DDA board chair John Splitt (left) and Michael Ortlieb (right) of Carl Walker – the design firm that's handling the new Fifth Avenue underground parking structure. (Photo by the writer.)

Downtown Development Authority board meeting (Nov. 4, 2009): Measured in raw dollars, the major news coming out of the DDA‘s regular Wednesday meeting was the selection of The Christman Company as the construction manager for the Fifth Avenue underground parking garage.

Because the firm had already been awarded the pre-construction services contract, with the construction management contract to be contingent on performance during pre-construction, Christman’s probable selection was well known. The  dollar amount of Christman’s guaranteed maximum price is now also known to an exact figure: $44,381,573.

In other significant business, the board passed a resolution authorizing support of an initiative to increase the number of shelter spots for the homeless in the face of the coming winter – $20,000 for additional beds, to be paid for out of the DDA’s housing fund.

The board also passed a resolution that might resuscitate the LINK – the downtown circulator bus that did not resume service this fall after its usual summer hiatus. The resolution calls for a partnership with the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority to sort out what that service should look like. Michael Ford, AATA’s CEO, had alluded to these efforts in a side-remark during his presentation to the AATA board last week.  This resolution reflected those efforts.

Shelter Beds

In a presentation to the city council at its Oct. 19, 2009 meeting, Mary Jo Callan, director of the city/county office of community development, had outlined a strategy for increasing the sheltering capacity for homeless people this season. That strategy includes adding 25 beds to the Delonis Center and increasing the number of beds in the rotating warming center from 25 to 50.

In the resolution before the DDA board on Wednesday, $20,000 was proposed to be given as a grant to the Shelter Association of Washtenaw County, which operates the Delonis Center.

Deliberations were brief, with board member John Mouat getting clarification on the total number of beds the money would purchase and how they were categorized: 25 of the beds would be heavy-duty “cots” for the Delonis Center itself; 25 of them would be the set of “bedding” materials used in the rotating warming shelter, which is located at local churches.

Mayor John Hieftje explained that the initiative had come from a working group including himself, councilmembers, city/county staff, and other community members, which had been meeting over the last several weeks.

In support of the same initiative, the Ann Arbor city council will be asked at its Nov. 5 meeting to authorize an expenditure of $159,000 from the city’s housing trust fund, which will provide case management support and vouchers for family housing.

Outcome: The board unanimously approved $20,000 for beds to be used at the Delonis Center and the rotating shelter.

The LINK: “Not Just a Cute Purple Bus”

At the Ann Arbor Transporation Authority’s special meeting held last week  at Weber’s Inn, as AATA CEO Michael Ford added the LINK to a PowerPoint slide, he mentioned that there were some people interested in bringing back the downtown circulator bus service. [Previous Chronicle coverage: "No Funding for LINK bus ... For Now" and "AATA to Arborland: We Could Pay You Rent"]

Earlier in the year, the DDA did not renew the grant support that would have allowed the resumption of the LINK service in the fall after its usual summer hiatus.

The resolution before the DDA board on Wednesday expressed support for a partnership with the AATA “to develop the elements of a successful downtown Ann Arbor circulator in partnership with the DDA.” In presenting the resolution to his fellow board members, John Mouat, chair of the DDA’s transportation committee, reported that the resolution had come as a result of further study of the LINK by the transportation committee.

Mouat reported that the work of the DDA’s intern, Amber Miller, in researching examples of successful downtown circulators in other small cities had been useful to the committee. It had convinced the committee, he said, that such a thing was possible. He was also encouraged that Michael Ford and AATA’s director of service development, Chris White, attended the transportation committee meeting.

Among the features to be considered for the re-invented LINK, said Mouat, included:

• Don’t include the University of Michigan’s Oxford Housing on the route
• Reduce number of stops (to speed up the service)
• Route should help patrons get to South University, State, Main, and Kerrytown
• Locate stops to foster connectivity
• Offer 7-day service
• Consider special event use
• Consider use of service for integrating the UM campus into downtown

Board member Keith Orr, in expressing his support for the resolution, stressed that there was no funding component. The expectation from the AATA, Orr said, was that the AATA board would respond with a similar resolution. This would give the AATA staff the necessary confidence that boards of both organizations were in support of the service, Orr explained. Previously, the LINK was perceived partly as a downtown marketing tool more so than a piece of the transportation system, and the idea was to put the LINK squarely in the realm of transportation.

Board member Jennifer Hall suggested an amendment to the resolution that added a “Whereas” clause to make clear why the LINK did not re-appear in the fall: The board had not considered and declined a grant to continue funding, but rather had not appropriated a grant in order to continue study of the issue. She would later echo Orr’s emphasis on the role that the AATA needed to play in developing the LINK system going forward, stressing that it was a part of the transportation system as opposed to a downtown marketing program: “The LINK is not just a cute purple bus.”

Hall’s suggested amendment passed unanimously.

Board member Russ Collins suggested that the additional language might have been added as a friendly amendment, instead of taking a vote on it – a point that board chair John Splitt would later use for humorful effect.

Collins also observed that while the language that the transportation committee had chosen to describe the types of businesses served by the LINK included retail and restaurants, but not “arts and entertainment.” This was met with a chorus of playful ooooooh’s from his fellow board members – Collins is executive director of the Michigan Theater. Collins also put the LINK in the historical context of his recollection of 30 out of the last 50 years of downtown – there’d been a lot of attempts to implement downtown circulators, but they’d all failed due to lack of ridership.

Collins noted that the majority of the riders on the LINK before it was discontinued were affiliates of the University of Michigan and that this raised the question of where the money to fund its operations should come from.

