Number 8: February 24, 2002

-------------------------------------------------------------
The Birmingham Buzz # 8
-------------------------------------------------------------

February 24, 2002

Welcome to the eighth edition of the Birmingham Buzz. If you missed our first seven editions, check out our archives at http://www.bhambuzz.org/archives.htm.

Our mission: To inform and involve all Birmingham citizens.

Visit us at http://www.bhambuzz.org.

In this edition:

1) Second Buzz forum to focus on downtown building
2) Building inspections find few violations
3) Grant application gooses Booth Park plans
4) Editorial: An evening of ironies
5) Ferrario says back-off: Thorsby, Carney and Lanzetta said to want building official removed
6) Open letter to Commission and Planning Board
7) Recreation Master Plan wins award
8) Letter to Eccentric: Can we trust a Commission that acts before promised review of 2016 Plan?
9) Acrobat files upgrade
10) To be removed


1) Second Buzz forum to focus on downtown building

The second Birmingham Buzz community forum will focus on downtown zoning, and provide explanations of changes in zoning regulations regarding building heights and other issues. Location has not been determined, but the forum will be held at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, March 26. A panel of experts -- to include architects, developers, city officials and others -- will comment upon recent changes and answer questions. Mark your calendar, and watch the Buzz for the location.

The first Buzz forum in January drew more than 30 Birmingham residents for a presentation by Geoff Hockman on the Principal Shopping District.


2) Building inspections find few violations

February 24, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

A two-week crackdown on construction sites in Birmingham resulted in "very few" violations, said Police Chief Richard Patterson.

"We were inundated with reports and the implication was that we were being too lenient," said Patterson. "That's why we decided to see how bad the problem was."

Patterson is to report his findings at Monday's 8 p.m. Birmingham City Commission meeting. He said he couldn't reveal the statistics because he said police were to continue conducting daily inspections of some 290 building sites throughout the weekend.

Birmingham City Commissioner Gordon Thorsby called for increased enforcement of construction sites at a Jan. 28 commission meeting. He produced a thick file of complaints complete with pictures.

Before the meeting, he dispatched an e-mail message to Birmingham City Manager Tom Markus detailing his stance on the issue.

"It is not the responsibility of citizens to cope with these frustrating issues," Thorsby said. "It is the responsibility of those that work in this city to respect those that live here. If they have difficulty with that, those builders and workmen are not welcome."

Patterson said he ordered the increased vigilance due to an influx of "behind the scenes" complaints that taxed building inspectors beyond their limits. According to documents obtained under The Freedom of Information Act, many of the complaints came from Thorsby and resident Tom Elliott. Both sent several e-mail messages to city staff pointing out possible code violations.

The additional inspections will cost taxpayers in excess of $6,000 in overtime paid to police officers and the commission will have to decide if it wants to continue the program. Firefighters and building code officials also participated in the inspections.

Police and fire officials routinely issue citations for violations that may be detrimental to public safety. Building code officials enforce other matters, such as illegal signs and property damage.

Thorsby recently toured construction sites with Patterson and a building official to get a firsthand look at the results of the stepped-up enforcement.

"I don't have the report but I can say that things do look substantially better," said Thorsby. "There is improvement in site maintenance and gates are getting locked up more often."

Thorsby said the tour produced two violations that city staff planned to follow through on.

Birmingham Mayor Dianne McKeon said she will wait for Patterson's report but early indications are that the increased vigilance wasn't prudent.

"I understand there are residents with concerns, but that isn't how I want my tax dollars spent," she said. "I've lived here 26 years, and I've never driven around looking for violations. But people have different interpretations of why we are elected."

Birmingham resident Anne Honhart said she has come across dangerous construction sites that aren't properly secured at night and believes the city could do a better job of enforcing building codes.

"People who have children might feel it's worth $6,000 to keep those sites safe," she said.

Marjorie Randall, also of Birmingham, didn't agree.

"I think the fact that we have police officers doing the job of building officials is a cause for concern," she said. "That's just wrong."

Though some city staff have criticized Thorsby for his exuberance, he is taking it in stride.

"Something had to be done because we need enforcement on a regular basis," he said.


3) Grant application gooses Booth Park plans

February 24, 2002

The April 1 due date for a state Department of Natural Resources grant application may speed the process of improvements to Booth Park. The application requires that conceptual designs be submitted to the City Commission, and that a public hearing be held prior to its submission.

Three conceptual plans were presented last Wednesday at the second Booth Park workshop, which was attended by about 20 Birmingham residents. The plans were drawn by consultants Wade-Trim.

Workshop participants favored a hybrid of two plans, showing support for such items as an entrance feature at Old Woodward and Harmon, a gazebo, playgrounds for younger and older children, improved grading, drainage and landscaping, an open play area surrounded by public art and sculpture, improvements to the banks of the Rouge River, and bridges and walkways making the park accessible from Old Woodward and from the surface parking area on Willets between Jacobson's and the First Baptist Church.

Features that were rejected included a parking lot, concession stand and skate park.


4) Editorial: An evening of ironies

February 21, 2002

For a meeting at which no official action was planned, the joint session of the Birmingham City Commission and Planning Board Tuesday night had plenty to write about. It was filled with irony.

Much of the irony occurred during a l-o-n-g discussion of parking downtown. Planning Board member Charles Tholen presented a detailed report (Birmingham has elevated the study of parking to nearly that of rocket science) that concluded, among other things, that if all vacancies downtown were filled, and a build-out similar to that envisioned by the 2016 Plan occurred, we could face a significant shortfall in parking spaces, requiring up to four additional parking structures.

We found the whole discussion ironic for several reasons.

First, it seemed to be a rehash of a rehash of what the 2016 Plan had already covered in sufficient and startlingly similar detail more than five years ago. We shouldn't be surprised, of course, because the notion that we ought to move forward, and that we've "been there, done that," clearly has little attraction for a group that would much rather "go back and do that over."

Second, it was rather amusing that such a discussion would occur between two public bodies that have spent the better part of the past year discouraging downtown development and doing little or nothing to help fill vacant retail space. With so many business people and developers saying the Commission and Planning Board are hostile to business people and developers, we thought it would have been more in character for them to be talking about tearing down a parking structure or two, rather than building more. (Then again, a supposed shortfall in parking could turn out to be a convenient pretext for further discouraging new development.)

If only we needed ONE additional parking structure! Unfortunately, at this point, developers are loath to do their thing in Birmingham, in large part because the Commission and Planning Board have removed many of the incentives for doing anything here. They've see-sawed allowable building heights, and gone beyond reasonably dictating basic uses like retail, office and residential to unreasonably redefining basic architectural terms like "mezzanine" with an eye toward regulating what you can and can't do with the interior of a structure.

Planning Board member Brian Blaesing brought the whole discussion momentarily back into reasonable focus when he reiterated the wise notion that the discussion of parking needs ought to follow development, not dictate it.

Another irony came when we started thinking about how great it would be to expand Shain Park, and to connect downtown to Booth Park. All we'd have to do is reduce or eliminate the surface lots across from the Community House and next to Jacobson's. So while the alleged anti-development folks were talking about building more parking decks, the alleged pro-development "shill" was sitting there hatching a plan for trashing a couple of parking lots. What's wrong with this picture?

As the discussion over parking requirements proceeded, Commissioner Dante Lanzetta provided more irony. He castigated himself, the Commission, the Planning Board and the 2016 planners for failing to spell out goals for the city's hopes and plans to encourage more residential use downtown. Do we want affordable housing, rental flats, million-dollar condos or what, Lanzetta asked. He took the opportunity to disdainfully assert, for the umpteenth time, his opinion that the million-dollar Willets condos, and other similar housing, are attracting well-heeled "snowbirds" who own two or three other homes and will spend just three or four months of the year in Birmingham. The implication was clear: Those aren't the kinds of people he'd like to see living downtown, in part because he doesn't think they'll be around long enough to spend much money in town.

