Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000 Planning Board Minutes July-Sept FINAL APPROVED AS PRINTED JULY 18, 2000 Draft to Clerk 07172000 Approved 07182000 To Clerk 07212000 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 p.m., City Council Chambers c '- Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall � 124 West Michigan Avenue Tuesday, July 5, 2000 ' 1. OPENING SESSION: The meeting was called to order at 7 p.m. by Mr. Ruge. Upon a motion by Mr. Frederick, seconded by Ms. Patrick, Mr. Ruge, in the absence of both Chair and Vice Chair, was named Temporary Chairman for the meeting. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Patrick, Ruge, Smith; four members present. Absent- Nischan and Keene. Two vacant seats. B. Excused Absences - Mr. Nischan and Ms. Keene were granted excused absences. C. Introductions. James A. Ruff, Planning Manager, introduced staff present, William C. Rieske, Principal Planner; and Louise H. Christian, Recording Secretary. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - Approved as presented. 3. COMMUNICATIONS A. Letter dated June 20, 2000 addressed to the Lansing Planning Board from Monica Zuchowski, President, Downtown Neighborhood Association RE: SLU-9-2000, 532 N. Seymour Ave. and 223 W. Lapeer Street, Parking Lot in "DM-3" District in support. B. Phone Call July 5, 2000, from Mr. David Schade, 601 N. Seymour Street, RE: SLU-9-2000, 532 N. Seymour Ave. and 223 W. Lapeer Street, Parking Lot in "DM-3" District in support. C. Letter dated June 27, 2000 addressed to the Planning Office from Rae Ann Esterhai, 919 LeGrand Dr., RE: Z-8-2000, 3901 S. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd., "F" Commercial to "H" Light Industrial District, in opposition. D. Letter dated June 30, 2000 addressed to Jim Ruff from Mourer Foster RE: SLU-8-2000, 216 W. Lapeer Street, in general concurrence. 4. HEARINGS E. SLU-9-2000, 532 N. Seymour Ave.; 223 W. Lapeer St., Parking Lot in "DM-3" District Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by Lansing Community College for a Special Land Use request to construct a parking lot in a "DM-3" PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 2 Residential District for the property which has two addresses, 223 W. Lapeer and 532 N. Seymour Street. It is a four-unit building owned by the Lansing Community College Foundation. They intend to raze the building in order to add to an existing parking lot adjacent to it to support their offices and campus. A special land use permit is required for this type of use. A previous application was withdrawn. The property directly to the south was also reviewed for a special land use permit for parking. A map in the packet shows where the parking lot of 20 additional parking spaces would be installed at the corner of Lapeer and Seymour. A buffer to the north would be increased. The house is vacant at present. Mr. Ruge asked what are plans for long-term parking by Lansing Community College? There will be only three buildings left. The rest of the block would be all parking lot. Mr. Ruff said the most recent parking study done by LCC in 1997 by Walker Parking Consultants showed the College has a shortage of 175 parking spaces for staff and visitors. They have invited Mr. Ruff and staff to a planning committee meeting on July 7 on a facilities plan. Mr. Ruge said last year we approved a parking lot in the Adado park. Mr. Rieske said the lot has not been constructed because, according to the Transportation Office, there is no funding. BARBARA LARSON, 6100 COLEMAN ROAD, EAST LANSING, MI, VICE PRESIDENT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES AND FINANCE, LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE. You have received information about the application for a Special Land Use permit for a parking lot which would provide 20 parking spaces for staff and faculty. The College applied for a special land use for this earlier in the spring but withdrew the application when the Downtown Neighborhood Association expressed concern. Subsequently, the DNA did vote to support our request. The drawings you received include an increase of the curb setback of the portion of an existing lot. We will continue to work with our neighbors to plan for appropriate landscaping. We did a parking study in the fall of 1997 that revealed a deficit of approximately 175 spaces. We plan to update the study this fall. When we purchased the Sinas-Dramas building, we gained about 51 spaces. These 20 spaces would further address our parking deficit. Mr. Ruge asked about the deficit of 80 spaces. Ms. Larson said we are looking at telecommuting and other things that don't involve constructing additional parking. The Adado Riverfront Park project is on hold. Ms. Larson has talked with Mr. Berridge about the possibility of excess space in City lots that LCC could lease for those additional 80-100 spaces. Mr. Ruge asked wasn't LCC going to pay for the parking lot? Ms. Larson said PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 3 yes, that was the original intent prior to changes in leadership both at LCC and the City. DEBORAH MULCAHEY, 1200 S. GENESEE, LANSING. I own property at 608 Seymour. I spoke here a couple weeks ago regarding the 216 W. Lapeer property that Mourer-Foster, I am sorry to say, is still using it inappropriately. My concern with the property at 532 N. Seymour and 223 W. Lapeer is that if the building were to come down, it would significantly change the block face and character of the area. I just learned from the person who owned the property just east of 922 W. Shiawassee that his house was sold to LCC to somebody in the Athletic Dept. to be used for student athletes. It is a beautiful home on the north side of Shiawassee between MLK and Butler. Why do they want to be all the way over there when they could maybe use this house right here? I suggested to some people at DNA that LCC has a wonderful building trades department and program--why don't they use this house as a building to fix up? They have a great horticulture staff. Why don't they use this building as an example of what they can do? I heard all kinds of excuses. Parking is a continual problem. What have they done to address alternatives? I don't know why this property was bought the way it was. I thought there was a master plan for how to do things. What is LCC doing for their employees, administrative and teaching staff and students to encourage alternative means of transportation--mass transit, CATA, bicycling. I don't see enough of it. My property at Seymour is occupied by four people, three of whom are students. They tell me that if it wasn't for that property, some of them feel they could not go to LCC because they can't afford to have a vehicle, commute, and pay for parking. I would like to know, before this building is razed and parking constructed, what alternatives LCC has considered. If they are going to put in parking, I am concerned about lighting. We don't want light spilling into private properties. They need to be cautious about vegetative buffers. Do we want to look at another surface parking lot? I don't want to. Please work with them to look at alternatives. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for SLU-9-2000, 532 N. Seymour Ave. and 223 W. Lapeer St., Parking Lot in "DM-Y District and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, July 12, 2000, in the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. B. SLU-10-2000, 1915 W. Mt. Hope Ave., Child Care Facility Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by Mr. Joseph A. Cain, Creekwood Architecture, Inc., representing the owner, Michigan Early Elementary PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 4 Center, for a Special Land Use permit to operate a child care facility in conjunction with their school currently under construction at the site. The property is zoned "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office. This property was part of the old Drive-Away site, purchased by the adjacent church, a portion sold to another adjacent church and then a portion sold off for the elderly apartment complex. We did a master plan amendment in 1995 for it. The front two acres was rezoned for office. The Michigan Early Elementary Center has purchased the property. A school is allowed in the "A" Residential District. A special land use permit is required for the child care facility. The property is approximately 3.14 acres in size. The school wants to dedicate two classrooms to the preschool age, the day care program. The school is oriented in the "A" Residential portion of the site. Mr. Ruge asked is this a charter school? Ms. Patrick said there is a sign in front that says it is not a charter school. KATHRYN J. COLE, 1336 ORLANDO, HASLETT, MICHIGAN, REPRESENTING EARLY ELEMENTARY CENTER, ADMINISTRATOR. We have been in the Lansing area for 25 years, and have leased space all that time. Five years ago, our nonprofit private school became the second charter school in the state. We switched to charter schools at that point because many families solicited our individualized type of education. We are a small school, but the tuition was a problem for families, and waiving the tuition was a problem for us, so the charter school has been a blessing for us. After 25 years, we are building our own building, which is exciting. Many schools include a four-year-old component. We have a twenty-five-year history of having a small-child- care component, though the school will primarily serve elementary students. We are seeking a special land use permit so we can extend the building use to those children, too. The maximum number of children in the entire building will be 200 students. We are using the state licensing rules for child care for our square footage, and then upping it as we go; we are a K-5, with about 35 children in the pre-school program. Ms. Patrick said she expected to see a vacant lot, but the building is going up quickly. Did you go through the site plan review process? Ms. Cole said we have gone through all the site review process except for the child care center. We have approval to operate an elementary school there this fall, and if the child care permit is not available, we will operate an elementary school this fall. Because we were going through the process and building on the one, and never knowing what federal program for a four-year-old element might come, we wanted to start the process now. We are not dependent on the child care facility for the PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 5 success of the building; rather, it is something that we have historically done, and we would like to continue it. We were the first infant and toddler center in the State. We are the precedent case in the country for 501.c.3. status for infant-toddler care. We have a historical commitment for child care and did not want to abandon it. When we filed for the other permits, we decided to file this one at the same time. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for SLU-10-2000, 1915 W. Mt. Hope Ave., Child Care Facility meeting and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, July 12, 2000, in the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. C. Z-9-2000, 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "A" Residential and "J" Parking Districts to "F" Commercial District Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by David Behnke, representing the owner, Benjamin Behnke, for property at 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., rezoning from "A" Residential and "J" Parking to "F" Commercial. Historically, this was a commercial property; however, when it was annexed into the City, it was left "A" Residential. A heating supply company was located there formerly. Mr. Behnke has renovated the building. At present, it is occupied commercially downstairs and has one or two apartments upstairs. The property was nonconforming because the property size was not much bigger than the building. More recently, they purchased some property, lawn area, from Nic's Restaurant next door. They want to make the property conforming to the use of the building. It is a small site, 55 ft x 121 ft, about 6,655 sq ft of lot area, surrounded primarily by commercial properties. It is a small white two- story building with green awnings on the front. A tattoo business is located on the first floor. There is no structure on the property other than the one commercial building. (Mr. Ruff distributed a site plan, a topographic survey.) There are improvements for parking, asphalt right in front of the building, with no other provisions for parking. They wanted to have their commercial business, plus residential. DAVID BEHNKE, REPRESENTING BEN BEHNKE, 13337 TUCKER, DEWITT. We took a piece of property that was run down for many years. It is our first foray into commercial property in the City of Lansing. We hope to get this done quickly because we do have a buyer if it is changed to commercial. We have a viable tenant in there who is trying to buy the property, but there is a problem because of the residential designation. It does not appraise at what we need it to appraise. It has been commercial PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 6 since 1961, and we are allowed to use it as commercial, but we would like to have it conforming, so we can complete the sale. Ms. Patrick asked how many parking spaces; Mr. Behnke said 10 to 12 spaces. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for Z-9-2000, 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "A" Residential and "J" Parking Districts to "F" Commercial District and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting at 4 p.m. on Wednesday, July 12, 2000, in the Planning and Neighborhood Development 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: June 20, 2000. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, to approve the minutes of June 20, 2000, without corrections. On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: AII; Nays: None; carried; unanimous; the minutes of June 20, 2000 were APPROVED. 1. Committee of the Whole - Has not met. 2. Zoninq and Ordinance Committee, Mr. Frederick, Chair. Next meeting Wednesday, July 12, 2000, at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. 3. Urban Development Committee, Mr. Smith, Chair. a. Act-6-2000, 535 E. Cavanaugh, Vacate Utility Easement The applicant, Ty Patrick, Jr., requests that the City vacate a utility easement to permit construction of a two-car detached garage for his single-family residence. The applicant's property consists of two adjacent lots, both 46 ft wide by 104 ft deep, with 2 ft utility easements along the side and rear lot lines. The 4 ft-wide x 104 ft-long easement which is 416 sq ft in size therefore restricts the development of a detached PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 7 garage as proposed. It also restricts any additions onto the existing house in that particular area. No utilities were found in the subject easement. Neither the Public Service Department nor the Board of Water and Light has any objection to vacating the easement as described. The Ingham County Drain Commission is "in agreement with the vacation." Staff recommends approval of Act-6-2000, the vacation of the easement as requested, subject to the following: a. The applicant provide a title commitment to determine what jurisdiction holds title to the easement, the City, or the County Drain Commission; b. The applicant call Miss Dig for the location of any utilities that may be located in other easements on the property before construction. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence regarding the location, character and extent of the proposal, that no negative impact is anticipated from the vacation of this easement as described. It was moved, seconded and carried unanimously 3-0, to approve Act-6-2000, 535 E. Cavanaugh, Vacate Utility Easement, provided that the applicant provide a title commitment to the Planning Office and call Miss Dig for the location of any utilities before construction of the proposed garage and driveway. Mr. Smith made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to recommend approval of Act-6-2000, 535 E. Cavanaugh, Vacate Utility Easement, provided that the applicant provide a title commitment to the Planning Office and call Miss Dig for the location of any utilities before construction of the proposed garage and driveway. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Ms. Patrick said she supports the Committee recommendation; however, she looked at the property again this evening. Is this case subject to site plan review? Mr. Ruff said it would be internal plan review, when there would be a building permit for construction. There would not be review by multiple agencies. Ms. Patrick asked that the chain link fence in front be reviewed by Code Compliance for compliance with building codes. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 8 Mr. Ruff said a fence in the front yard can be 3 ft high unless it is visually open to code; then it could be a maximum of 4 ft high. Visually opaque fences over 3 ft high are only allowed in the side and rear yards. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge . .Ave Smith. . .Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried, Act-6-2000, 535 E. Cavanaugh, Vacate Utility Easement, provided that the applicant provide a title commitment to the Planning Office and call Miss Dig for the location of any utilities before construction of the proposed garage and driveway, was APPROVED. b. Act-7-2000, American Road, Vacation and Rededication Menard's, Inc., requests City approval of the proposed realignment of American Road to facilitate land assembly for a retail development. The subject property consists of two vacant parcels, one to the north (3.22 acres) and the south (15.97) acres of American Road as it currently exists. The proposed roadway reconfiguration along a more southerly route provides better flexibility for the location of their 161,640 sq ft store with the parking lot in front of the building and the newly relocated American Road along the south edge of the development. The applicant proposes to relocate utilities and easements as required, maintain access and service to the adjacent properties throughout the project, and cover all expenses. Staff recommends approval of Act-7-2000, vacation and realignment of a portion of American Road subject to the following conditions: a. The applicant provide a title commitment and a certified survey indicating the exact location of American Road facilities on the subject property; b. Site plan, public utility relocation plans, and road design plans be approved by all applicable agencies; and C. All agency requirements be met, and that there be no significant impact on services and circulation. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence regarding the location, character and extent of the proposal, PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 9 that the proposed realignment will help accommodate the large-scale retail development without interrupting traffic or service to adjacent properties. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously 3-0 to recommend approval of Act-7-2000, American Road, Vacation and Rededication, provided that: a. The applicant provide an acceptable title commitment for the new public right-of-way; b. City review and approval of all design and roadway plans; C. Satisfaction of all agency concerns; d. The applicant cover all costs of the roadway realignment; e. The applicant install adequate landscaping and screening between the proposed roadway and 1-96 to eliminate glare to passing motorists. Mr. Smith made a motion, seconded by Ms. Patrick, to recommend approval of Act-7-2000, American Road, Vacation and Rededication, subject to the above five conditions. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Rieske said on the first line, third paragraph of the Urban Development Committee report regarding Act-7-2000, ". . . two parcels, one to the north (3.22 acres). . ." That is a typo. When you look at the map, it looks more like 13.22 acres. Mr. Rieske put forth that correction. (EDITOR'S NOTE: The staff report stated the amount of land to be assembled is 3.22 acres to the north and 15.97 acres to the south of American Road. It should have read "Lot 7, Kahres Farm Subdivision is 3.22 acres and Lots 21-26 of Kahres Farm Subdivision No. 2 is approximately 15.97 acres, for a total of approximately 19 acres.) Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge . .Ave Smith. . .Aye Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried, Act-7-2000, American Road, Vacation and Rededication, with conditions as above was APPROVED. C. Act-8-2000, State Complex, Washtenaw and Sycamore Sts., Eliminate 24-hour public access, Redevelop into parking. The Michigan Department of Management and Budget requests that City eliminate the 24-hour, 7 day-a-week PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 10 access and use of the Sate-owned sections of Sycamore Street (between Kalamazoo and Allegan) and Washtenaw Street (between Pine and Butler). The street rights-of-way were vacated in 1990 and 1985, respectively, with the requirement that they remain open to the public. The State of Michigan proposes to eliminate the public access function of the vacated streets, to redesign its parking lots in the area, and to incorporate the area of the existing roadways in the design. Presently, the two streets divide the State parking area into three lots. Besides allowing for vehicular circulation, these streets also provide for pedestrian circulation and a measure of green space. The proposal to eliminate the 24-hour/7-day-a-week use of Sycamore, from Allegan to Kalamazoo, and Washtenaw from Pine to Butler, presented in schematic form, a. does not affect access of public services; b. has an unknown impact on circulation, with the Two- way Street Study, proposed closing of Butler, future development of the Hall of Courts, Veterans' Memorial Park and Seven Block commercial/office all being factors; C. provides additional parking in the State complex without the demolition of buildings; d. provides for paving of a parking area which is currently unpaved; e. includes minimal landscape, screening and buffering for the adjacent neighborhood. Increased landscaping and buffering, use of native Michigan trees and plant material (including trees, ornamental grasses and perennials around perimeter), use of grass pavers and integration of connecting pedestrian pathways may help minimize impact of expansive hard-surfaced lot. The applicants indicated that they will install walking pathways through the landscaped lawn area to help improve the environment for pedestrian movement. They will also explore asphalt materials in lighter shades to help alleviate heat gain from the summer sun. Staff recommends approval of Act-8-2000, State Complex, Washtenaw and Sycamore Streets, Eliminate 24-hour public PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 11 access, redevelop into parking, provided that the applicant continue to work cooperatively with the City on parking area's design, layout, circulation, and aesthetics. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence regarding the location, character and extent of the proposal, that the elimination of 24-hour public access is reasonable and can be accommodated, provided that concerns about design, aesthetics, layout and circulation can be addressed. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously 3-0 to recommend approval of Act-8-2000, Elimination of 7-day 24-hour Public Access to the State- owned sections of Sycamore Street between Kalamazoo and Allegan, and Washtenaw Street between Pine and Butler provided that a. The applicant work with the neighborhood regarding the installation of a sidewalk/walking path in the landscaped lawn area on the south side of the building; b. The applicant investigate mitigating measures to reduce storm water runoff and heat absorption and light reflection- C. The applicant work with the Planning Department and the neighborhood on design, layout, circulation, and aesthetic concerns. Mr. Smith made a motion, seconded by Ms. Patrick, to recommend approval of Act-8-2000, Elimination of 7-day 24-hour Public Access to the State-owned sections of Sycamore Street between Kalamazoo and Allegan, and Washtenaw Street between Pine and Butler with conditions as follows: 1. The applicant work with the neighborhood regarding the installation of a sidewalk/walking path in the landscaped lawn area on the south side of the building; 2. The applicant investigate mitigating measures to reduce storm water runoff and heat absorption and light reflection; 3. The applicant work with the Planning Department and the neighborhood on design, layout, circulation, and aesthetic concerns. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Ms. Patrick emphasized that a concern of the neighborhood organization was the impact that adding another 300 parking spots would have on the perimeter streets of Pine, PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 12 Butler, Kalamazoo and Washtenaw. In Committee we talked generally about circulation patterns, the most critical issue. These streets have on-street parking. If that much traffic is going to pour out of the parking lot, they may need to eliminate on-street parking, or widen the streets. Mr. Ruff said there was a preliminary meeting with Mary Ellen Perkowski and Mr. Kane concerning design. Those concerns were discussed, and we were assured that the state will continue working on the matters. We talked about loading, curb cuts, exits, and entrances; landscape and pedestrian circulation issues. Ruge . .Aye Smith. . .Ave Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried, Act-8-2000, Elimination of 7-day 24-hour Public Access to the State-owned sections of Sycamore Street between Kalamazoo and Allegan, and Washtenaw Street between Pine and Butler with conditions as follows: 1. The applicant work with the neighborhood regarding the installation of a sidewaIk/walking path in the landscaped lawn area on the south side of the building; 2. The applicant investigate mitigating measures to reduce storm water runoff and heat absorption and light reflection; 3. The applicant work with the Planning Department and the neighborhood on design, layout, circulation, and aesthetic concerns was APPROVED. d. Election of Urban Development Committee Vice Chair. Mr. Ruge noted a vacancy for position of Vice Chairman. It was moved by Mr. Ruge and seconded by Mr. Smith to nominate and elect Jan Patrick to the position of Vice Chair; carried; unanimous. Next meeting Tuesday, July 25, 2000, at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol, Department Conference Room 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from Planning Manager Mr. Ruff is working on filling the Zoning Administrator vacancy. Hopefully, testing and interviews will take place this month. Mr. Ruff and Mr. Rieske have been working on some programatic documents to try to outline an update to the City's master plan. As we get this more defined, we would PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 13 like to organize the Executive Committee in late July or early August to review preliminary layout of the process, organization and method along with the information the Executive Committee gave us previously regarding this issue. Mr. Ruff has had another inquiry regarding a Planning Board seat. D. Pending Items: Future action required. 1. Zoninp and Ordinance Committee a. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) b. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to"G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) C. Z-7-2000, 2710, 2712, 2716, 2718 and 2726 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential to"D-1" Professional Office District(Tabled May 10, 2000) d. Z-15-99(Revised and Expanded) Portions of 6820 S. Cedar Street, "F" Commercial to"J" Parking District and"J" Parking to"F" Commercial District; Also 915, 920, 926, 927, 1000 Just A Mere Avenue, 6900, 6931, 6937, 7001, 7007, 7015 Georgia Avenue and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Road from"A" Residential to"J" Parking District; also 7025 Georgia Avenue, 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the south 178 ft of 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd., 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd. from"A" Residential District to"F" Commercial District(Tabled June 14, 2000) e. SLU-8-2000, 216 W. Lapeer Street, Off-Street Surface Parking Lot in"DM- 4" District (Tabled June 14, 2000) f. Z-8-2000, 3901 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "F" Commercial to"H" Light Industrial District(Tabled June 14, 2000) 2. Urban Development Committee a. Act-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris Ave., Vacate Everett Lane 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-21-99, 1000 Block Just-A-Mere Ave., Pedestrian Overpass(Tabled January 18, 2000) d. MPA-1-99, Master Plan Amendment to the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan (Tabled January 18, 2000) 9. NEW BUSINESS - None. 10. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None. 11. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Mr. Smith said signage needs to be installed on the River Trail near Cooley Gardens behind Oldsmobile. There is an industrial area, then you are back on a City street, and there is no signage direction. Mr. Frederick noted that the Lansing Police now has a bicycle-mounted patrol on the River Trail. Regarding Cavanaugh at Sycamore Creek near the new county park, there used to be a gravel yard, now closed. Now it appears to have become a location for 35 or 40 wrecked cars, hauled in by a wrecking company. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 5, 2000 PAGE 14 A fence encloses another fence for the impound lot. There is nothing to control runoff or leakage from cars. "I question the wisdom of putting something like that in the flood plain." Are they allowed there? Mr. Ruff will check into the matter. Mr. Ruge asked about the parking lot at Michigan and Grand. Nothing is changed. Mr. Ruff will phone them and find out what is going on. Mr. Ruge said he did not recall any part of the River Trail coming out on City streets. Mr. Smith said when you come out of Moores River Park and get on the Trail, it is on the south side of the river, then it crosses on a small wooden bridge which takes you behind Oldsmobile Plant, near the BWL power plant. You are on the south part of Townsend, then you end up on the street. The path continues on the other side of the street, but unless you are really attentive, you don't see it. There is nothing to indicate the path continues here. 12. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Mr. Smith said he notices more and more homes having aprons added to their driveways. They have a two-car garage, and a driveway with two cars parked; then they add an apron beside the garage to be able to park several more cars. Do they have to get permission from the City to add to their already existing driveway? Mr. Ruff said only if they are breaking the curb. If they park in the front yard not on the improved driveway, they can be ticketed for front yard parking. There is no prohibition against putting concrete there. It's an enforcement issue that must be clarified in the code; also provisions are needed to allow reasonable parking in the front yard in some situations. Too, the two-car garage is inadequate. Mr. Frederick said on Luwanna about half way down a travel trailer for sale is parked in the front yard. Grass is getting tall around it. 13. ADJOURNMENT was at 8:25 p.m. Respectful y submitted s uff, PI nning Manager Planning Board =07052000 a:\58 APPROVED AUGUST 1, 2000 WITHOUT CORRECTIONS Draft to Clerk 07312000Approved 08012000 To Clerk 01082001 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 p.m., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall 124 West Michigan Avenue ,- Tuesday, July 18, 2000 1. OPENING SESSION: - ra The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m. by Vice Chairman Keene. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Keene, Patrick, Ruge, Smith; five members present. Absent: Nischan. Two vacant seats. B. Excused Absences - Mr. Nischan granted an excused absence. C. Introductions. James A. Ruff, Planning Manager, introduced staff present, William C. Rieske, Principal Planner; Tracy Carney, Development Specialist, Economic Development Corporation Office, and Louise H. Christian, Recording Secretary. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - Approved as presented. 3. COMMUNICATIONS A. Memorandum from Economic Development Corporation Concerning Proposed Establishment of Three Neighborhood Enterprise Zones and request for resolution of support. 4. HEARINGS 1. ACT-1 0-2000, 802-804 E. Michigan Ave., Outdoor Seating in E. Michigan Ave. Right-of-way Mr. Rieske presented the case, a request by Michael R. Moriarty, representing Moriarty's Pub, Inc., to provide customer seating within a 8.8 ft x 25 ft area on the public sidewalk in front of the restaurant at 802-804 East Michigan Avenue. Since the area for the seating encroaches into the public right-of-way, an Act 285 Review is needed. This project is similar to the 621 Club approved on East Michigan Avenue. Moriarty's is located on the southeast corner of Michigan and Hosmer in an "F-1" Commercial District, with "DM-3" Residential District to the south. The North-East Master Plan designates this area for commercial development. Mr. Smith asked the hours of operation; Mr. Moriarty said 10 a.m.-12 midnight. The furniture would be left out for the summer and removed in the winter. Ms. Keene asked, regarding the 621 Club, was a railing installed, and will there be a railing here? Mr. Rieske said the railing forms an enclosure around the seating area so that access is only from PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 2 inside the restaurant. Distances from the curb to the railing will be available for the Urban Development Committee meeting. MICHAEL MORIARTY, REPRESENTING MORIARTY'S CLUB, 802-804 EAST MICHIGAN AVENUE. I am here to answer questions. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for Act-1 0-2000, 802-804 E. Michigan Ave., Outdoor Seating in E. Michigan Ave. Right-of-way and referral to the Urban Development Committee meeting at 4 p.m. on Tuesday, July 25, 2000, in the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room, 316 N. Capitol Avenue. Mr. Smith said he would be unable to attend this meeting; likewise, Ms. Keene and Mr. Ruge. The Urban Development Committee meeting date was changed to 6 p.m. on August 1, prior to the first August meeting. Ms. Patrick will be away on August 1, 2000 and so unable to attend. 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each) BEVERLY MILLER, NORTH LANSING. Two projects affecting North Lansing are coming before the Planning Board. One is the church on the corner of Cedar and East Grand River, the old Bethlehem Temple Church. They want to bring more nightlife to North Lansing. The Spiral Bar is already in the neighborhood, and there is objection to it. I am concerned about a project that will bother people in the surrounding neighborhood. There is not too much objection from the neighborhood, but if there is any intention of serving alcohol, North Lansing is saturated with alcohol businesses again. We object to any more alcohol in that one area in North Lansing. My second concern is the old Pussycat Theater, Class A nonconforming status. Originally, the building was grandfathered, because it was there before 1983. He has already changed the structure of the building. He has built out a patio and used up all the land. There is no parking. I believe he owns the property adjacent to it which has a house. I think he wants to tear down the house and make that the parking lot. Across the street and one house down is a Jehovah's Witnesses church. Across the road is Otto School. Since this is a new project and less than 35 percent will be adult material, what I need to know is what percentage of it can he use and still be in compliance with the church and school, which are within 300 ft. The ordinance says no adult business within 300 ft of a church or a school. The wording for the adult business is different from the wording for the liquor license. For the adult business, the ordinance says it cannot be located within 300 ft of residentially used or zoned area. don't know why it is not done that way for a liquor license. When the bar was put in, it was necessary only to get a liquor license from the Liquor Control PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 3 Commission; Planning Board approval was not required. The Planning Board does have control over the adult business. I am relying on you not to allow an adult business in next to a church and school. Do the right thing. The church project does not sound like a bad idea if it does not have alcohol. Mr. Frederick asked who Ms. Miller represented; she said she is a member of the North Lansing Community Association but she does not represent them. "My neighborhood had petitions." The Spiral Bar was built and everything was done before anyone in the neighborhood was consulted. Mr. Frederick said the Planning Board had no authority in that case, only the Liquor Control Commission. 6. RECESS - Mr. Frederick explained that the last Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting did not have a quorum. He asked for the Board's indulgence to allow a meeting during the recess. Mr. Ruge volunteered as a Zoning and Ordinance Committee member. The Zoning and Ordinance Committee convened with Mr. Frederick acting as Chairman and Ms. Keene and Mr. Ruge as members. Zoning and Ordinance Committee Meetinq 1. NCU-7-2000, 1145 Farrand Street, Class A Nonconforming Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request for Class A nonconforming status for a single-family residence in the "F" Commercial District. This request is being sought as a condition of approval of BZA 3548.99 granted to allow the building setbacks and parking requirements necessary for approval of a lot split. On this one piece of property, there is a commercial building and a single-family home. The applicant wants to sell the single-family residence for homeowner occupancy. The only way to do this is through a lot split through a Board of Zoning Appeals variance, and further to give the residential building mortgageable standing. As a requirement of approval, the Board of Zoning Appeals required the applicant to seek Class A Nonconforming status. This is a foursquare home. The "F" Commercial District only permits residential uses associated with commercial use on the same lot. This needs to be changed, and the NCU is one way of doing that. This lot would have enough space for two required off-street parking spaces. The lot at 1208- 10 East Grand River contains the commercial structure with a storage shed. There is also residential above the commercial building. The petition was well-received at the Board of Zoning Appeals. Not finding any negative impact, staff recommends approval of Class A status to be able to maintain the structure and get a mortgage. Mr. Ruge said we just had another one of these in the same neighborhood on Grand River. Why don't we rezone this residential? PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 4 We would want to prevent erosion of commercial uses into the neighborhood. Mr. Ruff said the property went through the variances with commercial zoning and received the variances based on the commercial zoning. Mr. Ruge asked if it is possible with this petition to deny the NCU and approve a zoning change. Mr. Ruff said a different application would have to be made. Mr. Ruge said anyone wanting any kind of commercial use could buy the building. Mr. Ruff said the building would have to be converted by building code and meet certain requirements. Ms. Keene said they have been counseled by staff to apply for the NCU rather than a rezoning. If they have filed and paid the filing fee, the Board cannot deny the request, direct a different action, and have them start over again. We should approve it as supported by staff with the recommendation that at some point they apply for a rezoning. "I don't see holding them up at this point when they have been counseled by staff. I will be supporting the recommendation." Mr. Ruge said he did not see anybody applying for rezoning in the future. It is too expensive. Mr. Ruge would like to see buffering between the two parcels if this is approved. Mr. LaMacchia said there is not room for a fence or for plantings. Mr. Frederick said it is not in compliance no matter what we do. This is an old part of town. Mr. Ruff said both commercial building and residence were put in there before there was much use of automobiles. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve NCU-7-2000, 1145 Farrand St., Class A in "F" Commercial District. Voice vote; Ayes: 2; Nays: 1; motion carried 2-1. 2. SLU-9-2000, 532 N. Seymour Ave.; 223 W. Lapeer St., Parking Lot in "DM-3" District Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by Lansing Community College for a Special Land Use permit for property at 223 W. Lapeer - 532 N. Seymour St., to construct a parking lot in the "DM-3" Residential District contiguous with parking areas currently existing on the south and east sides of this property. The proposal includes the construction of 20 parking spaces for LCC faculty and staff and would require razing or removing a four-unit residential structure built ca. 1870s. This is not a matter of rezoning. The Master Plan recommends this area for office use, and even though parking is a support mechanism for office, staff hesitates supporting this recommendation due to the loss of the structure which is significant to the corner. This item was tabled pending additional information regarding parking alternatives and requirements. We received information that this would help resolve a portion of their parking needs. We were looking for a plan that would resolve the parking issue before we went further. The Board previously considered a Special Land PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 5 Use to add parking just south of this on a vacant property on which the structure was fire-damaged and subsequently torn down. Ron Roush met with Mr. Berridge, the transportation engineer, who offered to relocate some existing parkers to permitted parking in adjacent City ramps. The City is trying to accommodate them for additional parking. Alternatives are available, but LCC wants parking nearby and contiguous. LCC is currently going through a facilities plan; they also anticipate updating their parking study to know exactly how many spaces they need. Pending that information, staff recommends tabling this item. Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to table SLU-9-2000, 532 Seymour Ave.; 223 W. Lapeer Street, Parking Lot in "DM-3" District. Item was TABLED. 3. SLU-10-2000, 1915 W. Mt. Hope Ave., Child Care Facility Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by Michigan Early Elementary Center for a Special Land Use permit to operate a child care facility at 1915 W. Mt. Hope Avenue. They are building a 13,765 sq ft elementary school on a 3.14 acre site. The school is to consist of classrooms, offices, library, kitchen, and a multi-purpose room. Within the school, there will be two 600 sq. ft. rooms designated for preschool age children. There will also be 5,000 sq ft of play area to serve both child care facility and school. The property is zoned both "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office District. The "A" Residential zoning district allows the child care facility as well as the school. They want to be able to continue the child care portion of their operation even though their primary emphasis is the school. Staff recommended approval based on the nine criteria for special land use permits. There were no conflicts with adjacent land uses or the Master Plan or the zoning ordinance. Staff recommends approval. Mr. Ruff checked the roof trusses, and they are standard construction elements. Based on the analysis of the Special Land Use permit, it does meet all nine criteria: 1. is harmonious with the character of adjacent property and surrounding uses; 2. will not change the essential character of the surrounding properties; 3. will not interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent properties; 4. represents an improvement to the use and character of the property; 5. will not be hazardous to adjacent properties; 6. will be adequately served by public services and utilities; PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 6 7. will not place any demand on public services and facilities in excess of current capacities; 8. is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and objective of the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan; 9. does meet the dimensional requirements of the district in which the property is located. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge, to approve SLU-10-2000, 1915 W. Mt. Hope Ave., Child Care Facility. Voice Vote: Ayes: 3; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously. 4. Z-9-2000, 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "A" Residential and "J" Parking Districts to "F" Commercial District Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by David Behnke to rezone the property located at 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. from "A" Residential and "J" Parking Districts to "F" Commercial District. It is a nonconforming commercial building across from Shaheen Auto Sales. A commercial use has been located at this property since 1961. The "A" Residential zoning designation is intended for single family uses. Therefore, the use is nonconforming with the current zoning designation. Rezoning the property to "F" Commercial would make the use conforming and allow the owner to obtain financing and insurance. Recently some property from the adjacent restaurant was added for parking and access. Rezoning the subject property from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial would be compatible with surrounding land uses. Commercial use along this section of S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. would be consistent with the intent of the comprehensive plan. It should not adversely affect surrounding land uses. There was a comment about a house adjacent to the rear of this property. We could require additional buffering of this commercial property during landscape plan review. Mr. Ruge asked if a storm water detention basin will be located on the property. Mr. Ruff said some sort of storm water detention will be required. Mr. Ruff said the property was used commercially as a heating company prior to annexation into the City. Upstairs was an apartment. The Behnkes acquired and renovated it. It looks much better than it did five years ago. Mr. Frederick said that if City Council were to follow our recommendation and rezone this, it would be in an established commercial strip along Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. and help protect the residential neighborhood behind it. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 7 Mr. Smith asked about parking on the north side of the building adjacent to the driveway from the restaurant. Would there would be a conflict between restaurant patrons exiting on the driveway and people turning in from the street? Most people enter on the north side of Nic's restaurant and exit on the south. Mr. Ruff said the small size of this property would indicate an insignificant amount of traffic. There should be no conflicts. Mr. Frederick asked if landscape and buffering would be required for the back of the parking lot. Mr. Ruff said it is abutting commercially zoned land, with residential zoning to the rear. Landscape and buffering could be highly recommended. Staff recommends approval of this request to rezone the property located at 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. From "A" Residential to "F" Commercial District. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge to approve Z-9-2000, 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "A" Residential and "J" Parking Districts to "F" Commercial District; Ayes 3; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously 3-0. For the record, it was noted that the Zoning and Ordinance Committee highly recommends that there be landscaping and buffering between the residential use and the parking lot. 5. Z-4-98, 201 E. Grand River, "F-1" Commercial an "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District Mr. Ruff said the person filing this application, Mr. Mark Kerrins, no longer owns the property and has requested withdrawal of the request. Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to accept the withdrawal of Z-4-98, 201 E. Grand River, "F-1" Commercial an "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District; Voice Vote; Ayes: 3; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried 3-0. 6. SLU-8-2000, 216 W. Lapeer Street, Off-Street Surface Parking Lot in "DM-4" District Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by John T. Foster, representing Mourer-Foster Inc., for a Special Land Use permit to construct an off-street surface parking lot at 216 W. Lapeer Street in the "DM-4" Residential District. The request was amended (5/30/2000) to propose a lot designed to accommodate approximately 8 spaces. The lot is intended to be used for employees of Mourer-Foster Inc., located at 615 N. Capitol Avenue. This is not a matter of rezoning. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 8 Mr. Foster agreed with the alternative proposal presented by staff, with the exception that he wanted to use asphalt instead of brick for the parking area. His letter also stated that he wanted to make it a one-way situation. If you look at the alternate plan, if it is one way, he would only lose one space in his existing parking lot, plus another space plus lose the residential spaces. Mr. Ruff does not recommend that "but that the plan be as suggested by staff." Trying to keep it as small as possible and with as much open space as possible back there is the important thing. Having access off Lapeer is not the answer either; we are trying to help maximize parking spaces. That eliminates parking spaces rather than maximizes them. The staff alternative was recommended at the previous Zoning and Ordinance Committee; Mr. Foster did not indicate if he was receptive to the alternative plan. His associate responded the following week saying they concurred with the alternate plan with two exceptions. The fourth condition that the parking lot surface include brick pavers . . . . he said asphalt is just as easy to restore as brick pavers, and maybe easier because of elimination of hand labor. The other part was that he preferred to not lose two spaces in his existing lot to get access in and out of that back paved area, and he preferred to have access one way off Lapeer into the site and out into his parking lot and only lose one space in the existing parking lot. What that truly does in numbers is instead of getting a net gain of six spaces back here after losing two here plus two here for residential use because it is still zoned residentially and you can't use it for office and you can't use it for storage. He needs some residential parking, too. We thought this would be the most attractive plan. He wanted to keep this circulation through. It does not add up. He wants to get more parking. We would prefer them not having office access off Lapeer. Ms. Keene said we need to reject his request. He is making a counter- offer. He does not like the alternative plan. We can't approve it if it's not something agreeable to him. Mr. Ruff said the Board can place conditions as relevant on a special land use. He can not do the improvements and not use the land unless he wants to adhere to the conditions, or he could return to the Board later and try to revise it. Mr. Frederick said Mr. Foster was informed that the Board was going to take this up, and he has no problem with voting to deny, or voting to table and giving him another chance. Mr. Ruge said a third alternative would be approval of the staff alternative plan the way we feel it should be. That way it would be out of our hands. Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to approve the staff alternative for SLU-8-2000, 216 W. Lapeer Street, Off-Street Surface Parking Lot in "DM-4" District with the nine recommendations in the staff report; Voice vote; Ayes: 3; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried 3-0. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 9 Mr. Ruge asked about the storm water detention basin depicted on the map. Mr. Ruff said it has not as yet been engineered. Mr. Frederick reported that completed the business of the Committee; the Zoning and Ordinance Committee adjourned. A brief recess followed. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: July 5, 2000 Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, to approve the minutes of July 5, 2000, without corrections. On a Voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; carried unanimous; the minutes of July 5, 2000, were APPROVED. Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, to resolve to the Committee of the Whole; unanimous; carried. Mr. Frederick assumed the gavel. The Committee considered a resolution of support for establishment of three neighborhood enterprise zones presented by Tracy Carney of the Economic Development Corporation. The Economic Development Corporation wishes to create three new Neighborhood Enterprise Zones in the central downtown area. All three areas were identified by the Blue Ribbon Revitalization Housing Subcommittee and subsequently included in the overall recommendations from that group. Creating these zones in the downtown will encourage development of 40 loft housing units. We are projecting 80 people in the lofts, not including the Triangle. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, to accept as written the Resolution following the memo dated July 6, 2000 to Chairman Nischan and Vice Chairman Keene from Tracy Carney. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTION was as follows. On a Voice vote, there were: Ayes: All, Nays: 0, carried; unanimous; Resolution Approving Proposed Neighborhood Enterprise Zones was recommended to be APPROVED. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith to rise ; unanimous; carried; the Committee of the Whole arose. Mr. Frederick passed the gavel to Ms. Keene. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole, Mr. Frederick, Chair. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 10 a. Resolution of Support for Establishment of Three Neighborhood Enterprise Zones The Committee of the Whole voted unanimously to accept the resolution and the memo dated July 6, 2000 from the Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development sent to Chairman Nischan and Vice Chairman Keene and members of the Planning Board by Tracy Carney. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge, to adopt the resolution of support of the Economic Development Corporation for the Proposed Establishment of three Neighborhood Enterprise Zones PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. On a Voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous; the resolution of support of the Economic Development Corporation for the Proposed Establishment of three Neighborhood Enterprise Zones was APPROVED. 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee - Mr. Frederick, Chair. a . NCU-7-2000, 1145 Farrand Street, Class A Nonconforming This is a request for Class A nonconforming status for a single family residence in the "F" Commercial District. This request is being sought as a condition of approval of BZA 3548.99 granted to allow the building setbacks and parking requirements necessary for approval of a lot split. On this one piece of property, there is a commercial building and a single- family home. The applicant wants to sell the single-family residence for homeowner occupancy. The only way to do this is through a lot split through a Board of Zoning Appeals variance, and further to give the residential building mortgageable standing. As a requirement of approval, the Board of Zoning Appeals required the applicant to seek Class A Nonconforming status. This is a foursquare home. The "F" Commercial District only permits residential uses associated with commercial use on the same lot. This needs to be changed, and the NCU is one way of doing that. This lot would have enough space for two off-street parking spaces required. The lot at 1208-10 East Grand River contains the commercial structure with a storage shed. There is also residential above the commercial building. Not finding any negative impact, staff recommends approval. The petition was well-received at the Board of Zoning Appeals. Staff recommends approval of Class PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 11 A status to be able to maintain the structure and get a mortgage. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried 2-1 to recommend approval of NCU-7-2000, 1145 Farrand St., Class A in "F" Commercial District. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to approve NCU-7-2000, 1145 Farrand St., Class A in "F" Commercial District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Ruge said for the sake of the City, this should be rezoned and not given a nonconforming use. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Ruge . . Nay Smith. . .Aye Keene. . . Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 1; carried; NCU-7-2000, 1145 Farrand St., Class A in "F" Commercial District was APPROVED. a. SLU-9-2000, 532 N. Seymour Ave.; 223 W. Lapeer St., Parking Lot in "DM-3" District In Committee, this item was TABLED. b. SLU-10-2000, 1915 W. Mt. Hope Ave., Child Care Facility The applicant is requesting a Special Land Use permit to operate a child care facility at 1915 W. Mt. Hope Avenue. The Michigan Early Elementary Center is building a 13,765 sq ft elementary school on a 3.14 acre site. The school is to consist of classrooms, offices, library, kitchen, and a multi-purpose room. Within the school, there will be two 600 sq ft rooms designated for preschool age children. There will also be 5,000 sq ft of play area to serve both child care facility and school. The property is zoned "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office District. The "A" Residential zoning district allows the child care facility as well as the school. They want to be able to continue the child care portion of their operation even though their primary emphasis is the school. Staff recommended approval based on the nine criteria for special land use permits. There were no conflicts with adjacent land uses or the Master Plan or the zoning ordinance. Staff PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 12 recommends approval. Mr. Ruff checked the roof trusses, and they are standard construction elements. Based on the analysis of the Special Land Use permit, it does meet all nine criteria: 1. is harmonious with the character of adjacent property and surrounding uses; 2. will not change the essential character of the surrounding properties; 3. will not interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent properties; 4. represents an improvement to the use and character of the property; 5. will not be hazardous to adjacent properties; 6. will be adequately served by public services and utilities, 7. will not place any demand on public services and facilities in excess of current capacities; 8. is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and objective of the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan; 9. does meet the dimensional requirements of the district in which the property is located. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously 3-0 to approve SLU-10-2000, 1915 W. Mt. Hope Ave., Child Care Facility. The Committee made corrections to the report. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge, based on based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve SLU-10-2000, 1915 W. Mt. Hope Ave., Child Care Facility. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge . . Ave Smith. . .Aye Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..Aye Keene. . . Aye On a voice vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried; SLU-10-2000, 1915 W. Mt. Hope Ave., Child Care Facility was APPROVED. C. Z-4-98, 201 E. Grand River, "F-1" Commercial an "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 13 This item had been tabled in the Zoning and Ordinance Committee for a considerable period of time. The applicant submitted a letter requesting withdrawal. In Committee, the request for withdrawal was unanimously accepted. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge, to accept withdrawal of Z-4-98, 201 E. Grand River, "F-1" Commercial an "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. On a Voice vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous; Z-4-98, 201 E. Grand River, "F-1" Commercial an "H" Light Industrial Districts to "G-1" Business District was WITHDRAWN. d. Z-9-2000, 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "A" Residential and "J" Parking Districts to "F" Commercial District The applicant is proposing to rezone the property located at 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. from "A" Residential and "J" Parking Districts to "F" Commercial District. It is a nonconforming commercial building across from Shaheen Auto Sales. A commercial use has been located at this property since 1961. The "A" Residential zoning designation is intended for single family uses. Therefore, the use is nonconforming with the current zoning designation. Rezoning the property to "F" Commercial would make the use conforming and allow the owner to obtain financing and insurance. Recently some property from the adjacent restaurant was added for parking and access. Rezoning the property from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial would be compatible with surrounding land uses. Commercial use along this section of S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. would be consistent with the intent of the comprehensive plan. It should not adversely affect surrounding land uses. There was a comment about a house adjacent to the rear of this property. We could require additional buffering of this commercial property during landscape plan review. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 14 Mr. Frederick asked if landscape and buffering would be required for the back of the parking lot. Mr. Ruff said it abuts commercially zoned land, with residential use to the rear. Landscape and buffering could be highly recommended. The Committee concurred with the staff recommendation to approve rezoning the property located at 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. From "A" Residential to "F" Commercial District. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously 3-0 to approve Z-9-2000, 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "A" Residential and "J" Parking Districts to "F" Commercial District. For the record, it was noted that the Zoning and Ordinance Committee highly recommends that landscaping and buffering be placed between the residential use and the parking lot. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve Z-9-2000, 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "A" Residential and "J" Parking Districts to "F" Commercial District. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. A friendly amendment was offered that landscaping and buffering be considered for the entire property. Mr. Frederick and Mr. Ruge accepted the friendly amendment. Ruge . . Aye Smith. . .Ave Frederick . . Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Keene. . . Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; unanimous; carried, Z-9-2000, 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "A" Residential and "J" Parking Districts to "F" Commercial District was approved; however, approval of a rezoning requires a minimum of six affirmative votes; therefore, this item will be forwarded to the Mayor and City Council with NO RECOMMENDATION. An explanation of the vote will accompany the letter. The Zoning and Ordinance Committee highly recommends that landscaping and buffering be placed between the residential use and the parking lot. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 15 e. SLU-8-2000, 216 W. Lapeer Street, Off-Street Surface Parking Lot in "DM-4" District This is a request by John T. Foster, representing Mourer- Foster Inc., for a Special Land Use permit to construct an off- street surface parking lot at 216 W. Lapeer Street in the "DM-4" Residential District. The request was amended (5/30/2000) to propose a lot designed to accommodate approximately 8 spaces. The lot is intended to be used for employees of Mourer-Foster Inc., located at 615 N. Capitol Avenue. This is not a matter of rezoning. The Committee voted unanimously 3-0 to approve the alternative plan presented by staff. Mr. Foster agreed with the alternative proposal presented by staff, except that he wanted asphalt instead of brick for the parking area and a one-way situation. The staff alternative was recommended at the previous Zoning and Ordinance Committee; Mr. Foster did not indicate if he was receptive to the alternative plan. His associate responded the following week saying they concurred with the alternate plan with two exceptions. They preferred asphalt to brick pavers, and secondly, he preferred to not lose two spaces in his existing lot to get access in and out of that back paved area, and he preferred to have access one way off Lapeer into the site and out into his parking lot and only lose one space in the existing parking lot. What that truly does in numbers is instead of getting a net gain of six spaces, he loses two plus two for residential use because it is still zoned residentially and you can't use it for office and you can't use it for storage. We would prefer them not having office access off Lapeer. The Committee considered voting to deny, voting to table, and voting to approve the staff alternative. In Committee, it was moved, seconded and carried unanimously 3-0 to approve the staff alternative with the nine conditions listed in the staff report for SLU-8-2000, 216 W. Lapeer Street, Off-Street Surface Parking Lot in "DM-4" District. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge, based on testimony, evidence, and the staff report, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part thereof, to approve the staff alternative with the nine conditions listed in the staff report for SLU-8-2000, 216 W. Lapeer Street, Off-Street Surface Parking Lot in "DM4" District. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 16 PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Frederick said the original plan submitted by the applicant appeared to be simply a layout of the parking that would fit with the building. Since we rejected that plan and accepted the staff alternative, Mr. Frederick noted that staff stated that the parking lot would be paved with a catch basin. "I don't know if the applicant understood when he submitted his first plan that it was going to be an issue." The applicant should be informed that potential runoff from parked cars needs to be controlled and not allowed to enter storm sewers and ultimately the Grand River. Mr. Ruff said site plan review is required. Public Service Department would review storm water runoff. Mr. Smith wanted clarification that if any condition is not met, the applicant cannot proceed? Mr. Ruff said the approved site plan must meet all conditions; then he can proceed with construction, and then park on the lot. Right now he is parking, and we are taking corrective action. Mr. Smith said "My inclination is to say no to this individual because in fact he apparently has been violating this all along and parking there illegally. . . . He wants eight extra spots but he in effect would have to give up two in the adjacent area so his net gain would be about six parking spots. . . . As long as these recommendations will have to be met, I would be inclined to accept this recommendation. . . ." Mr. Ruff observed that Ms. Love, Code Compliance Manager, is intent on making sure that conditions are carried out. Smith. . .Aye Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Ruge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Keene. . . Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried, unanimous; SLU-8-2000, 216 W. Lapeer Street, Off-Street Surface Parking Lot in "DM-4" District, staff alternative and with nine conditions, was APPROVED. The nine conditions are as follows: 1. The parking lot development be restricted to the rear of the lot and a lawn area be reserved immediately behind the house for a residential use. 2. The required landscape screening and buffering include 6-ft cedars, arborvitaes and/or hemlocks and that the mulch be of wood material, not gravel. 3. The ingress/egress be accessed from the adjacent parking lot to the east and that the existing brick wall be retained as much as possible except where necessary to access the parking lot. 4. The parking lot surface area include brick pavers or other materials (i.e., crushed limestone, pea stone) that would allow future restoration of the rear yard for residential purposes if this area of the property is no longer needed for parking. 5. The parking lot be monitored and managed for loitering or inappropriate activity, especially until the house is rehabilitated or occupied. 6. The house be rehabilitated for single-family residential use. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 17 (a) The applicant may wish to donate the house to a nonprofit to rehabilitate, or (b) seek funding assistance from the City's Development Office and historic preservation funds to rehabilitate the house for sale or lease (i.e. to Mourer-Foster staff, LCC or law students) (c) The exterior design and scale of the building be preserved. (If storage is a need, storage space may be available at other nearby office buildings.) 7. A minimum of two parking spaces be reserved along the west drive of the house for residential purposes. 8. The site plan be reviewed administratively by all necessary agencies through the Site Plan Review process. 9. Alternative options to expanding parking be investigated by the applicant to address any existing and future growth needs: (a) public parking is located within three blocks (b) cooperative parking (i.e., church building at the corner of Seymour and Saginaw) (c) use of mass transit and tax credits. Next meeting Wednesday, August 9, 2000, at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room C 3. Urban Development Committeee - Mr. Smith, Chair. Next meeting Wednesday, August 1, 2000, preceding the regular Planning Board meeting. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from Planning Manager Mr. Ruff will begin interviewing for the Zoning Administrator position within the next few weeks. The nomination of Mr. Charles L. Moore to the Planning Board appeared on the City Council Agenda on Monday, July 17, 2000. Mr. Frederick is being reappointed, as is Mr. Nischan. All items reported to Mr. Ruff for Code Compliance at the last meeting have been referred to the appropriate individuals. We are looking at a 425 agreement with Meridian Township, and working with GM and Delta Township on development of the Platinum Project for a new plant in Delta Township. Our next Planning Board meeting will be video taped. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 18 D. Pending Items: Future action required. 1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) b. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to"G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) C. Z-7-2000, 2710, 2712, 2716, 2718 and 2726 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential to"D-1" Professional Office District(Tabled May 10, 2000) d. Z-15-99 (Revised and Expanded) Portions of 6820 S. Cedar Street, "F" Commercial to"J" Parking District and"J" Parking to"F" Commercial District; Also 915, 920, 926, 927, 1000 Just A Mere Avenue, 6900, 6931, 6937, 7001, 7007, 7015 Georgia Avenue and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Road from"A" Residential to"J" Parking District; also 7025 Georgia Avenue, 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the south 178 ft of 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd., 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd. from"A" Residential District to"F" Commercial District(Tabled June 14, 2000) e. Z-8-2000, 3901 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "F" Commercial to"H" Light Industrial District(Tabled June 14, 2000) 2. Urban Development Committee a. Act-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris Ave., Vacate Everett Lane 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-21-99, 1000 Block Just-A-Mere Ave., Pedestrian Overpass(Tabled January 18, 2000) d. MPA-1-99, Master Plan Amendment to the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan (Tabled January 18, 2000) e. MPA-2-2000, Amendment to the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan, S. Washington and W. Willard (Tabled June 26, 2000) f. Act-4-2000, W. Willard west of S. Washington, Vacate ROW(Tabled June 26, 2000) g. Act-9-2000, 201 E. Grand River Ave., Projecting Sign over ROW. Tabled June 27, 2000) 9. NEW BUSINESS - None. 10. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None. 11. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Ms. Patrick who will be out of town for the August 1 meeting requested and was granted an excused absence. Mr. Ruge asked if the state of Michigan will do storm water detention at the Library of Michigan parking lot? Mr. Ruff said they have committed to cooperation regarding storm water detention. Mr. Ruge asked about Bethlehem Temple moving to the South Baptist's former location. South had to have a parking lot, so they took out four or five houses. Now they have moved, but the houses are gone, replaced with a parking lot. We have to decide these things on a land use issue, not on how badly a parking lot is needed right now, because next year the church could be gone. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 18, 2000 PAGE 19 Mr. Smith remarked on the lack of bike racks downtown. Not having them is inconvenient. Bike racks are mentioned in the Central Lansing Downtown Plan. Mr. Frederick said bike racks were not mentioned in the Enterprise Zones presentation we had tonight. We should remind the EDC. Mr. Frederick said the wrecked cars are still at Cavanaugh at the tracks. 12. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS 13. ADJOURNMENT was at 9:37 p.m. Respectful) submitted James A. Ruff Pla ning Manager Planning Board mn07182000 a:158 ay .. SLU-10-2000 1915 W. Mt. Hope Special Land Use for a Child Care Facility GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Mr. Joseph A. Cain Creekwood Architecture, Inc. 1111 Creekwood Trail Burton, MI 48509 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Representing Owner PROPERTY OWNER: Michigan Early Elementary Center 727 N. Jenison Lansing, MI 48915 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting a Special Land Use (SLU) to operate a child care facility at 1915 W. Mt. Hope. EXISTING LAND USE: A school is currently under construction at the site. EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 361.81' x 300' = 108,543 sqft. (3.14 acres) - rectangular SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Country club, office, & residential S: Multi-Family residential E: Multi-Family residential W: Church SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office S: "DM-1" Residential E: "DM-1" Residential W: "A" Residential and "DM-3" Residential MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: MPA-1-95 amended the land use designation of this property to community facility and office. Page 1 SLU-10-2000 1915 W. Mt. Hope Special Land Use for a Child Care Facility SPECIFIC INFORMATION DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to build a 13,765 sqft. elementary school on a 3.14 acre site. The school consists of class rooms, offices, library, kitchen and a multi-purpose room. Within the school there will be two 600 sgft. rooms designated for preschool age children. AGENCY RESPONSES Assessor: No Response Received Building Safety: This project is currently being reviewed by the site plan review staff. A building permit is not required for public and private schools, unless the school board authorizes jurisdiction by the local municipality. It is suggested that you have the plans reviewed by the building safety office to ensure compliance with the applicable codes. If a day care facility is involved a building permit will be required for the day care portion. City Attorney: No Response Received Code Compliance: Please notify the Code Compliance Office of any conditions & requirements should this petition be approved. Consumers Energy: No Response Received Fire Marshal: No Response Received Colonial Village Neigh. Asso. : No Response Received Lansing Police Dept.: No Response Received Public Services: No Response Received Transportation: No Response Received Page 2 SLU-10-2000 1915 W. Mt. Hope Special Land Use for a Child Care Facility APPLICANTS PROPOSAL The applicant is proposing to build a 13,765 sqft. elementary school on a 3.14 acre site. Two rooms are designated for preschool age children. There will also be 5,000 sqft of play area to serve both child care facility and school. 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? The proposed Michigan Early Elementary Center is currently under construction. The site plan has been approved by the Planning Office. This development is harmonious with the character of adjacent properties. 2. Will the proposed special land use change the essential character of the surrounding area? Previously, the property was a vacant lot used as a auto drive-a-way lot for new cars. This development will improve the character of this property. Michigan Early Elementary Center's building is 13,765 square feet in size. Landscaping will be planted through out this development providing adequate screening and buffering. 3. Will the proposed special land use interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent property? There is no anticipated impact on the general enjoyment of adjacent properties. 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? Michigan Early Elementary Center represents an improvement to the property, which was previously vacant. Page 3 SLU-10-2000 1915 W. Mt. Hope Special Land Use for a Child Care Facility 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? The child care facility component of Michigan Early Elementary Center does not pose any hazards to adjacent properties. The use will not generate any excessive traffic, additional noise, smoke, odor, fumes, or glare that will impact businesses or residents in the area. 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 "A" Residential and "D-1" Professional Office. A child care facility is permitted in the "A" Residential District with a Special Land Use permit. Section 1248.04 of the Zoning Code states that a child care facility shall be permitted if it meets the following conditions: 1. The facility provides and maintains on the lot not less than 2,500 square feet of outdoor play area. (5,000 sqft of play area is proposed) 2. For each child in the facility in excess of thirty-three children, the facility shall provide and maintain seventy-five additional square feet of outdoor play area. (Proposed play area would permit up to 65 children) 3. Outdoor play space shall be fenced. 4. One sign shall be permitted, which shall not be larger than six square feet. Page 4 SLU-10-2000 1915 W. Mt. Hope Special Land Use for a Child Care Facility MPA-1-95 amended the land use designation of this property to community facility and office. Michigan Early Elementary Center primary function is a school and is considered a community facility. Land used for community facilities should be dispersed in and around residential areas. 9. Will the proposed special land use meet the dimensional requirements of the district in which the property is located? The proposed school/child care facility meets all dimensional requirements in the "A" Residential District. SUMMARY Based on the analysis of the Special Land Use permit, it does meet all nine criteria. The proposed Special Land Use is not 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. 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 does not meet the dimensional requirements of the district in which the property is located. Page 5 SLU-10-2000 1915 W. Mt. Hope Special Land Use for a Child Care Facility RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of SLU-10-2000 a request to operate a child care facility at 1915 W. Mt. Hope. Respectfully Submitted, Sam Quon Senior Planner Page 6 KCAL DESCRIPTION $R8 ..O..M�—a.sn.S.Y�,Iwl,.�r1.wA.,��..-.>n m:•.� ... IRIf CENCPfTC OWYaIIAY UPdEiEC UET111.u ^ urtsvww cw,wu �p� t r i ..wnlwn.c �� d 1gJ LOCATTON YAP y A w.a �` �.m—L yCY---_ Yu — �1.�— — •H PE AVENUE a���j.J7 s...—.sue✓ ,�ryy'i33 V � u � .IPIACIM 0 r � I ERI4 IA'RdD g LEGEND e I �' m I® 6 z<z • �� i ' ___ e�u�u v 1 { 1 1 1 I '--- ---- tDloHGt muca Z �a R.PIBT nrtxx � KM �Y-..�e" Pla�rrrerr Q Er�me.�a..me uE w�iv p�oan>♦u •~� SITE PLAN T INDE X �t: Pn.re.eplua _ ` E pZ:K Fsi i BEFORE YOU pIIG ..o.....m ti.• ._e..,...a - . .��.•. e,u CNl 4155 DIG 3 RHI 157.99 OF DRIVE W/TAPPERED - -ASPHALT wv Sf. I19.74 SIDEWALK MAX.SLOPE I IN 20 S 892434"£2644.26' wiv co-weiio.ej C1`SCcn—ON- - - - - - - - OF DRIVE 5kW-ouT t REMOVE —�LY ROAO - - - - - - - - - G NG.H TO BE b* EXI5T.GO 6 ITTER, TIE NEW SAN LINE TO I EXIST.SAN.LINE PER R>NGETE ■ REPLACE I NEW CX.SAN. k STOW 4.1i. —CS Os CS GONG.GUTTER PAN fX-JO-CCAA MAIXIV SCRCR LOCAL REQUIRMENTS RMI 151.66 EI 25' SE AI -H. —a-- �—CS � 251' [INV.NIY. 150.01 TH15 SHEET _CX-P NCRPgF(nP.) — ffx-O.H.k_ /ex-s'CA SWAM c c c c c LCc c c EX-COVORf7E SVENALK. zQ 58924 I"EJ61.87 ) �Y a�w ry6Q PROPOSED 516N I BENCHMARK 0 W r-o- I z< HDA.T. SIGN BY OTHERS HNC If!SOUR!CAC PONCR PO(E ail°)�I 3 a C1 MATCH 'Q (SIZE16N GODFI ON ASPHALF^VIN, _ ELEVARQV=IS(.95 WUT o�Id s ^1 i— GB. GONG.SIDEriAl_K ' Z FFQ I n �► NOT ENTER- LANDSCAPE z I6N ,� + 1` < n �I N O oQa F� � �° Z (F ASPHALT :jv PAINTED r PAV IN6� - STRIPING ACCESSIBLE M SPACE I L. O (ao BF.PARK NG O ?r 516NA&F Fop I w 20' 24' 20' 20' 24' I 24' PLAYGRDUFID L 241.44b'(GUI SEA 50' (S�TB + G.B. 1 < J o SPACES I 1 ILAr L LL SPACES la /PROPOSED n sPAces ISLANDo N I /MICHI6AN EARLY o 1 a = z ELEMENTARY CENTER n 46 U 3,1b5 SO.FT.% x— —x—x �� I 2.493AR I ° SI < o I � I< 3 I L ti h � PAINTED STRIPING LIP. Ln ONE KAr 7 ISLAND APE DROP OFF/ PICK UP I n 1 ENTRANCE 516N O PAVI _ Y - PAVI n GONG:,SIDEWALK. 1 I i I I I I 6"GONG. I I BOLLARDS o (TYP OF 2IN FRONT OF I ENCLOSLIRP) I I I I I I Y � 1 I I I _— � N 897756 W 361.81 J N 8924 36" W 362.17(M) — — _—— 7i——I[ k ■ [ ■ t k IN s Cv F Z r--------------------------------------------- -----i C b0 00 i SAGA Wig Salo-Slk 9 5,3w 2Ll L49 QTb-WA L19 13 Y o, * '1 S-WI9 Z � i b H3+'Jl � •1 r] 4i0lJ21 ASOclY1d-LLVH - G 3hDAY►6a10?Ll G 2AD9Y/scw:,Q J•al'ywal'I c 3g doll I �PG4+�d ZOOH'�- d I �i 39Y2101S,l?14 572114 ti�3"I SLU-10-2000 1915 W. Mt. Hope NORTH Vicinity Ma HOPE ROAD MT. HOPE AVE. Site DR. w � V pR. U) EEN0RE A Y (L W a 0° �Q o COOPER AVE. w VER DR. c� GORDON AVE. MpSHIRE Rp' Q V) a J m of Z O F-X C� SLU-10-2000 1915 W. Mt. Hope NORTH Zoning Or POTOMAC 'A "Res. p_ I ►► 'A " es. MI, HOPE AVE. MT. HOPE r /itSite ------- I)M-3 ui „DM_ I ff pR. N LLLENORE Y wm II ACE ZQ o COOPER AVE. w O Q' C' GORDON AVE. 1 Z-9-2000 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. "A" Residential and "J" Parking to "F" Commercial GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Mr. David Behnke 13337 Tucker DeWitt, MI 48509 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Representing Owner Mr. Benjamin Behnke 2115 Clearview Lansing, MI 48917 REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning LEGAL DESCRIPTION: The North 30' of the East 121' of Lot 3 and the South 25' of the East 121' of Lot 2 Supervisor's Plat of Hillcrest Farms, City of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan. PPN:3301-32-203-243. EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential and "J" Parking Districts PROPOSED ZONING: "F" Commercial District PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 55' x 121'= 6,655 sqft.- rectangular SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Commercial S: Commercial E: Residential W: Commercial SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "F" Commercial & "J" Parking S: "F" Commercial E: "F" Commercial & "DM-3" Res. W: "F" Commercial MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The South West Area Comprehensive Plan designates this area for commercial use. Z-9-2000 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. "A" Residential and "J" Parking to "F" Commercial SPECIFIC INFORMATION DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to rezone the property located at 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. from "A" Residential and "J" Parking Districts to "F" Commercial District. A commercial use has been located at this property since 1961. The "A" Residential zoning designation is intended for single family uses. Therefore, the use is nonconforming with the current zoning designation. Rezoning the property to "F" Commercial would make the use conforming and allow the owner to obtain financing and insurance. AGENCY RESPONSES Assessors: No comments received AT&T Cable: No comments received BWL: No objection Building Safety: No objection City Attorney: No comments received Code Compliance: Please notify this office of any site requirements approved as a part of this action. Colonial Village Neigh. Asso.: No comments received Consumers Energy: No comments received Economic Development: No objection Fire Marshal: No comments received MDOT: No objection Police Dept: No comments received Public Service: No comments received Trans. Engr.: No comments received Z-9-2000 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. "A" Residential and "J" Parking to "F" Commercial ANALYSIS COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE The subject property is located at 3822 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard, Currently, the property is zoned "A" Residential and "J" Parking and is used for commercial purposes. Land uses to the north, east, and south of the site are commercial. Residential use is located to the west behind the property and east across M.L. King. This rezoning is compatible with surrounding land uses. COMPLIANCE WITH MASTER PLAN The Southwest Area Comprehensive Development Plan identifies the land use at this location as commercial along the frontage of S. Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. Rezoning the property to "F" Commercial is consistent with the intent of the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC M. L. King is a major arterial that can accommodate the amount of traffic generated by this site. Pedestrian circulation is not anticipated to be impacted by this project. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT No impact on the environmental is anticipated. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT No impact on future development is anticipated. Rezoning this property to "F" Commercial makes the zoning consistent with the land use according to the Master Plan. Depending on how the east side of the property is developed, landscaping, screening, and buffering may be needed. SUMMARY Rezoning the subject property from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial would be compatible with surrounding land uses. Commercial use along this section of S. M.L. King would be consistent with the intent of the comprehensive plan. Staff does not anticipate any impact on the environment or circulation as a result of this project. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of this request to rezone the property located at 3822 S. M.L. King from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial. Page 3 it j BUILDING TYPICAL SECTION L-�43' T C 8-Lq"3c ASPHALT ASPHALT IYj I RETENTION POND 17' R STABILIZE 2:1 SLOPE BENCHMARK TINAIL=- 'WITH RIP RAP .O.W. FOR ROAD PURPOSES L.19 MR, PGS. 60, 187 P.K., 859.99 NAIL P INTO EX' 36TASTU SEWER L) 00 I.E. 849.59 -REWOvE, 34 LF 6- I 1�1 - FLOW RESTRICTOR I.E. 51.0 LOT PARCE� 3 �a PPJ�� ' o 4 #2 El. CONC A—' cl. LOT LIN U.] E 121 —.,51 54.5' cD P.K. Ln NAILIj. UO BRICK -fly O. LOT #3 BUILDING . FIF 858.58 PARCEL I PARCEL 2 CL 54.5' Q 1 CONC. 70 4.8 P.K. NAIL ASPHALT 1 Ln, A SF'H,4!-T iI i TICASTING= 858.09---,,6� SET FOUND Li be Z-9-2000 3822 S. M.L. King NORTH Vicinity Map � O J m Cl) Z Y p J J W S WARM CK DR. Site m OUSE Q POMPTON CIRCLE GRAND DR. 0 c 3 � o Z p J O of Q MASON M N Z EATON CT. O O J Z Q ry Q MARY AVE. CgV�N q(j, Z-9-2000 3822 S. M.L. King NORTH Zoning � p J m CD Z Y p J J _w 2 WARWICK DR. Site m POMPTON CIRCLE „F, GRAND DR. U) ►►i► TM-3 ,► ZC) 0 "F � MASON Trr z EATON CT. o J n Bbh Z �N �J SLU-08-00 Page 1 216 W. Lapeer Street Lansing Parking Lot in 'DM-4" Residential District GENERAL INFORMATION OWNERIAPPLICANT: John T. Foster 615 N. Capitol Avenue Lansing, MI 48933 STATUS OF APPLICANT: On behalf of Mourer-Foster, Inc. REQUESTED ACTION: Special Land Use to construct an off-street, surface parking lot with approximately 8 spaces, at 216 W. Lapeer Street in a "DM-4" Residential District. EXISTING LAND USE: Multiple family residential unit currently vacant EXISTING ZONING: "DM-4" Residential District PROPOSED ZONING: No change in zoning PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 41.25' x 132' = 5,445 sq. ft. Rectangle (13 acres) SURROUNDING LAND USE: North: Office and Church South: Parking and Office East: Parking and Office West: Residential SURROUNDING ZONING: North: "D-1" Business District South: "DM-3" Residential and "D-1" Office District East: "D-1" Professional Office District West: "DM-4" Residential District MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The River Island Area Comprehensive Plan, Amendment 1986, designates this area for office use. SPECIFIC INFORMATION This is a request by John T. Foster, representing Mourer-Foster Inc., for a Special Land Use permit to construct an off-street surface parking lot at 216 W. Lapeer Street in the "DM-4" Residential District. The request was amended (5/30/2000) to propose a lot designed to accommodate approximately 8 spaces. The lot is intended to be used for employees of Mourer-Foster Inc., located at 615 N. Capitol Avenue. This is not a matter of rezoning. SLU-08-00 Page 2 216 W. Lapeer Street, Lansing Parking Lot in "DM-4" Residential District Historical Information: • The proposal would impact the existing 2-story brick bungalow built in 1924. • Henry & Henry Preservation and Architectural Consultants Inc., in their final Lansing Architectural Survey II report, 1998, indicated the structure appears to meet the criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic Places based upon the following: 1. the house retains its historic massing and character; and 2. contributes to the scale and historic character of the proposed district; 3. the consultants recommended that"a national and local historic district designation be pursued for the block bounded by Lapeer, Seymour, Saginaw and Capitol; and 4. the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has indicated "this block be considered as part of a larger historic district eligible for national and local designation that includes blocks to the immediate west and north". • The structure at 216 W. Lapeer Street is located in the proposed Capitol Historic District • The house has deteriorated as a result of deferred maintenance over the years. Developer's Proposal: The applicant's amended request for a Special Land Use (SLU-8-00) is to develop approximately 8 surface parking spaces behind the house at 216 W. Lapeer, currently owned by Mourer-Foster, Inc. The proposed expansion onto the property at 216 W. Lapeer is requested to accommodate employee parking associated with the Mourer- Foster office building at 615 N. Capitol Avenue. The owner proposes using the existing house for their document storage and potential leasing space to the adjacent law firm for document storage also. AGENCY RESPONSES Ameritech: (No response received). Assessor: It is not clear which house is being proposed to be moved or razed. Please specify the address. Building Safety: No objection. BWL: Electric: No objections to the proposed removal of the existing home and construction of the new parking lot. Water. No objection to surface parking. Existing water service will be disconnected at the curb upon request. Steam: Steam Service has been disconnected at this location. SLU-08-00 Page 3 216 W. Lapeer Street Lansing Parking Lot in "DM4" Residential District City Attorney: (No response received). Code Compliance: How did it get to 13 spaces? Applicant has used this property illegally for a parking lot for more than one year in rear yard. If approved, please notify this office of any site requirements which need to be enforced. Community Policing: (No response received). Consumers Energy: (No response received). Development Office: Adjacent property at 608 Seymour was rehabbed through City Program. No other comment. Downtown Neigh. Assoc.: (No response received). Fire Marshall: No Objections. Historic District Commission: The HDC at its June 1, 2000 meeting voted unanimously (5-0) to recommend that the approval of the SLU be contingent on the following conditions: 1. The structural integrity of the building exterior be maintained; 2. The functional integrity of the interior be maintained; and 3. The exterior appearance of the property be maintained. Historical Society: The HSGL is concerned that issuance of a SLU for parking in the rear of 216 W. Lapeer Street; thereby impacting parking associated with the building, may jeopardize any future sale of the house for residential purposes. Recommend preserv- ing the house until full studies (of potential impact) can be completed. As member of HSGL and downtown neighbor, do not want parking (lots) intruding further into the neighborhood. Linda Peckham, Board member on behalf of HSGL (via voice mail message). Lansing Neighbor. Council: (No response received). Media One: (No response received). Parks and Recreation: No comment- does not impact parks operations. Public Service: The Public Service Department has no objections to the proposed SLU-8-00. The Public Service Department reserves the right to comment on the site plan as part of the Site Plan Review Process. Transportation Engineer: No comments or requirements. SLU-08-00 Page 4 216 W. Lapeer Street Lansing Parking Lot in •DM-4" Residential District Background Discussion: Mourer-Foster reported the property at 615 N. Capitol Avenue accommodates the law firm of Mourer-Foster. Inc. which has been at that location for 22 years and Mid- Michigan Guardianship Services. There are about 46 existing parking spaces associated with that property (exclusive of the 8 spaces requested with SLU-8-00). There are approximately 50 -55 people who work 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. at the offices on 615 N. Capitol Avenue. If spaces are unavailable, customers park on the street or on a semicircle drive in front of the building. Mourer- Foster acquired the property at 216 W. Lapeer and has been using the area behind the house for parking illegally. They were notified they were required to have an approved Special Land Use for the parking use. The proposal to expand surface parking (approximately 8 spaces) for Mourer-Foster, Inc. onto the rear of the adjacent lot at 216 W. Lapeer is shown on the attached landscape plan. Due to circulation and ingress/egress issues, the plan may require loss of two spaces in the adjacent lot to the east currently used by Mourer-Foster, Inc. The owner of the property at 608 N. Seymour, immediately on the west side of the proposed parking lot, expressed concern that the plan did not meet circulation, landscape screening and buffering or the ingress/egress requirements. She noted the attached garage, a section of a brick wall (on the east side of the property) and the rear gardens have been removed already by the applicant to accommodate the new parking, prior to the application for SLU-8-00. Water drainage (hard-surfacing will impact water runoff) and snow removal were a concern also. The property owner further noted that parking demand associated with 615 N. Capitol Avenue will continue to grow and therefore suggested alternatives to the approval of the SLU: • use of City parking ramps; • use of bicycles; • a mass transit program ( for employees may provide a credit for Mourer-Foster); • use of the house as a residence (for employees, students, families). The adjacent property owner additionally requested the following, if the SLU is recommended for approval: • significant evergreen vegetative buffering (6 ft. cedars, arbor vitae, and hemlocks to take up runoff water) between the parking lot and properties immediately west; • wood mulch rather than gravel materials (deter use as missiles) at the base of the vegetation; • appropriate fencing; • rehabilitation of the house for residential purposes and associated parking. ANALYSIS Case History The original request by John T. Foster, representing Mourer-Foster Inc., for a Special Land Use (SLU-8-00) permit was to construct an off-street surface parking lot at 216 W. Lapeer SLU-08-00 Page 5 216 W. Lapeer Street, Lansing Parking Lot in •DM-4" Residential District Street in the "DM-4" Residential District. The lot proposed is designed to accommodate13 spaces and is intended to be used for employees of Mourer-Foster Inc., located at 615 N. Capitol Avenue. The proposal required the removal of a structure at 216 W. Lapeer that appears to meet the requirements for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and is located in a potential National and local historic district. This is not a matter of rezoning. A letter from Jeffrey Smith, Director of Operations, transmitted on behalf of Mourer-Foster, dated and received in the Planning Office May 30, 2000, amended Mourer-Foster's application. The request was revised to clarify that Mourer-Foster did not intend to remove the (brick) building at 216 W. Lapeer Street, but were requesting permission to use the space immediately behind the building for approximately 8 parking associated with their offices at 615 N. Capitol Avenue. He further indicated the intended use of the house would be storage. 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 the Character of Adiacent Properties (designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner harmonious) : Lapeer Street is considered a residential street according to the street classification system, in the Northeast Comprehensive Plan. The parking plan currently shows access off W. Lapeer by a narrow drive insufficient to meet ingress/egress requirements. The property is zoned "DM-4" Residential. The design of the adjacent buildings and those in the surrounding are of residential scale and character. Many of the buildings appear to meet the criteria for listing in the National Register of Historic places for their architectural significance (including the Mourer-Foster building at 615 N. Capitol), others would be considered "contributing" buildings in this potential local or National Register Historic District. Single and multi-family homes are in the west half of the block and immediately to the west and southwest across Seymour Street. Mourer-Foster, Inc. proposes using the existing house for office document storage which is not a permitted use in the"DM-4" Residential District. The parking lot use of the property at 216 W. Lapeer is: • accessory to the office uses at 615 N. Capitol Avenue; • would be used during typical daytime office hours when neighbors are away; • the size of the rear lot is minimal, providing at best 8 spaces, with a potential loss of 2 spaces in the adjacent parking lot to the east to accommodate ingress/egress access for the proposed parking expansion; • landscape screening and buffering would be required between office parking and the residential use to the west(Chapter 1290 of the Zoning Code). Substantial landscape, screening and buffering of this proposed parking lot, as well as an appropriate drainage plan, are critical in making this use compatible with the properties to the west and to address neighborhood concerns. SLU-08-00 Page 6 216 W. Lapeer Street Lansing Parking Lot in "DM-4" Residential District 2. Change in the Essential Character of the Surrounding Area: The subject property is located at the east edge of a multi-family residential district. The proposed small parking lot will net only 6 spaces . Approval of the SLU may invite additional requests for encroachments into the neighborhood which would significantly change the residential and historic character of the surrounding area. Retention and rehabilitation of the existing of house for residential rather than accessory office storage use (which is not allowed in the "DM-4" Residential District) would be more beneficial to the character of the surrounding area. The Mourer-Foster building is located on Capitol Avenue in the downtown area. In the downtown area it is reasonable to expect to have some, if not all, parking supported by public or private shared facilities. They have a majority of their parking already on site and their request is not a significant number of spaces. The office is located within three blocks of two public parking facilities, the North Capitol Ramp and the surface lot at Capitol and Shiawasee Street. Students, workers and visitors walk from their respective parking locations on a daily basis. There is no reason that some of these employees could not as well. This is typical of the area. 3. Interference with General Enioyment of Adjacent Properties: Due to the accessory nature of the use, the SLU may interfere with the enjoyment of adjacent properties unless the following occurs: • the concerns raised by neighbors at the public hearing are addressed through additional improvements to the overall parking lot design including landscape screening (use of evergreens such as cedars, arbor vitae, hemlocks), water runoff and circulation; • good monitoring and management of the parking lot to prevent loitering or other inappropriate activities on the property, particularly while the building is vacant; • rehabilitation of the house for residential use to retain the residential character of the area and simultaneously address neighborhood concerns about the parking plan. 4. Improvement to the Use or Character of the Property and Surrounding Area: The improvements, represented in the plan provided by the applicant: • do not meet the dimensional or landscape, screening and buffering requirements of the Zoning Code. • the proposed use of the existing building is not in conformance with the Zoning Code Improvements which would include appropriate circulation, ingress/egress, and landscaping and the use of brick pavers or"clean" gravel (ie. crushed limestone or pea gravel), which might allow the property to be restored for residential use in the future, particularly if Mourer-Foster outgrows its current location and relocates to another site. Rehabilitation of the house for residential use (with its associated parking) would help SLU-08-00 Page 7 216 W. Lapeer Street, Lansing Parking Lot in "DM-4" Residential District stabilize the neighborhood rather than contribute to an erosion of the neighborhood. 5. Environmental Impacts (hazards to adiacent property, or uses, activities, materials or equipment detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of persons or property): The applicant's plan does not meet circulation requirements and shows an ingress/egress off Lapeer Street by way of a small driveway which is too narrow to accommodate an ingress/egress for the rear parking lot proposed. There is a concern also for the management of the property, particularly in the evening when loitering and other inappropriate activity might impact adjacent residential buildings. The use of the property will create some impact upon the environment . Proper development plans for the parking lot, along with the rehabilitation of the structure for residential use would not have a negative impact on the visual appearance of the property and surrounding area. It would minimize security issues and other neighborhood concerns. 6. Impact on Utilities No adverse impact anticipated; however consideration should be given to additional storm water runoff. 7. Impact on Public Services No adverse impact anticipated. 8. Compliance with the Intent and Purpose of Zoning Code and Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan: The parking lot plan, as presented, is considered an accessory use to the office at 615 N. Capitol Avenue and does not meet dimensional or landscape screening and buffering requirements of the Zoning Code. If the SLU is approved: • during site plan review process, a drainage, landscape, parking and circulation plan will be required; • the proposed use of the structure will have to be in compliance with the permitted uses in the "DM-4" Residential District (a storage building is not permitted). 9. Compliance with Zoning District Regulations: The proposed parking plan, as presented, does not conform with the requirements of parking lot design in Chapter 1284 of the Zoning Code. • the driveway is not wide enough for two-way circulation and there is no practical way to add to it; • the present layout requires a width of 46.5 ft. and the lot is only 41.5 ft.; • the present plan does not meet minimum landscape buffering requirements of 5 ft. Otherwise, the Zoning Code requires the Special Land Use permit for the use itself. To SLU-08-00 Page 8 216 W. Lapeer Street Lansing Parking Lot in 'DM-4" Residential District confirm compliance with all design regulations, the site plan is required to be reviewed by all necessary agencies through the administrative site plan review process. The proposed use of the building as an accessory storage building is not permitted in the "DM-4" Residential District. SUMMARY 1. The proposed parking lot and use of the existing residential structure is not compatible with the essential character of the surrounding area, as designed. 2. The special land use, as proposed, will change the essential character of the surrounding area. 3. The proposed special land use may interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent properties unless adequate circulation, landscape, screening and buffering is in place and the existing structure is rehabilitated for residential purposes. 4. The proposed parking lot and building use will impact adjacent properties as it does not represent an improvement to the use or character of the property under consideration or the surrounding area in general. 5. The special land use may impact the health, safety and welfare of persons or property in the surrounding area. 6. The proposed parking lot can be adequately served by essential public facilities and services 7. The proposed special land use will not place any demands on public services and facilities in excess of current capacities. 8. The proposed parking lot design and building use is not consistent with the intent and purposes of the Zoning Code or in conformance with the master plan. 9. The proposed parking lot does not meet the dimensional requirements, design and landscape screening and buffering requirements of"DM-4" Residential District. The proposed use of the existing building for accessory storage is not in conformance with the Zoning Code. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Special Land Use to allow the development of the surface parking lot with the following conditions: 1. The parking lot development be restricted to the rear of the lot and that a lawn area be reserved immediately behind the house for a residential use. 2. The required landscape screening and buffering include 6 ft. cedars, arbor vitae and or hemlocks and that the mulch be of wood material not gravel. 3. That the ingress/egress be accessed from the adjacent parking lot to the east and that the existing brick wall be retained as much as possible except where necessary to access the parking lot. 4. The parking lot surface area include brick pavers or other materials (ie. crushed limestone, pea stone) that would allow future restoration of the rear yard for residential purposes if this area of the property is no longer needed for parking. 5. The parking lot be monitored and managed for loitering or inappropriate activity, SLU-08-00 Page 9 216 W. Lapeer Street, Lansing Parking Lot in "DM-4" Residential District especially until the house is rehabilitated and occupied. 6. The house be rehabilitated for single residential use. • the applicant may wish to donate the house to a non-profit to rehabilitate, or • seek funding assistance form the City's Development Office and historic preservation funds to rehabilitate the house for sale or lease (ie. to Mourer-Foster staff, L.C.C. or law students) • the exterior design and scale of the building be preserved. (If storage is a need, storage space may be available at other nearby office buildings). 7. A minimum of two parking spaces be reserved along the west drive of the house for residential purposes. 8. The site plan be reviewed administratively by all necessary agencies through the Site Plan Review process 9. Alternative options to expanding parking be investigated by the applicant to address any existing and future growth needs: • public parking is located within three blocks • cooperative parking (ie. church building at the comer of Seymour and Saginaw) • use of mass transit and tax credits SLU-08-00 Report By.Susan Cantlon,Senior Preservation Planner SLU-8-00 216 W. LAPEER STREET NORTH W. SAGINAW ST. 3a1% 311 Ili 31+ oq al all dos r' UO 45' ��' y1-S 41- i1.S' P1.i 1 1a' N 11' go L DM �3 ^ J n a IL � 127 - - � - - - 6 63 ._.62 ti 13 9 II p, e ti Q , Q 0 oU v 0 V ;, � 4 0` 0 0 6� �' ti V rrs.r' ,f' ��• � 3or• 128 lia 1l0 21� W. LAPEER ST. 311-i1 31S loq ply K 7s'` 'If' vt' t)' )1' #0' A 4 2 �� � \�\ �� U\ h ti� O rh I I \ 5 2 w 011•71' 1 I 0 2 c' �- L'�• tO M r 129 0 - ` - �' c N A s 7 �.�" 4 ; h }. / 130 4f a s oll} — �— — — — — — — � �� Hf �+ 1�• Li K — — — by 8 V I QVA v o 1 g a r 5 — — — — — — h /Ax, I o o J�o W. GENESEE ST. SLU-8-00 216 W. LAPEER STREET NORTH P/�i T�L I'v T/-1 EXISTING IN SI7-E COND 1 ONS xA ilo 216 LAPEER STREET MOURER FOSTER INSURANCE CO. CONCRETE r �v a yb°� LEGAL D SCRIPTION: THE EAST bye e oe m z6 2 RODS 0 LOTS 5 AND 6 BLOCK y y6� �y6' ---- IG�NAL PLAT OF LANSING, INC. - lb UNTY, ; MICHIGAN. Ld 41.8' 41. EXISTING 2.8 ! W $yb ' 2 STORY � ��' , _, — Q BRICK BUILDING 1 ELP J y9 G 3 �------- Ar his' z.a Q S. � i o New Tomcn ) Imo , m 66 0 3 co 9 Z —oi-. y6• o \ \ 26.5' I w - — -- do —- - -- -- —— O _ ye 5• WI e _ 15• - v oo ZV)a e y6�- i9 26 O W 1U �4 o EXISTING m I�I—^ ; Z x -------- ' 2 STORY vl Q O� W-m ry U! 9' --- - - ry FRAME N - y6. y 0 16, 0 9y 16' N 15' 13' 5(_/MQ(R ST. 4 .25• TR T IN 1 1h `7 ---Ss ss-- s ss ` —ss— ss--- --ss ss - ss - 0-��ss— CnNCR[TC WALK .2iG L 0y 0y. th SLU-8-00 216 W. LAPEER STREET NORTH rNi/ � � , r3e/Gx �dALL �N/�S ciST r t-/nIr APPROVED AS PRINTED AUGUST 15, 2000. Draft to Clerk August 11,2000 Approved August 15,2000 To Clerk January 12, 2001 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD - 7 p.m., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall 124 West Michigan Avenue Tuesday, August 1, 2000 1. OPENING SESSION: The meeting was called to order at 7:10 p.m. by Vice Chairman Keene. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Keene, Ruge, Smith; four members present. Absent: Nischan, Patrick. Two vacant seats. B. Excused Absences - Mr. Nischan and Ms. Patrick granted an excused absence. C. Introductions. James A. Ruff, Planning Manager, introduced staff present, Jim Sturdevant, Senior Planner, Donna Wynant, Senior Planner, William C. Rieske, Principal Planner 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - Approved as presented. 3. COMMUNICATIONS A. Old Town Main Street supporting Z-12-2000 from Amy Collette, Program Manager, Old Town Main Street. 4. HEARINGS 1. NCU-8-2000, 741 Chicago Avenue, Class "A" Restoration, 4-unit in "C" Residential District Jim Ruff presented the case. Dennis North, owner of property, is requesting non-conforming Class A Status for the property in order to completely renovate the structure. He has a permit partly for doing work that does not exceed 35% of the value of the structure and proposes to extend that to do additional work. It's a four-unit dwelling in the "C" Residential District. The "C" Residential District is primarily a single family or two family district in the code. The structure was built in 1923 and was built as a multi-family dwelling. There are single and two family residences predominately around the site and those properties are similarly zoned "C" Residential. The property is not conforming primarily due to land use, but there are also some set back non-conformities and parking non-conformities. Dennis North is requesting Class A status so they can continue renovations of the structure. .�ti �: h.: PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 2 Mr. Ruge asked about the two garages in the back. Is that a non- conformity? Can you have two garages in the property? Mr. Ruff responded: in the "C" district that is an allowable item. The garages are fairly old as well, built in the 30's, but they do exist, have been repaired over time and as he understands it, they are in relatively good shape. DENNIS NORTH, OWNER AND OCCUPANT, 741 CHICAGO AVENUE. I have lived in the property for over 20 years, most of the time as a tenant and recently bought the property when it went on the market for sale, in order to maintain it as my own residence. That was my principle object. The petition is basically to allow me to continue to operate the building as a four unit building, and to spend the necessary money to complete restoration to its previous condition. The report covers a number of the items very well, but I would like to mention a few other details. As the report says, building was built in 1923 and was built as a four unit building and has been continued to be used this way ever since. It was very well built, it is still in very good condition, very good materials and the need for restoration is not really extensive for complete remodeling of the building. History: 1998, the person who had been my landlord for 20 years sold the property on land contract to another party who became, for about 18 months, my landlord. He decided to occupy the upper floor, which has two units in it, convert it into an apartment for his family and do some other modifications of the main floor at the back to tie in with that. He began to do these changes and did some fairly extensive work on the plumbing and the electricity, began some remodeling on the main floor and never started on the upper floor. After approximately 18 months he had to quit-claim deed it back to the original owner because of bankruptcy. At that point the owner offered the property to me on a mortgage and I bought the property on a FHA 203K Mortgage and has done some work on the property with that money. Basically, apart from the work that is necessary to undo the beginnings of the remodeling and to redo the electricity and plumbing problems that were caused by this person, who did this unpermitted and did it very badly, the great majority of money that is necessary to spend on the house is to undue and reduce that. The main issue in the actual report from the compliance officer Dolores Fuller, is to simply add to the bathrooms, some exhaust fans. Bathrooms do not have outside windows and exhaust into a central well. Part of their original intention was to do remodeling, which we did in part, to reverse part of what the previous R. T. .f _ - - ��- ,: .. - - . _ `. :, - -ti fiA �� � �1� PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 3 person had done. It took up enough money that they did not go ahead with the 203K money to do the exhaust fans. My intent is to try to restore the building back to the condition it was before this person did the work on it. Then, planning to use materials and design that are historically consistent with the building. Working with Brindley Byrd, president of Qx2 Contracting, who does a lot of this work in the city and he is here to make comment or answer questions on some of the details they intend to do. I'm proposing to restore the building back to the condition it was before that unpermitted work, and to address the other code issues and to reside in the building and to rent the other three units that are in it to help make the mortgage. I have brought for members of the board to look at, property survey, floor plans, documentation on when it was built, rented as early as 1924, and copy of the code report from Dolores Fuller. Also, two copies of additional photographic documentation showing the front and rear aspects of the building, to show what has been accomplished up to this point, and improving the area in the back of the building. That is the area where we will continue to undue the remodeling to restore it back to its condition. Mr. Ruge asks if there is any tenants currently? Mr. North responded that he has one presently. Mr. Ruge asked if he parked in the garage or is there other parking places? Mr. North responds that the south garage is not being used as it still has a lot of building materials that were left behind by the previous person doing renovations and has to be cleared out at some point. He has two cars: one that does work and one that does not and both are parked in the North garage. Current tenant who has been there for 15 years is handicapped and does not drive or own a car. Part of resolution to the parking situation is that I am writing into his lease the fact that I will not be providing any parking places for him, because he does not have any need of them. To comply also I am willing to write into the other two units that they are restricted to only one vehicle per unit. If that does not work, I would propose to lease parking from the parking lot at the end of the block from the city. Mr. Ruge asked for a four unit building like this with five bedrooms, what would the city generally require for parking? Mr. Ruff said there is 1 two bedroom unit which requires two spaces and 1 % for each 1 bedroom unit, so six spaces required. We drop the half if it's below half; if it's more than a half, it goes up to the next number. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 4 Mr. North comments that the handicap person lives in the two bedroom. If he writes his spaces out that would reduce the number to 4 and there are enough spaces available. BRINDLEY BYRD, PRESIDENT Qx2 CONTRACTING. Has been working with Dennis North on this project of over a year. He has already been fighting this for a while, and hopefully the Board will allow him to continue to what he feels is an admirable cause as far as renovating and maintaining his house. I have renovated over 40 houses in this area and hate to see this house turned over and not be allowed to be renovated because someone does not like the parking situation. They could work this out. The house is beautiful and has lots of potential and would hate to see it go to the wayside because of the parking issue. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for NCU-8-2000, 741 Chicago Avenue, Class A Restoration, 4-unit in "C" Residential District and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee at 4:00pm on Wednesday, August 9, 2000, in the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room, 316 N. Capital Avenue. 2. NCU-9-2000, 2400 N. East Street, Class "A" and Substitution, Nonconforming Use for Setbacks and Parking Mr. Sturdevant presented the case. Lawrence Moore is requesting Class "A" non-conforming status for 2400 N. East Street. On the northeast corner of Northeast street and Gier Street. You have attached to the staff report, an area map, identifying the site, and a site plan, showing the property. Currently the property has been used for a adult related book store and business. The applicant's proposal is to remodel the building to where (for clarification: the zoning code defines an adult oriented business as something where more than 35% of the floor area of the structure is used for an adult oriented materials or more than 35% of their business is oriented for an adult oriented materials) less than 35% of the building and less than 35% of the business is adult oriented materials, therefore it would not be considered an adult business anymore. The property is non-conforming for parking, because there is basically no room for any parking on the property. The applicant has addressed this issue by supplying a lease agreement for parking on a commercial property that is one block to the north of this site and has supplied r i ., ,' , - p-. ' ., - e„ i � - •r�� i l 9: � � _ 1. .i - � � y � PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 5 the documentation for that, where he would have twenty spaces leased on an off-site location. That location is within the three hundred feet radius that is permissible for a business in the commercial zoning district. The building is on a corner lot and on the front yard set-back (the Gier Street side) requirement is 20 feet. The building is established and located only 71/2 feet from the property line along Gier Street. So, because the applicant is addressing two issues through other means, which is the use of the business and the off-street parking, the largest issue that comes before the board is considering the non-conforming front yard setback along Gier Street. That is what the applicant is asking that we consider tonight in order to allow him to fix up the business and use it for general retail and book store business. Mr. Smith asked, how it came to pass with a small setback to begin with? Mr. Sturdevant said the building was constructed before the code was established for that setback requirement. The building has been there for a long time. Mr. Smith asked if it has been predominately used for commercial business? Mr. Sturdevant said yes. Mr. Ruge said, behind the building is a small back yard, but there is no curb cut to get back there, but there was a car, is that going to be used as a loading dock, the back door of the building? It's paved and it looks like a driveway, but there is no curb cut. Mr. Sturdevant said that it possibly could be, but stuff has not reviewed the final building plans yet, but it would be a logical place for a loading dock. Mr. Ruge said that it looks like a logical place, but he is concerned with legal access to the street and what should be done about that. Mr. Sturdevant said, with their building permit application, they could apply for a curb cut permit, and it would likely be granted. Mr. Ruff said, this is also not conforming for the rear setback. It does not meet the twenty-five foot rear yard setback requirement. This is one of the other points of non-conformity on it. LAWRENCE MOORE, OWNER. To answer some of the questions, for the rear part of the building, we could apply for a permit for a curb cut. I have obtained the lease for off street parking, approximately 20 spaces, to conform to that part of the code. I have the architect with me this evening who can explain the more technical matters of this. - , � . . -�-_- _ ..., � 5 r .. . PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 6 Mr. Ruge asked what type of business will this be. Mr. Moore replied a book store, like a cafe with computers. Mr. Ruge asked if it would be like a coffee shop and book store? Mr. Moore replied not as much like a coffee shop per se, it might have machines in there with pop and stuff, but not like a cafe because of the health code. Mr. Ruge asked what size of trucks will be used to bring the books and goods for sale? Mr. Moore replied vans and such. Mr. Ruge said, do you expect to do most of the loading and unloading from that back door? Mr. Moore replied yes. DENNY PURDUE, BUSINESS DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH OF THE PROPOSED BUSINESS AT 2416 N. EAST STREET, AKA ACE HARDWARE. I have a couple of concerns, the business being 35% per se books, that leaves another 65%. That is an empty building as book stores go. What is going to be in the other 65% if that is a book store? And if it is going to be computers, is it going to be adult computer cyber porn and then it falls under the student problem with the Junior High less than a block away? Is there going to be an age limit as to adult book store, adult cyber porn? Is there regulation that the junior high kids can not waltz in there on their way home? BONNIE PURDUE, CO-OWNER OF THE BUSINESS NEXT DOOR. My concerns are the zoning for the parking. Today, often there are people going to his business parking in their lot. We have a gate and have had to lock our gates at 6:00pm and have had people come into our gates, tear the gates down to remove their vehicles, and have had people call the police and them call us. We reply we open at 9:00am. If this is going to increase their business and it is going to grow, there is already a problem with the parking, we just receive the parking that will take up the great brunt of that. Please consider this when discussing the parking situation. LARRY CROSS, ARCHITECT FOR THE PROJECT. Let me try to clarify a couple of things. The main part of the book store will be a typical book store, adult section will be just a portion of it. Biggest part of the area of the building will be standard book store. Parking; they have off-site parking and have also arranged, according to the site plan, to make the handicap spaces made available on site immediately in front of the building. Behind the building would be loading and we will get a curb cut permit, if required, to take care of it. � � k 3r ! � -� � _ II . _ �� .. .. � ' � PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 7 BEVERLY MILLER, NORTH LANSING. I have become an expert on off-street parking as Jim can tell you. Nobody, except for maybe workers downtown, park a block away and walk back to a business. They park as close to a business as they can park. Which means that Gier St. is going to be full of cars. This business should not even be considered, since its been, the prior business has been grandfathered in and is gone. 1%, 2%, 3%, 10% adult business is an adult business. It does not matter how much floor you use. I'm sure the 35% of businesses can say it comes from the other books, but there is no way you can prove that it didn't. You've got to give this some thought. You are going to allow him to conform on a building that has no parking space. He built his patio out and took up the only parking space he had. Now he has no spaces and you are going to conform with a 14 foot set back. No matter how it is looked at, no one is going to park a block away and walk back to the book store. Besides, you have a church practically next door. You have criteria, which you should use. This is one of the first times where you have actually planned something in the beginning of the process. The bar next door to us, we had no chance because the Planning Board didn't have to do anything. You do now, you have to make him conform to it. This Class "A" is probably the only thing. He has already started building on that without conformity, and I do not even know if that is legal. You probably could make him tear that out and put that parking space back there for that building. I do not know what rules you go by. If you really believe that people are going to walk a whole block to get to that building you are wrong. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for NCU-9-2000, 2400 N. East Street, Class "A" and Substitution, Nonconforming Use for Setbacks and Parking and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee Meeting next Wednesday, August 9, 2000 at 4:OOpm in the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room, 316 N. Capital Avenue. 3. Z-10-2000, 2602 N. Grand River Avenue, "A" Residential and "E-2" Local Shopping Districts to "E-2" Local Shopping District Mr. Sturdevant presented the case. Lester Peckham has requested rezoning for property which is located at the northwest corner of ,, ,t - �.,, .,. 4. � �, r. � � .. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 8 Martin Luther King Blvd. and W. Grand River Ave. The property is currently zoned "E-2" Local Shopping District and "A" Residential District. He is requesting that the entire property be rezoned to "E-2" Local Shopping District. The property currently has a building on it that was formerly used as a gas station and a garage. The applicant is right now in the process of converting that structure into a restaurant. If you look at the site plan, you can see that there are two small portions of the site that are basically remnants to older residential zoning and what is essentially strictly commercial area. There is a small triangular piece on the southwest corner of the property that is currently zoned "A" Residential and a strip about 20 feet wide on the east side property that is zoned "A" Residential. The majority of the property is zoned "E-2". What this does by requesting to rezone the entire property is it allows him to use a more efficient parking layout for the restaurant business. The surrounding area is primarily zoned for commercial use. There is residential to the north of the property, however, to the east, across King Blvd. is commercially and industrially used property as well as all the other corners on this location. Property to the west is zoned "E-2" and used as a filling station. LESTER PECKHAM. Mr. Sturdevant summarized it well. There is a narrow band on the Martin Luther King side and a small triangle that really has no effect, I picked that up, the surveyor had that on an old plan and as long as we were going to do it they decided to rezone the entire parcel. It made sense to rezone it all. Mr. Ruge had two questions, are you anticipating expanding the current building? Mr. Peckham said No. Mr. Ruge said what kind of restaurant is it going to be? Mr. Peckham said it is specialty hamburger and hot dog restaurant. Mr. Ruge said kind of like Sparty's? Mr. Peckham said a grade up, but something like that yes. