The "boomerang map" showing the Ann Arbor corridors being studied for higher quality transit options like bus rapid transit, streetcars, and monorail. (Image links to higher resolution file.)

Some early results of the “Ann Arbor Connector Feasibility Study” were presented last Tuesday evening at the Ann Arbor District Library in an open-house style format with boards and easels, complemented by a presentation from the consultant hired to perform the study, project manager Rick Nau of URS Corporation.

Nau reported that the study is currently in the needs analysis phase – traffic congestion was a phrase Nau sprinkled through his remarks during the evening. The initial needs analysis shows that the majority of the travel demand in the Plymouth-State corridors is accounted for by trips between different parts of the University of Michigan campus.

The study has not reached the point of drawing lines on maps for possible transportation routes. Instead, the representation of the area of study is a “boomerang map” stretching from US-23 near Plymouth Road to Briarwood Mall. The boomerang includes two of four “signature transit corridors” identified in the city of Ann Arbor’s Transportation Plan Update – Plymouth/Fuller roads and State Street.

Prompted by an audience question, Nau made clear that the study has not yet reached the dollars-and-cents analysis phase that will eventually come. The study is expected to be completed by December 2010 with the preliminary recommendations to be publicly presented in the fall.

Nau’s presentation focused on establishing the need for higher quality transit along the corridor and the range of technology choices available to meet that need. Those technology choices range from larger buses running along the regular roadway to elevated monorail trains.

Transit Technology Choices

The choices Nau laid out to the audience broke down into five categories, all of which are comparable to current systems in American cities, most of which are larger than Ann Arbor.

University of Michigan planner Sue Gott gave introductory remarks at the June 8 open house.

Streetcars: Modern, electrically-powered vehicles that operate on single-car trains and carry 100-120 passengers each, a streetcar system would not offer a great travel-time advantage given that its track operates in mixed flow with cars and makes frequent stops. They are, however, a popular method with patrons, offering a smooth and quiet ride.

Nau cited officials in Portland, Ore. who estimated their city’s streetcar system has generated $6 billion in adjacent growth and development. It wouldn’t be Ann Arbor’s first ever streetcar line – two railroad stations in town and the downtown area were connected by streetcars in the early 1900s.

Light Rail: This is an electrically-powered model that is larger than a streetcar but more expensive. Light rail operates with three-car trains and carries more people. Light rail typically offers an exclusive or semi-exclusive right-of-way, meaning no cars drive over the tracks, which leads to quicker travel. Although usually found in larger cities like Dallas and Denver, Nau said he thinks Ann Arbor could support it since the travel demand is more comparable to that of a bigger city.

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT): Cheaper than other options, a BRT system can run with contemporary, “articulated” buses, rubber tires and a duel-fuel technology similar to current AATA vehicles. Typically, an exclusive lane is dedicated to these buses in this system for at least part of the day. Nau mentioned how excited the people of Cleveland were for the opening of their BRT system, which he said remains popular there today.

Monorail: This option is an elevated track similar to Chicago’s L that offers cars with great time efficiency, using electricity that is supplied within the rail itself.

Automated Gateway Transit/Personal Rapid Transit: Driverless, automated systems similar to Detroit’s People Mover.

All these options may be far more sophisticated than what the city has now with standard AATA buses. With no projections yet on the necessary capital, URS can’t give a recommendation on what would be right for Ann Arbor and what wouldn’t be a good option. That will come during later phases of the study.

A demonstration of dual technology. One of the slides in the PowerPoint presentation turned up blank, so Eli Cooper, transportation program manager for the city of Ann Arbor, grabbed the corresponding poster from an easel and manually filled in the blank.

“What we’ll try to do is narrow this universe of alternatives down to a more manageable set of things that can be considered in future studies,” Nau said.

When a time does come to enact a plan, it will almost certainly need government funding – a lot of it. While a massive project is obviously unlikely to be paid for with city and state dollars alone, getting federal assistance requires a lengthy process that may take 10 years to complete, Nau said.

As for the study itself, AATA is paying for half of the $640,000 price tag. The city of Ann Arbor and the Ann Arbor Downtown Development Authority agreed to each pitch in $80,000. The University of Michigan makes up the rest of the funding for the study with a $160,000 contribution.

The Funding Partnership: Who Pays?

Representatives from each of the four study-funding partners were present at the meeting, saying a few words before Nau took the podium. Eli Cooper, the city’s transportation program manager, kicked off the meeting, stressing the study evolved out of a transportation plan update that was completed last year. The plan recommended action to address future needs as the community evolves.

“The issue of transportation is not one of those things that respects any boundaries,” Cooper said. Transportation impacts from downtown affect the area outside of the downtown, and the university affects the entire community. “The community is responsible not only from within, but for those who commute here from without,” Cooper said.

Roger Hewitt of the DDA followed Cooper, stating that his organization handled more than parking, and was very excited and deeply involved with this mass transit project. University planner Sue Gott from UM said she was interested in improving mobility and noted new sustainability efforts at UM where all new construction is to meet Silver LEED standards. AATA CEO Michael Ford said he wanted to move more people and be more effective for Washtenaw County and beyond.

The preliminary analysis of travel among main activity areas within the area of study in the “boomerang map” shows that the main activity areas themselves and the majority of trips between them are related to the UM campus. There are 50,000 daily trips made between central campus and north campus, for example.

