-----------------------------------------------------------
THE BIRMINGHAM BUZZ
-- "It's the 2016 Plan, stupid."
-------------------------------------------------------------

Buzz # 21 -- May 30, 2002

Promoting intelligence and reason in city government. Our mission: To inform and involve all Birmingham citizens.

VISIT OUR WEBSITE at http://www.bhambuzz.org for:
-- Up-to-date news items
-- Resources such as the 2016 Plan and the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance
-- A calendar of important city events
-- A lively and intelligent discussion group

We want to hear from you! Please send questions, suggestions and feedback to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}
In this edition:

1) MDOT offers $$ for road, but will city take it?
2) Editorial: Kicking back, considering the issues
3) Letter to the Buzz: City Manager satisfied with handling of soap box derby application
4) Probe finds no wrongdoing in Willits project
5) Shain Park expansion plan resurfaces
6) Editorial: Apology and do-over is warranted for organizers of proposed soap box derby
7) Traffic consultant suggests innovative parking for improvement to N. Old Woodward
8) Soap Box Derby asks to close Old Woodward, meets 'adversarial attitude,' so drops request
9) Letter to Eccentric: Misconception on tree law
10) Editorial: Timber! If a tree law falls with no official support, does it make a sound?
11) To be removed, send a request to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}

1) MDOT offers $$ for road, but will city take it?

May 30, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

By Larry Ruehlen

A dangerous intersection in town will remain that way unless the Birmingham City Commission accepts a pile of free money from the state at an 8 p.m. June 10, meeting.

State officials offered the city as much as $280,000 for the job, but the Birmingham City Commission rejected the cash because it didn't like the state's plan for fixing the problem.

At the time, Bob Lariviere, a traffic engineer with the Michigan Department of Transportation, said the rejection was rare.

"I didn't feel like they (commissioners) liked me much," said Lariviere, in a January interview. "Normally, communities want this type of project to go forward as fast as possible to keep their own people safe."

The intersection in question is the merging of South Old Woodward and Woodward Avenue, south of Maple. It is particularly dangerous because vehicles traveling 25 mph on South Old Woodward must merge with vehicles on Woodward Avenue near Lincoln that are traveling twice that speed. In 1999, there were 18 accidents at the intersection and most of them were caused by one motorist sideswiping another.

Under MDOT's plan, South Old Woodward would no longer merge with Woodward at Lincoln. Instead, southbound traffic on Old Woodward would enter Woodward north of Landon Street.

The plan also diverts traffic from several businesses and into the adjacent neighborhood - something merchants, residents and the commission objected to.

City commissioners said MDOT officials hadn't seriously considered the traffic plan proposed by the Downtown Birmingham 2016 Plan, which called for a European "roundabout" and public sculpture that would create an "unforgettable entrance to Birmingham."

The commission rejected MDOT's offer, with commissioner Seth Chafetz saying he would never approve a plan that diverted traffic into the neighborhood.

Commissioner Dante Lanzetta Jr. asked MDOT for a commitment to put in a traffic circle within five years. MDOT has since had a chance to look more closely at the 2016 Plan and is expected to come back to the commission with a recommendation on June 10. Lariviere could not be reached for comment on whether MDOT planned to offer a roundabout.

But on Monday, Birmingham City Manager Tom Markus said that isn't likely.

"They'll probably come back and say they'll look at a roundabout when the serviceable life of the suggested improvement concludes," said Markus.

If the city rejects MDOT's offer again, the project could fall to the bottom of a long priority list.


2) Editorial: Kicking back, considering the issues

May 30, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

After a relaxing Memorial Day weekend and as we head toward summer, it's a good time to take an overview look at some of the hot issues in Birmingham.

Comcast: After receiving piles of complaints against the cable service provider and a $28,500 fine slapped on it by the Birmingham Area Cable Board (which the company refuses to pay) because of numerous complaints over its often lousy service, the media giant responded by magnanimously awarding disgruntled subscribers with two free movies.

Total value: About $10.

What a resplendent act of conciliation. We can only hope that the devastating losses this will no doubt produce to Comcast's bottom line will ensure that in the future it will be a responsible corporate citizen in tune with its customers.

Ethics: The Birmingham City Commission is toying with an ethics ordinance that would apply to all city employees and members of citizen boards and committees.

That's not an irregular thing to do, and indeed, has some merit. But you don't have to read between the lines to see that there are some questionable provisions in this proposed ordinance. We note the clause that requires city employees to be "loyal to the political objectives" of the elected officials.

Sounds like if you don't agree with the commission members you better keep your mouth shut. Aside from violating the right of free speech, this appears to be a blatant way of stifling not only criticism but also any expression of an alternative view.

If we're going to have an ethics ordinance, let's at least have one that is fair and honest and -­ dare we say it? -- ethical.

Derby: Speaking of the city commission, it might have been a little less adversarial with the planners of the Soap Box Derby, who were asked to go to great lengths to prove merchants wanted the race in our town.

The commission was right in its refusal. The derby would have closed a section of Old South Woodward for a weekend just a week before the Dream Cruise in August. That wouldn't have been fair to the merchants to get stung two weekends in a row. (Remember, not every business rakes in money from the Dream Cruise.) But the commission might have used a little more tact in ushering out the derby planners.

Finally: Whatever shenanigans go on in city hall, it's nice to note that the city still knows how to have a good time. Warm weather activities already have begun and there's plenty more on the horizon.

Let's hope cool heads prevail in city hall and we have sizzling summer.


3) Letter to the Buzz: City Manager satisfied with handling of soap box derby application

May 29, 2002

To: Clinton Baller
From: Tom Markus

As promised, I have completed a review of the process that took place with regard to the DADA application to hold a Soap Box Derby on N. Old Woodward on August 10th and 11th. Attached you will find a copy of the Commission approved policies and procedures for special events, and the agenda materials provided to the City Commission with regard to this application.

-- Approximately the first of April, a DADA events organizer approached Deputy Police Chief Don Studt. Mr. Studt referred them to City Clerk Nancy Weiss and PSD Director John Heiney. The Clerk's Office accepts and administers applications. As a practical matter, Mr. Heiney is often in the best position to provide informal advice and counsel to special events applicants seeking downtown venues.

-- During the month of April, several conversations and meetings took place between the DADA and Mr. Heiney, and also between the DADA and Ms. Weiss. Due to the road closure aspect, Deputy Chief Studt was also in this "loop." The DADA was advised that:

1. Due to the request to close N. Old Woodward for 2 days, there would be opposition to the event by merchants - merchants with legitimate concerns for loss of business.

2. A weekend in early September - rather than the August 10/11 dates just prior to Dream Cruise week - might be easier for merchants whose business would already be adversely impacted by the cruise for much of the following week.

3. Rather than merely notify the merchants as required under item #9 of the policies and procedures, they could help themselves by actively seeking out the affected merchants well in advance of City Commission consideration of the application. (The Clerk's Office also provided mailing labels to the DADA.)

-- DADA Organizers did reach out to the merchants during early May while the event application was reviewed by City departments. They held their own meeting and invited all of the merchants. Deputy Chief Studt also attended to answer any road closure questions. They obviously chose not to change their planned dates.

Given all of the above, I think that the DADA would not say that staff gave them the impression that City Commission approval was a "slam dunk."

As one City Commissioner aptly put it, the Commission spent nearly two hours trying to balance the legitimate concerns of constituents against the desire to accommodate the special events request. In the end, these conflicting interests could not be reconciled. The Commission then did what it does -- it decides. Such Commission decisions are by their very nature not universally popular. The fact that this is the way the public process works does not mean that the DADA and city staff did not do their job. On the contrary, I am satisfied with the job that was done by staff -- with one exception. It has always been the Manager's policy that first time special events requests are placed under new business on the Commission's agenda. Only repeat events, previously approved, are placed under consent. This was missed in our review of the agenda prior to publishing it. The error was obviously corrected at the Commission meeting when it was pulled from consent, which the agenda policy provides for. I also, in hindsight, wished we had advised DADA of the possible future road improvement to N. Old Woodward. This may have altered their pursuit of this venue because of the altered road section, or, at a minimum due to the construction interference of this improvement, in future years.

cc. City Commission, Department heads


4) Probe finds no wrongdoing in Willits project

May 26, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

By Larry Ruehlen

No shocking revelations or any signs of corruption were exposed by a two-month investigation into the approval process for the Willits condominium project.
The results of the probe were presented to the Birmingham Planning Board on Wednesday.

"I said from the beginning that this was a witch hunt," said Paul Robertson, of Robertson Bros., the developers of the Willits. "And I don't like what they tried to do - especially the innuendo - everything we did was above board, and Birmingham could have saved a lot of money by listening to us in the first place."

Robertson was reacting to the findings of a study conducted by the Illinois-based architectural firm of Raths, Raths & Johnson that concluded the building was built to state and city standards despite some 20 design changes that weren't approved by the Birmingham Planning Board. Earlier this year, City Attorney Tim Currier conducted a legal inquiry as well, and the city spent a combined $30,000 to clear the cloud of controversy surrounding the Willits.

When Currier presented his findings in March he said:

"Did anyone get paid off? I have no evidence of that. If someone has evidence to that effect they can bring it to my office, and I'd be glad to look at it."

On Wednesday, Robert Kudder, the engineering expert hired by the city, said design changes to the building were appropriate.

"I'm not here to claim that there weren't changes because there have been," said Kudder. "But the changes that were made were well within the scope of the construction and not only were they minor and routine, but they were a necessary part of the process."

Kudder was hired to compare the set of blue prints the planning board approved with the construction blueprints that were approved by the city's community development department. Members of the planning board questioned the performance of city planning and building officials because the board is supposed to be given a list of administrative approvals and that didn't happen in this case.

Kudder basically said that the Willits design team should be commended for its expertise because buildings of similar size can have as many as 600 design changes.

Victor Saroki, the project architect, said all along that numerous design decisions are made after final site plans are approved by the board. Before the investigation was ordered by Birmingham City Manager Tom Markus, Saroki said that such changes are common and necessary. He now questions whether members of the planning board understand that basic premise.

"We were always confident what we were doing was appropriate for a building of this magnitude," he said. "You would think the board would understand the process, but from the questions they keep asking, you would think perhaps they don't."

Much of the controversy revolved around administrative approvals granted by a former Birmingham city planner who left town to take another job. Currier's investigation centered on the approval of a 9-foot-8-inch screening wall atop the building. Currier found that the approval of the wall should have come before the board, but didn't. He said the city couldn't find a paper trial for the approval, and Saroki eventually agreed to lower the wall.

Planning board members found other discrepancies in the two sets of blue prints but Currier and Kudder determined they were legal and architecturally sound. Members of the board repeatedly asked if certain design changes were ordinance violations but Kudder and Currier said they couldn't find violations.

Planning board member Chuck Tholen refused comment and other board members could not be reached.


