From left: Ann Arbor planning commissioners Wendy Woods, Jeremy Peters and Paras Parekh. (Photos by the writer.)

One day after the Ann Arbor city council took action related to the Library Lane site, planning commissioners made recommendations to the council about how to develop that South Fifth Avenue property. The council’s action on March 17 included asking the city administrator to hire a brokerage service to sell development rights to the Library Lane surface, on top of an underground parking structure. The council also voted, after a long debate, to designate part of the surface for an urban public park.

On March 18, the commission’s advice focused on conditions for developing the site that would garner economic benefits to the city, such as a mixed-use development that generates foot traffic, with an entry plaza or open space and a design that “creates an iconic addition to the skyline.” The recommendations drew on material in several existing documents, including the Connecting William Street report that was completed by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority about a year ago.

After the vote, Sabra Briere – who serves on both the planning commission and the city council – noted that many members of council don’t believe that the Connecting William Street project was successful in its public outreach. She also said that many councilmembers “do not believe that maximizing density, scale and mass of a building on that site is in the public interest.” Briere said she hadn’t raised these issues during the commission’s deliberations because she didn’t want anyone to feel that she was trying to tell the planning commission what to do.

In separate action on March 18, commissioners passed a resolution with recommendations on uses for the Edwards Brothers site on South State Street, which the University of Michigan is acquiring. The intent is to encourage representatives from the city and UM to discuss their mutual interests in that area – weighing the university’s need to expand its facilities against the city’s interest in strengthening its tax base. Issues include the possible private development of the section that fronts South State, impact on the park-and-ride lot in that area, and the extension of Oakbrook Drive from South State to South Main, through UM property. The city council is expected to consider the same resolution at its April 7 meeting.

Further south on the State Street corridor, at the intersection with Eisenhower Parkway, a proposal to renovate the Shell station, tear down the car wash, and add a drive-thru restaurant was recommended for approval by the commission on March 18. The existing convenience store and gas station would remain open during construction. The specific drive-thru restaurant to be located there is still being negotiated, according to the owner.

Some of the discussion on this project related to upcoming ordinance revisions that the commission will consider on April 1 regulating drive-thru restaurants.

Also recommended for approval on March 18 were an expansion to an office on Collingwood near West Stadium Boulevard, and an easement related to a new Belle Tire on West Ellsworth.

Library Lane Site

On March 17, the Ann Arbor city council had passed a resolution directing the city administrator to hire a brokerage service to sell development rights to the Library Lane surface, where an underground parking structure is located. The council also engaged is a lengthy debate – two and a half hours of sometimes heated commentary – over a proposal reserving part of the surface for a publicly owned urban park. That resolution also passed, over dissent from mayor John Hieftje, Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) and Margie Teall (Ward 4).

The resolved clauses from the city council resolution passed on March 17 are:

RESOLVED, That City Council approve the reservation of the site for an urban public park of between approximately 6,500 and 12,000 square feet on the surface of the Library Lane Structure bounded by the Fifth Avenue sidewalk on the west, the Library Lane Street curb to the south, the western entry to the central elevator to the east, with the northern boundary to be determined at a future date;

RESOLVED, That the City will encourage the creative use of this space to commence on an occasional basis during the transition from parking to public park even before the urban park design and installation work is complete, and hereby requests that Community Services and the Park Department work together with DDA and the AADL to encourage groups to reserve the space for public activities including, but not limited to, craft fairs, book fairs, food carts, fine arts performances, and other activities and consider modification of permit requirements in order to eliminate fees for those seeking to put on public programs on the Library Lane site;

RESOLVED, That the City will work with the developer of the remaining portion of the Library Lane site to ensure that the designs for both spaces, an urban public park and the adjacent development, complement and support each other’s successful uses;

RESOLVED, That all development on the Library Lane site, whether public or private, will proceed in close collaboration with neighboring properties and businesses including, but not limited to the Ann Arbor District Library, First Martin Corporation, the University of Michigan Credit Union, the Inter-Cooperative Council, and the businesses fronting on Fifth Avenue and Liberty Street. Possible goals of this collaboration include:

• Reorientation of the physical design and uses of these adjacent properties so that they help to create pedestrian interaction with the public park on the Library Lane Structure,
• Creation of pedestrian walkways that connect the Library Lane Structure and public park to Liberty Plaza, Liberty Street and William Street;
• Discussion about incentives, such as premiums or subsidies, that the City or DDA might offer to encourage both physical reorientation and pedestrian access/easements through adjacent properties, and
• Consideration of possible joint development on the Library Lane Structure’s remaining build-able portion.

The following night at the March 18 planning commission meeting, commissioners Diane Giannola and Bonnie Bona brought forward a resolution that gave guidance to the council about the Library Lane site. It’s similar in intent to the recommendations that the commission gave to the council last year regarding the use of the former Y lot. Those recommendations were approved at the commission’s Aug. 20, 2013 meeting.

The planning commission resolution on the Library Lane structure makes recommendations about elements to include if the city sells the Library Lane development rights. [.pdf of advice resolution at start of March 18 meeting] [.pdf of advice resolution, as amended during March 18 meeting] The two resolved clauses, as amended during the March 18 meeting, are:

RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission recommends to City Council that if the development rights over the “Library Lot” underground parking structure are sold, an RFQ/RFP process be utilized that conditions the sale of the property in order to obtain a long-term, ongoing and growing economic benefit for the residents of the city;

RESOLVED, that the City Planning Commission recommends to City Council that if the development rights over the “Library Lot” underground parking structure are sold, an RFP contain all of the following conditions:

• A building that generates foot traffic, provides a human scale at the ground floor and creates visual appeal and contains active uses on all first floor street frontage and open space;
• A requirement for an entry plaza or open space appropriately scaled and located to be properly activated by adjacent building uses and to be maintained by the developer;
• A “mixed use” development with a density at around 700% FAR that takes advantage of the investment in footings and the mid-block location with active uses that have a high level of transparency fronting the plaza and at least 60% of Fifth Avenue and Library Lane frontages, while encouraging large floor plate office or lodging as a primary use, residential as a secondary use, and incorporating a cultural venue.
• A requirement for the entry plaza or open space to incorporate generous landscaping;
• A requirement that discourages surface parking, limits vehicular access for service areas to be located in alleys where available and prohibits service areas from being located on Fifth Avenue
• To seek a design for this site that is meant to be visible on all four sides and that creates an iconic addition to the skyline;
• A requirement for high quality construction; and
• A request for a third party environmental certification (e.g., LEED Gold or Platinum)

The March 18 planning commission meeting included a public hearing on this item, but no one appeared at the public hearing to speak.

Library Lane: Report from Council

At the start of the March 18 meeting, Sabra Briere – who serves on the planning commission as the representative from city council – gave an update to commissioners about council action. She reported that the council approved designating a section of the Library Lane site as an urban park, bordered by Fifth Avenue on the west, Library Lane on the south, and the elevator stacks on the east. The northern border isn’t defined at this point, she noted. The council resolution states that the park will be between 6,500 and 12,000 square feet.

Paras Parekh and Sabra Briere.

The council also directed the city administrator to hire a broker to put up for sale the right to partner in a condominium arrangement on the remainder of the site, Briere said, rather than an outright sale of the land. It would allow a condominium partner to build there. It’s also possible that the successful respondent will design or construct or provide security or program the park, she noted.

What’s really important in all of this, Briere said, is that the city has opened the door to having a downtown park on the Library Lane site. The park advisory commission, the city administrator and the broker will help determine the details, she added.

Diane Giannola asked whether the council resolution stated “park” or “plaza.” The resolution states that it would be an “urban public park,” Briere replied. She noted that “those people who want to define it as trees and grass would be disappointed in this location.”

Giannola then asked what language had been deleted from the original resolution. Briere explained that the council deleted language that would have added the site to the city’s parks and recreation open space (PROS) plan and that would have required it to remain a city-owned public park. That was done because the council cannot, by fiat, add something to the PROS plan, she noted – because the PROS plan is part of the city’s master plan, which the planning commission must also approve.

The other amendment during the council’s meeting changed the definition of the site’s northern boundary, Briere said.

Kirk Westphal asked whether the council resolution designated that the park would be under city ownership. Briere replied that the city “has no choice. The city is not selling the top of the underground parking structure – that’s public land.” Rather, the city is forming a condominium arrangement and allowing someone to build, she said, in the same way that the city handled the Liberty Square (Tally Hall) parking structure and the City Apartments project at First and Washington, which includes public parking.

Bonnie Bona.

Bonnie Bona asked Briere to provide insight into any sense of urgency that exists regarding the Library Lane site. Bona noted that this council resolution had come up so quickly after the city had sold the former Y lot, which is located nearby. What’s the basis for moving so quickly?

Briere noted that people who have been advocating for a park on top of the Library Lane structure have been doing that for several years. Jack Eaton (Ward 4) worked with those advocates before he became a member of council, Briere said, and he worked with them to draft the resolution. But the city isn’t willing to commit to a public park today, she added, without also discussing how to pay for the design, maintenance, capital improvements and other things. There’s an expectation among many councilmembers, Briere said, as well as among people who advise those councilmembers, that the developer will design, construct and maintain the public park, thus providing the funding for it.

So to set aside the parkland without a funding stream means that the parkland would never get built upon, Briere said. That was the rationale behind going forward with the two resolutions. She noted that potential developers will have guidelines for what can be done on the site, and where, and the council will be able to determine which of the concepts work best, in consultation with the park advisory commission.

The question is “which comes first?” Briere said. Some people felt strongly that it made no sense for a park to be designated before there’s an opportunity to develop it. Others felt that deciding to sell to a developer made no sense. “It was an interesting discussion,” she said.

Ken Clein asked whether the portion of the site designated for a park would be rezoned. Briere responded that “it doesn’t need to be rezoned. It’s public land already. All parkland is public land.” Clein said he thought some portions weren’t zoned as public land. Briere then indicated that he was right – in fact, she said, the city had zoned that site as D1, the designation that allows the maximum density of development. So it would need to be rezoned, she said. Clein pointed out that a rezoning request would first need to be reviewed by the planning commission, before going to council.

Library Lane Site: Commission Discussion

When she introduced the planning commission resolution, Bonnie Bona noted that it’s meant to offer planning advice to the city council – and that’s the planning commission’s charge.

The Library Lane parking deck is highlighted in yellow. The name “Library Lane” is based only on the proximity of the structure to the downtown location of the Ann Arbor District Library. The library does not own the structure or the mid-block cut-through. (Base image from Washtenaw County and City of Ann Arbor GIS services.)

She said the second “whereas” clause was important, because it refers to the council’s direction to the planning commission to review downtown zoning. Citizens have raised concerns that are not yet incorporated into the downtown zoning, she noted.

