit City Code zoning by amending Article 17.

Zoning District Maps, Section 50 17 49.

District Map Number 47 to revise the zoning classification for a parcel generally bound by Richden Street to the north, Pataski Avenue to the west, DeWayne Street to the south, and Homer Street to the east, commonly known as 4094 Dwayne Street from the R2 district, two family residential zoning classification to the SD1 Special Development District, small scale mixed use zoning classification.

And good morning.

We have several individuals joining us here.

Please be sure to touch the base of the microphone.

The light will turn from red to green.

And please introduce yourself for the record and you may proceed.

Good morning, Eric Fizzini, CPC staff.

Good morning.

Sorry, good morning.

Lolita Williams with Presbyterian Villages of Michigan.

Good morning, Debbie Fisher with Hope Village Revitalization.

Morning.

And we also should have online Mr.

Graham Welling and Brennan Dylan if they could be promoted.

We will certainly promote them.

Did you need access to share your screen?

Yes, please.

I'll have a brief presentation, then the applicant will have a follow-up.

And if you are joining us virtually here for the public hearing, please raise your hand and the team will promote you to be a panelist.

And please introduce yourself for the record.

Hello, good morning.

My name is Graham Welling with Wallach Development.

Good morning.

If the host could please allow sharing.

Good morning, Sarah who just joined us virtually.

Please introduce yourself for the record.

Good morning, everyone.

My name is Brennan Davis.

I work as a development manager alongside Graham with Wallach.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm just unable to share that my screen if I could please.

Ms.

Greg, can you please give Mr.

Fazzini access to share his screen?

I am trying to do that.

Is it possible for him to request it?

Sometimes it pops up for me.

I could just run through it verbally if if that's okay if we can't get it to work.

So is that is that okay, Miss Madam Chair?

Should we keep trying to sure?

That's fine.

And I'll ask another team member to see if they can assist.

Oh, I can do it now, sorry.

Okay.

Thanks.

Okay, sorry for the delay.

Um, so this site is in uh City Council District 5 in the Narden Park neighborhood, sometimes referred to as Russell Woods Narden Park.

Uh to the north, a few blocks is West Davison, and this site is one block to the west of Dexter Avenue.

Uh Dexter Avenue's had a recent uh streetscape improvement and some other investment in the area.

Uh and HRD is also focusing on some city-owned property for mixed use in housing development to the east, just to give some context.

Uh so the site was formerly the Alice Burney Elementary School, uh opened in the 1960s, closed in 2009 and demolished in 2016.

It's one parcel city-owned.

Um, and again, Dexter Avenue is to the top right of the screen.

Uh so here's an aerial with surrounding zoning, R2 uh on all sides.

Uh just walking around the site.

Uh, this is looking um south across the site from the northeast corner at uh Richden and Homer.

Um, there's an existing multifamily building across the street to the northeast.

Then looking back at that intersection again, uh multi-family uh to the northeast, and a second uh small multifamily building across from the site.

Uh then looking east uh down Richden um stable uh single family residential across the street from the site to the north.

Um turning uh looking across the site again and now looking north uh down Pataski.

So these are the end blocks of the residential area to the west, uh, which would line up with the proposed uh orientation of the proposed buildings, uh looking back across the site from the south, um, and now looking at the proposal.

So um the applicants presented two projects um within this proposal.

The first would be the south half of the site in the northwest corner, um, and that would be 11 multiple family buildings totaling 53 units with a mix of 13 one bedroom, 28 two bedroom, and 12 three bedroom uh clubhouses proposed along Homer with internal walkways, a playground, and other amenities, and the SD1 would allow this number of buildings and units where the current R2 zoning would not.

And the SD1 would allow this number of buildings and units where the current R2 zoning would not.

And here's a look at those proposed buildings in project one.

So type A would be the largest.

Four of those buildings with six units each.

Type B would have four of those buildings with five units each.

And then type C would have three buildings of three units.

And then the senior building examples in the bottom right would be that project two area.