Collins then returned to a theme he’s consistently emphasized over the last year in discussions on the LINK: The DDA itself is not a transportation authority, and design of the service should rely primarily on the expertise of transportation planners, not community discussion that could become politically co-opted. [See, for example, Chronicle coverage of a 2008 DDA retreat: "Trick or Retreat: DDA Board Plans Year"] At Wednesday’s meeting, Collins suggested that the board “let professionals, not amateurs, tell us what’s going to work.”

Collins asked how the resolution addressed his concern that the AATA should be responsible for planning the service. In response, Orr and Mouat pointed to the specific mention of the AATA’s expertise in the resolved clauses, and the transportation committee’s conscious choice not to include specification of routes in the resolution.

Collins suggested that the DDA board needed to steel itself for the calls they might get from business owners who wanted to know why the LINK did not to run past their business or stop in front of it.

Board member Leah Gunn then “called the question” – a procedural move to end deliberations and vote. The board voted in favor of Gunn’s motion, and was ready to vote on the resolution. Then Splitt noticed that Mayor John Hieftje had wanted to address the question. Splitt deferred to the mayor, who noted that there was a fair question of whether this was the best use of transportation dollars. Splitt then quipped that this was the last time he’d make an exception for the mayor on the procedural issue and that during his time as chair the board there would also be no friendly amendments to resolutions.

Outcome: The resolution expressing support for a DDA-AATA partnership on the LINK downtown circulator passed unanimously.

Underground Parking Structure Construction Manager

The Christman Company had previously been selected as the manager of pre-construction services for the underground parking garage to be constructed along South Fifth Avenue at the city-owned lot next to the downtown library. Based on performance during the pre-construction phase, Christman was to be awarded the contract for construction manager of the project.

Board member Roger Hewitt indicated that Christman had performed up to expectations on the pre-construction phase. The guaranteed maximum construction price of $44,381,573, he explained, included the fixed fees for Christmas determined during pre-construction, with all other work to be competitively bid.

The price summary provided in the board packet shows that the single most expensive component of the project is for structural concrete – almost $20 million worth. [.PDF file of Nov. 4, 2009 board packet.] This explains why the companies that bid for the construction manager job, but did not win the contract, are still following the project. With their own in-house concrete teams, they’ll be bidding for that $20 million worth of concrete work in a closed bid process against Christman, which is managing the project.

Board member Leah Gunn expressed her agreement with Hewitt on Christman’s performance.

Outcome: The resolution to award the construction manager contract and accept a guaranteed maximum price for the underground parking structure of $44,381,573 was approved by the board with dissent from Jennifer S. Hall.

Construction Updates

John Splitt reported out from the capital improvements committee on the Fifth and Division streetscape improvement project, as well as the underground parking structure. Brick is being laid along Division Street, which has gone slower than anticipated, but is catching up. Water main work is taking place at the intersection of Division and Liberty, but is expected to be completed by the end of the week, Splitt reported.

DTE and AT&T were moving utilities for the underground parking garage. Some of the easements were still being worked out, but work was moving ahead, Splitt said.

The wayfinding sign project continues, as does tweaking of those signs, Splitt said. The first of the signs that needed approval by the Michigan Department of Transportation have been installed, reported Susan Pollay, executive director of the DDA. Those are located on Jackson Road near Westgate. “You are here” maps for the information stations will arrive shortly. Splitt said that the tweaking and corrections would be implemented when installation of all the signs was completed, so that it could be treated as one unified process.

Energy Grants

Board member Sandi Smith, who’s also on city council, reported out from the partnerships committee on the energy grant program. The program, now in its second year, provides support for property owners downtown to have their buildings audited and to implement improvements. Phase I is the audit, while Phase II is the implementation. This year, 50 applications for Phase I have been received, reported Smith, which included 692,000 square feet of space. Those applications were all approved.

Parking and Finances

Roger Hewitt, chair of the operations committee, reported nothing unusual from the first-quarter’s finances. He pointed out explanations for some apparent discrepancies, including direct parking expenses that were already at 44% of their budgeted amount. That’s because the DDA has already made the $2 million payment to the city as part of its agreement with the city to manage the parking system.

The DDA and the city face coming negotiations over that agreemeent, which has been the subject of considerable controversy. [Chronicle search results of articles on that subject.]. Smith reported that there was nothing to report from the committee charged with the task of negotiating that agreement – the “mutually beneficial committee.”

The parking system continues to show increased demand, reported Hewitt. Compared to the first quarter from last year, there was a 8.13% increase in revenues and a 23.08% increase in the number of hourly patrons. Mayor John Hieftje joked that the data should be sent to Lansing and Washington D.C. as a leading indicator showing signs of a recovery.

Board members Smith and Jennifer Hall asked for future parking data reports to include information on specific events and the number of spaces in each structure and lot, so that changes in the numbers could be more easily understood.Hewitt indicated that he’d see what he could come up with.

Russ Collins said that as the board’s new treasurer, he’d be looking at ways to condense the financial information that was presented at the whole board level in order to facilitate greater clarity. The details, he said, would still be available, or course, to any board member or member of the public, and attendance at the operations committee meetings was open as well.

Other Business

Board member Russ Collins, reporting out from the partnerships committee, said that two requests for grants had been put off for now, but not rejected. One was from the Near North affordable housing development in which Avalon Housing is a partner. The other was from the Arts Alliance, which is seeking support for development of a web portal. The idea of the web portal was pitched to the whole board at its October meeting by the alliance’s president, Tamara Real.

From the transportation committee, John Mouat presented a table reflecting the committee’s work of identifying high-impact, low-cost strategies for improving the quality of the pedestrian experience downtown. This was met with particular enthusiasm from Russ Collins. Among the items identified was “minimize sidewalk obstructions, including café tables/chairs, no bike riding on sidewalks.”

