Ann Arbor officials take action to add more farmland to Greenbelt
The Ann Arbor City Council took steps tonight to add another piece of farmland to the ranks of the city's Greenbelt Program, forever preserving it as open space.
The city will spend $165,140 from Greenbelt millage proceeds for the purchase a portion of farmland in Ann Arbor Township owned by Kenneth and Joann Zeeb.
The parent parcel is about 83.7 acres and is currently being farmed. The landowner is excluding 2.12 acres - which includes the house and farm buildings - from the Greenbelt.
"The property is considered large enough to sustain agricultural production and is in a location that will encourage additional farmland preservation and agricultural preservation activities," Ginny Trocchio, one of the Greenbelt Program's administrators wrote in a memo to the City Council. "The property is adjacent to the Kapp Farm that was jointly protected by Ann Arbor Township and the City's Greenbelt program in 2006."
The property owners applied to the Ann Arbor Township Land Preservation program in 2008, and the township in turn applied for federal Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program grant funds. The township was awarded $307,720, which covered half of the purchase of development rights to the property. The city and township each paid another $160,140, plus due diligence costs.
In other action tonight, the council voted to approve going after federal grants for two other Greenbelt purchases. That includes a 156-acre farm owned by the Whitney family along Farrell Road and Webster Church Road in Wesbter Township, and a 98-acre farm owned by the Honke family (no relation to City Council Member Carsten Hohnke) at the intersection of Northfield Church Road and Nollar Road in Northfield Township.
City officials recently announced 709 acres were added to the Greenbelt in 2009, bringing the total land protected by the program to date to 1,782 acres.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529.
Comments
brad
Wed, Feb 3, 2010 : 4:31 p.m.
@raised: General Fund doesn't pay for sanitary or water. Anybody know how many houses (and subsequent roads & pipes) could be built on 1,700 acres? For me the question is whether the greenbelt will pull development into the City, push it farther away, or stop it completely.
voiceofreason
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 6:10 p.m.
I bet the City of Detroit wishes it would have developed something similar to the Greenbelt.......
tlb1201
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 5:01 p.m.
Katie, check your facts about who buys food from whom. China is by far a net purchaser of food from the US, not the other way around. And their purchases from us are growing as their citizens' income and ability to buy better food grows -because they are selling manufactured goods to us. The US is the largest exporter of food in the world. We are feeding them as well as sending them all of our own money that which are lending back to us! If it wasn't for agricultural exports, our balance of trade would be even worse than it already is. Interesting fact: The Greenbelt program preserved 740 acres in 2009. There are approximately 460,800 acres of land in Washtenaw County. That means that 0.16% of the county was preserved in 2009. And that cost us how much?! The greenbelt is a prime example of why people need to educate themselves on the facts from unbiased sources instead of completely buying into mis-informed, emotional propaganda fed to them by bunch of zealots, some of which have profited nicely from the Greenbelt. Consider the motives and the consequences before blindly voting and committing to a long-term spending binge. There is only so much tax money to go around. Let's use our scarce money where it matters most for quality of life and regulate development through effective and sensible land use policy instead.
katie
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 2:53 p.m.
When the price of oil goes sky-high, as it surely will. and we can no longer afford to ship food from China and other places, we will be exceedingly glad to have some farmland preserved by the foresight of these folks. I, too, am against the big parking hole next to the library. Utterly against it. This will be a money sinkhole for decades to come and will cost considerably more than any greenbelt project. Yes, fund the police and fire fighters after you stop building buildings and digging parking structures. There will be plenty of money for it. The greenbelt money is a pittance compared to that. But then, the developers don't like the idea of not building those buildings. Just like they don't like the greenbelt. I say, greenbelt, police, and firefighters - yes! More useless development - no!
Paul the Malcontent
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 2:31 p.m.
Less farmland available for development outside the city should lead to increased residency and business development within the city (and therefore more tax revenue).
doh
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 1:54 p.m.
People, 160k is not going to do much for firefighters etc. while it will preserve a large chunk of land for a long time.
Craig Lounsbury
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 1:43 p.m.
