For actual coverage of the announcement that the Fuller Road Station project has been suspended, see: “UM, Ann Arbor Halt Fuller Road Project.”

The city was able to get the TIGER II federal funds formally “obligated” for that first right-of-way phase of the project – city council held a special meeting on March 16, 2011 to sign the necessary agreement.

The approval of the easements at the April 4 meeting will allow the city to proceed with getting $13.1 million of TIGER II grant funds obligated that have already been awarded for the second phase of the bridge replacement project. A continuing federal budget resolution passed by the U.S. Congress – which would preserve the TIGER II funding – expires on April 8. Previous proposals by House Republicans have included cuts that would have eliminated the TIGER II funding.

The council is acting with some urgency to get the funds obligated before the program is eliminated – if, in fact, it is eliminated.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 100 N. Fifth Ave. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Top: File photo from March 2009 of city engineer Mike Nearing as he gives the East Stadium bridge a hammer sounding test. Bottom: At a March 16, 2011 special meeting, Nearing and other city staff were on hand to answer questions. To Nearing's left is Sue McCormick, public services area administrator. Standing is Homayoon Pirooz, head of project management. (Photos by the writer.)

Announcement of the grant’s award to the city for the reconstruction of the East Stadium Boulevard bridges had come in October 2010. The bridge over State Street is in such poor condition that its southern two lanes were intentionally demolished in November 2009.

The council’s special session reflected an urgency to complete the contract. The council has a regular meeting scheduled next Monday, March 21 – just five calendar days after the special session – when the council could also have taken the necessary vote on the contract.

The urgency stemmed from the March 18 expiration of a continuing resolution (CR) passed by Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 2. A CR is a mechanism for keeping the federal government operating, based on the previous fiscal year’s budget assumptions, until formal appropriations bills are passed by Congress. The federal budget procedure is essentially a two-step process in which the budget levels for each department are first set and signed into law, followed by appropriations bills that authorize spending the budgeted amounts.

Based on proposals brought forward in February by U.S. House Republicans, but ultimately not enacted, the current two-week CR would have eliminated TIGER II grants. And based on the political posturing that took place over the current CR, the Ann Arbor city council was taking the step of signing the contract as soon as it could, to allow the U.S. Federal Highway Administration to “obligate” the TIGER II grant funds for the bridges project under the current CR – as a hedge against the possibility that a subsequent CR might cut TIGER II funding.

Although the grant had previously been awarded, the funds are not secured until they are actually obligated, a process that includes various requirements – among them, signing the contract that the council authorized at its special session.

The council’s action enabled obligation of TIGER II funds only for the right-of-way phase of the project – which amounts to around $800,000. According to Congressman John Dingell’s office staff, they’d been informed by the Dept. of Transportation on March 15 that the $800,000 for the initial phase had just been obligated.

Based on the city of Ann Arbor’s timeline, obligation of the $13.1 million in TIGER II funds for the construction phase is expected in May. Construction on the project, which is estimated to cost a total of $23 million, is tentatively scheduled for October 2011.

A public information meeting on the status of the project is scheduled for Wednesday, March 23 from 6:30-8 p.m. at the Pioneer High School cafeteria. Pioneer is located at 601 W. Stadium – just down the street from the bridges.

Council Deliberations

Given the single item on the agenda, the special meeting was brief, but councilmembers still had substantive questions. Three city staff members were on hand to answer them: Sue McCormick, public services area administrator; Homayoon Pirooz, the city’s head of project management; and Mike Nearing, the city engineer who’s directly responsible for managing the bridge reconstruction project. This report begins with the council questions and answers, and continues with additional background detail organized roughly based on councilmember questions.

Council Deliberations: Right-of-Way

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) wanted to know if the city was confident that the University of Michigan is a willing partner in providing to the city the rights-of-way that it needs in order to complete the project.

Pirooz told Kunselman that the city had been talking with the university staff since October of 2010, and that the university has seen all the pieces of property, and descriptions for them, that the city is requesting.

Next week the city will be making a good faith offer, Pirooz said, and then the ball will be in the university’s court. Pirooz said he hoped that the university would accept the offer.

Council Deliberations: Obligation of Funds

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) wanted to know if the signing of the contract, which the council was approving that night, would actually “obligate” the funds from the TIGER II grant. Pirooz explained that the $13.9 million from the grant would be obligated in two steps, corresponding to the two phases of the project: (1) the right-of-way phase, and (2) the construction phase.

Homayoon Pirooz shows mayor John Hieftje the documents he needs to sign. At left are Sandi Smith (Ward 1) and Marcia Higgins (Ward 4).

When the contract is signed, Pirooz said, the first $800,000 of the grant would be obligated – “locked in.” After that, the city can make an offer to the UM for the rights-of-way needed for the project. On acceptance by the university, the city can then, under the same contract, lock in the remaining $13.1 million for the construction phase of the project.

Council Deliberations: Timeline

Tony Derezisnki (Ward 2) wanted to know how things stood on the overall timeline for the project. Pirooz told him that the Michigan Dept. of Transportation will be advertising the construction jobs to solicit bids in the summer and that they will be awarded in September. Construction is expected to start in October 2011.

Right-of-Way (ROW) Acquisition

The action taken on Wednesday by the Ann Arbor city council to approve the U.S. Dept. of Transportation contract will allow the obligation – “the locking in” – of the initial right-of-way acquisition phase of the project. From the contract:

Phase 1 – Right-of-Way Acquisition

This phase of the project consists of acquiring five, small, irregularly-shaped parcels of land that are needed for permanent right-of-way; and, three, small, irregularly-shaped parcels of land that are needed for underground utility easements for the subject project. Also to be acquired for the subject project are seven, temporary grading permit areas, that are needed for the purposes of constructing the project and will be restored to their original condition upon completion of the project.

The Federal funds for phase 1 may only be used on the costs associated with the purchase of the permanent right-of-way needed and the acquisition of the seven, temporary grading permit areas. No Federal funds, including TIGER II grant funds, will be used to reimburse the cost of ROW acquisition activities that were incurred prior to the date of obligation of the Federal funds.

Based on an October 2009 project design, a total of around half an acre of UM property would need to be acquired by the city in order to complete the bridge reconstruction project. The parcels in question are part of the Crisler Arena parking lot, the UM golf course, the field hockey facility, and the Red Lot (a parking lot).

The contract calls for the city to make a “good faith offer” to the university for the parcels, which are needed either as permanent conveyance or as utility easements. The city and the university have a history of conveying right-of-way to each other, either permanently or for temporary use.

In response to a query from The Chronicle, Jim Kosteva – UM’s director of community relations of community relations – gave examples of past projects that involved the university’s permanent conveyance of right-of-way to the city without a cash transaction: (1) expansion of Main Street at the intersection of Main and Stadium Boulevard to add a turn lane; (2) reconfiguration of Fuller Road around the VA hospital area to connect at Glazier Way; and (3) reconfiguration of Huron Parkway.

On the flip side, with the city permanently donating land to the university, Kosteva also gave examples: (1) the section of East University Avenue between North University and South University; (2) Monroe Street between Tappan and East University. [The university has also expressed interest in the last few years in acquiring the right-of-way between South State and Tappan on Monroe Street, but has up to this point received an unenthusiastic response from the city.]

In the category of temporary use of right-of-way, Kosteva offered various university construction projects that have required lane closures, most notably the football stadium renovation project, the construction of the North Quad dorm at State and Huron, and the law school project currently underway at State and Monroe. The city charges 1.5 cents per square foot per day for temporary use of the right-of-way. While the amount sounds trivial, Kosteva said that it has added up to several hundred thousand dollars over the last few years.

[To illustrate how the 1.5 cents can add up, consider a 12-foot-wide lane, and the 1,570-foot distance for one block of Main Street from Stadium Boulevard to Pauline Boulevard, for a closure of, say, 100 days. That works out to 12*1,570*.015*100 = $28,260]

Why Call a Special Meeting?

By way of background, the federal budget procedure is based on a fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 and ends Sept. 30. The budget for the state of Michigan is aligned to that fiscal schedule, as are those of some other local units of government – like the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, for example. In contrast, the city of Ann Arbor’s budget year begins July 1 and ends June 30.

Once the city’s budget is approved each May by the city council, that money can be spent. However, throughout the year, the city council will vote on myriad contracts, because the power to make contracts on the city’s behalf is, per the city charter, vested in the council. Some dollar figure is associated with those contracts. A typical question asked by a councilmember of the city administrator on a night when the council is asked to vote to authorize a contract is: Where is this money coming from? A typical part of the answer is: This money has been authorized as part of the budget you approved last May.

On the federal level, once Congress approves the budget – which sets the dollar figures for all the departments – an additional step is required in order to allow any money to be spent. That additional step is the passage of various appropriations bills that specify with greater precision how the money in each department is to be allocated.

To gain time to consider and debate appropriations bills, Congress can use a continuing resolution (CR) to extend the habit and practice of spending from the previous year’s budget, to keep the federal government running. In December 2010, Congress passed, and President Obama signed into law, a CR that extended funding through March 4, 2011. In mid-February, as the expiration of that CR loomed, House Republicans announced a plan to pass a new CR, but with $100 billion in cuts, which would have also cut the TIGER II grant program. Though approved by the House, the Senate balked, and Republicans settled for a two-week CR with $4 billion in cuts – which spared TIGER II funding.

