The first is a 24-acre parcel just north of the Huron River in Scio Township. The city of Ann Arbor, through its greenbelt millage, will be contributing $25,200 to the total $84,000 cost of purchasing development rights, with the township contributing the difference. The deal was recommended by the Ann Arbor greenbelt advisory commission at its Jan. 2, 2014 meeting.

Property owned by Thomas E. and Eleanor S. Moore in Scio Township. The Moores applied to the Scio Township Land Preservation program. The city is partnering with the township on the deal.

The second greenbelt deal voted on by the Ann Arbor council is a 64-acre property on Zeeb Road, also in Scio Township. For that deal, the city is contributing $39,000 to the total purchase price of $130,335. The city’s greenbelt advisory commission recommended moving ahead with this deal at its Nov. 7, 2013 meeting.

Property owned by Maria E. White in Scio Township. White applied to the Scio Township Land Preservation program and the city of Ann Arbor is partnering with the township on the issue.

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

Staff and members of the Ann Arbor greenbelt and park advisory commissions at a joint meeting on Nov. 1, 2012. From left: Colin Smith, Shannon Brines, Archer Christian, Peter Allen, Tim Doyle, Laura Rubin, Alan Jackson.  (Photos by the writer.)

Earlier this month, members from both commissions met in a joint session to get a financial update from staff and learn more about the roles and priorities of the greenbelt and parks.

The greenbelt program uses about two-thirds of the millage proceeds. By the end of 2012, about 4,200 acres will have been protected around the outskirts of Ann Arbor. When the program began, the expectation was that it would fund protection for between 3,500 to 4,500 over the life of the 30-year millage. But because the economic downturn has lowered the cost of land, the program has protected more land – primarily through the purchase of development rights – than originally anticipated. Land that previously was valued at about $16,000 per acre is now closer to $4,000, with the likelihood of even lower costs in the coming year.

The last joint meeting of these groups was held in June of 2011, but membership on the groups has changed over the last year and a half. The park advisory commission in particular has seen considerable turnover since then. Earlier this year PAC members Gwen Nystuen, David Barrett, Sam Offen and Doug Chapman left the commission, either because they were term-limited or did not seek re-appointment. New members are Ingrid Ault, Bob Galardi, Alan Jackson and Missy Stults. New to GAC this year is Archer Christian, replacing long-time member Mike Garfield, who was term-limited. Both Garfield and Christian are executives at the nonprofit Ecology Center.

The Nov. 1 discussion among commissioners was wide-ranging. Among the topics covered were the need to provide connections between existing parks, potential for recreational use of greenbelt-protected land, farming trends, and protections for both greenbelt property and parkland. For this report, the conversations are summarized and grouped thematically. The meeting began with a staff update – and that’s where this report begins, too.

Annual Update

Ginny Trocchio is a staff member of The Conservation Fund, who manages Ann Arbor’s greenbelt and parkland acquisition programs under contract with the city. She typically gives separate financial and activity reports to the two commissions, but delivered the report to both groups at their joint meeting on Nov. 1. The reports covered the most recent fiscal year, which ended June 30, 2012. [.pdf file of activity report][.pdf file of financial report]

Trocchio also reviewed the greenbelt program’s strategic plan, which was updated earlier this year. [See Chronicle coverage: "Greenbelt Commission Briefed on Strategic Plan"] [.pdf file of 2012 greenbelt strategic plan]

The greenbelt program and park acquisitions are funded through a 30-year 0.5 mill tax that Ann Arbor voters passed in 2003. It’s called the open space and parkland preservation millage, and appears on the summer tax bill as the line item CITY PARK ACQ. The city’s policy has been to allocate one-third of the millage for parks land acquisition and two-thirds for the greenbelt program. The greenbelt advisory commission (GAC) handles the portion for land preservation outside of the city limits, while the city’s park advisory commission (PAC) oversees the funds for parkland acquisition. PAC’s land acquisition committee, of which all PAC commissioners are members, makes recommendations for parkland purchases.

Ann Arbor greenbelt acquisitions through June 2012 (Image links to dynamic geocommons.com map)

To get money upfront for land acquisition, the city took out a $20 million bond in fiscal year 2006. That bond is being being paid back with revenue from the millage. Debt service on that bond in FY 2012 year was $1.225 million. [Two debt service payments are made during the fiscal year.]

Trocchio reviewed the major priorities for the greenbelt program: (1) protecting large blocks of farmland, with the target of at least 1,000 acres in a given area, (2) protecting natural areas in the Huron River watershed, (3)  building partnerships to leverage other funding sources – including funding from other local governments, the federal government, nonprofits and landowners, and (4) education and outreach.

Geographically, the greenbelt is focused on five areas of the county:

• Lodi Township: With several large farms and an increased number of applications from landowners, this township is viewed as a prime area for activity in the coming years, in part because of an expansion of greenbelt boundaries to include more of that township. Acres protected under greenbelt program: 337.
• Northern Scio Township, Webster Township and east Northfield Township: One of the most active areas, in part because both Scio and Webster townships have their own land preservation millages and frequently partner with the greenbelt program. Land in this area is also considered critical for protection of the Huron River watershed. Acres protected under greenbelt program through FY 2012: 1,484.
• Northfield and Ann Arbor townships: Over 1,400 acres have been protected in Ann Arbor Township alone – that township also has its own land preservation program. The Tilian Farm Development Center, a local farm incubator, is located there. Acres protected under greenbelt program through FY 2012: 1,415.
• Salem and Superior townships: This area includes land protected by the Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy and Washtenaw County parks and recreation. The greenbelt program has partnered on several properties in that area. Acres protected under greenbelt program through FY 2012: 819.
• Pittsfield Township: Most of the township lies outside of the greenbelt boundaries, but it’s viewed as an important area for both farmland and natural areas protection. Acres protected under greenbelt program through FY 2012: 89.

Trocchio noted that by the end of this calendar year, about 4,200 acres will have been protected through the city’s greenbelt program. When the millage was approved in 2003, the expectation was that it would fund protection for between 3,500 to 4,500 over the life of the 30-year millage, she said. The economic downturn has helped the program protect more land than anticipated. When the program began, the purchase of development rights cost about $16,000 per acre. Today, it’s closer to $4,000 per acre, Trocchio said, with the likelihood of even lower costs in the coming year.

Annual Update: FY 2012 Financial Report

In her financial update for the year ending June 30, 2012, Trocchio reported that net revenues from the millage for FY 2012 were $2.574 million, with expenses of $3.083 million. In addition to debt service, expenses include $1.65 million in greenbelt projects and $87,230 for parkland acquisition. The greenbelt acquisitions were for:

• the purchase of development rights on the Thomas/Lobato property ($103,472 plus $23,867 for an endowment) for 30 acres owned by Duane Thomas and his wife Judith Lobato in Scio Township. The property is located near the northwest corner Scio Church and Wagner roads.
• the purchase of development rights on the Lindemann/Weidmayer property ($657,112 plus $23,867 for an endowment) for 111 acres in Lodi Township, owned by Bill Lindemann and his sister Karen Weidmayer. The property is located along Pleasant Lake Road, about a half-mile from the former Girbach farm, which is also protected through the greenbelt program.
• the purchase of development rights for the Boike Farm in Northfield Township (about 136 acres for $468,026 plus $23,867 for an endowment).
• $171,819 toward the purchase of 100.33 acres owned by Lakeside Development in Superior Township, located along the east side of Prospect Road, south of Cherry Hill Road. It’s now called the Jack R. Smiley Nature Preserve, in honor of the founder of the Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy. The conservancy and Washtenaw County’s natural areas preservation program were the lead partners on that deal, which became part of the Superior Greenway, a corridor of more than 2,000 acres of protected land between Ann Arbor and Detroit.
• the purchase of development rights for the Newton Farm property – 58.85 acres in Ann Arbor Township – for $85,226. It’s now under different ownership, and called the Green Things Farm.
• $15,000 toward a conservation easement for 32 acres owned by Charles Botero in Northfield Township, in partnership with the Legacy Land Conservancy. The land is located on the east side of US-23, north of East Northfield Church Road.
• $46,750 toward the purchase of two adjacent properties owned by Joe Bloch, in Northfield and Ann Arbor townships. The land was purchased by Washtenaw County parks & recreation, with contributions from the greenbelt program. The 33-acre site in Northfield Township is on the north side of Joy Road east of US-23 and west of Gleaner Hall Road, adjacent to the county’s Northfield Woods Preserve.

Trocchio noted that during the 2012 grant cycle, the city was able to secure $396,900 from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranchland Protection Program (FRPP) – for the Robert Schultz farm in Superior Township, and the Robbin Alexander farm in Webster Township. Since 2005, the city has brought in nearly $6.7 million in FRPP grants.

In total during FY 2012, the city contributed about 48% – or $19.4 million – to the protection of land valued at $38.76 million. The remaining funds were provided by FRPP grants, landowner donations, or partners like Washtenaw County, townships or land conservancies.

A chart provided in the greenbelt’s strategic plan lists the sources of potential matching funds for the city, and amounts that have been secured to date:

Chart of current and potential greenbelt partners.

For the parks system, there was only one significant acquisition during FY 2012: $74,232 for the purchase of 5 W. Eden Court, located next to the Bryant Community Center. Trocchio noted that the priorities for parks purchases are laid out in the city’s parks and recreation open space (PROS) plan, and include geographic distribution, natural resources protection, enhancements and linkages between existing parks, recreational value, protection of the Huron River, and long-term maintenance or development issues. The PROS plan doesn’t generally cite specific properties to target for acquisition, she said, with the notable exception of the MichCon/DTE property near the Argo Cascades.

