Ken Nieman, the library’s associate director, gave his monthly update on the current budget with a summary of January’s financial statement. He noted that AADL’s cash balance as of Jan. 31 was about $11.5 million. The library received a $30,000 grant from the Friends of the Ann Arbor District Library, prompting a thank-you from board president Rebecca Head.  Nieman said the roughly $46,000 in capital outlays for the month included the final amount paid to Luckenbach Ziegelman Architects, for work done on the proposed downtown library building project, which was halted last November.

After Nieman’s presentation, Ed Surovell gave a brief report from the budget and finance committee. He said the committee met with staff earlier this month  and had an extensive discussion about the economy and what might happen to the library’s revenue base. Projections are going down, not up, he said.

[All local governments are facing lower revenues, primarily due to a drop in the property tax base. The impact of Pfizer's departure was another blow, coupled with the likely acquisition of Pfizer's Ann Arbor property by the University of Michigan, which is tax-exempt. What's more, Pfizer is appealing the taxable value of its land for 2008 and 2009. The library board's packet for Monday's meeting contained a letter to Ann Arbor taxing authorities, which includes the AADL, from city treasurer Matthew Horning, city assessor Dave Petrak, Ann Arbor chief financial officer Tom Crawford, and city administrator Roger Fraser. The letter stated that Pfizer is appealing the taxable value of its land for 2008 and 2009, and if the company is successful in its appeal to the Michigan Tax Tribunal – a process which could take several years – the library could lose $242,072 already received in 2008 and the same amount anticipated for 2009. Starting in 2010, the AADL will also stop receiving roughly $456,000 annually as a result of UM's purchase of the Pfizer property.]

The economy came up again in Josie Parker’s director’s report. She said that earlier in the day the library had an all-staff meeting that more than 110 people attended, focused on the local economy and its impact on the library. Describing the meeting as very productive, open and straightforward, Parker said they discussed the fact that revenue projections are down. Following Monday’s board meeting, Parker added that they’ve made no decisions about how to deal with the decline in revenues yet, and that a draft of the library’s annual budget will be ready in April.

The meeting included two other staff reports: Ken Nieman gave the last in what had been monthly updates about the new Traverwood branch, reporting that a dedication plaque will be installed there later this week. Celeste Choate gave an update on the Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled, which opened at the AADL earlier this month after transitioning from operation by Washtenaw County. She said there are 482 registered patrons, and that library staff will be calling each one to welcome them to AADL and update their profiles on things like author and topic preferences. Parker gave Choate a shout-out for managing the transition.

The board also unanimously passed resolutions to revise AADL’s exhibitions policy and to approve $235,000 for the purchase and installation of two air handlers for the downtown building. The issue of replacing outdated air handlers had been discussed at the board’s January meeting, as had the proposal to change AADL’s exhibits policy to eliminate specific references to the application process. Both resolutions were passed without comment on Monday.

Present: Rebecca Head, Margaret Leary, Josie Parker, Carola Stearns, Ed Surovell.

Absent: Barbara Murphy, Jan Barney Newman, Prue Rosenthal

Next meeting: Monday, March. 16, 2009 at 7 p.m. in the library’s fourth floor meeting room, 343 S. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]

Audit report

Dave Fisher of the accounting firm Rehmann Robson gave a brief summary of findings from the audit of the library’s fiscal year ending June 30, 2008. The audit determined that the library’s finances were in good shape, and included a couple of minor recommendations related to internal controls. One of the recommendations related to keeping more up-to-date worksheets on the library’s inventory of assets, which includes items valued at $1,000 or more. The library’s director, Josie Parker, said that many libraries tie their worksheets to items valued at $5,000 or more, and that might make more sense. Later in the meeting, board member Prue Rosenthal, who chairs the budget and finance committee, said they’d considered raising the amount to $5,000, but had reached no decision yet. Board members had no questions for Fisher about the audit.

Director’s report

Josie Parker described “a very interesting week” for the library system. On Sunday, she and eight library staffers met with about 25 users of the county’s Library for the Blind and Physically Disabled, for which AADL is assuming responsibility. They had mailed invitations to 500 people, and though only 25 people came, it was a cold, snowy afternoon so they were pleased with the turnout, she said. The people who came were very interested in talking with the library staff, since the relationships they’d developed with the Library for the Blind employees – who were not hired as part of this transfer – were an important part of that service. Parker said the people who attended gave some great feedback, and that she and her staff were able to address most of their questions and concerns.

