The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1999 Planning Board Jan-March FINAL APPROVED AS PRINTED MARCH 2, 1999. Draft 030199 Approved 030299 To Clerk 033099 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD s7 7 P.M., City Council Chambers 1 Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall _ `, 'D 124 West Michigan Avenue , t Tuesday, January 12, 1999 Fri r 1. OPENING SESSION: Chairman Ruge called the meeting to order at 7-.02 p.m. A. Roll Call. Present-. Frederick, Goolsby, Keene, Miller, Smith; Ruge. Six members present, one vacancy. B. Excused Absences C. Introductions. Ms. Eleanor Love, Planning Manager, introduced staff present, James A. Ruff, Zoning Administrator, Doris Witherspoon, Senior Planner, and Louise H. Christian, Recording Secretary. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: The agenda was approved as presented. 3. COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Ruff distributed a packet of material regarding Z-13-98, 4720 S. Cedar Street (East 183 ft), "D-1" Professional Office District to "E-2" Local Shopping District. The other communication is a referral from the Department of Environmental Quality regarding SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People. HEARINGS A. Proposed Objectives, Goals and Projected Use of Community Development Fund Resources, including the Community Development Block Grant, Home and Emergency Shelter Grant Programs, FY 1999-2000 Ms. Witherspoon reviewed the funding amounts for CDBG funds, HOME dollars, and Emergency Shelter Grant. The purpose of the hearing is to receive comments. Final allocations have not been received from HUD. ROSE NORWOOD, HOUSING RESOURCE CENTER. We have been in existence for 26 years now, serving the Greater Lansing community with comprehensive housing counseling programs. That is everything from homeless assistance through home ownership. First I would like to say thank you for the support you have provided us in the past in regard to helping us with both CDBG funds and HOME dollars to help prepare PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 2 potential home buyers as they get ready to become home owners, and then also with down payment assistance to actually help them achieve home ownership. We have had some real success with our programs, and I believe we make a big difference in the City in terms of helping people become home owners. Our programs are working, and I would like to say I would appreciate your support for future funding. Thank you. Chairman Ruge said we certainly want to encourage home ownership in the City. Mr. Nischan arrived at approximately 7:10 p.m. HOWARD JONES, 426 W. BARNES. I would like to comment not only on the amount of money that is being allocated through the CDBG program, but also the manner in which it is allocated. I know that Eleanor will remember this, and perhaps Jim Ruff, but it has been probably fifteen years ago that on one occasion the Planning Department went to the neighborhoods, and they developed a list of priorities about how this money should be allocated. And I think this would be helpful, if you would be willing to do this again, go back to the neighborhoods that are in the areas served by the CDBG program, to get a better feel of how the neighbors would really like to see these funds allocated. I think that perhaps you would see even more money allocated for housing improvements and housing renovations than is in this budget. And I think we also have to take a real close look at what is the overhead that is being spent through CDBG and perhaps something can be done to minimize the amount of overhead that is taken out of the CDBG budget. I think that is a function of the federal government in terms of their allocation of money to make it possible for us to do an even better job of improving the housing stock in this city. It is encouraging to note that we do have a lot of programs. Ms. Norwood was just telling me about the program she has now with Ingham Regional Hospital, and then there is one other outfit down there, but she is getting $100,000 so people can come back in if they work at Ingham Medical, then they can benefit from this at the rate of $5,000 a crack. And that is similar to what the City program is. But I wish you would consider that for next year. It is a lot of work, perhaps a little more work for you. It is a lot of work for the neighborhoods, but I think it is very fruitful. Thank you. STEPHANIE WHITBECK, 620 W. IONIA, CHAIR, LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION. I am actually here on another matter, but I do see that this is before us, and I will address it. There is funds in this, roughly $3 million worth of CDBG funding, including the amount for the HOME program which really brings this total to $4.6 million. I note on Page 3 at the top of the page, it indicates that there is intended to be $60,000, for the first time, PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 3 designated, a specific amount for historic preservation indicating that this would deal with seven to ten historically significant single-family or multiple residential structures. The current funding limits that we deal with are, if it is a corner property, and there are two exposed facades, that they would be able to obtain a maximum of $12,000. For a noncorner property, because only one facade is exposed, the current maximum is $6,000. We applaud the notion of actually designating the amount. We have had a lot of working back and forth, trying to deal with the issue of funding. I would like to point out to the staff and the Board that in the most recent lame-duck session of the Legislature, both the House and the Senate approved historic tax credits, and the Governor signed them last week. This really is going to be a significant incentive statewide and in this community. This will allow--there are two bills, one on the SBT and one on the personal income tax, which means any taxpayer will be able to have access to this tax credit. This is not a deduction at the top of the form for state taxes, but rather a credit. At the bottom, where it says send John Engler this amount, one would be able to, rather than send John Engler that amount, divert this money into your at-minimum 50-year-old property. There is no cap on how much money you can spend on doing your project, and this is not just an exterior program. This covers the inside, the outside, the roof, the plumbing, the electrical. If there are legal fees associated with the development, if there are architects' fees associated with the development. You have to do a job that is at least equal to 10 percent of your SEV, and I think that most people know that at least in the oldest areas of this City, in the one year that there is a sale when there can be an increase in the SEV, the SEVs are not being increased to reflect the actual sale. So SEVs are lower than they would be, to reflect market value so you can easily meet doing restoration or rehab of your residential, commercial, institutional, educational or whatever property and there is no cap. The tax credits would be for 25 percent of the job, and you can take up to ten years from what needs to be your taxes to take the credit. So if you pay $3,000 a year in taxes, and $30,000 equals 25 percent of the job you are doing, you can spend that tax credit paying no taxes to the State of Michigan for ten years. That doesn't go on deaf ears for property owners. This works for the first time for even residential owner-occupied. For quite a long period of time, there had been federal tax credits that deal with income-generating property. This is the first time that it is not for residential. So this is for 25 percent. This is something that I think is really going to make an awfully big difference in communities, particularly in Lansing, which is well behind the eight ball in terms of properties compared to other communities throughout the state in historic districts. These properties that would have access to this tax credit would either have to be or be able to be on the state or national register or in a locally-designated district. Other communities have many more properties already in districts. We currently PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 4 have in Lansing a combination of the Cherry Hill Historic District, a portion of the Cherry Hill Neighborhood, and the Ottawa-Walnut Historic District, 28 properties. We have somewhere in the nature of 900 potential in the proposed Capitol Historic District, but there are a number of neighborhoods that have properties that are over 50 years old in the City, that the State of Michigan already determines to be potential districts. Do not be surprised if you see neighborhood associations and property owners, residential and commercial, paying attention to this and wanting to make themselves qualify so that they can, rather than simply pay their money to John Engler, put it into their properties and have jobs circulated. I would suggest to you that you really think about in a year such as this, whether a limitation of$60,000 is feasible. This really is the possibility of making marked progress in the improvement of people's property. The tax credits do not make any difference whether someone is low- to moderate-income, high-income, a corporation, a partnership, a sole proprietorship, or anyone. Even a building owned by government or a nonprofit will qualify if a long-term tenant who is a taxpayer, and has something like a 25-year lease. So even churches, government, and institutions, buildings owned by them as nontaxpayers if they have a qualified taxpayer in it. I would hope that you would give this serious consideration. Chairman Ruge asked if any neighborhoods have approached the Historic District Commission seeking to be designated as historic districts at this time? Ms. Whitbeck said not formally. "I have personally, as Chair of the Commission, received requests. I have met with representatives of several neighborhood associations to explain what it is about, and what the process is, and based on our experience within the last year and a half, suggested to them the advice that it would be well worth their while to have a core group that clearly understands what it is all about and is able to talk to people before they come above ground and go through a number of the difficulties that we have had to deal with in the downtown neighborhood. There are several neighborhood associations that are seriously interested in it. And since in the time that this legislation has been almost passed, passed, and now finally signed, that is really generating a lot more interest and people are really looking at what does it take in time, timetable, etc." SHARON KELLOGG, 421 W. IONIA STREET. In response to your question, a lot of neighborhood associations are watching the existing proposed Capitol Historic District process. They are watching to see what kind of effort it takes and what the outcome is going to be. There is a lot of skepticism out there that this can be done, so I think that we will be setting a precedent by bringing this to the Council this year. I sell real estate, and I know of five to seven people right now who are in the early process of PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 5 coming in to apply for historic preservation money. I am really astounded to see the $60,000 limit on that money. If we go into a process where you've got to wait three to four years for the money, it's not going to be successful. I would really hope that you would take another look at that number, taking into consideration that we could get the Capitol Historic District passed this year. You are going to see a lot of activity. Thank you very much. TERRY JONES, HERE ON BEHALF OF THE GREATER LANSING HOUSING COALITION. GLHC is soon to be celebrating its tenth anniversary. In October of 1998 , we celebrated the completion of our fiftieth completed rehabilitated home. Neither of these milestones would have been possible without the use of CDBG and HOME funds. CDBG funds play a significant role at GLHC by providing operating assistance without which we could not function. HOME funds are used in almost every house that we rehabilitate and allow us to offer these homes at affordable prices to families that may not otherwise achieve the dream of home ownership. I think that all of us realize the importance of increasing the ratio of homeowners to renters in the City of Lansing, and the importance of safe, sanitary, and affordable housing. CDBG and HOME funds make these things possible. CDBG moneys are also a key component in Lansing's newest home ownership initiative, the LHOP program. These funds will be loaned to home purchasers to renovate the homes they are buying. They also provide a guarantee to local banks participating in LHOP should a purchaser default. Again, this is a program that would not be possible without CDBG and HOME dollars. At the Coalition, we realize there are many types of uses for these funds. We feel strongly, however, that the most important of these uses is shelter. Persons living in a safe, stable environment are better able to learn in school. All of us benefit when we can provide a home to someone who needs one. CDBG and HOME funds are an indispensable part of that provision. I would like to take the opportunity to thank this body and the City's Development and Planning Offices for their support of Greater Lansing Housing Coalition, and we ask that you continue to provide the support to home ownership in the City of Lansing. Thank you. CHERYL RISNER, DIRECTOR, LANSING NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL. The Lansing Neighborhood Council has been around since 1980. At this time, we have 38 neighborhood groups. Three of those are less than a year old. One we are still working on organizing; they have found their acronym, HERO, but they can't remember what they want the "R" to stand for. As soon as we work that out, they will be added to our list. This last June, we celebrated our tenth annual Paint Blitz. We painted 20 houses here in Lansing on the first Saturday in June with the help of over 400 volunteers. Next month we will be having our twelfth annual Bea Christy Award Dinner PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 6 that gives the neighborhoods a chance to showcase who they feel is the best in their neighborhood for going above and beyond the call of duty. Last year, we had 17 nominees who had representatives from 20 neighborhoods, and we had over 325 people attend this awards banquet. We held two seminars last year, a 501.c.3. seminar and a grant-writing seminar to help neighborhood groups go after money to help to do some of the things they would like to do in their neighborhood. This year we are having a seminar on how to build a better display to showcase your neighborhood, so that they can bring it down when they need to come before Council. They can bring down the display showing exactly what their area looks like and what it means to them. The other seminar we are going to have is how to run a successful meeting, and why you don't have to have the meeting just because it is the second Thursday of the month. Hopefully, that will help on some of the burnout of the neighborhood groups. We also have been working quite closely with the Public Safety Committee and the Code Compliance Officers to help with the housing code and make some changes that will help to keep neighborhoods safe and to stabilize them. We are working with the Landlords of Mid-Michigan. We are meeting with the president of that group, and have attended Board meetings to try to work with landlords to let them know that we do feel there is a lot of good landlords out there, and not all neighborhoods are against them, and to see what we can do to open communications to help with some of these problem landlords and to see what can be done to rid our neighborhoods of these landlords. We now have a new eleven-member board. We used to have 15 members; we cut it down to 11 to be more efficient. We have three landlords on the Board, three renters, and five home-owners, so that will give us a better idea of different perspectives of each neighborhood. Again this year, we are asking for your support for our budget. If you have any questions I can answer, please call me at my office at 372-6290. Thank you. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the chairman declared the hearing closed and referred to the Urban Development Committee, meeting on January 19, 1999 at 4 p.m. in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. B. Z-13-98, 4720 S. Cedar Street (East 183 ft), "D-1" Professional Office District to "E-2" Local Shopping Districts Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by Mr. Baryames to rezone the front portion of the property at 4720 S. Cedar from "D-1" Professional Office District to "E-2" Local Shopping District. This property at the northwest corner of Syringa has had a number of rezoning cases. We have included a case history in your packet. In May 1996 the Board recommended rezoning the east 183 ft to "F" Commercial. Council denied that. Subsequently, rezoning to "D-V Professional Office was requested. Council PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 7 approved that. This petition is to go to an intermediate zone between "D-1" and "F" Commercial, which is the "E-2" Local Shopping District. There are a few differences between "F" Commercial and the "E-2" Local Shopping District, but the principal purpose is to provide more local retail and commercial activities. The applicant requests the rezoning so they can put a restaurant on the property. MARK CANADY, REPRESENTING SPARTY BARYAMES. (Showed photographs of the property.) This property, the subject of several rezoning requests, has sat vacant since 1994. To the east and north is commercial zoning. This board determined that a commercial designation would be best for this property and it would also be in conformance with the Master Plan. It would be in conformance with the zoning of the property immediately contiguous. It is the only appropriate use of the property. There have been four rezoning requests. The previous owners sold it for less than half of what it should be worth. The proposal of Mr. Baryames is a good one. An issue of the neighbors was whether or not there would be a curb cut on Syringa. Mr. Baryames is agreeable to placing a deed restriction on the property that would prevent a curb cut onto Syringa, recognizing that neither this Board nor the Council can make rezoning contingent on such a deed restriction. It is a question of the only possible use. Mr. Baryames would work to be a good neighbor and will do what is necessary. The western 130 ft of this lot would be a buffer, remaining residential. Mr. Baryames wishes the Board to be consistent with its prior position and recommend that the property be rezoned. Mr. Goolsby asked the proposed seating capacity; Mr. Canady said it will be 75; hours of operation will be 6 a.m. to 8 or 9 p.m. ED BENSON, 214 CLOVERLAND, one block south of the proposed building. We recognize the need for the Hacker family to put their property to use, but we live in the neighborhood. We are concerned by the traffic generated by that kind of business. Hours of operation would impact stability and family nature of neighbors. The property has not been marketed properly. We propose that the present zoning not be changed. Quoting from Community Development Program, Section A. "...talks about the prevention of blighting influences and deterioration of property and community facilities." That is the very thing we are afraid of. We don't get the impression that the building proposed will be conducive to or fit the general neighborhood. I moved in six years ago with the understanding that the neighborhood was stable. I propose that the zoning requested not be approved. JAN PATRICK, 328 SYRINGA DRIVE. I have been involved in the polling of our neighbors to learn what their positions are. We have watched PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 8 proposals come forward, all for retail business. One of the initial concerns of the neighbors was that there would be another restaurant there, in addition to McDonald's. Neighbors agreed to the one zoning category that they felt was compatible with the neighborhood, "D-1" Professional, like the property to the south. This property provides a buffer to the neighborhood to traffic, noise and congestion that is created by a restaurant like the one proposed today. Our concerns largely have to do with traffic, but there are other concerns. We are 2 blocks from the Cedar-Jolly intersection. Traffic there is heavy and fast, and there are many accidents there. Also, it is a complicated intersection because it does not line up with the street across the street. We see this getting worse with another retail establishment on that corner. There are already three intense commercial businesses there, Richters, Auto Zone and McDonald's. The one corner that does not get a lot of traffic is the "D-1" Professional insurance office. We believe it has not been properly marketed. Neighbors have contacted Hackers, and other realty companies handling the property, and have been told the property is not for sale for "D-1" Professional use. There is a marketing issue. The question is, has it been available as "D-1"? Eighty households in the Gardenaire Subdivision have consistently, at least three times, signed petitions opposing the commercial development of this corner. We understand that the Planning staff has recommended against this rezoning. The only zoning acceptable to the neighborhood is its current low intensity "D-1" Professional Office District. I hope you will consider that in your deliberations. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman declared the hearing closed and referred to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting on January 20, 1999 at 4 p.m. in the Department Conference Room at 316 N. Capitol Avenue. C. Z-18-98, former 528 North Seymour Avenue, "DM-3" Residential District to "D-1" Professional Office District Mr. Ruff presented the request by Lansing Community College, owner of this vacant property as well as the office property to the south to rezone the property from the "DM-3" Residential District to the "D-1" Professional Office District. The property is 42 ft wide x 123.75 ft deep. It is proposed to be joined with the property to the south at 520 Seymour to expand the parking lot on the north side of the building to accommodate some additional parking. The property is located in a block designated for office use in the River Island Amendment Plan. The property is located in the "DM-3" District, a multiple family district. Rezoning to the "D-1" Professional Office District would also allow residential land use in the future if so desired, at a lesser density, at the "DM-1" Residential District. The property has residential uses PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 9 to the north, as well as to the west, and parking and office uses to the south and east. RON ROUSH, REPRESENTING LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE. We submitted the request for rezoning so that we could add approximately seven parking spaces on this small property, which is contiguous with a existing parking lot surrounding the structure, which we recently purchased. We submitted the request for rezoning based on recommendations of Planning staff. It is consistent with the Master Plan; however, based on concerns of the Downtown Neighborhood Association, as well as the Historic District Commission, we intend to withdraw the request for rezoning to "D-1" and resubmit a request for a special land use. We understand that both groups would support that use. Mr. Ruge asked whether or not people who do not work at 520, or who do not attend a function at 520, will be parking there. Mr. Roush said the answer is no. STEPHANIE WHITBECK, CHAIR, LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION. We are pleased with this win-win situation. I have a letter from Joan Sheldon who is unable to attend tonight, in which she indicates her opposition to the rezoning, but would support the special land use for parking. HOWARD JONES, 426 W. BARNES. I would like to commend the representative of Lansing Community College for agreeing to comply with the desires of the Downtown Neighborhood Organization as well as the Historic District Commission, to change this to a special land use. SHARON KELLOGG, 421 W. IONIA. I am pleased that they are withdrawing this. I would like to say that I would support a the special land use. Prior to coming tonight, there was a meeting of the Downtown Neighborhood Association. The group indicated, and I do have a letter here, that they will support a special land use for parking for this property. It is a much better way to go than rezoning. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman declared the hearing closed. Mr. Roush was informed of the need for a written withdrawal for files. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 10 D. SLU-24-98, 3726 Delta River Dr., Adult Foster Care Facility for Eight Persons This is a request by Ruby Strudwick for a special land use permit to expand an adult foster care facility from six to eight persons. The property is at 3726 Delta River Drive on the north side of Delta River Drive, just east of St. Stephen's Lutheran Church, zoned "A" Residential District. It is 85.5 ft wide x 150 ft deep, containing a little over a quarter acre. It is primarily residential, and institutional around it. In the packet is a map, a survey of the property and a letter from Mr. Thomas Rasmussen of the River Forest Neighborhood Association. Mr. Ruge asked about the report statement that no record exists of an adult foster care facility at this location. Mr. Ruff said that the City does not keep records of facilities for six or fewer people, nor does the City have information from the state concerning whether or not it is a licensed facility. RUBY STRUDWICK, 2709 ATTENBOROUGH CIRCLE. I am the applicant. We do have licenses, and copies of the license. We are asking for the special use permit because there are so many elderly people out there, and we have the space, and we enjoy doing this. We don't have any problems with surrounding neighbors. JOHN STRUDWICK, 2709 ATTENBOROUGH CIRCLE. We have operated this adult foster care home since March of 1998. The increase from five to eight will not be an increase in staff. We need one staff for one to 12. We have a two-car garage, and parking for four cars in the drive. At present, none of our clients have automobiles. The only parking requirement is for one staff and clients` case workers. We have five clients right now. We have four bedrooms upstairs. We propose to put the others downstairs. In the basement area there are two larger rooms. Currently the people we have stay in the four bedrooms upstairs. One of the bedrooms is capable of housing two individuals. Three bedrooms have one person each, and one bedroom has two people. The additional people we will put in the basement; it is a walk-out basement. We have eating facilities there, a bathroom. We have a smoking room, so smokers don't have to go outdoors. Ms. Keene asked about the license for five people; do you have to go back and get licensed for additional people? Ms. Strudwick said we have to notify Greg Rice, our coordinator. I have talked to him; he said it would be OK as long as I got approval of the City. Mr. Ruge asked about the size of the basement rooms. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 11 Mr. Strudwick. The two rooms downstairs, one is 19 ft x 14 ft; the other is 19 ft x 8 ft. They have access windows to the outside in case of fire. It is a walkout basement with two doors TOM RASMUSSEN, 3715 DELTA RIVER DR. I am an attorney and a member of the River Forest Neighborhood Association. You have a copy of the letter that I sent. The proposed use, we neighbors believe, is too intense for the size of this building. It is one of the smallest houses in the River Forest area. For one mile around, you could say it is commercial, but actually, immediately adjacent to this property and around it is all family housing. The River Forest area is an area of owner-occupied single-family houses well maintained. We question the size. It is one of the smallest houses in the area. There are only five people there presently, and at various times of the day and night, even in inclement weather, you will see residents of that house standing in the front yard and wandering around the front yard. If you took a small family house, and you had all the kids divorce and come home to mom and pop, that house is going to be under intensive use. It's said it's going to be a continuation of the present use, described as elderly. When five is too intense, and they want to go to eight, and use the basement? It doesn't sound very nice. They haven't talked about visitor parking. If they are talking about the present occupants not having cars, we don't know about the future occupants. Talking about the supervision, the neighbors are concerned. You only have one staff person for five, and now they are going to eight? We wonder about the quality of the supervision under those circumstances. We question if it has sufficient size. I am surprised it would meet code restrictions for this usage. It is the lightest kind of housing construction you can find. It looks like a modular double-wide. We would ask you to consider the size, codes, and the character of the neighborhood. AL SCHAIBLE, 2401 DELTA RIVER DRIVE. I am president of the River Forest Neighborhood Association. Delta River Drive does not need any more traffic. The traffic has gotten worse. At 8 a.m., I can hardly get out of my drive. Foster care is getting to be an epidemic in the City; it's becoming a production line activity. We have been bombarded with residential care facilities in our neighborhood. You have heard of PRC, LASER projects, etc. Some residential care facilities--we should look at them. Are they taking care of elderly people, or ex-convicts? If it is a production line basis, I would not want that next door to my home, or within a block of my home. If we are going to keep our neighborhood residential, we should look at foster care programs. If we are going to have foster cares, we should put them in a building that is designed for foster care with parking and commercial zoning. The River Forest Neighborhood Association is declining. People are moving out. Our association is the highest owner-occupied in the City of Lansing, about 65 percent. I have a baby-sitting facility across from my house. At 8 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 12 a.m., I can't even get down the side street for the cars that are parked illegally in the street. Nobody polices the baby-sitting or foster care facilities. They under-staff and over-fill. We need to stop commercializing our neighborhoods and turning everything into foster care. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the closing of the hearing for SLU-24-98, 3726 Delta River Drive, Adult Foster Care Facility for Eight Persons, and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting on January 20, 1999 in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. E. SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People Mr. Ruff presented the request, an application by The Hospice of Lansing, represented by Barbara Kowalski, as owners of approximately 22.5 acres of vacant land, formerly a gravel pit, zoned "A" Residential. They wish to utilize a portion of the land for a new home to be used for hospice purposes. It is irregular in shape and topography, because of the pit. It is becoming more naturalized over time. The area is primarily single family-residential with "A" Residential zoning. The proposed structure would have approximately 7,500-8,000 sq ft and provide hospice service for eight residents. They are working with the neighborhood organization and Lansing School District (Beekman Center) to provide access from their driveway to the northeast corner of the property, where they would be locating the structure on a terrace approximately 30 ft below the level of Wabash Street. BARBARA A. KOWALSKI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE HOSPICE OF LANSING, 6035 EXECUTIVE DRIVE. A hospice residence is a home for individuals with a life-threatening illness where competent and compassionate end-of-life care is available. Individuals who qualify for hospice care will be provided with a home when hospice care can no longer be continued in their home. It will be helpful for people who live alone, whose spouse is elderly, whose children live far away or who have become too physically exhausted to care for their loved one until death occurs. Hospice of Lansing has purchased this piece of land. State statute defines a hospice residence as a new category and a new entity for the specific purpose of caring for people with a life-limited illness of six months or less. The property meets the lot area requirement; twenty-four-hour care will be provided, and no existing residential care facility exists in the immediate area. We are asking for eight to provide housing for those who will need to live there and still have available beds for those individuals who live at home but need respite beds so they do not have to go to a nursing home or a hospital. It will also provide us with the capacity to offer a hospice bed to individuals for short-term periods as an alternative to hospitalization. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 13 Staffing requirements for eight are the same as for six. We envision hospice care for residents in an environment as similar as possible to their own homes so a good dignified death can occur. We see the old gravel pit as a wonderful environment for a singular home which will be designed to be as homelike as possible. We have hired Keystone Design Group, Russell Hinkle. We are concerned for the neighbors and have met with the Forest View Citizens Association. Traffic is a concern. We are hoping to use the access of the Beekman Center. Traffic to the hospice will be intermittent. There will be a loss of use of the property by nearby residents. We would like to start construction this year. RUSSELL HINKLE, KEYSTONE DESIGN GROUP, LANSING. (Displayed copy of site plan.) We will locate the facility in the northeast to take advantage of the best area of the site. Also, we are negotiating with the School District on obtaining an access easement from the Beekman Center. We will be before the Lansing School Board on February 4 for their approval of an easement. The selected site is approximately 30 ft below the residences on Wabash Avenue to the north. The remainder of the site will be left natural. Mr. Ruge asked why go to Wabash and not to Stoneleigh? Mr. Hinkle said with the facility location in the northeast corner, a drive access through the Beekman Center would have a more gentle slope, and a more secluded entry. We are looking for seclusion. With the existing terrain, it's an easier access. We looked at the possibility of bringing a drive out near Stoneleigh, but it would take more work and cause more disturbance of the site because of a ravine and a ledge there. BECKY THAYER, 2735 WABASH. I have questions and concerns. I am familiar with the land, and it is sand. I don't see how they can build on it and put a road in. Where will runoff go? Into the pond? What about the sewer? It will take a lift station, and utilities will have to be moved. At the end of Stoneleigh is a nursing home within a quarter mile. They come in on buses to Beekman, there is a lot of traffic for half an hour twice a day. I am concerned about the traffic and the driveway. The Beekman buses will come down a hill and around a curve right where the traffic will becoming out. On Stoneleigh, it is a sharp curve, 900 with limited line of sight, also coming downhill and around a curve. What will it do to the environment? MARION TAYLOR, 2628 WABASH. My concerns are the same as Becky. We have discussed this topic at two Forest View Neighborhood meetings. In my opinion, the proposal was not endorsed. More questions were raised. Has it been investigated as to the wetland? Has a traffic count been taken? Has the Traffic Dept. investigated the impact? Has the Fire Dept. been asked how they will get a fire truck down the access in a snowstorm? PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 14 Ambulances? I question if this is a good sound building site. It will take extensive site preparation and an enormous amount of funds. I question the wisdom of the School District granting an easement for right-of-way. There is another care facility a quarter mile away. In addition to this 8-bedroom facility, could we at a later time put in another 8-bedroom facility? The special use permit is for the whole 22 acres, not just a segment of the site. I have lived there since 1961. The environment will change. I used to have pheasants in my back yard; today I do not. Their dollars are going to be excessive, beyond what they may have budgeted for site preparation alone. BEN WILLIAMS, 2903 MANLEY DRIVE. I have lived there since 1956. It is important that this project be done properly in terms of access and landscaping and environmental preservation. We need more input from the architects. Mr. Ruff noted that Ms. Kowalski phoned recently and requested that the public hearing be postponed because they were concerned about not having sufficient information to proceed, especially regarding access from the School District property. I said we really couldn't postpone the public hearing part, but we could postpone committee action once it was referred to committee. RODNEY THAYER, 2735 WABASH. Across the street from where they plan to put the easement. I have lived in Lansing all my life, and I used to ride my motorcycle down in that pit. My neighbor across the road who worked for the state of Michigan said they made Solomon quit digging in the sand pit because the sand bar in there runs down to Jackson, Michigan, and it was getting too deep and would be harmful to the environment. It is an eyesore to look at. It is no place to put somebody near death. It's in a hole in the ground, and I think it's going to be impossible to make a road down in there that you will be able to get fire trucks, ambulances and visitors down in the pit without creating more problems. I think Mr. Solomon intimidated her into buying the land by a certain date--nobody wants to buy that land. It's worthless. It's nasty, stagnant water. It's a muck hole. I know, because I buried my motorcycle in it. DOUG McGINNIS, 2520 WABASH. I have heard everybody talk against the hospice. My opinion is that we are fortunate to have hospice come into our neighborhood and build a facility. They offer a wonderful service. The site plan is not obtrusive to any of the neighborhoods. The concerns of walls and sand and building techniques would not be a concern of the neighborhoods but of the land buyer. I look forward to having a facility like that rather than residential. I can't think of a nicer place to spend my final days than looking out over a pit. It is starting to overgrow with trees. I have deer in my back yard, all sorts of wildlife. I am in favor of the proposal. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 15 ELIZABETH McGINNIS, 2520 WABASH. I also am in favor of this. If the site problems could be adequately explained to the residents, the concern about the sand would be alleviated. I can't imagine anyone anticipating building there without checking that out first. I personally would like to know if that is considered a wetland. I doubt that it is. We have lived in the neighborhood for 12 years now. Our children sledded down the pit; we have collected insect specimens; we have watched bluebirds. When you look at the whole thing, it is a beautiful piece of property with lots of wildlife. Adding a building to the far corner of the property will not chase the wildlife away. There is no more important thing than having a peaceful place to die. I can envision this facility as being a wonderful place for terminally ill patients to die, especially if their windows face out into the natural area. RUBY STRUDWICK, 2709 ATTENBOROUGH CIRCLE. I think it would be a good thing because hospitals do not keep people very long. To have someone dedicated to taking care of people when they are sick, some might oppose it, but there has to be places to put people who are sick and need to be taken care of. We have to consider what would be good for the people. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the chairman announced the conclusion of the public hearing for SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting Wednesday, January 20, 1999 in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. Mr. Ruff said we may not be able to consider the case in its entirety because we will not have information on acquisition of the easement from Lansing School District. 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each) - None. 6. RECESS - The Chairman declared a short recess. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: December 15, 1998 Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Goolsby, to approve the minutes of December 15, 1998. Mr. Miller noted a correction, Pg 4 Ln 5.19" Pos 6.71 regarding LS-34-98, 300-306 S. Holmes Street, Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pass-AYE. Voice vote (6-0), unanimous; carried; the minutes of December 15, 1998 were APPROVED. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole - Did not meet. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 16 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee - Mr. Miller, Chairman. Next meeting Wednesday, January 20, 1999, at 4 p.m., Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 3. Urban Development Committee - Mr Nischan Next meeting of the Urban Development Committee will be held at 4 p.m. on Tuesday, January 19, 1999 in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from the Planning Manager. Ms. Love said we have a candidate for Mr. Greiner's position, a young woman who works for a title company. She lives on the southeast part of town. She is filling in the application now, and would be a good addition to the Board. We have been fairly busy lately with housing studies, historic preservation studies, General Motors studies, and other things. Funds for master planning may be in jeopardy, because of the rain fee shortfall. Ms. Love commended Board members, especially the Urban Development Committee which has been working extremely diligently, many extra hours. They have met uncomplainingly, on Saturdays; they have worked at home. This should be noted for the record. Ms. Love noted her appreciation. D. Pending Items: Future action required. 1. Planning Board a. Z-25-97, 300 Blk. S. Butler, W. Side, "C" Residential to "D-V Professional Office District(Tabled January 6, 1998) 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-19-97, N.W. Cor. Cavanaugh & Aurelius, "F" Commercial to "G-2" Wholesale District(Tabled October 15, 1997) b. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-V Business District(Tabled February 11, 1998) C. Z-3-98, 1131 & 1133 Race Street, "H" Light Industrial to "G-V Business District(Tabled April 15, 1998) d. Z-4-98,201 E.Grand River, "F-1" Commercial &"H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) e. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) f. Z-8-98, 208 E. Grand River Avenue, "F-1" Commercial to "G-1" Business (Tabled August 12, 1998) g. SLU-5-98, Gier Community Center,2400 Hall Street(Act-6-98); h. SLU-7-98, Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave. (Act-8-98); I. SLU-10-98, Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd. (Act-11-98); PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 12, 1999 PAGE 17 j. SLU-12-98, Fire Station#4, 5550 S. Pennsylvania Ave. (Act-13-98); Urban Development Committee a. Act-19-97, 120 E. Shiawassee Street, Fire Station#1, Market/Sale for Mid- Rise Residential with Building Preserved b. Act-21-98, Ingham Regional Medical Center, Replacement Sign in S. Pennsylvania ROW(Tabled September 8, 1998) C. MPA-1-98, Downtown Comprehensive Plan (Tabled September 8, 1998) 8. NEW BUSINESS - None. 9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON Mr. Ruge asked, concerning the approval for the Community Mental Health Building at Jolly-S. Cedar, that the Board specifically stated that a tree grouping in a swale was to remain. The consensus was that the trees were to stay; however, they have all been removed. Mr. Frederick said most of what he has seen removed has been scrub growth and minor vegetation. 10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS - None. 11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Mr. Ruge asked about sign enforcement. Ms. Love said at the moment, it is on hold. The building inspectors are racing through numerous projects, with three state office buildings being renovated, the State Legislative Office building; the Jackson National Life building. These inspectors are also responsible for sign enforcement. We are asking in our next budget for a new person to do weeds and trash May-September and to do sign enforcement October-April. We hope City Council will approve this new position. We have already surpassed last year's building permit fees. The total for the first seven months is more than the total for the entire previous year. 12. ADJOURNMENT - was at 9:41 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Eleanor K. Love, Secretary, Planning Board mn011299\49 APPROVED AS PRINTED FEBRUARY 16, 1999. Draft 021299 Approved 021699 To Clerk 031999 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 P.M., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall 124 West Michigan Avenue Tuesday, January 26, 1999 - r-- 1. OPENING SESSION: Chairman Ruge called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Goolsby, Keene, Miller, Nischan, Smith; Ruge. Seven members present, one vacant seat. B. Excused Absences C. Introductions. Ms. Eleanor Love, Planning Manager, introduced staff present, James A. Ruff, Zoning Administrator, William C. Rieske, Principal Planner, and Louise H. Christian, Recording Secretary. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: The agenda was approved as presented. 3. COMMUNICATIONS - None. 4. HEARINGS - None. 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each) EDWARD BENSON, 214 CLOVERLAND. I would like to speak to Z-13-98, corner of Cedar and Syringa. There are other neighbors here; we are opposed to the request. We are a growing neighborhood, with 14 young children whose families moved in less than five years ago. I moved in six years ago with a five-year-old who is now ten. Next door is a new family with two children who moved in last week. We ask your consideration of our concerns and that you not approve this rezoning request. Inquiries have been made about the back of the property. The response was no, it's not available. I believe the request is genuine. We are concerned about changing the complexion of the neighborhood from residential to commercial We believe there is still a market for office, doctor's office or professional office that would match the building just south, an insurance company. We don't feel that the property has been well-enough marketed; therefore, we are asking that you do not approve the request for rezoning for the front. EMERSON OHL, GRANGER PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT, regarding easement for communications cable at 124 W. Michigan. The staff has been very helpful in determining the utilization of the cable and the conduit. There is a conduit on the south wall of the parking garage of City Hall, and a 2 in cable that will intercept the PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 2 existing State of Michigan conduit, and go across the top of the garage to a junction box directly adjacent to the old Board of Water and Light building, the new House of Representatives Office Building. This is an exciting development for Lansing in that the fiber optics cable will carry data, voice, or picture from the U. S. Congress directly into the Michigan House of Representatives offices. It provides for a wide range of communications to be available to members of the House. Thank you. SANDY ALLEN, SECOND WARD COUNCILPERSON, here on the Hacker property. This property has a history of zoning requests from its original "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial by the former owner, Mr. Hacker. On May 19, the City Council approved a "D-1" Professional Office District zoning. This was done at the Council's initiative, which is very unusual. The Council recognized the difficulty in marketing this property as "A" Residential and felt that the "D-1" was a suitable compromise. The "D-V designation would allow a doctor's office, an attorney, a dentist, or insurance office, which would lessen the impact on a street that has been labeled by the Lansing Police Department as having some of the most dangerous intersections in Lansing. When I became aware of Mr. Baryames's request, I contacted Planning and asked that the request be reviewed in light of the Council's actions. I quote from a memorandum to the Council's Development and Planning Committee by Jim Ruff, Zoning Administrator. "The ownership is different from those who have owned it during the previous zoning request, but the land issues remain the same. There have not been any significant changes in the land use or circulation patterns of that area, and there is not a significant change in the request. Therefore, the request is virtually the same as the previous request that was denied by Council on September 23, 1996, and the opinion of the Planning Office does not need to be accepted. The Planning Office suggests that the Committee recommend the council resolve the issue to return the request by Mr. Baryames with this finding and the application fee of $650. Mr. Baryames purchased the property with the awareness of the current zoning and the history of zoning requests which have been denied by the Council." Mr. Baryames retained attorney Mark Canady on his behalf. I am not suggesting there was any impropriety here; however, Mr. Canady is a former councilman and has formed relationships with council members which could unintentionally give the request through a former council member more weight, which makes me very uncomfortable. The Council has not been given any indication that there was any attempt to market this property with this current appropriate zoning of"D-1". Mr. Canady has stated that the Coney Island Restaurant, which Mr. Baryames proposes, would not attract additional traffic, but would rely on existing traffic. Mr. Canady may believe that to be true; however, as a person who frequently eats in restaurants on the east side I have found that is not the case. Restaurants do have peak hours, breakfast, lunch and dinner. I don't know if this Board is aware that we already have a Coney Island on that block, Mr. Vince's Coney Island, a very small operation, but it has been there for many years. We have to take into consideration existing businesses, especially PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 3 a small business, which would be negatively impacted by a larger operation of the same type. Although the "E-2" designation, requested by Mr. Baryames, is less intrusive than "F" Commercial, it far exceeds that of"D-1" Professional, which would have little impact on the neighborhood due to the patterns of traffic circulation. The Council on its own initiative approved the current "D-1", and nothing has changed over the past year to indicate it should be any different, nor have I seen any attempt to use the market for its current zoning. Finally, the neighborhoods have vehemently opposed any zoning change, and I think no one knows an area, and the impact it will have on the area better than the people who live there. Lansing has been good to the Baryames family and supportive of their various enterprises, and I would hope that Mr. Baryames would be as good to the community and withdraw his request, which has no community support in this location. RUBY STRUDWICK, 2709 ATTENBROUGH CIRCLE, here on behalf of 2498 Delta River Drive Adult Foster Care. I bought that home 30-some years ago. I lived there, raised six children plus a sister. The home was not remodeled for adult foster care. I went after a license to be adult foster care, and I requested five, because I wanted to make sure that I was a very good foster care. The reason why I went into this business is because my mom got sick and I had to put her in adult foster care. I have five people but the home is not remodeled. I could have six, but the structure is the same as when I had my inspection. I have had inspections through the City, which my house was approved, and later on I found out that I had to go through Michigan licenses. They came and inspected my house and approved me to be adult foster care. I could have had six but I decided to take five. I am asking for a special permit to get eight because I have the space. I think I am capable of taking care of them. I wanted to address something that was said that our people wander around. I have some smokers. We have no convicts in our house. They are elderly people; there are a couple smokers. They are permitted to go out and smoke, but they go to the porch and smoke, but they do not wander. In the summertime, we did have people that want to go out and take a little walk. They are on my sidewalk; they are not on anybody else's property. The church next door permits my people to come to church on Sunday. We have had no problems with our people. I watch out for them. I think adult foster care is very important. I am not the only adult foster care in the City. I don't know how somebody else runs their home, but I can address mine. We have adequate parking. If we wanted to put in something like an exercise room, we have the space. I ask you to approve the special permit for the eight. MARK CANADY, REPRESENTING MR. BARYAMES REGARDING Z-13-98, THE PROPERTY ON S. CEDAR. I have a couple observations. I am not quite sure where Councilmember Allen was going with respect to a reference that I used to be on the Council. If Councilmember Allen will recall, I had served with six members of the Council. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 4 The'last time this matter came up, we were voted down unanimously. Of the three members on Council that I served with, Tony Benavides in the past did vote against me; Sandy Allen has made her feelings very clear, and Ellen Beal's and my relationship is well known. What concerns her most is that there is no longer anyone on Council who holds a significant grudge against me. That might be a problem, but to somehow suggest there is undue influence is grossly misplaced. With respect to this property, it has been suggested that the property was not properly marketed. Well, the property was marketed and sold, to Mr. Baryames, at less than 50 percent of its value if it were zoned "E-2" or "F" Commercial. Mr. Baryames is willing to undertake the struggle of trying to have the property rezoned. It was suggested that a number of people that approached the former owners and tried to inquire as to the availability of the property as "D-V Professional Office. I have no knowledge of that; I represented those people since 1996 and never heard of anything. If there are such people interested, my client certainly would like to sell the property for a profit if in fact there are bona fide offers. To my knowledge, there has never been a bona fide offer other than Mr. Baryames's made on this property, and I challenge anyone to claim otherwise. The problem with the property is that it is not suitable for anything other than some type of commercial venture. It is on Cedar Street, one of the busiest streets, if not the busiest, in the entire City. The suggestion that somehow this one parcel of property out of the miles of frontage on Cedar St. that is commercial is going to impact the market value of the neighborhood or impact the quality of life in the neighborhood I think is a red herring. The character of Cedar Street is well established, and well established in the Master Plan, which calls for it to be commercial. The various clients that I have represented have tried numerous times to have this property rezoned and have come back time and again trying to reach some accommodation. The accommodation we are trying to reach now is an "E-2" Shopping District designation. I think it was pointed out very appropriately at the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting that the difference between "D-V and "E-2" is not very great. Some uses would be more intense than a Coney Island, for instance, a drive-in bank. The real issue here is the character of the street which was established long before any of these people ever moved in here. When I was five years old, that McDonald's was there. These people moved into the neighborhood moved in, knowing the nature of Cedar Street, and knowing the type of zoning that was going to take place on that street. No one is trying to diminish the property values or impact or harm the neighborhood. There will be at least 130 ft of buffer between this property and any other neighbor in the neighborhood. This is half of the parcel that is being requested to be rezoned. There is proper buffering, but the real issue here is that there is not an appropriate use for the property within the current zoning. That was the case before, and the only reason the Council went for a "D-1" classification was they knew they couldn't support an "A" Residential classification if a lawsuit was filed. It was not an effort to try and reach an accommodation; in fact this panel recommended that the "D-1" classification not be PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 5 approved. The real issue comes down to this being a parcel suited for one thing and one thing only, namely some type of retail establishment. It is on one of the busiest streets in the City; there is a buffer of at least 130 ft between all the neighbors; across the street to the north and east is commercial; for miles to the north and south is commercial with the exception of the "D-1" on the south which happens to be an insurance agent. The real difference that exists there is that it is across the street and not subjected to the fumes from McDonalds. Someone at a meeting suggested that no one wants to be subjected to the fumes from Sparty's but I point out to you that no one is going to live next door to Sparty's. They are going to live next door to a green vacant lot. The impact on this neighborhood is nominal. This board is charged is to find the highest and best use for property in the City. I ask that you give us the "E-2" classification which comes close to being in conformance with the Master Plan. As the property sits now, it is not. At that point, Mr. Baryames can proceed with his business, which is well-established in the City. It operates in a number of neighborhoods with no complaints from the neighbors. He has been and will continue to be a good neighbor. We are asking that this property be placed in its proper designation so that we can get it back on the tax rolls. JAN PATRICK, 328 SYRINGA, regarding Z-13-98. As a member of the Gardenaire Subdivision who has been opposed to a development of this property to a commercial use, I have been involved with the neighbors with every proposal but this one. In that prior experience, 80 households within two blocks of that property signed petitions saying that in their opinion, this redevelopment to "F" Commercial, especially if it is a restaurant, would bring many additional vehicles to that area. Those residents have continued to sign petitions through the last three proposals. The most recent proposal had a public hearing two weeks ago. In our efforts to find specifically what the same neighborhood at large, in addition to the neighbors here tonight, we expected to have at least 30 days, and we have not had that amount of time. We still plan to get together as a neighborhood to discuss concerns relative to this proposal. We expect that this group is going to take a vote tonight. I would ask you, since you have heard conflicting facts tonight, that you would consider tabling your action on this property until the neighborhood can get together and provide you with that feedback. In addition, a major concern of the neighborhood is the traffic, not only on Syringa, but also on Cedar. Since the fifth lane has been put into Cedar, that area, located two blocks of the Cedar-Jolly intersection, has been increasingly subject to auto accidents with cars turning into and out of McDonalds, into and across the street at Auto Zone, etc. The extension of Syringa, Cedar Court, does not line up straight across Cedar, so you have drivers miscalculating when trying to turn onto Cedar at the very same corner where this restaurant is going to be generating additional turning and stopping. We think that this is reason enough to consider that, although the Master Plan may have envisioned a twenty-year commercial development down Cedar, we think this is PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 6 significant enough now that the Board would consider whether this particular rezoning make sense because of some mitigating factors. With respect to Mr. Canady's remarks, the neighbors are of the opinion that the message of the Council to rezone the property has not been heard. Less than a year ago, the decision to rezone the property, which the neighborhood opposed because they thought that until there was a viable proposal it should not be rezoned to anything. As a compromise, the neighborhood agreed to the Council's proposal to rezone it to "D-1" Professional Office as an acceptable proposal. Here we are a year later, again in the same discussion when from our viewpoint the issue had been settled. We would like the opportunity to prepare information and feedback from the neighborhood why we believe this rezoning is inappropriate for this property. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the chairman closed the comments from the audience. 6. RECESS - None. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: December 1, 1998 Mr. Goolsby made a motion, seconded by Mr. Nischan, to approve the minutes of December 1, 1998. Voice vote (6-0), unanimous; carried; the minutes of December 1, 1998 were APPROVED. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole - Did not meet; no report. 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee - Mr. Miller, Chairman; report from January 20, 1999 committee meeting. a. Z-13-98, 4720 S. Cedar Street (East 183 ft), "D-1" Professional Office District to "E-2" Local Shopping District The applicant proposes to rezone the east 183 ft of the one- acre site for commercial development. The west 130 ft is proposed to remain zoned for single family residential development. The request is to rezone the east portion of the property fronting on Cedar Street at its intersection with Syringa from "D-1" Professional Office District to "E-2" Local Shopping District. Staff has raised several concerns relative to the establishment of the depth of commercial zoning parallel to and west of Cedar Street. The proposed development falls within the guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan. The "E-2" Local Shopping District is more restrictive than the "F" Commercial District which further reduces the possibility of PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 7 uses that could have a significant negative impact on the adjacent residential zone. Staff recommends approval of this request to rezone the east 183 ft of the property from "D-1" Professional Office District to "E-2" Local Shopping District. The potential intensity of development permitted by the "E-2" Local Shopping District, while it would be more than permitted by most uses in the "D-1" Professional Office District, would be less than that possible under a more intensive commercial zoning district. It was noted that many hours of discussion have taken place on this property over the years. The history of the rezonings was reviewed. The Board is concerned about area residents. Board and planning staff position is to consider the facts presented and criteria necessary for rezoning as presented. The issue of traffic was considered; traffic should addressed as traffic calming measures. Cut-through traffic does occur. Other issues such as compatibility with surrounding land use, it was noted that the 183 ft of basically commercial zoning is consistent on Cedar Street for quite a distance where that type of zoning has taken place. It is consistent with the Master Plan. Regarding other factors, there was no significant negative environmental impacts; in terms of patterns of development, it is consistent. There was discussion concerning whether or not this property has been properly marketed, and some disagreement there; however, in terms of what the Board considers, this may not be entirely relevant in terms of the facts of the case and considerations of the Board as meeting the criteria of the Board. Staff had recommended approval to "E-2" Local Shopping District, which is a less intensive use than the "F" Commercial previously approved by the Planning Board. We would note that in terms of reports of other agencies, the Lansing Police Dept. was Super; excellent addition to our tax base, and good to remove problem houses. Based on staff findings and evidence, the Committee concurred with the staff report and found that this restaurant is similar to the principally permitted uses in the "E-2" District. This is important that the Board has discretion in terms of noting that, and we did note it in our report. In Committee, it was moved, seconded; carried; unanimous (3-0) to approve Z-13-98, 4720 S. Cedar Street rezoning the East 183 ft from "D-1" Professional Office District to "E-2" Local Shopping District, including finding that this restaurant PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 8 is similar to the principally permitted uses of the "E-2" District. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, based on testimony, evidence and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve Z-13-98, 4720 S. Cedar Street (East 183 ft), "D-1" Professional Office District to "E-2" Local Shopping District, including the finding that this restaurant is similar to the principally permitted uses of the "E-2" District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Nischan said that of all the possibilities the Board has looked at, this one seems to fit best with both protecting the residential from the commercial, and yet conforming to the Master Plan. It seems workable. We are trying to be in conformity with the Plan, but we do nevertheless hold protection of residential neighborhoods as a high priority. By keeping the west 130 ft single family residential and having no ingress on Syringa will give that protection. "My inclination would be to vote in favor of the rezoning." Mr. Ruge asked if Mr. Baryames is the owner or optionee, and noted that the comment was made that the neighborhood did not have enough time to address the case.. Mr. Ruff said it is his understanding that Mr. Baryames is the owner. "We have had [the petition] for some months now. . . . Look at the number, Z-13." Regarding neighborhood notification, the Planning Office mailed a standard notification, a postcard, to owners and occupants within 300 ft., which is more than required by code. A legal ad was published in the newspaper 15 days in advance. We did try to contact a past resident, Mr. Banker, but a formal neighborhood organization is not registered with the Neighborhood Council. Councilmember Allen was aware the application after it was applied for. Whether or not they have had time to meet and discuss strategy, we don't know, but they say they haven't. A letter was sent to Council after the petition was filed asking how this could be heard again when it was decided a couple years ago. So there was some awareness in the neighborhood. We also have the history of the previous cases, which we have referenced. Mr. Ruge observed that "E-2" Local Shopping District seems to exclude restaurants specifically. Mr. Ruff said the "E-V Apartment Shop District, a combination district, in the zoning progression is one level down, trying to marry the multiple-family or residential uses together with convenience commercial uses. That district does have convenience retail, restaurant, bar and tavern as a permitted use. The "E-2" has convenience retail, bar, tavern. The "F" Commercial District has restaurant, bar, tavern, convenience retail, and I believe, comparison retail as well. You end up with this kind of jump in zoning district. It was staff's opinion that the restaurant, especially the kind of restaurant proposed, the size of it, etc., was more of a local neighborhood-type restaurant versus a large chain destination-type restaurant, so staff recommended that it be considered equitable with the other uses allowed in the "E-2" District. You can eat in a bar or tavern, so the idea here was the Coney Island as a specialty restaurant, considered to be on the same level of intensity and type of use. Mr. Ruge asked if the "E-1" is less intense than "E-2"? Mr. Ruff PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 9 said because of its density, it could be more intense. Think of the Dean Apartments off North Capitol. On the first level, there was the Dean Bean, some other commercial, a laundromat, and those types of uses, and apartments associated with it. That is generally the idea of the "E-1". It can be more intense, based on how much you do there. It allows the restaurants, bar and tavern type of activity, so staff thought it reasonable to consider them similar. Mr. Ruge asked about the motion. In the report, Mr. Goolsby suggested that in site plan review there be no ingress or egress on Syringa. Was that part of the motion? Mr. Goolsby said no because that would be a restriction that could not be placed on the rezoning. It was only a suggestion, just as traffic calming on Syringa is only a suggestion. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Goolsby . Ave Keene. . . Ave Miller. . . Ave Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nay Ruge . .Ave On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 1; carried; Z-13-98, 4720 S. Cedar Street (East 183 ft), "D-1" Professional Office District to "E-2" Local Shopping District was APPROVED. b. Z-18-98, former 528 North Seymour Avenue, "DM-3" Residential District to "D-1" Professional Office District The Committee unanimously accepted the withdrawal of the request pending receipt of letter from the petitioner. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to accept the withdrawal of the request for Z-18-98, 528 North Seymour Street, "DM-Y Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District for withdrawal. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the action was as follows. Mr. Ruff said he has not as yet received the letter; however, he has received LCC's application for a special land use today. On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; withdrawal of Z-18-98, 528 North Seymour Street, "DM-3" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District was APPROVED. C. SLU-24-98, 3726 Delta River Dr., Adult Foster Care Facility for Eight Persons. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 10 The applicant is requesting a Special Land Use permit to expand an existing adult foster care facility from six persons to eight persons. Residential care facilities containing over six persons require a special land use permit. The requirement of the Zoning Code for spacing facilities 1,500 ft apart was recently invalidated by the courts. In Committee, concern was expressed that it was beginning to look more like a business vs. a home and that allowing more than six people might be uncharacteristic of the area. Staff recommended approval with conditions: 1. Twenty-four-hour supervision is maintained on site; 2. Capacity of the facility be limited to eight persons; 3. Operation of the adult foster care facility must meet all federal, state, and local ordinances for the licensing of adult foster care facilities; 4. Any office use must be directly related to management of this facility only; 5. No increase in the external dimensions of the structure; 6. Approval of the Special Land Use permit does not include an approval of the construction or use of any second unit(s) in the building as appears to be suggested by the applicant. Any such construction or use would require submission and approval of a rezoning petition which would have to be granted prior to considering the construction and/or use of the second unit. Based on testimony and evidence, the committee concurred with the staff report with the six conditions, Mr. Frederick, being in the minority. In Committee, it was moved and seconded and carried (2-1) to approve SLU-24-98, 3726 Delta River Drive, Adult Foster Care Facility for Eight Persons with six conditions incorporated. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Goolsby, to approve SLU-24-98, 3726 Delta River Dr., Adult Foster Care Facility for Eight Persons, with six conditions incorporating the staff report. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows: Mr. Nischan said the house should meet state licensing requirements; the requirement should be included in the conditions. He is concerned about the adequacy of the facility. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 11 He requested a friendly amendment to require state licensure as a condition. Ms. Keene said when the applicant was first here, she brought and passed around a license for five. She too is concerned about the space issue. She would support the friendly amendment. Goolsby Ave Keene Ave Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Smith. Ave Frederick. Nay Ruge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 1; carried; SLU-24-98, 3726 Delta River Drive, Adult Foster Care Facility for Eight Persons with six conditions and the additional requirement of state licensure as a condition for approval was APPROVED. d. SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People The applicant requests a Special Land Use to construct a residential care facility to provide hospice services for eight residents. The proposed location of the residential structure, approximately 7,500-8,000 sq ft in size is in the northeast corner of the site. The committee found, based on testimony, evidence and the staff report, that there are still questions regarding this proposal, especially with regard to access. TABLED. Next meeting Wednesday, February 10, 1999, at 4 p.m. in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 3. Urban Development Committee - Ms. Keene a. Act-30-98, City Hall, 124 W. Michigan Ave., Easement for communications cable This is a request by the State of Michigan Legislative Service Bureau for an easement for an communications cable, to route a single two-inch conduit containing fiber optic cable from Michigan Avenue north through the City Hall parking garage to the new Legislative Office Building at 123 W. Ottawa/201 N. Capitol. The conduit will be two inches in diameter and tap into a 2 ft x 2 ft electrical box on the south wall, approximately 84 ft 7 in east of the westernmost wall of the underground parking garage in the City Hall basement. It would then run downward from the ceiling, and enter the Legislative Office PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 12 Building through the north wall of the City Hall parking garage. The only alternative is to extend this conduit within the Capitol Avenue Right-of-way. The staff recommended approval of Act-30-98 to grant an easement through the City Hall Parking Garage for a conduit containing fiber optic communication cable, provided that the project be constructed in accordance with the specifications approved by the Management Services Department and the Building Safety Offices. The Committee found, in reviewing the location, character and extent of the proposed conduit, the impact of the conduit installation in the City Hall parking garage is expected to be negligible. