HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002 Planning Board Jun-Sept minutes FINAL APPROVED WITH CORRECTIONS: Draft to Clerk September 27,2002
PAGE 7, LINE 6, REMOVE FERRIS DEV.,ADD THE WORD WERE Approved October 1,2002
PAGE 10, PARA 2, LINE 3, REMOVE THE WORDS TO TIGHT MOVEMENTS To Clerk October 2,2002
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, September 17, 2002
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Frederick.
A. Roll call. Present: Frederick, Cordill, Foster, Keene, Patrick, Ruge.
B. Staff Attending: Rieske, Stachowiak.
C. Excused absences: None.
Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to approve an excused
absence request for Ms. Foster for the September 41h meeting. On a voice vote,
the motion carried (6-0).
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
It was moved by Ms. Patrick, supported by Ms. Keene to approve the agenda.
On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (6-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Notice of Public Hearing from the East Lansing Planning Commission
regarding East Lansing North Tier Plan
4. HEARINGS
A. Act-12-2002, RiverTrail South Extension from Potter Park to Hope
Soccer Complex
This is a request by the Lansing Parks and Recreation Dept. to extend the
RiverTrail from Potter Park along or near Sycamore Creek to the south
city limits. The project includes the acquisition of easement or fee simple
interest in six (6) properties for the proposed RiverTrail route.
Mr. Rieske gave a brief overview.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 2
Mr. Murdock Jemerson, Director of Parks and Recreation, City of
Lansing, stated that Mr. Bob Ford, President of Landscape Architects and
Planners, appeared before the Board on August 201h and gave a total
presentation of the northwest expansion as well as the south leg
expansion to the project. He also stated that Mr. Phil Dorland, Deputy
Director of Parks and Recreation, City of Lansing, was present.
Bob Ford, President of Landscape Architects and Planners,
introduced his staff and gave a brief presentation of the RiverTrail
expansion.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the trail crossing Cavanaugh and Jolly Roads.
Mr. Ford stated that in both situations the trail is too low to go under the
roadways because of the flood plains. If the bridges were raised higher, it
would be a possibility. In those cases, it was proposed to go over the
roads with an overpass.
Sergeant David Emmons, Lansing Police Department, stated that in
June, July and August of 2001 there were 6 reportable offenses on the
RiverTrail: 1 urinating in public, 2 malicious destruction of properties,
1 found property, and 2 sudden deaths. In 2002, there was only one
incident, Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC), that happened in September on
the river trail near the Radisson Hotel. This was an isolated incident and
the accused was arrested.
There is also a Riverwalk Watcher's Patrol during the day and consists of
35 volunteers that work 7 days a week approximately 8:00 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. on the RiverTrail. The program runs through the summer and this
years has been extended through October, depending on the weather.
The department has received numerous calls of appreciation for this. The
motorcycle units patrol the RiverTrail as well as do traffic control. There
are also bicycles in the department that are used for problem solving
events and also with the community policing. He personally used a
bicycle when he was a community policing officer in the Baker Street
area. These are also used to patrol the RiverTrails as well during all
hours of the day.
There are also patrol units that can patrol in vehicles most areas of the
RiverTrail. A few of the bridges cannot be used by the patrol units but
officers are down there patrolling in cars. He is there personally every
night patrolling areas of the RiverTrail during his routes.
Part of the duties of the volunteers and police officers besides patrol is
also to report graffiti. This has been handled rather quickly and the Police
Department is making sure that it does not become a problem in the area.
The Parks Department has done a very good job at keeping the RiverTrail
clean as well. There have not been any problems with that.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 3
From personal experience of being on the RiverTrail, he stated that it is a
very safe spot. If the rest of the City was as safe as the RiverTrail,
everyone would be pretty fortunate.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the safety of traffic going under bridges in terms
of visibility to the greater public. Sgt. Emmons stated that the Parks
Department has attempted to do a real good job of lighting those areas
and the Police Department does try to patrol those areas. There has not
been any reported incidents that would have isolated those incidents.
Even the CSC did not take place near one of those underpass areas. It
happened out in the open.
Mr. Ruge had concerns about the proposed RiverTrail that runs along
Aurelius Road and stated that there was an alternate route that does not
run along Aurelius Road. The alternate route goes over the river and
through the woods. Mr. Ford stated that there is an alternate route that is
suggested, which runs on the east side of the Lindbergh Drive properties.
Some of the residents in that area have voiced some opposition of the
trail running through this area. It has not been confirmed at this time. The
reason the route was cast as an alternate connection and this being
primarly was because people would take advantage of the very low costs
of the extension of the trail southward. The Lindbergh Drive route will be
left on as a future alternate route until it has been thoroughly reviewed.
Mr. Ruge inquired about ownership of the property. Mr. Ford stated that
everything seen except the light pale green is all City owned land. A
discussion ensued.
Mike McDonald, Vice Chairman of Ingham County Parks Board and
resident of 5616 Wood Valley, Haslett, stated that at the September 16tn
meeting of the Ingham County Parks Board, the Parks Board unanimously
passed a resolution in support of the extension of the RiverTrail to the
south. He would be glad to leave a copy of the resolution for the Board
and Planning staff, and have it go on record as support from the County
Parks Board. In the County Parks Board viewing of earlier presentations
by Mr. Bob Ford and his staff, there is a lot of potential to some day have
this concept turned into reality. Twenty-five years ago he first started as
staff at the Department of Natural Resources, Grants Section. There was
no Lansing RiverTrail. Over time, the trail went from a conceptual plan to
something now that is thought of so very highly and is really considered to
be one of the main features of the City of Lansing. With the beautiful new
park implemented at Hawk Island, the many improvements at Potter Park,
and the great use of the Soccer Complex, he and the Parks Board are
optimistic that over time this will become a reality.
Amy Miller, resident of 934 N. Walnut, stated that she moved to Lansing
last October and that she really likes living in the City. The RiverTrail is
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 4
her favorite part about the City and she really enjoys it. She believes that
any money spent in extending the length is going to be money well spent.
Kathy Webber, resident of 804 W. Shiawassee, stated that she moved
to her home about 7 years ago and that she is on the trail running, roller
blading, riding her bike, etc. at least a few days a week with her dogs.
The RiverTrail is a wonderful place to be. The only time she seeks other
trails is because she is looking for more links so she drives to other areas.
The Lake Lansing system is a harsh place to be. Her dog collapsed on
that trail. The trail is out in the sun and runs across the wet lands. It does
not feel very sturdy. She works in construction around the State and the
wetlands really need protection. She believes that it would be much
better to go up and around than to consider going through that area.
Habitat is important.
Kellie Dean, Owner of Dean Transportation located at 4812 Aurelius
Road, stated that he is one of the property owners. He has spoken
before and would like to speak enthusiastically again as a property owner,
and a person looking forward to participating in this project being a link
between some great projects that are already existing. He believes the
City could not do a better service to the community. Mr. Ford stated very
well the benefits, safety factors and all the enhancements to the
community. As a property owner, he is truly looking forward to
participating any way that he can. Congratulations and keep it going.
Jessica Yorko, resident of 316 N. Sycamore, Apt. #1, stated that she
moved to Lansing in January of 2001. The trail is one of her favorite
things about Lansing. When she has visitors from out of town, she always
makes a point to take a walk or bike trip on the trail because it is such a
special feature of the City. She hopes the plans will move forward with
extending the trail. The trail is a great place for kids and since she is
expecting a baby, she is real excited about taking her child on the trail to
the playgrounds and on a bike ride.
Paul BrunDelre, resident of 1919 Rockdale, Delta Township, stated
that he has been a long time resident of Lansing and has been up and
down the trail for many years. Part of his vision is not only this extension,
which he believes is wonderful to go to the south side, but he would like to
see this trail extended to Williamston and Grand Ledge. He lives in Delta
Township and bikes into work downtown from his home. He has to go
down Willow Highway part of the way to get to work. If the City can have
corridors connecting these outlying parts of the City and some of the
suburban areas surrounding it, he believes it would be wonderful to
encourage people not to bring their cars downtown. Parking has always
been a problem. Not only is he supportive of this project, he would like to
encourage the City Council to think in terms of even expanding beyond
this specific project. He and his wife, when they lived in the downtown
area, would always bring their kids on the trail with their bikes. Currently,
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 5
he and his wife are doing the Big Brother/Big Sister program with
Sudanese kids. Extending the trail would make it wonderful for people
who are trying to find an easy way into the City without bringing their cars,
and for other various forms of recreation (i.e. running, biking, walking,
roller blading). He also runs on the trail during lunch time. He would like
to lend his support for the project and encourage the Board to dream
beyond this particular project.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Frederick
referred Act-12-2002 to the next Urban Development Committee meeting
scheduled for Tuesday, September 24, 2002, at 4:00 p.m., 316 N. Capitol
Ave., Department Conference Room.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
Seeing no one else wishing to address the Board, Mr. Frederick closed the
public comment period.
6. RECESS was not taken by the Board.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval
Ms. Keene moved; seconded by Ms. Cordill to approve the minutes of
September 4, 2002 with corrections. On a voice vote, the motion carried
(6-0), the minutes of September 4, 2002 were
APPROVED w/CORRECTIONS.
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
a. NCU-4-2002, 724 N. Walnut Street, Class A
Nonconforming Status
The applicant, Ferris Development, is requesting a Class "A"
nonconforming status for the property at 724 N. Walnut
Street. Based upon Section 1294.02(c) of the Zoning Code,
the proposed use of the building as a 4-unit residential
structure in a "C" Residential District is a "Class B, Group 3
Nonconformity". The applicant intends to reduce the
number of dwelling units from 5 units to 4 units with one
bedroom each. As a Class B, Group 3 Nonconformity, the
cost of restoration or substitution cannot exceed 35 percent
of the value of the building. The assessed value of the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 6
building is $104,184 and the applicant estimates the cost of
rehabilitation of the structure will be approximately $43,600.
Therefore, the applicant is requesting a Class "A"
Nonconforming Status change in order to exceed the 35
percent cap (i.e., $36,464.40) on the amount of money that
can be put into the building.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the Historic District Commission
recommendations being implemented into the Planning
Board recommendations. Ms. Stachowiak stated that the
review by itself are requirements through the 106 Review. A
discussion ensued.
Ron VanZee, Ferris Development, stated that all the
specifications for this project, the exterior especially, almost
every line refer to Secretary of the Interior Standards for
rehabilitation of the historic structures. These specifications
were forwarded to the State of Michigan, State Historic
Preservation Officer. Ferris Development has received
comments in return on both of the properties that the
specifications do meet their requirements for rehabilitating
historic structures. Ferris Development would be more than
happy to let the local Historic District Commission review
them and he would be glad to meet with them regarding the
specifications. He is not sure what more could be added.
Ferris Development has tried to maintain the character of
the properties. He was not sure if the Board had seen the
pictures that were also a part of the specifications. These
were the earliest pictures that the State of Michigan had in
the library on these two structures. The pictures do show
that they have the shorter, wider turn spindle rails, 30" high
railings on the front of the porch. This is what Ferris
Development is proposing. Both had vertical skirting on the
front porches. The property located at 819 N. Walnut Street
had a turn column and it also has the larger, round turn
columns. Ferris Development is proposing to implement 3
round turn columns. Ferris Development had proposed to
repair all the front windows on both properties. After
meeting with a contractor today, they came to the conclusion
that because there is a lead issue with the windows, Ferris
Development has to be very careful with them. It is almost
impossible to encapsulate those friction surfaces. Ferris
Development would actually replace the sashes with new
wood sashes to match exactly what is there. Ferris will
install jamb liners which would not be visible from the street
but allow the windows to slide up and down without going
against the lead surfaces. Ferris Development is doing a full
lead abatement on both properties. The specifications are
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 7
thick because they have lead risk assessments for every
aspect of the house. There are some contaminated soils
with lead that Ferris Development will need to excavate. All
of the siding on the exterior will need to be removed. The
only things that do not contain lead on the exterior are the
front porches, which were replaced
back in the 1970s or 1980s and will be torn off again. Ferris
Development's intent is to try to match to the character that
the properties were originally and they are going by pictures
that were supplied by the State of Michigan Library. The
only thing that Ferris Development had not planned on was
the brick veneer on the property located at 819 N. Walnut
Street. The contractors have gone in and put stucco on the
entire chimney. Ferris Development would take the upper
portion of the chimney down and rebuild it, matching the
original brick as close as possible rather than trying to put on
veneer and maintain it.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the upper porch on 724 N. Walnut
Street. Mr. VanZee stated that it has an upper porch, a non-
heated area. Ferris Development went back in history
because his first thought was that it was not original to the
house. It turned out that it was original to the house. Ferris
Development's intent is to maintain it as an unheated area to
be used for people to come out on the porch area from the
front unit, and be able to sit and watch the traffic and
pedestrians pass by.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the windows. Mr. VanZee stated
that the windows are aluminum storm windows. Ferris
Development was proposing to put an enamel storm window
on those, matching the same color as the other windows on
the front of the house. All the front windows will have storm
windows because the wood windows cannot be exposed.
Those windows will match the rest of the windows of the
house. All the windows will be double hung. There are 2
windows on the front of the house that are the oreo style and
Ferris Development will be matching the storm windows to
the oreo style. There is one window that will not be touched
that came up in discussions today in the pre-bid meeting. It
is located on the south side of the 724 N. Walnut Street
property. There is a leaded glass window with several
panes of metal glass. The risk assessment came back
showing there is not lead in it even though there is a leaded
glass on the window sill. Ferris Development will maintain
that window. This will be an exception to the replacement of
all the other windows of the house.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 8
Ms. Cordill thanked Mr. VanZee for the information and
stated that she was not sure how much communication, if
any, had occurred with the State Historic Preservation
Office. She was sure that it had been reviewed with a fine
tooth comb and that she would be fully pleased with the
recommendations. She thanked him for being so patient
and thorough with the rehabilitation of properties like these.
Mr. VanZee stated that it is Ferris Development's desire to
bring the houses back to the original character.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that one of the recommendations in
the Zoning and Ordinance Committee report was that the
upper porch windows be removed. This might be conflicting
with Ferris Development's plans. Mr. Ruge stated that he
would be willing to delete number 5.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend approval of
NCU-4-2002, 724 N. Walnut Street, Class A Nonconforming Status with the
conditions as reported by the Zoning and Ordinance Committee. Discussion
ensued regarding the conditions and they were amended to read as follows:
(1) The driveway and parking areas be hard-surfaced with asphalt or Portland
cement, (2) That all other requirements be met (storm water runoff, parking lot
lighting, access to parking spaces, etc.) through the Site Plan Review process, (3)
The exterior historic architectural features and finishes that define the character
of the structure be retained, preserved and or rehabilitation to meet the Secretary
of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (as required in 106 Review), (4) That
all required improvements be completed within one year from the approval of this
NCU request, and (5) Change the HDC recommendation from "use turned
spindles if economically feasible" to "use turned spindles".
Frederick . Ave Cordill. . Aye
Foster . Ave Keene. . Ave
Patrick . Ave Ruge. . Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
b. NCU-5-2002, 819 N. Walnut Street, Class A
Nonconforming Status
The applicant, Ferris Development, is requesting Class "A"
nonconforming status for the property at 819 N. Walnut
Street. Based upon Section 1294.02(c) of the Zoning Code,
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 9
the continued use of the building as a 4-unit residential
structure is a "Class B, Group 3 Nonconformity". As a Class
B, Group 3 Nonconformity, the cost of restoration cannot
exceed 35 percent of the value of the building. The
assessed value of the building is $72,615 and the applicant
estimates the cost of rehabilitation of the structure will be
approximately $39,500. Therefore, the applicant is
requesting a Class "A" Nonconforming Status change in
order to exceed the 35 percent cap (i.e., $25,415.25) on the
amount of money that can be put into the building. This is
not a matter of rezoning.
Ms. Cordill stated that after hearing Mr. VanZee, she made a
recommendation to change or eliminate number 7 because
the it was discussed that there would not be brick veneer on
the chimney. Mr. Ruge stated to replace the chimney with a
brick chimney.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
NCU-5-2002, 819 N. Walnut Street, Class A Nonconforming Status with the
conditions as reported by the Zoning and Ordinance Committee. Discussion
ensued regarding the conditions and they were amended to read as follows:
(1) The six (6) conditions of NCU-2-99 be retained (See attached), except that six
parking spaces must be provided and must be hardsurfaced with asphalt or
Portland cement, (2) That all other requirements be met (storm water runoff,
parking lot lighting, access to parking spaces, etc.) through the Site Plan Review
process, (3) The exterior historic architectural features and finishes that define
the character of the structure be retained, preserved and or rehabilitation to meet
the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation (as required in 106
Review), (4) That all required improvements be completed within one year from
the approval of this NCU request, (5) Change the HDC recommendation from
"recommend any replacement windows be double-hung wood windows
particularly those visible from the street, to "any replacement windows, visible
from the street, be double-hung wood windows", (6) Change the HDC
recommendation from "use turned spindles if economically feasible" to "use
turned spindles", and (7) Change the HDC recommendation from "if economically
feasible, add a brick veneer to chimney" to "replace chimney with a brick
chimney."
Frederick . Ave Cordill. . Ave
Foster . Ave Keene. . Ave
Patrick . Ave Ruge. . Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 10
C. Z-14-2002, SW Corner Hartford & Waverly, "A"
Residential District to "F" Commercial District
This is a request by Michael Markey of Silverwood
Properties to rezone two properties at the Southwest corner
of Hartford and Waverly Roads, more specifically described
as:
Parcel A -North 1 Acre of that part of North fractional
of the Northeast fractional 114, lying Southeast of
Railroad Right-of-way, T3N, R3W, Section 1, T3N,
R3 W,
Parcel B -Commencing 974.26' South and 33' West of
NE Corner, Section 1, thence West 214.5, South
247.19, N 40Deg 57Min E 327' +1- to Beginning,
Section 1, T3N R3W
from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District for an
undetermined commercial use. Staff recommended denial
of Z-14-2002 based upon its inconsistency with the
Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan and incompatibility
with the surrounding residential land uses.
Ms. Foster stated that she understands the whole area is
residential in nature and that is the reason for denying the
request. With the new urbanism, it is
nice to mix a little bit of commercial so that the residential
area may be supplied with a commercial use so that people
do not have to drive forever to go to the grocery store.
There would be something right there. She inquired about
the property having a convenience store or something small
that would fit the character in a commercial setting for this
residential area. Ms. Stachowiak stated that "D-1"
Professional Office District permits neighborhood
convenience retail with a special land use permit. One of
the big items discussed in the Committee meeting and one
of the major factors in staff making the recommendation to
deny the commercial, was the Master Plan. The Master
Plan, as shown in the diagram of the packet, really confines
the commercial to everything north of Hartford Road. If
someone requested a rezoning of any of the property along
Waverly between Hartford and Jolly Roads, staff can
certainly support the request based on consistency with the
Master Plan. The Master Plan is very clear that in that it
tries to confine the commercial more along the major
intersection there and then step down to high density from
Hartford Road to the low density residential, which is a
typical land use pattern. The Planning Office believes this
should be upheld in this case, specifically since there is a lot
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 11
of under-utilized commercial sites directly to the north of this
property.
