[5:49] Mhm.

[6:17] » Welcome to the August 18th meeting of the Ann Arbor Parks and Advisory

[6:21] Commission. This meeting is being conducted

[6:23] electronically and will be broadcast live on CTN cable channel 16 and online

[6:29] at A2 gov.org/watchctn.

[6:34] To speak at public comment, call toll-free 877-853-5247

[6:41] or at another of the published numbers on the agenda and enter meeting ID

[6:45] 966-5327-1469.

[6:51] Josh, would you like to call roll?

[6:54] » I'll do. Uh, Commissioner Bush.

[6:58] Commissioner O'Connell. >> Here in Ann Arbor.

[7:01] » Commissioner Montague. >> Here in Ann Arbor.

[7:05] » Commissioner Polawsky. >> Here in Ann Arbor.

[7:09] » Commissioner Skiles. >> Here in Ann Arbor.

[7:12] » Commissioner Smith. >> Here in Ann Arbor.

[7:15] » Commissioner Winslow. >> Here in Ann Arbor.

[7:19] » Council member Radina. >> Here in Ann Arbor.

[7:22] » Council member Watson. >> Here in Ann Arbor.

[7:25] » You have a quorum.

[7:29] » Wonderful. That brings us to our agenda. Are there any changes to the agenda?

[7:37] Hearing no changes, the agenda is approved and that brings us to our first

[7:42] public commentary. To speak at public comment, call

[7:46] toll-free 877-853-5247

[7:51] or another of the published numbers on the agenda and enter meeting ID

[7:55] 966-5327-1469.

[8:00] Follow the instructions to raise your hand to indicate you'd like to speak.

[8:03] When it's your turn to speak, state your first name and address. We allow 3

[8:07] minutes per speaker. We do not respond in the moment to speakers, but we

[8:11] appreciate you taking the time to call in and share your thoughts.

[8:15] Do we have any callers for public comment?

[8:21] » There are no callers waiting online.

[8:26] » Okay, that brings us to approval of the July meeting minutes. Is there any

[8:32] discussion or corrections to the minutes?

[8:40] Or a motion to approve?

[8:44] All right, motion by Josh.

[8:48] Seconded by Larry. All those in favor, raise your hand or

[8:53] say I.

[8:56] All right, motion passes. That brings us to We don't have any

[9:02] presentations. Um so, that brings us to reports.

[9:07] So, off back to you, Josh. >> Thank you very much.

[9:11] Um Just a few items today. Um we since July

[9:17] 1st, um Parks has posted three full-time positions um that were approved in this

[9:23] year's budget that we're very excited about. Um there are two park operation

[9:27] Aspen positions as well as a park planner um position. Uh

[9:32] all three of them are in various stages of the

[9:35] um posting, interviewing, onboarding

[9:38] process, well, not hiring process. Um, but we were very excited about the

[9:42] various um, quality of of candidates we got for all of those postings. So,

[9:47] exciting to bring full-time staff onto um, the team. Um, is much needed

[9:52] throughout um, the the park system. Uh, additionally, we as we approach the end

[10:00] of the summer, um,

[10:03] we with people going back to school, park facilities will begin adjusting

[10:07] hours soon. Uh, one thing that we're very excited about this year is we are

[10:11] anticipating all three pools um, remaining open through Labor Day.

[10:17] Um, while there will be some uh, hours adjustments adjustments once

[10:21] AAPS schools go back in session, um, particularly um, at Veterans and Buhr.

[10:27] Um, and then the libraries will adjust their hours post Labor Day. So, um, if

[10:32] you're heading out to one of our facilities um, later this month or into

[10:35] September, make sure you check the website to get uh, more information.

[10:40] Um, as far as um, volunteer opportunities, parks remain a

[10:46] great volunteer opportunity for individuals, groups, businesses, or

[10:49] clubs. Uh, we have several um, upcoming work

[10:52] days in various parks as well as the opportunity to adopt various parks. So,

[10:57] um, if you're interested in giving back to the park system, um, please or you

[11:01] want more information, um, please contact volunteer staff at

[11:05] volunteer@a2gov.org.

[11:08] Uh, just some exciting news about a couple park um, projects.

[11:13] Um, work at South Maple Park and the soon potentially to be renamed um,

[11:20] Dexter Road Park um, is moving along nicely.

[11:23] Um, lots of excitement over on the west side of the of the city with some um,

[11:27] park improvements taking place on there. Uh, there currently are some minor

[11:31] repairs and inspections taking place at various parts along the the border to

[11:35] border. Um, right now, um,

[11:38] to make some improvements on that, we anticipate impacts being uh, minimal,

[11:41] but please be mindful um, as there will be some work going on um, near Vandemere

[11:47] and near um, Gallup um, over the coming coming weeks. Uh,

[11:52] exciting news, uh, the nature playground construction at uh, Mushroom Park is

[11:56] ongoing. Um, if you get an opportunity to get out there, it's really kind of a

[12:00] neat process to see um, the transition of a a uh,

[12:05] tree that needed to be removed into a nature playground. So, take the

[12:08] opportunity to go see that. Lots of fun. Um,

[12:12] we had a wonderful event um,

[12:18] uh, this past weekend at West Park. Uh, the party in the park went well um,

