Aerial map showing a possible location – the purple trapezoid outline – for a dog park in West Park. The image is oriented with south at the top. North Seventh Street runs on the right side of this image, on the west side of the park. (Map by city staff, included in the park advisory commission’s meeting packet.)

No action was taken, and a PAC committee will continue to evaluate 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.

Another PAC committee, focused on developing recommendations for a possible downtown park, gave only a brief update. Its next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, March 5. However, commissioners heard from four people during public commentary who advocated for a new park atop the city’s Library Lane underground parking structure on South Fifth Avenue. Part of the commentary covered a proposal to build a temporary ice-skating rink on that site.

Commissioners also recommended approval of several contracts totaling over $180,000. The contracts cover landscaping work at multiple locations, golf cart leases, custodial work at Cobblestone Farm, renovations at Esch Park, and rental of an overflow parking lot for the Argo canoe livery. The landscaping work is being funded through a donation from the Henrietta Feldman Trust.

And in his monthly report, parks and recreation manager Colin Smith informed commissioners about a strategy the city is pursuing to deal with invasive aquatic plants – primarily Eurasian watermilfoil – at Geddes Pond.

New Dog Park

A report from PAC’s dog park committee turned into an extensive discussion on the topic. By way of brief background, at PAC’s Dec. 18, 2012 meeting, commissioners had recommended locating a new dog park in West Park, in a spot across from New Hope Baptist Church. But because of concerns raised by church members, the recommendation was never put on the city council agenda and that location – by the parking lot off of Chapin Street – was abandoned earlier this year, when it was removed from the city council’s Jan. 22, 2013 agenda.

So the dog park committee – Ingrid Ault, Missy Stults and Karen Levin – met again with park planner Amy Kuras. They visited and evaluated three sites that had been among the top five locations previously identified as suitable for a possible new dog park. The goal is to find a location more centrally located than the city’s two legal off-leash dog parks in Ann Arbor, at Olson Park and Swift Run – on the far north and south sides of the city.

The locations visited by the committee were:

• A different part of West Park, on a roughly 1-acre knoll in the south-central area.
• About 2 acres in and near South Maple Park, on the city’s west side off of West Liberty.
• Just under an acre at city-owned land at the northwest corner of Crest and Bemidiji.

Each of these sites had been on the short list of locations that were previously considered for a dog park. Committee members had evaluated the three sites, scoring each site based on location, size, shade, parking, water access, neighborhood buffer, surface grading (minimal slopes), and potential conflicts with other uses on the site. The ratings are on a scale of 1 to 5, from best to worst. [.pdf of scoring and maps for the potential dog park locations]

At PAC’s Feb. 26 meeting, Kuras told commissioners that subsequent conversations with city staff have eliminated the Crest/Bemidiji site from consideration. It’s a former landfill, and for that and other reasons, the city’s utilities department – which is responsible for the site – did not support using it as a dog park.

The utilities department also has plans for the South Maple site, where a water tower might be built at some point, Kuras reported. But city staff felt that a dog park could co-exist with a water tower, so that site remains a possibility. The positives are that it’s a large area well-buffered from neighbors, and is in an underserved part of town. However, there isn’t much parking available there, and that’s an issue that would need to be addressed, Kuras said.

Ingrid Ault, PAC’s vice chair, led the Feb. 26 meeting in the absence of chair Julie Grand, who was on jury duty. Ault reviewed the agenda with parks and recreation manager Colin Smith before the meeting began.

The West Park spot is more centrally located to the downtown, and in a part of the park that is near to only one home – although it would be somewhat near the back yards of houses along North Seventh Street.

Neither of the sites have lighting nearby. That was an advantage of the previously identified site at West Park, where the nearby parking lot provided ambient lighting.

PAC talked about how to proceed, with the committee planning to meet again to make a recommendation to the full commission. There would also need to be public meetings with neighbors and a revised budget, because the sites being considered now are larger than the previous half-acre lot off of Chapin.

Tim Doyle encouraged staff to conduct a survey of current dog park users, to get feedback about existing parks that might be useful in creating a new one.

Christopher Taylor wondered how the site at West Park is currently being used. Kuras replied that the uses are mostly informal –  saying it’s not a location where organized sports are programmed.

Tim Berla wondered whether the new site at West Park was too far away from parking for people to use. His observations were that people preferred to drive to the other dog parks. Kuras thought that the parking – either in the Chapin lot, or on North Seventh – was sufficiently close. She didn’t think it would be a barrier. If that’s the location chosen, the city would need to put in a path to reach the dog park, she said. Graydon Krapohl noted that it’s in more of a residential area than the other two dog parks, so people might be more likely to walk there.

Berla also questioned whether PAC needed to get a broader perspective, perhaps by looking at a larger number of possible sites and identifying how many total dog parks the city should have. Colin Smith noted that this effort is following up on a goal in the city’s parks and recreation open space (PROS) plan – which PAC approved – that identified the need for a centrally located dog park. It’s not clear how to answer the question of how many dog parks the city should have, Smith said.

Commissioners discussed concerns that neighbors might raise about being close to a dog park. Doyle suggested that PAC consider finding a location away from residential areas, perhaps near a highway so that traffic noise would drown out noise from the dog park. If the point is to add a new dog park, the city might need to give up the idea of one that’s centrally located, he said.

From left: Christopher Taylor, Tim Doyle, and Bob Galardi.

Stults strongly disagreed that the idea is just to add a dog park, and she stressed the importance of the central location. For her, the South Maple location wouldn’t fit that description. She also noted that it doesn’t need to be an either/or decision. When Doyle then suggested pursuing both the South Maple and West Park locations simultaneously, Smith cautioned that the city didn’t want to move forward on anything that it didn’t have adequate funding.

Krapohl wondered what the costs would be, other than the initial start-up expenses. Jeff Straw, the city’s deputy parks and rec manager, reported that the Swift Run dog park, which is operated in partnership with the Washtenaw County parks & recreation commission, had $25,000 in expenses for calendar year 2012. Those costs include mowing, trash removal and general maintenance. Straw noted that Swift Run is fairly large – about 10 acres – which makes a difference in expenses.

Alan Jackson pointed out that mowing already occurs at the West Park location, so he wondered if there would be any additional increase in expenses by adding the dog park. Parks staff indicated that some efficiencies would be seen because mowing and trash pickup already occur at West Park. Smith again noted that a budget would need to be developed, depending on the location identified.

Public Commentary: Library Lane Park

Four people spoke during public commentary at PAC’s Feb. 26 meeting, all of them advocating for a park on the top of the Library Lane underground parking structure. The South Fifth Avenue site is owned by the city, adjacent to the downtown Ann Arbor District Library building and across from the Blake Transit Center.

Aaron Hammer told commissioners he lives in Ward 5 and has a background in landscape architecture. He focused his remarks on the load-bearing capacity for part of the Library Lane area – the part of the site that does not include footings for a large building. He was attempting to show how much soil and plant material could be supported on the site. Information provided as part of the city’s previous request for proposals (RFP) for that site indicated that it can accommodate 18 inches of soil, Hammer said, and that accommodating an additional 18 inches of soil beyond that would require further analysis. Average soil weights are between 75-100 pounds per cubic foot, he said, so a cubic yard of topsoil will cover 100 square feet with a depth of 3 inches. That translates roughly to between 19-25 pounds per square foot. So the structure can support about 150 pounds per square foot – the weight for 18 inches of soil.

Mary Hathaway addressed the Ann Arbor park advisory commission at their Feb. 26 meeting to advocate for a park on top of the Library Lane underground parking structure.

Factoring in the weight of crushed gravel and stone that’s already on the site, it would be possible to remove the surface parking and replace it with plantings and trees with shallow root systems, Hammer contended. He thought that more questions could be asked about the information in the RFP as well as the construction documents, which show the site in more detail. In addition to being a great green outdoor common space, it could be a live, environmentally-respecting, useable green roof, he concluded.

Mary Hathaway said she was speaking as a member of the Library Green Conservancy and as a former chair of the Ann Arbor historic district commission. She was there to address what she described as two fallacies put forward by opponents of a park on top of the Library Lane structure. Opponents say that the site isn’t suitable for a park because the existing structures wouldn’t face the park, she said. The second fallacy is that new construction would be forbidden under historic district ordinances. “Both of these arguments are false,” she said. There’s nothing in the law that would prevent existing buildings from opening their rear facades to face a new park, Hathaway said. New entries, porches, balconies and decks could seize this opportunity, she added, and would bring the buildings enhanced value.

Also, the historic districts on the block would not prevent new development from occurring, Hathaway said. She showed a drawing that indicated the location of buildings that are part of historic districts – five houses on South Division; a carriage house on East William; three houses on East Liberty, west of Seva restaurant; and three buildings on South Fifth, including those that house Jerusalem Garden and Earthen Jar.

These houses can’t be demolished, she said, but changes are allowed in the rear. Not part of an historic district are the Ann Arbor District library building on South Fifth; the University of Michigan Credit Union building on East William; and the Michigan Square building on East Liberty, next to Liberty Plaza. The Denali condos and the Seva restaurant building on East Liberty are technically within an historic district, she noted, but are classified as “non-contributing” structures and as such could be demolished or replaced.

Hathaway mentioned the “proximity principle,” which predicts increased value of land near public parks. A park at the Library Lane location would encourage redevelopment of properties that aren’t protected by an historic district, she said. The conservancy hopes that a new park and redevelopment of that area would create a vibrant setting for downtown.

Odile Hugenot Haber told commissioners that she’s French, and in Paris there are many parks where you can sit on a bench and meet older people who live in your neighborhood, watch children play, see people walking their dogs – there is social life going on. In Ann Arbor, many people work all day in front of a computer, she said, so it’s nice to walk downtown and have some place to meet your friends. She said she couldn’t think of a better place for that to happen than next to the library. You could check out or return your books, meet a friend in an area where there’s grass and a waterfall, she said, with maybe a concrete ping pong table or place for people to play chess. It would be an interactive urban park.

This kind of thing is happening in other cities, she noted. “I don’t know why Ann Arbor is so stuck in the ’50s.” People want to destroy old buildings and just put in more parking. The city wants to attract people to live downtown, she noted, but why would people want to do that if there’s no place to walk around and see green space? A lot of people she knows would like to see a playground next to the library – there’s a big demand for it, she said. “Why not go for it?”

Alan Haber distributes material about a proposed skating rink on top of the Library Lane parking structure.

Alan Haber spoke next, focusing his comments on a proposal for an ice-skating rink on top of the Library Lane structure, using artificial ice. The site won’t be developed for quite a while, he said, so in the short-term there could be a skating rink there. It would be a way to indicate how people like using that space. Haber said that people have already pledged money toward this project, and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority has been asked to make a contribution too. The Library Green Conservancy is also making this proposal to the city council, he said. [.pdf of handout given to PAC on skating rink proposal]

Skating is a lot of fun, he said, and even people who don’t skate have expressed enthusiasm for it. He called it “public art in motion.” The project is a good idea, and he hoped PAC could make a statement as a body or individually to the city council, urging them to give it a try for just two months. It could even continue into the summer, because artificial ice doesn’t require freezing, he said. Or the ice could come off and the platform underneath could be used as a dance floor.

As commissioners look at the issue of where a downtown park should be, he said, this would be a great project to support on an interim basis and would generate a lot of community involvement.

Downtown Parks

Commissioners did not discuss the public commentary on the proposed park atop the Library Lane parking structure. However, there was a brief update regarding work of a subcommittee that’s developing recommendations on the need for downtown parks. [For background, see Chronicle coverage: "Committee Begins Research on Downtown Parks."]

The next subcommittee meeting is set for Tuesday, March 5 at 4 p.m. in the council workroom at city hall. The meeting of PAC’s land acquisition committee, which typically meets at that time, has been canceled. Parks and recreation manager Colin Smith reported that after March 5, the subcommittee will be meeting every two weeks, and will begin posting information about its work online.