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for Z-10-2000, 2602 N. Grand River Avenue, "A" Residential and "E-2" Local Shopping Districts to "E-2" Local Shopping District and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee Meeting on Wednesday, August 9, 2000 at 4:00pm, in the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room, 316 N. Capital Avenue. • t , PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 9 4. Z-11-2000, 7011 Georgia Ave., "A" Residential to "J" Parking District Donna Wynant presented the case. This is a request by applicant Gordon Long, representing Lansing Clarion Unlimited Partnership. This request is for the rezoning of 7011 George Ave. from "A" Residential to "J" Parking District. As you know with previous requests on this, the Holiday Inn Convention Center is proposed to be substantially increased and several properties in the past have been acquired for this development under the case management number Z-15-99. This is a separate case. This was acquired after that process began and is going through its own rezoning process. The property measures under 17,000 sq. ft. in size. It has 39 feet along Georgia Ave. and is approximately 462 feet deep, zoned "A" Residential. It is surrounded by single family homes with the exception of Oak Park Village to the west. The plan currently designates the use of the area for low density residential development. There are several cases involved in this. There is currently a master plan amendment, MPA-1-99. Z-15-99 has been on hold because of the MPA. Just for a little background those are the cases that proceeded this particular case Z-11-2000. There is an overview of the project on page 2, which gives the size of the Holiday Inn South Convention Center and the number of parking spaces. This particular property has been added under a separate zoning case. The site plan probably shows it best; the location of the property and where it lies within the context of that development. It doesn't show the current site plan, but it does show how it fits within the overall redesign of the parking area. In the staff report it is mentioned that the parking has been reduced from the initial count of 2233 parking spaces, they have pulled in some of their parking lot to use for landscape screening and buffering throughout the development and to provide an entry in from Willoughby Road with landscaping along those areas as well as internal landscaping in the parking lot for the complex. So they have gone down in terms of the number of parking spaces but with this property added it allows for a better assemblage of land. It allows them to assemble the land better and to allow for some additional spaces for landscaping throughout the development. GORDON LONG, 6910 S. CEDAR STREET, LANSING. Ms. Wynant clearly set forth the requests of this evening. I do have diagrams that show specifics but I believe you have that. I'm here to answer any questions. , . - A ���i I ._ ' / �n«j .. ' _ �„� S� ' PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 10 MR. FRANCIS SUTTON, 908 JUST-A-MERE AVE. The Board knows how I feel about this project. There have been a few more problems in this area in the middle of the night. I presume you read about this in the paper. With the expansion and a few private homes left in the area. Guess it is bound to be. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for Z-11-2000, 7011 Georgia Ave., "A" Residential to "J" Parking District and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee Meeting on Wednesday, August 9, 2000 at 4:00pm, in the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room, 316 N. Capital Avenue. 5. Z-12-2000, 502 E. Grand River Avenue and 1106 N. Cedar Street, "F-1" Commercial and "C" Residential Districts to "G-1" Business, "D-1" Professional Office and "J" Parking Districts Mr. Sturdevant presented the case. The applicant, D.R. Development, has requested rezoning for 2 properties more commonly known as the Bethlehem Temple Church and the Cedar Street School. A pair of local entrepreneurs have acquired these properties from the church and are intending to adaptively reuse both buildings and the property around them for some performance arts space, office space and loft apartments. In order to accomplish this they have requested rezoning of the property. Currently the church property at 502 E. Grand River is zoned "F-1" Commercial. The School property which is to the south of it and runs along the corner of Cedar Street and Maple Street is zoned "C" Residential District. They have requested that the church be rezoned "G-1" Business District. Attached to the staff report are the area zoning, location map and a more detailed zoning map of the property which shows what specific parts are needing to be rezoned. The actual parcel with the church on it they are requesting rezoning from "F-1" Commercial to "G-1" Business District. The school property consists of two parts, basically the part with the school and part with the parking lot on it. They're requesting the part with the school on it be rezoned from "C" to "D-1" Professional Office District. Also, they are requesting the parking lot be rezoned from "C" Residential to "J" Parking District. The purpose is to preserve a good portion of the site for parking, to allow the school building to be used for loft apartments and offices and then to allow very creative � .. �:- - _:.,} -. i - �w _ � .f . . � r .- PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 11 use of the church building for performance art space. That is why "G-1" is requested for that particular use of property. This is very important to the redevelopment of the substantial corner of Old Town. This corner here at Grand River and Cedar is a gateway into this part of Lansing. Both are historic buildings and national register eligible properties. I have been concerned they will be demolished and replaced with cookie cutter stuff, like a drug store or a drive through restaurant. This proposal intends to preserve these buildings and to use them in the way that would be consistent with much of the redevelopment that has happened in the Old Town Area as of late. The applicants are here to fill in the details; parking and other items. Mr. Ruge asked what is the reason for the "G-1" zoning? Mr. Sturdevant said for the performance art part of the project and the "G-1" zoning does not have a specific requirement for off street parking. Mr. Ruge said so it is the parking, they could do performing art in a "F-1" zoning. Mr. Sturdevant said potentially yes. Mr. Ruge asked if it is rezoned "G-1" potentially this property could be built to the lot lines, they could tear down this building or add to it? Mr. Sturdevant said potentially yes. Right now the property stands very close to the lot lines on two sides. Mr. Ruge stated he was concerned about the driveway on Maple Street. Concerned that could cause a lot of late night traffic down that street. Has there been discussion on closing off that driveway and having an alternate route on to Grand River or Cedar Street? Mr. Sturdevant answered no. Ms. Keene asked how many parking spaces are on the church property now? Mr. Sturdevant said according to the site plan that was submitted by the applicants at the time, it looks like there are around 70 or 80 spaces currently. They have submitted a revised design for the lot east of the school. This brings total number of spaces to about 109. Ms. Keene asked are we talking about joint spaces for both facilities? Mr. Sturdevant said yes. RICHARD KARP, 107 E. GRAND RIVER, REPRESENTING DR DEVELOPMENT. The revised parking plan is available. Two changes to that are, the square footage on the church is 14,000 not 20,000, in addition to what is shown on the plan, we also propose to add a landscape buffer area on the far east edge of the parking lot running north to south. There are a number of persons in support 5 ��; ., 1 J ,� �� �. J .. , Y PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 12 that will stand, they stood. Sixteen stood in support and J. Ruff asked that applicant get their names to Planning Board. Seeing no one else wishing to comment, the Chairman announced the close of the public hearing for Z-12-2000, 500 E. Grand River Avenue and 1106 N. Cedar Street, "F-1" Commercial and "C" Residential Districts to "G-1" Business, "D-1" Professional Office and "J" Parking Districts and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee Meeting on Wednesday, August 9, 2000 at 4 p.m, in the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room, 316 N. Capital Avenue. 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each) GORDON LONG. Quick clarification. The Planning Board is a normal 8 member board, as was stated, with two vacancies. Would the standing board be six with four voting members for a quorum? Ms. Keene answered, we would need six votes for the zoning matter, Mr. Rieske said that State Law requires that six affirmative votes be cast in favor of a master plan amendment for that amendment to pass, Section 8 in Public Act 285. Mr. Long said, so this is not a quorum. Mr. Rieske said you need all six members affirmatively, and then if we do get more members, which we have plans to do, then there's more room, too, in case somebody disagrees. Mr. Long said, just wanted to make sure that this little element was not overlooked. BEVERLY MILLER. I would like to stress again that whenever you make decisions on off-street parking, the first thing you have to take into consideration is that patrons of any business would rather park in your neighborhood than in a parking lot. Park on the street next to the building. It is just what they do. You have to make some kind of decision, or at least refer a decision or rezone for that matter. Take the neighborhood into consideration such as Maple Street. This is a great project, it's not going to disturb anybody, they are used to it. But it's like you say, you have concerns with the drive and the parking on Maple Street, and these things do affect neighborhoods. When Mr. Karp starts a project he finishes it. Unlike some of the projects in Old Town that were started long ago and are still incomplete. I think this project is going to be fine. 6. RECESS - Urban Development Committee has unfinished business, and will meet in the conference room behind them. The public is invited. - a r p 1 > ' .. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 13 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: July 18, 2000 Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge, to approve the minutes of July 18, 2000, without corrections. On a Voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; carried unanimous; the minutes of July 18, 2000, were APPROVED. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole, did not meet. 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee, Mr. Frederick, Chair. a. Has not met since the last meeting. Due to meet Wednesday, August 9, 2000 at 4:00 p.m. in the Planning and Neighborhood Development Conference Room, 316 N. Capital Ave. 3. Urban Development Committee, Mr. Smith, Chair. We do not have enough members present to vote on them fully, however, we will report them out in abbreviated form. a. MPA-1-99, Amendment to Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan, South Cedar, Long Blvd. to Willoughby Road. The Committee discussed this item at several meetings since the beginning of the year. Committee action at each of these meetings was to table it pending further information. A public hearing was held on January 11, 2000 regarding this proposal. The applicant, Gordon Long, presented the proposal, which includes the expansion of the hotel and conference center on Just-a- Mere, a parking deck with a pedestrian bridge (ACT-21- 99); and Staybridge Suites (an extended stay hotel) and a single story office building, both fronting on Willoughby Road. .6 i �� PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 14 Since the initial proposal, the applicant has purchased a total of 25 houses for the redevelopment of this area. Eight homes will remain. He has also proposed scaling down the proposed parking deck from four levels with 2,475 spaces to three levels with 919 spaces, and increasing surface parking area. Also proposed is an increase in the square footage of the office building from 13,299 to 16,800. The staff recommendation is to divide the planning area into three land use classifications: 1. Commercial, including all frontage of Cedar, the hotel conference Center, parking deck and Staybridge Suites. Extends westward to near end of Just-a-Mere, including frontage on both sides. This area would include the hotel/conference center, the proposed parking deck and the connecting pedestrian bridge. 2. Office, along the north frontage of Willoughby, west of the south entrance to the complex east of Georgia. Frontage only. This serves as a commercial to the north and east, and the residential to the west and south. 3. Residential 15-20 du/acre west of Georgia, south of the frontage along Just-a-Mere, and including the north frontage of Willoughby and Oak Park Village. Buffers low density residential on the west from the commercial and office on the east. This recommendation is subject to five conditions. In Committee, it was moved by Mr. Ruge, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to recommend approval of MPA-1-99, provided: 1. Any remaining residential properties be screened from the development with adequate landscape, screening and buffering. 2. Improvements to the environment throughout the development to include storm water drainage, J _ -;: 4 ^'�.; � � � y;' u _, -• I' ' 1, PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 15 green space, and landscape screening and buffering. 3. Direct traffic away from Georgia Avenue, and keep it as a residential street for local traffic only. 4. No front yard parking in front of (south) of the office building along Willoughby Road. Parking should be in the rear, with ingress/egress off the main drive. 5. Line up the main entry off Willoughby with the commercial drive to the south. In Committee, on a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0). PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows. It was moved by Mr. Frederick and seconded by Mr. Ruge to table this item for later action. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously to table MPA-1-99 pending a quorum. TABLED. b. ACT-21-99, 1000 Block of Just-a-Mere Avenue, Pedestrian Overpass. This case is in specific regard to the granting of air rights over Just-a-Mere to enable the applicant, Gordon Long, to install a pedestrian overpass connecting the hotel/convention center with the proposed parking deck. As proposed, the walkway will have 18 feet of clearance above the roadway and will be made of the same materials as the hotel complex - glass, brick, steel. It will be heated, air conditioned and enclosed, and extend approximately 145 feet between the ramp and the hotel. Staff recommends approval, conditioned on the approval of MPA-1-99, and provided that the clearance be at a minimum height necessary for the safe passage of emergency vehicles, and that it receive final approval from the Fire Marshall's Office. The committee found that the proposed deck is in conformity with MPA-1-99, and that the clearance height of 18 feet will allow for the passage of emergency vehicles. n �- ' S.�i � , � I ' �, PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 16 In Committee, it was moved by Mr. Ruge, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to recommend approval of ACT-21-99, a pedestrian overpass over Just-a-Mere Ave., conditioned on the approval of MPA-1-99, and provided that the clearance be at minimum height necessary for the safe passage of emergency vehicles, and that it receive final approval from the Fire Marshall's Office. In Committee, on a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0). PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows. Moved by Mr. Smith and Seconded by Mr. Ruge to table this item for later for later action. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously to table ACT-21-99 pending a quorum. TABLED. C. MPA-2-2000, Amendment to Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan on S. Washington and W. Willard. This is a request by George Abraham to locate an office building on Willard Street west of Washington Avenue. The Southwest area Comprehensive Plan designates the subject parcels as Residential, 0-7 du/acre. Staff believes the roadway capacity would be able to accommodate the amount of traffic generated by a professional medical office. Traffic counts for this corridor shows that the amount of traffic has fluctuated over the last six years, but has experienced a decrease in the last two years. Additionally, the proposed traffic calming will not have a significant impact on traffic along S. Washington. Staff recommends adoption of MPA-2-2000, amendment of the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan, to allow the land use change for the subject property from low density residential to professional office, provided that the remainder of the enclave be designated low density residential and open space with four conditions (see plan for recommendation 1). �: `ti. � - , -;��� .. ..., � '. _ PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 17 The committee found that: a) there is a demand for office uses in close proximity to Ingham Regional Medical Center, b) the roadway capacity is sufficient to accommodate the traffic generated by an office use, c) the proposed site on the west side of Washington is better suited for office development because of the deeper lot, there are fewer residences adjacent to the subject properties, and there is direct access to Washington rather than a local street going through a residential neighborhood. In Committee, it was moved by Mr. Ruge, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to recommend adoption of MPA-2-2000, amendment of the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan, to allow the land use change for the subject property from low density residential to professional office, provided that the remainder of the enclave be designated low density and open space, with the following conditions (see plan for recommendation 1): 1. A 20' landscape buffer along S. Washington Avenue, residential properties, and park land shall be established, with parking to the rear of the building 2. The development of any office shall be architecturally compatible with the residential homes in the area similar to the McRee House. 3. The development shall preserve as many of the mature trees on site as possible. 4. The transfer of Willard Street to the applicant be according the general layout suggested by the Parks and Recreation Department, involving the exchange of the Willard Street ROW for additional park property. In Committee, on a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0). PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows. Moved by Mr. Smith and Seconded by Mr. Ruge to table this item for later action. On a Voice vote the motion carried unanimously to Table MPA-2-2000 pending a quorum. TABLED. r. ,.ti ,; w ? �,, PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 18 d. ACT-4-2000, W. Willard west of S. Washington, Vacate ROW This case is in specific regard to the vacating of W. Willard west of Washington Avenue, east of Washington Park. The applicant, George Abraham, proposes to utilize the ROW as part of a building site for his proposed office building. All properties abutting W. Willard are owned by the applicant, and would be included in this building site. Some property on the west side of the site could be exchanged for the ROW area, thus squaring off the building site, and providing a small addition to Washington Park. The Department of Public Service has a sewer within the ROW, which could be vacated if the applicant documents that the sewer no longer services the abutting properties. Staff recommends approval of ACT-4-2000, the vacation of the Willard Street ROW west of Washington Avenue, provided the ROW is exchanged for property owned by the applicant which abuts Washington Park, under the following conditions: a) adoption of MPA-2-2000, and b) the Department of Public Service requirements regarding the public sewer are met. The committee found: a) the ROW contains a sanitary sewer that could be abandoned if it is documented that the sewer is no longer necessary, b) the unimproved ROW could be combined with the adjacent parcels, which are owned by the applicant, to form a building site for the proposed office structure, and c) the Parks and Recreation Department has indicated an interest in acquiring any residual property from the site to combine with Washington Park. In Committee, it was moved by Mr. Frederick, seconded by Mr. Ruge, to recommend approval, pending the results of a title search, of ACT-4-2000 provided that (1) MPA-2-2000 shall have first been approved by the Planning Board, (2) that the Department of Public Service requirements regarding the public sewer are met. f - .3�..;., a.�i ., .. � 1' - .. A PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 19 In Committee, on a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0). PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows. Moved by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. Frederick to table this item for later action. On a voice vote the motioned carried unanimously to Table ACT-4-2000 pending a Quorum. TABLED. e. ACT-10-2000, 802-804 E. Michigan Avenue, Outdoor Seating in E. Michigan Ave., ROW This is a request by Michael R. Moriarty, representing Moriarty's Pub, Inc., to provide customer seating within a 8.8 ft. x 25 ft. area on the public sidewalk in front of the restaurant at 802-804 E. Michigan Avenue. Since the area for the seating encroaches into the public ROW, an Act 285 Review is needed. The property is located in the "F-1" Commercial District. The applicant is proposing to install outdoor seating enclosed with a wrought iron fence in front of 802-804 E. Michigan Ave. The entrance to this patio section would be from the restaurant. According to the applicant, the occupancy of the patio section will be 30 people; the patio area will be open between 11 a.m. - 2 a.m.; the wrought iron fence perimeter is 42" high, 25' long and will extend 8.8 ft from the building; the fencing would be semi-permanent, to be removed seasonally and the area will be well lit. The sidewalk is 17'3" in width. Because the subject property has residences located nearby, there is a potential for patrons to disturb the residents' quiet enjoyment of their property. Staff recommends approval of ACT-10-00, that the City permit outdoor seating within the ROW at 802-804 E. Michigan Ave., with four conditions. The committee found that: a) the proposed seating area is similar in design to that of the 621 Club, b) the proposed seating area expands the number of spaces required by the parking regulations to 54, c) the +✓ y�. ' y .�.: . 1 i. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 20 proposed seating area is subject to the noise ordinance regulations, which prohibit excessive noise during some of the hours of operation. In Committee, it was moved by Mr. Ruge, seconded by Mr. Frederick to recommend approval of ACT-10-2000, that the City permit outdoor seating with the ROW at 802-804 E. Michigan Ave., with the following conditions: 1 . The railings may not be permanently fixed in the sidewalk. All railings, seats, tables, flower arrangements, etc. must be removed entirely from the ROW during the off season. 2. A minimum of five feet of clear unobstructed walkway be maintained for pedestrian travel along the sidewalk. 3. The Public Service Department approves granting rights to occupy the ROW for the seasonal outdoor seating on an annual permit. 4. The applicant complies with all applicable noise and parking regulations. In Committee, on a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0). PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows Ms. Keene asked, did you receive any feedback from a neighborhood organization about noise issues or was this just something the staff or committee looked at. Mr. Rieske said that the noise issue was something that Mr. Ruff brought up because of noticing a number of residence within close range of the proposed outdoor seating area. Did not receive a referral from any neighborhood organization although there was one sent to the Green Oaks Neighborhood Organization and the East Side Neighborhood Organization. Mr. Smith made a motion; Supported by Mr. Frederick to approve ACT-10-2000, 802-804 E. Michigan Avenue, Outdoor Seating in E. Michigan Avenue, Right-of- Way with the four conditions enumerated in the committee report. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Ruge . . Aye Smith. . .Aye Keene. . . Aye i � e V � ... . . r. s„ E ,'. . _ r �. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 21 On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; ACT-10-2000, 802-804 E. Michigan Avenue, Outdoor Seating in E. Michigan Avenue, Right-of-Way was APPROVED w/ CONDITIONS. f. ACT-12-2000, Aurelius Rd. at Bowker & Remsing Drives (Lots 23, 24 & 37, New Horizon Sub.), Remove/reduce 10' utility easement This is a request by Richard Remsing that the City reduce a 10' utility easement along the west side of Aurelius Road at Bowker and Remsing Drives, along the east side of lots 23, 24 and 37. Lot 23 is located at the southwest corner of Aurelius and Remsing. It faces Remsing and is 70' in width. The applicant proposes to construct a house, 58' in width, on the 70' lot. The easement reduces the buildable lot width to 54 . The applicant also proposes to reduce the easement on the east side of lots 24 and 37, which also abut Aurelius, and are 78' in width. Staff recommends approval only if details can be worked out with the Board of Water and Light. The committee found that it would be unwieldy for the Board of Water and Light to relocate its utilities and reduce the easement by jogging it for the three parcels. In Committee, it was moved by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. Frederick to recommend denial of ACT-12-2000. In Committee, on a voice vote, the motion to deny ACT-12-2000; carried unanimously (3-0). PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows. Moved by Mr. Smith and Supported by Mr. Frederick to deny ACT-12-2000. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Ruge . .Aye Smith. . .Aye Keene. . . Aye , ' - _, - �' - -:r,,, s- - - _i .. 1 .. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 22 On a Roll Call Vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; Motion Carried, ACT-12-2000 request for vacation of utility easement was DENIED. g. Dismissal of ACT-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris Ave., Vacate Everett Lane ROW This case was tabled by the Urban Development Committee on February 16, 1999. At the staff level, it was referred to the Decentralization Committee, an interdepartmental committee with neighborhood representatives, in order to find alternative solutions to the problems reported by the applicant. The staff requested the completion of a withdrawal letter, which was mailed to the applicant with a SASE, and has received no response. Staff recommends dismissal of ACT-24-98. The committee found that (1) there has been no action on ACT-24-98, vacation of the Everett Lane ROW, (2) this item was referred to the Decentralization Committee to seek other solutions instead of the ROW vacation, and (3) the applicant has not responded to staff's request to withdraw the application. In Committee, it was moved by Mr. Ruge, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to recommend dismissal of ACT-24-98. In Committee, on a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0). PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows: Moved by Mr. Smith, supported by Mr. Frederick to dismiss ACT-24-98. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Ruge . . Aye Smith. . .Aye Keene. . . Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; Motion Carried. ACT-24-98, Everett Lane at Paris Avenue, Vacate Everett Lane ROW was DISMISSED �,. -�, . '_ � � .n t d ,:. f �, i. :�i� � �, _�_. . c a- PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 23 Next meeting is Tuesday, August 22, 2000 at 4 p.m. at 316 N. Capital Avenue, Department Conference Room. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from Planning Manager Mr. Ruff has had a meeting with a potential applicant for the Board. Her name is Sissy Foster. She is an Assistant Professor of Landscape Architecture at Michigan State University after 10 years of practice. She has excellent experience of Geographic Information Systems and in Landscape Ordinances. She has both her Bachelors and Masters Degrees and she would make an excellent candidate, especially since we are making advances in the GIS area, beautification landscape Ordinances. This would also strengthen our ties with Michigan State University and the College of Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture. I have sent a recommendation to the Mayor for favorable recommendation to City Council for appointment and if it is possible her first meeting would be the meeting in September. Ms. Keene asked if she has already met with City Council. Mr. Ruff said that will come following the recommendation of the Mayor. I am seeing if can get the recommendation up to council this Monday. I have reported out the various items of enforcement that the board members have given him such as parking motor homes in the front yards and the issues like this. I have made contact regarding the buffering at Michigan and Grand Avenue, but don't have any further information for tonight. Beyond this, we are doing interviews for the Zoning Administrators position and we should be completed with those this week. D. Pending Items: Future action required. 1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) b. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to"G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) C. Z-7-2000, 2710, 2712, 2716, 2718 and 2726 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential to"D-1" Professional Office District(Tabled May 10, 2000) d. Z-15-99 (Revised and Expanded) Portions of 6820 S. Cedar Street, "F" Commercial to"J" Parking District and "J" Parking to"F" Commercial District; Also 915, 920, 926, 927, 1000 Just A Mere Avenue, 6900, 6931, 6937, 7001, 7007, 7015 Georgia Avenue and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Road from "A" Residential to"J" Parking District; also 7025 Georgia Avenue, 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the south 178 ft of 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd., 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, - �.• .; .. �� N 1�,- � � NL! � -� .r� �. 7 _ C. 9 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 24 1227 and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd. from "A" Residential District to"F" Commercial District(Tabled June 14, 2000) e. Z-8-2000, 3901 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "F" Commercial to"H" Light Industrial District(Tabled June 14, 2000) 2. Urban Development Committee a. Act-7-99, Somercroft Drive at Post Oak Lane, Vacate Public Right-of-way for School Parking (Referred to UDC May 18, 1999) 3. Planning Board Committee a. Act-21-99, 1000 Block Just-A-Mere Ave., Pedestrian Overpass (Tabled January 18, 2000, Re-Tabled August 1, 2000) b. MPA-1-99, Master Plan Amendment to the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan (Tabled January 18, 2000, Re-Tabled August 1, 2000) C. MPA-2-2000, Amendment to the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan, S. Washington and W. Willard (Tabled August 1, 2000) d. ACT-4-2000, W. Willard west of S. Washington, Vacate ROW(Tabled August 1, 2000) 9. NEW BUSINESS - Mr. Andrew Frederick stated that in the Urban Development Committee we discussed the various city Departments that we request reports from and we noted that especially in reference to the seating in the right of way for Moriarty's Pub that it would be nice if we could get a report from the Police Department specifically in cases like this, any record of violations, or complaints that have been made about particular property that might come before us and in general we expressed an appreciation of hearing from the Police Department in the past. We found it quite helpful and have noticed that we have not gotten these reports as of late and we now have a new Police Chief and this might be a good opportunity to write to the Police Commissioner that they ask the Police Chief to see if he can get the Police Department to respond to our request for information in that regard and would like to move that we ask the secretary to send a letter to the Police Commission so they know of our desire. Moved by Mr. Frederick and Seconded by Mr. Ruge to submit a letter to the Police Commission requesting more feedback from Police Department. Motion carried. 10. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None. 11. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Mr. John Ruge asked for an excused absence for the next meeting of August 15, 2000 and was granted an excused absence. Second, he had a question; a chainlink fence in the front yard can be 4 foot high? Answer yes, the yard areas that extend from the house to the street in both situations. If it is an interior lot where there is only one street frontage, from the front wall of the house toward the street, is all front yard and the same thing for the corner lot. You have front yards that extend the full length of the lot between the line of the house and the street. Also, he asked on the master plan amendments, we approved, what kind of official document is s �: � � ' y�. � ;, .. .,� L � � , � � � � + - ` f � i _ • � - PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 25 there going to be kept in the file to say this was the master plan amendment? Mr. Rieske answered that the official record will be the staff report and the attachments. Having researched these at the register of deeds, what happens upon adoption of the plan the planning manager certifies a copy to the register of deeds which then keeps it on file, not recorded, but on file. Having researched the ones in the past what he has noticed that it includes the staff reports when there is not a large plan or it has the plan. Mr. Ruge asked that plumbing shop that we approved a non- conforming use for on Lake Lansing Road. Could you tell me where that is in the process, has City Council approved that? Mr. Ruff answered that Council does not act on non-conforming items that is strictly to the planning boards discretion, so will have to verify what permits have been issued and what conditions have been met so far. Mr. Ruge, he can verify what conditions have been met so far, that is none. Mr. Smith, a quick comment. I know that Mr. Frederick attended some performances at Common Ground, and want to be on record to say that it was good to see Lansing pull off a really wonderful bit of entertainment and hopefully it will continue next year and get even better. Mr. Frederick said he will be on vacation from September 7-16, 2000. Mr. Frederick said yes it was a good festival and had some really fine music. Mr. Frederick said for the Zoning and Ordinance Committee Meeting scheduled on September 13, 2000 he will not be there, and also for the Board of Zoning Appeals on September 14, 2000, he will not be there. 12. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Mr. Frederick said he would like to ask if Mr. Ruff has any information on Bill's Wrecker Service for him. He moved into Mr. Frederick's neighborhood. Mr. Ruff has done some inquiry, and is doing continual research on the whole area because of the size issue. Want to make sure that everything is in order; licenses have to be issued for wrecker service locations and that is a flood plain which has to be dealt with as well. There are a number of issues that have to be dealt with there and are looking into them. Mr. Frederick saw a sign that proposes a new development there and not sure what that is about, but it shows a kind of layout with a road extending south along that area, it is almost like it goes right through Bill's Wrecker Service, so maybe he is going to be temporary, but don't know what that is about. Mr. Ruff said that they have schematic plans for development by what we thought was a property owner and there are some issues that are still being resolved with Department of Environmental Quality regarding filling of the floodplain that took place without permit. We .-C .. ' ��� , 1 - �+. .. � � t�•� .. ii� 1 ` , � - , Y ♦ - ` � 1 I 1 � � � r. • b � � •�\ _^ PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 1, 2000 PAGE 26 are dealing with these issues as well as DEQ and then beyond that have not received anything official, but it is possible that the owner of the property will come in with an industrial development similar to where Soccer Zone is. The southern part is out of the floodplain. All these issues could be dealt with but there has not been any progress. Mr. Frederick also has another code enforcement violation he would like to report. Speaking of the festival. On way home, his wife and he noticed what appears to be an unauthorized auto repair facility at 900 Bensch Street, corner of Bensch and Main Street by the corner market, which also needs some investigation on its signs. This was a Sunday night on the way home from the Festival and noticed there is a garage there where the door is usually closed, the guy was working on at least 4-5 cars in that garage. There was another 3 cars in the yard in various states of disrepair, so basically they counted 8 cars. While they were there a wrecker came to haul a car away so it looks like it is a bustling business. He had way more cars than he could own, unless he was a real car fanatic. Every other time he has driven by the garage door is closed, so I do not know exactly if there is any regularity that this guy works there, the actual garage is on Main Street, but the address is on 900 Bensch Street. NOTE: His wife wrote down time they noticed that. Mr. Ruff says there are some unusual zoning patterns there due to the railroad and on the north side of Main Street you have a warehouse or industrial zoning so then you have of course Summer Time Concrete and Martin Block on the south side of Main Street. So you get some of those adjacent properties that carry over the industrial zoning. But there is also change in use requirements, that if it was a house, even a non-conforming house in an industrial district and they decided to convert it to a business they still would have to get a building permit, site plan to get the parking lot approved and so on, to make sure the zoning codes were fulfilled. Mr. Frederick said it might be a tough one, because you might have to catch him in the act. 13. ADJOURNMENT was at 9:34 p.m. Respectfully submitted 01 James A. Ruff, Secretary Lansing Planning Board mn08012000 aA58 4 t f n. ii l Act-10-2000, 802-804 East Michigan Ave. Outdoor Seating in Right-of-Way GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Michael Moriarty 802-804 East Michigan Lansing, MI 48912 REQUESTED ACTION: Act 285 Review EXISTING LAND USE: Restaurant EXISTING ZONING: "F-V Commercial District PROPOSED ZONING: No change PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 66' x 165' = 10,890 ft2 SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Jon Anthony's Florist S: Residential E: Commercial W: Commercial SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "F-1" Commercial S: "DM-3" Residential E: "F-1" Commercial W: "F-1" Commercial MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The NorthEastArea Plan designatesthis area for commercial. SPECIFIC INFORMATION This is a request by Michael R. Moriarty, representing Moriarty's Pub, Inc., to provide customer seating within a 8.8 ft. x 25 ft. area on the public sidewalk in front of the restaurant at 802-804 East Michigan Avenue. Since the area for the seating encroaches into the public right-of-way, an Act 285 Review is needed. AGENCY RESPONSES AMERITECH: No response received yet. AT&T: No response received yet. ACT-10-2000, 802-804 E. Michigan Ave, Outdoor Seating in Right-of-Way, Pg. 2. Assessor: We assume that this is a request for a temporary license to use the public right-of-way. We would NOT recommend any permanent transfer of ownership such as selling the land or vacating part of the right-of-way. BWL: No response received yet. Building Safety: No objection provided that the seating area does not impede exiting. City Attorney: No response received yet. Code Compliance: Please notify this office of any requirements for physical improvements if approved. Development: No comment. Eastside Neighborhood Organization: No response received yet. Fire Marshal: No objections. Seating may not block or impede exiting to public way. Green Oaks Neighborhood Organization: No response received yet. Parks and Rec.: No response received yet. Police: No response received yet. Public Service: No response received yet. Trans. Engr.: No response received yet. 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). ACT-10-2000, 802-804 E. Michigan Ave, Outdoor Seating in Right-of-Way, Pg. 3. BACKGROUND The applicant is proposing to install outdoor seating enclosed with a wrought iron fence in front of 802-804 E. Michigan Avenue. The entrance to this patio section would be from the restaurant. According to the applicant, the occupancy of the patio section will be 30 people; the patio area will be open between 11:00 a.m. - 2:00 a.m.; the wrought iron perimeter is 42" high, 25' long and will extend 8.8 ft. from the building; the fencing would be semi-permanent, to be removed seasonally and the area will be well lit. The sidewalk is 1 TY in width (see attached diagram). The regular hours of the restaurant is as follows: Monday - Friday 10:00 a.m. - 2:00 a.m. Saturday 12-00 p.m. - 2.00 a.m. Sunday 6:00 p.m. - 2:00 a.m. The largest number of employees is 5 (five) which is on the night shift. According to the applicant, the usable floor area is 1,992 square feet. According to Section 1284.13(c)(6) of the Zoning Code, there are 50 parking spaces required. The applicant has identified at least 85 on-street parking spaces within 300 feet of the business. LOCATION: The applicant is proposing to provide seasonal outdoor seating for the restaurant located at 802-804 E. Michigan Ave. The location of the outdoor seating is in an area 25 ft X 8.8 ft area with the entrance to the patio from 802-804 E. Michigan Avenue. ': Even with the outdoor seating, there should be sufficient room for pedestrian passage on the sidewalk. The subject location is outside of the Principal Shopping District's(PSD) Downtown Mall and Environs jurisdiction. According to PSD's criteria the minimum width for an unobstructed walkway outside of Washington Mall is five feet. This is the minimum appropriate width wheelchair users and the blind. Considering the lot area and sidewalk width, the application of the PSD's criteria in this case is reasonable. Because the subject property has residences located nearby, there is a potential for patrons to disturb the residents' quiet enjoyment of their property. Thus, close ACT-10-2000, 802-804 E. Michigan Ave, Outdoor Seating in Right-of-Way, Pg. 4. attention to the noise ordinance is advisable. For example, Section 654.07(b) prohibits: (1) The using or operating for non-commercial purpose of any loudspeaker, public address system, musical instrument or similar device between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. of the following day, such that the sound therefrom creates a noise disturbance across a residential real property boundary: or (2) The using or operating for commercial purpose of any loudspeaker, public address system, musical instrument or similar device so as to be audible in residential areas or in a noise sensitive zone. [Noise sensitive zones are areas near schools, hospitals, nursing homes, libraries, residences, etc.] CHARACTER: The character of the area is basically commercial and will not change as a result of the installation of the outdoor seating. In fact, many restaurants have considered adding an outdoor seating which is an added bonus not only to attract businesses, but provide additional seating for their customers. EXTENT: The outdoor seating is not permanent and will be removed during the off season. OTHER: The outdoor seating area will add an additional 30 customers. The pedestrian passage is wide enough for wheelchair users. The property is zoned "F-1" Commercial District and there are parking requirements in this zoning district. According to Section 1284.13(c)(6) of the Zoning Code, fifteen, plus one for every sixty square feet of usable floor area, plus one for each two employees, based upon the maximum employment shift is required for parking. Also, this property is east of the Oldsmobile baseball stadium and general downtown business area and can attract customers to this location. According to the applicant, the only parking available for Moriarty's Pub is on-street parking which has been the situation for years and he has identified more than 85 spaces within 300 feet of the Pub. ACT-10-2000, 802-804 E. Michigan Ave, Outdoor Seating in Right-of-Way, Pg. 5. SUMMARY The location of the wrought iron fence would allow more than 5 feet of area for pedestrian passage. The character of the area is commercial and will not change as a result of the installation of the outdoor seating. The outdoor seating will be removed during the off season months. The location, character and extent are reasonable. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Act-10-00, that the City permit outdoor seating within the ROW at 802-804 E. Michigan Ave., with the following conditions- - the railings may not be permanently fixed in the sidewalk. All railings, seats tables, flower arrangements, etc. must be removed entirely from the right-of- way during the off season. - a minimum of five feet of clear unobstructed walkway be maintained for pedestrian travel along the sidewalk. - the Public Service Department approves granting rights to occupy the right-of-way for the seasonal outdoor seating on an annual permit. - the applicant complies with all applicable noise and parking regulations. Report Prepared by DMW 7/2000. r'q p.il ACT-10-2000, 802-804 E. Michigan Ave. Outdoor Seating in the Right-of-Way NORTH /6 1 55 �F'I� /4 20 Z 29 C o Mmu��a� 2 / LV 735 0 -;�:� �f0 _Y��� �pt7 MICHIGAJ g�2�ey o cam' �, �-�� �IR1M• 34 23 50 C o I P1 RKING 39 4 I 25 27 J WALLS /5 29 ^O PARKING 26 97/.9 29 34 7 : 87/.5 /6 lJ 27 ❑ 29 = 7J a 25 2B ❑ 3/ 28 29 32 2B 30 El 2B 870.2 1 E�D 870.3 EURE ❑ 663.6 Eu KA 27 3/ 32 24 4 3/ 36 I 3/ 30 i 27 25 26 Q 27 673.4 25 l 27 PARKING 872.6 cp 25 ❑ f26 ^ 29 �❑ � 27 ❑ 27 29 26 U1 ❑ 256 --] 2B 29 26 ne^ 1--�_ o C] 4�--, j2 32C rl t/n r,r+ I J r '1.1, E fl o Q o � w o Appendix I - Usable Floor Area (For Purposes of Computing Parldng) `v cn w pA(N (or SA N. OFFICE STOR. ' :;; A S L E S 8 SERVICE n! M . . ............................. USABLE FLOOR AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF COMPUTING PARKING) FLOOR AREA rIN T-0 L F-T J_ j /il Ufa �ll� i k ( -v yU )- e, In(L N- A vc L/EN f cf Gut' ( O� Oo�M r«� )' oo VLBdPA Tl'Q14 FR SA' T :uoP� S u,Y rR( �tT6 lrr IN sy f r --7� lit L) APPROVED WITH ONE CHANGE P. 10, Ln 8.88" Pos 6.27"Seuth Logan Draft to Clerk Unknown DR MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD Approved 09062000 To Clerk 01192001 Minutes of the Regular Meeting _ LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 p.m., City Council Chambers _ Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall j'} 124 West Michigan Avenue Tuesday, August 15, 2000 1. OPENING SESSION: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice Chairman Keene. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Keene, Smith, Patrick; four members present. Absent: Nischan, Ruge. Two vacant seats. B. Excused Absences - Mr. Nischan and Mr. Ruge granted an excused absence. C. Introductions. James A. Ruff, Planning Manager 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - Approved as presented. 3. COMMUNICATIONS A. Letter dated August 14, 2000, City Council Planning Board and Zoning Ordinance Committee, from Mr. George Abraham, on Z-7-2000. Indicating he's head of this project we will be voting on this evening, and he is thanking the Board for their consideration. B. Letter addressed to the members of the Planning Board and Zoning and Ordinance Committee, from Bonnie and Denny Purdue, owner's Vet's Ace Hardware, NCU-9-2000. Was tabled at the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, on August 9, 2000. 4. HEARINGS - None 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each) DENNY PURDUE, OWNER OF VET'S ACE HARDWARE, 2416 N. EAST STREET. Wanted to go on record as reading my prepared statement. Dear Members of the Planning and Zoning Board, I am speaking with concerns with the business that would like to open at the old Pussycat Theater, right next door to our business that is Ace Hardware. (NCU- 9-2000, Nonconforming Uses of Setbacks and Parking. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 15, 2000 PAGE 2 Let me point out, it has been brought to my attention the formerly owned business was closed due to illegal prostitution from their adult entertainment business. Now they would like to open a "bookstore" with only 35 percent adult books. Please let me understand: 1) Who is going to monitor the 35% adult books? 2) Who is going to monitor the children from buying time from the Cyber Cafe a.k.a. cyber porn? 3) How many feet within a school can one open an adult entertainment center? (Otto Middle School can not be more than 300 feet away.) 4) How many feet within a church can one open an adult entertainment center? (The church can not be more than 75 feet away.) 5) Whom will monitor the age of the customers? And indeed, how will it be monitored? 6) What type of protection for the customer who comes in to purchase a book from the non-adult materials from being exposed to pornographic scenes from the Internet while other customers are watching? As I mentioned, we own the hardware store, next to the prospective business. In the past, many times, clients from the Pussycat have parked their vehicles in our parking lot while visiting the adult entertainment center. I have had to go over to the Pussycat and ask them to come and remove their vehicles (in which they did). I have to lock the gate of our parking lot after hours due to our equipment and rentals. Several times over the years we have had to lock our gate with vehicles from the Pussycat in the parking lot itself. Police Officer's have called my home and asked us to unlock the gate so the trespassers can remove their vehicles. Twice, that I can recall, our fences were driven through and destroyed, which was costly for us to replace, from cars that were illegally parked in our lot after business hours. Is this going to continue? The prospective business only has 1 % to 2 parking spots, and this is what we will have to look forward to again. I understand that there is an agreement with Attorney Mike Nolen to lease some parking spots. Please let me understand, what happens if Mike Nolen decides to move or sell his business and the next owners don't agree with the parking lease? What happens if Mike Nolen, decides to reopen a west side Deli or another business and needs the parking? What if they do decide to park in the lease lot, will it be necessary to allow their cliental to walk through our parking lot? Will it be comfortable for our customers to be walking from their legally parked vehicles of our business to have to look face to face with those who were just leaving a cyber porn site or using our property as a short cut to get to this prospective business? Is it necessary we expose our customers to this kind of situation? PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 15, 2000 PAGE 3 In reality are people really going to walk a block away to park, when our parking lot is wide open right next door? The answer is no. These are issues not consulted, the answers are found before the construction of the new business took place? Is a business at liberty to just go ahead and hope that the Planning and Zoning Board would agree, or do they need to do some investigating before some extreme measures begin? Please members of the Planning and Zoning Board, I beg you to please revisit the reason the Pussycat was closed up. Is this new business not a "front" from more prospective problems? Not a "front" for more adult entertainment? This is a neighborhood of families. We are a family owned business for fifty years and cater to families of the Lansing Area. We do not want to expose this kind of activity to our own families or the families who support our hardware. Please listen and consider our plea. Sincerely, Bonnie and Denny Perdue, owner Footnote: Has anyone been provided with an ironclad parking lease? BEVERLY MILLER, NORTH LANSING. Just wanted to add to what Denny said that I can tell you that they will not walk a block. There is just no way they are going to do it. Also, what role does the Planning and Zoning Boards play in bringing this business together? I do not understand where the Board stands. Do you do just the zoning, do you take care of the parking? Can the business go in without your say-so? Do you help them plan it? We have no way of knowing what the function of the Planning Board actually is. If it is your stage that looks at the parking that shouldn't be to hard, since he has no parking. I think the only way he is going to have room for handicap parking is if he tears off his patio, which I'm not sure why he put the patio up there. He said he was going to put some tables out there for some coffee or something. But, if it turns out that you decide that 35% is an adult business, the signs, you say if it advertised any type of adult business, then it becomes an adult business. To have an adult business within 300 feet of a school, church, most important part, if you read it, if you understands what it says, the City of Lansing does not put an adult business or any type of an adult business within a neighborhood that is used residentially. The difference here is if you want a bar next door, and the bar is not zoned like the neighborhood, the neighborhood has nothing to say about it. But an adult book store they do. There not to put an adult bookstore or business, anything that has anything to do with an adult business, 35% or more, next to a neighborhood. This is right next to a neighborhood. Right next to where the customer are going to park on Gier, there's no doubt about that. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 15, 2000 PAGE 4 1 did have one other thing I wanted to ask. Is there some way they can get a copy of the function of the Planning Board, that tells what place the Board plays in the process? Is there a book or a paper they can get. Mr. Ruff says the function of the Planning Board is spelled out both in the State Statue as well as the Zoning Ordinance and you are more than welcome to look at either one of them at our office. Ms. Miller asked if they can purchase them. Mr. Ruff said he was sure she could. DENNIS NORTH, 741 CHICAGO. I simply came back to the Board meeting tonight because there will be a report from the Zoning and Ordinance Committee and I am here to answer any further questions that might have come up to the Boards attention. In the mean time, I am just here to answer questions. 6. RECESS - none taken. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: August 1, 2000 Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Smith, to approve the minutes of August 1, 2000, without corrections. On a Voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; carried unanimous; the minutes of August 1, 2000, were APPROVED. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole, did not meet. 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee, Mr. Frederick, Chair. a. NCU-8-2000, 741 Chicago Avenue, Class "A" Restoration, 4- unit in "C" Residential. Mr. Dennis North requests Class "A" Nonconforming status for a structure at 741 Chicago Avenue to provide substantial restoration to a four unit structure in a "C" Residential District. This property is nonconforming due to land use, setbacks and parking and therefore is limited to 35% of the value of the structure ($30,436.70) for repairs. Based upon Section 1294.02(c) property of the Zoning Code, the property is a four unit building in the "C" Residential District and is a Group 3 Class "B" Nonconformity for use. Therefore this is a request for a Class "A" Nonconforming status it is not a matter of rezoning. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 15, 2000 PAGE 5 This particular unit has been there for quite some time, it has five bedrooms, is a four apartment unit, and it requires six parking spaces. The applicant is investigating an agreement for two addition lease spaces, but currently one of the tenants, who happens to be in the largest unit, is disabled and can not drive and does not have a car so that resolves the immediate need for parking. The staff recommended approval for this Class "A" Nonconformity with the following conditions: 1. That four accessible parking spaces be maintained and not used for storage and the property be managed within the four available parking spaces. 2. The interior work required to meet the Housing Code be completed within one year. We discussed the facts in the report and we found that there will be at least be one parking space per unit and additional spaces could be provided on site or off site and we therefore unanimously moved to recommend approval of NCU-8-2000, 741 Chicago Avenue, Class "A" Nonconformity with the conditions stated in the report and so move tonight. PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows Mr. Frederick made a motion; Supported by Mr. Smith to approve NCU-8-2000, 741 Chicago Avenue, Class "A" Nonconformity. Frederick . Ave Patrick •Ave Smith .Ave Keene . Ave On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; NCU-8-2000, 741 Chicago Avenue, Class "A" Nonconformity was APPROVED w/ CONDITIONS. b. NCU-9-2000, 2400 N. East Street, Class "A" Nonconforming Status There was discussion regarding the parking situation and other issues that arose with this request and the Committee moved to table this item pending further information, particularly regarding parking. So we lay that on the table and will bring that up as soon as the staff brings them the information they need. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 15, 2000 PAGE 6 C. Z-10-2000, 2602 N. Grand River Avenue, "A" Residential District and "E-2" Local Shopping Districts to "E-2" Local Shopping District This site currently is primarily zoned "E-2" Local Shopping District, but for whatever reason, two very small portions of the site are zoned "A" Residential District. Mr. Lester Peckham is requesting application to rezone the entire site in "E-2" Local Shopping District. This is currently a vacant commercial building that is most recently been used for a gasoline filling station and automotive service facility. The applicant requests to have these two small portions rezoned so the whole property will be the appropriate zoning. The two parts that are zoned Residential are so tiny, that they will make no appreciable difference on the use of the building and the Committee found that approval of Z-10-2000 should be done at 2602 N. Grand River Avenue, "A" Residential District and "E-2" Local Shopping Districts to "E-2" Local Shopping District. We unanimously move to recommend approval. PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows Mr. Frederick made a motion; Supported by Mr. Smith to approve Z-10-2000, 2602 N. Grand River Avenue, "A" Residential District and "E-2" Local Shopping Districts to "E-2" Local Shopping District. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Patrick . .Aye Smith. . .Aye Keene. . . Ave On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; NCU-8-2000, Z-10-2000, 2602 N. Grand River Avenue, "A" Residential District and "E-2" Local Shopping Districts' to "E- 2" Local Shopping District was APPROVED. Mr. Ruff stated that zoning with less than the 6 votes will go up with a recommendation as it shows for approval, recognizing the vote, but it will not carry an official recommendation with it. Mr. Frederick said maybe you can explain to the City Council Committee that this was simply a matter of not having enough members, this really is a good thing. Mr. Ruff said that will be done. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 15, 2000 PAGE 7 d. Z-11-2000, 7011 Georgia Avenue; and Z-15-99 (Revised and Expanded) Portions of 6820 S. Cedar Street, "F" Commercial to "J" Parking District and "J" Parking to "F" Commercial District; Also 915, 920, 926, 927, 1000 Just A Mere Avenue, 6900, 6931, 6937, 7001, 7007, 7015 Georgia Avenue and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Road from "A" Residential to "J" Parking District; also 7025 Georgia Avenue, 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the south 178 ft of 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd., 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd. from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District Z-15-99 was removed from the table where it had been for a fair amount of time and addressed simultaneously with Z-11- 2000. This is some of the long standing requests that need to be resolved for Mr. Long's project to expand his Holiday Inn site. We did move for approval, but at this point I am recommending this be tabled at the Planning Board level to resolve minor issues between rezoning and the Master Plan Amendment that is pending. PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows: So move that these to items be tabled at Planning Board to be referred to the Committee at the Whole at a later time. Mr. Frederick made a motion; Supported by Mr. Smith to table Z-11-2000, 7011 Georgia Avenue; and Z-15-99 (Revised and Expanded) Portions of 6820 S. Cedar Street, "F" Commercial to "J" Parking District and "J" Parking to "F" Commercial District; Also 915, 920, 926, 927, 1000 Just A Mere Avenue, 6900, 6931, 6937, 7001, 7007, 7615 Georgia Avenue and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Road from "A" Residential to "J" Parking District; also 7025 Georgia Avenue, 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the south 178 ft of 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd., 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd. from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District TABLED. e. Z-12-2000, 500 E. Grand River Avenue and 1106 N. Cedar Street, "F-1" Commercial and "C" Residential Districts to "G-1" Business, "D-1" Professional Office District, and "J" Parking District There are still some pending issues regarding resolution of the number of parking spaces that will be available for this PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 15, 2000 PAGE 8 application so we move to table this and will address this as the information becomes available to them. f. Z-7-2000, 2710-2726 S. Washington Avenue, Rezone from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office I am going to abbreviate and hold the report at this time because although we moved to recommend approval, this also needs to be tabled at the Planning Board level to be considered with the Master Plan Amendment that accompanies it and so moves tonight. PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows: Mr. Frederick made a motion; Supported by Mr. Smith to table Z-7-2000, 2710-2726 S. Washington Avenue, Rezone from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office TABLED. Next meeting will be September 13, 2000, at 4:00pm, 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. Mr. Frederick stated that he will not be attending this meeting. 3. Urban Development Committee, Mr. Smith, Chair. Next meeting is Tuesday, August 22, 2000 at 4:00pm at 316 N. Capital Avenue, Department Conference Room. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from Planning Manager Just a reminder that Wednesday, September 6, 2000 is the next Planning Board meeting. Council will meet on Tuesday Night and Planning Board will meet on Wednesday, September 6, 2000. At that meeting we hope to have sufficient members to take business on the Master Plan Amendments that are tabled by the Urban Development Committee, as well as, these related zoning and ACT-285 cases, both dealing with the Z-15-99 case as well as Mr. Abrahams case on S. Washington. So we anticipate that and we also hope that we will have a new member on board at this time, that shall be a welcome addition. Then we will have one vacancy yet. To note, we have hired a Zoning Administrator and that person will be starting Tuesday, September 5, 2000 with the Planning Office. That is the new business. I anticipate that we will be setting a time to get the Executive Committee together of the Planning Board to discuss the PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 15, 2000 PAGE 9 Master Plan update as we need to get underway on further action there. And then also on September 6, 2000 we need to have elections for Board Officers. So be considering that as well. The Code Compliance issues that you mentioned at the last meeting have been disseminated to Code Compliance, so we hope to have further action on those issues. Did you notice the article in the paper today about last night's Council meeting there was a Public Hearing regarding front yard parking and changing the type of fine for that, it will become a Civil Infraction under the proposed ordinance and be subject to the same fines as other Civil infractions and so that will be a significant change on how those are handled, both administratively as well as how they are dealt with instead of a one time ticket, it would be a Civil Infraction. Ms. Keene says she has not had a chance to read it and asks what the penalty, is there a graduated penalty? Mr. Ruff says, yes it is a graduated penalty, the first violation will be a warning and if that does not get observed the first penalty is $150 and it moves to a maximum of $500. D. Pending Items: Future action required. 1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) b. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to"G-1" Business District (Tabled June 10, 1998) C. Z-8-2000, 3901 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "F" Commercial to"H" Light Industrial District(Tabled June 14, 2000) d. Z-12-2000, 500 E. Grand River Avenue and 1106 N. Cedar Street, "F-1" Commercial and "C" Residential Districts to"G-1" Business, "D-1" Professional Office, and"J" Parking Districts (Tabled August 9, 2000) 2. Urban Development Committee a. Act-7-99, Somercroft Drive at Post Oak Lane, Vacate Public Right-of-way for School Parking (Referred to UDC May 18, 1999) 3. Planning Board Committee a. Act-21-99, 1000 Block Just-A-Mere Ave., Pedestrian Overpass (Tabled January 18, 2000, Re-Tabled August 1, 2000) b. MPA-1-99, Master Plan Amendment to the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan (Tabled January 18, 2000, Re-Tabled August 1, 2000) C. MPA-2-2000, Amendment to the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan, S. Washington and W. Willard (Tabled August 1, 2000) d. ACT-4-2000, W. Willard west of S. Washington, Vacate ROW(Tabled August 1, 2000) e. Z-7-2000, 2710, 2712, 2716, 2718 and 2726 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential to"D-1" Professional Office District(Tabled August 15, 2000) f. Z-11-2000, 7011 Georgia Avenue(Tabled August 15, 2000) g. Z-15-99(Revised and Expanded) Portions of 6820 S. Cedar Street, "F" Commercial to"J" Parking District and"J" Parking to"F" Commercial District; Also 915, 920, 926, 927, 1000 Just A Mere Avenue, 6900, 6931, 6937, 7001, 7007, 7015 Georgia Avenue and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Road from"A" Residential to"J" Parking District; also 7025 Georgia Avenue, 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the south 178 ft of 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 15, 2000 PAGE 10 Willoughby Rd., 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd. from "A" Residential District to"F" Commercial District(Tabled August 15, 2000) Ms. Keene noted that there are a number of these that should be disposed of within the next month or so. She asked about the Z-5-98? Mr. Ruff said, those two (Z-1-98 and Z-5- 98) are issues that are up in North Lansing Old Town and they are working with the attorneys office going through a draft of a potential overlay district that may address these issues. As you know, these requests were for the "G-1" Business District that totally exempts them from parking and yet it too allows other improvements that potentially can be made on these properties that may not be in the best interest of the area, such as: no height limitations and the such, so with that in mind. The idea here is to potentially have an overlay district that would satisfy the overriding need on how to handle parking and also in the North Lansing Old Town Area, but also set-up a special District where that would be handled. So, it would apply to certain properties and these are two of them that it could apply to. Ms. Keene said so they would have some kind of height parameters and those kinds of things? Mr. Ruff said yes, instead of rezoning you would add another level of relaxed conditions that would basically modify the existing zoning of those properties. So that they could take advantage of the public parking that is in the area which was intended for that purpose, and yet that public parking may not fully supply all the parking needs and you have to address Residential needs, as Beverly Miller is here to remind us as well, the needs to make sure there is sufficient parking to operate effectively without harming other people's properties. Ms. Keene asked what time frame they are looking at for this (it is two years old now)? Mr. Ruff said yes these cases are a couple years old and we hope to bring that to you this fall for review and public hearing. Those would require public hearing before it's considered by the Board. It would be an ordinance amendment. 9. NEW BUSINESS - None 10. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON Want to thank Mr. Smith, who she assumes pinch-hit for me at the Zoning and Ordinance Committee Meeting for her the other day, and other Planning Board Members who have been over the past year or so been willing to pinch-hit for others because we are short people and it becomes a challenge and she knows that we are all very busy, but she appreciates everyone for stepping in. Mr. Ruff said that Mr. Ruge also stepped in to the other meeting, so that was very helpful. 11. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Mr. Smith asked what the status on the Old Drakes Station on South Logan DR MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BOULEVARD which still doesn't look like PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 15, 2000 PAGE 11 anything is being done to it. Mr. Ruff answered that he does not necessarily have up-to-date status on it, but there is a potential that I think I reported that we were working with the state to get the property cleaned up and I am not sure the progress or the status of when that would occur. I will check with Economic Development Corporation who is working with the State Department of Environmental Quality in the potential for cleaning that site. There are also some unresolved coding issues that need to be resolved as well. The problem is getting in touch with the person who owns it to do the work. That makes it difficult, because it has been sold in a couple fashions, a number of the tax shares have been sold from the Department of Natural Resources and yet not all of them. There is ownership issues is a problem as well. The Code Compliance Manager and the City Attorney's Office as well as others are also working on a commercial blight ordinance that we hope to bring to the Planning Board soon. Hopefully within this year so we can look at taking better action on commercial blighting influences were there is properties that are left vacant and are obviously adversely affecting their neighbors. Mr. Smith asked if there is going to be anything in that plan to deal with properties that are now still being occupied. Mr. Ruff said good question and he will have to check. 12. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Mr. Frederick said that this caught my eye, because have had opportunity to address restaurants putting tables in public right-of-way. Six Twenty One Club and then Moriarty's down the street and as much as I encourage that and think that it is a good thing for the general look of the downtown, I believe the Exchange is putting tables with a temporary rail, expandable bank rails that has the nylon that roles out of the standard and they certainly have been extending into the public right-of-way and he does not recall seeing any kind of application from them. While I am certainly inclined to approve it if I saw it, I think fair is fair, since we have heard from applications from two restaurants and the very near facility the Exchange should receive equal treatment. Mr. Ruff said that this is a good point and needs clarification as well. Those properties that are within the Principal Shopping District (PSD Area) go through the PSD Board as part of their function. Those that are out of the PSD Area, such as the Six Twenty One Club, that is outside the Principal Shopping District and then any private use of the public right-of-way in this manner is appropriated to the Planning Board and so that is why you have not seen anything. The Exchange went through a different process than the Six Twenty One Club, which is only a block away. He believes that Larch Street is the cut off on E. Michigan Avenue and so then as you go down the street PLANNING BOARD MINUTES AUGUST 15, 2000 PAGE 12 farther to Moriarty's, which is in the 800 block, that is where the Planning Board comes into play. Mr. Frederick said thank you for that clarification and will now not feel uncomfortable about going and sitting there and having a break in the right-of- way and not feeling like I am violating that which I know I shouldn't and I am glad they did. Mr. Ruff said, it is the same thing as the Washington Square Mall. We are used to the Washington Square Mall where there's vending that basically goes on in the streets sitting there on the sidewalk area. That is part of the Principal Shopping District and we are more used to that but those boundaries extend out and include other eateries such as the Exchange. 13. ADJOURNMENT was at 7:41 p.m. Respectfully submitted James A. Ru , Secretary Lansing Planning Board mn08152000 a:\59 Z-10-2000 "A" Residential District and "E-2" Local Shopping Districts to "E-2" Local Shopping District 2602 N. Grand River Avenue GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Lester H. Peckham 701 E. Herbison Road DeWitt, MI 48820 OWNER: Admiral Petroleum PO Box 198 Cooperville, MI 49404 EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential District and "E-2" Local Shopping Districts REQUESTED ZONING: Presently, the site is primarily zoned "E-2" Local Shopping District: however, two small portions of the site are zoned "A" Residential District. The applicant is applying to zone the entire site "E-2" Local Shopping District. EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant gasoline filling station PROPOSED LAND USE: Restaurant PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 130 feet by 175 feet, irregular (approximately 22,750 square feet, or 0.52 acre) SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Single family residence S: Commercial E: Commercial W: Commercial SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential District S: "F" Commercial District & "H" Light Industrial District E: "H" Light Industrial District W: "E-2" Local Shopping District Z-10-2000 2602 N. Grand River Avenue "A" Residential District and "E-2" Local Shopping Districts page 2 to "E-2" Local Shopping District MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan, Future Land Use Map, designates this area for commercial and industrial development with residential to the north along ML King Blvd up to the railroad crossing approximately 1/4 mile north of the ML King Blvd/N. Grand River Avenue intersection. APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: Presently the site is primarily zoned "E-2" Local Shopping District: however, two small portions of the site are zoned "A" Residential District. The applicant is applying to zone the entire site "E-2" Local Shopping District. AGENCY RESPONSES: AMERITECH TELEPHONE: No response received. BOARD OF WATER & LIGHT: No conflicts or comments. BUILDING SAFETY: No response received. CONSUMERS ENERGY: No response received. EDC/TIFA: No objection. MI DEQ: No response received. MI DEPT. TRANSPORTATION: No response received. PUBLIC SERVICES : The Public Service has no objection to the proposed request. TRANSPORTATION: No response received. Description of Site The subject property is a currently a vacant commercial building most recently used for a gasoline filling station and automobile service facility (see Figure 1, Area Map). The lot immediately to the north of the subject property presently contains a single family structure. Z-10-2000 2602 N. Grand River Avenue "A" Residential District and "E-2" Local Shopping Districts page 3 to "E-2" Local Shopping District ANALYSIS COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE The primary use of the property is, and has been, commercial. The proposed rezoning will make the property more useful for commercial purposes and permit a safer design of the off-street parking area and driveways on the busy streets. The existing site plan indicates a six foot tall wooden stockade fence has been placed parallel to the site's north property line to buffer the residential use to the north. Staff anticipates no perceptible impact on the adjacent residential use to the north. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC The proposed rezoning will make it easier for the property owner to rehabilitate the property and change the location of the existing curb-cuts further away from the intersection of North ML King Blvd and N. Grand River Avenue. This should have a positive impact on traffic safety at this busy intersection. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The proposed rezoning will have no environmental impact, as the proposed development will occur with or without approval of the rezoning. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT Presently the site is vacant. While the redevelopment will occur with or without the rezoning, the requested rezoning will make the site more viable for a commercial business establishment. SUMMARY The applicant is requesting rezoning of two small portions of the site from "A" Residential District to match the zoning of the majority of the site, which is "E-2" Local Shopping District. The applicant is presently redeveloping the former service station property for use as a restaurant. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval. Respectfully Submitted, Jim Sturdevant, AICP Senior Planner August 2,2000 Z-10-2000.FE.wpd M n 7 OEM I-11:'117.3 it r7l N, 'N'jg­ lei ,:.n �.'_' ®tl Uri Lq WERE Mr 4 r...i FIT o°C r 0 �J C S Q/Q ll�P7 , 1 ` I /' / �`'' bra •_ � / Or I / r `��A� tatAr i yet!. i o / y1+4 � 4 Ij � e v f it � y O� XC N 1 quo k4 / h, �sA 1 N , i � � CL O a�C 9r�r ,•��^ i �+ A �U� +f�v� ���! \` I iw�� ��r N. O `� Y . r cn CD IA lk - -If � o A -'So crrg ue w:.r y{� wear s i co.✓e_ c.� y S e A cjr Q¢jtiwA .¢O. cU.b y m r •I 'rJ t. A. r}. 4 ^`�.-., a ♦�, � � - � :. j r d . i 1 -..1,. e1 Y. •' � 1 d�. r+, �� Ilp y�.ka r 7 � Y N�4 f t 1� .:1r 'd r S 4 i e 1 ail �,�► � L,� �L � '•� �� � ..�ti..r;i���,�"' Y`.. a OF F .. I s h I MEN a i y�" a,,. `F;x�w1�Naf�'hfr��'X �:q uw��...z,,,, ' � � ;' "• {, +'� i }�. v � :: � �I � •'!�j,..,��� a � ' �� ��Yp�¢¢��'" bt .:r �h�+N .��'� r cL..f'un ,<� ¢7� ;Y�'�'"' �2 7 t� p,^r .��::,a2.i4`.`=�"r". _'`1.�,y * ♦ r.. •,pA�. .l � ,'n+•..«.t.tx hL 't". vl�S :��"�,,as,«;`tier' �r .,,r�„ �t yye�{y..µ - e. r 4 � r ;,:.",!►`` ,vim ct � ��_ IL ik ,V�l ..� r br.W::.,b •#.Sig �i ,,(�'q� C wy � " ' .•." t1'f�' t ♦..y�r i . . ♦ ; s1 mod°;:. ,�. .ic 4 ro _- M I! u + + '• {�(,'}7�.4�'�* .���J"!Fj' yY•�3„ � Y T° :. _�rta" ra; �, - 1 • s ��- n...,�`..,_� . r. ..�_ �'^Jai'' r'Jr�.�"'�i ��.:' '�' T�,�—er,,,x . v JI i +� ^V. 04 r ik +I• S pt! .;'�v� J � � ��,. •'� L,�`• 9�{•x :'�"�,�wl�'^ ; ��"f��t v Rr „& ,L'.jt � > '..f� �.: 4 ! .'F..'� n.�',•.a. �•Y a sb sz 4 r' � t�fit'`t" .t < '� ��� !'�,�v�r:1.<�fk�'�'�•r J r :� !1 s� 3,i� �-�� r y ,ggro, � t p #' -`LTA., ,«k Y.rtt<+x.w' .e- ?bn ��• 1 r hlrwa� ,& .'g9., r.. � APPROVED AS PRINTED SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 Draft to Clerk DATE UNKNOWN 2000 Approved 09192000 To Clerk 02022001 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 p.m., City Council Chambers - Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall 124 West Michigan Avenue Wednesday, September 6, 2000 -- i 1. OPENING SESSION: The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Nischan. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Keene, Smith, Patrick; Nischan, Ruge. One vacant seat. Ms. Foster is expected to attend her first meeting on September 19, 2000. B. Excused Absences - None C. Introductions. James A. Ruff, Planning Manager, Bill Rieske, Principal Planner 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA -Approved as presented. 3. COMMUNICATIONS a. Card from John T. Szarowicz, 2116 Desoto Drive, no objection to SLU-11-2000, 2111 DeSoto Drive, Child Care Facility. b. Gordon L. Long, letter concurring with the staff recommendation for Z-15-99, Z-11-2000 and Act-21-99. 4. HEARINGS - Mr. Ruff was asked by Mr. Nischan to explain this process. Mr. Ruff read an explanation. a. SLU-11-2000, 2111 DeSoto Drive, Child Care Facility Mr. Ruff presented the case, a request by Oscar and Robin Slaton, owners, 2111 DeSoto Drive, for a Special Land Use (SLU) to operate a child care facility at 2111 DeSoto Drive. It is currently a group day care. A group day care is a facility that is an accessory use to a single family home, and it operates and is licensed for up to 12 children in a day care situation.) It is currently zoned "A" Residential, with a property size of 6,600 sq. ft. in a rectangular shape. The surrounding land use and zoning are residential. The Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan shows the land use designation as residential 0-7 du/acre. PLANNING RQARD MINUTES SEPTFMRFR 6, 2000, PAGE 2 Currently, the applicants operate a 24-hour group day care home for up to 12 children at their residence located at 2111 DeSoto Drive. They are requesting a Special Land Use to change the group day care to a child care facility for up to 30 children. If approved, the residential use would be discontinued at the location. Location maps are contained in the packet. We have received some agency responses thus far from various departments and also have provided for you the basic code requirements for a day care facility. Those requirements include four criteria found in the "A" Residential section as well as some additional parking criteria that are found in the parking section of the codes. There is also a description of the proposal by the applicant, a proposed time schedule for the operation as well as a site plan, floor plans and photographs of the property. Mr. Ruge said it appears that they are going to need eight or nine parking spaces on site for this according to the ordinance and he does not see that. Are the parking spaces available on this property? Mr. Ruff said no, not that we have been able to see. Also, you have to realize that when it is changed from a residential property to a non-residential use, then the parking regulations require that they also meet commercial circulation standards and parking standards, not just a single-family residential driveway standard. Mr. Ruge asked if the site plan has been reviewed and is there anyway to do this? Mr. Ruff said that he does not see this in the present situation, but this is part of the review process that we will have to go through. Mr. Ruge said that if not in the present situation, what kind of situation could occur which they could have adequate circulation. Mr. Ruff said if they expand the site somehow, that might be a way, but normally that would be the situation. Mr. Smith asked about the 2500 square feet that would be required if the facility has in excess of 33 children. The description here in Section 1248.04 and particularly point 2 just describes it as maintaining for each child in excess of 33 children, the facility shall maintain an additional 75 square feet of outdoor space and that it is not to have less than 2500 square feet. "I noted in their letter and packet that they are claiming approximately 1,100 square feet of front yard and 1,800 square feet in the back yard, and then as I looked at the map and tried to calculate this, I came up with less than that if one subtracts the area of the deck, sidewalk, and the garage. My question is do they have 2,500 square feet, and if they do, are they counting the garage and decking, and is the deck considered appropriate play area outside for children or are they considering that 2,500 feet primarily grass?" Mr. Ruff said the outdoor play space could include the deck or another hard surface where they might be able to ride tricycles or other types of equipment such as that. He has not calculated the lot area for use, but that would all be included PLANNING BOARD MINLITFS SFPTFMRFR 6, 2000, PAGE3 in the staff report that the Zoning and Ordinance Committee would look at. OSCAR AND ROBIN SLATON, OWNERS, 2111 DESOTO DRIVE. Currently, our driveway is 23 ft. x 85 ft. long, and we have been able to park eight cars in our driveway on several occasions. With us currently running a 24-hour program, we are licensed to have 12 kids at one time; however, we have up to 40 kids registered with us and in and out during the day because we have before-school, pre-school, evening care, and overnight care, so the driveway is being used to the max now. Plus, we have a 2'/ car garage, so once we leave, our staff would take over our garage to be able to park there and still allow our driveway to be opened up for the parents to drop off and pick up their children. As far as the yard space goes, I have had the Health Sanitation Inspection done and Fire Inspector to come out to make sure that we meet all of the codes and Health Sanitation man measured the yard to make sure that we met their qualifications; he told us we did meet their qualifications. The only thing that is needed to do is to complete the fence, but we are not going to do this unless we knew it was going to pass Planning and Zoning. Mr. Ruge asked how many employees there are. Mrs. Slaton said there are currently five employees; two live in the neighborhood and walk. One takes the bus, and another drives, and the other drives only half of the time. Whatever the requirements are, depending on how many kids we end up having, we would have enough employees to accommodate for regulation needs. Mr. Ruge asked if they expect to have more employees or the same number. Mrs. Slaton said that if we are licensed for thirty kids, we have to have one staff for every six children. Probably the same, five or six. The difference will be that if we turn into a Center we will not be 24 hours. It will be a 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. facility. Ms. Patrick asked at what point they expect to get a license. Mrs. Slaton responded that we will take care of that if this is approved. Once this is approved, a few renovations such as door widths need to be met for the fire inspector, and once that is done and we move out, then it would be ready to go. Mr. Nischan said that the only action taken tonight on this proposal is to refer it to a committee. The Committee will actually do the study and make a specific recommendation of action, favorable or not, back to the Board. So, the purpose of the hearing tonight is to get all the possible input we can that will be useful for the Committee as they study this in depth. So your testimony tonight will be to inform the Planning Board and specifically the members of the Committee that will be studying it. LINDA DONAWA, 2109 DESOTO DRIVE. I received a little note in the mail stating that Robin and Oscar wanted to do something. They stay PLANNING BOARD MINIITFS S PTEMBER 6, 2000, PAGE 4 right next door to me. I have a concern because this is my neighborhood, and this is a quiet cul-de-sac, and I need to be informed on how my neighborhood will be changing. Mr. Nischan said that the purpose is to hear and consider everyone's issues. Mr. Ruff explained the proposal. I am concerned about the traffic. Right now I get off work and have had to have people move their cars. I am not there during the day because I work, so there are no problems with the children. My only concern is with the parents. Unfortunately, it is with the parents that I have a problem. So I wish that would be taken into consideration. I hate to hear that Robin and Oscar are thinking of moving out of the neighborhood. We have to remember that we pay good money for our homes and this should be considered. I appreciate your time. DAN SHULER, 2123 DESOTO DRIVE. My wife and I are opposed to the Special Land Use Permit to allow a day care center for up to 30 children. This home is currently licensed by the State of Michigan as a group day care home for up to 12 children. We are concerned that approving this special land use permit will result in a significant negative impact on the neighborhood. First of all, we are concerned about the increased traffic and parking on the street. Parents leaving and picking up children two times a day, minimum, is an increase of approximately 21/ times more than is currently caused by the traffic to and from the group day care home. Increased staff would be required, and because there is no on-site parking for employees, they would have to park on the street. DeSoto Street is a short one-block cul-de-sac. One of the reasons we purchased our home is because it was on a cul-de-sac and therefore had less traffic and would be safer for our children playing outside. In the fifteen years we have lived on DeSoto, there have always been small children living and playing on the street, and that continues today. Since the current day care facility has opened in 1998, our street has experienced an increase in traffic flow as well as an increase in on-street parking. We believe that allowing a day care center to operate on this small residential street will significantly increase traffic and on-street parking, placing children living and playing on the street at increased risk. Currently, 2111 DeSoto is licensed as a group day care and I wanted to take the time to read to you what the Division of Child Day Care describes as a group day care home. A group day care home means a private home in which more than six but not more than 12 children are given care, and it can operate 24 hours a day. If a Special Land Use permit for a day care center for up to 30 children is approved, the City of Lansing will be approving this address as use for a child day care center. A significant difference between a child day care home and a child day care center is that the child day care center means a facility other than a private residence. I talked to the people at the Bureau of Licensing, and they indicated that no one can use a day care center as a residence. So that would be a non-residential use and would be open 12 hours a day from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., and it would be PLANNING. BOARD MINIITFS SFPTFMRFR_R. 2000, PAGE left vacant at night. It is a residential neighborhood, and we are very concerned about how this will affect the whole neighborhood and the life here, having something that is a commercial use in a very residential area. I further checked with the Bureau of Licensing to learn more about the requirements. Currently the house has 890 sq. ft. on the main floor. Bureau of Child Day Care indicated that the basement could not be used as part of the square footage requirements; 890 sq. ft. is not enough activity area as required by the state. I think that even if you approved or recommended approval for this zoning use that the State is not going to give them a permit unless they are planning on doing some remodeling. If they are going to change from a house to a commercial building then again it changes the neighborhood. The Chairman announced the close of the hearing on SLU-11-2000, 2111 DeSoto Drive, Child Care Facility and referral to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting on Wednesday, September 13, 2000 at 4 p.m. at 316 N. Capitol Avenue in the Department Conference Room. 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each) BILL SHROEGER, 2501 COULIDGE RD., SXJE II LLC. In reference to Act-13- 2000, about trying to maintain an attractive street scape along Michigan Avenue, presently, the building has concrete from building to back of the curb, 18 foot wide. Our proposal, in addition to moving the transformer up against the building, is to build a landscape screen bringing greenery along that building, something the tenant would like to have and something that would get rid of some of the concrete. An 18 foot wide sidewalk is a bit much in any area. There are other areas where they have allowed landscaping in the city right-of-way (Radisson Hotel for one, Emil's). We think that is going to add and be more attractive than what is presently there and what would be there under the original site plan that was approved. Parks and Recreation's concern is that we don't damage any trees. There is nary a tree on that property, which is something we planned on adding, along with the moving of the transformer that we are requesting. Regarding Public Service, there is virtually no pedestrian traffic on that street. There is a parking lot across the street, and we own the lot behind that. A commercial air conditioning company is behind that and no residential that I am aware of. There might be one house on the opposite side of the street, two blocks down. So when they talked about shifting the sidewalk away from the roadway, I asked Jim Ruff what is the standard sidewalk right-of-way in a residential area. Normally it is 2 foot from the curb to the edge of the sidewalk and then a five-foot sidewalk. Mr. Ruff said normally it is approximately 5 feet for the parkway and 5 foot for the sidewalk in a residential setting. That varies of course depending on the right-of-way and the approved design for the sidewalk. PLANNING RQARn MINUTES S PTEMRER 6,ZQQQ, PACT s This building is unique in that it used to be a warehouse, and the use is changing into a Class "A" Office Space. We are spending up to $13,000,000 refurbishing this building and making it something the City can be proud of instead of the pigeon hotel it was in the past. We think that the landscape buffer would add to it. We think we could screen the transformer with a decorative landscape wall that would blend in with the building so it would not be an eyesore. If anything, it is going to add to the approach to the Capitol from the east. The Transportation Engineer does not see a safety issue there. Option 1, the original in the Board packet, is directly across the intersection from Jerome Street. I would think that would be more of a safety issue for cars sliding through that intersection. The Board of Water and Light suggested that they wouldn't have any problem if we were to build some kind of decorative retaining wall. Mr. Danke from Public Service Public Service, when this was originally proposed, said he would rather have bollards if we had to have anything. I question his decision process. Under the location options, Option 1 where you show the transformer would not be located in the public right-of-way, we would still need an easement the length of the building in order to get the power. We would have to build a vault under the sidewalk the length of the building. We would be responsible for it, whereas if it was located at Option 3, then the Board of Water and Light would be responsible for installation and maintenance. This would be pretty high voltage running under the street there. We think that our proposal is not the eyesore that everyone is making it out to be. If anything, it is an improvement to a barren piece of property, and I suggest people drive by and take a look at it. EMILY HORNE, 110 W. HODGE. Regarding Z-7-2000, S. Washington Avenue and MPA-2-2000, I am asking you to seriously consider denying this request. Tearing down these houses which are very affordable and viable to our neighborhood would really change the whole characteristic of this area between Greenlawn and Holmes Road. This area is a very fragile area, because we have many elements that make our area fragile. Sometimes we feel that we ought to flee instead of fighting, because we are in an area that has Ingham Regional. We do know the properties that they own, and we know the uncertainty of their building program as of now. We know what is going to happen on the development of S. Cedar Street and E. Willard. We know that the house is going to be demolished in the 300 block of E. Willard that is the property owned by Dr. Goodman. Therefore, with all of these uncertainties, we as residents of this area really do not want to see houses going down, and we don't want the character of this neighborhood to be changed. So I am asking you, before you seriously consider this rezoning (Z-7-2000 and MPA-2-2000) that we sit down and really look at this area, especially from Mt. Hope to Holmes Road. As we start tearing down houses and change the residential to "D-1" Professional, we will be changing to Commercial. What is going to happen to this neighborhood? P1 ANNIN . ROARD MIN IT R RFPT MRFR 6, 2000, PACE 7 1 request that you look at this one section of South Lansing and see what we can do to preserve its neighborhood characteristic. 6. RECESS - The Urban Development Committee and Zoning and Ordinance Committee met to discuss their respective cases. Mr. Nischan called the meeting to order at 9:10 p.m. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: August 15, 2000 Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve the minutes of August 15, 2000, with one change P. 10, Ln 8.88", Pos 6.27" C�o.�vgaR DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. BLVD. On a Voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; carried unanimous; with one change, the minutes of August 15, 2000, were APPROVED. B. Committee Reports 1 a. Committee of the Whole The members resolved to the Committee of the Whole. Chairman Keene called the Committee to order. Mr. Ruff summarized. The reason we move to the Committee of the Whole is for the purpose of reconciling any differences that might have come out of the two Committees' actions regarding the Master Plan and the rezoning. So, in order to do that and also because the Planning Board is required to have six votes to approve a Master Plan Amendment, these items have been tabled. As such, we first need a motion to remove these items from the table and request that a member make a motion that MPA-1-99, Act-21-99, Z-15-99 and Z-11-2000 be removed from the table so they can be discussed as a whole. Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Nischan, to remove MPA-1-99, Act-21-99, Z-15-99 and Z-11-2000 from table. Mr. Ruff said basically many changes have occurred during the process of this proposal by Mr. Long in that the original proposal was a much smaller piece of property. His revised proposal which came to the board included more properties, and in fact another property has been included with the advent of Z-11-2000. Donna provided you supplemental information to help illustrate what had been proposed originally by using the "J" Parking. Mr. Ruff's recommendation was to reduce the amount of "J" Parking so that PI ANNINr, BOARD MINIITFS S PT MB R R, 2000, PACE-8 there would be reasonable flexibility in the design of the property. "J" is basically a function that we might use as we try to shoehorn something in or try to confine something into a smaller space. With the original proposal, that was the case. The applicant made the proposal to reflect those ideas to specify specifically where parking would be and specify specifically where the commercial development would be. Since this project has expanded as it has over these last few months, staff is recommending that we might utilize the "F" Commercial Zoning more, not remove things from the "F" Commercial and put them in "J" and so on. Then, also, with the idea that the south 178' of certain lots be rezoned to "D-1" instead of"F" Commercial as originally proposed by the applicant for the development of the office building. This did not quite line up with the graphics that the Urban Development Committee proposed for the Master Plan Amendment where the "D-1" penetrated a little farther to the north. Mr. Ruff wanted to clarify those differences tonight. What staff is really recommending here from a Master Plan Amendment is that the Amendment be approved as recommended by the Urban Development Committee with the understanding that the "D-1" would be on the frontage of Willoughby Rd. adjacent to Georgia Avenue, and specifically in regard to Z-15-99, that is spelled out in particular lots. This basically is Lots 2 and 3 and the South 178 feet of Lots 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23 of Just-A-Mere Farms Subdivision. That would be how it was recommended from the Zoning and Ordinance Committee. There were some slight differences there. If you look at the graphic that Donna provided for you, "D-1" was recommended back to be in line with the "CUP" coming straight across, and in essence the way the design has been reorganized and you have in front of you a more final site plan where the Office Building has been moved more in the front of the site along Willoughby which puts the parking in behind it and the parking that is directly behind the building would all fit in that 178' depth of those lots. So that is the recommendation for the "D-1" Area. Then rezoning much of the rest of it simply to "F" commercial as possible to keep it in "F" Commercial. That will leave a couple of areas still zoned "J" Parking if this is followed through. That is on graphic three in your packet. "F" Commercial is green, "J" Parking is blue, the small area of "J" would be directly on the south side of Just-A-Mere as existing "J" Parking and is currently used as a parking lot. It would not have an adverse effect to the development of the parking structure or to the development of the parking as proposed. There would still be a strip of"J" between the newer part of the parking lot just to the west of the expanded hotel complex and the hotel complex itself. So there will still be a couple of small places there that would remain "J". Those PI ANNINr. RQARD MINLITFS SFPTFMRFR 6, 2000, PAGF 9 could be cleaned up if necessary. Otherwise, it is simpler to put more of this into the "F" Commercial and less of it into the "J" Parking from the administration standpoint as well. With that, we have recommended that the Board consider that for Lots 65, 66, 67, 68 & 69 Just-A-Mere Farm Sub, which are those where the building would be built, the addition to the hotel and the exhibition area, that those be rezoned from "J" Parking to "F" Commercial and that be approved. Secondly, that Lots 54, 55 and 56, the request from the applicant to rezone those from "F" to "J", be denied finding it be unnecessary to rezone those "J" for the development to accommodate the parking facilities for the remainder of the development. Then, Lot 5, the north 242' of Lot 18, the north 110' of Lots 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23, also the west 108 ft of the north 27 ft and the east 354 ft. of the north 30 ft of Lot 26, also Lots 27, 28, 29, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 61, 62 and 63, be rezoned from "A" to "J" Parking, instead be rezoned from "A" to "F" Commercial. That would bring this into conformance what you see in graphic three. Finally, the two other small areas, also for the area for the suites hotel, which is Lot 10 except as described, as well as Lots 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17 be rezoned from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial, that be approved to allow the construction of the extended stay motel and its parking areas. Then finally, Lots 2 and 3 as well as the south 178 ft. of Lots 18-23 be approved to be rezoned to "D-1" Professional Office District to help provide a transition zone both to those properties across Willoughby Street in Delhi Township and the residential that remains along Willoughby. Mr. Ruge asked why are we leaving this little strip "J" parking and also the square that is the old parking lot. Mr. Ruff said that those were not included in the original request. The applicant did not request that those be rezoned. They are presently zoned "J". Looking at this, it was an option to provide more in the Commercial Zoning District and less in the Parking District. They were not requested to be rezoned. If they wanted those zoned Commercial, another application would need to be submitted. They picked up another piece of property on the extreme west end of Just-A-Mere on the south side, Mr. Sutton's property. This would require rezoning if he were to use that for parking, or he could apply for a Special Land Use. Mr. Ruge asked if that was marked "A" on Map #3. Mr. Ruff said correct because that is not part of the request. It PLANNING BOARD MINIITFS S PT MB R S. 2000, PA .F 10 is included in the Master Plan. The Master Plan addresses that as being used commercially. Mr. Ruge asked commercially or for parking. Mr. Ruff said that he thinks Commercially. Parking is a commercial use for that. The Master Plan had commercial, office and multi-family. Multi-family was the area to the south and west of Georgia. Mr. Ruge has a bit of a problem putting the "F" Commercial next to the CUP. Mr. Ruff said that is fine. Mr. Ruge said the rest of it he understands, and it makes sense. He would hate to see some commercial use go in next to the residential structures. Mr. Ruff said if you look at Map 2, that would be the rezoning as requested. So the only change would be from what the Master Plan stated, that the "D-1" Professional Office Area on the south side would be to "D-1" instead of "F" Commercial. That is the other way of dealing with it, is to go as it was requested, with the exception of the office building on the south end. Mr. Ruge would be comfortable with the "F" Commercial on the east side of Georgia, but is he not comfortable with the commercial on the west side of Georgia. Mr. Rieske said we have not specifically dealt with the recommendation of the Master Plan as we have the discussion with the zoning. I wanted to make sure that everybody was fully up to speed on what the Master Plan Amendment recommendation was. Basically, that is going from 1-96 south to Willoughby along the east side of Cedar would all be commercial uses, including all of Just-A-Mere including the frontage west of Georgia. This would go down to the office uses that are proposed for Willoughby. It would include the Suites. Then the office uses as proposed and then west of Georgia, residential at 15-20 units per acre. You have this in your packet, with some minor adjustments that may need to be made with this boundary between the Commercial and the Office Uses. But essentially that is the UDC recommendation on the Master Plan. Mr. Ruge is comfortable with the Master Plan recommendation as it was, but for the specific zoning he would prefer to have just "J" Parking west of Georgia. Mr. Nischan asked if we are specifically talking about Z-15-99 right now. Mr. Ruff said you have them all in front of you. Mr. Nischan said we have to act on them individually, and while I'm still clear on Mr. Ruge's suggestion, if we are on Z-15-99 1 would like to make a motion. PLANNINr. RQARn MINUTES SFPTFMRFR 6, 2000, PAGE1.1 Mr. Ruff said that the first thing that the Committee of the Whole should do is act on the Master Plan. a. MPA-1-99, Master Plan Amendment to the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan The Committee discussed this item at six meetings since the beginning of the year: January 18, February 8, May 23, and June 27. Committee action at each of these meetings was to table the item pending further information. A public hearing was held on January 11, 2000 regarding this proposal. The applicant, Gordon Long presented the proposal, which includes the expansion of the hotel and conference center on Just-a-Mere, a parking deck with a pedestrian bridge (Act-21-99); and Staybridge Suites (an extended stay hotel) and a single story office building, both fronting Willoughby Road. Since the initial proposal, the applicant has purchased a total of 25 houses for the redevelopment of this area. Eight homes will remain. He has also proposed scaling down the proposed parking deck from four levels with 2,475 spaces to three levels with 919 spaces, and increasing surface parking area. Also proposed is an increase in the square footage of the office building from 13,299 to 16,800. At its June 27, 2000 meeting, the Committee reviewed the staff's future land use recommendation. This recommendation was to divide the planning area into three land use classifications: Commercial, Office, and Residential 15-20 du/acre. The committee voted unanimously to table MPA-1-99 and Act-21-99 pending receipt of a traffic study. On August 1, 2000, the committee reviewed the traffic report by Tetra Tech MPS, provided on behalf of the applicant. The staff recommendation is to divide the planning area into three land use classifications: 1. Commercial, including all frontage of Cedar, the hotel conference Center, parking deck and Staybridge Suites. Extends westward to near end of Just-a-Mere, including frontage on both sides. This area would include the hotel/conference center, the PLANNIN[, BOARD MINI ITFR SFPTFMRFR 6, 2000, PAr.F 12 proposed parking deck, and the connecting pedestrian bridge. 2. Office along the north frontage of Willoughby, west of the south entrance to the complex, east of Georgia. Frontage only. Buffers commercial to the east with residential to the west. 3. Residential 15-20 du/acre west of Georgia, south of the frontage along Just-a-Mere, and including the north frontage of Willoughby and Oak Park Village. Buffers low density residential on the west from the commercial and office on the east. This recommendation is subject to five conditions. The Committee moved to recommend approval of MPA-1-99, provided: 1. Any remaining residential properties be screened from the development with adequate landscape, screening and buffering. 2. Improvements to the environment throughout the development to include storm water drainage, green space, and landscape screening and buffering. 3. Direct traffic away from Georgia Avenue, and keep it as a residential street for local traffic only. 4. No front yard parking in front of (south) of the office building along Willoughby Road. Parking should be in the rear, with ingress/egress off the main drive. 5. Line up the main entry off Willoughby with the commercial drive to the south. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve MPA-1-99, Master Plan Amendment to the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan as provided by the Urban Development Committee. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTION on the motion was as follows. Discussion was as follows. Mr. Rieske asked about the change in the boundary that you were speaking of. Mr. Ruff said where Office is shown, it goes up further north than the Office as proposed in the development. The depth was what I wanted to clarify. Mr. Nischan asked then what depth are we talking about in MPA-1-99, the MPA depth or this depth of the zoning? Mr. Ruff said that it probably does not make a whole lot of difference, but I wanted you to know that there was a difference there, that what the Zoning and Ordinance Committee was recommending to "D-1" is slightly different than PLANNING BOARD MINl1TFS gFPTFMRFR 6, 2000, PAGF_1.-1 what is recommended to Office use in the Master Plan. Mr. Ruge said so one of them has to change. Mr. Ruff said it would be appropriate for one of them to change since you are taking action on all of them tonight. Mr. Ruge said you do not have a preference on which one change? Mr. Ruff said he thought it would be cleaner if the north office line was south another 60 feet on the Master Plan, approximately the width of the one lot so that it would line up with the Zoning and Ordinance recommendation. Mr. Nischan, maker, and Mr. Frederick, second, accepted the friendly amendment. On a Voice Vote, Ayes: All, Nays: None; motion carried unanimously. As revised, MPA-1-99 was APPROVED. b. Z-15-99, (Revised and Expanded) Portions of 6820 S. Cedar Street, "F" Commercial to "J" Parking District and "J" Parking to "F" Commercial District; Also 915, 920, 926, 927, 1000 Just A Mere Avenue, 6900, 6931, 6937, 7001, 7007, 7015 Georgia Avenue and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Road from "A" Residential to "J" Parking District; also 7025 Georgia Avenue, 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the south 178 ft of 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd., 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd., from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District The overall Holiday Inn South Center complex will include: a. 280,000 sq. ft. addition to the Holiday Inn South Conference Center which includes approximately 156 hotel rooms, 32,500 sq. ft. of exhibition space, 25,000 sq. ft. of meeting rooms and 247 fixed seat meeting auditorium b. 919 space parking ramp for visitors C. 150 suite extended stay hotel facility (separate from the Holiday Inn) d. 16,800 sq. ft. single story office building. The site plan submitted for the Z-15-99 case shows an overall total of 2,233 parking spaces. The site plan for this request, which includes 7011 Georgia (lot 26), shows an overall total of 2,179 spaces for the complex. The Committee members discussed the two cases together (Z-11-2000 & Z-15-99) and identified the land that would be recommended to "D-1" Professional Office District verses the requested "F" Commercial District for Z-15-99. The Committee found that the rezoning requests (Z-11-00 and Z-15-99) conform to the recommended Master Plan PLANNING ROARn MIN IT R S PT MB R 6, 2000, PAGE 14 Amendment with exception of the approximate South 170' of lots 18 through 22, Just-A-Mere Farm Subdivision, which is recommended to be rezoned to "D-1" Professional Office District as opposed to the requested "F" Commercial District. The Committee recommends Z-11-00 and Z-15-99 be approved with the change to "D-1" Professional Office District for the South approximate 170' of lots 18-22, Just-A- Mere Farm Subdivision. Voice Vote: Ayes: 3; Nays None. Motion Carried. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve Z-15-99 with the change that west of Georgia, what is presently designated as "F" be changed to "J" to be consistent with Mr. Ruge's observations to protect potential development subsequent to this plan that might be detrimental to the Community Unit Plan to the west. Mr. Ruff said also there is the "D-1" recommendation for the office area. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Nischan requested that the entire action be spelled out for purposes of the minutes. Mr. Ruff summarized. The recommendation action is as follows: 6820 S. Cedar Street: Lots 65, 66, 67, 68 and 69, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI. From "J" Parking District to "F" Commercial District be approved for the construction of an approximately 280,000 sq. ft. addition onto the Holiday Inn South Convention Center and Lots 54, 55 and 56, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI From "F" Commercial District to "J" Parking District be denied, finding it unnecessary for the development to accommodate parking facilities, and 915, 920, 926, 927, Just-A-Mere Avenue and 6900 Georgia Avenue: Lots 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 61, 62 and 63, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI From "A" to "J" be approved and 1000 Just-A-Mere Avenue, 6931, 6937, 7001, 7007 and 7015 Georgia Avenue, the north 242 ft of 1115 E. Willoughby and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015. 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd.: Lot 5, the north 242 ft of Lot 18, the north 110 ft of Lots 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23; also the west 108 ft of the north 27 ft and the east 354 ft of the north 30 ft of Lot 26, also Lots 27, 28, 29, 48, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI P ANNIN , BOARD MIN IT S RFPTFMRFR 6, 2000 PA[.F 16 give better flexibility for additional landscaping materials throughout the development. Staff recommends that property 7011 Georgia Avenue be rezoned from "A" Residential to "J" Parking in conjunction with Z-15-99 following adoption of MPA-1-99. The Committee members discussed the two cases together and identified the land that would be recommended to "D-1" Professional Office District versus the requested "F" Commercial District for Z-15-99. The Committee found that the rezoning requests (Z-11-00 and Z-15-99) conform to the recommended Master Plan Amendment with exception of the South 170' of lots 18 through 22, Just-A-Mere Farm Subdivision, which is recommended to be rezoned to "D-1" Professional Office District as opposed to the requested "F" Commercial District. The Committee recommends approval of Z-11-00 and Z-15- 99 change to "D-1" Professional Office District for the South 170' of lots 18-22, Just-A-Mere Farm Subdivision. Voice Vote: Ayes: 3; Nays None. Motion Carried. Mr. Nischan made a motion; seconded by Mr. Frederick, to recommend denial of Z-11-00 from "A" Residential to "J" Parking and further recommend it be rezoned from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial District to be consistent with the recommendation on Z-15-99. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTION on the motion was as follows. On a Voice vote, Z-11-2000, 7011 Georgia Avenue, "A" Residential to "J" Parking was denied with a further recommendation that rezoning from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial District be APPROVED. d. Act-21-99, 100 Block Just-A-Mere, Pedestrian Overpass This case is in specific regard to the granting of air rights over Just-a-Mere to enable the applicant, Gordon Long, to install a pedestrian overpass connecting the hotel/convention center with the proposed parking deck. As proposed, the walkway will have 18 feet of clearance above the roadway, and will be made of the same materials as the hotel complex - glass, brick, steel. It will be heated, air conditioned and enclosed, and extend approximately 145 feet between the ramp and the hotel. PLANNING BOARD MINUT S S PT MB R 6, 2000, PAGE 15 From "A" to "J" be denied and further recommended to approve to rezone these parcels from "A" to "F", and 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227, and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd.: Lot 10 except that portion described as commencing at the southeast corner of Lot 10; thence NW'LY along the northerly line 26 ft; thence southerly 261.60 ft to beginning, also Lots 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI From "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District be approved to allow the construction of an extended stay hotel with 150 suites and 7025 Georgia Avenue 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the South 178 ft. of 1015, 1027, 1101, 1109 and 1115 E. Willoughby Rd., Lots 2, 3, and the south 178 ft of Lots 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI From "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial be denied, but further that they be rezoned to "D-1" Professional Office District for a 16,800 sq ft single-story building. On a Voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: 0; motion carried unanimously; Z-15-99, (Revised and Expanded) Portions of 6820 S. Cedar Street, "F" Commercial to "J" Parking District and "J" Parking to "F" Commercial District; Also 915, 920, 926, 927, 1000 Just A Mere Avenue, 6900, 6931, 6937, 7001, 7007, 7015 Georgia Avenue and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Road from "A" Residential to "J" Parking District; also 7025 Georgia Avenue, 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the south 178 ft of 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd., 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd., from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District as spelled out above was APPROVED. C. Z-11-2000, 7011 Georgia Avenue, "A" Residential to "J" Parking District The request to rezone 7011 Georgia Avenue allows a better assemblage of land for the expansion of the Holiday Inn South Convention Center complex as identified in the Z-15- 99 request. The subject parcel would allow for a better layout to Surface Parking Lot C, and would give better flexibility for additional landscaping materials throughout the development. Mr. Gordon Long is requesting that property at 7011 Georgia be rezoned from "A" Residential to "J" Parking to allow for a better assemblage of land for the expansion of the Holiday Inn South Convention Center complex as identified in the Z-15-99 request. The subject parcel would allow for better layout to Surface Parking Lot C, and would PLANNING BOARD MINLITFS SFPTFMRFR 6, 2000, PAr.F 17 Staff recommends approval, conditioned on the approval of MPA-1-99, and provided that the clearance be at a minimum height necessary for the safe passage of emergency vehicles, and that it receive final approval from the Fire Marshall's office. The committee found that the proposed deck is in conformity with MPA-1-99, and that the clearance height of 18 feet will allow for the passage of emergency vehicles. It was moved to recommend approval of Act-21-99, a pedestrian overpass over Just-a-Mere Ave., conditioned on the approval of MPA-1-99, and provided that the clearance be at a minimum height necessary for the safe passage of emergency vehicles, and that it receive final approval from the Fire Marshall's office. Mr. Nischan made a motion; seconded by Mr. Frederick to recommend Act-21-99, 100 Block Just-A-Mere, to allow a Pedestrian Overpass, conditioned on the approval of MPA-1-99, and provided that the clearance be at a minimum height necessary for the safe passage of emergency vehicles, and that it receive final approval from the Fire Marshall's office. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTION on the motion was as follows. On a Voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; carried unanimously, Act-21-99, 100 Block Just-A-Mere, to allow a Pedestrian Overpass, conditioned on the approval of MPA-1-99, and provided that the clearance be at a minimum height necessary for the safe passage of emergency vehicles, and that it receive final approval from the Fire Marshall's office was APPROVED. Mr. Nischan made a motion; seconded by Mr. Frederick, to remove MPA-2-2000, Act-4-2000, and Z-7-2000 from table; carried unanimously. On a Voice Vote, MPA-2-2000, Act-4-2000 and Z-7-2000 were removed from the table. Mr. Ruff said this again is dealing with multiple cases. The Master Plan Amendment and the Act 285 to vacate or sell Lot 6 of this assessors plat to the applicant as requested and then Z-7-2000 which includes the properties of 2710-2726 on the west side of S. Washington Avenue to be rezoned from "A" to "D-1". The Master Plan recommended approval of the amendment. The Zoning and Ordinance Committee recommended that Lot 5, the extreme west portion of the property, be left zoned residentially for potential exchange of property. That was consistent with Act-21 as well. PLANNING BOARD MIN IT S S PT MRFR 6, 2nnn, PAGE 18 e. MPA-2-2000, Amendment to the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan, S. Washington and W. Willard Mr. Rieske said the request was just for the enclave of properties that abutted W. Willard, west of Washington Avenue and did not include the residential properties which were south of that area that were fronting on Washington Avenue. This was reported out by the UDC on August 1, 2000, and they found there is a demand for office in the area of Ingham Regional Medical, that the roadway capacity is sufficient to accommodate the traffic for a development of this scale, and the proposed site on the west side of Washington is better suited for office development because of the deeper lots and there are fewer residences adjacent to the subject properties and their direct access to Washington rather than on a local street going through a residential neighborhood. So this is why the UDC recommended approval of this change to office. The following are the conditions for this proposal: 1. A 20' landscape buffer along S. Washington Avenue residential properties, and park land shall be established. 2. The development of any office shall be architecturally compatible with the residential homes in the area and similar to the McRee House. 3. The development shall preserve as many of the mature trees on site as possible. 4. The transfer of Willard Street to the applicant according to the general layout suggested by the Parks and Recreation Department, involving the exchange of the Willard Street ROW for additional park property. 5. The sewer easement is addressed to the satisfaction of Public Service. Mr. Ruge asked if there should be a large buffer area between the office building and parking lot and the closest house to the south. Mr. Rieske said that could be, it might appear in another document which he was not reading from. Mr. Nischan said that the June 26 talks about a 20 ft. landscape buffer along Washington, but you are talking about the South edge. Mr. Rieske said that it was discussed but is not shown in the August 1, 2000 Planning Board minutes. If this is part of a recommendation it should be made at this point. Mr. Nischan said that this shows a 20' buffer around the whole property. This is an attachment to June 27 Memorandum from Sam Quon. PLANNING. BOARD MINUTES SEPTEMBER 6, 2000, PAGE 19 Mr. Nischan asked if we already moved to approve MPA-2- 2000. Mr. Ruff said no. Mr. Ruge asked if this is where we would want to add the additional condition in the MPA-2-2000. Mr. Nischan said he thinks it should be Z-7-2000. Mr. Ruff said that as Mr. Rieske said it is appropriate to add it here to give direction to the Development and you can modify condition A that a 20' landscape buffer along S. Washington Avenue and the south line adjacent to the residential property. It is already there. The committee found that • there is a demand for office uses in close proximity to Ingham Regional Medical Center, • the roadway capacity is sufficient to accommodate the traffic generated by an office use • the proposed site on the west side of Washington is better suited for office development because of the deeper lot, there are fewer residences adjacent to the subject properties, and there is direct access to Washington rather than a local street going through a residential neighborhood. The Committee recommends adoption of MPA-2-2000, amendment of the SW Area Comprehensive Plan, to allow the land use change for the subject property from low density residential to professional office, provided that the reminder of the enclave shall be designated low density and open space, with the following conditions (see plan for recommendation 1): 1. A 20' landscape buffer along S. Washington Avenue, residential properties, and park land shall be established, with parking to the rear of the building 2. The development of any office shall be architecturally compatible with the residential homes in the area similar to the McRee House. 3. The development shall preserve as many of the mature trees on site as possible. 4. The transfer of Willard Street to the applicant according the general layout suggested by the Parks and Recreation Department, involving the exchange of the Willard Street ROW for additional park property. 5. The Department of Public Service requirements regarding the public sewer are met. PLANNING BOARD MINUT -S S PT MRER R. 2000, PAGE 20 Mr. Nischan made a motion; seconded by Mr. Frederick, to adopt MPA-2-2000, Amendment to the Southwest Comprehensive Plan, S. Washington and W. Willard. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTIONS on the motion was as follows. On a Voice Vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; carried unanimously; MPA-2-2000, Amendment to the Southwest Comprehensive Plan, S. Washington and W. Willard. was APPROVED. f. Act-4-2000, W. Willard west of S. Washington, Vacate ROW This case is in specific regard to the vacating of W. Willard west of Washington Avenue, east of Washington Park. The applicant, George Abraham, proposes to utilize the ROW as part of a building site for his proposed office building. All properties abutting W. Willard are owned by the applicant, and would be included in this building site. Some property on the west side of the site could be exchanged for the ROW area, thus squaring off the building site, and providing a small addition to Washington Park. The Department of Public Service has a sewer within the ROW, which could be vacated if the applicant documents that the sewer no longer services the abutting properties. Staff recommends approval of Act-4-2000, the vacation of the Willard Street ROW west of Washington Avenue, provided the ROW is exchanged for property owned by the applicant which abuts Washington Park, under the following conditions: • adoption of MPA-2-2000, • the Department of Public Service requirements regarding the public sewer are met. The committee found that • the ROW contains a sanitary sewer that could be abandoned if it is documented that the sewer is no longer necessary, • the unimproved ROW could be combined with the adjacent parcels, which are owned by the applicant, to form a building site for the proposed office structure, and • the Parks and Recreation Department has indicated an interest in acquiring any residual property from the site to combine with Washington Park. PLANNING RQARn MINIIT S S PT MR R 6, 2000, PAGE 21 It was moved to recommend approval, pending the results of a title search, of Act-4-2000 provided that (1) MPA-2-2000 shall have first been approved by the Planning Board, (2) that the Department of Public Service requirements regarding the public sewer are met. Mr. Nischan made a motion; seconded by Mr. Frederick, to recommend approval with conditions of Act-4-2000, W. Willard west of S. Washington, Vacate ROW. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTION on the motion was as follows. On a Voice Vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays; None; carried unanimously; Act-4-2000, W. Willard west of S. Washington, Vacate ROW, was APPROVED. g. Z-7-2000, 2710, 2712, 2716, 2718 and 2726 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District This involves the zoning portion of this. From the zoning standpoint the Committee found that in conjunction with the Master Plan Amendment and the Act 285 it would be appropriate to rezone Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7 to "D-1" Professional Office District with the understanding that Lot 6 would be zoned "D-1" when vacated after official zoning action, and further that Lot 5 would be exchanged with Lot 6 if found to be in accordance with the City charter. Lot 5 would not be zoned. This is the one that is farthest to the west that sticks into the park the most. Rezoning the property from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office would be inconsistent with the current Master Plan. Office use could be intrusive to residential uses in this enclave, but can be mitigated with proper landscaping, screening, and buffering. The proposed rezoning will increase the amount of vehicular traffic to this particular site. This proposed development may require the existing old growth trees to be removed. These trees are assets and should be preserved if possible. Potential impact on future development patterns could occur if this property is rezoned. This could initiate a trend for additional office and commercial development along South Washington Avenue. Additional traffic could deter pedestrians from walking to Washington Park. PI ANNINC, RQARD MINLITFS RFPTFMRFR R. 2QQQ, PA rF 22 The recent housing market study recommends that housing be preserved. The market study also states that neighborhood parks play an important role in the quality of life within residential area adjacent to park facilities. Problems occurring in or around the area needs to be addressed in a practice manner. Z-7-2000 was tabled at the May 10, 2000, Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting pending action on MPA-2- 2000 by the Urban Development Committee. UDC found that there is a demand for professional office in this area associated with Ingham Regional Medical Center. The roadway capacity would be able to accommodate the amount of traffic generated by a professional medical office. The proposed site on the west side of Washington Avenue is better suited for office development because of the deeper lot, there are fewer residential properties adjacent to to subject property, and there is direct access to Washington rather than a street going through a residential neighborhood. The remaining houses in this residential enclave presents the possibility of future development. However, these 140' deep residential lots present additional constraints for office development because they are not as deep as the subject property. Therefore, the remainder of the enclave is recommended to remain low density residential/open space. On August 1, 2000, the Urban Development Committee gave a favorable recommendation (3-0) to amend the land use designation for properties located at 2708-2726 S. Washington Avenue from low density residential to professional office with conditions. Staff recommends approval of Mr. Abraham's request to rezone property located at 2710-2726 S. Washington Avenue from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office. The Committee members discussed the change from the request to the staff recommendation to rezone all except lot 5. The Committee concurred with the staff report and recommendation, based upon testimony, and evidence, and recommended rezoning lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 to "D-1" Professional Office, following the adoption of the Master Plan Amendment. PLANNING RQARn MINUTES SFPTFMRFR R. 2000, PAGE 23 The Committee recommended approval of Z-7-2000, 2710-2726 S. Washington Avenue, Rezone from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office as amended. Mr. Ruge made a motion; seconded by Ms. Patrick to approve Z-7-2000, 2710, 2712, 2716, 2718 and 2726 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office as recommended by the Zoning and Ordinance Committee. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ACTION on the motion was as follows. On a Voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; carried unanimously; Z-7-2000 2710, 2712, 2716, 2718 and 2726 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office was APPROVED. Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, that the Committee of the Whole do now rise. On a Voice Vote, the motion carried unanimously. 1 b. Committee of the Whole, Ms. Keene, Chair. Ms. Keene presented the report for the Committee of the Whole. Mr. Nischan asked if, since we just sat through all the details, can we just incorporate that entire discussion by reference and make a recommendation in accordance of the Committee of the Whole action. Mr. Nischan said we could just cite the case and then vote. Mr. Ruff said yes. Ms. Keene has a report that will be added to by Mr. Ruff and Mr. Rieske. We took up two projects. The first set were on the Southeast Area Master Plan and the related Acts and Zoning. a. MPA-1-99, Master Plan Amendment to the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan. The Committee voted to approve MPA-1-99 as was discussed and approved by the Committee of the Whole report. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve MPA-1-99, Master Plan Amendment to the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan as recommended by the Committee of the Whole. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Patrick . .Ave Smith. . .Aye Keene. . . Ave Ruge. . . Aye Nischan. . .Ave PLANNING HOARD MINUTFS SFPTFMBER S. 2000, PAGE 24 On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; MPA-1-99, Master Plan Amendment to the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan, was APPROVED w/ Conditions. b. Act-21-99, 1000 Block Just-A-Mere, Pedestrian Overpass The Committee voted to approve Act-21-99, 1000 Block Just-A-Mere, Pedestrian Overpass as was discussed and approved in the Committee of the Whole report. Ms. Keene made a motion; seconded by Mr. Smith, to approve Act-21-99, 1000 Block Just-A-Mere, Pedestrian Overpass as discussed and approved by the Committee of the Whole. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Patrick . .Ave Smith. . .Aye Keene. . . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; Act-21-99, 1000 Block Just- A-Mere, Pedestrian Overpass was APPROVED w/ Conditions. C. Z-15-99, (Revised and Expanded)Portions of 6820 S. Cedar Street, "F" Commercial to "J" Parking District and "J" Parking to "F" Commercial District; Also 915, 920, 926, 927, 1000 Just A Mere Avenue, 6900, 6931, 6937, 7001, 7007, 7015 Georgia Avenue and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Road from "A" Residential to "J" Parking District; also 7025 Georgia Avenue, 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the south 178 ft of 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd., 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd., from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District The Committee voted to approve Z-15-99 as was discussed and approved in the Committee of the Whole report. Ms. Keene made a motion; seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve Z-15-99, as described in the Committee of the Whole report as follows: 6820 S. Cedar Street: Lots 65, 66, 67, 68 and 69, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI. PLANNING ROARD MINUTES SFPTFMRFR 6, 2000 PAr.F 25 From "J" Parking District to "F" Commercial District be approved for the construction of an approximately 280,000 sq. ft. addition onto the Holiday Inn South Convention Center and Lots 54, 55 and 56, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI from "F" Commercial District to "J" Parking District be denied, finding it unnecessary for the development to accommodate parking facilities, and 915, 920, 926, 927, Just-A-Mere Avenue and 6900 Georgia Avenue: Lots 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 61, 62 and 63, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI from "A" to "J" be approved and 1000 Just-A-Mere Avenue, 6931, 6937, 7001, 7007 and 7015 Georgia Avenue, the north 242 ft of 1115E Willoughby and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015 1027 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd.: Lot 5, the north 242 ft of Lot 18, the north 110 ft of Lots 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23; also the west 108 ft of the north 27 ft and the east 354 ft of the north 30 ft of Lot 26, also Lots 27, 28, 29, 48, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI from "A" to "J" be denied and further recommended to approve to rezone these parcels from "A" to "F", and 1121, 1201, 1209 1215 1227, and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd.: Lot 10 except that portion described as commencing at the southeast corner of Lot 10; thence NW'LY along the northerly line 26 ft; thence southerly 261.60 ft to beginning, also Lots 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District be approved to allow the construction of an extended stay hotel with 150 suites and 7025 Georgia Avenue, 1009E Willoughby Rd., the South 178 ft. of 1015, 1027 1101, 1109 and 1115 E. Willoughby Rd., Lots 2, 3, and the south 178 ft of Lots 18, 19, 20, 21, 22 and 23, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial be denied, but further that they be rezoned to "13-1" Professional Office District for a 16,800 sq ft single-story building. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Frederick Ave Patrick .Ave Smith. .Aye Keene Ave PI ANNINr BOARD MINIITFS S PT MB R 6, 2000, PA ,F 26 Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; Z-15-99 as revised and modified was DENIED AS FILED AND APPROVED AS MODIFIED. d. Z-11-2000, Georgia Avenue The Committee recommended approval of Z-11-2000 as modified to "F" Commercial as was discussed and approved in the Committee of the Whole report. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to deny Z-11-2000, 7011 Georgia Avenue, from "A" Residential to "J" Parking and further recommend it be rezoned to "F" Commercial, as recommended by the Committee of the Whole. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Patrick . .Aye Smith. . .Aye Keene. . . Aye Ruge. . . . . . . . . . ... . . . .. . Aye Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Aye On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; Z-11-2000, 7011 Georgia Avenue was DENIED as FILED AND APPROVED as MODIFIED This takes us to the second project. e. MPA-2-2000, Amendment to the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan, S. Washington and W. Willard The Committee approved MPA-2-2000 as modified as was discussed and approved in the Committee of the Whole report. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Ms. Patrick, to approve MPA-2-2000, Amendment to the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan, S. Washington and W. Willard as recommended by the Committee of the Whole. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Patrick . .Aye Smith. .Aye Keene. Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . Aye Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ave On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; MPA-2-2000, Amendment to the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan, S. Washington was APPROVED as MODIFIED. PLANNING ROARD MINIITFS SFPTFMRFR 6, 2000, PA .F 27 f. Act-4-2000, W. Willard west of S. Washington, Vacate ROW The Committee approved Act-4-2000 with conditions. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Ms. Patrick to recommend Act-4-2000, W. Willard west of S. Washington, Vacate ROW as recommended by the Committee of the Whole. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Patrick . .Ave Smith. . .Aye Keene. . . Ave Ruge. . . Aye Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ave On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; Act-4-2000, W. Willard west of S. Washington, Vacate ROW as described in the Committee of the Whole was APPROVED with CONDITIONS. g. Z-7-2000, 2710, 2712, 2716, 2718 and 2726 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District The Committee approved Z-7-2000 as modified and recommended in MPA-2-2000. Ms. Keene made a motion; seconded by Ms. Patrick to approve, Z-7-2000, 2710, 2712, 2716, 2718 and 2726 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District as recommended by the Committee of the Whole. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7, Assessors Plat#53 be rezoned from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office and that Lot 5 remain zoned "A" Residential. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Patrick . .Ave Smith. . .Aye Keene. . . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Aye Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; Z-7-2000, 2710, 2712, 2716, 2718 and 2726 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District as described in the Committee of the Whole was DENIED as FILED and APPROVED as MODIFIED. 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee, Mr. Frederick, Chair. The Committee met during recess and considered an item tabled at a previous meting. PI ANNIN , ROARD MIN IT S SFPT MRFR 6r Man, PArF 28 a. Z-12-2000, "F-1" Commercial and "C" Residential Districts to "G-1" Business, "D-1" Professional Office District, and "J" Parking District, 500 E. Grand River Avenue and 1106 N. Cedar Street. This request was tabled previously. Currently the existing land use is a vacant church and vacant school building. The proposal is an adaptive reuse for Art Performance, Office and Loft Apartment Residential uses. This is at the corner of Grand River and N. Cedar in the Old Town District, the old Bethlehem Temple Church and school next to it. The applicants propose to reuse it and remodel it, but essentially preserve it while getting an adaptive reuse for arts performance, professional office and loft apartment development which is well in keeping with the plans for the Old Town area. Essentially the uses that the applicants propose need parking, and the issue that we dealt with was how to come up with sufficient number of parking spaces with the appropriate zoning to fit the existing number of parking spots available on the property. This is one of the few pieces of property that does have its own parking. So staff presented a report with some specific rezoning. There would be enough parking area based on the recent parking study, as well as parking available in the parking lot. The Committee unanimously agreed to support Proposal Two in the staff report, which is rezoning the property as requested but scaling down the area of the site being rezoned "G-1" Business District to include the church building and the area immediately between the church and school building. This would preserve the majority of the school property which is for off-street parking and would minimize the potential for some undesirable development that could occur in the future. Mr. Frederick requested staff read the zoning because it is fairly technical dealing with exactly where the two pieces are located on which the zoning would be changed. Mr. Ruff said the committee recommended the rezoning of the north 90 feet of the west 106 feet of lots 5 & 6, so it would basically would put an approximate 20-foot buffer to the south side of the church building in the "G-1" so they could develop any necessary appurtenant structures like an elevator shaft or something of that nature. The remainder of Lots 4, 5, 6, 9,10,11 and portion of lot 12 (one rod, 16'/ feet) would be rezoned to "J" parking which would preserve the bulk of the existing parking area plus PLANNING BOARD MINLITFS -RFPTFMRFR 6, 2nn , PA rF 29 additional parking area. Lots 7 and would be rezoned to "D-1" Professional Office District. Mr. Frederick said the committee recommended that the traffic impact be minimized on the Maple Street neighborhood by judicious use of the entrance and exit design of the parking lot entrances from both Grand River and Maple Street. Mr. Frederick made the motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to approve the second recommendation as specified by staff and read into the minutes. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Ruge wanted clarification. The church building is going to be rezoned "G-1" and the school is going to be "D-1" Professional Office; is that only the school? Mr. Frederick said yes, it is only the school. Mr. Ruge confirmed that all the rest is going to be "J" Parking, Mr. Frederick said that is correct. Mr. Ruff said the "D-1" allows for residential use as well. Mr. Ruge asked we can not specify buffering? Mr. Ruff said that would be part of the site planning process because they will have to expand the parking on the existing site. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Patrick •Ave Smith. . .Aye Keene . Ave Ruge. . . Ave Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ave On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; Z-12-2000, "F-1" Commercial and "C" Residential Districts to "G-1" Business, "D-1" Professional Office District, and "J" Parking District, 500 E. Grand River Avenue and 1106 N. Cedar Street was DENIED as FILED and APPROVED as MODIFIED. Next meeting of the Zoning & Ordinance Committee Wednesday, September 13, 2000 at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. Mr. Frederick will not be able to chair that meeting. Mr. Nischan will be in Gaylord that day. Mr. Ruff said potentially we can meet before the next board meeting. Mr. Frederick still would not be here. We will talk about this at the Business Session. 3. Urban Development Committee, Mr. Smith, Chair. a. Act-11-2000, 1400 Block Indiana Avenue, Permission or Conveyance of City parcel for private use. Decided to table this. No further action taken. TABLED. PLANNING BOARD MIN IT S S PT MBFR 6, 2000, PAGE 0 b. Act-14-2000, 1900 S. Cedar Street, Abandon Sewer Easement Mr. Quon presented the case. Matt Moore, Wolverine Engineering, and Shirley Hyde, Eyde Construction, were in attendance on behalf of the project. The applicant, Eyde Construction, is proposing to build a 23,988 sq. ft. office building on the Walter French Academy property located at 1900 S. Cedar Street. The proposed building would be located in what is currently the parking lot south of the Academy building. The proposed building will be on the site of the existing sewer known as the relocated Marvin Drain. Eyde Construction is requesting that this sewer be abandoned at its current location and moved to accommodate the proposed development. The existing "relocated Marvin Drain" runs diagonally across the property from northeast to southwest. The proposed sewer location would circumvent the building site by running in an "U shape southward along S. Cedar Street, then westward along the south property line. The applicant is currently working with the City's Public Service Department to relocate the sewer and easement. By relocating the sewer, the City enables the applicant to construct the building closer to Cedar Street in keeping with the general design of the area. Locating the building closer to the street provides better visibility for the building from the street and minimizes the visual impact of the parking lot. Staff recommended approval of Act-14-2000, with the condition that the existing easement cannot be vacated until the sewer has been relocated and a new easement has been provided to the City. The Committee found based on its review of the location, character and extent of the proposal that: a. The relocation of the Marvin Drain would enable the building to be constructed in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. b. Moving the parking area to the rear of the property could have a potential adverse impact on the neighborhood to the west. It was moved by Mr. Ruge and seconded by Ms. Patrick to recommend approval of Act-14-2000, 1900 S. Cedar Street, Abandon Sewer Easement, with the second condition that PLANNIN i ROARD MINIITFS SFPTFMRFR A, 2000, PAr.F 31 no right hand turns be allowed out of the driveway at Riley Street. The Committee recommended approval of Act-14-2000, with the request that the City vacate, release, or abandon the existing sewer easement, and accept a replacement easement at the proposed general location, with the condition that the existing easement cannot be vacated until the sewer has been relocated and a new easement is provided to the City, and with the additional condition that no right turns be allowed out of the driveway at Riley Street. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0) Mr. Smith made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge, to approve Act-14-2000, 1900 S. Cedar Street, Abandon Sewer Easement, with two conditions as above. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows: Mr. Frederick asked who is responsible for the cost of moving the sewer. Mr. Ruff said it is the developer's responsibility and provided the documentation for the sewer easement is acceptable to the Public Service Department. Mr. Ruge asked if that is a rule of the City's, or how does that work. Mr. Ruff asked if he meant the purchase of it. Mr. Ruge said that it makes sense that the applicant would be responsible for the costs of moving the sewer since they have asked the City to do that. Mr. Ruff said you could make that a condition, it's for them to develop it, it is part of the cost of development. Mr. Ruge said it has been bothering him since we passed this. We talked about it in Committee meeting and the developer's representative said they were going to pay for it. Mr. Ruge would feel more comfortable if we put that in there as another condition, that the applicant is responsible for all the costs. Mr. Frederick would also like to suggest that the developer also be responsible for providing proof of the appropriate easement to the City. Mr. Ruff said that would be the proper title. Mr. Nischan said then there are now four conditions, which are: 1. The existing easement cannot be vacated until the sewer has been relocated and a new easement is provided to the City; 2. That no right turns be allowed out of the driveway at Riley Street; 3. The applicant/developer is responsible for the cost of moving the sewer; and 4. The applicant/developer is responsible for providing proof of the appropriate easement to the City. Frederick . . Ave Patrick •Ave Smith .Ave Keene . Ave Ruge . Ave Nischan .Ave Friendly amendments were accepted by makers and seconds. PL ANNINri gQARD MINl1TFG SFPT MB R 6, 2000, PArF .32 On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6, Nays: 0; carried; Act-14-2000, 1900 S. Cedar Street, Abandon Sewer Easement with the four above conditions was APPROVED. Earlier this evening the Urban Committee Members met to consider: 3. Act-13-2000, 735 E. Michigan Avenue, Private Use of Hosmer St. ROW (BLW Transformer) Yesterday, the case was presented by Ms. Witherspoon. The applicant who is Eyde Construction Company (actually SXJE II LLC) are requesting to locate the Board of Water and Light electrical transformer adjacent to the east side of the building at 735 E. Michigan Avenue and a 16 sq ft underground "J-Box" for tenant phone and data lines to the building, in the Hosmer Street ROW. The proposed transformer/switch box encroaches 11 ft into the Hosmer Street ROW. The property is located at 735 E. Michigan Avenue, along the East Michigan Avenue corridor which is primarily surrounded by commercial/office use. The property is zoned "H" Light Industrial District. The building is the future office location for the State of Michigan - Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA). The building is located on the east property line. To meet utility regulations and standards, a 6 ft x 15 ft concrete pad is located 3 feet from the east side of the building. The transformer and switch box are to be placed on this slab. Another two feet is provided between the pad and the sidewalk with bollards to help protect the equipment. With a standard 5-foot wide sidewalk, about 2 feet remains for a parkway before the curb. In this parkway are utility poles. The concrete slab for the equipment would be located approximately 55 feet from the Michigan Avenue ROW. To help compensate for the visual impact of the equipment, the applicant has proposed adding plantings and sidewalk areas on the Hosmer Street side of the building. The equipment definitely has a utility- like appearance. The applicant has identified several options and cost analysis. There was discussion regarding other options, aesthetics and accessibility to the transformer/switch box. Staff recommends denial of the request to locate the transformer in the Hosmer Street Right-of-Way. The Committee findings were such that the Committee reviewed the location, character and extent of the proposal PLANNING BOARD MINUTFS SFPT MRFR 6, 2000, PA(.F 33 and requested additional information. We were waiting for that this evening and got a little, but not all of what we were looking for. Specifically, the reasons for the denial recommendation from Public Service Department and the need for additional information in the underground "J-Box", those two items were addressed earlier this evening. In Committee, a motion was made and seconded to deny Act-13-2000, 735 E. Michigan Avenue, Private Use of Hosmer St. ROW (BLW Transformer). On a voice vote, the motion carried (2-1). Mr. Smith noted that the vote to recommend denial was done with the acknowledgment that it would permit the location of the transformer on what would be known as Option number 1. Several options cited where this transformer could be located. This would also permit the necessary high-voltage cabling to be put underground in the right-of-way next to the building which would be made necessary if it were located on Option 1. Mr. Ruff made one other note that he thinks the Committee recommendation included allowing the underground "J-Box" as well. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Mr. Smith made a motion, seconded by Ms. Patrick, to deny Act-13-2000, 735 E. Michigan Avenue, Private Use of Hosmer Street Right-of-Way for a transformer with the acknowledgments that the staff just clarified. (For clarity, the denial is for the Option 3.) Mr. Ruge said he thinks that there should be a condition put on this that there be plantings along the east side of the building to make it more attractive. Mr. Nischan asked if this was offered as a friendly amendment. Mr. Ruge said yes it is. Mr. Ruff asked for clarification. Mr. Ruge said we are denying Option 3 but we are allowing Option 1. Mr. Ruff said Option 1 is pretty much allowed use with the exception of the underground cabling that would come up alongside of the building. Mr. Ruff said when you state your vote, an aye vote will recommend denial of Option 3. Mr. Rieske asked if we could rephrase this to recommend denial of Option 3 and to further recommend approval of Option 1 including the underground wiring and the "J-Box" so as to be completely covering all the things that are you are actually approving. Mr. Smith has no objection to this, but to be clear, an "aye" would be to deny. Mr. Ruff said it would be for the motion as stated to recommend denial of Option 3 as proposed and further to recommend approval of Option 1 including the allowance of the PLANNING RQARn MI NUT S S PT MRFR 6, 2000, PACF 14 underground cabling and "J-Box" in the Hosmer Street Right-Of-Way with condition that plantings be added to the east side of the building to soften the building. Mr. Nischan said an aye vote is to deny and to permit and require the other things. Frederick . Aye Patrick . .Ave Smith. . Aye Keene. . . Aye Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Nischan. .Ave On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried unanimously; Act-1 3-2000, 735 E. Michigan Avenue, Private Use of Hosmer St. ROW (BLW Transformer) has been denied as requested but approved as modified. DENIED AS REQUESTED AND APPROVED AS MODIFIED. Next meeting is Tuesday, September 26, 2000 at 4:00pm, 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from Planning Manager The new Zoning Administrator has been hired and started working with the City this week and that is Susan Stachowiak. Hope to introduce you to her at the next Planning Board Meeting. She comes to us with Undergrad and Master's Degrees in Public Administration and has experience as a City Manager in a small community as well as Planning and Zoning Administrator for the city of Grand Ledge for the past 5 years. So we are glad to have her on staff. Also, I regret to announce that Mr. Sturdevant is moving on to a position with Delhi Township beginning in a few weeks and so Mr. Sturdevant will be in Delhi Township serving that community. Beyond that, I was glad to have Mr. Nischan back so we can take care of this business. The last item is that Sissy Foster has been sworn in and should be in attendance for the next Planning Board Meeting. She is an Assistant Professor of Landscape Architecture at Michigan State University. She was referred to me by Mr. Smith and in fact she did her Masters Thesis on Landscape Ordinances. So she should be quite helpful at looking at some of the things the City is looking at presently, in particular, beautification issues and landscape ordinance issues. Also she has a wealth of experience in private practice with Geographic Information Systems. So she will also be helpful there. She spent 10 years in private practice in Maryland prior to coming to Michigan. PLANNING BOARD MINIITFS SFPTFMBFR 6, 2nnn, PAGE35 D. Pending Items: Future action required. 1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) b. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to "G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) C. Z-8-2000, 3901 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "F" Commercial to"H" Light Industrial District(Tabled June 14, 2000) d. NCU-9-2000, 2400 N. East Street, Class"A" and Substitution, Nonconforming Use for Setbacks and Parking (Tabled August 9, 2000) 2. Urban Development Committee a. Act-7-99, Somercroft Drive at Post Oak Lane, Vacate Public Right-of-way for School Parking (Referred to UDC May 18, 1999) Make a note on the Zoning and Ordinance Committee that we still have issues we alluded to tonight, the G-1 issues. Mr. Ruff said yes. Mr. Nischan asked if we were any closer to being able to bring those up and being able to deal with the parking issues or not. Mr. Ruff said we are still waiting for some review by the City Attorney's Office. I hope to have these out. I will try to calla meeting with the City Attorney's Office to discuss that matter and the options to this. Mr. Nischan said his concern is that they are old and he does not know to what extent a thorn in the side of the developers but it would be nice to dispose of them in one way or another. 9. NEW BUSINESS - Election of Officers. Positions that need to be voted on: Chairman, Vice- Chairman Mr. Nischan made a motion; seconded by Mr. Frederick to nominate Ms. Keene for Chairperson. On a Voice vote, motion carried. Mr. Smith made a motion; seconded by Mr. Nischan, to nominate Mr. Frederick for Vice Chairman. On a Voice vote, motion carried. New Chairman: Deborah Winfrey Keene. New Vice Chairman: Andrew Frederick. 10. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON None 11. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Mr. Nischan would like to thank everyone, in particular Ms. Keene for carrying on staunchly in my absence. It was absence because of work commitments and I wasn't goofing off. Because I am self-employed, when the contracts come, I follow the work. So that is what was going on. I know it created hardship for you PI ANNINr, BOARD MIN IT S S PTFMB R 6, Man, PAGE 36 and I apologize for that and I appreciate the work you have done. Ms. Keene said we missed you and we are going to call upon you when we have vacancies. 12. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Mr. Frederick noted the development next to the University Club, the hotel and the golf course. We approved it, and one of the conditions is that the construction traffic not travel west on Forest Road. They are doing this. Especially the gravel trains. They're kind of tearing up the road in front of the development, but I don't know how that can be avoided, I have seen them repair that once. I am a little concerned that if they continue to travel west on Forest, they will rip up that brand new pavement, and I would hate to see that because it is still pristine and smooth as only new asphalt could be. Please contact the contractor. Mr. Ruff will call the University and have them direct the contractors. Ms. Patrick noted that a sign needs to be checked in the ROW on South Cedar right north of Auto Zone. A new sign. It is a Real Estate Sign. 13. ADJOURNMENT was at 10:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted James A. Ru , Secretary Planning Board mn09O62000 a:\59 M PA-1-99: Master Plan Amendment Area bounded by 1-96, Willoughby Road, S. Cedar and Eiffert Road GENERAL INFORMATION SUBJECT: Proposal to amend the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan APPLICANT: Gordon Long 6820 S. Cedar Street Lansing, MI 48911 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Representing Lansing Clarion Limited Partnership & Gordon L. Long 6820 S. Cedar Street Lansing, MI 48911 PURPOSE: Master Plan Amendment: to reflect changes in the development use patterns since the adoption of the Southeast Comprehensive Plan in 1981 for the area area bounded by 1-96 Expressway, S. Cedar Street, Willoughby Road, and Eiffert Road on the west. EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial, Office, Hotel/Convention Center, Parking lots, Vacant Land and Single Family Residential land use EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential and "F" Commercial, and "J" Parking Districts SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Commercial and Office S: Commercial Development and Residential in Delhi Twp. E: Commercial W: Residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "F" Commercial S: Out of City (Delhi Twp.) _ E: "F" Commercial W: "A" Residential and "CUP" District MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Southeast Area Plan generally designates properties in this area for commercial use that MPA-1-99 Master Plan Amendment: Area bounded by 1-96 Expressway, S. Cedar Street, Willoughby Road, and Eiffert Road on the west. recognizes the strip commercial pattern of development along S. Cedar Street. The Plan designates this area as shown in Attachment #1. The Plan identifies S. Cedar Street as a Major Arterial and Willoughby Rd. as a collector street. Just-A-Mere and Georgia are identified as local streets as shown in Attachment #2. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN MASTER PLAN AREA: Development proposed in this area is an expansion of the Holiday Inn South Convention Center complex located at 6810 S. Cedar Street. The proposed development includes: • 280,000 sq. ft. addition to the Holiday Inn South Convention Center which includes approximately 156 hotel rooms, 32,500 sq. ft. of exhibition space, 25,000 sq. ft. of meeting rooms and 247 fixed seat meeting auditorium. • 919 space (originally proposed for 2,475 space) parking ramp for visitors, two levels above grade (originally proposed three levels) • 150 suite extended stay hotel facility (separate from the Holiday Inn). • 16,800 sq ft single story office building (originally proposed at 13,299 sq. ft.), to directly front onto Willoughby Road. PROPOSED PLAN DESIGNATION: The proposed expansion to the existing hotel/convention is located in the south end of Lansing, adjacent to Delhi Township. The current Comprehensive Plan designation for the site is shown on the attached Southeast Comprehensive Plan map. The area is primarily designated commercial along the frontage of Cedar Street. Land to the west of the frontage is primarily designated low density residential and residential behind the frontage along Just-A- Mere, Georgia, and Willoughby. The expanded hotel/convention center requires rezoning of the property to appropriate districts that would accommodate the development, involving additional MPA-1-99 Master Plan Amendment: Area bounded by 1-96 Expressway, S. Cedar Street, Willoughby Road, and Eiffert Road on the west. land zoned for expanded hotel/convention space, parking office development. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Following the 1981 adoption of the Southeast Area Plan, there have been several requests to alter land use patterns in the area through zoning changes. These include: • #1928: (Z-62-78) to rezone land along the east side of the 7000 block of S. Cedar from "A" Residential and "DM-1" Residential to "F" Commercial District • #2176: (Z-28-85) to rezone land from "F" Commercial and "J " Parking to "F" District • #2210: (Z-35-86) to rezone land in the 6900 Blk. S. Cedar Street from "A" Residential to "F " Commercial District • #2280: (Z-25-88) to rezone land at 7026, 7028, 7032 S. Cedar Street from "A" Residential to "F " Commercial District • #2284: (Z-31-88) to rezone 6900 Block S. Cedar/1250 Roth Dr./1301 Brookdale from "A" Residential and "G-2" Wholesale Distrcts to "F" Commercial District. Also, street vacations include: • Two short streets off of the east side of Cedar Street were vacated. These included Benton Street in 1987 and Brookdale Street in 1991. This allowed former right of way land to be added to adjacent land for commercial development. This proposed amendment of the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan was initiated at the request of City staff for the Planning Board to examine changes in trends in the South Cedar Street and Willoughby area. This request is appropriate due to the proposal for the expansion of the Holiday Inn Convention Center facility. A public hearing on the amendment was held M PA-1-99 Master Plan Amendment: Area bounded by 1-96 Expressway, S. Cedar Street, Willoughby Road, and Eiffert Road on the west. simultaneously with the public hearing for rezoning and the Act 285 involved in the overhead pedestrian walkway connecting the hotel/convention center to the proposed parking ramp. Z-15-99 was then referred to the Zoning and Ordinance. The Master Plan Amendment was referred to the Urban Development Committee where it was tabled for further information. The applicant since then has acquired additional residential properties along Just-A-Mere, Georgia, and Willoughby, to accommodate changes in the proposed development involving a smaller parking ramp, additional surface parking, and a larger office building. A Traffic Impact Study was conducted by Tetra Tech to evaluate the impact of traffic from the proposed expansion on nearby streets and was submitted to the Planning and Transportation Office for review. ANALYSIS The request for a Master Plan Amendment is further discussed below. COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE The applicant has indicated the rezoning is necessary for expansion of the development as proposed. Much of the impact expected from the proposed development was upon the remaining homes along the residential streets to the west. Concerns included increased traffic on Just-A-Mere and Georgia Avenues and the impact of noise, light, glare, and vehicle emissions from the development upon the adjacent neighborhood. The applicant has acquired a total of 25 homes for the redevelopment of this area. The 8 houses (all single family homes) to remain include: • 908 Just-A-Mere • 7016 Georgia • 7021 Georgia • 7022 Geogia • 7025 Georgia • 939 Willoughby (house fronts onto Willoughby) 0 1001 Willoughby (house fronts onto Willoughby) M PA-1-99 Master Plan Amendment: Area bounded by 1-96 Expressway, S. Cedar Street, Willoughby Road, and Eiffert Road on the west. (The house at 6900 Georgia will remain for the duration of a life lease.) The Zoning Ordinance requires landscaping, screening, and buffering where the hotel/convention center complex abuts remaining residential development. Additional landscaping is encouraged throughout the development to reduce heat, glare and runoff from the expanse of surface parking for this complex. COMPLIANCE WITH MASTER PLAN The Master Plan serves as a guide for orderly growth and development in the City. As trends change and new factors emerge, the Master Plan must be updated. The Plan uses generalized land use maps and text to describe the desired and most beneficial use patterns and development requirements. Development of land should be led by the Master Plan to discourage piecemeal, haphazard, and arbitrary development. Zoning is one tool for implementing the Master Plan, and rezoning of land takes place within the context of expressed policies. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC Access to the site is probably the single most important factor affecting the impact on vehicular traffic. The location of any parking lot or ramp should probably be limited to S. Cedar Street and will need to be carefully considered by the applicant and reviewed by the City's Transportation Engineer. Willoughby is controlled by the Ingham County Road Commission and this section of S. Cedar Street is controlled by the City of Lansing (not the State of Michigan). The traffic lights at the intersection of Cedar and Willoughby are controlled by the City of Lansing. Staff believes the ideal situation would be to ensure that good traffic circulation maintained throughout the development and that it be directed to the major adjacent streets, away from the residential street (Georgia and Just-A-Mere, west of Georgia). The Traffic Impact Study was submitted for staff's review. The supplement to the Traffic Impact Study is attached, that summarizes anticipated traffic impacts. Considerations to be made for traffic improvements include: • cutting off any through traffic from the hotel/convention center complex to Long Blvd. • prevention of through (convention center) traffic onto Georgia Ave. • installation of a traffic light on Cedar Street at Just-A-Mere. • adjustments in signalization, especially for high traffic volumes exiting from the hotel/convention center complex site. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT MPA-1-99 Master Plan Amendment: Area bounded by 1-96 Expressway, S. Cedar Street, Willoughby Road, and Eiffert Road on the west. Development of the subject property will have a significant environmental impact on S. Cedar Street and Willoughby Road. The substantial stand of trees will be removed to build the proposed parking ramp, stripping the site of its natural features or functions. Many of the trees along Georgia Avenue and on residential properties will be removed which will open up the site for large expanses of surface parking lots. The loss of mature trees will result in a significant change in character to the area. Landscape, screening and buffering will be required where the development abuts the remaining residential properties. Overall, the development as proposed should act as a good buffer/transition to the commercial development along the south side of Willoughby Road in Delhi Township. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT Development of this overall site should have a positive impact on future patterns of development along S. Cedar Street, by potentially increasing business in the area, and assembling a large amount land into a coordinated development. Any development to occur along the east side of S. Cedar Street should be coordinated with any major entries into the hotel/convention center complex, namely the intersections at Long Blvd. and Just-A-Mere. PROPOSED LAND USE DESIGNATIONS The land use designations that coincide with the proposed development and surrounding development are depicted in the attached land use map and are described as follows: 1. Commercial, including all the frontage of Cedar, the hotel/conference center, parking deck and Staybridge Suites. Extends westward to near end of Just-A- Mere, including frontage on both sides. 2. Office, along the north frontage of Willoughby, west of the south entrance to the complex, east of Georgia. Frontage only. Buffers commercial to the east with residential to the west. 3. Residential 15-20 du/acre, west of Georgia, south of the frontage along Just-A- Mere, and including the north frontage of Willoughby and Oak Park Village. Buffers low density residential on the west from the commercial/office on the east. MPA-1-99 Master Plan Amendment: Area bounded by 1-96 Expressway, S. Cedar Street, Willoughby Road, and Eiffert Road on the west. SUMMARY Many changes in land use and zoning have occurred throughout the S. Cedar Street area from 1-96, south to Willoughby Road, since the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1981. The proposed expansion of the Holiday Inn South Convention Center complex located at 6810 S. Cedar Street presents opportunities and challenges that have been reviewed throughout this Master Plan Amendment and will be further reviewed through the Site Plan Review process. Staff believes that the increase in traffic from the proposed complex can be handled with improved signalization and a new traffic light on Cedar Street at Just-A-Mere. Enhancements to the area should result from the expansion of this complex into a better coordinated overall development for South Lansing. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of MPA-1-99, along with the proposed pedestrian overpass (Act-21-99) subject to the following: 1 Any remaining residential properties be screened from the development with adequate landscape, screening and buffering. 2. Improvements to the environment throughout the development to include stormwater drainage, green space, and landscape screening and buffering. 3. Direct traffic away from Georgia Avenue, and keep it as a residential street for. local traffic only. 4. No front yard parking in front of (south) of the office building along Willoughby Road. ..... .�... x'......'i............. ...........:..... ..�.j...=...... .... .....................••••••••. i...i.•.••••• ..........•...•..... ............••. ••u u.•.0 u•.•u. tsuuu.. .•• row�0 tR cE � •••, ..........:ice::: RESIDENTIAL 0-7 u/ac RESIDENTIAL 8-14 u/ac RESIDENTIAL 15-20 u/ac 12tip, RESIDENTIAL 21 + u/ac PROFESSIONAL OFFICE °°....° z COMMERCIAL PARKS/OPEN SPACE/CEMETARY UTILITIES LIGHT INDUSTRIAL �] HEAVY INDUSTRIAL COMMUNITY FACILITIES •` "" MIXED USE (COMM/OFF/APT) �t 0 WAREHOUSE/RESEARCH PARK ..�.n.< �'<`^•• S SPECIAL LAND USES LANSING PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1 PROPOSED LAND USE TO 1990 SOUTHEAST AREA. COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN ............. 'ji % ........................ .... t .......................... .......... ........... m L ................ 4� PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS MINOR ARTERIALS COLLECTORS IMPROVEMENT INTERSECTIONS IN NEED OF LANSING PLANNING CEPARTMENT m"im------------------ PROPOSED CIRCULATION TO 1990 SOUTHEAST AREA COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN .cw roxs-1(i PCXX` PS-tz Po,,.6- r Ts r ,rnA uts, •. t rcw WAW.4Ch-320DW sr LW A.527 UPS -- C.5-TEA U75 25!CA25 '—'"r-'+-r1•J r I \-- Ic c-•r..uxs clk aAur.1 ler�: lNS 5TA-MDM 9.nT6-tM CARS r>•.-'^""-"'A-61 UPS aE — — .jbl _ 1 FtlI�:IRJ6 I — s 0 0_ EB rr hOLJDA, NN cx'AN50N K>'vst�Ile OVERALL 5ffE PLAN 5TA13RDGE 5UnS HOTEL 42Too ILA LV 101,151 INVIgN ��.1.• 1 \� PVWAF 11 Ex alp � .� PR4 A W a � ' Proposed Holiday Inn South Expansion Supplement to the Traffic Impact Study After preliminary review of the Traffic Impact Study for the proposed expansion of the Holiday Inn South, the City of Lansing's Traffic and Parking Office requested that progression of traffic on South Cedar Street be investigated to determine the impacts of installing a traffic signal on South Cedar Street at Just-A-Mere Avenue. In addition, we analyzed the operation of the intersections of S. Cedar Street at Lon,, Boulevard and at Just-A-Mere Avenue with the addition of PM peak traffic from the proposed Lowe's Store on the east side of South Cedar Street. The intersection of Just-A-Mere Avenue and South Cedar Street was also analyzed assuming a luncheon event ends at approximately 1:30 PM. These analyses reveal that, with the addition of a Lowe's Store, the two intersections will operate better with a traffic signal at both intersections. Increasing minor street traffic at Long Boulevard, either from the Holiday Inn Development or from Lowe's, will decrease the green signal time for South Cedar Street traffic. This negatively impacts the through progression on South Cedar Street. Also, adding more traffic to Long Boulevard decreases the level of service for the eastbound and northbound left-turns from LOS C to LOS E. With a traffic signal at Just-A-Mere Avenue, most of the westbound to southbound left-turning traffic would be expected to utilize the traffic signal at Just-A-Mere rather than the one at Long Boulevard. With this reassignment of traffic, and changing the traffic signal to three-phase operation. Long Boulevard at South Cedar Street would operate at LOS B, with the eastbound and westbound through/left-turn movements at LOS D. With this operation, the South Cedar Street green indication would be five seconds greater than currently exists. The signalized intersection of Just-A-Mere and South Cedar Street would operate at LOS B with the east and west approaches at LOS D. The addition of a traffic signal at Just-A-Mere Avenue will not impact the width of the through progression band in either direction on South Cedar Street. The intersections that control the width of the through progression band on South Cedar Street are Edgewood Boulevard and American Road/Pennsylvania Avenue. The offsets at Long Boulevard and at Just-A-Mere Avenue can be adjusted by time of day to increase the progression band-width for northbound or southbound traffic between Edgewood Boulevard and Willoughby Road. Special-event signal timing plans can be utilized as necessary to facilitate heavy traffic exiting from the hotel/convention center complex site. Progression on South Cedar Street would be impacted. The intersection analyses and two possible time-space diagrams showing progression between Northrup Street and Willoughby Road are attached. July 25, 2000 TETRA TECH MPS \jr rl ZI c co c 56 Ao IDO 7-,5' 660' �45 61 5ec, 6;z6Zt;. 6, 79z5ec -49 6 ec" L = 8- 58 i e,- 9 -43 re 7 4 3 aa5L�- 21 �a� �aG6s�� Ja571 119 5-Z '2as i-? !�L_ C. Rs N viz oo� U ci VQ R� rn co �N . W 6. ---- ------- ------ — --- C�z � � U 31 i s �W �U z �-rn rn rt ..,nil Act-21-99 1000 Block of Just-A-Mere Ave. Pedestrian Overpass GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Gordon Long 6820 S. Cedar Street Lansing, MI 48911 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Representing Lansing Clarion Limited Partnership & Gordon L. Long 6820 S. Cedar Street Lansing, MI 48911 REQUESTED ACTION: Vacate part of right of way above pedestrian walkway EXISTING LAND USE: Hotel, Parking lots, Vacant Land and Single Family Residential land use EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential and "F" Commercial, and "J" Parking Districts PROPOSED ZONING: "F" Commercial and "J" Parking District (see attached proposed rezoning map for Z-15-99) PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: Subject property to be rezoned (Z-15-99) is irregularly shaped, located behind (to the west) of the commercial strip in the 6800 -7000 blocks of S. Cedar Street. The existing Holiday Inn and Convention Center has 368 feet of frontage along S. Cedar and the proposed new Hotel and Office will have approximately 1,000 feet of frontage along Willoughby Road. SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Commercial and Office S: Commercial Development and Residential in Delhi Twp. E: Commercial W: Residential, (Single Family Residences and Oak Park Village Apartments) SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "F" Commercial to the north of the existing Holiday Inn/Convention Center S: Delhi Township: Cedar Park Shopping Center - Act-21-99 1000 Block of Just-A-Mere Ave., Pedestrian Overpass "C-2" General Business "R-1 C" Medium Density Residential and "A-V Agricultural E: "F" Commercial W: "A" Residential and "CUP" Residential District MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Southeast Area Plan generally designates properties in this area for commercial use that recognizes the strip commercial pattern of development along S. Cedar Street. The Plan identifies S. Cedar Street as a Major Arterial and Willoughby Rd. as a collector street. Just-A-Mere and Georgia are identified as local streets. A request to amend the Southeast Area Plan (MPA- 1-99) is curr-ently before the Planning Board to consider changes in land use designations for this area. SPECIFIC INFORMATION Developer's Proposal: This is a request by Gordon Long, representing himself and Lansing Clarion Limited Partnership, to construct a pedestrian walkway over Just-A-Mere that would connect the hotel/convention center complex to the three story parking ramp to the south. The applicant therefore wishes to utilize the air rights over the Just-A-Mere Street ROW to construct a span between two structures. The height from the street to the bottom of the pedestrian walkway would be 18 feet and will extend from one side of the street to the other, approximately 145 feet. AGENCY RESPONSES Note: Agency Responses to the Act-21-99 were made a part of the original Z-15-99 Planning Board Report. These have been reiterated here for the purposes of the Act- 21-99. Ameritech: (No response received.) Assessor: (No response received.) Act-21-99 1000 Block of Just-A-Mere Ave Pedestrian Overpass AT & T Cable Services (No response received.) Bd. of Water & Light: Electric No objection to rezoning the proposed parcels. Contact Person: Ricky Thornton 371-6726 Bob Strobel 371-6082 Water No objection to projects. Water Customer Projects needs water service requirements and site plan. Contact Person: Terry Robison 371-6494 Building Safety: (No response received.) Consumers (No response received.) Energy: City Attorney: (No response received.) Development Office: Recommend easement for pedestrian overpass similar to one for new State Legislative Building over Ottawa street. Delhi Township: In their (attached) response, they have indicated that the "proposed land use will be quite compatible with the existing and proposed land uses in Delhi Charter Township. Therefore, we have no objectives or comments pertaining to the proposed developments." Fire Marshal: (No response received.) Historic Preservation Planner: (No response received.) Lansing Neigh. (No response received.) Council: MI Dept. of Transportation: (No response received.) Parks & Rec: It doesn't impact park operations and maintenance. We have no objections. Community Policing: (No response received.) Act-21-99 1000 Block of Just-A-Mere Ave., Pedestrian Overpass Public Service Dept.: (No response received.) Traffic Engineer: Dave Berridge, in his attached response, recommends a traffic impact study be conducted and that some changes be made in the site plan. ANALYSIS COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE The applicant stated that the pedestrian walkway will be made of the same materials as the hotel complex: glass, brick, and steel. It will be heated, air-conditioned and enclosed. The area, if developed as proposed, covers a significant area between 1-96 and Willoughby Road. The original request consisted of about 21 .5 acres. Several more acres were included of commercial development/parking with additional residential properties included along Georgia and Just-A-Mere. COMPLIANCE WITH MASTER PLAN The Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan generally identifies this area for commercial development. The amendment to this plan is currently under consideration with MPA-1- 99 report to examine changes in land use and development since the adoption of the current plan in 1981. The pedestrian overpass would therefore in compliance with the current and proposed amendment to the plan to accommodate commercial with convenient nearby covered parking. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC The applicant originally proposed a four story parking ramp. This was revised to a three story parking ramp with the revision to the rezoning application. Additional surface parking lots were added. The pedestrian overpass would therefore connect the hotel/convention complex to a three story ramp instead of a four story parking ramp. The pedestrian overpass, according to the applicant, is "to allow the safe and convenient access of our many customers directly from the parking structure to the hotel and conference/exhibit space. This will minimize the necessity of customers walking to and from parking across Just-A-Mere Avenue." The height from the street to the bottom of the pedestrian walkway would be 18 feet Act-21-99 1000 Block of Just-A-Mere Ave. Pedestrian Overpass and will extend from side of the street to the other, approximately 145 feet. This clearance is sufficient for the clearance of emergency vehicles. Therefore, staff believes no negative impact on vehicular and pedestrian traffic is anticipated from the pedestrian overpass. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The pedestrian overpass connecting the hotel/convention center complex to the three story parking ramp would not result in any negative environmental impacts. The applicant therefore wishes to utilize the air rights over the Just-A-Mere Street ROW to construct a span between two structures. The applicant stated that the pedestrian walkway will be made of the same materials as the hotel complex: glass, brick, and steel. It will be heated, air-conditioned and enclosed. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT No negative impacts on future development is anticipated from the pedestrian overpass. The clearance height of 18 feet will allow for the passage of emergency vehicles and other vehicles. SUMMARY The pedestrian overpass is designed to give customers safe and convenient access from the hotel and converence/exhibit space to the three story parking ramp, across Just-A-Mere Ave. No negative impacts are anticipated from the proposed overpass. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends conditional approval provided that the clearance be at a minimum clearance necessary for the safe passage of emergency vehicles and that receive final approval from the Fire Marshall's office. .-�,r ', ); _,�' f ., ,�,�. 4" � � 4 LU C Z 0 uLS 5 d v 6 B Z � O MAS Lu Le Cl Sw O F- P v 's �h�',\',S//��I\//�',Y/lqf/��Y1✓!.'il�Y7�lif:�l's.;:� � !—��. - `` =� �V R6M[ inR CR faIDlMl RTGMN \ / ryL \ \ / I / \ BALL ROOM\ EXH54T HALL o` "" /// ♦\ \\ / 1 / o Mbp 1 / \ FI F � E luau ATRLM GOVERN rom to cKa- 1 I y+n I DNNCiROOM I I HOTEL ENTRT `W LMOMN<ZONE I , I - 1 , `------------------- I I - I — I ,•..:��n....,— FRST FLOOR PI.fW otslcecYovel® 1,.�,._.._ FtOLDAY NN EXPATlr-✓ION (i►.rsollo ue ROOM E1U1Bff HALL BELOW . MEETNO ROOMS 5 ROOMS 2300 S-F. n�.. 2 ROOMS 1200 S.F. I ROOM 1060 SF. 2 ROOMS 730 S.F. 6 ROOMS 650 S.F. no sr. aso sr. aso sr. eso sr. iso sr. rso sr, a,b 2 ROOMS 225 SF. I L EGTl1RE 250 SEATS s ATRLM BELOW deo sr. 'p , ,a„° BREAKOL[T LOBBY ' s wo Sr., MEETN6 ROOMS m00 sr. EWITNG HOTEL ROOMS 7300 sr. 2300 sr. roo sr. I300 sr. 2300 sr. moo sr. �ug WALK Aj-TC PARKNG ...J"�u►� °"° °- MEETWG RDOM LEVEL-SEGON / R 1 4 4 o / -- II ff - • t � �1 �� •J 1`;yt�7� `�1'r r �II b r r � I Il r i ry J I LLS uU taid ji Ba !f f El � y • 'fit; �� _ci ,�t•,rT n:7r.,:u.}�c',KK�'zr -•str:a(;.ti�:�li ".3 - }:• 8 ..'0� SWrfi,.;n►3'<M? t' .`;� v'.1 :4'i � =}:i:ii..�!S'r. +e,"'vi}�!i,�y.4.- _wte�,,t}�y�,,AI�.. .3'wti^ir•. :%"'t - R�:�%- t• -w ,,,.. v)".:{•4 _yr+s•�4::;•ar•thj•L_.•�'tf•- ri1:1 'f+. !�vb Y.r_ �t.c. ••.•�,+.:^,u y t„e:g;f L:,r.: �• +;�;'�E•• :,r.,t.,�. K ':ti=y.,i...lP.��i"• .,r., t'i:B.yy 4.r- &-rciR ter:. t.tj...vy.:.(d)�' =x'e:i,?'":Y•'.':^,I: n:, 17..q , 1.• :r• �,,.1�5r_�' �L 7 'ic: t�F'-'e .'•_x[":, :r,..�:-ulY• t-5vn ",tl'�:a, r:'ti{.^ �.,,..."„}�.'.,r.- r_. .w.1 ,>_;:0'4$1' !,ts .t, rySSf .;r;,y,, r ., f�.. �. .y:.,c.r.a t 1+._ ,.},a., - s•. ,�. - a` i' ,r. :y _ -w. .,i4�:a�' ?,r u i,. - a i*tS•, 5 4. :rs 46; `=t"• 1'a i .urv+ g r,: _e4' r<: 1. t ;:!:; e•}Ac:i:.lT -5�,'r.•s.t7„ndS '�"-r, 'k'7,s_ '�...� t:7"..[k,� ,11v�'+<r��L:.r,•>...,�Qf`'• s9 ..tom .Y;�.:, t� ,.r La - •�Icy`�`���•t;'•.�,.•`;'�i'��r�-!: _c•�, j..f•.:-.. .-.�,••:.•7's7_ ,.1P"::Lr^r•IS",:4' •:C rf`Ya•�t # w TrrTa.,.Tz"s- to t+`, :• r �- "t;. oM1Gx. ri•.. ce .e' .,.,.>,v{�t N;I,ifiY. Div i{! .t.;:�l-' rP•,-.� �"r +r afra F` sa +a++ N 6m' t 7} �aq ,•r �y� :,'S. j: }'mot t c�' o;,��1�i i:.J;L._:= -,5 k: Sr ?' i C, }. ' ��. ,5:�'*'•�:wST, J •=r.-�r .!ir r:.v.ili:' S..� �.kral;/ ?_ .''�'n3r-.':r`�y41,'i'�ik .�e•r^:art, "ra• ,.5.a.f_..}:,L:':�.:_.,., a ,7,,i,-.Ri:ft .1 jjf,��y f'•�•..'•$ -0?,. 'h14:ri._:T-..,, ..1�,` .I.r :H,,:f'l.:i•' rt,tlry. ,i-ter :1.'=3':L, ¢ ,J:� ,I.e.,.n• :.i�:.•i. .ef,: -ri.. 'i,... ._ .,(:>'•n>_•t.'•r ti':t,`.iM ryt•9_ .l.t'1<. t x5„'Fa.. , pa r rJc, �V .v�': .Mi4n,A...s.-�.��•: .a. mot. ,r,, ::r ..r..,.r.in`'y r•,t1��:-.. ., :" .'t H.- ..7' xt.. 1: r (� 1L..�,.,(r. U` •:•.. 1'Sr,,,. Atet�'i?r-:++c'. 1... ::rl f T•'�-in. ys.*. c':•i+.''af y .:!:k. iY7:re„.,�'1k•'d'.. <'!i,. Zc .�'r•.-.. ..�Y`;,_.T rts:' •y. 1 a :�• ►!?{i: Irr. •rkyyc `crf;�1 t'1. c!�^Yjt; 5r�, +. -ar. 4 y�!t3� i,. {.. �'�7ti' Via ; } •fix yix.- 5 !,t r 'i. 'E• -;wr C r.:. ..,� ^J.�. .t,. 1 .+<� L is �.fI...y. 5 ,re i't'G'4+ ."'l�.g�0 4i3".} ..r'{. ,,;._,.).,vim 5-- G.l•"4 -P,1", i{� cr y -0 1 �. }•-t♦t<. S. 5: :i�� ,fie iS; - t y �`i •f, t} o a z<'Y:+a { •.+E!T_^) �ppf, }!h. L , jk,.ary...,a •tc. r c• tr+."., .sl>'. ",x.., r2 t...-•r,:..a''•L •.ft� ,la.:•?;. 0;4: "'ti' ,�y°- L '3t u�G ate, •x„ ,:! �., !. .• .,, S_}s r,-'' rA'% i?• , f' :L'r-••{ ,.a,ri. i.a r, 1� Y+ 2-••..Sa tr 4r', t��cy°...,5;. ^ lkt r`4t .•. -� :te r.=t,rr�:-'•f..rt+,-..Y�'i: :,'r:Y*"•e "-s!q: r,?•.'iglis : !dl-< ,.titt vi :�ifi,:: '1'fi'e.(•,:::,tr: tl`+•: 13e_ }.r� ;s +•x�, i •�,x y� 't' . fr y(� i. •rF r i •+r3.t7:a• =r''r. h •7i• ,•'t. '••w`.+x- -.E•' r .•�`Ss. n, `t•"` t. }.:. �� ,'7: P�� .f.. ) •i', {,� ':'ri. '�i� ..Y. '...7r::}i. 't^l, rim, -.y_d,. .4, 4. 1.:r. +�td ,�G�, a •,: ,, i��•,X,�'.�.,t'''iY'%tsr�"i o•Sr:•... ..i* '•it 1..i'. '+fT� :.V"'rs.- 'rk:.�. 4:.hi - ... •r+S. •� � �L++.y�yy,,1�� .f..a..,.L� . •�'�• •eSF!:-^ .r,'...- .T-:r. 't' "k:i• ••yi }`a ,VZ• ,,'a ,li:. Lt.. r^ ,+ti'::.?+ . .a \ .;1;:,::Y.n _r;i'.'•:`�� .f .;_. .+. •)Fi.t .•,� r•3 .f.�•+ �•:.1. �., .rF Y , d•,{�;.. .,""-1-. i,'. _Ca..i•r :', .'�a,,+ 7 t. .•I.�i'• t "f:a r'^ rtr: +r - - .L -..a;,;e:.:...: ..a .;ir:7 'uii, _aY 1 r.'�';yir�. .7 •..ir-.. ,,,�,,_ r. .r A 4s ,••� -�, a;.t zn rt- Ir,. ✓.: P' If" . '� ti'r .i' '�j•. ...,•y 1_ m ,� ,':d- •rj. ,1•c� YY•.....k, qaG'• t}r"'.G•9 yi p��1,,-,S:_V'. a. k+ rtxr �- rlr•r,.e,- rr`. "�1 In� •1.+ (i nl i •4 ::N�''""ar -r t. .a7;•.ri��i•• ,( 7.s•.F.. ,rY ,F,'� ".,,.+�. •r' it-]. 1- 1. t 't.z.• -n i k'+ m ,tf, �S:• ass: :�• '�.4 •�s+. '''=' :}. n•. - •:o ! as �,r _;r'. M%•♦ ter-.__ :ie' rr,f��J:♦Jr. ''JP..r'• F�u-..t:aj4':. f.,r,: :, 't if^.^�' •]r v.,.+,..• -�:.' .� ..Tr- ,.;y. !. •'t �lff• ..�k' ;',11•� � `"r,:`.E. i65 '�se. •1..i .L ,t?, - r!' 1 •1• .ni, �.r •� �'�• .t M'f`'14.� � .Y 1 3'L:i j r:S �.. N_ ,.,-:.ae: t�': t:,r •a•' r.:&'%fir a •:+. .,1 .f`v:•�: - _2 + - '•( •i'-a rk.. i2: "�>:: ,.•�.f^ .t}...� f,' •�•Sr. .�:L,.Ms. .p-ql., �4 - Z.�',_ ,rr, nLl• I .t. ,� �:'ro: w+ �: ,1...- •3. ,k{ '.1. > •f!• .14+y, ,�+.,r. D -••.1 ..G,. ..•rrt• :fir r ,•i• �• tie - �'�' r' �d•-:i•tiii- .,. :_ �I - ^�n�• ).:-,, T� `% •w t a.. -'I' ,.41. 1.7'v'w'1 ''-J•' •t r, •b N .1 ,t.3 i i• .`,�_ rr.' t��°r.'""+",%• c+._ -n k• .tia r" =i:' .I::n f, , r, a•••t^+ '•a+..:.. 4 e'r •f2 -0r. •'.t.... :\ ii :.�t,"a!7 _,+,�, ..+:+ .-,'t t,l::,;.,:y,•I_. �-'ram... r 4 x'h �_ •k• .k tla_ ,y. :i+:• c�,' 1e i mst. :R....,.e, ,Cil. :��- }.,•'U r':t t r+fE ,.•$k!9tit: ._t-[•'•,7•. .[ i^,. .,2"'i;.�. f. .i .f t .Z_ , .+oi .•i :FaArt � (! I�+a;r:4v..IFY't .,.;1,n :�,..,r.i-�•}� ., i. �,•% -!."r c'::..-. .e t. er-' r. _ ;`. •j +}. r., .T;cl ,ar• .p.i.,:�fe -:•x .F,lM"-'' ;f-5: �! L .t t. ,'q;.+.• )'`t', L•,,'�t"Z'!:i t5.. 1, ur.'; -r'.z .2.':.'1. ;F-a�"� :;1+,.-�•..,_... •,.v+i!,"i },,.4,r, ,im t'rdtt3�t .rt'��T�'y..a .r,; ..+_ .f�-'2_:Y,T,f�„F'.},.a-�.ai.i t'1; 'aYi9„9.�i i� .1.4 .t+.�ci,•'i. A= •r4 15•.�fF+k.. :; ! y' :Ir-r..fi •,t•sc•,-Ji t -'"� ,(::r• �-2`�. .CY. t rq "ki .'� •.CSC .:�^y,. ^.x+c•i :�_t= '� i, +4Ie v '3%:!t'G.d:.y .i,_ .�x,.r- X:+.A:•l.R-,. 4. •-r ti':t�,+••r j:`K`U J• v._°_ _:tr, _ r.•� .rCr.- ,+. r.,{7: _ sr„tiT ,•r__a:y.r- r. :):i_ R. "t r•• '�, .Y, .,�:.,-,�! ,c[•n,_ -.:Yx:, J 5 ,•^tt:`_!'-'is ,G'f.- r;?u •,h..•rt. ), .} .4 i k ,it•a:4:.w• ,Ys.. `s f t u :S=�j Lt .•� ru:.->.,:. �t.ri_' "' ii•L.� gi:!.,,iia '✓.F,r:C�'�:Q-A r w•,r`a - � ,.!k ,,.� -,fd.7•v,.s�rY. t�1,+� .,; •:1 - .<L.'ys ;},, ,y:•.l .Y.[ .1.:;:•'i?i:. iS.�: +: t: .t'c',,, ,.. .c S a? .}..4.•, .(iS •i-�'" ...r .u.. �yL •�:„,vC ,:r t.. �.+r_� ..r.�'r;.,:''i:.I - ..F,LCf. ^?'" tia'•;r3;•s^<,•` r:ti•tty}: .x.� .'try..-::t'r t13'...1,(+ i'@' 'r•%LY L,�7 .4'•, tc• !:-:�:i.�;s t� .;qi.,t. .s �.•7t-t6*<J'.• _hS;a 1�: a,• .aK .• .-<fi,. .t�ir..r-:e• �d' 'i-„ _ •T: �t'J!t� y.,;,..ra`�Y+.«,fdt't,.,r •� �1�inat..r_'"aFt i> t t.->.(•f, .?i4..,Z�+��3 ¢: ,E�':�,. r,.11i;t:5f�•%C<,�_..5.-r-r-�,;,Cl�/.�+t„�j .r^ ti^�t-.;,r r ir. ;1 •Iv r,a�5. .,1, c}+.�; .�• (( F�` :r ,;i' ��tS, t..4���. .A, !�� ta'r .y !r..::t k.-. ;lire x.,! Sy..,fl':,!':7,^y1'!*•.� •%IzL .•aC2 3+��YiG7�tr.+l•i+!..ri:: .a� �r .:Tss,f�- e.,txa:IC'' rt'rt.-- -�4'�'r •t r. +.,. r•5,7'f,'t. }a,...�';':y�?.,.�r,r,:rrr 1''=' ..u. 1,�,.., `y7�yrl. - 'w'• ;, r,. ;t L sLiiC�" ,i.;�'..Sk+ ,q., .1�. '�..,tr Y. ny;.-.fit'.;.,Y�: ,.i ts���;".'g,•,f•4:as r•,i"rt'r-.�, ' 1 .� f 'sfi!t'•aax:�9�•f:a;•�, 4y r�t.,r.3�;S� t •^•3;�•-iia y .(::1� r,•a:-4•.0:+ _,It'-"ti'r•sr:. i�•4`r�•i. ;+ +..I�... :+,:t .t; <f.l.a .i .-..,�sr]� .iy}•. .•:1.- :nit..n r6,;(sy r4,fii. h+ -ems p^.rt...11 rs ,C. :,}s;, t i:> •,.H:i:, -:•1•,1+ :a''' tr. a�.i.'+�'+:n•ra�., ,+r.a_,�a ,t+:a':.:t r:_ �:s?,9 r- ) �„�. ``-t, r • ,•r.t_ ,t. r t '}� ,r $'L' (�'�'e ..�•.` ..h.,a... ,,..., '.:ik';:iy{: +);!:R'u•.�f'"+••:x.7. :•i r?,.��'' ft11,,.i•" - -•-uf.�;• .fhu.r �I :yL• �j•�'r.�,.•v• '•t .+ t .+.•Y.�jt. +.Y.3114• ='N a -,[. ,.�.rt74 •+.vnk:.i*:7:- !� ,-1 ap.W•,yrS,....%,�"l�lr•�,•�1••;yy�.• .ti�!7r.51�iF' 't +.ir - ":ice `-iSIc.K•::...:'r:�ra�'f 't'. ' 7.: .'•,h y!:!j'. :S• .4,r,1.� .s�_+:,:: �•'!ifi:5r .�,: .ES::'n:.e •! ♦!:/.e .�i ,t;j'-R e•II� 1'.. �F. :,tP):61'gS =r: 'di C ti' h• f!. �:n :dt..,. ''1'7<= '.E::::�•. _'=,.a: .r.. ,reri.., rpt� i."rr.Cf'�.!'+1 .,.t. ....••t1...,•_'("t:�'� :.�':?;ytCL7r:'1';�='� .�t: t.•t,'x'eLi�,`':r Tri���'�`.i><r✓-,r����.. +�.,�.,::1 r..: ,'.1?!9i ""'.�•t ,,MLJ17. s FS._:'ti: ;�"`-i,o:. ;i, r•y,..t,+ „2ti..,.,ti .,t,� :w t .:�•+!.•�..:i.+.Tr ,,tom } .., �Y•it•:•w•, .S,t•. .i,s:'�S �� - ,:i+ �,}f C h•. .r}.nr 4,;i,s XL th!,T. Ctt-� i)�.�_^.r^::::t't5.r+t3•; ., ::ry: �t. �I.J74, .1•f'•!fL"�'.^'• �,+.,c:.�.,.4sxt:r. ,a +..t'..F4 ': ••[:..• __t..r., 1.'. rv>•;n. -k'Y;N" -f.::. .r'� ..r ,.C_ cw: .Y,•..ti ,R'. "'re,,.Tl:..-+-„S'..a•i••'.►{;t.?ilifG��� h'4. i;:•.',:. � n,.x4tljifji.••+'=.+[':q; ••r..a ,.... ,:r,.,l$r„.,t„ ,i.,,. 