Warpehoski had sponsored the item along with mayor John Hieftje, with the title “Resolution to List for Sale 415 W. Washington and Appropriate Funds for Allen Creek Greenway Master Plan.”

As of mid-day Friday, July 18, no text or memo was included in the resolution. Warpehoski responded to an emailed query from The Chronicle by saying that the resolution might be pulled, depending on the outcome of a meeting of the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy on July 18. [The agenda item was later updated with text. The amount to be allocated for the master planning effort was $250,000.]

On July 19, however, Warpehoski announced that he’d be withdrawing the resolution. An excerpt from the comment he left on The Chronicle’s meeting preview article reads as follows:

At the request of the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy Board, I am withdrawing the resolution from the Council agenda.

The resolution to fund the creation of a greenway master plan and development of the greenway through the sale of the non-floodway portion of 415 W. Washington was developed in partnership with Bob Galardi, chair of the Greenway Conservancy, and Jonathan Bulkley, chair of the Greenway Roundtable.

Bob and Jonathan had discussed the potential resolution with the Conservancy board. They found some initial support from the board. At their meeting on July 18, the Conservancy Board reviewed the final resolution, but were not able to come to agreement to support the resolution at this time. As the conservancy does not have clarity in supporting the resolution, I am withdrawing it. From the beginning, the my approach to this was that if the Conservancy was supportive then we could bring it forward. If the conservancy was not in support then we would not move forward in this way.

The city-owned 415 W. Washington parcel is highlighted in yellow.

Warpehoski indicated to The Chronicle that one reason a master plan for the greenway is important is that the lack of such a plan hurt the city’s application for funding from the state of Michigan to support renovations to the 721 N. Main property. The city did not receive the state grant after applying for it in early 2013.

In addition, Warpehoski wrote, there’s an opportunity to partner with the University of Michigan and a class taught by Larissa Larsen, a professor of urban and regional planning and natural resources. Such a partnership would reduce costs of the planning effort.

The idea of funding work on a master plan for the Allen Creek greenway was discussed most recently at the June 16, 2014 council meeting, in the context of a resolution that Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) had brought forward that would have jump-started an effort to redesign Liberty Plaza at the corner of Division and Liberty streets. Taylor’s resolution would have appropriated $23,577 for the work, which was to have included input from a variety of stakeholders, including adjacent property owners.

That resolution was ultimately referred by the council to the park advisory commission (PAC). At PAC’s July 15 meeting, two people spoke during public commentary to advocate for an integrated approach to the “library block,” which includes Liberty Plaza. But PAC postponed discussion related to Liberty Plaza and the council resolution, as only five of nine voting members were present. Taylor is an ex officio non-voting member of PAC, but had not discussed the resolution at previous PAC meetings. He attended PAC’s July 15 meeting.

The June 16 council meeting discussion featured the following exchange between Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) and Hieftje, recorded in The Chronicle’s live updates from the meeting:

10:15 p.m. Kunselman asks if this means that Liberty Plaza would jump ahead of developing a master plan for the Allen Creek Greenway. Hieftje says that if Kunselman can be a bit patient, there will be a master plan proposed soon.

10:18 p.m. Hieftje says that an Allen Creek Greenway master plan might be prepared before the end of the budget year. Kunselman asks if there’d been any council direction to start any of the activity that Hieftje has described. Yes, Hieftje says, there was a resolution involving 415 W. Washington. Kunselman reiterates the fact that staff has not been directed specifically to develop a greenway master plan. He’s reiterating the lack of resources for park planning. There are 157 parks in the city and he wonders why Liberty Plaza has become the most important one. Kunselman will support the referral to PAC.

If the council had directed the 415 W. Washington property to be listed for sale, it would have been be the third downtown city-owned property to be listed for sale in the last year and a half. The council directed the city administrator to move toward hiring a broker for the old Y lot at Fifth and William at its March 4, 2013 meeting. And on Nov. 18, 2013, the council authorized the sale of the lot to Dennis Dahlmann for $5.25 million.

And the council voted at its April 7, 2014 meeting to confirm its earlier decision to direct the city administrator to list the development rights for the top of the Library Lane parking structure for sale. On July 1, city administrator Steve Powers notified the council that he’d selected CBRE to market and broker the sale of the development rights.

The 415 W. Washington parcel is currently used as a surface parking lot in the city’s public parking system, which has averaged about $18,000 in revenue per month, or about $216,000 a year over the last two years. The parcel also includes several buildings that previously served as the road commission facility and the city maintenance yard. A study commissioned by the city of the property concluded that the cost of stabilizing and renovating all of the buildings could be as high as $6 million. [.pdf of Aug. 29, 2013 report] That study came after the 555 Nonprofit Gallery and Studios had stepped forward with an interest in the possible renovation and reuse of the building as artist studio space. For additional background on that, see “City Council Parcels Out Tasks: Open Space.”

Ultimately the city moved toward demolishing the buildings. The city administrator’s proposed FY 2015 budget included $300,000 for the demolition of the buildings, but the council amended out that allocation during its deliberations on May 19, 2014:

1:40 a.m. Budget amendment: 415 W. Washington demolition. This proposal will simply eliminate general fund support for demolition of the city-owned buildings at 415 W. Washington. [Kailasapathy, Lumm, Eaton, Anglin]

1:54 a.m. Outcome: The council approved this amendment over the dissent of Kunselman, Taylor and Warpehoski.

Two pieces of land immediately adjacent to 415 W. Washington have been in the news recently. At their July 1, 2014 meeting, city planning commissioners approved The Mark condo project for the parcel on Liberty Street where a car wash is currently located. The proposal from developer Alex de Parry is to demolish an existing car wash at 318 W. Liberty and build an 11,910-square-foot structure with seven residential condominiums – five two-bedroom and two three-bedroom units.

And at the July 2, 2014 meeting of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, it was announced that the final site recommendation for a downtown stop for the WALLY rail line is for the east side of the railroad tracks between Liberty and Washington streets – opposite of where the former city maintenance yard was located at 415 W. Washington. It was reported at that meeting that it would not be a full station. Rather, it would be a platform with canopies and a ramp to Washington Street to the north and a sidewalk connection to the south onto Liberty. The stop would be built entirely within the railroad right-of-way – and there would be no taking of public or private property. The site would be contingent on the WALLY project moving forward.

This brief was filed from the city council’s chambers on the second floor of city hall, located at 301 E. Huron.

721 N. Main site showing the two buildings to be demolished, which are located in the floodway.

The unanimous vote to accept the funds came at the council’s March 4, 2013 meeting. The 721 N. Main site is a former city maintenance yard, and is part of a broader area being studied by a task force. That area includes the North Main corridor and extends to the Huron River, covering the MichCon site near Broadway.

The cost of the demolition will be $116,939, with the remaining $29,235 to be paid by the city. The city’s portion will be drawn from a combination of funds – fleet services, major streets, local streets, and stormwater utility.

The two buildings are being demolished because they’re in the FEMA floodway. A third building – not in the floodway, but still in the flood fringe – is being studied for possible re-use. On a recommendation from the task force, the council approved $30,000 for the physical testing of that building at its Feb. 19, 2013 meeting.

The task force recommendation for the use of the 721 N. Main site has already been delivered to the city council, and is consistent with a previous council resolution that the floodway portion of the site would be incorporated into an Allen Creek greenway. The site-specific recommendation for 721 N. Main was delivered to meet deadlines for grant applications. The recommendation for a broader area on the 721 N. Main site is due at the end of July 2013. The city is applying for $300,000 in funding from the Washtenaw County parks and recreation commission’s Connecting Communities program, which had a December 2012 deadline. The city also plans to apply for a Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund grant, which has an April 1, 2013 deadline.

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

Three parcels received discussion at the council's May 7 meeting, from south to north: 415 W. Washington, 721 N. Main, the MichCon property. (Image links to higher resolution file)

In connection with different agenda items, the council discussed the future of three major parcels within the city, two of which are city-owned: 415 W. Washington and 721 N. Main, and the MichCon site near Broadway bridges.

First the council heard an update on the possible future of the city-owned 415 W. Washington property, located across from the Ann Arbor YMCA, which opened in 2005. The Y replaced the old Ann Arbor Technology Center, which had been the home of the 555 Nonprofit Gallery and Studios, along with independent artists and musicians, who rented space at the center. It burned in the course of a 2003 demolition.

The 555 Nonprofit Gallery and Studios went on to re-locate in Detroit. The group has some experience re-purposing buildings as space for artists, recently hosting a fundraiser for an additional property it has acquired – the 3rd Police Precinct in southwest Detroit. Artists can rent literal jail cells there as work space.

On Feb. 1, 2010, the Ann Arbor city council had established a task force – consisting of greenway advocates and members of the arts community – to explore the future use of the 415 W. Washington property. The Ann Arbor Arts Alliance was the group identified to represent the arts community interests.

Now, the 555 group appears ready to take responsibility for the arts portion of planning for the site. That’s the portion that entails re-using the existing building on the site, which is located in the Old West Side historic district. Carl Goines, a representative of 555, addressed the council on Monday night. Goines had co-founded the group 10 years ago in the tech center.

Goines described how an investment of around $45,000 is needed for surveying and environmental analysis of the 415 W. Washington site. That investment would be required whether the building is preserved or demolished, he said. Mayor John Hieftje indicated in his comments at the meeting that he’d be willing to give the group perhaps a year to establish a viable way to re-purpose the building, but also indicated an eagerness eventually to apply to the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund for a grant to develop the entire parcel as a park. If the 555 group could not find a way to rehabilitate the structure within a reasonable time, Hieftje indicated a willingness to pursue the option of asking the city’s historic district commission for permission to demolish the structure.

The other city-owned parcel discussed by the council was 721 N. Main, former site of a city maintenance yard.  That came in connection with a council resolution to establish a task force to study the North Main corridor, and deliver a report in a year’s time, by July 31, 2013. Earlier than that, by the end of 2012, the task force is supposed to provide a recommendation on the use of 721 N. Main.

The city has an already-approved grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to pay for demolition of two buildings on the site – but not the main building. The 721 N. Main parcel will also likely be part of a Natural Resources Trust Fund grant application by the city in the spring of 2013.

The task force is also supposed to provide a recommendation on the future use of the MichCon property, between the Amtrak station and the Huron River. MichCon is currently undertaking an environmental cleanup of the land, and the standard to which MichCon remediates the parcel will depend on its intended future use. Hieftje has been clear about his preference – that the city acquire the land for a park. A possible source of funds the city could use for acquisition of such a park would be money generated by the open space and parkland preservation millage.

By administrative policy, a third of the revenue from that millage is overseen by the land acquisition committee of the city’s park advisory commission. The council confirmed a new appointment to that commission at Monday’s meeting – Ingrid Ault, who replaces the term-limited Gwen Nystuen. The other two-thirds of the millage revenues – for preservation of land outside the city as a greenbelt – is administered by the greenbelt advisory commission. And notice of two upcoming reappointments to that body was also on the agenda – for Catherine Riseng and Peter Allen.

Allen is a real estate developer, who might have alternatives in mind for MichCon’s property that include more than just a park.

415 W. Washington

On the council’s agenda under the “introductions” section was an item updating the status of the city-owned 415 W. Washington site. For the council, the most recent historical touchstone was their Feb. 1, 2010 resolution establishing a task force consisting of Allen Creek greenway advocates and representatives of the arts community to work together to explore uses of the site. Chronicle coverage of that council meeting: ”Council Restarts 415 W. Washington Process.”

But the history of the planning for the site dates back more than just two years.

415 W. Washington: More Context – Current Use

Currently, the part of the parcel not occupied by buildings is used for surface parking in Ann Arbor’s public parking system. The lot offers 161 spaces, and generated $160,274 for 49,818 hourly patrons for the first nine months of fiscal year 2012 – that is, through March 31.

Based on the first three quarters of FY 2012, the annual revenue from 415 W. Washington’s parking lot can be estimated at $214,000 annually. The Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority operates the public parking system under contract with the city of Ann Arbor – a contract that stipulates 17% of gross parking revenues be paid directly to the city. So currently, the surface parking lot at 415 W. Washington could be estimated to provide about $36,000 annually to the city of Ann Arbor.

415 W. Washington: More Context – Future Use

A 2007 city of Ann Arbor greenway task force’s report included the following alternative recommendations for 415 W. Washington: (a) open space and a community art park; (b) a community building; and (c) new housing and additional open space. The (b) alternative mentioned the arts community specifically, but was not limited to that nonprofit sector. From the report:

Another rationale for maintaining the current structure has been provided by a variety of artists, artist organizations and other non-profit entities such as Kiwanis, many of which have expressed a desire to maintain the building for use by their respective organizations.

The city then issued an RFP (request for proposals) for the site. The RFP included a range of site objectives, but did not specify any one of the three recommended greenway task force alternatives for the site. The RFP site objectives, in excerpted form, are these:

1. Beneficial use of the site. … Preference will be given to proposals that incorporate a use (or uses) that provides a publicly available service to the community, for instance, building space that may be used for public meetings and civic or cultural events. Additional consideration will be given for the development of dwelling units affordable to downtown workers earning between 60% and 80% of Area Median Income (AMI), as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
2. Public greenway linkage. The floodway portion of the site should be reserved in some manner as open space for the Allen Creek Greenway. … The proposal should include provisions for long-term maintenance of the public elements by the applicant.
3. Flood risk mitigation. A successful proposal will employ the best management practices identified in the City of Ann Arbor Flood Mitigation Plan. …
4. Environmental benefits. The development proposal should incorporate to the greatest extent possible environmentally sensitive design and energy efficiency features that follow Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards. Preference will be given to proposals that reuse or rehabilitate existing structures, consistent with historic district standards. …
5. Historic preservation. The project design must respect the historic character of the surrounding neighborhood and comply with the Old West Side historic district regulations. …
6. Financial return. The proposal must provide a positive financial return to the City. …

The three proposals received by the city, in severely abbreviated form, were as follows:

Old West Side Design Group: This proposal called for construction of a 3-story artist loft and live/work building totaling 24-36 units with above grade-level parking. The building, which would contain a minimum of 5-8 affordable units, would be located south of the main building on land currently occupied by garage structures. It would be designed for a LEED Silver rating or higher. A 24-unit residential condominium and commercial building is proposed on the adjacent 318 W. Liberty, to be developed under a separate site plan by members of the OWSDG proposal team.

Morningside: Construction of a new five-story, 52-unit condominium building with 48 parking spaces on the grade level under the building. Second floor residences are proposed for artist live/work space. Units would be priced in the mid-$200,000 range. The building, which would be designed for LEED Gold certification, would be located south of the main building on land currently occupied by garage structures.

Ann Arbor Art Center: Renovation of the 415 W. Washington building and garages into a community arts facility, to be owned by the Art Center. The Art Center would occupy approximately 13,000 square feet and rent or lease the remaining space to art groups and individuals.

Membership on the RFP review committee was as follows: Christine Brummer (Old West Side Association), Chris Easthope (now 15th District Court judge and then Ward 5 city council member), Sue McCormick (then director of public services with the city of Ann Arbor), John Mouat (then as now, an Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority board member), and Scott Rosencrans (then a member of the city’s park advisory commission).

After meeting seven times from May to December 2008 to review and evaluate the proposals, the RFP committee offered praise for all three proposals but did not designate any one of the three a recommended choice. From the committee report:

Notwithstanding these positive elements, the Committee finds that no single proposal is able to satisfy all of the site objectives and requirements of the RFP on its own merits. This evaluation is described in the findings below, followed by recommendations for the next steps in the site redevelopment process.

The RFP committee then kicked the process back to council by asking councilmembers to refine the RFP and allow opportunity until mid-March 2009 for revision to the proposals. From the report:

City council should further clarify its vision for the intended uses of the site and revise the site objectives in the RFP accordingly. The Committee recommends that city council include the following elements in its vision for the site:

• A publicly-owned greenway along the existing floodway.
• Renovation of the 415 W. Washington office building for an arts and/or civic use.
• Removal of the garages behind the office building.
• Construction of a new multi-family or live-work residential building at the southwest corner of the site.
• Pedestrian and vehicle connections to both Liberty and Washington streets.