Lanzetta, we are sorry to say, is a bit out of touch with the sorts of people who spend $1 million or more on a home, especially the ones who spend it on a second or third home. They tend to spend money on the street, too, and pay five-digit tax bills. Somebody needs to remind Lanzetta that the taxwoman doesn't care whether you're occupying your home or not. Even if Lanzetta's dubious assumptions about occupancy are correct, his "snowbirds" will probably spend more money in three or four months than, say, the typical city commissioner will spend in an entire year. We wonder if, during this joyous tax season, Lanzetta would be willing to provide a breakdown of his own downtown expenditures for 2001.

When you talk about the types of residences you want downtown, what you're really talking about is the types of people you want living there. After all, if you encourage million-dollar homes, you're going to get millionaires. If you encourage senior citizen housing, you're going to get seniors. If you encourage affordable housing, you're going to get middle-class residents.

Perhaps the 2016 Plan wisely avoided such discussion. On the other hand, perhaps Lanzetta is right, and we ought to begin to recognize, as he is wont to say, the elephant in our midst. What kind of people do we really want living downtown?

Certainly, as a respected member of the City Commission during the 2016 process and since, and as a leader of the City Commission, Lanzetta has had ample opportunity to influence such discussions and decisions. Clearly, he isn't fond of millionaires. Who would be acceptable to Lanzetta and the rest of the Commission? We are tempted to say that if their official actions lately in amending zoning regulations to discourage development are any indication, the answer is nobody. But that would be either cynical or naïve or both. The truth appears to be simpler -- yet, alas, discouraging. Our city fathers have shown us that they are very good at indicating what they don't like, but still have a long way to go when it comes to the more creative and intellectually challenging job of articulating a positive vision.


5) Ferrario says back-off: Thorsby, Carney and Lanzetta said to want building official removed

February 21, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

An attorney representing Birmingham building official Mary Ferrario is accusing three city commissioners of meddling in personnel matters and has threatened to file a sex discrimination lawsuit if the alleged behavior continues.

Bloomfield Hills attorney Lynn Shecter made the accusation in a Jan. 15 letter to Birmingham City Manager Tom Markus.

"We understand that Commissioners Dante Lanzetta, Gordon Thorsby and Don Carney have demanded that Ms. Ferrario be fired, bought out or dismissed on some pretext," said Shecter.

"In addition, the fact that the representatives of the city commission chose to threaten only female employees of the city is a strong indication of sex discrimination."

Patricia McCullough, Birmingham community development director, has also hired an attorney. The lawyer, Robert Webster, said he is in the process of collecting information about a Dec. 17 meeting between Markus, McCullough, Carney, Lanzetta and Thorsby and could not comment further.

Markus said building code enforcement and personnel matters were topics of discussion at the Dec. 17 meeting but he wouldn't go into detail. Markus later released a statement spelling out his stance on the issue.

"Under the council-manager form of government personnel decisions rest with the city manager," said Markus. "Rest assured that as long as I am the city manager the responsibilities associated with personnel matters will be my decision and mine alone.

"It has long been my practice not to discuss the personnel actions that I am involved with," Markus said. "Consistent with this practice and on advice of legal counsel, I am respectfully declining to answer your specific questions."

Under the Birmingham City Charter, only the commission has the power to fire the city manager, the city clerk and the city health officer, which in Birmingham's case is provided by Oakland County.

In a Feb. 14 report in The Eccentric, Thorsby was critical of city code enforcement at residential building sites, but said he didn't blame specific city employees for problems.

A screening wall on the roof of The Willits condominium project has also been the subject of much controversy, with elected and appointed officials calling for an inquiry into whether the wall was properly approved by city staff.

City Attorney Tim Currier is investigating the Willits matter and is expected to give a full report to the Birmingham Planning Board at its 7:30 p.m. Feb. 27 meeting.

Lanzetta and Carney did not respond to inquires about the personnel matters. Thorsby had no comment.

In 1994, Ferrario filed a sex discrimination lawsuit against the city that was settled out of court. Ferrario, then a part-time building inspector, alleged she was denied full-time employment because she was a women. The city eventually paid Ferrario undisclosed damages and hired her for the full-time job, said Markus.

A few years after that and based only on merit, said Markus, Ferrario became the city building official. Ferrario is now responsible for interpreting and enforcing building codes.

At a Feb. 13 planning board meeting, the board approved a resolution to ask the city commission for $10,000 to hire its own attorney to advise the board rather than depend solely on the advice of city staff.

McCullough and Ferrario could not be reached for comment.


6) Open letter to Commission and Planning Board

Dear Commissioners and Planning Board members,

You are cordially invited to contribute to the Birmingham Buzz.

We will happily publish your articles and/or editorials. We also invite you to participate in our less formal, but lively, discussion group.

Many readers of the Buzz would like to hear your positions on the issues discussed in our pages, or on any issues you deem important. We believe that as as public servants you have a duty to talk to us -- to explain the positions you take and the votes you cast, to articulate your vision for our city, and set our agenda.

When you talk to the Buzz, you will be talking to more than 300 subscribers. Our website gets roughly 40 hits per day. And more than 60 Birmingham residents have signed on as "Supporters."

Most of us cannot attend public meetings, and neither the minutes of those meetings nor occasional newspaper coverage provide sufficient depth. You owe it not only to readers of the Buzz, but to yourselves, lest you or your actions be misunderstood or misinterpreted.

Please accept this invitation in the humble and positive spirit in which it is offered. We look forward to hearing from you. Write us at info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}
Respectfully,

Clinton Baller, Editor


7) Recreation Master Plan wins award

The Birmingham Recreation Master Plan has won the 2002 Master Plan Award from the Michigan Recreation and Park Association. Kudos to the Parks Board and consultant Wade-Trim, who developed the plan.

Check out the award at http://www.bhambuzz.org/pdfs/parks_plan_award.pdf.

Check out the plan at http://www.bhambuzz.org/pdfs/recreation_master_plan.pdf


8) Letter to Eccentric: Can we trust a Commission that acts before promised review of 2016 Plan?

February 17, 2002

At its January 28 meeting, the Birmingham City Commission reduced the maximum allowable heights in the D2 and D3 downtown commercial/residential overlay districts. Last month, the D4 zone also fell victim to the same political engineering that has tainted virtually all City Commission decisions.

These changes will dramatically (and negatively) alter what can be built (if anything) in this city. January 28's vote happened in spite of what these same commissioners agreed to and voted upon at a public hearing last August 27 at the Community House.

For those who did not attend the packed meeting on that August evening, it was attended by more than 350 people, most of whom were hostile to the Commission's intent. The Commission had been predisposed to reduce building heights (the D4 zone height was the issue of the night, with the D2 and D3 zones on deck) without concern for the effect this action would have on the 2016 Plan-mandated mixed-uses this town so desperately needs to sustain itself. The proposal for reduced building heights was offered for a vote without reason, research, or explanation, and was in conflict with the recommendation of city staff.

Fortunately, the scrutiny of the crowd delayed (temporarily) this punitive decision. At the August meeting, Commissioner Seth Chafetz, along with Commissioners Dixon, McKeon, Wooley and DeLaura, voted against reducing heights established by the 2016 Plan, stating they were uncomfortable voting for these height reductions until a formal citywide, long-promised, 2016 review was held.