The millage fund balance stood at $9.587 million as of June 30. Of that fund balance, $4.396 million is designated for parks, while $5.19 million is set aside for the greenbelt program. In addition, there’s $525,761 in an endowment set up to cover legal costs related to monitoring and enforcing the conservation easements held by the city.

Administrative costs of $120,043 in fiscal 2012 equate to 3.9% of total revenues. Administrative costs over the life of the millage are limited by ordinance to be no greater than 6% of revenues.

Connections & Walkability

Peter Allen (GAC) raised the issue of connectivity. He wondered whether PAC members embraced the idea of prioritizing land acquisition that creates linkages between existing parkland, as well as providing ways for people to navigate Ann Arbor – for people who are walking or biking to work, for example. Were acquisitions evaluated with an emphasis on making those linkages more than just a recreational use, creating options for people who don’t want to get in their cars? If so, it’s an approach that would mean the city is aggressively embracing a walkability agenda, he said, with implications for making its residents healthier.

Colin Smith, manager of the city’s parks and recreation system.

PAC chair Julie Grand replied that connectivity is one of their top priorities, along with acquiring land along the Huron River. PAC’s primary focus is on maintaining and improving the land that’s already part of the parks system – and connectivity is a piece of that, she said. If it has the added benefit of a potential greenway or increasing walkability, that’s good. But members of PAC need to look at the parkland and facilities that the city already owns, she said, and see how they can better connect people with those existing properties. For parkland along the river, for example, how can the city get people there more easily and safely?

Grand said the city has done a pretty good job in terms of neighborhood access to parks. In most neighborhoods, you can walk to a park that’s within a quarter mile without having to cross a busy street. So now it’s about improving safety and improving the quality of that walking experience. When improvements were done at Argo Cascades, it connected with the county’s Border-to-Border Trail, she noted – that was a big selling point for that project.

She also reported that she serves on the North Main/Huron River corridor task force, and on the technical committee for 721 N. Main – a city-owned property in that corridor. That group is  looking at connectivity issues, Grand said, “but we don’t want to build a path to nowhere.”

John Lawter (PAC) added that when connectivity is a piece of a potential acquisition, “that’s a big plus.”

Grand also observed that if the MichCon/DTE property is donated to the city, then the money that’s been set aside for that potential purchase would be freed up to make other acquisitions.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, noted that park-to-park or trail-to-trail connections are important. But Allen was also talking more broadly about getting around town, Smith said. A lot of people don’t realize that maintenance and funding of the the bike paths that aren’t within parks are not the responsibility of the parks system, Smith said. He thinks there’s opportunity for better collaboration between parks and alternative transportation staff, to figure out how to tie together transportation and parks initiatives.

Connections: Crossing Streets

Allen wondered if PAC had discussed getting better connections to the river across North Main and the railroad tracks, other than using sidewalks. Grand replied that they’d had lots of discussions about it. Smith added that those discussions have been going on for at least a decade.

Grand felt it made more sense for the North Main/Huron River task force to deal with those issues, rather than PAC, because North Main Street is under the jurisdiction of the Michigan Dept. of Transportation (MDOT). But PAC should be involved in conversations about how all these pieces fit together, she said.

Tim Berla (PAC) described the issue of connectivity as an expensive problem to solve. The Allen Creek greenway – from the river to Michigan Stadium – has been discussed, but having the land isn’t the entire solution, he said. He felt the biggest advance that the city had made in developing a greenway was the installation of the HAWK (high intensity activated crosswalk) signal at the intersection of Huron and Chapin, near the YMCA. But obviously, installing traffic signals isn’t in the purview of the city’s parks system, he said, so it’s a difficult problem.

Peter Allen noted that several transit issues will be moving forward in the next 6-12 months. He cited a connector study between Plymouth and South State, commuter rail, the sale of railroad tracks from Norfolk Southern to MDOT – which Allen said could open the possibility of having “a little more reasonable person at the table to negotiate crossings” – and countywide transit. “I think the park agenda will need to be aggressively at the table,” Allen said.

[The countywide transit project, known as The Washtenaw Ride, was effectively halted a week later when the Ann Arbor city council voted to opt out of that project at its Nov. 8, 2012 meeting. Some councilmembers and the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority have indicated a desire to encourage other ways of expanding public transit.]

Celebrating Successes

Dan Ezekiel, the chair of GAC, said it was good to discuss difficult issues that the two commissions have faced, but he also wanted to pause and celebrate the successes that they’ve had. Since the two groups last met, the new Argo Cascades has been completed. He described it as the biggest positive thing to happen in town in a decade. That’s a huge step forward in connectivity, he said. It brings the Huron River to the forefront of people’s minds as being part of the city. Until the cascades opened, he hadn’t canoed from Gallup to Argo since his college days – “all because of the dumb little portage.” He gave the parks system kudos for that project, and he hoped the same kind of connectivity can be found for the Border-to-Border Trail.

From left: Tom Bloomer and Dan Ezekiel of the Ann Arbor greenbelt advisory commission.

These projects show that intractable issues eventually can be solved, Ezekiel said. How long had there been quarreling about the Argo Dam, or talking about the MichCon/DTE property? He noted that the greenbelt program had a few “brags,” too. The greenbelt participated as a partner in creating the Jack R. Smiley Nature Preserve in Superior Township, with the Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy and Washtenaw County’s natural areas preservation program. The project, which is part of the Superior Greenway, connected several other parcels and includes public access and trails.

Ezekiel also pointed to some projects that have been completed and that are in the pipeline involving “locally consumed food.” [That phrase is one that GAC member Tom Bloomer has advocated for, in an effort to distinguish from food that is produced in Washtenaw County, but sold outside this area.] Ezekiel reported that one of the properties in Ann Arbor Township that the greenbelt program helped to preserve was bought by a small local farmer. Getting Salem Township on board with the greenbelt program was new, and Lodi Township is also getting more involved – that’s probably the nicest area that’s available for expanded protection of farmland, he said. Both commissions have some positive things to point to since the last time they met, Ezekiel concluded.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks and recreation manager, said it’s important to keep in mind that good things can happen in places where you might not think it’s possible. Argo Cascades is an example of that – it’s the first time since 1830 that the river has been connected in that area. “Things can change.”

Some land acquisition deals are 15-20 years in the making, Ginny Trocchio added. ”You never know what’s going to come back around.”

Recreational Uses in the Greenbelt

Tim Berla (PAC) explored the possibility of using millage funds to buy land for recreational use outside of the city. Inside the city, for example, it would be hard to find an adequate amount of land for more soccer fields. Dan Ezekiel (GAC) said it’s been very clear that the city doesn’t want to own land outside its boundaries. That’s a guideline that the greenbelt program has always used, he said.

Berla felt that a recreational field could be an exception, because it’s open space, but he understood that it doesn’t appear the greenbelt funds can be used for something like that.

Laura Rubin (GAC) pointed out that the city does participate in fee-simple (outright) purchases within the greenbelt and outside of Ann Arbor, but that always happens in partnership with other entities that can own the land and manage it, like Washtenaw County. Examples include the Fox Science Preserve, Meyer Preserve and Scio Woods Preserve – all done in partnership with the county’s natural areas preservation program (NAPP).

Ezekiel noted another recent example – the Jack Smiley Preserve that’s part of the Superior Greenway. The Ann Arbor greenbelt contributed to the purchase price, but the property is owned by the Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy, and Washtenaw County’s natural areas preservation program holds the conservation easement.

Tim Berla of the Ann Arbor park advisory commission. In the background is Catherine Riseng of the Ann Arbor greenbelt advisory commission. Barely visible between them is Mike Anglin, a Ward 5 city councilmember and ex-officio member of PAC.

Rubin recalled that GAC had discussed possibly purchasing the Knights of Columbus property for use as soccer fields. Ginny Trocchio quickly pointed out that the city didn’t pursue the purchase, adding “that’s not for discussion.” [Most land acquisition deals are initially discussed in closed sessions – that category is permitted under the Michigan Open Meetings Act. It's likely that the Knights of Columbus property was discussed in that venue in the past.]

Berla wondered how many acres in the greenbelt program were protected via fee-simple purchases. Trocchio estimated that of the roughly 4,200 protected acres, all but about 400 acres are agricultural lands protected through the purchase of development rights.

Later in the meeting, the issue of recreational use emerged again. Alan Jackson noted that some soccer and other sports associations want to own their own land. It has the benefit of creating a kind of park without entangling the city in maintaining the property, he said. Jackson wondered if the greenbelt program had done any outreach to those groups? It sounded to him like GAC wasn’t amenable to that approach.

Ezekiel replied that it hasn’t been a priority for the greenbelt program. Trocchio noted that the issue of active recreation has never come up in any of their discussions. Jackson observed that it might reduce the purchase price for protecting open space.

Tom Bloomer noted that the first difficulty would be that none of the greenbelt’s partners would be interested in participating. The other programs – particularly the federal government – are focused on preserving the agricultural economy, he said, “so we’d have to do it all on our own.” The second problem is that if there was a conservation easement, the owner of the land would still have the insurance liability and other responsibilities associated with having a sports complex on the property. The city doesn’t want to own property outside of Ann Arbor, so it would be a difficult scenario, he said.

Trocchio said the only way she could see the greenbelt program being involved is if a piece of the property had a high-quality natural area. In that case, perhaps the city would purchase an easement for that piece.

Farming Trends

Peter Allen (GAC) brought up the topic of farming trends in the county. Shannon Brines (GAC) – who owns Brines Farm in the Dexter area – noted that on average, “farmers are pretty old, and retiring.” But there are definitely more small farms at the farmers market, he added, so that’s a growth area. But Brines wasn’t sure what the balance is between new farmers and those who are retiring.