With the two-week CR set to expire on March 18, the Ann Arbor city council scheduled a March 16 special session, so it could authorize the agreement with the U.S. Dept. of Transportation (USDOT), which would allow the USDOT to obligate the TIGER II funds for the $800,000 phase 1 part of the East Stadium bridges project. The initial phase of the project involves acquisition of right-of-way from the University of Michigan – a disjoint mix of small, irregularly shaped parcels. According to Congressman John Dingell’s office staff, they received word from USDOT on March 15 that the phase 1 funds had, in fact, already been obligated.

Also on March 15, the House passed another three-week CR, which also maintained the TIGER II grant funding, extending governmental operation funds through April 8.

In that context, the special city council meeting may not have been necessary; however, the obligation of those funds was not known when the special council meeting was announced by Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) at the March 14 city council work session. In addition to clearing the logistical hurdles of identifying a venue and coordinating with councilmember schedules, the council needed to meet the Michigan Open Meetings Act requirement that special meetings are given a minimum 18-hour public notice before the meeting.

The Ann Arbor city charter provides a specific procedure for calling a special meeting:

Special meetings of the Council shall be held at the regular meeting place thereof and shall be called by the Clerk on written request of the Mayor or any three members of the Council. Written notice stating the time and purpose of a special meeting shall be delivered to each member of the Council or left at the member’s usual place of residence at least three hours prior to the time set for the meeting. The Clerk shall record a certificate of service of notice in the journal of such meeting. A special meeting may be held notwithstanding lack of notice if all members are present, or if a quorum is present and each absent member has filed with the Clerk a written waiver of notice. A vote taken by the Council at a prior meeting shall not be reconsidered at a special meeting, unless as many members are present as were present when the original vote was taken. Except by unanimous consent of all members of the Council, a matter shall not be acted upon at any special meeting unless it has been included in the notice of the meeting.

Due to ongoing renovations at city hall, since January the “regular meeting” place of the city council has been either at the Washtenaw County boardroom or the Community Television Network (CTN) studios. The Washtenaw County board of commissioners were holding their regular meeting in their boardroom on Wednesday evening, which left the CTN studios as an option.

East Stadium Bridge Construction Timeline

The timeline the city is using includes a construction start in October 2011. The contract authorized by the council on Wednesday night includes a target completion date in June 2013, with the bridges open to traffic again eight months before that, in November 2012.

Tentative
Date        Task
March 2011  Complete appraisals of UM properties
March 2011  City Council approval of TIGER II Grant Agreement
March 2011  Execute TIGER II Grant Agreement by US-DOT
March 2011  FHWA Authorization of TIGER II Funds
            (for ROW Phase only)
March 2011  Prepare and submit "Good Faith Offer" to UM for ROW
April 2011  City Council approval/acceptance of ROW from UM
April 2011  Execute and record all permanent ROW instruments
May   2011  Certification of all ROW to MDOT
May   2011  MDOT/FHWA Authorization of TIGER II Funds
            (for Construction Contract)
June  2011  MDOT Advertises the Construction Contract
July  2011  City Council Approval of City/State Agreement
Sept  2011  MDOT receive bids from the contractors
Oct   2011  MDOT issues "Notice to Proceed"
            to Bridge Construction Contractor
Nov   2012  Bridge open to traffic again
June  2013  Project complete

-

Timeline of East Stadium Bridge History

The East Stadium Boulevard bridges – one over State Street and the other over the railroad tracks – have a long history. Here’s an overview focused on the last five years.

• 1973: Voters approve a millage to fund a bond to repair the East Stadium bridge. The proposed bond sale on the ballot included $800,000 for creation of a citywide bicycle system using existing streets and new pathways, and $360,000 designated for repair of the East Stadium bridge. At the time, the debate centered on whether the new bridge design should accommodate a wider roadway for State Street. On the same ballot was a transit millage, which passed as well – the same millage that supports today’s Ann Arbor Transportation Authority.
• 2006: The city of Ann Arbor is awarded $766,000 from Michigan’s local bridge program (MLBP), but the city allowed the award to expire a year later, because the amount did not go far enough towards funding the project. The alternative to expiration would have been to spend the MLBP money towards bridge reconstruction.
• 2006: The city pays $1,249,467 to Northwest Consultants Inc. (NCI) for preliminary design engineering of the comprehensive bridge project that included bridge replacement, a transmission water main, storm sewer, and a South Main non-motorized path.
• 2007: After a biannual inspection of the bridge, weight limits were reduced on the span. The limits were set as follows: 31 tons (reduced from 38 tons) for one-unit trucks (e.g., school or AATA buses); 39 tons (reduced from 48 tons) for two-unit trucks (e.g., a single-trailer semi); 44 tons (reduced from 54 tons) for three-unit trucks (e.g., a semi with two trailers).
• 2007: On Sept. 18, 2007 and Oct. 2, 2007 at Pioneer High School’s cafeteria, informational workshops are held on a comprehensive project to address replacement of the span over State Street as well as the one over the railroad, including non-motorized improvements (i.e., sidewalks) extending along Stadium Boulevard to Main Street and south along Main to Scio Church Road. Those workshops are well attended, especially by members of the Ann Arbor Golf and Outing Club, which is located near the bridges.
• 2007: On Dec. 29, 2007 there are reports of “medium-sized pieces of concrete” falling off one of the 16 pre-stressed concrete box beams supporting the roadway.
• 2008: Early January re-inspection by city staff and bridge engineering consultants leads to the short-term recommendation of a traffic control order further reducing weight limits: 19 tons for one-unit trucks (e.g., school or AATA buses); 24 tons for two-unit trucks (e.g., a single-trailer semi); 26 tons for three-unit trucks (e.g., a semi with two trailers).
• 2008: In March, the vision for a comprehensive renovation of the bridges plus the corridor from Main to White streets meets with a funding setback. The Michigan Dept. of Transportation awards only $760,000 for the project, though the total cost was estimated at that time at around $35 million.
• 2008: On Oct. 22, 2008 Northwest Consultants Inc. – the engineering consultant for the bridge – performs biennial inspection.
• 2009: In early February, Northwest Consultants is called back to re-examine the bridge. A 7/8 inch deflection of the beam is found. [Chronicle coverage: "Discontent Emerges at Caucus" and "Building Bridges"] The bridge safety rating has dropped to 2 on a scale of 100.
• 2009: In March, traffic is rerouted so that it’s limited to the bridge’s northern lanes, and does not pass over the beams showing deflection. [Chronicle coverage: "How the E. Stadium Bridge Gets Monitored" and "Council Gets Update on Stadium Bridges"] The project scope is reduced from the more ambitious work on the corridor to just replacement of the two bridges.
• 2009: On Sept. 15, 2009 the bridge inspection consultant, Northwest Consultants, inspects the East Stadium bridge over South State Street, and recommends removing the five southernmost beams.
• 2009: On Oct. 5, 2009 the city council authorizes expenditure to remove five beams.
• 2009: On Oct. 28, 2009 and again on Dec. 1, 2009, public meetings are held to discuss design.
• 2009: In November, five beams are removed from the bridge.
• 2009: In November, the state’s local bridge advisory board awards no funds for the Ann Arbor bridge project, citing the lack of any other non-city funding available for the project. [Chronicle coverage: "State Board: No Funding for Stadium Bridges "]
• 2010: In February, the U.S. Dept. of Transportation announces the final recipients of the federal TIGER grant – they do not include the city of Ann Arbor.
• 2010: In October, the U.S. Dept. of Transportation announces recipients of TIGER II grants – Ann Arbor is included on the list with a $13.9 million grant award.
• 2010: In November, the state of Michigan announces an award of $1.67 million from its local bridge program and $1.2 million from its transportation enhancement funds, bringing the total of grants supporting the project to around $16.8 million, or about 73% of the total $23 million estimated cost of the project.

Communications and Comment

Every city council agenda contains an opportunity for the public to address the meeting. On Wednesday, no one spoke.

Present: Stephen Rapundalo, Mike Anglin, Margie Teall, Sabra Briere, Sandi Smith, Tony Derezinski, Stephen Kunselman, Marcia Higgins, John Hieftje, Carsten Hohnke.

Absent: Christopher Taylor

Next regular council meeting: March 21, 2011 at 7 p.m. in the Washtenaw County administration building, 220 N. Main St. [confirm date]

Elizabeth Chen assembles a tetrahedron from connectors and straws. (Photos by the writer.)

In that way, at least, Ann Arbor is densely packed.

This is a story about that town-gown connection. It’s a story that connects a recent UM mathematics PhD thesis defense to the Ann Arbor planning commission – and takes a continuous path though topics like Klingons, grocery bags, affordable housing, yard waste collection and Valentine’s Day.

We begin with Elizabeth Chen, who successfully defended her PhD dissertation last Friday in East Hall on the UM campus. Her presentation included several hands-on assignments for those in the audience of around 30 people – several of whom assured The Chronicle that hers was an “unconventional” thesis defense.

Chen exhorted the assembled mathematicians to paste together plastic pyramid shapes with gummi putty to help them get an intuitive feel for the shapes: “It’s not so scary!” she admonished them. After half an hour, one member of her thesis committee prodded her to get to the mathematics part – he really had “better things to do.” The Chronicle, however, did not.

Packing Pyramids: Background

Never mind the answers – many of the questions themselves that mathematicians work at solving are completely inaccessible to (even very clever) non-mathematicians. That’s not the case with Chen’s work. Her dissertation title sounds almost like it could belong in the children’s section of a bookstore: “A Picturebook of Tetrahedral Packings.”