City council should provide each of the three proposers an opportunity to amend their proposal to respond to the revised site objectives and to provide for collaboration between the parties. The charge of the advisory committee should be extended to review the amended proposals and make its recommendation to city council by March 16, 2009.

The city council did not act in the fashion described by the RFP review committee.

Instead, the city council eventually moved ahead with its Feb. 1, 2010 resolution on the 415 W. Washington site. That resolution could be fairly described as taking the concept from the Ann Arbor Art Center’s RFP response and starting a community-based process to explore its realization.

The resolution language referred explicitly to an “innovative process of community collaboration to explore a greenway park and arts center.”

415 W. Washington: Update on  Process – 2011

The Greenway Arts Committee established to engage in the “innovative process” included: mayor John Hieftje, Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5), Margie Teall (Ward 4), Christine Schopieray (the mayor’s administrative assistant) on behalf of the city council; Joe O’Neal and Jonathan Bulkley for the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy; and Tamara Real, Susan Froelich and David Esau for The Arts Alliance.

A year ago, at its April 4, 2011 meeting, the council received an update on the process. Esau of the Arts Alliance gave the presentation for the group. Highlights of the work included a report on focus groups conducted with artists. The committee also had made site visits to The Russell in Detroit, the Park Trades Center in Kalamazoo, and the Box Factory in St. Joseph.

At that time, the committee had secured a donation that had allowed a grant writer to be hired, to help submit applications for several grants, but none had yet been secured, Esau reported. He said the next step would be to raise $100,000 for additional studies on the old buildings located at the site, which are protected by the Old West Side historic district.

415 W. Washington: Update on  Process – 2012

At the council’s most recent meeting on May 7, 2012, Esau’s update was less sanguine about his own group’s involvement.

He characterized the group as having completed the work for the skills that are relevant to the Arts Alliance. The group had wanted to see a combination of different kind of spaces for artists and had generated preliminary layouts for the building. The result of that work suggested the building could house the activities that the Arts Alliance would like it to house, and that it could operate on a break-even basis. What was needed was a more sophisticated and detailed revenue/expense analysis, he said.

Funding for grant writing had been arranged, Esau said. However, most foundations offering grants are limited in their scope, he said. Foundations offering grants often are not interested in funding bricks-and-mortar capital projects, especially not early-stage projects like the 415 W. Washington project. The group wound up applying for just one grant, and it turned out that for that grant as well, the kind of capital project the Ann Arbor group had in mind was not a good fit, even though that was not evident from the grant criteria. The balance of the money that had been donated to the group for grant-writing activity has been returned to the donor at the request of the donor, Esau reported.

For the greenway portion of the project, Esau indicated that it would be included as part of the city’s grant application to Michigan’s Department of Natural Resources Trust Fund. [That same entity is funding part of the Ann Arbor skatepark and the renovations to the city's boat facilities at Gallup Park.]

Esau told the council that if the city is serious about redevelopment of the building, there is money that needs to be spent now. Some of that money would be needed anyway – even if the building is demolished. The Arts Alliance still believes a shared arts facility has potential and could be beneficial. However, as supportive as the Arts Alliance is of the concept, that organization can’t continue to do work on the project without compensation. All their work thus far has been pro bono. He noted that a different arts group has emerged that has more experience in adapting existing structures and is interested in participating.

With that, Esau handed over the presentation to Carl Goines, executive director of 555 Nonprofit Gallery and Studios. Goines sketched out the mission and history of the group, as it was founded in the Technology Center, where the Ann Arbor Y now stands, across the street from the 415 W. Washington site.

Vision of 415 W. Washington as complementary spaces with a greenway and space for contemporary artists. The bottom image is an aerial view of the existing site, looking north. (Image links to higher resolution file.)

Goines described three locations in Detroit that 555 currently operates, including the former 3rd police precinct building, with around 7,000 square feet, including jail cells. Goines said 555 was interested in working with greenway advocates to create complementary spaces – the greenway portion of the parcel and a building with space for artists.

The first steps that Goines said need to be taken are: hazardous materials assessment ($5,200); Phase 2/3 environmental assessments ($20,000); topographic and boundary survey ($6,200); structural condition survey ($3,000 to $5,000); and architectural/structural as-built survey ($8,000).

So the estimated total for survey work, he said, is $45,000 – but he had an understanding that the first three items were already in the city’s budget. It’s work that would need to be done, whether the building is demolished or rehabilitated, he said. [In subsequent remarks, community services area administrator Sumedh Bahl described the need to have environmental closure on the site, in order to be able to apply for a grant from Michigan's Natural Resources Trust Fund.]

After those first steps, Goines said, the next steps would be: developing a hazardous materials abatement plan; doing a structural feasibility analysis; doing a more detailed analysis of programming and design feasibility; performing a site and environmental feasibility analysis; doing a cost analysis; forming partnerships; and fundraising.

415 W. Washington: Council Deliberations

Mayor John Hieftje had introduced some of the history of the site before Esau and Goines addressed the council. When they concluded their remarks, Hieftje noted that 415 W. Washington is a city-owned site. The city needs to do something with it. He characterized it as a magnet for graffiti. Because it’s in the Old West Side historic district, the city can’t simply remove the building. The city would need to petition the city’s historic district commission, Hieftje said. He hoped that a proposal could be brought forward working with people who’ve done a similar project before – the 555 group.

However, Hieftje cautioned that if something couldn’t be brought forward in a year, the task force would have to come back and say they haven’t been able to bring something forward, and a decision would need to be made at that time. A year from now, Hieftje remarked, the building won’t be in better shape than it is now. He echoed the remarks of Esau and Goines in noting that the expenditures they’d identified would need to be made anyway before tearing down the building.

Sumedh Bahl, community services area administrator, explained that the annual deadline for Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund grant applications is in April. Bahl reported that staff had looked at 415 W. Washington as the subject of a possible grant application, but had concluded there are a number of elements not yet in place – for example, “environmental closure” on the site.

At the city park advisory commission meeting on Jan. 2, 2102, Colin Smith – the city’s manager of parks and recreation – had responded to a question from commissioner Gwen Nystuen about the possibility of moving ahead with development of a greenway park at 415 W. Washington. He noted the issue with the historic district as well as the need to master plan a greenway as items that would need to be addressed before a trust fund grant application could be made. From The Chronicle’s meeting coverage:

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, noted that a council resolution was passed on Aug. 4, 2011 expressing general support for the idea of a greenway. There have been conversations, he said, about applying for a grant from the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources Trust Fund, to turn the 415 W. Washington site into a park. The city staff is looking into that. The process would be similar to the way that the trust fund application for the skatepark had been handled, Smith explained. Staff would first come to PAC for a recommendation to apply. That recommendation would be forwarded to city council, which would need to approve the application.

Smith noted that one issue for the 415 W. Washington property is that it’s located in a historic district – the Old West Side. So in addition to PAC, the city would need a recommendation from the historic district commission too, he said.

Finally, Smith reminded commissioners that the parks, recreation and open space (PROS) plan, which PAC approved, recommends that the first action should be development of a master plan to guide the creation of a greenway. That point bears consideration, he said.

415 W. Washington: What about 721 N. Main?

At the council’s May 7 meeting, Bahl explained that because the city could not move quickly with a trust fund grant application for 415 W. Washington, staff were instead considering the city-owned 721 N. Main as a grant application. To apply to the trust fund, he explained, there would need to be environmental closure on the site, a budget and a plan. Even for 721 N. Main, he said, it’d be an aggressive time schedule, but he felt the city could manage it. All the planning work would need to be done by Jan. 1, 2013, he said, to have the application ready for the April 2013 deadline. It would need to be reviewed by the park advisory commission and the environmental commission. Also, community meetings would need to be held and a community consensus achieved.

The introduction of the topic of the 721 N. Main property led to some confusion among councilmembers: Was the city considering applying for Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund grants for 721 N. Main or 415 W. Washington, or possibly both?

Back and forth between Jane Lumm (Ward 2), Hieftje, and Bahl established that the city would plan to try for an application on 721 N. Main in April 2013, and for 415 W. Washington the following year, in April 2014. Hieftje said that city staff say they won’t have the capacity to do both at the same time.

Hieftje also indicated there’s a problem with the environmental conditions at 415 W. Washington. The city thinks it can meet the environmental standard at 721 N. Main. Hieftje also indicated that there’s some concern on the part of the city’s lobbyist in Lansing that the Natural Resources Trust Fund might not be as flush in coming years as it has been. In addition, Hieftje said, the Greenway Conservancy needs to have a park established as a part of the Allen Creek greenway so they can point to it, which will facilitate fundraising for additional acquisitions.

Lumm agreed that both properties are key parcels. She ventured that many members of the city council would like to assist with the planning effort for the greenway, and noted that it involved asking city staff to invest the time to master plan the greenway. Bahl said that planning exercise would be a two-year effort.

In his remarks on the 415 W. Washington presentation, Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) noted the relationship between the two parcels, saying a lot things are coming together at the same time. The 721 N. Main property is within the area of the North Main corridor task force, he said, which was an item later on the council’s agenda.

Outcome: The council did not have a voting item on its agenda related to 415 W. Washington.

North Main/Huron River Task Force

The council considered a resolution establishing a task force to study the corridor along North Main Street and the Huron River.

The scope of the task force is described in one of the “Resolved” clauses:

RESOLVED, This task force’s efforts should develop a vision to create/complete/enhance pedestrian and bike connection from downtown to Bandemer and Huron River Drive, increase public access to the river-side amenities of existing parks in the North Main-Huron River corridor, ease traffic congestion at Main and Depot at certain times of a day and recommend use of MichCon property at Broadway; …

The task force is supposed to submit a report on its vision more than a year from now, on July 31, 2013. The membership of the task force is described as follows:

RESOLVED, That the task force will include one member of the park advisory commission, one member of planning commission, one resident representing Water Hill, one resident representing the North Central, one resident from Old Fourth Ward and one resident representing Broadway/Pontiac neighborhood, two business and property owners from the affected area, and one member of Huron River Watershed Council;

North Main/Huron River Task Force: 721 N. Main

In addition to the MichCon property, the resolution establishing the North Main/Huron River task force explicitly mentions another parcel – 721 N. Main.

RESOLVED, This task force’s efforts should result in a recommendation to council for the best use of 721 N. Main as part of the Allen Creek Greenway trails by Dec. 31, 2012;

So there are two deadlines for the task force – an outcome that was decided only after confusion and much conversation by the council during its May 7 deliberations. The earliest deadline is for a recommendation on the 721 N. Main property – by the end of 2012. The later deadline, for the overall report, is not until 2013, on July 31.

The 721 N. Main parcel is west of Main Street. The main building on the site is oriented north-south, visible just north of the blue-shaded area (the FEMA floodway) and inside the green area (the FEMA floodplain). The FEMA grant for demolition of buildings does not include the main building. (Links to higher resolution image.)

Council deliberations on the 721 N. Main portion of the task force resolution had already begun in the context of the presentation on 415 W. Washington. At that point in the council meeting, it was already established that the 721 N. Main property would be put ahead of 415 W. Washington for consideration of a Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund application. It’s the trust fund’s April 2013 application deadline that pushed the council to give the task force a Dec. 31, 2012 deadline for a recommendation on 721 N. Main.

Some of the additional background on 721 N. Main, reviewed by community services area administrator Sumedh Bahl, included the fact that the city has received a grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to demolish two of the buildings – those in the floodway. The main building is in the floodplain, not the floodway, and is not included in the FEMA grant. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) asked if there was any intent to save the main building. Bahl said he didn’t know right now, but the FEMA grant is for the demolition of the other two buildings.

The receipt of the FEMA grant is contingent on getting the city’s All-Hazard Plan updated, Bahl explained. It had lapsed, and FEMA requires an updated plan before the grant award can be made. [The city recently hired a new emergency management director, Rick Norman, who was introduced to the council at its Feb. 21, 2012 meeting. Updating the plan will be one of Norman's priorities.]

As funding sources for development of 721 N. Main as a greenway park, Hieftje gave another possibility in addition to the FEMA grant and the possible Natural Resources Trust Fund grant. Hieftje reported that he also had had a fruitful conversation with Washtenaw County parks and recreation on possible funding from that group. [The Washtenaw County parks and recreation commission operates with its own dedicated millage funds.] No formal agreement exists, Hieftje allowed, but the group was happy to see an application for funds go forward.

By way of additional background, Bob Tetens – director of Washtenaw County parks and recreation – told The Chronicle in a recent phone interview that there was not anything yet in front of the parks and recreation commission related to 721 N. Main. He indicated that there’d been conversations with the city about the project, and that the idea of connecting the 721 N. Main property would be a good fit with the county parks and recreation Connecting Communities grant program – a $600,000 annual program over five years, for a total of $3 million. Tetens also said that a project already partly funded through another source (like the state’s Natural Resources Trust Fund) would enhance that project’s application for a Connecting Communities grant. However, there are more applications for various projects every year than Washtenaw County parks and recreation can fund through the program, Tetens said.

Excerpt from the city's 2007 Non-Motorized Transportation Plan. (Image links to higher resolution file.)

At the council’s May 7 meeting, Bahl said that Ann Arbor will work with Washtenaw County parks and recreation as the project moves along. Hieftje also described the possibility of a tunnel under the railroad track that could connect the 721 N. Main side of the railroad tracks to the Border-to-Border Trail. [The two borders to which the trail's name refers are the eastern and western edges of Washtenaw County.]

The city’s 2007 Non-Motorized Transportation Plan, which is currently being updated by the city, shows a non-motorized trail underpass for the railroad tracks that would essentially extend a shared-use path from Fifth Avenue at Depot Street under the tracks across the MichCon property, where it could eventually connect with the Border-to-Border trail. [.pdf of map from 2007 Non-Motorized Transportation Plan]

Hieftje commented that he’s hopeful about a railroad underpass, because the Michigan Dept. of Transportation would be soon be acquiring the tracks from Norfolk Southern Railway. Railroad are notorious for being difficult to work with, he said. Hieftje felt that MDOT should be easier to work with than Norfolk Southern.

Bahl responded to Hieftje’s speculation by saying that MDOT might be easier to work with than the Norfolk Southern, but said that working with MDOT is no piece of cake. Bahl’s sentiments were consistent with those expressed by city staff on a March 16, 2012 staff-led tour of the area around the MichCon site and the Broadway bridges. Responding to residents who ventured that MDOT would be easier to work with, city engineer Michael Nearing and city transportation program manager Eli Cooper were both keen to stress that MDOT would not be easy to work with on railroad issues.

North Main/Huron River Task Force: Council Deliberations

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) led off the deliberations on the task force resolution. She co-sponsored it with her wardmate, Sabra Briere. She highlighted the fact that it’s meant to be a collaborative effort to look at the North Main corridor along the Huron River. She noted that access to Bandemer Park was difficult – for pedestrians, bicyclists and cars. None of it is being done very well currently, she said. So people use the illegal cut-throughs across the railroad tracks.

The city has given up maintaining a fence there, because it was destroyed so many times, she said. But across the railroad tracks is the only way into Bandemer, unless you go up North Main and cross the tracks at the at-grade crossing. Almost everyone takes the illegal shortcut, she noted. The city is investing a lot of resources in that general area. The Argo Cascades bypass around the Argo Dam has doubled or tripled the number of visitors to the area. People are flocking to it, she said. A connection between 721 N. Main and Bandemer will serve the greenway very well, she said. Getting to the Huron River from that side of the railroad tracks needs to be addressed, she said.

In his remarks, made later in the deliberations, Mike Anglin (Ward 5) noted that Smith had served on the Allen Creek greenway task force that had produced the 2007 report. It had a lot of technical detail that’s very deep, he noted. The participation of the greenway conservancy would be an asset, he said.

Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) said the task force effort ties in with efforts that had been discussed two years ago. He noted that he and Smith had walked the area to see what the North Main entrance into the city looks like. He said he’d support the resolution as an idea whose time has come.

