The rationale for the project, according to a staff memo, is to address energy costs that are regressive, because renters often pay more on utilities due to the condition of rental housing stock. That is, higher energy costs affect poorer renters more. The grant will be used to develop a strategy to address inefficiencies in rental housing and thereby increase the affordability of rental housing stock.

The money was awarded to the city as part of a larger $3 million grant given last year to Washtenaw County through the U.S. Housing and Urban Development Community Challenge Planning Grant (CCPG). According to the city staff memo, the goal of the Washtenaw County grant is “to expand existing affordable and energy efficient housing options and connect them to job centers and healthy food through an enhanced multi-modal transportation corridor.”

The corridor in question is Washtenaw Avenue, between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti.

The $256,000 will be used by Ann Arbor for a rental housing energy efficiency project that is planned to last through December of 2014. Of the $256,000, $210,000 is budgeted for labor to hire a project manager and $46,000 is budgeted for marketing and outreach.

Matching funds totaling $370,000 have been pledged: $50,000 from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality grant supporting Michigan Green Communities; $60,000 from the Home Depot Foundation Sustainability Framework; and $260,000 from the city’s PACE/A2energy.org energy efficiency financing and community outreach efforts.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron. A more detailed report will follow.

PAC is one of several Ann Arbor advisory groups that have been working with city staff to develop a focused set of sustainability goals, drawing from more than 200 existing goals in city planning documents. The project began more than a year ago, after the city received a $95,000 grant from the Home Depot Foundation to fund a formal sustainability project.

The grant funded the job of a sustainability associate, a position held by Jamie Kidwell, who’s been the point person for this effort. Originally the effort involved four advisory commissions: park, planning, energy and environmental. More recently, the city’s housing commission and housing and human services commission were added to the effort.

The goals are fairly general, and are grouped into four main categories: climate and energy; community; land use and access; and resource management. Four public forums were held earlier this year, with speakers and public input on each of those categories. [See Chronicle coverage: “Building a Sustainable Ann Arbor,” “Sustaining Ann Arbor’s Environmental Quality,” “Land Use, Transit Factor Into Sustainability,“ and "Final Forum: What Sustains Community?"] The city also maintains a website with information on the project.

If approved, the 16 sustainability goals would be fleshed out with more detailed objectives and action items.

This brief was filed from the second-floor council chambers of city hall at 301 E. Huron, where PAC meetings are held. A more detailed report will follow.

Interim Ann Arbor police chief John Seto talks with Eunice Burns, a longtime activist who attended an April 12 sustainability forum at the Ann Arbor District Library. Seto was a panelist at the forum, which focused on building a sustainable community. (Photos by the writer.)

Community is one of four categories in a framework that’s been developed over the past year, with the intent of setting sustainability goals for the city. Other categories – which have been the focus of three previous forums this year – are resource management; land use and access; climate and energy; and community.

At the April 12 forum on community, Wendy Rampson – the city’s planning manager, who moderated the discussion – told the audience that 15 draft goals have been selected from more than 200 already found in existing city planning documents. The hope is to reach consensus on these sustainability goals, then present them to the city council as possible amendments to the city’s master plan. The goals are fairly general – if approved, they would be fleshed out with more detailed objectives and action items. [.pdf of draft sustainability goals]

Rampson said that although this would be the final forum in this year’s series, there seems to be interest in having an annual sustainability event – so this would likely not be the last gathering.

The forum was held at the Ann Arbor District Library’s downtown building, and attended by about 50 people. Panelists were Dick Norton, chair of the University of Michigan urban and regional planning program; Cheryl Elliott, president of the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation; John Seto, Ann Arbor’s interim chief of police; Jennifer L. Hall, executive director of the Ann Arbor Housing Commission; Julie Grand, chair of the city’s park advisory commission; and Cheryl Saam, facility supervisor for the Ann Arbor canoe liveries.

Several comments during the Q & A session centered on the issue of housing density within the city. Eunice Burns, a long-time local activist and former Ann Arbor city councilmember, advocated for more flexibility in accessory apartments.

Doug Kelbaugh, a UM professor of architecture and urban planning, supported her view and wondered whether the city put too high a priority on parks, when what Ann Arbor really needs is more people living downtown. He said a previous attempt to revise zoning and allow for more flexibility in accessory units was shot down by a “relatively small, relatively wealthy, relatively politically-connected group. I don’t think it was a fair measure of community sentiment.”

Also during the Q & A period, Pete Wangwongwiroj – a board member of UM’s student sustainability initiative – advocated for the concept of gross national happiness to be a main consideration in public policy decisions.

The April forum was videotaped by AADL staff and will be posted on the library’s website – videos of the three previous sessions are already posted: on resource management (Jan. 12); land use and access (Feb. 9); and climate and energy (March 8). Additional background on the Ann Arbor sustainability initiative is on the city’s website. See also Chronicle coverage: “Building a Sustainable Ann Arbor,” “Sustaining Ann Arbor’s Environmental Quality” and “Land Use, Transit Factor Into Sustainability.“

Update on Sustainability Goals

The overall sustainability initiative started informally two years ago, with a joint meeting of the city’s planning, environmental and energy commissions. The idea is to help shape decisions by looking at a triple bottom line: environmental quality, economic vitality, and social equity.

In early 2011, the city received a $95,000 grant from the Home Depot Foundation to fund a formal sustainability project. The project set out to review the city’s existing plans and organize them into a framework of goals, objectives and indicators that can guide future planning and policy. The overall project also aimed to improve access to the city’s plans and to the sustainability components of each plan, and to incorporate the concept of sustainability into city planning and future city plans.

The Home Depot grant funded the job of a sustainability associate. The position is held by Jamie Kidwell, who’s been the point person for this effort. In addition to city staff, this work was initially guided by volunteers who serve on four city advisory commissions: park, planning, energy and environmental. Members from those groups met at a joint working session in late September of 2011. Since then, the city’s housing commission and housing and human services commission have been added to the conversation.

Over the past year, city staff and a committee made of up members from several city advisory commissions have evaluated the city’s 27 existing planning documents and pulled out 226 goals from those plans that relate to sustainability. From there, they prioritized the goals and developed a small subset to present for discussion.

Fifteen goals have been organized into four main categories: climate and energy; community; land use and access; and resource management. The draft goals are:

Climate & Energy

• Sustainable Energy: Improve access to and increase use of renewable energy by all members of our community.
• Energy Conservation: Reduce energy consumption and eliminate net greenhouse gas emissions in our community.
• High Performance Buildings: Increase efficiency in new and existing buildings within our community.

Community

• Engaged Community: Ensure our community is strongly connected through outreach, opportunities for engagement, and stewardship of community resources.
• Diverse Housing: Provide high quality, safe, efficient, and affordable housing choices to meet the current and future needs of our community, particularly for homeless and low-income households.
• Safe Community: Minimize risk to public health and property from manmade and natural hazards.
• Active Living: Improve quality of life by providing diverse cultural, recreational, and educational opportunities for all members of our community.
• Economic Vitality: Develop a prosperous, resilient local economy that provides opportunity by creating jobs, retaining and attracting talent, supporting a diversity of businesses across all sectors, and rewarding investment in our community.

Land Use & Access

• Transportation Options: Establish a physical and cultural environment that supports and encourages safe, comfortable and efficient ways for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users to travel throughout the city and region.
• Sustainable Systems: Plan for and manage constructed and natural infrastructure systems to meet the current and future needs of our community.
• Efficient Land Use: Encourage a compact pattern of diverse development that maintains our sense of place, preserves our natural systems, and strengthens our neighborhoods, corridors, and downtown.

Resource Management

• Clean Air and Water: Eliminate pollutants in our air and water systems.
• Healthy Ecosystems: Conserve, protect, enhance, and restore our aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.
• Responsible Resource Use: Produce zero waste and optimize the use and reuse of resources in our community.
• Local Food: Conserve, protect, enhance, and restore our local agriculture and aquaculture resource.

A public meeting on March 29 to get input on these draft goals drew only a handful of people, but feedback can also be sent to the city via email at sustainability@a2gov.org.

Framing the Discussion: What Is Community?

As he did at the first sustainability forum in January, Dick Norton – chair of the University of Michigan urban and regional planning program – began the April 12 event by giving an overview to frame the subsequent discussion. He started by defining three terms: community, development and sustainability.

What is community? It’s not “I am an island unto myself,” he said, nor is it anarchy, nor dystopia, nor even utopia. Rather, community brings to mind images of the common, the social aspects of our nature, the notions of inclusiveness, identity and belonging. But it’s likely that most people in the room didn’t give much thought to what community means, he said.

The concept of development connotes improvement over time in the things we value, Norton said. It’s a sense of improving the human condition, in a qualitative way. Sustainability is harder to define, he noted. If we sustain our society, we keep it going and stable. But we want a just community, too – we want governments and those with power to treat the rest of us fairly. We also want happiness, Norton said, so we want to develop communities that we love, that are desirable places to live, work and play.

The trick is to do all these things simultaneously, he observed. So what institutions can help us get there? Government certainly plays a role, as do markets, to some extent. But nonprofits and religious institutions also play an important role. All of these entities interact, Norton said, adding complexity.

Norton also talked about the wide range of components that are necessary to build community. Citizen participation is key – residents need to be engaged. Fair and affordable housing, jobs, public safety, landscape and environment, services and amenities, historic preservation – all of these are important.

Norton also raised the issue of connectivity – how accessible are things? [This was a topic addressed at length by his UM colleague Joe Grengs at the Feb. 9 forum on land use and access.] Redevelopment is another component of community, but that’s set against concerns of gentrification. There are also issues of race, class and inclusiveness, Norton said. Who are we talking about when we talk about community?

Norton then laid out challenges faced in promoting community development. First, people are individuals, yet they’re also social creatures – we live in that tension, he said. Added to that, we’re a community of individuals with a variety of abilities, ambitions and circumstances. That causes us to behave differently, yet we still need to make communities work, given that variation.

Another challenge is the huge plurality of viewpoints and values that we hold about what’s important and valuable. We tend to want people to see things the way we see them, Norton said. But there are different preferences for whether things should be planned or evolve organically, for example, and those preferences influence how much government we want.

Norton also pointed to the challenge of randomness and uncertainty. That makes planning difficult, because you don’t know how things will play out. Measurement is also a challenge, he said. How do you measure whether you’re achieving your community development goals?

Community is vital, Norton concluded. The American ethos tends to be a cowboy mentality, the idea of individuals bootstrapping themselves and making it on their own. “That is just so untrue,” he said. People depend on communities to help them thrive.

Quality of Life: Community Foundation

Cheryl Elliott, president of the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation, described the work of her organization. It was founded nearly 50 years ago, and its overall mission is to improve the community’s quality of life. AAACF manages more than 425 funds with over $60 million in assets, and administers scholarships, grants and other community support.

Cheryl Elliott, president of the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation.

Elliott focused her comments on the quality-of-life issues of community, and said some of her remarks were informed by the recent book “The Economics of Place,” a publication of the Ann Arbor-based Michigan Municipal League. Quality of life plays a vitally important role in the community’s economic future, she said. When Elliott came to Ann Arbor as a University of Michigan freshman in 1969, “you could have shot a cannon down Main Street,” she said, and not hit anyone. It took a lot of collaboration to achieve the city’s vibrancy that you see today.

A wonderful community is crucial to attract and retain workers in a knowledge-based economy, Elliott said. An AAACF board member [Kevin Thompson] works for IBM and could live anywhere, she reported, but he chose to live in Ann Arbor. Quality of life and place wasn’t something that was previously considered as a factor in economic development. But today, a functioning, safe community isn’t enough, she said. It needs to be a place that inspires people, and that encourages creativity and innovation.

Elliott ticked through eight dimensions that affect quality of place: physical design and walkability, green initiatives, a culture of economic development, entrepreneurship, multiculturalism, messaging and technology, transit, and education. We need to think more regionally to achieve goals in these areas, she said.

Turning her comments to the role of culture in economic development, Elliott highlighted the importance of a healthy creative sector. Before Pfizer pulled out of Ann Arbor, its leadership talked about the city’s diverse cultural environment as an important factor in their desire to be located here, she said. Communities with healthy cultural sectors help create jobs, build a stronger tax base, and bring in more tourism.

Ann Arbor ends up on a lot of national Top 10 lists, Elliott noted, in large part because of the city’s quality of place, and a lot of that has to do with arts and culture – everything from the Ann Arbor Summer Festival and art fairs, to the University Musical Society and events like FestiFools. But “it doesn’t just happen,” she added. These things require partnerships and a lot of collaboration.

Elliott wrapped up her remarks by saying that the area has a creative, entrepreneurial nonprofit sector. She cited the example of a coordinated funding approach being taken to fund human services – a joint effort of the city of Ann Arbor, Washtenaw County, Washtenaw Urban County, AAACF and Washtenaw United Way, administered by the city/county office of community and economic development. No other community in the country is doing that, she said.

Public Safety

John Seto, Ann Arbor’s interim chief of police, told the audience that when he first was asked to speak at the forum, he wasn’t sure how public safety fit into the notion of sustainability. But after giving it some thought, he realized that most of what the police force does helps create a sustainable community, and it would be difficult to condense it into the limited time he had for his presentation.

John Seto, Ann Arbor's interim chief of police.

So what does sustainability look like for public safety? he asked. It entails a vibrant downtown, safe neighborhoods, disaster preparedness, and a partnership with the community. Seto outlined a variety of ways that Ann Arbor police work toward these goals:

• Neighborhood crime watch: There are over 300 neighborhood crime watch captains in the city, working with a police coordinator who disseminates information throughout the city.
• Crime Stoppers: The coordinator for this Washtenaw County program works out of an office at the Ann Arbor police department. The anonymous tip line is 1-800-SPEAK UP.
• Justice Center e-kiosk: Located in the lobby of the new Justice Center at the corner of Fifth and Huron, an electronic kiosk allows users to make a police report, get traffic crash reports, pay a parking ticket, obtain a Freedom of Information Act request form and more.
• Online police reports: Several types of reports can now be made on the police department’s website, Seto said. They are typically crimes with no suspects, or reports that are needed for insurance purposes. The reports that can be filed if there are no known suspects include harassing phone calls; theft (but not of a home or business that’s been entered illegally); and vandalism. Reports of private property traffic crashes – if your vehicle was parked and struck by an unknown vehicle, for example – can also be made online, as can reports for lost or damaged property.
• CrimeMapping.com: Ann Arbor is now participating in this online mapping of crime data, which indicates the location and type of crimes. It allows users to search by date, crime type or address.
• Disaster preparedness: The city’s office of emergency management coordinates the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT), a countywide effort with more than two dozen members.
• CodeRED notification: Residents can sign up to be notified of crime alerts and other warnings – such as missing persons – through an automated phone notification system. It can handle 1,500 calls per minute, Seto said.
• Regional collaboration: Sustainability means collaborating to make the most out of your resources, Seto said. For policing, the city is collaborating both in everyday operations – like a joint dispatch unit with Washtenaw County, or mutual aid agreements with surrounding communities – and in special units like the SWAT and crisis negotiations teams.

Seto concluded by asking the audience how they would like to see the police department partner with the community. He said he hoped to hear some questions and comments about that later in the evening.

Affordable Housing

Jennifer L. Hall gave a shorter version of a presentation she made at the Ann Arbor Housing Commission’s December 2011 board meeting, which was her first meeting as executive director of the AAHC. Previously, Hall served as housing manager for the Washtenaw County/city of Ann Arbor office of community development.

She began by describing affordable housing. It’s defined relative to income levels – what is affordable to a higher income family is not necessarily affordable for a lower income family. For federal funding purposes, affordable housing means that a household is paying 30% or less of its gross income for housing, including utilities, taxes and insurance. Several programs of the U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) provide affordable housing assistance for low-income families – AAHC is one of the local entities that receives funding from these HUD programs.

Hall described a continuum of affordable housing throughout Washtenaw County. On one end are shelters for people who are homeless, including the Delonis Center, SafeHouse Center (for victims of domestic violence), Interfaith Hospitality Network’s Alpha House (for families), and SOS Community Services, which runs a housing access hotline. At the opposite end is market rate housing that is affordable. Within those extremes, Hall outlined a range of other housing assistance and types:

• Transitional housing (Dawn Farm, Michigan Ability Partners, Home of New Vision)
• Group homes (Synod House, Washtenaw Community Health Organization)
• Senior assisted-living (Area Agency on Aging 1-B, private sector)
• Nonprofit supporting housing (Avalon Housing, Michigan Ability Partners, Community Housing Alternatives)
• Senior housing (Lurie Terrace, Cranbrook)
• Public housing (Ann Arbor Housing Commission, Ypsilanti Housing Commission)
• Tenant vouchers (Ann Arbor Housing Commission, Ypsilanti Housing Commission, Michigan State Housing Development Authority)
• Private developments (Windsong)
• Cooperatives (Arrowwood, Pine Lake, Forest Hills, University Townhomes)
• Houses for homeownership (Habitat for Humanity and other nonprofits)
• Units within private developments (First & Washington, Stone School)

Ann Arbor’s owner-occupied housing market is getting more expensive compared to other areas nationally. According to data from the National Housing Conference, in 2011 metro Ann Arbor (Washtenaw County) ranked as the 87th most expensive housing market among the nation’s 209 metro areas, Hall reported. The median home price for the Ann Arbor metro area was $162,000. Just two years earlier, the median home price was $136,000, and metro Ann Arbor ranked 132 among the 209 metro areas, she said.

Jennifer L. Hall, executive director of the Ann Arbor Housing Commission.

For the rental market, metro Ann Arbor also ranked 87th among the 209 markets in 2011, with an average monthly rent of $882 for a two-bedroom apartment. But that is a drop in the rankings from 2009, when the area ranked 51st with an average monthly rent of $940.

Hall noted that in an ideal world, every household would live in a unit it could afford – there would be units available for all income levels. But unfortunately, that’s not the case, she said. There’s a mismatch of availability and income, with some families paying more than 30% of their income for rent, and others paying far less than 30%.

There’s a growing need for more affordable housing in this community, Hall said. A study conducted by the Washtenaw Housing Alliance showed that in 2004, 2,756 people in Washtenaw County reported that they had experienced homelessness. In 2010, that number had grown to 4,738.

AAHC manages two main programs: (1) the Section 8 voucher program for Washtenaw, Monroe, and western Wayne counties; and (2) public housing units in Ann Arbor. Hall noted that the majority of people on wait lists for these programs fall into the category of extremely low-income families, with income at 30% or less of the Ann Arbor area’s median income. For a family of four, Ann Arbor’s median income is $86,300 – 30% of that would be an annual income of $25,900.

Hall then turned to the issue of fair and equitable housing. She showed the audience a map that indicated levels of poverty throughout the county, and pointed out that the map showed concentrations of poverty in downtown Ann Arbor, in the student neighborhoods around the University of Michigan. The city has benefited from its student population, in terms of federal funding, because students typically report poverty-level incomes, she noted. And because federal funding to communities from HUD is based on formulas that are tied to poverty levels, Ann Arbor receives more funding than it otherwise would, Hall explained. HUD is looking to change that formula, she added, but the formula hasn’t been changed yet.

In fact, this measure of poverty doesn’t reflect where most true low-income households are located, she said. For example, you’d see very different areas of poverty – primarily clustered in Ypsilanti and Ypsilanti Township – if measured by the number of people on public assistance.

Hall also observed that as people search for affordable housing and move further away from where they’d prefer to live, they often increase the amount they pay for transportation to get to work or to necessary services, like grocery stores. That increased cost often isn’t factored in to their housing decisions, she noted, and the more distant location can end up being more expensive overall.

Hall wrapped up by noting that federal funding for low-income housing is decreasing. In 1976, HUD’s budget was $86.8 billion. By 2010, its budget had dropped to $43.58 billion.

Parks & Recreation

Giving the presentation on Ann Arbor’s parks and recreation were Julie Grand, chair of the city’s park advisory commission, and Cheryl Saam, facility supervisor for the Ann Arbor canoe liveries.

The city has 157 parks and recreational facilities, 52 miles of pathways, and 2,008 acres of land – 72% of that land in open space. How the city cares for these resources makes an impact on the quality of life for residents here, Saam said.

Grand noted that one of the city’s draft sustainability goals is to have an engaged community. The goal states: “Ensure our community is strongly connected through outreach, opportunities for engagement, and stewardship of community resources.” One way to do that is through neighborhood parks, Grand said – this is a community that’s very engaged with its parks, and many neighborhoods are defined based on their relationships to nearby parks.

The city also engages residents through its senior center and other community centers, as well as through volunteer programs like the Give 365 program, Adopt-a-Park, or natural area preservation program. The thousands of volunteer hours benefit the parks system, Grand said, but also provide a way for people to feel connected to the community and give back in a meaningful way.

Julie Grand, chair of the Ann Arbor park advisory commission.

The parks system also supports the community goal of diverse housing, Grand said, through partnerships with the office of community and economic development. Parks land acquisition funds paid for property to expand the Bryant Community Center, for example. The city’s goal is to have a park within a quarter-mile of every residence, she said, and to make sure that low-income areas are well-served.

Grand said that having a safe and healthy community is also important to the parks system. Using best practices in stormwater management, protecting the Huron River ecosystem, and building non-motorized pathways are all examples of that. Parks and recreation also contribute to the city’s economic vitality, with facilities that draw people in, she said – the farmers market, golf courses, and other venues. “People want to live in communities with a vibrant parks system.” Parks also improve safety and add value to neighborhoods, she said.

Saam addressed the goal of providing an active living and learning community. The parks system provides both structured and unstructured active recreation, where people can get measurable health benefits and social interaction – summer camps, classes, or places just to relax and take a walk. A scholarship program offered by the parks system makes the venues and class offerings accessible to lower-income families.

The mission of the parks system is to provide open space and recreation that’s accessible, Saam said, and they strive for a broad range of services and facilities for people with disabilities. Recent examples include adding steps in Buhr pool, and plans to renovate the Gallup canoe livery, adding ADA-compliant pathways.

Saam also highlighted recent renovations in West Park and the new Argo Cascades, a bypass by the Argo Dam that’s just now being completed. And Grand pointed to land acquisition – both through the city’s greenbelt program, and for parkland within the city – as other examples of the parks system enriching the community.

Turning to the future, Grand said the parks system hopes to increase volunteer opportunities, expand non-motorized pathways and connections between the Huron River and the city’s urban core, continue paying attention to best practices in stormwater management, and emphasize making improvements to existing facilities – it’s important to improve what the city has before building something new, she said.

Grand also reminded the audience that the parks maintenance and capital improvements millage would be up for renewal in November. She encouraged people to get more information online or to attend an upcoming public forum on the topic. [Also see Chronicle coverage: "Park Commission Briefed on Millage Renewal."]

Questions & Comments

During the last portion of the forum, panelists fielded questions and commentary from the audience. This report summarizes the questions and presents them thematically.

Questions & Comments: Accessory Dwellings, Density

Several questions and comments centered on the issue of housing density within the city. Eunice Burns, a long-time local activist and former Ann Arbor city councilmember, described how she’d sold her house to her daughter and son-in-law, and now lives in the home’s garage that was renovated into an apartment for her. But because of existing zoning constraints, only a family member can live in an accessory dwelling, she noted – no one will be able to use the apartment when she’s gone. The city’s ordinances need to be revised to allow for more types of dwellings like this for a wider range of people, Burns said.

Eunice Burns advocated for zoning changes to allow for more accessory dwellings in Ann Arbor. Her record of public service includes the Ann Arbor city council, the board of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority and the local officers compensation commission.

Ann Arbor faces a growing senior population, and many of them can’t afford senior housing like Glacier Hills, Burns noted. She recalled that when the city tried to change zoning for accessory dwelling units in the past, it had met with resistance. ”I’d like to see us work on this again and see if we can get it through this time,” she said.

(Burns concluded her remarks by putting in a plug for Huron River Day on July 15.)

The derailed effort that Burns mentioned would have changed the city’s zoning to make it possible for non-family members to live in accessory apartments. Wendy Rampson, the city’s planning manager, told the audience that the concern had primarily been about neighborhoods close to campus becoming too densely populated.

Conditions have changed since then, however. Rampson noted that according to the most recent census, Ann Arbor’s population has stabilized while the size of households has decreased. With fewer people living in individual homes, density isn’t as great as it was a few decades ago.

Dick Norton responded to Burns’ comments by taking a broader view. Like sustainability, the concept of community is difficult to define – it means different things to different people. Residents of a gated community might have a different definition than people who live outside of it. Norton pointed to sociologist Max Weber’s description of the Protestant work ethic in America – the idea of individuals making their way in society through hard work, and succeeding on their own merits. That concept influenced how people viewed the world, and complicated efforts to help people who are less well off, Norton said – people think that if someone is poor and homeless, it’s because they lack the ambition to work.

There are some deeply embedded ideological perspectives that need to be addressed, Norton said. Americans need to figure out how to ensure that people who are in less fortunate circumstances are at least doing okay and have opportunities to do better, he said. It requires people to open their minds a little bit. People tend to fear change and feel threatened if they’re asked to do something where there are no easy answers. Norton concluded by saying he knew he was preaching to the choir – the people who show up to the sustainability forums are already engaged in these issues, he said.

