Mhm.
» Welcome to the August 18th meeting of the Ann Arbor Parks and Advisory
Commission. This meeting is being conducted
electronically and will be broadcast live on CTN cable channel 16 and online
at A2 gov.org/watchctn.
To speak at public comment, call toll-free 877-853-5247
or at another of the published numbers on the agenda and enter meeting ID
966-5327-1469.
Josh, would you like to call roll?
» I'll do. Uh, Commissioner Bush.
Commissioner O'Connell. >> Here in Ann Arbor.
» Commissioner Montague. >> Here in Ann Arbor.
» Commissioner Polawsky. >> Here in Ann Arbor.
» Commissioner Skiles. >> Here in Ann Arbor.
» Commissioner Smith. >> Here in Ann Arbor.
» Commissioner Winslow. >> Here in Ann Arbor.
» Council member Radina. >> Here in Ann Arbor.
» Council member Watson. >> Here in Ann Arbor.
» You have a quorum.
» Wonderful. That brings us to our agenda. Are there any changes to the agenda?
Hearing no changes, the agenda is approved and that brings us to our first
public commentary. To speak at public comment, call
toll-free 877-853-5247
or another of the published numbers on the agenda and enter meeting ID
966-5327-1469.
Follow the instructions to raise your hand to indicate you'd like to speak.
When it's your turn to speak, state your first name and address. We allow 3
minutes per speaker. We do not respond in the moment to speakers, but we
appreciate you taking the time to call in and share your thoughts.
Do we have any callers for public comment?
» There are no callers waiting online.
» Okay, that brings us to approval of the July meeting minutes. Is there any
discussion or corrections to the minutes?
Or a motion to approve?
All right, motion by Josh.
Seconded by Larry. All those in favor, raise your hand or
say I.
All right, motion passes. That brings us to We don't have any
presentations. Um so, that brings us to reports.
So, off back to you, Josh. >> Thank you very much.
Um Just a few items today. Um we since July
1st, um Parks has posted three full-time positions um that were approved in this
year's budget that we're very excited about. Um there are two park operation
Aspen positions as well as a park planner um position. Uh
all three of them are in various stages of the
um posting, interviewing, onboarding
process, well, not hiring process. Um, but we were very excited about the
various um, quality of of candidates we got for all of those postings. So,
exciting to bring full-time staff onto um, the team. Um, is much needed
throughout um, the the park system. Uh, additionally, we as we approach the end
of the summer, um,
we with people going back to school, park facilities will begin adjusting
hours soon. Uh, one thing that we're very excited about this year is we are
anticipating all three pools um, remaining open through Labor Day.
Um, while there will be some uh, hours adjustments adjustments once
AAPS schools go back in session, um, particularly um, at Veterans and Buhr.
Um, and then the libraries will adjust their hours post Labor Day. So, um, if
you're heading out to one of our facilities um, later this month or into
September, make sure you check the website to get uh, more information.
Um, as far as um, volunteer opportunities, parks remain a
great volunteer opportunity for individuals, groups, businesses, or
clubs. Uh, we have several um, upcoming work
days in various parks as well as the opportunity to adopt various parks. So,
um, if you're interested in giving back to the park system, um, please or you
want more information, um, please contact volunteer staff at
volunteer@a2gov.org.
Uh, just some exciting news about a couple park um, projects.
Um, work at South Maple Park and the soon potentially to be renamed um,
Dexter Road Park um, is moving along nicely.