Certainly even small children can grasp the basic concept of the question Chen works on: How tightly can you pack pyramids together?

Example of a model of a regular tetrahedron in the form of a die. The way you tell which number is "up" on such a die is to look at the one that can be read in its usual orientation. For this one, someone rolled a "4."

The specific kind of pyramid Chen works with is a regular tetrahedron (plural: tetrahedra). Each of the four faces of a regular tetrahedron is an equilateral triangle – one with three congruent sides.

For longer than a little while, it was believed that tetrahedra could be packed together perfectly to fill all of space, leaving no gaps at all. It was Aristotle (384 BC-322 BC), writing in “On the Heavens,” who suggested that regular tetrahedra were space-filling.

But by the 1400s, German mathematician Johannes Müller had countered Aristotle’s claim. And by the end of the 1800s, another German mathematician, Hermann Minkowski, had begun looking at the general problem of packing convex shapes. [A tetrahedron is convex – if you take any two points in a tetrahedron, the straight line connecting those points stays completely inside the tetrahedron.]

In 1900, David Hilbert, also German, included the problem of tetrahedron packing as a special case of Problem 18 in a list of 23 problems he had identified as interesting.  Hilbert’s list has guided much of mathematical inquiry for the last century. From Hilbert’s paper [emphasis added]:

How can one arrange most densely in space an infinite number of equal solids of given form, e. g., spheres with given radii or regular tetrahedra with given edges (or in prescribed position), that is, how can one so fit them together that the ratio of the filled to the unfilled space may be as great as possible?

Already in the early 1600s Johannes Kepler had conjectured that the most efficient way to pack spheres was in a way that Chronicle readers would recognize as the same approach that any produce clerk would take to stacking oranges. What Hilbert was asking for, though, was an actual proof that this was the optimal configuration. That (computer-aided) proof came in 1998 from Thomas Hales, who began his work at the University of Michigan.

A cluster of 9 tetrahedra gummied together. Chen's approach to maximizing density involves taking copies of these locally dense clusters and fitting them into lattices.

The density of an optimal sphere-packing is approximately 0.74048. That is, given an infinite number of identically-sized spheres, about 74% of space can be filled up with them – and we know, per Hales’ proof, with 100% certainty that there’s no configuration of spheres that would be any denser than that.

The 0.74048 number is thus a kind of a benchmark against which tetrahedron packing can be measured.

In 1972 Stanislav Ulam, a Polish-American mathematician who worked on the Manhattan Project, conjectured that spheres were the worst-packing of all convex bodies. So from Ulam’s conjecture, it should follow that tetrahedra should pack denser than 0.74048.  But in the mid-2000s, investigations of tetrahedron packing that used computer simulations, as well as experiments using  physical tetrahedral dice, could not establish any configuration of tetrahedron packing that clearly surpassed the 0.74048 for spheres. Maybe tetrahedra were worse-packing than spheres?

Was Ulam wrong? No. We’ll get to that in a moment. Now’s a good chance to think about how very wrong Aristotle had been – wrong about tetrahedra and their ability to completely fill space. How did he manage to massively miss that one?

Part of the reason could have been that Aristotle had no ready source of tetrahedral dice and gummi putty to try pasting models of tetrahedra together – the way that Elizabeth Chen asked the audience of her thesis defense to do. Once you have them in your hands, it’s easy to paste together models and convince yourself that they will fill less than all of space – a pastes-great-less-filling experience.

Alex Mueller (foreground) and Zach Scherr (to Mueller's right), both graduate students in mathematics at the University of Michigan, stayed pretty well focused on the hands-on tasks provided by Chen during her thesis defense.

In 2008, Chen showed how to arrange tetrahedra to achieve a packing of around 0.7786 – clearly beating the maximal packing for spheres, and in some sense vindicating Ulam.

Since Chen’s 2008 paper, other researchers have ratcheted the number upward, to 0.855506. But in early January of 2010, in a paper published with Michael Engel and Sharon Glotzer – both faculty in the UM department of chemical engineering – Chen nudged that number a bit higher, to 0.856347. [The more recent activity in the field of tetrahedron packing is succinctly covered in a New York Times article by Kenneth Chang: "Packing Tetrahedrons, and Closing In on a Perfect Fit"]

The January paper’s result, which is not included in Chen’s PhD thesis, was all that some in the audience wanted hear about: “What about the ‘champion’? I want to know how you did it, and then I’m going to leave.”

Chen eventually produced what they were there to see, which was the culmination of her systematic investigation: how individual copies of clusters of tetrahedra can fit densely into lattices. And her committee gave her a passing grade on the thesis defense.

Ann Arbor’s Kind of Density

When the topic of dense packing shows up in the pages of The Chronicle, it’s typically not in the sense of how densely you can pack space with tetrahedra. It’s usually something less esoteric, like a caution from the city’s public services area administrator, Sue McCormick, about packing the city’s yard waste containers too densely with leaves. From a recent Chronicle report on a city council budget meeting:

McCormick cautioned against compacting too many leaves into the containers, as it sometimes made emptying them difficult. [The automated arms tilt the carts upside down – whereupon the contents are liberated from the confines of the cart through a physical attractive force, a so-called "gravity."] McCormick pointed to the benefit of bagging as (i) providing more control, and (ii) limiting the amount of disruption in the community.

Or, if not densely packing leaves, then it’s densely packing people that’s the topic of discussion. We reported resident Lou Glorie’s remarks made during public commentary at a June 2009 city council meeting this way:

She suggested that urban sprawl had been replaced by the desire to pack 1,000 more souls into the downtown of some city. “Concrete is the new green,” she concluded.

Discussion on the merits of planning for greater population density in the city of Ann Arbor has dominated the local political conversation at least over the last decade. So it’s worth noting that a former Ann Arbor planning commissioner, Eric Lipson, attended Elizabeth Chen’s dissertation defense on dense packings of tetrahedra.

Eric Lipson, former planning commissioner with the city of Ann Arbor, hold the hands-on materials provided to audience members at Elizabeth Chen's Feb. 12 thesis defense.

Lipson did not attend by random accident. He’s the general manager of the Inter-Cooperative Council, a housing cooperative started in 1932 by UM students. Chen lived in ICC housing, at the Georgia O’Keeffe House, from 2005-2008. She was the O’Keeffe work manager for most of her time there.

That’s how Lipson knew Chen, and knew that her dissertation defense was coming up.

But Chen and Lipson aren’t just linked by the ICC connection.

Lipson himself has a practical interest in geometric shapes. He holds a patent on a connector for construction panels, which can be used to create 10-sided dome-shaped buildings.

And those 10-sided buildings can be shipped flat-packed wherever they might be needed. The company formed to manufacture and sell the product is called DecaDome. Lipson has prototypes set up in his backyard. While the audience was waiting for Chen’s dissertation committee to confer on her presentation, he showed us images of those prototypes from his Blackberry.

Eric Lipson showed The Chronicle images of DecaDome protoypes while we waited for Elizabeth Chen's dissertation committee to confer.

Part of what makes the connector special, said Lipson, is that the opening doesn’t require absolutely perfect alignment in order to accept a panel, which makes the task easier. As far as tools, all that’s needed is a screwdriver – though he allowed that a cordless power screwdriver would be recommended.

Panel material for DecaDomes ranges from foam core, to fluted polycarbonate, to pressure-treated plywood, to foam core panels covered with resin cement and fiberglass mesh.

Klingons

Different kinds of material is also the basis of the Klingon connection to Chen’s thesis. After Chen’s presentation, Sharon Glotzer, a UM professor of chemical engineering, helped clarify for The Chronicle why she and chemical engineering colleague Michael Engel were co-authors with Chen on the world-record tetrahedron-packing paper.

Glotzer and Engel are interested in designing new materials with interesting properties – properties that could, say, affect how we visually perceive objects made from them. That is, they’re interested in materials that have some kind of cloaking property. Glotzer told us that the various tech blogs take their speculations on this kind of scientific work in the direction of the Klingon cloaking device from the Star Trek series. [A cursory look into the Star Trek archives suggests it's the Romulans who pioneered cloaking technology, not the Klingons, who may have simply stolen it, but that's an issue that lies beyond the scope of this article – in any case, the proof is left to the reader.]

The tetrahedron connection to Glotzer’s work is this: Starting with tiny tetrahedra composed only of a few thousand atoms and suspended in a liquid medium, they can self-assemble into ribbon-like lattices. Exposure to light causes these ribbons to twist. And it’s the twist that holds the potential for cloaking. The twist – or chiral property – makes a compound optically active. That is, it will rotate the plane of polarization of light that’s passed through it. Glotzer stressed that the key to these compounds is the starting shape of the nano-particles – it only works with tetrahedra.

Glotzer told The Chronicle that she’s focused on the purely scientific aspect of this work – she’s not hoping someday to run a private company manufacturing cloaking devices.

Groceries and Valentines

Glotzer’s perspective on tetrahedra is not that the densest packing of tetrahedra is the most interesting packing. Rather, it’s that an interesting packing of tiny tetrahedra is the one that results in a larger object with desirable properties.

It’s a similar principle that applies, for example, to packing grocery bags. The goal is not to fit as much as possible into each bag. The goal is to pack each bag so that the resulting larger object – the packed bag – has desirable properties. A commonly desired property of a packed grocery bag is that it will stand up on its own – a property that’s a function more of the way its contents are packed than of the bag itself, something that’s especially true with plastic grocery bags.