Three-story senior housing proposal.

P and D found that the proposal is consistent with the master plan.

The site is in the Winter Halter Master Plan neighborhood.

And staff also found that the proposal would be consistent with the rezoning criteria we have in the ordinance to touch on a couple of those.

The rezoning would meet the challenge of developing vacant city-owned property and may support other recent efforts along Dexter Avenue.

Three, uh, that the rezoning uh will help the public through development of vacant underutilized property and the development agreements with the city would help ensure uh city control going forward.

And then six buildings have been oriented to follow the existing block pattern, and the housing investment should have a positive impact.

And they've previously been working with PDD on uh that layout and design.

Uh so that's all I have, Madam Chair, and we'll turn it over to uh Mr.

Welling um to share his screen if he has a presentation.

And it looks like it's not letting me share at the moment.

All right, we will provide access to you.

All right, I think that should do it.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Uh if you can see my screen, so um, I just want to give a uh brief um introduction to the different team players here.

Um screen so that it's the presentation is on full screen.

Uh you may be able to uh let me try.

Does that work?

Yes, thank you.

Okay, perfect.

Um my name's Graham Welling.

I'm with Wallach Development.

Um joined by my colleague Brennan Davis.

Um in the room, uh, we have Lolita Williams of Presbyterian Villages of Michigan and Debbie Fisher of Hope Village Revitalization.

Um, just briefly about Wallach.

We are uh entering our 60th year of development.

We're an integrated development construction and management company based in the Columbus, Ohio area.

Um we've got uh projects and and properties really throughout the Midwest, um, Ohio and the adjacent states.

Um, and we have uh partnered with Presbyterian Villages on the uh Dr.

Violet T.

Lewis development um uh or the redevelopment of the former Lewis College of Business on Myers Road.

Um and that project's just coming to a completion now, and we're excited to deepen that partnership and partner uh partially with Presbyterian Villages and also with Hope Village.

Um, Lolita, would you uh want to give a quick introduction to Presbyterian Villages?

Absolutely, yes.

Uh we are a faith-based nonprofit organization.

We serve uh senior living housing and um metroplex Metroplex Detroit as well as uh southern several regions of Michigan.

We have over 32 facilities, and we serve over 3200 seniors in Michigan.

So we're very proud of our mission, and we are very excited to be a partner of this particular project above Hope Village as well as with uh Wallach.

Uh Wallach has done a very good job with partnering with us or us partnering with them in managing their project with the Dr.

Violet T.

Lewis project that's uh been very very ongoing and very very successful so far.

And so we are looking forward to managing this particular project and um work looking forward to working with Hope Village.

Thank you.

And we've also partnered with Hope Village Revitalization.

Uh Debbie, if you like to give a quick introduction as well.

Yep, just quickly uh Hope Village Revitalization is a small community development corporation focused on the Hope Village neighborhood founded by Davison, uh Dexter, the Lodge Freeway, and and Hamilton on the east, and so we're about a mile square, and we're um focused on sustainable affordable housing.

So we've been working on um building energy efficiency as well as um uh renewable energy and affordability into housing throughout the area, and we're very excited.

And we're very excited.

We've partnered with Presbyterian Villages of Michigan before on a senior development, and we're now happy to be involved in bringing this affordable housing to the neighborhood area.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

This team was selected and it's a product of Detroit HRD request for proposals in late 2024 to redevelop uh this block.

Um as far as the rezoning uh request is concerned, um it stems out of our work uh in early 2025, um, you know, coming through the PPR process, presenting to various neighborhood groups, um, meeting with the actual uh neighbors right on Richton Street as well, and using that community outreach to guide our plan to uh watch the site plan evolve based on that feedback.

You know, a concrete example of how neighbor feedback was integrated was at first our plan was to access the senior uh building or project two on the site plan uh directly from Richden Street, but based on neighbor feedback and really seeing how narrow that street is and how traffic moves, we made the decision to move that driveway.

Um, so all the access is off of Homer and Potosky.

