Post on 28-Mar-2018
MEETING AGENDA Morehead –Delaware Bridge Focus Group Meeting 1 Monday, July 11, 2016 5:00‐7:00 p.m. City Hall (301 E. Huron Street) Second Floor, Council Chambers
I. Welcome, Introductions and Meeting Purpose (10 min)
II. Introductory Materials (10 min)
III. Background (10 min)
IV. Updates (10 min)
V. Goals Discussion (60 min)
VI. Next Steps (20 min)
VII. Public Comment (3 minutes per speaker)
QUESTIONS?
Contact Igor Kotlyar
(ikotlyar@a2gov.org // 734‐794‐6410 ext. 43634)
Morehead-Delaware Pedestrian Bridge Focus Group Roster
Name: Representative of:
1. Chen, Yi Lans Basin
2. Hiller, Steven Lansdowne No. 3
3. Maly, Kris Lansdowne No. 3
4. Merion, Debbie Lansdowne No. 3
5. Psarouthakis, Michael Lans Basin
Lans Basin
1 Morehead‐Delaware Pedestrian Bridge Focus Group
Morehead Delaware Pedestrian Bridge Focus Group
GUIDELINES
July 2016
Introduction
The City of Ann Arbor has formed a focus group of Lans Basin and Lansdowne No. 3 residents to develop
a recommendation for the Morehead‐Delaware Pedestrian Bridge location. The focus group will serve as
representatives of the larger community.
Purpose
The focus group is intended to generate new ideas, provide feedback, and make a recommendation for
the Morehead‐Delaware Bridge. The focus group shall consider preferences of the larger community,
available budget, and engineering feasibility to develop a recommendation.
Membership
The Focus Group consists of individuals from Lans Basin and Lansdowne No. 3 neighborhoods. Interested
prospective focus group participants were asked to contact the designated Lans Basin representative. All
persons who requested participation in the Focus Group were selected. All focus group members have
been asked to commit to engaging in the entire process.
Role and Operating Principles
City staff will manage the community engagement process for the Morehead‐Delaware Pedestrian
Bridge, including support for the focus group through the process of developing their recommendation.
Focus group meetings will be led by staff and will follow an established agenda, set by staff and
distributed to focus group members prior to scheduled meetings. Supporting documents and
supplemental material will be distributed to focus group members in advance of meetings, to the extent
practical. Focus group members are expected to review materials in advance and be prepared to engage
in substantive discussion of the agenda topics.
Focus group members will provide critical feedback toward the development of a recommendation for
this project site. The focus group will serve in an advisory capacity and will not have independent
authority to act in a decision making capacity. Final decision making authority rests with City Council.
All focus group meetings will be conducted as open meetings, including time designated for public
comment. Attendance at focus group meetings by the general public or non‐members will be welcomed
and will follow the guidelines in the Open Meetings Act.
Schedule
The focus group members will serve from the June 2016 through September 2016 at which time a
recommendation for the site will be made to City Council. Three focus group meetings are anticipated.
Focus group meetings will typically be scheduled to run for two hours and will be held at location and
time TBD depending on preferences from the focus group members.
2 Morehead‐Delaware Pedestrian Bridge Focus Group
Focus group members are expected to attend and participate in all meetings unless an unavoidable
conflict arises that necessitates an absence. Prior notice shall be given to city staff if a member is unable
to attend a focus group meeting.
Code of Conduct
At the first focus group meeting the body, as a whole, will agree to a code of conduct in order to move
efficiently through the process. Code of Conduct examples that will be considered include:
o Treat each other with dignity and respect. o Avoid territoriality; try to think about what's good for neighbors and groups, as well as the city
collectively. o Come prepared to meetings showing value and respect for the time and convenience of others. o Discussion at meetings shall not be continually revisited/revised at future meetings. o Those who must miss a meeting are expected to bring themselves up to speed (via reading the
minutes and talking to others) prior to the next meeting, accept that they have missed an opportunity to contribute on a certain topic, and should not expect a rehash of a discussion that was missed.
Morehead‐Delaware Pedestrian Bridge Public Meeting: Polling question responses
June 7, 2016
Audience response technology was used at the June 7 meeting to gather feedback electronically.
Questions were asked with multiple choice response options. A tally of the responses provided at the
meeting are shared below.
Question Percent Count
Where do you live?
Lans Basin 39.47% 15
Lansdowne Neighborhood (outside of Lans Basin) 52.63% 20
Outside of the Lansdowne Neighborhood 7.89% 3
Total 100% 38
How long have you lived in the Lansdowne Neighborhood?