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously (3-0) to approve Act-30-98 to grant an easement through the City Hall Parking Garage for a conduit containing fiber optic communication cable, provided that the project be constructed in accordance with the specifications approved by the Management Services Department and the Building Safety Office, including a requirement for the temporary removal of the conduit as necessary for the maintenance and repair of the Parking Garage. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Nischan, to approve Act-30-98 to grant an easement through the City Hall Parking Garage for a conduit containing fiber optic communication cable, provided that the project be constructed in accordance with the specifications approved by the Managment Services Department and the Building Safety Office, including a requirement for the temporary removal of the conduit as necessary for the maintenance and repair of the Parking Garage. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Keene. . . Ave Miller . .Ave Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith . Ave Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Goolsby . Ave Ruge . . Aye On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; unanimous; Act-30-98, City Hall, 123 W. Michigan Avenue, Easement through the City Hall Parking Garage for communications cable, provided that the project be constructed in accordance with the specifications PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 13 approved by the Managment Services Department and the Building Safety Office, including a requirement for the temporary removal of the conduit as necessary for the maintenance and repair of the Parking Garage, was APPROVED. b. Act-33-98, 1000 Blk. Holmes Rd., South Side East of Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Vacate portion of ROW This is a request by Katz Brothers, the developers of a proposed Walgreen's drug store. The subject portion of the right-of-way is 17 ft in width, located on the south side of Holmes Road, approximately 69 ft from Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. and stretches east 147 ft to the entrance of the Southwind Office Park. It is south of the existing roadway, and currently used as part of a private parking lot. The request is to continue to use this portion of the right-of- way as parking for a proposed Walgreen's drug store. This proposed development already has sufficient parking on the south side of the proposed building site, but the building entrance will be on the northwest corner, near the subject portion of the right-of-way. Parking at that location would enhance the success of the project. The project would include underground utilities, parking lot buffering, and brick facades. The Traffic Engineer and Public Service Dept. suggest retaining the right-of-way for possible future use, allowing temporary private use through a licensing agreement. Staff recommends allowing the use of the right-of-way through a licensing agreement, provided that the license is revokable at the will of the City. The applicant will be required to remove any improvement made on the right-of-way, and the applicant will need to provide enough space on their site to meet the parking requirement on a one-for-one basis in the event the City needs the use of the right-of-way at a later time. In a review of the location, character and extent of the proposal, the Committee found that the subject portion of the Holmes Road right-of-way has no current public use, but may serve a public purpose in the future for a possible roadway widening or deceleration lane. Thus, the impact of the temporary private use of the subject portion of the right-of-way is expected to be negligible. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 14 In Committee, it was moved, seconded and approved unanimously (3-0) to recommend approval of Act-33-98 to allow the use of the subject 17 ft x 147 ft portion of the right-of- way for private parking through a license agreement as recommended by staff with the following provisions: 1. The license is revokable at the will of the City. 2. The applicant will be required to remove any improvement made on the right-of-way. 3. The applicant will provide enough space on their site to meet the parking requirement on a one-for-one basis in the event the City needs the use of the right-of-way. 4. The proposed Walgreen's shall use the existing driveway on the southwest corner of the site for access to Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. (A shared access agreement with the Eyde Company will be necessary.) Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, to approve Act-33-98 to allow the use of the subject 17 ft x 147 ft portion of the right-of-way for private parking through a license agreement as recommended by staff with the above provisions. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Ms. Love said she has been discussing the access point with the Transportation Engineer. The site is not flat. To the south there is an approximately six-foot drop-off. The Transportation Engineer has indicated that if they can get the curb cut between Walgreen's and that driveway, it has to be a minimum of 40 ft back from the curb on the south side of the driveway. They have to have a minimum of two stacking spaces so that the driveway is not blocking the rest of the space. The preference of the Transportation Engineer would be 60 ft back from the curb line of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. on the south side of the driveway. By the time you get back 40 ft, there is a six-foot drop-off. His other suggestion is a right-turn-in, right-turn-out at the location where there is already a driveway. If they can fit the driveway in along the south side of the property into that other driveway, it must be a minimum of 40 ft back. In addition to the Transportation Engineer, Ms. Love has also been talking with the Walgreen's representative from Chicago who said that either alternative was agreeable. He will discuss the situation with both the contractor and excavator to determine whether they could arrange with the Eydes to get a sloped driveway there. If they can work it out, they will; if not, they will settle for the right-turn-in, right-turn out arrangement. This will give us the flexibility to do either option, depending on the final recommendations of the Transportation Engineer. Ms. Keene accepted as a friendly amendment "subject to the approval of the Transportation Engineer." Ms. Love said all we need to say is that use of that entrance to the south and that the easement to the driveway has to be subject to the final approval of PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 15 the Transportation Engineer or other access as may be deemed appropriate to the Transportation Engineer. Mr. Miller commended the staff's inclusion of the vicinity map for the case; it was very helpful. Miller. . . Ave Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith. . . Ave Frederick . .Ave Goolsby .Ave Keene Ave Ruge . Ave On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; unanimous; Act-33-98, 1000 Blk. Holmes Rd., South Side East of Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Vacate portion of ROW, was APPROVED. C. Proposed Statement of Community Development Objectives and Projected Use of Funds Mr. Winnicker reviewed the use of the funds. The Committee did not consider the Public Services portion because Mr. Ruge declared a conflict of interest. That left two members, so the matter was not considered; rather, it will be taken up tonight. The Committee took action on the balance of the projected use of funds. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that improvements for health/safety and emergency purposes can be paid for with Historic Preservation funds, given qualification and compliance with other aspects of the program, and that the designation of historic preservation funds will not hamper the ongoing housing rehabilitation program activities. There was some concern about whether there was enough funding for historic preservation. After much discussion, it was moved by Mr. Ruge and seconded by Mr. Smith to recommend approval of the Proposed Statement of Community Development Objectives and Projected Use of funds as printed, with the following amendments: 1. Page, 2, reduce the allocation for "Housing Rehabilitation" by $60,000 to $760,000. 2. Page 3, increase the allocation for "Historic Preservation" by $60,000 to $120,000. Delete the words "the facades of," and double the number of PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 16 structures to "14-20" from 7-10" (because of doubling the funding). 3. Forward the "Public Services" portion to the Planning Board without comment or recommendation. In committee, the motion carried unanimously (3-0). Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Nischan, to recommend approval of the Proposed Statement of Community Development Objectives and Projected Use of funds as printed, with the amendments #1 and #2. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Miller was uncomfortable making judgments concerning rank order of importance. He asked for staff's recommendations. Ms. Keene said that Mr. Winnicker too had reservations and concerns about this change. We must balance concerns of home rehab with historic concerns, but approval of the budget is necessary. After much discussion, it was agreed to keep the process moving though it may not be the best way to go. Mr. Smith noted discussion concerning specifying a figure for historic preservation vs. keeping the amount under the umbrella of rehab funds. Mr. Miller recommended the word "facade", which connotes cosmetic changes, be dropped. Structural changes can be addressed under rehabilitation. Mr. Ruge said in Lansing historic preservation is important and not just cosmetic. How a neighborhood looks is essential in determining both a neighborhood aura and success in attracting quality people to live there. Mr. Ruge would like to see the $60,000 increased to symbolically emphasize the importance of historic preservation. Mr. Goolsby inquired about the inventory of historic buildings. Some communities started historic preservation 20, 40, or a hundred years ago, and they have followed through, whereas Lansing has not. Lansing needs to make up for lost time. The first step is the inventory, then a plan to further historic preservation. Ms. Love said that regardless of the dollar amounts assigned, the programs are going to run exactly the same way as in the past. With an amount assigned for historic preservation, credibility and importance are established for historic preservation, but regardless of a number, we have to do housing rehabilitation with sensitivity. Ms. Cantlon is doing an excellent job sensitizing the inspectors in Development and in Building Safety. "Whether you say 60 or 120, you are just moving the money from one pot to another." Mr. Ruff said, since the dollars are out of the same pot, some historic dollars can be designated for exterior work, while CD dollars can be used for interior work. Instead of $12,000 for exterior, maybe it is $20,000 for exterior plus interior, so they do historic preservation and don't designate it as such. Rehab on historic structures is going to get -- ROTARY MUITIFORMS,INC. 616-942-2574 xo '�� WRITE IT RIGHTI *DON'T SAY IT—WRITE IT �� • �� , — FROM: TO: /L OUR JOB NO. I DATE OF MEMO SUBJECT: -17 — ---- -----�=--- ----- - - ------- .� -- ------ — - - - -- -----------�-- ------- - - - ----------------------------------------- ---- -- - ------------- -------- ------------ SIGNED 4e 'y,� SENDER—DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE — — --------------------------------------------------- --------------------- ------------------------ --------- ----------------------------------------- ;:0 ;s a - ---- ------------------------ r-; — - -----�---- ------------------- rrze , ------- -t;�--------------------------- SIGNED DATE SENDER—Retain part 2 for your follow-up, send parts 1 and 3 to addressee ORIGINAL RECIPIENT—Retain part 1 and return part 3 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 17 done in a sensitive way. Before we do a 106 Review, we are required to look at environment and historic status. Mr. Miller said his nay vote is not against the budget, but against the amendments. Mr. Frederick asked how do we convey our interest in historic preservation while at the same time not encumbering this money. Ms. Love said it is a two-edged sword, no matter which way you go. Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith . Ave Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Goolsby . Nav Keene. . . Ave Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nay Ruge . . Ave On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 2; carried; Proposed Statement of Community Development Objectives and Projected Use of funds with amendment No. 1 on p. 2, to reduce the allocation for"Housing Rehabilitation" by $60,000 to $760,000, and amendment No. 2 on p. 3, to increase the allocation for "Historic Preservation" by $60,000 to $120,000 deleting the words "the facades of," and doubling the number of structures to "14-20" from "7-10" was APPROVED. Prior to discussion of the public services portion, Chairman Ruge handed the gavel to Vice Chairman Goolsby and left the room. Ms. Keene resumed, summarizing the public services section, including neighborhood clean ups, Neighborhoods 'N Bloom, support to the Lansing Neighborhood Council, financing of two Community Police officer positions, Letts Center Recreation programs, Kids' Camps, Community Police Recreation Program and support to Housing Resource Center, as well as LISC, and Greater Lansing Housing Coalition, and other activities related to benefits for low- and moderate-income families. The proposed allocation for that area is $371,000. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to recommend approval of the public services portion of the Proposed Statement of Community Development Objectives and Projected Use of Funds. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; unanimous, carried; the public services section of the Proposed Statement of Community Development Objectives and Projected Use of Funds was APPROVED. Mr. Ruge returned and resumed the Chair. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 18 d. Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington, Vacate Alley along RR ROW This is a request by Alan Martin of Jones Development to vacate a 16.5 ft. wide x 207.77 ft long alley on the south side of the ConRail Railroad tracks west of Washington Avenue along a railroad right-of-way. He proposes to build a new Quality Dairy Store of approx. 3,000-3,500 sq ft in size, in approximately the same location as the existing building at this location and requests the unimproved alley be vacated to potentially add to his development site. He currently has an option on the property, the former Henfling Transmission site. Staff recommended approval of Act-32-98, the vacation of the 16.5-ft-wide x 206.77-ft-long unimproved alley subject to the reservation of appropriate utility easements as necessary. The alley once vacated would be attached to the corner property (Lot 5, Block 18, Park Place Subdivision). A concern was raised at the meeting about the ownership of the part of the property, if there was a vacation. There is a new letter in the packet from the City Attorney's office. Ms. Keene asked for clarification in light of the letter. Mr. Rieske said the City Attorney's letter deals with a hold harmless clause regarding the environmental condition of the property, and the retention of a utility easement right-of-way, basically saying that Consumers Energy should have an easement, and not necessarily the City, if the City has no utilities in there. This letter also confirms what the Assessor's Office said, that the entire alleyway would go to that corner property, because the railroad is adjacent to the plat, but not part of the plat. It is not a platted railroad right-of-way. Therefore the railroad would not receive any property as a result of the vacation of the subject alley. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence and location, character and extent of the proposal, that no public purpose was found for the unimproved alley. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously (3-0) to approve Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington Avenue, Vacate alley along RR ROW, subject to: 1. The reservation of easements for existing utilities as necessary; PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 19 2. The applicant working with Consumers Energy to address concerns of how close any new construction can be to their gas line; 3. A baseline environmental assessment of the subject alley be performed as appropriate; and 4. The applicant's indemnification of the City of any preexisting conditions associated with the property. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, to approve Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington, Vacate Alley along RR ROW, with the above four conditions, and the City Attorney's hold harmless agreement being executed with the abutting owner for any environmental conditions because a transmission shop was located there previously. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Discussion ensued regarding ownership, the hold harmless clause, leasing or licensing the alley, the railroad's property and other questions. Mr. Rieske was asked to straighten out the details in time for the Planning Board meeting on February 2, 1999. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Goolsby, to table Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington, Vacate Alley along RR ROW, voice vote, Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried, Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington, Vacate Alley along RR ROW was TABLED. e. Act-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Closure. f. Act-28-98, 900-1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw between Butler and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Vacation. These cases are scheduled for public hearing on February 2, 1999. g. Act-29-98, 700 Blk. Sheridan Street, Vacation or Sale of ROW. This case is scheduled for a public hearing on February 16, 1999. Next meeting Tuesday, February 9, 1999, at 4 p.m., Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from the Planning Manager. Ms. Love said two new Historic District Commission members, Glenn Bachelder and Dennis Denno, have been approved by the Committee on Development and Planning for confirmation by the City Council on Monday, February 2, 1999, PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 20 Regarding the three amendments of the Subdivision Regulations which had public hearings in April 1998, the City Attorney has held the draft amendments. One concerns developers paying for the top coat of paving in new plats which formerly the City paid for. The second is that developers be responsible for new traffic signals that would have to be installed as a result of their new development. A new signal can cost $23,000-$24,000. The third is a change in the regulations specifying that City Council has the right to grant lot splits which meet less than minimum code requirements. We have been holding several lot splits; three such items are pending. One was in December 1998, involving two structures on one property. The two structures need rehabilitation; however, the bank won't loan money for rehab until the lot is split because the houses are nonconforming. The only way to grant a variance to allow the petitioner to split the lot is to have City Council approve the split. The lending institution is eager to close. She also wants to buy and rehab properties in Old Town. But for this one sentence in the subdivision regulations, she would be on her way, as would the other two. Ms. Love has worked with City Council to put this on a fast track. The amendments are tabled in committee now; consequently, I would like to ask the Board, and specifically the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, if they would meet next Tuesday February 2, 1999 at 6:30 p.m. before the Board meeting to consider these amendments, and to act on them at the Board meeting next week. City Council will be introducing this ordinance change next Monday, February 1, 1999 and having the public hearing on February 15, 1999. If you act next week, we will have our comments and recommendations to the City Council by the time they have their public hearing. I apologize about the speed. . . . I would ask your indulgence to allow us to put that on the committee agenda and on the Board agenda for next week. . . . I will send you copies of the memo I have written about what these changes entail. Ms. Love consulted with the Board wrapping up the Downtown Lansing Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Love said she would like to join the Urban Development Committee for some of the deliberations. Ms. Love proposed meeting next Tuesday, February 2, 1999, at 4 p.m. prior to the Board meeting in the City Council Conference Room. Mr. Nischan said it would be useful to let people know about the transportation study. Ms. Love said we need to make a decision about whether or not we want to follow up on the state's recommendation of the downtown two-way system. Mr. Ruge said the committee would like to pursue that to see if it is a viable option. D. Pending Items: Future action required. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 21 1. Planning Board a. Z-25-97, 300 Blk. S. Butler, W. Side, "C" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District(Tabled January 6, 1998) 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-19-97, N.W. Cor. Cavanaugh & Aurelius, "F" Commercial to "G-2" Wholesale District(Tabled October 15, 1997) b. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-V Business District(Tabled February 11, 1998) C. Z-3-98, 1131 & 1133 Race Street, "H" Light Industrial to "G-1" Business District(Tabled April 15, 1998) d. Z-4-98,201 E.Grand River, "F-1" Commercial &"H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-V Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) e. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1"Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) f. Z-8-98, 208 E. Grand River Avenue, "F-1" Commercial to "G-1" Business (Tabled August 12, 1998) g. SLU-5-98, Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street(Act-6-98); h. SLU-7-98, Washington Park,2516 S. Washington Ave. (Act-8-98); I. SLU-10-98, Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd. (Act-11-98); j. SLU-12-98, Fire Station#4, 5550 S. Pennsylvania Ave. (Act-13-98); Urban Development Committee a. Act-19-97, 120 E. Shiawassee Street, Fire Station#1, Market/Sale for Mid- Rise Residential with Building Preserved b. Act-21-98, Ingham Regional Medical Center, Replacement Sign in S. Pennsylvania ROW(Tabled September 8, 1998) C. MPA-1-98, Downtown Comprehensive Plan (Tabled September 8, 1998) 8. NEW BUSINESS - None. 9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON Chairman Ruge asked, when members intend to vote "nay" on an item, that they state their reasons during the Planning Board discussion. Regarding the Preservation Education Program mentioned by Mr. Smith, how can we get it funded. Ms. Love said part of Susan Cantlon's charge is to work with the Education Committee to provide a variety of different kinds of educational materials such as a video; a promotional brochure relative to the new tax credit; a draft preservation plan for the entire city and on identifying and inventorying all historic structures. 10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS - None. 11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Mr. Goolsby said last Friday ECW Wrestling, sponsored by the City, was at the Lansing Center. Signs were plastered everywhere, on telephone and utility poles. It's time we insist that a clause be put in the contract stipulating that there will be an automatic fine if promotional signs are in conflict with the sign code. We can't enforce the sign code if the City is somewhat responsible for the pollution by PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 26, 1999 PAGE 22 allowing people who contract to use the facility to act in violation of the sign code. Ms. Love has been collecting abandoned sign locations throughout the City. Members noticing such signs should inform Ms. Love, so a sign contractor can be engaged to remove them. 12. ADJOURNMENT - was at 9.48 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Eleanor K. Love, Secretary Planning Board =012699 aA48 Z-13-98 4720 S. Cedar Street "D-1" Professional Office to E-2 Local Shopping District GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Chris A. Baryames 1040 S. Pennsylvania Avenue Lansing, MI 48912 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Owner by option. OWNER: CCPL Real Estate Group, L.L.C. 11455 Upton Road Grand Ledge, MI 48837 REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning from "A" Residential District and "D-1" Professional Office District to "A" Residential District and E-2 Local Shopping District LOCATION: 4720 S. Cedar Street - NW corner at Syringa EXISTING LAND USE: Single Family Residence (vacant) EXISTING ZONING: "D-1" Professional Office and "A" Residential District PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 161' x 313'; 50,394 square feet The petition is to rezone only the 183 feet of the property fronting on Cedar Street. SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Commercial; 1-family residential S: Office; 1-family residential E: Commercial (across Cedar Street) W: 1-family residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "F" Commercial, "A" Residential S: "D-1" Professional Office, "A" Residential E: "F" Commercial & "D-1" Professional Office W: "A" Residential MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for commercial/professional office/ residential at 0-7 dwelling units per acre. Z-13-98 4720 S. Cedar Street page 2 "D-1" Professional Office to E-2 Local Shopping District SPECIFIC INFORMATION DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to rezone the east 183 feet of the one acre site for commercial development. The west 130 feet is proposed to remain zoned for single family residential development. CASE HISTORY: This property has been subject to four recent rezoning petitions. 1. The Planning Board, on January 17, 1994, voted unanimously 7-0, to recommend denial of Z-5-94, a request by Wolverine Development to rezone property located at 4720 S Cedar Street from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial District. The applicant proposed to develop speculatively for a future commercial use. This request was withdrawn by the applicant before City Council action. 2. The Planning Board on January 15, 1995, voted unanimously (6-0), to recommend denial of the request by J. Carroll Barber, Architect, to rezone the same property from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District and "F" Commercial District. 3. The Planning Board on May 21, 1996 unanimously (6-0) recommended approval Z-4-96, a petition by Mr. Thomas P. DeBoer to rezone the property from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District and "A" Residential District. The petition was to rezone only the east 183 feet of the property to "F" Commercial District. 4. The Lansing Planning Board, at their meeting on February 4, 1997, by a vote of 2 yes -4 nays, failed to recommend approval of the request by the City of Lansing (applicant) to rezone the property from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District. The City Council had proposed to rezone the east 183 feet of the 1.15 acre parcel for professional office development. Council approved this rezoning on May 19, 1997. Z-13-98 4720 S. Cedar Street page 3 "D-1" Professional Office to E-2 Local Shopping District In all of the above cases, the Planning Board based its decision, in part, on the Comprehensive Plan which establishes a formal line of separation between commercial and residential areas. The Board also expressed a desire to see professional office development for the front of the property, both to match existing office development south of Syringa, and to prevent a intensive commercial use that could be incompatible with the residential neighborhood. AGENCY RESPONSES: ASSESSOR: No Comments. BOARD OF WATER & LIGHT: No response received. BUILDING SAFETY: The Building Safety Office would have no objection to the proposed re-zoning of this property. Normal Site Plan Review and submittal of sealed plans with permit applications and fees will be required prior to start of construction. CODE COMPLIANCE: No response received. CONSUMERS ENERGY: No response received. COUNCIL OFFICES: See attached. DEVELOPMENT: Encroachment of non-residential into residential area. City has consistently denied such encroachments. No Development Office issues. EDC/TIFA: No response received. LANSING NB'HOOD COUNCIL: No response received. MAYOR'S OFFICE: No response received. LANSING POLICE: Super, excellent addition to our tax base and good to remove problem houses. PUBLIC SERVICES: Public Service - Engineering has no objections to the proposed action. We reserve the right to review Z-13-98 4720 S. Cedar Street page 4 "D-V Professional Office to E-2 Local Shopping District plans prior to approval of a building permit through the normal site plan review procedure. TRANSPORTATION: No response received. SPECIFIC INFORMATION Description of Site The site is presently a residential lot with a vacant single family residence on it. The lot is located at the intersection of a major arterial street with a local street. West of the site is a well established single family neighborhood. Commercial and office uses line either side of Cedar Street to the north, south, and east of the subject property (see map). ANALYSIS The Cedar Street corridor is characteristic of strip commercial development abutting many major arterial roadways in Lansing. The commercial businesses help to insulate the residential neighborhoods from the large volumes of traffic on the major streets. The depth of the subject property from Cedar Street is greater than the depth of the commercial "buffer zone" that has been established along the west side of Cedar Street in the vicinity. ZONING DISTRICT COMPARISON Because this site has a significant history of zoning activity, it is appropriate to compare the current zoning of the property ("D-1" Professional Office District) with the current zoning district being requested ("E-2" Local Shopping District) and with the previous zoning requests ("F" Commercial District). The "D-1" Professional Office District permits many office uses by right: business offices, doctor and dentist offices, banks (including drive-thru facilities). Uses permitted subject to special conditions in the "D-1" include funeral homes, medical clinics and hospitals, child care facilities, and other similar uses. Special land uses in the "D-1" include planned neighborhood convenience centers, barber shops, and churches. The "E-2" zone permits by right convenience stores, bars and taverns, post offices, automobile service stations, accessory structures, and any principal use permitted in the "D-1", and similar uses as determined by the Planning Board. With the exception of residential uses, conditional uses and Special Land Uses permitted in the "E-2" are Z-13-98 4720 S. Cedar Street page 5 "D-V Professional Office to E-2 Local Shopping District similar to those permitted in the "D-1" District. By contrast, the "F" Commercial District permits everything permitted in the "D-1" and "E-2" zones (with the exception of residential uses), in addition to theaters, hotels, and commercial parking facilities. As conditional uses, the "F" zone would permit animal hospitals, kennels, automobile sales lots. One small technicality upon which the Zoning Code is unclear is regarding the use of a "restaurant" in the "E-2" zone as compared to the "F" zone. The code describing principal uses permitted in the E-2 zone, (Section 1266.02(a)), states "A convenience retail store, bar or tavern;". The code describing principal uses permitted in the "F" zone (Section 1268.02(e)) states "A restaurant, bar or tavern;". Fortunately, both zoning districts permit the Planning Board discretion through sections 1266.02(i) and 1268.020) which both read: "Any other use which, by the decision of the Planning Board, is similar to the principally permitted uses set fourth in this section." In Staffs opinion, it is difficult to justify greater restriction of a "restaurant" than a "bar or tavern" when the only difference is the serving of alcoholic beverages. Therefore, the Planning Board would be justified in determining that a restaurant is permissible in the "E-2" zone. COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE Because of the size, shape, and location of the subject site, the proposed zoning may pose some problems with surrounding land use. The "E-2" zone would permit commercial uses such as a fast food restaurant, but not an automobile sales lot as previous requests for rezoning to the "F" Commercial District would have. By comparison, a professional office development would likely have more limited hours of operation as well as generate less noise and traffic. COMPLIANCE WITH MASTER PLAN The Southeast Area Comprehensive Development Plan, Proposed Land Use to 1990 (Map) indicates commercial and office uses at a uniform depth fronting on Cedar Street and insulating the residential land uses to the west. Commercial uses expand in scope, primarily at the intersections of major roadways, such as South Cedar (a principal arterial) and Jolly (a minor arterial). As a general policy statement referring to housing policy in the Comprehensive Plan, page 88 states, "In areas where nonresidential uses of land have begun to creep into residential areas, steps will be Z-13-98 4720 S. Cedar Street page 6 "D-1" Professional Office to E-2 Local Shopping District taken to establish formal lines of separation and policies developed to maintain the separation." IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC The property under review is located at the intersection of a local street (Syringa) with a principal arterial (Cedar). This intersection is located only 800 feet north of Jolly Road, which is a major intersection that often experiences severe traffic delays. To escape these delays, some motorists often use Syringa as a shortcut to westbound Jolly Road, causing more traffic, and therefore more turning movements, at the Syringa/Cedar intersection than would be considered normal for a residential street. The City's Traffic Engineer has provided traffic counts indicating that, on average, 575 vehicles per day use Syringa Street. Typically, an average residential street in the City would be used by 350-425 vehicles per day. This indicates a significant amount of nonresidential traffic is using Syringa. The additional commercial development at this intersection will add to the number of vehicles turning onto Syringa. If any access driveways from this property are not properly designed and located, any problems caused by the existing and additional traffic could be compounded. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The proposed zone change would have less of an impact on the natural environment than would previous proposals for this site. The subject property, because of its size and significant number of large trees and ornamental shrubs, now serves as a significant buffer zone between the commercial development and traffic on Cedar Street and the residential neighborhood on Syringa and Cox. Storm water runoff from the site is not a problem at present, because very little of the site is impervious. Any future development would require construction of storm water management facilities on site. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT If granted for the property, a zone change to "E-2" Local Shopping District would maintain the depth of the commercial development parallel to Cedar Street as called for in the Comprehensive Plan. This is using the office and commercial uses to buffer residential uses from the busy arterial street. Z-13-98 4720 S. Cedar Street page 7 "D-1" Professional Office to E-2 Local Shopping District SUMMARY The request is to rezone the east portion of the property fronting on Cedar Street at its intersection with Syringa from "D-1" Professional Office District and "A" Single Family Residential to "E-2" Local Shopping District. Staff has raised several concerns relative to the establishment of the depth of commercial zoning parallel to and west of Cedar Street, and the proposed development falls within the Comprehensive Plan's guidelines. The "E-2" Local Shopping District; is more restrictive than the "F" Commercial District, which further reduces the possibility of uses that could have a severely negative impact on the adjacent residential zone. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this request to rezone the east 183 feet of property from "D-1" Professional Office District to "E-2" Local Shopping District. The potential intensity of development permitted by the "E-2"zone, while it would be more than permitted by most uses in the "D-1" Professional Office District, would be less than that possible under a more intensive commercial zoning district. rett Z-13-98 4720 S. Cedar Street His "26 95 24 221 22 21 20 18 1.8 ' 1T I 1l 68 68 60 0/}�; 34 33 32 31 . 30 i 28 28 27 as 36 0.',. T6 74 73 p 1' I S 0 0 J N 06 so/ "Say Yll i/ Coco R a - - BLVD. s. �. •• a SIA, 'g 220 •li fir W .1 001 0 14 16. •16 IT 18 I 18 20M 121 "22 • t tcst 4 3 2 D �Y1 R. 00 :/a ?o,r ,AB Iva IV CEDAR CT. C .• - eo• Ian 7.V FK �—R�S v) 44 .45 46 I 00V• s� 30 311 32 33 34 3e 36 'V� hl �► h �OT A fi r i 0 i•I so ii sit A l yo 0 /a 390 DR' Sao IOUTLOT Q 78 mac• . r . rs• — — .wr• 00 - �: i S. Cedar Street room"am .�N..�9. ."r' •"I� .�'1•..a'1' :Ch .a'r. .Vh .a`r• .a4• \b 11►► .W _��p .'1.-,•p �'1. T _'. ;� ..•.... ! s u 1 =�► /► n r • , 11 .. �*r\ a•r ar i . 11 TO REMAINAre• REZONE -� . I�• �� '�1� , (h n a� .1 H JOEN 7r;L W 4 JEW fx r �� a` I` -- �• it � / ■■■■r[�►\I'r�l'r[rt�rrtitrrrrr�t��:•rrrrrrrrrrrrrr�ri: .��.os+�.�'►�le�■■rrrtrr'.ffr►'\rrrr.I ...arem r --/-/ ❑>• SLU-24-98 3726 Delta River Drive Adult Foster Care Facility for Eight Persons GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Ruby Strudwick 2709 Attenborough Lansing, MI 48917 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting a Special Land Use permit (SLU) to expand an existing adult foster care facility from six persons to eight persons EXISTING LAND USE: Single Family/Adult Foster Care <6 persons LOCATION: North side of Delta River Drive, east of St. Stephens Lutheran Church EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential District PROPERTY SIZE: 85.5' x 150' = 12,835 square feet (0.29 acres) SURROUNDING LAND N: Residential USE: S: Residential, Institutional E: Residential W: Institutional SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential District S: "A" & "B" Residential District E: "A" Residential District W: "B" Residential District MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for residential development at 0-7 units per acre. AGENCY RESPONSES ASSESSOR: This address appears to be a 3 bedroom house with an attached (unfinished) garage. How will they fit 8 residents into it? ATTORNEY:. No response received. SLU-24-98 3726 Delta River Drive Page 2 Adult Foster Care Facility for Eight Persons BUILDING SAFETY: Small group homes do not alter the use group of the facility, consequently the change in occupant load will not trigger any building code requirements until the occupant load exceeds 11. CATA: No response received. CODE COMPLIANCE: Acknowledged. FIRE MARSHALL: No response received. INGHAM CO. HEALTH DEPT.: No response received. LANSING NB'HOOD COUNCIL: No response received. LANSING POLICE DEPT.: No response received. RIVER FOREST NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION: See attached letter. APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL The applicant states that the house is presently used as an adult foster care facility for six or fewer persons. Presently, the City does not regulate facilities that house six or fewer persons. The applicant has supplied a copy of there State license which indicates the facility is currently licensed for five persons. The applicant's proposal is to expand the capacity of the structure to eight persons by finishing additional bedrooms in the lower walkout level of the house. This will require approval of the requested Special Land Use Permit. DESCRIPTION of SITE The site is located on the north side of Delta River Drive adjacent to St. Stephens Lutheran Church, across the street from First United Methodist Church. Other adjacent uses are all single family residential structures. Building plans submitted by the applicant indicate that the first floor of the residence will have four bedrooms, 1'/ bathrooms, a living room and a kitchen. The basement, which is also walkout at grade in the rear of the structure, will have four bedrooms, one bathroom, kitchen, living room, full bathroom, and laundry. The applicant also indicates SLU-24-98 3726 Delta River Drive Page 3 Adult Foster Care Facility for Eight Persons that a portion of the basement is currently used for office space. Essentially, it appears that the structure is capable of being used for a two-family dwelling unit. While the facility is managed by the owners, it is not "owner occupied". ANALYSIS for SPECIAL LAND USE PERMIT (SLU) Section 1248.04(f) of the Zoning Code permits a "Residential Care Facility' in the "A" Residential District as follows: (f) A residential care facility which provides care for more than six persons may be permitted in an A, A-1 or B Residential District, if it meets all the following conditions: (1) The residential care facility provides a minimum lot area of not less than 1,000 square feet per resident. (2) Twenty-four hour supervision is maintained by a sponsoring agency. (3) The proposed residential care facility is located more than 1,500 feet from an existing residential care facility which provides care for more than six persons. The third condition listed above was recently invalidated by the Court, and therefore will not be part of the evaluation of this application. Section 1282.03(f)(1)-(9) of the Zoning Code sets forth the criteria which must be used to evaluate a Special Land Use permit request. The criteria and evaluation are summarized as follows. 1. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL BE DESIGNED, CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED IN A MANNER HARMONIOUS WITH THE CHARACTER OF ADJACENT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING USE The applicant has not proposed any significant physical changes to the exterior of the building. However, the house presently contains two kitchen areas, while a typical single family structure contains only one. The potential for conversion of the structure into a duplex dwelling unit, which would be contrary to the current single family residential zoning, raises concerns as to the perception of the use and the intentions of the applicant for long term use of the facility. In addition, the current use of a portion of the basement as office space may not meet zoning code criteria for a "Home Occupation", depending on the residence of the employee, and whether or not the function is related only to administration of the on- site use. SLU-24-98 3726 Delta River Drive Page 4 Adult Foster Care Facility for Eight Persons 2. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT CHANGE THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY From an exterior physical viewpoint, the applicant has not proposed any changes that will change the essential character of the neighborhood. However, the increase in capacity may increase the amount of traffic generated by visitors to the facility. From a practical land use standpoint, it may have the appearance of a two family dwelling on the inside, which is not the intended use of the property. Conversely, the property directly abuts a church, and near the busy intersection at Waverly Road, makes it a better location for a "transitional" use, as opposed to the middle of the neighborhood. 3. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH THE GENERAL ENJOYMENT OF ADJACENT PROPERTY If the facility is managed properly, the additional residents will likely have an imperceptible impact on the ability of the owners of adjacent property to enjoy their property. 4. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE REPRESENTS AN IMPROVEMENT TO THE USE OR CHARACTER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA IN GENERAL, AND WILL BE IN KEEPING WITH THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE LOT The applicant has not indicated any significant improvements to the property, or any significant physical changes to the building's exterior. 5. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT BE HAZARDOUS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES OR INVOLVE USES, ACTIVITIES, MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE OF PERSONS OR PROPERTY THROUGH THE EXCESSIVE PRODUCTION OF TRAFFIC, NOISE, SMOKE, ODOR, FUMES OR GLARE Staff anticipates only a slight increase in impacts caused by traffic, noise, smoke, odor, fumes or glare. SLU-24-98 3726 Delta River Drive Page 5 Adult Foster Care Facility for Eight Persons 6. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE IS ADEQUATELY SERVED BY ESSENTIAL PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES AND IT IS DEMONSTRATED THAT THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE IS ABLE TO CONTINUALLY PROVIDE ADEQUATELY FOR THE SERVICES AND FACILITIES DEEMED ESSENTIAL TO THE SPECIAL LAND USE UNDER CONSIDERATION The site is adequately served by all public utilities and services. The applicant appears to have a reliable track record as she is licensed by the State. 7. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT PLACE DEMANDS ON PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES IN EXCESS OF CURRENT CAPACITY The site is adequately served by all public utilities and services, such as water and sewer. The site is also on a public bus route. Staff anticipates no change in impact on public facilities and services other than the potential increase in use of emergency services due to the increase in intensity of the residential care facility. 8. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE ZONING CODE AND THE OBJECTIVES OF THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for residential use at 0-7 dwelling units per acre. 9. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE MEETS THE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED The structure appears to meet all setback requirements for the "A" Residential District. There appears to be adequate off-street parking (4 to 6 spaces) on the site for anticipated needs, assuming that only employees and visitors will have cars. SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a Special Land Use permit (SLU) to expand an existing residential care facility from six persons to eight persons. Residential care facilities containing over six persons require a special land use permit. The Zoning Code's requirement for spacing facilities by 1,500 feet was recently invalidated by the courts. SLU-24-98 3726 Delta River Drive Page 6 Adult Foster Care Facility for Eight Persons RECOMMENDATION The location of the property is conducive to a transitional use between Waverly Road and the residential neighborhood. However, if the facility is not properly managed, it could have a negative impact on the residential neighborhood. Therefore, Staff recommends approval of the Special Land Use request with the following conditions: 1. Twenty-four hour supervision is maintained on site; 2. Capacity of the facility be limited to eight persons; 3. Operation of the adult foster care facility must meet all federal, state, and local ordinances for the licensing of adult foster care facilities; 4. Any office use must be directly related to management of this facility only; 5. No increase in the external dimensions of the structure; 6. Approval of the Special Land Use permit does not include an approval of the construction or use of any second unit(s) in the building as appears to be suggested by the applicant. Any such construction or use would require submission and approval of a rezoning petition which would have to be granted prior to considering the construction and/or use of the second unit. SLU-24-98 Figure 1, Area Map '3726 Delta River Drive x PARKING 5-6 ` x 20. 5.92 44.5 24 25 K l 842.8 X 843.8 v 842.9 /5 24 • zz 4 CRANBROOK AVE /3 PARKING /4 0 /3 t, O Q 20 ��.. ❑ ^x . 8, 3.6 � 850 / U PO01 ` O i /6 WA /3 /4 O m 2 859.8 ALL 860. I- 8606 DELTA 854/ DR 85� RIVER LINVORTH Figure 2, Site Plan SLU-24-98 3726 Delta River Drive _ _ !" Field-checked*-arid, on June 5. 1971 ;. at re Burton Abstract. &•Titl (Job 1336418) t . - • fp 44:c zl^75 .' 440 240.0'•b w e (i CRAN�g�oK DG t6 ;.:. 5• id&Walk. HIHON s��Q ��• f /QOr ��4Gf ZAna HaAIH Yma QanO. %TQeepFs WS rn ; 9 S door o Walk-in closet BR BR LR W -N 4 c I bath �I closet 2 car door door • attached garage Full �. It bath Hall Closet loor stairs to door door basement I 1BR closet BR I Ij door to garage a _ 4- 6- and out tide Closet I DR I KT I I-I'I• S (o lLc. + �—q4—►14 Closet First floor will consist of 4 Dr's, one and baths. f Each BR will -have its own closet. Living room, dining room and kitchen, plus extra closet space all on the first level. NORTH -3 A- WALK-OUT BASEMENT B A C K Y A R D . B A C K Y A R D ' P A T I O Q Door to Sliding doors o w "I -11ftx51n outsid to outside patio 19 ft ` o 28ft Room 44 F A M I L Y R 0 0 M 5 K I T C H E D ocloset w r .a closet Furnac ' room �! 4W Oil 1 9 W c UNFINISHED AREA u r Room Co .a � w Laundry room Full 19 ft - bath ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Delta River Drive ---------------------------------------------------------------------- NORTH The basement now consists of a kitchen, family room, one full bath, laundry room and two bedrooms, furnace room plus two other rooms now being used as office space. There is also available on the ground level an eating area. Urban Development Committee Report, January 19, 1999 Page 2 a. Act-30-98, City Hall, 124 W. Mich., Easement for communications cable. Bill Rieske presented the case. Emerson Ohl, of the Granger Group, and Greg Bensinger representing the Legislative Service Bureau, appeared on behalf of the project. The applicants request an easement to route one 2" conduit containing fiber optic cable from Michigan Avenue, north though City Hall parking garage to new Legislative Office Building at 123 W. Ottawa/201 N. Capitol. The conduit will be two inches in diameter, and tap into a 2' X 2' electrical box on the south wall, approximately 84'-7" east of the westernmost wall. It will hug the wall, ceiling and beams on the south end, where the ceiling is lower, and be suspended from the ceiling after the ceiling rises. It would then run downward from the ceiling, and enter the Legislative Office Building through the north wall of the City Hall parking garage. The only alternative is to extend this conduit within the Capitol Avenue ROW. STAFF RECOMMENDATION To recommend approval of Act-30-98 to grant an easement through the City Hall Parking Garage for a conduit containing fiber optic communication cable, provided that the project be constructed in accordance within the specifications approved by the Management Services Department and the Building Safety Office. COMMITTEE ACTION: Finding: In a review of the location, character and extent of the proposed conduit, the impact of the conduit installation in the City Hall parking garage is expected to be negligible. Motion: It was moved by Mr. Ruge, seconded by Mr. Smith, to recommend approval of Act-30- 98 to grant an easement through the City Hall Parking Garage for a conduit containing fiber optic communication cable, provided that the project be constructed in accordance within the specifications approved by the Management Services Department and the Building Safety Office. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0). Urban Development Committee Report, January 19, 1999 Page 3 b. Act-33-98, 1000 Blk Holmes Rd., S. Side E of MLK, Vacate portion of ROW. Eleanor Love and Sam Quon presented the case. Shirley Hyde and Patrick Maloney, both of Katz and Katz, represented the applicants. The subject portion of the ROW is located on the south side of Holmes, approximately 69 feet from Martin Luther King Blvd., and stretches east 837 feet to the entrance of the Southwind Office Park. It is south of the existing roadway, and currently used as part of a private parking lot. The request is to continue to use this portion of the ROW as parking for a proposed Walgreen's drug store. This proposed development already has sufficient parking on the south side of the proposed building site, but the building entrance will be on the NW corner, near the subject portion of the ROW. Parking at that location would enhance the success of the project. The project would include underground utilities, parking lot buffering, and brick facades. The Traffic Engineer and the Public Service Department suggest retaining the ROW for possible future use, and allowing temporary private use through a licensing agreement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends allowing the use the Right of Way through a license agreement, provide that the license is revokable at the will of the City, the applicant will be required to remove any improvement made on the Right of Way, and the applicant will need to provide enough space on their site to meet the parking requirement on a one for one basis in the event the City needs the use of the Right of Way. COMMITTEE ACTION: Finding: In a review of the location, character and extent of the proposal, the Committee finds that the subject portion of the Holmes Road ROW has no current public use, but may serve a public purpose in the future for a possible roadway widening or deceleration lane. Thus, the impact of the temporary private use of the subject portion of the ROW is expected to be negligible. Urban Development Committee Report, January 19, 1999 Page 4 Motion: It was moved by Mr. Ruge, seconded by Mr. Smith, to recommend approval of Act-33- 98 to allow the use the subject portion of the ROW for private parking through a license agreement, provided that: ► the license is revokable at the will of the City, ► the applicant will be required to remove any improvement made on the ROW, ► the applicant will provide enough space on their site to meet the parking requirement on a 1 for 1 basis in the event the City needs the use of the ROW. ► the proposed Walgreen's shall use the existing driveway on the SW corner of the site for access to Martin Luther King Blvd. (A shared access agreement with the Eyde Company will be necessary.) On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0). APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY MARCH 2, 1999 Draft 030199 Approved 030299 To Clerk 051299 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 P.M., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall 124 West Michigan Avenue Tuesday, February 2, 1999 c. 1. OPENING SESSION: Chairman Ruge called the meeting to order at 7.10 p.m. A. Roll Call. Present- Frederick, Goolsby, Keene, Miller, Nischan, Smith; Ruge. Seven members present, one vacant seat. B. Excused Absences C. Introductions. Ms. Eleanor Love, Planning Manager, introduced staff present, James A. Ruff, Zoning Administrator, Doris M. Witherspoon, Senior Planner, and Louise H. Christian, Recording Secretary. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: The agenda was approved as presented. 3. COMMUNICATIONS 1. From Historic District Commission regarding Act-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Closure, recommending against approval. 2. From Historic District Commission regarding Act-28-98, 900-1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw between Butler and M.L. King Blvd., Street Vacation. recommending against approval. 3. Addendum to report concerning both Act-27-98 and Act-28-98. 4. HEARINGS A. Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request from Donald E. Wilson to rezone property on the southeast corner of N. East Street at East Howe Avenue from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial District to allow for development of small retail office-type uses. The property is approximately 15,000 sq ft in size. There is commercial to the north and east and residential to the south and west. The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates this use for residential purposes. Mr. Ruge asked about the property to the west. Mr. Ruff said the property PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 2 at 622 East Howe wraps around the property at 620 East Howe, a 40 ft x 120 ft portion of platted lot 78. The remainder of the lot was attached to 622 E. Howe. DONALD E. WILSON, 201 STRATHMORE. The property has been vacant since about 1938. There were three houses there at one time. The lot has quite a slope to it from the front to the back. The idea for two buildings is that it would have office at the lower level and retail-commercial at the upper level. I had a purchaser for the property from the DPD Corporation. He has a larger site plan than what you have. Maybe you would like to look at it. If you have questions, maybe he can answer. PARVIZ SOROUGHIAN, REPRESENTING DPD, INC., the buyer. DPD is a research corporation largely working with the federal government on new technologies on developing and marketing new technologies in the field of construction. The question was raised, why two buildings. This is to maximize the south-facing openings and sunlight entering into the building. The buildings besides their commercial purpose also are demonstration projects for some energy-efficiency concepts we have developed with the funding of the U.S. Dept. of Energy. We, together with DOE, will be monitoring the building, its energy use, etc., and the purpose is compared to a conventional frame building to reduce the energy consumption for cooling and heating by about 75 percent. The building will use new concrete materials developed for high heat mass that can moderate the peaks and valleys of temperature during the day and night and so produce in a passive mode a more moderate temperature within which minimizes the use of energy. They are concrete with large opening spaces. Mr. Ruge asked if they are experimental buildings. MR. SOROUGHIAN. From an energy efficiency point of view, they are, structurally, no, but from the point of view of thermal properties, yes. They are meant to be more energy-efficient larger-mass type of construction, so the walls and roof would have a larger heat mass than a regular concrete construction. Mr. Ruge asked if two buildings can be put on one site like this. Mr. Ruff said for a commercial site, yes. The problems come in the fact that as a small site, there is going to be a delicate balance of parking vs. usable square feet, because it becomes with multiple tenant spaces what we call a shopping center, even though it is a very small site. You have more than one tenant, potentially up to four or six or seven tenants, and in a shopping center your parking demand rises, and with that, you have a delicate balance, parking vs. building size plus curb cut concerns on a major thoroughfare. It is sensitive with regard to site design and capacity. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 3 Mr. Ruge said "I do not see much room allotted on the west side for screening and buffering." Mr. Ruff said that is correct. The drawing is just the size of the site; it does not include the right-of-way with sidewalk and parkway to the curb line. It looks like it is shown to the curb line, but it is not. BONNIE L. FEHER, 2915 N. EAST ST., REPRESENTING CRAIG FEHER who has residential property abutting the property for rezoning. He is ill and cannot attend this meeting. We have concerns. I would like to read: "Upon purchase of the house located at 2915 N. East Street in 1992, the fence and driveway had been in existence for several years." There seems to be a discrepancy on property lines. The surveyor's stakes and that takes half of his driveway. I do have pictures to substantiate that. "I can only approximate that I would say twenty or more years for that fence line there; therefore, we had no reason to doubt the property lines because of the duration of the existing fence, driveway, etc. We purchased and sold the house to my son Craig in good faith that the existing driveway and property inside the fence belonged to the house. The surveyor's stakes indicate that a portion of that property inside the fence line does not belong to my son. My feelings are that due to the length of time and availability of the driveway that perhaps at some point in time an easement may have been granted. Whether it was written, or whether it was verbal, we don't know. How else would the occupants of that particular house have access to their property. We do not wish to cause problems with the rezoning, but we feel the need to try and resolve the problem of two feet and seven inches of property purported to belong to Mr. Wilson with the recent survey that he had done of the property that is up for rezoning. Without resolution, my son Craig does not have enough room for access to or from his home. He appears to be locked out of his property, and we are more than willing to negotiate with Mr. Wilson." I do have pictures with me showing survey stakes. We intended to have it surveyed by tonight, but that was not the case. Our surveyors have not been able to do it. Probably this week it will be done. If there ends up being a discrepancy between Mr. Wilson's surveyor and our surveyor, there can be some conversation between Mr. Wilson and my son, but in the meantime, that is our major concern. Chairman Ruge informed Ms. Feher that the matter will be taken up at the Zoning and Ordinance Committee on February 10, 1999; Ms. Feher should provide information to Mr. Ruff before that meeting. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the conclusion of the hearing for Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 4 "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting at 4 p.m. on February 10, 1999 in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. B. Z-20-98, 505 West Allegan Street, "DM-3" Residential District to "G-1" Business District. Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by Eyde Construction Company to rezone the former Civic Center from "DM-3" Residential District to "G-1" Business District. The property would be considered the west half of that larger site, which also has parking to the east. That half is approximately 3 1/3 acres. Offices surround the property primarily, including state offices and the Federal Building. Because the property was public property prior to the sale to Eyde Construction Company and also because there are state offices surrounding the property as well, the zoning pattern does not necessarily reflect the uses. The River Island Amendment Plan designates this area for community facility, with professional office use on the east part of the block. The property is located at the corner of Allegan and Pine Streets, Allegan being a minor arterial and Pine Street a collector street. The property is located in the study district for the Capitol Historic District. The east half has the parking lot; the west half has the buildings on it. The west half is proposed to be rezoned. Mr. Nischan asked what are the main uses in "G-1"; Mr. Ruff said primarily office and commercial use. The intention here is additional office space in a taller structure than normally allowed in the Office District. That is one of the reasons they are requesting the "G-1" Business District. Generally, retail, commercial, residential is an allowed use subject to special condition. Primarily, it is the Central Business District zoning. The intent is to develop an office building there, modifying the existing building and adding to it. Chairman Ruge noted that the other aspect of the "G-1" District is that parking is not required to be provided by the property owner. Mr. Ruff said that the owner also has the parking lot that is adjacent to it. It is a lease lot, so that state employees or others working nearby can lease in that lot. Otherwise, there is no parking associated with the property. SCOTT McKILLOP, BETA DESIGN GROUP IN GRAND RAPIDS. With me this evening is Bill Shroeger from Sam Eyde Construction Company, Mr. Sam Eyde, and Mr. Don Brandt from Beta Construction. I would like the record to reflect that this application is for Sam Eyde Construction Company. There is an Eyde Construction Company, a separate company, doing business in Lansing. We want the record to reflect that. The matter before PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 5 you this evening is a request to have the Civic Center property rezoned from a multiple family designation to business district designation for the purpose of removing the existing Civic Center complex, the Veterans Memorial Auditorium, and the Veterans Building, and replacing it with the office building, a model of which you see in front of you. We also have a color rendering of a simple site plan of the property as well. The building would provide 500,000 sq ft of space. Currently we are negotiating with the State of Michigan to lease all that office space for use by office employees. With reference to the specific site improvements that would occur, we would eliminate all but two curb cuts that are on the east side of the building. The main entrance to the building would be from the east side. That would also be where the service area would be located. The property is adjoined on all sides by office uses; no residential properties are located nearby. The use is reasonably consistent with what is proposed for the property in the comprehensive plan for that area. BILL SHROEGER, GENERAL MANAGER, SAM EYDE CONSTRUCTION, 2501 COOLIDGE ROAD, SUITE 501, here to answer any questions you might have. Ms. Keene asked how many square feet; Mr. Shroeger said about 500,000 sq. ft.; Mr. Ruge asked how many employees. Mr. Schroeger said about 2,000, about 90 percent of whom would be from the downtown area. They would be relocated. Mr. Ruge mentioned parking in the downtown area; Mr. Schroeger said it is being addressed by both the State and the Planning Department. Occupancy would be in approximately 30 months. STEPHANIE WHITBECK, 620 W. IONIA, CHAIRMAN OF LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION. I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Eyde. Past discussions indicated he was going to be saving the building. Tonight he indicated this building was not going to be saved, and what you are seeing is a new building. Our concerns start with zoning, the first thing that changes everything. The residential zoning is because government does not have to have their property rezoned. The report that we have turned in to you indicates that we believe that the "D-1" is more appropriate for offices than the "G-1", and we have quoted from the Code of Ordinances on the intent of both the "D-1" and the "G-1". "G-1" allows for "general retail commercial district for the downtown area, and the intent of the "D-1" is to permit the construction or conversion of structures for office uses and multiple dwellings. In this report we recommend to you that the entire parcel be not "G-1" but "D-1", or if there would be the possibility of dealing not only PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 6 with surface parking for the building, that the land that is currently the surface parking be rezoned "J" Parking because that designation allows not only surface parking, but also a parking structure. As we have just heard, there is no parking plan for this 500,000 sq ft building. We would also like to point out that this is a historic building. We probably take the Civic Center much more for granted than many buildings downtown. We often overlook that it is the site of the 1961 Constitutional Convention, probably the most significant political event in this state's history in the Twentieth Century. I am going to give you each copies of the November-December issue of Michigan History, published by the State of Michigan Office of Secretary of State giving a full discussion of the Constitutional Convention. Nearly 400,000 people worked hard to circulate petitions. It is the first time in this state's history that women or blacks were involved in the writing of the Constitution. It is a building that we should make every effort to save. I strongly suggest as a fourth priority the creation of the kind of zoning district that requires parking. (Provided copies of magazine and short summary of historic tax credits.) Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the conclusion of the hearing for Z-20-98, 505 West Allegan Street, "DM-Y Res. to "G-1" Business Dist. and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting at 4 p.m. on February 10, 1999 in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. C. Act-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Closure. Ms. Witherspoon presented the case, a request for an Act 285 review initiated by the Development Office of the City of Lansing. Existing land use consists of residential structures zoned "C" Residential District. Surrounding land uses consist of residential zoning. The Seven Block Area Development Plan designates this area for street closure for construction of the cul-de- sac. Concerning demolition of houses on Lenawee which is not happening, one of the City's priorities is to retain those residential structures for single family home ownership. On the south side of Lenawee at 1017 W. Lenawee, and the two vacant parcels just west of that, is the area that is proposed for the cul-de-sac. If any homes eliminated, they will be removed because of poor condition or overcrowding. We are proposing to replace them, or construct two to three new single family homes. Also in your packet, under the background, eliminate last sentence "The closed portion of Lenawee will be integrated into the linear parking." For background information, the Seven Block Citizens District Council reviewed both of these Act 285 reviews and did approve them at the January 14, 1999 meeting. This is pursuant to the Seven Block Plan. Earlier in 1998, amendments to the Seven Block Development Plan were also approved by the Citizens District Council. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 7 Mr. Ruge clarified that the drawing in the original report showing the cul-de- sac was not accurate? Ms. Love said the cul-de-sac was a concept, it was never engineered or drawn. Mr. Ruge asked if traffic counts were done on Lenawee Street; Ms. Witherspoon will provide the information prior to the Urban Development Committee meeting. STEPHANIE WHITBECK, 620 W. IONIA, CHAIRMAN OF LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION. (Asked about cul-de-sac.) Is it or is it not a cul-de-sac? Mr. Ruge said it is configured differently than the cul-de- sac that we received in our report. It will apparently not be necessary to remove the houses on Lenawee as previously indicated. Ms. Witherspoon said there is a structure at 1017 that will be removed. We are concerned about the expenditure of effort and money. Visual inspection does not seem like the plan is accomplishing its stated purpose of rehabilitation of the area. There is financial need for rehabilitation of those houses. The current artificial limitation of the amount of money used to fix a house under local option is limited to $35,000. If it costs more than that, it has to be acquired. Two years of relocation benefits paid could vary from $6,000 to $20,000. Acquisition at fair market value--I've seen them acquired in Seven Block at $47,000. Demolition costs can range from $10,800 to 16,000 and seeding the property, but we can't spend that amount to fix the house and have a house rather than dirt. We note that because this area is Lansing's last stand as Lansing's traditional black neighborhood. When these homes are gone, the homes, the social fabric and the people who lived there will be obliterated. We are currently working on nomination to the National Register of Historic Places for the house at the northwest corner of Butler and Washtenaw. We have received a request for Historic District from property owners on Butler and Allegan. This is not immediately adjacent but it is close. We believe that the entire Seven Block Area, if looked at with different tools, different eyes, and less limitations on spending per house for fixing rather than demolishing, we might be able to turn that back into a thriving neighborhood. We would suggest the tool: The Historic District. That is not something anyone should be afraid of. We understand that the rationale for this street vacation is to create a cul-de-sac to eliminate cut- through traffic. Cut-through traffic is a normal part of living in downtown. If we eliminated cut-through traffic, we would have to close W. Sycamore and W. Chestnut because both of those streets go through residential areas into state parking ramps. We would have to close Butler, a cut-through area, also Ionia, Shiawassee and Allegan, because those are entrance and exit streets into the downtown. Cut-through traffic is a different issue than speeding, clearly a problem in the downtown. We would recommend traffic calming or speed enforcement. Cul-de-sacs are not a normal part of Lansing's downtown. Lansing is built on a grid system. We think the money could be best spent elsewhere, and we would be sorry if even one more PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 8 house would be demolished, because the entire area has the capacity to be a historic district. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the conclusion of the hearing for Act-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Closure, and referral to the Urban Development Committee meeting at 4 p.m. on Tuesday, February 9, 1999 in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. D. Act-28-98, 900-1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw between Butler and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Vacation Ms. Witherspoon presented the case, a request by the Development Office for a street vacation in the Seven Block Development Area for the office/commercial center. It is referred to as such because last year we went through the amendments in the Urban Development Committee. This also was approved by the Citizens District Council to make those amendments to the commercial center. The area is residential in nature. There has been some demolition in the area for the construction of the office-commercial center. Also in your packet, delete eliminate the last line, "The closed portion of Washtenaw will be integrated into the proposed neighborhood commercial center as a major pedestrian access from the east." Please refer to the additional information provided, there were concerns regarding the property at the northwest corner of Washtenaw and Butler at 230 S. Butler regarding accessibility into the property. That portion of the street is not being vacated because of that concern. Also, on the south side of Washtenaw at 911 and 1003 W. Washtenaw, those are the two houses that have been identified as having some historical nature. We are working with the state of Michigan to resolve those concerns. I have included some of the renderings of the proposed office-commercial center that the developer is looking at. They are proposing two-and-a-half stories (passed board around). This is just a rendering. These buildings are similar to the office development near the Sheraton Hotel. This also is pursuant to the Seven Block Development Plan. Mr. Nischan said the Master Plan Designation is for development of neighborhood commercial center, and this plan is for office. Ms. Witherspoon said the amendments change this language. We tried to find a developer for the grocery store; however, we had no luck, but we did have a developer interested in office development. That does not eliminate the possibility of those uses still being provided there. Ms. Love said the Citizens District Council wanted this; they brought it to us; they asked for it to be this way. Subsequently, it was passed through this Board and the City Council; this is the way the amendment now reads. