Saturday, April 28, 2007

Liquor licensing stays on city radar

Liquor licensing will continue to occupy the attention of the Birmingham City Commission Monday night as it considers the application from Birmingham developer James Esshaki to transfer Alban's license to his ownership for a proposed Crave sushi restaurant and nightclub. It also will consider a request from the landlord of the Blue Martini/City Cellar for reconsideration of the commission's objection to renewal of the establishments' liquor license. The landlord says it intends to ask the Michigan Liquor Control Commission to approve its sole ownership of the liquor license.

Thursday, April 26, 2007

BARNUM SPECIAL REPORT: Costs underestimated, building reuse understudied, fate an open issue

By John McTaggart

The Birmingham City Commission has set aside $1.5 million in parks bond money to pay for the demolition of Barnum School and the design and construction of a park, but inquiries by the Birmingham Buzz show that actual costs are likely to be much higher.

The Buzz sought estimates of the costs of widely expected park features from an array of experts, and found that the total of low estimates approaches $2 million, while the total of higher estimates exceeds $2.5 million.

While City Manager Tom Markus has said the $1.5 million “is not set in stone,” and “we all know that $1.5 million isn’t going to buy you dink over there,” no credible estimates of the actual costs of demolition and development have been publicly presented by city staff or elected officials.

The city paid $8.5 million for Barnum; a $2.5 million demolition-and-development plan would bring the total cost to $11 million, or 44% of the $25 million parks bond. City Commissioners have so far rejected any method of recouping Barnum costs.

If the city moves forward on Barnum, it would likely have to issue the remaining $9.3 million in parks bonds, thus raising taxes on residents, many of whom already feel overburdened.

The fourth Barnum ad hoc committee – this one charged with helping city staff develop and review responses to an RFP for development of the park, and making a recommendation to the City Commission on a master planning firm – began work last week with the appointment of resident Jeff Van Dorn as chairman.

The committee of five also includes Barnum neighbor Carroll DeWeese; William Duffy, a member of the last Barnum ad hoc committee; City Commissioner Rackeline Hoff, and Parks Board member Keith Vosburgh.

City staff has pegged the cost of demolition at $400,000-$600,000, according to an estimate prepared anonymously for the ad hoc Barnum Property Committee that didn’t include asbestos removal.

Of seven demolition contractors contacted by the Buzz, one agreed to inspect the exterior of the structure and give an estimate.

“Based on what I know about the structure, I’d say closer to $700,000, possibly more,” EDP Demolition president Greg Ogden said. “In some cases, older structures harbor problems such as asbestos and other things that can add to that cost.”

The Buzz contacted other experts for pricing on other common features.

Soccer and baseball fields cost $100,000-$150,000 each, according to Claude Shillte, of ROSS Environmental & Civil Contractors, of Birmingham, Ala., one of the nation’s top natural-grass athletic field construction firms.

“There are a number of factors involved, but the field has to be crowned properly, and the correct drainage has to be in place,” Shillte said. “These two elements are crucial.”

“I would say these estimates are in the ballpark,” Assistant Public Services Director Bob Fox said. “Based on what I’ve seen as far as estimates for baseball diamonds at places like Kenning Park, I’d say these are in line.”

Fox said two tennis courts would cost around $80,000, and a basketball court would run another $80,000.

“The fields are an important part of any community park,” said Charles Kozlowski, of Boston’s Halverson Design, winner of the American Society of Landscape Architects National Honor Award last year. “But what makes it a park is the landscape and landscape design features.”

Of the $1 million set aside for development of the 8.3-acre park, “I would say that’s probably not enough,” Kozlowski said. “It’s a lot of money, but not for a project of this size. That’s my opinion.”

For landscaping and amenities such as water features, seating and lighting that would round out the park, Kozlowski estimated costs of $400,000 to $600,000.

With the success of the playground at Booth Park, a playground at Barnum would likely see high demand. The Booth playground cost well over $200,000, which did not include significant landscaping costs or the value of volunteer labor that build the play structure.

