Graph from weatherspark.com showing the -12 F temperature at the start of the Jan. 6, 2014 city council meeting. (Image links to weatherspark.com)

The direction came after the city council met in a closed session for about half an hour. Councilmembers emerged to craft and then pass the resolution. It gives direction to explore options to make the purchase financially feasible. That means finding a way to finance a $12.8 million deal. The sale of the Edwards Brothers property on South State Street is currently pending to the University of Michigan for $12.8 million, in an agreement that was announced in a Nov. 27, 2013 press release. The business – a fourth-generation Ann Arbor publishing and printing firm – had signaled its intent to put the property on the market in late July.

The topic of the possible land acquisition ties in to an upcoming Jan. 13 city council work session about economic development.

At the start of the Jan. 6 meeting, the council got an update from three key staff members about the city’s response to the snowstorm that had hit the entire Midwest over the weekend.

From public services area administrator Craig Hupy they heard an update on snowplowing, which was continuing during the meeting. From police chief John Seto, they heard an update on the police department’s support for relocating residents of a housing complex after a water pipe burst. And from Mary Jo Callan, Washtenaw County’s director of the office of community and economic development, they heard an update on efforts to address the needs of the homeless population during the freezing weather.

Concern for how the homeless were faring was the topic of eight out of nine speakers who signed up for public commentary reserved time.

In its regular business agenda, the council dispatched two items leftover from its last meeting of 2013. One of those items was the official termination of a four-year-old memorandum of understanding with the University of Michigan for construction of the Fuller Road Station project. That item was voted through with little controversy, although mayor John Hieftje compared it to digging someone up who died a couple of years ago and re-burying them.

Fuller Road Station was a planned joint city/University of Michigan parking structure, bus depot and possible train station located at the city’s Fuller Park near the UM medical campus. The council had approved the MOU on Fuller Road Station at its Nov. 5, 2009 meeting on a unanimous vote. However, a withdrawal of UM from the project, which took place under terms of the MOU, was announced on Feb. 10, 2012.

The other item delayed from last year was a resolution assigning a specific cost to the removal of on-street metered parking spaces, in connection with future developments: $45,000 per space. That amount was based on the cost of constructing a new parking space in a structure. After the policy was amended during the Jan. 6 meeting, it included a requirement that lost revenue also be compensated, based on projections of revenue for the space for the next 10 years. An average parking meter in the system generates $2,000 in annual income.

Apart from those previously delayed items, the rest of the council’s agenda was mainly filled with future development.

Accounting for two of the council’s Jan. 6 voting items was Traverwood Apartments – a First Martin development on the city’s north side. The site is located on the west side of Traverwood Drive, north of Plymouth Road. The council gave final approval of some rezoning necessary for the complex of 16 two-story buildings. And on a separate vote, the council gave site plan approval and a wetland use permit associated with the apartment complex.

The council also approved the upward expansion of the Montgomery Ward building on South Fourth Avenue in downtown Ann Arbor. The estimated $3.8 million project will expand the existing 17,273-square-foot building – a former Montgomery Ward’s department store – to 38,373 square feet, with housing on the second through fifth floors.

And finally, the council approved the site plan and development agreement for two restaurants at Briarwood Mall. The restaurants – one at 6,470 square feet, the other at 7,068 square feet – will be constructed on the east side of the Macy’s building. The restaurants would be operated by two chains: P.F. Chang’s and Bravo! Cucina Italiana.

As part of the consent agenda, the council approved agreements with Sprint for placing antennas at four facilities: the Plymouth Road water tower, the Manchester Road water tower, the Ann-Ashley parking structure, and the water treatment plant on Sunset Road. The contracts are being revised upwards to $45,000 a year at each location, with 4% annual escalators.

The council also approved appointments to the Ann Arbor Summer Festival board of directors.

Members of a pedestrian safety task force, established late last year, were also nominated at the meeting. A confirmation vote will come at the council’s meeting on Jan. 21. Related at least indirectly to that, city administrator Steve Powers has provided the council with the first part of his response to the council’s direction in connection with the city’s updated non-motorized transportation plan.

Edwards Brothers Property

By way of background, the sale of the Edwards Brothers Malloy on South State Street is currently pending to the University of Michigan for $12.8 million, in a deal that was announced in a Nov. 27, 2013 press release.

The business – a fourth-generation Ann Arbor publishing and printing firm – had signaled its intent to put the property on the market in late July.

But a right of first refusal on the property is held by the city of Ann Arbor as a condition of a tax abatement granted by the city council almost three years ago, on Jan. 18, 2011. Purchase by the university would remove the property from the tax rolls. Washtenaw County records show the taxable value of the property at just over $3 million.

According to the tax abatement agreement, the event triggering the city’s 60-day right-of-first-refusal window is a formal notification to the city by Edwards Brothers.

Edwards Brothers Property: Council Deliberations

At the end of the meeting, the council voted to go into a closed session for discussion of land acquisition and written attorney-client communication. Those are both allowable exceptions to Michigan’s Open Meetings Act.

Assistant city attorney Kevin McDonald reviewed the wording of the resolution on the Edwards Brothers property with city clerk Jackie Beaudry.

When councilmembers emerged from the closed session after about a half hour, they voted to go back into open session, and then immediately recessed the meeting so that the verbiage of the resolution could be crafted. [.pdf of amended Edwards Brothers resolution on Jan. 6, 2014]

The resolution directed Ann Arbor city administrator Steve Powers and city attorney Stephen Postema to gather information to help the city council determine whether to purchase the 16.7-acre property on South State Street. The resolution provides direction to explore options to make the purchase financially feasible. That means finding a way to finance a $12.8 million deal.

Some brief back-and-forth resulted in the addition of a deadline for assembling the information: Jan. 30, 2014. Last year there had been some disagreement about when the clock had started ticking on the 60-business-day window for the city to exercise its right of first refusal. In response to an emailed query after the meeting, city administrator Steve Powers stated:

The City is operating on a timeline to provide notice to Edwards Brothers prior to February 25, 2014. This calculation is made from Nov. 27th, 2013.

On returning from recess about 15 minutes later, the council reopened the agenda to add the resolution on the Edwards Brothers property.

Mayor John Hieftje recited a standard explanation of the city’s interest in preserving the city’s tax base. He called the acquisition of the old Pfizer property and the property along South Division where the Blimpy Burger’s previously stood part of a pattern that the University of Michigan has displayed.

Jane Lumm (Ward 2) said she was glad additional information was being gathered so the council could decide whether to exercise its right of first refusal. She said it would be invaluable to have that information so that the council can make its decision. Staff would be looking at the zoning questions, she said, which will help to inform the council’s decision. The site, at 16.7 acres, is the largest remaining such parcel in the city, she said.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) echoed Hieftje and Lumm. The University of Michigan’s acquisition of property is a long-term challenge the city faces, he said.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the resolution directing the city administrator and city attorney to gather information on exercising the city’s right of first refusal on the Edwards Brothers property.

Snowstorm

At the start of the meeting, much of the city administrator’s communications and the public commentary dealt with the snowstorm that began Jan. 4, which ultimately dropped 10.4 inches of snow on the city and subsequently pushed temperatures to -14 F.

Snowstorm: City’s Response

City administrator Steve Powers introduced Craig Hupy, public services area administrator, to give an update on the city’s snow removal response during and after the recent snowstorm.

From left: Public services area administrator Craig Hupy, Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) and Christopher Taylor (Ward 3).

The official tally for snowfall was 10.4 inches. Hupy described how the city had been using 12-hour shifts since New Year’s Eve, and was starting its seventh day of continuous plowing. Hupy said the colder weather was starting to affect the equipment and they were experiencing some breakdowns. He also described how the ridge that the plows were leaving behind on their first pass as the temperatures dropped was pretty stiff, which meant that sometimes motorists who tried to drive through it were getting hung up on that ridge. And that delayed the ability of the plows to make a second pass, he said.

Twenty-four snowplows were working on the local streets right then, and four plows were working major streets to keep drifts back, he said. Hupy also gave a summary of the mileage driven by the city’s snowplows.

Based on data provided to The Chronicle before the meeting, from midnight Sunday through around 1 p.m. Monday, Ann Arbor city snowplows logged 7,641 vehicle miles. Eleven of the city’s fleet logged at least 300 miles during that period. Top mileage for any plow, logged by vehicle number 4551, was 483.9 miles. [.jpg of snowplow mileage chart]

Next to be introduced was Mary Jo Callan, Washtenaw County’s director of the office of community and economic development. Her email message to councilmembers from earlier in the day had by that time been attached to the council’s online agenda. [Callan's Jan. 6, 2014 email] She gave the council a status update. That included reading aloud a portion of her written update:

All community shelters are open, including: the Delonis Center, IHN/Alpha House, Salvation Army’s Staples Center, and Ozone House. Housing Access is also open, and able to connect those in need with shelter options.

Callan said the Delonis Center had opened its daytime warming center, and 25 people were using it. The warming center has a capacity of 200, she said. No one had been turned out into the cold up to that point, she said. The restriction on intoxication in order to gain admittance to the warming center had been loosened, she noted. If someone arrives who is intoxicated to the point of being dangerous or severely disruptive to other guests, they are provided transportation to the Home of New Vision’s Engagement Center.

Callan continued by describing how known campsites had been visited by PORT (the county’s project outreach team). The soundness of tent structures was assessed. Various materials were distributed, she said. The work by PORT had begun on Friday before the storm in anticipation of the storm, she said, and that outreach had continued. Callan reported that 15 people had been put into hotels, extended at least until Friday, Jan. 10.

Callan described a number of warm places, not necessarily warming centers, that were accessible in the urban core area from Ann Arbor to Ypsilanti and in between. As examples, Callan listed off the Delonis Center, Ann Arbor city hall, all Ann Arbor District Library locations, the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority, Homeward Bound, University of Michigan Medical Center, and IHN Alpha House.

Callan then read aloud a statement from St. Joe’s, which has space for 30 people. St. Joe’s is looking to coordinate with the county and city on this. The county’s community support and treatment services (CSTS) and Alpha House are coordinating to staff that possible St. Joe’s facility, she said, if a decision is made to use it. That decision would be made later that night, she added.

Mayor John Hieftje got clarification from Callan on the situation with the daytime warming center at Delonis – a capacity of 200, with about 25 people making use of it.

From left: Mayor John Hieftje and city administrator Steve Powers.

Jack Eaton (Ward 4) asked a question about how much money this is costing all the organizations. He wanted information about how much it is costing so that the city could understand what it might do to help.

Responding to a question from Margie Teall (Ward 4), Callan thanked the council for its recent support of affordable housing. She mentioned the plan that the Ann Arbor housing commission (AAHC) has for Miller Manor to convert it to a front-desk staffed facility. She said the world had changed a lot since the 2007 needs assessment was done. So she’d be providing fresh information soon about what the current needs actually are.

Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) said he was glad that the Delonis Center had loosened its restriction on intoxication. He inquired about those people who have been prohibited from accessing the Delonis Center due to behavioral problems. Callan said that the 15 people that PORT has responded to were in that category.

Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1) said that the collection of organizations that have stepped forward seemed ad hoc. She wanted to know if it could be better publicized and systematized. Yes, said Callan. There is a plan in place, but it could be better. In some cases, she said, staff for some facilities couldn’t get into work due to the snow.

Police chief John Seto was then invited to the podium to report out. He said there had been no staff shortages, and the AAPD is “response capable.” He said that the department had not seen increased calls for service. On Saturday, Jan. 4, there had been a water pipe rupture at a large student apartment complex, he said, and the city’s emergency manager Rick Norman had worked with the University of Michigan’s office of the dean of students to place students from that building in temporary housing.

City’s Response to Snowstorm: Public Commentary

During public commentary on a different topic at the start of the meeting, saying that she wanted to start on a positive note, Kathy Griswold reported that her street had been plowed early Monday morning and that when she drove around town, she observed the streets were well-plowed, even the mid-block crosswalks.

Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5). In the foreground are Margie Teall (Ward 4) and Jack Eaton (Ward 4).

Tracy Williams introduced himself as a homeless resident. People are in trouble, he said, and although we can keep talking, we need to be doing. He suggested 721 N. Main as a possible warming shelter. The city’s plan to demolish the building and turn it into a park would prevent that, he noted. Williams said that instead of turning it into a park, the city should turn it into a cemetery – because that way, the city’s homeless might finally find a place to rest there.

Ryan Sample commended the Delonis Center for operating beyond its capacity. He urged the city to open the doors to the 721 N. Main building for use as a warming center.

Tate Williams said that the existing social services network is overtasked and underfunded. It leaves many people unable to receive the help they need to survive, he said. He asked for the city to provide a way for citizens to help in an organized way – including opening their homes to the homeless.

Sheri Wander told the council she lives on White Street. She apologized if her remarks came off as emotional. She’d spent the last several days delivering propane tanks to those who are living in tents. She said she was “in awe” of PORT as they raced around to put some people in hotel rooms. She was proud of what the city had done, but it shouldn’t be done at the last minute, she said. She hears over and over that the city has the infrastructure and the capacity to take care of people. But she didn’t think there’s enough sanctioned capacity to take care of people. “I know the city can do better,” she said. Wander wanted the city to look at 721 N. Main, even though that facility isn’t perfect, she said. She quoted G.K. Chesterton: “Anything worth doing is worth doing badly.”

Greg Pratt thanked all the previous speakers by name. He also thanked Mary Jo Callan. He appreciated all the support. But he offered an alternative pledge of allegiance: “I pledge allegiance to the people of the city of Ann Arbor and to the principle for which we all stand: warming centers open at 45 F degrees, with room for people who blow above .10.” The phrase “for which we all stand” was a cue for the rest of the audience in attendance advocating for the homeless community to stand up, which they did. Pratt concluded his remarks by raising his fist: “Power to the people!”

Odile Hugonot-Haber read aloud Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which includes the right to housing. She said that city officials seemed to want to say that everything is just fine. She allowed that what the city had done was good, but called for more to be done. The timer ending her speaking time then went off prematurely, and her remarks concluded after about a minute and a half, instead of three minutes.

Alan Haber thanked Odile for reading aloud from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Ann Arbor should adopt warmth as a fundamental human right, he said. Warmth is not just temperature, he noted. Statistics might show that everyone is taken care of, he said, but from what he’s heard and seen, that’s not so. The city needs a space that is managed by those who use it, he said. All of us should be more contributory. The homeless “them,” he said, are seen as a problem. But they have creativity and skills. He called on the council to consider 721 N. Main as an option.

City Response to Snowstorm: Council Coda

Jack Eaton (Ward 4) noted that when Camp Take Notice was dispersed, the city had interfered with an attempt to create a self-governed community to deal with homelessness in the way that Haber described. Eaton ventured that the city might lease a city building to a group. His remarks drew applause.

How Much Is a Parking Space Worth?

The council considered a resolution that defines a policy setting the amount that a developer would need to pay, if a project causes an on-street metered parking space to be removed from the system.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3).

The proposed amount in the original resolution was $45,000 per space. The money to be paid would be passed through to the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority. The payment goes to the Ann Arbor DDA because the DDA manages the public parking system under a contract with the city.

The resolution had been postponed for the second time at the council’s Dec. 16, 2013 meeting, and that’s why it appeared on the Jan. 6 agenda. The rationale for originally postponing the item on Dec. 2 – offered by Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), who sponsored the resolution – was that because it amounts to a fee, a public hearing should be held on the matter before the council voted.

After the public hearing held at the council’s Dec. 16 meeting, the council’s deliberations focused on the question of the accounting procedures to be used by the DDA in tracking any money that might be paid under the policy.

Given that the rationale for the policy is that the money would be put toward the cost of constructing new parking spaces, councilmembers wanted to know how the money would be reserved for that purpose.

In this matter, the council was acting on a four-year-old recommendation approved by the Ann Arbor DDA in 2009:

Thus it is recommended that when developments lead to the removal of on-street parking meter spaces, a cost of $45,000/parking meter space (with annual CPI increases) be assessed and provided to the DDA to set aside in a special fund that will be used to construct future parking spaces or other means to meet the goals above. [.pdf of meeting minutes with complete text of March 4, 2009 DDA resolution]

The contract under which the DDA manages the public parking system for the city was revised to restructure the financial arrangement (which now pays the city 17% of the gross revenues), but also included a clause meant to prompt the city to act on the on-street space cost recommendation. From the May 2011 parking agreement:

The City shall work collaboratively with the DDA to develop and present for adoption by City Council a City policy regarding the permanent removal of on-street metered parking spaces. The purpose of this policy will be to identify whether a community benefit to the elimination of one or more metered parking spaces specific area(s) of the City exists, and the basis for such a determination. If no community benefit can be identified, it is understood and agreed by the parties that a replacement cost allocation methodology will need to be adopted concurrent with the approval of the City policy; which shall be used to make improvements to the public parking or transportation system.

Subject to administrative approval by the city, the DDA has sole authority to determine the addition or removal of meters, loading zones, or other curbside parking uses.

The $45,000 figure is based on an average construction cost to build a new parking space in a structure, either above ground or below ground – as estimated in 2009. [For more background, see: "Column: Ann Arbor's Monroe (Street) Doctrine."]

Taylor, the resolution’s sponsor, participated in meetings during the fall of 2013 of a joint council and DDA board committee that negotiated a resolution to the question about how the DDA’s TIF (tax increment finance) revenue is regulated. In that context, Taylor had argued adamantly that any cap on the DDA’s TIF should be escalated by a construction industry CPI, or roughly 5%. Taylor’s reasoning was that the DDA’s mission is to undertake capital projects and therefore should have revenue that escalates in accordance with increases in the costs to undertake capital projects.

Based on Taylor’s reasoning on the TIF question, and the explicit 2009 recommendation by the DDA to increase the estimated $45,000 figure in that year by an inflationary index, the recommended amount now, four years later, would be closer to $55,000, assuming a 5% figure for construction cost inflation. The city’s contribution in lieu (CIL) parking program allows a developer (as one option) to satisfy an on-site parking space requirement by paying $55,000. (The other option is to enter into a 15-year agreement to purchase monthly parking permits at a 20% premium.)

The actual cost of building an underground space in the recently completed (2012) underground Library Lane parking structure could be calculated by taking the actual costs and dividing by 738 – the number of spaces in the structure. Based on a recent memo from executive director Susan Pollay to city administrator Steve Powers, about 30% or $15 million of the cost of the project was spent on items “unneeded by the parking structure.” That included elements like oversized foundations to support future development, an extra-large transformer, a new alley between Library Lane and S. Fifth Avenue, new water mains, easements for a fire hydrant and pedestrian improvements.

The actual amount spent on the Library Lane structure, according to DDA records produced under a Freedom of Information Act request from The Chronicle, was $54,855,780.07, or about $1.5 million under the project’s $56.4 million budget. Adjusting for those elements not needed for the parking structure yields a per-space cost of about $52,000. [(54,855,780.07*.70)/738] [.pdf of Nov. 22, 2013 memo from Pollay to Powers][.pdf of budget versus actual expenses for the 738-space Library Lane structure]

By way of additional background, the Ann Arbor DDA’s most recent financial records show that last year, on-street parking spaces generated $2,000 in gross revenue per space or $1,347 in net income per space annually. The contract with the city under which the DDA operates the public parking system stipulates that the city receives 17% of the gross parking revenues. So the city’s revenue associated with an on-street parking space corresponds to $340 annually.

Based on information provided to the council by the DDA, the majority of on-street spaces that have been removed from the system since 2006 can be attributed to University of Michigan projects.

How Much Is a Parking Structure Worth: Council Deliberations

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) described the resolution, noting that it creates a policy that the contract between the city and the DDA describes.

From right: Sally Petersen (Ward 2) and Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1).

Sally Petersen (Ward 2) wanted to amend the resolution. She said that the true cost of a metered parking space should include the net present value estimate for the revenue associated with a parking space. She’d chosen a 10-year projection provided by the staff. She and Taylor had had some back-and-forth on the amendment, she reported. Her amendment ensured that the city would get 17% of the revenue from that portion of the payment that compensates for lost revenue.

Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1) wanted to amend the resolution so that the money that goes to the DDA is recorded as restricted funds for capital projects in the parking system.

Taylor responded, saying that they were both excellent ideas, which he was happy to support. The changes were considered “friendly.” [At its Dec. 18, 2013 meeting, the DDA operations committee discussed the matter and concluded that the money paid under the meter-removal policy would be shown as a restricted amount in the DDA’s parking maintenance fund.]

Taylor also offered an amendment of his own: swapping out the phrase “on the parcels” for “in the right of way.” That amendment was accepted as “friendly” as well.

Jane Lumm (Ward 2) said the changes were an improvement. She thanked staff. She supported the resolution. Lumm reviewed how many meters had been removed in the past. She thought it was important to adopt a requirement for reimbursement for lost revenue, because the amounts that accumulate can be substantial.

By way of more detailed background, the policy applies in part only if the DDA were to determine that the removal of a parking space is not a community benefit, but rather is localized to a particular development. Subsequent council deliberations focused on a part of the policy that provides for a review of the decision by the city administrator: “The City Administrator shall review the DDA’s determination of whether space removal would constitute a community benefit, and is authorized to reverse such determination if, in the City Administrator’s reasonable discretion, the DDA has incorrectly evaluated the existence of ‘community benefit.’”

Jack Eaton (Ward 4).

At the Jan. 6 meeting, Jack Eaton (Ward 4) raised the question about the authorization of the city administrator to review the DDA decision. Given that the city administrator now sits on the DDA board, Eaton wanted to substitute “city council” as the party responsible for the review.

Margie Teall (Ward 4) said she understood the conflict that was being pointed out. But she didn’t think the council should review the decision. She felt it could be handled within the administration. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) said he didn’t have a problem with the city administrator having the authority to override the DDA as a whole.

City administrator Steve Powers stated that he felt he could balance the responsibility, noting that his ultimate accountability is to the city council.

Eaton noted that he was not questioning the ability of Powers to balance the decision, but thought it was bad public policy to have someone sitting on a board who then reviews the decisions of that same board.

Mayor John Hieftje responded by saying that the DDA statute requires conflict in some ways. Petersen noted that the DDA has not drafted a policy for evaluating public benefit.

Kailasapathy characterized the issue as one of checks and balances, and not the integrity of Powers. We’re human beings and we’re fallible, she said. Having the same person implementing the policy and reviewing it isn’t good policy, she said.

Kunselman indicated agreement that it might not be good policy, but noted that government is messy. If the city council should review the decision, as Eaton was suggesting, he wondered if the council shouldn’t just take back the whole parking system. He didn’t think it’s possible to avoid the kind of conflict that Eaton had identified. The language is fine the way it is, Kunselman said.