The Ladies Library Association, a group which founded the library 170 years ago, is still active in its support and has recently selected an oil painting to be hung at the new Traverwood branch, Parker said. Titled “Still Life with Brushes,” the work was created by local artist Mignonette Yin Chen. Two current board members – Prue Rosenthal and Jan Barney Newman – are members of the association.

On Friday, about 400 people in their teens and early 20s came to the downtown library for a talk and performance by Nerd Fighters – brothers John and Hank Green, who’ve become an Internet phenom. They’re on tour now, and clearly a draw – their fans showed up though there was virtually no local publicity. “We’ve never brought a crowd of that age group and size here,” Parker said.

Finally, she noted that Eli Neiburger and the library’s IT staff were instrumental in organizing Saturday’s “National Gaming Day @ your library.” The event, held locally at the Malletts Creek branch, allowed video gamers to play in real time with each other across the country. The technology enabling this project was developed by the Ann Arbor library’s staff.

Articulating a vision for the new library

Carl Luckenbach, lead architect for the downtown library project, began his presentation by noting that “we have nothing as interesting as Nerd Fighters to talk about.” He summarized some of the aspects of the proposed building that he felt they’d come to consensus on: the concept of the library as a “community living room” that’s highly transparent and visible to the street; the decision to build the library out to the sidewalk, with its primary orientation facing the proposed Library Lane; the commitment to sustainability, reflected in both design and construction; various other design aspects, such as “zoning” activities based on noise levels, with floors becoming progressively quieter as you go up.

“I think we agreed it’s a 21^st century library and should look like it,” he said, adding that he wanted to hear what exactly that meant to them. Turning to board member Ed Surovell, Luckenbach said, “Ed, rumor has it that you’ve got some strong feelings and I’d love to hear them.”

So Surovell kicked off a discussion aimed at guiding the building’s design. “I think the building needs to be monumental,” he said. “I think it needs to be a grand statement of purpose and place.”

Ann Arbor doesn’t have any building of modern architectural significance, he said. “We don’t yet have an iconic structure.” The downtown library building is now “surrounded by mediocrity,” and this new structure should set a standard for future development that will inevitably follow.

“We haven’t fared well in our city and I don’t want to be responsible for a failure,” Surovell said. “And it’s all in your hands. It’s a huge load, but you have a board that’s going to stand behind you.”

Prue Rosenthal said she wants a building that’s iconic and enduring, as well as suited to its function. “I would like it to be unsilly,” she said, later adding that “I want it to mark its time as well as being useful. I don’t want it to be a throwback.”

Barbara Murphy agreed that the building should not be silly, but said she would like to see some playful elements in the design. She cautioned against having a structure that was impressive yet “frightening,” and said it should be warm and inviting, a place where people of all ages feel comfortable, light and airy and designed so that some of its activity is visible from the street. And “no halo,” she quipped, referring to the widely maligned design feature that encircled Michigan Stadium – then was taken down – during president Lee Bollinger’s tenure.

Margaret Leary talked about the importance of the quality of materials and finishes used in construction, wanting to build something that people would respect. She also said that human scale was important – she’d recently visited buildings designed by well-known architects that were so huge they overwhelmed the people who used them.

Carola Stearns voiced concern about cost, saying that she was fiscally conservative and wanted to make sure there were price limitations in place. Yes, use quality materials, she said, but be aware that the Ann Arbor taxpayers who’ll be footing the bill are enduring tough economic times.

Luckenbach said his team would take this feedback and bring back a more concrete design at next month’s board meeting.

A2D2 overview

Wendy Rampson, systems planner for the city of Ann Arbor, gave a presentation about proposed downtown zoning changes, a project known as A2D2. It’s a similar talk and slide show to the one she’s doing at a series of public meetings, and provided both an historical background and overview of recommendations that city council will be considering early next year. (The Chronicle reports in detail here on one of her presentations earlier in the day.)