“There are so many variables that go into the cost of a playscape,” said Margo Douglas of Egan, Tooley, Doyle & Associates, of Okemos, a manufacturer of playground equipment. “These costs can range from as little as $20,000 to as much as $400,000, depending on size, surfacing and materials used to build it.”

The typical municipal structure, Douglas said, costs around $125,000.

Parking would also be necessary. A 65-space parking lot would cost about $125,000, according to Gary Cudney, of Walker Parking Consultants, a city contractor.

Hydro-seeding the acreage with grass is likely to cost $0.06 per square foot, according to American Hydroseeding, of Macomb Twp. Total: About $21,000.

A 2005 plan submitted by local designers Ron Rea and David Peterhans included a pair of tennis courts, a basketball court, a bocce court, a formal garden, an outdoor reading room, a soccer field, a skating rink, tennis courts, tether ball court, water features, sculpture, artistic lighting, a maze, a tricycle path, classic wooden play equipment, flower beds, deciduous and evergreen trees and other features. Peterhans estimated the cost at more than $2 million.

Here’s a table of low and high estimates of the cost of demolition and park features:

Item...................................Low...................High
Demolition..........................$400,000...........$700,000
Hydro-seed.........................$21,000.............$21,000
Parking...............................$125,000...........$125,000
Soccer field.........................$100,000...........$150,000
Baseball diamond.................$100,000...........$150,000
Landscaping/amenities..........$400,000...........$600,000
Tennis courts.......................$80,000............$80,000
Basketball court...................$80,000............$80,000
Playscape............................$50,000............$125,000
SUB TOTAL..........................$1,356,000.......$2,031,000
Design (17-18%)..................$230,520..........$365,580
SUB TOTAL..........................$1,586,520.......$2,396,580
Contingency (15%)... ...........$237,978...........$359,487
TOTAL COSTS......................$1,824,498........$2,756,067

Preservation, adaptive reuse of Barnum not given sufficient consideration, experts and residents say

By John McTaggart

The preservation and adaptive reuse of Barnum School could help defray the cost of developing a new Barnum Park, and has not been given sufficient consideration by the Birmingham City Commission, according to a broad range of citizens and experts.

“I really don’t believe it should be torn down,” Birmingham resident Lucille Hammond said. “It’s a very beautiful building. There are a lot of memories for people at that school. There must be something that can be done with it.”

Hammond attended Barnum School and says demolishing the structure is shortsighted.

“I’m no expert, but it seems like it’s the easy way out.” Hammond said. “Just level it and move on. That seems to be the mentality of the commission. They should take the time to think about what this city is all about – history.”

Hammond may not be an expert, but Bob Donahue, Oakland County’s Principal Planner, is.

“I don’t think the city government is aware of how much character that building has. People are attracted to Birmingham because of its character, and I believe Barnum School is a part of that,” Donahue said.

“There are a variety of ways to save this building. Those in government, though, have to be willing to look for them and put the work into finding them.” Donahue said. “I just don’t think the idea of preserving the building has been given equal time, and it deserves it.”

One possible solution, Donahue said, is to sell the building to a private developer and then use the money from the sale to renovate the remainder of the park.

“This seems like the logical course of action,” Donahue said. “The commission could still have a lot of say in what a private developer could do with the structure, and they would also have funds to redo the property and turn it into the park that the community wants. I just don’t think they’ve really given this option much thought.”

The city has tentatively budgeted $1.5 million to demolish Barnum School and develop a park. But City Manager Tom Markus has said that won’t be enough, and a Buzz inquiry supports that opinion.

Donahue says the costs, coupled with what appears to be a sustained economic downturn in southeastern Michigan, including a reluctance by some officials to raise taxes to pay for Barnum redevelopment, makes adaptive reuse of the building practical.

“There are grant programs out there for Barnum School. You have to look for them though.” Donahue said. “And there are certainly tax incentive issues that should be explored as well. I’m certain of this.”

Preserving buildings such as Barnum as important community assets “can be and has been done before,” Donahue said, “and it’s been done successfully.”

