|
Minutes note:
|
DiLeo provided the staff report.
PUBLIC HEARING
Dan Riem, 1250 Ferdon, Ann Arbor, thanked the Commission for reconsidering the decision. He said he understands this is the first request and therefore requires prudent discernment in order to make a good decision. He thanked the Commission for the work they do and the time they invest on the Commission. He made three points. He said, the definition of ‘functional family’ uses the word "permanent". He said however, that is the relationship between the members of the functional family, rather than the time they live in the home. He said what makes their relationship permanent and distinct is their vowed religious life; they share a common life or formation, which takes, on average, 11 years to priesthood, after completion of undergraduate studies. He said community life is based on the constitution of their order, which spells out how they live their day to day life together. He said they share a common mission; the service of faith and the promotion of justice. He said his relationship with the other priests, because of their vocation, existed before they lived together on Ferdon and will continue long after they are missioned elsewhere. He said the fact they are one another’s patient advocates should indicate their depth of commitment to one another. He said the point made regarding transiency should be looked at in light of the commitment made at St. Mary’s Student Parish in Ann Arbor and given the declining numbers of priests they consider it well worthwhile to send even more priests here. He said for the sake of stability in their ministry it would be counterproductive to interchange the priests. He said he has been here for the past 10 years and he and the other priests are likely to be around for a long time and they love the house on Wayne Street because it has enough bedrooms and has a living space that fits their religious lifestyle, which is similar to that of a family. He said they are not a family, but believe to be, as the criteria states, functionally equivalent to the family. He said he will never have a family and does not regret that choice; but the lifestyle of living in a Jesuit family will come as close to that of a family. He said if the Special Exception Use is not granted, either their ministry will be exceptionally burdened by limiting them to 4 members or their vowed life together will be burdened by them living in separate houses. He said their realtor has said that it is unlikely that they will find a house with seven bedrooms and communal living arrangements suitable for them in other zoning districts and he hopes that their good, respectable living as good neighbors will heal any issues brought about by this request. He said they can be trusted by their word that they will abide by the conditions determined by the Planning Commission, including parking.
Jonathan Levine, 456 Hilldale, Ann Arbor, said that he supports the Jesuit’s request. He spoke about the claims made that denying the request would be gender discrimination, and the claim of failures of the Catholic Church to weed out pedophilia are somehow related to this zoning request. He said he was embarrassed to even have to say these words, and that all individuals deserve to be treated based on their own actions and not subject to guilt by association. He said the fact that this even has to be said in Ann Arbor in 2014 is profoundly disturbing. He said he was also disturbed about the argument raised about ones’ religious beliefs and interpretation thereof has been brought before the Planning Commission. He asked what the proponents of these claims would say if the applicants were Unitarians, or Buddhists or Presbyterians. He said if they felt the same, he would consider that religious discrimination and either way such arguments deserve to be rejected in strongest of terms. He said overwhelmingly the zoning is designed for the R1 and the lifestyles that fit within it and one needs to realize that that there is not just one American Dream that is to be pursued in this town but many and the Special Exception Use in the R1 district is the proper vehicle to be pursued here.
Liz Kamali, 2122 Dorset Road, Ann Arbor, resident of Oxbridge Neighborhood Association, said that the Oxbridge Association and attorney Scott Munzel is not accurately representing the neighborhood. She said their full membership has still not heard from Oxbridge about their position or the hiring of an attorney and attorney fees. She said she represented 33 Oxbridge neighbor association members and other residents who are in support of granting the Jesuit’s petition for Special Exception. She asked neighbors to stand up and said they believe that Attorney Scott Munzel does not legitimately represent the Oxbridge Neighborhood Association but rather a minority. She said they agree with City staff and the City Attorney’s office that the Jesuits meet the standards to qualify as a functional family and asked that the Commission grant their petition as they would be happy to welcome the Jesuits to the Oxbridge Neighborhood. She offered to provide a list of supporters from their association to the Commission.