Um we've been integrating neighbor feedback, we've maintained communications with the neighbors and community stakeholders throughout the development of the project.

Uh we did apply to MISHTA, the Michigan State Housing Development Authority for tax credit financing last fall, and unfortunately came up a few points short.

Um this project has been working its way through, and we've made some changes on the financing and application competitiveness pieces that we feel will be successful and allow the projects to move forward in the April 1st MISTA round.

Um just as Mr.

Fizzini showed, uh there's really two different projects here that are designed to form a cohesive whole.

A 53 unit senior development up in the top right, and a 52-unit family or general occupancy development to fill out the block.

Um as I mentioned, kind of the project details.

Um as far as amenities uh for you know people beyond just the residents of the community.

The idea is to create a greenway space that links the two disconnected pieces of Monterey Street.

And that was really integral in our planning from the beginning to allow neighbors and community members to cross through this uh development to create a non-motorized connection.

Um to build some community gathering spaces off of that greenway to allow people to move more seamlessly and kind of restitch this block in the community.

Um and finally, a small commercial space, about 850 square feet, is planned for in the senior building.

And the goal is for that space is to really be a community serving amenity, um, whether that's a small shop or a small social services office, something that won't uh create a tremendous amount of traffic, but will give people a reason to come and visit um this area.

Um as far as rents for the community, this is affordable housing, um, you know, financed through the tax credit program.

So rents are between 30% and 60% of area median incomes.

Uh so that's up to 42,420 for a single person or 60,600 for a family of four.

Um rents are certainly lower than uh what we would see if this was market rate new construction and uh market study has assessed that the even the top-end rents are appropriate and achievable for the area.

Additionally, um the family project has been awarded eight project-based section 811 vouchers through MISHTA, which are designed for people with uh disabilities, you know, physical or intellectual disabilities.

Um, so there'll be eight of those units.

And the senior project uh should find out today whether it's awarded eight project-based vouchers as well.

Um, these would be traditional project-based vouchers.

So that allows these communities to serve folks at even lower levels and serve folks with different abilities and different needs.

Um in each community, eight of the units will be fully accessible, and all of the units in the family community uh with first floor living space will be visitable by those with disabilities, and all of the units and the building will have an elevator as well.

Just quickly, some questions that came out of the uh CPC process last year.

Why the SD1 zone was chosen.

So SD1 is a designed to be a flexible zone.

And here it permits a wider range of uses, but is uh slightly more restrictive in the scale of those uses than some of the other zones that would permit uh multifamily.

So we also considered the R5 zone, but R5 has a higher height limit.

Um it has a higher density allowance.

So we wanted to be careful that whatever zoning is set here is respectful of the community and the surroundings and permits the type of development that the neighbors and and the community would like here.

Um additionally, uh the SD1 zone has a little bit less parking requirement, which we feel is appropriate for an affordable development, especially on the senior side.

Our goal is not to create more asphalt and parking lot and storm water than is necessary for the site.

As Mr.

Fizzini showed here, some example elevations.

Um these are certainly conceptual, and and we've been in touch uh with the the neighbors and the PPD team as well on some design feedback.

Um so these should be considered example at this point, but kind of a general design direction.

Um just briefly here the floor plans for the senior project.

Um this would be very standard for an independent living senior building of the type that Presbyterian Villages manages throughout the state of Michigan.

So there's community space, there's on-site management.

The building itself is secure, so key fob access to the entry, well lit security cameras, um, you know, to create a secure environment for residents and to deter folks who uh might think about causing trouble there as well.

Um on the townhome side, our goal is to create something that looks like an up and down townhouse, but has some single level flats on it on the first floor to allow greater accessibility than you would normally get with an up and down townhouse.

These are some examples of unit layouts and unit interiors that we would propose.

And finally, our project timeline, as I mentioned, we are applying uh April 1st for competitive 9% tax credits allocated by MISHTA.

We believe with some changes and especially the award of the project-based vouchers, these developments are primed to be very competitive.