The study has looked at current travel demand among nine activity areas. Four out of 36 of those connections have current travel levels that would support a more robust transportation technology than a standard bus. (Image links to higher resolution file.)

From a chart presented at the June 8 open house slide presentation – and available on the connector study website – the preliminary needs study shows four trips where current travel demand would support a transportation technology more robust than a standard bus.

The four trips that would currently support more sophisticated transportation are between: North Campus and Central Campus; Medical Center and Central Campus; Downtown and Central Campus; South Campus and Central Campus

The prominence of UM-centric trips in the study area was already a concern for some who believe the project will serve UM more than the community at large. That concern factored into discussions about who should pay for the study, and later for the construction of the project.

In June 2009, when the DDA board voted to approve its $80,000 share of the study, DDA board member Sandi Smith said she had reservations about providing support for what would essentially be a “U of M trolley.” Then-board member Rene Greff, co-owner of Arbor Brewing Co., said UM had enough money to support this study itself. That was countered by DDA board member Leah Gunn’s perspective of the UM as the area’s major economic engine, which was not separate from the Ann Arbor community. As part of that discussion, mayor John Hieftje indicated that he felt it was an advantage to have the city involved in any applications for federal grants.

In detail from The Chronicle’s report of the June 3, 2009 DDA board meeting:

Board member Sandi Smith, who is also a city councilmember … 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.

The discussion of the study’s funding distribution came against a backdrop of a total cost that had initially been estimated as dramatically lower – $250,000. In February 2008, the plan was to have AATA provide $100,000 and the other three partners $50,000 apiece.

When the bids came back dramatically higher than expected for a total price tag of $640,000, the initial plan was to have each funding partner contribute $160,000 apiece. The DDA and the city resisted the idea of being counted as separate funding sources, and agreed to split one $160,000 “share,” at $80,000 apiece. The AATA picked up the extra share, for a total of $320,000.

Public Comment

The June 8 connector study open house at the downtown library included a segment for attendees to pose questions or make statements.

Two residents made comments that highlighted the possibility that a more sophisticated transportation technology could itself be an attraction to the Ann Arbor area. Ray Detter, head of the Downtown Citizens Advisory Council, noted that there’d been an acceptance of the idea of increased density downtown. He said there could be an additional 5,000 people living downtown. A transportation connector was not just a necessity, he said, but also an amenity that would create something of an attraction, providing vitality to the downtown.

An attendee who lives and works downtown – Rob Thomas – noted that the form of some transportation technologies might have an impact on their ability to attract new riders. He wanted to know if that would factor into the analysis. In response, Nau acknowledged that rail systems did have the ability to attract new riders and that many who give it a try become believers. Construction of such a system costing hundreds of millions of dollars over the course of 2-3 years created a great deal of anticipation, he said, and when it does open, “it’s like Christmas” and people want to ride it.

Clark Charnetski expressed his confidence that high speed regional rail would be coming to Ann Arbor and that it would be important for people to have a way to get around Ann Arbor once they get here.

Local developer Peter Allen complied with a request at the start of the meeting that people turn off their cell phones.

Another resident noted that the use of public transportation is voluntary. He asked if the idea had been explored of requiring a payment to bring a privately-owned vehicle into the city – had that been considered as a funding option? Nau answered that as far as funding options, for projects like this you don’t look at two or three different funding options, you look at 10 or 15 different possibilities. They could include everything from a tax increment finance district (TIF) to using parking meter revenues.

A city councilmember representing Ward 1, Sabra Briere, expressed concern over the potentially considerable costs of building anything with fixed guideways, whether it be rails or bus-exclusive lanes. She asked what an estimate would look like, but Nau wasn’t ready to give out even ballpark figures, saying cost-estimation was the next phase of the study.

Steve Bean, an independent mayoral candidate and chair of Ann Arbor’s environmental commission, asked Nau if there was any possibility of reducing road repair costs due to an improved transit operation, and of downsizing the size of the road network. Nau said the study had not looked at that specifically, but that has not been the experience in other cities. Although passengers enjoy these systems, the overall reduction in traffic on the roads is not significant enough to warrant a decrease in road infrastructure investments.

Later, Nau did say that if some kind of enhanced transit option were not chosen and implemented, it would be necessary to expand the road network.

Carolyn Grawi, director of advocacy and education for the Center of Independent Living, asked about the accessibility to the disabled in any of the transportation systems. Nau assured her that all systems had quick boarding processes and that if they were built with the help of federal funding, it would be “absolutely required that every system be 100 percent accessible.” In response to a question from a different audience member, Nau indicated that all of the options presented could also accommodate bicycles.

Grawi also asked about affordability, both for residents and potential riders. Nau said the cost of these projects for residents was notoriously complicated, but fare would have to be at a price “that would be appealing for the vast majority of the public.”

Additional reporting for this article was provided by Dave Askins.

Hank Baier, associate vice president for facilities and operations, gave regents an update on plans for a Central Campus Transit Center on North University Avenue. (Photos by the writer.)

Enough of them showed up a few minutes later to begin the meeting that had a relatively light agenda and lasted about an hour.

Of note for city residents was a briefing on what’s called the Central Campus Transit Center, a $4.5 million project to build larger bus shelters and make changes to North University Avenue, narrowing the road and adding bike lanes.

Regents approved the appointment of Phil Hanlon as provost, to replace Teresa Sullivan, who’s leaving later this year to become president of the University of Virginia.

