HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005 Planning Board Minutes Oct-Dec FINAL Approved as written 1-3-06 Draft to Clerk December 20,2005
Approved January 3,2006
fi To Clerk January 4,2006
LU
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
t.l1 _., LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
:v a Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, December 6, 2005
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mr. Hollister, Vice Chair.
A. Roll call: Present: Frederick, Bruch, Ruge, Cordill, Hollister.
B. Staff Attending: Stachowiak, Rieske.
C. Excused absences: Czekai.
D. Absent: None.
Ms. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to approve an excused
absence request from Mr. Czekai for tonight's meeting. On a voice vote, the
motion carried unanimously (5-0).
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Ms. Stachowiak stated that SLU-6-2005 has been withdrawn at the applicant's
request. She stated that ACT-9-2005 has been postponed, at the applicant's
request, until a later date.
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Bruch to approve the agenda as
amended. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS — None.
4. HEARINGS
A. SLU-7-2005, 3001 S. Washington Avenue, Special Land Use Permit —
Church in a "D-1" Professional Office District
This is a request by Richard Evans on behalf of On This Rock Church for
a Special Land Use permit to utilize the existing building at 3001 S.
Washington Avenue for church services on weekends. The child care
center at this location will continue to operate on weekdays. The property
is zoned "D-1" Professional Office District which permits churches, with a
special land use permit, if approved by the Lansing City Council.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES December 6, 2005 Page 2
Mr. Ruge asked if the Board will receive a drawing that shows the layout
of the inside of the building and the meeting space. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that she can request it.
Ms. Cordill asked about limiting the seating area for what the parking can
provide and if this was the existing parking. Ms. Stachowiak stated that
this would be the existing parking and the City requires one parking space
for each three seats in the sanctuary. It would be limited to what the
existing parking would accommodate. It will be written in such a way that
if the church does expand the parking area, it can also expand the
congregation accordingly.
Ms. Bruch asked how many would be in attendance. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that the applicant could better answer that question.
Mr. Richard Evans, applicant, stated that the original application showed
approximately 6 to 8 families involved with the church. The parking should
be adequate for them. He appreciates the owners of the property and
stated that they have had a good rapport with the neighborhood. Robin
and Oscar Slaten are good friends and called him and asked if he would
be interested in using the facility. It is used all week long for the daycare
and it is vacant on the weekends. Robin has had a desire to do good
things for the neighborhood. They are good friends and he hopes that the
church can be a blessing to those in the neighborhood.
Ms. Bruch asked if there were any other parking areas in this area that the
church could have an agreement with. Ms. Stachowiak stated that the
church to the south has no parking to spare at all. There is a commercial
site directly to the north and there is not a whole lot of parking but the
Planning Office would have to review it to see exactly what the
requirement is and see if there is any excess. Other than that, it is pretty
much residential in the area.
Ms. Bruch asked what the policy is for parking on the street. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that the ordinance requires one space for each three
seats in the sanctuary and the applicant has to meet the requirement.
Ms. Cordill asked if the applicant anticipated signage. Mr. Evans stated
that it would be nice to have something to show the community that the
church is there and whatever is acceptable, the church would like to do.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Hollister closed the public
hearing and referred SLU-7-2005, 3001 S. Washington Avenue, Special
Land Use Permit - Church in a "D-1" Professional Office District to
the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, scheduled to meet on January 11,
2006 at 4:00 in the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference
Room at 316 N. Capitol Avenue.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES December 6, 2005 Page 3
B. SLU-8-2005, 2101 Bruce Street, Special Land Use Permit - Child Care
Facility
This is a request by Montessori Children's House of Lansing for a Special
Land Use permit to utilize the existing building at 2101 Bruce Street for a
child care center. The property is zoned "A" Residential District which
permits child care centers, with a special land use permit, if approved by
the Lansing City Council.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Maureen Newton, Administrator for Montessori Children's House
of Lansing, stated that she has been there as an administrator for seven
years. Montessori would like to use the home at 2101 Bruce Street as a
daycare facility for the 3 and 4 year olds that are currently let out at 11:30
a.m. every day. Currently, the parents have to arrange for the children to
be picked up or take their lunch hours to pick up those children and take
them to child care elsewhere. Then the parents have to come back at
3:00 p.m. or 5:45 p.m. to pick up their older children if they are in the
extended daycare program. Parents are making lots of laps all day long
and it can be very stressful. Montessori is simply trying to make the
parents' lives easier and offer care to the children in a clean and tidy
environment that is close to the school. This seems like a very convenient
place for Montessori to be. There would be no additional traffic in the
neighborhood. All of the drop offs and pick ups would be through the
current school parking lot. There should not be any difficulties there.
Ms. Newton stated that Montessori Children's House of Lansing has been
in the community for 35 years and at this location for 21 of those years.
Montessori has good relationships with the neighbors and there are
several children from that neighborhood who attend the school.
Mr. Ruge asked about the maximum number of kids who would be served
by Montessori. Ms. Stachowiak stated that she would look into the matter.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Hollister closed the public
hearing and referred SLU-8-2005, 2101 Bruce Street, Special Land Use
Permit - Child Care Facility to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee,
scheduled to meet on January 11, 2006 at 4:00 in the Planning and
Neighborhood Development Conference Room at 316 N. Capitol Avenue.
C. Z-14-2005, 118 & 124 N. Larch Street, "H" Light Industrial District to
"G-1" Business District
This is a request by Matt Fisher to rezone the property at 118 & 124 N.
Larch Street, more specifically described as:
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES December 6, 2005 Page 4
Lots 16 & 17, Assessors Plat No 36 of Block 243, Original Plat, City
of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan
from "H" Light Industrial to "G-1" Business District, for the purpose of
utilizing the existing building at 124 N. Larch Street for a mix of residential
and office uses.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Bruch asked how many parking spaces would be required for each of
the lofts. Ms. Stachowiak stated that it depends on how many bedrooms
are in each loft, roughly two parking spaces for each unit. If it is rezoned
to "G-1" Business District, the applicant does not need any parking.
Mr. Hollister stated that the goal would be to build these lofts above the
existing facilities. So the existing facility currently is two-story, the first
story would be retail and the second story would be the first level of a two
level apartment. There would be at least another level. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that the applicant would like to do more than one additional level
but will be limited in density. She has already discussed that with the
applicant. She stated that the applicant is not going to be able to get quite
as many apartments in there as what he would like to. He will certainly be
able to get a few, maybe eight apartments.
Ms. Bruch asked what the density limitation is. Ms. Stachowiak stated that
the density limitation is up to 87 units per acre. This is not a very large
site. Ms. Bruch stated that this is the type of development the City would
love to encourage. Ms. Stachowiak stated that it is exactly the type and it
is right across the street from Oldsmobile Park. This is a Cool Cities
project and right around two major corridors where there are bus routes
and easy access to transportation. The Stadium District will be going in
kitty corner from this site. This is a great project.
Ms. Bruch asked what the site was currently limited to. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that if the request was rezoned to "G-1" Business District and with
the lot area available, depending on how many bedrooms in each loft, it
will dictate how many units could be built. The "G-1" Business District
allows a pretty high density: for each two bedroom unit it requires 950
square feet of lot area or for each one bedroom unit it requires 700 square
feet of lot area. The applicant has 13,340 square feet.
Mr. Frederick asked if this area was part of a plan that the Board
considered a while ago regarding development between Cedar and Larch
Streets. Ms. Stachowiak stated that it was on the south side of the street.
Mr. Rieske stated that was the Central Lansing Comprehensive plan that
was adopted in August 1999 and this was encouraged in that plan. Mr.
Frederick stated that the staff report mentioned the Northeast Area
Comprehensive Plan designates this area for commercial use and this is
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES December 6, 2005 Page 5
incorrect. Ms. Stachowiak stated that she will make sure this gets
changed.
Mr. Angelo Oricchio, Chief Executive Officer for Paramount Coffee
Company, stated that Paramount has been there for 70 years and have
74 employees. He is concerned about the impacts to Paramount's facility.
There is a loading dock behind the building and it is a very tight space and
very difficult for parking. Paramount faces several battles with other
complexes and given a choice, Paramount does not want to face that
again because it creates lots of problems for their deliveries.
Mr. Matt Fisher, applicant, stated that the Paramount facility on the days
it is curing the beans, it actually smells pretty nice and was a selling point
for that location. This was something that was taken into consideration as
being conducive to Paramount's current operations. The main motivation
for the "G-1" Business District was the parking issue. Currently, his
business is located in Old Town, in a location where the exterior walls are
the property boundaries. There is no parking whatsoever and he utilized
the public parking lot next to the Brenke fish ladder. That has worked
quite well for at least the commercial operation that he has.
Mr. Fisher stated that the project he is hoping to do is a little bit of a result
of his personal residence burning to the ground earlier in the year. He has
been looking at the project not only for the commercial operations of his
business but for his own personal residence. The type of project that he is
trying to do is very unique. He is not looking to just mass produce some
units with dry wall and make them boring with linoleum floors. He would
like to do some unique features.
Mr. Fisher stated that he has looked at the parking issue from a liability
perspective. He is mostly looking at a lot across the street from Clara's
Restaurant. There happens to be a lot for $25.00 a month that people can
park in. It looks like it could accommodate approximately 100 to 125
vehicles. The current usage that he has gone through during the week is
about 8 vehicles. There is a lot of room available for parking as well as a
few spaces that he has not investigated. There are some spaces possibly
that could be acquired on Pier Marquette or some other agreements that
could be made. The primary consideration on the parking has been that
particular lot which may be 100 to 125 yards from the building. The
parking he was looking at doing and the adjacent building was to give an
area where residents could pull up and unload groceries. There would be
an elevator service building and he would be looking at 4 or 5 stories. He
hasn't worked out all the details but he is looking at different building code
restrictions and what he would be capable of doing.
Ms. Bruch asked if the Board could get the surrounding businesses so that
it can see how they relate to the site.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES December 6, 2005 Page 6
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Hollister closed the public
hearing and referred Z-14-2005, 118 & 124 N. Larch Street, "H" Light
Industrial District to "G-1" Business District to the Zoning and
Ordinance Committee, scheduled to meet on January 11, 2006 at 4:00 in
the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room at 316 N.
Capitol Avenue.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
Seeing no one wishing to address the Board, Mr. Hollister closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was not taken by the Board.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval — (Minutes will be presented for consideration at a
later date)
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
Next meeting, Wednesday, January 11, 2006 at 4 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Cordill, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, January 24, 2006, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
3. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE — None.
4. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
a. Planning Board Goals and Objectives
Mr. Hollister stated the Executive Committee discussed the
Planning Board Goals and Objectives that will be forwarded
to the Mayor's transition team. Mr. Rieske will brief the new
Council members and the new City Clerk on these goals and
objectives.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES December 6, 2005 Page 7
b. Rules of Administrative Procedure
Mr. Hollister stated that Mr. Czekai wanted to discuss the
rules but he was not able to make it tonight due to illness.
These were not discussed.
C. Work Program
Mr. Hollister stated that Ms. Stachowiak and Mr. Rieske
gave an overview of the annual work program for the
Planning Office. This will be presented to the new staff and
Council members at the start of the new year.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that copies of the work program were
distributed at the last Board meeting. Everyone should have
a copy of it.
C. Report from Planning Manager
Mr. Rieske stated that he is now Interim Planning Manager and the
Planning Office is down to three Senior Planners, Ms. Stachowiak as
Zoning Administrator, and he as Principal Planner/Interim Manager. The
office is trying to keep up and continue making progress.
The Work Program has intentions of doing both, keeping up with daily
business and also making progress on things. The Planning Office intends
to fulfill that to the best of its ability.
The Capital Improvements Program will be his biggest project as it relates
to the budget.
Ms. Stachowiak asked who will be attending the dinner on Tuesday,
December 201h. Ms. Bruch, Mr. Hollister, Ms. Cordill and Mr. Ruge will be
attending.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that Mr. Hollister was registered for the Cool Cities
meeting.
D. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St.,"H" Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. SLU-3-2002,2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J" Parking District(Tabled May 15, 2002)
C. Z-7-2005, South 99 Feet of 600 E. Kalamazoo Street,"B"Residential District to
"F"Commercial District(Tabled July 13,2005)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000,201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27,2000)
b. Master Plan Project
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES December 6, 2005 Page 8
C. Act-1-2003, SE Corner Michigan&Washington, Lot 3, Block 111, Orig Plat,
Vacate Alley(part)(Tabled on April 29, 2003)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
5. Board Member Code Enforcement Notification Reports
a. Teen Challenge-wood privacy fence(May 20, 2003)
b. Dollar Store-Willow Street&MLK Blvd.-landscaping &buffering (May 20,
2003)
C. Grovenburg property-dumpster in ROW(July 1, 2003)
d. 2714 W.Jolly Road-church with large statue in front yard (January 20,2004)
e. 545 Baker Street- Mount Hope Church outreach (April 20, 2004)
f. W.Willow Street-Grace Tabernacle Church-no landscaping (May 4,2004)
g. Michigan Ave&Shepard Street-sign business-several banner signs nailed to
the outside of building (May 4,2004)
h. 2702 S.Cedar Street-no landscaping (May 18,2004)
i. Michigan Ave&Virginia Street-Sparrow Hospital property-no screening and
buffering (October 5,2004)
j. 2410 S. Pennsylvania Ave.-no landscaping (November 3, 2004)
k. Keeps Party Store-Aurelius Rd-illegal signs (February 15,2005)
I. 2200 W. Holmes-Bad Habits-excessive signs(May 3, 2005)
M. 704 S. Clemens Street-possible abandoned building (October 18,2005)
n. 2618 Cavanaugh Rd.-registered rental&front yard paved, used for parking
(October 4,2005)
o. S. Pennsylvania-Church of the Rock- buffer parking lot along side street
(October 4, 2005)
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. 2006 Planning Board Schedule
There was a discussion regarding the first meeting in November. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that because of Election Day, the meeting was moved
to the previous Wednesday instead of the Wednesday following Election
Day. It would be either the November 1 st or November 8th. If the Board
meets on November 8th, then there will be a meeting the same week of
Thanksgiving. She thought it would better to do the meeting earlier in the
month.
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Bruch to approve the 2006
Planning Board Schedule. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously
(5-0).
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON — None.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Ms. Bruch stated that she needs an excused absence for January 3, 2006.
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to approve an excused
absence request from Ms. Bruch for the January 3, 2006 meeting. On a voice
vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES December 6, 2005 Page 9
Ms. Bruch stated that she is concerned about the small Planning staff and asked
what may happen in the future. Ms. Stachowiak stated that currently there is no
information. Mr. Rieske stated that the Planning Office has a lot of work to do on
this and that there is not a whole lot of information available right now.
Mr. Frederick stated that Lansing's future web site, which is the Transition
Team's web site, is taking applications for a Planning Manager. Mr. Hollister
stated that applications were due yesterday by 5:00 p.m. Ms. Stachowiak stated
that it was for all of the department heads. All of the positions were listed.
Mr. Hollister encouraged the Board to get involved in the Transition Team. There
are a number of public hearings that are going to be held and are starting this
week. Ms. Stachowiak stated that they are listed in the Lansing State Journal
today in the Local section.
Mr. Hollister stated that as a Board, it could write a letter to the Transition Team.
Mr. Frederick stated that he would support the letter and that he does not think
that the Board should have to go to a public hearing to have its concerns and
issues heard. The Transition Team should be willing to listen to the Board's input
directly since the Board is a part of the Executive branch.
The letter should include reinstating positions, current projects, business items
and Board positions. Ms. Bruch will draft the letter and email it to Mr. Rieske.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS
Mr. Frederick asked what the policy is on commercial enterprises being
undertaken by private individuals on a City park. He is referring to selling
Christmas trees on Maguire Park at the corner of Jolly Road and Cavanaugh
Street. This has been going on for years and years. Mr. Rieske stated that he
would inform the Parks Department.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
William C. Rieske, Secretary, Planning Board
P B M i n u tes.120605.d oc
Approved as written 1-3-06 Draft to Clerk December 19,2005
Approved January 3,2006
To Clerk January4,2006
C "
c:w _ Minutes of the Regular Meeting
- LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
F_ Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, November 15, 2005
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mr. Hollister, Vice Chair.
A. Roll call: Present: Frederick, Bruch, Ruge, Cordill, Hollister.
B. Staff Attending: Stachowiak, Rieske.
C. Excused absences: Czekai.
D. Absent: None.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Ms. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to approve the agenda.
On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS
Ms. Stachowiak stated that there are no official communications. There are a few
things that were submitted by some of the speakers for the CIP hearing tonight.
4. HEARINGS
A. Capital Improvements Program (CIP)
Mr. Rieske gave a brief overview.
Mr. Eric Hart, President and CEO of Lansing Entertainment Public
Facilities Authority (LEPFA), stated that LEPFA overseas the Lansing
Center, City Market, Oldsmobile Park and Common Ground. Mr. Scott
Keith, Vice President of Operations for LEPFA, introduced himself.
Mr. Hart stated that the packet of information provided to the Board was
similar to the packet provided to City Council. He stated that City Council
approved $4 million worth of renovations that can be seen in the CIP plan.
Over the next two years, the $4 million will be spent. The entire Council
plan shows the infrastructure of the facility and some of the upgrades and
maintenance. It is broken down into a two year plan. Inside the packet,
there is a specific plan for items and repairs. The final three years is
shown on the last page as a five year outlook, the Board can see that after
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Pacle 2
the $4 million is spent, LEPFA believe that the facility will need between
$317,000 to $362,000 annually over that time frame for continued repairs
and maintenance to the structure, facilities and upgrades. He stated that
part of the reason why LEPFA spent $4 million this year is because there
had not been a capital reinvestment into the facility for an extended period
of time and it had cost LEPFA additional dollars. A very similar problem
that LEPFA faced at Oldsmobile Park.
An architectural engineering firm did a full study on the stadium and this is
being used for a basis for the $3 million. In 2008, LEPFA will be coming
back with a full plan which will be presented next year based on the report
and recommendations. LEPFA will be letting out an annual plan between
$100,000 to $200,000 annually for repairs within that facility, capital
infrastructure changes and upgrades for the facilities. There is not a
detailed plan for the City Market at this time. The strategic planning group
is looking at the overall operations of the market and the long term
recruiting operations in developing a long term plan. As that group
continues to meet, LEPFA will be coming back with some
recommendations for the Board and City Council.
Mr. Hollister asked if the report was for the Lansing Center. Mr. Hart
stated that it was for the Lansing Center and that it is huge and is full of
detailed pictures. LEPFA has done a similar thing for the Lansing Center.
HNTB is going to do a partial study on the Lansing Center. LEPFA has
already done parts that it knows it has to fix. They will be picking up
portions of it, some of it is structural and there are some significant roof
issues that LEPFA is facing.
Ms. Cordill asked how old the Lansing Center is . Mr. Hart stated that
there are two parts: 1) the original building was built in 1987 and 2) the
final expansion phase in 1995.
Mr. Ruge asked if the Lansing Center makes money and how much the
center costs the City on a yearly basis. Mr. Hart stated that the City does
subsidize LEPFA's operations for all of the facilities (i.e. City Market,
Lansing Center, and Oldsmobile Park) for roughly $1 million. This year it
was cut to just under $800,000. Mr. Ruge asked if this could be broken
down for the three different facilities. Mr. Hart stated that the Lansing
Center is the only one that receives a subsidy of approximately $560,000.