The Commissioners, who so love to support the 2016 Plan when it is convenient to do so (as with the Commission's recent refusal to accept MDOT road funds because the MDOT plan did not include a traffic circle as suggested in an early version of the 2016 Plan) and who so quickly disregard it and remind us that it has never been officially adopted when it's not convenient, defiantly displayed their ignorance and complete lack of understanding and respect for the very complex and nuanced 2016 Plan.

Jan. 28's vote passed without any credible evidence to support the reason for the reduction, any explanation of how the new height limitations were determined, or any understanding of the consequences. The Commission also failed to consult with the professionals, staff, or citizens who participated in the charrettes that gave rise to the 2016 Plan.

The long-promised 2016 Plan review, for some reason, could never be conveniently scheduled. At the August meeting, the review was finally scheduled for the weekend before the November election. Not only was this review cancelled, but the City Commission also refused to hold the public hearing that is has traditionally been scheduled before an ordinance amendment becomes law. Did anybody really think the promised 2016 Plan review would happen with the new Commission?

These actions are designed to eliminate public pressure on the Commission and confine public debate and dissent to the Planning Board level. Unfortunately, as the Planning Board is currently populated by Commission-appointed no-growth folks who have little expertise in these issues (see coverage of Tom McGraw's resignation in the January 13, 2002, Eccentric), public debate and dissent are also less than welcome at this level.

I think that public and elected officials are duty-bound (if not ethically bound) to be credible. How can any citizen trust our Commissioners when they publicly state one thing for the record at a public hearing (under public scrutiny), vote (accordingly) at that hearing, and then vote not to hold the much-promised public review, and then weeks later vote not have the public hearing (ever), only to vote (after conspiring to eliminate all public opposition) in support of reduced building heights in contradiction to their earlier public promises and public opinion.

Is anyone else more than a little concerned about this Commission's integrity or credibility? No matter what you feel about building heights in the D4 and D2 and D3 zones, you should be concerned about the assaults on the democratic process that have been undertaken by this Commission.

Christopher J. Longe, AIA
Birmingham

9) Acrobat files upgraded

We've upgrade the Adobe Acrobat .pdf files throughout our site to make web viewing quicker! If you've been frustrated in the past trying to download and view the 2016 Plan or the Recreation Master Plan, give it another try.

10) To be removed, please send a request to info@bhambuzz.org.


-------------------------------------------------------------
The Birmingham Buzz # 7
-------------------------------------------------------------

February 18, 2002

Welcome to the seventh edition of the Birmingham Buzz. If you missed our first six editions, check out our archives at http://www.bhambuzz.org/archives.htm.

Our mission: To inform and involve all Birmingham citizens.

Visit us at http://www.bhambuzz.org.

In this edition:

1) Talk was never cheaper
2) Proposal seeks to protect trees
3) Old Woodward median work progresses
4) Judge to hear case on Vinewood house
5) Letter to Eccentric: No traffic circles
6) Editorial: Appointees bring instant credibility to arts board
7) Ain't Email Great Dept.
8) Code enforcement scrutinized: Thorsby calls for crackdown on builders
9) Letter to Eccentric: What traffic circle?
10) Editorial: Birmingham thrives as new venue
11) To be removed


1) Talk was never cheaper...

... and it's the most effective way to get your questions answered and your opinions heard! We urge you to:

* Add to our discussion groups. We're proud of the give-and-take we see. Keep up the good work! Visa http://www.bhambuzz.org/public.html.

* Attend a meeting, and speak up. This week, you can choose from three: The joint City Commission/Planning Board meeting on Tuesday evening, the second Booth Park development workshop on Wednesday evening, or the Neighborhood Roundtable on sewers on Thursday. Visit our calendar at http://www.SuperCalendar.com/view.php?a=1525.

* Write to the City Commissioners, members of the Planning Board and city staff. Ask them questions. Express your opinions. Visit http://www.bhambuzz.org/Write_to_city.htm.

* Write to the Birmingham Eccentric. The newspaper accepts letters and guest columns. Email Editor Lee Snider at lsnider@oe.homecomm.net


2) Proposal seeks to protect trees...

From the Birmingham Eccentric

The roar of chainsaws may be silenced by a complex tree preservation ordinance that could force Birmingham residents to pull a permit to remove or trim trees.

A subcommittee of the Birmingham Planning Board has been working on the ordinance for months at the request of City Commissioners Russell Dixon and Seth Chafetz.

Though board members won't divulge what's included in the ordinance, the latest draft appeared to be more than 20 pages thick and Chafetz is beginning to wonder when and if it will ever get to the city commission.

"It's a bit frustrating that the protections we asked for last year still aren't in place," said Chafetz. "Construction season is coming and trees will be destroyed unless we have a proper ordinance."

The need for tree preservation became obvious when a residential construction project killed the 75-year-old tree of a neighbor, said Chafetz, and city officials told the neighbor to have the tree cut down because it was dangerous.

Chafetz said the original request was to protect trees on lots adjacent to construction sites because digging can destroy the root systems of large trees more than 100 feet away.

Instead of city staff writing a short provision that would have protected such trees, it sent the matter to the planning board, where it has stayed mired at the committee level.

"It should have been a basic ordinance," said Chafetz, "that clearly spelled out the difference between right and wrong. City staff doesn't work for the residents. They won't tell contractors they have to save trees."

City Manager Tom Markus said the city can only enforce codes that are already on the books, and staff will do its best to enforce the new tree preservation ordinance when it's formally adopted.

Chafetz said the ordinance should make one fact very clear.

"If you can't build a house and keep the trees on your neighbor's yard alive, then maybe you shouldn't be building that house," he said.

Franklin Village passed a landmark tree preservation ordinance last year that calls for the mandatory replacement of all protected species of trees that are cut down for any reason.

The Franklin ordinance forces residents to pull a permit to cut down a tree and sets stiff penalties for violators. Whenever a heritage tree, such as an elm, is cut down, it must be replaced by several smaller heritage trees at the owner's expense.

Complying with the Franklin ordinance can cost a person clearing a lot for construction several thousand dollars.


3) Old Woodward median work progresses...

From the Birmingham Eccentric

Pedestrians in Birmingham's art gallery district may find crossing N. Old Woodward a bit easier next year.

The city recently hired Florida-based traffic engineer Walter Kulash to review plans for adding a median to the road to make crossing the street safer.

Elizabeth Stone, the owner of an art gallery on N. Old Woodward, said she is looking forward to the day people can get from one side of the street to the other without dodging traffic.

"I get a lot of families coming from Mill Pond," she said. "They can't cross with their strollers because traffic can be going 40 mph."

The speed limit on that stretch of road is 25 mph and the city has already spent $30,000 to install a pedestrian-directed crosswalk with strobe lights that can be seen up to 1,000 feet away.

Stone said the crosswalk, which was installed almost two years ago, was a major improvement but a new median would be a better solution.

"Before the new crosswalk was installed the lack of pedestrian traffic was making the galleries suffer," Stone said. "It's better now, but we want a median so badly. With the drivers around here, it's always rush, rush, rush."

In addition to the proposed new median, parking on the west side of N. Old Woodward would be converted from angle to parallel to reduce the instances of people backing out into traffic.

Kulash has been asked to study the impact of the design on many factors including pedestrian safety, cut-through neighborhood traffic and the loss of 20-30 parking spaces.

If Kulash approves the design it would eventually come before the Birmingham City Commission for final approval -- a process that could take several months, said Birmingham Community Development Director Patricia McCullough.


4) Judge to hear case on Vinewood house...

From the Birmingham Eccentric

A judge may soon decide the fate of one of the most controversial houses in Birmingham.