They also heard a presentation about the extensive accreditation process that’s underway. Occurring every 10 years, the process includes a site visit in mid-March by members of the Higher Learning Commission. There’s a distinct lack of suspense – it’s unlikely that UM will fail to achieve accreditation. But like any good student, they’re trying for the highest marks.

Commencement Tickets?

In her opening remarks to the board, UM president Mary Sue Coleman led off by saying she was excited and honored that U.S. president Barack Obama would be giving the 2010 commencement speech on May 1, and that his decision to come was a testament to their students. The No. 1 question she’d been hearing since the announcement was, “How can I get tickets?” They’re working on it, she said.

Coleman noted that regents would be asked to approve the appointment of Phil Hanlon as provost. He currently serves as vice provost for academic and budgetary affairs. Regents are already familiar with his command of academic and budgetary matters, Coleman said, describing Hanlon as an accomplished mathematician and respected leader.

Noting that the winter Olympics were underway, Coleman said that four of the six figure skaters who are representing the U.S. in the ice dancing competition – Meryl Davis, Charlie White, Emily Samuelson and Evan Bates – are UM students. She wished them well in their performances.

Bus Stop = Transit Center

Hank Baier, associate vice president for facilities and operations, briefed the regents on plans for upgrades to the bus stops on both sides of North University, between Fletcher and Church near the C.C. Little and Ruthven buildings and the School of Dentistry.

UM students wait for the bus at the current Central Campus Transit Center on the eastbound side of North University Avenue, between Fletcher and Church.

The stops are called the Central Campus Transit Center, and are on both AATA and UM bus routes. The $4.5 million project, which the board approved, includes building larger bus shelters on the north and south sides of North University. The shelters will include “Magic Bus” displays – allowing students to see, in real time, where the buses are located along the routes.

Design features for the shelters include translucent roofs, for better daytime lighting, that extend past the curb so that riders can enter and exit buses without being exposed to rain or snow. New landscaping will be added along that area as well.

The eastbound and westbound lanes, currently two lanes each, will be reduced to one lane, and bike lanes will be added. More bicycle racks will be added as well. The university also will replace what Baier described as an “undersized” water main under the street. They’ll repave North University, and make improvements to the crosswalk. The paving in some areas will be porous, to help with water drainage.

In general, the project aims to improve pedestrian safety and respond to increased demand for use of buses in the central campus area, Baier said. It’s part of the university’s overall parking and transportation strategic plan, which he outlined in detail at the regents’ meeting in July. [See Chronicle coverage: "UM Regents Get Transportation Update"]

This architectural rendering shows the proposed bus shelters along North University, between Fletcher and Church. (Rendering by Hubbell, Roth & Clark Inc.)

Federal stimulus dollars from the American Recovery and Rehabilitation Act, matched by UM funds, will pay for the project, Baier said.

Andy Richner, chair of the board, asked whether this was the first time the university had used its resources on a city road. Baier said that typically, the city would pay for the water main replacement and a portion of the resurfacing, which will cost an estimated $450,000. The city is not in a financial position to do so at this time, he said. [The fact that UM is shouldering this cost was noted at the Feb. 16, 2010 Ann Arbor city council meeting by the city administrator, Roger Fraser.]

The goal is for the project to start soon and be completed by this fall, Baier said.

New Provost, New Title for Bill Martin

With no discussion, regents approved the appointment of Phil Hanlon as provost and executive vice president for academic affairs. His appointment begins July 1, 2010 – the start of UM’s fiscal year – and runs through June 30, 2015.

Hanlon is also an Arthur F. Thurnau professor. During Thursday’s meeting the current provost, Teresa Sullivan, announced the naming of five new Arthur F. Thurnau professorships, calling it the highest honor that the university can bestow on its faculty.

Phil Hanlon, right, was appointed by regents as the next UM provost, for a term beginning July 1, 2010. He's talking with sophomore Haley Weinger, who spoke to regents during the public commentary portion of the meeting.

The professors receiving this designation are: Joel Blum, a John D. MacArthur professor of geological sciences; Anne Ruggles Gere, a Gertrude Buck Collegiate professor of education; Louis Loeb, professor of philosophy; Robin Queen, associate professor of linguistics; and Edward West, professor of art.

In other personnel moves, which received no discussion, regents approved a change in title for Bill Martin, outgoing athletic director. He will be a special adviser to the president, effective March 8 through Sept. 4, 2010. In a cover letter to the regents, Mary Sue Coleman said the move was to provide “administrative continuity” as David Brandon, the new athletic director, transitions into the job.

Accreditation Process

UM professor Ben van der Pluijm, who’s leading the accreditation team, gave regents an overview of the multi-year process that’s coming to a close next month. Since work began in 2007, there’s been a huge amount of data collection and organization, van der Pluijm said, touching every part of the institution. Most of this information is available on the Accreditation 2010 website. He urged regents and others to look through the site, which includes survey results, information about university facilities, data on campus demographics and more.

One component of the process is called “self-emphasis study,” which allows the university to select a topic, analyze its current status and set goals for the coming years. UM chose internationalization, or global engagement – a topic that “really resonates on campus,” van der Pluijm said. The university’s goals in that regard include better preparing students to become global citizens, internationalizing the curricula, enhancing the institution’s international profile and reputation, and growing international partnerships in research and teaching.