Bona pointed out that since the city put its new downtown zoning in place in 2009, the Connecting William Street plan was completed, which included lots of public input, she said. [That project, conducted by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, looked at how the city might develop five city-owned downtown properties, including the Library Lane site.]

Other factors guiding this advice are the Midtown Character Area intent statement in the zoning ordinance, the downtown design guidelines, and the recommendations for downtown parks by the city’s park advisory commission. A lot of this isn’t yet reflected in the zoning, Bona said.

The city has only a few sites that it owns where it has the opportunity to provide some ongoing economic and aesthetic impact – beyond just the minimum requirements of the zoning code, Bona noted. So she and Diane Giannola took some of the information from these sources that aligned with what the planning commission has discussed in the past, and identified those elements as priorities.

The resolution is similar to the one that the planning commission passed regarding the former Y lot, Bona said. One major difference is the recommendation to seek an “iconic design” for the Library Lane site, because there are potentially four visible sides to a development and it is more centrally located.

Sabra Briere weighed in with what she called a “nitpick.” She commented on the use of the word “iconic” twice in the same bullet point: “To seek an iconic design for this site that is visible on all four sides and that creates an iconic addition to the skyline;…”

Ken Clein and Diane Giannola.

It’s overkill, Briere said, and she recommended that one of the instances be removed. “I felt that in drafting it, you became overly enthusiastic,” she told Bona and Giannola.

Giannola said it didn’t matter to her, but noted that the same wording was used in the Connecting William Street plan.

Bona said she’d struggled with the wording. The intent is to seek a design that is meant to be viewed from all four sides. One of the issues with buildings like Zaragon West is that two sides of the building were meant to never be exposed, she noted, because the expectation is that tall buildings will be constructed next to them in the future. So Bona preferred to remove the first mention of iconic, and revise the text to reflect the viewed-from-all-sides intent.

The bullet point was revised to state: “To seek a design for this site that is meant to be visible on all four sides and that creates an iconic addition to the skyline;…”

Jeremy Peters objected to the phrase “and public” in the following “whereas” clause:

WHEREAS the City Planning Commission requests that the City Council and public recognize the sale of “Library” Lot without an RFP may result in a development that 1) does not fulfill the overarching or site-level recommendations of the Connecting William Street Framework Plan, 2) does not meet the Intent statement for the Midtown Character Overlay Zoning District in the zoning ordinance, 3) ignores the recommendations of the Design Guidelines, and 4) ignores the recommendations of the Parks Advisory Commission (PAC) Downtown Parks Subcommittee Report;

Giannola replied that the same wording was used in the planning commission’s resolution regarding the Y lot. To her, the resolution was speaking both to the council and the public – because the public will weigh in on this, she said.

Briere’s problem with this whereas clause was that it’s an action statement, using the verb “requests.” So it shouldn’t be a “whereas” clause, she said.

Kirk Westphal recommended rephrasing the clause to make it more of a background statement: “WHEREAS the City Planning Commission recognizes the sale of ‘Library’ Lot …” Bona and Giannola accepted his suggestion as a friendly amendment.

Ken Clein said the phrase “cultural venue” gave him pause in one of the bulleted points of the final resolved clause:

A “mixed use” development with a density at around 700% FAR that takes advantage of the investment in footings and the mid-block location with active uses that have a high level of transparency fronting the plaza and at least 60% of Fifth Avenue and Library Lane frontages, while encouraging large floor plate office or lodging as a primary use, residential as a secondary use, and incorporating a cultural venue.

Bona noted that the bullet point reflected the Connecting William Street study. The idea was that it seemed like this location would provide a good opportunity to incorporate a cultural venue, she said. It wasn’t a directive to include a cultural venue, she added. Clein suggested adding the word “possibly” to the phrase – “and possibly incorporating a cultural venue” – which Bona and Giannola accepted as a friendly amendment.

Eleanore Adenekan asked what the term “generous landscaping” meant in one of the bullet points of the final resolved clause. Bona replied that “you pick a word that helps get the point across.” Bona didn’t think anyone wanted to put a percentage on the amount of landscaping a site should have. Bona was comfortable with the term “generous” because it conveyed the intent that landscaping should be noticeable, not just a couple of trees. If the resolution became too specific, Bona cautioned, “we could create unintended consequences.” Council can decide whether they want to be vague and use the power of suggestion, or if they want to be more specific, she said.

Jeremy Peters.

Wendy Woods wondered about the recommendation to use an RFP/RFQ process, pointing out that the council has already given direction to use a brokerage service – as the city did with the former Y lot. She noted that Briere had indicated the city was going to use a condominium arrangement on the site.

Wendy Rampson, the city’s planning manager, noted that the issue of a condominium arrangement was brought up at the council meeting because there seemed to be some misunderstanding about how the financial arrangement would work. She indicated that the planning commission resolution might not need that level of detail.

Westphal asked Rampson to comment on the difference between an RFP/RFQ process and what occurred at the former Y lot, when the city hired a broker to find a buyer. Rampson replied that with a broker, there would still be proposals that describe what the developer would do with the site. That would be available to the public at some point, she said. An RFP/RFQ process would “bake in” additional public process, she noted. Typically a committee is formed to review the proposals, and give recommendations about the proposal that would best meet the criteria of the RFP.

Briere said that the council felt the process of hiring a broker for the former Y lot had been very successful. It was easier and more straightforward, and resulted in a variety of different proposals, she noted. They’d seen that previous RFP attempts by the city had not been successful, she added, and that experience has influenced whether the council decides to do an RFP.

Giannola thought that the resolution passed by the planning commission about the Y lot had an indirect effect, because a lot of what the commissioners had wanted was incorporated into the proposals that the city received. So even though the council isn’t likely to issue an RFP, she thought it was important for potential developers and the community to know what the planning commission would want.

Bona added that it’s not yet clear what will happen on the former Y lot. “We don’t have a building,” she said. [The agreement between the city and local hotelier Dennis Dahlmann, who has offered $5.25 million for the lot, hasn't yet closed. The current closing date is April 2.] Her caution comes from the fact that the city has a downtown zoning ordinance that “doesn’t always get us what we want, because it’s words instead of a building,” Bona said.

She thought the power of suggestion might result in something that the community wants, in spite of not being a “protracted process.” Bona noted that an additional step in the RFP process is actually writing the RFP, which can take a lot of time. “So I’m not opposed to the process that the council is taking now,” she said.

Clein agreed with Briere that hiring a broker is more expedient, and he agreed with Bona that the ultimate test is whether the outcome is what the community wants. At the former Y lot, “the jury’s out on that until we see what happens,” he said.

Woods supported the resolution. She pointed to the wording of the final resolved clause: “RESOLVED that … an RFP contain some or all of the following conditions:…” Woods said the resolution makes a wonderful case for all of the conditions, so why say “some or all”? She proposed a revision to delete “some or” – adding that obviously the decision about the Library Lane site is up to the city council.

Giannola didn’t want the resolution to come across as “all or nothing.” Woods replied: “You know they’re bright enough to know that.” Giannola thought some people might think the commission was asking for too much, saying she’d be happy if most or even some of the suggestions were taken.

When Giannola said she thought it was overreaching to say “all,” Woods pointed out that it’s overreaching to even pass the resolution. She advocated against sounding “wishy-washy.” Westphal supported Woods, and at that point Giannola and Bona agreed to delete “some or” as a friendly amendment.

Westphal then called for a vote. All other commissioners voted, but Briere hesitated. Westphal called for another vote.

Outcome: Commissioners voted unanimously to approve the resolution, as amended, regarding the Library Lane lot.

After the vote, Briere said she hesitated because the council did not embrace the Connecting William Street report. Many councilmembers do not believe that the project was successful in public outreach, she said. Personally, Briere added, she believed that some of the advice in the planning commission’s resolution is excellent. However, she said, she’ll “take it worth a grain of salt as a member of council, because of the insistence on density as a result of having made the commitment to put footings in that could hold a dense building. Many members of council that I have spoken with do not believe that maximizing density, scale and mass of a building on that site is in the public interest.”

From left: Planning manager Wendy Rampson and Sabra Briere, who serves on both the planning commission and city council.

Briere said she was making these comments after the discussion and vote because she didn’t want other commissioners to feel that she was trying to tell the planning commission what to say or think. And despite Giannola’s belief that the planning commission’s recommendations were heeded on the Y lot, Briere wasn’t sure the recommendations were “knowingly heeded.”

Giannola noted that the council had approved the Library Lane parking structure with the additional footings, and at that time the majority of councilmembers did believe that a dense building should go on that site. There might be a change in viewpoint on council now, she added, but “we’re still going on what was in the plans back then.”

As for Connecting William Street, Giannola said it involved much public input. The majority of councilmembers at that time felt the same way, she added, and it’s the newer councilmembers who haven’t supported it. “To me, just because you have a different viewpoint and you’re a new councilmember, you can’t override everything that’s happened in the past,” she said. “History to me is important.”

Briere agreed that history is important, but noted that it’s not the past councilmembers who’ll be receiving the commission’s current resolution. People change on council, she noted, and that’s “sometimes in reaction to the very things that you’re citing.”

Briere noted that some of the documents mentioned in the commission’s resolution – the downtown plan, the design guidelines, the midtown character district – give strength to the resolution. They are documents that councilmembers can and should cite when they need to, she said.

The biggest thing that people should be talking about is what it means to have a strong frontage along South Fifth Avenue, Briere said. All of the documents cited in the commission’s resolution that refer specifically to the Library Lane site have recommended putting a public plaza along the South Fifth Avenue side. But a public plaza is not a strong frontage, she said. The structure was designed to hold at least very low or moderate intensity fronting South Fifth, she noted. “I don’t know how to reconcile those things,” Briere concluded.

Edwards Brothers Site

Planning commissioners also considered a resolution regarding the former Edwards Brothers Malloy property at 2500-2550 South State Street. The resolution recommended that the University of Michigan collaborate with the city of Ann Arbor regarding the future development of the site, immediately adjacent to existing UM athletic facilities. The university is purchasing the 16.7-acre property, following the Ann Arbor city council’s decision on Feb. 24, 2014 not to exercise its right of first refusal to buy the site.

The city council voted down a resolution that would have authorized Ann Arbor’s right of first refusal on the Edwards Brothers Malloy property, at a special session of the council on Feb. 24, 2014. That will allow the University of Michigan to purchase the property unimpeded.