The house at 543 Vinewood was designated a historic district after a city study found the 1872 structure was built on land once owned by Elijah Willits, one of Birmingham's founding fathers.

The owners of the house were against the historic designation and had in fact planned to tear it down to build a Bigfoot house. The disagreement resulted in a lawsuit, Susan R. Bruley Trust vs. Birmingham. The case is expected to go to trial unless a city motion to dismiss is granted.

Oakland County Circuit Judge John McDonald is scheduled to hear the motion at 8:30 a.m. Feb. 20.

Last year, city officials were advised to pay $500,000 in damages by a panel of Oakland County Circuit Court moderators, but the suggestion was declined.

John Staran, an attorney working on the case for Birmingham, said the basis for the motion is that proper procedures weren't followed because the matter never went before the Michigan Historic Review Board.

But Pete Webster, an attorney representing the trust that owns the property, said the city never had the right to designate the home a historic district in the first place. He also said the city has very little to go on in trying to establish that the house is historically significant.

"Willits never lived there and more than half the house was built in 1987," said Webster. "This isn't a historic issue at all."

Webster also notes that in the 1920s the house was moved to its current location - a street with several modern homes - and that singling it out for historic district designation is a clear violation of the law that prohibits "spot districting."

Staran said the city determined the house had significant architectural value even though it "did not conclude that he (Elijah Willits) lived there."

He chose his words carefully, noting that the city hadn't eliminated the possibility that Willits had lived there.

Webster said city documents prove the home was built after Willits died.

Staran has said potential damage awards could exceed $1 million if the city loses. City Manager Tom Markus said Birmingham is insured in the event it loses the lawsuit. The policy, however, would not cover the city if the court rules the city improperly assumed ownership of the property.

The city is also seeking a protective order that will bar members of appointed city boards and committees from being deposed in the case.


5) Letter to Eccentric: No traffic circles...

I was surprised to read that the city is dragging it's feet on accepting money from the state to remedy an existing and dangerous intersection at Woodward and Old Woodward, north of Lincoln. If MDOT considers it a dangerous intersection, provides money for improvements, and Birmingham does not act on it, is the city open for lawsuits?

I have been stuck in traffic circles here in the United States and Europe, and I don't think that is an answer. There is much confusion for people while in the circle: who has the right-of-way and where is the exit one is looking for?

There are many fender-bender types of accidents. Traffic circles are designed for slow, residential type of traffic, not combining with Woodward at 45 plus miles per hour. In fact, the state of New Jersey has been removing traffic circles for the last five years.

According to the article, there are some people who think that with the state proposal, traffic will be diverted through the surrounding neighborhood until the new layout becomes familiar to the drivers. With proper signage (blinking signs) and barricades, that problem would be remedied in a short period of time.

Whatever is done, it should not include a traffic circle. They do not work! If a circle is built, then people certainly will drive through the neighborhood to avoid it.

Something should be done, the city should not procrastinate. This dangerous situation has existed here for a very long time.

Indulis Liepins, Birmingham


6) Editorial: Appointees bring instant credibility to arts board...

February 15, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

Birmingham, already an art-friendly city, is about to become even more artistically inclined.

The City Commission recently approved the addition of seven appointees to the Birmingham Arts Board, and the new members bring a wealth of expertise and prestige to their positions.

Included among the appointees are representatives of the Cranbrook Academy of Art, the Birmingham Bloomfield Art Center and the Detroit Institute of Arts. There is also an art marketing executive, an arts consultant and a cultural affairs director for the city of Detroit.

Can't do much better than that.

Such a wealth of knowledge will bring immediate credibility to the board's suggestions.

The Birmingham Arts Board was established in December and is charged with making recommendations for the purchase and display of art objects on public property around the city. Acquisition financing hasn't been worked out yet.

Gary Kulak, a member of the Birmingham Planning Board, was a major force behind the creation of the arts panel. It's a natural in a place like Birmingham, which is cultured and attractive and has many fine-arts galleries and striking architectural landmarks.

Public art can be a great enhancement for a city. The Shain Park sculpture, "Freedom of the Human Spirit" by Marshall Frederick, is a perfect example of how a piece of contemporary art can enrich the urban experience. The handsome centerpiece provides a visual focal point for the park, and lends an artistic atmosphere to stage and musical performances that take place nearby.

Chicago, one of the most beautiful cities in the world, is a veritable outdoor museum, with works by Calder, Picasso, Miro and Chagall gracing its plazas and public squares. While Birmingham couldn't hope to acquire works of that caliber, there are many fine pieces the city might be able to afford. It will be the task of the arts board to identify appropriate artworks that can add variety and appeal to Birmingham's already stunning vistas.

With the quality of expertise sitting on the Birmingham Arts Board, city residents can rest assured that any future suggestions about public arts purchases will be well informed and in good taste. We look forward to their ideas and recommendations.


7) Ain't Email Great Dept....

Date : Tue, 5 Feb 2002 10:09:00 -0500
From : Peter Gough
To : Mill Pond Association Board members

Subject : The Old Home on Vinewood

During a discussion late last week an idea cropped up.

Mr. Mobley the developer has an image problem in the City in general and particularly in Millpond due to his treatment of some neighbors of his projects and the "cause celebre" re demolishing the old home on Vinewood.

Prior to the April 15th (tax deadline), do you think we could persuade Mr. Mobley to donate that old home on Vinewood to the Millpond Assn. for the benefit of our residents and Assn? (We could even share it with our friends in the Quackers Assn., they need a venue for their meetings too).

Such a gesture would generate immense goodwill for Mobley, provide positive publicity as well as providing him with a tax write off.

A gesture like this would go a long way towards solving his image and resentment problems.

We could fix it up and use the house for Association and Board Meetings. It would be a real spark plug for the residents.

I acknowledge that there are numerous details which would have to be worked out but it is worthy of discussion at the next Board meeting.

Sincerely,
Peter

Date : Tue, 5 Feb 2002 10:24:00 -0500
From : Clinton Baller
To : Peter Gough

Subject : re: The Old Home on Vinewood

Peter,

Very interesting idea. Are you suggesting he donate the land as well as the house? Permanently, or just until the lawsuit is resolved? And if permanently, then how would maintenance (including costs, and taxes) be financed?

Clint

Date : Wed, 6 Feb 2002 03:51:00 -0500
From : Peter Gough
To : Clinton Baller

Subject : The Old Home on Vinewood

Clint,

Thanks for your interest.

Yes, I envisage that the developer(s) would donate the house and site to Millpond or maybe the City. Let's face it, organizations like ours really need space for meetings and functions.

The Quacker Assn. has to hire a room in a school for their meetings every month, I'm sure that we could get them interested. The Presidents Council also has to meet in a private home each month. The Vinewood House could be almost totally occupied with neighborhood assn. meeting and other small gatherings.

Re the tax issue. It might be subject to a non-profit abatement, like the Community House. I'll inquire from some friends who are involved there.

Re. maintenance. I envisage that it would be maintained by volunteers and private donations. A nominal levy for the use of the building could be applied. (Local companies like GM, Chrysler, Ford and Masco have funds available for citizenship initiatives. They might chip in (with an appropriate plaque of recognition.)

Maybe we could get people like Ted Fuller to lead a broad coalition of developers, particularly when I hear of the large donation they made to the church adjacent to the Willits Building. Ted could do with some image polishing in our community.

It is an opportunity to repackage the developer's image more towards "giving back" something to our community rather than their present image. In their shoes I'd jump at it.

I don't have all the answers but with a will this can be worked out.

Sincerely,
Peter


8) Code enforcement scrutinized: Thorsby calls for crackdown on builders...