Subcommittee 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. The meetings are also open to the public.

Landscaping Contract

A contract to do plantings and other landscaping work at several parks in Ann Arbor was on PAC’s agenda for review. The $53,248 contract with Terra Firma Inc. would be for plantings at Cobblestone Farm, Gallup Park Livery, Huron Hills Golf Course Club House, Leslie Park Golf Course entrance, and the Veterans Park Pool and Ice Arena entrance.

The work would be funded through a $112,442 donation from the Henrietta Feldman Trust. Terra Firm submitted the lowest of two qualified bids, coming in under a $103,695 bid from Crimboli Nursery Inc. The contract with Terra Firm will include a 10% contingency of $5,325, bringing the project total to $58,573.

The contract will include maintenance for two planting seasons, including watering, weeding, and replacing dead plants. It will also cover maintenance of plantings made in the fall of 2012 by volunteers at Bryant Community Center, Northside Community Center, the Ann Arbor Senior Center, Fuller Park and Buhr Park Pool and Ice Arena. Those plantings were also funded by the Feldman Trust, which also paid for work to design all of these plantings. That work was done by InSite Design Studio, an Ann Arbor landscape architecture firm. [.pdf of InSite designs for park plantings]

Diagram of proposed landscaping at Buhr Park, designed by InSite Design Studio of Ann Arbor.

Amy Kuras, the city’s park planner, gave a presentation to PAC about the proposed work, including before and after photos of plantings that volunteers have already done. She noted that the Ann Arbor Rotary paid for plantings at three of the sites.

Parks and recreation manager Colin Smith said it’s important to note that there are people in the community who support the parks system – this landscaping project is an example of that. He also cited the previous donation made for improvements at South University Park. [Leslie and Michael Morris made that donation in 2011. See Chronicle coverage: "Couple Gives $50,000 for Ann Arbor Park."]

Smith told commissioners that these efforts make a big difference in the appearance of the parks, which over the years have been affected by budget cuts. He pointed out that several years ago, the city employed a horticulturalist – but that position had been cut. So to have a funding source like the Feldman Trust is really outstanding, he said, and will make the parks look better and more colorful.

Landscaping Contract: Commission Discussion

Missy Stults asked whether the plantings would be robust enough for this climate, and whether they would be native plantings. Kuras replied that InSite was known for its work with native species. The firm had designed the rain garden at city hall, for example. But because of soil and aesthetic considerations, the plantings will be a mix of native plants and cultivars, she said.

Ingrid Ault observed the variation in bid amounts made by Terra Firma and Crimboli Nursery. Kuras said it wasn’t clear why there was such a difference in price. She noted that when the Terra Firma representative saw the other bid, he wondered if his own bid had been too low. Sometimes firms will bid low if they want to get work for the first time with the city, Kuras said. But that’s not the case in this situation, so she didn’t know why.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously voted to recommend awarding the landscaping contract to Terra Firma. The contract requires city council approval.

Esch Park Upgrades

Commissioners were asked to recommend approval of a $39,219 contract with D&J Contracting for improvements to the 4.5-acre Esch Park, located off Fenwick between Packard and Eisenhower Parkway on the city’s south side. The contract would include a 10% construction contingency of $3,922, bringing the total project to $43,141.

The city received 12 bids on the project, which entails repairing an asphalt walk and game court, adding pathways to the playground that will make the area compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and installing picnic tables, benches and shade trees. The bids ranged from a high of $106,904 by DRV Contractors to the lowest bid, which came from D&J Contracting.

The project would be paid for out of the fiscal 2013 park maintenance and capital improvements millage.

Park planner Amy Kuras gave a presentation on the work. She characterized it as a fairly simple project, but noted that neighbors were excited about it. [.pdf showing location and features of Esch Park]

Esch Park Upgrades: Commission Discussion

Alan Jackson said it seemed like a nice project, but he wondered what kind of public process had been involved. Kuras explained that it was a three-step process, including an initial public meeting, a questionnaire sent to residents, and a follow-up communication to residents with proposed drawings that showed the work to be done. She noted that the project had been initially spurred in response to complaints from residents about the park’s condition.

Bob Galardi pointed out the wide variance in the bids, and wondered why that had occurred. Kuras said she’d also been baffled by that, given that it’s a straightforward project. She didn’t know why the bids had come in at such different levels.

Responding to a question about her experience working with D&J, Kuras reported that she had worked with D&J on other city projects, including renovation of a bridge at Bandemer Park and work on pathways at Buhr Park.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously voted to recommend awarding the Esch Park improvements contract to D&J Contracting. The contract requires city council approval.

Golf Cart Leases

On the agenda was a resolution to award a two-year contract for leasing golf carts at Huron Hills and Leslie Park golf courses. The contract with Pifer Inc. – for up to $40,260 – covers the leasing of 65 golf carts for the 2013 and 2014 seasons, with an option to renew for 2015.

Doug Kelly, the city of Ann Arbor’s director of golf.

Part of the deal includes selling 24 city-owned golf carts to the company. That sale is a trade-in of nine-year-old carts that are no longer suitable to rent, and will be used to offset the new lease.

The city received four bids for this contract, from Club Car-Midwest Golf & Turf; Ellis Sales Inc.; Michigan Tournament Fleet; and Pifer. Club Car submitted the highest bid at $124,113 with a trade-in offer of $28,800 for a net cost of $95,313 over two years.

Pfier was the lowest responsible bidder. The lease cost of $75,600 will be offset by the trade-in valued at $35,400, for a net bid of $40,260 – or $20,130 per year.

According to a staff memo, golf cart rental at Huron Hills and Leslie Park generated about $250,000 in revenue for the city during fiscal year 2012.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, explained that in 2009, the city council authorized buying a fleet of golf carts that the city had been leasing. Since then, those carts have been supplemented with additional carts leased during the season, but at an amount that didn’t trigger the need for council approval. Now, the carts are too old to continue using, he said, so they’re being sold to Pifer to “retire to Florida for less intensive use.” That trade-in aspect makes this particular contract more complicated than it would normally be, he said.

He noted that the current FY 2013 budget includes a $45,000 line item for golf carts. So the good news is that there will be substantial savings, he said, because the lease is for $20,130 per year.

Golf Cart Leases: Commission Discussion

Tim Doyle asked how much a new golf cart would cost. Doug Kelly, the city’s director of golf, replied that the cost would be about $6,000.

Karen Levin asked why the city was leasing, rather than buying. Colin Smith explained that the current carts are gas-powered. Eventually, the city would like to explore moving to electric carts, but the infrastructure for that – such as charging stations – isn’t in place yet. The city’s capital improvements plan (CIP) includes the infrastructure for electric vehicles in the future, Smith said, so the staff is recommending a short-term lease until the transition from gas to electric can be made.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously voted to recommend awarding the golf cart leasing contract to Pifer. The contract requires city council approval.

Custodial Contract at Cobblestone

Commissioners were asked to review a three-year contract with Magic Finish to provide custodial and event services at Cobblestone Farm. The contract would not exceed $44,250 annually, from fiscal year 2013 through fiscal year 2016. It would include an option to renew administratively for an additional two years at an amount not to exceed $47,200.

From left: Ann Arbor park advisory commissioners Tim Berla and Alan Jackson.

Four firms bid on the contract, according to a staff memo, but two of those bidders – Kristel Cleaning and Pristine Cleaning – were disqualified. Magic Finish submitted a lower bid than H & K Janitorial Services, which had bid $47,695 for the first year and $51,280 in each of the subsequent two years.

The city-owned Cobblestone Farm, located at 2781 Packard, is used as office space for the parks and recreation customer service staff and GIVE 365 volunteer program. Event space is rented to hold public meetings and special events, including weddings.

Parks staff noted that revenue generated by the facility is growing, and reached $342,000 in 2012. Although cleaning and set-up services have been used in previous years, the amount now required has grown to the point that the contract triggered the need for city council approval.

Jeff Straw, the city’s deputy parks and rec manager, reported that Cobblestone Farm hosts about 160 events each year. This year, the facility is booked every Friday, Saturday and Sunday from April through mid-November.

Custodial Contract at Cobblestone: Commission Discussion

Tim Doyle asked whether the city provides staffing for events held at Cobblestone Farm, or if the renter brings in outside staff for services like catering. Straw replied that the city provides a staff person to oversee the building during the event, but the renter is responsible for everything else, like catering, DJ, and other amenities.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously voted to recommend awarding the custodial contract to Magic Finish. The contract requires city council approval.

Parking for Argo Canoe Livery

A $3,000 lease to accommodate overflow parking for the Argo canoe livery was on PAC’s Feb. 26 agenda for review. The lease of a parking lot at 416 Longshore Drive – with about 40 spaces – will cover Saturdays, Sundays and holidays from May 25 to Sept. 2, 2013, with an option to renew administratively for two successive one-year periods.

City parks staff reported that the overflow parking at this lot had been used during the 2012 season, and they recommended continuing the lease. According to city records, the land is owned by the Stewardship Network.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, noted that even though the amount is low, the city’s charter requires that any land contract must be approved by the city council.

Parking for Argo Canoe Livery: Commission Discussion

Ingrid Ault asked how the use of this lot is monitored. Smith said that the lot owners have asked the city to put signs up to indicate when the lot is available for the public. The owners would call the city if there are any problems, he said, but so far there hadn’t been any issues.

Bob Galardi wondered if there was sufficient parking, even with this overflow lot. Jeff Straw, deputy parks and recreation manager, reported that the extra lot helps, but parking is still a challenge as the use of the canoe livery grows. He clarified for Galardi that people come to that area both to rent from the canoe livery as well as to use the public boat launch for their own canoes or kayaks.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously recommended approval of the parking lot rental. The contract requires city council approval.

Manager’s Report

Colin Smith, manager of Ann Arbor parks and recreation, gave commissioners an update on plans to deal with aquatic plants at Geddes Pond.

Colin Smith, manager of parks and recreation for the city of Ann Arbor.

Last year, city staff hired a company to harvest excess vegetation in July near the Gallup Park canoe livery. The main problem is with Eurasian watermilfoil, an invasive plant that makes it difficult for people to use paddleboats or canoe on that part of the pond. In addition to the difficulty of using that area and the aesthetics, the vegetation increases the rate of sedimentation, reduces water clarity, and is perceived as unsafe.

This year, the city staff are proposing to harvest the vegetation three times, and are preparing a request for proposals (RFP) to hire a company to do the work. The parks staff is working with the city’s staff in natural areas preservation and water quality, as well as with the city’s environmental coordinator, Smith said. He referred commissioners to a staff memo with more information. [.pdf of staff memo]

Alan Jackson reported that he’d talked with Andy Buchsbaum, regional executive director of the National Wildlife Federation’s Great Lakes Natural Resources Center in Ann Arbor. Buchsbaum had expressed skepticism about this approach, Jackson said, and had hoped that the city would pursue other alternatives.

Smith responded, saying that the city staff who’ve looked at this have a wide range of expertise and had explored a variety of options. They had also consulted with Laura Rubin, executive director of the Huron River Watershed Council. Approaches like dredging would require getting state permits and would be quite costly, he said, although that might be something to consider in the future. Smith also noted that the harvesting approach is used by other park systems, including the Huron-Clinton Metroparks.

Manager’s Report: Budget, Conference

Smith also reported that the budget process for fiscal year 2014 is underway, and for the first time in years, no budget reductions are proposed, he said. The outlook for fiscal 2015 is less clear, he added, but still encouraging. [The city's fiscal year runs from July 1 through June 30.]

Smith will meet with PAC’s finance committee – Tim Doyle and Bob Galardi – then bring the budget for parks and recreation to PAC’s April meeting for review and a recommendation to the city council. The council will vote on the entire city budget in May.

