Farewell to Zanzibar

In which the fate of Zanzibar is linked to the success of our downtown, with some history.

I always wanted to like Zanzibar (the Ann Arbor restaurant) more than I did.  The place that it occupied in my mind was idealized and dreamy, starting with the name. Zzzzanzibar.  Remember the Bill Harley song?,

Zanzibar is very far,

You can’t get there in a car.

The place seems so unreachable and unknowable that it typifies the exotic ideal, though some people have made it.  Ann Arbor’s Zanzibar played on this beautifully, with its gorgeous mural, its colorful fabric hangings suspended overhead, and its promise of “pan-tropical cuisine”.  I liked the idea of warm exotic food and fruit from Latin America, Africa, Asia – all along the equator, like a world trip just by stepping in the door.

Unfortunately, my dining experiences there were uneven, not so much unsatisfactory as not achieving expectations, and in latter years, we often stopped and read the menu outside, then moved on. The descriptions (meals had moved from complex dishes to variously seasoned meat entrees)  didn’t promise quite enough delight to merit the prices.  Then there was the final disappointment, on a cold rainy evening when it seemed the ideal spot to eat before a run across campus to see the Royal Shakespeare Company.  We joined a number of unhappy would-be diners who sat or stood in the entryway for half an hour before being told that we definitely could not be seated without a reservation.  Most of the restaurant was not in service.  It was a weekday evening and apparently they didn’t expect much business, so didn’t bring in the workers.  We finally escaped into the cold for a quick bowl of soup at Ashley’s.

And now it comes to an end.  Even in mid-June there was some hope that it might survive, but it closed on June 18.   The story is more complex than just another restaurant that didn’t make it during the recession.  It is integral to the story of how Ann Arbor’s downtown is developing, and how current development trends affect its success.

As I indicated in an earlier post, our downtown is showing signs of strain.  Or I could say that “Downtown is in trouble.”  But what does that mean and how can anyone make a pronouncement about the health of downtown?  This might be said to be a question of metrics.  How we measure the health of downtown probably depends on the place where we stand in terms of our expectations of it.  Vacancies are a symptom anyone can recognize.  There are too many downtowns across the nation where a sad progression of empty storefronts finally leads to urban renewal or simply abandonment.  We’re not likely to get there, but even a few vacancies on a street can lead to an unfortunate “gap tooth” effect that makes pedestrians less eager to visit the area.  Another related metric is rental rates (the problem reported earlier).   And ultimately, this will also rebound upon property values, both of which affect people who have an investment in downtown’s real estate.

But I’m more concerned with a qualitative measure: the types of retail establishments and their success. For those of us who live in Ann Arbor and want to visit and enjoy the downtown, having vigorous successful local businesses that fulfill real needs (even if they are only entertainment and dining) is important.  And State Street has been stressed in this regard for some time.   As early as 2001, it was noticed that local businesses, with their often unique characters, were being lost while chain restaurants were moving in.  State Street’s proximity to the UM campus has always made it a natural location for student-oriented businesses, but it used to hold its own as a place the general population would want to visit.  I remember when we would walk from our home (then on the east side) to State Street to spend an evening browsing in the old Borders (for those under the age of 100, Borders used to be a wonderful independent bookstore) and strolling the street, delighting in the storefronts and perhaps ending up in one of the restaurants like Thano’s Lamplighter (served pizza and Greek food) for dinner. Actually, State Street was an important book destination.  In addition to Borders, there were Shaman Drum, Books in General (a second-floor walkup with a great selection of used books, including technical ones), and the quirky Kaleidoscope, with some collectibles and paperbacks in certain genres.  Of course Dawn Treader was and happily is just a few steps down Liberty.  I heard anecdotes and  read interviews from international scholar-visitors who said that they loved to come to Ann Arbor for the books. Now all are gone, except for Dawn Treader (Kaleidoscope has moved to North Fourth and Borders is a struggling outpost of a national corporation, not the beloved local bookstore of earlier days.)