In addition to documentation that UM submitted in January, the Higher Learning Commission, which oversees accreditation as part of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, will be making a site visit on March 14-17. On the morning of the 17th, HLC representatives will meet with president Mary Sue Coleman in private, then make a public announcement about their determination immediately afterward. They’re booked on flights that leave later that morning, van der Pluijm said, which he characterized as a good sign.

Formal reports will be sent to the university about six weeks after the site visit.

Public Commentary

Only one person spoke to regents during the time set aside for public commentary. Haley Weinger, a UM sophomore, described her experience as a student in the School of Art and Design following hospitalization from a collapsed lung last fall. The school’s administration – particularly Joann McDaniel, assistant dean for undergraduate programs – refused to work cooperatively with her to allow her to complete her coursework and requirements, Weinger said. “Unfortunately, there are many people who have had very similar experiences in the School of Art and Design,” she said.

Weinger reported that she has now transferred to the School of Literature, Science and the Arts, where she’s found her professors and academic advisor to be positive and encouraging. She urged regents to investigate these “pervasive and serious problems” at the School of Art and Design, so that other students can have a more positive experience there.

Present: Mary Sue Coleman (ex officio), Julia Darlow (by phone), Larry Deitch, Denise Ilitch, Andrea Fischer Newman, Andrew Richner, Martin Taylor, Katherine White

Absent: Olivia Maynard

Next board meeting: The next board meeting is Thursday, March 18 at 3 p.m. in the Fleming Administration Building, 503 Thompson St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

At right is Michael Ford on Day Two of his work as CEO of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. At left is board member Rich Robben. (Photo by the writer.)

Ann Arbor Transportation Authority board (July 21): The AATA board’s monthly meeting schedule usually skips the month of July. But there was some unfinished business from June’s meeting on the approval of funding for the north-south connector feasibility study. And a looming expiration date of July 31, 2009 on the M-Ride agreement with the University of Michigan had led to the suggestion from board chair David Nacht of a one-year extension to that agreement.

Mainly in order to address those two items, the board decided to call a special meeting for Tuesday, July 21. It was properly noticed and publicized as required by the Open Meetings Act.

In addition to approving the two items on the agenda that had prompted the board’s special meeting, it was also an occasion for the board to welcome the recently hired CEO, Michael Ford, who did not take up much time with his few remarks: “Day Two,” he declared, “And I look forward to many more!”

Welcoming and Thanking

Board chair David Nacht publicly thanked interim director Dawn Gabay for her services over the last two years, describing it as a “thankless job” with a tough board that she had to work with. He also welcomed the new CEO of the AATA, Michael Ford. Nacht described a previous transit organization with which Ford had worked – TriMet in Portland, Oregon – as an organization that was visionary and serious about transit, so he was looking forward to seeing Ford apply that vision and seriousness to Ann Arbor’s transportation needs. Nacht wished Ford “spirited adventures that will change our community for the better.”

Ann Arbor Connector Feasibility Study

During public comment at the start of the meeting, Thomas Partridge addressed both main agenda items, including the north-south connector study.

Thomas Partridge: With respect to the item on the agenda authorizing a study for a north-south connector along the Plymouth and State Street corridor out of downtown, Partridge asked that the board send it back for further evaluation, saying that the study does not consider the connections necessary to turn the AATA into a countywide authority. He described the study as too limited in scope.

Board chair David Nacht introduced the item on the north-south connector study by saying that at the last meeting he had objected to the authorization of funds because it had not been put through the board’s committee process. Now that the project had enjoyed the benefit of the board’s committee process, he said, he fully supported the project.

By way of background, it’s worth noting that the official name of the study is “Ann Arbor Connector Feasibility Study.”

What’s the Point of AACFS?

The concept is to assess the feasibility of constructing a high-capacity transit system (e.g., a street car, or bus rapid transit (BRT) system) in both directions from the downtown area of Ann Arbor: (i) northward to US-23, and (ii) southward to I-94.

How Long Has Such a Study Been Discussed?

The north-south connector feasibility study has been under discussion for over a year. A memo from Chris White, manager of service development for the AATA, traces the AACFS history from February 2008.

In broad strokes, the initial estimate for the cost of the study was $250,000. The four partnering agencies had agreed to share the cost as follows: AATA, $100,000; UM $50,000; Downtown Development Authority, $50,000; City of Ann Arbor, $50,000. When bids came back it became apparent that the estimate was dramatically low. This led to an initial decision to share the $640,000 cost evenly at $160,000 each. The DDA board and the city council of Ann Arbor, however, were resistant to having their contributions counted as coming from separate entities and pushed for a $160,000 share to be split between the two agencies at $80,000 apiece, leaving a shortfall of $160,000, which was to be made up by the AATA, bringing its total contribution to $320,000.

An incomplete timeline of approvals:

• February 2008
  Total: $250,000
  Shares: AATA $100,000; UM $50,000; DDA $50,000; City of Ann Arbor $50,000
• Nov. 17, 2008 $160,000 approved by AATA board
  Total: $640,000
  Shares: AATA $160,000; UM $160,000; DDA $160,000; City of Ann Arbor $160,000
• June 3, 2009 $80,000 approved by DDA board
  Total: $640,000
  Shares: AATA $320,000; UM $160,000; DDA $80,000; City of Ann Arbor $80,000
• June 15, 2009 $80,000 approved by Ann Arbor city council
  Total: $640,000
  Shares: AATA $320,000; UM $160,000; DDA $80,000; City of Ann Arbor $80,000
• July 21, 2009 $320,000 approved by AATA board
  Total: $640,000
  Shares: AATA $320,000; UM $160,000; DDA $80,000; City of Ann Arbor $80,000

At the AATA board’s June meeting when the board was asked to approve the $320,000 expenditure, board chair Nacht questioned whether it had been reviewed appropriately through the board’s committee process. It was thus postponed from that meeting.