Public Comment

Ray Detter: Detter gave his monthly update from the meeting of the Downtown Area Citizens Advisory Council, touching on two main points: (i) the A2D2 rezoning effort, and (ii) the Downtown Ann Arbor Historic Street Exhibit Program. With respect to the first of these, Detter said that there were 14 representatives from 8 different downtown neighborhood associations that had been meeting every Monday focused on the design guidelines that would be proposed, and providing feedback to the city council as quickly as they could. They were advocating for a mandatory process with voluntary compliance initially, which could perhaps evolve to a mandatory compliance system.

Later in the meeting, DDA board member Roger Hewitt, who’s a member of the A2D2 steering committee, would indicate that city council action on A2D2 was anticipated at its Nov. 16 meeting. The steering committee would be meeting on Nov. 19 to discuss where they should go from here.

The street exhibit program, Detter said, had begun with a $50,000 grant from the DDA, and had grown to a $1 million project funded largely through private sources. It serves to activate downtown and give it a sense of identity, Detter said. He reported that 200 students from Skyline High School had been brought to downtown Ann Arbor and run through tours using the street exhibits, and that this represented 200 students who are now connected to the downtown.

Alan Haber: Haber introduced himself as an Ann Arbor resident who lived on Third Street who was involved with a group of people developing a proposal for the top of the underground parking garage. [The city of Ann Arbor has issued a request for proposals (RFP) for the lot.] He was there, he said, mostly to say hello and to encourage the DDA board to give his group’s proposal some thought. That proposal was not for dense development, but rather for a community gathering place – a “front porch” for Ann Arbor. He said the group’s focus was on development of community, not development of buildings.

Present: Gary Boren, Jennifer Hall, Roger Hewitt, John Hieftje, John Splitt, Sandi Smith, Leah Gunn, Russ Collins, Keith Orr, Joan Lowenstein, John Mouat.

Absent: Newcombe Clark.

Next board meeting: Noon on Wednesday, Dec. 2, at the DDA offices, 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301. [confirm date]

Map of the previous LINK connector service in downtown Ann Arbor

Downtown Development Authority board meeting (June 3, 2009): The start to Wednesday’s DDA board meeting paralleled the beginning of its recent retreat two weeks ago – the board met in closed session with their legal counsel to discuss pending litigation over the Fifth Avenue underground parking garage. Board chair Jennifer Hall recused herself from the session, as she had at the retreat’s closed session.

Later in the meeting, she removed herself from the DDA’s “mutually beneficial” committee, appointing board member Russ Collins to take her place. More on that after the jump.

In other board business, the theme of the balance between university and city funding responsibilities was reflected in board consideration of two transportation-related issues: (i) a feasibility study for a north-south connector service along the Plymouth-State Street corridor, and (ii) the LINK circulator buses – familiar to some downtown visitors as simply “the purple buses.”  The board approved an $80,000 contribution for the north-south connector, but did not renew the grant – last year around $70,000 – that funds the LINK. The LINK is ordinarily suspended during summer months, but the lack of DDA grant renewal likely means that in the fall the purple buses will re-appear only on their eastern UM loop.

Further, a $12,000 evaluation of the getDowntown program was approved, budget amendments were made to reflect allocations already approved, and a resolution was passed approving final recommendations to city council for the A2D2 rezoning package. The board also heard updates on the DDA’s website and data policy, the Fifth & Division streetscape improvements project, the underground parking garage, and the valet parking service. The valet service has been suspended for the summer after the pilot showed less-than-successful results through the first five months of the year.

Closed Session, the Mutually Beneficial Committee, Underground Parking Structure

At the start of the meeting when the roll call vote was taken to go into closed session, board chair Jennifer Hall indicated that the DDA board’s legal counsel had advised that there was no reason that compelled her to recuse herself from the closed session. She had chosen to do so, she explained, in order to afford her colleagues the ability to discuss the issues with frankness and candor. The closed session related to a letter of notification that her husband, Noah Hall, had sent on behalf of the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center and other nonprofits, which raised the possibility of an environmental lawsuit over the Fifth Avenue underground parking structure.

Later in the meeting after the board had come back from its closed session, Rene Greff reported that the committee to discuss a mutually beneficial financial agreement with city council had not met since the last board meeting. The DDA had formed that committee in response to the city council’s request that the DDA begin discussions to renegotiate the city-DDA parking agreement. The outcome of those conversations expected by the city is that an additional $2 million payment will be made by the DDA to the city – an expectation reflected in the city’s budget plan for FY 2011. At the DDA’s recent retreat, Mayor John Hieftje had cited Hall’s membership on that committee as one barrier  to the city council’s willingness up to now to seat a committee of its own.

The other barrier cited by Hieftje at the retreat – the membership of Rene Greff on the DDA’s committtee – will soon be eliminated as well: Greff told The Chronicle after the board meeting that Hieftje had informed her he had now decided not to reappoint her to the board when her term expires on July 31, 2009.

At the conclusion of Greff’s brief report on the committee’s activity, board chair Jennifer Hall, who as of the start of Wednesday’s board meeting also served on that committee, delivered what could fairly be described as a lambasting of some of the other board members.

She rejected the description that there was an “cloud over [her] head” – made by Hieftje at the recent retreat – as an overstatement. She clarified that her husband, Noah Hall, is not currently filing a lawsuit against the city, but rather is a volunteer executive director for the nonprofit Great Lakes Environmental Law Center, and as such, was performing pro bono work for a variety of other nonprofit groups who had concerns about the environmental impact of the proposed underground parking garage along Fifth Avenue.

Just as it would have been inappropriate for her to try to dissuade him from providing those services, Hall said, it was improper for the city council to hold off from appointing a committee to begin the discussions between the DDA and the city. She allowed that the situation was “awkward,” but stressed that there was no conflict of interest on her part. She also characterized the assumption behind the city council’s reluctance to begin the discussions as sexist – that assumption being that she was not able to formulate opinions that were separate and distinct from her husband’s.