5) Shain Park expansion plan resurfaces

May 26, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

By Michelle Jarboe and Larry Ruehlen

The last plan to expand Birmingham's Shain Park cost taxpayers $260,000 and produced nothing. Now city officials are considering looking at a new plan.

"We are not headed in a specific direction," said Birmingham City Manager Tom Markus. "We want to revisit everything that has been done up to this point and decide where to go next."

Birmingham City Commissioners will begin with a stroll in the park at 7:30 p.m. Wednesday then return to city hall to discuss just what can be done to expand the park. Visions of grandeur and a $20 million price tag killed the first design in 2000.

Starting in 1997, the city spent three years studying the issue but eventually severed all ties with the design team and gave up efforts to implement the plan. Robert Gibbs, a local urban planner, has offered a new park pl
n that the commission is expected to consider as well.

In the Downtown Birmingham 2016 Plan for the city, it was recommended that Shain Park be extended into parking lot No. 7, across from The Community House, by removing the existing surface parking. When the interim report for the Civic Center Improvement Project was published in September, 1998, this issue was debated, and the 2016 Plan was favored but no action was taken.

The interim report proposed changes to Shain Park, beginning with an expansion of the park across the street and into neighboring lot No. 7. Other landscaping plans included:

* Incorporation of a new aesthetic through integration of both land and water gardens.

* Creation of a main entry or various entries, most likely at the four corners of the park.

* Extension of the play area, which would then be either moved or contained.

* Potential relocation of the climbing tree.

* A new landscape and base for the Marshall Fredericks "Freedom of the Human Spirit" sculpture.

* Addition of utilities, including public restroom facilities compatible with the aesthetics of Birmingham and visually-conscious areas to host temporary portable restrooms, to allow for special events and crowds.

* Building of an aesthetic and multi-purpose performance stage.

* Creation of transitions or buffers between the park and surrounding neighborhood areas.

Most controversial was the possibility of extending the park into lot No. 7. The loss of convenient parking raised the ire of Birmingham residents and patrons of The Community House.

The shelved interim report favored removing parking lot No. 7, but Markus said he is prepared to offer a new solution to the parking problem Wednesday.

"My answer would be to put it (the parking lot) under ground," said Markus.


6) Editorial: Apology and do-over is warranted for organizers of proposed soap box derby

May 23, 2002

One doesn't often hear apologies from city government, but there's a big one due to the City Commission, event organizers, downtown merchants and, most of all, the people of Birmingham over the denial of a permit last Monday for a proposed soap box derby on N. Old Woodward Ave.

The Detroit Auto Dealers Association is sponsoring the derby, on which they've been working for the past four months. They recently approached the Principal Shopping District and the City Clerk for guidelines on how to get a special event permit that would allow them near-exclusive use of N. Old Woodward for two days during the summer.

Apparently, there was a breakdown in communication. The event organizers wanted to know how to obtain the permit, and city officials apparently told them how to apply for one.

Anyone familiar with Birmingham city government knows there's a big difference between making an application for something and actually getting it -- especially when the interests of residents and merchants are involved.

Those interests collided with the derby Monday night before the City Commission, which was blindsided by a request that should have been thoroughly researched and negotiated by city staff, but instead was presented as a routine request for a rubber stamp.

Derby organizers thought they were in for a slam dunk -- until one merchant and one resident complained. That was enough to spark a nearly two-hour debate on the merits of the event, its timing and its effects on businesses and residents.

The City Commission, so often criticized for micro-managing city government, didn't seem to have a choice in this case, since no one had managed the application before it reached the commission's agenda.

With such a rough game plan, it came down to whether or not commissioners would trust city staff and organizers to pick up the ball and make a reasonable attempt to satisfy all interests.

In the end, Commissioners Seth Chafetz, Dante Lanzetta and Gordon Thorsby were willing to go out on a limb. Mayor Dianne McKeon, Don Carney, Russell Dixon and Rackeline Hoff were not.

Unfortunately, organizers told the Birmingham Eccentric the next day that they'd go elsewhere, in part because of the "adversarial attitude" they encountered.
We hope it's not too late, and that a do-over is possible.

City Manager Tom Markus should extend an apology to the organizers. Then they should get together, consider all the issues and present an acceptable plan to the commission -- something that should have been done in the first place.


7) Traffic consultant suggests innovative parking for improvement to N. Old Woodward

May 23, 2002

A nationally recognized traffic consultant who is helping Birmingham implement the 2016 Plan has suggested an innovative parking arrangement for improvements to N. Old Woodward between Oakland and Oak.

The 2016 Plan calls for a landscaped median on the street, and the city recently submitted a preliminary design to the consultant, Walter Kulash, who had participated in formulating the 2016 Plan.

Kulash endorsed the city's design, and suggested it test an alternative parking arrangement. "In just the last year or so, there has been significant interest in, and applications of, diagonal back-in parking as an alternative to the diagonal pull-in parking shown in the conceptual layout," Kulash wrote. "The City of Seattle has converted large numbers (possibly all) of its many diagonal parking spaces to the back-in mode of operation."

"In the diagonal back-in mode of parking operation, the dimensions and angle of the parking space are identical to pull-in parking... but with the orientation of the angle reversed. Drivers enter a space by backing in, and exit by pulling forward. Advantages of back-in parking over pull-in parking are numerous: visibility (of moving traffic) for the driver leaving the space is vastly better; open vehicle doors direct passengers toward the sidewalk, not toward the street; the cargo loading area of all vehicles is against the curb, not against the moving lane of traffic. The need to stop in a moving lane of traffic and back into a space might be seen as a drawback of back-in parking. However, this maneuver causes no more disruption than a driver backing out from a pull-in space, and is far safer and more comfortable."

"We recommend that the city further pursue the reconfiguration of the diagonal parking from its present design as pull-in parking to the alternate design of back-in diagonal parking. The experience with this parking, although very recent, has already proven it to be highly advantageous. The amount of redesign effort for the conceptual layout is small, and there should be no loss of parking space. At least one Detroit area government (Allen Park) is seriously considering the use of diagonal back-in parking..."

The city will present the redesign and invite Kulash to explain his findings in a public forum at a time and place to be announced.


8) Soap Box Derby asks to close Old Woodward, meets 'adversarial attitude,' so drops request

May 23, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

By Larry Ruehlen

An adversarial attitude left Detroit Metro Soap Box Derby officials looking past Birmingham to find another host city Monday.

"That bit about us not doing our homework didn't bode real well for us coming to Birmingham," said Ken Schewe, spokesman for the Detroit Auto Dealers Association, referring to a comment made by a city commissioner.

"Apparently this isn't the type of activity that Birmingham merchants wanted to participate in and that's fine. We'll find another city."

Schewe and a contingent of DADA and derby officials spent two hours Monday trying to convince the Birmingham City Commission to close down N. Old Woodward the weekend of Aug. 10 to hold a race on the hill in the art gallery section of town.

Soap Box Derby is a decades-old race for children who build their own cars and sit in them as they glide down a hill. A hill is needed because the cars run on gravity, not motors.

To stage the event, the road would have to be closed down from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on Saturday and from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Sunday, said Schewe. But race officials would work to offer promotional opportunities to merchants to make for the possibility of lost revenue.

"Our intention isn't to come in and take over the city or hurt the merchants in any way," said Schewe. "Our goal is to turn the merchants' concerns into a positive."
Last year the event was held near Flint and 50 participants and their families showed up, said Joe Flynn, director of the event Metro-Detroit Soap Box Derby, but bringing the race to Birmingham would double participation and draw a bigger crowd.

"This is an old-fashioned event that is coming back to prominence across the country," said Flynn, "And we believe what is happening on a national level can also happen here."

Race officials said the event would cast Birmingham in a good light because local celebrities would participate in a fun race and a television and radio station had promised to promote it as wholesome family activity.

But not all merchants and residents were pleased with the prospect of shutting down N. Old Woodward for large crowds the weekend before the Woodward Dream Cruise.
"The bottom line is they would be closing down our businesses," said Lori Karbal, owner of a store of the same name at 554 N. Old Woodward. "Nobody wants it, I talked to my (merchant) neighbors and they don't want it... crowds deter people from shopping. People mean well, but events don't help us."

Karbal said her store would lose thousands of dollars if she was forced to close down for the soap box race.

Birmingham resident Bud Bernstein said he wanted no part of the large crowd the event would likely draw.

"The timing couldn't be worse," he said. "It's the weekend before the Dream Cruise... think for once of the residents who live in the area."

Members of the city commission asked what race officials were prepared to do to make up for lost revenue for area businesses. City Commissioner Dante Lanzetta Jr. even raised the possibility that the event could directly compensate merchants like Karbal.

Members of the commission said they wanted to know how many merchants supported the race coming to the city. Race officials said they sent out information to area businesses and had a meeting to address their concerns, but couldn't tell exactly how many favored the proposal.

When only one merchant showed up Monday to support the race, the majority of the commission said race organizers should go back and poll all the merchants on N. Old Woodward and come up with a business plan for the race. City Commissioner Seth Chafetz made a motion to let the race go on but only commissioners Lanzetta and Gordon Thorsby voted in support while Don Carney, Dianne McKeon, Russell Dixon and Rackeline Hoff voted no.

One race official said Monday that he was dismayed at the adversarial attitude the race was getting from the city when other suburbs like Troy, Southfield and Rochester would be glad to play host to soap boxers throughout the Midwest.

The commission offered to reconsider the matter next week but race officials had ruled that out by Tuesday.

"We specifically asked if we had to talk to every merchant and the city said we didn't have to," said Schewe. "We were concerned about the boulevard project, but it was the adversarial attitude that meant more to us."

The city is planning a major construction project that will install a pedestrian island in the middle of the road next summer. That fact may have made it difficult to stage the race in the same location next year.


9) Letter to Eccentric: Misconception on tree law

May 16, 2002

I am quite surprised that the Eccentric has not published a summary of the proposed tree ordinance, or made its readers aware that they can download the entire document from the city's Web site (http://www.ci.birmingham.mi.us/index). Most of the published opinions came from people who had not even read the ordinance. Neighbors who have spoken to me have a lot of misconceptions, and a lot of questions, such as:

Why now? Citizens whose own trees were killed by careless construction practices on adjoining land asked what legal protection they had. The answer was: None. The tree ordinance is an effort to protect homeowners' trees from damage by others. Once destroyed, after all, they cannot be replaced for any amount of money, and they are a valuable resource, both in terms of property value and quality of life.

How does this affect the average homeowner? For ordinary tree care and pruning, it doesn't have any effect. Eight exempt species may be removed without permits or replacement, as may trees under 6 inches in trunk diameter or hazardous trees. Replacement is required for most healthy trees 6 inches or greater in diameter. A homeowner may remove two protected trees per year without replacing them - that means taking down two healthy 22-inch maples every year is OK.