Briere noted the difference between the work of the task force and the work that city staff would do. She observed that members of the task force are individual citizens, not staff members. She continued by saying she is partial to the resolution language that says the task force will conduct a series of workshops and would work with independent professionals – to help everyone listen to ideas they might not think of inside the box they live in. She stressed that the task force membership includes people who have a real stake in the area. She also stressed that anyone who wanted to attend the task force meetings would be welcome to do so.

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) indicated she supported the resolution. But she wanted to know how the work would be funded. Briere indicated the task force would have access to one staff member – Sumedh Bahl. Most of the work would be done by people who don’t get paid. So Higgins ventured that the independent professionals the task force was supposed to consult with would be volunteers – yes, said Briere.

A lengthy discussion then ensued about the work that the task force would do on 721 N. Main, compared with the staff work that would be done specifically in connection with preparing to meet the April 2013 application deadline for the Michigan Natural Resources Trust Fund.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) and Sandi Smith (Ward 1) before the May 7 council meeting.

Bahl indicated that the initially proposed deadline for the task force recommendation on 721 N. Main (which had been March 31, 2013) would be much too late to make a difference for the April grant application. That deadline was revised to Dec. 31, 2012.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) expressed some concern that even that earlier deadline would not give city staff enough time to prepare the grant application. Bahl assured Taylor that the site plan that would be produced in connection with the grant application would be only at the conceptual level, indicating that the deadline would be achievable.

Hieftje stressed that the best thing from the point of view of pushing a greenway forward is to get the funding for 721 N. Main, so that the first of a series of greenway parks could be established. That would be the best approach to establishing 415 W. Washington as part of an Allen Creek greenway, he said.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) thanked Briere and Smith for developing the resolution and bringing it forward. He counted it as significant progress since the greenway task force had submitted its report. He also noted that progress had been made on the First and William lot. Hohnke felt that progress was now being made on the other two city-owned parcels [identified by greenway advocates as three key parcels for an Allen Creek greenway.] Hohnke noted that part of the challenge of the First and William site is environmental remediation.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved establishing the task force to develop a vision for North Main/Huron River. Appointments to the task force could come as soon as the next council meeting on May 21.

Appointments to Open-Space-Related Bodies

In addition to eventual appointments to the North Main/Huron River task force, at its May 7 meeting the council considered appointments to two park-related bodies of the city: the park advisory commission, and the greenbelt advisory commission.

Appointments: Park Advisory Commission

The council considered the nomination of Ingrid Ault to the city’s park advisory commission (PAC). Ault – executive director of the nonprofit Think Local First – replaces Gwen Nystuen, who served two three-year terms on the commission starting in 2006. Service on the commission is limited to six continuous years at a time – but an additional appointment can be made after a three-year pause.

During the council’s opportunity to deliberate on the appointment, Jane Lumm (Ward 2) spoke at length in praise of Nystuen’s service to the city on PAC.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved Ault’s nomination to the city’s park advisory commission.

Appointments: Greenbelt Advisory Commission

A parliamentary snafu was associated with the nomination for re-appointment of two members of the city’s greenbelt advisory commission (GAC), which is charged with overseeing a portion of the proceeds from the open space and parkland preservation millage. By administrative policy, two-thirds of the millage proceeds are invested in land preservation outside the city – GAC makes recommendations to city council for those investments. The other third of the money is overseen by the land acquisition committee of PAC, which also acts in an advisory capacity to city council.

The re-appointment of Catherine Riseng and Peter Allen to GAC was on the agenda as a voting item, but was supposed to be a communication. The council agreed informally to postpone the vote until its following meeting, on May 21. Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) raised the corresponding point of order – the council should actually vote on the postponement as a matter of form, which the council then did.

Outcome: The council unanimously postponed the reappointment of Riseng and Allen to GAC.

MichCon Site

Also a part of the North Main/Huron River task force scope of work is the MichCon site, bounded roughly by the railroad tracks next to the Amtrak station on the west, the Huron River on the east, and Broadway bridges on the south.

MichCon, a subsidiary of DTE Energy, is currently engaged in the environmental cleanup of contamination that’s related to the site’s history as a coal gasification plant. The cleanup plan for the strip of land alongside the river was presented to the city council recently, as well as to the city’s park advisory commission. [For a more detailed look at that plan, see Chronicle coverage of the March 20, 2012 park advisory commission meeting.]

At an April 10, 2012 public hearing held at Cobblestone Farm, Shayne Wiesemann, a senior environmental engineer with DTE Energy, spoke to The Chronicle about the cleanup. He explained that the cleanup of the area next to the river was the subject of the hearing, not the cleanup for the entire site. While the standards for remediating the riverside strip had essentially been determined, that was not the case for the entire site.

The cleanup standard that DTE Energy would meet for the entire site would depend on its eventual planned use by a future owner, Wiesemann said. He indicated that the MichCon leadership is interested in selling the property – but does not have an immediate sense of urgency to dispose of the land. He indicated that something like a five-year time frame would be appropriate to think about.

"Broadway Mills" – a University of Michigan student project. This rendering is oriented with south at the top of the image. (Image links to large .pdf of class project.)

Mayor John Hieftje and others have spoken about their desire to see the land acquired by the city and become a park. One possible source of funds for acquisition of at least part of the parcel by the city would be the open space and parkland preservation millage. That purchase would need to be recommended by the park advisory commission’s land acquisition committee.

For Peter Allen, who serves on the greenbelt advisory commission in the slot designated for a real estate developer, the vision of the MichCon property is more than just a park. [Allen's service on GAC would not allow him to have say in the expenditure of open space and parkland preservation millage dollars on the MichCon property, which lies inside the city.]

In a recent phone interview with The Chronicle, Allen described how the “buildable” portion of the property is closer to the Broadway bridges, and that he could imagine the parcel as including parkland as well as developed property. He highlighted in particular the possibility of including a performing arts venue at the location.

NoMo – a University of Michigan student project. The view is from the east with the Broadway bridges in the foreground. (Image links to large .pdf of class project.)

Allen teaches a course in urban planning as an adjunct professor at the University of Michigan. Two and a half years ago, The Chronicle reported on a class assignment that Allen gave students to look at the potential development of various sites around Ann Arbor. Two groups of students took on the challenge of evaluating the MichCon property as developable land.

The two projects were called Broadway Mills and NoMo. Both proposals include construction of buildings on the eastern part of the parcel, leaving the western portion as open space.

NoMo proposed a mix of retail (ground floor), office (middle) and residential uses (top). Broadway Mills also included a mix of retail and residential uses, and specifically called for a small amphitheater and a seasonal ice rink. A space the project team dubbed “Depot Plaza” – located roughly where the current Amtrak station is located – would be “a family-oriented space, with a splash fountain, climbable sculptures, and a playground.”

Outcome: The council did not have a voting item on its agenda regarding the MichCon property.

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

Absent: Margie Teall.

Next council meeting: Monday, May 21, 2012 at 7 p.m. in the council chambers at 301 E. Huron. [confirm date]

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

Baseball field #4 at Veterans Memorial Park will be among fields at three parks that will be renovated, if the Ann Arbor city council approves a recommendation of the park advisory commission. (Photos by the writer.)

PAC unanimously recommended awarding a nearly $1 million contract to RMD Holdings of Chesterfield, Michigan, for renovation of ballfields at Veterans Memorial Park, West Park and Southeast Area Park. If approved by the city council, work would begin after the 2012 summer season. Ann Arbor Rec & Ed – a unit of the Ann Arbor Public Schools – plans to cancel its fall season in light of the project. Teams playing in Rec & Ed programs are the primary users of these fields.

Commissioners also got an update on the status of West Park renovations – specifically, how problems with an underground stormwater system are being addressed. City engineer Nick Hutchinson described plans for repairing the system, saying that legal issues are still being worked out, but the project will likely be completed by July of 2012. A public forum will be held on Feb. 13 at Slauson Middle School to update residents. At a similar meeting held in mid-January, residents raised concerns over whether the situation in West Park has caused flooding in nearby basements.

Also at PAC’s Jan. 24 meeting, commissioner Gwen Nystuen urged the group to consider taking action on the Allen Creek greenway, in light of remarks made by mayor John Hieftje at the city council’s Jan. 23 meeting regarding the city-owned 415 W. Washington property. Colin Smith, the city’s manager of parks and recreation, reported that there’s been discussion about possibly applying for a state grant to help fund the greenway, but the timeline for applying this year is tight. He also suggested that an initial step would be to develop a master plan for the greenway, as recommended in the city’s parks, recreation and open space plan.

Near the beginning of the meeting, commissioner Sam Offen introduced the new executive director for the Leslie Science & Nature Center, Susan Westhoff, who spoke briefly to commissioners. Offen is a board member of the center, a nonprofit that’s located on city property.

Ballfield Renovations

The main action item on the Jan. 24 agenda was a resolution recommending a nearly $1 million contract to renovate softball and baseball fields at three city parks.

If approved by the city council, the $982,333 contract would be awarded to RMD Holdings of Chesterfield, Michigan. That amount includes a $893,030 base bid plus a 10% contingency of $89,303. It was the lowest of four bids received for the project, which will focus on the fenced ballparks at Veterans Memorial Park, West Park and Southeast Area Park. Originally, the city had intended to include fields at Allmendinger Park as well, but bids came in higher than expected, and that work was eliminated from the project.

The renovations have been in the works for more than two years. At PAC’s September 2010 meeting, commissioner David Barrett gave a report on the condition of the city’s ballparks after personally surveying them. [.pdf file of Barrett's ballpark report] According to a staff memo accompanying the Jan. 24 resolution, no major restoration work has been done on the fields in more than 10 years.

Staff from Ann Arbor Rec & Ed, a unit of the public school system, will work with city staff on this project – Rec & Ed programs are the primary users of these fields. Construction will likely begin in mid-August of 2012, with fields ready for use again in early spring of 2013. Rec & Ed plans to cancel its fall season to accommodate the project.

Funding will be drawn from three sources: (1) $250,000 from the approved FY 2012 parks maintenance and capital improvements millage budget; (2) $64,000 from an unobligated remaining fund balance in the expired park repair and restoration millage; and (3) $668,333 from the unobligated fund balance of the existing parks maintenance and capital improvements millage.

Deputy parks manager Jeff Straw and Matt Warba, the city’s supervisor of field operations, briefed PAC on the proposal. Straw noted that in collecting feedback for the 2010 update to the parks, recreation and open space (PROS) plan, the city heard loud and clear that people wanted better maintenance of the fields. The fields – used for baseball, softball and kickball – drew more than 5,000 players during the summer and fall seasons in 2011, Straw said.

Warba noted that when the city had a larger parks staff, renovations of the fields occurred every 10 years. Now, that’s no longer possible to do in-house, he said. Describing the current conditions of the fields, Warba said they are poorly graded, with poor drainage that results in water pooling in the infield, which limits play. The material used for the infield makes it dusty in the summer, and doesn’t allow water to drain quickly when it rains.

For the outfields, the playing surfaces are uneven, Warba said, the turf is in poor condition, and the warning tracks are filled with weeds. Fencing is deteriorating and damaged, and many of the backstops don’t have overhangs.

Upgrades will include regrading the infields, removing the infield lip, replacing the existing infield material with red clay, and installing drainage around the infield’s perimeter. Fencing will be replaced, automated irrigation systems will be installed, field turf will be restored, and concrete will be used for floors of the dugouts and bleacher pads.

Warba told commissioners that Stantec had drawn up designs for the project, and that the lowest “responsible” bid came from RMD Holdings, a company with prior experience doing this work.

Ballfield Renovations: Commission Discussion

Karen Levin asked whether other fields in the city’s parks system can be used to play on during the renovations. Warba said there are 24 other neighborhood fields available. The next phase of this project will be upgrading those as well, he said. Straw added that Rec & Ed decided to cancel its fall season in part because lighting would be a challenge – most of the other ballfields don’t have lights.

Colin Smith, the city’s manager of parks and recreation, noted that no matter how the renovations are handled, it will be inconvenient. Rec & Ed staff felt this would be the best approach, he said. Rec & Ed director Sara Aeschbach told commissioners that players had been surveyed about their preferences, and the strong preference was to preserve the summer season. Using the neighborhood ballparks is too difficult in the fall, because it gets dark earlier. She said players are excited that the fields will be improved.

Gwen Nystuen asked about the material that would be used under the team benches. Will it be a pervious surface? Water drainage is important, she noted. Warba replied that the area will be designed with an angle to allow water to flow off the surface. Pervious materials weren’t considered, he said, though there’s still time to make changes.

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

Smith noted that the majority of players wear cleats, which would create problems for any pervious surface. He also pointed out that significant stormwater improvements will be made in that section of Veterans Memorial Park, as part of the Dexter-Ann Arbor street repair project.

Nystuen said that in general, whenever they can install pervious surfaces, it will make a difference in helping address stormwater runoff.

Christopher Taylor asked whether the ballpark renovations would coordinate in any way with the possible skatepark construction at Vets. Smith replied that it’s unlikely the skatepark construction will begin by August – it’s more likely that work on the project will start in the spring of 2013. In response to another query from Taylor, Smith indicated that construction equipment used to build the skatepark isn’t expected to damage the work done on the ballfields.

Mike Anglin said he assumed that the parks staff had coordinated this project with the road work being done along Dexter-Ann Arbor. Yes, Smith said. The stretch of Dexter-Ann Arbor along Veterans Memorial Park, east of Maple, will likely be closed from April through November. That’s another good reason for the fall season to be canceled, Smith said, adding that a lot of coordination will be needed.

Julie Grand observed that rates for using the fields at Fuller and Olson parks increased after those fields were renovated. Would rates also be increased at the ballfields after renovations?

Aeschbach said that Rec & Ed charges fees to cover the cost of prepping the fields for play, and those costs won’t change. It’s up to the city, she said, to set the actual rental rates for the fields. Many user groups no longer play on city fields because of the damaged conditions, she said, so demand isn’t high. Perhaps after the fields are renovated, the city can check to see if those groups will return and pay a higher rate.

Smith noted that this project is in line with the philosophy of taking care of and restoring what the city already owns. The ballfields are eyesores, he said, and not good for playing. In addition, Veterans Memorial Park is located at one of the major entry points into town – the corner of Maple and Dexter-Ann Arbor roads. The area needs attention, he said, and the city is undertaking a major effort to do that, in part to respond to feedback from users.

Outcome: Commissioner voted unanimously to recommend approval of the $982,333 contract with RMD Holdings for ballfield renovations at Veterans Memorial Park, West Park and Southeast Area Park. The recommendation will be forwarded to city council for consideration.

West Park Update

Commissioners had received an update on problems at West Park nearly a year ago, when Craig Hupy – head of systems planning for the city – spoke at PAC’s February 2011 meeting. At that time, Hupy had described the situation with the stormwater infrastructure there as a “catastrophic failure.”

PAC got a more detailed briefing at its Jan. 24 meeting. Parks planner Amy Kuras introduced Nick Hutchinson, a civil engineer and one of the project managers in the city’s public services unit, who was on hand to give an update on the status of swirl concentrators at West Park. It was a shortened version of a similar presentation he’d given at a public forum on the topic earlier in January. Kuras reported that forum had been well-attended.

Nick Hutchinson, an engineer and project manager with the city of Ann Arbor, updated PAC on the status of infrastructure renovations at West Park.

Hutchinson began by giving a brief history of stormwater management in West Park. Originally, north and south branches of Allen Creek flowed over the surface through the land that’s now West Park. In the early 20th century, Washtenaw County built drains through the park to collect stormwater, and directed the flow of Allen Creek into underground pipes. There’s also a sanitary sewer main that runs underground through the park. Hutchinson showed a map that indicated the location of the floodway and floodplain running through the park, as well as the location of the sewer main and county drains.

Over the years, conditions worsened. Deteriorating recreational facilities and uncontrolled flooding in the park led to certain areas being underused.

In 2010, the city renovated West Park, including its bandshell, basketball courts and pathways. The project also included upgrades for stormwater management, Hutchinson said. [The total project, supported in part by federal stimulus funds, cost about $4 million.]