Doug Kelbaugh, a University of Michigan professor of architecture and urban planning, also commented on the topic of density. The carbon footprint of those living in the suburbs is dramatically higher than for urban residents, he noted. Increasing urban density would have the single greatest impact on reducing that carbon footprint – saving energy, the amount of land that’s used for development, the amount time people spend commuting, and more.

Kelbaugh said he loves the city’s parkland, but he sometimes thinks there’s too much of it – what the city really needs is more people living downtown. Perhaps parkland is being over-prioritized.

Regarding sustainability and affordable housing, Kelbaugh said the lowest-hanging fruit to address that issue is accessory dwellings. The previous attempt to revise zoning and allow for more flexibility in accessory units was shot down by a “relatively small, relatively wealthy, relatively politically-connected group,” he said. “I don’t think it was a fair measure of community sentiment.”

There cannot be too many people living downtown, Kelbaugh concluded – the more, the better – and Ann Arbor is far from hitting the upper level of the population it can sustain.

Julie Grand, chair of the city’s park advisory commission, said she’d argue that the city needs greenspace to allow people room to breathe. There also needs to be recreational opportunities for residents, she said.

Questions & Comments: Being Proactive

Ann Larimore, a UM professor emeritus of geography and women’s studies, followed up on the issue of density by saying that it doesn’t help to use the word in a general way. There are different kinds of density – of families with children, of low-income people, of students living in high-rise apartment buildings, of people who only use their Ann Arbor homes on football weekends and otherwise those homes sit empty.

But Larimore said her question related to creating a community that’s proactive. An increase in private high-rise apartments aimed at students has been a national trend that’s also seen in Ann Arbor, she said, often fueled by out-of-town development money. Pfizer pulled out of Ann Arbor several years ago and UM bought its large research campus, thus taking that property off of the local tax rolls and creating an employment crisis. There’s also been more severe weather because of global warming, she said. What can the community do to be more proactive to these kinds of outside events?

Dick Norton noted that by the very nature of these events, it’s difficult to be proactive. But it’s possible to build a community that’s adaptable and resilient, he said. Creating a diverse economic base is also important, so that the community is not dependent on any one entity like Pfizer or UM.

Norton said he teaches planning, which includes taking stock of how things currently stand and reflects on where you’d like to go. But a plan is never a fixed thing, he added. You need to build in a resiliency and a capacity to respond as conditions change. That’s an unsatisfying answer, he acknowledged, but it’s a complicated world.

Jennifer Hall of the Ann Arbor Housing Commission responded by saying that you can’t discriminate against the type of people who might move into a building. You can plan for the type of building, but not the type of people who ultimately live there, whether they be students or the elderly. It’s a fair housing issue, she said.

Questions & Comments: Gross National Happiness

Pete Wangwongwiroj introduced himself as a University of Michigan student who’s active in the campus sustainability movement – he’s a board member of the student sustainability initiative. He said he’s shifted the focus of his studies from environmental issues to happiness. Happiness is an issue that’s bipartisan and that can unite people, he said. The country focuses its attention on the gross domestic product as an economic indicator, he noted. But there’s a new concept that deserves consideration: gross national happiness. Wangwongwiroj advocated that this concept should be the main consideration of public policy decisions. He asked the panel what has been done in Ann Arbor regarding the well-being and quality of life for residents, and what more can be done?

Jennifer Hall observed that there are some interesting new studies related to that topic and public health, looking at how your environment can make you happy or depressed. People are more depressed who live in neighborhoods with buildings that have boarded up windows and are in disrepair, with uncollected garbage and broken streetlights. She related an anecdote about developers who came to Ann Arbor and were interested in building affordable housing. Hall took them on a tour of one of the city’s low-income neighborhoods – the Bryant area, on the southeast side of Ann Arbor – and reported that the developers were shocked that it was considered low-income, because it was so much nicer than the low-income areas they were used to seeing elsewhere. So Ann Arbor is doing relatively well, she said.

Cheryl Elliott pointed to the involvement of youth as a community resource, through volunteering in different organizations – in youth advisory councils, for example. The community can leverage that enthusiasm and creativity, she said: “They aren’t jaded yet.” In general, a more engaged community does bring more happiness to residents, she said. Elliott also pointed to public events like the recent FestiFools parade as another way that Ann Arbor brings happiness to residents.

John Seto of the Ann Arbor police said that many times, it’s the smaller things that affect quality of life. Many complaints that the police receive have to do with quality-of-life issues – a neighbor’s barking dog, or uncut grass. It’s important not to lose sight of those smaller issues, he said, adding that Ann Arbor does a good job of that. Any complaint is important, he said.

Wendy Rampson noted that as the sustainability project moves ahead, the next step – after a consensus is reached on goals – will be to develop objectives and metrics to measure progress. She asked Wangwongwiroj to fill out a comment card, and said the group that’s working on these sustainability goals would be happy to consider adding happiness as a factor.

Dick Norton noted that happiness is based on a sense of safety and stability, but also on the relationships you build. The problem is that there’s too much focus on GDP, especially at the national level. The government needs to rethink that approach, and people need to resist the constant bombardment of advertising to buy more stuff. Norton also recommended getting backyard chickens to increase happiness – chickens are very calming and fun to watch, he said.

After the panelists finished weighing in, Doug Kelbaugh, a UM professor of architecture and urban planning, stepped to the microphone to make a comment related to accessory dwellings and density (see above). But he prefaced his remarks by saying that although a happiness index might sound frivolous, in fact it’s getting a lot of serious professional and academic respect.

Questions & Comments: Spending Priorities

Thomas Partridge said he wanted to know how the community could prioritize, when there was no sustainable, progressive tax base. He said he’s called on the Ann Arbor city council and Washtenaw County board of commissioners to place a Headlee override on the ballot. He also wondered why there is a dedicated millage for open space and parkland, while at the same time there are homeless people living in parks and under freeway overpasses. The city isn’t giving priority to human values like affordable housing, health care, transportation, education, human rights, and adequate fire and police protection.

Panelists responded primarily by pointing to examples of collaboration. Cheryl Elliott talked about the collaborative funding approach used to support local human service organizations – a joint effort with the city of Ann Arbor, Washtenaw County, the Urban County, Washtenaw United Way, and the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation. They aren’t working in silos, she said. They’re communicating and working more effectively with the resources they have.

Julie Grand noted that the city parks collaborates with the county – the proposed Ann Arbor skatepark project is an example of that, she said, and also involves the Ann Arbor Area Community Foundation. The county’s parks and recreation commission has committed $400,000 to that project.

Grand also reported that when the city park commissioners discuss land acquisition, the first question they consider is how much it would take away from the city’s tax base. She said they’ve determined that the Headlee rollback isn’t significant enough to be a real concern.

Jennifer Hall thanked Partridge, saying that she appreciated his advocacy for the same people that she was trying to support. She raised the issue of Michigan being a “home rule” state, making it difficult to overcome the jurisdictional boundaries of townships, cities and villages. The city of Ann Arbor’s tax rate is much higher than the townships, she noted, so many people want to live in the townships and pay lower taxes, yet they use the amenities of the city. It results in some “weird dynamics,” she said. Hall also noted that Ann Arbor is very generous in its funding of housing and human services for low-income residents.

The Chronicle could not sustain itself without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of local government and civic affairs. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Joe Grengs, a University of Michigan associate professor of urban and regional planning, and Ginny Trocchio, who manages the city's greenbelt program, were among the speakers at a Feb. 9 sustainability forum.

Issues of land use and accessibility were the topic of a sustainability forum on Feb. 9, the second in a series that’s part of a broader city sustainability initiative. During the forum, city staff also unveiled a set of draft goals for Ann Arbor related to four general sustainability themes: Resource management; land use and access; climate and energy; and community.

Wendy Rampson, head of the city’s planning staff, told the audience that the 15 draft goals were extracted from more than 200 that had been identified in existing city planning documents. The hope is to reach consensus on these sustainability goals, then present them to the city council as possible amendments to the city’s master plan.

Speakers at the Feb. 9 forum included Joe Grengs, a University of Michigan associate professor of urban and regional planning; Susan Pollay, executive director of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority; Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager and member of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority board; Jeff Kahan of the city’s planning staff; Ginny Trocchio, who manages the city’s greenbelt program; and Evan Pratt of the city’s planning commission.

A Q&A followed presentations by the speakers and covered a wide range of topics, including thoughts on the proposed Fuller Road Station. The following day, Feb. 10, the city and University of Michigan announced plans to halt the initial phase of that controversial project – a large parking structure near the UM medical campus.

The topics of the series of forums reflect four general sustainability themes: Resource management; land use and access; climate and energy; and community. The first forum, held in January, focused on resource management, including water, solid waste, the urban forest and natural areas.

All forums are held at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library and are being videotaped by AADL staff. The videos will be posted on the library’s website. Additional background on the Ann Arbor sustainability initiative is on the city’s website. See also Chronicle coverage: “Building a Sustainable Ann Arbor,” and an update on the project given at the November 2011 park advisory commission meeting.

Draft Sustainability Goals

The Feb. 9 forum was moderated by Wendy Rampson, the city’s planning manager. She said it’s hoped that the city’s sustainability effort, and these forums in particular, will serve as a springboard for a community discussion and help set overarching sustainability goals.

Wendy Rampson, city of Ann Arbor planning manager, moderated the Feb. 9 forum.

The overall sustainability initiative started informally nearly two years ago, with a joint meeting of the city’s planning, environmental and energy commissions. The idea is to help shape decisions by looking at a triple bottom line: environmental quality, economic vitality, and social equity.

In early 2011, the city received a $95,000 grant from the Home Depot Foundation to fund a formal sustainability project. The project set out to review the city’s existing plans and organize them into a framework of goals, objectives and indicators that can guide future planning and policy. The overall project also aimed to improve access to the city’s plans and to the sustainability components of each plan, and to incorporate the concept of sustainability into city planning and future city plans.

In addition to city staff, this work was initially guided by volunteers who serve on four city advisory commissions: park, planning, energy and environmental. Members from those groups met at a joint working session in late September of 2011. Since then, the city’s housing commission and housing & human services commission have been added to the conversation, Rampson said. Many of those members attended the Feb. 9 forum, which was held at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library and drew around 100 people.

Over the past year, city staff and a committee made of up members from several city advisory commissions have evaluated the city’s 27 existing planning documents and pulled out 226 goals from those plans that relate to sustainability. From there, they prioritized the goals and developed a small subset to present for discussion.

The draft goals are:

Climate & Energy

• Sustainable Energy: Improve access to and support use of renewable energy by all members of our community.
• Energy Conservation: Reduce energy consumption and eliminate net greenhouse gas emissions in our community.
• High Performance Buildings: Increase efficiency in new and existing buildings within our community.

Community

• Engaged Community: Ensure our community is strongly connected through outreach, opportunities for engagement, and stewardship of community resources.
• Diverse Housing: Provide high quality, safe, efficient, and affordable housing choices to meet the current and future needs of our community, particularly for low-income households.
• Safe Community: Minimize risk to public health and property from manmade and natural hazards.
• Active Living: Improve quality of life by providing diverse cultural, recreational, and educational opportunities for all members of our community.
• Economic Vitality: Create a resilient economy that provides access to employment opportunities, supports a diverse range of economic activities, and attracts investment to our community.

Land Use

• Transportation Options: Establish a physical and cultural environment that supports and encourages safe, comfortable and efficient ways for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users to travel throughout the city and region.
• Sustainable Systems: Plan for and manage constructed and natural infrastructure systems to meet the current and future needs of our community.
• Efficient Land Use: Encourage a compact pattern of diverse development that maintains our sense of place, preserves our natural systems, and strengthens our neighborhoods, corridors, and downtown.

Resource Management

• Clean Air and Water: Eliminate pollutants in our air and water systems.
• Healthy Ecosystems: Conserve, protect, enhance, and restore our aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems.
• Responsible Resource Use: Produce zero waste and optimize the use and reuse of resources in our community.
• Local Food: Conserve, protect, enhance, and restore our local agriculture and aquaculture resource.

Rampson described the proposed goals as “very, very drafty.” A public meeting to discuss the goals will be held on March 29. Feedback can also be sent to the city via email at sustainability@a2gov.org.

Sustainability & Land Use: Framing the Issue

Joe Grengs – a UM associate professor of urban and regional planning – led off remarks from the panel at the Feb. 9 forum. He began by saying it was great to discuss these issues, and that there are very committed people in the city who are willing to take risks and do things in innovative ways. His task at the forum was to frame the discussion of land use and sustainability, and he planned to do it through the lens of one idea – interaction.

Joe Grengs, University of Michigan associate professor of urban and regional planning, speaking at a Feb. 9 forum on sustainability in the city of Ann Arbor.

The real estate adage of “location, location, location” is really just a way of saying that place matters, Grengs said. Where you’re situated has an impact on your ability to interact with people and places – at schools, stores, work, and places of worship. Each location ties you to a network of opportunities and constraints. For example, it determines your social network, to some extent. It determines your educational opportunities – a family living just across the border in one school district might be able to send their kids to a great school, while the family on the other side of the district border might be going to a school with a weaker reputation.

Location is very much rooted in factors like income and race, he noted, and it’s central to determining the degree to which people interact. Transportation and land use also have a lot to do with interaction. To illustrate, Grengs presented a scenario. It’s Saturday afternoon, and you have four errands to run. Your teenager needs to get to high school for theater rehearsal, while your youngest child must get to the park for soccer practice. You have to drop by the drugstore to pick up a prescription, and as you’re leaving, your partner asks you to stop at the party store to get some candy.

To do these errands, would you rather travel slow or fast? Grengs asked. Most people would answer fast, he said, but his answer is: It depends. He said he’d ask how much total time it takes to do the errands – that’s more important than your speed of travel. So if you’re traveling slower but the places you need to be are close to you, it will take less time to do the errands. Proximity is crucial, Grengs said.

Yet transportation policies and our government’s codes and standards emphasize mobility and speed, Grengs observed. If that’s your end goal, then the means of achieving that goal include things like capacity expansion – more roads, more lanes of traffic – and ease of parking. But there’s a better way, he contended.

What if the goal is accessibility, Grengs asked, measured by the amount of interactions you can accomplish within a given period? And this really is our goal, he noted. With some exceptions, you’re not getting in the car and traveling to a location just because you like to drive. You’re interested in reaching the destination.

So what tools can you use to achieve the goal of accessibility? Mobility is one way, Grengs said. Connectivity – including the use of technology, like the Internet – is another. A third way of achieving accessibility is proximity – and that’s what land use policies can address.

In looking at these methods of achieving accessibility, Grengs noted that there’s a tension between mobility and proximity. Mobility is important when destinations are spread out, like in a rural or suburban setting. People travel on freeways or other major roads at high speeds to get from place to place. In contrast, in a place like Manhattan everything is close together. You won’t be traveling fast, or far. But in terms of accessibility, proximity helps residents accomplish more even though they’re moving more slowly, Grengs said.

Grengs concluded his remarks by making two final points. When a community takes steps to increase mobility, it’s important to stop and ask: Is this hurting us in terms of proximity? An example is sprawl – when infrastructure like roads is built farther out, developers respond by building in those far-ranging locations, and it undermines the goal of accessibility.

The other question to ask is: How can a community achieve its goal of accessibility? It’s a two-part recipe, Grengs said: (1) by making accessible places, through transportation and land use policies; and (2) by encouraging people to live and work in accessible places. Usually, he said, a community needs high density to achieve those goals.

Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority

Wendy Rampson introduced Susan Pollay, executive director of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, by noting that the DDA was originally formed to support parking and infrastructure projects. But its work has shifted over the years from mobility issues to an increasing focus on accessibility, Rampson said.

City of Ann Arbor transportation manager Eli Cooper and Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority executive director Susan Pollay.

Pollay began by noting that the downtown doesn’t exist in isolation. She briefly reviewed the history of DDAs, noting that 1972 state-enabling legislation allowed the creation of these authorities in order to support economic development. There are now about 300 DDAs in Michigan, she said. The Ann Arbor DDA was formed in 1982 and over the years has been known for its management of the city’s parking system. In 2003 the DDA’s development plan was amended and renewed by the city for 30 years, and sustainability was one of its eight key goals. The aim, Pollay said, is for the downtown to be ”the sustainable heart of a sustainable city.”

The DDA supports that goal with different approaches, Pollay said. Regarding land use, the organization acts as an advocate. The DDA supported land conservation millages that were put on the ballot – and ultimately approved by voters – for the county and the city, she said. The authority also supports zoning that encourages residential development in the downtown area, Pollay said.

She noted between 1990 and 2000, there was no population growth in the DDA district. But the 2010 census showed that the DDA district had gained 1,263 new residents  – a 30% increase since 2000 – for a total of 4,607 residents. That’s at a time when the city and state lost population, she said.

Transportation is another approach that the DDA uses to achieve sustainability, Pollay said. More than 60,000 people commute into Ann Arbor each day. The idea is to get people out of those vehicles and using other forms of transportation. The DDA has provided grants for increasing service along the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority’s #4 Route between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. Grants are also supporting (1) the AATA express routes between Ann Arbor, Chelsea and Canton; (2) parking for AATA service to the airport, which is expected to launch in March; (3) an exploratory study for commuter rail between Ann Arbor and Howell; and (4) a feasibility study for a transit connector between Ann Arbor’s north and south sides.

Pollay also pointed to the DDA’s financial support of the getDowntown program, noting that there’s been a dramatic shift in the number of people who use alternative transportation, including public transit and bicycling. Since 2002, the DDA has funded 95% of the program’s go!pass, which provides free bus passes to more than 7,300 employees of downtown businesses. In 2011, more than 630,000 rides were taking using the go!pass, Pollay said – a 15% increase compared to 2010. [For a roundup of ridership data, including go!pass usage, see "Transit: Ridership Data Roundup"]

Other transportation-oriented initiatives that the DDA helps fund include bike parking and lockers, free parking for motorcycles and mopeds, a Night Ride service, the Zipcar car-sharing service, and grants to groups like the Washtenaw Bicycling and Walking Coalition. Pollay said that 33% of downtown employees who own cars choose not to drive them to work.

The DDA also supports efforts to make the downtown more walkable, Pollay said. In addition to major streetscape improvement projects, other efforts include creating topiaries and edible landscaping, window display contests, and trip hazard/sidewalk maintenance.

Pollay pointed to sustainability as a component of construction projects supported by the DDA. For example, the authority provided a grant to the city of Ann Arbor to cover LEED certification costs on the city’s new municipal building. And the new underground parking garage that the DDA is building along South Fifth Avenue will include elements like electric-car stations, energy-saving fixtures, reuse of excavation site materials, and 100% stormwater detention.

Energy-saving programs are another way that the DDA supports sustainability, Pollay said. The DDA provided a grant to install LED lights downtown, for example, and has funded about 120 energy audits for downtown businesses. The authority tries to highlight these efforts whenever possible, Pollay said, to let the public know how the city is working toward sustainability. She cited signs at the Fifth and William surface parking lot as an example, explaining how pervious pavement is used there to handle stormwater runoff.

Pollay concluded by noting that many of these projects are accomplished by partnering with other entities.

Sustainability and Transportation

Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager, spoke about the city’s efforts to encourage different modes of transportation. Nationwide, in 1960 about 60% of people used a private vehicle as their primary mode of transportation to work. That number increased to nearly 90% by 2000, he noted. But in Ann Arbor, only about 70% use a private vehicle to get to work – and that percentage has been relatively flat since the 1970s.

So Ann Arbor has found a way to bend the trends, Cooper said. What makes the city special, and what can be done to strengthen the aspects of transportation that are sustainable?

The number of people who walk to work in Ann Arbor is about four times the national average, Cooper said. Policies that relate to sidewalk maintenance and pedestrian crossings help make that a safer option, he said, noting that the city recently adjusted its ordinance on pedestrian crossings. The city realizes that walking is a very sustainable mode of transportation, he said.

Going up the transportation hierarchy is bicycling, Cooper said. The city and University of Michigan have had a bicycle coordinating committee dating back to the 1970s. This year, the number of bike lanes in the city will exceed 40 miles, he said, and 3.5% of residents use bikes to commute from work – up from 2.3% in 2000. Bicyclists are burning calories, not carbon, Cooper quipped, and that’s part of the sustainability equation.

While walking and bicycling satisfy shorter trips, Cooper said, public transit gets you anywhere you want to go. He said the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority provides a fantastic service in a sustainable way. [Cooper was recently appointed to the AATA board.] Some buses in the fleet use biodiesel fuel, he noted, and about 50% of the fleet are hybrid electric buses.

Cooper also discussed railroad service in Ann Arbor, noting that investments are being made at the state and federal level to improve the tracks between Chicago and Detroit – passing through Ann Arbor – to make service more reliable. Work on a commuter rail service between Ypsilanti and Detroit is also underway, he said, although no dates have yet been set for when that might start.

Despite all of this, automobiless are still the main mode of transportation, Cooper noted, even in Ann Arbor. Auto technology is becoming more sustainable, he said, so the challenge is how the city can encourage people to use those more sustainable types of vehicles. That might include putting in charging stations for electric vehicles, or expanding car-sharing programs, he said.

Land Preservation: Ann Arbor’s Greenbelt

Ginny Trocchio gave an overview of the city’s greenbelt program – she’s a staff member of The Conservation Fund, which is under contract with the city to manage the program. The greenbelt is funded through a 30-year, 0.5 mill tax that voters approved in 2003 for land preservation and acquisition. A portion of that millage is used for parks acquisition, Trocchio said, but her presentation would focus on the greenbelt, which protects land outside of the city from development.

Park advisory commissioners Sam Offen and Gwen Nystuen attended the sustainability forum as members of the audience.

Most of the land preservation occurs through the purchase of conservation easements, she said. The property remains in private ownership, but there are restrictions on what can be done on the land, ensuring that the land isn’t developed and that its natural features are preserved. City staff go out to the properties once a year to monitor compliance.

Why is there a need for a greenbelt? Trocchio noted that in 2003, the real estate market and overall economy were quite different than today. Farmland and open space was being bought and converted into residential subdivisions, and there were concerns about the amount of sprawl that this area was seeing.

Since the millage was passed, Ann Arbor has protected over 3,500 acres within the greenbelt’s boundary, Trocchio reported. The city has also been able to leverage its investment on a one-to-one dollar match, by partnering with other entities. More recently, land prices have also worked in the program’s favor. When the greenbelt program was launched, land prices were about $16,000 per acre, Trocchio said. Now, that price has fallen closer to $4,000.

The city has also been able to secure more matching funds in recent years, both from federal sources as well as local partners like Washtenaw County, which has its own millage to protect open space and farmland. Some townships in the county – including the townships of Ann Arbor and Webster – also have land preservation millages, and have partnered with the greenbelt program.

Trocchio briefly reviewed the program’s finances, noting that the city had taken out a $20 million bond in fiscal year 2006 and is making payments with proceeds from the millage. In addition to debt service, expenses include greenbelt purchases. [For a detailed financial update on the greenbelt program, see Chronicle coverage of a September 2011 meeting of the greenbelt advisory commission.]

While there’s not the same kind of development pressure now, Trocchio cited food security as an issue, and noted that the city is building a sustainable perimeter of farmland. The program is also protecting land in the Huron River watershed, she noted, and protecting the region’s water supply. Other attributes of the greenbelt include preservation of scenic views, and in some cases support of educational and recreational opportunities – the Fox Science Preserve, a partnership with Washtenaw County, is an example of that, she said.

Ann Arbor Planning Policy

Two panelists addressed sustainability from the city’s planning perspective: Jeff Kahan of the city’s planning staff, and Evan Pratt, a member of the Ann Arbor planning commission.

From left: Susan Pollay, executive director of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, and Jeff Kahan, Ann Arbor city planner.

Kahan told the audience that Ann Arbor has been pushing for sustainability before people even knew the word. He described five elements of the city’s sustainable land use: (1) natural systems preservation; (2) adaptive re-use; (3) land use efficiency; (4) mixed use development; and (5) pedestrian/transit-oriented development.

Protecting natural areas is one of the things the city does best, Kahan said. Ann Arbor was the first in Michigan to insert language into its city code to protect wetlands, landmark trees, woodlands and other natural areas, he said. And it was the second city in the nation to require on-site stormwater detention.

Adaptive re-use has been done in the city for decades, without thinking about it in terms of sustainability, Kahan said. Examples in town include the Gandy Dancer restaurant in a former train station, the Armory condo development at Fifth Avenue and Ann Street, Kerrytown Market and Shops, and Liberty Lofts.

Kahan then turned to land use efficiency, saying you couldn’t talk about it without mentioning the topic’s four-letter word, “which of course is ‘density.’” The city is preserving land in the greenbelt surrounding Ann Arbor, but the flip side of that is accommodating density in appropriate areas, he said, like the downtown and commercial corridors. Kahan also cited mixed-use developments – buildings that typically include a mix of retail shops and residential units – as being another land use approach that works downtown or in corridors like State Street or Washtenaw Avenue.

The city has also taken steps to encourage pedestrian- and transit-oriented development, Kahan said. He pointed to changes in the city code that have allowed buildings to be constructed closer to sidewalks, encouraging developers to put parking behind buildings rather than close to the street.

Evan Pratt discussed the role of the planning commission in land use and sustainability. He said a remark by Susan Pollay earlier in the forum had really resonated with him – that without partnerships, sustainability isn’t possible.

From left: Ann Arbor city planner Jeff Kahan and Ann Arbor city planning commissioner Evan Pratt.