Tim Doyle (PAC) wondered if the amount of land being farmed is decreasing. Tom Bloomer (GAC) – owner of Bur Oaks Farm in Webster Township – described the agricultural sector as the strongest part of the American economy at this point. There’s less development pressure, so the agricultural land base is pretty stable. There’s even farmland in Ypsilanti Township that’s owned by developers and is being sold back to farmers, Bloomer said. Ten years ago, you wouldn’t have imagined that was possible. “That’s a situation that I don’t know if we can expect to continue forever,” Bloomer said. “But right now, land is moving out of development and into agriculture – if the land hasn’t been ruined in the meantime.”

Allen recalled that an appraisal done a few years ago indicated there was an 8-10 year supply of excess development lots in Webster and Superior townships. That is, it would take 8-10 years until demand for development would surpass the available supply.

Trocchio reported that the USDA is updating its agricultural census this year, so next year there will be more data on the number and age of local farmers, and the amount of farmland.

Tim Berla (PAC) said he knows some people in their 30s who are trying to start small farms. Is there any way that GAC can promote that – or is it even a good idea for GAC to help establish small farmers?

Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund.

Trocchio noted that the commission has talked a lot about that issue. If a developer wants to sell the land outright, the city can buy the development rights to lower the land value while a farmer comes in simultaneously to buy the property. “That’s one way we can help new farmers get on the land,” she said.

Dan Ezekiel (GAC) gave the example of a project in Ann Arbor Township. Land had been donated to the township by a developer. Now, the Tilian Farm Development Center is located on that site, which provides a farm incubator for new farmers. One farming couple in that program ended up buying the farm across the street from it – that transaction included the greenbelt program buying the development rights, while the couple bought the farm.

Berla suggested that the city could help new farmers by coordinating the process of finding land and securing deals for conservation easements. Trocchio said she doesn’t envision the city or GAC taking on that role, but she noted that she had helped an intern for the Food System Economic Partnership (FSEP) explore the idea of a “land link” program. [See Chronicle coverage: "Greenbelt Group Briefed on Land Link Idea."]

Laura Rubin (GAC) noted that in some ways, the participation of the greenbelt program is dependent on the size of the farm. A few years ago, GAC changed its strategic plan. It had originally favored large farms – 40 acres or more – because that’s the size that is eligible to receive federal matching funds. There is the expectation of a certain amount of matching funds in these deals, and without federal funding, it’s more difficult to get that match. But when it became clear that the community was getting more interested in locally produced food, GAC changed its scoring system so that smaller farms wouldn’t be penalized when their applications are scored and considered by the greenbelt program. The city needs to be careful in its acquisitions, she said, and not protect land just so someone can build a McMansion and have the land around it preserved. It needs to be viable for farming – and when a property is too small, those concerns emerge, she said.

Ezekiel pointed to several local nonprofits that are focused on the local food movement, including Selma Cafe, FSEP, and the Washtenaw Food Hub. But the greenbelt program isn’t the “farm police,” he said. They don’t promote any particular business plan for farmers. The economy will dictate how the land is used, Ezekiel said. “Our job is to protect that farmland and greenspace outside the city, and the economy will decide what the best use of that land is.”

Ezekiel recalled a conversation he’d had with someone involved in Seattle’s greenbelt program. She had told him that things had changed dramatically for them in ways they hadn’t anticipated. When Seattle’s program first started buying development rights, there were a lot of dairies. But over the years, those businesses consolidated. Now, the land was being used for things like cut flowers and produce for local farmers markets in the Seattle area. So it isn’t wise to get too involved in telling farmers how to use their land, he said.

Berla asked whether the Ann Arbor greenbelt easements prevent a large property from being sold in smaller parcels. Trocchio replied that land divisions aren’t allowed.

Ingrid Ault said she was curious about the Washtenaw Food Hub. The greenbelt program isn’t really involved, Trocchio replied, although the hub is surrounded by land that’s protected by the greenbelt. Richard Andres, who’s leading the venture, had attended GAC’s April 9, 2012 meeting and briefed commissioners about the project. Located on the former Braun farm in Ann Arbor Township, it’s envisioned as a place to provide support for farmers to distribute and sell their produce, and for residents to buy food, attend workshops and create relationships with those who are part of the local food network. The Lunasa market has moved to the hub, Trocchio reported.

Ezekiel noted that the hub was a stop on the greenbelt bus tour earlier this year, and also on the Ecology Center’s annual EcoRide bike-a-thon route.

Protecting Parkland, Greenbelt Property

The issue of protecting land for parks and the greenbelt emerged in several different ways during the Nov. 1 discussion.

Protecting Parkland, Greenbelt Property: Land Use

Tim Berla (PAC) noted that Ginny Trocchio has used the word “protect” frequently in her presentation. He knew that if the city bought development rights for a property, then the owner couldn’t put a subdivision or shopping mall there – but apparently it can’t be used for recreation purposes either?

Trocchio explained that conservation easements typically describe the reason that the land is being protected from development. That reason is often for agricultural or natural areas preservation. Easements also include stipulation against certain activities – for example, stating that the land can’t be used for ballfields, because that would interfere with the reason that the land was being protected. There’s no stipulation about the type of farming that must be done, she said, although easements do address issues like pesticide management. However, there’s no requirement for things like organic farming.

Berla wondered if the land that has an easement could still have a large operation on it, like 8 million pigs – would that be allowed? Trocchio thought those issues would be addressed under the state’s generally accepted agricultural management practices (GAAMPS). But Tom Bloomer (GAC), a Webster Township farmer, noted that land protected using USDA grants would not allow restrictions on the types of farming. Factory farming, which he thought Berla appeared to be describing, is a loaded term, Bloomer said, but it’s not restricted as such.

Berla clarified with Bloomer and Trocchio that if the greenbelt program wanted to ban those kinds of large farming operations, it would mean that federal funds couldn’t be used to secure the purchase of development rights.

Protecting Parkland, Greenbelt Property: Financial Assets/Liabilities

With some communities in Michigan going through emergency financial management and bankruptcies, Alan Jackson (PAC) wanted to know to what extent are acquisitions protected from “financial calamity.”

Ginny Trocchio explained that even if a property goes through foreclosure, the conservation easement remains on the title and will transfer to the next property owner with the same restrictions on development. Jackson clarified that he wanted to know how the city of Ann Arbor would be protected. He acknowledged that it’s hard to conceive of the city reaching the point of needing an emergency financial manager, but they should think about that possibility.

Tom Bloomer (GAC) noted that you can’t put a monetary value on an easement and get that money back, because the landowner still owns the land. The only thing the city owns is the development rights. “There is no market for development rights, because those rights have been extinguished – that’s in the deed, so there’s nothing for the city to sell,” Bloomer said.

Conservation easements are not assets that can be liquidated. “It’s more of a liability, quite honestly,” Trocchio said. If the city went into bankruptcy, the easements would have to be transferred to another qualified conservation organization to hold.

Jackson observed that the Ambassador Bridge was never intended to be under the control of one person, and now it is – so that’s something to think about. Bloomer said if “everybody else disappeared,” the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture would take over the easement on properties that they’ve put money into.

Protecting Parkland, Greenbelt Property: Endowment

Jackson noted that the greenbelt sets aside funds for an endowment related to each property that has a conservation easement. He wondered how that’s invested.

Trocchio replied that those endowment funds – $525,761 to date – are invested along with other city funds. [In fiscal 2012, the millage funds, including the endowment, earned $176,082 in investment income. Commissioners had previously raised concerns about how those funds were invested, and were briefed by the city's treasurer, Matt Horning, on details of the city's approach.]

Trocchio said that when the program got started, Tom Crawford, the city’s chief financial officer, had given advice on estimated expenses related to enforcement. Currently, about $20,000 per property is set aside for that possible future need, she said.

Jackson wondered if that would be sufficient. Trocchio replied that they were taking a conservative approach, but they don’t expect all easements to be violated. John Lawter (PAC) wondered if there had been any easement violations yet. No, Trocchio said, but most landowners are still first-generation. It’s more likely that violations would occur after the property changes hands.

[The issue of violating an easement emerged last year in Webster Township, for a conservation easement outside of the greenbelt boundaries. See Chronicle coverage: "Webster Gives Ground for Civil War Days."]

Protecting Parkland, Greenbelt Property: Parkland Sale

There was some discussion at the Nov. 1 meeting about a parks-related proposal earlier this year at Ann Arbor city council, in the context of what protections are in place to prevent the sale – or de facto sale – of parkland. At its Aug. 9, 2012 meeting, the council debated putting a question on the Nov. 6 ballot that would have asked voters if they wanted to amend the city charter to require a referendum to lease parkland for non-park or non-recreational use for longer than five years. PAC had voted unanimously against recommending that council put that question on the ballot. Ultimately, only four of the 11 councilmembers had supported it: Marcia Higgins (Ward 4), Mike Anglin (Ward 5), Jane Lumm (Ward 2) and Stephen Kunselman (Ward 3).

At the Nov. 1 joint session, Tim Berla (PAC) said he had supported a 2008 ballot question that Ann Arbor voters had overwhelmingly approved, which changed the city charter to protect parkland from being sold:

Limitations on Contractual Power
SECTION 14.3.
(b) The city shall not sell, without the approval by a majority vote of the electors of the city voting on the question at a regular or special election, any city park or land in the city acquired for park, cemetery, or any part thereof.

Berla noted that the more recent proposed ballot question was seen as a reaction to the city’s effort to build a parking garage and train station on the site of a surface parking lot that’s part of Fuller Park. He described some ways that the parks are already protected from sale – if the land is purchased with parks millage funds, for example, or if it’s included in the city’s parks and recreation open space (PROS) plan.