Mayor Tom McDaniel said “the idea of selling the structure or a portion of the property is not a new one. There was interest from developers to build everything from houses to luxury condominiums. This issue was reviewed at the third ad hoc committee. However, the commission agreed that it’s going to be a park. How many times do we get the chance to add green space to the city? Not too many times. We as a commission – and I – feel this is the best option.”

Consideration of tax incentives and adaptive reuse of the oldest portion of Barnum School is given little mention in minutes of the third Barnum ad hoc committee, and several members of the Barnum ad hoc committees have said the panels were predisposed against any development.

The city’s Planning Board, Historical Board and Historic District Commission – 21 members in all – urged the City Commission to order a study of Barnum’s history, but the commission refused.

City Manager Tom Markus has said he supports some adaptive reuse of at least a portion of the building, or a sale or lease of a portion of the property to help defray the cost of developing the park.

That seemed to be the city’s plan until the commission decided in 2005 that the building was unsuitable for use as a community recreation center.

The first Barnum ad hoc committee in 2001 “found the building to be in good structural, mechanical and electrical condition,” according to its final report, and was “impressed by [the] attention to detail and sensitivity to the historical character of the building during renovations that have been undertaken over the years.”

The report also said the committee came “to an overwhelming consensus that … it is feasible to utilize the property, in one form or another, for public use.”

It added: “While not suitable for a community center, the existing buildings can be used effectively. With creative programming and partnerships, the buildings can support a mix of uses both public and private.”

Dave Anthony, the Wade-Trim project manager who led the study, said: “I firmly believed back then, and still do today, that demolishing this structure is unnecessary. This structure has a lot of options open to it.

“It’s a wonderful piece of property and the city should be thankful to have it,” Anthony said. “There is so much that can be done with that building in the context of a park.”

The second Barnum ad hoc committee, which was charged with deciding on whether or not the building would be suitable as a community center, also recommended preserving “the Purdy (oldest) building portion for streetscape and future flexibility.”

Furthermore, a scientific survey conducted by the second ad hoc committee indicated that only 27% of respondents agreed that all the buildings should be demolished, the playing fields retained and the remainder redeveloped into park. Fifty-five percent disagreed with this proposal, and 17% were impartial.

Ron Rea and David Peterhans, who drew a conceptual plan for Barnum Park, included the oldest portion of the school in their plans. Rea drew a conceptual plan for Shain Park that has been adopted by the city as a basis for Shain’s redevelopment.

Donahue would see the demolition of Barnum School as a blow to what separates Birmingham from other cities, and gives this warning to the city’s decision-makers:

“If Birmingham continues to tear down their historical resources, then they’re going to become ‘Anytown, USA’. What makes Birmingham so appealing are these historical resources. The town has so much character, and places like Barnum School are a big reason why. I think it would be a mistake to tear this building down.”

Many consider Barnum fate an open issue

By John McTaggart

What to do about Barnum?

As the fourth and possibly final Barnum ad hoc committee begins its work, the question is on the minds of not just the five-member committee, but residents, Barnum neighbors, city officials and others with an interest in the property.

Save part of the building or not?

Construct the park in phases, or all at once?

Issue new bonds – and raise taxes – to cover the cost, or find other ways to pay for the project?

While some commissioners and members of the public believe demolition of the school building and development of an 8.3-acre park is assured, others are keeping an open mind.

“The Parks Bond issue was approved when property values were increasing, not decreasing,” says Commissioner Julie Plotnik. “We need to take a hard look at the current state of our economy and ask ourselves very difficult questions about what we want and what we need. It may be time to seriously explore how we can defray the cost of Barnum and other upcoming projects.”

Plotnik sees the building as a potential resource, both for its history in Birmingham and as a way to defray the cost of a new park.

“It would not be fair at this time to raise taxes on residents with the sale of any new bonds,” Plotnik says.

Of the $25 million in bonds approved by voters in 2001, $15.7 million have been issued. If the city proceeds with Barnum development without alternative funding, it would have to sell the remaining $9.3 million, causing an increase in the city’s tax rate.

The city currently has a break-even arrangement on the building with Beaumont Hospital. Beaumont pays no rent, but it covers all property maintenance costs – estimated by City Manager Tom Markus at $300,000-$400,000 per year. The agreement runs through 2008, and Beaumont says it plans to stay at least till then.