In introducing the resolution, planning manager Wendy Rampson said she drafted the resolution based on previous discussions at planning commission and city council. The intent is for this resolution to be jointly passed by both entities, to be directed to the UM regents and president. [.pdf of draft resolution at start of March 18 meeting] [.pdf of resolution as amended at March 18 meeting]

Rampson said the city has struggled with this issue for many years, in terms of understanding the university’s need to expand its facilities weighed against the city’s interest in retaining its tax base. In the case of the Edwards Brothers site, there’s the added city desire to have redevelopment there provide a catalyst for other redevelopment in the South Street corridor, she said.

The hope is that representatives from both the city and UM will get together to talk about some of these issues, Rampson said. One question is whether there’s an opportunity for economic development along that section of the corridor. If UM would agree to “carve off” part of the site into smaller parcels fronting South State, she said, that might help to activate the corridor. Another issue is the existing park-and-ride lot, which will likely be displaced by UM’s expansion. Also of concern is the Oakbrook Drive extension that’s been planned for decades, she noted. What’s missing is a way to link from South State to South Main, through UM property.

The draft resolution at the start of the meeting had one resolved clause, which stated:

RESOLVED, That the Ann Arbor City Council and Ann Arbor City Planning Commission request that The University of Michigan Regents and the President Coleman authorize University staff to meet with City representatives to collaborate on issues related to future development of the South Athletic Campus area, including, but not limited to:

• Exploring the creation of one or more parcels fronting South State Street to be sold for the purpose of developing complementary uses adjacent to the South Athletic Campus;
• Discussing options for the relocation of park and ride facilities as the South Athletic Campus develops; and
• Discussing the opportunities for a future pedestrian and vehicular connection between South Main Street and South State Street via the planned Oakbrook Drive extension through the South Athletic Campus site.

No one spoke during a public hearing on this item.

Edwards Brothers Site: Commission Discussion

Sabra Briere began the discussion by asking whether it makes sense for the resolution to address UM president Mary Sue Coleman, given that Coleman is retiring this summer. Briere suggested addressing it instead to the new president, Mark Schlissel. Jeremy Peters recommended taking out reference to any specific name, and simply address it to the regents and president.

Kirk Westphal.

Ken Clein said he could imagine that the regents and president wouldn’t want the city to suggest how they should dispose of their property. Instead of stating that the parcels fronting South State should be sold, Clein suggested recommending how those parcel should be developed. Whether those parcels are sold or leased would be a matter for the university to decide, he said.

Peters thought the reference to selling the land was intentional, because it would add to the city’s tax base if the land were in private ownership. Clein thought the resolution might get a better reception from UM if the city didn’t try to stipulate how the university should deal with the property.

Bonnie Bona thought there’d be a taxable value to having development, even if the property remained in UM ownership. That’s because it would help motivate other development on private property elsewhere in the corridor, she noted.

Paras Parekh asked about the phrase “complementary uses.” Does that refer to uses that complement the South State corridor, or that complement activities on the UM campus? Westphal interpreted it as complementing land uses that the city would like to see in that corridor.

Rampson said both interpretations are appropriate. She’d intended it to refer to uses that would complement UM’s athletic campus, but it could also relate to the corridor too, she said.

Peters advocated for leaving in a reference to the front parcels possibly being sold. It’s been brought up frequently in community discussions, he noted. Briere pointed out that a reference to selling the land is in the fifth “whereas” clause:

WHEREAS, City Council, the Planning Commission, and concerned city residents have indicated a desire for community benefit to be incorporated into The University of Michigan’s plans for development of the Edwards Brothers site, including the possibility for frontage parcels to be created and sold for private development; …

Wendy Woods said her sense is that this resolution is intended to get some kind of a conversation started, based on the city’s goals for that area. In that regard, the resolution shouldn’t be a non-starter, she said.

Further wordsmithing resulted in this revised bullet point:

• Exploring the creation of one or more parcels fronting South State Street to be developed, preferably privately, for complementary uses adjacent to the South Athletic Campus that also follow the South State Street plan recommendations;

Westphal said he expected the city council would want to make changes to the resolution. If they do, would it come back to the planning commission, given that it’s a joint resolution? Rampson indicated that bringing it back to the commission would take more time. She suggested communicating that the commission wouldn’t object to changes that the council might make.

Briere noted that the next meeting of the planning commission, on April 1, falls before the next meeting of the council, which is on April 7. So it would be possible to take another look at this resolution, she said.

There was no particular interest among commissioners in postponing the resolution. Rampson said she’s already shared a draft of resolution with UM planner Sue Gott and Jim Kosteva, the university’s director of community relations.

The resolved clause, as amended, stated:

RESOLVED, That the Ann Arbor City Council and Ann Arbor City Planning Commission request that The Regents of The University of Michigan and President authorize University staff to meet with City representatives to collaborate on issues related to future development of the South Athletic Campus area, including, but not limited to:

• Exploring the creation of one or more parcels fronting South State Street to be developed, preferably privately, for complementary uses adjacent to the South Athletic Campus that also follow the South State Street plan recommendations;
• Discussing options for the relocation of park-and-ride facilities as the South Athletic Campus develops; and
• Discussing the opportunities for a future pedestrian and vehicular connection between Ross Main Street and South State Street via the planned Oakbrook Drive extension through the Ross Athletic Campus site.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously passed the resolution as amended. The resolution will be forwarded to the city council, with the understanding that changes made to the resolution by the council will be supported by the planning commission without further review.

Shell Station Site Plan

The site plan for an overhaul to the Shell station and a new drive-thru restaurant at 2991 S. State was on the March 18 agenda. The site is located at the northeast corner of the East Eisenhower Parkway and South State Street.

Aerial view of the site for a Shell station and drive-thru restaurant at the northeast corner of South State and East Eisenhower.

The plan calls for demolishing the current one-story convenience store and car wash on this site, which total 2,435 square feet. In its place, the owner – Joseph Kafi of JAK Cubed LLC – would put up a single building with a 1,250-square-foot drive-thru restaurant and 3,000-square-foot convenience store. The existing gas pump island canopy will remain in place, and two pumps will be relocated to spots under the canopy.

According to a staff memo, a single lane drive-thru would be primarily accessed from the existing East Eisenhower Parkway curb cut. Vehicles would move in an east-to-north direction before exiting onto either South State or looping back south to East Eisenhower. The drive-thru lane provides stacking for up to nine vehicles and would be screened to the west by the proposed new building. A total of 22 parking spaces are proposed for the site, including eight that are located at the four gas pump islands.

A new sidewalk connection with a striped crosswalk would connect the southern building entrance to the public sidewalk along Eisenhower.

Approval was needed to modify landscaping requirements in Chapter 62 of the city code – the landscape and screening ordinance. A minimum 10-foot right-of-way buffer is required. The owner is asking that the width of the buffer be reduced to the existing 4-foot wide right-of-way landscape buffer fronting South State Street, which contains a 30-inch-high screening wall and landscaping. That would allow for continued use of the two gas pump islands on the western portion of this site. Other landscaping would be added along South State Street and East Eisenhower Parkway to screen the vehicular use area. The site is zoned C3 (fringe commercial).

The project, located in Ward 4, is estimated to cost $800,000. The business is expected to remain open during construction. The existing convenience store will then be demolished after the new building is finished. The specific restaurant to be located there is still being negotiated, according to the owner.

Planning staff recommended approval of the plan. [.pdf of staff report]

Shell Station Site Plan: Public Hearing

Brad Cousino of Terratek Design Inc., the project’s engineer, began by noting that his older brother, Ken Cousino, had spoken to commissioners earlier in the meeting about a different project – the Collingwood office building site plan (see below). Cousino said he and the owners were on hand to answer any questions.

Shell Station Site Plan: Commission Discussion – Traffic, Parking

Eleanore Adenekan wondered if traffic would be congested coming in from the Eisenhower side. City planner Chris Cheng replied that the owner had submitted a traffic study. The city’s traffic engineer had commented that the site will capture drive-by traffic – that is, traffic that is already in the area. So the project isn’t expected to increase traffic significantly, he said. Within the site, there will be space for nine vehicles to queue up in the drive-thru lane.

From left: Joseph Kafi and Brad Cousino.

Sabra Briere wondered how the drive-thru would be accessible from State Street. Cheng noted that vehicles coming in from State Street would need to loop around the site. Briere observed that it seems vehicles from State would be routed across incoming traffic from Eisenhower.

Wendy Woods noted that 8 of the site’s 22 spaces are located at the gas pumps. She wondered if those gas pump spaces would be tied up when someone wanted to buy gas and eat in the restaurant and there were no other parking spaces available. Brad Cousino said that technically, the spots at the gas pumps do qualify as parking spaces. But he wouldn’t expect people to park there while getting food from the drive-thru.

Jeremy Peters asked about the pedestrian crosswalk that goes across South State Street, near the southern entrance into the Shell site. He noted that South State is a road with higher speeds. In discussions about traffic and pedestrian access, Peters said, was there any talk about that crosswalk and traffic flow? Cousino said he didn’t see that as a high-speed area, because vehicles would be slowing down at the intersection of State and Eisenhower.

Diane Giannola said she uses this gas station frequently, because it’s in her neighborhood. She suggested that the walkway should be well-marked to indicate that it’s a pedestrian crossing, so that cars entering from Eisenhower can see it. Cousino said they could put some kind of pedestrian crossing sign there.

Ken Clein noted that the parking along the proposed building gives him pause. Vehicles would be backing out into an area where other cars would be pulling into the pumps.

Bonnie Bona pointed out that there’s a six-foot space between the building and the parking spots, but that includes a two-foot overhang from vehicles – so there would only be four feet between a vehicle’s bumper and the building. She asked planning staff to verify that there’s enough space for the walkway. She assumed that the business wouldn’t be putting items like propane tanks on the walkway. The area looks really tight, she said.

Following up on Bona’s comments, Clein suggested that the project team look at the location of the entry doors to the convenience store, to make sure they are accessible from the parking area. He didn’t think it would meet ADA requirements, but noted that it’s not in the planning commission’s purview. Cousino described the plans as not yet finalized, so the issue that Clein raised would be addressed.

Bona asked how the 22-space parking minimum had been calculated. Cheng replied that it’s calculated by taking a combination of the requirements for the restaurant and for the convenience store. Bona said she supports less parking in general, so she’s not concerned about counting the eight spaces at the pumps. In the past, the planning commission has even discussed counting the stacked spaces in the drive-thru queue, she said.

Shell Station Site Plan: Commission Discussion – Canopy, Dumpsters

Sabra Briere noted that the canopy over the gas pumps, a chevron shape, is clearly designed for three sets of pumps, but there will only be two sets. Briere said she was curious about that. Chris Cheng noted that the entire canopy covers the pumps and the walkway to the convenience store.