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 9 STEPHANIE WHITBECK, 620 W. IONIA, CHAIRMAN OF LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION. You heard what I told you about Seven Block in general; that goes for this also. There are three historic properties related to this one, the two little houses on Washtenaw, the interest is in the land under them. The land has been sold and the houses are being made available for relocation. The chance of the houses being moved is none. The state has said that they are historic. They are the last examples in Lansing of the properties they represent. They are small, single-story, the kind of property that some elderly residents in Seven Block have wanted to live in to remain in their neighborhood. There is no effort being made to move them. The square footage is small, but it is the same square footage advertised in the suburbs for free-standing homes for seniors. They are not in good shape, but they could be fixed, particularly if we didn't have an artificial cap on how much we can spend fixing a house. There is a third historic house, the northwest corner of Washtenaw and Butler. We are doing a National Register nomination on that. The state has determined it to be historic. The original occupant of that house was associated with Olds; he was the blacksmith who worked along with the building of the cars. We don't normally think of blacksmiths involved in building cars, but that was the transition from horses to the first car that R.E. Olds built in Lansing. The owner of that house is very proud of that fact, he and his wife have spent a great deal of time in the State Library researching it. They also reside on that block and own one or two other properties on that block. He and the majority property owner on Allegan wish to be considered for a local historic district. For some reason, the street vacation has been talked about in an odd way as it relates to that property owner. A street vacation divides at the middle and gives property to either side. This was originally intended to come all the way to the corner. Mr. Gray, the owner, was told that he would not have access to his property. It was resolved with a solution to vacate only to the end of his property. That means there will be entrance to this office area from Butler. Seven Block is only five blocks. Talking to Mr. Eyde a year ago, we agreed that the problem of marketability is the wild mix of zoning in so small an area, this makes it difficult. A decision needs to be made: All residential or all office. We would hate to see those three properties jeopardized; we hate to see the entire neighborhood jeopardized. Ms. Witherspoon asked to make one last point. We are now in the implementation stage of the Seven Block. Everything that we do, we bring before the CDC; they want to know what is going on. When notices went out on the public hearing, the Citizens District Council knew about it; we talked about amendments at our meetings, and also at the January 14 meeting, they were aware of the public hearing and everything else we are proceeding with. We will continue to provide them information. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 10 Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the conclusion of the hearing for Act-28-98, 900-1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw between Butler and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Vacation and referral to the Urban Development Committee meeting at 4 p.m. on Tuesday, February 9, 1999 in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each) - None. 6. RECESS - None. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: January 12 and 26 not as yet available. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole - Did not meet; no report. 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee - Mr. Miller, Chairman; report from Committee meeting this evening, February 2, 1999. a. Proposed Subdivision Regulation Amendments Amendments to Sections 1236.08 and 1236.11 would give authority to Council to grant variances to lot size on minor subdivision or lot divisions as found in Chapter 1236. Amendments to Section 1238.04 would make developers responsible for installation of all traffic control devices in accordance with standards developed by the City. Amendments to Section 1238.11 would make the developer responsible for paving of the streets within the proposed subdivision. We had a hearing and discussion on this some time ago and this is being brought to us. There is a particular urgency to wanting to move the lot split issue. We discussed these issues in Committee. There was concern expressed in terms of wanting to have more single family homes in the area and a concern that this would basically raise costs of developers, and overall cost and concern in terms of being able to build affordable housing. It has been pointed out that particularly with the street paving, that the City no longer having its own asphalt plant, that costs have gone quite high. We understood the need to make these changes in spite of the concerns that were expressed. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously, to approve the proposed Subdivision Regulation Amendments. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 11 Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Goolsby, based on testimony, evidence and the information provided by staff, to approve the proposed Subdivision Regulation Amendments. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Frederick . . Ave Goolsby . Ave Keene. . . Ave Miller. . . Ave Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith . .Ave Ruge . .Aye On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; carried; Proposed Amendments to the Subdivision Regulations were APPROVED. Next meeting Wednesday, February 10, 1999, at 4 p.m. in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 3. Urban Development Committee - Mr. Nischan The Urban Development Committee met again tonight and continued making progress on the Plan. Next meeting Tuesday, February 9, 1999, at 4 p.m., Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from the Planning Manager. We will not be ready to do a public hearing on the Downtown Plan until the first week in March, though we are moving ahead diligently. We are negotiating for a housing market analysis study. We have tentatively picked a contractor. They have a remarkable grasp of our issues; they said we want to make Lansing the housing residence place of choice. We are having difficulty finding enough money to do this in its entirety at this time. We are still looking for funds. We may have to divide it into two sections, finishing part of it before June and part after July 1. There is no money. Y2K is taking money out of different departments; reduced revenues and other things have caused the City to do belt tightening. Revenue sharing is down; Act 51 dollars are down as well. The picture is grim. We are not going to have it done as quickly as we had hoped. The housing study is for the entire study; it will accomplish several things. We need to PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 12 have a snapshot of what we have now, locationally where it is; what its condition is; where the condition situations are, age of housing; demographics of occupants; and neighborhoods and amenities; schools. There is a whole compendium of things. It will allow us with a data base in place to continuously update rental vs. owner-occupied structures. It will allow us to look at an area where we have had condition problems. If we aren't getting any building permits in those areas, maybe we should look at the areas. What are impediments. We can determine price ranges of housing plotted on locations, and gaps, and what the City can do to help facilitate developing housing in all the ranges. If we want to attract younger families who will fill schools and shop in our community, then there are certain demographics of those people to market to. We need to be able to market and show positive aspects. This information will also be entered into the GIS system. There will be a whole database that you can call up and map. You can map housing condition by building permit, age by renters or home owners or income, etc. The Building office will be entering their data. The City submitted a groundwater grant to MDEQ through the Board of Water and Light. We are also doing a special land use for a fire station at Pleasant Grove and Jolly. Lansing Community College has refiled the special land use. Mr. Ruff said we want to build neighborhood characteristics into the Planning and Zoning and the Building Code so that the code is reflective of neighborhood integrity. For instance, if front yard setbacks are less than 20 feet, a request for a porch would not have to go to the Board of Zoning Appeals. We want to make it easy for people to rebuild their homes and have it in character with the neighborhood. In the grant from MDEQ, we want to review our existing ordinance and subdivision regulations to see how we can modify them to incorporate wellhead protection and environmental protection, and also identify abandoned wells. D. Pending Items: Future action required. 1. Planning Board a. Z-25-97, 300 Blk. S. Butler, W. Side, "C" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District(Tabled January 6, 1998) 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-19-97, N.W. Cor. Cavanaugh & Aurelius, "F" Commercial to "G-2" Wholesale District(Tabled October 15, 1997) b. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-1" Business District(Tabled February 11, 1998) C. Z-3-98, 1131 & 1133 Race Street, "H" Light Industrial to "G-1" Business District(Tabled April 15, 1998) PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 13 d. Z-4-98,201 E.Grand River, "F-V Commercial &"H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-V Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) e. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) f. Z-8-98, 208 E. Grand River Avenue, "F-1" Commercial to "G-1" Business (Tabled August 12, 1998) g. SLU-5-98, Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street(Act-6-98); h. SLU-7-98, Washington Park, 2516 S.Washington Ave. (Act-8-98); I. SLU-10-98, Biggie Munn Park,4801 Aurelius Rd. (Act-11-98); j. SLU-12-98, Fire Station#4, 5550 S. Pennsylvania Ave. (Act-13-98); Urban Development Committee a. Act-19-97, 120 E. Shiawassee Street, Fire Station#1, Market/Sale for Mid- Rise Residential with Building Preserved b. Act-21-98, Ingham Regional Medical Center, Replacement Sign in S. Pennsylvania ROW(Tabled September 8, 1998) C. MPA-1-98, Downtown Comprehensive Plan (Tabled September 8, 1998) 8. NEW BUSINESS -None. 9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None. 10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Mr. Miller said, with regard to the Civic Center, Z-20-98, that is a DEQ building, proposed to be my new office. "I don't think it presents a conflict, but I wanted the group to be aware of it." Mr. Miller also asked if Mr. Eyde has made the decision not to renovate the Civic Center, and what is background--is it a structural issue? Mr. Ruff said originally the intention was to convert the auditorium, modify it for office, and raze the south wing and building a new seven-story section on that side. "I don't know that in detail yet, but we can find that out." Mr. Goolsby said whatever they do there is a renovation, similar to 200 N. Capitol. There was a stone placed at the northwest corner of the building, done in April. When they took down the building, that was all that remained. That is why it is a building under renovation and not construction. This is done for tax purposes and it avoids other steps they would have to go through. Technically, it is a renovation and not a reconstruction. Ms. Love emphasized, about the Civic Center, that the adjacent parking lot is and will remain a lease lot. Mr. Ruff said they do not have any plans for the east half, though they do not believe the long-term future of that lot is for parking simply because of its proximity to the Capitol. They did not want to rezone it to "J" Parking. In the future, they will address that. Mr. Goolsby said a plan will be necessary to address the time frames for buildings coming on line after 2000--this building, the PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 2, 1999 PAGE 14 Supreme Court, the new legislative office building, not to mention the YW. Ms. Love said we are working with DMB about parking. When they finish their study, hopefully they will be able to give us a reasonable estimate of whose parking will be accounted for and whose won't. 11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Mr. Ruge asked about the status of sign code enforcement. Mr. Ruff said we are still holding meetings to deal with sign code enforcement. Ms. Love said the people charged with sign code enforcement are the building inspectors--three of them. There are thousands of buildings right now. Their time is completely occupied with that right now. We felt it would be a disservice to send letters to people, and then not follow up on enforcement. We would be more behind to do that than to put it on hold until we get a person whose time will be completely devoted to sign code enforcement. Mr. Smith asked about a former 7-Eleven on Jolly road east of Pleasant Grove. The interior glass is plastered with signs that you can't see in at all. It seems an odd situation. Mr. Ruff said he noticed that. A number of stores are restricting signage in windows because of security reasons. We do not regulate window signs on the insides of windows. 12. ADJOURNMENT - was at 8:52 p.m. Respectfully submitted, , Eleanor K. Love, Secretary Planning Board mn012699 a:\48 Draft 030199 Approved 030299 To Clerk 052799 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 P.M., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall -- 124 West Michigan Avenue - Tuesday, February 16, 1999 ` : :j 1. OPENING SESSION: C-, -; Chairman Ruge called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. -`' A. Roll Call. Present- Frederick, Keene, Miller, Nischan, Smith; Ruge. Six members present, one excused absence; one vacant seat. B. Excused Absences: Garry Goolsby, who is at home following hospitalization, motion to grant; voice vote; unanimous; granted. C. Introductions. Ms. Eleanor Love, Planning Manager, introduced staff present, James A. Ruff, Zoning Administrator, William C. Rieske, Principal Planner, Jim Sturdevant, Senior Planner, and Louise H. Christian, Recording Secretary. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: The agenda was approved as corrected with addition under 4. Hearings: A. Act-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris Ave., Vacate Everett Lane Right-of-way B. Act-29-98, 700 Blk. Sheridan Street, Vacation or Sale of ROW 3. COMMUNICATIONS A. Letter dated February 10, 1999, addressed to Ms. Love from J. Wesley Mesko, M.D., RE: Act-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris Ave., Vacate Everett Lane Right-of-Way in opposition; similar letters from Floyd G. Goodman, M.D., and Scott F. Sheppard, M.D., same address, also in opposition. 4. HEARINGS A. Act-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris Avenue, Vacate Everett Lane Right-of-way Mr. Rieske presented the request by Patrick M. Lindsay, property owner at 120 Paris adjacent to Everett Lane for the vacation of 41.5 ft of Everett Lane along the western property line of 120 Paris Avenue. Everett Lane is located on the west side of Cedar Street, north of Holmes, south of Mt. Hope, in a small enclaved neighborhood. This would change the use of the land to private property (residential). Everett Lane is an unimproved gravel road approximately 41.5 ft wide. The unimproved portion is probably the hill that you see when you go out there, on the west side of the roadway. Everett Lane is in a residential area. Land uses and zoning correspond with PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 2 residential, with one exception, Bill's Heavy Duty Wrecker Service. The comments received thus far essentially state that ". . . if you are going to vacate the area adjacent to 120 Paris Street, then a full block at the least should be vacated", which would extend the area of vacation southward along the side of Bill's Wrecker Service toward Hodge Avenue. A neighborhood group, "Our Neighborhood Organization," voted to oppose the vacation. We received five phone calls, from Mr. Richard Shue, Ms. Martha Eveleth, Ms. Wilda Davis, and Mr. Robert Belan, all opposing the vacation. One person calling in support of the vacation is Ms. Linda Pung. Mr. Nischan asked the objective of the vacation. Mr. Rieske said the applicant wants to eliminate pedestrian traffic causing problems such as litter, noise, public urination, property damage, and vehicular traffic speeding. The right-of-way is 41 ft wide; sixteen ft consists of a platted alley. The remainder is a former railroad right-of-way which the City purchased in 1953. In order to vacate the right-of-way, the railroad's portion of about 25 ft wide would need to be sold to property owners. The platted alley portion would need to be vacated. City Council would have to take a number of actions. Mr. Nischan asked if the area to be vacated is between Paris and Hodge? Mr. Rieske said it is the area west of 120 Paris Avenue, which would leave the right-of-way open at the corner of Hodge. The minimum amount to vacate is suggested as one full block, if any vacation is to happen, so as not to leave a dead-end street there. PATRICK LINDSAY, 120 PARIS AVENUE. Mr. Rieske's comments on the phone calls were incorrect. Richard Shue is with me; he called in favor. Second, the vicinity map sent out with the flyer is incorrect on the back. As you look down Denver, where it meets Everett Lane, it looks like it is open and goes straight up to Stabler. That was closed down about 30 years ago. My father, who lived at my address at that time, was offered that same option. He turned it down; however, I would like that option. I have asked different City officials why that was presented to my father, and if it would be presented to me again. No one can give me an answer. I have pictures of it blocked off, to prove that it has been blocked off for about 30 years. It took five or six phone calls to the City to get the hill cleaned up; it is a mess constantly. In the summertime, I have looked out my window and seen people having sex on that hill. My fence has been hit three times. Cars speed down this street; police cannot catch the speeders. The neighbors have lawn damage; I have pictures of that. I have witnessed fights. My van has been damaged by teenagers. I was assaulted by a gang of teenagers. I have had people urinating and defecating in my front yard. I pick up whiskey and trash from my yard every day. I have talked to three of the five PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 3 home owners that connect directly to the alley, two of them on Stabler and myself, and we all agree that it should be closed. I have signatures. There is loud music. When my folks first bought the house in the late sixties and early seventies, they came here to a City Council meeting. Bill's was present. Bill's agreed with the City Council and my folks and a petition they had signed not to use Paris Avenue any more to run their business. They are constantly going up and down there on Paris Avenue now, a dozen times a day. They are supposed to run their business out of Hodge. I have pictures of junk cars all the way down the lane. They are there overnight. I have pictures of the road in such bad shape you wouldn't want to drive on it. The neighbor's fence on the other side of the alley has had graffiti that he has had to spray paint over. It would save the City money for maintenance if it were changed. I want the problem gone. My family and I have lived there for 30 years. If the problem can't be solved, we are going to move out of the City. The Board should listen to the people who live on the road, not people two blocks away that want to cut through to get to the liquor store or for the convenience of not turning left off of Cedar. The Board should want to improve the quality of life in that neighborhood. Closing Everett Lane would be a dramatic step in doing that. SANDY ALLEN, SECOND WARD COUNCILMEMBER. I understand that Mr. Lindsay applied for the vacation. Everett Lane is used like any other City street by the people who live there. Because there is littering or because of more serious problems, we can't close the street off. This is a neighborhood problem and should be handled at the neighborhood level with the cooperation of Lansing Police Department. It is my understanding that Mr. Lindsay has not had a great deal of cooperation from the Police Department. That is too bad, and I would be willing to work with them and with LPD in trying to diminish the problem. I would urge you to deny this request. I have signatures from 53 people in the area. This is a street like any other in the City, and we don't close streets because of littering and loitering. EMLY HORNE, 110 WEST HODGE. This evening I am wearing two hats, first as a resident. My mother and I strongly oppose the vacating of Everett Lane from East Hodge to Paris Avenue. I also represent Our Neighborhood Organization. At our meeting in September, the residents directed me to write a letter to Sam Quon of the Planning Office regarding this request. All of us experience the same problems as Mr. Lindsay. Other issues include pedestrian and vehicular traffic which are important in connecting neighborhoods. Students need to meet school buses on Stabler and Hodge and Stabler and Berry, but the most important issue before you is that of setting a precedent by vacating Everett Lane, both north and south of East Hodge and eliminating movement of people by walking and driving. Our Neighborhood Organization opposes this request. On behalf of Mr. Ken PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 4 Hines, I would like to submit this petition opposing closing this portion of Everett Lane. Residents in the area of Paris and Denver experience difficulty in getting onto South Cedar, especially going north. If this area is closed, students will be forced to walk along South Cedar Street. During the winter, they would probably walk in the street because snow has not been removed in this area. In trying to develop community, we strongly oppose this request. I would be happy to answer questions. LINDA PUNG, 3101 STABLER. I would like it to be noted that I was against the street closing. I called Sam Quon a few months ago. There is a gas line back there, a five-to six-hundred gallon gas line. If you are going to sell the street, are you going to level the hill or keep it as a hill? My neighbor went to level the hill and we came across the gas line. There has been a conflict between BWL and Consumers Power over who would be responsible. It angles under people's property and goes up to Ingham Medical. I have a fence back there. If you go dig down so far, you can see the gas line. There is a house next to me that is a Lansing Housing Commission house with their driveway in the back. If you take that out, they will lose their drive. There is no way in the front on Stabler that they can put a driveway in. At that part of the driveway, the pipeline is only about 18 inches below the surface. I am against the petition. I want to keep Everett Lane open. RICHARD SHUE, 111 PARIS. I live across from the Lindsays. I am for closing that road. About the school kids, three of them on Denver walk towards the high school. All the other young kids walking to Maplewood go to Cedar and walk the sidewalk. The house that wouldn't be able to use their driveway--we ain't closing the whole road. They will have access to their driveway from off Hodge. That will be open because Bill's has to have access. I have had people tackled in my front yard by Lansing Police officers; I have had the light post taken out three times this year. I don't know if it is from the wreckers coming around the corner or if it is cars. They run into the telephone poles; they are all banged up. It is a dangerous corner for bicyclists because most traffic is cut-through to Washington, Logan. It is a quick way out. When police chase people, the cars head down Paris Avenue; they lose them every time. At that corner, they have five streets available. One guy chased down there last summer ran his car into somebody's front room near Maplewood School. Maybe you could look into big speed bumps limiting to 10 mph. Ten or fifteen people want to close it. Where they got 53 people, I don't know. There ain't even 53 houses on that street. It shouldn't make a difference to people who just want to cut through to the liquor store. Thanks for listening. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman declared the hearing closed for Act-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris Ave., Vacate Everett Lane Right- PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 5 of-Way, and referred to the Urban Development Committee meeting at 4 p.m. on February 23, 1998 in the Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue B. Act-29-98, 700 Blk. Sheridan Street, Vacation or Sale of ROW Mr. Sturdevant presented the case. "You have in front of you a copy of the preliminary staff report. Attached to that report are four separate maps; an area map, a City map showing how the City was laid out 100 years ago; preliminary site plan and a recommended site plan. I also have just received from the applicant this afternoon a revised site plan showing the project from Saginaw to Oakland and new Prudden Avenue where the Prudden Bldg. is and the whole project and how this ties in with the Prudden Wheel project." (Ms. Love held up blueprints.) The property is located on Sheridan Street, a one-block remnant of Sheridan Street, which used to run from Larch Street to the city limits." When Oakland Avenue was built, it was built over the top of Sheridan Street. When they put Oakland under the railroad tracks, they swung it a little to the north, so there is a block-long segment of the old street left. It runs from Oakland Avenue across the railroad tracks and dead ends at Larch Street. You can turn right onto Larch Street, because Larch Street is one-way going north. It serves the buildings on Sheridan Street. There is another building west of the railroad tracks closer to Larch that also has frontage onto Larch. This property has previously been before the Board as the special land use permit for 50-60 residential units in the old Lansing Pattern to accompany the Prudden Wheel site and the other condominium project that Mr. Hepler is developing in that building. Mr. Hepler would like Sheridan Street closed as a public right-of-way in order to use it as part of the parking for his project. The advantage to him is that it permits closing the railroad crossing and eliminates noise of the train whistle at an at-grade railroad crossing, making the building more desirable for residential development. The title company that did a search on this section of Sheridan Street thought it was still owned by James Seymour who developed a lot of the land here. We are working to verify that. If that is the case, the City really does not hold title to that street; however, we can claim adverse possession because the City has maintained and improved it for the last 100-plus years. Through the new Prudden Avenue coming up from Saginaw, it will eventually connect with Oakland, allowing a driveway entrance off Prudden Avenue into the Lansing Pattern Shop project, the Sheridan Lofts. It will eliminate any need for a driveway entrance off Oakland Avenue and will allow the parking configuration to be redesigned. Because it is a street closure, it requires a hearing before the Planning Board and approval by City Council. Mr. Smith asked about comments concerning MDOT and any potential problems. Mr. Sturdevant said the right-of-way abuts Oakland Avenue. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 6 Sheridan Street is the local street on top of the hill. The actual amount of right-of-way to be vacated would be up to the present curb line of Sheridan Street. The rest would have to be maintained under the control of the City or MDOT. MDOT was sent a request for response; as yet they have not responded. "As long as the engineering details are worked out, I assume they have no objections." Mr. Ruge asked about Prudden Avenue--is it scheduled to go all the way through? Half of it is completed; when is the other half supposed to go in? Mr. Sturdevant said it has not as yet been determined. Anything to do with Sheridan Street should be contingent upon the successful completion of the street through to Oakland. Right now there is only one way to go, in from Oakland Avenue and out on Larch. The way it is configured now, it is awkward to make a hairpin turn back out onto Oakland. Mr. Ruge asked about the other side of the railroad tracks--is there only one business on the other part of Sheridan Street? Mr. Sturdevant said there is a house on the corner and a business behind it which has frontage on Larch Street as well, but only the one primary business on Sheridan Street, Fisher Ross Wiegand Inc. "The developer has been working with them and has presented a letter. He gave me this the same time he gave me the plan this afternoon." (Handed letter to Chairman.) They don't object to that closure of Sheridan Street because they have worked out an access easement through the eventually-rebuilt May Street. Mr. Ruge said maybe we should vacate all of Sheridan Street and give it to Fisher Ross Wiegand so we don't have to deal with any of it. It seems like there is only Mr. Hepler's property and this other property on it. Mr. Sturdevant noted that the Transportation Engineer recommended that. For clarification, Mr. Smith said one map shows Summit Street. On the new map, it appears to be the same as Prudden Avenue. Mr. Sturdevant said Summit Street is the street that used to be there but that was vacated decades ago. It is the same. HARRY HEPLER, 603 E. MICHIGAN. A couple issues. I hate to see this approved subject to the final engineering of Prudden Avenue. There was another question. We are a candidate for the north extension of Prudden Avenue from May Street to Oakland for a grant for a state trunkline that would have a 15 percent City match. As a candidate we probably would be pushed to the top of the candidate list, based on the fact that they have already funded this project once and would like to see it the rest of the way through. It is coming up March 15. The reason why I would not like to see it conditioned upon the final engineering plans for Prudden Avenue is that (1) we need to plan the project, and we need to know that the audible train horn will be eliminated. For that to happen, the road needs to be vacated so PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 7 it becomes private property, and we can petition CSX to pull the signal and stop the audible horn. It takes a fair amount of time to deal with the railroad. (2) The property does not have a higher and better use than returning to office or residential; under the baseline environmental assessment, it can't return to industrial. You would not find an industrial user who would accept 15-ft column separation nonfreespan space, a defunct heating system (an old boiler), second floor space that can't carry the loads, fire issues, and codes that can't be met. This is the higher and better use. To create enough green space, which is minimal as is, and to create enough parking for the residential units, we would need Sheridan Road to be vacated by the City. It is a convoluted project. We need assurances that this road is going to be vacated. Tabling this and waiting for the plans would not be wise. I urge you not to approve this subject to final plans for Prudden Avenue. Make sure there is temporary ingress and egress into the property. It is a unique property with heavy timber structure with block exterior similar to the Blue Coyote, or the Nut House, or the Lansing Convention-Visitors Bureau. Mid- to upper-level income rental units are feasible; there is a substantial market there. We have confidence that with even a temporary driveway the project would be successful. In terms of Summit and Prudden, we were getting calls for ice time, if you remember the Summit Building. We urged the Mayor to change the name from Summit Drive to Prudden Drive, because our company name was Summit Investment Company LLC. We were getting phone calls for ice time until we changed our name. The audible horn is the key. The decibel reading inside for residential is not acceptable. Our zoning allows us, because we are industrial and we have a special land use permit, to go residential, but that doesn't mean the residents would tolerate it, at 26 trains a day on average coming through there. The white noise off the train wheels can be diffused through bermage, landscaping, mounding and deflecting sound. It is acceptable as it exists today for residents. We are confident that we can overcome that hurdle. HAROLD KING, 1563 NORTH HIGH, PRESIDENT, NORTHTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD, which this site is located in. I have lived in Lansing five years. I have spent three of them as President of Northtown. I have improved Northtown. I do not understand how Lansing can say they want citizens' input, and we are not told what is going on. This property, in the southwest corner of our neighborhood, is going to be a great improvement to the old Prudden Motor Wheel site and the Pattern site, but it is not going to do one single thing for the neighborhood. We haven't been involved in the process at all, though we want to be. We worked hard in the five years we have been a neighborhood; we have just become a 501.c.3. We want to be a part of building our neighborhood. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 8 BEVERLY MILLER, NORTH LANSING COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION. We received a notification. Is this Harry's project, or is this a City project? Ms. Love said the City of Lansing was involved with a match program with the State of Michigan to build a segment of Prudden that presently exists. We have applied for money from MDOT for the segment from May Street to Oakland. Again, that would be a match program. Tonight, we are reviewing a request by Mr. Hepler for the City to vacate Sheridan Street which we do not use any more. He would then use it to provide additional parking for his new apartments. Harry has sufficient parking on-site without Sheridan Street parking. This allows him some parking on the north side of the building closer to some of the units. He would be able to have residential units in there without the Sheridan Street parking. His original request was to be able to close the at-grade train crossing, not for the parking. Prudden Avenue will go all the way through to Oakland if the state gives us the money, and we anticipate they will. Ms. Miller said she was concerned with closing a street to eliminate a train whistle. Mr. Ruge said the street is not used very much; it mostly serves Mr. Hepler's properties. Closing the street probably will save the City money. Mr. Hepler will have to maintain it, rather than the City. The street is little- used; it would not be closed if it were used a lot. Other than Mr. Hepler, it is used only by Fisher Ross Wiegand, and Mr. Hepler has entered into an agreement with them to provide access to their property. The City is going to come out a winner. Seeing no one wishing to comment, the Chairman declared the hearing closed for Act-29-98, 700 Blk. Sheridan Street, Vacation or Sale of ROW and referred to the Urban Development Committee meeting at 4 p.m. on February 23, 1998 in the Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each). BONNIE FEHER, 2915 NORTH EAST STREET, representing my son at the last meeting regarding Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. At that time we did not yet have our survey done. It has been completed now, and there are discrepancies. The lot line does not follow a straight line; it is more on a diagonal. The question is access to his property from North East Street. From the surveyor's stake in his driveway as it exists now, there is only 5 ft 7 in to the sidewalk which goes to his elevated side entrance, which limits access. I would like the Board to look at the pictures (presented last time). You can see that the side entrance is elevated. We have had discussions with the prospective buyers, but it has not been resolved. I would like to request the Board to table this issue until the access issue can be resolved. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 9 CRAIG FEHER, 2915 NORTH EAST STREET. I am the present owner of the house at 2915 North East Street. I purchased the houses from my mother. I have been living here for about nine years. My concern is access from North East Street. My driveway comes off North East Street. The way the property lines are right now, I am not going to have enough access or room to drive a vehicle up beside my house and park it. I would like the Board to consider the pictures here and realize my position. I don't have a problem with the property being zoned differently other than residential. I would like access to my house and be able to park there. Before I purchased this house, I rented it. This is the first house I have ever owned. I apologize to the Board for not making it to the last meeting; I was sick. DON WILSON, 201 STRATHMORE, owner of the property Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. I would not like to have this request tabled. The party interested in building on it wishes to proceed with it. I have acquired these properties over several years from three different owners. They were talking about the property being built up--it has been built up in recent years by the owner. It wasn't there when I was involved with it. It crosses the stakes that the White Engineering Service put in for me. I can feel for them if they don't have enough property beside their house but there was three other houses on the other three lots that I had and there used to be a car, according to the photograph, between their house and the one adjacent to the north. I have a picture here showing where people years ago used it, and they had a car in there. I have a plot here from the City showing that I have 140 ft frontage and rear; they have 45 ft, and I have an offer on the property. I can't do anything towards working anything out with them because I have a deposit on the property as is. They would have to work it out with the new owner as far as ingress and egress, other than their 45 ft. frontage. As far as differences in the stakes, I will have Fred White get together with their surveyor, and they can work it out if there are minor differences. urge you to go ahead with it. BEVERLY MILLER, NORTH LANSING COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, on the continuing parking problem in the North Lansing because of the bar there. We can't get anything done about. Mr. Berridge puts up more and more signs. We have an ordinance. The bar does not use the parking spaces; instead the bar customers park in our neighborhood. Who enforces the zoning ordinance? Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the chairman closed the comments from the audience. 6. RECESS - The Chairman declared a three-minute recess. 7. BUSINESS SESSION. Chairman Ruge mentioned a misunderstanding on the part of a person wishing to address the Board who thought he could speak during PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 10 Committee Reports concerning Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. Board members did not object. ARTHUR GOOD, 201 CORBIN ST., MASON, here to speak on behalf of the purchasers of Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. They have had to go through a process to have this site approved and get approval of the Dept. of Energy. They have that forthcoming. There is a time constraint in the project that would be prohibitive in the event this would be tabled. The issue before Board is the concern of zoning and not so much property lines. The purchasers have made an offer to the neighbors for a viable solution, and this will proceed without problems because of the integrity of the people involved. Chairman Ruge asked if the purchasers are willing to work out a solution with the next-door neighbors. Mr. Good said yes. They have already talked. BONNIE FEHER, 2915 NORTH EAST STREET. We have been in discussion concerning an easement. They said we could have access to the back of the property. The issue is the driveway in the front of the property. We have not come to a resolution on that. I would hope that they would be willing to talk more on that so that we could reach a resolution. If the matter was tabled, it would give us talking time. A. Minutes for Approval: January 26, 1999. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, to approve the minutes of January 26, 1999 as presented. Voice vote (6-0), unanimous; carried; the minutes of January 26, 1999 were APPROVED. Minutes for January 12, 1999 were distributed at tonight's meeting for approval at the meeting of March 2, 1999. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole - Did not meet; no report. 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee - Mr. Miller, Chairman. The committee met February 10, 1999 and discussed three items. a. Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. The applicant wishes to rezone the property in order to permit construction of retail and office buildings. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 11 The request is to develop two buildings for retail and office use on this site. The energy efficiencies of the structures are to be studied by the Department of Energy as well. The property, at approximately 1/3 acre, is small, and the development will have to be sized to fit the site. Even though the Master Plan recognized this block on North East Street for residential use, further residential development along North East Street is unreasonable based upon the strip commercial nature of a majority of North East Street. The proposed use may be compatible with adjacent properties with appropriate buffering and resolution to access issues. The residential property at 2915 North East Street utilizes approximately three feet of the south edge of the subject property for a driveway. The residential property owner and the prospective commercial builder will need to work out a private easement to accommodate the driveway at 2915 North East Street. An adverse environmental impact is not anticipated as long as the storm water drainage is properly planned. The development is similar to other commercial development on North East Street, but it should be expected that the house at 2915 North East Street will at some time be requested to be used for commercial purposes. The Committee considers this an issue of an easement and a zoning issue. Compatibility, circulation and access issues must be resolved. Given the lack of resolution, Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to table Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District; on a voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District was TABLED. Chairman Ruge asked Mr. Ruff about the cramped, constricted site. It appears buffering is needed between the residential and commercial uses, given the layout on the property. A fence will not suffice. Three feet is not going to be enough to provide adequate buffering. Has this matter been discussed with the applicant? Mr. Ruff said an official site plan has not been presented as yet. Mr. Sturdevant said that while he has not discussed the merits of this plan with the applicant, "I have made him aware that we will require site plan review, and screening from adjacent properties will have to be addressed at that time. Chairman Ruge said, since this has been tabled, while they are working out the driveway problem, screening should also be worked out for the west line of the property. C. Z-20-98, 505 West Allegan Street, "DM-3" Residential District to "G-1" Business District PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 12 Sam Eyde Construction Company is requesting to rezone the property located at 505 W. Allegan Street, from "DM-3" Residential District to "G-V Business District. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing Civic Center Building (approximately 400,000 sq ft) and erect a new seven-story (approximately 87 ft high) office building (500,000 sq ft). The applicant has included a proposed site plan and elevations. Sam Eyde Construction Company purchased the former Lansing Civic Center from the City of Lansing with the intent of redeveloping the Block 119 portion of the site for an office building. Sam Eyde Construction Company has entered into a lease agreement with the State of Michigan for the use and occupancy of the proposed office building. Between 1,200 and 2,000 employees will be on-site at the largest shift period. The developer estimates that 90 percent already work downtown. The anticipated hours of operation for office building are Monday through Friday, 8 a.m.-5 p.m. 1. The proposed change in zoning is inconsistent with the River Island Plan, Amendment 1986 because the plan did not take into consideration the later construction of the Lansing Center. 2. The proposed development would require access to approximately 600 to 1,000 additional parking spaces. 3. The site plan as proposed is not anticipated to adversely affect the environment or pedestrian/vehicular circulation significantly beyond current levels for downtown traffic. 4. The scale of the proposed development would not impact the surrounding properties or obstruct a viewshed of the Capitol. 5. The scale, architectural design and unknown nature of the building materials do not illustrate clearly whether this infill will be sensitive to the adjacent historic properties. 6. Sam Eyde Construction Company has entered into a lease agreement with the State of Michigan for the use and occupancy of the proposed office building. 7. At this time, no adaptive reuse of the Lansing Civic Center (Civic Arena) nor accommodation of the existing public arts works and Veterans' Memorial, associated with the building, has been presented by the developer. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 13 Discussion took place regarding the building's demolition and the reasons for it (quantity of required floor space, nonalignment of floor elevations, internal circulation problems and security issues). Further discussion took place as to the appropriate recording and documentation of the historical nature of the building and the preservation of any public art works and/or significant materials. The owner's representative and the historic preservation planner will conduct a walk- through to evaluate prospective salvageable items. The owner's representative also agreed that a historic marker designating the site of the Constitutional Convention et a/ would be appropriate, and they would be willing to plan for that. In committee, based upon testimony and evidence, the members concurred with staff report, making revisions as noted above, and recommending to the full Board that the rezoning request be approved. It was moved, seconded and carried unofficially, 2-0, to recommend approval of Z-20-98, 505 West Allegan Street, "DM-Y Residential District to "G-1" Business District. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, based on testimony, evidence and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve Z-20-98, 505 West Allegan Street, "DM-Y Residential District to "G-V Business District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Ruge asked about the Historic District Commission recommending "D-1" zoning and about the effect of a "D-1" zoning as opposed to a "G-1" zoning. Mr. Ruff said it would have two major effects on the capacity of the site. The height would not be allowed. "D-1" allows up to 45 ft maximum; this is a seven-story building approximately 87 ft in height. Secondly, the "D-V Professional Office District would require on-site parking. It could be off-site parking only if it were within 300 ft and is similarly zoned. Mr. Ruge was concerned about the parking issue and adding 1,200-2,000 people. Ms. Love said we have been meeting with the State of Michigan to look at how to make existing parking system more user friendly and what if any new parking facilities would be needed, given the location and relocation of various state departments throughout the downtown area; however, the programming of the new buildings in the downtown area is not clear, and also numbers of people already parking downtown. We are looking at how we can better serve state parkers, and what the state plans over the next two or three years to accommodate them. Many people, if they have a good parking space, will keep it. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 14 Mr. Frederick said provision should be made for short-term parking for people who need to come downtown to meet with bureaucrats, the courts, or for other business reasons. Shuttles for employees might be a good idea to free up short-term parking. Keene. . . Ave Miller . .Ave Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith . Ave Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0, unanimous; carried, Z-20-98, 505 West Allegan Street, "DM-3" Residential District to "G-1" Business District was APPROVED. d. SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People. Mr. Miller provided an update. The applicant indicated that they have a meeting coming up this week with the School Board at which they anticipated approval. If the staff could prepare reports, and if there was a time crunch, the Zoning and Ordinance might be willing to meet at break or before the meeting, so that the matter could be taken up at the next Planning Board meeting. The item remains TABLED. Next meeting Wednesday, March 10, 1999, at 4 p.m. in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 3. Urban Development Committee - Mr. Nischan. a. Act-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Closure This project is an implementation step in the Seven Block Plan. The Seven Block Citizens District Council, Planning Board, and City Council (by ordinance) adopted the Seven Block Plan in 1993 and amended the plan in 1998. The street closure is located in the 1000 Block of West Lenawee. A cul-de-sac is planned for the west end of the street. Its alignment, with the circle on the south side of the street, reduces the number of structures that would need to be demolished from sixteen (as proposed in the original Seven Block Plan) to one: 1017 W. Lenawee. Although the Seven Block location is one of Lansing's first concentrated Black settlements, the State Historic Preservation Office has indicated that this house does not appear to have any historic significance. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 15 The residential character of the neighborhood will not change significantly as a result of the construction of the cul-de-sac. Cut-through traffic, which was a problem noted in the Seven Block Plan, will be eliminated by the cul-de-sac. Traffic will be routed to Kalamazoo, Butler and Hillsdale Streets, which are arterial, collector, and local streets, respectively. Staff recommends approval of Act-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Closure. In committee, it was found, based on testimony, evidence regarding location, character and extent of this project, that 1. The project implements the Seven Block Plan, adopted in 1993 and amended in 1998 by the Seven Block Citizens District Council, Planning Board and City Council (by ordinance), 2. The Seven Block area is one of Lansing's first concentrated settlements of Black residents, 3. The cul-de-sac alignment reduces the number of structures to be demolished from 16 to one. The earlier plan for that area called for demolition of 16 residential structures. The revised plan calls for removal of only one building. 4. The State Historic Preservation Office has indicated that the house that would be removed does not appear to have any historical significance In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously (4-0) to recommend approval of Act-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Closure. Ms. Love requested a point of clarification. Washtenaw would not be vacated all the way to Butler. Mr. Nischan said it left a little indentation for Mr. Gray's driveway. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to recommend approval of Act-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Closure. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Ruge noted that, asking Mr. Winnicker about cut-through traffic, he indicated that cut- through traffic was not a problem. The cul-de-sac was in the plan, so the plan was going to be implemented. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 16 Miller. . . Ave Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Frederick . .Ave Keene Ave Ruge Ave On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried; Act-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Closure was APPROVED. a. Act-28-98, 900-1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw between Butler and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Vacation This project is an implementation step in the Seven Block Plan. The Seven Block Citizens District Council, Planning Board, and City Council (by ordinance) adopted the Seven Block Plan in 1993 and amended the plan in 1998. The project calls for vacating the right-of-way for the whole block. As submitted, the request left a little stub of Washtenaw, the depth of a lot, so that an individual could continue to have access to the back of his house. The proposed street vacation is located in the 1000 Block of West Washtenaw, the site of a proposed office/commercial center. Twenty-three structures have been removed to accommodate the development. The Seven Block location is one of Lansing's first concentrated Black settlements, and the State Historic Preservation Office has indicated that two houses in the subject area have historic significance. These houses, 911 and 1003 W. Washtenaw, are being marketed by the City, searching for one or more interested parties to relocate and restore the houses as a priority over demolition. W. Washtenaw traffic is likely to flow to Kalamazoo, Butler and Allegan Streets, which are arterial and collectors, respectively. The property at 230 S. Butler uses Washtenaw for access, which can be maintained by closing the street west of the property, or by vacating the street west of Butler and providing a driveway for access. Staff recommends approval of Act-28-98, 900-1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw between Butler and M.L. King Blvd., Street Vacation. In Committee, it was found that: PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 17 1. The project implements the Seven Block Plan, adopted in 1993 and amended in 1998 by the Seven Block Citizens District Council, Planning Board and City Council (by ordinance), 2. The Seven Block area is one of Lansing's first concentrated settlements of Black residents, 3. The project involves the removal of twenty-three houses, 4. The State Historic Preservation Office has indicated that two houses have historical significance, and that the City is working to relocate these houses for restoration, 5. The ROW vacation is necessary to consolidate the site for the proposed office/commercial center. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously (4-0) to recommend approval of Act-28-98, 900- 1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw between Butler and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Vacation of West Washtenaw right-of- way east of Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., and west of S. Butler Street, provided that access to the property at 230 S. Butler be provided through the construction of a driveway for that property; and to encourage City efforts to market the houses at 1003 and 911 W. Washtenaw for relocation and preservation. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, to approve Act-28-98, 900-1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw between Butler and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Vacation, with the conditions as stated. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Frederick confirmed that Washtenaw will be closed all the way to the line for Butler Blvd., and that provision was made for access for 230 Butler. What about the people on the other side of the street. Mr. Ruge said the houses are gone. Mr. Rieske quoted Mr. Winnicker saying in the Urban Development Committee meeting that the housing in that area has been demolished as part of the commercial center. It is a non-issue. The 23 houses includes all previous demolition as well as the two houses which are proposed to be relocated. The Development Office is marketing the two houses for that purpose. Mr. Winnicker advocated the driveway solution, i.e., rather than vacating any part west of the rear lot line of the houses on Butler, just build a driveway, vacate the whole thing, and provide access, so as not to have to maintain a stub street. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 18 Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith . Ave Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Keene. . . Ave Miller . .Ave Ruge . . Aye On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; unanimous; Act-28-98, 900-1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw between Butler and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Street Vacation, was APPROVED. a. Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington, Vacate Alley along RR ROW This item was tabled at the Planning Board. The item will be placed on the agenda and a staff report will be prepared for inclusion in the packet for March 2, 1999 as an item under Committee of the Whole. Next meeting Tuesday, February 23, 1999, at 4 p.m., Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from the Planning Manager. Ms. Love said that the change in the Subdivision Regulations regarding lot splits and minor subdivisions did pass the City Council on February 15, 1999 and was given immediate effect upon being published in the newspaper. They then passed the lot split for the properties on South Holmes Street. The Board recommended two other changes in the Subdivision Regulations, one relating to traffic signals and signage to be paid for by the developer and the other requiring developers and not the City of Lansing to pay for asphalt. There were some wording discrepancies among the Attorney's office, Public Service and Planning which will be worked out. There will be another public hearing to address these two topics. Those amendments will be forthcoming within the next few weeks for the City Council. We are getting ready to sign Phase 1 of the Housing Study contract for approximately $58,000. We have outlined a Phase II which we could proceed with upon the issuance of a letter to proceed starting in July. I am hoping to do a public meeting on master plan amendments on March 16, 1999. Regarding parking issues, we met with the State today; we will initiate the committee to begin work. We will have a report for the Mayor in July. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 19 We are working on a wellhead protection program. We have a meeting tomorrow with the wellhead protection team. We are also working on the nonconforming sections of the code, home occupations. We have our budget hearing with the mayor on Wednesday, February 17, 1999. We are asking for a new person for sign and code enforcement, for support for the Master Plan and for the remainder of the money to do the housing study. The mayor is supportive. In response to a question by Ms. Keene about the conduct of the public meeting, Ms. Love said graphics presentations in the form of large maps would be most advantageous, with discussion of the primary elements of the plan, presented in the form of outlines--brief bullets. We could have bulleted handouts for distribution, and copies of some of the smaller maps, done in color. We also want to have copies of the revisions. Ten days in advance, I would like to be able to have available copies of the draft in the Clerk's office and in the Planning Office. People will be calling as soon as they get postcards. This is not a public hearing, so we are not required to have fifteen days. We could put an executive summary in the front, summarizing the major changes. People could have the summary and map free, and for full copies of the revised plan, people could borrow copies and return them. The problem is, drafts from last April are still out there and people think it is the final draft. "I would like to pull back in as many of those as possible, just so we don't have any misunderstandings." We will provide some free copies to the MSU Library, MSU Urban Planning Library, State of Michigan Library, public libraries, Geyer Center Library, City Council, Planning Board members, and neighborhood associations in or adjacent to the downtown area. Eventually the plans would be sold for about $10. This hearing will be at a Planning Board meeting, after the plan has been voted out of committee, but before the entire Board votes on it. "I would like to see the Planning Board members involved in the presentation of the material. It will demonstrate to citizens that it was not just staff, and it will give people an appreciation for how much work Board members have put into this." Mr. Rieske said a meeting is scheduled for February 23. We need to wrap it up at that time in order to get it assembled into one set of revisions and sent to the consultant for incorporation into the document. Then we can get that back from the consultant for a target date of March 5, 1999, which is only 11 days prior to the hearing. Mr. Rieske notified the consultant today. D. Pending Items: Future action required. 1. Planning Board a. Z-25-97, 300 Blk. S. Butler, W. Side, "C" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District(Tabled January 6, 1998) PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 20 b. Z-19-98,Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District(Tabled February 16, 1999) C. Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington,Vacate Alley along RR ROW 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-1" Business District(Tabled February 11, 1998) b Z-3-98, 1131 & 1133 Race Street, "H" Light Industrial to "G-1" Business District(Tabled April 15, 1998) C. Z-4-98,201 E.Grand River, "F-1" Commercial &"H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) d. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) e. Z-8-98, 208 E. Grand River Avenue, "F-1" Commercial to "G-1" Business (Tabled August 12, 1998) f. SLU-5-98, Gier Community Center,2400 Hall Street(Act-6-98); g. SLU-7-98, Washington Park,2516 S. Washington Ave. (Act-8-98); h. SLU-10-98, Biggie Munn Park,4801 Aurelius Rd. (Act-11-98); I. SLU-12-98, Fire Station#4, 5550 S. Pennsylvania Ave. (Act-13-98); Urban Development Committee a. Act-19-97, 120 E. Shiawassee Street, Fire Station#1, Market/Sale for Mid- Rise Residential with Building Preserved b. Act-21-98, Ingham Regional Medical Center, Replacement Sign in S. Pennsylvania ROW(Tabled September 8, 1998) C. MPA-1-98, Downtown Comprehensive Plan (Tabled September 8, 1998) 8. NEW BUSINESS A get-well card for Mr. Goolsby was distributed for signatures. 9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON Chairman Ruge added to Ms. Love's list of abandoned signs the Kalamazoo Laundry at Clemens and Kalamazoo. Regarding Z-13-98, 4720 S. Cedar Street (East 183 ft), "D-1" Professional Office District to "E-2" Local Shopping District, Mr. Baryames told the Board he wanted a Sparty's Coney Island there, but he has a sign out, "Will Build to Suit." This is a reminder that we can't zone to a proposed specific use; rather, we are zoning for a general land use. Chairman Ruge asked about the driveway layout for the lot split on S. Holmes; Ms. Love described the proposed driveway layout. Chairman Ruge asked about the rezoning of the Days Inn property. Ms. Love said the hearing was conducted before the City Council on January 4, 1999. It was passed out of committee during late January, and approved by the City Council the first week in February. 10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 16, 1999 PAGE 21 Mr. Miller reiterated some activities of November 3, 1998 when we passed a resolution indicating our intentions to incorporate wellhead protection and other environmental issues into major revisions of master plans, consistent with priorities set at the December 8, 1998 meeting. The record should be clear on that so that it would result in additional points in the City's Wellhead Protection grant request to the state, pushing us in front of the City of Kalamazoo. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to reiterate incorporation of wellhead protection and other environmental issues into major revisions of master plans. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Ms. Love said before we do any more master plans, certain things are city-wide in nature, such as environmental issues, wellhead protection, wetlands issues, etc. We need to establish city-wide policies for sensitive issues. When we look at a particular area, we have the policies to guide us as to how we should evaluate and develop (or not develop) a particular geographic site. On a Voice Vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; motion carried; unanimous; the motion to reiterate passage of a resolution indicating the Board's intention to incorporate wellhead protection and other environmental issues into major revisions of master plans, consistent with priorities set at the December 8, 1998, was APPROVED. Mr. Nischan will be away on business on February 23. Mr. Ruge will be away March 6-13. 11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Mr. Smith asked about the Action Auto on Mt. Hope and Pennsylvania; no movement. Mr. Frederick asked about cars in the front yard at 612 Jolly. Referred to Code Compliance. 12. ADJOURNMENT - was at 9:57 p.m. Respectfully s)ubmi ted, 7 Eleanor K. Love, Secretary Planning Board mn021699 a148 Page 1 Z-20-98, 505 W. Allegan St. "DM-3"Residential to'G-1"Business District GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Sam Eyde Construction Company 2800 Bryon Circle Lansing, MI 48912 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Applicant/Owner EXISTING LAND USE: Lansing Civic Center (Primarily vacant with an estimated 5,000 sq. ft. of office space currently in use) and parking. EXISTING ZONING: "DM-3" Residential District PROPOSED ZONING: "G-1" Business District SIZE AND SHAPE: 371.25' x 396' = 147,015 sq. ft approximately (3.37 acres) SURROUNDING LAND USE: North: State Offices South: State Offices East: State Office, Parking and Post Office West: Professional Office and Parking SURROUNDING ZONING: North: "F" Commercial and "DM-3" Residential South: "F" Commercial and "DM-3" Residential East: "DM-4" and "J" Parking West: "D-1" Professional Office and "J" Parking MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The River Island Area Comprehensive Plan, Amendment 1986, designates this area for community facility development with professional office use on the east side of the block. The property is located at the corner of Allegan and Pine Streets. Allegan is a minor arterial and Pine is a collector street. The property is also located in a proposed Capitol Historic District, currently under study. Report prepared by S.Candon\z-20-98 Page 2 Z-20-98, 505 W. Allegan St. 'DM-3'Residential to'G-1"Business District CASE HISTORY: City Council action #70A on January 20, 1947 rezoned the property at 505 W. Allegan from "D" Apartment District to "DM" Multiple Dwelling District. This change in classification "in no way changes the use, height and area regulations of any of the properties described". Chestnut Street at W. Allegan was vacated on April 13, 1953 to accommodate the construction of the Civic Center. DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: Sam Eyde Construction Company is requesting to rezone the property located at 505 W. Allegan Street, from "DM-3"Residential District to "G-1" Business District. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing Civic Center Building (approximately 400,000 sq. ft.) and erect a new seven story (approximately 87 ft. high) office building (of 500,000 sq. ft.). The applicant has included a proposed site plan and elevations. Sam Eyde Construction Company purchased the former Lansing Civic Center from the City of Lansing with the intent of redeveloping the block 119 portion of the site for an office building. Sam Eyde Construction Company has entered into a lease agreement with the State of Michigan for the use and occupancy of the proposed office building. Between1,200 to 2,000 employees will be on site at the largest shift period. The developer estimates that 90% already work downtown. The anticipated hours of operation for office building are Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. AGENCY RESPONSES: AMERITECH: No response Assessor's Office: Board of Water & Light: Electric: No objections to the rezoning. Water: No objections to the issuance of building permit. Water Customer Projects must see flow requirements before confirming service availability. Steam: No comments. Building Safety: No objection. The redevelopment project will require site plan review approval prior to construction of any buildings. Contact Jack Nelson or Christine Segerlind for additional information. Report prepared by S.Candon\z-20-98 Page 3 Z-20-98, 505 W. Allegan St. 'DM-3'Residential to'G-1'Business District City Attorney: No response Consumers Power: No response Development Office: "DM-Y is oversight and has never reflected use of the block. How will parking be accounted for? Downtown Neighborhood Association: No response Fire Marshall: No response Historic District Commission: The HDC recommends against the "G-1" zoning because it is inconsistent with the Master Plan and its total lack of parking and dimensional requirements. We recommend that the entire parcel be rezoned to "D-1r" or "D-1" where the current Civic Center Building stands and "J" Parking for the land that is currently a parking lot. The development proposal is consistent with the intent of the "D-1" and inconsistent with the intent of"G-1". The building qualifies as an historic building and is the site of the "state's most significant political event in the 20th century" It is in the proposed Capitol Historic District and can qualify for tax credits. See attached report. Historical Society of No response Gr. Lansing: Parks & Recreation: Does not impact park operations and facilities. Police Department: This change should not impact the police department. Rick Cook Public Service: Public Service - Engineering has no objections to the proposed action. We reserve the right to review plans through the plan review process. Transportation Dept: Attached is a copy of a communication from the Transportation Engineer, Dave A. Berridge, outlining concerns with the removal of the parking supply Report prepared by S.CanUon\z.20-88 Page 4 Z-20-98, 505 W. Allegan St. 'DM-3"Residential to'G-1'Business District requirement for this property through rezoning, increasing the responsibility of the City and State to provide adequate public and employee parking in the area of downtown . ANALYSIS This block was included in the Original Plat of 1847. This area is included in a proposed Capitol Historic District and also the Architectural Survey Level II study area report prepared by consultants Henry & Henry, Preservation and Architectural Consultants. This area was recommended in 1980 for nomination as a National Registered Historic District and/or a Local Historic District. COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE The proposed planned office development of seven stories, approximately 87 ft. is comparable in scale to the nearby governmental buildings including the Capitol. The main section of the Capitol is about 100 ft. with the dome rising to 267 ft. COMPLIANCE WITH MASTER PLAN The developer's request is to rezone the property, located at 505 W. Allegan Street, from "DM-3"Residential District to °G-1" Business District in order to erect a new 7-story office building. The River Island Area Comprehensive Master Plan, Amendment 1986 designates this area for community facility development with professional office use on the east side of the block. The most recent draft of Lansing Central Plan, designates future land use of this area for Capitol District development incorporating the state complex with supportive retail and office. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC The property is located at the corner of W. Allegan and Pine Streets. Allegan is a minor arterial and Pine is a collector street. Allegan currently runs one-way eastbound and Pine runs one-way southbound. The most recent draft of Lansing Central Plan recommends all streets west of the Grand River to be two-way streets. The proposed office development with 500,000 sq. ft. gross does not provide for parking spaces; however representatives of the City of Lansing and the State of Michigan are serving currently on a committee to review and develop a downtown parking plan to accommodate the growth of office space and the "shuffling" of employees. Report prepared by S.Cantlonlz-20-98 Page 5 Z-20-98, 505 W. Allegan St. "DM-3"Residential to"G-1"Business District ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Consideration should be given to air and noise pollution of any higher intensity traffic pattern on the property or surrounding area. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT The proposed development is consistent with the current draft of the Lansing Central Area Plan development patterns for the area south of Ottawa Street, west of Capitol Avenue, east of Pine Street and north of Kalamazoo Street. IMPACT ON HISTORICAL PROPERTIES The property is located in the proposed Capitol Historic District . The Lansing Civic Center falls also within the study boundaries of the 1980 Central Business District National Register Nomination. The nomination did not actually create a historic district. The area is composed principally of governmental, civic, educational and residential buildings. In a 1998 Lansing Architectural Survey II Report, Henry & Henry, Preservation and Architectural Consultants, noted that two buildings are already included in the National Register of Historic Places. They are the Lewis Cass Building (built in 1919 and designed by the prominent local firm of Bowd-Munson) and the Post Office/Federal Building at 315 W. Allegan (also the work of Bowd-Munson). The 1953 Lansing Civic Center (now Civic Arena) was completed in October 1955 and decdicated in 1957. Upon its completion, it was dedicated as a "Living Memorial to Veterans of All Wars". It was also the site of the Michigan Constitutional Convention in 1961, and therefore plays a significant role in the state's history also. Since it is less than 50 years old, it is ineligible at this time to be individually nominated for the National Register of Historic Places although it is recognized as an important building in the history of Lansing and the state. In the mid-1970s, the city commissioned local artists to complete a variety of art public works to be placed in the Lansing Civic Center. The disposition of all of the art works is currently unknown; however the ferrocement sculpture by Jack Bergeron still remains outside the main entrance. SUMMARY 1. The proposed change in zoning is inconsistent with the River Island Plan, Amendment 1986 because the plan did not take into consideration the later construction of the Lansing Center. Report prepared by S.CantloMz-20-98 Page 6 Z-20-98, 505 W. Allegan St. 