And in Ann Arbor, at least, properly packing “square bags” can lead to love. From a 2006 interview with former mayor of Ann Arbor Ingrid Sheldon, in which she describes how she met her husband, Cliff:

HD: So you were a checker at the Kroger in Lower Town and he was a produce clerk?

IS: He was. He was doing his management training. He had just gotten his MBA from Michigan and as a part of his training, he was anticipating going into finance, they had him work in the stores.

HD: So did this unfold … was it the break room, where you first met, or?

IS: It was five o’clock rush. And these were the old columns of numbers, you know, we didn’t have a nine-key or a ten-key. We had columns for one’s and ten’s and hundred’s. I was noted for being very fast! And for packing square bags! I could ring up blind, and do the division 3-for-79 in my head, and you had to just do it. So anyway, I turned around one day, during the five o’clock rush, and there was this scrawny kid, packing round bags slowly. Ugh! So, of course, I had to assist him. But I realized he was youngish and I thought maybe I ought to pursue this guy, and find out more about him, before I totally blow him off! … it was love in the produce aisle! … and we started dating.

Happy Valentine’s Day from The Chronicle.

More Photos

Additional photos from the thesis defense that could not be densely packed into the layout of the above text:

Prof. Jeffrey Lagarias, who chaired Elizabeth Chen's dissertation committee.

Julian Rosen, a graduate student in mathematics, holds the 17-er tetrahedral cluster he pasted together during the dissertation defense.

Igor Kriz, UM professor of mathematics and a member of Chen's thesis committee.

Elizabeth Chen distributes materials for the hands-on portion of her thesis defense presentation.

Tetrahedral die held by professor of mathematics David Winter.

Elizabeth Chen (far right) receives the verdict on the oral defense of her dissertation: she passed. Standing with documents (far left) is her committee chair, Jeffrey Lagarias. Standing to Chen's right around the corner from Chen is professor of chemical engineering Sharon Glotzer.

Matt Schroeder, president of the Ann Arbor firefighters Local 693, spoke to UM regents at their Sept. 17 board meeting about how possible firefighter layoffs could affect campus safety. (Photo by the writer.)

University of Michigan Board of Regents (Sept. 17, 2009): UM regents heard two presentations at their Thursday board meeting that closely linked the university and the community of Ann Arbor. Jim Kosteva, UM director of community relations, gave an update on the ways that the university is involved with the city, including payments as well as partnerships. And Matt Schroeder, president of the Ann Arbor firefighters Local 693, spoke during public comment on the possibility of additional layoffs among city firefighters and the potential impact it would have on the university.

Regents also heard several other reports and updates: from the director of the Life Sciences Institute; an architect working on the new basketball practice facility at Crisler Arena; and two alumni who hope to get the university more involved in an effort called Patriot Week.

And during her report on the board’s personnel, compensation and governance committee, regent Andrea Fischer Newman said that UM president Mary Sue Coleman had requested – and the committee agreed – not to raise Coleman’s salary this year.

We’ll begin with the issues most directly related to the Ann Arbor community: Kosteva’s report, and Schroeder’s public commentary.

Community Engagement

Cynthia Wilbanks, UM’s vice president for government relations, introduced Kosteva’s presentation by saying that in any relationship there are ups and downs, and that UM works to achieve more ups.

Kosteva cataloged several ways that the university interacted with the community, starting with UM’s relationship with the city government. UM and city staff meet monthly, he said, to discuss construction projects and other issues that might require planning and coordination. The university contributes about $125,000 annual to street repaving, he said, and is currently providing rent-free space for the Ann Arbor Police Department’s detective bureau, during construction of the city’s new municipal center.

UM partners with several government-related entities, Kosteva said, including the Downtown Development Authority and the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. He cited specific examples, such as the proposed Fuller Intermodal Transportation Station, the Forest Avenue parking structure (a joint DDA/UM project) and the M-Ride agreement, in which UM pays AATA to allow university students, faculty and staff to ride AATA buses without paying a fare when they board.

The university also pays the city about $8 million each year for water, sewer and stormwater fees, which Kosteva said represented about 20% of the city’s total water and sewer operating revenues. Connection fees that the university paid the city related to construction projects have increased four-fold over the past five years, and represent over 50% of the city’s total connection fees for that period. Examples include about $550,000 for the Kellogg Eye Center, $500,000 for the Biomedical Science Research Building, and $350,000 for the Cardiovascular Center.

Though the university is exempt from paying property taxes, they pay roughly $23 million annually in leases for space they occupy in privately owned off-campus buildings, Kosteva said. The university currently accounts for about 15% of the area’s occupied commercial lease market, he said.

For bus service, the university paid AATA over $1.073 million in fiscal 2009, Kosteva said. There were 2.2 million UM riders on the bus system during that year. Those ridership numbers, coupled with the university’s own bus system, leveraged $895,000 in federal funding for regional transit in fiscal 2009, he said.

In addition, other UM payments include the rental of parking lots and classrooms from the Ann Arbor Public Schools, and payments for Ann Arbor police services during home football games and other events, Kosteva said. He also listed partnerships between the university and local groups, including:

• the UM School of Education’s Spanish-language program with the Ann Arbor Public Schools;
• the Regional Alliance for Healthy Schools, also in partnership with AAPS;
• regional transportation efforts, including possible commuter rail;
• economic development through Ann Arbor Spark, to which UM contributes $350,000 annually;
• university spin-off companies and business incubator space;
• collaboration with the Ann Arbor Area Convention and Visitors Bureau to market and attract visitors to the city;
• support for the Washtenaw Health Plan and the Washtenaw Community Health Organization, a joint UM/Washtenaw County partnership;
• funding and in-kind assistance for a variety of cultural events, including the Ann Arbor Summer Festival and the Ann Arbor Art Fairs, and for local nonprofits like the Hope Clinic, Meals on Wheels and the Housing Bureau for Seniors, among others.

Kosteva concluded by citing several projects that are being discussed between UM and the city, including the possible closure of Monroe Street, the Fuller Intermodal Transportation Station, and the issue of easements and staging for the East Stadium Bridges replacement project.

It was the Stadium Bridges project that elicited the only question from a regent following Kosteva’s presentation. Andrew Richner asked what the time frame was for completion of that effort, an estimated $22 million project to reconstruct the current structurally impaired bridges that span South State Street and the Ann Arbor Railroad. [See previous Chronicle coverage for an update on that project.] Kosteva said he believes the city is planning to start construction next fall. “The sooner, the better,” Richner said.

Ann Arbor Firefighters

Speaking during public comment time at the end of the meeting, Matt Schroeder, president of the International Association of Firefighters Local 693, said that his union was concerned about the possibility of 14 layoffs and the possible closure of two stations, due to city budget cuts. They are currently in negotiations with the city, he said, and he was coming to the regents meeting to inform them of the situation. Statements from city administrator Roger Fraser about possible layoffs “send an alarming message to us regarding citizen safety and the safety of our crews,” he said, noting that layoffs would have a direct impact on their ability to provide basic services. There are currently 92 Ann Arbor firefighters.

Schroeder passed out a document that included information on national standards for fire ground staffing, as well as comparisons between communities in the Big Ten and throughout Michigan. Those comparisons looked at general population size, student populations, number of firefighters and equipment. Ann Arbor has the lowest number of career firefighters per 1,000 population of any community in the Big Ten, he said. All but Iowa City have more than 1.1 firefighters per 1,000 people – Ann Arbor has 0.804, a figure that would drop to 0.682 if 14 firefighters were eliminated.

He reminded regents that the university has many large buildings, and relies on Ann Arbor firefighters to respond. [The university does not maintain its own fire department and does not make regular payments to the city for fire service. It does provide rent and operating costs for a north campus fire station, on Beal Avenue near Plymouth Road, which is staffed by Ann Arbor firefighters. The university occasionally makes other contributions, such as $300,000 it paid in fiscal 2004 for a city fire engine.]

Regents expressed support for the issues that Schroeder raised. Regent Larry Deitch said that he was concerned, adding that no other group of people are more selfless and brave than firefighters. Deitch asked what the regents could do to help. Schroeder said that they just wanted to convey the current situation, and that they feel they can’t absorb additional layoffs.

Regent Denise Ilitch said that her sister had been involved in a fire at a Chicago hotel, and a firefighter had saved her life. Rest assured, she told Schroeder, that university officials will do whatever they can to make sure that people in Ann Arbor and students at UM are safe.

President’s Salary: No Raise This Year

Regent Andrea Fischer Newman reported that the board’s personnel, compensation and governance committee had evaluated UM president Mary Sue Coleman and were in unanimous agreement that she was a great president. Newman said she hoped that the Sept. 17 USA Today article, an obituary for NCAA president Myles Brand which mentioned Coleman as a possible successor, was “nothing more than sheer speculation.” Newman cited several accomplishments under Coleman’s tenure during the past year, including completion of a $3.2 billion fundraising campaign and the purchase of the former Pfizer research complex in Ann Arbor.

In recognition of the state’s economic climate, Coleman requested the board not give her a raise this year, Newman said, adding that they complied with that request. [Coleman receives $783,850 in total compensation, including a base salary of $553,500. Last year she received a 4% raise.] Coleman pointed out that none of her executive officers or deans had taken pay raises this year.