Outcome: The resolution to approve funding for the north-south connector study in the amount of $320,000 was approved unanimously.

M-Ride Agreement

M-Ride is a program that allows affiliates of the University of Michigan – students, faculty and staff, who are issued an M-Card – to ride AATA buses without paying a fare when they board. Although UM affiliates’ rides are free to the affiliates, the cost of their rides is subsidized through an agreement between the AATA and UM.

Negotiations between the AATA and the UM have not yet produced an understanding on which a longer-term agreement could be based. With the current agreement set to expire at the end of the month, the board was considering a one-year extension under basically the same terms as the existing arrangement – with a somewhat greater cash contribution from UM.

During public commentary at the start of the meeting, Jim Mogensen spoke in part to the subject of the M-Ride agreement, as did Thomas Partridge and Carolyn Grawi.

Jim Mogensen: Mogensen spoke to the issue of the M-Ride contract extension. He stated that it was exciting that options were being explored like having the University of Michigan Medical Center participate in paying for M-Ride. He said that he hoped that the future negotiations will include public transit access to the UM East Medical Campus on Plymouth Road near Dixboro Road.

Thomas Partridge: With respect to the one-year extension to the contract with UM to provide services under the M-Ride program, Partridge asked that the agreement be sent back for further consideration and negotiation. Partridge pointed out that there are many UM students and staff who live outside the areas who are currently served by the purchase of service agreement areas (POSA) outside the city of Ann Arbor. He also pointed out that UM operated a countywide health system for which there was no corresponding countywide transportation service.

Carolyn Grawi: Grawi pointed out that if you take the train from Detroit to Ann Arbor, from the Ann Arbor station you cannot get to the UM East Medical Campus with public transportation. And in the context of two additional health units for diabetes and endocrinology being added to the Domino’s Farms complex, she suggested that the AATA needed to help influence the university to become a better partner in the discussions.

Deliberations on the M-Ride Extension

During deliberations, board member Sue McCormick described the negotiations with UM as “collegial and collaborative” discussions. She said that the one-year extension recognized ongoing issues about the adjustment to the university’s contribution. Compared to the previous terms, McCormick said, the university was stepping up their contribution a bit more.

Asked by board member Rich Robben what the numbers were, Chris White, who is the AATA’s service development manager, said the new agreement specified a total of $1,967,842 – of that, $1,073,043 was cash, with the remainder made up from federal Section 5307 funds through the UM. This compares to $700,000 in cash per year previously provided by the university.

Nacht noted that part of the discussion involved a possible interest on the university’s part to treat students differently from faculty and staff. [Note: The university is also contemplating options like a student fee with an opt-out provision. With the new fare boxes installed on AATA buses in early February of 2009, it's now possible to distinguish one M-Card from another in the way that the university is contemplating. M-Ride riders now swipe their M-Cards to board. The previous system simply required M-Card holders to flash their card to the driver.]

Nacht stated that he continued to believe that there was not adequate transportation coverage for the university’s medical facilities. He continued by saying he believed that AATA was an organization that provided revenue to the UM health system. He noted that patients in the health system were in many cases people who had limited means to get physically to a healthcare provider. He noted that the university’s health system had a great interest in making sure that their patients kept their appointments, and that patients appeared for their doctor appointments on time. The AATA, said Nacht, played an important role in providing excellent service, thereby minimizing the university health systems costs and at the same time generating revenue for the system.

Board member Ted Annis pointed out that the statistics on the M-Ride program showed that people connected with the University of Michigan make up 40% of the ridership for the entire AATA system. In light of that fact, Annis said that the university’s financial contribution is currently inadequate, which meant that the burden fell disproportionately on the taxpayers of Ann Arbor. This was an issue that needed to get dealt with, and not ignored, concluded Annis.

Given that the arrangements considered by the board is only for one year, McCormick indicated that it was incumbent on the AATA to maintain a good negotiation schedule. Board member Paul Ajegba asked that the board be given updates on the status of those negotiations.

Outcome: The resolution to extend the M-Ride agreement by one year was passed unanimously with abstention from Rich Robben.

Authorization of Contract Execution

The board considered an agenda item that authorized the AATA CEO to execute all contracts for less than $1 million with the Michigan Department of Transportation.

It was a mundane item except for a point made during public commentary by Jim Mogensen. He pointed out a technical problem in the language of the  resolution – which authorized the “interim director” to sign contracts with the Michigan Department of Transportation. In light of the fact that the AATA now has a full-time permanent CEO in Michael Ford, he suggested that language be changed to reflect that.

Outcome: The resolution passed unanimously with abstention from Ajegba.

Public Commentary

Tim Hull: Hull introduced himself as a graduate student at the University of Michigan and a regular rider of the AATA’s buses. He pointed out a couple of different problems that he’d noticed from his perspective as a bus rider since 2003. The first problem was that there seems to be some inconsistency among drivers about when they were willing to “hold” buses in order for riders to make connections. In a recent experience, a driver on the No. 2 route would not hold the No. 9 bus in order for him to make a successful connection, which lengthened the time of his trip to over half an hour. A second problem that he noted was that there seemed to be a limited ability to give input in a timely fashion on major decisions for route changes. He suggested that the public be more actively engaged on major service changes so that the agency could be responsive to the community at large.

