CITY OF ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 100 North Fifth Avenue, P.O. Box 8647, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48107-8647 www.a2gov.org Administration (734) 794-6210 Community Development Services (734) 622-9025 Parks & Recreation Services (734) 794-6230 Planning & Development Services - Building (734) 794-6267 Community Services Area Planning & Development Services - Planning (734) 794-6265 April 30, 2009 Noah Hall Executive Director Great Lakes Environmental Law Center Subject: Freedom of Information Act Request dated April 23, 2009 09-080 Hall Dear Mr. Hall: I am responding to your request under the Michigan Freedom of Information Act, dated April 23, 2009. Your request for "all records produced, prepared, or otherwise created by Ann Arbor City Council members during the City Council's February 17, 2009 meeting" is granted in part and denied in part. The information has been denied to the extent that the following redactions have occurred: 1. Information of a personal nature if public disclosure of the information would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of an individual's privacy. MCL 15.243(1 )(a) 2. Documents and portions of documents that constitute communications from attorneys in the City Attorney's Office to City staff and/or Council members. These documents are subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or work product privilege. MCL 15.243(1 )(g), (h) The City does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of the information provided. Rather, it provides the documents only to comply in good faith with the Michigan Freedom of Information Act, and not for any other purpose. Please note that for cost savings, the City has attempted to omit any records released as part of your previous request. Additionally, the City has attempted to avoid producing multiple copies of a document when more than one Council member produced it. Also, because of redactions, the City was unable to simply forward these documents electronically. If you receive written notice that your request has been denied, in whole or in part, under Section 10 of the Act, you may, at your option either: (1) submit to the City Administrator a written appeal that specifically states the word "appeal" and identifies the reason(s) for reversal of the disclosure denial; or (2) file a lawsuit in the circuit court to compel the City's disclosure of the record. If after judicial review, the circuit court determines that the City has not complied with the Act, you may be awarded reasonable attorneys' fees and damages as specified under the Act. The Michigan Freedom of Information Act specifically provides that a public body may charge a fee for searching for and copying a public record. The cost for copying the records is $7.86 payable to the City of Ann Arbor. The breakdown of the copying costs is as follows: 8 V2" x 11" copies Staff-time 37 pgs @ .05/page 30min @$12.02/hr $1.85 $6.01 $7.86 Upon receipt of this amount, the documents will be released to you. Your documents may be picked up in the Community Services Office (Sixth Floor, City Hall), Monday through Friday, between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., or alternatively, if requested, the documents will be mailed to you upon receipt of the stated cost plus postage (include additional cost of $4.80 for postage). Please mail your check to Steve Bartha at the address noted above. If you have any questions concerning this response, please contact Steve Bartha, City FOIA Coordinator, (734)794-6210, ext. 42198. Sincerely, Jayne S. Miller Community Services Administrator Elias, Abigail From: Carsten Hohnke [chohnke@a2gov.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 11:48 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: [Fwd: RE: Leigh Greden...] --------Original Message-------- Subject: RE: Leigh Greden... Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:43:11 -0500 From: Greden, Leigh To: Higgins, Marcia , Teall, Margie , Hohnke, Carsten , Rapundalo, Stephen , Smith, Sandi References: Now WHO did I pander to???!?!? *From:* Higgins, Marcia *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 9:38 PM *To:* Teall, Margie; Hohnke, Carsten; Greden, Leigh; Rapundalo, Stephen; Smith, Sandi *Subject:* RE: Leigh Greden... pulllinnggg awwwwaayyyyyy. He has crossed the finish line. The winner is LEIGH GREDEN! *From:* Teall, Margie *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 9:35 PM *To:* Hohnke, Carsten; Greden, Leigh; Rapundalo, Stephen; Smith, Sandi; Higgins, Marcia *Subject:* Leigh Greden... Out in front for the Golden Pandy! Carsten Hohnke Ann Arbor City Council Fifth Ward chohnke@a2gov.org (734) 369-4464 l Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Carsten Hohnke [chohnke@a2gov.org] Tuesday, April 28, 2009 11:47 PM Elias, Abigail [Fwd:.] --------Original Message-------- Subject: Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:59:34 -0500 From: Greden, Leigh To: Derezinski, Tony , Rapundalo, Stephen , Teail, Margie , Higgins, Marcia , Taylor, Christopher (Council) , Hohnke, Carsten Way to go Tony for reminding us about the old folks! Carsten Hohnke Ann Arbor City Council Fifth Ward chohnke@a2gov.org (734) 369-4464 2 Elias, Abigail From: Carsten Hohnke [chohnke@a2gov.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 11:46 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: [Fwd: RE: tomorrow...] --------Original Message-------- Subject: RE: tomorrow... Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 20:04:37 -0500 From: Greden, Leigh To: Hohnke, Carsten , Teall, Margie References: No postponement. It's not necessary. 1 person has a problem with 5th/Division... and remember... we already voted on this and approved it. *From:* Hohnke, Carsten ?Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:04 PM *To:* Teall, Margie; Greden, Leigh ?Subject:* RE: tomorrow... I mentioned it to Sandi. Said she preferred no postponement, but might be OK with date certain. *From:* Teall, Margie *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:56 PM *To:* Greden, Leigh; Hohnke, Carsten ?Subject:* RE: tomorrow... She told me what you said, and she was not happy... I think she does care. Does Sandi know what's going on? *From:* Greden, Leigh *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:55 PM *To:* Teall, Margie; Hohnke, Carsten ?Subject:* RE: tomorrow... She said she doesn't. 8 ?From:* Teall, Margie *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:50 PM *To:* Greden, Leigh; Hohnke, Carsten *Subject:* RE: tomorrow... She cares... *From:* Greden, Leigh *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:49 PM *To:* Teall, Margie; Hohnke, Carsten ?Subject:* RE: tomorrow... Yup. And against Hewitt and maybe Gunn. I told her that. She doesn't care. *From:* Teall, Margie *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:49 PM *Toi* Greden, Leigh; Hohnke, Carsten ?Subject:* RE: tomorrow... Doesn't that put her squarely against Sandi? *From:* Greden, Leigh ?Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:46 PM *To:* Teall, Margie; Hohnke, Carsten *Subject:* RE: tomorrow... She's against 5th/Division and wants time to work on excluding that. What is the rate setting mtng? Parking rates?? *From:* Teall, Margie *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:44 PM *To:* Hohnke, Carsten *Cc:* Greden, Leigh ?Subject:^ RE: tomorrow... But why? *From:* Hohnke, Carsten *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:43 PM *To:* Teall, Margie *Subject:* RE: tomorrow... Marcia! ?From:^ Teall, Margie 9 *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:41 PM *To:* Hohnke, Carsten ?Subject:* RE: tomorrow... No. Why is anyone thinking about it? *From:* Hohnke, Carsten *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:40 PM ?To:* Teall, Margie ?Subject:^ RE: tomorrow... I'll be there. Thanks for the reminder. Are you supportive of postponing the structure? ?From:* Teall, Margie *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:39 PM *To:* Hohnke, Carsten *Subject:* tomorrow... Are you thinking of going to the Rate Setting meeting tomorrow? I think it would be good for you to go (good for the committee!) Carsten Hohnke Ann Arbor City Council Fifth Ward chohnke@a2gov.org (734) 369-4464 10 Elias, Abigail From: Carsten Hohnke [chohnke@a2gov.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 11:46 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: [Fwd: RE: tomorrow...] --------Original Message-------- Subject: RE: tomorrow... Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:56:33 -0500 From: Greden, Leigh To:J Teall, Margie , Hohnke, Carsten References: I was only telling her the truth. *From:* Teall, Margie *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:56 PM *To:* Greden, Leigh; Hohnke, Carsten ?Subject:* RE: tomorrow... She told me what you said, and she was not happy... I think she does care. Does Sandi know what's going on? ?From:* Greden, Leigh *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:55 PM *To:* Teall, Margie; Hohnke, Carsten ?Subject:* RE: tomorrow... She said she doesn't. *From:* Teall, Margie *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:50 PM *To:# Greden, Leigh; Hohnke, Carsten ?Subject:* RE: tomorrow... She cares... *From:* Greden, Leigh n ?Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:49 PM *To:* Teall, Margie; Hohnke, Carsten ?Subject:* RE: tomorrow... Yup. And against Hewitt and maybe Gunn. I told her that. She doesn't care. *From:* Teall, Margie *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:49 PM *To:* Greden, Leigh; Hohnke, Carsten *Subject:* RE: tomorrow... Doesn't that put her squarely against Sandi? *From:* Greden, Leigh *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:46 PM *To:* Teall, Margie; Hohnke, Carsten *Subject:* RE: tomorrow... She's against 5th/Division and wants time to work on excluding that. What is the rate setting mtng? Parking rates?? *From:* Teall, Margie *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:44 PM *To:* Hohnke, Carsten *Cc:* Greden, Leigh *Subject:* RE: tomorrow... But why? *From:* Hohnke, Carsten *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:43 PM *To:* Teall, Margie *Subject:* RE: tomorrow... Marcia! *From:* Teall, Margie *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:41 PM *To:* Hohnke, Carsten *Subject:* RE: tomorrow... No. Why is anyone thinking about it? *From:* Hohnke, Carsten *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:40 PM *To:* Teall, Margie 12 ?Subject:* RE: tomorrow... I'll be there. Thanks for the reminder. Are you supportive of postponing the structure? *From:* Teall, Margie *Sent:* Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:39 PM *To:* Hohnke, Carsten *Subject:* tomorrow... Are you thinking of going to the Rate Setting meeting tomorrow? I think it would be good for you to go (good for the committee!) Carsten Hohnke Ann Arbor City Council Fifth Ward chohnke@a2gov.org (734) 369-4464 13 Elias, Abigail From: Carsten Hohnke [chohnke@a2gov.