Pat

Sat, Jan 12, 2013 : 11:42 p.m.

Why is this portrayed as a U of M project? DTE is leasing the land from U of M and they installed the solar panels. Doesn't DTE have to abide by the same rules regarding new construction and zoning as everyone else except U of M? It might be different if U of M contracted DTE to install the panels but DTE is paying for the use of the land.

Sue_Z_Q

Sat, Jan 12, 2013 : 3:50 p.m.

Yellow Halo Redux? Count me amongst the irked. Actually, amongst the really, really mad. The university putting such a large, ugly display along a main corridor entrance to Ann Arbor shows a complete disrespect for the Ann Arbor community. It was so thoughtless. It showed a complete lack of awareness for the aesthetic values of the surrounding area. Parke Davis and then Pfizer after it kept up that area in visually pleasing manner. I've lived in that area of Ann Arbor since the early 1970s. Every year they did something to improve the visual aesthetic of that area. Beautiful flowering crab apples. Berms covered in lovely vegetation to hide the parking areas. Adding native vegetation and prairie areas. Reconfiguring sidewalks into visually appealing patterns. Etc, etc, etc. I was so upset when Pfizer pulled out. I thought the area was going to become derelict so I was beyond pleased when the U of M bought the property. And not just because of economic reason. I thought surely they would keep up the grounds the way Pfizer did. Continue to respect the view shed. Instead, they construct a giant, ugly, industrial construction right up against Plymouth Rd?? On top of the parking structure Pfizer went out of its why to hide from the view shed of surrounding area? It totally reminds me of when the UofM added the yellow halo to Michigan stadium. Something totally against the Ann Arbor aesthetic. Is solar power a good thing? Of course. But, the UofM has plenty of space on the Pfizer property to fit in solar panels as large as those put along Plymouth Rd. There was NO reason to ruin the appearance of a main artery into Ann Arbor. I think perhaps they were trying to show off their greenness but they could have done it in a million different ways. I am so disappointed and I hope public outrage will force them to move the panels to another area of their property much the way public outrage against the yellow halo finally forced the U fM to change their path of the stadium.

LXIX

Sat, Jan 12, 2013 : 2 a.m.

For such a simply answer in America's Solar City these numbers are sure hard to find. Maybe this is a DIY thing. To power all of Ann arbor and the UM requires about 1500 GWh (gigawatt hours) electricity. If this plant is 750 MWh on 2.4 acres then thats 312.5 MWh per acre. Ask the professionals downtown for specific answers but here is some rough math. 1,500,000MWh/312.5MWh per acre means 4000 acres of land needed to power Ann Arbor's electricity needs with this type of solar cell (minus the farmers market, this site, and someone named Heidi). To find 4000 acres to power Ann Arbor & UM Ann Arbor has a total 18,000 acres Ann Arbor landfill has 470 acres Ann Arbor Airport 837 acres Fed qualified roads about 1200 acres Green Belt 2000 acres A2 Parks 2000 acres UM total 20,963 acres UM A2 campus about 3100 acres (minus the 2.4 acres covered with solar panels) Okay, who wants to give it up?

monte

Fri, Jan 11, 2013 : 6:43 p.m.

what a bunch of NIBYs im surprised by the so called progressive city....would they really rather see another coal or gas based power plant built in the area to meet growing demands in the future or some of these here and there, it is a CITY after all so what if it looks Industrial, so do cell phone towers and no-one makes a fuss about those

Soulful Adrenaline

Fri, Jan 11, 2013 : 5:31 p.m.

Kellie, do you have technical info about the array?

JRW

Fri, Jan 11, 2013 : 4:01 p.m.

When I first drove by these panels and saw them from Plymouth Rd, I thought they were bleachers for some kind of athletic field. They are unsightly, but there aren't any houses nearby on Plymouth Rd and it's across from an ugly strip mall. I think the real issue is that UM didn't communicate their intentions to the community beforehand, but UM doesn't do that in other cases, so what would make this one different. UM does what it wants in the city and deals with fallout later through their PR machine.

Dan Pritts

Fri, Jan 11, 2013 : 3:34 p.m.

NIMBY

Brian

Fri, Jan 11, 2013 : 3:09 p.m.

Pretty typical of Ann Arbor. "We support green energy, just not in my own backyard."

SWard

Fri, Jan 11, 2013 : 1:59 p.m.

Absolutely in favor of more projects like this, but what continues to dismay me is the UM's "bull in a china shop" approach to the rest of Ann Arbor. It really isn't that hard to attempt to build bridges, but sadly seems impossible for the U to do so. U of M Haiku: Don't like it, do you? U-M built this town, baby! In your face, A-A!

Shawn S.

Fri, Jan 11, 2013 : 1:16 p.m.

Liberal Ann Arbor is made about a green project because it is "ugly". Is it the gas station or strip mall across the street that are complaining that it is ugly? If you are complaining it is ugly as you drive by that is just crazy. Keep your eyes on the road and you won't notice. Here is the complaint plain and simple, solar panels help produce energy by using the sun and we need more of them to help curb greenhouse gases but I'll be damned if you put those ugly things in my eye sight!! And we wonder why people in Washington don't work well together.

L. C. Burgundy

Fri, Jan 11, 2013 : 4:25 a.m.

Southeast Michigan is meteorologically known as the stratus capital of the East for the reason. It's a lousy place for a solar installation. But if it's in the 5-year plan, I guess it must be.

calmic

Fri, Jan 11, 2013 : 1:38 a.m.

The issue is NOT about solar panels -- which in of themselves are a welcome alternative to fossil fuel. The issue is the thoughtless IN YOUR FACE siting of these panels tight to the road. It says something that the panels were placed as far away as possible from the UM building (former Pfizer).

SalineBob

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 11:59 p.m.

I propose converting all the bench seats in Michigan Stadium to solar panels. They are rarely covered up by rear ends and even on those days thermal energy and natural gas might be collected.