The stormwater portion of the project included installation of some water treatment units – swirl concentrators – on the west side of the park, in the north and south branches of the Allen Creek drain. The purpose was to divert some of the water from the stormwater system, treat it, and remove pollutants before reintroducing it into the system to flow eventually into the Huron River.

Another part of the stormwater management was to remove a nominal amount of water from the stormwater pipes by disconnecting the inlets from North Seventh Street and sending some of the water back to the surface, as it had flowed historically. Water was diverted to a series of bioswales that led to wetlands and ponds as it flowed east through the park.

When construction was being completed around November 2010, Hutchinson reported, a sinkhole appeared on the west side of the park near the drain’s north branch, where the swirl concentrators were located. “These are maybe some of the things that didn’t go quite right on the project,” he said, “that we are still trying to address now.”

The contractor investigated and discovered that the lid on a swirl concentrator had caved in. Cameras were sent down into the other units and it was discovered that all four units on the north branch were in some stage of failure.

This photo, part of the meeting packet for the Jan. 24 park advisory commission, shows the installation of a swirl concentrator at West Park in the summer of 2010.

Hutchinson explained how the swirl concentrators are supposed to work. Water is diverted from the main stormwater pipe through a device called a diversion manhole, containing a 3.5-foot “weir wall” that prevents the water from flowing directly into the main stormwater system. Instead, the diverted water flows into a large cylinder, where it swirls around in a vortex. The solids in the water are forced to the center of the unit, where the velocity of the swirling is slower and the solids settle down to the bottom. The water exits into a pipe on the other side of the unit and is reintroduced into the stormwater system.

During normal conditions or a light rain, most of the water is diverted. But in heavy rainfall, only a portion of the water is diverted – the rest flows over the weir wall and continues directly through the stormwater system, without passing through the swirl concentrators.

A total of eight swirl concentrators were installed – four on the north branch, and four on the south branch. Each unit cost about $66,000, including construction. They were initially installed in June of 2010.

In August of 2010, the four units in the south branch were taken offline because of concerns that the weir wall wasn’t operating correctly, Hutchinson said. The wall wasn’t allowing higher flows to pass through the system during heavy rains. Then in November of 2010, after the swirl concentrator collapsed on the north branch, all four of those units were also taken offline. The weir wall was removed from the diversion manhole, and a bulkhead was installed to block the pipe that led to the swirl concentrators. Since then, water has flowed directly through the stormwater pipes – none of it is diverted to the swirl concentrators. The stormwater system is functioning as it did prior to 2010, Hutchinson said.

In late 2010, the city hired Orchard Hiltz & McCliment (OHM) to look into the situation. OHM began by doing a forensic investigation of the swirl concentrator failures, and determined that the lids of those units were too thin, causing the collapse. ”It was essentially a manufacturing flaw,” Hutchinson said.

OHM also reviewed the prior design of the diversion manholes and weir walls, and conducted some site-specific stormwater modeling to get an understanding of how stormwater behaves in the system. They used that information to present some ideas for improving the system, Hutchinson said. [In November 2010, city council authorized an additional $119,000 for OHM to complete these tasks. That brought total payment to OHM for the West Park project to $324,000. An August 2011 city staff memo indicated that the city expects to recover any additional costs due to the failures, either from the manufacturer or the firm that made the initial design, Beckett & Raeder Inc.]

With a failure of this magnitude there are legal issues, Hutchinson said, including disputes regarding who’s at fault – the contractor (Site Development Inc.) or the manufacturer (AquaShield Inc. and L.F. Manufacturing). He said he couldn’t discuss those issues, except to say that the parties seem to be getting very close to reaching a resolution. The legal issues shouldn’t hold up completion of the project, he said.

Next steps include refining the design of the diversion manholes and weir walls. In addition, residents have raised concerns about manhole covers being popped off during heavy rains, because of pressure from excess water in the system. So OHM is looking at redesigning the system to provide some relief options so that pressure will be eased during storms.

Another public meeting will be held on Feb. 13 at Slauson Middle School. At that meeting, city staff will review OHM’s draft design, and discuss the technical issues that led to the design, Hutchinson said.

In May and June of 2012, the manufacturer will make repairs on the units. Following that, the city will hire a contractor to make the changes that OHM proposes to the diversion manholes and weir walls. City staff hope to have that work completed by July of 2012, Hutchinson said.

West Park Update: Commission Discussion

John Lawter asked whether there are concerns that the shutdown of the swirl concentrators is affecting water detention capability, making it difficult to control floodwater. No, Hutchinson said – the purpose of the swirl concentrators isn’t water detention, but rather to improve the water quality as it flows through.

Are there problems in terms of how much water the units can handle? Lawter asked. If too much water is sent through the units, Hutchinson replied, the water will simply bypass the units and flow over the weir wall, going directly into the stormwater system. Capacity is not a concern. The redesign of the weirs and diversion manholes will ensure that the right amount of water gets in, he said.

Lawter raised the issue of basements flooding in that area, and wondered whether that problem is related to the situation at West Park. An improperly designed weir structure could cause back-ups upstream, Hutchinson said. Any design that’s installed in the future will be studied to ensure that it doesn’t cause any upstream disturbances, he added.

Sam Offen noted that this concern was raised by residents at the January public meeting on West Park. Offen agreed that the issue either needed to be resolved through the new design, or that information should be provided to residents to explain the situation.

Offen also asked how construction would affect the active areas of the park. The work will happen on the park’s west side, Hutchinson said. Access to the ballfield, bandshell and paths will be undisturbed. Kuras added that there are three entrances to the park off of Seventh Street. The north and south entrances will be closed, but the middle entrance will remain open.

Mike Anglin asked whether there was any data related to water flow through the system that was collected prior to the installation of the swirl concentrators. OHM collected flow data in the spring and summer of 2011, Hutchinson said, by putting monitoring devices in the stormwater pipes.

Anglin asked whether the city was making an effort to talk with residents whose basements have flooded. Hutchinson replied that the current project doesn’t entail working with residents. The project is specific to West Park infrastructure.

Kuras added that at the recent public forum on the West Park situation, some people brought up the issue of basement flooding. City staff knows that they need to address the broader issues related to the entire Allen Creek area upstream from West Park, she said.

Hutchinson noted that some neighborhoods – like Maple Ridge – experienced flooding in 2011. At that time, the pipes had been returned to their pre-2010 condition, he said, so the flooding they experienced wasn’t related to changes at West Park, he said.

Report on Fuller & Olson Athletic Fields

Commissioners received an update on conditions of the city’s Fuller Park and Olson Park athletic fields, which were renovated in 2009-2010. The first post-renovation scheduling of play occurred in 2011, from March through November.

From left: Jeff Straw, Ann Arbor deputy parks and recreation manager; Matt Warba, supervisor of field operations; and Jessica Black, parks and recreation customer service manager.

Jessica Black, parks and recreation customer service manager, described how the six Fuller Park fields were used during the spring, summer and fall playing seasons. [.pdf of Fuller fields layouts in 2011] She noted that the two fields at Olson Park are always used as full fields, but that some Fuller Park fields are split into half fields. There are also seasons when the fields are taken out of play and allowed to “rest.”

Black provided a breakdown of the types of users, noting that “soccer is definitely our No. 1 use.” Teams playing soccer accounted for 65% of the use of fields, 15% were lacrosse teams, and the remaining 20% was split between flag football and ultimate frisbee.

A total of 15 teams used the fields throughout 2011, including eight teams that returned from previous years and seven new teams. There were youth and adult teams, and University of Michigan club sports.

City staff had determined that 35 games per field per season was the maximum number of games that should be allowed, in order to maintain the condition of the fields, Black reported. For the three seasons in 2011, Olson and Fuller fields were used at about 79% capacity, she said. At the six Fuller fields, 679 games were played out of a possible 875. At Olson’s two fields, 175 games were played out of 210 possible games.

Jeff Straw, the city’s deputy manager of parks and recreation, briefed commissioners on revenues from the fields. Rates were set at $60 per hour for most of the full fields at Fuller and for the two Olson fields. Half-field rates at Fuller were $40 per hour. For field #6 at Fuller, the rental fee was $32 an hour for a full field, and $20 an hour for a half field. [Previously, rates ranged from $16 an hour to a high of $31.50 an hour, depending on a variety of factors, including residency (Ann Arbor residents were charged lower rates) and time of day (rates for prime time, between 4-8 p.m., were higher). PAC recommended rate increases at its January 2010 meeting.]

Based on the maximum number of games allowed, the six Fuller fields could have brought in a maximum of $70,280. But because the fields were not used at full capacity, Fuller fields recorded $54,608 in revenues during 2011. Of that, $5,400 was later refunded due to weather cancellations, Straw said.

For Olson’s two fields, $21,000 in revenue was collected, but $1,500 was refunded because of cancellations. Those two fields had the potential to bring in $25,200 in revenues, if played to capacity.

Factoring in refunds, the eight fields at Fuller and Olson had a total of $68,708 in revenues during 2011.

Total estimated expenses were $82,688. Major line items were administration and scheduling costs ($25,000), mowing ($18,368) and fertilizing/aerification/overseeding ($18,800).

Commenting on the financials, Matt Warba – the city’s supervisor of field operations – said he didn’t think it was anyone’s intent to make the fields self-sufficient. But it’s getting close, he added, and that’s encouraging.

Warba also noted that April and May of 2011 were especially rainy months – the city had to cancel play on 25 days out of a 45-day period because of rain. Warba also noted that the irrigation system at Olson failed during the summer, resulting in turf loss. That system has been repaired.

Report on Fuller & Olson Athletic Fields: Commission Discussion

Karen Levin asked how 2012 expenses are expected to compare to 2011. Warba replied that costs generally are expected to remain static.

Sam Offen wondered how revenues compared to previous years. Colin Smith, manager of parks and recreation, said it would be difficult to compare since the rates were lower in the past, prior to the renovations. He hadn’t asked his staff to bring those figures.

Gwen Nystuen asked how long it would be before the city would need to invest in another major renovation of the fields. Warba replied that it would be possible to maintain the fields without major renovations. They’re taking a cautious approach, he said, by resting fields periodically so that they can be kept in good condition. The city staff has to balance demand for the fields against maintenance.

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

Nystuen noted that because the fields are fenced in, that keeps people off when it’s raining. That was the intent, Warba said. Olson fields aren’t fenced, however, and in some cases players have jumped the fences at Fuller, he said. One field had to be taken out of play for a month because of the damage caused when people played on a field that was supposed to be closed. Warba said the city will likely hire a temporary worker next season to patrol the fields – it would be cheaper than having to repair damage to a field if players jump the fence.

John Lawter asked whether the city is meeting the need for this kind of play, or could they do more? Smith noted that the fields are at 79% capacity, so there’s space available. However, there’s more demand than capacity for prime time slots – between 4-8 p.m. Black reported that the staff has set the maximum number of games at 35 per field per season. If the city were to add more games in order to accommodate more teams, that might not ultimately meet the teams’ needs, because the condition of the fields would deteriorate. “It’s a balancing act,” Black said.

Smith said the city wants to avoid having to make another major investment in renovating the fields. If demand is high, it’s possible to look at adding fields in other parks, he added, or possibly to acquire more land for that purpose.

Julie Grand asked if the city is doing outreach to groups that might have a lower impact on the fields – sports that don’t involve as much running and kicking as soccer, for example. Black said that at this point, there hasn’t been that kind of outreach.

Gwen Nystuen called the overall report encouraging.

Communications: Allen Creek Greenway, Leslie Science Center

Every meeting includes opportunities for public commentary and communications from commissioners and staff. No one spoke during either of the slots for public commentary at the Jan. 24 meeting.

Communications: Allen Creek Greenway

Gwen Nystuen brought up the issue of the Allen Creek Greenway. She noted that mayor John Hieftje had mentioned there might be action taken soon on the city-owned 415 W. Washington property, which has been identified as a potential part of a greenway. He’d made these comments at the Jan. 23 city council meeting. She wondered if there was any additional information about that.

[Hieftje had indicated that talks were continuing with the group that had been formed to look at the city-owned 415 W. Washington lot. The council passed a resolution giving direction for the effort at its Feb. 1, 2010 meeting, nearly two years ago. The resolution calls for the arts and greenway communities to lead fundraising and development of a vision for the parcel’s use. The site, across from the YMCA, is currently providing revenue to the city as a surface parking lot. It was previously the city’s maintenance yard. At the Jan. 23, 2012 council meeting, Hieftje said the group continues to meet – the biggest challenge remains the building. He said a report on the status of the project would be given at the end of February.]

Christopher Taylor, an ex-officio member of PAC who also serves on city council, said he didn’t have any further information at all. Nystuen then reminded commissioners that the greenway is one of PAC’s priorities. The City Apartments project at First and Washington, by the developer Village Green, is moving ahead, she said. That residential development will include parking spaces, she added, which will free up the need for spaces at the city-owned First and William surface lot that’s located in a floodway. That lot could become part of a greenway, she observed.

Park commissioner Gwen Nystuen and city councilmember Mike Anglin, an ex-officio member of the commission.

The time has come for PAC to actively pursue the greenway, Nystuen said, adding that the city council passed a resolution recently in support of a greenway.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, noted that a council resolution was passed on Aug. 4, 2011 expressing general support for the idea of a greenway. There have been conversations, he said, about applying for a grant from the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources Trust Fund, to turn the 415 W. Washington site into a park. The city staff is looking into that. The process would be similar to the way that the trust fund application for the skatepark had been handled, Smith explained. Staff would first come to PAC for a recommendation to apply. That recommendation would be forwarded to city council, which would need to approve the application.

Smith noted that one issue for the 415 W. Washington property is that it’s located in a historic district – the Old West Side. So in addition to PAC, the city would need a recommendation from the historic district commission too, he said.

Finally, Smith reminded commissioners that the parks, recreation and open space (PROS) plan, which PAC approved, recommends that the first action should be development of a master plan to guide the creation of a greenway. That point bears consideration, he said.

Nystuen responded by asking what PAC could do to move this process along. This year her term on the commission ends, she said, and the greenway has been a priority for her for both of her terms on PAC. That’s why she feels some urgency about this issue, she added.

What PAC decides as a body is up to commissioners, Smith replied. They can give direction to develop a greenway master plan, or tell staff to move ahead on the grant application before a master plan is developed. Nystuen asked how other commissioners felt – should they put forward a resolution?

Mike Anglin, a city councilmember who’s a non-voting ex-officio member of PAC, noted that the city’s environmental commission – on which he also serves has previously served – sometimes deals with issues related to parks. Perhaps a subcommittee of the two commissions could be formed to discuss the greenway, he said. There’s federal funding available for water management, he said, which might be one aspect of the greenway. Anglin also noted that the arts community has been interested in that site – they should be included in the dialogue, too.

There are several interested parties, Smith said – parks, the county drain commissioner, the University of Michigan, the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, the railroad owners, the Arts Alliance and others. That’s why having a master plan would be useful.

Julie Grand asked about a timeline for the grant application. It’s due April 2, Smith said. That means it would be necessary to secure a PAC recommendation in February, and city council approval in March. It’s also unclear how the historic district commission would fit into this process.

No doubt there’s strong interest in the community, Smith said. But it’s uncertain how to manage the project at this point. He noted that a task force had been formed in 2007 to evaluate development of a greenway that might incorporate the 415 W. Washington site as well as city property at 721 N. Main and First & William. The group couldn’t come to a consensus for the best use of 415 W. Washington, he said, so no decision was made. It seems like a public dialogue is needed to figure out the best option, he said.

Nystuen said she wanted to point out that the near-downtown area on the city’s west side has a shortage of green space. New residential developments will be bringing hundreds of young people downtown, so there will be an increased interest in recreational areas, she said. It makes sense to move forward with a greenway adjacent to downtown. Nystuen said it sounded like the best approach would be to put together a resolution for PAC’s February meeting.

Smith said he’s still waiting on direction regarding whether to apply for the grant. If he gets that direction, then of course the staff would bring a resolution to PAC, he said. Separately, PAC can do what it wants regarding the greenway – that’s not for him to say, Smith told commissioners.