February 15, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

Pick-up trucks, debris and the rhythmic sound of hammers are in abundant supply on Birmingham's Vinewood Street. With two Bigfoot homes under construction, the area represents a microcosm for a growing controversy over residential building projects.

"The whole site is a mess and they tried to steal my electricity," said a 33-year Vinewood Street resident who wished to remain anonymous. "The contractor is absolutely ruthless. He does what he pleases."

Dominic Ercolani is the contractor in question, but he will also move into the house when it's done. He bought the Vinewood property in 1997 and eventually tore down the original home to make way for a 3,500 square-foot house that dwarfs his neighbor's place. Across the street, a much larger home is being built and the neighborhood is abuzz with activity.

But unlike the Bigfoot home issue of 2000, the home size is not the subject of this debate; it's the conduct of builders and city inspectors that's coming under scrutiny.

"She didn't complain when I took her garbage out, and she didn't complain when I let her borrow my phone for three days," said Ercolani. "Now I'm the bad guy. I think it's a generational thing. Some people just don't want anything going up next door."

Ercolani said a subcontractor did plug into his neighbor's electric supply but the cord was yanked as soon as she complained. As for the mounting debris, he said building a house in tight quarters is not easy but the mess will be gone by the end of the week.

Ercolani has been warned in connection with the project but was never ticketed by the city. His project is properly bordered by a fence and the mess within isn't against city code.

"I'm on a first-name basis with code officials," said Ercolani. "When there is a complaint, we get it fixed."

How the city is dealing with such complaints is the crux of the matter, said Birmingham City Commissioner Gordon Thorsby.

"I hate the polarization between builders and residents," he said. "I think it's disgusting Å we have to tell builders to crack the whip. They have to keep in mind people are living where they are working."

Two years ago, the city responded to similar issues by passing a builder's code of conduct and a citizen's bill of rights that set forth guidelines for construction projects.

The guidelines basically dictate that residents have a right to quiet in the evening and morning and an expectation that their property won't be damaged. On the other hand, builders have the right to carry out their tasks without harassment as long as they comply with city rules.

Thorsby said people elected him to make sure neighborhood issues were being addressed so he doesn't think he is overstepping his bounds by driving from site to site to point out possible violations.

"It's not like I'm getting on city staff to write tickets to everyone," he said. "We are asking that neighbors be treated with respect."

Thorsby said it is unreasonable to expect a resident to pay for it when damage is done to their property. If grass or a tree is damaged during construction, the builder should pick up the tab to restore the property to its original condition.

He is also asking the city to make sure projects are properly fenced in and that construction vehicles are not blocking residents' driveways or city rights-of-way.

Thorsby denied targeting specific city staff for poor performance.

On Tuesday, Birmingham Police inspected more than 70 residential construction sites and issued a few citations and passed along a few more issues of concern to the building department.

Birmingham City Manager Tom Markus said code officials are doing their jobs.

"I don't know that the scrutiny is warranted," he said. "I know our staff is doing the best job it can in enforcing the ordinances we already have on the books. That takes constant vigilance -- if there are problems perhaps they lie within the ordinances and not the enforcement of them."

He wouldn't comment on whether he felt members of the Birmingham City Commission were trying to run the day-to-day operations of the city.


9) Letter to Eccentric: What traffic circle?...

February 6, 2002

To the Editor of the Birmingham Eccentric:

I read your Jan. 31 article on MDOT's proposal for Woodward Ave., and our City Commission's response.

The City Commission "wondered why MDOT had not considered the traffic circle or roundabout at the intersection as called for in the 2016 Plan." A big reason may be that it is not in the plan! Perhaps they should all take a look at the 2016 Plan recommendations. The traffic circle was in the first draft, not in the final draft.

Furthermore, the so-called traffic circle was not even at the intersection of Lincoln and Woodward, it was north of the intersection, closer to the 555 building!

Most of the sketches our commission referred to did not deal with that intersection at all! Our commission was extremely rude and abusive to the MDOT representative. They turned down a few hundred thousand dollars in funding to fix an intersection that is causing injuries, that they themselves have done nothing to improve.

Commissioner Carney's comment, "Isn't there merit in doing it right the first time, rather then taking the money and running?" seems quite appropriate here since the first draft of the 2016 Plan had the sketches they referred to, but did not adopt.

Perhaps the City Commission should listen to Mr. Carney's comment and adopt the 2016 Plan as it was written the first time. Then they should read it and perhaps try following the implementation strategy layed out so carefully in it, which by the way they are responsible for.

Perhaps it is time for the city to consider hiring a city architect as is recommended in the plan so that they may have a better idea of what is in the
plan and how to implement it.

Michael Poris


10) Editorial: Birmingham thrives as new venue...

February 6, 2002

From the Detroit News

When plans for Birmingham's Palladium were announced a few years ago, they were met by some spirited opposition in that Oakland County community.

The city's height ordinance had been slightly exceeded, and many residents argued that it would "change the character" of Birmingham.

It turns out, they were right. And a good thing, too. Because just as Birmingham's retail is being challenged by the Somerset Collection and other shopping centers, its appeal as an entertainment center and gathering place has never been higher.

Much of that appeal centers around the Palladium, which opened late last year. With its 12 movie screens, added to the eight screens at the nearby Birmingham Theater, the development has given the city as many venues as most suburban cineplexes. But instead of being surrounded by acres of parking lot, the Birmingham's screens are surrounded by a city.

When the shows let out, the stream of foot traffic, much of it headed to nearby restaurants and bars, will remind onlookers with long memories of how Grand Circus Park in downtown Detroit used to look in the 1950s. There is a sense of urban excitement that cannot be found elsewhere in Metro Detroit.

Birmingham is a bit nervous about its retail presence, and with good reason. The Palladium stands on the site of the former Crowley's department store. The city's other major retailer, Jacobson's, is having serious financial problems.

The city's worries about challenges to its retail core made it anxious to enter into a deal with Bloomfield Township in an attempt to block construction of the Bloomfield Place development.

But conditions never are static in an urban environment, and it is apparent that the Palladium has been the catalyst for beneficial change. Several new condominium buildings have also opened recently, getting some of the highest prices ever paid for apartment-style living in Metro Detroit. All real estate values in the city are, in fact, increasing, despite the trepidation expressed by many residents.

The moral here is not to be afraid of growth. Communities cannot stop the clock, and those that try are frequently left with time on their hands and little more.
But by welcoming reasonable growth, they can refresh themselves and thrive.

11) To be removed, please send a request to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BE INFORMED...GET INVOLVED...SPREAD THE WORD
Forward this email to friends, neighbors and anyone you know who is interested in EXCELLENCE for Birmingham.
Subscribe at http://www.bhambuzz.org/subscribe.htm


Number 6: February 4, 2002

-------------------------------------------------------------
The Birmingham Buzz # 6
-------------------------------------------------------------

February 4, 2002

Welcome to the sixth edition of the Birmingham Buzz. If you missed our first five editions, check out our archives at http://www.bhambuzz.org/archives.htm.

Our mission: To inform and involve all Birmingham citizens.

Visit us at http://www.bhambuzz.org.

In this edition:

1) City officials deposed in Vinewood case
2) City restricts placement of mezzanines
3) The still after the McGraw storm
4) State urges city to accept road funds
5) Public Arts Board appointed
6) Neighborhood Roundtables set
7) Editorial: The vision and intent of 2016
8) Editorial: Build on merchants meeting
9) Editorial: The righteous pretenders
10) McGraw resignation letter
11) Second Booth Park workshop is set
12) City develops tree preservation ordinance
13) We're (still) hungry for hits
14) Talk is (still) cheap
15) To be removed.