A neighbor of Barnum (she lives three blocks away, on Henrietta), Plotnik admires the oldest portion of the school building, constructed in 1912, and agrees with the first Barnum ad hoc committee that adaptive reuse is possible.

“If we can defray the cost of the park and preserve a piece of Birmingham’s history, I think that’s a win-win. Taxpayers of this city will be holding us accountable for all costs going forward, and any project will need compromise from those who want to get it accomplished,” Plotnik said.

"Given the economic circumstances and the desire by many in the community to save this piece of Birmingham history, I don't consider the complete demolition of Barnum to be a closed issue.”

Plotnik said the city should keep Beaumont in the building as long as possible, work on finding a suitable occupant for the oldest portion of the school, and phase development of the new park.

Gordon Rinschler, chairman of the city’s Historic and Design Review boards, who spearheaded the effort to win voter approval of the $9.8 million Shain Park underground parking bond, agrees.

Rinschler says that, for the short-term, “what I would do is make improvements to the park that is already there. Remember, there is a park already there. Make sure we have a real recreational need for an eight-acre park. If we find out that there isn’t really this need, then put the building back into play. I have yet to hear anyone – any committee or board or commission – say there is a real need for an eight-acre recreational park.”

Rinschler said he thinks taxpayers are waiting to see what is proposed for Barnum, but “when they actually get the bill, I believe there’s going to be some upset people.”

After the third and most recent Barnum ad hoc committee finished its work, Mayor Tom McDaniel, a member of the committee, said several area non-profits had been approached about using Barnum, but none had expressed an interest.

City Manager Tom Markus said the Birmingham Senior Citizens Coordinating Council (BASCC) is the type of organization well-suited to occupy the building, assuming they would be willing to take financial responsibility for upkeep.

But Theresa Monsour, coordinator of the 1,600-member organization, said the group had never been approached, and had never considered the idea.

“That’s an idea that has never even been on the table. I can present the concept to the board, however. It is worthy of discussion, I believe,” Mansour said.

Of its current home at Midvale School, Mansour said, “We’re not busting at the seams here, we’re comfortable.”

Bloomfield Township Supervisor David Payne said the township has passed two millages to cover the cost of acquisition and operation of a senior center, but has yet to do anything.

“We talked to BASCC, I don’t know, probably a few years back, about possibly combining the two, but there really wasn’t any interest from them. And yes, Barnum was discussed as a possible site, when the city [Birmingham] was going to buy the property, but nothing ever came of it,” Payne said.

Barnum “was something we were willing to explore and had interest in, but there just wasn’t any interest in the idea from Birmingham,” he said.

“Right now, Barnum is an empty pallet of sorts,” said Markus. “We’ll see what happens when this design committee comes back. Right now, it would be fair to say that just about everything is in play. The beauty of this situation right now is that Beaumont covers the costs of the building. If they left, then we’d have a different story.”

“Whether or not [Barnum Park] is going to be done in phases remains to be seen, but I will say that it makes more sense, from a cost-effectiveness standpoint, to do it all at once,” said Markus.

Planning Board member Mark Nickita was on the third ad hoc Barnum Committee, which was charged with considering how the city might develop an acre or two of the property. He says the committee looked at several development options, but didn’t seriously consider any of them or proactively seek out developers, other than to invite submissions.

“My position, which was in the minority, was to uncover all the options,” said Nickita, who offered several concept drawings to the committee that showed an expanded park with some residential development. His ideas were rejected.

“The funny thing is, though, if you look at an aerial view of that property from 1949, you can see that the entire west side was housing,” Nickita said.

“I think there are still a lot of questions remaining – a lot,” said Nickita.

Marianne Preston, who lives on Frank St. across from the park, said, “I would love to see a park there, but exactly when isn’t important to me. I really think there are bigger issues for the city to focus on at present.”

Frank Covilissi, also a Frank St. resident, said, ““What’s likely to happen is more of what’s already happened a lot around here lately – nothing. There’s a lot of squeaking and chatter about things, but not a whole lot of action. Booth Park is the only instance I can think of where the city really took action. If they’re going to do something with this land then do it.”