Kai Petainen

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 11:46 p.m.

I speak for myself and I don't represent anyone on here. Agreed -- that the public should be given the opportunity to voice an opinion on a development such as this. That would go for any energy project in the city, and it would have been nice if the community was involved more in the process. I do believe that the solar panels are a good thing -- I'd rather have solar panels than windmills in Ann Arbor.

Kevin Renner

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 11:16 p.m.

For real? This is an issue? The Pfizer building itself was industrialization of Plymouth Road, and a much bigger eyesore than any number of solar panels. Actually, from the moment one leaves Dixboro, almost all of Plymouth Rd. is just butt-ugly. Frankly, I find some of the housing in the area pretty ugly, too. In short, the benefits of this installation far outweigh any offense to your oh-so-delicate aesthetic sensibilities. Grow up, & find a REAL problem to whine about already!

ThulsaDoom

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 11:06 p.m.

What was wrong with the empty Pfizer building? Why did they have to put something useful, and environmentally there? If they must change things, the least they can do is put up another ugly strip mall.

Carolyn

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 10:25 p.m.

Setback: the distance of a structure or other feature - as a well or septic system (OR SOLAR PANELS ) from the property line or other feature (SIDEWALK) definition provided by Merriam-Webster online dictionary (parentheses added by me)

eze

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 10:13 p.m.

They could have set them back from the road a little bit at least. Another big kick in the pants from Mary Sue to the residents of Ann Arbor. Maybe they could put them on the Blimpy Burger site instead.

martini man

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 9:51 p.m.

So, this monstrosity will provide electric power for 100 homes ??? Will it be at the same level as currently considered normal ?? How many of these monstrosities would it take to provide power for enough homes to actually make a difference ??/ How many acres of panels would it take to provide power for a city the size of Ann Arbor ? Flint? Detroit ? What a bunch of crap !!!!

Richard Carter

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 9:46 p.m.

If only the City of Ann Arbor had some sort of, I don't know, funding for ... oh, maybe art. Yeah, that's it, art you put out in public -- public art. It could hide the solar panels. Can't see how a public art project would do anything but make everyone happier. amiright? ;)

Joe Edwards

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 9:24 p.m.

Being from West Virginia, I can attest that the solar panels (even without the future landscaping) look better than the scars left on the land by mountaintop removal coal mining.

15crown00

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 9:23 p.m.

understand this:Uni M does what it wants.If the people don't like it toooooooooo bad.

A2K

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 9:10 p.m.

I think the solar panels are quite beautiful- and what was there before but some grass, weeds, and a few trees stunted by salt from the road? Plant some orderly rows of tulips, summer-blooming bulbs, perennials in the front of the bank. I'm sure people bemoaned the millions of telephone poles and wire when telegraphs, and the later phones went in. The huge panels and mills of today will give way to smaller and more efficient technology faster than you can blink...IF SUPPORTED.

Mike

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 8:49 p.m.

I'm so sick of the hypocrisy of the environmental folks in their Prius's who complain every time they see a windmill or solar panel. Not in my backyard.......unreal........... Ted Kenedy stopped the wind farms off of Martha's Vinyards because he didn't want to see them and was a big champion of alternative energy. Kind of like all the crybabies downtown who don't like the tall buildings while voting to buy up farmald to stop sprawl.........

Kellie Woodhouse

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 8:12 p.m.

U-M filled a request I put in earlier. I've added this to the story: DTE offered U-M an initial payment of $12,000 and will pay the school $12,000 a year to use the land, according to a university official.

Dawn

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 8:11 p.m.

You want the world to go green then you complain when a major group does so. The Solar panels look fine, we are just used to manicured lawns and trees. Of course a manicured lawn is one of the worlds most wasteful ideas. Stop whining and promote more ways we can work together to SAVE OUR PLANET. I would much rather see an array of solar panels than see the fumes from exhaust on a cold winter morning. Breathe the air, nothing there where those solar panels sit. Now go to the nearest road and take a deep breath, like that choking feeling of exhaust. Smells great too doesn't it?

ffej440

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 8:08 p.m.

I'm sure the folks in Monroe would trade spots any day. You know .. the place that has the coal power plant that provides YOUR electricity. #2 in the nation for acid gas emmisions and #9 for mercury emmisions. And did I mention its also an eyesore.

intellcity

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 7:20 p.m.

I like it. It is a great example of going green. So what if it does not look like a tree. Lots of things do not look like a tree. It is a nice demonstration project of solar energy. We need a lot more of these. The technology is getting better and better. The costs are getting lower and lower. We talk a lot about "green Energy" but Michigan is a behinder not a leader in solar and wind energy. Drive your hybrid down Plymouth and think of all the other sites these solar panels 'could also be placed', not 'instead of here'.

TheNewGuy

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 7:20 p.m.

We are looking at them from the wrong angle. I understand that viewed from above it reads "Go Blue"

Richard Riker

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 6:58 p.m.

HaHa not going to lie, I love this story. You want to go green but want it someone elses neighborhood. Too late for that, may as well add a few windmills while your at it.

Sutro1

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 6:51 p.m.

What the U of M wants, the U of M gets. Do you really think it matters what anyone thinks? Not at all.

grimmk

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 6:49 p.m.

Are you serious? Eye sore? Really? If it was next to your house, MAYBE I'd understand, but it's not bothering anyone! It's good for the environment! You should get some on your roof and soon you'd be able to sell back power to DTE.

Ghost of Tom Joad

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 6:36 p.m.

This is the epitome of NIMBY

NewStart

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 6:32 p.m.

They've paved that part of paradise and put up a parking lot anyway, so who cares!?

Ben C

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 6:27 p.m.

