Comments on: Better Deal Desired for Fuller Road Station

By: Mark Stock

Mark Stock — Wed, 12 May 2010 22:52:04 +0000

Seems to me the City has been had at the old rate when costs are put in dollars per parking spot and with all things being negotaible I beleive the City is being reasonable with it’s request of new language and terms under which the land is leased…U-M has been having it’s cake and eating it too at the expense of the city for too long IMO.

By: Lou Glorie

Lou Glorie — Tue, 11 May 2010 15:21:55 +0000

The university’s parking needs are not our concern. UM has plenty of land (Pfizer) to put up a structure. As for jobs, there is no policy that I’m aware of that gives Ann Arbor residents priority for jobs, so the creation of jobs does not necessarily benefit AA unless we have determined that jobs in parking lots are the best we can do.

The point about the present use is irrelevant. This parcel has been leased from the park system for that use at the expense of space for fields. The fact that this parcel is part of the park system should require that the transfer of rights of use be considered a sale of parkland and go to the voters. The University could then pay market value ($4million +) for the land.

At the time that council presented the language of the charter amendment for the “protection” of parkland, it was noted by many that the language was deliberately vague. It should have included requirements that any change of rights of use–such as gifting or long term leases, be put to the voters for approval.

Another point–very important–is that the project we are now discussing is “Phase I”. What it consists of now is a parking structure with showers and bike racks. At this stage there is no reason why our city should throw a cent into yet another garage.

The choochoos will start arriving “sometime” in the future. Projects of this sort are not the job of small college towns. The project, if it is ever properly funded at the federal and state levels, might require some financial commitment from our city, but not at this stage of the game. That is “Phase II”.

For now let’s call this what it is–a parking structure. Also, we now know why the city has been hoarding the roads millage money–to tart up Fuller Rd as our “gateway” to the Garage on Huron.

By: p

Thu, 06 May 2010 14:28:38 +0000

To summarize: the University needs parking for the new jobs it’s creating. Those jobs are being created through the hospital, which pays for itself rather than being subsidized by tax dollars. The University could have legally built parking on land it owns on Wall Street without any consent from the City whatsoever. After pressure from neighbors, they agreed to halt that project. Now the PAC wants to charge them an extra +$100K/yr to use the land in spite of the fact that there is no net change in impervious surface or total land devoted to parks.

On the surface, this seems rather spiteful and greedy.

By: David Lewis

David Lewis — Thu, 06 May 2010 04:33:44 +0000

Good lord folks, its been a paved parking lot for 15 years.

No place in the state has more people going to it than UM Hospital. It provides 20,000 jobs.

The UM just built a huge new Womens and Childrens Hospital, they need parking.

It will also be a bus terminal. Rail will come.

It gets tiring after awhile. There are no trees there, no grass either. Parks are really not holy places, at least not the ones that are parking lots.

This is one of the truly smart things to come along in quite awhile. Its a parking lot now, it could be the new gateway to Ann Arbor. Let it happen.