Mr. Ruge had the same concerns and stated that just north
of Hartford Road, between Hartford and Jolly, there is
vacant land that could be used if someone wanted to put a
store in there. Someone would have to walk a little farther.
There does seem to be a lot of density down Hartford Road
and it would be nice if someone could walk to a store.
Ms. Foster inquired about the type of use. Mr. Ruge stated
that the applicant would have some neighborhood retail (Le.
small store, cleaners).
Mr. Anthony J. Szilagyi, representing Silverwood
Properties, stated that his client will proceed with "C"
Residential District. If the Board had any questions, he
would be happy to answer them. One of the comments he
had made at a previous meeting was that it was clear that
there are some surrounding commercial uses that are not
being fully utilized. He believes that there are times where
taking a piece of property and utilizing it for commercial uses
can a spark that helps the surrounding commercial uses to
come up in standard and help to revitalize the property and
put it to better use. One can see this downtown and all
through this area. People come into the City with a vision
but it would need approval. It has made a significant
difference and that is what his client is proposing in this
area.
Ms. Foster inquired about where the commercial area
stopped. Ms. Stachowiak stated the Master Plan makes it
clear that the zoning ends north of Hartford Road and then
south of Hartford Road is multiple family and then further
down is "A" Residential. Hartford Road is meant to be the
cut off. Given the under-utilization of the area that is already
Master Plan for commercial, there seems to be no basis to
violate the Master Plan to take it another 200 plus feet
further south.
Ms. Foster inquired about the "D-1" use. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that it conflicts with the Master Plan.
Mr. Rieske stated that the Master Plan has higher density
residential clustered around commercial, and it is within
walking distance. He agreed with Mr. Szilagyi that a spark is
needed and sometimes something new will do this. There is
nothing saying that within this area of commercial that the
spark could not occur on one of those properties. Having a
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 12
spark does not necessarily indicate that this property is
appropriate more for commercial than it is for residential.
Ms. Cordill stated that the spark for commercial
development seems to be most appropriate at Jolly and
Waverly, not at this particular location.
Mr. Frederick inquired about the Planning staff being
comfortable with the "C" Residential zoning. Ms. Stachowiak
stated very much so. As she said at the Committee
meeting, staff would have even been supportive of "DM-1".
After checking into Ms. Cordill's inquiry about the density of
the surrounding area, both areas to the northwest as well as
directly to the west, there is approximately 14 to 15 units per
acre which falls right into the "DM-1" District. Staff would
have recommended approval of "DM-1" but Mr. Markey
indicated that he had no interested in "DM-1" but would
prefer "C" Residential. This is an even lesser intense zoning
district so staff is very comfortable with "C" Residential.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend denial of Z-14-2002,
SW Corner Hartford & Waverly, "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District
and recommend approval of the revised request for rezoning the property to "C"
Residential District.
Frederick . Ave Cordill. . . Ave
Foster . Ave Keene. . . Aye
Patrick . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
d. NCU-6-2002, 800-806 Baker Street, Class A
Nonconforming Status
The applicant, Brian McNamara, is requesting a Class A
nonconforming status for property located at 800-806 Baker
Street, on the southeast corner of Baker Street and Lyons
Avenue. The property currently maintains a Class B, Group
3 nonconforming status due to lack of parking and
noncompliance with the required 20 foot front yard setback
along Baker and Lyons and the required 25 foot rear yard
setback parallel to Lyons. Since the property is a Class B
nonconformity, the amount of restoration work is limited to
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 13
35% of the value of the building. The applicant proposes to
restore the structure in the response to a "Make Safe or
Demolish" order that the City Code Compliance/Building
Safety Office has issued on the building. Based on the
Assessor's 2002 Records, the current value of the structure
is $22,600. The estimated cost of repairs to bring the
structure up to code is $50,000.
The property at 800-806 Baker Street is zoned "F"
Commercial District and is regulated by Section 1268 of the
Zoning Ordinance. The applicant is proposing to rehabilitate
the commercial (Convenience Retail) portion of the building
at 800 Baker Street and use the residential side of the
building at 806 Baker Street for accessory storage.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
NCU-6-2002, 800-806 Baker Street, Class A Nonconforming Status with the
condition that the renovations/repairs be completed within one year from the date
of this approval.
Frederick . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Foster Ave Keene. Ave
Patrick Ave Ruge. Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
Tabled Item:
e. P-1-2001, Tentative Preliminary Plat, Wexford Woods
(Tabled June 13, May 9, 2001)
It was moved by Mr. Ruge, supported by Ms. Foster to accept the withdrawal of
P-1-2001. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (6-0).
Next meeting, Tuesday, October 9, 2002 at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Patrick, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, September 24, 2002, at 4 p.m.,
316 N. Capitol Avenue, Department Conference Room
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 14
3. Committee of the Whole - None.
4. Executive Committee - None.
C. REPORT FROM PLANNING MANAGER - None.
D. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St., "H"Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. Z-5-1998,401-407 E. Grand River, "F"Commercial District to"G-1" Business
District(Tabled June 10, 1998)
C. PRD-2-2001, "Crystal Woods", Planned Residential Neighborhood (Tabled
August 15,2001)
d. SLU-8-2001, 3000 W. Miller Road,Additional Parking for an Existing Church
(Tabled November 14, 2001)
e. SLU-3-2002,2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J"Parking District(Tabled May 15, 2002)
2. _Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000, 201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27,2000)
b. Act-2-2002, Lansing Housing Commission Property, 310 Seymour,Acquisition
for public purposes (Tabled February 26,2002)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
8. NEW BUSINESS
A. Election of Officers
Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster to nominate Mr.
Frederick for Chair of the Planning Board. On a voice vote; the motion
carried unanimously (6-0).
Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge to nominate Ms. Foster
as Vice Chair of the Planning Board. On a voice vote, the motion carried
unanimously (6-0).
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Ms. Keene inquired about the large, imposing structure that is being built near
Rally's and American Eagle. Ms. Stachowiak stated that she would check into
the situation.
Ms. Foster stated that there is a lot of concrete being broken up behind the
soccer complex at the southeast end of the City and that it is creating a lot of
dust. Ms. Stachowiak stated that she would check into the situation.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 17, 2002 Page 15
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS - None.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
James A. Ruff, Secretary, Planning Board
PB Minutes.091702.wpd
APPROVED WITH CORRECTIONS: Draft to Clerk September 10,2002
PAGE 1, UNDER 1C, SIB AN EXCUSED ABSENCE FOR MS. FOSTER Approved September 17,2002
PAGE 2, PARA 3, LAST LINE, SIB CONVENIENCE To Clerk September 18,2002
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Wednesday, September 4, 2002
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Chairman Frederick.
A. Roll call. Present: Frederick, Cordill, Keene, Patrick, Ruge.
B. Staff Attending: Ruff, Stachowiak, Rieske.
C. Excused Absence: Foster.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
It was moved by Ms. Keene, supported by Mr. Ruge to approve the agenda. On
a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS - None.
4. HEARINGS
A. Z-14-2002, SW Corner Hartford & Waverly, "A" Residential District to
"F" Commercial District
This is a request by Michael Markey of Silverwood Properties to rezone
two properties at the Southwest corner of Hartford and Waverly Roads,
more specifically described as:
Parcel A -North 1 Acre of that part of North fractional % of the
Northeast fractional 114, lying Southeast of Railroad Right-of-way,
T3N, R3W, Section 1, T3N, R3W
Parcel B -Commencing 974.26' South and 33' West of NE Corner,
Section 1, thence West 214.5, South 247.19, N 40Deg 57Min E
327' +1- to Beginning, Section 1, T3N R3W
from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District for an
undetermined commercial use.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 2
Mr. Frederick stated for the record that Ms. Patrick arrived at 7:05 p.m. after role was
taken and that she will be present for the duration of the meeting.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the parcels being included in the CUP and if the
parcels were under the same ownership. Ms. Stachowiak provided an
overview.
Mike Markey, of Silverwood Properties, was available to answer
questions.
Ms. Keene inquired about the type of business that would be located on
the property. Mr. Markey stated that the uses would be neighborhood
convenience retail type uses.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the Waverly Park sign. Mr. Markey gave a short
history.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Frederick
referred Z-14-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting
scheduled for Wednesday, September 11, 2002, at 4:00 p.m., 316 N.
Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
B. Ordinance Amendments - Nonconformities
The proposed amendment to Chapter 1294 (Nonconformities) of the
Zoning Ordinance provides for an exception to the 50% limitation on
restoration and reconstruction of nonconforming properties that receive
low income housing tax credits and are granting a Payment in Lieu of
Taxes (PILOT) under Chapters 884 and 886 of the Lansing Codified
Ordinance.
This change was suggested during discussions on the rezoning requests
by Ferris Development for the properties at 724 and 819 N. Walnut Street.
The City Council was in agreement with the Planning Board that the
rezonings would not be appropriate, however, they would like to see these
properties rehabilitated. The proposed amendment accomplishes the
objective of getting the properties rehabilitated, without compromising the
principles set forth in the Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Since Ferris does receive low income housing tax credits for most of their
projects, they are required to maintain the properties for at least fifteen
years. Since these properties are nonconforming under the current
ordinance, if they were destroyed beyond 50% of their values, they could
not be reconstructed. The proposed change provides for an exception for
these types of properties so that the restoration work can be completed
and Ferris will still be able to obtain its tax credits. It has been determined
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 3
that this would be a reasonable method of allowing the restoration of
residential structures without necessitating rezonings and variances.
Ferris, or another developer would still have to obtain a Class A
Nonconforming Status from the Planning Board in order to be eligible for
the exception.
Ferris Development has asked that the time frame of 15 years be
extended so that if the buildings are severely damaged and need to be
reconstructed or repaired, they would have enough time to accomplish the
construction and still receive the full 15 years that are required with the tax
credits. Ferris has asked that the time frame be extended an additional 3
years (18 years total). The Planning Office believes that an additional
three years is too long, as we would want to have some pressure on the
developer to do the necessary construction in a timely manner. It seems
that one year (16 years total) would be reasonable.
In the interest of time, the proposed ordinance change is on the
September 4, 2002 Planning Commission agenda for a public hearing,
action by the Zoning and Ordinance Committee and final action by the
Planning Board. The City Council has already set its public hearing on
this matter for the September 16, 2002 Council meeting.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Cordill inquired about Section 1, paragraph (c). Ms. Stachowiak
provided an overview.
Mr. Ron Van Zee, of Ferris Development, stated that he wanted to
apologize for the agony the Board endured a few months ago over the
rezonings for 724 and 819 N. Walnut. Because of the hesitation the
Board had in making the decision, the City Council saw a need for a
change in the ordinance. He thanked the City Council, Mayor's Office,
City Attorney, and especially the Planning Department. Mr. Ruff was very
instrumental in making all this come together and work for Ferris
Development. The Federal Government has seen for a long time the
need for affordable housing and this is one way through tax credits that
Ferris Development can stay in the neighborhood and be able to provide
affordable housing. Ferris appreciates the efforts of the Board and
everyone who has had a part in it.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Frederick
referred Ordinance Amendments - Nonconformities to the Committee
of the Whole which will meet after the Urban Development Committee
Report.
It was moved by Mr. Ruge, supported by Ms. Cordill to refer the Ordinance
Amendments - Nonconformities to the Committee of the Whole. On a voice vote, the
motion carried unanimously (5-0).
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 4
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
Seeing no one wishing to address the Board, Mr. Frederick closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was not taken by the Board.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval
Ms. Keene moved; seconded by Mr. Ruge to approve the minutes of
August 20, 2002 with corrections. On a voice vote, the motion carried
(5-0), the minutes of August 20, 2002 were
APPROVED WCORRECTIONS
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, September 11, 2002 at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Patrick, Chair
a. ACT-1 1-2002, 621 E. Hazel Street, Easement for
Vehicular and Fire Access
This is a request by D & C Real Estates, Inc. for a 8,130±
sq. ft. easement on City owned property west of the City
Maintenance building at 621 E. Hazel Street. The easement
would allow for vehicular and fire truck access to the east
side of the Lansing Printing Company/Foresight Group, 619
E. Hazel Street. Lansing Printing is proposing an addition
onto their existing building and fire truck access is required
to be maintained. Lansing Printing presently has an
agreement with the City to park within a portion of this
easement area. Parking is intended to continue.
The proposed location of the easement is on City owned
property west of the City Maintenance building at 621 E.
Hazel Street and east of Lansing Printing/Foresight Group at
619 E. Hazel Street. The surrounding land uses are
primarily residential and industrial. The proposed easement
would not change the character of the area nor should have
any adverse impact on surrounding land uses. The extent is
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 5
an easement for vehicular and fire truck access is required
by the Fire Department. The proposed easement will have
no adverse impact on future development.
Staff recommends approval of the easement which would
allow for vehicular and fire truck access to the east side of
the Lansing Printing Company/Foresight Group, 619 E.
Hazel Street.
Mr. Ruge inquired about parking in the easement. A
discussion ensued.
Ms. Cordill inquired about fire truck accessability. A
discussion ensued.
Bill Christopherson, of DNT, stated that they have been
leasing that property from the City of Lansing, a long time.
Along with this plan, they are building a parking lot across
from Beech Street that will move almost all their parking to
that lot. There is enough width that there are big freight
trucks driving through all day long with the current parking.
With this addition to the building and a new parking lot, they
expect all of their employees to park in the new parking lot.
He stated that this will hold 50 cars and is on the corner of
Beech and Hazel Streets.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend approval of
ACT-11-2002, 621 E. Hazel Street, Easement for Vehicular and Fire Access.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Keene. . . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
b. RiverTrail
In Committee, the following suggestions were offered:
• design the RiverTrail for a wide variety of potential
users and population,
• add pull-off areas to allow slower traffic to get out of
the main traffic flow. These can be used by families,
children or disabled who do not move at a steady
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 6
pace or who wish to stop and slow down without
impeding the rest of the users on the River Trail,
• provide picnic tables or benches for rest stops,
• install bird houses,
• take steps to allay fears about crime on the RiverTrail
(i.e. LPD attend one of the two meetings to address
what is being done in terms of any criminal activity or
how much impact there is),
• use way finding and design treatments to make the
trail heads more attractive and identifiable from both
on and off the RiverTrail.
No Planning Board action was taken at this time. The
Planning Board will be asked to consider two ACT 285
cases regarding the RiverTrail.
C. Lansing Planning Board Comments Regarding "City of
East Lansing Northern Tier Land Use Plan, 2002
Revision."
The Municipal Planning Act (Act 285) has been amended
with provisions which require local governments to provide
adjacent jurisdictions the opportunity to review and comment
on proposed master plan revisions. Although this law has yet
to take effect, East Lansing has given Lansing the
opportunity to comment on its proposed "Northern Tier Land
Use Plan, 2002 Revision."
Several points were raised:
• The City of East Lansing and the E. Lansing school
district have both experienced population declines.
• East Lansing has been expanding through the use of
P.A. 425 agreements in lieu of annexation. These
agreements are products of negotiation. They usually
focus on the provision of services and tax base
sharing, and specify the uses of land within the 425
areas.
• The City of East Lansing is a leader within the region
for transit use and nonmotorized transportation.
• The plan incorporates planning concepts such as
neo-traditional design, walkability, and cluster
development.
Staff recommends that (if it has not done so already) the
City of East Lansing, in cooperation with Tri-County
Regional Planning Commission and MDOT, conduct traffic
modeling to evaluate the impact of development on the city
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 7
itself and on the immediate surrounding road network area.
Overall, the land use plan lays out logical land use patterns
and appears to be a significant improvement to the region.
The committee offered the following comments and
suggestions in addition to the staff comments for Planning
Board approval and submission to the East Lansing
Planning Commission:
• Consider widening Chandler Road and installing
sidewalks & bike lanes to encourage the use of non-
motorized traffic modes for N-S movement.
• The proposed 1-69 freeway interchange at Chandler
Road will likely encourage urban sprawl unless
adequate land use controls are already in place.
• The freeway interchange proposal should be
evaluated in light of the Regional Growth project and
other freeway needs within the region.
• Establish non-motorized links along Lake Lansing
Road, including sidewalks & bike lanes.
• The North Tier plan includes large centrally located
public open space areas and a lot of private open
space. It is suggested that neighborhood parks also
be included to provide accessible public recreation in
close proximity (walking distance) to residences.
• Continue to work closely within the principles and
goals of the Regional Growth project, which include
the encouragement of agricultural entrepreneurism in
rural areas, to discourage sprawl.
Mr. Ruge stated that this is great establishing non-motorized
links along Lake Lansing Road. Lansing's portion of Lake
Lansing Road is not very friendly to people who are walking
or biking. He inquired about the new development and
rebuilding of Lake Lansing Road. A discussion ensued.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to refer these comments to the
City of East Lansing.
Frederick . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Keene. . . Ave Ruge. . . Aye
Patrick . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 8
Mr. Frederick stated it was nice that the Board had the opportunity to review the plan
and asked that the Planning Office send their appreciation to the City of East Lansing.
Next meeting, Tuesday, September 24, 2002, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
Mr. Ruge made a motion; seconded by Ms. Cordill to dissolve into the Committee of the
Whole. On a voice vote, the motion carried.
3a. Committee of the Whole, Mr. Ruge, Chair
a. Ordinance Amendments - Nonconformities
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Mr. Ruge inquired about Section 1, paragraph (b), "market
value OF THE BUILDING." Ms. Stachowiak provided an
overview.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the 15 years. A discussion ensued.
Mr. Ruge inquired about Chapters 884 and 886. A
discussion ensued.
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to support the Ordinance
Amendments to the Nonconforming Section and with the amendment that it be
(1) 18 years versus 15 years as shown. The purpose of that would be to allow
additional time for the repair of the structure in the event of a fire as well as to
process all the tax credits and the sale of the tax credits, and make sure there is a
15 year window for those tax credits to apply, and (2) for the Attorney's Office to
determine if the "AND" between the numbers "884 AND 886" on page 2, line 6,
and page 1, line 7, should be AND or OR. On a voice vote, the motion carried
unanimously (5-0).
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to arise from the Committee of
the Whole. On a voice vote, the motion carried.
3b. Committee of the Whole, Mr. Ruge, Chair
a. Ordinance Amendments - Nonconformities
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend approval of the
Ordinance Amendments - Nonconformities as written with the exceptions noted:
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 9
(1) 18 years versus 15 years as shown. The purpose of that would be to allow
additional time for the repair of the structure in the event of a fire as well as to
process all the tax credits and the sale of the tax credits, and make sure there is a
15 year window for those tax credits to apply, and (2) for the Attorney's Office to
determine if the "AND" between the numbers "884 AND 886" on page 2, line 6,
and page 1, line 7, should be AND or OR.
Frederick Ave Cordill. An
Keene. Ave Ruge. Aye
Patrick Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
Mr. Ruff stated that 6 votes are required for an official Planning Board recommendation
on an ordinance and that this will go to City Council without an official recommendation,
but with all the information of a vote.
4. Executive Committee - None.
C. REPORT FROM PLANNING MANAGER
Mr. Ruff stated that there should be one or two appointments for the
Board in the upcoming month. There will also be a hearing on housing
needs as well as CIP on October I"
There will also meetings with some of the leaders of the Eastside,
Northwest and the Southside Summits to do some coordination of Master
Plan issues.
D. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St.,"H" Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. Z-5-1998,401-407 E. Grand River,"F"Commercial District to"G-1" Business
District(Tabled June 10, 1998)
C. P-1-2001,Tentative Preliminary Plat,Wexford Woods(Tabled June 13,May
9,2001)-WITHDRAWN.
d. PRD-2-2001,"Crystal Woods", Planned Residential Neighborhood (Tabled
August 15,2001)
e. SLU-8-2001, 3000 W. Miller Road,Additional Parking for an Existing Church
(Tabled November 14,2001)
f. SLU-3-2002, 2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J"Parking District(Tabled May 15, 2002)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000,201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27,2000)
b. Act-2-2002, Lansing Housing Commission Property, 310 Seymour,Acquisition
for public purposes(Tabled February 26,2002)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 10
8. NEW BUSINESS
Election of Officers
Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge to suspend the rules of
procedure for the election of officers to be held at the next meeting scheduled for
September 17`h. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously.
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS - None.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS
Mr. Ruge inquired about the Michigan Avenue church. He stated that they put
up a fence, cut out the asphalt and are growing a nice crop of weeds. There are
no bushes. Ms. Stachowiak will look into the situation.
Ms. Patrick inquired about when screening and buffering is required for a site
plan, whether the plant materials are to be placed on the property owner's side
or on the buffering side. Ms. Stachowiak provided an overview.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the church on Willow Street and stated that they are not
occupying the building. Mr. Ruff stated that the church has experienced some
difficulties and are trying to get them resolved. There is some final work that
needs to be completed inside the building with regards to plumbing and
electrical.
Mr. Frederick stated that when traveling west on Cavanaugh Road approaching
Aurelius Road, someone took out the sign designating Aurelius Road. The sign
was located on the north side of the road. Mr. Ruff will forward to the
appropriate department.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the church on Cavanaugh Road and stated that the
church does not have blacktop where the buses are parked.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
James A. Ruff, Secretary, Planning Board
PB Minutes.090402.wpd
Draft to Clerk September 10,2002
Approved 2002
To Clerk 2002
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Wednesday, September 4, 2002
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Chairman Frederick.
A. Roll call. Present: Frederick, Cordill, Keene, Patrick, Ruge.
B. Staff Attending: Ruff, Stachowiak, Rieske.
C. Excused absences: Foster.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
It was moved by Ms. Keene, supported by Mr. Ruge to approve the agenda. On
a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS - None.
4. HEARINGS
A. Z-14-2002, SW Corner Hartford & Waverly, "A" Residential District to
"F" Commercial District
This is a request by Michael Markey of Silverwood Properties to rezone
two properties at the Southwest corner of Hartford and Waverly Roads,
more specifically described as:
Parcel A -North 1 Acre of that part of North fractional % of the
Northeast fractional 114, lying Southeast of Railroad Right-of-way,
T3N, R3W, Section 1, T3N, R3W
Parcel B -Commencing 974.26' South and 33' West of NE Corner,
Section 1, thence West 214.5, South 247.19', N 40Deg 57Min E
327' +1- to Beginning, Section 1, T3N R3W
from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District for an
undetermined commercial use.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 2
Mr. Frederick stated for the record that Ms. Patrick arrived at 7:05 p.m. after role was
taken and that she will be present for the duration of the meeting.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the parcels being included in the CUP and if the
parcels were under the same ownership. Ms. Stachowiak gave an
explanation.
Mike Markey, of Silverwood Properties, was available to answer
questions.
Ms. Keene inquired about the type of business that would be located on
the property. Mr. Markey gave a brief overview.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the Waverly Park sign. Mr. Markey gave a short
history.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Frederick
referred Z-14-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting
scheduled for Wednesday, September 11, 2002, at 4:00 p.m., 316 N.
Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
B. Ordinance Amendments - Nonconformities
The proposed amendment to Chapter 1294 (Nonconformities) of the
Zoning Ordinance provides for an exception to the 50% limitation on
restoration and reconstruction of nonconforming properties that receive
low income housing tax credits and are granting a Payment in Lieu of
Taxes (PILOT) under Chapters 884 and 886 of the Lansing Codified
Ordinance.
This change was suggested during discussions on the rezoning requests
by Ferris Development for the properties at 724 and 819 N. Walnut Street.
The City Council was in agreement with the Planning Board that the
rezonings would not be appropriate, however, they would like to see these
properties rehabilitated. The proposed amendment accomplishes the
objective of getting the properties rehabilitated, without compromising the
principles set forth in the Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Since Ferris does receive low income housing tax credits for most of their
projects, they are required to maintain the properties for at least fifteen
years. Since these properties are nonconforming, under the current
ordinance, if they were destroyed beyond 50% of their values, they could
not be reconstructed. The proposed change provides for an exception for
these types of properties so that the restoration work can be completed
and Ferris will still be able to obtain its tax credits. It has been determined
that this would be a reasonable method of allowing the restoration of
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 3
residential structures without necessitating rezonings and variances.
Ferris, or another developer would still have to obtain a Class A
Nonconforming Status from the Planning Board in order to be eligible for
the exception.
Ferris Development has asked that the time frame of 15 years be
extended so that if the buildings are severely damaged and need to be
reconstructed or repaired, they would have enough time to accomplish the
construction and still receive the full 15 years that are required with the tax
credits. Ferris has asked that the time frame be extended an additional 3
years (18 years total). The Planning Office believes that three years is too
long, as we would want to have some pressure on the developer to do the
necessary construction in a timely manner. It seems that one year (16
years total) would be reasonable.
In the interest of time, the proposed ordinance change is on the
September 4, 2002 Planning Commission agenda for a public hearing,
action by the Zoning and Ordinance Committee and final action by the
Planning Board. The City Council has already set its public hearing on
this matter for the September 16, 2002 Council meeting.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Codill inquired about Section 1, paragraph (c). Ms. Stachowiak gave
an explanation.
Mr. Ron Van Zee, of Ferris Development, stated that he wanted to
apologize for the agony the Board endured a few months ago. Because
of the hesitation the Board had in making the decision, the City Council
saw a need for a change in the ordinance. He thanked the City Council,
Mayor's Office, City Attorney, and especially the Planning Department.
Mr. Ruff was very instrumental in making all this come together and work
for Ferris Development. The Federal Government has seen for a long
time the need for affordable housing and this is one way through tax
credits that Ferris Development can stay in the neighborhood and be able
to provide affordable housing. Ferris appreciates the efforts of the Board
and everyone who has had a part in it.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Frederick
referred Ordinance Amendments - Nonconformities to the next Zoning
and Ordinance Committee meeting scheduled for Wednesday, September
11, 2002, at 4:00 p.m., 316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference
Room.
It was moved by Mr. Ruge, supported by Ms. Cordill to refer the Ordinance
Amendments - Nonconformities to the Committee of the Whole. On a voice vote, the
motion carried unanimously (5-0).
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 4
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
Seeing no one wishing to address the Board, Mr. Frederick closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was not taken by the Board.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval
Ms. Keene moved; seconded by Mr. Ruge to approve the minutes of
August 20, 2002 with corrections. On a voice vote, the motion carried
(6-0), the minutes of August 20, 2002 were
APPROVED w/CORRECTIONS
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, September 11, 2002 at4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Patrick, Chair
a. ACT-1 1-2002, 621 E. Hazel Street, Easement for
Vehicular and Fire Access
This is a request by D & C Real Estates, Inc. for a 8,130±
sq. ft. easement on City owned property west of the City
Maintenance building at 621 E. Hazel Street. The easement
would allow for vehicular and fire truck access to the east
side of the Lansing Printing Company/Foresight Group, 619
E. Hazel Street. Lansing Printing is proposing an addition
onto their existing building and fire truck access is required
to be maintained. Lansing Printing presently has an
agreement with the City to park within a portion of this
easement area. Parking is intended to continue.
The proposed location of the easement is on City owned
property west of the City Maintenance building at 621 E.
Hazel Street and east of Lansing Printing/Foresight Group at
619 E. Hazel Street. The surrounding land uses are
primarily residential and industrial. The proposed easement
would not change the character of the area nor should have
any adverse impact on surrounding land uses. The extent is
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 5
an easement for vehicular and fire truck access is required
by the Fire Department. The proposed easement will have
no adverse impact on future development.
Staff recommends approval of the easement which would
allow for vehicular and fire truck access to the east side of
the Lansing Printing Company/Foresight Group, 619 E.
Hazel Street.
Mr. Ruge inquired about parking in the easement. A
discussion ensued.
Ms. Cordill inquired about fire truck accessibility. A
discussion ensued.
Bill Christopherson, of DNT, stated that they have been
leasing that property from the City of Lansing, a long time.
Along with this plan, they are building a parking lot across
from Beech Street that will move almost all their parking to
that lot. There is enough width that there are big freight
trucks driving through all day long with the current parking.
With this addition to the building and a new parking lot, they
expect all of their employees to park in the new parking lot.
He stated that this will hold 50 cars and is on the corner of
Beech and Hazel Streets.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend approval of
ACT-11-2002, 621 E. Hazel Street, Easement for Vehicular and Fire Access.
Frederick . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Keene. . Ave Ruae. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Patrick . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
b. RiverTrail
In Committee, the following suggestions were offered:
• design the RiverTrail for a wide variety of potential
users and population,
• add areas to allow slower traffic to get out of
the main traffic flow. These can be used by families,
children or disabled who do not move at a steady
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 6
pace or who wish to stop and slow down without
impeding the rest of the users on the River Trail,
• provide picnic tables or benches for rest stops,
• install bird houses,
• take steps to allay fears about crime on the RiverTrail
(i.e. LPD attend one of the two meetings to address
what is being done in terms of any criminal activity or
how much impact there is),
• use way finding and design treatments to make the
trail heads more attractive and identifiable from both
on and off the RiverTrail.
C. Lansing Planning Board Comments Regarding "City of
East Lansing Northern Tier Land Use Plan, 2002
Revision."
The Municipal Planning Act (Act 285) has been amended
with provisions which require local governments to provide
adjacent jurisdictions the opportunity to review and comment
on proposed master plan revisions. Although this law has yet
to take effect, East Lansing has given Lansing the
opportunity to comment on its proposed "Northern Tier Land
Use Plan, 2002 Revision."
Several points were raised:
• The City of East Lansing and the E. Lansing school
district have both experienced population declines.
• East Lansing has been expanding through the use of
P.A. 425 agreements in lieu of annexation. These
agreements are products of negotiation. They usually
focus on the provision of services and tax base
sharing, and specify the uses of land within the 425
areas.
• The City of East Lansing is a leader within the region
for transit use and nonmotorized transportation.
• The plan incorporates planning concepts such as
neo-traditional design, walkability, and cluster
development.
Staff recommends that (if it has not done so already) the
City of East Lansing, in cooperation with Tri-County
Regional Planning Commission and MDOT, conduct traffic
modeling to evaluate the impact of development on the city
itself and on the immediate surrounding road network area.
Overall, the land use plan lays out logical land use patterns
and appears to be a significant improvement to the region.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 7
The committee offered the following comments and
suggestions in addition to the staff comments for Planning
Board approval and submission to the East Lansing
Planning Commission:
• Consider widening Chandler Road and installing
sidewalks & bike lanes to encourage the use of non-
motorized traffic modes for N-S movement.
• The proposed 1-69 freeway interchange at Chandler
Road will likely encourage urban sprawl unless
adequate land use controls are already in place.
• The freeway interchange proposal should be
evaluated in light of the Regional Growth project and
other freeway needs within the region.
• Establish non-motorized links along Lake Lansing
Road, including sidewalks & bike lanes.
• The North Tier plan includes large centrally located
public open space areas and a lot of private open
space. It is suggested that neighborhood parks also
be included to provide accessible public recreation in
close proximity (walking distance) to residences.
• Continue to work closely within the principles and
goals of the Regional Growth project, which include
the encouragement of agricultural entrepreneurism in
rural areas, to discourage sprawl.
Mr. Ruge stated that this is great establishing non-motorized
links along Lake Lansing Road. Lansing's portion of Lake
Lansing Road is not very friendly to people who are walking
or biking. He inquired about the new development and
rebuilding of Lake Lansing Road. A discussion ensued.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to refer these comments to the
City of East Lansing.
Frederick . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . Ave
Keene. . . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Patrick . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
Mr. Frederick stated it was nice that the Board had the opportunity to review it and send
their appreciation to the City of East Lansing.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 8
Next meeting, Tuesday, September 24, 2002, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
Mr. Ruge made a motion; seconded by Ms. Cordill to dissolve into the Committee of the
Whole. On a voice vote, the motion carried.
3a. Committee of the Whole, Mr. Smith, Chair
a. Ordinance Amendments - Nonconformities
The proposed amendment to Chapter 1294
(Nonconformities) of the Zoning Ordinance provides for an
exception to the 50% limitation on restoration and
reconstruction of nonconforming properties that receive low
income housing tax credits and are granting a Payment in
Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) under Chapters 884 and 886 of the
Lansing Codified Ordinance.
This change was suggested during discussions on the
rezoning requests by Ferris Development for the properties
at 724 and 819 N. Walnut Street. The City Council was in
agreement with the Planning Board that the rezonings would
not be appropriate, however, they would like to see these
properties rehabilitated. The proposed amendment
accomplishes the objective of getting the properties
rehabilitated, without compromising the principles set forth in
the Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Since Ferris does receive low income housing tax credits for
most of their projects, they are required to maintain the
properties for at least fifteen years. Since these properties
are nonconforming, under the current ordinance, if they were
destroyed beyond 50% of their values, they could not be
reconstructed. The proposed change provides for an
exception for these types of properties so that the
restoration work can be completed and Ferris will still be
able to obtain its tax credits. It has been determined that
this would be a reasonable method of allowing the
restoration of residential structures without necessitating
rezonings and variances. Ferris, or another developer would
still have to obtain a Class A Nonconforming Status from the
Planning Board in order to be eligible for the exception.
Ferris Development has asked that the time frame of 15
years be extended so that if the buildings are severely
damaged and need to be reconstructed or repaired, they
would have enough time to accomplish the construction and
still receive the full 15 years that are required with the tax
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 9
credits. Ferris has asked that the time frame be extended
an additional 3 years (18 years total). The Planning Office
believes that three years is too long, as we would want to
have some pressure on the developer to do the necessary
construction in a timely manner. It seems that one year (16
years total) would be reasonable.
In the interest of time, the proposed ordinance change is on
the September 4, 2002 Planning Commission agenda for a
public hearing, action by the Zoning and Ordinance
Committee and final action by the Planning Board. The City
Council has already set its public hearing on this matter for
the September 16, 2002 Council meeting.
Mr. Ruge inquired about Section 1, paragraph (b), market
value OF THE BUILDING. Ms. Stachowiak gave an
explanation.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the 15 years. A discussion ensued.
Mr. Ruge inquired about Chapters 884 and 886. A
discussion ensued.
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to support the Ordinance
Amendments to the Nonconforming Section and with the amendment that it be (1)
18 years versus 15 years as shown. The purpose of that would be to allow
additional time for the repair of the structure in the event of a fire as well as to
process all the tax credits and the sale of the tax credits, and make sure there is a
15 year window for those tax credits to apply, and (2) for the Attorney's Office to
question the "AND" in between the number "884 AND 886" on page 2, line 6, and
page 1, line 7, on whether that should be AND or OR. On a voice vote, the motion
carried unanimously (5-0).
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to arise from the Committee of
the Whole. On a voice vote, the motion carried.
3b. Committee of the Whole, Mr. Ruge, Chair
a. Ordinance Amendments - Nonconformities
The proposed amendment to Chapter 1294
(Nonconformities) of the Zoning Ordinance provides for an
exception to the 50% limitation on restoration and
reconstruction of nonconforming properties that receive low
income housing tax credits and are granting a Payment in
Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) under Chapters 884 and 886 of the
Lansing Codified Ordinance.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 10
This change was suggested during discussions on the
rezoning requests by Ferris Development for the properties
at 724 and 819 N. Walnut Street. The City Council was in
agreement with the Planning Board that the rezonings would
not be appropriate, however, they would like to see these
properties rehabilitated. The proposed amendment
accomplishes the objective of getting the properties
rehabilitated, without compromising the principles set forth in
the Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Since Ferris does receive low income housing tax credits for
most of their projects, they are required to maintain the
properties for at least fifteen years. Since these properties
are nonconforming, under the current ordinance, if they were
destroyed beyond 50% of their values, they could not be
reconstructed. The proposed change provides for an
exception for these types of properties so that the
restoration work can be completed and Ferris will still be
able to obtain its tax credits. It has been determined that
this would be a reasonable method of allowing the
restoration of residential structures without necessitating
rezonings and variances. Ferris, or another developer would
still have to obtain a Class A Nonconforming Status from the
Planning Board in order to be eligible for the exception.
Ferris Development has asked that the time frame of 15
years be extended so that if the buildings are severely
damaged and need to be reconstructed or repaired, they
would have enough time to accomplish the construction and
still receive the full 15 years that are required with the tax
credits. Ferris has asked that the time frame be extended
an additional 3 years (18 years total). The Planning Office
believes that three years is too long, as we would want to
have some pressure on the developer to do the necessary
construction in a timely manner. It seems that one year (16
years total) would be reasonable.
In the interest of time, the proposed ordinance change is on
the September 4, 2002 Planning Commission agenda for a
public hearing, action by the Zoning and Ordinance
Committee and final action by the Planning Board. The City
Council has already set its public hearing on this matter for
the September 16, 2002 Council meeting.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend approval of the
Ordinance Amendments - Nonconformities as written with the exceptions noted: (1)
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 11
18 years versus 15 years as shown. The purpose of that would be to allow
additional time for the repair of the structure in the event of a fire as well as to
process all the tax credits and the sale of the tax credits, and make sure there is a
15 year window for those tax credits to apply, and (2) for the Attorney's Office to
question the "AND" in between the number "884 AND 886" on page 2, line 6, and
page 1, line 7, on whether that should be AND or OR.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Keene. . . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
Mr. Ruff stated that this will go to City Council without an official recommendation but
with all the information of a vote.
4. Executive Committee - None.
C. REPORT FROM PLANNING MANAGER
Mr. Ruff stated that there should be one or two appointments for the
Board in the upcoming month. There will also be a hearing on housing
needs as well as CIP on October I".
There will also meetings with some of the leaders of the Eastside,
Northwest and the Southside Summits to do some coordination of Master
Plan issues.
D. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St.,"H" Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. Z-5-1998,401-407 E. Grand River, "F"Commercial District to"G-1"Business
District(Tabled June 10, 1998)
C. P-1-2001,Tentative Preliminary Plat,Wexford Woods(Tabled June 13,May
9, 2001)-WITHDRAWN.
d. PRD-2-2001,"Crystal Woods", Planned Residential Neighborhood (Tabled
August 15,2001)
e. SLU-8-2001, 3000 W. Miller Road,Additional Parking for an Existing Church
(Tabled November 14,2001)
f. SLU-3-2002, 2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J" Parking District(Tabled May 15, 2002)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000,201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27, 2000)
b. Act-2-2002, Lansing Housing Commission Property, 310 Seymour,Acquisition
for public purposes (Tabled February 26,2002)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2002 Page 12
8. NEW BUSINESS
Election of Officers
Ms. Keene made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge to suspend the rules for the
election of officers to the next meeting scheduled for September 171h. On a voice
vote, the motion carried.