'DM-3'Residential to'G-1'Business District 2. The proposed development would require access to approximately 600 to 1000 additional parking spaces. 3. The site plan as proposed is not anticipated to adversely effect the environment or pedestrian/vehicular circulation significantly beyond current levels for downtown traffic. 4. The scale of the proposed development would not impact the surrounding properties or obstruct a viewshed of the Capitol. 5. The scale, architectural design and unknow nature of the building materials do not illustrate clearly whether this infill will be sensitive to the adjacent historic properties. 6. Sam Eyde Construction Company has entered into a lease agreement with the State of Michigan for the use and occupancy of the proposed office building. 7. At this time, no adaptive reuse of the Lansing Civic Center (Civic Arena) nor accommodation of the existing public arts works and Veteran's Memorial, associated with the building, has been presented by the developer. RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the request from Sam Eyde Construction Company to rezone the property located at 505 W. Allegan Street, from "DM-3" Residential District to "G-1" Business District, with the understanding that; the potential parking pressures on the properties surrounding the proposed development are resolved. Staff also recommends the developer consider the adaptive reuse of the existing 400,000 sq. ft. Lansing Civic Center and the potential tax incentives associated with the rehabilitation of an historically significant property. Adaptive reuse and any addition to the structure should include compatible architectural design and materials. The remaining public art works and Veteran's Memorial Wall associated with the building should also be retained. An historic marker commemorating the significance of the Michigan Constitutional Convention could be incorporated into the plan as well. Report prepared by S.Cantlon\z-20-98 To: The Lansing Planning Board and City Council From: The Lansing Historic District Commission February 2, 1999 Re: Z-20-98, Rezoning Request for the Lansing Civic Center The Lansing Civic Center is in the proposed Capitol Historic District and the building is historic and qualifies for tax credits. The building meets the federal age requirement and the building is the site of the 1961 Constitutional Convention, "the state's most significant political event in the twentieth century. " The Lansing Historic District Commission recommends against the rezoning to the G-1 General Business District Classification because it is inconsistent with the master plan and the total lack of parking and dimensional requirements: - threatens the building; - has the ability, now or in the future, to result in a building of such a size that it could inappropriately visually dominate Lansing' s most important and historic building - the State Capitol building; and, because this zoning classification contains no requirements to provide for the additional cars coming into the downtown for these new' State workers . We recommend that the zoning be changed either to D-1 Professional Office District for the entire property or D-1 where the current structure exists and J Parking if there is a need or desire to create a parking structure incidental to the use of the office building. The agency referral and front end report are misleading. The existing land use is NOT "primarily vacant with some office (5000 sq. ft. ) ". Rather, this is the site of the Lansing Civic Center and its parking lot. The size and shape described on the report is for the land. No mention has been made of the size of the existing building. Mr. Eyde has previously indicated to us that he intends to convert the existing structure rather than demolish it. We are unaware of his current intentions or what plans he has discussed with the City. As you can imagine, converting the Civic Center (which currently includes a large auditorium) to offices could yield a large amount of space. In 1997, we compiled an estimate of vacant square footage in the Central Business District. In consultation with a well known commercial real estate broker, the Civic Center was estimated to yield 400,000 sq. ft. Neither the current zoning nor the proposed rezoning make sense. As the front end report indicates, the request is inconsistent with the master plan. The current zoning retains its original residential zoning and, like many parcels used by government, was never changed to reflect the actual use. Z-20-98 Page 2 It is possible to appropriately reconcile the proposed development with a more rational zoning. The proposed use is for offices for State employees . This will bring more people and cars to the downtown. The G-1 zoning request does nothing to deal with the parking issue . Undealt with, this could threaten other buildings or simply create such congestion downtown that even fewer people will be willing to relocate or shop here . This should not be allowed. A review of the intent of these zoning classifications, as stated in the Zoning Code is illustrative . Section 1260 . 01 states that " (t)he intent of the D-1 Professional office District is to permit the construction or conversion of structures for office uses and multiple dwelling uses . Section 1270 . 01 states that " (t)he intent of the G-1 Business District is to allow for a general retail commercial district for the downtown area. " As you know, the G-1 classification has no parking, height or area requirements . The D-1 classification does have height and area requirements (and, height should be considered important due to the proximity of this land to the Capitol building) and has parking requirements . The D-1 classification permits a surface off-street parking lot. Alternate zoning for the eastern half of the land could be J- Parking. This zoning allows a principal use of either a surface parking lot or structure. The intent of this classification is also useful to review: Section 1278 . 01 states that " (t) he intent of the J Parking District is to permit the establishment of areas to be used solely for the off-street parking of private passenger vehicles as a use incidental to a principal use. The District will generally be provided by petition or request to serve a use district which has developed without adequate off-street parking facilities . " HISTORY OF THE AREA AND BUILDING In the beginning, the area was residential . Eventually, William K. Prudden acquired the land, built the Prudden Auditorium as a gift to the City of Lansing for civic use in perpetuity. It was demolished to build the much larger Civic Center . The Civic Center includes the Veterans Memorial . Both the veterans and the Senior Center were displaced when the City sold this property several years ago. These are sore issues with many people . Z-20-98 Page 3 The Civic Center building qualifies as an historic building. It meets the federal definition of fifty years in age. Often overlooked, it is the site of an historic event. The November/December 1998 edition of Michigan History Magazine (published by the State of Michigan Office of the Secretary of State) contains an article titled "Order The 1961-62 Michigan Constitutional Convention" . The first sentence states that " . . Michigan Secretary of State James M. Hare gaveled into session the state's most significant political event in the twentieth century". This event, the constitutional convention (known as Con-Con) occurred in the Lansing Civic Center. The article was authored by Chuck Harmon who covered the Constitutional Convention for Booth Newspapers . Mr. Harmon was assisted with the article by Robert Danhof who also participated in Con-Con, served as a U.S. attorney, served as Governor Romney' s Legal Adviser and presided as Chief Judge of the Michigan Court of Appeals prior to his retirement in 1992 . The constitutional convention occurred because 322, 038 Michigan voters from all 83 counties petitioned for it. A total of 352, 688 Michiganders voted for it. It was supported by organized labor, the Democratic party and parts of the Republic party and many citizen groups including the Citizens for Michigan, the Jaycees, the Michigan Junior Chamber of Commerce and the Michigan League of Women Voters . Numerous leaders with State wide and national reputations participated. It was the first time in the state ' s history that women and African-Americans took part in the writing of a constitution. NSI � ti G CITY OF LANSING Public Service Department Transportation Division Interoffice Communication R E C F � V F FEB 0 2 1999 TO: Susan Cantlon, Preservation Planner PLANNING 0"ASION FROM: David A. Berridge, Transportation Engi eer DATE: January 28, 1999 SUBJECT: Z-20-98: 505 W. Allegan Street The Transportation Division has reviewed the rezoning request and has the following comments and issues. 11 The removal of the parking supply requirement for this property through rezoning will increase the responsibility of the city and State to provide adequate public and employee parking in the area of downtown. This is true for all G-1 rezoning requests and is not unique to this parcel. 2) This parcel is adjacent to a privately owned parking lot which is operated for public parking, therefore, the impacts will be less than for another site. 3) This parcel is also in the middle of the Capital Complex and surrounded by State employee parking facilities. The intended tenants are employees of the State of Michigan, therefore, the impacts of the rezoning will be less than for another site. 4) There are many downtown workers (generally non-State employees) using the existing parking lot. There is a large block of parking presently leased to the Accident Fund Company for employee parking. There will an increased demand for the use of the existing parking and the potential to displace existing customers to service the new ones since the building and the parking lot have the same ownership. To the extent that this occurs, there will be an increased demand in other downtown facilities which may be difficult to meet based on other parking demands in the same vicinity of the Accident Fund Company. 5) The City is presently considering a downtown parking demand study to address future parking needs. However, the report will not be completed in time for use during consideration of this rezoning request. If you have any questions, please contact me. file: (D A 8)Parking Demand Study C:\Corel\Office7\WPWin7\DATA\PLANNING\z-20-98.cantion.wpd Z-20-98, 505 W. Allegan Bt, NOM Rezoning from'DM-3"Residential to'G-1"Business District \ YIC M14aM Ave VAC 4•12•44 1 L SEE 3301-16-100-J T AVE. { G -----6p,-------T------ 'OI 00\ le i = F G° Go w a g2 ODN T r I _ in Z N : 2 STATE H 1 f` 4- O ` e STATE ® I 1 to 0 "DM-3 Residential "DM-3" Residential 0 ' i I - I ! ! steer.... r. /Y. 4 ALLEGAN ST. w f "DM-3" RRes>idential I "DM-4" Residential II "T'Parking ,\ ,2 010 r t CC Io 12 ! \\,,o` Io 30? ! r to II 26 ! + W \\ 1 r + Ile + Q 4 Z e\'•. \�� i e JI!- 4 Z e ►OeT OFFICE 4 } f 'D-1" Professional Office I U �n l I- + a ! e. I • a 3 e a 4 'T' Parking 05 • I T {{F„ Commercial ` ' ( U.S.GO'VT •— Y u.-. WASHTENAW ST. W. r - -T- �, I yF iz f'"+ UF" Commercial I 1 12 Ui "DM-4"Residential ' "DM-4" Residential 2 311 2 11 -°0 -- I ---- "DM-3 - s " Residential I r. 10 O 3 1u ! 10 3 10 126 3 . + t2! + STATE r C./r °' — — 329 ----- e 4 , �y FI f 9 4 9 Q 4+ + + + i 2 � } - -0�\ 7 6 T I T f/ •. {M, I I - 6 T COUNTY ur KALAMAZOO ST- W. 2-20-98, 505 W. Allegan Bt. TM Rezoning from"DM-3"Residential to"G-1" Business District L-, ✓ X WA L 848.3 a, X 52/ 853.9 B50 , 62 79- 1 / 851.57 DM--3 ;ErS/P7—Al7/ L— �M-3'� WALL 85/.B 853.4 A L L E G A N \ \ /4 /4 e� I /6 ,. l,p , �54.2 I 852. .9 852.3 B53.2 \ PARKING \ \ � � 854.( 1, 4 853.7 WASHTENAW 854.9 "Ce", U) z a 860 86/.i PARKING 17 ZONED DM-3 ZONED DM-3 UNZ N D BETA J \ Design ALLEGAN STREET I \ \ • ENTRY 1 \h LOT 12 J-- ----1—T—f------------ — ILOT 111 I\J LOT z \(/ W 1 \ t �\ QW Z — f —t----------- Q — I PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING 1 ZO�� DM-3 F, I BLOCK 119 /LOr le I I LOT 3 I� f ArmI \ r a � �, I I 1 ELOCSI ua ZONED DM-3 ILOT 9 ' 1 t LOT` 4 I 1 t 1 ZO w w N ILOr e tl I LOT I s I \°1 I J 4 / ZQN�D--F--i-- - ► z Q Z II I .� 1------- — I— O I I / / I/ I I j Q LU W I I ; QJTF{y LOT y LOT I B 0 /i 1 /a Lo 5e LL V) L W ASHTENA W S�VET \ IT ~ o ZONED ZONED DMA UNZONED o a F ! ! _I ISTM i l CONCa?T]lAt. 3ITIM !i.\?I zone. tgn ThoMaS Z:/9` iQ oams�-' c=>a o�uia��lim��l1s��lls_. .■ CJ IM S031,1 C�1,1 Ali1 ■ •:Ifl�!Ifl'~7�iCJ1�1 C�JI cal.......... II.... ial sai "1 s did ,tn 7 i 1 E:1117[Gi 11�L711�17l1�L�t'I 1� �al�r,.111^:11�L:��LG1 Z:>a Qa id1��11 Z11��1 31�S�W]o�E.»I ■ I��pI..Sd�IC�:�IL�11�I Cif 01a�■1[di■1�L�i�l .11 '� ICI t•i�^'.�i:1�L11 p p p mca o�1>o SI�c M lms�ls ■ J71 ff Uf�W11tf E�[l�lf I�I�� IN ;:I fi:S7 f:7 G71 w ■ t]I C]I [7/ ®1 C]I �� ,� •il I'e:ii■' i I'til■'811�I=' L41o1� .m11 L)I wamlfl Hit -' ■ `11Y t::i■i't i 11..M11 t7i�1�i1 C311�C9111M 71111�idll�z�l NNI ..a l .' ;,tl■IIl.l IS ,0• / ■1 �� 731 M 131�1 fit� �I—' ■■■■■■■■.1;■1,.■■■■ ■ C:711FIM L�71MNt1�C41 ,■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ Q 4!1��s�•l ,■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■ 17o ...,.�E aa � r�rs�aa��ccs �u tlr� 7La asac U Z:1K1VAE1M iU3UA JLsu..:a*AIN ! �—F" a i_..a1.14 i.d 3t 35 7L9 t iuF3"MEli0FaE3U11]fAW.,:`.,1 1 � ■ Y21�CCI�N1■N1i■t31G ■ :x�1 �1 ill ■"+il� — ®1 L�71 NI � E^tl _• .p1 1I■N_I''EARN Hall m:iAIt w 1 1 ■' �i[N■,ti,71 W■ Y-•at N1 awl M Mai 6S1 N 1 I1■011�I ■ u01 pIll�1 mim1��L1 i �1 �'o e�Leai LDl wl =1 qua wll��,l1l�1■IL11�1611 _� ■ ''i=■��t1l isaf ,:[1 m1Y91■IS71 . NI.IGII.I N11111 Nt■I Cii�I�� ■ .::1��1]:�1�'. 11A 11�i ■ C91�GI1�L71■-1�Ci1 of j ■' .1�1i`�w c:t fltf111l1 CCI t91 611 CJI Lti � >s's tv>�mss �� .1 ■' '. OI�Lu311�L©JI11�01■01 `.3a�<111�L71d ill�l e: ■ �I�C]1�I[]P�1[]I�It31f 1 ■�._7■m t671 Cw51 Cat�1�tS6Y7I1�1�.I11I wwWi:_. ,■■ =::a['JSC1 1fM se4.A177111 mMiINCaHC1i mm t,411111 11ry IS.�'i01l Ifflu,M al Ll 71�Si1lfCmmamolm®11I SI�I U101.01 eaA Cx7 11 — 1 � It • s•�a �'Y�"iY. 3• — � • � • 'II�'III'I"'I' II ■,■ C:1 lal ml ®1 tal 1��11■1■��1�� ■�■ .-moai 1moa1 Eli MI mi 1 ■1■ �l1e�ii,�lI:�lit■1l�i,l�i1 ■,■ -La. ©I U. @I '121 � .,. 11■1¢A1■1"a 1■111111—R � ■,■ LgRI Wi pi pl 101 ■,■ MI,11 1,11 1 71 N@i1 M tal r A■� __ �M•��_•��•• � 271f1:ii1f1Y.11 l�dl 671 � ¢fl Ml 6f1 1'JI nil L1.1- Laf pl . Sal ■,■ ml ml I'l 01, ni � ■,■ i71IIIfU11 191,111,m1IIIl1a11 _ ■,■ ail G1f 01 Ell o,1 IN �I C11■I moll _ :91 sal ql [71 A71 1"1■1 il/■1 a1�1011■l"I �� rcal ral c,�l a:tl � -al�i:al al■1-I�-1wi � ■,■ al Ml LA n_l aal ■,■ ai■I af,lr2t■It�f�1za11 ■,■ w71�IIt M1�Da1�i91� :21 1 21 'al 111 •'71 A� a71 ql pl :11 L21 ■,■ aL11�if7;�ILa— MI.I.M. _ 7a1 [al G]l Ya1 01 1 ._",al 8:21■■1 ii., a1 0, A� .,. 91 C9f ml mol E. / ■,■ a71■Lal■1i31■pl■is, l ■,■ fal mol pl WI pl � �x ,;�� teal ql 1 131 �91 ■ ■,■ 21■■_'iy 1.11111�1.11 C11■_Cf11 MI WI ml na !JI ■ +'uau Cdlll�ai111Y Wlll�CALa ■■,■■' 121, ; foal, moll imo8a7ii1 q>vill ■■ ■,■ R-1 pS2 1 ial 1al Gil ■■E Rinpginnglt�6111 ■ ■,■• +7.1 i1.'21 i1 Lai■I10i�1 @II ■ IE3S7EAC'E'I Ity1HE71 pH ll 111�l ■ `�o■l raaf1a21�l af�IW11 n;l ill i81 S87i ■ s_.�m�a ■ n1 A 6.1 Wi fi71 WIN5 E131�all ■ IAF3 871 [8! 011 ml 15€3 oaf fMl G71 MI e e e . ■,■ i q4l MaHI d1 RM'al 6i sC lEti3'� Q�.ii mi .1 1131 mi Mg MI�mi�a��mi 81 tag i fai 11 iAl 11 d71 ■ ■,■ RJI Pall Ni WI L71� : ■1■• HE 4alisAi f£a1 fa111; ■ MI 1111 a CII Cla �s �maami ■ ff11 MI M at rat I 1:1�I tNl■1 Dal■1G21 671 ■ Ga1�mi 01 MI�laA I ■,■ Gal■1tJli�lfil lld ml■mll ■,■ ®1 1111 S. mol ■,■ all■1&ll�l ql■If171■Iml tAl ra1 Ctl S. w_1 Dl1 G71 Wi HI R211 _I ■,■ MI 91 el 13l C. ■,■ �I111"i1101,111a11110f1 � _ MI Mi�131�01 f1;_ _ral_LV1_WI ■1■ a; 121, ui 121 aio � ■,■ S"1111"Mi111a1iillsai1l"M11 Elm iai 111 noi ni c®ai � WI! a l aul cai M I � � OH M Lt. ■1■ 1mo�li ni 011 wi ai ■1■ nilf1"A!wxalllciMg mo � ■,■ 6a1 di l 41 ml :11■■''COa■ Cal C11■'Cal 01�/71�141�aS1�®1 �� ■,■ �f;1i19;IIV adI IIV CII■ILLII ■,■ 1y; di 1i bmi 1i ■1■ RSI 11971 lIC71�1iii�118i� pl aAl OI A71 ©1 A ■,■ mi�ilii�li�®I out ■1■ wmoi,lgi,l�i,l i■�®il I ■■11 ml 1,1 ml� ■1■ iAl■C IM"1■C91sussulls moll ■ml --------------- • f• • • 'll�'I"IIII"I� Urban Development Committee Report 4:00 p.m. Tuesday, February 9, 1999 Conference Room, Code Compliance Office 316 North Capitol Avenue Members Present: Staff Present: Deborah Winfrey-Keene William C. Rieske, Principal Planner Jarl Nischan Emil Winnicker, Manager, Development Office John Ruge Michael Smith Members Absent: Others Present: None None The meeting was called to order at 4:11 p.m., and adjourned at 6:35 p.m. The agenda items were considered in this order: a. Act-27-98, W Lenawee E of MLK in 7 Block, Closure. b. Act-28-98, W Washtenaw E of MLK in 7 Block, Vacate ROW. C. Act-32-98, 1850 S Washington, Vacate Alley along RR ROW. d. MPA-1-98, Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan Pending: a. Act-26-98, E. St. Joe, Vacate - Cherry to Grand •� � , . � �, •- � _ ., . - .� ,- ., .: _ .. -� i .. .' Urban Development Committee Report, February 9, 1999 Page 2 a. Act-27-98, W Lenawee E of MLK in 7 Block, Closure. Emil Winnicker presented the case. This was presented at a public hearing on February 2, 1999, at which one person spoke against the proposal. The case had been introduced to the Committee on January 19, 1999, when one person spoke against the proposal. This project is an implementation step in the Seven Block Plan. The Seven Block Citizens District Council, Planning Board and City Council (by ordinance) adopted the Seven Block Plan in 1993 and amended the plan in 1998. The street closure is located in the 1000 block of West Lenawee. A cul-de-sac is planned for the west end of the street. Its alignment, with the circle on the south side of the street, reduces the number of structures that would need to be demolished from sixteen (as proposed in the original Seven Block Plan) to one: 1017 W. Lenawee. Although the Seven Block location is one of Lansing's first concentrated Black settlements, the State Historic Preservation Office has indicated that this house does not appear to have any historic significance. The residential character of the neighborhood will not change significantly as a result of the construction of the cul-de-sac. Cut-through traffic, which was a problem noted in the Seven Block Plan, will be eliminated by the cul-de-sac. Traffic will be routed to Kalamazoo, Butler and Hillsdale Streets, which are arterial, collector, and local streets, respectively. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of ACT-27-98, the closure of the 1000 Block of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd. COMMITTEE ACTION Finding: Based upon testimony and evidence regarding the location, character, and extent of this project, the Committee found that: 1. the project implements the Seven Block Plan, Urban Development Committee Report, February 9, 1999 Page 3 2. the Seven Block area is one of Lansing's first concentrated settlements of Black residents, 3. the cul-de-sac alignment, reduces the number of structures to be demolished from sixteen to one, 4. the State Historic Preservation Office has indicated that this house does not appear to have any historic significance. Motion: It was moved by Mr. Ruge, seconded by Ms. Keene, to recommend approval of Act-27-98, the closure of W. Lenawee east of Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd. as proposed. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0). Urban Development Committee Report, February 9, 1999 Page 4 b. Act-28-98, W Washtenaw E of MLK in 7 Block, Vacate ROW. Emil Winnicker presented the case. This was presented at a public hearing on February 2, 1999, at which one person spoke against the proposal. The case had been introduced to the Committee on January 19, 1999, when one person spoke against the proposal. This project is an implementation step in the Seven Block Plan. The Seven Block Citizens District Council, Planning Board and City Council (by ordinance) adopted the Seven Block Plan in 1993 and amended the plan in 1998. The proposed street vacation is located in the 1000 block of West Washtenaw, the site of a proposed office/commercial center. Twenty-three structures have been removed to accommodate the development. The Seven Block location is one of Lansing's first concentrated Black settlements, and the State Historic Preservation Office has indicated that two houses in the subject area have historic significance. These houses, 911 and 1003 W. Washtenaw, are being marketed by the City in search of one or more interested parties to relocate and restore the houses as a priority over demolitions. W. Washtenaw traffic is likely to flow to Kalamazoo, Butler and Allegan Streets, which are arterial and collectors, respectively. The property at 230 S. Butler uses Washtenaw for access, which can be maintained by closing the street west of the property, or by vacating the street west of Butler and providing a driveway for access. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Act-28-98, the vacation of the W. Washtenaw ROW between Butler Street and M.L.King Blvd. COMMITTEE ACTION Finding: Based upon testimony and evidence regarding the location, character, and extent of this project, the Committee found that: Urban Development Committee Report, February 9, 1999 Page 5 1. the project implements the Seven Block Plan, adopted in 1993 and amended in 1998 by the Seven Block Citizens District Council, Planning Board and City Council (by ordinance), 2. the Seven Block area is one of Lansing's first concentrated settlements of Black residents, 3. the project involves the removal of twenty-three houses, 4. the State Historic Preservation Office has indicated that two houses have historical significance, and that the City is working to relocate these houses for restoration, 5. the ROW vacation is necessary to consolidate the site for the proposed office/commercial center. Motion: It was moved by Ms. Keene, seconded by Mr. Ruge, to recommend approval of Act-28-98, the vacation of the W. Washtenaw ROW east of Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd. and west of S. Butler Street, provided that access to the property at 230 S. Butler be provided through the construction of a driveway for that property, and to encourage City efforts to market the houses at 1003 and 911 W. Washtenaw for relocation and preservation. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0). Urban Development Committee Report, February 9, 1999 Page 6 C. Act-32-98, 1850 S Washington, Vacate Alley along RR ROW. Bill Rieske presented the case. This case was tabled by the Planning Board on January 26, 1999, and was included on the UDC agenda as a follow-up measure. Mr. Rieske addressed questions raised at the Planning Board meeting. He verified that the City Attorney's term "hold harmless" was intended to be synonymous with the term "indemnify". He also verified that there is no public purpose for retaining the alley when it could be vacated, and that the railroad would not receive any land as a result of the vacation. COMMITTEE ACTION The Committee, by consensus, recommended that this matter be raised from the Planning Board table for consideration. February 11,1999,C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\WPDOCS\UDC\UDC99\990209.MIN L _ , .. s, �' �, r'fr � ._-, .. Act-27-98, 1000 Block of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., Street Closure GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: City of Lansing Development Office 316 N. Capitol Lansing, MI 48933 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Owner REQUESTED ACTION: Act 285 Review EXISTING LAND USE: Residential structures EXISTING ZONING: "C" Residential PROPOSED ZONING: No change PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: approx. 100 ft2 SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Residential S: Residential E: Capitol Commons W: R.O.W. SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "C" Residential S: "C" Residential E: "CUP" (Community Unit Plan) W: R.O.W. MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Seven Block Area Development Plan designates this area for street closure for the construction of a cul-de-sac. SPECIFIC INFORMATION This is a request by the City of Lansing Development Office to close West Lenawee Street at M.L. King Jr., Blvd. (See attached map) by constructing a cul-de-sac, "T" or other construction pursuant to the Seven Block Area Development Plan. ACT-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., - Street Closure, Pg. 2. AGENCY RESPONSES AMERITECH- No response received yet. Assessor: According to "Future Land Use" Map attached, this is more likely to require a re-platting of the area, as a re-alignment of lots and streets is indicated. BWL: See attached. Building Safety: No objection, does not appear to impact the building code. Code Compliance: No response received yet. Development: Street to be closed pursuant to Seven Block plan pursuant to in Spring 1999. Recommend owners/occupants on both sides of street be contacted and notified of proposal. MDOT/Transportation Engineer Information and input critical. Should hold public hearing on this. Fire Marshal: Approved. Historic District: The Historic District Commission recommends against the street vacation. We are preparing a nomination to the National Register of Historic Places and a request for a historic district (residential) in the area. The entire area could qualify. (See attached) Media One: No response received yet. MDOT: No comment on this proposal. Parks and Rec.: Closure of Lenawee would keep in many ways to turn this back into a better residential area. The proposed park space is of a size and shape not suitable for that type of use - leave a narrow strip for green belt and turn the rest into residential - neighborhood. Parks should not be located on busy streets. Whether the neighborhood service center is a duplication of Letts Community Center (three blocks away) we could not determine. If it is, we would recommend some other use. ACT-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., - Street Closure, Pg. 3. Police: No response received yet. Public Service: See attached. Seven Block Citizens District Council: Approved at the January 14, 1999 meeting. Trans. Engr.: See attached. ANALYSIS An Act 285 Review is conducted when the City purchases, sells or substantially changes the use of property. According to Section 125.36 of Act 285, PA 1931, as amended, the character, location and extent of the proposal must be evaluated. The following is a review of the project in accordance with the standards of the Municipal Planning Act (P.A. 285). BACKGROUND Ordinance#811, City Council passed an ordinance to provide for the creation of the Seven Block Neighborhood Development Area. 8/2/93 - City Council adopted the Seven Block Plan. The purpose of the Seven Block Plan is to revitalize the neighborhood bounded by Allegan Street on the north, Butler Blvd. on the east, St. Joseph Street on the south and the southbound lanes of M.L. King Blvd. on the west. Revitalization will include the rehabilitation of existing homes, acquisition of properties north of Kalamazoo for a neighborhood commercial center and commercial development along St. Joseph Street. The Seven Block Development Area Plan also identified several strategies to be undertaken in the development of this area. The streets in the Seven Block Area are part of a grid pattern established in the original plat of the City. However, changes in the overall patterns outside the area caused by the replatting of Capitol Commons and design of M.L. King have effectively eliminated the basic grid system. The development of Capitol Commons and the State Museum and Library, and the location of the entrances to associated parking facilities creates a substantial flow of non-local traffic through the Seven Block Area. ACT-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., - Street Closure, Pg. 4. Lenawee is aligned with the major entrance to Capitol Commons. Lenawee is designated as a local residential street and receives nonlocal traffic in excess of generally defined amounts. Much of this nonlocal traffic has also been observed moving at high rate of speed. LOCATION: The street is located in the Seven Block Neighborhood between M.L. King and S. Butler Street and is in a designated Renaissance Zone Area. The construction of a cul-de-sac in the 1000 block of Lenawee will be located on the south side of the street requiring the removal of the property at 1017 W. Lenawee and the acquisition of the two (2) vacant parcels located immediately to the west (see map). The house at 1017 W. Lenawee will be demolished. According to a letter of January 4, 1995, from the Bureau of Michigan History, State Preservation Office, there was a listing of houses that did not appear to meet the national register criteria. Among those houses, 1017 W. Lenawee was included. Pursuant to the amended Plan, most other residential structures along Lenawee Street will be rehabilitated for single family home ownership. 2-4 structures will be removed due to poor condition or overcrowding. 2-3 new single family homes may also be constructed. CHARACTER: The residential character of the neighborhood would not change as a result of the construction of the cul-de-sac and the closure of Lenawee Street. In fact, this should be an improvement to the residential area since the closed portion of Lenawee will eliminate non-local cut-through traffic. Also, the City's priority is to retain/rehab as many houses along Lenawee Street as possible for single family home ownership. In terms of the historical character of the area, the houses along Lenawee Street were among those identified in the letter of January 4, 1995 as not meeting the national register criteria for historical properties. EXTENT: The proposed closure of Lenawee will eliminate the cut-through traffic. The cul-de- sac will be constructed being constructed south of the street requiring the removal of one house, 1017 W. Lenawee, and the acquisition of the two (2) vacant parcels located immediately to the west. The residential structures along Lenawee Street will be rehabilitated for single family home ownership. A diagram of the proposed cul-de-sac is included in the report. In reference to the increase in traffic, according to David Berridge, Transportation Engineer for the City of Lansing, has indicated in his response that "the closure of Lenawee Street will increase the volume of traffic on the other local streets in the area as drivers are required to use alternate routes. Increased traffic can be expected on Hillsdale, Kalamazoo and ACT-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., - Street Closure, Pg. 5. Butler. These street can accept the additional traffic without any anticipated traffic delays or safety concerns. All of the displaced traffic would be considered normal neighborhood activity in the area." OTHER: This case was introduced to the Urban Development Committee at their January 19, 1999 meeting. At that time, concern was expressed regarding: 1). Housing Conditions and historical significance; 2). Demolition of housing in the area; 3). Volume of traffic; and 4). The number of houses being removed for the construction of the cul-de-sac. All of the concerns have been addressed in the report. The Public Hearing was held on February 2, 1999 and there was one person speaking in opposition to the closure of Lenawee Street out of concern for demolition of housing that might occur. See attached memo. The City is implementing the Seven Block Plan and this closure of the street is pursuant to the Seven Block Plan which was approved by Planning Board and Lansing City Council, 1993. Also, residents in the area are aware of the plan and activities related to the plan. As a matter of fact, the Seven Block Citizens District Council was not only instrumental in the development of this plan but also supported the recent amendments. In addition, the group is informed of activities related to the plan as well as provide input into decisions regarding the area. The Seven Block Citizens District Council approved Act-27-98, 1000 Block of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., Street Closure at their January 14, 1999 meeting. SUMMARY The street closure is located in the 1000 block of West Lenawee. The residential character of the neighborhood will not change significantly as a result of the construction of the cul-de-sac. There will be one house, 1017 W. Lenawee, demolished for the cul-de-sac. According to the State Historic Preservation Office, this house does not appear to have any historic significance. In fact, this should be an improvement to the residential area and considered a generally accepted traffic calming technique. The Act 285 Review process is in compliance with the Seven Block Development Plan. The Seven Block Citizens District Council, Planning Board and City Council adopted the plan in 1993 and amended the plan in 1998. A public hearing was held on Tuesday, February 2, 1999. ACT-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., - Street Closure, Pg. 6 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of ACT-27-98, the closure of the 1000 Block of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd. 33 u1j" Iyv' yo• 7f.s' 8].S' 4) rrs•5' h — l7 0 a I10 B 7 6 5 4 OIO � Zh1 � a a o w 13 14 15 1 17 18 19 20bLwu 3 I h a �'mo15L 9 A abf ` ' hon+ i ( e hab 21 11#,f! a s 33 3 ' 00' E3' S3' GG H•I' !i 2L' 94' +� ,� lolo ro�� logo _ /008 Iooil I000 non /if ' !zo 4l8 tra q►L 9ro qoto qoo �ea- � { Srdex,�+oQ 54f�ch de-mac. W. - LENAWEE IOt7 11017, l0 5 looli qz7 121 q17 '115 1113 Qoq I , VAC 33' " Ir 33' 95.5' 7o' I � IT 311 301 4 I2 2 3 q j ! 1 M � � ` � ern.k�1•- F 10 5 4 27 h 1-Z 4, � N 5,� r 13 I 14 I 15 16 I7 18 19 - fill Its io zo /ooG �S 33 rr 33 ys• 7t.5' #4 92q 9zz fit, 9iy O 90�W. HILLSDA•LE /01 a/f /007 /oo/ US 9t3 9/7 l/ 109 TITI r! r rl 97' y4' tzr Lt' re 7y,tf' ,.•'� . . tot a 0� Zy ' I Iq t �. + ,� t9I Z0% 'ell DUI Z�I 23 Qyl fit CONCEPTUAL PLAN ALLEGAN 1 aall�ci �1S pti 9cZ . FUTURE LAND USE PLAN I • � •L WASHTENAW OFFICE WITH MIX RESIDENTIAL USE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CENTER a J n o �o - 2 KALAMAZOO Toos 171,91s 0 • • - Uw dr ca PARK AND NEIGHBORHOOD �- I SERVICES CENTER fo rt LENAWEE REHABILITATION 01 STING HOMES W] NEW HOUSING DEV.1 StJ - S3F J 7 r 4[fsea CHURCH. SITE E%PAND COMMERCIAL DEV. t- 1 WATER8U GHT BOARD OF WATER AND LIGHT MEMO January 4, 1999 TO: Doris Witherspoon, Senior Planner Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development FROM: Rosemary Sullivan, Administrative Secretary oe_r--- (517) 371-6034 RE: West Lenawee Street at Martin Luther King Junior Boulevard Request by the City of Lansing Development to close the street by constructing a cul-de-sac, "T", of other construction pursuant to the Seven Block Area Development Plan. CUSTOMER PROJECTS Electric jNo objections to the proposed vacation of the right of way. The existing i distribution in the area serves only the properties to be redeveloped. t Contact Persons. Bob Strobel 371-6082 l: Water BWL water available according to Policies and Procedures. Contact BWL for water conflicts or disconnects. 371-6494 Contact Person: Terry Robison PLANNING AND SYSTEM INTEGRITY Water The BWL has water main in Lenawee that must be protected by an easement to the West to the connection at MLK Contact Person: Randy Roost 371-6114 01-09-02.Goc TOTAL P.02 CITY of ]LANSING INTEROFFICE COMMUNICATION To: Doris Witherspoon, Senior Planner From: Jane D.yAg_ma,Puhl? .service- Ilepart. Rnt Engi neeri_ng. _. ._--• _ Date : January 4 , 1999 G� Subject: ACT-27-98 , Cul-de-sac, 1000 Block of Lenawee at M. L-King We have reviewed the request by the City of Lansing to close west. Lenawee Street at M. L. King Jr . Blvd. and construct a Cul-de-sac at that location. We make the following COIRMents . 1 . A turnaround having an outside road pavement diameter of ninety feet and a street right of way diameter of 120 feet should be constructed. Thiz is in accordance with Paragraph 1236 . 03 (q) of. the city Ordinances . A "T" or ether type turnaround construction will neat be permitted. 2 . Design plans should include any necessary storm and sanitary sewer construction and provide service: leads to the new lots . Tfiey should also include the abandonment of existing public sanitary main and private services no longer needed. This may eliminate the need for a utility easement between the west end of the cul-de-sac and M.L. King, Jr . Blvd. It you have any questions or comments, please conrac.t me -at )#4460 . Thank you. 1•p' ivJ1 'C CITY OF LANSING N Public Service Department Transportation Division ,� Interoffice Communication ICHIGP TO: Doris Witherspoon, Senior Planner FROM: David A. Berridge, Transportation Engineer DATE: December 28, 1998 .t�/ 6-1- SUBJECT: ACT-27-98: Closure of West Lenawee Street at M.L. King, Jr. Blvd. The Transportation Division has reviewed the subject request and has the following comments. 1 ) Lenawee Street presently provides local access to single and multi-family dwellings in the area. It also has a direct median connection from southbound Martin Luther King, Jr. Boulevard. 2) The closure of Lenawee Street will increase the volume of traffic on the other local streets in the area as drivers are required to use alternate routes. Increased traffic can be expected on Hillsdale, Kalamazoo and Butler. These streets can accept the additional traffic without any anticipated traffic delays or safety concerns. All of this displaced traffic would be considered normal neighborhood activity in the area. 3) The Transportation Division reserves the opportunity to comment on specific design issues during the plan review process. 4) It appears that this project can proceed as planned with the proper planning and design review considerations. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. file: Lenawee Street C:\Corel\Office7\WPWin7\DATA\PLANNING\act-27-98.witherspoon.wpd To: The Lansing Planning Board & the City Council From: The Historic District Commission Re : ACT-27-98 The Lansing Historic District Commission recommends against this street vacation. It may be consistent with the plan but the plan is not working. The stated purpose of the plan is revitilization of the area. What is mostly happening is demolition of the area. The Seven Block neighborhood is our last stand as Lansing' s traditional black neighborhood. When these homes are gone, house by house, and street vacation by street vacation, the homes, the social fabric and the people will have been oblitered. We are currently working on a nomination to the National Register of Historic Places for the house at the northwest corner of Butler and Washtenaw. We have received a request for an historic district from property owners on Butler and Allegan. The entire Seven Block has the capacity to be made a thriving neighborhood through the tool of a historic district. The rationale for this street vacation is to create a cul-de-sac to eliminate "cut through traffic" on the street. No traffic counts seem to exist . Cut through traffic exists in fully functional residential areas in Lansing' s downtown. The rationale for this street vacation should cause the closure of W. Sycamore and W. Chestnut as both street lead into entrances to State parking ramps, the closure of Ionia, Shiawassee and Allegan Streets as entrance/exit streets to the CBD. The proposal (ACT- 27-98) to vacate Washtenaw only to use Butler as an entrance to a proposed office development increases traffic in the residential area of Seven Block. All of W. Butler experiences cut through traffic. Cut through traffic is normal in downtown Lansing and downtowns everywhere . Speed is a different problem. All who live downtown would like to see inexpensive traffic calming and traffic enforcement that tickets speeds even when they speed less than 15 MPH greater than the speed limit . Cul-de-sacs are not a normal part of Lansing oir its downtown. The traditional grid patter dominates . Cul-de-sacs are a feature of suburbia. People who prefer the amenities of suburbia will not be interested in living downtown. Cul-de-sacs are expensive . This cul-de-sac will take out further housing in our last stand as Lansing' s traditional black neighborhood. This street is still highly intact . The money would be better spent in raising the local option amount we currently limit housing rehabilitations . C. CUL-DE-SACS AND STREET CLOSURES The primary effect of street closures and cul- de-sacs is to eliminate through traffic rather than to reduce speed. There may be some speed reduction because higher speed through traffic is discouraged from using the neighborhood streets. This is true particularly where a pattern of closures is carefully de- signed to accomplish this end. Cul-de-sacs can be placed at an intersection or at midblock. The midblock application can be effectively used where it is desired to restrict traffic in a residential section while allowing access to a high traffic generator adjacent to the residential area. Among the disadvantages of cul-de-sacs are: • Restricted access to the neighborhood by service and emergency vehicles. • Problems with vandalism and maintenance. • Traffic is often transferred to neighboring streets, generating new problems and complaints. When cul-de-sacs are used, adequate turnaround areas must be provided at the end and proper signs installed to warn traffic of the dead-end. Reference: 8, 28 D. TRAFFIC DIVERTERS 1. Diagonal Diverters Diagonal diverters are barriers placed di- ' agonally across an intersection. This con- verts a normal four-legged intersection into — _ two separate roadways, each with a 900 turn. The purpose is to discourage "through" traffic by requiring it to take a circuitous route through the neighborhood. . Speeds of vehicles are only affected in the p Y immediate vicinity of the diverter because 16 i i INCRETE SIDEWALK 1020 1016 1010 1008 38,5' 33 _ 2.3' _ _ 66' CURB & GUTTER LENAWEE o- - 2 32' 34' 33' 66' O � 1 1 RO OSED 5' SID I PROPOS D ROW MDOT ROW WIDTH VARIES PROPOSED CUL-DE-SAC Act-28-98, 900 - 1000 Block of W. Washtenaw between Butler & M.L. King Jr., Blvd., Street Vacation GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: City of Lansing Development Office 316 N. Capitol Lansing, MI 48933 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Owner REQUESTED ACTION: Act 285 Review EXISTING LAND USE: Residential structures EXISTING ZONING: "C Residential PROPOSED ZONING: No change at this time. However, in the near future, the area would be rezoned to "F" Commercial for the development of the Office/Commercial Center. PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: approx. 22,893 ft2 SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Residential S: Residential E: Residential W: Residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "C" Residential S: "C" Residential E: "C" Residential W: "C" Residential MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Seven Block Area Development Plan designates this street closed for the development of the neighborhood commercial center. SPECIFIC INFORMATION This is a request by the City of Lansing Development Office to vacate the street in the . 900-1000 Blk of W. Washtenaw between Butler Blvd. and M.L. King Jr., Blvd. (See ACT-28-98, 900 -1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw at Butler & M.L. King Jr., Blvd., Pg. 2. attached map) for the construction of an Office/ Commercial Center pursuant to the revised Seven Block Area Development Plan. AGENCY RESPONSES AMERITECH: A proposed description for the vacation should be on file at the Planning Office. Assessor: Provided Planning Department with a proposed description for vacation earlier this fall. See attached letter. BWL: See attached. Building Safety: No objection, does not appear to impact the building code. Code Compliance: No response received yet. Development: Street to be vacated for commercial/office development to commence in Spring 1999. Recommend public hearing notification to all adjacent property owners (City, MDOT, Eyde). input from utility companies important. Fire Marshal: Approved. Historic District Commission: The HDC recommends against this street vacation. We are preparing a nomination to the National Register of Historic Places and a request for a historic district adjacent to this location (residential). The entire area could qualify (See attached report) Media One: No response received yet. MDOT: No comment on this proposal. Parks and Rec.: The vacation of Washtenaw fits in well with shown concept except the Commercial Center might better be serviced off MILK than Butler (keeps Butler residential) One comment at Development Plan -the Park and Neighborhood Service Area is of a size and configuration that doesn't work well as a park - Residential lots should be extended and added leaving a narrow green belt. ACT-28-98, 900 -1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw at Butler & M.L. King Jr., Blvd., Pg. 3. Police: No response received yet. Public Service: See attached. Seven Block Citizens District Council: Approved at the January 14, 1999 meeting. Trans. Engr.: See attached. ANALYSIS An Act 285 Review is conducted when the City purchases, sells or substantially changes the use of property. According to Section 125.36 of Act 285, PA 1931, as amended, the character, location and extent of the proposal must be evaluated. The following is a review of the project in accordance with the standards of the Municipal Planning Act (P.A. 285). BACKGROUND Ordinance#811, City Council passed an ordinance to provide for the creation of the Seven Block Neighborhood Development Area. 8/2/93 - City Council adopted the Seven Block Plan. The purpose of the Seven Block Plan is to revitalize the neighborhood bounded by Allegan Street on the north, Butler Blvd. on the east, St. Joseph Street on the south and the southbound lanes of M.L. King Blvd. on the west. Revitalization will include the rehabilitation of existing homes, acquisition of properties north of Kalamazoo for a neighborhood commercial center and commercial development along St. Joseph Street. The Seven Block Development Area Plan also identified several strategies to be undertaken in the development of this area. The streets in the Seven Block Area are part of a grid pattern established in the original plat of the City. However, changes in the overall patterns outside the area caused by the replatting of Capitol Commons and design of M.L. King have effectively eliminated the basic grid system. The development of Capitol Commons and the State Museum and Library, and the location of the entrances to associated parking facilities creates a substantial flow of non-local traffic through the Seven Block Area. ACT-28-98, 900 -1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw at Butler & M.L. King Jr., Blvd., Pg. 4. According to the Seven Block Plan, Washtenaw is aligned directly with the entrance to the State Museum and Library, which is designated as a local residential street and receives nonlocal traffic in excess generally defined amounts. Much of this nonlocal traffic has also been observed moving at high rate of speed. LOCATION: The property is located in the Seven Block Area (bounded by Allegan-N, St. Joseph -S, Butler-E, M.L. King Jr.,) and is in a designated Renaissance Zone Area. The vacation in the 900-1000 block of Washtenaw between Butler and M.L. King, Jr., is more specifically described as: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 19, BLOCK 11, BUSH, BUTLER AND SPARROWS ADDITION THENCE WEST 544.5 FT TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 12 THENCE SOUTH 82.5 FT. TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 11, BLOCK 10, BUSH, BUTLER AND SPARROWS ADDITION, THENCE EAST 546.5 FT TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 4 THENCE NORTH 82.5 FT TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, CITY OF LANSING, INGHAM COUNTY, MICHIGAN. T4N, R2W. CHARACTER: Washtenaw Street is considered a local residential street. The development of the Office Commercial Center, as proposed in the Seven Block Development Plan, would eliminate the excess nonlocal "high rate of speed" traffic in this area. This area will need to be rezoned to "F" Commercial as well as vacated to facilitate the construction of an Office/ Commercial Center pursuant to the Seven Block Area Development Plan, as amended. All properties in the 900 and 1000 Block of the portion of W. Washtenaw proposed to be vacated are currently owned by the City or proposed developer of the site (see map). The character of the area will change in accordance with the Seven Block Plan. EXTENT: The construction of an Office/ Commercial Center is pursuant to the Seven Block Area Development Plan, as amended, June 1998. The Seven Block Plan identified the street vacation for this specific purpose. Properties in the 900 -1000 Block of the portion of W. Washtenaw proposed to be vacated are currently owned by either the City or the proposed developer of the site. The vacation of this street is pursuant with the Seven Block Area Development Plan. ACT-28-98, 900 -1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw at Butler & M.L. King Jr., Blvd., Pg. 5. OTHER: The Seven Block Plan revision was approved by the Citizens District Council in June 1998 and basically addressed changing "neighborhood" to "office" commercial district; demolish properties south of Kalamazoo only for the following reasons.- relieve an overcrowded condition as established in the plan, dilapidated condition, land use change. Also, the houses on Lenawee street would be rehabilitated for single family ownership with only one house removed to construct the proposed cul-de-sac. The two properties at 911 W. Washtenaw and 1003 W. Washtenaw have been identified by the Michigan Historic Preservation Office as meeting the criterion for listing in the National Register of Historic Places on architectural grounds. The two structures will be moved or removed to accommodate development. The City is currently working with the State Historic Preservation Office to find a developer to move the structures to a nearby site for restoration. The City has offered to provide nearby lots on which to place the structures for a nominal fee to any party who will commit and demonstrate the capacity to carry out the project. Also, there was a concern regarding accessibility to the property located at 230 S. Butler(at Washtenaw). It should be noted that the City was aware of that and did not propose to vacate that portion of the street so that the resident can continue to have access. However, the vacation should be subject to the establishment of an access for the property at 230 S. Butler. A proposed driveway for accessibility is suggested which would allow the property owner to gain access onto the property at 230 S. Butler along with his other properties. The Public Hearing was held on February 2, 1999 and there was one person speaking in opposition to the vacation of Washtenaw Street. See attached memo. The City is implementing the Seven Block Plan and the vacation of Washtenaw street is pursuant to the Seven Block Plan which was approved by Planning Board and Lansing City Council, 1993. Also, residents in the area are aware of the plan and activities related to the plan. As a matter of fact, the Seven Block Citizens District Council was not only instrumental in the development of this plan but also supported the recent amendments. In addition, the group is informed of activities related to the plan as well as provide input into decisions regarding the area. The Seven Block Citizens District Council approved Act-28-98, 900-1000 Block of W. Washtenaw, Street Vacation, at their January 14, 1999 meeting. ACT-28-98, 900 -1000 Blk. of W. Washtenaw at Butler & M.L. King Jr., Blvd., Pg. 6. SUMMARY The street vacation is located in the 900-1000 block of W. Washtenaw. The character of the area will change in accordance with the Seven Block Plan. The vacation of this street is pursuant with the Seven Block Area Development Plan and those properties in the 900 -1000 Block of the portion of W. Washtenaw proposed to be vacated are currently owned by the City or proposed developer of the site. The City is working with the State to resolve the issues surrounding the two (2) historically identified properties at 911 and 1003 W. Washtenaw. Also, the concern regarding accessibility at 230 S. Butler has also been addressed. The City was aware of the accessibility issue and did not propose to vacate that portion of the street so that the resident can continue to have access. However, the vacation should be subject to the establishment of an access for the property at 230 S. Butler. A proposed driveway for accessibility is suggested which would allow the property owner to gain access onto the property at 230 S. Butler along with his other properties. The Act 285 Review process is in compliance with the Seven Block Development Plan. A public hearing was held on Tuesday, February 2, 1999. The Seven Block Citizens District Council approved Act-28-98, 900-1000 block of W. Washtenaw, at their January 14, 1999 meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of ACT-28-98, 900 - 1000 Block of W. Washtenaw between Butler & M.L. King Jr., Blvd., Street Vacation. To: The Lansing Planning Board & the City Council From: The Historic District Commission Re: ACT-28-98 - Washtenaw Street The Lansing Historic District Commission recommends against this street vacation. Office development is inconsistent with the plan. The proposal to use Washtenaw as an entrance to the office area from Butler is inconsistent with the plan and brings excessive traffic into the surrounding residential neighborhood. The house at the northwest corner of Washtenaw and Butler has been determined to qualify for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. We are currently assisting the owner with a national register nomination. Property owners on Butler and Allegan have indicated that they wish to be in an historic district. The Seven Block neighborhood is our last stand as Lansing's traditional black neighborhood. When these homes are gone, house by house, and street vacation by street vacation, the homes, the social fabric and the people will have been obliterated. Two small houses on Washtenaw have been determined by the State of Michigan to be historic and are unique representatives of their building style in this City. However, we have been advised that the Development Division sold the underlying real estate and the houses have been offered for sale, severed from the land. This is no solution. They will ultimately be demolished because of the cost of moving a house. These two small single story houses admittedly are not in the best of repair but they can be made into handsome homes with the assistance of the City CDBG funds . The minimal square footage of these two houses corresponds to the size of single family homes for the elderly. Elderly residents of Seven Block have long stated their interest to remain in the neighborhood but would like single family homes . The incomes of these elderly people, even when they were working, would never have been sufficient to obtain a traditional mortgage. This street vacation is justified as being based on the plan, the plan, the plan. But, simple observation of the neighborhood reveals that the plan is not working. It needs to be changed. The local option policy that the CDBG grant will NOT fix a house in Seven Block if the cost exceeds $35, 000 is not rational . If the estimated repair cost exceeds $35, 000 we will ONLY acquire it for fair market value (est $20, 000 to $50, 000+) , pay two years of relocation costs (est. $6, 250 to $23, 500+) , demolition costs (est $10, 800 to $16, 000) plus seeding. This policy needs to be changed. Is it any wonder that the residents want to be bought out if we will not fix their house? mr. Eyde desires to buy the property and build something, anything, out of sheer self defense because of the economic consequences of the continued blight of Seven Block on his property at Capitol Commons . This is greatly understandable . Mr. Eyde has stated that he agrees that Seven Block has not been marketable because it is a very small area that is a jumble of zoning types . The entire Seven Block needs to be either residential or office . Except for the long established BRD there is no currently commercial USE in Seven Block. Mr. Eyde proposes to build offices, not a neighborhood commercial center. This is inconsistent with the plan. The vacation of Washtenaw proposes to have traffic enter the office development from Butler rather than King. The properties on Washtenaw are residential and their owners wish to keep them as residential . The properties on Allegan have been rezoned to D-1 but are used as single family homes . The owner of most of the homes on Allegan attempted to sell them for offices - no offer was received. We, frankly, do not believe that there is any market for offices in the Seven Block. It is too far removed from any aspect of the Central Business District . Office tenants need amenities such as restaurants, some stores and proximity to other office activities . If anyone is pinning their hopes on office development in the Seven Block area to the proposed Supreme Court building to be built in the current dirt parking lot bounded by King, Ionia, Butler and Allegan they have been mislead. No lawyers will ever want to huddle around the Supreme Court or Court of Appeals . These are appellate courts . No trials occur. Lawyers generally appear one short time before these courts on a case . Lawyers who appear before these two courts exist throughout the State . They serve their clients and cannot predict appeals . Only a few "silk stocking" firms retain attorneys specifically to handle the appellate needs of their clients : these firms will not be relocating to Lansing' s Seven Block area. We wish Mr. Eyde well in all of his endeavors . He has a fine reputation as a contributing member of this community. We wish he would build compatible housing on the property he has recently acquired in Seven Block. HN-UD 77 14;J1 rmui i-ruoL-i-. JCRv1 - -- - --- --..- u- �- CITY of LANSING INTEROFFICE COMMUNICATION To: Doris Witherspoon, Senior Planner From: Jane Dykema, Public Service Department, Engineering r Date: January 4 , 1999 Subject: ACT-28-98, Vacation of 900-1000 Block of Washtenaw we have reviewed the request by the City of Lansing to vacate rtie :street in the 900-1000 blocks of Washtenaw between Butler Blvd. cirri M. L. King Jr. Blvd, and. make the following comments . 1 . Design plans ' should include any necessary stbrm and sanitary sewer construction and provide service leads to the proposed buildings . Plans should also include the abandonment of existinc3 pubiic; sanitary main and private servicets no longer needed. Utiiities at this location include a 12" sdnitZLry public nip Lii and .i 12" storm sewer. The Public Service Department will requi r•r2 u utiiity easement for these sewers . It you have any questions or comments, please c:uritact me at #4460 . Thank you. y�N S I �G CITY OF LANSING Public Service Department Transportation Division Interoffice Communication rcHIG TO: Doris Witherspoon, Senior Planner FROM: David A. Berridge, Transportation Engineer DATE: December 28, 1998 Le- 0 SUBJECT: ACT-28-98: Vacation of 900-1000 Blocks of West Washtenaw Street The Transportation Division has reviewed the subject request and has the following comments. 1 ) Washtenaw Street presently provides local access to single and multi-family dwellings in the area. It is also the secondary access to the Michigan State Historical Museum and Library. 2) The closure of Washtenaw Street will increase the volume of traffic on the other local streets in the area as drivers are required to use alternate routes. Increased traffic can be expected on Allegan, Kalamazoo and Butler. These streets can accept the additional traffic without any anticipated traffic delays or safety concerns. 3) The Transportation Division reserves the opportunity to comment on specific design issues during the plan review process. 4) It appears that this project can proceed as planned with the proper planning and design review considerations. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. file: Washtenaw Street C:\Corel\Office7\WPWin7\DATA\PLANNING\act-28-98.witherspoon.wpd Or �f,:ff c:+c Cyr: •tY,' :a Ct. >. rif=.� '�C;ti ` sir•: .i Yf. 11, •' ..'. .AI '.. Y Tr •c3-S .';:' I `►•J t� i.t»`Y{ uir,�.l..+ (y�,�QSrJ t�j+ � d I,r; � �.�r s L I _L ."F� L.� i��,CN �,�,�.yr-�r'.1r'L��• ,.a�+a�.7� ��i o►��.Tyti��+�d�ai�Vi'��L wcli�YdC LRJ.iLti��/ IGia+E�t='�ieG.�_ - •_w V ..,M ry`r�-Sg•�t�8.•ry FJ , �*� ��`� t` J.t ` �9�� rh• �'� �h4 ' �}�f •L � •- Z l��;{," ! ai yV��f'�r:' `�'' '�:lj'I''d•• i �}: � �•.: � ar1Ef `'.l:.:i"�• t .F ��+�' ��,*-�2 L4.-,•. 'T.�'.'f r"!{+},s+•�f'�7 . •{�• C :�r .1�, .: �. t;• e. .i r f•� �}:� ) t •r.'• y f �v �i k;.i•y. 11 3t lr <'•. ,: � � I �d'r-•r" `..y1� y '�`. rt I � ��s. �"�A� t''s J;, 'a� t�,�as� L�,. �;il,•� •.�y. �' tit ��. � • �i �•r 4; t -.'T { ad�7"i; ': a 4 t � I �•.- 1 S r :- pi Y4 Fij:'{u....••�a•a q �� 3.s Ap J r +� ��!�' •t: �y}�'t yf: fi.� s• .�11[♦ 1 t pV� 6 ii � c... It.�t Sf '•t' �2.�41•• '/ n ,•,(�?!��•1"M Y�✓i 4 A� �.) ��11�,�. {p,�.I�'�4� �`�� f yM"� :� �YZ rii�'r ��f` _��i`��'•�'t�7:^��tp �. Brij (� y• NCly,: 't• �'A, '��`� ?-l�_.)r � f V , J ' i MAN T �is r. v � � � � 'b•CFj;ni AL AA rL w, >A ,4•:�ru�. .��$ 3�'32'-'"✓,�� •,�i '�,'a° .V • 7 a. h:s �e:�.`J' •i�,ti �t-r' 1'kx ry r tip--{Z�-�� "+•'i•C i �; r r6 �.- ';:., � � -„ Nr z`�`, , '• r � �>.; �"i t t 1 r: ��r C,r��7I �3�sy.!-V�."�°'�•I �"�) �f� 'fl.:� y' � ��t=~ I � I , ). 1 r 115 4V di a 71 VQ Vk Tq Act-32-98 Vacation of Alley along RR ROW ADDENDUM TO ACT-32-98 REPORT The Act-32-98 case was tabled at the January 26, 1999 Planning Board meeting to answer and resolve the following questions members had on the requested vacation of the unimproved alley along the Conrail RR tracks and Bank Street. Attached is the response from Jack Roberts, Jr. Deputy City Attorney. Answers to these questions were made based on my phone conversation with Mr. Roberts on 2/2/99. Why vacate instead of lease or license? It does not make sense to retain this unimproved alley, if the City has not been using it. Utilities may be retained in the strip of land with the appropriate easements. It is best if the City vacates the alley to eliminate any possible liability in having to maintain it. What is their any relevance to the different language used between the staff recommendation of granting indemnification and Jack Roberts' recommendation to execute a release and hold harmless...? There is no difference between these recommendations. The phrases are often used interchangeably. The important point of this, is that the applicant grant indemnification to the City prior to the City's vacation of the alley. The staff recommendation found in the 1/19/99 UDC Report was made prior to Jack Roberts 1/20/99 memo (attached). Does the Railroad get a piece of the alley, once vacated? No. As stated in comments from the City Assessor's Office and confirmed by Jack Roberts, the entirety of the alley, if vacated, would go to the owners of Lot 5, Block 18, Park Place (Sub). This alley was dedicated for the use of the Public by the Proprietor of the plat of Park Place. Upon vacation, the fee of the alley would pass to the proprietor, or his devisees, within the plat. The Railroad was merely NOTED as to location on the plat. It is not assigned a Block or Lot number, and is not a part of the plat, because the plat proprietor did not own any of the railroad and could not include it with any of the platted lands. Therefore, the Railroad would have no claims to any part of the alley through the City's act of vacation. Further, the mere encroachment alone, of the structure at#1805 onto the alley, has no bearing on the passage of the fee to Lot 5 upon vacation. Nor does the encroachment mean that the owner of the building has owned any of the alley encroached upon. That PLANNING BOARD PAGE 2 ownership is only surrendered by the Public when the alley is officially vacated. Summary: The City has the opportunity to place an underutilized piece of property on the tax rolls and to have the property added to a commercially zoned piece of land, providing a larger buildable space for the redevelopment of this corner of Washington and Mt. Hope Avenue. Therefore, based on testimony and evidence on the location, character and extent of the proposal, that no public purpose was found for the unimproved alley and In light of these comments from Jack Roberts, the recommendation is as follows: Recommendation Staff recommends Act-32-98, the vacation of the 16.5' wide by 206.77' long unimproved alley, be approved and attached to the corner parcel, located at the northwest corner of S. Washington Avenue and West Mt. Hope. subject to.. 1. The reservation of easements for existing utilities as necessary; 2. The applicant working with Consumers Power to address concerns of how close any new construction can be to their gas line; 3. A baseline environmental of the subject alley as appropriate; and 4. The current abutting owner of Lot#5, which is the corner property, execute a release and hold harmless in favor of the City for the environmental conditions of the alley upon vacation. CITY OF LANSING A�� v9� nt of Law Departure ��p a N� 0y interoff ice MEMORANDUM To: DONNA WYNANT,SENIOR PLANNER From: JOHN M. ROBERT CITY ATTORNEY Subject: ACT-32-98NACATION OF ALLEY RIGHT OF WAY Date: January 20, 1999 As per your January 15, 1999 fax request, I have reviewed the comments of John Grannel and Dave Tijerina of the Assessor's Office. Mr. Grannel's comment regarding the effect of a street/ alley vacation pursuant to the Subdivision Control Act is accurate. For your reference, attached is the pertinent citation from the Michigan Title Standards covering the subject of division of vacated streets/alleys between abutting lots. Based upon the prior use of the property adjoining the alley, it would be prudent for the City to request that the current abutting owner execute a release and hold harmless in favor of the City for the environmental condition of the alley upon vacation. Finally, to the extent that the area subject to vacation will not have a building placed thereon, there should be consideration of whether the City would benefit by the retention of a utility easement in the vacated right of way. If the City is not otherwise retaining the utility easement, there should be described that portion of the right of way that remains subject to the existing Consumers Energy easement. I trust this answers your inquiry. Please feel free to contact me if you have any other questions. JMR/sp Attachment FAS vryWntath32-96vr=iM pd s; STANDARD 13.4 VACATION OF STREETS AND ALLEYS IN A RECORDED PLAT STANDARD: AFTER ENTRY OF A JUDGMENT OF A CIRCUIT COURT VACATING ALL OR PART OF A STREET OR ALLEY WHICH WAS DEDICATED AS PART OF A RECORDED PLAT,TITLE TO THE VACATED PORTION VESTS IN THE OWNERS OF THE ABUTTING LOTS IN THE PLAT AND BECOMES PART OF THE ABUT- TING LOTS. IF A DEDICATED STREET OR ALLEY IN A RECORDED PLAT IS VACATED AND THE STREET OR ALLEY IS ABUTTED ON OPPOSITE SIDES BY LOTS IN THE SAME PLAT, THE CENTER LINE OF THE VACATED STREET OR 1 ALLEY BECOMES THE BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN THE LOTS. IF THE VA- CATED PORTION OF A DEDICATED STREET OR ALLEY IS ABUTTED ON ONLY ONE SIDE BY LOTS IN THE PLAT, ALL OF THE VACATED PORTION BECOMES PART OF THE ABUTTING LOTS. A DESCRIPTION OF A LOT BY ITS LOT NUM- BER INCLUDES ANY PORTION OF A VACATED STREET OR ALLEY THAT HAS BECOME PART OF THE LOT. Problem A: Lot 16 of a recorded plat measures 50 feet from north to south, and is abutted on the south by a dedicated 60 foot wide street, south of which lies another lot in the same subdivision.The street was vacated in its en- tirety by a circuit court judgment. Subsequently, Mary Doe, the owner of lot 16, conveyed"lot 16"to Richard Roe. Did Roe acquire marketable title to lot 16 including the adjoining north half of the vacated street.? Answer. Yes.After the vacation,title to the north half of the vacated street vested in Mary Doe,as the owner of lot 16.The north half of the vacated street became part of lot 16.Thus, the description"lot 16"is equivalent to"lot 16 including the north one-half of the vacated street adjoining the south side thereof." Problem B: Same facts as in Problem A except the deed described"the south 40 feet t. of lot 16."Did Roe acquire marketable title to the north 30 feet of the va- cated street and the south 10 feet of lot 16 as originally platted? Answer. Yes. After the vacation of the street, the north 30 feet thereof became part of lot 16 so that lot 16 had a north and south dimension of 80 feet. Consequently, the south 40 feet conveyed is measured from the center of the vacated street and thus includes the north 30 feet of the vacated street and the south 10 feet of the original lot 16. ! i 848.5 849.5 20 PARKING 1 34 37 P9 35 30 ' J $,$0 /7 29 El ❑ 849./ PP I I /6 W LLS WALLS 26 Fj 2P P3 � /8 846./I 20 I PO 849.0 . I 30 26 �F d� LLLJJJ I I I 3/ WALL l 957.9 29 2/ � I /e I (� 33 I ❑ 1 L w 1 32 I P5 P7 A h 819-9 z/ 855.9 / WALL P7 842.8 r 7 8573 / 30 CO 30 �` i : 3 /6 855.8 853.3 34 Q 5-3 /3 853.7 • 853.0 - /8 2/ 855.6 �6 855.3 36 855.9 32 34 /7 /' X lY B55.B 1)6 • j' i tt_ It � 855.8 - _ r '^1 vPARK�IG� - — — - � � r: - R _ . � pia- — - - .,- „�,. - �n.. - _... - _b-�— -. -. - �. � 1 .._�pb. _� � .... .. J - 4 - _ s:-' � - _- i - 1 — . ,` — - _ _ � - - - - - — i -, ti i << , �,�, .., r - -- - -. •�� . _. - .. �5F r _ _ ,. .�- ,_ f S: ' - •e .-.. _ ` R, 5 ...i .. .� - .. . J �� - -- ; _ _� . - ,,.. r �. _ .�_ -- - ;� �--- -... � _. c .. _ .__ .. - — - _ - - APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY APRIL 20, 1999 Draft 041999 Approved 042099 To Clerk 052099 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 P.M., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall r- 124 West Michigan Avenue Tuesday, March 2, 1999 1. OPENING SESSION: Chairman Ruge called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. A. Roll Call. Present- Frederick, Keene, Miller, Nischan, Smith; Ruge. Six members present, one excused absence; one vacant seat. B. Excused Absences: Garry Goolsby requested an excused absence, motion to grant; voice vote; unanimous; granted. C. Introductions. Ms. Eleanor Love, Planning Manager, introduced staff present, James A. Ruff, Zoning Administrator, Donna Wynant, Senior Planner, and Louise H. Christian, Recording Secretary. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mr. Miller recommended that SLU-25-98, scheduled to be taken up during recess by the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, be discharged by the Committee and taken up in the Committee of the Whole this evening. Only two members of the Zoning and Ordinance Committee are present. With that change, the agenda was approved. 3. COMMUNICATIONS A. Memo to Harry Hepler representing Trooper Jake L.L.C. from Lisa Carey, Program Manager, Old Town Main Street, RE: Act-29-98, 700 Blk. Sheridan Street, Vacation or Sale of ROW, dated March 2, 1999, in support. B. Letter to the Planning Dept. RE- Z-2-99, NE Corner West Mt. Hope and Todd Avenues, "D-1" Professional Office District to "F" Commercial District received March 1, 1999 from Rex J. and Dianne C. Hatt, 1828 Todd Avenue, in opposition. C. Letter to the Planning Office RE: Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District dated February 25, 1998 from Craig Feher and Bonnie L. Feher requesting withdrawal of petition tabling Z-19-98 and attaching letter of agreement, Parviz Souroushian to Mr. Craig Feher dated February 24, 1999. D. Letter to James A. Ruff RE: Z-19-98, dated February 24, 1998 from Donald Wilson requesting to rescind tabling of Z-19-98 and completion of rezoning. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 2 E. Letter to Mr. Jim Sturdevant RE: Act-29-98, dated February 26, 1999 from CSX Transportation, in favor of closure. F. Letter to Mr. Sam Quon Re: Z-2-99, dated March 1, 1999 from Susan M. Carter, Exec. Dir., Lansing Area Safety Council, in support. G. Phone call to Sam Quon RE: Z-2-99, from Calvin Kern, Moores Park Neighborhood Association dated March 2, 1999 from Calvin Kern, Moores Park Neighborhood Association, in support. H. Phone call to Sam Quon RE: SLU-2-99, SE Cor. Jolly and Pleasant Grove Roads, Governmental Structure (Fire Station) in the "F" Commercial District dated February 22, 1999 from Mr. Fred Wicker, in support. I. Letter to A Complete Rental RE: Z-2-99 dated February 17, 1999 from Dwight Rich Middle School in thanks for donation of equipment. J. Letter To Whom It May Concern (A Complete Rental) RE: Z-2-99 dated February 23, 1999 from Elmhurst School in thanks for Hurricane Mitch victims donation. K. Letter to City of Lansing Planning/Zoning Department RE: Z-2-99 dated February 18, 1999 from David S. Ludebuhr, Assoc. Broker, Musselman Realty, in support. L. Letter To Whom It May Concern RE: Z-2-99 dated February 1, 1999 from Beverly J. Beal, 1010 Smith Avenue, in support. M. Letter To Whom It May Concern RE: Z-2-99 dated January 27, 1999 from Fred L. Parks, owned property at 1016 W. Mt. Hope, 726 Westhaven Blvd., in support. N. Letter To Whom It May Concern RE: Z-2-99 from Patrick Dailey, support. O. Letter To James and Diana Engman RE: Z-2-99 dated February 2, 1999 from Leonard & Deborah Waite, 1021 W. Mt. Hope Avenue, in support. P. Letter To Whom It May Concern RE: Z-2-99 dated February 2, 1999 from Andrea L. Conarton, owned property at 1838 Fletcher St. since 1992, in support. Q. Letter To James Ruff, Planning Office, RE: Z-2-99 dated January 25, 1999 from Leela MadhavaRau, Co-President, Moores River Park Neighborhood Organization, in support. 4. HEARINGS A. Z-1-99, 2517 E. Mt. Hope Avenue, "A" Residential and "D-1" Prof. Office Districts to "D-1" Prof. Office District Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by Harvest Property Investments to purchase and rezone part of the property at 2517 E. Mt. Hope, from "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office Districts to "D-1" Professional Office District. The property, over an acre in size, at present has an office for a radio station and is zoned "D-1" Professional Office. The remainder of PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 3 the property is zoned "A" Residential. The Southeast Comprehensive Plan recognizes the area for professional office use. The applicants wish to construct an approximately 4,000 sq ft building to house their office and studio. Mr. Ruge asked about the proposed lot split. Mr. Ruff explained that the petitioners propose to split the property and jointly use the existing parking and driveway. The lot split will be handled administratively. The property at 2427 is a residence. STEVEN W. CURRAN, PRESIDENT OF HARVEST MUSIC AND SOUND DESIGN, 5501 S. CEDAR ST., SUITE C, LANSING. The ell-shaped "A" Residential property wraps around the existing commercial property. We have a purchase agreement with the current owners. My partner, Mark Miller, and I have talked to the neighbors and plan to meet with the neighborhood association. We plan to construct a professional office building. It will not be a pole barn. It will be landscaped to maintain the natural beauty of the area. We run a professional commercial music production company, in a controlled environment. Hours are 9-5. The two previous radio stations occupying the property had as many as 22 people in the building at times. Our company has five employees, the company now located there has seven; between us, we will have 12 employees, so traffic volumes will be lower. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman declared the hearing closed for Z-1-99, 2517 E. Mt. Hope Avenue, "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office Districts to "D-1" Professional Office District and referred to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting at 4 p.m. on March 10, 1999, in the Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. B. Z-2-99, NE Cor. W. Mt. Hope & Todd Avenues, "D-1" Professional Office District to "F" Commercial District Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by Diana Engmann, owner of A Complete Rental who has an option to purchase this property, to rezone the property from "D-1" Professional Office District to "F" Commercial District. The property, vacant at present , has a parking lot on it and is situated just south of an existing fire station. Residential uses are located to the east and west, with commercial to the east, and industrially zoned property owned by Quality Dairy. The zoning reflects the surrounding land uses. The property has seen many changes in its zoning history. The applicant proposes rezoning the property to "F" Commercial to allow construction of a commercial facility to relocate A Complete Rental from farther west on Mt. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 4 Hope near Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Mr. Ruge asked about the "J" Parking east of the property and about a driveway onto Todd Avenue, Mr. Ruff said the parking is used by the siding and window company there, Exteriors of Lansing. Right now the driveways are onto Todd Avenue for the parking lot there. There is a proposal to eliminate two curb cuts on Todd Avenue and add one. They have two access points to the storage area. DIANA ENGMANN, 1020 W. MT. HOPE, REPRESENTING AFCOMPLETE RENTAL. Regarding the parking lot on Todd, it has a gated entrance. it would be used for larger loads. We are not opposed to having an entrance- exit off Mt. Hope. We have been there since 1977. We have never had a problem with neighbors, or a problem with noise. I have had letters written by neighbors on Todd closest in proximity to us saying that noise has not been a problem and that we have been good neighbors. We bought the business from Ken Alden. When we sell, we plan to sell to somebody like our manager. That's how rental businesses are sold, to someone coming up who understands the business and buys it. We have a manager now looking at eventually buying it. I wanted to address the noise issue and the issue of who would come in after us. Mr. Ruge asked what items would be stored in the fenced storage yard and do you run equipment in the yard; Ms. Engmann replied the chippers, a compressor, a log splitter. We start the equipment for the customers. This site is large enough that we can have the building close to the west side of the parking lot. We would start equipment on the east where there are no residential homes. We lived behind the business for seven years and we never had any problems. We are open 7.30-6 p.m. On the new lot, we would have the building buffering the noise for the residences. They probably would not see much business activity. ROSALINE LINE, 1840 TODD AVENUE, directly across from this property for 14 years. You will hear this evening several arguments for and against this rezoning. The bottom line is commercial property does not belong in a neighborhood. Businesses want to move into old neighborhoods because the land is cheap. When they are done, they sell it to whomever for a now- commercial property and make a profit. It doesn't matter how pretty they say it will be; a business is a business, and they are there to make money. A neighborhood has distinctive characteristics--homes. Supporters of this change are being influenced by their personal associations with the individuals involved in the proposed zoning change and sale. They are not a wise body to make a sound judgment. None of them live across the street PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 5 from this property. Every neighbor living directly across from this property who will be directly affected by this change is opposed to it. They should have the greatest say. Aside from additional traffic and noise and the largest portion of the building being in the neighborhood, we will have no peace in the evenings or on weekends with their long hours of operation. How can we feel comfortable working in our yard or just enjoying the day with the constant activity across the street, especially in the summer when we want to be outside. That is their high season, graduations, weddings, and construction projects. If this property is zoned commercial, there is no stopping the sale to other commercial businesses. A Complete Rental has sold their previous property, and what do their neighbors have to look forward to now? There is much available property currently zoned commercial in this area for them to choose from. This property should never be zoned commercial as long as a house is standing there. Would you like to look out your living room window and see a commercial business? Don't continue to drive good people out of the Lansing neighborhoods that our elected representatives say they want to save. Thank you. CALVIN KERN, 419 MOORES RIVER DRIVE, AN OFFICER OF THE MOORES PARK NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATION, IN FAVOR. The people at A Complete Rental have come to our neighborhood meetings; they have listened to our concerns regarding the design and operation of the building; they have incorporated our requests into their plans. It was our organization's request that they not use Todd as an entrance and egress, but limit it to their staff. All other concerns of the Moores Park Neighborhood Organization were addressed to our satisfaction. That prompted the letter you received from our president in support of this rezoning. DUANE BAKER, 1834 TODD AVENUE, right across the street, opposed. Once the zoning changed to commercial, anything could go in there. I am also concerned about the noise and additional traffic. In the summer, there are lawnmowers sitting outside; it is congested, and it is not a beautiful setting. The other things proposed before have not gone through, such as apartments, which would have been much more appropriate. I am opposed to having it changed to commercial. JEREMY HIDALGO, 1846 TODD AVENUE; TRINA HIDALGO, at the same residence, both in opposition. We have the same problems with this business. We were told that Todd Avenue would be the entrance for large items to be picked up. We don't want Todd Avenue congested. We already have the Fire Dept. there. We are concerned that the Fire Dept. would be backed up, with people parking on Todd Avenue. When we purchased our house; we were told possibly there would be homes across the street. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 6 TRINA HIDALGO. Additional traffic and people on Todd and Mt. Hope would cause additional noise, decrease safety on Todd, and would block fire trucks driving through. It is already congested and hard to get through to Mt. Hope. Property values would be reduced with a commercial property located across the street. We want young couples to move into the neighborhoods and rejuvenate them. We don't feel comfortable having a business across the street from us. Keep the idea and goal of a neighborhood in mind. We have our own Smith-Todd Avenue Neighborhood Association and have discussed this in our meetings; a majority was in opposition. JEREMY HIDALGO. None of the associations writing letters to you actually came to any of the houses on Todd Avenue to ask our opinion. Todd Avenue is not associated with the Moores River Park Neighborhood Association. SUSAN MORIN-PARR, 1117 RED CLIFFE, REPRESENTING PRUDENTIAL HUBBELL REAL ESTATE. This piece of property has been on the market since May 4, 1998. This is the only offer ever received. People buying homes in this area knew there was industrial to the south; across is Exteriors of Lansing. It is not as if you are surrounded by homes. A Complete Rental wants to stay in Lansing because this is their commercial base. People are used to having them there; they are also hiring people from the community. As of now, the property is useless. Offices tend to locate near other offices. There is no other office in that area; this is why it has never been picked up for office. DAVID EMMONS, 12738 HOLLY LANE, DEWITT, president of Lansing Area Safety Council, which bought this property about two years ago with the intent of building a new building. Since then, we had opportunity to buy another property at 3315 S. Pennsylvania Avenue. Our plans have changed. We put the property up for sale in May of 1988 with Musselman. We had no one look at the property until Diana and James Engmann made an offer for A Complete Rental, which requires commercial. We want to sell the property. We feel A Complete Rental would benefit the Moores Park Association as well as the Smith-Todd Neighborhood Association, and the Fire Dept. They have a good reputation, with a long history as good neighbors. In our opinion, developing this property, which has been vacant for many years, would help promote economic development within the city, increase tax base, and expand job opportunities. We encourage approval. PAM HEVERLY, 227 SMITH AVENUE, LANSING. (Submitted letter in support of rezoning.) You have heard much comment and received many letters. I live on Smith within 300 ft; I received a card to come this evening. I had a meeting at my home for the people on Todd Avenue to come and meet Diana and Jim to look at their design with the architect. I wanted to be PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 7 proactive, to get involved, to talk with neighbors about what can be developed on this eyesore that is full of glass and frequented by prostitutes. It is not good to look at. Nobody is interested in building there. If I were looking at this piece of property and somebody asked for it to be zoned commercial, I am not sure I would stand here and tell you I supported it. The issue I see is that a reputable business that is proactive in our neighborhood, with our schools public or private, is interested in building there. I am supportive of that; therefore, I am supportive of rezoning to commercial. I would not want another commercial business there such as Quality Dairy or some other organization. I know the business reputation of these people. I had people in our neighborhood sign a petition in favor. There are four people who live across the street who are in opposition. It is not a personal issue; it is a corner that is damn ugly, and I think this building will take care of that and be good for the taxpayers, the neighborhood, and the City. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman declared the hearing closed for Z-2-99, NE Corner West Mt. Hope and Todd Avenues, "D-1" Professional Office District to "F" Commercial District and referred to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting at 4 p.m. on March 10, 1999, in the Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. C. Z-3-99, 3435, 3627, 3631 Forest Rd. & Vacant MSU Land 3500 Blk. Forest Rd., "F" Commercial and "A" Residential Districts to "F" Commercial District. Donna Wynant presented the case, a request by Fred L. Poston, Interim Vice President for Finance and Operations and Treasurer, representing the Board of Trustees, Michigan State University and University Club, Inc., for rezoning vacant residential property, vacant land and golf course property adjacent to the University Club at present zoned "F" Commercial and "A" Residential Districts to all "F" Commercial District. The properties, located along the north side of Forest Road, east of US-127, are about 1,700 ft x 575 ft deep, representing about 22.5 acres. Surrounding development includes a golf course to the north; to the south is the University Corporate Research Park, US-127 to the west and Forest Akers Golf Course to the east. The request to rezone will allow for the development of an executive development center to train professionals within the business school, and others. The hotel suites proposed to be attached would accommodate housing needs of people coming for training. A single-family home at 3509 Forest Road is not included in the request. Two houses along Forest Road will be demolished. Mr. Smith asked about the designation of Forest Road as a Scenic Corridor. Would that apply on this section? Ms. Wynant said Forest Road in its entirety is considered an urban scenic corridor. City Council passed a PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 8 resolution with guidelines; these have been transmitted to the developer. BARRY WOOD, KEYSTONE DESIGN GROUP, PROJECT ARCHITECT. (Displayed various maps and illustrations). This is a fairly large piece of property, currently zoned "F" Commercial and "A" Residential; we propose to change it all to "F" Commercial. There is one single-family residence that will remain, surrounded by "F" Commercial. Because Forest Road is a Scenic Corridor, we have set the property back to leave areas untouched and placed parking behind the trees. Parking for about 379 cars would wrap the hotel portion. You have a drawing showing the University Club with the Executive Development Center to the east and a 122-unit hotel. The Center would house break-out rooms, classrooms, two large amphitheaters of 100 seats each, lobby, commons area seats for 200 and dining with an office component to operate the facility. This is a three-story building, 122 units total, that would be bridged at the mid-level coming over to the main floor. There is a grade change; we tried to work within the contours. It is hilly. In the northeast corner, the corner of the carts storage building, which would be built into the hillside and landscaped so as not to be seen from this development, would go over into East Lansing. This is the entire 18-hole Forest Akers Course. Golf course holes would be renumbered so that golf activity could start from the central location of the new development. We are making a contiguous whole zoning from the existing University Club over to the eastern boundary line of the City. Don Bowersox is with me for any questions, and another University person as well. DON BOWERSOX, 2609 WOODHILL DRIVE. I am here as a resource. Mr. Smith asked about lighting for the area, given that it is in a scenic corridor area and near the Observatory. Mr. Wood said we are concerned about trespass lighting. The Observatory is quite removed from this area. Mr. Ruge asked about numbers of trips per day are generated by the University Club and numbers generated by the new development; Mr. Wood had no figures but said it would be a significant add, particularly with the golf course. Most of the attendees coming to the hotel and development center will be approaching from the two highway interchanges and coming in off Collins or Harrison. Because of the nature of the road going west, there is not an expectation of adding any significant amount of traffic for that direction. Mr. Ruge asked, about accessing the clubhouse for Forest Akers from Harrison, -access will now be from Forest Road? Mr. Wood said that is correct. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 9 JAN KOLP, 2828 FOREST ROAD, VICE PRESIDENT OF FOREST VIEW CITIZENS ASSN. This has not as yet come before our association. I have met with Steve Webster, Vice President for Governmental Affairs, and Dick Ware from the University Club. I stressed to them the importance of keeping intact the integrity of the scenic corridor. While the University Club's parking lots are well maintained, we don't want to see any more parking lots from Forest Road. It is imperative that they be well screened. Something not mentioned was that golf traffic would now come on Forest Road. It definitely will be a sticking point with our association. I would like to see that point revisited. Mr. Miller asked when the association will meet; Ms. Kolp said next Tuesday, March 9, 1999. AUDREY CROSS, 3509 FOREST ROAD. I am that one house that's left, with the development surrounding me. For thirty years, I have looked out back and seen trees and wildlife; now there is going to be a parking lot and lighting. I am going to be squeezed. I am concerned about traffic and destroying our work getting Forest Road declared a scenic corridor. The driveway to the University Club is just to the west of me. There is a lot of traffic. I can't get on my bicycle any more and ride down Forest Road; the traffic is continuous. Sometimes they even park on my lawn when there is a function there. After they drive over, I have a terrible time getting the weeds out. Now on the east, I am going to have this development. They say they are going to put a berm or screen, but it is going to change the character of the whole end of Forest Road. Being the last one there, is my property still zoned residential. MARION E. TAYLOR, 2628 WABASH. I was not aware of this until this evening. My major concerns are the same as the previous speaker. One is traffic. Forest Road is only a two-lane road. There is a fair amount of residential there. We are going to have an enormous amount of traffic coming there. Golfers are going to be coming from all directions, not just the east but from the west also. Also, when the University Club first came in, the parking was all on the north side of the road. Now it is on the south side. There is no landscaping there whatsoever. If this development goes through, there should be some major requirements as to landscaping. I was very impressed with their presentation, their renderings and their pictures, but we as citizens have concerns about traffic and setbacks. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman declared the hearing closed for Z-3-99, 3435, 3627, 3631 Forest Rd. and Vacant MSU Land 3500 Blk. Forest Rd., "F" Commercial and "A" Residential Districts to "F" PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 10 Commercial District, and referred to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting at 4 p.m. on March 10, 1999, in the Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. D. SLU-1-99, 528 N. Seymour Ave., Parking Lot in "DM-3" Residential District. Chairman Ruge said because of a mailing error, a second public hearing is necessary, to be held on March 16, 1999, before the Planning Board. We will hold the public hearing today and probably act on the issue on the evening of March 16, 1999 after the second public hearing. Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by Lansing Community College previously filed as a rezoning. Ron Roush is here tonight representing the college. Council has accepted the withdrawal of Z-18-98, the previous action. The property, which is vacant, is zoned "DM-3" Residential. It is 42 ft wide x 123.75 ft deep, adjacent to 520 North Seymour, which they would like to incorporate into the parking lot. This area is designated in the River Island Amendment Plan Area for office use. The parking would be consistent with that plan, and it would support the existing office at 520 North Seymour Avenue. Mr. Ruff noted that at the previous public hearing for Z- 18-98, Mr. Jones spoke on behalf of his wife, a trustee of Lansing Community College; also Sharon Kellogg from the neighborhood, and Stephanie Whitbeck from the neighborhood and the Historic District Commission also spoke. RONALD E. ROUSH, LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE. I was here last month. This is a simple request. Originally we requested rezoning but in response to concerns expressed by the Historic District Commission and by the Downtown Neighborhood Association, we withdrew the request and resubmitted the request for the special land use. The three entities are now in support of our request. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman declared the hearing closed for SLU-1-99, 528 N. Seymour Ave., Parking Lot in "DM-3" Residential District., and referred to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting at 4 p.m. on March 10, 1999, in the Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. E. SLU-2-99, SE Cor. Jolly & Pleasant Grove, Governmental Structure (Fire Station) in the "F" Commercial District Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by the City of Lansing Fire Department, represented tonight by Chief Greg Martin, Assistant Chief Chuck Willis, and Jon Bauer, Capitol Consultants. This request was initiated PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 11 through the Act 285 process and the City's purchase of the property for relocation of fire facilities is in accordance with the Master Plan. The Fire Department is requesting the special land use permit to construct this governmental facility on the property which is zoned "F" Commercial District. The property, approximately 1.7 acres, has commercial zoning and land uses to the north, residential to the south and east, and churches to the west and east. The new station would have three drive-through bays and provide facilities that are more current to their needs. The Department has provided a program statement with criteria for development of the approximately 12,000 sq ft structure. They are still working on it so we don't as yet have a floor plan. They are looking at having an entrance off Starr Avenue and an exit onto Pleasant Grove Road for a one-way circulation pattern for fire equipment. Doors facing the neighborhood to the east would be closed when they exit. GREG MARTIN, LANSING FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE CHIEF. We are planning about a 12,000 sq ft station with three drive-through truck bays oriented so as to minimize the impact of noise on the neighborhood. We are trying to design a facility that will fit with more of a neighborhood theme. A concept we are trying to put in is a small classroom for our use during the daytime that would be available for neighborhood groups as a meeting room. Mr. Ruge asked how many emergency runs per day or per week? Chief Martin said about 16,000 emergency responses are made yearly; for this station, probably about three to seven responses a day. It varies. JERRY LOVELL, 5136 STARR AVENUE, ADJACENT TO THIS LOT. They want to come off Starr; why can't they come off Jolly and Pleasant Grove and make the circle there. The noise--they are going to be there at night. That lot they want to buy comes right to my driveway. I don't mind the fire station being here. I wondered if there is any way that I could buy some off them, because I have about a car-width driveway. Their property would come right up to my driveway, and it is only two feet from my garage. I would like to know if Lansing would like to sell ten or fifteen feet. At least I could put up a wall or privacy fence, because that's really close to my property. Ms. Love said to contact Chief Martin. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman declared the hearing closed for SLU-2-99, SE Cor. Jolly and Pleasant Grove Roads, Governmental Structure (Fire Station) in the "F" Commercial District, and referred to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting at 4 p.m. on March 10, 1999, in the Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 12 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each) MARION E. TAYLOR, 2628 WABASH RD. I am here regarding SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People. I don't have a concern as much with the special land use permit, but I have more concerns about some of the other related items to it, such as the site plan. I had not seen any comments from the Traffic Dept. as to what they envision may occur here, or the Police Dept., and especially the Fire Dept. I have a major concern with the Fire Department, because of the elevations of this site. It has a thirty-foot drop. This is a major concern. Also, the driveway as it comes off Stoneleigh is going to be a fifteen-foot wide driveway approximately 700 ft long. That is not wide enough for two vehicles. What is going to happen, especially with the elevations. The special use permit is for an 8-bedroom structure with one resident per bedroom. Since the first meeting, I have heard that there may be two people per bedroom. I have also been told there could be an additional structure put up there, an administration building. I have not seen any report from Michigan Department of Natural Resources on a wetlands. 6. RECESS - The Chairman declared a short recess. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: January 12, 1999. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to approve the minutes of January 12, 1999. Voice vote (6-0), unanimous; carried; the minutes of January 12, 1999 were APPROVED. Minutes for Approval: February 2, 1999. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve the minutes of February 2, 1999. Voice vote (6-0), unanimous; carried; the minutes of February 2, 1999 were APPROVED. Minutes for Approval: February 16, 1999. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Nischan, to approve the minutes of February 16, 1999. Voice vote (6-0), unanimous; carried; the minutes of February 17, 1999 were APPROVED. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Miller, to resolve to the Committee of the Whole; voice vote; Ayes: All; Nays: None; unanimous; carried. Mr. Miller chaired the Committee of the Whole. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 13 1. Committee of the Whole - a. Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington, Vacate Alley along RR ROW Ms. Love called the attention of the Committee to an addendum to Act-32-98 providing information to answer and resolve questions of the Board, together with a memorandum from John M. Roberts Jr., Deputy City Attorney regarding Act-32-98. Ms. Wynant said questions were raised concerning vacating the alley instead of lease or license. In the opinion of the City Attorney's office, it does not make sense to retain this as an unimproved alley. If the City is not using it, it should be vacated, thus eliminating any possibility of liability in having to maintain it. Another question concerned the different language of the staff recommendation of granting indemnification and the Deputy City Attorney's recommendation to execute a release and hold harmless. There is no difference between these recommendations. The phrases are often used interchangeably. The important point is that the applicant should grant indemnification to the City prior to the City's vacation of the alley. A third question asked was does the railroad get a piece of the alley, once vacated. The answer is no, they do not. This alley was dedicated for the use of the public by the proprietor of Park Place. Upon vacation, the fee of the alley would pass to the proprietor, or his devisees, within the plat. The railroad was merely noted as to location on the plat; it is not a part of the plat and would have no claims to any part of the alley through the vacation. The recommendation was that the alley be vacated with four conditions of approval as follows. 1. The reservation of easements for existing utilities as necessary; 2. The applicant working with Consumers Energy to address concerns of how close any new construction can be to their gas line; 3. A baseline environmental assessment of the subject alley be performed as appropriate; and 4. The current abutting owner of Lot #5, which is the corner property, execute a release and hold harmless in favor of the City for the environmental conditions of the alley upon vacation. The person who has an option on the property is Alan Martin, Jones Development Company. Mr. Martin would represent Quality Dairy in PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 14 the development of a new store at that location. Mr. Martin proposes to build a new Quality Dairy Food Store, approx. 3,000-3,500 sq ft in size, in approximately the same location as the existing Henfling building. The additional 3,411.7 sq ft of alley space would allow for a better layout for the new development. According to the Assessor's Office, the alley, if vacated, would go to the applicants as owners of Lot 5, Block 18, Park Place (Sub) since the alley was dedicated for the use of the public by the proprietor of the plat of Park Place. The site appears to have a large enough buildable area for the proposed building and required parking once minimum structural setbacks and the minimum 20 ft setback from gas lines are subtracted from the overall site. Staff recommends approval of Act-32-98, the vacation of the 16.5-ft- wide x 206.77-ft-long unimproved alley located at the northwest corner of S. Washington Avenue and West Mt. Hope subject to the reservation of appropriate utility easements as necessary. The alley once vacated would be attached to the corner property (Lot 5, Block 18, Park Place Subdivision). Further, staff suggested the City may want to consider leasing or licensing the alley to the applicant for better control by the City over the use of the alley, to ensure that any structures be kept at a minimum 20 ft distance from the Consumers Energy gas line. Any leasing or licensing of the subject property, however, would keep land off the tax roll and would not add to the building envelope area since the rear lot line for the corner property would remain the same. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence on the location, character and extent of the proposal, that no public purpose was found for the unimproved alley. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously (3-0) to approve Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington Avenue, Vacate alley along RR ROW, subject to.- 1 The reservation of easements for existing utilities as necessary; 2. The applicant working with Consumers Energy to address concerns of how close any new construction can be to their gas line; 3. A baseline environmental assessment of the subject alley be performed as appropriate; and 4. The current abutting owner of Lot #5, which is the corner PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 15 property, execute a release and hold harmless in favor of the City for the environmental conditions of the alley upon vacation. Based on the findings and summary, the Committee noted that the City has an opportunity to place this underutilized piece of property on the tax roles and have it added to a commercial piece of land for a larger buildable site. The staff recommended approval of the vacation of this 16.5 ft if right-of-way along the unimproved alley Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington, Vacate Alley along RR ROW, including the four conditions as stated above. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE action on the motion was as follows. On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried, Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington, Vacate Alley along RR ROW, including the four conditions as stated above was recommended to be APPROVED. b. Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District Mr. Ruff explained that the request is again before the Board because it was tabled at the last meeting to resolve access issues to the adjacent residential property. There was a conflict in the survey as well as potential use. Letters received under 3. Communications indicate that the table has been withdrawn and agreements have been worked out with the potential property purchaser. Staff recommends approval. Concerns about over-development of the site, buffering of adjacent residential properties, and proper circulation patterns will be addressed during the site plan review process. The property is currently a vacant lot. The site is lower than North East Street to the east, and East Howe Street to the north. The adjacent home to the south is at a somewhat higher elevation, while the adjacent home to the west is at approximately the same elevation as the west portion of the site. The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates the area for residential development. The proposed rezoning is not consistent; however, there is ample precedent for rezoning to commercial. Surrounding land uses are a mixture of commercial and residential. This rezoning will continue a PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 16 pattern of commercial properties facing North East Street, with residential properties buffered from North East Street by the commercial establishments. Additional landscape screening and buffering may be required to protect adjacent residential uses and will be addressed in site plan review process, as will storm water drainage. The proposed development is not expected to have a big impact on North East Street. Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to approve Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE action on the motion was as follows. Mr. Ruge noted that it appears that Mr. Soroushian has agreed to sell approximately 300 sq ft of land for approximately $1000 to Mr. Feher. Mr. Feher is withdrawing his request to the Planning Board to table Z-19-98. On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried, Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District was recommended to be APPROVED. d. SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People. Ms. Wynant directed member's attention to a memo in the packet addressing concerns that were brought up and a revised site plan showing reorientation of the access drive from Wabash Road. The drive is 700 lineal ft, 15 ft. wide, asphalt, with a 22 ft wide gravel base. Other development occurring on the site was also addressed; it would involve platting of the land which would have to be reviewed by the Planning Board. In their development proposal, Hospice of Lansing did not propose anything like that. The Fire Marshal's Office, which has reviewed the revised site plan, said they would like to see the width of the drive not less than 20 ft and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 ft 6 in, and that the drive be maintained to support fire apparatus. They would like to see consideration of an approved turning radius and approved grade which does not exceed the maximum allowed for access by fire trucks. The Executive Director, Barbara Kowalski, has supplied information in her letter concerning daily traffic activity. Wetlands information has not been provided. There is no floodplain on the property. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 17 Staff believes that the revised site plan does address some of the concerns of easement access to Wabash; but it raised some design concerns; however, these can be reviewed during the site plan review process. Volume of traffic to be generated by the eight-bed facility is expected to be negligible. The Transportation Engineer indicated that Stoneleigh would be able to accommodate expected traffic. He also mentioned that he would also like to see a minimum 20 ft. drive width. The applicant has submitted a revised site plan showing a drive accessing the facility from Stoneleigh. The drive is asphalt, approximately 700 ft long and 15 ft wide with a 22 ft wide gravel base. The revised plan was provided to area residents to help address their concerns. The Fire Marshal's Office has provided design criteria for width, clearances, weight-bearing criteria, turning radii and approved grade maximums. The applicant also provided estimates of daily vehicle trips. A building elevation has not as yet been provided, nor has information on wetlands. The applicant requests a Special Land Use to construct a residential care facility to provide hospice services for eight residents. The proposed location of the residential structure, approximately 7,500-8,000 sq ft in size is in the northeast corner of the site. Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, to approve SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People, with the condition that they work with the Fire Dept. and Public Service Dept. to ensure adequate access and create a driveway that is sufficient for emergency vehicles. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE action on the motion was as follows. Mr. Miller asked for clarification of remarks by the Fire Marshal who wants an unobstructed width of not less than 20 ft asphalt drive and an unobstructed vehicle clearance of not less than 13 ft 6 in; Keystone Design Group is proposing a 15 ft wide asphalt drive with a 22 ft wide gravel base. Ms. Wynant said this would have to be resolved during the site plan review process. On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried, SLU-25-98, 3400 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 18 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People was recommended, with the condition that they work with the Fire Dept. and Public Service Dept. to ensure adequate access and create a driveway that is sufficient for emergency vehicles, to be APPROVED. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith that the Committee of the Whole rise Voice Vote; Ayes: All; Nays: None; unanimous; carried. B. Committee Reports 1 Committee of the Whole. Mr. Miller presented the report of the Committee of the Whole. a. Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington, Vacate Alley along RR ROW In the Committee of the Whole, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously (6-0) to approve Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington Avenue, Vacate alley along RR ROW, subject to: 1. The reservation of easements for existing utilities as necessary; 2. The applicant working with Consumers Energy to address concerns of how close any new construction can be to their gas line, 3. A baseline environmental assessment of the subject alley be performed as appropriate, and 4. The current abutting owner of Lot #5, which is the corner property, execute a release and hold harmless in favor of the City for the environmental conditions of the alley upon vacation. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to recommend approval of Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington Avenue, Vacate alley along RR ROW, with the above four conditions. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Keene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Miller . .Ave Nischan . .Ave Smith . Ave Ruge . . Ave PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 19 On a Roll Call Vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried; Act-32-98, 1850 S. Washington Avenue, Vacate alley along RR ROW, with the above four conditions was APPROVED. b. Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District In the Committee of the Whole, based on testimony, evidence, the staff report, and the review of the Committee of the Whole, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously (6-0) to approve Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Nischan, based on testimony, evidence, the review of the Committee of the Whole, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to recommend approval of Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Ruge said it is important to note that the applicant and his neighbor were able to work out a problem created by the potential rezoning. Mr. Miller noted that staff did an excellent job of negotiating the resolution. Keene. . . Ave Miller . .Ave Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith. . . Ave Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave On a Roll Call Vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried; Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District was APPROVED. b. SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People After considerable testimony, discussion, and review by staff, it was determined that this proposal met the conditions of the Special Land Use, and a motion was made and seconded to recommend approval of SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People, with the condition that they work with the Fire Dept. and Public Service Dept. to ensure adequate access and create a driveway that is sufficient for emergency vehicles. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 20 Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, based on testimony, discussion by the Committee of the Whole, review by staff, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People, with the condition that they work with the Fire Dept. and Public Service Dept. to ensure adequate access and create a driveway that is sufficient for emergency vehicles. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Miller. . . Ave Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith. . . Ave Frederick . .Ave Keene Ave Ruae Ave On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried, SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People, with conditions was APPROVED. 1 Zoning and Ordinance Committee. Mr. Miller presented the report of the Zoning and Ordinance Committee. Next meeting Wednesday, March 10, 1999, at 4 p.m., Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. Mr. Goolsby may not be sufficiently recovered to attend that meeting, so Mr. Miller requested appointment of one member to attend in place of Mr. Goolsby. Ms. Keene agreed to be a backup attendee. 3. Urban Development Committee - Mr. Nischan a. Act-29-98, 700 Blk. Sheridan Street, Vacation or Sale of ROW The applicant is requesting that the City vacate the right-of- way for Sheridan Street adjacent to his property at 700-708 East Sheridan Street /Oakland Avenue. The applicant has filed this request for review under Act-285 for the vacation of the Sheridan Street right-of-way in order to: 1. permit additional off-street parking to serve the Sheridan Lofts redevelopment project; 2. close the railroad crossing on Sheridan Street in order to reduce noise from the adjacent railroad facility. The applicant's plans show Sheridan Street redesigned into an PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 21 off-street parking lot with access entirely from Prudden Avenue which is under construction as part of the nearby Prudden Wheel redevelopment project. This master plan includes the eventual extension of Prudden Avenue to Oakland, and the reconstruction of May Street, including its extension across the CSXT railroad to the present May Street. Staff recommends that the City take necessary action to vacate the right-of-way necessary if the following issues are adequately addressed: 1. The design of the proposed Prudden Avenue intersection with Oakland Avenue must be finalized, and access into the project must be safely designed, or an alternative acceptable to both the City's Transportation Engineer and MDOT is implemented. 2. The actual dimensions need to be determined by a detailed survey coordinated with final design drawings for the Oakland Avenue/Prudden Street intersection at the expense of the applicant. 3. The transfer be revocable if the Sheridan Lofts redevelopment project is not satisfactorily completed within a reasonable time. 4 Easements for utility purposes should be maintained for the City and utility companies. 5. Arrangements for rededication of May Street be finalized in order to assure a public right-of-way across the CSXT railroad. 6. Appropriate arrangements be made by the City to obtain and convey the City's clear interest in Sheridan Street to the applicant. In Committee, it was moved and seconded and carried unanimously to approve Act-29-98, 700 Blk. Sheridan Street, Vacation or Sale of ROW with the six above conditions. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, based on testimony, evidence and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to recommend approval of Act-29-98, 700 Blk. Sheridan Street, Vacation or Sale of ROW, with the six above conditions. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 22 Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Frederick. . .Ave Keene. . . Ave Miller. . . Ave Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruqe . .Ave On a Roll Call Vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous; Act-29-98, 700 Blk. Sheridan Street, Vacation or Sale of ROW with the six above conditions was APPROVED. C. MPA-1-98, Downtown Comprehensive Plan (Tabled September 8, 1998). The review of the Plan has been completed; the report to the Board and to the public will be presented at the same time, on March 16, 1999. Next meeting Tuesday, March 23, 1999, at 4 p.m., Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from the Planning Manager. Ms. Love reported that the Mayor recommended, and the City Council adopted, the creation of a new Boys Training School Committee for oversight of the development for the implementation of the plan. The neighborhood associations on the east side have been contacted and names have been submitted by most of the organizations. The process calls for the Planning Board to have a representative. Mr. Ruge is one of the Eastside Neighborhood Organization's representatives. Mr. Nischan is an Eastfield Neighborhood Association alternate representative; he agreed also to be the Planning Board representative. The money for the CDBG portion of the Housing Study was to be transferred from various accounts into an expenditure account. City Council refused to do that unless the administration came up with the other $57,500 to do the entire study at once. The transfer for both went through March 1, 1999, so the whole $115,000 is there and we will be moving ahead. The original deadline was the end of June; now it probably will be September. The other good news is that, in the mayor's recommendations for our next year's budget, he has recommended that the Department would have one additional enforcement officer who spend a majority of time on sign enforcement, and also help out on weeds-trash in the growing season. The PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 23 mayor is also recommending to set aside at least a portion of the money that we need for the Master Plan for next year, $100,000. D. Pending Items: Future action required. 1. Planning Board a. Z-25-97, 300 Blk. S. Butler, W. Side, "C" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District(Tabled January 6, 1998) 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. b. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) C. Z-3-98, 1131 & 1133 Race Street, "H" Light Industrial to "G-1" Business District (Tabled April 15, 1998) d. Z-4-98,201 E.Grand River, "F-1"Commercial&"H"Light Industrial Districts to"G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) e. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) f. Z-8-98, 208 E. Grand River Avenue, "F-1" Commercial to "G-1" Business (Tabled August 12, 1998) g. SLU-5-98, Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street(Act-6-98); h. SLU-7-98,Washington Park,2516 S.Washington Ave. (Act-8-98); I. SLU-10-98, Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd. (Act-11-98); j. SLU-12-98, Fire Station#4, 5550 S. Pennsylvania Ave. (Act-13-98); Urban Development Committee a. Act-19-97, 120 E. Shiawassee Street, Fire Station #1, Market/Sale for Mid-Rise Residential with Building Preserved b. Act-21-98, Ingham Regional Medical Center, Replacement Sign in S. Pennsylvania ROW(Tabled September 8, 1998) C. MPA-1-98, Downtown Comprehensive Plan(Tabled September 8, 1998) 8. NEW BUSINESS - None. 9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON Chairman Ruge asked about a candidate for the vacant seat; Ms. Love reported that her potential candidate could not commit the time required so we will have to search for another new person from Ward 2, southeast side of the City. Chairman Ruge reported two more abandoned signs, one at Regent and Michigan Avenue, and a second across the street in the Spad's parking lot. 10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Ms. Keene said the two houses on Allegan rehabilitated by Greater Lansing Housing Coalition sold months ago, but the signs are still up. GLHC should be reminded to remove them. Mr. Miller asked about availability of the Central Lansing Plan; Ms. Love said 50 copies will be available Friday, March 9. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 2, 1999 PAGE 24 Mr. Smith asked about Planning Board members' liability. Ms. Love said we could ask the City Attorney's office to do a presentation prior to a Board meeting. As long as we are not found to be overstepping the bounds of our duties, we are covered by the City's liability policies. Regarding the Planning Board, since it does not make final decisions on anything but a Nonconforming Use, "I don't believe you have culpability." Unless you have the actual legislative power, there is not an element of liability; you only make a recommendation to City Council. Mr. Nischan said if a member were named in a lawsuit, the person would have to retain a lawyer. Ms. Keene said you could be sued; the question is could they recover? Are we covered in the policy in the event we are sued? Ms. Love said this would be an excellent opportunity for a topic. Ms. Keene said a full-blown presentation would not be necessary; could he just tell us if we are covered? 11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Mr. Frederick said at the end of Provincial House Drive, there is a business, Auto Truck, a nonresidential use in a residential area that is parking trucks in front of the business and piling wooden pallets. It looks junky. Ms. Wynant said Code Compliance has been notified of the situation. We are working on it. Mr. Nischan reported that on the street south of Grand River between Cedar and Larch, at Maple Street, they are still parking dump trucks there. 12. ADJOURNMENT - was at 9.48 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Eleanor K. Love, Secretary, Planning Board mn03O299 a:\48 Act-32-98 Vacation of Alley along RR ROW GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Jones Development 111 W. Mt. Hope Ave. Lansing, MI 48910 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Optionee REQUESTED ACTION: Act 285 Review EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant EXISTING ZONING: The public right-of-way is unzoned. Land adjacent to the alley to the south is zoned "F" Commercial and is unzoned RR ROW to the north. The vacated ROW would assume the same designation. PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: The alley is approximately 16.5 ft. wide by 206.77 ft. long. SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Con Rail RR ROW and Bank Street S: Commercial (now vacant bldg.) E: Washington Ave. and Church W: Con Rail RR ROW and Bank Street SURROUNDING ZONING: N: unzoned RR and Street ROW S' "I" Heavy Industrial E: °C" Residential W: "F" Commercial MASTER PLAN: The Southwest Comprehensive Plan designates this area as industrial/warehousing. SPECIFIC INFORMATION APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The applicant, Alan Martin of Jones Development Company, requests the 16.5' wide by 206.77' long alley that runs along the south side of the Con Rail Railroad Tracks west of Washington Avenue, be vacated. Mr. Martin plans on building a new PLANNING BOARD PAGE 2 Quality Dairy Food Store at this location and requests the alley be vacated to potentially add to his development site. Although no site plan has been submitted with this request, the applicant proposes to build a new store in approximately the same location as the existing Henfling building, around 3,000 - 3,500 square feet in size. AGENCY RESPONSES: Ameritech: (No response received.) Assessor: (D.Tijerina): Since this was the site of a transmission repair garage I assume that a Baseline Environmental Assessment (BEA) will be conducted to protect the new owner from any liability due to contamination. (J. Grannell): I spoke recently with an owner or representative of the owner of the parcel at #1850 S. Washington about this alleyway, and gave him the following opinion. No doubt you are aware of these principals, but for the sake of Planning's records: From my reading of the Plat Laws, the entirely of the alley, IF Vacated, would go to the owners of Lot 5, Block 18, Park Place (Sub). This alley was dedicated for the use of the Public by the Proprietor of the plat of Park Place. Upon vacation, the fee of the alley would pass to the proprietor, or his devisees, within the plat. The Railroad was merely NOTED as to location on the plat. It is not assigned a Block or Lot number, and is not a part of the plat, because the plat proprietor did not own any of the railroad and could not include it with any of the platted lands. Therefore: the Railroad would have no claims to any part of the alley through the City's act of vacation. Further, the mere PLANNING BOARD PAGE 3 encroachment alone, of the structure at #1805 onto the alley, has no bearing on the passage of the fee to Lot 5 upon vacation. Nor does the encroachment mean that the owner of the building has owned any of the alley encroached upon. That ownership is only surrendered by the Public when the alley is officially vacated. Building Office: This project is subject to the City's Site Plan Review Process. The Building Safety Office has no objection to the proposal but formal site plan review is necessary prior to construction. Board of Water & Light: Customer Proiects Electric: No objections to this proposal. We have no electric distribution in this area. Contact Persons: Bob Strobel, 371-6082. Water: No objections to the issuance of building permit. Water Customer Projects needs to see customers water service layout. All installation by BWL forces. Contact Person: Terry Robison 371-6494. Planning and System Integrity Electric: BWL has an overhead distribution system that will need to remain in service in this alley. Contact Person: Bruce Archer 371-6081 CATA: (No response received.) City Attorney: See Attached. Consumers Energy Company: Consumers Energy Company has two high pressure gas mains in the area of the proposed building. I have enclosed copies of our gas distribution map and right of way documents. We would like any buildings constructed in the area to be 20 feet from the pipelines, and would like a reservation in the abandonment for operation and maintenance of the pipelines. Development Office: No comment other than if vacated part of alley PLANNING BOARD PAGE 4 will go to each adjacent property owner, one of whom is the railroad. The RR is not known for keeping up its property. Perhaps the alley should be abandoned for use and leased or licensed to QD instead. Fire Marshal: No objections. Fire Department access will need to be maintained behind future buildings. Ingham Co. Drain (No response received.) Commissioner: Lansing Neighborhood (No response received.) Council: MI DEQ: (No response received.) Media One: (No response received.) Parks and Recreation Dept.: Does not impact park operation & services. Public Service Dept. The Public Service Department has no objections to vacating this alley. Traffic Engineer: The Transportation Division has reviewed the subject request and has the following comments. 1) There is no functioning alley at this location at the present time. A future alley would serve no specific public purpose. It would only serve the single adjacent property. 2) The Transportation Division reserves the opportunity to comment on circulation, access and egress issues during the plan review process. 3) It appears that his alley vacation can proceed as requested with the proper planning and design review considerations. Moores Park Neighborhood: Moores Park Neighborhood applauds Quality Dairy's moving of the South Washington store from its present location to the Washington and PLANNING BOARD PAGE 5 Mt. Hope corner site. Does this land need to be purchased from the City? We would hope that a fair price be reached (not $1 and not full market value). Susan Dougherty, Co-President, Moores Park Neighborhood Organization Background The applicant, Alan Martin of Jones Development Company, requests the vacation of the 16.5' wide by 206.77' long alley that runs along the south side of the Con Rail Railroad Tracks west of Washington Avenue, be vacated (see attached survey). Mr. Martin plans on building a new Quality Dairy Food Store at this location and requests the alley be vacated to potentially add to his development site which would allow for a better layout for parking to accommodate a new store. According to the Assessor's Office, the alley, if vacated, would go to the owners of Lot 5, Block 18, Park Place (Sub) since the alley was dedicated for the use of the Public by the Proprietor of the plat of Park Place (see Assessor's Office Response). Although no site plan has been submitted with this request, the applicant (Jones Development) proposes to build a new store in approximately the same location as the existing Henfling building, around 3,000 - 3,500 square feet in size. Jones Development currently has an option on the corner property for a Quality Dairy Store. ANALYSIS Evaluation Act 285 requires that the character, location and extent of requests involving the acquisition of property for public facilities be evaluated. Location The unimproved alley is runs along the south side of Bank Street, west of Washington Avenue and ends 206.77 feet west of Washington Avenue where it connected to a north-south alley that was vacated in 1973. A 66 foot wide Con Rail Rail Road right of way runs alongside it to the north. Bank Street then runs alongside the Rail Road further to the north. The corner lot property at the NW corner of Washington and Mt. Hope Avenue is located to the south. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 6 Character and Extent The subject alley is located along the north property line of a commercial property, formerly occupied by the Henfling (transmission shop) business. The unimproved alley is 16.5 feet wide and 206.77 feet long. The existing building has encroached 4 feet into the alley right of way. The applicant, Jones Development, has an option on the corner property, to eventually build a new Quality Dairy Store, which is currently located further to the north on Washington Avenue, between Woodlawn and Island Ave. According to the applicant, the additional land from the alley, if added to the corner property, would give greater flexibility in the siting of a new building and creating a better parking lot layout. The existing transmission shop would be demolished for a new store. The two billboards on the property, according to Mr. Martin, have 5 year leases, which will expire in 2003. Summary The subject alley has not been used, and is therefore underutilized land. Other than retaining easements for any public utilities, no public purpose has been found to retain the right of way. The Traffic Engineer has indicated that there is no proposed use of the alley for traffic circulation in the future, and recommends it be vacated. The 65' X 206.77' would add 3,411.7 square feet to the corner lot. Any structural setbacks, however, would have to be a least 20 feet from the Consumers gas line within the 65 foot right of way, which therefore may not give much flexibility to move any new structure closer to a new rear lot line. Since no public purpose for the alley appears to exist based on this review, an easement for any existing utilities would be necessary. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the request by Alan Martin of the Jones Development Company to vacate the alley as requested be approved reserving appropriate easements as necessary. Further, the City may want to consider leasing or licensing the alley to the applicant for better control over the use of the alley, to ensure that any structures be kept at a minimum 20 foot distance from Consumers Energy gas line. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 7 If the property is attached to the corner parcel, zoned "F" Commercial, the minimum setback for structures would be 25 feet, which may be too close to satisfy the setback required for the gas line. Act-32-98 Vacation of Alley along RR ROW ADDENDUM TO ACT-32-98 REPORT The Act-32-98 case was tabled at the January 26, 1999 Planning Board meeting to answer and resolve the following questions members had on the requested vacation of the unimproved alley along the Conrail RR tracks and Bank Street. Attached is the response from Jack Roberts, Jr. Deputy City Attorney. Answers to these questions were made based on my phone conversation with Mr. Roberts on 2/2/99. Why vacate instead of lease or license? It does not make sense to retain this unimproved alley, if the City has not been using it. Utilities may be retained in the strip of land with the appropriate easements. It is best if the City vacates the alley to eliminate any possible liability in having to maintain it. What is their any relevance to the different language used between the staff recommendation of granting indemnification and Jack Roberts' recommendation to execute a release and hold harmless...? There is no difference between these recommendations. The phrases are often used interchangeably. The important point of this, is that the applicant grant indemnification to the City prior to the City's vacation of the alley. The staff recommendation found in the 1/19/99 UDC Report was made prior to Jack Roberts 1/20/99 memo (attached). Does the Railroad get a piece of the alley, once vacated? No. As stated in comments from the City Assessor's Office and confirmed by Jack Roberts, the entirety of the alley, if vacated, would go to the owners of Lot 5, Block 18, Park Place (Sub). This alley was dedicated for the use of the Public by the Proprietor of the plat of Park Place. Upon vacation, the fee of the alley would pass to the proprietor, or his devisees, within the plat. The Railroad was merely NOTED as to location on the plat. It is not assigned a Block or Lot number, and is not a part of the plat, because the plat proprietor did not own any of the railroad and could not include it with any of the platted lands. Therefore, the Railroad would have no claims to any part of the alley through the City's act of vacation. Further, the mere encroachment alone, of the structure at#1805 onto the alley, has no bearing on the passage of the fee to Lot 5 upon vacation. Nor does the encroachment mean that the owner of the building has owned any of the alley encroached upon. That PLANNING BOARD PAGE 2 ownership is only surrendered by the Public when the alley is officially vacated. Summary: The City has the opportunity to place an underutilized piece of property on the tax rolls and to have the property added to a commercially zoned piece of land, providing a larger buildable space for the redevelopment of this corner of r Washington and Mt. Hope Avenue. Therefore, based on testimony and evidence on the location, character and extent of the proposal, that no public purpose was found for the unimproved alley and In light of these comments from Jack Roberts, the recommendation is as follows: Recommendation Staff recommends Act-32-98, the vacation of the 16.5' wide by 206.77' long unimproved alley, be approved and attached to the corner parcel, located at the northwest corner of S. Washington Avenue and West Mt. Hope. subject to: 1. The reservation of easements for existing utilities as necessary; 2. The applicant working with Consumers Power to address concerns of how close any new construction can be to their gas line; 3. A baseline environmental of the subject alley as appropriate; and 4. The current abutting owner of Lot#5, which is the corner property, execute a release and hold harmless in favor of the City for the environmental conditions of the alley upon vacation. CITY Or LANSI NG Department of Law ��c s� 02 interoffice MEMORANDUM To: DONNA WYNANT, SENIOR PLANNER From: JOHN M. ROBERT CITY ATTORNEY Subject: ACT-32-98/VACATION OF ALLEY RIGHT OF WAY Date: January 20, 1999 As per your January 15, 1999 fax request, I have reviewed the comments of John Grannel and Dave Tijerina of the Assessor's Office. W. Grannel's comment regarding the effect of a street/ alley vacation pursuant to the Subdivision Control Act is accurate. For your reference, attached is the pertinent citation from the Michigan Title Standards covering the subject of division of vacated streets/alleys between abutting lots. Based upon the prior use of the property adjoining the alley, it would be prudent for the City to request that the current abutting owner execute a release and hold harmless in favor of the City for the environmental condition of the alley upon vacation. Finally, to the extent that the area subject to vacation will not have a building placed thereon, there should be consideration of whether the City would benefit by the retention of a utility easement in the vacated right of way. If the City is not otherwise retaining the utility easement, there should be described that portion of the right of way that remains subject to the existing Consumers Energy easement. I trust this answers your inquiry. Please feel free to contact me if you have any other questions. JMR/sp Attachment F.%SHARMCkyDq PW=ingD baninewyt=Lu-s:-ssr.�an.wpe R >3 STANDARD 13.4 VACATION OF STREETS AND ALLEYS IN A RECORDED PLAT STANDARD: AFTER ENTRY OF A JUDGMENT OF A CIRCUIT COURT VACATING ALL OR PART OF A STREET OR ALLEY WHICH WAS DEDICATED AS PART OF A RECORDED PLAT, TITLE TO THE VACATED PORTION VESTS IN THE OWNERS OF THE ABUTTING LOTS IN THE PLAT AND BECOMES PART OF THE ABUT- TING LOTS. IF A DEDICATED STREET OR ALLEY IN A RECORDED PLAT IS VACATED AND THE STREET OR ALLEY IS ABUTTED ON OPPOSITE SIDES BY LOTS IN THE SAME PLAT, THE CENTER LINE OF THE VACATED STREET OR ALLEY BECOMES THE BOUNDARY LINE BETWEEN THE LOTS. IF THE VA- CATED PORTION OF A DEDICATED STREET OR ALLEY IS ABUTTED ON ONLY ONE SIDE BY LOTS IN THE PLAT, ALL OF THE VACATED PORTION BECOMES PART OF THE ABUTTING LOTS. A DESCRIPTION OF A LOT BY ITS LOT NUM- BER INCLUDES ANY PORTION OF A VACATED STREET OR ALLEY THAT HAS BECOME PART OF THE LOT. Problem A: Lot 16 of a recorded plat measures 50 feet from north to south, and is abutted on the south by a dedicated 60 foot wide street, south of which lies another lot in the same subdivision.The street was vacated in its en- tirety by a circuit court judgment. Subsequently, Mary Doe, the owner of lot 16, conveyed"lot 16" to Richard Roe. Did Roe acquire marketable title to lot 16 including the adjoining north half of the vacated street? Answer: Yes.After the vacation,title to the north half of the vacated street vested in Mary Doe,as the owner of lot 16.The north half of the vacated street became part of lot 16.Thus, the description"lot 16"is equivalent to'lot 16 including the north one-half of the vacated street adjoining the south side thereof." Problem B: Same facts as in Problem A except the deed described"the south 40 feet of lot 16."Did Roe acquire marketable title to the north 30 feet of the va- cated street and the south 10 feet of lot 16 as originally platted? Answer Yes. After the vacation of the street, the north 30 feet thereof became " ... part of lot 16 so that lot 16 had a north and south dimension of 80 feet. Consequently, the south 40 feet conveyed is measured from the center 4 of the vacated street and thus includes the north 30 feet of the vacated street and the south 10 feet of the original lot 16. e-ss c J-y 848.5 849.5 eo 33 34 437 P9 X ,�5 i5 PARKING FU � H 27 ❑8's0 22 i7 l6 2s g50 849./ I WAILS WALLS I I 31 26 22 P3 /8 . I 846.1 I PD 4 8 .90 30 26 � � I 20 a 7.9 P/ I I 18 3/I WALL 29 25 P7 5 849.9 2i 855.9 / $a 27 WALL 842.8 30 `3 844 23 `� !!`��P� ❑ ❑ P5 �P 'Gv . � 32 /6 855.8 �1 f 26 3/ /5 34 29 853.7 2i 855.6 /8 /6 • 33 ❑ 855.3 36 855.9 32 54 / /s 14855.8 P2 WAIN 855.8 •�z "PARKING - r 1 • I t ' t � •c _ I � 1fi Y It .. r- ZONING & ORDINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT February 10, 1999 PAGE 2 1. Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District The applicant wishes to rezone the property in order to permit construction of retail and office buildings. The request is to develop two buildings for retail and office use on this site. The energy efficiencies of the structures are to be studied by the Department of Energy as well. The property, at approximately 1/3 acre, is small, and the development will have to be sized to fit the site. Even though the comprehensive plan recognized this block on North East Street for residential use, further residential development along North East Street is unreasonable based upon the strip commercial nature of a majority of North East Street. The proposed use may be compatible with adjacent properties with appropriate buffering and resolution to access issues. The residential property at 2915 North East Street utilizes approximately three feet of the south edge of the subject property for a driveway. The residential property owner and the prospective commercial builder will need to work out a private easement to accommodate the driveway at 2915 North East Street. An adverse environmental impact is not anticipated as long as the storm water drainage is properly planned. The development is similar to other commercial development on North East Street, but it should be expected that the house at 2915 North East Street will at some time be requested to be used for commercial purposes. Even though there were only two members present, the committee members, based upon testimony and evidence, concurred with the staff report, and recommended to the full Board that the rezoning request be approved. Mr. Smith made a motion, seconded by Mr. Miller, to approve Z-19-98, Vacant Land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. Motion carried unofficially (2-0). �Eg 4 1999 201 Strathmore Rd. NN1Nla u��i510ti Lansing, MI 48910-2806+ February 24, 1999 Phone 485-2712 Mr. James A. Ruff,Zoning Administrator Mr. Jim Sturdevant, Senior Planner City of Lansing Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development Lansing Planning Board 316 N. Capitol Ave., Suite D-1 Lansing, Michigan 48933-1236 Dear Mr. Ruff, Mr. Sturdevant and Planning Board Members, Regarding: Z-19-98, Rezoning of vacant land on N. East St. at Howe, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial Rezoning requested by: Donald Wilson During the February 16, 1999, regular meeting of the Lansing Planning Board, item Z-19-98 was tabled by the Board. Mr. Feher disputed the property line between his property of 2915 N. East Street and the property that the rezoning is being requested for. We ask that the Planning Board rescind the tabling of Z-19-98 and that the rezoning be completed as soon as possible. Dr. Soroushian, General Director for DPD, Inc., and Mr. Feher have reached a verbal agreement that has nullified any dispute between these two parties. There was also a question of correct property lines according to the surveys of Mr. Feher's property and my property, (Z-19-98). Fred White of White Engineering Co, is rechecking my survey and is going to contact Kebs, Inc., (Kyes Engineering-Bryan Land Surveys)to eliminate any questions regarding the property lines, and this matter will be cleared, and there should be no further problem for Mr. Feher. DPD, Inc.'s offer to buy the property is contingent upon the rezoning of the property within the time period of their offer to purchase the land which would also effect any agreements with Mr. Feher. DPD. Inc, has submitted some site drawings to the Planning Board. and will work with the Planning Board to meet any reasonable requirements necessary for the successful completion of it's project. I personally believe DPD, Inc's project would add a quality appearance to N. East St. at this location. Thank you for your consideration, Donald Wilson Z-19-98 "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District Vacant Land a@ Southeast corner of N. East Street & E. Howe Ave. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT/OWNER: Donald E. Wilson 210 Strathmore Road Lansing, MI 48910 SUBJECT PROPERTY: Southeast corner of N. East Street & E. Howe Ave. EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential District REQUESTED ZONING: "F" Commercial District EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant PROPOSED LAND USE: Retail and Office uses PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 135 feet x 110 feet; 14,888 square feet; 0.34 acre SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Commercial S. Residential E: Commercial W: Residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "F" Commercial District S: "A" Residential District E. "F" Commercial District W: "A" Residential District MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Map, designates this area for residential development at 0-7 units per acre APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: This request is to rezone the property in order to permit construction of retail and office buildings. AGENCY RESPONSES: AMERITECH TELEPHONE: Response not yet received. ASSESSOR: Response not yet received. BOARD OF WATER AND LIGHT: Response not yet received. BUILDING SAFETY: Response not yet received. Z-19-98 "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District page 2 Vacant Land @ Southeast corner of N. East Street & E. Howe Ave CITIZEN PARTICIPATION GROUP: Response not yet received. CONSUMERS ENERGY: Response not yet received. MEDIA ONE: No objection to the rezoning, however, we maintain our utility easement along the N. East Street right-of-way. MI DEPT. TRANSPORTATION: No comments on this rezoning. PUBLIC SERVICES : Public Service Engineering has no objections to the proposed action. We reserve the right to plans through the site plan process. TRANSPORTATION: Response not yet received. Description of Site The property is currently a vacant lot. Ground cover consists of a grass lawn and part of the driveway that serves the adjacent property. The site is lower than the adjacent roadway on the east and north sides, and thus appears to be "sitting in a hole". The adjacent home to the south is at a somewhat higher elevation than the site in question, while the adjacent home to the west is at approximately the same elevation as the west portion of the site. ANALYSIS COMPLIANCE WITH THE MASTER PLAN The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Map, designates this area for residential development at 0-7 units per acre. Obviously, the proposed rezoning is not consistent with this designation. However, there is ample precedent over time where other properties fronting on N. East Street have been re-zoned for commercial use. COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE Surrounding land uses are a mixture of commercial and residential. There is a well established residential neighborhood to the east along Howe Avenue however, with the exception of the single family residence south of and adjacent to the subject property, the majority of properties fronting N. East Street are commercial. North across Howe Avenue is a use car sales lot, and a Burger King restaurant is to the northeast across N. East Street. Directly east of the site is an animal hospital, dry cleaners, and a night-club. South of the site at the intersection of Chilson Avenue is a Mexican grocery store and a Taco Bell restaurant. There is an eight unit apartment building located at the northeast corner of Chilson Avenue and N. East Street. Z-19-98 "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District page 3 Vacant Land @ Southeast corner of N. East Street & E. Howe Ave Essentially, rezoning of this property will continue a pre-established pattern of commercial properties facing N. East Street, with residential properties buffered from the main roadway by the commercial establishments. The depth of the commercial "strip" development is somewhat inconsistent in depth from N. East Street, and the subject property has less depth (approximately 127 feet) than nearby commercial property to the south (160 feet). The development as shown on the proposed site plan may not provide sufficient landscaping, screening, and buffering from the adjacent residential uses. Typically, these issues are addressed in the site plan review process that occurs before building permits are issued for construction. Staff thought it prudent to raise this issue so future expectations regarding intensity of the site's development are not miss-represented. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC The proposed development is not large enough to have a major impact on traffic on N. East Street. Development of interior circulation patterns and curb cut locations are subject to the City's site plan review process before construction can begin. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Proper design of storm water facilities on the property will be part of the site plan review process. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT This proposal is a continuation of an established pattern of commercial strip development of formerly residentially zoned properties adjacent N. East Street. Eventually, a more uniform depth of commercial zoning from N. East Street will need to be established and maintained for long term development of the corridor. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval. Respectfully Submitted, Jim Sturdevant, AICP Senior Planner Z-19-98.FE.wpd NORTH Z-19-98 Vacant Land @ Southeast comer of N. East Street & E. Howe Ave so k l � 1 52 53 54 56 56 57 56 — 1 0" W 1 ° � 10 %_. - ems.. 13; -f+ �F Uj I � � 1a �0�-` 5 h8 ( 15 "a 65 `e4 63 ' 62 61 60 59 4 i 47 — — �"— — —Ig 1/3 I coi cog �4 G✓e /7//C 0 b MO 1-0 to /a• h 1 cao Coa G/i Gzz 620 'tJ / 72: 73 ( 74 i 1751 i 76' 77 c 7tq. %J I 1 I I i ,o �� , S45 001 it'S lie 1 W I N n 41 4 N 2 C`^' " 1 4 2 1 n. rr 10 V ' i'�I� tr tr ! _ � � 8 h j 03 � � n 9 8 , 7 I y 6 5 I i:,, j 64 G GOS Go9 G/ G./9 621 zs�' scr wol tilt Vol .«� /so• s., soy r. /eq.ya• C W. A; 4 - - OL ' > I ry V N a I ( , 3 4 5 i. 7/ 7/7 Z-19-98 Vacant Land @ Southeast comer of N. East Street& E. Howe Ave T HOWE ST. I I AlEls: N oaw, secTiou A-A, ❑ I / n = „ F-rJr iSITE I�LMA I � i 1 N L� GMTH ELEVATION I EGeT 71oMff' - _ ® CCILJ�.RDPe0.TY I I I LNLL I I ®REStO E AITIA L ©/:.tlNMERGl/1L GHILSeN AJ E. EAsr ELEV/.TION log SCcjl°u siT.E pLM4 LK0 Z-19-98 Vacant and @ Southeast comer of N. East Street & E. Howe Ave .. •gym DRTE 6f IC • DSWY� .• U 5CxlC '. K •sIGIN- N if r— U _U �u 6 KI STORE! IZ C1 r htEtH. I KM Slo�A4' SjORrfiE � I N W J 5-TOR 1 ,CO 3 McCK I KC STORJRi' � �� DaTORIt! I ST � r Ik�TH I FLOOR PLAN ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Tuesday, March 2, 1999, During the Recess of the Planning Board 7:pm City Council Conference Room, 10th Floor 124 W. Michigan Avenue Lansing, MI 48933 AGENDA 1. SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People (Tabled January 26, 1999) 2. Adjournment Pending Items: 1. Z-19-97, N.W. Cor. Cavanaugh &Aurelius, "F"Commercial to "G-2" Wholesale District(Tabled October 15, 1997) 2. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-1" Business District(Tabled February 11, 1998) 3. Z-3-98, 1131 & 1133 Race Street, "H" Light Industrial to "G-1" Business District(Tabled April 15, 1998) 4. Z-4-98,201 E. Grand River, "F-1" Commercial & "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) 5. Z-5-98,401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) 6. Z-8-98, 208 E. Grand River Avenue, "F-1" Commercial to "G-1" Business (Tabled August 12, 1998) 7. SLU-5-98, Gier Community Center,2400 Hall Street(Act-6-98); 8. SLU-7-98, Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave. (Act-8-98); 9. SLU-10-98, Biggie Munn Park,4801 Aurelius Rd. (Act-11-98); 10. SLU-12-98, Fire Station K 5550 S. Pennsylvania Ave. (Act-13-98); 11. SLU-21-98, 700-708 E. Oakland, Residential in "I" Heavy Industrial District(Tabled in committee December 9, 1998) 12. SLU-25-98, 3400 Block of Stoneleigh Drive, Proposed Hospice for Eight People (Tabled January 26, 1999) zoag2299.spc - _ ,< , ;,,; . ;;1 _,�,. � ,t- � � . � i .. DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT IVIell�, 316 N.CAPITOL AVENUE•LAN$ING,MI 48933-1236• (517)483-4066• FAx:(517)483-6036 HI PLANNING OFFICE David C.Hollister,Mayor MEMO To: Planning Board From: Donna Wynant, AIC�P �L�� Senior Planner 7therInfo Subject: SLU-25-99: Revised Site Plan& Date: February 25, 1999 The Zoning and Ordinance Committee of the Planning Board tabled SLU-25-99 in request of additional information from the applicant regarding the development of the Hospice of Lansing eight bed facility. The applicant, Barbara Kowalski has submitted the attached revised site plan showing a drive to the hospice facility from Stoneleigh instead of from Wabash as originally planned. The drive is approximately 700 lineal feet and is a 15' wide asphalt drive with a 22' wide gravel base. A copy of this revised plan was given to Jim Lynch who lives on Wabash Road. He has spoken to a couple of his neighbors along Wabash. His main concern is whether or not additional development could occur on site, in view of the 700 foot long drive that "would appear to allow the development of other buildings off the drive." As a note/reminder: any future development of the subject 22.5 acre site, expansion of the facility, or platting of land would have to be reviewed by the Planning Board as a change to this Special Land Use permit. A copy of the revised site plan was also given to Jan Kolp, representative of the Forest View Neighborhood Association. The Fire Marshal's Office has indicated that the drive is required to have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet and unobstructed verticle clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inch and designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus. Other design considerations to the drive include an approved turning radius and an approved grade which does not exceed the maximum allowed. Information on anticipated vehicle trips and deliveries is also included in the attached memo by Ms. Kowalski as requested by the Planning Board. �?J Please Recycle 'Equal Opportunity Employer" Planning Board Page 2 February 25, 1999 A building elevation showing the architecture of the structure has not been provided at this point that would be helpful in evaluating the compatibility of the structure to the surrounding neighborhood. Ms. Kowalski has stated that this will be provided as soon as possible. The layout of the facility has somewhat changed and has shifted slightly in its orientation on site as it faces the pond. Information on wetlands has not been provided, but may be more closely evaluated during the site plan review process. Summary: The revised site plan eliminates some of the concerns presented by the easement access to Wabash Road, as originally requested, but raises some design concerns. These can, however, be addressed in the site plan review process. The volume of traffic to be generated by this eight bed hospice facility will be very negligible. The Hospice of LANSING The Conunuuity"S Choice for Care 22 February, 1999 Mr. James A. Ruff, Zoning Administrator City of Lansing, Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development 316 N. Capital Avenue, Suite D-1 Lansing, MI 48933 SLU-25-98, 3400 BLOCK OF STONELEIGH DRIVE, "A" RESIDENTIAL Dear Jim, The following information regarding the SLU permit, specifically, the issues of access and traffic for the Hospice Residence is submitted for the Planning Board's deliberations. Access will be from Stoneleigh Drive as access from the north perimeter on Wabash Road will no longer be pursued with the Lansing School District. Stoneleigh Drive is the single access to the property. Attached is an architectural drawing and narrative description of the driveway to the Hospice Residence from Stoneleigh Drive. A typical day of traffic activity for Visitors and Staff: 1 to 2 visitors per resident, ( 8 residents), 2 to 3 on-site staff every eight or twelve hour shift, 1 to 3 volunteers per shift, and support staff( chaplain, social worker) 2 to 3 visits weekly with 1 weekly visit by physician. Once daily delivery (maximum by contract ) for medications by automobile. Bi-weekly delivery for medical supplies by car or van, ( or by assigned volunteer\staff. Medical equipment, such as, oxygen concentrators, as needed, ( projected maximum of 2 per week) by van. 1 to 2 weekly grocery transport for food supplies (one of the volunteer visits) . (Laundry will be done on-site, previously we consider out-sourcing) Traffic patterns of other Hospice Residences indicate traffic is contained to needs of operation and to family visitors as the purpose is to provide a quiet, peaceful environment for the resident. Clearly most of the traffic is intersperse through the day and evening with minimal cars at nighttime, (visiting is open 24 hours a day) Please call if you have any questions regarding this information and thanks to you and your staff for the assistance. Sincerely, Parwalski, MP Executive Director 6035 Executive Dr.,Suite 103 Lansing,Michigan 48911 Affiliate Program,The Ionia Area Hospice Telephone 517.882.4500 Fax 517.882.3010 Hospice of Lansing February 22, 1999 Proposed Site Access The site access shall be located in the northwest corner of the site where the site fronts on to Stoneleigh Drive. The new Hospice building is to be located in the northeast portion of the site. An access drive of approximately 700 lineal feet will be constructed from Stoneleigh Drive to the new building. Because of this low traffic volume, a 15' wide asphalt drive with a 22' wide gravel base is to be constructed. Consideration is being given to providing two wider sections along the drive to pull off on should on-coming traffic meet opposing traffic. Keystone Design Group Phone: [5171 394-3800 1120 Keystone Avenue, Lansing, Michigan 48911 Fax: [5171 394-5610 I 1 8 a Ir ' IF 1 S 1 9 I 1 oca se O9J 550 o;a 'Ile Orb Sig 1 I I I I sze 915Y�01 1 i I I I l l, QOH • _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — / g� I 11 I I — — — — — — — — — — .Y '� 44 �N I 1 1 — — — — — — — — — — l J Y M / � _ 1 — aiLr .t _ M M31VM. mono- � u ' ' uw — — — — — — — xw � 1 - -- — — -- — — — — — — 2 of - - lA121i(:n — _ — — _ — — — — — — — — _ — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — 1 �� i 59b OL _ 4Y ♦—_IL -i LS cn wN t �` S2)LLZl9d 02.1. ►-ss tie a M SLU-25-98 3400 Block Stoneleigh Drive Special Land Use for Hospice of Lansing GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Barbara Kowalski The Hospice of Lansing 6035 Executive Dr. #103 Lansing, MI 48911 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Owner REQUESTED ACTION: Special Land Use permit to construct a hospice residential care home. EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant land EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential PROPOSED ZONING: No change in zoning PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: Irregular shape; site is approx. 22.5 acres in size SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Single Family Residential S: Vacant- MSU Land E: Vacant- MSU Land W: Single Family Residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential S: "A" Residential E: "A" Residential W: 'W' Residential MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Southeast Master Plan designates future land use as "Parks/Open Space/Cemetery" SPECIFIC INFORMATION DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: This is a request for a Special Land Use to construct a residential care facility to provide hospice services for eight residents. The Planning Board SLU-25-98: 3400 Block, Stoneleigh Drive Page 2 Special Land Use for Hospice of Lansing proposed location of the residential structure, (approximately 7,500-8,000 square feet in size), is in the northeast corner of the site. AGENCY RESPONSES: Ameritech: (No comments received.) Assessor: (D. Tijerina): Will there be a purchase of land or an access easement from Beekman Center (Lansing School District)? Otherwise, there does not appear to be any road frontage. (Diane L): Also, will each private room be similar to a rental dwelling? (J. Grannell): 1) What is the relationship between the Applicant (Hospice of Lansing) and person shown as Taxpayer/Owner of Record (Edward F. Solomon)? Is there an unseen Land Contract, or an unrecorded or future transfer involved here between the parties? That is: do we have a sale contingent upon this SLU Approval/Denial? 2) For your information: Please be aware of the three surveys attached, which are a part of this total description. They were prepared in 1988, front on Stoneleigh, and appear to be sites for single-family residences. We have written letters to Solomon, requesting his intention in preparing surveys for these "parcels". The letters asked him to contact Planning about a Lot Split Application, before we could make any changes to the Tax Rolls. To date, those letters have not drawn a response. We have not changed the tax descriptions to create these surveyed areas as tax parcels; and have not been Planning Board SLU-25-98: 3400 Block, Stoneleigh Drive Page 3 Special Land Use for Hospice of Lansing asked to do so by the owner. Board of Water & Light: Customer Projects Electric No objections to the special Land Use permit. Contact Persons: Bob Strobel 371-6082. Water No objection to the issuance of a building permit. Water Customer Projects needs to see Utility Site Plan as soon as its is available to have flow model run. Contact Person: Terry Robison, 371-6494. Building Safety: A residential care facility for 8 individuals is considered as a single family residence by the Building Code. A building permit for a R-3 Residence will be required. The office has no objection to the use from a Building Code perspective. City Attorney: (No comments received.) Code Compliance: (No comments received.) Consumers Energy: (No comments received.) DEQ/DNR: DEQ, Land & Water Management Division: Thank you for the opportunity to review the above referenced project as it relates to the State's Floodplain Regulatory Authority found in Part 31, Water Resources Protection; Part 301, Inland Environmental Protection Act (NREPA), 1994 PA 451, as amended. A review of the City of Lansing Flood Insurance Study indicates the site is not within a 100-year floodplain, map enclosed. No permits are required under Part 31, State Floodplain Act, of the NREPA. Planning Board SLU-25-98: 3400 Block, Stoneleigh Drive Page 4 Special Land Use for Hospice of Lansing From the limited information you provided, I can not conclusively determine whether a permit would be required under Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams of the NREPA. An on-site evaluation is needed to determine conclusively whether or not wetlands are present. The enclosed wetland assessment program is available to the community. If you have any questions, please contact me. Development Office: No comment. Fire Marshall: (No comments received.) Ingham Co. Drain Com. (No comments received.) Media One: (No comments received.) Parks & Recreation: It does not impact park operation and services. Public Service: (No comments received.) Traffic Engineer: (No comments received). Lansing Neighborhood Council: (No comments received). Evaluation Section 1282.03(f)(1)-(9) sets forth the criteria which must be used to evaluate a Special Land Use permit request. The criteria and evaluation are as follows. 1. Compatibility with Use on Adjacent Properties The proposed residential care facility will be compatible with the adjacent land uses. The surrounding area is essentially a low density residential neighborhood. Single family homes are located to the north along Wabash and to the west along Stoneleigh. Vacant land owned by Michigan State University and its biological station, Bear Lake, is located to the east and south. Planning Board SLU-25-98: 3400 Block, Stoneleigh Drive Page 5 Special Land Use for Hospice of Lansing Based on the applicant's site analysis, access into the property is proposed to be from the far eastern end of Wabash Road as it extends into the Beekman property, owned by the Lansing School District. The applicant has had discussions with School District staff, but to date, has no official written agreement in the form of an easement from the School District. The issue of access into the site is critical to the location of the facility. If no access is secured at the east end of the site, the applicant may have to consider siting the facility at the west end of the site with access to Stoneleigh. 2. Change in the Essential Character of the Area The proposed residential care facility will not change the essential character of the area which is predominately low density single family residential. Although the proposed structure will be 7,500- 8,000, which is much larger than surrounding homes, it will be at a lower elevation, approximately 30 feet below homes along Wabash Road and will be located on a 22.5 acre parcel. The placement of the structure as proposed will also be as much as 400 feet away from Stoneleigh Drive. 3. Interference with General Enjoyment of Adjacent Properties No significant impact on adjacent properties is anticipated, particularly since the structure will sit at a substantially lower elevation. Any views into the 22.5 acre site will therefore not be significantly obstructed. The existing tree line will be retained along the north property line, which is to the rear of homes fronting onto Wabash Road. Any landscaping around the parking lot will also improve the appearance of the development from nearby residences. Generally, for a single eight bed development, very few vehicle trips will be generated on a daily basis compared to the overall size of the property. Staff has asked the applicant to supply a typical days traffic/visitor pattern, including anticipated regular and irregular traffic, for review. 4. Improvement to Property and Surrounding Area The proposed development should represent an improvement to the property. The vacant land is anticipated to be developed with a quality structure on a property to be well maintained. This development should resolve any questions about future use of this sizeable and significant property on the east end of this neighborhood. The applicant has indicated that the overall site will retain its natural vegetation. Some walkways may be created with some planting areas. Planning Board SLU-25-98: 3400 Block, Stoneleigh Drive Page 7 Special Land Use for Hospice of Lansing 7. Impact on Public Services Any impact on public services to result from a 7,500 to 8,000 square foot residential facility should not be significant and would certainly be much less than possible residential development of a 22.5 acre parcel. Access into the site is proposed to be from an easement across Beekman Center property which is accessed from the east end of Wabash Road. This arrangement with the School District, which owns the Beekman Center, is still pending. Securing such an easement will be critical to the placement of the structure on the eastern portion of the property. 8. Compliance with the Master Plan The Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates future land use generally at this location as Parks/Open Space/Cemetery. Land use along Wabash and Stoneleigh is designated as low density residential. The overall area which includes the subject site and land owned by Michigan State University featuring Bear Lake, was designated Parks/Open Space/Cemetery as a general land use category due to the amount of vacant land concentrated in one area and the subsequent development constraints posed by its former use as a gravel pit. Some reclamation of gravel pits have resulted in such development. The District 9 Plan of the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan recommended low density residential development or recreational use for possible future use. The gravel pit is identified as an "attractive nuisance" in the District 9 Plan and gives the following strategies: 1. Support a public recreational development on this site and only secondarily low to medium density residential housing. Any plan developed should be sensitive to the residential areas around it. 2. Enlist the support and technical assistance of the Michigan State University School of Landscape Architecture for design alternatives. 3. Any strategy should be especially attentive to the continued protection of the Bear Lake Area. Residential care facilities, like other conditional uses, are regarded as compatible uses in residential areas. Therefore, staff believes this proposal to be in compliance with the Plan. Planning Board SLU-25-98: 3400 Block, Stoneleigh Drive Page 6 Special Land Use for Hospice of Lansing 5. Environmental Impacts The proposed residential care facility will not represent a hazard to adjacent properties or involve uses, activities, materials or equipment detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of persons or property through excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, odors, fumes or glare. The development will be on 22.5 acres of land which allows the structure to be placed a good distance from any adjacent residential development. The property is not within a 100-year floodplain. However, according to the DEQ, no determination can be made whether a permit would be required under Part 301, Inland Lakes and Streams of the NREPA. They have indicated that an on-site evaluation is needed to determine conclusively whether or not wetlands are present. Also, due to the sensitivity of "Bear Lake" the development plan should be reviewed by MSU for preservation of Bear Lake. Concerns were raised at the Public Hearing about which trees were to be removed for the structure, driveway, and parking lot. The location of power lines needs to also be identified on the site plan. In terms of property management, the Hospice facility will, in effect, act as a caretaker of the subject property by having a vested interest in the property. It will be in their best interest to make sure it is attractive to its residents, staff and surrounding neighbors. Any dumping of trash on the property and in the pond will be reduced by having such a vested interest on-site as opposed to being an absentee landlord. This is an important aspect to this area, formerly identified as an attractive nuisance in the District 9 Plan that was made a part of the Southeast Comprehensive Plan (see attached). 6. Impact on Utilities No negative impact on utilities are expected to result from the proposed residential care facility since utilities (e.g. water, sanitary sewer, electricity) are already available to service the site. Sanitary and possibly storm sewer, however, will have to be extended to the site with a possible pump station due to the substantial difference in elevation of the structure and nearby streets. Power lines also need to be identified on a site survey. Planning Board SLU-25-98: 3400 Block, Stoneleigh Drive Page 8 Special Land Use for Hospice of Lansing 9. Compliance with Zoning District Regulations The property is zoned " A" Residential. Residential care facilities are permitted in the"A' Residential District subject to a special land use permit. Although, specific requirements for residential care facilities are not identified in the Off-Street Parking section of the Zoning Ordinance, the minimum amount of parking for homes for the aged or convalescent homes is one for each two beds. This would amount to four parking spaces plus visitor and staff parking. The 20 parking spaces shown on the site plan should easily accommodate this size of facility but will be further evaluated when we see the staffing program. The proposed 8 person Hospice facility complies with the conditions per Section 1248.04 of the Zoning Ordinance. As stated: "a residential care facility which provides care for more than six persons may be permitted in an A, A-1 or B Residential District, if it meets all the following conditions: 1. The residential care facility provides a minimum lot area of not less than 1,000 square feet per resident. 2. Twenty-four hour supervision is maintained by a sponsoring agency. 3. The proposed residential care facility is located more than 1,500 feet from an existing residential care facility which provides care for more than six persons. Additional information needed from the Applicant: 1. Access into site: Direct access to a local street is required. An easement is acceptable to give access to Wabash Road, but must be reflected in a written agreement between the applicant and the Lansing School District. 2. Site Survey: A more complete site survey is needed to determine impact on trees, particularly where the facility is to be located, and any drives and parking lot are to be located. Also, the location of any other pertinent information such as the location of power lines. 3. Elevation of building: An elevation would be helpful in better evaluating the compatibility of architecture and its appearance as it relates to the surrounding neighborhood. Planning Board SLU-25-98: 3400 Block, Stoneleigh Drive Page 9 Special Land Use for Hospice of Lansing 4. Environmental: We need the applicant to answer the question about wetlands. S.Traffic impacts: More detailed traffic information is required from the applicant so that staff can review it with the Transportation Office for impact. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Special Land Use be tabled to allow the applicant to provide more information to better evaluate the proposed residential care facility. Report prepared by: Donna Wynant,AICP Senior Planner The Hocpiccc o/'I i The Commutim'.Chowc ti)r(')rr Hospice Facts • Hospice provides care for the terminally M patient and their family in their own home, nursing home, or in the home of others. • Hospice concentrates on care - not cure. • All medical services are directed by the client's primary physician. • The client's physician must certify every six months the client has an expected prognosis of six months or less. (However, Hospice will never discontinue service.) - • All clients whose illness is considered terminal are candidates for Hospice care, not just those with a cancer diagnosis. • A registered nurse is assigned to each client as the primary nurse to assist in the management of care at the direction of the physician. • Home health aide services are available to assist with personal care. • A social worker makes regular visits to assist the client and family in coping with the changes illness brings. • A Hospice Spiritual Care Coordinator is available to any family who desires a visit and updates the client's minister, priest or rabbi. • Volunteers are available to offer short periods of respite or for numerous other tasks to relieve the caregiver. • A registered nurse is oa-call and available 24 hours a day to go to the client's home if needed. • Reimbursement for services is covered by Medicare/Medicaid, Blue Cross Blue Shield, private insurance and many other commercial insurances. Services are available to all eligible clients, regardless of their ability to pay. • The physician may bill and receive their regular reimbursement from Medicare or other health insurance for any physician services. • Medicare has added an unlimited fourth benefit period of coverage to allow Hospice to receive reimbursement for care of any qualified client who lives beyond the initial six moth prognoses. • Bereavement counseling is offered to the family for a minimum of thirteen months after-a client's death. • Hospice of Lansing, Inc, uses donations for persons in the Tri-County area and for community Bereavement Program. 6035 Executive Dr.,Suite 103 Laming,Michigan 48911 �1�I1late Progranr,The IoniaArca Hospice sz r Ido oni�31.7.982.4500 s Y Fax S17.882.3010 PRO no" ®®i ® Ila�� - � 1 llow Owe Fill on • _ �• ;'�,k��i\ram. III =, � r, h •. a� � -. • Via= ti IroiIE �i'',,.:v 00. I. ,� ''fir •;��;� . ,� � •� °�:' to `T�:•'�y . •. tom. ".. •�•' :�r � > 1 . •li r _ lsgQ�ra�\. 'o' - -'' �.� •�5't�,�,., 1 1• 1 111 •1 ®►\�► � ' III® mile se i �1V 1;PI!g� c; ou6t► CUM c pe.S ''4' � y'y�� M� U�ttz z oy,� F]IC G I ,�.+'`r l?`��c� l ir'.i Pyt i 1r ' kk i •Y ,.�1�11 6 + v @C7.ItJ ICdIC u. � •.+ I � tW�? � o c S'Y�:�.r F r' e� 2 �+ y„ f��Mt �,�Pr;/1"rf?'r �� ' � t9.1 \vw. es..:c: � i3.1y��,..�,w>• ..a..a..� rs...at-" s i f".r r.1 ±v' i � 7Rv iv1 !®�w:�r�>m' '�[ESs..sc� Trw�`Tl"R'♦ �r 5 �r FJ.tf �.1�,� �"C7-+ t+,s � /�_ .Y�s..,z„M y.A�,yr'm�`� mr +�+ L; .�,r,-c`�.414,gr;t7!�4K•.�."�i.�s�6'++y., �15s �';s"�f�1 ��i ,� �� '.cl � i � ;1{�`s4i�S1� �:��J @[ 1G�,. ►C,I®P'�..l\�,ai..� __�+,r.. .,. �: "��teF,��ja� � �" r 1,ry ,�r.c,A ,�; ..� y t �- ; •t. • �.�.•-•. ssp�yy rr,•:.yd"` �.�k' lei d"i�' ;". ♦ •,�SSiT53X �a � .'Y_ �s- Y;e�,, r��,�{'"�tr<`•2F t'"+r`' »C'�i",yJr�d";1...c� .,�" +..;�••..�h':.gin;(..��I�'(:'�•s;if_d�bt'-�,�*;��->y..�•�. �'� 1 1 1"`�'�,d'il�llys� >• l X z� 5[�'7,zt��i>r•�� T ,y��:p.a. '91�r'�\ y n;3.��.'(�i' ,J�,'}Y�'M1�� 'l.F`fA�. As ��'t!Cr7'� �T VJ'1+i'"�t,�'.'•'•'a rr � 3 > 4 r +yt+ p` ,-�z•� +:'+`r�4i ♦ ry^ •t +�' '�k'z t_ `:yrr ,�� •'� '`�.'a '� r �� .�' isg,�'r1 R'�Z,"$••r 1i• 'F�yy,Gis 6 `�� i", F31 �i:tY.e�ronk:2�,.ti":Y�r`'�4�� i a.� ��i° _�'�•� s.,-��i� %y.U,;.� 'y a. y. ♦ i" ' �'t-. ,^I j MK K:}}� (1''> i � ,;ti �3 �F�iC �4es�"s•�;�zJ � [+c�g �� i��. ;e`'�a^��.'�� k1'T`Dj ��'•�r w P`.c"'�1`'� �Vtd�9s��x'' ' s^'"�• .r � � Ita� ,11..J N' f ,z+ '' r \k'„ .��'�i"}{. _l .� +- ti 1' {� 4•�+, '4-`n ,{. Y� ,K, II�III L1{7 xr�?� t,i�1 F►��"' s'' �3'` t :�,, t,r.r ' ? � �" ns�� w. F. /t�L ��.' (!I®111�6 �''• ,. '�i �', ;.,, 3 ti �z�=Yr: .ihti.' v:. ,�w♦ , ,T�, QeA K. VA IMMUNE low In r i ../ r Y } - r •�J F w -r t 5 �.l.t� 7J'�-e'+� a><q ••`:�^.i�e ;:r� e• .a•�,rC j"ti/ y� ,.4:�'bi�.. �' ,,.`•y''S i.�t.`7Iti,.✓:YES I)'�"�t r d�A i , t _.t �,` ft~ `�'7'r� ��,L� r q!! i 5�'! i� �'r ��.. �'�'. a'� `".t G�.�� p.,�z�� •. ��' �4� .r%�P+14 ]r. 1�, J'• t '� ? ,{,1."9 k{rx �.1:. �i e' -�fY.M, •ay CSjds rt+�.K. ,wt s• t� �...0 t'Y�t r�, ixf r.r..t'u+,• .:,, � ,� � jj/I •, -..,r ts5,1 .Sh;� �a• .i+'` � 4+'- .�94 � t• ! FN�. ,2s ,.2 =f:iaaYrfi fir,•i :'�c� + � 7• .�'.f v� ` 9+t L�' 2t aw f:. `4y''-. � a .,.t• tl.Y `' .. :63f .1'iC � � .. ns.:�. Fs �.�. ..�+1� 'r ^c'�� . 't• w � � 4`�v `� 1fj, i" '"`'.. Wiz' l �s� z..!: -7",�.� �.•^c:';, fy � '�I'."fi'S i' tiy wn�rn�mnm v, �.::J r F i i .a�6•.� �?s ,. -r. i F.yC, 9. 1. 1 .5�rp"!� > .s r „t]r � r c r r,.t-`'4 fs. /�S 'i�a,�•. � � 'yt,t+�r�_< •r�CLs'61l30� F�. e 9.: ys��,�_ � .,s. t .1 .,., 1 - •,q ! ':' l �I..i•r f lG �._�:-' _.. � /,'•w 1 1 � � \ � ., � � ..mot \ __ ',I I I 1 I ► _ 640 — f S .. Co s�- 4 _ \� V Qv H Q1 01 EXHIBIT C SITE ANALYSIS Stoneleigh Drive Site , Hospice of Lansing 6035 Executive Drive Lansing, Michigan Prepared by: Keystone Design Group 1120 Keystone Drive Lansing, Michigan Bruce Stewart Associates, P.C. 603 East Michigan Avenue Lansing, Michigan October 22, 1998 INDEX • General Information • Zoning • Topography • Vegetation • Soil • Access • Utilities • Analysis Plan • Attachment A FENNER ARBORETUM FOREST RD. C� TAMMANY a: STATER 496 HAMELON ST. 0 ' Lc� 3 w o D_ ROBINSON RD. w FIRESIDE Z OR. O zi WABASH RD. w Cy- aFIMSE DR. aRovlr+aAL LUWANINA OR. CAVANAUGH RD. VICINITY MAP NO SCALE GENERAL INFORMATION The site is approximately 23 acres in size and has been mined for sand and gravel. Single family homes flank the property to the north and west. At the extreme east end of the north lot line approximately 63 feet of joint property line is shared with the Beekman Center. Michigan State University owns the property to the south and east. The University's long term plans for this land is not known. ZONING This parcel is zoned."A". Residential. The Hospice would be allowed in this district, providing a special land use permit is obtained. Three conditions must be met for a permit in this district, along with the general standards laid out for all special land use requests ( see attachment A ). Conditions: #1 A minimum lot area of 1,000 square feet must be provided for each resident. The site meets this requirement. #2 Twenty-four hour supervision must be provided. This facility meets this requirement. #3 This facility is located more than 1,500 feet from an existing residential care facility. This site is 1,400 feet from the Tendercare South nursing home on Provincial House Drive. According to Doris Witherspoon from the Lansing Department of Planning, these are not similar facilities so this is not a problem. A written request should be made to the City for a legal interpretation of this condition. The special land use process takes 60 to 90 days and costs $800.00 to file an application. The zoning of all property adjacent to this parcel is also "A" Residential. TOPOGRAPHY The site appears to be in a naturally depressed area, with the mining operation leaving the land with many steep banks and a pond centrally located. A vertical elevation change of roughly 70 feet exists from Stoneleigh Drive to the bottom of the mining pit. The source of the water is not known, it may be spring fed or just the result of surface drainage into a mining pit. The survey does not indicate a water line which may suggest that the latter is the case. Along the east and south sides of the pond the land is flat. This area is an average of 34 feet below the street and represents about 25% of the site area. VEGETATION Do to the mining of the site, it is mostly grasses and scrub plants. Some trees have grown sporadically around the property, with none of major size. The perimeter of the site has some larger trees that were not effected by the mining. SOIL No soil borings were available for review. It can be assumed that the soils in the area are suitable for construction, due to the existing development in the area. Sand and gravel may have been mined on site, however the extent of these soils is unknown. Soil borings are always recommended prior to purchase of any property. ACCESS The only street frontage is 242 feet along Stoneleigh Drive. Stoneleigh Drive is accessed off of Forest Road to the north and Provincial House Drive to the west. Provincial House Drive has direct access off.of Aurelius Road. Stoneleigh and Provincial House are classified as collector streets suitable to service this facility. Wabash Road runs east-west to the north of the property. The only possible access point to this street would be through the Beekman Center at the north-east corner of this site. Wabash is classified as a local residential street and could be used providing an agreement was reached with Beekman Center. UTILITIES • Water - An 8 inch main is located in Stoneleigh Drive and a 6 -inch main in Wabash Drive. • Gas - Available in both Stoneleigh and Wabash Drive. • Sanitary Sewer - 8 inch sewers are available in both Streets. The sewer in Stoneleigh Drive is deeper and probably more accessible. A sanitary lift station will be required because gravity flow will not function do to the depressed elevation of this site. • Storm Water - Sewers are available in the area, however the depressed elevation does not allow access to them. The pond can be used to store surface water. Generally a development must have a discharge point, this site has a swale leaving the site to the south. Engineering design will be required to maintain the pre-development rate/volume of water from leaving the site. ' s r � 1 •f1i • ,icy• ,,_ � 'fi; - �•,�r ,I3 ' J � •Itri ti APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY APRIL 20, 1999 Draft 041999 Approved 042099 To Clerk 051299 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 P.M., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall _ 124 West Michigan Avenue = Tuesday, March 16, 1999 1. OPENING SESSION: m .;�o TIC) Chairman Ruge called the meeting to order at 7:08 p.m. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Keene, Miller, Nischan, Smith; Ruge. Seven members present; one vacant seat. B. Excused Absences: None. C. Introductions. Ms. Eleanor Love, Planning Manager, introduced staff present, William C. Rieske, Principal Planner, Jim Sturdevant, Senior Planner, and Louise H. Christian, Recording Secretary, and McKenna Associates, Phil McKenna and Laurie Leland Kirk, Farmington Hills. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - Approved as presented. 3. COMMUNICATIONS A. Letter to John P. Ruge, Planning Board Chair, RE: Roma Bakery/A to Z Rentals and Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan, dated March 16, 1999 from Loomis, Ewert, Parsley, Davis & Gotting, in opposition. B. Letter from Lansing Community College Board of Trustees Re: Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan. C. Letter from Lansing Community College, President's Office Re: Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan. D. Letter from Planning and Zoning Office, Mark Wykoff, making comments on the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan. 4. HEARINGS A. SLU-1-99, 528 N. Seymour Ave., Parking Lot in "DM-3" Residential District. Ms. Love presented the case, a request by Lansing Community College originally submitted as a rezoning and subsequently withdrawn. They have now requested a Special Land Use permit for property adjacent to an office building which they purchased in the few years. They want to expand a parking lot onto this vacant parcel. They would redesign the interior circulation of the lot so that it would not have separate access onto the street, but rather would be part of the overall parking for the entire parcel. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 2 Instead of rezoning the parcel to "D-1" which would be consistent with the rest of the parcel, the applicant is requesting a special land use to allow parking in the "DM-3" District for that adjacent office use to the south. That is a permitted use, with a Special Land Use permit, in the "DM-3" District. The applicant did not wish to address the Board at this time. GWENDOLYN CONARTON, 308 LAPEER, #1, LANSING. My main concern is the fact that this is taking more viable residential housing space in the downtown area adjacent to residences and turning it into another parking lot. I live about 1'/ blocks from this parcel. I enjoy my neighborhood and like the fact that there are houses that are extremely interesting and do not like the fact that there is another parking lot being considered. This should not be allowed to become a parking lot. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman declared the hearing closed for SLU-1-99, 528 N. Seymour Ave., Parking Lot in "DM-3" Residential District. and referred to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee. 5. PRESENTATION A. Final Draft - Proposed Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Ruge said no action would be taken this evening on the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan. Jarl Nischan, Chair, Urban Development Committee presented the report. Mr. Nischan reviewed the chronology, what we have done so far, what steps the plan went through in the last 1'/years, what next steps are, and what the plan is and is not. For plan details such as the planning area, circulation issues, etc., Mr. Nischan deferred to McKenna & Associates. In September 1997 the Steering Committee was established. Over the next three months, several work sessions with City staff were conducted. Between October and March, two public town meetings were held and individual neighborhood association meetings were held. Between January and March, the process continued with stakeholder interviews into July of last year in which a variety of focus group and stakeholder meetings were held. Rough drafting of the plan was done through that whole period, and in July of last year, the working draft of the plan was presented to the Principal Shopping District Steering Committee. It was reviewed, more revisions were done, and in June 1998, the Planing Board held a public hearing. In September, the Urban Development Committee, a subcommittee of the Planning Board, met to edit the plan. That has been completed. The plan is now going from a PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 3 committee of the Board to the Planning Board. There will be a thirty-day comment period from March to April 13. Sometime near the end of April, we would see Planning Board action on the plan. Providing context, what the plan is not, is important. It is not law; it is not a zoning map; It is not a property taxation map; it is a set of recommendations for action by the City, Planning Board, City Council, developers; anyone who is involved. The stakeholders will be the Planning Board and everyone who in some way has had a hand with its shaping—the Principal Shopping District Steering Committee, and stakeholders such as residents, workers, businesses, neighborhood associations--everyone, we hope, will view themselves as stakeholders. It has been a year and a half in development. There will be many years of refinement in the future, because the plan is a guide for action. For specific context, Mr. Nischan introduced Philip McKenna, President of McKenna & Associates, and Lori Leland-Kirk, the Landscape Architect of McKenna & Associates. LORI LELAND-KIRK, McKenna & Associates. Ms. Kirk reviewed development plan objectives--the goal of the plan is to enliven central Lansing by creating a dynamic and vibrant area of commercial, retail, arts, entertainment, waterfront, educational, governmental and residential interests. This will encourage public and private investment thereby attracting residents, consumers, businesses, employees and business. To create this dynamic and vibrant area, we must encourage development and redevelopment, both commercial and residential; encourage and strengthen linkages, physical, institutional, social and transit linkages; encourage architectural and cultural resources of Central Lansing; encourage people to live there; present the vitality and beauty of Central Lansing; provide ease of transport. Ms. Kirk described three centers of activity, the Capitol Area, Stadium or Entertainment District, and Old Town. To achieve these development objectives, the Plan explores opportunities and constraints--Central Lansing lacks dynamism. To build dynamism, the Plan starts with the Grand River and lists as assets the apartments on the bank, a strong business center downtown, the Capitol, restaurants, schools, churches, historic architecture, and established neighborhoods. To increase vital activities downtown, we want to link the three areas using several strategies. First, increase linkages along the river, in the park and also improve the park. Trolley linkage is important, as is land use linkage, and increasing the PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 4 residential base. The full potential of the River Walk needs to be realized. The plan advocates using the river as a central focus. An area of high technology light industrial is proposed for its proximity to General Motors, Sparrow Hospital and Lansing Community College; it builds on existing rail and street networks. The Plan proposes a variety of circulation improvements, to convert the one- way street system to two-way in a vehicular circulation proposal, and to utilize traffic-calming mechanisms. Gateways are also emphasized, on Grand River, on Larch and Cedar, and several other gateways to create a destination in the Central Lansing area. Way finding is also addressed by signage, by maintaining landmark architecture, and by including public art as landmarks. Bicycle routes are also included to encourage bike usage. Regarding recommendations, the Plan recommends concentrating activity in the three areas with a walking district around the areas, with residential uses feeding activity into the three areas. An opportunity for residential in the downtown is the area north of the entertainment district, north of the stadium and south of Old Town. The Plan proposes a residential district west of Larch Street and the High Tech-industrial east of Larch Street. That residential district is a mixed use neighborhood. Circulation on Cedar and Larch would be improved so that Cedar would not be a divider through the area. Mixed use is encouraged. There would be some other uses besides residential, but they would contribute to the neighborhood in that district. Washington Avenue is a major commercial center in the Central Area. It goes through Lansing Community College up to Old Town; it provides an excellent opportunity for a linkage between the Capitol Area and Old Town. Suggestions have been made to open parts of Washington to a trolley line or to traffic, but there are many ideas for development. Details will be finalized in a future study. Lansing Community College provides opportunities for downtown Lansing. Linkages from LCC to surrounding areas are encouraged throughout the Plan. Connections to the neighborhoods north and to the Capitol area south are encouraged, and some design methods are proposed. Historic preservation is encouraged, as is infill construction. The recommendations were based on market analysis, which shows additional retail space for apparel, art galleries, books and music, drugs, pharmaceuticals; furniture and home furnishings and a pet store were viable in this area. A quality limited-service motel is also viable, along with speciality food stores and a 10,000 sq ft grocery store. Residential uses are also viable in this area. The more residential use, the more commercial PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 5 potential in the activity centers, and the more vitality. The High-Tech Park was shown to be viable, based on proximity to GM, Lansing Community College and Sparrow Hospital. Mr. Nischan said the strategy is to get more people downtown living, working, shopping, entertaining themselves, and enjoying what the City has to offer. This is the end of the working draft process. Final comments from those submitting comments will be worked into a proposed final draft which will be presented to the Planning Board. The Comment period will run for four weeks, ending Tuesday, April 13 at 4 p.m. The most helpful comments will be specific to things most important to you. The simpler and the clearer you can make them, the better. Action by the Board will take place between April 20 and May 4. 6. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (3 minutes each) RANDY RIFKIN, CO-OWNER OF FRIEDLAND INDUSTRIES. In the north end, just south of Old Town. The Plan for the most part ignores local industry interests. This alienates industry in Central Lansing. Friedland has been on the same site since 1885. We provide services to many local industries, to the public and to General Motors. The Plan discourages local industry, discourages potential industries from locating in the Central Lansing area, and discourages industry from expanding. These industries contribute to the tax base and provide employment and services locally. Approximately ten sections of the Plan threaten Friedland. On 2-3, "Large buildings along the riverfront block views and access to the river and prevent capitalizing of the natural asset of the Grand River." Many industrial concerns which should not be ignored are located there. A passage in 2-6 states Existing land uses which conflict with the developing Main Street must be phased out to encourage commercial and residential development." don't know if that applies to me, but others on Main Street would not be happy with that comment. A passage in 4-5, The Future Land Use Plan, under C, which in the middle of our company, is now considered for high density residential accessory mixed use. I find this extremely threatening. On 4-20, Convert Larch St. to a two-way four-lane major north-south arterial, convert Cedar Street to a local collector street with two-operations, bike lanes and on-street parking, this could not be done without relocating my company and others because of the truck traffic that goes up and down those streets. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 6 In 4-26, fixed rail trolley could utilize the recently-acquired City-owned railroad easement running from the heart of Old Town to the Ottawa Power Station between the Capitol and Entertainment Districts. We have a side rail running along that area. Where is the trolley going to be, and where is the City's railroad easement? Ms. Love said the property CSX sold to the City starts at the south end of the Friedland rail line, going south to the power station. Mr. Rifkin said, for public notice, there are gondolas and rail cars in and out every day. Regarding Cedar Street, recommended improvements to Cedar Street will drastically alter the character of the area to an environment which will support residential development. On-street parking, bicycle route, lower speed limits, all fly in the face of the present use in the area. On behalf of myself and Lansing Ice and Fuel, O'Leary Paints, our concerns have not been addressed. Businesses in the area who employ thousands of people, contribute to the tax base and provide services to businesses and the public are ignored. JIM BLAIR, BUSINESS OWNER AT 410 S. CEDAR ST, 511 FULTON PLACE IN LANSING. The plan has the river as a key element. In reading the plan, it doesn't seem like it is an important element because we don't do anything with the river. We talk about doing things on either side, but we don't encourage use of the river. I am trying to get people on the river, utilizing boating and other activities. I would like to see something in the plan to discourage parking along the river. Where development can take place, parking lots should be discouraged unless it is in the floodplain. The trolley thing is confusing. In one place it seems to run along the river; in another place using the streets is mentioned, on Washington Avenue. would be opposed to running motor vehicles down the River Trail. We should use streets. I am concerned about Cedar and Larch--we talk about Saginaw and Oakland and Main Street-St. Joe being main arteries. The artery east-west through the City is 1-496; Cedar-Larch is the north-south route. To discourage and funnel down to two lanes is a poor proposal. Concerning bike paths on both sides of Cedar Street, only 200 yards away is the River Trail, paralleling Cedar Street. would be opposed to bike paths on Cedar. We want to encourage people to use the existing bike path along the River Trail, not use Cedar Street. We have to compromise and encourage businesses in the City Market area. We are not addressing businesses like Roma Bakery, Commercial Blueprint and others. The same goes for businesses such as mine, south of Michigan Avenue. CAROL WOOD, 1018 W. LAPEER, PRESIDENT OF GENESEE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION. I was also a member of the Steering Committee. This is a workable plan. We had some boundaries; if not these, the next ones would have upset the next group. Maybe there could have been different people on the Steering Committee, but those who stayed and worked were members who moved the work forward. Some members of the Steering Committee only came to one or two meetings. We could have held more meetings in the community, but being a community member, I see the same people at the same meetings, and no matter PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 7 how many ways we try to encourage new and different involvement, it sometimes does not happen. We are looking at the downtown area which needs to encourage housing. This plan does that. We need to encourage businesses--this plan has ways to do that. The commercial area needs customers, residents within walking distance. This plan is not finished. If adopted, it can be changed for the better. I suggest that after passing this, the Planning Board set a date to see if the plan is achieving the hoped-for goals, that it be written into the plan, and that you have periodic reviews, also written in. As a member of the Steering Committee, I am pleased that we sent this to you with a unanimous vote. I appreciate all your work. JON C. EZZO, STAKEHOLDER AT 507 N. HAYFORD. My wife, Mary, and I are stakeholders at the Lansing City Market. I have a packet of items for you, including a partial list of hundred of names of our customers, friends and visitors to the City Market. Also in the packet is a letter from the Michigan Historical Commission directed to the then-Mayor of Lansing. "The Michigan Historical Commission is pleased to inform you that the Lansing Municipal Market, Lansing, Michigan, has been listed in the State Register of Historic Places." These names I am going to give you, again a partial list, it was necessary to do that after this article appeared in the State Journal in June 1998. 1 want to mention the word "bonds." The bonds that have made hundred-year businesses, seventy-year or ten-year businesses or a new resident--it could have been another community. They chose Lansing. When the vote comes, vote as if you were going to lose your choice. KEVIN RORAGEN, LOOMIS, EWERT, PARSLEY, DAVIS & GOTTING, 232 S. CAPITOL, #1000, REPRESENTING ROMA BAKER AND A-Z RENTAL. I trust you have received our correspondence and that it will be made part of the record of tonight's proceedings. Our clients are happy to be able to work with Planning staff and the Planning Board to achieve a mutually beneficial plan that helps the entire City. My clients, who own businesses in the Cedar-Larch corridor, Roma for 70 years and A-Z for 25 years, are disappointed that the plan does not take into account any of the existing commercial or industrial uses nearby. We want to work to rectify this unfortunate happening. MENA CASTRICIANO, 428 N. CEDAR, OWNER OF ROMA BAKERY, ALONG WITH MY HUSBAND. I am disappointed. Roma Bakery is located in a commercial area. It is not residential. This plan would destroy us. Don't destroy our future. SHARON KELLOGG, 421 W. IONIA, OWNER OF KELLOGG REALTY, INC. I have lived there for 20 years. My specialty is the neighborhood where I am a resident. Please consider the difficulty of getting a residential mortgage in this unusual mixed-use zoning mess. When I got a mortgage on my own property in 1984, 1 went to a lender who was not planning to sell the mortgage on the secondary market. That was the only way I could get a competitive rate mortgage due to the "D-1" Professional Office zoning of my property. Late last summer, I worked with a buyer who wanted to acquire a three-unit in the 800 Block of N. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 8 Capitol Avenue. Even though he had pre-qualified, and he intended to live in one of the units, with the idea that he might want to take over a second apartment to make it part of his home, he was quoted two points above the prime rate. This is a very serious problem. It was due to the "D-1" Professional Office zoning of the entire 800 Block of N. Capitol, so designated in the 1950s. None of the properties along there are used as office currently. With the help of Jim Ruff, and much work measuring everything of the property, we finally found a lender, though we called six to eight lenders. We would not have been approved if the lot had been smaller. It was larger than most. You should seek the advice of some local lenders, banks, and mortgage brokers. This zoning conglomeration could cause more office and commercial use because a person could not afford to purchase them for owner- occupied residential use, not at two points above prime. I admire efforts to create more residential uses, but the property between Capitol Avenue and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. north of 1-496 has predominant residential uses, most owner- occupied. Adding this area to the plan and rezoning for residential use would recognize this area as residential and make buyers feel more confident that it will remain residential. I agree with conversion of one-way streets. VICTORIA EARHART, 301 N. SYCAMORE. Following up on the mortgage problem, when rates were low in November, I looked for a mortgage because I had a five-year balloon. It took me until March 8, 1999. Who is going to lend right in the middle of town? My comments deal with the area starting at Kalamazoo and goes up north. The Capitol District is defined as including the state buildings. To the west of the ell is the Ottawa Street and the Allegan Street state government buildings housing the Depts. of Agriculture and Education. Farther south is the State Library and Museum. They should have been included. North of those properties, my house is there, too. Talking about encouraging historic preservation, I counted 12 buildings that have been renovated since I came in 1994. Ferris Park belongs because it is in the middle of Lansing. My house was built in 1884. The second area I would like to address is the mixed use grocery around the Roma area. Roma Bakery and other businesses have an economic interest in their place. Who as a residential builder is going to come in, buy the property and develop it, for how much, to possible residents? There is an economic juggling act that does not seem to be jibe. The market analysis recommendations, especially the apparel, art galleries, books and music, drugs, pharmaceuticals; furniture and home furnishings. I came to Lansing in 1971, and with the exception of the art galleries and the pet store, all of these things have been here and most of them have failed. The plan does not give us an idea of how to attract these businesses and make them profitable. MONICA ZUCHOWSKI, 320 N. WALNUT. I am here as a 20-year downtown resident, renter, and as the new President of the Downtown Neighborhood Association. The DNA Board voted on March 10 to ratify our earlier position on the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan. We need more people living downtown. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 9 The Plan is a guide, but it will be referred to as the basis for decisions dealing with future land use, traffic circulation, community facilities, as a guide for the Planning Board, City Council and Board of Zoning Appeals, and as the foundation of zoning and land use decisions within the central area of Lansing. We support the decision to change one-way streets to two-way, to promote traffic calming and to get to downtown destinations. We support the concerns of businesses in the Central Business District and the Cedar-Larch corridor, including the opening to traffic of Washington Avenue from Michigan to Saginaw. We also support efforts to make market-rate housing possible on second floors of CBD buildings; expansion of grocery shopping opportunities east of the river, using Roma, the City Market and Quality Dairy as a base. The Cedar-Larch corridor should remain commercial. We request that the boundaries of the study areas be expanded to Martin Luther King Blvd. On the south, boundaries should be Ottawa, Martin Luther King Blvd. to the west, and Oakland to the north. It should be designated low- to medium-residential density. We would also recommend that an additional residential area be added within the Old Town area, with Martin Luther King Blvd. as its western boundary and Oakland as its southern boundary. Failure to include these existing residential areas under the protection of the study fails to protect our homes from the expansion of offices and parking lots. The Downtown Neighborhood Association does not support this plan as written. KIT COASH, 515 N. PINE, MEMBER OF DNA BOARD. (Handed maps to Board.) As a person newly located in Lansing and as an attorney who has worked on land use regulations and zoning in the past, I was concerned when I received a copy of the future land use plan. The Plan envisions up to 14 different land uses in an area less than two miles long and a mile wide. This attempt to micro manage land use does not recognize what the land is being used for presently and does not recognize that cities do not develop on a block-by-block basis. It is going to worsen problems. As written now, the plan is going to be incomprehensible to the average citizen and land owner. I did a little research about how Lansing has regulated land use in the past. This brought me to the Comprehensive Plan for the city in the 1950s. This plan envisioned a total of six land use categories, over a broad area of the city. Even the more recent River Island Plan, which contained 11 land use categories, also included land use designations over much broader areas of town. This plan is unworkable. It does not recognize what is already on the land and packs many uses into a small area. I request that the Board revise the number of land uses in this small parcel and give it another try. SANDY SVEC, 617 W. GENESEE STREET, BOARD MEMBER OF DNA, AND SECRETARY OF THE BOARD; also downtown resident, for three years as a renter and six years as owner-occupant. We are pleased that you want to encourage more residential in the downtown area, but the map is confusing. The colored map has five different uses that include residential. In the corner it says the labels on PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 10 those can't stand by themselves, that you have to read the sections of the plan concerning those areas. In your handout today, those paragraphs have not been included. It gives a false concern to put residential and then mention mixed use or high density without being able to look at the description in the plan itself. When you get to those paragraphs, it is confusing because you talk about residential having priority in Lansing, the descriptions talk about the mix of both commercial and residential, but then you don't give a priority to the residential or say how those mixes will be treated. I have with me today two sets of pictures, one of the commercial businesses in the Cedar-Larch Center Corridor, where Roma Bakery is, and the second of Capitol Area Medium Density residential. You can't force something to be residential because you say it's going to be residential. There are very few homes in those areas. Again, you have a number of pieces. We do approve of the A area because it is clearly residential although the description of the A Residential, it mentions some nonresidential uses that may be permitted, but it is not clear how that will be done. We support the expansion of your study area to the north and west to protect the existing residential areas. STEPHANIE WHITBECK, 620 W. IONIA ST., DNA BOARD, LAND USE CHAIR, AND CHAIR, LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION. We have given you a set of maps providing a view of the last Master Plan. A lot of work has gone into the text, but it is not translated into the map. You deal with a lot of rezonings, and whether or not they are consistent with the plan. Do the words convey the intent or will future Planning Board members only look at the map. Natural boundaries downtown have always been the focus. In the River Island Master Plan, boundaries have been the river, the river, the river, and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. King functions like a river; it is a natural boundary. The middle of the road on Pine or Capitol Avenue makes no sense. Everything downtown, whether business, residential, governmental, educational or institutional, is interdependent. This plan does not recognize that. In this Plan we care about two things, bringing people downtown to live, and revitalizing it commercially. You can't deal with revitalization efforts until you deal with areas where you can bring people to live. Anybody know if the City has a lot of money to implement this plan; do we intend to buy out the businesses and build houses? No. If businesses locate in the CBD, you shoot yourself in the foot if they can still infiltrate the residential area. If you want more residents downtown, you shoot yourself in the foot if you think it is going to happen in the Cedar-Larch-Center Street area. What's going to happen there, if you approve this, is blight. The DNA urges you to look at the map, reassess the boundaries, withhold approval of the Plan and transmission to the City Council for endorsement until that happens. We have a question on the map about the northern half of the block bounded by Shiawassee, Seymour, Ionia and Capitol. It has changed from Yellow - Residential to Brown - High Density Residential Accessory Mixed Use. Is this a mistake? The western half of the blocks bounded by Lenawee, Grand, Hillsdale and Cherry as well as the block bounded by Hillsdale, Grand, St. Joe and Cherry changed from Yellow - Residential to Blue - PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 11 Capitol Area Business. We are curious how this came about. We want to know the intent and schedule of the Planning Board in the preparation of design standards, revised zoning clarifications and overlay zoning. The Plan alludes to these items. Who will prepare them and when will they be ready for review. The zoning classifications and lack of design standards will leave the area in the boundaries with problems that you do not anticipate. We want to compliment you for all that you have done. (Transmitted letter from Monica Zuchowski, President, DNA.) ELLEN SPROULS, 2308-F STONEHEDGE DRIVE, EAST LANSING, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, IMPRESSION 5 SCIENCE CENTER. I agree with many objectives of the Plan. We need to attract people to visit and live downtown, and to preserve the architectural and cultural resources of Central Lansing by protecting residential neighborhoods adjacent to commercial areas. There is a residential area downtown to the north and west of the Capitol. Why isn't it included. We need cultural diversity downtown, and downtown residents. In previous master plans, this area was included in downtown. By not including the area, what does it do to the area? Will people want to buy property there, if they don't know what the future land use is? What kind of sustainability will there be for real estate in this area? My other concern is the river, on the east side where it is lower. I direct your attention to the Entertainment District and to the residential area along the river. Has an overlay been done of the floodplain map? There are environmental and construction issues associated with construction, not only because of location in the floodplain; but also because of historical industrial uses. Prior uses have an impact on future uses. The REO Transportation Museum used to be a bus garage. Are the tanks still buried underground? What is the condition of the soil? Regarding the elevation, my office is in the floodplain. Part of the museum is in the floodway, if we were to have a hundred-year flood. There are mortgage and lending issues, and insurance issues. We should allow the existing built commercial area along the river to continue to be a commercial area., and look westward for a housing area. The two maps I have handed you, one is a floodplain map which shows the probability of having floods in the particular area at what year marks. The other one is from the 1958 Master Plan which shows housing construction away from the river and the floodplain. Why do we want to undo what historically we have done in the City. We need to look westward beyond the current proposed boundaries for the residential area, and we need to look at proposals for east of the river because it is in the floodplain. DAVID ANDERSON, 320 W. OTTAWA, LANSING HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION, ON BEHALF OF THE COMMISSION. Part of our goal is to preserve neighborhoods, strengthen the local economy, foster civic beauty and pride, and preserve historical architectural structures and resources. We have prepared a communication. My wife and I own the property in the Ottawa-Walnut Historic District at 318 West Ottawa, 320, 322, 326 and 328 West Ottawa, as well PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 12 as 208 North Walnut. We also recently renovated and restored the property at 325 South Walnut, between the Grady Porter Building and the funeral home. We have significant emotional and financial investment in the downtown, and we are very attached to the area. We just recently purchased a home west of Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. The reason that we are not in the central area of downtown is that past master plans have resulted in such destruction and devastation of its neighborhoods that there were not many choices in the immediate downtown area. On May 7 and June 4 of 1998, the Lansing Historic District Commission unanimously voted to express our reservations about the plan; on March 4 of this year, we voted again to express our reservations. When you ignore the residential west of Pine to King, that creates concerns over what would happen to the property. The Commission believes it ignores the realities of existing use. The lack of a firm land use plan with consistent zoning is the biggest enemy of neighborhoods. If you want to preserve the neighborhoods and have downtown residents, look at and incorporate existing uses. We think this plan will result in more of the same of what the City has had for the last twenty years. WILLIAM WHITBECK, 620 W. IONIA. I am a judge at the Michigan Court of Appeals and also President of the Michigan Historical Commission. My comments tonight, as an individual, will be somewhat critical. I have a dim view of the utility of planning and master planning. Planners tend to look at things as grids. They ignore what's existing and in place and vibrant and interesting about cities. The classic example is Brasilia. No one wants to live there; it is extraordinarily sterile. Conversely, Paris is a beautiful city with wide boulevards that a century ago could accommodate cannon lined up wheel to wheel. Architecturally and aesthetically it is now very pleasing, but it did not start out that way--the idea you start with may not be the idea you end up with. It's important to remember our own history. Lansing was built around transportation corridors, first the river, then the railroads, and now the freeways. They are the arteries that shaped the growth of this city. We have a wild card that no other city in Michigan has, the Capitol itself. That is the fourth locus of power development. To the extent that we forget that basic fact of Lansing's history is to the extent that we plan poorly. I don't see that aspect recognized in this plan. What was the most destructive act in Lansing's history? It was the construction of the state government complex, a sterile and unattractive set of boxy buildings west of the capitol that destroyed a wonderful old neighborhood and replaced it with a space having no human scale. The Court of Appeals will be housed in the proposed Hall of Justice on the west end of the area destroyed 40 years ago. We hope it will be a beautiful building, a complement to the Capitol, and we don't believe that it will drive commercial development to the west in the Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. area. We hope people employed there will live nearby, and that rather than completing the destruction of a neighborhood, that it will contribute to the neighborhood because people can live near their workplace. Specifically, about this plan, I suggest that we get away from imposing a grid on a natural feature, the river. We should make residential opportunities available in PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 13 residential neighborhoods and should not impose a use that is not there now and is economically infeasible. We should encourage uses such as Friedland where they will work. A compliment: The idea of two-way streets is excellent. Why we should easily and conveniently convey people who don't live here is beyond me. The freeways are the high-speed highways; streets are not. Regarding the plan, is it a livable plan? Can people live with it? I think no, but it can be improved to do that. DOROTHY JONES, 426 WEST BARNES, LCC BOARD OF TRUSTEES. The plan was created away from the people affected. Only when you get citizens committed and participating in the plan will you really get to what needs to happen. This looks like citizen input, but it is not. I went to one of the neighborhood meetings. There was insufficient time following the presentation for comment. The notices that I saw for the two public meetings in October and January did not mention discussing master plans. If a master plan had been listed, I would have been there. In April and July, the plan was presented to 12 community organizations. I also observed several steering committee meetings at which the Planning staff dominated the meeting. The citizens of Lansing are going to have to be the ones to implement any plan; it will not happen by somebody sitting in an office; it will have to be the people who are currently living and doing business in the area. It does not appear to me that the people in the area have been involved in the decision-making. On behalf of LCC, I urge you to reject the plan. We feel that 40 years ago City officials made an implied commitment to the college that they would facilitate the college if it stayed downtown. We have not had the help we need from the City regarding more parking. If we had been invited to talk with you about how we can make the campus appear more open, you would have had a good reception, but to hand us a plan that calls for a trolley down the middle of the campus offends us. Please, go to the people before you plan and find out how they would like the City developed. BEVERLY MILLER, 413 PEARL. It is more like a wish list for the Principal Shopping District and the Old Town District. It does not involve much of any other business. Friedland and O'Leary Paint hire a lot of people. You don't give them funds. Take another look at what the Principal Shopping District is doing; it should lose the attitude; if they can't, we don't need their Comprehensive Plan. ELLEN BEAL, 227 CUSTER, LANSING, LANSING CITY COUNCILMEMBER. I wanted to correct the last speaker; the City Council and not the Planning Board gives money to businesses; the City Council established and funds the Principal Shopping District. Regarding funding, some funds were put together, some from the Principal Shopping District, some from the Board of Water and Light, and some from the Planning Dept. budget to do a comprehensive plan for the downtown. At that time, the Council thought that parts of the City were of a higher priority than the downtown, but because of the Principal Shopping District's interest, this plan came PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 14 about. Parts of the City that are now commercial once were residential. What is the rush to approve this plan? Has a marketing study been done that shows people want to move downtown? Regional population is now about 300,000. Generally people are moving around, rather than into, the region. I would rather see us invest in existing housing around the downtown, rather than trying to implement this plan. The Council would like to see things moving out of the Planning Dept. such as helping the Historic District Commission to establish the Capitol Historic District west of the Capitol; the housing study--we have a moratorium on building of apartment complexes (two in the south end of town)--to determine housing needs; the southeast and southwest parts of the City need comprehensive master planning; the CSO and storm water fee. You have to look at where are the development pressures on the City, and I don't see them downtown. I propose we rethink this and take no action, as opposed to causing problems we haven't foreseen. We need to look at the residential neighborhoods surrounding this area, including my neighborhood on the east side. I live near Jarl and John; we are eastsiders, but we are also downtown residents. Rather than bring in new residential, we need to shore up existing neighborhoods. We need to fix the doable things now to improve existing downtown neighborhoods. KEN STOCKWELL, 4690 WELLINGTON, ON THE PSD BOARD. Concerning the neighborhood and commercial businesses, maybe you should have a transitional zone in there and let the market decide if housing or commercial should come in. I could see apartments on the river, but I also see it as a business area. When the plan was first presented, some things in the downtown area were ignored, though many recommendations of downtown business owners and merchants were accomplished, particularly in the circulation plan. A lot of things weren't. We got loft apartment housing downtown, but the four things I am concerned about are the mall, linkages, parking, and the trolley. Regarding circulation, the two-way street conversion is outstanding. Washington Mall closed is a major clogged artery. When the focus groups were asked about downtown, they mentioned parking and circulation. Contradictory things to the mall, the plan says improve the mall; pp. 2-3 says "The single most important element in any downtown is the main street." Pp. 2-7, Lansing Community College, "A barrier was created when the campus was developed. It discourages students from integrating into downtown. Improved connections are needed." For one, improving Washington Avenue will balance the overall area. For two, Washington Avenue should be opened from Michigan to Saginaw, at the very least, to the campus. Pp. 4-12, you have it as a future study area; however, it says opening the mall to vehicle traffic may be the solution to stimulating business. Again, refer to the circulation plan, phase 1, phase 2, phase 3 do not address Washington Square. Pp. 4-39, the Capitol District, The two most important streets are Michigan and Washington." Pp. 4-40, the mall, "Washington Mall, the traditional downtown retail center is essential for the success of any major city. Enhanced improvements should be considered." The master plan did not come up with a circulation proposal. If the Entertainment District is west of the river PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 15 and north of Washington and Michigan Avenues, how do you link the retail district to the power plant? Every merchant on Washington Square wants the mall ripped out. It is a great plan, but missing the one critical element to make it a positive circulation plan. I hope you listen, and at least take out one block of the mall. The plan also addresses linkages of the Entertainment District to the Retail District, yet Washington Square is a barrier. About parking, the plan mentions a need for 100 parking places, or 200 in the north grand ramp. Big mistake. There is a parking crisis downtown. The master plan does not show one potential parking ramp in the downtown area. There should be four. We have Cooley coming in; the civic center being built; where will Accident Fund people park? Two major things: One, circulation, with the major thing, the mall, and two: no parking ramps on the plan. The trolley is interesting. If the trolley goes to Old Town without linking to the retail district, you would have a revolt. The plan does not show tracks going to downtown. The Central Core Business District to a certain extent got lost in the shuffle. Create downtown and everything else will follow. The key element is circulation and Washington mall. Have Washington go through campus all the way up; it is absolutely critical. GLEN BACHELDER, 1717 LASALLE GARDENS, MEMBER OF HISTORIC DISTRICT COMMISSION, speaking tonight as a private citizen. I have been studying the history of Lansing. I have come across many plans, both in the City and in state government and have watched master plans pile up on shelves. Put this comprehensive plan on a shelf and get down to business. Develop an Old Town strategy. Develop an Entertainment District strategy. Develop a Central Business District strategy. This plan tries to be all things to all people and does nothing for anyone. Instead of expanding the residential aspect, we need comprehensive city-wide strategy policy and programs and resources for housing, neighborhoods and historic preservations. HAROLD T. LEEMAN, JR., FIRST WARD LANSING CITY COUNCILMEMBER, representing about 50 percent of the study area; Michael Murphy represents the other 50 percent. Thank you for the time you put in on this. I have constituents at 1008 and 1010 N. Larch St. who just learned about this and are very concerned because their homes are in the study area, and they worry their homes are going to be taken away. We need to do more education and listen tonight and slow this down. We had over 21 speakers tonight. The street issues we should go ahead on. We should bring in ward councilmembers. We had three other councilmembers here tonight, Ellen Beal, Joan Bauer; and Lou Adado, at large. That's five out of eight; it shows we are interested and want to do what's right. Many of the businesses are in my area; also many neighborhood organizations, North Lansing Community Association, Turner-Dodge Community Association, Old Town-Main Street, NorthTown, Oak Park, Sparrow Estates, Green Oaks, Hosmer St. Neighborhood, Hunter Park West, and the ABC Neighborhood. The North PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 16 Precinct will open soon. Board of Water and Light will move to an area near the Potter-Walsh Neighborhood. I didn't see many groups here tonight; their involvement is important. The comment about extending the boundaries to Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. on the west and Pennsylvania on the east is persuasive. wanted these comments put on the record. Thank you again for your time and doing this job. Chairman Ruge announced the close of the Comment section. 