The easement was recommended for approval by the Ann Arbor park advisory commission at its March 19, 2013 meeting. [.pdf of easement agreement] The council’s action came at its April 15, 2013 meeting.

DTE Energy Buckler substation site plan. (Links to larger image)

The easement agreement is needed so that DTE can remove old utility poles and install new poles and overhead lines – generally in the same location as existing poles and lines at Riverside Park. The easement allows DTE to provide maintenance on those poles and lines. DTE requested the easement in relation to an $8 million new electrical substation that the energy firm is building on land adjacent to the park. The Buckler substation’s site plan was approved last year by the city’s planning commission on June 5, 2012. It did not require city council approval.

The overall project entails building the substation in the utility company’s Ann Arbor service center – to provide a way to distribute an increase in electrical power to the downtown area due to increased demand for electricity. The project includes two 15.5-foot tall electrical transformers and related electrical equipment on raised concrete pads, and a new power delivery center (PDC) – a 630-square-foot, 12.5-foot tall steel structure. The source of power will be transmitted through underground sub-transmission cables in an existing manhole and conduit system.

The project also needed a variance to the 15-foot conflicting land use buffer requirements along the east side property line, adjacent Riverside Park. DTE requested a variance that would allow the firm to plant 23 trees along the far western side of Riverside Park instead of on DTE property. PAC recommended approval of that variance at its Feb. 28, 2012 meeting. It was subsequently authorized by the zoning board of appeals on June 27, 2012.

In addition to planting trees in the buffer, DTE plans to remove 15 trees along Canal Street, which will be replaced by 50 trees in other parts of the park. As stipulated by city ordinance, DTE also will be required to pay the city a “tree canopy loss” fee. According to the city’s urban forestry website, the current canopy loss rate is $186/inch for shade trees and $172/inch for ornamental trees. For this project, DTE will pay $23,800, which will be earmarked for future improvements to Riverside Park.

Construction on the substation will take place during the summer of 2013.

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]

Park planner Amy Kuras, left, talks with Stewart Gordon, an advocate for putting an ice-skating rink atop the Library Lane site. In the background are Andrew Walton, left, and Doug Kelly, the city’s director of golf. Walton supervises the Huron Hills golf course. (Photos by the writer.)

Commissioners discussed a proposal to build an ice-skating rink atop a portion of the city-owned Library Lane underground parking structure. They took no action on the item, but were briefed on the proposal by two advocates of the effort: Alan Haber and Stewart Gordon. The two men also attended a subsequent March 26 meeting of a PAC downtown park subcommittee. This report includes a summary of that session as well.

River-related items on PAC’s March 19 agenda included a resolution to recommend awarding a $295,530 contract to Gerace Construction Co. for repair work and repainting at Argo and Geddes dams, as well as site improvements around Argo Dam. Brian Steglitz, an engineer with the city, told commissioners that the work is being done in response to the most recent inspection by state regulators.

Commissioners also recommended awarding a $512,180 contract for improvements at the Gallup Park canoe livery to Construction Solutions Inc., which will be funded in part by a $300,000 state grant. Cheryl Saam, facility supervisor for the Argo and Gallup canoe liveries, gave commissioners a presentation on those operations, in preparation for budget recommendations that PAC is expected to consider at its April 16 meeting.

As part of her report, Saam noted that the city plans to issue another request for proposals (RFP) to design a whitewater section along the Huron River, downstream from the Argo Dam near the Argo Cascades. Parks and recreation manager Colin Smith reminded commissioners that the first attempt at this project wasn’t successful. The Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality did not approve the initial design, and would not issue the necessary permit for the project. The staff is working with the state to address MDEQ’s concerns, he said. Smith also reported that DTE Energy still intends to pay for the project, which is located adjacent to property that the utility company is cleaning up.

DTE representatives were on hand at the meeting because of a different project: To request an easement on city-owned land in Riverside Park, where utility poles are located. The easement is needed as part of an $8 million new electrical substation that DTE is building on land adjacent to the park. Commissioners unanimously recommended that the city council approve the easement.

In another presentation to set the stage for next month’s budget discussion, PAC heard from Doug Kelly, the city’s director of golf, and Andrew Walton, recreational facility supervisor at Huron Hills. They reviewed the status of the city’s two golf courses – at Huron Hills and Leslie Park – and noted that both courses have seen significant revenue gains over the past five years.

The issue that drew the most public commentary during the meeting wasn’t on the March 19 agenda: a possible dog park on a knoll in West Park. Residents in that area aren’t happy about the prospect of barking dogs in their neighborhood.

West Park Dog Park

At PAC’s Feb. 26, 2013 meeting, commissioners discussed two potential locations for a new fenced-in dog park: about 2 acres in and near South Maple Park, on the city’s west side off of West Liberty; and a roughly 1-acre section of West Park, on a knoll in the south-central area. No action was taken, but the intent is for a PAC committee to continue evaluating these options with parks staff before making a formal recommendation to the full commission. The previously recommended site – at a different location within West Park, near the parking lot off Chapin Street – was ultimately not presented to the city council, following protests from the nearby New Hope Baptist Church.

Although there was no item on the March 19 agenda related to a possible dog park, the bulk of public commentary addressed that issue. Most of the speakers were residents of the neighborhood near West Park.

Tom Fricke, who lives on North Seventh, told commissioners he appreciated their efforts to provide dog runs for Ann Arbor residents who own dogs. He knew nothing had been decided yet, but he wanted to reiterate some of the objections to the possible use of the knoll in West Park, saying “I think it’s a very bad location for it.” It violates planning and design considerations that went into the recent park renovations, which were enormously successful, he said. It would turn over a general use area to a single use. A dog park would also introduce a range of other issues related to parking problems, noise, and sanitation and watershed concerns.

Tom Fricke was one of several residents who live near West Park and who oppose putting a dog park on a knoll in the park.

Fricke said he’s become better educated about dog parks than he ever wanted to, and has been reading a lot of material, including information from the Association of Pet Dog Trainers, from other supporters of dog parks, and from other cities with dog parks. No other dog park that he could find was located in the core of an existing park. The dog parks seemed to be tucked to the side or in designated areas that are entirely apart from other park uses. He also noted that enclosing a dog park on the knoll doesn’t seem to comply with best practices for dog parks. If it were to be graded, the location would probably get a C- or D. Fricke concluded by saying that a well-designed dog park would likely be much more than the $25,000 or $30,000 budget that’s anticipated for this project. He hoped PAC would add these issues to their considerations.

Judith Connett said she lives on North Seventh, but her home doesn’t abut the park. Some of the problems, like noise, might not affect her, she said, while other problems – like parking – might be an issue. She objected to the dog park as an owner of two Cockapoos. She was worried about how it would change the use of the park, and about “how it will affect my puppies’ life in a negative way.” Her dogs weigh 22 pounds, and in the past she took them a couple of times to Slauson. [The Slauson Middle School property was used by dog owners as an unofficial dog park for a period of time.] Her dogs had been “horrified” by the big dogs there, Connett said. There will be dog fights if you have dogs of all ages and sizes in the same area, she said. Connett added that she’d like to see another dog park in Ann Arbor, but it needs to be a location where there’s room to separate the dogs by temperament or size. It should also be in a place that’s more rural, she said, so houses aren’t impacted.

Another North Seventh resident, Walter Butzu, said he can’t see the knoll from his house but he hoped a dog park wouldn’t be located there, for all the reasons that had been stated. He had supported the location on Chapin Street, because that’s in the “business side of the park,” where other activities like basketball courts, a baseball field and community gardens are located. The area on the grassy knoll is unstructured, he said. To see more of the park designated for a single-purpose use, like a dog park, would be disconcerting to him. Like Fricke, Butzu said he’s also become more educated about dog parks over the past two weeks. His hope is that the city chooses a location where noise is the primary consideration. Homeowners should be able to enjoy their back yards, and he’d support the objection of any homeowner if that enjoyment is encroached upon. He hoped commissioners would take into account the distance from residences. Part of Bandemer Park or Veterans Memorial Park – especially on the southwest corner – would work, he said. On Seventh Street, people are already chased into their back yards to get away from the street noise, and a dog park would “pretty much eliminate that [option] for us,” he concluded.

Marcia Healey told commissioners that West Park is not acceptable for a dog park. She’s lived near West Park for 15 years, and her house overlooks the knoll. She said she understands how that area is used and its aesthetics, and a dog park would be an immense change. People use this very open space in imaginative and practical ways. You might see people practicing yoga or tai chi, or meditating in the early morning or evening – looking out over the eastern side of the park. The knoll lends itself to being serene or playful, she said. Children use the area to fly kites, families have picnics, teenagers hold hands, people spread out blankets and read. It’s a very special space, Healey said. The park has a pond, wetlands and wildlife, and is a benefit to urban dwellers. She’d like to see a dog park at a different location.

Jim Mazak noted that his property would back up to the proposed dog park, and he’s against putting it there. Other locations got higher ratings, he noted. Parking would be a problem, similar to the problems near the Ann Arbor YMCA, he said. A dog park would bring people from outside the area, in addition to people who are already coming to the park for the community gardens, band concerts or baseball. Noise is also a factor, he said, and Ann Arbor has a nuisance ordinance. He’s been to Swift Run dog park and heard the dogs barking even at a distance, so he wondered how that noise would be blocked from his home. “I’m not going to listen to dogs barking all day long.” He described the dog park at Olson Park as a “mud pit,” with runoff – including dog waste – running into the pond and into tributaries of the Huron River. Finally, Mazak noted that right now, the West Park knoll has multiple uses. If a dog park is there, it would take away his ability to use the area.

Tom Egel said he was against the West Park location for a dog park because of the reasons that other speakers had already stated. Parking would be a problem, and the back yards of the houses along Seventh Street – where he and other residents go for quiet – would be affected.

Bob Dascola said he was with Friends of West Park, and had been involved in the early stages of the park’s renovation. He worked during the summer of 2011 with a group that produced Shakespeare plays in the park’s band shell – Shakespeare West, put on by The Blackbird Theatre – and he was able to observe activity in the knoll. Before that, he’d had no idea how noisy it was in the park. People at Miller Manor, which overlooks the park, make noise that projects into the park, he noted. Dascola also said he’d been to Olson Park, and the dogs there are very noisy. He agreed that a dog park in West Park would be very disruptive.

Janet Osborn told commissioners that she lives on Liberty Street. It’s loud there, and she could only imagine how loud it would be on Seventh, because of the traffic. She wouldn’t want residents there to go into their back yards for peace and quiet, only to be confronted with barking dogs. She agreed with others who had spoken, and felt that the park’s aesthetics are better suited for individuals and families. She thought it would be great to have a dog park at a location like Veterans Memorial Park.

West Park Dog Park: Staff Response

During his manager’s report, Colin Smith noted that the parks staff will continue to work on the dog park issue. It was good to get the feedback from residents, and it shows how the location is a difficult thing to resolve, he said. There are a lot of competing needs, he observed, including the need for a more centrally located dog park downtown.

Downtown Parks

The issue of downtown parks came up at various points during the March 19 meeting. During public commentary, two people spoke about the need for urban parks, particularly atop the Library Lane parking structure. And representatives of a group that wants to put an ice-skating rink on that site were invited to give a presentation at the meeting, after having lobbied the commission for several months.

By way of additional background, a subcommittee of PAC was formed last year to develop recommendations on the need for downtown parks, following up on an informal request from the city council. The effort comes in the context of Connecting William Street, an Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority project undertaken at the request of the council to help guide the future use of five city-owned downtown properties. Several park commissioners felt that the CWS “scenarios” didn’t include sufficient parkland or open space, and the DDA’s final recommendations ultimately stated that the park advisory commission should further examine the downtown’s needs in that regard.

The goal of the subcommittee is to draft recommendations that the full commission can consider and approve, which could be delivered to the city council in about six months. Members include Ingrid Ault, who is serving as the subcommittee chair, PAC chair Julie Grand, Alan Jackson, and Karen Levin. However, any park commissioner can participate.

This report includes a summary of the subcommittee’s most recent meeting, on March 26. For additional background, see Chronicle coverage: “Parks Group To Weigh In On Downtown Need” and “Committee Starts Downtown Park Research.”

Downtown Parks: Public Commentary

Two people spoke at PAC’s March 19 meeting on the subject of downtown parks.

Barbara Bach wondered: Where could she take her granddaughter, and what memory of Ann Arbor would her granddaughter have in the future? Will her granddaughter remember swan boats? A sprinkle pool? A funky favorite bench? Bach cited several other examples from memorable urban parks in other cities, and said her point is that Ann Arbor has no urban parks, and no city staff or elected body is making it a priority. “We have monster buildings, and a city hall that some can’t find,” she said, but there is no downtown public space that defines the character of Ann Arbor as a city of trees. There are real estate studies by the city and the Ann Arbor DDA, she noted, and the mayor often says there are plenty of parks. And there is a small group – with a huge mailing list – that’s been “battling mightily to be heard” about putting a park atop the Library Lane site. [She was referring to the Library Green Conservancy.]

Bach wanted the park commissioners to take the city council, DDA, planning commission and city staff to task on this issue, and to demand that an urban park become a priority. Where is the play space for all of us? Where are the setbacks? She wants to take her granddaughter to play, to rest, to see grass and a sculpture or anything that other cities have, along with new development. “I want her to remember something very special about her second city when she visits me,” Bach said. It’s great to have visitors to Ann Arbor’s restaurants and galleries, and it’s important to have people living and working downtown. All of these people need gathering places – a downtown urban park – to be developed and maintained. “Who knows?” she said. “With encouragement, we might even form a foundation to help maintain these special places that we will never regret having planned for.”

Janet Osborn also spoke about the topic of the “non-green space” at the Library Lane site. She recently moved back to Ann Arbor and was “absolutely shocked” by the number of new buildings in town. She couldn’t believe that yet another building was planned for the top of the Library Lane lot. [At this point there are no specific proposals for a building there, although the infrastructure was built to support a building.] Ann Arbor has long needed a place to gather for ordinary people – not university students – to meet their friends, Osborn said. She thinks the city can find a way to make that happen. “It doesn’t have to be a fancy place,” she said. It could be a very small area, with places to sit and meet friends. Osborn hoped the city would listen to its citizens, who overwhelmingly want a downtown park, she contended.

Downtown Parks: Skating Rink

The Library Lane site was the focus of a presentation at PAC’s March 19 meeting. Julie Grand – who chairs the commission – introduced the topic of a skating rink proposal atop Library Lane by saying that it had been raised several times during public commentary, but the commissioners hadn’t yet had the opportunity to discuss it amongst themselves. She had invited advocates for the project to make a presentation.

Alan Haber and Mary Hathaway attended PAC’s March 19 meeting. Haber addressed commissioners in support of an ice-skating rink atop the Library Lane parking structure.

The proposal is to build an ice-skating rink on part of the top of the city-owned Library Lane underground parking structure, which is now used as a surface parking lot. Commissioners have been lobbied about it during public commentary at several meetings, most recently on Feb. 26, 2013. At that meeting, Alan Haber – one of the organizers of the Library Green Conservancy – told commissioners that he hoped PAC could make a statement as a body or individually to the city council, urging them to give the rink a try for just two months.

Haber and Stewart Gordon spoke to commissioners on March 19, and provided a written proposal as well. The proposal again states the request for PAC support, as rink organizers seek $25,000 in matching funds from the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. [.pdf of rink proposal]

Gordon told commissioners that he’s lived in Ann Arbor since 1962. Pointing to the presentations earlier in the meeting on the city’s golf courses and canoe liveries, he said it brings him great joy to live in a city that supports those recreational facilities. He wanted to tell commissioners about another project that could bring residents great joy – a downtown skating rink.

The city’s other skating rinks aren’t located downtown, he said, so they don’t draw people to the downtown. He’s seen the joy that urban skating rinks can bring, like the flagship rink at Rockefeller Center in New York. There are others in communities across the country, he noted, even as close as Dexter. People who’ve lived in Ann Arbor a long time remember skating rinks all over the city, he said. So what his group wants to do is bring back something that’s joyous, and that takes advantage of modern technology to make artificial ice-skating a possibility. He emphasized that it’s an experimental project – a two-month trial period, not a permanent installation. After the capital investment is made, the skating rink can be disassembled and located at various sites.

Gordon asked commissioners if and how they’d like to be involved in this project.

Haber reported that his group has already made a proposal to the DDA, which manages the Library Lane site as part of the city’s parking system. He described the goals of the DDA as attracting private interest in the downtown, removing surface parking lots as much as possible, and developing public activities on public land. So skating rink advocates are asking the DDA for matching funds, and will seek private investment for the rest of the estimated $50,000 cost. They’d also like a resolution from PAC and the city council supporting the project, and Haber hoped that PAC’s downtown park subcommittee will explore it further.

Haber said he’s talked with the DDA’s partnerships committee, and a number of questions were raised that would need to be worked out with the city attorney.

The written proposal provided to PAC includes a list of “local supporters and consultants,” including John Fingerle of Fingerle Lumber, Mark Hodesh of Downtown Home & Garden, Carol Lopez of Peaceable Kingdom, Elaine Selo of Selo/Shevel Gallery, and Craig Forsyth of the Ann Arbor Figure Skating Club, among others. Updated after initial publication: Forsyth has contacted The Chronicle and stated that although he met with Haber and Gordon, he is neither a supporter nor a consultant for the project. He has asked them to remove his name from their materials.

The plan calls for building a 32-foot by 72-foot temporary artificial ice rink on the northwest corner of the Library Lane lot, at an estimated cost of $50,000. An “in-kind” contribution of 15 parking spaces, which the rink would cover, is also requested from the DDA.

The downtown building of the Ann Arbor District Library is adjacent to the site, although the library has no ownership of the Library Lane parcel. At the AADL board’s March 18, 2013 meeting, Gordon spoke briefly during public commentary asking for the board’s support on this project. He provided a handout regarding the project that’s similar to the one presented to PAC. There was no discussion or response from library board members during the meeting.

Downtown Parks: Skating Rink – Commission Discussion

Ingrid Ault described it as an interesting project. She grew up in the Burns Park neighborhood, and was able to use the rink there. She said she had walked the Library Lane site, to try to understand what’s being proposed. It wasn’t clear to her what size they’re proposing. She was envisioning the entire parking lot area. Haber replied that he could also envision that, “but we’re not being quite so ambitious.” They’re looking at the 15 parking spaces on the northwest corner, although the details still need to be worked out about exactly where the rink’s surface would be.

Ingrid Ault of the Ann Arbor park advisory commission.

Gordon added that different sizes are possible, but their estimates are based on a medium size – roughly 32-feet by 72-feet, adjacent to Earthen Jar restaurant and the sidewalk along South Fifth Avenue.

Ault said the size seemed small to her. She noted that there’s a circular “island” in the middle of the proposed rink, which takes additional space away from the actual skating surface. Haber replied that there are a variety of options, but they’re simply trying to figure out what’s feasible on a short-term basis. He noted that this idea began back in November of 2012, when he learned about the possibility of using artificial ice. Unfortunately it’s now past the time of colder weather, but he reported that artificial ice can be used year-round. “It’s a little counter-intuitive in one way, but in another way it could be very beautiful,” he said.

Gordon added that they didn’t want a rink that would be large enough to tempt hockey players. It’s really more about casual skating and families, he said. There are plenty of other places to play hockey.

Christopher Taylor – a city councilmember who serves as an ex officio member of PAC – asked whether any thought had been given to locating a skating rink on the parking lot next to Palio restaurant, at the northeast corner of Main and William. Given the activity there already from restaurants and retail shops, it might be interesting place to “be watched and watch others,” Taylor said. Haber indicated that he’s interested in having at least partial public use on all of the lots involved in the Connecting William Street study, including the lot next to Palio. However, he expressed skepticism that the DDA and the city council would be interested in giving up parking on that site.

Haber noted that Liberty Plaza – at Liberty and Division – has also been mentioned as a possible location for the skating rink, because that urban plaza needs more vibrancy. That location has challenges in terms of its configuration, he said.