Lumm said she appreciated Kunselman’s remarks. Having someone else besides Powers in the administration review the decision would still mean that person would be reporting to Powers, she noted. And to drag the city council into it, she said, wouldn’t be a good idea. She ventured that the council might want to weigh in on the drafting of the public benefit policy.

Eaton said it’s purely a process question, and it’s not a desire for the city council to take over that role – but he doesn’t know who else would take that role.

Petersen said that it’d been a good discussion and it showed that the council needs training on what is and isn’t a conflict of interest. [Petersen was alluding to a resolution that she'd put forward, which the council passed at its Nov. 18, 2013 meeting, calling for the development of an ethics education program.] She compared it to having a separate person collect the money and count the money. She was willing to let the issue go forward with the city administrator being the reviewer.

Outcome on Eaton’s amendment: Only Kailasapathy and Eaton vote for the amendment, so it failed.

Outcome on main resolution: The council voted unanimously to approve the policy, as amended, for charging a fee of $45,000 for removal of an on-street parking space, plus payment of 10-years worth of projected revenues generated by the space.

Killing Fuller Road Station MOU

The council considered a resolution that terminates a four-year-old memorandum of understanding between the city of Ann Arbor and the University of Michigan on Fuller Road Station.

Fuller Road Station was a planned joint city/UM parking structure, bus depot and possible train station located at the city’s Fuller Park near the UM medical campus. The council had approved the MOU on the Fuller Road Station project at its Nov. 5, 2009 meeting on a unanimous vote. [.pdf of Nov. 5, 2009 MOU text as approved by the city council] However, a withdrawal of UM from the project, which took place under terms of the MOU, was announced on Feb. 10, 2012. So it’s been clear for nearly two years that the MOU was a dead letter.

The item had been postponed from the council’s Dec. 16, 2013 meeting. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) sponsored that Dec. 16 resolution. The idea to terminate the MOU has its origins in election campaign rhetoric. He had stated at a June 8, 2013 Democratic primary candidate forum that he intended to bring forth such a resolution to “kill” the Fuller Road Station project. From The Chronicle’s report of that forum:

Kunselman also stated that he would be proposing that the city council rescind its memorandum of understanding with the University of Michigan to build a parking structure as part of the Fuller Road Station project. Although UM has withdrawn from participation in that project under the MOU, Kunselman said he wanted to “kill it.” That way, he said, the conversation could turn away from using the designated parkland at the Fuller Road Station site as a new train station, and could instead be focused on the site across the tracks from the existing Amtrak station.

The city continues to pursue the possibility of a newly built or reconstructed train station, but not necessarily with the University of Michigan’s participation, and without a pre-determined preferred alternative for the site of a new station. At its Oct. 21, 2013 meeting, the council approved a contract with URS Corp. Inc. to carry out an environmental review of a project called the Ann Arbor Station. That review should yield the determination of a locally-preferred alternative for a site.

At the Dec. 16 meeting, Kunselman led off deliberations by saying he wanted to postpone the resolution. He indicated that he thought he’d managed to add the item to the agenda on the Friday before the Monday meeting, but it turned out he had not done so. In light of the council’s discussion at their Dec. 9 budget planning session – when councilmembers had said they’d strive to avoid adding resolutions at the last minute – Kunselman said he wanted it postponed.

On Dec. 16, mayor John Hieftje and Sabra Briere (Ward 1) both indicated they’d vote for the resolution – but also said they didn’t think the resolution was necessary. They indicated they were willing to vote for the resolution without postponing. Kunselman nevertheless wanted to postpone it, because it was added late to the agenda. That’s why it appeared on the Jan. 6 agenda.

Killing Fuller Road MOU: Public Commentary

During public commentary at the start of the meeting, Kathy Griswold said she supported the termination of the Fuller Road Station memorandum of understanding. She called on the council to pay attention to process.

Road Station MOU: Council Deliberations

At the Jan. 6 meeting, Kunselman introduced the resolution. He called it wrapping up loose ends on a document that doesn’t have an expiration date. Hieftje said it’s like digging someone up who died a couple of years ago and re-burying them, but he was not opposed to that.

Outcome: The council voted to terminate the Fuller Road Station MOU.

Traverwood Apartments

The council considered two questions related to a First Martin Corp. project, which would construct a residential complex on the city’s north side. The project – located on the west side of Traverwood Drive, north of Plymouth Road – is called Traverwood Apartments.

The project, estimated to cost $30 million, would include 16 two-story buildings for a total of 216 one- and two-bedroom units – or 280 total bedrooms. Eight of the buildings would each have 15 units and 11 single-car garages. An additional eight buildings would each have 12 units and 8 single-car garages.

Two separate items were on the council’s agenda – one for the rezoning required for the project, and the other for the site plan and wetland use permit.

At the council’s Dec. 2, 2013 meeting, the initial approval of the required rezoning was given. Also approved at that meeting was a donation of 2.2 acres, just north of the project site – by Bill Martin, founder of First Martin Corp., to the city. The donated acreage is next to the Stapp Nature Area and the Leslie Park golf course.

Aerial view of the site for the proposed Traverwood Apartments at 2225 Traverwood Drive, north of Plymouth Road.

The city’s planning commission recommended approval of the site plan and the required rezoning at its Nov. 6, 2013 meeting. The site is made up of two parcels: a nearly 16-acre lot that’s zoned R4D (multi-family residential), and an adjacent 3.88-acre lot to the south that’s currently zoned ORL (office, research and light industrial). It’s the smaller lot that needed to be rezoned R4D.

Land donated by Bill Martin to the city of Ann Arbor indicated in red outline.

Traverwood Apartments: Public Hearing

During the public hearing on the rezoning aspect of the proposal, Mike Martin of First Martin told the council that the project team was in attendance and available to answer questions.

Thomas Partridge gave general commentary critical of the rezoning proposal. He wanted the proposal postponed until there is a requirement in every such proposal that ensures the turnaround of egregious past discrimination.

During a recess, Peggy Rabhi showed Earl Ophoff of Midwestern Consulting what her concerns were about the Traverwood Apartments project.

During the public hearing on the Traverwood Apartments site plan, Partridge followed up on his earlier remarks, by saying that it amounts to egregious discrimination to not take up the question of whether a site was used for the Underground Railroad, before approving the site plan.

Peggy Rabhi posed questions about the wetland use permit. She said it looked like the project will preserve the “lake” and the largest pond on the south end of the property. The south pond is home to frogs, newts and salamanders, she said. Those species pass the winter not in the pond, but rather adjacent to the pond, she said. She hoped that First Martin would be willing to work with the city’s natural area preservation staff on this issue.

Stacie Printon told the council she’s a park steward for the park adjacent to the property. She expressed some concerns and made some suggestions. The southwest portion of the plan abuts Leslie Park golf course and Leslie Woods, so she had concerns about the impact on those woods. There will be some cutting into the slopes, she said. There are three trees worthy of preservation, numbered 2582, 2583, and 2584. Buildings #5 and #6 come very close to the corner, she said. She suggested combining the buildings into a single L-shaped building that might eliminate the need for a retaining wall.

Traverwood Apartments: Council Deliberations

Jane Lumm (Ward 2) led things off, saying that she’d seen the development team having a conversation with those who spoke during the public hearing.

She asked for some response to the concerns described during the public commentary. Earl Ophoff of Midwestern Consulting responded by offering a description of the retaining walls – which are tiered so that the impact on the critical root zones of nearby trees is minimized.

During a recess, the Traverwood Apartments development team discussed aspects of the project with member of the public who spoke during the public hearing.

The location of the building that had been mentioned was predicated on the 22-foot deep sanitary sewer, he said, which had public easement associated with it. So it couldn’t be moved or twisted as had been suggested. The entire hedgerow along the south and the west had been preserved, he noted.

Ophoff described how the timing of the construction was key to various considerations. One was the interest in protecting the Indiana bat habitat at the north end of the site where there are shagbark hickories. To the extent that trees needed to be removed, he said, they wanted to do that when any bats that might live there during the warmer months were not there. So that tree removal needed to begin as soon as possible, now during the winter months, he explained.

Ophoff then described how the newts and salamanders will be finishing their mating in the spring around March and May before the project starts work. Right now they’re hibernating in the sedimentation basin in the mud.

Jack Eaton (Ward 4) asked about a pipe to be installed in connection with the wetland. Wetland #2 has three parts, Ophoff explained – a natural pond, a ditch, and a detention basin. The ditch will be enclosed in a pipe, so that driveway connections can be established. That 1,800 square feet is mitigated with about 2,700 square feet. Eaton was concerned that the pipe was undersized – because it could only handle a 10-year storm. Ophoff said that such pipes are not generally designed to accommodate a 100-year rain. If there were a 100-year rain, there would be standing water in a lot of places, he said.

Responding to Eaton’s concern, Ophoff noted that the ditch is not a creek, and normally there’s no water flow there.

Outcome: The council voted to approve the site plan and wetland use permit for the Traverwood Apartments project. In a separate vote, taken before the site plan and wetland use permit vote, the council approved without discussion the required rezoning.

Montgomery Ward Building

The council considered the site plan for a four-story addition to the existing two-story building at 210-216 S. Fourth Ave., between East Liberty and East Washington in downtown Ann Arbor. The plan calls for creating 32 new housing units, including four studios, 14 one-bedroom, and 14 two-bedroom units. Planning commissioners recommended approval of the project’s site plan at their Nov. 19, 2013 meeting.

Aerial view of the Montgomery building (indicated with crosshatches) at 210 S. Fourth Ave. in downtown Ann Arbor.

The estimated $3.8 million project would expand the existing 17,273-square-foot building – a former Montgomery Ward’s department store – to 38,373 square feet, with housing on the second through fifth floors. The ground floor would remain commercial space. Current tenants include Salon Vertigo and Bandito’s Mexican Restaurant. The top floor will include a stair/elevator lobby, restroom, wet bar, and access to several roof decks. Part of the fifth-floor roof will be covered in vegetation as a green roof.

Because the building is located in a historic district, it required a certificate of appropriateness from the city’s historic district commission. The HDC granted that certificate at its Sept. 12, 2013 meeting.

The site is zoned D1, which allows for the highest level of density. According to a staff memo, eight footing drain disconnects will be required.

According to a report from the July 10, 2013 citizen participation meeting, the units will be marketed to “anyone who wants to live downtown.” If approvals are received, construction is expected to begin next summer. The project’s architect is Brad Moore.

Moore is also the architect for an expansion project on the adjacent property – a three-floor addition to the Running Fit building at East Liberty and South Fourth, which will create six residential units. That project received a recommendation of approval from planning commissioners at their Oct. 15, 2013 meeting and was subsequently approved by the city council on Dec. 2, 2013.

During the public hearing, architect Brad Moore described the project as next to the Running Fit building, which the council had recently approved. He described the basic highlights of the project. Also during the public hearing Thomas Partridge said the attempt to rehabilitate the property is admirable. But he’d not heard the two words he thought were essential: “Affordable housing.”

Outcome: The council voted without discussion to approve the site plan for the old Montgomery Ward building.

Briarwood Mall Restaurant Expansions

The council considered the site plan for construction of two freestanding restaurants at Briarwood Mall.

Aerial view of Briarwood Mall. The cross-hatched section indicates the parcel where two new restaurants are proposed, adjacent to Macy’s.

The proposal calls for building two new restaurants – one at 6,470 square feet, the other at 7,068 square feet – on the east side of the Macy’s building at Briarwood Mall, 700 Briarwood Circle. The restaurants would be two chains: P.F. Chang’s and Bravo! Cucina Italiana.

The parking lot north and east of the new restaurants would be reconfigured, reducing the total amount of parking by 188 spaces. The estimated cost of the project is $1,577,094. The site is located in Ward 4.

Ann Arbor planning commissioners recommended approval of the site plan and development agreement in action at their Nov. 19, 2013 meeting. The project was originally considered at the commission’s Oct. 15, 2013 meeting, but postponed because of outstanding issues.

Originally, the planning staff had indicated that the project would require rezoning a portion of the parking lot from P (parking) to C2B (business service. However, according to a memo accompanying the commission’s Nov. 19 meeting packet, planning staff subsequently determined that because the original 1973 Briarwood Mall zoning anticipated the expansion of Hudson’s (now Macy’s ) to the east, no rezoning was needed.

During the council’s Jan. 6 public hearing on the Briarwood Mall site plan, Thomas Partridge told the council he was a recent candidate for the city council as well as for the Michigan state house and senate. He’d attended meetings of several different public bodies over the last decade. He reiterated his standard call for a requirement that all site plans include provisions for access to public transportation and affordable housing.

Outcome: The council voted without discussion to approve the Briarwood Mall restaurant expansion site plan.

Cellular Antenna Licensing

As a part of its consent agenda, the council considered two items involving cellular phone antennas mounted on city facilities. By council rule, contracts for less than $100,000 can be placed on the consent agenda.

Antennas from left: Plymouth Road water tower, Ann-Ashley parking structure, Manchester Road water tower.

One of the consent agenda items related to the specific contracts with Sprint for placing antennas at four facilities: the Plymouth Road water tower, the Manchester Road water tower, the Ann-Ashley parking structure, and the water treatment plant on Sunset Road. The contracts are being revised upwards to $45,000 a year at each location with 4% annual escalators. The previous agreements ranged from $25,920 to $39,283, according to the staff memo accompanying the resolution.

Total revenue to the city for cell antennas budgeted for FY 2014 is $520,000, all of which goes towards debt service on the Justice Center.

The staff memo also indicated that Sprint has been given initial administrative approval to undertake replacement of some of its equipment related to its 4G deployment.

The other consent agenda item related to cellular phone antennas made it unnecessary in the future for items like the agreements with Sprint to come before the city council for approval. Instead, the city administrator was given the power to approve licensing agreements with cellular service providers – even though they exceed the $25,000 threshold for council approval set forth in a city-charter required ordinance.

Outcome: The council approved the consent agenda, including the cellular antenna items.

Ann Arbor Summer Festival Board

The council considered a resolution appointing directors to the board of the nonprofit Ann Arbor Summer Festival. It reflected a certain amount of bureaucratic housecleaning, as all of the appointments were retroactive, some of them dramatically so:

• Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2014 Paul Cousins (trustee, Dexter Village)
• Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2014 Erica Fitzgerald (attorney with Barris, Sott, Denn & Driker)
• Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2014 Linda Girard (CEO, Pure Visibility)
• Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2014 Kimberly Scott (attorney with Miller Canfield)
• Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2014 Ellie Serras (community relations director, Main Street BIZ)
• Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2014 Christie Wong Barrett (manufacturing council at U.S. Department of Commerce)
• Oct. 1, 2012 to Sept. 30, 2015 Tim Freeth (head of industry, Google)
• Oct. 1, 2012 to Sept. 30, 2015 Jerold Lax (attorney with Pear Sperling Eggan and Daniels)
• Oct. 1, 2012 to Sept. 30, 2015 Kenneth Magee (former head of University of Michigan public safety)
• Oct. 1, 2012 to Sept. 30, 2015 Kevin McDonald (city of Ann Arbor, assistant city attorney)
• Oct. 1, 2013 to Sept. 30, 2016 Tom Crawford (city of Ann Arbor, chief financial officer)
• Oct. 1, 2013 to Sept. 30, 2016 Mary Kerr (president, Ann Arbor Area Convention & Visitors Bureau)
• Oct. 1, 2013 to Sept. 30, 2016 Dug Song (CEO of Duo Security, tech entrepreneur)

Most of these members, however, do not appear to meet the membership criteria listed out in the description available on the city’s online Legistar system, which reads:

Membership/Committee Composition: Representatives from each of the following: Ann Arbor Street Art Fair, South University Merchants Association, State Street Area Art Fair, State Street Area Association, Michigan Guild of Artists and Artisans, Main Street Area Association, Washtenaw Non-Profits, Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, Ann Arbor Area Convention and Visitors Bureau, Ann Arbor City Council (2-1 each caucus), City and County Government Departments (4 votes total): Ann Arbor Building Dept., Ann Arbor Police Dept., Ann Arbor Fire Dept., Ann Arbor Solid Waste Dept., Ann Arbor Transportation Division, Ann Arbor Attorney’s Office, Washtenaw County Health Dept., U of M (2 votes total): Community Relations, Public Safety, Michigan Union, Plant Operations, Parking Services.

Mayor John Hieftje, who sponsored the resolution, did not respond before the council meeting to an emailed Chronicle query about the issue, but spoke to The Chronicle after the meeting. He said it wasn’t clear from what document the Legistar description originated, but that it would be removed from the online description.

Some confusion surrounding these appointments is reflected in one of the resolved clauses of the resolution, which reads:

RESOLVED, That the Mayor and City Council request that the Ann Arbor Summer Festival, Inc., clarify the designation process in their Bylaws and implement an annual designation process by August 1, 2014.

The Ann Arbor Summer Festival runs for about three weeks each year and includes indoor ticketed performances and free outdoor events at the Top of the Park. Revenues come from ticket sales, sponsorships and donations.

Ann Arbor Summer Festival financial data from 2000-2011 from the National Center for Charitable Statistics. http://nccsweb.urban.org/

Hieftje told the council that the resolution had been prompted by a bylaws review of the Ann Arbor Summer Festival board. He then praised the Summer Festival for its work.

Outcome: The council voted to approve the board appointments to the Ann Arbor Summer Festival.

Nominations to Pedestrian Safety Task Force

Nominations were made at the Jan. 6 meeting for the nine members of the pedestrian safety task force, which was established by the council at its Nov. 18, 2013 meeting. The nominations are: Vivienne Armentrout, Neal Elyakin, Linda Diane Feldt, Jim Rees, Anthony Pinnell, Sarah Pressprich Gryniewicz, Kenneth Clark, Scott Campbell, and Owen Jansson. The council will vote on their confirmations at its Jan. 21 meeting.

Related to that, the first part of the non-motorized transportation plan implementation strategy that the city administrator was directed by the city council to develop had also been released by the time of the Jan. 6 meeting. This was the part of the council’s direction that dealt with improvement of traffic enforcement at and around crosswalks. [.pdf of crosswalk traffic enforcement plan implementation strategy]

Highlights of that strategy include targeted enforcement that was to take place on Jan. 9 and Jan. 10 using council-authorized police overtime pay for that purpose. The police department has also developed an on­line tool for reporting traffic complaints and concerns.

Communications and Comment

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

Comm/Comm: New Year’s Events

At the end of the meeting, during council communications time, Margie Teall (Ward 4) thanked police chief John Seto and the staff for their work on the New Year’s Eve celebration activities on Main Street, called The Puck Drops Here. She hoped it would be repeated.

Comm/Comm: Dream Nite Club

City attorney Stephen Postema reported to the council that the Michigan Court of Appeals had upheld the city’s position in the revoking the Dream Nite Club’s liquor license. Postema thanked the police department for its role in that.

Comm/Comm: Thomas Partridge

During public commentary at the start of the meeting, Thomas Partridge called on the council to protect the most vulnerable. He criticized various “right wing proposals.” He wanted provisions in all site plan approvals requiring accessibility for public transportation and affordable housing.

Partridge also addressed the council at the conclusion of the meeting during public commentary general time. He allowed that people might question why he attends council meetings calling on the council to abide by the law and the constitution. He called for reform and a turnaround of the council. He called again, as he has before, for the resignation of mayor John Hieftje and Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder. He alleged that he’s had property stolen and has been subject to threats of intimidation. Huge amounts of snow have been piled up around buildings that house handicapped people, he claimed.

Present: Jane Lumm, Margie Teall, Sumi Kailasapathy, Sally Petersen, Stephen Kunselman, Marcia Higgins Jack Eaton, John Hieftje, Christopher Taylor, Chuck Warpehoski.

Absent: Sabra Briere, Mike Anglin.

Next council meeting: Jan. 21, 2014 at 7 p.m. in the council chambers at city hall, located at 301 E. Huron. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date]

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor city council. We sit on the hard bench so that you don’t have to. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting us, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

The Ann Arbor city council’s first regular meeting of the year, on Jan. 6, 2014, features a relatively light agenda with only a half dozen substantive voting items.

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

Two of those items were postponed from the final meeting of 2013, on Dec. 16.

One of those postponed items was the official termination of a four-year-old memorandum of understanding with the University of Michigan for construction of the Fuller Road Station project.

That was a planned joint city/UM parking structure, bus depot and possible train station located at the city’s Fuller Park near the UM medical campus. The council had approved the MOU on the Fuller Road Station project at its Nov. 5, 2009 meeting on a unanimous vote. However, a withdrawal of UM from the project, which took place under the terms of the MOU, was announced on Feb. 10, 2012. So it’s been clear for nearly two years that the MOU was a dead letter. The vote to terminate the MOU has its origins in the politics of Stephen Kunselman’s Ward 3 re-election campaign in 2013, when he promised to bring forward such a resolution.

The council’s postponement of the MOU termination at its Dec. 16 meeting was not due to any particular controversy about the vote itself. Instead, the postponement resulted from the fact that the item had been added to the agenda on the same day as the meeting, and that’s a practice the council has agreed should be avoided.

The other item delayed from the Dec. 16 meeting was a resolution assigning a specific cost to the removal of an on-street parking space, in connection with future developments: $45,000. That item first appeared on the council’s Dec. 2 agenda, but the council postponed it, based on a desire to hold a public hearing on the matter before taking action. The Dec. 16 postponement came after questions were raised during council deliberations, about the accounting procedures that would be used by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority to track any money that might be collected under the policy.

Apart from those previously delayed items, the rest of the council’s agenda is filled out primarily with items concerning future development.

Accounting for two of the council’s Jan. 6 voting items is Traverwood Apartments – a First Martin development on the west side of Traverwood Drive, north of Plymouth Road. The council will consider final approval of some rezoning necessary for the complex of 16 two-story buildings. And on a separate vote, the council will consider the site plan approval and a wetland use permit associated with the apartment complex.

A third development item on the Jan. 6 agenda is the site plan for the upward expansion of the Montgomery Ward building on South Fourth Avenue in downtown Ann Arbor. The estimated $3.8 million project would expand the existing 17,273-square-foot building – a former Montgomery Ward’s department store – to 38,373 square feet, with housing on the second through fifth floors.

And a final development item on the Jan. 6 agenda is a site plan and development agreement for two restaurants at Briarwood Mall. The restaurants – one at 6,470 square feet, the other at 7,068 square feet – would be constructed on the east side of the Macy’s building at Briarwood Mall. The restaurants would be operated by two chains: P.F. Chang’s and Bravo! Cucina Italiana.

The consent agenda features two items involving cellular phone antennas mounted on city facilities. One of the items relates to the specific contracts with Sprint for placing antennas at four facilities: the Plymouth Road water tower, the Manchester Road water tower, the Ann-Ashley parking structure, and the water treatment plant on Sunset Road. The contracts are being revised upwards to $45,000 a year at each location, with 4% annual escalators.