Um they have full city support coming through that HRD RFP process, and we're really excited to move forward with the application and are hopeful for a good result.

Uh, if tax credits are awarded throughout the summer of this year, we would find out we'd be developing final construction plans, um, you know, working with funding partners to secure the remaining financing, um, looking toward a spring 2027 closing construction commencement.

It's about an 18-month construction period.

So in the winter or late 2028, um, the construction would be complete.

And by spring to summer of 2029, we expect full lease up and occupancy of these 105 units.

And with that, I'll pause for any questions.

All right, thank you so much for the presentation.

I am going to uh kick it off with a couple of questions.

Mr.

Fazini, if you can share with us why we are here today, because we have our budget hearings at 10 o'clock, and we traditionally don't have public hearings during our budget season.

Yes, so um, as uh uh Madam Chair, so as the applicant said, they're um seeking another um low-income housing tax credit application, which I believe April 1st um would be the deadline for that.

Um, this project um came through CPC last summer and was recommended for approval with some of the other um projects that were occurring last fall.

There was a little bit of a delay where this wasn't able to reach this committee in the fall or our winter prior to um the end of the last um term.

So um that's why it's here before you today.

And and the rezoning would need to take place prior to them applying for the tax credit?

Um I would let the applicant answer that.

Um I don't know if that's the case.

Um it would need to occur prior to permitting with BC from the city standpoint.

But if the applicant would like to add to that, um please go.

Certainly, yeah, happy to answer.

Um having the zoning approved at all of the different um board levels is a competitive advantage for the application, yes.

And do we anticipate coming back before this body for any tax abatements?

So I I can answer that as well.

Uh the project has or the projects uh have applied for the one percent um pilot administrative pilot.

Um so I'm not familiar if if it will come back before the body, but we certainly would welcome the opportunity.

It won't, it won't.

I was just wondering if there would be another opportunity for us to delve a little deeper into the details of within the project.

Um so I appreciate the um the units, the type A units that are fully accessible and um the ADA uh compliance that you shared with us.

I was wondering how many total parking spaces for the units.

So on the senior side, uh the parking ratio is uh three-quarters of a space or 0.75 spaces per unit, uh, which is you know, we feel appropriate um for a affordable senior development.

On the family side, it's planned to be one-to-one.

So I think with a couple of extra spaces for visitors and staff, um, it's slightly more than 52 spaces.

Thank you.

And then for I believe there is a um an apartment style.

Well, no, I'm I shouldn't phrase it that way.

I was trying to visualize if there would be um one door that allows you into the building, then you access other units.

And if there is, if you will um if you plan to have or I would encourage you to have an automatic door uh that opens for people of varying abilities.

Yeah, great question as well.

So on the senior development, the the three-story building, those would have the automatic door and and would have accessible routes.

So you know, people could access their apartments um via an elevator if they're on the upper floors or or the lower levels, it would all be um you know flat essentially.

Um the family or the townhouse side, our goal has been that each unit has its own dedicated entrance.

So there's no shared um common spaces within those buildings.

Um so residents can access their units directly.

Thank you.

And any of them zero grade will the senior building yes, yeah.

There would be zero step entry on the senior side and uh the first floor units on the family side would also have zero step entry.

Yep.

All right, excellent.

Thank you.

Colleagues, any questions?

All right.

Seeing no questions, we are going to open it up for public comment.

If there is anyone joining us who'd like to make a public comment regarding the public hearing, please raise your hand.

Please raise your hand.

The collection of public comment has now concluded.

And discussion.

Briefly, Madam Chair.

Member Santiago Romero.

No questions because you also make questions, so thank you.

Oh, thank you.

Ms.

Grey, how many hands do we have raised virtually?

Madam Chair, we have six hands raised for virtual public comment.

Okay, who is our first caller?

Please uh note that you will have one minute for public comment.

Our first caller is Owner Papa.

Owner Papa, you have one minute for public comment regarding the public hearing.

Owner Papa.

Good morning through the chair, may I be heard?