Regarding the NCAA job, Coleman said she hadn’t yet seen the article, adding “I’ve got the best job in the world. I just love it.” When someone pointed out that Walt Harrison, a former UM vice president for university relations, was also mentioned as a candidate for the job, Coleman said she thought he’d be great for that position.

Crisler Arena: Practice Facility

Don Dethlefs, CEO of the Denver-based architecture firm Sink Combs Dethlefs, showed regents the schematic designs – which they subsequently approved – for a $23.2 million basketball training facility at Crisler Arena. The two-story, 57,000-square-foot structure will include offices for men’s and women’s coaching staffs, locker rooms, two practice courts, film-viewing and hydrotherapy rooms, conditioning space and other amenities.

The design includes a “Hall of Fame” entry lobby on Crisler’s south side and a “champions” room overlooking the practice courts. These areas are envisioned for use in fundraising and other events. The lobby will be designed with a lot of glass walls and dramatic lighting, creating more of a “front door” to Crisler, Dethlefs said.

A tunnel will connect the facility to seating and the playing court at Crisler. Though the current project won’t include a roof plaza, Dethlefs said that the building will be designed to support such an addition in the future, and the athletic department hopes to eventually raise money to build it. The current project is expected to be finished in the fall of 2011. When the training facility is completed, the Crisler parking area will have about 100 fewer spaces.

Regent Andrea Fischer Newman asked for a report at some future date, giving a summary of all the construction projects that the athletic department has undertaken since Bill Martin took over as athletic director in 2000. Tim Slottow, UM’s chief financial officer, noted that a $3 million renovation to the UM football locker room in 2003 was the first investment after the department’s “difficult, dark days,” referring to the years when the department ran a deficit under the previous athletic director Tom Goss.

Other Construction Projects

The regents approved several other capital projects, with no discussion. They include:

• A $9 million electronic building access system. The university will install electronic card readers on the exterior doors of over 100 buildings on campus, which are currently locked and unlocked manually. The system will provide increased security, said Tim Slottow, UM’s chief financial officer, giving them the ability to remotely lock down buildings during emergencies, for example.
• Authorization to issue bids and award construction contracts on a $6 million soccer stadium – regents approved schematic designs for the project in June 2009.
• A $1.5 million infusion center at the East Ann Arbor Health and Geriatric Center.
• A $4 million project to upgrade the University Hospital emergency power system.

Life Sciences Institute

Early in the meeting, Alan Saltiel, director of the Life Sciences Institute, gave an update on the organization that was founded six years ago. When she introduced Saltiel, UM president Mary Sue Coleman said that he’d been inundated with calls since he announced his most recent research findings: A gene found in mice appears to control obesity. “Everyone wants to join the human clinical trials,” Coleman joked. Saltiel said his main job in life had become managing expectations.

The LSI started with the goal of recruiting a diverse group of top scientists who could work across disciplines to make new discoveries in the life sciences, Saltiel said. They now have 29 faculty with labs at the LSI building, with disciplines ranging from biology and bioinformatics to genetics and chemistry. In total, some 450 researchers work at LSI, including 150 students from across 14 different departments. They’ve secured over $150 million in research funding since the institute’s inception.

Collaboration is their mantra, Saltiel said. He cited his own research into the “obesity gene” – which long-term has potential to treat diabetes – as stemming from collaboration with several other researchers at the institute.

After Saltiel’s presentation, regent Martin Taylor asked whether the institute was the right size. Saltiel said that the building is full, but that it’s difficult to say whether it should be larger. Now, everyone knows each other, which makes it easier to collaborate. Coleman said that it’s a legitimate question to ask – the LSI model might extend to the North Campus Research Complex (NCRC), the new name for the 174-acre former Pfizer site that UM acquired earlier this year.

Research Funding

In his report to regents, Stephen Forrest, UM’s vice president for research, noted that the university had crossed a major threshold by logging a record $1.016 billion in federal research funding during fiscal 2009, which ended June 30. That’s up 9.4% from the previous year, he said, and includes only a very small amount – about $130,000 – of federal stimulus funding. Stimulus dollars will show up in the report for the current fiscal year, he said. So far, university researchers have been awarded $103.2 million in stimulus grants.

He joked that it took the university 192 years to reach the $1 billion mark, but he has set the goal of reaching $2 billion in eight years. “We’re well on our way,” he said.

Public Commentary

Patriot Week: Two speakers came to encourage UM to become engaged in Patriot Week, which ran from Sept. 11 through Sept. 17, Constitution Day. UM alum Michael Warren, an Oakland County circuit court judge and former member of the state board of education, said that he and his 10-year-old daughter, Leah Warren, came up with the idea for Patriot Week as a way to celebrate the country’s history and founding principles. Each day is dedicated to a different principle – such as the rule of law or equality – as well as a specific historical figure, founding document and symbol, as represented by a flag. He encouraged the university to embrace the event. [On a related sartorial note, Warren was wearing a bow tie with a stars-and-stripes motif.]

Accompanying Warren was David Weissman, who said he holds medical and undergraduate degrees from UM. He noted that Americans – even elected officials – score embarrassingly low on tests of civic knowledge and American history, and that it’s increasingly difficult to compete for attention to teach this information. Patriot Week is a focused approach to address this problem. He said they’d like to see UM host symposiums, student debates and celebratory events to mark the week, and to get students involved in partnerships with local high schools and elementary schools.

In response to a question from regent Andrew Richner, provost Terry Sullivan said that since 2005, the university has already been involved in events related to Constitution Week, which runs from Sept. 17-23. Specifically, she cited a panel discussion being held later that day at the law school, focused on court cases that have challenged the Constitution.

Department of Public Safety: Two people spoke on the same issue related to the DPS. Douglas Smith, a UM alumnus, spoke about the treatment of Dr. Andrei Borisov, whom Smith described as a whistleblower who was beaten by campus police then arrested for assaulting police officers. Smith said Borisov had been a research assistant professor in the university’s pediatrics department when a tenured faculty member took control of – and credit for – some of his work. Smith described a chain of events that he said led to several UM administrators conspiring to fire Borisov and prevent him from getting other jobs at the university. At one point, DPS officers escorted Borisov to his office to retrieve his personal property, Smith said, and ended up arguing with him about the contents of a briefcase, ultimately pushing him against a wall and charging him with trespassing. Smith said that Borisov discussed this incident with Stephen Hipkiss, chair of the DPS Oversight Committee, but that Hipkiss discouraged Borisov from filing a complaint against the officers. This matter should be investigated, Smith said.

Hipkiss also spoke during the time for public comment, and defended both the DPS and the oversight committee that he chairs. He described the committee’s role, and said that it was an advisory group, not a tribunal – they hear grievances, then make recommendations to the university’s chief financial officer, who has responsibility for the department. Hipkiss said that DPS has complied with all of the committee’s requests for information during the 11 years he has served on the committee. He disputed Smith’s claim that there’s not adequate oversight.

The media desk during the UM board of regents meetings. The bottle contains sanitizer for hands, not news reports. (Photo by the writer.)

Pfizer's Plymouth Road facility is largely vacated, except for the occasional snow angel.

Word about the University of Michigan’s plans to buy the former Pfizer research site had leaked out much earlier in the day, but UM regents waited until the end of their regular Thursday afternoon meeting before making it formal: The university will spend $108 million to buy the roughly 174-acre Plymouth Road complex, with plans to transform it into a major medical and scientific research hub. In the long term, university officials hope to add 2,000 jobs to the local economy over 10 years. But in the short term, the deal will take millions of dollars off the tax rolls for local governments at a time when they’re already anticipating budget shortfalls.

Comments made by regents and UM executives made it clear that they’d been considering this deal for some time. Local officials were informed either last night or this morning. Several interviewed by The Chronicle said they were concerned about the added financial strain – Pfizer paid a total of $12.5 million in taxes this year to various local entities, including about $4 million to Ann Arbor alone – but they were also optimistic that the UM purchase ultimately would help the local economy.

Details of the deal

UM will pay for the property – which includes nearly 2 million square feet of lab and office space in 30 buildings – primarily from reserves of the UM Health System, particularly funds set aside by the Medical School. A smaller portion of additional funding will come from investment income typically used for capital projects. The deal is expected to close sometime this summer. It’s the university’s largest property purchase since buying 300 acres for north campus in 1950.

The university has a general vision for the area, but hasn’t decided exactly what kinds of work will take place there, said UM President Mary Sue Coleman. The property, located on the city’s north side, is surrounded by land that’s part of UM’s north campus, which includes its College of Engineering. Its massive medical complex is just south of that area. Broadly, the university will use the Pfizer complex to provide research space, possibly for cell biology, stem cell, nanotechnology and other types of medical research. UM might move entire institutes or research centers there, but precise plans are expected to take 12-18 months to develop.

Bob Kelch, CEO of the UM Health System, speaks to reporters about the Pfizer property purchase.

Bob Kelch, CEO of the UM Health System and executive vice president for medical affairs, said the university has never had sufficient research space, a shortage that has hurt research productivity as well as recruitment. The Pfizer space will allow UM to develop more collaborative efforts, he said, both between different units within the university – such as engineering and medicine – and between the university and the private sector.

Several university officials hammered on the theme of economic development, saying that they were committed to helping the local, regional and state economy. “We’re living at the center of the economic contraction,” said Steve Forrest, vice president for research. Buying the Pfizer site sends a powerful message that the university is committed to the state, he said, and that it’s growing. Forrest added that UM plans to “aggressively” increase its partnerships with industry.