7. RECESS - The Chairman declared a short recess. 8. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: No minutes for approval. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole - 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee - Mr. Miller, Chairman. Mr. Frederick noted, in the Zoning and Ordinance Committee report, that he, and not Mr. Smith, was present at the meeting on Wednesday, March 10, 1999. The correction was duly noted. Mr. Goolsby made a motion, seconded by Mr. Miller, to discharge the Zoning and Ordinance Committee of SLU-1-99, 528 N. Seymour Avenue, Parking Lot in "DM-3" Residential District. Because of a mailing error, this case, which had a second hearing this evening, will also be acted on this evening. On a Voice Vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; SLU-1-99, 528 N. Seymour Avenue, Parking Lot in "DM-Y Residential District was discharged. a. Z-1-99, 2517 E. Mt. Hope Avenue, "A" Residential and "D-1" Prof. Office Districts to "D-1" Prof. Office District This is a request by Harvest Property Investments, LLC, 5501 S. Cedar, Suite C., Lansing, to rezone a property at 2517 E. Mt. Hope Avenue from "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office to "D-1" Professional Office District. The applicant is proposing to construct a 3,000-4,000 sq ft building for a music company business. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 17 The Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates this area for professional office. The surrounding zoning in this area consists of low density residential zoning to the west, and there are park areas to the north and south of the subject property. The subject property is located on east Mt. Hope where there is a mix of office and residential land uses. There is a potential for a minor increase in vehicular traffic because the "D-1" Professional Office Use is more intense than the present low density residential zoning. As with any type of new development, there will be an increase associated with noise, dust and other factors during the construction of the building. Any impact on public services, such as the installation of a new/replacement on-site wastewater treatment system to serve proposed and new buildings, would be the responsibility of the owner. There should not be any adverse impact on the future pattern of development in the area. The applicants have made a concerted effort to meet with the surrounding neighbors. They plan to meet with the Forest View Neighborhood Association next week to discuss their proposal. Staff recommends that the request to rezone 2517 E. Mt. Hope from "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office to "D-1" Professional Office be approved. The Committee, based on testimony and evidence, concurred with the staff report. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and approved unanimously, 3-0, to recommend approval of Z-1-99, 2517 E. Mt. Hope Avenue, from "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office Districts to "D-1" Professional Office District. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Goolsby, based on testimony, evidence and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve Z-1-99, 2517 E. Mt. Hope Avenue, "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office Districts to "D-1" Professional Office District. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Goolsby . Ave Keene. . . Ave Miller. . . Ave Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ru4e . .Ave PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 18 On a Roll Call Vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; unanimous; Z-1-99, 2517 E. Mt. Hope Avenue, "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office Districts to "D-1" Professional Office District was APPROVED. b. Z-2-99, NE Cor. W. Mt. Hope & Todd Avenues, "D-V Professional Office District to "F" Commercial District The applicant is requesting to rezone the property from "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial to allow for the construction of a new 7,200 sq ft commercial facility known as "A Complete Rental." Rezoning the property from "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial would intensify the commercial presence in this neighborhood. The Southwest Area Comprehensive Development Plan identifies the land use at this location as IndustriaUWarehousing up to the year 1990. The intent of the previous rezoning (Z-32-87), from "C" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office, was to create a transition area between commercial and industrial use and the residential neighborhood. The proposed rezoning will increase the amount of vehicular traffic to this particular site, but the amount of traffic that will be added to Mt. Hope Avenue is minimal. On-street parking along Todd Avenue could be a problem in the future. This could interfere with local traffic, as well as emergency circulation from the fire station. There are no anticipated impact on pedestrian circulation. Noise from the daily operation of "A Complete Rental" could impact the environment. Temporary noise, dust and traffic will result from construction activities on the site. Rezoning the property also open up the opportunity for other types of commercial uses to occupy the property in the future. Future uses have the potential of impacting the environment, as well as the surrounding neighborhood. Staff recommends denying the request to rezone the property from "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial, maintaining the transitional nature of the zoning pattern. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 19 Discussion took place regarding the other allowable uses in the "F" District, the possible traffic impact to Todd which is a local street, and the noise typical of an equipment rental company in relation to the neighborhood. In Committee, the applicant and neighbors were allowed to speak on the subject. The applicant stated that the property has been an unused eyesore for years and needed to be redeveloped to make an improvement. She further stated the noise and traffic would be able to be better controlled at this larger location. The neighbors were opposed and further pointed out that the additional traffic on Todd could interfere with the Fire Department access from the station just north of the site. The Committee, based on testimony and evidence, concurred with the staff report and the potential impacts the development could have. The committee further noted that they had nothing against the business owners, but recognized that many other uses are allowed in the "F" District that would not be a benefit to the neighboring houses. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously, 3-0, to recommend denial of Z-2-99, NE Cor. W. Mt. Hope & Todd Avenues, from "D-1" Professional Office District to "F" Commercial District. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to deny Z-2-99, NE Corner West Mt. Hope and Todd Avenues, "D-1" Professional Office District to "F" Commercial District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Nischan said he appreciates the fact that the business wants to grow, to be a good neighbor, and has talked to nearby residents. He did not want the business to feel unappreciated, but it would be a spot zoning, which would not prove successful. Mr. Nischan stated he would vote to deny. Mr. Goolsby said at the meeting he had a discussion with the applicant who seems to understand that if their business ever leaves the location, other commercial uses would be permitted in the neighborhood. She understands our concerns and our reasons for voting no. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 20 Mr. Smith said the applicants made the effort to solicit input from neighbors and to consider their wishes. The people who spoke against the request at the hearing are the people across the street. It is a neighborhood that should be protected. Ms. Love said we are going to continue to work with A Complete Rental to help them find a new location in the vicinity that is appropriately zoned. We appreciate their willingness to work with the staff and the Board. Mr. Frederick said he appreciated the testimony from the neighbors that A Complete Rental is a good neighbor; however, it is the potential of what could end up there that prompts Mr. Frederick to vote no. Goolsby . Ave Keene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Nischan. . . Ave Smith. Ave Frederick. Ave Ruge . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . Ave On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; carried; Z-2-99, NE Corner West Mount Hope & Todd Avenues, "D-1" Professional Office District to "F" Commercial District was DENIED. C. Z-3-99, 3435, 3627, 3631 Forest Rd. & Vacant MSU Land 3500 Blk. Forest Rd., "F" Commercial and "A" Residential Districts to "F" Commercial District The applicant proposes to construct an executive development center and hotel facilities to facilitate executive training and fill related lodging needs (see attached descriptions). The structure will be located to the east of the University Club, but will not include property at 3509 Forest Road. The Executive Development Center is designed to provide business training to professionals through the University's Graduate Business School. The Hotel Suites will include 122 rooms with kitchenettes that are designed as extended stay suites. The Executive Development Center and Hotel Suites are not designed for open bookings, but strictly for the use by University colleges and programs in addition to the Eli Broad College. The rezoning request is in compliance with the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan. Additional traffic to result from this development is anticipated to come from Harrison and Collins Road with some increase on Forest Road. The Urban Scenic PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 21 Corridor designation applies to this section of Forest Road which will require additional plant materials to create a canopy affect over the public right-of-way. The street will be required to stay two lane except where turning lanes may be necessary to reduce any turning conflicts. Staff recommends the rezoning request be approved as requested from the "A' Residential and "F" Commercial District to an overall "F" Commercial Zoning District. The Committee, based on testimony and evidence, concurred with the staff report and added that the major concern was how the additional traffic would be handled in order to minimize the traffic on Forest Road. The Committee recommended the University develop a "way finding" plan with signage and brochures that instruct visitors and golfers to utilize more appropriate streets avoiding the use of Forest Road west of the property. The Committee received a response from the Traffic Engineer that will be included in the Board's packet which estimated minimal additional traffic on Forest due to the development. Representatives of the applicant shared that the starter house for the east golf course will remain where it is, but only the west course starter's house would be relocated along with the pro shop. Also, the designed parking will accommodate the maximum use of all of the facilities planned and existing but anticipate that the peak golf use in the summer will be when the University Club and the proposed Executive Development Center will be at its lowest use. Further, the architect has and will continue to meet with neighborhood representatives regarding all aspects of the design. The Committee also encouraged that in the site plan review phase the frontage be designed to be in conformance with the Scenic Corridor guidelines. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously (3-0) to recommend approval of Z-3-99, 3435, 3627, 3631 Forest Rd. &Vacant MSU Land 3500 Blk., from "F" Commercial and "A" Residential Districts to "F" Commercial District. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 22 Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Goolsby, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve Z-3-99, 3435, 3627, 3631 Forest Rd. &Vacant MSU Land 3500 Blk., from "F" Commercial and "A" Residential Districts to "F" Commercial District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Frederick said the Forest View Neighborhood Association is concerned about development and increased traffic along Forest Road. Traffic is fast. It is hard to bike along the road. The 1987 amendment to the Plan said there should be no ingress or egress to Forest Road; it should be handled at Collins. It would make it difficult for traffic to enter and exit to Collins Road after the intersection was redesigned. Traffic handling devices could include traffic calming and directional signs to be placed to prevent cars from going west on Forest Road, angling exits and entrances to the east, and other traffic directions from the freeway and coming from Collins Road exit and the Dunckel Rd. exits. When printing publicity brochures, the University should leave Forest Road off the map. Mr. Frederick requested these points go on the record. Mr. Smith asked if there was further discussion about the sole homeowner remaining in the area. Mr. Miller said she did not attend the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting. The University representatives indicated that they intended to make sure that the buffers are there for the home. The University wanted to buy the site; however, the homeowner has refused to sell the property. Mr. Goolsby said that the University is working with the Forest View Neighborhood Association. They are open to Mr. Frederick's suggestion about signage and brochures. Mr. Nischan said it would not take people long to learn that they can access Forest Road from Collins. Mr. Frederick said in the Master Plan the intersection of Forest and Collins was planned to be reconfigured to make it safer for traffic to enter and leave Forest Road. Mr. Ruge asked, with all the land the University owns, why does this facility have to be at this location. It looks like a resort for the University, with a golf course, a swimming pool, hotel, etc. I am concerned, with the high tech park that is getting developed and the motel of 144 units, that traffic on Forest Road is going to become very heavy. I don't see the need for this development to be on this road at this spot. Ms. Love said, at the Forest View meeting, the gentlemen who runs the University Club was there. They have certain peak times--mostly at lunch. The facility would be a complement to their existing facility and would help them support the facility financially in a way that they cannot do now. People would be offered a meal package of breakfast and dinner, low times for the University Club. You would not have to duplicate all the hotel services as you would if you took it to another spot--duplication would increase costs considerably. You could have your building, pool, kitchen, catering and dining facilities where you have the amenities and land available. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 23 Mr. Goolsby said I don't think golf will attract traffic up Forest. Most of the people who play Forest Akers are affiliated with Michigan State University, students, faculty and alumni. The course is expensive, the third most expensive after Hawk Hollow and Timber Ridge. It is less expensive for MSU students and faculty. It will help parking at the University Club. With their sensitivity to the traffic issue, and signage instructing visitors to exit the highway at the Collins Road exit, any way you come off the expressway, you will be directed up Collins Road. It will also help people backtracking up Harrison Road. It is also the easiest way to get back on the expressway. It will not increase traffic in the area substantially. Mr. Frederick said the 1988 amendment to the Master Plan anticipated this kind of development, designated as commercial. The amendment to the Master Plan anticipated it has been on everybody's mind who has read the 1987 amendment. Mr. Goolsby said in terms of the scenic corridor, the tree canopy will be consistent through there. Mr. Nischan said he was happy to see MSU being a tax-paying facility in the City of Lansing. His concern remains the intersection where it tees into Collins Road. It is a nightmare now. Are they going to put in a light so that it not be so much a hazard, and safer to get down Forest? Mr. Goolsby said he was not sure Mr. Nischan's concern is valid. He goes to the area regularly and is surprised at how little traffic there is on Collins Road. Keene. . . Ave Miller Nischan . Nay Smith . Nay Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Goolsby . Ave Ruqe . Nay On a Roll Call vote there were: 4 Ayes; 3 Nays; motion passes; however, approval of a rezoning requires a minimum of six Aye votes, therefore, Z-3-99, 3435, 3627, 3631 Forest Rd. and Vacant MSU Land 3500 Blk. Forest Rd., "F" Commercial and "A" Residential Districts to "F" Commercial District will be forwarded to the City Council with NO RECOMMENDATION. d. SLU-1-99, 528 N. Seymour Ave., Parking Lot in "DM-3" Residential District. The applicant is requesting a Special Land Use Permit to utilize the vacant property formerly known as 528 Seymour Avenue for an off-street surface parking lot. The property is zoned "DM-3" Residential District, and an off-street surface parking lot is allowed as a special land use according to PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 24 Section 1256.04(g) of the Zoning Code if approved by City Council. The college wishes to expand the parking lot for the property at 520 N. Seymour Avenue onto this property, combining the two parcels. The College recently purchased both properties and wishes to make this parking improvement. 1. The proposed parking lot expansion will be compatible with the surrounding land uses with a landscape buffer along the north property line. 2. The proposed parking lot expansion does not significantly effect the character of the surrounding area. 3. The proposed parking lot expansion is minor and should not adversely impact the use of adjacent properties. 4. The proposed parking lot expansion does not significantly alter the use or character of the property or the surrounding properties. 5. The proposed parking lot expansion does not involve a use that will have a detrimental impact on the health, safety or welfare of persons or property. 6. The proposed parking lot expansion is adequately served by essential public facilities and services. 7. The proposed parking lot expansion does not place demands on public services in excess of current capacity. 8. The proposed parking lot expansion meets the intent and purposes of the Zoning Code and is in conformance with the master plan. 9. The proposed parking lot expansion meets the setback, design and landscaping requirements of the "DM-3" Residential District. Staff recommends approval of the special land use request with the understanding that the applicant will have to go through the site plan review process and include a landscape buffer plan. The Committee, based on testimony and evidence, concurred with the staff report. In Committee, it was moved, seconded, and carried unanimously, 3-0, to recommend approval of SLU-1-99, 528 N. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 25 Seymour Ave., to allow a Parking Lot in "DM-3" Residential District. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Goolsby, based on testimony, evidence and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve SLU-1-99, 528 N. Seymour Ave., to allow a Parking Lot in "DM-3" Residential District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Miller. . . Ave Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith. . . Aye Frederick . .Ave Goolsby .Ave Keene Ave Ruge . Ave On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; carried; SLU-1-99, 528 N. Seymour Ave., to allow a Parking Lot in "DM-3" Residential District was APPROVED. e. SLU-2-99, SE Cor. Jolly and Pleasant Grove Roads, Governmental Structure (Fire Station) in the "F" Commercial District The City of Lansing Fire Department is proposing to construct a new fire station with three (3) drive through bays. A new fire station will provide response time equal to or better than current services. A new station would also provide location, space and layout advantages at the same estimated cost as rehabilitating Fire Station#5. The property is at the southeast corner of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road. Besides the drive through bays for fire trucks, the fire station will have a cooking facility, a community room, and dorms that will house approximately eight (8) staff persons. The size and height of the fire station has yet to be determined, but it is estimated to range from 10,000 to 12,000 square feet. The special land use permit is requested to construct a new fire station on the southeast corner of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road. The site provides enough space for the proposed use. Both the zoning designation and the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan 1990 provide provisions for the use. Staff's major concern is the impact this facility will have on adjacent residential properties. The special land use request can meet the criteria for special land uses as outlined in PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 26 Chapter 1282 with conditions designed to mitigate any impacts on adjacent residential uses described below. Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. Access to the site from Starr Avenue shall be within 270 ft of the Jolly Road right-of-way in order to limit the amount of traffic and activity adjacent to residential homes. 2. Egress from the site shall be onto Pleasant Grove Road. Action should be taken to resolve the issue regarding previous Council action limiting curb cuts along Pleasant Grove Road. Approval of this special land use by City Council should include authorization for an ingress/egress point along Pleasant Grove Road due to the public safety nature of this proposal. 3. Lighting used to illuminate any off-street parking shall be confined within and directed onto the parking area only. 4. Landscaping, screening, and buffering be provided to minimize impact on adjacent residential properties. The Committee, based on testimony and evidence, concurred with the staff report. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously, 3-0, to recommend approval of SLU-2-99, SE Cor. Jolly and Pleasant Grove Roads, Governmental Structure (Fire Station) in the "F" Commercial District. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Goolsby, to approve SLU-2-99, SE Cor. Jolly and Pleasant Grove Roads, Governmental Structure (Fire Station) in the "F" Commercial District, with the four conditions stated above. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith . Ave Frederick . . Ave Goolsby . Ave Keene. . . Ave Miller . .Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; carried; SLU-2-99, SE Cor. Jolly and Pleasant Grove Roads, Governmental Structure (Fire Station) in the "F" Commercial District, with the four conditions stated above, was APPROVED. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 27 Mr. Miller as Chair of the Zoning and Ordinance Committee made a motion to discharge and refer to the Committee of the Whole the following: SLU-5-98, Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street (Act-6-98); SLU-7-98, Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave. (Act-8-98); SLU-10-98, Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd. (Act-11-98); SLU-12-98, Fire Station #4, 5550 S. Pennsylvania Ave. (Act-13-98); voice vote; unanimous; carried. Mr. Nischan as Chair of the Urban Development Committee, made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, to discharge and refer to the Committee of the Whole the following: Act-6-98, associated with SLU-5-98, Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street; Act-8-98, associated with SLU-7-98, Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave.; Act-11-98, associated with SLU-10- 98, Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd.; Act-13-98, associated with SLU-12-98, Fire Station #4, 5550 S. Pennsylvania Avenue; voice vote; unanimous; carried. Mr. Goolsby made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to resolve to the Committee of the Whole; voice vote; unanimous; carried. As Board Vice Chair, Chairman Goolsby called the Committee of the Whole to order to consider the above cases SLU-5-98, SLU-7-98, and SLU-10-98; and Act-6-98, Act-8-98, and Act- 11-98. These are tower requests. Mr. Frederick, as Planning Board liaison to the Board of Zoning Appeals, said that these requests were discussed and approved in the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting held March 11, 1999. Mr. Miller presented the cases. f. SLU-5-98, Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street (Act-6- 98); This is a request by the City of Lansing to allow the construction of a maximum 200 ft tall telecommunications tower on the property at 2400 Hall Street, Gier Community Center. Approval of a Special Land Use Permit is required under Section 1248.04(e) of the Zoning Code, in order to permit construction and operation of "a structure which is owned or operated by a public utility in the "A" Residential District." This is part of the city-wide telecommunications plan that allows for the co-location of antennas for wireless PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 28 communications in order to help reduce the possibility of an excessive number of towers dotting the Lansing skyline. The park property contains approximately 36.5 acres of land, and recently the Parks staff, in conjunction with the expected contractor, have decided upon a location for the tower, just east of the Community Center building, west of the commercial uses along North East Street. The proposal can meet the criteria which must be used to evaluate a Special Land Use permit request as set forth in Section 1282.03(f)(1)-(9) with the approval of a height variance by the Board of Zoning Appeals and the following standard conditions for these communication towers. 1. The tower shall be a monopole type tower, 2. The tower provide for the co-location of antennas; 3. The tower be located on the large portion of the site if possible to minimize the its impact on the on the existing residential neighborhood, the future development of the adjacent property, and its visibility on the horizon to traffic on N. East Street, 4. The contract with the City include language helping ensure the compatibility of the use of this tower with the hospitals; 5. Landscaping be added around the base of the tower to buffer the view of the base from surrounding properties; 6. The tower be appropriately accessible and fenced for security. The staff recommends approval of the Special Land Use with the above stated conditions. The Committee, based on testimony and evidence, concurred with the staff report and further suggested that the Parks Department negotiate for a T-1 Fiber optic communication's line to be run into the community center demonstrating a direct park purpose for this network of towers. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously, 3-0, to recommend approval of SLU-5-98 (Act-6- 98), to allow a Telecommunications Tower at Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street with the six conditions stated above. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 29 Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve SLU-5-98 (Act-6-98), to allow a Telecommunications Tower at Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street with the six conditions stated above. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTION on the motion was as follows. On a Voice Vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; Unanimous; SLU-5-98, Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street (Act-6-98) with the six conditions as stated above was APPROVED. b. SLU-7-98, Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave. (Act-8- 98) This is a request by the City of Lansing to allow the construction of a maximum 200 ft tall telecommunications tower on the property at 2516 S. Washington Avenue, Washington Park. Approval of a Special Land Use Permit is required under Section 1248.04(e) of the Zoning Code, in order to permit construction and operation of "a structure which is owned or operated by a public utility in the "A" Residential District." This is part of the city-wide telecommunications plan that allows for the co-location of antennas for wireless communications in order to help reduce the possibility of an excessive number of towers dotting the Lansing skyline. The park property contains approximately 45.5 acres of land. The nearby hospital, Ingham Regional Medical Center, did oppose the tower at this location but the City's contract language with the tower contractor and operator ensures the preservation of the frequencies the hospitals use for telemetry. The proposal can meet the criteria which must be used to evaluate a Special Land Use permit request as set forth in Section 1282.03(f)(1)-(9) with the approval of a height variance by the Board of Zoning Appeals and the following standard conditions for these communication towers. 1. The tower shall be a monopole type tower; 2. The tower provide for the co-location of antennas; 3. The tower be located on the large portion of the site if possible to minimize the its impact on the on the existing residential neighborhood and the future development of the adjacent property; PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 30 4. The contract with the City include language helping ensure the compatibility of the use of this tower with the hospitals, 5. Landscaping be added around the base of the tower to buffer the view of the base from surrounding properties, 6. The tower be appropriately accessible and fenced for security. The staff recommends approval of the Special Land Use with the above stated conditions. The Committee, based on testimony and evidence, concurred with the staff report and further suggested that the Parks Department negotiate for a T-1 Fiber optic communication's line to be run to the military building which could be a future park community center thus demonstrating a direct park purpose for this network of towers. In Committee, it was moved, seconded, and carried unanimously, 3-0, to recommend approval of SLU-7-98 (Act-8- 98), to allow a Telecommunications Tower at Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave. with the six conditions stated above. Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve SLU-7-98 (Act-8-98), to allow a Telecommunications Tower at Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave. with the six conditions stated above. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Nischan asked about the arrangement with the hospital on South Washington. Mr. Goolsby said there was concern that tower transmissions might interfere with hospital telemetry, but there is no proof that this could happen. They are still working with the hospital, but the concerns seem to have dissipated. Mr. Smith said the National Institutes of Health some months ago did issue a statement regarding very low amounts of EMF radiation being a true carcinogen. Mr. Goolsby said another thing that should be mentioned is that if poles are in locations where property might be abandoned, such as armories being left by the state, If the City gets the armory, provisions will be imposed in the lease so that it would be a benefit to the City. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 31 On a Voice Vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; Unanimous; SLU-7-98 (Act-8-98), to allow a Telecommunications Tower at Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave. with the six conditions stated above was APPROVED. I. SLU-10-98, Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd. (Act-11-98); This is a request by the City of Lansing to allow the construction of a maximum 200 ft tall telecommunications tower on the property at 2516 S. Washington Avenue, Washington Park. Approval of a Special Land Use Permit is required under Section 1248.04(e) of the Zoning Code, in order to permit construction and operation of "a structure which is owned or operated by a public utility in the "A" Residential District." This is part of the city-wide telecommunications plan that allows for the co-location of antennas for wireless communications in order to help reduce the possibility of an excessive number of towers dotting the Lansing skyline. The park property contains approximately 14.4 acres of land, and recently the Parks staff in conjunction with the expected contractor have decided upon a location for the tower, the northeast corner of the site next to the Consumers Energy right-of-way. The proposal can meet the criteria which must be used to evaluate a Special Land Use permit request as set forth in Section 1282.03(f)(1)-(9) with the approval of a height variance by the Board of Zoning Appeals and the following standard conditions for these communication towers. 1. The tower shall be a monopole type tower; 2. The tower provide for the co-location of antennas; 3. The tower be located on the large portion of the site if possible to minimize the its impact on the on the existing residential neighborhood and the future development of the adjacent property; 4. The contract with the City include language helping ensure the compatibility of the use of this tower with the hospitals; 5. Landscaping be added around the base of the tower to buffer the view of the base from surrounding properties; 6. The tower be appropriately accessible and fenced for security. The staff recommends approval of the Special Land Use with the above stated conditions. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 32 The Committee, based on testimony and evidence, concurred with the staff report recognizing that this tower is part of a system that will result in improvements to the Parks system. In Committee, it was moved, seconded, and carried unanimously, 3-0, to recommend approval of SLU-10-98 (Act- 11-98), to allow a Telecommunications Tower at Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd. with the six conditions stated above. Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve SLU-10-98 (Act-11-98), to allow a Telecommunications Tower at Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd. with the six conditions stated above. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTION on the motion was as follows. On a Voice Vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; Unanimous; SLU-10-98 (Act-11-98), to allow a Telecommunications Tower at Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd. with the six conditions stated above was APPROVED. Mr. Miller said that concludes his report to the Committee of the Whole. On a motion by Mr. Nischan, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Committee of the Whole arose. The Board took up SLU-5-98, Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street (Act-6-98); SLU-7- 98, Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave. (Act-8-98); SLU-10-98, Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd. (Act-11-98); and SLU-12-98 (Act-13-98). f. SLU-5-98 and Act-6-98, Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street Mr. Goolsby made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, based on testimony, evidence and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve SLU-5-98 and Act-6-98, Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street with six conditions as stated above. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith . Ave Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Goolsby . Nay Keene. . . Ave Miller . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nay Rum Ave On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous; SLU-5-98 and Act-6- 98, Gier Community Center, 2400 Hall Street with six conditions as stated above was APPROVED. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 33 h. SLU-7-98 and Act-8-98, Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave. Mr. Goolsby made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, based on testimony, evidence and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve SLU-7-98 and Act-8-98, Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave. with six conditions as stated above. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Smith asked about lease language. Is the hospital the entity that determines whether or not equipment is being interfered with? Who holds sway? Mr. Goolsby said we are talking about criteria and contract language. Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Frederick. . .Ave Goolsby Ave Keene Ave Miller. Ave Nischan Ave Ruge . .Ave On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous; SLU-7-98 and Act-8-98, Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave., with six conditions as stated above, was APPROVED. I. SLU-10-98 and Act-11-98, Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd. Mr. Goolsby made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, based on testimony, evidence and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve SLU-10-98 and Act-11-98, Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd. with six conditions. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Goolsby . Ave Keene. . . Ave Miller. . . Ave Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge .Ave On a Roll Call Vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; unanimous; SLU-10-98 and Act-11-98 Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Rd. with six conditions as stated above, was APPROVED. j. SLU-12-98 and Act-13-98, Fire Station #4, 5550 S. Pennsylvania Ave. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 34 Finding that this property is to be sold after the construction of a replacement station, the staff recommends the withdrawal of the application. The Committee, based on testimony and evidence, concurred with the staff report. In Committee, it was moved, seconded, and carried unanimously, 3-0, to accept the withdrawal of SLU-12-98 and Act-13-98, Telecommunications Tower at Fire Station #4, 5550 S. Pennsylvania Ave. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to accept the withdrawal of SLU-12-98 and Act-13-98, Fire Station #4, 5550 S. Pennsylvania Ave. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. On a Voice Vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; withdrawal of SLU-12-98 and Act-1 3- 98, Fire Station #4, 5550 S. Pennsylvania Ave., was ACCEPTED. Next meeting Wednesday, April 14, 1999, at 4 p.m., Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 3. Urban Development Committee - Mr. Nischan Next meeting Tuesday, April 26, 1999, at 4 p.m., Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from the Planning Manager. Ms. Love said the housing study is underway. We are doing a telephone survey of about 600 houses, and an exterior housing conditions survey of about 28,000-32,000 households. We will be done by the end of July. D. Pending Items: Future action required. 1. Planning Board a. Z-25-97, 300 Blk. S. Butler, W. Side, "C" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District(Tabled January 6, 1998) 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. b. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-1" Business District(Tabled February 11, 1998) C. Z-3-98, 1131 & 1133 Race Street, "H" Light Industrial to "G-1" Business District(Tabled April 15, 1998) PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 16, 1999 PAGE 35 d. Z-4-98,201 E.Grand River, "F-1"Commercial & "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) e. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) f. Z-8-98, 208 E. Grand River Avenue, "F-1" Commercial to "G-1" Business (Tabled August 12, 1998) Urban Development Committee a. Act-19-97, 120 E. Shiawassee Street, Fire Station#1, Market/Sale for Mid- Rise Residential with Building Preserved b. Act-21-98, Ingham Regional Medical Center, Replacement Sign in S. Pennsylvania ROW(Tabled September 8, 1998) C. MPA-1-98, Downtown Comprehensive Plan (Tabled September 8, 1998) 8. NEW BUSINESS - Request from Patricia A. Cook, EDC Manager, for resolution to support the establishment of proposed Neighborhood Enterprise Zones Referred to the Urban Development Committee. 9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON Chairman Ruge commended the Urban Development Committee, Mr. Nischan for his presentation tonight of the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan, and members Keene, and Smith for their months of dedicated work reviewing the Plan. 10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Mr. Goolsby asked Ms. Love how the PSD had the power to displace hotdog vendors from vending their fast food on the downtown sidewalks. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to authorize Ms. Love to investigate the issue of the PSD having authority to eject hot dog vendors and whether or not it is a Planning Board issue; voice vote; carried; unanimous. 11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS - None. 12. ADJOURNMENT - was at 11:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, '1 Eleanor K. Love, Secretary Planning Board mn031699 a:\49 Z-1-99 2517 E. Mt. Hope GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Harvest Property Investments, LLC 5501 S. Cedar Street, Suite C Lansing, MI 48911 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Option to buy REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning EXISTING LAND USE: Office EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential & "D-V Professional Office PROPOSED ZONING: "D-V Professional Office PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 231' x 297' = 68,607 ft2 SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Crego Park S: Arboretum Park E: Mt. Hope Monument W: Single Family Residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential S: "A" Residential E: "E-1" Apartment Shop District W: "A" Residential District MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan recognizes this area for professional office use. SPECIFIC INFORMATION DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: This is a request by Harvest Property Investments, LLC. 5501 S. Cedar, Suite C., Lansing, MI to rezone a property at 2517 E. Mt. Hope Avenue from "A" Residential and "D-V Professional Office to "D- 1" Professional Office District. The applicant is proposing to construct a 3,000 - 4,000 ft2 building for a music company business. Z-1-99, 2517 E. Mt. Hope, "A" Res & "D-1" Prof. Offc. to "D-1" Prof. Offc. Page 2. BACKGROUND: AGENCY RESPONSES: AMERITECH: No response received yet. Assessor: No response received yet. BWL: No response received yet. Building Safety: No response received yet. Consumers Power: No response received yet. Media One: No response received yet. Development: No response received yet. Fire Marshal: No response received yet. Parks & Rec.: No response received yet. Public Service: Has no objections to the proposed action. We reserve the right to review plans through the normal site plan review procedure. Trans. Eng:. No response received yet. ANALYSIS BACKGROUND Harvest Music + Sound Design (HM + SD) is a music production company and recording studio focusing on writing and producing original music, radio ads, sound design for TV and film, and film soundtracks throughout the United States and Canada. The applicants operate a professional commercial production company in a controlled environment. According to HM + SD, over 70% of the work is produced and shipped via FedEx or digital phone transmission and the anticipated traffic will be very low. The applicant is proposing to purchase a portion of the property at 2517 E. Mt. Hope. The intent is to rezone that portion to "D-1" Professional Office and then divide the lot. The applicants would like to build a 3,000-4,000 ft2 building (site Report Prepared by DMW 2/99. Z 1 99, 2517E Mt Hope, "A" Res & "D-1" Prof. Offc. to "D-1" Prof. Offc. Page 3. plan review required), complementing the existing neighborhood. There are approximately thirty-three (33) parking spaces which will basically be shared via an easement agreement with the current occupants, Premier Land and Investments, LLC (PLI). HM + SD will employ five (5) people and PLI currently have seven (7) employees, a total of twelve employees between the two offices will share the parking and driveway. COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE The surrounding land uses in the area consist of low density residential zoning to the west and there are park areas to the north and south of the subject property. The property to the east is zoned "E-1" Apartment Shop District and is used as a monument business. The subject property is located on east Mt. Hope where there is a mix of office and residential land uses. Therefore, a mix of office and residential uses already exist in the area. The rezoning of this property will be compatible with the surrounding land use. COMPLIANCE WITH MASTER PLAN The Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates this area for professional office. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC There is a potential for a minor increase in vehicular traffic because the "D-1" Professional Office District allows a more intense use than that of a residential zoning district. However, the proposed use would be in a controlled environment and would be even less intense than previous uses in the area. The proposed 3,000-4,000 ft2 will be located west of 2517 E. Mt. Hope, with adequate parking for the facility. There is an easement agreement between the two businesses to share the parking and driveway. Proper landscape, screening and buffering would be required through the site plan review process. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT There could be a potential impact on the environment for a short period of time, until the proposed building is constructed. Also, as with any type of new development, there will be an increase associated with noise, dust and other factors during the construction period. Report Prepared by DMW 2/99. Z-1-99, 2517 E. Mt. Hope, "A" Res & "D-1" Prof. Offc. to "D-1" Prof. Offc. Page 4. PUBLIC SERVICE IMPACT There is a septic system in the area however, there is no existing sewer system in the area. The applicants were aware of this and contacted the Ingham County Health Department as well as the City of Lansing Public Service Department to obtain feedback on the utilities. The attached letter from the Ingham County Health Department indicates that it would be possible to install a new and replacement on- site wastewater treatment system to serve the existing building and proposed building at 2517 E. Mt. Hope. Any impact on public services, such as the installation of a new system, would be the responsibility of the owner. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT The character of the area has changed with a mix of office and residential use along east Mt. Hope. The Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates this area for professional office use. There should not be any adverse impact on the future pattern of development in the area. OTHER The applicants have made a concerted effort to meet with the surrounding neighbors. They plan to meet with the Forest View Neighborhood Association next week to discuss their proposal. The applicants have indicated that the area will be landscaped to maintain the natural beauty of the area. An administrative lot split is required. Also, a site plan review is required for the construction of the 3,000- 4,000 ft2 building. SUMMARY The Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates this area for professional office. The surrounding zoning in this area consists of low density residential zoning to the west, and there are park areas to the north and south of the subject property. There is a mix of office and residential uses. The subject property is located on east Mt. Hope where there is a mix of office and residential land uses. There is a potential for a minor increase in vehicular traffic because the "D-1" Professional Office Use is more intense than the present low density residential zoning. As with any type of new development, there will be an increase associated with noise, dust and other factors during the construction of the building. Any impact on public services, such as the installation of a new system, would be the responsibility of the owner. There should not be any adverse impact on the future pattern of development in the area. The applicants have made a concerted effort to meet with the surrounding neighbors. They plan to meet with the Forest View Report Prepared by DMW 2/99. EMIR Z-1-99, 2517 E. Mt. Hope, "A" Res & "D-1" Prof. Offc. to "D-1" Prof. Offc. Page 5. Neighborhood Association next week to discuss their proposal. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the request to rezone 2517 E. Mt. Hope from "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office to "D-1" Professional Office be approved. Report Prepared by DMW 2/99. SOIL EVALUATION DATA SHEET Ingham County Health Department P. 0. Box 30161 Lansing, Michigan 48909 THIS RECORD SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE A PERMIT Requested by �� y'(� (�/— Township LP, I Section ~ Address $SOI S - C ,� � , 5�, �' Road Location ;P6-17 PC)- &Y, 1 Phone # 5 j7- F$_`]-6,s1-S ,-(—:K Z�7_6L(L(0 Subdivision Land Owner ❑ Realtor Lot No. Side of Road Prospective Buyer ❑ Bui Ider File Search /0-1 ❑� Installer ❑ Other: Parcel No. 33- Soil Survey Sheet No. N Parcel Size W E PLOT PLAN S . goy <�5#�- tic) �s . . . . . . . . . So. . . .� . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . - . . . . ' r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I5� . n-r . N�� PhD Jmj" o��CJI aid./y rarimeY i Bruce B. Bragg, M.P.H., Director aun -A.A4 Dean G. Simko,M.D.,M.S.,Medical Director Human Services Building fi t` V/ �"e'�O""�'� `)(� 5303 South Cedar Street (517) 887-4312 P.O. Box 30161 Lansing, Michigan 48909-7661 FAX (517) 887-4560 August 21, 1998 Mark Miller 5501 S. Cedar Street Suite C P.O. Box 22061 Lansing, MI 48909 Re: On-Site wastewater treatment systems for property at 2517 E. Mt. Dope Rd., Lansing Township, Section 23, previous Application #10-12-90-52. Dear Mr. Miller: On August 19, 1998, Randall Kamm and myself conducted an evaluation of the above mentioned property to determine the possibility of installing a new and replacement on-site wastewater treatment system. These systems would serve both the current commercial building and a proposed "office/commercial" building. Enclosed is a copy of the soils report. Both test holes indicated soils that would be suitable to serve both the existing and a proposed commercial building provided each building only served a total of 10 employees each, as we discussed at the site. It is recommended that the current septic tank and pump chamber be used to serve the existing building with a new drainfield located in the area of test hole number one (1). The existing septic tank will need to be up-graded with a septic tank effluent filter. The new building could be served with a new on-site system in the area of test hole number two (2). Both system areas would need to be designed with a main and reserve system. Our office requests that you have a private consultant or engineering company prepare a design for these commercial facilities. Enclosed is a list of businesses that can assist you. Each facility will require a separate application and permit for the work. Enclosed are two applications, one will be for a new system and the other as a repair. Also enclosed is the information you gave me in the field. Please call our office at 887-4312, for further consultation on this project. Sincerely, rry Row R.S., M.S. Bureau of Environmental Health GR:mwt . Enclosure cc: Randall Kamm 0 Ingham County is an Equal Opportunity, Affirmative Action Employer, M/F V �w 36QIP a _ bO f r I 12 `l F _.. ..79 .7-2 _ 8r r ✓ V 02 I I i I I I I Road Location ;,( 5 j-7 n refmi t NU. »- (after issuance Test # ( a Type of Test 8 S Depth Each p _ lot 5 L- 7 5 —> S test _ 3Ct l hole L �(0i� 3 � located (rs Sil}' ` ' i on 3(n Plot �"� L � s_ 55r lan by 52 �vu number f r SOIL TEXTURE S Sand SCL Sandy Clay Loam B Hand Auger Boring LS Loamy Sand SiCL Silty Clay Loam BH Backhoe Cut SL Sandy Loam CL Clay Loam TS Top Soil L Loam C Clay MT Seasonal High Water Level (mottling) S: L Silty Loam M Muck WL Water Level (saturation) ' imitations of the site that affect use of on-site subsurface sewage disposal : U 1 ) Severely restrictive soil features. 0 2) Impervious layer within 48" of ground surface. CI 3) High seasonal water level . U 4) Wet depressions or poor surface drainage. p 5) Slope limitations (exceeds %) . Cl 6) Overflow of run-off water from adjacent higher areas. IJ 7) Insufficient space for replacement of drainfield. Q 8) Insufficient isolation distance from n Observations, stipulations: 25 r ��`e5 �G o d (-X-J u e--c liz--> S Observer: pot I K Sanitarian: Date: `jj� �� Z-2-99 Northeast Corner of West Mt. Hope and Todd Ave. Page 2 "D-V Professional Office to "F" Commercial was approved to allow the property to be used as a parking lot. SPECIFIC INFORMATION DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting to rezone the property from "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial to allow for the construction of a new 7,200 sqft. commercial facility known as "A-Complete Rental". AGENCY RESPONSES Ameritech: No Response Received Assessor: See Attached Board of Water and Light: No Response Received Building Office: No objection, this will be subject to site plan review. City Attorney: No Response Received Code Compliance: No Response Received Consumers Energy: No Response Received Development Office: No Comment Economic Development/TIFA: EDC has no objection to the rezoning as proposed. The request appears to be in keeping with the surrounding land uses. Furthermore, the EDC believes that it is an important objective to maintain neighborhood service establishments, such as A Complete Rental, within the City of Lansing to help to facilitate their growth. Fire Marshal: No objections Lansing Neighborhood Council: No Response Received Z-2-99 Northeast Corner of West Mt. Hope and Todd Ave. Page 1 "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Ms. Diana Engmann STATUS OF APPLICANT: Option to buy REQUESTED ACTION: Requesting to rezone property from "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial EXISTING LAND USE: Parking Lot EXISTING ZONING: "D-1" Professional Office PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: Approximately 273' x 131' = 35,763 sqft. (.88 Acre) and irregular shape LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 8 & 9, and also west 131' of lots 10 & 11 Block 19 Park Place Subdivision. SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Community Facility S: Industrial E: Commercial and Residential W: Residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "DM-3" Residential S: "I" Heavy Industrial E: "J" Parking, "F" Commercial & "DM-3" Residential W: " C" Residential MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan 1990, designates the land use as industrial/warehousing with community facilities and medium density residential to the north and west. CASE HISTORY: In 1943, the subject property was rezoned from two family residential to an apartment designation. The property, in 1986, was rezoned from "DM-3" Multiple Family Residential to "C" Residential and "J" Parking. In 1987, the portion of the property zoned "C" Residential was rezoned to "D-1" Professional Office (Z-32-87) to permit construction of an office facility on the site. In 1994, a Special Land Use (SLU-12-94) Z-2-99 Northeast Corner of West Mt. Hope and Todd Ave. Page 3 "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial Lansing Police Dept.: No Response Received Media One: No Response Received Parks and Recreation: Does not impact Park operations. Public Services: See Attached Transportation Engineer: No Response Received ANALYSIS COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE Over the years many actions have taken place on this parcel. In 1943, the subject property was rezoned from two family residential to an apartment designation. In 1986, this parcel was rezoned from "DM-3" Multiple Family Residential to "C" Residential and "J" Parking. In 1987, the portion of the property zoned "C" Residential was rezoned to "D-1" Professional Office (Z-32-87) to permit construction of an office facility on the site. It was the intent at the time to decrease the amount of traffic and create a transition area between commercial uses and residential uses. Rezoning the property to "D-1" Professional Office would accommodate the proposed office at the time of the rezoning request, as well as, allow residential development. In 1994, a Special Land Use (SLU-12-94) was approved to allow the property to be used as a parking lot. The areas surrounding the site on the west, north, and east are zoned "C" Residential and "DM-3" Residential. A fire station is located north of the subject site. Zoning to the east and south along Mt. Hope Avenue are "F" Commercial and "I" Heavy Industrial respectively. The area north of Mt. Hope Avenue near the intersection at Todd Avenue is predominantly residential. Most of the structures are single or two family homes. There are a few 3 unit residential structures in this neighborhood. Commercial uses are present on the north side of Mt. Hope Avenue going towards Washington Avenue. The size of this proposed development is larger than the commercial business directly to the east (Exteriors of Lansing). Rezoning the property from "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial will intensify the commercial presence in this neighborhood. COMPLIANCE WITH MASTER PLAN The Southwest Area Comprehensive Development Plan identifies the land use at this location as Industrial Warehousing up to the year 1990. At one time the Industrial/Warehousing designation would have accommodated the parking Z-2-99 Northeast Corner of West Mt. Hope and Todd Ave. Page 4 "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial requirement of the industrial use to the south. Z-32-87 rezoned the property from "C" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office. Evaluation of the site at the time of rezoning determined a transition area was needed between commercial and industrial activities east and south of the site and the residential neighborhood. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC Points of ingress and egress are on Mt. Hope and Todd Avenues. Mt. Hope Avenue is classified as a minor arterial and Todd Avenue is a local street. The majority of traffic will be accessing the site from Mt. Hope Avenue. Access on Todd Avenue will be used primarily for large loads. Adding a commercial business to this site could add to the on- street parking on Todd Avenue. This could present a problem if it interferes with local traffic, which includes the fire station. The proposed rezoning will increase the amount of vehicular traffic to this particular site, but the amount of traffic that will be added to Mt. Hope Avenue is minimal. "A Complete Rental" will operate Monday through Saturday from 7:30 AM to 6:00 PM, therefore vehicular traffic to the site will increase during these time periods. There are no anticipated impact on pedestrian circulation. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Potential noise generated from "A Complete Rental" as a result of starting and maintaining equipment during business hours can filter into the surrounding residential neighborhood. At the March 2, 1999 Public Hearing, the applicant stated that the building will help shield the neighborhood from noise generated by equipment. Temporary noise, dust and traffic will be generated during the construction phase of "A Complete Rental". IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT Rezoning the property from "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial may potentially impact the surrounding residential neighborhood. "F" Commercial zoning designation permit retail stores, private clubs, restaurants, bars, theaters, hotels, and off-street parking facilities. Any future change in ownership of the property could result in a change of land use, which can impact the surrounding neighborhood. SUMMARY Rezoning the property from "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial would intensify the commercial presence in this neighborhood. The Southwest Area Comprehensive Development Plan identifies the land use at this location as Industrialfwarehousing up to the year 1990. The intent of the previous rezoning (Z-32-87), from "C" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office, was to create a transition area between commercial and industrial use and the residential neighborhood. Z-2-99 Northeast Corner of West Mt. Hope and Todd Ave. Page 5 69D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial The proposed rezoning will increase the amount of vehicular traffic to this particular site, but the amount of traffic that will be added to Mt. Hope Avenue is minimal. On- street parking along Todd Avenue could be a problem in the future. This could interfere with local traffic, as well as, emergency circulation from the fire station. There are no anticipated impact on pedestrian circulation. Noise from the daily operation of "A Complete Rental" could impact the environment. Temporary noise, dust and traffic will result from construction activities on the site. Rezoning the property also open up the opportunity for other types of commercial uses to occupy the property in the future. Future uses have the potential of impacting the environment, as well as, the surrounding neighborhood. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denying the applicants request to rezone the property from "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial, maintaining the transitional nature of the zoning pattern. Respectfully Submitted, Sam Quon Senior Planner CITY of LANSING INTEROFFICE COMMUNICATION TO: Sam Quon, Senior Planner FROM: Chad A. Gamble, Assistant City Engin DATE: February 20, 1999 SUBJECT: Z-2-99 The Department has completed its review of file number z-2-99. We understand that if above request is approved, a building may be constructed on an existing parking lot. Prior to any new building construction, any existing on site utilities, either storm sewer or sanitary sewer, must be properly abandoned or relocated. If there are any utilities on site, please have the property owner contact the Public Service Department to obtain direction on the proper abandonment policies of the City. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions regarding our review. Thank you. 11i._.SAWMDATAMTEPLANV-2-99 reveiw comments.wpd M 5 4 5 4\ 3 \ Cb 02 oil z7' \�y 66' \ 0� 3 g 3 6 7 8 9 10 ti na 6�31 �, 9 10 n � V 10 0'� V ^ \ \ p {N/ 0 o 0 q l n co Oy d p p v OCO 01 ^ 1 tp zZ' ez' .0, s 3Z� 3zY 318 31G 31z zz' zZ' y �f $2.: 2L4 SS4-ti 2/ 214-Iv Zlo p08 200 Lzo SMITH 3z9 3ZS 37-3 365 313 311 309 307 305 301 277 z z 5 Z19 L/7 21/ Z09 403 33" 33- 30• 36' 33' 33, yy' zz' zz' Yy' ti 1' zZ' zz' fq 6G' h ` 1' b� h \ �\ � \ ql �� a W ° 0�\ �\ o 0Ld 1 5 4 � Q \ � 3 l/G./ a ° Q O// (I • 0 o zz' vY' oc' 156.75' Ja, ISG.7s' /56.75- 03l co�� (,I6 17 ao 6 � 51 +�� Q ti O N I �Wi,tf-t- I N 0 ry/�i is S�a�ion J - ti 5 N \ , 0 °141- W va 517 167"41 �� No. 7 5 O RD � 00 hh � E 5 101 a h A a 061 9 14 �.0 0 ` N M xpn� O v ' m i993 Q1 " ,f el.7s. M 'ti 00 13 q� � a 10 0 � 1 � 0 0 I 1 0 1,z.7s � o m e 11 � 1 2 5Z v O � a o p II I a f h I I 12 82.5"' /3/' '75, ';\ -H4'' Lo.Yf' 2!L 2or, — -- - -- -- Tf�l EXTERI.,�s a f L A�'si.✓G 20 / DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT r H I C P 7 -LANSING,MI 48933-1236• (517)483-4066•FAX-(517)483-6036 FEB 17 1999 PLANNING OFFICE RECEIVED David C. Hollister,Mayor PLANNING r)IVI8I0fv FEB 15 1999 MULTI-AGENCY REFERRAL SHEET ASSESSORS OFFICE DATE: February 11, 1999 FILE NO.: Z-2-99 FROM: Sam Quon, Senior Planner (517) 483-4076 AGENCY RESPONSES: ❑ Ameritech ❑ Fire Marshal t:7 Assessdr ❑ Lansing Neighborhood Council ❑ Board of Water and Light ❑ Lansing Police Dept. ❑ Building Office ❑ Media One ❑ City Attorney ❑ Parks and Recreation ❑ Code Compliance ❑ Public Services ❑ Consumers Energy ❑ Transportation Engineer ❑ Development Office ❑ Economic Development/TIFA The following request is currently before the Lansing Planning Board, which must review and forward its recommendation to City Council. We invite your comments, requirements and recommendations for this proposal relative to your official function. Z-2-99, This is a request by Diana Engman, representing the owner, Lansing Area Safety Council, to rezone property located at the northeast corner of W. Mt. Hope & Todd Avenues from uD-1" Professional Office District to "F" Commercial District. The applicant proposes to construct a single-story 7,200 sq ft building and parking lot for "A-Complete Rental' including required landscape and screening. The property is currently used as a parking lot zoned "D-1" Professional Office District. Please provide your remarks to the Planning Office on this form, by separate cover, attachment, voice mail (483-4057), or facsimile (483-6036) by Noon Tuesday, February 23, 1998. Signed: 0 Please Recycle "Equal Opportunity Employer" Z- 2-99 NORTH Northeast Corner of W. Mt . Hope and Todd Ave . Vj unity Map CITY POWER PLANT FRAZEL ST. SLAND AVE a J a CHRISTIANC �a DIAMOND RED SITE REEK N H�)�S i ON CT. Z� OODLAVN AVE BAKER ST. MOORES RI /r VER F DR. a TORREN E CT. � a W GARDEN ST. DU v o 2� �" SO AVON ST. a BARNES AV El ¢ F ❑ _ � El ¢ � y AVE, SMITH ¢ AVE. ISBELL ST. :1 0 0 0 0 0 ❑aa ❑ �� U NORMAN ST. _ OULD y Z J Q J Q ¢ m o T. HOPE 0 m m LENORE S i t e LCRENCE ST W McKIM t� a COOPER a DIET KEN- m > WOODROW ST w WOOD m a < o m N PDXSON r J H RILEY m GORDUI �� PACIFIC u s � P'gdFIC LPKWY G� EDISDN a ROCKFORD RD. I ZON D OM-3 RE 510ENTIAL ZONED J ZONED F i -- -- -- -- -- -- -- I i PCR ZONING GWAN&S , A L LE Y 06.5) TH/4 PIES 1499 DATE D ISSN PBH FLE PATH FR\ ZONED J A0 \ i AGCMPLErZ7CTCGS 12 ry EXISTING FENCE S 0'137 W 13I94M - I p P FENCED 5TORA6E YARD h I QZ o YV/TH ASPHALT PAVING 2O' GATE IQ_z ASPHALT DRIVE FRC�fOSED GURU-GUT n v EN Y I ) LU I 1— OVERHEAD DOORS - q` 20' ? Ir V F— k9 GA T E Y �m - MAPLE Y PRCPC5ED CNE-STORY BUILDING Q �I Q (Y_ 120'X 60'= 7,200 S.F. 0-2 i l FORSYTHIA `t SITE hq6 ACRE M TY_V I � Q tr VT EN Y R EXI5TIN6 ZONING C-1 ►L N W N PROPOSED ZONING F U < h � EMPLC E W ENTRY BUILCIN6 CE516N TO BE DETERMINED r < PETER 3. HOL. U �I 2O'5ETBAGIC Y ARCHITECT, P.L.C. � REOU/RED LANCSGAP/NG TO 2215 BURCHAM CANE BE CETERMINED L I E.LANSING,mi 48823 1517)381-0762 -- FAX:-0764 NO'1223c' ?i2.09M -- -� �- -- -- --T--T-- ligmenlcr°�olCcm iCCN&L 1ANT E`CI5T/N6 � j EXISTING NG I EXISTING APPLE I �. I APPLE ,P'_E I APPLE EdXmISTI FRCPOSED I r REMOV ND E EXISTING CRIVEYIAYS, �� I 1 REPAIR 5ICEYiALK,CURB A I I SHEET TITLE T O D 51 A V E N U E (82.5) LAPW5 i PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN FOR REZONING NOTES: PRELIMINARY 51TE PLAN i PROkCT Wi. 1. TH15 15 NOT A SURVEY AND 15 NOT INTENCED FOR USE AS ONE. -WALE,1•.:o'"O' i :.TH/5 PLAN IS FOR RE-ZONING ONLY OTHER REGL'IREMENTS OF I 1 THE C17Y OF LAN51N6 INCLLVlNG,EMIT NOT LIMITED TO,LANDSGAPIN&, x ��0� STCRM WATER CETE.NTICN AND SI&NA6E AS WELL AS THE EUILCIN6 i MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL COCE RECUIRMENT5 TO BE SUBMITTED i SEPARATELY. - O IO' 2$' Sol _ -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- - II19d1 y-EeT rKl. ZONED C-RE51DENTIAL li Z-2-99 NORTH Northeast Corner of Mt. Hope and Todd Ave. Zoning "DM-3" Res N N Res "C es z "D-I" "DM Ig Office Rem �P � W F-I W 0 N /N ( 1 trill711 v "I"Heavy In strial ,,:., _, _ , �- as - .. ,,, �, . - ... - - ,_ � i r . c .. i _ ' _ ,f ._ i „ ,.. . - .; ,, � � - k ,_.. � I,t �� - ' Z-3-99 3435, 3627, 3631 Forest Rd. & Page 1 Vacant MSU Land in 3500 Block Forest Rd. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Fred L. Poston, Interim Vice President for Finance and Operations and Treasurer 494 Administration Building Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Representing the Board of Trustees, Michigan State University and University Club, Inc. REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning EXISTING LAND USE: (Vacant) Residential property, vacant land and Golf Course property adjacent to University Club EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential and "F" Commercial PROPOSED ZONING: "F" Commercial PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: Approx. 1,700 feet along Forest Rd. X 575 feet deep. SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Forest Akers Golf Course S: University Corporate Research Park E: Forest Akers Golf Course W: 127/496 Expressway SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential S. "D-1"Professional Office E. Out of the City (East Lansing) W: unzoned ROW MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Southeast Area Plan generally designates properties in this area for commercial use that recognizes the University Club development. The Plan identifies Forest and Collins Road as collector streets. The amendment to this plan, the "Collins Road Area Plan" adopted in 1988 primarily addressed future land use along Collins Road, but Z-3-99 3435. 3627, 3631 Forest Rd. & Page 2 Vacant MSU Land in 3500 Block Forest Rd. also included strategies for future development west of the expressway into the Forest View Neighborhood. CASE HISTORY: City Council designated Forest Road as an Urban Scenic Corridor and adopted maintenance standards for Scenic Corridors (5/7/90). SPECIFIC INFORMATION Developer's Proposal: The applicant proposes to construct an executive development center and hotel facilities to facilitate executive training and fill related lodging needs (see attached descriptions). The structure will be located to the east of the University Club, but will not include property at 3509 Forest Road. The Executive Development Center is designed to provide business training to professionals through the University's Graduate Business School. The Hotel Suites will include 122 rooms with kitchenettes that are designed as extended stay suites. The Executive Development Center and Hotel Suites are not designed for open bookings, but strictly for the use by University colleges and programs in addition to the Eli Broad College. See attachment "Executive Development Center Project Summary and Options" for a more complete description of the facility and program. The starter house for the Forest Akers Golf Course will also be relocated at the Executive Development Center. Z-3-99 3435. 3627, 3631 Forest Rd. & Page 3 Vacant MSU Land in 3500 Block Forest Rd. AGENCY RESPONSES Ameritech: (No response received.) Assessor: (No response received.) Bd. of Water & Light: Electric: No conflicts for rezoning of property. However, the proposed development would be eliminating an underground, radial, electric feed to a water well and restrooms at Forest Acres Golf Course. Water: No objection to issuance of building permit. Water Customer Projects must see site utilities plan with flow requirements to confirm service availability. Bldg. Safety: No objection. Consumers (No response received.) Energy: City Attorney: (No response received.) Development: No comment. Forestry Manager: Initial review indicated a significant conflict between the plan submitted and the Scenic Corridor Ordinance/Guidelines. The developer should meet with us before the design process starts in order to avoid future delays. Fire Marshal: No objections to proposed change. Future construction will need approval. Lansing Neigh. (No response received.) Council: Parks & Rec: (No response received.) Police Dept: (No response received.) Z-3-99 3435. 3627, 3631 Forest Rd. & Page 4 Vacant MSU Land in 3500 Block Forest Rd. Public Service Dept.: The Public Service Department has no objections to the proposed actions. However, there is currently no storm sewer in front of this property in Forest Road. The sanitary sewer in Forest Road is 8 inch diameter and more information regarding the proposed development is needed to determine whether or not it will accommodate the additional flow. Also some modifications to the existing roadway may be necessary to accommodate additional traffic volumes. We reserve the right to make comments regarding the project through the normal site plan review procedure. Traffic Eng: (No response received.) Forest View Neighborhood: (No response received.) ANALYSIS COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE The subject site is located along the north side of Forest Road, east of the 496/127 expressway, and extends approximately 1,700 feet east to the quarter section line, which is where Collins Road would meet Forest if extended to the north before it makes the curve along the new road alignment. COMPLIANCE WITH MASTER PLAN The Southeast Area Plan generally designates properties in this area for commercial use that recognizes the University Club development. The Plan identifies Forest and Collins Road as collector streets. The amendment to this plan, the "Collins Road Area Plan" adopted in 1988 primarily addressed future land use along Collins Road, but also included strategies for future development west of the expressway into the Forest View Neighborhood. Z-3-99 3435. 