So It's not great. I'll call this meeting to order. Study session of the board at 06:04PM. Miss Olzinski, may we have a roll call, please? Trustee Mohammed? Here. President Feaster? Here. Trustee Wilkins? Here. Trustee Wilkes? Here. Trustee Vasquez? Yes. Trustee Wilkerson? Present. Trustee Schmidt? Present. Thank you. Trustees, before I accept or entertain a motion to approve the agenda, I did receive a request from Thurston community members to add five minutes to the agenda so they can, so they can, speak to the board. So I would be I would be,
seeking a motion to add that if the board would like, please. I second that. I'll move. Second. Thank you. Motion by by trustee by trustee Wilkerson. Second. I'm sorry. President Feaster, the face Thurston Nature Center wants to speak. Who wants to speak? No. These are parents in the Thurston community Okay. Who would like to speak. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for that clarification. No problem. Are we at the discussion phase? Yes. Okay. So five minutes, is that enough time? If they wanna go longer, I have no problem with them going longer. I mean, I I mean,
I think it's only fair to be flexible for them. Yes. I think I think their request was five minutes, but, obviously, if it exceeds that, I don't have an objection to that. I have no problem. I totally support it. Thank you so much. No problem. Any other discussion? Okay. I'm sorry. It it was, you moved it? Well, I introduced it. Trustee Wilkerson moved it. Trustee Schmidt supported it. Thank you. And we are ready whenever you are. There are no there's no further discussion. Very good. Trustee Mohammed? Yes. Trustee Feaster? Yes. Trustee Wilkins? Yes. Trustee Wilkes? Yes. Trustee Basquiat? Yes. Trustee Wilkerson?
Yes. Trustee Schmidt? Yes. Motion carries. Thank you very much. I would now like to introduce the nonvoting member at the table, Jazz Parks. Yeah. We should go. Was that motion to include approval of the full agenda as well as Yes. It was to add to the agenda. Thank you very much. Sorry. Apologies. Now I wanna introduce Jazz Parks, superintendent of schools. Good evening. Thank you, president Feaster. Thank you. And I believe that brings us down to public commentary sign up. I don't have the normal spill in here, miss Olsinski, but how many do we have? We have 55 this evening.
Okay. There's thirty minutes allowed for public commentary for a special meeting, study session. Okay. And so each person would get thirty three seconds. Thank you very much. And I'll call a couple names. And here we go. Okay. Taylor Morgan, then Michael Oswald. Hello, board members. Thanks very much for holding this special study session for this Thurston community. My name is Taylor Morgan, and I'm a Thurston parent urging you guys, the board to listen to your experts and move forward with rebuilding our school today without delay. Thurston's early placement in the bond schedule speaks to a state of disrepair.
It's evident capital it's evident that capital improvements stopped years ago. The bond team has already addressed site safety, construction scheduling, and environmental concerns. They They have also communicated the many logistical and ethical considerations with staging. If we delay now, we're left in limbo. Trust your experts. Build new Thurston now. Michael Aswath and Becky Cato. Hi, Hi, everyone. This is the Heron Hello, the Thurston newsletter that went out 09/04/2023. On page five, it says attention, students, families, community members join members of the design team to preview plans for design and construction
of New Thurston. There were two options, September 29 at 08:30AM in the NPR or 5PM at the carnival. I attended the NPR. That New Thurston was being built on-site was discussed. There was a slide. I don't wanna delay. I don't want our community split up. But if that was going to happen, that conversation should have happened in 2023. It's 2025 now, and we're staring into a void without a plan. Please don't send our kids into a void at a failing school. Becky Cato followed by Praveena Ramaswamy. I'm a current Thurston parent. My house backs onto Thurston, and I also love the nature center.
With these three things in mind, please move ahead and build a new Thurston. In December, Gilbane stated at the meeting here, if we stage Thurston and you take time to revise the plan, the end result will be a mere 20 feet further south from the nature center than the current proposal. Is years of delays for our kids worth 20 feet? Is staging our kids in a school that is too small worth 20 feet? Is breaking up our school community worth 20 feet? Is losing millions of dollars in planning worth 20 feet? Please make a decision.
Our community has divided. Please move forward. Praveena Ramaswamy followed by Lasandra Fernandez Silver. I'm the chair of the Thurston Nature Center, and we were declined to present today, but I wanted to present you the layout of the Nature Center and the Thurston property. You will see here that this area was designated in 1967 by the Ann Arbor Hook Schools Board to preserve as a conservation site and for education. In 1968, the Michigan DNR, and this whole area was all conserved. The oak savanna was put in in 02/2008 to help mitigate the water in the area and to address stabilization of McMillers Creek along with the city of Ann Arbor
and the Huron Watershed Council and the Washington Drain Commission, and that's why that area is there. And also the rain gardens are there from 2014. I will be here for the entire time to answer any questions about the nature center. Lisandra Fernandez Silver, then Caroline Caroline Gross. I'm a mother of a future Thurston student and an attorney. I'm calling for more board oversight of Gilbane. They're not to be trusted. This developer has been linked to several public corruption scandals, which I've emailed president Feaster about. As a former federal prosecutor, I'm appalled. I urge the board to take a deeper look,
put a pause on New Thurston, and stage the children. If you don't, lawyers in the neighborhood plan to use any and all available legal remedies to stop the current plan. Thank you. Caroline Groves followed by Natasha Fernandez Silver. I'm sorry. You are you Caroline? Or Oh, I thought you said I said Caroline Gross. I'm sorry. She might not be here. Okay. I'll I'll read hers. I apologize. Natasha Fernandez Silver is next. So okay. Caroline Caroline writes, I'm a parent of three Thurston students, and I oppose the current site plan. It would be great to feel that my elected officials care about my children's comfort
and safety. Please listen to the expert presentation tonight and fix the plan, stage our students. Now Natasha Fernandez Silber followed by Colin Brooks. Hi. Can I start? Yes. Whenever you're ready. Okay. My name is Natasha Fernandez Silver. I'm a parent of a future Thurston Elementary student. I'm also a class action attorney. I've been I've been approached by dozens of people in the community asking if there are legal remedies to stop this construction project. The answer is yes. There are. I really hope it doesn't come to that. I hope that we come up with a plan that doesn't destroy the nature center,
doesn't harm students with IEP plans or five zero four plans, and doesn't put homeowners at risk of flooding. Thanks. Colin Brooks followed by Ben Higdon. Colin writes, I'm a PhD plant biologist who lives near Thurston Elementary at 2215 Yorktown Drive, and both of whose children went to Thurston for kindergarten through fifth grade. I have over thirty years of experience in geographic information systems, aerial photo interpretation, and vegetation surveys. I was reviewing the assessments and surveys page for the New Thurston,
but I did not see any detailed information on the wetlands surveys completed as part of the current planning procedure. There is a topographical survey, which includes wetlands boundaries and the overall phase one environmental graphical survey. Ben Higdon followed by David Stouffer. Ben writes, I oppose any development over the current boundary of the Thurston Nature Preserve. David Stoffer followed by Amy Griffiths. David writes, I we urge you to consider the current plan for scheduling construction on the new school.
While the need for a new facility is undeniable, the urgency is questionable, and the proposed timeline could disrupt the education of our students, create unnecessary stress on staff and families, and impose significant logistical challenges with the Thurston Nature Center. A delay or reevaluation of the schedule would allow for better planning, consideration of community impact, and ensure that we prioritize the well-being of both of our of both our students, educators, environment, and neighborhood. Amy Griffiths followed by Bill Hanna. Hello. Last week,
capital programs talked about their design process. They start by finding out what is unique about each school and when the design isn't right, then they change it to bring it into alignment. Well, the lands that Thurston inhabits, the headwaters of Miller's Creek and the Thurston Nature Center are a huge part of what's unique about Thurston. I urge you to bring the plans into alignment. Thank you. Bill Hanna followed by Dan Salamone. As was mentioned earlier, tonight's meeting should have happened months ago. I had notes prepared, but a thought came as I was driving here.
What you've done with the way you've handled this has divided a neighborhood. Everyone wants a new school. This decision and this bond project is too important that just one committee and a few board members are handling it. I'm glad to see finally the entire board is engaged in something this important. Thank you. Dan Salamone followed by Edward Olstecki. Dan writes, please listen to the many concerned citizens and do the right thing by protecting the Thurston Nature Center. There are options beyond the current ill conceived and poorly communicated plan.
Ed Volstecki followed by Julie Boster. Ed writes, I support the alternative plan for Thurston Elementary School presented by the Let Thurston Play. As an engineer, I struggled with difficult to solve flooding problems multiple times in two different Anhebor houses, including my current home next to Thurston Pond. My daughter's garden level apartment also flooded in Anarbor. Black mold was a huge health concern. Why would anyone knowingly build a multimillion dollar new school on the wettest part of a Thurston property when there's a better alternative. Under your current plan,
the required pumps and their constant future maintenance only adds to the cost of this project. Julie Boster followed by Benjamin. Julie writes, protect my home from flooding by protecting and preserving the Thurston Nature Center. Benjamin Vedalamente, then Neol Nathaniel. Please protect the green spaces at Thurston for future generations. Without physical education required every day, recess is an invaluable time for our youth. Physical exercise, the fresh air, and being outside are necessary for the proper development of our youth. I have serious concerns that the current building plan unnecessarily and drastically reduces the amount
of green space for such a large school. Staging Thurston is the only way we can construct a new and necessary school while maintaining the green space also required for happy, healthy, and active children for generations to come. Nael Nathaniel, then Monica Hannah. The org chart Gilbane showed in their presentation had no designated safety role. They claim safety is a priority, but they aren't even talking the talk. Without a person in leadership whose sole responsibility is the safety of workers and the community, safety will always be an afterthought.
The role of the occupational health and safety manager is clearly defined in ISO fifty four zero zero one standard and is an OSHA require recom recommended practice for safety and health programs. I am a certified safety professional, and this is part of the bare minimum I would expect for a job site I was overseeing. Monica Hannah, Ben Green Markel. Safe to say, we are all here for a better Thurston even if we don't agree on what that looks like. Tonight, please bring actual numbers, actual compo comparisons,
Northeast staging options, and open minds. Have a true discussion so each of you can make an informed vote for the best future of Thurston. Thank you. Space for educational purposes that are enjoyed by students and families across AEPS. Also, the current plan to have children trying to learn adjacent to an active construction site while the new school is being built. Madeline Conboy, then Greg Conboy. Can you do it? Can you do it? I hope you're doing it. Can you do it? Yeah. Miss Conboy is afraid she can't get her words out,
and she asked me to read her words. Is that okay? That's fine. My family was part of the origin and then the development of the nature center for about fifty years until my husband's death in 2017. My husband spent hundreds of hours maintaining and improving the area. We were thrilled when the nature center honored us by naming one of the paths, the Mike And Madeline Convoy Trail. I understand that your current plan for a new Thurston School would lead to the bulldozing of at least part of that trail. I would appreciate your trying to find a way not to do that. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you very much. And we have Greg Conboy, then David Hutchinson. Greg is sick tonight. He wanted me to pass out If you would speak at the microphone, please, sir. Yeah. I'm sorry. Greg is sick tonight, but he prepared some alternative modifications to the building that he would like to pass out to you if I may do that. That right to me. Absolutely. Thank you so much. Alright. David Hutchinson followed by Chris Tafegia. Okay. Now I'm me. I am I am terribly interested in understanding exactly where the limits of the wetlands are in the Thurston Nature Center area.
I have looked at every document I've seen from from the board, and I haven't seen that the board has done has undertaken a wetlands delineation, which is I understand it is the thing you must do to know where the legal boundaries are. If you don't wanna do one, and I would understand that maybe you're afraid to do one, then please let us do one. We can't do one without your permission. So I hereby ask for your permission to let us do and pay for a wetlands delineation so we'll all know the real rules. Thank you. Chris Tavegia, then Carrie Knopf. For fifty eight years,
the Nature Center has been designated to be pervert preserved for outdoor and conservation education by the board of ed. On 12/14/2022, the Ann Arbor Board of Ed established the Ann Arbor Public School Environmental Sustainability Framework, which set a goal to maintain and enhance outdoor environments on Ann Arbor Public School campuses to provide for outdoor formal and informal learning opportunities. Clearly, that Thurston Nature Center was what you were talking one of the things you were
talking about. Maintain and enhance, were those just words? Carrie Nook, then Sandra Bauma. Hi. I moved into the neighborhood in 1966, and I have a lot of strong feelings about this. And if you insist on building our school in a wetland, knowing the damage it does to our community, to our environment, know that we're gonna remember. We'll remember when the cost to build the school skyrocket because the soils aren't well good and when the cost to maintain the building escalate due to its location.
Don't let an arbitrary deadline force you to make a foolish long lasting decision. Thank you. Sandra Bauma, then Gabby Park. Thank you for holding a study session about Thurston. I support staging Thurston Elementary School so that the well deserved construction of a new school can take place on a site that will provide a stable foundation away from a flood zone, protect the Thurston Nature Center, and allow students to safely learn and play away from a construction site. Gabby Park, then Patricia Guest. I'm a Thurston resident and future I'm sorry.
I thought she's coming. Sorry. Sorry. I wasn't planning If you hear if you hear your name, you can start walking up. Thank you. Sorry. Thanks. Hi, everyone. I am a current resident and future parent of the Thurston community. And as someone who specializes in change management, I just wanna say, you know, as leaders, you can make a decision to think again, and that makes you stronger for it. I ask that you evaluate and reevaluate the current plans because currently, it's not safe for students, especially those with IEPs and sensory needs, which is going to be my child in the future. It's not safe for those teachers that are walking in and it's not great for
long term environmental sustainability. So please keep an open mind and actually come with the facts and estimates for what it looks like to stage. Thank you very much. Patricia Guest, then Jesse Song. Hi. My name I am my name is Tricia Guest. I'm a Thurston neighbor and former parent. I fully support constructing a new Thurston building. Saving the nature center, however, is not just saving a few trees. It is saving an environmental education center that the board designated as such in 1967. You are saving one of the only oak savannas in Michigan. You are saving one of dozens of species of nesting birds or nesting grounds for
birds and reptiles. You are saving a place for environmental education. Please stay true to your word that the Anarbor Public Schools building projects will be environmentally friendly and promote sustainability. Thank you. Jesse Song, then Beth Pearson. I'm a Thurston resident and future parent. Please provide actual financial estimates for staging Thurston and redesigning the build. The current plan does not take into consideration the needs of our kids with IEPs or sensory issues and also poses many geo geological risks to the area residents. Let's be wise and take a minute to reconsider alternatives so that we can do
this right the first time. Beth Pearson, then Jeffrey Carey. I'm a Thurston parent, and I oppose the current site plan. My biggest concern is the lack of staging and our students attempting to learn in the midst of construction. Please think about creative solutions for how we can stage. Maybe less school of choice kindergarteners during those years. Let's figure out a way for students and teachers to be able to do their jobs without the noise and chaos of being in a construction zone. Jeffrey Carey then Allison Carey. I'm running to express my strong opposition to the proposed project as outlined in the
geotechnical report. The report clearly states that the site contains problematic compressible soils that will lead to differential and global sediment over time. Even with mitigation measures such as engineered fill and ramped aggregate peers, the risks of structural instability, costly maintenance, and long term safety concerns remain significant. Additionally, the project requires extensive earthwork remove including the removal of trees, vegetation, and existing community features. Allison Carey, then Catherine Vane.
I'm a Thurston adjacent neighbor, and I'm a parent of a fifth grader. Thurston plans went through without a chief financial officer. The plans went through without its environmental sustainability committee, and it ignores its own framework. Please honor your fiduciary responsibilities and restore community trust through actions, not lip service. Choose a suitable site for the new Thurston. What happens after a Gilbane leaves? We are in this together for the long haul. But Thurston could have the safe quality learning environment that they deserve, protect neighbors from flooding and property damage, protect Thurston Nature Center and the Huron River watershed.
Use tax money wisely. There is a sinking bond in 2027. Thank you. Catherine Bain, then Pelham Baron. I'm a Thurston resident and current Thurston parent, and I'm strongly opposed to the current plan for New Thurston. Nearly everyone we know in the school and the neighborhood is also opposed. I urge the board in the strongest possible terms to truly listen to and consider the case presented by the Let Thurston Play community group. Make the right choice. Rebuild trust with the community, pause the build, and stage Thurston so that we can have the right building and a property that
benefits students, parents, teachers, and the neighborhood for decades to come. Choose what is right over what is expedient. Pelham Pelham Baron then Sofia God Gudioso. We know there is a path to staging Thurston students and rebuilding on the existing site. A plan that avoids encroaching on the nature center, preserves green space, and ensures a safer layout for students. Public trust is at stake. The board will need strong community support for the 2027 sinking fund renewal and future bonds. Why risk all of that when a better solution is right in front of us?
Please reconsider. Thank you. Sofia Gaddioso, then Sarah Kempke. Hello. I'm a current Thurston parent and homeowner whose yard backs up to the school. And I hope that the board chooses to move forward with the current plan and continues to incorporate thoughtful feedback that does not include threats. I could tell you stories of my son coming home without eating his lunch because the cafeteria is too crowded, loud, and hot. Or I could paint a picture of our school becoming a place teachers avoid working. But at the end of the day, I believe this decision should be based on facts. I trust the facts laid out in the plan by the professionals hired to do this work, and I trust this work will be done safely and effectively.
I hope the board relies on those facts as well, and I hope the board continues to engage the community and ensure that others understand. Sarah Kempke then Peter Androskowitz. Hello. Thank you. Thanks for holding the study session. I feel like it's a a great, move towards transparency, which has been desperately needed. I'm really hoping we'll get some answers to some questions. Maybe I misunderstood. But we I really, appreciate the the gesture. As a Thurston parent and neighbor, I believe although change is never ever easy, compromise is imperative to progress and continuing the Thurston project on schedule under the revised
plan that has taken into consideration a lot of feedback. Very, very reasonable feedback, but has taken it into account already is the best decision for our kids, and I ask you to continue on schedule. Thank you. Peter and Peter Andruskiewicz, then Jasmine Bolster. Hi, everyone. Pete Andruskiewicz. I've got a child at Thurston right now who has ADHD, and is on the spectrum. And the current plan is not only inequitable to him in amongst his community at Thurston, but to Thurston in amongst King Logan and Thurston, all schools feeding into Claige in a couple of years.
I'm just have to ask you why you're continuing to pursue this plan as it currently stands and are effectively forcing us to make a decision between staying in the community that we have chosen and to try to be in and leaving Ann Arbor Public Schools. Thank you. Jasmine Foster, then Mark Dobby. Protect my house from flooding by preserving the Thurston Nature Center. Do not build a new Thurston on the wetland or near the nature center. Mark Dobby, then Amy Lahan. King Elementary is bursting at the seams. Do not delay King Elementary's reconstruction for the sake of those who want to halt
progress on the updates this district and its children need. Thurston can move to the back of the line if they want to delay replacing their own building. Amy Lahan then Roberta Mosta. Hi. I'm Amy Lahan. I live adjacent to Thurston. The current Thurston plan lacks transparency, accountability, and responsible financial oversight. It moves forward without a CFO, ignores its own sustainability framework, and fails to address flooding, environmental risks, and community concerns. Approving this plan as is is irresponsible and will have lasting consequences. Hold AAPS accountable,
pause, fix the flaws, engage the community, and protect our students, neighbors, and taxpayer dollars. Thank you. Robert Masta, then Justin Jacques. Robert writes, build new Thursday now. He's here. Oh, done. Hi. I'm a licensed professional engineer. I've been living across from Thurston for fifty three years, and I was very impressed by the presentation at the September meeting. I thought it was very professionally done, and I'm kind of amazed how many people think they're experts and are challenging that
now based on who knows what. Justin Jock followed by Jim Valum. Hello. Thank you. I'm a parent of two Thurston children. I understand that construction can be disruptive, but the current building has outlived its safe and useful life. My older child used to suffer regular seizures, and so while I know that it is not exciting or as beautiful as green space, I really want the students to be in a school where fire trucks and ambulances can easily access both sides of the building as soon as possible. So I'm really hopeful that we do not throw out a decent workable plan for a new school for some vague alternative that no one has yet to figure out
the specifics for. I'm worried some other plan will result in staging by bus, splitting up our community, or a very long delay. Thank you. Jim Fallon, then Katie Richter. Hi. I think some of the people here, maybe are not aware that the alternative plan put out by the Thurston Playgroup gets the students out of Thurston in the exact same time frame. So all this stuff about we gotta get them out of here right away is not quite right. The Thurston Rain Gardens and the Oak Savannah are there for a reason. It's very wet there. The school gave up that property so that we could put those things in.