Communications: Leslie Science & Nature Center

At the beginning of the Jan. 24 meeting, commissioner Sam Offen introduced the new executive director for the Leslie Science & Nature Center, Susan Westhoff. [Offen is a board member of the center.]

Sam Offen, an Ann Arbor park advisory commissioner, and Susan Westhoff, executive director of the Leslie Science & Nature Center. Offen also serves on the center's board.

Offen said that Westhoff started about a month ago and is already doing an excellent job. He noted there had been a recent public meeting at the center to discuss a master plan for pedestrian access there. [The center was previously part of the city's parks system, but was spun off as a separate nonprofit in 2007. The city continues to own the center’s property and buildings.]

Westhoff spoke briefly to commissioners, noting that the center and the city had a long history. She said she’s been working in nonprofit administration for about 15 years. She grew up in Canton and graduated from the University of Michigan. Her first nonprofit experience was at the University Musical Society, and she said she’s glad to be back in Ann Arbor.

Westhoff said she’d be happy to share the plans for the pedestrian pathway improvements that are being developed. Among other things, it will make paths to the center’s raptor enclosures ADA compliant. She also noted that the center has many great public programs, and highlighted the Feb. 12 “Hoo’s Your Valentine?” event that features the center’s barn owl.

Julie Grand, PAC’s chair, thanked Westhoff for coming and said she looked forward to collaborating.

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

Absent: David Barrett, Tim Berla, Tim Doyle.

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 28, 2012 begins at 4 p.m. in the city hall second-floor council chambers, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

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

The single “resolved” clause reads: “That the Ann Arbor City Council is fully supportive of the creation of the Allen Creek Greenway, and hereby directs City staff to continue to work with and to assist the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy during the Greenway’s development and implementation phases.” [.pdf of Aug. 4 Greenway resolution]

The resolution comes as the possibility is becoming more real to construct the first section of the greenway close to the planned Near North housing project. On May 16, 2011, the city council approved neighborhood stabilization funds for the demolition of three houses as site preparation for the Near North project. Adjacent to the Near North site are additional houses that could be demolished and left as open space, which could become part of a greenway. But based on remarks made at the meeting by greenway advocates, it appears that the first segment to be constructed is most likely to be the portion running through 415 W. Washington.

During public commentary, the council heard that various key property owners like the University of Michigan and the Ann Arbor Railroad are interested in hearing a clear statement from the city expressing its commitment.

The 18 “whereas” clauses recite history dating back to 2005 when the city council appointed a task force to study the possibility of a greenway. The history recited by the resolution includes a measure approved by the council on July 6, 2009, which rezoned the First and William parcel as public land and set forth the council’s intention that the property (currently a parking lot) would eventually become part of a greenway. [Additional Chronicle coverage: "First & William to Become Greenway?"]

As a point of history, the July 6, 2009 meeting was the same meeting when the council authorized the start of a request for proposals (RFP) process for development of the city-owned Library Lot, which was eventually terminated  on April 4, 2011, without selection of a proposal.

Also included in the Aug. 4 resolution’s recitation of history is a Feb. 1, 2010 measure that started a process for re-developing the city-owned parcel at 415 W. Washington. The city had previously initiated an RFP process for 415 W. Washington. An RFP review committee met seven times from May to December 2008 to review and evaluate the three proposals the city had received. The RFP committee offered praise for all three proposals but did not designate any one of the three as preferred.

The committee punted the issue back to the city council, recommending that the council refine the RFP. The council’s Feb. 1, 2010 action did not follow that recommendation, and instead created a working group of city councilmembers, the Greenway Conservancy and the Arts Alliance to explore the re-use of the property.

Like the Aug. 4, 2011 resolution, the Feb. 1, 2010 measure was sponsored by mayor John Hieftje, Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) and Margie Teall (Ward 4) and was also added late to the council’s agenda. The July 6, 2009 measure was sponsored by Hieftje and Hohnke.

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

From left: Peter Allen, Julie Grand, Ella and Jennifer Santi Hall, Dan Ezekiel. Grand is chair of the park advisory commission. Allen, Hall and Ezekiel are greenbelt advisory commissioners. Jennifer Hall has served as GAC chair, but her term is ending on the commission – this was her last meeting. Ella Hall also had attended the first GAC meeting with her mother seven years ago – she was three weeks old at the time. (Photo by the writer.)

They covered many of the same topics that they’d discussed at their first joint meeting in April 2010 – funding issues, land preservation and acquisition strategies, as well as specific projects like the Allen Creek greenway and support for small farms.

Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund, which has a contract to manage the greenbelt and park land acquisition programs, gave commissioners an overview of finances, projects and goals. Both programs are funded by a 30-year, 0.5 mill tax for land acquisition, called the open space and parkland preservation millage, which Ann Arbor voters approved in 2003. Two-thirds of the millage proceeds are used for the greenbelt program, and one-third is allotted to park land acquisition. To get money upfront for land acquisition, the city took out a $20 million bond in fiscal 2006 that’s being paid back with revenue from the millage. Current combined fund balances for the two programs total nearly $9 million.

Trocchio also highlighted an upcoming event to celebrate the greenbelt program. On Thursday, June 16, an open house will be hosted at the Braun farm – one of the program’s protected properties in Ann Arbor Township. The event is free and open to the public, and starts at 5:30 p.m. – parking is available at 4175 Whitmore Lake Road.

At the end of the June 7 meeting, commissioners congratulated two GAC members for their service – it was the final meeting for Gil Omenn and Jennifer Santi Hall, who has served as chair. Their terms expire June 30, and it’s not clear when appointments to replace them will be made.

Greenbelt Program: Overview

Trocchio began with an update on the greenbelt program. To date, $17.86 million has been spent on the program – she noted that three greenbelt deals have closed in the last few weeks. [The deals are for the Lee and Lori Maulbetsch property in Northfield Township, and two properties – in Northfield Township and Salem Township – owned by Nancy and Rose Geiger.] Subtracting $769,580 that’s been earmarked for pending projects, that leaves an unallocated fund balance of $4,826,465.

Trocchio reviewed the greenbelt program’s strategic plan, which provides a framework for reviewing applications. [.pdf of strategic plan] Key elements include:

• Targeting properties that: (1) help form 1,000-acre blocks of protected land; (2) work with partners whenever possible; (3) protect land along the Huron River; and (4) support local foods.
• Leveraging the city’s greenbelt funds by partnering with other governments or land preservation groups. Trocchio noted that the city is part of Preserve Washtenaw, a consortium of land preservation groups that meets monthly.
• Focusing on the purchase of development rights (PDR). The millage funds can only be used for acquisition, not land management or development. By buying development rights, the city doesn’t own the land itself, but prevents it from being developed.
• Partnering with Washtenaw County. The city has done three deals with the county, via the Washtenaw County natural areas preservation program (NAPP): the Fox Science Preserve, Meyer Preserve and Scio Woods Preserve. It’s a good partnership, Trocchio said, because the county takes on the role of managing the land, and provides public access to the properties. The greenbelt program contributes funds for acquisition.

In outlining the program’s accomplishments, Trocchio said that they’ve achieved a 1,000-acre block of protected land in two locations: Webster and Ann Arbor townships. Each deal has included contributions from partners or grant funding – amounting to at least 20% of the PDR price. And while so far, none of the greenbelt properties are along the Huron River, land protected under the program does include tributaries of the river, she said.

Since the program started, 27 transactions have been completed and 3,200 acres have protected under the program, Trocchio reported.

Pointing to the fact that about 3,200 acres of land is now protected, Dan Ezekiel, GAC’s vice chair, put the size of these greenbelt properties into perspective, noting that not everyone has an intuitive feel for the amount of acreage being described. One square mile equals 640 acres, he said, so 3,200 acres would be five square miles. Burns Park and Veterans Memorial Park are each about 40 acres – the greenbelt has protected the equivalent of about 80 such places, he said.

The city has spent $17.86 million, but leveraged an additional $18.59 million, Trocchio reported – including $9.38 million in grant funding, $4.1 million in township funds, $2.76 million from Washtenaw County and $2.2 million in landowner contributions.

Now is a great time for farmland preservation, Trocchio said, because land values have dropped, allowing the city to stretch its greenbelt dollars. Because of the economic downturn, there’s also less competition from developers vying for the same properties, which contributes to lower land costs.

There are also increased partnership opportunities with Washtenaw County, Trocchio said. Last year, the county board of commissioners amended its NAPP ordinance to include a stronger emphasis on agricultural land – now, up to 25% of the NAPP millage can be spent on the purchase of development rights on agricultural properties. [For more background, see Chronicle coverage: "Greenbelt, County Look to Partner on Farms"]

In addition, several townships also have land preservation millages, including Webster, Scio and Ann Arbor townships. While much of that funding is already used, it’s likely the township millages be on the ballot for renewal in 2012 or 2013, Trocchio said.

Greenbelt: Commissioner Discussion – Acquisitions

Referring to a map from Trocchio’s presentation, John Lawter of PAC wondered why the greenbelt hadn’t focused on acquisitions on the west side of the county. The map had highlighted areas that GAC views as priorities, and included Webster and northern Scio townships, Northfield and Ann Arbor townships, Salem and Superior townships, a portion of Pittsfield Township, and Lodi Township.

This map shows boundaries of the Ann Arbor greenbelt program, in green. The city of Ann Arbor boundaries are in yellow. Sections outlined in pink are viewed as priority locations for land preservation.

GAC chair Jennifer Santi Hall said that some of the townships that were highlighted as a focus were those that had passed land preservation millages – those funds helped leverage greenbelt money in buying development rights. The prioritized areas also reflected interest on the part of landowners, she said.

Peg Kohring of The Conservation Fund noted another factor – the size of properties available for the greenbelt. The greenbelt program tries to tap federal funding when possible, and those funds have been limited to deals on property that was a minimum of 40 acres. The focus areas are also in portions of the county that are not densely developed, where it’s feasible to build 1,000-acre blocks.

Dan Ezekiel of GAC pointed out that the greenbelt program has contributed to deals in building a 1,000-acre block of protected land in Salem and Superior townships, in partnership with others. He also noted that Pittsfield Township has protected a significant block of land on its own – known as the Pittsfield Preserve.

Lawter wanted clarification that properties in the west could be considered for the greenbelt program – it’s just that the area isn’t a priority. GAC commissioners assured him that this was the case.

Greenbelt: Commissioner Discussion – Property Values

Sam Offen of PAC wondered what happens to township taxes when properties are added to the greenbelt – do the townships get less tax revenue? Kohring said that in most cases, conservation easements haven’t affected taxable value.

Kohring said the land’s market value does take a dip when a landowner sells the property’s development rights. With development rights, farmland or open space might be valued on the market at $8,000 per acre – that value might drop to $5,000 per acre after development rights are transferred.

Offen wondered if the taxable value increases when property changes hands, even if the development rights have been sold. Peter Allen, a local developer and member of GAC, said that depends on the underlying value of the land itself, which can’t be developed. In general, Allen observed that the value of developable farmland has dropped significantly in recent years, from around $16,000 per acre. He believes some land that was intended for subdivisions might actually revert to farmland, because of market forces. Tim Berla of PAC noted that the land might be more valuable if it’s located next to protected land.

Kohring observed that development values continue to fall: “We have not hit bottom yet.” Allen agreed, citing the oversupply of housing that was built in the boom years. In Superior Township, for example, there’s at least a 15-year supply of housing, he said. That’s coupled with a cultural shift away from home ownership, and excitement about living in an urban area. “I think the American Dream has fundamentally change,” Allen said.

Tim Doyle of PAC said some people might view this situation and say there’s no need for land preservation – it’s being taken care of by market forces. That’s a challenge of perception, he said. Ezekiel noted that the best time to do this kind of preservation work is when land values are low.

Offen asked if there was any financial value to the development rights that the city owns. No, Trocchio said – it’s considered a liability, in part because it requires a certain amount of enforcement by the city.

Greenbelt: Commissioner Discussion – Publicizing the Greenbelt

Doyle asked how property is identified for inclusion in the greenbelt – do property owners approach the city, or does the city staff solicit property owners? Both, Trocchio said. Doyle indicated that it might be time to revitalize public awareness about the greenbelt. Since the millage was passed, there’s been some population turnover, and others who were here at the time might have forgotten about the program, he said.

At the start of the greenbelt program, the farming community wasn’t aware of it, Trocchio said. Now, she’s seen an increase in applications from landowners.

Hall felt there’s a greater awareness of the greenbelt program outside of Ann Arbor, especially since some townships also have land preservation programs now. To raise awareness among Ann Arbor residents, the city held a bus tour of greenbelt properties last summer, and will hold an open house on June 16 at the Braun farm in Ann Arbor Township.

They’re also trying to make the connection between Ann Arbor taxpayers and their local food supply, Hall said. [See Chronicle coverage: "Leveling the Field for Small Farms"] Offen asked if farmers whose land is part of the greenbelt program sell food at the Ann Arbor farmers market. At this point, most of the farmers market vendors own farms outside of the greenbelt boundaries, Hall said. Trocchio added that land values closer to the city are higher, so it’s harder for small farms to make a financially viable business. Some farmers also prefer to sell wholesale to restaurants and groceries. And larger farms typically produce crops like grains and soybeans, which aren’t sold at farmers markets.

Ezekiel pointed to another issue with publicizing the program: Its name. People often confuse “greenbelt” and “greenway,” he said, or they think the “belt” implies a no-development zone encircling the city. He would have preferred the term “emerald necklace.”

There’s also an existential problem, Ezekiel noted. The greenbelt already exists – the program is simply trying to protect it. “When we do our work well, nothing changes, that anyone can see,” he said. “Our work by its nature is under the radar.”

Parkland Acquisition: Overview

In her update to commissioners on the parkland portion of the millage, Trocchio reported that $8,538,304 has been spent as of Dec. 31, 2010, leaving a $4,369,415 fund balance. Of that, $246,000 is set aside for pending projects.

Trocchio highlighted changes related to land acquisition in the city’s Parks & Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan, which was updated earlier this year. Priorities include identifying underserved neighborhoods, where residents aren’t within a quarter-mile walk to a park. After using GIS data to find geographic locations that fit this description, PAC members went out and researched these areas to assess the need, Trocchio said. For example, although Dolph Park is located on the city’s far west side, it doesn’t include a playground area – that’s a need for residents in that part of town. “But for the most part,” Trocchio said, “the city is being very well-served.”

Conversations about parkland acquisition tend to revolve around enhancing what the city already owns, she said – enhancing access, linkages between parks, and greenways. One example is the recent acquisition of a lot on Chapin Street, adjacent to West Park. The house on that property was removed, and now there’s much more visibility of the park from that street.

Another goal is to protect the Huron River and other natural features, Trocchio said. Proposed acquisitions and improvements outlined in the PROS plan show plans for a Huron River greenway, for example.

The parks portion of the shared millage is focused on land within the city limits, Trocchio said. She also outlined several issues that factor into land acquisition decisions, including budget constraints for development and long-term maintenance of parkland, and concerns over taking city property off the tax rolls.

Parkland: Commissioner Discussion – Allen Creek Greenway

Peter Allen asked PAC members what it would take to make the Allen Creek greenway happen. Gwen Nystuen said that as a start, the city needs to designate three parcels that it owns – at 415 W. Washington, First & William, and 721 N. Main – to be part of the greenway. That hasn’t been authorized, she said.

Sam Offen observed that with those anchor properties established as part of a greenway, it would be easier to get momentum for other properties that would connect them. Julie Grand, PAC’s chair, said they’ve prioritized properties for a possible greenway, including some along the river. But until the city decides what to do with the properties it already owns, there’s no point in talking with landowners about a possible sale, she said.

Jennifer Hall asked what it would take procedurally to get things moving. When Nystuen said it would take the city designating its three properties for a greenway, Hall noted that the city council has already done that for the parcel at First and William. [In July 2009, council passed a resolution designating the city-owned parcel at the northeast corner of First and William as open space. And in February 2010, the council passed a resolution to explore a "greenway park and arts center" at 415 W. Washington. Council received an update on that effort at its April 4, 2011 meeting.]