Thomas Partridge: Partridge called Nacht’s attention to the importance of nonprofits like the Center for Independent Living. But he pointed out that if someone gets on the No. 6 bus to go to the Center for Independent Living, they would be “dumped” in an unpaved area without a bus shelter, needing to cross Ellsworth Road in order to get to the center.

Carolyn Grawi: Grawi took the opportunity to express her thanks to Dawn Gabay for her service as interim director. She said she appreciated Gabay’s commitment to service and her availability. She also welcomed the new CEO Michael Ford. She noted that it was still quite a challenge to move through the multi-county area of Washtenaw, Livingston and Monroe using public transportation. She said that there were areas in which the AATA excelled and also areas in which there needed to be improvement. She alerted board members to the I-Ride kickoff.

Grawi reported that the situation at Arborland had become a “fiasco.” She reported anecdotally a situation of someone who was grocery shopping at Hiller’s and then couldn’t get across Washtenaw Avenue where the new bus stop is located to make the return trip. She encouraged the AATA to continue to pressure the management company of Arborland on that matter.

Jim Mogensen: Mogensen highlighted the inherent tension in planning for transportation between employment transportation – exemplified by the north-south connector study, and the park-and-ride lot on Plymouth and US-23 – versus the utilization of transit within the urban area by its residents as a means to get around.

Present: Charles Griffith, Jesse Bernstein, David Nacht, Rich Robben, Sue McCormick, Ted Annis, Paul Ajegba.

Next regular meeting: Wednesday, Aug. 19, 2009 at 6:30 p.m. at AATA headquarters, 2700 S. Industrial Ave. [confirm date]

University executives also praised the recent inclusion of UM Hospitals and Health Centers in the U.S. News & World Report ranking of best American hospitals – they ranked 14th in the nation.

Parking & Transportation

Hank Baier, associate vice president for facilities and operations, gave regents an overview of the university’s strategic plan for parking and transportation. UM’s approach is to provide commuters with multiple options, he said, including parking, buses, vanpools, carpools, Zipcars and cab service.

The total number of UM bus passenger rides for fiscal 2009 reached 5.9 million, he said, only a slight increase from the 5.8 million in ridership for each of the previous two years, but up from 4.7 million in 2004. Participation in the M-Ride program has also increased. M-Ride, a program of the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, allows UM faculty, staff and students to ride AATA buses for free. In fiscal 2008, UM ridership through the M-Ride program was 2.254 million, out of AATA’s total 5.739 million passengers on its fixed routes. The university pays $700,000 annually for this service, with additional subsidies paid for from federal grants. Baier described AATA as a “great partner.”

The university’s vanpool program had 531 riders in fiscal 2009, up from 452 the previous year. Riders pay $25 per month, but the driver doesn’t have to pay. UM encourages both vanpooling and carpooling through its GreenRide program, which provides an online interface to help people find out if there’s a carpool or vanpool they can join.

Baier also gave an update on the university’s plans for parking. The Thompson structure is being expanded to add 273 spaces and offices for Parking and Transportation Services and the Office of Budget and Planning. When finished in the fall of 2010, the $15.7 million project will have a total of 1,049 spaces, plus additional spots for motorcycles and bikes.

Two previous parking structures that were planned on Wall Street and north campus have been put on hold, as reported at the regents’ June meeting. UM’s acquisition of the former Pfizer site near north campus came with 2,800 parking spaces, Baier said, giving them more capacity in the system. They’re also talking with the city of Ann Arbor about a Fuller Road intermodal transit center, which could include east-west and north-south commuter rail.

Baier showed a map indicating how many UM employees were commuting from different parts of the region. Around 16,000 people live in the immediate Ann Arbor area, but more than 24,000 come from other parts of Washtenaw County or other counties. About 12,000 people, for example, commute from eastern Washtenaw or western Wayne County. That’s why UM is interested in a commuter express bus to Canton, which AATA is planning to launch.

A similar express bus – the A2Chelsea Express – isn’t being used as much as UM had hoped, Baier said. [AATA staff reported at the transportation authority's May meeting that ridership was "quite low," averaging around 1,200 total rides per month.] There are about 3,000 UM employees who commute from the western part of Washtenaw County.

Baier said the university is willing to explore subsidizing alternative transportation, such as the proposed north-south commuter rail between Howell and Ann Arbor. About 3,800 UM employees commute from the Livingston County area. Tim Slottow, UM’s chief financial officer, followed up by saying that the potential for getting more employees out of their cars – and parking spaces – is a win-win. It cuts costs for the university and opens up more parking for visitors, like patients coming to the medical campus.

Building Projects

Regents approved several building projects at Thursday’s meeting, but the major one was a $49 million renovation of Couzens Hall on East Ann Street. Slottow said that this will be the last “deep” renovation of a heritage residence hall – Couzens was built in the mid 1920s. The hall, which houses about 560 students, will be out of commission for about a year, starting in the spring of 2010 and competed by fall 2011. In addition to infrastructure upgrades, the renovation will transform a vacant dining hall and kitchen (which were closed when the Hill Dining Center opened last fall) into living-learning areas.

