Heritage Row project would help preserve the past, not destroy it
Since when is density near downtown a negative? I returned to town on Sunday to catch up with local happenings in Ann Arbor.com. I was appalled and surprised to learn of the fiasco of the City Council in refusing Alex de Parry’s Heritage Row proposal.
As I understand from the Ann Arbor.com coverage on Sunday, the Heritage Row development was friendly to the architectural integrity of the neighborhood as well as providing attractive housing options with hidden parking near the center of town. City Place, the fall back option which amazingly has already received council approval, would destroy the character of this historic neighborhood.
I don’t understand the logic of these decisions. Everything I’ve read about the re-vitalizing of older towns tells me that vibrant towns that attract young professionals, rather than losing them as we now are in Ann Arbor, require a possibility of affordable housing in or near downtown. I understand local special interest groups and neighborhoods resist change, but our city government must look beyond the short-term demands of these groups and think about the future. Historical preservation that calcifies the city in the past is not the answer.
De Parry’s Heritage Row presents the compromise of renovating and preserving the century old houses that many of us remember visiting when they were private homes while providing additional housing so needed if Ann Arbor is to have the appeal that a young, dynamic work force seeks. I used to live in an historic house and was a member of the Ann Arbor Historical Society. I’ve been involved with the Downtown Historical Street Markers and am very supportive of the value of the Historical Society in preserving important local landmarks, but having never heard of German Town until the neighborhood mobilized to prevent change, I think that de Parry’s project is one that will vitalize the neighborhood and therefore assure its preservation in a way that merely preventing change will not. My hope is that the City Council will review its position and realize that its obligation is to the viable future of Ann Arbor not just its historic past. Jan Barney Newman Ann Arbor
Comments
setsyfly
Mon, Jul 5, 2010 : 9:35 a.m.
Perhaps Ms. Newman was also on vacation when Mr. DeParry originally proposed his development. In that iteration, he proposed retaining only the facade of the houses on Fifth Ave., nailed into the apartment building behind. It was the tireless effort of the Germantown coalition (unknown to her) which prevented that travesty and led to the many compromises now in place. What has not changed is the number of units Mr. DeParry is set on. I doubt whether Ms. Newman would enjoy the construction of a 40 foot tall hotel next to her yard, but that is what is asked of the people who live on Hamilton Place. Are people who live near downtown to be relegated to a lower caste which must tolerate enormous intrusions into their neighborhoods while the gentry comfortably watch from afar? Had Mr. DeParry reduced the enormity of his development, it is likely that opposition would have been reduced equally. What benefits does this size development provide? Will Ms. Newman and family or any of the other supporters move in? What it really provides is a cash cow for one landlord, a huge student apartment complex, a new parking problem and increased traffic. It also sets a precedent for future intrusions into other near downtown neighborhoods. The question is, will council yield to the threat that Mr. DeParry will build City Place (a shabby apartment building on the Fifth Avenue site) if Heritage Row is not approved. Is the lesser of two evils not still somewhat evil?
ArgoC
Sun, Jul 4, 2010 : 11:45 a.m.
I have to agree. The Heritage Row project reminds me of the Braun Court project as well as the Hobbs&Black conversion of a church and several houses at the corner of Huron and State. I'd really like to see more of this kind of approach. I'm disappointed in Council's actions, to say the least.
Me Next
Sun, Jul 4, 2010 : 11:43 a.m.
I assume "Opinion" has no investment in "German Town"& desires to steal value of private property by an Unconstitutional Governing Power Never granted such Power. "the whole city benefit" IF only there were No Private Property Rights. Seems this man invaded by purchasing land to create a new & undesired community for his profit. Since when did a "city" become owner of what a lawful individual labored for? By what authority could Gov not serve residents by Decreeing ultimate ownership to satisfy the desire of unaffiliated people. Would you let me put a big box in the middle of your home & put people in it & you can just live around it & them - it's their Right to be there because using your home is good for us all. "city Gov" must tax to provide "common needs" in accordance to the chosen lifestyles of those that own the private property & those directly affected by submitting to opinions. "resist change" & they have every American right to do so. If the jobs are there, they will come; & they will live in what's available - it's not "city gov's" place to involve itself in housing workers. Free Country comes with individual's shopping what is available. "appalled" that people have Private Property Rights & the right to maintain their community that makes them happy. How appalling do you sound?
Alfie
Sun, Jul 4, 2010 : 10 a.m.
Well said!! I could not agree more. The Heritage Row project would have been excellent for the ENTIRE City of Ann Arbor. While a project like The Moravian was not an acceptable PUD, Heritage Row was truly unique, innovative, and offered a great product the City has not seen in a long time(if ever). The approved projects downtown cited by opponents are clearly marketed to students, by the developers own admission. Look at the facts, this was different. It is unfortunate the false information spread by a couple of neighbors cost the whole city the benefit this project would have provided. Watching a couple of council members speak out against the project, it was shockingly clear they didnt understand the facts and just blindly supported the accusations spread by a very small minority of neighbors(or were to scared by the looming election).