Fourteen million for one hundred homes. How about DTE give me the $140,000 and I'll pay the normal rates. Ann Arborites love to spend other peoples money but guess what - there is no free lunch. The fouteen million is coming out of someones pocket and it is its property owners. The best estimate from an engineering friend is that the solar panels will take fifty years for the return on investment. So enjoy the view from Plymouth Road - or better yet put 18 panels in your front yard.

ArthGuinness

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 6:25 p.m.

Well, gee, if it's not a smokestack belching mercury into the air, it's an "eyesore". I don't really get it, but then I also find windmills attractive.

db

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 6:16 p.m.

Hi everyone, David Bizot here. I'd like to clarify some issues. First - do not misinterpret this as a NIMBY situation: - I support solar power. - I support it on NCRC. - I even support it, for the most part, exactly where it's being installed. Most the panels are on the reverse slope of a berm and largely hidden from the road, which is great. But, in my opinion (and others), portions of the project are located too close to the road and too high above grade, which radically changes the previous look of Plymouth Rd at this location. I stress that this impact could have been easily addressed during the planning stage HAD the university released site renderings and sought community input prior to construction. That this did NOT happen is my major complaint. Had adequate public engagement occurred, I'm very confident the project could have been modified in a way that addressed any aesthetic concerns while still meeting all of Uof M's goals (including the objective of public visibility). There are usually win-win solutions for these situations - but only when adequate transparency and a willingness to engage are present. In this case, neither were. I think the diversity of opinion being expressed in the comments is GREAT and reinforces how important it is that the university actively engage the public when planning major development and infrastructure changes at the NCRC. All these voices should have been heard early in the process when they could've made a difference - not now, when for the most part it's too late. My hope is that the university will make a greater effort int he future.

Ken Bayard

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 6:12 p.m.

front page, this story is right above this one http://www.annarbor.com/news/2012-was-the-hottest-year-on-record-in-us-and-ann-arbor/ Yet, you don't get it... When will you get it? When we have rolling black outs? When you have to put on some type of solar suit before stepping outdoors (yes, extreme, but trying to make a point.) Keep putting your blinders on. The array is no uglier than a gas station, strip mall or run down neighborhood, yet, they are everywhere... even your precious little Ann Arbor. What it does say about Ann Arbor is you care about the environment, you gave a little more money because its the right thing to do and you care about your children. Is it perfect? No, but it is a step in the right direction.

JRW

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:57 p.m.

"Peter Mooney, a northeast Ann Arbor resident and president of the Orchard Hills-Maplewood Homeowners Association, said he's hopeful the university will be more communicative in the future." Good luck. The UM does exactly what it wants and when it wants. AA has a short memory...does anyone recall the massive building project on the football stadium a few years ago and the horrendous noise it created for nearby residents? If anyone thinks UM cares what the city thinks about it's "development projects," think again.

julieswhimsies

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:55 p.m.

I'm going to stop reading these "comments". It makes Ann Arbor sound like the grouchiest bunch of whiners I've ever heard. I'll stick to the articles alone from now on.

Chris Taylor

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:55 p.m.

"Ann Arbor ethos" of the last 10/15 years = more strip malls, condos, coffee shops, tacky chain restaurants.

Ken Bayard

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:54 p.m.

They are the best thing to happen in and around that town in a long time! Congrats U of M

Nicholas Urfe

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:54 p.m.

So how long until umich decides to put in landscape choking windmills without community input?

Chris Taylor

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:53 p.m.

Recall Jane Lumm.

Chris Taylor

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:46 p.m.

People in Ann Arbor will complain about anything. More solar panels please! I live on the west side near the proposed new hotel site where the Michigan Inn used to be. I say put more solar panels there too. Anybody complaining about this is DUMB. Maybe they would like a coal fired energy plant there instead? Solar panels should be public mandate #1 and installed on every building roof and utility pole. Wake up people.

Kara McGilvray

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:40 p.m.

and why do we care if they look bad, if they are saving money on energy and making a difference in the world. Instead of putting up some dumb building that someone will probably also complain about. it's all about me me me, and what I think....Stop being selfish and appreciate that someone is taking a step towards energy efficiency.

a2tom

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:37 p.m.

While Ann Arbor is making all those Top 10 best list's we should at least be Considered for "Whiniest city in the Midwest"

Martin Church

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:37 p.m.

Just wait till you see the ones in Ypsilanti. Oh that's right Ann Arbor is big on installing alternate energy plants anywhere but in ann arbor. You wanted sustainability you now have it, and it's ugly look. Which would you rather have solar or an Oil plant. Get use to it, you state reps demanded it now you can lead by example instead of waiting for the rest of us.

A2Onward

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:35 p.m.

I have no sympathy for the whiney baby boomers who did nothing to address energy independence and sustainability when it would have been easier and might have made a difference. The world energy situation went to crap on your watch, and we have to do whatever it takes to fix it now, even if it means your daily commute is aesthetically different.

Greg

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:34 p.m.

Come on now. It looks and sounds GREEN. Does it matter if it is ugly or cost effective??? As long as it gives those who planed it the "warm and fuzzy feelings" they want, that is all that matters.

Steve

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:32 p.m.

I was just past there last night and saw them. First reaction, hey a solar array, great. Second reaction, hey a solar array, great. People in this town are just not happy unless they are complaining about something and of course leading the charge, Jane Lumm who I have yet to hear say one good thing about anything since being elected or is that re-elected. If it's new or just different it therefore must be bad.

HeimerBoodle

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:25 p.m.

As someone who drives though the Main/Summit intersection every day, I don't think these people quite understand the meaning of "eyesore".

uptodate

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:24 p.m.

Let's hope that several years ago the late Peter Pollack had a solution for this solar array installation in his eco-friendly Site Master Plan for the Pfizer site - when he had to testify, redesign, and process that plan for weeks and months (to great public acclaim) in front of the Planning Commission and the City Council. After all that the new plan is now described as just a bunch of "pine trees and plants". The U Of M is indifferent to this issue....just like the row of trucks parked at the base of the Lurie Bell Tower on North Campus. The "master site plan" for that area was and has been ignored too. Site Planning at the U of M is now - "an economic" process....a business decision, call it what you will".