As far as he knew, Berla said there has never been an attempt to sell park property in Ann Arbor. If there were, he was pretty sure that PAC “would kick and scream.”

Julie Grand, who serves as PAC’s chair, said she hadn’t felt comfortable supporting the recently proposed ballot question on leasing parkland because it’s difficult to know what will happen 30 years down the road. Someone might propose a project that makes sense and provides a great benefit to the city, but that requires a long-term lease, she said.

The city has 157 parks and natural areas, Grand noted, and simply adding parkland at this point isn’t a good approach. The city shouldn’t buy land for parks just because a property owner wants to unload it so they don’t have to pay taxes. “Clearly there’s a difference between Furstenberg Nature Area and The Rock,” she quipped.

Colin Smith, the city’s parks & recreation manager, explained the process that would be required if the city wanted to sell parkland. The sale would have to be approved by voters, but even before it gets to that point there are significant hurdles, he said. It would have to be removed from the parks master plan, a process that would require a recommendation from both PAC and then the planning commission. The city council would then need to vote to put it on the ballot. All of these steps in some ways provide the greatest protection, Smith said. If you’re a business person who’s interested in buying  parkland, why would you want to go through all of that “rigmarole,” Smith asked.

However, Tim Doyle (PAC) noted that from the city’s perspective, there could be significant economic reasons for wanting to sell a piece of property that’s deemed as parkland. In some cases if a park can’t be maintained, “it’s crap,” he said.

Contract Update

Laura Rubin (GAC) asked about the status of the contract renewal for management of the greenbelt program.

Since the greenbelt program launched, the city has contracted with The Conservation Fund to manage its operation. The current three-year contract ends on Jan. 15, 2013. The nonprofit – with headquarters in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. – also manages the city’s parkland acquisition. Both efforts are funded by the 0.5 mill open space and parkland preservation millage that voters approved in 2003. Ginny Trocchio is the nonprofit’s local staff member.

The Ann Arbor city council approved the current contract with The Conservation Fund on Dec. 21, 2009. It authorized $119,565 in 2010, with two one-year renewal options for $113,661 in 2011 and $106,797 in 2012. The Conservation Fund was the only bidder for that request for proposals (RFP). It is expected to bid on the renewal as well.

At the Nov. 1 meeting, Trocchio reported that the RFP hadn’t yet been issued. [It was subsequently released, with a Nov. 28 (10 a.m.) deadline for responses. (.pdf of management RFP)]

Catherine Riseng, who serves on the RFP review committee for this contract renewal, praised Trocchio’s work – and Trocchio received a round of applause from both GAC and PAC commissioners.

Present from greenbelt advisory commission: Peter Allen, Tom Bloomer, Shannon Brines, Archer Christian, Dan Ezekiel, Catherine Riseng, Laura Rubin. Absent: Carsten Hohnke.

Present from the park advisory commission: Ingrid Ault, Tim Berla, Tim Doyle, Julie Grand, Alan Jackson, John Lawter, Mike Anglin (ex-officio). Absent: Karen Levin, Missy Stults, Christopher Taylor (ex-officio).

Staff present: Ginny Trocchio, Colin Smith.

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

Sign on the Trolz property in Manchester Township, which might become part of a new state recreation area in southwest Washtenaw County. (Photo by Russ Serbay.)

The proposal is to partner with the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources to acquire a total of 2,160 acres straddling the border of Jackson and Washtenaw counties – the Trolz property. The area includes an abandoned rail right-of-way that could become a multipurpose trail.

The county parks system would purchase about 461 acres of that total area – a parcel located in Manchester Township and appraised at $1.37 million. The commission authorized staff to conduct additional work on the potential deal, with a final proposal and request for approval in the coming months.

The commission also received an update on the proposed East County Recreation Center from Craig Borum, professor at the University of Michigan’s Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning. Borum presented two options for laying out the entire 38-acre Water Street redevelopment area in Ypsilanti, where the rec center would be located. He also reviewed two possible draft designs for the recreation building on a portion of the site.

The commission kept up its pace of land preservation efforts, often in partnership with other organizations. It gave final approval to acquire conservation easements on the 124-acre Drake property in Lodi Township, in partnership with the Ann Arbor greenbelt program. Final approvals were also given for easements on the 73-acre Hornback property in Salem Township, partnering with the greenbelt and Salem Township; and for the 213-acre Bailo property in Superior Township. In addition, the commission authorized preparation of a purchase offer for 65 acres in Superior Township – the Ford Road property – at a price of $500,000, contingent on completion of all due diligence and the commission’s final approval. When completed, WCPARC’s contribution to all these deals would total $900,224 to preserve 475 acres.

The nine-member commission will face some turnover in 2013. At the end of the meeting, commissioner Jimmie Maggard announced his intent to resign after 24 years of serving on WCPARC. Barbara Bergman, who serves on WCPARC because of her position as a county commissioner, did not seek re-election and will be leaving the county board at the end of 2012. The same is true for Janis Bobrin, who did not seek re-election as the county’s water resources commissioner. She’ll be replaced by Evan Pratt, who won the seat in the Nov. 6 election. Bergman expressed the hope that Bobrin would be appointed to a vacancy on WCPARC – those appointments are made by the county board.

Trolz Property Acquisition

Bob Marans, the commission’s president, introduced a proposal to acquire about 461 acres in Manchester Township, an opportunity for partnership with the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources to create a much larger new state recreation area at the headwaters of the Raisin River. He said the state’s new emphasis on place-making means the DNR is not just looking at areas “way out in nowhere,” but rather is looking for land with possibilities for recreation and wildlife preservation closer to populated areas.

The concept is, Marans said, that WCPARC and DNR would purchase all of the 2,160 acres remaining in what was originally the 3,500-acre Trolz estate. Tom Freeman, retired deputy director of WCPARC who now serves as a consultant, made a presentation to supplement a written recommendation by director Bob Tetens. Freeman explained that the proposal was for WCPARC to buy the 461 acres in Washtenaw County, using primarily funds from the county’s natural areas preservation program. The county would purchase the bulk of those acres with NAPP money, then use recreation funds to buy an abandoned rail track that runs through the entire property, which could become a multi-use trail to serve pedestrian, cyclists, and the equestrian community.

Freeman said it would be “fabulous kayaking and a fine migratory bird area.” The property includes a building that is ¼-mile long and could be used as part of an equestrian center, he said. According to the staff report, the property includes a “significantly diverse landscape,” with woodlots, wetlands and open fields. As part of the headlands for the River Raisin, the property is crossed by several small streams with a “rolling topography.” An appraisal prepared on behalf of the DNR found the 461 acres to be worth $1,374,295 – or $2,981 per acre. [.pdf of details for Trolz property appraisal] [.pdf map of Trolz property]

Trolz Property Acquisition: Commission Discussion

Commissioner Jan Anschuetz asked about the funding, saying: “We have specific ways to use NAPP, but we don’t have that with rec money. How are we going to sort it out?”

A view of the Watkins home on the Trolz property. (Photo by Russ Serbay.)

Bob Tetens replied that WCPARC would use parks & recreation funds for land to connect the natural areas – that is, to purchase the 36.53 acres that are in the rail corridor. Tom Freeman pointed out that the land in Jackson County includes Watkins Lake. Asked about the lake’s depth, Freeman reported that it’s no more than 8-10 feet deep. That prompted commissioner Fred Veigel to ask whether it would hold fish in the winter. Yes, Freeman said. Tetens then interposed: “The only thing they [MDNR] are not interested in is hunting.”

Freeman noted that the property in Jackson County includes historic structures, such as the Watkins home, which was part of the Underground Railroad – a recent article in Michigan History magazine featured this property, he said. There were exclamations over a slide of a brick Italianate house.

“Don’t get too excited,” Tetens joked, reminding the group “we’re not taking any action tonight” on the actual purchase.

Commissioner Janis Bobrin asked about the property’s operation or management. Freeman replied that a majority of the responsibility would be the state’s. Anschuetz asked what the DNR plans to do with the buildings. Freeman responded, “as a historic property, the farm house would stay.” He added that “the property is so large that Watkins had his own train stop.”

Freeman also pointed out that the property is very close to the Leonard Preserve, the largest NAPP area, just northwest of the village of Manchester.

Tetens added, “We need to take a trip out there. It is breathtaking. If I won the lotto, I would buy it all.”

Outcome: Unanimous approval of the motion to authorize WCPARC staff to initiate the necessary due diligence examination of the Washtenaw County portion of the Trolz property, including preparation of a survey, environmental site assessment, and if justified, a sales offer, contingent upon development of an acceptable participation agreement with the Michigan DNR. All items subject to review and final approval by the WCPARC

East County Recreation Center

About a year ago, the county parks & recreation commission announced plans to explore a possible new recreation center for the eastern side of Washtenaw County. The 12-acre site is located within Ypsilanti’s Water Street area, on the south side of Michigan Avenue just east of downtown and next to the Huron River.

At WCPARC’s Nov. 13 meeting, director Bob Tetens began the discussion by reviewing the project’s background, including a letter of intent signed earlier this year with the city of Ypsilanti for WCPARC to carry out preliminary planning. The concept is that Washtenaw County would pay for the building, while Ypsilanti would donate the land and the Ann Arbor YMCA would operate the facility. Tetens further explained that the design team, WCPARC staff and YMCA president Cathi Duchon had visited several rec building around the state to get ideas. [See Chronicle coverage: "More Planning for Rec Center in Ypsilanti." Information about the project is also posted on the county’s parks and recreation website and on the PLY Architecture site.]