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS - None.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS
Mr. Ruge inquired about the Michigan Avenue church. He stated that they put
up a fence, cut out the asphalt and are growing a nice crop of weeds. There are
no bushes. Ms. Stachowiak will look into the situation.
Ms. Patrick inquired about when screening and buffering are required in a site
plan, are the plant materials on the property owner's side or on the side buffering
from. Ms. Stachowiak provided an overview.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the church on Willow Street and stated that they are not
occupying the building. Mr. Ruff stated that the church has experienced some
difficulties and are trying to get them resolved. There is some final work that
needs to be completed inside the building with regards to plumbing and
electrical.
Mr. Frederick stated that when traveling west on Cavanaugh Road approaching
Aurelius Road, someone took out the sign designating Aurelius Road. The sign
was located on the north side of the road. Mr. Ruff will forward to the
appropriate department.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the church on Cavanaugh Road and stated that the
church does not have blacktop where the buses are parked.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
James A. Ruff, Secretary, Planning Board
PB Minutes.090402.wpd
APPROVED WITH CORRECTIONS: Draft to Clerk August 29,2002
PAGE 19, UNDER PLANNING BOARD ACTION Approved September 4,2002
DELETE UNANIMOUS To Clerk September 5,2002
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, August 20, 2002
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Chairman Frederick.
A. Roll call. Present: Frederick, Cordill, Foster, Keene, Patrick, Ruge.
B. Staff Attending: Ruff, Stachowiak, Wynant.
C. Excused absences: None.
Mr. Ruff stated that in the audience from the Parks and Recreation Department
is Mr. Murdock Jemerson and Mr. Phil Dorland of Parks Administration,
Representatives from Landscape Architects and Planners Consulting Firm, and
Mr. John Coleman from the Tri County Regional Planning Commission.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
It was moved by Ms. Keene, supported by Mr. Ruge to approve the agenda. On
a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (6-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Letter from Jim and Judy Sturdevant supporting the proposed expansion
of the RiverTrail.
B. Letter from Mr. Ron Whitmore supporting the proposed expansion of the
RiverTrail.
C. Letter from Mr. Rick Kibbey supporting SLU-6-2002
D. Letter from E.T. MacKenzie Company addressing construction issues for
SLU-6-2002.
4. HEARINGS - None.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
Kellie Dean, Owner of Dean Transportation located at 4812 Aurelius Road,
stated that their property is approximately 19 acres and is owned by Dean
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 2
Investment Properties, LLC. Over the last several years as the concept of
expanding the RiverTrail has arisen, he enthusiastically approached the City of
Lansing about the possibility, as a property owner and citizen, of participating in
some form or fashion. As the RiverTrail expansion appears to be growing to the
south, his property is a prime location to connect the Hawk Island Park off
Cavanaugh and go south towards the Ingham County Soccer Complex. He is
addressing the Board this evening as an enthusiastic participant with the City
and the Planning Board to commit anywhere from 500 to 1,000 feet of property
which would be very scenic along Sycamore Creek which is on the southern-
most and western-most border of his property to help link those properties
described, Hawk Island and the soccer zone to the south, if in fact, that is the
direction that it appears the trail is heading. Through his commitment, he speaks
very enthusiastically about the City's commitment to extend the property to the
south and he looks forward to participating in any fashion that he can.
Kerrin Olbrien, resident of 804 Downer Avenue, stated that she is on the
board of the Mid Michigan Environmental Action Council (MMEAC) which has its
office right on the river walk. She personally rides her bike on the river walk
whenever she has the opportunity and she enjoys it very much. She is an
advocate and supporter of the river walk and any extension to the trail to
connect it to the outer regions that are beyond the City of Lansing. The MMEAC
is an advocate and supporter and will be working very hard within the community
to generate support for these activities. They will also be working with their
contacts in the region and around the City to start to link and connect the trails
that are outside the City.
Jon Coleman, Executive Director of the Tri County Regional Planning
Commission located at 913 W. Holmes Road, Suite 201, stated that he came
before the Board some time back to discuss the regional growth project that has
been ongoing for 3 years and is nearing completion. There are elements of the
growth project that are very well connected to the plans that will be presented
tonight. He would like to point out some of them. He noted that these are not
final and that they are still in draft form. They are approaching final approval
sometime this fall on the regional plan. On the Principles for the long range
growth plan, there are two that specifically deal with this. Principal 21 called
Green Ways and Walk Ability reads "pathways, sidewalks, trails and bike lanes
should be developed to provide alternatives to motorized transportation and
improve recreational opportunities to the residents of the region." Principal 22
deals with park and recreation expansion and linkage. It reads, "Based upon the
preferred vision, parks and recreation expansion should occur with an emphasis
on linkage of the facilities through green ways." In addition to those kind of
general principles, there are several specific objectives that are incorporated into
the growth project. He will touch on those quickly. One goal is to encourage and
identify funding for physical linkages such as bike, pedestrian and equestrian
path ways that connect important regional assets such as parks and community
services. Specifically, an objective would be to create a regional green way plan.
Secondly, to create a regional non-motorized transportation plan. Non-motorized
simply meaning bikes, pedestrian walkways, etc. Another goal is to create a
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 3
regional system of parks that preserve regional natural corridors and open
space. An objective area is to identify natural corridors and open space
conducive for parks within the region. Finally, a goal is to identify, promote and
encourage public access points to rivers, lakes, that have water quality suitable
for recreational use. Again, specific objectives would be to identify water bodies
that are suitable for recreational use and inventory land suitable to provide public
access to water. These principles and objectives came out of 12 forums that
were held across the region over the last year. There were approximately 1,500
people involved in this process. Clearly the preservation of the recreational
quarters and parks, and linking these together through non-motorized pedestrian
and bike paths was a top priority of the people who attended the forums. They
actually voted on some of these objectives and principles. He believes that part
of the regional plan that the Tri County Regional Planning Commission put
together tries to work together with multiple governments. He stated that the City
needs these inner connecting linkages that go not only within the City of Lansing
as planned here, but well beyond into other communities linking together some
of the natural resources that are available. He thanked the Board for the
opportunity to speak. He again reiterated the draft plan. Clearly Tri County
Regional Planning Commission has had a lot of input and support for this type of
a project that the City of Lansing is undertaking.
Nancy Krupiarz, State Director of the Rails to Trails Conservancy Michigan
Chapter located at 416 S. Cedar Street, Suite C, and a resident of Haslett,
stated that she works at the Blair building which is right on the RiverTrail. She
uses the RiverTrail quite a bit to get from home to work and enjoys it a lot. She
believes that Mid Michigan really deserves an expanded trail system like the
ones already developed in similar size cities around the state. The City seems to
have lagged behind a little bit in making those Mid Michigan connections. Places
like Grand Rapids, Muskegon, Kalamazoo, Battle Creek, Midland, Flint and Bay
City are all rolling with their own trail systems and they are beginning to realize
the economic benefits of such amenities. It is really a big answer to many of the
questions that plague our City these days. How do we build Lansing's quality of
life? How do we realize more tourism revenue? How do we get more people
from the suburbs to come to downtown Lansing and experience all that the
downtown area has to offer? She believes that expanding the RiverTrail would
answer a lot of those questions and bring a lot of people downtown. Be able to
lessen that doughnut affect that happens in so many of our cities as people
move out and there is not enough to keep them coming back to the downtown.
However, she does believe that the Lansing RiverTrail has not done everything
that it can to experience a lot of the benefits that other trails have experienced.
Part of that is because it does a really good job of preserving nature. It is a
beautiful trail but there is not a lot to have it interact with the City in terms of ice
cream shops or business, places that people would want to go to bring them
down along the trail to be able to integrate it with the City. There is a lot that
could be done. There has been some remarks over the years about putting too
much into the trail. More needs to be put into the downtown. She believes that
there is a lot that could be done with the trail. The City should be able to have
signage to bring people downtown, have easier access from the trail to the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 4
downtown area, be able to develop along the trail itself, have places for trail
users to go, and make it a really enjoyable place to visit, spend the day and
spend money. Michigan State University did an extensive study regarding the
Pier Marquette Trail in the Midland area. She would be glad to share the results
of that study. She has an executive summary of the study available in case
anyone is interested. MSU embraced the trail and used it in different ways
between all the user groups (i.e. seniors, children, education, businesses,
employees). MSU has done an excellent job of examining all the benefits there
are to a trail. Rails to Trails Conservancy stands ready to help in any way
possible to provide their experiences from across the state and across the nation
to make the best use of the RiverTrail. Expanding the trail is the way to go to get
the best benefit from it.
Dave Goodman, resident of 605 Birchwood Street, Dewitt, stated that he is
not a Lansing resident but he is a regional area resident. He is a member of the
North Country Trails Association. This is a trail that runs from New York State to
North Dakota. Currently, it is in the building process. Maybe some people know
about it. The Trail runs through the Grand Rapids area in Jackson. Other
people were talking about a regional trail system. He believes that this would be
the perfect opportunity for bikes to link to other rail trails. The bigger the trail
network, the better. He wanted to share some information with the Board. He
has enjoyed using the trail and he would like to see it become as big as possible.
Jessica Yorko, resident of 316 N. Sycamore, Apt. #1, stated that she works at
the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality and she is on the Board of
the Mid Michigan Environmental Action Council. She frequently uses the trail to
travel to East Lansing and prefers to travel by bike than by car whenever
possible. She would be very enthusiastic to see the trail expand to other areas
of the region so that she could travel by bike more often. She would enjoy
having more businesses along the trail.
Patricia Prince, resident of 1030 Garfield Avenue, Delta Township, stated
that she is a regular rail trail user. She was not sure how to improve on Ms.
Nancy Krupiarz comments. They were the same as hers. She is employed with
Lansing Grand River Assembly, a world class facility. She would like to see
Lansing have a world class trail. The David Trail is an excellent trail on the west
side of the state as is the White Pine Trail. These trails are a way to get from
one community to another. She has seen all kinds of people on these trails (i.e.
young, old, differently abled). She sees people who really enjoy being on the rail
trail and having a good time. She brought some materials for the Board to
review. She also went to Wisconsin to a town that sponsored a recumbent rally,
which is a different type of bicycle. The town reminded her of Lansing. It has a
nice river, Wisconsin River, with a huge park and pavilion. It hosted
approximately 300 people who were interested in these bicycles. Ms. Krupiarz is
right about revitalizing the downtown communities. In the Wisconsin community,
the store fronts were restored. She is old enough to remember when
Washington Avenue was something grand and she would like to see it that way
again. She would like to see people downtown. She believes that this would
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 5
definitely give it a kick start. It may not be the cure but it would certainly help.
She lives within 3 miles of her place of work. She has attempted to ride her bike
to work but when she crossed Saginaw Street, she was pretty intimidated. She
went back to driving her car. She has also spoken with coworkers who live in the
Grand Ledge area. If the trail reached Waverly Road, they might see a chance
of the trail extending to Grand Ledge and other communities around Lansing.
People could take their bikes to work and maybe alleviate some of the traffic
congestion downtown. There are several things to review when making a
decision to implement something like this. She believes that linear trails are
going to be something that is as vital to a community as a traditional park. She
has envisioned that someday maybe there will be a link nation wide and people
will be using these trails to get from one state to another. There is no end to the
possibilities of what could happen once this is implemented. If this is not done in
Lansing, someone else will. Someone else will reap the benefits and she would
hate to see the City lose out. This is a nice community and she sincerely hopes
that people will think ahead.
Christina Riddle, resident of 2049 Hamilton Road, Okemos, stated that she
has worked downtown for ten years for the Veterans Trust Fund. She has been
living in Okemos for five years. She has recently been moved out of the
downtown area to the westside of Lansing. She has no way of easily getting
back to the downtown area without using an automobile. One of the things her
job has shown her is the number of people, for a variety of reasons, who do not
have a car. Getting from one place to another without an automobile is a
challenge in this society. To have an opportunity to have trails that go
someplace is exciting. She encouraged the Board to do whatever they need to
do to make it happen. As a representative of Region 6 for the League of
Michigan Bicyclists which includes Lansing, she is surrounded by her fellow
representatives from other parts of the state who route their trails. She cannot
show off a trail system. She can show a trail but not a trail system. Some of the
other communities are kind of showing up Lansing and she does not like that.
She would like for Lansing to be in the front of this and she thinks that this is a
wonderful step. From the heart of someone like Mr. Kellie Dean to be endorsing
this is very exciting. She received an email letter, in response to the notice that
was mailed regarding this meeting, that was addressed to the Board. This was
from a resident on Desoto Street, Ms. Joanne Creede. She presented a copy of
the letter to the Board. Ms. Creede used the trail daily to train for a 60 mile
walking event, and has kept on using the trail after that event. Ms. Creede
describes the dynamics of the trail in terms of wildlife. It is very exciting to
conceptualize what Ms. Creede is saying. Ms. Creede also stated that if there
are people that like to object to a trail in their yard, encourage the people to
move because there are a lot of others who would like to come and move in
there.
Lucinda Means, Executive Director of the League of Michigan Bicyclists
and resident of 1136 Burcham, East Lansing, stated that Ms. Christina Riddle
is one of her Board members. She believes that the river trail is a tremendous
asset to the community and that it can be even more of an asset to the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 6
community if the proposed extensions are implemented. She wanted to briefly
discuss some of the benefits that the community is already realizing. There are
economic benefits that are being realized now. She stands at the window of the
conference room of her work when she is taking a break and she sees all the
people who are state workers, city workers, and people who work in businesses
downtown pouring onto the trail. Either they are running, walking, or even roller
blading. One can tell that the people are actually having what she calls vertical
meetings as they walk down the river trail. Having a break or having this trail as
an amenity available to the employees that work in the various businesses, state
and city agencies downtown is a tremendous benefit. It can be turned into
dollars and cents because having this amenity makes it more likely that the City
would be able to retain quality employees, and offer perspective employees an
exciting place to work. There are also health benefits. She knows that the
Board is probably aware of the very grim statistics that the state is facing in
terms of obesity. Michigan has the dubious honor or distinction of being tied with
Mississippi for second place of obesity in the country. The winner she believes
is Louisiana. It is unconscionable that Michigan is in that state. Having a river
trail, whether it is the length it is now or even better extending it, means that
people want to get out and get healthy. Whether roller blading, walking, strolling
with their babies, jogging, bike riding or doing winter sports, the City needs this
as a public health benefit. The City needs to have this opportunity for people to
use the river trail to get healthy. Otherwise, Michigan's obesity statistics will
continue to sky rocket. The community and the state cannot afford that because
everyone knows that it translates into very expensive health care costs (i.e. heart
attacks and other cardiopulmonary problems). One suggestion that she would
like to make to the Planning Commission and City Council is that some sort of
non-motorized transportation advisory committee be created if the City has none.
Take this up from the point of view of people who are knowledgeable about non-
motorized transportation. This system that is being built needs to have a holistic
approach. It cannot be just piece meal. This is one of the problems that she has
had in the past. Having a committee that can help the City and the Tri County
region integrate this system into a regional plan, and having interested experts
and citizens who are knowledgeable about non-motorized transportation would
be very adventagous. It just so happens that there are an enormous number of
people in the Tri County Bicycle Association, the League of Michigan Bicyclists,
the Rails to Trails Conservancy and other like-minded groups that have the
expertise. The League of Michigan Bicyclists, which shares office space with
Mid MEAC and with the Rails to Trails Conservancy, has quite of bit of a growing
resource library that has an enormous amount of information regarding
specifications, designs, innovations, and trail design, resolving user conflicts, and
a variety of information. The League of Michigan Bicyclists would love to make
this available to the City. Yesterday, she was on the river trail from 6:00 p.m. to
8:00 p.m. doing an observation for a project that she is currently working on with
the Department of Community Health. Even though she works in the building
and looks at the river trail daily, she was awe struck by the diversity and sheer
quantity of people who use the trail (i.e. black, white, Hispanic, Asian, young
couples, small children, seniors, disabled, bicyclists, skate boarders, roller
bladers, all ages, all genders, all degrees of abilities). Because the Tri County
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 7
Bicycle Association had a table there and were offering cold water, a lot of
people stopped to talk. Almost every single person said how much they value
the river trail and how much they really want Lansing to continue to expand and
improve the trail. They see it as the crown jewel.
Tom Hardenbergh, resident of 1522 Osborn Road, stated that in 1975 or 1976
he was in a similar meeting when the original portion of the Lansing RiverTrail
was opened. He is glad to be here tonight at another planning meeting for a
river trail. He hopes that he is alive when this segment is completed. His only
complaint about the whole thing, as he has watched trails be implemented in
Grand Rapids, MI; Midland, MI; Coleman, MI; Zenia, Ohio; and all over the
country, is that it has taken Lansing so long to get to this point. He does not feel
the need to say anything about the assets that the trail has to offer. He just
wants to be sure that this will not result in internaval waiting because it will be put
on the ground. Two years ago, he was contacted by Ling Brewer to attend a
meeting for a trail extension from Hawk Island to Mason. No one knows when
that will be realized. He was on a trail in Zenia, Ohio and it took them about 22
years to get this trail going. These things take a long time. Let us not wait
forever. Let us get going on this and get it done. Let us get it, as people have
said, connected. The Lansing RiverTrail has a lot of short comings. As good as
it is and as valuable as it is, it has a lot of short comings, one of which could be
easily remedied. He has been to a lot of other trails in other towns. The one
thing that he finds lacking is sign boards that show people where they are and
what surrounds them. One can get to a point on the trail and wonder if there is a
rest room or a place to eat. The City's trail lacks this information. As the trail is
extended there will be other issues of this type. He would be glad to assist the
Board anytime. He has ridden a lot of trails and is experienced with the
development of trails.
Bill Castanier, resident of 1801 Tecumseh River Drive, stated that he has
lived along the Grand River for 23 years. He has run along the river for about 25
years and has recently biked along the river. He uses the trail almost everyday,
at least 6 days a week. He is a fervent user of the river trail. One tends to start
catching people over time and saying hello to them. He stated that he agrees
with all the bikers who are in attendance about using the trails. He wishes that
people would use the trail more often. He spoke about using caution when
entering neighborhoods. No one will get to his house because he lives high on a
bank, however, there are lots of neighbors that could be affected. He believes
that the neighborhoods are very fragile in Lansing. He has observed for the past
20 years in using the river front that when you get to the fringes of the river front,
it draws a very unsavory crowd. It also draws that crowd when people are not on
it after 8:00 p.m. If someone would like to take a trip on the river front, both ends
have lots of graffiti, and broken windows in some of the places in Old Town. He
has an office in Old Town and bikes to Old Town everyday. Right across from
his office, someone broke all the windows in a building. The river trail is the only
way to access that building. He hopes that the Board carefully considers the trail
going behind private home owners. Those homes, in some instances, are less
than 100 feet from the river trail. If he lived there, he would say that he is not so
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 8
fond of it. If he had a child under the age of 10 years old playing outside
continually, especially after he had seen the people on the trail today at the
Grand River Assembly plant, he would not want them in his back yard. If that
make him a NIMBY, than he is a NIMBY. He does not want them in his back
yard. There are a lot of people and that section of the trail goes through maybe
one backyard home that is 200 feet on a bluff. There was no one on the trail
today except for 3 runners when he was there. That is all he ever sees and he
stated that he was on it for quite a lengthy time because he ran slow. He also
believes that the City needs to continue to dedicate themselves to better
maintenance of the trail. There are still many areas on the trail that need a lot
better care and maintenance. There are some dangerous areas that still exist.