Ken Clein clarified with Cheng that the dumpster enclosure on the site plan is proposed, but doesn’t currently exist. Jeremy Peters wondered if the enclosure would have room for a grease dumpster, in addition to trash and recycling. Brad Cousino said that the 20-foot-wide enclosure is generous, so there might be room for a grease container.

Shell Station Site Plan: Commission Discussion – Landscaping

Regarding the landscape buffer, Bonnie Bona said she’s very supportive of maintaining the existing plants, adding that she knows how difficult it is for plants to survive in those kinds of locations. She wondered if the trees there are growing. The owner, Joseph Kafi, replied that in the six years he’s had the site, the trees appear to be growing. He’s also planted a crabapple tree and shrubs, which are doing well, he said.

Shell Station Site Plan: Commission Discussion – Drive-Thru

Wendy Woods asked what kind of drive-thru restaurant would be located there. Brad Cousino said they’re negotiating with several different chains, but it hasn’t been decided.

Wendy Woods.

Jeremy Peters wondered where signs for the restaurant would be located. Cousino replied that he wasn’t sure what the sign ordinance would require, but the signs would be visible. Peters hoped that the signs for the Shell station and the restaurant would be put on the same signpost.

Sabra Briere asked if the proposal complies with the proposed changes to the city’s zoning ordinance regarding drive-thrus. Wendy Rampson noted that the proposed changes would limit the drive-thru lane in a site’s front open space, to make sure it’s well-screened. She said this project wouldn’t be affected by the proposed amendments to the ordinance. [.pdf of proposed ordinance amendments, to be considered by the commission on April 1.]

Kirk Westphal wondered whether this kind of project would require special exception use approval, if proposed amendments to the ordinance are passed. Yes, Cheng replied, but currently drive-thru uses are permitted in C3 zoning.

Westphal asked Cheng to comment on why drive-thrus are currently allowed in this zoning district. Cheng replied that the city’s master plan does recommend commercial uses for this particular corner, with pedestrian amenities. The site plan includes a pedestrian connection from Eisenhower and six bike hoops. Rampson noted that C3 is the only zoning district that now allows drive-thrus without requiring a special exception use permit. She reported that the commission’s ordinance revisions committee is interested in putting more restrictions on this type of use because it’s not in alignment with the city’s master plan objectives.

The planning commission’s April 1 agenda includes proposed revisions to the zoning ordinance related to drive-thrus. The amendments would add a definition of a “drive-thru facility” to the ordinance. Drive-thrus would need special exception use permits, which would be allowed in the O (office), C2B (business service) and C3 (fringe commercial) zoning districts. Basic layout requirements would also be added to the ordinance.

Currently, drive-thrus are allowed in C3 districts without a special exception use permit. They are allowed as special exception uses in the C2B district.

Wendy Woods said that given the site’s location near an expressway – the I-94 exchange is located just south of this intersection – she thought the drive-thru would make sense.

Outcome: Commissioners recommended approval of the site plan and landscape modifications for the Shell station project.

Collingwood Site Plan

A proposal to expand an office building at 278-280 Collingwood was reviewed by planning commissioners on March 18.

Aerial view indicating location of 278-280 Collingwood Drive.

The site plan calls for removing the existing second floor on the east side of the office building and constructing a 2,451-square-foot second floor over the entire building for office use. A new staircase will be added at the southwest corner of the building. The second floor will overhang the first floor along the front of the building and along part of the north side.

An existing curbcut on the north side of the property will be removed. The current 22 parking spaces on the site will be reduced to 17.

Planning commissioners were also asked to approve modifications to the city’s landscaping requirements for this site. Some of the required interior landscaping – the right-of-way screening and interior landscaping island – would be in the critical root zone of two landmark trees, so the owner requested permission to move the landscaping to other parts of the site. That change is supported by the city’s urban forester.

Total construction cost for this project is estimated at $300,000. The office building is located in Ward 4. Collingwood Drive is a street off of West Stadium Boulevard, just south of West Stadium’s convergence with South Maple Road. [.pdf of staff memo]

Planning staff had recommended approval of the site plan.

Collingwood Site Plan: Public Hearing

Ken Cousino spoke during the public hearing, and noted that the project’s two owners were attending the meeting as well to answer questions.

Ken Cousino.

Collingwood Site Plan: Commission Discussion

Jeremy Peters asked for clarification about the curbcut off of Collingwood. City planner Chris Cheng explained that after the staff report was written, it was determined that there was no need to actually increase the width of the curbcut to meet the current code. The curbcut had been installed in 1978, so it would be considered an existing, non-conforming curbcut and wouldn’t be changed.

Wendy Rampson, the city’s planning manager, noted that the entire area had originally been zoned for parking. It had been intended as a buffer between the commercial corridor of West Stadium Boulevard and the office district to the east. The area was rezoned from parking to office in 1965.

Peters supported removing one of the curbcuts, saying it made things easier for pedestrians. He also supported landscaping modifications so that the landmark trees would be preserved.

Bonnie Bona clarified with Cheng that the pavement currently in place for the north curbcut would be replaced with turf and landscaping.

Bona also asked if the building would require an elevator. Ken Cousino responded that it did not. Bona noted that the project is only taking about half of the allowable floor-area ratio (FAR). She said she always likes to know why a project doesn’t take full advantage of the density that’s allowed. Cousino replied that an additional floor would require that an elevator be installed.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously recommended approval of the site plan and modifications to the city’s landscaping requirements. It will be forwarded to the city council for consideration.

Belle Tire Easement

The March 18 agenda included an easement related to a new Belle Tire at 590 W. Ellsworth.

The commission had recommended site plan approval at its Aug. 20, 2013 meeting, and the project subsequently received city council approval on Oct. 7, 2013. The site is located in Ward 4.

Aerial view of a proposed Belle Tire site.

A 50-foot-wide right-of-way easement on the front of this site was recorded by the city as part of a previously approved land division for this parcel. That easement reduced the front setback of the Belle Tire building from 10 feet to roughly 3 feet. The minimum front setback for this site, which is zoned C3 (fringe commercial), is 10 feet.

So the property owner, who also owns the adjacent site at 3975 S. State, has proposed that the city vacate the northern 7 feet of its right-of-way easement. In exchange, the property owner has offered to convey a non-motorized use easement over the same 7 feet.

Such an easement would allow for this strip to be used by the public for future non-motorized transportation facilities, according to a staff memo. And as a non-motorized use easement, the 7-foot strip would be considered part of the required 10-foot front building setback.

The planning staff recommended approval of this proposal. No one spoke during the public hearing.

Belle Tire Easement: Commission Discussion

Ken Clein asked whether the intent is to have a future pedestrian pathway on the easement. Planner Chris Cheng, who gave the staff presentation, said there are no current plans other than the sidewalk that will be installed as part of the site plan. But if in the future there are road improvements on Ellsworth and the sidewalk must be removed, then a sidewalk or other non-motorized use could be located in the easement.

In response to another query from Clein, Cheng noted that the site plan addresses a grade change along that edge of the property by including a walkway and some steps.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously recommended approval of this proposal. It will be forwarded to the city council for consideration.

Communications & Commentary

Every meeting includes several opportunities for communications from planning staff and commissioners, as well as two opportunities for public commentary. No one spoke during public commentary on March 18.

Communications & Commentary: Planning Commission Bylaws

Planning manager Wendy Rampson noted that the city council had approved some revisions to the planning commission’s bylaws – but not all of the revisions that have been recommended by planning commissioners were brought forward. The council approved the revisions that planning commissioners had passed about six months ago – at its July 16, 2013 meeting.

The changes relate to the order of agenda items, and the length of time required for special accommodations. The bylaws, as revised, call for additional lead time so that special accommodations, including a sign language interpreter, can be made for people with disabilities, when requested at least two business days in advance of a meeting. The previous bylaws specified just a one-day advance request.

Revisions that were approved by planning commissioners more recently – at their Feb. 20, 2014 meeting – have not yet been forwarded to the council. Rampson reported that assistant city attorney Kevin McDonald wanted to have some additional discussion about those revisions related to public hearings.

Wendy Woods wondered whether the city attorney’s office would work quickly, “so that we aren’t waiting a long time.” Rampson replied that she asked McDonald to draft language that he would find acceptable, and that could be forwarded to the commissioners for consideration. She said she’d communicate with him that commissioners would like to see that as quickly as possible.

One revision clarifies the limitations on a city councilmember’s interaction with the commission. The revised section states: “A member of the City Council shall not be heard before the Commission during the Councilmember’s term in office.” The intent is to prevent undue influence on the commission, and to avoid the possibility of legal action against the city.

Other revisions affect speaking turns at public hearings. The intent is to clarify how many turns the same person can speak at a public hearing, and how public hearings are continued if an item is postponed.

Present: Eleanore Adenekan, Bonnie Bona, Sabra Briere, Ken Clein, Diane Giannola, Jeremy Peters, Paras Parekh, Kirk Westphal, Wendy Woods. Also: City planning manager Wendy Rampson.

Next meeting: Tuesday, April 1, 2014 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 survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the city’s planning commission. If you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and coworkers to do the same. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle.

Aerial view of a proposed Belle Tire site.

The commission had recommended site plan approval at its Aug. 20, 2013 meeting, and the project subsequently received city council approval on Oct. 7, 2013. The site is located in Ward 4.

A 50-foot-wide right-of-way easement on the front this site was recorded by the city as part of a previously approved land division for this parcel. That easement reduced the front setback of the Belle Tire building from 10 feet to roughly 3 feet. The minimum front setback for this site is 10 feet.

So the property owner, who also owns the adjacent site at 3975 S. State, has proposed that the city vacate the northern 7 feet of its right-of-way easement. In exchange, the property owner has offered to convey a non-motorized use easement over the same 7 feet. Such an easement would allow for this strip to be used by the public for future non-motorized transportation facilities, according to a staff memo. And as a non-motorized use easement, the 7-foot strip would be considered part of the required 10-foot front building setback.

The planning staff recommended approval of this proposal. It will be forwarded to the city council for consideration.

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

The sign on the door to the Ann Arbor city council chamber, installed in the summer of 2013, includes Braille.

Besides the consent agenda, the council will need to vote on just eight items. And half of those eight are standard easements, which are rarely subjected to any council discussion.

But those easements also mean that not too many councilmembers would have the chance to take the night off. As conveyances of land interest, the easements will require an 8-vote majority on the 11-member council. Two of the easements are related to the construction of a new Tim Hortons on South State Street, one is related to the Arbor Hills Crossing development at Washtenaw and Platt, and the fourth is linked to construction of the new Blake Transit Center in downtown Ann Arbor.