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 11:43 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: [Fwd: RE:]- --------Original Message-------- Subject: RE: Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:35:05 -0500 From: Smith, Sandi To: Hohnke, Carsten To: Hohnke, Carsten , Higgins, Marcia CC: Greden, Leigh R. References: I would be honored. I've never been the recipient of the Pandy. But alas, Marcia would have done the same for our honored Friends of the Woods. I am afraid I cannot accept. The Pandy is open for tonight! -----Original Message----- From: Carsten Hohnke [mailto:chohnke@a2gov.org] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 5:18 PM To: Higgins, Marcia; Teall, Margie Cc: Greden, Leigh R. Subject: [Fwd: Update to Council Packet for 2/17] "The February 17 packet has been updated to include INT-1 Dicken Woods 5th Anniversary." Is this the first pre-Council meeting Golden Pandy? --------Original Message-------- Subject: Update to Council Packet for 2/17 Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:07:27 -0500 From: Beaudry, Jacqueline To: Anglin, Mike , Beaudry, Jacqueline , Bowden (King), Anissa , Briere, Sabra , Dempkowski, Angela A , Derezinski, Tony , Fraser, Roger , Greden, Leigh , Hieftje, John , Higgins, Marcia , Hohnke, Carsten , Postema, Stephen , Rapundalo, Stephen , Schopieray, Christine , Smith, Sandi , Taylor, Christopher (Council) , Teall, Margie Hi: The February 17 packet has been updated to include: INT-1 Dicken Woods 5Ath Anniversary. 33 The link includes the current agenda. There are no associated attachments with this item. Jacqueline Beaudry City Clerk City of Ann Arbor Please note new phone number: 734-794-6140 (p) 734-994-8296 (f) Carsten Hohnke Ann Arbor City Council Fifth Ward chohnke@a2gov.org (734) 369-4464 Carsten Hohnke Ann Arbor City Council Fifth Ward chohnke@a2gov.org (734) 369-4464 34 Page 1 of 8 Smith, Sandi From: Smith, Sandi Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 8:36 PM To: Pollay, Susan Cc: Subject: RE: LIBRARY PARKING LOT PROPOSAL (again!) Attachments: Good idea. I think we are back on again. Sandi Smith Ann Arbor City Council First Ward 734-302-3011 —Original Message----- From: Susan Pollay [mailto:SPollay To: "Pollay, Susan" Sent: 2/17/09 5:35 PM Subject: FW: LIBRARY PARKING LOT PROPOSAL (again!) Susan, See Karen's comments below. She seems terribly misinformed. It may be wise to make sure that the presentation addresses most of these concerns. I have been hearing the same mis-information all day. Sandi Smith Ann Arbor City Council First Ward 734-302-3011 From: C. Robert Snyder [mailto:a Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 2:14 PM To: Hieftje, John; Anglin, Mike; Smith, Sandi; Greden, Leigh; Rapundalo, Stephen; Higgins, Marcia; Derezinski, Tony; Briere, Sabra; Taylor, Christopher (Council); Teall, Margie; Hohnke, Carsten Cc: 4taMflfeMBMBpAnn Arbor Neighborhoods Subject: LIBRARY PARKING LOT PROPOSAL (again!) https.7/vvTO.a2mi.org/exch^ 4/28/2009 Page 2 of 8 Please note: this is a re-send of a message sent this morning which "bounced back". Apologies to those who did already receive It! For what ifs worth, a little more verbiage has been added!) Dear Mayor Hieftje and City Council Members, I presume all of you have seen the message, below, from Karen Sidney. It has been circulating widely (some of you might say "wildly") among the members of the various neighborhood groups. I can neither refute it nor defend the logic and economics of the proposed underground parking structure (Item PH-6 on tonight's agenda). I would welcome any point by point rebuttals from Council members to Karen Sidney's communique. I have also read the request for delaying Council's vote on PH-6 sent to all of you by Steve Bean (a copy of which Is pasted below Karen Sidney's message). I'm neither in favor of nor against the proposal that's on tonight's Council agenda. I know too little about it (that's both my problem and alsothe City's/Council's "problem") to say definitively it's good/it's bad. But I do know it's another hot potato that's going to be tossed around, esp. In these very tough economic times. To date, no one either in the City administration, the Council, or DDA has connected all the dots regarding Ann Arbor's downtown development, D1-D2, A2D2 and revenues, assessments, taxes locally or nationally. I do know that we're in the midst of one horrendous economic meltdown and that Ann Arbor, despite it's top-of-the-food-chain reputation, is and will not be immune. Let's at least let this highly expensive and volatile project sit on Council's table for the next several monthly Iterations while and until we see how we ~ the city, state, and nation - are doing. I strongly support Mr. Bean's request and ask that a vote for approval/disapproval not occur at tonight's meeting. Thank you! Bob Snyder South University Neighborhood Association 525 Elm Street https://wm.a2mi.org/exchange/SSmith/Inbox/Parking/FOI A/RE:%20LIBRARY%20PAR... 4/28/2009 Page 3 of 8 734-665-5524 LIBRARY LOT PARKING STRUCTURE ECONOMICS - Karen Sidney On February 17, 2009, Ann Arbor city council is expected to take the first step to authorize up to $55 million in debt for a new $56.4 million underground parking structure next to the downtown library. GET INFORMED AND LET COUNCIL KNOW WHAT YOU THINK. About 25% of the cost of the structure is for things that encourage future development, such as a new service alley, a new water main and supporting columns sufficient to hold a 25 story building. Taking on this expensive new parking structure will mean the DDA cannot do much else. DDA projections show less money for things like alleys and sidewalks, grants for things like Get Downtown, the Neutral Zone and merchant's associations, and replacing and maintaining downtown trees. According to DDA projections, the new structure will generate about $2 million in annual revenue and the annual bond payments will range from $2.6 to $3.7 million. If you consider operating costs and the lost revenue from the present surface lot, the new structure will require an additional $2-$3 million per year in revenue. That revenue comes from two sources. The first is additional tax revenue from new downtown projects. DDA projections assume that by fiscal year 2012, 28% of the total taxes captured by the DDA will come from 4 projects: Liberty Lofts, Ashley Terrace, 411 Lofts and Zaragon Place. If any of these projects experience financial difficulty because of the slump in the commercial real estate market, the actual taxes from these projects will be less than projected. The other source of revenue is parking rate increases. The DDA wants to raise street meters to $1.40 per hour and permits to $145 per month. Those increases do not include anything for Council's request to have the DDA parking system continue to pay $2 million per year. Continuing the $2 million payment would require an additional 12% increase in revenue over current levels. Predicting future revenue is difficult and the answer varies with the assumptions. For example, the latest DDA projections show about $2 million in revenue from an 845 space structure on the Library lot. Projections done about 6 months earlier, using higher parking rates, showed only $1.6 million in revenue from a 900 space structure. The latest plan is that the structure will have 777 spaces. https://wm.a2mi.org/exchange/SSmi^ 4/28/2009 Page 4 of 8 DDA projections assume that demand will not drop. However, if higher rates cause businesses to flee to office space with free parking, or If higher parking rates deter shoppers, those assumptions will not hold up. If businesses did not consider the cost of parking, the city would not have had to promise Google 600 free spaces to locate downtown. It would also be unnecessary to build a $56.4 million parking structure to attract development, such as a new convention center. Because campus area structures are the most heavily used, the DDA assumes it can maintain parking revenue by renting to students. But if student parkers don't fill the revenue hole, the shortfall will have to be made up by the city's general fund. That means service cuts or a tax increase. MESSAGE FROM STEVE BEAN FOLLOWS: Dear council members, I'm writing to ask that you - postpone action on the proposed underground parking structure at the "library lot", - request a comprehensive presentation by the DDA on its parking availability data for the structures as well as on its parking demand management efforts, and - perform a more extensive analysis of the presumed need for the structure and possible alternatives before approving its construction. I believe that a delay is fully justified given the state of the economy, the upcoming addition of several hundred new parking spaces elsewhere downtown, the incomplete implementation of alternatives for managing peak parking demand, the lack of consideration of environmental impacts (such as greenhouse gas emissions) from increasing parking supply, and the likelihood of a permanent decrease in parking demand early in the lifetime of the proposed structure. (The last two might seem contradictory, but any increase in emissions, no matter how short-lived, would be very detrimental.) The Executive Summary of the City's Draft Transportation Plan Update report states that 'The Cityrjs vision is to become more transit-oriented, bike-friendly, and pedestrian-friendly, and less reliant on fuel consumptive forms of motorized travel." The proposed underground parking structure would be entirely counterproductive to that vision as well as to other of our environmental goals. More than 100 new on-street parking spaces are about to be added to 5th and Division streets, through the heart of downtown, and close to 200 new public spaces will become available when the parking structure for the City Apartments development at 1st & Washington is completed. The need for more capacity beyond that has questionable basis. The 2007 Ann Arbor Downtown Parking Study report by Nelson/Nygaard Consulting Associates ( http://www.a2dda.org/downloads/Phase II Part 6.pdf ) recommended the formalization of processes for both funding new parking and determining when new supply is needed. It also recommended that "parking https://wm.a2mi.org/exchange/SSmitMnbox/Parkmg/FO 4/28/2009 Page 5 of 8 demand management options be exhausted" before undertaking new construction or instituting higher rates. The City has not followed these recommendations, nor have more than a few of the eighteen "Immediate Actions" listed in the report been implemented. Those that have been pursued, such as the DDA's experiment with valet parking at the Maynard structure, are just getting underway and have insufficient results to evaluate at this point. Meanwhile, both new construction and rate increases are proposed to be undertaken simultaneously. The technology and data available to the DDA on the parking system have opened opportunities for improved service as well as better load management. However, to my knowledge, load balancing has yet to be explored. Likewise, other resources, such as the surplus spaces in underutilized private surface lots, have not been considered for near-term peak demand management. Meanwhile, the getDowntown program has compiled an impressive record of success with its initiatives. For example, the number of golpass trips has increased each of the last four years, by an overall increase above the base year (2003-2004) of more than 35%. Unfortunately, AATA is now considering a