[12:23] despite despite being overcast. Um, we had about 200 people attend. Um,

[12:28] we had a new food truck um, on site and a band performed um, a couple bands

[12:33] performed. So, um, participants had a good time with music, crafts, face

[12:38] painting um,

[12:39] and we got to use a dunk tank um, this past weekend. So, fun way to

[12:45] activate that park um, which is which is exciting. So, thank you to Torrie and

[12:49] her staff for putting that together. Uh, and then lastly

[12:55] um, with this being the inaugural season of the Bicentennial Splash Pad, there is

[13:00] a survey out to see how people feel about that. So, we encourage people to

[13:05] go to the Bicentennial page at engage.a2gov.org

[13:11] um, to provide their feedback. So, lots of things going on uh, into the summer.

[13:16] It's always a busy and fun time as we transition from hot weather into much

[13:21] more pleasant fall weather. So, that's all I got.

[13:28] » Thanks, Josh. Any questions?

[13:33] All right, that brings us to committees. Hannah, are there any rec updates?

[13:39] » Rec does not meet during the summer, so no update for me.

[13:42] » Okay, that brings us to our regular business then.

[13:47] Um, our first piece of business is the resolution recommending the

[13:51] authorization of the publication of notice of intent to issue capital

[13:56] improvement bonds for various park capital improvements, and I think Remi's

[14:00] going to talk to us about that. >> Yep.

[14:03] It's me again. How are you all doing? Thanks,

[14:08] um,

[14:11] in advance for sticking with me through this presentation. So, uh, yes, uh, back

[14:15] to discuss the, um, 2026 parks and recreation bond that would be based off

[14:21] of uh, the parks park maintenance and

[14:24] capital improvements millage revenue. Um, so, again, to recap, in, uh,

[14:29] November 2024, um, the voters did approve a renewal of our existing park

[14:34] maintenance and capital improvements millage at the same millage rate, but

[14:38] this time, uh, for a 20-year, um, period. So, that runs from 2025, uh, and

[14:46] through 2044. >> [sighs]

[14:48] » Um, leading up to this conversation about

[14:52] using that millage revenue, uh, to issue a bond and utilize bond funding, um, the

[14:59] the context behind that was the findings that were developed in 2023 through our

[15:04] ADA transition plan, as well as the final conclusion of the asset management

[15:08] plan in 2025 that indicated the vast, um,

[15:13] uh, needs of the park system and quantified them in a way that we had not

[15:17] previously had numbers attached to. Um, so, with that, the planned

[15:23] enhancements and updates that we would be doing, uh,

[15:27] in the coming years would readily utilize a, uh, $10 million bond for

[15:31] those city park improvements. Um,

[15:37] so, details on the bond itself, again, this is a $10 million capital

[15:42] improvement bond specific to capital projects, uh, funded by the park

[15:46] maintenance and capital improvements millage.

[15:48] The total bond amount was determined based on the availability of millage

[15:54] revenue to pay the debt service to the bond. Um,

[16:00] uh, of the millage revenue earmarked for capital improvements. So,

[16:04] um, we would be paying annually

[16:08] approximately, uh, $850,000 toward the bond.

[16:14] Um, and, uh, the bond term is 14 and 1/2 years at, uh, the interest rate worked

[16:20] on with our finance team and consultants, um,

[16:24] uh, bond experts. And then, the key here is that all bond projects would need to

[16:29] be completed, uh, within 3 years. So, that puts us on a, um, a fast timeline

[16:35] to make quick use of these, uh, bond funds.

[16:40] The entire interest estimated over the life of the bond would be 2.8 million.

[16:52] In terms of what projects the bond might fund, um, we've

[16:57] categorized it into some general buckets of, uh, infrastructure, mechanical

[17:01] systems, playgrounds, courts, facilities, shelters, and addressing a

[17:06] lot of the, um, or potentially addressing several ADA barriers that

[17:10] were identified in the ADA transition plan.

[17:13] Um, we all know that the park system has many asset uh, capital asset challenges.

[17:19] Um, Um, and so we would try to earmark all of those for improvements

[17:25] and upgrades in those buckets.

[17:31] And then in terms of the opportunity cost, I just

[17:35] you know, there's that 2.8 million in interest could

[17:39] be a question mark for you all and that's that's well understood on staff's

[17:43] part about that opportunity cost of whether to pay that

[17:47] versus allowing the millage revenue to come in

[17:50] incrementally instead of having an influx of 10 million in available

[17:55] capital over that short period of 3 years. Um,

[18:00] what we have seen is a dramatic increase in project capital project costs, labor,

[18:05] materials, supplies, etc. Design and so forth. So, that increase over the last 5

[18:11] years that we've seen throughout all of the Park City projects that Adam Hillary

[18:16] Marina and others are leading for the city

[18:19] represents what potential we could see in terms of inflation

[18:24] over a longer period of time in excess of 2.8 million

[18:29] that could be premium on those projects as inflation accrues. So,

[18:35] it's no one has a crystal ball. We don't know the

[18:38] a certain future of costs and inflation, but in general

[18:42] that is how we conceptualize that opportunity cost and weigh that

[18:46] ourselves. And so the resolution before you

[18:52] would be to authorize the issue and set the public notice that is required for

[18:57] the bonds issuance for 45 days and then the issuance of the bond after that

[19:02] notice of intent period is over.