Smith also reported that he’d be attending the Michigan Recreation & Parks Association conference in Lansing later in the week, along with some of the other city parks staff. Gayle Hurn, the city’s outreach coordinator for the Give 365 program, will be making a presentation at the conference about outreach efforts, he said.

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

Absent: Julie Grand.

Next meeting: PAC’s meeting on Tuesday, March 19, 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.

The work would be funded through a $112,442 donation from the Henrietta Feldman Trust. Terra Firm submitted the lowest of two qualified bids, coming in under a $103,695 bid from Crimboli Nursery Inc. The contract with Terra Firm will include a 10% contingency of $5,325, bringing the project total to $58,573.

The contract will include maintenance for two planting seasons, including watering, weeding, and replacing dead plants. It will also cover maintenance of plantings made in the fall of 2012 by volunteers at Bryant Community Center, Northside Community Center, the Ann Arbor Senior Center, Fuller Park and Buhr Park Pool and Ice Arena. Those plantings were also funded by the Feldman Trust. Also funded by the trust was work to design all of these plantings. That work was done by InSite Design Studio, an Ann Arbor landscape architecture firm. [.pdf of InSite designs for park plantings]

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

The exemptions were prompted when the three projects requested administrative amendments – changes that can be made at the staff level – to previously approved site plans. Those projects are: (1) a 184-square-foot addition to the Gallup One Stop gas station and convenience store at 2955 Packard Road; (2) a 3,231-square-foot third-floor addition to the University of Michigan Credit Union at 340 E. Huron St. (formerly the Ann Arbor News building); and (3) reconfiguration of parking lots for a Glacier Hills planned project Life Enrichment Center addition, at 1200 Earhart Road.

The planning commission’s approval on Tuesday means that existing landscaping plans that were previously authorized at these sites can remain in place, even though the plans now don’t conform to a new landscaping ordinance.

Prior to recent revisions of the city’s landscape ordinance, these exemptions would not have required planning commission approval and would have been handled at the staff level. The landscaping ordinance changes got final approval at the city council’s June 20, 2011 meeting.

This brief was filed from city hall’s council chambers at 301 E. Huron St., where the planning commission meets. A more detailed report will follow: [link]

Mayor John Hieftje (standing) and interim city administrator Tom Crawford before the start of the city council's June 6 meeting.

For road users who head to the polls on Nov. 8, possibly the most important issue on the agenda was a brief presentation from the city’s project management manager, Homayoon Pirooz, on the city’s street repair tax, which would reach the end of its current five-year life this year, if not renewed by voters. The city council will convene a working session on June 13 to look at the issue in more detail.

Also related to infrastructure was the council’s initial action on setting rates for utilities (water, sewer, stormwater), voting unanimously to send the rate increases on to a second and final vote with a public hearing. The rate increases range from 3-4% more than customers are currently paying. All new and amended city ordinances require two votes by the council at separate meetings.

The council also approved an $800,000 agreement with the Michigan Dept. of Transportation for the initial, right-of-way portion of the East Stadium bridges replacement project. Construction on that public project is due to start later this fall.

For another public project, the council voted to add a previously budgeted $1.09 million to the construction manager contract for the new municipal center at Fifth and Huron.

In an action designed eventually to reduce employee benefits costs, the council passed a resolution – brought forward by its budget committee – that directs the city administrator to craft an ordinance revision that would alter the way non-union employee benefits are structured. What’s planned is a change from three to five years for the final average compensation (FAC) calculation, and a change from five to 10 years for vesting. In addition, retirees would receive an access-only health care benefit.

The city’s newest non-union employee is Chuck Hubbard, whose appointment as the new fire chief was approved by the city council on Monday night. Hubbard was previously assistant chief, which, unlike the chief’s job, is a union position. Hubbard has 25 years of fire protection experience, all of it in Ann Arbor.

Expected to begin construction this year – in late summer – is a private development on the First and Washington lot currently owned by the city. On that lot, Village Green is planning to build a 9-story, 99-foot-tall building featuring 156 dwelling units and a 244-space parking deck on the first two stories. After much discussion, the council approved a $100,000 reduction in the purchase price – from $3.3 million to $3.2 million – that Village Green will pay for the First and Washington parcel. The price break came in the context of water management and a decision to use a full “bathtub”-type design for the foundation. The unanimous vote came after two councilmembers had already left the meeting (which pushed nearly to midnight), but it seemed at one point to hang in the balance, with two of the remaining nine councilmembers expressing reservations. Because the resolution involved land purchase, it needed eight votes to pass.

Village Green’s project, a planned unit development (PUD) approved over two years ago, was not required to undergo the mandatory process of design review that is now part of the city’s code. The council gave final approval to that design review process on Monday night. The new ordinance sets up a seven-member design review board (DRB) to provide developers with feedback on their projects’ conformance to the design guidelines. While the DRB process is required, conformance with the recommendations of that body is voluntary.

Also receiving approval at first reading was a revision to the landscaping ordinance. Fuller Road Station also drew comment from the public and the council.

Final action on medical marijuana zoning and licensing is not expected until the council’s June 20 meeting. Council deliberations on medical marijuana will be covered in Part 2 of The Chronicle’s meeting report.

Ann Arbor Street Millage Renewal Planned

The council received a brief presentation setting out a timeline for renewing the city’s street repair millage, which is currently authorized through 2011 at a level of 2 mills, but is levied at 1.9944 due to the Headlee cap. One mill equals $1 for every $1,000 of a property’s state equalized value, or SEV. Renewal of the millage would need voter approval on Nov. 8, 2011.

As part of the council’s budget retreat discussion in January 2011, councilmembers briefly discussed the idea of folding the city’s sidewalk replacement program – for which property owners now pay directly – into the activities funded by the street repair millage.

And at a budget work session in late February, public services area administrator Sue McCormick outlined how funds received through the METRO Act, which are currently used for administration of the sidewalk replacement program, could be used to close out the 5-year cycle for the current program. Then in future years, the METRO funds could be used for other work in the right-of-way. METRO funds are paid to the city under state statute for use of the right-of-way by telecommunications companies.

The street reconstruction millage is listed as CITY STREETS on tax bills.

The short briefing that the council received on Monday was given by Homayoon Pirooz, who heads up the city’s project management department. He described how the millage actually has 27 years of history, dating back to 1984, when it was first approved. Over the years, the funds collected under the local street millage have generated an additional $67 million in matching grants.

The street repair millage has criteria attached to the use of funds, Pirooz explained: The street repair millage is for resurfacing and reconstruction of streets – it’s not for filling potholes. [The city has two other funds it uses for that kind of maintenance work, including snow removal – the Major Street and Local Street funds, which receive money from the state of Michigan through vehicle weight and gas taxes.]

One of the new ideas for the street repair millage when it’s put before the voters again, Pirooz said, is to include sidewalk repairs as part of the criteria. If the public is in favor of that, he said, the city would like to apply the same approach as it does to roads. Namely, the millage would not be used for winter maintenance, but rather for replacing existing sidewalks.

Pirooz sketched a timeline for the public discussion on the street repair millage – including the possibility of increasing it to 2.125 mills to accommodate the sidewalk replacement program. That timeline would include two public meetings in June, a city council work session on June 13, and an online survey. At the council’s July 18 meeting, they’d hear a report on the public engagement, and the city council would give direction on how to proceed. At the council’s Aug. 4 meeting, it could then approve the ballot language, which needs to be submitted to the city clerk’s office by Aug. 16.

Mayor John Hieftje noted that there’s now an opportunity to release money in the street repair fund that the city thought it might have to use to replace the East Stadium bridges. With receipt of a $13.9 million TIGER II federal grant, the city can spend more of the balance in the street repair fund on road repair.

Utility Rate Increases Get Initial OK

On the council’s agenda was a resolution to approve changes in rates for drinking water, sanitary sewer and stormwater facilities. In terms of revenue generated to the city, the rate increases are expected to generate 3.36% more for drinking water ($664,993), 4% more for the sanitary sewer ($829,481), and 3.35% more for stormwater ($176,915).

Because the rates are part of a city ordinance, the changes must receive a second approval from the city council, after a public hearing.

According to the city, the rate increases are needed to maintain debt service coverage and to maintain funding for required capital improvements.

The city’s drinking water charges are based on a “unit” of 100 cubic feet – 748 gallons. Charges for residential customers are divided into tiers, based on usage. For example, the first seven units of water for residential customers are charged $1.23 per unit. The new residential rate for the first seven units would be $1.27.

The city’s stormwater rates are based on the amount of impervious area on a parcel, and are billed quarterly. For example, the lowest tier – for impervious area less than 2,187 square feet – is currently charged $12.84 per quarter. Under the new rate structure, that would increase to $13.24. [.pdf of complete utility rate changes as proposed]

At the council’s Monday meeting, mayor John Hieftje asked public services area administrator Sue McCormick to comment on a study last year showing that Ann Arbor had some of the lowest rates in the state. Ann Arbor’s average increase of 3.2% compares favorably with the regional average of 9% increase this year, McCormick reported.

Councilmember Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) questioned McCormick’s numbers, saying it looked like McCormick was relying on comparative data taken exclusively from communities served by the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department (DWSD). He asked that, when the council votes on the rate increases at its next meeting, councilmembers be provided with additional comparative data.

McCormick said she’d bring comparative data on other communities to the next meeting, before the final vote. Sabra Briere (Ward 1) asked that McCormick bring the actual rates together with percentage increases.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to give initial approval to the utilities rate increases.

East Stadium Bridges

In front of the council for its consideration was authorization of an $800,000 agreement with the Michigan Dept. of Transportation (MDOT) for the right-of-way acquisition phase of the East Stadium bridge reconstruction project. Previously, at its April 4 meeting, the council had accepted easements from the University of Michigan for the right-of-way phase.

To be reimbursed for those easements – from federal TIGER funds that the city has been awarded for the project – the council needed to authorize the agreement with MDOT. MDOT acts as the conduit through which the city receives federal funds.

In August, the city council will be presented with a similar city-state agreement – for the construction phase of the project.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to approve the agreement with MDOT.

Retiree Benefits Change

On Monday, the council considered a resolution directing its city administrator and city attorney to begin work on an amendment to the city’s retirement benefits package for new non-union employee hires.

Under the amendment, for new hires after July 1, 2011, the final average contribution (FAC) for the pension system would be based on the last five years of service, instead of the last three. Further, employees would be vested after 10 years instead of five, and all new non-union hires would be provided with an access-only style health care plan, with the opportunity to buy into whatever plan active employees enjoy.

Christoper Taylor (Ward 3) introduced the resolution to his council colleagues, saying it came through the council’s budget committee that met earlier that day. It has resulted from the hard work of Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), he said. After reviewing the content of the resolution, he stated that the city’s potential financial exposure due to retireee health care is significant, and the resolution was a beginning of the reform.

Taylor asked interim city administrator Tom Crawford if an estimate had been calculated for the savings that would be realized. Crawford told him that no estimate had been generated yet – staff would need to do additional research. Crawford said it’d be 5-7 years before the city sees savings. The nature of the change is long-term, he said, so it’s unlikly to save money in short term.

Taylor asked Crawford to explain what an “access-only” benefit plan is.

[As the phrase suggests, what the retiree gets is access to health care coverage (and only that). Here, "access" means the ability to purchase health coverage as part of the same group to which active city employees belong. The access to insurance as a part of that group allows retirees to purchase health care more economically than they could as individuals.] In his remarks Crawford emphasized that retirees would be able to use money the city sets aside, as well as their own money, to purchase that health care.

Mayor John Hieftje appeared interested in heading off criticism that this kind of reform should have been done years ago, by noting that the city has not hired that many people in the last few years. Given that so few people have been hired, he concluded, the council was acting in a timely fashion.