Good morning, yes.

Um, I I appreciated the the presentation.

It appears that they um they went to the public or the the residents and they got a lot of feedback that they're listening to.

I wanted to know, I mean he may have told us what is the estimated opening for these for these facilities, and um will you maintain the um the rates to be affordable since you're using LITECEC, which is low income tax credits, and how long will that be in effect?

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next caller.

Our next caller is Foster Foster, Mr.

Foster, you have one minute for public comment regarding the public hearing.

Let's go to the next caller.

I see Mr.

Foster just walked in the room.

Our next caller is William M.

Davis.

William M.

Davis, you have one minute for public comment regarding the public hearing.

Good morning, yes.

I didn't hear.

Did they state how large each unit is and how many square feet for the various different types of units?

If so, I didn't hear it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our next caller is Jadante Smith.

Jedante Smith, you have one minute for public comment regarding the public hearing.

Good morning, Mabby Hurt.

Good morning, yes.

I just want to say it seems that uh developers that are from outside of the city have an easier process to develop an easier pathway versus developers who are from Detroit or who are uh more community-based and community centered.

I didn't get to watch this entire presentation.

I just joined in.

Um but I just want to know if this is going this development is going to alter this neighborhood wherever it may be in a substantial way that the residents that live there are going to have to uh deal with a a different level of uh quality of life than they've already had, and also is this development going to have a substantial increase to rents in that area because it area media well AMI, whatever you call it, uh is based on the rents in that area, supposedly, and based on the uh media income and things like that, but I'll also I think some of these AMI things are based on the rents that are being charged.

So if these rents are substantially higher than those in the neighborhood, then this is going to affect renters in that area very very substantially.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next caller.

I want to know if they could put uh stormwater drainage under their parking lot and then uh use that water to plus the toilets that would keep some of the maintenance or the operation cost down for the buildings and uh I wanted to know about this one percent you mentioned that I nobody talked about it, but uh I don't know what that referred to a trial that you're gonna try and um I do think that the taxes that the last statement made is true because sometimes fun uh the way they raise taxes on on the buildings is uh what uh that uh the other buildings in the area are worth comparable buildings.

So I the whole property tax thing, the way we do stuff, I think needs to be looked at trying to finance everything off of people where they live.

Thank you.

The next caller.

Yay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And one bit.

Oh that we can be agent.

Thank you.

All right.

I believe that concludes our public comment.

And to the uh representatives that are here, if you all can please be succinct.

We have nine minutes before we have to conclude.

Madam Chair.

Yes.

Foster had his hand raised before we cut off public comment.

Mr.

Foster came in the room, and then I believe he indicated that he was no longer interested in public comment.

Is he still here?

Okay, he's he did indicate he was no longer interested in making a public comment.

Thank you.

Okay, if you all can please um again succinctly just um respond to the questions that pertain to your area, and if there's anything that I I wrote down that I did don't hear a response for, I will just certainly remind you of the question.

Who'd like to be in?

Yeah, certainly, and appreciate all the questions.

Um they were very good.

Um so the first one I had noted was how long would the affordability period be in place?

Uh for this development, it would be 45 years.

Um that's secured by a deed restriction and monitored by the state.

So there's uh strict compliance, the state and this and the city as well as there's city funding in these projects.

Um the square footage for the units uh on the senior side would be approximately 700 square foot for a one-bedroom and nine hundred for a two-bedroom.

Um on the family side, the units are a little bit larger, so it's about 800 square feet for a one-bedroom, uh, about a thousand for a two-bedroom, and um up to I believe 1,300 square feet for a three-bedroom.

Um, there's a couple of different unit layouts there.

Um how would this impact rents in the area?

So uh the rents for the project uh were set by a market study, so they're they're designed to be attainable for the area.

Um that's reviewed by Mishta.

They have some pretty strict standards that they want to make sure that the rents are realistic, that we're not charging more than uh is possible for the area.

Um and AMIs are actually determined on a countywide basis.