The other consent agenda item that’s related to cellular phone antennas, if it’s approved, would make it unnecessary in the future for items like the agreements with Sprint to come before the city council for approval. Instead, it would give the city administrator the power to approve licensing agreements with cellular service providers – even though they exceed the $25,000 threshold for council approval set forth in a city-charter required ordinance.

This article includes a more detailed preview of many of these agenda items. More details on other agenda items are available on the city’s online Legistar system. The meeting proceedings can be followed Monday evening live on Channel 16, streamed online by Community Television Network.

The Chronicle will be filing live updates from city council chambers during the meeting, published in this article below the preview material. Click here to skip the preview section and go directly to the live updates. The meeting is scheduled to start at 7 p.m.

How Much Is a Parking Space Worth?

A resolution that was postponed for the second time at the council’s Dec. 16, 2013 meeting is now on the Jan. 6 agenda. It would define how much developers would need to pay the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority if a developer’s project requires removal of a metered on-street parking space. The proposed amount is $45,000 per space. The payment would go to the Ann Arbor DDA because the DDA manages the public parking system under a contract with the city.

The rationale for postponing the item on Dec. 2 – offered by Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), who sponsored the resolution – was that because it amounts to a fee, a public hearing should be held on the matter before the council voted.

After the public hearing held at the council’s Dec. 16 meeting, the council’s deliberations focused on the question of the accounting procedures to be used by the DDA in tracking any money that might be paid under the policy. Given that the rationale for the policy is that the money would be put toward the cost of construction for new parking spaces, councilmembers wanted to know how the money would be reserved for that purpose.

In this matter, the council would be acting on a four-year-old recommendation approved by the Ann Arbor DDA in 2009:

Thus it is recommended that when developments lead to the removal of on-street parking meter spaces, a cost of $45,000/parking meter space (with annual CPI increases) be assessed and provided to the DDA to set aside in a special fund that will be used to construct future parking spaces or other means to meet the goals above. [.pdf of meeting minutes with complete text of March 4, 2009 DDA resolution]

The contract under which the DDA manages the public parking system for the city was revised to restructure the financial arrangement (which now pays the city 17% of the gross revenues), but also included a clause meant to prompt the city to act on the on-street space cost recommendation. From the May 2011 parking agreement:

The City shall work collaboratively with the DDA to develop and present for adoption by City Council a City policy regarding the permanent removal of on-street metered parking spaces. The purpose of this policy will be to identify whether a community benefit to the elimination of one or more metered parking spaces specific area(s) of the City exists, and the basis for such a determination. If no community benefit can be identified, it is understood and agreed by the parties that a replacement cost allocation methodology will need to be adopted concurrent with the approval of the City policy; which shall be used to make improvements to the public parking or transportation system.

Subject to administrative approval by the city, the DDA has sole authority to determine the addition or removal of meters, loading zones, or other curbside parking uses.

The $45,000 figure is based on an average construction cost to build a new parking space in a structure, either above ground or below ground – as estimated in 2009. It’s not clear what the specific impetus is to act on the issue now, other than the fact that action is simply long overdue. [For more background, see: "Column: Ann Arbor's Monroe (Street) Doctrine."]

Taylor, the resolution’s sponsor, participated in meetings during the fall of 2013 of a joint council and DDA board committee that negotiated a resolution to the question about how the DDA’s TIF (tax increment finance) revenue is regulated. In that context, Taylor had argued adamantly that any cap on the DDA’s TIF should be escalated by a construction industry CPI, or roughly 5%. Taylor’s reasoning was that the DDA’s mission is to undertake capital projects and therefore should have revenue that escalates in accordance with increases in the costs to undertake capital projects.

Based on Taylor’s reasoning on the TIF question, and the explicit 2009 recommendation by the DDA to increase the estimated $45,000 figure in that year by an inflationary index, the recommended amount now, four years later, would be closer to $55,000, assuming a 5% figure for construction cost inflation. The city’s contribution in lieu (CIL) parking program allows a developer (as one option) to satisfy an on-site parking space requirement by paying $55,000. (The other option is to enter into a 15-year agreement to purchase monthly parking permits at a 20% premium.)

The actual cost of building an underground space in the recently completed (2012) underground Library Lane parking structure could be calculated by taking the actual costs and dividing by 738 – the number of spaces in the structure. Based on a recent memo from executive director Susan Pollay to city administrator Steve Powers, about 30% or $15 million of the cost of the project was spent on items “unneeded by the parking structure.” That included elements like oversized foundations to support future development, an extra-large transformer, a new alley between Library Lane and S. Fifth Avenue, new water mains, easements for a fire hydrant and pedestrian improvements.

The actual amount spent on the Library Lane structure, according to DDA records produced under a Freedom of Information Act request from The Chronicle, was $54,855,780.07, or about $1.5 million under the project’s $56.4 million budget. Adjusting for those elements not needed for the parking structure yields a per-space cost of about $52,000. [(54,855,780.07*.70)/738] [.pdf of Nov. 22, 2013 memo from Pollay to Powers][.pdf of budget versus actual expenses for the 738-space Library Lane structure]

By way of additional background, the Ann Arbor DDA’s most recent financial records show that last year, on-street parking spaces generated $2,000 in gross revenue per space or $1,347 in net income per space annually. The contract with the city under which the DDA operates the public parking system stipulates that the city receives 17% of the gross parking revenues. So the city’s revenue associated with an on-street parking space corresponds to $340 annually.

Killing Fuller Road Station MOU

An item postponed from the Dec. 16, 2013 meeting would officially terminate a four-year-old memorandum of understanding between the city of Ann Arbor and the University of Michigan on Fuller Road Station.

Fuller Road Station was a planned joint city/UM parking structure, bus depot and possible train station located at the city’s Fuller Park near the UM medical campus. The council had approved the MOU on the Fuller Road Station project at its Nov. 5, 2009 meeting on a unanimous vote. [.pdf of Nov. 5, 2009 MOU text as approved by the city council] However, a withdrawal of UM from the project, which took place under terms of the MOU, was announced on Feb. 10, 2012. So it’s been clear for nearly two years that the MOU was a dead letter.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) sponsored the Dec. 16 resolution. The idea to terminate the MOU has its origins in election campaign rhetoric. He had stated at a June 8, 2013 Democratic primary candidate forum that he intended to bring forth such a resolution to “kill” the Fuller Road Station project. From The Chronicle’s report of that forum:

Kunselman also stated that he would be proposing that the city council rescind its memorandum of understanding with the University of Michigan to build a parking structure as part of the Fuller Road Station project. Although UM has withdrawn from participation in that project under the MOU, Kunselman said he wanted to “kill it.” That way, he said, the conversation could turn away from using the designated parkland at the Fuller Road Station site as a new train station, and could instead be focused on the site across the tracks from the existing Amtrak station.

The city continues to pursue the possibility of a newly built or reconstructed train station, but not necessarily with the University of Michigan’s participation, and without a pre-determined preferred alternative for the site of a new station. At its Oct. 21, 2013 meeting, the council approved a contract with URS Corp. Inc. to carry out an environmental review of a project called the Ann Arbor Station. That review should yield the determination of a locally-preferred alternative for a site.

Kunselman led off deliberations at the Dec. 16 meeting saying he would like to postpone the resolution. He indicated that he thought he’d managed to add the item to the agenda on the Friday before the Monday meeting, but it turned out he had not done so. In light of the council’s discussion at their Dec. 9 budget planning session – when councilmembers had said they’d strive to avoid adding resolutions at the last minute – Kunselman said he wanted it postponed.

Mayor John Hieftje and Sabra Briere (Ward 1) both indicated they’d vote for the resolution – but also said they didn’t think the resolution was necessary. They indicated they were willing to vote for the resolution without postponing. Kunselman nevertheless wanted to postpone it, because it was added late to the agenda. It now appears on the Jan. 6 agenda.

Traverwood Apartments

Also on the council’s Jan. 6 agenda is a First Martin Corp. project, which would construct a residential complex on the west side of Traverwood Drive, north of Plymouth Road. The development is called Traverwood Apartments.

The project, estimated to cost $30 million, would include 16 two-story buildings for a total of 216 one- and two-bedroom units – or 280 total bedrooms. Eight of the buildings would each have 15 units and 11 single-car garages. An additional eight buildings would each have 12 units and 8 single-car garages.

Two separate items are on the council’s agenda – one for the rezoning required for the project, and the other for the site plan and wetland use permit.

At the council’s Dec. 2, 2013 meeting, the initial approval of the required rezoning was given. Also approved at that meeting was a donation of 2.2 acres, just north of the project site – by Bill Martin, founder of First Martin Corp., to the city. The donated acreage is next to the Stapp Nature Area and the Leslie Park golf course.

Aerial view of proposed Traverwood Apartments at 2225 Traverwood Drive, north of Plymouth Road.

The city’s planning commission recommended approval of the site plan and the required rezoning at its Nov. 6, 2013 meeting. The site is made up of two parcels: a nearly 16-acre lot that’s zoned R4D (multi-family residential), and an adjacent 3.88-acre lot to the south that’s currently zoned ORL (office, research and light industrial). It’s the smaller lot that needs to be rezoned R4D.

Land donated by Bill Martin to the city of Ann Arbor indicated in red outline.

Montgomery Ward Building

Another item on the city council’s Jan. 6 agenda is the site plan for a four-story addition to the existing two-story building (the old Montgomery Ward building) at 210-216 S. Fourth Ave., between East Liberty and East Washington in downtown Ann Arbor. The plan calls for creating 32 new housing units, including four studios, 14 one-bedroom, and 14 two-bedroom units. Planning commissioners took action to recommend approval of the project’s site plan at their Nov. 19, 2013 meeting.

Aerial view of the Montgomery building (indicated with crosshatches) at 210 S. Fourth Ave. in downtown Ann Arbor.

The estimated $3.8 million project would expand the existing 17,273-square-foot building – a former Montgomery Ward’s department store – to 38,373 square feet, with housing on the second through fifth floors. The ground floor would remain commercial space. Current tenants include Salon Vertigo and Bandito’s Mexican Restaurant. The top floor will include a stair/elevator lobby, restroom, wet bar, and access to several roof decks. Part of the fifth-floor roof will be covered in vegetation as a green roof.

Because the building is located in a historic district, it required a certificate of appropriateness from the city’s historic district commission. The HDC granted that certificate at its Sept. 12, 2013 meeting.

The site is zoned D1, which allows for the highest level of density. According to a staff memo, eight footing drain disconnects will be required.

According to a report from the July 10, 2013 citizen participation meeting, the units will be marketed to “anyone who wants to live downtown.” If approvals are received, construction is expected to begin next summer. The project’s architect is Brad Moore.

Moore is also the architect for an expansion project on the adjacent property – a three-floor addition to the Running Fit building at East Liberty and South Fourth, which will create six residential units. That project received a recommendation of approval from planning commissioners at their Oct. 15, 2013 meeting and was subsequently approved by the city council on Dec. 2, 2013.

Briarwood Mall Restaurant Expansions

A site plan for construction of two freestanding restaurants at Briarwood Mall is also on the council’s Jan. 6 agenda.

Aerial view of Briarwood Mall. The cross-hatched section indicates the parcel where two new restaurants are proposed, adjacent to Macy’s.

The proposal calls for building two new restaurants – one at 6,470 square feet, the other at 7,068 square feet – on the east side of the Macy’s building at Briarwood Mall, 700 Briarwood Circle. The restaurants would be two chains: P.F. Chang’s and Bravo! Cucina Italiana.

The parking lot north and east of the new restaurants would be reconfigured, reducing the total amount of parking by 188 spaces. The estimated cost of the project is $1,577,094. The site is located in Ward 4.

Ann Arbor planning commissioners recommended approval of the site plan and development in action at their Nov. 19, 2013 meeting. The project was originally considered at the commission’s Oct. 15, 2013 meeting, but postponed because of outstanding issues.

Originally, the planning staff had indicated that the project would require rezoning a portion of the parking lot from P (parking) to C2B (business service. However, according to a memo accompanying the commission’s Nov. 19 meeting packet, planning staff subsequently determined that because the original 1973 Briarwood Mall zoning anticipated the expansion of Hudson’s (now Macy’s ) to the east, no rezoning was needed.

Cellular Antenna Licensing

The consent agenda for Jan. 6 features two items involving cellular phone antennas mounted on city facilities. By council rule, contracts for less than $100,000 can be placed on the consent agenda.

Antennas from left: Plymouth Road water tower, Ann-Ashley parking structure, Manchester Road water tower.

One of the consent agenda items relates to the specific contracts with Sprint for placing antennas at four facilities: the Plymouth Road water tower, the Manchester Road water tower, the Ann-Ashley parking structure, and the water treatment plant on Sunset Road. The contracts are being revised upwards to $45,000 a year at each location with 4% annual escalators. The previous agreements ranged from $25,920 to $39,283, according to the staff memo accompanying the resolution.

The staff memo also indicates that Sprint has been given initial administrative approval to undertake replacement of some of its equipment related to its 4G deployment.

The other consent agenda item related to cellular phone antennas, if it’s approved, would make it unnecessary in the future for items like the agreements with Sprint to come before the city council for approval. Instead, it would give the city administrator the power to approve licensing agreements with cellular service providers – even though they exceed the $25,000 threshold for council approval set forth in a city-charter required ordinance.

3:54 p.m. Now added to the agenda are nominations for the nine members of the pedestrian safety task force, which was established by the council at its Nov. 18, 2013 meeting: Vivienne Armentrout, Neal Elyakin, Linda Diane Feldt, Jim Rees, Anthony Pinnell, Sarah Pressprich Gryniewicz, Kenneth Clark, Scott Campbell, and Owen Jansson.

4:00 p.m. An email from Mary Jo Callan, Washtenaw County’s director of the office of community and economic development – sent today to city administrator Steve Powers, among others – outlines the county’s response with respect to the homeless during the snowstorm. The email indicates she’ll be at tonight’s city council meeting to provide additional information. [Callan's Jan. 6, 2014 email] Most of the nine people signed up for public commentary have indicated they’ll be addressing the topic of shelter for the homeless during the inclement weather.

4:22 p.m. Part of the tally associated with the 10.4 inches of snow that fell on Ann Arbor is the vehicle miles traveled from midnight Sunday through around 1 p.m. Monday by Ann Arbor city snow plows: They logged 7,641 vehicle miles. Eleven of the city’s fleet logged at least 300 miles during that period. Top mileage for any plow, logged by vehicle number 4551, was 483.9 miles. [.jpg of snowplow mileage chart]

4:25 p.m. Staff responses to city council “caucus questions,” which are submitted in advance of the meeting, are now available. [.pdf of Jan. 6, 2014 staff answers to caucus questions]

6:28 p.m. Pre-meeting activity. The scheduled meeting start is 7 p.m. Most evenings the actual starting time is between 7:10 p.m. and 7:15 p.m. Three audience members have arrived so far. Yellow agenda sheets are stacked neatly on the public speaking podium.

6:42 p.m. Chief of police John Seto and public services area administrator Craig Hupy have circulated through council chambers. Earl Ophoff of Midwestern Consulting has arrived with posterboards for the Traverwood Apartments project.

6:53 p.m. Sally Petersen (Ward 2) and Jack Eaton (Ward 4) have now arrived. Eaton is explaining to Odile Hugonot Haber that he’s not, as was rumored, bringing a resolution tonight to fund a warming center. He characterizes the issue as not an emergency, in the sense that it gets cold every winter. But it’s become an emergency because adequate action hasn’t been taken in the past. Jane Lumm (Ward 2) is also now here.

6:58 p.m. Mayor John Hieftje and city administrator Steve Powers are here. City attorney Stephen Postema is here. Postema has started a beard. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) is also here, with fresh beard.

7:01 p.m. Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) has now arrived, clean-shaven.

7:04 p.m. Margie Teall (Ward 4) has now arrived. Kathy Griswold, signed up to speak during public commentary, has now arrived.

7:06 p.m. Chuck Warpehoski (Ward 5) has arrived, as has Sumi Kailasapathy (Ward 1).

7:08 p.m. Brad Moore, architect for the Montgomery Ward building expansion, is here.

7:11 p.m. Call to order, moment of silence, pledge of allegiance. And we’re off.

7:11 p.m. Roll call of council. Mike Anglin (Ward 5) and Sabra Briere (Ward 1) are absent.

7:11 p.m. Hieftje reports that Briere is out with the flu.

7:11 p.m. Approval of agenda.

7:11 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the agenda.

7:15 p.m. Communications from the city administrator. City administrator Steve Powers has introduced Craig Hupy, public services area administrator, to give an update on the city’s response to the recent snowstorm. Official tally for snowfall was 10.4 inches. He’s describing how the city has been using 12-hour shifts. Twenty-four snowplows are working on the local streets right now. Four plows are working major streets to keep drifts back. Hupy also gives the mileage summary, which was reported above.

7:17 p.m. Mary Jo Callan has been introduced. She is Washtenaw County’s director of the office of community and economic development. Her message from earlier in the day is now attached to the agenda. [Callan's Jan. 6, 2014 email] She gives a status update. She says the Delonis Center has opened the daytime warming center. Twenty-five people were using the daytime warming center, she says. It has a capacity of 200. No one has been turned out into the cold up to this point, she says. The restriction on intoxication has been loosened, she notes.

7:18 p.m. Known campsites were visited by PORT (the county’s project outreach team), she says, and soundness of tent structures were assessed. Various materials were distributed, she says. First Pres will be open tomorrow, among other facilities, she says.

7:20 p.m. Callan is reading aloud a statement from St. Joe’s, which has space for 30 people. St. Joe’s is looking to coordinate with the county and city on this. The county’s community support and treatment services (CSTS) and Alpha House are coordinating to staff that facility, if a decision is made to use it. That decision will be made later tonight, she said.

7:22 p.m. Hieftje is getting clarification from Callan on the situation with the daytime warming center at Delonis – a capacity of 200, with about 25 people making use of it.

7:22 p.m. Eaton asks a question about how much money this is costing for all the organizations. He wants information about how much it is costing so that the city can understand what it might do to help.

7:25 p.m. Responding to a question from Teall, Callan thanks the council for its recent support of affordable housing. She mentions the plan that the Ann Arbor housing commission has for Miller Manor to convert it to a front-desk staffed facility. She says the world has changed a lot since the 2007 needs assessment was done. So she’ll be providing fresh information soon about what the current needs actually are.

7:26 p.m. Warpehoski says he’s glad that the Delonis Center has loosened the restriction on intoxication. He inquires about those people who have been prohibited from accessing the Delonis Center due to behavioral problems. Callan says that the 15 people that PORT has responded to were in that category.

7:28 p.m. Kailasapathy says that the collection of organizations that have stepped forward seems ad hoc. She wants to know if it can be better publicized and systematized. Yes, says Callan. There is a plan in place, but it could be better. In some cases, she said, staff for some facilities can’t get into work due to the snow.

7:30 p.m. Police chief John Seto now reports out. He says there have been no staff shortages, and the AAPD is “response capable.” Last Saturday, there was a water pipe rupture at a University of Michigan student dorm, he says, and AAPD had helped with that.

7:30 p.m. Powers notes that parks and recreation programs had been cancelled today and tomorrow due to the severe cold. Hieftje thanks Powers for keeping councilmembers up to date.

7:31 p.m. Public commentary – reserved time. This portion of the meeting offers 10 three-minute slots that can be reserved in advance. Preference is given to speakers who want to address the council on an agenda item. [Public commentary general time, with no sign-up required in advance, is offered at the end of the meeting.]

A total of nine people are signed up to speak during public commentary reserved time. Eight of them are signed up to speak on the topic of providing shelter to the homeless during the current inclement weather [current temperature -12 F with forecast high temperature of around 0 F for Tuesday, Jan. 7]: Thomas Partridge, Tracy Williams, Ryan Sample, Tate Williams, Sheri Wander, Greg Pratt, Odile Hugonot-Haber, and Alan Haber.

Kathy Griswold is signed up to speak on the topic of the termination of the Fuller Road Station memorandum of understanding.

7:36 p.m. Thomas Partridge calls on the council to protect the most vulnerable. He criticizes various “right wing proposals.” He wants provisions in all site plan approvals requiring accessibility for public transportation and affordable housing.

7:39 p.m. Saying that she wanted to start on a positive note, Kathy Griswold reports that her street was plowed early this morning and that when she drove around town, she observed the streets were well-plowed, even the mid-block crosswalks. She supports the termination of the Fuller Road Station memorandum of understanding. She calls on the council to pay attention to process. She cautions that enforcement for traffic might be understood as much more than just handing out tickets, and that there could be far more positive interactions between officers and residents besides just ticketing.

7:41 p.m. Tracy Williams introduces himself as a homeless resident. People are in trouble, he says. We can keep talking, but we need to be doing, he says. He suggests 721 N. Main as a possible warming shelter. The city’s plan to demolish the building and turn it into a park would prevent that, he notes. He says that instead of turning it into a park, they should turn it into a cemetery – because that way, the city’s homeless might finally find a place to rest there.

7:41 p.m. Ryan Sample commends the Delonis Center for operating beyond its capacity. He urges the city to open the doors to the 721 N. Main building for use as a warming center.

7:43 p.m. Tate Williams says that the existing social services network is overtasked and underfunded. It leaves many people unable to receive the help they need to survive. He asks for the city to provide a way for citizens to help in an organized way – including opening their homes to the homeless.

7:46 p.m. Sheri Wander lives on White Street, she says. She apologizes if her remarks come off as emotional. She’s spent the last several days delivering propane tanks to those who are living in tents. She says she was “in awe” of PORT today as they raced around to put some people in hotel rooms. She’s proud of what the city has done, but it shouldn’t be done at the last minute, she says. She hears over and over that we have the infrastructure and the capacity to take care of people. But she doesn’t think there’s enough sanctioned capacity to take care of people. “I know the city can do better,” she says. Wander wants the city to look at 721 N. Main, even though that facility isn’t perfect, she says. She quotes G.K. Chesterton: “Anything worth doing is worth doing badly.”

7:48 p.m. Greg Pratt thanks all the previous speakers by name. He also thanks Mary Jo Callan. He appreciates all the support. But he offers an alternative pledge of allegiance, and on the phrase “to the principle for which we stand,” the rest of the audience stands. The pledge calls for 45 F degrees as the threshold for opening the warming center.

7:51 p.m. Odile Hugonot-Haber is reading aloud Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which includes the right to housing. She says that city officials seem to want to say that everything is just fine. The timer goes off. [That seems a bit abbreviated. Possibly the timer was set incorrectly.]