rate increase for bus riders. The most likely outcome with regard to ridership of such a change would be for some users to find alternatives (perhaps even going back to commuting by car and parking in the structures.) The 2007 Annual Report of AATA ( http://www.therlde.org/pdf/AnnualReport2007.pdf ) noted that "over 80% of evening downtown workers reported that they park at on-street meters." Clearly, the lack of coordination between our parking and transit systems threatens our efforts to achieve our community goals and has much room for improvement before we resort to adding expensive capacity to handle peak demand. One alternative would be for a portion of the funds that would otherwise be used to build and maintain the parking structure to be redirected so that the bus system can be improved without raising fares. While U-M president Mary Sue Coleman has stated that the university does not "do" payment in lieu of taxes, they do contribute to AATA's operating budget. The City and AATA could make a very strong case to the university that similarly increasing its funding to the transit system would be In their interest as well. It also might enable a greater integration of the AATA and university bus systems. Below I've provided responses (including some components of possible alternative approaches) to comments IVe heard or read regarding this issue. Thank you for your consideration and your valuable service to our community. I'll gladly respond to any questions. (I had hoped to attend the caucus meeting on Sunday in order to discuss this, but learned on Saturday that it had been cancelled.) Steve Bean - People will continue to drive cars. Yes, but less than in the past. Oil supply is expected to decline 2-4%/year minimum (and as high as 7%/year), beginning as early as 2010. That translates to an expected price increase of between 8%/year and 40%/year. Assuming a fairly conservative cost increase of 20% per year, in order to maintain zero net increase in fuel cost for driving, the owner of a car that currently gets 20 mpg would have to somehow get at least 24 mpg next year and almost 50 mpg five years from now. Five years later, they'd need to be getting almost 124 mpg. The historical turnover of the US vehicle fleet is about 15 years. On top of the higher cost for driving, most other expenses will go up, making the purchase of new vehicles even less affordable. The 2006 parking study data are already out of date with regard to these changes and trends. (While demand in the US decreased in June 2008 by 388,000 barrels/day, it increased by 475,000 barrels/day https://v^.a2rm\org/exch^ 4/28/2009 Page 6 of 8 in China, more than offsetting the demand reduction |ferj:p://www.gulmews.com/business/Oil and Gas/10230996.html .] The number of cars in China in 1993 was less than 750,000. By 2004 the number had reached 6 million. By 2005, 8 million; by 2007, 20 million. Due to that Increased global demand, coupled with the coming decline in supply, gas prices will continue to rise unless drivers respond with drastic cuts in driving.) When cars In use eventually do become smaller on average, more on-street spaces could be created, possibly by 10% or more. When people begin driving less, more existing traffic lanes could be converted to parking in order to compensate for any loss of spaces if surface lots are lost to development. Q: How many such potential spaces are there? - The parking structure would pay for itself over its lifetime through parking fees received. While the current system pays for itself, the individual structures don't pay for themselves. They're essentially subsidized by the surface lots and on-street spaces. Furthermore, if parking demand declines soon, the structures will become even greater financial sinks. In any case, this assertion doesn't take into account the opportunity cost compared to the alternatives. One alternative is to leave the existing surface lot. Another would be to sell the land to a private developer and receive both the sale price and the subsequent tax payments. In economic terms, the proposed structure may be the worst of those three scenarios, especially if insufficient resources remain for the necessary development of a sustainable infrastructure. - If parking demand decreases, the DDA can close surface lots and remove older structures from service, which would free up those sites for more productive uses. A distinction needs to be made between short-term and long-term parking needs. Most of the long-term parking is in the structures. Eliminating surface lots may not be appropriate if most of the demand decrease is for long-term parking, which seems likely (or at least more desirable.) Eliminating parking structures before the end of their useful life would be wasteful if it could possibly be avoided. Eliminating them at all will require skillful management of the system (much like the situation we now face), primarily because the reduction in spaces would need to occur in large blocks. Furthermore, the surface lots have the highest demand throughout the day and charge the highest rates. The impact of eliminating such spaces in favor of keeping structure spaces (including underground ones) hasn't been fully considered. The new surface lot at the old Y site plus the new on-street spaces to be added on 5th and Division will provide about 200 spaces for short-term use. More permit spaces could be made available in the existing structures by using the improved parking system data and technologies to manage the capacity at 90% or higher rather than the recommended 85%, at least until new rates are implemented and future demand trends become clearer. The DDA could provide coordination services to match commuters with private lot owners to take advantage of their large surplus of (widely distributed) unused spaces. The parking study contains a recommendation to that effect. This would also provide an economic benefit to existing downtown businesses. - We need more parking to attract new businesses to downtown. While some potential employers would prefer to have publicly provided parking for their employees, others might prefer their employees to use a reliable transit system with adequate backup services, such as guaranteed ride home. Smaller businesses and those with a commitment to community sustainability may not have the expectation of subsidized parking. Our challenge isn't to beat the malls and the townships at the parking game, it's to envision and create a ht^s://wm.a2mi.org/exchange/SSm 4/28/2009 Page 7 of 8 downtown that's better and more attractive to potential residents, businesses, and visitors than the current one. The parking study report duly notes the need for things like keeping sidewalks clear of snow, for example. Parking will continue to play a role, but a declining one and only one among many. In terms of value to downtown businesses, the best opportunity may very well lie in attracting more visitors on days and times when the parking system is underutilized. - The DDA has a 1000+ person waiting list for parking permits which the new structure could address. We don't know enough about those people's current situations to assess the value to them'of a structure at this site (as far as I'm aware.) Are they even still looking for a permit since getting on the list? Would they like to park at this site? What are they doing now to meet their parking/commuting needs? Do they want a permit because it's cheaper than where they're currently parking? How much are they willing to pay? Even if that demand does currently exist, a new parking structure would be a 50-year-lifetime fix to a problem that might only exist for 5 years or less. More information is needed on the status of the waiting list before making a large long-term investment. - Of course we need to support all the alternatives-and we do, but we need more parking too. The two are at cross purposes, with the alternatives moving us toward sustainability and the construction of more parking spaces moving us away from it. If demand for more parking truly exists at this time, It's a demonstration that the investments in alternatives haven't been sufficient to offset the past and current subsidies for parking and single-occupant-vehicle use, and that the price of parking is too low. If we ultimately need a sustainable transit system (and we do), investing in the current unsustainable system is a waste of valuable resources, especially if it doesn't end up paying for Itself. - Providing parking downtown for potential employers will result in jobs to help Ann Arborites who are suffering through home foreclosures and other economic difficulties. Building an underground parking structure isn't a quick fix. Construction will take time and result in a temporary decrease in parking supply in the short term. If parking really is that important and a crisis exists, there are other means of addressing it more quickly and directly. In the longer term, ifs very difficult to estimate the value of downtown parking to specific individuals. (Also, it's debatable how much can be done locally to address problems that result from economic issues rooted more at the state and national levels.) From the perspective of an employer/commuter, a $5/year go! Pass is far more affordable than a $1500/year parking permit. Improving the affordabllity of downtown employment for the currently employed is far more within the DDA's Influence than providing a solution to the others. - Parking belongs underground. Yes, for new, private developments for overnight storage, putting the parking spaces underground makes good sense. Also perhaps for new public developments (e.g., government facilities) where long-term parking is necessary. However, constructing underground parking to replace aboveground structures before their end of life would be a waste of existing resources (assuming that existing parking supply distribution is adequate, and even lacking that it would be questionable.) Likewise, existing resources (i.e., private surface lots, driveways, and public streets) should be maximized to meet parking needs before building a new structure. - An underground parking structure at this site will be good for the library. The 2008 library users survey results ( http://www.aadl.orq/buildings/downtown/surveyresults ) indicate that the addition of an underground structure would result in more people parking at the site than currently use the surface lot (see questions 10 and 16.) However, it's not clear to what extent those people would increase use of the library, nor to what extent they would increase their number of trips downtown. Parking supply was identified as a problem by only about 10 of the more than 6000 survey participants. (Question 1 asked about the importance of adequate httos://wm.a2mi.org/excha^ 4/28/2009 Page 8 of 8 parking, not about the need for more.) Without more information we can't adequately assess the value of the proposed structure to library users (or to downtown in general, for that matter, at least not from the survey results.) Library Lane seems to be desired by the library board and staff, but its creation doesn't necessarily rely on the underground structure. Alternatively, if (as I've suggested we could explore) the transit center were moved