Tetens introduced Craig Borum, a professor of architecture at the University of Michigan Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning (TCAUP), who is leading the preliminary design work. Borum used slides and models to illustrate his description of the work that a team of TCAUP faculty and students have done over the last six months to develop both a site plan for the entire 38-acre Water Street redevelopment area, and a design for a recreation center building. The presentation was essentially the same as the Sept. 27, 2012 public forum at SPARK East in Ypsilanti. [See Chronicle coverage: "Public Gives Input on East County Rec Center"]

Borum’s presentation focused on the main qualities of the proposal: that it aimed to provided sustainable urban design; that the rec center would become a catalyst for other development; and that the project would “promote environmental consciousness even after the [rec] building is finished.” The project also is intended to highlight the significance of both the Huron River, which runs along the west side of the site, and of Michigan Avenue, on the north side of the site.

Borum pointed out that the Water Street site was the same size – 38 acres – as all the rest of downtown Ypsilanti, to underline the importance of continuing the sense that you are still in the city when you are on the east side of the Michigan Avenue bridge over the Huron River.

East County Recreation Center: Site Plans, Building Design

Borum presented two possible ways to organize the whole Water Street site: (1) Jeffersonian squares creating a grid, similar to the existing grid in downtown Ypsilanti, of about 12 blocks; or (2) long narrow “French” lots – or ribbons – that would run between the Huron River and Michigan Avenue. The grid scheme would have commercial uses along Michigan Avenue, transitioning to residential uses on the south side, where the Huron River bends to create the southern border of the site. The ribbon scheme creates an extension of River Street as a boulevard connecting Michigan Avenue to the Huron River. Both approaches are urban and emphasize both the river and the canopy of trees that will eventually develop on the site.

Model of a conceptual “canopy” design for a proposed new recreation center near downtown Ypsilanti. It was one of two models displayed at a Sept. 27 open house to get feedback on the proposed project.

Borum tagged the two possible designs for the recreation building itself as the “storefront” and the “canopy.” The “storefront” would be narrow and long, presenting its face on Michigan Avenue almost like the downtown buildings west of the river and running along the river. The exterior of the building would be “frit glass,” which Borum explained was glass embedded with ceramic bits that could create whatever image the owner desired. His slides showed the glass “fritted” to resemble the façades of a few typical downtown Ypsilanti buildings.

The “canopy” building design had a completely clear glass exterior, so that “you would feel you were under the canopy in a park,” Borum said. Both designs had similar amounts of space devoted to the several activities in the rec building: a reception desk, running track, exercise and meeting rooms, a two-part indoor pool with cool-water lanes for lap-swimmers, and a warm-water pool with a graded entry area suitable for children and those who need assistance such as a walker or chair.

East County Recreation Center: Commission Discussion

Commission member Jan Anschuetz commented that the use of glass for natural interior illumination was similar to the architectural style of early Ypsilanti buildings. She specifically cited the Woodruff School, which was built before there was electricity. Borum replied that the interior sketches in his presentation showed the spaces as they would be when lit by natural light.

Anschuetz commented on the “canopy” design by saying that “this one is very unpopular – people feel it is ugly.” She was referring to comments she had seen on Facebook. She noted that many people in Ypsilanti have spent a lot of money restoring their houses, and even have restored city hall. “We have to be sensitive about why people live in Ypsilanti,” Anschuetz said. “We want to have a rec center, but you have to be very careful with this. People don’t like this one [the canopy design] at all. Many neighborhood groups are strongly opposed.”

WCPARC commission chair Bob Marans responded by saying that the UM team led by Borum is not designing the building – these are conceptual ideas. “Once we get the funding, we will hire someone to design it,” he said. Anschuetz repeated her objections to the “canopy” design, concluding, “The strength of our community is in restoration.” Borum noted that feedback from the public presentation in September showed that the canopy design was ahead with perhaps 80% of the votes that were submitted by the public. WCPARC planner Meghan Bonfiglio spoke in agreement.

Commission member Fred Veigel asked whether Borum had considered translucent panels on the roof. Borum said he had, but that “the payoff on solar is long, about 30 years now. It will get better down the road. The 30-year payback includes the cost of equipment and installation.”

Anschuetz asked Tetens why the project contemplated having the Ann Arbor YMCA operate the facility. Tetens answered that WCPARC can’t afford to both build and operate it, because at the start there will not be a lot of members. He added that the Y has decades of experience running an urban rec center.

Commissioner Barbara Bergman asked for confirmation that the Y was “willing to take the financial risk.” Yes, Tetens replied. Bergman than inquired, “How is the [Ypsilanti] city government responding to this?” Tetens said there is some concern, but the Water Street property – which is owned by the city – hasn’t been on the tax rolls for years. The site also is in the floodplain, and “the valuable property is at the corner of Michigan and River Street” – not where the rec center would be located.

Tetens then segued into a related matter: How the Border-to-Border Trail (B2B) would cross Michigan Avenue. He said he had just gotten word that WCPARC’s application for funding from the Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources had scored very high, “so we are likely to get it.”

Discussion closed with Anschuetz’ comment that the September rec center presentation was “wonderful.” There had been standing room only, she said. Borum promised to provide booklets on the presentation to commission members, and Tetens said the Ypsilanti city council would get briefed in November or December. “We have until July 2013 to come to agreement,” he said, based on terms outlined in the letter of intent with the city of Ypsilanti.

Outcome: This was an item for discussion only, with no vote required.

Conservation Easements

During their Nov. 13 meeting, commissioners approved several new conservation easements that will protect land through the county’s natural areas preservation program (NAPP). A conservation easement is a legally enforceable agreement – between a landowner and a government agency or a land trust – for the purpose of conservation. The purchase of development rights (PDR) is a common mechanism for protecting undeveloped land by letting owners keep their property for farming or other specified uses but preventing its development. Development is prevented through a conservation easement.

WCPARC contracts with the nonprofit Legacy Land Conservancy (LLC) for work on conservation easements like the ones discussed during the November meeting. Susan Lackey, the conservancy’s executive director, and Robin Burke, the LLC land protection coordinator, were on hand to brief commissioners about these deals. Commissioners also were provided written reports prepared by WCPARC director Bob Tetens.

Conservation Easements: Bailo Property

The seven parcels in this deal – owned by the Bailo family – are located in Salem Township, covering 213 acres on the north and south sides of Six Mile Road between Dixboro Road and Pontiac Trail. [.pdf map of Bailo property] According to Tetens’ written report, the acquisition of development rights by WCPARC “would compensate the landowner for the cost of development rights, would establish an agricultural conservation agreement between the landowner and WCPARC to keep the land in agriculture in perpetuity, and would maintain the private ownership of the land.” An appraisal by Bosserd Appraisal Services identified a value of development rights of approximately $430,000. To facilitate this purchase of development rights, the report continued, WCPARC had received a grant of $203,840 from the federal Farm and Ranch Lands Protection Program (FRPP).

Lackey noted that the property has been in the Bailo family for 80 years. It’s a valuable parcel because of the woodland (with a harness track in the middle) that is relatively intact, with a wetland that drains into the river. Burke showed photos taken from walking through the property, including a 60-acre pumpkin field. She described “high quality woods on the north side, with a vernal pond where there is habitat opportunity for salamanders, toads, and turtles.”

Lackey reported that the phase one environmental survey revealed “nothing scary.” Salem Township, she said, “would contribute paperwork worth $2,000.” That comment brought a simultaneous response from Janis Bobrin and Barbara Bergman: “Is that all?” Tetens added that Salem Township had done the application for FRPP funding, and “as time goes on, that participation will grow.”

Commissioner Jimmie Maggard asked whether WCPARC would own this land. Lackey explained that the county would hold a conservation easement, so that the land is protected and can’t be built on. However, the property would be owned by the private landowner, who will continue to pay taxes. She noted that it’s part of a farmland protection program adopted by the county board of commissioners in May 2010.

Maggard responded that “it seems funny we would put in two to three hundred thousand dollars and the land will just sit there.” Bergman pushed back: “There is a legacy for the citizens in the future. We are buying beauty.” Bobrin joined in: “The commissioners and the community place a value on knowing that farming will continue. Without this, the incentive to sell for development is a danger.”

Commissioner Fred Veigel raised a different concern, asking “Is it too late to get a separate appraisal, from another group?“ Lackey responded, “This appraisal was done for the county. I was surprised at how low it was for this location. I had expected it to be twice that.” Bergman added, “This is the time to do it.”

Outcome: The motion to accept the recommendation to authorize final approval to purchase the development rights on the Bailo property at a price of $430,000, with $203,840 to be reimbursed by the FRPP, passed with dissent by Jimmie Maggard.

Conservation Easement: Drake Property

This item had received preliminary approval at the September 2012 WCPARC meeting. The Drake property is 124 acres in Lodi Township on the south side of Waters Road. [.pdf map of Drake property] Preservation of the property is “a high priority for both the Ann Arbor Greenbelt and Lodi Township. A collaborative or partnership approach is proposed,” according to Tetens’ written report. The Ann Arbor greenbelt program would contribute 80% of the price of the conservation easement, or $439,456. WCPARC’s natural areas preservation program would contribute 20%, or $109,864. Lodi Township is contributing $1,000.

The Ann Arbor city council had approved the greenbelt contribution at the council’s Oct. 15, 2012 meeting.

Tom Freeman, former deputy director of WCPARC now serving as a consultant, highlighted that the Drake property is one of the few remaining dairy farms in the county. Of the acres under consideration for the conservation easement, about half are farmed and half are natural. The property contains a high quality woodlot and wetland, and has been “well-managed from a forestry standpoint,” Freeman said. There is a “diversity of trees in age, with a clean understory,” he said.