The City Market subsidy this year has been cut from $75,000 down to
$48,000. The Oldsmobile Park is roughly $212,000 and he does not have
the specifics right now. Mr. Ruge asked how many people the Lansing
Center brings downtown on a yearly basis. Mr. Hart stated over a quarter
million people and that a lot of the visitors are from outside the Lansing
area.
Ms. Cordill stated that LEPFA did a presentation before the Council where
the City's investment is bringing in so much dollars in terms of tourism.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 3
She asked if there were figures like that. Mr. Hart stated that the total left
for properties last year based on the department presentation was just
over $30 million. All of the properties bring economic benefit to the
downtown area.
Mr. Murdock Jemerson, Director of the Parks and Recreation
Department, stated that he has slides to show the Board and that Mr.
Rieske was passing out some information regarding capita improvements.
With Parks and Recreation, the capital improvement is actually the
Lansing park millage. As most of you know, there was a renewal of the
Lansing park millage and this is the fourth renewal. This is the first
renewal that had some opposition. He asked if the Board was aware of it
and members said yes. He stated that the Lansing voters approved the
fourth park millage by 66% of the vote and he is very pleased with it.
Mr. Jemerson provided handouts and gave a detailed overview.
Mr. Jemerson stated that the park millage program is very important for
the City to be competitors with other cities in the state of Michigan for
those State dollars and the department has been very successful with it.
Ms. Bruch stated that she is very impressed with the way Mr. Jemerson
has leveraged all of the millage dollars and the range of projects and the
partnerships he was able to put together. She thanked him for it and
stated that it is really impressive the way everything is being taken care of
throughout the City for all ranges of recreational activities.
Mr. Ruge stated that the Parks Department used the millage for the
Capital Improvement projects and asked if the department also used the
City CIP money. Mr. Jemerson stated no. The department should be a
part of the CIP for the City but because it does have the park millage the
department does not. The City CIP budget is somewhere in the
neighborhood of approximately $2 million. Out of this amount, there is the
Lansing Center as well as the Public Service Department, Fire
Department and everything else coming out of it.
Ms. Cordill stated that she echos Ms. Bruch's comments. She asked
about the playground surfaces and the Nike reuse-a-shoe program. Ms.
Cordill stated that an incident happened in Lansing in July at Immanuel
Lutheran School. There were treaded tires as a base for the playground,
and unfortunately kids apparently were playing with fire crackers and it
caused a fire. The equipment was burned and the playground is just
being restored now after insurance. She asked if this could happen with
the shoe material. Mr. Jemerson stated that was loose and this is all solid.
No telling what was underneath the rubber surface that would have
caused that. Ms. Cordill thinks it was sand underneath. Mr. Jemerson
stated that he does not think this is a flammable material. Ms. Cordill
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 4
stated that it is a real disappointment for the kids to miss out on their
playground.
Mr. Jemerson stated that it is not all Parks and Recreation that does this
kind of work on the CIP program. He stated that Marty Riel, who is in
charge of Management Services, also works in building some of the
department's projects. Management Services is involved in doing projects
at Sycamore, Marshall and Potter Park.
Mr. Kevin Green, Director of the Principal Shopping District, stated
that he was asked to speak about the Cool Cities program and the
Michigan Walk of Fame. He stated that he volunteered to be the
coordinator for the City. Apparently nobody else was interested because
they willing accepted his offer to do it. He acts as a liaison working with
the Mayor's Office in order to help move through the process. If someone,
like in the case of the Friends of Hunter Park, the Department of Parks
and Recreation wanted to submit something, he would make sure that if
there is anything that he can do on behalf of the City, he certainly would.
He stated that if someone is not familiar with the Hunter Park project, it
truly is an incredible program and it really puts off a vibe of what the
Governor is trying to do. He is thrilled, even though it is not his project, to
be a part of the whole program.
Ms. Bruch asked what has been happening with the Cool Cities program
because it was a vague initiative to get people to stay. Mr. Green asked if
she was referring to Lansing in general or the State. Ms. Bruch stated
Lansing in general. Mr. Green stated that people look at the Cool Cities
program and they think that the very first year people can sort of nominate
anything and receive a grant. What people fail to remember is that in
most respects, it is sort of like icing on the cake. There needs to be a
program in the pipeline and if it is funded, this will help push it over the
edge. It will even enhance the program. This is really where it is coming
from. He stated that the Hunter Park program is the only program in the
City of Lansing that the PSD put through. He was going to put through a
program for the PSD in partnership with the City of Lansing particularly the
Planning and Neighborhood Development and also the Public Service
Department. There is a three year window of opportunity. If you receive a
$100,000 grant and this grant comes under the neighborhoods in progress
category, the program must be completed in three years. He realized that
the project would take four years. The PSD is holding off and hoping the
parameters the City puts forth are altered because the PSD will be
submitting it this year as a Cool City grant application.
Ms. Bruch asked if something like the Lansing Center redevelopment
could be added to the Cool Cities to make it even cooler. Mr. Green
stated that probably not and that there are lots of programs involved. It is
sort of cut and dry in most respects. What the State is looking for is arts
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 5
organizations, non-profit organizations, two or four year community
colleges and universities, a variety of mixed uses if possible. He stated
that housing is a very important component. There are also divisions
pertaining to the Hunter Park project as far as the broader neighborhood
that surrounds it and involves an incredible housing program on Michigan
and some things like that. Mr. Green stated that the Lansing Center
probably would not qualify. Ms. Bruch stated that it looks great but there
is nothing to do in there if someone is just walking by. She was wondering
if there was a way to add detail things. It is nice to look at but as a
pedestrian walking by it does not do anything. Mr. Green stated that he
receives lots of phone calls and emails from people even at the State level
who have just incredible ideas that pertain to the City which they suggest
as a Cool City grant opportunity. Unfortunately, none of them really
qualify. It is an idea. This is to help actual projects that are helping to
revitalize the neighborhoods.
Mr. Green stated that the PSD is introducing the Michigan Walk of Fame
in downtown Lansing. The Walk of Fame is a strategic partnership
between the PSD and actually the 501(c)3 branch which is Downtown
Lansing Inc. The State of Michigan, under the Department of History, Arts
and Libraries, in particular the Michigan historical museum, and the City of
Lansing, are currently in the nomination process. The deadline for
nominations is Friday, December 2"d. Currently, as of 5:00 p.m. today, the
PSD has 188 individuals nominated to the Walk of Fame. These are
potential nominees. He presented a copy of the home page and he
encouraged the Board to view the website. He stated that there are six
different categories that the PSD is accepting nominations in. There will
be two inductees every year in each of the six categories. There will be
12 inductees every year. The PSD will announce them. The judging
process will take place during December 2005 and a portion of January
2006. Probably in early February 2006, the PSD will announce who the
first 12 inductees are. The PSD will be installing bronze plaques, 18" x
30", in the sidewalk. This would be kind of like a Hollywood Walk of Fame
concept. They are bronze plaques that have a star with the individual's
name, the category that they have been inducted under and a ten line
biography that will be in the sidewalk. On the website there will be much
more biographical information as well as photos. The State is also
providing things at that the Historical museum. The actual ceremony
announcement will take place during Michigan week, which is May 20
through May 26, 2006. On Thursday night, May 25, 2006, the PSD will
have a gala celebration at the Michigan Historical Museum. This will be a
fund raiser with the proceeds being split between the Michigan Historical
Museum and Art Center, and the Michigan Walk of Fame. The PSD
wants to recognize anyone, who has been a state resident at any point in
their life and who has made a significant contribution at either the State,
National or Global level. The PSD created the program so it is not publicly
funded. The PSD sees this as potentially becoming one of the largest
tourist attractions in the state of Michigan. The Capitol is one of the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 6
premier tourist attractions in the state along with the Michigan Historical
Center, Impression 5 Museum, Oldsmobile Park and all of these other
elements downtown to attract people. The beauty of the program is that
this will continue on long after we are all gone and people will continue to
be added to the Michigan Walk of Fame. The PSD is doing this to remind
people that Lansing is the state capital and to attract people to the
downtown area.
Ms. Cordill asked about the location of where this would be. Mr. Green
stated that it would start on Washington Square in a five block area from
Ottawa Street and probably be extended past Kalamazoo Street, but not
necessarily all the way to Lenawee Street. For the first few years, the
PSD will concentrate only on Washington Square. The beauty of it is it
can be taken any where. Once Washington Square is saturated, then it
can be expanded out. With the 200 to 300 N. Washington block
scheduled to be reopen in 2007, this would obviously provide more
potential to Michigan Avenue. The Michigan Historical Center would like
to see this eventually connect to the museum and the PSD would like to
do that as well.
Mr. Hollister asked if Mr. Green had ever been to the Freedom Trail in
Boston. Mr. Green stated no. Mr. Hollister stated that it is worth visiting
because it is the same concept. You see people walking around looking
down and it goes throughout the city. Mr. Green stated that there is no
reason why the City cannot do the same thing. The PSD truly believes
that the City will become one of the popular tourist attractions. The only
other state that has a Walk of Fame is Arkansas. Besides the former
President Bill Clinton, the only other individuals who are recognized are
entertainers and athletes. The City will truly be the first comprehensive
Walk of Fame in mid-Michigan that recognizes state residents'
accomplishments.
Mr. Marty Riel, Director of the Management Services Department,
stated that this is the first time Management Services has had the
opportunity to do this. Management Services is a department that helps
all the other departments within the City of Lansing. He stated that the
department actually helps with the backbone of a lot of things: 1) building
maintenance facilities; 2) informational technology which handles phones
and communications; 3) central garage which covers all the Police and
Fire vehicles and the Administrative fleet; and 4) printing services. There
are a lot of other things that the department does. People ask how come
restroom facilities cost so darn much. Management Services designs it to
make sure that it will last a long time. Typically, cities do not replace their
buildings like a regular corporation can replace theirs in a 30 year cycle.
Traditionally, the City has its buildings for much longer, 50 years or even
longer. Management Services has to build these facilities for that
purpose.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 7
By comparison, Management Services is responsible for 223 different
buildings within the City of Lansing. Based on what they are, the vary in
age from the Turner Dodge House built in 1868 to some of the new
facilities like Fire Station No. 4 on Miller Road. There is a wide variety of
different facilities that Management Services has to service and maintain.
It is totally different from the structure of many years ago to today.
It you took the replacement value of all of the City's facilities it is
approximately $276 million in facilities that Management Services tries to
maintain. The comments that Management Services receives is that
these are not maintained or serviced well. In order for these to be
maintained properly, the industry standard based on the number of
facilities that the City currently has would cost the City $15.5 million in
annual maintenance in order to do that. By comparison, the Management
Services Department services and maintains these buildings on a budget
of$4.5 million. This gives the perspective of what Management Services
has to deal with in order to do certain things. To void and control that is
obviously to reduce the number of facilities that the department has to
service and maintain. He does not see that coming any time soon so the
department does the best it can with what it has. When the department
receives money to build new facilities, they are built to last a long time and
the department has to be able to service and maintain them for many
years.
Some of the things that Management Services does is when festivals
come to Lansing on the weekdays or weekends, his group of people helps
with plumbing for water services or electrical. The largest event is
Common Ground.
Management Services also helps LEPFA with the Lansing Center.
Through a maintenance program, he is trying to get them on board and
help them facilitate something else with the new renovations, Oldsmobile
Park and the City Market in order to bring people in to Lansing.
Management Services is helping them with putting their best foot forward
because these areas have not been serviced and maintained to the levels
that they should be. Management Services is trying to help get the dollars
and make the dollars go further. Management Services is helping with
staff, designs and plans, and is putting its best foot forward on that.
Some of the other things that Management Services has to contend with is
being under the scrutiny of the regulatory codes and standards. There are
26 regulatory codes and standards that have to be followed (i.e. building,
plumbing, air conditioning, heating and ventilating, Americans with
Disability Act, National Fire Protection Act, Environmental Protection Act,
National Historical Preservation Program, U.S. Green Building Council,
Leadership Energy Environmental Design (LEED), Homeland Security
through environmental design, Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA)).
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 8
Management Services is also dealing with the Sick Building Syndrome,
Legionairs Disease, black mold, asbestos and building security, and is
constantly on the alert of trying to deal with these issues.
Ms. Bruch asked if there were any LEED certified buildings in Lansing.
Mr. Riel stated no and that the standard to do a LEED building is very
rigid. Management Services has been limited due to funding. When
changes and renovations are done where there is funding available,
Management Services tries to set aside and actually do the whole thing.
One of the programs the department is currently working on is an energy
management program for Letts Community Center. This will be coming
up shortly. Management Services is looking to replace the lighting
throughout the facility and replace the roof and add insulation above the
industry standards. Unless you do the whole criteria for LEED building, it
does not match the criteria. Management Services always seems to miss
the mark one way or another. Ms. Bruch asked what would be the first
LEED certified building in the City. Mr. Riel said probably a park's
building, but which one he is not sure.
Mr. Rieske stated that EDC was invited to speak but Ms. Patti Cook could
not attend. However, she did provide a memorandum for the Board's
review.
Ms. Gretchen Cochran, resident of 403 N. Sycamore Street, asked if
any of the paperwork the Board received had anything to do with the
Southside Community Center. She stated that there was so much
discussion about the center during the debate regarding the millage. Ms.
Bruch stated that the paperwork says that the Southside Community
Center is part of the Parks improvement plan for 2006 to 2010.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Hollister closed the public
hearing and referred Capital Improvements Program (CIP) to the Urban
Development Committee, scheduled to meet on November 29, 2005 at
4:00 in the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room
at 316 N. Capitol Avenue.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
Mr. Rob Eschbach, resident of 1228 Daisy Lane and owner of the structure
located at 716 N. MILK Blvd., stated that he just wanted to remind the Board that
this would be a great improvement for the City to convert this into a structure that
can house two units. This would help provide housing for the professionals and
students in the downtown area, especially across the street from the hospital.
Ms. Gretchen Cochran, resident of 403 N. Sycamore Street, asked if the
Board would be acting on ACT-9-2005. Mr. Hollister stated yes and that it was
under "Pending Items" under the Business section. Ms. Cochran asked if she
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page_9
should make a comment at this time or wait. Mr. Hollister stated that now would
be a good time.
Ms. Cochran stated that the Downtown Neighborhood Association (DNA)
presented an alternative proposal to the dead ending of Sycamore Street. After
the meeting Mr. Chuck Calati of the DNA went to the Genesee Neighborhood
Association (GNA) to present the alternative proposal. The following week, Mr.
Calati went to the Genesee Redesign Committee with photos of the suggested
proposal that would allow vehicles to turn right only at Sycamore and Saginaw
Streets. Pictures of the Harrison and Marigold Avenues were taken to the
Genesee Redesign Committee and there was quite a bit of discussion. She
stated that the Redesign Committee folks suggested a summit at which members
of the DNA and GNA would come together, sit down and discuss the matter.
Neither organization has had a chance to meet since then. She has talked
extensively with Ms. Ruth Hallman and has concurred that they are saddened by
the discord and anger between their neighbors. They are looking for some
resolution that would eliminate it. Ms. Cochran stated that the DNA will be
meeting Thursday night and that the GNA will be meeting sometime soon, she is
not sure when. She asked the Board to delay acting on ACT-9-2005 and table
the request to allow the two neighborhood organizations time to get together.
Ms. Colleen Beeman, resident of 610 N. Sycamore Street and representative
of the Genesee Neighborhood Association and the Genesee Redesign
Team, stated that she was at the Genesee Redesign meeting when Mr. Calati
was present. They talked about the summit and agreed to meet but not for the
specific purpose of the permanent cul-de-sac. It was for the purpose of the
neighbors getting together and finding a better way to communicate with each
other in the various groups. She asked for the Board not put off this request
(ACT-9-2005) but to take action on it. She hopes that the Board will support the
permanent cul-de-sac. She encouraged the Board to go ahead and vote so the
request could be forwarded to City Council. She sees no purpose in waiting.
She stated that the GNA just does not want to get together with the DNA because
of the cul-de-sac. The GNA wants to get together because of the neighborhood
and because it wants better communication between the different organizations
that represent the various aspects of the neighborhood.
Ms. Beeman stated that she had information from Mr. Kilpatrick regarding the
City sewer system being in the neighborhood in 2007. If the partial right turn only
proposal is put in, it will have to be ripped out when the sewers are redone. If the
Board votes to put that in, it would be a waste of money.
It is her understanding that if the permanent cul-de-sac is put in, the drain system
will be addressed at that time. It will not have to be ripped out and redone when
the sewers are redone.
Ms. Beeman encouraged the Board to support the permanent cul-de-sac and
hopes that the Board will not delay the request. The GNA has worked on this for
over two years and needs it to be moved forward.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 10
Seeing no one else wishing to address the Board, Mr. Hollister closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was taken by the Board.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval — October 4, 2005
Mr. Frederick moved; seconded by Ms. Bruch to approve the minutes of
October 4, 2005. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
The minutes of October 4, 2005 were
APPROVED.
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
a. Z-12-2005, 716 N. ML King Blvd., from "B" Residential
District to "C" Residential District
This is a request by Robert Eschbach to rezone the property
at 716 N. ML King, more specifically described as:
South 33 Feet of Lot 25, Englewood Park Addition,
City of Lansing, Ingham County, MI
from "B" Residential district to "C" Residential district, for the
purpose of converting the existing house at 716 N. ML King
to a duplex.
Staff recommended approval of Z-12-2005, 716 N. ML King
Blvd., from "B" Residential District to "C" Residential District.
In Committee, the request was recommended for approval
and the motion carried unanimously (3-0).
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to recommend approval of
Z-12-2005, 716 N. ML King Blvd., from "B" Residential District to "C" Residential
District.
Frederick . ... . . . . . ... ... . ..... . . . . Ave Bruch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge. . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Hollister . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
b. Z-13-2005, 233 Woodlawn Avenue, from "C" Residential
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 11
District to "DM-4" Residential District
This is a request by Mohamad Abduljabar to rezone the
property at 233 Woodlawn Avenue, more specifically
described as:
East 44 Feet of Lot 22 Johnson's Additions, City of
Lansing, Ingham County, MI
from "C" Residential district to "DM-4" Residential district, for
the purpose of utilizing the building at 233 Woodlawn
Avenue for four residential units.
Staff recommended denial of Z-13-2005, 233 Woodlawn
Avenue, from "C" Residential District to "DM-4" Residential
District.
In Committee, the request was recommended for denial and
the motion carried unanimously (3-0).
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to recommend denial of
Z-13-2005, 233 Woodlawn Avenue, from "C" Residential District to "DM-4"
Residential District.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Bruch . . Ave
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Ruge. . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Hollister . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
DENIED.
C. Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments —
Parking/Landscape Requirements
Ms. Foster stated that she would like to see further
reductions in the amount of required parking. She would like
to move the amendments forward, but would like to revisit
the parking requirements in the near future.
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to recommend approval of the
Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments - Parking/Landscape Requirements.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Bruch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge. . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Hollister . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 12
APPROVED.
