We’re out of town for the rest of the week. Here’s something about another Lower Town historic district delay.
15 Responses to “Snooze”
209 “resources” and they have a half-dozen supporters. That coupled with the “you do not ask people living in the district to vote on it” comment makes me feel like democracy is alive and well.
Call them properties if resources is offensively euphemistic for you, Tim, but I don’t see that democracy is the issue here nor that it should be. Should the integrity of a historical neighborhood be solely or primarily in the hands of the people who happen to be living there at any given moment? The fact is that lower town is lousy with anti-change post-hippies who opposed any development at all, so it isn’t as though they don’t care. But individuals come and put up suburban special front-ended (garage in front) hideous monsters in the middle of quaint west and northside enclaves, and there is no process to decide how destructive it is. Landmark status can be overly restrictive so most of us are reticent to seek it, but MAN do some of these people get it wrong.
I’m afraid the real problem is lack of self-regulation because Ann Arborites tend to lack… taste and common sense.
And so we’ll look to government to determine what is tasteful and protect all that is good and beautiful? I can guaran-freakin’-tee you I’m a thousand times more conservative than anyone who posts on this blog and the thought of the government telling me what’s tasteful, historic, or good for me and the common man gives me the heebie-jeebies as much as any of my hippy northsider neighbors with their “End the War!” and “Impeach Bush†signs feel from living under the Bush Administration. Ever watch a HDC meeting? People worrying about the feds spying on the average schmoe should check out a meeting or read the minutes of one. I’m generally in favor of Historic Preservation but so far the HDC can’t seem to write a ordinance or draw a district map that’ll pass legal muster. I want these folks, all well-meaning I’m sure/hope, measuring my porch and telling me what kind of replacement windows I can buy? I think it was that great American patriot Ludacris who gave us these words of wisdom inrelation to government interference in “Stay the fuck up out my biznassâ€.
And so we’ll look to government to determine what is tasteful and protect all that is good and beautiful? I can guaran-freakin’-tee you I’m a thousand times more conservative than anyone who posts on this blog and the thought of the government telling me what’s tasteful, historic, or good for me and the common man gives me the heebie-jeebies as much as any of my hippy northsider neighbors with their “End the War!” and “Impeach Bush†signs feel from living under the Bush Administration. Ever watch a HDC meeting? People worrying about the feds spying on the average schmoe should check out a meeting or read the minutes of one. I’m generally in favor of Historic Preservation but so far the HDC can’t seem to write an ordinance or draw a district map that’ll pass legal muster. I want these folks, all well-meaning I’m sure/hope, measuring my porch and telling me what kind of replacement windows I can buy? I think it was that great American patriot Ludacris who gave us these words of wisdom in relation to government interference in our daily life: “Stay the fuck up out my biznassâ€.
Hooray for small-c conservatism! And down with regulations that would force owners to maintain unlivable buildings just because they’re historic.
But, I can’t help putting in a vote for *some* regulation to fairly preserve property values and avoid the whole tragedy of the commons scenario. You have to regulate the common resource (ie the historic-looking neighborhood) a little bit to avoid the race to build and sell a large modern home or condo tower before your neighbor does. That race will not only destroy whatever legitimate historic value may be present in the neighborhood, but will slash property values for those who don’t sell fast enough to get the “cute neighborhood bonus” on the sale price.
Also, there is Democracy and there is Tyranny of the Majority…if regulations and laws were open to interpretation by “the people,” we would have people hanging dead from lamposts (Judge Roy Bean style) and an Applebee’s on every corner.
We’re talking about home building, not hanging offenses. And it sounds like we’re having a tyranny of the minority, and then not even a minority that thinks it relevant to ask the people who would be affected. If people are concerned with what is happening to these homes, resources, whatever, then they should buy them and protect them. It is unreasonable for you or me or anyone without a vested financial/property interest to make unreasonable demands on those people who do. Why people in Ann Arbor (and many other cities) feel they have a right to establish control over other people’s property is beyond me. This should be left up to the owners of the 200-odd buildings in the Lower Town, and no one else. Now, in the spirit of OFWinsurgent, I’m not suggesting that people build toxic dumps in the middle of a residential area, but if I buy a piece-of-crap house, I don’t think it is unreasonable for me to make improvements to or build an entirely new house.
The Study Committee filed petitions with 140 signatures in favor of the proposed district last Monday. That’s more than the “antis” were able to muster.
Also, Monday was not a true public hearing. It was just “public comment reserved time”. All eight speakers who spoke on the district spoke in favor.