Your own geotechnical advisors said, we don't think you should be building right there. There used to be a wet meadow there in the eighteen hundreds, and it was filled over, but it still adds soil underneath. Thank you. Katie Richter, then Mary Johnson. Hello. Thank you. I just wanna say I have a degree in ecosystem management. This Thurston site was evaluated for the possible impact to threatened or endangered species that could live there, but there was no study on the effects of biodiversity that does live there? How will the increased stormwater runoff affect the temperature,
chemistry, or food web of the pond? How will the daily disturbance of 500 pairs of feet on the fragile shoreline in Hope Savanna affect the vegetation? Fifty percent of all bird fatalities are caused by collisions with windows. 250,000,000 birds annually. Placing a building with windows near the pond is a death trap. Is this consistent with a reserve whose purpose is to teach students what they care for and value? Thank you, ma'am. Thank you very much. Barry Johnson and Chris Burnt. I'm Barry Johnson, retired environmental engineer.
My concerns for the new Thurston Elementary School are the proposed location and the potential environmental impact on Millers Creek. Previous people have mentioned the engineering report, which indicated that consideration should be given to relocating the proposed building to a portion of the site where the building will be supported by engineered fill overlying non problematic soils. Looking to the future, the foundation problems could yeah. Hopefully. Thank you, sir. Thank you. If you have comments,
you can leave your microphone. Press Ert, then Deshaun Mata. Hello. Thank you. I currently have a second grader at Thurston, and I have a young five starting in the fall. I am fully in favor of the current plan. Delay is a nonstarter neither splitting up our school community. I'm very excited about the prospect of a new state of the art school for my kids and for generations of students to come. Build the new Thurston now. Deshaun Mata and Gabriel Steiner. First, put students first and build Thurston on schedule. The consensus from all Thurston parents,
teachers, and students is that the need for a new school is paramount. As we learned at the last bond committee meeting, construction will not begin until all permits are approved. The collateral issues raised by the Thurston Nature Center and others have been fully addressed. The plan has already undergone multiple revisions due to community input. Unlike some of the planned detractors as a Thurston parent, my child will be present during all four years of construction. Of course, having construction nearby is not ideal, but I strongly support the plan. My name is Nate Steiner. I'm Gabrielle's husband. May I read instead her said she couldn't be here?
That's fine. My name is Nate Steiner, dad of a current and future Thurston Heron, Thurston adjacent. The Thurston plan is not a % perfect, but I believe the pan plan is sound and ready to move forward. The plan has been adjusted, taking into account the surrounding areas and beautiful Thurston Nature Center. We the kids are our number one priority. This is not for only Thurston, but also for Logan and King neighbors. I hope instead of threats of litigation or leaving the district, everyone in this room can imagine a beautiful complete state of the art school in just a couple years time integrated within your Thurston Nature Center. I imagine community events that could transpire at the pond.
Yeah. Keith Curry, then Wendy Carmen. It's not too late to improve the plan for New Thurston. Adjusting the amount of the bond issuance issuance is entirely possible and can be done without major consequences. The Let Thurston playgroup has put forward a stronger plan that deserves serious consideration. Dismissing their ideas simply because they aren't part of the original plan does a disservice to the community. This is an opportunity to work together and create the best outcome for everyone. Don't let it go to waste. Wendy Carmen then Yvette Dimchuff. Having a safe and updated new school one,
having a safe and updated new school. Two, maintaining control of stormwater on and off school grounds. Three, preserving the Thurston Nature Center. It is possible to come together to find a solution that meets all three of these critical goals. This current plan does not appear to do that, so make time for true dialogue with representatives from each of these goals and find that solution. Give the community the assurance that you care. It will cost us all more if you don't. Yvette Dimcha, then Bradley Pritz. I'm a thirsty neighbor, and I am concerned about the location chosen for the new school.
I'm asking that you abide by the APS commitment to environmentally sustainable sustainability and consider how the current location negatively impacts the Thurston Nature Center. Does the current plan improve the indoor and outdoor environment environmental quality of the school campus while conserving resources and operations, maintenance, and construction projects as stated in the APS environmental sustainability framework. Bradley Pritz, then Rachel Habuda. We are parents, neighbors, friends, and taxpayers. We want nothing more than the best success for Thurston students. We believe that this can be done without taking significant risks of flooding,
groundwater issues, and settling for the school as well as neighbors. We believe that this can be done without damaging a major part of the beloved nature center, cooperatively creating the schools and volunteers. So please reconsider. There is no journey gone so far that you cannot stop and change direction. Steven Schwartz. Children of Eden. Rachel Habuda, then Penelope Moscus. Please proceed with the new Thurston build building as planned. We need to move as fast as possible. The current building is not safe. No fire truck access, no air conditioning, etcetera. This issue was was already approved and should not be in question.
We can improve the method as we go if possible, but we should not halt progress. Thank you. Penelope Moscus, then Alexandra Taylor. I'm a parent of children who attend Thurston, a longtime resident of Orchard Hills neighborhood and an environmental scientist. My three boys grew up playing in the Thurston fields and the Thurston Nature Center, and my youngest son attributes this to selecting environmental engineering as his major in college. I requested the board stage the construction of the new Thurston School to preserve the existing open green space in the oak savanna adjacent to the Thurston Nature Center for
future generations to explore and enjoy. Having this contiguous green space is a valuable buffer between the school and wildlife and especially valuable for recreation. Alexandra Taylor, then Philip Saputowski. Decision matrix. A decision matrix is made up of a combo list of options and criteria on which to weigh the options. It's a structured approach that provides transparency to the decision makers for collaborative feedback and iterative adjustments. This allows decision makers to systematically analyze the options against data informed criteria.
Unfortunately, the absence of a structured decision matrix in evaluating the new Thurston site plan led to a single, uninformed and suboptimal solution. The process lacked a transparent framework for comparison, and without this, it's impossible to say that we have the best solution. Philip Sekutowski. Hello. Thanks for, holding this session. I appreciate having the opportunity to listen in and provide feedback. I support the current Thurston plan as it is. I think that there's a lot of concerns about people mentioned safety concerns,
construction concerns, damage to flooding damage. And I would find it helpful if, the board could provide some feedback to those people who have those concerns to, about the actual concerns of the problem of the project, not fictitious concerns that people are worried about. So some concrete feedback would be helpful. Thank you. And that concludes public commentary. Thank you to everyone who spoke. We greatly appreciate your feedback. Miss Parks, I guess, are there any points of clarification you wanna offer? The significant clarification that I'd like to offer because we're gonna get into most of
it during the study session proper. This project, as well as our other projects, were approved several years ago. And at that time, there, was an executive director of environmental sustainability and a CFO who, along with the Board of Education, were a part of approving these plans that were put in place and in motion several years ago. Thank you so much, superintendent Parks. And I believe that brings us to the study session proper. And we have the added group of the thirsting parents and community members.
And if you all we'll let them go first. Yes. As they wanna come forward now, for their five or ten minutes that you requested. Thank you all, so much for this added time. We weren't totally prepared for it, so I think we're just gonna read, what I was going to, send to the board this week, but we we really appreciate it. Being unprepared, of course, just means we're not unlike so many parents not prepared for this potential change or delay because they voted for a bond and they've seen the plans for the new school. Many of those same parents are not here because it's dinner time.
They're home right now listening to stories like my daughter told me yesterday that she didn't go to the bathroom one day this past week because she didn't have a working toilet near her classroom, are they reflecting on the science fair that was incredible fun but also strangely hot and weirdly stuffy in the dead of winter? It would be one thing if we were here in 2023 after the meeting in the Thurston NPR where PowerPoint stated that the new school was going to be on-site and it caused zero commotion for months, but it's 2025 and we're ready to go. The time for commotion, if there's going to be any commotion,
was two years ago. It's not parents' fault these concerns were not raised then. It would be one thing to delay with a plan to continue. Maybe we could break ground again in six months, ten months, or a year, but we don't have that. We have a time cliff with no bottom where we worry about that bottom. We worry that it's Skyline High School, which took ten years. It would be one thing to talk about staging if building on a similar site were some unprecedented thing, except what's happening at Dickin right now, except there have been articles written about the Lake Orion rebuild where parents and administrators
gush that the kids are able to watch their new school being built every day. It'd be one thing to have serious concerns about floodings, building codes and noise of experts, people who've devoted their entire lives to building safe and environmentally sound buildings with schedules that accommodate kids with IEPs and teaching schedules didn't exist, but they do and you've hired them. It'd be one thing to talk about sending our kids away and sacrificing other school builds if we knew we wouldn't be back here again in four, five or six years with identical issues, but we've heard no building on or near the nature center when we know that
the school must go north. So we know all this will continue no matter what. It'd be one thing to talk about splitting up our community if third graders didn't help the second graders learn their lines in Wackadoo Zoo, the annual class play, if fifth graders weren't reading buddies for the young fives and safety buddies for the bus kids, but they do and they are. It'd be one thing if bonds were slush funds and any penalties just affected our own neighborhood, but we know that it impacts the entire city. It affects all of us. It affects every kid in Ann Arbor. It'd be one thing if we didn't have a board that trusts experts,
looks honestly at the facts, does their due diligence, solicits input, and votes accordingly. But we do, so we cannot delay the new Thurston Elementary School. Thank you. Well, thank you all very much for coming forward and presenting. And I believe that brings us, to the Let Thirston Play group and their presentation. This one's Don't put in writing if you don't want me to do it. Here, I'm gonna give you guys a second. I can I can do that? Whatever works. And I'm gonna present to the Zoom. Yeah. Okay. This figure looks like it's not. Alright. Can you hear me? Yes, sir.
Okay. Great. Thank you for having us today. We're really very appreciative. We have a lot of experts who gave up their evening to help us all better understand what is going on. So to respect their time and your time, we're gonna move through this content as quickly as possible. First, who we are, then why we're here, and what we're asking. Then we're gonna go into some details on what green space loss actually means, and the impact of construction on our children and teachers. Remember, this isn't Lake Orion. We are not a 50 feet away. We are five feet away, 30 feet at most. Lastly, we'll address the big reason why everyone is here tonight.
The lack of community engagement and how it has led us to a suboptimal site plan. But it's not all doom and gloom. We have some experts here that can walk us through solutions that are not only doable but preferable. So, is it is it not moving or is it a delay? It's not moving the slide up there. Sorry. So I'm presenting this one. Right? Yep. That's how I'm oh, there it is. But it's not moving when I have my speaker notes up. I saw it. It's, like, not moving when I have the speaker notes on here. It's it's got it's got focus on speaker notes. President Feaster, is this available to us?
They emailed it to miss Olsinski. I couldn't we I might have him. Okay. Okay. Or or could you just drop it in board dock? I can You've been for board dock? Quickly. I'm not Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. I'll just do I'll just do it here. Yeah. Yeah. I might just have to roll without it. Alright. Okay. Perfect. So who are we? We're a group of more than 20 concerned parents, parents, teachers, and community members that represent hundreds of Thurston community members opposed to the proposed site plan. We have a petition with over a thousand signatures, and you can imagine with that many people,
it's pretty easy to find people who are energized to be here tonight and to help us explain some things. We also have dozens of Thurston parents including four families with four plus families of students with IEPs. You will hear from some of them tonight, but please don't hesitate to reach out to us and we can introduce you to any of them, and and have further conversations. We also have over 11 Thurston teachers involved who've made statements. It's linked there, and you're gonna see a survey later with about 23 Thurston teachers that kinda gives an idea of of, how they're feeling about the proposed site plan and what they want. And lastly,
we all want a new school as soon as possible and we're very confident that the solutions that we have come up with mean that we're able to get the Thurston community out of Thurston, out of the current building within two years into a new building or into another building that is not, you know, that doesn't have the same problems and that that they will stay on the same timeline to get a new school or to at least be out of the current school at the same time. Yeah. APS has shared a lot of great goals for the upcoming bond projects. Goals around connections with nature, gardens and habitats on school grounds,
and new buildings that continue the Ann Arbor tradition of neighborhood schools. These are wonderful initiatives that reflect the values of our city and the promises of the bond. Thurston Elementary School has actually been exemplifying these values for generations. We have the oldest surviving educational nature center in the country. Numerous habitats for wildlife and learning planted and maintained by the community. We have community garden beds. We have wide open green play fields that transition seamlessly into natural areas for children to enjoy.
Our site has served as inspiration for other schools and programs, including the green team at Huron High School and outdoor classroom initiatives in Canton. We want to build upon the legacy of Thurston, not make it worse with bad design decisions. The proposed site plan demolishes a great deal of our community investment and fundamentally leaves the grounds less usable for future generations. We're here three because of three main concerns. The plan will destroy our green space, which is something this community, including Logan, depends on for many things,
including sports, habitats, and recess. It will be almost entirely destroyed in stages over four years, and then it will be replaced with a single field surrounded by cars and asphalt. Even after the temporary hardship during construction, what we're gonna be left with after all this is said and done is objectively worse than what it is now if you're looking at it in terms of green space. Second, we're gonna go over the construction hardship on students and teachers. Thurston has three self contained ASD classrooms the most in Ann Arbor. We accommodate so many kids with different needs and it's part of what makes us special.
Putting one of the largest and most vulnerable elementary populations through this hardship is cruel, especially when no other school in the Northeast area is being asked to bear this hardship. Last but not least, we'll go over the importance of community engagement and how the community is demanding a better site plan. We're very fortunate that we have such an intelligent and vocal community, but they've been ignored throughout this process. So we're really here to ask for two things. First, to briefly pause construction beginning in March and second, to find a site plan that makes more sense for our community and our needs. On February 12,
trustee Wilkerson asked for the capital teams to bring forth an alternative site plan that includes staging options. He asked that each plan consider impact on green space, the cost of staging, and qualitative impact to students. That's what we want to. Up until this point, we've been told staging is impossible. But as we all know now, that's simply not true. In fact, the original plan was to stage Thurston along with King and Logan. Trustee Wilkerson is right. We need time to evaluate all the possible staging options and alternative site plans. Before I turn it over, I just wanted to focus everyone on this image.
So this is the aerial image of what Thurston is at now, and I wanted to point out the green space. A lot has been made about the green space. A lot of, you know, a lot of things have been said both both, you know, about how how it's been used and and what we stand to lose here. We are very incredibly lucky that we have so much room for our children to play and experience nature. No other school has this. Thurston is one of the largest elementary schools in Ann Arbor, and we have the green space to accommodate them. We also have folks from Logan and Clay who use these spaces frequently. Pretty much everything in this photo that's green, I mean, maybe 90% of it is gonna be destroyed in stages across three to four years.
It will be replaced, but it's gonna be replaced by a very large bus loop, a huge parking lot, almost double what you see there, and then a single play field. But that play field, because it has to be, is surrounded on all sides by asphalt. Now that might be okay for some schools that already don't have a lot of green space, but I want everyone to ask themselves this question. Why would we spend $40.50, $60,000,000 to end up with something that's worse than what we have now? For the same reasons that staging seems difficult. Right? There's so big. We have so many unique classrooms. Those are the same reasons why the proposed site plan is such a bad fit
for our school. We need that green space because we're big and diverse. We can't afford to lose it for four years and then have the next fifth sixty plus years of it with less than we have now. Alright. I'm gonna turn it over to, to Pete Andraskiewicz. He's a Thurston dad and engineer, and he's gonna walk through some of the details on how our green space will be impacted. There we go. Sorry. Hello again. Anyway, first, I'd like to say I'd like to encourage any and every board member to come out and see how much of the space is currently used during recess. It's not just the delineated fields in the baseball diamond.
It's everything that was green in the fur in the the the previous image. The whole space is used by our kids and provides them a space to recharge their social batteries, especially those that may be neurodivergent and have other constraints within the classroom. The green space is also used by the communities of Logan and Clegg because, again, it's one of the largest green spaces there, and there are numerous community activities with kids from other schools and the rest of the area that use it. So the image on the left there is taken,
and, taken directly from what Gilbane had presented December eighteenth of last year, on what the perimeter was going to be for the next two years. So basically, you can see that at least half of the space there, half the green space, or more of it is taken up and the rest is even further compromised because it's bordering the construction fence and there are temporary playgrounds that are put in place there, reducing the green space even further. Now all of this is necessary if that much of the if that much of the the site is taken up.
What we're arguing is that it really isn't necessary. That first, that first year Even if all of the site grading that needs to happen. All the rammed aggregate peers that are necessary by basically pile driving material into the ground to to to make the foundations on this subpar soil there goes according to plan over the over the summer. There's still the exterior of the building, the framing, the walls, the the roof and everything else that's going to be going up during the first
school year, where it's listed there in the, in the timeline that Gilbanan showed as, periodic noise medium. This was compared to the sound and noise of lawn mowing. So, yes, it might not be louder than lawn mowing, but lawn mowing is an hour, an hour and a half a week. In some of the teacher statements that we received, even that's considered disruptive in some of the classrooms. So I'd just like to point that out that it's going to be like that, but much more of the time.
The second year is certainly gonna be less disruptive as the interior of the building and everything is finished up, and the, all the finishes are put on electrical and plumbing is done. And then we move into the third and potentially fourth year here where the re recess space is, kids are moved into the new school, and the recess space is divided up in between three sort of main areas and four playgrounds there. Right now, Thurston doesn't have enough volunteer recess monitors. I try to do it when I can, when I'm able to work from home, and can get a little bit of time off. There aren't enough people out there watching our kids as is.
You kill the sight lines by putting the building right in the middle of them. You put the recess spaces right by the Thurston Nature Center where kids can slip into the woods or by the pond or behind the back of the building where they won't be allowed to go because you won't be won't be able to monitor them easily during recess. And you end up with this really subpar divided space there that's hard to monitor, that's going to be more unsafe for our kids than what we currently have, certainly, and more unsafe than if the building was further south. And, again, is right up against parking lots, the driveline,
and at least for the next two years, the fence where geothermal installation is happening. And that's basically drilling scores to hundreds of 500 foot deep tunnels into the ground to be able to put the pipes and everything in to exchange heat. A great initiative, definitely going to reduce the HVAC cost for the building, but very disruptive for the time that's going on. And as we've seen at Clegg, sixty six months, seven months is had ballooned into two years or more. And it's the same company that's gonna be doing it at Thurston because it there's
only one company in the area that's submitting bids for this. So even once construction is, and the groundworks are completely done, we're still left with the subdivided playground area. The the all of the space bordering where vehicles, the buses, and the parking lot is and the very poor sight lines during recess. And this is not this is gonna affect the safety of all of our kids, but especially the the more neurodiverse kids who need the brain breaks, need the, need the the green space and the ability to get out and away from things
sometimes. What if they're not in the age range that gets to play in the middle space? What if they're over on one of the sides there and are surrounded by pavement and stuff? Is it going to be safe? Are they gonna be able to get over to where the play the play field is? Is that even gonna be possible with the number of recess monitors that the school has? It's by far a subpar design in comparison to what we currently have. And this is the site that we're going to be stuck with all because we wanna rush into doing this as quick as possible. As quick as possible, shove another building on the site. Let's go. Let's no delays.
We don't want any delays. Shove a new building on the site, and this is what we're stuck with for sixty, seventy years or more. Thank you, Pete. Now I wanna pivot to another impact, of not staging the school, and that is the impact that construction will have on our kids. Pete mentioned a little bit of it, and I want you to keep in mind here that construction impact and loss of green space, they're tied together. The students right now I mean, I encourage all of you literally go there during recess. Maybe wait till it's, you know, a little less gross out, but, like, go there in March. It's incredible. They use every bit of this space,
and and they love it. And it's a big part of it. I mean, my daughter went to Thurston, and when she didn't get recess, she came home crying because it's such a big part of of going to school at Thurston is is is this green space. But they won't have these green spaces for three to four years to decompress and relax and escape from the construction nuisance. Not only will it be a much smaller space, but that space is gonna be next to construction. So the inside of their school is going to be harsh and the outside of their school is gonna be harsh. Now I know that this doesn't last forever, but why are we doing this? This all goes back to our our kind of original point.
If there's a better way and we can avoid this, why wouldn't we take it? Okay. I'd like to introduce Doctor. Ali Hassani who's a Thurston resident, AAPS K12 alumni and automotive research engineer. He will walk us through construction impacts and safety practices. Thank you, James. So I wanna start off by actually thanking Naomi and Nathaniel. He is a construction hygienist who wanted to be here, has the flu. He really is our expert here, but as a person who has worked in an automotive manufacturing plant, I do understand safety practices rather well and I feel like I'm suited to speak to this. So let let's just take a moment and put everything aside in our heads.