The job of keeping State Street vital fell in part to the State Street Area Association.  (Visit the “Our Neighborhood” tab; it has a great history by Grace Shackman, with pictures.)  Two active members were Roger Hewitt, a partner in the management of Red Hawk and Zanzibar restaurants, and Karl Pohrt, the owner of the respected Shaman Drum Bookshop. Both were concerned about the issue early.  Both of them conceived of the idea that the solution was to bring more residents downtown, thus creating a stable customer base.  As I wrote in an article published in 2006,

“Karl Pohrt, the owner of Shaman Drum Bookshop, was recently quoted in Business Review as saying that downtown is like an ecosystem and that housing downtown is important to its survival. And at a Democratic Party meeting in March, State Street restaurateur Roger Hewitt argued that building more housing is the ‘only way’ to save weak downtown retailers.”

Both Pohrt and Hewitt have been on the Downtown Development Authority board.  (Hewitt has recently been its chair, and served as its spokesman.)  Both have been active in politics. (Pohrt once ran for City Council, and Hewitt has been an active contributor to local campaigns.)  In his more recent service on DDA, Hewitt has been a strong proponent of downtown residential development. Along with a strong push from council for affordable housing (which was thought to follow naturally with increased supply),  Hewitt’s advocacy has been significant in bringing more high-rise development to the downtown.  He has been in a position to make a difference as a member of the A2D2 and adhoc Downtown Steering Committees.

But has the advent of major development downtown, and the State Street area in particular, been good for our home-grown retail businesses? (Of course, not every plan submitted has been built.) The evidence, whichever metric you might chose, seems to indicate not.  One of the earliest new developments was Corner House Apartments, right on State Street. At DDA meetings later, Hewitt was heard to comment that what was needed was long-term residents downtown.  But student-oriented developments like Corner House seem to be the most supportable from a development viewpoint.  They haven’t brought success to local businesses on State Street.  And now, sadly, both Zanzibar and Shaman Drum are, literally, history.  In an article about the changes on State Street, Newcombe Clark is quoted as saying, “it would take a conscious effort on the part of landlords and brokers to steer State Street away from the fate of South University, which has seen a stagnant retail scene and deferred maintenance on many buildings”.  Unsaid is that this has been an effect of a predominantly student-oriented customer base.  Hewitt himself is quoted in the same article as acknowledging that “It was a shopping destination for the whole community…It appealed to a broader section of the whole community than it does now.”

It is eerily appropriate that Hewitt’s next venture will be to open a carryout sandwich shop and convenience store in the Zaragon high-rise near South University.  And unfortunately, the dream of Zanzibar, as well as our old local-friendly State Street, is very far.

UPDATE: The space once occupied by Zanzibar is now occupied by Sava’s Café.  My one visit was not as positive as that of the reviewer on AnnArbor.com.  Probably I was still suffering from the loss of the mural.  My lunch companion was happy with his hamburger (Knight’s ground beef).  But my tomato bisque was overly thick and salty and the tuna salad I ordered seemed to be solid tuna with just a little mayonnaise mixed in.   The server was nearly stymied by my request for crackers to go with it. (I didn’t finish either one.) Overall, it will probably not be a destination restaurant, but may serve the visitors to State Street for other reasons adequately.

The Ann Arbor Media Flip

Today’s the day – the last day of publication for the Ann Arbor News.  Tomorrow the successor (it has the same publisher, at least) , AnnArbor.com, is formally initiated (they seem to be sneaking up on it today).  So – as I’ve noted in a couple of previous posts, it’ll be up to us to figure out how we get our news.  There’ll never be “the newspaper” again – or at least that particular reality doesn’t seem to be on the horizon.

Of course, this has provoked a good deal of soul-searching and plenty of trips down memory lane, including one by a former reporter, Jeff Mortimer, in the Ann Arbor Chronicle today. Regular readers of the Chronicle will remember a couple of heart-wrenching stories by its publisher, Mary Morgan, who was with the News for many years.   Arbor Update’s Juliew asks some very good questions along the line of What is a newspaper? What is a journalist? What is news?  There is a pretty good discussion, including submissions by actual journalists.  (Okay, I’ve stepped into the swamp of definitions.  A journalist is someone who actually investigates and reports, not someone who merely repeats what they’ve heard and offers opinions.)  (And since you’re asking, I consider myself to be teetering just on the edge of that, but I’m getting a lot of my reporting from other people, and I definitely have opinions.)

So that still leaves us with the question – how do we find out what is going on – the news and the background behind the news?  We’ve been listing sites that seem to convey some actual news about the Ann Arbor area, or at least aggregate it.  Today Ann Arbor Business Review will come off the list, since they are being submerged into AnnArbor.com.