The other land-related item on the agenda is initial consideration of a rezoning request for a site that has been annexed into the city from Ann Arbor Township. The final vote on the item would come at a subsequent meeting after a public hearing at that meeting. The Aug. 19 agenda doesn’t include any items that require a public hearing.

The council will be asked to approve a $107,000 purchase order for continued participation in CLEMIS (Courts and Law Enforcement Management Information System). The service is used by several public safety agencies in southeast Michigan. Among the support services provided by CLEMIS are computer-aided dispatch (CAD), mobile CAD, report management system, fingerprinting and mug shots.

The council will also be asked to approve the issuance of $3.15 million in revenue bonds to fund some electrical improvements for the water supply system.

The final voting item on the agenda is confirmation of several nominations to city boards and commissions made at the council’s previous meeting.

The agenda still offers some opportunity for stretching long. For example, the council could separate out some of the nominations for individual consideration. Among those nominations, the council will be asked to confirm appointments to the boards of two high-profile organizations – the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority and the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. Rishi Narayan, founder of Underground Printing, is the nominee to the DDA board. Jack Bernard, who works in the University of Michigan’s office of the general counsel, is the nominee to the AAATA board.

The council could also pull individual items off the consent agenda for separate consideration. Two of those items are street closures for downtown bars to host Oktoberfest activities on Sept. 20-21. It’s possible those items could be pulled out for separate consideration – but not because of a desire to deny the requests. Instead, a possible reason to consider them separately would be to highlight what’s different about the Oktoberfest street closures, compared to a similar request made at the council’s last meeting for “Beats, Eats, and Cleats.” That request, which was denied, was for an event sponsored by The Landmark apartment building. It was scheduled for Friday, Sept. 6, 2013, the evening before the football game between the University of Michigan and the University of Notre Dame.

The Oktoberfest event also takes place on a weekend when the Michigan football team plays a game. But that game against the UConn Huskies will be contested on the gridiron of Rentschler Field in East Hartford, Conn. – over 700 miles away from the intersection of Washington and Main Streets in Ann Arbor, Mich.

Councilmembers also have the opportunity at three different points in the agenda to share communications with the public and their fellow councilmembers.

More detail on the meeting agenda items is available on the city’s Legistar system. Readers can also follow the live meeting proceedings on Channel 16, streamed online by Community Television Network.

The Chronicle will be filing live updates from city council chambers during the meeting, published in this article “below the fold.” The meeting is scheduled to start at 7 p.m.

6:43 p.m. Pre-meeting activity. The scheduled meeting start is 7 p.m. Most evenings the actual starting time is between 7:10 p.m. and 7:15 p.m. Sally Petersen (Ward 2) has arrived. She’s the only councilmember here so far. City administrator Steve Powers has also just arrived.

6:53 p.m. Jane Lumm (Ward 2), Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1), Mike Anglin (Ward 5) and Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) have now arrived. Nancy Shore, Warpehoski’s wife, is here with their two children. Jack Eaton, winner of the Ward 4 Democratic primary on Aug. 6, is chatting with Kailasapathy. Lumm says the meeting should last about a half hour. She thinks it’s probably the thinnest agenda she’s seen, including both her terms of service dating back to the mid-1990s. Petersen is introducing Powers to a representative of Honda.

7:04 p.m. And we’re off.

7:05 p.m. Pledge of allegiance, moment of silence and the roll call of council. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) and Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) are absent.

7:05 p.m. Proclamations. An item has been added to the agenda honoring Eastern Michigan University’s English as a Second Language Students for volunteering in the city parks through the GIVE 365 Volunteer Program – for multiple “pool splash days” and the annual Huron River Day celebration.

7:09 p.m. Public commentary. This portion of the meeting offers 10 three-minute slots that can be reserved in advance. Preference is given to speakers who want to address the council on an agenda item. [Public commentary general time, with no sign-up required in advance, is offered at the end of the meeting.]

Only three people are signed up to speak tonight. According to the agenda, up first will be Thomas Partridge to speak on commemorating Martin Luther King Jr., building affordable housing and public transportation, and promoting himself as a declared write-in candidate for Ward 5 city council in November. On the ballot, incumbent Democrat Mike Anglin is unopposed. Partridge is followed by James Rhodenhiser, who is signed up to speak on the protestors outside of Beth Israel Congregation. Rounding out the trio of public speaking reserved time is Kathy Griswold, who is signed up to talk about the city’s crosswalk ordinance.

7:13 p.m. Partridge is now holding forth. He introduces himself as an Ann Arbor and Washtenaw County resident advocating for those who need more government services. He calls for “integrated progress.” It’s the eve of the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King Jr.’s march on Washington, he says. So he calls on all residents of the city and county to make King’s dream a reality. He calls for an investigation of what he calls misappropriation of funds that the city now needs to expand public, affordable housing. He doesn’t think the mayor has answered any of the questions surrounding the economic downturn.

7:17 p.m. Rhodenhiser is now addressing the council. He is rector at St. Clare of Assisi Episcopal Church in Ann Arbor. He picks up on Partridge’s mention of the 50th anniversary. He refers to an anniversary in Ann Arbor – the 10th anniversary of a demonstration outside the Beth Israel Congregation. He characterizes the protests as “picking on” one congregation. He tells the council that he’s given the city clerk a letter from 31 religious leaders. He encourages the council to make a statement about what kind of city Ann Arbor wants to be. He calls for civility. His heart goes out to those in Egypt, he says. He asks the council to consider going on record supporting the congregants of Beth Israel, who might feel their burden will go unremarked.

7:19 p.m. Griswold is criticizing CityWorks as a piece of software. It is a platform for the citizens service request system. It does not have a mobile interface, she contends. She calls for an improvement. She also addresses the local crosswalk ordinance. Is it enforceable? Is education possible? She says she’s angry because she found a pamphlet that says, “Pedestrians Rule.” She calls that shameful. She calls for hiring a professional transportation engineer.

7:20 p.m. Council communications. This is the first of three slots on the agenda for council communications. It’s a time when councilmembers can report out from boards, commissions and task forces on which they serve. They can also alert their colleagues to proposals they might be bringing forward in the near future.

7:21 p.m. Kailasapathy reports that the human rights commission is working on a revision to the city’s nondiscrimination ordinance. Another topic from the HRC is to pursue policy guidelines for installation of video surveillance cameras.

7:23 p.m. Anglin raises the issue of stormwater control. He ventures that sites could be identified for stormwater detention farther upstream, using city land. He calls for “natural projects” upstream as much as possible.

7:23 p.m. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) is commenting on a recent pedestrian fatality on Plymouth Road, highlighting the fact that state law, not just Ann Arbor local law, requires motorists to yield to pedestrians in a crosswalk. Ann Arbor’s law differs from Michigan’s Uniform Traffic Code in requiring motorists to stop, not merely slow as to yield, and in requiring action for pedestrians standing at the crosswalk, not already within the crosswalk.

7:23 p.m. From the Michigan Uniform Traffic Code:

R 28.1702 Rule 702. Pedestrians; right-of-way in crosswalk; violation as civil infraction.
(1) When traffic-control signals are not in place or are not in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way, slowing down or stopping if need be to so yield, to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is on the half of the roadway on which the vehicle is traveling or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the roadway as to be in danger, but a pedestrian shall not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into a path of a vehicle that is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield.

7:24 p.m. From the Ann Arbor city code, last revised on Dec. 19, 2011 after a revision a year earlier on July 19, 2010:

10:148. – Pedestrians crossing streets.
(a) When traffic-control signals are not in place or are not in operation, the driver of a vehicle shall stop before entering a crosswalk and yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian stopped at the curb, curb line or ramp leading to a crosswalk and to every pedestrian within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is on the half of the roadway on which the vehicle is traveling or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the roadway as to be in danger.
(b) A pedestrian shall not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into a path of a vehicle that is so close that it is impossible for the driver to yield.

7:26 p.m. Briere has now summarized the laws. She’s ticking through some basic stats.

7:26 p.m. Additional background, based on data pulled from the Michigan Traffic Crashes website for 2004-2012: the majority of traffic crashes involving pedestrians are in the downtown area. [ped crash year-by-year animated map .gif)] The number of traffic crashes involving pedestrians has been somewhat higher the last two years than any of the previous seven years. [ped crash chart by year .jpg] Crashes related to pedestrians also show consistent seasonal variation. [ped crash chart by month total .jpg] [ped crash chart by month broken out by year]

7:28 p.m. Mayor John Hieftje now commends Rhodenhiser and his group, saying that he had watched a conversation between Rhodenhiser and the leader of the protests. He says that rationality had fallen on deaf ears. Hieftje notes that the council had passed a resolution a few years ago. He calls it a tough problem that attorneys have worked on.

7:30 p.m. Powers invites the public to a swearing in of four new police officers at 1 p.m. on Friday. He alerts the public to the UM student move-in from Aug. 28-30. He says that the AAPD party patrol will be in effect from then until Sept. 3, the start of classes. East University and Oakland will have a free solid waste drop off.

7:31 p.m. Minutes. The minutes from the last meeting have been approved without amendment.

7:31 p.m. Consent agenda. This is a group of items that are deemed to be routine and are voted on “all in one go.” Contracts for less than $100,000 can be placed on the consent agenda. This meeting’s consent agenda includes three mid-September requests for street closings in downtown Ann Arbor. All three resolutions include approval of special permits for serving alcohol outdoors.

The consent agenda also includes two software purchases – one for case management at the 15th District Court and the other for tracking of maintenance needs for city assets. Rounding out the consent agenda is a contract for inspection of two of the city’s dams – Barton and Superior. In more detail, here’s a summary of the consent agenda.

• Street Closing: W. Washington for Oktoberfest Sept. 20-21 (Grizzly Peak Brewing Company and the Blue Tractor). This would be for the block between Main and Ashley, leaving intersections open for north-south traffic.
• Street Closing: E. Washington for Oktoberfest Sept. 20-21 (Arbor Brewing Company). This would be for the block between Main and Fourth Avenue, leaving intersections open for north-south traffic.
• Street Closing: E. Washington for Lite Bike Sept. 15. (Arbor Brewing Company and A2 Bike). This would be from half block between Main eastward to the alley.
• Approve purchase order to Azteca Systems for CityWorks software license and annual maintenance and support agreement ($60,000). This software is based on a geographical information system (GIS) platform and allows the city to track the maintenance of its equipment and assets. It’s also the software on which the city’s citizen request system is based. However, according to city CFO Tom Crawford, responding to a query from The Chronicle, the city is currently evaluating whether to continue using the existing citizen request application or convert to something else.
• Approve professional services agreement with Mead and Hunt Inc. to complete a dam safety inspection and report for Barton and Superior dams ($53,600). This is an inspection required every five years by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) by an independent consultant. The last one was done in 2008. Mead and Hunt’s bid was the lowest of four bids. It was about half the highest bid for the work, which was submitted by Black & Veatch at $107,000.
• Approve purchase order to Michigan Supreme Court State Court Administrative Office for judicial information software (JIS) (not to Exceed $54,000). JIS is case management software provided to the 15th District Court, which the local court uses for day-to-day operations.