There was no discussion among commissioners.

Outcome: On a roll call vote, the Drake conservation easement was unanimously approved at $109,864.

Conservation Easement: Hornback Property

This conservation easement would be for 73 acres in Salem Township at the northeast corner of Ann Arbor’s greenbelt, on the east side of Pontiac Trail extending due east and widening to the south to meet Brookville Road, according to Tetens’ written report. The property contains a mature woodlots and wetland areas, with about 30% of the property used for farming. The owners want to retain five acres for a future home site. [.pdf map of Hornback property] WCPARC gave initial approval to this deal at their September 2012 meeting.

Consultant Tom Freeman noted that like the Drake property, the Hornback land was nominated by the Ann Arbor greenbelt for a conservation easement. He was impressed with both the quality of the property and with the partnership being offered: 20% of the cost would come from Salem Township ($64,200), 20% from the county’s NAPP program ($64,200), and 50% from the Ann Arbor greenbelt program ($160,500). The final 10% would come from the property owners, who offer a 10% reduction in the price of the conservation easement.

An appraisal by Williams & Associates put the value of a conservation easement at $321,000, or $4,400 an acre. Mannik & Smith Group did a phase I environmental assessment, and there is a boundary survey including legal description and sealed survey drawing.

Outcome: There was no discussion. A roll call vote was unanimously in support of the recommendation to commit $64,200 toward the purchase of a conservation easement on 73 acres of the Hornback property.

NAPP Acquisition: Ford Road Property

This proposal had been on the agenda for the October meeting, which was cancelled for lack of a quorum. There are three parcels totaling 147 acres in the northeast portion of Superior Township. The proposal before WCPARC was the purchase the northern two parcels – 65 acres – for $500,000. Bosserd Appraisal Services established this value. [.pdf map of Ford Road property]

The property lies north of Ford Road on the east side of Berry Road, just south of Superior Township’s Schroeter Park, which can provide both parking and a trail into the Ford Road land. Tom Freeman presented information about the site, saying that Superior Township has wanted it for some time but is financially unable to acquire it. He pointed to a survey conducted in 1992 by Ellen Weatherbee, who had described the property in glowing terms, noting the high quality of its plant life and stating that it was one of the highest quality pieces of property in the township.

Freeman described the “dramatic contour lines and heavy woods, comprised of red and white oaks, along with a small area of hardwood swamp filled with red maples. A perennial stream cuts through a steeply sloped topography,” part of the River Rouge headwaters.

The county’s natural areas technical advisory committee (NATAC) identified this as a high priority property for acquisition. The relatively high price of $7,692 per acre is due to the property’s proximity to residential development and the Lucas nursery, Freeman explained. This price, he added, is consistent with what NAPP paid for other property in Superior Township: about $8,000 per acre for the J.A. Bloch property on Prospect Road [for the Meyer Preserve], and comparable to the Pellerito property on the southeast corner of Prospect and Cherry Hill Roads.

There was no commission discussion on this item.

Outcome: Unanimous approval to authorize preparation of a purchase offer for the northern portion, 65 acres, of the Ford Road Property LLC at a price of $500,000, contingent upon completion of all necessary due diligence examination of the property and the commission’s final approval.

Rolling Hills Contract Change

WCPARC deputy director Coy Vaughn reported on the Rolling Hills master plan, with the most recent work being on the ring road and trails.

In addition to reporting on completion of phase I, Vaughn asked for approval of change orders to the contract with Dan’s Excavating – for an additional $328,123, or about 10.5% of the original contract for $3.121 million. With the change order, the total contract amount now comes to $3,449,373.

Of the added expenses in the change orders, Vaughn said, 80% were “advancing the capital improvements program.” WCPARC director Bob Tetens added that the biggest changes were in the width of the road, and storm water management. This was, he said, the final change order.

Tetens’ written memo to commissioners listed seven additions to the work and cited several unforeseen unfavorable site conditions, including “multiple areas of heavy clay soils within the storm water management features” and “areas disturbed by Detroit Edison’s crew installing underground electrical service.” The report concluded that “Dan’s will continue to maintain the seeded landscape areas…and are responsible for replacement/repair of deficient items during the warranty period….In general terms, the project is now complete.”

There was no substantive discussion among commissioners on this item.

Outcome: The commission gave unanimous approval to a one-time change order of $328,123, based on the overall work performance of Dan’s Excavating Inc., and their ability to complete the project elements on schedule. The vote also established a final total contract value of $3,449,373 to complete the Rolling Hills Phase I master plan.

Financial Reports

The November meeting included written financial reports covering two months, since WCPARC’s October meeting had been cancelled.

Financial Reports: Claims

The commission received two claims reports: for October and November 2012. In October, a total of $651,872 claims were paid: $647,944 on parks and facilities’ operation and improvements (of which $412,596.24 was for capital improvements primarily at Independence Lake parks); and $3,928 for NAPP acquisition and management. [.pdf of October claims]

In November, a total of $1,890,407 in claims were paid: $1,804,792 on parks and facilities’ operation and improvements (of which $1,266,293 was for capital improvements at the Meri Lou Murray Center, Rolling Hills, and Independence Lake parks); and 400,000 for funding partnerships, primarily for the Border-to-Border Trail in Dexter. [.pdf of November claims]

Outcome: The commission approved payment of claims in the amounts above, which for the two months totaled $2,542,279.

Financial Reports: Fund Balance Statements

Two financial reports were provided – for the months of September and October. Neither required approval, and neither generated comments or questions. [.pdf of fund balance statement through Sept. 30, 2012] [.pdf of fund balance statement through Oct. 31, 2012]

Recreation Reports

WCPARC director Bob Tetens highlighted the increase in rounds at the Pierce Lake golf course, which as of the end of October 2012 were 19,246, up 31% from the previous year’s 14,677, in spite of the heat this year. [The number was up only 7% from 17,926 rounds in 2010]. Revenues for all operations at Pierce Lake were $613,449, up 21% from $508,437 in 2011; but an increase of 17% from $523,869 in 2010.

Tetens also underlined the effect of the warmer-than-usual year on attendance at the Meri Lou Murray Rec Center. In the last three years, 2010 through 2012, attendance was 281,326; 282,669; and 268,978. Revenues for those three years were $977,986; $1,006,356; and $997,406. So even though attendance was 12,348 less in 2012 than in 2010, revenues increased $19,420 from 2010 to 2012.

Independence Lake County Park gate attendance (and total revenue) through October was 17,743 ($211,458) in 2012; 16,968 ($209,427) in 2011; and 16,842 ($201,458) in 2010.

Rolling Hills County Park’s numbers are more complex, because there are two different admission counts and charges: just to use the park; and to use the water park. Attendance at the park (and revenue) was 34,288 ($265,617) in 2012; 34,816 ($266,930) in 2011; and 33,583 ($258,910) in 2010. Attendance at the water park dwarfed that at the rest of the park: 114,522 ($780,122) in 2012; 115,012 ($780,995) in 2011; and 113,635 ($761,453) in 2010. Total revenue at Rolling Hills – which has rental facilities, food concessions, and winter operations exceeding those of the other parks – was $1,317,900 in 2012; $1,310,255 in 2011; and $1,247,549 in 2010.

Recreation Reports: Development Projects

Tetens reported that the spray-and-play zone at Independence Lake is about 80% complete for the building, spray zone, landscaping, and electrical service. TriMedia was hired to update the sewage pump system serving the beach center.

At Rolling Hills, the water park expansion is well underway, with the block structure for the bathhouse building nearly done and underground utility piping and storm water piping complete. The improvement in both parks will be done and ready for opening on Memorial Day 2013. Tetens predicted that 2013 “will be a remarkable year for us,” with these two huge improvements.

At the County Farm Park, paving work and site restoration is nearing completion for the pathway from Washtenaw Avenue to the Platt Road pavilion, creating what Tetens called “a new front door.” He reassured commissioner Fred Veigel that “all the dead trees have been taken out.”

At Sharon Mills Park, replacement of the pedestrian bridge adjacent to the millpond dam with a new, prefab steel truss bridge is in progress.

Recreation Reports: Border-to-Border (B2B) Trail

The Border-to-Border (B2B) Trail continues to be built at Dexter’s River Terrace. The boardwalk sections are nearly finished and asphalt paving is underway. Staff also erected blazes on the B2B in Ann Arbor from Fuller Road to the Argo Cascades.

In Ypsilanti, city staff revised the application to the state DNR to extend the B2B into the Water Street redevelopment area, with WCPARC financial support. That application is under review.

Natural Areas Preservation Program (NAPP) Update

Several updates were given in a written report presented to commissioners.

Acquiring natural areas requires several steps, and after acquisition they must be maintained. To assist acquisition, a baseline environmental assessment was done for the Baker property purchased in Lima Township and sent to the state Dept. of Environmental Quality. WCPARC staff also made site visits to properties under consideration in Manchester, Freedom and Salem townships; and WCPARC forwarded the title search and a revised phase 1 environmental assessment for the Arbor Vistas project to the state DNR.

Staff also received a schedule for constructing a boardwalk in the Draper-Houston preserve; engaged a contractor to build a parking lot and observation decks for the Trinkle Marsh at Easton Farm preserve and another to construct boardwalks and bridges through the wetlands of the Spike Preserve; continued to remove invasive species, especially invasive shrubs, from parks and preserves; and began to develop management plans for Scio Woods and West Lake preserves, as well as a low-impact wayfinding system for all NAPP preserves.

Commission Changes

As business drew to a close, commission member Jimmie Maggard announced, “As of today, this will be my last meeting.” He said he was resigning from the commission after 24 years, and has other projects in the works in Ypsilanti Township.