Ed Surovell and Rebecca Head both told Rampson they thought the proposed guidelines didn’t go far enough in allowing for density, especially in the context of the Ann Arbor greenbelt and other efforts to cluster development in urban areas while maintaining the county’s rural character outside of the city.

Josie Parker asked how these changes would affect the library. Rampson said that development on public land is not constrained by these zoning standards. However, she said she hoped the library would use the zoning as a measuring stick for its future projects.

Prue Rosenthal said she felt the city was being reactive rather than proactive. She said the library board and administration had a clear vision and were showing leadership to reach that vision. “As a private citizen, I’d love to see the city act in a similar manner.” Rampson said that A2D2 is an attempt to do that.

Literacy initiatives

Josie Parker told the board that she has agreed to co-chair the Washtenaw County Literacy Coalition, along with county administrator Bob Guenzel. (Guenzel wrote about the initiative earlier this year as a guest blogger for the online publication Concentrate.) Parker also noted that because board members will be out in the community making the case for why the library needs more space, she wanted to brief them on some of the programs that are driving that need.

Library staff members Terry Soave, Sherlonya Turner and Cecile Dunham spoke about a wide range of programs that deal with different aspects of literacy, from early childhood reading skills to English as a second language tutoring to financial and computer courses for adults.

Turner described several youth services programs. One of their largest annual efforts in the fall is a program to bring all second-grade classes into the library – roughly 1,000 students, brought in a different times. The point is to introduce kids to what the library has to offer. The library makes another outreach effort to fifth graders in the spring, when librarians visit schools to talk about library services.

Programs for teens include a Telenovela writing workshop, bringing kids together to write and produce pieces based on the popular Spanish-language soap opera style; poetry and comedy-writing workshops, where teens perform their work before peers; and one-on-one tutoring.

Soave talked about songwriting workshops for students; a book-sharing program aimed at expectant mothers; health literacy efforts, including a partnership with the Spanish Health Outreach Coalition; ESL and adult basic literacy tutoring and conversation groups; computer classes; tax prep assistance and several other programs.

Finally, Dunham noted that the current economic crisis has heightened the need for programs addressing employment and financial literacy, and she described several efforts in that area. Several workshops are planned for early 2009, including a six-week program that brings in experts on writing resumes and cover letters, career counseling and job interviewing. More information is available on the library’s website.

Votes

The board ended its meeting by voting on three items, all unanimously approved: 1) accepting the 2007-08 audit, 2) forming an ad hoc committee – chaired by Margaret Leary, with Carola Stearns and Prue Rosenthal – to work with Josie Parker in developing a communication strategy regarding the downtown library project, and 3) setting an executive session at the Dec. 15 meeting to discuss real estate and legal issues.

Present: Rebecca Head, Margaret Leary, Barbara Murphy, Jan Barney Newman, Josie Parker, Prue Rosenthal, Carola Stearns, Ed Surovell

Next meeting: Monday, Dec. 15, 2008 at 7 p.m. in the library’s fourth floor meeting room, 343 S. Fifth Ave.

Frizt Haeg presents his "Edible Estates" project to a gathering at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library.

In Fritz Haeg’s first slide, shot straight down into his own compost pile, a banana peel was still discernible. “This,” he said, “was what we should be celebrating!” Not banana peels per se, but rather compost – a kind of recycling that does not lose value with each cycle as many of our other efforts do (like, for example, paper recycling).

Haeg was standing in front of about 40 people in the multipurpose room of the Ann Arbor District Library to present his project, “Edible Estates,” which involves installations of gardens in place of front lawns. He’s implemented gardens as front lawn replacements in various locations across the U.S., and has done one in England. Haeg first traced the history of the lawn from a demonstration of wealth in the English estate, to the definition of a unfenced democratic space given privilege at Jefferson’s Monticello, to a hostile no-man’s land in post-war suburban development.

Haeg then showed some before-and-after shots of lawns that had been converted to gardens. This kind of documentation is a part of his work of art, which is distributed across the world. Not every lawn is a good candidate for an “Edible Estates” installation. Aside from the need that the work be commissioned by a fiduciary like a museum, Haeg said the ideal lawn is one that is smack in the middle of a street otherwise lined with perfect patches of green lawn. And the ideal homeowner for an “Edible Estates” installation is someone who is interested in sharing the story of the garden as it evolves after installation – it becomes their garden, because Haeg lays no further claim to it.