[19:07] Happy to answer any questions.

[19:23] » Any questions for Remy?

[19:27] » Um I think I have one quick question. Um so when will PAC receive like a like an

[19:34] itemized list of um like how these bonds are going to be

[19:39] um distributed throughout the park system and which projects are going to

[19:43] be in the pipeline? >> Uh I can go ahead and jump on that one,

[19:48] Remy. Uh yes, I mean I think that you know, as we move forward um kind of at

[19:53] this point we don't have to have we have we need to have a generalized bucket of

[19:57] of items for the bond um as we go past these 45 days and we need to get into

[20:01] the in the issuance. There needs to be a

[20:04] little bit more concrete with it. So, we'll have

[20:07] um we'll have a better understanding of what we anticipate being the the primary

[20:11] projects with it. Um and then as we come to any of these projects as we do with

[20:17] all of our construction, we will begin we will come to PAC first. Um just

[20:21] because we have these funds available doesn't mean that we don't go through

[20:24] all the other processes that we do with PAC. So, um but we will we will be

[20:28] identifying what our plan is. Um and as it is kind of mentioned, you

[20:33] know, one of the things is you know, our goal is to spend the 10 million as

[20:40] um as as effectively for the community as

[20:44] possible. Um you know, at the end of the day

[20:47] there's going to be some things that we probably have to scale up and some

[20:50] things that we scale down through those 3 years.

[20:53] Um you know, in a in a in a concept mind, the idea of doing two or three

[20:58] playgrounds per year is a wonderful idea until there's a major project that costs

[21:04] $100,000 more. And so, we're going to have to scale that back down to it. So,

[21:09] um yeah, I would anticipate as as we get towards the end of this 45-day process

[21:14] and the issuance um that they'll be kind of a general general under ex- a general

[21:19] pro- we will provide a general statement of what we anticipate this

[21:24] being. Um again, the project list is always going to be a little

[21:29] iffy just because depending on how funds come about, but um

[21:33] as I as as we will definitely share what we we plan to do. Um so

[21:39] priority one, priority two, and priority three as we go through this process.

[21:43] » Mhm. Perfect. Thanks.

[21:46] » Uh and just one other thing I want to just for for add to it. Um you know, I

[21:51] think when we spoke about it, but just a little bit more clarity. So, um the

[21:54] funds that we utilize for for capital improvements is one of the five buckets

[22:00] of the millage that we have. Um and that that bucket is about right

[22:04] now about 2.5 million annually. So, the 850

[22:09] thousand is is out of that 2.5. Um you know, what we're what we're what we

[22:14] anticipate is the idea of um we we anticipate as we've seen um and

[22:20] we hope that the millage will continue to grow based on property values and and

[22:24] more people coming into the city. Um so, we anticipate seeing that that grow and

[22:29] so that 2.5 in in 5 years we hope will be higher, but that 8.5

[22:35] that we did these projects with will or 8 and a half 850 annually will be the

[22:39] same amount even if that number goes up. So, we feel like there'll be

[22:43] opportunities to address some of the um the needs within the park system

[22:48] still on an annual basis um because we'll have that about

[22:52] 60% of the the contingency funds there to work on those projects and the things

[22:57] that are coming about. So, um we got a lot to work on. Um

[23:01] this just gives us an opportunity to to to address some things that we really

[23:04] need to focus on um here in the short term.

[23:15] » Thank you. Any other questions or a motion to approve?

[23:23] » I'd like to motion to approve. >> Thank you, Rachel.

[23:27] » I second. >> Thank you.

[23:31] Um all those in favor, please raise your hand or say I.

[23:36] All those opposed?

[23:40] All right, the motion passes. Thank you. That brings us to our second

[23:46] piece of business, which is the resolution of support for renaming the

[23:51] DT DTE Energy House at the Leslie Science and Nature Center to the A20

[23:57] House. And I believe I saw Susan here. Oh, sorry, Josh.

[24:00] » We're we're still waiting on combination. So, if we can

[24:05] there's Susan and another person that are going to be working so

[24:08] we can go to the next one. Um >> you.

[24:11] » I mean, we'll be >> We'll

[24:14] » Perfect. Um so, the next one the next piece of regular business is the

[24:19] resolution to recommend that 2570 Dexter Avenue Park be renamed George Henry

[24:26] Jewett the second park. Um and

[24:31] believe Remy is back for that one. >> Me again.

[24:36] All right. Uh

[24:40] Suppose the resolution title is a little bit of a spoiler alert, but bear with me

[24:45] while I build anticipation. Um

[24:49] So, in 2021, uh the city purchased this parcel um of

[24:54] land at Dexter Road and Seebold Boulevard back here. Road.