7:31 p.m. Councilmembers can opt to select out any items for separate consideration. Lumm wants to pull out two of them and Teall pulls out one.

7:33 p.m. The council is now discussing the Blue Tractor Oktoberfest street closing. Lumm asks if closing part of Washington has been done in the past all day. Sumedh Bahl, community services area administrator, indicates that the timing is requested by the applicant.

7:37 p.m. The council is now discussing the Azteca software item. Lumm totals up several different software items. CFO Tom Crawford indicates that the city tries to negotiate a multi-year, but flat rate contract. The maintenance costs are generally about 20% of the software costs. Kailasapathy brings up Griswold’s point about the lack of a mobile interface for CityWorks. Crawford calls CityWorks a key piece of software. Crawford notes that CityWorks does have a mobile API. A third party had created the citizens request system for the city. But that was five years ago, he says. So the city is now looking at going and and asking a third party to upgrade the mobile application. Warpehoski has looked up last year’s contract and notes that it’s the same as this year.

7:42 p.m. The council is now discussing the dam safety inspection contract. Teall asks for public services area administrator Craig Hupy. She gets confirmation that the funding is coming from the general fund. She asks for the status of discussion about hydro-electric use with interested parties. Hupy says that two years ago or so, a study was done about the feasibility of hydro-electric at Argo or Geddes. Hupy indicates there had been only one party, the VA hospital, interested in pursuing hydro-electric. He essentially concludes that hydro power wasn’t feasibility.

Briere ventures that in 2010 the council had made a decision that dam maintenance would not be funded out of the parks budget. Lumm recalls that previously the dam maintenance fund was an enterprise fund. Hupy confirms that the hydro-electric fund would in general just about break even, paying its own way. Hupy and Lumm are discussing dam operations back in the 1980s and 1990s.

7:43 p.m. Hieftje ventures that the reason that the dam is profitable is due to the fact that the price of electricity has gone up.

7:43 p.m. Outcome: The council has now voted unanimously to approve all items on the consent agenda.

7:43 p.m. Rezoning for 2925 Devonshire: Initial approval. The 0.66-acre parcel is requested to be rezoned from TWP (township district) to R1A (single-family dwelling district). The city’s planning commission recommended approval of the rezoning on a 9-0 vote at its Jan. 15, 2013 meeting. The rezoning comes in the context of the annexation of the land into the city.

7:43 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously without discussion to give initial approval to the rezoning of 2925 Devonshire. The council’s final vote will come at a future meeting after a public hearing.

7:44 p.m. Issuance and sale of water supply system revenue bonds ($3.15 million) The bonds are being sold to finance some of the additions and improvements to the city’s water distribution system, including electrical improvements at the Barton and South Industrial pump stations. Michigan Finance Authority (the “Bond Bank”) will purchase the bonds as part of its Drinking Water Revolving Fund (DWRF) program. Bond payments are to be made from the water supply system revenues.

At its June 17, 2013 meeting, the council approved a $2.6 million contract with Shaw Electric Company to upgrade electrical systems for the city’s drinking water system. That contract covered replacement of the primary and secondary switchgear at Barton Pump Station and replacement of electrical controls and a check valve at South Industrial Pump Station.

7:44 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously without discussion to authorize issuance of the water supply system bonds.

7:44 p.m. Approval of a purchase order with Oakland County for CLEMIS (not to exceed $107,000). CLEMIS (Courts and Law Enforcement Management Information System), which is hosted by Oakland County, is used by several public safety agencies in southeast Michigan. Among the support services provided by CLEMIS are computer-aided dispatch (CAD), mobile CAD, report management system, fingerprinting and mug shots. CLEMIS allows for sharing of information among public safety organizations across Southeast Michigan.

7:45 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously without discussion to approve continued participation in CLEMIS.

7:45 p.m. Resolution accepting water and sanitary easement for Arbor Hills Crossing. The easement is being granted by RSW Washtenaw LLC (3100 Washtenaw Ave.) to the city at no cost as apart of the development agreement for Arbor Hills Crossing. As a land transaction, the acceptance of the easement will require an 8-vote majority on the 11-member council. Arbor Hills Crossing is located at on the southeast corner of Washtenaw and Platt, consisting of four one- and two-story buildings throughout the 7.45-acre site – a total of 90,700-square-feet of space for retail stores and offices. A new traffic signal has recently been installed and is operational at the Platt and Washtenaw intersection.

7:45 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously to accept the easement for water and sanitary lines for Arbor Hills Crossing.

7:45 p.m. Resolutions accepting public utilities easements and public right-of-way easements for South State Street Tim Hortons. Both easements are being granted to the city, at no cost, from 3965 South State Associates LLC. The granting of right-of-way is 50 feet wide and about 345 feet long along Ellsworth Road. As land transactions, the acceptance of the easements will require an 8-vote majority on the 11-member council. The site plan for the Tim Hortons was approved by the city council last year at its April 16, 2012 meeting.

7:46 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously without discussion to accept both easements for the Tim Hortons on State Street.

7:46 p.m. Resolution to approve a grant of easement to DTE Electric Company. This easement is to allow electrical service for the new Blake Transit Center currently under construction by the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. The easement begins on the Fourth Avenue side of the old Y lot ( 350 S. Fifth Avenue) and extends eastward about halfway across the block. As a land transaction, the acceptance of the easement will require an 8-vote majority on the 11-member council.

7:46 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously without discussion to grant an easement to DTE to provide electrical service.

7:47 p.m. Confirmation of nominations. Nominated at the previous council meeting were the following:

• Alison Stroud to the Ann Arbor Commission on Disability Issues. On the city commission for disability issues, Stroud would be finishing the term of Ian Scott. Stroud is a public policy intern for the summer at the Ann Arbor Center for Independent Living. She addressed the board of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority during a public hearing at its June 20, 2013 meeting.
• Paul Darling (reappointment) to the Building Board of Appeals
• Reka Farrakand to Housing Board of Appeals. Farrakand is city of Ann Arbor fire marshal.
• Alex Milshteyn (reappointment) to the Zoning Board of Appeals
• Rishi Narayan to the board of the Downtown Development Authority. Narayan would replace Leah Gunn. Narayan is founder and managing member of Underground Printing, which offers screenprinting of apparel in more than a dozen cities nationwide. Narayan made the Crain’s Detroit Business “Twenty in their 20s” list in 2010 as a 28-year-old.
• Jack Bernard to the board of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. Bernard is lecturer in the University of Michigan law school and an attorney with UM’s office of the vice president and general counsel. He is also currently chair of the university’s council for disability concerns. Given the nature of wrangling over Eric Mahler’s recent appointment to the AAATA board, Bernard’s chairship of that group could be a key qualification. Some councilmembers objected to Mahler’s appointment, arguing that someone who could represent the disability community should be appointed instead. If Bernard is confirmed by the city council at tonight’s meeting, that would bring the total of UM employees on the board to three, or one-third of the nine members. The other two UM employees on the AAATA board are Sue Gott (the university’s head planner) and Anya Dale (a representative in the office of sustainability).

7:50 p.m. Petersen highlights three of the nominations. She notes that Stroud has a Pittsfield Township address, but she’s hearing-impaired, so she asks that the residency requirement be “waived.” She calls Narayan a young urban professional and says that the future of Ann Arbor relies on such individuals. She points out that Bernard sits on the UM committee on disability issues, to which she serves as a city liaison. She’s reading aloud praise about Bernard from a third party. Bernard is legally blind, she says.

7:50 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted unanimously to confirm all the appointments.

7:51 p.m. Mayoral nominations to boards and commissions. Nominations made tonight will be voted on at the council’s next meeting. Leigh Greden has been nominated for re-appointment to the Ann Arbor housing commission. Devon Akmon’s name was put forward to fill a vacancy on the public art commission. Logan Casey has been nominated to fill a vacancy on the human rights commission. And Al McWilliams is being nominated to replace Newcombe Clark on the board of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.

McWilliams’ name had appeared on an early version of the list of nominees for the council’s Aug. 8, 2013 meeting. The final version, however, did not include his name. McWilliams is founder of Quack!Media, an ad agency located in downtown Ann Arbor. Quack!Media lists the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority on its website as one of its clients. McWilliams has written advocacy pieces for bicycling on his blog.

Also originally slated for nomination at the Aug. 8 meeting to serve on the public art commission was Jeff Hayner. But the final version of the nomination list did not include his name. He has filed petitions to run for the Ward 1 city council seat. The Ward 1 city council ballot for November will include incumbent Democrat Sabra Briere, and independents Hayner and Jaclyn Vresics. According to Hayner, mayor John Hieftje had explained to him that he had a policy against appointing people to boards and commissions if they were candidates for the city council.

7:53 p.m. Council communications. Lumm gives an update from the council’s liquor committee. A recommendation would be coming to the council about the fee schedule. Adjustments would be made to make sure that fees charged reflect the costs. A recommendation on liquor license transfer procedures will also be forthcoming, Lumm says, in light of a change in state law. She thanks the various staff who are involved in the annual renewals of licenses, and indicates that their time investment will be tracked.

7:54 p.m. Briere gives an update from the North Main Huron River task force, indicating that the report is almost finished. Demolition of the two buildings on 721 N. Main was taking place today, she notes.

7:55 p.m. Anglin follows up by saying that 133 establishments in Ann Arbor hold liquor licenses. Each one pays $50 a year, Anglin says.

7:55 p.m. Public Commentary. There’s no requirement to sign up in advance for this slot for public commentary.

7:59 p.m. Jim Mogensen comments on the hardship exemption in the city’s living wage ordinance. He recalls the history for its rationale – a recognition that some nonprofits were not able to comply with the requirements of the ordinance. He recounts how the exemption for the Ann Arbor Summer Festival was handled and how an exemption was also put in for work-study students. Last fall, the issue had arisen again. He was bringing it up to provide the history, he said, because a waiver had been granted last fall to Community Action Network over work-study students, he said, who were already exempt under the ordinance.

8:02 p.m. Thomas Partridge repeats the points from his initial public commentary – Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech and his candidacy for Ward 5 city council as a write-in candidate. He laments the lack of affordable housing and effective public transportation in Ann Arbor.

8:04 p.m. Closed session. The council has voted to go into a closed session under Michigan’s Open Meetings Act to discuss land acquisition and pending litigation.