Michael Appel, executive director of Avalon Housing, which hosted Haeg's talk, makes the introduction.

Haeg clearly knew where he was speaking, acknowledging that while in other locales, a front-lawn replacement might well generate outrage and protest, or at least loud grumbling, he imagined that here in Ann Arbor it might well be met with a round of applause. Indeed, when he did a quick poll of the audience to determine how many people were growing food around their own homes now, he concluded that he was “preaching to the converted.”

One of those converted was Ellen, who lives at Carrot Way and who related how she gardened her front lawn, using dirt from a nearby Project Grow garden, edging it with bricks bought for 10-cents apiece from Habitat for Humanity’s ReStore. Ellen enjoyed a nice crop of strawberries this year.

Haeg’s appearance was hosted by Avalon Housing. In the course of his introduction of Haeg, Avalon’s executive director Michael Appel described the nonprofit he directs as committed to providing quality housing to those with the fewest options. What’s the connection to gardening? As Paula Baldoni, director of communications for Avalon, explained to The Chronicle, Avalon has gardening programs at some of its housing sites, and is looking  to expand that program. When she saw a feature on Haeg in the shelter magazine “Dwell,” she thought it would be a good fit.

Lori Saginaw, Paula Baldoni (pointing in background) and Fritz Haeg share a light moment after Haeg's talk.

Convincing Haeg to come speak wasn’t a matter of leveraging some n-th degree personal connection – it was as straightforward as sending an email.

The book “Edible Estates: Attack on the Front Lawn” was available for purchase after Haeg’s talk, and is available online as well.

Next up for Haeg is a project that involves converting homeowners’ garages into retail space, one that poses some more challenging hurdles with respect to zoning than the front lawn conversion project.

At a cost of about only $10 per book, the entire digitized collection (as it currently stands) could be recreated in physical form by an Espresso Book Machine for $20 million. Put a different way, for the $700 billion price tag of the currently proposed bailout of our core financial institutions, we could instead reprint the digitized collection of the UM library 35,000 times. At 5-7 minutes per book, that project would, on a low estimate, take one Espresso Book Machine [70 billion]*[5 minutes], or 665,905 years.

Here at The Chronicle, we’ve got nothing but time, but we have a less ambitious project in mind: We’d like to find somebody in the next few weeks who wants a specific book printed off on the Espresso Machine, who would let us tag along and document the event. That is to say, we’d like to come as close as we can to spotting a “reprinting in the wild” of a book in the digital collection. Hanging out in the Shapiro Library and setting upon patrons who have a digital gleam in their eye, pestering them to “Let us see, c’mon pretty please, let us see the book, let us touch the book,” seems like a horribly inefficient approach, not to mention one that might cause library staff and patrons undue stress. So we’d like to ask in advance if you’re planning to get a book printed on the Espresso Machine: Can we please watch? We promise not to get in the way.

Or if you find yourself in the library and spontaneously decide to print off a book, we’re nothing if not agile here at The Chronicle, and could probably be on site in under half an hour.

Contact information is elsewhere on this website.

For example, one detail not often reported about the noontime meetings of the Downtown Development Authority board is that lunch is provided – to anyone who shows up and would like to partake. Susan Pollay, executive director of the DDA, explained that they started providing lunch because given the hour of the day, board members were bringing food to eat anyway. And she said the DDA wanted visitors to feel welcome when they attend.

Among the non-board-member visitors in the audience were Stephen Smith and Tony Bisesi (of Republic Parking), Carsten Hohnke (recent winner of the Ward 5 city council Democratic primary), Steve Bean (chair of the Environmental Commission, although he was attending in his guise as an regular citizen), Nancy Shore (getDowntown!), Ray Detter (Downtown Area Citizens Advisory Council), Josie Parker (Ann Arbor District Library) and Wendy Rampson (city of Ann Arbor planning).