Stephen Kunselman noted that the city would be hiring at least one person soon – a city administrator. Kunselman wondered whether the benefits policy is intended to be in place before the administrator is hired. Crawford noted that the ordinance would require two readings before the council.

Kunselman wondered about the change in the vesting period from 5 to 10 years. He asked what the vesting period was back in the Neal Berlin days – 10 years seems extreme. [Neal Berlin is a former city administrator, who preceded Roger Fraser.] What about seven years? Kunselman said he wouldn’t necessarily expect a new city administrator to last 10 years. He wouldn’t want to hinder the city’s ability to make a hire.

Crawford told Kunselman that the last major change was when Neal Berlin was city administrator – the vesting period was changed from 10 to 5 years. So the resolution would direct the preparation of an ordinance to restore what was in place previously. City staff could take direction from the council’s labor committee on preparation of the ordinance, Crawford said.

Hieftje said there was a myth that Neal Berlin had received an extraordinarily generous severance deal. In fact, Hieftje said, Berlin had paid $140,000 in order to receive a $26,000-per-year pension. That meant he had to wait six years before getting a return on that, Hieftje said.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to direct staff to begin drafting an ordinance to change the benefits program for non-union employees. The resolution also indicated a goal to include union employees in a similar benefits program.

Ann Arbor Fire Chief

In front of the council for its consideration was authorization to appoint a new fire chief: Chuck Hubbard. Hubbard is an internal hire, who previously served as an assistant chief. His 25 years of experience in fire protection, coming up through the ranks, has all been in Ann Arbor.

Barnett Jones, head of public safety and chief of police, introduced Hubbard to the council with his recommendation. Jones has been serving as interim fire chief since the resignation of Dominick Lanza from that position earlier this year, after a bit less than a year on the job. Lanza had been an external hire.

Hubbard made some brief remarks by way of introducing himself.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to approve the appointment.

Police Promotional Assessments

Items included on the consent agenda, which are normally moved together and voted on as a group, can be pulled out for separate consideration by any councilmember. It’s not uncommon for at least one item to be pulled out for that kind of separate consideration. On Monday, Sandi Smith (Ward 1) asked that an item be pulled out that approved a $35,830 contract with Industrial Organizational Solutions Inc. to conduct promotional assessment of Ann Arbor police department officers for ranks of sergeant and lieutenant.

Chief of police Barnett Jones explained that the item is related to layoffs and retirements – it helps create a clear path for promotions. It’s been a long time since sergeants and lieutents have taken exams, he said. While the department is faced with layoffs now, it will also be experiencing some retirements in the future – around 16-17 by 2013, he said. Some of those who are retiring will be sergeants and lieutenants. The department will need supervisors at those ranks to replace the retirees. He could not simply promote people as he passed people walking down the hall, Jones said. This will be one of the most imporatnt promotional teams in the history of the city. The assessment will contain a written part and and oral interview.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to approve the contract for promotional assessment of police officers.

Landscaping Ordinance Gets Initial OK

On Monday the council was asked to consider initial approval to a revision of the city’s landscaping ordinance. The revision is intended to: (1) improve the appearance of vehicular use areas; (2) revise buffer requirements between conflicting land uses; (3) reduce negative impacts of stormwater runoff; (4) improve pedestrian movement within a development site; and (5) preserve existing significant vegetation.

Those benefits are meant to be achieved through several text amendments to the ordinance, which include: adding definitions for “bioretention” and “native or prairie plantings”; allowing the width of landscape buffers to vary; modifying requirements for interior landscape islands; prohibiting use of invasive species for required landscaping; and increasing fines for violation.

The city’s planning commision had given the ordinance change a unanimous recommendation at its March 1, 2011 meeting.

All city ordinances require a first and a second reading in front of the city council, after a public hearing, before final enactment. The landscape ordinance will need a second vote before its approval is final.

Outcome: The council voted without discussion to give the landscape ordinance change an initial approval.

Downtown Design Guidelines

In front of the council for its consideration was final approval to an amendment of its land use control ordinance that will establish design guidelines for new projects in downtown Ann Arbor, and set up a seven-member design review board (DRB) to provide developers with feedback on their projects’ conformance to the design guidelines. It’s the final piece of the A2D2 rezoning initiative.

Review by the DRB will come before a developer’s meeting with nearby residents for each project – which is already required as part of the citizen participation ordinance. While the DRB process is required, conformance with the recommendations of that body is voluntary.

The city council had previously approved the design guideline review program at its Feb. 7, 2011 meeting. The city planning commission unanimously recommended the change to the city’s ordinance at its April 5, 2011 meeting. [Previous Chronicle coverage, which includes a detailed timeline of the design guidelines work, dating back to a work group formed in 2006: "Ann Arbor Hotel First to Get Design Review?"]

Downtown Design Guidelines: Public Hearing

Thomas Partridge told the council they should use the word “democratic” with a big and a small “D” when considering these items. Too often, he said, an anti-democratic viewpoint is taken. He called on the council to advance the cause of using undeveloped land for mixed-use, including affordable housing. He noted there’d been no new housing cooperatives in the last 30-40 years.

Ray Detter thanked the council for their previous support of the A2D2 rezoning process and urged their support of the design guidelines. He told them he was speaking both as chair of the downtown citizens advisory council and as a member of the design guideline review committee. He reviewed some of the more recent history of the review committee. A group of citizens had formed in late 2009. In February 2010 the council had supported the formation of a design guidelines task force. Then in January 2011, members of task force had presented the outcome of their 34 weekly meetings at a city council working session.

James D’Amour told the council it was exciting to be present when the design guidelines are finally going to be approved. He’d served on the planning commission five years ago when talk about this started, he said. He urged councilmembers to support the proposal.

Downtown Design Guidelines: Council Deliberations

Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) said she thought Detter had summed it up well, and urged her council colleagues to pass it. Mayor  John Hieftje thanked the people who did the work, including Higgins, for seeing it through.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to approve the new downtown design guidelines. The council also received nominations from the mayor for the membership of the design review board, which the council can confirm at its next meeting, on June 20: Tamara Burns, Paul Fontaine, Chester B. Hill, Mary Jukari, Bill Kinley, Richard Mitchell, Geoffrey M. Perkins.

First & Washington Purchase Price

Councilmembers were asked at Monday’s meeting to approve a revision to the purchase option agreement with Village Green on the city-owned First and Washington site, where the developer plans to build a 9-story, 99-foot-tall building with 156 dwelling units. That revision reduces the price from $3.3 million to $3.2 million.

The break on the price is related to the “bathtub” design for the foundation of a 244-space parking deck, which makes up the first two stories of the development. The site of the development is near Allen Creek, and some kind of design strategy is required in order to deal with the possibility of water entering the parking structure. Rather than use a hybrid design that would entail pumping water out of the structure and into the city’s stormwater system on an ongoing basis, Village Green wants to use a complete bathtub-type design that will cost around $250,000. The city’s price break is a portion of that cost.

The parking deck is being developed in cooperation with the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, which has pledged to make payments on around $9 million worth of bonds, after the structure is completed and has been issued a permit for occupancy.

The timeline put in place on Aug. 5, 2010 – when the city council most recently approved an extension of Village Green’s option to purchase the First and Washington city-owned parcel – called for Village Green to purchase the land by June 1, 2011. However, that deadline was subject to an extension of 90 days by the city administrator – an option which interim administrator Tom Crawford exercised. That sets a new deadline of Aug. 30, 2011 for purchase of the parcel. Proceeds from the sale of the land are part of the city’s financing plan for the new municipal center at Fifth and Huron, which is currently in the final stages of construction.

First & Washington Purchase Price: Council Deliberations

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) led off council deliberations by saying that it appeared the council was being asked to reduce the purchase price by $100,000 due to construction issues related to high water. Alluding to the arrangement the DDA has to support the project, he asked why the DDA would not increase that support, instead of having the city reduce the purchase price.

Kunselman then said he wanted to take the opportunity to talk about the DDA. That organization’s 2009-2010 annual report included some telling numbers, he said. The report indicates over $18 million in annual revenue against expenditures of $22 million. Of those expenditures, $5 million is for debt service. The outstanding bond debt is $140 million – of that, $81 million is principle and $59 million interest. The report shows zero dollars in bond reserve. Kunselman noted that the number of jobs created is recorded as “n/a.”

Kunselman asked why the city is “bailing the DDA out for $100,000.” The issue that’s been identified (the bathtub design) is not a property issue, he continued, but rather a construction issue. Kunselman said he was having a difficult time voting for the resolution, but he did not want to see the resolution fail. But he noted that the resolution required eight votes for approval and two councilmembers had left the table.

[Margie Teall (Ward 4) and Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) had left. It was after 11 p.m. Higgins' hoarse voice during the meeting indicated she was under the weather. Votes on real estate transactions are required by the city charter to be ratified by an eight-vote city council majority.]

Interim city administrator Tom Crawford told Kunselman that the logic used in not involving the DDA on the price agreement was that it’s a city-owned asset. He noted that it’s possible to design the foundation without the full bathtub deign. But Crawford noted that the city and Village Green have worked with the DDA to use lessons learned from the current construction on the South Fifth Avenue underground parking structure. It’s the city’s decision to mitigate the risk with respect to flooding, and it’s a city decision to move forward with the bathtub design. The full bathtub design guarantees as close as you can that in the future, no pumping of water into the city’s stormwater system would be required, he said.

The agreement to reduce the price could have been set up to include the DDA, Crawford said, but the city did not structure it that way. That approach would have made it a tri-party agreement. The approach the city took – to amend the agreement between the city and Village Green – seemed the most approprate way, Crawford concluded.

Kunselman then asked Crawford to explain how the $100,000 would be made up – proceeds from the parcel were supposed to go into the building fund for the new municipal center. Crawford clarified that the original purchase price was $3.3 million and the amount designated for the building fund was $3.0 million. There’d always been a $300,000 excess, he said, so the price break of $100,000 would not compromise the funding of the municipal center.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) expressed some frustration at the length of time the Village Green project had been in the works, saying it had been going on about five years now. Didn’t we already know, he asked, that the location had water issues? Anglin wanted to know if the developer was willing to move forward. Crawford indicated that Village Green was in fact moving forward, actively spending money on design. Anglin questioned why the city was putting itself at risk with respect to the Pall Gelman dioxane plume – the plume was mentioned in a staff memo about the Village Green project.

Crawford explained that the plume is actually a far distance away, and the reason it’s discussed in the memo is that the city is looking at the very long term. By having a full-bathtub foundation design, there’ll be no requirement to do any pumping of water, so the risk is mitigated of pumping water that’s polluted with dioxane – that would require onsite treatment before pumping. The bathtub design is an attempt to protect the city from every possible eventuality, Crawford said.

Anglin questioned whether adequate hydrological studies had been done. Crawford addressed Anglin’s remark a bit later, noting that the city had relied on Carl Walker, the DDA’s engineering consultant on parking structures, for geotechnical analysis. There’d been a host of consultants, he said, and a substantial amount of work done. That work was what had triggered the need for a 90-day extension.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) drew out the fact that the bathtub design will cost $250,000, with Village Green picking up $150,000 of the cost and the city effectively picking up $100,000. She noted that a year ago, when the purchase option extension granted, nothing was getting built in the Midwest at all. The First and Washington project is a chance to get “another private crane in the air.” The council needs to support this, she concluded.

Mayor John Hieftje stated that using a pumping strategy would be much more of a problem. The full bathtub design offers the greatest amount of security.

Kunselman said he was still not convinced that selling the land should somehow result in an agreement about construction design. He came back to the point about DDA involvement. He felt the price reduction should be expressed in a three-way agreement.

