Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 Planning Board Jan-March minutes FINAL APPROVED AS PRINTED JANUARY 25, 2000 Draft to Clerk 01212000 Approved 0125000 To Clerk 01312000 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 p.m., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall �- 124 West Michigan Avenue Tuesday, January 11, 2000 1. OPENING SESSION: C Chairman Nischan called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Keene, Miller, Nischan, Patrick, Smith. Six members present, one excused absence. B. Excused Absences - Ruge. Mr. Ruge requested and was granted an excused absence due to illness. C. Introductions. Eleanor K. Love, Planning Manager, introduced staff present, William C. Rieske, Principal Planner, James A. Ruff, Zoning Administrator, and Donna J. Wynant and Doris M. Witherspoon, Senior Planners. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - 3. COMMUNICATIONS A. Letter dated January 11, 2000, addressed to Mr. Jarl Nischan, Chairman, from Franklin Street Community Housing Corporation RE: Public Hearing Testimony for Use of Community Development Funds. 4. HEARINGS A. Proposed Objectives, Goals and Projected Use of Community Development Fund Resources, including the Community Development Block Grant, Home and Emergency Shelter Programs, FY 2000-2001 Ms. Witherspoon provided a more detailed explanation of the purpose of tonight's hearing regarding the Community Development Block Grant and the funding allocations and revised dollar amounts. This is the opportunity for citizens to speak on behalf of the funding allocations for the Proposed Objectives, Goals and Projected Use of Community Development Fund Resources, including the Community Development Block Grant, Home and Emergency Shelter Grant programs, to be included in the City's Consolidated Strategy and Plan Submission for Fiscal Year 2001. The City expects to receive and have available a total of approximately $4.4 million in funds through the Community Development Block Grant, Home and Emergency Shelter Grant Programs during the next fiscal year commencing on July 1, 2000 and ending on June 30, 2001. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 2 Any person in the audience who wishes to address the Planning Board on these matters should come to the microphone, state your name and address and provide us your comments. Written comments will also be accepted for consideration. RICK KIBBEY, 300 SHEPARD, LANSING. I wanted to congratulate Mr. Ruff on the handout on the planning process. For people who are new to it, I am sure that is an enormous help in trying to figure out what is going on, which committee follows what committee. I will be duplicating this and handing it out to people who will be involved in this. Second, I serve on the organizing committee for the Allen Neighborhood Center, which is an attempt by a neighborhood group to figure out how we can do something about the situation in the schools. What it has become is a location for programs in the neighborhood in support of Allen School, which is a school that serves a very low income area. We have gone out and managed to hustle up some money for some programming, and hustled up a year's worth of rent. But this is an idea that seems to be catching on, and we are interested in trying to find a permanent home. I hate paying $700 a month rent. I have money to do it the first year, so I can do it, but it strikes me as a real waste of resources. So what I would like to do is, I would like to find us a permanent home, and I am requesting assistance from whichever of the funding sources you think is appropriate. We are looking at something in the neighborhood of $70,000-$80,000. 1 won't be asking one place for all the money, but first money is always the hardest, and to the extent that we could get a commitment of a portion of that money, it would make it much easier for us to raise the rest of it. If you have any questions, I would be glad to answer them. I understand that there is quite an administrative budget process that follows this, and we will be following it through the process, but I think a positive recommendation from you all would start us off on the right foot. Thank you. CHERYL RISNER, DIRECTOR, LANSING NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL, 500 W. LENAWEE, #319. Currently, the Lansing Neighborhood Council is working with 38 established neighborhood groups here in Lansing. There are three more groups in the process of forming, one of them that we are very happy about that we call the Renaissance Neighborhood Association, formerly known as the Seven Block Area. A number of residents have been working together in that area for over a year now to improve their neighborhood. In September they had an organizational potluck dinner to establish ties between neighborhood people, and since then they have established a neighborhood watch, applied for neighborhood flowers, officially incorporated, and will be applying to become a member of the Lansing Neighborhood Council, and are meeting on Thursday. Right now the Council is working on preparations for this year's Bea Christy Dinner, which will be held again at the Lansing Center on Friday, February 18. For those of you who don't know about the Bea PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 3 Christy Dinner, it is one of the biggest events that we do each year. Last year we had over 325 people attend to show their support for the neighborhood volunteers. There is one overall winner each year. Last year we had seventeen different nominees. We had 21 neighborhood groups show up to help show their support for these nominees, and Willy Dawson of the Northwest Neighborhood Alliance won last year. We are also working on the Paint Blitz 2000. It will be held the first Saturday in June, unless it rains; then it is the second Saturday in June. Each year we work with over 400 volunteers to paint houses in Lansing. Last year we had 18 different homes in Lansing painted in one day, scraped, primed and painted. It is a big endeavor, but it really works well with all of our volunteers. Our Council also does different types of record-keeping seminars to show neighborhood groups how to keep track of their funds. We have taught groups how to do display boards in order to go after grants, so that they can make presentations and showcase what their neighborhoods are doing. We also each year instruct our Paint Blitz captains on a safety and strategy seminar. We also help host the Neighborhoods 'N' Bloom Garden Party at Cooley Gardens, and help with the Neighborhoods 'N' Bloom Project. If anyone has any questions now, I can answer them, or call our office at 372-6290. Thank you. Chairman Nischan read into the record a communication received from the Franklin Street Community Housing Corporation. In summary, it notes that it has gratefully received support from the City over the last 13 years, and it also wants to encourage us to continue support of the housing programs through the proposed Community Development Block Grant Program. With the use of these funds, FSCHC has been able to provide quality, affordable housing to hundreds of low-moderate income persons. Many of our rental units have tenants who have incomes of 50 percent or less of median income for Michigan. There is a need for larger homes amongst that population, particularly even three- and four-bedroom rental units. "It is my impression that there is a need for more rental properties of this size in Lansing. The proposed Objectives speak to an emphasis on increasing home ownership opportunities. I would urge the Board to consider encouraging the development of rental housing for large low- income families as well." So there is a plea for that in the communication. BEVERLY WIENER, HAVEN HOUSE, A SHELTER FOR HOMELESS FAMILIES; ALSO A TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROGRAM. This is a program where we work with families in their rental housing to work on the underlying issues that cause them to come to our shelter, money management, increasing their income, maintaining their property, paying their rent on time, all those kinds of things. We have received funding through the ESG program, which we appreciate very much, from the City. I will be very brief. We serve homeless families, and we want our families to succeed, and not come back to the shelter again, so that is why we created our transitional housing program, Partners in Progress. I would PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 4 like to talk about our ideas for the future. Number one, we will still continue to need shelters. I think the transitional housing programs are very important, because they do help a lot of the people who have been in shelters to make some changes and become more stable over a longer period of time. This makes them better renters, and I think that will help stabilize some of the neighborhoods where there are rental houses and rental apartments available. I agree with the last comment, that we do need more low cost rental housing because a lot of the housing is much too expensive for a lot of the families. This has become a bigger problem for the shelters because we can't move people out of the shelters so fast because there is nowhere that they can go that they can afford. I also think we are looking ahead to a time where we need to beef up our efforts to work with some of these low income families in rental housing to continue to work on the money management issues, on the long-term goals, and eventually work them toward home ownership. Many are not ready for home ownership when they leave our shelter, but we really think that is a long-term goal, and they really need support and services, so those would be my personal objectives for the next few years. I hope that the Planning Board will look at those and continue to support those things which are very important. Thank you very much. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing and referral to the Urban Development Committee of the Planning Board meeting Tuesday, January 18, 2000, at 4 p.m. to discuss the proposed Objectives, Goals, and Projected Use of Funds presented this evening. The meeting will be held in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. B. SLU-15-99, Vacant Land 100-200 Blk. East Jolly Road (South Side), Church in "G-2" Wholesale District Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by Pastor William Lee, owner of a portion of this property, to construct a church on the parcel which is zoned "G-2" Wholesale District and "F" Commercial District. The property is located on the south side in the 100-200 Block of East Jolly Road, directly west of Jolly-Cedar Court and south of the military processing center on Jolly Road. The access drive there is Skoog Court, a private drive at present which has been petitioned to be made public in a past case. To the north is office and residential uses; south is a 165 ft wide utility right- of-way for Consumers Energy, then single-family homes south of that. To the east is a commercial shopping center for K-Mart, and to the west is a school and multi-family residential. The zoning of the surrounding properties reflects the land uses. This was before this board most recently for a multiple family development that was denied in 1997. Since then Pastor Lee's church has been able to purchase a portion of the property. We advertised the entire property because it is one parcel at present, approximately 17.4 acres, zoned "F" Commercial on the northern PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 5 two-thirds, and "G-2" on the southern third, the area directly west of K-Mart. The whole site was advertised because discussion is going on with the K-Mart property owners to possibly extend the K-Mart property a little bit to the west. If it should be approved, advertising the whole site will give flexibility as it goes through the process. You have a simple graphic depicting a location of a church, possible extension of the Skoog Court roadway, and a site diagram. The final drawing shows the surrounding zoning and the entire parcel in the two parts in "F" and "G-2". PASTOR LEE, CHURCH OF GOD IN CHRIST. We are presently located in Lansing Township, off Kalamazoo near US-127. We are outgrowing our facility, so we are shopping for land. Many of the services that we provide we just don't have facilities for, so we are desperate to get something done in terms of expansion. We have purchased the property directly in back of the K-Mart properties; we hope to have the full acreage there condominiumized so that we will in fact have the Skoog Court as an entrance to the church properties, but right now part of the property that we had purchased is adjacent to K-Mart, and they are interested in part of that, and the part we are interested is closer to the military processing center. We are trying to work out an arrangement so that we can just shift space, so that there will be no need for through traffic there to anything except the church. We hope to have that finalized early this winter. We will be building an edifice that will host approximately 500 people. The services that we will be offering include a senior day-care facility in the church during off hours so that people who are working or who are part of the sandwich generation can leave their adults, or children, because we will have day-care as well. In the evenings we will be using that for church services. We will provide counseling and other services there. Right now you have a sketch based on the 6.28 acres that we have purchased. That will move toward the north into the 3.2-acre section with parking in the back if the deal with K-Mart is consummated fairly soon. SANDY ALLEN, COUNCILMEMBER, SECOND WARD. Is this going to be just a church, or are there plans for a church school? Mr. Ruff said right now the request is for the church. Certain land uses are allowed based on zoning. Because this is more commercial zoning, some of the land uses that might be found in a church in a residentially-zoned area might not normally be allowed here because of the zoning. There could be some further action necessary if they request other types of uses. Even day care may be a complication based on zoning. Possibly those uses would have to be considered separately. No plans have been presented for a school. In the present zoning, an elementary school would not be allowed. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for SLU-15-99, Vacant Land 100-200 Blk. East Jolly Road (South Side), Church in "G-2" Wholesale District and referral PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 6 to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting on Wednesday, January 19, 2000, in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol. C. Z-15-99, Portions of 6820 S. Cedar St., from "F" Commercial District to "J" Parking District and from "J" Parking District to "F" Commercial District, Also 915, 927 & 1000 Just A Mere Ave., 6931, 6937 & 7001 Georgia Ave. from "A" Residential District to "J" Parking District, Also 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 & 1301 E. Willoughby Rd. from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District; D. MPA-1-99, Master Plan Amendment to the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan; E. ACT-21-99, 1000 block of Just A Mere Ave., Pedestrian Overpass Mr. Ruff said, when going through the cases, he wants to take comment on all three cases, the zoning case, the Act-285 case, as well as the Master Plan Amendment. Z-15-99 is the land use issue being requested by Mr. Long; the Act-285 case is specifically related to extending a connecting pedestrian way over Just A Mere between two of the proposed buildings. It would be an easement for the air rights to get over Just A Mere Avenue. The master plan amendment is specifically to open discussion about the future land uses for the area between Just A Mere and Willoughby. The proposal made by Mr. Long has some major impacts on the neighborhood between Just A Mere and Willoughby, on the west side of Cedar Street. To address only the rezoning itself may not be sufficient. The opportunity here is to take input from property owners as to their opinions concerning future land use, for not only Mr. Long's petition for his property but also surrounding properties—houses south of Just A Mere and on both sides of Georgia north of Willoughby. There are three issues here. One looks at the whole master plan issue, and it includes Mr. Long's proposal, and it includes Act-21-99. Donna Wynant will present each of the actions. Ms. Wynant noted that the packet received by the Board contains the information described by Mr. Ruff. The applicant is Gordon Long, also representing Lansing Clarion Limited Partnership. The actions to be reviewed by the Planning Board include Z-15-99, the rezoning; Act-21-99, the Act-285 review, and MPA-1-99, the master plan amendment. Also, the Board of Zoning Appeals will be considering height and setback variances for this proposal. The property is located in the 6800 block of South Cedar Street on the west side between Long Blvd. and Willoughby. The development consists of hotel, parking lots, vacant land and single-family homes that the development will be taking in. The existing zoning is predominantly "F" Commercial and some "J" Parking. The land adjacent to Willoughby is zoned "A" Residential, single-family zoning. The two properties adjacent to Georgia are "A" Residential. Maps in the packet illustrate this. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 7 Reviewing the proposed development, the expansion of the Holiday Inn South Convention Center Complex consists of a 280,000 sq ft addition to the Holiday Inn South Convention Center. It will include approximately 156 hotel rooms, 32,500 sq ft of exhibition space with 25,000 sq ft of meeting rooms. There will be an auditorium with 247 seats. This part of the development will be just to the west of the existing Holiday Inn Convention Center. The surface parking lot is proposed to be expanded farther to the west to the Oak Park Village on the north side of Just A Mere. There will be a three-deck visitor parking ramp with 2,475 spaces. To the south of that would be an extended-stay hotel facility of 150 suites that would be separate from the Holiday Inn facility. Just to the west of the extended-stay hotel facility would be a single-story office building of 13,299 sq ft. The report contains graphic illustrations. The zoning requests are to the west of the existing facility. Two homes on the north side of Just A Mere are requested to be rezoned from "A" Residential to "J" Parking District to be used exclusively for parking. The portion adjacent to Georgia Avenue currently zoned residential is requested to be rezoned from "A" Residential to "J" Parking District, and the properties fronting on Willoughby are requested to be rezoned from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial District. This is primarily the rezoning requested. We have received some comments from agencies contacted, probably the most notable being from the Transportation Engineer who is requesting that a traffic impact study be done. He has concerns about traffic exiting onto Georgia Avenue, remarking that there should be adjustments to the site plan and to internal circulation. Delhi Township states that they believe that the overall development is compatible with surrounding development in the Township, which is the shopping center to the south of the development, as well as residential farther down on Willoughby, though they think there is a need to align some streets better, such as Cedar Park Street should align better with drives coming out of the development. A petition with 22 signatures of home owners to the west of the development has been made a part of your report. Concerns outlined have been attached to the petition. The person submitting the petition requested that they be read into the record. These comments, part of the report, make arguments in opposition to the proposed rezoning request. Mr. Ruff made the point that the request involves certain addresses of properties for rezoning. Those include portions of 6820 South Cedar Street from "F" Commercial to "J" Parking, and from "J" Parking District to "F" Commercial District. Also the residentially zoned properties involved in this rezoning request are 915, 927 and 1000 Just A Mere, as well as 6931, 6937 and 7001 Georgia Avenue from "A" Residential to "J" Parking PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 8 District; also 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 and 1301 East Willoughby Road from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial District. Chairman Nischan asked Mr. Ruff if the applicant owns all of those properties. Mr. Ruff said the applicant either owns them or has an option to purchase. A request for rezoning requires that the applicant either represent the owner or have a vested interest, which can include a purchase agreement. GORDON LONG, 6910 SOUTH CEDAR STREET, LANSING. With me is Mr. Russell Hinkle, president of Keystone Design Group, our architects. am a local resident and local businessman. I have operated in the Lansing area since 1955 as a broker, developer, builder and businessman. We are asking to expand a significant, existing business that we have operated for the past 25 years, first as a conference center, then as a hotel added to the conference center operated for the past 14 years. The overall site plan shows the existing Holiday Inn and Conference Center, a 300-room motel and 50,000 sq ft conference center. We wish to add 161 rooms. The new expansion will contain an exhibition center of approximately 32,000 sq ft and 25,000 sq ft of meeting space. The new building areas comprise an additional 320,000 of buildings. We have approximately 250,000 sq ft of buildings now. We will provide parking for the expansion in the form of a parking ramp located across from the new tower but connected to it by the pedway. The new facilities would be attached to the back, with the major entry off Just A Mere. The pedway comes across from the parking ramp and ties in directly to the hotel. The combination of the ramp and the surface parking comprises in excess of 2,800 parking spaces, about 2,865 spaces. Tied in with that is an addition to be located on Willoughby Road, an extended stay facility, Staybridge Suites, an arm of Holiday Inn similar to the Residence Inns of Mariott Hotels. The rooms are like apartments, studios, one- and two-bedrooms. It is a four-story structure. To allow traffic circulation from the ramp, there will be a major artery connected from Willoughby to Just A Mere. Next to the Staybridge Suites, we are proposing a 13,000 sq ft single-story office building to provide a buffer between the remaining residential and this project. After we do this, there does remain in the corner of Willoughby and Georgia on the east side of Georgia a series of 12 parcels containing 133,056 sq ft, about 3.05 acres. There are 3 parcels left on Georgia Street containing about .66 acres, a little over half an acre; and four lots containing 114,000 sq ft, about 2.6 acres remaining in the area that is not part of our request. (Displayed aerial photos.) This is an interchange location with significant development and with considerable growth over the years. With regard to the parcels left over, with the exception of a couple people, I have not contacted them to attempt to purchase their property or to make them aware of this proposal. The existing and new structures all have to blend together. That will be accomplished. The new structure is higher than the existing structure. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 9 The existing hotel has a roof height of almost 49 feet. The roof stairs has an approximate height of 58 ft 4 in; we were granted a variance of 18.4 ft for the roof stairway about 14 years ago, and variance of about 9 ft for the height of the roof on the principal hotel. The new hotel, being a tower, is higher. From the ground floor to the roof of the new hotel is 82 ft; we would be asking for a 42 ft variance. The ground floor to the elevator roof is 95.6 ft, necessitating a variance of 55.6 ft variance. At an interstate highway location, the height would not be offensive. The top of the three-deck parking ramp is 33 ft, so no variance is required. From the ground floor to the top of the deck rail is 40 feet. From the ground floor to the elevator roof is 48 ft, necessitating a variance of 8 feet. (Editor's note: Actually, 45 ft height is allowed in the "J" District necessitating only a 3-foot variance.) The construction of the Staybridge Suites is two-story colonial with gables up to 35-40 ft; the gables are significant. The total elevation to the roof of the Suites is 54 feet, and so a 14 ft variance is required. Next in your packet is the first-floor plan with ballroom, covered pool—everything to the right half is existing. At present, there is an atrium; now it would be enclosed, with the new pool, etc. (Described first floor lobby with entry, registration areas with escalators and exhibition hall, food courts, laundry and mechanicals; mezzanine area; second floor walkway from ramp into breakout lobby, meeting rooms and 250-seat lecture hall; third, fourth and fifth floors with 155 rooms; sixth floor with sky-view dining area, an upscale restaurant, 6 expensive suites and balance in open roof area for open-air meetings). Next in your packet is the Staybridge Suites, a four-story structure with 152 rooms of 43 studios, 56 two-bedrooms and 53 one-bedrooms. The pool will be enclosed for year-round use. It has a main entry and its own parking; a ten-day stay is average. The architecture of the office building will be in keeping with the Staybridge Suites. The facility has no restaurant. (Next presented maps of current and proposed zoning). The entire project would consist of about 21.5 acres. We now have about 269 employees; that number would at least double. Total valuation of the complex would be about $75-$80,000,000. Ms. Keene requested more information about the pedestrian walkway, what is the height from the ground to the bottom of the walkway, and what will it be made of, and what is the approximate length. Mr. Long said 18 ft; it will be made of the same materials as the hotel complex—glass, brick, steel; heated, air-conditioned and enclosed, but probably the top will not be as open as the Sparrow Pedway, though similar. It will extend from one side of the street to the other, approximately 145 ft. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 10 Mr. Smith asked how light pollution would be minimized. Mr. Hinkle said building codes require construction of lights so that illumination would be directed to the facilities. Some will reflect over, but predominantly light will be directed to the existing site. The Staybridge Suites won't have a lot of lights around it. The parking ramp lights will be on the inside. There will be lower-illumination boulevard lighting on Just A Mere and Willoughby. Lighting on the tower to the north of Just A Mere would be similar to that existing at present; there is nothing glaring on the exterior. We have lights in the parking lot. Chairman Nischan asked about the office building just west of the Staybridge Suites. It seems close to "A" Residential; is there adequate room for buffering, and what are plans in that regard? Mr. Long said there is a green area with setbacks. That is its purpose, for buffering, to comply with code. We do not have a problem with shrubbery or additional screening. There is a buffering zone there. FRANCIS SUTTEN, 908 JUST A MERE. My wife is also here. I want to thank Sandy Allen for coming in tonight. I am opposed. I don't think South Lansing needs this. We are already saturated with hotels in this area. All it costs us to live in our little house is taxes and insurance. This used to be an ideal place to raise children. Neighbors still have little children. Why do they need all the parking. Now there are only about 100 cars in the lot. The lots are not full the busiest times. They do have people who park in the street who want to get out first; I am opposed to that. We don't need this. KENNETH KRUGER, 920 JUST A MERE. I am opposed to this; it does not need to be in our neighborhood. When the motel was first built, there was a lot of houses taken down, and the residential area was pushed to facilitate the hotel and parking lot. Cows used to be in Oak Park Village. Now Mr. Long is pushing deeper into the residential area. I composed a letter; most people here have signed it as property owners or renters. Many people have lived there for years, the oldest one for 53 years. She will be directly across the street from the parking ramp and see the sun rise over it every day. I live where the three lots are for the "J" Parking, he is going to take that away. A lot of cars, trucks and buses will end up there because there is no other surface to park on. Right now, the surface parking lot to the west of the hotel is busy with truck deliveries, buses parking with motors running all night. I am constantly phoning the hotel asking for the generators to be turned off on the buses. We can't leave our windows open at night because of that noise. I don't see the need for him to take residential properties. If he wants to build his hotel, other places are available. There is a nice convention center downtown that could use a nice big hotel along with the Radisson. He should stay out of our residential area. We have done enough. We have given everything. People have lived there for 15, 25, 50 years, and this is what they are going to have to put up with if this is allowed to be constructed. We are going to have to look at cars and trucks, a 100-ft tower, a parking PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 11 ramp. It is unfair for these people to have to deal with traffic and all the things that go along with it. Take the structure and build it somewhere else, not in our back yards. Not in our front yards. Thank you. BETHANY PLATTE, 933 EAST WILLOUGHBY ROAD. My address is not included in the take-over, but I have a few comments. The only time the existing parking is filled up is when they had a car show in the parking lot. That was because there were a lot of cars in the show. Also, there are a lot of vacant offices in that area in the Jolly-Cedar Shopping Center and along Long Boulevard. There are plenty of offices that aren't being used, so I don't see the need for any more. The added traffic on Willoughby and Georgia is going to be a big problem. In 1997, there were five car accidents on the corner of Georgia and Willoughby—I was one of them. Also, we are trying to build up the shopping in our downtown area here. This will take away if there is a convention center built on the south side. It will detract from the downtown. I am also concerned about the taxes for the residents in that area. It may eventually raise our taxes. LISA MARSHALL, 926 JUST A MERE AVENUE. My husband and I have lived there for about 14 years. We love the dead end street right there. We are raising three daughters in a two-bedroom house, a little crowded but we like our property. Our back yard is large, but from our front yard we are looking at a parking lot. We didn't think it could get much worse, until we heard the presentation. Now we are going to be looking from our front door at a huge parking lot. I walk my dog every day, and that parking lot is very rarely ever full. I do not personally see a need for such an extensive metropolis moved into the South Lansing area. Gordon Long has not considered the amount of people that it will affect. There will be traffic, but the traffic won't be coming from the hotel. There is traffic in and out of there from everybody else that cuts through from Willoughby to get over to Long's to hit the traffic light over there, lots of traffic that way. I believe that is going to increase with the parking lot space, and I agree with Mr. Kruger about the buses and semi trucks that will be parked right across the street from us. Let's look down the road. Eventually we would like to sell our house. That is not going to happen, because no one will buy our house. We are faced with this, and we are still raising our kids. They've got a long way to go before they are adults. After I think this through more, I will have more comments. FERN MARLATT, 920 JUST A MERE. Gordon Long listed his residence as 6910 South Cedar? That is not his residence. I have lived there 35 years, and he doesn't live on 6910. He lives someplace else, so to him when he mentioned the land area on Just a Mere, it's not just a strip of land. There is homes there, houses and people. He is talking about a little strip of land there, and a little strip of land on Georgia, and then all the rest is going to be this $75-$80 million structure? Yes, it's going to be beautiful, great. Why doesn't he spend one more million and buy out the rest of our houses so we can move someplace else? That would be fair. If he doesn't want our property and he wants to just leave a few little PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 12 buildings there that are just land, they are not houses or homes, that's what's going to be left. A few little teeny pieces of land that people live on. He wants it? Let him buy us all out. Then make a big beautiful development and get everybody off the highway, have them stop in there, and we will all live happily ever after. WARD RYCKMAN, 7015 GEORGIA AVENUE. I'm like the rest of the folks here. We have small kids. You see some of the traffic running up and down the street; they fly through there. What's it going to do to the property around there? Is it going to take our property down? I really don't think we need this. I have sat in my driveway for 20 minutes waiting to get out when the convention center starts letting out. It's a lost cause. I am against it. RICHARD CULP, 1109 WILLOUGHBY ROAD. I am completely against this ordeal. Mr. Long has developed South Lansing pretty much, doing up the Clarion Center, but now changed over to Holiday Inn. I have lived there for 11 years now. Backing out of my driveway, it is a hassle. I can see when they get all this built up how it is going to be with traffic. It is going to be a lot more hectic for everyone, especially if they have conferences and so forth. I am very grateful that we can get together and talk about it, but I am completely against it. JAMES PLATTE, 933 WILLOUGHBY. I feel pretty much equal as everybody else. I have two young sons to worry about who want to ride bikes. I have to watch the road. It will make Georgia even worse by doing this. It will make my kids take their life in their hands. My neighbor's daughter walked out to the bus stop across the street and almost got hit off Georgia. You need to be prepared for it. SANDY ALLEN, COUNCILMEMBER, SECOND WARD. I am here tonight gathering information, as are you folks. I wanted to take this opportunity to thank the Planning staff, Jim Ruff, and also Eleanor Love and also the staff people in the Planning Office, for their diligence and cooperation in keeping me advised of the things that are going on in the second ward. It is extremely important that I be aware of these things, and it is appreciated. I want to assure everybody here that I will continue to gather information prior to making any decision. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing Z-15-99, Portions of 6820 S. Cedar St., from "F" Commercial District to "J" Parking District and from "J" Parking District to "F" Commercial District, Also 915, 927 & 1000 Just A Mere Ave., 6931, 6937 & 7001 Georgia Ave. from "A" Residential District to "J" Parking District, Also 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 & 1301 E. Willoughby Rd. from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District; MPA-1-99, Master Plan Amendment to the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan; ACT-21-99, 1000 block of Just A Mere Ave., Pedestrian Overpass. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 13 Z-15-99 is referred to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting on Wednesday, January 19, 2000, in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. MPA-1-99 and Act-21-99 are referred to the Urban Development Committee, meeting on Tuesday, January 18, 2000. Mr. Ruff did not anticipate having all report work done by that time for the Committee. The Committee will be meeting then. Additional information can be received and given to the Board, it can come in at any time regarding this case until the Board passes it on to City Council. We do not anticipate having a Zoning and Ordinance Committee draft report ready until February 9. We anticipate the Urban Development Committee will start looking at this on Tuesday, January 18, 2000. 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (Five minutes each) - None. 6. RECESS - Chairman Nischan declared a 15-minute recess. The meeting reconvened at 9:04 p.m. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval - Minutes for Approval: December 7, 1999 Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Miller, to approve the minutes of December 7, 1999, as printed. On a Voice vote, unanimous, carried; the Minutes of December 1, 1999 were APPROVED. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole - did not meet. 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee - Mr. Miller, Chairman. The Zoning and Ordinance Committee met on December 15, 1999. a. LS-22-99, 921, 927, 1000, 1004, 1008, 1010, 1016, 1020 West Lenawee This is a request by the City of Lansing, Development Office, 316 N. Capitol, Lansing, for variances of the Subdivision Regulations for several lot splits to divide properties at 921, 927, 1000, 1004, 1008, 1010, 1016, 1020 West Lenawee, in the Seven Block Area. Twelve feet of property would be split off from the east side of the vacant lot (3301-17-478-361) formerly known as 927 W. Lenawee and added to 921 W. Lenawee having the resulting legal descriptions: 921 W Lenawee The West '/ of Lot 5 and the East 12 feet of Lot 6, Block 8, Bush, Butler and Sparrow Addition to the City of Lansing PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 14 927 W Lenawee The West 54 feet of Lot 6, Block 8, Bush, Butler and Sparrow's Addition to the City of Lansing. This is a request by the City of Lansing, Development Office, 316 N. Capitol, Lansing, for variances of the Subdivision Regulation for several lot splits to divide properties at 921, 927, 1000, 1004, 1008, 1010, 1016, 1020 West Lenawee, in the Seven Block Area. Twelve feet of property would be split off from the east side of the vacant lot (3301-17-478-361) formerly known as 927 W. Lenawee and added to 921 W. Lenawee having the resulting legal descriptions.- 921 W. Lenawee The West '/ of Lot 5 and the East 12 feet of Lot 6, Block 8, Bush, Butler and Sparrow Addition to the City of Lansing 927 W Lenawee The West 54 feet of Lot 6, Block 8, Bush, Butler and Sparrow's Addition to the City of Lansing The City of Lansing, Development Office, is proposing to have a new home built on the vacant portion, but the twelve feet is to be split off to create a private driveway for 921 W. Lenawee. The lots at 921 and 927 W. Lenawee will have widths of 45' and 54' respectively and lot width-to-depth ratios of 1:4.4 and 1:3.6 respectively. Section 1236.07 of the Subdivision Regulations requires a minimum lot width of 60' and a maximum lot width-to-depth ratio of 1.2.5. Variances to the Subdivision regulations are requested. Six (6) lots including 1000 W. Lenawee, the vacant lots formerly known as 1004 (3301-17-476-121), 1008 (3301-17- 476-111) and 1010 (3301-17-476-101), and the homes at 1016 and 1020 W. Lenawee are proposed to be redivided into four (4) lots more particularly described as: Parcel A - 1000 W. Lenawee: The East 42' of Lot 16, Block 9, Bush, Butler and Sparrow's Addition to the City of Lansing Parcel B - Vacant lot, parts of both former 1004 and 1008 W. Lenawee: PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 15 The West 24 feet of Lot 16 and the East 26 feet of Lot 15, Bush, Butler and Sparrow's Addition to the City of Lansing Parcel C - vacant lot, parts of both former 1008 and 1010 W Lenawee: The West 40 feet of Lot 15 and the East 13 feet of Lot 14, Block 9, Bush, Butler and Sparrow's Addition to the City of Lansing Parcel D - Lot composed of part of vacant lot former 1010 W. Lenawee and current 1016 and 1020 W. Lenawee: That part of the Lots 13 and 14, Block 9, BUSH, BUTLER & SPARROW'S ADDITION to the City of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan, beginning on the South line of said Lot 14 at a point S90000'00"W 13.00 feet from Southeast corner of said Lot 14: thence continuing along said South line S90000'00"W 20.00 feet to a point of curvature; thence Northwesterly 89.48 feet along the arc of a 60.60 foot radius curve to the left whose central angle is 85027'04" and whose chord bears N62011'49"W 81.42 feet to a point on the West line of the East 38.50 feet of said Lot 13; thence along said West line N00047'00" W 44.52 feet to the North line of the South 82.50 feet of said Lot 13; thence along said North line N90000'00"E 38.50 feet to the line common to Lots 13 and 14; thence along said common line N00047'00"W 115.50 feet to the Northwest corner of Lot 14; thence along the North line of Lot 14 N90000'00"E 53.00 feet; thence S00047'00"E 198.00 feet to the point of beginning. There will be two (2) homes relocated onto Parcels C and D to accommodate the cul-de-sac. Also, a new home is proposed to be built on Parcel B. See attached drawings. The lot at 1000 W. Lenawee will have a width of 42' and a lot width to depth ratio of 1:4.7. The vacant lots will be 50' and 53' wide and have lot width to depth ratios of 1:3.9 and 1:3.7 respectively. The odd shaped lot (Parcel D) meets the lot width to depth ratio. Section 1236.07 of the Subdivision Regulations requires a maximum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2.5 and a minimum lot width of 60'. Therefore, variances to the Subdivision Regulations are requested. Basically, the actions to redivide and split off some of the properties and recombine them were considered in November. Questions and concerns were raised and the action was postponed. Individuals attending that meeting were notified; however, they did not show up at subsequent meetings. The lots are not excessively wide, but they are adequate to construct a typical home for the area. That was PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 16 one of the things that was the focus, that homes constructed be similar to existing homes. The lots are deep and provide more than adequate lot area for single-family homes. The Committee, based upon testimony and evidence, concurred with the staff report as amended. In Committee, it was moved, seconded, and carried unanimously 3-0 to recommend approval of LS-22-99, 921, 927, 1000, 1004, 1008, 1010, 1016, 1020 West Lenawee. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to recommend approval of LS-22-99, 921, 927, 1000, 1004, 1008, 1010, 1016, 1020 West Lenawee. PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Keene. . . Ave Miller. . . Aye Patrick . . Ave Smith. . . Aye Nischan . . Ave On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried; LS-22-99, 921, 927, 1000, 1004, 1008, 1010, 1016, 1020 West Lenawee was APPROVED. b. NCU-4-99, 1022 Eureka Street, Fire-Damaged Nonconforming 8-unit The applicant is requesting Class A nonconforming status for property located at 1022 Eureka Street. The property currently maintains a Class B nonconforming status due to lot area, setbacks and parking. The applicant proposes to restore the fire-damaged 8-unit structure in the "DM-Y Residential District. The cost of repair of fire-damaged nonconformities is limited to 50 percent of the value of the structure. The current value of the structure is $96,096. The estimated cost of repairs is $200,652.85. The proposed restoration of this nonconforming eight-unit structure will not create any traffic or pollution problems for the area in which it is located. In terms of the parking requirements, there are currently eight parking spaces on site, or one parking space per unit. This should be documented in the lease agreement. Staff recommends approval of NCU-4-99 for a Class A Nonconforming status for property located at 1022 Eureka Street with conditions. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 17 The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that there was sufficient parking on site to satisfy the needs of this building with the eight spaces available. Also, the building was built as an eight-unit and is not the result of a conversion. Finally, the criteria for Class A designation are satisfied. Discussion took place regarding the necessary building improvements to make the building fit more within its historic character in that the storm windows on the front as well as the awning over the front door required modification and/or replacement to better fit with the architectural style of the building. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously 3-0 to recommend approval of NCU-4-99, 1022 Eureka Street, Fire-Damaged Nonconforming 8-unit, with the following conditions as amended and as stated in the report: 1. Repairs should be done to meet appearance of the original structure, including the front storm windows and front awning. 2. Eaves should be repaired and painted to original character. 3. Repair fencing and install new fence along south lot line to screen parking (decorative 6-foot wood fence to be approved by the Planning Department). 4. New dumpster pad to be installed with 6-inch reinforced concrete. 5. Extend dumpster screen - 6 ft. 6. Tuck point the brick as necessary to maintain the integrity of the brick as required. 7. As required by the Building Safety Office, submit a set of construction documents sealed by an architect or engineer for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. This project must comply with State of Michigan barrier-free design requirements due to the extensive damage. 8. Lease documents should reflect one parking space per unit. 9. The building repairs and the aforementioned conditions must be completed by December 20, 2000. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve NCU-4-99, 1022 Eureka Street, Fire-Damaged Nonconforming 8 -unit with conditions as above. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 18 Mr. Frederick stated that it is a nice-looking building, though it needs some work. With approval, it could become a much nicer-looking building and a very fine addition to the neighborhood and could actually upgrade the surrounding neighborhood. If we don't approve it, it very quickly will become an eyesore. "I strongly encourage the Board to vote in favor of this." Keene. . . Aye Miller. . . Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Smith. . . Ave Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Nischan . .Ave On a Roll Call Vote, there were: Ayes: 6, Nays: 0, unanimous; carried, NCU-4-99, 1022 Eureka Street, Fire-Damaged Nonconforming 8-unit with conditions as above was APPROVED. Mr. Ruff noted that NCU-4-99, 1022 Eureka Street, Fire-Damaged Nonconforming 8-unit is not referred to City Council for any further action. A letter will be sent to the applicant with this motion and these requirements. C. SLU-13-99, 1200 Block Jerome Street, Parking Lot in "C" Residential District This is a request by Sparrow Health Systems, 1215 East Michigan Avenue, for a Special Land Use permit for property located in the 1200 Block of Jerome Street, north of Jerome Street. The applicant proposes to expand the existing surface parking lot from 109 spaces to approximately 390 spaces for Sparrow Hospital. The parking lot is proposed to be expanded onto an area that is presently a practice athletic field. The expanded parking is proposed to be temporary in nature. The property may be used as requested if City Council approves the Special Land Use request. The Boys Training School (BTS) Plan designates this area for the Greater Lansing Health Education Collaborative, a health education center and parking. Sparrow Hospital would expand north across Jerome Street, which involves relocating Lansing Public School play fields and tennis courts to Parcel A. The proposed special land use is designed to be constructed and operated in a manner harmonious with the character of adjacent property and surrounding uses. The proposed special land use will not change the essential character of the surrounding area. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 19 The proposed special land use will not interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent property. The proposed special land use should not have any negative impacts on the surrounding area. The proposed special land use will not be hazardous to adjacent properties or involve uses, activities, materials or equipment which are detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of persons or property through excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, odor, fumes or glare. The proposed special land use will not impact the environment, public services or utilities. The proposed special land use is consistent with the intent and purpose of the zoning code and comprehensive plan. Staff recommends approval of the Special Land Use request by Sparrow Hospital to expand the existing surface parking lot from 109 spaces to approximately 390 spaces for property located in the 1200 block of Jerome Street, north of Sparrow Hospital, with the condition that a landscape screening and buffering plan for this temporary parking lot be submitted and approved pursuant to Chapter 1290 of the Zoning Code and the improvements to be reviewed and approved by all necessary agencies through site plan review. The Committee discussed the need for landscaping and how that could be accomplished, recognizing that the use is an interim use that is expected probably for three years. It would be unreasonable to require full buffering at this time until the construction plans are developed for the building. Further, there was discussion regarding the need to keep any lighting from adversely affecting the residential properties. Finally, there was discussion regarding the need for careful traffic planning by the hospital and possibly the school district to alleviate congestion at certain hours. Mr. Nischan suggested that the Lansing School District should make a driveway connection between their parking lots off Jerome Street and their parking lots off Pennsylvania in order to allow a second means of egress for employees as well as parents. Mr. Nischan suggested the fencing be repaired and the sidewalk along the west side of Holmes north of Jerome could be removed to add landscaping. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the interim use of the property for surface parking was PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 20 reasonable and consistent with the BTS Plan as long as the improvements are properly made. Also, the improvements can meet the criteria of Chapter 1282, Special Land Uses. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously 3-0 to recommend approval of SLU-13-99, 1200 Block Jerome Street, Parking Lot in "C" Residential District with conditions. Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to recommend approval of SLU-13-99, 1200 Block Jerome Street, Parking Lot in "C" Residential District with the following four conditions: 1. That approval expire for this interim use in January, 2006, unless an extension is granted by City Council. 2. That adequate landscape screening and buffering be installed. 3. That lighting shall not affect the residential neighbors. 4. That traffic patterns and hours of turn-over be established to reduce traffic impacts. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Frederick said in Committee discussion took place concerning landscaping, screening and buffering for the neighborhood, and lighting control. His concern was the traffic patterns and how traffic flow will be designed. "I don't believe that Sparrow Hospital quite has a handle on how to move cars in and out of their parking lots." Parents pick up children from Pattengill. There is much traffic. This parking lot is only going to make this worse if it is not designed intelligently for exiting and entering traffic. Mr. Nischan said even before the diverter and before this proposal, the school drop off- pick up was a problem. He suggested discussion with the School District about putting in a little connector between their southern lot and their northern drive, which would enable parents to pull in, drop off and pull out where there is a light on Pennsylvania, or even reverse the flow. But at least it would not have to turn into a little cul-de-sac. Ms. Love said in previous years there has been discussion with the School District relating to joining parking lots of Eastern and Pattengill. There is concern for student safety as they cross to the Johnson Fieldhouse and to the play fields to the east. It is a traffic nightmare. The traffic solution is not easy nor obvious. Miller. . . Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith. . . Aye Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Keene. . .Aye Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried unanimously; SLU-13-99, 1200 Block Jerome Street, Parking Lot in "C" Residential District with conditions as above was APPROVED. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 21 Next meeting is Wednesday, January 19, 2000, at 4 p.m. in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 2. Urban Development Committee - Mr. Smith, Chair. Next meeting Tuesday, January 18, 2000, at 4 p.m. in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. Chairman Nischan asked for volunteers to attend UDC in the absence of Mr. Ruge. Ms. Patrick said she has a conflict with the committee meeting and with MSPO Planning Board training at 5 p.m. that day at the Holiday Inn South. The UDC date, time and place has already been announced. Items to be discussed include the Parks Plan, MPA-1-99 and Act-21-99, and the Proposed Objectives, Goals and Projected Use of CDBG funds. Ms. Love noted that the CDBG matter is on a schedule; also the Parks Plan goes to Council for public hearing soon. Regarding MPA-1-99 and Act-21-99, Board members may want to discuss issues they want more information on, or issues raised by the public, and advise staff concerning what additional information the Committee requires. The first two items would probably be doable for an hour's meeting; Ms. Patrick can then leave. Mr. Smith inquired about rank ordering importance of the Parks Plan, and the Proposed Objectives, Goals and Projected Use of CDBG funds; which should take precedence? Ms. Love said the CDBG item, in order to meet its schedule, requires action by the Planning Board. The Parks Plan will have a hearing before the City Council. The Council Committee on Development and Planning will take it up after the public hearing and "I am sure they would be willing to take your comments at a later time if that was necessary." It was decided that Parks Plan could be the first item at a meeting beginning at 3:30 p.m. 3. Executive Committee - did not meet. C. Report from Planning Manager The corrections suggested by the Board have been made in the Work Program, and it has been submitted, together with the Department's budget. Including the Transportation Office, the total budget is about $12 million. Tonight you have received copies of the Housing Study and the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan. Thursday's paper will publish an article about the Plan by Mr. Delgado. "I did talk to him after we met last in December, and he promised a correction," though Ms. Love did not see it. We are working with a consultant and four other communities and surrounding townships to do modifications to the Master Plan and the PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 22 Zoning Code regarding groundwater and wellhead protection. We will have recommended language to you for modifications to the Master Plan and also to the Zoning Ordinance and other potential ordinances like the Board of Water and Light's regulations and Public Service regulations regarding sewers. The plan probably will be ready in April. We are going to ask Mr. Smith to assist in developing and laying out a public brochure to go along with the Comprehensive Plan for people who just want the public document for free and not pay for the $20 copy. D. Pending items: Future action required 1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-19-97, N.W. Cor. Cavanaugh &Aurelius, "F" Commercial to "G-2" Wholesale District (Tabled October 15, 1997) b. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) C. Z-4-98, 201 E. Grand River, "17-1" Commercial & "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) d. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) 2. Urban Development Committee a. Act-21-98, Ingham Regional Medical Center, Replacement Sign in S. Pennsylvania ROW (Tabled September 8, 1998) b. Act-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris St., Vacate ROW (Tabled February 16, 1999) a. Act-7-99, Somercroft Drive at Post Oak Lane, Vacate Public Right-of- way for School Parking (Referred to UDC May 18, 1999) d. Act-14-99, 100 Blk. West Elm Street, Sale of Property (Tabled October 26, 1999) e. Act-15-99, 703 East Shiawassee Street, Purchase of Property for Parks Dept. Oak Park Field Office (Re-referred to Committee November 2, 1999). Chairman Nischan noted that items a and b have been on the agenda for a long time. The applicants will be sent letters informing them that if there is no substantive action, the cases will be closed. Mr. Ruff said that the applicant for Z-19-97 was sent such a letter; however, as yet no response has been received. 8. NEW BUSINESS - None. 9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None. 10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Mr. Miller asked about distribution of the Downtown Lansing Comprehensive Plan. Copies for sale will be about $20. Those receiving copies are members of the Steering Committee, Planning Board, City Council, area libraries--Lansing Public, MSU, LCC, Library of Michigan. The Blue Ribbon Committee, meeting Thursday, January 13, 2000, received excerpts. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 11, 2000 PAGE 23 We have printed 60 copies to start out with. After they are distributed, we will make copies available to the public. Mr. Smith asked if the Plan will accessible through the City's web page; Ms. Love said it has to be linked, and Sam Quon is working on it and also on the Housing Study. 11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS 12. ADJOURNMENT was at 9:47 p.m. Respectfully submitted Eleanor K. Love, Secretary Planning Board mn0111200099 a:\54 CITY of LANSING INTEROFFICE COMMUNICATION MEMORANDUM DATE: November 17, 1999 TO: Planning Board Members FR: Doris M..Witherspoon, Senior Planner AQ RE: Additional Information - LS-22-99, 921, 927,1000,1004, 1008, 1010, 1016, 1020 West Lenawee At the November 17, 1999 Planning Board meeting, LS-22-99, 921, 927,1000,1004, 1008, 1010, 10:1.6;: 1020West-Lenawee was tabled pending additional information. Specifically, Planning Board members were interested in the following: What precipitated the change for the house at 921 W. Lenawee to be preserved instead'of the original proposal to purchase and demolish? The property at 921 W. Lenawee is owned by Dianne Clark, Chairperson of the Seven Block Citizen's District Council (CDC). The original plan discussed demolishing the structure at 921 W, Lenawee_along with other structures as part of the plan to construct a cul-de-sac at-the west end of Lenawee Street. However, it was discovered that construction o de- f-the cut- sac would not require demolition of structu rally sound homes as anticipated.. The Plan was therefore amended. On June 24, 1998, the CDC made recommendation,to amend the Seven Block Development Plan. Section 4 of the document(attached) addressed-the acquisition section of the plan. Specifically, § 4.5 reads, "acquire`o,n a`selective basis, propertyt�long Lenawee Street for ptarposes of facilitating rehabilitation and for facilitating conversion of rental to owner-occupied. The Planning Board, at their August 4, 1998 meeting, voted unanimously (7-0) to recommend approval of the amendments to the Seven Block Area Development Plan. City Council approved the amendments at their August 31, 1998 meeting. In addition, at the January 14, 1999 Seven Block meeting, as part of.a staff,report reviewing the closure of Lenawee Street (-ACT-27-98) a proposed design was presented and discussed with CDC members which included the proposed design to construct a cul- de-sac and implement the plan as amended. Memo to Planning Board November 17 1999 LS-22-99 Page 2 Input from CDC on this proposal At their January 14, 1999 meeting, the Seven Block CDC approved the concept of the lot split by approving ACT-27-98, Street Closure on Lenawee Street. The proposed redevelopment of property was included as part of the staff report (See attached map and minutes). A motion was made by Fred Johnson and seconded by Mary Wrigley to move forward with ACT-27-98. Rationale for adding a home to the property between 921 and 1001 W. Lenawee The Seven Block CDC reviewed the information outlined on the map. The map clearly showed that the structure at 927 W. Lenawee, due to poor condition and in keeping with the Plan amendments adopted June 24, 1998, would be demolished and 1-2 new homes were proposed for development. The structure was found upon inspection to be structurally unsound and too costly to renovate, which was the first choice. At that time, there were no objections to the proposal. The lot split is the means of implementing the plan as amended and as proposed in the Act 285 review. Design of Structures The design of new homes being constructed in the Seven Block Neighborhood was approved by the Seven Block Citizens District Council prior to any new construction taking place. A design subcommittee was appointed to review alternative proposals. A brainstorming section was held on December 3, 1997. The City hired a consultant, Robert Morris with City Vision, to develop proposals to review. On April 9, 1998, the subcommittee met and identified a list of possible designs which included: gable roofs, garages constructed closer to the houses for safety reasons, designs to blend in with existing structures, etc. The new homes reflect the character of the neighborhood and are intended to fit into the area. This was a "high priority" established by the subcommittee and adopted by the CDC. The consensus approval of the CDC is reflected in the homes being built. One floor plan allowed for a first floor bedroom and laundry to accommodate a desire to provide for elderly needs. Ranch style design was rejected as inappropriate to the area. CITIZEN'S DISTRICT COUNCIL SEVEN BLOCK AREA DEVELOPMENT MINUTES January 14, 1999 5:30 p.m. Members Present: Dyanne Clark, Fred Johnson, Mary Wrigley, Orby Gray, James Ballard, Geneva Smith, Andrew Husband, Members Absent: Elizabeth Duncan (excused), Rev. Vernon Moore, Carol Skillings, Luke DeMyers Guests: Dorothea Mitchell, Michael Mitchell, Terry Jones, Ron Whitmore, Sasha Williams Staff: Doris Witherspoon, Denise Estee, Emil Winnicker The meeting was called to order at 5:35 p.m. by Chairperson Dyanne Clark. Roll call. There were seven members present. Chairperson Clark wished everyone a Happy New Year. Introductions were made. Ms. Witherspoon reviewed the Act 285 Review process. An Act 285 Review process is conducted when the City purchases, sells or substantially changes the use of property. According to Section 125.36 of Act 285, PA 1931, as amended, the character, location and extent of the proposal must be evaluated. ACT-27-98. 1000 Block of Lenawee. Street Closure This is a.request by the City of Lansing Development Office to close West Lenawee Street at M.L. King Jr., Blvd by constructing a cul-de-sac, "T"or other construction pursuant to the Seven Block Area Development Plan. ACT-28-98, 900-1000 Block of W. Washtenaw, Street Vacation This is-a request by the City of Lansing Development Office to vacate the street in the 900- 1000 Blk of W. Washtenaw between Butler Blvd. and M.L. King Jr., Blvd. (See attached map) for the construction of a Neighborhood Commercial Center pursuant to the Seven Block Area Development Plan. There was a concern regarding access to the property at 230 S. Butler (at Washtenaw). The City was aware of that and did riot vacate.that portion of the street . so that.the resident can continue to have access. CDC reviewed the information and asked questions. Ms. Witherspoon reminded the group that the two Act 285 reviews are pursuant to the Seven Block Plan. She also indicated that a public hearing will be held before the Lansing Planning Board on Tuesday, February 2, Seven Block Citizens's District Council, January 14, 1999 minutes, Page 2. 1999, 7:00 p.m. A notice of the public hearing will be advertised in the Lansing State Journal as well as mailed to residents and property owners in the Seven Block Area. Mr. Johnson made a motion seconded by Ms. Wrigley to move forward with ACT27-98 and ACT-28-98, pursuant to the Seven Block Plan. Motion carried with one abstention. OFFICE DEVELOPMENT Mr. Winnicker presented two possible office developments proposed by Abraham and Sisbro for the Office Development Center: Plan 1 -Three-story, 95,000 square feet, building oriented towards Martin Luther King. Flexibility of additional land Plan 2 - Two-one story buildings 72,000 square feet building (36,000 square feet each). Provides more open space. Once final plans are developed,,the design for the office development will be presented to the group for review. The City is looking for creativity and flexibility in terms of the office development. In the development agreement, a timeframe will be included; a purchase offer will be signed; charter required, etc. Paul Barbour, Architect, has been hired to design the office-development. There were some questions regarding the status of the existing store at the northwest corner of Kalamazoo/Butler. There has been an offer made by the city. To date, there has not been a response. Also, there were questions regarding the impact of traffic on Kalamazoo Street; rezoning in the area and the two historic houses in the area. The.group inquired about the status of two(2)houses on S. Butler: 522 (being renovated) and 410 (vacant). Other Seven Block Activities It appears that Union Missionary Baptist Church may be postponing the sell of their existing facility for a little while. To date, the City has made twelve (12) offers on properties; there are four(4) structures to acquire. The State of Michigan may extend the Renaissance Zone program. The meeting adjourned at 6:25 p.m. Act-27-98, 1000 Block of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., Street Closure GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: City of Lansing Development Office 316 N. Capitol Lansing, MI 48933 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Owner REQUESTED ACTION: Act 285 Review EXISTING LAND USE: Residential structures EXISTING ZONING: "C" Residential PROPOSED ZONING: No change PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: approx. 100 ftz SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Residential S: Residential E: Capitol Commons W: R.O.W. SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "C' Residential S: "C' Residential E: 'CUP' (Community Unit Plan) W: R.O:W. MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Seven Block Area Development Plan designates this area for street closure for the construction of a cul-de-sac. SPECIFIC INFORMATION This is.a request.by the City.of Lansing Development Office to close West Lenawee Street at M.L. Kmg Jr., Blvd. (See attached map) by constructing a cul-de-sac, "T" or other construction pursuant to the Seven Block Area Development Plan. ACT-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., - Street Closure, Pg. 2. AGENCY RESPONSES AMERITECH: No response received yet. Assessor: According. to "Future Land Use" Map attached, this is more likely to require a re-platting of the area, as a re-alignment of lots and streets is indicated. BWL: See attached. Building Safety: No objection, does not appear to impact the building code. Code Compliance: No response received yet. Development: Street to be closed pursuant to Seven Block plan pursuant to in Spring 1999. Recommend owners/occupants on both sides of street be contacted and notified of proposal. MDOT/Transportation Engineer Information and input-critical. Should hold public hearing on this. Fire Marshal: Approved. Historic District: The Historic District Commission recommends against the street vacation. We are preparing a nomination to the National Register of Historic Places and a request for a historic district (residential) in the area. The entire area could qualify. (See attached) - Media One: No response received yet. MDOT: No comment on this proposal. Parks and Rec.: Closure of Lenawee would keep in many ways to turn this back into a better residential area. The proposed park space is of a size and shape not.suitable for that type of use - leave a narrow strip for green belt and turn the rest into.residential - neighborhood.. Parks should not be located on busy streets. Whether the neighborhood service center is a duplication of Letts Community Center (three blocks away) we could not determine. If it is, we would recommend some other use. ACT-27-981 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., - Street Closure, Pg. 3. Police: No response received yet. Public Service: See attached. Seven Block Citizens District Council: Approved at the January 14, 1999 meeting. Trans. Engr.: See attached. ANALYSIS An Act 285 Review is conducted when the City purchases, sells or substantially changes the use of property. According to Section 125.36 of Act 285, PA 1931, as amended, the character, location and extent of the proposal must be evaluated. The following is a review of the project in accordance with the standards of the Municipal Planning Act (P.A. 285). BACKGROUND Ordinance#811, City Council passed an ordinance to provide for the creation of the Seven Block Neighborhood Development Area. 8/2193 - City Council adopted the Seven Block Plan. The purpose of the Seven Block Plan is to revitalize the neighborhood bounded by Allegan Street on the north, Butler Blvd. on the east, St. Joseph Street on the south and the southbound lanes of M.L. Fling Blvd. on the west. Revitalization will include the rehabilitation of existing homes, acquisition of properties north of Kalamazoo for a .neighborhood commercial center and commercial development along St. Joseph Street. The Seven Block Development Area Plan-also identified several strategies to be undertaken in the development of this area. The streets in the Seven Block Area are part of.a grid pattern established in the original plat of the City. However, changes in the overall patterns outside the area caused by .the replatting of Capitol Commons and design of M.L. .King have effectively eliminated the basic grid system. The.development of Capitol Commons and the State Museum and Library, and the location of the entrances to associated. parking facilities creates a substantial flow of non-local traffic through the Seven Block Area. ACT-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., - Street Closure, Pg. 4 Lenawee is aligned with the major entrance to Capitol Commons. Lenawee is designated as a local residential street and receives nonlocal traffic in excess of generally defined amounts. Much of this nonlocal traffic has also been observed moving at high rate of speed. LOCATION: The street is located in the Seven Block Neighborhood between M.L. King and S. Butler Street and is in a designated Renaissance Zone Area. The construction of a cul-de-sac in the 1000 block of Lenawee will be located on the south side of the street requiring the removal of the property at 1017 W. Lenawee and the acquisition of the two(2)vacant parcels located immediately to the west(see map). The house at 1017 W. Lenawee will be demolished. According to a letter of January 4, 1995, from the Bureau of Michigan History, State Preservation Office, there was a listing of houses that did not appear to meet the national register criteria. Among those houses, 1017 W. Lenawee was included. Pursuant to the amended Plan, most other residential structures along Lenawee Street will be rehabilitated for single family home ownership. 2-4 structures will be removed due to poor condition or overcrowding. 2-3 new single family homes may also be constructed. CHARACTER: The residential character of the neighborhood would not change as a result of the construction of the cul-de-sac and the closure of Lenawee Street. In fact, this should be an improvement to the residential area since the closed portion of Lenawee will eliminate non-local cut-through traffic. Also, the City's priority is to retain/rehab as many houses along Lenawee Street as possible for single family home ownership. In terms of the historical character of the area, the houses along Lenawee Street were among those identified in the'letter of January 4, 1995 as not meeting the national register criteria for historical properties. EXTENT: The proposed closure of Lenawee will eliminate the cut-through traffic. The cul-de- sac will be constructed being constructed south of the street requiring the removal of one house, 1017 W. Lenawee, and the acquisition of the two (2) vacant parcels located immediately to the west. The residential structures along Lenawee Street will be rehabilitated for-single family home ownership. A diagram of the proposed cul-de-sac is 'included in the report. In reference. to the increase in traffic, according to David'Berridge, Transportation Engineer for the City of Lansing, has 'indicated in his response that "the closure of Lenawee Street will increase the volume of traffic on the other local streets-in the area as drivers are required to use alternate routes. Increased traffic can be expected on Hillsdale, Kalamazoo and ACT-27-981 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., - Street Closure, Pg. 5 Butler. These street can accept the additional traffic without any anticipated traffic delays or safety concerns. All of the displaced traffic would be considered normal neighborhood activity in the area.° OTHER: This case was introduced to the Urban Development Committee at their January 19, 1999 meeting. At that time, concern was expressed regarding: 1). Housing Conditions and historical significance; 2). Demolition of housing in the area; 3). Volume of traffic; and 4). The number of houses being removed for the construction of the cul-de-sac. All of the concerns have been addressed in the. report. The Public Hearing was held on February 2, 1999 and there was one person speaking in opposition to the closure of Lenawee Street out of concern for demolition of housing that might occur. See attached memo. The City is implementing the Seven Block Plan and this closure of the street is pursuant to the Seven Block Plan which was approved by Planning Board and Lansing City Council, 1993. Also, residents in the area are aware of the plan and activities related to the plan. As a matter of fact, the Seven Block Citizens District Council was not only instrumental in the development of this plan but also supported the recent amendments. In addition, the group is informed of activities related to the plan as well as provide input into decisions regarding the area. The Seven Block Citizens District Council approved Act-27-98, 1000 Block of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., Street Closure at their January 14, 1999 meeting. SUMMARY The street closure is located in the 1000 block of West Lenawee. The residential character of the neighborhood will not change significantly as. a result of the construction of the cul-de-sac. There will be one house, 1017 W. Lenawee, demolished for the cul-de-sac. According to the State Historic Preservation Office, this house does not appear to have any historic significance. In fact, this should be an improvement to the residential area and considered a generally accepted traffic calming technique. The Act 285 Review process is in compliance with the Seven Block Development Plan. The Seven Block Citizens District Council, Planning Board and.City Council adopted.the plan in 1993 and amended the plan.in 1998. A public hearing was held on Tuesday, February 2, 1999. . ACT-27-98, 1000 Blk. of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd., - Street Closure, Pg. 6. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of ACT-27-98, the closure of the 1000 Block of W. Lenawee at M.L. King Jr., Blvd. - i ---- 3!• YY' r ��� YT' !L'Iir Yr- -- -- yg• 1i.f' t=.�• /If•s- it • � O I 10 �— 0�0 � a � r i. f o 1 13 I 15 I 17 18 19 20 �3) jr a c ~\Q �-� E1titho g 5F1ab Il�.i000, Vae+D /iIo /gr{r /O!0 _ IooB 1004 logo tt0 T18 Try 41L 116 Tou goo , de-mac W. r esrdu►ea � LENAWEE .„,,y ► lilt, 10172 ow►x 0 00 27 921 117 111511131109 �► VAC •� ° ' r 33' 46' 33' r' rr Sf' g5et' 70' I 16' 3�t 3�� 3y1 3%1 301 v 167- 1 w 4r 8 2 gel m I 10 B •y-, � 1L 5 4 tj 1, 144 20 3, 13 I 14 I 15 16 1 18 19 - { ,�� I 2Nl -- - • � /Y.ca a y � 0 k I I I ♦ iis.s � _ — ZZ 2E-. 33 ys 7J.�j' '. io so root loo0 9tq qtt !/� 9/y f/o ya, — -- 4 W. HILLSDA•LE 17 Iol 007 i 9tS 9t3 9n i! tot T•f JJ ioo N 11 J= r/y' rZr 0� h 1 g I s . 'ell Cpl 241 Q3' �i� , yip � NS1N" DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT P 316 N.CAPITOL AVENUE • LANSING,MI 48933.1236• (517)483.4066 • FAx(517)483-6036 �cHiG PLANNING OFFICE David C. Hollister, Mayor August 19, 1998 Honorable Mayor David C. Hollister Ninth Floor, City Hall Lansing, MI 48933-1694 Dear Mayor Hollister: RE: Seven Block Amendments The Lansing.Planning Board, at their meeting on August 4, 1998, voted unanimously (7-0)to recommend approval of the amendments to the Seven Block Area Development Plan as outlined in the attached documentation. The Planning Board found based on testimony and evidence that there needs to be flexibility in development of the site and therefore recommends, along with the Citizens District Council (CDC), that the potential for office development should also be included. The Planning Board is committed to assuring that any office and/or commercial development'located.on the site needs to be designed in a"sensitive" manner which is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Since the Seven Block Area Plan is an adopted ordinance; any amendments will require City Council approval. A public hearing was held before City Council on August 3, 1998. There was no opposition to the proposed amendments. Following your review of this matter, please refer this to City Council for their approval of the amendments to the Seven Block Plan. Sincerely, Eleanor K. Love, Secretary. Lansing Planning Board EKL:DMW cc: Dennis J.Sykes James D.Smiertka ® Please Recycle "Equal Opportunity Employer' SEVEN BLOCK AREA DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT#1 June 24, 1998 Background The Seven Block Area Development Plan was adopted by the City Council of Lansing through Ordinance No. 866, on August 2, 1993. The intent of the ordinance as stated in the ordinance is as follows: An ordinance of the City of Lansing, Michigan,for the purpose of adding a new chapter 1222 to provide for, subject to the availability of financing, the adoption of strategies for the implementation of the seven (7) block neighborhood development plan; the adoption of the seven (7) block neighborhood development plan itself and the procedures for monitoring the implementation of the seven (7) block neighborhood development plan. The Ordinance approved the plan and set forth the direction for implementation. Implementation included CDC monitoring of progress. As an outcome of the monitoring,the CDC has recommended the following amendments to the Seven Block Neighborhood Development plan. Amendments 1. Replace "neighborhood center" with "office/commercial center" when referenced throughout the document. 2. Amend the"Goals and Policies" and"Recommendation" of the"Economic Development" section as follows: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOALS AND POLICIES • Encourage the development of an rtciglrborhovd service OFFICFYCOMMERCL4L center, with COMMERCIAL uses TARGETED TO THOSE THAT whick directly support the neighborhood such as-a grocery, Laundromat, dry-cleaner, pharmacy, hair stylist, etc., provided adequate parking is assured. .ate,and WheLC adequate paticirig exists�. upportnew=d existing businesses RECOMMENDATIONS A. "OFFICE./CON IM ERCIAL CENTER 3. The CDC strongly recommends the development of an OFFICE/commercial center, WITH COMMERCLAL USES ORIENTED TO COMMERCL4L NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE BUSINESSES. w1rich includes at least a EXAMPLES OF NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICE BUSINESSES include a GROCERYSTORE,dry cleaning station, postal station, hair stylist, restaurant, clothing store, hardware, automatic bank teller, community policing station, or any other similar commercial use to benefit and serve neighborhood residents. GENERAL PROFESSIONAL OFFICE USE NOT IN COMPETITION WITH OFFICE DEVELOPMENT IN THE CBD IS ALSO RECOMMENDED. EXAMPLES INCLUDE MEDICAL OFFICES, LAW OFFICES, INSURANCE, LOBBYIST, ETC9RIe 10=tiOLI selected by tire residents is a parcel containing ap,=Xfinately fb=acres-at 61C MLti=t COMeL Of K2da== Md King&OgaU. The site would extend north a1mg Mlegan Street and wotdd include tire r=tion of��htenawp Street. THE AREA TO BE DEVELOPED AS THE OFFICE/COMMERCIALICENTER IS DESCRIBED AS APPROXIMATELY FOUR ACRES OF PROPERTY BORDERED BY M.L KING ON THE WEST, BUTLER STREET ON THE EAST, KALA MZOO STREET ON THE SOUTHAND THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE OF PARCELS SITUATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WASHTENAW STREET. (SEVERAL PROPERTIES ON THE BUTLER STREET NOKH OF WASHTENA W ARE NOT INCL UDED) 3. Amend Rehabilitation section to include: 3.1. Owner/occupants eligible for up to$35,000, 0%interest loan to fix up their homes. Loan to be forgiven over seven (7) year period. Repairs and improvements will be done according to standards established for City of Lansing sponsored CDBG and/or Home programs. Other funding programs,such as the State sponsored Rehabilitation Assistance Program(RAP)may also be applied to supplement, replace or leverage City funds. The Development Office shall determine the appropriate program(s)to apply. 3.2. The.CDBG Program will be utilized primarily for projects limited to code related and weatherization work. This will allow for work on properties that would be too expensive to rehabilitate(within the$35,000 limit)under the HOME Program. 3.3 The HOME Program will be utilized for projects were more extensive rehabilitation is possible within the$35,000 limit. HOME projects include not only code related and weatheriztion items, bid other rehabilitation standards required as part of the City's HOME Program. 3.3. More than one program may be utilized `for a property. However, the total City contribution to the-project shall not exceed$35,000. The owner may choose to utilize other sources of funding, such as savings and State programs, to complete a project that exceeds $35,000. 3.5. If economically feasible, rehab instead of demo 909 W. Kalamazoo pursuant to recommendation of the Michigan State Historic Preservation Officer. 3.6. IncrCase funds for bricks and mortar improvements available to nonprofit housing corporations to undertake projects through the City's Lease/Purchase Program in the Seven Block Neighborhood from$12,000 to$18,000. All other LeaseJPurchase Program procedures will apply. 3.7 Allowance of a maximum of$25,000 per unit to nonprofits engaged in improving rental property in Seven Block Neighborhood through the HOME Rental Rehabilitation Program. All other HOME Rental Rehab procedures will apply, including the match requirement. 4. Amend the acquisition section to include: 4.1. Acquire and demolish 910 W. Kalamazoo. The structure is on the same parcel as the grocery store which is designated for same. 4.2. Acquire and demolish 222 and 600 S. Butler due to bad condition and high cost of rehab. 4.3. South of Kalamazoo Street - Acquire and demolish structures only for the following reasons: - relieve an overcrowded condition as established in the current plan - Dilapidated condition with a rehab cost exceeding$35,000 or 80% the post rehab value of the structure, whichever is greater. - Land use change established in the current plan No property currently designated for rehab to be acquired until inspection and cost estimate is completed by the Development Office verifying that cost to rehab according to CDBG and/or HOME program exceeds$35,000 or 80/of the post rehab value of the structure, whichever is .greater, and no other grant or forgivable loan programs are available to help finance the cost of improvement. 4.4. Acquire and remove 322 and 324 & Butler to accommodate redevelopment of the 300 Block of S.Butler. A consolidated site for development of mixed office/residential uses consistent with the current plan will then be available. 4.5. Acquire,on a selective basis,property along Lenawee Street for purposes of facilitating rehabilitation and for facilitating conversion of rental to owner-occupied units. All sections,maps and narratives in existing plan shall be changed to reflect the above amendments. All sections, maps and narratives contrary to or in conflict with these amendments shall be deleted. �- r' ��. -- { ' .r�7. I - - - r i, .� - - �. _ �.. .: - - ; � - \ � i <a � � � � - _ � ,. _ ' .I i _ _ � t., - , !. ''� .— ... j `Y r � _ - _ .y .i LS-22-999 921, 927,1000, 1004, 1008, 1010, 1016, 1020 West Lenawee GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: City of Lansing Development Office 316 N. Capitol Ave Lansing, MI 48933 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Owner (majority of lots) REQUESTED ACTION: Lot Split EXISTING LAND USE: Residential EXISTING ZONING: "C" Residential PROPOSED ZONING: No change PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: Eight (8) lots 33' x 198' = 6,534 ft2 (5) 38' x 82.5' = 3,135 ft2 (1) 66' x 198' = 13,068 ft2 (2) SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: One-Two Family Residential S: One-Two Family Residential E: One-Two Family Residential W: One-Two Family Residential/MDOT SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "C" Residential District S: "C" Residential District E: "C" Residential District W: "C" Residential District MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Seven Block Area Development Plan designates this area as residential. BACKGROUND INFORMATION This is a request by the City of Lansing, Development Office, 316 N. Capitol, Lansing, for variances of the Subdivision Regulation for several lot splits to divide properties at 921, 927, 1000, 1004, 1008, 1010, 1016, 1020 West Lenawee, in the Seven Block Area. LS-22-99, 921,927,1000,1004,1008 1010,1016 1020 W. Lenawee Page 2 Twelve feet of property would be split off from the east side of the vacant lot (3301- 17-478-361) formerly known as 927 W. Lenawee and added to 921 W. Lenawee having the resulting legal descriptions: 921 W Lenawee The West % of Lot 5 and the East 12 feet of Lot 6, Block 8, Bush, Butler and Sparrow Addition to the City of Lansing 927 W Lenawee The West 54 feet of Lot 6, Block 8, Bush, Butler and Sparrow's Addition to the City of Lansing. The City of Lansing, Development Office is proposing to have a new home built on the vacant portion, but the twelve feet is to be split off to create a private driveway for 921 W. Lenawee. The lots at 921 and 927 W. Lenawee will have widths of 45' and 54' respectively and lot width to depth ratios of 1:4.4 and 1.3.6 respectively. Section 1236.07 of the Subdivision Regulations requires a minimum lot width of 60' and a maximum lot width to depth ratio of 1.2.5. Variances to the Subdivision regulations are requested. Six (6) lots including 1000 W. Lenawee, the vacant lots formerly known as 1004 (3301-17-476-121), 1008(3301-17-476-111)and 1010(3301-17-476-101), and the homes at 1016 and 1020 W. Lenawee are proposed to be redivided into four (4) lots more particularly described as: Parcel A - 1000 W. Lenawee: The East 42' of Lot 16, Block 9, Bush, Butler and Sparrow's Addition to the City of Lansing Parcel B - Vacant lot, parts of both former 1004 and 1008 W. Lenawee: The West 24 feet of Lot 16 and the East 26 feet of Lot 15, Bush, Butler and Sparrow's Addition to the City of Lansing Parcel C - vacant lot, parts of both former 1008 and 1010 W Lenawee: The West 40 feet of Lot 15 and the East 13 feet of Lot 14, Block 9, Bush, Butler and Sparrow's Addition to the City of Lansing Parcel D - Lot composed of part of vacant lot former 1010 W. Lenawee and current 1016 and 1020 W. Lenawee: That part of the Lots 13 and 14, Block 9, BUSH, BUTLER & SPARROW'S ADDITION to the City of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan, beginning on the South line of said Lot 14 at a point S90000'00"W 13.00 feet from Southeast corner of said Lot 14: thence continuing along said South line S90000'00"W 20.00 feet to LS-22-99, 921,927,1000,1004,1008,1010,1016,1020 W. Lenawee Page 3. a point of curvature; thence Northwesterly 89.48 feet along the arc of a 60.00 foot radius curve to the left whose central angle is 85027'04" and whose chord bears N62011'49"W 81.42 feet to a point on the West line of the East 38.50 feet of said Lot 13; thence along said West line N00147'00" W 44.52 feet to the North line of the South 82.50 feet of said Lot 13; thence along said North line N90000'00"E 38.50 feet to the line common to Lots 13 and 14; thence along said common line N00047'00"W 115.50 feet to the Northwest corner of Lot 14;thence along the North line of Lot 14 N90000'00"E 53.00 feet;thence S00047'00"E 198.00 feet to the point of beginning. There will be two (2) homes relocated onto Parcels C and D to accommodate the cul-de-sac. Also, a new home is proposed to be built on Parcel B. See attached drawings. The lot at 1000 W. Lenawee will have a width of 42' and a lot width to depth ratio of 1:4.7. The vacant lots will be 50' and 53' wide and have lot width to depth ratios of 1:3.9 and 1.3.7 respectively. The odd shaped lot (Parcel D) meets the lot width to depth ratio. Section 1236.07 of the Subdivision Regulations requires a maximum lot width to depth ratio of 1:2.5 and a minimum lot width of 60'. Therefore, variances to the Subdivision Regulations are requested. SPECIFIC INFORMATION AGENCY RESPONSES: AMERITECH: No response received yet. Assessor: See attached. BWL: No response received yet. Building Safety: No objection. Code Compliance: No response received yet. Development: Recommend quick approval. Construction and relocation scheduled for Spring 2000. Fire Marshal: No response received yet. Public Service: Public Service cannot guarantee the existence of sanitary service leads to serve proposed house relocations. Sewer work to install leads should be completed prior to final paving on Lenawee. LS-22-99, 921,927,1000,1004,1008,1010,1016,1020 W. Lenawee Page 4. Seven Block Area Citizens District Council: No response received yet. ANALYSIS BACKGROUND Ordinance#811, City Council passed an ordinance to provide for the creation of the Seven Block Neighborhood Development Area. 8/2/93 - City Council adopted the Seven Block Plan. The purpose of the Seven Block Plan is to revitalize the neighborhood bounded by Allegan Street on the north, Butler Blvd. on the east, St. Joseph Street on the south and the southbound lanes of M.L. King Blvd. on the west. Revitalization will include the rehabilitation of existing homes, acquisition of properties north of Kalamazoo for a neighborhood commercial center and commercial development along St. Joseph Street. The Seven Block Development Area Plan also identified several strategies to be undertaken in the development of this area. Location, Size and Character The area of the proposed lot splits is located on Lenawee Street between M.L. King and S. Butler Street in the Seven Block Area and is in a designated Renaissance Zone Area. The proposed lot splits are on both the north and south sides of the street: 921, 927, 1000, 1004, 1008, 1010, 1016 and 1020 W. Lenawee. Of those lots, all are owned by the City except 921 W. Lenawee, there are tenants occupying 1016 & 1020 W. Lenawee and the remaining are vacant. The construction of a cul-de-sac is proposed at the western part of the street on the north side of W. Lenawee. Qn the south side of W. Lenawee, there are two (2) lots (921 and a vacant lot 3301-17-478-361 formerly known as 927 W. Lenawee) proposed to be split. Currently, there is a resident at 921 and the lot measures 33' x 198', the vacant lot to the west(formerly known as-.927 W. Lenawee) measures 66' x 198'. Twelve feet of property is proposed to be split off from the vacant lot and added to 921 W. Lenawee to create a private driveway. There will be new house built on this vacant lot. The resulting lot area would be as follows: 45' x 198', 921 W. Lenawee and 54' x 198', vacant lot formerly known as 927 W. Lenawee. Even though the proposed Report prepared by Doris Witherspoon, 11/99. LS-22-99 921 927 1000 1004 1008 1010 1016 1020 W. Lenawee Page 5. configurations for the lot at 921 W. Lenawee is larger and the other lot is smaller, they still do not meet code requirements. Section 1236.07 of the Subdivision Regulations requires a minimum 60'wide lots and a lot width to depth ratio of 1:2.5. Address Lot Area Proposed Lot width to Lot width Variance Lot Width Proposed Variance Lot Area depth Ratio Required Lot Width required 921 W. 33'x198' 45'x198' 1:2.5 1:4.4 1.9 60' 45' 15, Lenawee Vacant lot 66'x 198' 54 x 198" 1:2.5 1:3.6 1.1 60' 54' 6' (aka 927 W. Lenawee) On the north side of W. Lenawee, six (6) lots are proposed to be divided into four (4) lots which the City owns including the occupied structures at 1016 and 1020 W. Lenawee. The current lot configuration consist of: four(4) - 33'x198', one (1) -66' x 198', one odd shaped lot - 38.5 x 82.5'. The proposed lot pattern will include two homes being relocated and anew home being built. The proposed cul-de-sac will be located on the north side, instead of the south as it was once proposed, of W. Lenawee. Attached are maps illustrating the existing lot pattern and the proposed lot pattern. The proposed lot splits would be larger in width to the existing structures yet comparable in size to each other. The proposed lot pattern will not meet the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations.- Parcel Proposed Lot Proposed Lot Lot Width Variance Lot width to Lot width Variance Area Width Required depth Ratio required Parcel A 42'x 198' 42' 60, 18, 1:2.5 1:4.7 2.2 Parcel B 50'x 198' 50' 60, 10, 1:2.5 1:3.9 1.4 Parcel C 53'x 198' 53' 60' 7' 1:2.5 1:3.7 1.2 Parcel D 91.5' x 196' 91.5' 60' 0' 1:2.5 1:2.16 0 The odd-shaped lot (Parcel D) meets the lot width-to-depth ratio. The aforementioned lot splits are in accordance with the Seven Block Area Development Plan. Vehicular and Pedestrian Traffic The construction of the cul-de-sac on Lenawee Street should eliminate any cut through traffic from M.L.King. There should not be any adverse impact on vehicular and/or pedestrian traffic. In fact, the proposed cul-de-sac should be an Report prepared by Doris Witherspoon, 11/99. LS-22-99, 921,927,1000,1004 1008 1010 1016 1020 W. Lenawee Page 6 improvement of the circulation in the area. Physical Character Public Service has indicated that they cannot guarantee the existence of sanitary service leads to serve proposed house relocations and sewer work to install leads should be completed prior to final paving on Lenawee. Impact on Future Land Use Patterns The proposed lot splits should not set a precedent or have an adverse impact on the future land use patterns in this area. The request is in compliance with the Seven Block Area. Summary The location, size and character are reasonable with approval of variances to the Subdivision Regulations. There should not be any adverse impact on vehicular and/or pedestrian traffic. The proposed lot splits should not set a precedent or have an adverse impact on the future land use patterns in this area. The lot split request is in compliance with the Seven Block Plan. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the request by the City of Lansing, Development Office, for variances of the Subdivision Regulation for several lot splits to divide properties at 921, 927, 1000, 1004, 1008, 1010, 1016, 1020 West Lenawee, in the Seven Block Area. Report prepared by Doris Witherspoon, 11/99. 7 LS-22-99, 921,927, 1000,1004, 1008,1010,1016,1020 W. Lenawee NORTH 90 O 00' 13 40' 26' 24' 42' ' _ LOT 13 Ll 14 LOT 15 LOT 6 9,90 SQ.FT. 10,494 SQ.FT. O W O, co z 11421 S .FT. O GAR. ' N 9 N 38.50' h d 3 z u 10 0 7.5' O o z I e� z - ro 89,48 V W 2-ST. RES. m F m m J 1 O N = 16 N F Apo W (L 2 4 z �� 00 3 ' ao 20' 22' a 00. iz�AL� � m PORCH pp, r I6� 15.9' S90 00 53.00' 50.00' .'��OF Mrcy�� 6' SIDEWALK 6'SIDEWALK 6'SIDEWALK RADIUS POINT CO JAMES E. * STEPHENS- TT k CURB CURB CURB r PROPEMONAL cc SURVEYOR 0 LENAWEE STREET ��y ,aJrua ��" LS-22-99, 921,927, 1000,1004, 1008,1010,1016,1020 W. Lenawee NORTH 90 M''00"E 53.00' 13' CC J. 40' 26' f 2 4' 4 2' 1 7�1 LOT 13 LOT 14 LOT �ItC�rG I5 LO I��Z • pace 9,90 SQ.FT. A laT iii 10.494 Sq.FT. 0 O ��VW� OD L Z 11,421 SQ.FT. N GAR. 38 50' J N a z a- 10 zI ° 7.5' F ° o Z 13.8' 8g,48, J V a m t 2-ST. RES. ILL O N N Q co - �`!7° �� n 20' 24 z i� pp 3.6, 00, I q PORCH 00. 16 O 2' rl5.9' r s9o°oo 53.00' 50.00' OF AA/Cyr 6' SIDEWALK 6'SIDEWALK 6'SIDEWALK RADIUS POINT T * JAMES E. gTEPHENS GUPB- CURB CURB PROFES�OttAL r SURVEYOR p No. LENAWEE STREET 7 7 LS-22-99, 921 927, 1000,1004, 1008,1010,1016,1020 W. Lenawee NORTH 90 00 00"E 53.00' 13' J. 40' 26' , 2 4' 4 2' f .0 1466 If LOT 13 LOT 14 LOT �, 15 LO 16 in 9,900I SQ.FT. ♦ 10,494 SQ.FT. O ` r a 9WWW ° L Z 11421 SQ.FT. , o GAR. IMOCAW ° &MF 36.50' I J N I a 4 M a � � Z � I ° 7.s' Z �arm 89.48' J V Q m t 2-ST. RES. 1 / co a 0 m J V1 p � N Ld ry Q ocr 20' 4 s p` 3.6' O co ao 1 '� 22' a �i� o, q`s PORCH �00. 