But his focus is primarily on the Library Lane site, Haber said. Maybe things can happen elsewhere too – the hope is that public activities would proliferate, he said. Gordon added that there’s a synergy in being located next to the library. When you come to check out books with your kids, you can also go skating, he said.

Taylor was interested in hearing how AADL board members and staff felt about the ice rink. Gordon indicated that some individual board members are very supportive, but the board as a whole hasn’t weighed in. He said the impact on the library would be minimal – for example, an estimated average of two people per hour using the library restroom. Haber added that in general, the library is reluctant to get involved with the Library Lane site. Haber indicated that the library might be more responsive if questions came from PAC rather than from the rink advocates.

Tim Berla clarified that this project wouldn’t be a park in the traditional sense – for example, no city employees would be involved. It would be a two-month project, followed by what Gordon called a fairly complex assessment, including “social science metrics” and questionnaires. If it appears that it could be a long-term project, then decisions must be made about a long-term organization to handle staff, maintenance and other issues. Gordon characterized it as a long-term capital investment – the ice man manufacturer guarantees it for 10 years.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, asked if the organizers had spoken to other communities that used the artificial ice. Gordon replied that if you’re a high-level figure skater or hockey player, you’ll hate the surface – because it’s slow, and there’s not enough glide to go fast enough for jumps and tricks. If you’re a medium-level hockey player, you’d like it for working on your stick handling. Gordon noted that the artificial ice is used by Advantage Sports on West Stadium Boulevard. But if you’re a recreational skater, he said, “it’s lovely.”

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

Julie Grand asked about skates. Her understanding is that the artificial ice would require really sharp skates, which raised safety concerns for her. Both of her kids are skaters, and she said she knows what it’s like helping them get their skates on. Having potentially sharp objects in the public space is a concern.

Gordon replied that there are good models for dealing with that. One possibility would be to have lockers available at the library, he said. For the two-month trial period, however, it’s likely that people would bring their own skates. He said he’d love to have a day for people to dig out their old skates from attics and garages, and donate them for rental.

Haber said the DDA has asked for a two-year projection of this project, including expenses like staff and capital costs. One of those capital costs would be a skate-sharpening instrument, he said.

Berla asked about the process for making this happen – what would be the procedure, from the city’s perspective? Smith guessed that the city staff and DDA would need to negotiate what would happen, because the city owns the lot but it’s managed by the DDA. The council would need to pass a resolution directing it to happen, he said.

Smith continued, saying he appreciated the enthusiasm and effort that organizers have shown. His concern is that there aren’t a lot of examples of other communities using this type of artificial ice. He had asked the managers at the city’s ice rinks to talk to other communities that have tried this kind of project, and the feedback hasn’t been overwhelmingly positive, he said. A couple of recreation departments in other cities removed similar rinks after a year, because the rinks didn’t generate repeat customers. One person had described the experience of skating on the artificial ice as running up a sand dune. Smith said he’d hate to see a community group put energy and funding into a project that won’t work very well.

Gordon pointed to the rink at Advantage Sports, which has been in place for several years. He also volunteered to do additional research about the experiences of artificial ice rinks in other communities.

Smith then expressed concerns regarding maintenance. Often, the manufacturers of “synthetic amenities” will say that there’s no or low maintenance, he noted, but generally “that’s really never the case.” Other recreational departments that have used this kind of artificial ice say that it requires daily application of a spray to make the skating smoother. Gordon replied that there have been several iterations of this technology, and the most recent types of artificial ice don’t require daily spraying.

Ault again stated that the size of the rink concerns her: It’s really small. It would help to know the sizes of rinks in other communities, she said.

She also wondered if the DDA had indicated buy-in with the project. Would the DDA be willing to provide matching funds? Haber replied that he and other supporters are taking this “step by step.” The DDA’s basic view seems to be an interest in buildings, and they’re not eager to see public activity at that site, he said, because if “you let the people on, they’ll never want to get off.” But some of the DDA board members on the partnerships committee were quite interested, Haber added. The short-term nature of this proposal will be persuasive, he contended, but the DDA’s partnerships committee still wants some questions answered. “So I’m hopeful,” he concluded. It’s a big dream to think the DDA might embrace this project, but it’s within their mission to find better uses for that surface parking lot, he said.

Downtown Parks: March 26 Committee Meeting

Haber and Gordon also attended a March 26 meeting of PAC’s downtown park subcommittee, along with Will Hathaway and Mary Hathaway, who also support a park on top of the Library Lane parking structure. The meeting included the city’s park planner Amy Kuras and Colin Smith, parks and recreation manager.

Amy Kuras, the city’s park planner (far right), describes aspects of a map that shows public property within the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority district. She was attending a March 26 meeting of the Ann Arbor park advisory commission’s downtown park subcommittee, which was also attended by members of the Library Green Conservancy.

The subcommittee had previously met on Feb. 5, 2013, and had agreed as a first step to read background material from a variety of sources, including the city’s parks and recreation open space (PROS) plan, elements of the city’s master plan, and reports by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority’s Connecting William Street project.

On March 26, the group discussed aspects of the PROS plan and CWS report that relate to downtown parks. Alan Jackson observed that the PROS plan is a very “interpretable” document. You could draw conclusions that are even diametrically opposed, he noted, so there’s a lot of latitude within the scope of that plan.

The PROS plan’s needs assessment identifies two actions directly related to downtown parks and urban plazas: (1) Discussion concerning downtown open space should continue as well as to plan for developer contributions and small pocket parks; and (2) Work with the Downtown Development Authority to plan for renovation and acquisition of downtown open space, including the development of the library lot [a reference to the top of the city-owned Library Lane underground parking structure].

Kuras, who is responsible for soliciting developer contributions to parks, reported that she’s exploring whether that’s the best approach for the city to take. She typically negotiates with developers, asking them to donate parkland or cash in lieu of land, which can then be used in the parks system. The intent is to maintain a certain ratio of parkland to residents, and to encourage the owners of new developments to help fund that goal. It’s been successful in other parts of the city, but is difficult to do downtown – in part because land is so much more expensive.

Smith noted that right now it’s voluntary, and developers can refuse to contribute. He reported that the developers of the 413 E. Huron project have agreed to contribute $125,000, although it’s unclear whether that project will move forward.

One possibility would be to require this kind of contribution, Smith said. To do that would require action by the city council. Smith also suggested that the city might consider using this funding source not just for park infrastructure or acquisition, but also for programming needs, to activate existing urban parks or plazas.

Smith stressed the importance of programming – saying it plays a role in making a park is successful or not. Traditionally, he said, parks and recreation employees are tied to a facility, like a skating rink or golf course. But the PROS plan discusses the possibility of having a parks employee devoted to programming across the system, not just at one particular facility. That might be a recommendation for the subcommittee to consider, he said.

Regarding the Connecting William Street project, several people observed that the CWS report recommends further exploration of the need for downtown parks and open space. [For more background on the status of Connecting William Street, see Chronicle coverage: "Connecting William To Be Resource Plan."] A few people expressed puzzlement about the CWS proposal for a mid-block cut-through – a possible pedestrian walkway between Main Street and State Street. Kuras said she was baffled by that particular recommendation, because most of the feedback that the city staff hears is about the need for more downtown open space, not a walking corridor.

Smith urged commissioners to look not only at the CWS sites as they prioritize, but also to factor in the Allen Creek greenway, and the city-owned sites at 721 N. Main and 415 W. Washington.

The subcommittee spent a portion of the March 26 meeting looking at a map that Kuras had printed out, which highlighted publicly-owned land in the DDA district – including city land as well as the University of Michigan. They also talked about how to solicit specific input from groups like the downtown merchant associations, the Ann Arbor District Library, the university, residents and others. Their strategy at this point includes inviting representatives to future subcommittee meetings, developing an online survey and holding public forums.

Although the group had previously discussed the possibility of hiring the nonprofit Project for Public Spaces as an outside consultant, Smith reported that he had tried to contact that group but had not received a response.

Also attending the March 26 meeting was Matthew Altruda, who told commissioners that he does the booking for many music events in town, including the Sonic Lunch weekly summer concert series that’s sponsored by the Bank of Ann Arbor and held at Liberty Plaza. At the end of the March 26 session, Altruda said he agreed with the group’s assessment that programming is important, and indicated that he’d be willing to help with that, if they wanted.

The subcommittee’s next meeting is set for Tuesday, April 9 from 5-6:30 p.m. in the second-floor city council workroom at city hall, 301 E. Huron. These meetings are open to the public and include the opportunity for public commentary.

DTE Easement at Riverside Park

On PAC’s March 18 agenda was a resolution to recommend approval of an easement between the city of Ann Arbor and DTE Energy – for land in Riverside Park where utility poles are located. [.pdf of easement agreement]

DTE Energy Buckler substation site plan. (Links to larger image)

The easement agreement is needed so that DTE can remove old utility poles and install new poles and overhead lines – generally in the same location as existing poles and lines at Riverside Park. The easement will also allow DTE to provide maintenance on those poles and lines. DTE requested the easement in relation to an $8 million new electrical substation that the energy firm is building on land adjacent to the park. The Buckler substation’s site plan was approved last year by the city’s planning commission on June 5, 2012. It did not require city council approval.

The overall project entails building the substation in the utility company’s Ann Arbor service center to provide a way to distribute an increase in electrical power to the downtown area due to increased demand for electricity. The project includes two 15.5-foot tall electrical transformers and related electrical equipment on raised concrete pads, and a new power delivery center (PDC) – a 630-square-foot, 12.5-foot tall steel structure. The source of power will be transmitted through underground sub-transmission cables in an existing manhole and conduit system.

The project needed a variance to the 15-foot conflicting land use buffer requirements along the east side property line, adjacent Riverside Park. DTE requested a variance that would allow the firm to plant 23 trees along the far western side of Riverside Park instead of on DTE property. PAC recommended approval of that variance at its Feb. 28, 2012 meeting. It was subsequently authorized by the zoning board of appeals on June 27, 2012.

In addition to planting trees in the buffer, DTE plans to remove 15 trees along Canal Street, which will be replaced by 50 trees in other parts of the park. As stipulated by city ordinance, DTE also will be required to pay the city a “tree canopy loss” fee. According to the city’s urban forestry website, which provides the technical definition and sample calculations, the current canopy loss rate is $186/inch for shade trees and $172/inch for ornamental trees. For this project, DTE will pay $23,800, which will be earmarked for future improvements to Riverside Park.

Construction on the substation will take place during the summer of 2013. The easement agreement requires approval by the city council.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, introduced the item, saying he’s always wanted to see a better buffer between the park and the power substation. The landscaping that DTE is putting in place will make the park look much better, he said. Regarding the easement, Smith said it wasn’t a significant departure from how things are currently handled with DTE’s utility poles in that area.

Paul Ganz, DTE’s manager of regional relations, showed park commissioners a map indicating new projects in Ann Arbor that added to the city’s energy needs.

Paul Ganz – DTE’s manager of regional relations in Washtenaw, Livingston and Ingham counties – told commissioners that the substation project is essential, and the easement is a critical piece of that $8 million investment. The project will bring nearly 30 megawatts of additional electrical capacity to the Ann Arbor area.

In order to minimize disruptions during the switchover phase, DTE needs to build a new overhead pole infrastructure, to allow for the safe transfer of the utility’s distribution lines, he said. The company will install a new set of poles, then take off the wires from the old poles and put the new distribution lines on the new poles. He noted that phone and cable companies, which also use the poles, will need to move their lines as well.

He highlighted DTE’s replacement of trees that will have to be removed, as well as the company’s payment to the forestry fund. He said he appreciated the “cooperative posture” of the city staff, as well as PAC’s previous recommendation of a variance to the conflicting land use buffer requirement.

Ganz concluded by calling it a “garden variety easement,” and he hoped commissioners would look on it favorably.

DTE Easement at Riverside Park: Commission Discussion

Tim Doyle clarified with Colin Smith that the 50 new trees would be planted throughout the park. Smith referred Doyle to a drawing – included in the meeting packet – that showed where those trees would be planted. [.pdf of planting map]

Doyle also asked about the purpose of the substation. Was it to generate more electricity for the community? No, Ganz replied. The substation doesn’t generate electricity – it distributes electricity. DTE needs to build new circuits to handle the electricity loads. Ganz showed commissioners a map that indicated new or proposed developments in the city, “and they all need new sources of electricity,” he said. [.pdf of project map]

Doyle then observed that the substation doesn’t encroach on the park itself, but he asked for clarification about the location of the utility poles. Smith explained that the utility poles are located on parkland – that’s why an easement from the city is required.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously recommended approval of granting the easement to DTE. It will next be considered by city council for approval.

Gallup Park Renovations

The March 19 agenda included a resolution recommending that the city council award a $512,180 contract for improvements at the Gallup Park canoe livery to Construction Solutions Inc. The project budget includes a 10% construction contingency, bringing the total cost to $563,398.

Schematic of the proposed Gallup Park canoe livery improvements.

Construction Solutions, based in Ann Arbor, was the lowest qualified bidder on the project. Other bids were submitted by Braun Construction Group ($534,600); Detroit Contracting Inc. ($554,620); The E&L Construction Group ($580,700); A.R. Brower Company ($607,160); and Terra Firma Landscape ($612,137).

In introducing the item, parks and recreation manager Colin Smith noted that the project has been two years in the making. He reminded commissioners that park planner Amy Kuras had briefed them on the project in the past. At its March 15, 2011 meeting, PAC had approved applying for a $300,000 grant from the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources Trust Fund to help fund the project.

Kuras gave commissioners an overview of the improvements, which include barrier-free paths to the docks; barrier-free docks and fishing facilities; an expanded patio area to create barrier-free outdoor seating and to separate these areas from the pedestrian circulation; sliding glass doors from the meeting room; and redesign of the park entry to create a separation between the service drive and the pedestrian pathway.

The project will be funded in part through the $300,000 MDNR trust fund grant, with matching funds from the FY 2013 park maintenance and capital improvements millage. Smith noted that when the grant was awarded, it was the second-highest ranked application statewide. He credited Kuras for her work in making that happen.

As soon as approval is given by the city council, the project’s first phase will begin on the docks and livery area, with work continuing until Memorial Day in late May. Work will resume after the summer season on Labor Day, focusing on paths and the park entry reconfiguration. The entire project is expected to be finished by mid-November.

Gallup Park Renovations: Commission Discussion

Mike Anglin wondered if there would be a launch for kayaks, so that people wouldn’t tip over while getting into the boat. Kuras explained that a new ramp would allow the kayakers to actually come up out of the water, and grab a railing to help them out of the kayak.

Anglin asked if the renovated meeting space would be available to rent for events. Kuras replied that the space is rented out now, but the staff expect that rentals will increase after the renovations.

Anglin also wanted to know if local firms had been considered for this contract. Kuras noted that the city’s policy is to accept the lowest bid, unless there are reasons to reject it – like past bad performance. In this case, the lowest bid happened to be a local firm, she noted.

Graydon Krapohl wanted to know when the project will likely be completed. Kuras replied that the weather is the biggest factor, but if all goes well, the hope is to have the project finished by mid-November of 2013.

Christopher Taylor observed that a van turnaround area could also be used as a cut-through for pedestrians or bicyclists. He wondered if there will be design elements to discourage it. Kuras said pervious pavers will be used in that area, “so it’s not going to be the most comfortable surface to walk on.” The hope is that renovated walkways will be a more desirable option.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the resolution recommending that Construction Solutions Inc. be awarded the contract for Gallup Park renovations. It was subsequently approved by the city council at its April 1, 2013 meeting.

Update on Argo, Gallup Canoe Liveries

Cheryl Saam, facility supervisor for the Argo and Gallup canoe liveries, gave commissioners a presentation on those operations. The briefing was in preparation of budget recommendations that PAC is expected to consider at its April 16 meeting. [.pdf of Saam's presentation]

For Gallup, Saam highlighted the stillwater paddles on the 2.5 mile Gallup Pond, the popular 5.7-mile river trip from Barton to Gallup, a coffee shop that sells Zingerman’s coffee and baked goods, and the meeting room that’s available for rental. She also reviewed the upcoming renovations, which had been featured in a presentation earlier in the meeting by park planner Amy Kuras.

Aerial view of Argo Pond and Argo Cascades – a series of nine pools that lead from the pond to the Huron River. The large site at the bottom of this image is the DTE property that the city hopes to acquire.

At Argo, the livery provides canoe, kayak and tube rentals on the 2-mile Argo Pond, a concession stand, and river trips – a 3.7-mile trip from Argo to Gallup, and a 7.1-mile trip Delhi to Argo. The most recent feature is the new Argo Cascades, a series of pools that allow kayakers to bypass Argo Dam and connect from Argo Pond to the Huron River. Saam noted that the Cascades won the 2012 Michigan Recreation & Park Association (MRPA) park design award, and was named a “Frontline Park” by the City Parks Alliance, a national advocacy group.

Saam noted that the city hopes to expand river recreational activities onto the DTE/Michcon site in the future. That site, which DTE is remediating, is on the opposite side of the Huron River, across from the Argo Cascades. For example, Saam said, because canoes can’t go through the Argo Cascades, one possibility would be to have another canoe livery on the DTE side of the river. “There are lots of opportunities that could come up with that site,” she said.

Both liveries offer River Camps, Saam said. Last year, 101 kids participated at Argo; 258 participated at Gallup.

Overall in 2012, 50,336 people rented boats during the year at both liveries – up from 35,834 in 2011. Saam attributed that increase primarily to the opening of Argo Cascades. A busy weekend day would bring about 900 customers, she reported. “It has been a big hit.” The Argo-to-Gallup river trip was the most popular, accounting for 67% of all river trips during the year.

As a percentage of river trips, the Barton-to-Gallup trip grew from 7.5% to 27% of all river trips in 2012.

Saam reported that projected revenues for the current fiscal year, which ends June 30, are $619,626 compare to $569,589 the previous year. Projected expenses of $567,645 are also up, compared to $488,421 in the previous year. She noted that seasonal staff – about 50 employees – accounts for 44% of the budgeted expenses.

Looking ahead, the city plans to issue another request for proposals (RFP) to design a whitewater section along the Huron River, between the Argo Dam and the spot where the Argo Cascades enters into the river. Saam said that the staff believe it will provide a recreational amenity unlike any other in southeast Michigan – nothing too extensive, she added, probably just a surf wave and some eddy points. Most of the public would use the Cascades, which would exit downstream from the whitewater area.

Regarding the whitewater RFP, parks and recreation manager Colin Smith noted that the first attempt at this project wasn’t successful. The Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality did not approve the initial design, and would not issue the necessary permit for the project. The staff is working with the state to address MDEQ’s concerns, he said.

Update on Argo, Gallup Canoe Liveries: Commission Discussion

Tim Berla asked about the 27% of river trips that go from Barton Pond to Gallup Park – he wondered how people using canoes can get around the Argo Dam. Do they have to get out of their canoes? Yes, Saam replied, they have to walk the length of the Argo Cascades, and put in the canoe where the Cascades exit back into the Huron River. Canoes can’t go through the Cascades, but most people use kayaks, she said.

“Is there any chance we’re going to fix this?” Berla asked. Obviously the Cascades has been a successful amenity, he said. But when it was “sold” to PAC, he added, commissioners were told that canoes would also be able to use it. At one point, the idea had been that canoes could even paddle up the Cascades, he said.

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

Colin Smith acknowledged that the project had been difficult to complete as it was originally envisioned. He noted that even prior to the Argo Cascades project, there’d been a strong trend toward using kayaks rather than canoes. The city is exploring the possibility of partnering with DTE or in some way gaining access to a portion of the land currently owned by DTE that borders the Huron River downstream from the Argo Dam – where the whitewater feature would be located. Earlier this year, DTE issued a request for information (RFI), seeking possible partners to developer that site, which is located at 841 Broadway. [.pdf of DTE's RFI for the 841 Broadway site]

If the city gains access to that side of the river, Smith said, a supplemental canoe livery could be located there so that people wouldn’t need to carry canoes from the current livery past Argo Cascades. “We’re continuing to explore options – it’s not an easy solution,” he said.