Monday, April 23, 2007

Nickita dissed by petty politicians

The release last week of minutes of the City Commission's March 19 meeting reminded us of the petty politics played by commissioners Don Carney, Stuart Sherman and Dianne McKeon. We intended to call attention to this sooner, but better late than never.

On that night, Robert Boyle and Mark Nickita were up for reappointment to the Planning Board. No other candidates stepped forward, and both were nominated.

Both men have served with distinction. Boyle is head of the urban planning department at Wayne State, and Nickita is principal in Archive Design Studio, a Detroit urban planning firm. Boyle served one term, and is chairman of the board; Nickita has served three terms over the past decade.

Boyle's nomination won the votes of all seven commissioners. When Nickita's name came up for a vote, Carney, Sherman and McKeon sat mute (a condition we've come to expect from Sherman and McKeon).

Nickita is an outspoken advocate of the Downtown Birmingham 2016 Plan and of increased density and development throughout Birmingham. He is sometimes brusque, often long-winded, but always well informed and a reliable and valued member of the Planning Board.

We asked Carney, Sherman and McKeon for comment on their failure to support Nickita, but characteristically, none would respond. Nickita, for his part, felt dissed and angry.

“Your guess is as good as mine, really,” he said when asked why the three did not support him. “I don’t know what happened. You look at my record, and I’ve voted for and against a variety of issues. I voted against the Palladium, for example, and garage-front homes, things that made a lot of pro-development people upset at me. On the other hand, I’ve voted in favor of some pro-development issues as well.

“My job, in my mind, is to take my experience and apply it to issues that come before the Planning Board. I work very hard at doing that and I believe I do an excellent job.

“I’ve made it very clear to all the Commissioners to call me whenever they need to. I’m always willing to talk to them, explain my position, and the position of the Planning Board, about any issue. However, not once have I been challenged,” Nickita said.

Thursday, April 19, 2007

The Birmingham Eccentric on ...

Chamber President Iacobelli resigns

By John McTaggart

The Birmingham-Bloomfield Chamber of Commerce is looking for a new president after the resignation of Pam Iacobelli this week. Iacobelli’s resignation is effective May 13, she said. She’s going to work for the marketing firm FUSE Communications in Birmingham.

“It was a very tough decision for me,” Iacobelli said. “I’m excited about the new opportunity, but it’s very bittersweet for me. I’m going to miss so much about my position with the chamber.”

Iacobelli was president of the chamber for nearly four years and says she’s proud of the work she and the staff were able to do during her tenure.

“I’m extremely proud of the staff we put together. They’re outstanding and great people to work with. I’m also proud of the Vine & Dine fundraiser created about three years ago, and the Non-Profit Network we created a year ago. These programs have been very successful, and really stand out as something that makes me very proud.”

Iacobelli said she will help find a successor.

“I’m sure we’ll find an excellent person for the position,” she said. “The process is already underway, and over the next few weeks we’ll be going through the pool of applicants.”

City, township move toward consolidating police, fire departments

By John McTaggart

Birmingham’s police and fire departments, representing half of all city employees, could be consolidated with the police and fire departments of Bloomfield Township if a study approved by the City Commission Monday reaches its logical conclusion.

The commission unanimously approved a resolution directing staff to work with Bloomfield Township on an agreement to study and recommend action on consolidation.

“I like to call it ‘Consolidation Light’,” said City Manager Tom Markus. “I think that forcing people into situations is not going to achieve buy-in like you want to achieve buy-in. That’s why we’re opting to take a more cautious, deliberate approach.”

“There really is no timetable,” said Markus. “We have a lot of work to do before it even gets back to the commission. But, there’s going to continue to be a lot of progress.” Markus said it could be years before a consolidation is achieved.

“The key here is to start. We’ve been talking about it for a long time, and we’ve found a community in Bloomfield Township with a similar approach,” Markus said.

Markus said Bloomfield Township is demographically similar to Birmingham and its proximity makes it a logical choice for consolidation efforts. Bloomfield Township’s board approved a similar measure April 10.