The Planning Board discussed the proposed legislation that
would impact the ability of a municipality to enforce the
Zoning Ordinance. Ms. Stachowiak stated that she attended
a House committee meeting last week to oppose the bill
because it would require a 30 day waiting period before any
action can be taken on a zoning violation and it would place
a cap on the amount of money that can be assessed for
zoning violation fines.
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster to send a letter to
Lansing's representatives and the Governor opposing the bill. On a voice vote,
the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster to recommend to the
transition team that enforcement of housing, premise and zoning ordinances be
increased in the City of Lansing. On a voice vote, the motion carried
unanimously (5-0).
Next meeting, Wednesday, January 11, 2006 at 4 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Cordill, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, November 29, 2005, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
3. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE — None.
4. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Next meeting, Tuesday, December 6, 2005, at 6:00 p.m.
124 E. Michigan Ave. City Council Conference Room.
C. Report from Planning Manager
The holiday dinner will be on Tuesday, December 20, 2005 from 6:00 to
9:00 P.M.
D. Pending Items: Future action required
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 13
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St.,"H" Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. SLU-3-2002,2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J" Parking District(Tabled May 15,2002)
C. Z-7-2005, South 99 Feet of 600 E. Kalamazoo Street,"B"Residential District to
"F"Commercial District(Tabled July 13,2005)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000,201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27,2000)
b. Master Plan Project
C. Act-1-2003, SE Corner Michigan &Washington, Lot 3, Block 111, Orig Plat,
Vacate Alley(part) (Tabled on April 29, 2003)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
a. ACT-9-2005, 600 Blk. Sycamore St. South of Saginaw St.,
Close North End of Street
5. Board Member Code Enforcement Notification Reports
a. Teen Challenge-wood privacy fence (May 20, 2003)
b. Dollar Store-Willow Street& MLK Blvd.-landscaping &buffering (May 20,
2003)
C. Grovenburg property-dumpster in ROW(July 1,2003)
d. 2714 W.Jolly Road-church with large statue in front yard (January 20, 2004)
e. 545 Baker Street- Mount Hope Church outreach (April 20,2004)
f. W.Willow Street-Grace Tabernacle Church-no landscaping (May 4, 2004)
g. Michigan Ave&Shepard Street-sign business-several banner signs nailed to
the outside of building (May 4,2004)
h. 2702 S. Cedar Street- no landscaping (May 18,2004)
i. Michigan Ave&Virginia Street-Sparrow Hospital property-no screening and
buffering (October 5, 2004)
j. 2410 S. Pennsylvania Ave.-no landscaping (November 3,2004)
k. Keeps Party Store-Aurelius Rd- illegal signs (February 15, 2005)
I. 400 Allen Street-small port holes for windows (April 19, 2005)
M. 2200 W. Holmes Road- Bad Habits-excessive signs (May 3,2005)
n. 704 S. Clemens Street-"For Sale"items (May 3, 2005)
o. Corner of Aurelius&Cavanaugh Rds-Citgo Gas Station-high grass/weeds
(July 5,2005)
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Bruch to remove ACT-9-2005
from the table.
A discussion ensued. Mr. Ruge suggested that ACT-9-2005 remain tabled
because not all Board members were present. The motion was withdrawn.
TABLED.
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Ranney Building Historic District Study Committee Preliminary
Report
The Board reviewed the Preliminary Report. The members commented
that from their perspective, it's a beautiful building, and a good job was
done on the report.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 14
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to approve the
Ranney Building Historic District Study Committee Preliminary
Report. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON — None.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Ms. Cordill suggested sending a letter to the Mayor-elect and his transition team
in support of Mr. Ruff continuing as the Director of the Planning and
Neighborhood Development. Mr. Ruge stated that the Board had to remember
that as a department head, Mr. Ruff was trying to carry out Mayor Benavides
program and one of the reasons the Mayor was defeated was that people did not
see anything happening. Mr. Ruge stated that he does not know if the Board can
lay the "nothing happening" on Mr. Ruff's door step. Mr. Ruge stated that he did
not think that Mr. Ruff would be opposed the Board sending a letter in support.
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to send a letter of
support to the Mayor-elect regarding Mr. Ruff continuing as the Director of
the Planning Department. On a voice vote, the motion carried (4-1). Ms.
Bruch cast the descending vote. Mr. Frederick called for Point of Order and
stated that a member cannot abstain on a voice vote. According to the Rules of
Procedure, one of the rules is that a member has to vote, be recused or have a
conflict of interest.
Mr. Ruge wanted to add a friendly amendment to the motion that the Board
supports Mr. Ruff continuing in the job that he has but if the Mayor does not see
Mr. Ruff in that position, the Board would certainly support and encourage Mr.
Ruff to stay in some capacity within the Planning Department. Mr. Hollister asked
Ms. Cordill and Mr. Frederick if they feel this is friendly. Ms. Cordill stated that
this was not her intent and all she is saying is something like a letter of
recommendation. They are going to do what they want to do. It may not make a
difference. She would not want this to be an ultimatum. Mr. Ruge withdrew his
friendly amendment.
Mr. Ruge stated that on his way to the meeting this evening the 600 Block of E.
Michigan Avenue, right next to the 621 Club, it looks like one of the buildings just
imploded. He stated that the roof is gone and the front is out. Mr. Hollister stated
that is the City Rescue Mission and they are working on it. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that she signed a building permit on it.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 15, 2005 Page 15
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS
Mr. Frederick stated that 2101 Luwanna Drive should be checked for being a
registered rental. There has been some plumbing work added in the basement.
Mr. Frederick stated that he got that out of the plumber's mouth and that the
plumber happened to be working on that job while he was working on his mother-
in-law's place. The plumber stated that the owner was adding a lavatory. Mr.
Frederick stated that for having more than three unrelated people, there are so
many cars parked there regularly that they cannot all drive them all at the same
time and only be three people. There are at least five and sometimes six
vehicles. In the evening, there is front yard parking. This needs to be checked
out.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
` r (�_ , 4L
William C. Rieske, Secretary, Planning Board
PBMinutes.111505.doc
Approved as written 1-3-06 Draft to Clerk December 16, 2005
Approved January 3, 2006
To Clerk January 4, 2006
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Ga Lansing City Hall
_ Tuesday, November 1, 2005
1. rOPENING SESSION
,&�The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mr. Czekai, Chair.
A. Roll call: Present: Frederick, Bruch, Ruge, Cordill, Czekai, Hollister.
B. Staff Attending: Stachowiak, Rieske.
C. Excused absences: None.
D. Absent: None.
Mr. Hollister made a motion, seconded by Ms. Bruch to approve an excused
absence request from Mr. Frederick for the September 20t". On a voice vote, the
motion carried unanimously (6-0).
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Rieske stated that under New Business, he would like to discuss a
newspaper article regarding Allen School.
Ms. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Ms. Bruch to approve the agenda as
amended. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (6-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Letter and information from Ms. Priscilla Holmes regarding Z-13-2005.
B. Letter from the Walnut Neighborhood Organization president
4. HEARINGS (3 minutes each)
A. Z-13-2005, 233 Woodlawn Avenue, from "C" Residential District to
"DM-4" Residential District
This is a request by Mohamad Abduljabar to rezone the property at 233
Woodlawn Avenue, more specifically described as:
East 44 Feet of Lot 22 Johnson's Additions, City of Lansing,
Ingham County, MI
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 2
from "C" Residential district to "DM-4" Residential district, for the purpose
of utilizing the building at 233 Woodlawn Avenue for four residential units.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Priscilla Holmes, resident of 135 Island Avenue, read her letter of
opposition for the record.
Mr. Richard Barber, resident of 223 Woodlawn Avenue, stated that he
opposes this request. It is very small and there is no space for parking. If
the Board members were to see the house, they would wonder where four
units could possibly go.
Ms. Danyel Evans, resident of 237 Woodlawn Avenue, stated that she
lives next door to the proposed site and is opposed to the request. This is
very small property and to think four families would be living in this home
seems very impossible. She believes that the house needs to be
demolished. There is not enough room for the birds to live in the windows
and to see four families living in this house is impossible.
Ms. Janine Stephenson, resident of 236 Woodlawn Avenue, presented
the Board members with berries from a Gingko Tree that is in front of the
proposed site. She has lived at this residence since 1989 and that
various people have owned this property. This property and that tree are
basically a nuisance. Every year in the fall little berries fall down and if
someone steps on them, they smell like dog manure. The kids walk along
the road and the sidewalk, and they get these little berries on them and
they track them all over the place. The people who have owned this
property have been good owners, in her opinion, and have cleaned up this
tree. They have made sure that the tree was not a nuisance for the
neighborhood. Whoever owns this property now has not done that. To
give the owner the right to have four units on a very small lot, to her is an
abomination. She urged the Board to vote against this request. She
never thought about tearing down the house and said that was not a bad
idea.
She stated that there is a lot of drug traffic on this street and the neighbors
and the City are working hard to clean it up. She does not want to see a
four unit place at this location because it would create a lot more traffic.
She encouraged the Board to throw them out.
Mr. Brent Cleland, resident of 227 Woodlawn Avenue, stated that he
lives right next door to the proposed site and that he has lived there for
almost two years. One of the main reasons why he decided to purchase
the house in that area was he had an understanding that there were going
to be steps taken to clean up the area. There was a process already
under way. Knowing that the ordinance was already in effect was one of
the reasons that he decided to take a risk on this area of town and on this
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 3
property. He knew that he would not have to worry about a full unit
dwelling going in there. The driveway of the proposed property is
probably three feet off the side of his house. He believes that there is not
enough parking or area for four separate families to live in this particular
unit. Even allowing a four unit residence to take place there is almost
giving him wrong information from what he decided to move into the area.
He did not think this could be something that he would have to worry
about or that it would be allowed. The reason why the ordinance is in
effect is just one more hoop to jump through that you know you can get
around. It is really not doing its job.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Czekai closed the public hearing
and referred Z-13-2005, 233 Woodlawn Avenue, from "C" Residential
District to "DM-4" Residential District to the Zoning and Ordinance
Committee, scheduled to meet on November 9, 2005 at 4:00 in the
Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room at 316 N.
Capitol Avenue.
B. Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Needs
This allows citizens the opportunity to indicate needs, views, and
proposals for the preparation of the Capital Improvements Program (CIP)
for the fiscal years 2007 to 2012.
Mr. Rieske gave a brief overview.
Ms. Angela Bennett, Finance Department Budget Manager, gave a
brief presentation regarding the City's funding behind capital
improvements. The City's funding is divided into the following categories:
Streets, Parks, Sanitary Sewer System, Stormwater Sewer System,
Parking System, and General Improvements. She provided information to
the Board members regarding the current budget for 2006.
Mr. Dave Berridge, Director of Public Service, stated that the Public
Service Department prepares a six year rolling CIP for all the on going
projects and that there are also street projects which occur in a one year
construction time frame that are projected to occur in the six year plan.
The projects are categorized as both essential and developmental. The
2007 CIP plan is currently under development and a review of the 2006
CIP plan will provide insight to the Board as to the City's needs.
Mr. Berridge stated that the Public Service Department infrastructure
categories fall into eight categories: Streets, Bridges, Sidewalks, Storm
Sewer, Sanitary Sewer, Waste Water Treatment, Environmental, and
Miscellaneous. He gave a brief overview these categories.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 4
Ms. Bruch inquired about when the Board might see the street needs
report. Mr. Berridge stated that he would expect it to be available some
time around the first of the year.
Ms. Bruch asked about updates on the sewer system study. Mr. Berridge
stated that the Public Service Department is in year three of five and that
at this point the department does not have anything that is available. The
City has an old system and is an old community, and is no different that a
lot of other communities that are old. The department is trying to figure
out how to manage an infrastructure built 70 to 100 years ago. The needs
are daunting and the solutions are just as daunting. He stated that it will
be another year before the Public Service Department even has
something.
Ms. Bruch inquired about the ISTEA funding and how successful the City
has been with receiving a lot of these types of funds to help pay for some
of the road costs. Mr. Berridge stated that the Public Service Department
receives about $1 million annually (a little less than a third) of the Region's
STP allotment, which is about $3.5 million. The City's percentage has
dropped of a little bit. The urbanized area has grown and the suburban
needs (i.e. Okemos Road, Jolly Road) also compete for funds. The
department is still receiving roughly 25 to 30 percent of the dollars that are
available on a regular basis.
Ms. Bruch asked about the life expectancy of roads. Mr. Berridge stated
that one can expect that a major street will probably need to be
reconstructed every 35 years and local streets probably every 50 years.
Mr. Frederick asked if pedestrian overpasses would be able to be
eliminated if the main corridor that runs east and west through the City
was made into two-way streets with smaller lanes, slower speed limits and
more traffic controls installed so pedestrians could get across those
streets without having to deal with the overpasses. He asked if this would
be a significant reduction in funds to maintain it. Mr. Berridge stated that
he doubts if the City could get away without the pedestrian overpasses
even in a lot of cases where they typically touch down in residential area
and sometimes on school property so that the children do not have to use
walk the sidewalk systems. Trying to cross a one-way street at a
signalized intersection, the department is avoiding the pedestrian traffic
interface entirely by going overhead. Not everyone uses them. The
direction of traffic or the volume of traffic is really not a significant impact
as to whether or not the overpasses were kept.
Mr. Frederick asked who is responsible for paying for the US 127 sound
wall. Mr. Berridge stated that the sound wall is a project of the Michigan
Department of Transportation and that there are state and federal dollars
involved. There is still a 10 percent local match which constitutes about
$500,000 on a $5 million project.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 5
Mr. Dan Flynn, Board of Water and Light, provided a handout for the
Board members, and gave an overview of the Lead Replacement Project.
Prior to 1960, the BWL used lead piping to connect water services to the
customer. Starting in 1960, the BWL stopped this practice and started
using copper tubing for the new services and replacement of any lead
services where repairs were necessary. In July 2004, the BWL began an
active review of lead services and established a Lead Task Force. In
March 2005, the BWL commissioners approved a Lead Service
Replacements Project Implementation Plan and this plan is to be
completed by December 31, 2014. In summary, the BWL is committed to
remove all lead services. Since January 2004, the BWL has completed
1,607 services and as of September 2005, there is a balance of 11,272 to
complete. The BWL has replaced approximately 1,300 services per year.
Mr. Flynn stated that the BWL schedule is coordinated with the Combined
Sewer Overflow(CSO) project to minimize customer disruption and street
restoration, and remains flexible to complete its services ahead of the
CSO work. The BWL prefers to be out of the CSO contractors' way at
least a year in advance, which offers flexibility for both the CSO
contractors and the City, and rescheduling when necessary.
Mr. Flynn gave a brief overview of the four major areas of the Water Main
Reconstruction work: Filley Street from N. Martin Luther King Blvd. to
Turner Street and cross streets, CSO Area Route 27 and Harris Street,
CSO Area Beaver, Center, Case, N. High, Rheamount, and Gier Streets;
and Michigan Avenue Cedar to Pennsylvania and cross streets.
Ms. Bruch asked about a quick update on the wells and some of the
contamination that has been happening. Mr. Wood stated that there are
some wells that the BWL has taken out of service due to some of the
contamination and remedial action is being taken right now to mediate that
by others. Ms. Bruch asked what remediation steps are being taken. Mr.
Wood stated that he would be able to provide that information.
Mr. Andy Kilpatrick, Director of the Transportation Office, provided a
handout for the Board regarding the Transportation and Parking Office
CIP projects which include (PACE, ITS Coordination Initiative, Traffic
Calming, Traffic Signal Pre-Emption Project, Intelligent Transportation
System [ITS) Communications System, and a Traffic Operations Center.
Mr. Kilpatrick stated that on the department side, one of the main projects
on a 10 year cycle is the parking ramps because they are the most
expensive for rehabilitation. Currently, the department is doing 5 years of
projects, one year in each one of the parking facilities and then 5 years to
rebuild that capital fund so that department can do another 5 year series.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 6
Mr. Kilpatrick stated that the department is in the off years and have
completed the major restoration activities in 2002. There is a study in
progress to look at the next round of maintenance.
There are a couple of projects the department is doing right now is
implementing new signage in the parking facilities' interior both for
pedestrians and vehicles, and also some exterior signage. The
department is looking at implementing customer assistance system so that
people who park in the ramp can push a button and get someone on the
other end in the Transportation Office and want directions or potentially
the department can work something out with a 911 dispatch or a private
company after hours they could emergency assistance if they had issue.
Mr. Kilpatrick stated that the department is looking at pedestrian walkway
that connects to the Radisson North Grand Ramp and the Lansing Center,
and do a study of this to see what upgrades need to be done. There are
some leaks and the carpet will be replaced.
Ms. Bruch inquired about the traffic calming report and if the Board could
get a copy of it.
Ms. Bruch inquired about the intelligence Transportation System. She
stated that there are two philosophies with it: 1) by doing that then the
traffic can just smoothly keep going but yet you lose some of the visions of
the different business along the way; or 2) to interrupt it so people actually
stop. She asked which way Transportation Department is leaning
towards. Mr. Kilpatrick stated that what the department is trying to do is
make time so the people can essentially drive the speed limit and
minimize the stops, delays and fuel consumption.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Czekai closed the public hearing
and referred Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Needs to the Urban
Development Committee, scheduled to meet on November 29, 2005 at
4:00 in the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room
at 316 N. Capitol Avenue.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (3 minutes each)
Ms. Tah-sha Leek, President of the Walnut Neighborhood Association
(WNA), stated that she does not understand why the Genesee Neighborhood
Association (GNA) feels that a blockade is going to prevent drug traffic from
being in that area. She has just organized a 100 member neighborhood watch in
Walnut community for this issue alone. She stated that the GNA needs to get
their Watch program more in focus and if it is an organized watch, things could
get done and you will see progress.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1. 2005 Page 7
Ms. Leek stated that if the GNA feels like this is what is going to prevent drug
trafficking, the Walnut neighborhood has its fair share of drug trafficking. If this is
the case maybe instead of getting members to be on the neighborhood watch,
the WNO should have proposed this as well.
She asked about where the funding would be coming from for this blockade. If
the City has anything to do with this, it seems that the City should allocate
fundings more to streets or projects that everybody would be able to use.
She asked how the blockade would be effective. She urged the Board to deny
ACT-9-2005 and stated that it makes no sense. It seems like the couple of
houses that are on this street feel that they should be out on a gated community.
This area is an urban community. She chose to live in this neighborhood and
therefore, she wants to make it better. She will do projects and try to make it
better and not just block it off and think that will solve the issue.
Ms. Monica Zuchowski, President of the Downtown Neighborhood
Association (DNA), passed out a statement of a resolution that was distributed
at the DNA meeting last week along with a hand written and a diagram of a
suggestion the DNA had to help with the traffic problems in the neighborhood.
At the October 27, 2005 DNA meeting, the Board of Directors passed the
following resolution: The DNA recognizes that the Genesee Neighborhood
Association has been working to make its area a safe, vibrant community. The
GNA work with the Genesee Redesign Committee had been exemplary and pride
Code Compliance in getting after inattentive landlords. The Lansing Police
Department (LPD) now recommends permanently barricading Sycamore Street
at Saginaw Street as a deterrent to the crime in the area. The GNA and LPD say
that the blocked border by Sycamore, Saginaw, Pine and Lapeer Streets is an in-
out race track for drug purchasers. The DNA cannot support permanently
barricading one street to combat a region wide problem. The DNA can instead
recommend a redesign of the intersections at Saginaw and Sycamore Streets,
and Pine and Lapeer Streets to deter turns into the neighborhood. She provided
diagrams that the DNA had done at last week's meeting. She stated that some
simple redesign rather than the barricade would make it so that vehicles would
only be able to turn in one direction and would not be able to enter onto certain
streets.