[25:01] Maybe I'm wrong. I can't remember what the other cross roads are there at the

[25:04] corner. But, um it's about .6 acres.

[25:08] Uh it was always envisioned as a collaborative um joint acquisition in

[25:13] partnership with the Ann Arbor Housing Commission

[25:15] who would take ownership of the northernmost parcel, which is not

[25:19] outlined in red here. Um and then the city park system would retain ownership

[25:23] of the parcels to the um south, east, west. Um

[25:29] outlined in red here. Uh so, we purchased jointly for $184,000

[25:35] uh in 2021. And then it has been sitting there on our books as 2570

[25:41] uh Dexter Ave Park for quite some time. Our Visit Every Park Challenge

[25:46] participants really love that name. You know, it has such a ring to it and they

[25:50] can't wait to get there and see what's there. And a lot of them uh

[25:55] I hope participated in this survey given their experience and direct connection

[25:58] to the property. So,

[26:01] uh I I

[26:03] hate to steal Adam's thunder here given that he's worked really hard on this

[26:07] project in collaboration with the Ann Arbor Housing Commission, but here's a

[26:10] sneak peek at what Josh referenced in the

[26:13] manager's report of the improvements that are actively underway at this park.

[26:18] So, we have a pavilion, basketball court,

[26:21] grills, picnic table, water fountain, bioswale, uh all going in right now. Um

[26:26] my understanding from Adam is that most of this should be completed this fall um

[26:32] and then total completion of the um park renovations and improvements should be

[26:38] done in the spring of 2027. Uh

[26:44] So, now that it's coming to life in a new way and it's going to have a lot of

[26:49] increased use, it is time to transition this park from uh its current name of

[26:54] 2570 Dexter Ave Park to a new name. So, we are taking it through our more

[27:00] our standardized naming process, which aligns with our

[27:05] adopted and PAC approved naming guidelines and criteria. So, the survey

[27:10] opened in late February, closed in late March.

[27:13] 29 nominations were submitted by the community. Um

[27:20] There were I I know this is an odd sentence, so I'll just unpack it a

[27:24] little. There were no park-supported nominations that received duplicate

[27:30] nominations by the community. So, even though there were several submissions

[27:35] for Parky McParkface, I am sad to say park staff do not support that.

[27:41] So, in that there were no other duplicative

[27:46] nominations that would indicate a majority vote or or interest,

[27:52] one of the most powerful nominations on the list of 29

[27:57] was that to honor Dr. George Henry Jewett II.

[28:01] And so,

[28:04] who is Dr. George Henry Jewett II? For those that don't know

[28:10] this remarkable man in Ann Arbor history,

[28:14] George Jewett was born and raised in Ann Arbor.

[28:19] He was the captain of the high school debate team, football team, baseball

[28:23] team, and the valedictorian of the 1889 Ann Arbor High School class.

[28:30] Now Pioneer, first African American football player

[28:33] at both the University of Michigan and Northwestern University.

[28:39] Um After graduation from Northwestern,

[28:44] George Jewett became a doctor in Chicago and practiced for many years until

[28:47] returning to Ann Arbor in 1880 or 1899. Um,

[28:53] the act clear this is an outstanding uh legacy and those academic and athletic

[28:58] achievements um of Dr. George Henry Jewett II reflect um

[29:03] our community values and the city wishes to honor

[29:07] uh those through this rare opportunity to rename or name a city park. Uh so and

[29:13] just to confirm for you all this nomination does conform with the

[29:17] existing and adopted um parks guidelines for naming a city park.

[29:22] So with that, the resolution is yours for consideration.

[29:30] Any questions? I'm I'm not the deepest expert in the history of George Jewett,

[29:36] but there are others here who may be and I understand that his legacy um

[29:40] continued on through generations of uh really prominent figures here in the Ann

[29:44] Arbor community um and surrounding community and it continues on to this

[29:48] day. >> Yeah.

[29:54] » The Jewett family is a uh

[29:58] longstanding um community family and service family and well

[30:04] respected um around Ann Arbor. Um and so I'm excited about this.

[30:13] » Yeah, I agree with Tisha. It's a great choice, great name.

[30:22] » Any other questions or discussion?

[30:29] Or a motion to approve? >> I'd like to motion to approve, please.

[30:33] » And I'll definitely second it. >> Great. Thank you, Rachel and Tisha. All

[30:38] those in favor, please raise your hand or say I.

[30:43] All those opposed? Okay, the motion passes.

[30:49] Thank you. That brings us to our next piece of

[30:54] business, which is the resolution to recommend approval of a construction

[30:59] contract with the Inner City Contracting LLC for the West Park Bandshell

[31:04] Demolition Project. And I believe Adam is going to walk us through this one.

[31:09] » Thank you. Yeah, let me share my screen real quick.

[31:17] Uh can you see my screen? >> Yes.

[31:20] » Yes. >> All right.