7:52 p.m. Alan Haber thanks Odile for reading aloud from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Ann Arbor should adopt warmth as a fundamental human right, he says. Warmth is not just temperature, he says. Statistics might show that everyone is taken care of, he says, but from what he’s heard and seen, that’s not so. The city needs a space that is managed by those who use it, he says. All of us should be more contributory. The homeless “them,” he says, are seen as a problem. But they have creativity and skills. He calls on the council to consider 721 N. Main as an option.

7:55 p.m. Communications from council. Eaton says that Anglin is stuck in Florida and could not be at the council meeting. Anglin is with his 94-year-old mother. Eaton notes that when Camp Take Notice was dispersed, the city had interfered with an attempt to create a self-governed community to deal with homelessness in the way that Haber described. Eaton ventures that the city might lease a city building to a group. His remarks draw applause.

7:55 p.m. MC-1 Appointments: Confirmations. The council is being asked tonight to confirm nominations to city boards and commissions that were made at the council’s Dec. 16, 2013 meeting: Kristin Tomey to the Ann Arbor public art commission, filling the vacancy of Wiltrud Simbeurger for a term ending Dec. 31, 2016; and Benjamin Bushkuhl, a reappointment, to the historic district commission for a term ending Dec. 6, 2016.

7:55 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to confirm the two appointments on the agenda.

7:56 p.m. MC-2 Nominations. Nominations are being made for the pedestrian safety task force, which was established by the council at its Nov. 18, 2013 meeting: Vivienne Armentrout, Neal Elyakin, Linda Diane Feldt, Jim Rees, Anthony Pinnell, Sarah Pressprich Gryniewicz, Kenneth Clark, Scott Campbell, Owen Jansson. A confirmation vote will be taken at the council’s Jan. 21, 2014 meeting.

7:56 p.m. Public hearings. All the public hearings are grouped together during this section of the meeting. Action on the related items comes later in the meeting. Four public hearings are on the agenda. The first two relate to the Traverwood Apartments project – a proposed complex of 16 two-story buildings on the west side of Traverwood Drive, north of Plymouth Road. One of the Traverwood Apartments public hearings relates to some rezoning that’s required as a part of the project. The second public hearing is on the Traverwood Apartments site plan and a wetland use permit associated with the apartment complex.

A third public hearing on tonight’s agenda is the site plan for the upward expansion of the Montgomery Ward building on Fourth Avenue in downtown Ann Arbor. The estimated $3.8 million project would expand the existing 17,273-square-foot building – a former Montgomery Ward’s department store – to 38,373 square feet, with housing on the second through fifth floors.

And the fourth public hearing is on the site plan and development agreement for two restaurants at Briarwood Mall. The restaurants – one at 6,470 square feet, the other at 7,068 square feet – would be constructed on the east side of the Macy’s building at Briarwood Mall, 700 Briarwood Circle. The restaurants would be operated by two chains: P.F. Chang’s and Bravo! Cucina Italiana.

7:57 p.m. PH-1 Traverwood Apartments rezoning. Mike Martin of First Martin tells the council that the project team is in attendance and available to answer questions.

8:01 p.m. Thomas Partridge is giving general commentary critical of the rezoning proposal. He wants the proposal postponed until there is a requirement in every such proposal that ensures the turnaround of egregious past discrimination.

8:01 p.m. That’s it for PH-1.

8:08 p.m. PH-2 Traverwood Apartments site plan and wetland use permit. Partridge follows up on his remarks on PH-1 saying that it amounts to egregious discrimination to not take up the question of whether a site was used for the Underground Railroad, before approving the site plan.

8:08 p.m. Peggy Rabhi has questions about the wetland use permit. She says it looks like the project will preserve the “lake” and the largest pond on the south end of the property. The south pond is home to frogs, newts and salamanders, she says. Those species pass the winter not in the pond but rather adjacent to the pond, she says. She hopes that First Martin would be willing to work with the city’s natural area preservation staff on this issue.

8:11 p.m. Stacie Printon says she’s a park steward for the park adjacent to the property. She expresses some concerns and makes some suggestions. The southwest portion of the plan abuts Leslie Park golf course and Leslie Woods, so she has concerns about the impact on those woods. There will be some cutting into the slopes, she says. There are three trees worthy of preservation, numbered 2582, 2583, and 2584. Buildings #5 and #6 come very close to the corner, she says. She suggests combining the buildings into a single L-shaped building that might eliminate the need for a retaining wall.

8:11 p.m. That’s it for PH-2.

8:13 p.m. PH-3 – Montgomery Building site plan. Architect Brad Moore describes the project as next to the Running Fit building, which the council had recently approved. He’s describing the basic highlights of the project.

8:16 p.m. Thomas Partridge says the attempt to rehabilitate the property is admirable. But he’d not heard the two words he thinks are essential: “Affordable housing.”

8:16 p.m. That’s it for PH-3.

8:19 p.m. PH-4 Briarwood restaurants site plan. Thomas Partridge says he was a recent candidate for the city council as well as for the Michigan state house and senate. He’s attended meetings of several different public bodies over the last decade. He reiterates his standard call for a requirement that all site plans include provisions for access to public transportation and affordable housing.

8:20 p.m. That’s it for PH-4.

8:20 p.m. Approval of previous meeting’s minutes.

8:20 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the previous meeting’s minutes.

8:20 p.m. Consent agenda. This is a group of items that are deemed to be routine and are voted on “all in one go.” Contracts for less than $100,000 can be placed on the consent agenda. This meeting’s consent agenda includes three items: (1) authorization for the city administrator to approve cell phone antenna licensing agreements, even if they exceed the $25,000 threshold requiring city council approval; (2) authorization to pay Scio Township $46,807 in sewer hookup charges for the Varsity Ford property at 3480 Jackson Ave.; and (3) approval of cell phone antenna licensing agreements with Spring at four city locations – the Plymouth Road water tower, the Manchester Road water tower, the Ann-Ashley parking structure and the water treatment plant facility on Sunset Road. [For additional background on cell phone antenna licensing, see Cellular Antenna Licensing above.]

Worth noting is that total revenue to the city for cell antennas budgeted for FY 2014 is $520,000, all of which goes toward debt service on the Justice Center.

8:21 p.m. Councilmembers can pull out items on the consent agenda for separate consideration. Hieftje says that an administrative change has been made to correct the name of the company in CA-3.

Warpehoski pulls out CA-2.

8:21 p.m. CA-2 Scio Twp. Sewer connection fees. Councilmembers are discussing this item that Warpehoski pulled out for separate consideration. Warpehoski says he doesn’t understand why the city is paying instead of the landowner. Hupy explains that the landowner is paying the city, and the city is meeting the request of its customer in the most cost-effective way possible. The landowner is paying the city’s fee to the city. The city is paying the township to service the city’s customer. Warpehoski says he doesn’t fully understand it, but he’s comfortable going ahead.

Kunselman asks Hupy to describe the property: It’s Varsity Ford on Jackson Road. Hupy describes it as cleaning up a situation that came to light as the city prepared to renegotiate the agreement between the city and Scio Township for sewer service.

8:26 p.m. Outcome: The council has now approved the Scio Township sewer hookup payment.

8:26 p.m. Outcome: The council has now approved all the items on the consent agenda.

8:28 p.m. Recess. We’re now in recess.

8:36 p.m. And we’re back.

8:36 p.m. B-1 Traverwood Apartments rezoning. This project, estimated to cost $30 million, would include 16 two-story apartment buildings for a total of 216 one- and two-bedroom units – or 280 total bedrooms. Eight of the buildings would each have 15 units and 11 single-car garages. An additional eight buildings would each have 12 units and 8 single-car garages.

The site is made up of two parcels: a nearly 16-acre lot that’s zoned R4D (multi-family residential), and an adjacent 3.88-acre lot to the south that’s currently zoned ORL (office, research and light industrial). It’s the smaller lot that needs to be rezoned as R4D. The city council gave initial approval of the rezoning at its Dec. 2, 2013 meeting.

8:37 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted without discussion to give final approval of the Traverwood Apartments rezoning.

8:37 p.m. DC-1 Approve a city policy regarding removal of on-street metered public parking spaces. This item would establish $45,000 as the fee to be charged to developers and passed through to the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority for removal of an on-street metered public parking space. The conceptual basis for the amount is the cost per space of constructing new parking structures. [For additional background see How Much Is a Parking Space Worth? above.]

8:38 p.m. Taylor describes the resolution. The resolution creates a policy that the contract between the city and the DDA describes.

8:41 p.m. Petersen wants to amend the resolution. She says that the true cost of a metered parking space should include the net present value estimate for the revenue associated with a parking space. She’d chosen a 10-year projection provided by the staff. She and Taylor had had some back-and-forth, she reports. Her amendment ensures that the city would get 17% of the revenue from the $45,000 payment.

8:43 p.m. Kailasapathy wants to amend the resolution so that the money that goes to the DDA is recorded as restricted funds for capital projects in the parking system. Taylor says that they are both excellent ideas, which he’s happy to support. The changes are considered “friendly.”

8:45 p.m. Taylor also has an amendment: swapping out “on the parcels” for “in the right of way.” That’s accepted as friendly as well.

8:48 p.m. Lumm says the changes are an improvement. She thanks staff. She supports the resolution. Lumm is reviewing how many meter have been removed over time. She thinks it’s important to adopt a requirement for reimbursement, because these do accumulate to amounts that can be substantial.

8:51 p.m. Eaton has a question about the authorization of the city administrator to review the DDA decision. Given that the city administrator now sits on the DDA board, he wants to substitute in “city council” for that. Teall says she understands the conflict that’s being pointed out. But she doesn’t think the council should review the decision. She feels it could be handled within the administration. Kunselman says he doesn’t have a problem with the city administrator having the authority to override the DDA as a whole. Powers says that he can balance the responsibility, noting that his ultimate accountability is to the council.

8:54 p.m. Eaton says he’s not questioning the ability of Powers to balance the decision, but thinks it’s bad public policy to have someone sitting on a board who then reviews the decisions of that same board. Hieftje responds by saying that the DDA statute requires conflict in some ways. Petersen says there’s no drafted policy the DDA has for evaluating public benefit. [The issue here is the ability to waive the $45,000 fee if there's a public benefit to removing the on-street parking space.]

8:57 p.m. Kailasapathy characterizes the issue as one of checks and balances, and not the integrity of Steve Powers. We’re human beings and we’re fallible, she says. Having the same person implementing the policy and reviewing isn’t good policy, she says. Kunselman indicates he agrees that it might not be good policy, but notes that government is messy. If the city council should review it, he wonders if the council shouldn’t just take back the whole parking system. He doesn’t think it’s possible to avoid the kind of conflict that Eaton has identified. It’s fine the way it is, he says.

9:00 p.m. Lumm says she appreciates Kunselman walking the council through the nuance. Having someone in administration review the decision would mean that person would still be reporting to Powers, she notes. And to drag the city council into it, she says, wouldn’t be a good idea. She ventures that the council might want to weigh in on the drafting of the public benefit policy. Eaton says it’s purely a process question, and it’s not a desire for the city council to take over that role, but he doesn’t know who else would.

9:01 p.m. Petersen says that it’s been a good discussion and that it shows that the council needs training on what is and isn’t a conflict of interest. She compares it to having a separate person collect the money and count the money. She’s willing to let it go forward with the city administrator being the reviewer.

9:01 p.m. Outcome on Eaton’s amendment: Only Kailasapathy and Eaton vote for the amendment. It fails.

9:02 p.m. Outcome on main resolution: The council has voted unanimously to approve the policy, as amended, for charging a fee of $45,000 for removal of an on-street parking space.

9:02 p.m. DC-2 Termination of MOU on Fuller Road Station. This resolution would formally terminate the four-year old MOU between the city and the University of Michigan for construction of joint city/UM parking structure, bus depot and possible train station located at the city’s Fuller Park near the UM medical campus. The university withdrew from the project two years ago under the terms of the agreement. The resolution is a formality. [For additional background, see Killing Fuller Road Station MOU above.]

9:03 p.m. Kunselman introduces the resolution. He calls it wrapping up loose ends for a document that doesn’t have an expiration date. Hieftje says it’s like digging someone up who died a couple of years ago and re-burying them, but he’ s not opposed to it.

9:03 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to terminate the Fuller Road Station MOU.

9:03 p.m. Ann Arbor Summer Festival board appointments. This resolution appoints directors to the board of the Ann Arbor Summer Festival. It reflects a certain amount of bureaucratic housecleaning, as all of the appointments are retroactive, some of them dramatically so:

• Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2014 Paul Cousins (trustee, Dexter Village)
• Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2014 Erica Fitzgerald (attorney with Barris, Sott, Denn & Driker)
• Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2014 Linda Girard (CEO, Pure Visibility)
• Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2014 Kimberly Scott (attorney with Miller Canfield)
• Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2014 Ellie Serras (community relations director, Main Street BIZ)
• Oct. 1, 2011 to Sept. 30, 2014 Christie Wong Barrett (manufacturing council at U.S. Department of Commerce)
• Oct. 1, 2012 to Sept. 30, 2015 Tim Freeth (head of industry, Google)
• Oct. 1, 2012 to Sept. 30, 2015 Jerold Lax (attorney with Pear Sperling Eggan and Daniels)
• Oct. 1, 2012 to Sept. 30, 2015 Kenneth Magee (former head of University of Michigan public safety)
• Oct. 1, 2012 to Sept. 30, 2015 Kevin McDonald (city of Ann Arbor, assistant city attorney)
• Oct. 1, 2013 to Sept. 30, 2016 Tom Crawford (city of Ann Arbor, chief financial officer)
• Oct. 1, 2013 to Sept. 30, 2016 Mary Kerr (president, Ann Arbor Area Convention & Visitors Bureau)
• Oct. 1, 2013 to Sept. 30, 2016 Dug Song (CEO of Duo Security, tech entrepreneur)

Most of these members, however, do not appear to meet the membership criteria listed out in the description available on the city’s online Legistar system, which reads:

Membership/Committee Composition: Representatives from each of the following: Ann Arbor Street Art Fair, South University Merchants Association, State Street Area Art Fair, State Street Area Association, Michigan Guild of Artists and Artisans, Main Street Area Association, Washtenaw Non-Profits, Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, Ann Arbor Area Convention and Visitors Bureau, Ann Arbor City Council (2-1 each caucus), City and County Government Departments (4 votes total): Ann Arbor Building Dept., Ann Arbor Police Dept., Ann Arbor Fire Dept., Ann Arbor Solid Waste Dept., Ann Arbor Transportation Division, Ann Arbor Attorney’s Office, Washtenaw County Health Dept., U of M (2 votes total): Community Relations, Public Safety, Michigan Union, Plant Operations, Parking Services.

Some confusion surrounding these appointments is reflected in one of the resolved clauses of the resolution, which reads:

RESOLVED, That the Mayor and City Council request that the Ann Arbor Summer Festival, Inc., clarify the designation process in their Bylaws and implement an annual designation process by August 1, 2014.

9:04 p.m. Hieftje says that this item was prompted by a bylaws review of the Ann Arbor Summer Festival board. He then praises the Summer Festival.

9:04 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the board appointments to the Ann Arbor Summer Festival.

9:04 p.m. DB-1 Traverwood Apartments site plan and wetland use permit. This is a proposed complex of 16 two-story buildings on the west side of Traverwood Drive, north of Plymouth Road. This is the second of two items on the agenda related to this project. Earlier in the meeting the council approved the rezoning necessary for the project. [For additional background see Traverwood Apartments above.]

9:06 p.m. Lumm leads things off, saying that she’d seen the development team having a conversation with those who spoke during the public hearing. She asks for some response of the concerns described. Earl Ophoff of Midwestern Consulting responds to the description of the retaining walls that are tiered so that it minimizes the impact on the critical root zones of nearby trees.

9:09 p.m. Ophoff is describing how the newt and salamanders will be finishing their mating in the spring around March and May before the project starts work. He describes how the project accommodates bats.

9:12 p.m. Eaton asks about a pipe to be installed in connection with a wetland. Wetland #2 has three parts, Ophoff explains. Eaton is concerned that the pipe is undersized.

9:13 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the site plan and wetland use permit for the Traverwood Apartments project.

9:13 p.m. DB-2 Montgomery Ward building site plan. The council is being asked to approve the site plan for the upward expansion of the old Montgomery Ward building on South Fourth Avenue in downtown Ann Arbor. The estimated $3.8 million project would expand the existing 17,273-square-foot building – a former Montgomery Ward’s department store – to 38,373 square feet, with housing on the second through fifth floors. [For additional background see Montgomery Ward Building above.]

9:14 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted without discussion to approve the site plan for the old Montgomery Ward building.

9:14 p.m. Briarwood restaurants site plan. The council is being asked to approve the site plan and development agreement for two restaurants at Briarwood Mall. The restaurants – one at 6,470 square feet, the other at 7,068 square feet – would be constructed on the east side of the Macy’s building at Briarwood Mall, 700 Briarwood Circle. The restaurants would be operated by two chains: P.F. Chang’s and Bravo! Cucina Italiana. [For additional background see Briarwood Mall Restaurant Expansions above.]

9:14 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to approve the Briarwood Mall restaurant expansion site plan.

9:14 p.m. DS-1 Approve a purchase order with Hastings Air Energy Control Inc. The council is being asked to approve a contract with Hastings Air Energy Control Inc. for 15 systems to capture exhaust from fire department vehicles. The amount of the contract is $109,845. Most of the cost is being funded by a federal grant, which the council formally accepted at its May 13, 2013 meeting. A local match of $21,969 was required on the grant, which was for $87,876.

According to the staff memo accompanying the resolution, the systems will be deployed “within the city’s five operating fire stations as part of the city’s commitment to providing its fire fighting personnel and visitors of city fire stations a safer and cleaner living atmosphere, while supporting the city’s leading role in protecting the overall quality of the environment.”

9:14 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted without discussion to approve the contract with Hastings Air Energy Control Inc. for exhaust capturing systems.

9:15 p.m. DS-2 Accepting sanitary sewer easement. The council is being asked to accept a standard grant of easement for sanitary sewer from the owners of the properties at 2200, 2220, 2240, and 2260 Wolverhampton Court.

9:15 p.m. Outcome: The council has voted to accept the grant of easement for the properties at Wolverhampton Court.

9:16 p.m. Communications from the council. Teall thanks police chief John Seto and the staff for their work on the New Year’s Eve celebration activities on Main Street, called The Puck Drops Here. She hoped it would be repeated.

9:16 p.m. Communications from the city attorney. City attorney Stephen Postema reports that the Michigan Court of Appeals has upheld the city’s position in the revocation of the Dream Nite Club’s liquor license. Postema thanks the police for their role in that.

9:18 p.m. Clerk’s Report. The clerk’s report is now received.

9:18 p.m. Public commentary There’s no requirement to sign up in advance for this slot for public commentary.

9:21 p.m. Thomas Partridge is the only speaker. He says that people might question why he attends council meetings calling on the council to abide by the law and the constitution. He calls for reform and a turnaround of the council. He calls again as he has before for the resignation of mayor John Hieftje and Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder. He alleges that he’s had property stolen and been subject to threats of intimidation. Huge amounts of snow have been piled up around buildings that house handicapped people, he claims.

9:22 p.m. Closed session. The council has voted to go into a closed session for discussion of land acquisition and written attorney-client communication.

9:39 p.m. While we’re waiting for the closed session to conclude, here’s the first part of the non-motorized transportation plan implementation strategy that the city administrator was directed by the city council to develop: [.pdf of non-motorized plan implementation strategy]

9:51 p.m. Councilmembers have emerged from the closed session.

9:53 p.m. They’re back, but have decided to take a short break.

10:02 p.m. It sounds like the council will be considering a resolution that will direct the city administrator to make inquiries about the Edwards Brothers property on South State Street, with an eye toward possibly exercising the city’s right of first refusal to purchase the property.

10:03 p.m. The resolution is being crafted during the recess.

10:07 p.m. Council is back in open session.

10:10 p.m. They’re opening the agenda to add a resolution directing the city administrator and city attorney to gather appropriate information to explore the possibility to exercise the city’s right of first refusal to purchase the 2500 S. State property owned by Edwards Brothers. The resolution also directs the development of financing proposals that would be feasible for the city. The information is to be gathered by Jan. 30.

10:12 p.m. Hieftje is reciting the standard explanation of the city’s interest in preserving the city’s tax base. He calls the acquisition of the old Pfizer property and the property along Division where the Blimpy Burger’s previously stood part of a pattern that the University of Michigan has displayed.

10:14 p.m. Lumm is glad they’re gathering the additional information so the council can decide whether to exercise its right of first refusal. She says it will be invaluable to have that information so that the council can make the decision. Staff will be looking at the zoning questions, she says, which will help to inform the council’s decision. The site, at 16.7 acres, is the largest remaining such parcel in the city, she says.

10:15 p.m. Taylor echoes Hieftje and Lumm. The University of Michigan’s acquisition of property is a long-term challenge the city faces, he says.

10:16 p.m. Outcome: The council has approved the resolution directing the city administrator and city attorney to gather information on exercising the city’s right of first refusal on the Edwards Brothers property.

10:16 p.m. Here’s the text of the unamended resolution. The amended version contains the due date of Jan. 30. [Edwards Brothers Resolution of Inquiry and Information Gathering Jan. 6, 2014]

10:16 p.m. Here’s the amended resolution. [Amended Edwards Brothers Resolution of Inquiry and Information Gathering Jan. 6, 2014]

10:16 p.m. Adjournment. We are now adjourned. That’s all from the hard benches.

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

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

Screenshot of Legistar – the city of Ann Arbor’s online agenda management system. Image links to the Jan. 6, 2014 meeting agenda.

Two of those items were postponed from the final meeting of 2013, on Dec. 16.

One of those postponed items was the official termination of a four-year-old memorandum of understanding with the University of Michigan for construction of the Fuller Road Station project.

That was a planned joint city/UM parking structure, bus depot and possible train station located at the city’s Fuller Park near the UM medical campus. The council had approved the MOU on the Fuller Road Station project at its Nov. 5, 2009 meeting on a unanimous vote. However, a withdrawal of UM from the project, which took place under the terms of the MOU, was announced on Feb. 10, 2012. So it’s been clear for nearly two years that the MOU was a dead letter. The vote to terminate the MOU has its origins in the politics of Stephen Kunselman’s Ward 3 re-election campaign, when he promised to bring forward such a resolution.

The council’s postponement of the MOU termination at its Dec. 16 meeting was not due to any particular controversy about the vote itself. Instead, the postponement resulted from the fact that the item had been added to the agenda on the same day as the meeting, and that’s a practice the council has agreed should be avoided.

The other item delayed from the Dec. 16 meeting was a resolution assigning a specific cost to the removal of an on-street parking space, in connection with future developments: $45,000. That item first appeared on the council’s Dec. 2 agenda, but the council postponed it, based on a desire to hold a public hearing on the matter before taking action. The Dec. 16 postponement came after questions were raised during council deliberations, about the accounting procedures that would be used by the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority to track any money that might be collected under the policy.