Grand observed that the First and William parcel would require a lot of remediation. [It's now used as a surface parking lot. The 2009 resolution called for the city to seek additional funds for environmental remediation.]

John Lawter said that nothing has emerged as an opportunity for the greenway, but it’s still a priority.

Later in the meeting, Allen returned to the topic. He outlined how easements might be acquired from property owners between 415 W. Washington and the Huron River – he felt that the YMCA, located across the street from 415 W. Washington, would sell an easement to the city for land it owns next to the railroad. Another property owner, who Allen said owns unbuildable land along the railroad from Miller to Felch, might be convinced to sell an easement – just dangle a big check in front of the man, Allen advised.

Hall asked whether the city had ever done PDRs or conservation easements. That’s not an approach they use, Kohring said – landowners in the city don’t want the liability. For city parkland, the city purchases the property outright, she said.

Parkland: Commissioner Discussion – Border-to-Border Trail

The conversation segued into a discussion of the border-to-border trail, an effort to create a contiguous east/west path for bikes and pedestrians across the county. Nystuen said the path still needs work, especially along the Huron River section. Allen asked if anyone had spoken with MichCon about the riverfront property it owns near Argo, which is now vacant. There’s been no movement on that, Nystuen said, noting that it was the most polluted site in the county.

Hall asked whether there was any legal crossing of the railroad tracks in that area for parks users. This has been an ongoing concern, and is highlighted in the PROS plan:

Throughout the City, the railroad tracks cut off access to the river parks. At two locations, Gallup Park and Argo Pond, the City has procured easements from the railroad to construct non-motorized trails; however, access to these trails is limited as the railroad will not allow additional at-grade crossings. Challenges associated with accessing the river and parkland safely are ongoing as the desire to connect trails along greenways adjacent to the railroads and the popularity of these trails continues to increase. As discussion of a high speed rail gains momentum, safe railroad crossings will become more important for park access.

Later in the PROS plan, in the section outlining infrastructure needs, an item on trails and greenways cites a specific location as a priority:

At-grade crossings at railroads have been difficult to secure. A safe, legal, public crossing at Lakeshore Drive into Bandemer Park is a high priority. As discussions to turn the Norfolk Southern rail line into a high speed corridor continue, securing these public crossings is crucial and needs to be addressed in the short term.

At the June joint PAC/GAC meeting, Tim Berla said that various approaches had been explored, such as building a tunnel under the tracks. The pricetag for one crossing was $2 million, he recalled.

Hall expressed frustration that other communities are able to build overpasses or find other ways of traversing railroad tracks. Why does it seem impossible to do in Ann Arbor – is it just the money? That’s much of it, Berla replied. He felt it was possible that a crossing would be built within the next five years, but added that there’s a long list of other projects too, including a skatepark.

Offen noted that often, these kinds of projects get rolled into larger efforts, like road or bridge reconstruction. Tim Doyle observed that other communities might have been able to build their greenways with federal and state transportation funding. “That’s where the really big bucks are – moving cars.”

Allen speculated that the Michigan Dept. of Transportation (MDOT) might acquire the Ann Arbor Railroad, which owns the tracks running through the city. He indicated that an ownership change might facilitate future projects.

Parkland: Commissioner Discussion – Stormwater Management

Dan Ezekiel noted that the city recently had a “good rain event.” He recalled that he’d been around in the 1960s when heavy rains burst the Dixboro dam. The rain had also caused flooding in the city’s Old West Side, along the Allen Creek floodway. It seemed there was less flooding this time, he said.

The water features in the newly renovated West Park seem to be working, he said, and the Argo dam held up. The rain has put some of their stormwater management ideas to the test, he said, but things seem to be working.

Parkland: Commissioner Discussion – Future Plans

In looking ahead, Nystuen characterized PAC’s priorities as “more green, and more trees.” She also cited the need for another dog park, completion of trails along the Huron River, and work on a greenway.

Grand noted that while they can’t create a whole swath of land running through the downtown, they might be able to do things to increase access to existing parkland, like building more and better trails between parcels.

Nystuen suggested that the next joint meeting include representatives from the county’s natural areas preservation program, because the city will likely be partnering more with them in the future.

Tenure Ending for Hall, Omenn

This was the last meeting for two greenbelt advisory commissioners – Gil Omenn, and Jennifer Santi Hall, who has served as chair.

At the end of the meeting, GAC vice chair Dan Ezekiel praised Hall and Omenn for their service – they received a round of applause from the group. Ezekiel noted that the commission needs members to take their place, as well as someone to serve as an officer. [GAC members will vote on a new chair at their July 13 meeting, and it's expected that Ezekiel will be elected to that role. That would leave a vacancy for vice chair.]

Hall noted that both she and Omenn are at-large members. Unlike some of the other GAC slots, which are designated for certain professions like a real estate developer or farmer, the at-large members are open to anyone. The term runs for three years, and members can serve two consecutive terms. Hall urged anyone who’s interested in volunteering to contact their Ann Arbor city councilmember. Unlike most other city commissions, in which members are nominated by the mayor and confirmed by council, greenbelt commissioners are nominated by city council. Hall said she hadn’t heard whether any nominations were in the works so far.

Hall’s daughter Ella attended the June 7 meeting as well, and earlier Hall noted that Ella had been in the same room seven years ago when GAC first convened. Ella had been three weeks old at the time, Hall said – she turned seven this month. “She was with me then,” Hall said, “and I’m glad she’s here with me today.”

Present – park advisory commission: Dave Barrett, Tim Berla, Doug Chapman, Tim Doyle, Julie Grand, John Lawter, Karen Levin, Gwen Nystuen, Sam Offen. Present – greenbelt advisory commission: Peter Allen, Dan Ezekiel, Jennifer Santi Hall, Gil Omenn, Catherine Riseng. Staff: Peg Kohring, Ginny Trocchio.

None of the city council representatives serving on these commissions – Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) on GAC, and PAC ex-officio members Christopher Tayler (Ward 3) and Mike Anglin (Ward 5) – attended.

Purely a plug: The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the city’s greenbelt program and parks system. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

Ray Fullerton, a board member of the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy, passes out a letter to planning commissioners that makes suggestions for revising the city's Parks and Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan. In the background is planning commissioner Kirk Westphal. (Photos by the writer.)

The postponement coordinated with a similar move made last month by the Ann Arbor park advisory commission, which rescheduled its vote to its Feb. 15 meeting in order to allow for additional public input.

The PROS plan provides an inventory, needs assessment and action plan for the city’s parks system, and is updated every five years. The updated document is required by the state in order for the city to be eligible to apply for certain grants.

A public hearing on the PROS plan drew three board members of the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy, a nonprofit dedicated to developing a park running through Ann Arbor from Stadium Boulevard to the Huron River, roughly following the course of the original Allen Creek. They advocated for stronger support of the greenway within the PROS plan.

PROS Plan Update

Updated every five years, the city’s Parks and Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan is a comprehensive look at current assets and future needs. The current update spans 2011 through 2015. It is reviewed by the park advisory commission (PAC) and the planning commission before being forwarded to city council for a final vote, then sent to the state.

The effort is being led by parks planner Amy Kuras. The planning commission has previously given Kuras feedback, most recently at its Jan. 11, 2011 working session. [The Chronicle's report on that working session provides a detailed look at the PROS plan draft.] Planning commissioners were originally scheduled to act on the PROS plan at their Feb. 1 meeting, which was canceled due to severe weather warnings. They pushed back the vote to Feb. 15, to coincide with the park advisory commission’s vote on that same day. PAC had pushed back action to allow time for additional public input.

Tuesday’s planning commission meeting included an update from Kuras on changes in the draft, a public hearing and more than an hour of commissioner questions and comments.

PROS Plan Update: Staff Report

Kuras began by summarizing changes that had been made to the draft PROS plan since she last met with planning commissioners. [.pdf file of changes to the draft]

Amy Kuras, the Ann Arbor parks planner, gave an update to the city's planning commission on the Parks and Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan, which is nearing completion.

She noted that the window for including public commentary had officially closed at the end of January, though additional feedback from public hearings and the parks and planning commissions could still be incorporated. In addition to input from the general public, the main feedback had been given by the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy, the parks and planning commissions, and the Washtenaw Area Transportation Study (WATS), which advocated incorporation of more information about non-motorized transportation plans.

There had been a lot of feedback about the use of 2000 Census data – people thought the PROS plan should use the more recent 2010 data, she said, but it wasn’t yet available. As soon as it was provided, the plan would be updated with that information, she said.

Kuras gave a section-by-section report of changes that had been made to the draft. Here’s a sampling:

• Section I – Community Description: Information was added about the city’s updated transportation plan, including a description of issues with the railroad cutting off park access, and improvements to the Border-to-Border Trail along the front of Fuller Road, at the site of the proposed Fuller Road Station. A paragraph was added to explain that any proposed sale of parkland must be placed on the ballot for a vote by the general public, as required by city charter.  A sentence was added about the process of rezoning parkland parcels, noting that questions have been raised as to whether parkland is sufficiently protected and whether zoning should include more restrictive language for parks.
• Section II – Administrative Structure: Information was added about facilities that are owned by the city, but are run by private nonprofits – including the Leslie Science & Nature Center, and the Community Action Network, which manages the city’s Bryant and Northside community centers.
• Section III – Budget & Funding: Following the suggestion of planning commissioners at their January working session, Kuras said she moved the FY 2011 budget information from this section into an appendix, and included more information about general budget trends. More explanatory text was added to make the budget-related charts clearer, she said.
• Section IV – Inventory of the Park, Recreation and Open Space System: The parks maps will be replaced with maps that have easier-to-read text and legends.
• Section V – Land Use Planning & Acquisition: A map will be replaced with a larger one showing the location of properties protected by the greenbelt millage. An explanation was added to distinguish between criteria for acquiring greenbelt property and city parkland.
• Section VI – Planning Process for the PROS Plan: In the section that summarizes feedback from the planning commission, these sentences were added: “Staff should explore all opportunities to generate revenue, including public/private partnerships. A balanced view must include all possible risks inherent with acceptance of private funding.” In the section regarding the Huron River Impoundment Management Plan (HRIMP), an explanation was added, noting that one of the plan’s consensus points was that certain types of limited commercial development should be encouraged along the Huron River, especially in the Argo/Broadway area.
• Section VII – Goals & Objectives: A goal was added to explore public/private partnerships, while considering their long-term effects. Several objectives were removed that did not specifically relate to parks and recreation.
• Section VIII – Infrastructure Needs Assessment: Several additions were made that related to the Allen Creek Greenway, including information related to the history of the proposed project and recommendations of the city’s Allen Creek Greenway Task Force.
• Section VIX – Action Plan: The capital projects criteria section was updated to align more closely with the city’s capital improvements plan (CIP) rating system. Also, an explanation was added that these criteria have been tailored to park projects. And a sentence was added that states: “The Allen Creek Greenway is not listed under a specific year as the construction of new trails and park areas are contingent upon both land acquisition, master plan approval and an implementation plan.”

PROS Plan Update: Public Hearing

Four people spoke during the PROS plan public hearing, including three board members of the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy.

Jonathan Bulkley, chair of the conservancy’s board, told commissioners that if it is designed properly and if zoning changes are made carefully in conjunction with that design, then the greenway will provide a return to the city that will exceed its costs. It’s not an overnight project, he said – the earliest reference that they could find to it is in the 1981 PROS plan. But now is the time to act, and each passing day of inaction makes the project more difficult, he said. “It’s an opportune time to move forward, and it’s a time for action.”

Bulkley said the conservancy has held talks with officials from the University of Michigan, the Ann Arbor Railroad and potential donors. A solid backing in the updated PROS plan would provide a catalyst to these entities, he said. The major change to the plan requested by the conservancy is to give the greenway a separate subsection in Section VIII (Infrastructure Needs Assessment). The greenway is currently an item listed in the subsection on potential new recreational facilities and parks amenities.

Board member Ray Fullerton continued this thread, inviting commissioners to check out the conservancy’s website for more information, including a video with remarks from supporters. The greenway trail would be for a variety of users, including bicyclists, runners, and people with baby strollers. The idea is to make the three-mile stretch as lively as possible. The railroad is only running two trains a day, he said – the conservancy hopes to secure the railroad’s right-of-way for the greenway. He noted that they’ve looked at similar projects in 18 other cities, including Flint, Kalamazoo and Grand Rapids. The best greenway is in Seoul, South Korea – a project that Fullerton described as breathtaking. The conservancy hopes to take the lead in the greenway project, he concluded, much like a lead sled dog is needed on a team.

Joe O’Neal, who’s also a conservancy board member, began by apologizing to commissioners – “we don’t mean to be ganging up on you tonight.” They weren’t asking for money or land at this point, he said. But they do need the city’s support. One donor told them, “When the city’s behind you, I’m behind you, but not until.” O’Neal then reviewed three of the requests they were making for revisions to the PROS plan:

• Adding a bullet point in the parkland acquisition subsection of Section VIII (Infrastructure Needs Assessment): “Designate the floodway portions of city-owned First & William, 415 West Washington and 721 North Main as parkland.”
• Adding a bullet point in the neighborhood parks & urban plazas subsection of Section VIII (Infrastructure Needs Assessment): “Begin the process of developing a Master Plan for the Allen Creek Greenway showing potential alignment and its relationship with all neighborhoods along the route, the Downtown, the University of Michigan (more specifically, the Athletic Campus), the Huron River Greenway (Border to Border Trail), the Ann Arbor neighborhoods south of Stadium Boulevard, and the opportunities to the south through Pittsfield Township to Saline.”
• Labeling the Allen Creek Greenway on two of the maps.

O’Neal concluded by noting that the properties along the proposed greenway will never again be as available as they are now, given current market conditions.

Rita Mitchell raised concerns about information on a chart in Section I (Community Description), which included data on parkland acreage per 1,000 residents in different parts of the city. The lowest by far is in the central district, which includes downtown, at 3.7 acres per 1,000 residents. She noted that if there’s an effort to increase residential density in this area, there should be a commensurate effort to increase parkland there. Mitchell said she opposed the Fuller Road Station project – a large parking structure, bus depot and possible train station that’s proposed on city-owned land now designated as parkland – and supports the greenway. There’s a lot of community support for the greenway, she said.

PROS Plan Update: Commissioner Deliberations

Several commissioners thanked Kuras for her work, and praised her efforts over the past year in getting input for the PROS update. They also offered a wide range of comments and questions. For this report, their discussion is organized by topic.

PROS Deliberations: Density, Parkland Acreage

Bonnie Bona asked Kuras to discuss how they should be viewing the downtown area, with regard to density and parkland. Have other communities come up with formulas to calculate density? Perhaps quantity isn’t the best way to look at it, she offered.

There’s been a lot of dissent on this topic, Kuras said. Many people feel that downtown is a different animal regarding parks and open space, she said. People living downtown aren’t looking for soccer fields – people are recreating differently, and that recreation includes public as well as private areas, like sidewalk cafes. Creating plazas and other hardscape areas are more of a priority. Kuras also noted that there are several parks that are peripheral – but within walking distance – to the downtown, including West Park and Wheeler Park.

Bona said that assuming they accepted this description, there’s nothing in the PROS plan that would give guidance about this issue to the planning commission or residents. She suggested adding some description to articulate these characteristics of the downtown area.

Among other things, this chart of census data shows the amount of parkland acreage per 1,000 residents for different areas of the city. (Links to larger image)

Evan Pratt clarified that the calculations of acreage didn’t include land on the University of Michigan, the public school system or parkland owned by Washtenaw County. He noted that because of that, the statistics end up looking skewed – not all of the city’s open space and parkland is reflected in those calculations. Kuras noted that although the chart doesn’t reflect it, there are maps with that information indicated, and the non-city parkland is described in narrative form elsewhere in the plan.