Hall also rejected the notion that her commitment to the DDA board was suspect, characterizing her loyalty to the DDA board as “unwavering.”

She then announced that she would replace herself on the committee in order to remove herself as an obstacle – which Hieftje had cited at the board’s retreat – to the city council’s creating its own committee to begin the negotiations. She expressed the expectation that city council would now seat its own committee without further delay.

Based on the report from the capital improvements committee, which came later in the meeting, the potential lawsuit is not causing a delay in pre-construction activities for the Fifth Avenue underground parking project. John Splitt, reporting to the whole board for that committee, said that detailed drawings were expected on the Fifth Avenue underground parking garage at their next committee meeting. The committee would be having some conversations with the Ann Arbor municipal airport about soil relocation, he said. There was concern that the sheer volume of soil could affect the airport’s storm water retention plan, Splitt allowed, but it was still very much on the table to be able to use the airport as a place to put the dirt from the underground parking garage. Splitt suggested that excavation could start possibly in September.

As a part of the same report for the capital improvements committee, Splitt said that the Fifth & Division streetscape improvements project was awaiting Michigan Department of Transportation permits. The streetscape improvements are being coordinated with the underground parking structure. When the permitting was done the bids could be opened, Splitt said. He was hoping to be able to open bids by June 30, 2009 with a start to the project planned immediately following the art fairs in mid-July.

North-South Connector

Two different transportation topics were related thematically by the relative roles that city entities play in funding them, as compared to the University of Michigan.

The DDA board considered a resolution that came out of its transportation committee to fund a feasibility study for a north-south connector running along the Plymouth Road and State Street corridors. Previously the board had approved a $50,000 contribution to the project. The resolution they considered raised that amount to $80,000. Since the fall of 2008, discussions about the appropriate amount to be contributed by each of four partners on the project have taken place in a context of a total price first estimated at $250,000, which then climbed to more than double that figure when initial bids came back.

The four partners on the study are the DDA, the city of Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, and UM. In deliberations, board member Roger Hewitt alluded to the relatively long time frame of the discussion, and stated that he supported the resolution. He pointed out that there were a number of deliverables attached to the resolution that he felt should allay some of the concerns others might have. Those deliverables include a “fatal flaw analysis” as well as ridership and demand forecasting. The latter is expected to show that the primary ridership will be members of the UM community, which is also the pattern with the LINK downtown bus circulator. [board packet with deliverables specified]

Board member Sandi Smith, who is also a city councilmember, allowed that the specificity of the deliverables was good, but that she had a problem providing support for a project that was essentially going to be a “U of M trolley.” She said she understood that the route was not completely determined, but she had some hesitancy, still. She stressed that if the feasibility study indicated that 70% of the ridership would come from the University of Michigan community, then the cost of construction should reflect that.

Rene Greff echoed Smith’s sentiments, saying that the university had enough money to fund the study by themselves. She said that she was willing to support funding the study but stressed that there should not be an expectation in the long-term for a corresponding level for participation in the system’s construction.

For her part, board member Leah Gunn offered the perspective that the University of Michigan was the major economic engine of the city and indeed of the state. She said that just because someone attends the university or works there, it doesn’t mean they’re not part of the community. The project benefits the university, thus benefits the community as well, she said.

Hieftje indicated that the city had “not held back in making clear that the University of Michigan would need to step up.” He suggested that there would be an advantage, though, in being the entity that applied for federal grant dollars, or at least making an application in concert with the university going forward.

Outcome: The resolution to fund the north-south feasibility study for $80,000 passed unanimously.

The LINK

A second transportation-related topic at the meeting that reflects the issue of  UM-city balance of funding was the LINK. The LINK  is a circulator (purple) bus service, provided free to passengers, with two major loops – one in the center of downtown Ann Arbor, and the other southeast of the University of Michigan central campus. It doesn’t operate during the summer months. Its funding depends on a collaboration between the AATA, UM and the DDA.

The DDA did not have a resolution before it to fund the LINK, which would normally resume in fall 2009 – and without a resolution the portion of the LINK funded by the DDA will not be restored. During board member John Mouat’s report from the transportation committee, the board deliberated on the LINK question. Those deliberations took place in the context of the public comment made by Thomas Partridge at the start of the meeting.

Thomas Partridge: Partridge introduced himself to the board as a recent Democratic candidate in the 18th Senate District of the state of Michigan as well as the 52nd District of the House of Representatives. He described his interests as concerning not just the DDA district but rather the whole city of Ann Arbor, the county of Washtenaw, and the entire state of Michigan. In reference to the north-south connector study that was on the board’s agenda, Partridge encouraged the DDA to enlist University of Michigan students to conduct studies for them at a much lower cost than consultants. He also encouraged the board to not use studies as a stumbling block to real progress. He asked the board to pass a resolution that day to provide dial-a-ride transportation service in the city of Ann Arbor plus the surrounding areas. He suggested combining revenues of the Ann Arbor DDA with other DDAs in the entire metropolitan area for a united DDA effort. He said that he had attended an Ann Arbor Transportation Authority planning and development committee meeting just prior to coming to the DDA board meeting, and that Chris White, the AATA director of service development, had indicated that the LINK – a downtown circulator bus service – “would be squashed.” Partridge urged that the LINK not be squashed but rather modified and strengthened.

Deliberations by the board on the LINK

Reporting out from the transportation committee, John Mouat summarized the committee’s six-month long exploration of the LINK connector service downtown and announced that they were, at this point, reluctant to continue DDA funding for that service. He said that a decision needed to be made by June to renew the grant that would restore service to the DDA portion of the twin-loop system in the fall. [The LINK goes on a seasonal summer hiatus.] Susan Pollay, the DDA’s executive director, indicated that the board was right up against the deadline.

