The Comedy Club

note from the editor: this essay was written in November 2022, and originally contained footnote citations which, regrettably, are unable to be applied on this webpage. Please refer to the list of sources for additional information.

At its current iteration’s final meeting on November 10, the Ann Arbor City Council approved the rezoning of 190 properties to allow the development of high-density, “downtown- style” structures on the city’s west side. Proponents of the planned redevelopment welcome the move away from vehicle dependence in the area, and see the project as an important step in advancing the city’s climate goals, while also addressing the need for additional housing. Opponents, however, view the project as a step in the wrong direction, and voice wariness of newcomers to the city bringing their carbon footprints along with them, while also expressing fears over the potential loss of small business in the area. While these factors are all certainly worthy of consideration, it appears the city at large seems to have mistaken its priorities. After all, there exists an entire planet’s worth of carbon pollution beyond the city limits of Ann Arbor, Michigan, and the city’s goal of carbon neutrality by the end of this decade amounts to a relatively meager impact on global efforts in the midst of our climate crisis. It is for this reason that the far more salient issue of Ann Arbor’s housing crisis, an issue which the city has a greater means of addressing and which has more immediate material benefit for its citizens, should be prioritized over climate goals with the development of the TC1 district. Ultimately, however, if history is any indicator, the outlook in either regard bodes poorly from any angle.

Context into the city of Ann Arbor’s climate goals is necessary, alongside a look at the current state of Ann Arbor’s housing situation, in order to come to a comprehensive understanding of the development of the TC1 district, and ultimately why the prioritization of the former issue is to the detriment of the latter. First, consider the city’s carbon neutrality plan, A2Zero. In six “core strategies”, the city lays out its goals for 2030. While the means by which each of these strategies will be specifically realized in the development of the district remains unclear, in the ordinance’s statement of general intent, the city provides: “This district has been created to…realize mixed use developments…as well as encourage affordable housing, enable more housing choices, more sustainable forms of development, with reduced resource and energy dependence”. With these intentions in mind, the district would indeed appear to advance the goals of resilience, energy efficiency, and reduced vehicle dependence, through the nature of mixed-use development. While objectively positive in this regard, the city’s stated intent is subverted through allowing the continued existence of nonconforming (i.e. single-story buildings and lots) structures within the new district as-is, with the promise of conforming redevelopment at an as-yet undetermined date. Whether intended or not, this would have the added effect of exorbitantly raising land values where these nonconforming structures currently reside, ushering in a new wave of land speculation in the city. Going forward, this all would suggest that the kind of change the rezoning promises, that is, sustainable, affordable, “downtown-style” living, will be slow to appear, and is therefore unlikely to substantively aid in meeting the city’s climate goals by 2030.

Beyond climate is the issue of housing affordability and availability. In short, there exists a woeful lack of each. Simple math indicates that to afford the Fair Market rate of $1,047 for a studio apartment in the city, an individual must earn no less than $37,692 per year, or $18.12 per hour, 40 hours per week. With median rental prices rising above $1100 for a studio apartment in the city in 2022,5 and any new development amounting to complexes such as the Standard (with a single shared bedroom starting as low as $1530 per person!), it’s no wonder city councilwoman Kathy Griswold would implicate Ann Arbor’s mayor of catering to real-estate interests in the approval of the TC1 district. Adding to this is are the types of housing allowed under the new ordinance.8 Notably, allowing the construction of townhouses speaks to the city’s prioritization of climate and/or profit to the detriment of housing access, offering a smaller carbon footprint over single-family dwellings, to be sure, while accommodating no greater number of individuals, should one be sold or leased to a single family. While the plan does offer incentives by way of increased height limits to developers meeting sustainability or affordability requirements,9 the ordinance itself does not provide any additional insight as to what these requirements actually are, leading one to assume the majority of the market-rate housing to be developed will ultimately exacerbate the city’s problem of affordability further.

Only time will tell if these grim predictions for the TC1 district will come to pass. In a less opaque scenario, the city would specify its affordability requirements to ensure the peace of mind of those most concerned in housing access. Likewise, they could assume a more aggressive stance in their climate action plan by utilizing their authority of eminent domain to expedite the redevelopment of the district’s nonconforming structures, subsequently realizing the district’s vision at a greater pace, while closing the door on would-be speculators. While these actions are not to be expected, each would certainly provide a far clearer path toward addressing the issues of climate and housing than the reality in which we currently find ourselves.

Sources

1. “Carbon Neutrality – A2ZERO.” The Plan, City of Ann Arbor, Michigan, Apr. 2020, https:// http://www.a2gov.org/departments/sustainability/Carbon-Neutrality/Pages/A2ZERO-Plan.aspx, p. 6.
2.  “TC1 Transit Corridor: Ordinance to Create a New Zoning District.” City Initiated TC1 Rezoning – Stadium Boulevard Area, City of Ann Arbor, Michigan, 2021, https://www.a2gov.org/departments/ planning/Documents/Planning/April%206,%202020%20Public%20Hearing%20(TC1).pdf, p.1.
3. Stanton, Ryan. “Big Rezoning Causes Drama at Last Meeting of Ann Arbor’s Outgoing Council.” MLive, 11 Nov. 2022, https://www.mlive.com/news/ann-arbor/2022/11/big-rezoning-causes-drama-at- last-meeting-of-ann-arbors-outgoing-council.html.
4. “Ann Arbor Fair Market Rent FY 2022 Ann Arbor, MI MSA Rental Data.” 2022 Fair Market Rent in Ann Arbor | RentData.org, https://www.rentdata.org/ann-arbor-mi-msa/2022.
5. “Apartment Floor Plans: The Standard at Ann Arbor.” Apartment Floor Plans | The Standard at Ann Arbor, https://www.thestandardannarbor.com/floorplans/#one-bed-content.