So um we you know have to look at the area because the county income would suggest that we could charge higher rates than are possible here.

Uh stormwater management or or gray water, so we will certainly have integrated stormwater management, um, probably including some under um parking lot, uh retention, detention, uh greywater recycling isn't part of the plan at the moment, um, although uh it's certainly something that you know could be looked at here, but uh it's not not part of the plan at the moment.

Um the breakdown of one bedrooms and two bedrooms in the senior buildings good question.

Uh 45 one-bedrooms, eight two-bedroom units.

Uh would there be hearing and vision impaired units?

Yes.

Uh so based on I think it's a HUD uh section 504 standard, two percent of the units need to be uh designated as hearing and vision impaired units, so they have um special buzzers and uh lights to indicate you know the doorbell and things of that nature.

Um would the lot be gated?

So at the moment the plan is no.

Um it's certainly a point of discussion, but that's that's not uh something we're playing for at the moment.

And there would be um security cameras throughout uh you know the common spaces within the senior building and then throughout the property as well, just to ensure uh safety and security.

I I think that's all the comments um that I had noted.

And the final one, which was the first question, was in regards to when you are planning to open, and I know you indicated 2029.

So thank you so much for answering all of the questions.

We appreciate it.

Colleagues, any additional questions?

Is there a motion?

Motion to approve set send to formal with the recommendation to approve.

There's a motion to send line item five to formal with recommendation to approve.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Thank you all so much.

You just need to turn your microphone on.

Oh that now closes out the 920 public hearing.

And we will move very quickly back through the agenda.

And would like to recognize Mr.

Jeff Jones who joined us as well.

Thank you.

Great to see you, sir.

Looking forward to it.

Thank you.

All right, colleagues, we are on line item 7.2.

Line item 7.2 is contract number 6004900-a four.

This is 100% ARPA funding.

Amendment number four to provide a time only extension for managing the single family scatter site homeownership program.

Contractor CHN housing partners.

Is there a motion on line item 7.2?

Motion to approve.

There's a motion to send line item 7.2 to formal with a recommendation to approve.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Line item 7.3.

Contract number 6007424-A1 and contract number 600 6779-A1.

This is for emergency services provided by the Housing and Revitalization Department.

These items are for expansions of emergency emergency shelter bed capacity for individuals experiencing homelessness.

And the secondary contract will expand the 50 beds to 77 beds.

Colleagues, is there a motion on line item 7.3?

Motion to approve.

There's a motion to send line item 7.3 to formal with a recommendation to approve.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Line item 7.4 is a resolution amending and restating the project plan and issuance of bonds by the economic development corporation of the city of Detroit for the music hall expansion project.

Colleagues, is there a motion to discuss very briefly?

This question.

Move David Howe over as a panelist, as well as Rebecca Naven.

Madam Chair, if they could please raise their hands, I will promote them.

Mr.

David Howe and Rebecca Naven.

Are you present?

Colleagues, if we can I was just about to put it at the end of the agenda.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Please introduce yourself for the record.

Thank you, Nathan.

I'm the general counsel of the Detroit Economic Uh Growth Corporation here today on behalf of the Economic Development Corporation.

Thank you for joining us.

My quick question is just to ask whether or not the issuance of bonds puts any financial requirement on the city or or on the Detroit Economic Growth Corporation or the City of Detroit, and also if this opportunity and ability to issue bonds extends the ability for the DEGC.

Um the DGC's bond issuance.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um to your first question.

No, the um these bonds are 501c3 tax exempt um bonds and some taxable bonds.

The EDC would be a conduit issuer only, and the bonds would be solely paid and secured by revenues of the Detroit Music Hall.

So no obligation whatsoever on the city of Detroit, no obligation whatsoever on the economic development corporation.

Um and this this issuance, the um the issuance that would be done here.

Uh this um is limited to this specific issuance.

Any additional bond issuance that would be um requested by the economic development corporation would have to come back to city council through a project plan, um just like this one is.

Okay, thank you.