16 0 2' S.9' S90°00 53.00' 50.00' OF M�� � 6' SIDEWALK 6'SIOEWALK 6'SIDEWALK K�'��' y�Q' ' ..IT RADIUS POINT 4 JAMES E 'F gTEPHEN8 k CURB CURB CURB �ROFES8IORAL r sm YOR p n.�, No. ti N S I 'YG CITY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE 3rd Floor,City Hall 124 W.Michigan Ave. Lansing,MI 48933-1687 (517)483-4020 HIGH David C. Hollister, Mayor Nov 1 0 7999 04..,aNI\IING l 1 i�1J()F�i Doris Witherspoon, Senior Planner RE: Proposed US 22-99 900 & 1000 Blocks West Lenawee Street Doris: Parcel "A": There is a discrepancy between the description on the proposal and the dimensions on the sketch of the final land sizes. The written description states "The East 39 feet", while the sketch indicates "The East 42 feet". As the original width of Lot 16 is 66 feet; this has the following impact on Parcel B: 66' - 42' = 24', 66' - 39' = 27' If"Parcel B" is intended to have a final width of 50 feet, it must include the West 24 feet of Lot 16, and not the West 27 feet of Lot 16. If that is the case, we presume Split "A" must be 42 feet of Lot 16. Therefore the written description on "A" will need to be corrected to read " The East 42 feet", before this goes to Council, etc. The other descriptions appear to be correct as written. Since the description for the cul-de-sac was written by a Registered Land Surveyor, it should be right. As to the relocated houses: according to the sketches; Current #1020 E. Lenawee is to be moved onto Parcel "C" Current #1016 E. Lenawee is to be moved onto Parcel "D" Is this right? Our Appraisal staff will need to know which existing house is being moved to which proposed Parcel, so our Assessment records can be updated with the proper information. What will the new addresses be on the three moved/new homes? John C.Grannell Nov. 3, 1999 "Equal Opportunity Employer" DAVID & DIANE; FYI, from Planning Dept. Please review and return to me. -77 Qir C Gam"` DAVE T DIANE L J-1---- Thank You John G � // 4 �..li } �.� �p a. NCU-4-99 1022 Eureka Street 8-Unit Fire-damaged Nonconforming GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Harvey Clarizio 236 Maplewood Drive East Lansing, MI 48823 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Owner REQUESTED ACTION: Nonconforming EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant EXISTING ZONING: "DM-3" Residential PROPOSED ZONING: Same PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 8,068 ft2 SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Church S: Single Family Residential E: Two-Family Residential W: Single Family Residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "DM-3" Residential S: "DM-3" Residential E: "DM-3" Residential W: "DM-3" Residential MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The NorthEast Area Comprehensive Plan designates this area for residential, 8-14 du/ac. SPECIFIC INFORMATION This applicant is requesting a Class A nonconforming status for property located at 1022 Eureka Street. The property currently maintains a Class B nonconforming status due to lot area, setbacks and parking. The applicant proposes to restore the fire-damaged 8-unit structure in the "DM-3" Residential District. The cost of repair of fire-damaged nonconformities is limited to 50 percent of the value of the structure. The current value of the structure is $96,096. The estimated cost of repairs is $200,652.85. NCU-4-99, 1022 Eureka St., Fire-Damaged Nonconforming 8-unit, Page 2. The property at 1022 Eureka is an eight-unit apartment building which is zoned "DM-3" Residential and is regulated by Section 1256 of the Zoning Code. The property contains 8,068 square feet of lot area. According to Section 1256.06 of the Zoning Code, 7 one-bedroom and one efficiency dwelling units are required to have 10,200 square feet of lot area. There are 8 parking spaces on site. Section 1284.13 of the Zoning Code requires 11 parking spaces. In the"DM-3" Residential District, the minimum required setbacks are asfollows:20'orestablished front yard, 10% of lot width to 25' side yard and 25' rear yard. Based on field observation, the existing setbacks are: 8' front yard, 2'-3' east side yard and 25'+ rear yard. The applicant is currently not meeting the required front and side yard setbacks in the "DM-3"Residential District. The property is currently lacking the front and side yard setback requirements; 3 parking spaces and 2,132 square feet of lot area. AGENCY RESPONSES Assessors: The City Assessor would like to know how often this type of NCU is approved in order to determine whether we should add an obsolescence factor due to the inability to re-build if a fire occurs on this property or other similarly situated parcels. ABC Neighborhood Organization: No response received yet. AT&T: No response received yet. BWL: No response received yet. Building Safety: A set of construction documents sealed by an Architect or Engineer must be submitted for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. This project must comply with State of Michigan barrier-free design requirements due to the extensive damage. Code Compliance: No response received yet. Development: How can Class A status be achieved without accounting for parking? Neighborhood input important. Report prepared by Doris M.Witherspoon,Sr.Planner,12199 NCU-4-99, 1022 Eureka St., Fire-Damaged Nonconforming 8-unit, Page 3. Eastside Neighborhood Organization: No response received yet. Fire Marshal: East wall of building would be required to meet current code for proximity to lot line (6 ft.) Building would be required to meet current fire codes. 1997 UFC Public Service: No objection to the proposed NCU. Trans. Engr.: No response received yet. BACKGROUND: The property at 1022 Eureka was built as an eight-unit apartment building in 1922. To this date, the building has remained as a eight-unit apartment building. Since the building is considered nonconforming, repairs are restricted to 50%of the value of the structure. According to the Assessor's Records, the 1999 value of the structure is $96,096. Based on field observation, the existing conditions consist of an 8' front yard setback, approximately 2'-3' side yard setback on the east side; damaged fence along the south side of the property which needs repairing; unscreened dumpster; partial concrete pavement; damaged eaves and unkept lawn. Also, there are eight (8) parking spaces on site or one parking space/unit. ANALYSIS Section 1294.04(d) sets forth the criteria for evaluating Class A proposals. These include: 1. Has direct access to a non-local street if the use is non-residential; 2. No more pollution generated then would be associated generally with uses in that zoning district; 3. Parking requirements are met. DIRECT ACCESS TO A NON-RESIDENTIAL STREET This generally applies to uses that are more intense than is typically allowed in the zoning district such as a retail store on a residentially zoned parcel. An eight-unit structure located on Eureka Street, a local street, would have minimal impact on traffic. There is a shared driveway with the neighbor to the west of this property and the parking is in the rear of the property. Report prepared by Doris M.Witherspoon,Sr.Planner,12199 NCU-4-99, 1022 Eureka St., Fire-Damaged Nonconforming 8-unit, Page 4. POLLUTION IMPACTS The repairs and other activities needed to bring the structure to code and associated with the eight-unit will not generate smoke, odor, air pollution, water pollution, vibration, glare or noise that is more than the level associated with uses permitted in the "DM-3" Residential District. PARKING REQUIREMENTS According to the Section 1284.13 of the Zoning Code, parking requirements for a eight-unit apartment are 11 parking spaces. There are currently eight parking spaces on site or one parking space/unit. This is adequate based upon the owners testimony, typical tenant and proximity to public transportation. This should be documented in the lease agreement. OTHER This brick building structure has been in this residential neighborhood for seventy- seven years and located one block south and east of major bus lines on Michigan Avenue and Pennsylvania Avenue respectively. The Michigan Bureau of History has identified the property at 1022 Eureka as possibly meeting the National Register Criteria for Historic Places. The applicant would like to restore the fire- damaged structure to its original character. The interior as well as exterior of the structure need repairs. Also, the surrounding outside area needs improvements. SUMMARY The proposed restoration of this nonconforming eight-unit structure will not create any traffic or pollution problems for the area in which it is located. In terms of the parking requirements, there are currently eight parking spaces on site or one parking space/unit. This should be documented in the lease agreement. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of NCU-4-99 for a Class A nonconforming status for property located at 1022 Eureka Street with the following conditions: 0 Repairs should be done to meet appearance of the original structure. 0 Eaves repaired and painted to original character. 0 Repair fencing and install new fence along south lot line to screen parking (decorative 6' wood fence to be approved by the Planning Department). Report prepared by Doris M.Witherspoon, Sr. Planner, 12/99 NCU-4-99, 1022 Eureka St., Fire-Damaged Nonconforming 8-unit, Page 5. 0 New dumpster pad to be installed - with 6" reinforced concrete. 0 Extend dumpster screen - 6'. 0 Tuck point the brick as necessary to maintain the integrity of the brick as required. 0 As required by Building and Safety, submit a set of construction documents sealed by an Architect or Engineer for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit. This project must comply with State of Michigan barrier-free design requirements due to the extensive damage. 0 Lease documents should reflect one parking space/unit. 0 The building repairs and the aforementioned conditions be completed by December 20, 2000. Report prepared by Doris M.Witherspoon,Sr. Planner, 12/99 NCU-4-99, 1022 Eureka Fire-damaged Nonconforming 8-unit NORTH ��� •_R V v V J I C I I � J N s - l7 I -1 I � ;I _ SLU-13-99 1200 Blk. Jerome Street, Parking Lot in "C" Residential District GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Sparrow Health Systems 1215 E. Michigan Avenue Lansing, MI 48912 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Option to buy REQUESTED ACTION: Special Land Use EXISTING LAND USE: Existing parking Lot/Athletic Field EXISTING ZONING: "C" Residential PROPOSED ZONING: Same PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 227' x 551' = 125,077 ft2 SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: "C" Residential District S: "DM-4" Residential District E: "C" Residential/"J" Parking W: "C" Residential District SURROUNDING ZONING: N: Football field/E astern High School S: Sparrow Hospital E: Parking/Residential W: Pattengill Jr. High MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The NorthEast Area Comprehensive Plan designates this area for open space/school. The Boys Training School (BTS) Plan designates this area for the Greater Lansing Health Education Collaborative, a health education center and parking. Sparrow Hospital would expand north across Jerome Street,which involves relocating Lansing Public School play fields and tennis courts to Parcel A SLU-13-99, 1200 Blk. Jerome St., Parking lot in "C" Residential District, Page 2. SPECIFIC INFORMATION DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: This is a request by Sparrow Health Systems, 1215 E. Michigan Avenue, for property located in the 1200 block of Jerome Street, north of Sparrow Hospital. Sparrow Health System proposes to expand the existing surface parking lot from 109 spaces to approximately 390 spaces for Sparrow Hospital. The parking lot is proposed to be expanded onto an area that is presently a practice athletic field. The expanded parking is proposed to be temporary in nature. The property may be used as requested if City Council approves the Special Land Use request. AGENCY RESPONSES Assessors: Would any of the parking spaces ever be controlled by a for profit entity. BWL: No response received yet. Building Safety: No objection. Issue does not impact code related matters. Code Compliance: No response received yet. Consumers Energy: No response received yet. Development: Proposal is not consistent with BTS Plan Property,to be obtained from the Lansing School District, is proposed to be used for health field training program. What is the view of School District given that athletic fields will be lost at this time? Eastside Neighborhood Organization: Telephone message received on 12/3199 from Rick Kibbey, ENO President. Mr. Kibbey stated that the SLU request appears to be consistent with the BTS Plan with the understanding that the proposed parking is a temporary use. This is the proposed location for the health training center. Report prepared by Doris M.Witherspoon,Sr. Planner,12/99. SLU-13-99, 1200 Blk. Jerome St., Parking lot in "C" Residential District, Page 3. Eastfield Neighborhood Association: No response received yet. Fire Marshal: No objections. AT&T- No response received yet. Lansing School District: No response received yet. Oak Park Neighborhood Organization: No response received yet. Sparrow Estates: No response received yet. Public Service: No objections to the proposed SLU. The Public Service Department reserves the right to comment on engineering issues as part of the site plan review. Trans. Engr.: Driveway sizes and locations should take into consideration the large size of the lot and existing development on the south side of the road. Design should be coordinated with the Transportation and Parking Office BACKGROUND: Sparrow Hospital, a part of East Michigan Ave, has been instrumental in the implementation and development of several plans and studies in and around the East Michigan Avenue area including the Boys Training School (BTS) plan in efforts to revitalize the surrounding areas. Sparrow Hospital has taken efforts to improve their hospital facilities which included involving the surrounding community. Sparrow has been working closely with the surrounding neighbors and neighborhood groups to create a positive relationship and facilities that will fit into the area and create as few adverse impacts as possible. Sparrow Hospital needs expansion space. This expansion is for the Greater Lansing Health Education Collaborative, a health education center and parking. The proposed surface parking is "temporary" until the health education facility is built. Because of the expansion need of Sparrow Hospital, north of Jerome Street, some existing Lansing School District (LSD)athletic facilities need to be relocated. This relocation and addition would involve the reuse of most of Parcel A. According Report prepared by Doris M.Witherspoon,Sr.Planner, 12199. SLU-13-99, 1200 Blk. Jerome St., Parking lot in "C" Residential District, Page 4. to the BTS plan, LSD's existing sports facilities would be undisturbed with the exception of the tennis courts which would be relocated to Parcel A. A combination softball, soccer, and football field will also be located in this parcel. A new P.E./football field would be developed to the north of the proposed Sparrow Hospital expansion. Sparrow Hospital would help to finance these renovations as part of the compensation for the Lansing School District property needed for expansion north of Jerome. The property is currently owned by the Lansing School District and Sparrow Hospital has the option to buy. According to the applicant, LSD is transferring the property to Sparrow Hospital on December 17, 1999 and Sparrow will not do anything until ownership. The proposed temporary parking lot will increase from 109 to 390, an additional 281 parking spaces and is designated for visitor parking and eventually an employee lot. The construction of GLHEC would be approximately 2-3 years. ANALYSIS Evaluation Section 1282.03(f)(1)-(9) sets forth the criteria which must be used to evaluate a Special Land Use permit request. The criteria and evaluation are as follows. 1. COMPATIBILITY WITH USE ON ADJACENT PROPERTIES The predominant use in the area consist of the Football field/E astern High School to the north; Sparrow Hospital to the south; Parking/Residential to the east and Pattengill Jr. High School to the west. The proposed parking lot would be compatible with the adjacent properties. The addition of screening to the existing fencing would provide some protection from the view of the nearby residential neighbors. 2. CHANGE IN THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE AREA The existing use is a parking lot and an athletic field. Eventually, this area will be the location for the health education facility, which is a part of the BTS plan. The proposed parking lot, with proper landscape, screening and buffer, should not change the essential character of this area. Report prepared by Doris M.Witherspoon,Sr. Planner, 12199. SLU-13-99, 1200 Blk. Jerome St., Parking lot in "C" Residential District, Page 5. 3. INTERFERENCE WITH GENERAL ENJOYMENT OF ADJACENT PROPERTIES The increase in traffic to access this lot may interfere with circulation around the school if peak time overlap such as when school is starting or ending. Sparrow should plan to attempt to avoid conflicts, but the interference should be limited. With proper landscape, screening and buffering, the proposed temporary parking lot will not interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent properties. 4. IMPROVEMENT TO PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA With proper landscape, screening, buffering and maintenance of the proposed lot, this could be an improvement to the property and surrounding area. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS None anticipated. 6. IMPACT ON PUBLIC SERVICES None anticipated. 7. IMPACT ON UTILITIES None anticipated. 8. COMPLIANCE WITH THE MASTER PLAN The NorthEast Area Comprehensive Plan designates this area for open space/school. The Boys Training School (BTS) Plan designates this area for the Greater Lansing Health Education Collaborative, a health education center and parking. 9. COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS According to Section 1250.04(h) of the Zoning Code, an off-street parking lot is permitted in the "C" Residential District with a Special Land Use permit. Report prepared by Doris M.Witherspoon,Sr.Planner, 12/99. SLU-13-99, 1200 Blk. Jerome St., Parking lot in "C" Residential District, Page 6. OTHER A site plan review would be required for the proposed parking lot. Water run-off, circulation and any other impacts will be evaluated during that time. SUMMARY The proposed special land use is designed to be constructed, and operated in a manner harmonious with the character of adjacent property and surrounding uses. The proposed special land use will not change the essential character of the surrounding area. The proposed special land use will not interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent property. The proposed special land should not have any negative impacts on the surrounding area. The proposed special land use will not be hazardous to adjacent properties or involve uses, activities, materials or equipment which are detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of persons or property through excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, odor, fumes or glare. The proposed special land use will not impact the environment, public services or utilities. The proposed special land use is consistent with the intent and purpose of the zoning code and comprehensive plan. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Special Land Use request by Sparrow Hospital to expand the existing surface parking lot from 109 spaces to approximately 390 spaces for property located in the 1200 block of Jerome Street, north of Sparrow Hospital with the condition that a landscape screening and buffering plan for this temporary parking lot be submitted and approved pursuant to Chapter 1290 of the Zoning Code and the improvements be reviewed and approved by all necessary agencies through site plan review . Report prepared by Doris M.Witherspoon, Sr. Planner,12/99. I�w SLU-13-99, 1200 Blk. of Jerome St., Parking Lot fn the "C" Residential District NORTH f . ,I ' � �•� "C++RESIDENTIAL 9 , mr( •r .1c..•..I IT Nn, RESIDENTIAL "C"RESIDENTIAL J. AJ "C"RESIDENTIAL i • . � � � . { �;c7�� . — m — — — - rr1�,. r " ?►'?5=�`r.�--�+}'" , f/�� ,, U Ii1K.✓vil�l I �t.-; T- •,, 'fit +', ' Y +- .V • -�' .' ,1f�1) �� ,fl,i.l •! + + �� �� �. •'/ �I t •.•i �� ' I .,„ IT , VINE ST.low 1 fT. • 1� • •. •r' 1 +,. � i �!'I J i � r•Jrt•y.. .+ +In, fq.••f 1 •'� �?AID �. .r Y.IP'«'f'• � j. •� !] -•�� .+ f• •' �J ST iJEROMEi fT. ' �' LLii•' ' •, / 1 rw.••.w•... r.... '~• ��i `.1 • • r _�,, : ,��'`+r t • • . f•r' I.•. 'ITS "DM411 RESIDENTIAL+ +-+ '� -*' 4~" IAI+ G: _ +'N RESIDENT MTCHTGAN Avv,• 1 + 1 I � J JNDEVELOPED �i ar oa 1 Fli UNDEVELOPED z PED w Ij ...... .. J .. In w r ro».•r a u•a v�[ I w I •\ �• L. �...,..• LANSING A w..:;•;: c Trio O —: n f CENTRAL - - - Z �:::::: . ...... I� x :;: _- -_ _ a ...fit::=:= _ a w - a qq - I cr O y' •Y[.sur m do u,ot 'l L Ifflfp r4. —fib IM _Q u r t s is i�ti Y Z 1� x .......... . ............. F �� •:•Han.[r. [ � _ k ` ._sr.._••r>o'. Z � li ::::: rWlRab[ar 4tr uarr row+. W li WTDN M01 0100L _,.: •r _. 03 vY.�plr, a •. ................ .... - a ir► .... ail `.:..... RESIDENTIAL l iarf TF Atom IP I FOG FIQp 1 x M7[71TY is Lob I+a II❑ I -1 r r.M 01. •-La.O( wm oouw1Im ArrDKKL MOIL :• ""r'r'r• JEROME STREET -- --- *•Toga-a' sacra M?om ;j COMMERCIAL EASTERN HIGH SCHOOL SITE PLAN 220 IL PEK"YLVANIA AVE. 200 4007-7 LANiWO•Ut=CkAN 42912 gym. o loo NORTH FILE 9020EAW 07/29/93 �S2 E Yr.1II I,.rVili:rrE FELP 227• 228' EYM N6 FENCE colAa EZISiIIJG A5PF1 V PM.IJG(109 5WE5) Ex5fw MfMNG W&L/FENCE EXSTNG MfMW WU/FENCE _ffOME 5TMr 20' 215' EMMC,MNEWAY 5PMOW HWId 5Y5ru 5yo �XI511N6 511E PLAN NORiN NEW PEi rE 552' /,-4 r'CLMf 5WPY.GAM 22B' 227' 357 SPrLES E w n I 5 C4 P :1 I I 11. 111 1111 U15fN Mrf r 5 f My�P/fx�Y C.�R/LE 5 C EX rmRErmww&L/fEa X15fNGREfANNSwa/ffsrf SPOME 51REEf 18' 1 20' S 9' 20' 215' PROP05ED DRNEWAY 400 We5 EXISfW DMEWAY 5PmWw HMTH 5Y5tm- MOF05�P 511T� PLAN NAtM � ..Jv?'{F' � � '•r? 7 � i.1/r.l ., ,♦i�tir, ..•r._. Y', k'f •iF `h:,1 R 'ix•- r, 7T � 6 :J t:' :y . `'E J �s '•:' .•' .+• �iit`ggfy 4 ' • ... � 1l' -1��._- �•: ..,- .• - ^.y,.r,.,• .. ..i•+r. 1 1 {Jr..1 ,,aeyy - r etia+.+nearmao-' ., t• _'r�', ..t.. •'m•'��•+ao�,yr '4y y} { q +•y t.r ,a • S y•a3 !c F t •1�+_3 :R •c . .,.r .+Mw. •.:+•In a t;;.. .• "" of •'w 3 '• F.t.MPLrd :Ac;lri dC+4l. ` 9`.: C:i• ' N+» 7a ( ,Jrfr J...3C. b'Y,2R.k•:�+J.'..r+,:fd:•%tt•GnttVi3r1���:J1,,.�A - ;• '•. •...t� - �C�S'J J J ^' ..:' :Y.a '.•.•1'+M!1N0,7.4..:M'•r7wlvyt�.•pbmg14l,i ,)� 1 .' r � .w° ;tl T. 1 a A '1r�p'3 ��, (( Jrf4' S'� i'{�sArat..iw''JAt'i,h"C\d4Wgee�SYP::hfirRiyl?r,d l 5. 'N •r, • ��J ' �'b 1! '�! J i w1� .. "t�•;'; •'r�t ...^7•. ^• '8"h1Nt.OgrPlq('V+W+rMF i1P.nw 4s:. .. .. . .e .:ir,.1b ���•/�" ••� %J-0•:, +.•.. L•-'"� 11 \ F 'i �'i,•: 'i J Q ... _ '•Yin�' . q y •�.� « i i •�S `t t� it •.� S< .3; _: t 'i .a.a �,1 f? 1 3 \ } � l�• r, � , +M - �t r `.: ..'{3 ,f (.r + S.L. •+ .l@rJy.. t) a r1"• v?- , �S.9 . *o ' f ►'• � � f 9i' T t rr Y-o-q y ..y r• � +. - -.. + r .y S•S ; q1;• �' 'r"• //��'' '11+ 2 t �F• �J�r q .'3'"'yq. •tr;. t ..5 "at .H •rin.!.f.f�r$++tf•WJ4 L'' � iyl. l,> ...{_21i 1• {Jit'b }5 al��!t !,..,' a: 4.�.,,"e�•N�W.w' , i �•-.fir�..r:�.y'�••} •C, •a„'Y•"1.^ '-�.• ..�,..,..... .•,►•i. a' .n• •r .j! r _ i.. r •cr � i S••.. r Y r'+ t 1 >' i ;f Q t C i a' •�'� »t*.. .�',� ' 7'::`lr•^ - MS RA ihii.!1HV..M�r.. e .!.� \. S :•.M �:�!:���•r, -l.:l�.�..-�+ 1 �'J' i V, �o�� . l .,tii ✓ 1� > (d�C!+•:'6�•�E:�' tq.. (.ti.131,Cr r`�: ..'t 1. •„��+:.i�,• . y...•,... 4 H j.Vt F r .14 A-'L;`1 tiwb f(i1LY>.'�:d FVd:.ts'• -'d ! t' • ,: • ..nS" J 1 1 J � .- l w- •� 4 .. ..+y`r�-aWNaci.►•77tii'k�JyiS'j� „ .y��• �C { ^^ ; r ►•: 4 •t ` ; ...0., y ...,• wK NY;, y. %APO ter, 41. +r M•�N,. _ ••r'•• •i } Y ;+7� a {�� 51...,rxi� ��rrqq 1!.?Y.;. :. +.. w..+l..�;" •"^^„"..•.'..»... ,r,.,,r...� .. .. '.1 •••• r•• �I...��y:�. .iJ't-w`r _ J T [t7 Si•J. isL''(Y.(J: C� .by JJ1-�1./ 1r4 '7 f•, %. �).J�.'.�.•��t•,^"Y'j".�3r+.•..+.n �,.w.r•�.•w»�.� .., • •Y �ry�• •;.J..I i ). �♦1 .t 1:. r`•^I ... i�W .. ...... �a 7 ^, .. •T S t. a f 1 rJ Y �' 7 `�+ �•' Jt. •,a t"'•n ��{��y % '' y i t J,pr -M�j•'� n.'.wl.wai��+,� 1�n� ,•IS{...,6. ._ `•,t1� rC'JifV/y(C4'�fOh i i `7' '.(t .y. A'/AFa '_ yf S...Jr +..� .\•:rJ!. rJt�r t�l /. 3 !'1. ,J 1 r 1.. .rr L Jls :A JJ,J• x!..�:.�tr:. ..Vi•�: !rd"r .�,!,79' '+r '!ai•,•1+'4 r.. J�•k� '0'Y'rJw+;✓.ayoyya7iDw ,%..; 7'3 �*1wlle:5jl .a. S`itut+l Q J�i:w1y�`:•c l + ' t:y r a A bl, S J• /'e :a'�CNJ�l� � 'aiP �` \jmtSyr,2JC{^. ,r. ns+�v M j arrartu ,�w^rao+MMYvb +terbdo,)^+,+s1A+o.NIrt.UF�- ` '!1�' �r -• l7��!!iCj�1r 1 C.•+ ,:may ."'s� _�"%t �.J',.,n. .«..•.,: InJ��1.e lwr�tsa•4Ca�iaiyrJVian:4i:;Se7P ;J y J e S ,n1•ci Y kh i A1t�:yb✓,•..::�• ^ar.. F M ..N �►,J.. qa `7, • .. L�I a.�N h�).'.J it �:� � t. 9 �� `�'•..;!7 fy yr,,y,�,,�,•vva•....\..•ifn.v� y.F,°i 4!c I k yJ S 3 ...ry..� ' ''q� ` .��p, ' ... •1• i.7• �)r'..ti�� '+sw.n ZiP' .' '•V7""4 y i A I .3:..:.,'i•. ,..,._.,v.- �.+�Y•A.. T• JM i r%l,r,9'1�'•{yf� 4 0}:ZY! p• 6� 'Y lac "�„Y. R v,1'A Sy17Y ' •l'.f J � ..�',J;+�toj •9Y. .i'4• k l�! �+!'�! �..� �,g��3eCu.;7•'.rq,+ir.:.�;n w1t Ar-J�L ti �• M.k 11.r-' h' :•t' f 'r c� .,�. :... •�-. r.:.`.i� f1 r •rq MS Z�MCLM+i Fi4�� a+ ! �4NR�+f• F �I j' .i• JrT. r �v c•a,J ` 'k.{'+36 r• 1 ° l l r,:! µ{7+ 1•F,;;Y•`. wi i�y� �f t'aroa.''}•.,s ('p1 W la " ..�w 2C 4'••Yt ... `fl •.:C`,,•:-•k'ya JMa ;C J''S='^ J lci��� y��J••� �.: � .+ .;4i, e +� lF.-��wlh.�� '"^;y r�r � 1 1 yy ��i:3 � •%.t+. �!Iti � •.... 4?*R1 •4 \ �� '•.e y 7.q,.", .y�r v a:.+:)++r•a•w,•.•,,, F�)S•.i •!•:i 1 J +�'. ;•f' . .)`. .t [fy,•L„a*� r 7= J7'• AL . ..J•..:..a 7+...JN. _ l 4 T t. F f � .l y:�hy: t••F tJ 7' i ' •a �i}�•j .+a�y..�r,. �. "'S t:•a t 1^M: ••nA:.} •.j(a� :11.5.1.. �v rw ♦ iti hS1�7rF•�c^' 1s�4�'G ♦J J�,G. �Rwrn{�WaW:ra .Jrr.. .{�',.. .f,•�'` � 7J•?'4•J;a r�91;C.sY' .,•.,L ,•3:��•. •a �C'-Z'7�� .t .•i •.f �.y''•! �. r.''' .'PT; ',•;l. ,•.�i '.`'C•'��•�;^.� t, /tr. f�r 'a 1•'c:a v,<x. r r ne.. .3:. ++Is i' -R.a.�yA ,t'• 'fi^+���. � .5 �� .'r UNK TO MARSHALL FIELD PARK d _ - ----- Mnn — SAGINAW)EAST BOUND M-43) RESIDENTIAL L 1 I RESIDENTIAL. RESIDENTUL nl.ca.l•aoao I E (OWNER OCCUPIED, (OWNER OCCUPIED) v fOlt�COND new —_ o ch"6Uetl 8 ..c w in.io An�Z � l_ RL'7tMlON POND U.ka Gm" CFI O 1 1( � �p;G Ttmx p 1 LANSING I ARMORI FUTURE LINK rxlm=m G LASIlAIL AND roonALL CATHOLIC CENTRAL TO RIVER WALK Smoot,Dam ,ANC TFl/A REFURIIISII Sm.mo St ti LXPAnaON so 1191h PARK o-p._� IM rr.susrsa oho hK knedt i :a vimsuta EASTERN HIGH SCHOOL e o PAITENGILL JUNIOR III(;II Rnae Sueel ` Jenne S4eel 5 SPARROW HOSPITAL SEPARATE JEROME MICJI[GAN AND HOLMES STREETS �)ENSUS PLAN Norlh 'CANNING AND DEVELOPMENT S'1'UD1' ° loom aw aw AI BOYS TRNING SCHOOL PROPERTY G"ph"`eIIk WY OF LANSING: Panning nod M°akipal Derelupmenl Dlv km M n�~��KLX&y`' IaJy.MkMe� '[CURE 1.3:CONSENSUS PLAN T — 4 APPROVED AS PRINTED FEBRUARY 1, 2000 Draft to Clerk 01; Approved 02( Minutes of the To Clerk 02G LANSING PLANNING Meeting CANNING BOARD P•m., CitY Council Chambers Tenth Floor Lansing City Hall 124 West Michi I Tuesday, Janua rY 25, 2000 �• OPENING SESSION: Chairman Nischan called the meeting g t o order at 7:05 p.m. Roll Call. Present: Frederick members present one excused absence. Nischan P B. Excused Absences - Patrick, Smith. excused Ruge. Mr. Ruge re Six C. Introductions. xcusd ence due to illness. quested and was granted an present PrinJames A. Ruff, Zonin � William C. Rieske g Administrator, introduced staff - APPROVAL OF cipal Planner. AGENDA - The agenda was approved a 3- COMMUNICATIONS - None. sprinted. 4_ HEARINGS - None 5_ COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE _ None. g- RECESS - None. 7- BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval -January 11, 2000 Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded minutes of January 11, 2000 none , as printed by Mr. Miller, to unanimous; the , Voice vote; Ayes: the minutes of January 11, 2000 yeS' all; Nays: Mr. Frederick made , were APPROVED. Committee c the a motion seconded b Committee of the Whole to consider y Mr. Miller, to resolve into the Whole. SLU-15-gg, Ms. Keene Chair, 1 SLU-15-99 Vacant Land 100- Side), Church in " 200 Blk. East jolly G-2" Wholesale District y Road (South Mr. Nischan presented the re representing the Robinson port, a request b y Pastor Memorial Church of God inChlrl t f Special Land Use Lee permit to construct a church in the or a PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 2 "G-2" Wholesale District that will range from 16,000 to 17,500 sq ft in size on vacant property that is located on the south side of the 100-200 Block of East Jolly Road (parcel 3305-04-201-017). The proposed church is tentatively planned to be built on 6.29 acres of land and will have approximately 450 seats. The final location has yet to be determined. Extension of Skoog Court may be required to access this site. A day care center and senior center are complementary uses to the church that the applicant is contemplating. Zoning of the property is "F" Commercial District and "G-2" Wholesale District, either of which will allow a church if a Special Land Use permit is granted by the City Council. The Committee, based on the analysis of the Special Land Use permit, noted that the request meets all nine criteria for the issuance of a special land use permit. The Committee desired to approve the request; however, only two members were present, an insufficient number for an official committee recommendation. Staff recommends approval of the Special Land Use permit with conditions. In Committee, members discussed the need for a condominium as an option to fulfilling code requirements for this church to be developed according to the Zoning Code. Staff members explained that the church still needs to maintain property all the way up to Jolly Road in order to have frontage on a minor arterial as well as opportunity for a ground pole sign that would be readable. If Skoog Court is improved and dedicated and the property is platted, versus the use of the condominium act, the church property would only have frontage on Skoog Court, a local street. This would not fulfill requirements of the code. The two Zoning and Ordinance Committee members present, based on testimony and evidence, concurred with the staff report and recommended forwarding SLU-15-99, Vacant Land 100-200 Blk. East Jolly Road (South Side), Church in "G-2" Wholesale District, with a positive recommendation to the Committee of the Whole subject to the following conditions: a. The proposed development is required to conform to all site plan review and construction conditions including any necessary Skoog Court and Jolly Road improvements; and b. The proposed Special Land Use shall be developed as a condominium project; Skoog Court shall be retained as a private street, or a portion of land that is contiguous from Jolly Road to the church property shall be reserved to maintain contact with Jolly Road, a minor arterial; and PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 3 C. The proposed Special Land Use provide adequate landscaping, screening, and buffering. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to recommend approval of SLU-15-99, Vacant Land 100-200 Blk. East Jolly Road (South Side), Church in "G-2" Wholesale District subject to three conditions as above. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTION was as follows. Ms. Patrick asked for a definition of "condominium" in the context of this case. Mr. Ruff said, from a staff standpoint, there are two ways to divide land. One is by use of the Plat Act; the other is by use of the Condominium Act in which a unit is purchased individually with other land portions in common ownership and maintained by a fee system. The reason the Condominium Act is invoked here is because there was question about what part was to be reserved for the church, and which part might be sold to another entity. A church is required to have frontage on a major or minor arterial; Jolly Road is a minor arterial. Skoog Court is a private street which provides access to the minor arterial. As one solution, they could buy Skoog Court, or they could buy a strip of land adjacent to Skoog Court that would provide frontage on Jolly Road. Or through condominium, they can have direct rights out to Jolly Road. According to the land owner, this will probably be developed as a condominium; that is why it is included. The other purpose is for a sign on Jolly Road for identification and proper traffic direction. The church facility will be located well back from Jolly Road. We have discussed with the property owner how to achieve some of these other goals. One way is to maintain some common lands up to and including Skoog Court for the location possibly of a two-tenant sign identifying the tenants of a possible two-parcel condominium. A condominium agreement which is reviewed by the City must be filed with the State of Michigan. The property would be assessed according to how the agreement is finalized. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTION on the motion was as follows. On a Voice vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: Q unanimous; carried; SLU-15-99, Vacant Land 100-200 Blk. East Jolly Road (South Side), Church in "G-2" Wholesale District subject to three conditions as above was APPROVED. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Miller, that the Committee of the Whole rise; carried; unanimous; Chairman Nischan resumed and called for the report of the Committee of the Whole. 1. Committee of the Whole, Ms. Keene, Chair. d. SLU-15-99, Vacant Land 100-200 Blk. East Jolly Road (South Side), Church in "G-2" Wholesale District The Committee of the Whole met and discussed SLU-15-99, Vacant Land 100-200 Blk. East Jolly Road (South Side), PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 4 Church in "G-2" Wholesale District. The Committee voted to adopt the staff recommendation for approval of the special land use with three conditions as above. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to recommend approval of SLU-15-99, Vacant Land 100-200 Blk. East Jolly Road (South Side), Church in "G-2" Wholesale District subject to three conditions as above. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Miller. . . Aye Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Smith. . . Ave Keene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried unanimously; SLU-15-99, Vacant Land 100-200 Blk. East Jolly Road (South Side), Church in "G-2" Wholesale District with conditions as above was APPROVED. 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee - Mr. Miller, Chair. Next meeting is Wednesday, February 9, 2000, at 4 p.m. in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. Mr. Ruff noted that at the February 1, 2000, Planning Board meeting, a new rezoning case will have a public hearing. It will then be before the Zoning and Ordinance Committee on February 9, as will some information on the tabled rezoning for Z-15-99, the Holiday Inn South development, and also MPA-1-99, and Act-21-99 in a coordinated presentation. Mr. Frederick as a point of information said that the Board of Zoning Appeals also has before it an appeal on the Holiday Inn project. It too is tabled. 3. Urban Development Committee - Mr. Smith, Chair. The Urban Development Committee met on January 18, 2000, and considered four items. a. Parks and Recreation Draft Master Plan 2000-2005. The Urban Development Committee met on January 18, 2000, and wanted time to consider and comment further. The Committee met earlier tonight to reconsider the draft and the comments. The intent is stated as fulfilling the requirements to have the Plan on file with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources to apply for MDOT grants, to identify capital improvement projects and to assist various PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 5 boards, the mayor and members of Council in developing budgetary and operational policies. The Plan includes descriptions of the Lansing community, the administrative structure, the planning process, followed by a recreation inventory and an action plan. During discussion about the funding sources covered by this plan, it was noted by Ms. Patrick that the Michigan Consumers and Industry Services Department has funding available to local governments for renewable energy improvements which could be used in park facilities and that also could be used to expand the concepts of what Parks and Recreation could legitimately cover. Discussion ensued regarding the process of receiving public input. Most of that came about from stakeholder focus groups. The plan was favorably received. Staff recommends endorsement of the Parks and Recreation Draft Master Plan, and also recommends that Planning Office staff forward the Board's suggestions for the final document to the Parks and Recreation Department. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously 3-0 to recommend endorsement of the Parks and Recreation Draft Master Plan, with the understanding that comments of the Urban Development Committee, Planning Board or Planning Office staff would be included with the endorsement of the Plan and transmitted to the Parks and Recreation Department. Mr. Smith made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to approve Parks and Recreation Draft Master Plan 2000-2005, with the understanding that comments of the Urban Development Committee, Planning Board or Planning Office staff would be included with the endorsement of the Plan and transmitted to the Parks and Recreation Department PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Frederick noted that the Board's desire to have River Trail access to Cooley Gardens is in the Plan. Miller. . . Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith. . . Aye Frederick . . Ave Keene. . .Aye Nischan . . Ave On a Roll Call Vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried; Parks and Recreation Draft Master Plan 2000-2005 was recommended to be ENDORSED. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 6 b. Proposed Objectives, Goals and Projected Use of Community Development Fund Resources, including the Community Development Block Grant, HOME, and Emergency Shelter Programs, FY 2000-2001. The Proposed Objectives, Goals and Projected Use of Community Development Fund Resources, including the Community Development Block Grant, Home and Emergency Shelter Grant programs describe the funding allocations to be included in the City's Consolidated Strategy and Plan Submission for Fiscal Year 2000-2001. The City expects to receive and have available a total of approximately $4.4 million in funds through the Community Development Block Grant, Home and Emergency Shelter Grant Programs during the next fiscal year commencing on July 1, 2000 and ending on June 30, 2001. The Consolidated Plan provides a fuller discussion of the goals and objectives and projected use of funds. City Council will hold a public hearing regarding the Consolidated Plan during the month of April. A summary of the Plan will also be printed in the Lansing State Journal prior to the hearing. The Committee concurred with the Plan. Staff recommends approval. In committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously 3-0 to recommend approval of the Proposed Objectives, Goals and Projected Use of Community Development Fund Resources, including the Community Development Block Grant, Home and Emergency Shelter Grant Programs, FY 2000-2001. Mr. Smith made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to recommend approval of the Proposed Objectives, Goals and Projected Use of Community Development Fund Resources, including the Community Development Block Grant, Home and Emergency Shelter Grant Programs, FY 2000-2001. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Smith. . . Ave Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Keene. . .Ave Miller. . . Ave Nischan . .Ave On a Roll Call Vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried; the Proposed Objectives, Goals and Projected Use of Community Development Fund Resources, PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 7 including the Community Development Block Grant, Home and Emergency Shelter Grant Programs, FY 2000-2001 was recommended to be APPROVED. C. MPA-1-99, Master Plan Amendment to the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan After discussion, the consensus of the Committee was that encouragement of more public comment was needed, especially from owners of nearby properties. Remains TABLED. d. Act-21-99, 1000 Block of Just A Mere Ave., Pedestrian Overpass. Remains TABLED. Next meeting Tuesday, February 8, 2000, at 4 p.m. in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 4. Executive Committee - did not meet. C. Report from Planning Manager Mr. Rieske received a copy of the Housing Market Study for the City's web page. It is in the process of being entered. We are continuing to work with Census 2000 Complete Count Committee and trying to obtain services of a coordinator for the City. The importance for the City of a complete count is being stressed city-wide. D. Pending items: Future action required 1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-19-97, N.W. Cor. Cavanaugh &Aurelius, "F" Commercial to "G-2" Wholesale District (Tabled October 15, 1997) b. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) C. Z-4-98, 201 E. Grand River, "F-1" Commercial & "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) d. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) 2. Urban Development Committee a. Act-21-98, Ingham Regional Medical Center, Replacement Sign in S. Pennsylvania ROW (Tabled September 8, 1998) b. Act-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris St., Vacate ROW (Tabled February 16, 1999) b. Act-7-99, Somercroft Drive at Post Oak Lane, Vacate Public Right-of- way for School Parking (Referred to UDC May 18, 1999) d. Act-14-99, 100 Blk. West Elm Street, Sale of Property (Tabled October 26, 1999) e. Act-15-99, 703 East Shiawassee Street, Purchase of Property for Parks Dept. Oak Park Field Office (Re-referred to Committee November 2, 1999). PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 25, 2000 PAGE 8 Chairman Nischan asked if Z-19-97, N.W. Cor. Cavanaugh & Aurelius, "F" Commercial to "G-2" Wholesale District (Tabled October 15, 1997) could be pulled from pending and placed on the Zoning and Ordinance Committee agenda under Committee Reports. Mr. Ruff said the petitioner was notified in early December; however, no response has been received as yet. The staff will notify the applicant and owner that the request will be on the Committee's agenda for February 9, 2000 for action. This will then allow the Board to dispense with the item. 8. NEW BUSINESS - None. 9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON The Planning Office is reestablishing Board Chairs monthly meetings, therefore, Mr. Nischan and Ms. Keene will be meeting with chairs of the Board of Zoning Appeals and Historic District Committee. We met last Friday morning. If issues arise that require coordination among Boards, we have a forum in which to pursue coordination. 10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Mr. Miller who is moving from the City announced his resignation. The February 15, 2000 meeting will be his last. He has enjoyed his tenure on the Board. Chairman Nischan said he will be missed. 11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Regarding Michigan and Grand, Mr. Ruff has met with the property owners and informed them that they must implement a landscaping plan by spring. They razed Tiffany's, paved the lot and striped it before a plan was approved. Now they are saying they will lose parking spaces. They submitted a landscape plan which Mr. Ruff approved, but they did not realize how many parking spaces the engineer took out of their plan. "Now we are working through an alternative plan." Mr. Rieske said they have submitted an offer to return right-of-way which was vacated for the greenhouse which was a condition of the special land use. It will be on the agenda for the next Urban Development Committee meeting. 12. ADJOURNMENT was at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted James A. Ruff, Interim Planning Manager Secretary, Planning Board mn01252000 a:\55 SLU-15-99 South of the 100-200 Block of East Jolly Road Page 1 Special Land Use for a Church GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Pastor William Lee STATUS OF APPLICANT: Owner REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting a Special Land Use (SLU) to build a 16,000 to17,500 square foot church South of the 100-200 block along East Jolly Road. EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant EXISTING ZONING: "G-2" Wholesale and "F" Commercial PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 6.29 acres from a parent parcel that is 17.43 acres. Lot is irregular in shape. SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Office and residential S: Residential and utility right-of-way E: Commercial and office W: School and multi-family residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "F" Commercial and Community Unit Plan S: "A" Residential E: "F" Commercial W: "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan 1990, designates the land use as commercial and light industrial. Jolly Road is classified as a minor arterial. BACKGROUND: This property was rezoned in 1969 from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial (Z-100-69). The southern portion of the property was later rezoned to "G-2" Wholesale District in 1979 (Z-50-79). Recently, a petition to rezone the property to "DM-1" Residential was denied (Z-9-97). SLU-15-99 South of the 100-200 Block of East Jolly Road Page 2 Special Land Use for a Church SPECIFIC INFORMATION DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to build a church that will range from 16,000 to 17,500 square feet in size on vacant land off of Skoog Court, which is south of the 100-200 block of East Jolly Road. There will be approximately 450 seats in the church. The tentative location of the church is the southwest portion of the parent parcel (see site plan). The final location has yet to be determined. Extension of Skoog Court may be required to access this site. AGENCY RESPONSES Assessor: An exemption from property taxes is not automatically given to a church. The Assessor's office must be furnished with documentation that the property is owned by the church and no part of it is owned by a private individual. We must also receive a copy of the Articles of Incorporation or by bylaws to show the purposes for which the property will be used. We assume that the subject property is a vacant lot as of December 31, 1999, and as such would still be assessed for tax year 2000. Building Safety: Plans sealed by a registered architect or engineer must be submitted to the Building Safety Office for review to determine compliance with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code for an assembly use. Questions concerning the permit procedure may be directed to Chris Segerlind. Fire Marshal: No Response Received Lansing Neighborhood Council: No Response Received Lansing Police Dept.: The Police Department does not anticipate any significant impact on services by this request. SLU-15-99 South of the 100-200 Block of East Jolly Road Page 3 Special Land Use for a Church Parks and Recreation: This does not impact park operations and maintenance. We have no objections. Public Services: The Public Service Department has no objection to the proposed SLU. However, please note, Skoog Court was constructed by a private developer, and to date has not been turned over to the City as Public right-of-way. Therefore, the appropriate right-of-way will need to be turned over to the City prior to the approval of the developers site plan. Transportation: A detailed site plan for the entire vacant acreage must be submitted. The full development of this area will require the development of a center lane for left turns on Jolly Road. Traffic issues associated with the church and other potential development can be mitigated through proper analysis and planning. Please require and resubmit prior to consideration by the Planning Board. APPLICANTS PROPOSAL The applicant is proposing to build a church that will range from 16,000 to 17,500 square feet in size on vacant land off of Skoog Court, which is south of the 100-200 block of East Jolly Road. There will be approximately 450 seats in the church. The tentative location of the church is the southwest portion of the parent parcel (see site plan). The final location has yet to be determined. Extension of Skoog Court may be required to access this site. A day care center and senior center are complementary uses to the church that the applicant is contemplating. ANALYSIS Section 1282.03(f)(1-9) sets forth the criteria which must be used to evaluate a request for a Special Land Use Permit. The criteria and evaluation are as follows: 1. Is the proposed special land use designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner harmonious with the character of adjacent property and the surrounding area? Properties surrounding the proposed church are zoned "F" Commercial and "A" Residential. Commercial properties are located primarily along Jolly Road and Jolly Cedar Court. K-Mart is located southeast of the site. Residential properties SLU-15-99 South of the 100-200 Block of East Jolly Road Page 4 Special Land Use for a Church are both north and south of the subject property. The tentative location of the church is setback from Jolly Road. Vehicles will have access to the site from Skoog Court, a private street, just south of East Jolly Road. This proposal is subject to site plan review that will require the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed church to be harmonious with the character of adjacent properties. 