Pratt said the process of reviewing goals in the city’s various planning documents has been interesting. There’s a lot of crossover, and some conflicting goals as well. He likes the idea of developing a matrix for scoring projects, so that a blended perspective could be used to evaluate projects.

It’s important to develop good policies that encourage the types of projects that the city wants to see, Pratt said – projects that encourage people to live downtown, for example, and that add to the city’s vibrancy. As an example, Pratt pointed to the 618 S. Main project that the planning commission recommended for approval at its Jan. 19, 2012 meeting. It was a “planned project,” he said, which meant that by offering up certain premiums, the developer could get permission to build a structure taller than what zoning would otherwise allow. In this case, those premiums included capturing 100% of the stormwater runoff on-site, putting solar panels on the roof to help heat water for the building, and getting LEED certification – something that’s written into a development agreement with the city.

Pratt concluded by saying there was one big “eureka” moment in looking through the 226 goals that had been culled from city plans. The words “region” or “county” appeared only three times. So Pratt said he wanted to leave the audience with one question: In what areas does Ann Arbor need to broaden its horizons?

Questions & Comments

During the last part of the forum, panelists fielded questions and commentary from the audience. This report summarizes the questions and presents them thematically.

Questions & Comments: Huron River

Question: Is anything being done to make the Huron River more of an attraction?

Evan Pratt of the city’s planning commission noted that he’s also involved with the Huron River Watershed Council, a nonprofit that’s charged with protecting the river and its tributaries. [HRWC's website lists Pratt as chair of its board of directors.] Of all the city’s land use plans, he observed, none of them focus on the land adjacent to the river. The city’s Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan (HRIMP) turned into an Argo Dam argument, he said, but there are some recommendations in the plan that apply to land use around the river. For example, a recommendation for commercial development in the Broadway bridges area states:

Encourage limited development of a restaurant and/or other public-use facilities where the public congregates and can enjoy the river in the Broadway Bridge/Argo area, especially if it generates revenue for river planning and implementation.

Pratt said the planning commission is interested in revisiting the HRIMP recommendations. He also pointed to the county’s Border-to-Border trail for pedestrians and bicyclists, and said a similar initiative is underway for the Huron River. Called RiverUp! and coordinated by the watershed council, the idea is to encourage communities to turn their face to the river, Pratt said. Among other things, there’s an economic benefit to doing that, he said. [For Chronicle coverage of the initiative, see: "RiverUp! Focuses on Revitalizing Huron River"]

Ginny Trocchio noted that one goal of the city’s greenbelt program is to protect land located in the Huron River watershed.

Wendy Rampson of the city’s planning staff recalled that two decades ago, the parks and recreation open space (PROS) plan had identified a goal of developing a ring of parkland around Argo Pond. Much of the property at that time was owned by industrial firms, she said. Over the years, the city was able to acquire key parcels – including land that’s now Bandemer Park – and today that portion of the river has a trail system and more public access. It shows the value of planning documents and a vision in working toward a goal, Rampson said.

Questions & Comments: Urban Open Space

Question: What about the need for open space in downtown Ann Arbor? There’s been a debate about the Library Lot on South Fifth Avenue, and whether the top of the underground parking structure being built there should be open space or a high-rise building. [The underground parking is being built by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.] Research has shown the need for greenways and open space in urban areas, and how that kind of space generates economic development around it.

Noting that she lives near Dolph nature area on the city’s far west side, Susan Pollay of the DDA observed that the need for open space downtown is very different than in other parts of the city. Downtown open space poses different challenges and serves different purposes. Sculpture Plaza, at the corner of Fourth and Catherine, has been successful, she noted, while Liberty Plaza at Liberty and Division doesn’t feel as good.

Eric Lipson, former Ann Arbor city planning commissioner, addressed the panel with a question about open space and its role in the downtown, in the context of the future use of the top of the Fifth Avenue underground parking garage, which is nearing completion. In the background is Clark Charnetski, who addressed the panel expressing support for the Fuller Road Station.

Ingredients to Sculpture Plaza’s success include the fact that it’s small and manageable, Pollay said. It’s adjacent to retail stores, which helps animate the plaza – there’s usually activity there. Employees at the shops take ownership of the area, helping to clean it up. All of that is missing at Liberty Plaza, Pollay said. As the city looks at developing a greenway or deciding what goes atop the Library Lot, she indicated it will be important to learn from these other urban park experiences.

Urban areas also can serve multiple functions, Pollay noted. Main Street can be shut down for events like FestiFools. The surface parking lot next to Palio restaurant – at the corner of Main and William – is used for events like the annual car show and Taste of Ann Arbor. There are different needs and uses for open space, depending on the season, she said. Sidewalks are also important elements of urban open space, as are landscaped areas around parking lots. She noted that dogs, for example, need areas where owners can take them to do their business. The city can be smarter in thinking about the needs for downtown open space, Pollay concluded.

Jeff Kahan said the city’s planning staff is very interested in this issue. But you can’t simply apply suburban concepts – the notion that more is better – to the downtown, he said. Smaller, intimate spaces are more appropriate, like the farmers market, sidewalks, the Diag, or the bandshell at West Park. It’s important to remember that downtown users of open space aren’t likely looking for a large playground, he said. For one thing, not that many families with kids live downtown.

Eric Lipson, who had posed the original question, followed up by asking Pollay if she would support having a surface parking lot atop the underground parking structure that would also be used for community events. Absolutely, Pollay replied. She noted that the entry/exit ramps into the garage were specifically designed so that Library Lane – the small street running between Fifth and Division, just north of the downtown library – could be closed so that events could be held there. The point was to make cars secondary to that space, she said.

Lipson said everyone agrees that micro areas like Sculpture Plaza are needed. But there’s also a need for larger spaces, he said, like the Ingalls Mall area on the University of Michigan campus, where the Street Art Fair and Summer Festival‘s Top of the Park events are held. The Library Lot could serve the same purpose for the downtown, he said.

Wendy Rampson observed that the parks and recreation open space (PROS) plan is a good place for this kind of suggestion to be included.

Questions & Comments: Fuller Road Station

Clark Charnetski – a member of the AATA’s local advisory council – referred to Evan Pratt’s description of a blended perspective, and said that Fuller Road Station is an example of that. Tradeoffs are involved, he said, and it’s important to look at two locations: The existing Amtrak station on Depot Street, and the proposed Fuller Road Station.

Although Fuller Road Station would use three acres for parking and a train station, Charnetski said, it would free up space where the current train station is located, which is near property owned by DTE that’s being cleaned up and could possibly become a park along the Huron River. So the tradeoff is in favor of relocating the train station to Fuller Road Station, Charnetski concluded – that’s something to keep in mind. [Charnetski's remarks were made the day before news broke that the city of Ann Arbor and University of Michigan were suspending plans for Fuller Road Station's initial phase – a large parking structure located near UM's medical complex. See Chronicle coverage: "UM, Ann Arbor Halt Fuller Road Project"]

Wendy Rampson of the city’s planning staff noted that projects like Fuller Road Station and the Library Lot illustrate the difficult decisions that communities make on issues like density and transportation, and the appropriate locations for development. Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager, said locating a train station next to a major employment site is fundamental in order to encourage walkability.

Rampson asked Joe Grengs – a UM associate professor of urban and regional planning – to comment on techniques that communities might use to grapple with these tensions. Grengs said focus groups and other methods can be used to draw out ideas. But regarding the Fuller Road Station project in particular, Grengs said he had some concerns. He didn’t believe the university needed more parking, and said there are steps that could be taken to reallocate parking within UM’s current infrastructure.

The Fuller Road Station project undermines the city’s stated sustainability goals, Grengs said, because the mode of parking falls into a completely different category than walking, biking and rail transit. All of those latter modes work well in areas of high density, he said. But cars work against that – they are “big, hulking objects” that simply sit all day, he observed. So to have 1,000 cars parked at that location every day, at a place where there should be opportunities for interaction – places for retail or recreation, for example – “to me is a mistake and I’d urge the city to think about that,” he concluded. Grengs’ remarks were met with a smattering of applause from the audience.

Later during the Q&A, Rita Mitchell said she agreed with Grengs regarding Fuller Road Station, and she urged the city to consider adaptive re-use of the existing site of the Amtrak station instead.

Questions & Comments: Public Transit & Housing

Jeaninne Palms told panelists that she really appreciated these public discussions on sustainability issues. [Palms was one of the organizers of the Transition Ann Arbor initiative, which focused on some of these same issues.] The forums bring up perspectives that people don’t often think about, she noted. Palms cited Grengs’ comments about accessibility, and observed that that Ann Arbor Transportation Authority recently increased the frequency of buses along Route #4, between Ypsilanti and Ann Arbor. She wondered what his thoughts were about making it more accessible for people who work in Ann Arbor to also live in Ann Arbor.

Jeaninne Palms addressed the panel with a question about transportation goals.

Grengs replied that Palms’ comment illustrates the point that addressing transportation goals can be done better by thinking about land use. Affordability is a barrier to living in Ann Arbor, he noted – it’s easier for low-income residents to live in Ypsilanti. So one way to solve the transportation problem is to create more affordable housing closer to jobs.

Evan Pratt pointed to the 618 S. Main project that planning commission recommended for approval in January. [See Chronicle coverage: "618 S. Main Project Gets Planning Support"] The apartment building will have a variety of unit sizes, he noted. [The proposal calls for 70 studio apartments, 70 one-bedroom units, 42 two-bedroom units, and 7 duplex units with 1 bedroom each.] The plan also includes 121 spaces for on-site parking, Pratt said, which is far fewer than the total number of bedrooms.

He also noted that the development “unbundles” parking – that is, tenants aren’t given a parking space as part of their lease. Parking spaces must be rented separately. The city wants to encourage that, Pratt said. It’s not possible to stop people from choosing to have a car, he said, but it’s possible to ensure that a choice must be made – that it’s not automatic for parking to be provided.

Wendy Rampson observed that the issue involves the question of density. If it’s important to have more workforce housing, that means more housing units will be needed. One way to accomplish that is through accessory apartments, she said. But when the city discussed that possibility a decade ago, the community decided that wasn’t something it wanted. In places like California, Rampson said, communities have turned to accessory dwellings as one way to increase density.

[At the same meeting in January 2012 when the planning commission recommended approval of the 618 S. Main project, they also authorized a special exception use at 3645 Waldenwood, to allow an accessory apartment to be added to the single-family house there. According to planning staff, it was only the second time a special exception use had been requested for an accessory unit since the accessory dwelling ordinance was crafted in the early 1980s. The effort that Rampson mentioned would have changed the city's zoning to make it possible for non-family members to live in accessory apartments.]

Commenting at the end of the Q&A session, Rita Mitchell noted that a four-party agreement is now being discussed that could lead to a countywide transportation system. [Action on four-party agreement – between the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, Washtenaw County, and the cities of Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti – has been postponed three times by the Ann Arbor city council, most recently at its Feb. 6, 2012 meeting.] Mitchell suggested that AATA should improve its existing routes and make service truly excellent, saying it would be a draw for people and would provide environmental benefits as well.

Rampson noted that transit ridership has increased. The AATA recently started more frequent service on Route #4 between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti, she said, which is already showing increased ridership. Eli Cooper added that increased service requires increased resources. Part of the proposed countywide plan calls for enhancing services in the core population areas, as well as better connecting communities within the county, he said.

Questions & Comments: Noise

Question: Ann Arbor is surrounded by freeways. I live by M-14 and there’s nothing but noise. There should be some thought given to creating a buffer – berms, or trees – because noise has a big impact on quality of life.

Susan Pollay said she didn’t have an answer, but a comment. A few years ago, when M-14 was shut down for construction, it was incredibly quiet. It was remarkable not to have that freeway sound – she hadn’t previously been aware that it was such a constant background noise.

Eli Cooper noted that building noise barriers or berms is prohibitively expensive, and yields a limited effect. He agreed that noise affects the quality of life for residents. That’s why it’s important to encourage quieter modes of transportation, like walking, bicycling, or using hybrid buses.

Questions & Comments: Local vs. State Policy

Question: To what extent are people thinking about the future, with regard to resisting certain tendencies? For example, the University of Michigan isn’t accountable to the residents of Ann Arbor. The state is also doing things that residents don’t want – like allowing companies to shoot movies in the city. There’s nothing sustainable about that. The city should have its own policies.

Eli Cooper replied that in order to be successful, the city needs to align its policies with entities around it. Being sustainable within the city’s boundaries is one thing, he said, but it’s also important to consider sustainability in a broader context. And it’s important for the city to coordinate and work well with higher forms of government, like the county and the state.

Future Forums

Two more forums in this sustainability series are planned. All forums will be held at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library building, 343 S. Fifth Ave. starting at 7 p.m.

• March 8, 2012: Climate and Energy – including an overview of Ann Arbor’s climate action plan, climate impacts, renewable and alternative energy, energy efficiency and conservation.
• April 12, 2012: Community – including housing, public safety, public art, recreation, outreach, civic engagement, and stewardship of community resources.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public entities like the city of Ann Arbor. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

Matt Naud, Ann Arbor's environmental coordinator, moderated a panel discussion on resource management – the topic of the first in a series of four sustainability forums, all to be held at the Ann Arbor District Library. (Photos by the writer.)

It was the first of four public forums, and part of a broader sustainability initiative that started informally nearly two years ago, with a joint meeting of the city’s planning, environmental and energy commissions. The idea is to help shape decisions by looking at a triple bottom line: environmental quality, economic vitality, and social equity.

In early 2011, the city received a $95,000 grant from the Home Depot Foundation to fund a formal sustainability project. The project’s main goal is to review the city’s existing plans and organize them into a framework of goals, objectives and indicators that can guide future planning and policy. Other goals include improving access to the city’s plans and to the sustainability components of each plan, and to incorporate the concept of sustainability into city planning and future city plans.

In addition to city staff, this work has been guided by volunteers who serve on four city advisory commissions: Park, planning, energy and environmental. Many of those members attended the Jan. 12 forum, which was held at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library.

The topics of the forums reflect four general themes that have been identified to shape the sustainability framework: Resource management; land use and access; climate and energy; and community. The Jan. 12 panel on resource management was moderated by Matt Naud, the city’s environmental coordinator. Panelists included Laura Rubin, executive director of the Huron River Watershed Council (and a member of the city’s greenbelt advisory commission); Kerry Gray, the city’s urban forest and natural resource planning coordinator; Jason Tallant of the city’s natural area preservation program; Tom McMurtrie, Ann Arbor’s solid waste coordinator, who oversees the city’s recycling program; and Chris Graham, chair of the city’s environmental commission.

Dick Norton, chair of the University of Michigan urban and regional planning program, also participated by giving an overview of sustainability issues and challenges that local governments face. [The university has its own sustainability initiative, including broad goals announced by president Mary Sue Coleman last fall.]

The Jan. 12 forum also included opportunities for questions and comments from the audience. That commentary covered a wide range of topics, from concerns over Fuller Road Station and potential uses for the Library Lot, to suggestions for improving the city’s recycling and composting programs. Even the issue of Argo Dam was raised. The controversy over whether to remove the dam spiked in 2010, but abated after the city council didn’t vote on the question, thereby making a de facto decision to keep the dam in place.

Naud said he’s often joked that the only sure way to get 100 people to come to a meeting is to say the topic is a dam – but this forum had proven him wrong. The city is interested in hearing from residents, he said: What sustainability issues are important? How would people like to be engaged in these community discussions?

The forum was videotaped by AADL staff and will be posted on the library’s website. Additional background on the Ann Arbor sustainability initiative is on the city’s website. See also Chronicle coverage: “Building a Sustainable Ann Arbor,” and an update on the project given at the November 2011 park advisory commission meeting.

Sustainability & Resource Management: Setting the Stage

Dick Norton, chair of the University of Michigan urban and regional planning program, began the panel presentation by saying that he’d been asked to talk about the big picture concepts related to these themes, and challenges that local governments face in dealing with them. He emphasized that the concept of sustainability encompasses more than just the environment, but that this first forum would focus on environmental issues.

Dick Norton, chair of the University of Michigan urban and regional planning program, and a member of the Huron River Watershed Council executive committee.

Norton gave a brief overview of possible ways to think about attributes of a clean environment, related to topics that would be discussed by panelists. For air and water quality, it’s important that those resources are unpolluted, available in sufficient quantity, and that residents have adequate access. Viable ecosystems are one way to provide clean air and water, he said. Ecosystems provide filtering functions, and are a source of biodiversity – we suffer if we homogenize our environmental base, he said. Ecosystems also provide an aesthetic quality, making places pleasant to live.

Regarding responsible resource use, Norton pointed to the three Rs: Reduce, reuse, recycle. Recycling is good, he said, but reuse is better and reducing is the best approach to responsible resource use. It’s also important to think about the waste stream, and how waste can be used as input for new systems. Composting is one example of that.

Norton then outlined four challenges that local governments face when dealing with these issues. The first is factual uncertainty. The world is complex, and there is a great amount of scientific uncertainty. That gives people ammunition to argue against environmental protection, he said. There’s uncertainty over when a substance becomes pollution, for example. Carbon dioxide or arsenic are common elements – at what amounts do those elements become pollutants? Another uncertainty relates to resource depletion. The environment is a resilient receptor, Norton said – it can take a lot of shock to its system. But at what point does disruption and depletion of resources become too great? That uncertainty makes it difficult for government to act, he said.

Moral disagreements are another challenge for governments, Norton said. Is nature a form of sacred life, or just toilet paper on a stump? Should nature be preserved at the expense of jobs? And who gets to decide? Norton said he tells his students that if you have a collaborative planning process, you’ll encounter a plurality of values. That’s a challenge.

Capacity problems – both legal and financial – are also an issue, Norton said. Local governments are creatures of the state, he said, and can only do what the state enables them to do by law. A lot of local officials are reticent to undertake proactive environmental protection, but they have a lot more capacity to act than they think, he contended.

Regarding fiscal capacity, Norton noted that financial resources are highly strained, and there’s a sentiment that local governments can’t afford this “sustainability stuff.” But Norton argued that energy efficiency, for example, is often less expensive in the long term, though it usually requires a higher upfront investment. He encouraged officials to make decisions based on a longer timeframe.

The final challenge Norton cited is a category he called “unhappy propensities” – localism, parochialism and inertia. Localism is the attitude that “we get to decide,” he said. Parochialism is the belief that if something is happening outside of our borders, we don’t need to worry about it. That works if the problems are downstream, but not so much if it’s an upstream problem headed our way.

Then there’s the challenge of inertia: We’ve always done it this way, so why change? Norton noted that sustainability is a different way of looking at things, and that means change. Ann Arbor is stepping out in front of other communities, Norton said, and is pushing these boundaries. He encouraged a broader perspective, looking at decisions as they fit into a bigger system.

Water Resources: Protecting the Huron River

Laura Rubin, executive director of the Huron River Watershed Council, began by describing the history of HRWC. The nonprofit was founded in 1965 by 17 communities along the Huron River who were concerned about protecting this water resource. They knew they couldn’t just look at it from the perspective of where the river flowed through their individual jurisdictions.

Sometimes people overlook the value of the watershed, Rubin said. In addition to providing drinking water, the river also is an asset for recreation, property values, wildlife habitat and stormwater control. The watershed – including the Huron River and its tributaries – is arguably the region’s largest natural feature.

Laura Rubin, executive director of the Huron River Watershed Council.

The Huron River is the only river in southeast Michigan that’s a state-designated “natural river.” The designation affords the river special protections, she said, related to development and vegetation. The watershed also is protected by strong local and regional regulations and partnerships, Rubin said, citing the Huron Clinton Metropolitan Authority as one example.

The watershed offers a wealth of recreational and fishing opportunities, Rubin said, and provides a habitat to threatened and endangered wildlife, including the northern madtom, the snuffbox mussel, the prairie fringed orchid, the least shrew, and the massasauga rattlesnake.

But although the Huron River is the cleanest urban river in Michigan, she said, there are also problems. Many sections are classified as “impaired,” based on the inability to meet certain uses, like swimming or fishing, as laid out in the federal Clean Water Act. Two major problems are excess levels of phosphorus and E. coli – a problem that’s especially common in urban areas, Rubin said. Sources for E. coli include animal and human feces, which can be discharged into the river from wastewater or sewer overflow during storms.

Other problems causing the impaired classification relate to sediment, erratic flows, low dissolved oxygen, mercury and PCBs.

Rubin outlined several broader threats to the area’s water resources. The region, sandwiched between the urban areas of Detroit and Lansing, has lost many of its natural areas, she said. Ann Arbor itself has become more urbanized, which has contributed to the loss of habitat, as well as to pollution, warmer temperatures and erratic flows.

Hydrologic changes are another threat. The river has 97 documented dams, Rubin said, and this changes flow patterns tremendously. It leads to the loss of wetlands, causes sedimentation, and alters the way that the ecosystem functions.

Rubin also identified “non-point” source pollution as a threat to the watershed. As rain falls onto roofs, into gutters, and onto roads, it collects pollutants that eventually flow into the river. That’s the No. 1 cause of water pollution in the U.S., she said.

A variety of tools are used to address these issues, Rubin said, including watershed-wide partnerships, data that’s collected and analyzed, advocacy and education. Due to efforts by the watershed council and the University of Michigan, the Huron is one of the best studied rivers in Michigan, she said.

The watershed council pushes people to do more to protect the river, Rubin said. Staff and volunteers work on water-quality monitoring, for example, as well as an adopt-a-stream program, which includes data collection and experiential learning.

There’s value in having “eyes on the river,” Rubin concluded. Among other things, it enables the long-term tracking of trends, and provides a scientific basis to advocate for local and state protection policies.

Following Rubin’s presentation, Matt Naud asked the audience a trivia question: How many cities use the Huron River for their drinking water? Just one – Ann Arbor, he said. That’s why the city cares about its upstream partners.

Solid Waste: Reduce, Reuse, Recycle

Tom McMurtrie, the city’s solid waste coordinator, began by saying that recycling is one of the most effective things that people can do to reduce their carbon footprint. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has identified Ann Arbor as one of the nation’s top recycling communities, he said. So how did the city get to this point?

From left: Kerry Gray, Ann Arbor's urban forest & natural resource planning coordinator; Jason Tallant of the city's natural area preservation program; and Tom McMurtrie, solid waste coordinator.

In the 1970s, the city brought curbside recycling to every home in the city, McMurtrie said. Back then, recycling required more work – residents had to separate green glass from brown glass, cardboard from newspapers. It reminded him of a favorite New Yorker cartoon: “Recycling in Hell.”

In 1991 the city introduced two-stream recycling. And every multi-family building was added, which doubled participation. The city built a sorting facility at the location of the current drop-off site.

Then in 2010, McMurtrie said, the city moved to another level of recycling: single stream. New plastics were added to the list of recyclables, and new carts with radio-frequency tags were deployed, which allowed single-family homes to record their recycling and be eligible for a rewards program.

In mid-2010, a $3.5 million overhaul was completed to the city’s materials recovery facility – known as the MRF (pronounced “murf”)– at 4150 Platt Road. Overall tonnages of recyclables have tripled, he said, with materials coming from as far away as Toledo and Lansing. Four new hybrid recycling trucks were purchased, which use less fuel.  Four more hybrid trucks will likely be added in 2012, he said.

McMurtrie also pointed to the concepts of “reduce” and “reuse.” His suggestions included shopping for fresh food at the farmers market, where less packaging is used, and using reusable bags whenever possible. About two years ago, the city also added the option of including food waste in its composting program, he noted. Every pound of food or yard waste that’s composted greatly reduces the burden on landfills, he said.

Showing images extracted from a core boring taken at the closed Ann Arbor landfill, McMurtrie noted that most materials in the landfill haven’t decomposed.

McMurtrie concluded by saying that the city is working on an update of its five-year solid waste plan, and he encouraged residents to participate by giving their input. The first meeting will be held on Thursday, Jan. 19, 2012 from 4-6 p.m. in the 4th floor conference room in Larcom City Hall, 301 E. Huron. The meeting is open to the public.

Urban Forest Management

Kerry Gray, the city’s urban forest and natural resource planning coordinator, said that until recently, the city didn’t have a comprehensive understanding of its urban forest resources. In 2009, city staff finished an updated tree inventory, cataloging location and maintenance needs, among other things. The city has 42,776 street trees, 6,923 park trees (in mowed areas), and 7,269 potential street planting locations, she said.

Maintenance needs were also inventoried, with 1,642 trees identified as priority removals and 3,424 trees that needed priority pruning. An additional 43,271 trees needed routine pruning, and 1,362 stumps needed to be removed.

In 2010, the city completed an evaluation of its urban tree canopy, Gray reported. The canopy covers nearly 33% of the city. Of that, 46% is located in residential areas, 23.7% is in the city-owned right-of-way, and 22% is in recreational areas, such as parks. Compared to other cities, Ann Arbor’s tree canopy is average, she said.

Chart of tree diversity in Ann Arbor. (Links to larger image)

Gray addressed the issue of tree diversity, and said the city discourages the planting of maple trees, which account for 37% of the public tree population. ”Plant something other than a maple – that’s my take-away message,” she said.

Ann Arbor’s urban forest is a tremendous asset, Gray said. Public trees provide an estimated annual $2.8 million in benefits related to energy, property values, stormwater control, air quality and other benefits.

But in the past, there hasn’t been a management plan for the urban forest, unlike the city’s other assets, Gray said. So in 2010, city staff began developing an asset management plan, with the goal of maintaining the urban forest and maximizing its benefits. The city is doing a lot of public engagement related to this plan, she said – more information is online at a2.gov/urbanforestry.