Regent Larry Deitch gave a bit of historical context for the deal, reminding the group that UM had sold Pfizer 55 acres of property for about $27 million in 2002, when Lee Bollinger was president. The university initially wasn’t interested in selling the land, Deitch said, but did so when they were told that if they didn’t, Pfizer would leave. “So we sold them the land, and they left,” he joked. But in crafting that deal, UM’s legal staff had added a clause that let UM retain rights to the land if Pfizer departed, as they eventually did. Deitch praised the staff for their foresight in that decision.

From left: Washtenaw County commissioner Mark Ouimet, Ann Arbor city councilmembers Leigh Greden and Margie Teall, and city administrator Roger Fraser watch as the regents discuss their decision to buy Pfizer property.

Local impact

Because the deal won’t likely close until mid-2009, Pfizer will still pay local taxes on the site next year. That gives local officials some breathing room as they face the loss of their largest taxpayer. (As a public institution, UM does not pay taxes.)

Of the $12.5 million in total local taxes paid by Pfizer in 2008, about $1.3 million went to county coffers. Washtenaw County prepares its budgets on a two-year cycle, and will begin looking at the 2010-11 budget early next year. The county had already projected lower revenues from a weak housing market that has dropped property taxes, “so now this is added to the mix,” said county administrator Bob Guenzel, who attended Thursday’s regents meeting. Pfizer taxes account for about 1% of the county’s $107 million annual budget.

Yet Guenzel said despite the challenge, he has confidence that UM is making economic development a priority, and that the purchase will pay off for the community in the long run. Guenzel also serves on the board of Ann Arbor Spark, the local economic development agency that’s been helping Pfizer shop the site around to potential buyers. He said he was informed of the purchase on Thursday morning, when he got a phone call from Jim Kosteva, UM’s director of community relations.

John Hieftje, Ann Arbor’s mayor, recently had coffee with Coleman but didn’t hear about the Pfizer deal until she called him Wednesday night. In 2008, taxes from Pfizer represented 4.85% of the total property taxes collected by the city. But Hieftje, too, believes the purchase will be good for the overall economy, especially if the jobs that UM hopes to add actually materialize.

UM President Mary Sue Coleman answers a reporter's question about the Pfizer property deal.

Responding to a question from a Michigan Radio reporter, Coleman said the university would have been happy if another buyer had come forward for the property. When Pfizer announced it was closing its Ann Arbor operation two years ago, she had been hesitant to pursue the property, in part because of concerns over the tax implications for the community. But the economy changed over that period, she said, making other buyers scarce. And as the university looked more closely at the property, they realized it was a better fit than they’d originally envisioned.

As the university’s research agenda and capacity increases due to the expansion into Pfizer’s site, they expect to hire more faculty, post-doctorate researchers and research staff, Coleman said. Those higher-paying jobs will benefit the economy, she said, noting that the same is true for jobs created as the result of partnerships with the private sector.

“And if we really cram people in there,” Coleman said, “maybe we can hire 4,000 people.”

Media coverage

Regents meetings normally don’t draw a lot of media attention, but UM put out a press release Thursday morning saying there’d be a “major announcement” at the meeting, and several news outlets, including The Chronicle, reported that the purchase of Pfizer’s research campus was on the table. So Thursday’s meeting was well attended by print, radio and TV reporters.

During the meeting, Regent Andi Fischer Newman apologized to Ann Arbor News reporter Dave Gershman, saying that he’d emailed her on Wednesday asking if the announcement was on Thursday’s agenda and she told him no – but what she didn’t say was “not at this time.”

Other news reports: Ann Arbor News, Ann Arbor Business Review, Detroit Free Press, Detroit News, Crain’s Detroit Business, Michigan Radio

The media mini-mob at Thursday's UM regents meeting.

Ann Arbor News reporter Stefanie Murray interviews Mike Finney, CEO of Ann Arbor Spark, in the UM Regents room on Thursday. News photographer Lon Horwedel is videotaping the interview.

Reporters Marisa Schultz from the Detroit News and Ryan Beene from Crain's Detroit Business work on stories following the UM regents meeting on Thursday.

Eliana Moya-Raggio, a Wall Street resident and former UM faculty member, explains her objections to UM's proposed parking structure. She spoke at a Tuesday evening meeting held at the Kellogg Eye Center.

There were two distinctly different agendas on view at Tuesday’s Wall Street neighborhood meeting, hosted by University of Michigan staff. University representatives, led by Jim Kosteva, were there to deliver information about environmental and safety issues related to the proposed UM expansion in that area. The neighbors wanted answers to questions they’d been asking for many months – and their frustration was palpable.

This was the second in a series of meetings organized by UM to discuss the planned expansion of its medical complex with neighbors. The current piece of that project calls for an office building, parking structure and transit center on Wall Street, just down the street from UM’s Kellogg Eye Center.

Kosteva, UM’s director of community relations, repeatedly used the phrase “regentally authorized project,” and that was one of the first things challenged by neighbors at Tuesday’s meeting. In response to a question, Kosteva said that in fact the regents had taken the first of three steps: At their September 2008 meeting, regents gave initial authorization for the $48.6 million project and for hiring an architect. (Several neighbors were also on hand at that meeting, which The Chronicle covered, to speak against the project.)

At some point the regents will have to vote on approving a schematic design and a “refined” budget, Kosteva said, then at a later date they’ll vote on the project’s final design and budget. Sue Gott, a university planner, said the schematic design will likely be presented to regents at their March meeting.

Though Kosteva and other UM staff members repeatedly said they wanted feedback and would take the neighbors’ concerns into consideration as the project moved forward, residents on Tuesday were decidedly skeptical. As Kosteva finished his introductory remarks, one neighbor asked whether he planned to respond to questions and concerns raised at the November meeting, which focused on transportation issues, parking and the university’s planning process. She said the neighbors had hoped for a dialogue, but that based on Tuesday’s agenda, it didn’t appear that previously raised issues would be addressed, and that was disappointing.

UM's Jim Kosteva, left, makes a point to Eugene Daneshvar, a board member of Riverside Park Place condominiums.

Kosteva said the university staff was thankful and appreciative of all questions and concerns, which he said had caused the staff to analyze and reflect on their plans. But he said they did not intend to respond to those issues at this meeting. Gott said that at the February neighborhood meeting they planned to bring together everything they’d heard and roll it into a discussion then.

When pressed on whether this meant that there was room for negotiation of the medical system’s master plan, Kosteva responded that they were working under regental guidelines and have made adjustments based on feedback, but he did not specify what those adjustments had been. The master plan – which calls for eventually two parking structures along Wall Street and as much as 900,000-square-feet of additional office, clinical and research space – was first introduced in 2005, though the university has been talking about expansion in that area since the mid-1980s, Kosteva said. The street is already being transformed with the $121 million, eight-story expansion of the Kellogg Eye Center.

Several neighbors said they understood and even supported the medical system’s expansion – except for the inclusion of the parking structures.

Tim Mortimer, a board member for the Riverside Park Place condominiums, asked whether alternative sites had been considered for parking, such as land along Fuller that’s being considered for a city transit station, or a surface lot at the corner of Huron Parkway and Glazier Way. When it became clear that the answer was no – Kosteva said the university was working with the city on the Fuller site, but that the projects were on “parallel tracks” and wouldn’t eliminate the need for parking on Wall Street – neighbors responded with frustration.

Eliana Moya-Raggio said that the needs of the university weren’t the only factor – UM should also consider the solid opposition of the people who live in the area. “Who are we – are we nothing?” she asked. “Do people have no importance in this project of yours?”

Mortimer said the university had time and opportunity to look at alternative sites for parking, but that they just aren’t doing it. “You’re polite and courteous,” he said, “but you’re not listening.”

A major point of conflict is the fundamentally different goals that UM and the neighbors hold for that part of Ann Arbor. The university is trying to address the needs of its staff, faculty and patients who come to the medical complex. John Ballew, who manages facility planning for the UM health system, said that access to parking is crucial for employee satisfaction, retention and recruitment. He said that the health system’s staff – which the university expects to grow – wants parking that’s close enough for them to access their cars, especially for people who work off-hour shifts, have kids or dependent adults, or who move between the medical campus to other parts of UM during the day. He said the timing is uncertain for the city’s “multi-modal” station on Fuller, which is envisioned as a hub for light rail and bus.

Residents have a much different goal for Wall Street and the larger Lowertown area. Ray Detter, chair of the Downtown Area Citizens Advisory Council, read a section from the city of Ann Arbor’s master plan, which describes the vision for Lowertown as a “pedestrian-oriented urban village.” The influx of traffic from one or two large parking structures runs counter to that vision, Detter said.

Those disparate goals were also evident in the university’s presentation of crime statistics related to parking structures. David Miller, UM’s executive director of parking and transportation services, provided data on crime at UM parking structures on Glen, Ann and Catherine streets, and noted that parking structures in residential areas have far fewer crime incidents than those near businesses. (For those three structures, with a total of about 2,000 spaces, there were nine incidents in 2007 – four traffic accidents, three property damage incidents and two larcenies from vehicles.)

Sabra Briere, a neighborhood resident and Ward 1 city councilmember, said those statistics were important for people who used the parking structures, but were less valuable for people who live near them. Residents would be concerned about crime near the structure, or about bike/car and pedestrian/car incidents.