What about the permits? Permits are required when removal, major alteration or construction are proposed. You can remove trees in order to build, but must replace them if they are large and healthy. Most people who want to remove a large tree, hire a company to do it. In our densely built area, it is foolhardy to do it yourself. The permit (no fees are likely) would be pulled by the company, and as long as they have a city-approved arborist on staff to determine tree condition, no city bureaucracy need be involved.

Many of the most infuriating provisions are in the existing ordinance! "No electric wires," city-enforced pruning or removal of hazardous trees, and "no parking on lawn extensions" have been law for years.

This is the time to review the whole issue, and produce a tree protection law which seems reasonable to most of Birmingham's residents. Citizens should learn about the proposed ordinance, and write to the city commission about what specific changes they want.

And the Eccentric could help by being objective rather than alarmist.

Jean M. Holland
Birmingham
(Jean Holland is a member of the Birmingham Planning Board)


10) Editorial: Timber! If a tree law falls with no official support, does it make a sound?

From our Discussion Board

Posted by I.O., May 17 2002,22:56

Tree ordinance wilts! Commish Chafetz, facing reelection in '03, runs up white flag in face of near-universal public hatred of proposed law. Signs of blight appeared earlier:

Big Dee Lanzetta, seeking way out of suicidal corner, hands abusive public tirade to his puppet plan board, claiming "I know nothing;" nobody fooled by crude and desperate ploy to distance by backstabbing own troops.

With Dixon, Hoff, McKeon already unmoved by ordinance, only Carney and Thorsby left to kiss the tar baby. Will they follow Prezidentz Council diktat, or join the smart money in hurried rush to bail?

Left holding the bag: betrayed Lanzetta loyalists on plan board and in neighborhoods who were defending party line right up to time leadership bugged out.

Losers: Prez Council, S. Chafetz, D'te Lanz, "Heinrich" Kulak, any homeowner assn officer who supported ordinance, "The Commission" in general, "Neighborhood Movement" in general, B'ham city reputation.

Winners: the Buzz, the ECCENTRIC, Teddy Boy Fuller, anyone who runs against anyone who supported, city staff who brewed up this poison pill, Dixonhoffmckeon.

COMING UP NEXT: "The Ethics Ordinance!" Paulie Reagan versus J. Madison & T. Jefferson. Don't miss it!

11) To be removed, 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


------------------------------------------------------------
THE BIRMINGHAM BUZZ
-- "It's the 2016 Plan, stupid."
-------------------------------------------------------------

Buzz # 20 -- May 17, 2002

Promoting intelligence and reason in city government. Our mission: To inform and involve all Birmingham citizens.

VISIT OUR WEBSITE at http://www.bhambuzz.org for:
-- Up-to-date news items
-- Resources such as the 2016 Plan and the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance
-- A calendar of important city events
-- A lively and intelligent discussion group

We want to hear from you! Please send questions, suggestions and feedback to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}

In this edition:
1) Chafetz opposes regulation of private trees
2) Buzz Editor calls for Lanzetta's censure
3) Ain't Email Great Dept.: Lanzetta shows he's not above name-calling and innuendo
4) City investigation finds no signs of corruption
5) Tree law is buzz of town as hearing is set
6) Editorial: Read, then speak out on tree law
7) Editorial: Fun, and intelligent life, is on streets
8) Ain't Email Great Dept: Neighbors avoid confrontation at Planning Board hearing
9) Public hearing is set on tree ordinance
10) Racky's quick wit adds levity to Commission
11) Commission misses chance to pluck thorn
12) To be removed, send a request to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}

1) Chafetz opposes regulation of private trees

May 17, 2002

Birmingham City Commissioner Seth Chafetz says he will oppose provisions of the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance that place restrictions on private property owners.

In a letter sent Wednesday to Nick Leo, of the South Poppleton Park Homeowners Association, Chafetz said "I do not wish to impose any restrictions on private property owners and will work to bring out the few good ideas that do exist... I will ask that the rest of the ordinance be tabled."

"I believe that the residents do want trees and have demonstrated their commitment to maintaining trees!" Chafetz wrote. "The city needs to step up to the plate at this point and match the tenacity the residents continue to show. The process that has taken place has been very interesting. The city is focused on trees, and I think that is a very wonderful and healthy topic to be discussing in our town."

Chafetz also said, "The tree ordinance has provoked a lot of editorial comment -- both in the papers and around town. The document is huge and combersome."

Chafetz was responding to a letter from Leo to city officials about the ordinance. "My neighborhood association is against this ordinance as written, and we are very curious as to why we are continually told that we are reading it wrong when the language is very clear," Leo said.


2) Buzz Editor calls for Lanzetta's censure

April 15, 2002

At least one Birmingham resident has said "enough is enough" when it comes to longtime City Commissioner Dante Lanzetta, and he is urging city residents to join the call for Lanzetta's censure by the City Commission.

Clinton Baller -- a longtime resident of the city, business owner and editor of the Birmingham Buzz website and email newsletter -- is calling on the commission to censure its senior member after Lanzetta called Baller a "guttersnipe" and a "liar."

"The citizens of Birmingham expect and deserve public officials who act with dignity and respect. Lanzetta does not, and his peers should publicly censure him," Baller said in an open letter to the commission submitted for the commission's agenda Monday night. "...You cannot be silent in the face of such repugnant behavior. If you are, then you condone it."

You can read the letter at http://www.bhambuzz.org/pdfs/Lanzetta.pdf

The brouhaha began when the Buzz published an editorial last week (see http://www.bhambuzz.org) noting Lanzetta's history of run-ins with fellow commissioners and members of the public and city staff. The editorial called Lanzetta "obnoxious, rude, condescending, snickering, obfuscating, pedantic, sophomoric, arrogant, pompous, snide, sarcastic."

After Monday night's commission meeting, at which a public hearing was set on the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance, Baller sent a message to several residents and city officials who were either involved in drafting the ordinance, or who had commented on the ordinance Monday night. It asked for help in debunking the myths surrounding the proposed ordinance. Lanzetta was included, and responded within hours.

The exchange is published below. Lanzetta didn't respond to the plea for help, and instead attacked Baller with name-calling and innuendo.

Baller called Lanzetta's response "outrageous."

"The amazing thing is, Lanzetta has behaved this way for years. He is truly a loose cannon. His frequent pontifications are one thing, but when he resorts to blatant name-calling and innuendo, it's time to say 'enough is enough.' This community deserves better, and all of us, most of all Lanzetta's colleagues on the commission, who so often themselves are the targets of his abuse, need to stand up to him," Baller said.

Former Commissioner Mike Wooley, whose run-ins with Lanzetta were legendary during Wooley's eight years on the commission, said, "I went head-to-head with this guy because somebody had to step up and try to counter his tactics... The last two years were pure hell, because I was the only one willing to stand up to him. I knew that eventually it could cost me an election, because people in general don't respond well to that kind of behavior, particularly in a public forum. But if I didn't do it, nobody would."

"I'll go to my grave trying to figure out" why residents have put up with Lanzetta for so long, Wooley said, adding that Lanzetta has "reached the saturation point" of citizens' willingness to accept his behavior. "He needs to take a back seat for a while. He's obviously not up for reelection. He's certainly not positioning himself for it."

Wooley said he would join in calling for Lanzetta's censure.

Longtime Birmingham activist Dorothy Conrad, a Lanzetta supporter, said "I've watched him for many years. It's part of his personality."

She told the Buzz: "I think you have to look at your record and the comments you have made about him. Why would you expect a nicer answer."

Wooley said public figures should be held to a higher standard. "I had people stand in front of me [at meetings] and call me" names. "I had to just sit there and smile."

Baller drew a distinction between a citizen's fair and reasoned criticism of a public official -- even if harsh -- and a public official's use of name-calling and innuendo. "Lanzetta acts like the ballplayer who lashes out at the fan who calls him a 'bum.' ... Lanzetta seems to have adopted as a role model the infamous and despicable Roy Cohn, counsel to Senator Joseph McCarthy," Baller said in his open letter.

You can urge commission members to censure Lanzetta by contacting them individually or by sending an an email to all of them.

Visit http://www.bhambuzz.org/Write_to_city.htm for a list of individual email addresses and phone numbers.


3) Ain't Email Great Dept.: Lanzetta shows he's not above name-calling and innuendo

Subject : Debunking Tree Ordinance Myths
Date : Tue, 14 May 2002 16:35:00
From :
To :Dante Lanzetta

Folks,

At least one commissioner (Lanzetta) and one member of the public (Dorothy Conrad) expressed opinions Monday night about "misinformation" that has been published about the proposed Tree Preservation ordinance.

Unfortunately, they did not identify the misinformation.

The Birmingham Buzz would like to set the record straight.

We don't doubt that much misinformation has spread by word of mouth. And we don't dispute that news reports have been, in some cases, ambiguous or misleading or downright wrong.

I have attached most of the published material on the issue (presented in reverse chronological order), and I would like to ask your help in identifying the misinformation and correcting it.

I think this is a worthwhile and relatively simple project. While we all may not agree on the ordinance, I think we can all contribute meaningfully to an objective reading of the ordinance and the news reports, and an effort to set the record straight.

Clearly, time is of the essence, and so your timely cooperation is essential.

Thanks in advance for your comments.

Clint Baller
Buzz Editor


Subject : Debunking Tree Ordinance Myths
Date : Tue, 14 May 2002 17:59:00
From : Dante Lanzetta
To :

Once again, you are wrong. I have given you the benefit of the doubt before -- allowing that you are no more than ignorant, or perhaps not very bright. It has becoming obvious that, over and above being a guttersnipe, you are a practiced and intentional liar.

When you show up running for office (assuming your masters give you leave) against the people of Birmingham, I will recall exactly when you started campaigning. That will be the time to lay bare your record of vicious personal attack and each and every lie.

I'd say, "Shame on you," but I don't think you have the requisite conscience -- but your mother should be ashamed.

D


4) City investigation finds no signs of corruption

May 16, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

By Larry Ruehlen

Corruption is not running rampant at city hall, but investigations can and do take place when specific concerns are raised, said Tom Markus, Birmingham city manager.

"If it would have been true, it would have raised strong concerns," said Markus. "The city takes these matters very seriously, but I would prefer if people came directly to me."

Markus was talking about the latest in a long series of internal investigations launched into alleged corruption at city hall. Bob Gibbs, an urban planner and member of the city's Historic District Design Review Commission, raised the possibility of wrongdoing at a Feb. 20 meeting.

During an open discussion portion of the meeting, Gibbs said a client of his that planned to add on to a historic building was told by a city employee that "those buildings tend to fall down a lot during construction, and don't worry if it falls down."

The client, who Gibbs refused to identify at the meeting, interpreted the conversation to mean that the city employee was encouraging him to have the building "accidentally" cave in during construction. Some years ago, a historic building did cave in during an addition project and the city made the contractor rebuild it.

According to a transcript of the Feb. 20 meeting, Bill Dow, a Birmingham resident and historic preservationist, also urged an investigation to make sure city staff wasn't playing a role in the destruction of historic buildings.

