15. November 2005 • Juliew
Email this article
From last Friday’s Ann Arbor News
The City Council on Thursday discussed finding alternative housing for about 90 residents (from the old Y), a move that one council member estimated could cost the city about $1.6 million over the next two years. The council approved spending nearly $160,000 to keep the residents in two local motels through the end of the year.
The residents have been living in the motels since Oct. 20, when the old Y building was thought to be just temporarily closed after pipes broke and flooded a floor and knocked out the heat for the building. Officials had hoped the building could be fixed and the residents could be moved back in quickly into their single-room-occupancy efficiency units.
...because of the two upcoming University of Michigan football home games, the 90 residents are being moved today to hotels in Canton. The rooms the residents were in had been previously booked in advance by football fans.
Daniel Seller, a YMCA resident, said Thursday many of the residents weren’t happy about moving to Canton because it kept them far away from friends, family and vital medical services located in downtown Ann Arbor.
« Previous Article Greasy Spoon Anthology Accepting Submissions
Next Article Labor settlement dips into Ann Arbor's reserves »
|
—Juliew Nov. 15 '05 - 05:27PM #
—David Cahill Nov. 15 '05 - 05:55PM #
I imagine most of the people displaced probably relied on being within the AATA system or within walking distance to get to absolutely anything they were able to get to. (Why is it important to have affordable housing downtown? That’s why.) Being displaced to Canton is a pretty severe disruption…
—Murph. Nov. 15 '05 - 05:57PM #
—Juliew Nov. 15 '05 - 09:40PM #
Remember, the building was owned by the “Y”, not the City, until just recently. The condition was always bad, but the “Y” let it deteriorate markedly because they knew they were going to sell it when their new facility was built. An analysis was done to see if rehabilitation was possible. It is not, because the building was poorly built to start with, and there would have to be extensive asbestos remediation, which is very costly. To provide private bathrooms and kitchens would not have worked in a rehabbed building, and the number of units would have been reduced.
And, at the “Y”, the people living there were not tenants, they were hotel guests, and, as such had few, if any, rights. The City sued to make them tenants, but lost and they remained hotel guests.
The new building has private bathrooms and kitchens, rather than shared bathrooms and no kitchens, so the in the proposed development they will be treated like human beings.
—Leah Nov. 15 '05 - 11:11PM #
Wait…WHERE is Canton?
And why not Ypsi?
—Margaret Nov. 16 '05 - 10:30AM #
Why Canton? A number of the western Wayne County townships were named for Chinese cities, including Nankin (now Westland), and Pekin (now Redford), supposedly because the surveyors who laid out those areas were discontented with their compensation, and associated China with “cheap”.
—Larry Kestenbaum Nov. 16 '05 - 01:45PM #
As Leah says, the proposed new building will maintain 100 units of very affordable housing on site, targeted at people earning from 15% to 40% of area median income; currently (er, until just recently) the residents of the old Y were paying $380/mo for single rooms with shared bathrooms and no kitchens; HDC’s proposal involves private bathrooms and kitchens in every unit, with rents ranging from a little over $200 to $500/mo. the redevelopment won’t be open until the end of 2008, it sounds like, but HDC apparently has some commitment to provide housing for the Y’s residents in the interim, and is putting together that plan with the County/City right now? They didn’t elaborate much.
Attendance at the meeting was sparse, due to weather, and the developers said they’d probably have another when more people could come (this one was invitation-basis to the Old West Side, New West Side, Near West Side (ah, overlapping associations!), South Main Neighbors, and Downtown Area CAC). Bloggers made up almost half the crowd; Dale, JulieW, and I were matched by JulieW’s husband, Sonia Schmerl, and a couple who live on Hamilton Pl. (a block away from the site) whose names I didn’t catch. Everybody seemed fairly happy with the project, though not without grilling the presenters first…
—Murph. Nov. 16 '05 - 02:34PM #
—Dale Nov. 16 '05 - 03:49PM #
Did anyone say roughly when the Old Y building will be demolished?
—David Cahill Nov. 16 '05 - 03:50PM #
—Young Urban Amateur Nov. 16 '05 - 06:53PM #
—Dale Nov. 16 '05 - 07:14PM #
Yes, 3 years – they’re talking about a year to get all their approvals and their financing in place, and then 18-24mos. construction time.
Funding-wise, they’ve got a best-case scenario which involves a competitive (by lottery) program that would yield $17m of the $18m involved in building the replacement affordable housing. This would allow them to build an additional 45 rental units targetted at 60% AMI households. Their fallback funding plan involves all units beyond the 100 replacements being market-rate for-sale.
They’re also working with the DDA to finalize parking arrangements (the DDA would like to consider adding an extra level u/g of public (permit) parking); with the Feds, about the pedestrian pathway running along the northern edge of the redevelopment; with figuring out the availability of brownfield TIF funding; etc.
Such is the nature of downtown, mixed-income, mixed-use, transit-centered, brownfield, blah blah blah, development.
Building 100 Levittown houses in Lima Township would no doubt happen a little faster, but we’ve already decided that’s not what we want for the outlying townships, right?
—Murph. Nov. 16 '05 - 07:38PM #
The City is not, at this time, collecting any rent and I believe that they will be looking into moving the residents into apartments for 2006-08.
Why so long? I think Murph explained it very well.
It is my understanding that they will not be returning to the “Y” on Fifth. I hope not, because the building is a disgrace.
—Leah Nov. 16 '05 - 07:50PM #
Anyone interested in what will be happening at the Old Y site is welcome to come to the meeting of the Library Board this Monday, Nov. 21, in the fourth floor board room of the Downtown Library, 343 South Fifth Ave, in AA.
The Board will be hearing an update on the Y site from Connie Dimond of JJR and Bob Jacobson of HDC Construction Co. I will be asking about what will happen to our evacuees after their stay at the motels is concluded. I will also be asking if the fact that there will be no more guests at the Y hotel means that the task of constructing the new building will be made easier, faster, and cheaper. After all, there will no longer be the requirement that the hotel remain open while part of the site is demolished.
The meeting starts at 6:00 p.m. This presentation should start shortly after we are called to order.
Members of the public are welcome at our meetings, but only Board members can ask questions. So if you have a particular question you want me to ask, please post it here.
Also – as a special bonus, those at the meeting will be able to hear a presentation on the proposed schematic design of the replacement Northeast Branch library at Traverwood and Huron Parkway. I just got my packet, and I’m really impressed with the design.
—David Cahill Nov. 19 '05 - 04:19PM #
Then I asked for his best guess as to housing for the evacuees after January 1, when the motels would not be used any longer. He said they were preparing three options for City Council for next week, plus a fourth option: an estimated budget for putting the Y back together so that it could be used again for guests.
I also asked, if the Y is permanently closed, will there be any savings because you can demolish the whole structure at once? Bob said no. He said they had assumed that the tenants would be relocated for the two years of construction (late 2006 through late 2008), rather than trying to keep them housed on the site. He said the new problems at the Y just moved up the relocation by a year.
Ed Surovell, the president of the Library Board, said he presumed the current tenants were beginning to disperse. Bob said that a detailed assessment of those residents was underway now.
—David Cahill Nov. 22 '05 - 04:48PM #