I Think It Was Formed Officially Two Weeks Ago As a Results of a Variety of People S Efforts

I Think It Was Formed Officially Two Weeks Ago As a Results of a Variety of People S Efforts

The Kalamazoo Coalition for Just-Development (a coalition of local residents, students, organizations, and local businesses) is calling for an exploratory moratorium due to concerns over the displacement of residents and environmental concerns that would accompany the proposed regulations. The Coalition expects the elected officials of the city of Kalamazoo to move forward in the most responsible fashion to ensure that residents and small business owners are not negatively impacted. To accomplish this goal, measures must be included to ensure that incoming developers hire neighborhood residents and that already present stakeholders have the necessary resources to participate in the revitalization of their neighborhood.The group will join with their supporters at City Hall, on Monday February 2nd at 7pm to propose the suggested moratorium meant to provide time for city employees to engage and work with neighborhood residents and stakeholders in revising the legislation to protect and enrich the existing neighborhood communities.
# # # #
Contact:
Michelle S. Johnson PhD, ( , 269.873.6828 )
Executive Director Fire Historical and Cultural Arts Collaborative,
and organizer for Kalamazoo Coalition 4 Just Development

I think it was formed officially two weeks ago as a results of a variety of people’s efforts tro have sustained discussion about some alternate ways to think about development more generally and specifically the southtown area. I am one of the executive director of and co-founders of fire. We are there in the Edison neighborhood and have been for nine and a half years. A one-time resident when we lived in the building.

Largest concern with the guideline expansion? I think the organization is concerned primarily in addition to business restriction, we want to make sure there is a corresponding just approach to development as it pertains to people and culture. Gentrificaitons models are happening across country. Want to make sure people aren’t dispkaced and people are empowered by changes that happen in the area. We’re not saying no development, we not curmudgeons, kind of key things that need to be in place. Now this is a new cool area and we have new people coming in without considering the same kinds of standards. There areals

What would your group like to see happen before commissioners approve the expansion of these guidelines, or would you like to see the expansion abandoned entirely?We would love to have a mortitorium on any kind of vote until there is an agreement made with standards of just development. Ensure that at least 50 percent of workforce hired within the proposed district. And 50 percent of new development are from folks invested for 5 years or more. Like to see support for existing residences and stakeholders, we want them to be drawn from people in the community. We’d also like the city to work with local communities to address the root causes of crimes. We feel real strongly that crime has roots in poverty and limited opportunities for young people and resources. We also know for instances domestic violence. To support the organizations like boys and girls and fire and Hispanic armerican council. Also want to be sure any new developments undergo environmental sustainability evaluation. Before we do a lot of building we make sure the land can withhold it. We’d love to see and know it may not be possible, like to see some kind of protection, rent protection for current renters that are living in the area so that as the value of the property rises, so does the protection for the folks that are living there. a multi-tiered proposal for getting info to and from current residents. There have been some outreach attempts, but residents and fire included have not been the recipents of that outreach. So that people have a sense of ownership in this kind of change. We are expecting that there be meetings held in Spanish for the latino community members. All flyers have been in English. Our heaviest population of latino residents in kalamazoo is in Edison. We want to be sure the dialogue.

I think it can be recitified. I think part of that is that there are multiple orgs that serve constituency of this area. I think it’s important for multiple orgs to be involved rather than a single org or a couple. One other piece that’s important is the whole kind of name change of the area. The shift from distinct neighborhoods to this kind of blanket name of southtown, which has no connection to the identity of any of these neighborhoods. What happens when you shift the name, crosstown and burdicksotuhdown sign, when you do something ,like that it’s a dangerous move, begins to erase cultural and neighborhood of people. Renaming is very much a part of gentrification, it’s a long standing tactic in American history. I’ve looked at this pretty extensively, when you shift a name you shift the identity and start to erase people’s connection to place. I think it’s very unfortunate that kind of thing is happening without any input from people. Without making these kinds of provision, we’re really doing the same old thing that’s happening across the country. Kalamazoo has the opp to really do something different, we can be a model of inclusive development of just development.

We were there three weeks ago, a number of us there, coalition was largely a result of people saying, rather than saying we don’t want development, saying. We’re not saying no to development, no to invigorate, we’re saying yes to just development. Much of

I’ve had conversations with vice mayor Anderson and Hopewell. And cinabro is open to having conversations as well, it appears that commissioner cooney feels along the same lines as coalition. It seems there is an openness to have a conversation, the timeline is moving forward without these expectations of just development is problematic. There is an openness but I think there needs to be an effort from the commissioners to say there are significant concerns here.