“One advantage we both have it that we’re both in relatively good financial positions,” Markus said. “Because of that, we can look at this situation before we are in a crisis. … This has the potential to have a significant impact.”

In addition to police and fire, Markus said, “We may find that we can consolidate something such as recreational services.”

Markus said no employees would be laid off as a result of consolidation; personnel reductions would occur only through attrition.

“This could be the start of something very big,” Mayor Tom McDaniel said. “It’s a very good thing for the city.”

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Commission must insure quality bistros

We are, of course, ecstatic with Monday night’s City Commission decision to issue bistro liquor licenses to qualified applicants.

Our humility notwithstanding, we have to take much of the credit for the success of this initiative. The community has wanted more liquor licenses for years, but our leaders repeatedly said “no.”

Only when their legal arguments – which amounted to little more than the specter of a “Pandora’s Box” – were exposed as specious, only when we demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that the city CAN control licensing adequately, and only when we pressed the commission to revisit the issue again last year, just two years after dropping it in 2004, was action finally taken.

Now the work really begins.

Monday night’s deliberation was excruciating. As much as we are grateful to them for their votes, we repeatedly got the impression that certain commissioners, perhaps even a majority of them, still don’t get it. What they don’t get is this: Anyone can apply for a bistro license, but the City Commission is under no obligation whatsoever to approve the applications. As liquor licensing attorney Kelly Allen has repeatedly told us, and as state case law clearly bears out, the commission can deny a license to someone because it “doesn’t like the color of their socks.”

Nonetheless, the commission painstakingly deliberated and compromised over such guidelines as where licenses can be located, the number of seats at a bar, and whether they should restrict the number of licenses they issue.

While some guidelines are essential -- especially general ones on which the commission can hang a denial -- the sorts of guidelines the commission haggled over were middling non-issues, because the Planning Board and commission will be free to approve or deny any application for almost any reason, and influence the successful applicants in the process.

If they don’t want licenses in the Rail District, they don’t have to approve them. If they want to limit the number of licenses they issue, they can simply stop accepting applications, or deny or defer the ones that come before them. (After all, that’s what they’ve been doing for several years now.) If they want an applicant to tone down proposed entertainment or install more refined finishes, they can negotiate these matters as part of the operating contract.

This is not just an important aspect of the new Birmingham law. It is an ESSENTIAL aspect of it. Here’s why:

Up until now, a license to serve liquor in Birmingham cost upward of $750,000. That fact made licensing virtually self-regulating. When the applications for City Cellar and the Blue Martini, Mitchell’s Seafood Market, Cameron’s Steakhouse and most recently Fleming’s Steakhouse came before the commission, they were approved with little substantive review. The owners were checked out by the city’s chief of police, and the City Commission rubber-stamped the applications.

We didn’t think much of it, because it’s a pretty safe rule of thumb that anyone spending $750,000 for a liquor license is going to put up a pretty classy establishment. (Or not, as the Blue Martini illustrated in a remarkable exception to the rule.)

In an evening, with some members likely not knowing it, the City Commission changed the rule of self-regulation. They significantly decreased the cost of entry for a bistro operator, and virtually eliminated insofar as bistros go the self-regulating mechanism of the $750,000 liquor license. They also substantially expanded the responsibility of city government to oversee the quality of establishment that enters Birmingham.

Which is why we cringed Monday night, even as the commission moved toward approving one of our pet issues.

Planning Board Chairman Robin Boyle, an expert urban planner, repeatedly admonished the commissioners, as when he told them: “You have to trust us and how we do our business … Every applicant will be judged on their merits.”

He might have also said: “You have to trust yourselves.”

He might have also said: “The community is counting on your good judgment.”

For it will be, ultimately, the City Commission that decides whether to issue a bistro license, and it will be, ultimately, the City Commission that must enforce the standards that the community expects.

The devil will be in the details of each and every bistro, and that’s where the Planning Board and commission need to focus if Birmingham is going to get what it wants and needs from this new law.