"This is not the first story I've heard of this kind of thing happening," said Dow. "It is very, very disturbing and it has disturbed a lot of people in this community on, quite frankly, how some of this building department stuff has been going on with some of the developers."

As a result of the meeting, Markus did launch an internal investigation that revealed the following:

* The conversation took place 12 years ago between Gibbs' client and a city building department staff member.
* The conversation did not pertain to a historic building.
* The employee no longer works for the city.

Gibbs said he raised the issue during public discussion because it is always best to "shed light on the issues."

As for the result of the investigation, Gibbs said he wasn't aware the conversation had taken place long ago or that it didn't involve a historic building.

"I was very glad the city followed through," said Gibbs. "The city did exactly the right thing."

Markus said several complaints have come lately and all make city staff uneasy and cost time and money to investigate.

"I don't want to discourage people from coming forward but it should be done the right way," said Markus. "If people come to me, I will handle it. They should tell me whatever accurate information they have. It's the misinformation that puts people on edge."

Several years ago, a member of the building department was fired for misconduct after a similar investigation.

Markus said many more internal investigations have been ordered since then but none have uncovered illegal activity.

Dow also complimented the city for looking into the situation.

"I'm very pleased that the city looked into this and that the allegations proved to be false," said Dow.


5) Tree law is buzz of town as hearing is set

May 16, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

By Larry Ruehlen

After months of debate over whether the city should have the power to regulate trees on private property, residents will have a say at an 8 p.m., June 10 public hearing in the city commission chambers at 151 Martin St.

The Birmingham City Commission scheduled the hearing on a 4-3 vote Monday. Some commission members said they wanted to talk about the measure more before it went to the public but others said eight months of study and talk by city officials was enough.

Birmingham City Commissioner Dante Lanzetta Jr. said last week that he was getting irate telephone calls from residents. On Monday, the effect of those calls was evident.

"I didn't write this thing so I'm not ready to stand behind it," said Lanzetta.

Several Birmingham residents spoke in favor of the ordinance Monday and said there has been misinformation about it in the press. Gary Kulak, chairman of the planning board and the primary author of the ordinance, attempted to set the record straight.

"This ordinance doesn't prohibit anyone from taking down a tree," said Kulak. "I doesn't prevent you from cutting down a tree on private property."

But the ordinance requires a permit to remove a "landmark tree" and the city commission may deny the permit, thus prohibiting someone from cutting down a tree on private property. Under the ordinance, the only recourse a resident would have if denied would be to file a lawsuit against the city.

George Dilgard, a supporter of the proposed ordinance, said he wants to be sure people realize that normal pruning of a tree on private property does not require a permit. But Mike Barger, owner of Troy-based Mike's Tree Surgeons, the company working with the city on the ordinance, said residents who prune trees in ways that result in a major alteration could be punished.

"We don't want people whacking the side off of a tree," he said. "We are just trying to be practical about it."

At 19 pages long, the proposed tree preservation measure would give the city the power to control most trees in the city with a permit and inspection process for tree removal and pruning on public and private land.

Under the proposed language, protected trees would include those that are greater than six inches in diameter, with the exception of nine undesirable species, including silver maple and willow, that may be chopped down without a permit. Special protections for 46 "landmark" species including ash, elm and birch are also included, and the proposed ordinance goes to great lengths to preserve them.

Anyone who removes a protected or landmark tree would have to pay the replacement costs for the tree. A city expert estimated that one in three residential lots contains at least one landmark tree.

Barger said establishing the replacement cost of a landmark tree is difficult because it depends on the tree's species, condition, size and location and all factors must be assessed by a professional. He said his company charges $75 per hour to assess trees. Residents would also have to pay those costs.

A 24-inch maple in excellent condition would have to be replaced with many smaller trees to equal the diameter of the tree removed, said Barger, and current prices for a 2-inch maple are in the $300 range so replacing the maple would cost some $3,600.

Residents would be able to remove diseased or dangerous trees and would also have a right to cut down up to two trees or 10 percent of the trees on a given lot per year as long as those trees aren't of the landmark variety.

Barger said as the ordinance grows closer to possible approval by the city commission, people have called his company for estimates on removal costs. He said he is telling people not to rush, but other companies are profiteering on the fear factor of possible fines that reach into the thousands of dollars.

"Believe me, they are having trees cut down, but a good number of them (the trees) wouldn't fall under the ordinance anyway," he said. "There are companies feeding on this. Telling people they better remove the trees now or it will cost more later. We are telling people to be patient."

6) Editorial: Read, then speak out on tree law

May 16, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

Judging by the turnout at Monday's City Commission meeting, concern is growing about Birmingham's proposed tree ordinance.

Several people spoke about the ordinance as the discussion focused on setting a public hearing for 8 p.m. Monday, June 10, in the commission chambers. The commission -- which wasn't legally obligated to hold a public hearing because the Planning Board already had one -- should be ommended for its willingness to listen to residents.

The potential impact of the ordinance is far reaching and could, over time, hit everyone in the pocket book. Becoming well-informed before the public hearing is key.

Members of the commission and tree-ordinance supporters said misinformation has been rampant in the press. Specific examples weren't offered, and we believe people were merely using broad generalities to deflect criticism from an ordinance that spun out of control when too many like minds got together.

We therefore urge everyone to get involved before the city commission takes further action -- go to the public hearing and see for yourself. Listen to the comments of your neighbors and speak your mind.

The ordinance, as written, is a blatant abrogation of personal property rights. The intention, to preserve Birmingham's natural character, is sound. But this is not the way to do it.

The ordinance is 18 pages of micromanagement that taken to the extreme would give the city a certain amount of control over what a person can or cannot place in his or her own back yard.

Further, the ordinance states the city "shall have the power to control the removal, alteration and destruction of protected and landmark trees on private property."

The ordinance is almost dizzying in its complexity and aspects. To see it in its entirety, check out the city's Web site at http://www.ci.birmingham.mi.us.

Read it, but above all, go to the public hearing. This is the key opportunity for people to voice their opinions. There are indications that the commission is already having second thoughts on the ordinance, given the rising negative feedback it has been getting.

Although the city commission plans to hold the hearing as part of the regular commission meeting in its chambers, it might want to rethink that plan. The chambers were packed at Monday's meeting, which was just to set the public hearing.

The hearing itself may draw a far larger crowd. We hope it does. While there have been a few voices speaking in support of the ordinance, most that have been raised to us have been against it.

There is value in having a tree ordinance, and, indeed, many communities have them.

But it should be reasonable, practical and fair. This proposed ordinance fails on all three counts.

7) Editorial: Fun, and intelligent life, is on streets

May 16, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

Abominable tree ordinances. Absurd "virtual reality" fees. Draconian building codes.

It can be easy to get caught up in the often maddening world of Birmingham city operations and the machinations of city hall.

So every so often it's good to take a step back and look in a different direction. While there are plenty of hot issues swirling around city hall, there are also many plans in the works to have fun in Birmingham.

Just this week, the Principal Shopping District and the organizers of the Revvin' With Ford Dream Cruise activities announced plans for a special event on Thursday, June 20, in downtown Birmingham.

Called the Revvin' with Ford Walk of Fame, the event will offer an evening of shopping, parties and music around the town.

That, coupled with other events, such as the JazzFest, concerts, art fairs and the Dream Cruise itself in August makes for a full venue of fun activities.

The importance of that cannot be understated.

Having fun is a critical element in the makeup of a successful city. Providing enjoyable activities beyond recreational programs is crucial to the vitality of a town. They bring in people from beyond the borders and give the whole community a sense of life.

Sidewalk traffic after 5 p.m. is a key indicator of how strong a community is and anything that can be done to promote it is welcome.

So while the folks in city hall may squabble and weigh the relative worth of worthless ordinances, there are signs of intelligent life on the streets of Birmingham.

Take part and enjoy.


8) Ain't Email Great Dept: Neighbors avoid confrontation at Planning Board hearing

From: Barbara Armbruster
Date: Wed, 15 May 2002 23:20:28
To:
Subject: Request for assistance regarding a Planning Board Issue

I was told that you may be able to help me out. I received a letter Saturday notifying me that Hamilton Hotel will be installing a new air conditioner unit on the northwest corner of the Hamilton Hotel. For me, that is basically my backyard. I am very very concerned about the noise that the unit will create day and night and that I will be able to hear it not only outside, but inside my house. (there currently is no unit there)

How do I go about objecting to this change in the hotel that could significantly affect my property and my enjoyment of living where I do and my enjoyment of spending time outside in the summer?? I don't suspect I will receive much support from my one neighbor since they just sold their house and I don't know about the other neighbor.

I understand that this is on the agenda for next week's Planning Board meeting.

Can you please give me some feedback on how to proceed quickly and effectively?

Thanks
Barbara Armbruster
524 Oakland Ave

From:
To:
Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 9:37 AM
Subject: Request for assistance regarding a Planning Board Issue

Barbara,

Read the notice carefully. I have to assume, since you got the notice, and since you mentioned that it is on the agenda of the Planning Board, that it would give you an opportunity to comment upon it, either at the Planning Board meeting, or in writing in advance, or both.

Call the City Clerk at 644 1800 for the deadline for written comments for the meeting.

Then send the letter and/or attend the PB meeting. (The clerk accepts email, by the way.)

You also might consider contacting Planning Board members in advance and inviting them over to survey the property. Their names, phone numbers and email addresses are listed on the Buzz at http://www.bhambuzz.org{{PERIOD}}

In Birmingham, the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

One more very important note. It always helps to approach an issue like this with alternatives. Try not to be 100% negative. I suggest you try to work with the owners/managers of the hotel to come up with a mutually agreeable solution. I believe the hotel is owned by longtime Birmingham resident, businessman and civic leader Geoff Hockman. I can't imagine that Geoff wouldn't be sympathetic and willing to work with you.

Hope this helps.

Clint Baller
Buzz Editor

From :
To :
Cc :
Date : Thu, 16 May 2002 19:04:00 -0400
Subject : Request for assistance regarding a Planning Board Issue

Barbara:

Clinton forwarded your e-mail with regard to the request for the Hamilton Hotel for an air conditioning unit. My name is Jeff Hockman and I am one of the owners of the hotel. I believe once you have the facts of our request your concerns should be alleviated. The facts of the request are:

1. The unit will located at the corner of the building next to the sidewalk and will face Woodward. It will not be at the property line where our two properties abut. The unit will be at least 20-25 feet from the property line.
2. The unit is a small residential unit. We only need to cool the lobby area.
3. The unit will be screened as required by the city code.
4. I would anticipate you hearing less noise than if your neighbor installed a unit because of the distance and the screen wall.

If you have any additional questions please contact me.

Jeff Hockman

From : Barbara Armbruster
To : Clinton Baller Date : Thu, 16 May 2002 22:49:00 -0400
Subject : Request for assistance regarding a Planning Board Issue

Mr. Baller,

Thank you for your response. In fact, Mr. Hocker, [sic] from the hotel has already sent me a message - Thank you!!! It looks like many of my concerns will be non-existent, but I am trying to meet with him shortly on Monday.

