[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.