Crawford responded to Kunselman by saying the city attorney’s office advised that this was a good way to proceed. Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) weighed in by saying that Ann Arbor would own the parking deck for the next 75 years [the expected life of the deck]. The city has a chance now to guarantee that they don’t have a problem, at a cost of $100,000, he said. Taylor supported that.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) confirmed with Crawford that the developer currently has no obligation to pursue a full bathtub design. With Anglin and Kunselman having expressed their dissatisfaction, Hieftje recognized that if they both voted no, that would leave the agreement one vote short of the eight-vote majority it needed. Hieftje stated he would feel okay postponing it. Hieftje then filled some time with some general remarks about the structure, and Anglin followed up with an indication that what he wanted was to make sure the homework was done on it. Hieftje then called for the vote, which wound up being unanimous.

Outcome: The council voted 9-0 to approve the amendment to the purchase price from $3.3 million to $3.2 million.

Municipal Center

At Monday’s meeting, the council considered a $1,091,211 revision to the contract with Clark Construction Co., which is doing the construction on the new municipal center at Fifth and Huron, which houses the 15th District Court and the police department. Of that total, $693,327 is for security elements and $397,884 is for audio/visual.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) said the revision brings the building’s total cost to $39 million. Interim city administrator Tom Crawford explained that the increase was for upgrades to the security of the building. He noted that the amount is not an increase to the budget of the entire project, but rather a recognition that implementation of the security measures is best done by the onsite construction manager.

Anglin wanted to know why the money is coming out of the city’s general fund. Crawford explained that the court is a general fund entity. Anglin asked why the funding for security was not part of the bonding process, saying he would rather have security outside the building [i.e, police officers on patrol] than inside the building. Crawford indicated that the expenditure is a one-time cost. The idea of how security in the building would be delivered was a conversation that had unfolded over time, Crawford said, and this was determined to be the most cost-effective. The fact remains that it’s coming from the general fund, Anglin grumbled.

Sue McCormick, the city’s public services area administrator, told the council that they’d previously decided they wanted to make these decisions about security later and had decided not to make decisions about installation of furniture and fixtures until later. It had been an early and deliberate discussion of the city council, she said.

Outcome: The council voted to approve the contract amendment, with dissent from Anglin.

Wireless for City Hall

Also pulled out of the consent agenda by Sandi Smith (Ward 1) was an item that authorized a $64,571 contract with Sentinel Technologies to equip the public areas and conference rooms of the city hall, the new municipal center and the Wheeler Service Center with wireless internet access – both secure and for public use.

Smith was curious about why the city used the middle bidder, instead of the lowest. She wanted to know why the city was using a non-Michigan bidder, who was not the lowest bid. Dan Rainey, head of IT for the city, explained that the low bid did not include the cost of recurring maintenance.

Outcome: The council voted unanimously to approve the contract with Sentinel Technologies.

Fuller Road Station

The proposed Fuller Road Station – a large parking structure, bus depot and possible train station that the city plans to build in partnership with the University of Michigan, near UM’s medical campus – drew considerable public and council commentary, although the council did not have any business to vote on that specifically referenced the project.

James D’Amour expressed various concerns. He responded to a contention of the mayor’s to the effect that Fuller Road Station would result in the city getting some open space back. What are we getting? he asked. D’Amour contended that current facilities for trains are adequate. If it’s so important, D’Amour said, we should come clean with the fact that it will be located on public parkland.

D’Amour also noted the public art commission’s annual plan, attached to the council’s agenda as a communication item, included proposed art for Fuller Road Station. He asked that the language be removed. He added that the city did not need murals on Huron Parkway, as described in the public art plan.

Barbara Bach told the council that the Fuller Road Station project is getting in the way of a discussion of rail transportation and about public park preservation. She then read aloud the sentiments of Tom Whitaker, who left a comment on an Ann Arbor Chronicle article about a recent meeting of the city’s park advisory commission.

As proposed, Bach said, Fuller Road Station is a huge warehouse for cars on parkland. She said that the city should work on getting cars out of the river valley and begin to talk about rail service.

Nancy Shiffler introduced herself as the current chair of the Huron Valley group of the Sierra Club. She said that the parcel where the Fuller Road Station is planned is used as parkland, appears on maps as parkland, and is included in the parks and recreation open space (PROS) plan as parkland. The city’s designation of the parcel as public land is used in the applications to the federal government for grant funding, but there’s no mention of its park designation.

The U.S. Dept. of Transportation requires a more extenstive environmental study for parkland, she said. The redefinition of allowable uses for public land, approved by the council, allows public land to be used as a transportation center. As councilmembers, they should think about the use of parkland, as they anticipate putting the parks maintenance and capital improvements millage before the voters in 2012, Shiffler concluded.

George Gaston told the council he was there to speak in defense of Fuller Park. It’s been a city park for more than 50 years, he said. The 1993 accord struck with the university for use of the parcel as a parking lot was a temporary agreement – it was never intended to be a permanent lot, he said.

In a draft of environmental assessment for selection of the site, he said, 15 sites had been considered. Of those, three were eliminated because they’re city parks. The University of Michigan’s Mitchell Field was considered, but rejected because it’s a recreational area. Gaston said he could see why the university wants a project with free land and a prime location. But if the university is truly interested, he said, then let the university become a stakeholder. Mitchell Field would offer better access to Fuller Road. He contended that there are too many connections between town and gown for it to be an untainted vote. He contended that everything had been decided a year and a half ago. It’s taken too much effort to put together a ribbon of parks along the Huron River to lose that now, he said.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5) called on his council colleagues to watch a recording of the May 17 park advisory commission meeting. Eli Cooper, transportation program manager for the city, had given a presentation on Fuller Road Station, Anglin said. Members of PAC were restrained but confused, Anglin said. [Anglin serves as one of two ex-officio representatives from the city council to PAC.] They thought they were going to have a train station, Anglin said. But now it’s looking like a parking structure more than anything else.

When the council voted to change the allowable uses for public land to include transportation facilities, that moved parks to another category, Anglin said. He said he did not think it sounds like the city’s share of the funding would be coming forward [roughly $10 million]. He stated that the city doesn’t need a large train station for a town this size – it just has one track.

At a time when the city is laying off police officers, $10 million for this project in unconscionable, he said. Anglin said he’s personally not excited by parking structures. The project has momentum behind it, but no funding, he said. There are no guarantees of a train coming to Ann Arbor, but there is a guarantee of a large structure. It’s such a pretty area, Anglin said, they should consider whether they should do that.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) anticipated mayor John Hieftje’s reaction to Anglin’s comments [Hieftje has pushed hard for the project] by telling the mayor that she knew he had a lot of thoughts about Fuller Road Station. But she thought the council should have a working session, so that councilmembers can become more knowledgable about the issue.

Hieftje indicated that he would look into adding something to the calendar. He then went on to describe how he and Briere had attended a press conference in Detroit recently when $196 million in federal rail funding had been awarded to projects in southeast Michigan. U.S. senators Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin were there, he said. Levin had called out Fuller Road Station as a good idea. Gov. Rick Snyder had also talked positively about rail transportation, he said.

Responding to Anglin’s contention that there is only one track, Hieftje noted that two tracks will be installed at Fuller Road Station. The design of the station has changed, he said, and will now put the train station inside the other building. But as far as the basic site selection, no other location is as ideal as the Fuller Road site – it has 24,000 people a day going to the university’s hospital. He then thanked Anglin for his previous vote in support of Fuller Road Station.

Communications and Comment

Every city council agenda contains multiple slots for city councilmembers and the city administrator to give updates or make announcements about issues that are coming before the city council. And every meeting typically includes public commentary on subjects not necessarily on the agenda.

Comm/Comm: Volunteer of the Month

Karen Moore was recognized as volunteer of the month for her work in connection with downtown parks, in particular for Ann Arbor Downtown Blooms Day.

Comm/Comm: Affordable Housing

Forest Hills Housing Co-op received a mayoral proclamation for its role in providing affordable housing for the last 40 years.

Comm/Comm: Environmental Commission Nomination

Most nominations for the city’s various boards and commissions are made by the mayor. One of the exceptions is the environmental commission (EC), for which the council makes the nomination.

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) announced that a nomination for a three-year EC term was being placed before the council that evening and that it would be before the council as a resolution at the following meeting. Margie Teall (Ward 4), who sits with Hohnke as the city council’s representatives to the EC, prompted Hohnke to name the nomination, which he did: Jamie Woolard.

Comm/Comm: Municipal Center

Margie Teal (Ward 4) reported that the building committee reviewed construction of the new building at Fifth and Huron, and the renovation of the existing city hall building. They concluded that the project is on time and under budget.

Comm/Comm: Argo Bypass Channel

Interim city administrator Tom Crawford gave an update on progress for the construction of the Argo bypass channel. An application for a permit has been submitted to the state. The city is waiting for that permit to be issued before earthwork can begin. There’s no way to know when the permit will be issued, he said, but city staff is estimating six weeks. The contractor will go ahead and begin to mobilize in preparation to start the earthwork.

Comm/Comm: Rain

Crawford reported that cleanup continues in the area of Plymouth Road, where the railroad embankment collapsed after heavy rains at the end of May. The city received 87 reports of sewer backups in basements in areas where the system was stressed. Some residents were given vouchers for cleanup, he said. The affected areas were the neighborhood Packard & Stadium, and Hill & Division. The city is considering creating two new areas for the city’s footing drain disconnect program – adding to the five existing areas – and accelerating the program.

Comm/Comm: Historic District Awards

At the start of the meeting, the city’s historic district commission presented its annual awards to property owners. A complete listing of the awards is available in the city’s press release.

Comm/Comm: Ward 5 City Council Race

Henry Herskovitz introduced himself as a Ward 5 resident, saying that it’s a matter of public record that Neal Elyakin is running for city council in that ward. Herskovitz told the council it’s his understanding that if elected, councilmembers must promise to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Elyakin, he said, had chosen to fly a national flag in front of his home that is not the U.S. flag, but rather one from a country that 44 years ago on Wednesday (June 8) had killed 34 Americans. [Hersovitz was referring to an attack on the USS Liberty in 1967.] Herskovitz said that he supported Elyakin’s right to fly the Israeli flag, and his right to run for a seat on the city council, but wondered to which country Elyakin owed his allegiance. Elyakin should state his loyalty and allegiances clearly, Herskovitz said.

Comm/Comm: JFK, Dems, Mackinac

Thomas Partridge reminded the council that it was the 50th anniversary of numerous historic events in the first year of John F. Kennedy’s administration, like the test ban treaty and the beginning of work on the civil rights act. He said he wanted to remind everyone of the progress made beginning in 1961, and the need to keep up the struggle. He opposed the attitude of those who left southeast Michigan and traveled to the recent Mackinac Policy Conference – that was nothing but a right-wing Republican convention, he said. He called on voters to recall Gov. Rick Snyder.

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

Next council meeting: June 20, 2011 at 7 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at 301 E. Huron. [confirm date]

Purely a plug: The Chronicle relies in part on regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of publicly-funded entities like the city of Ann Arbor. 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.

Those benefits are meant to be achieved through several text amendments to the ordinance, which include: adding definitions for “bioretention” and “native or prairie plantings”; allowing the width of landscape buffers to vary; modifying requirements for interior landscape islands; prohibiting use of invasive species for required landscaping; and increasing fines for violation.

The city’s planning commission had given the ordinance change a unanimous recommendation at its March 1, 2011 meeting.

All city ordinances require a first and a second reading in front of the city council, after a public hearing, before final enactment. The landscape ordinance will need a second vote before its approval is final.

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]

A cluster of Skyline High students at the March 1, 2011 Ann Arbor planning commission meeting. (Photos by the writer.)

On Tuesday, the issue of screening for privacy came up as commissioners discussed a request from the Michigan Alpha Chapter of Sigma Phi Epsilon, which had asked for a special exception use that would allow it to convert a church at 730 Tappan into a fraternity house. The building has been the home of the Memorial Christian Church, which plans to move.