Mortimer described the proposed Wall Street parking structure as “the worst of both worlds.” The parking is far enough away from the medical complex to require that people take a bus from the structure to their destination. Yet it creates traffic congestion as people drive their vehicles to a parking structure in an urban neighborhood.

Moya-Raggio also remarked on the oddity of discussing environmental concerns – part of the university’s presentation was about how it planned to deal with various issues like air quality for its bus fleet – while at the same time encouraging people to drive by providing more parking. “It’s a paradox,” she said. Miller replied, “It’s complicated.”

Ray Detter listens to Sabra Briere, a neighborhood resident and city councilmember for Ward 1. The ward's other council representative, Sandi Smith, also attended Tuesday's meeting.

A couple of residents from Kessler Commons, another condominium complex on Wall Street, warned others of what they’ll face during construction. They said the university has ignored efforts to compensate them or deal with property damage and noise from the expansion of the Kellogg Eye Center. “You need to be aware of the scope of what’s coming,” said one resident, who asked not to be identified in this article.

When asked what the city was doing, Briere said the city’s staff was talking to the university’s staff, and that the mayor, John Hieftje, had managed to meet with UM President Mary Sue Coleman, “which was momentous to him.” She added that the council had passed a resolution to encourage that level of communication. But ultimately, she said, the city has no authority to do anything, other than to prevent the university from using the street.

Sandi Smith, who also represents Ward 1 on city council, said that UM officials need to respect the 2,000 residents in the area, and not create a plan that has no relation to the city in which the university exists. Celeste Novak asked whether it would be possible for neighbors to meet with city staff about what’s happening on Wall Street, and Briere said she could arrange a meeting, possibly at Northside Grill after the holidays.

The next neighborhood meeting with UM is on Jan. 27, when university staff plans to present a schematic design for the project.

Reaction to the news from Ward 5 councilmember Carsten Hohnke was unambiguous: “The impact of removing $1.5 million from our tax rolls can not be overstated. I’m extremely disappointed that the University could not find a way to be a more creative and equitable partner with the city in this.”

Ann Arbor City Apartments

In the audience participation segment, Ray Detter reported on the previous evening’s meeting of the Downtown Area Citizens Advisory Council, at which Jon Frank of Village Green was a guest. Frank gave the DACAC an update on the Village Green’s Ann Arbor City Apartments project, which is a PUD proposal for the First and Washington site to be brought before planning commission at its Oct. 7 meeting. Detter reported some changes to the mixed-use, mixed income housing project.

• number of total units: increased from 146 to 156
• number of affordable units: increased from 15 to 16
• facade: changed from brick to corrugated metal
• parking spaces: public spaces increased by 2 spaces
• roof: addition of a roof deck that does not affect FAR (floor area ratio)

Later, reporting for the partnerships committee, Sandi Smith noted that a request from Village Green for $380,000 for 20 motorcycle parking spaces for the Ann Arbor City Apartments project had been turned down.

Underground Parking Garage

John Splitt, reporting for the capital improvements committee, announced that the revised site plans for the underground parking garage proposed at the library lot had been submitted on Sept. 25, and that the project would be presented at the city council work session on Oct. 13 starting at 7 p.m. The following day, Oct. 14, from 7-8:30 p.m. there will be a public open house in council chambers at the DDA office, 150 S. Fifth Ave. 3rd floor to introduce the public to the proposal.

Model of underground parking garage. View is from the west, Fifth Avenue running left to right in the foreground. Library Lane splits the block east to west. The model of the library (to the right) is not meant to depict the design of the new library. There is one nod to one possible design element for the new library: an entrance at the northwest corner.

Hotel Taxes Could Increase

Sandi Smith, reporting for the partnerships committee, brought a resolution to increase the county accommodations tax from 2% to the maximum rate allowed by the state, which is 5%. Smith said that most localities already collect at the maximum rate allowed. Dave DeVarti weighed in for a wording change to make the math clear: “an increase of 3%” was changed to “an increase to 5%”. Revenue from the tax is distributed between the Ann Arbor Area Convention and Visitors Bureau and the Ypsilanti Area Convention and Visitors Bureau based on the geographic location of hotels. This works out to be a roughly 75% (Ann Arbor) to 25% (Ypsilanti) split. In total dollars Ann Arbor’s share is about $1.2 million.

The final decision to increase the tax rate or not rests with the county board of commissioners. DeVarti asked if there was any discretion about what agencies received the money. Leah Gunn, who serves on the county board of commissioners, said that there was not that kind of discretion available under the state enabling legislation.

Parking: Demand Management and Rate Increases

Roger Hewitt, reporting for the operations committee, gave an update on the selection process for the new parking kiosks that serve multiple on-street spots, which will eventually replace conventional coin-fed meters at every parking space. The selection committee is visiting Milwaukee and Seattle where some of the models have been installed, to meet with staff responsible for service and maintenance.

The initial purchase of kiosks will be for 25 units, to be deployed in the State Street and Liberty Street area. Eventually, some 150-175 units are envisioned. The kiosks will be connected via a wireless system to be managed by 20/20 Communications and the city of Ann Arbor IT department.

The wirelessly communicating kiosks factor into future recommendations for parking rate increases, because they make possible the assignment of different rates to different areas of the street. Hewitt also spoke of the possibility of different areas of the same parking structure being charged at different rates. The upshot is that the 3-year proposal for rate increases, which is expected to be made at the November DDA board meeting, will be grounded in averages, not absolute rates.

University of Michigan Bus Station

As part of her report for the partnerships committee, Sandi Smith mentioned briefly a request from the University of Michigan for $50,000 to enhance the bus stop facility near North University Avenue and Washtenaw Avenue at Church Street, which had been punted by the committee for the time being as not within their particular purview, and in light of committee restructuring in November.

The item piqued the interest of John Hieftje, who wondered if the request had come directly from the university or had been conveyed directly to the DDA via the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. Answer: it came directly from the university. In response to a question about the scope of the project from Hieftje, Smith gave a total project budget of $1.9 million broken down as follows: $1 million, grant; $250,000, AATA; $470,000, split evenly between the city of Ann Arbor and the university to cover re-paving costs; $180,000, from miscellaneous community resources of which the university was kicking in another $130,000. It was the remaining $50,000 out of this $180,000 that the university had requested from the DDA.

Supportive Housing Services

Sandi Smith, reporting as the DDA representative to the County Taskforce on Sustainable Revenue for Supportive Housing Services, announced that a package of recommendations would be presented to the county board of commissioners at their work session on Oct. 16. Of the eight specific recommendations, the main goal to be brought forward was to fund 500 units at a cost of $5,000 per unit per year. One of the recommendations includes a Phase II task force to help implement the other recommendations. The package also includes a recommendation to explore endowment funding as well as a millage funding strategy.

Trees and Accounting

In the context of the discussion of the audited financial reports, which showed that the TIF maintenance fund had only been tapped for around half the amount it had been budgeted for, Dave DeVarti advised that he would like to address the perception among many in the community that trees lost to the emerald ash borer were not being replaced, because the money for tree replacement was being squirreled away for various and sundry pet projects. That perception could be addressed in part, DeVarti said, if the DDA could make sure that tree replacement in the district proceeded apace. John Hieftje said that city-wide the lost trees were being replaced at a rate of 5% per year. Susan Pollay said that the fact of successful replacement needed to be brought out more clearly.

Various suggestions were made to mitigate against the situation where invoices to be received could be tracked more efficiently, so that mis-matches between funds budgeted and funds spent would be less dramatic. These suggestions ranged from the idea of keeping a record of invoices expected even if they were not entered into the accounting system (Gary Boren) to the idea of building into vendor contracts a requirement that invoices be submitted by specific deadlines (John Hieftje). Susan Pollay expressed her commitment to better communication with Adrian Iraola, who manages many of the DDA projects.

DDA on TV

Russ Collins, reporting for the research and opportunity committee, floated the idea of webcasting or televising DDA board meetings, an idea that board chair Jennifer Hall is urging forward. John Hieftje noted that all of the major boards and commissions of the city are now televised and quipped that there was a clamor to have the taxicab board televised.

Until arrangements are made to bring more technology to bear on the challenge of making the content of meetings by the DDA board more accessible (a body that is responsible for millions of taxpayer dollars), Chronicle readers can rely on our notebook.

Present: Gary Boren, Russ Collins, Dave DeVarti, Leah Gunn, Jennifer Hall, Roger Hewitt, John Hieftje, Joan Lowenstein, John Mouat, Sandi Smith, John Splitt. Absent: Rene Greff.

Next board meeting: noon on Wednesday, Nov. 4 at the DDA offices, 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301.

Tom Partridge. Partridge makes clear who he’s talking to: “Members of the public at large, representatives of the media, I am Tom Partridge.” Media. That’s us, The Chronicle. When people speak directly to us, we listen. Partridge stressed the importance of electing Democrats in November, saying, “We need to support candidates who stand for progress – true progress.”

John Floyd. Floyd did not coin the phrase Charm Zone – he heard it at a recent planning commission working session – but he has embraced this term for the part of Ann Arbor built before World War II. He contends it’s what makes Ann Arbor different from Royal Oak or Novi and what gives Ann Arbor a strategic advantage in the worldwide market for intellectual capital.