Jimmie Maggard at the Nov. 13 meeting of the county parks & recreation commission. (Photo by M. Leary.)

President Bob Marans expressed surprise and said, “I am sorry to see you go, and I appreciate your contributions.” When Fred Veigel proposed that the commission present Maggard with a plaque to commemorate his service, Maggard replied: “I just want my golf course pass.”

Maggard then thanked his colleagues on the commission. “We’ve always been on the same level, always thinking about the citizens, what we can do for them, keeping the parks clean. We’ve had Bob [Tetens] for quite a while now and he’s done a great job.”  Maggard said Tetens was leading them in the right direction. He also praised the transition when Coy Vaughn was promoted to succeed Tom Freeman as deputy director. “I want to thank everybody,” Maggard concluded. “I’ll change my resignation to the end of the year.”

Commission member Barbara Bergman chimed in to say, “The next meeting will be my last. [She did not seek re-election to the county board of commissioners, the reason for her seat on WCPARC.] I hope to remain on the mental health board. Hopefully there will be one slot that the chair can appoint and I hope it will be Janis [Bobrin, who is retiring as county water resources commissioner – position that entitled her to a seat on WCPARC. Evan Pratt, newly elected water resources commissioner, will take that place]. As much as I love WCPARC, this spot belongs to Janis. I haven’t,” she added, “been here long enough to get a cake.”

Present: President Robert Marans, vice president Patricia Scribner, secretary/treasurer Nelson Meade, Jan Anschuetz, Barbara Bergman, Janis Bobrin, Jimmie Maggard, Dan Smith, and Fred Veigel.
Absent: Rolland Sizemore, Jr.

WCPARC staff: Director Robert Tetens, deputy director Coy Vaughn, planner Megan Bonfiglio, and consultant Tom Freeman.

Legal Legacy Land Conservancy: Executive director Susan Lackey and land protection coordinator Robin Burke.

Next regular WCPARC meeting: Tuesday, Dec. 11, 2012 at 7 p.m. at the parks and recreation commission administrative offices, 2230 Platt Road in Ann Arbor.

The Chronicle could not survive without regular voluntary subscriptions to support our coverage of public bodies like the Washtenaw County parks and recreation commission. 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!

Jim Daratony, owner of Cobblestone Farms in Webster Township, made a presentation at the Jan. 12 meeting of the Ann Arbor greenbelt advisory commission. To the right is Jennifer Merrick-Brooks, an equestrian trainer and coach. (Photos by the writer.)

It’s the first equestrian-related property to be considered for the greenbelt, so they came to commissioners to make their case for including it. The land is used for a sport called “eventing,” which includes a cross-country component. Jim Daratony said the eventing competitions that they’ve held so far on the property have drawn people from as far away as Texas – he stated that it’s having a positive economic impact on this area.

Commissioners also heard from John Satarino, one of the original advocates of the greenbelt program, who spoke during public commentary. He urged them to consider making more outright acquisitions of property, which could then be open to the public. Much of the land protected by the greenbelt is done through the purchase of development rights, with the land remaining private property.

In her staff update, Ginny Trocchio reported that in 2010, the greenbelt program had protected just over 1,000 acres of land, bringing the total of greenbelt land to nearly 3,000 acres.

Equestrian Uses for the Greenbelt?

Jim and Darlyn Daratony, who own Cobblestone Farms in Webster Township, are applying to the greenbelt program for a 53-acre parcel they own next to Cobblestone. [Their business is not connected to the city-owned Cobblestone Farm, located on Packard Road in Ann Arbor.]

Jim Daratony gave a presentation to commissioners, noting that preserving land for equestrian purposes is a little different than what the greenbelt program is accustomed to doing. He described the land – located at Zeeb and Gregory roads – as a beautiful parcel, with open spaces, a pond, wetlands, a stream that feeds into Arms Creek, active wildlife and forest areas. Several acres of the land are in hay production, he said, and are used by people for walking, riding their horses and cross-country skiing.

Specifically, they’d like to preserve that land for “eventing,” a sport that Daratony described as an equestrian triathalon. The land is currently used for that purpose just two or three weekends during the year. The reason for applying to the greenbelt is to preserve the land, he said, but also to preserve the sport of eventing.

Eventing competitions have been held there for three years and are growing, Daratony said – at their last one in 2010, nearly 200 horses participated. Overall, the events have attracted more than 800 participants from multiple states, with 700 spectators annually. The competitions are supported by the U.S. Equestrian Federation and the Fédération Équestre Internationale, he said. “We hope that we continue to grow that,” he said.

Jennifer Merrick-Brooks, who organizes eventing competitions in the U.S. and Canada, spoke about the sport itself, which she said is quickly disappearing because of the lack of preserved land. To run these competitions, a lot of undeveloped acreage is required, with different types of terrain. It’s a three-phase event: (1) dressage, (2) stadium jumping, and (3) cross country.

Merrick-Brooks said they’ve seen a growth in the number of participants and spectators at the local events over the past three years. People are coming from out of state – as far away as Texas – and many are being introduced to Michigan for the first time, she said. It’s creating an economic impact, she added, for local hotels, restaurants, and businesses that sell on-site concessions. In addition, local stores get business, she said – wood is needed to build the jumps, for example, and veterinarians are hired to be at the events.

Daratony then described Cobblestone Farms – about 100 acres that’s adjacent and to the west of the land that they’re requesting to be part of the greenbelt. He characterized it as a state-of-the-art equestrian development and training facility, housing over 40 horses. Cobblestone includes about 50 acres of paddocks, pastures and riding areas, and an area that grows hay for horses and livestock.

The combination of Cobblestone Farms plus the acreage they hope to protect via the greenbelt will create a large parcel of preserved land in that area for equestrian use, Daratony said. “We’re excited about it, and we hope you are too.”

Equestrian Uses: Commissioner Questions, Comments

Peter Allen began the discussion by asking what kind of access, legally, the public would have to the property. Daratony replied that he isn’t a lawyer, but that the goal is to keep it open for their neighbors. Some people walk their dogs on the property, he said, and some people who board their horses at Cobblestone ride on the land. He noted that the property is completely insured.

Four members of the Ann Arbor greenbelt advisory commission, from right: Carsten Hohnke, Mike Garfield, Dan Ezekiel, Peter Allen.

Dan Ezekiel said the proposal has given the commissioners a lot to think about. Access is a big issue, and he wasn’t expecting to hear that the Daratonys would be willing to have people walk through the property. Ezekiel asked if they’d be amenable to having a certain guarantee of public access written into an easement agreement. “That would be a real positive factor in our consideration,” he said.

Daratony replied that they’d been talking about that issue – they’re aware of other places that open up the land to other equestrian uses, like pony clubs and 4-H. “We’re not opposed to that,” he said.

Merrick-Brooks noted that she and Darlyn Daratony are members of the Eventing Association of Michigan. That group has an easement to use another property in Washtenaw County, she said – though she didn’t identify its location. As a past president of the association, Merrick-Brooks said she was involved in getting that property insured. They haven’t had anything happen, but they’re covered, she said.

Jennifer S. Hall, the commission’s chair, asked whether this other property in Washtenaw County includes a public access component written into the easement agreement? Merrick-Brooks said she didn’t recall, but that people did use the property to walk their dogs and such.

Ezekiel noted that if the commission moved ahead with this proposal, they’d probably want to negotiate capping the number of events held on the property. They wouldn’t want to see 50 events held there each year, for example. It would be counter to the purpose of preserving open space if it were constantly in use.

Daratony responded by saying it’s a lot of work to hold these events, and he had no problem putting a limit on that.

Mike Garfield asked Daratony to talk about the land’s history, how long they’ve owned it and how they got into this equestrian sport.

Daratony described himself as a “city boy,” but their four daughters had fallen in love with horse riding. They’ve owned the land for four years. It was previously owned by a long-time local farmer whose family was selling off his property after he passed away. Daratony’s family was just starting to get involved in the sport of eventing, he said, and they were interested in hosting some competitions – the land seemed like a good fit for it.

Hall noted that Ginny Trocchio, a staff member who manages the greenbelt program, would have more information for commissioners during a closed session later in the meeting. [That closed session, for the purpose of discussing possible land acquisitions, lasted nearly an hour. Details of greenbelt negotiations aren't released until the proposals are forwarded to city council for approval.]

Public Commentary: Public Access

John Satarino was the only person to address the commission during time set aside for public commentary. He began by noting that he was proud to be one of the early founders of the greenbelt program, and he thanked commissioners for their efforts in what he described as a very successful purchase of development rights (PDR) program. At the same time, there has been a commitment to purchase land outright for users, he said, adding that now is a good time for that kind of purchase. It might be more expensive and problematic in some ways, he allowed, but could be accomplished by using partnerships and grants. There are many beautiful properties, Satarino said, especially west of Ann Arbor and near the city.

Satarino pointed out that a Washtenaw County-owned property, Scio Woods Preserve, is growing in popularity, which reflects that there’s a need for this kind of property that’s open to the public. Taxpayers would like to see something more tangible for their tax dollars, he said. He reported that some people voted against the county program in November because they thought it was part of the greenbelt. [The 10-year renewal for a millage to fund the county's natural areas preservation program was approved by voters on Nov. 2. Most of the county's natural preserves are open to the public, while most property protected by the greenbelt program is not.] Satarino concluded by encouraging the commission to look at opportunities, knowing that in decades to come, it would help meet the program’s goals of wildlife protection and providing places for the public to use.

Staff Update

Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund, who serves as staff for the greenbelt program under a contract with the city, gave a brief report.