Matt Naud added a coda to Gray’s presentation, noting that the city lost about 10,000 city street trees that were attacked by the emerald ash borer several years ago. The city spent over $2 million just to remove the trees, he said, and that doesn’t count what it cost residents for tree removal on private property. That’s why tree diversity is important – you don’t know what’s coming next, he said.

Natural Area Preservation

Jason Tallant of the city’s natural area preservation program (NAP) began his comments by showing a slide of the Furstenberg Nature Area – it’s the image he sees when he closes his eyes to think about the topic of sustainability, because it integrates the built environment with the native landscape.

NAP straddles the line between providing services for people, he said, and empowering them to preserve natural features in the city’s parkland and on their own property. He read NAP’s mission statement: “To protect and restore Ann Arbor’s natural areas and foster an environmental ethic among its citizens.”

Ann Arbor resident David Diephuis, center, talks with urban forester Kerry Gray, left, and Jason Tallant of the city's natural area preservation program.

A lot of sustainability practices are based on history, Tallant said, specifically what occurred prior to European settlement. He quoted from the 1836 land survey notes of John M. Gordon, who described the land between Ann Arbor and Dixboro: “Oaks of the circumference of 9-15 feet abound in the forests… White Oak and Burr Oak at intervals of 30-40 feet with an undergrowth 5-6’ high which has the appearance of being annually burnt down as I am informed it is.”

The history of the land is really important when thinking about how to move into the future, Tallant said. He showed a slide of the types of vegetation on land in the Ann Arbor area prior to settlement, and noted that much of the area had been covered by a mixed-oak or oak-hickory forests, with wetlands along the river. It wasn’t a monoculture, he noted, but rather a mixed environment, depending on topography, hydrology, soil type and other factors.

NAP facilitates restoration work in all of the city parks and natural areas, Tallant said. Their work includes conducting controlled burns, taking detailed inventories of the plants and animals within the city, and knowing what’s occurring in the landscape. They also do invasive species control, he said – when you see someone walking along with an orange-colored bag full of garlic mustard, they’re restoring the land so that its biodiversity isn’t diminished. That work helps create a resilient ecosystem, he said.

Outreach, Education

Chris Graham, chair of the city’s environmental commission, said he hoped that the previous speakers had given the audience an idea of the extraordinary things that Ann Arbor is doing related to sustainability. Residents should be very proud, he said.

Graham explained that the original “Ann’s arbor” was a grove of large burr oak trees – the “children” of those early oaks are obvious in the area near St. Andrew’s Church, he said, north of city hall. Underneath those oaks were roughly 300 species of plants that the native Indians burned every year.

Just a few decades ago, there were no regulations related to landmark trees, Graham noted. Controversies in the 1970s and ’80s, when development resulted in the removal of many of those trees, led to changes in Chapter 62 of the city code – what’s known as the natural features ordinance, Graham said. Ann Arbor stepped up courageously, he said, and added a natural features standard that must be met in order to gain site plan approval for any development.

What are natural features? Graham asked. His list includes woodlands, native forest fragments, some wetlands, waterways, and floodplains. Related to native forest fragments, Graham said there’s an idea hatching to develop a stewardship program, similar to the city’s natural area preservation program. The new program would look at native forest fragments in all parts of the city, including the University of Michigan and private land – the fabric of natural features knits itself across the city, he said. The plan would be to do outreach and education, so that property owners would know what’s in their back yards.

The children of trees that existed in the 1820s won’t last without help, Graham said. “Come join us in this endeavor.”

Questions & Comments

During the last portion of the forum, panelists fielded questions and commentary from the audience. This report summarizes the questions and presents them thematically.

Questions & Comments: Recycling

Question: Why doesn’t the city’s recycling program accept No. 3 plastics or biodegradable materials?

Tom McMurtrie noted that No. 3 plastics – made from polyvinyl chloride – are a significant contaminant if mixed with other plastics. The city needed to be responsible, he said, and fortunately there aren’t a lot of No. 3 products in the waste stream.

As for biodegradables, McMurtrie said that’s been a challenging issue. On the surface, it looks like a good idea, he said. However, research shows that biodegradable products break down into very small particulates that aren’t necessarily good for the environment. Most of the particulates are petroleum-based, he said, and end up staying in the environment in that form. The other issue is that if those particulates end up in the recycling stream, they act as contaminants.

Question: Are there plans to eventually accept post-consumer food waste? And how much contamination ends up in the compost stream?

McMurtrie fielded this question too, inviting the speaker to participate in the city’s solid waste plan update. This issue of post-consumer food waste will be explored, although there are some repercussions around that issue, he said. Regarding contamination in the compost stream, that hasn’t been a problem, McMurtrie said. The city switched to a private operator about a year ago, and it’s worked out well, he said. [At its Dec. 6, 2010 meeting, the city council approved contracting with WeCare Organics to operate the city's composting facility.]

Question: If reducing waste is really the goal, how will incentives be built into the program to achieve that goal? There are incentives to recycle, but how can the city encourage reduction?

McMurtrie called this a great question, and said that a simplistic approach might be to use a graduated fee system for trash collection – to charge more for large trash containers, and less for smaller ones. The city is already doing that to some extent, he said. Households that use 96-gallon trash containers pay a fee each year – $38 – while there’s no fee for 64-gallon or 32-gallon containers. Perhaps the city could incentivize more in that area.

Jeanine Palms asked city staff about whether there are plans to give incentives to residents for reducing their waste, not simply for recycling it.

Jeanine Palms, who had asked the original question, wondered if there was any way to charge for the actual amount of waste that a household produced. McMurtrie replied that it’s an option, but that city council has been hesitant to take that approach. It risks becoming a kind of regressive tax on low-income people with large families, he said.

Dick Norton weighed in, saying that the answer depends on what you want to reduce. Palms’ question and McMurtrie’s answer had focused on trash, he said, but there are other things that people consume, like energy, water and land. Urban planners try to design cities to create greater density and transportation systems so that people can live more compactly. The ways that cities are built out impacts how much people consume, he said.

Norton also pointed to research on the impact of monetizing behavior. One study looked at a daycare center, which started charging parents who showed up late to pick up their kids. The intent was to create a disincentive for people, and to eliminate the late pick-ups. But instead, more people started showing up late, Norton said. When a monetary amount was attached to that behavior, people decided it was worth the amount charged. So incentives can result in perverse outcomes, he noted.

We have to start changing our cultural expectations, Norton continued. We have to stop thinking about living the big life, then throwing it away later. And that’s a tougher nut to crack, he said.

Chris Graham pointed to another thing that could be reduced: Turf grass. The amount of energy, pollutants, time and effort that’s spent on maintaining lawns in the city is counterproductive when trying to achieve sustainability, he said.

Laura Rubin addressed the question from the perspective of water resources. She noted that the city has a graduated water rate structure, so that heavier users pay more. The Huron River Watershed Council have been holding focus groups on the issue of water conservation. Because water is plentiful in the Great Lakes region, the issue of saving water isn’t always compelling. It’s better to tie the issue to energy conservation, she said.

When people talk about reasons why they might want to save water, the knee-jerk answer is to save money, Rubin noted. But when asked, no one in the focus groups could report what their water bill is, she said. Rubin concluded by noting that while our culture seems to be driven by money and economics, other motivations are often at play.

Matt Naud pointed out that information on water consumption per household is available on the city’s website. Residents can get a lot of data about their water usage by typing in their address and water bill account number, he said.

Comment: Portland, Oregon, has mandated that residents compost their food waste – that’s a direction that Ann Arbor should be headed. Currently, compost pick-up in Ann Arbor runs from April through December. I still eat fruits and vegetables in the winter – compost pick-up should be year-round.

Matt Naud encouraged the speaker to participate in the city’s solid waste plan update, saying that this type of feedback is exactly the kind of thing the city needs to hear.

Question: I live in an apartment in order to be environmentally sound. When will food compost pick-up be available for multiple family dwellings? I now take my food scraps to friends who live outside the city and raise chickens. So there’s no lack of motivation.

Matt Naud again suggested that this kind of feedback would be useful for the city’s solid waste plan update. Tom McMurtrie said that most multi-family buildings can get compost carts. Requests can be made by calling 99-GREEN.

Questions & Comment: Air Quality – Fuller Road Station

Question: The proposed Fuller Road Station will be a parking structure with almost 1,000 spaces that will bring 1,000 cars into an area near Fuller Pool and Fuller Park. It seems like this will affect the air quality along the Fuller Road corridor and the Huron River. It’s already a heavily used traffic corridor with a lot of emissions, and it seems like Fuller Road Station would really change the quality of air.

Matt Naud said he wasn’t sure if a formal air-quality study has been completed for the Fuller Road Station project. He offered to contact Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager, and find out what’s being done or what the plan is.

Questions & Comment: Water Quality – Argo Dam

Comment: I was really surprised to see the number of dams along the Huron River. Fred Pearce wrote a book called “When the Rivers Run Dry.” He has almost nothing good to say about dams.

Laura Rubin noted that there are 97 documented dams along the Huron River – until recently there were 98, but one was removed in Dexter. Beyond that, there are at least 50 other dams that the Huron River Watershed Council has discovered while taking inventory for a new dam management tool it’s developing. A lot of the dams are connected to aging infrastructure, she noted – used at former wastewater treatment plants, or to generate electricity. Some dams have been retired from their original uses. Some are just piles of rubble.

Dams are very detrimental from an environmental point of view, Rubin said, but socially they can be very successful. They can have recreational value. For the Huron River, flood control isn’t a problem, so dams aren’t generally needed for that purpose, she said. A lot of river systems and social systems have been engineered, she noted, and it’s hard to change that mentality.

Dick Norton said the issue highlights the fact that “green” and “nature” don’t have the same meaning for everyone. Norton, who’s on the executive committee of the Huron River Watershed Council, noted that the council was involved in discussions about whether to remove Argo Dam, and it had been painful. [The watershed council advocated for dam removal.] A lot of people who would typically be on the same side of an environmental issue were on different sides of the Argo Dam issue, because they valued natural resources in different ways, he said. The debate was emblematic of issues that society struggles with, he added. Norton said he sympathizes with local officials, who get hammered by people on various sides of an issue.

Questions & Comment: Public Outreach

Comment: I’ve been a townie since 1967 – and have been to a lot of the concerts that are in the posters hanging around the room. [The concert posters were part of a retrospective organized by the Ann Arbor District Library called "Freeing John Sinclair."] Outreach needs to go much further.

My neighborhood is concerned about the Gelman 1,4 dioxane plume, and about property values. Very few of my neighbors are paying attention to other issues that were mentioned tonight. They don’t want taxes to go up, or property values to do down, and they don’t want to pay more for a trash cart. They need to understand sustainability issues in ways that make sense to them. I’d like to see more outreach.

Matt Naud acknowledged that outreach is a challenge. Funding for this kind of effort is one issue – many people who work on sustainability issues are funded by grants, and “that’s not sustainable,” he said.

Questions & Comment: Land Use, Natural Areas – Library Lot

Question: Will the city have a public conversation about the future use for the top of the new underground parking structure – the Library Lot? A lot of people would like to see a park or green space there. Is the city going to ask for ideas from the public?

Sabra Briere, Ward 1 city councilmember.

Matt Naud asked city councilmember Sabra Briere – the only elected city official who attended the forum – to comment.

Briere noted that early last fall, at the city council’s direction, the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority began to explore alternate uses of  the five city-owned parcels in downtown Ann Arbor. Those parcels include the Library Lot on South Fifth Avenue north of William; the former YMCA lot north of William between Fourth and Fifth avenues; the Palio lot at the northeast corner of Main and William; the Kline lot on Ashley north of William; and the bottom floor of the parking structure at Fourth and William.

This is a plan that hasn’t been developed yet, so no one can say what will happen, she said, but part of the plan will be to solicit public input. In the near term, she said, the Library Lot will be a surface parking lot, with trees planted. That’s not the long-term plan, she said. However, Briere added, no one knows how long the near-term will last.

Dick Norton commented that there’s a need to see how to make urban environments more green, but it’s also important to worry about maintaining farmland outside of the city. Development should go into already developed cities – it’s important to think about how to accommodate more people in urban areas so that large tracts of farmland and forest can be preserved outside of cities. It’s a difficult trade-off, he noted, especially because different jurisdictions are involved, and different perspectives. Residents of the city don’t want it to change and grow bigger, while farmers don’t want to be told that they can’t sell their land for development – in many cases, that’s their retirement plan.

But if the city wants to reduce energy and preserve farmland, turning the Library Lot into open space probably isn’t the best use for it. The site should probably be put to a more urban use, Norton said. It’s something to think about.

Matt Naud noted that at one of the future sustainability sessions, the city’s greenbelt program will likely be included. [Laura Rubin of the Huron River Watershed Council is a member of the city's greenbelt advisory commission, which oversees the greenbelt program. The program, funded by a 30-year millage, preserves farmland and open space outside of the city by acquiring property development rights.]

Comment: Some years ago, we dug out the grass on our lawn extension and replanted it with native plants – and we were ticketed by the city. The city needs to straighten out that disconnect.

Jason Tallant of the city’s natural areas preservation program applauded the planting of native plants in the easement. Some residents are putting in rain gardens or bioswales, which is great, he said. But the key point, he said, relates to public safety. If the plantings obstruct the view – of pedestrians using a crosswalk, for example – that’s a problem. That’s why the city enforces height restrictions on plants in the easement, he said. The thing to remember is “the right plant for the right place.” [The height restriction limits vegetation to an average height of 36 inches above the road surface.]

Questions & Comments: Future Forums

Question: It was interesting to hear about what the city is doing, but this forum didn’t match my expectations. I thought you’d have more opportunities for asking questions and engaging in dialogue. As I decide whether to attend future sessions, I wonder if the format will be the same?

This is an experiment, Matt Naud said. The first forum was intended to give people a taste of what the city is doing toward sustainability in different areas – city staff are never quite sure how much information is getting out, he said. The question is whether to hold longer sessions, to give the public more time to ask questions and give commentary, or to hold smaller focus sessions that take a deeper dive into these issues.

Naud said the city staff would like to hear what kind of format would be most effective – feedback forms were provided at the forum. Basically, if people want a certain kind of meeting and will attend it, the city will hold it, he said.

Naud said he’s held public meetings about the Gelman 1,4 dioxane issue and only a dozen people would come. It’s hard to know what issues will draw a turnout. He said he’s often joked that the only sure way to get 100 people to come to a meeting is to say the topic is a dam – but this forum has proven him wrong, he said. The city wants to know how people prefer to give feedback, and how this discussion should move forward, Naud said.

Future Forums

Three more forums in this sustainability series are planned. All forums will be held at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library building, 343 S. Fifth Ave. starting at 7 p.m.

• Feb. 9, 2012: Land Use and Access – including transportation designs, infrastructure, land uses, built environment, and public spaces.
• March 8, 2012: Climate and Energy – including an overview of Ann Arbor’s climate action plan, climate impacts, renewable and alternative energy, energy efficiency and conservation.
• April 12, 2012: Community – including housing, public safety, public art, recreation, outreach, civic engagement, and stewardship of community resources.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public entities like the city of Ann Arbor. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

From left: Earl Ophoff of Midwestern Consulting talks with Jeff Kahan of the city's planning staff about proposed changes at Traver Village. (Photos by the writer.)

The owner, First Martin Corp., plans to reconfigure retail space that the Blockbuster video store previously occupied, at the southern part of the complex near Plymouth Road, converting it into three smaller retail spaces.

Plans call for adding a new 25-space parking lot to serve that location, between the south side of the building and Plymouth. Elsewhere within the complex, 128 parking spaces will be removed – primarily in the northwest area behind the Kroger grocery. More bike spaces and landscaping are part of the plan as well, which was approved unanimously by commissioners after brief discussion. It will now be forwarded to the city council for consideration.

Communications during the 30-minute meeting included a reminder of a series of public forums on sustainability starting early next year. The first one, on Thursday, Jan. 12, will feature a panel of city staff on the topic of resource management. All forums will be held at the Ann Arbor District Library’s downtown building, 343 S. Fifth Ave., beginning at 7 p.m. It’s part of a broader sustainability initiative that began earlier this year, funded by a Home Depot Foundation grant.

Traver Village Site Plan

The only action item on Tuesday’s agenda was a site plan for changes at Traver Village, a shopping center owned by First Martin Corp. at 2601 Plymouth Road, on the northwest corner of Plymouth and Nixon.

The southern-most store in the complex, nearest to Plymouth Road, formerly housed a Blockbuster video outlet but has been vacant for more than a year. The owners plan to convert it into three smaller retail spaces, with entrances from the south side of the building. As part of that change, they want to build a new 25-space parking lot between the south side of the building and Plymouth.

In addition, the plan calls for removing 128 parking spaces in other parts of the site, mostly in the northwest area behind the Kroger grocery, where a shallow bio-retention area will be built instead. Other parking spots will be removed and replaced with landscaped islands. Overall, the number of parking spots will be reduced from 609 to 506 – closer to the city’s maximum parking requirement of 492 spots for that development, according to a staff report.

The site plan for changes at Traver Village indicate where parking will be added and removed. Plymouth Road runs along the right side of this map, with Nixon Road at the top. (Links to larger image.)

The new parking area will cover 9,530 square feet, but 16,334 square feet of impervious surface elsewhere in the complex will be eliminated. The result is a net reduction in impervious surface of 6,804 square feet. To build the new parking lot, 13 evergreen trees will be removed. The plan calls for planting 46 new trees, and adding new landscaping between the edge of the new parking lot and Plymouth Road.

More bike spaces will also be added. Currently there are 38 uncovered bike spaces throughout the complex. The plan calls for adding 22 covered bike spaces and 26 more uncovered spaces.

The staff report on this proposal notes that the developer is required to pay $3,075.15 into a street tree escrow account, to conform with Chapter 57 Attachment C of Ann Arbor’s city code. The escrow fund is for the planting and maintenance of trees on the public street right-of-way abutting a development. The fee must be paid before the city issues building permits.

Eric Ophoff of Midwestern Consulting and Chris Grant of First Martin Corp. attended the Dec. 20 meeting. No one spoke at a public hearing on the plan.

Traver Village Site Plan: Commissioner Discussion

Bonnie Bona clarified with city planner Jeff Kahan that new trees would be located on the northern side of the sidewalk – Kahan indicated that the city’s forester preferred that location so that the trees wouldn’t interfere with utility lines. Bona noted that from a pedestrian’s perspective, it’s preferable to have trees between the sidewalk and the street. Placing trees so that there’s no conflict with utility lines does not comply with the concept of “complete streets,” she said.

By way of background, at its March 7, 2011 meeting, the Ann Arbor city council adopted a resolution expressing its commitment to the concept of “complete streets” – the idea that streets should be constructed to accommodate a full range of users, from pedestrians, to bicyclists, to public transit vehicles, to privately owned automobiles. The impetus for the city’s proclamation came from the state of Michigan’s enactment in 2010 of Public Acts 134 and 135, which amended the state’s planning enabling statute and the transportation funding law. The city’s resolution was meant to ensure that Ann Arbor continued to qualify for state transportation funding.

Bona said she hoped that in the future, the city can head in the direction of the “complete streets” approach.

Tony Derezinski noted that the staff report mentioned the owner had mailed out 786 postcards to nearby residents, but that no one had responded. “That says a lot,” Derezinski said, adding that the complex is located in Ward 2, which Derezinski represents on city council.

Ophoff said most of the residents live in multi-family complexes, and getting no response is not uncommon.

Derezinski also wondered whether the Traver Village entrance onto Nixon Road was near the roundabout there. It is, Ophoff said, but the reconfiguration and new parking in the complex isn’t expected to change the traffic patterns there. The entrances off Plymouth Road are used the most.

Diane Giannola asked where the new bike spots will be located. The bike spaces will be spread along the eastern and southeastern frontage of the shopping center, Ophoff said.

Outcome: Planning commissioners voted unanimously to recommend approval of the Traver Village site plan. It will now be forwarded to city council for approval. No further approval is required.

Misc. Communications

There are several opportunities for public commentary and communications from staff and planning commissioners during any meeting. On Tuesday, no one spoke during public commentary.

Misc. Communications: Sustainability Forums

Jeff Kahan of the city’s planning staff reminded commissioners of the upcoming series of public forums on the topic of sustainability. All will be held at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library building, 343 S. Fifth Ave. starting at 7 p.m.

• Jan. 12, 2012: Resource Management – including natural areas, waste reduction, recycling, compost, local food systems, water and air quality. Panelists will include Matt Naud, the city’s environmental coordinator; Kerry Gray, the city’s urban forest & natural resource planning coordinator; Tom McMurtrie, Ann Arbor’s solid waste coordinator; and Dave Borneman, manager of the city’s natural area preservation program.
• Feb. 9, 2012: Land Use and Access – including transportation designs, infrastructure, land uses, built environment, and public spaces.
• March 8, 2012: Climate and Energy – including an overview of Ann Arbor’s climate action plan, climate impacts, renewable and alternative energy, energy efficiency and conservation.
• April 12, 2012: Community – including housing, public safety, public art, recreation, outreach, civic engagement, and stewardship of community resources.

The four forums reflect categories in a framework that the city is developing to organize its existing goals as they relate to sustainability. The project, which began earlier this year, is being led by Jamie Kidwell and funded by a $95,000 grant the city received from the Home Depot Foundation. Four city commissions – park, planning, energy and environmental – participated in a Sept. 27, 2011 joint working session focused on prioritizing existing goals for the city that touch on sustainability issues. [For additional background, see Chronicle coverage of Kidwell's briefing at the Nov. 15 park advisory commission meeting.]

Misc. Communications: Public Notice of Land Division

As an item of information, planning commission chair Eric Mahler read a public notice of a request to divide a 2.8-acre parcel at 500 Huron Parkway into two parcels. Access to both parcels is to be provided via a shared driveway from Huron Parkway. Public input on the land division can be made by calling the planning staff at 734-794-6265, or emailing planning@a2gov.org. The deadline for feedback is Jan. 11, 2012.

Land division requests are handled administratively by the city planning staff, and do not require planning commission action.

Present: Bonnie Bona, Tony Derezinski, Diane Giannola, Eric Mahler, Evan Pratt.

Absent: Eleanore Adenekan, Erica Briggs, Kirk Westphal, Wendy Woods.

Next regular meeting: The planning commission next meets on Thursday, Jan. 5, 2012 at 7 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the city planning commission. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

At left: Lynn Bowen, an administrative assistant with the city who provides staff support for the park advisory commission, is retiring and was honored at PAC's November meeting. She has worked at the city for 26 years, including the last six years with parks and recreation. To the right are PAC chair Julie Grand and Colin Smith, the city's parks and recreation manager. (Photos by the writer.)

Commissioners were briefed by city staff about annual finances related to the land acquisition for parks and greenbelt programs, which are funded by a 30-year millage. They also got an update on the city’s marketing efforts for parks and recreation, and heard a report on the status of a sustainability project – several PAC commissioners had attended a September joint work session to help prioritize city goals related to environmental quality, economic vitality, and social equity.

Updates were also given about a sediment removal project in the Ruthven Nature Area, and about two parking-related projects at Riverside Park and Veterans Memorial Park.

In his manager’s report, Colin Smith noted that he’d taken a canoe run through the under-construction Argo Dam bypass pools – the new channel was a ”bit sportier” than he had expected, and is still being tweaked. He also told commissioners he’d received word that two state grant applications made by the city of Ann Arbor – $300,000 for the proposed Ann Arbor skatepark at Veterans Memorial Park, and $300,000 for improvements at the Gallup Park canoe livery – had ranked in the top 12 out of 100 applications statewide for funding from the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund. That bodes well for the possibility that the grants will be awarded – a decision from the state is expected in December.

During the meeting commissioners also honored two volunteers with the city’s natural area preservation program – Sarah Newman and Drew Lathin – and said farewell to Lynn Bowen, the administrative assistant who works with PAC. The meeting was her last before retiring from the city.

An item not on the agenda – the proposed Fuller Road Station – drew focus from public commentary as well as some questions from commissioners later in the meeting. 

Fuller Road Station

The issue of Fuller Road Station has raised concerns for several members of PAC dating back nearly two years. The large parking structure, bus depot and possible rail station is proposed near the intersection of Fuller Road and Maiden Lane, near the University of Michigan medical campus on city-owned land. The land has been used as a surface parking lot since 1993, leased to the university, but is on property designated as parkland. It’s a joint project of the city of Ann Arbor and UM, but a formal agreement regarding its construction and operation hasn’t yet been finalized.

In June 2010, the commission passed a resolution that asked the city council to make available a complete plan of Fuller Road Station – including any significant proposed agreements, such as what the university will pay the city for use of the structure – allowing sufficient time for a presentation at a televised PAC meeting before the council votes on the project. The resolution also asked that staff and the council ensure the project results in a net revenue gain for the parks system. PAC most recently got a detailed update on the project at its May 2011 meeting. The commission has not formally received word about whether the city council will agree to the requests made in the 2010 resolution.

There was no agenda item for the proposed Fuller Road Station, but the issue came up during public commentary as well as at the end of the meeting, with questions from commissioners.