So lunch at the DDA meetings is free. But here’s some numbers on the various projects mentioned in the course of the meeting – which provide organizational structure for this article:

• $60-70 million, proposed downtown library project (not a DDA project)
• $56.4 million, South Fifth Avenue Parking Structure Project
• $7.1 million, Fifth & Divison Improvement Project ($6.1 million from DDA)
• $0.25 million north-east connector project ($50,000 from DDA)

Update from Josie Parker on the future of the downtown library

Among the options considered for the future of the downtown library, one was eliminated from further study about a month and a half ago: the possibility that a new library could be built on top of the proposed underground parking garage. The taller library building that would have resulted from a smaller footprint would have been more expensive operationally.

That leaves two options currently.

1. Renovate. Demolish 1958, 1977 sections, renovate the 1990s section and add a 4-story portion.
2. Demolish. Tear down the entire library building and construct a new one.

On the second option, the building would be 4 floors tall across the board, encompassing 160,000 square feet, compared to its current 110,000 square feet.

One key design feature would be access to the garage at P1 at a point where a vibrant, well-lit, welcoming area would be created. Parker said that library patrons entering from the underground parking garage would see a lit glass wall and that natural light would be brought all the way down to that lower level. Parker described how there would be a grand stairway from the P1 level up to the lobby.

“Coming in from underground will be a great experience,” said Parker, eschewing the word “basement” in favor of “P1 Lobby.” “We’re not walking people into a concrete wall out of an elevator,” Parker assured the board.

Adjacency to Library Lane is another key design feature. The current design concept includes making the building open at the corner of 5th and Library Lane (the proposed new midblock street running between Fifth and Division). Parker described a three-way doorway, a corner of glass, and an indoor-outdoor courtyard with possibly a cafe.

In weighing the pros and cons of the renovate versus demolish options, one factor that affects the cost of any renovation is compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The ADA was not in effect when the last renovations were undertaken, with the effect that the library building is currently not ADA compliant. The current plan to renovate would necessarily include bringing the entire building into compliance with the ADA.

Another challenge posed by the option to renovate are the design features of the old building: multiple vertical columns and limited floor-to-ceiling heights. The columns limit flexibility in use of space, while the inability to raise ceilings makes the installation of under-floor heating and cooling more challenging.

Parker said that under a demolition scenario, the possibility of recycling demolished building parts is being explored.

Board member Joan Lowenstein inquired if and how downtown library operations would continue through renovation and/or reconstruction. Parker described a strategy that would parcel out current operations at three different locations:

1. temporary downtown branch, geographically close to current downtown location; 19-25,000 square feet
2. warehouse space for much of the collection using a closed-stack system
3. offices housing administration, human resources, and finance departments

In any case, Parker said that during any scenario, the library would heed the advice of staff who had worked on site through the 1990s renovation. Parker reported their unanimous sentiment regarding the current plan was, “Get us out of here!” She said also that it was simply less expensive to move out while work was completed.

Board member John Mouat inquired about how the proposed 400-seat auditorium would be programmed. Parker stressed that it was not a full-performance stage. For example, it will not have fly space. But it would be big enough for small orchestras and bands. Parker predicted lots of lectures would take place there. She pointed out that the capacity of the theater had an impact on the parking requirements for the new facility. Last year, without the 400-seat auditorium, the downtown location counted 600,000 door swings made by patrons visiting the library in person (1.7 million system wide).

South Fifth Avenue Parking Structure Project

Much of the discussion by the board of the parking structure project stemmed from a letter sent the previous day by Steve Bean (on behalf of himself, not for the Environmental Commission, which he chairs) to the DDA board and staff. Wrote Bean, “In our society hope for sustainability (if it is possible at all) is dependent on high levels of environmental quality, economic vitality, and social equity, with a general balance among them. The proposed project is lacking in each of those areas.”

In particular Bean expressed concern that the proposed structure would not provide adequate flexibility in the event that demand for parking decreases as a result of increased fuel costs and the success of alternative transportation: “The DDA needs to be prepared to make immediate system management changes as soon as demand peaks.” Details of Bean’s specific concerns about the project can be found in the full text of the letter [.pdf file], which The Chronicle makes available with Bean’s permission.