Karen Levin asked about the whitewater project: Wasn’t the company that designed the Argo Cascades also hired to for the whitewater feature? She wondered if that same company would still be working on the whitewater.

Smith reviewed the project’s history, noting that when the project was originally proposed, the resolution that PAC recommended, and that the city council later approved, was primarily for the dam bypass – later named Argo Cascades – with the option of adding whitewater. [PAC's recommendation, approved on Oct. 19, 2010, was to build a bypass channel in the Argo Dam headrace for $988,170, and to add whitewater features for an additional $180,000. The $1,168,170 project was designed by Gary Lacy of Boulder, Colo., and built by TSP Environmental, a Livonia firm.]

Smith noted that the whitewater features weren’t required as part of an agreement with the state Dept. of Environmental Quality to address issues related to the dam. [In August of 2009, the state issued a dam safety order to the city, with several deadlines that the city needed to meet in addressing problems with the dam, as well as an order to immediately close the headrace. The city closed the headrace in November of 2009 but contested the order. Negotiations with the state resulted in a consent agreement that was signed in May of 2010. (.pdf file of consent agreement)]

Smith noted that DTE later committed to funding the construction of the whitewater section, because the company needed to do remediation on its side of the river, which needed to be coordinated with construction of the whitewater area. He said DTE is still planning to honor that commitment to pay for the whitewater feature.

The city will issue an RFP for the whitewater design, Smith said, and it may or may not be awarded to the designer who did Argo Cascades.

Mike Anglin thanked Cheryl Saam, noting that it all started years ago with “drainage disconnects.” [Anglin was likely referring to the state's concerns over the condition of toe drains on the Argo Dam embankment. The term "drainage disconnect" is typically used in reference to the city's footing drain disconnect program.] “We took the hard long way,” Anglin told Saam, “but got a great product.”

Outcome: This was not a voting item.

Dam Repairs

In another river-related item, commissioners were asked to recommend awarding a $295,530 contract to Gerace Construction Co. for repair work and repainting at Argo and Geddes dams, as well as site improvements around Argo Dam.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, reviewed some history on this project.

By way of background, the city council – at its Nov. 15, 2010 meeting – had passed a resolution directing the city administrator to find a new funding source for the city’s recreational dams: Argo and Geddes. [The city's other dams, Barton and Superior, generate electricity and are not considered recreational.] At that time, maintenance and other needs for the dam were paid for out of the city’s water supply system fund. The resolution stated:

RESOLVED, That City Council direct the City Administrator to remove funding for repairs, maintenance and insurance for Argo and Geddes dams from the City’s Water Supply System Fund in the FY 2012 budget and thereafter.

In 2011 when the council passed its budget for FY 2012 – starting July 1, 2011 – the costs for Argo and Geddes dams were shifted to the parks operations budget. This move had been recommended by PAC, Smith noted.

The current contract is for work that’s done on a 15-20 year cycle, Smith said. Gerace, based in Midland, submitted the lowest of four qualified bids for this work. Other bidders were Anlaan Corp. ($354,050); E&L Construction ($457,989); and Spence Brothers ($797,000). According to a staff memo, the work entails “repair and repainting of gear housings, lift equipment, tainter gate structural steel, miscellaneous concrete repair, and minor site improvements. Site improvements include addition of rip rap and constructing a path to portage around Argo Dam.”

Brian Steglitz, an engineer with the city, was on hand to answer questions. He indicated that the work is being done in response to feedback from state regulators. The two dams are inspected every three years by the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality (MDEQ).

The project will be funded from the city’s parks maintenance and capital improvements millage.

Dam Repairs: Commission Discussion

Tim Berla observed that since the dams aren’t generating electricity or providing drinking water, the appropriate way to fund them is out of the parks budget.

From left: Park commissioners Tim Berla and Graydon Krapohl.

Smith described the rationale for funding these dam repairs out of the parks and recreation budget. He noted that a lot of recreational opportunities offered by the parks system at Argo Pond are called “pond paddles.” People might prefer pond paddles, as opposed to going down the river, if they have young children, or if they just feel more comfortable on still water. There are also times when the water flow causes the staff to suspend river trips, but people can still enjoy canoeing or kayaking on the Argo Pond, between Barton and Argo dams. In fiscal year 2012, revenue generated from pond paddles, rowboat and paddleboat activities was about $175,000.

Smith likened it to the kind of investment that the city makes in other recreational facilities, like its ice-skating rinks.

Berla clarified with Brian Steglitz that the dams are not involved in flood mitigation. That’s right, Steglitz said. The dams at this point are purely recreational. Under the existing permits, they operate as “run of the river” dams. That is, for every drop of water that enters the pond, a drop needs to go over the dam to compensate.

Berla wondered how this project fits in with the overall cost of maintaining these dams. How much money is spent every year, and when will the city need to make this kind of expenditure again? Smith said the annual cost for operating each dam is about $18,000 to $20,000. That’s already budgeted, he said, separately from the repair project.

Steglitz said this kind of maintenance hasn’t been done on these dams in about 25 years, so it’s past due. Originally, the city had planned to do this work one dam at a time – one per year. But the staff decided to combine some of the less expensive, out-of-the-water work at Argo and Geddes this year. In a couple of years, another project is planned to address the gates on the dams, he said. That will be a more complicated project, and will involve shutting down the dams and de-watering one side in order to paint the gates. Smith reported that the gate repair in the city’s capital improvements plan (CIP) for fiscal 2017, estimated to cost about $400,000.

After that second project is completed, Steglitz said, the two dams probably won’t require significant work for another 20 years.

Christopher Taylor asked if the costs were about equally divided between Geddes and Argo. Yes, Steglitz replied.

Taylor also asked for an explanation of the term “rip rap.” Steglitz described rip rap as “large aggregate” – typically rocks or concrete rubble – that’s used for erosion control. The intent is to hold back earth along the dam embankments. From an engineering standpoint, he said, the city needs to make sure it maintains the integrity of those embankments, as well as the integrity of the concrete dams.

Taylor asked where the new portage would be located. It will be constructed from the first pond of the Argo Cascades to the “tail” of Argo Dam, where people will be able to launch their canoes into the Huron River. Tim Doyle asked whether that’s the same location that the city plans to add a whitewater feature. Smith answered by noting that the city hasn’t yet received permits for the whitewater project, and that this new path isn’t a significant improvement. Doyle observed that it’s a temporary fix while the city waits on the whitewater project. Smith agreed with that assessment.

Doyle then asked whether these dams are regulated by the state. Steglitz replied that the dams are regulated by the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality, which inspects the dams every three years. Doyle asked if this repair work is the consequence of the state’s inspection. Yes, Steglitz said. The city is responsible for maintaining the structural integrity of those dams, he said, and this project is in response to that.

Doyle asked if dams, like bridges, have a life. Yes, Steglitz said. He noted that these dams have been rebuilt. Like any structure, you can do things to extend its life, he added, “and that’s what this project is all about.” By doing this kind of work, the city can extend the life of the dam by decades. There’s no reason to believe the dams would need to be replaced in the near future, he said.

Mike Anglin asked Steglitz to describe how Barton and Superior dams differ from Argo and Geddes. Steglitz explained that Barton and Superior dams are federally regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). They both generate power – about 1.5 megawatts of power combined, when operating at full capacity. There are more stringent regulatory requirements, with more frequent inspections. Barton also provides an impoundment for the city’s water supply. Those two dams are also more complex structures, he said, because they both generate hydropower. So they’re more costly to operate and maintain. The city’s general fund receives revenue from Barton and Superior dams, and the general fund also pays for the improvements and maintenance of those dams. Capital improvements are planned at both dams as well, and are in the city’s CIP, Steglitz said.

In response to a query from Doyle, Steglitz said that at one point, both Argo and Geddes also generated electricity. All of the dams were purchased from DTE in the early 1980s, he said, for “very little to no cost,” because major renovations were needed. At that point, the hydropower components at Argo and Geddes were abandoned, he said.

Taylor questioned a clause in PAC’s resolution, which stated: “Whereas, The coating on the gear housings and portions of the gates at both Argo and Geddes Dams has failed; …” The proximity of “failed” and “dams” caused him, as a lay person, to raise a “flashing light red alert.” He joked that Steglitz appeared calm, so Taylor asked him to elaborate on that wording.

The dams aren’t in danger of failure, Steglitz replied, but the coatings have failed. There are places where the coating is gone. Coatings aren’t just for aesthetic purposes, he noted, but rather to protect the structural steel from corroding. There are now signs of corrosion, he said. If that continues, at some point you just can’t repaint the steel – you’d need to replace it, which would be a lot more expensive. There are some components that will need to be replaced, he added, but not many. “We’re doing this at the right time.”

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved awarding the contract to Gerace for work on Argo and Geddes dams. The contract was subsequently won approval at the city council’s April 1, 2013 meeting.

Golf Courses Update

In another presentation to set the stage for next month’s budget discussion, PAC heard from Doug Kelly, the city’s director of golf, and Andrew Walton, recreational facility supervisor at Huron Hills. They reviewed the status of the city’s two golf courses – at Huron Hills and Leslie Park.

From left: Andrew Walton, recreational facility supervisor at Huron Hills, and Doug Kelly, the city’s director of golf.

Kelly told commissioners that his overview would be similar to one he made at PAC two years ago, at their March 15, 2011 meeting. He described attributes of both courses – Huron Hills has a shorter layout that’s good for the entire golfing community, for people of all ages, abilities and economic backgrounds. During the winter months, Huron Hills also provides one of the area’s best sledding hills, he said.

Leslie Park “is our jewel,” he said, attracting golfers from across southeast Michigan and beyond with its layout that is challenging, yet playable. Golf Digest magazine has rated it as the best municipal course in the state, he said. More recently, Leslie Park golf course has been “entrenched” in a $1.4 million major Traver Creek reconstruction project.

As background, in 2007, the city council and staff examined the golf courses closely, hired a consultant and made some decisions about the future of the courses. “It was decided that if we’re going to do this, we’re going to do this right,” Kelly said, so the city invested in infrastructure and staff.

As a result, he said, the number of golf rounds have increased at both courses. At Huron Hills, rounds have grown from 13,913 in 2007 to 23,842 rounds in the 2012 season. At Leslie Park, 21,857 rounds were played in 2007, compared to 32,628 in 2012. Those represent increases of 70% and 50%, respectively, and come during a period when rounds of golf in Michigan have been flat, Kelly said, and when rounds have fallen 2.4% nationwide.

Revenues have also increased during that period, Kelly reported. In fiscal 2007, Huron Hill reported revenues of $242,577. Those increased 55% to $375,068 in fiscal 2012. At Leslie Park, revenues grew from $623,942 in FY 2007 to $929,071 in FY 2012 – an increase of 49%.

Kelly noted that fees haven’t changed significantly since 2008. Rental revenues at Huron Hills increased from $5,000 in fiscal 2007 – when the course did not have rental carts – to $72,000 in fiscal 2012. Leslie Park’s golf cart rental revenues grew from $122,000 to $183,000, while concession revenues grew from $28,000 to $97,000, in large part because the clubhouse now has a liquor license. The idea wasn’t to make it a local pub, he said, but rather to make it more attractive for group outings and league golfers. Some of that is due to increased rounds, but Kelly attributed about $50,000 of that increase solely to the sale of alcohol.

Revenues from Ann Arbor golf courses FY 2007 through FY 2012.

Kelly also highlighted the priorities that he and other golf staff have emphasized in the last five years: exceptional customer service, excellent facilities, environmental stewardship, collaboration with the community, and an effort to grow the game of golf.

Leslie Park golf course has been certified by the Michigan Turfgrass Environmental Stewardship Program, which requires that the course exceed requirements of environmental laws, protect water resources and enhance the maintenance of turf grass and open spaces. The course also was designated as an Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary, part of a national program that focuses on enhancing the habitat for wildlife on golf courses. Huron Hills is currently working to get both of these certifications, he said.

Kelly noted that several years ago he came up with the idea for a Michigan “municipal golf trail,” to promote municipal courses throughout the state. It was launched last year by the Michigan Recreation and Park Association, with a goal of getting 500 people signed up. They exceeded that goal, with about 3,500 people participating.

Andrew Walton highlighted several efforts to grow the game of golf – because most of those types of programs are located at Huron Hills, which he supervises. Efforts include family nights on Sundays after 3 p.m, when children can golf free; “nite lite” golf events with glow-in-the-dark equipment; a $100 season pass for juniors; “wee tees” – a shorter 7-hole course for kids; golf lessons and other instruction programs; power carts; and leagues.

Huron Hills also received a $12,000 grant from the National Recreation and Parks Association to help pilot a national program called SNAG – Starting New at Golf – aimed at children 4-5 years old. The city was one of only 15 agencies nationwide to pilot this program. SNAG is now partnering with the Jack Nicklaus Learning Leagues, and Ann Arbor expects to be involved in that effort as well, Walton said.

Golf Courses Update: Commission Discussion

Julie Grand recalled serving on the golf task force several years ago, and said it’s amazing to see how the golf courses have changed over the past few years.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, praised the golf staff as well as the staff of the canoe liveries. He highlighted the role of seasonal staff, saying those employees are crucial to the success of the parks system.

Grand joked that she remembered a time when “a young Colin Smith” was also a seasonal employee in the parks. Smith replied: “I wouldn’t recognize that person.”

Mike Anglin said that if there’s a national parks and recreation month, he’d like to see Smith and other senior parks staff come forward to city council to be recognized for their work. The parks system has been supported by a millage for a long time, he noted, and the system just keeps getting better even though the economy has declined. That might be because people can’t afford to travel, so they stay and use the local parks, Anglin said. The city’s recreation facilities are packed, he noted, in large part due to the people on staff. Anglin concluded by saying he was on council when Smith was hired as parks and recreation manager, “and I’ve never regretted it.”

Communications: Recreation Advisory Commission

Tim Berla, a PAC member who’s the liaison to the city’s recreation advisory commission, reported that the Ann Arbor Public Schools are “strapped” in terms of their budget. It’s possible that all sports will become “pay to play,” so at the most recent RAC meeting there was a long discussion about the possibility of having a recreation millage, he said. It’s something they’ll continue to think about for the future, he added.

Present: Ingrid Ault, Tim Berla, Tim Doyle, Julie Grand, Alan Jackson, Graydon Krapohl, Karen Levin, and councilmembers Mike Anglin and Christopher Taylor (ex-officio). Also Colin Smith, city parks and recreation manager.

Absent: Bob Galardi, Missy Stults.

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, April 16, 2013 begins at 4 p.m. in the city hall second-floor council chambers, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [Check Chronicle event listing to 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 helping The Chronicle with some financial green, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

DTE Energy Buckler substation site plan. (Links to larger image)

The easement agreement recommended by PAC is needed so that DTE can remove old utility poles and install new poles and overhead lines – generally in the same location as existing poles and lines at Riverside Park. The easement will also allow DTE to provide maintenance on those poles and lines. DTE requested the easement in relation to an $8 million new electrical substation that the energy firm is building on land adjacent to the park. The Buckler substation’s site plan was approved last year by the city’s planning commission on June 5, 2012. It did not require city council approval.

The overall project entails building the substation in the utility company’s Ann Arbor service center to provide a way to distribute an increase in electrical power to the downtown area due to increased demand for electricity. The project includes two 15.5-foot tall electrical transformers and related electrical equipment on raised concrete pads, and a new power delivery center (PDC) – a 630-square-foot, 12.5-foot tall steel structure. The source of power will be transmitted through underground sub-transmission cables in an existing manhole and conduit system.

The project also needed a variance to the 15-foot conflicting land use buffer requirements along the east side property line, adjacent Riverside Park. DTE requested a variance that would allow the firm to plant 23 trees along the far western side of Riverside Park instead of on DTE property. PAC recommended approval of that variance at its Feb. 28, 2012 meeting. It was subsequently authorized by the zoning board of appeals on June 27, 2012.

In addition to planting trees in the buffer, DTE plans to remove 15 trees along Canal Street, which will be replaced by 50 trees in other parts of the park. As stipulated by city ordinance, DTE also will be required to pay the city a “tree canopy loss” fee. According to the city’s urban forestry website, the current canopy loss rate is $186/inch for shade trees and $172/inch for ornamental trees. For this project, DTE will pay $23,800, which will be earmarked for future improvements to Riverside Park.

Construction on the substation will take place during the summer of 2013. The easement agreement requires approval by the city council.

This brief was filed from the second-floor council chambers at city hall, located at 301 E. Huron, where PAC holds its meetings. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

A view looking upstream at the Huron River from the Broadway Bridge, toward the section of the proposed whitewater feature. On the left is environmental remediation work on the DTE/MichCon property. (Photo by D. Askins.)

Colin Smith, Ann Arbor’s parks and recreation manager, informed the park advisory commissioners about the opposition at PAC’s Sept. 18, 2012 meeting, describing the news as “not especially positive.” Other letters filed against the project were from the state Dept. of Natural Resources fisheries division and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.

The project requires a permit from the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) because it affects the Huron River, a state waterway. The project was originally approved by the Ann Arbor city council in 2010, as part of a larger effort that included building the Argo Dam bypass, which wrapped up earlier this year. Subsequent to that council approval, DTE Energy offered to pay for and oversee the whitewater aspect, to coordinate it with environmental remediation work that’s taking place on property it owns along that stretch of the river, just downstream of Argo Dam.

DTE is the applicant for the whitewater permit, although the company is working closely with the city on the project. The city is interested in acquiring the DTE property along the Huron after remediation is completed – and it’s hoped that the company might gift it to the city as a park.

Smith told PAC members that the EPA objection – because it comes from a federal environmental oversight agency – has triggered a process that might stop the project. The EPA filed its letter on Aug. 15. From that date, the MDEQ has 90 days [until Nov. 13] to resolve the EPA’s concerns with the applicant.

The EPA’s letter from Tinka Hyde, director of the agency’s water division, states that the project could significantly degrade the Huron River by inhibiting fish passage and increasing the water velocity, which in turn could affect sediment flow and degrade the stability of that section of the river. Another concern cited is that the project could constrain public use of the river. Because of these issues, the EPA believes the project does not comply with the federal Clean Water Act. [.pdf of EPA letter]

Similar concerns were cited in the other letters of objection. Additional issues raised include water quality concerns that could affect the health of those using the whitewater area, who might come in contact with E.coli in the river; and exacerbated flow problems during drought periods. [U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services letter] [DNR fisheries division letter and additional attachments] [HRWC letter]

The DNR fisheries letter – signed by Jeffery Braunscheidel, senior fisheries biologist – also alludes to the contentious “dam in/dam out” debate involving Argo Dam. Structures used to create the whitewater are in essence dams, he stated, and the division does not support new dam construction. “Planning should provide for a naturally functioning system below Argo Dam as history has made clear that, at some point in time, the Argo Dam will be modified or removed. Impediments should not be constructed in the river that the public will again be asked to address.”

But it’s the EPA’s objection that carries the most weight. If the EPA does not withdraw its objection and the MDEQ still decides to grant the permit, then DTE would also need to seek a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers before the project can move forward.

At PAC’s Sept. 18 meeting, Smith told commissioners that the EPA letter was “somewhat surprising.” It’s unusual for the federal agency to weigh in on a relatively small project like this. He did not speculate on why the EPA got involved, but said that staff with the city and DTE had met with MDEQ earlier in the day to make sure they understood the objections. The design had already been modified to respond to concerns that the MDEQ had previously raised, he said, adding that the staff will try to do everything they can to move the project forward.

The objections from the Huron River Watershed Council are less surprising. The Ann Arbor-based nonprofit, which works to protect and improve the Huron River and its tributaries, was an advocate for removing the Argo Dam when that issue was debated by city council in 2009. [Background on that topic is included in Chronicle coverage: "Planning Group Revisits Huron River Report."]