Fuller Road Station: Public Commentary

Nancy Kaplan told commissioners that she was there to speak about transforming Fuller Park into a Fuller Road parking garage, saying it set many negative, troubling precedents. One precedent is that it’s OK to change a part-time surface parking lot into a parking garage. The fact that it’s a surface lot to accommodate parking for the University of Michigan is being used to justify building a parking garage with up to 1,600 spaces, with an expected structural life of 75 years, she said. This decreases the chances of reclaiming the Huron Valley as a beautiful amenity. Another negative precedent, Kaplan said, is circumventing the expectations of a 2008 ballot initiative passed by Ann Arbor voters, which requires a referendum in order to sell city parkland. This circumvention breaks with the trust of voters, who had a common understanding of what it meant to sell parkland, she said, and although this situation isn’t technically a sale, the result is the same.

A third negative precedent is accepting that the project will move forward without a due process hearing. Aside from the memorandum of understanding, no city council vote on the overall project has been taken. Yet at the Nov. 14 council work session, Kaplan noted, it was stated that a groundbreaking is expected this spring, and that public art is already being planned. Finally, she said the university has embarked on a sustainability initiative, but bringing up to 1,600 cars into the parking garage is counter to sustainability. She pointed out that Stanford University in California doesn’t subsidize employee parking, as UM does. Instead, as part of its reward system, Stanford pays employees not to park, and offers bus passes and free shuttles. The side benefit is that Stanford doesn’t have to build a lot of parking garages. Kaplan said that hopefully these negative precedents, plus the model of Stanford, are issues to be considered seriously.

Rita Mitchell continued the topic of Fuller Road Station. She began by noting that she’s a steward for the city’s natural area preservation (NAP) program, and takes great interest in parks. She said she appreciated PAC’s work. She asked that commissioners discuss and forward a series of questions to city council, to be reviewed in public, regarding plans to build a parking structure in Fuller Park. She gave a brief history of the property, noting that it was acquired by the city in the 1920s for use as parkland, and was the city’s first golf course. Starting in 1993, it was temporarily leased to UM for parking, and many problems have stemmed from that use. It’s already an area of great traffic congestion, and adding up to 1,600 more cars will create a range of problems, including air pollution, more polluted runoff, and conflicts with pedestrians, buses and bicyclists. Air pollution and health risks will increase in the summer for people, including children, who use Fuller Pool, located across the street, Mitchell said.

The city has spent significant money already, without discussing with the public whether parkland should be repurposed in this way, Mitchell said. She asked that PAC advise the city council to hold a public hearing on the issue, at a time that’s not influenced heavily by upcoming holiday schedules, so that the community can express their concerns. She noted that the council’s Nov. 14 work session had included discussion of art for the structure, and called it “outrageous” that this discussion would happen for a project that hasn’t yet been approved. The university is the primary beneficiary for this project, but the public doesn’t know who is negotiating with the university on this project. “Do you, as commissioners?” she asked. PAC should ask council to be provided with the names of those negotiating, and the specifications of the negotiations. Repurposing parkland subverts the letter and intent of the 2008 ballot initiative that requires a voter referendum on the sale of parkland, she said. The structure would have a 75-year lifespan, and 75 years for use of land is in effect a sale. But there’s been no discussion of a fair market value, or compensation to the citizens or parks system for the use of the land.

Mitchell also said she’s heard about the possible transfer of the Amtrak station to that site. While rail travel is a great idea, she said, there are also a range of concerns. Is it in the best interests of the city to build and run a train station? Should it be placed on parkland? If Ann Arbor is just one commuter stop, why do we need a 1,600-space parking structure? There hasn’t been adequate public discussion on this issue, Mitchell said. In addition, this summer a major water and sewer line were moved in Fuller Park – had that been discussed with PAC? Is the sign that’s now missing from the south end of Fuller Park a silent indication that the land is no longer part of the park system? Park commissioners are stewards of all city parks, Mitchell said. She urged them to start asking pointed questions and advocate for greater public participation in decisions that relate to parkland.

Fuller Road Station: Commissioner Questions

Later in the meeting, Gwen Nystuen asked city staff a series of questions about the Fuller Road Station project. She wondered about the legal status of the city’s parks, and how that relates to the project. She asked about the site plan for Fuller Road Station – if council approves the project, would it constitute a change of land use, and no longer be part of the parks system? These are issues that have never been discussed by city council, she noted. The land is part of the central Huron River valley, an area that has some of the least parkland per capita in the city, she said. This project would reduce it even more, she said, so it’s of concern to PAC. She also wondered about the status of the soccer field that had been in that area.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, said these are legitimate questions. He asked Nystuen and other commissioners to send him whatever questions they had, and he would forward the questions to the city attorney or other relevant staff. He said the soccer field will be put in place again after utility work is finished on the south side of Fuller Road.

Tim Berla suggested asking representatives from the city attorney’s office, systems planning unit and Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager, to attend a future PAC meeting to discuss the Fuller Road Station project. He noted that sometimes their answers are a bit opaque, and that it’s better to have the chance to ask follow-up questions in person, rather than to just get their answers in writing.

Open Space Millage Update

Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund briefed commissioners on the annual financial report related to the land acquisition for parks and greenbelt programs. [A similar update was given to the greenbelt advisory commission by Kelli Martin, financial manager for the city’s community services unit, at GAC's Sept. 14 meeting.] [.pdf of land preservation annual report]

Under contract with the city, Trocchio is a Conservation Fund staff member who helps administer the city’s greenbelt program and land acquisition program for parks, which are both funded by the 30-year open space and parkland preservation millage. The 0.5 mill tax was approved by voters in 2003. Two-thirds of the millage proceeds are used for the greenbelt program, and one-third is allotted to parkland acquisition. PAC oversees the portion related to parkland acquisition.

Revenues from the millage were $2.164 million in fiscal 2011, down slightly from $2.262 million the previous year. In addition, the greenbelt program brought in nearly $2.8 million in federal grants during the year – the highest amount it has ever received. Those grants are from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, or FRPP. Investment income was $233,614 for the year, down from $492,576 in FY 2010. In total, $5.185 million in revenues came in for the combined greenbelt and parks acquisitions programs in FY 2011.

On the expense side, items included $1.2 million in debt service on the $20 million bond that the city issued in FY 2006. The greenbelt program spent $8.3 million during the year, related to land preservation projects. Parks spent $985,900 during the year, including two major purchases: (1) $592,503 for property off of South Pond owned by Wes Vivian and Elizabeth Kauffman, and (2) $369,160 for property next to the Bluffs Nature Area, owned by the Elks.

In FY 2011, $120,338 was paid to The Conservation Fund, which manages the greenbelt and park acquisition programs. Total administrative costs – including items like information technology (IT) and bond insurance – were $161,195. Administrative expenses accounted for 1.5% of the $10.672 million in total expenditures.

The fund balance stands at $10.3 million, down from $15.79 million a year ago. Of that, the portion for land acquisition for parks is $4.24 million.

Commissioners had no questions for Trocchio about the report.

Promoting Parks and Recreation

Kimberly Mortson, communications liaison for the city of Ann Arbor, gave a presentation on communications, marketing and social media for the parks and recreation system. She said that although she also does some work for other parts of the city’s community services area, 95% of her efforts are for parks and recreation.

Mortson noted that she started using Facebook and Twitter to promote city programs and events about two years ago. One of the advantages is that she can post a message one time, but there are an infinite number of people who’ll see it – and it doesn’t impact her budget, because Facebook and Twitter are free services. There’s a general Facebook page for parks and recreation, and other pages for specific units of parks and recreation, like the Ann Arbor farmers market, Cobblestone Farm and canoe liveries, among others

Twitter page for Ann Arbor parks. (Links to Twitter)

On Twitter, the @a2parks account has over 1,800 followers, Mortson reported. Over the past year, staff has tweeted from events, like the re-opening of West Park after its renovations, or the Heisman Trophy appearance at Hanover Park. They also use the account to promote other activities and programs.

Parks and recreation has also started using FourSquare, a social networking website that allows users to “check in” from their smart phones or other mobile devices, when they arrive at their destination. Mortson said she’s uploaded all the city’s parks and recreation locations to FourSquare – it’s another free marketing tool, she said.

Turning to the city’s website, Mortson told commissioners that the parks and recreation page is one of the most visited pages on the a2gov.org site. There will be changes to the page in the coming weeks and months, she said, to help people use the site more easily. Staff is also working with the state of Michigan on a new mobile application – the MI Camping and Recreation Locator. Now, people can use the application to search for information about state parks, she said. Ann Arbor will be the first city in the state to have its information loaded on that application, so that people can search for Ann Arbor parks information, too.

Some marketing materials for parks and recreation include QR codes, Mortson said – a marking similar to a bar code, which can be read by smart phones. The code is used to direct people to different websites for parks and recreation.

In addition to cost savings, social media and other online marketing is green, Mortson said – it saves paper.

Mortson said the city also advertises parks and recreation events and programs in traditional media, and showed several examples of ads that have run in the Ann Arbor Observer, Ann Arbor Chronicle, AnnArbor.com and other publications. Other venues for promoting parks and recreation include ads on buses and posters within city facilities.

Following Mortson’s presentation, Gwen Nystuen praised her efforts, saying the information showed that her marketing work is succeeding. Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, noted that the programs are being well-run, and are being promoted exceedingly well. He gave the example of this summer’s day camps. In an extremely competitive area, two of the city’s four day camps were filled. Smith credited Mortson’s marketing efforts for helping achieve that level of participation.

Sustainability Project

Jamie Kidwell is working for the city on a sustainability project funded by a $95,000 grant the city received from the Home Depot Foundation. At the Nov. 15 meeting, she briefed commissioners on a Sept. 27, 2011 joint working session that involved four city commissions: park, planning, energy and environmental. The session focused on prioritizing existing goals for the city that touch on sustainability issues.

A Sept. 27, 2011 sustainability work session at Cobblestone Farm involved four city commissions: park, planning, energy and environmental.

By way of background, the concept of sustainability focuses on what’s called the triple bottom line: environmental quality, economic vitality, and social equity. The goal of the sustainability project for Ann Arbor is to review the city’s existing plans and organize them into a framework of goals, objectives and indicators that can guide future planning and policy. Other project goals include improving access to the city’s plans and to the sustainability components of each plan, and to incorporate the concept of sustainability into city planning and future city plans.

There’s an 18-month timeline for the project, which started earlier this year. For the first phase, Kidwell reviewed existing city plans – such as the downtown plan, the non-motorized transportation plan, the natural features master plan and others – and interviewed key city staff to determine which plans they use to guide their decision-making. Included in this project are 26 plans, and the second phase has involved organizing the goals for each plan. [.pdf of the list of 26 plans]

Kidwell and other city staff started to develop a framework for these plans, and to identify gaps that exist – goals that the city might want to pursue, but that aren’t laid out in existing plans.

At November’s regular PAC meeting, Kidwell characterized PAC as well-represented among the 26 commissioners at the three-hour sustainability session on Sept. 27. [Among the PAC members attending were Julie Grand, Tim Berla, Tim Doyle, Gwen Nystuen, Sam Offen, and John Lawter.]

Kidwell explained that the staff had identified four planning areas – climate & energy, community, land use & access, and natural systems. During the work session, commissioners met in breakout groups and started to prioritize the 226 goals that staff had pulled out from the city’s 26 planning documents and sorted into the four planning areas.

Kidwell provided a handout that listed the top goals identified at the work session in each planning area:

Climate & Energy

(1) Reduce community-wide greenhouse gas emissions 8% from 2000 levels by 2015.

(2) Commit to energy conservation measures and methods.

(3) Reduce greenhouse gas emissions in municipal operations 50% from 200 levels by 2015.

(4) Use 5% renewable energy community-wide by 2015.

Community

(1) To encourage cooperation between the City educational institutions and between the City and Townships that surround Ann Arbor (Ann Arbor, Pittsfield and Scio) on development issues that affect each other.

(2) Provide job opportunities, raise the standard of living of county residents, promote a sense of place and realize a tax base sufficient to provide public services through a comprehensive set of public and private strategies to foster and attract emerging industries.

Land Use & Access

(1) Encourage dense land use and development patterns which draw people downtown and foster an active street life, contribute to its function as an urban residential neighborhood and support a sustainable transportation system

(2) Establish a network of greenways throughout the City that provide non-motorized connections between various land uses, such as neighborhoods, commercial and employment centers, downtown and the University of Michigan, and that help retain the shape and continuity of natural features, especially along stream corridors, between parks and through new neighborhoods. The network also should extend to greenways located on adjacent township and County properties.

Natural Systems

(1) To protect and restore woodlands, landmark trees, steep slopes, endangered species habitats, prairies and savannahs, the Huron River, creeks and native flora and fauna from the impacts of development.

(2) To improve air quality to protect the health and welfare of the public

(3) Develop, complete and regularly update watershed plans for the City’s tributary waterways to improve water quality and to restore and preserve, waterways, banks, wetlands, floodplains, wildlife habits, native species and natural areas. Plans should include techniques to dramatically reduce the volume and speed of storm water runoff, increase water directed to infiltrate soil, and reduce the volume of toxics and pollutants reaching waterways.

(4) To protect, preserve and restore the natural resources of Washtenaw County through a comprehensive approach to water management and preservation of our natural features.

The 226 goals had been an exhaustive list, Kidwell said, with overlapping goals on a range of topics. The priority goals identified at the working session are a starting point, she said, providing feedback as the staff continues to refine what goals will fit into a sustainability framework.

Among the next steps, Kidwell said, will be to form a joint committee with representatives from each of the four commissions, to continue work on this project. There will also be a lecture series starting in January featuring issues in the four planning areas. Those lectures will be free and open to the public. At the same time, work will continue on developing a sustainability action plan, tying goals to measurable targets, Kidwell said.

Julie Grand, PAC’s chair, reported that she and Karen Levin will serve on the joint committee, representing PAC.

Parking Lot Improvements

Park planner Amy Kuras and Liz Rolla, a city engineer who primarily works on road resurfacing and reconstruction projects, talked about two parking lot improvement projects – at Riverside Park and Veterans Memorial Park.

Kuras said the projects represent a collaboration between the parks and public services units. At Riverside, the current parking lot is frequently under water, so Kuras was planning to address that issue as well as make other changes at the park. [For details, see Chronicle coverage: "Work Planned at Ann Arbor's Riverside Park"]

Sketch of proposed changes to Riverside Park. (Links to larger image)

Canal Street, a city street runs next to the park, also needs repair, so Kuras approached the public services staff to coordinate their work. The parking lot will be moved to a different part of the park – out of the floodplain – and Canal Street will be repaved.

Tim Berla noted that the path at Riverside, running next to the Huron River, is also frequently under water. Will the project address that too? Short of creating an elevated boardwalk, Kuras said, there’s nothing they could do to prevent flooding, given the path’s proximity to the river.

The second project involves the repaving of Dexter Avenue, which runs past Veterans Memorial Park. The road repaving needs to address stormwater issues, while the parks staff is concerned about the park’s path and parking lot, which are falling apart, Kuras said.

Rolla said the road will be reconstructed from Maple to Jackson. Typically, the requirement to capture stormwater runoff is handled through underground oversized pipes and swirl concentrators. But since the road runs past the park, the staff is looking at handling runoff with a bioswale in the park, which would include native plantings. There are federal dollars to pay for stormwater improvements, which will cover about 80% of the project’s cost, Rolla said.

Kuras said benefits include rebuilding the path that runs along Dexter Avenue, and reducing the parking lot’s footprint, though the number of parking spaces will remain unchanged. It’s a better environmental solution, she said, because of the bioswale.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, said it’s good timing, since the city plans to renovate the softball fields there in 2012. The field renovation will likely start in mid-August, after the softball leagues finish their season.

Gwen Nystuen asked whether the parking lot would be paved with a pervious surface. No, Rolla replied. It’s too wet in that area for pervious pavement. Instead, the lot will be graded so that runoff will drain into the bioswale.

Karen Levin asked whether the park would be closed during this project. The section off of Dexter Avenue will probably be closed for some period, Kuras said, but the ice rink and pool – with an entrance off of Jackson Road – won’t be affected. Rolla added that the Dexter Avenue project will likely run from April through November, but they’ll leave it up to the contractor to decide when to do the parking lot and bioswale part of the project.

Aerial view of the site for the proposed bioswale at Veterans Memorial Park. The road at the top is Dexter Avenue. (Image links to larger file.)

John Lawter asked whether the bioswale will have standing water. There might be some minimal amount of standing water as the plants take hold, Rolla said, but the bioswale will be designed so that water will infiltrate. It’s similar to the bioswale at Buhr Park, she said. There will also be outlets leading to the city’s conventional storm sewer system, she added, in the event of a major rain.

Tim Doyle asked how much maintenance will be required in the bioswale. Rolla replied that the city will have an agreement with the contractor, who will provide maintenance in the area for three years. After that, the plantings should be established and it will be treated as a wet meadow by the city’s natural area preservation program. Smith noted that currently, the area proposed for a bioswale is included in the park’s mowing cycles. That maintenance would eventually be eliminated.

Julie Grand wondered what will happen if balls get hit into the bioswale – how are they retrieved? Smith said it’s a rare day when any balls are hit into the area proposed for the bioswale. Nor is it an area that’s typically used for team warm-ups. “It is really pretty much a dead space,” he said.

Grand also noted that the new parking lot will be closer to the playing fields. Is there more potential for balls to hit the cars? Rolla said it’s proposed to be moved only slightly closer to the fields. Kuras added that the location was discussed at length, and indicated that there’s little concern about the change.

Ruthven Nature Area

Lara Treemore Spears of the city’s natural area preservation (NAP) program updated commissioners on a wetland mitigation sediment removal project at the Ruthven Nature Area. The project involves removing sediment from Millers Creek, which flows through Ruthven, and repairing stream bank erosion that occurred when the creek bypassed its channel because of a sediment dam.

Like many streams in urban areas, Spears said, Millers Creek is surrounded by impervious surfaces. That creates runoff and sediment flowing into the creek, and over the years, has caused the creek to completely change its course.

The city risks losing some of its infrastructure along Huron River Drive and Geddes Road, Spears said – specifically, there’s the risk of damage to an undersized 24‐inch culvert under Geddes, which was not designed to receive the full volume of Millers Creek and could result in road flooding. Removing the sediment would redirect stormwater flow to a former open channel running through the wetlands at Ruthven, and into a larger 60-inch culvert under Geddes. It’s not an area that’s designated as a county drain, she noted, so it doesn’t fall under the purview of the county water resources commissioner’s office.

It’s best to remove the sediment when the ground is frozen, Spears said, so the work will likely begin in January. It will require some clearing, she said, but not nearly as much as has been done along Washtenaw Avenue for the county’s Mallets Creek drain project. The stream bank will be shored up with rock and restored with topsoil, mulch blanket, and native plant seed.

The city has submitted an application for a permit from the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality to do the work, and is awaiting review.

The ultimate goal, Spears said, is to reduce erosion. The city’s capital improvements plan (CIP) includes a sediment study of Millers Creek, to see if better long-term solutions can be found for preventing erosion.

Gwen Nystuen noted that there are a lot of  invasive species in Ruthven. She also wondered if the city had any plans to put in more trails through the nature area. There’s a trail with an entrance off of Geddes Road. But Spears noted that for a path off of Huron Parkway, after the first 325 feet it gets quite wet. There is one high quality area – a glacial kame, a hill created by glacial deposits. But most of the runoff flows straight south through a buckthorn thicket, she said – buckthorn is considered an invasive.

Tim Berla asked for Spears to give her best guess as to how long it would be before they’d have to repeat this work. Spears acknowledged that the problem comes from upstream, in an area that the city doesn’t control, and that erosion is aggravated by the surrounding impervious surfaces of roads and other development. Berla asked if there are any additional measures that can be taken, like adding underground swirl concentrators – devices designed to remove suspended solids from stormwater prior to reintroducing it into the city’s stormwater system. Spears said a long-term sediment study of the creek would look at those kinds of potential solutions.

Manager’s Report

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, updated commissioners on a range of items, starting with plans to renovate the city’s softball fields at Veterans Memorial Park, West Park, Southeast Area Park and Allmendinger Park. It’s analogous to the work already done at the soccer fields, he said. The idea is to bring the fields up to an acceptable level of play. Staff will be presenting a budget for the project to PAC at its December meeting. Smith and other staff had held a public meeting on the project earlier this month, which was attended primarily by managers of various leagues that use the fields. Smith reported that they seemed happy to see the project get underway.

Manager’s Report: Argo Bypass

Smith also noted that earlier in the month he had gone canoeing to test the new Argo Dam bypass, even though it had been snowing at the time. The design team is still tweaking the series of pools that make up the channel, and Smith described the stretch as a “bit sportier” than he had expected. It’s exciting to see that project come together, he said. Smith reported that the city council would be voting on a proposed change of scope to the project, which PAC had recommended at its August meeting.

View facing west of the first two pools in the Argo Dam bypass. The concrete pass-through at the far end will be replaced by a new, larger entrance.

The change will add a new entrance to the waterway from Argo Pond to the Huron River. The modification to the project is linked to an offer from DTE to pay for a whitewater section that’s part of the overall project, which freed up city funds for a new entrance from Argo Pond into the bypass. DTE is being required by the state to complete environmental remediation on its nearby property, which prompted its request that the city hold off on the part of the project that runs along the river.

Smith said the city’s agreement with DTE stipulates that the energy firm will hire the same consultant who designed the bypass – Gary Lacy – to design the whitewater features. TSP Environmental, which is building the bypass, will build the new entrance. [The city council subsequently voted to approve the change of scope at its Nov. 21 meeting.]

Tim Doyle wondered whether the change of scope will delay other aspects of the project. Only the whitewater features, which will be located in the river, will be delayed, Smith said. The bypass and new entry will move forward. It will likely be at least another year before the whitewater features are added, he said.

Manager’s Report: Update on Skatepark, Gallup Livery Grants

Smith reported that two state grant applications made by the city of Ann Arbor – $300,000 for the proposed Ann Arbor skatepark at Veterans Memorial Park, and $300,000 for improvements at the Gallup Park canoe livery – ranked in the top 12 out of 100 applications statewide for funding from the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund. Smith told PAC members that he received the application scores in the mail earlier in the day.

The skatepark application ranked 12th out of the 100 applications, based on a scoring system used to evaluate the grants. The Gallup Park application ranked 2nd. Smith also reported that a $300,000 grant application for Rutherford Pool in Ypsilanti had ranked 11th in the scoring system. The scoring is an indication of the likelihood that these grants will be awarded, but that announcement won’t be made until Dec. 7, Smith said. It’s also unknown how much money will be awarded this year from the trust fund. He told commissioners that the top 12 grant applications total $2.7 million. There’s a cap of $300,000 per project.

At its March 15, 2011 meeting, PAC had voted to recommend supporting the grant applications. The city council made a similar vote of support on March 21. The council’s resolution of support prioritized the skatepark project over the Gallup renovations – based on the opportunity to leverage $400,000 of matching funds from the Washtenaw County parks and recreation commission.

NAP Volunteers Honored

Toward the beginning of the Nov. 15 meeting, Dave Borneman, manager of the city’s natural area preservation program, introduced two volunteers – Sarah Newman and Drew Lathin – who had been honored in October by the city council as NAP Volunteers of the Year. Newman was recognized for work in the Miller Nature Area and Furstenberg Nature Area. Lathin was honored for work in the Miller Nature Area, as well as for volunteering for NAP’s burn crew and its frog and toad surveys. Borneman read the proclamations that had been given to the two volunteers at the Oct. 26 council meeting, and PAC gave them a round of applause.

Newman thanked commissioners, as well as the staff of NAP, for all their work. She described Furstenberg and Miller as areas that are at the opposite ends of the spectrum. Furstenberg is a gem in the parks system, located along the Huron River and constantly maintained by NAP. Miller, on the other hand, is a large but relatively unknown neighborhood park on the west side that’s full of invasive species.

Her time most recently has been spent at Miller, and her role has been to encourage neighbors to get involved, she said, including work with kids in Peace Neighborhood Center‘s summer day camp, helping them to learn about what a nature area is and to help preserve the trails. “It’s a privilege and pleasure to work with the dedicated, intelligent and super hard-working group that Dave heads,” Newman said.

Dave Borneman, center, head of the city's natural area preservation program, introduced two NAP Volunteers of the year: Drew Lathin and Sarah Newman.

Lathin said it was an honor to be honored, but that he and Newman wouldn’t have gotten much done in Miller Nature Area without the hundreds of hours that other volunteers worked. They’ve had close to 1,000 volunteer hours there since they started working on about a one-acre section of the park.

He said his work at Miller started one winter day when he was walking through and saw all the invasive honeysuckle and buckthorn there. In a moment of insanity, he said, he decided to do something about it. Borneman directed him to Jason Frenzel, who was NAP’s volunteer coordinator at the time. Lathin said he’s happy he has mental health benefits as part of his insurance, because he thinks they’re called for. He praised NAP staff under Borneman’s leadership, saying they aren’t typical government employees – they’re very committed to what they’re doing, and they do great work. Lathin said he’s just the tip of the iceberg, in terms of the volunteers who work for NAP.

Present: Tim Berla, Doug Chapman, Tim Doyle, Julie Grand, Karen Levin, Gwen Nystuen, John Lawter, councilmember Mike Anglin (ex-officio). Also Colin Smith, city parks manager.

Absent: David Barrett, Sam Offen, councilmember Christopher Taylor (ex-officio).