Board member John Mouat first mentioned the letter in a complimentary fashion and expressed his hope that the structure would accommodate the changing shapes of personal transportation in the future. Board member Dave DeVarti followed up by proposing an amendment to the resolution to approve a project budget and scope for the parking structure:

Whereas no attempt has been made to assess future demand for downtown parking with consideration to expected transportation fuel costs and the recent success of alternative modes of transportation, nor to assess the financial impact of a possible decrease in parking demand on the parking system;

Resolved that prior to construction of the proposed parking structure, a thorough analysis be made of current and future parking demand, giving consideration to the success of the go!Pass program and other recent transportation initiatives (i.e. the possible creation of a light rail commuter train to serve the area) as well as to the impact on automobile use caused by anticipated fuel price increases

Immediately on circulation of the amendment, DeVarti himself proposed striking the phrase “prior to construction of the proposed parking structure,” saying he hoped that eliminating that requirement would help the amendment gain some support around the table. But the stricken phrase was not the one that irritated Leah Gunn. She took exception to the whereas clause: “I would like to respond by saying, ‘no attempt has been made to assess future demand for downtown parking, etcetera …’ ??!”

When DeVarti attempted to interject a clarification, Gunn would not have her speaking turn interrupted. “Excuse me, I’m speaking,” she said firmly, and continued, “We have a Nelson/Nygaard study that went into this – it’s only about this thick! If you’ve read it you will understand we are moving into a new mode of how we are going to handle parking – the demand management system.” Gunn also stressed that she felt it was more properly the purview of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority to undertake such a study, as opposed to the DDA. Gunn said that the broader scope of the AATA beyond downtown Ann Arbor put them in a better position to assess the factors that might have an impact on downtown.

As Gunn’s objection seemed to stem from the claim that “no attempt has been made,” Russ Collins noted that reasonable people might differ as to whether “an attempt has been made” and suggested striking the entire whereas clause. In the same spirit, he proposed that “thorough” be replaced with “an additional.” Here’s how the modified amendment looked when voted on:

Whereas no attempt has been made to assess future demand for downtown parking with consideration to expected transportation fuel costs and the recent success of alternative modes of transportation, nor to assess the financial impact of a possible decrease in parking demand on the parking system;

Resolved that prior to construction of the proposed parking structure, an thorough additional analysis be made of current and future parking demand, giving consideration to the success of the go!Pass program and other recent transportation initiatives (i.e. the possible creation of a light rail commuter train to serve the area) as well as to the impact on automobile use caused by anticipated fuel price increases.

René Greff spoke against the amendment, saying that usage of parking facilities through the recent dramatic increase in gasoline prices had only increased. Making a final effort to win support for the amendment, Devarti said, “This is asking for analysis or a study of current and future parking demand – that’s our [the DDA's] business!” DeVarti’s amendment failed on a 6-5 vote [7 votes were need to carry it.]

However, Sandi Smith, who had also spoken against DeVarti’s amendment – citing the difficulty of getting experts to agree should such a study be undertaken – suggested making explicit elsewhere in the resolution the DDA’s commitment to ongoing due diligence in assessing demand for parking. What she had in mind was a resolved clause that already created a single committee dedicated to focus on transportation choices (i.e., alternative transportation and parking demand management).

RESOLVED: The DDA shall work to consolidate its many efforts to encourage alternative transportation and parking demand management from several committees into a single committee focussed on transportation choices so that the goals of all its various programs are interrelated more closely; and that the committee continues analysis of current and future parking demand.

The main resolution passed. Roger Hewitt explained his support by saying, “I know that right now we don’t have enough parking downtown.” Leah Gunn stressed that much of the visible work that the DDA had done with respect to new parking (4th and Washington) had resulted in no net gain in parking spaces, and had merely replaced existing parking, hence the need for this structure. Joan Lowenstein, while acknowledging a possible trend toward people using their cars less, suggested that “storage parking” for residential use would persist and that the city’s desire to have more people living downtown was a goal that would be supported by building the new structure. The sentiment that the project was a wonderful opportunity to partner with the library on its project was unanimously shared at the table, with Russ Collins saying, “They’re not in lock step, they are marching together voluntarily.”