Colleagues, any additional questions?

I'm sorry.

Oh, I was gonna just for clarifications.

Um today, madam chair.

I believe the only thing that we are requesting today is for the um public hearing uh to be set, and then we'd come back in it um and give you more details on the project in a couple weeks.

Thank you.

Um Madam Chair.

Thank you.

Um so that was not my understanding.

I know we had a public hearing last year about this project.

Um yeah, so if I may, madam chair.

Uh in 2024, there was a public hearing about this project in April of 24.

Um, and the the since that time, um, the music hall has changed its plan of financing.

Um, and the plan of financing now um has resulted in a requested increase on the bond issuance amount.

Um, so we've amended and restated the project plan.

Um, and because it's now an amended and restated project plan, but it has to go back through the process of a public hearing and new approval by city council.

Um, and so today we are um we've we've submitted the package uh and we're asking for the public hearing to be set.

Um and then we would come back um in a couple weeks with representatives from the music hall to present the project.

Okay, thank you as revised.

All right, thank you so much.

Colleagues, is there a motion to send line item 7.4 to formal for the setting of a public hearing?

Motion to send a formal motion.

There's a motion to send line item 7.4 to formal, hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

And madam clerk, if you will note that member Benson has joined us.

Thank you, colleagues.

Line items.

Is there a motion to send line item 7.5 and 7.6 to formal with a recommendation to approve?

These are resolutions in regards to support or opposition of state house bills motion.

There's a motion to send line items 7.5 and 7.6 to formal with a recommendation to approve.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Excuse me, madam chair.

To parliamentarian.

We need to during the discussion on 7.4.

Wasn't it indicated that they wanted to send it to formal for introduction and setting the public hearing?

Yes.

Um, you only said send the formal, ma'am.

Okay.

So I just wanted it.

I wanted the clerk to be clear.

I I think I did request the motion to send it to formal for the introduction of a for the set of a public hearing.

Yes, it the chair is um has to uh repeat what the actual motion is.

All right, so I just trying to keep it clear, ma'am.

Okay, thank you.

Uh so line item 7.4 shall be sent to formal with a recommendation to approve for the setting of a public hearing.

Madam Clerk.

We clear thank you.

Line item 7.7 is property sale at one 225, 1235, and 1241 Springwell Street.

Motion to bring it back in one week, madam chair.

Discussion.

Discussion.

Yeah, do we have to notice that we have a quorum now?

Oh, I just saw member waters.

Okay.

Um Madam Clerk, will you please note that member waters has joined us?

Yeah, we didn't notice the quorum.

We we should always notice PED as a quorum.

Um can we I'd like to recess the plan that I'm okay it as long as they don't say anything, ma'am.

You're okay.

Okay.

Just you can just continue on and they can be silent.

All right, thank you.

We're we're gonna wrap up shortly.

There is a motion to bring line item 7.7 back in one week.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Line item 7.8 is the transfer of jurisdiction of two parcels from the plan and development department to the general services department and DPR.

And DPR.

What is that?

What for 7300 Garden and a portion of to St.

Jean?

That's Detroit Parks and Recreation.

Colleagues, is there a motion to approve or discuss?

Motion to approve.

There's a motion to send line item 7.8 to formal with a recommendation to approve.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Line item 7.9 is a request for authorization of DTE electric easement for a portion of the future Joe Louis Greenway.

Is there a motion to approve?

Motion.

There's a motion to send line item 7.9 to formal with a recommendation to approve.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Without objection, I'd like to combine line item 7.10 through 7.13.

These are various requests to the legislative policy division.

Is there a motion to refer these items to the appropriate department LPD or law and bring back in two weeks?

Motion.

There is a motion to bring line item 7.10 through 7.13 back in two weeks and refer to the appropriate department.

Hearing no objections, that action shall be taken.

Is there a motion to suspend member reports?

Motion.

Hearing no objections, that action there was one objection from Pro Tim Young.

The motion still passes.

Without objection, we shall stand adjourned.