Three people spoke during a public hearing on the issue, including a representative from the neighboring sorority, who raised concerns about lighting and privacy – specifically, about the fraternity having “visual access” to the sorority’s sleeping rooms, which face the current church. However, she said she supported the project overall, and commissioners unanimously voted to grant the request.

During her staff communications, Wendy Rampson – head of the city’s planning staff – noted that city administrator Roger Fraser had announced his resignation the previous evening, at a city council working session. His last day with the city will be April 29 – he’s taking a job with the state of Michigan as deputy state treasurer for local government services. Rampson said she’d alert commissioners as soon as a date is set for his farewell gathering.

Rampson also mentioned that at the city council’s March 7 meeting, they’d be voting on a resolution of support for the state’s Complete Streets policies, saying that the city had been following similar policies for decades. Later in the meeting, however, commissioner Erica Briggs expressed some disappointment that the city wasn’t taking additional steps beyond what’s set by the state. “It certainly doesn’t establish us as a leader,” Briggs said.

Landscape Ordinance Revisions

At its Dec. 7, 2010 meeting, the planning commission had heard an extensive presentation from staff about proposed changes to Chapter 62 of the city code – the landscape and screening ordinance. At that meeting, Jerry Hancock, Ann Arbor’s stormwater and floodplain programs coordinator, had told the commission that the intent was to improve water quality by requiring that a greater amount of stormwater runoff be “infiltrated” on the site where it is generated. [Infiltration is a process that retains water before allowing it to filter out into the soil.] The changes also aim to encourage the use of native plants and prohibit the use of non-native invasive plant species, he said.

Jerry Hancock, Ann Arbor’s stormwater and floodplain programs coordinator, talks with city planning manager Wendy Rampson before the start of the March 1 planning commission meeting. Hancock was on hand to answer questions regarding revisions to the city's landscape ordinance, but there were none.

The planning commission’s ordinance review committee, which had evaluated and provided input on the changes, had requested that the ordinance include: (1) additional types of land use – such as multi-family dwellings – that are required to have a conflicting land-use buffer; and (2) an increase in the number of trees in the conflicting land-use buffer.

During a lengthy discussion at their Dec. 7 meeting, commissioners raised several concerns regarding the required landscape buffers between multi-family dwellings and public parks or single-family homes. They ultimately tabled action on the ordinance, and asked city staff to consider additional revisions.

On Tuesday, city planner Jeff Kahan outlined the additional changes that had been made since the Dec. 7 meeting. Most of the changes related to the conflicting land-use buffer requirements, known as CLUB:

• Responding to a concern about requiring a landscape buffer when new residential development is proposed next to parkland, the ordinance language was changed so that the required 4-foot-high screen may be reduced.
• Language was changed to clarify that new development will need to adhere to the full requirements. Flexibility in applying the CLUB relates only to existing (developed) sites that are being redeveloped.
• A requirement calling for a landscape buffer between R3 and R4 residential zoning districts and parkland was removed.
• A requirement was removed that had called for a wall or fence to be constructed as a buffer between a park and land zoned or primarily used for residential purposes.
• Language was added to clarify that the planning commission has flexibility in applying the conflicting land-use buffer requirement.
• A nonconforming site clause, which had previously been removed, was kept in the code.

More generally, the revised ordinance will prohibit the use of non-native invasive plants, encourage the use of native plants, provide design flexibility and modify how the conflicting land-use buffer is applied. Other changes include requiring portions of interior landscape islands to be depressed and utilized as bio-retention to improve water quality. [.pdf of landscape ordinance revisions]

No one spoke during a public hearing on the changes, and commissioners had no additional questions or discussion on the revised ordinance.

Outcome: The planning commission unanimously approved revisions to Chapter 62 of the city code, the landscape and screening ordinance. It now moves to the city council for consideration and final approval.

Sigma Phi Epsilon Request

The commission was asked to approve a special exception use for the Michigan Alpha Chapter of Sigma Phi Epsilon, allowing it to convert a church at 730 Tappan into a fraternity house. The three-level building is located at the northwest corner of Tappan and Hill, and has been the home of the Memorial Christian Church. No changes are planned for the exterior of the historic building. The church sanctuary was originally built in 1891 – on State Street, where the University of Michigan law quad is now located. It was moved to its current location in 1923, and additions were made to the building in subsequent years.

In giving the planning staff report, Jeff Kahan noted that the 15,560-square-feet structure could accommodate 64 residents, but that the fraternity is requesting a maximum of 44 beds. [The chapter has over 100 members, but more than half live off-site.] The property is currently zoned R2B, a zoning category that allows for fraternities. The neighborhood includes many fraternities, sororities and student rental properties.

The site includes 17 parking spaces. The plan calls for adding 11 bike spaces in the basement of the building as well as 11 bike spaces outside.

Tuesday’s meeting also included a public hearing on the request.

Sigma Phi Epsilon: Public Hearing

Three people spoke during a public hearing about the special exception use request – two of them were affiliated with the project.

Jon Kucera, an architect, is president of SigEp National Housing, a Richmond, Virginia firm that assists local alumni and volunteer groups in the maintenance, management, and purchase of chapter facilities. The UM chapter has been searching for a permanent home for several years, he said. [The chapter is currently located nearby at 704 Hill St., on the southeast corner of Hill and State.]

The fraternity had negotiated an option-to-purchase contract with the church in September 2010, he said. For the purchase to be feasible, they needed, among other things, to secure a zoning variance and the special exception use. They’ve already secured the variance, Kucera said.

He said the reality is that the church is moving, and it’s unlikely another church would be interested in the property. Adaptive reuse of the structure for a fraternity is ideal, he said, because of its proximity to UM’s central campus and because the layout, mass and scale of the building allow for its reuse. The sanctuary space would be converted into a study and meeting area, for example, while the lower level would be used for a meeting and dining area. They hope to finish the project by July of 2012.

In a follow-up email to The Chronicle, Kucera laid out the following timeline for the project:

• By March 31, 2011: Conclude the due diligence period (dealing with issues of zoning, constructability, fundraising, financing, etc.) and execute the option to purchase.
• By Sept. 30, 2011: Close on the purchase of the property and take title. After this, the fraternity could occupy the building for limited purposes (such as building security, chapter meetings or fundraising events), subject to approval by the city’s building inspectors.
• January 2012 to July 2012: Renovations will take place.
• July 2012: Move in furniture and prepare the building for occupancy for the fall semester.

The Memorial Christian Church is located across Tappan from the University of Michigan Ross School of Business. This file photo from December 2010 was taken from Hill Street, facing north.

Jerry Mangona, president of the chapter’s alumni association, told commissioners he’d been involved with the chapter since its 1997 “recolonization.” [Recolonization occurs after a chapter is revoked or surrendered, then revived. In a phone conversation with The Chronicle, a spokesman for the UM Greek Life office reported that in 1994 – following a hazing incident in the fall – sanctions were put in place against the fraternity. Members at the time felt the sanctions were too harsh, and voted to surrender their charter. In a follow-up email to The Chronicle, Mangona confirmed that a hazing incident had occurred under the previous charter and someone was injured. Both the UM Interfraternity Council and the SigEp headquarters had placed sanctions on the group, he said.]

At Tuesday’s public hearing, Mangona said that since recolonizing, they’d demonstrated to the Greek community that their chapter can be both popular socially while maintaining a high GPA and a no-hazing program. The chapter has grown, and has received many awards both here and nationally, he said. [He outlined these awards in more detail in a letter submitted to the commission.] Mangona told commissioners that an 11-member alumni board oversees the chapter, and that another board will oversee the renovation of the building and its future management.

Jane Cooper identified herself as president of the Iota House Corp. board of the Delta Delta Delta sorority, which owns the house at 718 Tappan – adjacent to the church. She referred commissioners to a letter she’d submitted about the project, saying that the sorority doesn’t object to having a fraternity next door – “in fact, the girls are quite pleased,” she said. [.pdf of Cooper's letter] However, they did have some concerns, she said, that she hoped commissioners would address. Because the sorority’s sleeping rooms face the church, they are worried about excessive light, noise and “visual access,” Cooper said. She concluded by saying she was probably more in support of the project than opposed to it, but still had concerns.

Kucera then returned to the podium to respond to Cooper. He noted that city standards set certain levels of lighting in the parking area, for safety, as well as cutoff standards that require fixtures to direct light downward. He said those issues would be addressed at the site plan stage, and that he felt the solutions would satisfy their neighbors and the city. The visibility issue “is a bit more elusive,” he conceded, because the “view angle” from the ground on the fraternity’s property to the sorority’s upper windows is fairly steep – 35 to 40 degrees. That means any ground-based screening would have to be very high, he said. Kucera expressed confidence that they could work with the sorority to identify a solution that would be both practical and appropriate.

Regarding noise concerns, Kucera said that most gatherings would occur in the lower level, which he said is both visually and acoustically separated from the adjoining properties. That would go a long way toward mitigating that issue, he said. Kucera also pointed out that the project had letters of support, including one from Chris Haughee, UM assistant director of Greek Life. [.pdf of Chris Haughee letter]

Sigma Phi Epsilon: Commissioner Questions, Comments

Jean Carlberg had several questions about the project. She noted that there aren’t currently windows on the building’s north side, which faces the sorority. Would windows be added? she asked.

Kucera said the building’s educational wing has windows on the east and west facades on both levels – rooms in those areas would be used for sleeping. The concept plan for the building only includes adding one window on the north facade, he said. The other sleeping area will be at the end of the existing sanctuary, with windows facing west.

Carlberg then asked how much traffic they anticipated during the evening, coming into the parking lot. Currently, only a chain link fence separates the parking lot from the sorority, she noted. Mangona said it is hard to speak for the future, but that the current house has only parking spots for four to six vehicles. The lot at 730 Tappan has 17 parking spots, and he didn’t think the fraternity members would need more than that.

Carlberg asked them to consider putting up a wooden fence to block the car lights. The church doesn’t have a lot of night traffic, she said, and she could imagine that the additional traffic from the fraternity would be a real nuisance for the sorority.

She had additional concerns about the lighting used in the parking lot. She cautioned Kucera to choose fixtures that would block the light from intruding into the sorority house. In response, Kucera noted that city standards address the issue of light intrusion, and asked whether she was requesting something beyond that.

Since the sorority house is so close to the parking lot, Carlberg said, the fraternity needs to be more careful than what the ordinance requires, or they’ll be creating a nuisance. But Kucera noted that in the absence of a definitive standard, the issue becomes subjective. Evan Pratt weighed in, saying that even if the fraternity was fully compliant with the city standards, the commission hoped that they would not have a wall-mounted fixture, for example, with light shining into the sorority.

Carlberg added that the fraternity could work with the sorority “in the interest of good neighbor relations” to come up with a solution. Kucera agreed with that approach, but said he hoped the commission wouldn’t add it as a contingent condition for getting the special exception use.

Kirk Westphal asked for more information about the resident manager. Mangona reported that the alumni board hasn’t yet determined the details of that job. However, they’ll be investing nearly $3 million in the property, he added – it’s a large investment, and one that will make the building a crown jewel for the chapter. They’ll want oversight of that asset to be managed professionally and responsibly, he said.

Wendy Rampson, head of the city’s planning staff, told commissioners that the city’s zoning doesn’t define what a resident manager is. In the past, it was typically an adult who lived on the property – a house mother, for example, not a student. Over time, she said, that practice has changed and the resident manager could be a graduate student or undergraduate. Mangona said he could state unequivocally that the resident manager for their property wouldn’t be an undergraduate.

Erica Briggs brought up an issue raised in Cooper’s letter, which stated that there are surface water issues along the sorority’s southern property line. Sorority leaders wanted assurances that the fraternity’s parking lot doesn’t drain into their property.