Jean Carlberg observed that the chart is the kind of thing that will be used by people in the future to justify certain actions. For that reason, it would be helpful to include data on parkland and open space owned by the county, UM and others for each district, she said, because it greatly changes the picture. For example, she said she lives in the south sector, which has the second-lowest amount of city-owned park acreage per 1,000 residents. Yet there’s a lot of school-owned land that’s well-used in that area, she said. The 141-acre County Farm Park is also in that area, but it’s not factored into the chart because it’s owned by Washtenaw County Parks & Recreation, not the city.

PROS Deliberations: Allen Creek Greenway

Bona noted that some of the requested revisions from the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy are very specific. They asked that specific city-owned properties – First & William, 415 W. Washington and 721 N. Main – be designated as parkland, for example, and requested that the city begin developing a master plan for the greenway that includes specific areas. She expressed concern that specifics for the greenway are being added to the PROS plan just because the project is getting a lot of attention, whereas that level of detail isn’t included for other projects. She felt the plan should be consistent, not reactive or based on the most current popular topic. The plan shouldn’t just plug in directives simply because someone asked for them.

Wendy Woods asked Kuras if she was changing the plan every time she got input – what’s the process for doing that? Some changes can actually have broad implications, Woods noted. Giving the greenway a separate section, for example, could have an impact on future funding.

Kuras replied that it’s an issue she has struggled with – do you give a project a special section, just because people are lobbying for it? It’s a question of fairness, she said. Regarding the greenway, Kuras noted that it’s already mentioned multiple times in the PROS plan. Because it’s in the plan in a significant way, it’s not clear that it needs a special section, she said.

From left: planning commissioners Bonnie Bona, Wendy Woods, Diane Giannola and Erica Briggs.

Kirk Westphal said he echoed the concerns expressed by Bona and Woods, about singling out the greenway. Evan Pratt agreed that it didn’t need a separate section. He noted that the greenway’s history goes back even further than 1981, to at least the late 1960s and early 1970s. Greenway discussions began after a major flood in 1968, he said, when Ann Arbor’s west side in particular was hit hard. A greenway was one idea to address the flooding problem.

Diane Giannola said that creating a separate subsection for the greenway elevates it in importance – it isn’t clear that city council has decided that. She also suggested that reference to the greenway be removed from the section on existing parks and facilities – that section doesn’t include other proposed projects, she noted, like the skatepark.

PROS Deliberations: Budget Issues

Tony Derezinski, referring to the action plan, noted that some projects indicate they’ll be privately funded, like the skatepark. He wondered if there are any projects that might be funded in part through revenues, rather than the general fund – perhaps the canoe liveries could be funded this way? Kuras said that none of the major capital projects are funded through revenues. The exceptions would be projects in the two “enterprise” funds – for the public market, and the golf courses – that might be partially funded by revenues generated from their operations.

Derezinski followed up by asking if the staff considered raising fees. That’s a challenge, Kuras said. They re-evaluate fees each year, but are cautious about making them too high. Part of their mission as a public entity is to provide parks and recreation for all residents, regardless of their ability to pay, she noted.

Eric Mahler thanked Kuras for including projections for 2012-2013 as part of the budget information – even more projections and trends would be helpful, he added. Mahler noted that the parks maintenance and capital improvements millage expires in 2012. He assumed the budget projections are based on a continuation of the millage, but that needs to be clarified in the plan. Part of the section also mentions the guidelines that city council approved in 2006, prior to the millage vote. The implication is that those guidelines are still observed, he said, but that should be clarified too. References to FY 2007-08 should also be updated, he said.

These are the guidelines, as stated in the PROS plan draft:

Annual allocation for maintenance is to be between 60% and 80% and for capital improvements between 20% and 40%, with a total annual allocation being 100%.

Originally, the Natural Area Preservation Program budget received a minimum 3% annual increase to enhance the stewardship of increased acreage of natural park areas. As part of the FY2011 budget process, and as recognition that the revenue generated by the millage was decreasing, this guideline was amended to provide equality between all City units receiving funding from this millage.

If future reductions are necessary in the City’s general fund budget, not including the budget for Safety Services, during any of the six years of this millage, beginning in the fiscal year of 2007-2008, the general fund budget supporting the Parks and Recreation System, after subtracting the revenue obtained from fees for parks and recreation, will be reduced no greater than the average percentage reduction, for each particular year, of the rest of the City general fund budget, not including the budget for Safety Services, for each of the applicable six years of this millage.

If future increases occur in the City’s general fund budget, not including the budget for Safety Services, during any of the six years of this millage, beginning in the fiscal year of 2007-2008, the general fund budget supporting the parks and recreation system, after subtracting the revenue obtained from fees for parks and recreation, will be increased at the same rate as the average percentage increase, for each particular year, of the rest of the City general fund budget, not including the budget for Safety Services, for each of the applicable six years of this millage.

The millage is not subject to a municipal service charge, but is subject to appropriate information technology and fleet charges.

PROS Deliberations: Misc. Comments

Park security: Westphal asked whether Kuras had information about the incidence of crime in various parks – do some parks have more crime than others? The downtown parks are more problematic, Kuras said, with higher incidence of drug use, panhandling and other crimes. Since the city’s park ranger program was dismantled several years ago, the parks staff have worked with police to monitor the parks, and identify which ones need more police presence. That’s difficult, she noted, since there have been cutbacks in the police force, too. Westphal suggested including some information about that – it could alert them to which parks are working well, and which ones might need help. They might then be able to address problems in part through other means, like zoning decisions, for example.

Collaborations: Derezinski said he was especially interested in efforts to collaborate with other entities. He wondered how much the city currently partnered with the Ann Arbor Public Schools Rec & Ed program, for example? Kuras said the city parks staff works with them closely. For one thing, Rec & Ed uses a lot of the city’s parks for its programs, but it hasn’t gone the other way – there’s hasn’t been much effort on the city’s part to use the schools’ property. She said she wasn’t personally involved in those collaborations, so she couldn’t talk about it in detail, but said she knew there was a lot of dialogue between the two entities.

Electronic vs. print versions: Erica Briggs said the graphs and other images in the plan’s electronic version were sometimes difficult to read. For example, sometimes the page breaks bump the legend for a chart into the next page, causing the reader to scroll back and forth. As more people use the electronic version rather than a printed copy, it’s worth considering how to make it more readable, she said. Perhaps displaying it in landscape mode, rather than vertically, would be helpful.

Outcome: The planning commission voted unanimously to postpone action on the PROS plan until their Feb. 15, 2011 meeting.

Misc. Communications, Updates

Wendy Rampson, head of the city’s planning staff, briefed commissioners on several items during the Feb. 8 meeting.

Wendy Rampson, head of the city's planning staff.

Arbor Dog Daycare

At its Dec. 21, 2010 meeting, the planning commission approved a special exception use for Arbor Dog Daycare, a business located at 2856 S. Main St., near the corner of Eisenhower. Rampson reported that the staff had received a call last month from one of the neighbors, Tim Thieme, who was upset because he hadn’t been notified of the meeting. [The project had come before the planning commission multiple times, including an Oct. 19, 2010 meeting during which Thieme spoke against the special exception use.]

At the Oct. 19 meeting, Thieme had not signed up to be notified of future meetings on the issue, Rampson reported. However, he had subsequently emailed the planning staff asking to be notified, she said – they somehow didn’t see the email, and he hadn’t been notified of the December meeting. He was very upset, she said, and they apologized and offered him the opportunity to speak to the commission during public commentary.

He also sent an email to the staff, which was included in the Feb. 8 meeting packet. [.pdf of Tim Thieme email] It reads, in part:

I am very disappointed that I received no notification of this hearing as the City Code requires. Because there was no notification of the topic being discussed I question the legality of the decision. Perhaps you could try to give me an answer as to why the granting of the Special Exemption is legal before I consult my own attorneys for their help in obtaining an answer.

Commissioner Bonnie Bona asked Rampson to clarify what is required by city code. The code requires that the city notify neighbors of a public hearing, Rampson said. If it’s postponed for more than six months, they’re required to re-notify. However, if the project comes back within that six-month timeframe, there’s no obligation to do direct notification again, she said. They do alert the public in other ways, she said, including by publishing their agenda in the Washtenaw Legal News, through email alerts and by posting it on the city’s Legistar system. There are also sign-up forms at planning commission meetings.

Erica Briggs clarified that although it didn’t work in this instance, the public can still email or call the planning staff and asked to be notified about upcoming projects. That’s true, Rampson said – and they will work to avoid situations in the future like the one that occurred with Thieme.

Updates from Council: Medical Marijuana, Heritage Row, Design Guidelines

Rampson and Tony Derezinski, a planning commissioner who also serves on city council representing Ward 2, gave several planning-related updates from the Feb. 7 city council meeting.

Derezinski said the council spent considerable time fine-tuning the medical marijuana licensing proposal, and worked through about three-quarters of the proposed amendments before voting to postpone additional action.

He also reported that council, on a 9-2 vote, agreed to waive a portion of development fees for the Heritage Row project. Though the original resolution – sponsored by Derezinski and Sandi Smith (Ward 1) – proposed eliminating the fees entirely, they compromised and will charge $2,000. Derezinski said they hope the residential project, proposed for a stretch along South Fifth Avenue, will move forward “in a fairly expeditious time period.”

Rampson added that the expedited process relates primarily to staff review – they will not abbreviate any of the public input pieces, she said. The developer would be required to hold a citizen participation meeting prior to filing a site plan, she said, and there would be public hearings at both planning commission and city council. She said the project could come before the planning commission in March, with council addressing it in April.

In other action, council approved the A2D2 design guidelines, Rampson reported. It will ultimately be a mandatory review, with voluntary compliance. The council resolution directs the planning commission to put in place a design review process, to be conducted prior to a project’s mandatory citizen participation meeting.

An interim design review committee was also appointed by council – Rampson said it’s expected that they’ll transition to become the official committee. Members are: Chet Hill (landscape architect); Mary Jukari (landscape architect); Dick Mitchell (architect); Tamara Burns (architect); Paul Fontaine (planner); William Kinley (developer); and Geoff Perkins (contractor).

The planning commission’s ordinance review committee will tackle the project first, Rampson said.

Derezinski noted that the council meeting included a tribute to Peter Pollack, a local landscape architect who died late last year. Pollack had served on the design guidelines task force, and was instrumental in that effort. Pollack’s widow, Eleanor Pollack, was on hand to accept the tribute, and received a standing ovation, Derezinski said.

Washtenaw Corridor Improvement Authority

Rampson told commissioners that two public forums have been scheduled regarding a possible Washtenaw Corridor Improvement Authority (CIA), for a stretch of Washtenaw Avenue between Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti. The first one, on Feb. 23, will be geared toward business owners and held at 7:30 a.m. at Paesano Restaurant, 3411 Washtenaw Ave. The second meeting, on March 2, will be primarily for residents. That meeting begins at 7 p.m. at Cobblestone Farm, 2781 Packard Road. There will also be a public hearing on the issue at the city council’s March 7 meeting.

Present: Bonnie Bona, Erica Briggs, Jean Carlberg, Tony Derezinski, Diane Giannola, Eric Mahler, Evan Pratt, Kirk Westphal, Wendy Woods.

Next regular meeting: The planning commission next meets on Tuesday, Feb. 15  at 7 p.m. in the Washtenaw County administration building boardroom, 220 N. Main St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

Park advisory commissioners Sam Offen, left, and Tim Doyle look at a schematic of the proposed Allen Creek Greenway during a presentation at PAC's Jan. 18 meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

A speaker during PAC’s public hearing on the plan had pointed out that the official public commentary period runs through Jan. 24. That prompted discussion among commissioners about whether to hold off until all possible commentary is heard – though some indicated there’d already been ample opportunity for feedback. Another public hearing on the PROS plan will be held at the planning commission’s Feb. 1 meeting, with a vote by that group set for Feb. 15. City council is expected to hold a public hearing and vote on the plan in early March.

Tuesday’s PAC meeting included two presentations. Mike Quinn, a board member of the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy, described the group’s efforts and asked PAC to convey a sense of urgency about the project to city council. And Scott Rosencrans, a former PAC chair, gave an update on the Ann Arbor skatepark: “The big news is that this is the year we build the skatepark.”

Updates from city parks staff included a quarterly financial report, during which parks manager Colin Smith reported that parks & recreaction is looking at 2.5% cuts during the next budget cycle. Commissioners also got briefed on the outcome of the Miles of Golf proposal to take over operations of the Huron Hills golf course – a proposal rejected by the city late last year – and an update on planned improvements at the Gallup Park canoe livery. Staff will hold a public meeting with concept plans on Tuesday, Jan. 25 at the livery, starting at 7 p.m. If the plan is approved, the city is poised to apply for state grant funding for the project, estimated to cost about $450,000.

Action on PROS Plan Postponed

The Parks and Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan, which provides an inventory, needs assessment and action plan for the city’s parks system, is updated every five years. The updated document is required by the state in order for the city to be eligible to apply for certain grants. The process – led by parks planner Amy Kuras – began in late 2009 and is nearing completion, with final input being solicited on a draft. A resolution was on the agenda at PAC’s Jan. 18 meeting to recommend approval of the plan, and a public hearing was held to get additional feedback.

[For additional details on the plan itself, see Chronicle coverage: "Planning Commission Weighs In on Parks" Files in .pdf format of the draft PROS plan sections: Intro and Section I: Community Description, Section II: Administrative Structure, Section III: Budget & Funding, Section IV: Inventory, Section V: Land Use Planning & Acquisition, Section VI: Planning Process, Section VII: Goals & Objectives, Section VIII: Needs Assessment, Section IX: Action Plan]

PROS Plan: Public Hearing

Two people spoke during a public hearing on the PROS plan. Alice Ralph said she was speaking on behalf of Rita Mitchell, who wasn’t able to stay long enough to participate. Mitchell had prepared written remarks, which Ralph read, stating that it would be premature for PAC to vote on the PROS plan at this meeting. The city has indicated that public commentary will remain open through Jan. 24, and that public hearings at PAC, the planning commission and city council would be held in February and March.

[She was referring to the following paragraph, posted on the city's PROS plan website:]

Comments may be submitted until Jan. 24, 2011 to be considered for inclusion in the plan. In February and March, public hearings will be held at the Park Advisory Commission, Planning Commission and City Council. Dates will be posted as they are confirmed. To submit comments e-mail a2parks@a2gov.org.

Reading Mitchell’s remarks, Ralph stated that PAC hasn’t yet heard from the public, and that insufficient notice has been provided to the public about the opportunity for input. Will another public hearing be held at PAC? How will additional public input be incorporated into the plan, if PAC votes on it now? In addition, there were several specific comments directed at the plan itself. She opposed the concept of public/private partnerships, stating that it could lead to the piece-by-piece dismantling of the parks system. She cited Fuller Road Station and the Huron Hills golf course RFP process as examples. The current draft uses 2000 census data – 2010 data should be used instead. She also said there is a lack of clarity on the budget that’s included in the draft. She described here remarks as the start of her comments, and that she’ll be sending more. [.pdf file of full remarks]

George Gaston spoke briefly, saying he wanted to echo the comments that Ralph had made. He urged commissioners to postpone their voting on the PROS plan until all public input was received.

PROS Plan: Commissioner Comments, Questions

Tim Berla asked Amy Kuras to review the public process that had been done so far for the PROS plan. She said it started about a year ago, when a steering committee was formed to provide guidance on updating the plan. An online survey was open for three months, yielding about 820 responses from the public. They held three public forums, which she said weren’t particularly well-attended – about 30 people in total came to those. In addition, CDs of the draft are available at parks facilities, she said.

The public comment period to respond to the draft itself is dictated by the state, Kuras said. There’s a mandatory 42-day period from the time that the draft is released – that period ends on Jan. 24. She noted that in addition to the public hearing at PAC, there will be one at the planning commission on Feb. 1, and another at city council in March. She’s also solicited feedback directly from PAC and planning commissioners at work sessions. [See Chronicle coverage: "Planning Commission Weighs In on Parks"]

Gwen Nystuen said she supported waiting until the public commentary period has ended before voting on the draft. In response to a question from Nystuen about timing, Kuras said they needed to have final approval of the plan by all entities on April 1. If the city doesn’t meet that deadline, it won’t be eligible for certain state grants, she said. It’s not clear whether the city would remain ineligible for an entire year, or for a shorter period.