to the library lot (possibly incorporating the Greyhound station) and a new library building were constructed on the current transit center site, the 4th & William structure (which typically has hundreds of available spaces during the day) could be used for library patron parking and 4th Avenue or a mid-block cut-through could be use for drop-off at the library. - The proposed structure would result in 600+ new spaces for a cost of approximately $50,000 per (constructed) space. If the structure Is planned to be managed at 85% capacity, the projected cost per used space would need to be increased by 15% to get a cost/benefit value as opposed to a number used for comparison purposes. If parking demand declines during the lifetime of the structure, the cost per used space would increase (either for this structure or for others.) - This structure could enable the development of a convention center. Convention centers are historically financial losers (or so I've heard.) With the current economy and peak oil near if not already behind us, a convention center could be a very poor choice for downtown's future. https://wm.a2rri.org/exchange/SSm 4/28/2009 Page 1 of 1 Smith, Sandi _ From: Smith, Sandi Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 8:27 PM To: Higgins, Marcia Cc: Subject: RE: I won't be asking for a postponement Attachments: ;-) Sandi Smith Ann Arbor City Council First Ward 734-302-3011 From: Higgins, Marcia Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:27 PM To: Briere, Sabra; Smith, Sandi Subject: I won't be asking for a postponement hrtos://wm.a2mi.org/exchange/S^ 4/28/2009 Page 1 of2 Smith, Sandi _ From: Smith, Sandi Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 8:18 PM To: Hohnke, Carsten Cc: Subject: RE: Parking Structure "Resolution Amendment Attachments: I believe you want the amendment to say 677. Sandi Smith Ann Arbor City Council First Ward 734-302-3011 From: Hohnke, Carsten Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:17 PM To: Smith, Sandi Subject: RE: Parking Structure Resolution Amendment That's the number on the agenda. From: Smith, Sandi Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:10 PM To: Hohnke, Carsten Subject: RE: Parking Structure Resolution Amendment Your document shows 785 spaces... Sandi Smith Ann Arbor City Council First Ward https://wm.a2mi.org/exchange 4/28/2009 Page 2 of 2 734-302-3011 From: Hohnke, Carsten Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:36 PM To: Beaudry, Jacqueline; *City Council Members (All) Subject: Parking Structure Resolution Amendment Colleagues, attached is mark-up of the amendments I plan on offering for your consideration on the parking structure (DB-2) https://wm.a2mi.org/exchange/SS 4/28/2009 Page 1 of 1 Smith, Sandi _________ _________ _ _ From: Smith, Sandi Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 8:10 PM To: Hohnke, Carsten Cc: Subject: RE: Parking Structure Resolution Amendment Attachments: Your document shows 785 spaces... Sandi Smith Ann Arbor City Council First Ward 734-302-3011 From: Hohnke, Carsten Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:36 PM To: Beaudry, Jacqueline; *City Council Members (All) Subject: Parking Structure Resolution Amendment Colleagues, attached is mark-up of the amendments I plan on offering for your consideration on the parking structure (DB-2) https://w.a2mi.org/exchange/SSm 4/28/2009 Page 1 of 1 Smith, Sandi From: Smith, Sandi Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 8:07 PM To: Greden, Leigh Cc: Subject: RE:. Attachments: Excellent! Sandi Smith Ann Arbor City Council First Ward 734-302-3011 From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:07 PM To: Smith, Sandi Subject:. No postponement! https://v^.a2mi.org/exchange/SSrm^ 4/28/2009 RE: Page 1 of 1 Elias, Abigail From: Derezinski, Tony Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 3:52 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: . From: Derezinski, Tony Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 10:01 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: . As it happens, today is my 67tn birthday—ergo, personally verified, data based decisionmaking From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:00 PM To: Derezinski, Tony; Rapundalo, Stephen; Teall, Margie; Higgins, Marcia; Taylor, Christopher (Council); Hohnke, Carsten Subject: . Way to go Tony for reminding us about the old folks! 4/28/2009 Elias, Abigail From: Derezinski, Tony Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 3:52 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: meeting From: Derezinski, Tony 4/28/2009 RE: R4C next steps Page 1 of 1 Elias, Abigail From: Derezinski, Tony Tuesday, April 28, 2009 3:51 PM Elias, Abigail Sent: To: Subject: FW: R4C next steps From: Derezinski, Tony Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 9:07 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: R4C next steps Right. Per your earlier email, I called both Jayne and Mark and told them what I intended to do. Neither called me back. I also talked to Bonnie Bona, who had brought it to my attention a month ago, and told her this was the night to bring it up, and then to introduce it at the next meeting. She will be at it; I will also see her at the Planning Comm meeting This Thursday. From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:48 PM To: Derezinski, Tony Subject: R4C next steps Meet w/Jayne to draft a resolution. Tell her to use flexible timing b/c of their staff constraints. 4/28/2009 RE: R4C Page 1 of 1 Elias, Abigail From: Derezinski, Tony Sent: Tuesday, April 28, 2009 3:51 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: R4C From: Derezinski, Tony Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 9:03 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: R4C I did talk to him about it yesterday when we were together at the Dingell conference. Would definitely want his help. From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:24 PM To: Derezinski, Tony Subject: RE: R4C You did the right thing Mayor wanted it. But just be advised. Rapundalo can help. From: Derezinski, Tony Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:18 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: R4C My humbly Bad. From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:16 PM To: Derezinski, Tony; Rapundalo, Stephen Subject: R4C BTW, Marcia will attack you for addressing zoning. She doesn't want anyone touching zoning. Just play sweet and dumb. 4/28/2009 Elias, Abigail From: Teall, Margie Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 8:12 AM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: DC-8: Resolution Honoring Congressman Dingell Attachments: Resolution Dingell congratulations.doc From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:16 PM To: *City Council Members (All) Cc: Beaudry, Jacqueline; Bowden (King), Anissa; Fraser, Roger Subject: DC-8: Resolution Honoring Congressman Dingell Resolution lingell congratulat. 1 RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING AND HONORING CONGRESSMAN JOHN D. DINGELL WHEREAS, Congressman John D. Dingell has served the people of southeast Michigan with honor and distinction as a Member of the United States House of Representatives since December 1955; WHEREAS, Congressman Dingell has played an instrumental role in developing important legislation that has benefited all Americans, including the Clean Air Act of 1990 and the Children's Health Insurance Program; WHEREAS, Congressman Dingell has delivered unmatched constituent service on behalf of his constituents, including the people of the City of Ann Arbor; and WHEREAS, on February 11, 2009, Congressman Dingell became the longest serving Member of the United States House of Representatives in the history of the United States; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ann Arbor City Council honors and congratulates Congressman John D. Dingell on being the longest serving member of the United States House of Representatives in the history of the United States; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Ann Arbor City Council looks forward to continuing to work with Congressman Dingell on behalf of the people of the City of Ann Arbor. Submitted by: Mayor John Hietfje, Councilmember Leigh Greden, Councilmember Margie Teall, Councilmember Marcia Higgins, Councilmember Stephen Rapundalo, Councilmember Sabra Briere, Councilmember Sandi Smith, Councilmember Christopher Taylor, Councilmember Carsten Hohnke, Councilmember Tony Derezinski, and Councilmember Mike Anglin Date: February 17, 2009 Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Thursday, April 23, 2009 11:21 PM Elias, Abigail FW: TV Issues -----Original Message----- From: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 10:34 PM To: Beaudry, Jacqueline Subject: TV Issues There's weather on the in house TVs. Are we still going out to the public? Christopher Taylor Councilmember (Third Ward) Mobile: 734-604-8770 Work: 734-213-3605 Home: 734-213-6223 ctaylor@a2gov.org 2 Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Thursday, April 23, 2009 11:21 PM Elias, Abigail FW: TV Issues -----Original Message----- From: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 10:43 PM To: Beaudry, Jacqueline Subject: RE: TV Issues thanks Christopher Taylor Councilmember (Third Ward) Mobile: 734-604-8770 Work: 734-213-3605 Home: 734-213-6223 ctaylor@a2gov.org From: Beaudry, Jacqueline Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:35 PM To: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Subject: RE: TV Issues I think it was an emergency broadcast. CTN is still taping and you won't see the interruption on the rebroadcast of the meeting. Jacqueline Beaudry City Clerk City of Ann Arbor Please note new phone number: 3 734-794-6140 (p) 734-994-8296 (f) From: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:34 PM To: Beaudry, Jacqueline Subject: TV Issues There's weather on the in house TVs. Are we still going out to the public? Christopher Taylor Councilmember (Third Ward) Mobile: 734-604-8770 Work: 734-213-3605 Home: 734-213-6223 ctaylor@a2gov.org 4 Elias, Abigail From: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 11:20 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: This evening -----Original Message----- From: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Sentyiie2/17/200911:58 PM Subject^misevening^ Christopher 734-604-8770 (c) 734-213-6223 (h) 734-213-3605 (w) 5 Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Thursday, April 23, 2009 11:20 PM Elias, Abigail FW: Taylor is so sweet and polite... -----Original Message----- From: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 10:44 PM To: Teall, Margie; Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: Taylor is so sweet and polite... Oh, go on! Christopher Taylor Councilmember (Third Ward) Mobile: 734-604-8770 Work: 734-213-3605 Home: 734-213-6223 ctaylor@a2gov.org From: Teall, Margie Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:44 PM To: Greden, Leigh; Taylor, Christopher (Council) Subject: RE: Taylor is so sweet and polite... Yes he is so sweet. What's wrong with you Leigh? And I'm surprised your comments didn't relate to someone else's compost comments. From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:41 PM To: Taylor, Christopher (Council); Teall, Margie Subject: Taylor is so sweet and polite... Taylor: "Is someone suitable from staff here to address this?" Jayne: "I'm here; I'm not sure if I'm suitable." Taylor: 'Thank you for sticking around at this late hour." Jayne: "As if I had a choice." 