Apart from those previously delayed items, the rest of the council’s agenda is filled out primarily with items concerning future development.

Accounting for two of the council’s Jan. 6 voting items is Traverwood Apartments – a First Martin development on the west side of Traverwood Drive, north of Plymouth Road. The council will consider final approval of some rezoning necessary for the complex of 16 two-story buildings. And on a separate vote, the council will consider the site plan approval and a wetland use permit associated with the apartment complex.

A third development item on the Jan. 6 agenda is the site plan for the upward expansion of the Montgomery Ward building on Fourth Avenue in downtown Ann Arbor. The estimated $3.8 million project would expand the existing 17,273-square-foot building – a former Montgomery Ward’s department store – to 38,373 square feet, with housing on the second through fifth floors.

And a final development on the Jan. 6 agenda is a site plan and development agreement for two restaurants at Briarwood Mall. The restaurants – one at 6,470 square feet, the other at 7,068 square feet – would be constructed on the east side of the Macy’s building at Briarwood Mall, 700 Briarwood Circle. The restaurants would be operated by two chains: P.F. Chang’s and Bravo! Cucina Italiana.

The consent agenda features two items involving cellular phone antennas mounted on city facilities. One of the items relates to the specific contracts with Sprint for placing antennas at four facilities: the Plymouth Road water tower, the Manchester Road water tower, the Ann-Ashley parking structure, and the water treatment plant. The contracts are being revised upwards to $45,000 a year at each location, with 4% annual escalators.

The other consent agenda item that’s related to cellular phone antennas, if it’s approved, would make it unnecessary in the future for items like the agreements with Sprint to come before the city council for approval. Instead, it would give the city administrator the power to approve licensing agreements with cellular service providers – even though they exceed the $25,000 threshold for council approval set forth in a city-charter required ordinance.

This article includes a more detailed preview of many of these agenda items. More details on other agenda items are available on the city’s online Legistar system. The meeting proceedings can be followed Monday evening live on Channel 16, streamed online by Community Television Network starting at 7 p.m.

How Much Is a Parking Space Worth?

A resolution that was postponed for the second time at the council’s Dec. 16, 2013 meeting is now on the Jan. 6 agenda. It would define how much developers would need to pay the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority if a developer’s project requires removal of a metered on-street parking space. The proposed amount is $45,000 per space. The payment would go to the Ann Arbor DDA because the DDA manages the public parking system under a contract with the city.

The rationale for postponing the item on Dec. 2 – offered by Christopher Taylor (Ward 3), who sponsored the resolution – was that because it amounts to a fee, a public hearing should be held on the matter before the council voted.

After the public hearing held at the council’s Dec. 16 meeting, the council’s deliberations focused on the question of the accounting procedures to be used by the DDA in tracking any money that might be paid under the policy. Given that the rationale for the policy is that the money would be put toward the cost of construction for new parking spaces, councilmembers wanted to know how the money would be reserved for that purpose.

In this matter, the council would be acting on a four-year-old recommendation approved by the Ann Arbor DDA in 2009:

Thus it is recommended that when developments lead to the removal of on-street parking meter spaces, a cost of $45,000/parking meter space (with annual CPI increases) be assessed and provided to the DDA to set aside in a special fund that will be used to construct future parking spaces or other means to meet the goals above. [.pdf of meeting minutes with complete text of March 4, 2009 DDA resolution]

The contract under which the DDA manages the public parking system for the city was revised to restructure the financial arrangement (which now pays the city 17% of the gross revenues), but also included a clause meant to prompt the city to act on the on-street space cost recommendation. From the May 2011 parking agreement:

The City shall work collaboratively with the DDA to develop and present for adoption by City Council a City policy regarding the permanent removal of on-street metered parking spaces. The purpose of this policy will be to identify whether a community benefit to the elimination of one or more metered parking spaces specific area(s) of the City exists, and the basis for such a determination. If no community benefit can be identified, it is understood and agreed by the parties that a replacement cost allocation methodology will need to be adopted concurrent with the approval of the City policy; which shall be used to make improvements to the public parking or transportation system.

Subject to administrative approval by the city, the DDA has sole authority to determine the addition or removal of meters, loading zones, or other curbside parking uses.

The $45,000 figure is based on an average construction cost to build a new parking space in a structure, either above ground or below ground – as estimated in 2009. It’s not clear what the specific impetus is to act on the issue now, other than the fact that action is simply long overdue. [For more background, see: "Column: Ann Arbor's Monroe (Street) Doctrine."]

Taylor, the resolution’s sponsor, participated in meetings during the fall of 2013 of a joint council and DDA board committee that negotiated a resolution to the question about how the DDA’s TIF (tax increment finance) revenue is regulated. In that context, Taylor had argued adamantly that any cap on the DDA’s TIF should be escalated by a construction industry CPI, or roughly 5%. Taylor’s reasoning was that the DDA’s mission is to undertake capital projects and therefore should have revenue that escalates in accordance with increases in the costs to undertake capital projects.

Based on Taylor’s reasoning on the TIF question, and the explicit 2009 recommendation by the DDA to increase the estimated $45,000 figure in that year by an inflationary index, the recommended amount now, four years later, would be closer to $55,000, assuming a 5% figure for construction cost inflation. The city’s contribution in lieu (CIL) parking program allows a developer (as one option) to satisfy an on-site parking space requirement by paying $55,000. (The other option is to enter into a 15-year agreement to purchase monthly parking permits at a 20% premium.)

The actual cost of building an underground space in the recently completed (2012) underground Library Lane parking structure could be calculated by taking the actual costs and dividing by 738 – the number of spaces in the structure. Based on a recent memo from executive director Susan Pollay to city administrator Steve Powers, about 30% or $15 million of the cost of the project was spent on items “unneeded by the parking structure.” That included elements like oversized foundations to support future development, an extra-large transformer, a new alley between Library Lane and S. Fifth Avenue, new water mains, easements for a fire hydrant and pedestrian improvements.

The actual amount spent on the Library Lane structure, according to DDA records produced under a Freedom of Information Act request from The Chronicle, was $54,855,780.07, or about $1.5 million under the project’s $56.4 million budget. Adjusting for those elements not needed for the parking structure yields a per-space cost of about $52,000. [(54,855,780.07*.70)/738] [.pdf of Nov. 22, 2013 memo from Pollay to Powers][.pdf of budget versus actual expenses for the 738-space Library Lane structure]

By way of additional background, the Ann Arbor DDA’s most recent financial records show that last year, on-street parking spaces generated $2,000 in gross revenue per space or $1,347 in net income per space annually. The contract with the city under which the DDA operates the public parking system stipulates that the city receives 17% of the gross parking revenues. So the city’s revenue associated with an on-street parking space corresponds to $340 annually.

Killing Fuller Road Station MOU

An item postponed from the Dec. 16, 2013 meeting would officially terminate a four-year-old memorandum of understanding between the city of Ann Arbor and the University of Michigan on Fuller Road Station.

Fuller Road Station was a planned joint city/UM parking structure, bus depot and possible train station located at the city’s Fuller Park near the UM medical campus. The council had approved the MOU on the Fuller Road Station project at its Nov. 5, 2009 meeting on a unanimous vote. [.pdf of Nov. 5, 2009 MOU text as approved by the city council] However, a withdrawal of UM from the project, which took place under terms of the MOU, was announced on Feb. 10, 2012. So it’s been clear for nearly two years that the MOU was a dead letter.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) sponsored the Dec. 16 resolution. The idea to terminate the MOU has its origins in election campaign rhetoric. He had stated at a June 8, 2013 Democratic primary candidate forum that he intended to bring forth such a resolution to “kill” the Fuller Road Station project. From The Chronicle’s report of that forum:

Kunselman also stated that he would be proposing that the city council rescind its memorandum of understanding with the University of Michigan to build a parking structure as part of the Fuller Road Station project. Although UM has withdrawn from participation in that project under the MOU, Kunselman said he wanted to “kill it.” That way, he said, the conversation could turn away from using the designated parkland at the Fuller Road Station site as a new train station, and could instead be focused on the site across the tracks from the existing Amtrak station.

The city continues to pursue the possibility of a newly built or reconstructed train station, but not necessarily with the University of Michigan’s participation, and without a pre-determined preferred alternative for the site of a new station. At its Oct. 21, 2013 meeting, the council approved a contract with URS Corp. Inc. to carry out an environmental review of a project called the Ann Arbor Station. That review should yield the determination of a locally-preferred alternative for a site.

Kunselman led off deliberations at the Dec. 16 meeting saying he would like to postpone the resolution. He indicated that he thought he’d managed to add the item to the agenda on the Friday before the Monday meeting, but it turned out he had not done so. In light of the council’s discussion at their Dec. 9 budget planning session – when councilmembers had said they’d strive to avoid adding resolutions at the last minute – Kunselman said he wanted it postponed.

Mayor John Hieftje and Sabra Briere (Ward 1) both indicated they’d vote for the resolution – but also said they didn’t think the resolution was necessary. They indicated they were willing to vote for the resolution without postponing. Kunselman nevertheless wanted to postpone it, because it was added late to the agenda.

Traverwood Apartments

Also on the council’s Jan. 6 agenda is a First Martin Corp. project, which would construct a residential complex on the west side of Traverwood Drive, north of Plymouth Road. The development is called Traverwood Apartments.

The project, estimated to cost $30 million, would include 16 two-story buildings for a total of 216 one- and two-bedroom units – or 280 total bedrooms. Eight of the buildings would each have 15 units and 11 single-car garages. An additional eight buildings would each have 12 units and 8 single-car garages.

Two separate items are on the council’s agenda – one for the rezoning required for the project, and the other for the site plan and wetland use permit.

At the council’s Dec. 2, 2013 meeting, the initial approval of the required rezoning was given. Also approved at that meeting was a donation of 2.2 acres, just north of the project site – by Bill Martin to the city. The donated acreage is next to the Stapp Nature Area and the Leslie Park golf course.

Aerial view of proposed Traverwood Apartments at 2225 Traverwood Drive, north of Plymouth Road.

The city’s planning commission recommended approval of the site plan and the required rezoning at its Nov. 6, 2013 meeting. The site is made up of two parcels: a nearly 16-acre lot that’s zoned R4D (multi-family residential), and an adjacent 3.88-acre lot to the south that’s currently zoned ORL (office, research and light industrial). It’s the smaller lot that needs to be rezoned R4D.

Land donated by Bill Martin to the city of Ann Arbor indicated in red outline.

Montgomery Ward Building

Another item on the city council’s Jan. 6 agenda is the site plan for a four-story addition to the existing two-story building (the old Montgomery Ward building) at 210-216 S. Fourth Ave., between East Liberty and East Washington in downtown Ann Arbor. The plan calls for creating 32 new housing units, including four studios, 14 one-bedroom, and 14 two-bedroom units. Planning commissioners took action to recommend approval of the project’s site plan at their Nov. 19, 2013 meeting.

Aerial view of the Montgomery building (indicated with crosshatches) at 210 S. Fourth Ave. in downtown Ann Arbor.

The estimated $3.8 million project would expand the existing 17,273-square-foot building – a former Montgomery Ward’s department store – to 38,373 square feet, with housing on the second through fifth floors. The ground floor would remain commercial space. Current tenants include Salon Vertigo and Bandito’s Mexican Restaurant. The top floor will include a stair/elevator lobby, restroom, wet bar, and access to several roof decks. Part of the fifth-floor roof will be covered in vegetation as a green roof.

Because the building is located in a historic district, it required a certificate of appropriateness from the city’s historic district commission. The HDC granted that certificate at its Sept. 12, 2013 meeting.

The site is zoned D1, which allows for the highest level of density. According to a staff memo, eight footing drain disconnects will be required.

According to a report from the July 10, 2013 citizen participation meeting, the units will be marketed to “anyone who wants to live downtown.” If approvals are received, construction is expected to begin next summer. The project’s architect is Brad Moore.

Moore is also the architect for an expansion project on the adjacent property – a three-floor addition to the Running Fit building at East Liberty and South Fourth, which will create six residential units. That project received a recommendation of approval from planning commissioners at their Oct. 15, 2013 meeting and was subsequently approved by the city council on Dec. 2, 2013.

Briarwood Mall Restaurant Expansions

A site plan for construction of two free-standing restaurants at Briarwood Mall is also on the council’s Jan. 6 agenda.

Aerial view of Briarwood Mall. The cross-hatched section indicates the parcel where two new restaurants are proposed, adjacent to Macy’s.

The proposal calls for building two new freestanding restaurants – one at 6,470 square feet, the other at 7,068 square feet – on the east side of the Macy’s building at Briarwood Mall, 700 Briarwood Circle. The restaurants would be two chains: P.F. Chang’s and Bravo! Cucina Italiana.

The parking lot north and east of the new restaurants would be reconfigured, reducing the total amount of parking by 188 spaces. The estimated cost of the project is $1,577,094. The site is located in Ward 4.

Ann Arbor planning commissioners recommended approval of the site plan and development in action at their Nov. 19, 2013 meeting. The project was originally considered at the commission’s Oct. 15, 2013 meeting, but postponed because of outstanding issues.

Originally, the planning staff had indicated that the project would require rezoning a portion of the parking lot from P (parking) to C2B (business service. However, according to a memo accompanying the commission’s Nov. 19 meeting packet, planning staff subsequently determined that because the original 1973 Briarwood Mall zoning anticipated the expansion of Hudson’s (now Macy’s ) to the east, no rezoning was needed.

Cellular Antenna Licensing

The consent agenda for Jan. 6 features two items involving cellular phone antennas mounted on city facilities. By council rule, contracts for less than $100,000 can be placed on the consent agenda.

Antennas from left: Plymouth Road water tower, Ann-Ashley parking structure, Manchester Road water tower.

One of the consent agenda items relates to the specific contracts with Sprint for placing antennas at four facilities: the Plymouth Road water tower, the Manchester Road water tower, the Ann-Ashley parking structure, and the water treatment plant. The contracts are being revised upwards to $45,000 a year at each location with 4% annual escalators. The previous agreements ranged from $25,920 to $39,283, according to the staff memo accompanying the resolution.

The staff memo also indicates that Sprint has been given initial administrative approval to undertake replacement of some of its equipment related to its 4G deployment.

The other consent agenda item related to cellular phone antennas, if it’s approved, would make it unnecessary in the future for items like the agreements with Sprint to come before the city council for approval. Instead, it would give the city administrator the power to approve licensing agreements with cellular service providers – even though they exceed the $25,000 threshold for council approval set forth in a city-charter required ordinance.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. Click this link for details: Subscribe to The Chronicle. And if you’re already supporting The Chronicle, please encourage your friends, neighbors and colleagues to help support The Chronicle, too!

On Dec. 4, 2013, city administrator Steve Powers attended his first DDA board meeting as a member. (Photos by the writer.)

The board also considered a resolution added to the agenda on the day of the meeting, related to the contribution-in-lieu (CIL) parking agreement for the 624 Church St. project – but ultimately decided to table that resolution pending further review at the committee level.

The DDA’s Dec. 4 resolution allocating $280,000 for the Main Street light pole replacement ended the political wrangling over who should pay for those downtown Ann Arbor light poles. Replacement of the deteriorating poles was identified by the city as a need in the first half of 2012. The source of an estimated $600,000 required for the project was specified in the city’s CIP (capital improvements plan) that year as coming from the DDA – though the funds were at that time not authorized by the board.

In the spring of 2013, the city council weighed how it might clarify the city’s ordinance that restricts the DDA TIF (tax increment finance) capture. In that context, DDA executive director Susan Pollay told the council that the DDA might not be able to afford to pay for the Main Street light pole project – if the council changed the ordinance language to clarify the calculations in a way that did not favor the DDA. The question of the DDA’s TIF capture was not ultimately settled until the council’s Nov. 18, 2013 meeting.

In the interim, the city council voted at its May 20, 2013 meeting to request that the DDA allocate at least $300,000 for the $580,000 light pole project. After the council then declined at its Oct. 21, 2013 meeting to approve a budget allocation for the remaining $280,000 that was needed for the project, the DDA board passed its Dec. 4 resolution, citing the urgency of replacing at least 36 of the poles as the reason for its decision.

According to the DDA’s resolution, staff will use the DDA funding to begin now with replacement of those poles most in need of being removed, with the remainder replaced in the summer of 2014.

Also at its Dec. 4 meeting – in connection with the city’s pending sale to Dennis Dahlmann of the former Y lot, at William Street and Fifth Avenue – the DDA board passed a resolution that waived claim to $1,439,959 in reimbursements from the sale that the DDA has calculated it might be owed. The city council adopted a policy on Oct. 15, 2012 that included depositing net proceeds (after reimbursements) from the former Y lot sale into the city’s affordable housing trust fund.

So the DDA board’s action is an attempt to increase the amount that will be deposited into the affordable housing trust fund. The resolution passed by the DDA board also calls on the city council to waive the city’s claim to reimbursements. The city purchased the property in 2003 for $3.5 million and has made interest-only payments for the last 10 years on a loan for that amount. The agreed-upon sale price to Dahlmann is $5.25 million.

In another formal action taken on Dec. 4, the DDA board accepted the audit report from the most recently concluded fiscal year – FY 2013, which ended June 30, 2013. The auditor issued an “unmodified” or clean opinion.

The board also considered a request, which was ultimately tabled, from the developer of the 624 Church St. project. The developer is asking for an extension of the contractual agreement under which parking permits could be purchased using the city’s contribution-in-lieu (CIL) program. The program allows a developer to satisfy certain zoning requirements that parking spaces be provided for a project – by purchasing monthly permits in the public parking system at a premium rate, instead of building the spaces on site. The developer of the 624 Church St. project wants the ability to extend the 15-year minimum to cover a 30-year financing period – based on feedback from firms that would be providing the financing. The DDA board ultimately voted to table the question pending further review by the board’s operations committee.

The board’s newest members introduced themselves at the meeting: city administrator Steve Powers and Main Street retailer Cyndi Clark.

Also at its Dec. 4 meeting, the board heard a range of updates on various projects and public commentary. Highlights included a report from the Main Street BIZ (business improvement zone), which has enough money in its fund balance to handle sidewalk snow removal for the coming winter, without collecting the winter tax assessment to which it is entitled. In a separate update, there’s a possibility that downtown ambassadors could be hired by the DDA as soon as the summer of 2014.

Other topics covered in updates included the effort to save the State Theater, the NHL’s Winter Classic on New Year’s Day, and The Puck Drops Here festivities on New Year’s Eve.

Main Street Light Poles

The need to replacement the Main Street light poles due to rusting bases has been known since last year – in early to mid-2012.

Downtown Ann Arbor Main Street light pole on northeast corner of Main & William. Photograph is from the city of Ann Arbor, taken in April 2012.

This spring, at city council meetings, replacement was characterized as an urgent public safety issue, because the bases of some of the poles are rusting. Various statements were made about the number of light poles that had failed, but responding to an emailed query from The Chronicle earlier this year, city of Ann Arbor staff indicated that in early 2012 two of the light poles fell – due to a structural failure at the base of the poles caused by rust. After inspection of all the poles, two additional light poles were deemed to be in immediate risk of falling and were also replaced.

The poles were part of the city’s CIP last year with the source of the funds identified in the CIP that year as the DDA’s TIF (tax increment finance) fund. The status of the funding – estimated at that time to be $600,000 – was identified as not yet authorized.

Over the course of the year, the replacement of the light poles became part of the fractious politics between the city council and the DDA.

In timeline overview form:

• April 1, 2013: Initial approval of DDA TIF capture ordinance revision (Chapter 7). Main Street light poles were cited as a project the DDA might not be able to pay for if the Chapter 7 revisions were approved.
• April 15, 2013: City council approves an amendment put forward by Sally Petersen (Ward 2) to the Chapter 7 revision, which delayed applying the revised language until FY 2015.
• May 20, 2013: City council approves FY 2014 budget amendment that affects DDA budget.
  

  Whereas, The DDA is forecasted to receive $568,343 more in TIF revenues than anticipated in the proposed FY14 budget;
  Whereas, Council desires to support the public housing program in the DDA area;
  RESOLVED, The DDA TIF fund revenue and expenditure budgets be increased by $568,343 for the purposes of creating a one-time transfer;
  RESOLVED, The DDA Housing fund revenue and expenditure budgets be increased by $300,000 to reflect Council’s desire for the DDA to support affordable housing in the DDA area; and
  RESOLVED, Ann Arbor City Council requests that the DDA allocate at least $300,000 for the replacement of the light poles on Main Street.

• June 5, 2013: DDA board meets and executive director Susan Pollay reports the council’s action. She tells the board that she’s meeting with city staff to figure out how the light poles will be paid for.
• July 3, 2013: DDA board allocates $300,000 for the light pole replacement project at the same meeting it allocates $250,000 for other capital projects, and $59,200 to support the creation of a business improvement zone in the South University area. One “whereas” clause characterized the council’s action in a way that is not based on the wording of the city council’s May 20 budget amendment.
  

  Whereas, Through the 2013/14 budget approval process it was determined that the City would undertake this street light replacement in calendar year 2013, with the DDA allocating $300,000 toward the cost of the project, and the City allocating $216,000; [.pdf of complete DDA light pole resolution]

• Oct. 21, 2013: City council resolution allocating $280,000 toward the project fails on a 7-4 vote. It needed eight votes for approval.
• Oct. 31–Nov. 1, 2013: City staff inspect the 81 light poles, determining that 36 need to be replaced within 6 months and the remaining 45 within 1-2 years.

Until the Oct. 21 council resolution failed, according to city of Ann Arbor public services area administrator Craig Hupy and DDA executive director Susan Pollay, their intent was that a cost-sharing arrangement between the city and the DDA would allow for the DDA to purchase the fixtures for all the poles, with the city paying for the poles. The DDA proceeded with the purchase of the fixtures. That left insufficient funds to deal with the 36 Main Street light poles most in need of replacement. The initially planned splitting of the costs, which did not come to fruition, appears to have contributed to the timing of the DDA’s resolution to allocate the additional $280,000 on Dec. 4.

Main Street Light Poles: Board Deliberations

Roger Hewitt began deliberations on Dec. 4 by indicating he believed it was back in May when it was determined that the light poles on Main Street were rusting out at the bases, and that they all needed to be replaced. [The need to replace the poles was identified a year earlier in 2012, with the source of the funds identified in the city's CIP that year as the DDA's TIF fund. The status of the funding – estimated at that time to be $600,000 – was identified as not yet authorized in the CIP.]

Hewitt indicated that in May, the DDA passed a resolution that it would allocate $300,000 of the $580,000 for the total cost of the project – which would be carried out by the city, he said. [The DDA's resolution was actually passed on July 3, 2013. What was passed in May – on May 20, 2013 – was a city council budget amendment that included a request for the DDA to allocate at least $300,000 toward the light pole project.]