1'«,r,.a.#;„�;.. :ff:atl_ �,.'»U_i-.-�.).:F.,L`--�YL1.+�.. in� .+*�.'....;•r!•-•••' �•. •,J~'�.� .it;,l-)tt-;t,{,nrt.1.�7�,:. �'-•:.s.,,•,,.'=A:� I�i:'•,ii":r_.,. ! ,r,�19 t� i�iy,+.yt1i., J��,.�;.L��art.FS. .+,t•• - jy r•:,1:, �'i.;,J ,r�. J..,,, ,� ,r,,..r'-. Ip""�Oj^' ::::,' t J..{-r } ' ice- r ° ,t.+tY,ylc,l S ,:T'• i.� } '�" �.. �'•t�•=crAryq r 7t'q'};-:"issry_'C!�-:.._,.�t�+..y5�', a„: i. a x._:.S` :l: '' r __ R: i a '!f f� �,.. ••..x. �7f.1 •'�.L.A• ),¢.:.r:r,. r.,(.i,.., , iil it !.T t ° ,'�C t!E rY __-_r'rf :fit�1�( � :t•TH-•,q4 .r.h_L; r i,c•.u!, t..F• ,��;(•"y:7;r')•h- .,E,Z,,ya,�„r:�.,:y'i ,i., h�.;� �i:.th^; �}�,.}r"'w. �?c ''cf,x:: :.r i (' `„3• .H,` �'1 3; �t• f, i` '=L.,'4• '"�:;hu't.� 'L•,. T �".. at rf.••.-•y 'S�i4:y��y R. <z �: .,a `♦ x'r ,.r tlr.� .+ t.=pf" icaw+,.tw,:•t'_•,' .1' u jG::L: �1..:.=,�,�.:ritr.:S`l& ,�1w '',�'pf � 1� ry� :�• tom.. ,.�. r !i� i �'. - � ^_r i �� A .,s: .�}S 1•- _ t' +�� ),�3',r ,',tyri.ri• 1' r:• ,,. 3.,2'....». ..f ,3�'�1�7.+,•. ..:•v'- t •'1 �� L.a a>; ! ...' i•. .i1�•.rl y...,.. t� ;1..1 �_i. r t, :i'l;:v:.;u•N,: i.i r>k t ',�.,a" -y;•:•rYI%.':.. s... ,r;r� inl^ '� '�' t,.. •.r+•t h• •, .,., �� .;. ••.•r�. :,� •!:� :?9.c' , �i"r•=;rrr�. .f- � .r�'�' -'-;�:y:�� �..:al?.�:�Lr��� ,....•.'• ,�•'«frh r .r-..r•�. ,3•:4 �4,''C':r,; .;\ -•taci �r�"$f.•f• -k: w.�"� T'tn•t�+.•!:' vrs:.r.:,., iaC+aatr,/'- ..?t'T,., ! `wG 'w< -,•F i"iY .t7 1,f°. :yy�r.. Ti•.rr,•_:1]LI �•d�i' �•ir. akJ -ff. .Y+,yi'ti�r1r,S.T�Y� '•�t��i'Z f. 'rt r;' '' ,r; fd: �F:i�?._a•� •.r :' .. I i� a. _tom i5r h �-I.e1,�i}d a•. 7, ttr .,!>?�i:�< Se »• -r�: }.rria:Y ���ef kt" t. Sk;;`:! .!•�1q 1�e `!t r +7•b a rT :1:', �+'�.t' j•Y,� c '''[�11 ,C ..t.♦ f ::.p. i.C. ,:1.!'� ,f 16•i':7�'.r^ 1 .d:: .i F'. N:- .p. �.r .p '+'r.•r. - �(�^'t+f(, .,L•. .r. as•_ 'ii� .r ,,tt•w• ,'' :n: - ..� � ri�'� .r � .:i.;h r':�:'•::�y s,r� ,+�:•. �'J.rp� 'F'�P- +r"';� v7:E i,,,; ';,;�• �i rj�iiyd =M '7i. �•}-45J. �I.,il:: :+k�, ..Y„'.• tt :,, n.ara .»,1.? ..`•I�u�'L.sl.lh���•.+:iN:.•.• �k,.. r., }r•..?';5 !�. N.�c £ .:i-:; ^♦ ,.�.>''. .✓r# }+��-;'�< �M1�� a=;e!(;tytl�:� r r,,y- 'a.r�.y -v:ash' :•t.w•.:.,,(::od�,l:c. ;e;.r_.,;. � � f II - - ,J•,.+,'tf .1 ��1_,Sy.,, , V e;1is�.Ws},;r:C,'`sif::[(.'S L!.su t>k,Rir' '+'L...ti.e• T'.'y'i.,f1'.1. ,.'fn �n .`�,rta 1.4'it 1`i.t` u '+i N� Frl�i i ! rp [• ♦ki ��ltti♦ tu,l'J*' •�..rY . 1tl 4,rli�.:W,`•r�, 'i•t..p.''.3.'+.^,i�.� r '•t.'E•' �yy:..6.•:!a.•P'4 �^ Cif �'tJ 7r�h:�:`�� '.�'�"ne�►�"..t � ��� ��'4n'f�•. 'n:'(t;<•' �� �• ' d• s_ :r-' ::$ .k. i tt• _ :S'tiS"'�`"�-t%sL'mmf Imo'"""--tm'.■ ' � � :.f.'.:h�•: 'ri��" � ��' .•n J: 'LF4::'} =1f'• � {.r.;��: J„ t:. �� =t,. -'s'�• -„rr: - .P c•i tear,�f® � 5 �SS�� �..!6'.r•.. J'r-{:� r�. ,:`fir: t :F,=,. :�3�k 5., :i: �' r�,; :.'a_,�`'-"' T '�'a�::«:, �•o- _ eci�i t r'1?b::vkT;,' ' -r' +5 r� LY :•:a 14LC•-A' ;�a'a'+ 'a ,,,r �.;..n�+i'� lr 57�� ��_.� 3pR� Ord ® t �•'...�VkS:.' t� �r2• K 't1�`�,�'.1�.`:-ti�a:ii%'r gpt1�' .K ri :�i°w''s'C,+, +•r., _ � fHl +� •i t �u v' -. ._.�� 2 � _�' .:•}I „• � •�� ♦i 4 4�••aid: y 'W. „rr i •r 'ka .�c3;yf,t£'�.t�`wr �Y� �;�S !{;��t7•'�i�'�� �`7Y cs�„-fr,:....f:.. ':i k � �.�-i�.}ram .vy µ.}.tir.�rF 1y f;T�•l 1E r 13 ,7% tr. 7a;:5 h ;�� `a t +;iti•►^+ *:ll i 1 +cy, '4.�!.:'..1,k::.' +ate lam• '`� �'� � rr r �f�r '���c> ir7 6� pr[+'•' y.; it .. ,.am ,r�. .SFr" •� y � ., :.,;,i• tk may - ��.�r 'c[ -j ice , t '('•!.'. trd'f'S ^ ti7 t tN +' _•'�i1�/Y-i- �1�= •r� Y�' ��;a ,e ;ii, }¢z,,"�j� 'Z': �=�5 ?h '"fi3 :i '»•;�+.r. 7��rr' • �.. f� l `�-i.,;•�i�`�'' ?• fl tt, �.'� i t ff � jt1 '„L,1:�i'.:t a!'� k3S7-' F Giw':,wi•� r -al,r A'i.,• P't"r � • 'tj� rr.? hra7 Z e1 � u•i•� � ~ ;;��trytr+`y.I,�Q'' „ 3, irti�� .��t�� '� x..., �1-} "+"i ..J j{{7 �f�`!}l�y.g✓!1�/ ��' ,f�171!���f�=: d .� 'Sta�� .y� - tt .,:}_.. � 1' r'irt��tjj'»-l�.'...,io� c -WV'"�4'o t�++ :♦:_.` ^ :� • ,FS)'r.,r'• y C ���y 1•r+' •F •i rr���} •� ''7 .Jr� 1 rv'�s't:t!:%Y�'•ixnN��'''�i. t 1''�.� t♦��'• 'r _•1�•:, :•ff'�, 1':=iktia'•1 •r7' r k;ty � '�,,��r�•:y •i7+, •.,C eft ,,n,.•y ,ay.. �[l 5:,1 G �,'I1 L.�.•.. � •tom�f•` 1 �.�.t!�,a,"n�•Sf..:.,ti. o ty��YY,+,�•n�}J,. ?.y i•''+• # .,,r �':k9f.'�j �}r�'�5�.'ri'' � .1♦ti( t♦ r` �• �t,,,ul� 1 t. '�i fit�n` ,;Ri ...yi�� Y f, i;'�,lr6�x�'t a rl€fY': �i1'� L?f_P�.,vy�-•` ♦ la i .i'-¢"a` aj! ,r•�`a 4.ri.r ._::Aifi^ ::¢{t' �„ { i '�5+, 1p'' 7.Era +la's ! kt ►�t' A .� �! t11 r�{,i�f F'�i � r} Js, S Y,•+' b ti{•- �;A �� T � �,'[ J5, ^-le= -rt : t t('j•1Y!' -t A.�j4e°- ., f r �{� -c Lf� i:%,i•"`" �� I • .tom°71 t ..1�l.••�' `,1• ' K -i�. f;'�'''j rfi rrtpy6�.7t})•�(•d- 7r ��• •. i•�''� ��� xy �'�•?y?;''�' 'r 3 ,`try'•$i t rrkl=7r§�s-' ,j' �' �r r•�wc�:=: q' :}i-��t� �q�t .{�rr't F�� •,�.�,i�=li ..a..-..,r ti� ,.�4�raef. �•' � ��•'.. fit•,:. �„ '7 a yi'+' bA••'.. 4 l'1 w L -� r� t. ��r�;�r•tit kr. � Aiz ':.ram-"�,4,1^�.,,�.�. �,]],,___ .. .,•.�,,,��'�)�w�, _ ,- ',r�.A/��,.�r JAW -' ✓y :r y�� 17yJ1r I�e♦ .,y54 kr ryy1,�� t r�����f '�' aH � j=i'In'• •',�r�'::P if iL'�y?b 1,�ly JG t�.f f.AY \ =s .yi•• t ,' j �.✓�e1a1;{ �•_�'\'\,` 'keM1 4i .tSV.si^it1y1 i-, �krit L;rT ��� r k I.f•� U i� lyjk 1) 1 fLF'' 1 f+R✓�" 1{k t -} l 4a�t��11A ,~•� sMo 02 fl f i• L� SIN DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 316 N.CAPITOL AvENUE•SLIITE D-1•LANSING,M1 48933-1236 f c H I G Q•� (517)483-4066•FAX:(517)483-6036 PLANNING OFFICE David C. Hollister,Mayor Memo To: Planning Board X From: Donna Wynant, AICP Date: 8/8/00 Subject: Z-15-99 Update and Recommendatio , Holiday Inn Hotel/Convention Center Complex The Z-15-99 staff report recommended the rezoning request for the Holiday Inn hotel/convention center complex be tabled until the applicant provides a landscape, screening and buffering plan to show how the remaining properties along Georgia and Just-A-Mere will be screened from the hotel/convention center complex. Staff also recommended a traffic impact analysis be submitted for review, which was completed and attached as an addendum to the Master Plan Amendment (MPA-1-99) report. The Planning Board will take up that request (MPA-1-99) at its August 150' meeting to make a recommendation to the City Council. As you recall, the Z-15-99 request involved the rezoning of several properties along Just-A- Mere, Georgia Ave. and Willoughby Road. An additional property at 7011 Georgia was then acquired by Mr. Gordon Long, to incorporate into the overall design of the Surface Parking Lot C which involves a rezoning from "A" Residential to "J" Parking. The inclusion of the property at 7011 Georgia allowed for a better assemblage of this long narrow parcel into the overall design of the hotel/convention center complex. However, no landscape, screening and buffering plan has been submitted to show how the remaining properties will be protected from the impact of additional commercial development, with its increased activity, noise, traffic, glare, auto emissions, runoff, etc. upon these remaining properties and their quality of life. The Landscape, Screening, and Buffering section of the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum 5 foot strip up to a maximum 20 foot strip of landscape, screening and buffering to screen residential properties from commercial development. The applicant has Landscape Architect, Bruce Stewart, working on design solutions to protect the remaining properties, with landscape, screening and buffering. 0 Please Recycle "Equal Opportunity Employer" Recommendation Staff recommends that Z-15-99 be considered by the Zoning and Ordinance Committee at its August 9, 2000 meeting. Staff believes that the details of the site plan showing how remaining properties will be protected and details on any other site related issues (e.g. runoff from surface parking lots) can be resolved through the Site Plan Review process. An update regarding a revised site plan may be given to the Z& O Committee and Planning Board, if so desired. 4 L F 4 to C Z Z3 Z� rLL, d� r= ~ grytN � ;- t� tQ N CL ' C\�,\fit\"�y�,e���.�"���`,�\\• _ �����' � - � � `i� LU r FI • � LAN NIA .-- AL — Q Cl �c '��n;,i�� �=•f'/,i it/l "'� t fniflh Rlt7f r1t11f?IY�1i - rrrn rffrnllm' _ ...!!1 1 111 lllilill llll!J!llLlll 11 l!II;:!:L�:�:!Illl .n-• . J• 3 T76 rrx s-ero ROOM TCTti ats ROC+ -w M"-6 rr�-MDDc x 17" Cr A-$7:IRS IOT C T -IIL CMS -Di L�7cr� IW C.-As -L tTA '-- -.r,,........-m rlRs w rows T n a�+.vxsi ,_-.c-mzp!cV5 I _ -L2 CIR3 TCT� zm CMS 1 EE y tt \ S t�-\ ,'y^.aTv�m,4s'lf t \', •ram naa -. — — - �� l�'1 a'�l. r. p s k ® ® Ile OVERALL-SffE PLfJr �_ IiOLDA7'NN 5X°AN501N STATdRDGE SUfTEh I10TEL a Vr Page 1 Z-15-99: Holiday Inn South Convention Center (Revised and Expanded) Portions of 6820 S. Cedar Street "F" Commercial to "J" Parking and from "J" Parking District to "F" Commercial District, Also 915, 920, 926, 927 & 1000 Just-A-Mere Ave., 6900 6931 6937 7001 7007 7015 Georgia Ave. and the north 110 ft. of the properties at 1015 1027 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd., from "A" Residential to "J" Parking District; also 7025 Georgia Avenue, 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the south 178 ft of 1015 1027 11 01 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd., 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd. from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District This is a revised and expanded request by Gordon Long, representing himself and Lansing Clarion Limited Partnership, to rezone several properties in order to expand the existing hotel and convention facilities at 6820 S. Cedar Street, construct additional parking facilities, construct an extended stay hotel with 150 suites along E. Willoughby Road and a 16,800 sq ft single-story office building along E. Willoughby Road. As a reminder, the other cases to be considered, as before, include the Act 285 Review for the pedestrian overpass (Act-21-99), the Master Plan Amendment (MPA-1-99), and the request for height and setback variances (BZA 3564.99). GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Gordon Long 6820 S. Cedar Street Lansing, MI 48911 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Representing Lansing Clarion Limited Partnership & Gordon L. Long 6820 S. Cedar Street Lansing, MI 48911 REQUESTED ACTION: By the Planning Board: Rezoning Review Act 285 Review Master Plan Amendment By the Board of Zoning Appeals Request for Height and Setback Variances EXISTING LAND USE: Hotel, Parking lots, Vacant Land and Single Family Page 2 Z 15 99• Holiday Inn South Convention Center (Revised and Expanded) Residential Land Use (see land use/zoning map) EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential, 7" Commercial, and "J" Parking Districts (see land use/zoning map) PROPOSED ZONING: "F" Commercial and "J" Parking District (see proposed rezoning map) PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: Property to be rezoned is irregularly shaped, located behind (to the west) of the commercial strip in the 6800 -7000 blocks of S. Cedar Street. The existing Holiday Inn and Convention Center has 368 feet of frontage along S. Cedar and the proposed new Hotel and Office will have approximately 1,000 feet of frontage along Willoughby Road. SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Commercial and Office S: Commercial Development and Residential in Delhi Twp. E: Commercial W: Residential, (Single Family Residences and Oak Park Village Apartments) SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "F" Commercial to the north of the existing Holiday Inn/Convention Center S: Delhi Township: Cedar Park Shopping Center - "C-2" General Business "R-IC" Medium Density Residential and "A-1" Agricultural E: "F" Commercial W: "A" Residential and "CUP" Residential District MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Southeast Area Plan generally designates properties in this area for commercial use that recognizes this area for office land use and the east side of Cedar as warehouse/research park. Commercial land use is proposed closer to the 1-96 expressway. Commercial development and open space is proposed closer to Willoughby Road. The Plan identifies continued residential land use behind the commercial/office strip. Page 3 Z 15 99• Holiday Inn South Convention Center (Revised and Expanded) The Southeast Area Plan identifies S. Cedar Street as a principal arterial and Willoughby Rd. as a collector street. Just-A-Mere and Georgia Avenues are identified as local streets. CASE HISTORY: City of Lansing annexed this general area in 1960. SPECIFIC INFORMATION Developer's Proposal: This request is for an expansion of the Holiday Inn South Convention Center complex. The proposed development includes: • 280,000 sq. ft. addition to the Holiday Inn South Convention Center which includes approximately 156 hotel rooms, 32500 sq. ft. of exhibition space, 25,000 sq. ft. of meeting rooms and 247 fixed seat meeting auditorium. • 919 space parking ramp for visitors (reduced from the 2,475 space ramp originally proposed). • 150 suite extended stay hotel facility (separate from the Holiday Inn). • 16,800 sq. ft. single story office-building. Legal Description of Properties: 6820 S. Cedar Street: Lots 65, 66, 67, 68 and 69, Just-a-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI. from "J" Parking District to "F" Commercial District for the construction of an approximately 280,000 sq ft addition onto the Holiday Inn South Convention Center and Lots 54, 55, and 56, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI from "F" Commercial District to "J" Parking District to accommodate parking facilities, and 915, 920 926, 927 and 1000 Just A Mere Avenue, 6900, 6931 6937, 7001, 7007 and 7015 Georgia Avenue and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd.: Lot 5, the north 110 ft of Lots 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23; also the west 108 ft of the north 27 ft and the east 354 ft of the north 30 ft of Lot 26, also Lots 27, 28, 29, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 61, 62, and 63, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI Page 4 Z-15-99• Holiday Inn South Convention Center (Revised and Expanded) from "A" Residential District to "J" Parking District for expanded parking facilities, including surface parking and a parking garage (two levels above grade), and 7025 Georgia Ave., 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the south 178 ft. of 1015, 1027, 1101, and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd., also 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227, and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd.: Lots 2, 3, Lot 10 except that portion described as commencing at the southeast corner of Lot 10; thence NW'LY along the northerly line 26 ft; thence southerly 261.60 ft to beginning, Lots 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and the south 178 ft of Lots 19, 20, 21, 22, and 23, Just-A-Mere Farm Sub., City of Lansing, Ingham Co., MI from "A" Residential District to 7" Commercial District to allow the construction of an extended stay hotel with 150 suites and a 16,800 sq ft single-story office building. AGENCY RESPONSES Ameritech: (No response received.) Assessor: Mr. Long should be encouraged to approach the Assessor about combining tax descriptions in the project area. (J. Grannell) Are there any plans to re-locate the easement between lots 82 and 83? This would affect the value of Lots 81, 82, 83, 7 84 owned by Mr. Tony Paradise. He has been requesting relief or assistance in clearing up this matter for several years. (D.T.) AT & T Cable Services (No response received.) Bd. of Water & Light: Electric: No objections to the revised and expanded project. Customer will need to contact the BWL regarding electric services to the new buildings. Contact Persons: Bob Strobel 371-6082 Water: No objection to rezone. Need site plan with water service or main requirements when available. Approval of proposed service or main will require positive flow model run by BWL. Contact Person: Terry Robison 371-6494 Building Safety: No objection. The project is subject to site and plan review approval. Page 5 Z 15 99• Holiday Inn South Convention Center (Revised and Expanded) Code Compliance: Please notify this office of any requirements which may be installed if approved which we would be responsible to enforce. Consumers Energy: (No response received.) City Attorney: (No response received.) Development Office: No comment Delhi Township: (No response received.) Econ. Dev. Corp. The EDC has no objection to the construction of parking as proposed. Fire Marshal: No objections Lansing Neigh. Council: (No response received.) MI Dept. of Transportation: No comment Parks & Rec: (No response received.) Community Policing: (No response received.) Public Service Dept.: The Public Service Department has no additional comments in regards to this request. The comments dated January 4, 2000 still need to be addressed. (Copy attached.) Traffic Engineer: (No response received.) ANALYSIS COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE The original proposal included a four-level parking garage to the south side of Just-A- Mere south of the proposed hotel/convention facilities that would be connected to the hotel and convention facilities with a pedway extending over Just-A-Mere Avenue. The proposal for the Staybridge Suites Hotel has not significantly changed. The original proposal was for an approximatelly 13,000 sq ft office space; now it is proposed to be Page 6 Z-15-99: Holiday Inn South Convention Center (Revised and Expanded) 16,000 sq ft, oriented more east-west parallel with Willoughby. The parking ramp is proposed to be three levels, one at grade, and two above grade. Surface parking is proposed to be expanded. The plan shows an overall total of 2,322 cars on-site, broken down for the Holiday Inn South, the Staybridge Suites and the office building. This revised zoning request includes several additional homes that are proposed to be removed along Just-A-Mere, Georgia, and Willoughby Rd. for surface parking lots. One home will remain on Just-A-Mere (908), three homes will remain on Georgia (6900, 7011, and 7021). Mr. Long has indicated that the home at 6900 Georgia will have a life lease and will eventually be removed and included in the overall development. Properties to remain along the west side of Georgia Avenue include 7022 and 7016 Georgia Avenue. One property will remain at the corner of Georgia and Willoughby (1001) and another property at the northwest corner of Georgia and Willoughby (939 Willoughby). Two properties not included in the rezoning request are 1317 and 1323 Willoughby, and are located just west of the China East Buffet restaurant at the corner of Cedar and Willoughby Rd. They are owned by Rite Aid, and are zoned "A" Residential. Those homes that are not part of this rezoning request will be highly impacted by the proposed development. Additional surface parking lots proposed to accommodate the development are designed to be placed within a few feet of these homes. The impact of the increase in traffic, noise, glare, heat, and air pollution upon their properties will be substantial, and change their quality of life. The proposed development will also substantially decrease the value of the properties as residential properties. Other remaining residential properties that will be impacted are located in the 900 block of Willoughby Road west of Georgia Avenue and properties along the south side of Willoughby, across from the proposed office building. Those along the north side of Willoughby Road are in the City of Lansing. Homes along the south side of Willoughby, in Delhi Township will also be negatively impacted by the change in land use to result from this rezoning, as a result of the increase in traffic, noise, glare, etc. Substantial landscaping, screening, and buffering adjacent to any remaining homes is required to help reduce these negative impacts upon their quality of life. The landscape, screening, and buffering ordinance requires a minimum strip of 5 feet to a maximum of 20 feet. This would help reduce glare, give privacy, and help to reduce some noise. However, given the scale of development this may be difficult to accomplish. COMPLIANCE WITH MASTER PLAN The rezoning of properties as requested to accommodate the expanded hotel and convention center development with a new office building and extended stay hotel along Willoughby Road does not comply with the Master Plan. The Southeast Area Plan generally designates properties in this area for commercial use that recognizes Page 7 Z-15-99• Holiday Inn South Convention Center (Revised and Expanded) this area for office land use and the east side of Cedar as warehouse/research park. Commercial land use is proposed closer to the 1-96 expressway. Commercial development and open space is proposed closer to Willoughby Road. The Plan identifies continued residential land use behind the commercial/office strip. The Southeast Area Plan identifies S. Cedar Street as a principal arterial and Willoughby Rd. as a collector street. Just-A-Mere and Georgia Avenues are identified as local streets. The applicant has requested a master plan amendment (MPA-1-99) to be considered by the Planning Board reflect the development as proposed, in light of the change in development trends in the area and given the development proposal at hand. The Urban Development Committee will continue to review this request at their 6/27/00 meeting. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC Just-A-Mere and Georgia Avenue are classified as local streets in the Master Plan. Willoughby is a collector street and S. Cedar is a principal arterial. Traffic lights exist at the Cedar/Willoughby intersection and at the Long Blvd./Cedar Street intersection and are controlled by the City of Lansing. Willoughby Road is controlled by the Ingham County Road Commission and this section of S. Cedar Street is controlled by the City of Lansing (not the State of Michigan). Traffic circulation should be directed to the major adjacent streets, away-from the residential streets (Georgia and Just-A-Mere, west of Georgia). The removal of homes for the development will, however, change how these local streets will function and will be difficult to justify directing traffic strictly onto the major adjacent streets (i.e. Cedar and Willoughby). The covered parking ramp has been reduced in size with this revised proposal from 4 stories to three stories with two floors above ground, from 2,400 to 915 spaces. The smaller structure is proposed to now be turned in a north-south direction. Mr. Long stated that accommodating total parking, and ingress-egress and view necessitated the acquisition of additional property. The revised plan shows a curved boulevard that is located across from Cedar Park Blvd. in Delhi Township. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Development of the subject property will have a significant environmental impact on the remaining properties within and immediately adjacent to the development site. The overall character of the area will change from one that includes single family homes along a residential street with mature trees to one of expanded commercial development and new commercial development with a new parking ramp and extensive Page 8 Z-15-99: Holiday Inn South Convention Center (Revised and Expanded) surface parking lots. Five extra surface parking lots are located throughout the development. A significant water retention system will have to be designed into the development to handle the amount of run-off to result from the increased impervious material. The substantial stand of trees will be removed to build the parking ramp. Other mature trees throughout the residential area will also be removed, changing the overall character of the area. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT Development of this overall site, which will expand from 12.5 acres to approximately 27.5 acres, will have a far reaching impact on future patterns of development within the immediate area along S. Cedar Street and Willoughby and beyond the immediate area. As Mr. Long has pointed out, this is an expansion of an existing business which has been at the Cedar Street and 1-96 interchange location for approximately 35 years, with the convention center having been there for 14 years. The expansion of hotel and convention facilities may have a positive impact on south Lansing and Delhi Township. However, any issues remain involving traffic and circulation and issues that impact quality of life for the remaining residents in and adjacent to the area. SUMMARY Mr. Gordon Long is requesting that several properties be rezoned to accommodate the proposed expansion of the Holiday Inn South Convention Center complex. Development would include: • 280,000 sq. ft. addition to the Holiday Inn South Convention Center which includes approximately 156 hotel rooms, 32500 sq. ft. of exhibition space, 25,000 sq. ft. of meeting rooms and 247 fixed seat meeting auditorium. • 919 space parking ramp for visitors (reduced from the 2,475 space ramp originally proposed). • 150 suite extended stay hotel facility (separate from the Holiday Inn). • 16,800 sq. ft. single story office building Mr. Gordon Long is therefore requesting that portions of 6820 S. Cedar Street be rezoned from "F" Commercial to "J" Parking District and "J" Parking to 7" Commercial District; He is also requesting that 915, 920, 926, 927, 1000 Just A Mere Avenue, 6900, 6931 , 6937, 7001, 7007, 7015 Georgia Avenue and the north 110 ft of the properties at 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Road be rezoned from "A" Residential to "J" Parking District. He is also requesting that 7025 Georgia Avenue, 1009 E. Willoughby Rd., the south 178 ft of 1015, 1027, 1101 and 1109 E. Willoughby Rd., 1115, 1121, 1201, 1209, 1215, 1227 and 1301 E. Willoughby Rd. be rezoned from "A" Residential District to T" Commercial District. Page 9 Z 15 99• Holiday Inn South Convention Center (Revised and Expanded) Many significant issues remain with this development as it relates to properties that remain and that are adjacent to the proposed development. Provision of a buffer/transition for the remaining residential areas. A traffic impact analysis needs to evaluate how much traffic is expected from the development and determine how it will circulate throughout the area. OTHER: The other cases to be considered, as before, include the Act 285 Review for the pedestrian overpass (Act-21-99), the Master Plan Amendment (MPA-1-99), and the request for height and setback variances (BZA 3574.99). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the applicant provide a site plan that shows how the remaining properties will be protected with landscape, screening and buffering. Further, a traffic impact analysis is required to evaluate the impact of the proposed development on the remaining properties and the surrounding area. 4LLJL � 0 � G C Z D ZN N d� Q F- g N a I /-Jrmmimmtt^n� 1 --- r JAI II _ lJ = inr rr�)JC?3i - OTC Cl >,: � :'�, I_ ���4.etc,.,.•' I I . I i T'.--•�.,__- -•"'TTiit1 U-.—. -...._..- -RRiI _ \...:.4'(c',. •"•`}'t?,�� 3 Eye Er � iilillllrRlrir(1L T-. im • i . - - i 1 i,n:ac CUP 1 F J. FQ - KEY ZOW- A'•-RESDEMw DISTRCT �.� TI ° 1.4 ZOW—'f'-•COMkERGV.I D15TRCT rMITTI ZOW-7'--PARKW MTRCT \\\\ Zore CLF11OMhY.NT7 t1JW REsc=L CLIP A ' ,-Tl„R1,TiL�,T1i,,TTTTnTiT11:I IN � Li r 1 . STP..�' DEW Tprrt p-ZONM RFSCEMw OMt&V ZOIM C-I COMMERCUL 11siollt - E76TNG ZONINS ouwI eraur r� ,__,•r..,�, HOXAT NN EXPAW kYS N STAYBRDGE SLI(TES F10TEL CUP ImIf F - I ZOrE W--RESCENTVLL Di5TRr-T ZONE F'-{-OMMERCv.L D5TRiCT �A 7-PARIJfY D5TP,CT —{�7 � 33 ZOrE -CLP---COhVMTT LNT PUN RESiOENfV.I Cup r M-iAA NEW ZONING- ArTER CMANGGS hOUDAT NN EXPANSON 5TATBRD6E 5UrFE5 hOTc', i ``�= g •taw• ^'t i ---------- ------ -- ............. ................ .t. _ i\ L.-.--Jr ��.- - oo, .1"WX FBI a &94V 141 41! PRINCIPAL ARTERIALS MINOR ARTERIALS COLLECTORS INTERSECTIONS IN NEED OF IMPROVEMEl' LANSING PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROPOSED CIRCULATION TO 1990 SOUTHEAST AREA COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN .., i . .1. 'i.• w. •M ..• — • ;.••i�•ii.•i • •.. u•r ...... -------------------------- ••r••.•.•• • '� •...•••......... r r.••••....••.......• •.••••.•.�.•r• ' ......• •.... •.......rce i:: C E �u u u •••••u•..•..............• •• I /' :° t. Ifs• _ I :� /. RESIDENTIAL 0-7 u/ac RESIDENTIAL 8-14 u/ac 2 •' 0 RESIDENTIAL 1 [� RESIDENTIAL € © PROFESSIONAL OFFICE COMMERCIAL PARKS/OPEN SPACE/CEMETARY ;y: 0 UTILITIES ' " pp ; ••••• LIGHT INDUSTRIAL 1 �7 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL o e COMMUNITY FACILITIES •°-'� ":: I Q MIXED USE (COMM/OFF/APT) — — -7 — a _ E WAREHOUSE/RESEARCH PARK SPECIAL LAND USES 1 LANSING PLANNING DEPARTMENT ` PROPOSED LAND USE TO 1990 SOUTHEAST AREA. COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN Page 1 Z-11-00: 7011 Georgia Ave. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Gordon Long 6820 S. Cedar Street Lansing, MI 48911 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Representing Lansing Clarion Limited Partnership & Gordon L. Long 6820 S. Cedar Street Lansing, MI 48911 REQUESTED ACTION: Rezoning EXISTING LAND USE: Single Family Residential EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential PROPOSED ZONING: "J" Parking District (see proposed rezoning map) PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: 39 feet of frontage (along Georgia Ave.) for the first 108 feet of property, then narrows down to 36 feet wide and 462 feet deep. 16,956 square feet in size SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Single Family Residential S: Single Family Residential E: Single Family Residential W: Multi Family Residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential S: "A" Residential E: "A" Residential W: "CUP" Residential District MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Southeast Area Plan generally designates properties along Georgia Ave. as low density residential and designates land along S. Cedar Street as office, commercial and warehouse/research park. Page 2 Z-11-00: 7011 Georgia Ave. Georgia Avenue is identified as a local street. CASE HISTORY: The request to rezone several properties (Z-15-99), was made by Mr. Gordon Long for the expansion of the Holiday Inn South Convention Center complex. Additional properties were included in this request at a later date. This request to rezone 7011 Georgia Avenue was made after the applicant was able to acquire the property. SPECIFIC INFORMATION Developer's Proposal: The request to rezone 7011 Georgia Ave. allows a better assemblage of land for the expansion of the Holiday Inn South Convention Center complex as identified in the Z-15-99 request. The subject parcel would allow for a better layout to Surface Parking Lot C, and would give better flexibility for additional landscaping materials throughout the development (see attached site plan). As a reminder, from the Z-15-99 case, the overall Holiday Inn South Center complex will include: • 280,000 sq. ft. addition to the Holiday Inn South Convention Center which includes approximately 156 hotel rooms, 32,500 sq. ft. of exhibition space, 25,000 sq. ft. of meeting rooms and 247 fixed seat meeting auditorium. • 919 space parking ramp for visitors • 150 suite extended stay hotel facility (separate from the Holiday Inn). • 16,800 sq. ft. single story office building. The site plan submitted for the Z-15-99 case shows an overall total of 2,233 parking spaces. The site plan for this request, which includes 7011 Georgia (lot 26), shows an overall total of 2,179 spaces for the complex. Page 3 Z-11-00: 7011 Georgia Ave. AGENCY RESPONSES Ameritech: (No response received.) Assessor: No comments AT & T Cable Services (No response received.) Bd. of Water & Light: Electric: No objections to the rezoning. Contact Persons: Bob Strobel 371-6082 Water: No objection to rezone. requirements when will Contact Person: Terry Robison 371-6494 Building Safety: No objection Code Compliance: Please notify this office of any premise requirements when approved. Consumers Energy: (No response received.) City Attorney: (No response received.) Development Office: No comment Delhi Township: (No response received.) Econ. Dev. Corp. The EDC has no comments on this proposal. Fire Marshal: (No response received.) Lansing Neigh. Council: (No response received.) MI Dept. of Transportation: No comment Parks & Rec: (No response received.) Community Policing: (No response received.) Public Service Dept.: (No response received.) Traffic Engineer: (No response received.) Page 4 Z-11-00: 7011 Georgia Ave. ANALYSIS COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE The development currently surrounding the subject parcel is single family residential in character, except for Oak Park Village directly to the west, which is a multiple family residential development. The proposed expansion of the Holiday Inn South Convention Center complex as identified in the Z-15-99 request has involved the acquisition of several properties for additional parking to accommodate the expansion. The extended stay hotel facility and proposed office building that both front onto Willoughby Road, have also resulted in the acquisition of several homes. The character of the area will therefore change from a residential neighborhood to a commercial area, provided the MPA-1-99 and Z-15-99 are approved and the hotel/convention center is developed. The property at 7011 Georgia Avenue , if rezoned, would therefore be made a part of the overall development, allowing for better design which ultimately would make it more compatible with the surrounding area. The lot measures 39 feet along Georgia and narrows down to 36 feet and extends east 462 feet, totaling 16,956 square feet. COMPLIANCE WITH MASTER PLAN This area of south Lansing lies within the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan which generally designates properties along S. Cedar for commercial and office use. The Plan identifies continued residential land use behind the commercial/office strip. Cedar Street is identified as a principal arterial and Willoughby Rd. as a collector street, and Just-A-Mere and Georgia Avenues are identified as local streets. An amendment to the master plan (MPA-1-99) has been requested to evaluate the changes in development and development trends since the adoption of the plan in 1981. The MPA-1-99 proposes to designate properties along the east side of Georgia as commercial development. Office land use designation is proposed at the northeast corner of Georgia and Willoughby. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC The inclusion of the land at 7011 Georgia Avenue will allow for a better design in parking layout for the proposed hotel/convention center complex. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation should therefore be enhanced with the new layout that includes the subject property. Traffic and circulation issues have been addressed in a traffic impact study, referred to in MPA-1-99, that addresses increased volumes of traffic and changes in circulation. Page 5 Z-11-00: 7011 Georgia Ave. The anticipated increase in traffic volumes to result from the proposed expansion of the hotel/convention center complex are addressed in a traffic impact study, which has also been referred to in the MPA-1-99 report. Traffic will be directed more towards the development and away from the remaining residents adjacent to the hotel/convention center complex with the emphasis upon the main entries into the development at Just-A-Mere/Cedar and the main entry off of Willoughby Rd. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The redevelopment of the subject parcel will allow for a better design to the Surface Parking Lot C. Since the property allows for additional parking space, it gives greater flexibility to the developer to provide landscaping throughout the overall development which should utimately enhance the site. As mentioned in the Z-15-99 staff report, the overall character of the area will change from one that includes single family homes along a residential street with mature trees to one of expanded commercial development and new commercial development with a new parking ramp and extensive surface parking lots. Five additional surface parking lots are located throughout the development. A significant water retention system will have to be designed into the development to handle the amount of run-off to result from the increased impervious material. The substantial stand of trees will be removed to build the parking ramp. Other mature trees throughout the residential area will also be removed, changing the overall character of the area. The applicant has indicated that significant trees will be saved where possible. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT The rezoning of the subject parcel will allow for a better design to the circulation patterns and parking layout of the proposed hotel/convention center which will cover approximately 27.5 acres of land. The development will have a far reaching impact on future patterns of development within the immediate area along S. Cedar Street and Willoughby Road. The applicant believes this development will have positive impacts throughout south Lansing and into Delhi Township. Traffic and circulation issues have been addressed in a traffic impact study, referred to in MPA-1-99, that addresses increased volumes of traffic and changes in circulation. Traffic will be directed more towards the development and away from the remaining residents adjacent to the hotel/convention center complex according to the traffic study. Improvements in signalization at Cedar and Willoughby and at Just-A-Mere. will help handle the increase in traffic volumes and improve circulation patterns to result from the proposed development. Page 6 Z-11-00: 7011 Georgia Ave. SUMMARY Mr. Gordon Long is requesting that property at 7011 Georgia be rezoned from "A" Residential to "J" Parking to allow for a better assemblage of land for the expansion of the Holiday Inn South Convention Center complex as identified in the Z-15-99 request. The subject parcel would allow for a better layout to Surface Parking Lot C, and would give better flexibility for additional landscaping materials throughout the development OTHER: Other pending cases involved in the proposed development, include the Act 285 Review for the Master Plan Amendment (MPA-1-99), the pedestrian overpass (Act-21- 99) and the request for height and setback variances (BZA 3574.99). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that property at 7011 Georgia Avenue be rezoned from "A" Residential to "J" Parking in conjunction with Z-15-99 following adoption of MPA-1-99. Z-11-2000 NORTH 7011 Georgia Ave. CD I ' m Im r � V n48 I 49 50 51 52 53 54 v W J 1 396' I `. 55 56 Q 462' 57 0) co 29 N M rn co 28 OZ\ O 1 i 2' 321.7 O 27 0 � 462' P to — - — (p �p Q O m N 108' 3' �\ M O 354' M 4662 Q 132' w !Q n 06\ 5 I , N _ C) \ 4 o I O _ I I I N I h IQ a - ON n O46\ 3 132' \�\ i \6\ Og\ \O N N 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 1 2 _ 13' 66' I 1 49.5' 66' " " " " " 66' I 63' 69' 66' " 1001 1009 1015 1 027 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 9 1115 1 12 1 1201 1209 12 RD. f.�1^T 1111 / ITV hll-1 ■I A r%tl �• f J r[1r KLIb-W rGL'y6 rrnJ.aan. yore-rn u+es n1f o S �kl ,- A • r' l C• � �q♦nrw.. r_> ,. = ��' I .. � -_..'-«�r x"y v. '"' r"'�„'"�' ?"�-,• � sr�<emr_xrres-m u+cs .. �.. 6o roc.�s ro araxsi s f: I Dlle OYE�RALL 575 PLAN HOLDA7 NN ENPANSfON 5TAT5RDGE 50TT o HOTEL Hanoi eaour:Lrv(rc -�. ,-;,��.� 62T oo r,a�•,ao nsw�ree 4' F a�� 4 u3 § C zZ:3 �In rIn Q� 8 II O =Q O ~ rLU 8gaS�a i � :.fly �/� ' � 1inf�h•- �;� FL Q V� ""77j7 7a\ t„ ,V7 .mt, y - ff1T}ltlffliftl(�fimTTiTT➢ - = frn Gir.""'i� ��� _� -. :.aidl!lllUllllllll! lllllllllllJl ul!c:1-L..._.'� t i Z-11-00 7011 Georgia Ave. Existing Single Family Home Memo To: Zoning and Ordinance Commit Q� From: Sam Quon, Senior Planner Date: August 3, 2000 Subject: Revised Staff Report for Z-7-2000, 2708-2726 S. Washington Ave. Z-7-2000 was tabled at the May 10, 2000, Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting pending action on MPA-2-2000 by the Urban Development Committee. UDC found that there is a demand for professional office in this area associated with Ingham Regional Medical Center. The roadway capacity would be able to accommodate the amount of traffic generated by a professional medical office. The proposed site on the west side of Washington Avenue is better suited for office development because of the deeper lot, there are fewer residential properties adjacent to the subject property, and there is direct access to Washington rather than a street going through a residential neighborhood. The remaining houses in this residential enclave presents the possibility of future development. However, these 140' deep residential lots present additional constraints for office development because they are not as deep as the subject property. Therefore, the remainder of the enclave is recommended to remain low density residential/open space. On August 1, 2000, the Urban Development Committee gave a favorable recommendation (3-0) to amend the land use designation for properties located at 2708-2726 S. Washington Avenue from low density residential to professional office with the following conditions: 1. A 20' landscape buffer along S. Washington Avenue, residential properties, and park land shall be established. 2. The development of any office shall be architecturally compatible with the residential homes in the area similar to the McRee House. 3. The development shall preserve as many of the mature trees on site as possible. 4. The transfer of Willard Street to the applicant according the general layout suggested by the Parks and Recreation Department, involving the exchange of the Willard Street ROW for additional park property. 5. The sewer easement is addressed to the satisfaction of Public Service. Attached is a revised staff report for your consideration. MPA-2-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Residential (0-7 du/acre) to Office GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: George Abraham 431 S. Capitol Avenue Lansing, MI 48933 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Owner REQUESTED ACTION: Master Plan Amendment to change land use from residential (0-7 du/acre) to office (MPA-2-2000) Vacation of the Willard Avenue ROW West of the 2700 block S. Washington Ave. (Act-4-2000), Rezoning of property from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office (Z-7-2000) EXISTING LAND USE: Single family residences EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: Approximately 1.6 acres on an irregular shaped property. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 Assessors Plat No.53 City of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan. PPNs 3301-28- 301-141, -161, -182, and -192 (Z-7-2000) Lot 6, Assessors Plat No. 53 City of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan. PPN 3301-28-301-901 (ACT-4- 2000) SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Washington Park S: Single Family Residential E: Single Family Residential and Ingham Regional Medical Center W: Washington Park SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential S: "A" Residential E: "DM-4" Residential and "A" Residential W: "A" Residential May 19, 2000 Page 1 MPA-2-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Residential (0-7 du/acre) to Office MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The proposed project is located at the eastern edge of the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan. The SE Area Plan designates the land use as residential, 0-7 dwelling units per acre. Both the SW and the SE Area Plans designate South Washington as a minor arterial, along with Mt. Hope, Holmes, Jolly and Miller roads. CASE HISTORY: In 1963, a petition to rezone the property from "A" Residential to "DM" Multiple Dwelling (Z-114-63) was denied by City Council because the density was too high. In 1995, this property was included in a request to rezone 2.4 acres from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office (Z-18-95) for constructing a medical office building and parking. Planning Board recommended denial of this request. This case has been pending before City Council and no action was taken. SPECIFIC INFORMATION DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes an office development consisting of 16,800 -19,650 square feet of building area with 112 -151 parking spaces on approximately 1.6 acres. This proposal involves combining the Willard ROW (if vacated) with property he owns to the north and south for his proposed office development. AGENCY RESPONSES Ameritech: No Response Received Assessor: See attached AT&T Cable: No Response Received Board of Water and Light: Electric - No objection May 19, 2000 Page 2 MPA-2-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Residential (0-7 du/acre) to Office Wafer - BWL water system has piping in Willard to serve parks property and existing homes on the north side of Willard. An easement will be required to maintain existing water main. Building Office: This project is subject to site plan and plan review process. Contact Chris Segerlind in the Building Safety Office for additional information. City Attorney: No Response Received Consumers Energy: No Response Received Development Office: No objections Fire Marshal: No objections Lansing Neighborhood Council: No Response Received MDOT: No Response Received Parks and Recreation: Proposed development would intrude into Washington Park. Trading land parcels (ROW for private land) would mitigate the effects of the conflicting land uses. See attached sketch. Public Services: See attached Transportation Engineer: No specific comments or requirements May 19, 2000 Page 3 MPA-2-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Residential (0-7 du/acre) to Office MPA 2 00 SOUTHWEST AREA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REQUEST Appropriateness of Master Plan Amendments The Master Plan serves as a guide for orderly growth and development in the City. As trends change and new factors emerge, the Master Plan must be updated. The Plan uses generalized land use maps and text to describe the desired and most beneficial use patterns and development requirements. Development of land should be led by the Master Plan to discourage piecemeal, haphazard, and arbitrary development. Zoning is one tool for implementing the Mater Plan, and rezoning of land takes place within the context of expressed policies. Since the Plan is a guide for development, changes in actual zoned land use may occasionally differ from the type of use depicted o the generalized land use map. Often such differences are addressed in the text of the Plan. Amendments to the Master Plan are then considered when there is a need for illustrating change and for uses and trends. The rezoning of land parcels where they differ from the Generalized Land Use Map is only one of the reasons to consider amending the Master Plan. Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan The SW Area Plan recognizes the need for locating office uses along major transportation routes. The proposed land use map concentrates office uses at the intersection of South Washington and Holmes Road. The plan also identifies that offices should be clustered or grouped to provide numerous services in one building and where services offered would be oriented to the surrounding community rather than the City as a whole. The SW Plan also encourages the availability of adequate off-street parking. It encourages the development of office uses in or adjacent to major activity nodes such as industrial parks and commercial centers. Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan The SE Area Plan designates the Ingham Regional Medical Center as a major community facility east of Washington Avenue. It also suggests the clustering office uses to provide numerous services, and places an emphasis on adequate off-street parking and landscaping, screening and buffering. LAND USE Attached is a map showing existing land uses along S. Washington Avenue between Mt. Hope and Holmes Roads, and pie charts with land use classifications of the S. Washington Avenue frontage (as measured in linear feet). Pie charts are provided for May 19, 2000 Page 4 MPA-2-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Residential (0-7 du/acre) to Office both sides, the east side, and the west side, respectively. This analysis classifies land uses as Residential (SF), Multi-Family Residential, Church, Office, Hospital (which also includes medical offices), Commercial, Industrial, Parkland, and Parking. The parking consists primarily of off-site parking for the Ingham Regional Medical Center. Residential uses make up almost half the total Washington Avenue frontage, followed by industrial, commercial, and parking. On the east side, the frontage is dominated by residential uses, followed by commercial and hospital uses. (Ingham Regional MvdncalS Wash Washington Avenue separates is a major land owner in hthe is area, but most of its frontage is along Greenla ) hospital from the subject property to the west. On the west side, no single land use dominates. Residences, almost half of which are multi-family, make up just over 29% of the frontage, followed by industrial, commercial, parkland and parking. Washington Park is to located to the west of the subject site. It has two entrances on Washington Avenue with residences in between. The park and its entrances act as buffers between the single family houses and apartments to the south and National Guard Headquarters to the north. If an office development goes in at the site, it would break up the continuity of residential uses along South Washington Avenue between the two park entrances. The proposed office would be functionally off ce development tehospital, would ut South Waease shington Avenue separates the two land uses. A dominance of nonresidential uses on the west side of Washington. VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC South Washington Avenue is a minor arterial that has a northbound, southbound, and turning lane. Over the years traffic has increased in this corridor, making it more difficult for residents to who back out on to South Washington Avenue. The proposed office could generate a substantial amount of vehicular traffic. Vehicular traffic will enter and exit the site off of Washington Avenue. It is anticipated that traffic will substantially increase during weekdays during business hours. Pedestrian circulation could increase depending on the type of offices and its relation with Ingham Regional Medical Center. There is a crosswalk at the intersection of Greenlawn Avenue and South Washington Avenue. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Page 5 May 19, 2000 MPA-2-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Residential (0-7 du/acre) to Office This proposed development may require the existing old growth trees to be removed. These trees are assets to the character of the area and should be preserved if possible. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT The approval of this proposed office development could encourage future nonresidential development along this corridor, particularly between Washington Park entrances. Future development patterns could create additional traffic that would make it difficult for pedestrians who live in surrounding neighborhoods from accessing Washington Park. OTHER The recent housing market study recommends that housing be preserved. Lansing offers an attractive "incubator environment" for young families. In general, housing conditions are better in area where population is growing. The market study also states that neighborhood parks provide various amenities to residents and provide important open space/green space which enhances the livability and visual aesthetics of the neighborhoods. The parks play an important role in the quality of life in residential area adjacent to park facilities. At the public hearing on May 2, 2000, Mr. Abraham stated that he has built new housing for the tenants who currently live in the four houses on the subject property. If these four houses are demolished, there will be neither a net gain or loss to the number of single family houses. Mr. Abraham also mentioned that property crimes have taken place on his properties and reported problems with parking and public urination in the park. Some of these problems will not go away with a change in land use. Residential use, especially owner occupied housing, provides another set of eyes to assist police with these type of crimes and nuisances. Office users would not be aware of these activities when the office is closed. SUMMARY The prominent land uses in the area are residential, hospital, and park. The proposed office would provide a link to the hospital, but South Washington Avenue separates the two land uses. If an office development goes in at the site, it would break up the continuity of residential uses along South Washington Avenue between the two park entrances. This proposed development may require the existing old growth trees to be removed. These trees are assets and should be preserved if possible. May 19, 2000 Page 6 MPA-2-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Residential (0-7 du/acre) to Office The rezoning of this property could occur initiate a trend for additional office and commercial development along S. Washington Avenue. Additional traffic could deter pedestrian from walking to Washington Park. The recent housing market study recommends that housing be preserved. The market study also states that neighborhood parks play an important role in the quality of life within residential area adjacent to park facilities. Staff is seeking a determination as t whether s sale. WWillard i � of a platted e vacated, r must be conveyed by other means, such a ap rcel, and parcels are normally conveyed by other means rather than vacation. CONCLUSION The master planning decision at the subject property is primarily between the existing Residential (0-7 du/acre) and office. There are, within this choice, several alternatives to consider, including 1. Recommend denial of the request to amend the Master Plan and retain the land use pattern represented in the SW Area Proposed Land Use Map. This would preserve the residential enclave between the north and south entrance to Washington Park, future land use of the entire residential enclave to 2. Recommend changing the "Office", 3. Recommend changing the future land use of the subject properties, while maintaining the remainder of the enclave as residential, 4. Recommend approval of the requested land use change, without relinquishing ownership to the W. Willard ROW (Act-4-2000), thereby encouraging reuse of the existing buildings and maintaining the residential character of the area. (There may be practical difficulties for bhan a and the transfeeof this Willard Street) use 5. Recommend approval of the land 9 to the applicant, according to one of the three general layouts: • Proposed Site Plan #1, which would locate parking to the north and west of the office structure, • Proposed Site Plan #2, with parking in front of the structure • The layout suggested by the Parks and Recreation Department, involving the exchange of the Willard Street ROW for additional park property. This would provide more flexibility to the applicant, and reduce the development's projection into Washington Park. In any case, the residential character of the area should be preserved, and if office uses are allowed, parking should be placed to the rear of the structure(s), and any new structures should be designed in a manner that preserves the residential character. May 19, 2000 Page 7 Z-7-00 ACT 4-2000 & MPA 2-2000 NORTH 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. I Vicinit Map I < KELSEY �' c C IORUNE D KfN .fie 4 L�F AVE ~ H N Dow IOYAL HOLLY mrtn CT. ,� VILLARD HrNLOM ROSADELL 4PL mDUNLAP ST. , DUNLAP ST. w U � Z ASTOR AVE. FF_ � ' /CDGE AVE. SOUTH NO AVE. Ej )ERRY AVE. LOG AN PLAZA BERRY SHOPPRK. CENTER FOLMES R0. � H L N Y So .wASN� aa' I »o Pao cd,' FlA+Y�' co-r• _ a I 3I 7� 31.00o z. I so'� V t 6+)n p,1Jy SYPtL / — T / t.•;> C t I 44' bb' I 81.-11 % / . C 0 14 PAtZyL / o IX cl \ /ir PROPERTY DESCRIPTION \ 14 ADJACENT TO THE ! INGHAM COUNTY,MIO PAGE 41,INGHAM COUP oaf- \ y� ✓ NOTES: PARKING LOT S17-E r d USABLE BUILDING P y \ r N _ ./ / �• PARKING SPACES. \� P L'•`` 'II \\X' �/ ./i 2. FRONT,_SIPE.`AND -P NS CITY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE ti C 3rd Floor,City Hall 124 W.Michigan Ave. Lansing, MI 48933-1687 `` (517)483-4020 Ic H I G P . David C. Hollister, Mayor Sam Quon April 24, 2000 Senior Planner Planning Dept. Re: Willard Street West of S. Washington Ave. This portion of Willard Street was not dedicated to the Public in any Plat. It should not, therefore, be "Vacated". It was Platted as Lot 6, of Assessor's Plat No. 53, as recorded in 1951. As you can see from the copy of the plat, there is no mention whatsoever of Lot 6, or any Willard Avenue therein, being a street, being us as a street,and PublicSery Service goes, 6 g used ased as a street. a street, but there As far as the Assessor's Office are no deeds for the parcel in any of those departmental files. Recommendations: First: Do not "vacate" this description! A vacating order will not pass title on this particular piece to anybody! Since this was an acquired parcel; it should be appraised, and sold for Fair Market Value. Second: Locate a deed for the Land. Maybe Parks Department has one? Perform a Title Search if needed. When we sell, the new owner will know what kind of Title they will be getting from us. So will their lending institution. According to Public service, there is a sewer going through part of this "street", but we could always reserve an easement for it if needed. Third: It is possible that "Willard Street" Itema have was ly a small come to us along with Loart of a larger p 14eo;r South originally acquired solely for park purpose y Washington Park, etc... At any rate: Some Council of the past may or may not have transferred the jurisdiction of this parcel/park/street to Public Service from Parks Department! The Assessor's Office has no way of knowing "whose department" actually "owns" Lot 6.... Current ownerships: "Street" and "Park"; City of Lansing Three Parcels on North side of Willard: George & Paulette Abraham Parcel on South side of Willard: Evelyn H. Piper Cordial G John C. Gratinell A.O. Cadastrals 4028 "Equal Opportunity Employer" V '} �' �� CITY OF LANSI NG PUBLIC SERVICE DEPARTMENT 124 W. Michigan Avenue + Lansing, All 48933 • (517) 483-4455 . FAX:(517)483-6082 fc � P David C. Hollister, Mayor TO: aRm 4uon, S lor Planner FROM: AelnE . Danke DATE: April 19, 2000 SU BJECT: Z 7-2000 , ACT 4-2000 , MPA 2-2000 The following is our comments with regards to the above referenced planning issues : Zoning 7-2000 : The Public Service Department has no objection to the proposed zoning request provided all conditions related to the Act 4- 2000 request is met. MPA 2-2000 : The Public Service Department has no objection to the proposed Master Plan Amendment. Act 4-2000 : The existing Willard Avenue right-of-way is being utilized by the Public Service Department for the existing 8-inch sanitary sewer . The developer shall be required to document that this sewer is not providing sanitary sewer service to properties other than the properties 2708 , 2710 , 2712 , 2716, 2726 . (It is assumed that these properties will be demolished to facilitate the proposed office development. ) Once it is documented that the sewer is not providing sanitary service to adjacent properties , this sewer may be abandoned by the applicant and then the right-of-way may be vacated. Other utilities may exist within the Willard Avenue right-of-way. Approval by all existing utilities is required prior to approval by the Public Service Department. An existing 8-inch sewer is located along the west side of Washington Avenue approximately 7 feet west of the west right- of-way. The applicant will need to provide a 20 foot wide permanent sewer easement to the City for maintenance of this sewer . Reference the attached sketch. nt ill need The City of Lansing Parks tha Willard Avenue acreation Wenotwrequired to provide documentation for access to the Washington Avenue Park. Site Plan Review: require The Public Service Department reserves the right c° to the additional comments , revisions , conditions , proposed development as necessary as part of the site plan review process . c:\MvFiles\act 4 20000 response.wpd d 'op 7Sr 4� o OI lA'1 b y0'1 Q 1Lol 0l8? 9j �A A 0 0 w A. PROPOSED LAND UbL I U I you MPA-1_82 Master Plan Amendment March 16, 1982 Lindell Property Change to Industrial Land Use { r- �/ 7 0 Ifu RESIDENTIAL 0-7 /ao! / � -_ � ._... •� 1- Q RESIDENTIAL 7•I4 au/acre - , f `` "• RESIDENTIAL 14-20 aulacre 17­71 RESIDENTIAL 20•au/acre T .... •- i �•{ -• p OPEN SPACEL-1MUL COMMUNITY FACILIl llS • +1� I„- 16Y-�• ��01_ (--�ji: .�GL��JQ OFFICE� UTILITIES r`--4.'.t•" . - _Q COMMERCIAL � _ ( INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSING % , _ •- JL J'�,I :o_.°L. /: / Imp �.... 1•. ',i:'�� ..A _ -1 � Imo. _R i, r.�.:. "-�•r of - _ -:-_� __ _ r •� -- 1 '1�: a' �,T�TTVJT' ��il�_.;,,-r!' Y,'.�L-'� 1_:ee i•.__—. /.,_ N711 I .._.—.— — "",ate`,,•j, �I j 1 _ J South West Area CITY OF LANSING.MCHIGAN J Q\* N;1 ■ I.. I — — — •� i i �'t�. ... .::.. .Q •.I L•--.................L'::::::: Ea:: ........... .............................. .......... ................. ............ ................ RESIDENTIAL 0-7 u/ac RESIDENTIAL 8-14 u/ac RESIDENTIAL 1 5-20 u/ac RESIDENTIAL 21 - u/ac PROFESSIONAL OFFICE .I � COMMERCIAL ............. [, PARKS/OPEN SPACE;CEMETARY J (� UTILITIES LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL Y' COMMUNIT" FACILITIES _r\ '• I f•AIXED USE (COMM/OFF/APT) WAREHOUSE/RESEA.RCH PARK S SPECIAL LAND USES I ..,.,ni narnNG^E�naTr.u-riT PROPOSED LAND USE TO 1990 SOUTHEAST AREA COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SOUTHWEST AREA COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FUTURE CIRCULATION .� MAJOR ARTERIAL ./ :"% -^ �'�� • / MINOR ARTERIAL if COLLECTOR / �•�� .�,,,,,�rl' l_ •..' INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS /;� >'�, I dl I,_:�' %� `_ I •L "=--,I=� —_ __ ]I it �•`\ �j I, — _ (� � r _'' I ," •:_i .» ,••. ,:�' Jam.�--. �. -I r --------� A � F ea— u To L 'F :ji� I S �, •t �'� i � 1 _ 1 South West Area VLtiw�I m•.w CRY OF LANSING,MICHIGAN LAND USE MPA-2 - 2000 C09MEFZGIAL OFFICE i i i I R SI ENTIA I OSPJAL R IDEN A MULTI-FAMILY RE IDENTIAL RESIDE I TIAL I COMMERCIAL I I I I I I Trans.shp HIGHWAYS RAILROAD STREET_CL N Parcel s.shp RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL CHURCH 0 OFFICE w 0 HOSPITAL - COMMERCIAL ® INDUSTRIAL PARK S -1 PARKING MPA 2 =2000 Frontage g to e Along S. Washington Corridor PARK (7.10%) CHURCH (1.73%) HOSPITAL (6.01%)-� -RESIDENTIAL (37.54%) PARKING (6.98%) INDUSTRIAL (14.85%) OFFICE (2.3000)-' ULTI-RES. (9.58%) COMMERCIAL (13.89%)- MPA 2 =2000 Frontage on East Side of S. Washington PARK (0.00%) CHURCH (1.07%) HOSPITAL (12.85%) INDUSTRIAL (0.00%) OFFICE (4.93%)- - i COMMERCIAL (13.64%) �-RESIDENTIAL (62.84%) MULTI-RES. (4.67%)- I - 000 MPA 2 2 Frontage on West Side of S. Washington PARK (13.35%) -RESIDENTIAL (15.29%) CHURCH (2.310/,0)- PARKING (13.12%) MULTI-RES. (13.90%) -COMMERCIAL (14.12%) INDUSTRIAL (27.92%) `OFFICE (0.00%) i i .. 'ti. e .� 1, e,NSIN v c DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 316 N.CAPrroL AvENUE-3urrE DA•LANSING,MI 48933-1236 �ICGP (517)483-4066•FAX:(5 17)483-6036 HI PLANNING OFFICE David C.Hollister,Mayor Memo To: Planning Board From: Sam Quon, Senior Planner Date: June 27, 2000 Subject: MPA 2-2000 Recommendation MPA 2-2000 is a request by Mr. George Abraham to amend the land use from low density residential to professional office. Staff acknowledges that there is a demand for professional office in this area associated with Ingham Regional Medical Center. The roadway capacity would be able to accommodate the amount of traffic generated by a professional medical office. The proposed site on the west side of Washington Avenue is better suited for office development because of the deeper lot, there are fewer residential properties adjacent to the subject property, and there is direct access to Washington rather than a street going through a residential neighborhood. Staff also acknowledges that housing within the City should be preserved. The remaining houses in this residential enclave presents the possibility of future development. However, these 140' deep residential lots present additional constraints for office development because they are not as deep as the subject property. Therefore, the remainder of the enclave should remain low density residential/open space. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the land use change for the subject property from low Page 1 ® Please Recycle "Equal opportunity Employer" density residential to professional office and the reminder of the enclave shall be designated low density and open space with the following conditions (see plan for recommendation1): 1. A 20' landscape buffer along S. Washington Avenue, residential properties, and park land shall be established. 2. The development of any office shall be architecturally compatible with the residential homes in the area similar to the McRee House. 3. The development shall preserve as many of the mature trees on site as possible. 4. The transfer of Willard Street to the applicant according the general layout suggested by the Parks and Recreation Department, involving the exchange of the Willard Street ROW for additional park property. Page 2 1 � � 9 ' Q 3 vPF- PO' 1>6014 Y �3 izs 1te4&1Dat"1T1 A` °, 'a'� -�! 33 14 lowc o e &PAC& WIL \\\ u / -y. 23 (40 CD' 00 \ u J, 101 +o. // rB' • 3 \ \ O�� � yo •►o. 4 21 a iQ� s2o 08/ IN/ \ 22 `� 8 ti \ �01 ` yz(„ 4L2 AVE. so 7 Yr 7 QOil + vy.»' c° c,Jr.7f' ro vo• rr to Vo' •• y°• \ a ,; moo. �,�• �3 \2 o � 0 0� 251 Z�1 o O21 4 5 6 ° ti ti � 7 8 9 at 1 10 E1 6 ; 7 1 6 ; 5 irz.