1) City officials deposed in Vinewood case

February 1, 2002

Was the Birmingham City Commission right last year to declare 543 Vinewood a historic district over the objections of the property owner? Or should the property owner be allowed to demolish or move the house to make way for a new home that does not comply with current residential zoning laws?

City officials were deposed this week in the case, in which the owner of the property, the Bruley Trust, is challenging the historic designation of the property. The owner is also challenging the so-called "bigfoot" lot coverage and building height ordinance that was adopted around the same time as the fight began over the historic designation, said trust attorney Tim Stoepker, of the law firm of Dickinson Wright.

City Commissioners have rejected the decision of mediators in the case, who found in favor of the property owner and recommended a settlement of $500,000.

City Manager Tom Markus disputed claims Friday that the city's insurer has withdrawn from the case. He said the Michigan Municipal Risk Management Authority continues to cover the city, which has a $150,000 deductible. Markus added, however, that if the city's action is judged to be a taking, "then no coverage will be provided."

A "taking" is a government action assuming ownership of real property by eminent domain.

In 1996, the property was listed by the city as potentially historic. In 1999, a previous owner was among 18 property owners asked to voluntarily declare their properties historic. The former owner did not respond to the written requests, said Stoepker.

The trust acquired the property in August 1999, during an ongoing city debate about residential lot coverage and building height.

In early May of 2000, the trust submitted an application for a building permit. Plans called for demolition of the house and the construction of a home according to then-acceptable zoning ordinances. The application was submitted just prior to adoption of the ordinance limiting lot coverage and building height.

Under the law, permit applications made under the old law that were pending when the new law took effect were acceptable if demolition and final permits were obtained by March 31, 2001, said Stoepker.

In September of 2000, the Commission imposed a six-month moratorium on development of the property. The moratorium was set to expire just days before the deadline for demolition and permitting under the new ordinance.

Deadlines and zoning changes notwithstanding, the city declared the property a historic district on March 19, 2001, following a study and recommendation by the Historic District & Design Review Commission.

(Click on the following link to download a 1.1MB copy of the HDDRC study: http://www.bhambuzz.org/pdfs/HDDRC_Vinewood.pdf.)

"The Michigan Court of Appeals told the city of Ann Arbor that you can't create a single-house historic district," Stopker said, explaining the legal basis for his argument against the historic designation.

"They took my client's property without just compensation," he said, and the damage "increases every day that we don't have use of our property."

In challenging the zoning ordinances, Stoepker argues that the city did not "advance a real and substantial governmental interest. In laymen's terms, for a government to adopt legislation as it relates to regulating the use of property, it can only do so if it advances a real and substantial governmental interest."


2) City restricts placement of mezzanines

From the Birmingham Eccentric
February 3, 2002

Restricting mezzanines to the first floor of buildings is a misguided decision that will backfire, said Thomas McGraw, a former member of the Birmingham Planning Board.
"It's high comedy," said McGraw. "They wanted to look up and see five sets of windows instead of six. There is essentially no way you can include a mezzanine in Birmingham now."

The Willits, a luxury condominium development currently under construction in Birmingham, includes a mezzanine on the top floor. Members of the city commission have said the building looks like a six-story structure, something they want to avoid in the future.

McGraw, an attorney who specializes in zoning matters, resigned from the planning board earlier this month and claimed the board and city commission were no longer interested in bringing sound planning to the city.

He said last Monday's 5-1 commission decision restricting mezzanines to the first floor of buildings in the city's overlay zoning district is yet another example of their goal of discouraging development.

"They won't just come out and say it, but the commission's real intent is to stop development," he said. "I don't know why they didn't just take mezzanines out of the ordinance altogether."

City Commissioner Russell Dixon voted no after questioning how the best interests of the public could be served by the restriction.

Though first-floor mezzanines were allowed under the current ordinance, Gary Kulak, chairman of the planning board, said the new restriction would encourage more retail development downtown.

First-floor retail is required in the overlay zoning district and adding more space to the first floor would, in effect, mean more retail space for the city.

City planner Jill Bahm warned the restriction would prevent the construction of loft-style dwellings and discourage affordable housing downtown. Lofts may be cheaper because they could require fewer parking spaces, said Bahm, but there are currently no lofts in the city.

Many people saw the 2001 city commission election as a referendum on development issues. A slate of candidates who talked about the need to rein in development won the election.

Since then, the planning board and commission have made decisions consistent with that goal.

In addition to looking at ways to encourage loft-style housing, the planning board also plans to revisit parking requirements for residential developments with the goal of bringing more affordable housing to the downtown.


3) The still after the storm

February 2, 2002

Thomas McGraw made some pretty heavy charges about the City Commission and the Planning Board when he resigned a couple of weeks ago. (His resignation letter is published in full below.) We thought City Commissioners and the Planning Board chairman ought to be given an opportunity to respond. Heck, we thought the citizens of Birmingham deserved a response. So on Wednesday we shot off emails to each of the commissioners and a couple of members of the Planning Board.

The responses -- such as they were -- trickled in slowly. Mayor Dianne McKeon was the first to respond. She gratiously promised to review the letter and "get back to you with my response."

Planning Board chairman Gary Kulak also responded:

"Mr. McGraw's letter was directed to the City Commission and not the Planning Board. As such it is not my place to respond to it," wrote Kulak, ignoring direct jabs such as this from McGraw:

"A current majority of the Planning Board disregards traditional principles and common sense, and directs their energy toward blocking projects in order to satisfy the City Commission. Recent decisions follow no plan, adopted or otherwise. They appear to be made in a haphazard and arbitrary fashion."

Wrote Kulak: "Mr. McGraw did offer a verbal resignation to the Planning Board at the conclusion of the January 9th meeting. At that time I acknowledged, on the record, his service on the board. The minutes of this meeting are available from the city."

City Commission Gordon Thorsby, a former member of the Planning Board, weighed in on Saturday, after he was finally able to download more than 100 emails stuck in cyberspace.

"The guy did some nice service for the city...," said Thorsby. "I don't agree with him, but has a right to his opinion."

Thorsby defended the recent appointment of Jim Neuhard, an attorney, as Thorsby's replacement on the board. "Jim was very well qualified," said Thorsby. "He's had some very good experience... He's an involved person in the community."


4) State urges city to accept road funds

From the Birmingham Eccentric
January 31, 2002

Motorists attempting to merge from S. Old Woodward onto Woodward are getting injured in side-swipe accidents that will continue unless city and state officials agree on a remedy for the dangerous intersection, said Bob Lariviere, an engineer with the Michigan Department of Transportation.

"We have moral obligations to fix this problem," said Lariviere. "…We would eliminate 100 percent of the accidents… and it wouldn't cost Birmingham residents anything."
Officials from MDOT and Birmingham are expected to sit down in the coming weeks in an attempt to resolve a controversy over whether the city should accept federal grant money to reconfigure the intersection.

MDOT studied 18 injury accidents at the intersection from 1997 to 1999 and said future accidents could be prevented under the proposed solution.

S. Old Woodward merges with Woodward at Lincoln, forcing vehicles traveling at vastly different speeds to blend quickly. Under the MDOT plan, S. Old Woodward would no longer merge with Woodward there. Instead, southbound traffic on Old Woodward would enter Woodward north of Landon Street.

People who miss that turn would have to go right on Lincoln and into an adjacent neighborhood - something commissioners said they wanted to avoid.

Federal officials have offered as much as $280,000 for the job, but preliminary estimates peg the cost at some $150,000.

Birmingham Police Chief Richard Patterson said traffic would increase in the residential area for a short time. When motorists realize the intersection is changed, they will turn onto Woodward farther north and avoid the neighborhood.