Schematic showing location of the planned whitewater amenity in the Huron River, upstream from where the Argo Cascades enters into the river.  (Image links to .pdf of slide presentation made at a March 12, 2012 Ann Arbor city council working session, with higher resolution images.)

Part of the context for the dam in/dam out question related to MDEQ’s concerns about toe drains in the earthen embankment adjacent to the concrete and steel dam, which separates the headrace from the river. The dispute with the state over how to deal with the toe drains at Argo Dam was ultimately resolved when the city council approved a $1,168,170 project at its Nov. 15, 2010 meeting to build a bypass that replaced the headrace and eliminated the portage previously required by canoeists and kayakers. That project – the Argo Cascades – was finished earlier this year.

The $1.168 million included $180,000 for the whitewater feature, to be designed by Gary Lacy of Boulder, Colo., and built by TSP Environmental, a Livonia firm – the team that designed and built the Argo Cascades.

In mid-2011, DTE proposed paying for the project but delaying its construction until after the company finished remediating the land next to the Huron River immediately across from the cascades, on the south side of the river. DTE had hoped to secure a permit for the whitewater project this summer. It has already begun environmental remediation work at the site.

The letter of objection from HRWC is signed by its executive director, Laura Rubin, and deputy director Elizabeth Riggs. The letter raises a range of concerns, including the project’s affect on flow rate. From the letter:

The documented flow problems at Argo Dam and the Argo Cascades … during a low flow period highlight, at best, the challenges of multiple-use resource management and, at worst, the desiccation of Michigan rivers when recreational use is prioritized at the expense of other uses, namely shared natural resources. This problem will be exacerbated if the proposed structures are built . Moreover, a likely unintended consequence of the structures being built will be City leaders and staff finding they have to choose one whitewater feature over the other when flows are insufficient to keep both recreation features open.

For Chronicle coverage of the flow-rate issue, see ”How Low Can Argo Flow Go?”

The majority of concerns cited in the HRWC letter relate to potential problems caused by the installation of two structures in the river that are necessary to create the whitewater effect. From the letter:

1. Whitewater structures can impact stream hydrology and hydraulics. Low-flow dams/weirs incorporated into certain whitewater structures reduce channel width by up to 90 percent, creating velocity barriers to organism passage and potentially increasing shear stress on down stream bed and banks.

2. These narrow weirs can create stagnant pools that strand aquatic organisms and raise water temperature.

3. Many whitewater structures are ” low head” dams and have similar effects of a low head dam. Dams interfere with sediment transport by creating sediment deposition zones in the pools between structures, which in turn may eliminate preferred fish habitat, interfere with down stream drifting of macroinvertebrates, and lower dissolved oxygen concentrations. Whitewater structures may also interfere with the transport of small and large organic materials. Organic material transport plays a crucial role in stream health, from fallen leaves that are food for macroinvertebrates to large woody debris that provides sediment retention in stream channels and cover for fish.

4. Whitewater structures can create passage barriers or stranding hazards for fish and other aquatic organisms due to a combination of high water velocities, inadequate water depths, high vertical drops, turbulence, and lack of space for resting cover. The measured velocities over current white water structures are greater than the known velocity capabilities of most of the native fish species present in Michigan rivers.

5. The porous streambed and banks in rivers are essential habitat for fish and macroinvertebrates – macroinvertebrates such as the state threatened freshwater mussel species that was positively identified in this section of the Huron River on July 25, 2012 by ecologists with the University of Michigan and HRWC. Additionally, this habitat functions to exchange water between the ground and river, assist in nutrient and carbon assimilation, and moderate river temperatures. Grouted whitewater structures eliminate habitats in the spaces between rocks and block the interplay between the river, land, and groundwater.

6. The proposed whitewater structures include large rocks, benches, terraces, or viewing platforms, which can displace riparian vegetation. Riparian vegetation contributes to the health of the river by providing shade, bank stabilization, large woody debris, and habitat for aquatic and terrestrial wildlife. Riparian vegetation also improves water quality by removing excess nutrients, preventing sedimentation from bank erosion, and lowering water temperature. Whitewater structures also increase the amount of rock in the stream or riparian corridor, which can increase water temperatures.

Upon receiving news from Smith about the letters of objection, park commissioners had only a few clarificational questions, though several members spoke to him about it immediately after the meeting adjourned. PAC had previously recommended approval of the whitewater feature, as part of the overall dam bypass project. That vote took place in October 2010 – there has been considerable turnover on the commission since that time.

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

Erica Briggs is ending her term on the Ann Arbor planning commission at the end of June, and is not seeking reappointment. At the June 5 meeting, she lobbied unsuccessfully to postpone a DTE Energy project, arguing that the community needs a broader discussion about whether providing unlimited energy fits the city’s long-term goals of energy reduction.

The estimated $10 million project by DTE to build a new electrical substation was met with caution by commissioner Erica Briggs, who urged her colleagues to postpone the proposal. DTE is building the substation to meet increased energy demands in the city.

The project – called the Buckler substation – had previously been discussed at the commission’s May 15, 2012 meeting, which Briggs did not attend. When the item came up again at the June 5 meeting, she argued that a broader conversation about the community’s energy needs is needed. It’s a rare opportunity for that, she noted, given that projects like this don’t occur frequently – the last Ann Arbor substation was built in the 1960s. She used an analogy to transportation: If a proposal came in to widen all the roads in the community, that idea wouldn’t automatically move forward – because people would stop to discuss whether this is what they want for the city. The DTE project will essentially widen the energy capacity for the city, she said, at a time when the community is talking about the need to reduce its energy use.

As examples, Briggs noted that the city is moving forward with sustainability goals, as well as with a climate action plan. Later in the meeting, the commission unanimously recommended approval of 16 sustainability goals, including three that relate to climate and energy. One of the goals calls for the city to “reduce energy consumption and eliminate net greenhouse gas emissions in our community.”

Briggs made a motion to postpone the substation proposal, but it died for lack of a second as none of the other commissioners at the meeting were supportive of another postponement. A possible ally on the issue – commissioner Bonnie Bona, who works for the nonprofit Clean Energy Coalition – did not attend the June 5 meeting. The project was approved on a 5-1 vote, with Briggs dissenting and three commissioners absent. It does not require further approval by city council.

Another proposal that had been postponed from an earlier meeting in May – Maple Cove Apartments & Village development – was taken up again on June 5. The two apartment buildings and seven single-family homes are proposed at 1649 N. Maple, north of Miller Road between North Maple and Calvin Street on the city’s west side. Safety concerns over two planned entrances off of North Maple had caused the previous postponement, but planning staff reported that the entrances conform to city code.

Two residents of Calvin Street spoke during a public hearing, both of them objecting to the project. Several commissioners also expressed disappointment in the project, as they had at earlier meetings. But they noted that because it conforms to the city’s ordinances, they had no choice but to approve it. Briggs said it pointed to the need to reexamine some problems in the city code that led to this situation. The commission’s unanimous recommendation of approval will be forwarded to city council for consideration.

The vote on a project located near Maple Cove – a proposed Speedway gas station at the northeast corner of Maple and Miller – was postponed by commissioners. City planning staff had recommended postponement, to allow the owner to make requested revisions in a landscaping plan and traffic impact statement.

Two other requests were approved, both related to rezoning of land acquired by the city: (1) two parcels for an expansion of the Bluffs Nature Area, and (2) a site adjacent to the Bryant Community Center. In both cases, commissioners recommended that city council rezone the sites to PL (public land).

DTE Buckler Substation

Following a postponement by the planning commission at its May 15, 2012 meeting, the site plan for a new DTE Buckler electrical substation at 984 Broadway near Canal Street was on the agenda again for the June 5 meeting.

The project entails building the substation in the utility company’s Ann Arbor service center – to provide an increase in electrical power to the downtown area due to increased demand for electricity. The project will include two 15.5-foot tall electrical transformers and related electrical equipment on raised concrete pads, and a new power delivery center (PDC) – a 630-square-foot, 12.5-foot tall steel structure. A new six-foot tall perimeter chain link fence will be built, with one foot of barbed wire and a concrete block retaining wall. The source of power will be transmitted through underground sub-transmission cables in an existing manhole and conduit system.

Because of floodplain issues, DTE has proposed to build raised transformer pads by bringing in 800 cubic yards of fill. To mitigate that impact to the floodplain, DTE plans to remove 1,155 cubic yards of earth on the MichCon site at 841 Broadway. [MichCon is a DTE subsidiary.] The proposal also calls for removing a building on the MichCon site, which will give the company an additional 55 cubic yards of  ”floodplain mitigation credit.” The proposal for that MichCon portion of the project received unanimous approval by planning commissioners at their May 15, 2012 meeting.

DTE Energy Buckler substation site plan. (Links to larger image)

The project also needs a variance to the 15-foot conflicting land use buffer requirements along the east side property line, adjacent to Riverside Park. DTE requested a variance that would allow 33 trees and 38 shrubs to be planted along the far western side of Riverside Park instead of on DTE property. The city’s park advisory commission recommended approval of that variance at its Feb. 28, 2012 meeting.

Planning staff had previously requested a postponement to resolve some outstanding issues with the site plan, which were addressed by the June 5 meeting.

The June 5 approval came with several contingencies, however: (1) obtaining variances from the city’s zoning board of appeals for the conflicting land use buffer and storm water detention requirements; (2) obtaining a Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) permit for work within the floodplain, prior to issuance of building permits; (3) relocating a fire hydrant and construction of its associated water main, prior to the issuance of building permits; (4) completing the required footing drain disconnects, prior to final inspection approval; and (5) executing the contract for water main easements, prior to final inspection approval.

DTE Buckler Substation: Public Hearing

Only one person spoke during the public hearing. Mike Witkowski, DTE planning engineer for Washtenaw County, thanked the planning staff and said he wanted to reiterate the critical nature of this project. As he’d done at the May 15 meeting, he noted that from 2009 to 2011, summer peak loads were up 12% for the Ann Arbor area, and 17% for the mile radius around the nearby Argo substation, located across Broadway at the intersection with Swift. Without this project, there is an increased risk of brownouts or blackouts, he said. DTE has already upgraded its infrastructure somewhat to combat that, but the new substation would allow the company to serve new businesses and address future demand.

Witkowski thanked the staff and commission for getting the project back on the agenda. The company needs to order a $500,000 piece of equipment soon, he said, in order to ensure delivery by January or February of 2013. If that window is missed, they’d likely have to wait until April of 2013 to install it, and that puts DTE’s ability to serve next summer’s loads at risk.

DTE Buckler Substation: Commission Discussion

Erica Briggs started off by saying she’d missed the May 15 meeting, but she had watched it on video and had noted that one big question hadn’t been raised. “Brace yourself,” she added – it’s a little radical.

Briggs expressed concern that the commission hadn’t done its due diligence with respect to looking at the city’s long-term energy needs. It’s great that DTE is trying to be proactive in meeting its customers’ energy demands, she said, but the community of Ann Arbor has a different agenda. The last time that a substation was built in Ann Arbor was in the 1960s, she observed, so these discussions don’t arise frequently.

The city is moving forward with sustainability goals, Briggs noted, as well as with a climate action plan. [Later in the meeting, the commission unanimously recommended approval of 16 sustainability goals, including three that relate to climate and energy. One of the goals calls for the city to "reduce energy consumption and eliminate net greenhouse gas emissions in our community." .pdf of sustainability goals]

Briggs drew an analogy to road expansion – if someone proposed to widen all of the roads in Ann Arbor, people would see the need to take a step back and have a broader discussion about that, she said. There are parallels to energy use. One way to limit the community’s energy consumption it so limit the supply of energy, she said. Briggs added that she realized it’s not entirely in the city’s control. But she’d recommend postponing action on this project in order to have a broader conversation, even though they ultimately might arrive at the same conclusion.

She also asked whether there had been discussions along these lines that she might not be aware of, regarding future energy needs.

Planning manager Wendy Rampson replied that there have been discussions about greenhouse gas emissions, and DTE has been at the table with the city’s energy commission and others on that issue. The electrical grid for the downtown area has been discussed for more than a decade, she said, regarding the city’s growing energy needs to support downtown density. The energy commission has understood that this project would be moving forward, Rampson said, and while she didn’t know the details of that discussion, no one told DTE “don’t do this.”

The climate action plan will look at reducing energy use and using cleaner energy, Rampson said, but she hadn’t heard any discussion about limiting energy availability. Rampson noted that planning commissioner Bonnie Bona serves on the climate action plan task force – but Bona did not attend the commission’s June 5 meeting. A draft of the climate action plan will be coming to planning commissioners in the fall, Rampson said.

Briggs said she recognized that she was asking to postpone a $10 million investment in Ann Arbor’s energy infrastructure. But if the goal is to significantly reduce the amount of energy that the community is using, this is a tool to do that, she said. It concerned her that they hadn’t talked about it, and she wondered what other commissioners thought.

From left: DTE staff Mike Witkowski and Paul Ganz.

Tony Derezinski told Briggs that she’d made some good points regarding future planning, but the problem is that this project is in front of them today. He said he heard her angst. He recalled that when the mayor of Tübingen, Germany, had visited Ann Arbor last year as part of a delegation from that city – one of Ann Arbor’s sister cities – energy use had been one of the topics they discussed.

But this DTE project has a timeframe that’s very urgent, Derezinski said. He agreed that this issue should be discussed, and said he hoped to do it at an appropriate time.

Eric Mahler felt that DTE had laid out its needs, but he asked whether the company’s representatives could talk about its renewable energy efforts. He agreed with Briggs to some extent. On the one hand, there’s a sense of pride because Ann Arbor’s economy is growing again. On the other hand, there are concerns about future energy use.

Paul Ganz, DTE’s regional manager, described the situation as a convergence of two issues. One is the distribution grid’s needs, which are entirely separate from green energy needs. The Argo substation has grown to its maximum capacity, he said, and now DTE is trying to fill a 26 megawatt “hole” that has grown in the middle of the area that the substation serves – from hotels, restaurants, and other developments, and the University of Michigan medical center, to some extent. That is driving the need for a new substation. Projects that have previously been approved by the planning commission are adding to that energy demand. The company is responding to that need with an $8-10 million investment, he said.

That’s separate, Ganz added, from DTE’s goal of generating 10% of its energy from renewable sources by 2015, or from its $4 billion investment in wind farms.

Briggs said that obviously there’s a need for green energy, but the other question is about the amount of energy that the community uses. That’s an issue of sustainability. The problem with delaying a conversation on this topic is that there hasn’t been an opportunity like this since the 1960s, and it might be another 40 years before another opportunity arises, she said. ”This is our opportunity, so I don’t want to let that pass by and rubber stamp something because a large piece of equipment needs to be purchased.”

Briggs again used a road analogy. In communities that don’t have a lot of traffic congestion, there’s no need to talk about alternative transportation – it’s not an issue. In Ann Arbor, people talk about alternative transportation because they don’t want to build another expensive parking structure. The same thing is happening with the city’s energy infrastructure, she said, and the community needs to think about that. Maybe a few blackouts will make people recognize that they have a responsibility to do something about it.

Acknowledging that she didn’t sense much support around the table, Briggs made a motion to postpone.

Outcome: No one seconded the motion to postpone, so it died without moving to a vote.

Wendy Woods said she understood what Briggs was saying. Some discussions are taking place at the energy commission, she noted. Woods suggested that for future projects, perhaps the planning staff memo can include a paragraph indicating how much energy would be required for each project. Her understanding was that the energy from the new Buckler substation is already half “used up” from pent-up demand. She pointed to the needs of the University of Michigan as another factor.

Mike Witkowski of DTE clarified that UM serves about 90-95% of its energy needs from its own system. The Kellogg Eye Center, for example, is served by the university’s power facilities.

Outcome: The project was approved on a 5-1 vote, with dissent from Erica Briggs. Three commissioners – Bonnie Bona, Evan Pratt and Kirk Westphal – were absent. The project does not require additional approval from the city council.

Sustainability Goals

The planning commission was asked to recommend that a set of 16 sustainability goals be incorporated into the city’s master plan.

The sustainability goals are in four categories: resource management; land use and access; climate and energy; and community. The goals were culled from more than 200 already found in existing city planning documents, as part of a project that began in early 2011. It’s been funded by a Home Depot Foundation grant. [.pdf of sustainability goals]

This work by city staff was initially guided by volunteers who serve on four city advisory commissions: park, planning, energy and environmental. Members from those groups met at a joint working session in late September of 2011. Since then, the city’s housing commission and housing and human services commission have been added to the conversation. A series of panel discussions on each category topic was held earlier this year, as was a public forum to solicit input.

Additional background on the Ann Arbor sustainability initiative is on the city’s website. See also Chronicle coverage: “Building a Sustainable Ann Arbor,” “Sustaining Ann Arbor’s Environmental Quality,” “Land Use, Transit Factor Into Sustainability,“ and “Final Forum: What Sustains Community?”

Jamie Kidwell, who has served as the staff point person for this project, reported that four other commissions have already recommended approval of the goals. The housing commission will vote on a recommendation later this month. If approved, these relatively general goals would be fleshed out with more detailed objectives and action items.

No one spoke during a public hearing on the goals.

Sustainability Goals: Commission Discussion

Tony Derezinski said he regretted that Bonnie Bona wasn’t at the meeting – because this was a challenge that she had taken on over the past few years, he noted, and she accomplished what she set out to do. [Bona served as chair of the planning commission when the sustainability effort began.]

Evan Pratt thanked planning manager Wendy Rampson and Matt Naud, the city’s environmental coordinator, for taking the initiative to apply for the Home Depot Foundation grant, which provided $95,000 to pay for staff support of the project. He also pointed to the city council’s role, saying that councilmembers see this as a visionary document.

Outcome: The commission voted unanimously to recommend that the 16 sustainability goals be incorporated into the city’s master plan. The recommendation will be forwarded to city council.

Maple Cove

For the third time, the planning commission considered a site plan for the Maple Cove Apartments & Village development. The project is located on 2.96 acres at 1649 N. Maple, north of Miller Road between North Maple and Calvin Street on the city’s west side.

The plan calls for combining two sites – 1649 N. Maple and 1718 Calvin – and demolishing an existing single-family home and detached garages there. Two 3-story apartment buildings would be built with a 64-space parking lot and eight bike spaces. The project also includes building a private street to serve seven new single-family houses near Calvin Street, but with an entrance off of North Maple. The apartment complex would have a separate entrance, also off of North Maple.

The project has a somewhat unusual history. Planning commissioners originally approved it at their March 20, 2012 meeting. But that vote was rescinded because Scio Township residents on Calvin Street had not been included in an original public notice mailed out for the commission’s March meeting.

Several residents attended the commission’s May 1, 2012 meeting to protest the development. Although there were no changes to the plan in the interim period between March 20 and May 1, commissioners voted to postpone action to get more information from the traffic engineer about whether the proposed two separate entrances to the property created a health, safety and welfare hazard.

According to city planning staff at the June 5 meeting, the city’s traffic engineer raised some concerns, but he subsequently confirmed that the site plan – with two entrances off of North Maple – does conform to city code.

In giving the planning staff’s report, planning manager Wendy Rampson said that if the two entrances cause problems in the future, then the traffic engineer could decide to close one of the entrances. But it can’t be pre-assumed that the two entrances will cause a problem, she said.

Maple Cove: Public Hearing

Two residents of Calvin Street spoke during a public hearing on the Maple Cove project, both expressing concerns about its impact on their neighborhood. Other residents had spoken against the project at previous planning commission meetings on March 20 and May 1.

Several representatives of the owner  – Muayad Kasham of Dynasty Enterprises – attended the June 5 meeting, but did not address the commission.

The entrance to Calvin Street, a private road off of Miller Road just west of North Maple.

