Golden Rezoning Passes
The Golden Avenue anti-density zoning change passed unanimously last night. At least the landlord lobby seems to have done their research; they didn’t let one of the proposal’s supporters get away with casting it as a measure aimed solely at stopping commercial development, when just two months ago she had been issuing dire warnings about “the encroachment of student housing.”
The neighborhood, Judy McGovern writes, is “home to both year-round residents and students in rental properties.” This terminology pretty much sums up everything that’s wrong with the way we look at housing and at adulthood in general — not just in Ann Arbor but everywhere.
You’re either a “student in a rental property” or a “year-round resident.” That’s how normal people live, anyway. They go to college, party a bit and then settle down in a nice house with a family. Twenty- and thirtysomethings who rent and live alone or with roommates? Sure, they exist, but they are “adultolescents” who refuse to grow up. Or, if we’re being charitable, they are forced by economic circumstances beyond their control to delay the onset of real adulthood.
In any event, there’s no reason to design policies to accommodate them. They’ll never learn that way.
I’ve lurked around this blog for awhile now, but this one is the one that really got in my craw. I realize I’m preaching to the choir here, but what about grad students who have rented the same house for multiple years (four, for me) with a friend or ten to keep the rent low and stay in AA for the summer doing research? Shouldn’t we qualify as year-round residents? According to my driver’s license, I’m officially a resident of this town. I vote. I pay taxes. Would it be different if I was living here with a family? Am I supposed to be penalized for not marrying my college sweetheart and immediately cranking out babies because we recognized that it wasn’t going to work out longterm and we thought our careers were more important? A career, which by the way, has left me stuck in this town until I get my PhD. Or maybe it would be different if I decided, in this treacherous housing market, that it was a good idea to invest in a house? Yeah, that’s how they qualify adults in New York.
Whew, rant over. Thanks for the Internet space.
posted by AA Grad Student on February 20th, 2008 at 1:10 pmThey don’t literally mean “year-round residents,” of course. Lots of students stay here year-round. Who does McGovern think those Summer Fest workers she thinks should be an exception to living wage laws are? And they don’t really mean permanent residents either, since lots of people move for their jobs these days. They mean residents like them.
At least A2 has not yet been infected with the particular “progressive” line of thinking that adults who live with roommates are privileged brats ruining the rental market for families with babies. I think that’s because no one acknowledges that families might rent.
posted by ann arbor is overrated on February 20th, 2008 at 1:43 pmThat was a crappy move by City Council, and really a uniquely ann arbor experience-for a town that charges developers money for low income housing!
posted by juliem on February 20th, 2008 at 1:55 pmEveryone is being so melodramatic about this when actually all that happened was the zoning on Golden was changed to match the streets around it. No will will lose any housing or have to move because of the change. Any and all existing multi-family dwellings will be grandfathered in until someday down the road their use changes. Otherwise all that is prevented is the conversion of more single family homes to multi-family. It will be years and years down the road before any noticeable change could be seen, if then.
It will also prevent a developer from buying adjacent lots and putting up a large apartment building. That’s it, that’s all it does.
posted by Dustin on February 20th, 2008 at 3:09 pm“Otherwise all that is prevented is the conversion of more single family homes to multi-family. It will be years and years down the road before any noticeable change could be seen, if then.”
All that’s happened is that another area of Ann Arbor has basically had the door slammed shut on any hope of affordable housing there. Which is fine if you already got yours, not so good if you had hopes for further development making Ann Arbor a less yuppified place to live.
posted by js on February 20th, 2008 at 5:03 pmLook, Dustin, it is in poor form to be selfish and then deny that you are actually selfish.
posted by juliem on February 20th, 2008 at 6:20 pmAll my best friends are adultolescents
posted by (former) OFWinsurgent on February 20th, 2008 at 10:08 pmHave you actually looked at Golden? It is what passes for affordable housing in central Ann Arbor. The houses are, for the most part, very small. There is no way that six adults would choose to live in most of them, and you couldn’t even add on to get six bedrooms. There are families — with, God help us, children — renting houses on Golden, as well as young couples, and singles. Why should its zoning be different than Park, parallel to it? Because whoever tore down a couple of houses and put up the apartment building 40 years ago had clout, that’s why.
posted by Clem on February 20th, 2008 at 10:17 pmI agree that the distinction between transient students and stable families is short-sighted. Because of the local culture and because it is a college town, A2 can be very attractive to what Richard Florida termed the “creative class”: young, bright professionals who choose where to live as much based on the local culture as employement opportunities. This is the exact group that a company like Google wants to recruit, and apparently does an excellent job of keeping happy. But it’s Ann Arbor and Detroit’s inability to cater to this group as well as other places that oftentimes makes these cities a pitstop on the way to Chicago, New York or LA for a lot of 20 and 30-somethings. Now, it’s true that there are a lot of married people in this age-group, some with kids some without, but if Ann Arbor did a better job of making this a desireable and more affordable place to live, I think they’d see the benefits.
posted by Leah on February 22nd, 2008 at 12:18 pmI agree with Leah. Lord knows Ann Arbor has tried to keep people here, and I think something that Ann Arbor has going for it is the “it’s better than anywhere else in Michigan” factor. I’d add, though, that the *state* has to do something, too. My partner and I, after having been here for 7 years, are leaving Michigan in large part b/c this state is not at all friendly to gay people. And things don’t look like they’re changing quickly. When you take that into consideration along with all sorts of other things–not terribly close to a vibrant urban core, clouds, decomposing infrastructure, snow, ineffective government, dreadful economy–Ann Arbor’s fighting a losing battle. For now. The eastern state we’re moving to is much better than Michigan on a number of these issues.
Ann Arbor’s a great place to raise a family. But to be young and without kids and not terribly close to a vibrant city easily accessible by public transportation just isn’t cool.
posted by OWSider on February 22nd, 2008 at 12:48 pm