A new addition:  The Michigan Daily.   I didn’t think of it earlier because, frankly, I have not been in the habit of reading a “student newspaper”.  However, a glance at the site shows some pretty serious reporting, not just on student topics, and it is worthy of inclusion.

I won’t be adding our two major NPR stations, for different reasons.  WEMU is an important source for local news (especially listen in the morning just after the top and bottom of the hour); they have long sent reporters to meetings and done original and timely reporting on Ann Arbor, Ypsilanti, and Washtenaw County news.  But as far as I can tell, extensive coverage is not carried over to their website.  On the other hand, though WUOM has a good deal of “Michigan News” on their website, it is rarely local to Ann Arbor.

More blogs and online efforts are likely to pop into this vacuum.  The Ann Arbor News says that Tom Gantert, a longtime reporter for the News, is starting an online political journal called The Michigan Reporter – which he hopes will be funded by grants.  Not a good beginning to read his quote about it.  It is clear between that and his comments on Arbor Update that this transition is not going well for him.

Then there are alternative newsweeklies/newsmonthlies.  Ann Arbor has had a string of them.  The Ann Arbor Observer, of course, has news as well as other types of features, and is still mostly a print publication.  (We’ve put the online version, ArborWeb, on the blogroll.)For many years, one could pick up Agenda, a liberal monthly, free at some newstands.  I haven’t seen it for a long time, though it is still listed as extant.  More recently, I’ve seen a well-produced GLBT paper, Between the Lines. I’m not sure that it is still being printed, but I don’t get to the places like coffee shops where it is likely to be found.  There is also Current, vaguely in the free shopper category, but has finally gotten its website up so that one can read the features and reviews online.

Maybe next someone should start an alternative publication like that now being read in Flint.  It is being passed out for free by volunteers – just like the old broadsides back in the days of the American Revolution.

Update: Today’s Arborweb (Ann Arbor Observer) and Ann Arbor Chronicle have reciprocal links to one another.  Connectivity lives!

Second Update: The Ann Arbor Chronicle has added the Lucy Ann Lance (1290 AM) blog to its “local news” links.

Third Update: The A2Journal, which was supposed to be a print publication delivered to homes weekly, also has a web presence.  We didn’t have a delivery last week (after receiving them for two weeks).  It’s not clear how much actual reporting they are doing.

Fourth Update: The Ann Arbor Chronicle provided this link to a Time Magazine story on the death of the Ann Arbor News.  It reports that the move was a bold business decision rather than a burial.

Zoning Changes Simplified, and the Moratorium

As promised, Councilmember Sabra Briere sent out an inquiry to her constituents in preparation for her vote on the proposed R4C/R2A moratorium.  With it, she helpfully included a thumbnail summary of all the zoning decisions to be made in Ann Arbor’s near future, with a  map to show the areas affected.

As she notes, “If you live in the downtown area, you live in the neighborhoods colored pink in the Zoning Activity Map.  This is the area involved in the A2D2 (Ann Arbor Discovering Downtown) study process.  We are nearly done with that, but not quite.  So far, we expect to vote on the final zoning and design guidelines in the fall.   (Editor’s note: postponed to the September 8 council meeting. Links to documents at the Planning website.)

“If you live in the areas colored yellow – or even just near them – you are in the areas currently impacted by the Area, Height and Placement zoning review, which is looking at (mostly) multi-family, commercial, industrial and office zoning.”  (Editor’s note: this is sometimes called the Chapter 55/59 revisions [big file]. Public meetings have been scheduled and anyone may go to any meeting.  Only the ones in the 3rd and 5th wards remain.  They are July 23 at Cobblestone Farm and July 30 at Forsythe, both at 6:30.)

“And if, like me, you live in the orange areas, you could be impacted by a development moratorium, and you definitely could be affected by the proposed study of R4C and R2A zones.”

CM Briere goes on to explain (the following has been edited for continuity),

“The Council has recently confronted a number of development proposals that fit the R4C zoning specifically but that don’t fit the master plan for the area of the proposal.  This disparity between the zoning regulation and the master plans has created significant difficulties for the adjacent neighborhoods, the planning staff, the Planning Commission, the Council – and even the developers.  The Council has felt constrained to approve projects that are not necessarily consistent with the plans and goals the citizens of set out for the City’s future.”