Sonia Urbaniak, current owner of 1919 Wayne, Ann Arbor, and Oxbridge Neighborhood Association member, said she was glad the Jesuits were trying to talk to the neighbors. She thought if the Jesuits would get the exception approval they would be lovely neighbors to have and she would like them. She said she became very upset when she watched the video of the previous meeting. She said when taking her citizen test last Tuesday, she was asked by the lady giving her the test, what is the ‘rule of law’. She said no one is above the rule of law. She said this is not about setting a precedent or anything like it, but about applying the Ann Arbor code that is already there. She said the code has been there a long time and should put this whole discussion into perspective. She asked the Commission why people who use secret, behind the back campaigns behind the Jesuits did so and if the concerns they had were reasonable and founded would it not have been so much better to do so in the open? She said if one of the concerns was to inform the neighborhoods would it not have been reasonable to invite her or her husband, life long members of the ONA [Oxbridge Neighborhood Association] to the meeting about the sale instead of removing them from the email list as to not inform them about the meeting. She said if the information was true would it not have been better to share it with everyone? She asked why the president of ONA had not gotten feedback from its membership in the last 2 weeks, especially after being informed of the secretive approach of ONA regarding this matter. She said she was sure there might be some reasons why people wouldn’t want the Jesuits here in their neighborhood, similar to other reasons why they wouldn’t want all different groups somewhere in America and all over the world. She said she was from Germany so it was even harder for her to think about that. She asked the Commission to let the laws decide and not prejudices because if prejudices become our advisors then we have lost a lot of advancements of the last century.
Vivian Johnson, who lives in Ann Arbor Hills, Ward 2, said she her husband and she fully support the Jesuit application before the Commission. She said her husband and she are not Catholic. She said let the laws in place decide this request. She reiterated that that ONA has still not informed their full membership about hiring an attorney and noted that ONA and Scott Munzel had put some disrespectful statements in their letter to the Planning Commission. She read from the letter, noting that they cannot make this decision based on what may happen. She said the statements and reasons given by the ONA president sound similar to statements to keep out African Americans, Jews and other groups from living in neighborhoods in the not too distant past. She asked the Commission not to give credence to the ONA president’s letter or restriction requests that might be discriminatory, as bigotry and exclusion has no place in our society or neighborhood. She welcomed the Jesuits to the other side of Washtenaw Avenue only half mile from where they have been living for 10 years.
Joanne Barrett, 2254 Riven Oak Court, Ann Arbor, realtor representing the owners selling the home at 1919 Wayne Street, said her children grew up in the Oxbridge neighborhood and it was a great place; the historical, intellectual, international tapestry of it and a quiet safe place where families grow. She understands why neighbors want to preserve the fabric of their community. She said our religious places of worship are an important thread in that fabric and our art, music, and books have their roots in centuries of sponsorships by clergies. She said churches and temples help us celebrate life transitions from birth to adulthood, marriage, death. She said they counsel us as we go through our journeys and no matter what you believe or don’t believe there is not one among us who will not be touched by the kindness and charity of ministers, priests and rabbis. She said the hungry, the homeless, the poor, the sick, they provide meals, clothing, transportation, and kind words. She said what better way to enrich a neighborhood than to invite those who go out into the neighborhood to help the weakest and neediest among us. She said traditional families are allowed 4 cars to be parked on the street and the Jesuits aren’t being allowed any. She said this exception is a gift to the neighborhood; it is not a change in zoning, it does not change with the home if they some day leave it. She said their home and two bathrooms can only help property values in the area. You can talk to their neighbors on Ferdon to realize the good fortune of those who live near them, and they are more permanent than most of us, having lived in their last home 10 years before they outgrew it; five years longer than the average Ann Arbor homeowner. She said they drive safely, don’t play loud music, don’t have a mean dog, and have no intentions of painting the house purple and they keep a neat yard. She said when Ann Arbor is considering being less inclusive than the State of Michigan, there is something very, very wrong and she urged the Commission to follow the law and the recommendations of the State, the City Attorney and grant this exception.
Sherry Moray, 2065 Day Street, Ann Arbor, said the Oxbridge Neighborhood Association does not speak for her. She said she purchased her home in late 2009 and tried twice to reach out to become an ONA member, without response. She said she is beginning to understand why she did not get a response after hearing the discussion; perhaps it was because her home was a rental prior to her purchasing it or as a single parent to two teens at the time she did not represent the traditional family. She said ONA does not represent the over 2,000 residents that live in the Oxbridge neighborhood which the Commission should take into consideration. She welcomes the home on Wayne Street to being purchased and inhabited by the Jesuit cohorts and read a number of responses and was quite embarrassed that citizens in her beloved, open minded city, which has historically stood for diversity and civil liberties, is fighting this on the basis of age and religion and hiding behind semantics. She said just because the ones proposed to be living in the neighborhood are different in age and other spectrums, doesn’t mean we can’t learn from each other. She said there are many young and older drivers in the area currently and some houses are rentals when owners go on sabbaticals and her children often have friends over who stay for several days without problems.