Um, lots of excitement over on the west side of the of the city with some um,
park improvements taking place on there. Uh, there currently are some minor
repairs and inspections taking place at various parts along the the border to
border. Um, right now, um,
to make some improvements on that, we anticipate impacts being uh, minimal,
but please be mindful um, as there will be some work going on um, near Vandemere
and near um, Gallup um, over the coming coming weeks. Uh,
exciting news, uh, the nature playground construction at uh, Mushroom Park is
ongoing. Um, if you get an opportunity to get out there, it's really kind of a
neat process to see um, the transition of a a uh,
tree that needed to be removed into a nature playground. So, take the
opportunity to go see that. Lots of fun. Um,
we had a wonderful event um,
uh, this past weekend at West Park. Uh, the party in the park went well um,
despite despite being overcast. Um, we had about 200 people attend. Um,
we had a new food truck um, on site and a band performed um, a couple bands
performed. So, um, participants had a good time with music, crafts, face
painting um,
and we got to use a dunk tank um, this past weekend. So, fun way to
activate that park um, which is which is exciting. So, thank you to Torrie and
her staff for putting that together. Uh, and then lastly
um, with this being the inaugural season of the Bicentennial Splash Pad, there is
a survey out to see how people feel about that. So, we encourage people to
go to the Bicentennial page at engage.a2gov.org
um, to provide their feedback. So, lots of things going on uh, into the summer.
It's always a busy and fun time as we transition from hot weather into much
more pleasant fall weather. So, that's all I got.
» Thanks, Josh. Any questions?
All right, that brings us to committees. Hannah, are there any rec updates?
» Rec does not meet during the summer, so no update for me.
» Okay, that brings us to our regular business then.
Um, our first piece of business is the resolution recommending the
authorization of the publication of notice of intent to issue capital
improvement bonds for various park capital improvements, and I think Remi's
going to talk to us about that. >> Yep.
It's me again. How are you all doing? Thanks,
um,
in advance for sticking with me through this presentation. So, uh, yes, uh, back
to discuss the, um, 2026 parks and recreation bond that would be based off
of uh, the parks park maintenance and
capital improvements millage revenue. Um, so, again, to recap, in, uh,
November 2024, um, the voters did approve a renewal of our existing park
maintenance and capital improvements millage at the same millage rate, but
this time, uh, for a 20-year, um, period. So, that runs from 2025, uh, and
through 2044. >> [sighs]
» Um, leading up to this conversation about
using that millage revenue, uh, to issue a bond and utilize bond funding, um, the
the context behind that was the findings that were developed in 2023 through our
ADA transition plan, as well as the final conclusion of the asset management
plan in 2025 that indicated the vast, um,
uh, needs of the park system and quantified them in a way that we had not
previously had numbers attached to. Um, so, with that, the planned
enhancements and updates that we would be doing, uh,
in the coming years would readily utilize a, uh, $10 million bond for
those city park improvements. Um,
so, details on the bond itself, again, this is a $10 million capital
improvement bond specific to capital projects, uh, funded by the park
maintenance and capital improvements millage.
The total bond amount was determined based on the availability of millage
revenue to pay the debt service to the bond. Um,
uh, of the millage revenue earmarked for capital improvements. So,
um, we would be paying annually
approximately, uh, $850,000 toward the bond.
Um, and, uh, the bond term is 14 and 1/2 years at, uh, the interest rate worked
on with our finance team and consultants, um,
uh, bond experts. And then, the key here is that all bond projects would need to
be completed, uh, within 3 years. So, that puts us on a, um, a fast timeline
to make quick use of these, uh, bond funds.
The entire interest estimated over the life of the bond would be 2.8 million.
In terms of what projects the bond might fund, um, we've
categorized it into some general buckets of, uh, infrastructure, mechanical
systems, playgrounds, courts, facilities, shelters, and addressing a
lot of the, um, or potentially addressing several ADA barriers that
were identified in the ADA transition plan.
Um, we all know that the park system has many asset uh, capital asset challenges.
Um, Um, and so we would try to earmark all of those for improvements
and upgrades in those buckets.
And then in terms of the opportunity cost, I just
you know, there's that 2.8 million in interest could
be a question mark for you all and that's that's well understood on staff's
part about that opportunity cost of whether to pay that
versus allowing the millage revenue to come in
incrementally instead of having an influx of 10 million in available
capital over that short period of 3 years. Um,
what we have seen is a dramatic increase in project capital project costs, labor,
materials, supplies, etc. Design and so forth. So, that increase over the last 5
years that we've seen throughout all of the Park City projects that Adam Hillary
Marina and others are leading for the city
represents what potential we could see in terms of inflation
over a longer period of time in excess of 2.8 million
that could be premium on those projects as inflation accrues. So,
it's no one has a crystal ball. We don't know the
a certain future of costs and inflation, but in general
that is how we conceptualize that opportunity cost and weigh that
ourselves. And so the resolution before you
would be to authorize the issue and set the public notice that is required for
the bonds issuance for 45 days and then the issuance of the bond after that
notice of intent period is over.