He sees them everyday. Before the trail is expanded, there needs to be a plan
in place for ongoing maintenance. The trail stretches too long before one
catches something. By the Lansing Center for almost 2 weeks there was a hole
that someone could have put their foot it. The day after an article appeared in
the newspaper about maintenance, the hole was fixed. That is not "A" typical
after 25 years experience of being on the river trail. When someone talked
about signage, if one has ever been on the river trail and looked carefully, there
is a lot of signage. Most of it is damaged. It has been ripped, torn down, or
destroyed. The Planet Walk which the downtown science museum did, most of
those markers have been damaged in some way. Many have been replaced
several times. The quarter mile markers have at one point or another been
destroyed. Be very careful because this does not need to be brought into the
neighborhoods especially fragile neighborhoods which is generally most of
Lansing.
Tim Carr, resident of 4825 Thurlby, Mason, stated that he lives south of 1-96
and that he is quite a ways from the proposed trail. He is supportive of the trail
and is also on the Parks and Recreation Commission. The Commission is
submitting their 5 year plan to implement a trail within his community that would
connect with this trail. Someone else mentioned the Mason trail which would
potentially connect to this trail. He would be interested in this as well.
Philip Wells, resident of 450 West Street, stated that he has worked downtown
for almost 28 years and works for the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) in
the Trails Program. He works across the state, mainly working in the Rails to
Trails area, trying to convert the old railroad lines into trails. He is a river trail
user here in Lansing. From this perspective, he has seen much of what has
been happening all around the state in developing and expanding the trail
systems. He would like to congratulate Lansing for being one of the pioneers in
this. He has been working for the state and he knows how long things take. He
stated that Lansing has done a remarkable job over a period of time. There are
a lot of real tough issues to deal with in extending the trail to where it currently is,
and he hopes to see this continue. He has also seen around the state the very
common and legitimate concerns of people who live in areas through which a
trail is proposed. It is very important to listen carefully to those concerns, take
them seriously and make sure that they are addressed. As he has seen time
and time again the concerns of negative impacts on neighborhoods and
communities are simply not realized if the trail is properly designed, the concerns
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 9
of the people are taken into account, proper maintenance, and responding to
concerns when they arise. It can be a tremendous asset and an increase in
property values. On the Paint Creek trail in Oakland County people are building
half a million dollar home on the trail just because they want to be on the trail.
This is something that Lansing could certainly wish for. He hopes that DNR will
continue to expand the trail and he believes that it is one of the finest assets of
the community.
Brad Garmon, resident of 122 Stoddard Avenue, Apt. B, East Lansing,
stated that he works in downtown Lansing. He offers the opposite approach to
the proposal. He has been in Michigan less than year. One of the first things
that he did was ride the river trail to work. He took pictures along the way and
sent them home to people in Kansas. Kansas is probably one of the strongest
anti-trail states there is and it is very frustrating for him to look back on that
knowing what trails do for communities. He has been around the state this past
year and has biked the river trail here. He has studied river trails and trails in
general through his place of work. He has seen that all the considerations heard
here tonight are true. All the pros are there as well as some of the concerns that
have been raised. He believes that from his perspective what the City needs to
do is work together as a community. He represents the Mid Michigan
Environmental Action Council and tries to do his part to become involved in
community affairs. All the residents need to be involved in the happenings of
their neighborhoods. Those are legitimate concerns. What will not help is the
idea that trails breed fear and things of this sort. What the City needs to do is
look at the positives of trails in terms of what they do for communities in getting
business, and seeing the people that one interacts with on a daily basis. He has
been out there and he does recognize those people that he sees on a regular
basis. That is what is going to make the communities a better place to live and
the neighborhoods a safer place. It is not trying to stay away from them but
getting out there. These kind of trails do that. These trails are around the
country and around Michigan. He encouraged the Board to go forth with the
proposed plan and stated that it is a great plan. He encouraged more
involvement. He asked the Board to consider looking at the businesses and see
what could be done about getting businesses along the trail. He also mentioned
to look at what it would do for health and the children in their understanding of
their environment, nature, and their neighbors. Trails do great things. Coming
from Kansas, he knows that property rights are a big deal. It is not the only deal.
He believes that the Board recognizes that as a Planning Commission. What is
good for a bunch of people is something that needs to be taken into
consideration. He hopes the Board will do that. He is in great support of the
river trail and he will send more pictures back to Kansas as the trail gets bigger.
He presented the Board with a letter.
John Mertz, resident of 330 N. Clemens, stated that he is here tonight to
comment briefly on SLU-6-2002. He asked the Board to deny the request or cut
it in half. He suggested to the Board the last time he was before them that there
are some studies that indicated greenery cuts crime. He printed some
information from the internet. Compared with apartment buildings that had little
or no greenery with those that had high levels of greenery, those that had high
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 10
levels of greenery had 52% fewer total crimes including 46% fewer property
crimes and 56% fewer violent crimes. Buildings with medium amounts of
greenery had 46% fewer total crimes and 40% fewer property crimes, 44% fewer
violent crimes. It is clear at least from the study which was done in Chicago,
apartment building or places that are landscaped with greenery are less prone to
crime than barren ones. One of the findings in the conclusions done by the staff
which he has disputed on a prior occasion was that somehow security was going
to be increased by having the Armory turned into a big parking lot with all sorts of
security lights. The Ohio State University bulletin stated that "recently there has
been evidence showing that the presence of vegetation especially trees and
urban areas encourages positive interactions among people. It is associated
with lower crime rates." The University of Illinois study also found that "residents
living near green spaces enjoy more social activities. The very fabric of a healthy
neighborhood." The New York times today, Managing Planet Earth science
section, a special issue examines scientists growing convictions that humans
have become the dominant influence on the ecosystem's world wide and that
choices made now could determine the health of the environment for decades.
The study also found that "mental health was improved by greenery." Prior to
this summer, there were 10 acres of green space. There were 16 acres of green
space in the armory. Two of the acres were turned into a garden and the now
the rest of the acres will be turned into a parking lot. That is a shame. It is
contrary to the best interest of the neighborhood and the citizens who live in the
neighborhood. This is not the best use for this land. Unfortunately the decision
is being based on who is asking for the variance and not the criteria that is set
out in the ordinance. This is what was pointed out in his last memo. This is his
third argument to the Board. He stated that the Board needs to think about the
people who will be affected by this request. This land's preferred use is green
space, open space or maybe single family housing. It is not a parking lot. That
is one of the lowest, conceivable possible uses that should be used in this case,
and only if Sparrow can justify doing this. Not just because parking space is
needed. There have been demonstrations of available parking spaces to
Sparrow. He has been told directly that Mr. Sam Eyde would deal with Sparrow
to allow them to use the parking that is located by the railroad, which is easily
accessible as the Armory. Mr. Pollard has identified 1,600 alternate parking
spaces that are available on the eastside. If Sparrow needs temporarily parking
than a permanent change to this ecosystem should not be allowed. This would
be a permanent change, not temporary. Sparrow's use is temporary. The
military has made it very clear that the lot will not be restored to green space. If
the Board allows Sparrow to turn all the remaining green space that is left in the
Armory, then in one year, 5/6 of all the total green space in this neighborhood
has been taken away. He hopes that the Board will deny the request or cut the
acreage in half.
Brian Smith, President of Citizens for a Greater Lansing and resident of
1007 Woodbine, stated that he is doing everything he can to preserve green
space and trying to save paradise against another parking lot. He was proud of
the Planning Board at the last meeting when they voted unanimously to table
SLU-6-2002 when Mr. Pollard came forth and presented over 1,600 alternative
spaces. He was hoping the Board will find some kind of compromise so the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 11
green space does not become demolished. At the last Eastside Neighborhood
Organization meeting, Mr. Mertz got Mr. Ginsburg to say that Sparrow is under
no legal obligation to return the property to green space. The military has made
it very clear that they do not plan to restore property either. He believes that it is
wrong to say that this places an excessive burden and not a workable alternative
on Sparrow. There is always alternatives when something is wanted. He
believes that Sparrow will not pack their campus and take it to Delhi Township,
Eaton Rapids or wherever. He reiterated a comment made by Mr. Ginsburg
regarding the parking lot on the other side of the railroad track and how the
employees would get caught behind a train in the morning and mess up
everybody's hospital schedule. If the bus driver saw that there was train, why
could the driver not take Cedar Street to Saginaw Street and backtrack to
Pennsylvania Avenue? He did not think that this would be going much out of the
way. He is looking forward tonight to seeing what kind of alternatives the Board
has agreed to, and for everyone coming together to see what can be done
without having to destroy the corner of Marshall and Saginaw Streets.
John Pollard, resident of 1718 Blair Street, stated that he is vehemently
opposed to Sparrow Hospital taking 6 to 8 acres of green space at the corner of
Marshall and Saginaw Streets when it is totally unnecessary. He would love for
someone, whether it be the Board or Sparrow, to give him the cost estimates of
what Sparrow is trying to do. Picture coming in with a bull dozer, removing three
to six inches of top soil, replacing 6 to 8 acres with three to six inches of sand,
lay rock, build a fence around the lot, add green netting like it is a tennis court,
add lighting, implement a security system, and in two years do a reversal of this.
There is one other problem and that is environmental problems because there
would be 588 cars leaking gas, oil and other fluids on the property. Then the
environmental clean up would be completed. Then there would be three to four
inches of topsoil added to 6 to 8 acres, grass would need to be replanted, and
then someone would need to water the grass to keep it from dying. At the North
Precinct on Prudden Street, the distance from Sparrow to Marshall Street is one
mile. Everything on the sheet that he had given to the Board of over 2,200
available paved parking spaces are within a one mile distance. What is safer
than being next to a police station? Even if it is not safe everyone's conception
is that it would be no safer than to be next to a parking lot. There is enough
space. They are willing to sell the spaces and re-stripe the parking lot for
Sparrow. Lights will be implemented and the cost will be eaten. The gated
entrances will be closed off so that Sparrow can take care of the other concerns.
Then Sparrow will be charged $20.00 per parking space which Sparrow is
currently charged $45.00 per parking space at Clara's. He would like to see a
cost estimate as to why Sparrow is set on following through with this request.
The City is already planning on taking 25 acres of green space of BTS property
and turning it into a development. No one seems to be concerned with run off or
environmental conditions. What about the health, safety, and well being of all
those citizens who live in that neighborhood who absolutely positively need some
green space? They purchased their homes and thought they had access to the
green space. He does not understand this. He presented the Board with a
proposal where all of the parking spaces are in one place. He identified the
Eyde property and other properties on the eastside from churches to businesses
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 12
who are willing to rent their parking spaces, to even Eastern High School,
Pattengill Middle School and Lansing Catholic Central, which lists another 600
parking spaces. These parking spaces may not be used all winter because the
kids have returned to school but they can be used during the summer. When
there is an alternative with parking spaces or parking lots already striped, why
would someone go and do what is heard tonight? At the City Council meeting on
July 22nd, a city employee went through his neighborhood and gathered 146
signatures from the residents who want to keep this property as green space.
Why cause these problems? Has Sparrow explored their options? Have they
discussed things with Mr. Hepler like he did to obtain number about what he is
willing to do? He reiterated that he believes in the preservation of green space.
Once it is taken, it is never restored. There is no reason for this. He asked the
Board to deny the request because there are more than enough parking spaces
available. It is economically feasible and it would even save Sparrow money.
Belinda Fitzpatrick, resident of 224 S. Holmes Street, stated that Mr. Pollard
does not understand. She would like to share some of her observations. She
has seen Sparrow work before. She believes that Sparrow does a strategy.
Even if it is not done with intent, it works as if it was done with intent. The
strategy is to turn something into an eye sore and then there would be
neighborhood support to put in the residential parking that someone would like to
have. She concluded that somehow there is a link between what the City wants
with the BTS plan and what goes on at Sparrow Hospital. She believes that
there is a link between whoever is behind the BTS plan. It is a strategy to make
the lot into an eye sore. Once made into an eye sore, the community would ask
to develop a residential neighborhood and get rid of the ugly parking lot. She
strongly opposes this request because there is alternative parking. It would not
be good for the neighborhood. It is as if Sparrow is asking the Board to rezone
the 8 acres for commercial use or professional office use and that it is parking
not to be used by residential properties. It is parking to be used by professional
office space. She asked the Board to consider in terms that it is not just a
request for a special residential land use, it is actually a request for a significant
rezoning from residential to professional office zoning.
She loves the river trail and that it is one of the best things in the City of Lansing
for aesthetic reasons (i.e. walking, civic space, socializing). She thinks it is great.
She believes that one of the challenges in the world is to manifest dreams in
harmony with the dreams of other people. Trying to look for a way that everyone
can get what is wanted when it was possible. She reiterated an earlier comment
that if there were people who lived along the river trail and did not like it, they
should move because there are other people who would want to move there.
She finds this disturbing because she believes that people should have a deep
respect for others who are attached to their homes and properties. She believes
that in the Board's position it is very important to look at both sides: the affect on
the communities and the homeowners, and the potential for the river trail and the
assets it would bring to the community. One of the things that is most important
is to try to get passed the myth of what public space does to private homes and
that it brings crime.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 13
Rick Kibbey, Chairman of the BTS Committee and resident of 1614
Lindbergh Drive, stated that the action the Board is asked to take this evening
is an action that the Board has taken twice before where Sparrow has asked for
temporary use of green space. Sparrow has used it and has restored it. One of
the instances where Sparrow did this is the very site being talked about. The site
in question was used as a staging area. There were concrete beams on that site
that were longer than this room. If one looks at the site now, none of the people
that were talking about green space have said a word about it. Sparrow restored
that site the way it needed to be restored and he is very confident they will do it
again. If the Board is familiar with the site, there are several dozen trucks, tanks
and armored personnel carriers, parked less than 100 feet from this site. If one
speaks to the old timers on the street, that area used to be the bivouac area
when the National Guard was in transition from Indiana to Camp Grayling. They
would have hundreds of guys camped there. There were privies and trucks all
over the site. Story Olds had their tent sales there. He is far more concerned
about the ammonia plume coming from 200 feet straight down. The ammonia
plume is leaking from the motor wheel site that is a threat to the aquifer. The
idea of someone's leaky Taurus contaminating the site is going to have to go
through a plume of poisonous ammonia to get to the aquifer. He thinks that this
is all much ado about nothing. This is something that was handled before.
Sparrow has handled this well in the past and he is confident that they will do it
again. As for creating an eyesore, the architectural firm is one of the most noted
architectural firms in the country. The last two buildings that Sparrow has built,
the standards of architecture and the design that they have used plus the work
that they have done on Michigan Avenue to install street lighting and street
furniture are not an eyesore to him. He remembered what Michigan Avenue
looked like in the 1970s and he knows what it looks like now. He would dare to
make an issue with the idea that Sparrow is creating an eyesore. He has
appreciated the Board's help in the past and he hopes that the letter explains
itself. He looks forward to continue working with the Board on the development
of this property.
Michelle Johnson, resident of 206 Rumsey Avenue, stated that she is
vehemently opposed to turning this property into a parking lot. It seems like
Sparrow got a deal. They found someone else to do their footwork in finding
other parking spaces. It makes no logical sense to let other spaces go empty
while Sparrow is building their parking lot. The City has been developed all over
and people are living in Lansing because there are parks and areas where kids
can play, dogs can run, and gardens can be grown. It makes no sense to tear
up this lot and abandon the other spaces. Sparrow did not have to look for other
spaces. She asked the Board to not let the green space behind her home be
turned into a parking lot.
Seeing no one else wishing to address the Board, Mr. Frederick closed the
public comment period.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 14
6. PRESENTATION FOR RIVERTRAIL
Murdock Jemerson, Director of the Parks and Recreation Department
(PRD) for the City of Lansing, gave introductory comments and recognition to
those who were present for their support of the proposed expansion.
Bob Ford, Landscape Architects and Planners, gave an overall presentation
of the RiverTrail expansion.
Mr. Ruge expressed his concern about Cooley Gardens not being on the river
trail and thought it would be a good asset that the City should show off more
because it is kind of hidden. At that time, Mr. Eric Reickel assured the Board
that this would be the next step on the river trail. He was disappointed that it was
not included on the proposal. Mr. Ford stated that he did remember the
discussions about making that connection to Cooley Gardens and Scott Center.
There is a formidable grade there that would have to be negotiated and it would
be a costly adventure. At the same time, for Master Planning, that might be a
comment that he needs to get some advice about. Mr. Jemerson stated that
PRD has access to Cooley Gardens from the street and that is the access point
where people are referred. It is a very beautiful facility and they do need to do
more in terms of advertising that facility. Right now, the plans for the trail are to
continue to use the street access for Cooley Gardens.
Mr. Ruff stated that one of the things discussed through the River and Waterfront
Board years ago was the idea of Moores River Park possibly implementing a
hand operated lock or some sort of lock system, whether motorized or self
propelled, to allow boats to travel around the dam.
Ms. Foster inquired about the time table. A discussion ensued. In terms of the
development costs, the on-land portion of the trail is somewhere between $70.00
to $85.00 a linear foot and is pretty much for the asphalt, base and things of this
nature. There are amenities that will add to this such benches, signage and all
those other types of costs which are outside of that. When one is out on the
river and under the bridges, the price could be as high as $400.00 a linear foot.
Again, it does not include the amenities referred to earlier. A discussion ensued
regarding the time line of the grant process.
Mr. Ruge stated that the overall river trail project is a great idea especially
expanding it to the edges of the City. Putting signs along the trail indicating the
locations of where restaurants and other amenities are off the trail, would be a
great idea. It would seem like that could be a way of receiving a little extra
funding. He inquired about the changes occurring on Aurelius Road. A
discussion ensued. He commented in the area where Aurelius Road reduces to
two lanes, that additional greenery be included along with grass strips to help
shade trail users. A discussion ensued.
7. RECESS was taken by the Board.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 15
8. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval
Ms. Patrick moved; seconded by Ms. Cordill to approve the minutes of
August 6, 2002 with corrections. On a voice vote, the motion carried
(6-0), the minutes of August 6, 2002 were
APPROVED WCORRECTIONS.
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
a. SLU-8-2002, 2107 W. Holmes Road, New Church in an
"F" Commercial District
This is a request by Reverend Rickey Smith of New Life
Community Church of Christ for a Special Land Use permit
to use an existing vacant building for a church at 2107 S.
Holmes Road. The property is zoned "F" Commercial
District which permits churches with a special land use
permit, if approved by the Lansing City Council. This is not
a matter of a rezoning.