“Because these projects, often called ‘by right’ but truly just within the zoning, are likely to continue to be proposed, the Council decided to empanel a committee to look at the R4C and R2A zoning and the various area plans, and see how these can be brought into conformance.  At the same time, the Council directed the committee to address issues about the future use of these areas, and what types of protections should be created for the neighborhoods represented by these zonings.”

“Right now there are three projects under consideration. One of these is City Place, which just received a postponement until January, 2010. Another is The Moravian, which is proposed for the block of Madison between 4^th and 5^th Avenues, opposite Fingerle’s Lumber. The third is a speculative PUD (Planned Unit Development) being requested for Casa Dominick’s. No building is currently planned for that location, but the property owners would like the land zoned PUD.”

She asks the following questions (again, edited for brevity and consistency):

1. How do you feel about closing off demolition and development while the study committee studies R4C and R2A areas? (Editor’s note: remember this is for 180 days in the current draft resolution.)

2. Do you believe it’s fair to impose a moratorium while there are projects under consideration?

3. Do you believe, if a moratorium on development is imposed, that it should extend to the entire R2A and R4C areas? (… “the R4C and R2A areas are scattered all over the City.  However, the resolution is focused on the Central Area.”)

4. Is there anything else?

CM Briere invites any and all to respond to her by email (sabra.briere@gmail.com).  But it seems to me that this also serves as a good script for you to contact your own representatives on council and let them know what you think.

If you do nothing else, do take a look at that Zoning Activity Map.  It provides a really good perspective on all the zoning changes in the works.

Update: The Ann Arbor Chronicle has a long explanatory article about the Area, Height, and Placement proposals.

City Council and City Place

Two items appeared on Monday’s Council agenda that related in some way to City Place.  One was the resolution to approve the site plan.  The other was the moratorium on site plans under the current R4C zoning. (See the two previous posts for more discussion.)  Neither one passed.  Neither was defeated.  The story continues.

As expected, consideration of the City Place “by right” site plan was postponed, as requested by the developer.  Council retired into a closed session for attorney-client communications immediately after public comment.  When the City Place resolution came up on the agenda, CM Derezinski was prepared.  He moved to postpone until the second meeting in January (2010).  His postponement motion included a direction to staff to assist with delivery of yet another PUD application by the developer, Alex de Parry.

The actual text of the amendment:

“Based on a written request from the developer, dated July 17, 2009, I move that Council postpone consideration of the City Place site plan until the 2nd meeting in January, 2010, that Council direct Planning and Development Services to accept and process a PUD application for this site following its established procedures, and that if the developer wishes to withdraw the PUD application, that the City Place site plan be scheduled for public hearing and consideration within 35 days of receipt of a written request of the withdrawal from the developer.”

He also stated that there seemed to be a way open to satisfy both the needs of the petitioner and of the city (the neighborhood association was not mentioned).  CM Smith commented further that it must be a good compromise if no one is happy at the end.  That must have been an interesting closed session.  There was also discussion of appearance of the project on the agenda at any time with 35 days notice.

The moratorium in R4C/R2A zoned areas was postponed to August 6.  CM Derezinski made a strong pre-emptive statement that appeared to be laying out an argument that a moratorium was too difficult, too perilous to consider.  He called it “the nuclear option” – “don’t drop the bomb without serious consideration”.  Though CM Anglin’s comments in support of his motion were mostly directed toward the City Place development (somewhat moot at this point because of the expected postponement and possible withdrawal altogether of the “by right” R4C-based site plan), others made points about the broader impact of a moratorium.  But they don’t seem to have read the resolution very carefully. CM Taylor, CM Rapundalo, and CM Derezinski all emphasized the notion that it affected 1300 separate properties, and they were pursuing an argument that this would affect the owners of each property equally, with obligations for notification and other complications requiring much more staff work.  CM Hohnke even compared this moratorium to the proposals for the Library Lot in a need for public input.  Yet the moratorium resolution clearly and specifically excludes most development proposals on these parcels:

RESOLVED, That City Council hereby imposes a moratorium on all new development that requires site plan approval, expansion of existing development that requires site plan approval, zoning changes, special exception uses, or other comparable zoning items, in the R4C and R2A zoning districts, and that any petitions or permits for such items be deferred for a period of 180 days from the date of this resolution in conjunction with the study and revision of the zoning ordinances pertaining to these districts, with the following exceptions:

· Approval of development, redevelopment, or the issuance of building permits for projects that do not require an approved site plan, including but not limited to construction of or addition to one single or two-family dwelling or accessory structure on a parcel

· Applications or permits which involve routine repair and maintenance for an existing permitted use

Clearly the only parcels that would be affected would be those for which a major development was proposed, and most of those parcel owners would not have a concern.  (Recall that the moratorium is proposed for only 180 days, and that there is also an appeals process.)  CM Briere very nicely stated that she personally favored the resolution, but that the constituents of the First Ward needed to have a chance to weigh in.  With some support from the Mayor, she was able to pull back the reconsideration date to August 6 (from August 17).