I’m glad to see we don’t have to drive to Militia-ville (12 miles?) to find a citizen as passionately skeptical of the GOV-ER-MINT to oppose control of the reckless destruction of cultural legacy, but that don’t make it rahhht (even if you say it twice, cowboy)
Cultural legacy? My neighbors built their house, which won’t be included in the district, after moving here in the 40’s from the deep South to one of the few areas in town a Black family could live in. He also built the house next to him on the other side. Mine? Moved in the 50’s from where the old Suzuki Tech Center now sits. Been added onto and changed repeatedly over the last 106 years. Mine is just old and out of square. Their house has more historical value in my eyes. When his widow dies someone will be able to buy it, knock it down, and build whatever the building department and zoning will allow. So much for protecting the cultural legacy.
As to saying it twice, you never made a mistake in your life posting? Plus you can lose the cowboy thing, I’m from Flint originally; not Grand Blanc or Fenton or Davison like that poser Michael Moore, but the real gritty city. What I am is one of the few uncloseted conservatives up on the Northside, let alone in the People’s Republic. Forgive me if I’m not terribly impressed by the functioning of city government, except the garbagemen and the forestry department.
The logic then is: if something valuable is not included in the protection, protection is bunk. And if you aren’t impressed with city services, besides garbage and forestry (and compared to Flint, apparently), we should just forget about any city planning and historic preservation (yeeee-hah!). So city zoning is gonna do any *worse* than the so-called stewards of the unzoned property, one of the town’s oldest houses? Dude, they razed it.
Hate to confess it, but the news is: protecting cultural legacy is *conservative*. In a good way (yes, Virginia, there is one)
209 “resources” and they have a half-dozen supporters. That coupled with the “you do not ask people living in the district to vote on it” comment makes me feel like democracy is alive and well.
posted by Tim on May 18th, 2006 at 4:42 pmThanks, AAIO, for leaving town with such a compelling topic to keep us busy.
I, for one, am rivited.
posted by OFWinsurgent on May 18th, 2006 at 10:56 pmCall them properties if resources is offensively euphemistic for you, Tim, but I don’t see that democracy is the issue here nor that it should be. Should the integrity of a historical neighborhood be solely or primarily in the hands of the people who happen to be living there at any given moment? The fact is that lower town is lousy with anti-change post-hippies who opposed any development at all, so it isn’t as though they don’t care. But individuals come and put up suburban special front-ended (garage in front) hideous monsters in the middle of quaint west and northside enclaves, and there is no process to decide how destructive it is. Landmark status can be overly restrictive so most of us are reticent to seek it, but MAN do some of these people get it wrong.
I’m afraid the real problem is lack of self-regulation because Ann Arborites tend to lack… taste and common sense.
posted by buzz on May 19th, 2006 at 10:11 am“I’m afraid the real problem is lack of self-regulation because Ann Arborites tend to lack… taste and common sense.”
Most Americans do, I think.
posted by Dave on May 19th, 2006 at 12:10 pmAnd so we’ll look to government to determine what is tasteful and protect all that is good and beautiful? I can guaran-freakin’-tee you I’m a thousand times more conservative than anyone who posts on this blog and the thought of the government telling me what’s tasteful, historic, or good for me and the common man gives me the heebie-jeebies as much as any of my hippy northsider neighbors with their “End the War!” and “Impeach Bush†signs feel from living under the Bush Administration. Ever watch a HDC meeting? People worrying about the feds spying on the average schmoe should check out a meeting or read the minutes of one. I’m generally in favor of Historic Preservation but so far the HDC can’t seem to write a ordinance or draw a district map that’ll pass legal muster. I want these folks, all well-meaning I’m sure/hope, measuring my porch and telling me what kind of replacement windows I can buy? I think it was that great American patriot Ludacris who gave us these words of wisdom inrelation to government interference in “Stay the fuck up out my biznassâ€.
posted by Thomas Cook on May 19th, 2006 at 2:54 pmAnd so we’ll look to government to determine what is tasteful and protect all that is good and beautiful? I can guaran-freakin’-tee you I’m a thousand times more conservative than anyone who posts on this blog and the thought of the government telling me what’s tasteful, historic, or good for me and the common man gives me the heebie-jeebies as much as any of my hippy northsider neighbors with their “End the War!” and “Impeach Bush†signs feel from living under the Bush Administration. Ever watch a HDC meeting? People worrying about the feds spying on the average schmoe should check out a meeting or read the minutes of one. I’m generally in favor of Historic Preservation but so far the HDC can’t seem to write an ordinance or draw a district map that’ll pass legal muster. I want these folks, all well-meaning I’m sure/hope, measuring my porch and telling me what kind of replacement windows I can buy? I think it was that great American patriot Ludacris who gave us these words of wisdom in relation to government interference in our daily life: “Stay the fuck up out my biznassâ€.