Kucera said that in the three months he’s worked on this project, he hasn’t encountered drainage issues, nor had he received any comments from city staff about stormwater management. To the extent that there are any problems with drainage to the north of the fraternity’s property, that could be addressed during the construction phase, he said. He asked whether Cooper could elaborate on her concerns.

Cooper stated that the issue had been raised by Jan Culbertson, an architect and board member for the sorority. Their big concern is that whatever changes are made should not add to the problem, she said: “We don’t want the new work to make them worse.”

Kucera observed that the concerns might have stemmed from earlier proposals that had considered adding to the existing structure, but that’s no longer the case.

Outcome: Planning commissioners unanimously approved the special exception use for Sigma Phi Epsilon to convert the church at 730 Tappan into a fraternity. The special exception use requires six votes, and six commissioners were present at Tuesday’s meeting.

Misc. Communications

Wendy Rampson, who leads the city’s planning staff, had several items to report during the time set aside for communications, in addition to noting the recent news of city administrator Roger Fraser’s resignation.

At the March 8 working session, she said, agenda topics will include a legislative update on planning statutes, as well as some planning for an upcoming commission retreat. [The commission's previous retreat took place on March 30, 2010.] Rampson said she’ll also provide an update on the staff’s efforts to develop a sustainability framework, part of the work that’s funded by a recent Home Depot grant. She noted that the first update on the project was posted on Feb. 23 on the Sustainable Cities Institute blog.

The planning commission will be meeting at the Washtenaw County administration building boardroom for at least the next several weeks, Rampson reported. Recent flooding in the basement of city hall has pushed back renovations in that building by about a month, she said. [The flooding resulted from a burst water pipe valve that froze when heat was cut off.]

Among the other upcoming meetings Rampson mentioned was a community open house that the University of Michigan is planning for its new North Quad residence hall on Thursday, March 31 from 3-6 p.m. The event will include tours of the building, which is located on South State Street between Huron and Washington.

Kirk Westphal reported that the commission’s ordinance review committee had met recently with staff to take a preliminary look at how the new downtown design guidelines will be incorporated into the city’s site plan review process. Those changes will eventually be brought forward for review by the planning commission.

Eric Mahler, the commission’s chair, noted that the Library Lot review committee would be meeting on March 3. [The next day, that meeting was canceled. The meeting has been rescheduled for Tuesday, March 8, from 3-5 p.m. in the fourth floor conference room of city hall.] The committee is charged with reviewing responses to the city’s request for proposals on the use of the space above the Fifth Avenue underground parking garage, currently under construction by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority.

Mahler also announced public hearings for three projects, scheduled for the commission’s March 15 meeting: (1) a request to annex and rezone the Millcreek Townhouses on Stone School Road; (2) a site plan proposal for 215 N. Fifth Ave. to tear down the existing industrial building and construct a two-story single family dwelling; and (3) a site plan proposal for Packard Square, a mixed-use development on 6.52 acres at 2502 Packard – site of the former Georgetown Mall.

Present: Erica Briggs, Jean Carlberg, Diane Giannola, Eric Mahler, Evan Pratt, Kirk Westphal.

Absent: Bonnie Bona, Tony Derezinski, Wendy Woods.

Next regular meeting: The planning commission next meets on Tuesday, March 8, 2011 at 7 p.m. for a working session in the 6th floor of city hall, 301 E. Huron. The commission’s next regular meeting is on Tuesday, March 15 at 7 p.m. in the Washtenaw County administration building boardroom, 220 N. Main St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

Planning commissioner Wendy Woods, left, confers with city councilmember Tony Derezinski during the Dec. 7 planning commission meeting. Derezinski and Diane Giannola, right, also serve on the planning commission. (Photos by the writer.)

What they sat through was two hours dominated by a discussion on proposed changes to the city’s landscape ordinance, which the commission ultimately tabled. Several concerns were raised regarding required landscape buffers between multi-family dwellings and public parks or single-family homes. The ordinance would also increase the fines for violating the ordinance, from $500 to up to $2,500 – that change was not debated. Commissioners asked planning staff to revisit the draft.

During the time set aside for communications, Tony Derezinski – who also represents Ward 2 on city council – gave an update on actions at Monday night’s council meeting that touched on planning issues. Saying it was “like the corpse that would wink,” he reported that he and councilmember Sandi Smith had attempted, unsuccessfully, to bring back the Heritage Row project, a residential development on South Fifth Avenue that had been approved by the planning commission in March. Some modifications had been made to the proposal – which council has previously rejected in July – and Derezinski felt that might have persuaded enough councilmembers to support it. But before the project could be reconsidered, council needed to approve suspending their rules – and not enough councilmembers would vote to do that. “I needed one more vote,” Derezinski said, “and didn’t get it.”

Planning commissioner Wendy Woods asked whether there had been enough changes in the project to enable it to be submitted to the city as a new project. Derezinski said that was possible. However, he indicated that the developer, Alex de Parry, had already spent considerable time trying to move Heritage Row forward, and it wasn’t clear whether the financing he had lined up would allow further delays. Derezinski also noted that de Parry has another project, City Place, that’s already approved for that site – it’s possible he’ll build that instead.

Communications: Council, Commission

Wendy Rampson, head of the city’s planning unit, reported that the planning staff had moved their offices last week from the sixth floor of city hall to the fifth floor. It’s a temporary location – in the spring, they’ll move again to the first floor, where space is now being renovated.

Rampson also told commissioners that discussions have begun for the next two-year budget cycle, and the administration anticipates the need for cuts. She said she’d keep commissioners posted as that process moves forward.

Finally, Rampson reported on progress in the city’s application to the Home Depot Foundation for a sustainability grant. [See Chronicle coverage: "Ann Arbor Pursues Sustainability Grant"] A phone interview with Home Depot was scheduled for Dec. 8, she said. The hope is that the grant would allow the city to fund a person who can pull together all of the sustainability elements that already exist in the city’s various master plans, with the intent of creating a “sustainability framework.”

Communications: R4C, R2A Study Committee

Commissioner Jean Carlberg reported that work on the R4C and R2A zoning district study is progressing. The study committee will provide the city council with a report and recommendations for potential ordinance changes in R4C (multi-family residential) or R2A (two-family residential) zoning districts. She said the advisory committee is reaching consensus, and will likely plan a public hearing on proposed changes in January or February. In addition to Carlberg, committee members include Tony Derezinski, Chuck Carver, Ilene Tyler, David Merchant, Wendy Carman, Carl Luckenbach, Ellen Rambo, Michele Derr, Julie Weatherbee, Nancy Leff, Ethel Potts and Anya Dale.

Derezinski complimented the planning staff on their patience and “incredible tact” over the past several committee meetings. He said it hasn’t been easy, as several people have their own areas of concern.

Communications: City Council Update

Derezinski reported that Monday’s city council meeting lasted until about 1:15 a.m., and had touched on several planning-related items. They had given initial approval to zoning changes that changes affect area, height and placement (AHP), with several amendments from the version that had been approved by the planning commission in July. In addition to the “biggie” of the attempted Heritage Row resurrection, Derezinski said the other issue that the council discussed was a medical marijuana licensing proposal developed by the city attorney’s office. He characterized their discussion as a good one, but they ultimately postponed an initial vote on the issue until council’s Jan. 3, 2011 meeting.

The licensing piece is being considered in conjunction with zoning regulations, which have already received initial approval by council, after first being approved by planning commission at their Oct. 5, 2010 meeting. Final consideration for both zoning and licensing is set for the council’s Jan. 18, 2011 meeting.

Rampson elaborated on the proposed licensing requirements, reminding commissioners that they had recommended that a licensing process be developed.

By way of background, the planning commission voted at their Oct. 5 meeting to recommend that the city institute a business license for medical marijuana, with dissent from Eric Mahler. From Chronicle coverage:

There were no additional details in the planning staff report about a possible license. Although it had been mentioned at previous meetings that the city attorney’s office was developing a proposal about licensing medical marijuana businesses, planning commissioners had not previously discussed the topic in depth.

Deliberations were brief. Jean Carlberg asked whether a license would only apply to dispensaries, or if it would be required of cultivation facilities and “home occupation” businesses as well. Kristen Larcom of the city attorney’s office said she didn’t know, because they hadn’t yet drafted a proposal for the license. Kirk Westphal asked if the license might include a cap on the number of dispensaries in the city, or require that there be building security. Larcom said that it might.

Outcome: In a 7-1 vote, the planning commission approved a motion to recommend that city council institute a medical marijuana business license. Eric Mahler dissented, and Wendy Woods was absent from the meeting.

Mahler did not comment during the public meeting on this issue. When asked by The Chronicle following the meeting about his reason for voting against it, Mahler indicated that they didn’t know what the license would entail at this point, and it was difficult to support something without that information.

At Tuesday’s meeting, Rampson said the licensing proposal would limit the number of medical marijuana dispensaries and cultivation facilities in the city to 15. Home occupations wouldn’t be limited, she said, but they would be required to obtain a license and they’d be subject to inspection.

Derezinski also reported that he had updated city council about efforts to develop a Washtenaw Avenue corridor improvement authority. Four jurisdictions are involved – Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, Ypsilanti Township and Pittsfield Township. Of those, Derezinski said that Pittsfield Township and Ypsilanti have both approved some version of the project, and that Ypsilanti Township’s board will be considering it soon.

He noted that at the Dec. 4 Ann Arbor council budget retreat, city administrator Roger Fraser had stressed the importance of collaboration. It was a message that Kirk Profit, a Lansing lobbyist for the city, had reiterated at Monday’s council meeting, Derezinski said – collaboration is an important priority for the incoming governor, Rick Snyder. Derezinski added that the Washtenaw Avenue project is a major example of collaboration that could produce wonderful results for a stressed corridor.

Landscape Ordinance

City planner Jeff Kahan and Jerry Hancock, Ann Arbor’s stormwater and floodplain programs coordinator, gave a detailed report on the proposed changes to Chapter 62 of the city code – the landscape and screening ordinance. [.pdf draft of landscape/screening ordinance changes]

Jerry Hancock, Ann Arbor's stormwater and floodplain programs coordinator, gave a presentation and answered questions at the planning commission's Dec. 7 meeting about proposed changes to the city's landscape and screening ordinance.

Hancock said the intent is to improve water quality by requiring that a greater amount of stormwater runoff is “infiltrated” on the site where it is generated. [Infiltration is a process that retains water before allowing it to filter out into the soil.] The changes also aim to encourage the use of native plants and prohibit the use of non-native invasive plant species, he said.

In addition, Hancock said the planning commission’s ordinance review committee, which had evaluated and provided input on the changes, had requested that the ordinance include: (1) additional types land use – such as multi-family dwellings – that are required to have a conflicting land use buffer; and (2) an increase in the number of trees in the conflicting land use buffer.

Highlights of the proposed changes include:

• Prohibiting the use of invasive species, such as euonymus alatus (burning bush), lonicera tatarica (tatarian honeysuckle) and acer platanoides (Norway maple). For the past decade, the city has been encouraging projects to use non-invasive species, Hancock said – this change simply codifies that request. He later indicated that information on salt-tolerant native species is available from the city’s natural area preservation program.
• Mandating that some of the required interior landscape islands in parking lots be constructed for use as bioretention.
• Building in design flexibility by allowing variable-width landscape buffers.
• Adding multi-family and townhouses to the list of land uses that require a conflicting land use buffer. Currently no buffer is required between buildings, though it is required between parking lots and dumpster areas.
• Increasing by 25% the number of trees required in a conflicting land use buffer.
• Providing the planning commission and/or city council with flexibility to modify the strict planting requirements, to accommodate bioretention and native prairie plantings.
• Omitting the “grandfather clause” on nonconforming sites that has existed since 1986 for by-right projects, and allowing the planning commission to review nonconforming sites on a case-by-case basis.