Minda Hart had emailed commissioners before the meeting. [.pdf of Hart's email] At the hearing, she began by saying she was dismayed by this project. Obviously the planning commission intended to approve it, she said, but why wasn’t there any planning or attempt to address concerns of residents on the street? It’s a very rural street, not like any other street in the area, she said. [Calvin Street is a private dirt road, with one entrance/exit off of Miller Road, just west of North Maple.] Hart said she’s lived there for 18 years, and some people have lived there for as long as 47 years – the street’s residents are not transient.

Hart said she learned about the Maple Cove project from one of her neighbors – there had been no warning that it was happening, she said. When she had taken courses on planning at the University of Cincinnati years ago, Hart said she’d learned that people are important in the planning process. But it seems like the Ann Arbor planning commission isn’t taking residents of Calvin Street into consideration.

Noting that there are many trees along the street, Hart said it seems the developer will be taking down a lot of large trees, and that’s upsetting to her. When a project had been proposed for the same site several years ago, it had been for an office building, she said, and nobody had objected to that. Now, it’s for a high density apartment building, when there’s already a lot of vacant housing in Ann Arbor, she said. The additional traffic will be touch-and-go, down a street that’s traveled by students going to Skyline High School. Traffic will increase on Miller too, she said, and it’s already difficult to turn out of Calvin onto Miller.

Another resident of Calvin Street, Cheryl Shavalia Brown, noted that she had spoken to commissioners at a previous meeting. She wanted the developer to be aware that Calvin Street was private, and that there would be no construction traffic allowed on the street. She said she’d be outside with her notebook and camera, and would contact the police if anyone trespassed. She’d be keeping a close eye on things. Brown also said that residents would appreciate some kind of fencing along the property line that backs up to Calvin Street.

Maple Cove: Commission Discussion

Erica Briggs pointed out to the owner – Muayad Kasham of Dynasty Enterprises – that there’s been a lot of disapproval about the project, and that’s a shame. It points to the need for better planning. Perhaps there are some issues that couldn’t be resolved, like the project’s density. But she felt the smaller issues could have been worked out. It’s a shame that there’s already animosity in the neighborhood, Briggs said, even before construction has started. She suggested that the developer sit down with the neighbors and work on some of these smaller issues.

Briggs also felt it was a “failing on our part” not to properly educate residents about the implications of the previous zoning change, which later allowed for this residential project to take place. Neighbors had supported the office project, but hadn’t been aware that the rezoning would permit for residential development too. Going forward, it would be good to educate residents about the full spectrum of zoning issues, she said.

Further, the project points to problems in the city’s zoning code, Briggs said, as well as Chapter 47 of the city code, which relates to streets and sidewalks. She hoped the commission’s ordinance review committee would look into it.

There are a lot of problems with the Maple Cove project, Briggs concluded, ”but I don’t see a way around [approving] it.”

Tony Derezinski said he agreed with Briggs. He also pointed to the caveat that planning manager Wendy Rampson had mentioned – that if a traffic problem emerges, it can be addressed. There were many other issues that had been raised in a heartfelt way, he said. He noted that the developer had sent the commission a letter, pledging to make sure the project complied with all of the city’s ordinances. If the project meets the city’s requirements, it can move ahead, Derezinski said. So because it conforms to city code, Derezinski said he’d support it.

Perhaps some of the city’s ordinances do need a review, he said – that is happening with the R4C/R2A zoning. [An advisory committee has been reviewing the R4C/R2A residential zoning districts. See Chronicle coverage: "Planning Group Weighs R4C/R2A Report."] Derezinski reported that he had visited the Maple Cove site and walked around the property – “I did not trespass on Calvin,” he quipped. The site could use some improvement, and this project does that, he said. It’s hard to predict what might happen in 10 or 12 years. You make your best judgment, he said, and right now, the project complies with the city’s ordinances.

Wendy Woods said she still had concerns about the two entrances/exits onto North Maple, but she understood that the developer could move forward with this site plan. Even so, she encouraged him to reconsider. This project would likely move forward for city council approval, she said, and it would help to compromise, even just a little. Like Derezinski, Woods pointed to Kasham’s letter, noting that he says he cares about Ann Arbor. From the letter:

We want you to know that the developers are a team of siblings, all born and raised in the great city of Ann Arbor and are end products of the Ann Arbor Public School system. My family and I have a strong vested interest in the community, as we too are longstanding members of Ann Arbor. We have made a commitment to remain in this great community to raise our families and invest in it.

We want you to be reassured that we are working very hard to ensure that this project serves in the best interest of the community while addressing the market needs for both single family and apartment living space. We have selected a team of local and reputable civil engineers and architects to work on this project in an effort to ensure best methods/techniques and advancements are utilized to facilitate the plans of the project. [.pdf of entire letter]

Woods noted that Kasham might have additional opportunities to look at this project, and she hoped he would. In the long-run, she concluded, compromise works better than holding a stick.

From left: Senior assistant city attorney Kevin McDonald and Eric Mahler, chair of the Ann Arbor planning commission.

Eleanore Adenekan said she would support the project too – the city’s competent planning staff has recommended approval, she noted, and the owner is in compliance with the law. But she was disappointed that the project had been considered three times, and the owner hasn’t changed the project, cooperated, or responded to the neighbors’ complaints.

Eric Mahler was the final commissioner to weigh in, saying he remained dismayed over the lack of a sidewalk along the private drive leading from North Maple to the single-family homes. The developer dropped the ball on that important safety feature.

But Mahler took issue with criticism that had been levied against the planning staff and commission during the public hearing. There had been three meetings with opportunities for public input, he noted. The planning staff had taken into account everything that was said, and Mahler said he was proud of what they’d done. The project is not what it could be, he concluded, “but it is what it is.”

Outcome: The commission’s vote was unanimous, with six of the nine commissioners present. Absent were Bonnie Bona, Evan Pratt and Kirk Westphal, The commission’s recommendation will now be forwarded to the Ann Arbor city council for its consideration.

Speedway Gas Station

An agenda item for a project just south of Maple Cove was a site plan for a Speedway gas station at 1300 N. Maple. The project is located at the 1.39-acre site on the northeast corner of Miller and North Maple roads. The proposal also included a request to rezone a portion of the site from PL (public land) to C3 (fringe commercial).

Site of a proposed Speedway gas station at the northeast corner of Maple and Miller.

The plan calls for demolishing an existing 1,500-square-foot vacant service station building, which was built in the 1950s, and constructing a new 3,968-square-foot, single-story gas station and convenience store with five pumps. The gasoline pumps will be covered by a 28-foot by 121-foot canopy. Fourteen parking spaces will be provided next to the convenience store, and six bicycle hoops will be located on the south side of the building, adjacent to a sidewalk leading to Miller.

According to a staff report, underground storage tanks have been removed and an environmental analysis of the site is underway. If any environmental contamination is found, the owner will be required to remediate the site to meet requirements of the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality.

The rezoning relates to a previous site plan that was approved in 1972 but never built. That plan provided a 30-foot dedicated public easement along the eastern and northern sides of the site, intended as a greenway for the adjacent Garden Homes neighborhood. However, even though the strip was zoned as public land, it remained in private ownership. The easement for public access will remain, despite the rezoning.

The planning staff recommended postponing action on the site plan and rezoning, to allow more time for the owner to address issues related to landscaping and the traffic engineer review.

One person representing Speedway – Kevin Foley of Grand Rapids – spoke briefly during a public hearing on the item. He introduced himself and said he was available for questions.

Speedway Gas Station: Commission Discussion

Tony Derezinski said he felt obligated to ask a question of Kevin Foley, since Foley had traveled all the way from Grand Rapids to attend the meeting. Derezinski asked if there are any time constraints related to the project.

Foley replied that it’s budgeted for this year, and the company would like to start in early September and finish before winter weather hits. But to get everything in place to everyone’s satisfaction, he acknowledged that it sometimes takes many months.

Derezinski asked if Foley saw any insurmountable problems in getting the requested revisions to the landscaping plan and traffic impact statement. No, Foley said. He hoped that the outstanding issues could be resolves so that the proposal would be placed on the planning commission’s June 19 agenda.

With that, Derezinski made a motion to postpone.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously voted to postpone action on the Speedway site plan, based on the planning staff’s recommendation.

Rezoning for Bluffs Nature Area

On the June 5 agenda was an item recommending the rezoning of two parcels that were recently acquired for expansion of the Bluffs Nature Area at 1099 N. Main St., north of Sunset Road.

The entrance to the Elks lodge on Sunset. The drive leads to a parking lot behind the lodge, with access to a trailhead to the Bluffs Nature Area.

A 1.12-acre parcel to the north of the Bluffs – connecting the existing parkland to Huron View Boulevard – is currently zoned O (office), and had been donated to the city by a nursing home near that site. A 0.57-acre addition to the south connects the existing parkland to Sunset Road and is currently zoned R4C (multiple-family dwelling). It had been purchased by the city from the Elks lodge, using funds from the open space and parkland preservation millage. Both parcels were recommended to be rezoned as PL (public land).

Alexis DiLeo, the city planner who gave a staff report on this item, told commissioners that the parcels make the nature area more accessible. Though there is frontage onto North Main, there’s no easy access there for pedestrians or cyclists.

No one spoke during a public hearing on the rezoning.

Rezoning for Bluffs Nature Area: Commission Discussion

Diane Giannola asked if access was immediately available through the parcels. DiLeo replied that the deeds have already been transferred to the city – the city owns the property. She wasn’t sure about the long-range plans for these entrances, in terms of signs and additional infrastructure. That will be handled by the city’s parks staff.

Giannola observed that there aren’t many access points to this nature area. Is there a path that can be accessed from these new parcels?

The parcel near the Elks lodge has a trailhead adjacent to a parking lot. There had previously been an informal arrangement with the lodge that people could use the parking lot to access the trail, DiLeo said. Erica Briggs indicated that people can access a trail from the north parcel as well, off of Huron View Boulevard. Briggs said she’s glad to see the property rezoned, and called the nature area a “hidden park in our community.” She hoped that it now could become better known.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to rezone the parcels for Bluffs Nature Area. The recommendation will now be forwarded to the Ann Arbor city council for its consideration.

Rezoning for Bryant Community Center

Commissioners were asked to recommend rezoning of an 0.2-acre site at 5 W. Eden Court from R1C (single-family dwelling) to PL (public land). No one spoke at a public hearing on the proposal.

This land was recently purchased by the city for $82,500 using funds from the city’s open space and parkland preservation millage – a purchase approved by the Ann Arbor city council at its Sept. 6, 2011 meeting. The site is located next to the city’s Bryant Community Center in the Arbor Oaks neighborhood off of Stone School Road, north of Ellsworth.

During her staff report, city planner Alexis DiLeo said the property contains a single-family home that will be used by the community center to expand its operations. Eventually, the center would like to renovate the interior and build an addition to connect the two buildings, she said. The center is managed under contract with the nonprofit Community Action Network.

Outcome: With no discussion, commissioners unanimously voted to recommend rezoning of the property. The recommendation will be forwarded to the city council for its consideration.

Present: Eleanore Adenekan, Erica Briggs, Tony Derezinski, Diane Giannola, Eric Mahler, Evan Pratt (arriving at 8:10 p.m.), Wendy Woods.

Absent: Bonnie Bona, Kirk Westphal.

Next regular meeting: The planning commission next meets on Tuesday, June 19, 2012 at 7 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 301 E. Huron St., Ann Arbor. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date]

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

Commissioner Erica Briggs made a motion to postpone again, but it died for lack of a second. Briggs had not attended the commission’s May 15, 2012 meeting when this proposal was first discussed, and she expressed concern that the commission had not undertaken a broader conversation about the community’s energy needs. It was a rare opportunity for that, she noted, given that projects like this don’t occur frequently. She used an analogy to transportation – if a proposal came in to widen all the roads in the community, that wouldn’t automatically move forward. This project will essentially widen the energy capacity for the city, at a time when the community is talking about the need to reduce its energy use, she said. None of the other commissioners at the meeting were supportive of another postponement.

The project entails building the new Buckler substation in the utility company’s Ann Arbor service center – to provide an increase in electrical power to the downtown area due to increased demand for electricity. The project will include two 15.5-foot tall electrical transformers and related electrical equipment on raised concrete pads, and a new power delivery center (PDC) – a 630-square-foot, 12.5-foot tall steel structure. A new six-foot tall perimeter chain link fence will be built, with one foot of barbed wire and a concrete block retaining wall. The source of power will be transmitted through underground sub-transmission cables in an existing manhole and conduit system.

Because of floodplain issues, DTE has proposed to build raised transformer pads by bringing in 800 cubic yards of fill. To mitigate that impact to the floodplain, DTE plans to remove 1,155 cubic yards of earth on the MichCon site at 841 Broadway. [MichCon is a DTE subsidiary.] The proposal also calls for removing a building on the MichCon site, which will give the company an additional 55 cubic yards of  ”floodplain mitigation credit.” The proposal for this MichCon portion of the project received unanimous approval by planning commissioners at their May 15, 2012 meeting.

Staff had previously requested a postponement to resolve some outstanding issues with the site plan, which were addressed by the June 5 meeting. The June 5 approval came with several contingencies, however: (1) obtaining variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the conflicting land use buffer and storm water detention requirements; (2) obtaining a Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) permit for work within the floodplain, prior to issuance of building permits; (3) relocating the fire hydrant and construction of associated water main, prior to the issuance of building permits; (4) completion of required footing drain disconnects, prior to final inspection approval; and (5) execution of water main easements, prior to final inspection approval.

The project was approved on a 5-1 vote, with dissent from Briggs. Three commissioners – Bonnie Bona, Evan Pratt and Kirk Westphal – were absent. The project does not require additional approval from the city council.

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

Sherry Knight Bedolla speaks to the Ann Arbor planning commission at its May 15, 2012 meeting. Her father, Ray Knight, bought the former Ty's Market on the corner of Spring and Miller in 1952. Knight's Market is seeking to expand and add a bakery in the current single-family house. They are asking the city to rezone the property from residential to C1 commercial. (Photos by the writer.)

The city’s fiscal year ends June 30. Year to date, 10 zoning or planned unit development (PUD) applications have been received, compared to one in fiscal year 2011. Twenty-one site plans have been submitted this year, compared to 13 in FY 2011. And 494 zoning compliance reviews have been completed this year for building permits, up from 215 in FY 2011 – a 129% increase.

At the commission’s May 15 meeting, five projects were considered. The one drawing most interest from residents was a proposed expansion of Knight’s Market at the corner of Spring and Miller. The plan calls for an addition on the current market building, which has been run by the Knight family since 1952. Three parcels would be combined into one that would be rezoned as C1 (local business), allowing the Knights to turn one of two single-family homes next to the market into a bakery. The bakery wouldn’t have a retail space – it would be used to make products for the market and the family’s restaurants in Ann Arbor and Jackson.

Ten people spoke during a public hearing on the project,  mostly residents of the neighborhood. They expressed support and gratitude for the Knights and their business, but raised concerns about increased truck traffic and “commercial creep.” Residents were also cautious about the future of the site, if ownership changes hands after the property is rezoned for commercial uses.

Speaking on behalf of the family, Sherry Knight Bedolla assured commissioners that there are no plans to sell to a developer – the family simply needs to meet demand for its baked goods, she said. The bakery would also be used to repackage food from the restaurant into ready-to-eat meals that would be sold in the market. At the planning staff’s request, commissioners ultimately voted to postpone action on the project to allow time for additional review.

Also postponed was action on the site plan for DTE Energy’s Buckler electrical substation at 984 Broadway near Canal Street. DTE hopes to build the substation in the utility company’s Ann Arbor service center to provide an increase in electrical power to the downtown area, due to increased demand for electricity. The project is expected to be back on the planning commission’s June 5 agenda. A companion project – a site plan for remediation of the nearby MichCon property on Broadway – was unanimously approved, assuming that a list of contingencies are met.

Two other projects were also unanimously approved: (1) an expansion of parking for the Wintermeyer office complex on South State; and (2) a temporary retail sales special exception use for Phantom Fireworks, to sell fireworks in the parking lot of Colonial Lanes at 1950 South Industrial Highway.

Knight’s Market Expansion

Ann Arbor planning commissioners were asked to consider a request from Knight’s Market – a rezoning and site plan proposal to allow the neighborhood market to expand and add a bakery. City planner Alexis DiLeo gave the staff report.

Knight’s Market is located at the northeast corner of Spring and Miller. The market’s owner, Ray Knight, also owns two separate, adjacent parcels. (Knight is perhaps best known for his family’s restaurant, Knight’s Steakhouse, located at 2324 Dexter Ave.) The grocery store is on land zoned zoned C1 (local business) and M1 (light industrial). Another parcel at 306-308 Spring St. has two zoning designations – R2A (two-family dwelling) and M1 – and contains two single-family homes and part of a parking lot. The third parcel at 310 Spring St. is also zoned R2A and M1 and contains the other half of the store’s parking lot. All three parcels are currently non-conforming in some way, according to a staff report, and are located in the 100-year Allen Creek floodplain.

The proposal from Knight’s involves several steps. The request calls for 306, 308 and 310 Spring to be rezoned to C1. That rezoning would allow the building at 306 Spring to be converted into a bakery, although the intent is to leave the exterior of the house intact. The rezoning would also allow for approval to build a 1,200-square-foot addition to the existing grocery store and to expand, reconfigure, and improve the existing parking lot. In addition, the plan requests that 418 Miller Ave. – the site of the existing grocery – also be rezoned to C1.

The proposed work to the parking lot includes providing three additional spaces (for a total of 17 parking spaces), a designated snow pile storage area, solid waste and recycling container storage enclosure, right-of-way screening, conflicting land use buffer, and rain gardens for storm water management. An unused curbcut on Miller Avenue would be removed and the curb and lawn extension would be restored there. A temporary storage building at 418 Miller would be removed. The house at 310 Spring would remain a single-family dwelling.

The staff report notes that a neighborhood meeting in September 2011 drew about 10 people, who raised concerns about the proposed bakery at 306 Spring, as well as possible future uses for adjacent land also owned by Knight at 314 and 422 Spring, which are not part of the current proposal.

Knight’s Market Expansion: Public Hearing

Ten people spoke during the project’s public hearing. Architect Dick Fry described more details of the project. The site will be “cleaned up,” he said, including removal of a trailer that’s been illegally located there for years. No changes to the footprints of the two houses are planned, and the parking is being expanded. He noted that members of the Knight family were attending the meeting – they had been raised on this property. Fry noted that he’s heard speculation about the rezoning being requested in order to sell out to a big developer. That’s not their intention, he said. The Knights need more room to prepare food that will be sold at the grocery.

Dick Fry, the architect for the Knight's Market expansion.

He said the Knights have agreed to accept the floodplain lines, rather than taking a stand and showing documents that indicate the floodplain had been drawn in a different location when the project first started. They’ll be floodproofing the building – pulling off the siding and putting up brick, which will also make the building look nicer, he said. Fry also told commissioners that there are plans to put up signs – many people don’t know it’s a market. [The building is marked only by black knight chess icons on the sides facing Miller and Spring. The door into the building is off of the parking lot – there is a relatively new sign on that side of the structure, next to the door.]

Sherry Knight Bedolla spoke on behalf of the Knight family. Ray Knight is her father, she said, and two of her four brothers – Jeff and Don – were at the meeting, along with her brother-in-law, Vernon Bedolla. They all work or have worked in the store or at Knight’s restaurant, and want to keep those businesses going. She gave a bit of history about the store, explaining how the small local market became known for its quality meat. She said she was amazed that it’s still in business, after big supermarkets became popular. Yes, the store’s prices are a bit more expensive than larger groceries, she said, but not overly priced. It serves the neighborhood and community. She said she grew up in the house next to the market, and some family members still live in the neighborhood. They don’t plan on going anywhere or selling out.

They aren’t looking to make huge changes, Bedolla said, but she noted that it’s been about 50 years since they’ve made major improvements. They want to make the outside look nicer. If rezoning for the bakery is approved, they’ll be able to do more baking for the restaurants and market, she said. Right now, she can’t satisfy customer demand. They also plan to bring food from the restaurant and package it for ready-to-eat meals that they’ll sell at the store. The changes will also provide jobs for their growing family and others, Bedolla said.