Susan and Bill Black, 2002 Wayne Street, Ann Arbor, showed two postcard notices they had received inviting them to the public hearing, noting that they live within 300 feet of the proposed request. She said they have enjoyed 27 wonderful years in their neighborhood and that they supported the petition back in April, because it was the right thing to do. She said she was an Oxbridge Neighborhood Association board member, but had resigned over this issue. She said they had paid lifetime dues to the association. She said there are nine neighborhood parking spaces in front of her house that are unused. She noted that as for property values, she had used Zillow to calculate that the Jesuit’s current home on Ferdon has increased in value more than $160,000 in the last six years.
Michael Mc Donnell, 435 Huntington Place, Ann Arbor, Ward 2, said he was a cardiologist and a lot of who he became and what he is, is because of his Jesuit education, and he could speak first hand about the Jesuits applying for this application and could vouch for them fully. He said he felt any negative influence to the community would be the negative impact on the parish, because Father Reim couldn’t function as needed. He said they are truly an asset to his parish as well as to the surrounding parishes, through their community work with the homeless and social justice issues they are involved with. He asked members of St. Mary’s Parish who were in the audience to stand up.
Ethel Potts, 1014 Elder Boulevard, Ann Arbor, said she was disappointed because the Commission did not spend time applying the City Code at their last meeting. She said she hoped the Commission had their zoning codes with them and that they must not rely on the staff report from the previous meeting as it was full of errors. She said the errors might have been corrected. She said there were some added words that changed the meaning of the code, and also omitted a whole sentence from the functional family definition. She read from the zoning code to the Commission, noting that associations and societies are explicitly excluded as functional families. She said the community member’s loyalty was to the Jesuits order and they could be reassigned at any time and was not, in her opinion, a permanent character and would be a violation of City code.
Theresa Angelini, 1315 Beechwood, Ann Arbor, architect and member of St. Mary's Parish, said she was very familiar with the zoning code and the specific neighborhood, and believed the code was intended to protect neighborhoods, so not to have sororities, fraternities and student housing spread into that neighborhood. She said she thought the Jesuits would be a great addition to that neighborhood and speaks to the great diversity of her town. She said she was embarrassed of Ann Arbor’s closed mindedness on this issue and said they should read the zoning code closely, understand the neighborhood and approve the request for this house. She added that seven bedroom houses are few and far between and asked the Commission to support the request.
Laura Paterson, 1925 Cambridge, Ann Arbor, said she was a lifetime members of the Oxbridge Neighborhood Association and had lived there for 10 years. She said she was speaking in support of the request since it meets the requirements. She said she has known the Jesuits for the last 10 years, and that the views expressed by ONA do not represent the majority of the neighborhood on this matter. She asked the Commission to vote in support of the request.
Paul Morel, 703 Berkshire, Ann Arbor, Vice President for ONA, said they represent about 205 homes out of 250 homes in the neighborhood. He said they held a meeting on May 13rd to discuss the Functional Family petition. He said they send out 205 emails, of which 111 were opened and 33 people attended the meeting. He said at that time there was a unanimous consensus to prepare a paper outlining the issues they had with the petition. He said there were two or more that changed their minds and supported the petition, so they represent most of their neighbors, but not all. He said there was universal agreement that this is not about whether the Jesuits would be good neighbors, but whether the use of a functional family designation is appropriate. He said they are concerned that approval of this Special Exception would set a precedent for future petitions and the expansion of the restriction from 4 to 6 individuals within the R4 zoning. He read from his submitted remarks adding that they represent a large number of residents within ONA, stating that they don’t know if they represent the majority of residents. He said the society does not qualify as a functional family, since the Jesuits have a commitment not to each other but the larger group; the Jesuit society, and their relationship is not permanent; but rather a commitment to the Jesuits. He said per the code a society is excluded from qualifying as a functional family. He said even if the applicant meets the definition of a functional family, they fail to meet the standards for Special Exception, since the use must be compatible with the character of the vicinity. He said this neighborhood is a single-family residential neighborhood and does not contain group-homes, cooperatives or any student housing types for more than 4 occupants.
Gwen Nystuen, 1016 Olivia, Ann Arbor, said since the previous meeting she has spent time searching the web and reading the application. She saw that they had including a list of other Jesuit residence examples in other communities in other states. She said she felt the Planning Commission should be considering this as a church-parsonage use which would be allowed in the R1 zoning district. She said even though they would need a Special Exception Use for a church-parsonage it would fit the definition.