Happy to answer any questions.
» Any questions for Remy?
» Um I think I have one quick question. Um so when will PAC receive like a like an
itemized list of um like how these bonds are going to be
um distributed throughout the park system and which projects are going to
be in the pipeline? >> Uh I can go ahead and jump on that one,
Remy. Uh yes, I mean I think that you know, as we move forward um kind of at
this point we don't have to have we have we need to have a generalized bucket of
of items for the bond um as we go past these 45 days and we need to get into
the in the issuance. There needs to be a
little bit more concrete with it. So, we'll have
um we'll have a better understanding of what we anticipate being the the primary
projects with it. Um and then as we come to any of these projects as we do with
all of our construction, we will begin we will come to PAC first. Um just
because we have these funds available doesn't mean that we don't go through
all the other processes that we do with PAC. So, um but we will we will be
identifying what our plan is. Um and as it is kind of mentioned, you
know, one of the things is you know, our goal is to spend the 10 million as
um as as effectively for the community as
possible. Um you know, at the end of the day
there's going to be some things that we probably have to scale up and some
things that we scale down through those 3 years.
Um you know, in a in a in a concept mind, the idea of doing two or three
playgrounds per year is a wonderful idea until there's a major project that costs
$100,000 more. And so, we're going to have to scale that back down to it. So,
um yeah, I would anticipate as as we get towards the end of this 45-day process
and the issuance um that they'll be kind of a general general under ex- a general
pro- we will provide a general statement of what we anticipate this
being. Um again, the project list is always going to be a little
iffy just because depending on how funds come about, but um
as I as as we will definitely share what we we plan to do. Um so
priority one, priority two, and priority three as we go through this process.
» Mhm. Perfect. Thanks.
» Uh and just one other thing I want to just for for add to it. Um you know, I
think when we spoke about it, but just a little bit more clarity. So, um the
funds that we utilize for for capital improvements is one of the five buckets
of the millage that we have. Um and that that bucket is about right
now about 2.5 million annually. So, the 850
thousand is is out of that 2.5. Um you know, what we're what we're what we
anticipate is the idea of um we we anticipate as we've seen um and
we hope that the millage will continue to grow based on property values and and
more people coming into the city. Um so, we anticipate seeing that that grow and
so that 2.5 in in 5 years we hope will be higher, but that 8.5
that we did these projects with will or 8 and a half 850 annually will be the
same amount even if that number goes up. So, we feel like there'll be
opportunities to address some of the um the needs within the park system
still on an annual basis um because we'll have that about
60% of the the contingency funds there to work on those projects and the things
that are coming about. So, um we got a lot to work on. Um
this just gives us an opportunity to to to address some things that we really
need to focus on um here in the short term.
» Thank you. Any other questions or a motion to approve?
» I'd like to motion to approve. >> Thank you, Rachel.
» I second. >> Thank you.
Um all those in favor, please raise your hand or say I.
All those opposed?
All right, the motion passes. Thank you. That brings us to our second
piece of business, which is the resolution of support for renaming the
DT DTE Energy House at the Leslie Science and Nature Center to the A20
House. And I believe I saw Susan here. Oh, sorry, Josh.
» We're we're still waiting on combination. So, if we can
there's Susan and another person that are going to be working so
we can go to the next one. Um >> you.
» I mean, we'll be >> We'll
» Perfect. Um so, the next one the next piece of regular business is the
resolution to recommend that 2570 Dexter Avenue Park be renamed George Henry
Jewett the second park. Um and
believe Remy is back for that one. >> Me again.
All right. Uh
Suppose the resolution title is a little bit of a spoiler alert, but bear with me
while I build anticipation. Um
So, in 2021, uh the city purchased this parcel um of
land at Dexter Road and Seebold Boulevard back here. Road.