You had to be there department: Political theater may be one of the most underappreciated art forms.  I admit it, I’m a political junkie and love nothing more than a long meeting crackling with suspense over the amendment to the amendment.  But this meeting included lots of mixed media.  In addition to cleverly designed models designed to show how roofline relates to height, a speech with picket signs that somehow combined a boycott against Israel, support for Iranian democracy, and outrage over the demolition of historic houses,  public comment included Libby Hunter’s lovely soprano voice in a song to the tune of “Battle Hymn of the Republic” (I include only one of three verses):

Developers are coming to your neighborhood real soon

They will tear down all the houses and build apartments cheap and huge

More sewer backups, traffic jams and LEDs real cool

Development goes marching on

Council sat patiently until the audience then joined in (text had been passed out):

Glory, Glory Hallelujah

Density is coming to ya

You have no voice, council’s made the choice

Your neighborhood will succumb

Development goes marching on.

At this point the Mayor bestirred himself and protested that “only one person may speak at a time”, but the song went on to its conclusion without a gavel strike.

Update: Per request, I’ve attached the complete text of the song here.  I’ll fill in details about authorship as I am able to obtain them.

Second Update: I’ve pasted in the actual text of CM Derezinski’s amendment, which our city clerk, Jacqueline Beaudry, graciously provided.

Third Update: The Ann Arbor Chronicle’s account of the meeting includes a useful chronology of the City Place project.

Fourth Update: The Development Hymn now on YouTube for your listening enjoyment.

City Place and the R4C Zoning Classification

As was discussed here earlier, an enduring issue in the background of the debate over the City Place proposed development has been the role of the Central Area Plan in determining how the Germantown area – and all the city’s neighborhoods near the downtown core – should be developed.  Sadly, the zoning map was never revised to reflect the goals of the CAP.  Specifically, the predominant zoning, R4C, allows for much greater density than that indicated by a reading of the CAP.  Worse, in combination with a rather labored definition of a “household” in our code, R4C allows a peculiar configuration into a “housing unit” designed solely for student occupants, with individual locked bedrooms adjoining a central living area.  It is not a form of apartment design that is likely to be used by other demographics at any time in the future, and provides for a very high income from one “housing unit”.  So the R4C, when applied to a neighborhood of homeowners, will create high-density buildings that will not support long-term tenants or families.

City Council passed a resolution to form a committee to study possible changes to the zoning ordinance for R4C and R2A categories on July 6. But while these admittedly defective (for today’s purposes) zoning classifications remain on the books, developments are still being considered for sensitive areas. The Germantown Neighborhood Association has been lobbying for a moratorium on development under the old zoning definitions. Tom Whitaker, the president of the association, posted a number of discussions of this issue on their blog. You might suppose that since the R4C version of City Place has been temporarily set aside by the developer in favor of seeking approval for a new PUD proposal, the GNA’s urgency on a moratorium might be scaled back  Not so.  Here’s what Whitaker said in a recent email (quoted with permission; emphasis mine):

“Yet another twist to the on-going saga of City Place.  Yesterday, Alex de Parry’s attorney, Scott Munzel, sent a letter to the City requesting that they table the City Place vote until early November in order to allow time for Mr. de Parry to submit yet another PUD proposal…This proposal is the same one we were discussing with Mr. de Parry in February/March, but called off our talks when he submitted the “R4C” project, often called his “by right” project.  This alternative proposal, as Mr. de Parry would like to see it, would be much larger in terms of density – as much as 180+ occupants.  The design calls for complete demolition of one of the seven historic homes, with the rear portions of the other six demolished and the front portions dismantled and stored off-site.  Then, an underground parking structure would be built, almost to the lot lines, and a large, long gable-roofed structure built along the length of the combined parcels.  The pieces of the dismantled houses would then be brought back and attached to this new structure.  They would be spaced and ordered differently from their current configuration and nothing would remain of the original foundations or interiors.”