Less than one year 2.44% 1
1‐5 years 2.44% 1
6‐10 years 4.88% 2
11+ years 85.37% 35
I do not live in the Lansdowne Neighborhood 4.88% 2
Total 100% 41
How often did you use the Morehead‐Delaware pedestrian bridge?
Daily 39.47% 15
Weekly 31.58% 12
Several times a month 21.05% 8
Several times a year 5.26% 2
I did not use the bridge 2.63% 1
Total 100% 38
How did you use the Morehead‐Delaware pedestrian bridge?
Recreation 51.28% 20
Commuting 2.56% 1
Other 0% 0
All of the above 43.59% 17
I did not use the bridge 2.56% 1
Total 100% 39
Considering the information shared today, what is your preferred option?
No bridge 0% 0
Minimum width bridge 78.57% 33
All season bridge 16.67% 7
Other 0% 0
Undecided 4.76% 2
Total 100% 42
Morehead‐DelawarePedestrianBridgeQuestionsandAnswers
Last updated: 7/7/2016
Questions compiled below were identified from notes taken at the June 7 public meeting. Staff have
provided answers below, where feasible. Outstanding items in need of further investigation are noted in
italics.
What is the history of the previous bridge?
The bridge was constructed by the developer in City right‐of‐way (ROW) when the Lansdowne
No. 3 and Lans Basin neighborhoods were built (late 1970s – early 1980s). The bridge was
constructed resting on top of the private weir that forms the upper pond of Mallets Creek in the
Lans Basin neighborhood. As the weir aged, the bridge stability became a concern. The City
removed the bridge in approximately 2010.
What was the width and span of the original bridge?
This information has not yet been located in City records.
What will the process look like for refining the cost estimate?
A design contract is required to develop a cost estimate for construction. The design contract for
this project was presented to council for their consideration in March 2016 but was not
approved. In lieu of an approved design contract, a planning level cost estimate provides a
preliminary figure based on a study but may not be sufficient to proceed with construction. The
City currently has a planning level cost estimate for the project. Depending of the parameters of
the focus group recommendation the City may be able to utilize an existing general services
agreement to have a consultant develop a new planning level cost estimate.
What work has been completed toward this project since the 2016 budget approval? Note:
the 2016 budget (voted on in May 2015) was amended to include the Morehead‐Delaware
Bridge project.
Funding was approved for this project in May 2015, there were no available staff to begin
working on the project until fall 2015. The request for proposal (RFP) was posted in January
2016 and a consultant was selected in February 2016. The professional service agreement for
design of this project was presented to council for consideration in March 2016.
What will next steps look like?
A focus group of Lansdowne and Lans Basin residents will meet with City staff throughout July
and August 2016 to develop a recommendation for this project site. The focus group
recommendation will be shared with the public in advance of being presented to City Council in
September 2016.
What requirements must be followed to successfully install a bridge at this location?
A bridge at this location would need to meet the requirements of all permits including but not
limited to: wetlands, Washtenaw County Water Resources Commission (WCWRC), threatened
and endangered species concerns, soil erosion and sediment control, and MDEQ. Compliance
with the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) is required. Construction of the bridge as a
separate structure, independent from the existing weir, is required.
What items would the City prefer to see in this location, but are not required?
The City does not have any specific interest or desires for this location. Rather, the City’s role is
Morehead‐DelawarePedestrianBridgeQuestionsandAnswers
Last updated: 7/7/2016
to provide an outcome that reflects the community’s interests while adhering to necessary
regulations, requirements, and engineering best practices.
What is the short‐term plan to address safety concerns at the existing site?
A short term plan to address safety will be discussed with the focus group.
What would maintenance look like for a bridge at this location?
The City of Ann Arbor would provide long term maintenance for the bridge, consistent with City
practices for other sidewalks and pathways. The City of Ann Arbor is not proposing winter
maintenance for the bridge.
What does the process look like for the City to turn over the ROW to private ownership?
City staff are working to confirm this process with the Attorney’s Office.
Is it possible for the bridge to be constructed by neighborhood residents?
The most likely scenario where neighbors are able to construct the bridge would be if the ROW
is abandoned by the City first. City staff are working to confirm with the Attorney’s Office
whether it is possible for neighbors to construct the bridge.
Could a prefabricated bridge work in this space?
Yes, however, the unique site considerations that were shared at the June 7 public meeting
would apply for any bridge installation.
What similar City projects have been completed in the past few years? Can these be used as
comparative examples for this project?
No comparable projects that share this site’s unique considerations have been identified within
City records.