2. Will the proposed special land use change the essential character of the surrounding area? The character of the property will change from a vacant lot to a church. This proposed land use would be consistent with office, commercial, and residential uses surrounding the site. Activities generated by the church and day/senior center are complementary to surrounding uses. Staff believes that this proposed project will not have a negative impact on the character of the surrounding area. 3. Will the proposed special land use interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent property? General enjoyment on adjacent properties will not be impacted by the church. Staff believes that the proposed church with a day care or senior center will not interfere with residential uses to the north and south. Skoog Court will provide access to the site, which will not impact residential circulation. However, vehicular ingress and egress from Skoog Court and Jolly Road is a concern. This issue will be addressed during site plan review. 4. Will the proposed special land use represent an improvement to the use or character of property under consideration and the surrounding area in general, and will the use be in keeping with the natural environment of the lot? The proposed development will improve the character of the vacant lot. Landscaping, screening, and buffering will be required to enhance the built environment on the site. The southern portion of the site has numerous trees that would be beneficial to save. This can be reviewed in the site plan. 5. Will the proposed special land use be hazardous to adjacent property, or involve uses, activities, materials or equipment which are detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of persons or property through the excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, odor, fumes or glare? SLU-15-99 South of the 100-200 Block of East Jolly Road Page 5 Special Land Use for a Church The proposed church does not pose any hazards to adjacent properties. Operation of the church and day care/senior center will not generate any additional noise, smoke, odor, fumes, or glare that will impact businesses or residents in the area. However, circulation and traffic is a concern brought up by the Transportation Engineer. This may require improvements to Skoog Court and Jolly Road. Site plan review will address required improvements. 6. Will the proposed special land use be adequately served by essential public facilities and services, or is it demonstrated that the person responsible for the proposed special land use is able to continually provide adequately for the services and facilities deemed essential to the special land use under consideration? Public services and utilities are adequately provided at the site. 7. Will the proposed special land use place demand on public services and facilities in excess of current capacity? The proposed SLU will not place an increase demand on public services. 8. Is the proposed special land use consistent with the intent and purpose of this Zoning Code and the objectives of any currently adopted Comprehensive Plan? The property is zoned "F" Commercial and "G-2" Wholesale. Churches are permitted in the both "F" Commercial and "G-2" Wholesale Districts with a Special Land Use permit. Section 1268.04(b) and 1272.04(a) of the Zoning Code states that a church may be permitted if the lot abuts a collector, principal arterial, or minor arterial. Each point of ingress and egress shall be directly onto a principal or minor arterial. Currently, the subject property is located south of Jolly Road, which is a minor arterial. Skoog Court, which is a private road, will be used to enter and exit the site. This proposal complies with the Zoning Code as long as the property that the church is on abuts Jolly Road. In the event the northern portion of the property is divided into a separate parcel the church property will no longer abut Jolly Road. Therefore, the applicant will need to develop the church property as a condominium, retain Skoog Court as a private street, or reserve a strip of land that is contiguous with the church property. Reserving a strip of land will also allow the applicant to locate a sign along the frontage of Jolly Road. Off street parking will need to meet Zoning Code requirements. Child care facilities are permitted subject to special conditions in both the "F" SLU-15-99 South of the 100-200 Block of East Jolly Road Page 6 Special Land Use for a Church Commercial and "G-2" Wholesale Districts. Both Section 1268.03(i) and 1272(k) require the following: 1. The facility shall provide and maintain on the lot not less than 5,000 square feet of open space. 2. For each child in the facility in excess of thirty-three children, the facility shall provide and maintain 150 additional square feet of outdoor play area. The Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan 1990 classifies churches under community facilities. Community facilities should be supported to locate near residential areas. The location of this proposed church is consistent with the intent of the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan. 9. Will the proposed special land use meet the dimensional requirements of the district in which the property is located? The 6.29 acre site provides ample space to build a 16,000 to 17,500 square foot church with seating for 450 persons. A site plan will be required to be submitted for site plan review. This proposal will be required to meet all dimensional requirements in the "F" Commercial and "G-2" Wholesale Districts. SUMMARY Based on the analysis of the Special Land Use permit, it meets all nine criteria. The proposed Special Land Use is harmonious with the character of adjacent property and surrounding uses. The proposed Special Land Use will not change the essential character of the surrounding properties. The proposed Special Land Use will not interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent properties. The proposed Special Land Use represents an improvement to the use and character of the property. The proposed Special Land Use will not be hazardous to adjacent properties. The proposed Special Land Use will be adequately served by public services and utilities. SLU-15-99 South of the 100-200 Block of East Jolly Road Page 7 Special Land Use for a Church The proposed Special Land Use will not place any demand on public services and facilities in excess of current capacities. The proposed Special Land Use is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and objective of the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan. The proposed Special Land Use will meet the dimensional requirements of the district in which the property is located. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Special Land Use permit with the following conditions: 1. The proposed development is required to conform to all site plan review and construction conditions including any necessary Skoog Court and Jolly Road improvements; and 2. The proposed Special Land Use shall be developed as a condominium project, Skoog Court shall be retained as a private street, or a portion of land that is contiguous from Jolly Road to the church property shall be reserved to maintain contact with Jolly Road, a minor arterial; and 3. The proposed Special Land Use provide adequate landscaping, screening, and buffering. Respectfully Submitted, Sam Quon Senior Planner 1,177%lp)I s---M)fy+L TT . I SLU- 15-99 NORTH 100-200 Block E. Jolly Rd. Vicinity Map VANS Cf. Cox BL ROOM ST. BEECH- WOOD KENDON 0 ti 51RINCA DR. CEDAR �LECLOVELA DR. SPOKE AVE. �E t T z JOLLY JOLLY RD. RD. . LLL G G LLL IDAHUA LLL stu "� r LLL LLLLLLLL LLLLLLLL Parent Pacel CARDNER a Q� BLUER SItG - ARWSTRONG RD. PAT-R � 4 yy J REDNER V1111'GE DR. Y NORTHRUP ST. FRED ST. LOUISA ST. LARRABEE LAUISA DORIS -1171F cGARRY OLYAIPIA SLU- 15-99 NORTH 100-200 Block E. Jolly Rd. Zoning z CLOVERLAND DR. J SPOKANE AVE. 3 N o 0 w 0 = 3 U � � p � A CUPon ,rFr' RD. e`S N 0 JOLLY RD. LLL U LLL Q LIA T-1"Pro. Off nFrr o ) L w "Frr LLL LLL o -LLLLLLLLI rent Pacel LLLLLLLL U GARDNER Sit rlF,r ARMSTRONG RD. 'A" Q Res w U w r n ,r o /`'1 Res REDNER v �\ GE OR. VIUA � F o Ct Y NORTHRUP ST. Parks & Recreation Draft Master Plan 2000 - 2005 Comments from Planning Office Staff Quality of life is greatly enhanced in our community with the many things that our parks have to offer. It is what makes Lansing more of a "World Class City" and distinguishes it from others. Lansing's parks and recreation programs are a big reason (other than employment) why nonresidents come into Lansing. The intent of this Plan as stated on Page 'a' is to fulfill the requirement to have it on file with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources to apply for grants that the MDNR administers; to identify capital improvement projects; and to assist various boards, the Mayor and Council in developing budgetary and operational policies. The draft of the Parks & Recreation Master Plan: 2000 - 2005 is quite comprehensive. The following comments and suggestions are intended to strengthen this document and to reinforce the Parks and Recreation Department's efforts to make continuous improvements to its planning process. SPECIFIC COMMENTS (identified as to page number): Table of Contents - the Table should be more specific to make the document more usable, perhaps by including subheadings. 1.3 "No other bodies of water exist within Lansing...": Though Bear Lake is held by MSU, it is a significant body of water in Lansing. It is mentioned in the Southeast Comprehensive Plan. Suggestion: Include Bear Lake on Page 1.3 1.4 Paulson Park - Suggestion: Consult the Paulson connector street study. 2.6 River& Waterfront Development Board: This Board has not met for 6-7 years. Suggested change: The Waterfront Development Board was created by City Council Ordinance to oversee implementation of the waterfront plan. This Board has been inactive in recent years. It should be revitalized, or other arrangements should be made to ensure that the purpose of this Board is fulfilled. 2.7 Suggestion: Add the Historic District Commission and the Historical Society of Greater Lansing as groups that are advisory (even though they may have not been in the past) to the Parks and Recreation Department. 3.6 Regional Park Map - Joint efforts between/among communities within the Lansing region will go a long way to share in the resources (natural and people resources) that all communities have to offer. 3.7 Suggestion: Historic Preservation should be given greater emphasis to structures and places other than the Scott House and Turner Dodge House. The Lansing Historic District Commission and the Historical Society of Greater Lansing could be consulted on this and should be included in the list of organizations consulted on pp. 2.6-2.8. Planning Office Review of Page 2 Parks and Recreation Draft Master Plan 2000-2005 January 20, 2000 4.3 Some of the maps are difficult to read. 4.18 Suggestion: Correct the map re: Turner-Dodge and Impression 5. 4.19 Pro-Bowl - 2122 North MLK. 4.26 Suggestion: Consider the deletion of adult entertainment uses which are not oriented to health & fitness or museums. 4.27 Suggestion: Include Lansing Community College's performing arts program. 4.27 Suggestion: Include Tollgate Wetlands, east of Groesbeck, in Lansing Township. 5.5 Suggestion: Mention Oldsmobile Park as a recreational resource to the City of Lansing, and emphasize that it is an accessible park/stadium. 5.6 Suggestion - revise "A" to read: "To develop partnerships/coalitions with community groups, educational institutions, and churches." The discussion should be expanded to include the need for the involvement of volunteers, particularly children. The creative use of volunteers is absolutely the wave of the future! 5.10 Downtown Business District - The Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan supports the linkage of attractions and open space, as well as the installation of a continuous riverwalk on both sides of the river, and if feasible, pedestrian/bicycle bridges. The feasibility of these bridges has yet to be determined. The Parks and Recreation Plan should include feasibility studies for pedestrian/bicycle bridges, and improve linkages between River Trail and street-level routes. 5.10 Turner/Dodge - properties located west of Turner/Dodge House include homes that were moved to Capitol Avenue (south of North St.). This project, which includes improvements in the ROW, needs to be resolved and completed. 5.11 Suggestion - Under"City-Wide," item d: add "provide linkages between park facilities and other City attractions."to the end of the sentence. 5.11 Acquisition/Disposals: A map would be very helpful. 5.11 Disposals: Mifflin Property is in the flood plain. Limited potential for single family development provided flood plain permits are obtained. 5.12 Elmhurst Park- Suggestion: Get surrounding neighborhoods involved in strengthening the school's involvement in the maintenance of overall area if the school takes over the park. Planning Office Review of Page 3 Parks and Recreation Draft Master Plan 2000-2005 January 20, 2000 5.14 Potter Park and Zoo - Raised beds for gardening for the disabled. This sounds like a great idea. Could possibly include a children's garden or component to get a good intergenerational mix to the project. 5.14 Adopt-a Park- may become more and more important as City costs continue to rise in maintaining and improving what Parks we have. A.15 Suggestion: Give Olds Stadium/Lansing Center/City Market greater emphasis in this document. A.22 Much of the remaining privately owned open space will eventually be developed. A.24 Suggestion: The Adopt-A-Park discussion should mention that traffic islands/medians are now maintained by Public Service Department which does not trim shrubs. Those who "adopt" a park should have some official recognition, sign off from neighborhood organization, or proof of being able to perform according to an agreement. Adopt-a- highway could also be implemented along City streets'(e.g., Forestry Commission - Champaign, IL). Churches could be actively engaged in parks and recreation programs. A sure bet for an Adopt-A-Park program would be the Community Gardens programs. A.30 "As our urban environment continues to become more 'risky', the Leisure Services Division must continue to design programs that promote developmental skills and provide personal satisfaction to the users." Suggestion: Clarify the term "risky." Does that refer to hazardous or dangerous recreational activities (e.g., extreme sports), or safety/security threats? D1 Other Plans referenced- Should include the City of Lansing's Master Plan and the Plan for Development of Lansing's Waterfront. P.5 An Adopt-an-Acre program should be considered, so groups can take care of a particular section of a park. GENERAL COMMENTS: Relationship with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan was recognized only byway of its proposed land use and circulation maps (pp. 1.16- 1.24). The text, which contains policies and recommendations, was omitted. Suggestion: The Comprehensive Plan policies related to parks should be referenced in this plan and included in future editions. Other Funding Sources: Concern was expressed by the Department Director(p. iv ) on finding other ways to fund the Parks and Recreation Department other than the General Fund. Some demographic groups are often assumed to be unable to pay (e.g., seniors and teens). The City could set up credits, scholarships, etc. to those who lack ability to pay. It could start 'workreation' programs where kids work in exchange for the use of facilities, such as pools or ball games. We could look to many other communities to explore creative ways of paying for programs and park improvements. Lansing is rich in its people resources. Planning Office Review of Page 4 Parks and Recreation Draft Master Plan 2000-2005 January 20, 2000 A Teen Center: City Council, (on Page b2) lists a Teen Center and a Youth Advisory Commission under its goals for the Human Relations and Community Services Department. It seems these would have a direct relationship to the Parks and Recreation Department. Mutt Mitts: This should certainly be just a part of an overall strategy to get owners to pick up animal waste. Required dog licensing could possibly be combined with education and discounted "pooper scoopers." Conflict should be anticipated from a proposal to designate any parks as "dog parks." Community Centers: These are great locations for neighborhood organizations to hold meetings and various neighborhood functions and fundraisers. Use of the centers by neighborhood organizations would increase participation in the centers, strengthen the partnership between the Parks and Recreation bepartment and residents, thereby widening the base of support for the Department. The Foster and Letts Centers both have fairly active use by neighborhood organizations. Gier and Miller Road Centers probably have much less use, if any, by neighborhood organizations. It appears, according to p. 2.7, that there is no advisory group for the Miller Road Center. Privatization of activities/programs in public parks: There is little discussion of privatization of activities/programs in public parks. The proposal for an "extreme" park at Ranney Park would be the exception. Regional Importance of Centrally Located Parks: The parks that are fairly central to the Lansing region are clustered together: Potter Park/Crego/Fenner/Scott Woods/Forest View Park (and Mt. Hope and Evergreen Cemeteries) to comprise the greatest amount of(publicly) owned open space in the region. Linkages should be emphasized to and among these regional parks with river trail connections, trail/bike path connections, etc. Information posted at each of the parks regarding the area would strengthen the focus of this area as a significant "natural" area that has much to offer. Historic Preservation: Emphasis and attention to the historic character of buildings and the significance of historic events that have occurred in City parks and the three rivers would add a richness to the experience that historic context provides. Much of Lansing's history is based on the river. For example, the confluence of the Grand and Red Cedar River has much significance in the history of Native Americans to this area. The Pottawatomi Indian Gardens off of E. Willow at the north end of CACS property. Parks mentioned in the Memorandum '76 document lists the following parks of significance: Oak or East Park, Durant Park, and Reutter Park. Structures of historic significance include Lansing City Market and Moores Park pool. Sites include Lansing's First House and Early Dam Site at Race and E. Maple Street. The preservation of views should be mentioned (e.g., Francis Park, Cooley Gardens, Sheffield Park, etc.) Lansing is one of Michigan's six significant cultural heritage corridor areas now affiliated with the National Parks Service. An inventory of cultural and recreational resources administered by the Parks and Recreation Department is underway, and a plan to preserve and market these resources will be necessary. Some Parks facilities, such as Durant, Reutter, and Riverfront Park Planning Office Review of Page 5 Parks and Recreation Draft Master Plan 2000-2005 January 20, 2000 are included in the American National Automobile Heritage Corridor proposal, which may lead to national recognition as historical resources. Community Gardens: This program, administered by The Garden Project, through the Ingham Co. Health Dept., is an excellent program for residents, regardless of income, age, race or ethnicity. They are good for recreation, therapy and food, and tend to benefit persons with low incomes. The program is trying to find a way to continue funding while attracting higher income people to the program. There are currently two community gardens that are located in City parks (e.g., Foster and Risdale Parks). The potential use of parks for community gardens, possibly through the Adopt-a-Park program, would be a good way of putting public parks to good use. A reciprocal agreement could be made to have some contribution by gardeners toward some limited park maintenance or other improvements. These types of programs should be recognized and strengthened. Facilitating such programs in the future could generate positive PR and be upheld as a way of furthering Lansing as a World Class City. Much of the produce gleaned from the gardens is donated to food banks. Park Beautification: A partnership among the various programs such as Neighborhoods in Bloom and the City's "Beautification Squads" (p. b4) could be strengthened with the active participation of the Master Gardeners program. The City could recruit Master Gardeners for various projects where candidates in the program are required to put in many hours of doing gardening projects or giving workshops to the community. Beautification projects within median strips or alongside streets within the public right-of-way could be largely organized and sponsored by nearby businesses or business associations. Good examples are found in East Lansing, along Trowbridge Road and along Lake Lansing Road, near Meijers. City/regional Oldsmobile Park: This is hardly mentioned at all in this Master Plan. This is one of the City's most significant regional recreational facilities. Regional approaches to recreation: The Music Festival by LEPFA at Adado Riverfront (p. A.15) is a good regional effort. Possibly have some music performances along Washington Avenue to benefit downtown businesses. Crime prevention/sense of security: Anti-Graffiti program through Public Art - murals, sculptures. The Philadelphia's Mural Arts Program is a success story. It started as a training ground for former graffiti writers, and developed into a professional organization creating sophisticated works of public art. Citywide linkages: Other linkages to be made throughout the City could include abandoned railroad and utility rights of way (See the City's Master Plan). Wildlife/Open Space vs. Development: Privately owned vacant land is often assumed to be publicly owned by nearby residents. Planning Office Review of Page 6 Parks and Recreation Draft Master Plan 2000-2005 January 20, 2000 Other Areas Not Covered: • Flood plains and waterways. • Street ends at the riverfront. • Concentration/coordination of economic development efforts along the River Trail. • Interurban trail. • Urban Scenic Corridor: (Forest Road) • Private uses of public parks. • Memorials/Historic markers in public parks. • Historic character of bridges that, due to construction, age, design, contribute to the character of the waterfront. (See page 73 of the Waterfront Plan.) APPROVED AS PRINTED FEBRUARY 15, 2000 Draft to Clerk 02142000 Approved 02152000 To Clerk 03072000 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 p.m., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall r- 124 West Michigan Avenue Tuesday, February 1, 2000 G i � n co ..y 1. OPENING SESSION: J Chairman Nischan called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Keene, Miller, Nischan, Patrick, Smith. Six members present, one excused absence. B. Excused Absences - Ruge. Mr. Ruge requested and was granted an excused absence due to illness. C. Introductions. James A. Ruff, Zoning Administrator. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - The agenda was approved as printed. 3. COMMUNICATIONS - A. Letter from Tracey Carney, EDC Office, re: EPA Brownfield Economic Redevelopment Initiative requesting comments and support of the Brownfield Redevelopment Initiative. B. Letter from residents on Miller Road in opposition to Z-1-00, 3307, 3329 W. Miller and Vacant Land Just West of 3329 W. Miller Road, "A" Residential to "H" Light Industrial District with 25 signatures, in petition form. C. Letter from Roger Melton, 3220 West Miller Road in opposition to Z-1-00. 4. HEARINGS - A. Z-1-00, 3307, 3329 W. Miller and Vacant Land Just West of 3329 W. Miller Road, "A" Residential to "H" Light Industrial District Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request from Corvus International which has an option to purchase the land. At present, the two properties with addresses are single family homes while the remainder is vacant land, zoned "A" Residential, about 53 acres land area. The lot is irregularly- shaped because in the northwest corner is a parcel of land with a church on it. To the north are residential land uses, a church, and some vacant land zoned commercial, as well as apartments and single- and two-family homes. To the south is 1-96 right-of-way; to the east is City property and property zoned wholesale which has a Bobcat equipment distributorship on it. To the west is residential, in the Township and in the City. The zoning reflects the land uses. The Southwest Comprehensive Plan, developed in 1990, designates this land for industrial warehouse space as well as open space. The applicant proposes to develop the land as an PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 1, 2000 PAGE 2 industrial park. Corvus International estimates the maximum build out to be approximately 865,000 square feet. The Transportation Engineer comments that a phased traffic study should be required for this development. The Waverly Road access point is also mentioned. Mr. Smith asked about the two residences. Mr. Ruff said both properties have homes on large lots which were developed in the Township prior to annexation. They are included in the petition. HENRY E. DIETZ, 121 WEST LONG LAKE ROAD, FIRST FLOOR, BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MICHIGAN, REPRESENTING CORVUS INTERNATIONAL. Also present is Mr. Sumbal, the property owner from whom we have the option. The site plan shows the maximum build out on the site. There is a detention pond requirement. There are also potential wetlands, still being investigated as to extent and regulatory status. The site plan is conceptual, but it does indicate type and scope and is drawn to consider the residences and the church. Truck docks will face the highway, away from residential. One of the reasons for the rezoning is wanting to be able to satisfy the automotive supply requirements of companies we work with. With the new Catera plant going in and other potential expansion in the immediate area, we would like to develop in Lansing. This is expected to be more of a just-in-time operation to serve area assembly plants and will generally have assembling. We have asked for Light Industrial zoning, not Heavy. We have to be able to accommodate some machining, some assembly, but we are looking for uses that are compatible. These are not intended as single-tenant buildings. The 280,000 sq ft building may have several tenants and we have to have uses that make good neighbors. LOIS MELTON, 3220 W. MILLER ROAD, LANSING. I oppose the rezoning. We have had problems with the Bobcat place and trucks running in and out at all hours, stopping traffic. Many small children walk through there all the time. We don't want any more businesses there. A senior citizen apartment, or a park, or a Boys and Girls Club would be better. JOHNNY W. GOSS, 3515 COACHLIGHT COMMONS, LANSING. We need to be concerned about safety. We don't have the streets for big trucks to travel. Before Christmas, a car going too fast ran into two of my cars, and into my yard. The streets that turn off of Miller, if a car turns too quick, they are going to be out of control. It is so close to the residences; there would be noise factor too. GHULAM H. SUMBAL, 4534 OKEMOS RD, OKEMOS. I am the owner. I am a retiree from General Motors, worked there about 30 years; lived in the same neighborhood. As far as safety is concerned, I was so close to PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 1, 2000 PAGE 3 Fisher Body. Sexton High School was nearby. I didn't see any accidents there. This area is pretty secluded between Miller and 1-96. There are very few homes on the north side, and one church on the corner. The owners before me tried to put a senior house in there, but they were turned down because it was earmarked for future industrial use. This is part of keeping GM and its suppliers in Lansing. Thank you. SHED BLAKE, 3514 COACHLIGHT. I am concerned about safety because people coming up Miller Road take Coachlight through there like it is the expressway. I have had cars end up on my lawn. Police chase guys down through there; one of them ended up in my rose bush. A motorcycle ended up in a tree beside my house. We have had several accidents. We don't need any more traffic. I am concerned about child safety, and air pollution from trucks. There is too much traffic now. CALVIN LYNCH, 4815 WAINWRIGHT. Is the traffic study is going to be available for the public? Mr. Ruff said any of the information provided for completion of the study of the rezoning is available for public review. A traffic study has not been completed or undertaken as yet. The Transportation Engineer suggested that a traffic study be done in two phases. It will be discussed with the applicant and determined by the Board as to its requirement. Mr. Ruff suggested interested parties phone him for updates. Sam Quon is the other contact person. BETTY BLAKE, 3514 COACHLIGHT. I oppose this. It is a safety factor, as well as people suffering with upper respiratory problems. It would not be conducive to better health. It needs to be somewhere else. EVELYN THOCKER, 3330 WEST MILLER. I oppose this because of the noise, pollution and vehicles speeding by. Mr. Miller, looking at storm water requirements, said the area serves as a natural detention pond. It is quite low and has poor drainage. Putting in a facility of this magnitude would generate a significant amount of runoff. Because that is naturally a retention area, we need to be concerned about capacities. It might take something beyond a normal storm water review to make sure it is not overburdening the storm system that takes water away from that area. Mr. Smith asked about the annexation of the property, when people moved into their residences in the area and when the zoning may have been changed. What zoning was in place prior to the annexation? Mr. Ruff said after annexation, it was placed automatically in the "A" Residential District back in the '60s. "I will update the case history information for you in the staff report and what the master plan designation is for the property." The property to the south of 1-96 in the Township was a muck pit. To the west of Waverly Road is a tree farm, PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 1, 2000 PAGE 4 Cottage Gardens. There was a fifteen-year court case that dealt with the extension of Edgewood Boulevard and land uses along it. Residential designations are not made to the south of the E-W corridor that was created as an extension of Miller-Pleasant Grove-Edgewood. Over the years, the proposals for residential development between the E-W corridor and 1-96 which is not good planning practice, brought about the master plan designation for this area. This is a challenge to satisfy both the area master plan and the differences in land use located across the street. We will be looking at those issues through the Zoning and Ordinance report and the staff report. The applicants know that there are conditions of the site that may have an effect. We asked them what the maximum build out of the site could be for their purposes. Too, wetland definitions must be clarified. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for Z-1-00, 3307, 3329 W. Miller and Vacant Land Just West of 3329 W. Miller Road, "A" Residential to "H" Light Industrial District and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, February 9, 2000, in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE - None. 6. RECESS - None. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval - January 25, 2000. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to approve the minutes of January 25, 2000 without corrections. On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: AII; Nays: None; carried; unanimous; the minutes of January 25, 2000 were APPROVED. August 18, 1998. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, to approve the minutes of August 18, 1998, without corrections. On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: AII; Nays: None; carried; unanimous; theAPPROVED. minutes of August 18, 1998 were B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee Next meeting Wednesday, February 9, 2000, at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. 3. Urban Development Committee Next meeting Tuesday, February 8, 2000, at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. 4. Executive Committee C. Report from Planning Manager PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 1, 2000 PAGE 5 Mr. Ruff reported that Eleanor Love has taken leave of the Planning Manager's position; she is now the Code Compliance Manager in the Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development. It is a lateral move. She is taking 25 years of planning experience into the code enforcement area, which from a departmental standpoint is good. From a management standpoint, there will be more emphasis on zoning and housing. The previous manager, Henry Hernandez, has retired, and Mr. Sykes moved quickly to fill that position, appointing Eleanor. Mr. Ruff has been appointed interim manager of the Planning Office. Ms. Love is still handling the groundwater committee and departmental coordination of the Census. The City has hired a contractual census coordinator, Sandra Hearns, who has Model Cities experience and development and planning experience. For next meeting, we will present a resolution and congratulatory card honoring Eleanor for her service. We had a meeting last week with the South Lansing Business Association, attended by several councilmembers, Patricia Cook, Jack Nelson, a representative of the Mayor's office, and Mr. Ruff. We discussed a number of topics, EDS, Drakes, Logan Square, Walgreen's. "I also told them we need their assistance in the Census." Regarding the chiller facility, it is Mr. Ruff's understanding that the chiller is not going to be constructed at the location this Board reviewed, but that a more reasonable location is the mezzanine of the existing Ottawa Street power station, locating the chiller towers between the parking deck and the wall of the power plant. It should not significantly interfere with the commercial or other reuse of the Ottawa Street power plant. No permits have been issued. Mr. Frederick asked if that increased the cost? Mr. Ruff said it appreciably raises the cost of piping. They will have to tear up some streets that have recently been redone, such as Grand Avenue. It will apparently reduce land and construction a Street Power Plant.there will not be a need for a building addition Mr. Frederick suggested that, while they are tearing up Grand Avenue, could they put the brick back at the intersection of Grand and Michigan? ,,I miss it." Mr. Ruff said that is a good point. Mr. Smith asked, about the Logan Square area, has thought been given to the aesthetics of the area? Power lines crisscross the intersection. In that area they are so connenitaatedmthey asseslof�concrst ete. The e out ne sunlight. There are also unappealing g Walgreen's will improve the look of that intersection. Mr. Ruff said some good people are involved in the Business Association. Part of Planning Office outreach that he would like to do is to educate business as to how landscaping and site maintenance could raise their own value and that of surrounding properties, and also influence street frontage. It is important. We get complaints from businesses about neighborhood deterioration and vandalism. Some of this is cause and PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 1, 2000 PAGE 6 effect—the poor appearance some businesses project is reflected in the vandalism that occurs in these transitional parts of neighborhoods adjacent to their properties. We need to raise the level of awareness. Mr. Frederick mentioned the broken window theory—one broken window in the warehouse leads to the next until they are all are broken. Mr. Smith said he lives in this area and visits the Logan Center. Many people are on foot, but it is not an accommodating area for pedestrians trying to cross Logan and Holmes. If the area businesses took that into account, it may encourage more business. Mr. Ruff observed that the Burger King incorporated benches into their green area for use by customers. It works well and looks better. Mr. Smith said there are two assisted-living homes in the area with residents who do not drive. Mr. Ruff will mention that to the Transportation Engineer. Chairman Nischan said the landscape screening and buffering portion of the zoning ordinance was identified as needing revision. It may be an opportunity to raise standards and confront the fact that building in at least the prevailing sense of urban aesthetics is a legitimate thing to do. D. Pending items: Future action required 1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-19-97, N.W. Cor. Cavanaugh &Aurelius, "F" Commercial to "G-2" Wholesale District (Tabled October 15, 1997) b. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) C. Z-4-98, 201 E. Grand River, "F-1" Commercial & "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) d. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) 2. Urban Development Committee a. Act-21-98, Ingham Regional Medical Center, Replacement Sign in S. Pennsylvania ROW (Tabled September 8, 1998) b. Act-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris St., Vacate ROW (Tabled February 16, 1999) b. Act-7-99, Somercroft Drive at Post Oak Lane, Vacate Public Right-of- way for School Parking (Referred to UDC May 18, 1999) d. Act-14-99, 100 Blk. West Elm Street, Sale of Property (Tabled October 26, 1999) e. Act-15-99, 703 East Shiawassee Street, Purchase of Property for Parks Dept. Oak Park Field Office (Re-referred to Committee November 2, 1999). 8. NEW BUSINESS - EPA Brownfield Economic Redevelopment Initiative. Mr. Ruff said the request is from the Economic Development Corporation for the Planning Board's support as they seek a grant from EPA for continued dollars for brownfield redevelopment. The possibility is that Lansing can be designated a brownfield assessment demonstration pilot. The Department would like the Board's action to support this if at all possible. A summary is included that PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 1, 2000 PAGE 7 includes four items, an inventory and limited economic analysis of brownfield properties; prioritization of sites to place them in priority based on economic and social value; presenting outreach information; and selecting and completing environmental site assessments on the highest priority brownfield properties. It is another avenue for brownfields programs to capture dollars for Brownfield redevelopment. "I ask your support tonight." Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Miller, to direct staff to prepare a letter of support for the EPA Brownfield Economic Redevelopment Initiative. Mr. Frederick believes developers will go where the land is least costly to develop. Right now many of them are going outside cities where they can buy agricultural land cheaper because there is no pollution on site. Something like this can only encourage development of these properties. "I am fully in support of this. We need an inventory of brownfields in the City. My only concern would be that this would not be enough money." Ms. Patrick asked about the Authority itself, and what kind of acreage in the City would be affected. Mr. Ruff said in the Economic Development Corporation, there is another commission that also serves as the Lansing Brownfield Redevelopment Authority. This is not a renaissance zone; it is different. It is City-wide. As a pilot program, it would help set a standard. Mr. Ruff suggested asking staff from Economic Development Corporation to attend our next meeting to answer questions. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: All, Nays: None, motion carried, unanimous, to direct staff to prepare a letter of support for the EPA Brownfield Economic Redevelopment Initiative was APPROVED. 9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON The Chairman requested Mr. Ruff to convey to Ms. Love, on behalf of the Planning Board, their sadness to see her go. She well served the Board and the community with a high degree of integrity. Chairman Nischan remarked that he was reassured by Mr. Ruff's background, awareness of fundamental issues, and personal responsiveness to the Board. He welcomes working with Mr. Ruff. 10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS - None. 11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS - None. 12. ADJOURNMENT was at 8:23 p.m. Respectful y submitted James A. Ruff, Acting Planning Manager Planning Board mn020100 aA55 APPROVED MARCH 7, 2000 with one correction Pg 8 Ln 8.51' Pos 5.9"J. Ruge, Draft to Clerk 02282000 Approved 03072000 To Clerk 03132000 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 p.m., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall �- 124 West Michigan Avenue - Tuesday, February 15, 2000 ~ C - 1. OPENING SESSION: rJ Chairman Nischan called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. W A. Roll Call. Present- Frederick, Keene, Miller, Nischan, Patrick, Ruge, Smith. Seven members present, one vacant seat. B. Excused Absences - None. C. Introductions. James A. Ruff, Acting Planning Manager, introduced staff present, William C. Rieske, Principal Planner. Tracey Carney is also here representing the Economic Development Corporation to provide additional information concerning the Brownfield Economic Redevelopment Initiative. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - The presentation and question and answer session of the Economic Development Corporation was moved to 5. The agenda was approved with that adjustment. 3. COMMUNICATIONS - None. 4. HEARINGS -None 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each) HENRY DIETZ, 121 W. LONG LAKE RD., FIRST FLOOR, BLOOMFIELD HILLS, MICHIGAN, REPRESENTING CORVUS INTERNATIONAL. This is in relation to the rezoning on Miller-Waverly and 1-96. Although the ordinance calls for a 20-ft buffer, your committee has increased that to 40 ft along the south side of Miller Road across from the residential as well as some commercial. We have within that buffer indicated landscaping consisting of nine trees within 100 ft, four of which are deciduous and five evergreen. We have upon recommendation of the Planning Office created a berm which extends five ft higher than the crown of the road. Notice the focus of the landscaping on the viewable side of the berm. We have smaller copies of this (distributed them to the Board and interested members of the audience). Do you have any questions regarding this? Mr. Ruff requested this information be reviewed by the Zoning and Ordinance Committee at the recess. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 2 Ms. Keene asked about the berm; Mr. Dietz said the berm would extend the full length of the frontage. EVELYN THOCKER, 3330 W. MILLER ROAD, LANSING. Double-bottom trucks, the CATA bus and the school buses go down our road. They shake the houses. There are going to be day cares near Wise Road. There is too much traffic. It's going to be even worse. TRACEY CARNEY, DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. I am here to answer questions about the EPA Brownfields Pilot Program. We hope that by applying to the EPA, we will be designated as a pilot community for brownfields redevelopment. The first two years of the program will entitle the City of Lansing to $200,000 in funding. That money will be used to develop a comprehensive package of site-related information about the brownfields that are located in our city. It will also help us identify some of them. We know about 20 that have been identified, but we think there are many more that for a variety of reasons have not yet been identified, so we will be able to do a comprehensive inventory that will provide information on each of the sites such as ownership, known historical uses of the property, dimensions, and state equalized valuations. This will allow us to look at the compiled information and begin to prioritize the sites and determine which ones are most viable regarding development or which ones would have the greatest community impact. Then some of the $200,000 would be used to do outreach to work with the Planning Board, realtors, Chamber of Commerce, and other community groups and organizations in Lansing to provide educational information about brownfield redevelopment and what the brownfield authority can do to help. Our last step will be to take those prioritized sites and actually perform some environmental assessments on them. In doing so, we will be able to identify what is causing the property to remain underutilized, what is the level of contamination if any, and what the comprehensive status of the site really is. That way, down the road, when developers or property owners or interested businesspeople come to us we can illuminate some of the unknown factors that potentially could scare off possible investors. We found in dealing both with the RiteAid at Greenlawn and Cedar, and now the Motor Wheel facility that the biggest deterrent is really the unknown risks and liabilities associated with these properties. If we are awarded this grant and were designated as a pilot, we will be able to go a long way in taking away some of the unknowns and being able to provide people with solid factual information about these sites. Ms. Patrick asked for an explanation of how the Brownfields program is related to the State Renaissance Zone program. Ms. Carney said in some communities they are more related than in our community. Here the renaissance zone program is designated to specifically the two sub-zones the Seven Block and the PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 3 Lindell Drop Forge site. Basically, that means that if you own property or live or run a business in a renaissance zone, you are entitled to certain tax abatements. In most cases, it is property tax, personal income tax as well as single business tax, on the local and state level. The Brownfield program which the Lansing Brownfield Redevelopment Authority wants is different in that it is based on a tax increment financing tool. When a plan is written for the development of a property, it is based on the knowledge that certain investment will go into the property so that when the SEV is raised at the end of the project, the LBRA is able to capture that tax increment and then reimburse the property owner or developer or whoever is paying for the required environmental cleanup of the property. They could be related, but not necessarily. Anytime time you do a renaissance zone when you are abating all the taxes, that doesn't leave anything for a tax increment financing program to capture, but there are instances where you could use the single business tax credit portion that is afforded through the Brownfield plan in conjunction with the renaissance zone, but it is not done so much. Ms. Patrick asked if there is an estimate of how much land has potential for being identified. Ms. Carney said right now we know of 20 sites, the largest of which was the Motor Wheel facility. That was around 26 acres. Most of the sites we know of are around one to one and a half acres, some more or less, but no really big parcels any more. "I expect we will identify up to a total of 100 sites under the Pilot Program, and I would estimate them to all be all similarly sized." Ms. Patrick said $200,000 seems quite inadequate to take care of the size task outlined. Ms. Carney said it will be a good start. Hopefully, as we implement this program, the LBRA will be able to write a couple of plans for the actual redevelopment, and after reimbursement of the property owner or developer, the LBRA can continue to capture the tax increment for a period of five years which then creates a revolving fund. In the future we will be looking to input into the revolving fund to continue funding our program. We have a good start now. We will be capturing approximately $80,000 for the RiteAid plan that is already in existence, and probably somewhere in the neighborhood of $5 million under the Motor Wheel plan. That will start happening in the next three to four years, so that will give us a start. There is also the possibility of continued funding through the EPA on a yearly basis. If you are designated as a Pilot Program and you continue to demonstrate that you are meeting the goals of the program, they will usually give you additional funding, but it's not a guarantee. Ms. Patrick asked if Lansing is one of the few cities in the state that have a chance to become a Pilot Program. Ms. Carney said that anyone who can establish a Brownfield Authority could apply; however, so far, only Saginaw and PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 4 another southwestern Michigan city has been designated. If Lansing is designated, we will be one of a very few. Chairman Nischan thanked Ms. Carney. 