David Barrett said it was important to point out that more than 820 people had responded to the online survey. He elicited from Kuras that the previous report had used a phone survey, with about 600 responses.

Mike Anglin, a Ward 5 city councilmember who’s an ex-officio member of PAC, clarified that amendments could be made to the plan even after it is approved. He noted that over the past few years, the city has been involved in rezoning efforts, changing the zoning of city-owned property to “public land,” and adding transportation facilities as a possible use for parcels zoned as public land. That “might be a very radical change that’s taken place,” he said.

Perhaps a five-year plan is a model of the past, Anglin said. The council might want to review the document more frequently. He noted that he doesn’t use the parks much himself, but he’s proud that the city has these amenities – PAC serves as a custodian of that legacy. Anglin concluded by saying he was glad to know the plan could be amended.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks manager, said that one option for PAC would be to pass the resolution at that meeting, but make it contingent on possibly incorporating additional public commentary. He also pointed out that even if commentary is received, that doesn’t mean it will automatically be included in the plan. “It will be considered,” he said.

Julie Grand, PAC’s chair, voiced support for that approach. She observed that Kuras had met with PAC members last week at their land acquisition committee meeting, and they’d given feedback to her then. There have been multiple opportunities for input, she said, and this isn’t the last one.

Karen Levin proposed taking a vote at PAC’s next land acquisition committee meeting, on Feb. 1. [LAC is a committee that includes all PAC members. Its meetings are open to the public, but are held at Cobblestone Farm and are not televised.] Berla observed that it would be unusual not to take a vote on such a public topic at their main meeting.

Tim Doyle suggested adding the word “draft” into the resolution, making it clear that they were voting on a document that wasn’t yet completed. With that change, he said he’d support voting on it at the current meeting.

Sam Offen felt uncomfortable taking action before all the public commentary had been collected. It might be the last comment they receive from the public that prompts discussion and revisions, he said. For that reason, he supported postponing a vote.

Saying he didn’t want to prioritize the “food chain,” David Barrett clarified that the normal process would be for PAC to vote first, then the planning commission, and finally city council. If it could be worked out, he’d feel more comfortable waiting until after Jan. 24 to vote. He also praised Kuras for the tenor of the report, saying the document reflected the public commentary that had been made so far, but didn’t judge that commentary.

Because the planning commission has scheduled a public hearing on the plan for its Feb. 1 meeting, that group could vote on it at their Feb. 15 meeting, Smith said. He suggested that PAC also take a vote at their Feb. 15 meeting. [PAC meets prior to the planning commission – their meetings start at 4 p.m. and 7 p.m., respectively.] That way the vote is televised, and there’s adequate time to incorporate public commentary, he said. Kuras said her plan is to compile a summary of public commentary by the end of next week, which she’d provide to both PAC and the planning commission.

Grand concluded the discussion by observing that consensus seemed to be reached on taking a vote at their next Feb. 15 meeting. She thanked Kuras for her work, saying “it’s a beautiful document.”

Allen Creek Greenway

Mike Quinn, a board member of the Allen Creek Greenway Conservancy and a senior principal at Quinn Evans Architects, gave a presentation to commissioners and asked for their support of the walking/biking pathway. He described the greenway as ambitious, with the goal of transforming a stretch of land that’s now considered blighted – extending from East Stadium and South State, running north along the railroad right-of-way through town and ending at the Huron River. The transformation would have major economic benefits, he said, and the time is right to act – the economic downturn provides an opportunity, he said.

The conservancy – a 501(c)3 nonprofit – is trying to facilitate discussions between major property owners needed to make the greenway a reality: the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Railroad and the city of Ann Arbor. Quinn reported that board members Joe O’Neal and Jonathan Bulkley were meeting with mayor John Hieftje that day. Members of the group also met recently with the owner of the Ann Arbor Railroad, and got a positive response, he said. And officials at the university have said they won’t impede the idea, Quinn reported – a response that greenway supporters consider positive.

Quinn noted that the PROS plan mentions the greenway briefly, but the conservancy hoped that PAC could give the project more energy.

Mike Quinn gave a presentation on the Allen Creek Greenway project at the Jan. 18 meeting of the Ann Arbor park advisory commission.

It’s critical to get a design in place so that people will have a proposal they can react to, Quinn said. There are three city properties that the conservancy hopes the city will commit to the project: 1) A surface parking lot at First & William, 2) the 415 W. Washington property, a former city maintenance facility, and 3) 721 N. Main, another city maintenance yard. He noted that all of the city land at First & William is located in the floodway, making it difficult to build there, but ideal for the greenway – the other two properties are partially located in the floodway.

In discussions last year, Quinn said city councilmembers had raised safety concerns, given that the proposed route would include crossing many streets. Conservancy members agree that it’s a problem, but it can be addressed, he said.

In response to a question from commissioner Tim Doyle, Quinn said the conservancy assumes the greenway would eventually become the responsibility of the city’s parks and recreation unit. He noted that it would connect with Washtenaw County’s border-to-border trail, and would promote efforts to create a more walkable, bikeable community.

After some wrangling with set-up, the presentation concluded with a five-minute video featuring community members – including Eppie Potts, Margaret Wong and Grace Shackman, among others – talking about why they support the project.

Quinn again asked PAC to convey to city council a sense of urgency about the greenway.

Ann Arbor Skatepark

Scott Rosencrans was in familiar territory at Tuesday’s PAC meeting. A former chair of the commission, he was on hand to make a presentation on behalf of the Ann Arbor skatepark project. He’s now a board member of the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark, and told commissioners that he’s also the group’s project liaison. He thanked the public for voting in the December Pepsi Refresh competition, an online effort to win $250,000. Though they didn’t get the prize, they came in 20th out of 200 projects in their category, which was based on online votes throughout the month. He thanked the city for helping promote the competition, saying that even though they didn’t win, they raised awareness about the project.

Rosencrans reported that the Friends of the Ann Arbor Skatepark recently added two new board members – himself, and Sam Saalberg, a teen who’s representing users of the skatepark. He also noted that Trevor Staples, a long-time leader of the skatepark effort, decided not to run for president, though he’ll remain on the board. Instead, Joe Galante was elected to that position.

Skatepark organizers are running a major donor campaign, cultivating five- and six-figure contributions, Rosencrans said. At the same time, there’s an active grant-writing program too. They’ve received a great deal of financial and logistical support from local businesses and individuals, he said, and are raising funds through selling merchandise, including items sold at Acme Mercantile on West Liberty.

But the big news, Rosencrans said, “is that this is the year we build the skatepark.” There are deadlines they need to meet – Washtenaw County Parks & Recreation has committed $400,000 to the roughly $1 million project, but that offer expires on Jan. 1, 2012 if skatepark organizers can’t raise matching funds. An agreement with the city of Ann Arbor has set aside land at Veterans Memorial Park until 2014 to use for the project, but city officials can reconsider that date if sufficient funding hasn’t been raised by 2012, Rosencrans said. He’s optimistic they can do it, but said there’s a tremendous amount of work to do.

Next steps will include writing and issuing a request for proposals (RFP) for a firm to provide construction drawings and technical oversight to the project. They’ll need to form an RFP review committee, get their funding in place, go through the construction bid process, “and then we’ll build the darn thing,” he said. The skatepark will be a world-class facility, Rosencrans told commissioners, serving an estimated 5,000 to 7,000 skateboarders. “I think this will be a project all of us can be proud of.”

Several commissioners had comments or questions. David Barrett asked about parking – when baseball or softball games are played at Veterans Memorial Park, the parking gets tight. Are there plans to expand it? Rosencrans said it wasn’t part of their design and he didn’t know of any plans by the city to expand parking. He noted that there was also a large parking lot at the shopping center across the street. Colin Smith, parks manager, confirmed that the city didn’t intend to expand parking. He noted that even at peak usage, the lots were rarely if ever completely full. He also pointed out that the park is on a bus line, and it’s anticipated that many users of the skatepark will take the bus or come from surrounding neighborhoods.

Sam Offen asked whether they expected to raise the entire amount this year – if not, would they start construction, even if they still needed additional funding to complete the project? Rosencrans said the preferred scenario is to raise all the money and build it this year. It’s possible to build it in phases, but that’s not optimal and would likely increase costs overall, he said.

Tim Berla asked what the commission could do to help the project. He said it was interesting that the PROS plan listed several parks capital projects with funding identified, but that the line item for the skatepark was unfunded.

Rosencrans replied that personal contributions are welcome – he offered to facilitate donations. Spreading the word about the project is also important, he said. Smith pointed out that the memorandum of intent between the city and the skatepark organizers – which PAC approved – was the same language used in the PROS plan. Berla asked whether PAC could ask council to try to find skatepark funding, if the organizers came close to meeting their financial goal, but fell short. Smith indicated that if it gets to that point, there’s nothing prohibiting the city from revisiting the question of funding.

Julie Grand asked how much they’d raised so far. Rosencrans said they it takes time to cultivate donors, and that there were several five- and six-figure donations that hadn’t yet been finalized. They’ve raised about $80,000 so far, he said. An invitation-only fundraiser is being planned for potential supporters, he said – mayor John Hieftje and Zingerman’s co-founder Paul Saginaw have agreed to speak at the event.

Gallup Park Livery Improvements

Amy Kuras, the city’s parks planner, gave commissioners a briefing on planned improvements for the Gallup Park canoe livery. Renovations are needed because the use of the facility has outgrown its original design, she said, and it’s outdated in terms of energy efficiency and other features. They hope to expand the facility’s meeting room, improve the safety of the path approaching the livery, and give people barrier-free access to the facility and dock area.

City staff will hold a public meeting with concept plans on Tuesday, Jan. 25 at the livery, starting at 7 p.m. If the plan is approved, they hope to apply for state grant funding.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks & recreation manager, elaborated on the issue of grant applications. As their staff has decreased over the years, he said, they’ve had less capacity to seek grants. The application process isn’t very time-consuming, but administering the grants takes staff resources that they don’t have. However, the state last year awarded about $100 million for 80 parks-related projects statewide, out of about 120 applications, Smith said. Given those good odds, it makes sense for Ann Arbor to apply, he said. City staff believes the Gallup livery project would have a good chance, given the livery’s high usage and clear need for improvements.

The city has some consultants on retainer, Smith said, who might be used to administer the grant. But even if a consultant’s fees are paid out of the grant, it would still be worth it, he said. The project is estimated to cost between $450,000 to $500,000. Kuras estimated that the cost of a consultant to administer the grant would be around $5,000.

Offen asked whether the city plans to tear down the existing building, or renovate it. Kuras described the current structure as beautiful – it wouldn’t be torn down, but it would be reconfigured. For example, they might add doors to open onto a patio area, to create an indoor/outdoor space for events.

In response to another query from Offen, Kuras said she had talked to the city’s energy office, and that there might be opportunities for other grants for features like solar panels.

Smith concluded the presentation by urging the public to attend the Jan. 25 forum and give feedback on the project.

Quarterly Financial Report

Sam Offen, chair of PAC’s budget and finance committee, gave a brief report on the second quarter financial update for parks and recreation. [.pdf files of second-quarter update and FY2011 forecast]

There are no surprises, Offen said. For the overall parks & recreation operations, expenses are $47,500 lower than budgeted, and revenues are $35,000 higher than budgeted, for a net gain of $82,500 over the first six months of the fiscal year. Revenues were $50,000 higher than budgeted at the two golf courses – Huron Hills and Leslie Park – and expenses were $15,000 lower than budgeted. Revenues were higher than budgeted at several other facilities, but down at Mack Pool, Fuller Pool and the Argo canoe livery.

Offen commented that the parks staff is doing an excellent job at maximizing revenues while keeping expenses down.

Parks manager Colin Smith reported that as of the first six months of the year, parks & recreation operations were $17,500 “to the good” of their anticipated $1.2 million general fund subsidy for the fiscal year. It was a small percentage under budget, he noted, but they were pleased that they are so close to their target.

Smith also described the process for the upcoming two-year budget cycle of fiscal 2012 and 2013. The city council has already started budget discussions, he said, including budget retreats they held in December and January. Parks managers will be going over the budget in detail with PAC’s budget and finance committee, then bringing a recommendation to the full commission in April. That recommendation would be reviewed and voted on by PAC, then forwarded to city council.

This year, in addition to that process, each service area of the city will be preparing “impact sheets” with ideas about how to cut expenses and raise revenues. They’ll be giving presentations at city council work sessions on those impact sheets, he said. Parks is part of the community services unit, which will be making its presentation to council on Jan. 31. He expects to get feedback and guidance from council at that point, which will be incorporated into the budget.

Smith reported that parks & rec has been asked to cut its budget by 2.5% – or about $93,000. He described this as a manageable number, which can be made up through a combination of increased revenues and decreased expenses. In particular, Smith said they anticipate revenue opportunities at the Argo livery in the wake of improvements being done there this year. [The city council recently approved a $1.17 million project to build a bypass channel in the Argo Dam headrace and add whitewater features. See Chronicle coverage: "PAC Recommends Argo Dam Bypass"]

Related to the Argo Dam project, Smith reported that earlier this month, the Washtenaw County parks & recreation commission had agreed to fund the full cost of border-to-border trail improvements being done in conjunction with the bypass channel, for $112,500. The city had hoped for half that amount, Smith said, and appreciated the county’s enthusiasm for this project.

Huron Hills Golf Course Proposal

Tim Berla asked parks manager Colin Smith to brief PAC on the outcome of the Huron Hills Golf Course proposal from Miles of Golf, which had been rejected late last year.

Last year, the city had issued a request for proposals (RFP) to solicit ideas for improving operations at the city-owned course. Two groups submitted proposals, but only Miles of Golf – a Pittsfield Township business – was chosen by a selection committee to move forward in the selection process. The business owners made a presentation at a Dec. 3 public meeting, but were informed later in the month that the city would not be pursuing their proposal.

At Tuesday’s PAC meeting, Smith said that the selection committee’s charge was to make a recommendation to Sumedh Bahl, the city’s community services area administrator, who would then decide whether to forward that recommendation further. The committee felt that the proposal didn’t make sense for the city, Smith said. It asked for a $3 million capital contribution from the city, and the project’s risk outweighed its potential reward. The proposal also didn’t factor in operating costs that the city would still need to cover even if Miles of Golf took over operations of the course, he said.

In addition, there was a heavy emphasis on the firm’s retail business, which made members of the selection committee uncomfortable, Smith said. And though the revenue projections in the financial forecast were very aggressive, they still didn’t hit the amount needed for proposed financial incentives to the city to kick in. For all of these reasons, Smith said, the committee didn’t believe the proposal was one that the city should pursue.

Julie Grand, PAC’s chair who also served on the selection committee, added that the RFP had indicated the goal of proposals should be to improve the game of golf in this community. The Miles of Golf proposal, with its retail focus, wouldn’t do that, she said.

Smith noted that the process had been a contentious one for the community, and he gave Miles of Golf credit for trying to put together a proposal that would address the city’s needs as well as their own. “That should be commended, regardless of the outcome,” he said.

Public Commentary

John Satarino, a former PAC member, spoke against the proposed Fuller Road Station, a joint city of Ann Arbor/University of Michigan parking structure, bus depot and possible train station. He said a deed restriction placed on the property when it was bought by the city from a Detroit Edison subsidiary in 1931 requires that it remain for park purposes only. The city has spent more than $1 million on the project already, he said, partly with PAC’s blessing and partly because of the commission’s passivity.

He criticized the public forums held by the city about the project, describing them as heavily managed and reminiscent of the Third Reich. The station’s annual operations subsidy will cost millions, he said, but word about that hasn’t seemed to reach the Ann Arbor taxpayer yet. He concluded by saying that the city might have to sell off parkland to pay for it – and city officials are tooting their own horns “while Tree Town dies.”

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

Absent: John Lawter, councilmember Christopher Taylor (ex-officio)

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 15, 2011 begins at 4 p.m. in the Washtenaw County administration building boardroom, 220 N. Main St. [confirm date]