Tim Athan lives on Spring Street, and noted that the project would bring food manufacturing to the neighborhood, with trucks and increased energy use. He said he realized that mixed-use is a tenet of New Urbanism, but this project works against that because it might put the existing bakery – Big City Small World Bakery – out of business. He said he does like mixed-use development, and would like to see the city encourage restoration of older neighborhood stores that already exist.

Athan said it’s a nice neighborhood being encroached on by creeping urban growth. He used to live on Ashley and saw the same thing happen there. He doesn’t want it to happen on “good old Spring Street,” just for the convenience of the Knights. The street already suffers from high traffic, he noted – it’s a well-known cut-through to avoid the stoplights on Main Street. The city’s master plan mandates for reduced neighborhood intrusions, he said, but the city hasn’t helped with that. Each step isn’t bad, but the cumulative effect is negative and transforms the neighborhood. He asked whether anyone would look at the existing Knight’s Market and say that the design they’ve had for decades is big on charm. The proposed plan to use brick is great, but there’s still a long way to go, he said, and past performance should count for something. A sweet neighborhood is being whittled away unnecessarily, he said.

Steve Schewe began by joking that his wife Nancy had told him to speak up. They also live on Spring, and he wanted to read a letter that had been submitted to commissioners earlier. [.pdf of Schewe's letter] He said he’s known the Knights since 1973, and called them ”a classic, hard-working Midwestern family. They are wonderful neighbors and we have complete confidence that they will make improvements in their family-owned and family-operated market that will improve the quality of life in our shared neighborhood.”

Schewe talked about the family’s history and how they help out neighbors by clearing snow or letting people run tabs at the market during tough times. Bob Knight even escorted Nancy Schewe home one night when a murderer had escaped, Schewe said – armed with a baseball bat, Bob Knight had checked to make sure the house was safe for her. Schewe noted that the Knights sell products from local businesses like Mighty Good Coffee, Metzger’s, Ann Arbor Tortilla Factory and Dry Bucket Farms. “The Knights don’t make reckless moves,” Schewe said. “They are slow and cautious, and that is why we trust that they will not abuse this request for rezoning.”

Kathleen Canning, another Spring Street resident, said she’s shopped there since she finally figured out it was a market. Along with Big City bakery, it makes the neighborhood wonderful, she said, and she hopes that the Knights will stay and thrive. However, she also expressed concern about encroaching commercial zoning in an area that’s already seeing urban encroachment. The neighborhood is at its limit. She and Nancy Schewe had organized to get a residential parking program in the neighborhood, which had caused quite a bit of friendly disagreement among neighbors, she said. That program has improved conditions, but there’s still a lot of truck traffic.

Trucks don’t have an easy way out of Spring after they deliver to Knight’s Market, she noted. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that truck traffic will increase with this project, she said. The Knights are asking the neighborhood to bear more traffic, Canning said – that needs to be recognized, and solutions need to be pursued. There are increasing numbers of small children in the neighborhood, and traffic is a concern. The second concern is about the permanence of commercial zoning. She said it’s obviously not possible for zoning to revert to residential, if the property is sold, so she’s very nervous about the potential for commercial buildings that might get built where the houses are now.

Laurie Feldt has lived on the corner of Spring and Cherry since 1992, and said she definitely supported the project. The Knights have traditionally hired from the neighborhood, so it’s an opportunity for more jobs that residents can walk to, she said. The Knights are fair employers – they pay well and treat you well. The amount of truck traffic isn’t a big concern for her – there are already a lot of trucks on Spring, including city trucks and tow trucks. It would be nice for traffic to be mitigated, but she didn’t see how that would happen. Neighbors tolerate parking regulations and home construction projects because properties should work for the owner’s needs.

Feldt said she has a cottage industry baking business in her home, yet she welcomes the Knight’s new bakery. And it would make life easier to have prepared meals available in the market. She said her father is an emeritus professor of urban planning, and he affirmed her guess that the Knight’s project would increase property values and that mixed-use is the way to go. It’s an urban neighborhood, and having these gems gives the neighborhood more value and meaning, she concluded.

The white building, marked only by the black knight chess icons, houses Knight's Market on the northeast corner of Miller and Spring. Across Spring Street in the bright yellow/orange building is Big City Small World Bakery.

Sandra Levitsky also lives on Spring, and echoed her neighbors’ comments both for and against the project. She said she’s an enormous fan of the market and the family. But she’s lived in two neighborhoods in Los Angeles and Minneapolis that suffered from “commercial creep” into a residential neighborhood. In both cases, a benign and seemingly good plan turned bad when the property changed hands. In both LA and Minneapolis, it resulted in fairly ugly fights between residents and commercial owners, she said. She wished for some guarantee to be built into the zoning. ”I trust the Knight family, but who knows what will happen in the future?” As the mother of a 1-year-old, Levitsky also was concerned about traffic and especially increased truck traffic, and hoped the city could address it.

Virginia Gordan lives on Cherry, and said she didn’t mean any disrespect to the Knights or the market by her comments. She agreed with all of the positive attributes that had been cited. But she wanted to highlight a couple of things. Increased traffic is a concern, but the biggest issue is rezoning from residential to C1. What might change in the family’s current plans, or what happens if they sell? Commercial creep is a concern. Now, you can see the market on the corner but you can see houses immediately north of the store. If those are rezoned for commercial use, that’s scary, she said. After the property is rezoned, it seems there’s very little the city can do – South Fifth is an example, she said. [Gordan was alluding to the controversial City Place apartment project on South Fifth, between William and Packard. That property was not rezoned. But Gordan's point was that City Place was seen as an undesirable project that the city council could not reject because it met the conditions of zoning and could thus be built "by right."]

Karen Garrison, who also lives on Spring, began by saying that the character of the Knight family isn’t on trial. She likes the market and family, and appreciates what they’ve done. But what is on trial is the character of the neighborhood, she said. It’s a very special place, and has recently developed into the Water Hill neighborhood, which makes her proud. Garrison said she sees this projects as a conflict with the character of a residential area with community spirit. Ashley doesn’t have that same community feeling – that’s the reason why there’s not a music festival on Ashley, she said.

Scott Newell told commissioners that he owned Big City Small World Bakery at the northwest corner of Miller and Spring. He said he was very conflicted, “but these guys are great,” referring to the Knights. He agreed with the pros and cons he’d heard from previous speakers. If the city does approve the project, he hoped that a real streetlight could be installed on that corner, like one at First and Ashley. Pedestrian traffic is heavy, especially during rush hour, he said, and there are a lot of young families. Newell wrapped up by saying, ”These guys are great and I love ‘em.”

Knight’s Market Expansion: Commission Discussion

Tony Derezinski began the discussion by noting that a range of commentary had been heard but the one constant was a high respect for the Knight family and what they’ve done. People are also concerned about the future, he said, which is natural. It reminded Derezinski about the expansion of Zingerman’s Deli, and how people in the neighborhood praised Zingerman’s but were concerned about delivery trucks and other issues. [The planning commission recommended approval of the Zingerman's expansion at their May 18, 2010 meeting. The project was later approved by the city council and construction is well underway.]

Part of the situation is inevitable, he said. Trucks are already there – it’s a matter of degree as to what might happen in the future, and that’s impossible to predict. People are also worried about the rezoning, Derezinski said, but he felt that the issue was addressed in the staff report. There are natural boundaries to delineate the residential from the commercial. Is it enough to prevent leapfrogging up the street? On these decisions, you do the best you can, he said. Encroachment does happen, but on the other hand it’s good to have neighborhood stores. ”I guess I’m about as conflicted as you are,” he told the residents. It comes down to whether the city is willing to take a chance on the Knights, he said.

The rest of the commissioners’ comments are organized here by topic.

Knight’s Market Expansion: Commission Discussion – Traffic, Parking

Eleanore Adenekan had questions about the truck traffic, and asked for the market’s hours of operation.  Sherry Knight Bedolla said it’s open 8 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. on weekdays, and 8-5 on Saturday. The market is closed on Sundays.

Aerial view of Knight's property – the three parcels that are part of the project are outlined in black. Spring Street is the north-south street on the west side of the property. Miller Avenue runs east-west along the market's southern edge.

Adenekan then wanted to know how many trucks come through. Bedolla noted that part of the truck traffic is unrelated to Knight’s – the truck drivers coming down eastbound Miller see the railroad bridge ahead and if they don’t think the truck will fit under it, they cut up Spring Street. As for trucks coming to Knight’s, she estimated there are about a dozen per week, and she didn’t think it would increase very much. Products for the bakery will be delivered on trucks that already make stops at the market, and there are already delivery trucks that go back and forth between the market and restaurant.

Bonnie Bona said the parking expansion made her a little uncomfortable. How much does the market need and use? When she thinks of neighborhood stores – like the Big City bakery or Jefferson Market – she doesn’t think about parking. Neither of those stores have parking. She said she realized that the city has a 14-space minimum requirement, but the site plan calls for 17.

Bedolla reported that there are about six employee cars on the lot each day, with the rest for customers. They’re trying not to use spaces in the neighborhood, she said. Usually four or five customer vehicles are in the lot, though sometimes during rush hour it’s full, she said.

Bona clarified with Dick Fry that two bike hoops are planned, but more could be added.

Evan Pratt said he used to live in that area, on Chapin. It’s true that Spring Street is a cut-through, but most of that traffic is related to the railroad bridge, he said. And he didn’t think it was unreasonable to get two or three deliveries a day.

Pratt also noted that the city has a traffic-calming program, which requires a certain percentage of residents to petition for changes. He said he now lives off of Broadway, and the traffic calming there has been a benefit – maybe not with the amount of traffic, he said, but to reduce speeds.

Kirk Westphal said he didn’t know if a traffic study was warranted, but he noted that traffic creep can also be an issue. Alexis DiLeo replied that the site plan didn’t trigger a traffic study. Typically the trigger is if there’s more than 50 vehicles in the peak hour, but that threshold didn’t speak to deliveries, she noted – it looked at employees and customers. She said she hadn’t previously been aware of the concerns about truck traffic, however, so she could see what the options are for further study.

Knight’s Market Expansion: Commission Discussion – Zoning

Bonnie Bona said she had a couple of concerns about the project. The bakery will be a production facility, not retail – that’s a fact, she said. Her conflict is with the lack of retail. On the other hand, rezoning away from residential in a floodplain makes sense. Hundreds of homes are located in the floodplain, and usually the residents are the most financially challenged, she said. That’s not where people should be living.

Bona asked the planning staff if contract zoning might be an option to add restrictions on what would be allowed on the site. She also wondered about lot size. Currently, C1 has a minimum lot size of 2,000 square feet, she noted. At what point does a national chain become interested in a site – 20,000 square feet? 50,000 square feet? Bona said she’d be more comfortable knowing about that.

The entrance to Knight's Market off of Spring Street is between the market building and a single-family house, which would be converted to a bakery if rezoning is approved.

Diane Giannola also expressed concern about commercial creep. After the rezoning, would there still be three separate parcels? Alexis DiLeo said the site plan is contingent on combining the lots. Giannola wondered if it’s big enough that a national chain might want to locate there.

Giannola’s other concern is that there’s no retail in the bakery. Was any kind of store planned inside the bakery? Sherry Knight Bedolla replied that the intent is to make baked goods to sell in the market and restaurants. They didn’t want to encroach on the neighborhood by having another store. The outside of the house will look as it does now, she said – the exterior won’t change.

Giannola thought it didn’t really fit in C1 zoning if there’s no retail. Dick Fry clarified that the retail sales must be on the site, but not necessarily in the same building. It would be easy to have a walk-in room and counter sales, he said, but that would complicate the site and the traffic.

Kirk Westphal observed that it was great to hear the rich input from the community – it helps flesh out the commission’s discussion to picture what the worst case scenario could be, he said. He was struggling with the project as well, and asked planning staff to give examples about what kinds of businesses can operate in C1 districts, and at what scale.

DiLeo said that C1 allows for general retail sales, restaurants, and service businesses like dry cleaners and nail salons. There’s a limit of 8,000 square feet per use, she said, but that’s not a building size limitation. So there could be a strip mall, and each business could have up to 8,000 square feet of space. The limiting factor for building size would be the floor-area ratio (FAR), based on the lot size. Residential use would not be prohibited, but it would be discouraged because of the floodplain, DiLeo said.

Evan Pratt asked if staff had considered other zoning districts. DiLeo replied that C1 is the least intense of the commercial zones. It’s the only zoning district with a size limitation for use, for example.

Pratt commented that the current zoning is “pretty arcane.” What are the uses for M1 – the strip that goes along the railroad tracks? That’s for transportation and railroad uses, DiLeo said, and light manufacturing – something like a small machine shop. M1 allows for items to be assembled, but not created from raw materials. Pratt ventured that cleaning up the M1 zoning is a good thing.

Wendy Woods said she appreciated the concern about commercial creep, but that’s a balancing act that no one can predict. In the past, the Knights have attempted to keep their business going, she said, and it’s their intent to stay. She asked for clarification about whether anything can be done regarding a change of ownership. DiLeo replied that the zoning is tied to the land, not the land’s use or owners. Conditional or contract zoning is something that the property owners could offer to do, but the owners can’t stipulate that the zoning will automatically revert to its previous zoning. That would be in conflict with due process and public noticing, she said. If it’s rezoned from commercial back to residential or to some other kind of district, it would need to go through the rezoning process.

Westphal asked whether contract or conditional zoning could stipulate the size of a building’s footprint or area, for example. DiLeo said she’d need to check with the city attorney’s office on what kind of conditions could be stipulated. Westphal asked about a PUD (planned unit development) – might that type of zoning be useful in this situation? DiLeo said that typically, conditional zoning is a good tool to use when you want to limit what’s allowed, while a PUD is a useful tool when you want to expand what’s allowed from the base zoning.

Knight’s Market Expansion: Commission Discussion – Design

Bonnie Bona noted that she lives in the “upper Water Hill” neighborhood, north of the Spring/Miller area, and she frequents Big City bakery and the Kerrytown shops. But she hasn’t been to Knight’s Market in 25 years, she said, because it’s not welcoming. What are the owners trying to do to make it more welcoming? Windows would be good, to help keep an eye on the street, she said. [The current building has one small window facing Miller, and a few small windows facing Spring.] Bona also noted that Big City bakery has a residence above its shop. Why doesn’t the Knight’s plan have the same?

Dick Fry said they haven’t gotten into details about the building design, and the things that Bona mentioned would help. The entrance will likely stay on the side of the building where it’s currently located, facing north onto the parking lot, but the owners are open to other ideas, he said. Bona encouraged him to invite input from the neighbors – ultimately, she said, they’re the ones who have to live with it.

Kirk Westphal said he echoed Bona’s sentiments regarding the building facade for the sides facing Miller and Spring.

Knight’s Market Expansion: Commission Discussion – Wrapping Up

Eric Mahler asked Alexis DiLeo how much time it would take to address the outstanding issues. Would it be back for review at the planning commission’s June 5 meeting? Planning manager Wendy Rampson said that depends on whether the owners are interested in doing something different with the zoning. If the zoning approach changes, it would take longer. [Rampson subsequently confirmed that the project will not be on the June 5 agenda.]

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to postpone action on the Knight’s Market expansion.

DTE Buckler Substation

Planning commissioners were asked to consider a site plan for a new DTE Buckler electrical substation at 984 Broadway near Canal Street.

Site plan for DTE Buckler substation. (Links to larger image.)

City planner Jeff Kahan gave the staff report. DTE is building the new Buckler substation in the utility company’s Ann Arbor service center to provide an increase in electrical power to the downtown area due to increased demand for electricity.

According to a staff memo, the project will include two 15.5-foot tall electrical transformers and related electrical equipment on raised concrete pads, and a new power delivery center (PDC) – a 630-square-foot, 12.5-foot tall steel structure. The project also will include a new six-foot tall perimeter chain link fence with one foot of barb wire and a concrete block retaining wall. The source of power will be transmitted through underground sub-transmission cables in an existing manhole and conduit system.

Because of floodplain issues, DTE has proposed to build raised transformer pads by bringing in 800 cubic yards of fill. To mitigate that impact to the floodplain, DTE plans to remove 1,155 cubic yards of earth on the MichCon site at 841 Broadway. [MichCon is a DTE subsidiary.] The proposal also calls for removing a building on the MichCon site, which will give the company an additional 55 cubic yards of ”floodplain mitigation credit.” The proposal for this MichCon portion of the project was presented in a separate agenda item (see below).

City planning staff had recommended postponement of the Buckler substation site plan to allow more time to review several outstanding issues. For example, staff has recommended that DTE seek a variance from the city’s zoning board of appeals for a 100-year detention requirement – the proposed site plan would require such a variance. The site is located within the Huron River’s 100-year floodplain.

The project also needs a variance to the 15-foot conflicting land use buffer requirements along the east side property line, adjacent to Riverside Park. DTE is requesting a variance that would allow 33 trees and 38 shrubs to be planted along the far western side of Riverside Park instead of on DTE property. The city’s park advisory commission recommended approval of that variance at its Feb. 28, 2012 meeting.

DTE Buckler Substation: Public Hearing

The only person to speak during the public hearing was Mike Witkowski, DTE planning engineer for Washtenaw County. He thanked Kahan and other city planning staff for their help in working through a number of issues. He noted that DTE’s current infrastructure can’t support demand for electricity in that part of the city. Within a mile radius of the current Argo substation on Broadway, peak loads were 17% higher in 2011 compared to 2009. That’s what happens when you knock down a building and put up a high rise, he said – a probable allusion to the University of Michigan’s Kellogg Eye Center on Wall Street, near the proposed substation site.

Without this project, he said, DTE has limited or no ability to serve new businesses, and there would be increased risk of brownouts or blackouts to do equipment overloads. He said the utility has plans to address those concerns in the interim, but they need a long-term solution.

The location is critical because the substation needs to be near the center of the load, he said. The Buckler location would also be near existing infrastructure for DTE’s system. If the project is approved, Witkowski said the first circuits likely would be energized in May of 2013. A lot needs to happen before then, he added – it’s a long design and construction process. But once energized, the new circuits will support new customers.

Witkowski described the Buckler substation project as a $10 million investment in the city. DTE wants to foster a favorable environment for economic development, he said, and this substation should provide the ability to sustain growth for years to come.

DTE Buckler Substation: Commission Discussion

Wendy Woods asked whether the city council would need to vote on this item. Eric Mahler, the planning commission’s chair, replied that only planning commission approval is needed.

Woods highlighted Witkowski’s comments about the growth in demand and DTE’s ability to provide electricity to additional customers. She noted that the city has a focus on sustainability, and those numbers grabbed her attention. She asked for more details about the future ability to serve new customers.

It’s hard to make specific projections, Witkowski said. He noted that the last Ann Arbor substation was built in the 1960s, but Ann Arbor is a hot spot in the state for growth, unlike other areas. Electric vehicles might also increase demand in the future, he said. But if he had to give a ballpark estimate, Witkowski said the new substation would likely meet demand for at least 20 years.

Kirk Westphal’s initial line of questioning focused on the fence, and he wondered whether it could be a solid wall, rather than chain link and barbed wire – that’s the least desirable alternative, he said. Mark Fairless, a civil engineer with DTE, said the design, including the use of chain link and barbed wire, meets the national electrical safety code for substation protection. It’s a standard design, he said, and provides the most protection both for DTE’s assets and the public.

When Westphal pressed about other options that might be available, Fairless repeated that the proposed design is DTE’s standard one – they haven’t looked at other options. The retaining wall is required because of the substation’s location in the floodplain, he said, and the fence construction is standard. Westphal encouraged the designers to consider different materials.

DTE's Argo substation on the northwest corner of Broadway and Swift, looking west over the Broadway bridge.