"This may not be so noticeable now, but project out 20-50 years. Your children and grandchildren, if they choose to remain here in this area, may thank you for the foresight as they drink another glass of water." Except for the fact that here in Michigan we are surrounded by 9/10 of the fresh water in America and 1/5 of the entire worlds fresh water. So scrounging for a glass of water will never be a problem in Michigan.
iceman
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 1:41 p.m.
You can't teach stupid! Let's repeal the millage and remember those council members at the polls!
a2grateful
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 1:11 p.m.
Voters: Repeal the millage that the economic downturn has rendered obsolete. End the nonsense that takes up, and wastes, most of a2 City government time and attention.
aninsider
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 12:57 p.m.
The greenbelt makes no sense at all and the development paranoia is radial and dangerous to say the least, the arguments regarding our children and grandchildren are old, lame and misleading. The only real argument regarding the greenbelt may be wildlife, but as proven they as well as we adapt to our environments quite well. Our water resources are not in danger as radicals would like you to believe, in fact the fear mongering regarding our water resources was predicted to be used by radicals some 10 years ago as a method to push forward radical land use control. There is no decrease in aquifer replenishment especially with new storm water run-off designs that can be seen in all new developments. Some seem to think the greenbelt is all farmland being farmed, this is not the case, most all of these properties are not being farmed at all or if being farmed is growing stock grain shipped elsewhere. Land use rights appear to be being purchased as far away as Plymouth too which seems a little strange and maybe should be questioned. I think there should be more digging into this program, its real members and controllers and other organizations they are involved with. Beware and always question radical land use policies or any policies that you know deep down are just not right, especially when these groups are using your hard earned tax dollar. Attracting and maintaining talented people and a healthy local economy has always been attributed to development, not to trying to create a great big hippie commune. This is not a good use of peoples tax dollars period!
bunnyabbot
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 12:23 p.m.
um, federal grant money still comes from tax payers. If the federal gov't lowered peoples taxes and controlled their spending (or all gov't for that matter) I would have more money in my pocket to buy things, businesses would prosper, hire more employees, unemployment would fall, housing values would rise. And you know, I would have more money.
Tanzor
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 11:17 a.m.
Ann Arbor is flush with money, or so it seems. We have tens of millions of dollars to spend on farmland outside our city limits. Its not necessarily a bad idea however our mayor and city council need to reconsider priorities for the people of our city, times have changed. We are in the middle of the worst financial crisis Michigan and Ann Arbor has experienced in many decades and its not going to end anytime soon. Ann Arbor faces a multimillion dollar budget deficit and yet our city council and mayor elect to build a new and unnecessary city hall at a cost of 50 million plus. Lets not forget the 50 million dollar six story down hole in the ground parking nightmare that we dont need. I dont think Im alone when I say I do not want to part five or six stories underground. I thought Ann Arbor wanted to be the green city, six stories of under parking will require continuous lighting, ventilation and other mechanicals requiring large amounts of energy. Citizens of Ann Arbor are suffering under high taxes, our roads and bridges are falling apart, individuals and families are losing their homes. Our mayor and city council are out of touch with reality or just plain stupid; Im not sure which it is?
ali
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 10:47 a.m.
I think this is less of "scam" and waste of money than most of the other commenters imply. Much of the money came from federal grant programs that are specifically for conservation. In other words, they were not available to pay for fireman or police officers. Therefore, I don't think that this purchase did not compete with other budgeting priorities in the way commenters suggest. In addition, if this program is successful in maintaining farming closer to populated areas it could also help us all eat more locally, which actually will have "carbon footprint" benefits. Not to mention the benefits for maintaining wildlife corridors and habitats. Also not to mention that a place with more open space will likely have a better chance of attracting and maintaining talented people who will help rebuild the economy. I know it's easy to rush to a negative judgement. Especially in financial hard times. But I think this program has more going for it than people give it credit for.
actionjackson
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 10:29 a.m.
It's a great idea to form a greenbelt around Ann Arbor. Land prices are lower, development is at a low, and as soon as this economy regains momentum there will be areas where we will not see huge condo and apartment projects where the farmland used to be. I'm in for the long run not the shortsightedness of a few years.
E. Manuel Goldstein
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 10:21 a.m.