Sandi Smith said that she didn’t think the idea for a circulator was completely gone, it just didn’t seem like a good idea to keep funding it in the current form. Roger Hewitt said he’d been involved with the LINK since its inception, and that the service was not accomplishing what they had set out to do. He said he was reluctant to see it end completely, but that the conceptual plan needed be thought out for all of downtown. Leah Gunn said that she very much liked the idea of the LINK but that she never took it – she found that she could get to where she needed to go by walking. John Mouat picked up on that walkability theme, saying that the scale of downtown Ann Arbor was actually small enough that in most cases it was quite walkable. For point-to-point service, the AATA did a good job with that, he said.

Thomas Partridge, who walks with the aid of the crutch, interjected from the audience with a question about whether a senior could get service across town, but was told he was out of order and there would be time at the end for additional public commentary.

John Hieftje said he was hearing that the east-west commuter rail demonstration [Ann Arbor-Detroit] would be implemented by October 2010, which meant that a reconfiguration of the LINK routes would be necessary anyway. On rainy days, he allowed, the LINK was great but on other days it was pretty easy to walk.

The several-month long review of the LINK by the transportation committee was influenced in part by the disproportionate amount of ridership on the service by UM students.

A LINK ridership survey conducted in March 2008 on board LINK buses revealed that nearly 77% of LINK rider were UM students at the time they were surveyed. However, only 41% of riders described the purpose of the trip as for school. The breakdown for LINK usage was as follows:

work              11.1%
school            40.8%
get food          15.3%
medical             .5%
shopping           5.0%
entertainment     20.0%
personal business  8.4%
other              8.7%

-

That survey question was answered by 380 people. The survey also showed that there was not great satisfaction with on-time performance with LINK buses. On a scale from 1-7 with 1 being very dissatisfied, 4 “medium”and 7 “very satisfied,” of those surveyed 14.5% said they were very dissatisfied, with a total of 46% expressing a satisfaction level less than medium. Frequency of service also did not rate high: 32% rated frequency of service at a level less than medium.

A breakdown of the cost of service funding for the LINK circulator from September 2008 to April 2009 is as follows:

$145,385  University of Michigan
$131,267  State operating assistance
$ 10,000  AATA advertising revenues
$ 71,023  AATA operating subsidy
$ 71,023  Downtown Development Authority
-

getDowntown

A resolution to allocate $12,000 for the evaluation of the getDowntown program passed unanimously and with little discussion.

Bonnie Valentine: During public commentary at the start of the meeting, Valentine addressed the board as a recent participant in the getDowntown program’s commuter challenge during the month of May. Valentine indicated that she worked with the Whole Brain Group, which is located in the same building as the DDA but on a lower floor. Valentine said it was an interesting experience last year when she had participated in the commuter challenge and started taking the bus. She said that in her neighborhood as her neighbors watched her either waiting for the bus or walking to the bus stop, she had been offered rides in their cars. So she had taken the opportunity to try to be an advocate in her neighborhood for taking the bus. What the getDowntown program supported, Valentine said, was making a difference one person at a time. She told the board they should approve the $12,000 evaluation of the getDowntown program that was on their agenda for that day and that they should put even more effort towards that program.

Data and Public Relations

Reporting out from the partnerships committee, co-chair Russ Collins gave an update on progress towards a data policy and website updates that a subcommittee was making [Rene Greff, Keith Orr, Gary Boren, Jennifer Hall]. The board packet for each meeting, said Collins, was now available online. Previously only the agenda and specific resolutions had been available.

Rene Greff gave a report out from the ad hoc communications committee. She said the committee had met with Trek Glowacki and Catherine Hayes. Glowacki is an independent computer programmer, and Hayes works with Inner Circle Media, which maintains the DDA’s website. Greff said the DDA could do a much better job of telling its story.

They identified several goals. Among them were better public relations, better transparency, better community engagement, internal data management, and encouragement of downtown redevelopment. One specific project she suggested was some kind of calendar, plus use of existing social networking strategies. Greff said that Inner Circle Media would be working on a way to rotate a feature through the front page of the website – right now the featured item is parking, which feeds the notion that the only thing the DDA does its parking.

Greff also indicated that the ad hoc committee was working on a job description for a communications position. Such a position would not be conceived as a job to push press releases out, but rather to act as a communications liaison – someone to be the face and voice of the DDA.

Miscellaneous

Transportation demand management: Roger Hewitt announced that the installation of the new E-Park kiosks, which will be replacing the conventional meters, would begin around June 15. He announced that the valet parking service – a pilot program started in mid-December 2008 at the Maynard parking structure – had not been successful at this point. In light of the lack of success, Hewitt said that rather than continue to operate at a significant loss through the summer, it would be temporarily discontinued for that period. Hewitt explained that the Maynard parking structure is not heavily used in summer, anyway. With respect to the transportation demand management measures, Hewitt said that in many cases the systems were being developed from scratch because in many respects the parking industry had not yet developed the technology. “It’s not like we can just copy it, because it hasn’t been done elsewhere.”

Wayfinding: John Splitt, reporting out from the capital improvements committee, said the wayfinding project now had a contractor. Susan Pollay indicated that the first wayfinding sign might be expected sometime before the end of August.

Budget amendments: The board passed a series of budget amendments to reflect actions and appropriations that they had taken a earlier in the year. One major difference involved $700,000 extra to cover the cost of the DDA’s contribution to the city’s police-court facility and its LEED certification. Another application that needed to be accounted for in the budget amendments was a grant for Avalon Housing that had not been in the original budget.