8:20 p.m. The council has emerged from its closed session.

8:26 p.m. Lumm moves a resolution on the pending litigation which authorizes the city attorney to resolve the case Dobrowolski v. City of Ann Arbor in the manner recommended during the closed session. The council has approved that resolution.

8:26 p.m. Adjournment. We are now adjourned. That’s all from the hard benches.

A sign on the door to the Ann Arbor city council chambers gives instructions for post-meeting clean-up.

The Chronicle survives in part through regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like 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.

Platt & Washtenaw looking east down Washtenaw on July 14, 2013.

Two of the items were easements – for a sidewalk and for bus shelters and bus pullouts.

The other item was the dedication of additional public right-of-way, so that Platt Road can be widened at that intersection. New traffic signals have been installed at the intersection, but they are not yet operational.

The council had approved the site plan for Arbor Hills Crossing at its Nov. 21, 2011 meeting.

The project includes four one- and two-story buildings throughout the 7.45-acre site – a total of 90,700-square-feet of space for retail stores and offices. Three of the buildings face Washtenaw Avenue, across the street from the retail complex where Whole Foods grocery is located. The site will include 310 parking spaces.

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]

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]

The easements are necessary for the city to proceed with its plan to replace the E. Stadium Bridges over State Street and the Ann Arbor Railroad tracks. The city has been awarded a total of $13.9 million in TIGER II federal grant funding to pay for the project.

Easements approved by the council include: a road right-of-way easement from the University of Michigan for $563,400; two utilities easements from UM totaling $426,650; and an unrecorded water utilities easement.

The deleted provision in the easements had provided for a relocation of facilities, but only if it were allowed by law and specifically approved by the Michigan Dept. of Transportation – otherwise, relocation was prohibited. Because relocation is prohibited by law in any case, MDOT took the view that the provision should not appear in the contract; hence, the change to the wording was requested. It is an administrative change, not a substantive one.

By holding a previous special meeting on March 16, 2011 to sign necessary documents, the council was able to get $800,000 of the TIGER II federal funds formally “obligated” for the first right-of-way phase of the project.

This brief was filed from city council chambers. A somewhat more detailed account of the special meeting will follow: [link]

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

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

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

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

The location of a planned non-motorized path along Washtenaw Ave. Top: Toumy. Middle: mid-way. Bottom: Glenwood. (Image links to higher resolution file)

Some of the more interesting conversation emerged during deliberations as the council accepted one of several easements: Why is this one 7 feet wide, when the others measure 10 feet?

Another one of the easements accepted by the council involved a non-motorized path to be constructed on the north side of Washtenaw Avenue between Glenwood and Tuomy roads. That project has a history dating back to 2006. At Monday’s meeting, the council also completed the third of four required steps in the process to establish a special assessment of residents whose property abuts the non-motorized path.

In other business, the council authorized purchases of software, plus IT switches. The switches will support the data center to be housed in the new police-courts facility. The council also set the stage for the local firm NanoBio to be able to apply for a tax abatement, by establishing an industrial development district.

As a part of his city administrator’s report, Roger Fraser seemed to put participants in the annual shopping cart race on notice that the event could be shut down on pain of a missing parade permit. The shopping cart races are a part of “punk week,” which has been part of Ann Arbor’s late summer culture for over a decade. The following evening, the race took place – with Ann Arbor police cruisers serving the same function they’ve performed historically, hanging in the background, providing a measure of protection to racers from traffic approaching from behind.

The shopping cart race featured a former councilmember and DDA board member, Dave DeVarti, who was stirred to participate by Fraser’s threat to shut down the event.

Washtenaw Avenue Non-Motorized Path

The planned non-motorized path along the north and east sides of Washtenaw Avenue will stretch from Tuomy Road on its northwest end to Glenwood on its southeast terminus. The section of Washtenaw Avenue where the path is planned includes the confluence of East Stadium and Washtenaw Avenue just east of the shopping center where Trader Joe’s is located.

Funding for the project will draw from three sources: (i) the city’s non-motorized fund – which the city allocates from its Act 51 state funding, (ii) a Michigan Dept. of Transportation (MDOT) transportation enhancement grant, and (iii) a special assessment on property owners. Here’s the breakdown:

ESTIMATED PROJECT COST

$ 205,000 Design Engineering 

$ 1,050,000 Construction
    135,000 Construction Engineering
     85,000 Miscellaneous Costs
    105,000 Contingency

  1,580,000 Total Estimated Project Costs

ESTIMATED PROJECT REVENUE

MDOT

$   538,527 Transportation Enhancement
    155,512 Surface Transportation Program - Urban Funds

Local Ann Arbor Share

$    59,234 Estimated Property Share Assessable
    826,727 City Alternative Transportation Fund

$ 1,580,000 Total Estimate Project Revenue

BREAKDOWN BY CITY/STATE

    694,039 Total MDOT Grant
    885,961 Total City Share

-

The special assessment of property owners requires a total of four resolutions.

• Charter SECTION 10.3 “No control or expenditure … shall be made for any public improvement, the cost of which is to be paid by special assessment upon the property especially benefited thereby, until the Council has passed a resolution determining to proceed with such public improvement.”
• Code Chapter 13 1:286 “By resolution the city council shall approve the plans and specifications for the improvement; determine that the cost shall be paid by special assessment upon the property especially benefited; designate the district or land and tax parcels upon which special assessments shall be levied; and direct the Assessor to prepare a special assessment roll in accordance with the city council’s determination.”
• Code Chapter 13 1:288 “… Upon receipt of a special assessment roll the City Council shall order it and the information presented to the City Council by the City Administrator pursuant to Section 1:284 filed in the office of the City Assessor for public examination; shall fix the time and place when it will meet and review the roll.”
• Code Chapter 13 1:191 “After the hearing and review, the council may confirm the special assessment roll with the corrections as it may have made, if any, …”

Before the council on Monday night was Resolution No. 3 in the series, which set the public hearing on the special assessment roll – for Sept. 7, the date of the council’s next meeting. Out of the $1.58 million project budget, the special assessment of property owners totals just under $60,000 for 12 properties, at an average of $4,936 per parcel. But most parcels are being assessed at around $3,500. One parcel, at 16,087, skews the average high.

The second of the resolutions was passed on June 21, 2010, while the first of the resolutions was passed in 2006. On Monday, in response to a request from councilmember Sabra Briere (Ward 1), city administrator Roger Fraser described some of the long history of the project. Fraser described the property owners’ reaction to the planned path: “To say they were less than receptive would be accurate, if not an understatement.”

Meeting with neighbors about the non-motorized path project was one of the first tasks that the city’s transportation program manager, Eli Cooper, took on when he was hired by the city. From a 2006 interview with Cooper:

HD: Do you feel like that meeting went off pretty well? That people got their questions answered?

EC: I am confident that everybody got their questions answered. We went through about an hour and a half of questions and I stuck around after the meeting time ended and chatted with a few folks even beyond that. It’s a relatively, and I use the term ‘relatively’, it’s a relatively simple project.

HD: Just from a construction point of view?

EC: From an overall complexity, not just the construction, but the effect. It’s not like it’s affecting 50% of the population. It’s a path on a very specific right-of-way. Many of the folks who will benefit from this City investment probably aren’t aware that the meeting was held. Or that, in fact, this project is underway. Those would be the folks who would be travelling by, and get to the edge of the sidewalk and say, Gee, now where do I go?

HD: I follow the dirt path!

EC: Again, the folks who were at the meeting, I think, generally seemed satisfied at the end of the conversation and thanked me for …

HD: … there was no yelling?

EC: No! That’s where you get to the public ‘hearing’ definition with a microphone and it’s kind of like a shark-feeding frenzy where one person makes a statement and the crowd erupts, and the next person gets in. No it wasn’t that at all.

HD: So it was a pretty friendly meeting.

EC: Friendly in terms of the atmosphere. There were clearly sides. There some who were there just to learn about it, there were some who had some preconceived ideas that were opposed to it, and there were others that were supportive of it. It wasn’t a love-fest, but it was a very polite and professional public discourse.

Non-Motorized Path: Public  Comment

At the start of the meeting during time reserved for public commentary, Kathy Griswold addressed the Washtenaw non-motorized path resolutions on the agenda in terms of the city’s responsibility that was being accepted. From the cover memo in the council’s agenda:

The City will maintain the path; including repair, replacement, maintenance, mowing, tree trimming, and snow removal, …

She questioned whether this was good public policy, noting that it created the potential for inequity compared to other homeowners with sidewalks, who are expected to maintain them and remove snow from them. She also expressed concern that the city was making a financial commitment for maintenance of the path.

Griswold contrasted the Washtenaw Avenue non-motorized path project with an effort she’s pursued for more than a year to get a pathway or sidewalk constructed near King Elementary School. The point of that sidewalk installation would be to allow the crosswalk to be moved from its current mid-block location to a four-way stop where cars already are required to stop. Without the installation of a sidewalk, however, children crossing at that location would need to walk along a short unpaved section.

Griswold told the council that she’d turned the crosswalk project over to a group of King Elementary School parents and uploaded email exchanges she’s had to A2Docs.org. She said that her experience has become like a parody of “Roger and Me” [a movie directed by Michael Moore], with a supporting role by Stephen. [The allusions were to Roger Fraser, city administrator, and councilmember Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2).]

She reported that she’d talked to the Washtenaw County Road Commission concerning vegetation overhanging part of the roadway that belongs to Ann Arbor Township – there are various township “islands” within the city limits. She said that she’d learned that the street and the right-of-way belongs to the city and there is not a jurisdictional issue that would prevent the city from trimming the vegetation. She said she’d also called Norfolk Southern railroad about vegetation on Depot Street – several years ago she’d called and they’d been a bit more prompt about addressing it than they were being currently.

She said she’d also called the state attorney general concerning metered parking spots located within 20 feet of a crosswalk – near city hall – which she contends is in violation of the Michigan Vehicle Code.

Griswold concluded on a positive note, reporting that she and a foster child had enjoyed Fuller Park Day Camp – they’d had a great time. The gardens there were overgrown, so she called to get permission to clean up the gardens and by the time she received the phone call granting her permission, the lifeguards, on a rainy day, had gone out and cleaned them all up.

Non-Motorized Path: Council Deliberations

City administrator Roger Fraser related some of the history of the project, and the funding structure was outlined.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to set the public hearing on the special assessment roll for Sept. 7.

Easements

In connection with the non-motorized path, two easements were accepted from Washtenaw County – one for pedestrian access and one for public utilities. By way of background, an easement is simply the right to use land without actually owning it.

Susan Pollay, executive director of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, and Mike Bergren, of Park Avenue consultants., which is helping the DDA manage the underground South Fifth Avenue parking garage project. Bergren formerly worked for the city of Ann Arbor.