6. RECESS - Chairman Nischan declared a recess for the Zoning and Ordinance Committee to meet. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: February 1, 2000 Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve the minutes of February 1, 2000, without corrections. On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; carried; unanimous; the minutes of February 1, 2000, were APPROVED. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole - Has not met. 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee - Mr. Miller, Chair. The Zoning and Ordinance Committee met on February 9, 2000, and again this evening for the purpose of discussing Z-1-2000, 3307, 3329 W. Miller and Vacant Land Just West of 3329 W. Miller Road, "A" Residential to "H" Light Industrial District. In Committee, extensive discussion took place concerning traffic that would be generated in the area. As noted, traffic issues will be addressed as part of the review of this project, and staff will be working with the Transportation Engineer. Another matter which was expressed in the staff report and reviewed in Committee concerns proper buffering of this facility. The Committee found that this development is in compliance with the Southwest Area Comprehensive Master Plan, which designates this land for industrial/warehouses. Regarding environmental impacts, concerns such as additional noise and non-point source pollution from vehicles must be addressed as part of the development. Amenities, and the reviewing of those, staff basically acknowledged those are addressed during site plan review. In Committee, a motion was made, seconded and carried unanimously 3-0 to recommend approval of Z-1-2000, 3307, 3329 W. Miller and Vacant Land Just West of 3329 W. Miller Road, "A" Residential to "H" Light Industrial District. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 5 Mr. Miller made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to recommend approval of Z-1-2000, 3307, 3329 W. Miller and Vacant Land Just West of 3329 W. Miller Road, "A" Residential to "H" Light Industrial District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Ruff requested that the minutes acknowledge the fact that the Committee's motion and action took place recognizing the commitment that the owners made in amending the application to include a 40-ft buffer along the south side of Miller Road. Chairman Nischan observed that since a rezoning cannot be conditioned, it is good to make that observation. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Keene . .Aye Miller. . . Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . Aye Ruge . . Aye Smith. . Aye Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; carried unanimously; Z-1-2000, 3307, 3329 W. Miller and Vacant Land Just West of 3329 W. Miller Road, "A" Residential to "H" Light Industrial District was APPROVED. Chairman Nischan noted that Mr. Ruff has done much work to make the development friendly to the environment, neighborhood and economic climate of the south side. The Board appreciates his work and thanked him. Next meeting Wednesday, March 15, 2000, at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. 3. Urban Development Committee - Mr. Smith, Chair. The Committee met on February 8, 2000. Two items were acted upon. b. Act-14-99, 100 Blk. West Elm Street, Sale of Property This is a request by the Parks and Recreation Department to sell a vacant lot (PPN 3301-21-178-021) on the south side of the 100 Block of W. Elm Street. The owner to the east would like to buy the subject lot from the City to expand his auto sales business. The Parks and Recreation Department has determined that the 33 ft wide x 82.5 ft deep property has no recreational use or potential since it is a small lot surrounded by private land. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 6 The Planning staff recommends the City retain ownership of the subject property. The Committee found that based on the testimony and evidence that the size of the parcel, 33 ft x 82.5 ft was small and questionable as to developmental potential by itself, and that no significant public purpose was found to justify retaining ownership of the subject property. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously 3-0 to dispose of the subject parcel. Mr. Smith made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to approve Act-14-99, 100 Blk. West Elm Street, Sale of Property. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Ruff said he had a discussion with Mr. Ramont, who has requested the property. Mr. Ruff expressed concerns about the property, in that neither the Parks Department, whose department director will be retiring in March, nor the Public Service Department, which anticipates rebuilding the Elm Street Bridge in the future, was concerned about removing the property from City control. "It seems every time the City sells a piece of property near a development area, we need it back. That is our concern as a department. We disagree with the Parks Department." That was evident at the meeting. Mr. Ruff's discussion with Mr. Ramont centered around what he would agree to do to help allay those concerns. He is preparing a letter which Mr. Ruff encourages the Board to review to help the process. Mr. Ruff urges retaining the case until the information is received, possibly this week or the following week. Ms. Keene asked what the letter will say. Mr. Ruff anticipates that the letter will deal with the rebuilding of the bridge, and if the City needs to buy back some of the lot, how that could take place, and also, if we need to place tool trailers on it during construction. Right now, we are blocking part of his property with the fencing that has been put up. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to table Act-14-99, 100 Blk. West Elm Street, Sale of Property, until the Board can review the anticipated letter from the applicant. On a Roll Cal Vote, the motion carried unanimously. Act-14-99, 100 Blk. West Elm Street, Sale of Property, is TABLED. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 7 a. Act-2-2000, 100 Blk. E. Michigan Ave., Former Jim's Tiffany Place, Acceptance of Donation for Right-of-Way Summit Partners, which owns the former Jim's Tiffany Restaurant site, has offered to return a vacated portion of the East Michigan Avenue Right-of-way to the City. The subject property currently functions as a sidewalk, and blends into the sidewalk of the ROW. It is the site of the restaurant's sun room and canopy, which extended from the storefront into the Michigan Avenue ROW. The vacated area measures 10 ft x 44 ft. The effect of accepting the donation is to restore the sidewalk to its original 20 ft width. It is also a step toward implementing SLU-8-95, to permit a parking lot on the former Jim's Tiffany site. Staff recommended that Act-2-2000, 100 Blk. E. Michigan Ave., Former Jim's Tiffany Place, Acceptance of Donation for Right-of-Way, be approved. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that 2. the donation of the 10 ft x 44 ft area would restore the sidewalk to its original 20 ft width, and 3. would be a step towards meeting the conditions of approval for a parking lot on the former Jim's Tiffany site (SLU-8-95). Ms. Smith made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, based on testimony, evidence and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to recommend approval of Act-2-2000, 100 Blk. E. Michigan Ave., Former Jim's Tiffany Place, Acceptance of Donation for Right-of-Way. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Keene. . . Aye Miller . Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Ruge . Ave Smith. . . Ave Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Nischan . Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 7; Nays: 0; carried unanimously; Act-2-2000, 100 Blk. E. Michigan Ave., Former Jim's Tiffany Place, Acceptance of Donation for Right-of- Way, was APPROVED. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 15, 2000 PAGE 8 Next meeting Tuesday, March 28, 2000, at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. 4. Executive Committee C. Report from Planning Manager D. Pending items: Future action required 1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-19-97, N.W. Cor. Cavanaugh &Aurelius, "F" Commercial to "G-2" Wholesale District (Tabled October 15, 1997) b. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) C. Z-4-98, 201 E. Grand River, "F-1" Commercial & "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) d. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) 2. Urban Development Committee a. Act-21-98, Ingham Regional Medical Center, Replacement Sign in S. Pennsylvania ROW (Tabled September 8, 1998) b. Act-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris St., Vacate ROW (Tabled February 16, 1999) d. Act-7-99, Somercroft Drive at Post Oak Lane, Vacate Public Right-of- way for School Parking (Referred to UDC May 18, 1999) d. Act-14-99, 100 Blk. West Elm Street, Sale of Property (Tabled October 26, 1999) e. Act-15-99, 703 East Shiawassee Street, Purchase of Property for Parks Dept. Oak Park Field Office (Re-referred to Committee November 2, 1999). 8. NEW BUSINESS - EPA Brownfield Economic Redevelopment Initiative. This item was moved to 5. Comments from the Audience. 9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON Chairman Nischan thanked Mr. Miller for his service to the Board and the citizens of Lansing. He especially enjoyed Mr. Miller's gentle encouragement and sense of humor. Since Mr. Miller is leaving the Board, the Zoning and Ordinance Committee will be short of membership. Ms. Keene volunteered to switch committees until new appointments could be made to the Board to fill the gaps. Therefore, the Committees will be as follows: Urban Development Committee: Mr. Smith, Chair; J. Ruge, and J. Patrick, members. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 15) 2000 PAGE 9 Zoning and Ordinance Committee: A. Frederick, J. Nischan, and D. Keene, members. A chairman will have to be elected in committee. 10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Mr. Frederick mentioned that the Federal legislature is looking at a bill that could affect powers of local bodies to regulate. He referenced Bill HR 2372. 11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Mr. Ruge asked how the new sign code inspector was doing. Mr. Ruff stated very well; in fact, he is able to help find additional unregistered rental dwellings in the City besides keeping signs in check. Mr. Ruge commented that the home off Cedar where the man who had dump trucks on his property and attempted rezoning is at it again, and it is a mess. Mr. Ruge gave Mr. Ruff a list of abandoned signs. 12. ADJOURNMENT was at 9 p.m. Respectfully submitted �4� ames A. Ruff, Acting Planning Manager Planning Board mn021500 a:\55 S "CDEPARTMENT OF PLANNING .AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT �411 G Q.� 316 N.CAPITOLAvENUE • SUITE D-1 •LANSING,MI 48933-1236 (517)483-4066 • FAx: (517)483-6036 David C. Hollister, Mayor PLANNING OFFICE To: Urban Development Co ttee From: Donna Wynant, AIC�� Senior Planner Ile Date: February 4, 2000 RE: Act-14-99 Update Update to Act-14-99 Based on discussions with the Transportation Engineer and the Public Service Department, and discussion among Planning Staff, the following is the Planning Office's recommendation on the disposition of property in the 100 block of E. Elm Street (Act-14-99). Based on the various arguments (pro and con) that were outlined in the 11/19/99 memo to the Planning Board regarding the subject piece of property, the Planning Staff recommends the City retain ownership of the subject property. Though the Parks and Recreation Department and Parks Board would like to dispose of the property, and the Public Service Department has not expressed any strong interest in keeping the property, it is our position that the City should retain the property for the following reasons: 1. The parcel may possibly be needed for additional right of way in the staging of materials and equipment during the future reconstruction of the Elm Street bridge which is near the subject parcel. 2. The parcel should be retained and assembled with any additional land acquired in the future for parking, which would be in agreement with the recommendations of the River Point Neighborhood Plan which includes the following for the overall block: Improve appearance Consolidate and Improve Parking Lots Landscape, Screening and Buffering Maintain and Protect Few Residences Possible Expansion of Commercial over Time Maintain City Lot ® Please Recycle "Equal Opportunity Employer" Staff Recommendation Staff recommends the request to have the City dispose of this property be denied based on the reasons stated above. ,L4 S I N DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING .AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 316 N.CAPITOL AVENUE-LAN$ING,M1 48933-1236- (517)483-4066- FAX;(5I7)483-6036 PLANNING OFFICE Memorandum TO: Urban Development Committee FROM: Bill Rieske, Principal Planne DATE: February 4, 2000 RE: Act-2-00, 100 Blk E Michigan Ave, Former Jim's Tiffany Place, Acceptance of Donation for ROW. Summit Partners, which owns the former Jim's Tiffany Restaurant site, has offered to return a vacated portion of the East Michigan Avenue right-of-way to the City. The subject property currently functions as a sidewalk, and blends into the sidewalk in the ROW. It is the site of the restaurant's sun room and canopy, which extended from the storefront into the Michigan Avenue ROW. The vacated area measures 10' by 44', appears at the top of the attached map, and is described as: That part of Michigan Avenue beginning at the northeast corner of Lot 3, Block 111, Original Plat, thence west 22 feet on north line of Lot 3, north 10 feet, east 44 feet parallel to the north line of Lots 2 and 3, south 10 feet to the north line of Lot 2, west 22 feet to the point of beginning; Section 16, T4N, R2W, City of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan. The effect of accepting the donation is to restore the sidewalk to its original 20' width. It is also a step toward implementing SLU-8-95, to permit a parking lot on the former Jim's Tiffany site. The staff recommendation is approval of Act-2-00. Attachments: • A letter from Van Martin - The map with the subject property • A resolution dated February 13, 1978, vacating the subject property • Resolution #614, dated October 2, 1995, approving SLU-8-95 ® Please Recycle "Equal Opportunity Employer" CB RicHARD E[ IS/MARnN CB © Richard Ellis COMMERCIAL RPaL ESTATE SEtMCFS Martin Navigating A New World VAN W.MARTIN,CCIM,SIOR,CRE PMIDENT June 24, 1999 517 351-2200 517 351-2201 FAX www.cbrichar&11i&com Mr. James A. Ruff Zoning Administrator City of Lansing Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development 316 N. Capitol Avenue Lansing, MI 48933-1236 RE: SLU-8-95, Jim's Tiffany Parking Lot, Corner of Michigan and Grand, Lansing Dear Jim: This letter is a follow up to our November 5, 1998, letter. On behalf of Summit Partners, I hereby release the right-of-way along Michigan Avenue, previously used by Jim's Tiffany Restaurant, back to the City of Lansing (see attached Exhibit A for right-of-way location). Jim, thank you for your assistance and cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Cordially, CB RI:CHA D ELLIS/MARTIN Van . Martin, CUM, sioR,CRE President VWM/bjv Attachment cc: John Peckham Property Management Accmdded kt0arnational 99PIrWlviduel Membersh7p-tww Individual Membership- kxdrvKW Membership- Individual Memberstup- ® Oryarv�on ShoPPiM Society)e In mftors ® Imes ed C Membeal 0TheCEstaie 1� Certified YCenters and ORice Realtors InvestrnerA Member of Real 1111 MICMGAN AvagUE,SurrE 201, EAsr L+NSING,MIcmoAN 48823 ALLEY IN BLOCK III IS AN ESMT, BANK TO CITY E- MICHIGAN AVE. I01MICH.AVE.VAC.CP 2-13-78 nr, n t a zz'• 44' EL' 2Z' y4' d4' Q2,5' 9s" I � v I 001 105 o N IT 5 0%\ 1 3 2 l ° h 04 I "I` o ,O a �� III Q\ 1 2 • ca• y� A b , C4 ,� oz �• our M M 4D h V y ,w h 6OA\ 7 8 9 10 112 08y, 13 4 _ a 04% S. GRAND — — — l07-o1-II 113 11� 117 121-IL5 VAC. P'KING RAMP C.P. 7- I I-IE % E. ALLEGAN b ST o22 E; 9-6-I, na (CITY) ti� � 113 a a 01l 12 "I'l 202 CITY w t�s' 1•t• 1�•„- I5�=1o.. 4p2 SURFACE P'KING LOT • a 11.5' ° 3i 7/1 ,�\ b V a N � a 10 40q 3 ; N 0� 3 1 • N Q ,0' 4i' v 3° LIJ a\ ^cy OV JN ti \ 6Y.97' a OV ry is5.97• cA U} °-A� 40 5 u\ ' S y3 1 i n u� h N Q$\ 11 O Oq V \0 7. J h\ J V 6 \ B5' 0 4D i02' 1.3 VAC.JZ2.2989 S3•BG' Io7-o1 ILS-1fl � Il.fY' iJ.fB'� o, E . WASHTENAW N (;ZGO 1 1 e4-30 FEBRUARY It, 1978 COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS 103 By Councilman Brenke— said amendatory agreement shall be in aub- stantially the following form. Resolved by the City Council of the City of Lansing: Adopted by the following vote: That It is hereby determined to be a mat- Unanimously. ter of Public Health and Necessity to con- struct the street and sidewalk Improvements In Neighborhood Development Area No. 8 (North Side), PS 27082. and that the con- By Committees on Public Service and struction of the following Improvements Is hereby ordered: Highways, Planning, and Public Safety— Blacktopping of Alleys Resolved by the City Council of the City Sidewalk& Curb & Gutter Repair of Lansing: Street Reconstruction & Resurfacing Whereas, Angeles Vlahakis proprietor of Jim's Tiffany Place, 116 East Michigan And Further, that the estimated east of Avenue has requested that the City Conn- this project, $306.000.00. is to be financed cil of the City of Lansing discontinue and by assessments to the benefited property permanently vacate the following segment owners and from City funds through Ac- of a public sidewalk within the City of counts Nos.168-441-648-974 168441-698-974 Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan, de- 268.462-648-974, 2684iiall-974. Part 01 scribed as: this work will be done under City contract sad part will be done by City forces. That part of Michigan Avenue begin- ning at the northeast corner of Lot 8, Be It Further Reolved, that the Depart- Block on north line Lotinal t,north 10 1 thence st ment of Public Service is hereby directed L. to prepare as far as necessary, plans and east 44 ft pael to north line of Lots specifications for this project, and It is 2 and 8, south 10 ft to north line of farther directed to estimate in detan, the Lot 2, west 22 ft. to beg; Sea 16, cost of said project and to furnish said In- T4N, R2W, formation to the City Council. and i( Adopted by the following vote: Whereas, the request was referred to the Unanimously. Planning Board which held a public hear- ing, reviewed, and approved the request; and ' By Committee of the Whole— Whereas the Planning Committee has RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING and viewed e concurstherewith;report of tan he Planning Hoard d EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT TO Whereas, the Public Service and Public Safety Committees of City Council have also i it ANNUAL CONTRIBUTONS CONTRACT concurred; now, therefore, be It Whereas, the City of Lansing, Michigan, Resolved, that all of the above described (herein called the"Local Governing Body") part of the sidewalk he, and the same is acting by and through the Lansing Housing completely and fully discontinued and va- Commisaion (herein called the "Local Au- cated, subject to the retention of all neces- thori, , and the United States of Ameri- sary, easements and public utilities by the the(29thida�led the "Government") as of Board of Water and Light, Public Service y of March, 1971, entered into Department, Consumers Power Company, seertain Annual Contributions Contract to Michigan Bell Telephone Company; and s++lst is the development of certain low- be It rent hO°sI . Identified therein as Project X.. Mich. 58-1. 2, 8, 4, S. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, Further Resolved, that the City Clerk of f IL 12;Is the City of Lansing within thirty days / Whereas, the hereafter shall forward a certified copy of Local Authority and the this resolution to the State Treasurer of f CO9erament desire to modify the terms of the State of Michigan and a certified copy sold Annual Contributions Contract of this resolution to the register of Deeds e of Ingham County, Michigan for recording. As Be It Resolved By The Local Authority Follows: By Councilman Adado— &Woo 1. The Local Authority shall That the resolution be amended as fol- F aster into an amendatory agreement with lows: �A nualmenk modifying the terms of i nnu of ontributions Contract,and the That between the End and Srd"Whereas" I by as the Housing Commission Is paragraphs insert the following: Utorised and directed to execute kamendment al quadruplicate verIngBody is the the"Whereas dewalk proposed toars hat be vacatedtisn of not 1 lred and directed to impress and attest essential for public use" Metal seal of the Local Governing , �y > each such counterpart The afore- Carried. 104 COUNCIL PRI The resolution as amended was adopted by the following vote: Unanimously. OCTOE[R 2. 1095 COUNCIL PROCKKDINOS3 873 OCTOtfR=r 1see COUNCIL PROCQO1NGi 574 THE SURROUNDING AREA IN GENERAL. AND NAYS'YO Ar►R %THE REQUEST WITH CONDRIONS,Awp BY COUNCILMENMER LILLY BY COUMC-_cM[cR ULLY II WILL BE IN KEEPING WITH THE NATURAL THE APPROvtD MINUTES or "0 PLARNING BOAS 'I ENVIRONMENT OF THE LOT; Ne No Awe On FILE IN THE CITY CLERKS OFFICE,AMU THAT AN AFFIRMATTVt ROLL ME PLACED ON THE CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY RESOLUTION 5. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT WHEREAS THE MAYOR CONCURS In RESOLUTION IkC I B BE HAZARDOUS TO ADJACENT PROPEFTIES OR nccoMMEHDAnoN Or THE PLANNING BOARD,AO ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE: BY COMMITTEE ON PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT INVOLVE USES, ACTIVITIES, MATERIALS OR RESOLVED BY THE CRY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EOUtPMENT WHICH ARE DETRIMENTAL TO THE WHEREAS TH[CITY COUNCIL MELD A PUSUC HEAAIRG YEAS: COUNCILMEMstRM BEMAVIDES. BROCRwELL. - LANSING HEALTH,SAFETY OR WELFARE OF PERSONS OR TOR THIS R[QueaT ON S[PTENseR 25,,I 005.AND C.x.DT,JONES•NOVAK PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT rV PROPERTY THROUGH THE EXCESSIVE PRODUCTION OF TRAFFIC. NOISE. SMOKE. WHEREAS THE PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE OI NAYS: COUNCILMEMEERS StAL.LILLY WHEREAS.PURSUANT To THE PESOLJRION ADOPYED MY ODOR,FUMES OR GLARE: CITY COUNCIL MAN RrVIewKo THE REPORT or TNt THIS QoUNCIL on SEPYEMMER 5. 1 995, THe Crt PLANNING BOARD,AND CONCURS IN THE REPORT, ABSENT:COUMcILMtMMER ALLEN ASSESSOR NAM HtLO A PUBLC He All No NOR O. THE PROPOSED 0 SPEC AL LAND USE IS ASSESSMENT ROLL MUMSER 32Q MR Cuwc AID AOEOUATELY SERVED BY ESSENTIAL PUBLIC NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THt Ern RESOLUTION#B 15 GUTTER,AND STORM S[W[R,As rOLLOWI: SERVICES AND FACILITIES AND IT 15 COUNCIL HERESY APPROVE THE SPeC1AL LAID L(St BY COMMITTEE ON PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT DEMONSTRATED THAT THE PERSON RCQu[sr(5LU•15-95)MY VAN W. MARTIN Or MARTIrif RESOLVED BY THE CT'COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PROJECT TITLE: CUJPPCRT STREET RtcomsTwucn , RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROPOSED SPECIAL PROPERnES.TO DMAHO THE AOJACEKT PMRHO LANSING P.S. #3BO454 - MICHIOAN AVENUE To SAO— LAND USE 15 ABLE TO CONTINUALLY PROVIDE NY AN ADDTIGNAL 20 PARRHG SPACES roR AN OYOMyi PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT N 5TREET ADEQUATELY FOR THE SEFNICES AND FAGLITIES 9C PMAHO SPACES,WTTI THE ML'GW.O COMOn,,ow DEEMED ESSENfAL TO THE SPECIAL LAND USE WHEREAS.PURSUANT TO TMe RESOLUTION ADOPTED MY PROPERLY BENEFITTED ALL LANGM FRGMfTiNIO DIN THc UNDER CONSIDERATION; I. THAT A LANDSCAPE, SCREENING AND MUMMMM I THIS COUNCIL ON JULY 1 B. 1995. THE CITY LAST stce OF CUPP[RT SYRtR FROM 1 250 MET PLAN APPROVED MY THE DEPARTMENT O► ASSESSOR HAS META A PUBLIC HL4MNO MR ORTN CURB AND GUTTER: or MICHIGAN 7. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE WILL NOT ANO NEIOHDORH000 OEVCLOPMOfT R ASSESSMENT ROLL MUMMER 320 FOR CURS AHo AvoMAE To SAGSANR AVENUE µo ON THE WEST f.Ge Or PLACE DEMANDS ON PUBLIC SERVCES AND INPLEM ENTER; GUTTER. STORM SEWER. ,AND SAHrTARY SEWER AS CUPPERT STREET FROM MICHIOAN AVENUE To VINE FACILITIES IN EXCESS OF CURRENT CAPACITY: ro LUnws: STREET.EXCEPTING ALL rum"STR[crs AND ALLETS 2. THAT THE CURS CURS AND OR-CWAYS Be MO IFM AND OTHER LAND OttM[O HOT SEHcrrrreO. B. THE PROPOSED SPECIL LAND USE 15 A] SPECImeD sY THE Cm's TRArme ENOIH[OR; PROJECTTTTLE: CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF AND COST OF IMPROVEMENTS:ASSESSMENT ROLL 329 THE ZONING CODE AND THE OBJECTIVES OF INPnwaomr or SOUTH EAST STRUT(PART or 1995 THE CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 3. THAT THE CITY REQUESTS THE VACATED RIOMT•or-.. CUR■AND OurTE T.R PROJEC P5#O 10 1 7I cm/.EDc1.AA ASS[SSAMLc,o WAY PORTION OF,THE PROPERTY Me RETURNED To eNmmNwnNm. PROTEAN((ea.w ER 9. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE MEETS THE THE CITY FOR NIONR'OFlwAY use. PROPERTY BENEFITTED,CURB AND OU1TEft. DIMENSIONAL RECUIREMENTS OF THE DISTRICT STORM SEWER: MIRE E IIIrTcw 51.236.36 3s.e3s.3a IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED, µEN ALL LANos FRONTING OR SOUTf EAST STREZY FROM ��RESTS ]VISA I eO.7e 0.00 BY COu NCILMEMMER ULLY BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT IN ORANYHO KALAMAZOO To HILLSOALE O[CErnmo ALL Pu MLIe Teal<Nxn a]..3Go.12 33.a3s.34 REOU"T, THE CITY COUNCIL DETERMINES TIN! STREETS AND ALLEYS AND OTHER LAND OEEMEO NOT CARRIED U`NANINousLY FGLLOwINNG: sENCIFITr . NOW THERQOR BE IT RESOLVED THAT s,,c— CRY Amacas ROLL NYMMEw 329 AS RETURNED MY THE RESOI.lR10N:a,4 I. THE PwoPwta SPECLAL LAND usE IM MARMOMOLIt, COST OF IMPROVEMENTS:AJSdsMENT ROLL 32B CRY ASSESSOR.at RATIFIED AHD CONFIRMED,ANO THE SLU•8-9 WITH THC CHARACTER OF ADJACOR PROPERTY AMA MAYOR y AAlTNIORIZ[D To AFFX WITTIrN TEN DAYS H I• 50ll FORMIffzST CORNER Or MCHGAIN S GRAND AVENUE sVwROUNdlo uses. Hoy rtorra cHY AamESEAMLZ TIN WARRANT DIRECM40 THE CITY TREASURER TO COLLECT I (FORMER(Tr OP JIM s TIFFANY RESTAURANT OMIT eMITw�ITMIe. SA O TAX WfTNM 90 DAYS AFTER THE APPROVAL Or THE BY THE COMMITTLE ON PHri1G1 DEVELDPMENT 2. THE PROPos[O SPECLAL LAHO USE WILL RGf� ASSESSMENT ROLL CHANGE THE ESfOmAL cHAAACTeR or T77E II CumM a 24.234.24 1.E61.23 22.663.01 WHEREAS MARTIN PROPERnd HAS OImnER REQUESTED A suRROUNDINo PROPERTY, BY COUNCILMtNMER LILLY s PECIAI LAND USE PORWT TO EXPAND The ADJACENT PARRNO LOTS To INCLUDE THt sunjecr LOT ran AJI 3. THE PROPOSto SPECIAL LAND use WILL NNHER 142.340.tS I4t.]AO.2a 0.00 CARRIED UnAlNMous LY ! AOOfTXW1 20 PAAMNO SPACES.AND INTLRFZAc WITH THE CeNtRAL ENJOYMENT car• ADJACENT PROPE"Em. TOrmL. RESOLUTION Ale 1 7 WHEREAS rHc PROPEn rs xoHm'O-I I I Buflnda PReJ[MI BYTHE COMMITTEE ON PHYSICAL WHICH ALLOWS THE,PROPOSED USE MY SPECIAL LAND 4. TH[rROrOito sp=LAL LAND use WILL NOT M' OMIT IeM.S74.D0 14].921.aM 22.633.01 DEVELOPMENT USE PERINT ACCORDING TO SECTION 1 270.04(F Or HAZARDOUS To ADJACENT PROPLRnES. RESOLVED BY THE CITYCOUNGL OF THE THE ZONING COL.AND NOW THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED THAT SPECIAL CITY OF LANSING 5. THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND use WILL NOT PLNCE ASS MANQT ROLLS NMRMMOR 32B AM RETURMm MY THE WHEREAS THe PLANNING BOARo MILD A PUMUC ANY DEMANDS ON PUMUC SERVICES AND FAQRRI CITY ASSESSOR.Me MATFRO AND CONFIRMED,ARD THE WHEREAS I THe CITY DID ACQUIRE THE PROPERTY HEARING ON JULY 18, 1993."EAR.TIE APPLICANT IN O(CL55 Or CURRENT CAPACITIES. MAYOR IS ATMORtteD TO ARR WITHIN TOM DAYS HMS LOCATED AT 937 DARN STREET mo Remove THE 4 SPORE IN FAVOR OF THE REQUEST,AND A LETTER WAS WARRANT DIRECTHG THE CITY ThWuRER To COLLECT OKAPGATIM STRUCTURE AS PART or THE w ECOVED IN sur aiw or THE REOU[ST,AND G, THE PROPOSED SPECIAL LAND USE 1S COIHI ��.y], SAD TAX WITHIN 90 DAYS AFTER THIST AROVAL Or The IMPLEMENTATION Or TM[ M MM P NO DLOP [ AN R WITH THE INTENT 0/ T1[ ZONING CODE A1No AsstSs MINT ROLL NEGMSORMOOD ONELOPMENT MU#2 ADOPTED iN WHEREAS THt PLANNING BOARD,AT ITS McEn.0 OH OBJECTIVES OF THE CURRENT CONPREMONSNE' 1977 sT TH:LAMsINo CITY CouNCII AND AUGUST 15. 1995.yore.UM MOusLY(C AYES.0 PLAN. i i i � LANSING PLANNING OFFICE SQL DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND NEIGHBORHO16 OD VELO VENUE n��� DES ,, � I S n�N PMENT 3LANSING,MI 48933-1236 CITY OF LANSING 'f r� David C. Hollister, Mayor rovide the attached material. The Lansing Planning Office is pleased to p s ontact us. If we may be of further assistance, Please PHONE 517-483-4066; FAX 517-483-6036. APPROVED AS PRINTED APRIL 18, 2000. Draft to Clerk 02202000 Approved 04042000 To Clerk 04202000 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 p.m., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall 124 West Michigan Avenue Tuesday, March 7, 2000 1. OPENING SESSION: Chairman Nischan called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Keene, Nischan, Patrick, Ruge, Smith. Six members present, two vacant seats. B. Excused Absences - None. C. Introductions. James A. Ruff, Acting Planning Manager, introduced staff present, Jim Sturdevant and Donna J. Wynant, Senior Planners; and Louise H. Christian, Recording Secretary. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - Mr. Ruff said that one correction needs to be made to Z-2-2000. The hearing was advertised for "C" Residential and "E-1" Apartment Shop District; however, actually it is "C" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office District. The case has been readvertised, but we will hear comments from those present tonight, and again on March 21. We anticipate moving it through the Zoning and Ordinance Committee as scheduled. With that correction, the agenda was approved. 3. COMMUNICATIONS - None. 4. HEARINGS A. NCU-1-2000, 1400-1402 W. Ottawa St., Add Second Driveway Mr. Sturdevant presented the case, a request by William Snider for a Class A Nonconforming status for this two-unit house built in 1927 and located in "B" Residential, a single-family zoning district. The parking for the house is located on a driveway on the north side of the building and accommodates two cars. The applicant wants to build a driveway on the Ottawa Street side for another vehicle. The house is nonconforming for three reasons; first, for the number of units. The "B" Residential District allows one unit; this house has two units. Second, it is nonconforming for lot area coverage. In the "B" Residential District, the maximum lot area that can be covered by structure and/or hard surfacing is 55 percent; currently this lot has about 70 percent lot coverage. With the proposed driveway, it would be at about 83 percent. Third, a two-unit dwelling requires two off-street parking spaces for each unit. This house has two off-street parking spaces altogether. The applicant states it is hard to rent APPROVED AS PRINTED APRIL 18, 2000. Draft to Clerk 02202000 Approved 04042000 To Clerk 04202000 c� Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 p.m., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall 124 West Michigan Avenue , Tuesday, March 7, 2000 1. OPENING SESSION: Chairman Nischan called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Keene, Miller, Nischan, Patrick, Ruge. Six members present, two vacant seats. B. Excused Absences - None. C. Introductions. James A. Ruff, Acting Planning Manager, introduced staff present, Jim Sturdevant and Donna J. Wynant, Senior Planners; and Louise H. Christian, Recording Secretary. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - Mr. Ruff said that one correction needs to be made to Z-2-2000. The hearing was advertised for "C" Residential and "E-1" Apartment Shop District; however, actually it is "C" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office District. The case has been readvertised, but we will hear comments from those present tonight, and again on March 21. We anticipate moving it through the Zoning and Ordinance Committee as scheduled. With that correction, the agenda was approved. 3. COMMUNICATIONS - None. 4. HEARINGS A. NCU-1-2000, 1400-1402 W. Ottawa St., Add Second Driveway Mr. Sturdevant presented the case, a request by William Snider for a Class A Nonconforming status for this two-unit house built in 1927 and located in "B" Residential, a single-family zoning district. The parking for the house is located on a driveway on the north side of the building and accommodates two cars. The applicant wants to build a driveway on the Ottawa Street side for another vehicle. The house is nonconforming for three reasons; first, for the number of units. The "B" Residential District allows one unit; this house has two units. Second, it is nonconforming for lot area coverage. In the "B" Residential District, the maximum lot area that can be covered by structure and/or hard surfacing is 55 percent; currently this lot has about 70 percent lot coverage. With the proposed driveway, it would be at about 83 percent. Third, a two-unit dwelling requires two off-street parking spaces for each unit. This house has two off-street parking spaces altogether. The applicant states it is hard to rent PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 2 both units when the occupants have to jockey cars in and out of the driveway. The second driveway would allow occupants to have unobstructed parking. Ms. Keene asked about the 10-ft driveway dimension; Mr. Sturdevant said 8 ft is the minimum. Mr. Ruge asked about the gas meter positioned on the side of the house, Mr. Sturdevant said it could be moved to the front corner of the house. It would be better to have it located away from the driveway. WILLIAM SNIDER, 113 HILLSDALE STREET, HILLSDALE, MICHIGAN. With a high rental turnover rate, you have added expense. If you can't make any money, deterioration will continue. Right now, it is the worst- looking house in the whole block. Having parking for both tenants will correct the problem. I intend to have the meter moved to the front corner of the house. Mr. Ruff called attention to an audience handout summarizing the process for rezoning and special land use cases to be heard tonight. NCU-1-2000 is not part of this process. The final decision for this case is made by the Planning Board rather than being forwarded to the City Council. B. PRD-1-2000, 3115, 3205 Forest Road, Planned Residential Development Ms. Wynant presented the case, first giving the history of 3115 and 3205 Forest Road. About a year and a half ago, a proposal called the Hunt Club was made and approved as PRD-3-98. Along with that was a rezoning request, initially for a higher density multiple family zoning district, subsequently amended by the applicants to a "C" Residential District which allowed fewer units on the property. CED, Inc., also referred to as Sandspur Housing Partners, Ltd. from Maitland, Florida, is the applicant, with design work being done by the Land Design Studio, Royal Oak, Michigan. The land to be developed, approximately 13 acres, is located at 3115 and 3205 Forest Road and at present has on it two houses and the Forest Nursery. PRD-1-2000 proposes 144 multiple- family units under a planned residential development. Surrounding development consists of a cemetery to the north; apartments to the south, Tammany Hills; US-127 to the east; and a cemetery to the west. The master plan for the area designates the subject property for residential, 8-14 units per acre. Forest Road is a scenic corridor. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 3 PRD-3-98 proposed up to 144 dwelling units in 16 buildings; this proposal is for 144 apartments with approximately 11 dwelling units per acre. There would be 40 one-bedroom units, 64 two-bedroom units, 32 three- bedroom units, and 8 four-bedroom units. In a "C" Residential District, maximum allowed density would be just over 18 units per acre. There will be a community building. The retention pond will be moved from the southeast corner to the northwest corner of the property where a nonregulated wetland is located. The proposed bus shelter was removed at the request of the Forest View Citizens Association. TAD KREAR, LAND DESIGN STUDIO, LAND PLANNER AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR CLIENT SANDSPUR HOUSING. They are unable to be here tonight. We met with the Forest View Citizens Association and received input from them. I worked for the Parks and Recreation Dept. and lived in Lansing for eight years in Tammany Hills Apartments. It is an exciting project for me. (Presented a series of graphics.) The site is an existing nursery, so we will be able to use a lot of the plant material for the entire project. It is very rare to be able to do a development and have plant material available on-site. There are significant woodland areas to the north abutting the cemetery. The Arboretum is farther to the west. We had a tree survey done for the site. The architecture is more of a townhome style rather than apartments as in Tammany Hills. Each unit has an individual entry. This is the twelfth or fourteenth property for the developer in Michigan. They do a unified development with coordination as to color schemes, plant materials and clubhouse interiors. There will be a boulevard entry into the site, aligned with Staten Avenue across the street. No curb is proposed along the shoulder of Forest Road. It will be a gated community, to give a sense of privacy. Gates will be closed at night; however, emergency vehicles will be provided access. A clubhouse is central to the development, with a pool, exercise room, media room, and meeting rooms having fax machines and computers. There is also the Monster Club, for the youngsters, with facilities for after-school activities. So a lot of programming also goes into the development. The units are located around the site, away from the highways. Many of the trees will be maintained. Carports are selectively located. Exterior units have views of cemetery woodlands; interior units look out on a centralized courtyard where children can play without crossing traffic. In that area is a tot lot and a sport court for various activity levels. The Department of Environmental Quality has reviewed the site. Extensive sidewalks on-site will link to the new bike path along Forest Road. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 4 We met with the Forest View Citizens Association and have talked with Councilmember Sandy Allen. Typically, Sandspur Housing provides a bus shelter for students riding school buses. The Citizens Association, thinking it might be a loitering place, asked that we remove it from the plan, which we did. The Association requested some richer materials than previously proposed for entry monuments and signage. We are proposing stone pillars with a polyvinyl chloride rail fence or a white fence. I took photographs of developments throughout Michigan. On almost every development in Michigan, this rail is a popular entry feature, and it seemed to fit with the rural character of the scenic corridor. There are large spruce trees near the entry; we will focus on the scenic corridor and beautify it to the greatest extent possible. We will be meeting with the City Forester. We will provide some decorative lighting, as recommended by some Forest Road residents. Mr. Smith asked, about the bus shelter being removed, where will children wait for the bus? Mr. Krear said at the entry. There is no acceleration or deceleration lane on Forest Road, but there is sufficient turning radius for buses or large trucks to turn around inside the development. Forest Road residents were concerned about the visibility of the bus structure from Forest Road, and about the potential for loitering. Mr. Ruge asked about the fence; Mr. Krear said it is to give a sense of privacy, not to wall off or provide security. There will be no fencing on the perimeter of the property. Mr. Frederick asked what Forest View residents proposed for students if weather is bad? Mr. Krear said there was no discussion. Ms. Patrick asked about the parking structures; Mr. Krear said we tried to locate them strategically, so they are not obstructing views. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for PRD-1-2000, 3115, 3205 Forest Road, Planned Residential Development, and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, March 15, 2000, in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. C. SLU-1-2000, 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street, Parking in the "B" Residential District Ms. Wynant presented the case, a request for a Special Land Use permit for expansion of parking in the "B" Residential District. The request is PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 5 from GTB Properties, represented by CB Richard Ellis/Martin, for property located at the southeast corner of Walsh Street and South Pennsylvania across from the Board of Water and Light offices. The structure at 1115 South Pennsylvania having several different tenants is the building that needs the additional parking. Their lease by Board of Water and Light was terminated because of widening of Haco Drive. This development also had some parking spaces along the drive. They are before the Board tonight with their request to expand the existing parking lot. The case history presents background for SLU-18-90, which was denied. A subsequent request, SLU-3-92, was found to be substantially unchanged from SLU-18-90. Since that time, two of the homes have been removed, with only one remaining, and the lease with BWL has been terminated, making it important for them to find additional parking. CB Richard Ellis/Martin has provided a list of tenants in the structure needing parking. The existing parking lot is 30 spaces; the additional parking would generate a total of 62 parking spaces. Also attached is a landscape plan with a plant list. They also plan to paint the back side of the Hager-Fox Center. Mr. Ruge asked how this proposal differs from the previous ones that were turned down. Ms. Wynant said this plan is the same as what was presented in 1990; however, the circumstances have changed. They have lost their lease with BWL for parking spaces along Haco Drive. They were denied in 1990. In August of 1991 two of the three single- family homes were demolished. One dwelling remains. Mr. Ruff noted that changes were made in Haco Drive--realignment and widening, and realignment across Pennsylvania Avenue of the BWL access drive into the Board's facility. The purpose of the realignment was to make it as safe as possible for BWL employees and trucks having to cross Pennsylvania Avenue. There have also been some exchanges of land with various property owners. So there have been changes in the nature of access and to parking around the property. Before, there was a lot of parking directly off Haco Drive in the right-of-way and extending over onto private property. Some of that is the leased property that is being referred to, whereas, with the realignment of Haco Drive, curb and gutter has been installed, and there is less availability of access to some of the adjacent properties. Mr. Smith, looking at the landscaping plan and map, asked if the existing curb cut onto Walsh Street will be eliminated? Ms. Wynant said it is proposed to be eliminated. The curb cut would be off Pennsylvania. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 6 Mr. Smith asked about the five-foot fence buffering the residence at 1022 Walsh, and if there would be comparable buffering to buffer single family areas along the north side of Walsh. Ms. Wynant said some landscaping is proposed along the street frontage, 29 dwarf burning bushes and some canopy trees. Some would be screened, but not totally, not like a 5-ft tall wood privacy fence. LORNA McHUGH, REPRESENTING CB RICHARD ELLIS/MARTIN. Regarding the landscaping buffer, the landlord is willing to do anything around the parking lot to please the residents of the neighborhood, if a fence is wanted instead of shrubbery along Walsh Street. Ingham Medical is a clinic; they have physical therapy there. Patients coming in fill up the parking lot, and other tenants have trouble being able to park. MELODY ANGEL, M.D., 1103 WALSH STREET. I am basically in favor of this change. I think it would benefit the tenants of the facility there and their clients, as well as the Walsh neighborhood in certain ways. I have concerns with the change in aesthetics regarding the view from our neighborhood. A lot could be done with landscaping and fencing and paint to make it look attractive. The noise from Pennsylvania is another issue. That could be reduced some by landscaping along both east and west sides of the property. Traffic is a concern, especially for small children. I understand that there would not be an outlet onto Walsh Street after the proposed change. There is also concern about drug trafficking and loitering at night. The businesses and Police Dept. should be encouraged to do increased surveillance of the area. Regarding benefits to the building tenants, it is hard to run a business without adequate parking. It is in the interest of everyone concerned that the businesses be kept viable. Access to healthcare is another important issue since some of the clients are healthcare providers. Regarding the Walsh neighborhood, the main value is having a property that stays maintained well. GREGORY BYRD, 1103 WALSH STREET. I am the proud spouse of Dr. Angel. I support the concept of developing business viability in Lansing through adequate parking, lighting, infrastructure, police and fire services. What happens to the parking does not directly affect me, as I reside 300 feet up the street; however, I have experience with sound levels of South Pennsylvania, a main ambulance route accessing the now-Class A trauma center, Sparrow Hospital. It is a loud and busy street. When the house goes, we will lose about 60 ft of sound barrier. Please have plantings installed, 6- to 8-ft conifers, that can soak up sound all year long. The east boundary is very important to those of us who live east of this site. The parking lot should not have access to Walsh Street. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 7 It is hard to turn across two lanes of traffic on Pennsylvania Avenue onto Walsh Street with the curb cut there now, and motorists flowing in and out of the parking lot. The Walsh Street curb cut should be closed, low plantings should be installed to buffer lights for residents living directly in headlight line-of-site, and sound barrier landscaping should be installed on the east boundary. BETTY BOSSE, 1015 WALSH, directly across from the project. I opposed it then, and I oppose it now. Since Potter Park's back entrance was closed, the congestion on Walsh Street has multiplied. Twelve children live on our street who are grade school and younger. We have problems with skate boarders, cyclists, and roller bladers who turn into the parking lot on weekends and in the evenings. It is an attractive nuisance. I don't want to see cars or smell fumes when I sit out on my deck in front of my house. Drug dealing goes on in the parking lot at night. Parking has already penetrated three housing units into the residential district, as allowed in the master plan; now they want to go in for a total of six residential units. I don't know that the master plan has changed regarding incursions of more than three residential units. What they are asking is to go beyond what the master plan allows for. The two houses that were there, the previous owners let them run down so that they were no longer viable as rentals. We don't want to see a parking lot and have to deal with noise, fumes, heat, glare, and the parking lot view. Also, if deciduous trees are planted, we get to rake the leaves. I oppose it, and four out of five of my neighbors who live directly across oppose it. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for SLU-1-2000, 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street, Parking in the "B" Residential District , and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, March 15, 2000, in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. D. SLU-3-2000, 510 W. Willow, Residential Care Facility Ms. Wynant presented the case, located at 510 West Willow and originally known as Willow Manner, an elderly female residential facility for up to 42 women. That was followed by SLU-10-96, a proposal for Dimensions of Life for which the Planning Board approved a Special Land Use permit for up to 45 women. This proposal was for a type of transitional housing, with an average stay of about five weeks. The project was not carried out. The property, zoned "C" Residential which allows single- and two-family homes, is just over one acre in size. The River Island Plan designates it for low-density residential use. The applicants, Deb and Ed Garcia, who reside in St. Charles, Michigan, propose to PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 8 house up to 40 elderly residents. They did say that anyone with mental illness will be screened well to check that they have no violent behavior or behaviors of a sexual nature. Those residents would be controlled by medication. Twenty-four-hour care will be given these residents, as well as meals, medication, and bathing assistance, etc. A staff of four people would be provided to care for the residents. A site plan showing the location of the building and an accessory building for storage also indicates how they would improve the property with landscaping. They want to install a wood privacy fence along the east property line that would give screening for the property to the east. They also want to do plantings of various landscaping materials to enhance the site. In the packet for you to read is a response from the Downtown Neighborhood Association Land Use Subcommittee Chair, Stephanie Whitbeck. She brings up several concerns. ED AND DEBBIE GARCIA, 13425 W. DEMPSEY ROAD, ST. CHARLES, MICHIGAN. This is my husband, Ed Garcia. I have been doing adult foster care for the past 12 years; we have also operated two AIS homes during that same period. Right now I only operate adult foster care home located in St. Louis, Michigan, licensed for 12 mentally impaired, developmentally disabled, and elderly. I accept all three. Primarily I do have mentally impaired clients there. Anyone who has a question about the population I serve is welcome to come and visit the facility in St. Louis, located at 103 West Tyrell, St. Louis, Michigan on the corner of Main and Tyrell. This facility would primarily be for the elderly. Many times the elderly are dually diagnosed with either mental impairment or developmentally disabled diagnoses. We have spoken with the Commission on Aging who indicated there is a need for affordable housing for the elderly, and they see no difficulty filling the facility. I have also spoken with Lansing Mental Health who indicated an interest and need for good adult foster care homes in the area. We have a purchase agreement which has been accepted, and we have financing through the Republic Bank. They are appraising the property at present, so it is not closed yet. There was a question about how we will finance the facility; right now we have savings, and we also be using funds from the other adult foster care home until the facility can be self-sustaining. I purchased the facility in St. Charles in 1988. By 1992, 1 had totally refurbished the facility, added dining area, staff apartment and other private rooms on the upper level, redid all the interior rooms; refurbished the whole interior, installed new windows and siding. When we were done, it looked like a brand new facility. We got a lot of compliments from the City about the facility. I have also done the same with the facility that we have now. We have done some landscaping on the exterior, and PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 9 interior improvements in the kitchen, new carpeting, bathrooms fixtures and floors. Ms. Keene asked if the Garcias will relocate to Lansing to operate the facility, or remain in St. Charles with this facility operated by others. Ms. Garcia said we won't be selling our home in St. Charles. I will be living at the facility until we can get suitable staff that I can trust to manage the property. Mr. Garcia said both of us will be working from time to time like we do at the other home in St. Louis. We also have a son who is 24 who will be working with us at that facility in the summer and on vacations. Right now we operate just the one facility, with 12 residents. Ms. Keene asked what is the largest number of residents you have had in a given facility; Mr. Garcia said 12. Ms. Garcia said the first facility started out as a six-bed facility; after renovations, we relicensed for 12. Within one month it was full. The reason we were looking for another facility is because Shiawassee County requested that I open another facility so they could have somewhere to place clients. We couldn't find anything in the Shiawassee area, but we did find this facility here. KEVIN R. WEBB, 528 WEST GRAND RIVER AVENUE. When Dimensions of Life started the process to come into what used to be Willow Manor, they came to neighborhood association meetings and answered a lot of questions. Ms. Garcia phoned my answering machine once, but I work a lot of hours, and I was unable to get back to her. I had concerns when Clinton-Ingham-Eaton Community Mental Health wanted to move the House of Commons there. We were told as the neighborhood nearest to it that we would be able to have people on the board. I have concerns about the facility being kept out of harm's way. Willow Vista is right next door, and there is much drug traffic taking place there. The new management team has cleaned it up a lot, but there is still a horrendous amount that goes on in there. If you talk to any of the police officers, they will not pull a cruiser down in the back of that, unless there are two or three of them. I have concerns about fencing around the unit. I don't want it to look institutional, but by the same token, if people who are mentally retarded or mentally incompetent are in the yard, they do need to have protection from things that might happen along the back fenced area by Consumers Power parking. I am concerned about numbers of staff day and night. When House of Commons was proposed to be located here, there were many people appalled by the idea; I don't see them here tonight. I wonder why aren't they concerned tonight? I would like to get a copy of Stephanie's response. Of the 40 proposed residents, how many are going to be aged, and how many mentally incompetent or mentally retarded, and how severe could reactions be if PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 10 they don't take their medications? I have an aunt in this condition, and I have seen the fits of rage that can occur. When Mental Health was looking at it, many things needed to be brought up to code. If this facility needed to have that much work done then, how can it change that much now? I have many questions I would like to have answered before this thing goes through. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for SLU-3-2000, 510 W. Willow, Residential Care Facility, and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, March 15, 2000, in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. E. Z-2-2000, SE Corner of Cedar and Monroe Streets, "C" Residential and " "D-1" Professional Office Districts to "G-2" Wholesale District. Mr. Sturdevant presented the case, a request by L. Douglas Johns for a rezoning from "C" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office Districts to "G-2" Wholesale District. The approximately one-half acre site recently had two single family homes on it which were demolished. At present, it is vacant. Included in the report is text from the recently adopted Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan regarding the site in the River Vista area and identifying it as a mixed use district--residential, office and commercial, with a stronger emphasis on housing to encourage residential growth near downtown. MARK LATTERMAN, ATTORNEY FOR CEDAR & MONROE LLC, owned by L. Douglas Johns. (Presented site plan.) This is the type of thing we are looking at; however, this is an idea. It is not the final site plan. It is an example of the kind of thing we are considering, such as proposed oil change, car wash, retail store. We think that is a good transition, a good site, and a positive step for the area. We have talked to staff about this. It would be a substantial financial investment for the City. Mr. Ruge asked about the zoning of Lot 6, Mr. Latterman said it is "H" Light Industrial. Mr. Ruff said everything south of this property is zoned "H" Light Industrial. Mr. Frederick asked why the "G-2" zoning district was chosen; Mr. Latterman replied that it would give the maximum flexibility regarding site plan, buffering and zoning. We looked at the most intensive uses possible for "G-2"; however, at this point, we do not have specific uses. It is less intense than the "H" Light Industrial. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 11 Mr. Ruge observed that anticipated uses would be automotive-related, servicing commuters, perhaps. Mr. Latterman said those are the interests that so far have had discussions with Mr. Johns. MICHAEL MARCINIAK, RESIDING AT 519 MONROE. The lots we are discussing are directly visible from my house and from some of the other neighbors adjoining the property. I have had discussions with other resident-home owners. They are glad that those houses are finally out, and they are very glad that someone intends to put something there in its place. If you put a productive business there, it will create a couple jobs, increase the value of the developed property and the tax base. I am quite in favor of it, and the seven property owners that I have discussed the matter with are in favor of it as well. Mr. Ruge asked, about the residences to the east of the site, and across Monroe Street, what kind of screening and buffering is required here? Mr. Ruff said it is dependent upon the intensity of the development adjacent to the property. There is a minimum buffer of five ft required, to a maximum that can be required of 20 ft, and within the buffer, the intensity of buffer that can be placed in the space can be adjusted depending upon the intensity of the two uses adjoining each other. When you have residential against a non-residential use such as this would be to the east, it would have to be evaluated as to circulation and anticipated need. Across Monroe Street, buffering would be dependent upon the layout. The Arbor Drug at Willow and Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. on one side had adequate space to provide a larger buffer-green space, with trees on the berm. To the west it was much tighter, and a masonry wall was installed with landscaping. It depends on what we have to work with and the best balance of parking, circulation, built area, and type of buffering. When we have tighter buffering areas with more intense use, we have to seek a more intense buffer. With a single-family house next door, that will be the primary concern, circulation, lights, and landscape. To the north would be the next most intense area of buffering necessary. Facing to the west would be the Manpower Office building, so the intensity of buffer could be reduced there. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for Z-2-2000, SE Corner of Cedar and Monroe Streets, "C" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office Districts to "G-2" Wholesale District., and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, March 15, 2000, in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 12 F. Z-3-2000, Vacant Lot 200 Blk. Bell St., North Side, "A" Residential to "C" Residential District. Mr. Sturdevant presented the case, a request by Markey Associates at a location formerly known as 124 Bell Street south of Thomas and Gier Streets, just north of the railroad tracks crossing Turner Street, and north of Old Town. Surrounding zoning is primarily "A" Residential, with"J" Parking to the south. The North-East Area Comprehensive Plan designates this area for residential development, 0-7 du/acre. The 66 ft x 144 ft lot has sufficient area for a duplex structure with three or more bedrooms in each unit in the "C" Residential Zone. MICHAEL MARKEY, WITH MARKEY ASSOCIATES, REPRESENTING MARKEY FAMILY INVESTMENTS. I would be glad to answer any questions you might have. At your March 15 meeting, could I get moved up farther on the agenda? Mr. Ruff said it is possible. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for Z-3-2000, Vacant Lot 200 Blk. Bell St., North Side, "A" Residential to "C" Residential District, and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, meeting at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, March 15, 2000, in the Department Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each) - None. 6. RECESS - None. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: February 15, 2000 Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge, to approve the minutes of February 15, 2000, with one correction, Pg 8 Ln 8.51" Pos 5.9" J. Ruge. On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: All, Nays: None; carried; unanimous; the minutes of February 15, 2000, were APPROVED. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole - Has not met. 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee - Has no chair as yet. Next meeting Wednesday, March 15, 2000, at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 13 3. Urban Development Committee - Mr. Smith, Chair. Next meeting Tuesday, March 28, 2000, at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from Planning Manager - None. D. Pending items: Future action required 1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-19-97, N.W. Cor. Cavanaugh &Aurelius, "F" Commercial to "G-2" Wholesale District (Tabled October 15, 1997) b. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) C. Z-4-98, 201 E. Grand River, "F-1" Commercial & "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) d. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) e. Z-15-99, Portions of 6820 S. Cedar St., from "F" Commercial District to "J" Parking District and from "J" Parking District to "F" Commercial District, Also 915, 927 & 1000 Just A Mere Ave., 6931, 6937 & 7001 Georgia Ave. from "A" Residential District to "J" Parking District, Also 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 & 1301 E. Willoughby Rd. from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District (Tabled January 11, 2000) 2. Urban Development Committee a. Act-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris St., Vacate ROW (Tabled February 16, 1999) b. Act-7-99, Somercroft Drive at Post Oak Lane, Vacate Public Right-of- way for School Parking (Referred to UDC May 18, 1999) C. Act-14-99, 100 Blk. West Elm Street, Sale of Property (Tabled October 26, 1999) d. Act-15-99, 703 East Shiawassee Street, Purchase of Property for Parks Dept. Oak Park Field Office (Re-referred to Committee November 2, 1999). e. Act-21-99, 1000 Block of Just A Mere Ave., Pedestrian Overpass (Tabled January 18, 2000) 8. NEW BUSINESS - A. Planning Office Budget The Board reviewed the budget at our December meeting; however, we did not pass a resolution. Mr. Ruff has included a memo presenting a breakdown of budget figures. He requests that the Planning Board make a favorable recommendation on this budget. Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to recommend approval of the budget as represented in Mr. Ruff's memorandum of March 2, 2000. On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: All, Nays: None, unanimous; carried, the Planning Office Budget, FY 2001 was APPROVED. 9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 7, 2000 PAGE 14 10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS - Mr. Frederick called the attention of the Board to an upcoming public hearing in which the State of Michigan is requesting street vacations for parking expansion. "The State of Michigan is my employer, and I would like to be recused from that." Chairman Nischan thanked Mr. Frederick for recusing himself. Mr. Ruge requested and received an excused absence for the March 21, 2000, Planning Board meeting. Ms. Patrick said there is a possibility that she too will be out of the State for the March 21 meeting. If out-of-state travel is not approved, she will attend. Ms. Patrick received an excused absence for the March 21, 2000. Chairman Nischan asked what would be the effect on March 21 actions? Mr. Ruff said it would have an adverse effect. Approval of a rezoning requires a minimum of six affirmative votes. It would be referred to the City Council with no recommendation; however, the letter to the mayor would include an explanation of the vote. 11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Mr. Ruge asked about the old Action Auto parking lot on East Michigan Avenue across the street from Clara's. Does the City own or control it? It has been fenced and repaved, and it is an eyesore. Mr. Ruff will find out about it. 12. ADJOURNMENT was at 9:02 p.m. Respectfully submitted James A. Ruff, Acting Planning Manager Planning Board =03072000 aA55 APPROVED AS PRINTED APRIL 18, 2000. Draft to Clerk 02202000 Approved 04042000 To Clerk 04202000 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 p.m., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall 124 West Michigan Avenue ;v c: Tuesday, March 21, 2000 = '' ti- N 1. OPENING SESSION: ' r Chairman Nischan called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Keene, Nischan, Patrick, Smith. Five members present, one excused absence, two vacant seats. B. Excused Absences - Ruge. Requested and granted at meeting of March 7, 2000. C. Introductions. James A. Ruff, Acting Planning Manager, introduced staff present, Jim Sturdevant, Senior Planner, and Louise H. Christian, Recording Secretary. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - The Chairman noted that the Zoning and Ordinance Committee will need to meet during the recess. Mr. Ruff announced that a communication was received withdrawing Act-1-2000, so the case will not be heard at this time. Mr. Rieske requested that the hearing be held; however, Mr. Ruff said he would take comments if anyone is present for the case since the hearing was advertised. In the Zoning and Ordinance Committee section, PRD-1-2000, today we received a request to postpone it until April 18, 2000. With those amendments, the agenda was approved. Chairman Nischan said the Zoning and Ordinance Committee will meet during the Recess. At that time, we will table PRD-1-2000. 3. COMMUNICATIONS - A. Memorandum to Jim Sturdevant from Phil Dorland regarding Act-15-99, 703 Shiawassee Street, Purchase of Property for Parks Dept. Oak Park Field Office, RE: Withdrawal. B. Letter dated March 17, 2000, from Ms. Mary Ellen Perkowski, Director, Real Estate Division, Dept. of Management & Budget addressed to Mr. William C. Rieske RE: Act-1-2000, requesting withdrawal. C. Fax letter dated March 20, 2000, from Marc Gauthier, Development Manager, Sandspur Housing, addressed to Mr. James Ruff RE: PRD-1-2000 requesting removal from March 21, 2000, agenda and placement on April 18, 2000 agenda. D. Letter dated March 15, 2000, from Brett R. Stockhill, President, Forest View Citizens Association addressed to Mr. James Ruff RE: PRD-1-2000, in opposition. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 2 E. Letter dated March 12, 2000, from Jan Kolp, FVCA member, addressed to Mr. James Ruff RE: PRD-1-2000, in opposition. 4. HEARINGS 1. Act-22-99, 2113 Seventh Street, Vacate Right-of-Way Mr. Sturdevant presented the case, a request by Vera Watts, 2113 Seventh Street. She is purchasing the property; however, the lot is very small, 40 ft x 40 ft, and has little room for any accessory buildings. She is petitioning the City of Lansing to vacate the south 40 feet of right-of-way of Seventh Street located in front of her home so she can acquire some ground for an accessory building. Currently, all the surrounding properties to the east and west are zoned "B" Residential District, the property to the south is zoned "H" Light Industrial fronting on Lake Lansing Road. If the City were to vacate the requested 40 ft of right-of- way for Seventh Street, it would revert to the property owners on either side of it. It would be split into two parcels each of 25 ft x 40 ft and be attached, one to the applicant's property, and the other to the full lot across the street which has frontage on Randall Street. It would assume the zoning of these two properties, "B" Residential District. Agency referral responses indicate the location of utilities in the right-of-way. The Board of Water and Light has electrical facilities and water mains and services; the Public Service Department has sewer facilities in the right- of-way. They say right-of-way must be kept in City control because of the location of the sewer, and potentially for future sewer improvements as they continue combined sewer separation in this area. VERA WATTS, 2113 SEVENTH STREET, LANSING. I am buying the property at 2113 Seventh Street. My place is crowded. I don't have enough room to do my art work. I am the last house on the street. My house is about 20 ft x 24 ft. The type of storage that I would put in would have no basement. The City should allow me 25 ft extra to my lot so that I won't be too crowded. If my friends stop by, they don't have any place to park. I need to put in another place for storage. That land is right there in front of me, and I only have a small amount of land. When I bought the house, I didn't have enough land. I felt the land in front of me belonged to me when I bought it, my property since I am the last person on the street. If you recheck that, you might find that I might already own it. Mr. Ruff said it would be on your deed, but it is public right-of-way that is recorded in the plat of that property, so it would not be part of your property that you would have purchased from somebody. You wish to PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 3 have a storage building in front of your house? Ms. Watts said like a workshop, with heat and light but no basement. Ms. Keene asked Ms. Watts if she owns the house now? Ms. Watts said her last payment is the first of May. "I paid it up two months early than my contract is." Seeing no one else wishing to comment, Chairman Nischan declared the hearing for Act-22-99, 2113 Seventh Street, Vacate Right-of-Way closed and referred to the Urban Development Committee, meeting on Tuesday, March 28, 2000, at 4 p.m. in the Transportation Conference Room, 219 North Grand Avenue. B. Act-1-2000, Eliminate Public Access on State-owned Sections of Sycamore and Washtenaw, Vacate Butler between Allegan and Ottawa. Withdrawn. No members of the public were present to comment. C. Z-2-2000, SE Corner of Cedar and Monroe Streets, "C" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office District to "G-2" Wholesale District Mr. Ruff said this case had a hearing on March 7, 2000. There was a mistake on the advertisement, it was readvertised and the mailing repeated. It will have a re-hearing tonight. Mr. Sturdevant presented the case, a request by L. Douglas Johns representing Cedar and Monroe LLC to rezone Lots 2 and 3 of Block 17 from "C" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office Districts to "G-2" Wholesale District. Three lots immediately to the south are zoned "H" Light Industrial District. These properties are vacant. Adjacent property to the east is "C" Residential; remaining property to the south is zoned "H" Light Industrial. North of Monroe Street, property is zoned "C" Residential as is the block northwest of that intersection. To the west, the property is zoned "F" Commercial and a small pocket of residential. Part of the block to the north is also zoned Commercial. This area is in the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan, in the River Vista section of the plan. Land use recommendations are primarily residential, with mixed commercial uses to support the residential. This is a major shift in the current land use for the area. A part of this shift would be redirecting traffic from Cedar, converting it from one- to two-way operation and diverting through traffic to Larch to make Cedar more residentially compatible. The block to the northwest is suited to a higher-density residential development to take advantage of the views this block has of PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 4 the downtown area. The current residential stock in the area, single- and two-family homes, is in poor condition. The Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan envisions a more urban higher-density residential development to take advantage of its proximity to downtown and Old Town, the transportation links, the RiverTrail and other circulation issues that give it an advantage. MARK LATTERMAN, COUNCIL FOR CEDAR & MONROE LLC. We spoke at the previous public hearing and at the Committee meeting yesterday. We feel that the Master Plan calling that prime residential is unrealistic. We don't think you could change Cedar Street to a local street very easily with the present stores there now, excluding what we intend to do, to put something that makes some sense there, and "G-2" gives us a great deal of flexibility. We always have worked very closely with the Planning Department in terms of buffering and screening. Whatever plan we come up with will be appropriate for the area. We are looking at a car wash, maybe a retail or wholesale business, a service center. We haven't yet clearly defined it. NORMA SMITH, 3626 MUIRFIELD DRIVE, LANSING. I have houses on that block on Monroe. I am considering it to be residential and all of a sudden it is being commercial. I don't understand what is happening and which way it is going. We have to maintain those homes like private residences, and then suddenly commercial starts in there. I don't understand what will happen to that block--is it going to be commercial or is it going to be residential, the entire block? I own several lots and two houses that we have not been able to use commercially. We had to spend a lot of money to make them habitable as single residences. We are between, trying to maintain a high residential appearance, or is it going to be commercial? Mr. Ruff said that the zoning issue is what is being looked at tonight for part of the frontage on Monroe Street. The land use issue in the River Vista portion of the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan addresses some concerns generally. The Planning Board has to deal with specifics of the plan—where the rubber meets the road-- in a recommendation to the mayor and City Council. The issue will be discussed at the Zoning and Ordinance Committee this evening. You are welcome to attend. RICK L. MEREDITH, 1917 THOMPSON, LANSING. I would be against rezoning the property on the face of it. I own a house at 417 Monroe and it would hurt the value of my property. The house is not habitable now, but I am being forced by the City to do a lot of work on the house. When I PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 5 get done, I am going to have virtually a brand-new house in an old shell. Maybe it is not going to be worth what it might have been if a warehouse or gas station or an automotive garage goes in there. Something else, maybe that particular block is going to be not used for a denser residential area. Why is the City continuing to pressure me to hurry up and get my house done so it can be worth more, and then tear it down for some other use? Where is the logic? I didn't buy the house to do all this work but to move into temporarily while I sold my primary residence. Instead, I'm building a brand new house, new wiring, plumbing, heating, windows, in an area which is not one of the prime areas in Lansing. I am being forced to do something 1 shouldn't be if your plans call for my house to disappear. Mr. Ruff said master plans provide direction to you as a property owner. It does not indicate that the City would be purchasing property. It does not mean code compliance measures should be put on hold until the final stages of the master plan. It provides direction to the Planning Board as to the appropriateness of this request in relation to the master plan. Mr. Meredith said a garage there working on cars will harm the value of his property. "I would like to see this not pass." Mr. Ruff provided Mr. Meredith with an outline of the rezoning process. KEN SMITH, 3626 MUIRFIELD DRIVE. I would like to speak in support of Mr. Letterman's application. My wife and I own property at 516 Monroe, a vacant lot next door, formerly 518 Monroe, another vacant lot formerly 516 Monroe, and the single-family residence at 528 Monroe. In addition to that, we own the building at 733 North Larch, now occupied by Standard Electric Company. Any nice new building, whatever it is, is going to be in accordance with all codes. It will be an improvement of the entire area, like the office building across Cedar Street from that property; similarly 733 North Larch. It took out three or four houses and cleaned up the area. Regarding the value of area property, it can only enhance the value, and upgrade it. Mr. Letterman's property will be worth that much more. I am in favor of the application. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, Chairman Nischan declared the hearing for Z-2-2000, SE Corner of Cedar and Monroe Streets, "C" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office District to "G-2" Wholesale District closed and referred to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting this evening in the Council Conference Room during the recess. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 6 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each) - None. 6. RECESS - The Chairman declared a five-minute recess, to be followed by the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting in the Council Conference Room. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: March 7, 2000 - Not available. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole - Has not met. 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee - Mr. Frederick, Chair. a. NCU-1-2000, 1400-1402 W. Ottawa St., Add Second Driveway This is a request by William Snider for a Class A Nonconforming status for this duplex structure located in the "B" Residential District. The applicant wants to build a second driveway on the Ottawa Street side to provide off- street parking. This structure is nonconforming for the number of units, lot area coverage, and provision of an insufficient number of off-street parking spaces. The second driveway would allow occupants of the two units to have unobstructed parking. The property was constructed before the Zoning Code was in effect, establishing parking requirements. Based on Section 1284.13(a)(1), two parking spaces for each dwelling are required. Currently, parking is available for only one tenant. The proposed installation of a minimum-8-ft-wide driveway on Ottawa Street for the two-family dwelling will not create any traffic, pollution or parking problems for the area in which it is located. The gas meter would be moved to the front corner of the house, away from the drive. The owner believes that the parking situation is causing him to lose revenue and is contributing to deterioration of the property. Criteria for evaluating Class A status proposals is that it have direct access to a non-local street if the use is nonresidential; no more pollution be generated than would be associated generally with uses in that zoning district; and parking requirements be met. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 7 The Committee moved unanimously to approve the Class A nonconforming status be approved as requested with the condition that the driveway be graded so that water does not drain off onto the adjacent property. The two spaces available on-site and the addition of two more parking spaces provided by the new driveway meet the requirement for the minimum number of parking spaces for Class A status. The Committee further recommended that the applicant apply for historic preservation funds through the Development Office to help with the proposed restoration of the structure. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve NCU-1-2000, 1400-1402 W. Ottawa St., Add Second Driveway. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Ruff said the purpose of the driveway is to help in the rehabilitation of the structure. Throughout the application, rehabilitation of the building is discussed. Class B Nonconformities have a restriction on how much rehabilitation can be done to them, 35 percent of the value of the structure. "My concern is that by only talking about the driveway issue, they may run afoul of the fact that the purpose is rehabilitation of the building. That may exceed the 35 percent." By granting a Class A, the 35 percent can be exceeded. Mr. Frederick amended his motion for approval of NCU-1-2000, 1400-1402 W. Ottawa St., Class A Nonconformity, To Rehabilitate the Existing Two-family Dwelling and Add Second Driveway. The amendment was acceptable to Ms. Keene. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Keene. . . Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith. . .Ave Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried; NCU-1-2000, 1400-1402 W. Ottawa St., Class A Nonconformity, To Rehabilitate the Existing Two- family Dwelling and Add Second Driveway was APPROVED. Mr. Ruff noted that five aye votes is adequate to pass a request for a nonconforming use; likewise special land use requests also pass with a majority of votes. Approval of rezoning cases requires a minimum of six affirmative votes. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 8 b. PRD-1-2000, 3115, 3205 Forest Road, Planned Residential Development At the request of the applicant, this request was TABLED. C. SLU-1-2000, 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street, Parking in the "B" Residential District This is a request by CB Richard Ellis/Martin, Managing Agent, representing GTB Properties, for a Special Land Use permit for property located at 1012, 1016, and 1018 Walsh Street in the "B" Residential District. The applicant wishes to expand the existing surface parking lot at the southeast corner of South Pennsylvania and Walsh Street. Two vacant lots are located to the east of the remaining house at 1012 Walsh Street which will also be removed. Additional parking space is requested for the tenants of the building at 1115 S. Pennsylvania since a parking easement to the south of their building has been terminated. The North-East Area Comprehensive Plan indicates this area as low-density residential for future land use. The property may be used as requested if City Council approves the Special Land Use request. In 1965, the current parking lot, comprised of lots 31 and 32, was zoned from "C" Residential to "J" Parking. Screening was required along the east property line, and low evergreen plantings were required "along the building setback line and along the north line of the "J" Parking, except at access points." To date, the 5-foot-tall fence exists along the east lot line, but not the low evergreen plantings. A request for a Special Land Use (SLU-18-90) to expand parking was denied. The immediate area has also been scrutinized by the Planning Board because the Board of Water and Light wanted to trade pieces of property in order to reorganize the layout of their offices; also the street was relocated. That caused a reduction in the number of parking spaces available along here. Walsh Street is a local residential street, according to the street classification in the North-East Comprehensive Plan. The removal of the two homes at the southeast corner of S. Pennsylvania and PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 9 Walsh to create parking changed the character of the entrance into the neighborhood. The removal of two homes and the proposal to remove the third home for additional parking spaces will further change the character of the immediate area. Public comments indicated that the change would increase undesirable activities such as loitering, roller blading and sometimes drug activities. The proposed parking lot expansion will be compatible with the surrounding land uses with a landscape buffer along the north and east property line. Additional landscaping will be required along the north and west property line. Regarding changing the essential character of the surrounding area, provided that substantial improvements are made to the overall parking lot and provided no further encroachment into the neighborhood takes place, and landscape screening and buffering is put into place, the proposal should not significantly affect the residential character of the neighborhood. The proposed parking lot expansion should not adversely impact the use of adjacent properties if the concerns by the neighbors that were raised at the public hearing are addressed through additional improvements to the overall parking lot design, and if good overall management is practiced through the monitoring of the parking. Additional landscaping of the lot should help buffer the views of vehicles from the public right-of-way, and from the residential properties across Walsh Street which sit at a higher elevation than the parking lot. An evergreen hedgerow could provide a year-round landscape buffer along the north property line. Regarding the proposed parking lot expansion and any significant alteration of the use or character of the property, and whether or not it also is in keeping with the natural environment of the lot or the surrounding properties, the proposed parking lot expansion does alter the use or character of the property since it would be used as a parking lot instead of residential land use. Some opportunities do exist with the addition of the three lots to the existing parking lot by the addition of an 18-foot-wide buffer strip designed to include a five-foot-tall wood privacy fence with some PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 10 substantial landscape screening. Three mature pine trees that currently exist on Lot 34 will be removed unfortunately which will further open views to Pennsylvania Avenue. The property is located in the 100-year floodplain. Any development in the 100-year floodplain is restricted in terms of improvements to the structure, which makes substantial investment in the property beyond health and safety code- related items more difficult. For housing to be redeveloped on this site, the houses would have to be substantially elevated and not have a basement. Concerning whether or not the proposed parking lot expansion involves a use that will have a detrimental impact on the health, safety or welfare of persons or property, neighbors have described Pennsylvania as a loud and busy street and have suggested that this could be somewhat reduced by substantial landscaping. Again, these concerns can be adequately addressed with proper improvements in the design of the parking lot and with the installation of landscape, screening and buffering. The proposed parking lot expansion does not involve a use that will have a detrimental impact on the health, safety or welfare of persons or property. Answering the question is the special land use adequately served by essential public facilities and services, it does not require a significant amount of public resources, and the design minimizes the amount of additional storm water flow. Considering placing demands on public services and facilities in excess of current capacity, the proposed parking lot expansion does not. Relating to whether or not the proposed parking lot expansion meets the intent and purposes of the Zoning Code and the objectives of any currently adopted comprehensive plan, the proposed parking lot expansion generally meets the setback, design and landscaping requirements of the "B" Residential District. The final design review will be completed during site plan review where all details of the design will be worked out. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 11 Finally, does the special land use meet the dimensional requirements of the district in which the property is located? The proposed parking lot expansion generally meets the setback and minimum requirements for parking spaces and aisle widths. The proposed landscaping is adequate but can be improved upon to better screen properties to the north of the parking lot. The final design review will be completed during site plan review. The Committee discussed the request with staff and recommended approval unanimously with conditions that landscaping be added to minimally affect all residential neighbors and go through the site review process. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to recommend approval of SLU-1-2000, 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street, Parking in the "B" Residential District, with conditions that landscaping be added to minimize impact on all residential neighbors, that site review process be completed, and lighting installed be directed only onto the parking lot and not onto adjacent residential properties. Keene. . . Ave Patrick . . ... . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith. . .Aye Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried; SLU-1-2000, 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street, Parking in the "B" Residential District with conditions as above was APPROVED. d. SLU-2-2000, 3003 E. Michigan Avenue, Additions to Existing Building in Floodplain This is an expansion of the existing Staples building at the corner of Michigan Avenue and Homer Street. The surrounding land use is commercial, Frandor Shopping Center and other commercial entities. To the west is US-127 and the access road, Homer Street. The North-East Comprehensive Plan designates this area for continued commercial use. We have had numerous applications for various permits to allow improvements to the Frandor area. The applicant presented a request to expand the north side of the Staples building to better meet the needs and desires PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 12 of their customers; by expanding the north side of the building, they would expand over to their loading dock, obliterating that. So they had to expand their loading dock at the northwest corner, increasing the building footprint; however, the increase in the structure does not change the building line on the right-of-way on Homer Street. For them to continue having a loading dock, they must have this expansion. The proposal meets all of the parking lot requirements. The entrance to the parking lot off Homer Street will be moved to the north because its present position would be eliminated by the loading dock. The applicant has applied to the Michigan Department of Transportation and has received approval to move the entrance farther from the intersection, thus making it safer. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and approved unanimously to recommend approval of SLU-2-2000, 3003 E. Michigan Avenue, Additions to Existing Building in Floodplain with the following conditions: (a) The applicant must address all engineering concerns raised by the Public Service Department in the August 14, 1999 review prior to site plan approval, (b) The building is required to be flood-proofed in any area lower than 836 ft; (c) Approval of the front yard setback variance be heard and approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals. This variance was heard and granted contingent upon approval of this special land use request. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve SLU-2-2000, 3003 E. Michigan Avenue, Additions to Existing Building in Floodplain. Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith. . •Ave Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Keene. . . Ave Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 13 On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried; SLU-2-2000, 3003 E. Michigan Avenue, Additions to Existing Building in Floodplain, with conditions as above was APPROVED. e. SLU-3-2000, 510 W. Willow, Residential Care Facility This is a request by Ed and Deb Garcia to establish a residential care facility at 510 W. Willow. The applicants propose to house up to 40 residents, the majority of whom will be the elderly. Some may be diagnosed with mental illness and/or mental retardation. This special land use may be permitted in the °B" Residential District if approved by City Council. This is not a matter of rezoning. The River Island Plan and its Willow-Pine amendment indicates this area as low density residential for future land use. Surrounding land use is single family residential to the northeast, Consumers Power to the northwest; Consumers Professional Credit Union to the south; single family residential to the east and office building and apartments to the west. The property has been used in the past as an elderly female residential facility licensed by the State of Michigan to house a maximum of 42 women. The building was constructed in 1930 with additions in 1940 and 1965. A special land use permit was granted in 1997 for the Dimensions of Life, which proposed to house up to 45 women, with a small portion of the facility in the assessment and outpatient treatment of families, single parents, and men. Section 1282.03(f)(1)-(9) sets forth the criteria which must be used to evaluate a special land use permit request. The building will be used similarly as it has been in the past. The special land use will result primarily in a change in the type of residents. The change in use of the existing structure should not change the essential character of the overall area. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 14 It should not interfere with the general enjoyment of the adjacent property. The applicants have submitted their site plan that shows proposed landscape screening and buffering to the site, additional hard-surface parking spaces are shown on site. The structure will be required to comply with structural, mechanical, plumbing and electrical code requirements for the proposed use. The applicants have also indicated that they will put up a eight-foot- tall wood privacy fence between the facility and the house to the east. No negative environmental impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposal. No negative impacts on public services are anticipated as a result of this proposal. No negative impact on utilities is anticipated. Residential care facilities are permitted in residential districts subject to a special land use permit; thus it is in compliance. The proposal is in compliance with the River Island Plan and its amendment, the Willow- Pine Plan. Regarding compliance with zoning districts, this requirement is met since the site is 47,625 square feet in size and the applicant proposes to license the facility for up to 40 people. Concerning the requirement for twenty-four-hour a day supervision, the applicants will supervise this facility on a twenty-four-hour basis. A home manager will also be one of the four staff people at the facility. Relating to the requirement that the proposed residential care facility is located more than 1,500 feet from an existing residential care facility which provides care for more than six persons, this PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 15 requirement is met since no other similar licensed facility is found within 1,500 feet of the proposed site. Based on the analysis and discussion in the Committee meeting, the Committee believes that the proposal meets all of the nine criteria required. In Committee, a motion was made, seconded and carried unanimously (3-0) to recommend approval of SLU-3-2000, 510 W. Willow, Residential Care Facility, with the condition that the Planning Office be allowed to require fencing and/or landscape materials that would best screen any views objectionable to adjacent neighbors or to inhibit trespassing, and that approval of this special land use is also subject to the corrections made to the facility based on the inspections by the City of Lansing. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve SLU-3-2000, 510 W. Willow, Residential Care Facility, with conditions as above. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Ruff said there may be other reviewing agencies, such as the State of Michigan. He suggested in the phrasing of the second condition, that the building and property be improved in accordance with state and local requirements following inspection by appropriate agencies if acceptable to maker and second; accepted. Mr. Frederick noted one concern of the Committee, that this is a considerable expansion of responsibility and effort than is evident from previous experience of the applicants. "I would like to express that concern tonight, that I believe staff will have to take some care to make sure that this facility is successful in its endeavor." Mr. Smith asked if there was discussion of the credentials of the applicants. Mr. Ruff said, about the licensing of the individuals, they must meet standards of the State of Michigan for that purpose. The state has responsibility for the qualifications and licensing of facility operators. About improvements to the building, it could not be occupied unless it meets the requirements of all reviewing agencies. Smith. . Aye Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Keene. . . Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 16 On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried; SLU-3-2000, 510 W. Willow, Residential Care Facility, with conditions as above was APPROVED. f. Z-2-2000, SE Corner of Cedar and Monroe Streets, "C" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office to "G-2" Wholesale District This is a request by L. Douglas Johns representing Cedar & Monroe, LLC, to rezone the property located at the southeast corner of Cedar and Monroe Streets from "C" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office Districts to "G-2" Wholesale District. The applicant proposes to rezone the property for unspecified commercial or warehouse development. Surrounding land use to the north is two-family residential; to the south commercial and a vacant lot; to the east single-family residential, and to the west commercial and a vacant lot. Surrounding zoning to the north is "C" Residential. To the south is "H" Light Industrial; to the east is "C" Residential, and to the west is "F" Commercial District. The site recently contained a pair of single family residential structures which were demolished in November of 1999. A portion of the property was zoned from "C" Residential District to "DA" Professional Office District in 1972. This property is located within the River Vista area identified within the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the Lansing Planning Board August 17, 1999. The River Vista is envisioned to be a mixed use district with a stronger emphasis on housing. It is seen as a link between Old Town and downtown on the east side of the river. The Comprehensive Plan envisions that River Vista will provide the first opportunity in the city to establish a "transit village", one in which trolley and/or bus commuting will be commonplace. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 17 Commercial development in the area is recommended in the plan to support housing and downtown development. The request is to rezone the lot "G-2" Wholesale District is viewed as not being consistent with the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan. The staff is concerned that "G-2" is not appropriate and thus recommends less intensive zoning to "E-2" Local Shopping District since this excludes most objectionable uses across from the residences in the residential district. The applicant feels that the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan does not match with current marketing pressures and believes that "G-2" Wholesale District is more appropriate for this area given the plans for redoing the heavily-used streets in the area. The Committee agreed with staff. It was moved, seconded and carried unanimously (3-0) to recommend that the rezoning to "G-2" District be denied and supported a rezoning to a less intense "E-2" Local Shopping District. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to deny the request for "G-2" and instead recommend "E-2" Local Shopping District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the action was as follows. Chairman Nischan emphasized that the vote on this motion will be forwarded to City Council with the vote, but without a recommendation. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Keene. . . Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Smith. . .Aye Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried, unanimous; Z-2-2000, SE Corner of Cedar and Monroe Streets, "C" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office to "G-2" Wholesale District was denied for "G-2" and instead approved for "E-2" Local Shopping District. The motion passed; however, because approval of rezoning requires six affirmative votes, the request will be referred to the City Council with an explanation of the vote and NO RECOMMENDATION. g. Z-3-2000, Vacant Lot 200 Blk. Bell St., North Side, "A" Residential to "C" Residential District PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 18 This is a request by Markey Associates to rezone a vacant lot located in the 200 Block of Bell St., north side, from "A" Residential District to "C" Residential District. Surrounding land use to the north is two-family residential to the north, commercial and vacant lot to the south, single-family residential to the east and single-family residential to the west. The applicant proposes to construct a duplex dwelling on the property between 204 and 122 Bell Street, which would be allowed in the "C" Residential District. The subject property contains sufficient lot area for a duplex with three or more bedrooms in each unit if it were rezoned to the "C" Residential District. The majority of the residential structures in the vicinity of this structure are single-family units; however, there is one two-unit structure adjacent to the subject property and also a two-unit structure very close by, at the corner of Turner and Bell street. Impact on pedestrian and vehicular traffic would be insignificant. The area is already developed as a residential neighborhood, and the subject property formerly contained a single-family dwelling. The subject site is large enough to contain a duplex structure, so staff anticipates no negative environmental impact by the proposed rezoning. This development has the potential to impact future patterns of development by setting a precedent for rezoning to "C" Residential District the portion of Bell Street that contains lots large enough for duplex structures. It does make sense to create a transition of land uses from the industrially zoned property south of Bell Street and the single family residential neighborhood to the north of Bell Street, In Committee discussion, it was noted that this rezoning would act as a transition buffer between the commercial zoning to the south. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 19 Staff recommended rezoning from "A" Residential to "C" Residential District, and the Committee concurred unanimously (3-0). Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve Z-3-2000, Vacant Lot 200 Blk. Bell St., North Side, "A" Residential to "C" Residential District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Keene. . . Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Smith. . .Aye Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Nischan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried; Z-3-2000, Vacant Lot 200 Blk. Bell St., North Side, "A" Residential to "C" Residential District. was APPROVED. Next meeting Wednesday, April 12, 2000, at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. 3. Urban Development Committee - Mr. Smith, Chair. Next meeting Tuesday, March 28, 2000, at 4 p.m., 219 N. Grand Avenue, Transportation Conference Room. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from Planning Manager - None. D. Pending items: Future action required 1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-19-97, N.W. Cor. Cavanaugh & Aurelius, "F" Commercial to "G-2" Wholesale District (Tabled October 15, 1997) b. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) C. Z-4-98, 201 E. Grand River, "F-1" Commercial & "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) d. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) e. Z-15-99, Portions of 6820 S. Cedar St., from "F" Commercial District to "J" Parking District and from "J" Parking District to "F" Commercial District, Also 915, 927 & 1000 Just A Mere Ave., 6931, 6937 & 7001 Georgia Ave. from "A" Residential District to "J" Parking District, Also 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 & 1301 E. Willoughby Rd. from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District (Tabled January 11, 2000) 2. Urban Development Committee a. Act-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris St., Vacate ROW (Tabled February 16, 1999) PLANNING BOARD MINUTES MARCH 21, 2000 PAGE 20 b. Act-7-99, Somercroft Drive at Post Oak Lane, Vacate Public Right-of- way for School Parking (Referred to UDC May 18, 1999) f. Act-14-99, 100 Blk. West Elm Street, Sale of Property (Tabled October 26, 1999) d. Act-15-99, 703 East Shiawassee Street, Purchase of Property for Parks Dept. Oak Park Field Office (Re-referred to Committee November 2, 1999). e. Act-21-99, 1000 Block of Just A Mere Ave., Pedestrian Overpass (Tabled January 18, 2000) 8. NEW BUSINESS - None. 9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None. 10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Ms. Keene requested an excused absence for April 18. Mr. Nischan said he may be away during the months of June and July. 11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS 12. ADJOURNMENT was at 9.23 p.m. Respectfully submitted James A. Ruff, Acting Manning Manager Planning Board mn03212000 a:\56 SLU-1-00 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street Special Land Use for a Parking Lot in the "B" Residential District GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: GTB Properties C/O CB Richard Ellis/Martin 1111 Michigan Ave., Ste. 201 Lansing, MI STATUS OF APPLICANT: Represents Owner: GTB Properties REQUESTED ACTION: Special Land Use for parking in the "B" Residential District EXISTING LAND USE: 1012 Walsh St. includes a single family home. Two vacant lots are located to the east of the remaining house. EXISTING ZONING: "B" Residential PROPOSED ZONING: No change PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 120 feet of frontage along Walsh Street and 110.5 feet of depth (13,260 sq. ft.) SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Single Family Residential S: Office and Commercial E: Single Family Residential W: Board of Water & Light Offices SURROUNDING ZONING: N "B" Residential S: "H" Light Industrial E: "B" Residential W: "J" Parking MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Northeast Area Plan indicates this area as low density residential for future land use. CASE HISTORY: The current parking lot, comprised of lots 31 and 32 was zoned form "C" Residential to "J" Parking Planning Board SLU-1-00 Page 2 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street Parking in the "B" Residential District in 1965. Screening was required along the east property line and low evergreen plantings were required "along the building setback line and along the north line of the "J" Parking, except at access points." To date, the 5 foot tall fence exists along the east lot line, but not the low evergreen plantings. A request for a Special Land Use (SLU-18-90)to expand parking at 1012, 1016, and 1018 by David A. Nussdorfer was denied by City Council 6/24/91. Two of the three single family homes on the subject properties were demolished in August of 1991. A new request for a special land use permit was submitted in January of 1992 (SLU-3-92).A Jurisdictional Hearing was held by the Planning Board 5/19/92. It was found at that hearing that there was no substantial change from the initial proposal. The SLU petition was subsequently returned to the applicant with no further processing. DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: This is a request to expand the existing surface parking lot at the southeast corner of S. Pennsylvania and Walsh Street. The proposed expansion onto the three lots would include the removal of the house at 1012 Walsh Street. Additional parking space is requested to accommodate the tenants of the building at 1115 S. Pennsylvania since a parking easement to the south of their building has been terminated. (See attached letter terminating the parking agreement between Board of Water and Light and the applicant, David Nussdorfer.) The owner has accepted a proposal to lease 6,000 square feet on the second floor of the building to an Industrial & Construction Supply Company. AGENCY RESPONSES: AMERITECH TELEPHONE: (No response received.) Planning Board SLU-1-00 Page 3 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street Parking in the "B" Residential District ASSESSOR: #1012 Walsh Street is not owned by "GTB". We presume PP# 3301-22-176-003 & -561 are involved here & will eventually be combined for this proposal. ATTORNEY: (No response received.) BD.OF WATER AND LIGHT: Electrical Utility- Electric Planning and Systems Studies: No objections to expanding parking lot. Contact Person: Bob Strobel 371-6082 Water Utility: No comment on land use. Contact person: Terry Robison 371-6494 BUILDING SAFETY: No objection LANSING NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL: (No response received.) CODE COMPLIANCE: Would intrude further into an established residential neighborhood. CONSUMERSENERGY COMPANY: (No response received.) MEDIA ONE: (No response received.) DEVELOPMENT: No comment. ECONOMIC DEV. CORP: This would allow GTB Properties to better meet the needs of business in area, then the EDC supports the proposal. FIRE MARSHALL: No objections. PARKS AND RECREATION: It does not impact park operations and programs- no comment. POLICE: (No response received.) PUBLIC SERVICE: The Public Service Department has no objection to the proposed SLU. The Public Service Department reserves the right to comment on Planning Board SLU-1-00 Page 4 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street Parking in the "B" Residential District the proposed development as part of the site plan review process. TRANSPORTATION: (No response received.) POTTER WALSH NGHD ASSN: (No response received.) Background Discussion: The owner of the property at 1115 S. Pennsylvania has lost approximately 30 spaces as a result of the termination of a parking lease with the Board of Water & Light along the south side of the Haco Drive right of way. Recent improvements have included the realignment and widening of Haco Drive.The realignment across Pennsylvania Avenue of the BWL access drive into the Board's facility was done to make it as safe as possible for BWL employees and trucks having 'to cross Pennsylvania Avenue. Other changes have included some exchanges of land with various property owners in the area. Before, there was a lot of parking directly off Haco Drive in the right-of-way and extending over onto private property. Some of that is the leased property that is being referred to, whereas, with the realignment of Haco Drive, curb and gutter has been installed, and there is less availability of access to some of the adjacent properties. Staff believes these changes in the nature of access and parking around the property and the termination of the parking lease with the BWL to be significant changes that make this proposal a new request, deserving review by the Planning Board. The proposal to expand the existing parking lot (approximately 24 spaces) to a 62 space parking lot is shown on the attached landscape plan. The landscape plan provides an 18 foot landscape buffer with a 5 foot all wood fence along the east property line adjacent to the house 1022 Walsh Street. Plant materials include Austrian Pines, Red Maple Trees, and Forsythia. The 12 foot wide landscape buffer along the north property line includes deciduous trees and shrubs. Several street trees are located along Walsh Street. An attachment to the petition for the SLU also states the owners proposal to restrict access to Pennsylvania Avenue, with no access to Walsh Street, and other proposed improvements to include: painting the north side of the building to match existing brick and further screening with English Ivy on the building and screen plantings. The owner proposes to light the parking lot with one parking lot fixture with controlled down lighting. As stated above, two of the homes have been removed by the owner, with only one of the three remaining (1012 Walsh). The lease with BWL has been terminated, making it important for them to find additional parking. The property manager, CB Planning Board SLU-1-00 Page 5 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street Parking in the "B" Residential District Richard Ellis/Martin, has provided a list of tenants in the structure. Many of these tenants park on the south side of the building. The owner has accepted a proposal to lease 6,000 square feet on the second floor to an Industrial & Construction Supply Company. ANALYSIS Evaluation Section 1282.03(f)(1)-(9) sets forth the criteria which must be used to evaluate a Special Land Use permit request. The criteria and evaluation are as follows. In accordance with Chapter 1282 of the Zoning Code,the request is to be evaluated based upon the following criteria. 1. Is the special land use designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner harmonious with the character of adjacent property and the surrounding area? Walsh Street is considered a local residential street according to the street classification system, identified in the Northeast Comprehensive Plan. The removal of the two homes at the southeast corner of S. Pennsylvania and Walsh in 1965 to create parking changed the character of the entrance into the neighborhood. The removal of two homes and the proposal to remove the third home for additional parking spaces will further change the character of the immediate area. Homes across from the proposed parking lot(and the home adjacent to the parking lot to the east) will no longer be facing residential properties, but will face a commercial parking lot that will supply parking for an industrially zoned property. The area is at the edge of a neighborhood that is across from an industrial/warehouse area. Single family homes are located immediately to the east and to the north. Traffic in and out of the parking lot is typically during daytime office hours, a time when many of the neighbors are away from their homes. According to comments made at the public hearing, other types of activity takes place such as loitering, rollerblading, and sometimes drug activity. The parking that has been created on the north side of the Hager Fox building needs to be expanded to accommodate a new tenant which is an Industrial and Construction Supply Company. Any expansion of parking to occur in this area must be done with significant landscape, screening and buffering to screen the office/industrial development from the single family Planning Board SLU-1-00 Page 6 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street Parking in the "B" Residential District residential neighborhood and must be managed and monitored to avoid "attractive nuisance" and suspected criminal activity. A landscape buffer is required between the parking lot and the home to the east and along the frontage along Walsh Street across from residential properties according to Chapter 1290 of the Zoning Code (Landscape, Screening and Buffering). The design proposes a landscape buffer strip. This will be more thoroughly reviewed through the site plan review process. Substantial landscape, screening and buffering of this proposed parking lot is critical in making this development reasonably compatible with the surrounding properties and in addressing the concerns raised by neighbors regarding the aesthetics of the removal of additional houses and the creation of a larger parking lot. 2. Does the special land use change the essential character of the surrounding area? The subject site is on the edge of a single family residential neighborhood (Potter Walsh Neighborhood). The overall parking lot would be directly across from four single family homes (1065 S. Pennsylvania, 1011, 1015 & 1019 Walsh Street); and adjacent to a home at 1022 Walsh Street. The area to the south is characterized by business and professional offices, warehouses, and light industrial development along Haco Drive. The proposed parking lot expansion on the north side of the building would more than double the current number of parking spaces from 30 to 62 spaces. Provided that substantial improvements are made to the overall parking lot and provided no further encroachment into the neighborhood take place,this proposal should not significantly effect the residential character of the area. 3. Does the special land use interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent property? The proposed parking lot expansion should not adversely impact the use of adjacent properties if the concerns by the neighbors that were raised at the public hearing are addressed through additional improvements to the overall parking lot design, and if good overall management through the monitoring of the parking lot to prevent loitering and suspected drug trafficking is put into effect. Additional landscaping of the lot should help buffer the views of vehicles from the public right of way and from properties across Walsh Street which sit at a higher elevation than the Planning Board SLU-1-00 Page 7 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street Parking in the "B" Residential District parking lot. An evergreen hedge row could provide a year round landscape buffer along the north property line. Neighbors at the Public Hearing spoke of problems with skate boarders, cyclists, and roller bladers who turn into the parking lot on weekends and in the evenings, describing the existing parking lot as an attractive nuisance. Neighbors also reported that drug activity was a problem at night in the existing parking lot. With good design and management, these concerns can be addressed and help to improve the area. 4. Does the specialland use represent an improvement to the use or character ofproperty under consideration and the surrounding area in general and also is in keeping with the natural environment of the lot? The proposed parking lot expansion does alter the use or character of the property since it would be used as a parking lot instead of residential land use. Some opportunities however, do exist, with the addition of the three lots to the existing parking lot. An 18 foot wide buffer strip is designed to include a 5 foot tall wood privacy fence with some substantial landscape screening. Three mature pine trees that currently. exist on lot 34 however will be removed which will further open views to Pennsylvania Avenue. The proposed improvements to the back side of this building will be a great improvement in this area which has had a view of the backside of a plain concrete block industrial looking building. This will also be greatly enhanced with landscaping to soften the look of this building which stretches along this residential street for 490 feet. The property is located in the 100 year flood plain. Any development in the 100 year flood plain is restricted in terms of improvements to the structure, which makes substantial investment in the property (beyond health and safety code related items) more difficult. For housing to be redeveloped on this site, the houses would have to be substantially elevated and not have a basement. 5. Does the special land use pose a hazard to adjacent property, or does it involve uses, activities, materials or equipment which are detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of persons or property through the excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, odor, fumes or glare? Neighbors have described Pennsylvania as a loud and busy street and have suggested that this could be somewhat reduced by substantial landscaping Planning Board SLU-1-00 Page 8 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street Parking in the "B" Residential District along both east and west sides of the property. The amount of traffic down Walsh Street was another concern, particularly since many young children live in the area. Some traffic will be reduced on Walsh Street since no outlet will be allowed from the parking lot onto Walsh. It will also be easier for people to make their left turns across Pennsylvania Avenue traffic from Walsh Street since they will not have to contend with people going to and from the parking lot. The concern about drug trafficking and loitering at night that was raised by neighbors needs to be addressed by the owner and the Police Department who should increase their surveillance of the parking lot. Monitoring with surveillance cameras or restricting access to the parking lot may help to address such concerns. These concerns can be adequately addressed with proper improvements in the design of the parking lot and with the installation of lighting that is directed onto the parking lot only and not onto adjacent residential properties.The proposed parking lot expansion does not involve a use that will have a detrimental impact on the health, safety or welfare of persons or property. 6. Is the special land use adequately served by essential public facilities and services, or is it demonstrated that the person responsible for the proposed special land use is able to continually provide adequately for the services and facilities deemed essential to the special land use under consideration? The proposed parking lot expansion does not require a significant amount of public resources and the design minimizes the amount of additional storm water flow. The proposed parking lot expansion is adequately served by essential public facilities and services. 7. Does the special land use place demands on public services and facilities in excess of current capacity? The proposed parking lot expansion does not place demands on public services in excess of current capacity. 8. Is the special land use consistent with the intent and purpose of this Zoning Code and the objectives of any currently adopted Comprehensive Plan? The proposed parking lot expansion generally meets the setback,design and landscaping requirements of the "B" Residential District. The final design review, however, will be completed during site plan review where all details of the design will be worked out. The Northeast Comprehensive Plan, generally designates the area for commercial development at the southeast Planning Board SLU-1-00 Page 9 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street Parking in the "B" Residential District corner of S. Pennsylvania and Walsh Street with Industrial/Warehouse land use designated further to the south in the Haco Drive area (see attached Proposed Land Use map). The Northeast Plan recognizes potential conflict where commercial properties are located at the edge of properties and states: "Limit expansion of the commercial strip. As a priority, expansion of existing commercial enterprise should be oriented away from the residential neighborhood. Business expansion into a residential area should only be allowed if the relationship with the neighborhood would be substantially improved, and there is support for such action by the majority of area residents. " (Problem 7, as identified on p. 84, Northeast Comprehensive Plan.) It is in the interest of City that businesses be kept viable in Lansing and adequate parking is critical is maintaining and keeping business. The parking lot proposed is considered an accessory use to the office at 1115 S. Pennsylvania,and therefore the proposed special land use generally conforms to the master plan. 9. Does the special land use meet the dimensional requirements of the district in which the property is located? The proposed parking lot expansion generally meets the setback and minimum requirements for parking spaces and aisle widths. The proposed landscaping is adequate but can be improved upon to better screen properties to the north of the parking lot. The final design review will be completed during site plan review where all details of the design will be worked out. SUMMARY 1. The proposed parking lot expansion will be compatible with the surrounding land uses with a landscape buffer along the north and east property line. Additional landscaping will be required along the north and west property line. 2. The proposed parking lot expansion does not significantly effect the characterof the surrounding area provided substantial landscape screening and buffering is put into place. 3. The proposed parking lot expansion should not adversely impact the use of adjacent properties. Planning Board SLU-1-00 Page 10 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street Parking in the "B Residential District 4. The proposed parking lot expansion does not significantly alter the use or character of the property or the surrounding properties. 5. The proposed parking lot expansion does not involve a use that will have a detrimental impact on the health, safety or welfare of persons or property. 6. The proposed parking lot expansion is adequately served by essential public facilities and services. 7. The proposed parking lot expansion does not place demands on public services in excess of current capacity. 8. The proposed parking lot expansion meets the intent and purposes of the Zoning Code and is in conformance with the master plan. 9. The proposed parking lot expansion generally meets the setback,design and landscaping requirements of the "B" Residential District. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the special land use request with the understanding that the applicant will have to go through the site plan review process and include a landscape buffer plan that will likely alter the existing parking lot. Respectfully Submitted, Donna Wynant, AICP Senior Planner Property: 1115 S. Pennsylvania Avennue Parking Square Tenant Feet Notes Ingham Medical Center 12,260 VACANT 3,800 L.S. Properties (Tilford) 17,228 VACANT-Warehouse 22,640 VACANT 2,354 Mi Council - Crime& Delinq 1,738 Tenant needs a minimum of 10 parking spaces Mi League - Human Sery 4,410 Tenant needs a minimum of 20 parking spaces Clara's Inc 0 Innovative Computer Services 200 Total Square Feet 64,530 Total Parking Spaces 98 We have accepted an offer for 6,000 square feet of the warehouse space The Tenant is an Industrial&Construction Supply Company Sep-11-98 08:02A P_ 01 WATEPO"Al 'HT t tOME rutn v PftaPLE. HOMETQWN POWER, CO/� Post-11",r-ax Notes 7071 obb Paml Yo .h x,, ritz F,ntr, d 4t- Fep k Fay K Mr. Dovid A. Nus.dprfcr 151! Dttsrin Rd. Oktrnt(.m,A4148864 Dery Mr, Nussdorfer Sw a number of years you have mainlained a lcase/licensa to use,n OUL of the former i-sussing Connecting Rai road property for p arkiug through an agrctment with the,Grand Trunk Western Rai lruad Cu. As you may know the Baird of Wster and Light rect:ntly purchased the aubicet property from the Railroad and the L; tverc a35igned to w� for ytwr leaemiu:ns:al;rr•c;oatt. 'he ti1Nl.hes,.ulsu r,c«t�1X ::al;l.;atr tt,a�n al'fieu huilding and subscqudndy will br rcltxaring a majority al`our employees to out existing facility(in Hauo rh'. To tnee(the ncadr of cur facility relocation the following changes are plunncd that require us to tzrrnin:+lt�,you 10;tscAiccnsc xgrarmont: l. The City of Lansing wilt.entuiruct x third lane anti it tralftc light at the entrance to Haco Dr. which will require use of the area now occupied tty y(!ur parking on the existing City right-of-Wit3l on the south ,tide of Iiaco Dr. -'. 'Ilse B W'L will install now electric tend I•ilxr optic cables along the south+id0 Of H3co Dr. th-rough the U0.1 now occupied by ynurpsu•kinp;an dte former railroad property and the City tight;of=way. 9. to order LU stucoinmodaw u new enlargod parking lot tit our Halo Dr. facility the BWL,lias pegoxiated a prc'Pt:ny exchtutge with Merttli,l Internntlonal for prxlxrcy they ltctve;tdjnr,tnt to our facility in uxcleangc for iho railroad property along HFwo Dr. which inclucica your exi,;ting.lease/license.arcs and parking. 1 ulwl+,Ki,,e for the impact ran your parkitrg and the Aort notier, however the„tile of nur building and our relc>t;aliun efrorls have.hcen very complicared and on a very fast track page. Thin COINLn(ucion of the.third Bute and the installed n of electric and cubic utiliric; is pltmnerl ffrr compl.etiou This hull. Alrhough O(c. exetct Cunxtructihn date is not set at this time:please consider this letter to thirty(30 )clay Notice of Tt;rmintt(ion of any and all Icase/license tights that you may hxvc acquired on the formt>r milr(Ad Ltnd in accorda;tcce with Article d of the liucMn Agreement.dated Fohruary I, 1990. We will try to accommocLate your purkin�:for;is long as possible and will reirrthurse.you flr the prorated Rntount a,f)cus.manic.:;yali have I)aitl ditough the rnd of l99$. Again 1 "logi7C for the loss of your parking wia tlic shol•t notice,il'- yttu have any questions concerning this Noiiuc of Terminttion plensc give me a call ,ct 371.6053. sincerely Rupert Nicholson. Manager Proiccr Engineering Deportment rriniNI wi joc)claw.•panr,r 09/11/98 FRI 08:15 (TX/RX NO 62531 Z 001 : 35f1o}l33)V{A-p'1►`tJl�?J1�rtX� �f ( - .� • �. I yp��,y�1tj t1o'!+'l�m}I'1VHol � 5'37Nds hn+Z��d 15ix3bZ CB RICHARA E AM SE CFS C B © Richard Ellis COMMERCIAL REAL FSl'AiE SERVICES Martin Navigating A New World lit • ; . VAN W.MARTIN,CCIM,SIOR,CRE January 17, 2000 PRESIDENT 517 351-2200 Mr. James Ruff, Zoning Administrator 517 351-2201 FAX Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development www.cbrichudellis.com 316 N. Capitol Avenue Lansing, MI 48933-1236 RE: 1012 Walsh Street, Lansing Dear Mr. Ruff: Attached please find a special land use application along with copies of the plans showing what we would like to do at the above referenced property. We had spoken about this project last spring. It has now become necessary to submit this request as the Owner has accepted a proposal to lease 6,000 square feet on the second floor at 1115 S. Pennsylvania. The property has lost a parking easement with the Board of Water and Light and is now very short on parking. If you have any questions or if you need any further information, please give me a call. Sincerely, CB RICHARD ELLIS/MARTIN, AMO Accredited Management Organization Lorna F. McHugh Property Manager \enclosure A ,ednAd Inlematmal Individual MembeMhio- Individual Membership- Individual Membership- Individual Membership- ,` Mansge,-1 Cour r.d of Society of Industrial ® Certified Commermal The Co msel rs Certified Property Woomg C,nrers and Office Realtors Investment Member of Real Estate Manager i I I I MICHIGAN AVENIIF.St rTF 201. EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN 48823 PETITION FOR SPECIAL LAND USE - Attachment Re: 1012-1016 and 1018 Walsh Street Date: December 15, 1999 3. Use of property is to expand parking for employees of 1115 Pennsylvania Avenue. Parking to be landscape buffered along Walsh Street and along East Side of property adjacent to single-family dwelling. Access to parking shall be from existing parking lot with no additional access to Walsh Street. Side of existing commercial building to be painted to match existing brick and further screened with English Ivy on building and screen plantings. Lighting on the property will be one parking lot fixture with controlled down light(see attached cut). Existing sub-standard house on the property is to be removed. This existing structure is within the 100-year flood plan and is subject to flooding. Flooding would not have a detrimental effect on the parking. Note: Board of Water& Light terminated a parking easement agreement with 1115 S. Pennsylvania, further impeding the parking problem at this property. 3 OKAS Series KAR Series The classic rectangular shape of the KAS family is the time- Gracefully-shaped lighting to endure over many decades i honored solution to many outdoor lighting situations ... and provided by the circular.KAR family.Three sizes of round hous Lithonia Architectural Outdoor leads all other manufacturers ings ensure the correct proportions for a large parking lot o in production of this type of general area lighting.The KAS is pedestrian walkway. There is a choice of four distributior available in three housing sizes, determined by lamp wattage. patterns: Type II* Type III*. Type N and Type V Square Four reflector systems—Type II, Type III, Type N and Type V (*interchangeable in the field within the same size housing) Square—provide the versatility needed for uniform perform- The standard housings are smooth spun. finished with darF ance on the ground. Each KAS luminaire may be pole or wall bronze TGIC polyester powder enamel: nine other colors of mounted with a 12"extruded aluminum arm. Standard finish Architectural Class 1 anodize are available also.A 9"extrudec on the hand-detailed KAS is dark bronze TGIC polyester pow- aluminum arm, specially machined, cleanly mounts the KAR der enamel to withstand punishing environmental elements. to pole or wall. CITY OF LANSING CITY CLERK'S OFFICE -' To Planning Department The following action was taken by the City Council at a meeting held on November 8 1965 #1063 #1064 Dy Councilman Delen— Whereas, by- petition duly' filed on the 301h day of August, 1965. this council was petitioned to change the following IT property from "C" Two Family Residence District to "J" Parking District By Councilman Belen— all as set forth in the Zoning Code of this city, and Whereas, by Petition duly filed on the 2nd day of August. 1965, this council was Whereas, due notice as required by law petitioned to change the following de- has been given for a public hearing on scribed property from "A" One Family said petition, and . Residence District to "H" Light Industrial District all as set forth in the Zoning Code Whereas, at such hearing held on the of this city, and 1st day of November, 1965, all parties interested therein were heard and given Whereas, due notice as required by law due consideration, and has been given for a public hearing on said petition, and Whereas, the property involved is de- scribed as: Whereas, at such hearing held on the _ 1st day of I7overtber. 1965, all parties in- Z- f, _G'— 02 Wal==-h Street and terested therein were heard and given due 1107 S. Pennsylvania venue. of consideration, and an o on et - -a,v,c,—' gin Cit-v ot; anstng, Ingham Whereas, the property involved is de- CountCountyMi�igan +crlbed as: be rezoned from"C"Two Family Residence 7.-142.65 &5509 South Pennsylvania District to "J" Parking District and that Commencing at a point 50 screening be provided along the east and feet w•e::t of Southeast turner of North- north line of the "J" Parking area, west Fractional one quarter of section 3. V.N. R2W. Delhi Township. Run- Screening along the east line to consist ninK thence west 1202.43 feet on East of either: and \Vest quarter-line to East line of Ponnsylvania .Avenue thence north 495 1. 3 ft. high cyclone type fence with feet on East line of Pennsylvania dense evergreen plantings of R mature Avenue. Thence East .196 feet. Thence height of 5 ft. to 5 ft. 6 in. in height. North 165 feet parallel with East Line of Pennsylvania Avenue. Thence 2. 5 ft. high cyclone type fence with in- hOSA2 feet to a point 50 feet West of terwoven slats. North and South quarterline then South 660 feet parallel with North �ilNi Oft. redwood or cedar louvered fence 5 and South yuRrterline to the place of ow ft. in height with boards running Per- heginning being a Part of East IOU pendicular to the ground. acres of North West fractional vt oP said Section 3. Twp. of Delhi. Ingham Except for the building setback on Wttlsh County, Michigan. Street. Therefore• be it resolved, that the prop- Low evergreen' pl�"X' )ar��� erty alvwe described is herehy chanced from along the building se "A" One Family ReAdence District to the north line of the "H" Light Industrial District xs set forth at access points. in the Zoning Code of said city, and j T Lighting of 2/10 lumens liSht Per square Re it further ra oh cd, that the Zoning foot be provided on the Parking area, so Naps be amended to indicate such trans- directed-so as not to effect adjacent Prop- fer. erties or passing motorists. Adopted by the following vote: ! Therefore, be it resolved, that the prop— erty above described is hereby changed Rs Unanimously. yet. forth in the Zoning Code of said city, and Be it further resolved, that the Zoning Mops be xmended to indicate such tram fer. Adopted by the following vote: Unanimously. l.� City Clerk . a Q 1 boo toil 10 r .o ❑ Q E ISTIN El _ z - m. Q P, R G two. HA ER-FO CE TR -- CFIV HqC T RA o .- _ FLOOD., PLAIN --- - M. _. bI IOb�� 'IW�nNt9tv�7 -13Hz115 HS'IVM SIo� '�io�'2loi z1�1tv�� xo� zl�dn�dH.. us ii� •30 HJI�1N L'Y311Fi7klb' L?�111-L7UY )SNHor lOAA wo A IH Us I la s m I- ul a � Z D lm e-�In� nrli1s1X3 ' J-3��i1C HS`1�OM o f 610i SIOJ 1101 --� d '� ' yA f�•�. �°k ;: F°'t F >,' yr yf� �, inn �^a �:'��..� �:z�r��Xx� �.� � � �/•sF '7f. +F. R yz. SSyyrr i ?, f 1 £ s , dbt. H H y,ef xr. ii ' . ` I 6 1 r ICI E:. y zar L1101.# {W�til�`IISMC'1 —13��115 H9,1VM Slo{'�lo{'Zlol ?��1(V��7 Xo� ����{ „� dI HlJ,�.Zfad rYlorJ noaMlYh 1 dJ C us H� �olsl`{'ddX� 10-� r7N17f7,i+�� H17Jo S H5f1�drinll`fbn.�d �z�,rnw bz . c -Aa 3d11n�1o��y IV93�h �f7J`dC] 21 a 0 kadw ozu aa �7 31 Yld (`hdi�71 Srl y a7 7 � Olk$1H .73u"Ow Z/,s 3'1dHvJ 037� Z 9 i8O"q uz/,2 I HSd Iy33z(ti7 -b `d )Sall►aav SNHor HVtvN I M 11 �.� . om Wo NNIH t US �i tv IQ"il�fQ 4�1fVrvld 7U of-yWM �q Q4 a4 of q¢ I -- yla. b L.,irv3w3nvd snolvlwlv.l.9� °1 �7rvllslx� 0 5''�'�`dds Z�J-"7nh�t"d'dd Man 'IV14L 74 j� s3 Nds a4- hlYl�ra�dd -7N Urr)la v } LI I41, lWzNK Ai t I I I Z • ��d , aatVaZ N I � i'� 1o^I �7N1'�I'dVd /�'SHF'1- �, �0'1. hNl�t•zfYd..._!71111�1X3 hw .• .• OI �(T1Q ►7NIlSIX3 .3Myd�� ,&adorva 3ards 1t33 oos 3'7rt9d aa4m "S I—— s�r+U N337/r7 I '15 Hs dM RIVER MUgEUM ' y� EDAR 3.• z O BEECH ARCH v� ............ n ::::•:•:. n ..... ...... !i v; 2 L7 SM•• m EF?� m HOSM R m Z 2 E _ m D' r N• m a HAAG'. RAIDER m C� EIGHT c LESHER PEN :� z ..... YLVANIA ::': 0 .. m p r•;_ MORGA E: m _2 d.. m n n BINGH M O p x m p n -m z < _ r n JOHNS N JONES D ; o / m\ Z D F m HOLMES � v BENSCH pj X HOLMES C a m DAKIN \ a m C a m FERG SON N 0 MAHLO MCCULL UGH CLIFF D O Z m CUSTE . O `''' LATH P it O v �\ Z vr•:: : :::. ALLEN Z r:`•>r:: }:�:;; .:' RUMS Y SHEPAFiDr :' SHEPA D LESLIE MARSHALL LESLIE n ELVIN REGENT r REGENT < N HORTON D CLEMENS m AURELIUS m Z D CLEMENS FAIRVIEWrip FAIRVIEW . m AOL m MAGNOLIA m _ HAYFORD O a v 1',•�i. 7}I 7� — �}y '�f.s. � � �,aMs"'r -7777 - f 1 • r t� -1 - 147 17 pp • �Jam. �..e`�• � _ [: 7 �n � �.� ;.F 1. ,, �v'" nr'�A' �`"��� `�•`_f}fit F".r{ �•_ ��s � ? - _ � � . •t 7 r rl _ 4r 1 •1 0 _._�;�_ 1 t -. .. .. . ,... 2 I�.�. '^'�� '�'��- JIB � i ',—•_'R4 l.: �t y .y3•a ......,. A.. �h."" --�,�,�bwwirmr..^-�.-r—�•—n�. a•..rJil'.NpC .. r.� �-. `, Re _- � � r� a�1 - ��.+"' M•,,,�""„�^ 1 tj r". �d7�� I 'r"M%Cf�°x-. _l,r•+y -_ .-•v...'�i.;�'!� ( I�:�I •jl �'�"� '.. a xm�Wee � ."'fF "•''�i`' � yr 1 "" � � � S�w,�.i<it� 'rJ•l !•+; ,•..•-7..'� .a+.�—..v.+e_..._.aan.i...s. .�.__�..�a�--.-.—tee++} w-'- • r �� i 7-i V P ♦-�.� .1• ^A .i 4i,1 }( r1'��'. � ♦f l ML�`!}ff!• �� y' �,� 14 IV rt f:, X t'w t; r -a ti 1 { \• !` •a' a T- F�• �: `jar IA N -. ,t.. •� <F I� F 1: A' 1� .� �.��JtGy�: '��f. aS-, S,. ,r ,.`+" �, •, � 1 r� j '4 t�i ��t�Y �t..•H i � tit - � ..� 1 ,n� � �n %. •h �' 1"ttlt;, �tT(16 3��K+, Ir, a�..9�, z n� 1. t � +"�C w.� .. �� ��T•. ftL. ' 4 •x'f �c14 . � -,i. -. tc��'t '?y::�f�i r��+�n., � `.�y .. .-fir r _.;� b�.Lt;ls air ,5�'v. :r•� T.rg � � �u tee: yi� ATM" �I I{ SLU-2-2000 3003 E. Michigan Avenue Additions to existing building in floodplain GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Tony Gentilozzi 201 N. Washington #900 Lansing, MI 48933 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Represents owner: Shaheen Properties, LLC REQUESTED ACTION: Special Land Use permit EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial EXISTING ZONING: "F" Commercial PROPOSED ZONING: Same PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 109,995ft2(somewhat rectangular) SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Commercial S: Commercial E: Commercial W: U. S. 127 SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "F" Commercial District S: Out of City E: "F" Commercial District W: Unzoned public right-of-way MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates this area for continued commercial use. The Master Plan is also in support of continued operation, modernization, and expansion of existing businesses, and desires to attract new commercial, office, and industrial activity into the area. Report Prepared by:Yasheka Williams, Student Intern Doris M.Witherspoon,Senior Planner SLU-2-00, 3003 E. Michigan Ave. Additions to Bldg in Floodplain Page 2. CASE HISTORY: SLU-14-88 - allowed the substantial improvement of the building. Appeal Number 2949: The Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance on January 12, 1989 to Paul Gentilozzi to renovate the building subject to the entire electrical service being elevated at or above the 100-year floodplain. The proposed use of the building then was for another new and used car dealership. SLU-6-94 - allowed the substantial improvement of the building, which constituted a special land use for two additions. Appeal Number 3296: The Board of Zoning Appeals granted a variance on May 12, 1994 to Victor Design to renovate the building and to construct two new additions for the present use, Staples. DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: Tony Gentilozzi, representing Shaheen Properties, LLC, requested to construct two additions totaling 2,640 sq. ft. onto the north side of the Staples building located at 3003 E. Michigan Avenue. The two additions proposed are within the 100-year flood plain. The property is zoned "F" Commercial District which allows commercial development. However, a Special Land Use permit is required since the building is within the 100-year floodplain and over '/ an acre in size. The applicant has also applied to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a setback variance along the north side of the building. ANALYSIS The existing building has an overall square footage of 21,404. The proposed additions will be 2,640 square feet, 12% increase in the building size. The Floodplain Control section of the Zoning Ordinance, Section 1288.06 (a) requires any parcel more than a half acre in size to obtain a Special Use Permit. Nonresidential development is required to be elevated above the 100-year floodplain or floodproofed. The base flood elevation is 836'. The building's top slab Report Prepared by:Yasheka Williams, Student Intern Doris M.Witherspoon, Senior Planner SLU-2-00, 3003 E. Michigan Ave., Additions to Bldg. in Floodplain Page 3. has an elevation of 831.2', 4.8' below the 100-year floodplain which requires the building to be flood proofed. Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses The surrounding land area is predominately commercial in nature. The land uses consist of Frandor Shopping Center to the east, small commercial areas to the south and north, US 127 to the west. The proposed additions onto the Staples building is compatible with the surrounding land uses. Impact on Vehicular and Pedestrian Traffic Based on the site plan submitted by the applicant, there are 157 parking spaces on site. Staff has determined that parking is adequate for this site. Based on traffic patterns along Michigan Avenue and Homer Street, site visibility and circulation should not be a problem. Environmental Impact Since the building footprint is proposed to be increased by 2,640 square feet, a Special Land Use permit in the 100-year flood plain of the Red Cedar River is required with expansion of a building on a parcel larger than a half acre in size. The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) will need to evaluate the impact on the flood plain as to whether the proposed additions will increase the potential hazard in the area. From the Departments' experience, MDEQ will not likely have a problem permitting this. Impact on Future Development Patterns No negative impact is anticipated. Impact on Floodplain Since the base flood elevation is at 836' any part of the building below that elevation should be flood proofed. Report Prepared by:Yasheka Williams, Student Intern Doris M.Witherspoon,Senior Planner SLU-2-00, 3003 E. Michigan Ave. Additions to Bldg in Floodplain Page 4. Other For flood proofing purposes, there appears to be three (3) openings (doorways) in the building. The Red Cedar River is more than 1 ,100 feet from the subject property. Agency Referrals Public Service: No objections to the proposed SLU. This Development proposal was submitted for site plan review in August 1999. Applicant must address all engineering concerns raised in our August 24, 1999 review prior to site plan approval. Transportation Engineer: Preliminary site plans meet all requirements for the Transportation and Parking office. The office reserves the opportunity for further review during official site plan review. Board of Water and Light: See attached. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Special Land Use permit with the following conditions: 1. Applicant must address all engineering concerns raised by the Public Service Department in the August 24,1999 review prior to site plan approval. 