Westphal then turned to the topic of the Argo substation on Broadway, saying he rides past it every day and “it’s not the best feature of the neighborhood.” Is there any opportunity to consolidate the two sites – to upgrade the new Buckler substation so that the one on Argo wouldn’t be needed?

Witkowski clarified that the Buckler substation isn’t planned to be a replacement for Argo. The two sites would work in tandem, he said. He noted that the Argo substation serves a wide area, including city hall, that couldn’t be picked up by the new substation. It wouldn’t be economically feasible for DTE to decommission it, he said.

Evan Pratt wanted to know what the bigger picture plans are for Buckler and Argo. It would be nice if DTE’s long-range plan were to move Argo off of this major city corridor. What’s the expected life for the Argo substation? he asked.

That’s hard to say, Witkowski replied. When the project began in 2008, the original idea was to do upgrades at the Argo substation, he said. But that was before Ann Arbor started seeing accelerated growth. Because of the type of equipment at Argo, DTE couldn’t do the upgrade until some of the load was taken off of that substation. Now, he said, there’s a strong possibility that they’ll clean up the Argo site and make it less congested. However, essential equipment is there that can’t be moved at this point, and it will remain there for the foreseeable future, he said.

Bonnie Bona said she agreed with Pratt – there’s a bigger aesthetic consideration at Argo. She also pointed out that Michigan Stadium was previously surrounded by a chain link fence, too. Now, the fence is wrought iron and painted blue, with brick pilasters. Bona joked that as long as commissioners were redesigning DTE’s substations, she wanted to bring up the fact that the Buckler substation would be located near the Huron River. In the long term, she said, it would be nice to think that the area could be a more active, integrated part of the community. Is there anything about the substation that makes it integral to that site, or could it stand alone if other parts of the site were used for other purposes, like a park?

Witkowski said the site is perfect for the substation, and he explained how the location would allow the substation’s equipment to feed into DTE’s existing infrastructure.

Bona then asked a question about landscaping – she assumed that no trees would be removed? Fairless replied that six of the 13 trees would be taken down, because they are on the property line, growing into the existing fence. Landscaping plans call for DTE to add 23 trees, however, and to donate another 10 trees to be planted in Riverside Park.

Eric Mahler asked whether the $10 million investment is contingent on making a rate increase request to the Michigan Public Service Commission, which regulates utilities in the state. No, Witkowski replied. This project has already been approved by DTE’s executive management, and doesn’t require asking for rate adjustments from the MPSC.

Mahler wondered what information the planning staff needed. Jeff Kahan indicated that they had been awaiting several items, and that DTE had recently turned in a revised site plan that the staff hadn’t yet had the opportunity to review. Kahan expected the project would be ready for the planning commission’s meeting on June 5. [Planning staff later confirmed that the project will be on the June 5 agenda.]

After discussion ended, Bona made a motion to postpone, which was seconded by Westphal.

Before the vote, Tony Derezinski asked if DTE was working under any sort of critical timeframe. Scott Trowbridge, DTE’s project manager for the Buckler substation, said the company can move ahead and start making decisions about the project, but there’s some risk involved since it hasn’t yet been approved by the city. He said they’d likely do some work around the existing service center, to accommodate the eventual substation construction. At some point, though, the timing of approval will affect how well DTE can be prepared for electricity demands in the summer of 2013.

Derezinski said it will likely be just a short postponement, and it seemed like “you wouldn’t go bankrupt on that.” Trowbridge indicated that Derezinski was correct – DTE would not go bankrupt.

Outcome: Commissioners voted to postpone action on the Buckler substation project. It will return to the planning commission at its next meeting on June 5.

MichCon Site Remediation

A site plan for remediation of the MichCon property at 841 Broadway was another DTE-related item on the May 21 agenda. The proposal was made in conjunction with the site plan for the new DTE Buckler electrical substation on the opposite side of Broadway. MichCon is a subsidiary of DTE.

The MichCon site plan approval is contingent on three things: (1) obtaining variances from the city’s zoning board of appeals (ZBA) to exempt MichCon from providing a new stormwater management system; (2) obtaining a Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) permit for work within the floodplain and Huron River; and (3) indicating water main and storm sewer easements on the site plan and providing the city with legal descriptions for those easements prior to the city issuing grading permits.

From left: Planning commissioners Bonnie Bona, Wendy Woods and Diane Giannola.

The remediation site plan entails removing 1,155 cubic yards of earth on the MichCon property, including the site’s most heavily contaminated soil. The company would get another 55 cubic yards of “floodplain mitigation credit” as a result of removing a building on the site. The remediation is intended to offset impact on the Huron River floodplain that’s expected when DTE brings in 800 cubic yards of soil to build raised transformer pads at the new Buckler substation.

According to a staff memo, a ZBA variance is needed to exempt the company from building new stormwater detention systems. Because contaminated soil will remain on the site after remediation, the company has indicated that installing new detention systems would be harmful to groundwater and the Huron River. Detention systems would not be required if impervious surfaces were removed on the site. However, removing impervious surfaces would allow contaminants in the soil to leach into the Huron River and groundwater. The proposal calls for leaving the existing impervious surfaces in place to provide a cap on contaminated soils.

[DTE officials had previously briefed the city's park advisory commission about this project at PAC's March 20, 2012 meeting, and had made a presentation at a March 12, 2012 city council working session. An extensive report on that presentation is included in The Chronicle’s coverage of a recent master plan committee meeting: “Planning Group Revisits Huron River Report.”]

The MichCon remediation requires approval only from the planning commission, and does not require action by the city council.

MichCon Site Remediation: Public Hearing

Two people spoke during the public hearing for this project. Paul Machiele of Ann Arbor told commissioners that he’s overjoyed by many aspects of this project, but also has some concerns. He said he’s a recreational kayaker on the Huron River. Last summer, he visited the city of Bend, Oregon, and was amazed by the transformation of the riverfront there, with pathways, canoe/kayak launch sites and other features. When he returned here and kayaked along the Huron River starting near Argo Pond, he wondered ”why is Ann Arbor wasting our river?” He keeps driving past the MichCon site and wonders why it’s not possible to get access to the river from that site. It’s a flowing stretch of river in the downtown area, and a wonderful opportunity to encourage more people to go to the river, as well as for more businesses to grow in that area. He advocated for opening up both sides of the river along that stretch, including pathways for people to jog or walk. Machiele said he didn’t know what the restrictions would be, but it’s a wonderful opportunity and shouldn’t be wasted.

Shayne Wiesemann, a senior environmental engineer with DTE and project manager for the remediation, said that the request in front of the planning commission is just one piece of a broader effort. The remediation allows DTE to start listening to input from community stakeholders, he said – the Huron River Watershed Council, National Wildlife Federation, and the city, among others. He noted that DTE has entered into a partnership with the city regarding the whitewater feature that DTE will now be building along that stretch of the river. The company will be looking at future uses for the property – there’s been a lot of talk in the community about it becoming a park, or a place for mixed-use development, he said. But for now, DTE’s focus is on remediation, Wiesemann said. It’s an important step in making the site available for other uses. The site has been described as a jewel in the Border-to-Border trail, he noted, and DTE executives see the property as being an economic catalyst for the community. The request at this meeting is just a part of that process, he concluded.

MichCon Site Remediation: Commission Discussion

Tony Derezinski began the discussion by talking about how the project fits into the overall improvement in that area, including the new Argo Cascades bypass. The hard and gritty truth is that the MichCon property needs to be cleaned up, he said. He’s very much in favor of this remediation.

Bonnie Bona asked about the fence on the property. Jeff Kahan replied that the existing fence prevents access from Broadway, but the entire site isn’t enclosed. Shayne Wiesemann of DTE noted that the property’s west side isn’t fenced, and the idea is eventually to take down the fence on the east side, along the river, after remediation is completed.

Evan Pratt asked where he could find a copy of the environmental report for the site. He said he understood that the planning commission couldn’t have much input on that. Wiesemann said the results are posted on the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality’s website.  [The MDEQ keeps a list of contaminated sites in the state, including those in Ann Arbor, with a list of the contaminants at those sites. The contaminants at the MichCon Broadway site include heavy metals (lead, nickel, zinc, etc.) and phthalates.] He noted that the report had been available at a public forum in April, and at the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library.

Pratt said it was great that DTE is cleaning up the site, but it gave him pause to hear that asphalt would be left on part of the site because of concerns over what might be underneath it. He understood that it’s complicated, but asked for the simple version – anything that’s left on the site would be authorized by the DEQ? Is it developable in general? he asked.

Wiesemann replied that the cleanup would be amenable for industrial uses. DTE is stopping there until it knows what the future uses for the site will be, he said. They are eliminating risks along the river bank, and remediating some of the bad “hot spots” in the upland area. Beyond that, they don’t want to do too much or too little at this point, he said. When DTE figures out the final use of the property, they’ll submit another plan to the DEQ to fulfill requirements for that end use, and whatever project is proposed would also go through the city’s full site plan process.

Pratt said it sounds like recreational options are still on the table. Wiesemann’s reply was non-committal, saying that DTE was working with Laura Rubin, executive director of the Huron River Watershed Council, and Andy Buchsbaum, regional executive director of the National Wildlife Federation’s Great Lakes Natural Resources Center – both organizations are based in Ann Arbor. Everything’s on the table, Wiesemann said, and DTE wants to see this site fully enjoyed by the community.

Wendy Woods asked where the contaminated soils are transported. Wiesemann said the soil will be taken to a landfill with a Type II license. In the past, they’ve used the landfill in Northville, he said [the Arbor Hills landfill, operated by Veolia ES Arbor Hills Landfill Inc.]. But it might be taken to other appropriately licensed facilities in southeast Michigan, he said.

Woods clarified that this is a different process than a brownfield redevelopment project. That’s right, Wiesemann replied. MichCon/DTE is liable because the company purchased the site as part of a merger. DTE will be paying for it out of the company’s environmental reserve, he said, which is rate recoverable. [That means that DTE could ask the MPSC for an increase in rates to cover the costs.]

Kirk Westphal followed up on the public commentary, and asked about access to the river. Can a boat be launched from this site? No, Kahan replied. Wiesemann said people will be able to access the planned whitewater features from the opposite side of the river, from the pathway running next to Argo Cascades. Wiesemann said the pathways – and a boardwalk that will be built over wetlands in that area – are subject to DEQ approval, as part of the overall whitewater project.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the site plan for remediation of the MichCon property, assuming that the stated contingencies are addressed.

Wintermeyer Parking Expansion

The planning commission was asked to approve an expansion to the Wintermeyer office parking lot at 2144 and 2178 S. State St., south of Stimson and east of the University of Michigan golf course. A landscape modification on the 1.8-acre site also was requested.

A map showing the location of the Wintermeyer office buildings on the west side of South State Street.

Alexis DiLeo gave the staff report. Two two-story office buildings are currently located on the site, along with an 85-space parking lot. The parcel is zoned O (office). After the expansion, there will be a total of 101 parking spaces on the site. A maximum of 111 parking spaces are allowed for the existing office development.

City staff have notified the property owner, Tracy Wintermeyer, that eight slabs of sidewalk in front of the site are need replacement. He has agreed to do that, DiLeo noted.

Modifications to the landscaping requirements include: (1) allowing the existing landscaping islands in the parking lot to remain in their current locations; and (2) allowing existing runs of 21 and 28 continuous spaces to remain in place. Landscaping regulations limit the number of continuous parking spaces to 15.

Wintermeyer Parking Expansion: Public Hearing

One person – David Diephuis, whose home is located directly north of the site – spoke during the project’s public hearing. He and his wife aren’t enthusiastic about additional parking, he said, but they understand the need for it as well as the owner’s right to build it, based on the property’s zoning. They also support the proposed underground water detention.

They initially had three concerns, Diephuis said, but two of those concerns have been resolved after talking with the owner and city staff. The unresolved issue relates to the buffer between his home and the parking lot retaining wall. The site plan calls for shrubs to be planted between the lot and the wall. Diephuis proposed planting fewer shrubs there, in exchange for larger shrubs between the wall and his property, to soften the sterile look of the wall. He said he hoped the issue could be handled administratively.

Turning to the other two concerns, Diephuis pointed to questions about whether the rain garden/landscaping could handle the water during a heavy rainstorm. The drainage ditch between his property and the Wintermeyer offices is already stressed because of the heavy runoff from the UM golf course – erosion to that ditch is already substantial, he said, especially as it nears State Street. He said city staff have assured him that remediation would be possible if the rain garden doesn’t work as planned. “I’ll cling to the hope that the engineers that reviewed the data and analyzed the risk are better at their jobs than some of today’s Wall Street bankers,” he quipped.

Finally, Diephuis noted that the project will impact the root zone of some landmark trees on his property. City staff have informed him that state law allows this, even if it kills the tree. He suggested that the city consider creating some kind of tree escrow account, to mitigate damage that might occur not just on a developer’s land, but for adjacent neighbors too.

Wintermeyer Parking Expansion: Commission Discussion

Evan Pratt asked about the landmark trees – are those scheduled for removal? Alexis DiLeo indicated that while the trees won’t be removed, the project will create a disturbance in the critical root zones of the trees.

Wendy Woods asked about the landscaping issue that had been raised during the public hearing. Is it staff’s intention to work on this, or is there something that the planning commission should do? she asked. DiLeo replied that it seemed Diephuis was asking the commission to give conditional approval of the project, and that staff would work on changes to the landscaping plan.

The property’s owner, Tracy Wintermeyer, stepped forward and told commissioners that he has a good relationship with Diephuis and is happy to put plantings on the north side of the retaining wall. He said he’d be amenable to making the project contingent on that, if necessary. “I want to keep Dave as a good neighbor,” he said.

Planning manager Wendy Rampson suggested making a formal amendment “just to be safe.”

Outcome on amendment: Commissioners unanimously approved an amendment making the project contingent on administrative approval of changes to the landscaping plan.

There was little additional discussion. Pratt said that in general, when infiltration is proposed as a way to handle stormwater runoff, it would be helpful for staff reports to include the soil type for that area.

Outcome: In two separate votes, commissioners unanimously approved the landscaping modifications, as amended, and site plan for expanding the Wintermeyer office parking lot.

Phantom Fireworks Permit

Planning commissioners were asked to grant a temporary retail sales special exception use for Phantom Fireworks, a firm based in Youngstown, Ohio.

City planner Alexis DiLeo gave the staff report. The business is proposing to put up a 40×40-foot tent and an 8×40-foot storage pod in the parking lot of Colonial Lanes at 1950 South Industrial Highway. The tent would be set back 25 feet from South Industrial and take up 24 parking spaces on 2.96-acre site, leaving 203 parking spaces for the bowling alley and Cubs A.C. restaurant.

The northeast, two-way traffic entrance would be temporarily closed by placing four orange traffic cones and yellow tape in the parking lot. The remaining four entrances to the site would remain open. The sales tent would operate from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. every day of the week, with sales hours extended to midnight depending upon sales demand leading up to July 4, according to the staff report.

The site is zoned C3 (fringe commercial district), which allows certain types of temporary outdoor sales. A special exception use is needed because the proposed sales are different from items sold at the property’s permanent business.

Phantom Fireworks Permit: Public Hearing

Rick Tapper introduced himself as the Michigan representative for Phantom Fireworks. He noted that although they’ve signed a lease for 30 days, they only plan to have the tent up for 10 days. On July 5, he said, the tent – which is fire resistant, he noted – comes down. They’ll be selling Class C fireworks, and using employees from Colonial Lanes who would have otherwise been laid off during this slow period for the bowling alley, Tapper said. The operation is insured, and he hoped that commissioners would approve the permit.

Phantom Fireworks Permit: Commission Discussion

Wendy Woods asked for a clarification regarding Class C fireworks – does the buyer have to be over age 18? Yes, Tapper replied, and the staff are trained to check everyone’s ID.

Rick Tapper of Phantom Fireworks.

Woods then noted that people tend to “get happy” on July 4th while using fireworks. She asked Tapper about how the staff would identify people who are intoxicated. Tapper assured her that training is provided to staff about how to recognize if someone is drunk or high.

Responding to additional queries from Woods, Tapper described how the tent and storage unit will be inspected by the city’s fire marshal, and how a lock on the storage unit will provide security when the business is closed.

Woods ventured that the hours of operation – until midnight – seem late. Tapper replied that about 70% of their business happens in three days, from July 2-4. That’s likely the only time they would sell past the normal closing of 10 p.m.

In response to a question from Tony Derezinski, DiLeo said that notices about the special exception use for Phantom Fireworks had been mailed out to neighbors in that area, but the planning staff had heard no questions or concerns about it.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously approved the temporary retail sales special exception use for Phantom Fireworks. Special exception use is granted by the planning commission and does not require additional approval by the city council. 

Present: Eleanore Adenekan, Bonnie Bona, Tony Derezinski, Diane Giannola, Eric Mahler, Evan Pratt, Kirk Westphal, Wendy Woods.

Absent: Erica Briggs.

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

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

The project also needs a variance to the 15-foot conflicting land use buffer requirements along the east side property line, adjacent to Riverside Park. DTE is requesting a variance that would allow 33 trees and 38 shrubs to be planted along the far western side of Riverside Park instead of on DTE property. The city’s park advisory commission recommended approval of that variance at its Feb. 28, 2012 meeting.

DTE is building the new Buckler substation in the utility company’s Ann Arbor service center to provide an increase in electrical power to the downtown area due to increased demand for electricity. A DTE engineer told commissioners that within a mile radius of the current Argo substation on Broadway, peak loads were 17% higher in 2001 2011 compared to 2009. He described the Buckler substation project as a $10 million investment in the city.

According to a staff memo, the project will include two 15.5-foot tall electrical transformers and related electrical equipment on raised concrete pads, and a new power delivery center (PDC) – a 630-square-foot, 12.5-foot tall steel structure. The project also will include a new six-foot tall perimeter chain link fence with one foot of barb wire and a concrete block retaining wall. The source of power will be transmitted through underground sub-transmission cables in an existing manhole and conduit system.

Because of floodplain issues, DTE has proposed to build raised transformer pads by bringing in 800 cubic yards of fill. To mitigate that impact to the floodplain, DTE plans to remove 1,155 cubic yards of earth on the MichCon site at 841 Broadway. [MichCon is a DTE subsidiary.] The proposal also calls for removing a building on the MichCon site, which will give the company an additional 55 cubic yards of ”floodplain mitigation credit.” The proposal for this MichCon portion of the project was presented in a separate agenda item, and unanimously approved by planning commissioners.

The Buckler substation project is expected to return to the planning commission at its next meeting on June 5.

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

MDEQ is also accepting written public comment on the remediation plan through April 30, 2012. A copy of the plan can be viewed online at ftp://ftp.deq.state.mi.us/deq-outgoing/ with the user ID deq-public-ftp and the password Jumbl355#.

A copy of the construction permit application can be viewed online by searching for the file #11810066, then clicking on the folder icon for details. Copies of the plan and permit application also can be viewed at the downtown Ann Arbor District Library, 343 S. Fifth Ave.

A representative from DTE Energy, which owns the MichCon property, gave an update on the project at a March 12, 2012 Ann Arbor city council working session and at a March 20, 2012 meeting of the city’s park advisory commission.

Members of the Ann Arbor planning commission, from left: Eleanore Adenekan, Kirk Westphal and Diane Giannola. At the right is Wendy Rampson, head of the city's planning staff. Commissioners were attending the March 8, 2012 meeting of the master plan revisions committee. (Photos by the writer.)

The Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan, known as HRIMP, was completed in 2009. But in large part because of controversy related to Argo Dam – centered on whether or not the dam should be removed – none of the 30 other recommendations were implemented.

Only one of the HRIMP recommendations relates to land use, and is therefore in the purview of the planning commission. That recommendation calls for limited commercial development – such as a restaurant or other publicly-used entity – in the Broadway bridge/Argo area.

Much of the discussion at the March 8 committee meeting centered on the property now owned by MichCon, a subsidiary of DTE Energy, located north of Broadway Street, between the Huron River and the railroad tracks that run past the Amtrak station. A state-supervised cleanup effort is underway at that site, but its future use – including the possibility that it could be acquired by the city and turned into a park – is unclear.