“The Germantown Neighborhood Association objected to some of the key elements of this plan including the destruction of the houses and the overall size of the project (both density and physical size).  Our preference has always been to see the houses restored and then supplemented with well-designed additions or perhaps carriage-house structures with additional units.  With State and Federal historic tax credits available for approved work on historically-designated buildings, we think a project could be created that would enhance the neighborhood rather than destroy it, and still provide for a reasonable profit for Mr. de Parry.  First, we would all need to work together to get our neighborhood established as an historic district.”

“We were not surprised by this last-minute maneuver on City Place.  Many of us have always felt that the “R4C” project was simply a threat being used to “encourage” the neighbors and the City to approve a much larger PUD.  In fact, it was first drawn up specifically to show at a planning commission meeting last year, when the “brownstone” PUD version of City Place was being considered.  Even while the R4C project was working its way through the approval process, Mr. de Parry’s team was calling, emailing and meeting with anyone who would give them the time of day to try and promote his newer “alternative PUD”.”

“Folks, we are all concerned about the historic character and integrity of Germantown, but this all boils down to zoning ordinances that are too weak and subject to broad interpretation.  Council knows this, which is why they voted to study the zoning in R4C/R2A in order to correct it and bring it into compliance with the Central Area Plan.  We need your continued support for the moratorium, regardless of what happens with City Place.  This issue is bigger than any single project.  The City and the neighborhood will not be off this merry-go-round until City Council calls a moratorium and proceeds rapidly with the study and correction of the zoning.  We can’t tell Mr. de Parry what to build, but if the City had its zoning in shape and compliant with the Central Area Plan, it would be clear to all what he could NOT build.”

On Monday, July 20, the Council will be considering a resolution calling for a moratorium on developments requiring a site plan in areas currently zoned R4C and R2A, while the city awaits the findings of the study committee. It does not prevent construction of projects not needing a site plan, is for up to 180 days, and has an appeal process.  Here’s hoping that Council will approve it without regard to political faction issues (Mike Anglin is its sponsor), because it is needed if we are to make our planning procedures rational, predictable, and in accordance with public will, as expressed in the Central Area Plan.

Another Reprieve on City Place

As explained in an earlier post,  the last configuration of City Place – a “by right” development purporting to be consistent with the current zoning of the site – was sent back to Planning Commission for technical reasons.  Council directed that the PC should review it immediately and return the proposal to Council on July 20.   Accordingly, the item appeared on next week’s agenda after an inconclusive review by PC (the vote was 5-1 to approve but 6 votes were required for approval).

Now, in yet another change of course, the developer, Alex de Parry has requested another postponement through a letter from his lawyer.    The letter states that de Parry requests that the item be postponed till the first Council meeting in November.  By then, however, he is hoping that a new PUD application will have moved through the planning process.

Many have speculated that a new PUD was de Parry’s true aim all along.  He has already seen two such proposals rejected by Council and talks with the Germantown neighbors broke down some time ago.  But apparently he is willing to believe that the third time can be the charm.

Ann Arbor in the Goldfish Bowl

We hear a lot these days about transparency and openness in government. What that refers to is having all business done in public view. That was the intent of Michigan’s Open Meetings Act and Freedom of Information Act, both enacted in the mid-1970s. The Open Meetings Act sought to make all deliberations leading to legislative decisions subject to observation by the public, and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) gives the public the right to view or request copies of documents (including correspondence and notes) generated in the conduct of government business.  But that was so Seventies.  As noted by Noah Hall of the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center in a recent Workantile Exchange seminar, governments often put up barriers to this access.  Hall has an impressive grasp of the tactics needed for full access and has applied them frequently in pursuing issues of interest to GLELC.  His most recent moment in the spotlight followed his FOIA of Ann Arbor City Council emails, in the context of a letter to the city regarding the parking garage planned for the Library Lot.  (We linked to some of the emails in an earlier post, and recently released emails are available here.)  The resulting flap has provided some welcome entertainment but has also revealed that the council majority has not exactly embraced the whole transparency paradigm.