I will attend the meeting in any case, and if necessary send out those letters, if the hotel and I are not able to resolve any concerns. But so far, I feel very positive.

Thanks again.
Barbara Armbruster


9) Public hearing is set on tree ordinance

May 14, 2002

The Birmingham City Commission Monday night set a public hearing to obtain citizen input on the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance. The hearing is set for Monday, June 10, at 8 p.m.

The place of the hearing was tentatively set for the commission chambers at City Hall, but Mayor Dianne McKeon acknowledged that the venue may not be big enough, and said that if a new location is chosen, it will be announced to the public.

Members of the public were urged to review the 19-page proposed ordinance, along with a summary, on the city's website at http://www.ci.birmingham.mi.us.

10) Racky's quick wit adds levity to Commission

May 14, 2002

Ever a source of amusement, the City Commission didn't disappoint Monday night. But it wasn't Dante Lanzetta's pontifications that brought chuckles. It was Commissioner Rackeline Hoff's quick-witted reply to one of Mayor Dianne McKeon's polite efforts to assert herself.

McKeon, bless her sweet soul, makes up for a lack of true leadership skills by keeping order in the court. Sometimes she goes overboard.

On Monday night, during discussion of a proposal to pave Hazelwood Street in the Holy Name area, Planning Board member James Neuhard addressed the commission on neighborhood efforts to plan for future improvements.

Commissioner Hoff had a question. McKeon recognized her.

"Mr. Neuhard...," Hoff began, facing Neuhard.

McKeon interrupted. Please address questions to the chair, she told Hoff.

Hoff wheeled toward McKeon. "Mr. Neuhard," she repeated, facing McKeon squarely, and barely missing a beat as she continued her question.

We're likin' that Racky more and more every week.

11) Commission misses chance to pluck thorn

May 14, 2002

The Birmingham City Commission missed an opportunity to remove a thorn from its side Monday night when it turned away Julie Plotnik from her bid to join the General Investment Committee.

The advisory committee assists the city treasurer in determining appropriate investments for the city. Plotnik, a licensed stock broker, lost the appointment to Kenneth Pocius, an attorney.

Plotnik, of course, ran against three of the commissioners in the last election. She's thrown her hat in the ring three times since for advisory boards, including the Parking Advisory and Traffic & Safety boards.

We thought the relatively innocuous investment committee would have been the perfect place for the commissioners to stash Plotnik, and effectively end her bid to replace John Henke as the "Susan Lucci" of Birmingham politics.

Henke, who ran for commission in the last election but withdrew at the last minute, also applied for numerous boards and was turned down. Susan Lucci is the soap star who was nominated for Emmy Awards 19 times before finally winning one.

Interestingly, Plotnik won the support of one of her former opponents, Rackeline Hoff.


12) To be removed, 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 19: May 13, 2002

------------------------------------------------------------
THE BIRMINGHAM BUZZ
-- "It's the 2016 Plan, stupid."
-------------------------------------------------------------

Buzz # 19 -- May 13, 2002

Promoting intelligence and reason in city government. Our mission: To inform and involve all Birmingham citizens.

VISIT OUR WEBSITE at http://www.bhambuzz.org for:
-- Up-to-date news items
-- Resources such as the 2016 Plan and the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance
-- A calendar of important city events
-- A lively and intelligent discussion group

We want to hear from you! Please send questions, suggestions and feedback to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}

In this edition:

1) Appointee threatens to quit over ethics code
2) Editorial: Lanzetta is source of much incivility
3) Editorial: Virtual reality model is a fantasy, but high 'fees,' which may be illegal, are real
4) Businesses balk at 'virtual reality' fees
5) Laura Berman: Big Foot stubs big toe
6) Rountable on traffic issues to be televised
7) Taxes may dip if Commission OKs millage cut
8) Letter to Buzz: Manage change with balance
9) Hot dog! Mark calendar for DPS open house
10) Clean up, get to know Rouge River on June 1
11) To be removed, send a request to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}

1) Appointee threatens to quit over ethics code

May 13, 2002

A member of the Birmingham Historical Board and the Historic District Design and Review Commission says he will resign "the next day" if either of two versions of a proposed Code of Ethics is passed into law.

Tom McDaniel, in an April 8 letter to City Manager Tom Markus, said, "It is difficult for me to adequately express the depth of my contempt for this exercise. Not that some provisions of the draft are necessarily a bad thing -- it's just the motives of the individuals who are behind it."

McDaniel called the proposal "massive overkill -- far too long for anybody to wade through, much less understand."

"The most egregious part of the draft ordinance," said McDaniel, is the section titled Dedicated Service. "To me, this section reflects the true motives of the majority of the current commission and others who support them -- they want no disagreement with their own views, and they clearly are not interested in any professional opinion from city staff, or volunteer citizen board members, unless it is in full agreement with their own ideas."

McDaniel added that "administration and enforcement will create undue burden and expense for the city."

"In short," he concluded, "the city has worked just fine for many years, and does not need this ordinance. Nevertheless, if anyone believes such an ordinance is a good idea, then I strongly suggest starting over with the objective of developing a one-page 'Code of Conduct' that merely reinforces what should be obvious to everyone anyway."
McDaniel is a longtime resident of Birmingham. He has been a member of the HDDRC since 1995, and has sat on the Historical Board since 2000. He was a driving force behind the endowment of the Birmingham Historical Museum.

The Presidents Council of Homeowners' Associations, a tightly organized citizens group that claims to represent Birmingham residents but only recently began meeting in public, proposed an ordinance.

The council claimed that "in the last few years, 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. As residents, we feel it is vitally important that such a code be adopted, not only to delineate inappropriate actions, but to eliminate these ongoing rumors that have resulted in mistrust of our officials."

The Presidents Council proposed one version of the ordinance; Markus, City Attorney Tim Currier and City Commissioner Donald Carney drafted the second. Citizens at large were not invited to participate in development of the ordinance, but were instead invited to comment on the proposals.

Visit http://www.bhambuzz.org/pdfs/ethics_city.pdf to read the proposed codes. Visit http://www.bhambuzz.org to send an email to city officials with comments on the proposed codes.


2) Editorial: Lanzetta is source of much incivility

May 12, 2002

Anyone who thought the ouster of Mike Wooley last year from the Birmingham City Commission would restore civility to the commission was unfortunately mistaken.
Wooley was famous for his frequent bickering with Commissioner Dante Lanzetta. Like watching children or unhappily married couples, it was sometimes hard to tell who instigated the verbal brawls.

Wooley was defeated in the last election, and at the first meeting of the Commission after his defeat, Mayor Dianne McKeon promised that civility would be restored to Commission meetings.

It wasn't, and now the source of the incivility is pretty clear. It was, and is, Lanzetta.

Lanzetta was in typical form Wednesday night at a joint meeting of the City Commission and Planning Board.

Here are a few words that capture the essence of Lanzetta's frequent performances: Obnoxious, rude, condescending, snickering, obfuscating, pedantic, sophomoric, arrogant, pompous, snide, sarcastic.

On Wednesday, one of the main points of the meeting was to allow the Planning Board to present to the Commission its list of priorities for the coming year. In essence, it is a glorified to-do list, and anyone with a modicum of intelligence could see that. It was roughly organized into four categories, with lists of items under each category. Take a look at it by clicking here.

Sure, Planning Board Chairman Gary Kulak could have done a better job of introducing and explaining the list. But the point of the presentation was pretty clear: Tell us what you think of our list, the Planning Board was asking the Commission. Do you have any items to add? Should we re-jigger anything? Delete anything?

Those questions were lost on Lanzetta, who launched into one of his much too frequent lectures, focusing more on semantics than on the important questions at hand. The whole semantic discussion ended up dominating the segment of the meeting. Anyone listening for intelligent discourse about how the city should be prioritizing these all-important items before the Planning Board was disappointed.

Lanzetta is self-absorbed and disrespects others. Those traits would be offensive in any elected official; they are even more so in this case when one considers that Lanzetta is the senior member of a commission that lacks any real leadership.

At one recent meeting, a petitioner reasonably noted that one of Lanzetta's questions seemed to be beside the point. "Humor me," Lanzetta barked at the man without the slightest trace of respect. Answer the question and we'll all go home a little sooner, he said.

On Wednesday night, talking about the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance, Lanzetta said, "Here's an ordinance on which there are hardened and fast opinions, perhaps by people who haven't read the ordinance themselves, that's also a possibility, pretty much determining, before I've bothered wasting my time reading it, where the thing's going to go. ? I've gotten irate phone calls -- "you better kill this thing" -- and I haven't even seen the thing."

The next day, we sent Lanzetta a note, expressing surprise "to hear you say last night that you had not yet seen the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance," and offering a couple of good sources for the material.

His response: "You might well have been surprised, because that isn't what I said."

What he said is what he said, ambiguous at best and, more important, characteristic of a man who enjoys the sound of his own voice, and rarely chooses his words wisely.

Lanzetta's performances can be seen in person at Commission meetings. Check out the Buzz calendar at http://www.supercalendar.com/view.php?a=1525 for times and places. Or catch the replays on Comcast's Channel 15. For the schedule, visit http://www.gorillainteractive.com/cableboard/channel15.cfm.

Watching him over the past six months or so, we can only conclude that Lanzetta has given up on politics, and has no intention of seeking another term in office. He seems to have placed a noose around his own neck. With every silly lecture, every snide comment, every snicker toward another commissioner or member of the public, he reduces himself in the public eye and yanks the noose a little tighter. It won't be long before he finally commits political suicide.

Should he choose to seek another term in 18 months, anyone interested in civility on the commission should think about meting out to Lanzetta the same fate that met his nemesis Wooley the last time around.


3) Editorial: Virtual reality model is a fantasy, but high 'fees,' which may be illegal, are real

May 13, 2002

By Diane Katz
Mackinac Center for Public Policy

The gallon of Pratt & Lambert paint that Dulce Fuller fancies for the wood trim of her Birmingham storefront retails for about $30. The permit required to apply a new coat of color would inflate the job cost by 2,400 percent -- damning evidence of City Hall's apparent indifference toward its beleaguered business district.

The permit "fees" are more than just a costly nuisance to downtown entrepreneurs. Based on a plain reading of the Michigan Constitution, the City Commission appears to have violated state law by enacting a tax without voter consent.

Article IX, Section 31 of the Constitution, known as the Headlee Amendment, requires the state and local governments to win the approval of voters before imposing a new tax or increasing an existing one. Townships, cities and counties have repeatedly attempted to circumvent the law by masquerading new and higher taxes as "user fees." In striking down the practice, the Michigan Supreme Court has delineated the differences between the two. And while the outcome of any potential litigation can't be predicted, the Birmingham fee ordinance appears to flunk this legal test.