Remediation of the MichCon site was also a topic at the March 12, 2012 Ann Arbor city council work session, where the property’s potential future use was discussed. That presentation also included an update on a whitewater river feature that DTE Energy is paying for. The whitewater section to be built in the Huron River was originally part of the same project as the city’s Argo Dam bypass reconstruction. The bypass, which has been recently named the Argo Cascades, is nearly complete.

This article includes a summary of the council working session related to the MichCon cleanup, as well as a report on the master plan revisions committee meeting. Based on discussions at that committee meeting, it seems likely that a proposal will be forwarded to the full planning commission to add the HRIMP recommendation to the city’s master plan. Any changes to the master plan would also require city council approval.

Background: HRIMP Report

The Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan (HRIMP) committee was established by the city’s environmental commission in March of 2006 to develop a plan for protecting and maintaining the portion of the Huron River that flows through the city of Ann Arbor. Beginning in early 2009, a series of public forums were held as the committee entered the final stages of its work. [See Chronicle coverage: "Not So Gently Down the Stream"]

The Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan produced by the committee contains 30 recommendations labeled “consensus recommendations,” with two others on which there was no consensus. [link to .pdf of full HRIMP report] The two non-consensus resolutions contradicted each other, with one calling for the removal of Argo Dam and the other calling for its preservation. Much of the public engagement focused exclusively on the dam-in/dam-out question.

Part of the context for that question was a problem with toe drains, identified by the Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality, in the earthen embankment adjacent to the concrete and steel dam, which separates the headrace from the river. In May of 2009 the city’s environmental commission voted in support of dam removal, while the city’s park advisory commission voted for its preservation. [Chronicle coverage: "City Council To Weigh Mixed Advice on Dam"]

The dispute with the state related to Argo Dam was ultimately resolved when the city council approved a $1,168,170 project at its Nov. 15, 2010 meeting to build a bypass that replaced the headrace and eliminated the portage previously required by canoeists and kayakers. Final work is being done on that bypass – including installation of a new pedestrian bridge – and it’s expected to be open later this spring.

There was no action on the “consensus” recommendations, however. A resolution to accept the HRIMP committee’s plan was first considered at the council’s Nov. 16, 2009 meeting, but postponed until Dec. 7. At the council’s Sunday caucus prior to that Dec. 7 meeting, the focus of discussion was on the difference between “approving” the plan and “accepting” it, with the option of “receiving” it also thrown into the mix. [Chronicle coverage: "Huron River Plan, Percent for Art Program also Discussed"]

After considerable deliberation and public commentary at the council’s Dec. 7, 2009 meeting, the council voted to remand the 30 consensus recommendations to the park advisory commission and the environmental commission, asking those groups to develop options for implementation. No further action has been taken.

Master Plan Revisions Committee & HRIMP

The planning commission’s master plan revisions (MPR) committee is charged with reviewing possible changes to the city’s master plan, which are in turn considered by the full commission and eventually require approval by city council. The current MPR committee members are Eleanore Adenekan, Erica Briggs, Diane Giannola, Evan Pratt and Wendy Woods.

Planning commissioner Kirk Westphal had expressed a desire to revisit the recommendations of the Huron River and Impoundment Management Plan (HRIMP) that related to planning issues, so planning staff scheduled that topic for the March 8 MPR meeting. In addition to Westphal, three other commissioners attended: Adenekan, Giannola and Pratt.

Wendy Rampson, head of the city’s planning staff, began the meeting by very briefly reviewing the development of the HRIMP, noting that the city council didn’t adopt or even accept it. “Basically, they said thank you for your work,” she said. Most of the discussion in the community and by the council centered on the most controversial aspect, she said – whether to remove the Argo Dam. [The council never voted on that issue either. But by not taking action, councilmembers made the de facto decision to leave the dam in place for at least the foreseeable future.]

Aside from the dam, the other HRIMP recommendations are equally if not more important, Rampson said.

Westphal, who serves as the planning commission liaison to the environmental commission, said it seemed to be a natural fit with planning to have a discussion about the HRIMP’s land use recommendation. He noted that it’s a dynamic situation, given MichCon’s cleanup efforts along the river, but it’s an opportunity to open up discussion on those HRIMP recommendations that didn’t get much traction. The HRIMP committee spent a lot of time and thought on the project, he said, “and it seemed like something we should pick up.” Personally, he said, he’d love to see more people at the river.

MichCon Property Remediation

Much of the MPR committee discussion focused on the MichCon property that’s located north of Broadway Street, between the Huron River and the railroad tracks that run past the Amtrak station. MichCon is a subsidiary of DTE Energy – DTE also owns property on the opposite side of the river, south of Broadway, where it plans to build a new electricity substation. [An item related to the substation was discussed at the Feb. 28, 2012 meeting of the city's park advisory commission. A site plan for the project will be on the planning commission's April 3 agenda.]

Diane Giannola asked about the status of a cleanup project at the MichCon site. Planning staff said they didn’t know details.

However, at a March 12, 2012 working session, the Ann Arbor city council was briefed about the future of the former coal gasification site. The cleanup and remediation operation is being handled by MichCon, and overseen by the state of Michigan’s Dept. of Environmental Quality (MDEQ).

Craig Hupy, the city’s interim public services area administrator, introduced the presentation, telling councilmembers that its purpose was to give them a heads up before the mandatory public meetings start happening. MichCon would also be returning to the city council to get access to the sanitary sewers during the cleanup. MichCon will also need to coordinate with the city’s park operations staff, Hupy said.

The timeline for the project would see construction wrapping up in October of 2012:

• November 2011: pre-design studies report – submitted to MDEQ
• February 2012: response activities plan – submitted to MDEQ
• February 2012: construction permit application – submitted to MDEQ
• March 12, 2012: Ann Arbor city council work session – presentation
• March 20, 2012: parks advisory commission – presentation
• March 2012–July 2012: pre-construction activities and engineering
• April 11, 2012: MDEQ public meeting/public hearing
• June 2012: receive MDEQ plan approval and permit
• July 2012: contractor bid and selection
• August–October 2012: (2.5 months) construction

Presenting on behalf of MichCon was Shayne Wiesemann, a senior environmental engineer with DTE Energy.

MichCon Property Remediation: Background

Wiesemann told the council that MichCon had been working diligently with Michigan’s Dept. of Environmental Quality, as well as the Huron River Watershed Council and Ann Arbor city staff.

Aerial view of MichCon property. (Image links to dynamic Google map.)

Wiesemann thanked the city staff for their help over the last few years – they’d had weekly meetings or phone calls. He named city staffers Colin Smith (manager of parks and recreation), Sumedh Bahl (community services area administrator), Matt Naud (environmental coordinator), Craig Hupy (head of systems planning and interim public services area administrator) and Cresson Slotten (manager in systems planning).

Wiesemann ticked through a quick overview of the history of the site. It was developed as a coal gasification plant in 1900 by the Ann Arbor Gas Company, and the gas produced there was used by Ann Arbor residents for the next 50 years – for cooking, heating and lighting. As natural gas began to be supplied to the city in 1939 (which is a relatively cleaner fuel), use of manufactured gas diminished. By the late 1950s the gas manufacturing facility was decommissioned.

By then MichCon had become the owner of the facility, and in the early 1960s the MichCon service center was constructed. The property was used to dispatch crews to customers for another 50 years. MichCon merged with DTE Energy in 2001, becoming a subsidiary of the energy utility. In 2009, MichCon’s Broadway service center was deconstructed.

MichCon Property Remediation: Site Investigation

Wiesemann explained that residuals from the gas manufacturing process remained at the site. When the service center was demolished, MichCon investigated the site, he said. That site investigation is now completed.

Yellow areas are locations where soil is to be excavated and replaced with clean material. (Image links to .pdf of slide presentation with higher resolution images.)

He described how MichCon had excavated 1,680 cubic yards of contaminated soil from the western parcel and another 4,340 cubic yards from the eastern parcel. MichCon had installed a groundwater treatment system, and established routine groundwater monitoring and reporting. In total, Wiesemann told the council, MichCon has spent $2.6 million on the site investigation cleanup so far.

The investigation, Wiesemann continued, had provided a rich set of data with thousands of test results. The extent and nature of the environmental impacts at the site are now known, he said, and there’s no immediate risk to human health or the environment. There are still some structures on the site that are slated for removal, which have contamination. He showed the council a PowerPoint slide that indicated areas in yellow where structures and soil would be removed. One elongated area adjacent to the river is an area of impacted shallow soil and sediment – which will be excavated and replaced.

MichCon Property Remediation: Implementation

The success of the remediation plan, for which MichCon is now seeking approval from MDEQ, Wiesemann said, would lie in its implementation. He then sought to assure the council that impacts to Ann Arbor residents would be minimized. He told the council that MichCon has a lot of experience doing these kinds of remedial excavations – having completed dozens of them over the decades.

MichCon will use site controls like a security fence so that trespassers or children won’t wander onto the site. Surface water protection will be critical, he said, and a variety of tools will be used, including coffer dams, soft booms, and hard boom. Monitoring of the river water during the excavation would take place both upstream and downstream, he said. Odor-suppressing mist and foam would also be used, he said.

Wiesemann allowed that the impact of up to 20 trucks a day entering and leaving the site could be significant. Wheel washing would ensure that the trucks were not tracking sediment out of the site. MichCon would also plan to optimize the scheduling of truck traffic. In coordinating with the city, he said, MichCon had been advised, for example, that the Beakes and North Main area is not the best place to try to bring trucks through.

Wiesemann also pointed out the short-term economic gain due to the remediation activity and the long-term benefit of the environmental remediation. In addition to that, he reminded the council that MichCon will install and pay for the whitewater feature in the Huron River that was originally a part of the same project as the city’s planned Argo Dam bypass construction. The bypass, which has been named the Argo Cascades, is nearly complete.

MichCon Property Remediation: Whitewater Feature

Some councilmembers expressed concern about the impact of the excavation work on recreational users of the river. Wiesemann explained that the work would start on the upstream side and proceed downstream. By the time the work gets to the entry point from the Argo Cascades into the river, he said, it will be after Labor Day. After Labor Day, the Argo livery only offers weekend trips, which will coordinate well with MichCon’s weekday excavation activity. He allowed that it would not prevent someone from using their own canoe, instead of renting from the city’s livery. The fact that MichCon’s work will take place during the summer months, when the river will be relatively low, will also aid construction, he said.

Schematic showing the placement of the planned whitewater amenity in the Huron River, upstream from where the Argo Cascades enters into the river. (Image links to .pdf of slide presentation with higher resolution images.)

In connection with construction of the whitewater feature, councilmember Sabra Briere (Ward 1) questioned the placement of the feature that was indicated in the slide Wiesemann had shown, saying the rocks were not in the same place the council had previously been told they would be. It appeared that canoeists and kayakers who wanted to paddle through the planned whitewater amenity would need to navigate down the Cascades bypass, then paddle upstream through the whitewater and then reverse course, she said.

Wiesemann confirmed that was the planned implementation was as Briere described it. He indicated that this approach had been vetted with the city’s park and recreation staff. Colin Smith, city parks and recreation manager, confirmed that understanding, telling the council that Cheryl Saam, manager of the canoe livery, had been consulted as well. The idea was to make sure that the swifter water was well away from the entry of the Cascades into the river – to ensure that novice paddlers did not encounter the whitewater. It would also mitigate against any congestion between user groups. [That is, experienced users looking to spend the day paddling up and down through the whitewater feature would not interfere with novice paddlers who would be descending the Cascades and continuing on a leisurely float down the Huron.]

MichCon Property Remediation: Future of the Site

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) wanted to know what the future of the parcel was after the remediation was complete. Wiesemann indicated it was not clear. MichCon recognized that there was a lot of potential on the site for redevelopment. Talks had just started to take place with interested stakeholders in the community. But at this point, he said, it would be premature to speculate on the end use. But he allowed that the MichCon leadership does see the parcel as “a catalyst for economic growth and public enjoyment within the community.”

Mayor John Hieftje weighed in with his hope that DTE Energy would collaborate with the Wolfpack, to add the parcel to the city’s park system. [The Wolfpack is a conservancy group associated with the National Wildlife Federation, co-founded by local attorney and former Clinton advisor Paul Dimond and retired Ford executive Ray Pittman. (.pdf file of Wolfpack members)] Hieftje described how he could imagine tiered seating installed on the river bank opposite the whitewater feature so that people could come out and watch the kayakers navigate the rapids.

Hieftje confirmed with Wiesemann that even factoring in significant delays, the whitewater feature would be available for recreational users in the spring of 2013.

HRIMP and Land Use: Master Plan Revision?

At the March 8 master plan revisions committee meeting, Wendy Rampson – the city’s planning manager – noted that the Parks & Recreation Open Space (PROS) plan puts a priority on acquiring land along the Huron River. It indicates the goal of acquiring the entire MichCon parcel, Rampson said, but she’s not sure that’s realistic. The city’s Central Area Future Land Use map – part of the city’s master plan – shows the western portion of the site as parkland, and the eastern half for commercial/office use. Currently, the site is zoned M1 (industrial). Jeff Kahan of the city’s planning staff pointed out that much of the property lies within the floodway, which would limit development.

Rampson noted that there is only one HRIMP recommendation related to land use – the section on commercial development in the Broadway bridge/Argo area. From the HRIMP report:

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

Rampson asked whether the committee wanted to start working on a master plan amendment to incorporate this recommendation, or to propose something that makes the expectations for this recommendation clearer.

Evan Pratt, who had served on the HRIMP committee, said discussion on this topic among HRIMP committee members had centered mostly on the idea of having a restaurant in that area. He cited the example of Zingerman’s coffee and baked goods being sold at the cafe in Gallup Park – that’s an example of a business and park co-existing, he said. The idea was that it would be desirable if someone wanted to have a business that was related to the river area and that didn’t undermine the city’s canoe livery – like a bicycle rental business. So the zoning for that area shouldn’t allow large operations, but something more in keeping with drawing people to the river, Pratt explained.

Diane Giannola asked whether something like miniature golf would be appropriate. Is the idea to create an entertainment area, like a boardwalk?

Pratt replied that they don’t want anything like a San Antonio River Walk, but rather something for people to do that will open up the Huron River. Kirk Westphal added that a lot of ideas were discussed, including a paddle-up microbrewery, but a restaurant seemed to be the most common suggestion.

Rampson noted that while many people talk about a restaurant located right along the river, the topography would make that challenging. If the MichCon parcel becomes available, a building along the west end near the river isn’t possible, because the property is in the floodway. It would be possible to develop something on the east end of that property, she said, “but that doesn’t have the lovely views.”

Giannola noted that a raised structure could be built on the west portion of the property, but Rampson said that’s not what most people seem to envision – the preference is to be next to the river, not looking down on it. Westphal said there’s still a view of the river on the east end of the property, closer to the bridge. It’s not a wide-open vista, he said, but it’s nice.

Westphal wondered whether it would be possible to have a restaurant near the Argo livery, on land next to Argo Pond. Rampson said the HRIMP report wasn’t explicit about recommending anything in that area. Pratt weighed in that the spirit of the HRIMP committee discussions had focused on the Broadway area.

One issue with a restaurant near the Argo livery is that it’s located in a quiet residential area, Rampson noted. The lodge for the Society of Les Voyageurs is located there too. The question is whether introducing this type of new land use into that area is appropriate, she said.

A detail from the Central Area Future Land Use map, part of the land use section (Chapter 5) of the city's master plan. The large green and red section north of the railroad track and northwest of Broadway Street is the MichCon property. The property is zoned industrial, but the future land use indicates the western portion (green) for parks and open space, and the eastern portion (red) for commercial/office use. The Huron River runs to the north of the property. (Image links to .pdf of full Central Area Future Land Use map)

Rampson pointed out that for years, there have been efforts to revitalize the Lowertown area, east of the Broadway bridge. Perhaps a project on land near the bridge and the river could serve as a catalyst for development in Lowertown, she said. Rampson quipped that there’s a question about whether any land will be left after the University of Michigan finishes its projects in that area. [UM has been acquiring property along Wall Street, where its Kellogg Eye Center is located. The area is near the university's large medical complex.]

Rampson asked commissioners how deep they wanted to explore these options. A mini-study would be one approach, she said, or staff could work with commissioners to develop a set of recommendations. She asked whether they were interested in looking at just the site near the Broadway bridge, or if they wanted to focus on a broader area.

Giannola expressed support for looking at the entire Broadway/Lowertown area, not just one site.

City planner Jeff Kahan noted that there are several master plan-related efforts in the works right now – including studies of the Washtenaw Avenue and South State corridors – and the staff needs to strategize about how to use its limited resources. People might wonder what’s triggering an effort related to the HRIMP recommendations now, he said.

Rampson replied that there’s interest in the MichCon property, and in what DTE’s plans are for the property after they finish remediation work there. They could either put it on the market or ask the city to make an offer, she said. So you could argue that it’s timely to look at future land use for that area.

Kahan wondered whether it would “muck up the works” to go through a master plan and possible rezoning process that ends up doubling the value of that MichCon property, especially since it’s not yet clear what the company plans to do. He also noted that transit-related plans are unfolding quickly, and there’s uncertainty about that too. [The Fuller Road Station, a proposed parking garage and transit center located in that general area, has been paused – see Chronicle coverage: "UM, Ann Arbor Halt Fuller Road Project"]

Finally, Kahan said, if a drain is dug underneath the railroad, the floodplain lines could change yet again – that’s another factor that could have an impact on the area. [Earlier in the meeting, Rampson had mentioned that the city is issuing a request for proposals (RFP) to possibly build a drain underneath the railroad to relieve flooding. The project might include a pedestrian underpass.]

Pratt noted that the city has three plans, each recommending three different types of land use for the Broadway bridges and Argo Dam area: (1) the HRIMP, which recommends commercial development; (2) the property’s current zoning, for industrial use; and (3) the master plan’s future land use map, which shows a combination of parkland and commercial/office use. Each of those land uses reflect different levels of intensity, he observed.

Rampson said she doesn’t think anyone is talking about rezoning at this point. The master plan could simply be amended to indicate a preference for the type of use on that property. Then if the property changes hands and is sold to a private developer, there would be guidance if the developer proposed a project there that required rezoning – which would be likely, she said. It would be less of a problem if the property is acquired by the city, she said, and becomes zoned as public land.

The MichCon property has a high recreational value, Kahan said. It’s a critical piece of the puzzle for creating a pathway system of parkland along the river, and the city has acquisition funds available for parkland. It would be good to have a conversation with Ginny Trocchio about that, he said. [Trocchio is the Conservation Fund staff member who manages the city's greenbelt and park acquisitions program, under contract with the city.]

Kahan said it goes back to his earlier point – should the city take action that might have an impact on the property’s value, by potentially increasing an appraisal of the land?

For now, Rampson said, the simplest approach would be to insert the language of the HRIMP recommendation into the city’s master plan. That way, there would be guidance regarding future use of the property in that area.

The committee discussed where the language might be inserted – in the master plan’s Lowertown section, or the central area section. [link to .pdf of the master plan's chapter on land use] Kahan wondered whether the HRIMP should be added as a supporting document to the master plan, as part of this change. Rampson advised against that, noting that it might open the Argo Dam question. “I’m not sure you really want to go there,” she told commissioners.

Pratt said he recognized that revisiting HRIMP could be opening a can of worms. But at the least, he said, getting HRIMP’s land use language into the master plan, as it relates to commercial development near the Broadway bridge and Argo, will help safeguard the future of that area.

The committee’s discussion will be taken up by the full planning commission at an upcoming, to-be-determined meeting.

Present: Planning commissioners Eleanore Adenekan, Diane Giannola, Evan Pratt and Kirk Westphal. Also city planners Wendy Rampson and Jeff Kahan.

Dave Askins contributed to the reporting of this article. The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the city planning commission and the Ann Arbor city council. 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.