Dave Battle, an architect with Integrated Design Solutions, which is handling the project, gave a brief presentation with some architectural renderings of the proposed changes. He mentioned that they were planning to upgrade existing bathrooms into “spa-like” facilities, which prompted Royster Harper, UM’s vice president for student affairs, to say that meant installing low-flow toilets. “That’s our definition of spa,” she joked.

Other projects approved at the meeting include:

• $6.9 million to renovate and expand the University Hospital area devoted to surgical instrument processing, assembly, sterilization and storage operations. Ann Arbor-based Hobbs and Black Associates Inc. will be the architects for the project.
• $2.4 million for the first phase of a project to renovate and relocate the Alexander G. Ruthven Museums building and the Museum of Zoology collection. Regents approved the initial $20 million project at their December 2008 meeting. This first phase covers the installation of fire detection and fire alarm systems.
• $1.2 million to update and build new lab space at the Clarence Cook Little Science Building. The work is being done to support new faculty’s research in the Dept. of Geology.
• $1.16 million to expand the Cancer Center’s infusion pharmacy and infusion area, where chemotherapy is administered.

Regents also approved the renaming of the Indoor Practice Facility for Intercollegiate Football, which will now be called the Al Glick Field House. Glick, his family and his company, Alro Steel Corp., donated $8.7 million to fund the new facility under construction, which will be completed in August.

Public Comment

Two people spoke during the meeting’s public comment session, which allows for three-minute presentations per speaker.

Aaron Jacobson: Jacobson, who described himself as a third-generation Wolverine, said he was representing Riverfront LLC, a group made up of UM graduate students, developers and architects. (The group includes local developer Peter Allen, who attended Thursday’s meeting but did not speak during the time set aside for public comment.) They’ve been working with the city of Ann Arbor, Jacobson said, to develop a shared vision for the city in the underutilized area along Fuller Road. That’s the location being considered for an intermodal transportation center on city-owned property, a possible node for parking, bus and rail.

Jacobson reported that Riverfront had conducted a survey with 94 respondents. Of those, 65% said they would take a commuter train that stops at the UM hospital; 82% said they would patronize restaurants and retail shops within walking distance of the hospital; and 65% said they would choose to live or stay at a hotel within walking distance of the hospital, if they could.

The Fuller Road site should serve as more than a parking structure, Jacobson said. It could be a welcome center for Ann Arbor and UM, creating a first impression as people enter town by rail. Building a parking deck at the edge of the site would allow more space for future development, including retail and residential.

Jacobson said his group planned to make similar presentations next week to city council, planning commission and the park advisory commission. [A presentation was made to Ann Arbor's city council caucus on the evening of Sunday, July 19]. He asked regents for their feedback, and said he hoped they would express a preference for Amtrak to relocate its station to this site.

The regents did not comment on his presentation. However, UM CFO Tim Slottow did. He told regents that he wanted to make clear that Peter Allen and the Riverfront group were in no way advising or representing the university – he said it was worth noting, since there might be confusion because Allen is a UM adjunct faculty member and Jacobson is a graduate student.

Jim Mogensen: Mogensen said that the transportation report had been a “Cliffs Notes” version, and doesn’t give a full representation of the community’s transportation picture. It’s a challenge to provide services, especially to areas that are currently underserved. He said if AATA makes additional cuts to service for Ypsilanti, he plans to file a disparate impact complaint. He noted that it’s difficult to get bus service to UM’s medical campus on Plymouth Road in northeast Ann Arbor, and he urged the university to make sure they provide basic transportation access to their health facilities when they renegotiate their M-Ride contract with AATA later this year.

What We Missed

Thursday’s meeting began an hour earlier than its usual 3 p.m. start time – and being creatures of habit, The Chronicle did not notice the change and showed up at 2:45 p.m., the time when the doors typically open for these meetings. (We weren’t the only one – Dave Gershman of The Ann Arbor News arrived at 3 p.m.) So we missed the presentation of annual reports on the economic status of the faculty. These reports had previously been posted on the website for the Senate Advisory Committee on University Affairs (SACUA), the faculty governance group.

Present: Mary Sue Coleman (ex officio), Julia Darlow, Larry Deitch, Denise Ilitch, Olivia Maynard, Andrea Fischer Newman, Andrew Richner, Martin Taylor, Katherine White

Next board meeting: The regents do not meet in August. Their next meeting is Thursday, Sept. 17, at 3 p.m. in the Fleming Administration Building, 503 Thompson St., Ann Arbor. [confirm date]

Ann Arbor City Apartments

In the audience participation segment, Ray Detter reported on the previous evening’s meeting of the Downtown Area Citizens Advisory Council, at which Jon Frank of Village Green was a guest. Frank gave the DACAC an update on the Village Green’s Ann Arbor City Apartments project, which is a PUD proposal for the First and Washington site to be brought before planning commission at its Oct. 7 meeting. Detter reported some changes to the mixed-use, mixed income housing project.

• number of total units: increased from 146 to 156
• number of affordable units: increased from 15 to 16
• facade: changed from brick to corrugated metal
• parking spaces: public spaces increased by 2 spaces
• roof: addition of a roof deck that does not affect FAR (floor area ratio)

Later, reporting for the partnerships committee, Sandi Smith noted that a request from Village Green for $380,000 for 20 motorcycle parking spaces for the Ann Arbor City Apartments project had been turned down.