6 Elias, Abigail From: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 11:19 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: A2D2 Meeting -----Original Message----- From: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 10:41 PM To: Cc: uredenr Subject: A2D2 Meeting Dear Peter, As you may know, the A2D2 task force has nearly concluded its process of extensive public comment and review and will soon generate its final recommendations. In view of this beginning of the final stage, Leigh and I would like to schedule a session with you and the North Burns Park folks to gauge your collective satisfaction and to listen to any concerns that remain in the hopes of reaching a common ground that could obtain the support of Council. We expect the A2D2 draft language to be presented formally to Council at a Working Session on March 9 and are hoping thereafter for a meeting with you all. Both Leigh and I are open generally on March 15 and 22, and in the evening on March 12, 19 and 22. If these times are not convenient for your group, we can be flexible. Looking forward to continuing the conversation. Christopher Christopher Taylor Councilmember (Third Ward) Mobile: 734-604-8770 Work: 734-213-3605 Home: 734-213-6223 ctaylor@a2gov.org 7 Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Thursday, April 23, 2009 11:19 PM Elias, Abigail FW: -----Original Message----- From: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 10:29 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: Dear Peter, As you may know, the A2D2 task force has nearly concluded its process of extensive public comment and review and will soon generate its final recommendations. In view of this beginning of the final stage, Leigh and I would like to schedule a session with you and the North Burns Park folks to gauge your collective satisfaction and to listen to any concerns that remain in the hopes of reaching a common ground that could obtain the support of Council. We expect the A2D2 draft language to be presented formally to Council at a Working Session on March 9 and are hoping thereafter for a meeting with you all. Both Leigh and I are open generally on March 15 and 22, and in the evening on March 12, 19 and 22. If these times are not convenient for your group, we can be flexible. Looking forward to continuing the conversation. Christopher Christopher Taylor Councilmember (Third Ward) Mobile: 734-604-8770 Work: 734-213-3605 Home: 734-213-6223 ctaylor@a2gov.org 9 Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Thursday, April 23, 2009 11:19 PM Elias, Abigail_' FW: ¦¦^¦¦¦¦^V -----Original Message----- From: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Sent: Tue 2/17/2009 7:35 PM To: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Subject: Christopher Taylor Councilmember (Third Ward) Mobile: 734-604-8770 Work: 734-213-3605 Home: 734-213-6223 ctaylor@a2gov.org 11 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:53 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: DTE From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:48 PM To: Bergren, Mike Subject: DTE The students are hounding me for updates on DTE LED lighting. Any updates? 13 Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Greden, Leigh Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:53 PM Elias, Abigail FW: Upcoming Council agenda items From: Sent: To: Subject: Greden, Leigh Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:46 PM Smith, Sandi; Derezinski, Tony; Taylor, Christopher (Council); Hohnke, Carsten Upcoming Council agenda items New Members: The following is a *likely* schedule for upcoming matters. It hasn't been finalized yet. We're trying to make sure it accommodates the public's need to give input, while keeping a balanced schedule. M 3/2: COUNCIL- Commercial recycling (postponed from tonight) M 3/9: Work Session for A2D2 M 3/16: COUNCIL- No major items planned M 3/23: Special public hearing for A2D2 zoning M3/30: FREE NIGHT M 4/6: COUNCIL- 1st reading for A2D2 zoning M 4/13: Work session on the Budget M 4/20: COUNCIL- Resolutions for non-zoning portions of A2D2 M 4/27: FREE NIGHT M 5/4: COUNCIL- Public hearing on the Budget; Public hearing on A2D2 zoning; 2nd reading df A2D2 zoning 14 Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Greden, Leigh Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:52 PM Elias, Abigail FW: More traffic enforcement on Turnberry To: Cc: Subject: From: Sent: Greden, Leigh Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:38 PM Seto, John Jones, Barnett; Fraser, Roger; Dempkowski, Angela A RE: More traffic enforcement on Turnberry Thank you for the follow-up! From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Seto, John Tuesday, February 17, 2009 1:48 PM Greden, Leigh Jones, Barnett; Fraser, Roger; Dempkowski, Angela A FW: More traffic enforcement on Turnberry Councilmember Greden, Here is the information from the latest Turnberry traffic enforcement detail. It does not seem to be a problem. But as always, please feel free to have the complainant contact me if they have any other questions or concerns. From: Lee, Sean Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 08:28 To: Seto, John Subject: RE: More traffic enforcement on Turnberry We had an outstanding problem sheet that just showed up on my desk. Hence the delay in the results. However, we worked Turnberry for just over 5 hours (320 minutes) and issued two citations. Average speeds were all in the mid 20's to low 30's, with one high of 38 mph. The problem sheet is closed out. Sorry again for the delay in getting back with you. Sean P. Lee Ann Arbor Police Special Services (734) 994-2865 Fax: (734)994-9928 From: Seto, John Sent: Monday, December 29, 2008 12:36 To: Greden, Leigh; Jones, Barnett Cc: Fraser, Roger; Dempkowski, Angela A John 15 Subject: RE: More traffic enforcement on Turnberry Sir, I will get the Traffic Officers out to Turnberry again. As for the past statistics, I'll get that information to you. We also had a speed monitoring device our there for a period of time, I do not believe the speeds were that high, but I'll try to find that data and get it to you as well. Also, if it would be helpful, please feel free to have the resident(s) call me so that I can get a better understanding of the problem to relay to Traffic Services. Thanks, John From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 15:43 To: Seto, John; Jones, Barnett Cc: Fraser, Roger; Dempkowski, Angela A Subject: More traffic enforcement on Turnberry Turnberry residents say that the traffic slows down when the cops show up... and then creeps back up again. A resident reported she was in an accident there a few days ago due to a speeding driver ramming into her. Can we send some enforcement out in the next few days? Also, have your recent Turnberry enforcement efforts resulted in any tickets being issued, or are the people slowing down as soon as they see the officers? Thx. -Leigh 16 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:52 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: Where's Marcia??? From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:33 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: RE: Where's Marcia??? From: Teall, Margie Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:31 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: Where's Marcia??? True, I think she might learn about work stuff tomorrow or Thursday. But John said] From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:30 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: RE: Where's Marcia??? From: Teall, Margie Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:29 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: Where's Marcia??? From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:28 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: RE: Where's Marcia??? From: Teall, Margie Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:27 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: Where's Marcia??? John saysi 17 From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:26 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: Where's Marcia??? Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:52 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: Peter Nagourney email From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:32 PM To: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Subject: Peter Nagourney email Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:52 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: Where's Marcia??? From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:30 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: RE: Where's Marcia??? From: Teall, Margie Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:29 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: Where's Marcia??? From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:28 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: RE: Where's Marcia??? From: Teall, Margie Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:27 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: Where's Marcia??? John says From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:26 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: Where's Marcia??? 20 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:51 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: Where's Marcia??? From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:28 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: RE: Where's Marcia??? From: Teall, Margie Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:27 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: Where's Marcia??? John says i From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:26 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: Where's Marcia??? 21 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:51 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: Where's Marcia??? From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:26 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: Where's Marcia??? 