Hewitt continued by saying that the city’s portion was going to be $280,000, but when asked to approve the additional funds, that resolution “was not successful at the city council.” There was therefore a shortage of $280,000, Hewitt said. An examination had been done, and many of the light poles are a safety hazard, he said. So the DDA was recommending that $120,524 be allocated in this fiscal year. That’s the amount remaining in a bond fund for State Street improvements that were done back in 2000 or so, Hewitt said. It’s money that had been sitting in a fund that had been unspent for about 10 years. This would require changing the budget, he said. And then in the next fiscal year [FY 2015], Hewitt continued, the remaining money would be allocated. Hewitt alluded to the fact that the FY 2015 budget has not yet been adopted by the DDA board.

DDA board chair Sandi Smith.

DDA board chair Sandi Smith offered what she described as a “super friendly amendment” to change the description of the fiscal years to match the city of Ann Arbor’s labels. [The current fiscal year, which started July 1, 2013 is FY 2014 under the city's labeling scheme. The DDA has historically named the calendar years spanned by the fiscal year – e.g., calling this year FY 2013-14.]

John Mouat asked if there was conversation about the State Street improvement project. He wanted to know what the status of the project was. Hewitt told Mouat that the project was completed over 10 years ago. Hewitt said that in the upcoming fiscal year, the DDA should take a look at improvements in that area. Some of the improvements made back then had taken a beating, Hewitt said, so he felt it would be appropriate to spend some money in the State Street area to do repairs in the existing streetscape.

Mouat wondered whether some aspects of the State Street project had not been completed in the context of the moratorium on new streetlights.

By way of background, the “moratorium” on additional streetlights has its origins in a budget amendment approved by the city council in 2006. The history and current policy (which includes the moratorium) was reviewed in a message to councilmembers from city administrator Steve Powers this past summer. [.pdf of July 9, 2013 email]

At the Dec. 4 meeting, Hewitt said he didn’t think there were any streetlights that were a part of the State Street project plan that were not completed. DDA executive director Susan Pollay explained that as the lights were installed, the DDA discovered that the streetlights that had been selected didn’t cast as much light as they’d hoped. There were some very tall lights that fit that description, she said – at that time, light pollution was a very big concern, she added. The light levels were low, she said. Some light was supposed to be provided by store windows.

Pollay described how “dollars were held back” so that additional light could be added to the area. Ultimately the design, which looked good on paper, was not successful in achieving the desired light levels, she said. There’s an unofficial understanding that the city’s electric bills are not supposed to be increased by adding more lights. As the DDA waits to understand what the city policy on replacing streetlights might be, Pollay said it was appropriate to use that money to replace the light poles on Main Street. At some point, the light levels on State Street would be revisited, she said.

Mouat thanked Pollay for that clarification. John Splitt wanted to reaffirm that he hoped something could be done in the coming year in the State Street area – in connection with the lighting, as well as with the planters. Russ Collins offered what he called a “niggling point” about the Washington Street area: The streetlights on Washington Street are off – they’re not functioning on the south side, Collins said.

Outcome: The board voted unanimously to approve the additional $280,000 in funding.

Proceeds of Y Lot Sale

By way of background, at its Nov. 18, 2013 meeting, the Ann Arbor city council approved the sale of city-owned property downtown – a parcel north of William Street between Fourth and Fifth avenues – to Dennis Dahlmann for $5.25 million. The city purchased the property for $3.5 million 10 years ago and has been making interest-only payments on the property for that time. A balloon payment is due at the end of this year. The DDA has been shouldering roughly half of the interest payments on the loan taken out by the city.

The former Y building offered 100 units of single-resident occupancy (SRO) low-income housing. Soon after the city’s purchase, the mechanical systems in the building failed, and all the residents needed to be relocated. The building was subsequently demolished, which the DDA paid for. Equipment was installed so that it could be used as a surface parking lot until its ultimate disposition was determined.

At its Nov. 18 meeting, the council did not delve into the question of how the net proceeds of the pending sale would be defined, but some councilmembers indicated they were pleased that the result would be a deposit into the city’s affordable housing trust fund. A year ago at the council’s Oct. 15, 2012 meeting, councilmembers adopted a resolution that indicated the proceeds of the sale would:

“… first be utilized to repay the various funds that expended resources on the property, including but not limited to due diligence, closing of the site and relocation and support of its previous tenants, after which any remaining proceeds be allocated and distributed to the Affordable Housing Trust Fund …

That council policy was approved after the DDA board passed its own resolution on Sept. 5, 2012, encouraging the city to return to a previous policy that dedicated the net proceeds of sales of all city-owned land (not just the Y lot) to support affordable housing.

On Dec. 4, Keith Orr offered a replacement to the resolution that was included in the board packet. Orr alluded to the fact that he was bringing forward the resolution – because he served in the “Dave DeVarti seat” on the DDA board – even though many people had worked on it.

By way of additional background, during his period of service on the DDA board, DeVarti was a staunch supporter of funding for affordable housing. DeVarti was not reappointed, and in late 2008 Orr was appointed to replace him. After DeVarti left, board members sometimes have quipped that they were “channeling Dave DeVarti” when they spoke in support of affordable housing.

During public commentary at its Nov. 6, 2013 meeting, DeVarti addressed the board on the topic of the former Y lot, suggesting that the DDA purchase the lot outright, so that the need to repay the loan would be removed as the impetus toward selling the lot. That approach would give the city a lot more flexibility, he had argued.

The substitute resolution offered by Orr at the board’s Dec. 4 meeting included a separate “whereas” clause establishing the DDA’s position that affordable housing is in the interest of the downtown. The revision also named specifically the net amount that the DDA believes it has invested in the property: $1,439,599. And finally, the revised resolution separately recommended the city council waive its own reimbursement of its costs in connection with the sale of the former Y lot parcel.

Orr pointed out that the address of the property is 350 S. Fifth. He noted that the city now has a purchase agreement. Orr said that part of the sales agreement is that entities that had investment money in the property would be reimbursed. [Later in the meeting, city administrator Steve Powers, who was attending his first meeting as a DDA board member, corrected Orr's statement, pointing out that this was not part of the sales agreement but rather a city council resolution, passed in 2012.] The largest portion of the DDA’s contribution was paying for the demolition of the former Y building and picking up a portion of the interest payments.

A document provided at the DDA board meeting showed the demolition costs at $1.469 million and interest payments totaling $600,426 since 2004. The net contribution, factoring in the income the DDA received from the surface parking operations it established on the parcel after demolishing the building, was $1,493,959. So the resolution asked the DDA board to waive reimbursement of that amount. [The copy of the resolution distributed to the audience named $1,439,959 as the amount of the DDA board was waiving. That's the amount Orr named in reviewing the resolution. A separate document distributed at the meeting with the actual breakdown of payments and costs showed $1,493,959. The correct math based on those figures is the greater amount: $1,493,959.]

The resolution also asked the city council to waive its claim to reimbursements, which Orr said was around $ 2.7 million. The goal, Orr said, was to ensure that a substantial investment in affordable housing can be made.

Joan Lowenstein followed Orr’s description by saying that the DDA’s goal has been to see that the maximum amount from net proceeds of the sale go into the city’s affordable housing trust fund.

Orr confirmed Lowenstein’s understanding, but added that the resolution reflected everything that the DDA could do to maximize the investment in affordable housing as a result of that property sale. The DDA’s commitment to affordable housing, Orr said, was confined to investments within the district, or within 1/4 mile of the district. The city had more flexibility, Orr said.

Al McWilliams asked about the general motivation to use the proceeds from the Y lot to support affordable housing. Orr said that one reason is historical: The former Y building had included 100 single-resident occupancy units that provided low-income housing.

Orr continued by saying there’s always been this feeling that the proceeds of the sale should help low-income and affordable housing. Orr also pointed out that when board chair Sandi Smith served on the city council, the council was already talking about doing that. “It’s not a particularly new idea,” he concluded.

Bob Guenzel said that in his mind, it was more than a promise that those 100 units would be rebuilt in the downtown area, even if not on the same piece of property. That hasn’t happened for a number of reasons, Guenzel said, but the “substitute” is that the proceeds of the sale would be used for affordable housing. A lot of people remember that community commitment that was made, he concluded.

Russ Collins asked: Does the city have specific plans to build – or cause to be built – affordable housing? Collins wondered if there was any plan to contract with the Delonis Center [a homeless shelter located in Ann Arbor] to operate supportive housing? He wondered if there was any strategic plan to actually execute anything?

City administrator Steve Powers said that the city council’s first action would be to complete the sale of this property. He said he was not aware of any specific steps pending after that.

Collins ventured that there’s no strategic plan that the city is party to, other than “collect a bunch of money and use it for affordable housing?” “Council has no strategic plan …? If they do, that’s great,” Collins said. Powers responded to Collins by saying that the city is a party to work with the Washtenaw Housing Alliance (WHA) and the county’s office of community and economic development. There’s not a city-specific plan at this time, Powers said. WHA and the county’s office of community and economic development are talking about doing an assessment of affordable housing needs.

There’s a continuum, Guenzel said, from the very poorest to what is called workforce housing. He told Collins that there are a lot of discussions about it.

Historically, Smith said, there were funds in the affordable housing trust fund, and that has been spent down. There was no ability to plan for those funds, she said, because the balance is under $200,000 right now. It’s pretty nominal, she said, and you can’t build a unit for that amount. Guenzel noted that the question of whether some funds could be used for bricks-and-mortar versus supportive services was yet to be determined.

Collins had concerns about how prudent it is to allocate money toward a generally good idea without a clear strategy of what to do. “It’s great to do nice things. The DDA tries to do nice things, and we’re told that we’re a shadow government,” he said. If there’s no community strategy for addressing this, the DDA is doing something that might be nice in the future, he said, but he indicated he didn’t feel this was genuinely addressing the issue.

Smith replied that she didn’t necessarily think the DDA was the organization to tackle affordable housing. Smith noted the DDA has historically set aside money for affordable housing – and it’s now built into the DDA ordinance that the DDA is required to set aside $300,000 annually for affordable housing. She strongly supported the resolution because the DDA would then be able to leverage funds with the city and the county. She pointed to the last “resolved” clause that called on the city to follow the DDA’s example. Then those resources could be used to create a solid plan and move forward, she said.

John Mouat asked if it would be possible to take advantage of the city’s housing and human services advisory board (HHSAB). That would be a good entity to consult with in its advisory capacity. Powers indicated that he thought HHSAB had already had those kinds of discussions.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved the resolution waiving the DDA’s interest in proceeds of the sale of the former Y lot.

Proceeds of the Y Lot Sale: Parking Contract

Toward the end of the meeting during communications time, John Splitt indicated that he had some concerns about the sale of the former Y lot, based on the contract – under which the DDA manages the public parking system for the city. Under the contract, he said, the DDA is supposed to be given notice about the removal of parking spaces from the system. Sandi Smith stated that “We have not received written notice.”

Roger Hewitt responded to Smith by saying that he’d reviewed the most recent contract and he was not sure that the city actually is required give notice. DDA executive director Susan Pollay said that the contract refers to a “lease” and not a “sale.” Splitt said he just wanted to make sure that there was enough time to move equipment.

City administrator Steve Powers responded by saying that the city would be providing information about that, quipping: “It’s in the mail.” In connection with the sale of the property, the city would work through the removal of the parking equipment with the DDA, Powers said.

From the parking contract [emphasis added]:

The City shall not lease any portion of individual Facilities to third parties where such lease (either alone or cumulatively with other leases in such Facility) would reduce the number of usable parking spaces in such Facility by more than one percent (1%) or five (5) parking spaces, whichever is less, without first (i) providing DDA with thirty (30) days prior written notice; (ii) consulting with DDA about the location and terms of use of such leased spaces to reduce the impact of such use on DDA’s use of the Facility; and (iii) upon DDA’s written request delivered no more than fifteen (15) days after notice of the proposed lease, executing a side letter between City and DDA, the sole purpose of which is to make DDA whole for the loss of Gross Parking Revenue associated with the reduced parking spaces.

FY 2013 Audit

Board member Roger Hewitt made the motion to accept the DDA’s 2013 financial audit. Every year the DDA has an audit performed to ensure the DDA’s financial position is accurately stated. [.pdf of DDA FY 2013 audit]

DDA board member Roger Hewitt.

The DDA uses the same firm as the city [Rehmann], Hewitt said. The audit came back this year with an “unmodified” opinion, meaning there were no changes. He explained that the outcome essentially means that it was “clean” and that the DDA’s financial statements are an accurate reflection of the DDA’s financial position.

There was a suggestion, he allowed, to have an independent review of general journal entries. That’s been put in place, he said. A CPA the DDA has on contract will review those journal entries, he reported.

“Everything is just fine, according to our auditor,” Hewitt said. The conversation with the auditor was a good conversation that will help shape the budget in the upcoming year, Hewitt said.

Outcome: The DDA board voted unanimously to accept the FY 2013 audit report.

624 Church Street Parking CIL

By way of background, on Nov. 6, 2013 the DDA board approved the purchase of 48 parking permits under the contribution-in-lieu (CIL) program for a revision to a proposed residential development at 624 Church St. in downtown Ann Arbor. The spaces were approved to be provided in the Forest Avenue parking structure.

The CIL program allows a developer the option of purchasing permits to satisfy a parking requirement that would otherwise be satisfied by providing parking spaces on site as part of the project.

The original proposal for 624 Church, which received site plan approval from the city council at its March 4, 2013 meeting, was for a 13-story, 83-unit apartment building with approximately 181 beds. And for that version, the Ann Arbor DDA had authorized the project to purchase up to 42 monthly permits through the city’s contribution-in-lieu program.

The newly revised 624 Church St. project, which still needs planning commission and city council review, is larger than the original project, with roughly 122 units and 232 beds. The parking requirement is a function of the by-right premiums for additional square footage beyond the basic by-right of 400% floor area ratio (FAR). So the parking requirement for the revised project is greater than for the original version of the project. That’s why the DDA was asked to increase the number of permits from 42 to 48. The number of required parking spaces for the revised version of the project is actually 53, but five of them will be provided on site.

The DDA makes the decision about whether there’s adequate capacity in the parking system to allow the sale of additional monthly permits – because the DDA manages the city’s public parking system under a contract with the city.

Ann Arbor’s “contribution-in-lieu-of-parking” program was authorized by the city council on April 2, 2012. That program allows essentially two options: (1) purchase monthly parking permits in the public parking system for an extra 20% of the current rate for such permits, with a commitment of 15 years; or (2) make a lump sum payment of $55,000 per space. It’s option (1) that the 624 Church St. project is using.

624 Church Street Parking CIL: Public Commentary

Brad Moore, architect for the 624 Church St. project, appeared before the DDA board during public commentary time at the start of the meeting. He asked board members to consider modifying the terms under which the 624 Church St. project would be able to lease spaces monthly parking spaces under city’s contribution-in-lieu (CIL) program. Currently the project has been allocated 48 spaces for the minimum period under the CIL, which is 15 years. It’s come to the attention of the developer (Opus) that as it lines up financing, the financing companies would like to have two 10-year extensions added to the agreement, so that the length of the agreed-upon leasing of the parking spaces would cover at least a standard 30-year mortgage.

Moore said that Opus was asking that the agreement be amended – to add an option for two 10-year agreements that would exceed the minimum financing period. DDA executive director Susan Pollay told Moore that the item could be brought to the board in the next few minutes as an action item during the operations committee report.

624 Church Street Parking CIL: Board Deliberations

A draft resolution was distributed to the board at the meeting that would have addressed the issue that Brad Moore had raised. Roger Hewitt said the issue had only been brought to his attention that day.

He said that in his experience, funding for large commercial real estate projects tended to be for a 20-year financing period. He referred to Village Green’s City Apartments project as well as Ashley Mews as examples.

The resolution would add an additional five years to the existing agreement so that it could run, at the owner’s option, for 20 years instead of 15 years.

The indication from Moore was that the five-year extension would still endanger the financing for the 624 Church St. project. Hewitt indicated a reluctance to commit to a parking agreement for the length of time that Moore was requesting. He wanted to see some evidence that a 20-year financing plan – which in his experience is typical – is not possible before setting a new precedent.

Russ Collins ventured that the matter could be tabled until more information is received. Moore said that the parking would not necessarily be tied up in a single structure. Hewitt reiterated his concern that a 30-year term in this case would set a precedent for other developers.

Al McWilliams proposed an approach that would provide for optional renewal.

After some back-and-forth, Sandi Smith indicated that her preference would be for Moore to come back to the operations committee and allow the committee members to “chew on it” a bit more. The next operations committee meeting will take place on Dec. 18 at 11 a.m. Hewitt said.

Outcome: The board tabled the question of the CIL agreement in connection with the 624 Church St. project.

Communications, Committee Reports

The board’s meeting included the usual range of reports from its standing committees and the downtown citizens advisory council, as well as public commentary. In addition to information reported earlier in this article, here are some highlights.

Comm/Comm: Main Street BIZ

During public commentary time at the start of the meeting, Ellie Serras introduced herself to the DDA board as the community relations director for the Main Street Business Improvement Zone (BIZ).

By way of background, the Ann Arbor DDA board voted on April 1, 2009 to award $83,270 to defray various costs associated with the formation of the Main Street BIZ. Those costs included accounting, auditing, operations and legal services.

On Dec. 4, Serras told the board she was there to bring them up to date on the organization’s activities and plans for the future, and to thank the board for their investment from the very beginning. A BIZ allows property owners to establish a vision and to select services compatible with that vision, she said. The DDA’s support of the Main Street BIZ allowed development of a successful campaign that has grown into a fully-functioning provider of important services that have improved the quality of the Main Street neighborhood, she told them.

The Main Street BIZ was established in 2010 according to the state enabling legislation, receiving overwhelming support from property owners in the three-block area of Main Street from Huron Street down to William Street, she said. The Main Street BIZ provides sidewalk snow removal, sweeping, handbill removal and landscape improvements in that area.

The services and contractors had been “skillfully managed” by the Main Street BIZ board of directors within the parameters of an annually approved budget, Serras said. Funding for the BIZ is generated by an assessment added on to the property owners’ summer and winter tax statements, she said. The BIZ board had been diligent in protecting the property owners’ investment and as a result, the existing fund balance is adequate so that even if this winter brings a severe snowstorm, the snow removal could be handled without imposing the winter tax assessment this year.

So the BIZ board has determined that no BIZ assessment would be on their 2013 winter tax statements. Even though the assessment will not be imposed, the area will still receive the same level of consistent services that it has over the last three and a half years, Serras said.

The Main Street BIZ is now currently contemplating the possibility of expanding its boundaries, she reported, based on positive comments from surrounding property owners. As it contemplates such an expansion, she continued, the Main Street BIZ would be using the blueprint that had been developed in connection with the grant that the DDA had awarded to the Main Street BIZ. The blueprint will be updated to include changes to the state statute and the procedures used for establishing a BIZ.

In appreciation to the DDA, Serras said, the BIZ board wanted to invite the DDA board to join the BIZ for coffee and pastries to talk about the BIZ – on Jan. 28 at 9 a.m. at the DDA offices. The BIZ would not be asking the DDA for anything, but wanted to express its appreciation for the DDA’s support. She alerted the board to the BIZ website: annarbormainstreetbiz.com

Comm/Comm: Downtown Citizens Area Advisory Council

Ray Detter addressed the board as chair of the downtown area citizens advisory council. He told the DDA board that the CAC has a holiday party every year when it discusses developments over the last year and things that it wants to work for in the coming year. He said the CAC supports more public art, more trees – and taking better care of those that are already in place. The group also supports improvements to the alley between East Liberty and East Washington near The Liberty Square parking structure, to make it a more public place, he said.

The CAC supports the DDA’s development of a streetscape framework plan, and its parking and transportation management plan. The downtown transportation plan is part of a transportation plan for the entire county, Detter said, that includes Zipcars, mopeds, the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority’s AirRide service and the getDowntown go!pass program. Detter continued by mentioning the north-south commuter rail project (WALLY), and the possible connector. The CAC wanted to avoid any need for additional above-ground parking structures, Detter said.

But the two most important areas of focus, he said, were population and retail. Retail will not thrive, he said, without a commitment to residential. The CAC applauded the success of Urban Outfitters, Bivouac and Renaissance, but was appalled by the loss of Selo/Shevel Gallery and Seyfried Jewelers.

Comm/Comm: State Theater

Ray Detter, speaking on behalf of the downtown area citizens advisory council, continued by saying that the CAC was committed to the survival of the State Theater as part of a historic theater district in downtown Ann Arbor. The theater helps define the essential identity of downtown Ann Arbor, he said. Detter noted that many people remembered the Campus Theater.

Detter acknowledged the demand for office space, but that can’t equal the value of the two theaters, he contended. The Michigan Theater, Detter said, had provided the venue for the first “talking pictures” in Ann Arbor in 1928 and the State Theater had been around since 1942. [DDA board member Russ Collins, who's executive director of the Michigan Theater, corrected Detter, pointing out that it was the Orpheum that was the first "talking picture" movie theater.]

The State Theater attracts 50,000 people a year, Detter said. Some people “might think it’s a dump at this point,” but there are ways of fixing it up, he said. Detter added that he was looking forward to the expansion of the Cinetopia series with the State Theater as one of the venues.

It’s a challenge to save the State Theater, Detter said. But the Michigan Theater board has taken the initiative to open a conversation with State Theater LLC to work on a way for the community to purchase and retain the State Theater as part of the “theater district.” The DDA should be a part of that process, Detter said. Other DDAs have done this kind of thing, “and we can do it, too.” Detter said he still remembered the $250,000 that had been given by the DDA for the lobby of the Michigan Theater.

Later in the meeting, Russ Collins followed up on Detter’s commentary by saying it was not a DDA matter per se. But regarding the State Theater, the Michigan Theater is in talks with the owners of the State Theater building. He was hopeful that would have a positive outcome with respect to preserving the cinema exhibition capability at the State Theater. He was happy with the owner’s willingness to talk.

Comm/Comm: New Board Members

Board chair Sandi Smith invited the new board members who’d been added since the last meeting to introduce themselves.

City administrator Steve Powers quipped that he would not need four minutes [the time limit afforded public speakers]. “It’s a pleasure to be with you,” he said. When mayor John Hieftje had asked him to serve, he’d agreed with enthusiasm, he reported. He appreciated and understands the importance of the DDA to the overall mission of the city. The city council had confirmed his appointment Monday night [Dec. 2]. He told the board he’d worked as city administrator for a little over 2 years. In that time, he’d gotten to know executive director Susan Pollay and had enjoyed the professional relationship between the city and the DDA. Powers saw his service on the board as strengthening that existing relationship between the city and the DDA.