Mr. Jim Gillies, resident of 516 W. Ionia Street, stated that each request for a
cul-de-sac should be before the Planning Board and should be on a case by case
basis. The area on Sycamore Street between Lapeer and Saginaw Streets has
been notorious for many decades, not only for unique street crime but also for
neighbors complaining of the noise and the harassment. Due to the proximity of
the commercial area, it has been an attractive area for quick stop and to buy
criminal transactions. He remembers the decades of urban blight in the nearby
renaissance area located south of the newer Justice center on Kalamazoo and
Butler Streets where drugs, prostitution and gangs were prevalent just a few
years ago. Homes in the neighborhood were renovated. There is a beautiful
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 8
landscape and cul-de-sac constructed at the corner of MLK Blvd. and Hillsdale.
One can clearly see the difference these improvements have made to this
neighborhood. Neighbors have been relieved of the suffering from gruesome
individuals dealing drugs on the streets, from gun shots to loud fighting. The
traditional good style streets are for dominant in the Genesee neighborhood.
One small cul-de-sac or hammerhead design and a turn around will injure the
market value of 400 plus homes in that neighborhood or the numerous homes in
the adjacent neighborhoods. Let us remember that the Planning Board recently
approved the BTS development on Saginaw Street near Lansing Catholic
Central. It was decided after much study that there should be one entrance and
one exit to the neighborhood with a market driven homes in another
neighborhood. The lowering of crime and beautification of the block ending at
Saginaw Street would be a much deserved welcome relief for those good people
living there. We do not want to see more homesteaders move for fear of their
lives. Much time and effort has been spent by himself and others in the last 2
years talking with people and conducting surveys to find out what the
neighborhood wanted to solve the problems at Saginaw and Lapeer Streets'
area. There was an overwhelming consensus that the barricades were helpful
and that the permanent turn around with the landscape would be justified. He
has spoken with firemen, police, emergency vehicle operations, trash pick up,
snow removal personnel and they have said that there is no problem with a turn
around in such an area. If anyone has any questions or concerns regarding the
proposed plans of this project, should contact Andy Kilpatrick of the City
Transportation Department.
Ms. Gretchen Cochran, resident of 403 N. Sycamore Street and a member of
the Genesee Redesign Team, stated that she lives three blocks from this
proposed permanent barricade. She joined with the 40 other neighbors,
residents and business owners who signed petitions opposing the permanent
blockade of south Sycamore Street. Traffic and crime are similar; they flow like
water. Attempting to stop crime with barricades simply moves it. Five crime hot
spots were noted in the Lansing State Journal recently. She asked if the Board
would recommend dead end streets in all five areas. Residents along Lapeer
Street live along a race track. If Sycamore is permanently barricaded, the traffic
will flow onto Lapeer Street. Then the Genesee Redesign Team will be back
asking the Board to permanently barricade Lapeer Street at Prince Street and
MLK Blvd. in affect accomplishing the first stages of creating a gated community
like those in abandoned suburbs. What is wrong with a gated community? It is
dull, the houses look the same, the people look the same and there is an oar that
you must know the password to get it. Currently, our neighborhood is an
antithesis of that picture. One of the best ways to lose a rich diversity of
differences is to begin isolating segments of the community. She urged the
Board to not support the request.
Ms. Gina Nelson, resident of 605 W. Shiawassee Street, stated that she
moved downtown about 12 years ago. She left East Lansing condo area and
decided to move to a neighborhood downtown. It was a neighborhood, not a
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 9
gated community. There were people of different backgrounds, races and
everything is different about it.
Before she moved to this neighborhood, it was a very high drug and prostitution
area. Barricades or cul-de-sacs were not used to clean up the neighborhood.
The houses were cleaned up and home owners were brought in to clean up the
neighborhood. The residents have been very diligent and have kept the
neighborhood fairly clean. The only time that she saw in increase prostitution
and drugs was when the temporary barricade was done a few years ago. She
was opposed to the barricade then and she is opposed now. The residents will
start with one barricade and then they will want two, three and four more. If that
happens, she will put her house up for sale and move back to East Lansing and
Okemos. She urged the Board to deny the request because it will divide the
neighborhood.
Mr. Lyle Kissee, resident of 1115 S. Genesee, stated that he has lived in the
area for nine years and the area was a notorious place for crack dealing,
speeding, and lots of trash. When the barricades were put in, it was a great
neighborhood. It was quiet and there were no drug deals. It was one of the best
summers of the nine years he has lived there. He stated that the cul-de-sac is
not a barricade but rather a new development of a neighborhood. We cannot
afford to lose any more homeowners in that neighborhood. Every homeowner is
vital to the success of that neighborhood. When the street was barricaded, the
loudest opposition came from people who lived the furthest away who did not
sleep in the homes, fight the drug dealers, or pick up the trash. They did not
have the speeding cars and yet they are the loudest opponents. He believes that
the Board should listen to people who live at Sycamore and Saginaw Streets. It
is a notorious drug dealing area and everyone knows it. A cul-de-sac is not a
gated community. It is a place for people finally to have some peace and quiet to
raise their families, own their homes and not sell them or put them up for rentals.
He hopes that the Board will support the request and make the area a nice place
to live.
Ms. Ruth Hallman, resident of 1014 W. Lapeer Street, stated that the Board
knows how the Genesee neighborhood has worked in the area for a number of
years for the crime improvement. Removing the crime and improving the
neighborhood is very important. The neighborhood has worked together with the
Board on the Leitram situation with Mr. Townsend, where all the parking areas
from the houses purchased were going to be removed. There would not be
anymore parking or garages. It was an issue that the neighborhood did not
disagree with but felt that there were some things that needed to be developed
for the future and that this was going to improve that area. It definitely has
improved that area and the neighborhood did work out the problems that were
there with it. She and Mr. Rieske worked on this for a whole year to get it done.
She stated that the Printers row, where the new subdivision will be for Cherry Hill,
is also a cul-de-sac and some of the street area will be given to that area for the
neighborhood improvements. This will have a tremendous affect on how it is
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 10
going to improve the area. There was so much prostitution and drug problems
over there as well.
As far as the DNA, what it suggested with the transportation issue sounds like an
excellent idea. The only problem with it is does the City have police officers who
can sit on the corners and prevent these people from driving in and out in areas
where the residents do not want them to go. When you go down Saginaw Street
where the Meijer store and business properties are located, there are places
where you can only make right or left turns. When you sit there, you hold your
breath while the right turn vehicle makes left turns in front of you and so on. In
order to make it work is what the serious problem is. In the Renassiance zone
we all know that the crime and housing situations over there were both
outrageous. It was terrible. People came in and purchased homes. Some of the
homes were demolished and the people who owned them got new homes. The
properties were replaced, the cul-de-sacs were put in and the traffic did not come
in there the way is did previously. It is a beautiful neighborhood today.
Mr. Bob Cochran, resident of 403 N. Sycamore Street, stated that he is the
hearing officer for the Demolition Board for the Mayor. A lot has been done in the
neighborhood like demolishing homes of bad landlords. This is an ongoing
process. There are some 500 red-tagged houses in the City and the number is
dwindling. That is only one part of the solution. He attended a Genesee
neighborhood function when Councilperson Wood and Judge Garcia were there.
Ms. Wood mentioned the barricades and Judge Garcia said "Don't call them
barricades. They do not work. Call them cul-de-sacs." This is where the
incubation between barricades happened.
He does not envy the Board. All the things that he read from the list of reasons
against it from the COPS report have started to happen. The Walnut
Neighborhood Association is now here arguing against the proposal. This "my
way or the high way" attitude is going to continue. The COPS report forewarned
of that. It also forewarned of the perception that something is being done, things
are going to be better. The people have testified that the traffic changed and
calmed down. Did the crime change? Look at the statistics that the Board
received from Captain Hall last week. The same statistics that the City received
during the period when the temporary barricades were up show that the
barricades did not help. In addition, we also heard that LPD stopped using
vehicles and are now on bicycles and on foot. The barricades or cul-de-sacs are
not going to help that. The dissention has started and he is sorry that it has. He
just firmly believes in his heart that this is not the right thing to do. The Board is
given the job of trying to research this and advise City Council. He hopes that the
Board has done its homework. This is not an easy decision for the Board. The
DNA has offered a compromise and it may have already been rejected by the
GNA. He urged the Board to deny the request.
Lieutenant Larry Claus, Lansing Police Department, stated that he is currently
in charge of Special Operations (narcotics, vice and Street crimes). There is a lot
of dissention amongst some of the participants in the audience regarding the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 11
hammerhead turn around and he hopes one way or the other when this is
resolved that a lot of that will be alleviated and everyone can come back to good
terms. Everyone in this room together here to work on the problems that we face
and not only the Genesee neighborhood but Walnut and the downtown
neighborhood, and we need that community together and working together to
resolve a lot of these problems. LPD is recommending that the hammerhead cul-
de-sac be put in as a crime prevention technique through environmental design.
Captain Hall and prior to him, Kim Lawerence, and the neighborhood have
studied this for over two years. By putting the hammerhead cul-de-sac in, it will
close down the drive-through window where people can pop in, pop out and
purchase their narcotics and leave the vicinity. Just within the last three weeks,
LPD has conducted three drug raids at homes within two blocks of this location.
If you are looking at dollars, for LPD to conduct a drug raid, the overall cost to the
City for its services (policemen, jail, evidence, Quarter Master) runs between
$3,500 and $4,000. In the last two weeks, the four raids LPD that were done in
this area has run about $16,000. LPD is saying to give the cul-de-sac a shot.
Try it and see where LPD proceeds from there. There is some cleaning to do
and one way or the other, LPD believes that by doing this it can improve the
neighborhood, continue the home ownership. He was just transferred down to
the jail and into this unit about one month ago. There are a lot of "For Sale" signs
on Lapeer Street. He has worked this area about 15 years ago and battled crack
house after crack house, block by block by block. He does not want to go back to
that.
Ms. Colleen Beeman, resident of 610 N. Sycamore Street, stated that she has
lived at this residence for 19 years and has experienced it. The neighborhood
needs this cul-de-sac and crime prevention deterrent. LPD needs it also. We
need to move forward, not only in this community but in the City. This will show
drug dealers and prostitutes that the residents will not put up with it anymore and
that they are going to take permanent steps to fight this and prevent it from
happening in the future in other neighborhoods. There is no cure all when it
comes to drugs, prostitution and crime. It is as old as we are a country and it will
never going to go away. The City can eliminate the hot spots and eliminate it to
the point where it is so small that it is not a problem as it currently is. The Board
has done a lot of work, listening and a lot of reading and she hopes that the
Board will support this cul-de-sac. The neighborhood does need it. There are
more "For Sale" signs now than she has ever noticed in the 19 years and she
does not want her house to be one of them. She is not saying that as a threat
because she does not have any plans to move, but the residents needs help,
relief and the Board's support in this matter.
As far as the healing in the neighborhood, you are always going to have people
who oppose one side and people who are for another, and vice versa. Her
discretion with some of these people has absolutely nothing to do with this
proposal. It is a personal issue and if these individuals would like to talk with her
about that afterwards, she would be more than happy to discuss it. She asked
for the Board's support in this matter.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 12
Seeing no one else wishing to address the Board, Mr. Czekai closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was taken by the Board.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval — September 20, 2005
Mr. Hollister moved; seconded by Ms. Bruch to approve the minutes of
September 20, 2005 with corrections. On a voice vote, the motion carried
unanimously (6-0). The minutes of September 20, 2005 were
APPROVED.
Minutes for Approval — October 18, 2005
Mr. Frederick moved; seconded by Mr. Hollister to approve the minutes of
October 18, 2005 with corrections. On a voice vote, the motion carried
unanimously (6-0). The minutes of October 18, 2005 were
APPROVED.
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
Next meeting, Wednesday, November 9, 2005 at 4 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Cordill, Chair
a. Neighborhood Enterprise Zone (NEZ) for Stadium
District, 500 Block of E. Michigan Ave., South Side
The proposed Stadium District has been reviewed and
approved by the Planning Board previously (Z-18-04 and
Act-18-04), and the developer and City Administration had
just completed a development agreement for the proposed
project. The project would include 250,000 square feet of
retail and office on the first floor, and 36 apartments on the
second and third floors, and eighteen loft condominiums on
the fourth floor. The NEZ as proposed would be bounded by
E. Michigan Ave. on the north, E. Kalamazoo on the south,
S. Cedar on the west, and S. Larch Street on the east.
The NEZ program is a plan implementation tool to
encourage the construction and improvement of housing
units located within designated zones. It would establish a
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 13
zone in which property tax abatements are available to
promote new housing construction. The abatements
themselves are submitted separately for City Council
approval.
In Committee, Ms. Marchelle Smith had outlined the
Neighborhood Enterprise Zone approval process, and
emphasized that the benefit is to encourage owner
occupancy. She added that if this proposal is approved, the
City will still have approximately 84% of its legal capacity for
NEZ's remaining.
The Planning Board's role in the approval process is to
review the proposal for consistency with the City's
development goals, and to forward its findings to the Mayor
and City Council for their concurrence.
Staff recommended approval of the proposed Stadium
District Neighborhood Enterprise Zone (specifically, the
Planning Board resolution to transmit the finding that the
proposed Neighborhood Enterprise Zone is in conformance
with the current Comprehensive Plan and community
development objectives).
In Committee, the request was recommended for approval
and the motion carried unanimously (3-0). It was further
recommended that: 1) The Planning Board resolution which
transmits the finding of the Board and the recommendation
that the proposed Stadium District Neighborhood Enterprise
Zone be established; and 2) That the residential area east of
the proposed zone be considered for inclusion within this
zone, or in a separate NEZ proposal.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the residential area east of the
proposed zone. He stated that there is one residential street
and it ends west of the railroad tracks and goes between
Larch Street and the railroad tracks. Ms. Bruch stated that if
you drive up Larch Street there are a lot of residences and
some businesses on the opposite side of the street. Instead
of having the NEZ be one area and just one side of the
street, to include the other side of the street there would be
some continuity. If there is some development that
happens, then that whole area would be reviewed. It is not
just one side of the street area it also includes the other side
of the street. Mr. Ruge asked if this was referring to the east
side of Larch Street. Ms. Bruch stated that it was just on the
east side of Larch Street so that there is continuity.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1. 2005 Page 14
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Ms. Bruch, to recommend approval of the
Neighborhood Enterprise Zone (NEZ) for Stadium District, 500 Block of E.
Michigan Ave., South Side.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Bruch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Czekai. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Hollister . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
b. ACT-9-2005, 600 Blk Sycamore, S of Saginaw, Close
Sycamore permanently, Install turnaround
This is a request by the City of Lansing Planning Office to
permanently close Sycamore Street to through traffic, south
of the Saginaw Street intersection. A `hammer-head' turn-
around would be constructed south of Saginaw Street at the
north end of Sycamore St.
Staff recommend approval of ACT-9-2005,that the City close
N. Sycamore at the north end of the 600 Block (south of
Saginaw), and install a landscaped cul-de-sac or turnaround,
possibly through the use of movable curbs or other
removable methods.
In Committee, the request was recommended for approval,
with modification, that the City close N. Sycamore at the
north end of the 600 Block (south of Saginaw), and install a
landscaped cul-de-sac or turnaround, possibly through the
use of movable curbs or other removable methods, and
evaluate the short and medium term results.
The Committee further recommended that the design
process include all affected departments and the Genesee
Redesign Committee.
Mr. Hollister stated that one of the concerns that was
addressed in this planning process about trying to deal with
the issue of crime was "Have arrest records been checked in
the neighborhood specifically in this small area where the
closure would take place?" If there are active criminals who
are living in that neighborhood closing the street does not
seem to have much affect because they are still living there.
If the criminals are not living there then closing the area
would have an affect. He asked if the background
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 15
investigation had been done and if there were active
criminals living in that general area or are they coming from
outside the area. That does have bearing on whether or not
this will work.
Mr. Hollister stated that this seems to indicate that the Board
should be very wary of anecdotal evidence in that what is
needed is hard statistical evidence which the Board has not
been provided.
Ms. Bruch stated that there was a lot of discussion in
Committee about how people who do not live in the
neighborhood drive into the area and then drive out, By
blocking that traffic, whether the criminals live there or not, it
is the interaction between the rest of the world that is
happening. The prostitutes are there so they come in and
then go back out. The drug happenings come in and then
back out. Blocking this activity would not allow this to
happen and therefore it would more than likely move
somewhere else.
Mr. Frederick stated that this is a market and markets need
convenience to exist. If there is a criminal living in the
neighborhood selling drugs and you make it inconvenient for
his customers to get there, then you are not going to have
any more drug sales because there are no more customers.
Mr. Ruge stated that he does not see how blocking off one
street is going to inconvenience anybody. When the
experiment was done in 2003, it shut down all the traffic,
there were four barriers put in. With this one street being
blocked off, he is not sure how this will do anything. He can
only see it blocking off traffic in one block.
Ms. Bruch stated that when this was discussed in
Committee, it was a hard decision because the
neighborhood really wants the barricade. From the
psychological perspective, the residents are trying to make a
change and this would help. How much it will help really as
to the crime statistics versus how the residents feel living
there, may be a different story. Because the residents do
have some movement to make a difference in this
neighborhood, it felt like this was a good idea to do, but on a
temporary basis where it can be removed if this was not the
case. Whether or not this cul-de-sac was going to help was
the biggest debate. Mr. Kilpatrick, the Traffic Engineer,
show the Committee some designs that temporarily can look
really nice. The neighborhood can participate in the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 16
landscaping and was one of the things that the residents
wanted. She stated that the neighborhood is really trying to
make a difference. She does not like the idea of blocking
streets and the only way she would agree to it is if were on a
temporary basis.
Mr. Frederick stated that this is one part of illustrating the
cohesiveness in the neighborhood. This is not the solution
but part of the solution. When he drove over to the
neighborhood, he could see where someone could travel
east on Saginaw Street, make a quick right, pick up your
drugs, make a quick left on Lapeer Street, head right out to
Pine Street, zip south down Pine Street and be out of there.
When Sycamore Street is blocked off, it would put more
pressure on Lapeer Street. He does not believe that the
plans went far enough. He offered a friendly amendment
that the Genesee Neighborhood Redesign Committee and
the City Council look at traffic calming measures, regardless
of the opinion of the efficacy of it be put in strategic points in
the neighborhood especially to inconvenience even
speeding traffic down Lapeer Street. He would also like to
have City Council consider at least making Pine Street a
two-way street again, resurrecting the commitment that the
Board has made in the past to eliminating the one-way
streets in Lansing. When he drove through this area, it was
a very nice looking neighborhood and Pine Street being one-
way just really looked out of place. He stated that it would
really add to the neighborhood if Pine Street were made in to
a two-way street. He would like to offer the language the
same way that the language was in the previous
recommendation to the City Council that those two proposals
be considered. This would further inhibit traffic and further
inconvenience the customers, and also add to the
neighborhood.