Development: Russ Collins also said that in their committee meeting there had been a lively discussion about areas owned by private concerns. As an example, he gave the Brown Block, which is owned by First Martin Corp. and is bounded by Huron, Ashley, and First streets. Currently there is a surface parking lot there, said Collins, but at some point the developer will want to put up a building. He suggested there should be some community dialogue to encourage the sort of development that people would like to see.

Connected thematically to that discussion is the resolution passed by the DDA board at its March 4, 2009 meeting expressing the readiness of the DDA to make resources available to facilitate community-wide discussion on the question of “what goes on top” of the Fifth Avenue underground parking structure. At the city council’s June 1, 2009 meeting, Sandi Smith – who serves on the DDA board as well as city council – alerted her city council colleagues to the fact that she’d be introducing a resolution at the June 15 meeting calling for a request for qualifications for the parcel on Fifth Avenue under which the underground parking garage would be built.

415 W. Washington: In reporting on the 415 W. Washington request for proposals, John Mouat called on city planner Wendy Rampson, who was present in the audience, to give an update. Rampson indicated that the city had not moved forward yet on developing the revised RFP due largely to issues of timing with respect to the poor economy.

Parking report: Summarizing the April 2009′s parking usage for the operations committee, Roger Hewitt reported that revenues were up by 1% compared to April 2008. The number of hourly patrons was up significantly, he said. The demand for parking, Hewitt said, continues to be consistent after being somewhat flat for a few months. He concluded that it was a testament to the strength and attraction of downtown Ann Arbor.

Energy grant program: Reporting for the partnerships committee, Collins said that there had been some consideration of providing separate support to performing arts organizations, but that ultimately they had backed away from that approach except to offer such organizations a 75% match in the context of the DDA’s energy-saving grant program. Other organizations receive a 50% match.

A2D2 zoning recommendations: The DDA board considered a resolution to give its recommendation on the final A2D2 rezoning package. The resolution was a response to various changes that the Ann Arbor city council had undertaken to the initial package. Some of the recommendations made by the DDA board were made in response to the specific implementation of a height limit [180 feet for most of the downtown area, and 150 feet in other parts.] Those recommendations increased the amount of floor-area-ratio that could be built “by right.” Sandi Smith raised the question of whether the recommended changes by the DDA board, if implemented by the city council, would require that the package be sent back to planning commission.

Wendy Rampson said she had met with the A2D2 oversight committee and that they were aware of the recommended changes. Whether or not the package would need to go back to planning commission or would need to be reset to have an additional first reading was not yet clear. The city attorney’s office was looking at the issue, Rampson said. Hieftje offered that he was not worried if the package needed to go back to planning commission or was delayed at council because there were not a lot of petitions coming before the city at this time.

A2D2 design guidelines: Roger Hewitt gave an update on the A2D2 design guidelines process. He said that the next day the A2D2 committee would be having a phone conference with the consultant on the project and that it was still the plan to be able to present the design guidelines component of the A2D2 project to Ann Arbor’s city council by September 2009.

Public art: Leah Gunn gave a report on the joint meeting between the Ann Arbor Public Art Commission and some members of the DDA. The Chronicle will report separately on that meeting. Summarizing, Gunn said that one concern on the part of the DDA was that a lot of time and money was being spent on administrative issues instead of on the art itself. She said she had a personal interest in addressing the issue of some relief panels on the Fourth & Washington parking structure, which had been placed there in honor of Reuben Bergman, former head of the DDA.

Audience participation

Ray Detter: Detter made four points: (i) He encouraged people to come to his party that day, which started at 6:30 p.m. (ii) The downtown area citizens advisory council had received copies of the most recent downtown plan adopted by the planning commission, and had given its unanimous support for adoption of the downtown plan. (iii) Detter indicated that the placement of parking meters in residential neighborhoods near to the downtown was something the citizens advisory council opposed. Instead, Detter said, there should be a residential permit parking system implemented for all neighborhoods that did not currently have them. He also encouraged a comprehensive approach to the issue of parking meters, suggesting that the city and the DDA needed to cooperate on this issue. (iv) Detter reminded the DDA board of the situation at the Courthouse Square apartment building. It was not the first time that Detter had spoken on the issue with the DDA board. He said that three residents of Courthouse Square had attended the meeting of the citizens advisory council the previous evening. From those three, the council had learned that in less than two years the owners of the building intended to sell it. Detter indicated that the number of police reports filed from Courthouse Square during the period May 2008 to May 2009 was 26 compared to 14 reports filed in the previous year. The number of phone calls had increased during the same period from 190 to 270.

LuAnne Bullington: Bullington introduced herself as a transportation advocate. Alluding to Hieftje’s remarks about the demonstration east-west rail project being online by October 2010, she said the mayor was right. She said that the timeframe could be accounted for by the November elections. She suggested that if the rail system was not put in place before the November 2010 elections, there was a risk that after the elections there would be less political support for the project than now. She expressed concern that there may be a way to finance the construction of the rail system, but not to actually operate it. She pointed out that rail is the most expensive way and also the most inflexible way to provide mass transit. She also expressed concern that running a rail system into the city of Ann Arbor would be an intrusion to the neighborhoods.

Thomas Partridge: At the conclusion of the meeting, there was a brief uncertainty as to whether it was allowed under the DDA board rules for someone to speak twice during public commentary – at the start of the meeting and at the conclusion. From the audience, Steve Bean indicated that he had on past occasions spoken twice. In any event, Partridge was given an additional turn. He said he was there to challenge conventional thinking by the DDA as he had challenged the conventional thinking of the Ann Arbor city council and Washtenaw County board of commissioners, and the state-level government. He said that changing conventional thinking started with integrity, and called on the board to dissolve itself and then reconstitute itself with an ethics code that would disallow elected officials to serve on the board, because it represented a prima facie conflict of interest. He pointed to Sandi Smith, Leah Gunn (who is a county commissioner), and John Hieftje as examples. [Editor's note: The enabling legislation for DDAs calls for one seat on the board to be assigned to either the mayor or the city administrator.] The votes that these individuals had participated in on behalf of the DDA, Partridge contended, should be challenged in circuit court. He noted that there was no seat on the board for a senior citizen or a disabled person. He also suggested that there should not be a free lunch served to board members at their meetings.