[31:22] Um yeah, what I want to do is provide a little update on the West Park Bandshell

[31:26] project um and there is a resolution um for you to act on. Um I'll just give you

[31:30] a little bit of information on it. Um what I do is just a quick background

[31:35] on how we got to this point, talk about the engagement efforts and what we heard

[31:40] just really briefly, um

[31:42] talk about the demolition plan overview, what we're going to do and how we

[31:46] developed that, and then talk about looking forward at West Park and and

[31:50] what's next. Um What's my Teams?

[31:55] Um so background. So um this nothing new here, but in 2021, we um started

[32:01] noticing some cracks in the Bandshell. We immediately started um we shut it

[32:05] down. We hired um Hello Roth and Clark HRC um to do a structural assessment on

[32:11] the on the facility. Um they found that the foundations were severely

[32:15] compromised and at the [clears throat] time we were looking around $2 million

[32:20] to repair the structure. Given the cost that this was and the

[32:25] value to the community, we knew that there needed to be a robust community

[32:28] engagement effort. Um so we launched kind of a multi-year engagement process.

[32:34] Um we had really good turnout. I thought it was very successful. Um at the end of

[32:38] it, um, the conclusion of it, staff came to to PAC last year and recommended that

[32:43] we demolish the bandshell structure and then move forward with revisioning of

[32:48] the park.

[32:50] Uh, just going over the engagement effort real quick. So, we had an

[32:53] informational webinar for the community that was well attended. Um, we had a

[32:57] resident focus group with, um, households that lived on or adjacent to

[33:02] the park or road right nearby. We had stakeholder focus

[33:06] groups, um, who groups that used it in the past, groups that may use it in the

[33:10] future. We had, um, this is our first time doing pop-up sessions at the park.

[33:14] So, we had say it 10 of them throughout the throughout the time period and we

[33:18] would go out with a a pop-up tent, talk about what was happening, um, and try to

[33:23] get engagement that way. Um, getting the word out. We had an online survey with

[33:28] 1,300, um, community members responding to it. Um, it was open for for quite a

[33:34] while and we we got some good feedback on that. And we had a steering committee

[33:37] that was on the internal side of the city side, um, looking at this project

[33:41] as we move forward. What we heard was that

[33:45] the community, while they cared about the bandshell, they really wanted an

[33:48] activated West Park. They wanted a flexible space that could be used for

[33:52] more activation events that were out there. They really valued ADA

[33:56] accessibility, which if you're familiar with the park, the bandshell right now

[33:59] is not accessible. It's it's in the middle of the park. There's no

[34:02] accessible parking to get to it. It's really hard for someone with

[34:05] accessibility challenges. Um, stormwater management and flood

[34:10] management is really important to that community, especially with, um, kind of

[34:14] the drainage that we have happening through the middle of the park off of

[34:16] 7th. Um, safety, fiscal prudence, these were items that were important to the

[34:21] community. Um,

[34:24] and just stepping back just a second, we were not able to improve the the

[34:29] bandshell in its location by expanding the footprint. We were limited because

[34:33] it is in the floodway. So, a lot of these items that were brought to us

[34:36] about new restrooms, ADA, things like that, were not able to be done um to the

[34:41] structure, which is one of the reasons we moved forward with recommending that

[34:44] it get demolished.

[34:47] Um so, where all this came from is we we

[34:51] started moving forward putting together a demolition

[34:54] um package RFP to go out and I actually went ITB. Um we had Hubble, Roth, and

[34:59] Clark, the architect of record. Um they pulled together the documents. We had

[35:04] Tetra Tech, um an environmental testing consultant, um out there to monitor

[35:09] kind of the groundwater, um dioxin, things like that that

[35:13] may be prevalent or be there in the in the area where the

[35:18] bandshell cuz we're removing it from a flood plane. So, there's a little bit

[35:21] more there. So, we brought on Tetra Tech. We have OHM Advisors who's helping

[35:25] with permitting and construction administration.

[35:28] Um we were able to pull this package together over the last year.

[35:31] Um and we published it in June of this year, and we received two bids for the

[35:35] work. Um Inner City Contracting LLC, um they were the lowest responsible

[35:41] bidder at 437,968.

[35:45] Um E.T. McKenzie was the other bid that we received at around 600,000.

[35:51] Looking at the plan, so our plan is to remove the bandshell, the foundations,

[35:56] all associated utilities that are out there,

[35:58] um improve the site drainage, um really connecting the the storm water that

[36:03] moves through there, allowing it to pass as though it wants to naturally as part

[36:07] of the creek bed. Um we'll be putting in new native plantings that both match

[36:11] kind of what's out there in the existing storm water. We also thought it'd be

[36:15] really cool to highlight where the bandshell's footprint is. So, we're

[36:18] going to be putting in um birch, um so um several white just tall trees that

[36:25] kind of outline the bandshell stage with some really kind of cool plantings in

[36:29] front of it to kind of at least give a nod to what was there

[36:34] in the past. And so, you will have this native landscape kind

[36:38] of moving throughout and then we will have a more formal planting where the

[36:41] bandstand itself is. Really excited to see kind of how that

[36:45] comes out. And then

[36:47] construction access will be on the south path by the bandstand and that will be

[36:52] rebuilt as part of this project. So, that's kind of what will will be

[36:56] happening out there as a whole. On a regulatory side, so we have run the

[37:01] demolition plans through different city staff and agencies here.