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, Dec. 20, 2011 begins at 4 p.m. in the city hall second-floor council chambers, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor park advisory commission. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

Members of the Michigan Nurses Association union held banners during the Sept. 15 regents meeting, showing signatures from their supporters. (Photos by the writer.)

The Michigan Nurses Association, which represents about 4,000 UM nurses, is negotiating a new contract. Members brought large banners with signatures from their supporters, and three people spoke about the issue during public commentary – including Brit Satchwell, head of the Ann Arbor teachers union. The nurses are concerned that weaker benefits will affect patient care by hurting the UM health system’s ability to retain and recruit high-quality nurses.

Ora Pescovitz – UM’s executive vice president for medical affairs – read a statement to the board, asserting her respect for the nurses but saying the health system needs an agreement that’s market- and cost-competitive.

Also during the meeting, regents got an overview of UM’s annual development report for fiscal 2011, which ended June 30. The university received $273.14 million in contributions during the year, up from $254.08 million the previous year – an increase of 7.5%. The previous two years had shown declines from the $342.05 million raised in FY 2008, which marked the end of the multi-year $3.2 billion Michigan Difference fundraising campaign.

As part of that report, a couple who’ve given considerable financial support to UM – Bill and Dee Brehm – spoke to the regents about the motivation for their donations. They provide support for UM’s Brehm Center for Diabetes Research and Brehm Scholars program, among other initiatives.

Regents also heard from students and staff about work toward environmental sustainability on campus and in coursework. More is in the works: On Sept. 27, Coleman is scheduled to make an address to campus, expanding UM’s sustainability goals for both academics and operations. Her remarks will be shown via a webcast, starting at 11 a.m.

A range of action items during the meeting received little discussion and were all passed unanimously. They included several construction-related projects, the creation of two medical school departments, and authorization to buy a parcel at 716 Oakland Ave. in Ann Arbor, between Monroe and Hill streets near the law school campus. This is the fourth Ann Arbor property that UM has purchased within the past year with an apartment building on the lot.

President’s Raise

During the time for committee reports, regent Martin Taylor – who chairs the board’s personnel, compensation and governance committee – introduced a motion to award president Mary Sue Coleman a 2.75% raise, effective Aug. 1, 2011. Coleman’s salary before the raise was $570,105.

Taylor praised Coleman for her leadership, citing her role in the university’s economic development efforts. The Venture Accelerator program, a start-up incubator located in the North Campus Research Complex (NCRC), is 60% full, less than a year after opening, he noted. UM is in the top 10 universities for the number of spin-off companies created from technology developed there, with more than 90 firms founded since 2001. Research funding will top $1.3 billion by the end of this year, he said. And the university has created a masters degree in entrepreneurship.

UM president Mary Sue Coleman.

Taylor also commended Coleman for expanding the university’s global reach, and for overseeing the largest capital building effort in the university’s history – with projects that are all on schedule on on budget, he noted. She has also led development of an environmentally sustainable campus, and pushes on all fronts for academic excellence.

Coleman is focused on the future, Taylor said, citing the “deep” renovations of several residence halls during her tenure. She’s also a leader on the national level, he said. She was named by U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke to co-chair the National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship. She’s chair of the Internet2 board of trustees, and will be named chair next month of the Association of American Universities executive committee. Taylor also noted that Coleman joined president Barack Obama this summer in announcing his Advanced Manufacturing Partnership – UM is one of the partners.

Coleman “really puts the university in a place it wants to be,” he said, making it “the leaders and best.”

Taylor expressed regret that the regents weren’t proposing a higher increase, saying the raise amounts to a “whopping” $15,678. He said the board would like to award a higher amount, but must factor in the state’s economy.

Regents had awarded Coleman a 3% raise a year ago. Her compensation package also includes $75,000 in deferred compensation, a $100,000 retention bonus, $24,500 in retirement pay, and an additional $30,850 supplemental retirement payment. Her current contract goes through July 31, 2014.

Outcome: Regents voted unanimously to award a 2.75% raise to UM president Mary Sue Coleman.

After the vote, Coleman said she was deeply grateful. She praised her executives for their work, saying she was part of a team effort. She noted that she and her husband, Ken Coleman, recently received letters from students who’ve benefited from scholarships the Colemans funded to travel abroad. “I’m well-compensated,” she said, adding that she planned to donate her raise to fund scholarships for international travel. “This is the thrill of my life to be here,” Coleman said. She received a round of applause from the regents and staff.

Nurses Union Negotiations

There was no agenda item related to ongoing negotiations between UM administrators and the Michigan Nurses Association, which represents about 4,000 UM nurses. But with union members – wearing distinctive red T-shirts – packed into the audience, the issue provided a clear backdrop to the meeting. The previous contract expired June 30.

Ora Pescovitz, UM executive vice president for medical affairs, at the board table prior to the Sept. 15 regents meeting. Behind her is a banner held by supporters of the Michigan Nurses Association, which is negotiating with UM for a new contract.

During her report to the board, Ora Pescovitz – UM’s executive vice president for medical affairs – read a statement regarding the situation. She noted that the two groups had been negotiating since April, and that although they’d reached agreement on a variety of points, there remained some unresolved issues. The university needed to reach an agreement that is market- and cost-competitive, she said, allowing it to recruit and retain nurses of the highest caliber.

Pescovitz acknowledged that earlier in the week, the union had asked the Michigan Employee Relations Commission to conduct fact-finding for the two parties. She said the administration welcomes this process, and looks forward to a successful outcome. The university values and respects the nurses, she said.

Nurses Union: Public Commentary

There was no other discussion on the situation among executives or regents, but three people spoke in support of the nurses during public commentary at the end of the meeting.

Brit Satchwell – president of the Ann Arbor Education Association, the union representing about 1,200 teachers in the Ann Arbor Public Schools district – said he wasn’t there to talk about education. He went on to describe his mother, Clelia Steele, who was instrumental in the early push for Title IX legislation. She was compassionate yet formidable, he said, and not prone to fear – until she was diagnosed at age 79 with colon cancer.

Over the past year, she survived five major surgeries at the UM hospital. And while her doctor, Sandra Wong, was brilliant and helped save his mother’s life, “my mother will tell you that it was the many nurses who healed her that made all the difference.” Satchwell said he sympathized with the difficult choices that the administration needed to make as the state tries to pull out of recession, but he urged them to focus on the institution’s core priorities. “The nurses are the heart, soul and backbone of this great university’s health system, and you weaken that foundation at the system’s eventual peril.”

Keri Bokor told regents that she has a business management degree, but got into nursing because it’s her passion – she’s been working six years in the UM hospital’s surgical intensive care unit, and she’s proud of it every day. It’s difficult to become a nurse, she said, and to become a UM nurse requires a whole different level of skill and perseverance. She said she didn’t understand how administrators could expect concessions from the nurses while taking big raises themselves. [Pescovitz received a $21,000 raise for 2010-11, bringing her salary to $721,000. Doug Strong, CEO of the UM Hospitals and Health Centers, received a $53,637 raise for 2010-11 – his salary is $600,000.]

Bokor told regents that Washtenaw County sheriff Jerry Clayton took a pay cut when he asked his employees to do the same – that was honorable, she said. How can hospital administrators expect their staff to respect them when they fail to set an example? she asked. Bokor said that the situation is really about patient care. The administration risks too much if all they care about is the bottom line – high-quality, highly-specialized nurses could leave. She said there are 21 items that the administration wants to take away from nurses, and noted that the banners on display in the room show thousands of signatures in support of the nurses. “This is a game that hurts everyone,” Bokor concluded. “Please let’s not play it any longer.”

Julia Morrissey, a UM nurse and member of the Michigan Nurses Association, holds her baby while speaking to the board of regents during public commentary.

At the conclusion of Bokor’s remarks, regent Denise Ilitch asked her for some examples of the 21 items she had alluded to. Bokor said she couldn’t recall all the details, but that issues included limiting overtime, asking nurses to cover more of their health insurance costs, and taking away other benefits that the union had bargained for over the past 30 years. In essence, they’d be taking a pay cut, she said. Bokor told the regents that many of the nurses she worked with lived in Toledo, but worked at UM because the benefits were attractive. If you take those benefits away, you’ll lose high-quality nurses who have options to go elsewhere, she said.

Another UM nurse, Julia Morrissey, told regents that all the nurses and other supporters who turned out to the meeting were there because they are serious. They understand that if the administration undercuts respect for the profession, nurses will leave. Negotiations aren’t moving, she said, and the health system is more interested in the bottom line than about the people who care for patients.

Patient care suffers if there aren’t sufficient staffing levels to respond to the patients’ needs, Morrissey said. She noted that the health system will be hiring nurses for its new C.S. Mott children’s hospital, yet won’t be able to retain current staff if benefits are cut. [UM is expected to hire another 500 health professionals for the new C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital and Von Voigtlander Women's Hospital, which opens in November.]

Morrissey said negotiations are a distraction to their work, requiring that they come to meetings and picket in front of the hospital. If administrators will stop caring only about money, then “4,000 angry nurses can calm down,” she said. Nurses have been asked to be world-class patient advocates, and that’s what they’re doing. As to why the health system’s administrators are behaving this way, she concluded, “we frankly can’t believe it.”

Nurses Union: Follow-up

In a phone interview with The Chronicle later in the week, Ann Kettering Sincox, a representative with the Michigan Nurses Association, clarified that the state fact-finder will look at the issues and make an objective analysis. However, it won’t be a binding decision, she said, and negotiations are ongoing. The next meeting between the union and administration is set for Sept. 21.

Safe patient care is an overriding issue, Sincox said. There’s concern that if benefits are weakened, the highly skilled nurses that currently work for UM will leave – those working in specialized areas like the children’s transplant unit. As one example, Sincox said nurses are being asked to pay 30% of their health care premiums. In some cases, that would double the amount that nurses are currently paying.

If less attractive benefits are put in place, it will be difficult to recruit new nurses with the same level of skill and experience, Sincox said, because skilled nurses “don’t come cheap.”

When asked about the possibility of a walk-out, Sincox said there’s nothing like that planned at this point, noting that it would require a vote of the union membership. However, she added, “it’s something that you can’t rule out completely.”

Annual Development Report

During Thursday’s meeting, Jerry May – UM’s vice president of development – presented highlights from the annual development report for FY 2011, which ended June 30. [.pdf file of FY 2011 development report]

The university received $273.14 million in contributions during the year, up from $254.08 million the previous year – an increase of 7.5%. The previous two years had shown declines from the $342.05 million raised in FY 2008, which marked the end of the multi-year $3.2 billion Michigan Difference fundraising campaign. Turmoil in the economy had also been a factor in the decline, May said.

Jerry May, right, UM's vice president of development, talks with provost Phil Hanlon prior to the start of the Sept. 15 regents meeting.

By unit, the top five totals in FY 2011 were received by (1) the medical school – $61.90 million; (2) college of engineering – $34.40 million; (3) athletics – $31.31 million; (4) college of literature, science & the arts (LSA) – $29.17 million; and (5) law school – $19.85 million.

May noted that UM has seen an increase in the number of individual donors giving $25,000 or less. In FY 2011, there were about 109,000 donors in that category, up from about $104,000 the previous year.

Gifts from corporations increased from $17 million to $19 million, and foundation support grew from $34 million to $46 million.

About $65 million for scholarships was available for distribution from the endowment in FY 2011. Coupled with $13 million in expendable gifts, there was $78 million distributed in scholarships during the year, helping over 11,200 students, May said.

Annual Development Report: Bill & Dee Brehm

As part of his presentation, May introduced two major donors to the university: Bill and Dee Brehm.

Before they spoke, May showed a video of Linda Saab, a graduate of Fordson High School in Dearborn who was the first Brehm Scholar. The Brehm Scholars program awards four-year full tuition scholarships to UM for students from Fordson, which Bill Brehm also attended, graduating in 1947. It’s one of several efforts at UM that are supported by the Brehms, who over the years have contributed a total of $52 million to the university.

Bill Brehm is founder of SRA International, a Fairfax, Va. firm that provides consulting and technology services to the national security, civil government and global health industries. He described how he returned to Fordson in 1997, and was impressed by the condition of the school and the quality of the students. He noted that he’d been the recipient of a regents scholarship to UM, and decided to give back by setting up a scholarship program for Fordson students. The Brehms later set up a program awarding four-year full tuition scholarships to UM medical school as well – Linda Saab received that scholarship, too.

The program has awarded 30 undergraduate scholarships so far, and three for medical school. All are given to students with three qualities, Brehm said: excellent academic scholarship, leadership, and community service.

Dee and Bill Brehm.

Dee Brehm explained the genesis of their support for the Brehm Center for Diabetes Research. She has suffered from Type I diabetes for 62 years. About 12 years ago, she was making dinner in the kitchen when Bill came in and asked how he could help, presumably with dinner prep. “I said, ‘You can find a cure!” she recalled. After pausing a few seconds, he told her he would. From that day on, she said, her husband has been focused on that cause.

In doing research about how best to support finding a cure, the Brehms had a meeting with Frances Collins, a former UM researcher who at the time was leading the Human Genome Project, and now is director of the National Institutes of Health. After they told him what they were hoping to do, Collins told them, “I think you should go to Michigan.” He then put his hands out and asked them to pray, Dee Brehm recalled – his prayer asked that they be guided to the best place for their goal of curing diabetes. Their dream is that the cure will come from Michigan, she said.

Bill Brehm also talked about the importance of outreach. He started the Brehm Coalition for that reason – it brings together nine leading researchers in the fields of immunology and beta-cell biology, which are critical to understanding diabetes and its potential cure. These researchers come from institutions that account for 95% of funding for diabetes research, yet until the coalition was formed in 2007, they’d never met in the same room. Now they say they’d never go back to the way it was, Brehm said. [The group includes Peter Arvan, director of the UM Comprehensive Diabetes Center.]

When asked by May to comment on their philosophy of philanthropy, Bill Brehm said they rarely respond to an ask. They strongly believe that dreams and ideas must come first, followed by funding. The development staff at Michigan doesn’t ask them for money, Dee Brehm said – the staff listens to what they want to do, comes back with some options, and only then is money discussed.

Regents thanked the Brehms for coming to the meeting and sharing their story. Andrea Fischer Newman, who’s been a regent since 1994, said the board hasn’t previously had a presentation like this one, and it really brought the university’s development efforts close to home. They often don’t hear this kind of personal story, she said.

Denise Ilitch, the board’s chair, told the Brehms they set a wonderful example, and that she had to hold back tears during their talk. The board and staff gave the Brehms a standing ovation.

Mary Sue Coleman told the Brehms they are a wonderful example of how individuals can change a paradigm.

Security on Campus

During her report to the board, Royster Harper – UM’s vice president for student affairs – addressed the issue of security on campus, in the wake of several sexual assaults this summer and more recently. The UM Dept. of Public Safety and the Ann Arbor police have increased their patrols in the late evening and early morning hours, she said, and there’s been good cooperation on that front.

Sue Scarnecchia, left, UM's general counsel, talks with Royster Harper, vice president of student affairs. In the background are supporters of the Michigan Nurses Association union.

Students have led the development of a pilot program focused on safety, she reported. Students are going door-to-door in neighborhoods around campus, helping do safety checks and encouraging residents to form neighborhood block clubs for additional security. Other plans include a focus on better lighting, cutting back shrubs, and creating Facebook pages specifically for student neighborhoods, Harper said.

She also noted that the university is increasing its capacity for late-night transportation, and reported that the Greek system is encouraging a buddy system for people who are out late at night. “We are working hard to reduce the risk,” Harper said.

Earlier in her presentation, Harper had praised the Michigan Student Assembly and other students for their efforts to pull off a successful tailgate at the Michigan-Notre Dame night game on Sept. 10, noting that the party drew about 8,000 people, and was safe and fun. Regent Larry Deitch responded by saying it was typical of Harper to give credit to everyone else. The great experience that students had was due in no small part to her leadership, he said. Harper received a round of applause from regents and staff.

Construction Projects

During the Sept. 15 meeting, regents were asked to authorize a range of construction-related projects. One request was for the athletics department to issue bids and award construction contracts for a $52 million renovation and expansion of Crisler Arena. The board had previously approved the project’s schematic design at its May 2011 meeting.

Construction workers at Crisler Arena were on the job Saturday as Michigan football fans held tailgate parties in the nearby parking lot.

The project is adding about 63,000 square feet of new construction. The renovation includes building new spectator entrances, retail spaces, ticketing areas and a private club space. In addition, roughly 54,000 square feet would be renovated to accommodate accessible seats, increase the number of restrooms and concession areas, and add other fan amenities. Construction is expected to be finished by the winter of 2014.

Regent Andy Richner asked whether winter commencement would be held at Crisler Arena this year – that’s the traditional venue for the ceremony. Mary Sue Coleman clarified that it would be held there, and that construction wouldn’t start until after the basketball season ends.

Outcome: Regents unanimously approved the request to issue bids and award construction contracts for work at Crisler Arena.

Several other building renovation projects were on the agenda for action:

• A $47 million renovation for the 220,000-square-foot G.G. Brown Memorial Laboratories, which was built in 1958 on UM’s north campus and houses the Department of Mechanical Engineering. The project is part of the fiscal year 2011 capital outlay request to the state, which is expected to provide about $30 million in funding for the renovation. Two years ago, regents had signed off on a $56 million, 66,000-square-foot addition to building.
• A $1.5 million upgrade to the electrical substation and related equipment at the Med Inn, which was built in 1953 and is part of the UM Health System. Renovation projects at UM campuses in Dearborn and Flint were also authorized at Thursday’s meeting.
• A $1.148 million renovation of leased offices for the UM ophthalmology department at the River Place Offices building, 1974 N. Huron River Drive in Ypsilanti. The renovations will allow the department to consolidate its two current locations in Ypsilanti into one clinical site. The project is expected to be finished by the winter of 2012.

Outcome: Regents unanimously approved all renovation requests.

Golf Facility Naming

At Thursday’s meeting, regents were asked to authorize naming the university’s golf practice facility the Weisfeld Family Golf Center. Barry and Sally Weisfeld and the Weisfeld Family Foundation have provided financial support to the new facility. The Weisfelds’ son, David, played varsity golf at UM and is a 2010 graduate.

The recently completed $2.5 million golf practice facility, located off of South Main Street, includes indoor putting and chipping areas, driving bays, offices and locker rooms. The low-slung building is designed in the Mission style.

Outcome: Regents unanimously approved naming the golf practice facility the Weisfeld Family Golf Center.

Property Purchase

On the agenda was a request to approve the $730,000 purchase of 716 Oakland Ave. in Ann Arbor, between Monroe and Hill streets. The 0.14-acre parcel includes a 2,018-square-foot apartment building. The tentative closing date is set for Sept. 30.

According to a staff memo, the property is strategically located next to the Law School’s South Hall and Weill Hall, which houses the UM Ford School of Public Policy. The law school in particular is expanding in that area – South Hall just opened this fall, and the university has been talking with the city of Ann Arbor to secure the right-of-way for a block of Monroe street for part of its law school campus. [See Chronicle coverage: "Column: Ann Arbor's Monroe (Street) Doctrine"]

Within the past year, the university has purchased three other properties – all with apartment buildings. The previous three purchases were bought to accommodate the expansion of UM’s Institute for Social Research, on South Division.

Regarding the Oakland Avenue property, the staff memo indicates that the apartment building on the site holds no historical significance, but regent Andy Richner shared one bit of history: “I used to live there.”

Outcome: Regents unanimously authorized the purchase of 716 Oakland Ave.

Conflict-of-Interest Disclosures

Regents were asked to sign off on 14 items that required disclosure under the state’s Conflict of Interest statute. The law requires that regents vote on potential conflict-of-interest disclosures related to university staff, faculty or students. Often, the items involve technology licensing agreements or leases.

This month, the items related to the following businesses: Cornell Farms; Civionics Inc.; NeuroNexus Technologies Inc.; Inmatech Inc.; Vortex Hydro Energy; Rolith Inc.; Lean Therapeutics; Electric Field Solutions Inc.; Diapin Therapeutics; Arbor Research Collaborative for Health; Absolute Nano Inc.; and Michigan Critical Care Consultants Inc.

Outcome: Regents unanimously approved all 14 conflict-of-interest disclosures.

Medical School Departments Created

The creation of two new departments at the University of Michigan Medical School – for cardiac surgery, and computational medicine and bioinformatics (CMB) – was on the agenda for approval at the Sept. 15 meeting.

The CMB department will be established as of Jan. 2, 2012. It has existed as a center since 2005, with funding from the National Institutes of Health for research and a graduate training program. Becoming a department will help CBM recruit faculty and trainees, according to a staff memo.

Cardiac surgery is currently a section within the department of surgery. The section has grown to a size in terms of faculty, financial resources, and academic productivity that it warrants becoming a separate administrative unit, according to a staff memo.

Outcome: Regents unanimously approved the creation of the cardiac surgery department and computational medicine and bioinformatics (CMB) department.

Sustainability on Campus

Early in the meeting, regents received an update on environmental sustainability efforts at the Ann Arbor campus. Andy Berki, manager of UM’s office of campus sustainability, began by noting that he had a connection with one of the regents – he’d graduated from Pioneer High School with regent Kathy White.

Berki said he usually talked about operations, and he provided a handout with some environmental metrics for the FY 2011 fiscal year, as well as trend data from FY 2004 through FY 2011. But rather than focus on that, he said, three students were at the meeting to describe their work on sustainability.

Samantha Schiebold, a UM senior, spoke to regents about her work on a sustainability guide for students. Behind her is Andy Berki, manager of the UM office of campus sustainability.

Samantha Schiebold spoke first. A senior studying interdisciplinary physics, Schiebold had worked on a student guide called “How to Be a Green Wolverine,” which is distributed to each UM dorm room at the start of the academic year. The guide covers a range of topics, from how to conserve energy and water to how to throw a sustainable party. (“Use beeswax candles” is one of the suggestions.)

Not only did the project teach her teamwork and the ability to work as a consultant for a “client” – in this case, the university – but it also introduced her to the “mysterious inner workings of this university,” she said – a line that elicited laughter from the regents and staff. Schiebold said she was proud of the guide, and thankful that she could contribute to the effort.

Up next was Matt Friedrichs, a senior studying civil and environmental engineering. Although he’s involved in several projects – including the Kill-A-Watt competition – he focused his remarks on a sustainable neighborhoods course he took at UM. The course is offered through the Graham Environmental Sustainability Institute and the college of architecture & urban planning.

Students first studied urban planning theory, then spent two weeks at Wayne State University in Detroit, where they developed a master plan for the Delray neighborhood. Friedrichs said the area has been devastated – it’s disconnected from the rest of the city, polluted and desolate. The class suggested changes like redirecting truck routes, conducting an environmental survey of the area, and remediating structures into “green centers” that would connect through pathways to other parts of Detroit. The experience took students out of the bubble of the Ann Arbor campus, Friedrichs said, and let them deal with real-world political, social and environmental issues.

The final speaker was graduate student Jose Alfara, a co-founder of the student group Sustainability Without Borders. Last year, 10 students focused on projects in rural West Africa. They worked to implement “circular economies,” where everything serves as a resource for something else. For example, a toilet system was installed that creates biogas, which is used to fuel the school’s kitchen stove. The program is now starting to focus on training, Alfara said, so that people living in a community adopt sustainability as a way of life. “That community is starting in Ann Arbor,” he said, “and hopefully we’ll take it as far as we can.”

In wrapping up the presentations, Berki said that while the campus is growing in population and infrastructure, the university needs to be aware of its environmental footprint. How can they balance growth with being good stewards of the environment? Part of the effort includes linking academics with operations, he said, as well as supporting new ventures like Planet Blue. Success also requires continued strong support from the administration, he said.

Mary Sue Coleman noted that this is one of the times when students pushed for change, and it’s great to see students involved in addressing real problems on campus. [As an example, students spoke during public commentary at the regents March 2009 meeting, urging administrators to better coordinate UM's sustainability programs. There is also an active UM Student Sustainability Initiative.]

More changes are on the way. On Sept. 27, Coleman is scheduled to make an address to campus, expanding UM’s sustainability goals for both academics and operations. Her remarks can be seen via a webcast, starting at 11 a.m.

Misc. Public Commentary

In addition to commentary related to the UM nurses, three other speakers addressed a variety of topics.

Two dogs, trained through the PAWS program, sat quietly during the Sept. 15 regents meeting.

Jane MacFarlane spoke to regents about PAWS with a Cause, a program that trains dogs for people with disabilities. [She and a colleague brought two dogs to the meeting, one of them sporting a maize-and-blue bandana.] She briefly described the program, and noted that even though UM doesn’t have a veterinary school, it was amazing to see how the community has embraced the PAWS program.

Joan Knoertzer, a retired Ann Arbor Public Schools teacher, described the building and collections at UM’s Clements Library, calling it the most beautiful library in the United States. The library is known for its holdings of American history and culture from the 15th through the 19th centuries. Knoertzer has served on the library’s advisory board for six years, and she thanked regents for their support. “We are on the academic map worldwide.”

Linda Martinson, a former UM nursing student, began by noting that she’s previously been barred from speaking at regents meetings because of several trespass warnings that have been issued against her, dating back to 2007. Those warnings are still in effect, she said, despite a recent change in the university’s trespass policy.