From Mrs. Fuller and her downtown neighbors, the City Commission is demanding a minimum of $750 for permission to repaint a door or bit of window frame. The other permit regulations are equally onerous, including the required submission of material swatches, site photos, design plans drawn to scale (10 copies folded and stapled), colored renderings mounted on foam board, and a fully labeled brick-and-mortar site mock-up.

A multitude of dos and don'ts, ranging from the allowable letter size on signs to the style of garbage dumpster, have long forced business owners to jump seemingly unending bureaucratic hoops.

But what really rankles Birmingham's retailers these days is the so-called Virtual Reality "fee." Enacted by the City Commission, a minimum charge of $600 per façade per floor (or as much as $30,000 for a multi-story development) is levied against store owners when they undergo the "design review" required to paint a building exterior, add outdoor lighting, or hang an awning or a sign. This in addition to the $150 application fee.

This Virtual Reality fee is supposed to cover the cost of creating an electronic replica of downtown Birmingham for public access online. Contrary to the legal definition of a user fee, however, payment is mandatory whether or not a retailer wishes to participate.

Exacerbating matters, city officials acknowledge that the Virtual Reality project is more fantasy than reality. All that currently exists is an electronic file in a City Hall computer encoded with an incomplete inventory of downtown buildings. What will ultimately take shape is a "discussion that's still very fluid," city planner Jim Sabo conceded.

Moreover, the city is collecting the money in behalf of a private contractor that has never tested a similar project elsewhere. "We're just a pass-through," Sabo said, adding that Birmingham was picked for the experiment because "we're an affluent community."

Thus, there is no service being provided to those forced to pay the hefty "fee," nor is there any financial benchmark to determine whether the charge is proportionate to the supposed service rendered-as required of user fees under state law. That city officials evidently regard constituents' earnings as so easily expendable exposes a troubling disregard for property rights.

The vacancy rate in downtown Birmingham testifies to retailers' frustrations. "It's so hard to do business here," said Mrs. Fuller, whose curio shop Woodward and Maple will retain its pumpkin-hued trim so long as the city insists on levying the Virtual Reality tax. "City officials are absolutely anti-business, anti-development and anti-downtown. And by the day it's getting worse."

So widespread is opposition to the Virtual Reality "fee" that a good many other storeowners are likewise foregoing renovations. Interior Designer Joseph Keenan, for example, canceled plans to repaint his newly leased studio on Maple rather than submit to the $600 charge. The $7,000 he pays in city taxes is burden enough, he said.
"I hope the paint falls off my building," Mr. Keenan said. "Their $600 tax will do nothing to enrich my business."

Ironically, then, the City Commission's scheme to reinvigorate downtown is producing the opposite effect. But that's typically the result when government micromanages the private sector instead of leaving the business of business to the people who have actually invested their hearts, minds and money in it. Rather than taxing shop owners to create a virtual downtown, the City Commission would do far better to eliminate the very real financial and bureauc
atic obstacles that impede business growth.

(Diane Katz is director of science, environment and technology policy for the Mackinac Center for Public Policy (http://www.mackinac.org). She can be reached at (989)631-0900.)


4) Businesses balk at 'virtual reality' fees

May 12, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

By Larry Ruehlen

City planning with virtual reality is too expensive, said Mel Kaftan, on the $8,600 fee he was forced to pay to add two floors of residential space to a commercial building at 369. E Maple.

"It's an awfully high price to pay," said Kaftan, at a joint meeting of the Birmingham City Commission and planning board Wednesday. "... Don't you people know what budgets are. Don't you know what dollars are. Sometimes people get out of whack. I think it's a deterrent to development... this is just unconscionable."

In April 2001, the city commission adopted an ordinance that required downtown property owners to pay new fees related to building construction or alterations. The fees are passed on to Vantage Point Technologies, a company that spent $600,000 developing a computerized virtual reality model of the entire downtown area.

The model -- the first in the country -- is supposed to be a state-of-the-art planning tool that allows city officials to see the impact of proposed construction before it happens. Every storefront, alley and parking meter is digitally reproduced within the computer program. And a skilled operator can add a five-story office building to the heart of downtown with the click of a mouse.

Clicking on the name of a building immediately transports the user to that place, and historical comparisons are possible because complete models of the city from different time periods are available. According to city documents, merchants supported the idea when it was proposed. But many are now calling for the city to abolish the fees.

The city collects the fees and gives the money to Vantage Point Technologies to update the virtual-reality model. Every time a merchant wants to do something minor such as paint the facade of a building the fee is $600. When new construction is proposed the fees start at $6,000 and go up 25 cents for every square foot of space.

For Kaftan, the fees added up to $8,600 but fees for large projects would be in the $50,000 range, though no developer has been charged that much because all the city's major projects began before the ordinance was adopted.

Keith Deyer, chairman of the Birmingham Historic District Design Review Commission, recently called for a suspension of the fees and a refund of thousand of dollars that merchants have already paid.

"At present time, the model is not of use to the HDDRC," said Deyer. "There is no means of incorporating architectural drawings of proposed new or modified buildings or renderings of new sign proposals."

Gary Kulak, chairman of the planning board, said the planning board hasn't used the virtual reality for planning at all in the past year. City Manager Tom Markus said virtual reality will be integral to site plan review at the planning board level board and Kaftan's site plan will be the first the board reviews in the coming months.

Gil Cox, spokesman for Vantage Point Technologies, appeared before the council and commission Wednesday and said the fees are necessary because it takes time to update the computer program. He also said the company has switched focus and will now work to train city employees to update the program to bring down costs for applicants.

"This is the future and the way planning commissions will be planning all across America," he said. "But if we don't keep it up to date, it becomes relatively useless."
When city commissioners Seth Chafetz and Rackeline Hoff said merchants were growing increasingly agitated over the fees, Cox said the company would be willing to "talk turkey" with the city and try to find a way to reduce costs.

Cox denied charging exorbitant fees to recoup the $600,000 it cost to develop the computer model for the city.

Markus said an argument could be made that the company had given the computer model to the city, but Cox didn't agree. He said Vantage Point Technologies has a signed contract that it fully intends to enforce.

Markus said he didn't want the program to cease.

"We are very much on the cutting edge nationwide," said Markus. "It's really out on the front, and I wouldn't like to see us retreat. We'll examine the costs, and if the city wants to move forward, perhaps the city could participate in the costs."


5) Laura Berman: Big Foot stubs big toe

May 7, 2002

From the Detroit News

The Birmingham Big Foot boom has gone bust.

Two years ago, builders were hiking door-to-door, ringing doorbells, begging to buy, willing to shell out $400,000 and up for small houses near the city's downtown they could tear down and max out.

"Max out the lot" was developer lingo for building as deep and wide into the lot as legally possible.

"We'd have to tell the nice old lady in the 1,100-square-foot house with one bathroom: 'We don't want your house. We want the lot.' She'd be sad -- but ultimately she would want the $400,000," says Doug Keating, a Birmingham real estate agent.

But more than a year after the city passed an ordinance to limit how big a house could be to 30 percent of the lot's square footage, the city is glutted with expensive real estate. This week, 69 houses and condominiums are listed at $1 million or more, in one small suburban town (pop. 19,291), most within a one-mile radius.

A few are selling. And others, like a four-condominium development with units priced at $2.5 million and up, are sitting vacant.

"The market is plugged up," says real estate agent Rebecca Meisner of Weir Manuel Ranke. "The young dot-commers, the people with extra money ... we're not seeing that customer at the moment. And we're not seeing people buying to tear down, either."

Says agent Ronni Keating: "A year ago, you could still get $500,000 for a house that was going to be torn down and used as a lot. That's not happening." She and others suggest that the new ordinance that limits the height of houses and restricts size has dampened enthusiasm for new construction -- and hurt the economics for builders.

They contend that the incentive is no longer there.

The Big Foot law has fueled hostilities between the forces of development and the forces of Mayberry, an archetypal battle chronicled on-line by the Birmingham Buzz (http://www.bhambuzz.org), a pro-development newsletter.

"If they wanted to control development, they (the city commissioners) went about it completely the wrong way," says Clinton Baller, the Birmingham Buzz editor.

Well, maybe.

But with so many expensive houses on the market, the theory that the ordinance damages housing prices is difficult -- make that impossible -- to prove.

But given a slumping stock market, concerns about area business and the sudden disappearance of people with, as Meisner put it, "extra money," all that anyone can agree upon is that the former frenzy of home demolition and new construction -- unusual elsewhere in the Metro Detroit area -- has slowed in Birmingham.

"I do think the economy is the problem, not the ordinance," says Victor Saroki, an award-winning architect. "I don't think the ordinance has kept us from building good quality homes."

"The builders and architects will still find a way to build," says Fred Kapaldi, who opposed the law but is still building. "For now we're just living with it."


6) Rountable on traffic issues to be televised

May 7, 2002

The city's recent Roundtable Committee meeting on traffic and traffic-calming will be televised on Comcast's Channel 15 on the following dates and times:

Tuesday, May 7, 10 a.m.
Wednesday, May 8, 4 p.m.
Monday, May 13, 4 p.m.
Tuesday, May 14, 10 a.m.
Thursday, May 16, 4 p.m.
Tuesday, May 21, 4 p.m.
Thursday, May 23, 10 a.m.
Friday, May 24, 3 p.m.
Tuesday, May 28, 6 p.m.
Wednesday, May 29, 10 p.m.


7) Taxes may dip if Commission OKs millage cut

May 5, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

The average taxpayer in Birmingham will pay $85 less to the city in 2002-2003 if a proposed millage cut is approved by the Birmingham City Commission.
"We stood to collect more revenues than we expected or asked for," said Birmingham City Manager Tom Markus. "So we thought it was reasonable to give it (the added revenue) back."

The city commission approved the tax cut in principle Monday and is scheduled to vote on approval of the budget at its 8 p.m., Monday, May 13, meeting.

B. Sharon Ostin, Birmingham finance director, outlined the proposed tax cut Monday and said the taxable value of property in the city, which was estimated to be $1,400, 722,013, had actually risen to $1,492,257,488. The additional assessed value came from residential construction, house sales and commercial development. When a home is sold, the millage cap under Proposal A is lifted and the new homeowner pays taxes on the full taxable value.

Under the current operating millage rate of 12.02 mills, the increase in residential and commercial property values would raise an additional $1.1 million for the city. The proposed new rate is 11.49 mills. Levies for the library and debt service have also been slightly reduced but an increase in the trash pickup millage will offset both.

The bottom line for the taxpayers, said Ostin, is that the owner of a home with an assessed value of $135,910 will pay $2,020 in city property taxes compared with $2,105 last year.


8) Letter to Buzz: Manage change with balance

May 3, 2002

I join with others in thanking you for providing a vehicle and voice for the majority of Birmingham folks who are growing more and more disgusted with the tone and direction of city government. I, like many, see this city rapidly proceeding down a dangerous single-issue, anti-development road. I think that most people realize that we must, and can, have a balanced approach to how we manage change.