Staff recommended approval of the Special Land Use permit
with the following conditions:
1. An 8-foot landscape buffer strip be provided between
the subject property and the adjacent "A" Residential
zoning area to the south,
2. A site plan, that includes dimensions of the proposed
parking lot, be provided for review by the Planning
Office and Transportation Office,
3. The seating capacity be determined by the number of
legal parking spaces that can be accommodated on
the site.
The Committee members discussed the exterior lighting on
the site. Ms. Foster stated that the lighting needs to be
shielded to prevent glare on adjacent properties.
Ms. Patrick stated that the church is using chairs rather than
pews and there would be nothing preventing the church from
putting in more chairs than what the parking area can
accommodate.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that, if this happens, it would be a
violation of the Zoning Ordinance and Special Land Use
permit.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 16
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster to recommend approval of
SLU-8-2002, 2107 W. Holmes Road, New Church in an "F" Commercial District
with the conditions as reported by the Zoning and Ordinance Committee.
Discussion ensued regarding the conditions and they were amended to read as
follows: (1) An 8-foot landscape buffer strip be provided between the subject
property and the adjacent "A" Residential zoning area to the south, (2) A site
plan, that includes dimensions of the proposed parking lot, be provided for
review and approval by the Planning Office and Transportation Office, (3) The
seating capacity be determined by the number of legal parking spaces that can
be accommodated on the site, and (4) The existing lighting and any future lighting
be shielded to prevent glare on the adjacent properties.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Foster . .Ave Keene. . Aye
Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
b. Z-12-2002, 3001 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential,
"F" Commercial & "J" Parking Districts to "D-1"
Professional Office District
This is a request by Robin Slaton of Yurple & Jojo's Fun
Time Palace Inc. to rezone the property at 3001 N.
Washington Avenue, more specifically described as:
Lots 4, 5 and the east 90 feet of Lot 6, Holmsdale
Subdivision, City of Lansing, Ingham County,
Michigan.
from "A" Residential, "F" Commercial and "J" Parking
Districts to "D-1" Professional Office District. The purpose of
the request is to expand the population of the existing child
care facility and the size of the parking lot at 3001 S.
Washington Avenue.
In Committee, Ms. Foster stated that street trees should be
added along Dunlap and S. Washington. Ms. Foster also
asked the applicant if it would be possible to lease some
parking from the church to the south to avoid having to put in
new parking. Robin Slaton, 3001 S. Washington Avenue,
stated that it would not be possible to lease parking from the
church because she has a 24-hour, 7-days per week
operation.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 17
In Committee, Ms. Foster suggested that the applicant use
grass crete for the new parking area so that it could still be
used as play space when it is not being parked on.
Ms. Foster stated that maybe the ordinance requires too
many parking spaces for the child care and inquired about a
change to the ordinance. Ms. Stachowiak stated maybe this
would be something to discuss during the Zoning and
Ordinance Committee meeting and if the Committee feels
led that the ordinance needs to be changed, it can initiate a
new amendment at the level. A discussion ensued.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster to recommend approval of
Z-12-2002, 3001 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential, "F" Commercial & "J"
Parking Districts to "D-1" Professional Office District.
Frederick . . Ave Cordill. . . . . .. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Foster . .Ave Keene. . . Ave
Patrick . . Ave Ruge. . . Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
C. Z-13-2002, 4410 S. MIL King, "C" Residential District to
"F" Commercial District
This is a request by Allen Miller and Errol Johnson,
representing the Capital Area CEF (Child Evangelism
Fellowship), to rezone the property located at 4410 S. ML
King Blvd., more particularly described as:
N. 45 Ft. of Lot 46, Supervisor's Plat of Prosperity
Farms No. 1, Being a part of the S '/z Section 32,
T4N, R2W, City of Lansing, Ingham County, MI
from "C" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. The
purpose of this request is to bring the zoning into
conformance with the property's commercial use.
In Committee, Mr. Ruge stated that the committee should
make a finding as to whether this case warrants another
review since the same request was acted upon in 1973.
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster, to
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 18
reconsider the rezoning of 4410 S. ML King, based upon the
finding that the following conditions have changed which
warrant another review: (1) The establishment of the school
directly to the west, and (2) the rezoning of the property
directly to the south of the subject lot. On a voice vote, the
motion carried (4-0).
In Committee, Ms. Patrick stated that she was concerned
about the potential impact on the neighborhood to the west if
the property were to be rezoned to "F" Commercial. She
suggested that "D-1" Professional Office zoning would be a
more appropriate designation for the subject property.
Linda Chavez, representing the applicant, stated that "D-1"
would be too restrictive.
In Committee, there was discussion about the required
landscaping along the north border of the property and the
narrow width of the lot which will limit the number of parking
spaces on the site. There was also discussion about the
potential uses that could be located on this site if the
rezoning were to be approved.
Ms. Keene stated that she agreed with Ms. Patrick and that
she would be voting against this request. She had some
concerns about the potential impact on the neighbors, the
petition they submitted and some of their comments from
the public hearing. While she agreed that residential
probably was not the appropriate zoning, she believed that a
good compromise would be the "D-1" Professional Office
District.
Ms. Foster that she feels more comfortable now after seeing
the surroundings and walking around the neighborhood after
seeing the spacing between the residential area versus
commercial area. There seems to be enough of a buffer in
the back area to protect the residents, and the Martin Luther
King Blvd. area is all commercial buildings surrounding it.
She was quite hesitant about whether or not to go to a
higher density. In her mind that area seemed to be heading
in that direction yet it seemed to still be protected.
Ms. Keene stated that she is concerned about the direction
of some of the development along Martin Luther King Blvd.
While there is commercial in that area, she does not want to
see the area become so expansive that anything could
occur. She would be more comfortable with the "D-1"
zoning in that area in addition to the concerns of the
neighbors.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 19
Mr. Ruge stated that his view of the area at least in this
block is that it would benefit from this being "F" Commercial
and somebody coming in and tearing all the junk down and
putting in something that would unify the block instead of all
the hodge podge that is there now. With the zoning code,
there could be more buffer than there is now. He believes
that if the Board could unify the zoning along this face, there
would be potential for some larger redevelopment to come
in. He believes it should be demolished and then develop
something more unified.
Mr. Frederick stated that he agreed with Mr. Ruge and that
he might be a little more concerned at this point with making
the property commercial, however, the lot is so small that
most of the intensive commercial development that would
ordinarily be allowed in an "F" Commercial lot simply will not
be able to locate there without variances because of
violating setback requirements and so forth. That would give
the Board of Zoning Appeals an opportunity to deal with the
intensity of the use of the property.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster to recommend approval of
Z-13-2002, 4410 S. ML King, "C" Residential District to "F" Commercial District.
Frederick . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Foster . Ave Keene. . Nay
Patrick . Nay Ruge. . . Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 2; carried.
APPROVED.
Mr. Ruff stated that the motion carries but lacks 5 votes to form an official
recommendation. It will be sent to the Mayor and City Council with the vote and
comments as well as the petition that was presented.
d. SLU-6-2001, 517-519 E. Grand River Avenue, Church in
the "F-1" Commercial District (Tabled November 14,
2001)
In Committee, a motion was made to accept the withdrawal
of SLU-6-2001. On a voice vote, the motion carried (4-0).
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 20
It was moved by Mr. Ruge, supported by Ms. Foster to accept the withdrawal of
SLU-6-2001. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (6-0).
Next meeting, Tuesday, September 11, 2002 at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Patrick, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, August 27, 2002, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
3. Committee of the Whole - None.
4. Executive Committee - None.
C. REPORT FROM PLANNING MANAGER - None.
D. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St.,"H"Light Industrial District to"G-1"Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. Z-5-1998,401-407 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. P-1-2001,Tentative Preliminary Plat,Wexford Woods (Tabled June 13, May 9,
2001)
e. PRD-2-2001, "Crystal Woods", Planned Residential Neighborhood (Tabled
August 15,2001)
f. SLU-6-2001, 517-519 E. Grand River Ave., Church in "F-1" Commercial
District(Tabled November 14,2001)
g. SLU-8-2001, 3000 W. Miller Road,Additional Parking for an Existing Church
(Tabled November 14, 2001)
h. SLU-3-2002, 2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J" Parking District(Tabled May 15,2002)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000,201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27,2000)
b. Act-2-2002, Lansing Housing Commission Property, 310 Seymour,Acquisition
for public purposes(Tabled February 26,2002)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
a. SLU-6-2002, 300 Elvin Court,Surface Parking Lot in the"B" Residential
Zoning District(Tabled August 6,2002)-ACTION EXPECTED
It was moved by Ms. Patrick, supported by Ms. Cordill to remove SLU-6-2002, 300
Elvin Court, Surface Parking Lot in the "B" Residential Zoning District from the
table. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (6-0).
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 21
This is a request by Sparrow Health Systems for a Special
Land Use permit to construct a temporary surface parking lot
at 300 Elvin Court containing less than 600 parking spaces.
The parking lot would be used for 2-3 years and would have
a gravel surface. The property is zoned "B" Residential
District which permits parking lots, if a Special Land Use
permit is approved by the Lansing City Council.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the Special Land Use request
by Sparrow Hospital with the following conditions:
a. The interim parking use is approved until June 30,
2004, at which time this SLU will automatically expire
and terminate, unless prior to said date the City
Council has granted an extension.
b. The parking lot surface is maintained in a dust
controlled condition, without the use of hazardous
chemicals.
C. Lighting be shielded to prevent glare onto adjacent
properties and turned off by 8:00 p.m.
d. The applicant is responsible for making any
necessary changes to restore the site to meet or
exceed its current condition. Such restoration shall
take place within 6 months after the parking lot use is
terminated.
e. Lights and fence will be removed at the end of the
lease agreement.
f. The parking area is patrolled for security purposes.
g. Christmas tress sales be allowed to continue.
h. Automobile contamination is controlled.
i. All traffic laws are observed and the traffic using the
lot be encouraged to not cut through the
neighborhood.
j. All requirements of the City's Transportation Office
are met.
k. Appropriate landscape, screening & buffering be
added to the site as soon as possible.
I. No barbed wire be used on the fence.
M. An appropriate number of trees be added around the
perimeter of the property and remain on the site after
the parking lot use has been terminated.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 22
Ira Ginsburg, Vice President of Sparrow Hospital, 1215
E. Michigan Avenue, stated that he did not receive anything
in writing from Mr. Hepler until 5:59 p.m. tonight. Mr. Hepler
had written a letter and basically indicated that he could
lease Sparrow 400 spaces at $25.00 a space and that he
would commence working on them October 1". This is a
problem for Sparrow. In the letter Mr. Hepler stated he
could try to get 580 parking spaces. He has other parking
spaces in the area, referring to the spaces west of the
railroad tracks, which does present a problem. Again, it
would be the issue of crossing the railroad tracks. Sparrow
believes that there would be some operational expenses
because even though the Police Department is there and
people will argue that it is a safe area, it is perceived not to
be as safe because it is the Marshall Street area. Because
this area is hidden and is not as open as Marshall Street, the
employees do not feel that this is a safe area. Sparrow
would have to place more security in this area and their
operational cost would be higher. Sparrow also believes
that the traffic light at Pennsylvania Ave. and Saginaw Street
would slow down their operation even though it is the same
distance plus the option of the train slowing down the
operation. Sparrow does not have a guarantee that Mr.
Hepler would have the 580 parking spaces and that the
spaces would be available by October 1 s`. Sparrow has had
their parking ramp approved by the Zoning Board and will be
starting on that project. Sparrow needs parking spaces by
October 1". In Sparrow's previous experience with Mr.
Hepler, they have not been able to come to a conclusion on
a deal that has been satisfactory to both parties. Mr.
Ginsburg has concerns that this will end up in limbo and
Sparrow will not be able to get this operation. He believes
that Sparrow meets all the legal requirements and has done
everything the Board has asked for this property. He stated
that Sparrow is obligated to the Board to restore the property
back to its natural state. Sparrow cannot control the Armory
if the Armory decides not to allow this to happen. The
Armory has stated openly to the Board that for various
reasons they did not want the property restored because of
City ordinances and some Code Compliance issues. If this
could be settled with the Armory, Sparrow would gladly
restore the property back to its natural state. That is not an
issue with Sparrow.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the length of time for the contractor
to complete the job from start to finish. Mr. Ginsburg stated
approximately 4 weeks.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 23
Ms. Patrick inquired about when Sparrow formally requested
information from Mr. Hepler regarding the availability of his
lot. Mr. Ginsburg stated that he and Mr. Hepler did not
connect and that Mr. Hepler was aware of the request. They
did not speak to one another until the end of last week.
There was no problem with Mr. Ginsburg receiving Mr.
Hepler's letter tonight. That was when it could be done. Mr.
Ginsburg stated that it was going to be done this morning
but it did not work out.
Ms. Foster questioned if it looks like there is some
negotiation that could happen to make the space work so
that Sparrow would have confidence in the spaces being
ready on October 1". She stated that it would improve the
area so that when Sparrow leaves it, Lansing has gained
something, where it is no longer as blighted. It seems like
that area needed to be repaired and the addition of lighting
that Sparrow would have had to do could become
permanent. It would become a safer. Instead of having to
put something down and take it out, there would be
something to put down so that Lansing could gain from it.
Mr. Ginsburg stated that Sparrow has no control over Mr.
Hepler and that his proposal is a good proposal. In past
dealings with Mr. Hepler, Sparrow has spent a lot of money
and has gained nothing.
Mr. Ruge stated that if Sparrow could work with Mr. Hepler
to get a parking lot, it sounds like it is possible that he can
meet all of Sparrow's needs with 580 spaces. He would
prefer this over seeing a parking lot on the corner of
Marshall and Saginaw Streets. It sounds like there are
some lose ends that need to be tied up and his preference
would be to wait and see if this could be done. At the
September 4ch meeting it would still give Sparrow enough
time to squeeze in the parking lot. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Keene does not like the idea of removing green space
to put in a temporary parking lot when there are potential
alternatives out there. Sparrow has been a good neighbor
and the Neighborhood Association apparently supports
them. She inquired about the North Grand Ramp and stated
that she has noticed since the renovations last summer the
third floor of the ramp is vacant on any given day. There
would be maybe 10 cars parked on the third floor. She was
not sure about how many spaces there were in the ramp
and if these would be potential spaces for Sparrow to lease.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 24
Ms. Foster stated that she would prefer that Sparrow use
existing parking. She is a little concerned that if the Board
passes this request, the option to evaluate existing parking
would have been one of the things Sparrow would have
done. It seems like Sparrow would prefer something that
they can control and that would be easiest for them.
Because of this, she is hesitant to pass the request. She
wished Sparrow would have looked at this option earlier.
Apparently the neighborhood had tried to tell Sparrow that
this was an available option but it was not looked upon until
the Board forced the issue by tabling the request. She
understands that Sparrow is in a time crunch but did not
know if this was by their own doing.
Mr. Frederick stated that Mr. Hepler has brought 3 other
requests before the Board that sounded like great proposals
but none of which have come to fruition. One of Mr.
Hepler's request was to develop the Prudden property into
loft style residences, apartments, co-ops, etc. It sounded
like a great idea but all that he has seen Mr. Hepler
accomplish since he brought that idea several years ago
was to get more broken windows. He agreed with Mr.
Ginsburg regarding the hesitancy to deal with Mr. Hepler.
Mr. Ginsburg's assessment probably from personal
experience is in agreement with his. The property that Mr.
Hepler has would be a useful situation. He believes that
Sparrow Hospital would have a better idea of what would
happen if the Board voted against the proposal tonight than
if the Board expected Mr. Ginsburg to deal with Mr. Hepler.
Tabling the proposal would not be appropriate. He will not
say outright that he thinks Mr. Hepler would fail; he may not.
He wondered from Mr. Ginsburg if knowing of all the
opposition that has been heard the last few weeks on this
proposal would Sparrow be willing to amend their project if
Sparrow could come up with an alternative that would be
workable for Sparrow Hospital with Mr. Hepler or with some
of the other areas that have been suggested? Would
Sparrow be willing to commit to backing out of the Armory
project if they could make some of the other ideas work
within a reasonable time frame for Sparrow Hospital to
complete their work? He had an opportunity to spend a few
days at Sparrow Hospital because of a family member. The
quicker the parking structure is built, the better off it would
be for a lot of patients, the people visiting the patients, and
for the overall benefit of whole lot more people. When he
left before vacation, he said that he would never go along
with this if Sparrow were proposing a permanent lot, but they
are not. Sparrow is committing to remediating. Granted we
have no control over the military whatsoever; they can do
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 25
whatever they want. He believes that these issues can be
worked out with the City. He has absolute confidence that
when Mr. Ginsburg stands before the Board and says he will
remediate it, he will. If he does, Mr. Frederick believes it will
end up better than it is now. From what Mr. Frederick has
seen, the property is none to attractive at this point.
Although the rain that the City has had the past few days
may have helped, the property does not really look like his
idea of green space. Mr. Ginsburg and Sparrow Hospital
have come before the Board in the past with proposals and
they have made commitments and have always followed
through with them. Sometimes it took a little longer than he
liked but nevertheless they followed through and did what
they said they were going to do. He has no reason to think
that Mr. Ginsburg is not going to do what he says he will do
this time. He does not know if it will make the Board feel
more relieved if Mr. Ginsburg would commit to another
alternative if it were workable. Mr. Ginsburg stated that he
does not know how he can commit to another alternative if
he does not know if it will be workable. He stated that there
would have been Sparrow parking there if they had worked
out their first deal several years ago with Mr. Hepler.
Sparrow would have been parking there at this time and
probably not before the Board requesting another variance.
Mr. Ginsburg stated that what he is willing to do is to say
before this goes to City Council, if Sparrow could come up
with a deal with Mr. Hepler, then he will withdraw this
request. He will try and work a deal with Mr. Hepler in the
next couple of weeks and see if Sparrow can get one. If
Sparrow does, then he will withdraw the request. The price
is not an issue. If Mr. Hepler stays at $25.00 and does all
the preparation and can provide Sparrow with 580 parking
spaces, Sparrow can live with that if Mr. Hepler can do it by
the October 1" deadline. That is Sparrow's big crucial date
because that is when Sparrow would like to start some
ground work and moving their heliport and things like that.
They would have to be done for the parking lot. This is
where he is concerned. If it cannot be worked out in the
next couple of weeks, then Sparrow has a problem with their
contractors too because they cannot give them the four
weeks to complete it.
Mr. Ruge stated that it does not seem like even if the Board
passed the request tonight that City Council would be done
with this by September 1 s`. It looks like Sparrow will be
pushed beyond the October 1st deadline anyway. He
inquired of Mr. Ginsburg about the Board voting on the
proposal tonight and letting the chips fall where they may.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 26
Mr. Ginsburg stated yes, he would prefer that the Board vote
on the request.
Ms. Cordill stated that it seems like a compromise if Sparrow
were to go forward with negotiations on the May and
Prudden parking. It was suggested to table the proposal to
the first meeting in September. That would throw things too
late in the calendar. A discussion ensued.