Cyndi Clark introduced herself as a retail owner on Main Street for Lily Grace Cosmetics. A month ago, she’d just opened up a second business, she said – a spa. She was delighted to be on the DDA board. Her family lives in Ann Arbor and she was born and raised here, she said. She was delighted to be working with everyone. “It’s a full term for me!” she concluded.

Comm/Comm: Connector

By way of background on the connector study, the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority is currently conducting an alternatives analysis study for the corridor running from US-23 and Plymouth southward along Plymouth to State Street, then farther south along State to I-94. The alternatives analysis phase will result in a preferred choice of transit mode (e.g., bus rapid transit, light rail, etc.) and identification of stations and stops. A previous study established the feasibility of operating some kind of high-capacity transit in that corridor.

Roger Hewitt participates on the technical committee for that study. The DDA has contributed funding toward the study.

At the Dec. 4 DDA board meeting, Hewitt reported that three public meetings had been held on the connector project recently. The board then watched a video created to explain the project. After presentation of the video, Hewitt described the public meetings as an effort to get input on the different route options. The turnout was pretty good, he said. The morning session wasn’t all that well attended, with perhaps 10 people, Hewitt said, but the noon and evening sessions each had over 25 people attend, he said. People had a lot of questions and a lot of information was exchanged, he said, but he allowed there wasn’t as much feedback on specific transit routes as they would have liked.

Unless you’re in the “nitty gritty of it,” Hewitt felt that it’s a bit overwhelming to consider all the possibilities. The next meeting of the technical committee would take place on Friday [Dec. 6], he said, with a follow-up meeting the next Monday [Dec. 9]. The study needs to be completed in the first quarter of 2014, he said. The outcome of the study would be the “preferred local option,” Hewitt said, and he’d keep the board up to date on that.

Joan Lowenstein asked Hewitt to confirm that in the context of the basic “boomerang” route, there would still be a significant impact depending on how the route was planned through the downtown. Hewitt confirmed that, and said there had been a lot of discussion about it. One possibility that had been suggested was to just head south on State Street. There are significant problems with the width of all streets. He’d been pushing for the idea that the route needed to come at least as far west as the Blake Transit Center [on Fifth Avenue].

Right now, the group is looking at two stations – one in the central campus (State Street area) and one in the center of downtown (Main Street area). Neither the route nor the station locations have been determined, he said. There was some desire not to cross Main Street, he noted. That’s because the amount of federal support would depend on a demonstration that there’d be a savings in travel time – because “that’s how the feds measure things,” he said.

If the route crosses Main Street, then it would have to cross back over Main Street to get to the South State Street area, Hewitt explained, and with the current traffic backups on Main Street, it would be easy to get backed up during rush hour in the Main Street area. So the group is looking to stay east of Main Street.

From left: John Mouat and Roger Hewitt.

John Mouat asked for an analysis of the economic impact of such a project. In that context, he asked about the planned timing of the project. Hewitt responded by saying, “We’re talking about a while!” He noted that this is the second phase of the study, after the initial feasibility study. That study had shown that the existing ridership justifies a more robust form of transit than is currently in place. The current phase is an alternatives analysis, which would determine the local “favorite” route and mode of transportation. After that an environmental study would be done.

After all of that, you “stand in line for federal dollars,” Hewitt said. For a project that meets the right criteria, the federal government might fund up to half the cost of the project, he said. The cost, depending on the route and the mode, could be as little as $100 million and as much as $500 million. After getting the federal dollars lined up, he continued, you’d have to line up the local match. The University of Michigan has stated publicly that they’d be involved, he said, without putting a particular dollar figure on their participation. After construction and ordering of vehicles, Hewitt said, we shouldn’t expect anything rolling for 10 years.

But this phase of the study, Hewitt said, would be completed in the next three months or so. He felt that a decision was pretty close for the downtown route. It would mean a pretty big change to downtown, Hewitt said. He allowed that it’s hard to get people excited about this now, when the project is 10 years off.

Comm/Comm: Bicycles, Alt Transportation

Keith Orr gave an update on the bike share program. A representative from B-Cycle, the selected vendor, had been brought in by the Ann Arbor-based Clean Energy Coalition (CEC). They looked at potential sites for locating stations. The few on-street spots were too narrow for a station, Orr reported. So as of now, there were no requests from the CEC of the DDA for an on-street parking spot. The CEC still anticipates an Earth Day opening in the spring of 2014. Right now, the plan is for 14 stations, Orr said. Stations will be located as far north as the University of Michigan north campus, and as far west as Ashley Street.

Orr also reported out on the first usage stats for the Bike House – an enclosed facility in the Maynard Street parking structure. Orr reported that people love having it there, saying that it’s largely a commuting option for people. The time records for when people use it show that people use it primarily at the beginning of the day and the end of the day, he said, but it’s not the same people all the time. He concluded that people who are using the Bike House are not relying on one mode of transportation. Discussion is taking place about other locations where similar facilities could be constructed, Orr reported.

And based on recent go!pass stats, it continues to be a very robust program, Orr said. [The DDA funds the go!pass program, which is administered by getDowntown, whose staff are employees of the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority.] More rides were taken and more cards were sold and used. Orr concluded that it continues to be a very popular and important program.

Comm/Comm: Winter Classic, The Puck Drops Here

By way of background, two major events are scheduled for New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day in Ann Arbor: The Puck Drops Here and the National Hockey League’s Winter Classic Game. In connection with the NHL Winter Classic Game to be played on New Year’s Day, the Ann Arbor Area Convention and Visitors Bureau is hosting a New Year’s Eve event called The Puck Drops Here, which will mimic the dropping of the lighted ball in Times Square, but with a 6-foot diameter lighted “puck” that is being fabricated by METAL.

At the DDA board’s Dec. 4 meeting, DDA executive director Susan Pollay reviewed highlights of the strategy that will be deployed for the NHL Winter Classic and The Puck Drops Here events.

For New Year’s Eve, the Fourth and William parking structure, as well as the Forest structure, will have a flat rate fee. That way, people will not have to stop at the cashier booth on their way out.

On New Year’s Day, the city council had approved the street closures that will be in place. The NHL has asked that staffing be provided at public garages, Pollay said. That would allow for the reservation of a parking space in advance. If people reserve in advance, that would allow them to drive directly to a specific location.

Staff would also be handing out maps – mostly with an eye to help people after the game find the place where they’d parked. Pollay also told the board that the names of those businesses that are going to be open on Jan. 1 would be listed on the back of the map.

At all structures and lots, Pollay said, a flat fee of $5 would be charged on New Year’s Day. It’s meant to reimburse the DDA for its costs, not to make a lot of money.

John Mouat asked if anyone had developed a projection of how many people will be needing to park. Pollay said that to her knowledge, no. As much as possible, people are being encouraged to use the buses and shuttles that will be provided. They’re also working to communicate to people about the parking that’s available at locations away from the stadium.

City administrator Steve Powers noted that lawn parking will be allowed, as it is on home football game days.

Comm/Comm: Downtown Ambassadors

By way of background, for several years, the Ann Arbor DDA has had an interest in maintaining some kind of additional police patrol presence in the downtown. In the mid-2000s, the DDA entered into a contract with the city of Ann Arbor with the implicit hope that the city would maintain the dedicated downtown beat cops. That contract was structured at the time to pay the city $1 million a year for 10 years, with the city able to request up to $2 million a year for a maximum of $10 million.

That hope was not realized, and the DDA has since discussed the idea of providing additional funding for police or for “ambassadors.” The idea of ambassadors was explored in the context of subsequent re-negotiations of the contract between the city and the DDA under which the DDA operates the parking system. The DDA wanted to be assigned responsibility for parking enforcement (a function performed by the city’s community standards officers) and imagined that activity to be performed in an ambassador-like fashion.

At its June 3, 2013 meeting, the city council approved a resolution encouraging the DDA to provide funding for three police officers (a total of $270,000 annually) to be deployed in the DDA district. DDA board members visited Grand Rapids this fall to observe a new downtown ambassador program in that city. The initial report from that visit was given at the Ann Arbor DDA board’s Nov. 6, 2013 meeting.

At the board’s meeting on Dec. 4, Roger Hewitt reported that the operations committee had a lengthy discussion about the idea of hiring ambassadors, based on the visit by some board members to Grand Rapids to see the ambassador program there. A number of views were expressed, Hewitt said, but most people thought it was a good idea and that the Ann Arbor DDA should aggressively pursue it. At the next operations committee meeting, Hewitt said, it would be pursued. Personally, he said, he would like to see something in place for the summer of 2014, if it’s possible to move that quickly.

Comm/Comm: Prosperity

Joan Lowenstein reported out on the partnerships committee discussion about the A2 Ypsilanti Regional Chamber’s annual Impact conference.

Keith Orr and Joan Lowenstein.

The focus this year was based on a presentation made by Lou Glazer of Michigan Future Inc. Glazer’s work suggested that there’s a strong connection between prosperity and placemaking, and attracting young talent. The trends indicate that prosperous states show a higher proportion of wages from the “knowledge industries” – medical, technical and legal professions, Lowenstein said. Prosperous states also have a high proportion of college grads. Taxes don’t play as much of a role in prosperity, she said – it’s all about educational attainment and quality of place. Michigan and Ann Arbor are lagging behind other places in terms of the number of young professionals who are attracted here.

For example, she said, Madison, Wisc. has twice the number of young professionals as Ann Arbor does, Lowenstein reported. Glazer had said that Ann Arbor has an important role to play in prosperity, but the elements that are key to that need to be embraced: transit, private sector growth and density, she said. A lot of people want to attract families, but attracting young professionals will lead to that, she said, because people tend to establish families where they get their first job. Ann Arbor needs to do a better job of engaging young professionals in the community by giving them a better voice, Lowenstein said.

One of the panels at the Impact conference included young people who are reluctant to put themselves out in public positions, because of the nature of the media and social media – because you can get trashed by putting yourself out in public, Lowenstein said. She called it an unfortunate element of our modern life.

DDA board member Al McWilliams will be working on DDA communications.

Lowenstein also reported that the partnerships committee meeting will establish a subcommittee focused on communications. Al McWilliams and Rishi Narayan will head up that subcommittee, she said – noting that McWilliams is involved in that sort of thing all the time. [McWilliams is founder of the ad agency Quack!Media.]

January’s board meeting, which was originally scheduled for Jan. 1 – because it’s part of the first-Wednesday meeting pattern – was shifted to Jan. 8. There was no traction for the possibility of changing the day of the week or the noon meeting time for the regular board meetings.

Comm/Comm: Pedestrian Crashes

During public commentary time at the end of the meeting, Ed Vielmetti addressed the board about pedestrian safety issues. He noted the outcome of the city council’s recent action on the city’s crosswalk law [and the announcement by mayor John Hieftje that he would be vetoing the change the council had voted 6-4 to approve]. The current ordinance mostly addresses outside-downtown issues, Vielmetti said, with its reference to non-signalized crosswalks. In preparing for the city council meeting, Vielmetti said, he’d looked at about eight years of car crash data. What he’d noticed consistently is that the majority of pedestrian crashes happen in the downtown and campus area – probably because lots of people are walking downtown.

The narratives in some of the accident reports often describe how the pedestrian was crossing with a walk light, while the car had a green light and was turning, but didn’t see the pedestrian, Vielmetti said. This is an issue that’s within the purview of the DDA to address, he added. There’s only so much education you can do, with a transient student population. And there’s only so much enforcement you can do without adding to the police force. But the engineering could be addressed, he said – through careful attention to the built infrastructure where people cross the street, or near parking structures where there are a lot of pedestrian-car interactions.

Present: Al McWilliams, Cyndi Clark, Bob Guenzel, Roger Hewitt, Steve Powers, John Splitt, Sandi Smith, Russ Collins, Keith Orr, Joan Lowenstein, John Mouat.

Absent: Rishi Narayan.

Next board meeting: Noon on Wednesday, Jan. 8, 2014, at the DDA offices, 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301. [Check Chronicle event listings to confirm date]

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

The spots will be added on the west side of an existing driveway in the north part of the property, which is located at 1200 Earhart Road. There are currently 486 parking spaces throughout the 31.5-acre site. The property is zoned R4B (multi-family dwelling) and includes 227 apartments and two-family residences, 155 nursing rooms, and 197 nursing care beds. The site, near US-23, is adjacent to Greenhills School and a residential neighborhood.

A representative from the nearby Earhart Village spoke against the project, saying that the parking is primarily for commercial uses, even though the area is residential. He argued that Glacier Hills is drawing customers to the property, who use the cafe there and other services. He said the property is overdeveloped and negatively impacts the adjoining neighborhoods. He also complained about changes to the site that can be approved via administrative amendments, with no oversight by the planning commission. One such change – an addition to one of the Glacier Hills “villas” – is currently pending with the planning staff.

The addition of the 31 parking spaces is not an item that requires city council approval.

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

Jim Mogensen, speaking about the University of Michigan shouldering a half-million-dollar cost for the Central Campus Transit Center that the city would ordinarily have paid: "Look, it's not free." (Photos by the writer.)

The approval of a contract extension for the city’s public art administrator generated a great deal of discussion – partly concerning the dollar amount of the contract – and was passed despite dissent from three councilmembers.

But the council postponed a resolution that would have cut the base salaries of the city administrator and the city attorney by 3%, and would have directed the administrator to cut the salaries of non-union employees by 3% as well.

Another prominent theme of the meeting was real estate and infrastructure. Council approved the acquisition of a property within the city limits – a portion of the Black Elk’s site on Sunset Road – using greenbelt millage funds. They also approved the capital improvements plan (CIP), modified to delete an item for the extension and shifting of a runway at the Ann Arbor municipal airport.

The council also appointed members of a citizens committee on Georgetown Mall, the former location of a Kroger grocery store, to provide input to the city’s nuisance committee.

City administrator Roger Fraser reported in his communications to the council that the University of Michigan would be shouldering a $450,000 cost associated with the construction of a transit center on the central campus – a cost that would ordinarily be carried by the city.

The real estate and infrastructure theme included UM in another way: The council approved a lease agreement with the university for 18 parking spaces next to Riverside Park, but not without some complaint from councilmembers about the dollar amount on the lease, which they felt was too low.

Those parking spaces also provided a connection to the budget theme unrelated to the dollar amount on the lease – the spaces were originally used by a Motor Meals program in the mid ’80s, operating out of Kellogg Eye Center. A representative of the program, know called Meals on Wheels, spoke at the public hearing on housing and human services needs.

Motoring with meals would presumably still be allowed even after final approval of a city-wide ban on cell phone use while driving. The council gave initial approval to that ban on Monday night. In order to take effect, the ban would need approval at its second reading before the council. The ban also prohibits cell phone use while bicycling.

Also on Monday, the council voted to discontinue the city’s bicycle registration program. The council had tabled a proposed revision to registration procedures at its previous regular meeting.

Budget

Several items on the agenda related directly to the overall budget climate.

Budget: The Directive

Before the council was a budget directive, in the form of a resolution, that would have cut salaries for the city administrator and city attorney by 3% and would have directed the city administrator to cut salaries of non-union workers by 3% as well. The pay cuts in the resolution would be effective starting July 1, 2010. It would also have eliminated the $560 travel budgets for each councilmember and the $1,000 travel budget for the mayor.

The measure was added to the agenda on Friday, after the Wednesday publication of the agenda on the city’s website.

Among the “whereas” clauses:

Whereas, The following members of city council have taken a leadership role in returning 3% of their base pay to the City of Ann Arbor:

John Hieftje, Sandi Smith, Tony Derezinski, Stephen Rapundalo,
Christopher Taylor, Margie Teall, Marcia Higgins and Carston [sic] Hohnke;

Not on the list is Sabra Briere (Ward 1) – though she told The Chronicle that she gave Fraser a check on the night that some others had also announced their commitment to return 3% of their council salaries to the city.

The parallel between a 3% voluntary council pay cut in 2010 is not perfectly parallel to a 3% pay cut for the two officials whose salaries the council has the power to set – the city administrator and the city attorney. Since 2007, the council has awarded one-time lump sum “bonus” payments to the two, leaving their base salary unchanged. But in December 2007, the city council voted to accept a recommendation from the local officers compensation commission to increase their own base salaries 3% each year in 2008 and 2009.

In terms of base salary, then, councilmembers would need to make a 9% sacrifice in order to make their own situation parallel to the city administrator and the city attorney.

While the city council’s authority to set those two employees’ salaries derives from the city charter, the “resolved” clause committing all councilmembers to give back 3% of their salaries to the city does not seem to have any legally binding basis:

Resolved, That all City Councilmembers commit to returning 3% of their base pay to the City of Ann Arbor;

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), who sponsored the resolution with Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), opened deliberations by saying he’d be moving for a postponement. The intent of the resolution, he said, was to give clear direction to the city administrator regarding the budget. Briere seconded the motion to postpone.

When the resolution comes back for consideration, it could be more than a 3% that is put forward for discussion. A recent memo from CFO Tom Crawford to councilmembers, responding to questions from them, puts the savings to the general fund from a 5% reduction in the top three management tier salaries at $78,000. With a 10% reduction, the savings would be $157,000.

Outcome: The resolution giving the city administrator direction on the 3% pay cuts was postponed.

Budget: Housing and Human Services Needs Public Hearing

Representatives from several nonprofit agencies addressed the council, stressing the importance of funding for the missions of their agencies. Carolyn Grawi, of the Center for Independent Living, reminded the council that one-fifth of Ann Arborites have some form of disability – 20,000 people.

Carolyn Grawi of the Center for Independent Living

Danielle Mack spoke as a board member on behalf of Michigan Itinerant Shelter System-Interdependent Out of Necessity (MISSION) and a volunteer at Camp Take Notice. Ruth Blackburn spoke on behalf of Food Gatherers, pointing out that 88% of the food distributed by 150 agencies comes from Food Gatherers.

Beth Adams represented Meals on Wheels, which delivers meals to the homebound from Monday-Saturday. She said the UM Health System provided the majority of funding, but that it was contingent on matching dollars. Ellen Schulmeister spoke on behalf of the Shelter Association of Washtenaw County, asking the council to make replacement of the housing units lost at the old YMCA building a priority.

Carolyn Hastings, of the Housing Bureau for Seniors, told the council that the housing bureau would be merging with the Meals on Wheels program. Kimberli Cumming spoke on behalf of the Women’s Center of Southeastern Michigan – their wait list in January of this year of 67 people was the highest it had ever been, she said.

Michael Appel of Avalon Housing said they owned and managed 324 units of affordable housing in Washtenaw County, 282 of them in Ann Arbor. When they opened their wait list in 2009, he reported, Avalon received 505 applications in two weeks for 30 available units. He emphasized the importance of leveraging matching funds.

Citizens at large also addressed the council during the public hearing.

Jim Mogensen noted that around this time of year, when allocations to human services are made, he typically makes the point with his “red-ribbon” presentation that it’s only 1.7% of the city’s general fund. He noted that while sometimes human services are criticized for spending money on administration instead of services, there are only 12 people who work in the city/county office of community development – he observed that there were 12 people sitting around the table in front of him. Human services, Mogensen stressed, had been outsourced to nonprofit agencies. With regard to the frequent suggestion that various nonprofits consolidate and merge, he adduced the metaphor of an all-in-one business machine that faxes, emails, phones, prints, and copies. When they work, they’re great, he said, but when they don’t, you can’t do anything.

Thomas Partridge shared with the council the fact that he was elected president of his high school class in the same year that John F. Kennedy was elected president. He said that he supported what all the other speakers had said, but he would go further – by asking for a “bill of rights” for affordable and accessible housing, health care, transportation, and education.

Budget: Contract for Public Art Administrator

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) had asked that an agenda item – extending the contract for the city’s part-time public art administrator, Katherine Talcott – be pulled out of the consent agenda for separate consideration. The extension runs from Feb. 1, 2010 to June 30, 2010, and amounts to $21,800, of which $19,800 is for fees and $2,000 for travel expenses.

Smith asked Sue McCormick, the city’s public services area administrator, if Talcott was handling more than just the one public piece of art to be installed as part of the new municipal building, or if rather it was “all about Dreiseitl.” Herbert Dreiseitl is the German artist who was commissioned to design the piece for the municipal building.

McCormick explained that it was not just the one main Dreitseitl sculpture that Talcott was handling – there were two other pieces that Dreiseitl had designed for the inside of the new building that still might be installed. There was also an additional $250,000 allocated for public art as a part of the building. In addition, there would be a public art component for the Fuller Road Station, McCormick said, as well as a project in West Park, for which an RFP recently was issued.

McCormick confirmed for Smith that Talcott was a 1099 independent contractor, referring to her tax status. Asked by Smith to elaborate on the travel expenses, McCormick said it was intended to go towards a once-a-year professional gathering, but would need to be approved by McCormick. The travel money would not be automatically awarded, she said.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) said that in light of another item on the agenda, which directed the city administrator to cut non-union salaries by 3%, he wanted the public to be aware that the art fund is being used to pay for labor [Talcott's] and that it draws on funds that pay for other labor – for example, solid waste, the parks acquisition and maintenance millage, and the street repair millage. Kunselman noted that he voted against the award of a contract at the council’s Dec. 21 meeting. “The art program is not so benign that it doesn’t have an effect on other funds,” Kunselman warned.

Kunselman concluded by telling mayor John Hieftje that he wanted a roll call vote on the item. [Some agenda items require a roll call vote, e.g., items changing the city budget or a vote to go into closed session. But for any item, any councilmember can insist that a roll call vote be taken.]

Margie Teall (Ward 4) said she supported the contract. She said that was simply what it took to bring a significant piece of art to the city. Installing a piece of art like that into a building required the expertise of someone who’s done it before, she contended. Teall confirmed with McCormick that the authorization of the travel budget did not mean that the money would necessarily be used.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) conceded a certain level of ignorance about the contract, but noted that Talcott – at an average of 32 hours per week – was expected to work more than half time. Briere said that seemed excessive because there were not that many opportunities for installation of art projects. Why, she asked, was 32 hours per week needed? McCormick replied by saying that some weeks Talcott would work more and some weeks less. In response from a follow-up question from Kunselman, McCormick said that the six-month-at-a-time contract approach – as opposed to a three-year contract, say – was part of a “feel-it-as-we-go-along approach.”

Kunselman also inquired of the city attorney about a directive that the Ann Arbor Public Art Commission (AAPAC) had received from staff that no art program money could be spent on website design. From Chronicle coverage of the art commission’s Jan. 12 meeting:

The issue of city rules came up again during a report from the public relations committee, which had been working on AAPAC’s website. The committee – Cathy Gendron and Marsha Chamberlin – had been hoping to redesign the AAPAC website, which is separate from its page on the city’s website. However, city officials have told them that no Percent for Art funds can be used on website design, so they’re focusing their energy on how to revamp the city web page. “It won’t be elegant – or anything like we envisioned,” Gendron said.