°c te.cs' yr.r�' ez OJ►� 1 a o1\ oc� � 0 ?�' n 1 — 1116 115 (VI I- 119 111 iin • '+ - ' AV 1 _ _ _• �� // •1 of Zoo, Of 20/�-��� D9ltP4Tl AL ro� �� 33 14 QP SPACS \ ti o ro• W I J� lb`C b5f� �a.o. ``, /�.ti0011� 00\ 4�1 O G/ I I 5ti �o ,,° 23 r ti ' O P'/ �e. Sy O a 8/ `y. 3 2 I ) a Q � 22 \\ g ti IN, ti r0 �<< 09/ ,5'tiroQ 0 0 ►, \� 001 4z4 4L2 �< �o ^� r AVE. o So 7 'Y17 93' �� oil c r.7r' re• .. ro• zr 78 � fo- a W I 4 " 5 6 ° °, � 78 9 02`10 6 5 •f1.04, te. y+.t7'1 ti ,4 • 6�o Memo To: Planning Board From: Sam Quon, Senior Planner Date: June 21, 2000 Subject: Addendum to MPA 2-2000 The following is to address questions the Urban Development Committee had at their meeting on May 23, 2000. Questions regarding traffic and development in this area brought to staff. TRAFFIC S. Washington is a minor arterial. Major and minor arterials are designated truck routes in the City. Therefore, trucks from any of the industrial facilities in this area may use Washington Avenue, Mt. Hope Avenue, and Holmes Road to transport goods. Currently, drivers are experiencing difficulties when backing out of residential properties onto S. Washington. This is evident throughout the City where residential properties are located along major and minor arterials. Amending the Master Plan for this particular property for office use would reduce the amount of residential properties contending with backing out onto S. Washington, but this would also increase the amount of traffic for the remaining residents fronting along S. Washington. Overall, the level of service on this section of roadway is an "A". Traffic counts in 1995 on Washington at Holmes totaled 12,750 (6,150 north bound and 6,600 south bound). Traffic counts in 1997 on Washington at Mt. Hope totaled 15,850 (7,900 northbound Page 1 and 7,950 southbound). The capacity of the roadway is 10,000 per lane for a total of 20,000. Traffic counts on Greenlawn totaled 5,425 with a west bound count of 2,950 and an eastbound count of 2,475. South Washington can adequately accommodate the traffic the proposed office would generate. Currently, the four houses generate approximately 38 trips per day based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual average rate of 9.57 trips/day on a weekday for a single family dwelling. The proposed medical office (16,800 -19,650 sqft.) would generate between 607-710 trips per day based on the ITE average of 36.13 trips per 1 ,000 sqft. gross floor area of a medical-dental office building. This would increase the total traffic count to16,560 if the 1997 traffic counts are still valid. AREA DEVELOPMENT AND DEMAND FOR OFFICE Currently, this corridor has approximately 253 feet of office property fronting S. Washington (2.3% office). The addition of the proposed development would add 325 feet of office frontage for a total of 513 feet (5.7% office). If this entire residential enclave becomes office then the potential frontage would total 854 feet (7.8%). This would significantly reduce the amount of single family homes on the west side of S. Washington. Percentage of Office and Residential (SFR) Fronting on S. Washington Use East Side West Side Total Office (existing) 4.93% (253 ft) 0% (0 ft) 2.30% 253 ft Residential (SFR) 62.84% (3,228 ft) 15.29% (893.22 ft) 37.54% (4,121 ft) ft 325 5.56% 4.67% (513 ft) Office (Proposed) 4.93% (253 ft) ( ) Residential (SFR) 62.84% (3,228 ft) 10.84% (634 ft) 35.17% (3,861 ft) ft 601 Office (Potential) 4.93% (253 ft) 10.28% ( ) 7.78% (854 ft) Residential (SFR) 62.84% (3,228 ft) 5.01% (293 ft) 32.07% (3,520 ft) Total frontage on east Total frontage on west Total frontage = side = 5,136.7 ft side = 5,842.11 ft 10,978.81 ft Ingham Region Medical Center is a major land owner in this area. Their short range plan (5 to 7 years) is to develop on the existing campus and not expand outward. However, there is a great demand by doctors to locate in Ingham Regional's Page 2 professional building on campus. Ingham Regional believes that if professional office space was made available on Mr. Abraham's property that it would meet a need. Ingham Regional has no interest in purchasing the property at this time. Additionally, Ingham Regional is looking into the possibility of reconfiguring access to the Greenlawn campus to alleviate traffic on Greenlawn. In the long run, Ingham Regional is interested in acquiring the National Guard property for future development. The National Guard property is zoned "A" Residential and is identified for open space and community facilities in the Master Plan. From a traffic circulation and land use perspective, it would be more appropriate for Ingham Regional Medical Center to focus on expansion and circulation to Washington Avenue versus Willard or Greenlawn. CONCLUSION The growth of Ingham Regional Medical Center has created a need for professional office space. Traffic counts for S. Washington indicate that the roadway would be able to accommodate an office development. However, there will be some impact on existing residents who live along S. Washington. The master planning decision at the subject property is primarily between the existing Residential (0-7 du/acre) and office. There are, within this choice, several alternatives to consider, including 1. Recommend denial of the request to amend the Master Plan and retain the land use pattern represented in the SW Area Proposed Land Use Map. This would preserve the residential enclave between the north and south entrance to Washington Park, 2. Recommend changing the future land use of the entire residential enclave to "Office", 3. Recommend changing the future land use of the subject properties, while maintaining the remainder of the enclave as residential, 4. Recommend approval of the requested land use change, without relinquishing ownership to the W. Willard ROW (Act-4-2000), thereby encouraging reuse of the existing buildings and maintaining the residential character of the area. (There may be practical difficulties for barrier free access and parking difficulties under this alternative.) 5. Recommend approval of the land use change and the transfer of Willard Street to the applicant, according to one of the three general layouts: • Proposed Site Plan #1, which would locate parking to the north and west of the office structure, • Proposed Site Plan #2, with parking in front of the structure • The layout suggested by the Parks and Recreation Department, involving the exchange of the Willard Street ROW for additional park property. This would provide more flexibility to the applicant, and reduce the development's projection into Washington Park. Page 3 In any case, the residential character of the area should be preserved, and if office uses are allowed, parking should be placed to the rear of the structure(s), and any new structures should be designed in a manner that preserves the residential character. Page 4 LCH S1NDEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND NEIG HBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 316 N.CAPITOL AVENUE•SUITE D-1•LANSING,MI 48933-1236 (517)483-4066•FAX:(517)483-6036 PLANNING OFFICE David C.Hollister,Mayor Memo To: Planning Board From: Sam Quon, Senior Planner Date: June 26, 2000 Subject: Traffic Counts for MPA-2-2000 Traffic Study The Urban Development Committee requested that staff provide current traffic counts for the S. Washington corridor. The Transportation Office finalized the traffic counts on June 17, 2000. Results show that traffic along South Washington Avenue between Mt. Hope Avenue and Holmes Road has fluctuated over the last six years. However, the net change to date has been minor in this corridor (see Traffic Counts for MPA-2-2000). South Washington has a capacity of 10,000 vehicles per lane for a total of 20,000 vehicles. Traffic levels south of Washington at Mt. Hope have decreased by approximately 14% since 1997. Current traffic counts at this location are 6,788 north bound and 6,866 south bound for a total of 13,654 vehicles per weekday, which is less than the 15,850 counted in 1997(see Total Traffic Count). ® Please Recycle "Equal opportunity Employer" Total Traffic Count for S. Washington Corridor 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 2000 2900 15786 N. of Washington @ MT. Hope 12725 1 15786 S. of Washington @ MT. Hope* 13750 15850 16925 15606 W E. of ashington @ MT. Hope 15425 12662 W. of Washington @ MT. Hope 13125 12500 E.of ashington @ Greenlawn* W 7150 5425 5616 13850 13561 N.of Washington @ Greenlawn* 14560 S.of Washington @ Greenlawn* 13775 N. of Washington @ Holmes* 12750 12237 E. of Washington @Holmes 13325 12350 12237 19769 W. of Washington @ Holmes *Within the study area The total amount of traffic north of the intersection at S. Washington and Holmes Road was 12,542 vehicles per weekday (5,761 NB & 6,781 SB). This represents a slight decrease from the traffic count in 1995. The amount of traffic along Greenlawn has also decreased significantly since 1995. Traffic Calming A traffic calming study is proposed for the area south of Mt. Hope, west of Cedar Street, north of Holmes Road, and East of S. Washington. The Transportation office does not anticipate any impact on the amount of traffic along S. Washington as a result of traffic calming. Conclusion nt of Staff believes the roadway capacity wducal office. Trabe able to fficocounts for this corridor the shows traffic generated by a professional me that the amount of traffic has fluctuated over the last six years, but has experienced a decrease in the last two years. Additionally, the proposed traffic calming will not have a significant impact on traffic along S. Washington. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the land use change for the subject property from low density residential to professional office and the reminder of the enclave shall be designated low density and open space with the following conditions (see plan for recommendation1): 1. A 20' landscape buffer along S. Washington Avenue, residential properties, and park land shall be established. 2. The development of any office shall be architecturally compatible with the residential homes in the area similar to the McRee House. 3. The development shall preserve as many of the mature trees on site as possible. 4. The transfer of Willard Streetapplicant according dlnn involving general exchange of suggested by the Parks and Recreation the Willard Street ROW for additional park property. ;Traffic Counts by Direction for MPA-2-2000: S. Washin Iton C o riidor e Ii 1994: 1995�, 1996i 1997 % Chan 1998 /° Cha ! i N. of Washington @ MT. Hoe I ! -1.20/ a 68 6275 n North Bound /a 898024 j; 3121..0900%% b700 3.88% ' 67 South Bound 6450! i I S. of Washin ton MT. Hope I 7900 I 15.33%I I n/a 6788 I North Bound ; 6850 ° In/a 6866 -13.64%1 South Bound 6900 ! 7950 15.22/° i i E. of Washington U MT. Hoe II 10750 37.82% n/a 75811 -29.48% East Bound I 78001 ° n/a 8025 29.96% West Bound 7625 6175 -19.02/o 1 I i I W. of Washin ton MT. Hoe I I 6317 2.72% East Bound i 7025 i I 6150 -12.46% n/a 1 ° n/a 6345 -0.08% !West Bound 6100 1 6350 4.10/° E. of Washington Greenlawn 2600 n/a 2475 -4.81% 2685 8.48% East Bound n/a 2950 -35.16% 2931 -0.64% West Bound 4550 !N. of Washington Greenlawn n/a n/a 7146 3.57% North Bound 1 6900 n/a 6415 -7.70% South Bound 16950 n/a 1 'S of Washin ton Greenlawn n/a 6838 3.61% North Bound 66001 n/a n/a 7722 7.62% ;South Bound I 7175! nla I i I N. of Washin ton Holmes n/a n/a 57g1 -6.33% North Bound 61501 6781 2 74% i South Bound 6600 n/a n/a I I 1 E. of Washington Holmes n/a 6100 -15.57% 65001 6.56% East Bound 7225! 6100' n/a 6250 2.4601 5737 1 -8 West Bound I I W. of Washington Holmes ! 8565 n/a East Bound I 1 11204 n/a West Bound ■ ■ i = I z o � Traffic Counts at Holmes and Washington i I (2000) z o0 8,565 _ -4N 5,737 HOLMES RD moo-11,204 - •►6,500 i I N VAT E S Traffmic Greenlawn and Wash 'ington 0 (0 s � o h o ^ ! F 00 � ! 293� oop 5 GREFENLAWN i i N W E S ■ Traffic Counts at ■ Ho n Washington pe a d Mt . > I Z i O I y- F- Z 17U z ct N CD I C (D NN (2000) _ �.8,025 �• 6,345 MT HOPE AVE moo- 6,317 - 7,58'1 (20 Coco ) I N W E S :�`�: _•�� 3,. Act-4-2000 Willard Street West of S. Washington Avenue Vacate ROW Please refer to MPA-2-2000 or Z-7-2000 for additional information. ACT 285 SPECIFIC INFORMATION APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: Mr. Abraham is requesting to vacate the Willard right- of-way located along the northwest side of the 2700 block of South Washington Avenue. Mr. Abraham intends to combine this property with property he owns to the north and south for his proposed office development. Evaluation r, location and extent of requests involving the closing Act 285 requires that the characte of a public right-of-way be evaluated. Location The Willard right-of-way located along the northwest side of the 2700 block of South Washington Avenue. It is a platted parcel, not a platted street, and was platted as Lot 6, Assessor's Plat No.53, as recorded in 1951. Character Current) it is The right-of-way is approximatelylde and s accessOto1 p the twolhouses at 2708 and 2710 an unimproved roadway whichserves a South Washington Avenue. Extent Vacating the right-of-way means the City will give up ownership. The right-of-way would need to be vacated or conveyed to the applicant if the land use were to change from public use to a private use. The Assessor's Office states that this portion of Willard Street was not platted and dedicated. Therefore, it should not be vacated. Rather since this was an acquired property, it should be appraised and sold at fair market value, but first current ownership of the property needs to be determined. A title search may be necessary. Currently, the Public Service Department is using the right-of-way for an existing sanitary sewer. The developer will be required to document that this sewer is not providing sanitary sewer service to properties other than the properties at 2708, 2710, Page 1 August 1, 2000 Act-4-2000 Willard Street West of S. Washington Avenue Vacate ROW 2716, and 2426 South Washington Avenue. Once documentation is provided that the sewer is not providing sanitary service to adjacent properties, this sewer may be abandoned by the applicant. If this area is redeveloped for office use then Parks otent al impact between thend Recreation is interested in trading property with the applicant to mitigate any P proposed office development and existing (see Park's Proposal). Summary The right-of-way is located along the northwest side of the 2700 block of South Washington Avenue. The right-of-way is approximately roximatel 66' wide and 200' deep (13,200 sq. ft.). It is an unimproved roadway which serves two houses located at 2708 and 2710 South Washington Avenue. Willard Street is not a dedicated street, and the method of conveyance needs to be determined. A title search may be necessary. If possible, Parks and Recreation are interested in trading the right-of-way for land, the applicant owns. Public Service is using the right-of-way for an existing sanitary sewer.i sewers not providing The ewer could g serve to if the developer will be required to document that t 2708, 2710, 2716, and 2426 South Washington Avenue. Recommendation applicant Staff recommends exchange of the Willard Street right-of-way for property the owns as suggested by Parks, provided that the requirements set by Public service are met. Respectfully, Sam Quon Senior Planner Page 2 August 1, 2000 /P - �V, DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 316 N.CAPrrOLAVENUE - SUrrE D-1 -LANSING,MI 48933-1236 r C;H1 G e' (517)483-4066 -FAx: (517)483-6036 PLANNING OFFICE [Zw David C.Hollister, Mayor low �. . 1 20nij AGENCY REFERRAL SHEET DATE: April 14, 2000 FILE NO.: Z-7-2000, ACT 4-2000, MPA 2-2000 FROM: Sam Quon, Senior Planner (517) 483-4076 AGENCY RESPONSES: ❑ Ameritech Telephone ❑ Lansing Neighborhood Council ❑ Assessor ❑ MDOT ❑ AT&T Cable ❑ Parks and Recreation ❑ Building Safety Cl Community Policing ❑ Board of Water and Light\ ❑ Public Services ❑ City Attorney ❑ Transportation ❑ Consumers Energy ❑ Development Office ❑ Fire Marshal The following requests has been submitted to the Planning Board for consideration. For details, please see attachment. We invite your comments, requirements and recommendations for this proposal relative to your official_function. Please provide your remarks to the Planning Office on this form, by separate .cover, attachment, or facsimile (483-6036) by Noon April 25, 2000. OAS H/AI ErT 714 K �-f T Name Signature ® Please Recycle "Equal opponimity Employer' ,,o •w AS N• AR f �'(,�� 2rZa.c� P. vj- •a' 01 :ilk, .r Tv I rc�rc r sn.000 y4 IS- S iALJE bcz?aEZ mm) so-1•, u 6NR.Drr3�:splst�e. / C2 i r�r, :I. 1 pQo�V Mlles �.Jsas�-tt�1ABRAJ" 5 Py h c 10 PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONr LOTS It ADJACENT TO TV SOUTH[ INGHAM COUNTY,MKNIGAN, \ 9 PAGE 41.INGHAMCOUNTY RE( \ X�2 ci v a �.�,. / NOTES: 'o I. PARKJNG LOT SIZEtS BASE[ USABLE BUILDING SPACE. PARKING SPACES.'. 49 FRONT,,SIDE,.AND-..REAR Z-7-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Rezone from "A" Residential to "13-1" Professional Office GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: George Abraham 431 S. Capitol Avenue Lansing, MI 48933 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Owner REQUESTED ACTION: Requesting to rezone property from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office, vacate the Willard Avenue right-of-way West of the 2700 block along South Washington Avenue, and amend the Master Plan plan to reflect changes in land use from residential 0- 7 du/acre to office. EXISTING LAND USE: Single family residence EXISTING ZONING: "A" Residential PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: Approximately 1.6 acres on an irregular shaped property. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 Assessors Plat No.53 City of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan. PPNs 3301-28- 301-141, -161, -182, and -192 (Z-7-2000) Lot 6, Assessors Plat No. 53 City of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan. PPN 3301-28-301-901 (ACT-4- 2000) SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Washington Park S: Single Family Residential E: Single Family Residential and Ingham Regional Medical Center W: Washington Park SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "A" Residential S: "A" Residential E: "DM-4" Residential and "A" Residential W: "A" Residential Page 1 Z-7-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Rezone from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan 1990, designates the land use as residential 0-7 dwelling units per acre. CASE HISTORY: In 1963, a petition to rezone the property from "A" Residential to "DM" Multiple Dwelling (Z-114-63) was denied by City Council because the density was too high. In 1995, this property was included in a request to rezone 2.4 acres from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office (Z-18-95) for constructing a medical office building and parking. Planning Board recommended denial of this request. This case has been pending before City Council and no action was taken. SPECIFIC INFORMATION DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: The applicant proposes an office development consisting of 16,800 -19,650 square feet of building area with 112 -151 parking space on approximately 1.6 acres. This proposal involves combining the Willard Street ROW (if vacated) with property he owns to the north and south for his proposed office development. AGENCY RESPONSES Ameritech: No Response Received Assessor: See attached AT&T Cable: No Response Received Board of Water and Light: Electric - No objection Water - BWL water system has piping in Willard to serve parks property and existing homes on the north side of Willard. An easement will be required to maintain existing Page 2 Z-7-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Rezone from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office water main. Building Office: This project is subject to site plan and plan review process. Contact Chris Segerlind in the Building Safety Office for additional information. City Attorney: No Response Received Consumers Energy: No Response Received Development Office: No objections Fire Marshal: No objections Lansing Neighborhood Council: No Response Received MDOT: No Response Received Parks and Recreation: See attached Public Services: See attached Transportation Engineer: No specific comments or requirements Page 3 Z-7-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Rezone from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office Z-7-2000 REZONING ANALYSIS COMPATIBILITY WITH SURROUNDING LAND USE The site is located in a residential enclave with single family houses to the south, Ingham Regional Medical Center and single family houses to the east, and Washington Park to the north and west. Washington Park also has frontage along the street to the north and south of the residential homes along this block face. Currently, the park and its entrances act as a buffer between the apartments to the south and National Guard Headquarters to the north. South Washington Avenue acts as a boundary between the houses and the hospital to the east. The proposed 16,800 -19,650 square feet office with 112 -151 parking space on approximately 1.6 acres could be intrusive to the residential use south of the site. The Master Plan supports major office development in industrial parks or commercial centers. However, it does not support office development that would adversely affect adjacent land uses. COMPLIANCE WITH MASTER PLAN The Southwest Area Comprehensive Development Plan identifies the land use at this location as residential with a density of 0-7 dwelling units per acre. This proposal is inconsistent with the current Master Plan. However, the applicant has requested a Master Plan Amendment to designate the land for office use. MPA-2-2000 is currently before the Planning Board with a favorable recommendation from the Urban Development Committee. IMPACT ON VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC South Washington Avenue is a minor arterial that has a northbound, southbound, and turning lane. Over the years traffic has increased in this corridor. This increase traffic has made it difficult for residents to who backs out on to South Washington Avenue. The proposed office could generate an increase in the amount of vehicular traffic. Vehicular traffic will enter and exit the site off of Washington Avenue. It is anticipated that traffic will increase during weekdays during business hours. The roadway will be able to accommodate the traffic increase. Pedestrian circulation could increase depending on the type of offices and its relation with Ingham Regional Medical Center. There is a crosswalk at the intersection of Greenlawn Avenue and South Washington Avenue. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT This proposed development may require the existing old growth trees to be removed. Page 4 Z-7-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Rezone from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office These trees are assets and should be preserved if possible. IMPACT ON FUTURE PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT The approval of this proposed office development could encourage future office and commercial development along this corridor. However, MPA-2-2000 changes the land use designation of the subject property and not any of the surrounding properties. OTHER The recent housing market study recommends that housing be preserved. Lansing offers an attractive "incubator environment" for young families. In general, housing conditions are better in area where population is growing. The market study also states that neighborhood parks provide various amenities to residents and provide important open space/green space which enhances the livability and visual aesthetics of the neighborhoods. The parks play an important role in adding to the quality of life for residents who live near parks. At the public hearing on May 2, 2000, Mr. Abraham stated that he has built new housing for the tenants who currently live in the four houses on the subject property. By building new houses and eliminating the same number of existing houses is a zero sum gain. Mr. Abraham also mention the crimes that have taken place on his properties and problems with parking and public urination in the park. Some of these problems will not go away with a change in land use. Residential use, especially owner occupied housing, provides another set of eyes to assist police with these type of crimes and nuisances. An office use would not be aware of these activities when the office is closed. To resolve crime and nuisance issues there needs to be a proactive partnership with residents, property owners, and the police. SUMMARY Rezoning the property from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office would be inconsistent with the current Master Plan. Office use could be intrusive to residential uses in this enclave, but can be mitigated with proper landscaping, screening, and buffering. The proposed rezoning will increase the amount of vehicular traffic to this particular site. This proposed development may require the existing old growth trees to be removed. These trees are assets and should be preserved if possible. Potential impact on future development patterns could occur if this property is rezoned. This could initiate a trend for additional office and commercial development along South Washington Avenue. Additional traffic could deter pedestrian from walking to Page 5 Z-7-2000 2710-2726 S. Washington Ave. Rezone from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office Washington Park. The recent housing market study recommends that housing be preserved. The market study also states that neighborhood parks play an important role in the quality of life within residential area adjacent to park facilities. Problems occurring in or around the area needs to be addressed in a proactive manner. RECOMMENDATION Staff previously recommended tabling this request to rezone the properties at 2710- 2726 South Washington Avenue from "A" Residential to "D-V Professional Office pending Planning Board approval of MPA-2-2000. Staff at this time recommends approval of Mr. Abraham's request to rezone property located at 2710-2726 S. Washington Avenue from "A" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office. Page 6 Sp .wA5N� �Altf- IK P .d Pig¢#�"►Jim Lino a S I I 3 0I I ISO y/ b WASt�trJ�TorJ 'Ay y' PARK- y -•.: ,�., i , or It PROPERTY DESCRIPTIONi LC 1< ADIACEN'T TO THE SOLI INGHUNTY,MK311GA 02 PACE�NOGHAM COUNTY I J < Q NOTES: P' \ A �, d / / 1. PARKNG LOT SIZE is BAt USABLE BUILDING SPAC ?• ., \\ PARKING SPACES. ,. ,.•2. FRONT,,SIpE,•N1D REAi 1\1 S 1 CITY ASSESSOR'S OFFICE ti (> 3rd Floor,City Hall 124 W.Michigan Ave. Lansing,MI 48933-1687 (517)483-4020 ICHIGP David C. Hollister, Mayor Sam Quon April 24, 2000 Senior Planner Planning Dept. Re: Willard Street West of S. Washington Ave. This portion of Willard Street was not dedicated to the Public in any Plat. It should not, therefore, be "Vacated". It was Platted as Lot 6, of Assessor's Plat No. 53, as recorded in 1951. As you can see from the copy of the plat, there is no mention whatsoever of Lot 6, or any Willard Avenue therein, being a street, being used as a street, nor being dedicated as a street. As far as the Assessor's Office and Public Service goes, Lot 6 is used as a street, but there are no deeds for the parcel in any of those departmental files. Recommendations: First: Do not "vacate"this description! A vacating order will not pass title on this particular piece to anybody! Since this was an acquired parcel; it should be appraised, and sold for Fair Market Value. Second: Locate a deed for the Land. Maybe Parks Department has one? Perform a Title Search if needed. When we sell, the new owner will know what kind of Title they will be getting from us. So will their lending institution. According to Public service, there is a sewer going through part of this "street", but we could always reserve an easement for it if needed. Third: It is possible that "Willard Street" was only a small part of a larger parcel; originally acquired solely for park purposes. It may have come to us along with Lot 14, or South Washington Park, etc... At any rate: Some Council of the past may or may not have transferred the jurisdiction of this parcel/park/street to Public Service from Parks Department! The Assessor's Office has no way of knowing"whose department" actually"owns" Lot 6.... Current ownerships: "Street" and "Park"; City of Lansing Three Parcels on North side of Willard: George & Paulette Abraham Parcel on South side of Willard: Evelyn H. Piper Cordial John C. Gra>!�iell A.O. Cadastrals 4028 "Equal Opportunity Employer" IIV I LHUPHUL: GUMMUI /G/4 l IUN CITY OF LANSI NG PUBLIC SERVICE DEPARTMENT 124 W. Michigan Avenue •Lansing, MI 48933 • (517) 483-4455 • FAX:(517)483-6082 ICH G P David C. Hollister, Mayor T0: �� Quon, S i�Planner C/iG�:�`L( FROM: Daniel E. Danke DATE: April 19, 2000 SUBJECT: Z 7-2000, ACT 4-2000, MPA 2-2000 The following is our comments with regards to the above referenced planning issues : Zoning 7-2000 : The Public Service Department has no objection to the proposed zoning request provided all conditions related to the Act 4- 2000 request is met. MPA 2-2000 : The Public Service Department has no objection to the proposed Master Plan Amendment. Act 4-2000 : The existing Willard Avenue right-of-way is being utilized by the Public Service Department for the existing 8-inch sanitary sewer. The developer shall be required to document that this sewer is not providing sanitary sewer service to properties other than the properties 27081 2710, 2712 , 2716, 2726 . (It is assumed that these properties will be demolished to facilitate the proposed office development. ) Once it is documented that the sewer is not providing sanitary service to adjacent properties, this sewer may be abandoned by the applicant and then the right-of-way may be vacated. Other utilities may exist within the Willard Avenue right-of-way. Approval by all existing utilities is required prior to approval by the Public Service Department. An existing 8-inch sewer is located along the west side of Washington Avenue approximately 7 feet west of the west right- of-way. The applicant will need to provide a 20 foot wide permanent sewer easement to the City for maintenance of this sewer. Reference the attached sketch. The City of Lansing Parks and Recreation Department will need to provide documentation that Willard Avenue is not required for access to ,the Washington Avenue Park. Site Plan Review: The Public Service Department reserves the right to require additional comments , revisions , conditions , etc . to the proposed development as necessary as part of the site plan review process . C:\MyFiles\act 4 20000 response.wpd c a •o�I 's��F� o � o 7 rn� 1 1 loll m s a1197 9 g c� g 0I8* o 1 1-o-1 b loll x 009Z stSn .Q o w - r A, w PROPOSED LAND USE TO 1990 MPA-1-82 Master Plan Amendment March 16, 1982 Lindell Property Change to Industrial Land Use �- r- JAI,:_=, Q RESIDENTIAL 0-7 du/acre "`Lae�.. �/-�. — •"' .._ =1 RESIDENTIAL 7-14 du/acre r---1 RESIDENTIAL 14-20 dulacre Q RESIDENTIAL 20•du/acre / ........I• I Il..o.ir�-.1���� 1 f.�a _ (Q OPEN SPACE l COMMUNITY FACILITIES / ...�.I ' I FT �UL jOur � Lit aU � {• II I r, u 0 ❑ � OFFICE 1"�". 1 �I ...� ]I7_Rr- s,3L UTILITIES / •�r,� -= I / _:I j _ - —1 COMMERCIAL ) n Q INDUSTRIAL/WAREHOUSING f ;�. .—] �9L7IC "� •-�• "' SL_r_Ir_.'r�� I P ,2-ZDo 0 IN - MR JL AL ^-•- l� --- 1, r1p ll I , t.a ( !❑r- �l��..,�l Il1Ell C-1 e II South West Area CITY OF LANSING,MICHIGAN �°�� ®tea■ � ������ � _ � .� _ �1 11 . 4 � � � � � ■ ■ � SOUTHWEST AREA COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FUTURE CIRCULATION J IUD. .� MAJOR ARTERIAL MINOR ARTERIAL COLLECTOR ( ' IMPROVEMENTS INTERSECTION IMP „�„L.__ / ❑E;'� -C�CCTC?r11- o - fflLIDIU5 [ 17 37 ��(_.✓ ,- �� I[ fir_. :-1f:—_71 vAL-JILAN I~• IL fi. � is r ! i--•• �_ -�L_ LL IJ - - -Y IL South West Area - - - - - ..�����n. CrrY OF LANSING.MICHIGAN Urban Development Committee Report 4:00 p.m. Tuesday, August 22, 2000 Planning and Neighborhood Development Department Conference Room 316 North Capitol Avenue, Suite C3 Members Present: Staff Present: Jan Patrick Bill Rieske, Principal Planner John Ruge Sam Quon, Senior Planner Michael Smith Members Absent: Others Present: None re: Act-14-00 Matt Moore, of Wolverine Engineering (One Vacancy) Shirley Hyde, Eyde Construction Chairperson Smith opened the meeting at 4:00 p.m., and adjourned it at 5:20 p.m. AGENDA a. Act-11-2000,1400 Block Indiana Ave., Permission or Conveyance of City parcel for private use. b. Act-14-2000, 1900 S. Cedar Street, Abandon Sewer Easement. Pending: a. Act-7-99, Somercroft Drive at Post Oak Lane, Vacate ROW for School Parking. (Referred to UDC on May 18, 1999.) b. Act-9-2000, 201 E. Grand River Ave., Proj. Sign Over ROW. (Tabled June 27, 2000) C\OFFICMN WIMW DOCSWISCELL T00022lAimAs vy0 Urban Development Committee Report August 22, 2000, Page 2 a. Act-11-2000,1400 Block Indiana Ave., Permission or Conveyance of City parcel for private use. Bill Rieske and Sam Quon presented the case. The property is located on the east side of Indiana Avenue, at the foot of Oak Street. Janice Harper, the applicant, owns a house just south of the property, and uses the City property as a driveway for her garage which opens onto the subject property. The City property also provides a pedestrian path to Bancroft Park, and may indeed be a portion of the dedicated Bancroft Park land. The property is approximately 50 feet wide by 106.4 feet in length. It is located in a single- family area, zoned "B" Residential District. The driveway occupies the southern 30 feet of the subject parcel, except at the rear or east end where the driveway ends and there is a five foot concrete walkway to Bancroft Park curving in a southeasterly direction. The subject property contains existing electrical distribution and water distribution facilities on the property. On June 21 , 2000, the Park Board recommended that an Act-285 review be done to decommission this property as park land, to allow the property to be given to Janice Harper. The Parks & Recreation Director recommended granting an easement on the portion of the property on which the driveway is located at 1426 Indiana Avenue. The City Attorney's recommendation is that the proposed disposition should not be more than the applicant needs for access and should be sold at fair market value. SUMMARY The subject City property contains an existing driveway that serves a residence at 1426 Indiana Avenue through a verbal arrangement. Ensuring driveway access is necessary for the sale of the residence. The subject property also serves as a pedestrian access to Bancroft Park, and may be part of the Bancroft Park dedicated parkland. It was originally conveyed to the City for the extension of Oak Street. The Park Board recommended decommissioning the property and conveying it to the applicant. The Parks and Recreation Director recommends granting an easement for the portion of the property on which the driveway is located. Urban Development Committee Report August 22, 2000, Page 3 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Act-11-2000, the conveyance of a license or easement, as deemed appropriate by the City Attorney, for the minimum area required to provide access to 1426 Indiana Avenue. COMMITTEE ACTION Discussion. The committee had questions about: • the restrictive covenant within the deed which conveyed the subject parcel to the City, which requires that the property be used for an extension of Oak Street, • the date that Bancroft Park was first dedicated, and • the minimum conveyance a title or mortgage company will accept. Finding: Motion: It was moved by Mr. Ruge, seconded by Ms. Patrick, to table Act-11-2000 pending answers to the above questions. Urban Development Committee Report August 22, 2000, Page 4 b. Act-14-2000, 1900 S. Cedar Street, Abandon Sewer Easement. Sam Quon presented the case. Matt Moore, Wolverine Engineering and Shirley Hyde, Eyde Construction, were in attendance on behalf of the project. The applicant, Eyde Construction, is proposing to build a 23,988 sq. ft. office building on the Walter French Academy property located at 1900 S. Cedar Street. The proposed building would be located in what is currently the parking lot south of the Academy building. The proposed building will be on the site of the existing sewer known as the relocated Marvin Drain. Eyde Construction is requesting that this sewer be abandoned at its current location and moved to accommodate the proposed development. The existing "relocated Marvin Drain" runs diagonally across the property from Northeast to Southwest. The proposed sewer location would circumvent the building site by running in an "U shape southward along S. Cedar Street, then westward along the south property line. The applicant is currently working with the City's Public Service Department to relocate the sewer and easement. By relocating the sewer, the City enables the applicant to construct the building closer to Cedar Street, in keeping with the general design of the area. Locating the building closer to the street provides better visibility for the building from the street and minimizes the visual impact of the parking lot. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Act-14-00, the request that the City vacate, release, or abandon the existing sewer and easement, and accept a replacement easement at the proposed general location, with the condition that the existing easement cannot be vacated until the sewer has been relocated and a new easement is provided to the City. COMMITTEE ACTION Discussion Mr. Ruge and Mr. Smith raised questions about the proposed building and its accessory parking, having a possible adverse impact on the neighborhood to the west. Urban Development Committee Report August 22, 2000, Page 5 Finding: The Committee found, based on its review of the location, character, and extent of the proposal that: 1. The relocation of the Marvin Drain would enable the building to be constructed in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. 2. Moving the parking area to the rear of the property could have a potential adverse impact on the neighborhood to the west. Motion: It was moved by Mr. Ruge, seconded by Ms. Patrick to recommend approval of Act-14- 2000, 1900 S. Cedar Street, Abandon Sewer Easement, with the second condition that no right hand turns be allowed out of the driveway at Riley Street. The Committee recommends approval of Act-14-2000, with the request that the City vacate, release, or abandon the existing sewer easement, and accept a replacement easement at the proposed general location, with the condition that the existing easement cannot be vacated until the sewer has been relocated and a new easement is provided to the City, and with the additional condition that no right turns be allowed out of the driveway at Riley Street. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0). C:\OFFICE\WFIWIMWPDOCSWISCELLAIODD822 Min A...wpd Act-13-2000, 735 East Michigan Ave Private Use of Hosmer Street Right-of-Way GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: SXJE II L.L.C. 2501 Coolidge Road Suite 501 East Lansing, MI 48823 REQUESTED ACTION: Private Use of Hosmer Street Right-of-Way EXISTING LAND USE: Vacant - Old State Library EXISTING ZONING: "H" Light Industrial District PROPOSED ZONING: No change PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: Approximately 2 acres SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Anderson Services AC/Heating Controls S: Apartment Bldg/Lansing Auto Shine E: Jon Anthony Florist/Parking W: Sparrow Materials Management and Public Relations SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "H" Light Industrial S: "F-1" Commercial E. "H" Light Industrial W: "J" Parking/"H" Light Industrial MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The NorthEast Area Plan designates this area for Industrial/warehouse use. SPECIFIC INFORMATION This is a request by SXJE II L.L.C. to locate the Board of Water and Light, electrical transformer adjacent to the east side of the building at 735 E. Michigan Ave and a 16 ft2 underground "J-Box" for tenant phone and data lines to the building, in the Hosmer Street ROW. The proposed 90±ft2 transformer/switchbox encroaches 11, into the Hosmer Street ROW. ACT-13-2000, 735 E. Michigan Ave, Private Use of Hosmer St. Right-of-Way, Pg. 2. AGENCY RESPONSES AMERITECK No response received yet. AT&T: No response received yet. Assessor: The Assessor's records show "Better Limited Partnership" as the owner not SXJE II L.L.C. BWL: See attached. Building Safety: Proposal is not contrary to the City of Lansing Uniform Building Code. City Attorney: No response received yet. Code Compliance: Please notify this office of any requirements for physical improvements if approved. Consumers Power: No response received yet. Development: No comment - Easement or license - Use of Public ROW. Eastside Neighborhood Organization: Objects to the proposal per visit with Rick Kibbey, (8/23/2000, 3:00 p.m.). The proposed location of the transformer is visible along Michigan Ave. We are trying to maintain an attractive streetscape along Michigan Avenue. The applicant should consider consolidating the transformer with other utility facilities in the rear of the building. . Fire Marshal: No response received yet. Sparrow Estates: No objection to proposal per telephone conversation with Jack Stauffer, President (8/21/2000, 3:20 p.m.) Parks & Rec. (Forestry): No response received yet. Police: No response received yet. ACT-13-2000, 735 E. Michigan Ave, Private Use of Hosmer St. Right-of-Way, Pg. 3. Public Service: The Public Service Department prefers that the BWL transformer be located on private property. If the transformers are to be located in the ROW, the sidewalk will have to be shifted away from the roadway If they are to occupy the ROW, will have to indemnify the City. Trans. Engr.: This encroachment will not present a safety hazard at the proposed location: However, it appears this placement has been selected for financial reasons not as a matter of necessity. Generally RAN encroachments are only granted based on necessity. 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). LOCATION: The property is located at 735 E. Michigan Avenue, along the East Michigan Ave. corridor which is primarily surrounded by commercial/office use. The building is the future office location for the State of Michigan - Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA). The size of the transformer/switchbox is 90f ft2 and proposed to be located in the Hosmer Street ROW. According to the applicant, the transformer/switchbox was originally to be located in the basement electrical room of the existing building. However, this location would not allow adequate or timely access for maintenance and/or removal/replacement of the transformer and its components. Also, there is a 16 ft2 underground "J-Box" for tenant phone and data lines to the building, in the Hosmer Street ROW. The transformer would be located in the public right-of-way. CHARACTER: The building is located on the east property line. To meet utility regulations and standards, a 6' x 15' concrete pad is located 3' from the east side of the building. The transformer and switchbox are to be placed on this slab. Another two feet is ACT-13-2000, 735 E. Michigan Ave, Private Use of Hosmer St. Right-of-Way, Pg. 4. provided between the pad and the sidewalk with bollards to help protect the equipment. With a standard 5' wide sidewalk, about 2' remains for a parkway before the curb. In this parkway are utility poles. The utility boxes will be visible since it is proposed to be located in the Hosmer Street Right-of-Way. The 16 ft2 "J-Box" which is also in the Hosmer Street ROW, is underground and is for tenant phone and data lines to the building. The overall character of the commercial/office area will not change as a result of the installation of the transformer/switchbox but, the character of the sidewalk will change. The concrete slab for the equipment would be located approximately 55' from the Michigan Ave R/W. To help compensate for the visual impact of the equipment, the applicant has proposed adding plantings and sidewalk areas on the Hosmer Street side of the building. The equipment has a definite utility appearance. EXTENT: MSHDA is entering into a lease agreement as the sole tenants at 735 E. Michigan Avenue with an anticipated 212 employees. The transformer/switchbox, being located in the right-of-way of Hosmer Street will be a permanent location. The applicant has identified several options and cost analysis (See attached). Transformer Location Option Additional Cost to BWL (1) Option Located in Public ROW Additional Cost to Owner(2) Total 1 No Base (1) $60,000 $60,000 (2) 2 Yes $46,000 (1) $51,000 $ 5,000 (2) 3 Yes $14,060 (1) $21,060 $ 6,000 (2) 4 Yes $17,963 (1) $49,962 $ 32,000 (2) ACT-13-2000, 735 E. Michigan Ave, Private Use of Hosmer St. Right-of-Way, Pg. S. OTHER: The office building at 735 E. Michigan is located in a very visible position within the East Michigan Avenue corridor. It lies at the eastern edge and helps establish a gateway to the Central Area of Lansing, coming from the east. It also lies adjacent to a central Lansing urban neighborhood and acts as a transitional use between residential and nonresidential areas. The applicant has provided additional information (See attached-Variance request for the location of BWL transformer in the easement along Hosmer Street memo). The renovation to the building and future tenants, MSHDA, will be a definite asset to the neighborhood. The applicant has several options available for the location of the transformer/switchbox. Cost and feasibility are the primary factors involved in identifying the best location. Option 3 is a substantially lower cost than the other options. However, there is one option (Option 1) that keeps the transformer/switchbox out of the ROW, all other options plac=' the transformer/switchbox in the ROW. SUMMARY The transformer would be located in the public right-of-way which would be visible. The character of the commercial/office area will not change as a result of the installation of the transformer/switchbox. However, the character of the sidewalk would change since the transformer would be visible from both Michigan Avenue and Hosmer Street. One of the goals of the East Michigan Avenue Revitalization Study was to maintain an attractive streetscape along the East Michigan Ave corridor. The applicant has several options available for the location of the transformer/switchbox. An approval would be necessary from the Public Service Department since the transformer would be located in the Public ROW. The Public Service Department has indicated that they prefer that the BWL transformer be located on private property. Also, according to Public Service, if the transformers are to be located in the ROW, the sidewalk will have to be shifted away from the roadway. ACT-13-2000, 735 E. Michigan Ave, Private Use of Hosmer St. Right-of-Way, Pg. 6. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the request to locate the transformer in the Hosmer Street Right-of-Way. Report Prepared by DMW 8/2000. AUG-21-2000 10:00 BD OF WATER LIGHT 1 517 371 6055 P.01i01 17-00 IS :I 9721MP79773 WATHZS GHT BOARD OF WATER AND LIGHT MEMO August 21, 2000 TO: Doris Witherspoon, Senior Planner Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development FROM: Rosemary Sullivan, Administrative Secretary .. (517) 371-6034 RE: 735 East Michigan Avenue, Private Use of Hosmer Street ROW Request by SXJE II L.L.0 to locate the BWL electrical transformer adjacent to the east side of the building, and a 16 ft.2 underground "J-Box" for tenant phone and data lines, to the building in the Hosmer Street ROW. The proposed 90±ft.2 tra nsformer/switch box encroLches 11, into the Hosmer Street ROW. SYSTEM INTEGRITY AND CUSTOMER PROJECTS Electric Tim Rowden has been working with Christman on this proposal. The box, in the picture with the transformer, is not the 4 X 4 ft. J-Box for tenants phone and data lines, but is a secondary termination and metering enclosure, which will be installed, along with the transformer, on the 6 ft. X 15 ft. transformer pad. The J-Box for tenant phone and data lines will be an additional enclosure shown on the drawing, north of the transformer pad. Recommend the J-Box be placed at the south end of the transformer pad so as not to interfere with the BWL's ability to run the primary underground service conductors from a switch, to be located at the north end of the property, down to the proposed transformer pad. Contact Person: Tim Rowden 371-6101 Water No objeeVon to transforrer and J-Box location if they are not over existing water main or service. MISS DIG System to be used. Contact Person: Terry Robison 37 1-6494 09-200"8.aoc TOTAL P.01 ACT-13-00 735 E .M . Ave. Private Use of Hosmer St . ROW oil rm O II t o 227 to Ln NORTH oe, 5 in a t — — - - 1 S T. GENE SEE �40) .r .,.•. i� Di •.I r... 'I' \e` :: 00 44 e 14 2 1t 0` 4 e t x Z o 3 ee F' °t 4e ji ;t II 10 e e ,.r w Otte u — T `— r — pet. 0'3 r' t x -44 43 40 r 31 S I x I I e 1" I p I I p5 p � pu ,r DI, ,. .n ... ST. eC ✓ it :o y- ��(PWASSMSHIAWASSEE- --- - - - ,.,- „e T ^1 6 `C 5u ; S 2` I t 0 I I I I 1 003 4 1-1 e l 40 t hl I 0\ AI , r V J` u Its I I o II ° 10 9 -I o „L VINE • ^ .r. ' 1 I p0Y I ttl ` \ `' . .. e T N e t e r, .t 10 dy s Q v•.r41 ql °\ o 0 40i y: � I, ' -- ' , I o JEROME — — — xl 34 3e 19 I i „' °� : I a 16 k 33 IDA mS to _ 17 N a oI I - 0; N I. tt t1114�51tt 27 to to e0 ,�,.. ` s,• .. fir,.'. MICHIGAN `AVE. y • �•�i ':�'SiT�I Y� �4st . r r `• �� .�'a .p;�. •-� � _s^". __>a...,:•--. ---- �^tea .'.�.�,°�iv�. .•."w"�+:'T 'ye"^tirl/ �'�"+'.•��� ,''X �"e^...:.._.�"+ ^'.•.,�f:1.:11G��..{rti'd...-::� :'].� ..•-}.^ , t' ygif• _ 1 i-_, 1'�r `.'"-0+ •..i.•.:ly�'°(`r �•�:�4 �+�`�"s.,'l��r r+ H y�.�'��r't.'ra.r k ''•�4 t�•.:e+.4 ' '� .r.-•sr('.a;,. � wY�r.ir�,:l,.���,.,•....tiff .:I.:t�:=1,•' - Tom'.•...• I ,� �- .y 5...'~. 'r•,•`�' ���., t.a. s r•rr:r,, r rway..,r � ��J � _ -.�q ..r •+„���.,r...ai �i'^."( •Sr �.!'��-r+u. �i }i�?�.4h�$rr�,��i,. 'h�'.�i`iy_1•G1'i�A:..:t- �. .. _ •_ .. � .. = i�rL Fr.•.+'•1 j: rah�e,�is:.:�'i�{{�:+� :;�4,+'A,�.^y.�,,�! .I''" ,..;�'>`..1T�%�•,. •a,• '•_ _'�'+ �i •���'•� .�• �:,ref.-r �� �°��i f+i'+. '1r_.•4�" t ] iUrl:-`. z, :�}rS;, �.�_ - �,••,�. ��� a._7J,'•}I�'�'jt .��36,l.'r�i.,..syt':x>.'%+7U+ t.�.:r:: ::�;.. .. U/LUI V V Additional cost to Additional Cost BW&L to Owner Option 1: Transformer and secondary metering enclosure located at N. end of property out of city ROW. This woul be minimal cost to BW&L with the primary fused switch at this location. Base This option results in a substantial increase in the owner's cost to run secondary power approx. 300 feet from transformer to electrical room. $60,000 Total Option#1 $60,000 Option 2: Transformer located at N. end of property with secondary meter enclosure located on the east side of the building in city ROW. The BW&L has additional cost to run secondary UG cable to meter enclosure in ROW. $46,000 Owner must supply pad for secondary meter, however the pad size is much smaller than Opt. 3. Owner must also supply electrical service distribution from meter to main distribution panels. $5,000 Total Option#2 $51,000 Option 3: Transformer and secondary metering enclosure located on east side of building in city ROW. Cost for the BW&L to run the required primary UG Cable. $14,060 Owner must supply pad and barricades for equipment enclosures for this location and distribution . ,000 to main distribution panels. Total Option#3 $2121,owL' Option 4: Transformers located in undergroud vault on east side of building in City ROW. BW&L will have to purchase a submersible transformer not currently in stock. $17,962 Owner must pay for the cost of underground vault, as well as vault ventilation, and the cost to provide 32000 secondary metering within the building. $ , Total Option#4 $4949,962962 Option 5: Provide a split three phase and single phase service from the overhead system. The cost for this option is not estimated because the available overhead line is a 4160 volt circuit rated at 125 amps. The new load at 750 kVA would be an additional 104 amps on one of the phases. This circuit can not support that additional load and would have to be cut over to 13.2 kV. Even though the BW&L is in the process of cutting over many of the older 4160 cirucuits, this particular one is not slated to be cut over in the near future. Note: The BW&L has a 750 kVA pad mounted transformer in stock and can have that available for the owner immediately. They do not have 750 kVA submersibles in stock. Delivery time for this is not determined but would be between 12-16 weeks. The other items such as secondary metering enclosures would need to be ordered immediately but should only take 6 weeks to receive. b • • •1• L� •.:'G.Y��'+.•qr•, ej I I INN •� r rfi� � ��1 Iam 7 M. �a HIP, • i 7MRif 3111 -7,11 .���.y �a s ys A-i_ �� ! •:J:1:•'Yra'•ti•.:?tit :�: .i� .':47a]���' 'i+��iY71s-w.{. ..aw•:�:ir:+ �:�a, •�:Y i;..3 ash .; [�:�� /,; ■�8�1u"BB�iBB�1174 BB•c�",�/�I� /'���•ZF �•�[ tv.-�w���:P.e:'�r`:' �Oe.'r�'.'.��,`►�•i0../�i.A' -'-_tiiw�� • _,��•• �+' lilt !1.11 11.11 NQ — � �i' c i.._li:rswiu • �? 4•d.ram.:• "!�.- On =m1. :+ io -`�4. .fir,s,n�°�'a:7+jIC.;"C'[i^:- J•�.'E�i' +r t':•�J� �®II !v!�vti �:,'•yt?_'�aw1.9i�;�a7sis'ib�[ )"� ISiEC.f� 1•'.'.:1�� .f.s syi..S,,����, \��ti. •„ i/i,•iVn:a.\y r�:6.�eJ3.��_�#.�..._'�r��.yS"1�r�t.s.��lw r%�:��t`.•�� =F�p•'�i_t Y�y.�r�ai.L 3•:�•,i:,�i,.�••=:' -Fr.Y:..'+ik s•�Z'o.• yc��:_i;"_..j•'sS�'�a. PY-v �"�"1'�.'�-�::i`•`y'rinaa;l J'J:Y:�`i`�•1f,.•`1t.'li.?jr.�{Ts1.s'1r-_t�a�i;.[y�n1Z•j •. `'.'i�' t•'.•[ .v '{?irj`' 1't:::kt.ANT..+��1�+•,at!►�a>,�,!!;e.:;•�.:t.':•gr•�•. .-ti • .F"�:r•'. w A, ... { \r ;i�1: e"`•�SiG,wd.'.`•I.i:. •4_-:..,:<;�:.••Rs.' 14rt�'..�u`•..�. moo' .�:51�'y.2=w_��.e *, �_� 1 � t ���0"�' ;mow,:.' ��yrr N [.•i�'.'•'/:��y�t� •��1' �_• � a-.-s.�.a..'.4� c:.?'•r, ��? ^r:;�..i' as..'i+n�%a tr. -1•,. [. [ 1..h i �y '�r ;. iv. •�: •c 9 .4 ;tt T Tx.•.xi=y1 •.a..=.e �' ��:�:t�r.r . r'Y?'=yi3rti? t ..a. ` rS -!.4�'�.,.d-.. [.., :ft►-•..4t• *:�.i� �t4'..1.. Act -14-2000 Page 1 1900 S. Cedar Street, Abandon Sewer Easement GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Eyde Construction STATUS OF APPLICANT: Louis J. and George F. Eyde Limited Family Partnership REQUESTED ACTION: Abandonment of an existing sewer easement known as "the relocated Marvin Drain" EXISTING LAND USE: Parking lot EXISTING ZONING: "D-1" Professional Office PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: —9.8 acres and irregular in shape SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Office and school S: Commercial and Residential E: Commercial W: Residential SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "D-V Professional Office S: "F" Commercial and "B" Residential E: "F" Commercial W: "B" Residential MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates this area as professional office. BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing to build a 23,988 square foot office building on property located at 1900 S. Cedar Street. This site is currently a parking lot used by Walter French Academy. The proposed building will be on the site of the existing sewer known as the relocated Marvin Drain. Eyde Construction is requesting that this sewer be abandoned at its current location and moved to accommodate the proposed development. Act -14-2000 Page 2 1900 S. Cedar Street, Abandon Sewer Easement AGENCY RESPONSES AMERITECH: (No comment received) Assessor: (No comment received) AT&T Cable: (No comment received) Consumers Energy (No comment received) Board of Water & Light: (No comment received) Building Safety: (No comment received) Code Compliance: (No comment received) City Attorney: No comment at this time. Fire Marshal: (No comment received) Ingham Co. Drain Comm. (No comment received) Public Service Dept.: This applicant is working with the Public Service department regarding the proper relocation of the existing sewer utilities. The existing easement can not be vacated until the sewer has been relocated and a new easement provided to the City. Transportation Engineer: No comment or requirements Evaluation Act 285 requires that the character, location and extent of requests involving the vacation of a public right-of-way be evaluated. Location The site is located south of Walter French Academy along the1900 block of S. Cedar Street. The existing "relocated Marvin Drain" runs diagonally across the property to from NE to SW (see site plan). The proposed sewer location would circumvent the building site by running in an "L" shape southward along Cedar Street, then westward Act -14-2000 Page 3 1900 S. Cedar Street, Abandon Sewer Easement along the south property line. Character Currently, the site is proposed to be developed as office space for Michigan Works. The proposed location of the building is in keeping with the character of the area, but the existing sewer would necessitate that it be located further back on the property, thus aesthetically compromising the design of the site. Locating the building closer to the street provides better visibility of the building from the street and minimizes the visual impact of the parking lot. Extent Abandoning the sewer and easement will provide the applicant the opportunity to develop an office building on the site that is closer to South Cedar Street. However, the sewer will be required to be relocated. Currently, the applicant is working with the City's Public Service Department to relocate the sewer and easement. Summary The site is located along the 1900 block of S. Cedar Street. The proposed location of the building is on top of an existing sewer that runs diagonally across the property. Relocating the sewer will provide better visibility of the building, as well as, screen much of the parking. Currently, the applicant is working with the City's Public Service Department to relocate the sewer and easement. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Act-14-00, the request that the City vacate, release, or abandon the existing sewer and easement, and accept a replacement easement at the proposed location, with the condition that the existing easement cannot be vacated until the sewer has been relocated and a new easement is provided to the City. Respectfully Submitted, Sam Quon Senior Planner NTIan-dev%zharedkAct 295 Reviews12000ACTSMac114%00acl14repon.wpd Aupusl 17,2000 �r�- .) ..,. --. �q i / ACT-14-2000 1900 BLK S. Cedar St. NORTH Vicinity Map HI Q AVE. EIDO v N❑RMAN ST. J F7 g �� W J N > W P a a Z A W F- f J O J r F- O U MT. H❑PE VE. [LORENCE ST w McKIM > �O. e L KEN- w � WOODROW ST w WOOD > o ol Ad L �p RILEY ST, O� V� �Z N [7pACIFIC a P Q LD � A >_ gCIFIC PKWY Z O r P > u EDIS❑N ' E a O= ¢ ROCKFORD RD. ti oTISDALE AVE. E, w ¢ LINC❑LN AVE, N w FySINGTV4 ACT-14-2000 1900 BLK S. Cedar St. NORTH Zoning MT, H❑PE AVE, "D-1 " Pro. r"F r Office m. ENCE ST, L Com. W W❑❑DR❑W ST, Q "B" Res. L,J W om. > Tr J ST. a �T RILEY PACIFIC rs L4:a1187 P,U•I'12M j noYa Aft Pra bj"t 11resents, That.._.Lhe LPnntny_Schn�]_ille[riet�..!!--_ :`.ic'rasa...`.•.unxc.�^.tt�.C�.rpnraticn-,_519 u�st F:nl-amnznatreet, Lnn_ gtng, `iichignn__ party of the dret part,for ,.;i coroideration of the swn -............. -.----.dolL•--i, to be paid to eaid party of the first ppaart, irom the p Eon's of 'c: �z he:o:ra: r ::Eati6n by the City of Lanaing,Ingham County,bilchlgan,party q f the a - .=; p2 cond part,do ... 1^re1•y relm=e_qd convey to _id =d ety,and t-RAMa sr e��,ti,.r- ,ver, the right of way acroce and thrnugh the following described land, situate in the City of - I ansing, ingham County, Michigan, viz:_Section.,2.. ...... ....11-C{t_ef_Lflne;r3�..----_._._.. InAhar�..Cnunty.,..liicuir,aa,.. ---------_----------- ---------------------- ..... ......................-................__.......--...-......... ................... -- »SI:IF.h"C..P.£SCRLP.Tx0,�..-.1v1..CaSeiteitt-.-7�...feet_7r vitith_b�innin�at n=Dint nn-- 8 �A 1aff.....� t.. nccrccnv�c rr�T the Wester right of env line of Cedar Srrvrr _ \0. .6, recorded in L.her 12 of Plats on Hare 7-,-_Ingham_county-.PecPrds,.sptit.... se -. ......... ...._... ...............-.......... -- .............. -- - - - t+ i,. .c ❑c .`IC'c( 'JO 792 1 fee-L,•fr m.rnr_Sn rh 5 n^r of Lnt 13-n.f-_-_._-__•- .:'o'r'..F i..............Y. .......-:...---._: .. P... _ .L'.sr.{h.t._tt.'--=--....---.....---..-.. 531d P1++[, [hence cnntinctnT__rin_ge-said_rirhr of wnl•. line,'l0'34'3')"w_]Q..^--____, .•`set- tht:nce.rerrradiculaLto_�-id..rieht..of vny ti„ cro na- vQ ;.-SS.,°.ifzeL.-_ ;. therce S66'44'19"K 329_13.-f?et_tn a-+,oin.t.�n�he Sglr}yv,w-fine,.if._s^.t_]�-_ of said Pint,_thence.-alonv_s?i _ nuthcr]_v._line h89'08'E 44Lq fee-t_.tq_n�Lint- 1�"' 26A.67 feet Westerly or said Southeast corner of Lot 13. thence N46'44'19"E -28a,66-.feet.,_.thence-`7F9'03'3. "F.-._j4_19_-feet._L.e ..�QfLi_¢ �.@�lrtni.[[F..Eer—_ .......-.......--------------------- for a certain newer ;mown aa....thr-relocated.-N.arvin.-Drain...-......................................._.....- _ ._. ....._...................._ ._.._. ...................I........_..-......... _... - fl 'JIrrT=-�A�AEEIlS .................... .........--.. ........------•--•--------.......- IHOMA><LOGNI`.Nili? -" - ......._........------------------------------- ----------— acca ding to the survey And plena thereof in the olAce of the City Engineer of said second party, together with the right of raid second party and Its agents to enter upon void lsnd and cuantruct raid:;ewer and repair the same from time t,time. Said drat party alao re!e✓aes au8kient wound on either eiie of Cie canter line of eid dram for the corrat.-action theroof....thii...dLc.,mcnt....._._ is-.exu;,_•r-_fray---tne-_trnn fer--.tAx.-under Puh�i-q._h�t_32j_cf-_L9-fR_Sr.ctiln� - - . -..........._..-------------- In wituea whereof, the said Pa ry of the drat .hereunto eet''.`� hwd' _.._...._ and Deal ----.. ii,is..._✓../ day of-7 -.^rS.....-..-.-_....A. D. 192%- z In prcwnco of L[ Inc Lehooi District (a 1 \ "ichi_en_Municinal Cornnrationj-_[seal] ,{ ob ', W, yJalker- 15 Shvnk, Prea ent --- Lois L. Mod'augh �lC.r c.:tl.:7 Hesn, Secretary 2,� A`3 . . .....:..Y 1 7 . Sl.r..�a��,..sasr�wa.s a■.,vm�sr+�aaaa��.oea��cn�rs�toe�awoac:c.ers�e�awrae an�a�cya� . .��.r...-.�.�J�...r+.n+•�ww.�weR► ., ;to �mcm■r�■�rmo®000m■� . ue�Rii87 rnrl i2fi a i State of Michiaaa 1 County of ingfinm Or, this.--v --- - -... _ day OL_— ��—� -...A.D. 12.��...hefora ma a 0 ---____.-- ---- —_----- -_...in • ad for said County, :rotary Public._—_ .—.�J---J-- -$ n/j tG!nB O1R':1 tT ti■�3.- �■n+o nr�n.. _ ___..__- ...�.... ....., wwu...0 .a n. ,wcyulllj liMLTUDKSIt E and ecleiowled.^_d that;..hcy executed the same to Intents and purpoa,e tharmio mao".ionCKI r mm-d MY ce:nmiaeion ezp.r�sms.Gf 0 F finis ec=itsent prepared byi Gcoargo M. S�rr�e�, Demign Engine—sr y Deoartrent of Public service ar J 3 Y ■ 1 _ M 3 F ` j �In �t� WOLVERINE ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS, INC. 312 North St., Mason, Michigan 48854 PHONE(517)676-9200 FAX(517) 676-9396 August 3, 2000 MICHIGAN WORKS-WALTER FRENCH SITE EASEMENT DESCRIPTION FOR PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER: An easement 30 feet in width beginning at a point on the westerly right of way line of Cedar Street as defined in Assessor's Plat No. 46, recorded in Liber 12 of Plats on Page 7, Ingham County Records, said point being the Southeast Comer of Lot 13 of said Plat, thence S 89°08'00" W 289.79 feet along the south line of Lots 13 and 10 of said Plat, thence N 00°46'06" W 30.00 feet, thence N 89°08'00" E 259.70 feet, thence N 00056130" W 187.78 feet, thence N 89°03'30" E 30.00 feet to said westerly right of way line of Cedar Street, thence S 00' 5630" E 217.82 feet along said right of way line to the point of beginning, for the purpose of relocating a portion of Marvin Drain. S:/project\2000\00-0044\dwg\Easement_00.wpd 8/03/00 � r rt yr vJt,U L4 -- -- -- N B9'!! 30"E -- -- -- -�i9�f2AAIi+7 _SHARED ENTRANCE DRIVE 1 ! AR ROP. GB ------ ----- - - --------- I 20 LE 30- CLASS III STORM SEWER 0.6 \ — — -I-T - \ ABANDON SEWER I \ 110.0 I I I O 1 \\ CB +9 7 27 LF CLASS\III STORM _ I I I M EN \\\ \\ 00 68 LF SANI EWERI I \ I) LL- \ 8.00 (W (n >-- \ I �1 MH I 28.bO' I \ 0 co I I PROP. CB \ a-00 J r . r i \ 9 o 0 (D) U MH MH /� o (yn LL- —— — a I O � �H+ O � / I PROP. C8 J37 coI o+ / 0 ABANDON SEWS d/ p // I / / O / 6 GAS LEAD co _� I _I1t -if MH 4 OT OCATED V O 1 / to 28.00 OD IN � / ABANDON SEWER I 0 W I fV Lq / O \ O �c sf \ at NIA/ E"' o \ MH 12 orzr 30* CLASS III STORM SEWER O 0.4% / 11 0. �N. 20 MH i1 / CB 11 / ABANDON SEWER / I^ 3 N '08' 9 PROP.I M11- 18, & 0 Z 0 .4 � i I _ 202.86 ZMH 1#13 89.79' 760.92 I `, I I -I I PROP. MH #39 EX. BUILDING I I I I I N1 I PROP. 30' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT I ^I I �A 1 I o I I I BUILDING i 1 w 1 I ' I 1 I I I R/LEY STREET i Draft to Clerk DATE UNKNOWN 2000 APPROVED AS PRINTED OCTOBER 3, 2000 Approved 100 To Clerk 020 Minutes of the Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 p.m., City Council Chambers Tenth Floor, Lansing City Hall 124 West Michigan Avenue Tuesday, September 19, 2000 1. OPENING SESSION: The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Chairman Keene. A. Roll Call. Present: Frederick, Keene, Smith, Patrick; Nischan, Foster. One vacant seat. nded by Mr. Frederick, to excuse Mr. Mr. Nischan made a motion; seco Ruge. Motion carried unanimously. B. Excused Absences - Ruge C. Introductions. James A. Ruff, Planning Manager; Bill Rieske, Principal Planner; Susan Stachowiak, Zoning Administrator ra Landscape Arc; also new h ect, ng Board Member Sissi Foster. She comes to us as working at Michigan State University. We are glad to he Third have dhera , in onboard. One other comment--we have a vacancy for for that, which can the southwest part of the City. We welcome applications be obtained from the Mayor' Office. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA - Approved as presented. 3. COMMUNICATIONS ber 13, 2000, from Doris o ida ed Strategy and Plan A. Memo dated Septem Plan Planner, to Planning Board Eventss 2001g. Cons Submission Schedule 4. HEARINGS - None 5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each) LEE MASON, 3204 WESTWOOD AVENUE, SHADY OAKS eNEIct aGHBORt the dHOOD ASSOCIATION, member of the Bnaspite of of ithe Shady Oaks Neighborhood of Westwood Avenue is continuing Ian resented to the Association's concern. There has been a preliminary platry roval of all the Planning Department that has met with However,acontrary to the stated Departments affecting final approval. commitment of Mr. Bob Bower, there has been little Comm eon the neighborhoods concerning the progress of this plan, oven though he has indicated to us that he would share information an from the with born i the the neighborhood. There has been much investigation PLANNING BOARD MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2000 Page 2 Shady Oaks Neighbors Association that indicates that there is no environmental hazard that would prevent Mr. Bower from continuing his project. According to the Chair of the Association, the plan is to build 14 houses on the site. Final Plat and Site Plans have as of yet to be filed with the City Planning Department, but, we have been told that they will be submitted very soon, possibly by the end of September. The site plan, as we are told, includes a holding drainage due to the Reynolds Drain already at full capacity according to the Ingham County Drain Commissioner Pat Lindeman. This drain runs north and south in the area that we are talking about. So far Mr. Bower has been less than informative with the neighbors, and we understand that the property was deeded to him in the name of the Giving Tree Farms Incorporated, a nonprofit corporation, for $1. We don't know. We tried to find out how he obtained the property. Maybe you know. We would like to have that information. To date, there has been no communications from this individual. There was a planned meeting in August in which he was present and gave minimal information about his plan. However, in July, he started clearing the property without any of the permits, not once, but twice, even after he was told to stop the action by the City of Lansing and threatened with fines. There has been limited or no communications from Mr. Bower and the neighbors, and we are asking that you intercede on our behalf on this matter. The next questions is, how would you feel if you were told that you were required to live within 100 feet of a railroad track? Would you buy a home are we saying to people in this community that know the Mayo has hgone onhat record stating that we want this to be an All American City, and I know that we are encouraging the development of housing in the limited space that we have, but are we doing it at the expense of the children, of the seniors in this area? There are no sidewalks in the area. We just had a very bad accident on North Grand River. People are walking up and down the community. This would increase the traffic flow in that neighborhood. We would like for you to take a look at this, and if possible, we encourage you to reject the plans. Ms. Keene stated that she was not that familiar with the project and asked Mr. Ruff if he was. Mr. Ruff stated that they have had a couple of meetings with the administration as well as council members regarding the action of Mr. Bower on behalf of Giving Tree Farm on this property. Westwood is north of North Grand River Avenue. It is between the airport and Martin Luther King Blvd. It is on the end of Westwood, which is a small residential neighborhood. There is a seven- acre parcel that is adjacent to the railroad tracks and this neighborhood. So it divides the neighborhood from the railroad tracks. A few years ago, I believe, four or five years ago, the Planning Board entertained a residential care facility request by Clinton/Eaton/Ingham Community Mental Health Board for a singl, residential care facility building that was proposed there and that was later withdrawn by the applicant. They built their development down off of Coui Court. The development that Mr. Mason is speaking of, could be a plat r for which we have not received an application yet. Ms. Keene said so f PLANNING BOARD MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2000, Page 3 something this board has acted on. Mr. Ruff said that this Board has not acted on any of this. If he is continuing to do work, we will take a look at it and what is happening with the Public Service Department, especially in relation to soil erosion control and his time table to find out how to move forward on whatever the proposal is going to be. He did show us a preliminary site plan in one of the meetings that reflected 16 residential lots. Some of these lots would not meet the code requirements for platting on a preliminary review of that, but nothing has been officially filed. I do know the neighbors have expressed interest in preserving the property as open space in order to help protect the neighborhood from the railroad tracks and the development to the north of that and also to combat what the neighbors have had to deal with as far as some drainage issues and sidewalk issues. Mr. Mason says there is an airport there as well. The wooded area was a natural buffer for this community. Mr. Ruff said those are some of the things that they have been addressing with the administration as well as Council, but nothing has been filed as of yet. 6. RECESS - The Urban Development Committee and Zoning and Ordinance Committee met to discuss various cases. Chairman Keene said Ms. Sissi Foster was assigned to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, because we may need extra members. One of the matters that Z&O is taking up this evening is something that both Mr. Nischan and Chairman Keene believe may present an appearance of impropriety if they deal with the issue. So they are unwilling to participate on that item. Chairman Keene asked, when this item is taken up, if Ms. Foster could sit in on that one and any other volunteers. For just one item. Ms. Patrick volunteered. 7. BUSINESS SESSION A. Minutes for Approval: September 6, 2000 Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick, to approve the minutes of September 6, 2000. On a Voice vote, there were: Ayes: All; Nays: None; carried unanimous; the minutes of September 6, 2000, were APPROVED. B. Committee Reports 1. Committee of the Whole (no report) 2. Zoning and Ordinance Committee, Mr. Frederick, Chair. a. SLU-11-2000, 2111 DeSoto Drive, Child Care Facility PLANNING BOARD MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2000, Page 4 Mr. Frederick reported. The applicant today requested the item be tabled in Committee because she is having back problems. Upon a motion by Mr. Nischan, seconded by Ms. Keene, In consideration to her, the item was TABLED. b. SLU-12-2000, 601 E. South Street, Construction in Flood Plain Mr. Frederick reported. The City of Lansing Public Service Department would like to construct two additional floors to a building they currently use for office buildings and add a stairwell that would encroach into the flood plain of the Red Cedar River. They have contacted the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) and found that there is no permit necessary to have the stairwell encroach into the flood plain. So that is not much of an issue. The other issue is that the improvements and the additional construction they plan to make, and because of the size of the land, the improvements will be substantial in the flood plain, so they need also to have the Special Land Use approved for that. They intend to add two floors and also to flood proof the first floor. This building has been there for quite some time, and it is approximately six feet below the base flood elevation of 840 feet. They intend to spend a considerable amount of money flood-proofing this building, installing flood-proof doors that would be closed in ' case of a flood, and also raise the electrical, heating and cooling service and also raise some of the windows so it would be above the flood level. In Committee, it was moved to approve with conditions as outlined in the staff report as well as an additional condition that the Public Service Department carry forth the City's agenda by improving the functional use of the property and improve the landscaping and buffering along the river front parameters, since the river trail does go along there and the view from the river trail is not real attractive. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Nischan made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene, to approve SLU-12-2000, 601 E. South Street, Construction in Flood Plain, with the following four conditions: • Compliance with requirements of the City Public Service Department; • Compliance with requirements of the Department of Environmental Quality; • Compliance with requirements of all other responding agencies; PLANNING BOARD MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2000, Page 5 • That the Public Service Department carry forth the City's agenda by improving the functional use of the property and improve the landscaping and buffering along the river front perimeter. PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows. Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Patrick .Ave Smith. . .Aye Keene . Ave Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Aye Foster . Ave On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried unanimously; SLU-12-2000, 601 E. South Street, Construction in Flood plain was APPROVED w/ FOUR CONDITIONS C. SLU-9-2000, 532 N. Seymour, 223 W. Lapeer St., to Construct a Parking Lot in a "DM-3" Residential District Mr. Nischan requested to be recused from consideration from this item because he is a contractual trainer and consultant of Lansing Community College. Although this case does not entail any financial or functional benefit for him, he is concerned about the appearance it might create. Ms. Keene, who has been an adjunct instructor at Lansing Community College for the last nine years, to avoid the appearance of impropriety, requested to be recused. Mr. Frederick reported. This has been tabled for some time. It was a request by Lansing Community College to put a parking lot in a "DM-Y Residential District on the southeast corner of W. Lapeer and North Seymour. Our Committee had the addition of a new member, Ms. Foster, and she has not had an opportunity to review the property, so we tabled this item with the condition that we would bring it off the table on the next Planning Board Meeting, which is October 3, and with a little arrangement, it won't delay Lansing Community College in getting a decision one way or another that they need, so they have agreed to show Ms. Foster the building so she can be more comfortable with what they want to do with it as it is being raised. So, we did table this item until no later than October 3, 2000. Next meeting, Tuesday, October 3, 2000, during the Recess of the Planning Board meeting. Also, Wednesday, October 11, 2000, at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2000, Page 6 3. Urban Development Committee, Mr. Smith, Chair, reported. a. Act-11-2000, 1400 Block Indiana Avenue, Permission or Conveyance of City Parcel for Private Use. Mr. Smith said we initially met on this previous to this evening and at that point had considered the matter and had requested further information from the City Attorney. We subsequently did meet this evening during the recess and the case was presented again. To summarize briefly: This was brought forward by Janice Harper, who owns a house south of the property. The property is located on the east side of Indiana Avenue at the foot of Oak Street. She currently uses City property for access to her garage which opens on to the subject property. The City property also provides a path into Bancroft Park. I think most of you have heard this and are familiar with this from discussion earlier this evening, but the gist of it is that they would like to sell the property and in order to do so they need to be sure they have clear access to their driveway. There is an encroachment. After the request to the City Attorney for clarification, we did find that the deed which was presenting us a problem originally contains no reversion clause, which would jeopardize City ownership if the land was not used for extending Oak Street. The original concern was that Oak Street might be extended and the City needed to maintain that land as clear to do so. Second, it was also determined since the presence of Bancroft Park has been there since 1920, it pretty much obviates the previous intentions of ever extending Oak Street along with the public purposes for doing so. Third, it was determined that by the asking the realtor if they would need permanent right to access the garage and the City Attorney said there would be no problem with either granting a license or an easement with the duration matching the life of the house or the garage. So, to that extent, staff did recommend approval of Act-11-2000, Conveyance of a License or Easement as deemed appropriate by the City Attorney for the minimum area required to provide access to 1426 Indiana Avenue, PLANNING BOARD MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2000, Page 7 retaining all necessary utility easements. There were conditions added to this. They are: • No further structural development be permitted on the area of the encroachment; and • That new and subsequent owners be responsible for the continued maintenance of the area of the easement. Mr. Smith made a motion; supported by Mr. Nischan, to approve Act-11-2000, 1100 Blk. Indiana Avenue, Private Use of City Parcel, with the conditions set out by Mr. Smith. PLANNING BOARD ACTION was as follows: Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Patrick . .Ave Smith. . .Aye Keene. . . Ave Foster. . . Aye Nischan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Ave On a Roll Call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried unanimously; Act-11-2000, 1100 Blk. Indiana Avenue, Private Use of City Parcel was APPROVED w/ CONDITIONS. Next meeting is Tuesday, September 26, 2000, at 4 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room. 4. Executive Committee - Did not meet. C. Report from Planning Manager For the purpose of transportation planning, the Department has been reviewing the Tri County Regional Planning Commission's Traffic Zones, Socio-Economic Report. It is a draft report. We are recommending some changes, and we are also summarizing the draft report that has been submitted to the City. We are going to summarize that for the Administration. It helps guide transportation dollars by helping understand the growth patterns, the available land, etc., so once we finalize a report or response to Tri County Regional Planning Commission I would like to be able to present that to the Urban Development Committee as well, and Bill will help do that. The Committee, if desired, can send that through to the Planning Board as well, for informational purposes. It will prove beneficial as we enter Master Planning Phase for the City, so we are spending the necessary time to make sure it is as accurate as possible from a development standpoint. What happens is they review population numbers, and then they attribute those numbers, spread them out in the various traffic zones, and then they evaluate vacant land and the maximum potential of density in those vacant areas PLANNING BOARD MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2000, Page 8 depending on their zoning. So we are straightening those things out and making sure that the proper developments are attributed to the proper traffic zones and such. So that will go along to the Urban Development Committee as well. Otherwise, I am glad to have Susan Stachowiak on staff and she is getting her feet wet, jumping into things and also it's a pleasure to have Sissi Foster on the Planning Board, and we look forward to having a full Board here soon. D. Pending Items: Future action required. 1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee a. Z-1-98, 1223 N. Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business District (Tabled February 11, 1998) b. Z-5-98, 401-407 E. Grand River, "F" Commercial District to"G-1" Business District(Tabled June 10, 1998) C. Z-8-2000, 3901 S. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., "F" Commercial to"H" Light Industrial District(Tabled June 14, 2000) 2. Urban Development Committee a. Act-7-99, Somercroft Drive at Post Oak Lane, Vacate Public Right-of-way for School Parking (Referred to UDC May 18, 1999) b. Act-9-2000, 201 E. Grand River Avenue, Permission or Conveyance of City parcel for private use. (Tabled August 22, 2000) Ms. Keene called attention to the pending items and said a number of them are still up in Old Town. Mr. Ruff said that he will be sitting down with Ms. Stachowiak, and we are going to look closely at that Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance. I think we have come up with a way to simplify it. Simplification is important with any ordinance and ordinance amendment. We are looking at, instead of"G-1", the possibility of just modifying the "F-1" Commercial District to incorporate some relaxed parking requirements depending on how close it is to public parking lots. The "F-1" District is primarily in the areas we are concerned about. It's North Lansing, it's on E. Michigan Avenue, adjacent to Emil's Restaurant and to the Green Door Lounge. Those are all "F-1" areas and have the same types of problems. It is not necessarily one of those areas we want to zone to general business district like the downtown where heights are unlimited and so on, also South Washington Avenue, south of 1-496, that business district in there. A lot of the same types of qualities are there and a lot of City parking is available for use. They have been built that way. It may be a much simpler avenue to try to accomplish the goals that are necessary and that people are looking for in the development aspect as well as the reuse of existing structures, where we are looking for revitalized commercial use and loft development and so on. Ms. Keene said that if you take that measure, when do you think that process will be completed. Mr. Ruff said he would like to have a draft for your review in the first of November, so we can review it and get your comments and then look at a potential public hearing so we can resolve this during this winter. 9. NEW BUSINESS - Ms. Keene said she needs to make new Committee Assignments for the new year and asked if there are preferences. Mr. Frederick said that he would prefer PLANNING BOARD MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2000, Page 9 to stay on Zoning and Ordinance and Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Nischan said he will be available for whatever Committee he is placed. Ms. Keene said she would like to get off Zoning and Ordinance because it is on Wednesdays and there is a conflict with a course that she teaches. Mr. Ruff said there is also an option if the Committee members need to move the date of the meetings. Ms. Patrick said whatever works out, she will adjust. Ms. Foster said she will have to check to see if there is conflict for Wednesdays. Ms. Keene said that for now Ms. Foster is on Zoning and Ordinance. Zoning and Ordinance Committee - Mr. Frederick, Mr. Nischan, Ms. Foster. Urban Development Committee - Mr. Ruge, Mr. Smith, Ms. Keene and Ms. Patrick. Board of Zoning Appeals - Mr. Frederick. 10. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON First of all, is Mr. Sturdevant still with the Planning Office. Mr. Ruff said he will be with us until tomorrow, but his actual end date is October 2, 2000. 1 would just like, on behalf of the Board, to pass on our congratulations to him at his new position at Delhi Township and wish him the best and thank him for all of his good work that he did. Secondly, something that has been sort of her pet peeve. I very often have a hard time sorting through what is what in the Packet. I would like a tab at the beginning of each new report or item, even if it is just one of the stick-on tabs, so I can quickly refer to a committee report, or whatever is in the Packet. I find myself quite often at the meeting flipping through and looking for what is referred to. Would an option be if the pages were numbered, or if there was a table of contents? Ms. Foster asked about color coding the first page. Mr. Ruff said especially at how big some of the packets are. 11. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS Mr. Frederick said briefly, even though I was on vacation, especially if we go someplace that is really different, I evaluate the way people do things that might apply to Planning and Zoning and Ordinances. I did see some nice things in Southern France that might help us out, so I did bring pictures tonight if anyone would like to see them. I would love to show them to you and give you a narration from the Planning Commissioner perspective, if you can believe I went to France with that in mind. 12. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS Mr. Ruff said that Ms. Patrick commented about a sign in the right of way at the last Board meeting. I am not sure if it has been taken care of yet. Ms. Patrick said it has not moved. The only thing I have noticed is that is the area that you PLANNING BOARD MINUTES SEPTEMBER 19, 2000, Page 10 have the berm with trees on that I assume belongs to the City and then just in between the berm and Auto Zone you have a slice of property. That is where the sign is. It is hard to tell if that is the owner's property. The only thing between the street is the sidewalk, and then the sign is right next to the sidewalk. Mr. Ruff asked between the sidewalk and the curb? Ms. Patrick said there is nothing between the sidewalk and the curb, the sidewalk is right on the curb. The sign is right next to the sidewalk. It is closer to Cedar, to the street. Mr. Ruff said normally, when they are looking at those, if it is outside the sidewalk area, then it is acceptable. The area to the north that is in between the frontage road and Cedar Street, that is a special wide area that had been kept as public right-of-way, but that does not extend fully south, but we will take a look at that. Mr. Ruff asked who the realtor was. Ms. Patrick said Vlahakis. Ms. Patrick said, on Jolly, east of Cedar on the south side of the road where the entrance to the County property is, the first entrance, there is a house that has a lattice front, I think the address is 562, but you cannot see a house number. There are about 12 or 13 cars, one in the front yard, the rest in the back yard. I am not sure if it is auto repair, or what exactly is going on, but I have seen it different times of days, so I know it is not a picnic or a party. Mr. Frederick said I raised that same issue a few months ago with your predecessor. She indicated she knew exactly who that guy was. Something about Used Car Sales. Mr. Ruff said I will talk with her about this. Ms. Patrick said this probably is not code enforcement, but I noticed today, when I was checking out this City property on South Street for our meeting tonight, that the River Trail sign is down. It is a two-sided sign on the corner of Elm and Cedar and on one side it is hanging off the post, and on the other side it is right on the ground. I do not know if that is work in progress or what. Mr. Ruff said he would talk with the Parks Department about that. Mr. Smith said there are a couple of spots on the River Trail that, if you are going to talk with Parks, you might mention to them that some of the boards are in bad shape. If you ride across them, they literally bounce up and could potentially be a hazard to a bicyclist or someone on roller blades. One is on the bridge near Elm where there is a little foot bridge that crosses over towards the Oldsmobile Plant. There are a couple of spots there. The boards probably come up about 4 inches in some cases. Mr. Ruff said I know they went into a large plank replacement program a couple years ago. I will talk to them. 13. ADJOURNMENT was at 9:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted James A. Ruff, Secretary Planning Board =09192000 a:\59 SLU-12-2000 601 E. South Street Construct two additional floors with stairwell addition to existing building in floodplain GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Jim Campfield City of Lansing - Department of Public Service 601 E. South Street Lansing, MI 48910 STATUS OF APPLICANT: Represents Owner REQUESTED ACTION: Special Land Use - Construction in floodplain. EXISTING LAND USE: City of Lansing - Public Service EXISTING ZONING: "I" Heavy Industrial PROPOSED ZONING: No change PROPERTY SIZE & SHAPE: > '/z acre SURROUNDING LAND USE: N: Red Cedar River S: City of Lansing - Public Service E: RR tracks Public Service W. City of Lansing - SURROUNDING ZONING: N: Red Cedar River S: "I" Heavy Industrial E; RR Tracks W: "H" Light Industrial MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Southe area eaiCompriehensive Plan designates this SPECIFIC INFORMATION pP DEVELOPER'S PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing to build two (2) more 1 E. South floors onto the existing staircase abe�i0ng the only Street with an external component extending beyond the present footprint of the building. SLU-12-00, 601 E. South Street ANA- Pa e 2. The property is located at 601 E. South Street and in the 100 year Red Cedar River. Due to an increase in the functions of the o floodplain of the facility, there is a need for more space, therefore, the Cityof Service Department is proposing to build (u two a Aerations at this structure with an external staircase. The co Lansing, Public P) additional floors on the existing within the building footprint. The project is a "substantial improvement"construction of these two floors will be Ofaddition exceeds 50% of the value of the building. According o Section since the the Zoning Code, this floodplain project needs to be approved Section City Coit since the property contains more than '/ acre of land. Genera adverse impact associated with "buildingu �� o by City Council here is no the existing footprint of the building. A n a structure which doestnot exceed As a commercial building, the construction may take place as long as the building standard. is flood proofed. The construction will meet the flood proofing The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) has the construction of the proposed stairwell in the floodplain of the Red Cedar determined ar that does not need a permit (See attached). River Since this is a floodplain request, no recommendation of the Planning Board will e relyiewed by Council gwithoutrequired a public t c -OmPatibilitV with Surrounding Land Uses: The property is zoned "I" Heavy Industrial and is surrounded b City of Lansing - and the railroad tracks to the east. The zoning in the area is industrial. Public Service Department (Public Works) to the west; Red Cedar d In terms s to the north the proposal, the applicant has indicated that the functionalof increased substantially requiring additional operational space a there is a need demands have to expand the facility. Since this property is located in the floodplain one-half acre, a Special Land Use is required. The proposal is compatible than more with surrounding land uses. Impact on Vehicular and Pedestrian Traffic. There is no adverse impact on vehicular and pedestrian proposal. traffic as a result of this Report prepared by Doris M.Witherspoon,3/98 SLU-12-00, 601 E. South Street, Page 3. Environmental Impact: The property is located in the floodplain of the Red Cedar River. The base flood elevation is at approximately 840'. The building is approximately 834'. According to the MDEQ, the proposed stairwell for this existing building would not require a floodplain permit. By flood proofing the building, flood damage will be minimized in the event of a flood. Impact on Future Development Patterns There are no anticipated adverse impact on future development patterns. Impact on Floodplain See environmental impact above. Summary The proposal is compatible with surrounding land uses. There is no adverse impact on vehicular and pedestrian traffic as a result of this proposal. The property is located in the floodplain of the Red Cedar River. The base flood elevation is at approximately 840'. The building is approximately 834'. According to the MDEQ, the proposed stairwell for this existing building would not require a floodplain permit: There are no anticipated adverse impact on future development patterns. As a floodplain case, no public hearing is required. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval to construct the two additional floors upon the existing structure at 601 E. South Street with the external staircase being the only component extending beyond the existing footprint of the building with the following conditions: 1. Compliance with requirements of the City Public Service Department. 2. Compliance with requirements of the Department of Environmental Quality. 3. Compliance with requirements of all other responding agencies. Report prepared by Doris M.Witherspoon,3188 SLU-12-00, 601 E. Cedar, Building in RQodplain NORTH sus - � L�1 ST, m �4 of 2/O.vff' 7n.it�" 6 pcP� oot r k� 215 5 2 I 4 �O 1 1 IL rA 5'^�— M1 `2 3 �J a 4 �v 2-4213 Op� h O 4 a 23 " n � L(�I�c m 22 5 1� r 5 O O I G, N � i c%fy D.P.s 010 N. 19 20 21 — 16 17 18 6 Ga (r' tao.s ez.s' to B ii T.3z' _ h M S T. -!t�Cu T tt — �� a G/0 2eo.5' Bz.s i9s.i:• / » 6f / ov.if• �1.a�T1, Xr v SJ° CGG ^ ' N t � 3 4 5 6 7 8 z ao — Q (0 �C F-: Tf 15 p ,Z c�J G`� z �' I o ti"u ids 14 O � 10 U �� 212 P 50 3 ti `Q 13 QQ J61 II P W iw NORTH SLU-12-00 601 E. Cedar Building in Flood lain (drawing not to scale) -I Ens; - ? �- EAISTING r TEMPORARY OPERATIONS OFFICE (24'X60') "p ' V i .._ --1 �.� 6' Sr ORM ExISTNG 6"ST(ptM •-..__._.._- • _--._..__.__._.. .. E�0 E`rp it m WI EXISTING VLHICLE :I I[ STORAGE BUILDING .-C.- j Z I � rr.B7t._.• �i E CB 0I' N %'STNG' ! ! 1 8215' j g UMITS OF �• " EXISTING CONSTRUCTION STAGING I UTI1,;11 PO!.E I I , I '' I EXISTING 2 MON.WELL EXISTING TO REMAIN FOLLY OPERAT NA, 6"STORM= 4. EING I MAIN TENANXIST CE GMACC I; uI PROPOSED E CB 870.37 27.5'FiF nl CONSTRUCTION "v e2..e7 1 EXIsrING a STORM - aI - - - - - - - --------•----•--------- rc GATE BY EXIST.VESTIBULE`S.1 E GD j wl /OWNER I TO BE REMOVED?. 4 PROPOSED 4'X5'SHED,BY OWNER G / R 1f �' •E�.I.�T(N I SIDEWALK I i -/ i ik' •c �'". g; F(Ir:(, BY OWNER i - �O ! a• PROP TRANSFORMER SIDEWALK �� STRIPING & SIGNAGE L i !0. W — ' �ExISTNG BY OWNER FOR ACCESSIBLE ' , GAS SERVICE o /PARKING SPACES / EXISTING RSERVICE I BY OWNER SEWWER SERVICE '�, � EXISTNG 2" I tl WATER SERVICE ! " E%RING EXISTING 6'SAN. — XISTMI HATER _' PARKINNGG SEWER SERVICE ri— / 'rING I iA' ' EXI Tit, E%STING ERFACY TT SERVICE CNLOAin TMK 6 MMlTEN ONE I '�,E � N1 PROPOSED GREEN AREA L---� �='+�'f•cA,E I ' APPROXwATE PROPERit LIrE E— Ce E' — I' r•. [ 1 •� I I E%15TNC PARKING I I r '♦ 1 -�- _— _—_—_—__ ___—_—_ —_—_ ._ _ —_—__ ATONED .B"SAN.SEWER_mil =A1♦.c wcR UTILITY POLE E._e - s EXISTING_S_OUTH_ST_RE_ET ___-.___..-. _ zl3 kf4 EXISTING 12"STORM - .__•STOTR,1--'-'�'.1E uN - x. �I SEWER AB ANDONFD N.M E xtsrNG -----------•--'•--------------'—'-=---.._-.----- _- [x�l'St71nG .e E CA • "XJfi"SM1 -.._.._.._.._.._.._ - J _.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._.._-._.._.._.._.._ zf -_-___-_-_-_-___-_-__..-EXISTING 6_CAS wL..._.._. CITY OF I ANSFN(.i f CA 1 • 1 1 • �1��I " ''.�C���.o.t: T\�,,,�a�'�t'�'���?•�t Z1�',r+�r��`ki`s�`��nr-,,4a4a� iSRN�A+1.'G�� N'f1� _� !'� Y••ts� �t��; ��'�� �cli= ?rp�•;�s 1 ~�1�as,��+.' lyw r�{`�• r. " r ^ � T• � er.. . J .. l.r _ 3. F � \µ.'7'; -�"��+�-S'S'�"•-•J�"n�.��r:{.,)�.CJ���•��•~t ..�,r �'~ y J'l yw.'�'�S�C j�R3M t .,,>.. i v 4 i-„('�• rs a r v ri R'Jam,i T:,.t;y�'� 1 J tiry L'�wM� a'r\s•sav a,.w.1 r� gq� yy,,yy��� ��y�.� i as tin,r 'rar ^^`++ 'aZ��t�„r -itr+ISn `T l �a" ,J>A�#W+'�rvW'Ja�ikyeew+l,T3-a3 vnat rt,��,,�,,, n`;S*'� Yo..�, \ '4) ct!•`541n1 "` "c fi 3t 1. k ° +-- y yr,.cyy�rla wrw ..�•�• P .2 �,,w,r�CSpn3•rr �S. "+'� ~ iJcdr 4 �'o u ro n�'� �•T��K ti c \= st x s S ��'y Si• t ,g ! -'- S \\ r ti.a Lii`� �y�, NON � � ,•-�'}`.7I 5 -i•QR l'��,arC•"�e"Y'Cl�ar.a'a:++1� to w.A"' S fir' / e } Y n• S H S "tF ` Fj�} 1+ram xinyy, .�r'9L �`,3"}+4F . �oJ'•r;�.5� '44 y sn � �, rlj 4raT' ? s� i �.•^a., Jl ++.'�ir��ca»*�Y;T. Ii nk'r•h _ -trx f4)! 4"} ... } t?' r "`'�{#l _` is w.''t R4a;,q;,:�''r•'�'41.��t �,Yf .•\: v ti [�. Z r 19 n {l[ ; w.ry.,w^!•'ca r,ry: :.t+ J \ /7 Y. i �� Vi C .\� "+...� h\.Y+nr� •\ r�;'.Jr ti r i 4 Mid. •Y v' r\. P ��5t)�>,1- `�, �\ '•.J� b, \ T � "SaaY. y er '� �: J a .J.♦ •S r v 'c E h 4 i C'r, ♦ m. ) �� ��y "'� �[ }arL .. a+ -y -- A-C���'L�,{� n•r G.aq a "+1�'all lY4 i +\p i+l•.'!.-.f. [ J Y a \ 1 ' 1 • .,`i/ ;:s}7�,� g <, ,g - ',"i'.t`.c�+ •:,'r.:y:Y�f.•'.'�: .. -`k-t�'t'.�7 :,:,4,J�f'�t:� ^+a'�fd' •;�• ^.�A is i .��e�i�i{i.+: 'r3 abbe• s"'v , "1ti:Yti- a.f4'.cc.Ss`?+ n `fir} r "� ���•�r�� it � �••a' �,�• 4M�ti.�''"•rR t 3 YY�� ,�C �� - j ��`''�aX;�i i���. .R�MR r :"`+�:: . "ram.--try- e•^``` °' �RI � � � �.�..nw. .• -y .. w±. •.(�+�'`•+)s � y fib. ". � X"`t�.•.: zya irc `1^' r5 . hsa�N wi Lu' a. 4c F<' }",xav?��uytee�•,.+.. � , �-...a...- y�rafi�,^^v#" �y3ity-'"j{r`�,�r�"C�` •�'et�yL+f��xal ""�e.""�xKa _ r• e j A„��dM°?+,-`C; =vw` ;�"+Y+aL'`�•�'•�s��!+�ry��r�`'�'�S�✓ e .,a� Ttic�,��Tt-�, �.s+.,ti Zq?='7,. .ks•7'�A.'-c Y,� ''Y a '� ..s. ��7 3' 9• �i�k y}�S A� „w.',t.',,�1•`i��"a.;�^.�1 h�.:s+'°"r�""'Y . r' p+' ,��'yI - �.a �+iCbJyr��t,�ux'4�•�x . ��"��-' "-_• �`K''�k;.xfw�„��1L''� .►"'�`"'�'^-•'k�njlr�i.'csh h'tiw `� �Jr:r - +,.._ $ -C�.� r���"'••y�4 s_p �..�+4.rgGh�'✓.'yGi'4'K"Is�'f.t`h'.: Kle "^'+.�..�r�'. '+�4u zT;' `�, w'."_-iay+ie;r."wA.r .rf�G,•J '�M. r!a. J. •� a �- + ii. - rs.ov t ,�nt+TMt.'y',L•l i r� a-�•i ���5 �JcaiiP i -�,d..s/'j• °L+r" a.r- y yr y fd�,C" ..+ti�.+•x� �� ..�+.•.'. tir3 �«?i.r ,1- y�,��s..+i v.f*.xi*�' r yay^�C.2 i�, rr jt�'Y= ..-r.•,*�-"'"""'t�' -Y:r i<Cw} fie✓ 84PR 4•s t li'LfgS y� .t,. r �{` l 2 K 2 4e tiv. �' ;F•R+y •.�:t. +"`/ ..iC r.� ,�aid P �' Cry s?t.r'JxYY.r s.'•�'�'bL r•Tta ✓+r3`r`i•GeS'E9.i4£�b'y�rKt`�•:.s%'f rZKt".sva✓'y,.,riC rY6rit°-n •7!''VeL i sw'+'•"'Fad'.y r• z f'riy"G(j.Dno Jv ,.r.�.•,,�uv�,.,r gM�.y57c: ,Y.rP�''�'r'•S�'•vuy{?�+cyy r f ':ayy.d}�4s��-',a.'.i.��,�e>.;Rs��5r 3'a„.+t�rj..3'-^��.1s^•..`�•Ea"'$r � � s '�-.' �`1 ''r. F�' 2<� { S c•.�"`4t -+..,,- "T':Rss. *�' ba+ ��&r���"�t'1C� ,�.�"+y'yei���' �hL��e�'v�f� �4S.w.�ti��L:�i � �i., i�•I��S•Y•tyr 1 ��?�-4�' �-�s� ' -piy.Yr y Y ? rt+_' fi4 tr^lxi•4.S.e�+i•+•1y`rFs J' .." .M' J+�. S L} '�.j__ .r t 'hnT E., +•�`7 -;''wti "4�"���Y-r1,'e�s'y„Sr,£,'= _k�,1 �"'.2 � � a rM� „fie.. �i^,�``k+rlw'�fs�.,, �....c'4 r•. +:��'f > l�i� 'i�\sia,_�,'Z�•'`�''3�'Fr.'k^v��'�^r.111�.-� �y/,.et°' , t�{'vY y} y r •x ,., ay..3 n. a �;',y N,�+L C3•u�IJ�i,. •'�.A4 F ��,-1.4��.11Rf•..� ��,�y7 � •<'r hP `� ' L ?', `..P.3{rs'7d7��y( ,'.'�t. r`r'f4%t;�•�,•C 'yara5i4tY•tr,;a. tiF,r , *��°;`� ' `o n,.7 e .,,+r�✓�hw`u',>ryrr �`,tyc4 K° '`}- ",e. y rr r '+- I ,y�' r "••-b of�s,.'f 'f'•�7't , 5. . tcryy .7`J�ii•; ,•-�d:e�y. y. yr„n3�+..hM s^'�•r" x. +a ry '%�..� rr 'r'�� t rrr: ��r.a is�4,it'b�'.lt, u.,,�,J `slJ.,kv'l°¢ Jf'S f"'�3 f f n�/' •:F ..ja't-.�+^ y ' ...'o '"' �y.5� r�•a+•ak^P`S''yy�- a��� :hyt'X4•�v�3+sx�riSv sN c �V;is 7 •°f':•!. �'Lr.S w w � ,S -F` it�'�t�4 � �,� *.. ay3^`r. �r ce`_r ;�,� {;.jrytir`'��'C.e'� ��!' �r,A <f�4.�"� Y:r6!�'�!kt+'�a�S�.'+.•.,�.•- .r f'/.•."on9.C•�•A.�_c. ,;'��.a"'�i��•l��l�i^y.�t.i..(�:: JOHN ENGLER, Governor REPLY T0: DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY SHIAWASSEE DISTRICT OFFICE 10650 SENNETT DR "Better Service for a Better Environment" MORRICE MI 48857-9792 HOLLISTER BUILDING.PO BOX 30473.LANSING MI 48909-7973 INTERNET:fwww.doq.state.mi.us RUSSELL J.HARDING,Director June 26, 2000 t�EGEIVED BY Mr. James Campfield, Supt. of O&M Division JUL 13 2000 City of Lansing tHVI PUBLIC SCP 124 W. Michigan Ave. C ACc: r DEPT. Lansing, MI 48933 Dear Mr. Campfield: SUBJECT: DEQ File No. 00-33-0043-P City of Lansing, Ingham County, T4N, R2W, Section 21 22 Department of Environmental Quality staff reviewed of the above referenced application for permit. Based on the submitted plans and inspection of the proposed work site, it has been determined that the construction of the proposed stairwell in the floodplain of the Red Cedar River does not need a permit. Therefore, a permit is not required under provisions of the Floodplain Regulatory Authority, Part 31, Water Resources Protection, of the Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act, 1994 PA 451, as amended. To fully document the proposed activity, your application for permit will be made part of our permanent records. Any construction activity other than that shown on your application may require State permit. Enclosed is the check that was part of your application submittal. This letter does not convey, provide, or otherwise imply approval of any other governing act, ordinance, or regulation. This letter does not waive the obligation to acquire other State, local, county, or federal approval or authorization as may be required by law. Feel free to contact this office if you have any questions concerning this matter. Sincerely, w Jon W. Grace Floodplain Engineer Land and Water Management Division 517-625-4603 cc: City of Lansing Building Department Ingham CEA DEQ, LWMD, PCU ACT-11-00 1400 Block Indiana Avenue Conveyance of City Property GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: Janice Harper 1426 Indiana Avenue Lansing, MI 48406 REQUESTED ACTION: The applicant is requesting the City either sell City owned property adjacent to the house at the above address or grant an easement for use of the property as access, a driveway, and off-street parking for the single family residence on the adjacent property (see Figure 1, Area Map) EXISTING LAND USE: Driveway and parking area for the single family home located on the adjacent property at 1426 Indiana Ave., and a sidewalk that provides access to Bancroft Park LOCATION: East of and adjacent to the corner of Oak Street and Indiana Avenue: Lot A, Capitol Heights Subdivision, City of Lansing EXISTING ZONING: "B" Residential District PROPERTY SIZE: 50 feet wide by approximately 106.4 feet in length SURROUNDING LAND N: Single Family Residential USE: S: Single Family Residential E: Bancroft Park W: Oak Street/Indiana Avenue intersection SURROUNDING ZONING: N: "B" Residential District S: "B" Residential District E: "B" Residential District W: n/a MASTER PLAN DESIGNATION: The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates the surrounding properties for residential and recreational uses. AGENCY RESPONSES: Assessors: If sold: it should be stated by Council, and in the Buy-Sell Agreement, that the portion of "Lot A" sold to #1426 Indiana ACT-11-00 1400 Block Indiana Avenue Page 2 Conveyance of City Property (sic) is to be combined with Lot 295 for real property tax purposes. If only an easement is granted for the drive, no changes will be needed on the tax rolls at all. Attorney: See attached memo to Murdock Jemerson, Parks Director. It is my understanding from talking to the applicant that she is only requesting the City provide her with the access to the house/garage on the adjoining property. This proposed disposition should not be more than applicant needs for access and should be fair market value. Board of Water & Light: Electric: BWL requests consideration of easements for existing electric distribution facilities on property if sold. Contact person: Lori Karazim 517-371-6639. Water: Water service to park will require easement. Contact person: Terry Robison 517-371-6494. Building Safety: No objection. North Town N.A.: No response received. Code Compliance: Any requirements for implementation should be forwarded to this office upon final approval. Consumers Energy: No response received. Development: Recommend Parks Board Review. Should seek to validate long standing situation and honor request by taking necessary steps quickly. Ingham Co. Drain Comm: No response received. Lansing Nhb'hood Cncl: No response received. Parks and Recreation (Murdock Jemerson): Ms. Harper attended Park Board and this was added as an agenda item June 21, 2000. The Park Board recommended a 285 review be done to decommission this property to allow this property to be given to Janice Harper. After reviewing the site and the warranty deed, I recommend granting an easement for the portion of the property that the driveway is located on at 1426 Indiana Avenue. I have ACT-11-00 1400 Block Indiana Avenue Page 3 Conveyance of City Property attached copies of the deeds to both parcels north of 1426 Indiana. Lansing Police Dept.: No response received. Public Services: The Public Service Department, Engineering Division, has no objection to the proposed Act 285. Transportation: No response received. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The single family residence located at 1426 Indiana Avenue was constructed in 1928. Subsequently, a garage was added to the north side of the house that extended to the north property line of the lot. The lot containing the house measures 45 feet wide by 107 feet deep. The house sits on top of a hill above street level and access to the garage is on the adjacent (City owned) lot north of 1426 Indiana Avenue. The floor level of the garage is below the elevation of the first floor level of the house. At the time of drafting of this report, staff has no documentation of an agreement with the City regarding the placement of the driveway on the City owned lot. The City owned lot was acquired in 1908 for the future extension of Oak Street. At that time, this lot measured 50 feet wide by 106.8 feet deep: subsequently, an additional 16 feet of the adjacent lot to the north was added to the City owned property. Currently, this lot contains the driveway which provides access to the house at 1426 Indiana Avenue, and a sidewalk that provides access to Bancroft Park (see Figure 2, Lot Survey). The parcel may have been incorporated into Bancroft Park, and dedicated as parkland. The record is unclear on this point. The applicant has filed this request for review under ACT-285 in order to clear the issue of access to the house at 1426 Indiana Avenue because the current access on City owned property has limited the applicant's ability to sell the property. APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL The applicant proposes to utilize the subject property to provide vehicular access to her garage at 1426 Indiana. This is currently happening on the basis of a verbal agreement, without the documented permission of the City. DESCRIPTION of SITE Location The site is located at the east end of Oak Street, just west of Bancroft Park, and just north of the applicant's abutting property at 1426 Indiana Avenue. ACT-11-00 1400 Block Indiapa Avenue Page 4 Conveyance of City'Property Character The south side of the subject parcel appears to be part of 1426 Indiana, and serves as its driveway entrance. The north side features a "Bancroft Park" sign, and appears to be a pedestrian entrance to the park Extent Overall, the city owned parcel is 50 feet wide by 106.6 feet deep. The driveway occupies a rectangular area consisting of the south 28 feet and the western 80 feet of this parcel. The extent of the parcel that should be either conveyed or subject to an access/use easement or license is this 50 foot by 80 foot parcel. While the extent of the property conveyance could be either sale with retention of utility easements, or an easement or license to provide residential access to 1426 Indiana Street. The city attorney recommends that either an easement or license be utilized, the term of which would need to run with the continued use of 1426 Indiana Street for single family residential purposes. SUMMARY The subject City property contains an existing driveway that serves a residence at 1426 Indiana Avenue through a verbal arrangement. Ensuring driveway access is necessary for the sale of the residence. The subject property also serves as a pedestrian access to Bancroft Park, and may be part of the Bancroft Park dedicated parkland. It was originally conveyed to the City for the extension of Oak Street. The Park Board recommended decommissioning the property and conveying it to the applicant. The Parks and Recreation Director recommends granting an easement for the portion of the property on which the driveway is located. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of Act-11-2000, the conveyance of a license or easement, as deemed appropriate by the City Attorney, for the minimum area required to provide access to 1426 Indiana Avenue, and retaining all necessary utility easements. The subject property is described below: The south 28 feet of the west 80 feet of Lot A, Capitol Heights Subdivision, City of Lansing. Respectfully Submitted, Jim Sturdevant, AICP Senior Planner Ulan-de0shared\Act 285 Reviews\2000ACTS\00act11\ACT-1 1-OOFE.wpd September B,2000 July 26 , 200b, Mr . Jim Sturdevent , A. I .C. P. Att: Lansing Park Director and City Council : JUL 2000 I am writing regarding the property at 1426 Indiana Ave . Lansing, Michigan. PLANNING I�IIiISIUf�� There is a Walk-in Bancroft Park entrance at the end of Oak Street and Indiana Ave . In 1949, we bought the property at 1500 Indiana from the Park Department . In 1851 , we bought another 17 feet to }&uild our house next to the Park entrance. In 1951 Hdrold Park and I went to Lee Bancroft, Park Director, and he came out and gave Mr. Park permission to use 17 feet plus 6 feet for a turn-around so he could get out of the garage . I guess he did not put it in writing, but everyone who has lived there took it for granted that it belonged to the property. because it has never be questioned until now that Miss Harper is selling the property. Because it is a park entrance, it will never utilized for anything else . Leonard English 1500 Indiana Ave . Lansing, Mi . 48906 RECE�vEp 20 June 2000 ' 0 Z000 Janice Harper J U N 2 1426 Indiana Avenue MAYOR'S OFFICE Lansing, Michigan 48906 CITY OF LANSING (517) 484-7967 E-mail: hMerja rc ilot.msu.edu Mayor David Hollister City Hall Lansing, Michigan 48933 Re: Property located at 1426 Indiana Avenue Dear Mayor Hollister: I reside at 1426 Indiana Avenue, in Lansing, Michigan, which is adjacent to Bancroft Park. The property was purchased by my parents, Clifton and Neela Harper, in 1990. In 1997, after my father had passed away, my mother had the property put into a trust fund; she passed away shortly thereafter, and I am currently trustee and a beneficiary of the property. The terms of the Trust require me to sell the property. As such, I recently put the property up for sale, and have received two offers to purchase it. The driveway to the property, however, is on city property. My father was unaware of this when he purchased the property, and became aware of it in 1991 when he had the property surveyed because he was considering building a new garage. It was at this time that he discovered that the drive, the steps to the back door, about six feet of the side lawn, and about six inches of the garage, are all on city property. He became gravely ill shortly afterwards, and never pursued the issue with the city. It was my understanding that he believed that because the garage was original to the house, and the drive appears to be so (although it may have been built in the 1940's), and because the city allowed the drive to be used by the many former owners, that continued use would not be a problem. Unfortunately, the buyers to my property were unable to obtain clear title and a mortgage when the city's ownership of the drive became known(which I disclosed at the time I put the property on the market). The position of the mortgage company was that there is no access to the property. Moreover, because the lot is a small one, and the house is built on an elevated surface, it is impossible to put another drive on the property. As such, the only access to the property is by way of the drive which is on city property. Having lost one buyer, I now have another potential buyer who would like to buy the house. But without some form of acknowledgment or permission from the city to continue to use the drive, the property may well be stripped of any commercial value, which is to say, unsalable. As such, I would like to request a recorded easement or other legal record to enable me and any future owners to buy and sell the property. In considering this request, please make note of the following facts concerning the property. The house was built sometime around 1928, and was one of the first houses on the street. In 1946, a man named Harold Park bought the property. My neighbor, Leonard English, recalls very clearly going to the Department.of Parks and Recreation with Mr. Parks to request permission to use the property. He indicates that they received permission directly from Lee Bancroft. Unfortunately, I have not been able to discover any record of such permission. Mr. Park sold or passed the property to his son, who in turn, sold it to his son, Mr. Wesley Park, in the early 1970's. Mr. Wesley Park was unaware that the drive was on city property. He in turn sold the property to Mr. Ronald Holmes of Excellence, Inc., who shortly thereafter sold it to my father, Clifton Harper. Mr. Holmes died a few months following this sale. The drive and side lawn have always been maintained by the owners of the property and not by the city. When the recent storm of two years ago cut off the water supply to Bancroft Park, the City dug up the drive to reach the water lines, and repaired the drive at my request. The City has known, or should have known, that this drive is on City property, and yet there has never been any objection to its use as a private drive. Moreover, it has always been used in good faith, and no attempt has ever been made to my knowledge to defraud the city or illegally appropriate City land. As it stands, I do not know if it will be possible for my new buyer to obtain clear title and a mortgage to purchase the property. The property comprises my sole assets, as well as the sole assets of my brother and niece. To be unable to sell the property will pose a considerable hardship on my family. As such, I respectfully request that the City do anything in its power to facilitate the continued use of the drive and walkway to the house. Thank you very much for your consideration of this request. Sincerely, Janice Harp cc: Lansing City Council Lansing Department of Parks and Recreation 3 July 2000 ✓ do�' Janice Harper 1426 Indiana Avenue Lansing, Michigan 48906 `s/O (517)484-7967 IV E-mail: harperja�rGpilot.msu.edu Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development Attn: Mr. James Ruff 316 North Capitol Avenue Lansing, Michigan 48933 Re: 1426 Indiana Avenue Driveway Dear Mr. Ruff: Pursuant to our conversation of this morning, I am hereby requesting a letter from your office indicating that resolution of the driveway issue regarding the property at 1426 Indiana Avenue will be forthcoming, and that use or permanent ownership of the drive will be granted by way of easement or deed in the very near future. I understand that at this point in time you do not know exactly how the issue will be resolved, but any indication of a resolution that you can provide will enable me to obtain a home equity loan so that I may close on property I have contracted to purchase, as well as facilitate sale and closure of the Indiana Avenue property. As I indicated to you, the buyer for the property has rescinded his offer to close on the home due to the ambiguous status of the drive, and prior to his offer I lost another offer for the same reason. As such, I am very concerned that without timely action, I will be unable to sell the property. Clearly, it should have been resolved much earlier, but I was acting on the advice of my real estate agent, who suggested earlier in the year that no action would be necessary for sale of the home. Unfortunately, this advice was in error, and I am now confronting the need to resolve this issue as soon as possible so that I can fulfill contractual obligations I have entered. I am contacting the Department of Parks and Recreation to request that they provide you with written clarification of their recent ruling to grant a 285 Review. My understanding, from attending the Parks meeting at which this issue was voted on, is that the 285 Review process bypasses the need for a public vote on disposition of park lands. As you know, I have petitioned for a 285 Review to have the drive decommissioned from Park lands, and a survey of the drive and park entrance has been completed. Thank you very much for the time that you have put into this, and I apologize sincerely for not having had the foresight to address this issue sooner. Sincerely, anice Harper DEPARTMEN T (517)483ENT OF PLANNING -AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 316 N.CAPITOLAVEINp661T FDl(5148360.3648933-1236 PLANNING OFFICE David C.Hollister, Mayor July 7, 2000 MS JANICE HARPER 1426 INDIANA AVENUE IANSING MI 48906 RE: 1426 Indiana Ave., Driveway Encroachment Dear Ms. Harper: owned lication(ACT-11-2000)to gain legal use of City The Planning Office is in receipt of your app This long cent to y tactical alternative, will be reviewed by the property adja our home at 1426 Indiana Avenue for the established driveway. Act 285 of established situation, for which there is no other p d then by City Council. This process is in conformance with Public Planning Board an the end of August. 1931 and may be completed by that easement or sale of a portion of the property ermit a license, upon the requirements for The results of this review may p as it exists. Depending money to would allow the continued u may be other responsibilities that take additional do i iional timese and would be able one of these actions, there m y resolve. You will likely be responsible for these additional costs,which to review before hand. s Board has recommended the City proceeU with the review and are the Park roving your request, It is my understanding the location, favor of ranting your request. At this time, no discovery of the for approving Intthat 9 ur ose of the revs but that is part of the purpose character and extent of the encroachment and the property. rinci al Planner (483-4091) are 483-4057) and Bill Rieske, P you may have and confirm the Jim Sturdevant, Senior Planner ( specific Questions processing your request and can answer any p process. Sincerely, — Z41— James A. Ruff, Office Manager, Planning cc: Jim Sturdevant Bill Rieske cx,�zoningWct112k ^gqual opportunity Employer" ® Please Recycle U641 Department of Law ' E �� i vE D MEMORANDUM JUL 0 6 2000 PLANNING D1VrSl To: MURDOCK JEMERSON, DIRECTOR OF PARKS RECREATI ON ION JOHN M. ROBERTS J Y CITY ATTORNEY Date: July 7, 2000 Subject: REQUEST OF JANICE HARPER TO RECEIVE PORTION OF BANCROFT PARK ADJACENT TO 1426 INDIANA AVE' This office has received the attached letter from the Mayor's office identical letter was sent to the Lansing City Council by Ms. Harpere for a ro CouncilPP priate action. An Packet for the June 26, 2000 Council meeting. The Council eferr dd It P is letter the Planning office. I understand that this will result in an Act 285 r City to the e ter to the valuate the request of Ms. Harper. review, which is required by the In confirmation of our June 19, 2000 conversation regardingthis dedicated park land that has been used for a number of years b s property, I understand that it is predecessors in title, as a driveway. Y Ms. Harper's famil grant any perm Y Because this is part of a dedicated y� and their Permanent right to its continued use without either(1) a vote of People le arty cannot real property its or(2) the City's removal of the property from through the P P approving the Act 285 process. The Act 285 review includes the ParkstDedicated park land Board review, action by the Planning Board and final action b that the ro � Partment and/or Parks P Perty is not otherwise limited to y Concil. These options assume restricted, the City may not be permitted to Park t o tMs terms s er the City's acquisition. If so described in (1) or(2) above. Harper even if there is approval as As we further discussed, when Ms. Harper's request goes through matters of ownership, limitations of use and input from the Parks Dee Act 285 review part of the review and evaluation. process, partmentBoard will all be Please be aware Of Ms. Harper's formal request if you have not been otherwise notif ied fied of it. Attachment cc: Mayor David Hollister, w/out attachment Jim Ruff, Plarming, w/attachment Janice Harper, w/out attachment F:'SHARED\CityDept\LAW)4mrmcmos\bancruR park harper.wpd 25 August 2000 Janice Harper 5223 Warm Springs Houston, Texas 77035 (713) 743-3790 Department of Planning and Neighborhood Development Attn: Jim Sturdevant and Bill Rieske 316 North Capitol Avenue, Suite D-1 Lansing, Michigan 48933 SF,NT VIA FAX 517-483-6036 Re. 14261ndiana Ave. Driveway Encroachment Dear Mr's Sturdevant and Rieske: J It is my understanding that a meeting will be held to continue discussion of whether or not to grant me an easement or sale of the driveway portion of the Bancroft Park property. In order to clarify issues for the Planning Department and City Council, please be advised of the following. In a conversation with City Attorney Jack Roberts on or about August 1, 2000, he advised me that he did not foresee any problem with granting an casement. He indicated that although the property was originally deeded to the City for extension of Oak Street only, there was no reversion clause, which means that the gift to the city did not stipulate that the property would revert to the original owners or heirs should the property be used otherwise. As such,he expressed to me that he was not concerned about this issue. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact him. If there is any concern on the part of the Planning Department or City Council regarding how such an easement might affect the aestlietics of the Park entrance, I indicated to Attorney Roberts that a Deed Restriction prohibiting building any fence or structure on the property would be an appropriate way to address the issue. While it is not for me to make such decisions, I offer the suggestion in an effort toward resolving any concerns regarding continued public access to the Park. Finally, it has been impossible for me to sell the house due to the driveway issue. In fact, I was unable to obtain even a home equity loan due to the fact that my bank did not recognize any public access to the property. Ms. Cindy Wilkerson of Michigan State University Federal Credit Union is faxing to you a copy of her letter of denial to me, in which she indicated that this was the reason for the denial.. I made several phone calls to other financial institutions in an effort to secure the loan, and they were consistent in their position that there is no public access to the 30yd GBZ�B�GB lG:M dd0/HAV Yid ZE 10 21 00-W-00 drive. As such, any future buyer would face the same problem with securing a mortgage. I have lost two buyers who withdrew offers for this reason. It is imperative that I sell the house. My insurance company has indicated to me that they will not insure the home after October 1 because it will have been vacant for too long. It is difficult to find a renter while it is on the market, and I lack the resources to manage and maintain the home for renters. Moreover, the inability to sell the home while maintaining a home in Texas has posed an extreme financial hardship on me, and the home has now been on the market for so long that I cannot even find anyone to look at the house. I fear having to eventually sell it at much lower than its value, despite my father having invested over twenty thousand dollars and considerable labor into improving the home, thereby contributing to enhancing property values in the neighborhood_ please contact me if you have any questions or concerns. I appeal to you to please grant this request for an easement(for the life of the house) so that I can sell the property. Sincerely, Janice Harper Z Hodd L8Z�E�LElL:XVd dda/HiNV WJ ZEN M 00-�Z-DnV M101164N STA IF UNI VERSff Y. FEDERAL CREDIT UNION THE FINANCIAL INSTITUTION OF THE MSU AND OU COMMUNITIES July 12, 2000 JANICE L HARPER Account Number 562117 1426 INDIANA AVE Application for Home Advantage Iii Close LANSING MI 48906 $20,000.00 Dear Janice L Harper: Helping members reach their financial objectives is a primary goal of our credit union. We thoroughly evaluate each loan application taking into consideration all of your financial circumstances. Upon review of your loan application, the following was noted: * PROPERTY DOES NOT MEET REQUIREMENTS For the reasons stated above, the credit union can not extend credit to you at this time. We based our credit decision in whole or in part on information obtained in a report from the credit bureau listed below. You have a right under the Fair Credit Reporting Act to know the information contained in your credit file at the consumer reporting agency. The reporting agency played no part in our decision and is unable to supply specific reasons why we have denied you credit. You also have a right to a free copy of your report from the reporting agency if you request it no later than 60 days after you receive this notice. In addition, if you find that any information contained in the report you received is inaccurate or incomplete, you have the right to dispute the matter with this reporting agency: Experian, P.O. BOX 2002, Allen, TX 75013-0036 1-888-397-3742: Thank you for considering the credit union for your lending needs. Do not hesitate to call me at 517-333-2234 or 800-678-4968 if you would like to review your financial situation for alternative ways that we may be of assistance to you. Sincerely, Cindy K Wilkinson Mortgage Officer The Federal Equal Credit Opportunity Act prohibits creditors from discriminating against credit applicants on the basis of race,color,religion,national origin, sex, marital status,age (provided the applicant has the capacity to enter into a binding contract),because all or pert of the applicant'a income derives from any public assistance program.or because the applicant has In good faith exercised any right under the Consumer Credit Protection Act, The Federal Agency tnat aaministe►s compliance with this law concerning this creditor Is the Regional Director,NCUA.4225 Naperville Boulevard,Suite 125. lisle,Illinois,60532, 600 E. CRESCENT - P.O. BOX 1208 - EAST LANSING, MI 48826 - (517) 353-2280 CITY of LANSING INTEROFFICE COMMUNICATION Memorandum TO: Urban Development Committee FROM: Bill Rieske, Principal Planner CC: Planning Board DATE: September 12, 2000 RE: Act-11-2000, 1400 Blk. Indiana Ave., Private Use of City Parcel On August 22, 2000, the Committee tabled this matter with questions about: • the restrictive covenant within the deed which conveyed the subject parcel to the City, which requires that the property be used for an extension of Oak Street, • the date that Bancroft Park was first dedicated, and • the minimum conveyance a title or mortgage company will accept. We have received verbal responses from the City Attorney and the realtor about these questions. First, the deed contains no reversion clause which would jeopardize City ownership of the land if it is not used for extending Oak Street. So while its future use was specified, the consequences for not doing so were not. Second, the City acquired the parcel on November 25, 1908. Bancroft Park was acquired in 1920 as a community park, and was officially designated(along with over 96 parks) as parkland by Council resolution on June 22, 1981. Since 1920,the presence of Bancroft Park obviated previous intentions of extending Oak Street, along with the public purpose for doing so. Third, realtor indicated that they need a permanent right to access the garage on the north side of the property. I asked if"permanent" meant"for the life of the asset(the house and garage)," and he said yes. The City Attorney has indicated that there would be no problem with either a license or easement with a duration matching the life of the house and garage. Revised Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of Act-1 1-2000, the conveyance of a license or easement, as deemed appropriate by the City Attorney, for the minimum area required to provide access to 1426 Indiana Avenue, and retaining all necessary utility easements. The subject property is described below: The south 28 feet of the west 80 feet of Lot A, Capitol Heights Subdivision, City of Lansing. \\PIn-dn-`flee Act 283 Rcvinvc\2000AM100"1\00wtI I UDC Mmo.wpd NORTH ACT-11-00 1400 Block Indiana Avenue Eaj Lij O 2/ Q 22 X 874.3 I /7 /9 885,5 LLJ El Q I 90.3 89p 23 / . 22 870— / 23 - --- I BANCROFT 20 a 24 . 20 871.9 87 3 i � I /7 2/ ❑ v1 /3 P9 89/.2 884.3 /y��ST 890. I I 866.2 J 2/ 32 27 N B 977.0 868 /8 -------y ^� 25 I 1 � I 876.6 22 /T 888 1 I - 27 \ / /8 L /8 24 / 873.7 X PARKING 4. a 887 20 21 Z Q O z B = 22 O ALLS I Fes❑ /7 I!( 125-4 8 I.63 as X /875.6 x 880 x- 20 28 I I /e 890 + 32 V" ACT-11-00 1400 Block Indiana Avenue I I 111=20' INDIANA AVE" (60' wd) CURB a S'CONC WALK 45.00' 50.00' %Fd. cONc Fd. lPE WALK - PIPE 31 O O 24qj I v 1 p X�Y STORY N � FRAME RES z V ' A I 28' 29 1� los' O 4' V_ �Q 1" 16' Ir z r y U PORCH w Qz �JJ� J �00 J Fd. / PIPE 45.00' 50.00. F /6 Lo i17C D = Deeded Distance Set Line Stake M = Measured Distance r • Found As Noted P = Platted Distance 1I ' 1 OSet Iron and Cap fdr. },-....L... 4-4 F. 1,orr.4., A.....i hers • +4-4- +-6. V-1411-1:nna