Martinson gave an update on her lawsuit against the university, saying “the university has argued that students do not have a property interest in their education, without which they are not entitled to constitutional due process.” [An update on the case is also included in the litigation report that's part of the board meeting packet, prepared by UM's general counsel.] The bulk of her remarks focused on details of the trespass warnings against her. She noted that she was able to address the regents at their 2010 meeting in Dearborn, saying she believes that’s “the reason General Counsel Suellyn Scarnecchia expanded the trespass policy to all three campuses, in order to keep victims of the policy from speaking at all regents’ meetings.” [.pdf file of Martinson's remarks to regents]

Present: Mary Sue Coleman (ex officio), Julia Darlow, Larry Deitch, Denise Ilitch, Andrea Fischer Newman, Andy Richner, Martin Taylor, Kathy White.

Absent: Olivia (Libby) Maynard.

Next board meeting: Thursday, Oct. 13, 2011 at 3 p.m. at the UM campus in Flint. [confirm date]

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the University of Michigan board of regents. Click this link for details:Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

The view looking east down the dewatered Argo headrace, with the embankment on the right. The trail along the embankment to Broadway is closed, as the city prepares for major reconstruction of the headrace. (Photos by the writer.)

Commissioners approved a resolution recommending a change to the scope of work at the Argo headrace – a change that will add a new entrance to the soon-to-be-reconstructed waterway from Argo Pond to the Huron River. The modification to the project was linked to an offer from DTE to pay for a whitewater section that’s part of the overall project, which freed up city funds for the new entrance. A state permit needed to start the reconstruction is expected to be received by Aug. 23.

A second resolution introduced at Tuesday’s meeting urged the city council to incorporate design of a trail system – including the county’s Border to Border (B2B) trail – into the Fuller Road area in advance of building the proposed Fuller Road Station. Two members of the Washtenaw Bicycling & Walking Coalition were on hand with suggestions for where trails might be located to bypass the busy intersection of Fuller Road, Maiden Lane and East Medical Center Drive.

The topic of trails also emerged tangentially during a presentation by PAC vice chair John Lawter on dog parks. Some people walk their dogs off leash on park trails and in other park areas, violating Ann Arbor’s ordinance requiring dogs to be leashed. The exception is in the city’s two dog parks, on the north and south edges of town.

Lawter suggested that Ann Arbor might find other ways to let dogs off leash, either by creating another traditional dog park that’s more centrally located, or designating certain hours for dogs to be off leash in specific parks. PAC might form a subcommittee to explore options for a new dog park, and for how to increase enforcement of existing dog-control ordinances. Such an effort might uncover more data points like those Lawter provided in his presentation, which included the pounds of poo collected annually at Swift Run dog park.

Data collection has also been part of developing the city’s first urban forest management plan. Oliver Kiley of JJR, the consultant leading this project, updated the commission on the effort. Possible outcomes include a recommended maintenance plan, protections for mature trees, targets for new tree plantings, and proposals for relevant ordinances and zoning. The discussion among commissioners led to concerns over whether the city is prepared for something similar to the emerald ash borer – which decimated thousands of trees in the city over the past decade and chewed up the city’s forestry budget for several years.

The urban forest management plan will be among the 26 city plans in a sustainability framework being developed, focused on “triple-bottom line” goals of economic vitality, environmental quality and social equity. The commission was briefed on this project in preparation for a Sept. 27 joint meeting of the park, planning, energy and environmental commissions. The goal of that meeting is to start prioritizing goals from these existing city plans.

Argo Dam Update

Brian Steglitz gave an update on the city’s reconstruction project at the Argo dam headrace, as commissioners were asked to recommend amending the project scope with TSP Environmental. Steglitz is the city’s project manager for the Argo reconstruction. [.pdf of staff memo and resolution]

TSP, a Livonia firm, had been hired last year to build a dam bypass channel in the headrace for $988,170 and to add whitewater features for an additional $180,000. However, DTE is now offering to pay for the whitewater feature of the project, if the city agrees to hold off on construction of that piece until after DTE completes environmental remediation on its nearby property, as required by the state.

By having DTE pay for the work, the city is expected to save $163,636. The resolution at Tuesday’s PAC meeting recommended using some of these funds to improve the entrance to the headrace. That work had not previously been part of the project’s scope.

Steglitz told commissioners that the additional work would include modifying the entry into the headrace by removing the top of the concrete culvert, adding grouted limestone to widen the approach, building new concrete abutments, and installing an arched prefabricated steel clear span bridge with a concrete deck. The work is expected to cost about $85,000.

A July 25 memo from city staff reported that the city had been notified by DTE officials of upcoming remediation work that DTE plans to do in 2012, adjacent to DTE’s property on the south side of the Huron River, between Allen Creek Drain and the Broadway Bridge. The remediation is being required by the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality. The city is currently in negotiations with DTE about the details of the work it will do related to the headrace and whitewater features, Steglitz said.

Brian Steglitz gives a presentation on the Argo headrace project to the city's park advisory commission.

The overall Argo dam project, as previously approved, calls for removing the canoe portage and replacing it with a series of “drop pools” so that no portage is required. Originally, five pools were proposed, but that has increased to eight pools, Steglitz said. Grade changes on the drops between pools will be less steep, to accommodate fish movement through the headrace. The change will also make it easier for novice canoers and kayakers to navigate, he said. [.pdf of Argo headrace design and bridge info]

Other work includes improving the accessibility of the path – which is part of the county’s Border-to-Border trail – and addressing problems in the headrace embankment.

The work is tied to a consent agreement that the city reached with the state in May 2010, laying out steps that the city must take to deal with some of long-outstanding structural issues with the earthen embankment. TSP Environmental had been selected by the city council at its Nov. 15, 2010 meeting, following a recommendation by PAC in October 2010.

Steglitz told PAC that the city hasn’t yet received the necessary state permit to begin major work on the project. The city applied for the permit in April, and since then has been responding to comments and additional requests for information from the state. City staff expect to receive the permit by Aug. 23, after which work will begin immediately. There’s a Nov. 15 deadline from the state related to the consent agreement, Steglitz said, which had originally been set based on receiving a permit in May. Meeting that deadline now will be aggressive, he noted, but for the most part doable – and the state will likely be flexible, if necessary, given that work couldn’t begin when planned.

Steglitz also said that some work almost certainly won’t be completed by Nov. 15, such as paving the path and putting in plantings. That work will be finished up next spring.

Meanwhile, some work that didn’t require the permit has been done, including tree removal and dewatering of the headrace, which Steglitz said has been a battle. The trail along the embankment has been closed, and detour signs are up.

Argo Dam: Commissioner Discussion

Colin Smith, the city’s manager of parks and recreation, urged commissioners to visit the Argo site, saying it was exciting to see that some work has begun. He also noted that Gary Lacy, the Colorado consultant who’s designing the project, had previously talked about the benefits of improving the entryway to the headrace, if possible. City councilmembers had also expressed interest in that when they initially approved the project, he said.

David Barrett asked whether TSP Environmental will still build the whitewater feature, now that DTE is paying for it. Steglitz replied that it might not be TSP, because DTE will probably want to use its own contractor. The city still needs to negotiate with DTE about the role that city staff and Lacy will play. City staff might be indifferent to who builds it, he said, as long as the design remains acceptable.

Facing west, looking at the entry to the dewatered Argo headrace. Argo Pond is on the other side of the berm. If approved by city council, a proposed change in the project's scope of work will entail rebuilding the entry with a Trailblazer bridge to provide more headroom to travel from Argo Pond into the headrace.

Smith said DTE staff have been very helpful in working with the city. In response to a query from Sam Offen, Smith said it wasn’t yet clear what type of remediation needs to take place on the DTE site, but he promised to forward that information to PAC as soon as it’s available. Barrett noted that if the remediation is extensive, it might push back the timeframe for building the whitewater features. Tim Berla clarified that even if that occurs, the new headrace would still be open.

Berla asked whether the deal with DTE had been finalized – was it certain that they’ll pay? Smith said that DTE reviewed the memo about the project that was provided to PAC and the city council, so everyone is on the same page. Everything has been laid out, he said, though the agreement hasn’t been finalized. Smith felt it was solid. Offen later asked Smith to seek the city’s attorney’s opinion on the agreement, before PAC’s recommendation goes to city council.

In response to a question from Tim Doyle, Smith said the new bridge would be similar to one installed in Bandemer Park.

John Lawter confirmed that the city would still have the ability to close the headrace, following reconstruction. Steglitz said a stop log could still be used, which would allow staff to block water flowing into the headrace, if necessary.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved recommending an amendment to the scope of work for the Argo dam headrace project. The recommendation will be forwarded to city council for final approval.

Trails and Fuller Road Station

Over the past two years or so, several PAC members have raised concerns about various aspects of the proposed Fuller Road Station, a large parking structure, bus depot and possible rail station to be located near the intersection of Fuller Road, Maiden Lane and East Medical Center Drive, near the University of Michigan medical campus on city-owned land. The land has been used as a surface parking lot since 1993, leased to the university, but is on property designated as parkland. It’s a joint project of the city of Ann Arbor and UM, though a formal agreement regarding its construction and operation hasn’t yet been finalized.

In June 2010, the commission passed a resolution that asked the city council to make available a complete plan of Fuller Road Station – including any significant proposed agreements, such as what the university will pay the city for use of the structure – allowing sufficient time for a presentation at a televised PAC meeting before the council votes on the project. The resolution also asked that staff and the council ensure the project results in a net revenue gain for the parks system. Revenues from the lease of the surface parking lot support the parks system.

PAC most recently got a detailed update on the project at its May 2011 meeting. At that meeting, there was a discussion about the status of trails – including the county’s Border-to-Border (B2B) trail – as it runs through that area. As a follow-up to that discussion, at Tuesday’s PAC meeting, commissioners Gwen Nystuen and Tim Berla presented a resolution recommending that planning for a trail system be incorporated into plans for the proposed Fuller Road Station.

Trails and Fuller Road Station: Public Commentary

Eric Boyd of Ann Arbor said he strongly supported including non-motorized trails in the Phase 1 design of Fuller Road Station. The overall Fuller Road Station project is worthwhile to improve transit services in Ann Arbor, he said. But he said it will poorly serve cyclists if improvements aren’t made to non-motorized trails in the area – either first or at the same time. Specifically, one of the city’s best non-motorized assets is the trail connecting Bandemer Park to Parker Mill – a key link in the Border-to-Border trail, he said.

Right now, Boyd said, there are three obstacles preventing this from being a truly great ride, especially for families with young children: (1) access to Bandemer Park from the west is a mess, he said, (2) the dirt track along the headrace is difficult to navigate – he noted that the city is thankfully working on that now, and (3) the intersection at Fuller Road and Maiden Lane is an unwelcome obstacle and time-consuming to navigate safely. Boyd urged PAC to take a strong advocacy role in supporting non-motorized improvements – as called for in the Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) plan – in the vicinity of Fuller Park, before or during construction of the Fuller Road Station.

John Satarino, a former PAC member, encouraged commissioners to look at a study that was done several years ago regarding the Border-to-Border trail, especially as it related to the Bandemer/Argo area. The rest of his comments related to Fuller Road Station, and a recent letter that mayor John Hieftje sent out to the community with comments about the project. Satarino asked who would pay the $15 million annual operating and maintenance costs for the facility – no one talks about that, he said, though it’s included in a consultant’s report on the project. Also, nothing was said about WALLY, the north/south commuter rail project. That will cost about $36 million to get up and running, Satarino said, plus $6 million to $8 million in annual operating costs.

The mayor minimized the issue of when the Fuller Road Station site became parkland, Satarino said – that was in 1932, when the city acquired the property. At that time, there had been provisions that the land remain parkland, but over the years “I guess the lawyers might have taken care of that,” he said. Satarino also wanted to remind people that there’s a paved parking lot on the land now because the University of Michigan bullied the city into building it – creating a “hostage situation” in order to save some old oak trees near the Veterans Administration hospital.

Trails and Fuller Road Station: Presentation

In starting the discussion, PAC chair Julie Grand suggested commissioners limit their focus to the issue of trails in the area of Fuller Road Station, and not discuss the facility itself at this point.

Tim Berla agreed, saying the resolution was a way to address having biking and pedestrian paths that would provide a safer way to navigate through an area where thousands of vehicles pass every day. He then introduced two members of the Washtenaw Bicycling & Walking Coalition (WBWC): Larry Deck and Joel Batterman.

Larry Deck of the Washtenaw Bicycling & Walking Coalition.

Deck and Batterman covered much of the information contained in a statement issued by WBWC in June. [.pdf of WBWC statement and map showing recommended trails] They showed a series of maps with options for trails – including maps from the city’s PROS plan and the 2006 non-motorized transportation plan.

The WBWC is suggesting three actions, Deck said:

1. Complete the trail system before construction of the Fuller Road Station parking structure.
2. Complete the trail system before the proposed bike center within Fuller Road Station is completed.
3. Have the university share in the costs of the trails and a bridge.

Batterman described several conflicts that pedestrians and bicyclists face with vehicles in the Fuller Road area, at intersections and at entrances to places like Fuller Park. A demand for improvements exists there, he said. A 12-hour traffic count in 2006 showed more than 4,000 pedestrians and 700 bicyclists used that area.

Batterman noted that in the early 1980s, when bridges on Fuller Road and East Medical Center Drive were built over the railroad and when the bridge was built over the Huron River on Maiden Lane, the design included room for future trails to go under the bridges. However, those trails haven’t yet been built, and there’s no continuity in that area for the B2B trail. Both the PROS plan and the non-motorized plan recommend completing these trails, he said. The non-motorized plan also calls for a bridge to be constructed over the Huron River, linking the trails on the south of the river to the trail that continues on the north side of the river through Riverside Park.

It seems reasonable to request funding for trail improvements that have been envisioned for roughly 30 years, Batterman said. The lack of trails is one of the last major gaps in the Huron River greenway system in the city’s center, he noted, and is a keystone in the corridor between UM’s central and north campuses.

Trails and Fuller Road Station: Commissioner Discussion

Berla began by noting that the traffic study mentioned by Batterman is five years old – given the university’s growth, those figures are likely higher today, he said. Berla referred to the text of the resolution, but did not read it – the resolution and memo had been distributed to commissioners via email before the meeting. [.pdf of memo and resolution]

Among other things, the resolution states that detailed plans for the design and funding of the trail system, including the B2B trail through Fuller Park and the connecting links on all sides, should be approved by PAC and the city council prior to action on the Fuller Road Station project. The resolution calls for trail improvements to be completed prior to or concurrently with changes planned along Fuller Road or construction of the Fuller Road Station, and recommends that any future transit improvements – including the “Signature Route” of the future University of Michigan rapid transit connector along Fuller Road – should preserve the integrity of the trail system.

Further, the resolution states that improvement of the trail system should be given priority over planned bicycle amenities within Fuller Road Station, and that costs of a complete non-motorized trail system and a source of funding should be established jointly by the city of Ann Arbor, the University of Michigan, and the Washtenaw County Parks & Recreation Commission.

PAC member Tim Berla.

Julie Grand clarified with Larry Deck that the WBWC was proposing trails underneath the bridges in that area.

Parks planner Amy Kuras was asked for her opinion about the WBWC proposal. She said she agreed that the intersection at Maiden Lane and Fuller Road was one of the most dangerous in the city for pedestrians and bicyclists. Trail connections under the bridges are probably the safest alternative.

Berla noted that the resolution prioritizes trails over the bike amenities planned inside Fuller Road Station. But he wondered whether it would be useful to be even more specific in the resolution. He directed his question to Christopher Taylor, an ex-officio PAC member who also represents Ward 3 on city council.

Taylor replied that in general, articulating priorities isn’t a bad thing. He wondered what the current plans are for trails at Fuller Road Station. Berla said it was difficult to know, since he hadn’t actually seen the plans. But the last time Berla had asked that question of Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager, Cooper had indicated that the design entailed widening an existing path through the site to 10 feet, but that no other trail linkages would be part of the project’s first phase.

Tim Doyle asked how expensive it would be to build a non-motorized bridge over the Huron River. Deck indicated it could cost as much as $500,000.

Sam Offen had questions about two of the resolved clauses:

5) That improvement of the trail system, including the B2B Trail, be given priority over the bicycle elements of Phase I of FRS since there is use of and demand for trail continuity now, and

6) That the costs of a complete non-motorized trail system and source of funding be established jointly by the City of Ann Arbor, the University of Michigan, and the Washtenaw County Parks & Recreation Commission.

Regarding the #5 resolved clause, Berla clarified that while he’d like both the trails and the proposed amenities within the facility – bike lockers within the station, for example – priorities should be given to completing the trails first. Taylor observed that it seemed the clause oversteps the point of the resolution, which is to make sure the facility fits with the non-motorized infrastructure that feeds into it.

Offen was curious to know how Washtenaw County parks & rec was involved. Berla and Nystuen both emphasized that the county is a major funder of the B2B trail.

With no further questions, Grand called for a vote.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the resolution recommending action related to non-motorized trails in the Fuller Road Station area. The resolution will be forwarded to city council.

Dog Parks: More Needed?

John Lawter, PAC’s vice chair, has on several occasions raised the question of whether the city has a sufficient number of dog parks, and at Tuesday’s meeting he gave a formal presentation on the issue. He began broadly – by noting that dogs are believed to be the first domesticated animal, dating back more than 32,000 years. Dogs were hunting companions and guarded humans against danger, so in many ways, Lawter said, the evolution of humans is closely linked to the evolution of dogs.

The number of dogs is growing, both nationally and locally, Lawter said, including an estimated 75,000 dogs in Washtenaw County. And while there’s a leash law in Ann Arbor, there’s also a need for off-leash socialization and exercise. Leashes can cause dogs to be territorial, Lawter noted.

An off-leash dog area is fenced off from the rest of Olson Park, on the city's north side.

At the same time, complaints about off-leash incidents are on the rise, and enforcement is handled by police, who understandably don’t give it a high priority, Lawter said. But the challenge is that off-leash options in Ann Arbor are limited, he said – there are only two legal off-leash dog parks in Ann Arbor, at Ols0n Park and Swift Run. That’s led to informal off-leash gatherings, which Lawter characterized as common. In an “undisclosed” location in his neighborhood, Lawter said on Saturdays 50 or more people gather to run their dogs off leash. He knows of at least two other locations where this happens within a one-mile radius of the city’s center.

Possible solutions include increased enforcement and additional dog parks. The benefit of a dog park, Lawter said, is that it promotes responsible pet ownership and the enforcement of dog-control laws, while giving dogs a safe place to exercise. Dog parks provide seniors and the disabled with an accessible place to exercise their dogs, as well as a place for socializing for all people and dogs who visit the park – it’s a way to build community, he said.

On the flip side, concerns over dog parks include safety, sanitation, noise, traffic, effects on wildlife and natural areas, and the costs of construction and maintenance. Locations are often hard to find, he said, especially in areas adjacent to residential neighborhoods.

The two existing dog parks are located on the city’s edges – one in Olson Park, a fenced half-acre on the north side of town, and another 10 acres of fenced area at Swift Run in the south, which includes a separate section for small dogs. To reach these parks, most people need to drive there, Lawter said. Dogs aren’t permitted on AATA buses, and these aren’t walkable locations for most city residents.

Lawter also noted that while the number of permits to use these parks has dropped – from about 800 in 2008 to just over 400 in 2010 – the “pounds of poo” have increased, indicating that usage of the dog parks is increasing. About 12,000 pounds were collected by park staff in 2008, compared to over 14,000 pounds in 2010.

Traditional fenced-in dog parks cost about $40,000 to build, not including parking, Lawter said. Olson was cheaper – about $21,000. Maintenance costs are also a factor. Swift Run maintenance costs about $20,000 annually, he said.

In addition to traditional fenced-in areas, Lawter laid out several different options for dog parks. “Instant” dog parks can be created by putting up temporary fencing in areas that aren’t being used for other purposes, for example. Or unfenced dog parks can be designated in larger parks, he said, perhaps by setting restricted hours of use. Other ideas include having amenities like water areas for dogs to play in, benches that can be paid for by donors, and sponsorship opportunities – raising money by selling customized engraved bricks for paths, for instance. The goal is to “focus on the loot, not the poop,” Lawter quipped. He reported that a park planner in Indianapolis said permits for dog parks are “recession-proof” for that city, and that the dog parks could be money-makers, if managed well.

Lawter laid out a process the city could pursue, first by forming public/private partnerships to create additional options for dog parks, possibly by partnering with dog owner organizations. The city would need to identify an appropriate site – at least a quarter-acre minimum, and factoring in a capacity of 25 dogs per acre. Rules, regulations and enforcement issues would need to be developed, he said, followed by design of the park and eventual construction.

In conclusion, Lawter said there’s a need for another off-leash area in the central part of the city. He recommended incorporating this goal into the city’s park planning efforts, adding it as a consideration when looking at land acquisitions, and asking that parks staff actively look for potential sites.

Dog Parks: Commissioner Discussion

Julie Grand asked whether Lawter had suggestions for possible dog park locations. He did not identify any specific locations but said there are potential spots, depending on whether the dog park would be a small fenced-in area or a larger open space. However, the biggest issue is convincing neighbors to allow it, he said. It takes campaigning and advocating, which isn’t the role of the city staff, he said – that’s up to advocates for the dog parks.

Gwen Nystuen suggested setting up a PAC subcommittee to explore Lawter’s recommendations, and said she’d be willing to serve on it.

David Barrett jokingly described the informal off-leash gatherings as “spontaneous doggie flash mobs,” and asked whether there were a lot in the city. Lawter said he knew of at least three in his neighborhood alone, and he agreed with Barrett’s characterization that there was a kind of “doggie underground.”

Barrett also asked about the data regarding poo poundage. That’s collected by county employees at Swift Run, Lawter said – the dog park there is a joint city/county operation. Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, reported that it’s one of the stranger data points he’s regularly received from the county over the past three years, but that Lawter had found it useful – “so you never know,” Smith said.

From left: Park advisory commissioners Sam Offen and Tim Doyle.

Sam Offen said he supported another dog park, if it’s in the right park with the right amenities. But it’s important that an increased effort to find a location for another dog park in the city’s center be accompanied by increased enforcement, he said. Bird Hills seems to be the easiest place to find people walking their dogs off-leash, Offen said – and when it’s politely pointed out to them that they’re violating a city ordinance, they often don’t care. However, it’s not cost effective to have police patrol the parks, he added, saying he didn’t know what the solution is.

Lawter agreed that more enforcement is needed. A lack of enforcement only encourages more people to break the rules, he said.

Grand supported the idea of designating limited hours to allow off-leash dogs in an area in an existing park. She suggested exploring that idea since it meant not having to build another dog park. Lawter said that in other cities where this is done, the hours are set to coincide with times that the parks aren’t used by children – early in the morning, or later at night.

Tim Doyle asked whether any section of Bird Hills might be used for this purpose – would there be public outcry at that? Yes, Smith said, there’d be outcry. Bird Hills is one of the higher-quality nature areas in the city, and there’s no area where dogs could run without damaging the plant life, he said.

Barrett asked if Lawter had ideas about how the dog parks could make money, as the park planner in Indianapolis had indicated. There are many ways, Lawter said. Some dog parks have gates requiring keys that must be purchased. Another option is to periodically go to the dog parks and check to see if people have permits – probably only a third of people who currently use Ann Arbor’s dog parks have permits, he said. Or occasionally a booth could be set up at the dog park to accept permit applications, and educate people about why permits are needed.

Offen noted that currently, permits must be purchased at city hall – it’s not possible to get one online or at other locations, so it’s not convenient to do. Lawter said that one possibility would be to have permit applications available at other park sites where staff are present. Smith said that for people who’ve already gotten a permit, the city mails reminders at the end of the year, urging them to renew. [.pdf of dog permit application]

There are other reasons why permits are important, beyond the revenue, Lawter said. It’s also a way to verify that the dogs are vaccinated – that’s important for public safety. Doyle suggested making permits available at local veterinarian offices.

Smith noted that a few years ago, when the two dog parks were created, the city did significant public outreach on the issue. It’s possible to draw on that information again, he said.

Urban Forest Management Plan

Commissioners received a presentation about development of the city’s urban forest management plan from Oliver Kiley, a landscape architect with the firm JJR, which has been hired by the city as a consultant for the project. [Cheryl Zuellig of JJR is working as a consultant on the project as well. She also serves on the city's public art commission.]

This is the city’s first urban forest management plan, Kiley told commissioners. The intent is to develop a long-term vision for how to manage this major community asset. Public engagement has been a big part of the process, he said, in working to establish a range of goals, objectives and an action plan. Possible outcomes include a recommended maintenance plan, protections for mature trees, targets for new tree plantings, and proposals for relevant ordinances and zoning.

The process started over a year ago, when a working group was set up of the consultants and city staff. An advisory committee of community members was also formed to give input. Beyond that, Kiley said, there’s been outreach to stakeholders and focus groups, as well as two citywide public meetings last year. Two more meetings will be held later this year and in early 2012. In addition, an online survey posted last year yielded about 400 responses, he said.

The draft plan is divided into three components: (1) tree resources, (2) resource management, such as policies, funding and staff, and (3) community engagement. Goals have been set for each component, and a draft of over 50 possible objectives has been developed, Kiley said. [.pdf of draft objectives] The timetable calls for a draft plan to be circulated in April and May of 2012, with city council reviewing and adopting it later that year.

Kiley pointed commissioners to the project’s website at www.a2gov.org/urbanforestry for more information. He noted that Connie Pulcipher of the city’s systems planning unit is the point person for this project, during the time when the city’s forester, Kerry Gray, is on maternity leave.