Really unacceptable to say we’re going to ave a thinktank in a year to address these expectations for just development. That needs to happen right now to figure out ways to be able to do this. a think tank in a year means there is no established sustained conversation with community which we fundamentally believe is necessary. Yay on the think tank starting this month. Probably about 7 organizing folks, but they represent larger groups like kalamaazoo for justice, fire historical, environmental organization, representative of a large group of people. Individuals that are connected.

I think this is the perfect opportunity for the city and residents and activists and nonprofits and community members to create a really distinctive kalamazoo. The coalition should not just be the folks in the room, but people from commission, this should not just be the folsk who have issues, but city employees,

Do you live or own a business in the affected area?

Do you feel residents weren’t given enough time to provide input on the expansion, or is it more that the opposition isn’t being heard?

Will members of your group be attending Monday night’s meeting?

City charter requires that ordinances be adopted at a regular meeting. Next Monday consider special since it’s not on the regular meeting. It won’t even be on the agenda for the 9th. Will be on for the 16th.

Richard Stewart?

So you would support the expansion with a 10 year grandfather clause for existing businesses?A concession to protect us. We’ve asked since day1 for an exemption and this is about as far as we can go and still feel safe in our own skin. We’re in the city’s way apparently and they don’t seem to value existing businesses.

The signage restrictions are the most restrictive in the city. size of the sign is dictated by the frontage we have on the road. We have all purchased our locations to fit our business needs under. We can’t go back and time and not invest in this area. None of us that were here would have invested in a downtown design district.

I listened to the city boast and pat themselves on the back about how wonderful of a job they’ve done. I personally don’t consider a bar or brew pub on a corner something to be proud of. This city has prostituted itself to the highest bidder.

How would you be affected is there was no grandfather clause?

Where do you feel the initiative to do this is coming from? Honestly I’m not sure what power basis is behind this. I would say more than anything, stubbornness from city staff. The most disturbing part is after listening to those lines of opposition, commissioner cinabro had the audacity to scold the public and you need to see the piece of that tape. His loyalty to protect the staff of the city outweighs his duty to listen and to protect the citizens. This goes to show that he has a prejudice that favors city employees. Makes me question whether a city employee can fulfill their duties as a commissioner. I feel he has a conflict of interest and should recuse himself from further involvement in the process.

We need to put this issue to rest. We all have better things to do. we need to put this to rest. I reach out to laura lam to add the partial grandfathering of the 10 year exemption to existing owners in commercial buildings or until it sells to put and end to this conflict. But I will tell you, have you talked to the executive.

I went door to door and spoke to all the businesses. Criticism from the city is that we haven’t participated in the meetings. That couldn’t be further from the truth. In 2002 I was on main street design committee. Started with group that began implementing what could eb done with portage road. City is saying this is a mirror imagine of t he program. Have attended every single meeting.Have watched as the opposition has grown every single meeting because the city won’t listen.

What is your business?REO Specialists LLC. Real estate broker that works with banks credit unions and gov on selling foreclosures. Been there about eight years. 914 S. Burdick St. I’m in the targeted zone. I purchased this building as a foreclosure when I bought it. Owner occupied commercial building with loft apartment which I occupy.

I’ve been involved since day 1. Attended first meeting in Oct. I saw the small group of opposition and it’s just grown since then. The city is just not listening. The group osbusinesses has just grown. There’s 68 pages of regulations the downtown deisng review district is the most regulated zone in the entire city. more restrictive than historic. Signage is incredibly restrictive. Most businesses couldn’t survive with the signs they approve. Well known in the current zone that the rules are not implemented equally. It’s not handled equally, there’s no oversight to it, basically in the hands of Sharon. They just have a seedy history with .we’reconcerened, tried to get third parties involved to help broker a concession. Urban planner recommended the partial granfathering, that would give us the time we need to adjust to the new restricitons and adapt our business models. The more that we have people look at this their first impressions are shocking. The first thing an environmentalists said it triples your carbon footprint. We’re being forced to go the opposite. These guidelines and mandates go the opposite direction. My concern is that they prohibit most common building materials, like vinyl siding, instead you have to use brick or granite. Simply not affordable for most of the older building owners. We’re all in agreement that this is not downtown by any sense of the word. They want to cause urban sprawl and we have our own unique problems in this area. Graffiti is a huge problem in this district. The city’s position is pay and stay or move and sell. They have incentive to push the owners of oklder buildings out by making life just a bit more difficult for them. When we sell they’re uncapped, so they could tax more. The guidelines make older buildings economically obsolete. Their building is an example of a building that is that conformed to these downtown guidelines.