Present: Gary Boren, Rene Greff, Jennifer Hall, Roger Hewitt, John Hieftje, Joan Lowenstein, John Mouat,  John Splitt, Sandi Smith, Leah Gunn, Russ Collins

Absent: Keith Orr

Next board meeting: Noon on Wednesday, July 1 at the DDA offices, 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301. [confirm date]

The chair of the committee, John Mouat, had hoped to focus on sketching out a general strategy for how the committee would approach its work on this fairly broad topic – one that ranges from the ways that various transportation systems in southeast Michigan interconnect to the clearing of snow from a particular stretch of sidewalk. But that plan had to be balanced with the need to discuss two specific resolutions coming before the whole board at its next meeting on Dec. 3.

The first of these resolutions involves a $110,000 increase from $50,000 to $160,000 in the amount of money authorized for a north-south high-capacity connector study. The connector would run generally along the Plymouth Road and State Street corridors. The study is to be funded in a four-way partnership of the DDA with the AATA, the city of Ann Arbor, and UM. As The Chronicle reported, at its last board meeting the AATA had authorized an increase of its contribution from $100,000 to $160,000. And at the DDA transportation committee meeting, board member Roger Hewitt indicated that the city of Ann Arbor and UM had confirmed the same $50,000 to $160,000 increase that the DDA was being asked to consider.

Hewitt has been representing the DDA in discussions about the project with the other three partners. Some initial questions for Hewitt from fellow committee members about the funding increase included: (i) Why is AATA not maintaining its same proportionate share in the study’s new $640,000 budget as it had for the originally estimated $250,000? (ii) Why is there such a dramatic increase in the total budget for the study? (iii) What function does the study serve in the context of actually building something?

Hewitt explained that the AATA had been tapping federal dollars for its increased proportion of the funding. And the original estimate of $250,000 (which proved to represent a gross underfunding of the study based on the three different bids that were received) was too low, said Hewitt, in part because the number of such studies commissioned nationwide has increased, thus increasing demand for this type of consulting service. Despite its expense, this study is necessary in order to meet one of two main criteria for future federal grants – an alternatives analysis. The other criterion is an environmental impact study.

For the DDA’s part, their resolution for funding specifies a request that the following issues be addressed:

• What is the estimated number and type of downtown workers who will use this future Connector? What is the estimated percentage use by downtown workers/visitors, UM faculty/staff/students, other users?
• Why would a downtown worker use this Connector rather than a single-occupancy vehicle and/or the existing bus system?
• What is the optimal course through the downtown portion of its route to maximize its attractiveness to downtown users and transit connections? For instance, would Fifth Avenue or Fourth Avenue be the best route for the Connector to utilize?
• What are the various transportation modes the Connector could use in addition to a trolley?

Board member Sandi Smith expressed her reluctance to the DDA spending an additional $110,000 to determine if the ridership might involve people in the downtown area. Board member Rene Greff echoed the same kind of concerns. Mouat speculated that the study would go forward, even without the DDA’s additional contribution (with any shortfall made up by UM), but wondered about the political cost of failing to “be a good partner,” as well as the practical consequence of having an equitable share in the project if it is built. Smith ventured that “when you’re a good partner, it goes unnoticed, but if you’re a bad partner, then people definitely notice.”

Hewitt said he was enthusiastic about the possibility of streetcars, but not necessarily the study. He expressed his willingness to have paid DDA staff or additional board members supplement or substitute for his own participation in the discussions with the other partners.

Greff shifted attention away from the total price tag of the study to the DDA’s share by reflecting on whether she would be willing to pay $160,000 to find out why people drive into the downtown as opposed to using some other mode, where they’re coming from, what they’re doing downtown, where they go after leaving. That, she said, she might be willing to consider funding. Greff’s remarks provided an opportunity for Smith to shift gears and ask if it might be possible to contribute an extra amount of money in order for the study to address DDA-specific concerns. Hewitt said that should be possible, based on the example that UM was paying extra, above and beyond the basic study, for analysis of their faculty, staff and student movements between north campus and central campus.

The Chronicle was not able to stay until the end of the committee meeting, during which time it appeared that a second transportation-related resolution would be discussed, which is to come before the whole board at its Dec. 3 meeting. That resolution is for an additional $18,000 of funding for a Zipcar sponsorship that will increase the number of Zipcars stationed downtown from three to four, so that two pods of two Zipcars each can be established. The thought is that two stations will increase a sense of confidence among potential users that a car will be available when they need one. The $18,000 comes in addition to $64,000 approved in May for Zipcar sponsorship ($54,000 for guaranteed revenue to Zipcar up to $1,500 a month and $10,000 for marketing and promotion).

The marketing and promotion of Zipcars is being handled jointly by the DDA and the getDowntown program. The getDowntown program was a frequent topic of discussion during the transportation committee’s first meeting, often in the form of the desire of the committee to invite a guest from the transportation community every month to talk to the group as part of an ongoing learning exercise for the committee. The getDowntown program’s coordinater, Nancy Shore, was identified as the first of the guests to be invited, because of her primary connection to the go!pass program and her secondary connection (as a liaison to the AATA) for The Link. They intend to ask her: (i) What’s working? (ii) What isn’t working? (iii) What do you need to make the programs work?