THE MOTION FROM THE AUGUST 6T" MEETING WAS:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster to recommend approval of
SLU-6-2002, 300 Elvin Court, Surface Parking Lot in the "B" Residential Zoning
District with the following conditions: (1) The interim parking use is approved
until June 30, 2004, at which time this SLU will automatically expire and
terminate, unless prior to said date the City Council has granted an extension, (2)
The parking lot surface is maintained in a dust controlled condition, without the
use of hazardous chemicals, (3) Lighting be shielded to prevent glare onto
adjacent properties and turned off by 8:00 p.m., (4) The applicant is responsible
for making any necessary changes to restore the site to meet or exceed its
current condition. Such restoration shall take place within 6 months after the
parking lot use is terminated, (5) Lights and fence will be removed at the end of
the lease agreement, (6) The parking area is patrolled for security purposes, (7)
Christmas tress sales be allowed to continue, (8) Automobile contamination is
controlled, (9) All traffic laws are observed and the traffic using the lot be
encouraged to not cut through the neighborhood, (10) All requirements of the
City's Transportation Office are met, (11) Appropriate landscape, screening &
buffering be added to the site as soon as possible, (12) No barbed wire be used
on the fence, and (13) An appropriate number of trees be added around the
perimeter of the property and remain on the site after the parking lot use has
been terminated.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Foster . .Nay Keene. . . Nav
Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nax
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 3; Nays: 3; the motion did not carry.
Mr. Frederick requested that the conditions recommended by the Zoning and Ordinance
Committee be communicated to City Council.
9. NEW BUSINESS - None.
10. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 27
11. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Mr. Ruge inquired about how often City Council overturns the Planning Board
decisions. Mr. Ruff stated rarely.
Ms. Patrick inquired if the City could obtain a commitment from the Federal
Government to return the gravel Sparrow lot to its present state.
Ms. Cordill inquired if fences are allowed in front yards. Ms. Stachowiak gave a
brief overview of the fence standards.
Ms. Foster stated that she will not be able to attend Zoning and Ordinance
Committee meetings but would be able to attend Urban Development Committee
meetings. Ms. Cordill stated that she would be able to attend the next Zoning
and Ordinance Committee meeting on September 11tt'
12. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS
Mr. Ruge stated that the church on Cavanaugh Road near Aurelius Road is
using gravel parking.
Mr. Frederick stated that the "Walk" light at the intersection of Pennsylvania
Avenue and Michigan Avenue does not work from any direction.
13. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 10:33 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
James A. Ruff, Secretary, Planning Board
PB Minutes.082002.wpd
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 19
$6,553. The applicant intends to invest $11,000 initially in
rehabilitation work if a Class A Nonconformity is approved.
Mr. Ruge stated that the Master Plan indicates residential
use and that the property is being used residentially. A
discussion ensued.
Mr. Ruge believes it would be better to rezone the property
to residential. A discussion ensued.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
NCU-2-2002, 1803 S. Washington, Class A Nonconforming Status with the
conditions that (1) The applicant provide an easement across 1807 S. Washington
for continued use of the driveway to access the rear parking at 1803 S.
Washington, and (2) The common driveway and parking areas must be hard
surfaced with Portland Concrete or Bituminous Asphalt in conformance with
Sections 1284 & 1286 of the City of Lansing Zoning Ordinance (6-24-97), (3) The
applicant file for rezoning within one year, and (4) The initial rehabilitation work
proposed be completed within one year.
Foster. Ave Cordill. Ave
Ruge .Aye Patrick Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
f. NCU-3-2002, 1807 S Washington, Class A
Nonconforming Status
This is a request by Brian Trahey for a Class "A"
Nonconforming Status for the single family residential
structure located at 1807 S. Washington Avenue in the "F"
Commercial District. The property is nonconforming for use
since the "F" Commercial District only permits residential use
as a secondary use to a primary commercial use. There is a
driveway at 1807 S. Washington that is shared with the
property at 1803 S. Washington Ave. which is also owned by
the applicant. Section 1294.11(d) of the Zoning Code
restricts restoration of a Class B nonconformity to 35 percent
of the fair market value of the structure. According to the
Assessor's records, the valuation of the structure at 1807 S.
Washington Avenue is $21,998. Therefore, the maximum
rehabilitation allowed at 35% of the structure, without
approval of a Class "A" is $7,699. The applicant intends to
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 20
invest $11,000 initially in rehabilitation work if a Class A
nonconformity is approved.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
NCU-3-2002, 1807 S Washington, Class A Nonconforming Status with the
conditions that (1) The applicant provide an easement across 1807 S. Washington
for continued use of the driveway to access the rear parking at 1803 S.
Washington, and (2) The common driveway and parking areas must be hard
surfaced with Portland Concrete or Bituminous Asphalt in conformance with
Sections 1284 & 1286 of the City of Lansing Zoning Ordinance (6-24-97), (3) The
applicant file for rezoning within one year, and (4) The initial rehabilitation work
proposed be completed within one year.
Foster. . . Aye Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Ruge . .Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
Next meeting, Tuesday, August 14, 2002 at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Patrick, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, August 27, 2002, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
3. Committee of the Whole - None.
4. Executive Committee - None.
C. REPORT FROM PLANNING MANAGER
Mr. Ruff stated that he had Lugnuts tickets for the Board members.
He also stated that he will be interviewing two people for Planning Board
membership. Both applicants are Third Ward and he hopes to be making
a recommendation to the Mayor's office within a week or two.
He gave an brief overview of the Planning Development Committee
meeting regarding their action taken on cases.
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 21
D. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St., "H" Light Industrial District to"G-1"Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. Z-5-1998,401-407 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. P-1-2001,Tentative Preliminary Plat,Wexford Woods (Tabled June 13, May 9,
2001)
e. PRD-2-2001, "Crystal Woods", Planned Residential Neighborhood (Tabled
August 15, 2001)
f. SLU-6-2001, 517-519 E. Grand River Ave., Church in"F-1"Commercial District
(Tabled November 14,2001)
g. SLU-8-2001,3000 W. Miller Road,Additional Parking for an Existing Church
(Tabled November 14, 2001)
h. SLU-3-2002,2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J"Parking District(Tabled May 15, 2002)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000, 201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27,2000)
b. Act-2-2002, Lansing Housing Commission Property, 310 Seymour,Acquisition
for public purposes(Tabled February 26,2002)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
8. NEW BUSINESS - None.
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Ms. Foster stated that her fall semester schedule leaves Tuesdays open but not
Wednesdays. This will start August 261n
Mr. Ruge inquired about the church on Willow Street. Mr. Ruff stated that the
Pastor of the church stopped by recently and discussed things. The church has
experienced some mechanical or plumbing problems internally and is not
occupying the building. Things are in process. Once the church is given
occupancy, they have 90 days to finish what needs to be done.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS - None.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
James A. Ruff, Secretary, Planning Board
PB Minutes.080602.wpd
Approved as written 8-6-02 Draft to Clerk July 10,2002
Approved August 6,2002
To Clerk August 7, 2002
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, July 2, 2002
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Frederick.
A. Roll call. Present: Frederick, Cordill, Keene, Patrick.
B. Staff Attending: Ruff, Stachowiak, Rieske, Stanich.
C. Excused absences: Foster, Ruge.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Ruff stated due to vacancies and absences that are expected on July 16"
there would not be a quorum. It is suggested that the regular Planning Board
meeting be cancelled and that the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meet at
7:00 p.m. with the members that are expected: Cordill, Frederick, Ruge. This
would be a change to the Committee Report under item 7B.
It was moved by Ms. Keene, supported by Ms. Cordill to approve the agenda as
amended. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Letter of opposition from Mr. Robert Kimball regarding SLU-6-2002.
B. Letter of opposition from Ms. Jana Nicole regarding SLU-6-2002.
C. Interoffice Memo from Mr. Andrew Kilpatrick recommending conditions for
SLU-6-2002, if recommended for approval.
D. Letter of opposition from Adam and Danielle Droste regarding SLU-6-2002.
E. Letter of opposition from Mr. James Nobel regarding SLU-6-2002.
F. Letter of opposition from Mr. John Mertz regarding SLU-6-2002.
G. Letter of support with request for conditions from Ms. Nancy Parsons,
Eastside Neighborhood Organization regarding SLU-6-2002.
H. A petition of opposition with 146 signatures from R. Eberbach regarding
SLU-6-2002.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 2
4. HEARINGS
A. SLU-05-2002, 2710 S. Washington Avenue, Special Land Use -
Surface Parking Lot in an "A" Residential District
This is a request by Mr. George W. Abraham for a Special Land Use
permit to develop a parking lot at 2710 S. Washington Avenue (Lot 5 of
Assessor's Plat No. 53) in conjunction with the City of Lansing. The
property that is proposed to be used for parking is 100 feet wide by 130
feet deep and adjoins Washington Park. The property is zoned "A"
Residential. This is not a matter of rezoning.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Mr. Ruff stated that in the ACT 285 that was approved for the vacation of
Willard in this section west of Washington, one of the conditions was to
deed lot 5 over to the Parks Department as recommended by the Parks
Department so that they could use it for parking for the ice arena. In
doing so, it was deemed that it would be a better alternative to retain
ownership and then provide easement so the property would stay on tax
rolls and be able to be used by the Parks Department. If approved, it
would require a change to the ACT 285 resolution that Council passed
previously on the vacation of Willard. This has not been consummated to
this point where Willard is still City property. There had to be a number of
conditions met before the transaction took place and this is resolving one
of those issues the City has been working toward.
Ms. Patrick inquired about a referral to the Old Everett Neighborhood
Organization. Ms. Stachowiak stated a referral had been made to the
organization.
George Abraham, resident of 4143 Barton Road, stated that he is the
owner of the property and that an offer has been made on the property by
Ingham Medical. In his discussions with Ingham Medical when the project
began five years ago, Ingham Medical wanted to build a dialysis center
with medical offices. The whole thing depends on Ingham being able to
construct a building of 20,000 square feet. In order for him to do that with
the amount of property available, the parking would need to be shared.
Parking would be shared with the Parks Department. This lot is directly
across from the ice arena. The people from the Parks Department were
very satisfied with the arrangements proposed allowing them to have the
lot and he would get an easement for parking. As Mr. Ruff explained,
there is now an alternative that he maintain the lot and the City would
have an easement to use it for unlimited parking. The situation lends
towards the Parks Department using the lot mostly in the evening on
weekends and he would use it during the week during the day. It is a
good situation for all involved. By him allowing the City an easement, he
would have to maintain all the property. This would allow him to construct
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 3
a building of 20,000 square feet, which is what the hospital needs for this
facility.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on this matter, Mr. Frederick referred
SLU-5-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee scheduled for
Tuesday, July 16, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., 124 W. Michigan Ave., City Council
Chambers.
B. SLU-6-2002, 300 Elvin Court, Special Land Use Permit - Surface
Parking Lot in the "B" Residential Zoning District
This is a request by Sparrow Health Systems for a Special Land Use
permit to construct a temporary surface parking lot at 300 Elvin Court
containing approximately 677 parking spaces. The parking lot would be
used for 2-3 years and would have a gravel surface. The property is
zoned "B" Residential District which permits parking lots, if a Special Land
Use permit is approved by the Lansing City Council. This is not a matter
of a rezoning.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
A discussion ensued regarding a cut off time for special land uses.
Ira Ginsburg, Vice President of Sparrow Hospital, 1215 E. Michigan
Avenue, stated that Sparrow Hospital's proposing to use this armory
parking lot, and has been sized down since the original application to less
than 600 vehicles. Approximately six acres of the lot would be used and
about two and a half acres would be left as natural as it is now between
the garden area. Additional green space has been added to leave green
space in the area. There would be 100 feet easement between the
houses and the east fence line of the parking lot. Sparrow is proposing to
do this for two years. It will be vacated June of 2004. The Christmas
trees will continue to be sold on the lot if Sparrow has permission to use it.
For the tree sales, Sparrow has already negotiated with the Scouts to do
so on the property. The lot will be used Monday through Friday, 6:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m. It will be lighted during the winter months for those hours
when the vehicles are there. It will be patrolled by hospital security. The
purpose of this lot is to move employees and associates on a temporary
basis while Sparrow constructs an approximately 1100 to 1200 car
parking deck on the visitor lot at the hospital. When this is completed,
between 12 and 18 months, Sparrow will be able to have all the
associates move back and actually improve the neighborhood parking and
get more people out of the neighborhood that are currently parking there.
Sparrow will then have adequate parking on the premises. Sparrow is
approximately 200 to 300 cars short on current usage which was done by
a traffic study. Sparrow needed to create this parking lot in order to ease
the congestion for both patients, associates, and visitors to the facility.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 4
Sparrow is leasing the property from the armory for two years. There are
some requests that Sparrow will try to buffer the lighting. The lighting will
face west when the lighting is put in. Sparrow will be limiting the usage of
the lot until 6:00 p.m. and the lights will be turned off shortly thereafter,
probably around 7:00 p.m. There will be no night use of the lot by the
hospital at this point.
Ms. Keene inquired about the construction of the lot, if approved by City
Council. A discussion ensued. Mr. Ginsburg stated that Sparrow would
like to have the lot in use by September.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the State of Michigan preparing the surface for
the lot and if it was part of the agreement. She also inquired about
Sparrow having plans to return the lot to its original condition. Mr.
Ginsburg stated that the State of Michigan is not preparing the lot.
Sparrow is doing this at their expense. The only thing the State of
Michigan is doing is leasing Sparrow the property. As far as returning the
lot its original condition, Sparrow would be willing if the State of Michigan
is. They are moving from that site. That site is up for development at
some point in time. He thinks the City will have first rights to that property.
Sparrow will not know in two years if it will be turned over to the City or if
the armory would want Sparrow to do anything with it. Sparrow would be
willing to do it but the State of Michigan right now says they may not be
interested in Sparrow taking it back down. They will be vacating the
property and it will probably be up for sale some time in the future.
Ms. Keene inquired about Sparrow's discussion with the State of Michigan
and if the State of Michigan affirmatively stated that there is no interest in
having the land returned to its original state. Mr. Ginsburg stated correct.
Ms. Keene inquired about the neighbors anticipating dust from the gravel
lot and the chemicals used to control the dust. Mr. Ginsburg stated that
Sparrow would control the dust but not with an oil base substance at all, if
there is dust, Sparrow built a similar lot across from the hospital on
Jerome Street, which was the old Eastern High School football field.
There was not a dust problem. There were pot holes but no dust.
Sparrow kept that lot for approximately one and a half years before it was
paved as a permanent lot. Sparrow is planning on making sure that there
will not be a dust problem on Marshall and Saginaw.
A discussion ensued regarding the six acres being used for parking.
Mr. Frederick inquired about the route of the shuttle bus. Mr. Ginsburg
stated that the shuttle busses will go down Marshall Street to Michigan
Avenue, and then to the hospital.
Mr. Frederick inquired about the traffic flow of the associates who will be
using the lots. A discussion ensued.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 5
Mr. Frederick inquired about when the shuttle busses will run. Mr.
Ginsburg stated that the busses would run from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.
continuously. A discussion ensued.
Mr. Frederick inquired about the drop off point for the passengers. Mr.
Ginsburg stated the drop off point is behind Sparrow Hospital on Jerome
Street.
Ms. Keene inquired about the size of the shuttle busses. Mr. Ginsburg
stated the shuttle busses are 21 passenger.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the afternoon shuttle run. Mr. Ginsburg stated
between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the staff shifts. Mr. Ginsburg stated that most
of the staff who would be parking in the lot would not be twelve hour
shifts. These will mostly be people working eight hour shifts and maybe
some who will be working ten hour shifts.
Susan Fapier, resident of 1808 Jerome Street, stated no for this. She
realizes the need for parking but this will be eighteen months of pure
chaos on the street with the children. She inquired about who will be
taking care of the dust when Sparrow leaves. Would it become the City's
problem to chemically or otherwise treat the area? There is a huge
population of children in this area, and it is a beautiful neighborhood. She
recently moved in the neighborhood and would hate to leave Lansing so
soon after graduating. This is a very bad idea. Sparrow obviously is
trying to make concessions for the neighborhood but she cannot see that
it is worth it. There is going to be an increase in traffic, and she does not
want to see that in the neighborhood.
John Mertz, resident of 330 N. Clemens, stated that the proposal is on
its face and is unable to meet the conditions for the special land use
permit simply because it does so much damage to that particular plot of
ground as well as the neighborhood around it. This temporary lot is going
to take 8" of the soil off. All of the grass will be taken off and all the soil
remove. Then sand and gravel will be added with a huge 6' security fence
and lights all around it. This is a major green feature in the neighborhood.
It is a grassland and has quite a bit of wildlife. There are a lot of people
who use this as recreational, and has been used like this for over 53
years. He has been a life long resident on the east side and remembers
using this when he was a youngster. This is not going to be temporary. It
will be a permanent lot. The military is not planning on taking this out and
there are no plans to restore it whatsoever. Instead of having what was
14 acres of grassland, there are now going to be 2 acres of grassland.
While this may be nice for Sparrow, it has no benefit for the rest of us who
live there and use it. Having that nice park space inside a neighborhood
is an enhancing feature to the east side and to lose it, even temporarily is
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 6
bad enough, permanently is a great tragedy. He would hate to see this
happen.
He calls it Our Eastside Central Park. It really is this to those people who
get out and about in the neighborhood. He hopes the Board will seriously
take a look at this. He realizes Sparrow does need some space but this is
not the answer to Sparrow's problem. It results in too much loss in the
neighborhood, too much loss of open space, and it is not really a
preferred use. When you look at the way property is being used right
now, any "B" residential district is being used for what it ought to be.
Belinda Fitzpatrick, resident of 224 S. Holmes Street, stated that this
property is on her walking route for her dog and that she was just over at
the 119`h Park around 6:00 p.m. this evening. She noticed a lot of other
people out there with their dogs and now the gardens are there so there is
less places for people with their animals. This is important civic and social
space. She goes over there to see her friends and it is relaxing to have
that much open green space. If Sparrow was talking about 100 or 200
cars on Saginaw, that might not be such a loss. This is such a proportion
that it would be devastating to the community. This is an integral part of
the community. That space, which is community and civic space, which is
an established use, owned by the armory, somebody has designs on it, is
some sort of future development. What is being overlooked is its
established use, and its importance to the community. She has been over
in the area in the evenings and has seen beautiful fire flies. She has been
there with friends after the grass was mowed. One memory was a friend
sitting in the grass with a little girl. They were throwing the straw at each
other and sitting out there being social. Lansing needs to be more than
just a place where people come to work and they leave. She cannot
believe that Sparrow Hospital cannot find other places to park. She
believes it is time if the City of Lansing wants to be a residential
community, the residential use needs to be first. Put the Lansing
residents first. Do not make the residents of Lansing take second place to
those who want to drive to Lansing and leave at night. It is very important
at this point that if the City wants to have viable residential communities,
the residents need to come first.
Dr. Wallawisneuski, resident of 420 N. Fairview Avenue, stated that
she is concerned with the shuttle busses that will be running between 3:00
to 5:00 p.m. Every 15 minutes there will be shuttle busses running in the
area. She would like for the Board to consider the proximity of this
proposed parking lot to Fairview School. When Sparrow employees are
returning to their cars between 3:00 to 5:00 p.m., tired from their long day
at work and anxious to return home, are they going to consider the safety
of the children and the dogs in the area.