Mr. Ruge stated that he agrees one hundred percent with
the traffic calming idea and is looking forward to the seeing
the report that Transportation would bring out. He hopes
that it shows a big reduction in speed and problems.
Mr. Ruge stated besides the fact that he does not think the
one cul-de-sac is going to do anything to slow down any
traffic, he has two other problems: 1) the stats that the
Board was provided and crime statistics provided show that
crime has been going down in that neighborhood for at least
the last five years. He does not understand and the way the
people are talking, crime is worse or it is not any better and it
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 17
could be the worst it has been ever. He is kind of suspicious
of all the people's perception because you get this thing
where you are in a group and you get this idea, everybody is
on board, and the brain runs with it. He stated that the
residents are very passionate about this. It is their
neighborhood and he believes that they should be
passionate about it. He feels that they are wrong about it but
they are very passionate about it. Whenever there are
controversial issues, the neighbors are generally very
passionate about it. If the Board went by the neighbor's
feelings, he does not think the Board would build a group
home in the City of Lansing because every time someone
proposes a group home, no matter how feeble the people
are who live there, the neighbors are all incensed. Despite
the fact that the residents are so passionate, he does not
see that as being a real reason to vote for this proposal.
Mr. Czekai stated that one of his comments made during the
Committee meeting was that the Board cannot just consider
the affects that this is going to have on the Genesee
neighborhood. The Board has to consider the affects this is
going to have on the surrounding neighborhoods as well.
The Board has to look at this as the larger picture view. Yes
this may or may not reduce crime in an area that is already
seeing crime reduction. The Board has to look at what
costs. What cost is it going to be to the neighborhoods to
the northwest. There were temporary barricades done in
that area and there were spikes in crime other areas,
especially in the Walnut neighborhood area. He does not
necessarily believe that barricading this area is the answer.
Ms. Cordill stated that this is really difficult and she has gone
back and forth. It is tough. Crimes stats are a relative
measure. These kinds of statistics from various parts of
town she senses are still above average. She asked what
would make you change your mind from the Committee
meeting. She was definitely leaning towards voting in favor
of the request because it seemed like it was the salve that
the neighborhood needed. She does not like closing off
streets. It is a multi-prong approach. She would not be in
favor of any more barricading. Mr. Hollister stated that he is
very sympathetic to the neighborhood and the residents'
desire to make a positive difference. He thinks that is great
and they have done a good job at researching this. He is not
convinced that a permanent barrier is the way to go. There
are enough questions in his mind that have not been
addressed. He is looking at the narcotics including control
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 18
vice that consistently has gone down ever since 2001 in this
neighborhood. He stated that 2005 has been the best year
in terms of narcotics busts and this is seemingly the driving
issue.
Mr. Hollister that he would be open to either a temporary
solution (i.e. long term temporary— 1 to 2 years) to see what
happens and do a study. Set up a very controlled situation.
There are enough questions in his mind that he cannot
support this proposal.
Ms. Bruch stated that this was a difficult situation and she
really hates blocking off streets. Because the police really
support this proposal and the neighbors who live in the area
really supported this proposal and because of trends, it looks
like the neighborhood is really trying to do something. The
trend is showing that they are being successful. She stated
that she cannot support a permanent barricade. However,
she can support a temporary barricade to help the
movement alone. It looks like there is some momentum and
she would hate for that momentum to go. This proposal
supports the momentum. The neighborhood is really trying
and the police are supporting them. Everything seems to be
to improve this area. When things get well established, the
houses are more settled, and the criminal element goes
away, then the temporary measure can be removed. This is
why she is in support of a temporary solution.
Mr. Czekai stated the problem that was discussed in
Committee was the Police Department gave really good
statistics for that neighborhood but when asked what the
plan was for displacement there is no plan. The comment
made was to keep the criminals moving. There is nothing
out there that is saying the criminals are going to stop in the
next neighborhood. The problem is there is not plan. There
is a plan for the Genesee neighborhood but there is no plan
for the surrounding neighborhoods. When he pressed
further on the issue, the comment he received from LPD was
that it could look at other barricades in your neighborhoods
as well. This was shocking to him because it was a very
serious comment.
Mr. Frederick stated that one thing the Board should not
forget is that there is a plan to reduce crime but it is not
working. No matter what is done, whether there is a plan or
not, you are going to move the criminals. LPD is looking at
this realistically because anything that they do is just to keep
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 19
the criminals moving. This is all that they can do unless
there is some complete change of human behavior in this
country.
Mr. Frederick stated what makes him believe that this is a
good idea is that the Board has to remember that there is a
much bigger barrier at Sycamore and Saginaw Streets. The
only interaction that gets from Saginaw Street into Sycamore
Street are the people who are in the cars that are coming
into the area to buy drugs. Any cul-de-sac that is built is
temporary and is just simply a matter of cost. They can be
built cheaper temporarily than in other ways. You can
always go back in and take out whatever was put in. If the
Board could figure out a way to get rid of the barrier of
Saginaw and Oakland Streets so that it did not stop the
social interaction between the two sides of the street, then it
would make sense to review it. The Board has to remember
that all it can do with drugs and social interaction is deal with
it on an incident by incident basis. It is not going to go away.
LPD is spending a lot of time in this area and making an
effort in this area. So crime is going to go down. What he
heard from LPD is that the cul-de-sac is going to help more
with what there are doing and they want the proposed barrier
as a tool to help. He stated that the proposal is a good one
and he does not think that he blocks any social interaction
because there just is not any.
Mr. Ruge stated that the three people who appear to be in
favor of this request have all mentioned that the barrier
ought to be temporary but that is not the proposal that is on
the table. Maybe something should be done about that.
Mr. Ruge stated that he does not see how the Board will
know if this cul-de-sac is effective anyway. Since the crime
has been going down in the area for five years, if it goes
down next year is it because of the cul-de-sac or is it
because the residents keep doing what they have been
doing for the last five years. He does not even believe in a
temporary because he does not think it will measure
anything. If it does measure something, it will be so
convoluted that the Board will not know what it means.
Mr. Czekai called a point of order on item number 3, under
the Committee action (the Urban Development Committee
report). The report does say moveable or temporary curbs.
Mr. Ruge stated that was his mistake.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 20
Mr. Frederick stated that he thinks the true test of whether or
not it works is if crime goes up. Hopefully everyone keeps
doing what they are doing. If the cul-de-sac goes in and
crime goes up, the Board can conclude that it was probably
a fib. If the cul-de-sac goes in and everyone continues to do
what they do and at least crimes does not get any worse,
then the Board can conclude that it helped. He does not
really think that the Board has to have a study to prove that
the cul-de-sac works for it to be put in. Let the future resolve
that issue. Mr. Frederick stated that he is convinced that by
putting the cul-de-sac in that it will help and continue to hold
that neighborhood together. The only real thing that is going
to keep the crime out of the neighborhood is that Genesee
Redesign Committee will continue to meet, the neighbors will
continue to meet and they will keep chasing the drug dealers
down the street with baseball bats when they get up a little
courage. This is one more thing that will add to the
cohesiveness and it will not discourage interaction between
the neighborhoods. Why not recommend that the cul-de-sac
be put in, including emphasis being temporary and let the
City Council determine where the funds will come from. He
stated that this is not a huge amount of money being spent
here.
Ms. Bruch stated that with item number 3 says that it "could
be used" and she needs to have that changed to "will be
used" to make sure that it is temporary and not interpreted
as being permanent.
Mr. Hollister stated that he thought the DNA
recommendation was a better alternative.
Mr. Frederick stated that intersections that only allow right
turns out are violated quite frequently.
Mr. Hollister noted the example of southbound Harrison
Road in East Lansing, just south of the State Police
headquarters. He suggested that all Planning Board
members take a look at that intersection, and table this item
until the next meeting.
Mr. Hollister made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge to table ACT-9-2005, 600 Bilk
Sycamore, S of Saginaw, Close Sycamore permanently, Install turnaround until the
next meeting, and to also consider the DNA alternative. On a voice vote, the motion
carried (5-1).
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1. 2005 Page 21
Next meeting, Tuesday, November 29, 2005, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
3. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE — None.
4. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
C. Report from Planning Manager— None.
D. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoninq and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. SLU-3-2002, 2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F" Commercial District&
"J" Parking District(Tabled May 15, 2002)
C. Z-7-2005, South 99 Feet of 600 E. Kalamazoo Street, "B" Residential District to
"F"Commercial District(Tabled July 13, 2005)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000, 201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW(Tabled
June 27, 2000)
b. Master Plan Project
C. Act-1-2003, SE Corner Michigan&Washington, Lot 3, Block 111, Orig Plat,
Vacate Alley(part)(Tabled on April 29, 2003)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
5. Board Member Code Enforcement Notification Reports
a. Teen Challenge-wood privacy fence(May 20, 2003)
b. Dollar Store-Willow Street&MLK Blvd. -landscaping &buffering(May 20,
2003)
C. Grovenburg property-dumpster in ROW(July 1, 2003)
d. 2714 W. Jolly Road-church with large statue in front yard(January 20, 2004)
e. 545 Baker Street- Mount Hope Church outreach(April 20, 2004)
f. W.Willow Street-Grace Tabernacle Church-no landscaping (May 4, 2004)
g. Michigan Ave&Shepard Street-sign business-several banner signs nailed to
the outside of building(May 4, 2004)
h. 2702 S. Cedar Street-no landscaping (May 18, 2004)
i. Michigan Ave&Virginia Street-Sparrow Hospital property-no screening and
buffering(October 5, 2004)
j. 2410 S. Pennsylvania Ave. -no landscaping(November 3, 2004)
k. Keeps Party Store-Aurelius Rd-illegal signs(February 15,2005)
I. 2200 W. Holmes Road-Bad Habits-excessive signs(May 3, 2005)
M. 704 S. Clemens Street-"For Sale" items(May 3,2005)
8. NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Rieske reported that Neogen's proposed reuse of the Allen School for private
office use should be accompanied by a Master Plan Amendment to change the
future land use designation from "Parks/Open Space/Community Facility" to
"Office". He noted that the recent amendments to the Municipal Planning Act
require prior notification of adjacent jurisdictions of the Planning Board's intent to
amend the Comprehensive Plan. He requested that the Board take action
declaring its intent to amend the master plan in this manner. This would enable
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 1, 2005 Page 22
the Planning Office to begin the notification as a first step in the plan amendment
process.
Mr. Ruge stated that he would favor an amendment to allow Neogen to use all
the property it needs, but no more than that.
It was moved by Ms. Bruch, seconded by Mr. Frederick, and carried unanimously
(6-0) to declare the Board's intent to amend the Comprehensive Plan.
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON
Mr. Czekai stated that he wanted to schedule an Executive Committee meeting to
discuss the Planning Board's goals and objectives, the work program, and the
Rules of Procedure.
He also announced that he has started a new organization called the Equal
Rights Ordinance Coalition whose purpose is to advocate for gender preference
neutral ordinances in the City of Lansing.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Mr. Frederick noted that construction has begun on the Ingham County Mental
Health building on Aurelius Road.
Ms. Bruch reported that she will be absent for the November 29 Urban
Development Committee.
She also asked abut the strip mall at the SW corner of Washington and
Edgewood. Mr. Hollister replied that a gas station was being constructed.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS — None.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
Res ectfully submitted,
William C. Rieske, Interim Secretary, Planning Board
PBMinutes.110105.doo
Approved as written 11-1-05 Draft to Clerk October 26,2005
Approved November 1,2005
To Clerk November 9,2005
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
1. OPENING SESSION
C:J
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mr. Czekai, Chair.
A. Roll call: Present: Frederick, Bruch, Ruge, Cordill, Czekai, Hollister.` ' -'
B. Staff Attending: Stachowiak, Rieske.
C. Excused absences: None.
D. Absent: None.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Frederick asked for Committee Assignments to be added to the New
Business section.
Mr. Hollister made a motion, seconded by Ms. Bruch to approve the agenda as
amended. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (6-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS — None.
4. HEARINGS
Mr. Czekai stated that the Board is starting something new. There will be a
sign-in sheet at the back table. If anyone is wishing to speak at either the Public
Hearing section or during the Comments From The Audience section, please
sign-in if you have not already done so.
A. Z-12-2005, 716 N. ML King Blvd., from "B" Residential District to "C" "
Residential District
This is a request by Robert Eschbach to rezone the property at 716 N. ML
King, more specifically described as:
South 33 Feet of Lot 25, Englewood Park Addition, City of Lansing,
Ingham County, MI
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 2
from "B" Residential district to "C" Residential district, for the purpose of
converting the existing house at 716 N. ML King to a duplex.
Mr. Rob Eschbach, owner of the property, stated that the house will be
much more useful and beneficial to the community as a two-unit rather
than a single family dwelling. He has had trouble attracting single families
to the location and by converting it into a two-unit, he believes that it will
provide affordable housing for professionals who may be working across
the street at the hospital or for Cooley and Lansing Community College
students.
Mr. Eschbach stated that the neighborhood does seem to be moving in
that direction anyway. The next structure immediately to the north is also
zoned "C" Residential District and this will kind of fit in better instead of
being surrounding on one side by "C" Residential District and on the other
side by a commercial property. He believes that this will be a good
transition for the neighborhood.
Ahmad Gupta, property owner to the south, stated that he supports Mr.
Eschbach's request and that he requests that the Board approve the
rezoning for the two-unit. He stated that Mr. Eschbach has tremendously
improved this property and his improvements have caused others to
improve the neighborhood. He hopes the Board will support the request.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the property to the north and asked if it was
zoned "C" Residential District. Ms. Stachowiak stated that there is a very
small strip of land (16 feet wide) directly to the north of the proposed site
that is zoned "B" Residential District. The property north of that property,
which is the first property that has a house on it, is zoned "C" Residential
District.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Czekai closed the public hearing
and referred Z-12-2005, 716 N. ML King Blvd., from "B" Residential
District to "C" Residential District to the Zoning and Ordinance
Committee, scheduled to meet on November 9, 2005 at 4:00 in the
Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room at 316 N.
Capitol Avenue.
B. ACT-9-2005, Sycamore St. South of Saginaw St., Street Closure
This is a request by the City of Lansing Planning Office to permanently
close Sycamore Street to through traffic, south of the Saginaw Street
intersection. A turn-around (i.e. hammer-head) would be constructed
south of Saginaw Street at the north end of Sycamore St.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 3
Mr. Rieske gave a brief overview.
Ms. Cordill asked if Sycamore Street was one of the streets that had been
closed off. Ray Hall said yes.
Mr. Ruge asked if the Board could get some crime reports from Lansing
Police from 15 years ago. Mr. Hall stated that he has reports from the last
10 years and if the Board would like to go back 15 years, he can get those
reports too. Mr. Czekai asked if it was possible to have this information for
the Committee meeting. Mr. Ruge stated that crime reports from the last
10 years would be good enough for him.
Mr. Hollister stated that he would be curious about seeing how the close
off of Hillsdale and MLK Blvd. has affected crime. A similar process was
done for similar reasons. He would like to see some sort of historical data
on what the effects of it would be similar to this request. Mr. Czekai asked
if he was talking about crime statistics. Mr. Hollister stated he is interested
specifically in prostitution and drugs, and that this is the driving force for
this particular process.
Mr. Frederick asked why the street was reopened if it was closed off
before. Mr. Rieske stated that the purpose of closing it off before was to
test the idea and that this gives a before, during and after look of the
affects. It uses a longitudinal analysis of the data to determine the affects
of the closure.
Mr. Frederick asked if Sycamore Street was a one-way or a two-way
street. Mr. Rieske stated it is a two-way street and that Sycamore Street
is located west of Pine Street. Mr. Frederick asked if there has been any
consideration in looking at one-way streets that may also be contributing
to this problem and changing them to two-way streets. Mr. Rieske stated
that the focus of the analysis has been on the cul-de-sac or turn around
itself at this point. The two-way street proposal, while it may have an
impact, would be a larger issue that would require a whole lot more
analysis and would involve the public, the Transportation Department, etc.
It is a bigger issue than what is being focused on at this point. Mr.
Frederick stated that since one-way streets are wider and generally the
speeds are greater, it facilitates traffic exiting an area or making it an
escape route. It seems that maybe the City should consider having
another experiment where one-way streets are turned into two-way streets
to see what affect that has on the crime statistics in the neighborhood as
well. If they can do an experiment to close a street, then they should be
able to do it with one-way streets without as much difficulty. He believes
that this would also contribute to a reduction in crime just like the cul-de-
sacs do.
Mr. Ruge stated that there was an article in the Lansing State Journal
about this and there was a list of about five hot spots in the City where this
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 4
kind of activity is going on. He asked if the City had been approached by
any of the other areas requesting that streets be closed. Mr. Rieske
stated that this is the only permanent street closure proposal that he is
aware of at this time. He can check into other proposals that may have
been out there but he is not aware of any at this point.
BELOW IS A SUMMARY OF THE PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS.
Ms Ruth Hallman, resident of 1014 W. Lapeer, President of the
Genesee Neighborhood Association (GNA) and Chair of the
Neighborhood Watch 120 in that area, stated that the Genesee
neighborhood has worked very hard to remove crime and improve the
area and housing. The GNA is trying to make it an improved comfortable
neighborhood for people to live. The GNA has worked on this over the
past 19 years when the first drug problems began down on Butler Street.
When the reputation got out there that Genesee neighborhood was a
place someone could buy drugs, drug trafficking increased. Eventually, a
lot of it did go up to the street corners in the north Sycamore and west
Lapeer areas, over on Pine and Saginaw Streets and Pine and Lapeer
Streets. The GNA used the barricades and it came to the point where
Lapeer and the north Sycamore area were considered a very drug
available area. The Police Department works very hard with the GNA and
the GNA works with them. They have tried and are out there attempting
drug arrests as often as they can do it. The Police Department does not
have as many officers as before to get a team in these areas on a regular
basis. The GNA hopes that this does improve. As a police car comes
along, the young people take off running and driving and end up speeding
out of there. Within an hour, they are back there selling drugs again.
She stated that two years ago, there were barricades and they were in
four different areas: Saginaw & Sycamore, Pine & Lapeer, Genesee &
Pine, MLK Blvd. & Genesee. With the barricades, the area that was most
effected was the Sycamore and Lapeer area. In 2003, the barricades
were put in from Memorial Day to Labor Day. There are three months in
the summer when the activity is the heaviest and the residents wanted to
find out whether blocking this area off had any effect on drug trafficking.
There were surveys that went out but did not hit every single home.
Ms. Marji Seeman, former resident of 629 W. Lapeer Street, stated that
she had resided there for three years and that is was pure hell. She was
attacked, had property damaged, her dog was attacked and she finally
sold her house. She did not sleep for three years because of the noise
and confusion down there. The neighbors worked hard and when the
barricades were put up, neighbors came out who had not been out in
years to let their kids play in this area. The neighbors even stated to her
that they could finally come outside because the area quieted down and
the drug dealings had diminished. It was not a nice area and it is currently
getting worse. The neighborhood needs these barricades. When she
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 5
lived there, there was constant noise, hollering and fights. There were
people moving in and out across the street throwing beer bottles at each
other on her property and she would have to go clean it up. She was
attacked at night by a guy with a bat holding it over her head. She had to
call 911 and she was on her property cleaning up leaves. The area was
horrible and it will only get worse. The neighborhood needs help. She
stated that there was a complete difference when the temporary
barricades were put in. People were happy and they breathed a sigh of
relief. They came outdoors and talked about it. The neighbors are scared
and they will not speak because of it.