Maybe I'm wrong. I can't remember what the other cross roads are there at the
corner. But, um it's about .6 acres.
Uh it was always envisioned as a collaborative um joint acquisition in
partnership with the Ann Arbor Housing Commission
who would take ownership of the northernmost parcel, which is not
outlined in red here. Um and then the city park system would retain ownership
of the parcels to the um south, east, west. Um
outlined in red here. Uh so, we purchased jointly for $184,000
uh in 2021. And then it has been sitting there on our books as 2570
uh Dexter Ave Park for quite some time. Our Visit Every Park Challenge
participants really love that name. You know, it has such a ring to it and they
can't wait to get there and see what's there. And a lot of them uh
I hope participated in this survey given their experience and direct connection
to the property. So,
uh I I
hate to steal Adam's thunder here given that he's worked really hard on this
project in collaboration with the Ann Arbor Housing Commission, but here's a
sneak peek at what Josh referenced in the
manager's report of the improvements that are actively underway at this park.
So, we have a pavilion, basketball court,
grills, picnic table, water fountain, bioswale, uh all going in right now. Um
my understanding from Adam is that most of this should be completed this fall um
and then total completion of the um park renovations and improvements should be
done in the spring of 2027. Uh
So, now that it's coming to life in a new way and it's going to have a lot of
increased use, it is time to transition this park from uh its current name of
2570 Dexter Ave Park to a new name. So, we are taking it through our more
our standardized naming process, which aligns with our
adopted and PAC approved naming guidelines and criteria. So, the survey
opened in late February, closed in late March.
29 nominations were submitted by the community. Um
There were I I know this is an odd sentence, so I'll just unpack it a
little. There were no park-supported nominations that received duplicate
nominations by the community. So, even though there were several submissions
for Parky McParkface, I am sad to say park staff do not support that.
So, in that there were no other duplicative
nominations that would indicate a majority vote or or interest,
one of the most powerful nominations on the list of 29
was that to honor Dr. George Henry Jewett II.
And so,
who is Dr. George Henry Jewett II? For those that don't know
this remarkable man in Ann Arbor history,
George Jewett was born and raised in Ann Arbor.
He was the captain of the high school debate team, football team, baseball
team, and the valedictorian of the 1889 Ann Arbor High School class.
Now Pioneer, first African American football player
at both the University of Michigan and Northwestern University.
Um After graduation from Northwestern,
George Jewett became a doctor in Chicago and practiced for many years until
returning to Ann Arbor in 1880 or 1899. Um,
the act clear this is an outstanding uh legacy and those academic and athletic
achievements um of Dr. George Henry Jewett II reflect um
our community values and the city wishes to honor
uh those through this rare opportunity to rename or name a city park. Uh so and
just to confirm for you all this nomination does conform with the
existing and adopted um parks guidelines for naming a city park.
So with that, the resolution is yours for consideration.
Any questions? I'm I'm not the deepest expert in the history of George Jewett,
but there are others here who may be and I understand that his legacy um
continued on through generations of uh really prominent figures here in the Ann
Arbor community um and surrounding community and it continues on to this
day. >> Yeah.
» The Jewett family is a uh
longstanding um community family and service family and well
respected um around Ann Arbor. Um and so I'm excited about this.
» Yeah, I agree with Tisha. It's a great choice, great name.
» Any other questions or discussion?
Or a motion to approve? >> I'd like to motion to approve, please.
» And I'll definitely second it. >> Great. Thank you, Rachel and Tisha. All
those in favor, please raise your hand or say I.
All those opposed? Okay, the motion passes.
Thank you. That brings us to our next piece of
business, which is the resolution to recommend approval of a construction
contract with the Inner City Contracting LLC for the West Park Bandshell
Demolition Project. And I believe Adam is going to walk us through this one.
» Thank you. Yeah, let me share my screen real quick.
Uh can you see my screen? >> Yes.
» Yes. >> All right.