Those two programs (a bus pass program for downtown workers and downtown circulator buses) had been identified at the DDA annual retreat as part of an outcomes analysis of current transportation investments that needed to be undertaken. At the committee meeting, Hewitt said he wanted to know what the DDA’s funding of the go!pass program was actually accomplishing: subsidizing people who would ride the bus anyway (something he said he was not necessarily against), or causing people to ride the bus instead of driving their cars.

With respect to The Link, there was general agreement that the DDA needed to take an active role in determining what it wanted The Link to accomplish, instead of just writing a check to the AATA. Smith stressed that historically it was the DDA that had requested that the AATA develop a downtown circulator bus service and that there needed to be follow-through by the DDA on making that service accomplish the DDA’s goals. Greff confirmed that what had happened historically was that the AATA had proposed routing that would essentially have run the The Link between Main and State Streets, but that input from various downtown constituencies had led to stretching the route to include Kerrytown, South University, all the way to Oxford Housing, which has had a negative impact on timeliness of service.

Board member Joan Lowenstein said that she rides The Link every day, and that “you might as well cover up those signs with the schedule,” because the buses are rarely on time. Lowenstein reported anecdotally that when she’s asked the drivers of The Link buses what they would change to help matters, they pointed out that most of the current vehicles have only one door – which results in loading and unloading times of 3-4 minutes a stop if there are 20 or more students on the bus.

In addition to Shore, the transportation committee plans to invite as guests to future meetings: Jonathan Levine (Academic Program Chair and Professor of Urban Planning), Norm Cox (Greenway Collaborative), Chris White (manager of service development for AATA), among others. With respect to the issues they discuss, each guest will be asked: What do you think the role of the DDA should be?

Present: Rene Greff, Roger Hewitt, Joan Lowenstein, John Mouat, Sandi Smith.
Not present: Jennifer Hall, Keith Orr.

Next meeting: The DDA transportation committee is tentatively scheduled to meet on Dec. 31 at 9 a.m. at the DDA offices, 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301.

Farewell, 408 – The Link diesels on down Church Street.

I’ll admit – I’m not a regular rider of those purple buses that circle downtown Ann Arbor. In fact, this summer when I thought, “Hey – I’ll ride The Link!” I was revealed to be an idiot, unaware that the fleet went on haitus as soon as UM students dispersed. (Even though AATA posted signs to that effect at each stop. When you aren’t looking, you don’t see.)

Now, like the students, The Link is back. So when I set off for a chat with Ken Nisbet of UM’s Office of Technology Transfer, which sits above the Starbucks on South University, I decided to grab a free ride.

Free is nice. Waiting, not so much – or so I thought. The closest stop to my home was on Ashley near Washington, right next to Sweetwaters. I’d looked online before leaving, but the schedule (oriented sideways, as though someone just scanned in a brochure) didn’t give specific times for that spot, so I guessed.

It turns out that part of the beauty of waiting for a bus is that you’re stationary, and have nothing to do but look and see what’s happening around you. It gives you an excuse to stop, stand, and watch, without passersby thinking, “Uh oh – I spot a crazy lady.”

Not that anything momentous happened. Students working on their laptops at Sweetwaters. A woman pushing a stroller cradling a sleeping baby, slowing down to peer in the window of the Mitchell Gold furniture store. A couple of suits striding on their way to Somewhere Important, Bluetooth enabled.

And a mailman! My stop was a few feet from one of those army-green mailboxes that serve as drop stations for carriers, and the guy who does that route – let’s call him Frank – was picking up another batch of letters to deliver.

Retro mailman graffiti on the drop box at Ashley and Washington.

I made some inane comment about all the crap affixed, painted and scrawled (“NEATO”) on the rusted metal. “Yeah, they used to paint them every once in a while,” Frank said, referring to higher-ups at USPS. “I think they finally threw in towel.”

Then he smiled. “They did leave me a nice mailman, though.” The “they” in this case meant a graffiti artist, and when he closed the door to the mailbox, indeed, there was a lovely retro image of a mail carrier, sharply dressed, even wearing an official-looking cap. True, someone had scratched “GAY” on the cap, but that just added to the whole weird-yet-fitting incongruity.

And then my bus arrived.

I was the only passenger. The driver attributed this to the time of day. “Right now, in the middle of the day, people are mostly at lunch,” she said.

Still, it’s like sitting in an empty movie theatre – you really would like some company. And you’d like to refute the fairly common anecdotal claim that the city is blowing money driving around empty buses all day.

So I was glad to see two more people at the next stop, the Ann Ashley parking structure, and from there riders got on and off at almost every stop. Everyone was engrossed in their own thing – iPod plugs in their ears, books to read, companions to chat with. I watched out the window: Construction workers milling around in the closed-off section of Liberty; a banner hung over the door of the soon-to-open Chipotle Mexican Grill at State, “Burrito-fication In Progress”; several near-misses as cars squirted past oblivious pedestrians.

I’d worried about the time, but it was a quick ride, despite the frequent stops. And it’s not that far – a longish walk. At stop J on Church Street, just north of South U, I said good-bye to the driver and disembarked.

I don’t ride the bus often enough. When I do, I’m reminded of why I should. It’s easy to talk about the abstract concept of community, but what does that mean? In part, it means building a set of shared experiences. I see you dropping your kid off at school, then again at the grocery, then again on the bus – and from that, we form a relationship of sorts. We might get to know each other better, or not. But we’ve forged one link among many that, in aggregate, make this our community.

It’s those links – those shared observations, like noticing stencil art on a mailbox, or griping about how not enough people ride the bus, or whatever – that form the foundation from which we can do great things. Because for all the talk about alt-transit projects, density, bike lanes, gas prices, blah-de-blah – it’s really these little things, these discrete links and relationships, that have the power to change our culture.

Riding the bus doesn’t seem like a big deal. But it could be.