Folks on street support bistro decision

By John McTaggart

Some reaction to the new bistro law in downtown Birmingham Tuesday:

“It’s about time. This town needs something like this, and I’m glad the people in charge finally acknowledged it. It’s going to add a lot to the town.”
-- Todd Harris, 29, Birmingham

“It’s an element in Birmingham that I think has been missing for too long. It’s a sophisticated downtown, and bistros reflect that sophistication. Plus, bringing in reputable businesses is always an excellent idea, and I would think that’s what this will do.”
-- Sara Kensington-Booker, 41, Beverly Hills

“I view this as a real positive step for the city and business within the city. I think the city was losing touch with an important element: middle-aged couples. There are places geared more toward older couples and places geared more toward a younger crowd. I view the addition of bistros to the downtown landscape as a place for middle-aged couples to come and enjoy an evening or lunch. I’m looking forward to coming here with my wife and friends.”
-- David Na, 35, Birmingham

New bistro law a 'big victory for Birmingham'

Chianti and Chardonnay should be flowing within the year at Salvatore Scallopine, Elie’s and other Birmingham restaurants after the City Commission Monday night unanimously approved a landmark set of zoning amendments that will allow more bistro-style restaurants to obtain liquor licenses in town.

“I’m very, very pleased with the outcome,” said Mayor Tom McDaniel. “It was clear that everyone was going to have to compromise, and that’s exactly what happened. This was a great credit to the city, and I truly believe that it’s a very big victory for Birmingham.”

The decision came after an excruciating deliberation that lasted nearly four hours and included numerous compromises. The Rail District, recommended for bistros by the Planning Board, was excluded from the zoning changes. Until amended, city law will confine bistro licensing to the central business district and the Triangle District.

The number of establishments that potentially can be licensed also was limited. The commission distinguished between “existing” restaurants that have been in business in Birmingham for five years or more, and all others. In the first year of licensing, the commission decided it may license up to six “existing” establishments as bistros, and up to two others. In subsequent years, the commission may license up to two of each kind per year.

The commission limited the total number of seats in a bistro to 65, with at most 10 devoted to bar seating. It followed staff and Planning Board recommendations to allow “low-key” entertainment and compel outdoor dining, even in the public right-of-way. It said outdoor dining must end by midnight, and extended the outdoor dining provision to existing licensed establishments such as Max & Erma’s, which has repeatedly requested the right to set up an outdoor café on public property.

The commission agreed to review bistro licensing in general every year for the first three years, and then every three years thereafter. Individual licensees will be subject to annual reviews, as mandated by state law.

“What was so pleasing about this outcome was the compromise," said McDaniel. "I really think the quality of discussion was very high, from everyone: the commissioners, the audience, the city attorney, everyone. I believe this discussion is what really convinced those who were originally opposed to the concept to understand the benefits and work at getting it right. I think we did that. I think we got it right.”

Applicants for bistro licensing face a daunting set of bureaucratic hurdles. In addition to state-mandated application reviews, they must obtain Special Land Use Permits (SLUPs) from the city, which require hearings and approvals before both the Planning Board and the City Commission. In addition, they must negotiate and execute operating agreements with the city. Finally, their licensing applications must be approved by the City Commission.

The commission directed city staff to develop specific SLUP criteria, then send it to the Planning Board for review. Meanwhile, applications for licensing have been piling up at City Hall. Elie’s, Cosi and Papa Joe’s have all applied for licensing. City Manager Tom Markus estimated it would be at least six months or more before the first bistro license is issued.

Licenses can be obtained from numerous sources. Birmingham has 17 so-called quota licenses, which are not currently restricted, although Markus intends to ask the commission to apply some sort of SLUP requirement to any quota licensee who requests a change in status. Licenses can also be transferred from other jurisdictions in Oakland County. The state also issues so-called resort licenses. But the most promising source of license for potential downtown Birmingham bistro owners will most likely be those arising from a new state law enacted in January. Subject to the approval of a local legislative body, the law makes one liquor license available within a downtown development district or principal shopping district (PSD) for every $200,000 in investment in the district in the last five years. Each license costs just $20,000, with $11,000 going to the local government. The law would make dozens of licenses potentially available in Birmingham's PSD.