Like, we've all been here a lot. Many of us have been here every other Wednesday. Many of us have taken phone calls every evening. I see trusty feast or naughty. You you understand. I appreciate your time there. It's exhausting. So let's just take a second and take a zoom out. How many people have worked in a building where there's construction going by? Like, I can speak to at least my office. People stop focusing. That that's just the reality of it. At the end of the day, we're all human beings and that can be very disruptive. And so you might ask the question of, like, well, okay. What what if we plan this out really well? What if we go ahead and isolate out noise as we move kids around and
so on so forth. Let's just understand for a second that the American Association of Pediatricians recommends no more exposure beyond 70 decibels for continuous noise for children. That's a window AC unit. So just think about that for a second. The guidelines are to have a window AC unit is the upper limit of exposure for children. Now, we have a parent here who has a child with noise IEPs. The fact of the matter is that these kids will not just struggle to function, they will dysregulate And dysregulation as they will go into more detail means they cannot
hold their focus anymore. They cannot function as a child anymore. They cannot go ahead and operate and just be a kid. And as someone who went here k through 12, I I don't wanna give that up. Honestly, like that's something that I felt very special here and my wife can speak to this. I fought tooth and nails. We are staying in the Ann Arbor Public Schools because I had such a good time. I wanna make sure that stays for the next generation. And so as a couple of examples here, I'll show you a bulldozer is a hundred decibels on average. Now that's what Google says so we can fact check that if desired.
A pile driver is a 30 decibels. That's what we're gonna be using if we have to resettle the foundation there. We only need to do pile driving when we're dealing with the problematic soils. Now I again, I I understand, and I'm actually very sensitive to Gilbane here. We we will try to do our best to contain these things, but the fact of matter is we just saw right here, delays happen. That that is normal in any engineering project. So just be aware that even if we follow all of the best practices, even if we try to go ahead and contain things the best we can, we already know factually these are noises that should not be presented in continuous exposure.
Again, as, Pete presented, yeah. Okay. Lawnmower, that that happens. That's instantaneous, but this is continuous exposure. And I I just would challenge anyone. If if you think you can handle this, they're building a brand new credit union right across from the pool over there. Just sit down there. Pull your laptop. Have a work day. I'll buy you a coffee. In fact, I'll join you there. It's not fun. And so this is, what James was alluding to. It's it's not the same as Lake Orion. That that's me. You can, see my beautiful bald head is covered up with a hat. But at the end of the day, that's five feet. That is where we have been told now, again, things change,
but we've been told by every measure and every diagram the construction feet will be five feet away. And so I'd like to read something out by Naoli. The org chart Gilbane showed in the presentation had no designated safety rule. The role of an occupational health and safety manager is clearly defined in ISO 5,001 standard and is an OSHA recommended practice for safety and health programs. I'm a safe certified safety professional and this is part of the bare minimum I would accept for jobs that I am overseeing, let alone one where I my daughter will be attending school five feet away from. At the end of the day, these are just questions I have.
So we we already know five feet away is not normal, and they only can back you up on that. Please email him if you have any questions. He has told me every single job he's been on, and he's done hundreds of these, you do not have kids on-site. You don't have them five feet away. You typically don't have them anywhere near the site. So what what arises from that is that when we don't see someone designated in a leadership role as a designated safety officer, the officer, the questions that arise in my head is who is empowered to enforce standards? And that's why I bring up working in an automotive plan. If you don't have your safety glasses, you're sanctioned.
If you do not have a vest on, a high visibility vest on, you are sanctioned. If you are not walking a line that is clearly annotated on the plant floor, you're sanctioned. You do enough sanctions, you're banned from the plant. Now at the end of the day, but we're adults. We understand how to follow the rules, but I I can tell you when I was five year old, I literally had a cake that was construction themed. Why? Because we moved into new construction. So what's the kid gonna do when they see a fancy new construction fence and told don't go over there? Well, my little brain would be like, that looks really fun. That's exactly where I wanna be.
And so those are the questions that I have in terms of what process is verifying the fence is continuously closed. Again, I'm not criticizing Bilbay and saying it's impossible. What I'm saying is I'd like to understand. What is the protocol as the fence is open to bring in materials? What is the protocol as the fence is opened up to have construction workers go in and out? As we have all these different things coming into the site, what is the protocol to verify the fence is properly closed every single time? And I don't mean metaphorically we should do this. Like, you know, let let's kind of do it. No. I mean, like, literally every single time because one failure is unacceptable.
One child injured is unacceptable. And also as Pete brought up here, it's just an open question I have. What how are we gonna monitor recess? Like, we already have a lot of parents over there that are helping out. You can go over to check it out. There are tons of people there that are volunteering. Are we staffing that up? Are we adding more oversight protocol to them? Is that something that the bond is gonna pay for? Again, just just things I would want you all thinking about as far as would I want my own kid being in this experience? Are these the safety protocols that we think are the best standards that Ann Arbor can have? Or are there things that we're doing because,
you know what, we gotta bang it out? And from here, I would like to hand it over to Millie who is a current, future Thurston parent and advocate for her four children. Hi. I'm Millie Edwards. I'm a mom of four, and I have two neurodivergent children. Students have IEPs and five zero fours because they are entitled to the same free and appropriate public education that as their peers, and these plans give access to additional resources and staff at school to help them learn alongside their peers. These students are eligible for these plans for different reasons including learning disabilities,
autism, ADHD, sensory processing disorder, hearing impairments, and numerous other visible and invisible conditions that impact their ability to access the curriculum. Going to school daily next to a construct construction site is going to be hard on all students. But for students with IEP and five zero four plans, they could have more dysregulation in school than before. Dysregulation in a classroom would look like withdraw, aggression, tantrums, frustration, defiance, and more. This could domino when one student's dysregulation causes others to become dysregulated as well,
which then will cause the teachers to shift focus on regulating students or to regulating students and away from teaching them, which will contribute to teacher stress and burnout. Dysregulated students will often take sensory breaks during the day, but with the construction, noise, and vibration penetrating the whole school building, there will be no escape from the constant overstimulation. Recess is a crucial time for students to regulate their emotions and recharge for the rest of the school day.
My son has told me this too. With reduced green space and overcrowded playground and limited room to move and run, students will struggle to release their energy in a healthy way. Instead of feeling refreshed, many will be left feeling trapped, overwhelmed, and unable to reset, impacting their focus, behavior, and overall well-being in the classroom. Students who have who've never had problems learning at school in the past may start to struggle in this construction environment, which will result in increase in number of IEP and five zero four plans,
which five zero fours can be issued without for students without a diagnosis. This will further stretch the special education staff who are already spread so thin and require further hiring to support these new plans. The law that governs IEPs and five zero fours require special ed students to be taught in the general ed setting as much as possible. This is called the least restrictive environment. The constant sensory overload from construction will prevent students' needs will prevent special needs students
from learning alongside their peers, forcing them into more pull out services and into self contained classrooms. This would violate their right to the least restrictive environment. When parents disagree with this more restrictive placement, they have the right to demand that their students be placed in a different school By choosing to stage students before construction starts, you reduce further impact on the enrollment pressures that this district is already feeling, and you save the school from numerous complaints using the procedural safeguards with the Americans
with Disabilities Act, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and the Michigan Administrative Rules for Special Education. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Melissa and Ali. Now for the last part of the presentation, community engagement or the lack thereof. This is a quote, from the Michigan Land Use Institute based on a long term assessment of various school construction projects throughout Michigan. Their analysis includes millages, bond proposals, renovations, new builds, and dozens of other aspects of how our state has handled improving our schools.
There are many lessons and findings, but this quote stuck out to us because because it underlines how we got here. How did we get here in February 2025? We're six years from when we voted for the bond, and we're about to spend more than $5,060,000,000 dollars on a school that will leave us. The school's gonna be great, but the site will be worse than what we currently have. How did that happen? It happened because this community was not involved. We have a few topics on community engagement that will illuminate why we feel staging is ultimately the best option. First up is Andrew Vane. Andrew is a forensic engineer and Thurston parent who came to us like everyone else,
Upset and confused as to why our school is being built on a site plan that is worse than what we have now. Good evening. My name is Andrew Behn and I'm a Thurston neighborhood resident and current Thurston parent. Professionally, I'm a forensic engineer, and I'll briefly explain what that means. If I show up at your house, business, or property, something bad has probably happened that requires an engineering evaluation. A good portion of my work is catastrophe related, hurricanes, tornadoes, severe hail and wind, or flooding. Some of my work is driven by human error,
trucks hitting buildings, house or building fires like I looked at today, or lack of proper maintenance. But a good portion of my work and for the forensic engineering industry as a whole stems from the fact that engineered building solutions often do not perform as expected or last as long as hoped for. I routinely investigate the consequences of bad building decisions years or even decades after the builder has finished their work. Many of these design and construction issues end up in litigation where I provide expert testimony to jury judges and juries explaining what was damaged,
why it was damaged, and whose decisions played key roles, which brings me to the topic of new Thurston. With a full range of options available, you would simply never choose to build at the far north end of the Thurston property. Historical records indicate that Thurston's original builder intentionally avoided this area due to the marshy, problematic soils and history of flooding. These negative factors were, in fact, pointed out in AAPS's own geotechnical report for New Thurston, which recommended that a different building site be chosen due to these adverse conditions.
This is because even with proper site and building design, these conditions are often unpredictable and significantly increase the likelihood of expensive problems over the building's lifespan, problems that forensic engineers like me are called in to investigate. By choosing to build at the North end of the Thurston property on top of marshy problematic soils with a history of flooding, AAPS forces New Thurston to utilize costly design and construction methods, including pile driven aggregate peers,
extensive soil removal and replacement, and site regrading, and other mitigations and workarounds that the taxpayers of Ann Arbor would not otherwise have to deal with or pay for. The arbitrary decision to not stage Thurston for construction made behind closed doors years ago with no community involvement is the only real factor forcing such a suboptimal site plan and the risks and costs associated with it. It was simply the wrong decision. Another engineering topic that should be addressed is building permits.
As someone who routinely reviews permit packages and building plans, it's clear to me from recent commentary both from the public and trustees and public media coverage that the role of building permits is completely misunderstood and seems to be being used to mislead the Ann Arbor community. As I've noted on this slide, it is not the role of the permitting authorities to determine whether the new Thurston site plan or building design are in the best interest of the community, the students,
or the teachers. That is the responsibility of our political leadership, the AAPS board of trustees, whom Ann Arbor voters entrusted with this role. Now, based on my review of the publicly available bid package drawings, I believe it's highly likely that the current site plan will eventually receive a set of approved permits. It certainly appears that Gilbane and the project consultants have done the best they could given the drawbacks and the limitations of the site. But as Thurston parents, neighbors, and Ann Arbor voters and taxpayers,
we simply deserve better than the bare minimum required by the permitting authorities. We respectfully insist that the AAPS Board of Education trustees do their diligence to understand their role versus the role of the permitting authorities, and to refrain from attempting to cover up suboptimal planning and design choices made years ago through misrepresentation of what the permitting process actually does. Our neighborhood and future generations of Thurston children deserve a new school without delay, but we deserve the right building built on the best site,
not a suboptimal plan that's just good enough to pass the permit process. Thanks. We'll we'll try to keep it keep it quick here. So thanks, Andrew. He made a great point. Even if the flooding and the permits and the mitigation techniques are all correctly implemented, there's always gonna be a risk of large downsides by relocating at the school. Staging avoids all these risks even if you find the risks unlikely to happen. And that brings us well, I'm sorry. What where why would we choose to move the school when there is a way to keep it where it is? And And that brings us to Anne and Norm Cox. They actually grew up in the Thurston neighborhood,
and they both become professional architects who are focused on green building, thanks in no small part to their exposure to the Thurston Nature Center at a young age. Yes, ma'am. I told mister Freeland they could have approximately thirty minutes. So they're just about there. Could we go over? We started a little late. Motion for that, please. This is the first time this community group Pretty important stuff. It's up to it's up to the board. Okay. Because we do have another team to present. We do. What are we at? Sorry. Are we at thirty minutes already? We're about Yes. A minute or two from there. Yes. So I motion to extend maybe another ten minutes.
Thank you. The motion by trustee Mohammed. We have to vote on that. It's not just automatic. Just a moment, please. Just a moment, please. Or how much time do you need? Probably 10:10 ten to fifteen is probably fine. I would okay. I think ten is, like, the most we can do. Okay. Okay. Thank you. So there's a motion on the table by trustee Mohammed to extend and allow the group ten more minutes to finish presenting. Is there support? Support? Support by trustee Wilkins. Any discussion? This is Yes. Trustee Baskin. Yes. Again, we had an agreement. You had provided the parameters.
I think we should stick with the agreement. Mister Mahama? I honestly did not know that they were given some time. So until you just set it, thirty minutes. And just so that they can wrap up, as you know, I think ten minutes is you know, try to keep it under if you can. One of the things yeah. After Anna Norman did Thurston Teacher survey, which I think is very important. And if there needs to be more time added for that, I think that is desperately needed. Yeah. I believe we were all sent an email that they were given thirty minutes before the meeting from our president. It was before the meeting?
I did. I received that email as well. Oh, it was at work. So it's been moved to extend ten minutes. It's been supported. Is there any additional discussion? Okay. Seeing none. Miss Odesk, please. Trustee Mohammed? Yes. Present Feaster? I'm okay with ten minutes. Yes. Trustee Wilkins? Yes. Trustee Wilkes? Yes. Trustee Beskett? No. Trustee Wilkerson? Yes. Trustee Schmidt? No. Motion carries. Would you like five? Thanks. When you get the teachers? Okay. Great. Go ahead. Next slide, please. Yep. So, obviously, we have the new school as a significant investment that is gonna last over sixty
years. The question tonight, is the proposed site plan the optimal approach, or are we compromising a long term solution to meet a short term construction schedule? The exercise you'll see here is keeping all the program elements and setbacks as are shown in the existing proposed site plan that you see on the left. But looking at rearranging those to address the concerns that you've heard here this evening, and I'll let Anne walk you through the plan. Next slide, please. So, I am a Thurston alum, and I did become concerned about this project when I started to,
look at it. And so I came up with this alternative site plan. I am a registered architect in the state of Michigan. What I have done is taken the elements as proposed in the Gilbane plan. So that is the footprint of the building. That is the parking lot with the enough, stacking space to stop any traffic backups along Prairie. To the left and up to the north on Prairie, there's a separate fire lane that could be, made there to provide the,
safety and fire access needed. There's pavement all around the school to provide that safety and, fire access as noted. What this does is it uses the existing first in sight, pulls the school closer to Prairie. This is a more sustainable plan in the sense that you are not creating these long roads and more pavement to go to the back of the site if you, keep the current site plan where you have to build the long roads. So thinking about sustainability, a future better school,
keeping the green space behind the school, this achieves all this. There's also the separate bus lane there, separated from the parking lot. So it meets all the same criteria. It's just a different test fit and moved the pieces around on the site that we're now able to do because we know about staging. Next slide. So this is a proof of concept. There are ways to refine this, obviously, as you would move forward. The key point is that currently the proposed site plan is constricted by building this
new building while the other building is in existence. So I think as now that the option that is proposed has been fully explored, it's time to step back and assess, does that approach still meet the needs of the school district, the teachers, the students, and the community? Successful design can't stress this enough. It's an iterative process where each step informs the next and ideas that are no longer make sense. Once you have new information on the table, they are discarded. It's the reluctance in my practice of seeing bad design is the inability to change
when new information is presented and not adapt to that. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks Anne and Norm. It's important to step back and realize that the design constraints were never as hard as we thought. Staging the school is is both doable and preferable. Next we have Sarah and Emily who will walk through a survey of Thurston teachers. They're both Thurston teachers, Emily. Hello. My name is Sarah Thompson. This is Emily Terrell. We are substitute teachers at Thurston. I am in my tenth year substituting exclusively at Thurston Elementary. This is Emily's third year. When it was clear that our coworkers and friends felt unheard about their feedback,
we decided that we needed to make it heard for them. In a very simple terms, Thurston teachers want a new school just like the rest of our community does, but they don't want this plan. It's too dangerous. It's too loud. There are so many things about this plan that don't work for our teachers. Next slide, please. Most teachers want you to pause and reconsider. Their concerns are myriad. They are concerned about teaching during active construction. They are concerned about student, learning impact. They're concerned about air quality.
All of the things that you've heard us talk about tonight, they are concerned about. Our role at Thurston, we wear we both wear a lot of hats. My children are Thurston alum. I am a Thurston neighbor. Emily has a current Thurston student. These are our neighbors. These are they may not all know us, but we know that we know their children, and we love their children. We know their teachers, and we love their teachers, And their teachers don't feel heard. That's why we did what that's why we did this. That's why we did the what you see in front of you. It's a very simple survey.
And we can share the results, with everyone on the board as well as this, entire presentation. I'm gonna skip to the end. Is is that okay, guys? Yep. Okay. Great. Because we had we have a lot of teacher statements, which I think are super powerful. I really encourage everyone on the board to read these. They're very important, I think, for everyone here to read. And then we also have some other parent resident statements. Gonna skip all of them and just go to the end. So we heard from capital programs that the engagement with the Thurston community has been inadequate. We've also heard that they plan to change things for the better with future projects. That's really great. It's great for the future schools,
but it's not equitable to absorb our time, our pain, and our effort to make the approach better without solving this problem that's in front of you. When APS chose this site plan for Thirston, they did so in the dark. None of the problems which we just went through were caught because you didn't consult the people who would have caught them. For every school in the district, APS and their development partners have weighed the pros and cons of staging. For King, Pittsfield, Abbott, Angel, Burns Park, Eberweig, Bach, and a two Steam, They decided to stage those schools. The pros outweigh the cons and staging was determined to be the best option.
For Thurston, you simply just got it wrong. We should be staged like those other eight schools. You heard from other parents who wanna move forward ASAP. The other side, if you will. But before September 2024, we were not divided. We were friends. We'll still be friends. But this entire process has created divisions that were never there before. We're not monocues and capulas. It doesn't go back far. In fact, I think we're more united than we are divided. We're both afraid. You know why we're afraid. We just went through it. But they're afraid of delays. They're afraid of losing their school. The fear stems from a lack of community engagement,
and you have to fix this. For Thurston and for every other school in the schedule, please vote to briefly pause at construction so you can evaluate staging options and make an equitable decision for our community. Then and only then will we know that you're serious about community engagement. Thank you. One sec one second before you leave. Oh, yeah. Sure. Any questions? Yeah. Yeah. Thank you for your presentation. Greatly appreciate it. Trustees, I don't wanna do a back and forth. So I wanna try and get any questions out now so we can close this before we move to the next section. Any questions for this group? Yeah. I do have a question,
regarding the methodology of the survey conducted by substitute teachers. Mhmm. Can you share a little bit more about that? How did you go about it? What was the methodology? I've worked in Thurston for ten years. I know pretty much everybody in the building, which means that I have contact information for pretty much everybody in the building. So it was distributed personally by Emily and I to those be to It's a survey monkey study. So you do, like, you make the survey Mhmm. Then you send out the link, but you only send it out to people who you want to respond.
So did every Thurston teacher respond? Every single Thurston teacher. Thurston teacher had the opportunity Yes. To respond. Not every teacher did respond, but every teacher had the opportunity to. Yeah. And remember, there's only, what, forty, fifty teachers in school? Less. We are we are 23. There are 80 staff members at Thursday. 80 staff members. But they are not all teachers. But we did the teachers. Mhmm. Not. We had 23 respondents, which Okay. So when you were giving your presentation, you said most of the teachers responded. Yes. So, technically, that's is that correct?
I mean, based on the number of staff or teachers Classroom teachers. So classroom teachers online. Over half. Over half. Which, I mean, I I worked at the University of Michigan since Supersocial Research. I know survey methodology. I helped build Google's, you know, their survey methodology internally way back with ages ago. But, it's a it's I mean, the studies match passes the smell test. It's very well done. And, anything over 50% response rate is is is gold standard. I mean, anything above 10% consumer confidence index is based off 8% response rate. So Yeah. I just think it's a fair question because,
it can be somewhat misleading, and so that's why I really wanted to know. So, thank you for for the It's a great question. Feedback. Yeah. Thank you. Trustee Vasquez? So just following up on that. The teachers have a unionized contract. I'm concerned when I hear teachers feel unheard. Did you take this forth to your union representatives? We are not represented by the union. I understand that. But did you take the other teachers? May have been. So my question is, was this taken to the union representatives? No. So the sense of being unheard sounds like they didn't bring it forth to be
heard. I just wanna say it wasn't just unheard. I was actually involved. I didn't become involved until November. Beginning in November, a teacher approached me to let me know that to kind of fill me in on on everything. They had me going on. And to tell me that many teachers were fearful of of retribution, of speaking up, and that they did initially speak up in the Gilbane meetings, at the staff meetings when they came. And they were continually, brushed off. They were continually not listened to. And then eventually told this is what the parents want over and over again and
then gave up. And so when the first teacher came to me, I said, okay. I'll talk. I'll start talking to people and see who, you know, who feels what about what. You know? It's I I certainly when I heard that, I I certainly felt like, okay. If I can help in this situation I'd also like to say So, trustees I'm sorry. Go ahead. So I just wanna clarify. Trustees, we received an email at 02:39 this afternoon talking about many teachers have specific concerns for various reasons.