Here’s the problem.  Once deliberations, negotiations, and deal-making come into view, all interested parties start to ask questions, make demands, and generally cause a fuss.  As Mayor Hieftje commented (not happily) in a DDA committee meeting I attended some years ago, “We live in a goldfish bowl”.  Transparency is inhibitory to getting business done in an efficient way.  After all, once you have all the information that you yourself require, and you know the agenda and purpose you want to pursue, why involve a lot of backseat drivers?  You don’t really need “public input”.

The council majority clearly does have a set agenda and the emails show how directly they are pursuing it.  The February 17 emails include discussions within the group heading off a possible postponement of a  resolution to authorize bonds for $55 million, partly to pay for an underground parking structure.

“The Bonds are to be issued for the purpose of financing the construction of a 677 space, four story underground parking structure and streetscape improvements along Fifth and Division Streets. The project includes a new street running west to east on the north side of the Ann Arbor Public Library, utility improvements under Fifth Avenue and Division Street, and a new downtown alley. The footprint of the project will be from the west side of Fifth Avenue to the west side of Division Street and under Fifth Ave from the northern edge of the current parking lot to William Street. The parking structure will be built in a manner to allow future construction of an up to 25-story building on the site. The project will also include the construction of streetscape improvements on Fifth Avenue and Division Streets from Beakes to Packard including improved crosswalks, new streetlights, trees, sidewalks, bike lanes, and curb.”

But prior to that February 17 vote, there were plenty of other discussions.   As was mentioned in an earlier post, a private plan for a conference center was presented at the January council retreat. Subsequently, CM Sandi Smith (only recently elected after a long tenure on the DDA Board, of which she is still a member)  issued an invitation to all her council colleagues for a January 23 meeting at the DDA office with engineers designing the underground structure. “Before this comes to council, I want to hear where the project is now. I also want to investigate the ideas about what can be built on top of the structure…”  Now, it would have been possible to make this meeting legal according to the Open Meetings Act.  The meeting could have been posted (announced on a bulletin board, at least), open to the public, and minutes could have been taken that were subsequently available to the public. I have not attempted a FOIA to establish whether or not any of these things were done.  So – potentially the entire council had a substantial discussion, prior to a formal vote, on the underground parking structure and its potential use for aboveground building, without being in the goldfish bowl. And, as we have reported,  the Council has now passed a resolution calling for an RFP for the aboveground structure (a.k.a. the conference center?).

Efficiency is satisfying.  It gets things done.  Those who employ it may even believe that they are performing a public good.  But the purpose of transparency, with its ensuing public discussion, though messy, is both to guarantee the public an opportunity to respond to major initiatives and to guarantee that good and honest decisions are being made.  I hope that the Mayor and the council majority will consider this before making additional commitments to major projects.

Note: The email transcripts published on the Neighborhood Alliance website, of which one set is linked to here,  were excerpted and edited by an individual other than myself and I cannot make any representations as to their complete accuracy, though I believe the excerpting to be a good-faith attempt.

Jerusaleum Garden and the Character of Ann Arbor

A visit to the Ann Arbor Public Library coincided with a need for a lunch solution today, so I stopped in at Jerusaleum Garden for the first time in a while.  They seem to have a new menu and are generally looking spiffy.  I sat in the adjoining patio that they share with Earthen Jar (a vegetarian Indian restaurant that sells its food from steam tables by the pound).  It was a perfect summer day, just hot enough to make welcome a languid moment watching passersby while surrounded by diners and potted flowers.  I was also pleasantly impressed with lunch – for $15 we got a fully loaded lunch for two (leftovers will serve for a couple more days).  The tabbouli had a number of chopped vegetables, including carrots, cucumbers, and tomatoes in it, along with the required parsley in good proportion, and a light lemon dressing.  The falafel was not oily.  The yogurt salad was generously loaded with chopped cucumbers.  It was a perfect summer lunch in one of the places that gives Ann Arbor its special local character.  I hope that it is not endangered.

Think Local First has a really fun T-shirt that I first saw Steve Bean modeling at a Transition Ann Arbor meeting.  It says, “Keep Ann Arbor Funky”.  (Sadly, they were on sale at Shaman Drum, another special piece of Ann Arbor that just closed.)   I agree with the sentiment.  What is it?  “Funky” has gone through many meaning changes, including references to “funk” music.  But “characterized by originality and modishness; unconventional” or more simply, as another source gives it, “hip“, is what we are looking for here, along with an acknowledgment of a slightly down-at-the-heel character, as in the computing definition, where “(funky) is said of something that functions, but in a slightly strange, klugey way. It does the job and would be difficult to change, so its obvious non-optimality is left alone”.