[37:06] We've coordinated with Eagle, so that took some time because we are moving a

[37:10] structure from the the floodway. So, we got approval from them to move

[37:14] forward. We installed both permanent and

[37:18] temporary monitoring wells around the bandstand both to determine

[37:24] the the groundwater depth since we'll be kind of excavating into it as well as to

[37:29] monitor any dioxin levels that are present out there.

[37:33] As of our last reading, there were not any

[37:37] traces of it that were picked up in our monitoring wells. So, we just want to be

[37:41] cognizant of that as the all the data shows it is moving that

[37:45] way, so we just wanted to make sure that we're not going to be impacting that.

[37:49] Um and then just impacts to the park. So,

[37:53] if this is approved, we will be moving forward and hopefully

[37:58] get the majority of demolition done by the end of this year.

[38:02] That's removing all the structure, working on the regrading.

[38:06] Next spring when the time is right, that's when we'll likely do a lot of the

[38:10] planting to give them the most success for being out there.

[38:14] We that north the walkway on the north side is going to remain open, so people

[38:20] still be able to get east and West through the park and move through it.

[38:24] Um and we're just going to continue monitoring dioxin levels that are out

[38:27] there. Um

[38:29] just to make sure nothing else comes up.

[38:34] And then what's next at West Park? So um once this demolishing gets kind of

[38:39] underway and taken care of, we'll start a visioning process. We're working to

[38:43] develop that plan right now. We don't have it to to share.

[38:46] Um but we envision this taking off really early next year. Um

[38:51] So that's something that to that we'll be looking at. How we're getting those

[38:55] community needs again. We'll look at kind of the data that we pulled from the

[38:58] first round of engagement. We'll try and craft a process to be able to to really

[39:03] get a a park that the community wants. Um

[39:06] » [clears throat] >> In addition to that, we we've already

[39:10] Josh just mentioned one of them, but we had a party in the park just a couple

[39:13] days ago out there, but we've had two others um over the last year. So there's

[39:17] been three total. Um Victoria was talking with her earlier who runs these.

[39:22] Um so they're still getting really good turnout um around 200 plus people coming

[39:26] out to these. There's a real kind of like the community building atmosphere

[39:29] out there. Um you see we got tug-of-war going on. I

[39:32] did want to put this picture in the lower left. That is a temporary stage

[39:35] that we were able to set up at the ball field.

[39:38] Um so we are able to have those concerts and those those events that that draw

[39:42] people in, food trucks, things like that. Um

[39:46] And then in addition I just want to talk about the pros plan real quick. So we

[39:49] are working on that 2020 2032 pros plan. Um and so that's

[39:56] one of the major outcomes of that is helping us create a decision-making

[40:01] framework when we do projects that that balance our financial resources, the

[40:05] capital needs that we have, um and taking into account the community

[40:10] priorities and values. So that's running not specific to West Park, but we're

[40:15] getting data from that and working with consultants. Then that process will

[40:19] inform kind of how we move forward with the visioning

[40:23] process overall as it fits into the larger park scheme.

[40:28] So I have this uh it's a resolution to recommend approval of a construction

[40:31] contract with Inner City Contracting um for the West Park bandshell

[40:36] demolition at $481,765.72.

[40:42] Um that does include a 10% contingency on the demolition in case there are

[40:46] anything that come up um throughout this process. So

[40:50] um with that I'll take any questions. Thank

[40:52] you for for hearing me out.

[40:57] » All right, Travis. >> Thanks. Um Adam, I see in the resolution

[41:02] that it mentions the that Inner City was the lowest responsible contractor. Did

[41:06] this go through best value process and if not, is there a reason why?

[41:10] » Yeah, this went through the Sorry. Um

[41:15] This went through the ITB process. Um that was one of the discussions cuz it's

[41:19] not it's more of a service as though we're removing a facility, not doing a

[41:25] new construction or an improvement to the city. So there was some that we were

[41:29] talking with legal and procurement. There's it's a gray area when we come to

[41:33] removing a structure. Um and so that this was their kind of

[41:37] advice to move forward with the ITB version.

[41:40] » Okay. I imagine that will be a question at council as well and so this might be

[41:45] an area where we want to discuss in the future cuz I think we want to run

[41:48] everything as as much as possible through best value.

[41:51] » Yeah. Thank you. Thank you.

[42:01] » Mary? >> Yeah, Adam, the you were describing the

[42:07] the walkway I think you called it the north walkway

[42:11] would still be there. Yeah. Is that Is that So that would be what was what's

[42:17] currently in in front of what was the stage?

[42:20] » Yeah. So that's that there's the stamped concrete kind of

[42:26] plaza right in front of it. So yeah, it's the walk that comes into that and

[42:29] then leaves. So it connects 7th down there.

[42:33] So that will remain open. >> Okay. Yeah, that's good.

[42:38] And one other question, have we looked at and I don't know if

[42:42] it's it's a should be a part of this project

[42:45] or something else, but looked at lighting in the park?