You can read this. But if we publicly express our stance on this issue, we risk straining our relationships with families of children in our classrooms who may be holding different opinion. Alright. So just keep that in mind that there are different opinions. Oh, actually. Keep in mind, though, that there was an option That's why it's an option. To be present at the planning session. So just wanted to reiterate, we at the board have a survey methodology process, if you will, where we don't go to our teaching staff Oh,
but we don't go to our Hold on. Hold on. Let let the trustee finish, please. We engage with our union leaders when we conduct any survey, and so I'm concerned that this was out of process. And so I'm questioning and the veteran teachers who are used to, again, sanctioned surveys may be hesitant to respond or participate. So I just wanted to put that on the table. I know we have new trustees who may not be familiar with that. And I'm also concerned that you have the vice president of your union at Thurston,
and we have not heard anything one way or the other, which is her right. But, again, I just want to raise the awareness that it's claimed from her building that the teacher has felt unheard, yet they have not approached her. I'd like to answer this. I don't need any more answers. Well, I don't think of a question on that any longer. So let's leave that there. Are there any other questions? Trustees. So, when I read the petition that was signed, and then I don't really know exactly what the questions were to the teachers. If I was a teacher and somebody came up to me and said,
you know, there's gonna be all this loud noise outside your classroom, and the dust is gonna come in your classroom, and the kids are and fed me information that some of it isn't accurate, I might say, oh, I don't want that. So I think, like any survey, you can, build it with information that has an impact on the outcome. And so I'm Excuse me. The question. Excuse me. I have real hesitations about both the petition, which says things that we're gonna be demolishing the nature center,
and the idea that, you know, we're doing these things in construction where the whole thing isn't told to the teachers that the bigger things are done in the summer that, you know so I I'm just very skeptical about these results. I have a couple questions I wanna ask before you guys get out of here. President Beecher, could I repeat the the the questions that were asked in the survey? They have them. I I sent it to to all the trust. I I sent the survey, the email with the slides to all the trustees. They all have the questions. So they have so they know what the questions were. Okay. What the questions were.
Alright. My only couple of questions were this. It has been offered by a trustee, and I guess these are the things that my decision are weighing on. It's been offered by a trustee that perhaps the school should be separate in order to make stage a realistic possibility. That was not addressed in the presentation. Does the group have a position on that? I think when trustee Wilkerson asked, in February 12 that there be alternate options presented, he actually included a couple of options around school population, perhaps, putting. I think it should be considered.
I don't I'm what I don't wanna do is speak for the entire entire Thirsty community. You heard the parents that were here before us. Right? I'm not gonna speak for them. I will only speak for for for myself here. I think what I said in my at the end right right there is about pros and cons. Right. I think that staging well, I think staging is not maybe, you know, the best thing we could do in the world, but it certainly is much less bad than what is about to happen with the current site plan. I have a quick answer to that just after talking to some,
more teachers and parents. One thing about Thurston is that there are some programs there that are not quite as integrated into the school. For example, Thurston has a preschool program. And for anybody who's in APS, not every school has a preschool. So if a school has a preschool, it serves a larger population than just Thurston, which means that people who go to preschool at Thurston might have their elementary school years at a different school. So when we ask, like, hey. Are there some options for staging? There might be a way. We don't know yet. No one's looking into the numbers.
But do the numbers allow for perhaps temporarily relocating the preschool, which is much less integrated into Thurston and does it break up the students in the same way? Do the numbers work on that? So, again, we don't wanna speak for everybody. It has to be something that actually works for the students, parents, and teachers. But without investigating those options, we really don't know if they're worse than what's being proposed. Thank you for that answer. The second question I had, and then I think we're done if I wanna send the the question, is you all have asked for a pause. That pause, I can't tell you how long that pause would be.
That pause could be a year, two years, five years, seven years. Is that something that your group is willing to have be a possibility if we pause for another possible plan? I think given the lack of community engagement and I'd like to point out that when the community meeting happened in the fall, that was the time when most people in our community understood the full details of what would happen. At that time, en masse, we started asking for staging to be investigated.
That has not happened. You have had months to come to us with really creative solutions, and it wasn't until trustee Wilkerson was elected that he said, hey, can we at least look into this? Not endorsing anything, but just can we really look into this? I don't think it's appropriate to what kind of feels like to our community threaten a delay of six, seven, eight, nine, ten years when we, as a community, have really looked into the logistics of possibly staging at New or old Logan, until we have an answer for that,
the timeline for Logan is going ahead. If you could figure out a way, for instance, having the preschool at New Logan to make the numbers work, If you could figure out a way to actually look into the plan that we put so much work and research into, Thurston would be staged in two years. So I would like to hear real justifications for why there would be huge delays when the harm that this plan would cause to our community, wherever people come down, whether they want the new school right now or whether they're freaked out by construction
because they have families with IEPs, I think we need better answers than you guys stood up for yourselves, and so you're going to be punished. And if the logistics really, really, really don't work, please prove it. Don't just say good luck. Respectfully. That's not an answer. So I'm asking you, are you comfortable? If the if the if the plan works out, well, we can stage you, but it's gonna take us three years. Well, three years is very different than seven years. I don't know the time of years. If it's gonna take some time, is that something your group is willing to to I can only speak for myself.
I think three years is reasonable because it gets people out of the building only one year after they would anyway. Okay. Seven years feels punitive. I mean, we're two now. If you guys go forward with this, we're two years away anyways. Right. So that's just two we're just talking about adding on to that. Right. If you're and I'd it's strange credulity to think of like how you could get to six years Right. When the staging options that we have shown don't take that long. Right? Maybe it's an extra six months, maybe it's an extra year. I think that's inbounds and reasonable, but I think I also I really like she said I reject this like kind
of framing because it it does create division because it makes us look like boogeymen who wanna delay the school for eight, ten billion years when we don't wanna do that. And we we know that none we think we know there's a way to do this. Will it take imagination, creativity, maybe a little bit of pain? Yes. But it's doable. K. And it's worth pointing out that there are many families, if you don't stage, that will be that are considering leaving the school, not out of spite, but because of the harm that will be put on their children. So, again, this is not just we want a few trees saved.
This is an equity issue, and our community did not create this problem. We have spent hundreds of hours researching solutions. Please, at the very least, really look into their feasibility before you tell us that the options are no new school or harm to people in the school. That's what we're doing. Thank you. Thank you very much. Any other questions? I would just like to add one thing, president Feaster. The delay, you know, we've been talking about we don't know what the time frame could be, and it's not punitive. As you know, there are other schools involved.
There are other schools in line Mhmm. Waiting for projects as well. So that's where the delay would come in. It's not that we're punishing anybody. You know, of course, we don't wanna do that. That's not why we're here. So I just wanna make that that very clear that this is not, an effort to to be the boogeyman, as you said, or to be punitive. It's just the way the the schedule appears. So Yeah. Yeah. Well, thank you all for your I'll wrap it up with okay. Thank you all for your time. Thank you. Let's take a five minute recess and come back at 07:50,
and then we'll move on to our last group. They don't have children in the school. Approved rationale where we stage in a particular order or we construct in a particular order. Staging schools, schools that don't require staging go first while we create schools that can, be used for staging schools, etcetera. So an FCA version is nothing more than we're adhering to the rationale that was approved by the board. Non FCA versions deviate from this rationale. You'll see that there isn't much of a difference and impact between these, but we just wanna let you know we were looking at all the options.
We are not just limiting to what board approvals we have before us. So this is the order for staging at New Logan, the FCA version. If Thurston were staged at New Logan, the board approved rationale for the phase two plan could no longer be possible. That's because staging at New Logan would require Logan Elementary to occupy New Logan on time in 2027, only to vacate it two years later for three years to make room for Thurston. This is just saying that there isn't an FCA version for Thurston staging at New Logan.
It it doesn't work. It becomes more complicated if staging king at New London is all considered. So the versions that are available for staging at New Logan are the non Fca versions which we have two of to share. If Thurston and King were to stage at New Logan, and the board approved rationale for the phase two capital plan where we considered Northeast Sectors projects would go in this order. Number 18, Thurston would go first, occupying their new building in 02/1930, '3 years later than planned. They'd be staging at New Logan. This is because New Logan won't be ready for occupancy until 2027.
It's not started construction yet. So first, it would occupy New Logan from 2027 to 02/1930 and only then move back into their new facility. Number 10, King, would be second, occupying the new building in 02/1932, '3 years later than planned. And number eight, Logan would be third, occupying a new building in 02/1932, '5 years later than planned. The next version is the same, but it switches Logan and King. So this oh, sorry. I wanna just spend a minute on why we're talking about a three year delay, why Thurston would be at New Logan for three years.
That's because it takes three summers and two school years or twenty seven months just to construct the new building in site. But in the version where we are staging, we have to demolish, deconstruct and demolish existing Thurston first before we can enter into the twenty seven months of construction. And doing that, the deconstruction and demolition takes several months. It's not possible to compress the schedule to get all the work done in twenty seven months. So this approach impacts three school years at Thurston. Some might ask, how does the current plan work then? And the answer is new Thurston would be occupied while old Thurston is demolished.
In the current plan, they are concurrent, not sequential. There is another consideration here, which is that a midyear move in the third school year could shorten the duration because we probably don't need the full third school year to do this. But this approach is very difficult for staff, parents, and students and would and could mean a midyear move for two school communities. This is the order for staging at New Logan, the second version of the FCA. So this other version incurs costs for staging at both New Logan and Old Logan. In this plan, number 18, Thurston would be first as in the previous non FCA version,
three years later than planned because New Logan is not ready for occupancy until 2027 and Thurston would have to be there for three years. But in this plan, number eight, Logan would be second, occupying the new building in 02/1930, '3 years later than planned and King would be third, occupying the new building in 02/1932, '3 years later than planned. They would be staging at Old Logan. So we would have cost impacts. You'll see what they are, related to both of these, schools. So the summary of impacts of staging at New Logan. There is not a feasible FCA version.
There are two non FCA versions, and the summary of those is that approximately 700 Thurston students and 80 staff would see delayed improvements while they waited to occupy New Thurston in 02/1930. And approximately six ninety King students and 80 staff would see delayed improvements while they waited to occupy New King in 02/1932. And additionally, approximately six fifty Logan students and 70 staff would see delayed improvements while they waited to occupy New Logan in 02/1932. The way these figures are calculated, the 700,
the six ninety, and the six fifty, is that, if there's a one year delay, it's the entire school body. And then for each subsequent year delay, it's the incoming class. So, five year delay has two additional incoming classes over a three year delay. But the first year delay impacts the entire school community. The non FCAE version number two is fairly similar in the numbers to version one, but it requires staging, considerations at two schools. So here in the constraints section, maintaining the board approved phase two timelines for much needed improvements to Thurston,
Logan and King School communities is the mandate we're working with, but it could be reconsidered. We just don't recommend it. There would be refresh costs associated with new Logan if it were used as a staging school. If it were used by Logan and potentially King, we would upgrade select finishes and amenities to prepare it for use by the Logan community. Though these are modest costs, they still probably extend to the $500,000 range, flooring, painting, etcetera, bringing the current running total of Staging Thurston to between $8,700,000 and $11,900,000
These figures are specific to staging at New Logan. There are also King planning costs. Delaying planning at King, which is currently several months into the planning phase, would pause work there, requiring a restart later, justifying additional professional team fees. We experienced this at Pathways in Mitchell recently when we paused for COVID. When we restarted, there was additional work that was necessary, and additional fees came with that. We would expect these fees to be in the range of about $300,000
bringing the current running total of Staging Thurston to between $9,000,000 and $12,200,000 Here's another consideration that we can't track very well from a cost point of view. Traffic designs for Nixon Road, which are the city's traffic designs, and the New Logan site plan, which is the district's, are based on the staging school using Old Logan arriving and departing by bus. Nixon Road is not designed for simultaneous parent arrival and departures for both Old Logan
and New Logan. Bussing Thurston Students to New Logan is required in the same way that busing King's students to Old Logan is required. If additional Nixon Road improvements are required to account for Thurston parents driving students to New Logan, these have not been included in the estimated cost related to staging Thurston's, but they will be substantial. This is a summary of staging Thurston at New Logan. Staging Thurston and King at New Logan would represent a three to five year delay in improvements for up to 2,040 Thurston Logan and King students and two thirty Thurston Logan and King staff.
In this scenario, none of the Logan students who participated in the design of New Logan would benefit from attending the school. And this is a summary of costs associated with staging at New Logan. The general staging costs were from the previous slide, dollars 8,200,000.0 to 11,400,000.0. The costs specific to staging at New Logan would be the refresh costs and the King planning costs for $800,000 We do not know what the Nixon Road costs would be, so they're not including here. But this brings the total for staging at New Logan to $9,000,000
to a range between $9,000,000 and $12,200,000 plus unknown Nixon Road costs. Impacts on students, staff and parents at Thurston, Logan and King are considerable and primary constraints would have to be reconsidered. Can I have a question, please? Yes. I'm just pausing here for questions. Thank you. Could you expound upon the Nixon Road cost? Now we, I thought, don't are we talking about regarding the bus? Or what are those costs? Because I thought that the city's responsibility. It is. The the city's design and our design is based around bussing to King.
Right. So, right now, if you drive down Nixon in the morning, you'll see the traffic is backed up onto Nixon. Mhmm. That doesn't work with the roundabout design that the city has in mind. It would it would bring traffic to a standstill. So we would have to find a solution to that if we were to have parents driving to Old Logan and New Logan. The current plan is one or the other. So those additional costs, you're saying we would pay the city for having done the work? Something like that. Ship thing. Yes. Okay. Or traffic engineers,
but yes. So there'll be additional cost for the city to help design the solution. But since we are causing the issue, these would be, like, sharing the cost. This is this is likely. Yes. So when we did road improvements for Skyline, that was paid for by the district. That's true. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. We were just lucky enough that the city was doing the Nixon Road improvements, so we didn't have to do quite a bit of what they're doing. But if it has to be redone, there are likely to be costs associated. And is there a way, again, that's partnership. It's the city's responsibility,
would and, again, this is where our conversations with the city are going to be important. A way of setting an urgency with the city. You know, the city wants to move its own pace. Yeah. Well, we haven't entered into conversations with them about it. So far, all of our conversations are contingent on we're bussing to Old Logan. We're bussing King's students to Old Logan. So nine or 10 buses would be the trips plus staff, but not the myriad parents who come and go. Thank you. I have a question. Kevin, I'm not sure if this question is for you,
but related to the Nixon Road issue, traffic issue, if we have to pay the city to conduct the survey and take care of the road traffic issue, is this coming out of our general fund or is this bond money? I mean, since this is traffic related and I know earlier you said that traffic related costs, were coming out of our general fund. So, I don't know. Superintendent Parks is maybe this is a question for you. I'm I'm not sure of that question. So we would take we can take note of it and follow-up because I'm not
quite sure about the cost for that under fund. Okay. Thank you. So well, this is my follow-up question. That is we've had several city council people write in, contact us, encourage us to consider this. That's a cost the city could choose to absorb if they chose. Okay. We have not seen that happen. But, yes, it could happen. If if people are calling for it, then maybe we ask them to cover it if we decide to go this way. I I think our challenge is going to be that the city has already has already planned and designed and are getting ready to start on the work that would
call for them to have to potentially redesign or do something different. So k. Trustee, Wilkins. So a follow-up on the next thing. Isn't eventually the idea that that area is gonna be used for Clegg and New Logan at the same? Is it because the timing would be different? The area the campus is Yeah. Would be New Logan and Clegg. Yes. And we've accounted for all of the traffic that are associated with those two schools from parents Right. For drop off and pick up.
That's in our traffic model. We shared that traffic model with the city, and that works. But part of that conversation is that King would be receiving buses and not parents. So we don't have a model for the design of Nixon Road that has parents dropping off and picking up at both schools. We can't say with confidence that the plan will work, that we do know it wasn't engineered and designed for that. So it could very well be that it doesn't work and it requires design, and we suspect that that would be the case. So it was designed with plague and Yes.
Logan in mind Yes. But not the additional Absolutely. King bus. Yep. Thank you. No. Sorry. The king buses were included Oh. But not a whole other contingent of parents driving their kids to Old Logan. It was King's students would be arriving on 10 buses to Old Logan, and that would be the traffic, not a hundred or so parents who are stacked up waiting. The it's the parents that would be backing up onto Nixon, not the buses. Right. Yeah. Idling their cars. Trustee Lokesperson? Yeah. Quick follow-up on that.
Okay. And this is probably the best parks. We currently don't have a plan for Old Logan, strategic plan for that in the future. Correct? Old Logan in terms of staging? No. In terms of after construction. After the construction, it the plan is for it to be taken down. Is that correct, gentlemen? It's one of the options. At the time the phase two bond plan was was approved, it was shown as a Northeast sector preschool. Preschool. Yeah. But since then, preschool has been, put into every one of the projects,
so that consideration is not likely to occur. We are watching development pressures, and if they are as bad as they could be, We may. Then it could be that it's necessary as a school. But but our current traffic designs have not considered the traffic front. That's correct. Okay. But did we break it? Sorry. I had a dead microphone. But any revisions or modifications to account for a new elementary school at, that existing old Logan. So any monitor modernizations or whatever the new program may be or if it's a
new school, at that point in time, would have to be completely renovated and and then any traffic impacts associated with that would would follow that major monetization similar to all of our schools. Right. Okay. No. Thank you for that. One additional question on the King planning costs. These $300,000, that's assuming you cannot complete, the planning undercurrent situation. Right? It assumes it assumes that I thought they're all done. Hello?
Oh, it works out. You there. It assumes that the project would be paused. There'd be a mothballing process, if you would, and then restart it later. And that inefficiency in working is where this additional fee comes from. Okay. Is it but is it in the pausing of the construction or the pausing of planning? Planning. Planning. Okay. So could we continue on with planning, currently to complete the site plan for King? Yes. At some risk. Yeah. Okay. Meaning that you could have a design that's done and then it's not implemented for three years. Right. Codes could change,
principles could change. Outdated. Yeah. So there's a risk that it wouldn't be usable. Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry. Trustee Wilkins? One question. The student numbers estimate, slide 47. So you said those are that's a comment that's counting for all the number of students that would be touched over those three years. So fifth graders the first year and preschoolers the well, one of my questions is, are preschoolers included in that number? No. No. No. These are just enrollment figures for K through five.
K through five. Yes. Okay. So the 700 for it says approximately 700, that would be, this is a three year delay. So that would be five eleven existing Thurston students in the first year would see delayed and then, roughly 90 or so in the In their kindergarten. Every year, yes. Okay. Yeah. Alright. If nothing else, please continue. This next section is, discussing Thurston staging at Old Logan. And this section here covers specific conditions and impacts of staging Thurston at Old Logan.
Impacts on students, staff and parents at Thurston and King are considerable, which will be outlined in upcoming slides. The impacts of dividing Thurston's school enrollment are substantial and far reaching. They include impacts on students, staff, caregivers, the community, academics and operations. There would be primary constraints that would have to be reconsidered and impacts on the general fund would be significant. Current conditions at Logan. Today, Logan has 27 teaching stations available. A teaching station is a space used for instruction. So it includes not just classrooms,
but specials rooms, the library classroom, special ed rooms, etcetera. So this is where instruction occurs. It is only possible to add eight teaching stations to Old Logan using both Thurston and King's 4 classroom modulars. Doing so would result in a total of 35 teaching stations available at Old Logan. Existing Thurston contains 38 teaching stations. Three Thurston teaching stations will not fit at Old Logan even with modulars. The feasibility of staging Thurston at Old Logan. It is feasible to stage Thurston at Old Logan,
but only if Thurston's school enrollment is divided among multiple schools, which reduces the continuity of learning for students and impacts parents with multiple grade level children, or Thurston operates with three fewer classrooms, which reduces the the student learning experience impacting teaching conditions for staff. Both considerations impact enrollment and potentially raise classroom size. So, in the underlying here, our mandate is keeping the school community together and optimizing the learning student learning experience.
Those could be reconsidered, but we don't recommend it. And I will now turn it over Yep. To miss Melita. I'll start us off or and before right before miss Austin, jumps in there. So let's we're gonna talk a little bit at at this section here about the impact of dividing the school community, as well as, operating with three fewer classrooms. So we have a pair of schools that have upper l and the lower l, two separate schools, that the district took years to plan for.
Years to plan for. And it still results in significant challenges for family. And I have the benefit on my internal cabinet team, executive cabinet team of having two of the former principals of those schools who can speak to the real lived challenge real life professional experience challenges that result when you have a divided split up community. And again, this is for two schools that we planned for this for multiple years for this to be the case intentionally.