The traffic in the area is ridiculous all night long with loud noise and music,
dropping people off and picking people up. She had a prostitute wake her
up at 2:00 a.m. It is just ridiculous. People cannot live there and are
afraid to walk their dogs because of pit bulls attacking. People are afraid
to let their kids outside. People have to watch every time they walk down
the street. The residents need help and she asked the Board to please
consider this request.
Ms. Georgia Ellis, 325 N. Sycamore Street, stated that she really hated
losing a great neighbor and friend like Ms. Seeman. She can understand
why a single woman would be very hesitant to consider owning property in
a neighborhood where the drug activity and prostitution can be seen any
time during the day. She used to work nights and come home sometime
around 4:00 a.m. and there would be people out dealing drugs. When the
barricades were up, she was able to walk a couple of blocks down the
street and visit Ms. Seeman. That is how quickly the neighborhood
calmed down after that. It was a visible sign that the neighbors simply
were not going to take this any more. They were going to take definite
steps to face these problems and it seemed as if it worked. She was
actually able to take her children outside and not be afraid of being
constantly approached by a number of dealers asking her if she would like
to buy some weed. She stated that summer was lovely and that it was
absolutely wonderful to be able to walk through the entire neighborhood
and not have to worry about having to explain to her young children that
they cannot say hi to all of their neighbors or to these people who are
approaching us. We cannot walk past that house because of the kinds of
people who live there and because their pit bulls are out. It was amazing
just how quickly that element just disappeared and it was gone the whole
summer. As soon as those barricades came down, the drug trafficking
came right back and it was a short time after that her good friend, Ms.
Seeman, sold her house. She hates to lose a good neighbor and a good
friend to the other side of town but as she said, if she was single, she
could not live in this neighborhood. It is simply not a safe environment.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 6
Mr. Dick Wilkins, resident of 309 N. Sycamore Street and member of
the Downtown Neighborhood Association (DNA) Board, stated that his
house and driveway are on Sycamore Street and this will affect his traffic
pattern. He supports this request.
Ms. Colleen Beeman, resident of 610 N. Sycamore Street, stated that
she has been at this residence for the past 19 years. She took a picture
this past Sunday afternoon of people doing a drug deal as she was taking
the picture. She has 13 bullet holes in the side of her house and that
Lansing's Most Wanted was arrested at the house kitty corner across from
her residence. There were three murders in the parking next to her house
a few years ago. A couple of years ago, her house was broken in to
because of drugs. These people want anything they can get to sell to buy
drugs. The neighborhood has fought very hard and the police have
worked with the neighborhood all the way. The neighborhood needs this
cul-de-sac. The reason it has taken this long is because the residents
have done their homework and put the temporary barricades in. The
barricades were the big, ugly orange things that everyone complains
about. She stated that they were the most beautiful thing the
neighborhood had out that summer because the residents had a
wonderful summer. The barricades made a difference. As soon as the
temporary barricades came down, the drug trafficking was right back
there. She stated that these drug dealers are not stupid people and that
they are very, very intelligent. They know the routes and the one-way
streets. If the City turns a one-way into a two-way, it would give the drug
dealers a better route. She asked if we think that this cul-de-sac is going
to completely eliminate the drug problem in Lansing. No, but it will put a
dent in it so big that it will be noticeable and everybody is watching this.
Other neighborhoods are watching. The residents have done their
homework and have done surveys, and have been on the street talking to
the neighbors. It will make a difference. The neighborhood needs the
barricade at Sycamore and Saginaw Streets.
Ms. Beeman stated that she lives right there in the thick of it. She gets out
of work at 3:00 a.m. and she cannot turn coming down Saginaw Street
onto Sycamore Street, she cannot make a full turn at that hour of the
morning because there are so many people there dealing drugs. She
drives a pick up truck and she has to literally stop and wait for them to
move when they are done so that she can turn on Sycamore Street and
turn into her driveway. Even then, she stated that the drug dealers are
running up to her wanting to know if she wants to buy something or
because she is driving a truck they think it might be a guy so the hookers
are coming up because they work hand in hand with the drug dealers.
They come out approaching her and once they see it is a female, then
they kind of back off. They are still hitting her up for drugs, cash or bus
fare. They are trying to get into your house and they want anything they
can get to sell to buy drugs. They took Mel Torme tapes and she asked
who takes Mel Torme tapes. It is drug money. When the guy broke into
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 7
her house, she walked in on him. It is very scary and he is doing 13 years
right now. She could have been killed just because this guy is trying to get
money for drugs. The residents need the barricade.
Ms. Melissa Fox, resident 629 W. Lapeer, stated that she is a single
mother of three children and that it is hard for her to let her children
outside because these people who buy drugs are speeding down the
street. She has a four-way stop sign at the corner of Sycamore and
Lapeer Streets. They do not obey it and use it as a U-turn turnaround or
speed straight through. You would think it is an Indy race. She has
trouble getting out of or into her driveway because they are selling drugs
right on her corner. These people do not care. The residents care and
they are the ones who live here and deal with it every day. The
neighborhood families are the ones who are in this community and are the
ones who are sitting here everyday looking at the stuff going on. The
Board members are outsiders who do not see this. Changing Pine Street
into a two-way is not going to help the residents at all. The drug people
are racing through on Lapeer Street and she is hearing gun shots down
the street. She has drug deals taking place on the corner. She has hot
bake sales on Sunday when the photographer was there from the Lansing
State Journal. She was sitting down eating lunch and her kids are
watching this stuff and she is trying to tell them what it is. She has young
children and she bought this house for diversity so that her children could
be brought up in a diverse neighborhood. There are drug dealers and
prostitution, and drug sales going on daily that nobody to seems to want to
help. Every day in this community the residents see the City revitalizing
downtown Lansing. Let's start with the neighborhoods that surround it
because they are the ones who shop downtown and are living there. Fix
what is there so that the City can bring more people in to the area.
Ms. Nancy Wilkins, resident of 309 N. Sycamore Street, stated that she
lives right down from the corner where the closure could be. It really hit
home when drug dealers moved in next door to her and her grandson,
who is 4 years old. There were two drug dealers standing right next to her
driveway and they struck up a conversation with her grandson with her
right there. That is too close to home for drug dealers. There are
bicyclists going up and down the street with their connections. There are
drug dealers with their walkie talkies. She stated that the police are doing
the best they can and the residents appreciate all they have done. This
cul-de-sac would help the residents a lot more.
Ms. Emily Horne, resident of 110 W. Hodge, stated that she works with
Trinity Lutheran Church on the Redesign Committee and that she
supports ACT-9-2005 for the construction of a hammer-head turnabout.
She served on the Seven Block Renaissance Committee many years ago.
A street became a cul-de-sac for the purpose of controlling undesirable
traffic. There is so much diversity in this area and with the church located
here, the cul-de-sac does have an indirect affect on the church. She
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 8
asked the Board to approve this case because this construction will
certainly improve the quality of life for the residents as well as the
surrounding area.
Captain Ray Hall, Lansing Police Department, stated that as part of the
Genesee Design Team, he was asked to speak today. He has provided
10 years worth of data in reference to crime. The genesis of this problem
really reaches back to the mid to late 1980s when police first started
seeing crack appear on the street corners. Since then, this particular
neighborhood, the Pine/Saginaw corridor, had been really hit hard with
little relief during that period of time. There was community policing and
the police tried a number of different initiatives in this community. The
Police Department spent a lot of resources in the community over the
years in an attempt to deal with the drug problem, and has made
progress. The good news with crime in this area is that crime is down as
compared to 10 years ago. Community involvement has increased as
seen here today; there is a nice turn out. These are people who care
about their neighborhoods. Fifteen to 20 years ago, it would have been
tough to get a group of this size to come to a meeting for this sort of thing.
He grew up in the community policing side of the Lansing Police
Department and he can tell everyone that these types of initiatives do
have an impact. When there was prostitution on Michigan Avenue, the
City removed some of the bus stop benches. When there were drug
dealings in some of the parks, lights were put in. All of these initiatives
have an impact. Not one will solve the problem alone. It is a
collaboration. It is community government. He is here today to express
on behalf of the Lansing Police Department and the neighborhood, the
importance of putting in this cul-de-sac so that the traffic patterns in this
area can be changed. When this is done, there will be an impact. Will it
solve the problem in the area? No. He even has a team of officers in that
neighborhood tonight. This is not going to go away overnight and not one
single issue is going to solve the problem. This is a step in the right
direction and the Lansing Police Department is requesting it because it will
impact the problem.
Captain Hall stated that the Lansing Police Department is not looking to
barricade the neighborhood. He has a number of his friends in the
neighborhood who are advocates of the temporary barricades. These
barricades served a purpose and he certainly would not want to go back to
doing that. The Police Department knows that it calmed some of the
issues in the neighborhood, and reduced some of the crime, prostitution
and drugs. This is a temporary band-aid approach. This is a long term
solution and by implementing a cul-de-sac, the City would be working with
all the neighborhood residents, all of the counseling groups in the City and
would be improving home ownership. Home ownership is the next step to
solving this issue long term for this neighborhood because it would be
turning good renters into home owners.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 9
Mr. Frederick asked Captain Hall why criminals pick this particular
intersection to deal on. Captain Hall stated that it is notorious for the drug
dealings at that location. There are many different factors: Saginaw
Street is attractive, a quick way out, party stores in the area. Dopers like
to be in an area where people do not report them and they kind of blend in
the best they can. Where there is a high concentration of rental property,
the police department does a lot of crime displacement. LPD has hit a
number of houses over the years, boarded them and red tagged them.
New tenants move in, new landlords trade properties, and the dopers
move back into the neighborhood. It is a cycle of things. This is just a
piece of it and a traffic calming matter to isolate some of the dopers. It
really affects the drug customers more than anything else. If LPD can
affect the demand, they certainly can affect the supply.
Mr. Ruge asked what dates the barricades were up. A member of the
audience said Memorial Day to Labor Day 2003.
Mr. Czekai asked if there was any indication that the drug trafficking might
shift over to the other side of pine where there is a two-way street on
Chestnut and Saginaw. Captian Hall stated that crime displacement is a
reality that he faces in this business. Will it displace crime? You bet
because LPD knows that the drug people will go somewhere else. The
idea of effective law enforcement is targeting those areas that the drug
dealers move into. Could this historic hot spot move? You bet. His job in
law enforcement is to target the trafficking early and continue to address
the issue and address the issue with the residents who will be affected
elsewhere. Not only are these streets of concern of LPD, but certainly
there are a number of other streets of concern too. This neighborhood
needs relief because they have dealt with this problem for so many years.
It is the residents' time to live in a neighborhood with a little bit of quality of
life where they do not have to worry about the drive bys and the dopers
swinging their drugs.
Mr. Ruge asked where the barricades were up. A member of the
audience stated: Pine & Lapeer, Genesee & Pine, MILK Blvd. & Genesee,
and Saginaw & Sycamore.
Mr. Czekai asked Captain Hall if he or anyone from LPD would be at the
Committee meeting next week to answer further questions. Captain Hall
stated that he would welcome the opportunity to answer any further
questions that the Board may have.
Ms. Gretchen Cochran, resident of 403 N. Sycamore Street, stated that
she is three blocks from the location of the proposed barricade. She has
lived on Sycamore Street for 13 years suddenly finding the thoroughfare
on which she lives, if permanently blocked, will be inconvenient to say the
least. She opposes the request. She read her letter of opposition and
presented a petition in opposition to the proposal.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 10
Ms. Hazel Bethea, resident of 1002 W. Shiawassee, Vice President of
the Genesee Neighborhood Watch 120 and the Genesee
Neighborhood Association (GNA) and a volunteer for the Lansing
Police Department, stated that she travels these streets every morning
when she goes to work and never goes the same way. At 8:00 a.m. there
are guys standing on the corner selling dope. They will walk out in front of
her on many mornings and she has asked them to step aside because
she does not deal with that kind of stuff. When she comes home in the
evenings, she either takes Sycamore, Lapeer or Genesee Street. She will
do a circle and she can just about give you a face to every body that is
dealing in drugs over there. With those whom she does not know, she
can identify them.
The neighborhood needs this cul-de-sac or whatever they can get to help
out this area. There are people who do not live in this area who are trying
to tell the residents how to run their little section of town. The residents
are the ones who have to stay up at night and are afraid to walk out the
door not knowing if you are going to get shot, busted in the head or
whatever because these people want to get their drugs. A drug dealer will
not only hurt you but they will hurt their mother when they are in need of
drugs.
She asked the Board to please put in the cul-de-sac, hammer-head or
whatever for the neighborhood's protection. If not, then come over and
spend a weekend with some of the residents who live there and you will
see what they are going through. Then you will be glad to make your
decision.
Mr. Keith Pervorse, resident of 5231/2 N. Sycamore Street, stated that
a year before the barricades were up, he was assaulted real bad by
someone who lived in a drug house next to where he lived and it caused
him to lose his job. Now he is applying for social security because he
cannot work. After the barricades went up, everything just dropped. The
associate got rid of the drug house and it got real quiet. You cannot
imagine late at night you are trying to sleep and all of a sudden someone
is screaming down the street for a drug deal and they make all kinds of
noise. He lived there seven years and he had the same landlord. They
always kept up the property (i.e. planted flowers, kept the lawn mowed,
raked leaves). The tenants try to represent the landlord because if they
look good, the landlord looks good. His landlord is a very nice landlord.
He asked the Board to please let the residents have the barricade.
Mr. Bob Cochran, resident of 403 N. Sycamore, member of the
Downtown Neighborhood Association (DNA), past Board member &
Past President of the DNA, currently holding a position as a
volunteer City employee as a Demolitions Hearing Officer appointed
by Mayor Hollister and has continued through the current
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 11
Administration, stated that he has been on the Lansing City Council
ADHOC Committee for housing and the friends at Turner Dodge House.
He has been actively involved in the City and he is not here to dispute
these people's concern about crime. It is there. He is questioning
whether or not this is the right solution. He gave handouts from the U.S.
Department of Justice COPS Program to the Board. This report is 79
pages and raises many questions about whether barricades work. The
conclusion is the barricades probably do not work but they are not sure.
There are many reasons for this. The bad results do not get published
only the good results do and that report contains some of the ones that
are considered satisfactory or positive results. In all of those studies there
is a list of reasons and tables that obviously do not give the barricades a
clear choice. The consensus is from other things that he has researched
on the web, this is not a good deal.
Mr. Cochran stated that 12 years ago the crime was declining and going
down and he remembers sitting in the same meeting at the GNA and
Crime Watch with Ms. Hallman saying the neighborhood is at an all time
low. The neighborhood only has four drug houses and then it changed.
Why? Thanks to Chief Bowles and his successor Johnson, all of the
community policing officers were pulled.
Ms. Rosie Hoadly, resident of 708 W. Genesee, stated that she has
lived at this residence for over 10 years. When the barricades were put in,
she felt safe. She had two dogs and when she walked her dogs, she did
not have to worry about being attacked by pit bulls or anyone approaching
her. Now, she had to get up early to go to work and when she looks out
her window, she sees people dealing drugs. They are not looking for a job
at that time of night. She heard their loud music. Then it got to the point
when she walked her dogs, she had to carry a big stick with her. That way
if she got attacked by a bit bull, she could at least protect herself. It is very
bad out there. If you do not live there then you do not know what is going
on. Maybe Board members should spend the night in the neighborhood
and find out what really goes on.
Mr. Tom Gennara, resident of 714 W. Genesee, stated that he has lived
at this residence for 10 years and prior to that another 11 years in and
around the Lansing area. He asked for the Board's support in this matter.
Everyone talks about the barricades being a negative thing. When you
talk about barricades, they are not pleasant to look at. If the turn-around
happens, it will be a landscaped dead end street and will be an asset to
the City visually. It will be a very good thing.
Ms. Ora Fuller, resident of 829 W. Saginaw Street, stated that she lives
up above Shanora's Beauty & Barber Supplies and she owns the
business. She has been there for 24 years. She goes walking just about
every morning with her husband. She is outside around 5:30 a.m. and
usually gets back a couple of hours later. She stated that it is very
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 12
peaceful and that she has been doing this for almost a year. She has not
incurred any bad things so far. She sees people sometimes and has not
had any problems with them. She owns approximately 9 properties in the
neighborhood.
Since she has lived above the store, she has seen two shootings on
Saginaw Street at the light. There is drug trafficking stuff going on and
she would love it if the neighborhood had more police patrols in that area.
She is not sure about whether the barricade would help or if it would drive
the drug trafficking down to her corner of Butler and Saginaw Streets.
When the hot spots were published in the Lansing State Journal,
everybody knows where to go to get their drugs. She did not know about
the other 3 or 4 hot spots. Now there are detailed maps and everything.
Publicizing where the drug hot spots are needs to stop. When it is
publicized, people who are looking for drugs now have a road map. They
know where to go to pick up their drugs. That is putting more drug
trafficking in the neighborhoods.
She believes that there should be more police patrolling the area
especially around the 15th and the 1st when people get their checks. This
is when the hot spots are there. This should be looked into especially with
the State workers or factory workers who come down to these
neighborhoods to buy drugs. If people do not come down to buy, the
dealers will not be there to sell.
She does not like the idea of a permanent barricade because cars still
have to travel up and down that area.
Ms. Monica Zuchowski, resident of 320 N. Walnut Street, stated that
she does not live in the immediately vicinity of the problems that the
residents have been dealing with for all these years. She does live in an
area that had been impacted in the past during the temporary barricade
when a lot of the traffic and some of the drug problems shifted. It did not
eliminate the problems, it shifted the dealers to east, south and west.
One of her concerns, even though it may appear easy to make the
decision for the barricade, is that it may alleviate a lot of the Genesee
Neighborhood Association's (GNA) problems. However, it does not solve
the problem, it only shifts it. As President of the Lansing Neighborhood
Council, she is concerned about how it shifts not just to the Downtown
Neighborhood Association (DNA) area but to the other neighborhoods.
She would like to ask the Police Department to take a look at how they are
going to deal with these issues. The residents have gone through trials
and tribulations for a very long time. When looking at planning, she has
learned that the best decision is long range planning.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 13
Mr. Almas Thorpe, resident of 423 N. Sycamore, stated that 2 or 3
years ago he had the privilege of making the rounds in the neighborhood
with the questionnaire about whether or not the community wanted the
barricade. It was overwhelmingly positive. After the 90 day experiment,
he made the rounds again with a questionnaire and very few people did
not like it. The people who are the most inconvenienced are the people
who are most in favor of the barricade.
His concern is where do we go from here. How many and does it make
sense? Is it doing the job? It is a plea saying that there will be one at the
corner of Sycamore and Saginaw Streets which causes him very little
inconvenience. With where he lives, he might as well be a million miles
away because drug trafficking is concentrated in areas that are north of
his home.
He is concerned about the total plan. This is just the beginning. Where
are we going? Is this really going to do what we hope it will?