Commission members weren't so sure. They wondered why MDOT hadn't considered the city's desired option of installing a traffic circle, or "roundabout," at the intersection as called for in the Downtown Birmingham 2016 Plan.

"Isn't there merit in doing it right the first time," asked Commissioner Donald Carney, "…rather than taking the money and running?"

Patterson said there have been many accidents at the intersection, and the city would open itself to legal liability if it refuses the money.

Commissioner Dante Lanzetta Jr. asked for a commitment to put in a traffic circle within five years. "This (MDOT's solution) is once again about moving metal," he said. "Are we ever going to start being concerned for the safety of people and not the safety of cars? This is a hostile environment and we are trying to calm it."

In a Tuesday Telephone interview, Lariviere said MDOT is willing to listen to the city as long as officials back off from their demand for a traffic circle.
"We didn't even consider it," he said. "That is a long-range planning concept, and no one in the city has done the work to see if it is feasible … we are talking about years worth of study."

Larivier said though MDOT is considering a traffic circle for another area of the state, doing so in Birmingham would alter the road configurations and intersections for much of the city's south side.

He also said he couldn't remember another community being so reluctant about receiving free money.

"I didn't feel like they like me much," he said. "Normally, communities want this type of project to go forward as fast as possible to keep their own people safe."

In March, Commissioners Seth Chafetz, Don Carney, Russell Dixon and Dianne McKeon voted to approve the MDOT plan in principle. Despite the fact that the plan went largely unchanged, Chafetz said Monday he would "never" approve a plan that sends traffic into a neighborhood.

If both sides reach an agreement, the work would likely get done in 2002.


5) Public Arts Board appointed

The Birmingham City Commission has appointed four residents and three non-residents to the newly established Public Arts Board.

The residents are:
Rebecca Hart (three- year term)
Mary Dennison (three-year term)
Mark Schwartz (two-year term)
Barb Heller (one- year term)

The non-residents are:
Garhart Nodell (two-year term)
Marilyn Wheaton (two-year term)
Janet Torno (one-year term)

Click on the following link to read or download the ordinance establishing the board, along with the applications and resumes of the appointees: http://www.bhambuzz.org/pdfs/artsboard.pdf.


6) Neighborhood Roundtables set

Mark your calendar for the 2002 Neighborhood Roundtable meetings, where members of the public are invited to participate in informal, freewheeling discussions of topics of interest to Birmingham residents. The City Clerk has announced dates and topics for the meetings as follows:

Feb. 21........Sewers
April 25........Traffic
July 25.........Historic Preservation
Oct. 24.........Parks and Recreation

All meetings will be held from 6:30-8:30 p.m. at the Department of Public Services Building, 851 S. Eton.

The Neighborhood Roundtable Committee was established by a March 15, 1999 resolution of the City Commission. It consists of the Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem and anyone who claims to represent a Birmingham homeowners association.


7) Editorial: The vision and intent of 2016

By Mark Nickita, AIA
February 1, 2002

If you want to understand the recent debate regarding the Downtown Birmingham 2016 Plan, and changes occurring on the City Commission and Planning Board, then it is important to understand how the various parties to the debate interpret the vision and intent of the plan.

One excellent and important example of opposing interpretations arose with approval of the Townsend Hotel addition. This may have been one of the first big 2016 issues, and if you're going to look back and find a point where the current divisiveness in city government began, you might look here.

For those who are keeping score, the Townsend addition is currently the only completed building in Birmingham that was approved according to zoning laws adopted as a direct result of the 2016 Plan -- the so-called "overlay" zoning ordinance. This ordinance allows developers to choose a new set of rules by which they can develop downtown property. The new rules were intended to give developers more leeway in return for developing in accordance with the 2016 Plan. They can always go by the old rules -- the so-called "underlay" zoning ordinance -- but it has been, until recently, the city's intent to have most development occur according to the new, "overlay" ordinance.

(The Willits and Hamilton buildings are not complete, and the Palladium was built as a result of the settlement of a lawsuit against the city.)

For the Townsend, the leeway granted by the overlay ordinance allowed a fifth floor (in the attic space above the eaves line), but only if the Planning Board found that the predominant use of the Townsend was residential in nature.

Unfortunately, neither the 2016 Plan nor the resulting zoning ordinance is specific about hotels and whether they should be considered residential, commercial or otherwise. So it was up to the Planning Board, working with the city Planning Department staff, to decide. Both agreed: The vision and intent of the 2016 Plan is to bring more people to downtown Birmingham to help with the success of the stores, restaurants and ultimately the taxpaying citizens by increasing property values and desirability. The Townsend would function similarly to a residential building by putting more people on the street.

In fact, the Townsend's 70 new rooms undoubtedly bring more activity to the streets of Birmingham than even a new residential building. For example, most hotel guests choose to eat outside their rooms, bringing new business to all the restaurants in town.

Also, studies show that people out of town on business or vacation have a tendency to buy stuff. Harmony House, Anthropologie, Three Dog Bakery and Tender surely benefit from these out-of-towners, as do the rest of the shops in town. Is not this the "intent" of the plan - to increase traffic downtown as much as possible and assist in its vibrancy? So what's the problem?

A faction in the city disagreed with the Planning Board and city staff. They maintain that it was not a residential use, and that the building is too tall. They strongly believe that the Townsend addition should not have been approved and thought that the Planning Board was out of line.

Since then, the overlay ordinance that resulted from the 2016 Plan has been continuously modified. The Planning Board has been altered significantly, and by most estimates would not support the Townsend addition if it were proposed today. The City Commission has reduced allowable building heights in the overlay ordinance, and reduced incentives to build according to the 2016 Plan. The intent is clear: to stop construction of the type of buildings that we have seen go up over the last few years. Today, under current zoning laws, neither the Townsend addition, nor the Willits, nor the Palladium could be built.

The Townsend addition and the streetscape it creates on Merrill Street look, feel and work precisely as envisioned by the 2016 Plan. Go there. Walk along the street. I seriously doubt you will hear many complaints about the structure that dominates the street.

Let's bring back the heart of the 2016 Plan. Let the plan work as intended. If implemented as envisioned, all of us, including the almost 4,000 residents and stakeholders who participated in its creation, will benefit.

(Nickita is an architect and former chairman of the Birmingham Planning Board. Click on the following link to read a September 2001 Birmingham Eccentric guest editorial by Nickita about downtown building heights: http://www.bhambuzz.org/pdfs/ecc_nickita_streets.pdf.)


8) Editorial: Build on merchants meeting

From the Birmingham Eccentric
January 31, 2002

Birmingham City Commissioners stuck their heads into the lions' den last week and agreed to conduct a no-holds-barred dialogue with city merchants.

The three-hour meeting was a brainstorming session designed to take input from people doing business in Birmingham.

Several topics were discussed, including parking problems, high rental rates, burdensome permit regulations, high utility costs and retail product selection. Generally, the discussion was brisk and frank. Many merchants touched on key issues, and everyone left with the feeling that the time had been productively spent.

It's no secret that there is a measure of animosity between city commissioners and the Birmingham business community. Last year's election was a polarized affair, with many candidates openly siding with residents who are impatient with what they see as the commercial community's dominant role in the city. Some of the business owners at last week's meeting broached this issue, and pointedly asked commissioners to explain their apparent hostility toward local business interests.

For the most part, commissioners were diplomatic. Mayor Dianne McKeon said she spends time downtown every day, including Sundays; Commissioner Don Carney said that, while he initiated a review of the Principal Shopping District, he wasn't gunning for anyone and only wanted to pose questions; Commissioner Dante Lanzetta said it was his obligation as an elected representative to be responsive to his constituents.