And there are still challenges. And there are challenges for students. There are challenges for staff. There are challenges for administration, and for for families and caregivers. And so miss Austin and doctor Hayward, being two former principals of those schools who had to coordinate that continuity of learning for students, that consistency for staff, and the difficulty in navigating sometimes for families who many opt out of these two schools and, transfer to other schools because of the challenge of having,
a split school community. Miss miss Austin is gonna walk us through, some of the impacts to students, staff, caregivers, based on our experience and what we observe in Brian and Pat and Gill, as well as, the on the ground for many years experience, that she had professionally as the administrator there working with doctor Hayward to coordinate, around having a a community of this nature. Miss Austin? Thank you, superintendent Parks. Good evening, trustees. So some impact on students,
transition challenges, moving from one building to another can be difficult. Some students will not attend the same school as their elementary age siblings, peers, and neighbors. This represents reduced continuity in learning and instruction. This can also create a disconnect in learning strategies and support systems. Students will be limited to their exposure within school, after school, and extracurricular activities. Students who are used to a consistent peer group may struggle with social reintegration when they transition into the next building. Student leadership opportunities decline,
for example, not able to participate in student council and student safety patrol. Some additional impacts on students include peer relationships and sense of belonging. Friendship spending grades may be disrupted, affecting students' social, emotional, and behavioral supports. Students and families may feel disconnected from their school community, especially with separate locations. Students will have a transition and then have another transition a year later, going to middle school, interrupting continuity of learning, and requiring students to have two transitions in one year.
Some impacts on staff. Slide 59. Nothing works anymore. No. It's not enough. We've broken it. So some impacts on staff. The split buildings could interrupt vertical alignment for planning, collaborating, and reflecting with colleagues across all grade levels, preschool to fifth grade, sense of community and camaraderie, decreased grade level partnerships across two campuses, decreased mentorship opportunities across two campuses, as well as staff cohesion. And then for leadership, demand on both principals to attend all events at both schools, time for coordinating staff and family communication.
Can I interrupt here? Sure. So I lived this as as a parent, and I can't tell you how frustrating it was. And then I know that the super pair has grown and made major improvements. Mhmm. Because before, I was attending two PTO meetings, two pumpkin sales, two whatever, and I appreciate that. But I wanna speak to the difficulty I saw with my neighbors and still see with my neighbors regarding the the children with special needs and developing the relationships. I mean, the IEPs are fine and and but it was the relationships that I heard from
one grandmother who said I had developed this wonderful relationship with you, miss Alden, and and then I've gotta move on. And with the upper l and lower l, it's constant. And I know you spoke to this. The constant transition. I mean, it it's it's and and, again, I should turn to trustee Schmidt. She's the expert here in terms of special education. But the children saw the transition and the difficulties, but the families did too. And I I cannot stress. We cannot quantify in dollars the the challenges and the cost of that.
So thank you. I just wanted to just reemphasize that. Thank you for sharing that, trustee Baskett. I was also a Bryant, Patton, Gill parent, so I understand those complexities. So now I'll speak a little bit about the impact on caregivers in the community. Transportation and scheduling conflicts. Families will be forced to drive to two schools if they have children in both the upper and lower grades. Families will have to attend separate PTO meetings and other school related events at different times in two locations. Parents must stay abreast of two school communications, principals, office professionals, and others. Families with children at both sites may struggle with engagement and scheduling.
Splitting can cause concerns over the long term vision and whether the community's needs are being met and decrease walkability to their neighborhood school. There could also be some potential disruptions in before and after school care. If a family relies on both or before or after school programs, they may need to coordinate care at two different locations, which can be inconvenient and costly. Some programs may not serve both buildings, making it harder to find suitable options for childcare. While living in one neighborhood such as Thurston, a loss of real connection to the Logan neighborhood with school aged peers could also
be an impact. And, again, decreased walkability to the neighborhood school. I'll speak a little bit regarding the impact on academics. Curriculum continuity. And we see red general fund impact. Teachers may need to adjust instruction to align to new staffing and resource structures, potentially causing gaps or overlaps in learning. Transition challenges. Students moving from lower to upper elementary may face additional transition hurdles beyond the typical grade level shift. Intervention consistency. Services like special education, English language support, math and reading intervention might be disrupted or delivered inconsistently.
Additional space for multi age cross categorical special education classroom is also a consideration. And I would add here before, miss Lawson goes on to operations. Under a scenario where we would just say move fifth graders to, to Old Logan. Within a year's time, they'll be experiencing yet another transition to middle school. So we would be asking students to make a transition for fifth grade and then turn around and do another transition to go to middle school, which is not something that we we we we value doing.
And I, when you think about some of the, the difficulties for students that have learning problems, those transitions are and and I'm looking at these people that do this job. They are significant. They're used to a building. They're used to the lady in the office. They're we take years to get it so that when they have a meltdown, there are people that they they know, and it's not just their classroom teacher. But every transition every year as a matter of fact, at the end of, in fifth grade, when we do their IEP, the transition to middle or no,
I guess, eighth grade when they go to high school. I've been in those IEPs. I mean, that transition's huge. The IEPs before they go to the middle school, it's just it's just such it's hard for all kids, and we all remember middle school. Right? It wasn't a great time. But for those children, it's really difficult. Everybody laughs, but it I hate it. It was but I love teaching middle school. How warped is that? But, anyway, it it's it's more significant. And and for those people that haven't been touched by a child with special needs, maybe they don't have a child like that or haven't worked with them.
It it is it is, significant. So I'll speak to the impact on operations, transportation, which would impact the general fund. Additional routes and logistical complexities will increase cost and travel time for students. Communication, keeping families informed becomes more challenging with two different locations. Facilities and resources, another impact on the general fund. Ensuring both sites have adequate materials, technology, and specialized spaces. Preparing for a preschool that meets head start and GSRP licensing requirements, such as bathrooms and closed playground, furniture supplies, etcetera. And then also a potential decrease in the overall student enrollment,
which will impact the general fund. Before we go on to the next slide, I I just wanna touch on, some of the some of the the commentary around the the teacher survey. If we engage staff, and have already acknowledged that that process did not resonate. And so we it has informed how we have changed the process, that feedback. But we did not engage staff around a staging option. We engaged staff around the current plan. And I suspect that if the staff were engaged around a staging option with these considerations to factor into their to their thinking.
I suspect some of those results would look different for the 80 staff that we have at Thurston, most of which are our teaching staff. Schmidt. So if a family sees staging and says, I'm not gonna put my child through that. I I'd rather take all my kids and move to another school. What guarantees are there that there are other schools that have room and that they can do an in district transfer? And then I think about if some of those kids in the family that are gonna leave Thurston go to another school, you know, we have to make sure that if they have an IEP that we can also
support them there and does that I mean, that all has to be available. Because not all even though we take part in schools of choice and, we allow in district transfers, it's just not anybody can do it. It's where there are open seats. You follow me? Mhmm. So it's not a guarantee that you don't wanna do this, that, well, I wanna go to Steam. Well, there aren't any spots at Steam. I mean, you know, I I don't know. But Well, and don't we Trust the best debt. You brought up a good point. Do we not have to think too about the timelines of applications and decision making?
So I I how do we handle what's the timeline with in district transfers? So, miss Linden, can you give us some of that information, please? We'll be bringing forward, actually, some of this information tomorrow at the regular meeting of the board. But And we we'll have to be talking about schools of choice deadlines too. Mhmm. Correct. Okay. In response to your comment, trustee Schmidt, you're you're right. There are no guarantees. There would be space for any family who chooses to opt out. It does depend on grade level. So they also may have a couple of couple of siblings,
and there may be space for one and not the other. So that that is a puzzle that would have to be solved depending on who is asking and at what grades. Regarding our schools of choice windows, we have proposed this year, we have three potential windows. They are listed on our website, and I am pulling up our information as we speak. So give me one minute. Sorry, miss. And to be specific, schools of choice, of course, is people that live outside the Anarbor Public Schools. This might be families that live in the Thurston neighborhood that choose not to want
to be part of the staging experience. That would be what's called an in district transfer. Just for clarity for anybody that happens to be watching this. That is correct. Thank you for that. So we have a variety of windows, three for in district transfer. One has already closed. The second will be in process, and then we will have a third. So, again, I apologize. It's just gonna take me a minute. No. I apologize. We we raised the question on you. So applications for young fives through eleventh grade are being accepted February 25 through March 31. So this is the window that's opening now.
The additional window is not posted. So I will look in a couple other places so I don't share the wrong dates, so bear with me. Alright. Alright. Alright. Okay. Thank you, miss London. Alright. Thank you. Do you I I believe it's I have it. Listed on the website as TBD at this time. Yeah. TBD? Got it. I think that's It is, April 16 through May 10. Sorry. Just took me a little longer. Say that one more time, miss Linda. April sixteenth through May 10. That's the third window Correct. Of in district transit. And that's the final. That's the final. Correct. So to trustee Schmidt's point, there may be families who are really looking at this intensely that's gotta make some
decisions, but there may not be options because it's space available to transfer. Thank you. I think you something you mentioned, which I sort of forget. You know, we try to fill this is for the public. If you have at a third grade level in a building, maybe you have 35 38 students, that's way too big for one classroom. So you would have two classrooms, so you'd fill those seats. Right? So if a family has a preschooler, a first grader, and a fourth grader, they might say, well, I want my child to go to STEAM, but there's only a spot in one child's grade.
The other kids couldn't go to STEAM. I mean, we just don't have the spots for them. That's correct. It's really a puzzle Puzzle. How that all fits together. And every year, it's a little different if people move out. Look, we got a few seats open. Correct? Alright. Thank you, miss Linden. You bet. Alright. Mister Sainsbury, you can walk on. So this slide covers I'm also so sorry. I'm sorry. I have some questions about Please. Last section. When you talk about two transitions in one year, is so you're talking that's I mean, none of this is ideal,
but that's gonna happen with the new construction for a lot of these grades anyway. Right? Potentially transitioning to a new building. They would transition to a new building with their with their peers in their school community is the difference, I think, there. Not separate from so if we transition fifth graders Mhmm. To make more room at Old Logan for Thurston, and the fifth graders at Thurston are not with the preschool through fourth graders at Thurston, They're not transitioning to low Old Logan with their school community the way they would
be for the new construction. New construction, all of the schools transition, if I'm understanding your question correct. Okay. That's it. Yeah. That that answers my question. Thank you. Additional space for multiaged cross categorical special education classrooms. Mhmm. That's a lot of words. I wanna know what? Sure. Do you wanna know more about that, please? Who's ready for that question for you. So what happens with our cross categorical classrooms? They are multi age. So, say for at a Thurston where we have three different classrooms,
each of those classrooms, while they might all be ASD programs, are very unique in the makeup of the students and the needs of the students in each of those spaces. So to simply say we're gonna remove the fifth graders, you might be pulling, fifth graders from each class, but then I can't dissolve the programs that are there. So then I have to create a fourth program and add additional staff to that program where at a time when we already have critical staffing shortages. And, again, I'm taking three different,
groups of students with three varying needs and putting them together in one space. So, again, the staffing for that might be more than just your typical, ASD program staff. I might have to have additional support in that program because of the, unique and vast needs of the students that are in that space. Thank you. Does that make sense? Yes. Okay. They're set up. And I I can't help myself when it's about special ed. But, and so we know what is layered in with this is we're having a hard time filling the positions now.
It it is a fight across the country. Yeah. And, even with, you know, the additional pay special it gets and all these things, this is really a challenge. It is. Yes. I have one more question. Luce. The facilities and resources, extra money hitting the general fund, technology, specialized spaces, materials, why would that be more if we're if it's just in a different place? Yeah. With the example that miss, Lewis just shared, we have technologies that are in some of our cross categorical programs,
sound field systems, assistive technology, things like that that we would have to make sure we're also present in another classroom setting in another location. So that's just one example. Okay. So why would technology come from the general fund? Isn't there like a technology bond? The technology bond covers our technology for Chromebooks, those things of those nature. Miss Lewis, can you speak to the technology like assistive technology and tools like that? Have communication devices that are specific if Perhaps they are a nonverbal student or a
student that has limited verbal communication. They may have a device to help them communicate. So those typically come out of special education funds and not, bond funds. Yeah. And they share those technologies that it's not per student? It's so some of those are things inside of the classroom. It might be, as miss, superintendent Parks mentioned, amplification systems. It might be, interactive, whiteboards, those sort of things. And so because we still have classes at Thurston, I can't take the interactive board from this classroom because then I have students over
here without it. I have to create a whole new space identical to the space that's at the other building. They're not student specific. They're environment specific. Some are student specific. Some are environment specific. And sometimes it is, the staff also have devices to be able to communicate with the students in those places, so we have to mirror that as well. And those increased costs would not be reimbursable? They would be reimbursable, but that is the keyword. Right? Reimbursable. So it's always on the general fund on the front end, and then a year or two later, those costs are reimbursed.
Okay. Thank you. So I got a a quick question, to follow-up on some of the transitions. Because I know there's they're gonna happen, you know, especially because we already have schools that are being staged. Yeah. They you know, we accounted that transition. But when and I if I remember, I think this was brought up before, is potentially been looking at I don't know if this is gonna be addressed. The fifth graders being if there's even space in Clegg. Like, the Logan or not Logan, the Thurston Fifth graders, I think, and seeing if they would there is any space in Clegg.
Would that limit another transition because they're going to be going to Clegg? So we did not look at housing elementary fifth grade elementary students in a middle school. No. I just bring it up because I remember someone saying that or it's been brought up before, but No. We didn't. Okay. So that's not gonna be looked at. Okay. I'm sorry. Can I clarify the question? Yes. So you are saying taking elementary school children and putting them in another learning environment
like middle school. So then we would have I mean, we're not gonna turn into middle school kids. We would still have to provide an educational an elementary education. Correct? Correct. So that's additional staffing. And we know middle school operates differently than elementary school just in terms of transition of classes and all that. It was that your question? I just wanna clarify. No. I just I thought that there was an idea about fifth grade or I heard it. I think it was at a previous meeting about fifth grade and potentially seeing you
know, they're already going, you know, obviously, I understand that fifth grade education is very different than middle school. But if there's room, if we are splitting, and again, not that I agree with splitting, you know, schools, but if we are splitting, if there is a space or any consideration of having them in Clegg, but still giving them a fifth grade elementary experience. Yeah. No. We didn't examine that. Okay. May I just add this? I I think what I heard as an option is that if we peeled off the fifth graders and we put them at New Logan with a new group that
well, they'll just make friends and they're gonna go on to Clegg. So it won't be a problem. As you can see, the things that have been discussed, families in two spaces, two different buildings, all the other things that come with it, and all the social emotional issues when you take a child that has a friend group with not just kids in their own grade, but maybe the kids below and they've got the reading buddy and all these other things. Yes. It's true. They would move up to Clegg with that group, but that's still a transition for them that year and then the next year for middle school.
So they'd have two transitions right in a row. Yeah. So I I thought that's what I had heard, that going to Logan, hooking up with the other friends, and then everybody would move to Clegg. But the impacts are still great, in my opinion. Anything else? Alright. Bruce. This this section started with an assessment of the existing conditions at Old Logan, the number of teaching stations and the idea that we could add no more than eight teaching stations to Old Logan to get to 35. And this is a sketch showing the locations we've considered. Each of these locations A,
B and C is two four classroom modulars joined back to back. So that's eight classrooms in each of these options. And these are the more likely options that could occur. Option A is the only one that works, because it is within the hydrant coverage of the hydrant, which is the orange dot next to b, and the orange arc is the two fifty foot distance that that hydrant provides coverage. Option c would require a new water main, a new water main loop, and a new hydrant up up by the by that option,
and it would also require the fire department to work with us for not having a fire lane, which is unlikely. So the costs are prohibitive, for item c. Item b or option b could work. It's also next to a hydrant. It it has the hydrant coverage. It's that's necessary, but it takes half of the parking lot. And this is where Kingstaffe would park. So what we would be doing is, relocating the playground where option a is shown back into the back where option c is shown. So that area would become playground,
and option a would become the modular. But the main message here is there's not room for more than eight classrooms on this side. Two four classroom modulars can fit but not more than that. Okay. Modular costs. Even if Thurston school enrollment were divided to fit at Old Logan, roughly $1,000,000 would be spent to acquire and install one new four classroom modular to take the place of the existing modular otherwise available from Thurston in the current plan, bringing the current running total of staging Thurston to between $9,200,000 and $12,400,000
This relates to the fact that the plan currently is to locate two modulars to Old Logan, but they would both be available when King staged there. King's modular and Thurston's modular would be available. If we were to change the plan, we would need a modular sooner, and we would have to acquire that, and they cost roughly a million dollars. That is if we don't have to do fire lanes and hydrants. If we have to do that, it's another million. So, again, here in Pink, our our mandate is to allocate the smallest possible amount of resources to temporary improvements.
That's a constraint that could be reconsidered, but we don't recommend it because placing a modular here, purchasing another modular is a short lived solution. Well, I'll ask. Okay. So, some might ask, well, how does King fit at Old Logan? King's program requires the equivalent of 34 teaching stations, adding eight classrooms to Old Logan to the existing 27 teaching stations using both Thurston and King's available four classroom modules brings what would be available to Old Logan to a total of 35 teaching stations. So King can be accommodated at Old Logan and that's the current approach in the
approved Phase II plan. Okay. So the order of staging Thurston at Old Logan, this is the FCA version. This is the version that adheres to the rationale of the Phase II plan. If the Board approved rationale for the Phase two capital plan were retained and the Thurston school enrollment were divided or Thurston operated with three fewer classrooms, the Northeast sector projects would go in this order. Number eight, Logan would go first into their new building in 2027 on time. Number 10, King would be second,
occupying the new building in 2029 on time, staging that Old Logan. This requires the acquisition of that new modular used for three years. Number 18, Thurston would go third, occupying the new building in 2032, '5 years later than planned. That's because Old Logan will not be available for occupancy by Thurston until 2029. Thurston would occupy Old Logan from 2029 to 02/1932. This is the non FCA version where we reconsider the Phase II capital plan rationale. In this option,
if we reconsider the rationale and the Thurston School enrollment were divided or Thurston operated with three fewer classrooms, the Northeast sector projects would go in this order. Number eight, Logan would be first, occupying a new building in 2027 on time. Then Thurston would be second, occupying the new building in 2030, '3 years later than planned. This has to do with Old Logan not being available for occupancy by Thurston until 2027. So Thurston would occupy Old Logan from 2027 to 2030. And then King would be third, occupying the new building in 02/1932,
'3 years later than planned. This is the impacts of staging Thurston at Old Logan. In the FCA version, approximately nine seventy Thurston students and 80 staff would see delayed improvements while they waited to occupy New Thurston in 02/1932, '5 years later than planned. In the non FCA version, approximately 700 Thurston students and 80 staff would see delayed improvements while they waited to occupy New Thurston in 02/1930, '3 years later than planned, and approximately 690 King's students and 80 staff would see delayed improvements while they waited,
to occupy New King in February later than planned. So, in the pink here, in the underlined phrase, keeping school communities together and maintaining the board approved phase two timelines for much much needed improvements to Thurston and King school communities. That's the mandate we're operating under, but it could be reconsidered. We just don't recommend it. A staging summary of Thurston at Old Logan. Staging Thurston at Old Logan would represent delaying facility improvements to 80 Thurston staff and between 709 Thurston students for three and five years,
respectively, and delaying facility improvements to approximately six ninety King students and 80 King staff for three years. It would also require Thurston's school enrollment to be divided or for Thurston to operate with three fewer classrooms for three years. This is the on the dollar side, Thurston staging at Old Logan. Once again, the general staging costs, the $8,200,000 and $11,400,000 in the middle of this slide, those would apply to any staging solution. But the costs specific to Thurston Staging at Old Logan would be the modular cost
of $1,000,000 bringing the total for staging Thurston at Old Logan to between $9,200,000 and $12,400,000 Impacts to the general fund would also be significant. Impacts on students, staff, and parents at Thurston and King are considerable and primary constraints would have to be reconsidered. Any questions, this section? Can we go back to slide 64, please? Thank you. So I'm trying to understand exactly what you said here. You said that options a and b are within the appropriate distance for fire hydrants. Another way to say that is that they are not likely to incur the million
dollar cost for for a new water main and hydrant. Okay. Yes. Option c would require a new fire hydrant unless you said we got some kind of waiver. Well, the hydrant is unlikely to be waived. The question is could we could we work with the fire department to waive, the fire lane, which is unlikely. Okay. And the fire the fire lane is part of the million dollars you're you're saying? I don't think fire lane is feasible for item c. Okay. Because the the location it sits on so a fire lane typically has to have
a place for a fire truck to back up, which is a large space, or the fire truck must continue to be able to find a way out without backing up. What we have in item c here is grade just before the this sorry. On the top of the item c boy, I'm losing my words. North of option c is grade that goes up about 24 feet. Oh. So we can't put a road there. Oh. And there isn't space in front of option c for a hammerhead turnaround for a fire lane.
