TC1 Zoning Enriches Landowners, Developers and Lawyers, and Hurts Marginalized Communities

by Cathy Antonakos, Ph.D.

I am writing to draw attention to the proposed transit corridor (TC1) zoning on Stadium Boulevard. The diagram below left from the City’s presentation material on TC1 zoning, depicts TC1 building heights and set-backs from residential areas, but it is misleading. For example, the figure suggests that a five story building will be the same height as a single family home.

A large area near Briarwood Mall (State & Eisenhower) was recently up-zoned to TC1. The rezoned area includes offices, restaurants, and retail and the distance to downtown Ann Arbor is about 2-1/2 miles.

The City is now proposing transit corridor re-zoning for the commercial area running from Aldi on Maple, along Stadium Boulevard, to Pauline Road. Just under 200 hundred parcels in this area would be re-zoned (up-zoned), allowing for high density, mixed use development. The area the City proposes to rezone is about two miles from downtown and about 1.5 miles long.

In principle, this re-zoning might seem innovative, consistent with goals to provide more housing and promote use of public transportation. But in reality, the Stadium Boulevard area is quite different from the State & Eisenhower area.

The Stadium Boulevard corridor is closer to downtown Ann Arbor than the State & Eisenhower area. There are no significant “buffers” such as railroad tracks or wide streets between Stadium Boulevard and nearby neighborhoods. High density development there would significantly impact nearby residents.

Immediately to the east there are neighborhoods. Immediately to the west, there is a freeway. North and south of the boulevard, there are more neighborhoods. The area is quite lively as compared to the State & Eisenhower area, which is a dull repetition of grassy areas with many buildings set back quite a distance from the road.

The Stadium Boulevard area has a mix of housing, businesses, apartments, and park land. It is a particularly good example of an area with mixed land uses that supports walking and bicycling. Walk score ratings confirm this.

Single-family housing provides benefits in terms of aesthetics, history, comfort for residents, green space, and trees. As we replace that resource –at a fast clip in some areas of the City– there is no evaluation of the cost to the community. Urban planning history is replete with examples of large-scale projects that replaced existing businesses, housing and culturally-rich areas with high-rises and highways. The negative impacts of these projects have fallen and continue to fall most heavily on marginalized communities while increasing the wealth of landowners, developers and the lawyers who represent them.

Stadium Boulevard might benefit from a smaller scale, evolving process of new development accompanied by evaluation of the results — not just in terms of the pre-fabricated “downtown style” the City wants, but in terms of metrics the people who live and run businesses there consider important.

Stadium Boulevard could be economically healthier and more environmentally attuned, by investment in existing businesses, infrastructure to promote energy efficiency, and landscaping for water retention, all at a lower cost to taxpayers, and with far less stress on aging infrastructure. We should slow down, evaluate, identify, and address critical needs, and build a vision for Stadium Boulevard as we go along, with input from the community, and without transit corridor re-zoning.