Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Street Redevelopment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews environmental maps and community-benefit priorities for Water Street RFQ in Ypsilanti
Summary
The Water Street Redevelopment Committee reviewed environmental maps showing extensive contamination and utility constraints, discussed adding drone footage and a demographic appendix to the RFQ, and debated community-benefit priorities including green space and tribal engagement. Members scheduled follow-up work and next steps for RFQ revisions.
The Water Street Redevelopment Committee met Thursday to review environmental maps and the draft request for qualifications (RFQ) for the city-owned Water Street site in Ypsilanti, discussing contamination, utilities, community benefits and outreach steps ahead of issuing the RFQ.
Chair (S3) opened the meeting and staff (S2) led a packet update, noting a printing error in the agenda and reiterating that the maps and appendices are being prepared for inclusion with the RFQ. Presenter (S7), who walked the committee through the maps, said the intent of the contamination map is to show that nearly the entire property contains historic contamination and that only a few small parcels lack detections above residential cleanup criteria: "So 98% of the same, would be considered contaminated," Presenter (S7) said. The presenter also described engineered fill in previously remediated areas (Parcel 28), and identified locations with deep, non‑engineered fill that could require specialized foundations.
Why it matters: committee members said developers need clear, usable information to price due diligence and proposals. Staff (S2) told the committee the city plans to release phase‑1 environmental reports and maps as RFQ appendices and to include drone footage showing the site context and connections to downtown.
Committee members pressed for technical clarity. Several members asked which sewer and water lines are active and whether they could be tapped; Presenter (S7) said utilities are integrated with the town and often sit about 20 feet deep, and that some lines likely continue under the river. Committee members requested clearer off‑site utility depictions and suggested the RFQ append a short developer checklist of known tie‑in constraints.
Community benefits and vision. Members returned repeatedly to the question of how to incorporate the committee’s community vision into the RFQ. Several members urged including the vision statements and the five commitments crafted through prior engagement early in the RFQ to guide respondents’ proposals; other members said the committee should first agree on concrete goals tied to procurement language before weaving narrative language into mandatory RFQ requirements. The committee discussed using the CBO guide’s tiered structure to weight benefits such as affordable housing, workforce commitments and open space.
Green space and cultural resources. A number of members advocated protecting riverfront connectivity and expanding a river buffer beyond the 100 feet currently referenced in earlier materials, with suggestions ranging toward a larger buffer to preserve access, native trees and recreational connections. The committee also discussed tribal outreach and cultural sensitivity. Staff (S2) described planned coordination with the State Historic Preservation Office and Section 106 processes, and a member (S12) recommended noninvasive methods such as LIDAR or ground‑penetrating radar to help identify archaeological features without disturbing sensitive locations.
Decisions and next steps. The committee agreed to: (1) prioritize map clarifications so the RFQ appendices give developers consistent technical data, (2) circulate a more developed demographic/market appendix and drone footage to help out‑of‑area respondents, (3) compile and prioritize a short list of community‑benefit priorities (homework for members before the next meeting), and (4) schedule the incentives presentation and a focused RFQ redline at the next session. Staff (S2) will reissue the 365‑document with suggested edits and make targeted map corrections. The committee also named a vice chair to support upcoming meetings; the meeting adjourned at 9:16 p.m.
What to watch next: staff will present incentives and a revised RFQ with integrated appendices at the next meeting. Committee members said they plan to return with prioritized community benefits and concrete suggestions for how those benefits should be scored and enforced in procurement.