So I suspect we wouldn't get option c to work. And if we did, it would be at a considerable cost. And this is with two modules? Yeah. Each of each of these options is two four classroom module modulars joined. So they're each eight classrooms. And you said that still leaves a three short? For Thurston. Okay. But we have one more than we need for Kim. Okay. And each module is a million dollars for us to come. Buying a new four classroom modular is a million dollars. Okay. We currently possess two four classroom modulars Right.
And the plan is to use them here. Right. But if the sequencing is changed, then we are we have to buy one Right. Because the other one would not be available for us. K. So that's the million dollars is having to buy a module a modular that we would otherwise have used from what we have. A different school. Yeah. Okay. So if we were to buy two modulars, giving us a total of three, we'd have enough classrooms. Yes. But we can't fit we can't fit 12 classrooms on the site. No. I mean, option a is the most likely one, and you can see it's constrained on three sides.
The road to the south, the road to the east, and the building. There isn't room for that to add another 50% to this size to get to 12 classrooms. You couldn't put one where option c is? Only if we had a fire lane, fire hydrants, and a water main. And you're gonna build a road because you said it's high up in Yeah. Well, I mean, that's with two. So I'm wondering with one. We we still don't have we still don't have it. Okay. That's what I meant. Yeah. Alright. And I assume you can't put two where a is and one where bids can be functional.
Because that's within the orange circle. You could. You would have not enough parking, and then you would have a road that separates them. The bus drop off road would separate b and a, which we wouldn't recommend. Okay. What we're talking about here is what's feasible for both construction and school operations. We don't see a feasible option where we have more than eight classrooms added in a modular. And you can't put back to back to back at where a is? No. There's no room. Okay. Those are my questions for now. One other question on this slide. Could c be used as a parking lot and replacement for b?
It is currently a a parking lot. Yes. Okay. So does that leave enough parking then if you have a and one and b? There wouldn't be enough for staff. No. Okay. When I look at this, I think about, you know, there's been a lot of discussion about green space and playgrounds and everything. I'm trying to picture that with all of those there. Where does that happen? Let me ask another question. You said purchasing a four a four classroom modular is what we would have to do. And you said back to back. Those are all one level. Correct? Yes.
Do they have two level No. Okay. That was Florida. That's a whole another code too. Okay. We're gonna have a hard time selling the one level module. No. Leaving no stone unturned. That's right. I'll appreciate it for all these. It will be a challenge for us to get eight classrooms here. Okay. It's not that there's a lot of wiggle room. Okay. It will be a challenge. Sure. I do wanna mention that we did try to buy the property next to us Mhmm. And it didn't work out. So Okay. Okay. There was a family feud and three siblings didn't wanna all Didn't work,
Bill. Okay. Fair enough. Trustee Wilks? I just had a quick question not related to this slide, but, I had an acoustics question. Okay. And I know that our acoustics expert expert is still here. I've been keeping my eye on you, making sure you don't leave. And I know it's getting late. So will we have a chance to to ask her some questions? I I can't remember your name. I'm sorry. But will we have a chance an opportunity to to talk to her before she leaves that in the programming academic? Yes. There there are no questions.
We are halfway through our presentation. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I'm just gonna ask ask this question, and then I'll leave you alone about this. So you you said that you don't see a feasible way to get more than eight classrooms here No. And we would need 11? You would need 11. Yes. Okay. Okay. Alright. That's all. Trustee Wilkins? Do the 38 teaching stations include preschool? Yes. How many of those are There's one preschool class. There's one preschool classroom? So it's about 19 students eighteen, nineteen students, approximately.
Okay. But taking preschool out of the equation doesn't help us. No. It doesn't solve the problem. Alright. Thank you. Unless there's no more questions. Any any more questions on this section? So this is the Thurston stages at Old Logan section. So an overview of staging impacts is our next section. This is just a summary of what we've reviewed so far. Staging Thurston would delay much needed benefits to between $13.90 and 2,040 AAPS students at Logan, Thurston, and King, plus between one hundred and eighty and two sixty AAPS staff at those same schools
by between three and five years, impacting students, staff, caregivers, academics, and operations. It would cost the district between $9,000,000 and $12,400,000 which is equal to between a 13% and a 20% reduction in planned improvements for a project of Thurston size. The general fund is also impacted. It also means accepting these conditions. For all scenarios, staging more schools, delaying much needed improvements at Thurston King and or Logan, reducing resource allocations at other schools, allocating additional resources to temporary solutions, plus at least one of these three,
changing the board approved methodology for how projects are prioritized, changing the purpose of new Logan after vetting it with and designing it specifically for Logan, and dividing the Thurston Student enrollment or having Thurston operate with three or fewer classrooms. That's just a summary of what we've seen before. Unless you have questions, I'll move on to site plan considerations. I'm sorry. I do have a question, and I can't remember where we discussed this, so forgive me. How do we how would we operate Thurston with three fewer classes? That would be the that would be an experience to try to figure out.
I mean, average class size and divide it up. And so, I mean, that would still put us over our target per class. Have incredibly large class size. And then we would have to negotiate that because we have our target and versus our optimal. Contractually. Yes. Okay. Well and not to mention the size of the classrooms and adding more kids in. And if you're in the upper grades, they take up more space. They're bigger classroom for the big bodies. Yep. Okay. Thank you. Ready to move to the next section? Please. This is site plan considerations and proposed alternate plans.
There are limited site plan benefits to Staging Thurston. Staging Thurston will not result in substantial changes to the current site plan. Changes will be incremental and will not justify the cost and implications of staging. There are common ingredients. If Thurston were to stage, any eventual site plan would still include a similar building footprint to what is currently planned, nearly as much pavement in the form of fire lanes, drives, parking areas and sidewalks using nearly as much space on-site as is currently planned. It would include identical provisions for play areas,
playgrounds and play fields and roughly as much newly unmowed green space. In any alternative plan, the new building would be located more to the north than where it sits on the site today. Factors for any site plan. Primary considerations for any plan include balancing the benefits for students and staff, adhering to all regulatory requirements, maintaining safe and effective school operations for students and staff, a means of providing separate pickup and drop off lanes for both parents and buses. Others factor other factors that would apply to any plan include additional driveway length on-site
to reduce backups on Prairie, suitable parking for staff plus visitors, accommodations for generous playgrounds and play fields, accommodations for improved stormwater management and ample landscaping, including a reduction in mowed areas. Alternative plan number one was one of the first iterations presented to the district that was not developed by the capital program professional team. The site does not work with the building in this location. Alternative plan number two is also presented to the district but not developed by the capital program professional team. This plan also does not work due mainly to inadequate parent drop off and pickup,
queuing, and inadequate stormwater design. Improvements to alternative plan number two were proposed in alternative plan number three, which follows. Alternative plan number three, also presented to the district and not developed by the bond team, is the more realistic of the various plans but is not yet a completely workable solution due to inadequate bus queuing, misplaced stormwater solutions and to non compliance with fire lane regulations. To work properly, the building would move closer to the pond to accommodate compliant bus queuing and stormwater solutions. So the summary here is that any new building would be closer to the pond
than the existing building is. Any questions about that short section? Next section is considerations for the site plan. Impacts of locating a building closer to the pond than the current building is have been considered with mitigation measures already in place in the current plan. These include considerations on the following topics, bird safe design, lighting, noise, human activity, quantity of play areas, and quality of play areas. For bird safe design, any plan we would bring forward would include these measures, including the current plan. We will maintain the natural buffer to separate the pond from the building.
This is the primary defense mechanism against bird strikes, is to have a good natural buffer between the pond and the building. We have specified bird safe glass, particularly on the windows facing the pond. We designed a low glass to wall ratio, 30% or less, to reduce reflectivity and transparency, making the building less likely to confuse birds, particularly on the side facing the pond. The design facing the pond includes smaller windows because large expenses of unbroken glass are particularly problematic since they reflect large sections of the sky or vegetation,
and architectural elements have been added to create visual barriers to help birds see the building more clearly. Lastly, the building will be kept as dark as possible at night. This is a diagram showing, what we're doing for bird safe design with the building in the current location. It's a little hard to read. I apologize. But, the summary here is where the existing natural buffer is the finish, the building is is designed with the least amount of glass and is lower to the ground. So the red dash line there, that's the glass the glass to wall ratio in that one story section is less
than 3%. The glass to wall ratio in the yellow section is less than 30%. Both the yellow and the red sections are one story sections. The orange section, which probably looks red to most folks, which is on the left here, The glass to wall ratio in this two story section is less than 30%. Lighting design. Any plan would include these measures, including the current plan. Lighting inside the building will be turned off at night as a default, turning on only within occupied spaces when occupancy sensors are triggered.
This is a change to how AAPS buildings have operated in the past where we've had night lights on all night. The current design minimizes exterior lighting between the building and the pond, recognizing that we are also obligated to create safe spaces for humans. Exterior lighting north of the building will be directed at the building, not toward the pond or our neighbors, and will be shielded to avoid encroaching on the natural buffer zone. The control system for this outdoor lighting zone north of the building will permit these lights to be controlled uniquely from the remainder of exterior lights. Noise mitigation, any plan would include these measures.
Using background noise studies for reference, acoustically enhanced mechanical systems are included in the current design to achieve decreased noise levels over what is in existence today at the edge of the pond's natural buffer for most conditions. Human activity. There is a programmatic desire for connections to nature for Thurston students, meaning human activity around the pond. This may lead to interactions between wildlife and humans. However, within the existing trail network already in the TNC, used regularly by the community and designed specifically to encourage frequent use by students,
human activity impacts are already present. Birds and other animals are habituated to this human heavy environment. But what about fit? Because of Thurston's unique setting, play areas are recommended south of the building to keep the space between the building and the pond a more quiet, contemplative space, better mitigating the impact of day to day human activity on the adjacent habitats. This is a picture of what a play area could look like if it were just south of the Thurston Nature Center and north of the building. Placing play fields adjacent to the pond's natural buffer may look good on paper, but this type of activity is not ideal for sensitive animals and plants and will
quickly require a fencing solution. The currently planned functions Quick question. Yeah. Just to go back to noise mitigation, this might be a good spot to just do it real quick, Kevin. So the presentation prior to to yours, they were talking about the impact on students who may have noise impact on students, the construction impact, construction noise impact on students who may have IEP or or sensitivities, neurodivergent students who may have sensitivities. Could you address those? And if you can't, perhaps your expert can.
And, I mean, they were really specific in terms of decibels and, I don't know. They were using terminology that I'm not that familiar with. So could you address that? Yes. We have looked at this. Which is That's Mandy. So what we've looked at is the noise generated, Mandy will walk you through this, the distance, the noises from a classroom, the construction of a classroom wall, which provides some acoustical benefits. And the result is the noise level in a classroom, which Mandy will say much better than me. I don't have it memorized. Sorry. I think it was 44 decibels is where we got to.
I'm sorry? 44 decibels. Yeah. It depends, on the distance that the noise source is and exactly how loud the noise source is, the the frequency content of the noise source, and the sound blocking ability of the facade. But you can also do something on the interior, say, like, put a window insert in, which would be kind of like a third pane, and and that can help block sound if it's still not above the background. So so the sound from the outside will be more noticeable if it's very quiet
inside. And and so it it depends on how much contribution there is from the HVAC system and, just everything else that's going on. It gets it's more of a we look at more of the constant background, not necessarily the activity level because an activity might stop and start. It it's more of and even HVAC isn't constant. That would if we don't like to add sound to instructional spaces because, the the the most important thing is that the children can be able to hear
the teacher. I don't know if you remember the old HVAC systems with that were just, you know, like unit heaters. And I've had teachers tell me that they'd sit the bad kids by the unit heater because they weren't gonna listen anyway. So Classroom management. Is here. Yes. Well, anyway, so, all of these things go into consideration, and there are other things to do, say, like, in the construction area. You can put fencing in between that'll have, like, sound mitigation panels on that, and and we would consider all of that in in the design and the construction.
That there's, maybe quieter types of and and I haven't talked to the Christman, people yet, but, I know that New York City has a new regulation where you cannot have backup alarms. So and not the tonal sort. It's more of a broadband sort. So instead of sounding like beep beep beep, it's. And I I don't know if that's feasible here, but that's one thing that, some jurisdictions have done to reduce the annoyance because that more of that broadband sound, it it's not as noticeable in the environment.
Okay. Well, Mandy, it's good to know that there are buffers that are built into this project from the windows to, you said, even the fencing? Yeah. Around the construction area that that can be handled. We probably would do that first. The window inserts, I haven't talked to the team about, but, I actually have them in my own house. I live too close to Well, we lost you. Speaking of noise level. The target would be to get to 44 decibels in the classroom. So the methodology to get there can can differ based on where the classroom is
associated with the construction, etcetera. Okay. Good to know. Okay. Thank you. Also, the, construction, it was said in the prior presentation that it's five feet. As I understand, five feet was where a fence would be Yes. That that is not accurate. Right. Yeah. So there isn't a construction at five feet. No. The the closest the new building gets to the existing building is 35 feet in two locations at two points. What would occur in that 35 foot distance is light duty trucks, etcetera. We wouldn't have cranes or construction or concrete trucks there.
They would be mobilizing elsewhere. So there's likely to be light duty construction vehicles driving through there, but not the heavy equipment. So I wanna repeat that. The construction is not happening five feet from the building. That's correct. There is a fence five feet. Yes. And at two points, you said, it would be like 30 35 feet, but it's a greater distance everywhere else. Yes. And it's that fence that has the opportunity to put the sound blocking panels on? So there are operational adjustments that are made on the construction side and on the
school side so that the settings, the learning environment settings are appropriate. And that happens at every construction project. This is just common practice. And it should be repeated. We've heard it a couple times from you, not this evening, but the larger, more significant digging and noise, etcetera, happens when school's not in session. Correct. There there is some construction noise throughout. Yep. But the people that build these buildings, as we heard earlier when each person came to the mic, they're doing school buildings. This is what they do for a living,
and there are schools they're working on now. We had a whole list on that one slide that showed how many there were schools being built next to schools. And this is not, a new program that they're doing. This is something that they understand, you know, noise and safety for the kids, which is a priority. Right? Yep. That's correct. And we actually, before hiring Chrisman, went to, I believe, one of their sites in Clawson in which they literally added onto a building like, attached a building to an occupied building and did construction,
in a very tight space across from Thank you, sir. At the police station It's actually sandwiched between Could you come to the microphone, please? Yeah. Sandwiched between two buildings. I'm sorry. Yeah. I I just wanna put in a plug too while we can because I'm not sure if you get to the safety issue. But we discussed this in the December 18 meeting on slides five through seven, I believe, regarding safety specifically. And it's not just a fence. It's not just a fence. And so we don't need to reiterate that for now. But, again, to assure the public that we have spoken about that,
I'm sorry if I've burst in anybody's lives in the future here, in this presentation, but I think it's important to keep stressing that, again, it's more than a fence. The fence is gonna be useful as well with with the sound barrier, but we do have things as barricades, rolling gates, people, you know, live people there to, you know, control traffic, etcetera, etcetera. So And I think it's important to note on the safety portion that we have, asked and requested our construction management team to have a full on-site safety personnel at
all times. We've also given them direction to have, flag people and a person that actually mans the construction gate during the hours of operation Mhmm. Because we know that there's a sidewalk and that there is a thirst in nature center, that there is activity that occurs, throughout the day, whether it's students or just the general public. You know, I witnessed this. Some of you may be aware of the new dormitories they're building down near where the marching band, practice is. And they're not right next to a school, but they had those exact things in place.
You can see the huge fencing. They have men mostly men out there with vests. And as anybody was coming and going, they were opening gates, and things were really locked down. And that's our construction manager. Oh, there you go. But, I mean, they they had that going. And they still do. They're bricking now, but it's it's very controlled. And they're dealing with adults pretty much around there, not children. Mhmm. But they still were intentional. And a quick question about the sound barriers and panels and things like that. It I don't think you have to come it'll be a quick answer.
Are the costs for all of that already built into Yeah. The budget for this? Yeah. Because it sounds like we won't know how much of that we'll need until we get to that point. Oh, we do? Mhmm. Okay. I thought there was I thought you said it was variable depending on No. Different levels, but we we've already asked for at least as a starter to make sure that, we have the sound panels on the on the fence. Where the fence is closest to the classrooms. Right. Okay. Right. So Plus yeah. In addition to that,
we also have a screening to, separate visual of what's happening between construction and the school. And, actually, the screening is, I'm surprised, gonna be part of artwork program that we do with the kids where their artwork is shown on the on the screen of the fence. So K. So they won't be able to look through the fence and be distracted by the That's the point. Geckos doing their thing That's the point. All of that stuff. Okay. Thanks. All right. I think we were here.
Is this microphone, can you all hear me? Yes. Thank you. This is I think where we were discussing what is a better fit for the area between the building and the pond. The currently planned functions, which are quiet contemplative activities will be less impactful to sensitive animals and plants and are not likely to lead to a fencing solution. This we're moving on to dedicated play spaces today, not including the baseball diamond, which will not be replaced at any AAPS K-five site. Total play area available today is approximately 101,000 square feet.
Note that grassy areas covering most of the site today are regularly mowed, but most of this maintenance approach is not for the purpose of play. There is a distinction between green space and play areas. Green space is all unpaved space on a site, obviously excluding the building itself. It includes natural buffers, lawns mode for play areas and lawns mode for other reasons. Not all mode areas are play areas. So on the right here in yellow, we see today's natural buffers, roughly 1.25 acres of natural buffers. Everything else is mowed. In the current plan and likely in any plan we bring forward,
we would be increasing the natural buffers. In this plan, the current one, we're tripling them to 3.75 acres of natural buffers. This this will benefit a number of things. Our neighbors will be happier. It's a pollinator habitat for small animals, etcetera. And we don't have the cost and the carbon associated with mowing things unnecessarily. Dedicated play spaces in the current plan. Total play areas proposed is 11,000 square feet, a 10 increase. Dedicated play areas allocated for recess and physical activity include playgrounds,
blacktops and open play fields. The current plan includes two zero one square feet of play space per student for the five fifty two student design enrollment and 178 square feet of play space for student at a six twenty four student maximum enrollment. This is generous play space for Thurston students and is what we would provide in any version of Thurston's plan. What is generous, though? There are no regulatory requirements for place based size applicable to AAPS projects, nor are there any recognized guidelines,
but the National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities offered this context. Between 152 square feet per student is generous. This prevents overcrowding and allows for diverse activities. 100 square feet per student is acceptable, and 75 square feet per student is minimal. The NCEF's generous play space recommendation of 200 square feet per student was based on the number of students using the play space at any one time, not the total school enrollment. But our two zero one feet per student is for the entire design enrollment,
all at the same time. So at any one time is typically two grade levels at recess, so a third of the enrollment. That's what the 200 square feet per student was based on. But we've got it set up so that we're covering all five twenty four students at one time. Play areas north of the building. If play areas are placed north of the building, the following additional considerations would be relevant. Significant regrading of the entire area north of the building and West of the Oak Savanna would be required to resolve uneven terrain for play fields to function properly.
A significant retaining wall would be likely south of the TNC to reconcile the regraded field area with grade within the TNC and sensing would be likely south of the TNC to keep balls and the children chasing them out of the natural buffer. Play area safety. The new bus loop will be gated and will remain vacant during school hours other than drop off and pick up times. The improvements to the parking lot, parent drop off and bus loop are critical safety improvements that current Thurston does not have due to lack of space. Separating cars and buses is a known safety pro protocol recommendation that AAPS incorporates at
campuses across the district wherever possible. The parent and staff park parking driveway will see very little traffic through the day, all at very low speeds. These conditions exist today at a large number of AAPS elementary schools. So here we're going to share a few slides. Bryant has a playground and a play space partially fenced adjacent to a drop off area. Logan has a partially fenced playground immediately adjacent to a driveway. And Anarbor Open has a play area fenced at the street and driveway and also
a playground fenced at the street. The distinction between streets and driveways is that streets are high volume, high speed affairs, and driveways are low volume, low speed affairs. A2 Steam has an unfenced play area next to a driveway and a fenced play space next to a street. Wines has a fenced play area next to M14 and an unfenced play area at the driveway. Lakewood has an unfenced area next to the driveway. This is playgrounds and play fields at Lakewood. Dickon has an unfenced play area next to a driveway,
and Pattingill has an unfenced play area next to a street. Allen has a preschool playground fenced at a driveway. There's a distinction with preschool playgrounds. They must always be fenced regardless of where they are. So the current plan has a fenced preschool playground. Pittsfield has a plague area and playfield fenced at the street. And Carpenter has a partially fenced place playfield, at three streets. This site is surrounded on three sides by streets, and the fence exists on two of those. Mitchell has an unfenced playground next to the driveway there.