[42:50] » Yeah, there has been a few things in the past

[42:53] some trials that that we've looked at. I think one of the things when this

[42:57] project came up is we knew that there was the the band shell issue that we

[43:02] were dealing with in the center and we were doing this visioning project. I

[43:05] think it's something that we are considering as we move forward.

[43:10] Especially understanding that safety is a component was one of the big things

[43:13] that came out of engagement and you have that kind of long path that cuts through

[43:18] there. So it's definitely something that we

[43:20] have considered and I imagine will come out in this

[43:23] visioning process. >> Okay, thanks.

[43:32] » I don't have a question, but I just wanted to thank you for how thoroughly

[43:35] you went about doing community engagement around this

[43:39] and how thoughtfully you've really put together this plan and thoughts about

[43:43] the future. I look forward to seeing what's next.

[43:47] » Thank you.

[43:50] » Yeah, I just want to I just quickly add I mean this is this has been a big

[43:54] project since since I've taken this over.

[43:58] You know, we we've we've started this process to understand what what does

[44:03] this park look like moving forward. And and we understand the value that it

[44:07] has and and with all of our parks our goal is to

[44:09] to to find a way to activate them and engage them moving forward into the to

[44:13] the future and and while this is a this is a

[44:16] hard recommendation to make, it is one that we feel that is best for this park

[44:21] and this community and this park system moving forward. So,

[44:24] um, and and Adam has done an awful lot of work. Um, I was at most of those

[44:28] pop-ups as well and and they were really really good conversations and I think

[44:33] once you're out in front of it you kind of see what the reality is there.

[44:36] Um, doesn't mean that it's easy. Um, doesn't

[44:38] mean that we we like necessarily some of the things we have to do, but I good

[44:42] conversations and and Adam did a really great job of making this work. So, um,

[44:47] so that's all I really have.

[44:53] » Thanks, Josh. Any other questions, discussion, or a motion to approve?

[44:59] » One point of clarification for you all, just so you're aware, I'm sorry if you

[45:03] said this, Adam, but um, the number you see here on the slide

[45:07] is the combined uh, contingency and um,

[45:13] bid amount. So, that that is why it's reflecting a higher value than what the

[45:17] bid was.

[45:29] » I'll move to approve. >> Thank you, Anna.

[45:35] » I'll second that. >> Thank you, Rachel.

[45:38] Okay. All those in favor, please say I or raise your hand.

[45:45] Okay. All those opposed?

[45:49] » Um, I'd like to abstain if possible.

[45:54] » Okay. I believe the motion passes.

[45:58] Um, with that we're going to go back to our

[46:02] other piece of regular business. It's 8B on the agenda.

[46:06] That's the resolution of support for renaming the DTE Energy House at Leslie

[46:11] Science and Nature Center to the A20 House. So, I believe we have Susan and

[46:17] Misty to talk to us about this. >> Hi everybody, and sorry to ask for the

[46:23] change, but appreciate your accommodation. I'm coming to you from a

[46:26] very hot Denver at the moment. We are excited about this opportunity. You may

[46:31] know OSI, the Office of Sustainability and Innovations, has been working really

[46:35] closely with our Parks Department, such a great collaborator around all things

[46:39] sustainability and for many people a gateway into this work. And we're

[46:42] excited about expanding that collaboration to also include Leslie

[46:45] Science and Nature Center and the Hands-On Museum, where we've done

[46:49] many collaborations historically, but we're really looking to institutionalize

[46:52] that. So, Susan and I have been working for a while on a proposal that would

[46:56] help embed sustainability more formally into Leslie Science and Nature Center in

[47:01] particular. The ultimate objective is to work towards a living learning campus

[47:05] around all things sustainability, making this super engaging as it already is,

[47:09] but enhancing that engagement around the community's goals around carbon

[47:12] neutrality, sustainability broadly. And the gateway into that is the Energy

[47:17] House. The Energy House is a facility where it already has some demonstrations

[47:21] of sustainability in practice. It's not quite to the full decarbonization mark,

[47:25] and we are looking to get it there, to get it over the finish line. So, we got

[47:30] an agreement that we're working on and we'll be bringing to City Council that

[47:33] will include investments to make that a living learning laboratory of

[47:36] sustainability in action, leaning into the incredible skill set that Susan and

[47:40] her team have around education, really making sure that things are

[47:44] understandable and engaging with the public, with the

[47:47] our team has around how to decarbonize a building. And so, I think this is a

[47:50] really exciting collaboration, and in the arc of doing that work, we

[47:54] discovered, lo and behold, the naming rights are available. They have expired

[47:58] for what is now known as the DTE Energy House. And what a moment to maybe rename

[48:03] that the A20 House and have it be that living lab we've talked about. So,

[48:08] that's what's before you today as to see if you would support that as we prepare

[48:11] to go to council with the uh sponsorship of the entire site and some of the work

[48:16] that we're looking to do. So, Susan, anything you want to add there?