22 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:51 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: I was here, I voted yes! From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:26 PM To: Beaudry, Jacqueline; Bowden (King), Anissa Subject: I was here, I voted yes! 23 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:51 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: Area, Height & Placement committee From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:22 PM To: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Subject: FW: Area, Height & Placement committee Oops forgot to cc you. From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 9:52 PM To: 'Peter Nagourney'; 'Peter Nagourney' Subject: Area, Height & Placement committee Hi Peter- The City is considering changes to Chapter 55 of our zoning code, which covers Area, Height, and Placement standards outside the downtown. It addresses front setbacks, parking, etc. We are forming a citizen advisory committee to work with staff, and the committee will include one person from each Ward. Councilmember Taylor and I are inclined to select someone from North Burns Park as the 3rd Ward representative because we believe the proposed changes could impact Burns Park more than other areas. Would you be willing to send us two or three names of people you (or others) would suggest to serve as the 3rd Ward representative on this committee? Thanks. -Leigh 24 Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Greden, Leigh Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:51 PM Elias, Abigail FW: Area, Height & Placement committee From: Sent: To: Subject: Greden, Leigh Tuesday, February 17, 2009 9:52 PM 'Peter Nagourney'; 'Peter Nagourney' Area, Height & Placement committee Hi Peter- The City is considering changes to Chapter 55 of our zoning code, which covers Area, Height, and Placement standards outside the downtown. It addresses front setbacks, parking, etc. We are forming a citizen advisory committee to work with staff, and the committee will include one person from each Ward. Councilmember Taylor and I are inclined to select someone from North Burns Park as the 3rd Ward representative because we believe the proposed changes could impact Burns Park more than other areas. Would you be willing to send us two or three names of people you (or others) would suggest to serve as the 3rd Ward representative on this committee? Thanks. -Leigh 25 Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Greden, Leigh Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:50 PM Elias, Abigail FW: R4C next steps From: Sent: To: Subject: Greden, Leigh Tuesday, February 17, 2009 9:10 PM Derezinski, Tony RE: R4C next steps Sounds good. Jayne & Mark have been tied up preparing for tonight's council mtng; I suggest sending an email instead. Right. Per your earlier email, I called both Jayne and Mark and told them what I intended to do. Neither called me back. I also talked to Bonnie Bona, who had brought it to my attention a month ago, and told her this was the night to bring it up, and then to introduce it at the next meeting. She will be at it; I will also see her at the Planning Comm meeting This Thursday. From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:48 PM To: Derezinski, Tony Subject: R4C next steps Meet w/Jayne to draft a resolution. Tell her to use flexible timing b/c of their staff constraints. From: Sent: To: Subject: Derezinski, Tony Tuesday, February 17, 2009 9:08 PM Greden, Leigh RE: R4C next steps 26 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:49 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: R4C next steps From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:48 PM To: Derezinski, Tony Subject: R4C next steps Meet w/Jayne to draft a resolution. Tell her to use flexible timing b/c of their staff constraints. 27 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:49 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: Stimulus story From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:47 PM To: 'Tom Gantetf; Tom Gantert' Subject: Stimulus story Did you finish it yet? If not, here's my quote: "The stimulus legislation emphasizes shovel-ready green public infrastructure projects. The Police/Courts and Wastewater Treatment projects both meet all those requirements, as do all other projects we submitted." 28 Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Greden, Leigh Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:47 PM Elias, Abigail FW: DC-8: Resolution Honoring Congressman Dingell From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:36 PM To: Beaudry, Jacqueline Subject: RE: DC-8: Resolution Honoring Congressman Dingell Yes please! Also, email a copy to: Andy.LaBarre@mail.house.gov From: Sent: To: Subject: Beaudry, Jacqueline Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:33 PM Greden, Leigh RE: DC-8: Resolution Honoring Congressman Dingell Do you want a copy sent to Dingell? It wasn't in the resolution, but we can still do it. Jacqueline Beaudry City Clerk City of Ann Arbor Please note new phone number: 734-794-6140 (p) 734-994-8296 (f) From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:16 PM To: *City Council Members (All) Cc: Beaudry, Jacqueline; Bowden (King), Anissa; Fraser, Roger Subject: DC-8: Resolution Honoring Congressman Dingell « File: Resolution Dingell congratulations.doc » 30 Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Greden, Leigh Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:46 PM Elias, Abigail FW: Revised A2D2 schedule —-Original Message----- From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:03 PM To: Taylor, Christopher (Council) Subject: FW: Revised A2D2 schedule Here's the slightly revised proposed schedule for A2D2: 3/9- Work session for A2D2 3/23- Special public hearing for A2D2 4/6- 1st reading for A2D2 zoning 4/20- Resolutions for non-zoning A2D2 pieces 5/4- 2nd reading AND public hearing for A2D2 zoning.... AND public hearing on the budget 31 Elias, Abigail From: Sent: To: Subject: Greden, Leigh Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:46 PM Elias, Abigail FW: 5th & William lot/Convention Center -----Original Message----- From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:49 PM To: 'Sharon McRill' Subject: RE: 5th & William lot/Convention Center Ms. McRill- Thanks for writing. Although I am not your Councilmember, please allow me to respond. I also support the parking garage. But, there are no plans to build a convention center. The parking garage is totally unrelated to any such plans. There will be an extensive public process before we put anything in that area. Thank you again for writing. -Leigh Greden, Member of City Council —Original Message----- From: Sharon McRill [mailto:sharon@bettybrigade.com] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:47 PM To: Sharon McRill Cc: Hieftje, John; Smith, Sandi; Briere, Sabra; Rapundalo, Stephen; Derezinski, Tony; Taylor, Christopher (Council); Greden, Leigh; Higgins, Marcia; Teall, Margie; Hohnke, Carsten; Anglin, Mike; jesse@annarborchamber.org Subject: 5th & William lot/Convention Center Dear Mayor & Council Thank you for taking time to read this e-mail. My name is Sharon McRill, I am an Ann Arbor resident (Ward 5) and a business owner. Please stronly consider approving this parking lot with the idea of a possible convention center. This could bring millions (or more) of dollars in goods and services to our region and I strongly support the DDA and what Roger Hewitt are trying to accomplish. I wanted to let you all know that I feel as a business owner the more business we as a community can develop and grow, the better it will be for the entire community. This means additional retention of young workers and keeping our talent pool fresh and vibrant (as well as our city). Please strongly consider moving forward with this idea to create a convention center and parking structure. It's innovative and it's exactly what Ann Arbor needs to keep moving itself forward. I would be happy to discuss this further if you'd like. Sincerely, Sharon McRill The Betty Brigade President Betty 734-994-1000 o 734-996-5000 f 888-74BETTY tf www.bettybrigade.com As seen on WDIV/Channel 4 http://www.clickondetroit.com/video/18027485/index.html As seen in The Detroit News http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2008812110318 As seen in the Ann Arbor News http://www.mlive.com/annarbornews/news/index.ssf/2008/12/stressed_shoppers_take_note_to.html 32 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:45 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: Speech From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:42 PM To: Rapundalo, Stephen; Derezinski, Tony Subject: Speech Announce that you "plan to bring a resolution at the next Council meeting asking staff and the Planning Commission to begin a process to revise the R4C zoning code. We've seen too many problems with the R4C zoning code recently, such as lack of parking and too many bedrooms per unit. I look forward to a debate to make this section of the zoning code more appropriate for our community, and I plan to bring this resolution at our next meeting." 34 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:44 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: DC-8: Resolution Honoring Congressman Dingell From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:33 PM To: Higgins, Marcia Subject: RE: DC-8: Resolution Honoring Congressman Dingell You're welcome! From: Higgins, Marcia Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:25 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: DC-8: Resolution Honoring Congressman Dingell Leigh, Thanks for doing this. Thanks, Marcia From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:16 PM To: *City Council Members (All) Cc: Beaudry, Jacqueline; Bowden (King), Anissa; Fraser, Roger Subject: DC-8: Resolution Honoring Congressman Dingell « File: Resolution Dingell congratulations.doc » 35 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:44 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: DC-8: Resolution Honoring Congressman Dingell Attachments: Resolution Dingell congratulations.doc From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:16 PM To: *City Council Members (All) Cc: Beaudry, Jacqueline; Bowden (King), Anissa; Fraser, Roger Subject: DC-8: Resolution Honoring Congressman Dingell Resolution 'ingell congratulat. 