Whatever you choose to believe about the disposition of the current city commission, last week's summit could only be viewed as a positive development. Many business operators, even the ones who were outspoken in criticizing the elected board, agreed that an important step had been taken to bridge the understanding gap between city government and the business community.

The next step now is to build on the momentum and continue working toward a relationship of trust. City officials can best do this by following up on some of the merchants' suggestions and show good faith in responding to the concerns they heard last week. Specifically, the customer survey for which proprietors called should be implemented as soon as possible and ways should be found to speed the flow of cars leaving parking decks during peak times.

The good feeling generated by the merchants' meeting opens the door for a more constructive dialogue between commissioners and business operators. A residue of skepticism remains, but a continuing effort to respond to the merchants will help lead the city to a fresh outlook where both residential and business concerns can be given due weight.


9) Editorial: The righteous pretenders

By Clinton Baller
January 31, 2002

Birmingham Mayor Dianne McKeon and and the City Commission have received several letters from Tim Bannister of the Presidents' Council of Homeowner Associations. The city is also involved with the Presidents' Council and others in the Neighborhood Roundtable Committee.

Among other things, Mr. Bannister and the Presidents' Council are pressuring the city to adopt a code of ethics for city officials and staff. Implicit in Mr. Bannister's letters is the suggestion that he and his council are representative of Birmingham residents in general.

That's a stretch.

Mr. Bannister has repeatedly declined the opportunity to substantiate this suggestion, a failure that is ironic for someone who so strenuously and righteously speaks in favor of ethics and integrity. Adding further irony is the innuendo he uses to bolster his argument. "In the last few years," he writes, "there have been constant rumors circulating across our community regarding decisions and activities made by public officials -- both elected and appointed -- that appear to benefit special-interest groups."

Give me a break.

If Mr. Bannister wants to go down that road, he ought to have the courage, integrity and ethical fortitude to be specific. What rumors about what decisions and activities by which public officials to benefit what special-interest groups?

Mr. Bannister would have us believe that the Presidents' Council represents Birmingham neighborhood associations, and contains one delegate from each association. In an April 1999 letter to the Commission regarding the Palladium project, he even had the audacity to claim the Council represented 7,970 "members and voters who live in Birmingham."

The fact is, many neighborhoods are not organized, some are very loosely organized, some do not participate in the Presidents' Council, and others have more than one delegate on the Council.

If Mr. Bannister wants to claim he represents the residents of Birmingham, then he should do a few very simple things:

* Release a copy of the council's bylaws.
* Release a list of current council members/delegates.
* Annually release a breakdown of the associations represented, including:
-- The number of members in each association.
-- How each association defines a "member."
-- Whether each association has its own set of bylaws.
-- Whether each association elects its leaders.
-- How each association communicates regularly with its members.

In addition, Mr. Bannister should explain why several neighborhood associations appear to be over-represented on the council, and what he has done over the past several years to foster greater representation on the Council.

The fact is, the Presidents' Council is little more than a good idea. It does a great job of representing the dozen or so people who get together monthly to harp on city officials, downtown merchants and local developers. But it has a long way to go before it can legitimately claim to represent thousands of Birmingham residents.

Despite its good intentions, the Council needs to gets some integrity of its own. Until then, the City Commission should see the Council for what it is, and not what it pretends to be.

PS: We recently received an email from incoming Council President Paul Marion Reagan. Continuing his predecessor's inclination toward pretense, Reagan put this official sounding signature on his email:

Paul Reagan
President
President's Council of Homeowner Associations
City of Birmingham
A Walkable Community


10) McGraw resignation letter

Following is the resignation letter of Birmingham Planning Board member Thomas McGraw:

January 10, 2002

Birmingham City Commission
250 Martin Street
Birmingham, Michigan 48009

Dear Commission Members:

It is my opinion that the Planning Board for the City of Birmingham has ceased operating as a traditional Planning Board. It has now become simply a political tool for the City Commission to stir the public and in some cases scare the public into voting in a certain fashion. Very simply, it is my opinion that the City Commission uses the Planning Board solely to garner votes for the Commission members.

It appears that the City Commission no longer appoints members of the Planning Board based upon their credentials and knowledge of planning and zoning. Rather, it appears to appoint those who it feels will set aside planning and zoning concepts, zoning ordinances, adopted plans or common sense, and vote solely in an anti-business and anti-development fashion.

In my opinion, a current majority of the Planning Board disregards traditional principles and common sense, and directs their energy toward blocking projects in order to satisfy the City Commission. Recent decisions follow no plan, adopted or otherwise. They appear to be made in a haphazard and arbitrary fashion.

The results of this process have only begun to materialize. With the failure to implement the 2016 Plan, many fears that led to the adoption of that Plan will be realized. Decisions which are not based upon any adopted plan or other clear goals will, no doubt, lead to litigation. The City is currently defending a case where the City Commission allegedly acted in an inappropriate manner when placing a historic designation on a home located on Vinewood. The case was mediated for $500,000 and the City's insurer will no longer defend the City in the lawsuit. The City Commission has not advised the taxpayers whether or not the City still has insurance for this case, or whether the taxpayers will be required to pay a judgment in this matter.

I can no longer serve on a Planning Board or for a City Commission, a majority of which, in my opinion, pursues only political objectives, and does not pursue compliance with planning and zoning goals or plans. For these reasons, and for numerous additional reasons, the disclosure of which would require many pages and anger those who feel they have taken control of our City, I hereby resign from my office as Vice-Chairman of the Planning Board and from my position as a member of the Planning Board for the City of Birmingham.

Sincerely,

Thomas J. McGraw
cc. Tom Markus, City Manager
Mary Ferrario, Building Official


11) Second Booth Park workshop is set

January 30, 2002

Mark your calendar: The second public workshop on development of a plan for Booth Park will be from 6:30-9:30 p.m., Wednesday, Feb. 20, at the Birmingham Public Service Building, 851 S. Eton. Consultants Wade-Trim will present several design alternatives resulting from the first workshop in January. Click on the following link to see Wade-Trim's report on the first workshop: http://www.bhambuzz.org/pdfs/BoothWorkshop1.pdf. The public will be welcomed to help refine these alternatives. What would you like to see in Booth Park? This is your chance to have an impact on the development of one of Birmingham's finest resources.


12) City develops tree preservation ordinance

January 30, 2002

The Birmingham Planning Board is set to consider a landmark tree ordinance that would set standards for the removal, maintenance, and planting of trees. A subcommittee of the board has met five times since Nov. 1, and will present a draft ordinance to the Planning Board at its Feb. 13 meeting, said city Community Development Director Patricia McCullough. The ordinance will also be reviewed by the city's Parks & Recreation Board, McCullough said.

Click on the following link to read McCullough's Jan. 4 memo to the city manager about the ordinance: http://www.bhambuzz.org/pdfs/treememo.pdf


13) We're (still) hungry for hits

The Buzz is growing quickly, but we're still hungry for hits, subscribers and supporters. We're currently peaking at around 40 hits a day, with roughly 300 subscribers and more than 50 supporters. But those numbers are peanuts when you consider that Birmingham has nearly 10,000 households. Please take a moment now to spread the word. Forward our web address to everyone in your email address book. Tell them it's good. Ask them to subscribe. Tell them it's free.
Help us meet our first goals of 1,000 subscribers, 100 supporters, and 100 hits per day!


14) Talk is (still) cheap

So why not participate in the Buzz discussion group? The ice has been broken! Just click on the following link -- http://www.bhambuzz.org/public.html -- or on the Discuss link on the left side of our home page. Talk about anything; have some fun!


15) To be removed, please send a request to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}