Another notable change is that fines for violating the ordinance would increase from $500 to up to $2,500.

The landscape and screening ordinance comes into play when: (1) a site plan is submitted to the city for approval; or ( 2) the estimated expenses of construction for a site improvement project exceed 50% of the appraised replacement cost of the entire building or structure (exclusive of foundation), prior to its improvement; or (3) a shared driveway is constructed within an easement.

Hancock noted that he’s been working on these changes since 2000. The natural features committee of the city’s environmental commission got involved in the project in 2006, and the full environmental commission recommended approval of this draft in March 2010.

No one spoke during the public hearing on these ordinance changes. For purposes of this report, the commission’s discussion is organized by topic.

Landscape Ordinance: Nonconforming Sites

Tony Derezinski began the commission’s discussion by asking whether the city attorney’s office had reviewed the draft. He wondered whether substituting the case-by-case process in place of the grandfather clause related to nonconforming sites would constitute a “taking” – this was an issue that had emerged during the discussion of the medical marijuana ordinance, he said.

The section that is proposed to be stricken from the landscape ordinance is this:

5:611. Nonconforming Sites.

Landscape elements which are a part of site plans approved and constructed prior to the effective date of this ordinance and which meet the requirements of Chapter 62 as adopted March 17, 1986 may be maintained and continued as nonconforming sites, provided no alterations of the existing landscape elements are proposed.

Hancock replied that the city attorney’s office had looked at some of the proposed changes and hadn’t raised any red flags. The ordinance would be fully vetted by the city attorneys prior to going to city council, he said. Hancock also noted that this ordinance would only kick in for new site plans or if a property owner planned a major change on the site.

Later in the meeting, Eric Mahler said he was concerned about striking this section. In evaluating projects on a case-by-case basis, there’s a danger of being too subjective. He wanted to see more guidance on this issue written into the ordinance.

Landscape Ordinance: Bioretention and Parking

Jean Carlberg congratulated the planning staff for including bioretention in parking lots, saying it was something she’d been pushing for many years. She asked why a carport had been included in the definition for a “vehicular use area” – which is required to have landscaping and screening. Hancock said they were trying to close an existing loophole. Carports, because they aren’t enclosed, have the same impact as any outdoor parking space. But under the current ordinance, they aren’t required to have landscaping or screening.

A schematic of the bioretention system that would be required under proposed landscaping requirements for parking lot "islands."

Kirk Westphal asked whether the kind of bioretention that’s proposed is more expensive than current requirements. Hancock said it would be. Currently, the only requirement is for an “inhospitable” mound for a tree and grass, he said.

Wendy Woods asked whether this requirement could be counted toward the site’s overall stormwater retention requirements – Hancock said that it would, clarifying that it would allow the property owner to use a smaller underground retention tank, for example.

Woods asked if there are sites that currently use this type of bioretention, and whether there are any problems with it. Hancock gave the example of the Mallets Creek branch of the Ann Arbor District Library – bioretention islands are used in its parking lot, he said. There haven’t been any probems with it, he said. It’s more visible because the vegetation used is higher than grass, and it is bordered by curbs, just like other parking lot islands.

Woods also asked about the additions related to snow removal (the additions are indicated in italics):

5:602. Vehicular Use Area Landscaping and Screening. …

(h) Provision shall be made for snow pile storage locations such that they do not damage required plantings nor diminish required parking capacity.

and

5:607. Site Plans. …

(13) Identification of snow storage areas including a statement that snow shall not be pushed onto interior landscape islands unless designed for snow storage.

How would these requirements be enforced? she asked. Hancock admitted that enforcement would be difficult. However, in the current ordinance there’s nothing to enforce against, he noted. These changes require that some consideration of the issue be given during the design phase, he said, and if someone files a complaint, there’s something the planning staff can point to as a requirement. Kahan clarified that such a complaint would be filed with the planning staff, not the police.

Landscape Ordinance: Conflicting Land Use Buffer

Carlberg noted that parts of the conflicting land use buffer had been hotly debated in the ordinance review committee meetings. That section on conflicting land use buffers reads as follows (strike-throughs indicate proposed deletions; italics type indicates proposed additions):

5:603. Conflicting Land Use Buffers.

A vehicular use area; or an office, commercial, or industrial use; or a refuse dumpster which is adjacent to a public park facility or land principally used or zoned for residential purposes shall have a conflicting land use buffer between this use and the park or residential land. A conflicting land use buffer shall be provided under the following conditions:

A) A vehicular use area adjacent to a public park or land principally used or zoned for residential purposes.

B) A refuse/recycling container adjacent to a public park or land principally used or zoned for residential purposes.

C) The portion of a parcel zoned O, RE, ORL, C, or M abutting a public park or parcel principally used or zoned for residential purposes.

D) The portion of a parcel zoned R3 or R4 adjacent to a parcel zoned R1, R2 or a public park.

The conflicting land use buffer shall consist of the following:

(1) A landscape buffer strip averaging at least 15 feet wide over the entire length of the required buffer area, with no specific location along the buffer strip being less than 8 feet in width.

(2) One tree for each 20 15 feet or fraction thereof of abutting land. At least 50% of the trees within the conflicting land use buffer shall be evergreen. Arrangement of trees in clusters or groupings is encouraged, but in no case shall trees be more than 50 and shall be between 15 feet and 30 feet apart on center. Plantings should be placed to screen the views between buildings, that existed at the time of site plan approval, (especially windows and patio views) on the adjacent property.

(3) A hedge, landform berm, wall, fence or combination thereof forming a continuous screen at least 4 feet high. All gasoline or service stations shall employ opaque walls as the continuous screen.

(4) The site design and planting scheme shall comply with the requirements set forth in this Chapter.

(5) Materials used in these areas shall comply with standards set forth in this Chapter.

Carlberg asked why there was a requirement to have a landscaped buffer between two residentially-zoned properties, as stated in (D). Kahan explained that during public forums about changes to the city’s area, height and placement (AHP) zoning, they’d heard concerns from residents about large multi-family structures that could be built next to single-family homes. So the planning staff looked for ways to mitigate the visual impact of that situation – a conflicting land use buffer was one approach. Kahan pointed out that it wouldn’t require additional land – the buffer would be part of the existing setback, and would simply require more vegetation. That would provide a benefit for both the existing residences and the new development, he said.

Carlberg said it’s an extensive requirement – to form a continuous screen at least 4 feet high. That amount of landscaping could be difficult for some developers to afford. Kahan responded by saying that it could be added in stages, for larger developments. He also noted that as a percentage of an overall project, it was a relatively small cost. It wouldn’t be something that would deter deveopment, he said. “I guess we’ll hear about that later,” Carlberg replied.

Hancock later noted that with the exception of changes to the conflicting land use buffers section, the ordinance changes affect the quality of landscaping, not the quantity. That is, there would be no change to the amount of landscaping required – except for instances involving conflicting land use.

Erica Briggs asked if it would be possible to get a variance for the requirement of a buffer between residential properties. Yes, Hancock said – there are two mechanisms for doing that: (1) go through the regular variance process; or (2) appeal to the “modifications” section of the ordinance. That section had been developed so that a petitioner could ask the planning commission to deviate from the ordinance, depending on the details of any given proposal.

Evan Pratt asked about requiring a buffer adjacent to a public park. Was there any flexibility there? He gave the example of the Elks Lodge project, a condo development that had been proposed next to Bluffs Nature Area. [The project had been approved by the planning commission in 2007, but ultimately was rejected by the city council.] Pratt said he wasn’t sure that putting a row of plantings next to a woods made sense. Perhaps there was another option, he suggested, like a payment-in-lieu approach.

Hancock again pointed to the “modifications” section of the ordinance. Specifically, one of the instances where flexibility is allowed is when “the topographic features of the site create conditions so that the strict application of the provisions of this chapter will result in less effective screening and landscaping than alternative landscape designs.”

Diane Giannola objected to requiring a buffer for multi-family and townhome residences next to a public park. She noted that she lives in a complex of two-story townhomes next to a golf course. Even though the structures are no taller than a two-story single-family house, complexes like that would fall under the new requirement, she said. People in her neighborhood would hate having a buffer, Giannola said – they like the view of the golf course.

Kahan noted that the staff was most concerned about multi-family housing adjacent to single-family housing – the buffer for parkland was far less of a concern, he said. Rampson gave some historical context, saying that buffers between buildings and parks date back to the 1970s, when the common belief in the planning profession was that buildings and parks couldn’t co-exist. Hancock pointed out that the buffer is currently in place between parks and parking lots or dumpster areas – what’s new is adding the requirement for multi-family housing.

Bonnie Bona weighed in, saying that for park users, it’s better to have a screen of vegetation at the boundary than to have a building. She said she’s glad to see the buffer there. That said, it’s more important for her to see a buffer between multi-family and single-family zones.

Hancock again noted that there is language in the ordinance to allow the planning commission some flexibility in setting these requirements.

Carlberg raised the issue of landscaping on adjacent properties. If there was an existing landscape buffer on the property adjacent to a new development, for example, could the buffer requirement be lifted? Woods agreed that there are times when it would make sense to look at what’s on adjoining property.

Hancock said that if it’s private property, there’s an issue of equity. For example, imagine if a property owner submits a site plan and is required to put in the landscaping buffer. Then the owner of the adjacent property submits a site plan but is exempted from putting in a buffer, because the other property has it. That wouldn’t be fair, he said: “I think you’d be opening yourself up to litigation.”

Landscape Ordinance: Direction to Staff

Eric Mahler, the commission’s chair, wrapped up the discussion by asking if anyone wanted to make amendments based on the concerns that had been raised. Pratt stated his reluctance to craft amendments on the fly. Several commissioners indicated their desire for the ordinance to give the commission more flexibility, though Pratt pointed out that each time they add flexibility, they also increase the amount of time they’ll spend during site plan reviews.

Giannola reiterated that unless there’s a specific building height indicated for the multi-family dwellings, those units shouldn’t be treated differently than single-family residences.

Rampson summarized, saying that she understood the commission wanted the flexibility to say that a requirement doesn’t make sense in a particular situation, while at the same time not giving the impression that it’s open-ended.

Outcome: Commissioners unanimously tabled the resolution on changes to the city’s landscaping and screening ordinance, and directed staff to craft a revised draft to be considered at a future meeting.

Rampson clarified that after staff revises the draft, the changes would first be evaluated by the ordinance review committee, before coming back to the full planning commission.

Annexation Approved

Earlier in the meeting, with no discussion, the planning commission unanimously recommended approval of a request to annex 2562 Newport Road into the city – it’s now located in Ann Arbor Township. The city council must also approve the annexation. The parcel is on the east side of Newport, north of Warrington. The request included zoning the land as R1A (single-family residential) – a single-family home is already on the site.

The staff report indicates that the owner, Michael Betke, plans to connect the house to the city’s public water system. A water improvement charge of $1,447.09 will be assessed, and the owner must connect to water service within 90 days of annexation. When sanitary sewer service becomes available, the owner will be required to connect to the sewer and pay a fixed sanitary sewer improvement charge. The 2010 fixed sanitary sewer improvement charge was $21,930 – that charge is recalculated annually.

Public Hearings Set

The commission set public hearings for two projects at its Dec. 21 meeting: (1) a request to annex the 1.1-acre parcel at 2437 Newport Road into the city and zone it for single-family residential, use; and (2) a proposal to demolish the Allen Creek Preschool building at 1515 Franklin St. and construct a 1,101-square-foot structure there. The building is in a location that’s zoned residential – the project is requesting a special exception use, as well as site plan approval.

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

Next regular meeting: The planning commission next meets on Tuesday, Dec. 21 at 7 p.m. in the second-floor council chambers at city hall, 150 N. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]