Many of our beloved institutions (I’m thinking of eating places, but there are others) are like this – not always bright and shiny, but real originals that bring character to the town in a way that the newest “concept” can’t.  They are individual and irreplaceable, and they are being lost.  We have lost Red Hot Lovers (though it may re-emerge in another location).  We have lost Tios, though the restaurant has moved to McKinley’s Liberty Street complex.   Happily, Blimpy’s lives.

I can hear the boos and jeers now.   “Ann Arbor in Amber.”  (Jon Zemke of Concentrate pulled off a classic with his “amber NIMBY neighborhoods”).  Yet without anchors of its unique and personal character, Ann Arbor could be a moderately affluent suburb anywhere.   The Ann Arbor Chronicle has been finding a number of posts from other communities  (listed in their Old Media and New Media sections) where Ann Arbor is spoken of enviously.  Being called a living museum may not sound complimentary, but the artificial communities sometimes called lifestyle centers try to emulate it.  Other cities literally build theme parks trying to capture that sense of genuine character that we possess now.  (I was amused to note that Hyde Park,  the home of our current President, has Ann Arbor envy, though funkiness is not mentioned in the article.)

But can character stand up against the relentless press of development?  Look again at the picture of Zaragon Place looming over the hapless shell of Red Hot Lovers. The property has evidently become too valuable.  When the City Council begins to develop the Library Lot,  will Earthen Jar and Jerusalem Garden survive?  I hope so, else we will have lost a little bit of ourselves.

Fridays at the Workantile Exchange

The work is already going on at the Workantile Exchange.  As described in a couple of Ann Arbor Chronicle articles earlier this year, this space at 118 South Main was set up by Michael Kessler as a co-working space where independent workers can share a space and some facilities while working on their own projects.  But as the management explains, this is neither a conventional business incubator nor a rent-a-cubicle operation.  Rather, it appears to be an attempt to create a deliberate community where independent entrepreneurs and creative workers can bounce ideas off one another (fortified by the Mighty Good Coffee that also serves as an entrance hall), find others who have resources and skills needed for a current project, and schedule meetings and classes (the facility has a couple of conference and training rooms).  “We’re here for anybody pursuing a project-driven career, whether or not it’s their full-time profession. There will be the expected “geeks” and “suits” among us, but also lawyers and artists, sales professionals and writers, teachers and filmmakers.”  For about $100 a month, you can buy access to this free-floating brainstorm. Today, the main room (the Café floor) had a casual but quietly focused air, with several low-tone conversations going on while others worked at laptops.  A tiled set of large Post-its on the wall asked for leads to people with specific skills or noted future discussions; “B corporations and IF-profits” looked intriguing.

The mutual training seems to be a big part of this enterprise.  To that end, the Workantile Exchange is hosting some public brown-bag lunch seminars, especially on Fridays.  It’s a good excuse to check out the real estate.  And the topics are mind-bending. The next one, presented by Bill Tozier, is “The Independent Film Model for Project-Driven Businesses” (having little or nothing to do with film-making).

More Ann Arbor Media News

The media reassortments keep on coming.  The latest news over the transom was the announcement that Ann Arbor Business Review is ceasing publication and will be replaced by a new “business channel” on AnnArbor.com.  According to the story, “Ann Arbor Business Review executives said the weekly business-to-business news journal remained a strong editorial product despite a business climate that made the ongoing printing of a weekly product unsustainable”.  I have indeed found this publication to be a good source of business-oriented news, often more timely and more insightful than coverage by the old Ann Arbor News.  Apparently my paper copies will stop coming in August too.

There are now a steady parade of announcements across the top of the AnnArbor.com page, with new staff members and affiliations.  One not there but which I welcome is the addition of Jennifer Haines of a2eatwrite as the food blogger.  What I’m also not seeing is the offer I received by email yesterday.  I’m now signed up to receive

• Daily digital newsletter
• Weekly Deals and more
• Daily Obituaries Update.

(These are three different feeds, and I can unsubscribe any time.)

The announcement said I was receiving the offer because of a prior relationship with the Ann Arbor News, MLive or Ann Arbor Business Review.  I’d guess that they will be offered to the general public once AnnArbor.com is up and running.