In 2019, Ann Arbor voters settled a one billion dollar bond that would be used to improve infrastructure and reconstruct schools of Ann Arbor Public Schools. Five years later, that bond has finally begun to be put to use — but the response is not entirely positive.
One planned construction in particular has erupted an outrage amongst the community: the planned reconstruction of Thurston Elementary.
Originally constructed in 1963, Thurston is the oldest building in the Ann Arbor Public Schools district. More than 500 students currently attend the school, and the elementary is home to the Thurston Nature Center.
In 2018, Thurston’s Facilities Conditions Assessment, an assessment conducted by the district, scored Thurston as “poor,” the lowest ranking out of four categories. The school is facing extreme problems with overcrowding. Due to overpopulation, teachers have been forced to share and move their classrooms into dysfunctional spaces.
The AAPS Board of Education has proposed a reconstruction for Thurston Elementary to begin in 2025. The plan involves constructing a new Thurston building that aims to improve infrastructure and overcrowding in spring of 2025, while students reside in the old building. Students will move into the new building by 2027, as the current Thurston building will begin to be demolished, as well as landscaping, such as parking lots and playgrounds.
The project will have two phases. Phase One is set to start in 2025, Phase Two will start in 2028, and the project is expected to end by 2029.
While the plan seems simple enough, many parents and community members have expressed deep concern concerning the reconstruction, especially regarding the safety of the children as well as how the project will impact the Thurston Nature Center.
The Thurston Nature Center originated in the 1960s from a small group of Thurston families, and is one of the first environmental educational centers. The space of 20 acres is completely open and is home to various habitats and a diverse range of species, including migratory birds, butterflies, turtles and other wildlife. The space intersects directly with Thurston, as well as the neighborhood of which Thurston belongs to.
“[The Nature Center] is not just for Thurston, it’s for the entire community and has been maintained by the community,” Praveena Ramaswami, Thurston Nature Center’s Committee Chair told the Emery. “That environment is where we learn, where we wonder… it’s where people come out to be together.”
“When you have wonder, kids can walk through the nature center for the first time, they can walk on ice during the winter, they can see a bird or see turtles, and that is so special,” Ramaswami said. “We’ve heard from people all around the country who grew up at Thurston who now work in the environmental sciences and their experiences are directly inspired by their time at Thurston.”
The proposed plan would directly cause loss of the Nature Center and its natural elements, such as the myriad of species of trees and plants, and multiple habitats. Additionally, the plan would hinder the ability for children to play in a completely open space, without construction, parking areas or cars.
Parents are concerned about the safety of their children as well. In the proposed plan, children would be attending Thurston all the while it is an active construction site for around four years, if not more.
Lia Rose, a parent and active community member of Thurston is extremely concerned about the construction and especially how it will impact Thurston students.
“The distance between the construction and the closest place in school is 35 feet, which is the length of the school bus,” she said. “That doesn’t seem ideal to me.”
Rose went on to say that as soon as construction starts, more than half of the campus will be closed off and unusable for children. During lunch recess, all 500 students are outside at the same time. Rose additionally has concerns about the logistics of the proposed plan itself.
“In current Thurston, all of the play space is separated from cars — it’s completely safe,” Rose said. “In the finished Thurston, there are more areas for cars than children. As someone with young children, that seems like a big safety risk.”
Rose added that there is a containment pond in the proposed plan, which would be difficult to keep kids out of.
“There are runners, there are kids with special needs, there are kids with impulse control issues,” Rose said. “It is very dangerous to have the building back close to woods and water. At lunch recess, they don’t do a final head count for an hour until kids are back in class. What if someone’s missing? What if someone has drowned?”
Due to these many concerns, Thurston community members have created an alternative construction plan. Designed by Richard Hume, who is a community member and professor at the University of Michigan, the plan consists of three phases in which Thurston will work with Logan Elementary, which is down the street from Thurston.
Phase One consists of constructing a new building for Logan, which will take around three years. In Phase Two, will take place from years four to six, Thurston will be staged at new Logan building, while the old Thurston building will be torn down. Then, the new building will be reconstructed on the site of the old Thurston. During the last phase, in year seven, Thurston students would be moved back to the newly constructed Thurston building, and Logan students would be moved to the newly constructed Logan building.
Community members believe that the alternative plan would cause a significantly lesser loss of the Nature Center, and that by using staging, children would not be learning and playing on an active construction site for many years, omitting risks of safety.
While many community members have been supportive of the alternative plan, there has also been some inevitable pushback, mainly due to concerns regarding the plan’s length, staging with other schools and financial troubles.
“I know the current plan is not a perfect plan, but it seems clear to me – and many other parents/caregivers/community members with whom I’ve spoken – that a delay is even more harmful,” wrote Taylor Morgan, a Thurston community member, in a public email concerning the construction. “If we delay to the extent proposed, not a single student at Thurston today would get to take advantage of the experience of a brand new school. Not one. That doesn’t seem fair to me.”
Morgan, along with other parents, have concerns that the plan would severely prevent both the Logan and King buildings from getting built in a sizeable amount of time. The current AAPS will have Thurston and Logan students in their new buildings by 2027, while King will wait until 2029. The proposed plan will push that date back by around three years.
Regardless of the stance on the issue, parents and community members have a common concern; a lack of transparency and communication from the School Board.
“We need transparency as to what the construction site safety is going to look like,” said Morgan in an interview with the Emery. “We’re going to need a level of care and consideration given to parents to ensure that [safety] is not just an afterthought.”
“I was very surprised when they called a community meeting and they said the plans are done,” said Rose. “They said that it was going to be a collaborative thing, like ‘we’re really going to talk to everybody involved and get people’s input.’ I just was like, whoa. We were both there the whole time, but they never reached out to us.”
As of publication, AAPS is set to begin construction in March of 2025. For more information on the situation and the school construction bond, there is a list of resources below.
letthurstonplay.com
https://a2schoolsbond.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Thurston-Neighbor-Update_Final_2024_09_26.pdf
https://www.a2modern.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/ElementarySchools.pdf
https://a2schoolsbond.org/projects/