Um yeah, what I want to do is provide a little update on the West Park Bandshell
project um and there is a resolution um for you to act on. Um I'll just give you
a little bit of information on it. Um what I do is just a quick background
on how we got to this point, talk about the engagement efforts and what we heard
just really briefly, um
talk about the demolition plan overview, what we're going to do and how we
developed that, and then talk about looking forward at West Park and and
what's next. Um What's my Teams?
Um so background. So um this nothing new here, but in 2021, we um started
noticing some cracks in the Bandshell. We immediately started um we shut it
down. We hired um Hello Roth and Clark HRC um to do a structural assessment on
the on the facility. Um they found that the foundations were severely
compromised and at the [clears throat] time we were looking around $2 million
to repair the structure. Given the cost that this was and the
value to the community, we knew that there needed to be a robust community
engagement effort. Um so we launched kind of a multi-year engagement process.
Um we had really good turnout. I thought it was very successful. Um at the end of
it, um, the conclusion of it, staff came to to PAC last year and recommended that
we demolish the bandshell structure and then move forward with revisioning of
the park.
Uh, just going over the engagement effort real quick. So, we had an
informational webinar for the community that was well attended. Um, we had a
resident focus group with, um, households that lived on or adjacent to
the park or road right nearby. We had stakeholder focus
groups, um, who groups that used it in the past, groups that may use it in the
future. We had, um, this is our first time doing pop-up sessions at the park.
So, we had say it 10 of them throughout the throughout the time period and we
would go out with a a pop-up tent, talk about what was happening, um, and try to
get engagement that way. Um, getting the word out. We had an online survey with
1,300, um, community members responding to it. Um, it was open for for quite a
while and we we got some good feedback on that. And we had a steering committee
that was on the internal side of the city side, um, looking at this project
as we move forward. What we heard was that
the community, while they cared about the bandshell, they really wanted an
activated West Park. They wanted a flexible space that could be used for
more activation events that were out there. They really valued ADA
accessibility, which if you're familiar with the park, the bandshell right now
is not accessible. It's it's in the middle of the park. There's no
accessible parking to get to it. It's really hard for someone with
accessibility challenges. Um, stormwater management and flood
management is really important to that community, especially with, um, kind of
the drainage that we have happening through the middle of the park off of
7th. Um, safety, fiscal prudence, these were items that were important to the
community. Um,
and just stepping back just a second, we were not able to improve the the
bandshell in its location by expanding the footprint. We were limited because
it is in the floodway. So, a lot of these items that were brought to us
about new restrooms, ADA, things like that, were not able to be done um to the
structure, which is one of the reasons we moved forward with recommending that
it get demolished.
Um so, where all this came from is we we
started moving forward putting together a demolition
um package RFP to go out and I actually went ITB. Um we had Hubble, Roth, and
Clark, the architect of record. Um they pulled together the documents. We had
Tetra Tech, um an environmental testing consultant, um out there to monitor
kind of the groundwater, um dioxin, things like that that
may be prevalent or be there in the in the area where the
bandshell cuz we're removing it from a flood plane. So, there's a little bit
more there. So, we brought on Tetra Tech. We have OHM Advisors who's helping
with permitting and construction administration.
Um we were able to pull this package together over the last year.
Um and we published it in June of this year, and we received two bids for the
work. Um Inner City Contracting LLC, um they were the lowest responsible
bidder at 437,968.
Um E.T. McKenzie was the other bid that we received at around 600,000.
Looking at the plan, so our plan is to remove the bandshell, the foundations,
all associated utilities that are out there,
um improve the site drainage, um really connecting the the storm water that
moves through there, allowing it to pass as though it wants to naturally as part
of the creek bed. Um we'll be putting in new native plantings that both match
kind of what's out there in the existing storm water. We also thought it'd be
really cool to highlight where the bandshell's footprint is. So, we're
going to be putting in um birch, um so um several white just tall trees that
kind of outline the bandshell stage with some really kind of cool plantings in
front of it to kind of at least give a nod to what was there
in the past. And so, you will have this native landscape kind
of moving throughout and then we will have a more formal planting where the
bandstand itself is. Really excited to see kind of how that
comes out. And then
construction access will be on the south path by the bandstand and that will be
rebuilt as part of this project. So, that's kind of what will will be
happening out there as a whole. On a regulatory side, so we have run the
demolition plans through different city staff and agencies here.