So the idea is that, the current plan has a good quality and a good quantity of play space. We will be monitoring that to see if we need to add fencing anywhere. That would be an obvious next step if it were deemed necessary. The current plan does not include fencing because we don't think there's a need for it with the low volume and low speeds we're discussing and given the precedent that exists elsewhere in the district. So this is a staging summary now. There are limited site plan benefits to staging Thurston. It will not result in substantial changes to the current site plan.
Changes will be incremental and will not justify the cost and implications of staging. What staging affords and what it does not. With staging, Thurston students would not temporarily attend school adjacent to construction, an approach that is in place not just at Thurston, but also at Mitchell, Dickin, Lakewood, Lawton, Wines, Carpenter, Pat and Gill, Bryant, and Allen. Fewer than 12 T and C labeled trees would no longer need to be transplanted, and volunteer work done by the TNC within the last fifteen years on less than half an acre of the site would not be relocated nearby by the district.
But in any plan, the butterfly garden would be relocated, Play areas would be the same size as in the current plan, more than likely located south of the building. Stormwater solutions and impacts on wetlands would be no different. Unmowed area would be nearly identical. Those are those are the things that staging buys us. And these are the things that staging costs us. Between $13.90 and 02/1940, AAPS students at Logan, Thurston and King would be impacted, dollars 180 to $2.60 staff at those three schools by between three and five years,
impacting students, staff, caregivers, academics and operations. It would cost the district the 9 to $12,400,000 that we've seen before, representing a potential reduction in planned improvements for a project of Thurston size between thirteen and twenty percent. And we haven't yet enumerating general fund facts here. In addition, for all scenarios, we would be staging more schools, delaying much needed improvements at Thurston King and Logan, reducing resource allocations at other schools, allocating additional resources to temporary solutions,
plus at least one of these three, which we've seen before, changing the board approved methodology, changing the purpose of new Logan after vetting it for Logan, and dividing the Thurston's student enrollment or operating with three fewer classrooms at Thurston for three years. So for us, the costs and the price don't add up for staging. Any questions about that? We have two more sections. I I got a couple questions. In terms of play space, and maybe I missed it. It's been late, so I might have just missed it. What did you say the play space was in the new design and compared to
the current design? 10% larger. The dedicated play space. There is a lot of lawn mowed at Thurston. Mhmm. It's not mowed for play space. So the space that is currently dedicated for play space? Is 101,000 square feet, and we're providing a 11,000 square feet, so a 10% increase. Okay. So the only difference that I saw is where it's laid out and the and the complaint about it being between the bus loop and the park. Oh, I think that, community would also say that it's inadequate.
A 11,000 square feet we've provided because they're comparing it to the mowed area today. Right? The almost the entire site is mowed today, but as far as dedicated play space, it's about a 1,000 square feet. Okay. Yeah. Okay. So the mold space that is not specifically for play is what they're gonna be losing that that that we're hearing some of the complaints about Yes. As opposed to the deck. Okay. Yeah. Another question. Is back to on the slide 64. You don't have to pull it up. Just maybe you can ask this question for me. Trustee Wilkins asked you,
about the preschool class, and it sparked the question I had. You said that we were looking to do if we did the old Logan station plan, we do the four, unit modules back to back. Yes. Okay. Do they make five unit modules, and would those fit in that space? Maybe they do. They might be custom fabrications. They're cost they're custom, and we'd have to wait for one to be made, and it would cost significantly more. But the shorter answer is we think eight is the maximum that could possibly fit at old Logan.
Okay. Even two fives, I don't think will fit. It's it's going to be a challenge to get eight to fit. Okay. Alright. Okay. Any questions based on my questions, trustees? Trustee Wood? Another question regarding, slide number 97 related to the play areas north of the building. If play areas are placed north of the building, the following additional considerations would be relevant. You mentioned significant regrading of the entire area north of the building, a significant retaining wall and fencing, and additional costs. So there's no dollar figure,
but I would be interested in how much more that would tag on to our price tag. And would this this cost be covered by the bond money, or would this be something that would Yes. Again, come out of our general fund? No. This would be bond dollars This would be bond dollars. But it would it would compete with other interests we have our core mission objectives for school. Okay. So there would be a a modest increase in cost for this. No. No. It's not. No. It's not. It's No. It's not. It's approximately $1,500,000 Okay. Speaking of modest or regrading?
Regrading and a retaining wall. Okay. Okay. Thank you. You just for clarity, we have not designed this. Okay. No. We don't have the details. This is we're we're we're it's a guesstimate at this point. Yeah. Got it. But it's not But it's not insignificant. Okay. It's not But it's not insignificant. Okay. It's not It's a big if. It says, if the play areas are placed north. Yes. So that there's no okay. Yeah. Miss Corona, I believe you stated that, it will be I I know it doesn't fit, two fives. You said it'd be substantially more though in terms of the cost of those modules? Most modulars come in four and eight. Okay.
Four, six, and eight. They don't come in in an odd number. Okay. Odd number. Okay. Just to predict your question, can we go to four and a six to work? There's there's there's not space on the site. Okay. Thank you. We're all waiting for that. I try. Any other questions? Yeah. I do have some one additional question. On a dedicated play space today, right, I think we said a 1,000 square feet. Can we just go over what that includes and what part is mode that's not included in that number? Yes. So I think it's Slide 92.
2 90 3 90 4. So the dark green area is, open playfield. The orange areas are playgrounds, and the blue areas blacktop. And those are the three elements that go into the 101,000 square feet. The baseball diamond is additional space, but we are removing baseball diamonds from our K5 projects. Professor Schmidt? I remembered when we looked at the design, there was a road that goes around the building that is the access for fire. Mhmm. But because that's gated and it's only used if an emergency vehicle comes in,
that that paved area can also be used for, playing. Yes. Because, you know, you gotta have hoops, things of four square, and things like that. Yep. It's gonna look like it's playground on hardtop, but it can it can accommodate a fire truck if we need a fire truck to be there. Okay. Alright. Anything else? So is that added in to the total when you talk about play areas, or are you just looking at the green play areas? No. That's included. So the proposed whoops. This is proposed. So the blue areas are blacktop.
Oh. And the dark green area is the open play field, and the orange areas are playgrounds. The playgrounds are the same size. The open field area is a little bit bigger, and there's more blacktop. Got it. Do you have a diagram like that for how it is currently? This is the proposed plan. This is the current plan. And that blue blue is blacktop. Blacktop. Yep. Okay. Thank you. It is important to note, and I think this goes back. So preschool, there's certain, the playgrounds are set to accommodate different age groups. And it's important to note that you can't just lump all the,
you know, preschool with everybody else. The preschool needs to be by the preschool classroom. So when there's an, somebody asked earlier, why would we have to revise the interior of the building? Well, if the site is gonna drive the design, then and you you're insistent on putting, playgrounds in a specific space, that means that may require us to redo the whole interior of the building to accommodate adjacencies to those playgrounds, I e, you would put the playgrounds right next to classrooms.
You put them by the cafeteria or access to the cafeteria where the kids are coming out. So it's it's not simple to just say, well, I just want just put the playground over here because the inside of the building probably doesn't match. Anything else, trustees? Alright. Thank you for asking those questions. Our next two sections are solutions that do not require staging. The first one we looked at is a major modernization approach. This is an affordable option. Should Thurston stage, a major modernization would need to be considered in lieu of new building due to the cost impacts of staging as outlined in this presentation.
Major modernization involves a series of additions or other limited improvements to the existing building. It is the only affordable option other than the current plan, but it falls significantly short of the commitments approved by the board and voters. This is what this could look like. So that's the existing building in light gray there. And in dark gray with blue outlines are potential additions. The parking area stays the same, although we would be relocating the bus loop to off of Renfrew to the north, the Northwest corner there. And so the, one of the loops in the front could be converted to additional parking,
which we would need for staff and visitors. There would still be a fire lane going around the building. We would still have a playfield and playgrounds. So the additions would move closer to the pond in the solution. The building stays where it is in this solution with significant additions. But work is scaled back so it could be done while school was in session over several consecutive school years. I just want to go back. In this slide, we talk about staging, but this option is one that does not require staging. I think that could be a misleading statement. We're going to fix that. How would this impact like a geothermal field?
Are you still able to do that? Yes. And what is disrupted to be able to do it with this design? And we would disrupt green space for the season that we did the work. So it could either be north of the building there adjacent to the Thurston Nature Center or it could be under the playfield. Okay. So this is the list that we looked at earlier of commitments and the impacts on these. In this major modernization version, the impacts are significant. So orange items are items we cannot do as well with this approach. For the Phase two capital plan commitments, we cannot honor the priority order of projects or the timing of projects or the
type of projects. I'm not going to read all of these, but you can see here that there are significant general commitments that we would not be able to do as well in a major modernization approach. Site commitments we could meet. We don't have too many issues with the site commitments. But building commitments are a substantial challenge for us in this approach. And we'll just go through this list here. Again you've seen these, but this is simply pointing out what this solution we would not be able to meet these commitments. Just as a clarification, the major modernization approach, the building remains occupied and we construct various additions starting in the summer but extending
into the next school year and we do that for several school years. That's how we could get the building to the size with the amenities we would need. That approach is the approach we've used for the last thirty years in the district other than skyline and Roberto Clemente. So any capital improvements we've done have been additions like these. And the result of that is buildings that are hard to use because they're sprawling and they're disconnected. So among these orange items that you see here, the building won't function the way we we need it to function with these additions.
But it is affordable. Major modernization is the only affordable option other than the current plan, but it falls significantly short of the commitments approved by the board and voters. Any questions about the major modernization approach? So modernization major modernization has been focused on buildings, as we said the other meeting last week, the buildings that have good bones. Right? You've got buildings like Angel, Slauson. Yes. These buildings I live in a very old house in this city. I mean, they're never gonna fall down. You know, you you would never wanna level that and,
start over because of the quality of the construction of that time. This quality is not there in the buildings, this particular building. We don't think we'd be able to meet our objectives with a major modernization approach at Thursday. Mister Peskin? And I just wanna add, it gets you ugly buildings. We have some, as I've said before, public we've got some ugly buildings, and part of it is this add this patchwork. I mean, I don't even have to name the buildings. Wherever we've added one wing here and one you can tell. Mhmm. And and talk about user friendly. Again,
I pick on Slauson with that basement where you've gotta go up and over and down again. That's problematic for a student. Again, I'm still traumatized. Okay? As as a sixth grader getting lost and not figuring out how to get to the other side because I know my class was in the basement somewhere. So, I mean, I really we have been blessed with the community saying, here's the money to build us some awesome stuff. Let's build some awesome stuff instead of doing this patchwork and coming up with ugly buildings again. So that's my commercial. K. Anything else?
Trustee Wilkins? Do you mind just suggesting some of these specific like, why would designating and or constructing gender neutral restrooms be difficult or be problematic? This isn't an occupied building that we're talking about. Mhmm. So going into a building and redoing the the plumbing and the amenities in the building would be significantly challenging in the summer, and we have to this is among the things we would have to do in the summer. Mhmm. Whereas in addition, we could continue into the next school year because it's not really having an impact
on operations. But it would be a challenge to be in the building and do this kind of work. So it would take longer than a summer to create these bathrooms? Yeah. We only have we only have from the day everybody leaves to the day they start school less than ten weeks to do the work. The the patchwork of infrastructure that Kevin was talking about make just makes it more challenging. And the orange is just simply meant to indicate that we might not be able to do it as well. So it doesn't mean that we couldn't do it and we couldn't figure out how
to make it work. We just can't do it as well as we would. And you said it's affordable. Yes. Does that mean it's cheaper than building any staging option. Be. Or what about building the current plan? It would be cheaper than the current plan. Because it's not a new building. Because it won't get us it won't get us what we're after. How much cheaper? I don't have those numbers off the top of my head, but our issue is we're trading off, some of the operational savings, cost savings because we're not having an efficient building anymore.
It's less efficient to have a building that's sprawled out. There's a reason why the design is the way it is, why we're going two story buildings. Those are more energy efficient, and and that reduces the general operating cost. So it is it is proven through this district that whenever we continue to add on and go out horizontally, it's just an additional it's an additional operating cost. Mhmm. And in a building that's continually occupied, we couldn't do major mechanical upgrades in the summer. We couldn't add fire suppression or sprinklers.
We couldn't replace all the ceilings and lights in the ten weeks. So there would be concessions we would make to the baseline improvements for this for the facility. We could have nice additions, but they would be fragmented from the rest of the school just by the nature of how we would have to add on to the school. So what I'm interpreting is that it will cost us a ton to try to keep it up keep it up, maintain it if we went that way. It might save us half in construction cost. It will cost us millions over a year.
It'll probably somewhere in the 30% range is what it might save, but we would also fall far short of our Mhmm. But we haven't gotten into the the potential extra costs that some can people have raised concerns about, watershed issues and flooding things. You know, if we That's what we have people here to talk about. Right. Right. We have to get to that. Yeah. I get it. How much time would this modern modernization You said it's over a span of years. I yeah. Depending on what we did, I would anticipate it would be three to four years of construction actively on the
site in lieu of what we're looking at of two, two years. Okay. So But we still get the geothermal? Yeah. We could. We Believe We think we can do the geothermal. I mean, again, we would have to retest for the new area of the geothermal, and, we would have to figure out a way to to get it in, you know, into the space that's leftover available. So We're just exploring staging options and options that don't require staging, but we absolutely don't recommend a major modernization at Thurston. I appreciate you're exploring all the options.
That's what we asked for. Yes. So Alright. Any other questions? Okay. The current plan the current plan is the only affordable plan which honors all commitments approved by the board and voters. Adjustments we have made where feedback supported by evidence has been received and where accommodating this feedback has been possible without jeopardizing core mission objectives at Thurston and other schools, the site plan has been adjusted. We started making these adjustments back in June of twenty twenty four and continued through December. Adjustments have been made mainly in these areas,
positive adjustments with respect to impacts on the TNC, positive adjustments with respect to impacts on play areas, positive adjustments with respect to natural buffers. This has all been since June of twenty twenty four. This is an example of, the impacts on the TNC in July, late July. And this is the result of the adjustments we've made. It's an 84% habitat impact reduction as compared to the original version. It reduces impacts almost entirely to habitat areas that did not exist fifteen years ago. This is Thurston Place Bases in late July twenty twenty four.
This is the adjusted plan. Playfield size increased substantially. This is the natural buffers. This makes a comparison between today and previously. We have increased natural buffers since July, but the main increase here is that we're tripling natural buffers over what is in place today. So this is the current site plan. All new work is separated from the pond by at least 150 feet and from wetlands by more than 100 feet. Approvals from all regulatory agencies will be received prior to the commencement
of work. So we have had a wetland delineation made. It appears on the survey, which is publicly available, and that's how we know we're staying more than a hundred feet away from it. We know exactly where it is. This is the same list that we've seen before. Phase two capital plan commitments, orange items are items we can't do as well in this approach. You will see that there are no orange items on these lists. The current plan is the only affordable plan which keeps all commitments approved by the voters. No additional costs are incurred for the current plan and no constraints need to be
reconsidered for the current plan. And we end with a comparison. This is a chart we've put together, the current plan versus the staging plan. The duration of impact in the current plan is two years. With staging, which we don't recommend, it's more than three years, up to five. The number of schools impacted in the current plan is one, whereas with staging, it's three. Instructional impact for the current plan is intermittent construction noise, most disruptive activity outside plan to occur in the summers, whereas in the staging option, daily disruptions impact the student learning experiences.
Cultural impact for the current plan is that the community stays together on the site. And in staging, there's a temporary school and split grades, or we're operating Thurston with three fewer classrooms somehow. General fund impacts for the current plan are neutral. With staging, there are significant additional general fund costs. Capital fund impacts are neutral in the current plan. And in staging, we are adding $9,000,000 to $12,000,000 or cutting $9,000,000 to $12,000,000 in scope. Green space impacts in both plans, they are generous amenities.
And that is the end of our presentation. Thank you, mister Stansberry. Trustees, we like mister Stansberry shared, that concludes our, the informational part of our study session. We hope that we have addressed the questions that we have received from the bond team. The you have in front of you, and they will be posted to the website, the 21 questions that we received, from concerned community members. We have, tried to allay the concerns around, that we have heard around The thinking that there are only four decision makers for this project, that in fact,
there are a significant number of professional experts, and their offices that consult with us and work with us and, on every single project, including Thurston. So we hope we have addressed that as well. And at this time, if there are any additional questions that you all have for us or any of our guests, we are happy to to take them. Miss Lamont? So I know this this has come up in public commentary, and I think it's probably addressed in this this document. But just so that we can talk about it, the geotechnical report and what mitigation strict plans,
what are the problematic areas. But if we can go over, you know, here from the group as far as that that piece because it's come up a lot. Yep. We can bring g two up, and we might also wanna bring Stantec up. Yeah. G two will discuss why we wetland why we do these and what they mean, and Stantec can address how they have responded. So this is Jason with g two. Thank you. Yeah. So the the goal of the geotechnical investigation is to essentially see what we can't see from the ground. Right? We're not able to see what types of problematic soils or challenging conditions might be
there that might impact conventional construction of a project. Every site has some sort of geotechnical soil challenge. I can look at pathways with loose, loose, sand soils or Mitchell with fill soils or with Slauson with deeper fill soils, with leaker soils. Every site has challenges. That's why I have a profession. But there's always engineering solutions to all those challenges, and it's up to us to come up with cost effective solutions based on those challenges that we see at the site, whether it's soft clays, loose sands, high water table,
all kinds of things that might impact the construction. So specifically to Thurston, you know, we did find in a within a portion of the site, within a the northeast portion of the future building pad, some, fill soils with organics. And there are lots of engineering solutions to deal with that. We can look at completely removing the soils and then backfilling that with new, new sand fill. We can also look at putting the that portion of the structure on a deep foundation system, meaning take, piles down fifty, sixty, 70 feet to support the, the structure as well as support the structurally support the floor slab.
We could also leave the fill soils in place and actually change the properties of those soils such we can we can limit the amount of export of soil and impact due to that. So we came up with a solution based on looking at a variety of options and what those costs might be and decided that within a portion of the building pad where we have some poor soils. Again, it's not the entire building pad, just the northeast portion of that of essentially modifying or changing the soil so that we go ahead and have conventional construction to support the foundations and floor slab without
deep foundations, without mass hauling off of soil off of the site. That was the most cost effective solution and the least impactful solution for for the site. About the the question about flooding, the wetlands. Yep. We would bring, Jeremy up to the Thank you for that. Jeremy and Rob, if you could come up. As you stay there, we might we might move. Jeremy and Robert are with Midwestern. They did the civil engineering including the stormwater management plan. Yep. And I'll start with a high level. Jeremy, he'll get into the technical nitty gritty of the detail,
but basically the stormwater management, we did design it for an our republic schools, you all have a MS4 permit that's administered through the state of Michigan and we complied with providing rain gardens, detention ponds per that permit. And also you're by that permit you're required to have a third party review our plans. They did do that and they've approved the stormwater management plans. We comply with the federal
and state regulations. So we've kind of met all the requirements for stormwater. But if there's detailed like somebody has a, I haven't seen a certain problem or you know, somebody's personal problem. Like, I don't know how to answer answer to that. But maybe we can address does what does the plan do with respect to runoff into the pond and runoff into a Janie adjacent neighbors? How has the plan addressed that? Yep. And I'll start by saying also what what the rules are is we can't send
any more water off off the site tomorrow than it's going off today. As far as, like, going into the pond, there's there's, you know, we're not sending any water into the pond. If you wanna go into the Jeremy. Sure. Sure. I can start off saying that as the civil engineer of record, I'm the one that loses my license if I lie to you and if everybody floods out worse than happens today. I like to keep my career going. You're the one. And so I will tell you that I always design all of my projects as though all of the neighbors were my friends and family,
and that I would feel comfortable if my mother had the house next to Thurston. So in general, what we do when we design this is we make sure that things can't get worse. If there's some problem that's been going on for a hundred years, you know, we can't solve all the problems of the city and of the world. But the key things that we look at are flow rates and flow volumes. We look at the one year the the one inch storm, sorry, the two year storm, the ten year storm, and the hundred year storm. And what the rules are under the Ann Arbor Schools policy, which is the same as the one that the U of M has,
is for all of those design storms, the flow rates are not allowed to increase. And what that means is that the downstream storm sewers, they won't get any more flow at any time than they're getting today. The other thing that we look at is the two year overall storm volume, total cubic feet. And we have to be sure that that total volume does not leave the site. So the way that we handle this is through a collection of basins and chambers. We have one large chamber underneath the parking lot, and this is located in that location because that is the one point in the site that water goes into the ground.