Before the meeting she had distributed a map to commissioners, showing all protected land in Washtenaw County through the end of 2010. In addition to land in the greenbelt, the map showed land protected through development rights and conservation easements held by other governmental entities and nonprofit groups – such as the Legacy Land Conservancy and the Southeast Michigan Land Conservancy. It also indicated areas that are part of state, regional, county or local parks systems.

Trocchio reported that 2010 had been a very busy year for all land preservation efforts, including the greenbelt. The greenbelt alone had protected just over 1,000 acres in 2010, including year-end deals for the 146-acre Whitney Farm and the 33.7-acre Clark Farm – both in Webster Township – and the 96-acre Honke Farm in Northfield Township.

In total, nearly 3,000 acres are protected by the greenbelt, she said. That includes a 1,000-acre block in Webster Township, and a nearly 1,000-acre area in Ann Arbor Township. One of the greenbelt program’s strategic goals is to build areas of protected land in 1,000-acre chunks. [.pdf file of city press release on year-end update of all land preservation in Washtenaw County, including the greenbelt. Trocchio gave a more detailed report on the greenbelt program's most recent fiscal-year activities, from July 1, 2009 through June 30, 2010, at the commission's September 2010 meeting.]

Greenbelt Approvals on Council Agenda

Though these weren’t mentioned during the greenbelt commission’s Jan. 12 meeting, two items are on the Ann Arbor city council’s Jan. 18 meeting agenda that relate to the greenbelt:

• A resolution to approve a purchase agreement for the purchase of development rights (PDR) on the Lee A. Maulbetsch Trust and Lori M. Maulbetsch Trust Property in Northfield Township, for $804,392. The city expects to be reimbursed for $282,750 of that amount through a grant from the Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program (FRPP). The roughly 128-acre farm is located along Northfield Church Road.
• A resolution to approve a purchase agreement for the purchase of development rights on the Nancy M. Geiger Revocable Living Trust and Rose Ann Geiger Contingent Trust Property in Salem Township, for $1,339,442. Of that, the city expects to be reimbursed for $611,030 through an FRPP grant. The 218-acre farm is located along Pontiac Trail and Five Mile Road.

Present: Peter Allen, Tom Bloomer, Dan Ezekiel, Mike Garfield, Jennifer S. Hall, Carsten Hohnke, Gil Omenn, Laura Rubin

Absent: Catherine Riseng

Next meeting: Wednesday, Feb. 9, 2011 at 4:30 p.m. at the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners boardroom, 220 N. Main, Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

These deals have been in the works for more than two years. The city has binding purchase agreements with the owners based on appraisals taken when land values were higher. New appraisals, required to get funds from a federal program, came in with much lower values. That means fewer-than-expected federal funds will be available, and the city would be required to come up with the difference.

Saying that Ann Arbor Township was their partner, Moran urged commissioners to support the purchase of development rights. He called the Braun farm a “poster child” for the township’s land preservation movement, and said it would be a significant error to reject the deal simply because of the new appraisals.

Later in the meeting, commissioners also got an update on committee work being done to help support small farms in the greenbelt.

Impact: Land Values, Delayed Application Approval

Problems with the Braun and Gould deals came up at the commission’s February 2010 meeting. From The Chronicle’s report:

New appraisals for two properties – the 286-acre Braun farm and 51 acres of Gould land, both in Ann Arbor Township – had been requested by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, or FRPP. The city is requesting FRPP funds to help pay for the purchase of development rights to those properties, but previous appraisals were more than a year old by the time the federal program accepted all of the application paperwork, according to Kohring. [The city council has already approved the purchases, but the deals haven't yet closed, pending FRPP funding.]

At its January meeting, the greenbelt commission had recommended that the city council authorize the new appraisals. On Wednesday, Kohring reported that the Braun farm, which originally appraised for just over $4 million, was now appraised at $2,107,500. For the Gould property, the appraisal was lowered from $691,000 to $385,000.

In response, the available FRPP funds dropped from $1.43 million for the Braun farm to just over $1 million, Kohring said. For the Gould land, FRPP funds fell from $256,000 to $192,500. To cover the difference, an additional $377,000 is needed for the Braun property, and an additional $63,500 for the Gould property – those costs could be split with Ann Arbor Township, if township officials agree, Kohring said. The city had previously committed to paying $1,363,500 for Braun and $269,000 for Gould.

Ginny Trocchio of The Conservation Fund said that the next steps would be to ask city council to approve the additional funds. It takes the FRPP between three months to a year to process the federal portion, she said, adding that she’s been told the FRPP would expedite this application because the deals need to close by Sept. 30, 2010.

Peter Allen asked what the implications would be if the commission postponed action until its next meeting. Trocchio said they’ve been working with the landowners since 2007, and both owners are “pretty antsy.”

Jennifer Hall confirmed with Trocchio and Kohring that the city had binding purchase agreements with the landowners. Allen said the commission was hearing for the first time that the financing contingency in the agreements wasn’t valid. “What we’re hearing tonight is the reverse of what we were told by the attorney at the last meeting,” he said, referring to Mary Fales from the city attorney’s office. He suggested scheduling another meeting – perhaps an emergency meeting – to bring back someone from the city attorney’s office to clarify the situation.

Fales attended the March 10 meeting, along with Sumedh Bahl, the city’s interim community services director. They joined the commissioners in a closed session that lasted over an hour.

Public Commentary

Just before going into closed session, commissioners heard from Ann Arbor Township supervisor Mike Moran, who spoke during the time set aside for public commentary. The Braun farm is a significant parcel, he said, noting that years ago it was the site of a proposed mobile home development – a project, called Colt Farms, that helped spur residents to mobilize and pass a land preservation millage, both in the township and for the city’s greenbelt.

Initially, Moran said resistance to the greenbelt program came from homebuilders, not surprisingly, but also from farmers. It’s taken a long time to build up significant credibility, he said. Now, however, farmers will take township officials at their word when approached about being part of the greenbelt. “Our word is our bond,” he said, and it’s very important to live up to their commitments.

Moran also expressed concern over the views of some commissioners whom he’d heard are reluctant to close on these deals at a time when the city is facing significant budget cuts. But the city can’t use greenbelt monies for other purposes, he noted, and if purchases aren’t made when land values are low, they won’t be making the best use of taxpayer dollars.

“I hope you’ll be strong in this regard,” Moran said.

He ended by saying that the township is a partner with the city in this matter and is ready “to do what needs to be done” to close the deal. “We will share with you those difficulties that have been occasioned by the delay of time,” he said.

Resolution of Support

About an hour and 20 minutes later, the commission returned from its closed session on attorney-client privileged communication about the land acquisition deal. Laura Rubin, the commission’s chair, said they’d discussed the two properties and had spent considerable time reviewing decisions that were made two years and four months ago. Back then, the properties had first been considered for the greenbelt and had received high scores on measurements used to evaluate potential acquisitions. Rubin said the commission was ready to consider a resolution related to the topic of the closed-session discussion.

Carsten Hohnke, who also represents Ward 5 on city council, said the commission had concluded that the new information they’d received didn’t impact their support for the deal. He moved a resolution stating that the commission “wishes to express its continued support of the acquisition of the Braun and Gould property development rights, in compliance with FRPP requirements and in partnership with Ann Arbor Township and the property owners.”

There was no further discussion.

Outcome: The resolution of support passed with no dissent. The matter will next be considered by city council at an upcoming meeting.

Supporting Small Farms: Working Out the Details

Dan Ezekiel gave an update on the commission’s small farms subcommittee. A recent meeting had included Ezekiel and fellow commissioner Tom Bloomer; Molly Notarianni, manager of the Ann Arbor Farmers Market; local farmers Tomm Becker and Shannon Brines; and Mike Moran and Ray Grew of Ann Arbor Township.

Ezekiel said they kicked around possible language for a conservation easement specifically for small farms. They used the boilerplate easement language required for the FRPP applications (U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Farm and Ranchland Protection Program), but considered how it could be adapted without some of the federal requirements. Ann Arbor Township is doing a lot of parallel work, Ezekiel said, and it was good to get their perspectives.

One issue they discussed was impervious surfaces. What would be a reasonable amount of temporary, impervious surface to accommodate hoop houses? The requirement should meet the needs of farmers, Ezekiel said, but also take into account the fact that neighbors probably don’t want to have a collection of hoop houses packed close together and covering the entire property.

They also discussed water needs and drainage issues, and whether the greenbelt program should play the role of “farm police” – that is, how closely should these properties be monitored? Should these small farms be required to submit annual reports? Ezekiel said everyone agreed that requiring a business plan was important. One of the fears is tied to the potential failure of the farm – what would happen to the property in that case? Would it just become someone’s nice yard that’s protected by taxpayer dollars?

Affordable housing was another issue they discussed, Ezekiel reported, including the idea of having housing on the land for an intern or apprentice farmer. What are some creative approaches to fund housing for small farms, and how might that be written into the easement agreement? [This issue was discussed at some length during the greenbelt commission's December 2009 meeting. See Chronicle coverage: "Greenbelt Explores Support for Small Farms: Federal housing grants could offer funding options"]

Ezekiel described the conversation as fruitful, saying it was good to have a lot of stakeholders involved. No decisions were made and it will be a continued discussion, he said, but they had made a lot of progress.

Present: Laura Rubin (chair), Jennifer Santi Hall (vice-chair), Mike Garfield, Peter Allen, Dan Ezekiel, Carsten Hohnke, Tom Bloomer, Catherine Riseng

Absent: Gil Omenn

Next meeting: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 at 4:30 p.m. at the Washtenaw County Board of Commissioners boardroom, 220 N. Main, Ann Arbor. [confirm date]