We've coordinated with Eagle, so that took some time because we are moving a
structure from the the floodway. So, we got approval from them to move
forward. We installed both permanent and
temporary monitoring wells around the bandstand both to determine
the the groundwater depth since we'll be kind of excavating into it as well as to
monitor any dioxin levels that are present out there.
As of our last reading, there were not any
traces of it that were picked up in our monitoring wells. So, we just want to be
cognizant of that as the all the data shows it is moving that
way, so we just wanted to make sure that we're not going to be impacting that.
Um and then just impacts to the park. So,
if this is approved, we will be moving forward and hopefully
get the majority of demolition done by the end of this year.
That's removing all the structure, working on the regrading.
Next spring when the time is right, that's when we'll likely do a lot of the
planting to give them the most success for being out there.
We that north the walkway on the north side is going to remain open, so people
still be able to get east and West through the park and move through it.
Um and we're just going to continue monitoring dioxin levels that are out
there. Um
just to make sure nothing else comes up.
And then what's next at West Park? So um once this demolishing gets kind of
underway and taken care of, we'll start a visioning process. We're working to
develop that plan right now. We don't have it to to share.
Um but we envision this taking off really early next year. Um
So that's something that to that we'll be looking at. How we're getting those
community needs again. We'll look at kind of the data that we pulled from the
first round of engagement. We'll try and craft a process to be able to to really
get a a park that the community wants. Um
» [clears throat] >> In addition to that, we we've already
Josh just mentioned one of them, but we had a party in the park just a couple
days ago out there, but we've had two others um over the last year. So there's
been three total. Um Victoria was talking with her earlier who runs these.
Um so they're still getting really good turnout um around 200 plus people coming
out to these. There's a real kind of like the community building atmosphere
out there. Um you see we got tug-of-war going on. I
did want to put this picture in the lower left. That is a temporary stage
that we were able to set up at the ball field.
Um so we are able to have those concerts and those those events that that draw
people in, food trucks, things like that. Um
And then in addition I just want to talk about the pros plan real quick. So we
are working on that 2020 2032 pros plan. Um and so that's
one of the major outcomes of that is helping us create a decision-making
framework when we do projects that that balance our financial resources, the
capital needs that we have, um and taking into account the community
priorities and values. So that's running not specific to West Park, but we're
getting data from that and working with consultants. Then that process will
inform kind of how we move forward with the visioning
process overall as it fits into the larger park scheme.
So I have this uh it's a resolution to recommend approval of a construction
contract with Inner City Contracting um for the West Park bandshell
demolition at $481,765.72.
Um that does include a 10% contingency on the demolition in case there are
anything that come up um throughout this process. So
um with that I'll take any questions. Thank
you for for hearing me out.
» All right, Travis. >> Thanks. Um Adam, I see in the resolution
that it mentions the that Inner City was the lowest responsible contractor. Did
this go through best value process and if not, is there a reason why?
» Yeah, this went through the Sorry. Um
This went through the ITB process. Um that was one of the discussions cuz it's
not it's more of a service as though we're removing a facility, not doing a
new construction or an improvement to the city. So there was some that we were
talking with legal and procurement. There's it's a gray area when we come to
removing a structure. Um and so that this was their kind of
advice to move forward with the ITB version.
» Okay. I imagine that will be a question at council as well and so this might be
an area where we want to discuss in the future cuz I think we want to run
everything as as much as possible through best value.
» Yeah. Thank you. Thank you.
» Mary? >> Yeah, Adam, the you were describing the
the walkway I think you called it the north walkway
would still be there. Yeah. Is that Is that So that would be what was what's
currently in in front of what was the stage?
» Yeah. So that's that there's the stamped concrete kind of
plaza right in front of it. So yeah, it's the walk that comes into that and
then leaves. So it connects 7th down there.
So that will remain open. >> Okay. Yeah, that's good.
And one other question, have we looked at and I don't know if
it's it's a should be a part of this project
or something else, but looked at lighting in the park?