The council also considered and accepted four other easements: (i) for permanent drainage from Stone School Road Properties for storm ditch maintenance; (ii) for a permanent storm sewer and detention area from the public schools of the City of Ann Arbor [See related Chronicle coverage: "Drilling for the Drains"]; (iii) for public utilities from the Racquet Club; and (iv) for a water main from the underground South Fifth Avenue parking structure project.

The last one generated brief discussion, when Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) questioned why the easement was only for seven feet, not 10 feet.  Susan Pollay, executive director of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, and Mike Bergren, of Park Avenue consultants – which is helping the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority manage the underground parking garage project – approached the podium to explain.

Bergren explained that only seven feet is on private property, with the remaining three feet on city property. So the strip of land where the 8-inch water main will be installed is actually 10 feet wide, explained Bergren.

Asked by Kunselman if the water main was designed just for fire protection or to accommodate future development, Bergren indicated that it could be used as a looping water main for development.

NanoBio Industrial Development District

The council voted without discussion to establish part of a property owned by the real estate company First Martin Corp. at 2311 Green Road as an industrial development district. The step is necessary in order for NanoBio, a company located at that address, to apply for an industrial facilities tax abatement.

During the public hearing on the proposal, Thomas Partridge called on the mayor and the city council to report out on the projected impact for job and economic growth that would result from the establishment of the district.

NanoBio is a decade-old spinoff from the University of Michigan’s Center for Biologic Nanotechnology. The basic technology platform was developed by James R. Baker, Jr., who’s executive chairman and CEO of the company. It involves creating super-tiny droplets – 150-400 nanometers in diameter – that when applied directly to the skin can penetrate directly through pores and hair shafts to sites of infections. The ability of the droplets to penetrate in this way is a function of their extremely small size.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved establishment of the industrial development district, which will allow NanoBio to apply for an industrial facilities tax abatement.

Software

The council considered three different resolutions related to computer software: (i) a purchase order with ImageSoft Inc. for $200,000 to acquire document management software, which also established a content management budget of $470,000; (ii) a purchase order with The Ultimate Software Group for $174,000 for human resources software; and (iii) a $60,000/year expenditure for three years to upgrade the city’s asset management software to the enterprise level.

At the request of councilmember Sabra Briere (Ward 1), stemming from a question a resident had asked at the previous evening’s caucus, city IT staff explained that the city had partnered with Washtenaw County two years ago on the consolidation of their data centers. The county has been using ImageSoft’s OnBase software for quite some time – it provides business process automation and document management. It replaces physical file cabinets and integrates with the city’s Legistar system, which organizes the documents associated with all of the city’s public bodies – city council, commissions, boards and committees. ImageSoft is a Southfield, Mich. company.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved all the expenditures related to software.

Network Switches

Also computer-related was an item authorizing a $373,405 purchase of equipment from Amerinet for network switches to support the city’s communications infrastructure.

From the staff memo accompanying the resolution:

… the additional equipment provides the necessary network infrastructure to support the additional performance, power and data requirements of the Ann Arbor Municipal Center. In addition, the Information Technology Service Unit is upgrading its core datacenter distribution network. All of this equipment will be located in the new Municipal Center building.

Outcome: Without discussion, the council unanimously approved the expenditure for network switches.

Council/Administrator Communications

There are multiple opportunities for councilmembers and the city administrator to make announcements on any given agenda.

Communications: Rain

During his communications time, councilmember Mike Anglin (Ward 5) spoke to the heavy rains that hit the area on Aug. 11, specifically the effect on Allen Creek. He said that they really did not know how much water was going through the creek and it had not been adequately studied. He called for a hydrological study to be done.

City administrator Roger Fraser also addressed the Aug. 11 rainstorm and Allen Creek specifically during his communications. He noted that it was a short rainfall – about 45 minutes – but intense. Parts of the city received over an inch of rain during that 45-minute period, he said. Allen Creek’s flow rose from about 3.5 cubic feet per second to 380 cubic ft/sec. He described the ponding on city streets as what would be expected during an event of that intensity. He noted that sanitary sewer backups had been reported at four addresses in the Parkwood and Oakwood area, which was similar to a June 11 storm.

Communications: Punk Week

Roger Fraser indicated that there was an “interesting array of young people dancing around the north part of downtown.”

Dave DeVarti, former city councilmember and former member of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority board, before the shopping cart race, which was held the day after the Aug. 16 council meeting. DeVarti's participation was prompted by city administrator Roger Fraser's comments at the council meeting, DeVarti said.

He described the phenomenon as happening for four years in a row – there’s a shopping cart race that is the hallmark of the group, he said, which is conducted late at night down Main Street. In describing the shopping cart race, Fraser paused for a moment to consider word choice, then opted for “borrow” to describe how participants sourced the shopping carts for the race.

He contended that it started out as just that race about four years ago, but that it had evolved to the point that it’s become quite a nuisance. [Editor's note: The activity seems to enjoy a much longer history than four years.]

None of the activity has received permits from the city, and this year, Fraser said, he’d determined to take a look at every aspect of the activities.

To the extent that permits are required, he said, people who are known to be connected with or sponsor the event will be advised that they must comply with the standards for permits before they’ll be granted a permit.

Among the problems listed out by Fraser were bands playing at late hours into the night, people sleeping in the streets, and other “unmentionable activities” in the city parks.

Police officers have been actively involved in quelling the “melees” and citizens have suggested that things have gotten out of hand, Fraser said. The required permit for the shopping cart race would be for a parade or other competitive event.

From the city code:

10:152. Parades and competitive events.

(1) As used in this section, “parade” means any procession of 25 or more persons or vehicles in City streets. It includes noncompetitive bikeathons and walkathons but does not include funerals, picketing at a single location or processions of less than 50 persons on sidewalks and in compliance with traffic-control signals.

Communications: Library Lot Update

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), as chair of the Library Lot RFP review committee, gave an update on progress in reviewing development proposals for the city-owned Library Lot, where an underground parking structure is being built. Background research is being conducted by the consultant – previously reported by The Chronicle as the Roxbury Group. The consultant will be meeting with both of the two remaining proposers, he said, with the meetings not expected to be completed until mid-September.

Other Public Comment

Kim Kachadoorian appeared before the council with the largest visual aid of anyone in The Chronicle’s memory, a large tree branch that had fallen out of a silver maple tree [on the public right of way] on a nice sunny day. If the branch had hit a person, she warned, they’d be dead.

Kim Kachadoorian provides convincing evidence that the tree on the public right of way in front of her house is not healthy.

She’s been told by the city over and over that the silver maple is healthy. But the tree is rotting from the inside out, she said. She handed around samples of the rotted wood to the councilmembers. She said she called the city about it frequently, but they seldom came out to look. The tree’s roots are also causing the sidewalk to buckle, she said, so she can’t get a contractor to repair her sidewalk.

Today, she reported, someone from the city had finally come out to look at the tree. In 2006, she said, the city had come out to chop the tree down, but on inspection the city crew said the tree was tangled up in AT&T’s and Edison’s wires, and said there was nothing they could do about it until those companies do something about it. But AT&T and Edison told her they would not do anything until the city schedules a crew to chop it down.

Kachadoorian also told the council that the neighborhoods in the area of Madison and Main were not issued a red alert in connection with the armed robbers who fled the scene of a jewelry store robbery recently. An alert had come through the University of Michigan public safety department, she said, but not through the city’s system.

Thomas Partridge saluted the people who had received the mayoral proclamations at the start of the meeting, and called on the council to look at motorized and non-motorized transportation not just inside the city but also in the surrounding townships.

Proclamations

Three mayoral proclamations were made.

Local Food Month

The mayoral proclamation on local food declared September as Local Food Month in Ann Arbor. Organizers of the HomeGrown Festival, who accepted the proclamation, invited councilmembers and anyone watching the meeting to attend the Sept. 11 event, which runs from 6-11 p.m. at the Ann Arbor Farmers Market.

Women’s Equality Day

Mayor John Hieftje presented a proclamation declaring Aug. 23 “Women’s Equality Day” and called on everyone to observe this date with appropriate programs, activities and ceremonies supporting this year’s theme, which is “Vote!”

Eunice Burns accepted the mayoral proclamation establishing Women's Equality Day on Aug. 23.

Appearing in period costume – with sashes emblazoned with the word “vote” – was a group led by Eunice Burns, who addressed the council, reminding them that women had enjoyed the right to vote for not all that long, only 90 years.

She noted that her mother was 25 years old when she first got the opportunity to vote.

Burns invited councilmembers to attend the celebration at Washtenaw Community College on Aug. 23.

She said she believed that Michigan was the second state to ratify the 19th amendment, and that we could be proud of that.

Of possible related interest to Chronicle readers is a column that local history columnist Laura Bien wrote this past April: “In the Archives: The Male Suffragette”

Parks Volunteers: First Martin

John Teeter of First Martin Corp. was on hand to receive the city’s appreciation for the work that First Martin has done in Wheeler Park, Liberty Plaza, and Depot Park – planting flowers, weeding, trimming trees and grass.

The Chronicle previously reported the efforts of First Martin in connection with Liberty Plaza, as those efforts relate thematically to the ongoing discussions between the city and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.

Those discussions are focused on revisions to the contract under which the DDA manages the parking system. From “Parking Deal Talks Open Between City, DDA“:

However, following up on some information from an audience member at the meeting, The Chronicle spoke by phone with John Teeter of First Martin Corp. about First Martin’s current supplement of maintenance in two Ann Arbor parks – Wheeler Park just north of the DDA district, and Liberty Plaza at the corner of Division & Liberty, located squarely in the DDA district.

According to Teeter, First Martin paid for the tree trimming at Wheeler Park this year and is handling the mowing, trimming and edging through this year’s mowing season. They’ve also repaired the steel fence around the playground area. In Liberty Plaza there’s no area to be mowed, but First Martin will be taking care of the tree trimming as soon as the holiday lights are taken down. In addition, the trash collection in the plaza has been added to a First Martin employee’s task list.

The two parks are not accidental choices of First Martin as locations where the real estate company thought about helping to supplement city services. Wheeler Park is located directly across from First Martin offices on Depot Street. And Liberty Plaza adjoins a First Martin property – the Michigan Square Building at 330 E. Liberty. The plaza was built at the same time as the building. First Martin takes an interest in neighborhoods where they operate, Teeter said.

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

Absent: Christopher Taylor.

Next council meeting: Tuesday, Sept. 7, 2010 at 7 p.m. in council chambers, 2nd floor of the Guy C. Larcom, Jr. Municipal Building, 100 N. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]