Ann Arbor staff unveil draft UDC rewrite RFP; commission urges stronger sustainability, legal review and clearer public engagement

City planning staff presented a draft request for proposals (RFP) on June 2 seeking a consultant team to rewrite Ann Arbor’s Unified Development Code (UDC) to align zoning with the Comprehensive Plan 2050. Staff said the rewrite aims to reduce unnecessary districts, improve compatibility tools (area, height and placement standards), remove barriers to redevelopment, improve online usability and accessibility, and explicitly integrate sustainability and affordable housing objectives.

Planner Bennett summarized the scope and schedule. The RFP asks for a preliminary code and zoning layers, public engagement (working groups and targeted outreach), and linked online deliverables. Staff proposed a 24‑month delivery for a complete draft with a possible 36‑month maximum to allow for extensive outreach, legal review and council adoption. Bennett said the city would expect regular progress reporting and recommended meetings with staff and the commission at key decision points.

Commission feedback and recommended changes: Commissioners emphasized several adjustments: add explicit consultant qualifications that include familiarity with Michigan planning law and capability to produce legally sound code language; strengthen the RFP wording on sustainability so consultants propose where sustainable features can be “required or incentivized” and identify measures to avoid or mitigate environmental harm; clarify expectations for how the consultant will track changes and expose drafts (some commissioners asked for a transparent, machine‑readable version history or a clear way for the public to see what was added or removed); and emphasize engagement tailored to technical working groups (stormwater, transportation, DDA coordination) as well as broader public inputs.

Staff asked for suggestions on outreach mechanics and distribution plans for the RFP; commissioners suggested posting to Michigan Association of Planners and APA lists and asked the team to consider clickable maps and modern online publishing so the code is user friendly. Commissioners also recommended that proposers be invited to submit alternative approaches to organizing the rewrite (article‑by‑article or grouped topics) and to provide clear milestone benchmarks so the city can evaluate bids on schedule realism.

Next steps and timeline: Staff indicated the RFP would be posted broadly (MAP and APA) this month, remain open roughly one month for proposals, and return to the commission and city council with a recommended contract and budget later in the summer for approval. The selected consultant would then begin the multi‑year rewrite under contract.