Underground Parking Garage

John Splitt, reporting for the capital improvements committee, announced that the revised site plans for the underground parking garage proposed at the library lot had been submitted on Sept. 25, and that the project would be presented at the city council work session on Oct. 13 starting at 7 p.m. The following day, Oct. 14, from 7-8:30 p.m. there will be a public open house in council chambers at the DDA office, 150 S. Fifth Ave. 3rd floor to introduce the public to the proposal.

Model of underground parking garage. View is from the west, Fifth Avenue running left to right in the foreground. Library Lane splits the block east to west. The model of the library (to the right) is not meant to depict the design of the new library. There is one nod to one possible design element for the new library: an entrance at the northwest corner.

Hotel Taxes Could Increase

Sandi Smith, reporting for the partnerships committee, brought a resolution to increase the county accommodations tax from 2% to the maximum rate allowed by the state, which is 5%. Smith said that most localities already collect at the maximum rate allowed. Dave DeVarti weighed in for a wording change to make the math clear: “an increase of 3%” was changed to “an increase to 5%”. Revenue from the tax is distributed between the Ann Arbor Area Convention and Visitors Bureau and the Ypsilanti Area Convention and Visitors Bureau based on the geographic location of hotels. This works out to be a roughly 75% (Ann Arbor) to 25% (Ypsilanti) split. In total dollars Ann Arbor’s share is about $1.2 million.

The final decision to increase the tax rate or not rests with the county board of commissioners. DeVarti asked if there was any discretion about what agencies received the money. Leah Gunn, who serves on the county board of commissioners, said that there was not that kind of discretion available under the state enabling legislation.

Parking: Demand Management and Rate Increases

Roger Hewitt, reporting for the operations committee, gave an update on the selection process for the new parking kiosks that serve multiple on-street spots, which will eventually replace conventional coin-fed meters at every parking space. The selection committee is visiting Milwaukee and Seattle where some of the models have been installed, to meet with staff responsible for service and maintenance.

The initial purchase of kiosks will be for 25 units, to be deployed in the State Street and Liberty Street area. Eventually, some 150-175 units are envisioned. The kiosks will be connected via a wireless system to be managed by 20/20 Communications and the city of Ann Arbor IT department.

The wirelessly communicating kiosks factor into future recommendations for parking rate increases, because they make possible the assignment of different rates to different areas of the street. Hewitt also spoke of the possibility of different areas of the same parking structure being charged at different rates. The upshot is that the 3-year proposal for rate increases, which is expected to be made at the November DDA board meeting, will be grounded in averages, not absolute rates.

University of Michigan Bus Station

As part of her report for the partnerships committee, Sandi Smith mentioned briefly a request from the University of Michigan for $50,000 to enhance the bus stop facility near North University Avenue and Washtenaw Avenue at Church Street, which had been punted by the committee for the time being as not within their particular purview, and in light of committee restructuring in November.

The item piqued the interest of John Hieftje, who wondered if the request had come directly from the university or had been conveyed directly to the DDA via the Ann Arbor Transportation Authority. Answer: it came directly from the university. In response to a question about the scope of the project from Hieftje, Smith gave a total project budget of $1.9 million broken down as follows: $1 million, grant; $250,000, AATA; $470,000, split evenly between the city of Ann Arbor and the university to cover re-paving costs; $180,000, from miscellaneous community resources of which the university was kicking in another $130,000. It was the remaining $50,000 out of this $180,000 that the university had requested from the DDA.

Supportive Housing Services

Sandi Smith, reporting as the DDA representative to the County Taskforce on Sustainable Revenue for Supportive Housing Services, announced that a package of recommendations would be presented to the county board of commissioners at their work session on Oct. 16. Of the eight specific recommendations, the main goal to be brought forward was to fund 500 units at a cost of $5,000 per unit per year. One of the recommendations includes a Phase II task force to help implement the other recommendations. The package also includes a recommendation to explore endowment funding as well as a millage funding strategy.

Trees and Accounting

In the context of the discussion of the audited financial reports, which showed that the TIF maintenance fund had only been tapped for around half the amount it had been budgeted for, Dave DeVarti advised that he would like to address the perception among many in the community that trees lost to the emerald ash borer were not being replaced, because the money for tree replacement was being squirreled away for various and sundry pet projects. That perception could be addressed in part, DeVarti said, if the DDA could make sure that tree replacement in the district proceeded apace. John Hieftje said that city-wide the lost trees were being replaced at a rate of 5% per year. Susan Pollay said that the fact of successful replacement needed to be brought out more clearly.

Various suggestions were made to mitigate against the situation where invoices to be received could be tracked more efficiently, so that mis-matches between funds budgeted and funds spent would be less dramatic. These suggestions ranged from the idea of keeping a record of invoices expected even if they were not entered into the accounting system (Gary Boren) to the idea of building into vendor contracts a requirement that invoices be submitted by specific deadlines (John Hieftje). Susan Pollay expressed her commitment to better communication with Adrian Iraola, who manages many of the DDA projects.

DDA on TV

Russ Collins, reporting for the research and opportunity committee, floated the idea of webcasting or televising DDA board meetings, an idea that board chair Jennifer Hall is urging forward. John Hieftje noted that all of the major boards and commissions of the city are now televised and quipped that there was a clamor to have the taxicab board televised.

Until arrangements are made to bring more technology to bear on the challenge of making the content of meetings by the DDA board more accessible (a body that is responsible for millions of taxpayer dollars), Chronicle readers can rely on our notebook.

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

Next board meeting: noon on Wednesday, Nov. 4 at the DDA offices, 150 S. Fifth Ave., Suite 301.