[48:20] » I will ask for forgiveness for losing my voice most, um but just to say that

[48:24] Missy and I have been collaborating our teams have been collaborating for

[48:27] several years, and the thing that has come out of all those collaborations is

[48:32] the the hunger that the public has for understanding sustainability, for

[48:35] understanding how it can apply to their lives whether they live in apartment or

[48:38] house or have a business. And um even in the Energy House, we were able to put a

[48:42] heat pump in this past year. It's only been there 6 months. The amount of

[48:46] conversations I've had about a heat pump in 6 months because people are

[48:50] interacting with it in a space where they're publicly um attending a class or

[48:53] a workshop where the kids were in a camp. Um I think this will really reach

[48:57] a lot of people and allow the conversation to be low risk. We're

[49:02] just asking questions. We're just learning more. Um nobody's preaching and

[49:05] nobody's selling anything. And I think it's just going to be an amazing um

[49:07] opportunity. Happy to answer any questions though.

[49:12] » And I and I'll jump in just on one side obviously with this is our renaming um

[49:16] packed meeting um since we seem to have two. Uh

[49:19] the the long-standing agreement between the parks and Leslie Science and Nature

[49:23] Center gives Leslie the ability um the opportunity to rename facilities on

[49:31] their prop on that property different than our normal renaming process that we

[49:36] created just a little bit ago. So, um I just that's how this is coming

[49:40] about that way. I doesn't have to go through the same type of process that we

[49:44] did just with um you know,

[49:47] Dexter Park and that kind of thing. So, just want to make that aware that they

[49:50] it go through their process which was some of the stuff we did with our

[49:53] renaming as well. So.

[49:58] » Larry. >> Uh yes. I my question is how was it

[50:03] originally named DTE House?

[50:08] » You want me to take that Josh or do you want to take that?

[50:10] » Yeah. >> Uh

[50:11] the park was part of the city at the time. So, where Leslie Science and

[50:15] Nature Center is a nonprofit sitting on city park and city buildings.

[50:19] Um but we were all entirely part of the city in 1999 2000 when that building was

[50:23] built. And MichCon was one of the primary supporters of that building. Um

[50:28] DTE then purchased MichCon and it became the DTE House from from that transition.

[50:33] So, that's the short story of it. >> Is DTE still a significant supporter?

[50:39] » They are not.

[50:43] » Thank you.

[50:46] » Um just kind of tying into that question, are there any um sponsorship

[50:50] terms for that name at all or um like any any contracts around the name?

[50:57] » As Missy mentioned, we're bringing an agreement to city council in September.

[51:00] It's a 5-year agreement which includes the naming rights. At the end of 5

[51:04] years, there's an opportunity to renew if both parties still want to.

[51:07] Um but we could always decide that it's not something we want to renew as well.

[51:12] » That agreement is bigger than just naming though. Um so, we're really only

[51:15] under the advisement of Josh bringing the naming forward for y'all because the

[51:20] rest of it is a separate sort of it's in the same agreement but it's not under

[51:24] the purview of PAC. It's really under the purview of city council. And so, in

[51:27] addition to the naming rights, we will be making physical investments at the

[51:30] site, right? We'll be working to decarbonize that site and to set up the

[51:33] educational materials around it. So, OSI will help fund that work.

[51:39] » Yeah, and and Josh, that's that's kind of what we looked at is the fact that

[51:42] what OSI is looking to do for facility improvements and do different things are

[51:47] kind of what we are taking what we would normally look for from a sponsorship

[51:51] sponsorship side. Um, and the fun and the dollars that would go along with

[51:54] that this is that that's where that comes into play. So, it's a little bit

[51:57] less direct dollar amount up front, um, but a long-term relationship where we

[52:01] know there will be some improvements not just for Leslie, but then also some

[52:06] other things that we need to look at long-term at that site as well. So,

[52:09] those are win-wins for us. So. >> Got it. Thanks.

[52:20] » Any other questions or discussion for Susan and Missy?

[52:28] Are a motion to approve? All right, motion to approve by Josh. Do

[52:34] we have a second?

[52:39] Seconded by Tisha. Okay, all those in favor, please raise your hand or say I.

[52:46] All those opposed? Okay, motion passes. Thank you so much

[52:52] Susan and Missy. Um, that brings us to the end of our

[52:56] regular business. We do not have any land acquisition matters today, so that

[53:02] brings us to our second round of public commentary.

[53:06] To speak at public comment, call toll-free 877-853-5247

[53:13] or another of the published numbers on the agenda and enter meeting ID

[53:16] 966-5327-1469.

[53:22] Follow the instructions to raise your hand and indicate that you would like to

[53:25] speak. When it's your turn to speak, please state your first name and

[53:28] address. We allow 3 minutes per speaker. We do not respond in the moment to

[53:33] speakers, but we appreciate you taking the time to call in and share your

[53:36] thoughts with us. Do we have any callers for public

[53:40] comment? >> There is no one in the waiting room.

[53:45] » Okay, thank you. That brings us to the end of our agenda. Your communications

[53:51] are in your packet. And if there's nothing else, we are

[53:56] adjourned. Thank you all.

[54:00] » Thanks, everybody. >> Thank you.

[54:02] » Have a good evening. Bye.

Ann Arbor Park Advisory Meeting 8/18/26

Agenda

Transcript