Lisa Jevens, said she supported the Jesuits, but doesn't support them bending the zoning laws so they can buy this home. She said she was concerned that the Planning Commission was getting distracted by a large PR campaign rather than focusing on the laws, the zoning and the definitions. She said it was dangerous and biased to decide zoning based organization’s merits or individuals’ no matter how wonderful they may be. She urged the Commission to only focus on the zoning ordinance and how the definition fits a functional family, adding that was the only way a fair and impartial decision could be made. She asked the Commission to take the functional family at face value, other than trying to re-interpret it. She said it clearly states no societies, no organizations. She said part of the reason that their neighborhoods are so desirable is because of the protection they have received through zoning over the years – zoning that was painstakingly put in place by many people. She said there are plenty of other zoned places in Ann Arbor where 6 unrelated people can live, along with churches and parsonage. She asked for respect for the City’s ordinances and their neighborhoods, rather than chip away at them. She said every decision does set a precedent and by ignoring the ordinances, the Planning Commission would be encouraging other groups to find ways around the laws, and that is not the kind of protection the neighborhoods expect from the Planning Commission and the zoning.
Andrea Van Houweling, 920 Lincoln Ave., Ann Arbor, North Burns Park, said she would welcome the Jesuits to live next door to her if they were not asking for permission to be a functional family. She said she didn’t believe they were and felt that this would be opening a can of worms to many other requests, if it didn’t matter how permanent they are, etc. She supported what Gwen Nystuen, 1016 Olivia Ave., said, that they are a parish house or a parsonage and would be welcome anywhere in town and should be approved as that. She said the granting of a functional family would be opening up all single-family residential neighborhoods to abuse.
Michael Clark, 1838 Vinewood, Ann Arbor, said he lives adjacent to the 1919 Wayne and shares a back property line with them. He said the wording of the ordinance is unclear and needs to be made clearer and expanded upon. He said the prudent thing would have been for the Commission to ask if the petitioner meets all the standards and definition and requirements of the ordinance. He said when you look up the word definition of society it is clear that they do not, and if it was unclear they should have gone to the Zoning Board of Appeals for an interpretation. He said if you chose to approve an application for a group that you like, you must also be prepared to approve the next one that files a petition, even thought the process is supposed to be a case by case basis. He said an approval would set a precedent that any group of individuals with some kind of bond who say they function as a family could be approved. He said the larger question is; should the ordinance have been reviewed by the Zoning Board of Appeals before the Planning Commission began this process? He said the ordinance was written over 20 years ago and has never been addressed by this body. He said if this petition is approved they will appeal the decision to the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Cevin Taylor, Magill and Rumsey, P.C. 455 E. Eisenhower Parkway, Suite 355. Ann Arbor, Attorney for the Jesuits, read from the intent statement of the zoning ordinance. He said they are asking the Commission to accommodate the Jesuit centuries old living arrangement, and treat them no differently than other traditional family. He said it is against the law to hold them to a higher standard, and the Michigan Supreme Court and RELUIPA have said so, as unequal treatment is prohibited. He read from a prepared statement, that per the Dinolfo case, the concern for setting a precedent is not a valid argument to deny the applicant who meets the standards. He said their commitment is to each other as well as to the church and the word society is part of their name only.
Susan Friedlander, attorney representing the Clark Family, said there were interpretations at the first meeting to determine if the group fits within the definition of the ordinance and her concern was with equal protection under the law. She said no one should be denied the status of functional family based on their beliefs, regardless, and the question becomes, how do you apply the ordinance evenly to everyone who comes before you, since the ordinance needs some definition. She asked if they were to come in and say, we represent the Students for a Democratic Society, and we want to live in this neighborhood. Would we say society is in your name, so we wouldn’t even get to the functional family definition? She said how does one interpret the ordinance for permanence? Do we consider anyone from the same group, society, organization that stays 5 years or 10 years as permanence, even when it is different people?
Peggy Lynch, Ann Arbor, said she is a resident of Lower Burns Park. She said she and the others were present at the meeting because they loved the Jesuits. She said there has been talk about the meaning of the code, adding that the code must be interpreted in a constitutional manner. She said before them they have a case that has been addressed by the Supreme Court of Michigan. She said there are semantics involved with the name society being in their name, but they are not a social society as the rule prohibits. She said they have not heard anything that would lead them to believe they are anything other than a functional family and should be welcomes into Ann Arbor.
Michael W. Brinkman, 718 N. Fourth Avenue, Ann Arbor, said as mere mortals you don’t have to be gods to understand the sentiments of those who have spoke in favor of the Jesuits. He said there is an old proverb where semantics is a problem; the letter of the law kills, the spirit gives life!
Masoud Kamali, 2122 Dorset Road, Ann Arbor, read a quote from the Dinolfo case, "Under the instant ordinance, 20 male cousins could live together, whereas 3 unrelated clerics could not".
Erin Blizzard, Day Street, Ann Arbor, said he does not meet the definition of a functional family. He asked if he will be kicked out.
|