36 RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING AND HONORING CONGRESSMAN JOHN D. DINGELL WHEREAS, Congressman John D. Dingell has served the people of southeast Michigan with honor and distinction as a Member of the United States House of Representatives since December 1955; WHEREAS, Congressman Dingell has played an instrumental role in developing important legislation that has benefited all Americans, including the Clean Air Act of 1990 and the Children's Health Insurance Program; WHEREAS, Congressman Dingell has delivered unmatched constituent service on behalf of his constituents, including the people of the City of Ann Arbor; and WHEREAS, on February 11, 2009, Congressman Dingell became the longest serving Member of the United States House of Representatives in the history of the United States; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Ann Arbor City Council honors and congratulates Congressman John D. Dingell on being the longest serving member of the United States House of Representatives in the history of the United States; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Ann Arbor City Council looks forward to continuing to work with Congressman Dingell on behalf of the people of the City of Ann Arbor. Submitted by: Mayor John Hietfje, Councilmember Leigh Greden, Councilmember Margie Teall, Councilmember Marcia Higgins, Councilmember Stephen Rapundalo, Councilmember Sabra Briere, Councilmember Sandi Smith, Councilmember Christopher Taylor, Councilmember Carsten Hohnke, Councilmember Tony Derezinski, and Councilmember Mike Anglin Date: February 17, 2009 Page 1 of 1 Eiias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:53 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: stimulus money From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:42 PM To: Smith, Sandi Subject: RE: stimulus money Yup, but I doubt we'll get any. We do, however, have a decent shot at stimulus money for 5th/Division. From: Smith, Sandi Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:41 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: stimulus money Was the parking deck included in any list? Sandi Smith Ann Arbor City Council First Ward 734-302-3011 Page 1 of 4 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:50 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: Request for postponement of action on proposed parking structure From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 9:11 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: RE: Request for postponement of action on proposed parking structure He's reasonable. I'm happy to debate him! From: Teall, Margie Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 9:08 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: RE: Request for postponement of action on proposed parking structure This is good stuff! I commend you (both) for patiently persisting, with good humor and tolerance! From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:58 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: FW: Request for postponement of action on proposed parking structure And his latest response, to which I have not responded. From: Steve Bean [mailto:J^^H|^H^^^V Sent: Tuesday, February 17, ItmWVrm To: Greden, Leigh Subject: Re: Request for postponement of action on proposed parking structure And here's a not-so-quick one. (Good thing you enjoy this!) On Feb 17, 2009, at 9:27 AM, Greden, Leigh wrote: Hi Steve- All fair points. Here's a quick response: 1. Delay: A delay accomplishes only one thing: higher costs and more lost businesses. (See #3, below, for more detail about lost businesses). It's also not necessary. With all due respect, everything you suggested has been explored extensively by the DDA and the City for years. (Sort of like the PD/Courts Building). Higher costs may or not be the case, depending on the length of the delay, the timing of the stimulus funds 4/24/2009 Page 2 of4 trickling down, and the relative state of the economy. The parking study report recommendations haven't been implemented. Those items that have (as I already pointed out) don't have enough of a track record to evaluate yet. For all we know, some combination of them could be wildly successful. The additional spaces coming on line (again, mentioned) were given no consideration in deciding the size of the new structure. Extending meter hours beyond 6 PM hasn't been tested yet. Private lots with many unused spaces (according to the parking study, also noted previously) haven't been 'tapped' for commuter parking. Bus service hasn't been expanded beyond 10 PM on weekends. The permit wait list hasn't been surveyed to determine current interest or their current practice. What's been done to try to shift use to non-peak hours? I could go on. I don't think that exactly qualifies as "everything... [being].. .explored extensively." Thanks for the respect, though. :-) 2. Demand: The system's capacity is at roughly 85%, which by definition it at capacity. Many facilities are frequently. Drive by 4th/Washington any weeknight... drive by Ann-Ashley any weekday... drive into Forest garage any weekday. New technology and better data could allow the system to be managed at 90% of capacity or above. Why waste 15% of our investment? (Also, see Big Question below.) I'll pass on the drive by~I walk. :-) Even if demand for parking decreased, we still lack sufficient parking to meet future needs. Ann-Ashley, Maynard, Forest, 4th/Washington, and Tally Hall are all full during the day. Brown Block and Kline's lot are usually full too, and are almost always full on weeknights and weekend nights. A decrease in demand would mean that those lots/structures wouldn't be as full as much of the time. (What part of "decrease" aren't you getting?) The problem is those peaks, and peak management is something that can be addressed without building a "baseline" structure. (Think power plants, if you know anything about that sector.) But, demand will not decrease. "So it is written..." In fact, we anticipate significant increases in demand for Tally Hall and the Library Garage after the Washington/Division lofts open, and after the new dorm opens on Huron/Washington. Google also has an option on many parking spaces that don't currently exist. Fortunately, they've slowed their hiring and we haven't had to produce these non-existence parking spaces. Good government requires planning for future economic growth, and that's what we're doing. Student parking demand may well peak in a year or two and then steeply decline once gas prices and general living expenses (including tuition) increase to truly uncomfortable levels. General demand may well follow suit just as soon, in spite of new sources being added. Big question: Might we be able to ride out the peak without building an expensive parking structure by making optimal use of existing resources and improving parking and transit system policies/rates/services? "Future economic growth"? Like Google's cutbacks and Pfizer's move out? Bookstores closing (and not because of insufficient parking)? I'll grant that there's near-term demand, which is why I didn't ask council to cancel the project, but rather to examine it and explore alternatives (per above.) 4/24/2009 Page 3 of4 3. Business development. Businesses often approach me personally to negotiate parking deals and tax abatements. This is not speculation or second-hand gossip on my part. Of course they do. They want everything they can get, either from the City or from a township. Here's one example: a business that employs 40-50 highly-paid scientists just outside the downtown wanted to move into new space in the State Street area, and expand their operations. But it needed more parking, which doesn't exist. I tried to negotiate more permits in Maynard... I offered bus passes... I told them about the new library garage being built... I sent them info about the Link. Wasn't good enough. They're moving to the Township, where their employees will surely spew far more greenhouse emissions just by driving to lunch. Good point about lunch, assuming that they don't pack it, but overall emissions depend on distance traveled, which in turn depends on where they live relative to their office. Clearly the best situation for downtown would be for people to both live and work there. Speaking of which, you haven't mentioned downtown housing, just parking. Thanks for all the effort on alternatives. Here's another example: DTE has approached me several times about expanding their downtown operations, but their number one concern is parking, and whether they can secure spaces for their employees in nearby garages. I show them data, but their expansion plans are significant... if we can convince them we have sufficient parking to meet their needs. Here today, gone tomorrow? And we want them to expand so that they can support new downtown businesses that have employees who want parking, and so their taxes can fund more parking spaces for the next business that approaches you? Where does that unsustainable path end for you? I suggest that a greater focus on downtown housing and the types of alternatives that the parking study (and I) recommend are perhaps the way out. Here's another example: Google. The company that prides itself on alternative ways of doing business is, understandably, just like every other business in one important aspect: they need parking. We didn't offer them free parking. They asked for it. We offered a tax abatement. They didn't want it. They wanted parking. These are just three examples that demonstrate the important difference between speculative goals to "reduce greenhouse emissions" vs. real-life everyday impacts on our local economy and housing market. We need more employers downtown, and they *all* want parking. Today they do. What about a few years from now? We're getting a brief reprieve on gas prices. Carbon emission limits could be instituted during Obama's term. So have you seen An Inconvenient Truth, or not? Any familiarity with peak oil? 4. Near-term economics vs. long-term sustainability. I do not believe we must choose between the two. That's a straw man that I didn't erect. 4/24/2009 We're doing more for long-term sustainability than *any* community in Michigan. Page 4 of 4 And still, we're far from where we need to be. Faint praise. But, if we must choose between these two, I know which I choose: near-term economics. I'll choose it everyday, and twice on Sunday. Michigan has the highest unemployment rate in the nation. Families in Ann Arbor are losing their homes. Housing values are plummeting. Downtown businesses are begging for more customers. The economy trumps all else right now. So much for your professed belief! Geez, Leigh! I enjoy these debates! -Leigh Me too! Why didn't we (all) have one on this before council decided that the best alternative was an underground structure at the library lot? Or before they asked the DDA to get a design for one? Or before the bond sale was approved? (Okay, we're a few hours away still.) Or...? Well, at least you and I are having it. You still haven't asked me a question, though. :-) Steve 4/24/2009 Page 1 of 1 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:49 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: Steve Bean From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:57 PM To: Teall, Margie Subject: RE: Steve Bean I did. I'll send them. From: Teall, Margie Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 8:56 PM To: Greden, Leigh Subject: Steve Bean Can you forward to me the other comments exchanged between you and Steve? He made it sound like he responded after you answered him...? 4/24/2009 Page 1 of 1 Elias, Abigail From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:51 PM To: Elias, Abigail Subject: FW: Thank You!! From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:19 PM To: 'Jesse Bernstein' Subject: RE: Thank You!! Oh my goodness, you never give up! From: Jesse Bernstein [mailto:Jesse@annarborchamber.org] Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 10:08 PM To: Hieftje, John; Smith, Sandi; Briere, Sabra; Rapundalo, Stephen; Derezinski, Tony; Taylor, Christopher (Council); Greden, Leigh; Higgins, Marcia; Teall, Margie; Hohnke, Carsten; Anglin, Mike Subject: Thank You!! Now, let's figure out how to quickly get a community-wide, consensus vision of how to use the whole area around the library. JAB Jesse Bernstein, President and CEO Ann Arbor Area Chamber of Commerce 115 West Huron, 3rd Floor Ann Arbor, Michigan 48104 direct 734 214-0102 cell 734 355-6310 0 Increase Sales Save money Retain employees Business education Voice in public policy issues For more information visit www.annarborchamber.org 4/74/7ftftQ Page 1 of 1 Elias, Abigail To: Subject: Sent: From: Greden, Leigh Thursday, April 23, 2009 10:44 PM Elias, Abigail FW: Additional Info Attachments: info.pdf; info4u.pdf From: Greden, Leigh Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:15 PM To: Rapundalo, Stephen Subject: FW: Additional Info From: Crawford, Tom Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 1:33 PM To: Greden, Leigh; Hohnke, Carsten Subject: Additional Info FYI - attached info, includes financial summary DDA reviewed with me yesterday, debt schedule for total project including Fifth & Division, and parking rates from comparable cities. 