Change is inevitable. Whether it is good or bad is up to us. I can also be counted on to help unseat certain incumbents on the commission who have seriously damaged the relations with city staff and the community. The arrogance, sarcasm and intimidation used by one of our longtime commissioners is embarrassing to watch. From my
perspective, he has clearly changed the whole tone of governance and debate in our city. Our commission meetings should not be about scoring debate points, embarrassing people and micro-managing staff.

I applaud the attempts of commissioners Hoff and Dixon for clearly trying to move the debate and direction towards more balanced and reasonable solutions. I hope that the other commissioners (most of whom are well intentioned) would step back and take a look at the "atmosphere drift" that has and is occurring. I fear that winning the
anti-development agenda war is leaving a realistic long-term vision for Birmingham an orphan.

Tim Tindall
Birmingham


9) Hot dog! Mark calendar for DPS open house

Mark your calendar for the May 18 open house at the Department of Public Services, 851 S. Eton St. From 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., the department will be showing off all its cool equipment, and running short seminars on composting, lawn maintenance and tree-pruning.

The DPS is serving hot dogs and pop. The Open House is an opportunity to get to meet Bob Fox, the city's assistant director of public services; Charlie Moffatt, staff arborist (who might be point man on enforcement of the proposed tree ordinance) and others.


10) Clean up, get to know Rouge River on June 1

The annual Rouge River cleanup and appreciation day is June 1. Show up at Booth Park (at N. Old Woodward and Harmon) anytime after 8:30 a.m. Clean-up begins around 9 a.m.

The most common cleanup activity is removal of logjams and other debris from the stream. Other activities include stabilizing eroding stream banks, stream-side tree planting, and trail improvements. Dress accordingly.

Refreshments will be served in Booth Park after the event.

The city is considering improving the Rouge River trail, a project suggested in the 2016 Plan. The June 1 event is a good opportunity to familiarize yourself with the existing trail, and help with minor improvements.


11) To be removed, 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 18: May 2, 2002

------------------------------------------------------------
THE BIRMINGHAM BUZZ
-- "It's the 2016 Plan, stupid."
-------------------------------------------------------------

Buzz # 18 -- May 2, 2002

Promoting intelligence and reason in city government. Our mission: To inform and involve all Birmingham citizens.

VISIT OUR WEBSITE at http://www.bhambuzz.org for:
-- Up-to-date news items
-- Resources such as the 2016 Plan and the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance
-- A calendar of important city events
-- A lively and intelligent discussion group

We want to hear from you! Please send questions, suggestions and feedback to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}

In this edition:
1) Court upholds Bigfoot ordinance
2) Letter to Eccentric: Stop the Madness
3) Letter to Buzz: Chainsaws are deafening
4) Presidents Council meeting Thursday
5) Is there a Crate & Barrel in our future? Chicago chain thinks outside the box
6) From our discussion forum: Anonymity is best when elected officials inspire fear of reprisal
7) Join the cause: Let us list you as a Supporter
8) Editorial: City's new direction is alarming
9) 'Wayfinding' plan will supplement signs
10) Meeting gives Buzz on development issues
11) Letter to Eccentric: Tree ordinance improper
12) Business forum a 'disappointment'
13) To be removed, send a request to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}
Court upholds Bigfoot ordinance

May 2, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

By Larry Ruehlen

Oakland County Circuit Judge John McDonald summarily dismissed two counts of a lawsuit that could have overturned the city's "Bigfoot" housing ordinance Wednesday. McDonald is expected to consider the third count within two weeks.

The lawsuit, Burman vs. City of Birmingham, was filed over a July 11, 2001, decision of the Birmingham Board of Zoning Appeals that denied a height variance for a home on Hanna Street. The owners of the home, Scott and Kendall Burman, had intended to build a 34-foot tall house on the lot even though the controversial city ordinance set the limit at 30 feet.

Houses near the Burmans' lot exceed 30 feet in height, but they were built before the city's Bigfoot ordinance was adopted by the Birmingham City Commission.

Daniel Christ, the attorney representing the city, said the ruling maintains the status quo so the city can continue to enforce the restrictions set forth in the ordinance. He also said the Burmans still have the use of their property.

"They have a nice house on the property and they can still build a new one as long as they follow the ordinance," said Christ.

Eric Bean, the Burmans' attorney, argued that the decision of the BZA was improper and unconstitutional under state law, denied them due process and was an illegal taking of the property.

On the first two counts, McDonald ruled in the city's favor and upheld the Bigfoot ordinance as constitutional. On the third, the judge gave Christ two weeks to submit a legal brief supporting the city's contention that the Bigfoot ordinance merely establishes limits for residential land use and does not preclude anyone from using land.

A taking is when a municipality illegally seizes control of land and denies a person's right to use property.

City Manager Tom Markus has said Birmingham's insurance would not cover the city if it loses an illegal-taking case.

McDonald could issue a written opinion on the taking matter or call both sides back to court for further oral arguments.

Bean said he will consult with his clients to see if they want to pursue the case further.


2) Letter to Eccentric: Stop the Madness

May 2, 2002

The City of Birmingham officials must be stopped. These people are going too far in regulating our beautiful city. The city officials will make a criminal out of me because I will NOT obtain a permit if I want to cut a tree branch in my own back yard.

I can see myself taken away in handcuffs in front of my children for not allowing an inspection on my own property.

It is too bad that very few residents voted in the last election. With our apathy we are allowing this craziness to continue and get stronger. As residents, we must get rid of these people that are running and ruining our city.

Xico Gomez
Birmingham


3) Letter to Buzz: Chainsaws are deafening

April 29, 2002

With the tree ordinance bearing down on our community, the disproportionate amount of chain saw noise in my neighborhood "deafening."

The commission (in it's ever infinite wisdom) has not preserved trees, but rather hasten their removal. Within the last 7 days I have witnessed more trees over 40-50 feet tall, being brought to their premature demise. In most cases, when I asked the homeowner what precipitated the "residential deforesting," it was a bitter-sweet answer of the new ordinance and private property concerns.

The photo [at http://www.bhambuzz.org/images/chainsaw.jpg] was taken this past Friday. A mature and quite beautiful 55 foot high Evergreen, which bordered my own property was destroyed by my neighbor (it was his right). When I asked, the answer sadly was the same. He had future plans on placing a garage on his property, but with all the complex building ordinances (and now tree ordinance), he was acting proactively to remove a possible future impediment to his wishes.

Thus, I no longer enjoy the beauty, privacy, and shade this once majestic foliage offered. Sad huh?

That is a real-world example of what effect hastly planned ordinances have real people living here in the "now."

Kyle
Birmingham


4) Presidents Council meeting Thursday

April 29, 2002

The Presidents Council of Homeowners' Associations, which claims to represent you, meets this Thursday at 7 p.m. in the Board Room of the Townsend Hotel.

Show up and help the council celebrate its coming out. Most past meetings were held in private homes. This Thursday's meeting will be among the first in a public place.


5) Is there a Crate & Barrel in our future? Chicago chain thinks outside the box

April 20, 2002

From the Chicago Tribune

Shopping malls have always operated by an inherently unequal economic formula. The anchor tenants -- well-heeled department stores -- paid little or nothing for their space while the specialty stores that filled the rest of the mall paid hefty rents. The theory: Specialty retailers benefited from the presence of the department stores, which acted as magnets for shoppers.

Not anymore. With department store chains such as Marshall Field's and Lord & Taylor continuing to lose market share to discounters, it no longer makes sense to pay a premium to be in a mall, says Gordon Segal, founder and chief executive of Crate & Barrel.

Graphic evidence of Segal's thinking: a new freestanding Crate & Barrel store on the parking lot of Northbrook Court. The store is three times bigger than the Crate & Barrel that was inside the mall, making it the size of the chain's flagship on Michigan Avenue.

"In the mall, you're another blur as shoppers go by," Segal said as he greeted guests at the store's opening party Tuesday. "How do you create a personality?"

Segal is practicing what he preaches. Already, Crate & Barrel has pulled its stores out of two of Dallas' best-known malls and built new stores nearby. It also has decamped from malls in Boston and Palo Alto, Calif.

On the schedule for this summer, Crate & Barrel is moving out of a San Jose, Calif., mall and opening a store across the street.

"Gordon was at the forefront of thinking not that malls are dead, but that they have changed. They aren't differentiated," explains Bette Kahn, Crate & Barrel spokeswoman. "It's also a time issue. People don't spend time walking around malls anymore."

Crate & Barrel will continue to exit mall stores when its leases expire, Kahn says.

And that should be a wake-up call for the nation's retail developers.


6) From our discussion forum: Anonymity is best when elected officials inspire fear of reprisal

See the following and more in our discussion forum:

Posted: April 25 2002,12:47 by Quiet Supporter

It would be great for all of us to register as "Supporters."

Unfortunately, the reality is far different than the concept. The editorial below the "Join the Cause" item spells out the retaliatory nature of our current elected city officials.

Could you imagine the repercussions of placing "Buzz" names publicly, as dissenters to those who hold the power? What happens to those who list their names, once the officials start pressuring Chief Patterson to make more frequent patrols near their businesses and homes? It may not have happened yet, but it is the next logical step for them to take while seizing more control.

The real proof will come in the next election. It'll be interesting to see how many of the non-incumbent candidates' signs end up in the impound yards on Eton. You know the place, same as where they now put all the real estate agents' signs. Then force them to "buy" the signs back.

If the commission can legislate against our property rights (i.e. our trees), how hard will it be to control what we display in front of our homes or offices? Think of the last political sign you've seen in Troy. They have tough ordinances there, which are similar to what I'm referring.

No, listing ourselves is not a great idea. Showing up at ongoing "Buzz Forums" is. Strength is in physical numbers and turnouts. When the time comes, I'll be listing my name not on the "Buzz," but on petitions circulated by responsible candidates. After which, I'll campaign hard to get his incumbent opponents unseated.

One last point. What you have done here is outstanding. If the end result is a better Birmingham, I will personally nominate you for a "Citizen's Action Award." Unfortunately, we all got caught off guard during the last two elections, but thanks to you and others like you, we have awaken.


7) Join the cause: Let us list you as a Supporter

Are you listed as a Supporter on our About Us page? If not, consider letting us list you. There's no cost, and no obligation. It just tells readers that you support what we're doing. To be listed, send an email to info@bhambuzz.org
{{PERIOD}}

8) Editorial: City's new direction is alarming

April 25, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

For the past several months, there has been a not-so-subtle shift in the direction of Birmingham's city government.

The forces of anti-development have firmly taken control of the City Commission and are extending their influence into areas throughout City Hall.

Dissent among some city administrators and department heads is growing, and several key staff members already have resigned.

There is a concern being expressed by residents toward the heavy-handed manner in which city government is intruding into their lives, shown most blatantly in the proposed, oppressive tree ordinance.