Joel A. Levitt

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:24 p.m.

Hooray for the UM and DTE. Plant some small trees, perhaps that will make the neighbors happier.

SEC Fan

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:23 p.m.

yeah, we wouldn't want them to detract from the beauty of the strip mall...

Jay Davenport

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:19 p.m.

If Jane Lumm is against it then I'm for it.

st.julian

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:13 p.m.

Contract to Ms Lumm 's statement, the project is the Ann Arbor ethos in action. It is the sort outcome you would expect in a community that voted heavily for prop 3 and discusses "green" in unending glowing terms. Further, it comports with the industrial ware house designs council proves for DDA blessed buildings downtown and surrounding the campus.

Michisbest

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:07 p.m.

I love it! All Liberal Democrats be careful what you wish for you might get it. King Obama spouts solar this and solar that dumps billions into it and when it shows up they are appalled. I have been waiting for the evironmentalists to start a new push to take the dams out of the Huron river. We will really see thier true colors and it won't be green in thier backyard. A house on the Barton mud flats won't be so dersirable.

Elizabeth Jahn

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 5:02 p.m.

I live and work very close to NCRC and while I was surprised to see the solar panels, I think it is a great use of the land. Personally I don't find the panels to be an eye-sore, however I'm sure that some landscaping (e.g. evergreens) will do a lot to soften the industrial look of that stretch. If we truly want energy independence, and not just pay it lip service, then we need to utilize the available energy options available. The solar panels are in line with the University's commitment to sustainability and I would think that the residents of Ann Arbor would like the fact that they are investing in hybrid buses, solar energy, and other means of energy conservation. I would love to see solar energy utilized across town even more.

Dog Guy

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 4:57 p.m.

Ann Arbor's Great Green Leader and his council Oompa-Loompas must pass a resolution laudatory of U of M (from which all good things come) and declare a solar festival day in its honor.

Jeff Pigeon

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 4:46 p.m.

Awwwww! It is a new look and we dont like it! Suck it up! This is what needs to happen to lower the dependency on fossil fuels and keep the earth able to sustain life. "The assortment includes 1,800 panels and will generate enough energy to power about 100 homes" ....that is 100 homes not using fossil fuels. If it takes a little change to improve the way of life for us and our children... so be it! There should be more projects like this EVERYWHERE. Look at Isabella County and their use of wind turbines. They may have changed the skyline, but the benefits outweigh the "eyesore" opinion of some. IMO

demistify

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 4:42 p.m.

Lots of requests here for planting some trees to hide the eyesore from the street. What has not been mentioned is that mature trees were cut down to make room for it. This is a publicity stunt for DTE. They WANT it in your face.

redwingshero

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 4:22 p.m.

"This project is devoid of that very essential Ann Arbor 'ethos'" Please, enlighten us as to what Ann Arbor ethos are. So this is an eyesore, but that ridiculous building at the corner of Main and Stadium that nearly encompases part of Main street , isn't? Yes, yes, those godless, heartless solar panels are destroying our town. Go back to your shantys...

CynicA2

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 4:17 p.m.

The latest example of the University's Neo-fascist, Albert Speer school of architectural design. The Fuehrer would be pleased!

ahi

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 4:13 p.m.

I think I pulled a muscle rolling my eyes.

mtlaurel

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 4:12 p.m.

easiest cheapest way to do it won. if they had a discussion in the planning stage they may have had to spend time looking into other ways to do it...that would have cost more in money/time/consultation/evaluations/etc. it's alright, but could have been done differently to address some of these matters,but we'll never know--the Univ chose NOT to have a discussion. THEY SHOULD BE ASKED TO DEFEND why they did not have a discussion considering all the benefits they get around this town.

A2LifeR13

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 4:12 p.m.

People said the same thing about telephone poles and all those wires when that all first started back in the day too. Calm down guys, this is something to benefit us all. This is a positive, so why are you looking at it from a negative stand?? If its not pretty, don't look at it. The world changes, everythings not gonna stay the same forever and this change is for the better of our community. Just take it down a level everyone.

Richard Lindsay

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 4:07 p.m.

I think they look cool and futuristic. Glad the U is doing some sustainable projects instead of just talking about it.

Homeland Conspiracy

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 4:06 p.m.

Last time I checked we have people killing & being killed in the middle east over OIL !!! Maybe you could hide this so called "eyesore" behind tombstones!!! That's it!!! let's build something like the Vietnam War Memorial in front of the so called "eyesore" But I'm sure someone would whine about what kind of stone that would be used.

Jatra

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 4:04 p.m.

I live on the north side and I support the project. Ms. Lumm and the head of the homeowners association do not speak for everyone. The solar array looks a lot like... A solar array. The old Pfizer site had an industrial/tech look anyway. The solar array just adds to it. I understand the push to preserve areas of downtown for posterity but the strength of the northeast area of Ann Arbor is the space to develop and innovate. Putting a solar array on a grassy hill across the street from a strip mall (which is next to another strip mall) and in a commercially zoned area is fine. There are no homes the even face this instillation. Please stop the NIMBYism and just keep your eyes forward when you walk/bike/drive by.

John Hritz

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 3:42 p.m.

The solar panels are fine and it's their land, but the only view from Plymouth is of superstructure and the other "plumbing". Some sort of screen could be used without affecting the performance of the panels. I wonder who gets to sweep them during the winter? The multiple snow fences suggest they are trying to avoid drifting under the panels.

Diana

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 3:30 p.m.

I am hoping they will replace the Pink flowering crabapple trees and yellow dafodils that Pfizer had used on the site.

Cory C

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 3:23 p.m.