Urban Forest: Commission Discussion

Gwen Nystuen referred to stormwater management as a major issue for the city, and an important aspect of the urban forest. Will the urban forest management plan attempt to measure or quantify this impact? Kiley noted that the consultant Davey Resource Group did a tree inventory and benefits analysis in 2009 that addressed this issue. [.pdf of full report]

Sam Offen asked who serves on the advisory committee. Members include:

• Harry Sheehan: Office of the Washtenaw County Water Resource Commissioner
• Joel Dalton: Huron Valley Group of the Sierra Club
• Ann Lund: Broadway neighborhood
• Kathy Stroud: Traver Association
• Allison Stupka: Old Westside
• Lynn Borset: Ann Arbor Tree Conservancy
• Jeff Plakke: UM Botanical Gardens & Arboretum
• Neal Foster: Orchard‐Hills Maplewood Homeowners Association & Millers Creek Action Team
• Rita Mitchell: Neighborhood Alliance
• Jim Rogers: Friends of Greenview and Pioneer Nature Areas
• Peggy Sorvala: DTE
• Mike Martin: First Martin (representing business/property managers)
• Paul Bairley: Former city forester
• Kris Olsson: Huron River Watershed Council
• Matt Naud: Environmental Commission (city staff, sitting in for reporting purposes)
• John Lawter: Park Advisory Commission and UM Grounds
• Joan Doughty: Community Action Network

Offen noted that the city had been hit by the emerald ash borer several years ago, which decimated most of the emerald ash trees. He wondered if the city would have responded to the crisis differently, if an urban forest management plan had been in place at that time. Kiley replied that one of the plan’s goals is to be flexible and responsive to changing conditions. It’s important always to keep an eye on what the next disease or insect attack might be, he said, but it’s not clear how the city could have anticipated the emerald ash borer. The city was caught off guard, he said, and for several years the crisis consumed all of the city’s forestry budget and man-hours. That meant that other routine maintenance was deferred – the city just didn’t have the capacity to handle it.

Kiley noted that diversity of trees in the city is important, to prevent decimation of the urban forest by a single bug or disease.

David Barrett asked if the emerald ash borer crisis was over. The borer doesn’t attack trees under a certain size, Kiley said, so for the most part, those smaller ashes are all that remain in the city. Over the longer term, the question is whether the insect has moved out of the area so that the ash trees can grow.

Lawter noted that the plan will address many areas that relate to parks, including setting goals for tree canopy coverage, funding sources, and possible ordinances related to when trees can be removed. He said PAC will at some point receive a draft copy to review for input.

Julie Grand asked whether the interviews with stakeholders or focus groups yielded any surprises or common themes. Riley pointed her to a document on the urban forest website that lists common themes pulled from those interviews. [.pdf of common themes] A sampling includes: (1) the importance of communication and transparency of forestry activities, (2) the need for tree diversity, (3) the importance of tree maintenance and young tree care, and (4) the suggestion of incentives for tree plantings on private property.

Mike Anglin, an ex-officio PAC member who also represents Ward 5 on city council, wrapped up the discussion by thanking Kiley for the work he’s doing.

Sustainability Update

Jamie Kidwell, who’s working for the city on a sustainability project funded by a $95,000 grant the city received from the Home Depot Foundation, gave an update to PAC about those efforts. She had given a similar presentation at a city planning commission working session earlier this month.

The concept of sustainability focuses on what’s called the triple bottom line: environmental quality, economic vitality, and social equity. Kidwell told commissioners that the goal of the project isn’t to develop a new plan. Rather, it’s to review the city’s existing plans and organize them into a framework of goals, objectives and indicators that can guide future planning and policy. Other project goals include improving access to the city’s plans and to the sustainability components of each plan, and to institutionalize the concept of sustainability into city planning and future city plans.

There’s an 18-month timeline for the project, which started earlier this year. For the first phase, Kidwell reviewed existing city plans – such as the downtown plan, the non-motorized transportation plan, the natural features master plan and others – and interviewed key city staff to determine which plans they use to guide their decision-making. There are 26 plans that are included in this project, and the second phase has involved organizing the goals for each plan. [.pdf of the list of 26 plans]

Kidwell said she and other city staff are starting to develop a framework for these plans, and to identify gaps that exist – goals that the city might want to pursue, but that aren’t laid out in existing plans.

The final six months of the project will be focused on developing an action plan, Kidwell said. That will include prioritizing goals within the framework, and tying those goals to the city’s two-year budget plan.

Efforts in other parts of the country – Philadelphia, Miami-Dade, Santa Monica, Calif. and Asheville, N.C. – have provided some guidance in developing a framework for Ann Arbor, Kidwell said. Philadelphia’s model was particularly appealing for its simplicity, she said, using broad themes like energy and the environment.

The draft for Ann Arbor’s framework is centered around four themes: (1) climate and energy, (2) natural systems, (3) community, and (4) land use and access. Goals from each of the city’s 26 plans in the framework are being sorted to see how many of those goals fit into these four themes, Kidwell said.

Also in draft form is a document with summaries for each of the 26 plans, including the top 10 goals from each plan. It’s intended to be a reference resource, Kidwell said. [.pdf of draft sustainability summaries]

At the end of the project, Kidwell said, there will be two concrete products: a relative brief document that will be distributed with a summary of the city’s sustainability framework, and an interactive website – a centralized place where people can access all of the city’s plans, and can sort information based on different goals and themes.

Kidwell concluded by highlighting some upcoming events tied to the sustainability project:

• Tuesday, Sept. 13 at 7 p.m.: Lecture on sustainability by Dick Norton, chair of the University of Michigan’s urban and regional planning program. The venue has not yet been finalized.
• Tuesday, Sept. 27 at 6 p.m.: A joint meeting of the planning, park, environmental and energy commissions, to set sustainability priorities. The meeting will be held at Cobblestone Farm, 2781 Packard Road.
• Second Thursday of each month, January-April 2012: A lecture series on sustainability issues.

The events will be open to the public.

Sustainability Update: Commissioner Discussion

David Barrett asked whether there had been any outreach to the business community, given that one of the three sustainability goals is economic vitality. Not yet, Kidwell said. This initial phase has involved organizing what the city has already adopted. In later phases, the effort will involve community outreach, and the business community will be part of that.

Sam Offen described it as a tremendous project, and asked what outcomes Kidwell anticipates, in terms of recommendations and priorities. Kidwell replied that she hopes some priorities will be set at the Sept. 27 joint meeting of the four city commissions, perhaps identifying one priority from each theme that could be moved head in the coming year. That would provide direction for staff to focus. There are hundreds of goals within the 26 plans, she noted, and not all of them can be acted on at the same time. The hope is that an action plan will prioritize some of the goals so that staff can better track progress toward reaching those goals.

Colin Smith, parks and recreation manager, added that the priorities can be linked to the city’s capital improvements plan (CIP), which is used to prioritize projects for budgeting purposes.

Offen noted that if this kind of framework had been in place, then perhaps projects like the Fuller Road Station would have evolved from it by identifying transportation and environmental needs, rather than just appearing suddenly on someone’s To Do list. Fuller Road Station would have been more understandable if it had been part of a process, rather than just being “birthed,” he said.

Tim Doyle asked whether Kidwell had run across any inconsistencies or conflicts between goals in the different city plans. Not as much as anticipated, she said. There are some conflicts – between goals in the solar and urban forest plans, for example – but those will just have to be addressed whenever they’re encountered, she said. Conflicting goals will be highlighted in the database she’s compiling, Kidwell added.

Offen wondered why there weren’t any plans related to public safety. Kidwell said she wasn’t aware of any such plan, but that there was still time to incorporate suggestions for other plans to include.

Barrett observed that there also weren’t any plans specifically related to economic vitality. Kidwell said that no city plan focuses specifically on that issue, but that goals in many of the 26 plans used in the framework do address economic vitality. In response to a question from Offen, she said that no plans from the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority are being incorporated into the framework, though similar goals are in some of the city’s master plans.

Barrett then asked what’s meant by “social equity.” That’s a big question, Kidwell said, and one that the community needs to answer. Generally, it means ensuring that public health and affordable housing goals, for example, are part of the city’s planning. But part of the process to develop a sustainability framework is to define these terms, she said.

Julie Grand noted that several of the city plans address issues related to the Huron River and non-motorized transportation. She observed that PAC’s agenda that evening included an item related to that too – trails in the Fuller Road Station area.

Kidwell wrapped up the discussion by mentioning that she’s keeping a blog on the Sustainable Cities Institute website, giving updates on the Ann Arbor project.

Misc. Communications

At the end of Tuesday’s three-hour meeting, parks and recreation manager Colin Smith gave several brief updates.

Colin Smith, Ann Arbor's manager of parks and recreation.

He noted that stakes with white flags had been placed in the West Park detention pond in an attempt to “politely dissuade” water fowl from eating the plants there. He acknowledged that it would be helpful to put up signs explaining the purpose of those flags. He also noted that a memo had been sent to city council earlier this month, providing an update on West Park construction.

Earlier in the day, Smith said, an event to launch the RiverUp! project had been held at Island Park. [At its July 2011 meeting, PAC had been briefed on the project, which is spearheaded by a conservancy group called the Wolfpack, and involves several other partners, including the Huron River Watershed Council, the National Wildlife Federation, the Michigan League of Conservation Voters, and the Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan.] The event had been well attended, he said, but it was also a chance to reflect on how much the city has done over the past decade or so to improve conditions along the river and provide exposure to the river as a recreational resource. It was good to know that the city has taken a lead on that, he said.

Smith also reported that Matt Warba has been promoted to assistant manager of field operations for the city, taking on broader responsibility for operations outside of the parks. Warba was on hand to give a very brief report, focusing on efforts at Plymouth Park. The city continues to battle stormwater runoff from the railroad embankment in that area along Plymouth Road, he said. Engineering work is underway for a longer-term solution, he said, with construction to start in the fall.

Present: David Barrett, Tim Berla, Doug Chapman, Tim Doyle, Julie Grand, Sam Offen, Gwen Nystuen, John Lawter, councilmember Mike Anglin (ex-officio), councilmember Christopher Taylor (ex-officio). Also Colin Smith, city parks manager.

Absent: Karen Levin

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, Sept. 20, 2011 begins at 4 p.m. in the city hall second-floor council chambers, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor park advisory commission. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

State Street runs north-south. Ellsworth, which runs east-west, is at the bottom of the frame. The large paved area northwest of the I-94/State Street interchange is Briarwood Mall. The proposed area of study extends farther north to Stimson. (Image links to Bing Map.)

The RFP, which will likely be issued next week, will solicit a consultant to develop a comprehensive plan for the 2.15-mile section between Stimson Street to the north – near a railroad crossing and the Produce Station – and Ellsworth to the south.

The corridor is the city’s main gateway from the south – the stretch includes an I-94 interchange, entrances to Briarwood Mall, and other retail, commercial and office complexes. Although there is one large apartment complex along that road, it is not a densely residential area.

Also at Tuesday’s working session, commissioners and staff discussed plans for an April 26 retreat that will focus on another major corridor: Washtenaw Avenue.

State Street Study RFP

A comprehensive study of the South State Street corridor had been scheduled for the current fiscal year – it was an item discussed at the planning commission’s annual retreat held in April 2010. But the city’s planning staff didn’t have the resources to do the work, according to Wendy Rampson, head of the planning unit.

So rather than having planning staff tackle the project, the city plans to hire a consultant for this project. About $150,000 is available for the project, though it’s unlikely that entire amount will be used. Those funds, which are in the budget for the current fiscal year, would require city council approval if they need to be carried over into FY2012, which begins July 1, 2011.

Jill Thacher, the city planner who’s leading this project, plans to issue the RFP next week, and on Tuesday evening asked planning commissioners for feedback on the draft she’d crafted. [.pdf file of draft State Street Corridor study RFP]

The RFP includes a proposed process for developing the corridor plan – a process that’s expected to take 12 months, beginning in July 2011:

1. Data Inventory and Analysis: A large amount of preliminary data on the corridor has been collected by staff, and includes information on related planning efforts, existing conditions for land use, transportation, natural features, and infrastructure, and issues and opportunities related to these conditions. A database of building parcel information, and a large number of GIS maps specific to existing conditions have also been collected. The consultant will utilize existing data and identify additional data requirements, and collect that data.

2. Market Analysis: A market analysis to identify market demand and redevelopment potential will be undertaken by the consultant. The analysis may include, but is not limited to, examination of existing conditions, identification of trends affecting demand for various land uses, identification of market and non-market based forces affecting the corridor, future market demand, and/or other relevant market information.

3. Identification of Goals, Issues, and Opportunities: Upon completion of market analyses and data collection, the selected consultant should analyze the data and work closely with the public, as well as business and institutional stakeholders, to complete a full SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis for the corridor. This analysis will be used to craft a preferred vision of future land use in the corridor.

4. Identification of Alternatives and Priorities: The consultant will work closely with staff and the Planning Commission, considering public input, to identify alternative scenarios that could be implemented over time as the corridor develops/redevelops.

5. Preparation of Plan Concepts and Selection of Preferred Scenario(s): Using the alternatives and priorities identified via the ongoing public process, corridor plan concepts will be developed that address the priorities and needs identified. The consultant will work with staff and the Planning Commission to recommend and select the preferred future land use scenario(s).

6. Identification of Action Strategies, Plans, Policies, and Best Practices: The consultant will work with staff and the Planning Commission to identify action steps and strategies needed for successful implementation of the preferred future land use scenario(s). This could include outlining methods to work with City leaders, local, regional, and state planning agencies, business groups, and members of the community at large to best implement the corridor plans, preserve the desired current aspects of the corridor, and to embrace future anticipated growth.

7. Development of Final Corridor Plan Report: Deliverables expected from the selected firm will include a final corridor plan report, in a format suitable for publication, including intermediate studies which were used in the planning process, such as future development scenarios, alternative scenarios, and market analyses.

Thacher told commissioners that the RFP will likely have a mid-May deadline for submitting proposals, with selection of a consultant taking place later that month. The planning commission’s master plan review committee – consisting of Wendy Woods, Diane Giannola, Evan Pratt and Erica Briggs – will help select the consultant. The goal is for work to begin in July 2011. Because the study is expected to cost more than $25,000, it would first require city council approval.

In a follow-up email to The Chronicle, Rampson said that the Ann Arbor city council had approved $70,000 to develop corridor design standards in FY2010 and $90,000 in FY2011 for consulting work on corridors. Of that, about $10,000 has been spent so far on inventory work, leaving $150,000 available. She said they do not intend to spend the entire $150,000 on this contract.

In addition, the council had allocated $85,000 for master plan revisions in FY2010 and $95,000 in FY2011. Following direction given by the planning commission, the city’s planning staff has not embarked on a full master plan revision effort, Rampson said, and they don’t intend to use the remainder of those funds.

[It was at its Oct. 18, 2010 meeting that the city council revised its FY 2011 budget by moving funds out of the general fund reserve and allocating them for corridor and master planning. The money had reverted to the general fund – after being previously allocated in the FY 2010 budget, but not spent. Because the unspent funds were not carried forward for FY 2011 when that year's budget was approved in May of 2010, the council needed to authorize the transfer back from the general fund reserve. That authorization came with dissent from Marcia Higgins, who represents Ward 4]

State Street Study RFP: Commissioner Feedback

Eric Mahler, the commission’s chair, began the working session discussion by looking at the eight deliverables listed in the RFP – items that the city will want the consultant to produce as part of the project. They include:

1. Data Inventory & Analysis: Interview and meeting summaries; analysis maps; narrative.

2. Market Analysis: Findings and summary report.

3. Issues/Opportunities/Goals: Overview of SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) analysis; preliminary goals summary.

4. Choices/Trade-offs/Priorities: Summary of criteria and methodologies used; summary of choices

5. Recommended Plans/Policies/Practices: Draft plans and policies.

6. Action Strategies: Policy implementation and action strategies reports.

7. Draft/Final Corridor Plan: Draft and final plan text, illustrations, executive summary.

8. Two to four public meetings plus up to 25 targeted individual or small group interviews of key stakeholders.

Mahler said those are fine, but he noted that commissioners had also talked about incorporating sustainability goals into this project.

[By way of background, commissioners discussed sustainability and the State Street project at their April 2010 retreat, and more generally at a three-way joint working session of the environmental, energy and planning commissions that took place that same month. This year, the city was awarded a $95,000 grant from the Home Depot Foundation to: (1) create a sustainability framework; and (2) develop an action plan based on the sustainability framework. The funds are paying for a temporary employee, Jamie Kidwell, who's keeping a blog about the project on the Sustainable Cities Institute website. The goal is to develop a framework of goals, objectives and indicators, and a State of Our Sustainability Report.]

Mahler told other commissioners that this project is ideal for making the city’s sustainability goals concrete, though they need to settle on what specific goals they’d want to achieve. It might vary from one end of the corridor to the other, he said. There might not be a better opportunity to do this for a long time, Mahler added, saying that at the very least, the outcome would be something they could critique.

Rampson noted that Kidwell is just beginning her year-long project to build a sustainability framework, but she might be far enough along by the time the State Street consultant starts that they could work together.

Bonnie Bona added that it would help even if they simply developed questions to ask themselves relative to sustainability goals, and to identify where potential conflicts arise between the different goals of economic, environmental and social justice sustainability. The goals don’t always work together, she said.

Moving off the topic of sustainability, Evan Pratt suggested asking for the consultant to come up with alternative scenarios for the corridor. What would it look like in the future if the city did nothing? What might happen if there were different types of zoning changes?

Bona pointed to the city’s transportation plan – it would be nice to coordinate the State Street study with that plan, she said. Pratt added that an overview of traffic management issues should be part of the study.

Rampson later noted that the city will be able to provide the consultant with previously collected traffic data. City staff have also taken soil borings from the medians along State Street near Briarwood Mall, she said. The aesthetics of those medians has been an issue, and soil samples provide information about what can be done there – possibilities such as bioswales or native vegetation.

Kirk Westphal asked whether the consultant should explore funding possibilities, like a corridor improvement authority (CIA) that’s being considered for Washtenaw Avenue. Rampson felt it was more appropriate to ask the general question: What tools are available to implement the plan? She said they’ve already encountered the “realities” of possibly implementing tax increment financing (TIF) in the Washtenaw Avenue project, and she was reluctant to suggest that as a specific option for the consultant to explore.

Erica Briggs suggested that the study include information about where commuters who use the State Street corridor are coming from and going to. Westphal said the proposed Costco site on Ellsworth west of State – which will likely have a large surface parking lot – presents a huge park-and-ride opportunity.

Related to alternative transportation, Briggs noted that riding a bicycle along State Street is a problem.

Jean Carlberg described the diversity of development along the corridor, from “dilapidated” student housing on the north end, to the huge impact that Costco could have if it builds a store near State and Ellsworth, in Pittsfield Township. She also noted that the topography of the area isn’t mentioned in the RFP, but should be – stormwater issues are a concern.

A rendering of possible future development from Pittsfield Township's draft master plan, showing the northwest corner of State and Ellsworth. (Links to larger image.)

Thacher reported that she had attended a meeting in Pittsfield Township where the draft of the township’s master plan was presented. For the area near South State and Ellsworth, Costco would serve as an anchor retail store, but the plan also calls for offices, live/work units that are characterized as artist lofts, and a centralized parking structure.

Rampson said that when Pittsfield officials complete the master planning process, they’ll send out copies to adjacent municipalities – including Ann Arbor – for review. That will likely occur soon, she said. [At its April 13 meeting, the Pittsfield Township board of trustees approved release of the master plan for a 63-day public review period, beginning April 18.]

Diane Giannola clarified that land south of I-94 and to the west of State Street is in Pittsfield Township, while land south of I-94 to the east of State is in Ann Arbor. Rampson added that the road itself is in Ann Arbor’s jurisdiction.

Thacher asked for feedback about the public participation component – her draft suggested two to four general public meetings, plus smaller focus groups with stakeholders, including local businesses, residents at the apartment complex, and the University of Michigan, which has offices in Wolverine Tower near State and Eisenhower.

Pratt said they’ll probably need to knock on doors – getting meaningful feedback in that area will be difficult, he said. Mahler suggested that two public meetings would be sufficient.

Briggs noted that city staff had successfully used an online survey to get public input for the recent update of the Park and Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan. The city could contact businesses along State Street, and have employers ask their workers to complete the survey, she said.

Westphal said he assumed that overlays would be a potential option for tweaking zoning in this corridor, as would a possible premium for building affordable housing. Rampson replied that it would depend on the commission’s goals. If they want more density, they could recommend changing the zoning to allow for that, she said. Westphal clarified that the corridor study would include a discussion of goals.

Briggs pointed out that the community hasn’t yet clearly articulated its overarching goals, whether those goals include density, affordable housing, transportation or other things. As the city’s resources become more limited, she said, it’s important to know the community’s goals and direct resources into those areas.

Maher suggested adding to the RFP an indication of what kind of modeling they’d like to see. Words on paper are dry, he said – the consultant should develop some sort of visual representation, either a computer model or physical 3-D rendering.

Thacher noted that the draft RFP asks for a market analysis. She asked for feedback – the analysis could be tailored, or quite broad. Mahler weighed in on the side of keeping it basic, saying he was reluctant to get into a protracted discussion about the underlying assumptions needed to do trending forecasts. “The simpler we keep it, the better.”

Pratt agreed, noting that if you ask for a 20-year forecast, you get what the Library Lot proposal entailed – a lot of caveats. Carlberg suggested looking at what a five-year build-out might mean, then identifying possible opportunities beyond that.

Rampson said these types of projects have rarely included market analyses in the past, but that in this case, because State Street is an employment corridor, it would be useful to see what’s on the horizon. They don’t need to do a fine-grain analysis, she said, but to get a sense of where the market is heading in this region, so that the corridor can identify a niche.

When Briggs said that one thing they can predict with certainty is rising gas prices, Mahler replied that there might be a viable alternative fuel that’s developed, to offset that factor.

Westphal observed that even if they aren’t hiring an economic development consultant, it would still be useful to ask for comparisons to corridors in other communities that were anchored by a large retailer and near an interstate. What other areas have made those assets into an opportunity? He also suggested looking at other corridors in Ann Arbor – making sure that their vision for State Street doesn’t detract from other areas, like Westgate, Arborland and the Plymouth/Green corridor.

They’d talked about the North Main corridor previously as well, Derezinski said. But there’s no question that in terms of priority, State Street was second in importance only after Washtenaw Avenue, he said. Pratt added that State Street stood out as an opportunity because changes there were likely to raise fewer objections from residents – there are few residential areas there now.

Derezinski noted that it was remarkable to see the businesses that have sprung up around the Birch Run outlet mall north of Flint, or around the Cabela’s store in Dundee, south of Ann Arbor. Briggs commented that she hoped that kind of development wasn’t in Ann Arbor’s future.

Some of that development could happen in Pittsfield Township, Rampson noted – and the city will need to work with the township about it, in a respectful way.

Planning Commission Annual Retreat

Part of Tuesday’s working session was spent talking about the group’s April 26 retreat, which will focus on the Washtenaw Avenue corridor.

Tony Derezinski, a planning commissioner who also serves on city council, along with commission chair Eric Mahler have been planning the retreat with Wendy Rampson and Jeff Kahan of the city’s planning staff. It’s set to begin at 3 p.m. at the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority headquarters, 2700 S. Industrial, where they’ll get an update on the county’s transit master plan from Michael Ford, AATA’s CEO.

At least two hours are devoted to a bus tour with stops along Washtenaw Avenue, between the split at East Stadium in Ann Arbor, and as far east as Hewitt Road in Ypsilanti. Stops are likely to include the crossing at Arbor Hills; the Arborland shopping mall; Glencoe Hills, an apartment complex owned by McKinley Inc.; and the Washtenaw intersections with Golfside and Hewitt.

The group will return to the AATA headquarters for dinner and a discussion of the Washtenaw Avenue corridor improvement authority (CIA), a project that involves the four jursidictions that Washtenaw Avenue crosses through: Ann Arbor, Pittsfield Township, Ypsilanti Township and Ypsilanti. [For background, see Chronicle coverage: "What Does Washtenaw Corridor Need?"]

In describing the agenda at Tuesday’s working session, Derezinski said they planned to invite other community members to participate. Albert Berriz, McKinley’s CEO, will be joining them for part of the retreat, he said, as will Anya Dale, a Washtenaw County planner and AATA board member. The broad theme of the retreat will be regional planning – looking at how communities can work together, Derezinski said, noting that it’s an effort the current administration in Lansing is stressing.

Erica Briggs said she hoped they’d have time to get off the bus and walk along some of the sections of Washtenaw, to experience it as a pedestrian. It’s difficult for pedestrians, especially along the US-23 interchange – and biking is even worse, she indicated.

Rampson said they purposefully picked rush hour to take the bus tour, so that they could see the corridor at its most congested.

Also during the retreat, the commission plans to discuss its work program priorities for the coming year. The retreat, which is open to the public, will run until 8:30 p.m. However, it’s not yet clear how the commission plans to make the bus tour portion of the retreat accessible to the public.

Planning commissioners present: Bonnie Bona, Erica Briggs, Jean Carlberg, Tony Derezinski, Diane Giannola, Eric Mahler, Evan Pratt, Kirk Westphal.

Absent: Wendy Woods.