4/24/2009 $49,375,000 CITY OF ANN ARBOR COUNTY OF WASHTENAW, STATE OF MICHIGAN GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PARKING FACILITY BONDS, SERIES 2009B (LIMITED TAX GENERAL OBLIGATION) PROJECT COST BREAKDOWN CAPITAL COSTS: Library Lot Underground Structure $35,802,600 Fifth & Division Road 6,100,000 Pedestrian Improvemments 9,246,300 Future Development 5,283,600 TOTAL CAPITAL COSTS: $56,432,500 Municipal Bonding Fee 1,489,250 Legal, Financial, Advertising, Etc. 109,474 Bond Discount 1.50% 740,625 Bond Insurance 0 Capitalized Interest 0 Total Project Cost $58,771,849 Less Construction Fund Earnings (581,072) Less DDA Equity Contribution (8,815,777) Less Other 0 AMOUNT OF BOND ISSUE $49,375,000 Estimated Construction Fund Deposit from Bond Proceeds $47,035,651 SCHEDULE OF ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION FUND EARNINGS EXPENDITURE ACTIVITY Construction Local Financing Fund Interest Interest Date Expenditures Costs Totals Month Payout % Receipts Balance Rate Earned May 09 Fund Equity $8,815,777 $8,815,777 May 09 $2,351,354 $850,099 $3,201,454 1 5.59% Bond Funds 49,375,000 54,989,324 1.00% $45,824 Jun 09 2,351,354 2,351,354 2 9.69% 52,683,794 1.00% 43,903 Jul 09 2,351,354 2,351,354 3 13.80% 50,376,343 1.00% 41,980 Aug 09 2,351,354 2,351,354 4 17.90% 48,066,969 1.00% 40,056 Sep 09 2,351,354 2,351,354 5 22.01% 45,755,671 1.00% 38,130 Oct 09 2,351,354 2,351,354 6 26.11% 43,442,446 1.00% 36,202 Nov 09 2,351,354 2,351,354 7 30.22% 41,127,294 1.0Q% 34,273 Dec 09 2,351,354 2,351,354 8 34.32% 38,810,213 1.00% 32,342 Jan 10 2,351,354 2,351,354 9 38.43% 36,491,201 1.00% 30,409 Feb 10 2,351,354 2,351,354 10 42.53% 34,170,256 1.00% 28,475 Mar10 2,351,354 2,351,354 11 46.64% 31,847,377 1.00% 26,539 Apr 10 2,351,354 2,351,354 12 50.74% 29,522,562 1.00% 24,602 May 10 2,351,354 2,351,354 13 54.85% 27,195,810 1.00% 22,663 Jun 10 2,351.354 2,351,354 14 58.95% 24,867,119 1.00% 20,723 Jul 10 2,351,354 2,351,354 15 63.06% 22,536,487 1.00% 18,780 Aug 10 2,351,354 2,351,354 16 67.16% 20,203,914 1.00% 16,837 Sep 10 2,351,354 2,351,354 17 71.27% 17,869.396 1.00% 14,891 Oct 10 2,351,354 2,351,354 18 75.37% 15,532,933 1.00% 12,944 Nov 10 2,351,354 2,351,354 19 79.48% 13,194.523 1.00% 10,995 Dec 10 2,351,354 2,351,354 20 83.58% 10,854,164 • 1.00% 9,045 Jan 11 2,351,354 2,351,354 21 87.69% 8,511,855 1.00% 7,093 Feb 11 2,351,354 2,351,354 22 91.79% 6,167,594 1.00% 5,140 Mar 11 2,351,354 2,351,354 23 95.90% 3,821,380 1.00% 3,184 April 2,351,354 2,351,354 24 100.00% 1,473,210 1.00% 1,228 May 11 0 0 25 100.00% 1,474,438 1.00% 1,229 $56,432,500 $850,099 $57,282,599 $58,190,777 $581,072 STAUDER, BARCH & ASSOCIATES, INC. Municipal Bond Financial and Marketing Consultants 3989 Research Park Drive Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108 prs Phone (734) 668-6688 Fax (734) 668-6723 - 2/12/09 $49,375,000 CITY OF ANN ARBOR COUNTY OF WASHTENAW, STATE OF MICHIGAN GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PARKING FACILITY BONDS, SERIES 2009B (LIMITED TAX GENERAL OBLIGATION) SCHEDULE OF ESTIMATED REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES Tax[1] Increment Parking [2] $49,375,000 Dated 5/1/09 F/Y Revenue System Net Interest . Interest Principal Annual End Share Share Revenue Due Due Interest Due Capitalized Excess or 6-30, 36.56% 63.44% For Debt Nov-1 May-1 Rate May-1 Total Interest (Shortfall) 2009 0 0 0 0 0 0.000% 0 0 0 2010 992,745 1,722,880 2,715,625 1,357,813 1,357,813 5.500% 0 2,715,625 0 0 2011 992,745 1,722,880 2,715,625 1,357,813 1,357,813 5.500% 0 2,715,625 0 0 2012 1,133,488 1,967,137 3,100,625 1,357,813 1,357,813 5.500% 385,000 3,100,625 0 0 2013 1,288,425 2,236,025 3,524,450 1,347,225 1,347,225 5.500% 830,000 3,524,450 0 2014 1,288,188 2,235,612 3,523,800 1,324,400 1,324,400 5.500% 875,000 3,523,800 0 2015 1,288,873 2,236,802 3,525,675 1,300,338 1,300,338 5.500% 925,000 3,525,675 0 2016 1,288,553 2,236,247 3,524,800 1,274,900 1,274,900 5.500% 975,000 3,524,800 0 2017 1,289,056 2,237,119 3,526,175 1,248,088 1,248,088 5.500% 1,030,000 3,526,175 0 2018 1,288,453 2,236,072 3,524,525 1,219,763 1,219,763 5.500% 1,085,000 3,524,525 0 2019 1,288,571 2,236,279 3.524,850 1,189,925 1,189,925 5.500% 1,145,000 3,524,850 0 2020 1,289,312 2,237,563 3,526,875 1,158,438 1,158,438 5.500% 1,210,000 3,526,875 0 2021 1^88,745 2,236,580 3,525,325 1,125,163 1,125,163 5.500% 1,275,000 3,525,325 0 2022 1,288,699 2,236,501 3,525,200 1,090,100 1,090,100 5.500% 1,345,000 3,525,200 0 2023 1,289,074 2,237,151 3,528,225 1,053,113 1,053,113 5.500% 1,420,000 3,526,225 0 2024 1,287,941 2,235,184 3,523,125 1,014,063 1,014,063 5.500% 1,495,000 3,523,125 0 2025 1,288,955 2,236.945 3,525,900 972,950 972,950 5.500% 1,580,000 3,525,900 0 2026 1,288,261 2,235,739 3,524,000 929,500 929,500 5.500% 1,665,000 3,524,000 0 2027 1,289,513 2,237,912 3,527,425 883,713 883,713 5.500% 1,760,000 3,527,425 0 2028 1,288,855 2,236,770 3,525,625 835,313 835,313 5.500% 1,855,000 3,525,625 0 2029 1,288,114 2,235,486 3,523,800 784,300 784,300 5.500% 1,955,000 3,523,600 0 2030 1,289,019 2,237,056 3,526,075 730,538 730,538 5.500% 2,065,000 3,526,075 0 2031 1,289,540 2,237,960 3,527,500 673,750 673,750 5.500%- 2,180,000 3,527,500 0 2032 1,287,749 2,234,851 3,522,600 613,800. 613,800 5.500% 2,295.000 3,522,600 0 2033 1,289,129 2,237,246 3,526,375 550,688 550,688 5.500% 2,425,000 3,526,375 0 2034 1,287,895 2,235,105 3,523,000 484,000 484,000 5.500% 2,555.000 3,523,000 0 2035 1,287,703 2,234,772 3,522,475 413,738 413,738 5.500% 2,695,000 3,522,475 0 2036 1,288,352 2,235,898 3,524,250 339,625 339,625 5.500% 2,845,000 3,524,250 0 2037 1,287,813 2,234,962 3,522,775 261,388 261,388 5.500% 3,000,000 3,522,775 0 2038 1,287,813 2,234,962 3,522,775 178,888 178,888 5.500% 3,165,000 3,522,775 0 2039 1,288,151 2,235,549 3,523,700 91,850 91,850 5.500% 3,340,000 3,523,700 0 2040 0 0 0 0 0 0.000% 0 0 0 2041 0 0 0 0 0 0.000% 0 0 0 37,909,728 65,791,247 103,700,975 27,162,988 27,162,988 49,375,000 103,700,975 0 [1 ] Tax Increment Revenue to fund pedestrian improvements and future development costs. (2) Parking System Revenue to fund underground parking structure cost. Stauder, Batch & Associates, Inc. Municipal Bond Financial and Marketing Consultants 3989 Research Park Drive Ann Arbor, Ml 48108 Phone (734) 668-6888 Fax:(734)668-6723 12-Feb-09 PRS Community Parking Rate Data current 2008 2000 ^population 114,024 119,128 46,525 60,062 197,800 238,603 14,532 20&O54 69,291 225,581 382,618 STRUCTURES Hourly - - ^ $0.80 $2.00 First 34 hr free $8.50 Max $1.00 -$1.30 $0.50 First 2 hrs free $3 flat rate after 5pm $2.00 Daily max $5.75 -$10 $1.10 $0.50/hr for first 2 hrs $0.40/hr thereafter Daily max $4.00 $0.70 -$1.20 $0.50 $1.00 $2.00 - $4.00 Daily max: $5.00-$15.00 STRUCTURES Permits Monthly $125 Reserved $175 $72-$103 Reserved $137-$140 $75-$80 $35-$40 $112.75-142.50 $74-$104 $30-$33 $360 annual $100 quarterly $100-$133 Resident $117-$156 Non-Resident $56.25 $50-$75 $117.50 -$268 Reserved $144-$220 (not avail. For all structures) PARKING LOTS Permits Monthly N/A $20-$79 • $60-$70 N/A $24.50-$65.25 Monroe Place Lot $118.25 $41 - $64 $24.17 $290 annual $75-$80 Resident $85-$86 Non-Resident $45.83 $45-$55 N/A • PARKING LOTS Hourly $1.00 First 3 hours, $1.10/hr thereafter $1.10-$1.20 $0.50 -$0.75 High Demand $.25-$.50 Lower Demand Primarily Daily ($2-$6) Or Event ($4-$8) $0.80 -$2.00 $3.40 daily max N/A $0.50-$1.10 • $0.50 $1.00 $5.00 daily max Daily $7.50 METERS Hourly $1.00 Off-site lOhr meters $0.50/hr $1.00 $0.50 -$0.75 $1.25 -$1.75 $1.25 -$1.75 $0.60 $0.50-$1.25 $0.50 - $1.00 Short Term (2-4 hr) $0.50 Long term(12 hr) $0.50 $0.25 - $2.00 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Jayne Miller, Community Services Administrator DATE: February 17, 2009 SUBJECT: Resolution to Approve South Fifth Avenue Parking Garage and Street Improvements Site Plan (319 South Fifth Avenue) Attached is a resolution requesting approval of the above site plan for the construction of a four-story underground garage housing 785 parking spaces. In addition, the surface of the site will be improved to include 38 surface parking spaces, stairs and elevators serving the underground garage, and a new public street and right-of-way (Library Lane), extending from the west side of Fifth Avenue through to Division Street, for a total of 823 parking spaces. On October 21, 2008, the City Planning Commission passed a resolution finding that the above project adheres to City private development standards. Attached are the minutes from the Planning Commission meeting and the Planning staff report. Prepared By: Steve Bartha, Management Assistant Reviewed By: Mark Lloyd, Planning and Development Services Manager Jayne Miller, Community Services Administrator Approved By: Roger W. Fraser, City Administrator Attachments: Proposed Resolution 10/21/08 Planning Commission Minutes Planning Staff Report RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SOUTH FIFTH AVENUE PARKING GARAGE AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS SITE PLAN (319 SOUTH FIFTH AVENUE) Whereas, The Downtown Development Authority has requested site plan approval in order to allow the construction of a four-story underground garage housing 785 parking spaces at 319 South Fifth. Avenue; Whereas, The Ann Arbor City Planning Commission, on October 21, 2008, reviewed said request; Whereas, The contemplated development will comply with all applicable state, local and federal law, ordinances, standards and regulations; Whereas, The development would limit the disturbance of natural features to the minimum necessary to allow a reasonable use of the land, applying criteria for reviewing a natural features statement of impact set forth in Chapter 57; and Whereas, The development would not cause a public or private nuisance and would not have a detrimental effect on the public health, safety or welfare; and Whereas, The portion of the parking garage located under Fifth Avenue between the southern edge of the current library parking lot and the western edge of William Street, consisting of approximately 100 parking spaces, (the "Southern Section") may provide future benefit to the city; RESOLVED, That City Council approve the South Fifth Avenue Parking Garage and Street Improvements Site Plan with the condition that the site plan be amended to show that construction of the Southern Section will be deferred;-aft€l RESOLVED. That tfre-Citv Council directs the Downtown Development Authority to construct the pafking garageSouth Fifth Avenue Parking Garage and Street Improvements Site Plan to the southern edge of the current library parking -let-in a manner that facilitates the future construction of the Southern Sectionexpansion to the western edge of William Street upon approval by City Council.. ; and upon approval by City Council RESOLVED. That construction of the Southern Section shall reguire the prior approval of City CoufieUr