City attorney Stephen Postema told Kunselman that he was not aware of the directive.

Outcome: The contract for the part-time public art administrator was approved, with dissent from Briere, Kunselman and Higgins.

Real Estate and Infrastructure

A raft of different items were tied together by the theme of real estate and infrastructure.

Infrastructure: Capital Improvements Plan (CIP)

After a long discussion at the council’s previous meeting on Feb. 1 concerning the capital improvements plan – which resulted in the plan’s second postponement – the council approved the plan Tuesday with no discussion. At the Feb. 1 meeting, the council had approved an amendment that deleted a runway extension project at Ann Arbor’s municipal airport from the plan.

Outcome: The CIP was adopted – and thus did not include the runway project.

Greenbelt Acquisition: Black Elk’s Property

At their Feb. 1 meeting, councilmembers had voted to postpone the authorization of the use of greenbelt millage funds to acquire part of a parcel belonging to the Black Elks. [The parcel can be looked up on the county's GIS system under parcel number: 09-09-20-404-004.]

Black Elks property north of Sunset Road, from the county's GIS system. It is only the western portion of the parcel that is being acquired by the city. (Image links to higher resolution file.)

The postponement had come amid concerns that the appraisal had not been done recently enough. On Tuesday, there was no council discussion at the table.

Outcome: The authorization was approved, with dissent from Stephen Rapundalo. [Marcia Higgins, who had raised the concerns about the appraisal at the previous meeting, had left the meeting by this point.]

Real Estate: Riverside Park Parking Spaces

Before the council was a lease agreement with the University of Michigan for 18 parking spaces next to Riverside Park, totaling $10,998. The rent for each of the 18 parking spaces is equivalent to the rate the university charges for its “Blue” employee parking permits ($611/space), which are located in the vicinity of Riverside Park and the Kellogg Eye Center.

Riverside Park parking spaces. (Images links to higher resolution file)

By way of background, in FY 2009 UM paid the city of Ann Arbor a total of $29,890 in property rental. Of the nearly $9 million total received by the city in payments for services from UM, the largest part is due to basic services – $3.9 million and $3.4 million for water and sewer, respectively.

The 18 parking spaces next to Riverside Park had been on council’s agenda back in July 2009 – for a total lease amount of $2,232 – but was deleted. [Compare the July 2009 lease to the version approved on Tuesday: July 2009; Feb. 2010]

Opening remarks on the resolution by Sandi Smith (Ward 1) put that nearly five-fold increase in perspective, however. She stated that UM charges a low amount for parking – only $50 per month for a blue sticker. She said that 18 spaces would not make or break anything, but she wanted it to be a piece of the dialogue when the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority’s parking report was presented to the city council in April.

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) asked why the city was not getting the equivalent of a service vehicle parking space – the amount the university charged its own departments was $749 for service vehicles, not $611. He moved an amendment to change the amount to $749, but withdrew it after city administrator Roger Fraser weighed in. Fraser said the city had negotiated the agreement in good faith – going back to UM at this point would make it difficult to maintain that good faith. Fraser asked that the council approve the resolution “with encouragement to do better next time.”

The parking spaces have a history related to the Meals on Wheels program. From the memo accompanying the resolution:

The University of Michigan received approval from the City in 1985 to construct a short-term parking lot at this location for a Motor Meals program operating out of the Kellogg Eye Center. In exchange, the University provided funds to the City for improvements to Riverside Park to help solve riverbank erosion problems.

Real Estate/Infrastructure: Central Campus Transit Center

In his communications to council, city administrator Roger Fraser said that in connection to the UM Central Campus Transit Center, around $450,000 in costs that would ordinarily be carried by the city, would instead be paid by UM, with no expectation that it would be repaid. The item is part of the city’s capital improvements plan, which the council approved the same night. In the CIP it’s described as “desirable,” with $1.9 million in non-city funding required.

The Dec. 8, 2009 meeting meeting minutes of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority’s planning and development committee describes progress on the transit center this way:

Chris White reported that design of the Central Campus Transit Center is nearly complete and construction is scheduled to begin in May. The University of Michigan is preparing a joint use agreement between the University and AATA which was expected to be received any day.

During public commentary at the end of the meeting, Jim Mogensen addressed the topic of the new Central Campus Transit Center. He noted that the UM Regents would be meeting on Thursday, but because of changes to the bus schedule, it would be hard for him to attend. Referring to Fraser’s announcement that UM would be paying a $450,000 cost that the city ordinarily would be paying, Mogensen said, “Look, it’s not free. The UM invests.” Mogensen warned that some of the urban service would likely be re-allocated to serve the transit center, noting that his usual bus stops at the Michigan League, but not the Blake Transit Center.

Referring to budget materials the council had been provided, Mogensen noted that UM seemed to expect the city to be happy that they actually paid for their water and sewer services. He advised the council that UM was not completely omnipotent – they’d forgotten to install an autoclave on one occasion and had been fined by the Department of Environmental Quality.

Real Estate: Georgetown Mall Committee

The council appointed members of a citizens committee on Georgetown Mall, formerly anchored by a Kroger grocery store, to provide input to the city’s nuisance committee. The mall has been vacant since the fall of 2009 and neighbors are concerned about the potential negative impact on the area.

Georgetown Mall, looking west from Packard Street.

Members of the committee are: David Porter (King George area), Frank Schwende (Page Avenue), Mary Krasan (King George), Jeanne Horvath (Georgetown Condo Association), Catherine McClary (Washtenaw County Treasurer).

The Georgetown Mall area had been a campaign issue in the Ward 4 November 2009 elections – it was the topic of a question at a candidate forum in which Hatim Elhady and Marcia Higgins participated.

Sabra Briere (Ward 1) wondered if the six-month time period for the committee’s work was enough. Margie Teall (Ward 4), who’d helped bring the resolution forward, said she thought the time could be extended if necessary. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) was concerned that the property did not become “the next Michigan Inn” – a reference to an abandoned property on Jackson Road, which only recently was demolished, with plans for redevelopment.

Outcome: The Georgetown Mall committee was appointed with unanimous support of the council.

Infrastructure: Stadium Bridges

During his communications, city administrator Roger Fraser expressed his hope that the following day, the U.S. Department of Transportation would announce an approval of Ann Arbor’s TIGER grant application for $21 million to replace the East Stadium bridges. Depending on the outcome, Fraser said, “we’ll either fall flat on our faces, or stand up and run around the block a few times.” [The following day, it was announced that Ann Arbor did not receive TIGER grant funding for the bridge project. TIGER is an acronym that stands for Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery.]

During public commentary reserved time, Arnold Goetze addressed the East Stadium bridges problem. He suggested that the city could save $10 million out of the road fund by building an at-grade crossing at the State Street and Stadium Boulevard intersection, instead of rebuilding the bridges.

Goetze expressed skepticism that the city would be awarded a TIGER grant for the bridge replacement, noting that nationwide there had been $50 billion worth of applications for just $1.5 billion in available funding. He’d sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Transportation about Ann Arbor’s TIGER application, he said, and didn’t think that Ann Arbor would be “getting that TIGER by the tail.”

Responding to skepticism that the Ann Arbor Railroad would allow an at-grade crossing, he suggested that eminent domain could be used to force the issue. He pointed out that even though the savings would not accrue to the general fund, but rather to the city’s road fund, that was still taxpayer money, which if saved, could be returned to them.

In response to Goetze’s comments, Margie Teall (Ward 4) called Sue McCormick, public services area administrator, to the podium for rebuttal. She said the city had actually made quite a bit of effort at communications with the railroad and that they’d put in writing that they would not allow an at-grade crossing at that intersection. She said the city did not believe that eminent domain was a legal possibility in this case. She cited timing and signalization issues as another main obstacle to an at-grade crossing, concluding with “it’s not an option that’s available to us.”

Real Estate: Library Lot Development

Two people spoke on the Library Lot RFP process during public commentary time: Alan Haber, who used reserved time at the start of the meeting, and John Floyd, who spoke during open time at the conclusion of the meeting.

Alan Haber: Haber said he was persevering on the question of the Library Lot development. [Haber helped put together a proposal, the Community Commons, in response to the city's issuance of a request-for-proposals on the lot.] The Ann Arbor Democratic Party had passed a resolution, he said, addressing concerns about the process for determining the future of the lot, which had not been transparent or responsive to the citizens. He alerted the council to a League of Women Voters event on Feb. 24 to be held at the Ann Arbor City Club from 7-9 p.m. On Saturday, Feb. 20, Haber reported, there would be a meeting at 4 p.m. at Hathaway’s Hideaway, where the possible merging of the two open space proposals for the Library Lot would be discussed.

John Floyd: Floyd thanked the council for their decision on the capital improvements plan, and said that he appreciated the concerns for process that Tony Derezinski and Stephen Rapundalo had expressed during deliberations on the CIP at the council’s Feb. 1 meeting. Referring then to the city’s RFP process currently underway for the development of the Library Lot, Floyd asked Rapundalo about meetings between members of one of the proposers – Valiant – and city officials a year before the RFP was issued. Floyd wanted to know what effect those meetings had on the integrity of the process. [The last scheduled meeting of the RFP committee, on Tuesday, Feb. 16, was canceled.]

During his communications, Mike Anglin (Ward 5) reminded everyone that the Library Lot does not belong to the library. Alluding to the two remaining development proposals under consideration by the RFP review committee – both hotel/conference centers – Anglin said that hotel occupancy in the area is around 45-50% and that increasing hotel capacity would amount to moving money around. It would be damaging one business, Anglin said, to help another.

Use of Cell Phones While Driving, Cycling

The council considered two bicycle-related issues: (i) a ban on driving/cycling while using a cell phone and (ii) a discontinuation of the city’s bicycle registration program.

Cell Phones

The council considered and approved on first reading an ordinance that would ban cell phone use while driving and bicycling in the city. To take effect, the ordinance would need to be approved at its second reading, which will likely take place at the council’s March 1 meeting, along with a required public hearing.

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) who had worked to bring the measure before the council with his Ward 2 colleague, Tony Derezinski, stated that it “truly is a public safety issue.” He noted that seven states have a ban, as well as several localities, including Detroit. Seventeen states, Rapundalo continued, have bans against bus drivers using cell phones, and 21 states have bans against cell phone use by novice drivers. Rapundalo reported that there were over 50 peer-reviewed scientific studies showing that there were a wide range of risks associated with cell phone use while driving.

Sandi Smith (Ward 1) had some concerns about the wording of the ordinance that addressed the use of GIS devices. Rapundalo assured her that it had been modeled on language from other communities. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) expressed some concern about the inclusion of bicycling in the ban, raising the possibility that kids on bikes would be cited under the new ordinance. Rapundalo indicated that he thought police officers would exercise reasonable judgment.

By way of background, hand-held cell phone use while bicycling is already against the law, so officers are already exercising their judgment on this. From The Chronicle’s report of the Jan. 4, 2010 city council meeting:

In reviewing the Michigan Vehicle Code as background for this report, The Chronicle noticed a section that’s tangentially relevant to a possible city ordinance on cell phone use while driving. At the council’s Aug. 6, 2009 meeting, Tony Derezinski (Ward 2) mentioned a resolution he and Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) had asked the city attorney’s office to develop, prohibiting cell phone usage while driving. At the time there was some speculation about whether the new ordinance would apply to bicycles.

There is already a section of the MVC that would seem to preclude cell phone use while bicycling:

257.661 Carrying package, bundle, or article on bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, moped, or motorcycle.
A person operating a bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, moped, or motorcycle shall not carry any package, bundle, or article that prevents the driver from keeping both hands upon the handlebars of the vehicle.

Outcome: The ban on cell phone use while driving and cycling was passed on first reading. Passage at second reading is required before enactment.

Bicycle Registration: Repealed

At the council’s previous meeting, a resolution that would have revised the city’s bicycle registration program was tabled amid concerns about the program’s value:

Carsten Hohnke (Ward 5) reported that some additional data called the actual value of the registration program into some question, and he convinced his colleagues to table the measure. The additional information was this: From September of 2007 to the present, 39 stolen bikes had been recovered and returned to their owners – but in none of those cases had the bicycle registration program been instrumental. The return of those bicycles had been the result, Hohnke reported, of regular police work.

On Tuesday, the council considered and passed on first reading a repeal of the city’s bicycle registration program. In scant discussion of the item, Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) said he had some bicycles in his “bone pile” he’d like to check registration numbers on before all the records were destroyed.

Outcome: The resolution that repealed the city’s bicycle registration system passed unanimously. To take effect, the resolution will need to be approved on second reading as well, after a public hearing.

Other Council Business

Google Fiber

In his communications to the council, Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) announced that in response to an initiative by Google to conduct experimental “fiber-to-the-home” projects in various communities, there had been a lot of excitement and that “we are not immune to that excitement.” He indicated that Ann Arbor SPARK, the University of Michigan and councilmembers were putting together a response to Google’s request for information (RFI). [It's possible that Taylor's reference was to a meeting described on Twitter involving former UM president Jim Duderstadt.]

From Google’s corporate blog:

We’re planning to build and test ultra high-speed broadband networks in a small number of trial locations across the United States. We’ll deliver Internet speeds more than 100 times faster than what most Americans have access to today with 1 gigabit per second, fiber-to-the-home connections. We plan to offer service at a competitive price to at least 50,000 and potentially up to 500,000 people.

Liquor License for Packard Pub

The council considered the award of a liquor license to BW&R Go Blue LLC, which does business at 640 Packard Street as Packard Pub. Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2), chair of the city’s liquor committee, reported that the petitioner had addressed the concerns the committee had raised.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) stated that he did not believe the neighborhood would benefit from a proliferation of licenses and that he would be voting against it.

Mike Anglin (Ward 5), who also serves on the liquor committee, described the move as “pro-business,” with Packard Pub employing 30 people. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) said he appreciated the concerns expressed by Taylor, and had shared them previously with respect to other establishments, but that problems had not materialized. He said he was excited that a restaurant was going into the space, and that he remembered the old South Side Grill that used to be in that spot.

Outcome: The liquor license for Packard Pub was approved, with dissent from Taylor.

Taxicabs

Speaking during the public hearing on the revision to the taxicab ordinance, Thomas Partridge called for an amendment to ensure greater accessibility of services to seniors and handicapped people. He called for a “bill of rights” for transportation riders.

The revision to the taxicab ordinance would require that large companies – operating more than 10 cabs – be full-service. Here, “full service” means that service needs to be provided 24 hours round-the-clock, that a lost-and-found be available, and that it be possible to file a complaint with someone other than the driver during regular business hours from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.

Outcome: The council unanimously approved the revision to the taxicab ordinance.

In a related item, Margie Teall (Ward 4) made a plea for new members to the taxicab board – two or three are needed, she said. Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) was assigned to be the city council’s current representative, but is unable to attend its meetings, which are scheduled during the workday. [Kunselman's day job is energy management liaison at UM.] But in order to change the meeting time, the board needs to meet and must achieve a quorum to make the decision to change the meeting time.

Sandwich Board Signs

The council considered an ordinance that would have regulated, through a permitting system, the placement of sandwich board signs. The idea was to provide a legal framework for the signs, which many businesses already use.

Speaking during the public hearing, Kathy Griswold raised concerns about possible interference of such signs with sight distances. If the system were to be complaint-driven, she warned, there could be delays in getting signs removed that obscured sight lines.

Also during the public hearing, Susan Pollay, executive director of the Downtown Development Authority, read a brief statement on behalf of the DDA, saying that sandwich board signs are part of what makes for a vibrant downtown experience. She suggested that the system be adopted without permits and then reviewed after one year to determine if there was adequate compliance.

Carolyn Grawi of the Center for Independent Living pointed out that sandwich board signs can pose a problem for people with disabilities – for the blind, the signs are in unexpected places, and for those who use wheelchairs, the signs can pose access issues. Grawi cautioned that vibrancy did not necessarily mean cluttering.

Opening council deliberations, Sabra Briere (Ward 1), who sponsored the resolution, told her colleagues that it had been a long time getting before the council, but that she felt it was still not ready for public review. The effort had started with good intentions, she said, but did not end there. She told her colleagues that she would like the measure to be defeated so that the question of signs in general could be examined, not just sandwich board signs.

Stephen Rapundalo (Ward 2) agreed with Briere, and cited as most prominent among his concerns the potential problem posed to people with disabilities in navigating the signs. He recommended that the full body of the city’s disability commission be engaged as the matter was considered in the future. He also wondered how much opportunity business owners had had for input. Rapundalo’s conclusion: “Not ready for prime time.”

Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3) concurred in objecting to the ordinance, saying there were too many opportunities for unintended consequences. He asked about signage not related to a business – it raised free speech issues, he cautioned.

What would the effect of defeating the measure be on those who were already using such signs? The city attorney’s office is recommending that the ordinance – which does not allow use of such signs – be enforced. Marcia Higgins (Ward 4) expressed her concern that business owners be made aware that there would be enforcement efforts starting.

Outcome: The sandwich board sign ordinance was unanimously defeated.

Special Parking Rate: Payment on Entry

The council heard a brief presentation from Susan Pollay, executive director of the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority, and deputy chief of Ann Arbor’s police department, John Seto, on a proposed new pre-paid parking rate for special events and busy evenings. Pollay explained that the special rate – which would allow a motorist to pay $5 on entrance to a structure/lot – would reduce delays on exiting.

Susan Pollay and John Seto, speaking about a proposed pre-paid parking rate. The special rate would be used only during special events, anticipating that at large number of people would likely try to leave at the same time.

The pay-on-entry system could also be implemented after 9 p.m. as needed. Pollay described how sometimes patrons trying to exit the Maynard Street structure might be lined up to the third story of the structure trying to exit – not a pleasant way to conclude what was likely an otherwise pleasant evening.

Seto was on hand to attest to the idea that congestion and frustration at not being able to leave smoothly had a potentially negative effect on public safety. On some occasions, Seto said, the gate arms at the Fourth and William structure had simply been lifted in the interest of more rapidly dissipating crowds leaving at 2 a.m. at the conclusion of Studio 4′s night. Pollay described how the system would be implemented: Signage would be posted explaining the $5 entry fee, with information about available nearby alternatives. After 9 p.m., the gate arm would go up automatically on exit.

Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) wanted to know what the actual mechanics of the after-9 p.m. implementation would be like: If someone arrives at 8:30 p.m., they take a ticket as usual, so what happens at 11 p.m. when the driver exits? Pollay’s answer: The gate arm would just go up. The typical motorist entering after 9 p.m., Pollay said, pays about $4.75 – it is not conceived as a revenue generator, but rather as a customer service.

Planning and Development Staff

Roger Fraser introduced Ralph Welton as the city’s new chief development official, and Lisha Turner-Tolbert as project & programs manager.

Wendy Rampson and Roger Fraser.

Wendy Rampson will be taking over as planning manager. The reorganization of planning and development eliminates one full-time management position – the job formerly held by Mark Lloyd. Rampson’s previous responsibilities in systems planning – the service unit headed by Craig Hupy – will be filled by Connie Pulcipher, who previously worked in planning and development.

Other Public Commentary

Aaron Miller: Miller introduced himself as a senior at the University of Michigan and the liaison between the Michigan Student Assembly and the city council. He reported that he’d met with the city’s public services area administrator, Sue McCormick, as well as Nancy Stone, the public services area communications liaison. He said they’d explored the possibility of having students serve on various committees. He said he was looking forward to a meeting with city administrator Roger Fraser. Miller said that many students were interested in seeing Ann Arbor continue to grow and prosper.

Kathy Griswold: Griswold said she was making a formal request that a meeting be held on the King’s School crosswalk issue – the situation involves a mid-block crossing that could be moved to a four-way stop, if a short section of sidewalk were installed. [Griswold has requested such a meeting at multiple council meetings and caucuses over several months.] She stated: “Everyone involved looks a little stupid.”

Tom Partridge: Partridge delivered an “open message” to President Obama, the U.S. Congress, the Michigan delegation, and all elected officials, to come home to Michigan and stand up for the Midwest, and for the most vulnerable among us – seniors and disabled people. He reminded people that John F. Kennedy had visited the University of Michigan and had been followed by Lyndon Johnson. He called for a commitment to a new Great Society – one that would support affordable housing, transportation, health care, and education.

Sacha Platt: Platt brought complaints about policies and practices at Avalon Housing units and what he contended was the refusal of Avalon staff to document problems. He described his experience in dealing with staff as “If you’re not happy with our organization, you can move.”

Lily Au: Au spoke in support of building affordable housing. She criticized the failure of the city to provide replacement housing for the 100 units that previously existed in the old YMCA building at Fifth and William. She indicated that the residents of Camp Take Notice – a homeless tent camp – had recently been visited by Michigan State Police with the possibility that they would need to move their location again.

Likely in response to Au’s remarks, Ellen Schulmeister, executive director of the Shelter Association of Washtenaw County, was asked to the podium to give the council an update on the efforts that had been undertaken this season to provide additional shelter for the homeless. Shulmeister said that 25 “permanent resident beds” had been added to the warming center at the Delonis Center, bringing the total to 75 beds, and that 25 beds had been added to the rotating shelter sponsored by local faith communities for a total of 50 beds. She said that on average about 35 people used the rotating shelter.

Blaine Coleman: Coleman began by saying that everyone knows why he carries a sign that says “Boycott Israel” – Israel had recently massacred 1,400 Palestinians in Gaza. He was there, he said, to ask the city council to pass a resolution boycotting all Israeli products. He stated that he knew the council would eventually do this. He asked councilmembers how they felt about having appointed Neal Elyakin to the city’s human rights commission, when Elyakin was a member of the Friends of the Israel Defense Forces. He queried Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3), Sandi Smith (Ward 1), and Christopher Taylor (Ward 3) individually. [Councilmembers do not typically engage in back and forth with speakers during public commentary.] Coleman then suggested that perhaps members of the media present might have better luck at getting answers from councilmembers.

Mozhgan Savabiesfahani: She began by thanking mayor John Hieftje for correctly pronouncing her name. She noted that there’d been no response yet to her and others’ requests that the council pass a resolution to boycott Israel. She wondered what it would take to get council’s attention. She declared that she would try singing a song. She described the content of the lyrics as including the pride of the Palestinians, how they miss their vegetable gardens and how they carry their lives in their hands every day. After concluding the performance of the song, she declared that she knew that the city would boycott Israel. She wondered what else she could do to get the council’s attention – next time she might dance.

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: Monday, March 1, 2010 at 7 p.m. in council chambers, 2nd floor of the Guy C. Larcom, Jr. Municipal Building, 100 N. Fifth Ave. [confirm date]