» Yeah, there has been a few things in the past
some trials that that we've looked at. I think one of the things when this
project came up is we knew that there was the the band shell issue that we
were dealing with in the center and we were doing this visioning project. I
think it's something that we are considering as we move forward.
Especially understanding that safety is a component was one of the big things
that came out of engagement and you have that kind of long path that cuts through
there. So it's definitely something that we
have considered and I imagine will come out in this
visioning process. >> Okay, thanks.
» I don't have a question, but I just wanted to thank you for how thoroughly
you went about doing community engagement around this
and how thoughtfully you've really put together this plan and thoughts about
the future. I look forward to seeing what's next.
» Thank you.
» Yeah, I just want to I just quickly add I mean this is this has been a big
project since since I've taken this over.
You know, we we've we've started this process to understand what what does
this park look like moving forward. And and we understand the value that it
has and and with all of our parks our goal is to
to to find a way to activate them and engage them moving forward into the to
the future and and while this is a this is a
hard recommendation to make, it is one that we feel that is best for this park
and this community and this park system moving forward. So,
um, and and Adam has done an awful lot of work. Um, I was at most of those
pop-ups as well and and they were really really good conversations and I think
once you're out in front of it you kind of see what the reality is there.
Um, doesn't mean that it's easy. Um, doesn't
mean that we we like necessarily some of the things we have to do, but I good
conversations and and Adam did a really great job of making this work. So, um,
so that's all I really have.
» Thanks, Josh. Any other questions, discussion, or a motion to approve?
» One point of clarification for you all, just so you're aware, I'm sorry if you
said this, Adam, but um, the number you see here on the slide
is the combined uh, contingency and um,
bid amount. So, that that is why it's reflecting a higher value than what the
bid was.
» I'll move to approve. >> Thank you, Anna.
» I'll second that. >> Thank you, Rachel.
Okay. All those in favor, please say I or raise your hand.
Okay. All those opposed?
» Um, I'd like to abstain if possible.
» Okay. I believe the motion passes.
Um, with that we're going to go back to our
other piece of regular business. It's 8B on the agenda.
That's the resolution of support for renaming the DTE Energy House at Leslie
Science and Nature Center to the A20 House. So, I believe we have Susan and
Misty to talk to us about this. >> Hi everybody, and sorry to ask for the
change, but appreciate your accommodation. I'm coming to you from a
very hot Denver at the moment. We are excited about this opportunity. You may
know OSI, the Office of Sustainability and Innovations, has been working really
closely with our Parks Department, such a great collaborator around all things
sustainability and for many people a gateway into this work. And we're
excited about expanding that collaboration to also include Leslie
Science and Nature Center and the Hands-On Museum, where we've done
many collaborations historically, but we're really looking to institutionalize
that. So, Susan and I have been working for a while on a proposal that would
help embed sustainability more formally into Leslie Science and Nature Center in
particular. The ultimate objective is to work towards a living learning campus
around all things sustainability, making this super engaging as it already is,
but enhancing that engagement around the community's goals around carbon
neutrality, sustainability broadly. And the gateway into that is the Energy
House. The Energy House is a facility where it already has some demonstrations
of sustainability in practice. It's not quite to the full decarbonization mark,
and we are looking to get it there, to get it over the finish line. So, we got
an agreement that we're working on and we'll be bringing to City Council that
will include investments to make that a living learning laboratory of
sustainability in action, leaning into the incredible skill set that Susan and
her team have around education, really making sure that things are
understandable and engaging with the public, with the
our team has around how to decarbonize a building. And so, I think this is a
really exciting collaboration, and in the arc of doing that work, we
discovered, lo and behold, the naming rights are available. They have expired
for what is now known as the DTE Energy House. And what a moment to maybe rename
that the A20 House and have it be that living lab we've talked about. So,
that's what's before you today as to see if you would support that as we prepare
to go to council with the uh sponsorship of the entire site and some of the work
that we're looking to do. So, Susan, anything you want to add there?