3 p.m. 415 Stockbridge

Laura Lam: First official meeting was in Oct. Planning commission, decided to have extra meeting.

Initiative to do this: I think you’ve got a lot of new opportunities that are just popping up. I think the combination the Healthy Living Campus -- $42 million KVCC campus. You’ve got the opening of the med school just to the north, you’ve got Washington Square revitalization that’s really been 10 years plus. From the demolition of the DejaVu site to the transformation of the bookstore to the upgrades that are being made on a daily basis. You have all these new things that are popping up. And certainly, we are starting to getcalls of interest along Portage corridor: is there a plan for this area, what’s going on here? You start to realize a couple things, there’s likely a greater chance of private market interest on this corridor. 10 year plus history of revitalization efforts by the neighborhood. 2005 streetscape plan really calling for more pedestrian treatments and a more walkable environment. Design guidelines that go back to 2002. What tools do we have in our toolbox to be able to really guide in new development in a way that’s going to honor the work that’s been done and really create some quality vibrant product. Then you realize we don’t really have tools right now. Then you go to the downtown guidelines that are in place, you have a 10 year history, 430 applications filed with a lot of success stories. Then we started to ask the question, do you start from scratch, or do you take the existing framework that’s got some good success behind it and look at pulling those guidelines down. I think it’s important to note there’s not a one-size fits all for design guidelines, but if you begin to read into the guidelines and standards themselves, they’re not saying look like downtown, they’re saying, be in concert with the surrounding area. So if you’re in downtown, the surrounding area is downtown. If you’re in this area, when you’re looking at a proposal, take into consideration what’s around you. Although the name itself makes it feel like it’s solely and urban core guidelines, the idea is you’re having tools in place that will honor and respect the good that’s already there and then try to make the most of any new development that coming.

CONCERNS FROM CITIZENS: Zoning is going to dictate the use. That being said, within a zoning area, we do not have anything that speaks to the physical design. So when we talk about things like the setback of where a business is located, certainly we understand that people may be more likely to walk in an area that has buildings right up to the road that has visibility within the windows so you have something to interact within along the way. Those characteristics are desirable and yet a lot of times they’re not existing in this area. You’ve got private market interests potentially coming into an area and we don’t feel we have adequate tools to guide development in a way that’s going to truly enhance the neighborhood and the area.

Downtown guidelines: when you had a lot of things changing in the early 2000s in downtown, there were questions about design and standards. Those design guidelines that were born out of those conversations.

Rejections: depending on how you ask the question, in the approval, it’s tough tot piece out if there was back and forth. What we don’t have a number for is if there’s a little bit of back and forth. Even as part of this conversation, what we haven’t heard if downtown businesses jumping in trying to say why guidelines are problematic for them.

When we did the noticing , it was to the entire area. My feeling was at we went through questions, I didn’t see a lot of strong concerns being voiced.

CONFUSION: I think to some extent, there might be confusion between standards for new construction and standards for existing buildings. Within new construction, you’ll see it calls out inappropriate buildings materials as rough wood siding, stone aggregate, shingles, vinyl, aluminum siding. So here, we’re talking about new construction. EXISTING: a wide variety are appropriate, including but not limited to metal stone granite, brick… but it doesn’t say thou shall not do vinyl. What I’ve heard is someone will say, you have to do granite, you can’t put vinyl on existing buildings. And that I think is a confusion between what we’re saying for existing buildings and for existing construction. There are higher standards for new construction and that’s kind of a nod to its easier to start from scratch than to work with what you have. T I’ve not been able to identify specific instances where these would not work. What I’ve heard is well you can’t have vinyl and we’ll say no, in most instances you can.

Tier 1 review will be administrative, meaning replace a window, siding, a sign, those things will come through sharon and will be worked out that way. Bigger projects (façade) would actually go to review committee. When it comes to an existing building, all we say is window has to be clear and reflective. If you want to replace your windows, you do need to give sharon a call, you need to explain what you’re going to do. there is that additional review that is not there now. There’s a concern that it will be a higher cost or a higher price, committee can recommend materials that look nicer, but may not be a higher price. I’ve tried to understand the concerns about existing buildings and I have a hard time understanding them other than to say this can be kind of a difficult document to navigate.