Oy, same argument that was used against windmills in Grand Rapids: "I support this, so long as it's not in MY backyard!"

OutfieldDan

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 3:21 p.m.

It's ok as long as they change their mind and leave Krazy Jims alone.

Nick

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 3:21 p.m.

There is a implicit social contract when you buy a house in a neighborhood. You buy a home in Ann Arbor, and pay more, precisely because there are no industrial looking sites in the city. You could just as easily buy in Ypsilanti, only ten minutes away, and get the same house for much less, but you would have to live near one of the factories in that city. The expectation is that your neighbor will remain not change radically. Do you expect a steel factory to go up on the vacant land next to the Traverwood Branch library? Of course not. Like minded people live in your city, and control what can be built nearby. But the University of Michigan is exempt from this control. We who live here are dependent on the decency of the University not to trash our neighborhoods. That is what Jane Lumm is talking about. For fifty years that site was a beautiful corporate research campus. There are already two power plants on that property. They were built discretely. They do not look like power plants. Why not do the same with this installation? This is a deep violation of the valid expectations of people who live here. And one the is absolutely unnecessary. On the same campus, directly across Huron Parkway, only a quarter of a mile away, there is a power plant discretely tucked back from the street, with the same amount of grassy vacant land next to it as this installation took up. A perfect place to put this installation.

CincoDeMayo

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 3:17 p.m.

I think we may have reached the point where there is more whiners whining about whiners than there were original whiners. I think that you can be a supporter of solar energy and still be concerned with aesthetics. And, I think the more solar panels are placed with aesthetics in mind, the more people will want to embrace them and look for ways to incorporate them in their own living and working areas. UofM had a great opportunity here to present them in a positive way.

Hans

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 3:08 p.m.

I don't find them offensive. I embrace the future, regardless of whether or not our power generation is rolling green hills marked by solar panels, or windmills, or whatever else. I don't see a problem here.

clownfish

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 3:08 p.m.

So let them build as coal gasification plant instead. Then see how they howl.

nekm1

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 3:06 p.m.

Once again, so long as it is done "in the best interest of all" which is code for not in my backyard, these projects will continue. Typically people don't ask for permission, because they fear the discussion. Easy to hide behind the statement that "Choosing a prominent site for the solar panels and exposing the public to its location, especially within a research setting, reinforces the importance of embracing versus hiding." Says who?

Doug

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 3:04 p.m.

What a laugher! The neighborhood doesn't like the roof on the U of M property. And this makes the front page on the Ann Arbor News? Maybe the U of M should have consulted on the architecture of the building. Maybe the entrances aren't stylish enough or the colors are too drab. Incredible!

rm1

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 3:01 p.m.

The article notes: "the university plans to add landscaping into the site." The landscaping presumably isn't in yet because (1) it's better to plant after construction vehicles are done with the site; and (2) it's now January, and it's better to plant in spring rather than winter. Much of the commentary here therefore seem premature.

a2citizen

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:59 p.m.

I'd prefer a nucaler (sic) reactor. Abundant clean energy, you know.

A2James

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:55 p.m.

I was driving down Plymouth Road admiring the new solar panels being constructed, when I saw some ugly residences with bad landscaping and tacky color schemes. Man, that made me so angry!

EyeHeartA2

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:50 p.m.

Well, let's see how everyone in the neighborhood voted on this: Precinct 1-9 62.0% FOR Proposal 3 Precinct 2-6 50.4% FOR Proposal 3 Precinct 2-9 56.4% FOR Proposal 3 Precinct 2-1 66.9% FOR Proposal 3 So...a clear majority in this neighborhood want the panels. Not sure what the problem is then? No, really, I'm not sure at all. Strange, explainable behavior in Ann Arbor recently..... http://electionresults.ewashtenaw.org/nov2012/indexprecinctreport.html

28's..andtheydon'trub

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:50 p.m.

AN EYESORE?? Please.... that is nothing compared to the potholes I dodge as I travel across town... Jackson Rd going towards Downtown, Stadium right at the end of the bridge, Ann Arbor Saine road entrance ramp to 94 east, Ann Arbor Saline Rd bridge going over 94... Somebody take action on those please!!!!! Who cares what a money saving device looks like! PS: read the prevoius comments and you can obviuosly see peoples priorities are not together.

sayzme

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:50 p.m.

Residents nearby? The people who work at McDonalds? or the people who work for U of M at NCRC?

BHarding

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:49 p.m.

My first reaction was "Wow, how great! Solar panels!" I hope everyone gets used to them. I was immediately content, even proud.

Janis

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:49 p.m.

Just a question: if this array of panels is enough to power 100 homes, what would be needed to power a city like AnN Arbor, and where would it go?

ak3647

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:48 p.m.

I live off of Plymouth Road and I have no problem with the solar panels. I imagine that the majority of people who drive by them have no issue with the panels. But as always, a vocal minority will feel the need to be pandered to just because they take the time to complain about something. Besides, are the panels less "aesthetically pleasing" than the freaking McDonald's restaurant and Speedway gas station right across the street? Yes, what a BEAUTIFUL stretch of strip mall that has now been ruined by solar panels! But it's Ann Arbor, and people aren't happy unless they are outraged by something trivial.

Nicholas Urfe

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:45 p.m.

The problem with this project is the University's increasing disregard for the community. They routinely ignore and trample their neighbors. Just because it's "green" does not make it okay.

Kellie Woodhouse

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:41 p.m.

Readers, we added a video that shows the solar panels from the viewpoint of a driver along Plymouth Road.

Nicholas Urfe

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:41 p.m.

I hope the council will realize their own hypocrisy in the way they are moving forward with the windmill "demonstration" project. Specifically, how they have handed off all site placement and related issues to the inexperienced school board. All with apparently little regard for how the windmills will impact the neighbors.

a2girl

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:40 p.m.