So we're able to infiltrate down there and handle that. We have another small chamber up in the Northwest that holds water and any water that's held there isn't going into your basement because it's there. And then there's a small orifice. So what it does is it fills up really quick, goes out really slow, keeps those rates down. The same thing happens with the rest of the water in the big chambers as well as the water in the Basin Rain Garden it goes up a little bit it goes out slowly. Between those three areas we're looking at the different places it comes out of the site, the Northwest, the Southwest making sure that each of those areas separately goes down.
As well as overall, we don't wanna send too much into the ground because then we might flood out basements. So what goes into that infiltration area also is within a couple percent, we're matching everything as it goes out from each way. The only thing going into the pond directly is some of the the area north of the Fire Road, which is the natural area. It's vegetated. It's what it does today. Everything that is paved, we're collecting. We're treating it for stormwater quality. We have what's called hydrodynamic units that swirl chambers, they filter out the solids, they let little solid settle to the bottom. And in so doing,
we keep we keep the water clean. We make sure we don't make any problems, at least none that don't already happen today. And whatever happens on the site, we would make sure that that happens. Any other option that you have would be mostly the same thing happening with storm, maybe slightly different locations. So just I'm sorry. What's the best name? So to put it in layperson's terms, So we're not poisoning the pond? Correct. Your mother, you would feel comfortable with mom living next door to Thurston Yes. Currently designed? Yes. So we're not impacting the pond or the wetlands k.
Or Thank you. Neighbors. Are these the gentlemen who can answer the flooding question? Well, you can ask the question. We'll see. Okay. There's been a lot of talk about that's the area of the new building having so much water and questionable soil that's gonna cause flooding in the new building just because it's it's so wet back there. Can you speak to that in any kind of way? The the area where the building is going isn't there's a few very low spots
that are being filled in, but the floor of the new building is gonna be the same elevation as the floor of the existing building. Water flows around, and it's not gonna get caught in a low spot next to the building because it's gonna go to our stormwater treatment areas. I think what we're really talking about is how does the pond function, and does it ever does the pond ever spill? It has historically. But solutions for that, which this particular team aren't involved with, those those have been implemented. So historic flooding where the pond breaches the the levee,
if you will, that has been taken care of. Okay. Trustee Wilkins? I'm gonna play Debbie Downer in doom and gloom. Mhmm. If if the if that's not enough, if the reservoirs fill up, the flow becomes too great, all your mom and everyone else gets a flooded basement. Take that. Whose do we have extra insurance for that? Do we need extra insurance for that? Are we not insured for that? Do does the school have to pay for that? Does the school have to pay for it if it happens after the first year?
There's been, you know, questions about that kind of thing. Yeah. I'll I'll take part of that. So you're not in the flood plain. So usually when you hear flood insurance, that is if you're in the flood plain, you know, you'd be required to get a flood insurance. So you FEMA won't help us because we're not in a flood plain. You wouldn't need flood insurance for the for for this project. So who pays for his mom's basement to be redone once it gets flooded? Yeah. But, I mean, in our opinion, the you know, this, new Thurston Elementary School project is not causing any flooding into through any of the
residents' basements. I I understand that, and I I know you're the experts. I'm just again, I'm playing Debbie Downer here. What if it did? Who's who's on the hook for this month? Can you please explain can you please explain is the requirement is there a requirement that that makes us have to keep our stormwater on our property and only discharge it accordingly in into a, in a certain system? Basically, we have to keep our stormwater on our property. Yep. So, yeah,
today you have, you have certain stormwater that, does run off your property. Mhmm. The rules are this project, we're we're not able to cause more water to run off. So based on that, we're not sending any more water off-site tomorrow Mhmm. Than is going off today. So then that should, you know I think it won't flood the basement. And again Yeah. I What if it does? I wonder if I if another way to answer that question is that it would be the same as today.
There would be no evidence because we've done all of the due diligence that what we are doing is actually the cause of any of that. That's what I want. And so that is where it's, it's, kind of a theoretical question that's impossible to answer because I get it. Yeah. I mean, if there was a flooding basement, we would we would do an investigation. It may be ground water. It may not be, you know, flooding Mhmm. From runoff or something like that. So there'd be a whole investigation that would have to happen. So we can feel confident that all the due diligence has been done so that
we can't get sued for this. We can't all of the potential litigation, all of that stuff is I think we can be assured that we're doing our due diligence. Yes. Right. Like, sue is all denied. We've already got threats. And we won't get sued. We haven't done that. Lose lawsuits, maybe. Does that include EGLE, regulatory EGLE permits? I don't even know the right I just know the right You wanna know how EGLE is involved in this process? Yes, please. Yep. Well, we'll need an EGLE permit for your water main and your the sanitary sewer. Not really a sanitary, but the the water main.
Let's talk about wetlands a little bit. Yeah. There is a wetland delineation on the survey, like Kevin said. We could point it out, but it's right on the survey and it's on a lot of our plan sheets as well. We won't need a permit from EGLE because we're not impacting that wetland, we're not removing any of that wetland. So we don't we don't need a EGLE permit from EGLE for the wetland. What we do need from EGLE is what's called a notice of coverage. It's part of a soil erosion permit. So once we have that permit pulled then we need to obtain a notice of
coverage from the State of Michigan or from Eagle. But yeah from Eagle we need that notice of coverage and a water main permit. There is one, There is actually one other Eagle involvement and that is that because the Iannabra Schools is an MS four, stormwater agency, they have a stormwater manager who's been the one that's been third party reviewing our plans. It's, Robert Roshung at, PEA. So that stormwater manager has to maintain their license with Eagle who audits them and reviews things and looks things over. So this whole MS four system that they have is also regulated by Eagle.
And I would also say I felt really good today hearing a forensic engineer reviewed our plans, tried to pull it apart, and said that looks like it's probably getting approved. So I felt good there. It's true. It's true. We did hear. And is there oh, go ahead. It's to follow-up. Is there any reason to you said we don't need the EGLE permit because we're not we're far enough away from the wetlands. Yep. We're not filling in the wetland. We're not Is there ever instance where we would get it just because we're close
to it or does that not how that works? We could we could do what we did at, we could do what we did at Logan, meet with with Eagle and they would issue us a a letter of no permit required. I mean, we could get that if, if desired by the board. Does it I mean, again, to cover our butts, I think it's not a bad idea. Yeah. I could fill us facilitate that. Yeah. And and they're familiar with our projects and our work because we've worked with them in 2021 and afterwards when we,
restored the berm and fixed the underdrain, in that area. So we've we have regular communications with EGLE representatives on that site. Okay. And did I hear you say we are not in a floodplain? That is correct. And we do not need flood insurance because we are not in a floodplain. I suppose you could elect to to have it if you But but it's not required Correct. Because we're not in a floodplain. Okay. I just wanna make sure I heard you correct. And to clarify that, you are not within the 1% annual chance flood.
Right. Okay. Get up to the million year flood. A lot of people are in for this. But Fair. Alright. Before I before we let you guys go, we gotta handle a little bit of business. We are at, 10:56. Is there a motion to we're at a five near a five hour mark. Is there a motion to extend the meeting, fifteen additional minutes? Second. Moved by trustee Schmidt, supported by trustee Wilkes. Any discussion? Okay. Miss Osinski, please. Do we have an amount of time that we're I'm hoping fifteen more minutes should do it. Right? Alright. Let's do thirty just a second. Thirty minutes then. Yeah. Is it still moved by trustee?
Yeah. Wilkes is supported. Thank you. Second. Yeah. Like, moved by trustee Schmidt. I'm in. Supported by trustee Wilkes for thirty minutes. Oh, great. Thank you. Alright. Trustee Mohammed? Yes. Trustee Feaster? Yes. Trustee Wilkins? Yes. Trustee Wilkes? Yes. Trustee Basquette? Yes. Trustee Wilkerson? Yes. Trustee Schmidt? Yes. Motion carries. Thank you. Trustee Basquiat, do you have a question? No. Well, I just wanted to acknowledge that we have heard folks who have had some horror stories regarding flooding. And as I've shared with some of those folks, we in my poor little neighborhood have the same issues with the flooding.
Our subdivisions seem to be built around the same time by the same developer, by the way. Okay. But things and and when we, as homeowners in my neighborhood, look to, you know, fix things, we we don't have many options. Okay? And and I know how frustrating that can be, but I hope the community has heard you experts that we're not adding to the problem. We're not gonna create more problems. We are heavily regulated to make sure we don't do that. As as you said, we can't send off any more water than what we have currently.
And then we've got these large chambers and basins and strategic places. So again, I want to acknowledge the problem because I totally sympathize with it. Empathize with it. But again, we're not going to create any more issues. We're not in a floodplain And so, again, let's take that off the table, reduce that amount of fear, if you will, that's out there because I do understand the fear. But, again, you guys have, I believe, confirmed most of our questions or thoughts that we're not going to be adding to the problem.
Lawsuits will happen all the time. You know? We've already heard threats of it today, but, hopefully, we can be in a position we will be in a position to defend ourselves regarding this. So thank you. You may wanna sit there for this one. I'm I'm not sure. So question 11 on our questions that came from the community and perhaps from some of us, the about the Huron River Watershed Council, contacting us. They had, some concerns about different items. Do you wanna talk are they the ones that would talk about that?
I think I mean, I see the answer here, but for the public's sake, I I would like them to understand, what what the answer would be. Well, I I think I could just file so they do need to I do need you guys to answer this question. But, but I just wanted to say that after we received that, note, you know, or or the public comment, we did reach out to Huron River Watershed Council, and we asked them. We talked to them specifically about possibly being a peer reviewer on our projects and serving in a a role where they could put another set of eyes on what
we're doing, provide some comments so that we get feedback in advance. And we're going to and we have an opportunity, I think to work more closely with them and we're following up. But I would like you to answer that specific comment, Chris. Yeah. Yeah. Can we ask the question again so they have the question? Yep. It says the Huron River Watershed Council has formally contacted APS with concerns about the project. Let's see. Why were local environmental groups not included? When do you plan to remedy this? You've already answered that question.
I don't have their form in front of me, the things they care about or that they mentioned. But Yeah. They wanted to, you know, the idea is to protect, mill the Millers Creek Watershed and what steps are we going to take in order to ensure that we are protecting. Yep. So I would suggest we have them review our plans. And what we've done in the past is we've worked with them to add best management practices for design, for construction, you know, just looking out for the, you know, the best interest of, the Huron Watershed,
Huron River Watershed and Millers Creek. So, that's what I suggest we do there. And you've done the best man management practices. On another yes. We would be having them grade us, and if we would need to make adjustments, we could. But the practices that Rob is describing are already in the drawings. Yeah. What what I have envisioned, what I've done before is like they they're on the they're part of our project, but they're like bullet points, you know, kinda listed right there for you. So it's not as if the things that they brought up, these aren't things you're already taking into account. Correct. I mean,
they may find one thing. If if we didn't do it, then we would, add it to the plans and enhance enhance the plans that way. Okay. Thank you. But because we're so far away from the pond and the wetlands, it's unlikely that they're they're gonna financing. We should still ask. Yeah. There's enough trust trustee Vasquez? I I just wanna answer address the the subsequent question, why were local environmental groups not included in the planning process? To me, we did include the most relevant environmental group, and that was the Thurston Nature Center Group. And it I don't think they brought forth I do not believe they brought forth
the idea of adding the watershed council. But, again, we you know, it's been brought forth. We'll work out a partnership where that again, we we will address any concerns, but we did include a local environmental group. Did you wanna did you wanna clarify what you mean mean by that? The first and nature center group and the how we've included them that we've had didn't if you want to. No. No. No. I mean, I I think we've done it before, you know. But I just wanted to stress that, yes, we've had them at the table for several meetings, and we can document that.
Okay. So, again, we did start with them, and again, we'll welcome more people as it comes up. So thank you guys for, you know, offering the suggestion and, you know, keeps us on task. K. Thank you. Trustee Wilkins? While we're talking about the Thurston Nature Center is part of the, plan to make I've heard concerns about the pathways not being ADA compliant in the actual nature center or the trails that are around there. Is that part of this plan,
or is the plan just the building and not necessarily the The natural wooded paths within the Thurston Nature Center? No. There's, there's, like, been paved walking trails or something around the center. I think the best answer is anything we touch has to meet code. Mhmm. And anything we don't touch, we don't touch. We don't touch. Yeah. Okay. So, it's a significant redevelopment of the site, and quite a few sidewalks and etcetera are touched. But Okay. North of the building, we're generally leaving the paths the way they are.
Okay. For the moment? So I know you, reviewed even if we staged that the building wouldn't move, it would still be a little bit it would still you can't put it in the same spot as it is. It's still gonna it's not the building itself, but you're still gonna take up space that is still north. Can you explain why? Because I know there are some reasoning, but just kind of are there specific whys of why it still has to move up still north? Yes. There are elements that need to be in front of the building between Prairie and
the building, drop off loops, parking, stormwater solutions, etcetera. All of these will require that any new building be farther north than the existing building. And we get to a point pretty quickly where we're far enough north that we're deciding whether play fields right up against the Thurston Nature Center, are the appropriate place or whether we should swap those and move them south. So it's it's likely that any staging option that leads to a redevelopment of the site would still have Playfield south of the building,
but that would be a process we would have to go through. One thing that our our civil and storm water folks could chat about, I think, but maybe clarifies that if we reorganized play space to the north, play fields, we regraded, you know, included retaining walls and fencing and all that would be required. In addition, there would be all of the ways in which we needed to treat the stormwater that we're capturing with all of that redevelopment. And so there's an infrastructure required underneath all of that.
Again, I think our our civil guys could could help me, articulate much better, but there's infrastructure required as part of all of that as well. To keep impacts, to to avoid impacting the pond and wetlands. Yes. Trustee Wilkins. Hi. I addressing the safety concerns. I've got one easy question because but I just want everyone to hear it. So there was talk about the fire lanes and whether they'll be fire trucks will
be able to get at the new Thurston, and then that caused concerns about well, okay. What do you mean are there is there not enough room for fire trucks to get at Thurston right now? And can you clear that up, please? Yes. That comment was made from the fire local fire marshal observing that in the current plan, he doesn't see that we've accounted for fire trucks between the buildings, and that is something we must respond to. We can't get his approval, and therefore, we can't get approval overall.
So this is a it's a effectively, it's a plan review comment. He's observing that he would like to see us make adjustments, and we will make those adjustments. We can't proceed without his approval. And can fire trucks get to existing current right now, Thurston Sort of. Right now. They can get in. They don't like to drive on lawns. They get stuck quite often, which is why fire lanes are part of the new plan. Okay. In a in a major emergency, I can't speak for the fire department, I think they would get there. Yeah. And as part of the, modular project, we actually had to add a fire lane access to that area as part of
that project. So we do have access around that. Yeah. K. I would say where we need to have 70 or 80% access, currently, we probably have 60%. And and the reason it's like that is because there were different regulations when that building was built. It's grandfathered in. Correct. But we've still made some changes, you said, with the modular. When the modular went in, this is what we were talking about at Logan. We had to bring a fire lane to the modular and the hydrant. Yeah. And you said there was a designated safety person that couldn't be here.
Is that with Chrisman? Okay. Correct. Can I hear from someone else since that person isn't here? You said it's not just the fence. I just want everyone to hear all the safety stuff you can give me. Absolutely. Hey. So it's sorry. So it's it's a little hard to distill our approach to safety down to a five a five minute discussion, right, because this is something we're living, breathing, thinking about all day every every single day. But I think there's probably four or five, six top topics that we can hit on here real quick, right, to give you a little bit of comfort level on how we're we're going to
approach things here. Please. Yes. So, as you know, or may have seen in some of the logistics plans that we've submitted through, there'll be a temporary there's going to be a construction fencing that's placed around the entire perimeter of the new build. So this is not just freestanding on stanchions fencing. This is, you know, six to eight feet high fencing that's driven three to four feet into the ground. So it carries some weight itself. We've talked a little bit about these sound absorption panels that could go near the little bit about the sound absorption panels that could go near the building, specifically in the close areas, but also in the plans where we've had the contractors also include,
concrete jersey barrier similar to what you would see in a in like a highway highway project, up against areas that are tight to the building as well as areas that are tight to playground spaces. So, first line of defense obviously is controlling the equipment that's on-site and keeping it further away from the existing building. But then you have the plan b what if that situation occurs then we have those belt and suspenders solutions in place to take care of those. So that's specifically to that. Now, how we're going to feed everything into construction we're feeding everything to the Northwest of
the site. So we are eliminating all these crossover points between, you know, potential parent drop off, bus drop off, student walking zones. We've accommodated for all those walking areas. So as we get up to the Northwest, we're kind of away from there'll be no traffic in the existing parking lot, driveways, things like that. So as we approach from the Northwest, that's where we'll have rolling gates again to free ourselves from swinging gates that would potentially block views of anything, and then flag them that come out and help with the get the equipment inside
the building or any deliveries that happen. As we mentioned before we work a lot in different occupied buildings. Claussen was one of my projects. We built in a whole new middle school addition to that site working 40 feet from the existing middle school and 40 feet from the existing high school. So we do those things all the time. We just have to make accommodations and figure out how we're gonna do that. So one key and, you know, important thing is that we recognize that school districts basically put on two concerts per day. You have that many people coming in and that many people going out twice a
day. So all the deliveries that need to be coordinated, our trade contracting partners are great at it. We work with them immensely to make sure that we beat it into their heads that this is what needs to happen, because as much as we try truck drivers don't always listen, but we we have those places, you know, to go and address that, you know, hey, nope, you can't be here. You have to leave until drop off is done. So we we make accommodations for all those plans that happen on a daily basis. So those are just a couple of the the different safety and insight logistics things that we consider on it.
I'm sure there's more specific items that might pop up and and I'm happy to answer those questions if there's a specific question. But real quick, thank you for that. So this isn't your first rodeo. You've worked with you've had construction sites with, I guess, school sites Mhmm. With students occupying a building next door. Yes. No incidents, I'm assuming? No incidents. So you're experienced in this particular area? Absolutely. Okay. Yeah. And that's just one example. Obviously, we could probably line up and give you 50 to a hundred examples, but even just in my career,
but that was just one that we had completed two years ago that we're very proud of how we have approached that and solve the challenges to it and problems are just solutions we haven't figured out yet. So we can always approach it. And like we've talked to Ann Arbor Gebane, we always need to be nimble and ready to pivot. If there's any issues or anything that gets to arise, we address those concerns. We figure out how we can approach it differently and we move forward. Thank you. Thanks. If I may as well, and we do go to a different level of meeting with the principals and the
staff on a daily or weekly basis. Here's what you can expect to see for this week. Here is what you can expect to see on a daily basis and kind of give a big overview. Today we might hear more trucks coming in than normal. But the second layer of added defense that we talked about those Jersey barriers, just to put it in perspective, those barrier Jersey barriers are Jews and expressways, and they typically stop 60,000 pound trucks doing 55 miles an hour. So the concept of anything moving that fast on the job site is negated by those concrete Jersey barriers that we will be installing.
And as a project superintendent, my first goal is always the children. It's always the children. It's not money, it's not schedule, it's not budget, it's about the children. I wouldn't be able to go home at night knowing that I endangered a child if something happened to them. So that's what I that's what keeps me up at night, making sure that the children are stay safe here. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you, guys. Any other questions for us, please? I just have a comment. Okay. I am so impressed with our team. I am so impressed with the the layers of expertise that I've seen tonight.
I'm a new trustee, and, I'm just blown away. I'm also blown away by the great questions that we asked tonight. I'm sure there are gonna be others. But, I just wanna thank superintendent parks, and I wanna thank the team, and I wanna thank the experts. I mean, you all are like you're standing up like superheroes. Like, oh, we got somebody who can handle that, and we've got somebody who can do that. And, really, it's just been, yeah, I'm just proud to be a part of this district. And, yeah, we have work to do. And, but, anyway, I just wanna thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And trustees,
I told them they would be out of here at 07:00. Oh, shame on you. Shame on you, Kevin. Yeah. He should've remembered. Shame on you. I'll talk to you. Ask some more questions to make it more worth your time? They're here. They're never gonna show up to another meeting. You owe them a few beers. Well, if there's nothing further. Yeah. I just would like to also thank the team for their professionalism. They have been subject to some pretty, harsh criticism that was not warranted, or deserved. Again, they're not a decision making team of four. They represent a massive team experts and professionals,
and I couldn't be prouder of the professionalism of this team throughout this, throughout this experience here. So well done well done, guys. Thank you. Alright. If there's nothing further, I believe that brings it down to item number four, item four agenda planning. Trustees, are there any items for agenda plan? Yes. I need to. I didn't put a model of these guys. So so none of y'all say anything. Okay? Alright. Seeing nothing, that brings us down to a motion to adjourn. Trust is there. Motion to adjourn?
I so move. Moved by trustee Wilkes. Second. The board by trustee Schmidt. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. We are adjourned at 11:16PM.