Tom Wall. Wall, candidate for mayor of Ann Arbor in the November 2006 general election and again in the August 2008 primary, delivers a blistering assessment of John Hieftje’s appearance before the most recent University of Michigan Regents meeting, saying that it amounted to “political cover.” Hieftje had appeared in order to ask the Regents to pause the Wall Street parking structure project. In a different mood, Tom Wall might have been expected to make a joke about the name of the street (there’s no family connection). Tonight he’s dead serious. Wall suggests that the reason we don’t see a better cooperative relationship between the city and the university can be traced to the fact that Hieftje is employed by the university (job title: Intermittent Lecturer in Public Policy). Alluding to the label “irresponsible” that Hieftje had used to describe the no votes on the 42 North project at last council meeting, Wall said, “Irresponsible is serving two masters at once.” Later Hieftje would respond to Wall’s criticism during the meeting’s communications from council by citing previous mayors who had been professors or full-time staff at the university and by declaring that he had not been influenced by his university affiliation in making public policy decisions.

Communications from Council

Chris Easthope: Free Preliminary Breath Test (PBT) on Saturday, Sept. 27 on Main Street near The Ark. The idea is to help people understand where they are with respect to blood-alcohol level after they’ve been drinking.

Stephen Rapundalo and Leigh Greden: Both reported on their visit to Calgary for the International Downtown Association meeting from Sept. 11-14. Others on council attending were Margie Teall and Sabra Briere. Others who attended (not an exhaustive list) were Sandi Smith, Jayne Miller and Susan Pollay. Rapundalo highlighted (i) benchmarking opportunities for affordable housing, (ii) design of urban plazas and public spaces and (iii) tools to attract and retain young adults. Greden described a session on a high-tech application in parking (e.g., cell phone alert of impending parking meter expiration), affordable housing (consensus among Ann Arbor attendees was that Ann Arbor is way ahead of most places), and keeping downtown clean. In connection with this last point, Greden acknowledged its implementation was surely a ways off, but floated the idea of hiring college students as downtown ambassadors.

Hieftje: The mayor defended his relationship with the University of Michigan in light of the criticism leveled against him during public commentary, citing historical precedent and a recent resolution by council calling on cooperation “at the highest level” between the city of Ann Arbor and the university.

Marcia Higgeins: Expressed the view that council had made reasonable efforts to establish a cooperative climate and that the missing element could be found on the university’s end.

Agenda Items

Sidewalk vendor ordinance. Stephen Kunselman, who first raised the issue that prompted the revision to the existing ordinances, described the rationale behind it. It levels the playing field among vendors who remove their carts on a daily basis without using a public right of way as storage space, and ensures that carts are taken back to their commissaries for cleaning, plus prevents vehicles from driving up over sidewalk curbs – degrading curbside infrastructure and posing threats to pedestrians. Kunselman invoked the image of a vehicle-drawn hot dog cart hauled onto a sidewalk, scattering iPod-wearing UM students.

Higgins asked head of planning services Mark Lloyd to step forward. At the Sept. 8 meeting when the sidewalk vendor ordinance was given its first reading, she had pointed out two clauses in the ordinance that needed to be addressed before second reading (tonight). One involved the unintended prohibition of non-motorized towing of carts onto the sidewalk, and another involved a catch-all legal cover alluding to other parts of city code that the ordinance might contradict. The first issue had been addressed through striking of the phrase, but this revision to the language had come relatively late in preparation of materials for council. So Lloyd knew why Higgins had called him to the podium, and assured her that the latest revision reflected her concern from last meeting. Nope. Even though one sentence had been stricken, the other one had not. Higgins’ point was that if our city code as a whole is so unwieldy that not even city staff can examine it and determine definitively whether there is a conflict, this reflects a fundamental problem with the complexity of our code. She deplored the use of catch-all phrases like this as exacerbating the problem. (Below, the red-lined language is what had been stricken; the italicized portion had not.)

(10) Before any street or sidewalk occupancy permit is issued to an applicant proposing to sell or solicit for sale any food or produce for human consumption, certification must be received from the County Health Officer. For purposes of this subsection only, a non-motorized vendor cart or other similar non-motorized apparatus used for the sale or solicitation for sale of any food or produce for human consumption may be located on the sidewalk notwithstanding any other provision of the Ann Arbor City Code to the contrary. Provided, however, no person shall place or remove such a vendor cart or other similar non-motorized apparatus on or
from a sidewalk by driving or otherwise moving it over a curb.

Higgins’ effort to postpone the motion was unsuccessful, with attorneys on council (Greden and Joan Lowenstein) and the city attorney (Stephen Postema) embracing the language as useful. Greden: “I would leave that in there no matter what.” Passed.

Area, Height and Placement Standards. This was postponed indefinitely after Jayne Miller (Community Services Administrator) suggested that four to six months of additional conversations with citizens might be required. Postponed.

Rezoning of Dexter & Maple (northeast corner). Currently zoned as a parking district and fringe commercial district, the request was to change to a community convenience center. What is proposed includes an Aldi grocery store and other unspecified retail. Mike Anglin pointed out that this would be the view from Knight’s parking lot. Higgins sought clarification on a signage issue. Apparently Aldi will be seeking signage closer to the intersection, even though the store will be on the Knight’s side of the lot. First reading, passed.

Community Events funds disbursed. Allocation made from Community Events Fund to Ann Arbor Summer Festival in the amount of $17,800. Why now? In order to avoid leaving a balance in the Community Events Fund, and because the Summer Festival is closing their books at the end of the month. Passed.

Hotel at Briarwood. Approved without discussion.

133 Hill Street. This is a proposal for construction of a building that will house three 6-bedroom units. Some councilmembers voted yes only grudgingly, saying the student rental market targeted by such proposals is soft and that developers should not build such projects just because they’re the only kind of project banks will lend money for. Greden said, “Based on my review, it meets code … This market doesn’t exist to the extent developers believe it does. I’m begging the development community to reconsider what they’re doing.” Easthope echoed Greden’s sentiments, but also voted yes, saying that it was a difficult challenge, because zoning shouldn’t be changed to address what they felt was a misinterpretation of the market. Lowenstein, who had seen the project in more detail in her role as council representative to planning commission, was a bit more sanguine: “This will be one of the nicer things in the area. It will be a big improvement.” Kunselman was curious to know whether all the bedrooms would have egress windows – an apparent allusion to Zaragon Place, which is being built at the site of the old Anberay apartments, and features some interior bedrooms without windows. Passed.

Moveable Feast Building addition. Minor discussion. Passed.

Liquor for Quickie Burger. This was a transfer of a Class C license from Eguchi Corp. at 327 Braun to Quickie Burger at 800 S. State. Rapundalo asked for postponement citing various problems that needed to be addressed, among them the request for a sidewalk service area. Postponed.

Money for Avalon Housing Merger. Based on caucus preview, there is overwhelming sentiment in support of the merger between Avalon Housing Inc. and Washtenaw Affordable Housing Corp. Greden led off the discussion with a proposal to divide the $295,000 to be paid from the Ann Arbor Housing Trust Fund into two parts: $90,000 from the trust fund and $205,00 from the general fund, to be paid back to the general fund when the trust fund is infused with cash from future developments’ cash-in-lieu payments (e.g., Lower Town, Plymouth-Green, The Gallery). Higgins pressed Miller for an explanation of why council was only now hearing about the proposed accounting. Miller explained that the city had not expected that the Burton Commons project would be continuing and had expected to have some $400,000 more available. However, they had learned that same day that Burton Commons would move ahead. (Burton Commons is located on Burton Road near Packard and US-23, and is supposed to include 120 units of affordable housing.) Higgins proposed that the entire $295,000 amount be borrowed from the general fund instead of splitting accounts, noting that paying $90,000 out of the housing trust fund could jeopardize commitments to affordable housing. With the amendment to borrow all of the money from the general fund, to be paid back from the housing trust fund, the resolution passed.

Airport Layout Plan Update Approval. Assurances were given that this is not a proposal for a change in layout at this time. However, when that proposal does come, the 150-foot shift to the southwest of the runway will result in planes taking off earlier and thus flying higher than they do now in their initial flight path over residential areas to the northeast. Passed.

Public Commentary

Jim Mogensen stressed that when rezoning is undertaken, there is an underlying commitment by the city to build and maintain the infrastructure that is required to support that development which is allowed by the zoning. Mogeson drew on his afternoon’s research at the Bentley Historical Library to drive home the point that the questions faced in this regard are exactly the same questions confronted by city council 40 years ago.

Tom Partridge bookended the evening with a call for a true commitment to affordable housing, noting that the amounts of money discussed that evening paled in comparison to any single road project.

Miscellania

Noise. A variety of factors like custodial carts rolling down the hallway outside chambers, conversations in those hallways, the whirring of CTN cameras repositioning, the attendant background noise from people sitting in a room, plus microphones that don’t always pick up council people’s voices, all lead to an acoustical challenge in following what’s going on at a council meeting.

Bicycles. Heading off into the night on his bicycle after the meeting, Ron Suarez brought to a total of two the number of councilmembers The Chronicle has spotted in the wild on bicycles, the other being Mike Anglin. This could be stretched to three if Joan Lowenstein is counted, who was walking to her bike where it was locked at the Fourth and Washington parking structure

Present: John Hieftje, Ron Suarez, Sabra Briere, Joan Lowenstein, Stephen Rapundalo, Leigh Greden, Marcia Higgins, Chris Easthope, Mike Anglin. Absent: Margie Teall.

Next meeting: Monday, Oct. 6 at 7 p.m. in council chambers, 2nd floor of the Guy C. Larcom, Jr. Municipal Building, 100 N. Fifth Ave.