Those who don't like the Greenbelt can go ahead and try to repeal the millage - its your democratic right. The millage was passed during better financial times, for sure, so now it seems ironic to be spending money on land rather than propping up our police and firefighters. What many do not consider is the preservation of our water resources within the Huron River watershed. The potential consequences of development of the remaining open farmland within this watershed include decreased replenishment of aquifers and surface water. This may not be so noticeable now, but project out 20-50 years. Your children and grandchildren, if they choose to remain here in this area, may thank you for the foresight as they drink another glass of water.
aninsider
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 10 a.m.
I haven't read anything that suggests money be taken from the greenbelt monies to subsidize salaries of police and fire, posters are trying to point out that leadership priorities are not in the best interest of the public. Though I know there's this scary fear of development and real anti-development radicals in play here, I also know that they would be the first to call police and fire when their safety was threatened but with a proposed dwindling protection, would it be enough and/or in time to protect the publics safety? What is really mind boggling to me is the mindset that greenbelt is more important than the safety of your neighbors, this is a radical mind set which is doing more harm than good to the City of Ann Arbor and its taxpayers.
Zach
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 9:39 a.m.
Thank you TF. Regardless of the financial situation AA is in, taking money from this program to pay for other programs would not be a good thing. The voters didn't say that the greenbelt program could be used to subsidize salaries of public service workers.
TF
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 9:22 a.m.
The Greenbelt purchase has nothing to do with the police or firefighters. The voters specifically approved the Greenbelt millage for purchases like this.
aninsider
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 9:22 a.m.
Top Cat, The only suckers in this scam is the Ann Arbor taxpayer. We've heard nothing but monetary dire straits from Ann Arbor leaders. They're cutting wages, health insurance, workforce and service to the Ann Arbor taxpayer. It now takes them 3-weeks to pick up downed tree limbs from a 15 minute wind storm, We've seen the grass in the parks go uncut for weeks at a time, why does it take weeks to get permits or inspections for various projects taxpayers may have, the roads are failing at alarming rate and the street mileage money is resurfacing fewer streets every year and now may be used for bridge repairs cutting street resurfacing even more. With services to the taxpayer being cut on a regular basis due to (according to leaders) monetary dire straits they always find money for leadership wage increases, leadership management private consulting firms, (todays leaders seem to need an entourage of help), a phone system that helps no one, art sculptures, oversized new buildings and building additions and the biggest scam the greenbelt. What are the leaders trying to protect the taxpayer from with the greenbelt?? Well all agree that these are in fact dire times for many and the leaders need to be spending what little money they claim to have wisely and in the best interest of the tax payer. They are a bit out of control dont you think?
P4
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 9:17 a.m.
I agree with nowayjose. What about the firefighters, the police officers, and people, people, people who have lost their jobs, homes threatened with foreclosure, the food banks unable to supply enough food, and city council wants to buy more useless land because it looks pretty? A2 City Council needs to get their priorities straight. Unbelievable--obviously they still have jobs.
Arboriginal
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 9:14 a.m.
"Forever preserving it" is a real stretch. The Mayor and Council reserve the right to sell parkland without voter approval.
xmo
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 8:41 a.m.
So with this purchase,just to be fair,we should we allow the construction of an apartment building or something. We cannot upset the carbon balance.
Top Cat
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 8:15 a.m.
As a resident of Webster Township, thanks to the taxpayers of Ann Arbor for your generosity. However, I think you are being taken for suckers.
C6
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 8:07 a.m.
Gosh, I wonder how much the city would pay me to not build a new house on the vacant lot I own? Then I guess I'd be looking to sell the naming rights to my new "prairie"...
Awakened
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 7:52 a.m.
Actually they are only purchasing the right to regulate the use of the land. They won't actually own it. And they won't get taxes from it. The Township will still tax it.
nowayjose
Tue, Feb 2, 2010 : 12:47 a.m.
Forget the police and firefighters, lets buy more farmland outside of the city. Well done city council.
Craig Lounsbury
Mon, Feb 1, 2010 : 11:09 p.m.
At the rate people are leaving the state we'll have a green belt all the way to Chicago shortly without spending hundreds of thousands of dollars.