Mr. James Gillies, resident of 516 W. Ionia, stated that he is a 43 year
resident of Lansing in this neighborhood. It is not a question of$44,000
for a cul-de-sac. That will get you an officer for a year. It is a question of
working with the Police Department, the City and all the residents that
makes this important. He knows that the cul-de-sacs are not the Savior.
The residents are going to continue working with the broken windows and
the Police force. They will call on these people. The residents are tired of
their stuff being stolen. He stated that the residents need relief now. The
cul-de-sac would be an investment in the future.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Czekai closed the public hearing
and referred ACT-9-2005, Sycamore St. South of Saginaw St., Street
Closure to the Urban Development Committee, scheduled to meet on
October 25, 2005 at 4:00 in the Planning and Neighborhood Development
Conference Room at 316 N. Capitol Avenue.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
Mr. Bob Cochran, resident of 403 N. Sycamore, stated that the problem exists.
He stated that in the Board packet it says that the DNA was not heard from.
There are 40 or so signatures on a petition from people living along Sycamore
and adjoining streets. Many of them are DNA members, including the DNA
President. The DNA has spoken to the Board and it was not just in a letter. This
is the first time he believes that the DNA has ever circulated a petition.
Mr. Cochran stated that some of the proponents is a done deal. The Police
Department and Fire Department have already approved this and beautiful
landscaping will happen. In the Board's packet is the Fire Department's grave
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 14
concern that this is not a good thing and may threaten life and safety. They
cannot get turned around very easily in that cul-de-sac with their vehicles.
Mr. Cochran stated that test results from the barrier tests in the past were very
negative. The Board just heard that they were positive and the survey was done
before and after the barriers. He participated in that survey and as long as you
lived on this planet next to a warm rock, you would have answered everything
yes. The survey did not ask any questions about what the barriers did for you. In
his case, it was more of an inconvenience and he did not see any of the crime
rates go up or down. Once exception was that a drug house moved out of the
barricaded area to Walnut and Shiawassee Streets.
Mr. Cochran stated that one of the other things in the COPS report that is talked
about extensively is the perception of safety and the perception of feeling good
because they did something with the barriers. Irrespective of the results, he
urged the Board to take its time, look up the website and read all 79 pages.
Mr. Cochran read a portion of the report and table, item 2 on page 22, Reasons
For Not Doing This. Nobody has talked about all of those businesses at the
intersection of Pine and Saginaw Streets. The only way people who are west
and south of the intersection can get there is down Sycamore Street. They would
have to either go down Walnut or over to Oakland and back down Pine. Or, they
have to go up to Butler and over that way. When you start diverting people away
from their normal flow of the support to local business, they go elsewhere. Those
businesses have not been asked. He went and asked them what they thought
about this.
Mr. Cochran stated that in the LSJ editorial which was published after the
temporary barriers were put in, it says it straight and right on the nail head. "Nice
idea, good try, wrong thing, bad idea, did not work, fixed the policing problem."
He does not know how and why the Federal money that was appropriated for
specific community policing officers was pulled by Bowles, how he rationalized it
and answered the Federal funding requirements that he still had a community
policing program. The Larry Clouses and the Tracy Jones that did this
community so much good are no longer there, and the problem is back.
He stated that he wishes the Board would spend time with this. He does not
argue with all the emotion, perceptions and all the facts that the crime is there. A
barricade is not going to fix it. At a previous DNA meeting, Ms. Hallman said and
the Police Department both said the policemen switched from cars to bicycles.
What is this cul-de-sac going to do to bike traffic? Nothing. It is going to restrict
emergency vehicles and inconvenience the people who normally use this street.
The city's fathers laid out streets as a way of getting around and accomplishing
business. They did not include cul-de-sacs and barricades in the beginning and
their reasons are still valid. He thanked the Board for its time.
Ms Ruth Hallman, resident of 1014 W. Lapeer, stated that the GNA has worked
this for 19 years and approximately 10 or 11 years ago, there were 137 confirmed
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 15
drug houses in the Genesee neighborhood. Because of those community police
officers and all of the Police Department, the drug houses were cleaned out and
the number was brought down to 6 drug houses. Because of the area having a
reputation for purchasing drugs, the neighbors watched people come from the
State building at noon time. The people would drive in, purchase their drugs and
go back to work. They had people who worked at the State follow these people
in and go after those people who were purchasing drugs. This has been a
serious problem. There were barricades put in at Lenawaee & MLK Blvd., and
Hillsdale & MLK Blvd. The barricades were tremendous and those homes were
rehabbed. Some of those streets were blocked off and it is a lovely
neighborhood today. It is nothing compared to the crime that they had in it
before. They would speed on Saginaw and had less places to stop. Even if the
police were in the area and went after them, it did not necessarily mean they
were going to catch them after they got out in the area where they could go
faster. Three of those homes were sold; beautiful, good homes with wonderful
tenants and these tenants could not live with it anymore. There are three new
people who purchased those homes and they are excellent people. The last
thing she wants to see is for those people to feel like they cannot live with this
either and they are going to sell these homes and get out of here because they
did not know this is what they were going to have to deal with.
Ms. Hallman stated that she just had a woman, a home owner, in the 700 block of
W. Lapeer who just sold her house. This is a problem because it is basically all
rental property in that area. There were only three houses in that area that were
home owned anymore. She called her on the phone and said if there is anything
you can do to stop this crime in the area before she finally signs all the papers, I
won't sell my home. Ms. Hallman stated that of course she could not do it and it
did not happen. That woman sold her home and moved out of the area.
Ms. Hallman stated that she wants more people to be able to come in to this area
and purchase homes. The housing coalition rehabbed rental properties and the
neighborhood needs them to rehab more rental properties in the area so that
there is more of an equal balance instead of 90 percent rental in some of those
blocks.
She stated that where the problems are today is Saginaw, Lapeer and Sycamore
areas. There is a new SLS leader and he had been the neighborhood's
community police officer. There were three raids in one week and there were
over 25 people arrested. That does not stop these guys who come on their
bicycles because they do not even live in the area. A lot of them live over on the
south side and they can make their money coming over here. When you saw the
picture in the paper, there were at least seven people on their bicycles. A car
came flying by us off of Saginaw Street. They did not come up to where we were
standing on the north side of the intersection; they went to the south side of the
intersection. They watched the drug deal go down. This is sad and the last thing
the neighborhood needs is to have these residents sell their homes and move out
of the area because they cannot put up with it. She has a feeling that this cul-de-
sac can have an affect on what happens in the neighborhood. She is not going
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18 2005 Page 16
to tell the Board that the drug people are not going to other neighborhoods. She
is willing to work with the other neighborhoods and encourage them and show
them what this neighborhood did to clean it up. She is willing to help them in
every way she can. She appreciates the Board trying to help.
Mr. Keith Pervorse, resident of 5231/2 N. Sycamore Street, stated that it is
amazing how many of these people who do sell the drugs have pit bulls and
rottweilers. Some of the dogs are not on a leash. He, his wife and his dog have
been attacked at least 10 or 11 times. He reported it 2 or 3 times. Maybe
something can be done between the Police Department and Ingham County
Animal Control. If you can get some of these people out here or cut it down, it
would be better. It cost him $105.00 to get one of his dogs repaired just to have
him die. These people have some nasty dogs. It is too bad that people do not
have animals for pets but they have them for weapons now.
Ms. Gretchen Cochran, 403 N. Sycamore, stated she would like to finish her
comments. She finished reading her letter to the Board.
Ms. Colleen Beeman, resident of 610 N. Sycamore Street, stated that it was
mentioned earlier that 100 years ago the City planners built streets in straight
lines with no cul-de-sacs and no barricades. That is because they did not have
the crime problem that we have today. If you look at any new development or
sub development in the City of Lansing, in the surrounding area, in other cities in
Michigan, in other states, they are purposely designed one way in and one way
out. Why did they do this? Because it prevents crime and it is a proven fact that
it prevents crime.
Those of us who live in this neighborhood, have lived there and are going to
continue to live there, want this cul-de-sac. It is not an inconvenience for us and
she has a driveway big enough to park probably 20 cars in it. She welcomes any
emergency vehicle to turn around in her driveway. They will be able to turn
around. This neighborhood does not get a lot of emergency vehicles and this
area is not a main road. If someone needs an emergency vehicle, she is sure
they are going to be able to come into the neighborhood, back up or turn around.
She does not see this as a problem or a safety hazard for the neighborhood or for
the people who live there.
She stated that communities need help and this is a community who needs help.
It was proven in the past that the barricades worked. It disrupted traffic a little bit
more. This cul-de-sac is not going to disrupt traffic that much. If you live there,
you will not be disrupted. As far as accessing the businesses that surround the
neighborhood, the residents can get to those businesses on any one of those
roads other than Sycamore Street. This is not going to hinder anybody going to
those businesses. There are some businesses on Saginaw Street that are not
going to be affected either because you do not park on or go on Sycamore Street
to get to them. People go on Saginaw Street to get to them. This is not going to
deture traffic that much. This is not even an inconvenience for her because she
does not go out Sycamore Street; she has come in that way sometimes. It is no
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 17
big deal to go another block down. If it is going to help curb this crime, she stated
that she is all for it. This is not going to be an orange barricade. We are talking a
fully landscaped cul-de-sac. She guarantees that it will stay landscaped because
she Chairs the Genesee Flower Program. There are enough gardeners right
there on 600 block of north Sycamore Street who will maintain it. That it certainly
not even an issue in any way shape or form. The neighborhood needs this and is
asking for it. They have done their homework and prep work on this. They know
that the cul-de-sac is going to make a difference. We pray that the Board will see
it this way too because if they do not get this, they will not stop fighting crime.
That is why they have done their homework and why they have come before the
Board asking for this cul-de-sac. The neighborhood knows that this will make a
difference. It has been proven in other cities and towns, and right here in
Lansing. Look at any new development and it is purposely designed this way
because it prevents crime. Why should this area be denied this tool?
Seeing no one else wishing to address the Board, Mr. Czekai closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was taken by the Board.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval — September 6, 2005
Mr. Frederick moved; seconded by Ms. Bruch to approve the minutes of
September 6, 2005 with corrections. On a voice vote, the motion carried
unanimously (6-0). The minutes of September 6, 2005 were
APPROVED w/corrections.
Mr. Frederick stated that there was some discussion about benches or
shelters for the buses. He got the gist of what was being said but the way
it was written was not real clear to him to tell what was really going on.
The reason why he is bringing this up is because that part of the minutes
should be looked at to see if it might need some editing. Mr. Czekai asked
if this was to clarify. Mr. Frederick stated yes and that it was under the
Report from Planning Manager where it starts out with CATA. He stated
that it starts out with pronouned reference. He asked what "this" is. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that something must have gotten cut off and that the
Planning Office will certainly add it. He would like to see this in full detail
in the minutes.
Mr. Hollister stated that on page 18 of the minutes, he abstained from
voting. Ms. Stachowiak stated that it should be noted.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 18
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
a. Proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendments —
Parking/Landscape Requirements
Ms. Stachowiak stated that originally the Committee made a
motion to recommend approval of the Ordinance
Amendments. As the Committee went into further
discussion, it was decided that there were actually more
amendments needed. At that point, the Committee decided
to keep it in Committee until she had an opportunity to make
some of those further changes and then it would be reported
out at a later date. Mr. Czekai asked if the Board would get
those Ordinance changes at the second meeting in
November. Mr. Ruge stated that it would depend on how
busy Ms. Stachowiak is. Ms. Stachowiak stated that she
would certainly think so.
b. Web Site Topics
Mr. Ruge stated that the Committee discussed the web site
and the list of topics that is in the packet.
C. City of Lansing Basic Fence Ordinance Regulations
Mr. Ruge stated that the Committee discussed the Fence
Ordinance Regulations. Seeing that City Council is opposed
to having any kind of permit for fences, it was thought that
education would be the best way to go. The Committee
discussed this and it was recommended to approve utilizing
the City's web site, a cable channel and distribution of the
information sheet to educate the public. The Committee is
suggesting a full court press.
In Committee, the request was recommended for approval
and the motion carried unanimously (3-0).
Mr. Rieske stated that the Planning Board's Rules of
Procedure are based on Mason's Rules and not Robert's
Rules. This was a uniform change that was made among all
the Boards in the 1990s.
Ms. Cordill stated that she did not see discussion on
encroachments (i.e. fences being put on other properties).
Ms. Stachowiak stated that is not the City's issue and that it
is totally between property owners. The City does not get
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 19
involved. The City's rules require that fences in the front
yard are no higher than 3 feet unless they are see through
fences, in which case they can go to 4 feet. Fences cannot
be higher than 6 feet in the side or rear year. She stated
that property boundary disputes are private matters between
citizens and the City will not get involved. Ms. Cordill stated
that she has seen communities that do have permits and
there is a survey done. It may not be a Planning issue but
there have been instances where someone had a garage on
City park land and the City said it had to go.
Mr. Ruge stated that it would be a really good idea if the City
would not allow a chain link fence in the front yard. There
are a few in his neighborhood and they are ugly and detract
from the neighborhood. Ms. Stachowiak stated that the
Committee could take this up as an ordinance amendment
and all the Board is dealing with this evening is just getting
information. Mr. Frederick and Ms. Bruch stated that they
would support eliminating front yard chain link fences at a
later time.
Ms. Bruch stated that she would like to graphically show
people where they can put their fence.
Mr. Hollister stated that it is better to do overkill than
underkill and assume people know what you are talking
about. Ms. Bruch stated to add the line in the grey with a
line code differentiating the 4 and 6 foot fence. Mr.
Frederick stated to be sure to differentiate between a 3 and
4 foot fence. Mr. Ruge asked if Ms. Stachowiak could place
a box underneath the grey and have it be white for the back
yard fence up to 6 feet. Ms. Stachowiak stated that if the
Board would like for her to add this as a friendly amendment
to the motion, she can take care of it. Mr. Ruge accepted
the friendly amendment.
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Hollister, to recommend approval of
City of Lansing Basic Fence Ordinance Regulations.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Bruch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge. Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Czekai. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Hollister . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 20
d. 2003 Michigan Building Code - Handicap Parking
Requirements
Mr. Ruge stated that in the Committee's discussion it was
pointed out that those requirements are in the Michigan
Building Code and the Committee does not have any control
over it.
In Committee, there was a motion to recommend that a letter
be sent to the State representatives, who represent Lansing,
asking if they would amend the Building Code to increase
the number of required handicap parking space. On a voice
vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0).
Ms. Cordill questioned whether that would be across the
board because there are different use groups that require
more parking. Mr. Frederick stated that he experienced two
temporary handicap stickers of his own and also his mother-
in-law has a permanent handicap tag. It does not matter
where he goes, new construction or old construction, there
are simply not enough handicap parking spots during the
business day when most businesses are open. In particular,
going to rehabilitation or hospital sites, it seems like that
would be a no brainer that they should put more in. This is
why he is asking for the Board's support. There are simply
not enough handicap parking spots across the board
regardless of the use.
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Hollister, to recommend approval of sending
a letter to the State representatives, who represent Lansing, requesting consideration of
amending the 2003 Michigan Building Code - Handicap Parking Requirements to
increase the number of required handicap parking space.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . Ave Bruch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge. . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Czekai. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Hollister . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
e. Planning Board Goals
Mr. Ruge stated that the Committee reviewed the goals and
objectives and prioritized them. The Committee will get
them done.
I
f
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 21
Next meeting, Wednesday, November 9, 2005 at 4 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Mr. Czekai, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, October 25, 2005, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
3. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE — None.
4. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Ms. Bruch gave a brief overview.
C. Report from Planning Manager— None.
D. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St.,"H"Light Industrial District to"G-1"Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. SLU-3-2002,2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J" Parking District(Tabled May 15,2002)
C. Z-7-2005, South 99 Feet of 600 E. Kalamazoo Street,"B" Residential District to
"F" Commercial District(Tabled July 13, 2005)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000, 201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27,2000)
b. Master Plan Project
C. Act-1-2003, SE Corner Michigan&Washington, Lot 3, Block 111, Orig Plat,
Vacate Alley(part) (Tabled on April 29,2003)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
5. Board Member Code Enforcement Notification Reports
a. Teen Challenge-wood privacy fence (May 20, 2003)
b. Dollar Store-Willow Street&MLK Blvd. -landscaping & buffering (May 20,
2003)
C. Grovenburg property-dumpster in ROW (July 1,2003)
d. 2714 W.Jolly Road-church with large statue in front yard (January 20,2004)
e. 545 Baker Street-Mount Hope Church outreach (April 20, 2004)
f. W.Willow Street-Grace Tabernacle Church-no landscaping (May 4, 2004)
g. Michigan Ave&Shepard Street-sign business-several banner signs nailed to
the outside of building (May 4, 2004)
h. 2702 S. Cedar Street-no landscaping (May 18, 2004)
i. Michigan Ave&Virginia Street-Sparrow Hospital property-no screening and
buffering (October 5,2004)
j. 2410 S. Pennsylvania Ave. -no landscaping (November 3,2004)
k. Keeps Party Store-Aurelius Rd-illegal signs(February 15,2005)
I. 2200 W. Holmes Road- Bad Habits-excessive signs (May 3,2005)
M. 704 S. Clemens Street-"For Sale"items (May 3,2005)
Mr. Frederick stated that with item 5m, it looks like the tenant may
have moved and that it looks abandoned. He recommended
changing it to evaluation for a red tag.
9
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 18, 2005 Page 22
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Committee Assignments
Mr. Czekai stated that he has had a chance to talk to most of the Board
members and if there is no objection, it was thought that the Zoning &
Ordinance Committee would keep Mr. Ruge, Mr. Hollister and Mr.
Frederick, and have the Urban Development Committee keep Mr. Czekai,
Ms. Cordill and Ms. Bruch. Ms. Bruch stated that come next semester,
she will need to figure something else out. Mr. Czekai stated that in
January the Board would probably have to reevaluate the assignments.
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON — None.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS — None.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS
Ms. Cordill asked if 603 Kipling was a registered rental. Ms. Stachowiak stated
that it was a registered rental.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
James A. Ruff, Secretary, Planning Board
PB Minutes.101805.doc
Approved 11-15-05 Draft to Clerk October 26,2005
Approved November 15,2005
To Clerk November 16,2005
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, October 4, 2005
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Ms. Bruch, Chair.
A. Roll call: Present: Frederick, Bruch, Ruge, Cordill, Czekai, Hollister.
B. Staff Attending: Rieske, Boone, Witherspoon.
C. Excused absences: None.
D. Absent: None.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Czekai made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to approve the agenda.
On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (6-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Letter from the Greater Lansing Housing Coalition regarding housing
projects in 2006
B. Letter from the Greater Lansing Homeless Resolution Network regarding
the City's commitment to the network and continued support
C. Letter from the North West Lansing Healthy Communities Initiative
regarding CDBG funding for promoting economic development, improving
the City's transportation and infrastructure systems, and improving the
City's physical environment
4. HEARINGS
A. 2007 Action Plan Needs Public Hearing
Ms. Patricia Wood, representative of Franklin Street Community
Housing Corporation (FSCHC) at 221 W. Saginaw Street, stated that it
is a private non-profit working in the northwest Lansing area and a
housing development for low to moderate income individuals. The
FSCHC is asking for support funding from the City and thanked the Board
for its continued support and support in the past. The FSCHC also runs
two special programs that are asset building strategies for low to moderate
income individuals, mostly low income individuals, access to assets
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 2
individual development comp program. It is a matched savings program
funded by Michigan IDA Partnership, which is a state wide initiative.