3627, 3631 Forest Rd. & Page 5 Vacant MSU Land in 3500 Block Forest Rd. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC The proposed development will add a parking lot with 379 additional spaces. Added to the 214 spaces west of the University Club and 100 spaces south of Forest Road, the parking spaces to accommodate this overall University Club, EDC and Hotel Suites development totals 693 parking spaces. Additional activity will be added to the site with the relocation of the starter house for the Forest Akers Golf Course starter house. The applicant's architect has indicated that the bulk of the traffic will come from MSU and the expressway off the Dunckel/Jolly and Trowbridge Road exit. The Urban Scenic Corridor designation of the entire length of Forest Road from Aurelius Road to the eastern City limits and the nine factors listed in the "Scenic Corridor R.O.W. Maintenance Guidelines & Procedures" . The guidelines address the following: 1. Road Surface Management 2. Non-Asphalt Management 3. Hard Surface Shoulders Management 4. Drainage Ditch Management 5. Formal Landscape Management 6. Semi-Natural Area Management 7. Public Utilities 8. Development Review 9. Guidelines Review (every 5 years) ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The proposed development is oriented to take advantage of the contours of the land which is somewhat hilly because of the golf course layout. The development is also designed around the remaining single family home on Forest Road. The site plan shows substantial mix of deciduous and coniferous trees to screen the proposed development from the house. Lighting of the parking lot will be "cut off' style that will direct light downward to the parking lot, and not be a problem for any nearby properties and should not effect Forest Road as an urban scenic corridor. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT The University site is somewhat isolated, not on a major corridor or expressway Z-3-99 3435. 3627, 3631 Forest Rd. & Page 6 Vacant MSU Land in 3500 Block Forest Rd. interchange. Future development to directly result from this proposed development is unlikely given the surrounding uses. The University Corporate Research Park, to date, has only two of its parcels developed. The former Smith Tree Farm, west of the expressway, was rezoned and obtained a PRD. Though the developer did not exercise his option to develop the land, the possibility exists that that be developed in the future. Neighborhood Response Jan Kolp, representing the Forest View Neighborhood Association, stated at the Planning Board Public Hearing that the Association has not yet reviewed the development, but will do so at their March 9, 1999 meeting. She did express their interest in keeping the Forest Road Urban Scenic Corridor intact and stated they did not want to see anymore parking lots from Forest Road. The property owner of 3509 Forest Road, Marjorie Cross, expressed her concern about additional traffic and its impact on the scenic corridor. Another resident of the neighborhood, expressed his concern about the additional traffic on Forest Road which is a two lane road. He stated he would like to see additional landscaping along this section of Forest Road, particularly where the University Club has their ancillary parking lot on the south side of Forest Road. SUMMARY The rezoning request is in compliance with the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan. Additional traffic to result from this development is anticipated to come from Harrison and Collins Road with some increase on Forest Road. The Urban Scenic Corridor designation applies to this section of Forest Road which will require additional plant materials to create a canopy affect over the public right-of-way. The street will be required to stay two lane except where turning lanes may be necessary to reduce any turning conflicts. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the rezoning request be approved as requested from the "A" Residential and "F" Commercial District to an overall "F" Commercial Zoning District. CITY OF LANSING Public Service Department Transportation Division Interoffice Communication jcHIGP TO: Donna Wynant, Senior Planner FROM: David A. Berridge nsportation Engineer DATE: March 9, 1999 ' SUBJECT: Z-3-99: 3400 - 3600 Forest Road: Michigan State University The Transportation and Parking Office has reviewed the subject request and has the following comments. 1 ) The proposed plan calls for two new driveways on Forest Road near the intersection of Collins Road. Traffic for this development should be generated from the east due to the nature of the development and its relationship with Michigan State University. It is estimated that 80 - 90 percent of the traffic will enter from and exit to the east. 2) The remaining single family residence between the two driveways will not pose an operational concern for the commercial driveways. Nor should the commercial driveways pose an operational concern for the residential driveway. Obviously it would be preferable for this property to be consolidated in to the project at some future date. 3) The Transportation and Parking Office reserves the opportunity to comment further during the site plan review process. 4) It appears that this request can be approved with the proper planning, design considerations and conditions. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. file: Forest Road C:\Corel\Office7\WPWin7\DATA\PLANNING\Z-3-99.wynant.wpd Executive Development Center Project Summary and Options DRAFT: 16 Jan 99 Programming • Executive Development Programs(EDP)are an integral part of The Eli broad Graduate School of Management, and these programs,delivered in a state-of the-art Executive Development Center,are critical to the national ranking the Broad School will enjoy. The strategic goal of the Broad School is to achieve a consistent top-20 ranking among MBA,programs. Among graduate schools that consistently rank in the top 20 MBA programs, 18 have EDP initiatives with top-20.status. The high correlation between superior MBA ranking and leadership in executive development is due to the clear synergies that exist between the two levels of educational achievement. A highly successful EDP will be essential to the Broad School's strategic goals. • The EDC will be used by University colleges and programs in addition to the Eli Broad College;all use of the facility will be managed by the Eli Broad College. The hotel also will be used by University colleges and programs other than EDC programs. The hotel's location, extended-stay rooms, limited guest services, and price point will differentiate it from the Kellogg Center lodging operations;while some competition will exist between these two facilities,they are anticipated to be largely complementary in their approach to the regional lodging market and to the University lodging and conferencing market in particular. Facilities • +/-40,000 square foot Executive Development Center(EDC), constructed on property adjoining the University Club property to the east, connected to the University Club to the west,and to an extended stay hotel to the east. • EDC contains two 100-seat technology supported"case-teaching" auditoriums, four 52-seat flat classrooms,breakout rooms reconfigurable for between 8 and 32 seats,commons area for dining and receptions,and conference management and support offices. • EDC will connect to University Club through current Club Library Room; eastern-most(fireplace)portion of Club main dining room will connect to western-most EDC break-out rooms to permit these spaces to be used interchangeably by EDC and Club; Club will be responsible for EDC food and beverage service. I n a y �D y 7 yT L 1 I• N S . I V. `\ Fop ♦ten � .. a 4 \ I � k n l �iAtT&R T C ' iio-rEL;�UITG3 f i q �• , �. is _ - � .. _. i I � rJIVE&SI GLUE r SIT�EsyPLLAN i I � ifa\,° A,, .d. .,.,»moo !l o c r.s.r M A l; UNIVERSITY PARK lic r.nw' _ LAST 1 racHICAN Mull cKuor I rc6itwts :.�,�,:mom.„o-iaz`. �,o.rz-nae•s,1�.�'� calrtmrow euYeva-we'n UNIVERSITY PARK t �. EAST LANSING. MICHIGAN �_��4: 1il_ -PATto' DATE - F•1=e% 1, 1'9'19 COMMISSION NUMBER - 98071 ILJ POOL _ j•- ._ I - ' . __. •.�,` = ss L11V� 1. "�E + r 3 F C 193 c.�.Fs r� ' •�• " 379 CARSI TOTAL :1 .2,0� d,.2,33 r II� I n u� I _ T 4 � Lz 3 N ♦ � �� M� 1:IIY 4 � �8 a�z =4JPPER FLOOR P_LA- d r I • JR - II� UNIVERSITY 1PARI, EAST LANSING, MICHIG. iwee-1,1999 COMMISSION NUMBER - 98( -A-rW:ETIG CLUB k a i• • /. flCPSccAVA --P UNIVERSITY PARK EAST LANSING• li iCiilG�.l: I,1999 COMMISSION NUMBER 98G . ,_ I ' SLU-1-99 528 N SEYMOUR AVENUE, PARKING LOT IN 11DM-3" Res. Page 1 GENERAL INFORMATION OWNER/APPLICANT: Lansing Community College 419 N. Capitol Ave. Lansing, MI 48933 (Contact: Ron Roush, 483-1835) STATUS OF APPLICANT: Owner REQUESTED ACTION: Special Land Use Permit EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant Lot next to an office building EXISTING ZONING: "DM-3" Residential PROPOSED ZONING: Same PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 42' wide X 123.75' deep = 5,197.5 sq ft SURROUNDING LAND USE: North: Residential & Parking South: Office East: Parking & Office West: Residential & Office SURROUNDING ZONING: North: "DM-3" Res. & "D-1" Prof. Off. South: "D-1" Prof. Off. East: "D-1" Prof. Off. West: "DM-3" Res. MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The River Island Amendment Plan, designates this block for office development (See Attached Map). SPECIFIC INFORMATION The applicant is requesting a Special Land Use Permit to utilize the vacant property formerly known as 528 Seymour Avenue, more particularly described as: N 42 FT of W 71/2 Rods of Lot 11, Block 70, Original Plat, City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI., PPN 3301-16-130-011 for an off-street surface parking lot. The property is zoned "DM-3" Residential District, and an off-street surface parking lot is allowed as a special land use according to SLU-1-99 528 N. SEYMOUR AVENUE, PARKING LOT IN "DM-3" Res. Page 2 Section 1256.04(g) of the Zoning Code if approved by City Council. The college wishes to expand the parking lot for the property at 520 N. Seymour Avenue onto this property, combining the two parcels. The College recently purchased both properties and wishes to make this parking improvement. AGENCY RESPONSES: Ameritech: No response Assessor: This will probably be set up for a description change for the 2000 tax year, to combine into one parcel. Building Safety: No objection. The project is subject to site plan review. BWL: No objection. For BWL contacts, see response. City Attorney: No response Consumers Power: No response Development Office: No comment. Fire Marshall: No objection. Media One: No response Police Department: No response Public Service: No objection. Will need to review the construction site plan. Transportation Engineer: See attached comments. Parks & Recreation: Does not impact park operation. Lansing Neigh. Council: Referred to President of DNA (Monica Zuchowski). Downtown Neigh. Assoc.: No response Historic District Comm.: See attached from previous case. Only the second paragraph of#3 on page 2 directly addresses Historic District Commission concerns.. BACKGROUND 1893 Year built for the residential structure. By 1945 Multiple additions. The structure contained as many as eight dwelling units. 1994 Structure demolished. To utilize the property for parking for the adjacent office building, the applicant has two options: rezoning to "D-1" or "J" Parking ; or a special land use permit. The applicant previously requested the rezoning option in order to make the land zoned commonly with the office use which is zoned "D-1", but has since withdrawn that request and has filed for the SLU. Whether the property is rezoned to "D-1" or a special land use is granted, front yard parking is prohibited and the plan must get site plan approval, where conditions are attached. SLU-1-99 528 N. SEYMOUR AVENUE, PARKING LOT IN "DM-3" Res. Page 3 ANALYSIS In accordance with Chapter 1282 of the Zoning Code, the request is to be evaluated based upon the following criteria. 1. Is the special land use designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner harmonious with the character of adjacent property and the surrounding area? The subject property is primarily adjacent to parking or offices associated with LCC with the exception of the residential structure immediately north. A landscape buffer is required between the parking lot and the home according to Chapter 1290 of the Zoning Code (Landscape, Screening and Buffering). The design proposes a buffer strip. This will be reviewed through the site plan review process. The existing zoning does not allow for front yard parking, therefore the front 20' of the property will be landscaped as well. Lansing Community College has always done an excellent job of landscaping their properties and parking lots, and there is no reason for this excellence not to continue for this development. The landscaping will make this development reasonably compatible with the surrounding properties. The proposed parking lot expansion will be compatible with the surrounding land uses with a landscape buffer along the north property line. 2. Does the special land use change the essential character of the surrounding area? The area is characterized by older offices, parking lots and a few homes. The proposed parking lot expansion is minor and by incorporating it into a redesigned parking lot for 520 N. Seymour, any significant impact is lessened. The proposed parking lot expansion does not significantly effect the character of the surrounding area. 3. Does the special land use interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent property? The proposed parking lot expansion is minor and should not adversely impact the use of adjacent properties. The landscaping of the lot should help buffer the view of the vehicles from the public R1W and adjacent properties. 4. Does the special land use represent an improvement to the use or character of property under consideration and the surrounding area in general and also is in keeping with the natural environment of the lot? The proposed parking lot expansion does not significantly alter the use or SLU-1-99 528 N. SEYMOUR AVENUE, PARKING LOT IN "DM-3" Res. Page 4 character of the property or the surrounding properties since the whole north parking lot is being redesigned. By incorporating the additional land and parking spaces into the redesign of the existing parking lot, the impact upon the environment, in terms of lot coverage and noise, is minimized. 5. Does the special land use pose a hazard to adjacent property, or does it involve uses, activities, materials or equipment which are detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of persons or property through the excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, odor, fumes or glare? The proposed parking lot expansion does not involve a use that will have a detrimental impact on the health, safety or welfare of persons or property. 6. Is the special land use adequately served by essential public facilities and services, or is it demonstrated that the person responsible for the proposed special land use is able to continually provide adequately for the services and facilities deemed essential to the special land use under consideration? The proposed parking lot expansion does not require a significant amount of public resources and the design minimizes the amount of additional storm water flow. There may be a need to relocate a utility pole and a parking space in the public right-of-way, but the applicant is capable of making those improvements if necessary. The proposed parking lot expansion is adequately served by essential public facilities and services. 7. Does the special land use place demands on public services and facilities in excess of current capacity? The proposed parking lot expansion does not place demands on public services in excess of current capacity. 8. Is the special land use consistent with the intent and purpose of this Zoning Code and the objectives of any currently adopted Comprehensive Plan? The proposed parking lot expansion meets the setback, design and landscaping requirements of the "DM-Y Residential District. The final design review will be completed during site plan review where all details of the design will be worked out, but the plan is well conceived. The River Island Amendment Plan, designates this block for office development. The parking lot proposed is accessory to the office at 520 Seymour, therefore the proposed special land use conforms to the master plan. SLU-1-99 528 N. SEYMOUR AVENUE, PARKING LOT IN "DM-3" Res. Page 5 9. Does the special land use meet the dimensional requirements of the district in which the property is located? The proposed parking lot expansion meets the setback, design and landscaping requirements of the "DM-3" Residential District. The final design review will be completed during site plan review where all details of the design will be worked out, but the plan is well conceived. SUMMARY 1. The proposed parking lot expansion will be compatible with the surrounding land uses with a landscape buffer along the north property line. 2. The proposed parking lot expansion does not significantly effect the character of the surrounding area. 3. The proposed parking lot expansion is minor and should not adversely impact the use of adjacent properties. 4. The proposed parking lot expansion does not significantly alter the use or character of the property or the surrounding properties. 5. The proposed parking lot expansion does not involve a use that will have a detrimental impact on the health, safety or welfare of persons or property. 6. The proposed parking lot expansion is adequately served by essential public facilities and services. 7. The proposed parking lot expansion does not place demands on public services in excess of current capacity. 8. The proposed parking lot expansion meets the intent and purposes of the Zoning Code and is in conformance with the master plan. 9. The proposed parking lot expansion meets the setback, design and landscaping requirements of the "DM-3" Residential District. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the special land use request with the understanding that the applicant will have to go through the site plan review process and include a landscape buffer plan. Prepared by:Jim Ruff,Zoning Administrator SLU- 1-99 - 528 Seymour Ave. Noana LAND USE AND ZONING MAP Parking in the"DM-3"Residential District u 85tJ.6�� 855.3 858.E � • se B59.3 5s/ � I5.5 7 ( PARK PARKINGM8.56 54.4 8567 x 36 3/ 34 38 um 1A 3f LIZaG Z ZZo ....1 856.9 S T 854.9 LAVLE/e 854.8 854.4 2 S� -/� 11 L - S-Z5 PARKING01' 6Z/ 855.3 q 5Z 55 52�ro. D-/ rtaG--•• j . op 5.Z �M— 53. x 855.1 _ 'rD5 855.4 0. 856.4 PARKING �� C'f/U�eCN PARKING 'PAY i . 853.1 S T 853.7 �' EGc�54b ST. 853.5 853.E J/ J/ JO WALL ' 2s � B53.9 i,� SLU-1-99 - 528 Seymour Ave._ NORTH Parkin in the"DM-3"Residential District EXISTING PLOT PLAN-520 SEYMOUR 8 41.25' - 123:75' U) C) 14^4' c� p �' � --� ? 13 13-8 8 t0� G) I N O AV) uj � cn 13 a . 14-4 ro ado_ 14-4 - O z n - z Lz z v7 . D � . rn D 43 c rn rn rn 122 �I Iron OPINE 6'North M 4 2' in d. ti Iron I l N c 0 Q Q L C LE, Z O o GARAGE C/3 OL l.Os Oul3/de Q Of Prop,Llne CD N v L w � co c m GARAGE m re) LLj C\' Z z J J O C. � x O u7 C_ 0 E 0 F• O .a m C7 '� Cone. O 0.7' �+ Ins/de P/L > Pd. Cor, G6o LoPeerS M 42' P4' Sol P.K.Noll STREET LINE In Crack Of Or/vewo Iron r \ 0 0 � Z 23,23' CONC, Bock of Curb • Found Property Corner SEYMOUR STREET ((92.5' Wd) O Set Property Corner �F7e hereby certify that we have surveyed the property herein rj�tccr;h�ra SEYM OUR AVENUE11-AIJ-4 1 1 ri I �x/5% .Power rvc,c Z 'juf�EQG c n W / Hou5E z OFFICE BLIll-DING i 3 CIO ci Elr � , co (D rL i n - PARK PCs g � 1 I � iEXISTING IPAR+CING RIVER ISLAND PLAN AMENDMENT 3/88 SAGINAW _ ,,, LAPEER I I k 4ug�ECT x PWOP 7y/ GENESEE FERRIS PARK I r SHIAWASSEE FERRIS �—yq P v AWNZ. y — — =iIONIA �- ? _ � E cn z oNLU �C uj G U 3 W T en O T T AWA - - =_-- - IN LANSING �/ � 71 TOWER CAPITOL RESIDENTIAL -- RES.'/ OFF. MIX OFFICE t ,� SLU-2-99 Southeast Corner of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road Page 1 Construction of a New Fire Station GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: City of Lansing (Fire Department) STATUS OF APPLICANT: Owner REQUESTED ACTION: The City of Lansing is requesting a Special Land Use (SLU) to construct a new fire station. EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant EXISTING ZONING: "F" Commercial LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 102 & 103, also Lot 104 , except the West 80' of lot 104, Maple Grove, No.3, City of Lansing, Ingham County, MI. PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: Approximately 213' x 368' = 78,373 sqft. (-1.7 acres) Irregular rectangular lot SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Commercial S: Residential E: Residential/Vacant Church W: Vacant and Residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "F" Commercial S. "A" Residential E: "B" and "A" Residential W: "D-1" Professional Office and "C" Residential MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan 1990, designates the land use as residential 0-7 units/acre. CASE HISTORY: The property was acquired by the City of Lansing (ACT-5-98) for the purpose of constructing a new fire station. This is part of the Lansing Fire Department's facility renovation project. SLU-2-99 Southeast Corner of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road Page 2 Construction of a New Fire Station SPECIFIC INFORMATION DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: The City of Lansing is proposing to construct a new fire station with three (3) drive through bays. A new fire station will provide response time equal to or better than current services. A new station would also provide locational, space and layout advantages at the same estimated cost as rehabilitating Fire Station #5. AGENCY RESPONSES Ameritech: No Response Received Assessor: No Comments Board of Water and Light: No Response Received Building Safety: This project is subject to site plan and building plan review. City Attorney: No Response Received Consumers Energy: No Response Received Development Office: Property was acquired specifically for this purpose. Fire Marshal: No objections Lansing Neighborhood Council: No Response Received Media One: No Response Received Parks and Recreation: It does not impact park operations. Lansing Police Dept.: No Response Received Public Services: No objection on the proposed land use as long as it meets zoning requirements. Public Service will require site plans for formal review. SLU-2-99 Southeast Corner of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road Page 3 Construction of a New Fire Station Transportation: No Response Received APPLICANTS PROPOSAL The Lansing Fire Department is proposing to construct a new fire station at the southeast corner of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road. There will be three (3) drive through bays for fire trucks. The fire station will have a cooking facility, a community room, and dorms that will house approximately eight (8) staff persons. Size and height of the fire station has yet to be determined, but it is estimated to range from 10,000 to 12,000 square feet. ANALYSIS Section 1282.03(f)(1-9) sets forth the criteria which must be used to evaluate a request for a Special Land Use Permit. The criteria and evaluation are as follows.. ■ Is the proposed special land use designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner harmonious with the character of adjacent property and the surrounding area? Properties directly west of the site are vacant and zoned "D-1" Professional Office and "C" Residential. Commercial uses are located to the north and residential uses are to the east and south. There is also a church to the east. The Lansing Fire Department intends to integrate the architectural design of the building with the surrounding neighborhood as much as possible. This facility will accommodate the needs of the fire department and community. Emergency vehicles will access the site from Starr Avenue and exit the site on Pleasant Grove Road. Access from Starr Avenue should be located no greater than 270 feet from the Jolly Road Right of Way. The purpose of this traffic pattern is to create easy access and limit the amount of activity adjacent to residential homes. ■ Will the proposed special land use change the essential character of the surrounding area? A fire station at this site will eliminate the open space provided by the existing vacant lot. However, use of the lot will help define the southeast corner of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road by providing a community resource. ■ Will the proposed special land use interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent property? SLU-2-99 Southeast Corner of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road Page 4 Construction of a New Fire Station General enjoyment on adjacent properties will not be severely impacted by the fire station. Sirens and flashing lights from emergency vehicles could bother some neighbors depending on the time of day. Chief Martin, Lansing Fire Department, at the March 2 1999 public hearing said the number of emergency runs per day will be similar to Station 6 on Pleasant Grove. He estimates that this station will have 3 to 7 emergency responses per day. In addition, exterior lighting will be situated as to not directly interfere with surrounding neighbors. ■ Will the proposed special land use represents an improvement to the use or character of property under consideration and the surrounding area in general, and will the use be in keeping with the natural environment of the lot? Use of the lot as a fire station provides an opportunity to improve the use and character of the property. ■ Will the proposed special land use be hazardous to adjacent property, or involve uses, activities, materials or equipment which are detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of persons or property through the excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, odor, fumes or glare; The proposed fire station does not pose any hazards to adjacent properties. Noise and flashing lights will be generated when the fire department responds to emergency calls. Emergency responses will generate additional traffic from the site. However, response times and emergency service will be improved in the southwestern part of Lansing. ■ Will the proposed special land use be adequately served by essential public facilities and services, or is it demonstrated that the person responsible for the proposed special land use is able to continually provide adequately for the services and facilities deemed essential to the special land use under consideration; Currently, public services and utilities do not service this vacant site. The scope of this proposal will not impact essential services and utilities. ■ Will the proposed special land use place demand on public services and facilities in excess of current capacity? No, the proposed SLU will not place an increase demand on public services. SLU-2-99 Southeast Corner of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road Page 5 Construction of a New Fire Station However, fire service to the surrounding area will be improved. ■ Is the proposed special land use consistent with the intent and purpose of this Zoning Code and the objectives of any currently adopted Comprehensive Plan; Section 1268.04 of the Planning and Zoning Code provides for structures used by a governmental entity similar to any principal uses allowed in the "F" Commercial District, which is subject to review by the Planning Board. The Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan 1990, identifies this property as low density residential (0-7 units/acre). It also affirms that any new fire station should be located south of Jolly Road in the vicinity of Waverly Road. ■ Will the proposed special land use meet the dimensional requirements of the district in which the property is located? Yes, the proposed site is on a 1.7 acre lot. This is enough area to accommodate the proposed development of a 10,000 to 12,000 square foot fire station with 30 to 40 parking spaces. SUMMARY The special land use permit is requested to construct a new fire station on the southeast corner of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road. The site provides enough space for the proposed use. Both the zoning designation and Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan 1990 provide provisions for the use. Staff's major concern is the impact this facility will have on adjacent residential properties. The special land use request can meet the criteria for special land uses as outlined in Chapter 1282 with conditions designed to mitigate any impacts on adjacent residential uses described below. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. Access to the site from Starr Avenue shall be within 270' of the Jolly Road Right of Way in order to limit the amount of traffic and activity adjacent to residential homes. 2. Egress from the site shall be on to Pleasant Grove Road. Action should be taken to resolve the issue regarding previous Council action limiting curb cuts along Pleasant Grove Road. Approval of this special land use by City Council should include authorization for an ingress/egress point along Pleasant Grove Road due to the public safety nature of this proposal. SLU-2-99 Southeast Corner of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road Page 6 Construction of a New Fire Station 3. Lighting used to illuminate any off street parking shall be confined within and directed onto the parking area only. 4. Landscaping, screening, and buffering be provide to minimize impact on adjacent residential properties. Respectfully Submitted, Sam Quon Senior Planner 7-11 J&D BEDS JOLLY ROAD VACANT }—. RESIDENTIAL 1 I OR COMMERCIAL I I I STRUTURE I i I � I 14 � � I � � I 0 0 RESIDENTIAL w I 0 U I r I VACANT FIELD I VACANT PARCEL z I 0 w � J a I < I I I 'rr I I ` PROPERTY LINE RESIDENTIAL / _cr O Z S 7A? l CAN A00 Ply/-�SA.t�7 Cc 12v�1 . LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL TO: Jim Ruff COMPANY: City of Lansing Planning Dept. APITAL CoONSULTANTSSATE: Februa 24,1999 E N G I N E E R S FROM: Jon D. Bauer X820 N.WASHINGTON AVE. ❑ 114 E.MAIN ST. ❑ 4328 THREE MILE RD NW LANSING, MI 48906 P.O.BOX 1398 SUITE 100 (517) 371-1200 GAYLORD, MI 49735 GRAND RAPIDS, MI 49544 (517) 371-2013 FAX (517) 732-8113 (616) 791-1016 517 732-2714 FAX 616 791-1480 FAX Jim: Attached is information regarding SLU-2-99 for your use. As we discussed on the phone, we are at the early stages of the project and building and site plans have not yet been developed. However, per our discussion, I think the attached describes and indicates what the thinking is thus far. If you have any questions, please call. COMMENTS: cc Chief Martin SPECIAL LAND USE PERMIT SLU-2-99 LANSING FIRE DEPARTMENT JOLLY/PLEASANT GROVE SITE GENERAL: The Lansing Fire Department ( LFD ) intends to develop a new fire station at the southeast corner of Jolly and Pleasant Grove. LFD staff have been working with Capital Consultants Engineers and the Keystone Design Group ( architects ) to develop this station. A very detailed programming document has been developed to date. A graphic presentation of this is attached. This attachment indicates the various functional areas of the building. As of this date, building plans and a site plan have not been developed, but major design/development ideas are described below. BUILDING: As the attached document indicates,the building will consist mainly of the following: 1) 10,000— 12,000 square feet. (one or two story has not yet been determined) 2) There will be three (3 ) drive through apparatus bays with room to expand one bay in the future. 3) Sleeping quarters for eleven ( 11 ). Possibly expand to 14 in future. 4) Multi-purpose ( community)room 5) Lounge/Dining/Kitchen 6) Ancillary facilities SITE DEVELOPMENT: Fire stations historically develop a close relationship to the surrounding community. The LFD intends to promote that relationship and to integrate the structure architecturally as much as possible. The site design ideas discussed thus far are: 1) Apparatus may exit onto Pleasant Grove and return via Starr. 2) The traffic signal at the corner will be controlled by LFD staff and electronic equipment. 3) There will be 30—40 parking spaces. Approx. twelve( 12) spaces will be designated for staff. The balance will be for visitors. Hopefully parking spaces will be located on the south part of the property. 4) The station will accommodate a voting precinct as well as a Multi-purpose room for community use and Fire Department training. 5) An emergency 911 phone will be available. 6) LFD staff will do limited outdoor training on site as well as exhibit equipment to the community. 7) The site will be landscaped to present an acceptable environment for the building and the adjacent neighbors. 8) A communication tower will not be required. 9) Site lighting will be carefully selected and directed to not interfere with neighbors. ENTRANCE LOBBY WINDOW 16'-0' COUNTER 911 PHONE WALL MAP WALL-MOUNT OFFICE �, LOBBY BLOOD PRE55URE GAGE PHONE COMMUNITY WOMEN'5 MEWS ROOM RE5TROOM RE5TROOM 132 SF PUBLIC RE5TPIOOM BABY CHANGE AREA ELECTRIC HAND DRYER 50AP D15P. O � O O 16' 0' 256 5F MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM STORAGE 12'-0' NOTE: H L TH15 AREA MAY BECOME AN ALCOVE SPACE WITH STACKED MULTI-PURP05E STORAGE CHAIRS COFFEE BAR FUNCTIONS. O O STACKED v TABLES 120 SF MULTI-PURPOSE ROOM 20'-0' SINK COFFEE BAR NOTE: COFFEE BAR AREA MAY BE RELOCATED TO THE ALCOVE M (7)C) SPACE WITH THE MULTI-PURPG5E STORAGE. b 1, X 2'-6 W O N 520 5F P05515LE OFFICE STANDARDS VIEW TO STREET UGHT, VEHICLE EXIT o a VIEW TO OV RHE D n _ DOORS 1� PU6UG 144 51` CONTACT 'N 0 SHELVES COUNTER � 4 96 5F :o FAX O COPIER CAPTAIN'S OFFICE N 12 X 12 144 5F 1 12'-0" 360 5F UTIUTY ROOM/JANITOR'S CLOSET MOP HOOK MOP SINK MOP BUCKET FLOOR 51NK O SHELVES o VACUUM/CLEAMNG STORAGE AREA 48 5F MECHANICAL ROOM 300 5F NVNOR REPAIR SHOP/DRY 5TO. WORK BENCH W/5TO. BELOW 5TO. SHELF/CABINETS O ;o 7'-6' 45 5F DECON/EM5 12'-0' HAND SINK ELECTRIC HAND DRYER TRASH CAN O 3' OPENING (NO DOOR REQUIRED) SHOWER W/CURTAIN (3'X5) SHOWER- I HEAD W/WAND � FIXED HEAD SHELF (15"X36'X7'-O-HIGH) COMP. 51NK-STAINLESS 15TEEL/16'Xl6'Xl2' DEEP 120 5F W/DRAINBOARDS MOP 51NK WET LOCKERS i. 13'-4' II II 20"x20 x7'-O' TAU. LOCKERS 6 6 O O N TOTAL OF 40 LOGKER5 6 267 51` LAUNDRY/LINEN 14'-0' KITCHEN AREA O 5HELVES W/ 10 LINEN STORAGE GOMM DRYER O �° GOMM WASH. STAND-UP COUNTER 42' HIGH OPEN BELOW FOR ASH. CART/BASKET 5TO. APPARATUS ROOM 224 5F HO5E TOWER BRACKETS BEAM W/TROLLEY ---I LANDING ABOVE GAGED LADDER CJJ == �11 I i 96 5F APPARATUS ROOM 60'-0* a 14:XI4' — 14:XI4' 0 14:XI4' WATU VATE ' 6'-0- -O' MIN. MIN. H05,E RACKS ON EA5TER5 Q r oc m O = =3 oz > O » » >m u� o o 0 0 U _ oc � m 4800 5F PHY51GAI, FITNESS i 16*-0" TV ON 5HELF VARIOUS EOUIPMENT5 O N EI TV ON SHELF 320 5F RE5TROOM/3NOWER (REC. ROOM) - IF 6A5EMENT O p b ftl 45 5F LOUNGE/DINING ROOM/KITCHEN 26'-O' ENE AINME GEN E N O O 2-3o'XS' IFI TABLE5 PA55-THRU WINDOW TO DINING ROOM On MAGNETIC/DRY ERASE v ME55AGE BOARD n MULTI-BOARD �n ------- UPPER GABINET5 LL- HANGING POTS r< PANS O Pl�6 C) orc Fff� z > Q i L Rff 1144 5F RESTROOM (MAIN FLR. UVING) 16*-O' CID 0. FO O 96 5F FIRE SUPPLY R15ER ROOM O 45 5F �NIRANr,E 1,0551 LEOEND U Ir. R��HROOM BLAW 5cx a NO RELATIONSHIP TI- O SOME RELATIONSHIP ® STRONG RELATIONSHIP TI- T OFFICI MECHANICAL ROOM MINOR REPAIR. HP/DRY WET I.00KEE2 APPARAIIJI; ROOM IT ME TOIL-FT/15HOWER W T IL T/ H W PH I Al, FITNE R��HROOW5HQWER PININ6 RM&OUN6UKITCH RESTROOM (MAIN FLR UVING) FIRE 5UPP. RISER RM ��"' �.�ar>��t•rt }�;}*a��',�,Th .��tY�'' i � i� n � c^ �-z 0 3i. - d 9 0 ' �� :r' .'ri i+�lX Y�IT ��1 a -•'t `r t++� M ..-,YA Mr` >, o �y t; � �Z4�t� .o:�� °T- •t e t ''''+"`�`��" i r''r_7[ -._ x i..t i - !w z�� '.��+-°?-fit; �'� x ry d 9.jJ-'0 1.-..C.,0��9��=..i';t rf+t{".r.'k�..- +,4.," '�' k,.%.�4.i. °5��.[!, •�.:� .i''i� ..� Rf t L i is Me 1-aiiii wrfaBO.��L'.� iy �y��..�,,,py,�,L�� ,o��+T.-�• r :'�'a'- ++ Y_ � q '''.c LrN'.1] ?' ti r i� a �'�'- 57 �..�I'1.Ly.�-:..ti .i;r+iixTr�'::�_S. y hY. * 1 1,;. Y ,t v�•.y-*R!S�_„y 2 r.. "? ii_ -�: - • ?. �1F=`e�F��"i. �,L 1 4 _ V- _ .F. d H!"-q`F4+� L F-iG S .}1 1 � - 1 •1 ��,m� j�� y,��.,��y��. �..'-•.�`�-��GC)•� T'1+ - ^� •:_ri:�w } �A-�.r '4� ,�`�,��l.1',d��.45,'ti>,�.-�.f r`i..i,..{�.•<s-�tt•�-}4��.,a .�� t.l �:�` vs��it ,,._".•Y ..r+ is r:;^L�j• V [:•elf :{iaT>-$.aT %r S i 1 € A §2 0 a � • +:%•rj.,�.r_- E—.:-. =O �� • - - • 1 1 ��y c. i.. Y'�. - -. �;`•Sesas33. r t - i�� '� •'� � ,.-+.sa.`'•S".w-� -e '`s1� :'.:�i.�r��.Jw�tr�1.',5`• ..�^.9-..�?1.;s.-..�.+3.a� `Y..'.>..:-�. .s, Y,;.•:=, r.: • .-,�, �i.. • - I • I �� t r -0 a.einf �'U -r k,`:E^: - +.- • §s f.-e't5 - i� "r' O aiyng. s=� . ° � • • . � ••• y•1 i1 / ill /C rz_d a5y4+ [ `. t aTa _ y� N na u0 �1 r Stk Er 3 y yy^4 k y F i O• ?� ® � t"!� • • i 1 ✓" h 1 1.•. � ��x t tt+�..�.,+' r {.,,_ �! 7�:.� se.e ww:�.Y�•�#'w.f4t,>;�� '� v;,. J♦ Lf n o �jR' s .'f•� `1ip�-.Jim fyy I-,a x�/��7'♦I'• -^ti.� YSi r -sv,_-�yy, �r -.�i�I � r4 �._'�- ..�. ©.® '4��ht�� ^+w�M�� f.�,Ji��.a:_eYa1�i +.S R��:.:,s!e'^a0. �I,B ��tL,Ylay.,i'� _ �.t.�. • • • • • - - 1 • I / . / �� ® �.- 4 '�.f..`a+`may i-4 3� y a S:R:J}V t' .t 43:'1•?4 �. ,, `�0�. �`L+ef=+yt�.,�< 0 0 `'� ,M�t YET°✓ssa.� �i. 'G � O < pr.f`✓.-'.� ,,,fix 33,r tst�_ '0 •• q; F •• • i yy� {{8r•0 ±.(l L.{tom :,o t 4. Nr"£i+C.Y S�Y,.7 G f-. .ylt ;s 'a{`'t.*3•M �t LeS1:i'i 1 - �� ' .: r r �',�,ki. :.n st"\. -� �ti: ,. yr � ..-�: ... . �.rw_`.� -d•'V.�# 1 { -t. �+a a ;b�`:^.�tt a .a.,l`:1��%-tom � '�,. :�7�tS:-3i,:�t'Flu_.��a . > Z., I ��,"��+'Y''�•.5.. S '{''7 3 r .,.. 'moo SLU- 2-99 NORTH Southeast Corner of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road Vicinity Ma ci ci << S. BR Z O V N F-11 I O �l N � _ JOLLY RD. JOLLY RD. Site MIDWOOD F W N � y, U CT. G cr. WHSFDRD sr. a YOFFR n�T HORACE s� MARK TWA 3 y�. POLLARD RD. O tiG ��O POLLARD RD. 17:0Z HILL CENTERFORDQ, ( Q DESOTO F 1�F-771,DESOT ��d L I SLU-2-99 NORTH Southeast Comer of Jolly Road and Pleasant Grove Road Zoning 1> = J _U n-*,. A"Res T ►, iA „office J LeL R D . of�e "B " Res Try Res 'A��` Res 'A " Rec.) "B " Res 0 ACT-6-98 SLU-5-98 BZA 3824.98 Gier Park, 2400 Hall Street GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: City of Lansing 124 W. Michigan Avenue Lansing, MI 48933 CONTACTS: Linda Sanchez, Mayor's Office 483-4147 Jim Ruff, Planning Office 483-4085 R. Eric Reickel, Parks Dept. 483-4297 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The City of Lansing is requesting approvals necessary to permit them to lease a portion of Gier Park and construct a multi-tenant communications tower up to 200 feet tall. REQUESTED ACTIONS: 1. ACT The approvals requested for the Act 285 Review is limited to approval of the option to lease the property; if the property lease is approved, additional approvals necessary before erection of the cellular communications tower include: 2. SLU: Approval of a Special Land Use Permit under Section 1248.04(e) of the Zoning Code, permitting construction and operation of"a structure which is owned or operated by a public utility may be permitted in a "A" Residential District," 3. BZA Approval of a variance from Section 1254.10 of the Zoning Code, by the Board of Zoning Appeals, to permit the proposed structure over 35 feet in height, the maximum height permitted by right in the "A" Residential zoning district. EXISTING LAND USE: Public Park LOCATION: 2400 Hall Street (Gier Park) EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential PROPERTY SIZE: 36.5 acres SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Residential ACT-6-98 SLU-5-98 BZA 3482.98 Page 2 Gier Park; 2400 Hall Street S: Residential & Institutional (Otto Middle School and Gier Park Elementary School) E: Commercial W: Residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential S: "A" Residential E: "A" Residential & "F" Commercial W: "A" Residential MASTER PLAN: Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for open space. AGENCY RESPONSES: Ameritech: (No response) Board of Water & Light: Electric Utility The Electic Customer Projects and Marketing Department has no conflicts with this request. Contact Person: Steve Conn, 371-6726. Water Utility Water Technical Support/Distribution- Water Distribution has no conflict with tower. Contractor to use MISS DIG to confirm clearance with existing water utilities and tower. Contact Person: Terry Robison, 371-6494. Building Safety: (No response) Code Compliance: (No response) Community Policing: (No response) Consumers Energy: (No response) Development Office: No comment. Fire Marshal: (No response) Media One: (No response) ACT-6-98 SLU-5-98 BZA 3482.98 Page 3 Gier Park; 2400 Hall Street Public Service: The Public Service Department has no objections to the issuance of a variance of Section 1248.01 allowing the construction of a telecommunications tower. The Public Service Department reserves the right to review and comment on the plans when they become available, through the normal site plan review process. Transportation Engineer: (No response) North Lansing Neigh. Org: (No response) DESCRIPTION of SITE The 36.5 acre site is located west of Northeast Street and north of Thomas Street. The park has a community center and two large parking lots, four baseball diamonds, and play equipment. Residential development exists to the north south and west. Commercial development is located to the east, along Northeast Street. Gier Park Elementary School lies to the south. Gier Park's topography gently slopes from an elevation of around 873 feet at street level (Thomas and Northeast Street) to 842 feet around the baseball diamond area. Though no specific location for the unmanned cellular communications tower has been identified, possible locations to consider may include: ■ At a location central to the 4 baseball diamonds where lighting could be placed on the tower to better light the area for night games. ■ Near one of the parking lots, either near the community center or the parking lot by the baseball diamonds where lighting could be placed on the tower to better light the parking lot. No specific plans currently exist for the tower. However, towers that have been approved in the past have included small (220 square feet) accessory support building with an accompanying propane tank. The property is presently zoned "A" Residential; an application is pending to approve a Special Land Use permit necessary to permit the use of the site for a structure owned and operated by a public utility. The "A" District permits structures up to 35 feet in height: the tower and attachments requested, if approved, could be up to 200 feet tall. Access to the tower on the site depends on the specific location selected. For example, It could be obtained either by constructing a driveway from a drive or parking lot within ACT-6-98 SLU-5-98 BZA 3482.98 Page 4 Gier Park; 2400 Hall Street the park. ANALYSIS for ACT 285 REVIEW REQUEST The approvals requested for the Act 285 Review is limited to approval of the option to lease the property; if the property lease is approved, additional approvals necessary before erection of the cellular communications tower include the BZA variance and the Special Land Use. ANALYSIS for SPECIAL LAND USE REQUEST Approval of a Special Land Use Permit under Section 1248.04(e) of the Zoning Code, permitting construction and operation of"a structure which is owned or operated by a public utility may be permitted in an "A" Residential District." Section 1282.03(f)(1)-(9) sets forth the criteria which must be used to evaluate a Special Land Use permit request. The criteria and evaluation are summarized as follows. 1. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL BE DESIGNED, CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED IN A MANNER HARMONIOUS WITH THE CHARACTER OF ADJACENT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING USE The site is developed as an active city park with a community center, baseball diamonds, etc. The character of the park should remain unchanged with the placement of a 200 foot tall communications tower. 2. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT CHANGE THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY The essential character of the surrounding area is primarily low density residential with commercial development to the east along North East. The tower should not change the essential character of the surrounding neighborhood if placed away from homes and their views screened with landscaping. 3. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH THE GENERAL ENJOYMENT OF ADJACENT PROPERTY Other than the potential aesthetic impact, staff anticipates no significant change from existing conditions. 4. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE REPRESENTS AN IMPROVEMENT TO THE USE OR CHARACTER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA IN GENERAL, AND WILL BE IN KEEPING WITH THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE LOT The proposed new tower presents an opportunity to implement improvements to the site, such as landscaping, screening, and buffering. ACT-6-98 SLU-5-98 BZA 3482.98 Page 5 Gier Park; 2400 Hall Street 5. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT BE HAZARDOUS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES OR INVOLVE USES, ACTIVITIES, MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE OF PERSONS OR PROPERTY THROUGH THE EXCESSIVE PRODUCTION OF TRAFFIC, NOISE, SMOKE, ODOR, FUMES OR GLARE Staff does not anticipate any significant change from existing conditions. 6. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE IS ADEQUATELY SERVED BY ESSENTIAL PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES AND IT IS DEMONSTRATED THAT THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE IS ABLE TO CONTINUALLY PROVIDE ADEQUATELY FOR THE SERVICES AND FACILITIES DEEMED ESSENTIAL TO THE SPECIAL LAND USE UNDER CONSIDERATION Staff anticipates no significant change from existing conditions. 7. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT PLACE DEMANDS ON PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES IN EXCESS OF CURRENT CAPACITY Staff anticipates no significant change from existing conditions. 8. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE ZONING CODE AND THE OBJECTIVES OF THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Northeast Area Master Plan designates this area for open space. The use of public parks by a communication tower will not conflict with the intent of the Master Plan. 9. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE MEETS THE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED The maximum height for a principal structure in the "A" Residential District is 35 feet. The proposed tower will require a height variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals. ANALYSIS for BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS VARIANCE Section 1244.06 of the Zoning Code sets forth the criteria and standards which must be used to evaluate a Variance request. For the sake of simplifying this evaluation, staff assumes the Special Land Use request has been approved. The criteria and evaluation relevant to this case are as follows. 1. Does a practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship exist? Yes. The City's Zoning Code does not permit structures of 200 feet in height except in the G-1 Business zoning district, which is intended for the downtown business district. ACT-6-98 SLU-5-98 BZA 3482.98 Page 6 Gier Park; 2400 Hall Street 2. The location size and character of the use will be in harmony with the appropriate and orderly development of the surrounding neighborhood. As proposed, staff believes that a taller tower structure would not be inharmonious with the current residential neighborhood. 3. The proposed use will be of a nature that will make vehicular and pedestrian traffic no more hazardous than normal for the district involved,... Staff does not believe there would be any impact on pedestrian or vehicular traffic due to this proposal. Access to the site may be from a drive or parking lot within the park. The tower site should only require access periodically by maintenance and service vehicles. SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a variance to permit construction of a cellular telephone tower up to 200 feet in height. The "A" Zoning District permits structures up to 35 feet in height. In addition to the request for a variance, an application is pending for a Special Land Use Permit to allow a structure owned and operated by a public utility. Staff believes that the proposed tower location at Gier Park is appropriate. Any location selected in the park should be visually screened from residential land use in the vicinity. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that this request be approved by the Planning Board and City Council on the Act 285 Review and the Special Land Use request. Staff also recommends the height variance be granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Staff reserves the right to more thoroughly review this proposal for landscape, screening and buffering during the site plan review process. The recommendation includes the following standard conditions for these communcation towers: 1. The tower shall be a monopole type tower; 2. The tower provide for the co-location of antennas; 3. The tower be located on the the large portion of the site if possible to minimize the its impact on the on the existing residential neighborhood, the future development of the adjacent property, and its visibility on the horizon to traffic on N. East Street, 4. The contract with the City include language helping ensure the compatibility of the use of this tower with the hospitals; 5. Landscaping be added around the base of the tower to buffer the view of the base from surrounding properties; 6. The tower be appropriately accessible and fenced for security. Act-6-98/SLU-"MZA 3482.98 NOM Communications Tower. Gier Perk, 2400 Hall Street � MRK �4.7 46! I846. / GIER PAF K 841.8 N M 84/.9 84tt 842 / 841.8 84Z 8419 Vh.... x • 3.4 MY e 841.6 8575 844.E 0 t00, no 842 0 e56.J 842.3 �\ 8524' B5Z4 852.5 854 23 L4 9./ 852.2 > 0 /J 850.7 t+ It x 871.8 8754 8509 B506 ING GIER �RK x B52z J B7 2J SCH90L O N 850.1 K 63. /1 B5/.4 �a /a x 866.5 7 It 866.7 ❑ t1 X� .'ALL$ 870 ❑ I ^ ,a Z x B57. x O r1 � it o ro J a I 87J/ _ mso g r B6AJ S T B7J. 87Z.6 �— 03/09/1999 11:43 248-356-2571 SBA INC PAGE 02 \ r r INS or 1 r• o2 X 0. 00 Nb � i- or , ✓ �� t .000 ��`l ��♦ ,� �/1�/�..../ `/_ice J � l I ~�J 4$ex 7d" � � J �� ll I�Dr3"o MINlrr Co FAMSV.G1 Atr Po oRrrss 11"00/ ACT-8-98 SLU-7-98 BZA 3484.98 Washington Park, 2516 Washington Avenue GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: City of Lansing 124 W. Michigan Avenue Lansing, MI 48933 CONTACTS: Linda Sanchez, Mayor's Office 483-4147 Jim Ruff, Planning Office 483-4085 R. Eric Reickel, Parks Dept. 483-4297 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The City of Lansing is requesting approvals necessary to permit them to lease a portion of Washington Park and construct a multi-tenant communications tower up to 200 feet tall. REQUESTED ACTIONS: 1. ACT The approval requested for the Act 285 Review is limited to approval of the option to lease the property; if the property lease is approved, additional approval necessary before erection of the cellular communications tower include: 2. SLU: Approval of a Special Land Use Permit under Section 1248.04(e) of the Zoning Code, permitting construction and operation of"a structure which is owned or operated by a public utility..."; 3. BZA Approval of a variance from Section 1254.10 of the Zoning Code, by the Board of Zoning Appeals, to permit the proposed structure over 35 feet in height, the maximum height permitted by right in the "A" Residential zoning district. EXISTING LAND USE: Public Park LOCATION: 2516 S. Washington Avenue (Washington Park) EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential PROPERTY SIZE: 45.4 acres SURROUNDING LAND USE N: Institutional/Commuter Parking Lots ACT-8-98 SLU-7-98 BZA 3484.98 Page 2 Washington Park; 2516 S. Washington Ave. S: Residential E: Residential W: Federal Drop Forge SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential S: "A" Residential E: "A" Residential W: "I" Heavy Industrial MASTER PLAN: The Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for open space. AGENCY RESPONSES: Ameritech: (No response) Board of Water & Light: (No response) Building Safety: (No response) Code Compliance: (No response) Community Policing: (No response) Consumers Energy: (No response) Development Office: No comment. Fire Marshal: (No response) Media One: (No response) Public Service: (No response) Transportation Engineer: (No response) DESCRIPTION of SITE The 45.4 acre site is located in the 2300-2900 blocks of S. Washington Avenue. The site presently has an indoor and outdoor ice rink, a baseball diamond, play equipment, picnic area and shelter and parking lots. Though no specific location for the unmanned cellular communications tower has been identified, possible locations to consider may ACT-8-98 SLU-7-98 BZA 3484.98 Page 3 Washington Park; 2516 S. Washington Ave. include: ■ The northern section of the park near the utility building off the north drive. ■ Near the parking lot to the west of the ice rink where lighting on the tower could help to better light the parking lot. No specific plans currently exist for the tower. However, towers that have been approved in the past have included a small (220 square feet) accessory support building with an accompanying propane tank. The property is presently zoned "A" Residential. An application is pending to approve a Special Land Use permit necessary to permit the use of the site for a structure owned and operated by a public utility. The "A" District permits structures up to 35 feet in height: the tower and attachments requested, if approved, would be up to 200 feet in height. Access to the tower location on the site could be obtained either by constructing a driveway from one of the drives or parking lots. ANALYSIS for ACT 285 REVIEW REQUEST The approvals requested for the Act 285 Review is limited to approval of the option to lease the property; if the property lease is approved, additional approvals necessary before erection of the cellular communications tower include the BZA variance and the Special Land Use. ANALYSIS for SPECIAL LAND USE REQUEST Approval of a Special Land Use Permit under Section 1248.04(e) of the Zoning Code, permitting construction and operation of a structure which is owned or operated by a public utility may be permitted in an "A" Residential District." Section 1282.03(f)(1)-(9) sets forth the criteria which must be used to evaluate a Special Land Use permit request. The criteria and evaluation are summarized as follows. 1. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL BE DESIGNED, CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED IN A MANNER HARMONIOUS WITH THE CHARACTER OF ADJACENT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING USE The site is developed as an active city park with an indoor and outdoor ice rink, a baseball diamond, play equipment, picnic area and shelter and parking lots. The character of the park will remain unchanged with the placement of a 200 foot tall communications tower. 2. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT CHANGE THE ESSENTIAL ACT-8-98 SLU-7-98 BZA 3484.98 Page 4 Washington Park; 2516 S. Washington Ave. CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY The essential character of the surrounding area is primarily medium density residential. The tower should not change the essential character of the surrounding neighborhood if placed away from homes and screened with landscaping. 3. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH THE GENERAL ENJOYMENT OF ADJACENT PROPERTY Other than the potential aesthetic impact, staff anticipates no significant change from existing conditions. 4. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE REPRESENTS AN IMPROVEMENT TO THE USE OR CHARACTER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA IN GENERAL, AND WILL BE IN KEEPING WITH THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE LOT The proposed new tower presents an opportunity to implement improvements to the site, such as landscaping, screening, and buffering. 5. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT BE HAZARDOUS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES OR INVOLVE USES, ACTIVITIES, MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE OF PERSONS OR PROPERTY THROUGH THE EXCESSIVE PRODUCTION OF TRAFFIC, NOISE, SMOKE, ODOR, FUMES OR GLARE Staff does not anticipate any significant change from existing conditions. 6. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE IS ADEQUATELY SERVED BY ESSENTIAL PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES AND IT IS DEMONSTRATED THAT THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE IS ABLE TO CONTINUALLY PROVIDE ADEQUATELY FOR THE SERVICES AND FACILITIES DEEMED ESSENTIAL TO THE SPECIAL LAND USE UNDER CONSIDERATION Staff anticipates no significant change from existing conditions. 7. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT PLACE DEMANDS ON PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES IN EXCESS OF CURRENT CAPACITY Staff anticipates no significant change from existing conditions. 8. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE ZONING CODE AND THE OBJECTIVES OF THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Southwest Area Master Plan designates this area for open space. The use of public parks by a communication tower does not conflict with the intent of the Master Plan and the continued use as a park. ACT-8-98 SLU-7-98 BZA 3484.98 Page 5 Washington Park; 2516 S. Washington Ave. 9. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE MEETS THE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED The maximum height for a principal structure in the "A" Residential District is 35 feet. The proposed tower will require a height variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals to allow a tower up to 200 feet tall. ANALYSIS for BOARD of ZONING APPEALS REQUEST Section 1244.06 of the Zoning Code sets forth the criteria and standards which must be used to evaluate a Variance request. For the sake of simplifying this evaluation, staff assumes the Special Land Use request has been approved. The criteria and evaluation relevant to this case are as follows. Does a practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship exist? Yes. The City's Zoning Code does not permit structures of 200 feet in height except in the G-1 Business zoning district, which is intended for the downtown business district. The location size and character of the use will be in harmony with the appropriate and orderly development of the surrounding neighborhood. As proposed, staff believes that the tower would not be inharmonious with the existing park and surrounding area. The proposed placement of the tower away from any single family residential neighborhood is appropriate. The proposed use will be of a nature that will make vehicular and pedestrian traffic no more hazardous than normal for the district involved,... Staff does not believe there would be any impact on pedestrian or vehicular traffic due to this proposal. Access to the site could be from a driveway off of one of the parking lots or drives within the park.The tower site should only require access periodically by maintenance and service vehicles. SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a variance to permit construction of a cellular telephone tower up to 200 feet in height. The "A" Zoning District permits structures up to 35 feet in height. In addition to the request for a variance, an application is pending for a Special Land Use Permit to allow a structure owned and operated by a public utility. Staff believes that the proposed tower location at Washington Park is appropriate. Any location selected in the park should be visually screened from residential land use in the vicinity. ACT-8-98 SLU-7-98 BZA 3484.98 Page 6 Washington Park; 2516 S. Washington Ave. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that this request be approved by the Planning Board and City Council on the Act 285 Review and the Special Land Use request. Staff also recommends the height variance be granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Staff reserves the right to more thoroughly review this proposal for landscape, screening and buffering during the site plan review process. The recommendation includes the following standard conditions for these communcation towers: 1. The tower shall be a monopole type tower; 2. The tower provide for the co-location of antennas; 3. The tower be located on the the large portion of the site if possible to minimize the its impact on the on the existing residential neighborhood and the future development of the adjacent property; 4. The contract with the City include language helping ensure the compatibility of the use of this tower with the hospitals, 5. Landscaping be added around the base of the tower to buffer the view of the base from surrounding properties, 6. The tower be appropriately accessible and fenced for security. Act-8-98/SLU-7-98/BZA 3484.98 NORTH Communications Tower. Washington Park, 2516 S. Washington Ave. 849. i Bfe dK; 949, 8470 I » rr 94d I •i - �� BE1 B50 99.8 849.7 850.� - - - STI• -�• 84S.4 (e5c.t X —I Boa.s 49.82 j • I 848.3 850.7 i 6 830.5 � ---- 65C.2 �•� I x WASHINGTON � PARK \ 849.3 J �� 849.7 848.9 x 851.o 650 R£EN�QkN` I / 649.7 i ACT-11-98 SLU-10-98 BZA 3487.98 Biggie Munn Park, 4801 Aurelius Road GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: City of Lansing 124 W. Michigan Avenue Lansing, MI 48933 CONTACTS: Linda Sanchez, Mayor's Office 483-4147 Jim Ruff, Planning Office 483-4085 R. Eric Reickel, Parks Dept. 483-4297 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The City of Lansing is requesting approvals necessary to permit them to lease a portion of Biggie Munn Park property and construct a multi-tenant communications tower up to 200 feet tall with accessory area lighting for the parking lot. REQUESTED ACTIONS: 1. ACT The approvals requested for the Act 285 Review is limited to approval of the option to lease the property; if the property lease is approved, additional approvals necessary before erection of the cellular communications tower include: 2. SLU: Approval of a Special Land Use Permit under Section 1248.04(e) of the Zoning Code, permitting construction and operation of "a structure which is owned or operated by a public utility..."; 3. BZA Approval of a variance from Section 1254.10 of the Zoning Code, by the Board of Zoning Appeals, to permit the proposed structure over 35 feet in height, the maximum height permitted by right in the "A" Residential zoning district. EXISTING LAND USE: Public Park LOCATION: Northeast corner of Aurelius Road and Jolly Road EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential PROPERTY SIZE: 14.4 acres ACT-11-98 SLU-10-98 BZA 3487.98 Page 2 Biggie Munn Park- 4801 Aurelius Road SURROUNDING LANDUSE: N: Residential S: Commercial E: Residential W: Commercial SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential & "C.U.P" Community Unit Plan S: "A" Residential & "C" Residential E: "A" Residential W: "A" Residential & "C.U.P" Community Unit Plan MASTER PLAN: The Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates the subject property for use as Residential (0-7 du/acre). (Public parks are permitted uses in residential zoning districts.) AGENCY RESPONSES: Ameritech: (No response) Board of Water & Light: (No response) Building Safety: (No response) Code Compliance: (No response) Community Policing: (No response) Consumers Energy: (No response) Development Office: No comment. Fire Marshal: (No response) Media One: (No response) Public Service: (No response) Transportation Engineer: (No response) ACT-11-98 SLU-10-98 BZA 3487.98 Page 3 Biggie Munn Park- 4801 Aurelius Road Forest View Neighborhood Org: (No response) Delhi Twp.: (No response) DESCRIPTION of SITE Biggie Munn Park is a 14.4 acre site located at the northeast corner of Jolly and Aurelius Road. The site presently has frontage onto the Sycamore Creek, play equipment, basketball court, picnic area, and a parking lot. Residential development exists to the north and east. Commercial development is located to the south and west. A wide Consumer's Energy right of way runs immediately along the east and south border of the park. Biggie Munn Park's topography slopes from around 837 feet at the entrance to 846 at the parking lot and up to 865 at its peak. Beyond the park, the Consumers Energy right of way slopes up to as much as 867.4 feet which features a utility tower at that elevation. Though no specific location for the unmanned cellular communications tower has been identified, possible locations to consider may include: ■ Near the parking lot, preferably along its western edge where it would not obstruct view of the park and would be able to better light the parking lot. ■ Near the Consumers Energy right-of-way along the east property line. No specific plans currently exist for the tower. However, towers that have been approved in the past have included a small (220 square feet) accessory support building with an accompanying propane tank. The property is presently zoned "A" Residential; an application is pending to approve a Special Land Use permit necessary to permit the use of the site for a structure owned and operated by a public utility. The "A" District permits structures up to 35 feet in height: the tower and attachments requested, if approved, would be up to 200 feet in height. Access to the tower location on the site could be obtained either by constructing a driveway from the drive within the park or from the parking lot. ANALYSIS for ACT 285 REVIEW REQUEST The approvals requested for the Act 285 Review is limited to approval of the option to lease the property; if the property lease is approved, additional approvals necessary before erection of the cellular communications tower include the BZA variance and the Special Land Use. ACT-11-98 SLU-10-98 BZA 3487.98 Page 4 Biggie Munn Park- 4801 Aurelius Road ANALYSIS for SPECIAL LAND USE REQUEST Approval of a Special Land Use Permit under Section 1248.04(e) of the Zoning Code, permitting construction and operation of"a structure which is owned or operated by a public utility may be permitted in an "A" Residential District." Section 1282.03(f)(1)-(9) sets forth the criteria which must be used to evaluate a Special Land Use permit request. The criteria and evaluation are summarized as follows. 1. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL BE DESIGNED, CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED IN A MANNER HARMONIOUS WITH THE CHARACTER OF ADJACENT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING USE The site is a somewhat secluded park that is separated from areas to the east and south by a wide utility easement which gives it the appearance of being larger that it actually is. The character of the park should not be changed if a location is selected that can be screened from any significant views within the park and from nearby residences. 2. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT CHANGE THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY The essential character of the surrounding area, which is primarily residential to the east and south, should not change with this proposal, particularly if placed away from homes and screened with landscaping. 3. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH THE GENERAL ENJOYMENT OF ADJACENT PROPERTY Other than the potential aesthetic impact, staff anticipates no significant change from existing conditions. 4. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE REPRESENTS AN IMPROVEMENT TO THE USE OR CHARACTER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREA IN GENERAL, AND WILL BE IN KEEPING WITH THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OF THE LOT The proposed new tower presents an opportunity to implement improvements to the site, such as landscaping, screening, and buffering. 5. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT BE HAZARDOUS TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES OR INVOLVE USES, ACTIVITIES, MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT WHICH ARE DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE OF PERSONS OR PROPERTY THROUGH THE EXCESSIVE PRODUCTION OF TRAFFIC, NOISE, SMOKE, ODOR, FUMES OR GLARE Staff does not anticipate any significant change from existing conditions. ACT-11-98 SLU-10-98 BZA 3487.98 Page 5 Biggie Munn Park- 4801 Aurelius Road 6. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE IS ADEQUATELY SERVED BY ESSENTIAL PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES AND IT IS DEMONSTRATED THAT THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE IS ABLE TO CONTINUALLY PROVIDE ADEQUATELY FOR THE SERVICES AND FACILITIES DEEMED ESSENTIAL TO THE SPECIAL LAND USE UNDER CONSIDERATION Staff anticipates no significant change from existing conditions. 7. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT PLACE DEMANDS ON PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES IN EXCESS OF CURRENT CAPACITY Staff anticipates no significant change from existing conditions. 8. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE ZONING CODE AND THE OBJECTIVES OF THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Southeast Area Master Plan designates this area as Residential (0-7 du/acre) . The use of public parks by a communication tower does not conflict with the intent of the Master Plan and the continued use as a park. 9. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE MEETS THE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE DISTRICT IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED The maximum height for a principal structure in the "A" Residential District is 35 feet. The proposed tower will require a height variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals to allow a tower up to 200 feet tall. ANALYSIS for BOARD of ZONING APPEALS REQUEST Section 1244.06 of the Zoning Code sets forth the criteria and standards which must be used to evaluate a Variance request. For the sake of simplifying this evaluation, staff assumes the Special Land Use request has been approved. The criteria and evaluation relevant to this case are as follows. Does a practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship exist? Yes. The City's Zoning Code does not permit structures of 200 feet in height except in the "G-1" Business Zoning District, which is intended for the downtown business district. The location size, and character of the use will be in harmony with the appropriate and orderly development of the surrounding neighborhood. As proposed, staff believes that the tower would not be inharmonious with the surrounding development. The proposed placement of the tower away from any single ACT-11-98 SLU-10-98 BZA 3487.98 Page 6 Biggie Munn Park- 4801 Aurelius Road family residential neighborhood is appropriate. The proposed use will be of a nature that will make vehicular and pedestrian traffic no more hazardous than normal for the district involved.... Staff does not believe there would be any impact on pedestrian or vehicular traffic due to this proposal. Access to the site could be from a driveway constructed to the tower from a drive within the park or the parking lot. The tower site should only require access periodically by maintenance and service vehicles. Impact on General Patterns of Future Development The construction of a communications tower should not set any type of precedent. The tower is a use permitted in the "A" Residential District. The variance is for the height of the structure. SUMMARY The applicant is requesting a variance to permit construction of a cellular telephone tower up to 200 feet in height. The "A" Zoning District permits structures up to 35 feet in height. In addition to the request for a variance, an application is pending for a Special Land Use Permit to allow a structure owned and operated by a public utility. Staff believes that the proposed location of the tower in Biggie Munn Park is appropriate. Any proposed location should be visually isolated from any residential land uses in the vicinity. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that this request be approved by the Planning Board and City Council on the Act 285 Review and the Special Land Use request. Staff also recommends the height variance be granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Staff reserves the right to more thoroughly review this proposal for landscape, screening and buffering during the site plan review process. If approved, the 200' tower and any mechanical equipment shed, should include the following conditions: ► the tower shall be "monopole" type ► the tower should be placed in lieu of an athletic light standard (existing or new); ► the proposed monopole tower provide for a co-location of antennas; ► the proposed contract with the City of Lansing include language helping to ensure compatibility of the use of this tower with the hospitals; ► landscaping be added around the base of the tower to buffer the view of the base from surrounding properties, ACT-11-98 SLU-10-98 BZA 3487.98 Page 7 Biggie Munn Park- 4801 Aurelius Road ► the tower be appropriately accessible and fenced for security; ► the tower and any mechanical equipment shed be consolidated and placed in locations as far away from surrounding residential units so as to minimize the visual impact. Staff recommends approval of a Special Land Use Permit and a 165' variance to allow the construction of a 200' communications tower with these conditions. I; IRENE 90� ST ,, 0} 46 ; Ilk o 34 i A1A'TuRF- . rn rn \ o LO i 53 I 52 51 SO 49 46 47 W 55 -- 57 5B 59 60 61 40'•as't �� 1e f C� 56 0 0 • /, o' r h O x rt1' is td .�n• Idr h A' 0 �� ' � ` n _ aw _ 1�. WORDEN 90� ST. r i n - 1M0 le/ Ji/ - '1 eJ2 - 1/I.a j/• -1 / �� O � ; 1 "`� iF � n p � � �• ti � 191 \ 66 65 64, 1 e G / 1 " 63/ f ? inl - cr 69 68 .67 ��i� Gr�tMIE t� D PAW E - '• �, BIGGIE MUNN PARK - / O 70 �- LLJ J \ Ir Ip t)q� p� • - 6P O O , • ,5q 7 �yJ � eo - r Act-11-981SLU-10-98113ZA 3487.98 HOM �— Communications Tower. 4801 Aurelius Rd. —— 3s4 1 y 1 + a u I „y . -I �y 34 ( !3 1 3s — 38 39 40 « 4x 43 44 46 \ ♦ ' /'` Oy 37 _ C Q� ST 46 1, IRENE Dom 1 � C 54 Col. 1\ ♦ / / - - - H 4• 47 / -5155 ;l WOROEN pal ST. pa N' sr ♦ A� aS��Aga- r" p'� 0 } � ♦ sc 45 i4 o I I 1► •y f 70 • y 71 � t: ,\ r t4�AQ -p �w.• ►Al \ 4.1 ,. '�•,.- :1e.;` 11 + � � � 1! E. � JOLLY RO. �~•� �j/// /°fi'�`y�T�•�/��t'�/'/ �/��j� � NOT IN CI `-,1��' '' ;�_:, ..�I `r 1 ; J I 1 � .. � .l. ,. i _ .. .- - - J 2 ' •. r (�� . � I - � - .. ` � . ti+ ... ' ` . J y r I ' :��. I , � - Il .. � .�.., �+ - CITY of LANSING INTEROFFICE COMMUNICATION February 22, 1999 TO: Planning Board and Board of Zoning eats FROM: Jim Sturdevant, AICP Senior Planner RE: ACT-13-98 SLU-12-98 BZA 3489.98 Fire Station No. 4, 5550 S. Pennsylvania Avenue Due to the pending closure of this fire station and its replacement with a new facility in the vicinity, the planning staff requests the above applications be withdrawn from consideration. The Planning Staff has contacted the Lansing Fire Department and they have no objection to this action. However, the Fire Chief did caution staff that the Fire Department may not support tower structures at potential new fire station facilities.