Bloomfield Hills attorney Kelly Allen, who represents Elie’s, was ambivalent about the new Birmingham ordinances. Praising them, she told the commission that “passing an ordinance like this will probably be modeled all over the area, all over the state, and possibly even the country.” She later said she thought few new establishments would apply for the licenses at first because of the limit on the number, which will give rise to competition and risk, and the bureaucratic hurdles involved.

Edward Fuller, of Central Park Properties, Birmingham’s largest commercial property owner, said: “It took them a long time to do what the community wanted and needed. I’m happy its done, and I hope they move ahead with the economic development licenses.”

Fuller has an application pending with the city for a so-called economic development license, a class of license that would be approved for developers making a minimum investment in the city. The commission deferred action on such licensing until the bistro question was settled.

Fuller, who said he has no retail vacancies, said there is “absolutely no question about it: Bistro licensing will help other landlords fill vacant retail space. Retail is very soft at the moment. But believe me: I don’t think there’s going to be any kind of stampede, by any stretch. But it is important that the city shows its willingness to encourage entrepreneurs to bring their capital to invest in the downtown and improve the tax base.”

Shelli Weisberg, a local political activist and associate editor of the Buzz, said: “I think it’s a significant victory for those of us who worked to change the composition of the commission to draw in more progressive leadership. I think we’ve stayed focused on what we need to do to help the city thrive. I think we stayed focused on educating the commission, and we asked them to stretch themselves and investigate options to allow the type of establishments that we think are good for the city -- and they did that. I’m very happy.”

Shortly after the election of 2003, Weisberg and others urged the commission to consider allowing additional liquor licenses in town. The commission briefly considered the matter in 2004, then dropped it after City Attorney Tim Currier suggested that licensing would open a “Pandora’s Box” that the city could not control. Weisberg helped press the issue, seeking outside legal advice and demonstrating that other communities had passed ordinances that appeared to adequately control the licensing process.

For the scheme of control Birmingham has established, “I think the city manager and the city attorney deserve most of the credit,” said McDaniel. They came up with the original draft, and it was an excellent one. If they borrowed it from somewhere else, then I don’t know where it came from.”

“For the first time in a long time our commission worked on consensus and trying to come to resolution,” said Commissioner Julie Plotnik. “I believe we all knew the significance of this issue and realized some compromise was necessary. I only hope this is the start of better things to come for the city. This is a start to jumpstarting some economic changes to our downtown and Triangle District.”

Monday, April 16, 2007

Shain report, drawings presented

Shain Park would have a bandshell that mimics the shape of City Hall and Baldwin Library, and Merrill Street would form an open plaza flanked by glass entryways to the underground garage, under a preliminary plan being shown to city boards this month.

The next scheduled presentations by architects from Albert Kahn & Associates and Walker Parking Consultants will be at City Hall before the following boards:

* Historic District Committee, 7 p.m. Wednesday, April 18.
* Planning Board, 7:30 p.m. Wednesday, April 25.

The following links to Adobe Acrobat files contain most of the printed matter on the design. Some of the files are as large as 10mb, and so we recommend you right-click and select Save Target As... to download the file to you computer.

Click here for a written report on the design from AKA.
Click here for a preliminary budget for the project.
Click here for several drawings.
Click here for more drawings.
Click here for still more drawings.

Sunday, April 15, 2007

Manager's report on police/fire consolidation

City Manager Tom Markus submitted this report to the City Commission on a proposal to consolidate the police and fire departments of Birmingham and Bloomfield Township. Markus will ask the commission Monday night to approve a study of the consolidation.

Clear Blue CEO urges bistro licenses

Saying "Birmingham needs to provide new incentives to promote investment and growth," Birmingham resident and Clear Blue CEO Todd Smith urged the City Commission to add bistro licenses. Click here to read his letter.

Friday, April 13, 2007

The Birmingham Eccentric reports on...

* The Blue Martini, finally paying its taxes after stopping payment on its March 19 payment.

* Potential sharing of services between Birmingham and Bloomfield Township.