You have got to be kidding me. Take a drive around Ann Arbor sometime-- there is plenty to admire, but there are just as many bigger eyesores than this.

GoNavy

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:23 p.m.

So to be clear: First we wanted to put on the ballot in this State an initiative to force power companies to garner 20% of all power from renewable resources by 2020. Now, DTE has installed solar arrays, and they're an "eyesore." Once again, NIMBY. Perhaps the green-loving residents of Ann Arbor assumed that the residents of Inkster or Pontiac would be stuck with the green eyesores.

seldon

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:22 p.m.

Wait, don't these things back up to a strip mall? Why the whining?

gretta1

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:15 p.m.

I live in the neighborhood impacted by the solar panels. I think they are great! Are they beautiful? No. Does the image in the article show what those of us who walk and drive by them see? No. Are they a big step in the right direction? Yes! I was so excited when, jogging past, I began to realize what was being installed. Other neighbors I've spoken to think they're neat, too. Now, what would be really great is if DTE made it more affordable for us homeowners to install panels on our roofs, too. Also, I have to agree that U of M does what it wants when it wants and, because of it's economic power in this community, doesn't often bother with the nitty gritty of community relations. Also, as a resident of this corner of Ann Arbor, I find we are generally ignored by the newspaper and a lot of discussions related to Ann Arbor in general - but I've learned to accept that. Sometimes being left alone is a good thing. We are slowly getting better and better up here. Heck, we now have a South Indian street food restaurant, and it'll never get voted 'best of' anything because those are all biased toward anything downtown but it's great! These are our treasures. Folks in NE Ann Arbor, be proud we are the home of this array of solar panels! It's really a good thing in so many ways.

a2cents

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:12 p.m.

Hey folks, get used to it. It is sad, but the uom is an insensitive bully and you don't count for squat. Want a stadium?

Pete Warburton

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:10 p.m.

The University of Michigan method...Purchase property...rent it to a corporation for below competitive sq.ft. price {no taxes}....call what ever they do research....corporation hires some U of M workers makes an indirect profit...win /win . The method helps make U of M number one in research dollars each year.

Greggy_D

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:10 p.m.

How many years is it going to take to recover the investment costs of the panels?

Enso

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:09 p.m.

You know what I think is an eyesore? Civilization. Buildings, concrete, potholes, garbage, exhaust, gas stations, power lines, cell phone towers. Solar Panels? Really? How uppity you all have become!

FrankOZ

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2:06 p.m.

I live in this area and always found that expanse of lawn and trees on Plymouth very pretty. The panels do look awful and every time I drive or run past there, I get angry. I do hope whatever landscaping they plan to do will make a difference, but I can't even begin to imagine how that would work.

Pete

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 2 p.m.

The project isn't done yet. It may well be that a screen of trees and shrubs is yet to be installed. I hope that some intelligence is used if such a screen is planned. A screen of identical trees is just about as ugly as a row of solar panels; it LOOKS like a screen. I would prefer to see a mix of types and sizes. {SIDEBAR: A mix also avoids the problems caused by "monoculture". If elm trees had not been planted as a monoculture across much of the US, we might still have pockets of elm trees where they are best-suited. And never forget, those elms were planted as a replacement for another failed monoculture: chestnut trees.} Compared to wind generators, solar panels are fairly benign neighbors. And as neighbors, they do not contribute to traffic problems (once construction is finished). They are quiet. They do not place additional burdens on social services like police and fire departments. And they contribute to the tax base (usually; exactly how private plant on University property is taxed is another question). RE: payback time: If solar panels are not placed as proof-of-concept, there will never be any impetus to learn how to make them economical.

teeters

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:58 p.m.

Better than another strip mall. Stop crying.

PattyinYpsi

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:56 p.m.

In other news, residents in some part of Ann Arbor were outraged that unsightly trucks use the roads.

Brad

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:55 p.m.

Why build it in the city? We have a great greenbelt we're paying for - let's put that stuff out there where we don't have to look at it. Get some real benefit from that greenbelt. Plus green energy in a greenbelt gets you double green points. But at least when the U is involved, their "monument to alternative energy" will generate enough energy to do something useful.

Sooze

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:54 p.m.

Solar, wind, something other than coal and gas and do it very soon: that mess on the Jersey shore is just the beginning of the ice melting and the sea rising and the planet in drought with fires and tornadoes and hurricanes. What is the problem with trying something new even if (heaven forbid!) you weren't consulted and it isn't cute to look at. The U has the money and the engineers to try new things and we might all learn something.

G-Man

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:53 p.m.

So let me get this straight.... Ann Arborites are pushing all this "green" stuff, BUT, just don't put it next to me......?????

OLDTIMER3

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:53 p.m.

Like the gravel mining pits, everyone wants or needs gravel but not in their back yards. Everyone wants renewable energy sources but they don't want it where it can be seen. Just think of all the complaints if they had tried to put in a turbine driven generator or a coal burning one. Learn to live with it.

Ken B

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:52 p.m.

Seems like an easy thing to fix. How about a line of nice evergreen trees planted between the road and the array? That would hide the unsightliness of the back of the panels, while further enhancing the environment.

whojix

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:47 p.m.

It was a mistake to put something in the back yard of rich people that not all of them are comfortable laying their precious eyes upon. Surely we can find a low income area to move this to!

David Cahill

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:46 p.m.

I was also surprised to see this installation, but I think it's fine - especially if the promised landscaping appears. As to notice or cooperation from the SNUM (Sovereign Nation of the U of M), its lack is all too typical.

Halter

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:43 p.m.

Whine Whine Whine...we want a Greenbelt...we don't want development....we want new sources of energy...we want to waste taxpayer money on wind-powered energy...we want solar energgy...we want to hug trees and make sure every Robin has a chance to have plentiful offspring...JUST NOT IN MY BACKYARD....bunch of whiners.