» I will ask for forgiveness for losing my voice most, um but just to say that
Missy and I have been collaborating our teams have been collaborating for
several years, and the thing that has come out of all those collaborations is
the the hunger that the public has for understanding sustainability, for
understanding how it can apply to their lives whether they live in apartment or
house or have a business. And um even in the Energy House, we were able to put a
heat pump in this past year. It's only been there 6 months. The amount of
conversations I've had about a heat pump in 6 months because people are
interacting with it in a space where they're publicly um attending a class or
a workshop where the kids were in a camp. Um I think this will really reach
a lot of people and allow the conversation to be low risk. We're
just asking questions. We're just learning more. Um nobody's preaching and
nobody's selling anything. And I think it's just going to be an amazing um
opportunity. Happy to answer any questions though.
» And I and I'll jump in just on one side obviously with this is our renaming um
packed meeting um since we seem to have two. Uh
the the long-standing agreement between the parks and Leslie Science and Nature
Center gives Leslie the ability um the opportunity to rename facilities on
their prop on that property different than our normal renaming process that we
created just a little bit ago. So, um I just that's how this is coming
about that way. I doesn't have to go through the same type of process that we
did just with um you know,
Dexter Park and that kind of thing. So, just want to make that aware that they
it go through their process which was some of the stuff we did with our
renaming as well. So.
» Larry. >> Uh yes. I my question is how was it
originally named DTE House?
» You want me to take that Josh or do you want to take that?
» Yeah. >> Uh
the park was part of the city at the time. So, where Leslie Science and
Nature Center is a nonprofit sitting on city park and city buildings.
Um but we were all entirely part of the city in 1999 2000 when that building was
built. And MichCon was one of the primary supporters of that building. Um
DTE then purchased MichCon and it became the DTE House from from that transition.
So, that's the short story of it. >> Is DTE still a significant supporter?
» They are not.
» Thank you.
» Um just kind of tying into that question, are there any um sponsorship
terms for that name at all or um like any any contracts around the name?
» As Missy mentioned, we're bringing an agreement to city council in September.
It's a 5-year agreement which includes the naming rights. At the end of 5
years, there's an opportunity to renew if both parties still want to.
Um but we could always decide that it's not something we want to renew as well.
» That agreement is bigger than just naming though. Um so, we're really only
under the advisement of Josh bringing the naming forward for y'all because the
rest of it is a separate sort of it's in the same agreement but it's not under
the purview of PAC. It's really under the purview of city council. And so, in
addition to the naming rights, we will be making physical investments at the
site, right? We'll be working to decarbonize that site and to set up the
educational materials around it. So, OSI will help fund that work.
» Yeah, and and Josh, that's that's kind of what we looked at is the fact that
what OSI is looking to do for facility improvements and do different things are
kind of what we are taking what we would normally look for from a sponsorship
sponsorship side. Um, and the fun and the dollars that would go along with
that this is that that's where that comes into play. So, it's a little bit
less direct dollar amount up front, um, but a long-term relationship where we
know there will be some improvements not just for Leslie, but then also some
other things that we need to look at long-term at that site as well. So,
those are win-wins for us. So. >> Got it. Thanks.
» Any other questions or discussion for Susan and Missy?
Are a motion to approve? All right, motion to approve by Josh. Do
we have a second?
Seconded by Tisha. Okay, all those in favor, please raise your hand or say I.
All those opposed? Okay, motion passes. Thank you so much
Susan and Missy. Um, that brings us to the end of our
regular business. We do not have any land acquisition matters today, so that
brings us to our second round of public commentary.
To speak at public comment, call toll-free 877-853-5247
or another of the published numbers on the agenda and enter meeting ID
966-5327-1469.
Follow the instructions to raise your hand and indicate that you would like to
speak. When it's your turn to speak, please state your first name and
address. We allow 3 minutes per speaker. We do not respond in the moment to
speakers, but we appreciate you taking the time to call in and share your
thoughts with us. Do we have any callers for public
comment? >> There is no one in the waiting room.
» Okay, thank you. That brings us to the end of our agenda. Your communications
are in your packet. And if there's nothing else, we are
adjourned. Thank you all.
» Thanks, everybody. >> Thank you.
» Have a good evening. Bye.