However, Jennifer Hall, board vice-chair who wielded the gavel at the meeting, joined DeVarti in voting no. [Ed. note: Red strike-through here is standard Chronicle style for correction of errors of fact made in the original publication of an article; elsewhere in this piece, the same style is used to indicate redaction of resolution language discussed at the meeting. ] Hall said that she wanted to depart with custom by not waiting until others had spoken, because she did not want the final word spoken on the project to convey to the public that the DDA was against parking. Hall’s comments reflected that her decision to vote against the project was not easily reached. She said that she agreed with many of the sentiments of the whereas clauses, but felt that the scope of the project had shifted so substantially that she could no longer get “the scales to balance.” She suggested that more patience was required to see if the additional capacity already being added to the system independent of the structure would have a sufficient impact to reduce the need to build the structure.

In his remarks explaining his vote against the project, DeVarti pointed out that the $50,000 cost of constructing each of the 777 parking spaces would more appropriately be calculated at around $70,000 per space in light of the 193 spaces in the existing lot that would be lost. So, DeVarti concluded, the 500 free spaces previously allocated to Google independently of this structure represented the equivalent of a $35 million public subsidy of a for-profit private company. “Where,” DeVarti asked, “is the like commitment to affordable housing?

DeVarti described himself as the “squeaky wheel” on the affordable housing issue, though implying perhaps for not much longer (as his appointed term is drawing to a close). After the meeting, DeVarti said that he would be willing to continue to serve on the DDA board and that he had asked Mayor John Hieftje to be re-appointed, but did not know yet if that request would be honored.

DeVarti’s vote against the parking structure project was foreshadowed by his remarks on the Fifth & Division project, which was discussed prior to the parking structure (cf. below).

Fifth & Division Improvement Project

DeVarti supported this project but made clear some concerns:

I’ve had a continuing concern we need to replace the 100 units of affordable housing that we lost when the residents were moved out of the Y for some time. And I have a broad contextual concern with how many millions we are spending on the many projects we are participating in: the city hall and court expansion, this project, the Ashley garage across from the Blind Pig, and the next resolution coming up, which is another $50 million project.

And my fear is that we are taking our pool of resources and expending them, shooting the whole wad essentially. And when we do have the opportunity to do something to replace that affordable housing, my fear is the resources won’t be there. I know from my experience with all the people around the table that most everybody here is committed personally to trying to meet the needs of the lower income part of the community and replace that housing. And I have a lot of faith in people’s good will to try to do that.

But I have a really deep concern about whether the DDA will have the resources to allow that goodwill to come forward and actually make something happen to replace that housing. I will vote for this. It has been a long time coming and I think there are a lot of good aspects to this project, but I want to voice my concern in the broader context. And on the next resolution my concern is much deeper, because there we are talking about $56 million as opposed to here were talking about $6 million. So I will vote for this but with that concern.

During discussion of this project, it emerged that what the city calls the “level of service” for the Division & Huron intersection is not currently acceptable for automobile traffic. So one of the goals of burying utilities, and widening Division is to gain enough extra space to (i) make the proposed bicycle lane continue through the intersection as well as (ii) have additional room to “stack” cars waiting to turn left onto Huron.

The resolution to approve the project budget for Phase I construction passed unanimously. Of the $7.1 million, $1 million with come from Michigan Department of Transportation.

North-east connector

Roger Hewitt reported that last week the local connector steering committee interviewed three consultants to do the first phase, part of the process required for federal funding. One of the three had been eliminated, with choice between the other two hoped for in the next day or so. What’s possibly being connected with a high-volume transit system? The north-east area of Ann Arbor (UM north campus and medical campus) with downtown Ann Arbor.

The DDA is partnering with the city of Ann Arbor, the Ann Arbor Transit Authority, and the University of Michigan on this project. The DDA’s approved budgetary contribution stands at $50,000, with the other three partners contributing $200,000 for a total of a quarter-million dollars. Hewitt said that initial cost estimates for this first phase far exceeded that and they would be looking for ways to scale it back.

Concluding his remarks, Hewitt declared, “And I got all the way through that without saying the word ‘streetcars’.”

Next board meeting: noon on Wednesday, Oct. 1 at the DDA offices, 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301.