EyeHeartA2

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:41 p.m.

You can use street level Google Maps to see what that corner used to look like: http://goo.gl/maps/JsCnP I find it especially humorous that they ripped out a bunch of trees to make that corner more green.

Stephen Landes

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:40 p.m.

All of the upset over the current state f this project could have been avoided had the University done the basic and decent thing with respect to its neighbors: give notice of the project and show concept drawings of what the site could look like once construction and landscaping are complete. This is just the minimum that is expected of neighbors making such a major and prominent change to their property. We advocate for this in neighborhoods, too, where major changes involving sight-lines are affected. It is not a case of asking for permission, but of maintaining good relations, defusing a potential situation, and promoting good projects. It is always easier to do this upfront than to repair the damage after the fact.

EyeHeartA2

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:35 p.m.

I looked up NIMBY and found this: "I happen to be a supporter of this type of project, but it looks hideous," said David Bizot, a northeast Ann Arbor resident and member of the Orchard Hills-Maplewood Homeowners Association" I guess East of Carpenter would have been better?

outdoor6709

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:28 p.m.

And you wonder why we did not vote for 25% green energy.

Arboriginal

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:21 p.m.

I am looking forward to the landscaping!

johnnya2

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:13 p.m.

So I wonder is Ms Lumm and the rest of the residents in the area consult every person in the neighborhood before they plant certain flowers or paint their homes. If they need to cut down a tree do they set up a committee to discuss the options with the U? Any project under construction will not look great. Why do people think they have a right to be involved in every project other entities do? They followed all zoning, they put up something that is a net positive for the community )(solar power), yet they still complain. Get over yourself. I am not consulting you just because you want to be consulted.

Mermaidswim

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:12 p.m.

It was a shock as they began to go up. Even as a construction professional, it took me weeks to figure out what they were. A notice in the media and construction signs explaining what they are would have helped my initial negative reaction. Evergreen trees and berms are needed!

Phil

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:09 p.m.

Could be worse. They could have installed some fracking rigs on the property!

Olive

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1:08 p.m.

When I saw the panels being installed, I thought it was a wonderful thing. A unused space being used for solar energy! There are far worse eyesores in town. And if the landscaping is done, as they say it will be, what's the problem? Landscaping wouldn't be done at the time of year the panels were installed. People always have to complain about something, don't they?

thoreauvian

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 1 p.m.

This situation illustrates and highlights the problem we all face in dealing with the likely emerging environmental catastrophe of our planet, a train-wreck in such slow motion it is easy to ignore. And try not to think about at all. I'd recommend strongly seeing "The age of stupid" to see the parallel problem as is posed by the installation of this solar array in Britain - featuring, in particular, neighbors' objections to a windfarm that caused it not to be allowed to be built as a form of NIMBYism, while at least one neighbor purportedly wholeheartedly supports the need to address global warming in all possible ways.

ez12c

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:59 p.m.

Sounds to me like people would prefer a refinery in its place. LOL

LXIX

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:58 p.m.

Jane Lumm is correct in that the UM-A2 "ethos" was lacking here. Her constituents' desires were not properly ignored first before construction (the U needs their own DDA). So, Jane, How about any resident "shock and dismay" over the ugly development going up across the street? Blight is blight, right? Where's the outrage for expanding the carbon footprint? 1. I welcome clean local power generation in Ann Arbor. It is effectively printing money. One day even the University and City economist will understand that. 2. Add a "green" fence of rose bushes or pine trees at that corner and nobody will be the wiser as to what monetary magic is going on behind. 3. That little corner "includes 1,800 panels and will generate enough energy to power about 100 homes, according to DTE estimates." In seven years or less the system should pay for itself and then continue to produce for at least another 20 years. DTE's 100 homes worth of free power over 20 years is a lot of power! Like 100 of those nice Orchard Hills neighborhood houses nearby. 4. Imagine Georgetown Mall surrounded by the same "green" tree fence line. More like 400 homes worth of free energy pumped out down there - instead of that huge carbon boot that will be exhausting at least the same power. Why City leaders are so confused about which blight makes them more money is a mystery. 5. Go Blue ! [Be thankful it wasn't a dual-windmill farm].

justcurious

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:57 p.m.

Good luck with trying to change anything the U wants to do in this town. They run the town, or didn't you know? They consider themselves the life blood of the town, and maybe it's true.

wardsa

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:54 p.m.

Suck it up, Liberals! You want it, you got it. Be careful what you wish for, Greenies.

Todd Askew

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:54 p.m.

I could easily get used to a landscape with lots of solar panels. It gives me hope for the future, and I think that oil and gas are so much uglier in so many ways. Yes, please put one in my back yard. I applaud U of M for showing this kind of leadership.

Judy

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:52 p.m.

What am I missing? I do not understand the landscaping with trees, trees make shade and solar panels need sun light to work.

ccollins792

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:49 p.m.

I live on Nixon less than 1/4 mile from this site and I watched this project's progress as I would go on walks. It is unfortunate that so many will whine and complain about progress because "it's an eyesore" Really? They are not complete as stated in the article. Landscaping will help the aesthetics. It will generate enough power for 100 homes and yet there are complaints. Additionally our elected officials are now wasting their time sending memo's? "Lumm said she will ask the university to remove some of the panels that are close to the road". Again, Really? Because it doesn't look good to some people? That is ridiculous. I wonder how pretty the coalmines in Virginia or how visually pleasing the oil rigs in the oceans are ?

Billy

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:49 p.m.

So you DIDN'T include a picture of the solar array from the PLYMOUTH ROAD SIDE....which is what some of the complaints were SPECIFICALLY about... Way to do objective reporting there.....

GerryD

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:47 p.m.