Political insiders are also watching how people are being appointed to commissions and boards. There is a lot of strategizing going on behind the scenes.

To the average resident, the dissent in City Hall amounts to nothing. Let them fight among themselves, is the view. What does it matter to me?

Plenty.

Little things can have big repercussions. Seemingly innocuous actions today can have a severe impact years, even decades, into the future.

Suppose the tree ordinance as written is adopted. Suppose it generates millions of dollars in lawsuits that will cost the city in legal fees, even if it wins. That's our tax dollars at waste.

And what if the city develops a reputation as a bad place to work and can't attract the quality employees it needs, especially in this period of growth?

And how does one measure the lost opportunities that can occur if developers decide that maybe Royal Oak is a better town to locate their buildings and businesses?

It wasn't too many years ago that downtown Royal Oak was in dreadful shape. It can happen here.

The point is that all Birmingham residents need to monitor what is going on in City Hall. Watch the meetings on cable TV. Even better, attend a City Commission meeting. That is the best way to get a sense of what is going on, even behind the scenes.

But above all, stay in tune. It is not an exaggeration to say that the future of Birmingham is at stake because the decisions being made now may have a profound impact on tomorrow.

And get involved. Remember the old adage: You get the government you deserve.


9) 'Wayfinding' plan will supplement signs

April 25, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

By Larry Ruehlen

There will fewer signs but people will still find where they are going in Birmingham if all goes well with a proposed "wayfinding" project.

The city is taking proposals and is expected to hire a company to complete a wayfinding study to determine the best way to get people around town without using so many signs.

Gary Kulak, chairman of the Birmingham Planning Board, has said the current glut of signs could be greatly reduced with an effective wayfinding plan.

The city is expected to award the contract in October and has set a goal of completing the project by November, 2003.

City officials are looking for a coordinated system of words and graphics that will inform and direct people, not just downtown, but throughout the entire community. The system is supposed to symbolize the historical and cultural character of the city.

In the Downtown Birmingham 2016 Plan, urban planner Andres Duany recommended three types of signs. One would be a directional sign with a cast medallion with the city name on top, a directional sign in the middle with an arrow pointing to the nearest parking and another directional sign to a local point of interest on the bottom.

Street signs would be slightly different with the city name on top, the street name in the middle and a parking indicator sign on the bottom. The third type of sign Duany recommended is one that would include a large area map that includes parking structures and key buildings in the city. The use of color-coded walkways and styling cues could also be part of the plan.


10) Meeting gives Buzz on development issues

April 25, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

By Larry Ruehlen

It took five years of living in Birmingham for Karen Linnell to worry about the fate of downtown.

"I care about this city, and I don't want a downtown that's stagnant," she said. "I moved here because it was so vibrant, and it isn't that way today... I showed up because I wanted to find out what is going on."

Linnell was one of some 40 residents who attended a recent forum on development issues in Birmingham that was put on by the Buzz -- a website that was launched by Birmingham resident Clinton Baller to provide news and chat on issues facing the city.

Many people who regularly contribute to the sire hold political views contrary to the actions of the Birmingham City Commission, which has systematically slowed development in the city with a host of ordinance changes.

The forum included a slideshow presentation by Mark Nickita, a planner and former member of the Birmingham Planning Board. The presentation was basically a crash course in design that contrasted beautiful streetscapes from around the world with less-that-desirable storefronts, parking lots and strip centers.

When the presentation was over, Linnell said the Buzz should take the presentation to the residents so all get to know the issues.

A lengthy open forum where residents questioned a panel of experts followed. The panel included Bruce Thal, a current member of the Planning Board, local developer Ted Fuller, architect Victor Saroki, merchant Karen Daskas, Realtor Lanie Hardy Cosgrove, and builder J.C. Cataldo, who also served on the Planning Board.

Talk of the Downtown Birmingham 2016 Plan dominated the meeting, with residents asking where the plan is headed, and the experts saying the actions of the commission have all but squashed the plan.

"The irony is that my firm does a lot of work in other cities, and they all want to be like Birmingham," said Saroki. "... But look at what happened to the Shain Park project. It was a big flop. In my opinion, nothing is getting done in the private or public sector with regard to the 2016 Plan."

Thal said the people making the decision were elected by the pubic and are doing what they believe is best for the city. Most of the people at the Buzz forum disagreed with that philosophy.

"The commission doesn't want change, so they are blocking all development," said Fuller.

The discussion sounded much like banter surrounding the 2001 city election, when three candidates were elected to the commission after promising to slow development in town, and three candidates who supported development were defeated.

Birmingham resident Rob Lawrence mentioned the possibility of recalling some current commissioners -- an idea that the majority of the crowd objected to.

The last part of the talk was pointed at changing the mindset of voters in the neighborhoods before the 2003 election. Chuck Moss, a former Birmingham City Commission member and current Oakland County Commissioner, said the proposed Tree Preservation Ordinance may provide fodder for the upcoming political battle.

"That tree ordinance is a killer," said Moss. "And anyone who supports it will be dead in the next election."

Baller said he was disappointed in the turnout but would forge ahead with plans to hold similar forums in the future.


11) Letter to Eccentric: Tree ordinance improper

April 25, 2002

The Tree Preservation Ordinance is proposed as controlling what is described as serious tree abuse, frequently resulting from the work of builders or contractors, to trees on city or public property.

Such guidelines would appear reasonable and desirable, if not adequately covered already. However, the original concern has been expanded to have the ordinance cover trees on homeowners' private property. We have not heard a good rationale for this further step; it appears to be unwarranted and an appalling encroachment on personal property rights.

This goes against the heritage dating back to our founding fathers and more recently highlighted by President Ronald Reagan in his administration's goal of limiting and reversing government infringement on civil liberties.

The proposed ordinance has a provision for "landmark" trees, which may be regarded as a horse of a different color. However, to undertake a program of making a videotape record of all trees in every homeowner's front and back yards and thereafter tightly control all "alterations" (an extremely wide definition) by a program of permit applications, fees, regulatory delays, fines, and eventual bureaucratic decision causes many to think of life in totalitarian regimes.

At minimum, it is an unwarranted intrusion on homeowners' property rights.

The Birmingham Parks and Recreation Board is to be commended for their work in this tree ordinance, as it applies to trees on city or public property. However, it can only be considered an unwarranted encroachment on a homeowner's property rights to dictate and restrict him from planting, pruning, altering or replacing trees in a manner that he feels will enhance his property.

The proposed program will inevitably add to the administrative workload and expense, although it is clear it is expected to shift this back to the homeowner to carry the burden through permit fees and fines. In the end, we come back to the question, "Where's the beef -- where is there such a problem that this is a necessary ordinance?" It is reasonable to assume that each homeowner wants to enhance his property and maintain the character of the community where he has chosen to live.

This ordinance is subject to the approval of the Birmingham City Commission in the near future. I urge you to make your feelings known. Your silence can be construed as acceptance of the ordinance as now written.

James Hannagan
W.L. Whitfield
Birmingham


12) Business forum a 'disappointment'

April 25, 2002

From the Birmingham Eccentric

By Larry Ruehlen

A study session turned into a gripe session Monday as area merchants questioned why doing business in the city isn't getting easier.

"I am supposed to call the merchants and tell them what happened," said Kirk Kuchukian, president of the Birmingham Merchants Association. "And I will be telling them that it was a great disappointment because it was the same old story. They didn't actually do anything."

Kuchukian was reacting to a study session that was supposed to provide an opportunity for frank discussion between merchants and members of the Birmingham City Commission. More than 40 merchants attended.

In January, the commission held a similar forum where some 50 merchants complained about the pitfalls of conducting business in the city. Concerns included parking, marketing, tenant recruitment, the city's sign ordinance and the approval process for outdoor dining permits.

Monday's scheduled two-hour meeting was dominated by several presentations designed to show how the city is addressing the issues. On the parking matter, a new high-tech system is being considered that will make using the parking garages much easier by automatically identifying and billing cars as they pass through the garage, said Jeffrey Salz, chairman of the city's advisory parking committee.

When the system is in place, less than 10 percent of motorists would have to pay cash to an attendant, thus reducing the time it takes to get in and out of the garage during busy periods, such as when a movie lets out.

Salz said the concept of charging a reduced parking rate for part-time employees of downtown businesses is being considered as well to help businesses retain workers who now pay about $30 per month to park. Neither the new computer system, at a cost of just under $1 million, nor the reduced rates are imminent, said Salz, but both are being considered.

City Planner Jill Bahm gave a presentation on the ease of getting a permit to add outdoor dining. She said restaurants that want outdoor cafés on private property no longer have to get a special permit. But cafés on public sidewalks do have to be licensed by the city.

Before the ordinance change, every outdoor café required a permit that had to be renewed annually. The application fee for the permit was $500 and mandatory renewals were $125.

Under the new plan, there is a one-time $125 fee for site plan review and annual licensing fees under $100 for new cafés and no annual fees for established cafés on private property.

Kelli Lewton, owner of Aunt Olives Good Food 2 Go, 525 N. Old Woodward, said she attended the last business forum and was led to believe adding outdoor dining would be as easy as filling out a few forms. But when she called the city she was told the new streamlined process still required her to submit 15 site plans for review by the Birmingham Planning Board, which didn't have an opening on its agenda until at least June.

"I understand the city has rules," said Lewton. "But I'm just trying to add a few tables, and I won't be able to until July. I'm asking for some help here."

Birmingham Mayor Dianne McKeon said the crowded schedule of the planning board is a concern that the city commission will consider at a future meeting. Commissioner Seth Chafetz said merchants have to follow the rules and at some point they have to "step up and get done what the city requires."

Several merchants questioned what the city was doing to attract tenants downtown. While some merchants raised the possibility of hiring a full-time recruiter, others said that idea has already failed twice. Merchants also wanted to know what is being done on the marketing front.

John Heiney, executive director of the city's Principal Shopping District, said the city will soon begin an extensive survey to identify the core customer of the PSD that will also determine what type of shops people would like to in Birmingham.

When merchants complained that the permitting process for adding new signs or changing the color of a storefront can cost hundreds of dollars, McKeon said the commission would look into the possibility of eliminating some of the fees.

When the presentations concluded, about 10 minutes remained for open discussion -- a fact that didn't sit well with merchant Mark Keller.

"You give us 10 minutes for follow-up," he said. "That isn't giving us a warm, fuzzy feeling (about the relationship) between the merchants and the city."

Commissioner Dante Lanzetta Jr. said too much time was wasted on staff presentations and McKeon said another meeting would likely be scheduled. In the end, the meeting was extended a half hour and merchants took the time to complain about a lack of action and cooperation between the city, the commission and the merchants.

After the meeting, City Manager Tom Markus said the staff presentations were necessary to directly respond to issues raised in the January meeting. He also said the increased emphasis on the marketing study and the proposal for computerized parking system were the direct result of previous merchant concerns.


13) To be removed, 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