2. The building is required to be floodproofed, any area lower than 836'. 3. Approval of the front yard setback variance (BZA 3571.00) to be heard by the Board of Zoning Appeals, March 9, 2000. Report Prepared by:Yasheka Williams, Student Intern Doris M.Witherspoon, Senior Planner C --� MALEY'S C ! l< IBM SERVICE 6, � m CENTER j6L, 16 C / —; / /O / - ----------------------- ----- w z w a C c� cc i .0 STAPLES U_ i W M O � O M O � O � I N � J � � � I i NORTH PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN \ HOMER STREET PROPOSED STAPLES EXPANSION ,T" or.4aa , g .. x �. y, • y+� :+;i;r:•::: iSti`;;;.,:_1;:.,�.:tiih+.•\4::\.tr-:.. 1 \,?,;,..y:: yI''•.$�-.,•,'.•,c. ::.9;:?:;:�`:::w:�. Ei:•. •+;'.,#+#:•� .�{�?;i %�i:. ..P.z;..-,P.,yz:�z...,l`•\,..,.{ v R>,.:h::+•v. ::$:.,.•$+fii> i� �:t;;?:•:.•;,,. �:+;.,:,:„•y ,.t;.. .v;:.,•::y,.. .•✓;T:c;S,.,?�;..R.»max.+..•a:u;v. ,..,,., :.,t;+:.:+:<y;<y,;:y �: :v. �.•:'f:;;�,z•0`.�...•`t: h,..F :::};`.:•: `'`v''?Y°i•"'•` ':�?'�:a�'�ti'•: '•` -• huh ti s fik..,yy ..!. •:.ti,.� s•'.`4•;., �,:. :+ .:.�:�;�t._:�;;.y`r;.+,.. "'!• "S�J}_•..'....i....•.... r•:,w ter'}.:/ .y�.:}.It � �i:. y4,�:, "'', V ♦:`�'`•.�i`vA, 4 'a`•.:: :h;'mil..;,.;y;i,Y,;+:k�:}a.:;:y;.u,?'•ay:: .;;t::.:ti���.t !'l.:t�.,'c..:•' r•,�;v. •. v:, -��.:: \. r, ,\.:.:1\+.,:•.\+:�•:`•`.x.. •�.:.t•. �:;>,1� •;}'.ya::y,. ,,;.»;u:;rx , •:;x:�.;:.:;. ::,� ;•:a«t;�::?::.» . MIN. I? £;,•• :4,.: .«:•.rT:'s`•,.:,,..,.. �i•-.t.. .,,.w��e.S� .;c�' ."z7y,.:. ,'..�... .:•\,•„-. .:,?•:.k}t,; •.`..�y?:i:::�:K,' a,.. x,; .�.+'.;Nl::�..'•}2•'S,G::.P•.`L?• •yA; :tea'�.�:_�.., .y..jj. F y,:�.;..yuky.•.;;�`�,u,,.;,�;;r :x�F::,:`.`ry>r:?,?ht,.+.::..,:•,•:::,-. +�... . •h•'�,•.J.:?•'.•.,s�z�..•.:',:..`.�.?,a�`.nS �ri ..:z..;:�f�."T"?::i.. �zC �,y ,•a,�,,�,''" :.,?'x:...u,.::•::. ::::.,•�a.`�., ,•u:• � � h z} M.. "� ..si.S ...,5}1. . .^���.h,.+h,•:viY y'.•5.,�� ��.,. !,;:•••:..S,v u::.v\.:::::....n - ;• ::, :;-.,#•:.,2ltE-::;•:�+..,•i, :s..:..::,,.:..:.:•.:,•:.,lt•.;..:.::.;y;.;:;::.;.;t.;t .fi;:::: ...r..:.........•}:.......!`. .. .z•.:-::h•:t• .::,.a.'t�`•:r:.'1..:+.......,......,.....:.,.. ;;-:yt.•:::.;•;�.;..,.�::..;,.,v,.;,r.,;..#..,?S.tt,.....- ::........._....-_.r......-...rT•.:::._`4h7., .. .::;•,-,v i#i;;n.-:,}:.+.yr:;'+,.}!, r .;•:h,,,n„r':.:y..l,..:.he.v.\•.,,.,,.u,'M..0 n.,... ... ,..,+.::...,,,:, ....v.,..•,bzw.:.v.. ,.:. ...v.l...>s.....X•.'.C: •' ........e....�('}�..',7y::....... 5....r:>:;?;•:�, +:.ae;••:�:�:.•:;.,,,,,.>,,,...;:-:... a :.. ..�+. •yv:'•:;;tn �..............nb vyy:`•'�.'rn... .,::.:::»\,..n.......,,l::.;..«... ..4..a:�.y - ...... :::}....-•.•.•••i�u'iiLw_ ..•S. '4-tiuua:... l ,�;�:r,.i\.i :.:> ..•,h ,i,\r.y+'�'.�`:k,?xv.?ititi5<ii'i:.y;:.»:Y::E•.. S'•^..zr.: 1. ...a -R a ;.•"i;:;�: .,... sy�;?::;`la. day;\z-.• ,.,�y. t:.++ 5.�.,; •..'k ti ..�.: .}. .i.. �`'. '• .'7.1.� c.. v..,.'?S'�.:.., .ty`�'! ,��'t,•;,`e'�-•..'f•.yf+�,� ,�\�.:.v:�.i;;.v�.i,;•H`}UL;,`�bx,.s; "'}•, :3:»• «'�ii:z'�:i.z.' }a�t5 wd.. 7�:•. ',:r x.... 'wi. ,ht�;::aas • �•• t�Y�:r:•,;:.�`• +Z '4s4.•y' .ao$•,f�• •'+S .�: 1x�"��zzr• xts.•.�`�?.t..;c��x. •u, :x�:.."Y:t..... •.•�.. Y..} T E"�Y -�. }.« 'r�',.•.•�„•:�:., • .tsc{.s!!. t�3•:"�', w ,+s t•'` ' •#} 3�a ......:s;'aii:.•-}:�, ra;s• .�•�� zz,z�}s_.� � ^��'ci•: rz•..,y, c.y+t :.T ... ... ........ +`{+4' }. :: .. _ '+s y.>:=t�si• �'ifal - Yzt ary+j4 + Ao fr.�.:.;-:�._._ t •..�M1+. rr"7' _. ' e-'a -- � u_: a r 4,4 r+ x S a� Ft. '•"t a w°.3_{C .i�i- + "!ts '�' +R�•..• yr ,,, - ,}� !1 av taa z a F-P r r •rew,� .y..,:, ::v:td,y- -Y aaY r'-a`'F,; ••+'•�>:.f �,r.)t..: ��gpwS.r. ,pip ,�r,..:entr .:�z--• rP '.��'. - `w 7#''�+�i sy.sYa:•�s. `5"Y{•:tea'"ty.• n- G 1Aca �3$ "7?C i ::E!`•k"1h9i��Y�`�� T`.�ie4s••eke��^.' ,ri'�g'?;7_'�a •a—s.. e'••�'.t .�..� r i'�i�. � �.... .�.. �t�.r$a,•�� - �y �,. . -.,,q:,g'�F:t+o ���,rr,..l:.}J}..� y'[��f�j�y to >.M,» ^�- e .t +:, t r�1 ��TF + �r�• 2�+�r,�_ a �j.. ; ,.35 .:r+s,h $�s� 't+��,'i.. 'SL'•'.�' �Y' yyt y}` Sr t �(���'+d�� �•�.i'.wY�..T 1� i+fts �.y}�� I� �L-ii •���, -'l a�rY ex.'-.,T r� s4 y ��AT��rk'�kb`Z5�'�,Ti°'i� ��• Y• X• tl t, WATERSUGHT BOARD OF WATER AND LIGHT MEMO February 28, 2000 TO: Doris Witherspoon Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development FROM: Rosemary Sullivan, Administrative Secretary (517) 371-6034 RE: 3003 East Michigan Avenue Staples— Request to construct two additions onto the existing building, located in the 100-year Floodplain. The Zoning Ordinance requires a Special Land Use Permit, Section 1288.06(a), for any development over Y2 acre in size. SYSTEM INTEGRITY AND CUSTOMER PROJECTS Electric No objections to building additions. Contact Person: Lori Karazim 371-6639 Water No objection to issuance of building permit. See no request for additional or revised water service. Contact Person: Terry Robison 371-6494 02.2000-14�oc TOTAL.. P.01 SLU-3-00 510 West Willow Special Land Use for a Residential Care Facility GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Deb & Ed Garcia 13425 W. Dempsey Rd. St. Charles, MI 48655 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Option to Buy REQUESTED ACTION: Request for a Special Land Use permit for property located at 510 West Willow Street, for a residential care facility to house up to 40 residents. EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant (institutional) building EXISTING ZONING: "C" Residential PROPOSED ZONING: No change PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: Irregularly shaped 330' deep with 173' frontage: 47,625 square feet (1.09 acre) SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Single Family Residence to the NE, Consumers Power to the northwest S: Consumers Professional Credit Union E: Single Family Residence W: Office Building and Apartments SURROUNDING ZONING: N "B" Residential, "I" Heavy Industrial to the northwest S: (across street) "D-1" Professional Office E: "A" Residential W: "D-1" Professional Office MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The River Island Plan and its Willow-Pine amendment indicates this area as low density residential for future land use. CASE HISTORY: The subject property, commonly known as Willow Manor, was used as an elderly female residential facility licensed by the State of Planning Board SLU-3-00 510 W. Willow Page 2 Residential Care Facility Michigan to house a maximum of 42 women. The building was constructed in 1930 with additions in 1940 and 1965. A Special Land Use Permit (SLU-10-96) was approved in 1997 for the Dimensions of Life,which proposed to house up to 45 women with a small portion of the facility in the assessment and outpatient treatment of families, single parents, and men. This was proposed to be a type of transitional housing (compared to being a shelter or permanent housing)with the average stay of the women being five weeks. This project was not carried out. APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes to establish a residential care facility to house up to 40 residents, the majority of whom will be the elderly. Some may be diagnosed with mental illness and/or mental retardation. (The applicant's proposal is attached.) AGENCY RESPONSES: AMERITECH TELEPHONE: (No response received.) ASSESSOR: No comments. ATTORNEY: (No response received.) BD.OF WATER AND LIGHT: Electrical Utility- Electric Planning and Systems Studies: No conflicts Water Utility: No comment on land use permit. BUILDING SAFETY: Building Code review will be required for this project. Please contact Chris Segerlind for specific requirements. CODE COMPLIANCE: No anticipated impact on Code Compliance Office. HISTORIC PRES. PLANNER: (No response received.) Planning Board SLU-3-00 510 W. Willow Page 3 Residential Care Facility LANSING NGHD. COUNCIL: (No response received.) CODE COMPLIANCE: (No response received.) CONSUMERS ENERGY CO: (No response received.) MEDIA ONE: (No response received.) DEVELOPMENT: No comment. ECONOMIC DEV. CORP: No comment. FIRE MARSHALL: No objections. Will need to meet current code requirements for occupancy. PARKS AND RECREATION: Does not impact park operation- no comment. POLICE: (No response received.) PUBLIC SERVICE: The Public Service Department has no objection to the proposed SLU. The Public Service Department reserves the right to comment on the proposed development as part of the site plan review process. TRANSPORTATION: (No response received.) DOWNTOWN NGHB. ASSN: (No response received.) N. L.ANSING NGHD. ASSN: (No response received.) OLD FOREST NGHD. ASSN.: (No response received.) WALNUT NGHD. ASSN.: (No response received.) DNA LAND USE CHAIR: See attached comments. Planning Board SLU-3-00 510 W. Willow Page 4 Residential Care Facility BACKGROUND INFORMATION The property at 510 W. Willow is zoned "C" Residential which allows for single and two family homes. Reasonable uses of this property are limited since the existing layout of the structure with its 40 bedrooms does not lend itself to a single or two family home. Other uses, permitted by Special Land Use, are also limited given the lot size and layout of the building. The structure, for example, could not be used as a church since the lot does not meet the minimum two acre parcel size. Other uses permitted by SLU, which may be questionable given the floor plan, include: a child care facility- if it meets the four conditions of the ordinance, a private club, fraternal organization or lodge hall, a recreational facility not owned or operated by a governmental entity. Residential care facilities are permitted by Special Land Use permit in the "C" Residential Zoning District subject to the three conditions discussed in this report. A Residential Care Facility, as defined in Section 1240.03 (123) is defined accordingly: "Residential care facility" means a governmental or nongovernmental establishment having as its principal function foster care for more than six persons. "Foster care"means the provision of supervision,personal care and protection, in addition to room and board, for twenty-four hours a day, five or more days a week and for two or more consecutive weeks, with or without compensation. "Residential care facility" includes, but is not limited to, facilities for persons who are homeless, parolees, ex-offenders, aged, emotionally disturbed, developmentally disabled or physically handicapped who require supervision on an on-going basis but do not require continuous nursing care. A residential care facility does not include any of the following: A. A nursing home licensed underArticle 17 of Public Act 368 of 1978... B. A hospital licensed underArticle 17 of Public Act 368; or C. A hospital for the mentally ill or a facility for the developmentally disabled operated by the Department of Mental Health under Public Act 258 of 1974, as amended. The applicants, Deb and Ed Garcia indicated that they have doing adult foster care for the past 12 years and that they have operated two Al homes during that same period. They currently operate an adult foster care home located in St. Louis, Michigan, licensed for 12 mentally impaired, developmentally disabled, and elderly. Ms. Garcia indicated that the 510 W. Willow facility would primarily be for the elderly, but that many times the elderly are dually diagnosed with either mental impairment or developmentally disabled diagnoses. Planning Board SLU-3-00 510 W. Willow Page 5 Residential Care Facility At the Public Hearing, the Garcias stated that they will continue to maintain their St. Louis home but Mrs. Garcia would stay at the 510 W. Willow property until they can get suitable staff that they can trust to manage the property." ANALYSIS Evaluation Section 1282.03(f)(1)-(9) sets forth the criteria which must be used to evaluate a Special Land Use permit request. The criteria and evaluation are as follows. 1. Compatibility with Use on Adjacent Properties The proposed facility is surrounded by a variety of development. An office building is located immediately to the west and south (Consumers Professional Credit Union). To the north and west lies the Consumers Power Facility, zoned "I" Heavy Industrial. Single family homes exist to the north and immediately to the east. The actual physical structure will not change with this proposal. It has been used as a residential care facility for 42 elderly women in the past. This special land use will result primarily in a change in the type of residents. 2. Change in the Essential Character of the Area The change in use of the existing structure, should not change the essential character of the overall area which includes a variety of land uses in the area. The zoning of the property will not be changed to accommodate this proposal, thereby not increasing real estate speculation along Willow Street and other nearby areas. 3. Interference with General Enjoyment of Adjacent Properties Staff believes these concerns can be addressed with additional parking, landscape screening and buffering, and good management of the residential care facility and should therefore not interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent properties. 4. Improvement to Property and Surrounding Area The applicants have submitted their site plan that shows proposed landscape, screening and buffering of the site. Additional hard surfaced parking spaces are shown on site along the rear (north side) of the building. The facility will have to comply with structural, mechanical, plumbing, and electrical code requirements for the proposed use. The applicant also indicated they will put up an 8 foot tall wood Planning Board SLU-3-00 510 W. Willow Page 6 Residential Care Facilitv privacy fence between the facility and the house to the east (500 W. Willow). The Fence and Hedge Ordinance stipulates a maximum height of six feet behind the front face of the house, and therefore would have to adjusted. These proposed changes should represent substantial improvements to the property and surrounding area. 5. Environmental Impacts No negative impacts are anticipated as a result of this proposal. Impact on Public Services No negative impact on public services is anticipated as a result of this proposal. 6. Impact on Utilities No negative impact on utilities is anticipated as a result of this proposal. Sufficient capacity exists to accommodate the 40 residents as proposed. 7. Compliance with the Master Plan The River Island Plan and its amendment, the Willow-Pine Plan, identify this area as low density residential land use. Residential care facilities are permitted in residential zoning districts subject to a Special Land Use permit 8. Compliance with Zoning District Regulations Section 1248.04 of the Zoning Ordinance permits residential care facilities by Special Land Use Permit in the residential districts if it meets all the following conditions and if it meets the nine standards listed in Chapter 1282: "Special Land Use Permits": 1. The residential care facility provides a minimum lot area of not less than 1,000 square feet per resident. This requirement is met since the site is 47,625 square feet in size and the applicant proposes to license the facility for up to 40 people. 2. Twenty-four hour supervision is maintained by a sponsoring agency. The applicants will supervise this facility on a 24 hour basis. A minimum of four people will provide direct care for the facility which is based on licensing rules that require one staff per 15 clients. Mr. and Mrs. Garcia will be living at the facility most of time to monitor its Planning Board SLU-3-00 510 W. Willow Page 7 Residential Care Facility activities. A home manager will also be one of the four staff people at the facility. 3. The proposed residential care facility is located more than 1,500 feet from an existing residential care facility which provides care for more than six persons. This requirement is met since no other similar licensed facility is found within 1,500 feet of the proposed site. The Zoning Ordinance does not specifically identify parking requirements for residential care facilities. However, staff believes the minimum number of parking spaces on site should at least accommodate staff and visitors. Staff: 4 spaces Visitors: unknown (but usually very few) Total Required: 4 spaces + visitor spaces The parking lot to the east of the building has 9 parking spaces. An additional nine spaces may be provided on the north side of the facility, if the need arises. This proposal will easily provide the minimum number of parking spaces required for the amount of staff as projected above. OTHER A letter from the Land Use Chair of the Downtown Neighborhood Association raised several concerns regarding the proposed Special Land Use. Said letter is attached. The President of the Old Forest Neighborhood also raised concerns about the proposal at the Public Hearing. His concerns primarily related to the impact of the area on the facility (namely Willow Vista apartments and the drug traffic that takes place there). He also had questions regarding how many people would be aged and how many would be mentally incompetent or mentally retarded. SUMMARY Based upon the analysis of the special land use permit, it meets all of the nine principles required. The proposed special land use is harmonious with the character of adjacent property and surrounding uses. The change in the type and number of residents should not significantly effect adjacent properties. Planning Board SLU-3-00 510 W. Willow Page 8 Residential Care Facilitv The proposed special land use will not change the essential character of the surrounding property, once appropriate landscape, screening and buffering is in place. The proposed special land use will not interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent properties. The proposed special land use will not be hazardous to adjacent properties. The proposed special land use will not place any demands on public services and facilities in excess of current capacities. The proposed special land use is consistent with the intent of the zoning code and objectives of the current comprehensive plan. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the special land use be approved subject to the plan submitted for landscape, screening and buffering. The Planning Office reserves the right to require fencing and/or landscape materials that would best screen any views objectionable to adjacent neighbors or to inhibit trespassing. Approval of this Special Land Use Permit is also subject to the corrections made to the facility based on the inspections made by the City of Lansing. Respectfully Submitted, Donna Wynant, AICP Senior Planner e PLANNING OFFICE Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development 316 N. Capitol Avenue Lansing, Michigan 48933-1236 r� Htce� PHONE (517)483-4066 FAX (517)483-6036 David C. Hollister Mayor of Lansing AGENCY REFERRAL SHEET FROM: DONNA WYNANT. SENIOR PLANNER FILE: SLU-3-00 483-4075 DATE: February 22, 2000 ❑ Ameritech Historic Preservation Planner ❑ '❑ Assessor Lansing Neighborhood Council ❑ - ❑ Building Safety Media One ❑ �❑ BWL Parks & Recreation ❑ `-- .❑ City Attorney Community Policing ❑ -I ' Code Compliance Public Service ❑ L-❑ Community Policing Downtown Neighborhood Assn. ❑ 1. 0 Consumers Energy Co. North Lansing Community Assn. ❑ ❑ Development Office Old Forest Neighborhood Assn. ❑ .. 0. Economic Development Corporation Walnut Neighborhood Org. ❑ DNA Land Use Chair - ❑ Fire Marshall The following request has been submitted to the Planning Board for consideration. We invite your comments,requirements and recommendations for this proposal relative to your official function. SLU-3-00. This is a request by Deb and Ed Garcia for a Special Land Use permit for �- property located at 510 W. Willow. The applicant proposes to establish a residential care facility to house up to 40 residents, the majority of whom will be the elderly. Some may be' diagnosed with mental illness and/or mental retardation. This special land use may be permitted in the "B" Residential District if approved by City Council. THIS IS NOT A MATTER OF REZONING. Please provide your remarks in the space provided below, and return this sheet to the Planning Office by Wednesday, March 1, 2000, 5:00 p.m. 4.1 SL Sce_ Signed; Enclosures ho c- z- D (\J ® Please Recycle "Equal Oppormnity Employer" DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION March 1, 200 The Lansing Planning Board 316 N. Capitol Avenue Lansing, Michigan 48933 RE: SLU-3-00 Greetings: The Downtown Neighborhood Association opposes SLU-3-00 and recommends denial. After reviewing the application and site plan, we oppose the special land use request for the following reasons: 1. There is no indication that the application, a Deb and Ed Garcia, have any ownership interest in the land. A rezoning request or special land use request cannot be granted to someone who does not have an ownership interest in the land. The City Assessor's records indicate that the property is owned by Dimensions of Life. The property is currently listed for sale for $310,000. (see attached) The property is not in the best of shape and if the Garcias are prospective tenants, there is no reason to believe that any substantial improvement will occur. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that any improvement will occur to the value of adjacent properties. 2. The proposal to house "40 residents with either a diagnosis of mental illness, mental retardation or who are elderly" is a use that is too intense for the character of the area, the lot size and the zoning classification. The land encompasses five city lots totally 1.09 acres. The intent of the B Residential Zoning classification is for "predominately LOW-DENSITY one-family dwellings along with other residentially related facilities". Forty residents, staff, and visitors is NOT low-density. (Low density residential is up to 6 acres per acre, moderate density residential is 6 to 20 units per acre.) While the B Residential Zoning classification provides for residential care facilities for more than six persons, this particular proposal for 40 residents is more intense than that which is contemplated in the Zoning Code. The proposal is for HIGH density, institutional sized development in a predominately residential neighborhood. 3. The site plan proposes a total of 17 parking spaces (9 of which are for employees), the remaining 8 spaces presumably are for visitors and residents. The plan also details where 8 additional spaces could be placed, "if required". This is insufficient parking for staff, visitors, and 40 residents. The site does NOT provide sufficient space for this large potential of vehicles. The application does NOT propose to serve a majority of elderly residents as the typed information on the Agency Referral Sheet states. Rather, the application states it will "house 40 residents with either a diagnosis of mental illness, mental retardation or who are elderly. After speaking to the Commission on Aging they indicated a great need for affordable housing for the aged. So I am ASSUMING the majority will be aged. (emphasis added) The application also states that applicants will attend "both day programs and work programs." Most elderly people are not employed. We believe that this proposal either contemplates people who are working or would not reject working applicants and therefore, the site MUST be able to accommodate the full potential for parking. This site is too small for the parking potential for 40 residents. There is also no reason to believe that an elderly person does not drive. 4. The proposed resident mix of diagnosis of mental illness or mental retardation or who are elderly is not a desirable mix for the frail elderly. While the federal government may require a housing commission to house a broader population in federally subsidized senior citizen housing, it should not be considered good public policy to encourage such a mix in the private sector. In the past year, one Lansing woman was murdered in her bed in a senior citizen project. The murderer was not elderly. Most surviving elderly people are women. The combination of their gender and their frailty at elderly ages make them a potential victim of younger and stronger people. The current situation in Lansing is that residents in senior citizen develops that have a mixed age population is that the residents are afraid in their own home. Senior citizen projects in Lansing are not at capacity in the service to the elderly. 5. A proposed residential care facility for 40 people, including a mix of mental illness, mental retardation or elderly, is not substantially different that a prior proposal to use the facility for a probation residential care facility. That proposal was substantially declined by the residents in the area and parents of students attending the charter school in the former School for the Blind property. Both of these groups overwhelmingly said that the neighborhood is fragile and has worked very hard to improve itself. The PRC proposal was viewed as something that would "tip" the neighborhood downward. This proposal is no different. 6. Lansing and the overall downtown area has long been the site of more than its share of residential care facilities in this county. The concentration and proximity of other facilities should result in a denial of this application. The recently released Gove Housing Marketing Study for the City of Lansing indicates that Lansing has more than its fair share of certain kinds of housing in the county. To remedy the problems and to make the city a "residence of choice", Gove Associates do not recommend either more low income housing or more residential care facilities. Rather, Gove specifically recommends a fifteen year plan of building 92 new single family homes per year, restoring 5 historic homes per year and developing 5 condos per year. We would recommend that the property would better be adaptively rehabilitated as an affordable condo development of ten or fewer units. This recommendation considers the master plan, the existing B Residential Zoning, the neighborhood, the lot size (1.09 acres), the square footage in the building (16,733 sq. ft.) and the actual building which should be viewed as historic. This could be made financially feasible with the use of CDBG funds and historic tax credits. 7. The application provides no clue whether the applicants are capable of responsibly providing residential care to any group, to a group of 40, or to the proposed population mix. The hand printed application is not on any letter-head of an organization or a non-profit or for-profit corporation. There is no address stated for the applicant. There is no indication of the professional abilities of the application. Further, there is no indication of financial accountability. Respectfully submitted, Stephanie L. Whitbeck Land Use Chair Price:$3 10.000 `'40477 Scl .LAMS NNY TrAth:LANSING TOWNHIn Zone:REST YrB? t . 1 g_ Kev:CLO C o u n tc: Found Sz:iRREC, Square Ft-Apprx. : 4°.t0 Occ: Water-PUS Sewer:PliB WaterHt:GAS Basement:PAR a Gara N g: 0 ti1 Street Name City Zip 510 W WILLOW T,ANSING 45906+ Y:EXEMPT Tax: 0 TV: PropertyANC Status : A rection:WILLOW WEST OF GRAND R1VcR BrokerO,:0340 sal:LOT 45.46,47.68 & U ASSESSOR PLAT k15 LDate: Units Kn Bth Bed Rent Sq Ft Tenant Phone EDste: LIn1: Land :I+A Ua2: Units:40 Reserve Itni :N Un3: Lot Size: '.+ ACRE Un4: ?arm; 3301 -09- 151- 131 -z Un5: Total Parkir•g;AMPLE CFENSES: #Deposits: MULTI PHO. "rrRent: Elect: Manage: 4Ltases Rook:C009 )thlnc: Insur: MISCC1 . Disclosure: N Page: 325 ,essFL Taxes: TotExp Registcred: Arca:01 Vater : Maint: Netlnc License ;ttt:GFA,GIIW Extras:SMO.PAN UNIT 1 2 3 4 5 ,pe:TWO Improv:SCR Ranges; :rm:CAS,CON Shw.CLO Ext:W0Q,BR1 Refrig : Neer :DIMENSIONS OF LIFE Phone: -, 51-3617 Ovens "fice:TOMIE RAINFS. INC Phone 35i -3617 Washer: Jes -ACHTERBERG JiKATHYITQNI Ph:3 5 1 -a 7 5 7 157 Dryer ;ant Email:JACHTERBERG@TOMIERAIN'ES.COM Dispsl : k:3.5 BA:3 5 OF: var Ratc Dbl B-achure:N Micro : tta:GREAT POTENTIAL FOR FOSTER CARE, OR GROUP HOME' Dishwh: (07- AN APARTMENT BUILDINGt Wtrsof: pen House:N Date TIME: )ADING FEATLtRE TABLE Whi�'br,�eh i w � r This Fax is directed to: 9 Fax Number: , �.� _; Llp3 0 31 This is a Fax from: Telephone Number: " 7. — 516 S-- 7VI (, Fax Number: Today's Date: ZB02 Pages (NCLUI)MG COVER rkGE) � Comments: ?V-7--j3 h?i P,•t 3 S � � d ju 01/07/1995 08:14 517-865-7932 PAGE 03 i I i E I 11• -J Q i1 �.�` .� - i��J Va 'A '1 � i UI• `"•:?��; ., ...� •0 l. � - , I • J �, �'.. :WJbL 6Y J.Jb , ILMIAAN .. avrd ,ti S�v -Q- � rr a �./ Zfaxq.4),Oe- Or l� / 0/1 (2,0 l /'J r)l c of XJu corn 1,4 A)1-1-:CA F' 1 diJ7C/, z)(y Sri �' �� w, // — 691 ✓rpliA q r Cl� O C o Z) Ca/�' S LLCC Y— A.( f i71./ c ,Sct�SS� tOs IIY)Q L1210A 41A-) -o /��C� // l'� �v S 6C-)el q 3 -T /7/C,e vr .�IJ 4 _I a 4ti �SCa �SohJ IJ - - -� 7 7 /-C-/C-C C� es o COY O/U 11 X Iwo PRO v a` �, r.i. NO ml"Ij lial i I Z-2-2000 "C" Residential District & "D-1" Professional Office District to "G-2" Wholesale District GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT/OWNER: Mr. L. Douglas Johns Cedar & Monroe LLC 316 E. Michigan Ave., Lansing, MI EXISTING ZONING: "C" Residential District & "D-1" Professional Office District REQUESTED ZONING: "G-2" Wholesale District EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant residential lot PROPOSED LAND USE: unspecified commercial PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 132 feet by 165 feet ( 21,780 square feet, 0.5 acre) SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Two family residence S: Commercial and vacant lot E: Single family residence W: Commercial and vacant lot SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "C" Residential District S: "H" Light Industrial District E: "C" Residential District W: "F" Commercial District CASE HISTORY: The site recently contained a pair of single family residential structures which were demolished in November of 1999. A portion of the property was zoned from "C" Residential District to "D-1" Professional Office District in 1972. MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: This property is located within the "River Vista" area identified within the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the Lansing Planning Board August 17, 1999. The text of the land use recommendations for this area of the plan are as follows: Z-2-2000 "C" Residential District & "D-1" Professional Office District page 2 to "G-2" Wholesale District RIVER VISTA River Vista, not unlike Scofield Place to the south, is envisioned to be a mixed use district with a stronger emphasis on housing. Bounded by Saginaw (south), the Grand River (west), Grand River Avenue/Franklin St. (North) and the CSX Railroad to the east, River Vista must create the link between Old Town and downtown on the east side of the river. Old Town has begun to take on the distinctive character necessary to attract new businesses and residents. The proximity to the Grand River, Old Town, and the ability to connect with downtown quickly and easily through proposed transit, pedestrian and vehicular means, gives River Vista the ingredients necessary to develop medium to high density housing and associated commercial establishments. Land Use The Comprehensive Plan envisions that River Vista will provide the first opportunity in the city to establish a "transit village"; one in which trolley and/or bus commuting will be commonplace and desired by the people who chose to live there. Again, ease of pedestrian movement will be featured as will first floor businesses which cater to the local residents and the tourists coming to shop in Old Town. As with Scofield Place, the Comprehensive Plan recognizes the specialized and more detailed planning which must occur to establish the land use relationships and circulation patterns necessary to promote appropriate development. Therefore, staff recommends that the River Vista district be designated for additional study and development of a future small area plan. It should also be noted that to attract new development to this area and to take advantage of the river setting, other businesses which would discourage new growth in housing or commerce should be encouraged to seek alternative sites at which to operate that are not close to or are sufficiently screened from residential properties. While these businesses can perform valuable recycling functions, the operating characteristics of these businesses are not generally thought to be compatible with residential development. Urban Design River Vista provides the opportunity to construct more housing to support Old Town and downtown development. The primary challenges will be to design a community that is both compact but also open to the river, a Z-2-2000 "C" Residential District & "D-1" Professional Office District page 3 to "G-2" Wholesale District community that maintains a pedestrian scale and cohesiveness among taller and more massive buildings, and that "fits in" with Old Town, Scofield Place, and the single family dwellings to the east without competing. Lastly, transit opportunities must be integrated into this community which support alternative transportation and circulation choices. Circulation A primary objective in creating a "transit village" is to establish enough housing units to support various alternative forms of transportation to work/shopping/education and entertainment activities. Trolley, bus, walking, bicycling and use of the River Trail are all choices which would be available to persons living in River Vista. In addition, the village would establish certain local neighborhood amenities and support services which would also serve existing Old Town and Turner Dodge residents. The Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan also includes a discussion regarding converting of Cedar and Larch Streets from one way to two way in order to change the function of Cedar Street from a one-way thoroughfare to a street more residential in character. APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL This request is to rezone the lot "G-2" Wholesale District. At the public hearing of March 7, 2000, the applicant submitted a "tentative" concept plan proposing a design for the site which includes adjacent property to the south (See Figure 3, Concept Plan). This plan shows a design for the site consistent with a multi-tenant commercial building, a proposed oil change business, and a car wash, with off-street parking adequate to serve over 10,000 square feet of net floor area for a typical "shopping center" development. The applicant's plan shows the property that is requested for rezoning to be only about one-third of the total site. The other two-thirds of the property is located directly to the south and is zoned "H" Light Industrial District (see Figure 2, Zoning). AGENCY RESPONSES AMERITECH TELEPHONE: No response received. ASSESSOR: See attached. ATTORNEY: No response received. Z-2-2000 "C" Residential District & "D-1" Professional Office District page 4 to "G-2" Wholesale District BOARD OF WATER & LIGHT: Electric - No objections to rezoning property. Water - No comment on rezone. BUILDING SAFETY: No response received. CABLE TELEVISION: No response received. CATA: No response received. NLCA: No response received. OLD TOWN MAIN STREET: No response received. CONSUMERS ENERGY: No response received. DEVELOPMENT: No comment. EDC/TIFA: No comment. NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL: No response received. MI DEPT. TRANSPORTATION: No comment. PUBLIC SERVICES : The Public Service Department has no objection to the proposed zoning request. PSD: No response received. TRANSPORTATION: The Transportation and Parking Office has reviewed the subject request and has the following comments. 1) More intense land uses along the Cedar/Larch corridor have been the trend and are consistent with the traffic capacity of the roadways. 2) The future land use access should be oriented to Cedar Street to protect the remaining residential units on Monroe Street from additional traffic intrusions. 3) We reserve the opportunity to make specific site development comments during the plan review process. Z-2-2000 "C" Residential District & "D-V Professional Office District page 5 to "G-2" Wholesale District 4) It appears that this request can be approved with the proper planning, design considerations and conditions. DESCRIPTION OF SITE The subject property is bounded by Monroe Street on the north, Cedar Street on the west, a single family residential property to the east, and vacant property to the south. The subject property is presently vacant. The vicinity of the site in general is in a state of transition which is being re-developed in a piecemeal fashion from its historical use as a residential neighborhood into disjointed commercial and office structures. North of Monroe Street are several single family residential structures which are in marginal state of repair with some of them boarded and vacant. Properties located in the block to the northwest (bounded by Cedar, Center, Oakland, and Monroe Streets) are generally in sound condition with the exception of the three structures with direct frontage on Cedar Street. ANALYSIS COMPATIBILITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN As noted earlier in this report, the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan envisions this area "... to be a mixed use district with a stronger emphasis on housing." The proposed rezoning of the two lots at the northwest corner of Cedar and Monroe Streets to "G-2" Wholesale District would provide some transition between the industrially zoned property to the south and the residentially zoned property to the north and northwest. The actual development pattern that has occurred in the southern portion of the block that contains the subject property has been more commercial, as opposed to industrial or warehouse, in nature. This is evidenced by the demolition of the former Leon's Foods factory and its replacement with a restaurant and gasoline filling station. In addition, significant re-development of the opposite block (southwest of Cedar and Monroe) has been with office uses. While the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan emphasizes housing, it does not necessarily emphasize preservation of the current housing stock that remains in the area, but implies development of newer urban housing alternatives which could incorporate compatible commercial services. The plan looks forward to utilization of the views of the Grand River and the downtown skyline, and pedestrian accessibility to the downtown and Old Town districts as urban residential amenities. The plan also attempts to create the environment in which urban residential development could Z-2-2000 "C" Residential District & "D-V Professional Office District page 6 to "G-2" Wholesale District flourish by suggesting changes in the circulation patterns of through traffic by recommending that the conversion of Cedar Street to two-way traffic be further studied. The Planning Staff believes that while it may not be practical to expect redevelopment of the commercial portions of the block that contains the subject property, it is necessary to preserve the urban residential potential of the adjacent areas of the adjoining blocks to the north and west. While the applicant has requested rezoning to the "G-2" Wholesale District, the concept proposal presented at the March 7, 2000 public hearing could be accommodated by a zoning district that does not permit warehousing, auto-body shops, heavy auto repair, used car lots, or other more intensive commercial uses across the street from potentially "prime" urban residential redevelopment areas. Therefore, the proposed "G-2" Wholesale District is not consistent with the vision of the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan. COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE The subject property is.adjacent residential uses on two sides. In the short term, landscaping, screening and buffering would be required between the subject site and the residential property to the east. There is no requirement in the Zoning Ordinance for screening of residential properties across the street. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC Site design considerations that are routinely addressed during site plan review procedures for approval of any new development would be adequate to address short term traffic considerations. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Because the property is an urban redevelopment site, there is little left to be concerned about from a strict environmental impact. The property is near, but not within, the 100 year floodplain of the Grand River. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT The future development patterns envisioned by the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan are contrary to the "G-2" Wholesale District zoning proposed by the applicant. While the southern two-thirds of the site are already zoned industrial (which permits any of the uses allowed in the "G-2" Wholesale District in addition to industrial uses) the key issue is creating an adequate transition between the industrially zoned property with their current commercial uses, and the potential urban residential development of properties to the north and west. Z-2-2000 "C" Residential District & "D-1" Professional Office District page 7 to "G-2" Wholesale District SUMMARY The applicant is requesting rezoning of a parcel of approximately one-half acre from "C" Residential District & "D-1" Professional Office District to "D-1" Professional Office District. The property is located at the southeast corner of Cedar and Monroe Streets, approximately midway between Downtown and Old Town. The subject property is a portion of a larger site, the remainder of which is currently zoned "H" Light Industrial District. The Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan, which was adopted by the Lansing Planning Board in August of 1999, emphasizes development of a mixed use district with a stronger emphasis on housing for the surrounding area. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the request to rezone the subject property "G-2" Wholesale District, primarily because the requested zoning is not consistent with the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan. Staff believes that a zoning district that provides for a definite transition between existing commercial uses south and southeast of the subject property and potential urban residential redevelopment to the north and west may be appropriate for the site. An example of this type of zoning district is the "E-2" Local Shopping District. The "E-2" District would permit most of the same uses permitted in the "G-2" Wholesale District with the exception of warehousing, automotive repair, automotive body shops, and automotive sales lots. Respectfully Submitted, Jim Sturdevant, AICP Senior Planner March 15,2000 Z-2-2000.FE.wpd NORTH Figure 1 Area Map Z-2-2000 826 I 844, I —`8J8 J ASN ST 839.6 8J9 4 II F '25.2 I I - 842.6 8426 I 39_/1 r I IWALL 1,884 843.1 i ° W 1 O AVE 838.3 Z I w l 4J 825.3 p ) _ — I 84/.3 �� 83-9 ►J- ti �3o OAKLprIO �840 838 8174 (Fj[_ 825./ oil J9.O 837tcr l Ix , ( 8M..5 1 los-° 825.7 � 42"— I IRKING I B10N E 8393 838.2 ST 858.1 838.4 839-6� ?y BS° W 825 U 1822.9 � BM..9 B33.2 IL 836.. 1 _ e N +236 �` IZ 83/.4 824.7 El ' - -C B .B 825 a'? I I 8349 I % � 824.1• --{L I - r` \ 825 � 11 , --- PARKING 823 B I - i x C° to L. � as I V _ _82 b a /`�J�, o� - PARKING \ 828 7 I 826 P. "— Gi�i1++MY— L• .S�7 !V 111 Imp an n MEM ■ .. If PARKING ■ i331 r 1 CEDAR STREET R r w �.a z m rum lwq b. �o 0 ► Z r 0 it N : -n ro o fD CD + + c w m Ly F-r � � y a Al I—LL .r H C UMOL s wrwr +Do r a,i�ia�aM+r+.t mn Mat-.L,.. ��_,,.,�„� LOTS 2 t 3, BLOCK � ORIGINAL PLAT CITY OF LANSlN INGHAN COUNTY, MIQiIGAN .. ARE CURRENTLY ZON C (RESIDENTIAL AND E-1 (APT. OFFING). THE DEVELOPER mom= ''■r•. IS REQUESTING THAT ESE TWO LOTS BE REZONED 0- (WHOLESALE) LOT 6, BLOCK 17, ORIGINAL PLAT, CITY OF LANSING, INGHAM COUNTY, "iCHIGAN IS CURRENTLY ZONED H ( LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ). Z-3-2000 "A" Residential District to "C" Residential District 124 Bell Street GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT/OWNER: Markey Associates/Markey Family Investments, LLC 1400 Silverwood Okemos, MI 48864 EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential District REQUESTED ZONING: "C" Residential District EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant residential lot PROPOSED LAND USE: Two-family (duplex) dwelling unit PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 66 feet by 144 feet (9504 square feet) SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Two family residence S: Commercial and vacant lot E: Single family residence W: Single family residence SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential District S: "J" Parking District E: "A" Residential District W: "A" Residential District MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Map, designates this area for residential development at zero to seven units per acre. CASE HISTORY: The site recently contained a single family residential structure which was demolished in June, 1992. APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: This request is to rezone the lot "C" Residential District to permit construction of a two- family, or duplex dwelling unit on the residential lot. The subject property contains sufficient lot area for a duplex with three or more bedrooms in each unit if it were rezoned to the "C" Residential District. AGENCY RESPONSES: NORTH LANSING CMMNTY ASSN: No response received. Z-3-2000 124 Bell Street page 2 "A" Residential District to "C" Residential District CODE COMPLIANCE: No response received. LANSING NGHBRHD COUNCIL: No response received. PUBLIC SERVICES: The Public Service Department has no objection to the proposed rezoning. Description of Site The subject property is a vacant residential lot in a neighborhood of primarily single family homes (see Figure 1, Area Map). The lot immediately to the north of the subject property presently contains a two-family structure, even though it is zoned for single family use. The lot is relatively level and presents no obvious barriers to construction of a new residential structure. Bell Street dead-ends one lot to the west of the subject property. Bell Street is unpaved and without curb and gutter. Property on the south side of Bell Street is zoned a combination of "J" Parking District and "H" Light Industrial District (see Figure 2, Zoning Map). While most of this property is vacant, there is one business establishment located on the south side of Bell Street. ANALYSIS COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE The majority of residential structures in the vicinity are single family units, however, there is one two-unit structure adjacent to the subject property. Most of the homes in the vicinity are in sound condition but show evidence of needing some minor maintenance. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC On a street with this few housing units, the difference between a one-family or duplex unit would be insignificant. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The area is already developed as a residential neighborhood, the subject property formerly contained a single family dwelling, and the subject site is large enough to contain a duplex structure, staff anticipates no significant negative environmental impact of the proposed rezoning. Z-3-2000 124 Bell Street page 3 "A" Residential District to "C" Residential District IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT This development has the potential to impact future patterns of development by setting a precedent for rezoning the portion of Bell Street that contains lots large enough for duplex structures to "C" Residential District. It does make sense to create a transition of land uses from the industrially zoned property south of Bell Street and the single family residential neighborhood to the north of Bell Street. If this rezoning pattern were to occur over time, it would be advisable to consider paving the street and installing proper storm water utilities. SUMMARY The applicant is requesting rezoning of a single residential lot from "A" Residential District to "C" Residential District in order to permit construction of a two-dwelling structure. Surrounding properties are primarily single family except for the industrially zoned property south of Bell Street. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the requested rezoning from "A" Residential District to "C" Residential District for the vacant lot at 124 Bell Street, with the advisory that a precedent is being set for similar requests that may occur for adjacent properties. Respectfully Submitted, Jim Sturdevant, AICP Senior Planner March 10,2000 Z-3-2000.FE.wpd � f � � I i .. , � .�� I �a ■ 111 a a � ��PRO Y r,. ,}. '$ t�a+ra IMF' omm :. ��• kn,I�r.�+ja'y`'t�f �,°i'�`�f`5Y.4 f'� ,�_ }4'!, ,f i �•� {} ..6vf:I�J''A3�v�;ea t:.-, t(' .; 5 la{�'�Y••t� �'A`4 ++ Sct� t �"Li4 i��'� �'�,(y,.� 5"!iy °a t '.�"1 F. A l5 w*-:+ {,�..1. �s���%` Y.Sfs�vq" .R ,,N�'y`,t Sap''s'.�`r�lxiJ;f'lJ;.y°yam •:''`','x�+�:� 'Y b{'!`0�''t"ttta�r`. i °�Y«���`.:+ef �. c�14 �. rs s.�w t t t';n i �1: a t.L , v '•+��.a'i� � G' e w i + � � �,+a\ r i j `1�,�+Ca•'Nsi� s" _:ry '-r 'syt,�'y.,`t'+