Geesh! Not a fan of the UofMs attitude toward town (or their devouring o the tax base), but seriously -- if I were them, I'd just give up on community relations. No one is ever happy. 1) They are solar panels -- they have to face the way they face to collect enough sun (very limited at our latitude) to be useful. Seeing their "butt end" isn't super, but aesthetics are secondary to function here. 2) It's winter folks! Give them a chance to fill it in with landscaping (as they said they would in the article). Not much good putting in trees in January. See how it fills in next year. Can't believe I'm defending a U operation, but it's obvious why they avoid engaging the community -- nothing would ever get done.

Elaine F. Owsley

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:41 p.m.

It is certainly more attractive than the "art" on the city property on North Main and it has a utilitarian use. If that electric power is used for local housing, that's another plus.

Judy

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:40 p.m.

I did not hearing dissatisfaction from the neighborhood or the 2 Ward when the U of M bought the Pfizer property. Just another case of property owners being told what they can and can not do with "their" property, but in this case the property own does not have to pay taxes.

Townspeak

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:40 p.m.

Ms. Peterson talks about "building bridges" between U and City residents. But, she works for City, not the U. Comon City people, remember who you work for here. Let U officials be the bridge builders; city officials need to protect the city.

Ignatz

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:36 p.m.

I suspect the U has the "Halo" in storage. Maybe they could hide the objectionable part with that!

Craig Lounsbury

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:33 p.m.

I think I have a win- win-win-win solution. Build a giant block "graffiti" wall to hide the panels. Allow local vandals ...errr.....spray paint artists to have at it. win- can't see the panels win- frustrated 'artists" have a canvas win- other property owners get out from under graffiti problems win- the largest piece of evolving/rotating public art in the city. The more I think about it the less it seems the joke I intend.

Townspeak

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:31 p.m.

Since using land for profit, it is not tax exempt. Come on ann arbor, tax the greedy u

Thoughtful

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:30 p.m.

They didn't ask, because no matter what you do, there are always whiners. It's environmentally conscious. We have a home in our neighborhood with solar panels, and I think it's a GREAT idea. Welcome to reality. Perhaps you'd prefer a power plant there instead?

discgolfgeek

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:29 p.m.

From the Plymouth Rd perspective, they are downright ugly! Get some trees planted yesterday.

dzerweck

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:23 p.m.

Could agree more ... what an eyesore!!! If they were truly being green about it, there is a aesthetic side to "green", and they would plant trees between the solar panels and the road. Not sure if there is room, but they should have thought about it as a good neighbor. This would be a very simple solution which would satisfy both sides. I grew up in the area, and had not been down Plymouth Rd in more than a month and was shocked to see the "butt end" of this work facing the street. I appreciate what UM is trying to do, but it should not be at the expense of the community! Hate to say it, but it is time for UM to "man up" and take responsibility for a job not thought through to the end. Fortunately, there is an time to correct the mistake (at very little cost).

fjord

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:22 p.m.

This just proves there is NOTHING that people in Ann Arbor can't find a reason to whine about. Kudos to the university and DTE for adding some "green" energy to the grid.

Craig Lounsbury

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:17 p.m.

"1,800 panels and will generate enough energy to power about 100 homes, according to DTE estimates." breaking out my calculator (well actually just lopping off a couple zeros) does that mean 18 of those in my yard would more or less eliminate my electric bill? And if I had 36 would DTE pay me each month for my surplus?

sh1

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:15 p.m.

They do look bad right now, but the article states landscaping will be added to improve the view from Plymouth Rd. I think the eyesore being built across the street is worse.

missmisery

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:11 p.m.

They're across from a strip mall. Not in anyone's front or back yard. Drive past, look the other way if it's "too ugly to bear." Get a grip, people. This is not an issue.

Linda Peck

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:10 p.m.

I like Keith's idea to put them on top of the parking lot so that they offer shade, protection to the cars. As it is, while it is ugly, it is a step in the right direction. Perhaps a row of fir trees would help? Aside from that, we do know in Ann Arbor that the University never asks the community's permission.

Craig Lounsbury

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:08 p.m.

"Kosteva said the project was considered an infrastructure improvement, not new construction, and thus..." Seems to me the University used a similar argument to try to dodge ADA requirements when they remodeled the stadium. They thought if they called that rather massive project "repairs" they could ignore federal guidelines .

Keith

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 12:04 p.m.

I am surprised and disappointed that they did not install solar panels over the parking lot or on top if the buildings. Then they would have the added benefit of providing semi covered parking (shade in the summer and keep the snow off your car in winter) and additional cooling of the buildings they shade.

Real Life

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 11:53 a.m.

Ms. Lumm complains that the array doesn't comport with the Ann Arbor ethos. On the contrary, if there is an Ann Arbor ethos, it is that University does anything it damn well pleases, while not paying any property taxes.

ottozrule

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 11:52 a.m.

Get over it, people! It's solar, to be celebrated. Less dependence on oil. Kudos to DTE and the U.

spikefb

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 11:42 a.m.

I'm a bit confused. I agree that the panels were a surprise and look indiustrial. I also understand the local residents concerns that if the university does something like this without notice, the U might feel able to do other projects with the same lack of notice. What I don't understand is how is there an effected neighborhood? There is no housing that is directly connected to the installment region? They are across the street from a strip mall?

Stephen Lange Ranzini

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 11:40 a.m.

I agree they are an eyesore!

Chip Reed

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 11:33 a.m.

"...frustrating residents, some of whom already have a list of grievances against the university." What a great idea for a top 10 list, reader's poll, etc.!

Kishauwau

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 11:24 a.m.

But it will pay for inself in 1000 years….if anyone is still around on the planet.

motorcycleminer

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 11:22 a.m.

But it's" Green " ...wait till all the little windmills turn OZ into a little holland...all the sheeple want green energy just not in their backyards....

A2comments

Thu, Jan 10, 2013 : 11:11 a.m.

I agree they look horrible. Why didn't you show the view from Plymouth Rd? Couldn't,t they have been installed further down the hill?