posted by Thomas Cook on May 19th, 2006 at 2:55 pmsorry for the duplicate
posted by Thomas Cook on May 19th, 2006 at 2:55 pmWell said!
posted by Dave on May 19th, 2006 at 3:46 pmHooray for small-c conservatism! And down with regulations that would force owners to maintain unlivable buildings just because they’re historic.
But, I can’t help putting in a vote for *some* regulation to fairly preserve property values and avoid the whole tragedy of the commons scenario. You have to regulate the common resource (ie the historic-looking neighborhood) a little bit to avoid the race to build and sell a large modern home or condo tower before your neighbor does. That race will not only destroy whatever legitimate historic value may be present in the neighborhood, but will slash property values for those who don’t sell fast enough to get the “cute neighborhood bonus” on the sale price.
posted by RD on May 19th, 2006 at 7:14 pmAlso, there is Democracy and there is Tyranny of the Majority…if regulations and laws were open to interpretation by “the people,” we would have people hanging dead from lamposts (Judge Roy Bean style) and an Applebee’s on every corner.
posted by OFWinsurgent on May 19th, 2006 at 9:38 pmWe’re talking about home building, not hanging offenses. And it sounds like we’re having a tyranny of the minority, and then not even a minority that thinks it relevant to ask the people who would be affected. If people are concerned with what is happening to these homes, resources, whatever, then they should buy them and protect them. It is unreasonable for you or me or anyone without a vested financial/property interest to make unreasonable demands on those people who do. Why people in Ann Arbor (and many other cities) feel they have a right to establish control over other people’s property is beyond me. This should be left up to the owners of the 200-odd buildings in the Lower Town, and no one else. Now, in the spirit of OFWinsurgent, I’m not suggesting that people build toxic dumps in the middle of a residential area, but if I buy a piece-of-crap house, I don’t think it is unreasonable for me to make improvements to or build an entirely new house.
posted by Tim on May 19th, 2006 at 10:39 pmThe Study Committee filed petitions with 140 signatures in favor of the proposed district last Monday. That’s more than the “antis” were able to muster.
Also, Monday was not a true public hearing. It was just “public comment reserved time”. All eight speakers who spoke on the district spoke in favor.
posted by Anonymous on May 20th, 2006 at 7:04 pmI’m glad to see we don’t have to drive to Militia-ville (12 miles?) to find a citizen as passionately skeptical of the GOV-ER-MINT to oppose control of the reckless destruction of cultural legacy, but that don’t make it rahhht (even if you say it twice, cowboy)
posted by buzz on May 24th, 2006 at 9:46 pmCultural legacy? My neighbors built their house, which won’t be included in the district, after moving here in the 40’s from the deep South to one of the few areas in town a Black family could live in. He also built the house next to him on the other side. Mine? Moved in the 50’s from where the old Suzuki Tech Center now sits. Been added onto and changed repeatedly over the last 106 years. Mine is just old and out of square. Their house has more historical value in my eyes. When his widow dies someone will be able to buy it, knock it down, and build whatever the building department and zoning will allow. So much for protecting the cultural legacy.
posted by Thomas Cook on May 25th, 2006 at 9:14 amAs to saying it twice, you never made a mistake in your life posting? Plus you can lose the cowboy thing, I’m from Flint originally; not Grand Blanc or Fenton or Davison like that poser Michael Moore, but the real gritty city. What I am is one of the few uncloseted conservatives up on the Northside, let alone in the People’s Republic. Forgive me if I’m not terribly impressed by the functioning of city government, except the garbagemen and the forestry department.
The logic then is: if something valuable is not included in the protection, protection is bunk. And if you aren’t impressed with city services, besides garbage and forestry (and compared to Flint, apparently), we should just forget about any city planning and historic preservation (yeeee-hah!). So city zoning is gonna do any *worse* than the so-called stewards of the unzoned property, one of the town’s oldest houses? Dude, they razed it.
Hate to confess it, but the news is: protecting cultural legacy is *conservative*. In a good way (yes, Virginia, there is one)
posted by buzz on May 31st, 2006 at 10:38 pm