Individuals are encouraged to save and then the program matches toward
home ownership, business or education. Most of the accounts currently
are for home ownership.
She stated that the FSCHC also runs the Family Self Sufficiency program
for MSHDA. This is rental assistance housing choice voucher participants
and the FSCHC helps encourage the participants to be self sufficient.
She thanked the Board for its support in the past.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Ms. Bruch closed the public hearing
section.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
Seeing no one else wishing to address the Board, Ms. Bruch closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was not taken by the Board.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval — (Minutes will be presented for consideration at a
later date)
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
Next meeting, Wednesday, October 12, 2005 at 4 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Mr. Czekai, Chair
a. ACT-2-2005, 3500 Bilk. Coachlight Common, Outlot A,
License agreement
This is a request by the Monica Dungey, 3563 Coachlight
Common to acquire the property described as Outlot A,
Coachlight Estates Subdivision. Outlot A is now a dead end
portion of Monticello St. that connects Coachlight a
Subdivision with Pinebrook Manor Townhouses.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 3
Staff recommended approval of ACT-2-2005 modifications,
and conditions, that the City basically split the property
lengthwise, and license each half to the owners of the
abutting properties.
In Committee, the request was recommended for approval,
with modifications that the City enter into a license
agreement with the owners of 3563 and 3601 Coachlight
Commons for the private use of the south and north halves
(respectively) of Outlot A, provided that:
1. The City's public utilities, and the right to service
them, be protected;
2. No structures (buildings) may be constructed on the
subject property; and
3. Any changes or improvements to the property,
including the removal or installation of pavement,
shall not be permitted without site plan approval and a
permit through the Department of Public Service;
and the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
The Committee further recommended that the owners of
3563 and 3601 Coachlight Commons and the Pine Brook
apartments work together on the overall improvement of the
immediate area.
Mr. Ruge stated that he was quite troubled by this request.
Generally it was his belief on the Board that the members
felt that having access to different neighborhoods was
beneficial. If this request is approved, if someone from the
Pine Brook Apartment and they want to get over to
Coachlight Commons, they would have to go out onto Miller
Road and walk around, which is approximately 4 blocks
longer than what they would have to. He wanted to know
why the Committee felt that opening this up to vehicular
traffic was bad and why it wanted to cut off pedestrian
access.
Ms. Cordill stated that it is a peculiar situation and that it is
not right-of-way even though it has the appearance of a
street. This has implications. The apartment complex
property owner is entitled to build a fence across. While
Outlot A may have the appearance of a street, it is not
functioning as one. The Committee tried to address the
policing situation with a pedestrian access and that was not
decided upon by the Committee. It was not an easy
situation and is definitely a compromise. The main thing is
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 4
that it is an outlot not a right-of-way. It is unfortunate with
this that City is losing a pedestrian access.
Mr. Czekai stated that Committee really struggled with this
and that it was a split vote. The original vote was 2 to 2. In
order to get the case out of Committee to the full Board,
there was a switch vote. In Committee, the majority believed
that since it was not a right-of-way, the Committee did not
necessarily have the power to be involved with this type of
situation.
Mr. Frederick stated that what convinced him was the
testimony of the neighbors that it had been a problematic
gathering place for kids and others to do unlawful things (i.e.
noise, be messy, drug deals). The Committee heard
testimony that the apartment complex intends to build a
fence on their property line and essentially fence off this
quasi street outlot. Since the apartment complex property
abuts what looks like the end of the street, he felt that they
had the right to build a fence. The apartment complex is
going to go ahead with building a fence regardless of what
the Committee did and that the Committee did not have the
authority to require anybody to build through to make a
pedestrian access. This is what convinced him to vote to
support a licensing of this property and let the neighbors on
either side deal with the problems that they appear to be
having in that neighborhood since he could not see
regretfully to force any access through that area. Even if
there were children who needed to go to the school bus stop
on the other side, the property owner still could go ahead
and build a fence if he wanted to. Essentially what
convinced him was the lack of authority that the Committee
had to require this. The whole Committee agreed that this
was designed incorrectly in the first place and that it just did
not have the authority to fix it the way it should have been to
begin with: allow access between the two neighborhoods.
Ms. Bruch stated that she was the one who changed her
mind and she cannot tell the Board that she feels good about
it because she does not like to block pedestrian access.
She does not believe that putting up a fence is going to fix
the problem. The residents are hoping that by putting up this
fence, it will stop loitering. She believes that the apartment
complex can put up a fence there, whether or not it is going
to be done will be at the request of the neighbors trying to
figure this out. There is a dumpster that is planning on being
moved. The car access could happen but it is apparently too
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 5
tight and there were too many accidents with people backing
up into the fence. It is designed improperly for cars to truly
access that area. This is a closed area and kids are going to
hang out there. If it was an open area, there would be even
less problems. She stated that she does not feel good about
any of the solutions and is not sure if this is the right way to
go.
Mr. Ruge stated that if the City wants to, it can put a path
through there, tear up all of the pavement and get rid of it. In
reading the letters, it seems that the owner of the apartment
complex was amenable to doing what the City wants. He
can see why kids would want to hang out on a dead end
street; there is lots of room. If a 10 foot wide path is put in
with a fence on each side to keep the kids from going into
other people's properties, it would not be as attractive.
There is not the wide open space. It seems to him that the
City could do this and let people have the rest of the property
to give them a little more buffer and still preserve the
pedestrian access since the automobile access does not
seem to be practical.
Ms. Bruch stated that since it is a paved street looks like a
street, she asked Mr. Ruge if he is talking about the opening
being on the sidewalk. He envisions tearing out all of the
pavement and having a path go right down the center of the
street. Ms. Bruch stated that it becomes just a through way.
She would fee more comfortable because she really hates
the blocking of the pedestrian path. She thinks that if it gets
blocked, the kids will just the fence anyways. Mr. Ruge
stated that it is more of it being a dead end street because
there is a lot more space than a path. Mr. Ruge stated that
there would need to be a front end loader and a dump truck
working there for a day or two. Ms. Bruch stated that it is
City property. Mr. Ruge stated that he would think that the
City would do it and that it would get on the schedule some
time.
Mr. Rieske stated that the idea of redesigning this area
would require a good amount of money devoted to ripping up
the asphalt and concrete, regrading the area, dealing with
storm drainage and a pedestrian path, adding a fence and
underground utilities. This City is not going to see this as a
financially feasible project given layoffs or vacancies of the
Police Department, Fire Department and other department
personnel. There are also other priorities (e.g. Capital
Improvements Program — CIP). Mr. Rieske stated that
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 6
licensing it was a good idea because this is a problem that
the City has not been able to fix. This is a problem that the
two neighbors would like to work together to fix. A license
agreement is the only way the City can convey rights to the
neighbors in order to make it happen. What the
recommendation calls for is a site plan review. Mr. Rieske
stated that it will probably remain a dead end street in
appearance for a while.
Mr. Ruge stated he does not think that the neighbors on
either side are any more likely to dig up this street than the
City. The City is more likely to dig it up than the neighbors
area. If a fence is put up, it is not hard to tear it up. He does
not see building this fence as being any kind of a solution.
He sees much more with putting this path through as being
the solution rather than putting up a fence to keep the
problem kids out.
Mr. Hollister asked if this lot is large enough to put a house
on. Ms. Bruch stated that it is definitely a lot. Mr. Ruge
stated that there are utilities underneath and is unbuildable.
Mr. Hollister asked if a green space could be added here.
Ms. Bruch said yes. Mr. Ruge stated that adding a wood
chip path would be plenty.
Mr. Frederick stated that as much as he agrees with
everything that was said about what should be there, he
cannot see it happening. He cannot see the City doing
anything with it. If it is not licensed, it will stay just like this
and all of the same problems will exist. If it is licensed to the
residents on either side, then it is there responsibility to take
care of the problem or accept that they cannot fix it either.
He believes that they should be given the opportunity to try
knowing that there are other more important things that he
would like to see done in the City (i.e. sidewalks where there
are not put in). He cannot see where the City has the
resources to go back and undo a mistake.
Ms. Cordill asked if such a project would be eligible for
Community Development Block Grant funding and if it were,
would it have a chance. Ms. Witherspoon stated that the
City's funding is probably going to be cut about 6 percent.
This will probably come under the public improvements or
public service and under CDBG, but she is not sure. Ms.
Cordill asked if one could argue that there could be some
beneficiaries for that public improvement. Ms. Witherspoon
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 7
stated that this would be something that would have to be
discussed with the City's Public Service Department and
Development Manager when the Planning Department gets
its request. There will have to be proposals from the people
interested in funding. She is not sure if this would be a top
priority. The CDBG funds benefit the low to moderate
income people. Ms. Cordill was wondering if a case could
be made in that particular situation. Ms. Witherspoon stated
that she is not sure of the demographics in that area.
Mr. Hollister asked how long the license agreement would be
for. Mr. Rieske stated that it could be a subject of
negotiation. The license agreement can be renewable
annually or for a 10 year period. Mr. Rieske stated that it is
up in the air. It would not exist in perpetuity without some
renewal clause or at least the right to not renew it. Mr.
Hollister stated that he shares Mr. Frederick's concern but
the likelihood of the neighbors doing it is probably the same.
We are talking about a pretty good expenditure.
Mr. Frederick stated that the thing that convinces him is that
the neighbors are coming and asking and are willing to try.
He is willing to give them a shot at it. He is not sure whether
or not they will succeed but he is certainly willing to let them
go for it.
Ms. Bruch stated that she feels that this is something that
the City needs to deal with and that there is a better solution
than what is being presented. She asked about doing a
license with a yearly review, then the Board can see what
happens this next year. If it fails, then the Board can go to
plan B to try to put the walk through in. Mr. Rieske stated
that having a renewable license is a good idea but a year
would be a short time line. Administratively this would have
to be dealt with every year and seems to be high
maintenance. Ms. Bruch stated that it be just to make sure
that the problem is taken care of and if so, then the next
agreement would be for 10 years. She would like to add a
friendly amendment that the licensing agreement be for 2
years and then review it to see if it gets licensed for 10
years. This gives the neighbors an opportunity to try and fix
the problem. If it does not work, then the City would need to
look at it and see if the path could be added. Maybe there
could be funding for this project and maybe have the
apartment complex fund a portion of it.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 8
Ms. Cordill stated that this may be the route to take and she
asked who would review the agreement. She believes that
there is a general agreement if at all possible, some sort of
path be maintained. She asked if it could be folded back into
an administrative issue or is it necessary for the Board to go
through this exercise again given the two different scenario
approach at this. Mr. Rieske asked her what she had in
mind. Ms. Bruch stated that there seems to be an
agreement to some extent that ideally it would have been
better to have a path with a fence alongside. That way the
neighbors could maintain their properties on each side of this
lot. Because there are no funds for this project and that the
City is not likely to do it, the Board would like to try and give
the residents an option first to see if the problem can be
dealth with. At the 2 year line, if it looks like the problem is
still there, then the Board can go back to the option of adding
the fence. Whenever the funds come available to turn that
space into green, then it will happen. Mr. Rieske stated that
if there is a motion and second on the table, this would be a
friendly amendment.
Mr. Rieske clarified that there would be a license agreement
with the owners of 3563 and 3601 Coachlight Commons for
the private use of the south and north halves respectively,
allow Lot A provided the City's public utilities and the right to
service them be protected. No structures/buildings be
constructed on the subject property. Any changes or
improvements to the property, including the removal or
installation of pavement, shall not be permitted without site
plan approval and a permit through the Department of Public
Service. A license agreement up for renewal after 2 years,
be evaluated and have a Planning Office review and then
renewable for up to 10 years. Further recommendation that
the property owners, the 2 residences and the Pine Brook
Apartments work together on the overall improvement of the
area.
Mr. Czekai made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill, to recommend approval of
ACT-2-2005, 3500 Bilk. Coachlight Common, Outlot A, License agreement.
Frederick Ave Bruch Ave
Ruge. Na v Cordill. Ave
Czekai. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nay Hollister . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 2; carried.
APPROVED.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 9
b. ACT-7-2005, 1401 Georgetown Blvd., Vacate east end
This is a request by Moore Living Connections that the City
vacate the south half of the Georgetown Blvd. ROW beyond
the east edge of two access drives. Proposed removal of
existing barricade. The street is to be curbed at the east
edge of the new drive location. Pavement and boulevard
curb (south side) to be removed and re-landscaped. Utilities
and easements are to remain in place.
Staff recommended approval of ACT-7-2005, 1401
Georgetown Blvd., vacating the east end of the Georgetown
Blvd. ROW (both sides), with conditions.
In Committee, the request was recommended for approval
with modifications, that the City vacate the east 210'± of
Georgetown Blvd. ROW (both sides), provided that:
1. A sidewalk and utility easement to be retained by the
City for maintenance of and improvements to existing
facilities;
2. A land exchange to be executed in the manner
described in the survey prepared by Linsemier and
Associates, P.C. dated 2/08/05, subject to
Department of Public Service approval;
3. There are proper easements made for utility access, a
drainage basin, and a proposed city owned detention
facility;
4. A fire hydrant have proper distance from all streets
and contiguous median have appropriate length; and
5. There be appropriate turning radius for all emergency
vehicles;
and the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
The Committee further recommended that Aspen Hollows'
land owner(s) pursue a coordinated effort for improvements
to the vacated ROW.
Ms. Bruch brought up a correction: instead of vacating the
east 210 feet, it was to vacate the whole right-of-way. Mr.
Rieske stated that to vacate the east 210 feet of right-of-way
is to vacate 100 percent of the right-of-way at the east end.
Realizing that within this there are sidewalk easements so
pedestrian connectivity is preserved.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the sidewalk easement and where it
is going to. Ms. Bruch stated that the sidewalk connects to
the neighboring residential area. Mr. Czekai stated it will
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 10
connect to the other side. Mr. Frederick stated that the
barrier would disappear and goes right across essentially
what is the street now. Ms. Bruch stated that the other
sidewalk that currently that goes past into and looks like it
dead ends at the fence; it actually continues into the other
neighboring residential area. When she was there, people
were biking, walking and using the sidewalk. Mr. Frederick
stated it just puts a sidewalk where it would have been if the
street had not been there in the first place.
Mr. Czekai made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill, to recommend approval of
ACT-7-2005, 1401 Georgetown Blvd., Vacate east end.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Bruch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Czekai. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Hollister . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
C. ACT-8-2005, Jerome St. Between Penn & Holmes St.,
Easement for Three Sparrow Utility Tunnels
This is a request by the Wade Goehring, HDR Architects,
that the City permit 3 utility tunnels under Jerome Street to
connect to a proposed central utility plant on the north side
of Jerome Street. The purpose of the facility is to provide
state-of-the-art mechanical and electrical systems from a
centralized location. The facility will serve the new West
Wing addition that is presently under construction and the
existing hospital via a system of underground tunnels. Three
(3) 8 feet by 8 feet tunnels will need to be constructed
underneath Jerome Street to connect to the existing facility.
Staff recommended approval of ACT-8-2005, Jerome St.
Between Penn & Holmes St., Easement for Three Sparrow
Utility Tunnels, provided that all agency concerns are
addressed.
In Committee, the request was recommended for approval to
accommodate an easement for the proposed utility tunnels
underneath and the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 11
Mr. Czekai made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill, to recommend approval of
ACT-8-2005, Jerome St. Between Penn & Holmes St., Easement for Three Sparrow
Utility Tunnels.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Bruch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Czekai. Ave Hollister Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
Next meeting, Tuesday, October 25, 2005, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
3. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE — None.
4. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Ms. Bruch stated that the Executive Committee had its first meeting
today and discussed Planning Board goals and priorities.
By consensus, the Planning Board objectives were distributed to
the Zoning & Ordinance and Urban Development committees to be
addressed at their level.
C. Report from Planning Manager
D. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St.,"H" Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. SLU-3-2002,2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J"Parking District(Tabled May 15, 2002)
C. Z-7-2005, South 99 Feet of 600 E. Kalamazoo Street,"B" Residential District to
"F"Commercial District(Tabled July 13, 2005)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000,201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27,2000)
b. Master Plan Project
C. Act-1-2003, SE Corner Michigan &Washington, Lot 3, Block 111, Orig Plat,
Vacate Alley(part) (Tabled on April 29, 2003)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
5. Board Member Code Enforcement Notification Reports
a. Teen Challenge-wood privacy fence (May 20,2003)
b. Dollar Store-Willow Street& MLK Blvd.-landscaping &buffering (May 20,
2003)
i
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 12
C. Grovenburg property-dumpster in ROW(July 1,2003)
d. 2714 W.Jolly Road-church with large statue in front yard (January 20, 2004)
e. 545 Baker Street- Mount Hope Church outreach (April 20,2004)
f. W.Willow Street-Grace Tabernacle Church-no landscaping (May 4,2004)
g. Michigan Ave&Shepard Street-sign business-several banner signs nailed to
the outside of building (May 4, 2004)
h. 2702 S. Cedar Street-no landscaping (May 18,2004)
i. Michigan Ave&Virginia Street-Sparrow Hospital property-no screening and
buffering (October 5,2004)
j. 2410 S. Pennsylvania Ave.-no landscaping (November 3,2004)
k. Keeps Party Store-Aurelius Rd-illegal signs (February 15,2005)
I. 2200 W. Holmes Road-Bad Habits-excessive signs(May 3,2005)
M. 704 S. Clemens Street-"For Sale"items (May 3, 2005)
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Election of Officers
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Hollister to nominate Mr.
Czekai for Chair of the Board. On a voice vote, the motion carried
unanimously (6-0).
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Czekai to nominate Mr.
Hollister for Vice Chair of the Board. On a voice vote, the motion carried
unanimously (6-0).
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON
Ms. Bruch stated she was glad to have served as Chair of the Board and she
wished everyone else good luck.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Mr. Ruge stated that his wife attended a presentation at Allen Neighborhood
Center concerning street scape, walkable communities and design of apartment
complexes. She felt that is was a very worthwhile presentation. He stated that it
was recorded on a video recorder and that it is going to be broadcast on the
City's cable channel. He thought maybe the Board could take the time during a
quieter meeting to view a copy of it. Mr. Frederick stated that is a good idea.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS
Mr. Frederick stated that at 2618 Cavanaugh, it is a very small lot with a new
house on it. There is no front yard because it is paved so the residents can park
there. He suspects that the reason why this was done is because the lot is so
small and all that they would have is a narrow drive along the side to park their
cars. They cannot possibly do that because they have 4 different people renting
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES October 4, 2005 Page 13
the place. He stated that it needs to be checked for rental registration because it
looks like it is being rented out to college students.
Ms. Cordill inquired about 630 Kipling Blvd. and if it is a registered rental. It did
not appear on the list.
Mr. Ruge stated that with Solid Rock Missionary Baptist Church located at 2410
S. Pennsylvania Avenue, the Board approved a special land use for a new
church. As part of the special land use, the church was supposed to buffer the
parking lot on the side street. This has not been done.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
James A. Ru , Secretary, Planning Board
PBMinutes.100405.doc
i