Brian Smith, resident of 1007 Woodbine, Chairman of Citizens for a
Better Lansing, stated that even though he does not live on the east side
now, he grew up on the east side. Until he was 28 years old, he lived on
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 7
the east side and his grandmother, 86 years old, still lives on South
Hayford Avenue. He is here tonight to encourage the Board to deny this
request and not to consider it. Twenty-four to thirty-six months is a long
time. Sparrow started this in the early 1970's, bit by bit, piece by piece. It
started out with the Eastern High School football field and have gradually
taken over little parts of the east side. When the City is losing green
space like this, and this will be encroaching into the 119th Armory Park,
he hopes the Board will put a stop to this. Once you lose zoning or
change zoning, you cannot go back on it. He stated that he will be
attending the meeting on July 161h and Citizens for a Better Lansing will be
actively involved in opposing this request.
Chris Townsend, resident of 325 N. Fairview, stated that she is
opposed to the make over of the current green space into a parking lot.
She has used the field every day that she has resided on the east side.
She has lived on the east side for 12 years. She and her dogs have met
friends there. She would not be so opposed to this if she had not thought
about how many of the lots are 33' wide. There is very little space for the
children, animals, and families to get out and have a good run. This is
one field that is used very much for that purpose, and it is such a
wonderful space to visit. She has regular dates that she goes out there,
meets people. People walk and run out there. With the lot being used,
even if it is only 6 acres, it will significantly curtail the beauty and the
usability of the green space as it is being used now.
Gladys Collison, resident of 2711 Delta River Drive, stated that she
has moved into Lansing within the last 2 years from the suburbs. The
things she has heard after she moved into Lansing has been get rid of the
green space in Lansing, put in more parking lots, and put in more office
buildings. She wondered how Sparrow's program, Buy a House in
Sparrow Neighborhood, operated. Now she knows, and she believes it
was a failure. Sparrow is asking the citizens of Lansing, the ones who pay
taxes and live in the City, to spend their tax money to give up the
grassland and green space so that people can drive into the City, park,
and be shuttled to their place of employment. Obviously not using any
commuter parking lots, not using the City CATA system, and totally
ignoring anything the citizens of Lansing are trying to do to make the City
a place where people want to live. As someone who has recently been to
San Francisco, California and seen the beautiful Golden Gate Park, and
the beautiful areas in a neighborhood, the City could have built a
$500,000 house. Instead, there was a park with beautiful flowers that
covered an area no larger than an office cubicle at work. Coming back to
the City, Lansing wants to be a world class city. What does the City do?
It turns all of the green space into parking lots. This does not make it as a
world class city. Then again, if someone who had to park working
downtown in the City of Lansing from the State government for six years
from the parking lot and watching the people having push their cars out of
the ice covered mud holes in the winter, she cannot believe Sparrow
employees would say yes to something that is not a tarred parking lot.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 8
She believes that if the Sparrow employees had one winter, there would
be tar found out there. It would not be recoverable as anything that would
be desirable for the City of Lansing.
Nancy Parsons, President of the Eastside Neighborhood
Organization, stated that the organization sent a letter of support with
conditions for this special land use. She understood that there were other
conditions that may be considered for the beautification surrounding the
area (i.e. adding bushes and trees). She believes this is a waste of time
and money. If these are added, they will be taken out at the end of the
lease. They will be adding places where someone can hide and for trash
to build. The organization has talked quite lengthy regarding this issue.
The organization believes it is a positive thing that Sparrow is trying to do,
and that it would eliminate the traffic in and out of the neighborhoods.
The frequent parking that goes on day after day. She spent 3 days
visiting and talking with the neighbors on Clemens Street whose
properties abutt this area. Out of the 42 homes visited, 30 were in support
of this request with the conditions listed in the letter, 9 had no one home,
and 1 home that said absolutely nothing in there. At the time of the
organization's survey, the proposed lot was larger. She did not know the
lot was made smaller until Mr. Ginsburg announced it this evening. She is
here tonight to support the request.
Michelle Johnson, resident of 206 Rumsey Avenue, stated that she
recently moved into the area. Because of this open area, she is just now
beginning to meet her neighbors. She firmly believes that one of the main
reasons Lansing is not having the same fleeing reaction that is happening
in a lot of cities towards urban sprawl is because of these green areas,
especially where she lives on the east side. It is beautiful to be able to
share this community space. One of the greatest assets the people have
is the fact that we can leave places open. She hopes that the
neighborhood can keep this property for people to meet, so people do not
have to travel to the country in order to find grass for their dogs run,
gardens can be planted without fear of getting run off from a parking lot
coming into it, and to live with nature.
Colonel Lanczy, Facility Management Officer for the Department of
Military and Veteran Affairs, 2500 S. Washington, stated that he
represents the State Military Board and the Department of Military and
Veteran Affairs. They are responsible for the management of nearly
200,000 acres of land in the State of Michigan. He was interested in
listening to what the petitioner had to say, how the community feels about
the building, and give comments or answer questions the Board may have
when talking earlier with Mr. Ginsburg. There are 52 armory properties
spread throughout the State of Michigan. Several are in the Lansing area.
The property in question at the 119th armory used to be larger. This
property at the end of World War II was actually used as pastures for the
animals that pulled the artillery pieces. If some one were to look at the
Army Reserve Center, Marshall Park, American Red Cross, Greek
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 9
Church, Naval Reserve Center, Lansing Catholic Central, these used to
be pastures. The land was formerly managed by Department of
Management and Budget, City of Lansing, and State of Michigan for what
they felt was best for the community. In 1992, the law changed and the
Department of Military and Veteran Affairs was granted the authority to
manage its own lands. They still provide the properties to the public for
public use. Armories are rented out for wedding receptions. They support
car shows and carnivals, and also allow the Boy Scouts to sell
merchandise on the corner. The use of the land is vested in the Military
Board for military use, and is a tertiary use to allow the public to walk the
dogs and to use as a social gathering place. Artillery park is military
property. There is no written agreement between the State of Michigan
and the City of Lansing that makes this property a legitimate park.
However, it has been established and they understand that. This was
agreed to back in 1947. They are a people of their word, and they stand
behind that. When they were approached when the Boys Training Center
was closed and the garden needed to be removed, the request came from
the Parks and Recreation Department was granted free of use for that
purpose. When they were approached by Sparrow Hospital for the
potential of using this property as a parking lot and just as they were
approached by the contractors doing the City sewer and water separation,
they provided as a service. As long as it does not preclude the military's
need on that piece of property for anything that may come up for security
reasons. To develop the property and then what is done afterwards is an
argument that was brought up, and he would be willing to address it.
What he is hearing is some real conflicting data about people who would
like to see that area left green and never mow it when he is constantly
receiving notices of violation by the City telling them to mow it and then
mowing it and sending them the bill. He received the notifications in the
spring to pay for cleanup from the trees that are left behind or from
contractors who have worked on public projects. We pay it. In this issue
with allowing Sparrow to build the parking lot, they looked at this as an
opportunity for them not to have to deal with all the notices of violation that
have been received, and provide a public service to the Planning
Commission to allow the development of a ramp that apparently has been
approved for downtown.
Ms. Patrick inquired about Department of Military and Veteran Affairs
discussing with the City and other interested parties flexibility of the
property after the special land use has been completed. Colonel Lanczy
stated that they want to be good neighbors. They are exempt from the
City's zoning and ordinance codes. By allowing this property for use other
than military use, they require whoever the user is to comply with all local
codes and ordinances. If the City would like to restore the property to
green space, they can look at it as returning to green space, but they
would be looking at some compensation to allow them some relief from
the constant problems they have of people parking cars, putting for sale
signs on the cars, and the department getting notified of running illegal
parking lots. They are not the department's cars, Christmas trees, or
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 10
electrical products. It is not their autonomous payment left behind but
they pay to clean it up continuously. By putting this area into a parking lot
and having it managed with a security force, they looked at the situation
as resolving many complaints that their department has had to deal with
on an ongoing basis.
Mr. Frederick thanked Colonel Lanczy for the flexibility of the property.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on this matter, Mr. Frederick referred
SLU-6-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee scheduled for
Tuesday, July 16, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., 124 W. Michigan Ave., City Council
Chambers.
C. SLU-7-2002, 1219 N. Walnut Street, Special Land Use - Child Care
Center in an "A" Residential District
This is a request by Juanita Castillo for a Special Land Use to utilize the
property and existing building at 1219 N. Walnut Street and the vacant
property at 1218 N. Chestnut Street for a child care center that would
serve approximately 50 children.
D. Z-11-2002, 1219 N. Walnut Street, Rezoning from "C" Residential
District to "A" Residential District
This is a request by Juanita Castillo, representing Small Folks
Development Center, to rezone the property located at 1219 N. Walnut
Street, more particularly described as:
LOT 3 & W 2 R OF S '/2 LOT 2 BLOCK 28 ORIG PLAT, City of
Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan
from "C" Residential District to "A" Residential District.
SLU-7-2002 and Z-11-2002 were combined. Sue Stachowiak gave a brief
overview on both cases.
Ms. Cordill stated that the daycare expects to have 30-50 children, and
inquired about the size of the house. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the State of Michigan determining the square
footage requirements per number of children. A discussion ensued.
Juanita Castillo, Director of Small Folks Development Center and
resident of 3031 S. Washington Apt. D6, stated that the center has
been in operation since 1974 and is currently located in the North
Presbyterian Church. They had started with model cities monies and then
moved on to community development monies. In 1982, the center was
de-funded and has been on their own. They are looking for a new
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 11
location. Their lease was not renewed with North Presbyterian Church.
They have been looking and have found the home on Walnut Street.
They are figuring the home has 1,800 square feet and by measuring the
square footage, the State licensing should allow them to have between
40-50 children at the home. It would be very convenient for the center
because they would be able to have their playground in the same area.
Currently, the children are walked to Willow Street, behind the Capital
Area Community Services building. It is City property that they utilize for
their playground. This home is what the center has been looking for.
Ms. Keene inquired about the square footage. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the center not having 50 children all at once.
Ms. Castillo stated that she is not sure if she will be licensed for 50
children. The State has to look at the home and decide how many
children the center can have. The center would not have 50 children at
one given time.
Reverend Stephanie Spangler, resident of 1019 N. Chestnut, stated
that she lives approximately two blocks from the property. She is the
Pastor of North Presbyterian Church where Small Folks Development
Center is presently located. Small Folks has been around for
approximately 30 years in the community. It is unfortunate the church
cannot physically take on the daycare center and expand the ministries in
the life of the church at the same time. The church shares a lot of the
space for napping. The daycare center spends a good amount of time
moving items around for the children to play on if it is a rainy day, and
moving items so that the children are provided the adequate space that
they need for their napping that is required by the State. This property
would allow Small Folks to remain in the community where the church can
still participate and support them. It also allows Small Folks to continue
with the reputation they have had in the community where parents and
people know they are there. Small Folks is the only developmental center
in the Lansing area that provides for bilingual daycare arrangements. It is
a significant gift to the community, and she hopes that the Board will
approve the special land use so Small Folks can stay in the relative
neighborhood where they have been.
Mr. Ruff inquired about the lease ending in September 2002
A discussion ensued regarding the lease ending in September and the
timing for the processing of the application.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Frederick
referred SLU-7-2002 and Z-11-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance
Committee scheduled for Tuesday, July 16, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., 124 W.
Michigan Ave., City Council Chambers.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 12
E. LS-6-2002, 3316 & 3326 Aurelius Road
This is a request by Jim Jones to divide parcels located at 3316 & 3325
Aurelius Rd., and more particularly described as:
Commencing at the SE corner of Sec. 27, City of Lansing, Ingham
County, Michigan, T4N R2W; Th. N 124 , W. 795. S 124' E 792' to
P.O.B., and Commencing at the SE corner of Sec. 27, City of
Lansing, Ingham County, T4N R2W, Th. N 124' to P.O.B.; Th. N
205', W 792', S 205', E 792' to P.O.B.
The request is to create three parcels from the two existing parcels. Two
existing houses would occupy two of the parcels. These parcels would be
approximately .5 acres in size. The other parcel, (Parcel 3), would be 5
acres in area and represents most of the interior land of the original two
parcels.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Pete Holoway, of Coldwell Banker Hubbell Real Estate and
representing the applicant, stated that there are two existing parcels
with houses. They would like to create a third split or a "flag" lot. Their
intentions are to leave enough room between the second parcel and the
far edge of the land to have access to the rest of the land so they would
be able to provide more housing in the City of Lansing. This property has
been owned by the Jones family since 1954 at 3326 Aurelius Road. In
1975, the family purchased the property at 3316 Aurelius Road. They are
requesting the Board's approval for the lot split.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the number of houses the applicant is
proposing to build on the property. Mr. Holoway stated there could be up
to 30 units based on the leftover land for the third split.
Ms. Cordill inquired about access to get back to the property. A
discussion ensued.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Frederick
referred LS-6-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting
scheduled to meet during the recess.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
Monica Zuchowski, President of the Downtown Neighborhood Association
and resident of 320 N. Walnut, stated that they did not have a quorum at the
DNA's meeting earlier this evening. The DNA has not taken a position regarding
the request from Lansing Community College to the City to vacate the right-of-
way on Washington Avenue. From this evening's meeting, the DNA Board is
concerned about the ultimate ownership of the land. She believes they will be
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 13
encouraging and trying to find a way for LCC to continue to use the property as
part of the campus for someone throughout the term of a 99 year lease but to be
able to continue so that LCC knows the campus will remain as is or at least
within a footprint allowing LCC to make investments they feel are necessary to
the campus. This also reserves the ownership with the City so that at some
point down the road if something happens with LCC and they had to leave for
various reasons the ownership of Washington would stay with the City and not
become part of that mass of land. She wanted to share this with the Board with
the understanding that it is not a formal position of the DNA. It has been
discussed on several occasions and she believes the DNA Board will support
trying to find something that will address the concerns of LCC and the property
ownership of the City.
Seeing no one wishing to address the Board, Mr. Frederick closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was taken by the Board. During the recess, the Zoning and Ordinance
Committee met to discuss LS-6-2002.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval
Ms. Keene moved; seconded by Ms. Patrick to approve the minutes of
June 18, 2002 without corrections. On a voice vote, motion carried (4-0),
the minutes of June 18, 2002 were
APPROVED.
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Ms. Patrick, Acting
Chair
a. LS-6-2002, 3316 & 3326 Aurelius Road
This is a request by Jim Jones to divide parcels located at
3316 & 3325 Aurelius Rd., and more particularly described
as:
Commencing at the SE corner of Sec. 27, City of
Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan, T4N R2W; Th. N
124', W. 795. S 124' E 792' to P.O.B., and
Commencing at the SE corner of Sec. 27, City of
Lansing, Ingham County, T4N R2W, Th. N 124' to
P.O.B.; Th. N 205', W 792', S 205', E 792' to P.O.B.
The request is to create three parcels from the two existing
parcels. Two existing houses would occupy two of the
parcels. These parcels would be approximately .5 acres in
size. The other parcel, (Parcel 3), would be 5 acres in area
and represents most of the interior land of the original two
parcels.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 14
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
LS-6-2002, 3316 & 3326 Aurelius Road as recommended with the conditions that
(1) any development of Parcel 3 will be in accordance with platting procedures for
the City of Lansing, Chapter 1234 of the Subdivision Regulations, or the
Condominium Act, Act 59 of 1978 of the State of Michigan, and (2) a deed
restriction shall be placed on Parcel 3 describing the terms of condition 1 and
registered with the Register of Deeds Office for Ingham County, subject to the
City Attorney's acceptance and a certified copy to be delivered to the Planning
Office within 5 days of its registration.
Frederick . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Keene .Ave Patrick Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED WCONDITIONS.
Next meeting, Tuesday, July 16, 2002 at 7:00 p.m.
City Council Conference Room, Tenth Floor, City Hall
124 W. Michigan Avenue.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Patrick, Chair
a. Act-1-2002, Alley in Block 67 Orig. Plat, Sale of
Encroachment Area.
Lansing Community College wishes to acquire a portion of
the City's "L" shaped alley located in Block 67 of the Original
Plat to correct an encroachment caused by the 1981
construction of a mechanical room at the southwest corner
of the Academic and Office Facility (AOF).
The N-S "leg" of the alley is 14' in width, and is in good
condition. The E-W "leg" is 12' wide and in rough shape.
The "L" shaped alley has an additional 25' x 44' rectangle
located inside the elbow of the alley. The College proposes
to purchase the east 18.5' x 44' portion of this rectangular
area.
The alley provides access to LCC, Gentilozzi Real Estate,
and the Michigan Economic Development Corporation
(MEDC), and serves as a loading zone for the AOF building.
Representatives from Public Service, Transportation, and
these entities agreed that:
1. the alley is navigable by emergency vehicles,
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 15
2. the primary problem with alley traffic is that truck
loading behind the AOF conflicts with access to the
Gentilozzi and MEDC parking facilities, and
3. the subject portion of the alley could be sold to LCC
without affecting the functioning of the alley.
One possible solution is an agreement between LCC and
Gentilozzi Real Estate, owner of the property at 320 N.
Washington, for the use of the drive aisle on that property to
circumvent parked and loading vehicles within the alley.
Staff recommends approval of Act-1-2002, the sale of a
portion of the "L" shaped alley immediately west of and
adjacent to the building at 315 N. Grand Avenue to Lansing
Community College, for fair market value, with conditions.
Based on its review of Act-1-2002 in accordance with its Act
285 Review procedures, the Committee found that:
1. the subject area is the minimum amount necessary to
remove the encroachment, and does not extend into
the main part of the alley,
2. the mechanical room is in good condition, and the
encroachment is longstanding and does not restrict
movement within the alley,
3. the primary problem with alley traffic is that truck
loading behind LCC's AOF building blocks the alley
conflicts with access to the Gentilozzi and MEDC
parking facilities, and
4. the City has no current or anticipated future use for
the area proposed to be acquired by LCC.
In Committee it was moved, seconded and carried
unanimously (4-0) to recommend approval of Act-1-2002,
the sale of a portion of the "L" shaped alley immediately
west of and adjacent to the building at 315 N. Grand Avenue
to Lansing Community College, for fair market value, with
the condition that Lansing Community College resolve the
conflict between truck loading and access to the Gentilozzi
and MEDC parking facilities, in a manner which is agreeable
to all parties, prior to the sale of the property.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend approval of
Act-1-2002, Alley in Block 67 Orig. Plat, Sale of Encroachment Area as
recommended with the condition that Lansing Community College resolve the
conflict between truck loading and access to the Gentilozzi and MEDC parking
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 16
facilities, in a manner which is agreeable to all parties, prior to the sale of the
property.
Frederick . . Ave Cordill . Aye
Keene . .Aye Patrick . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITION.
b. Act-3-2002, David St. E of Vermont, Vacate ROW.
The Lansing Board of Water & Light requests that the City
vacate the David Street Right-of-Way (ROW), located east
of Vermont Street, and north of Porter Park and Groesbeck
Golf Course.
David Street is a discontinuous unimproved ROW
(interrupted by Bancroft Park). The western segment is 33'
by 1,009' (approx. 0.8 acres), and lies between Vermont
Street and Bancroft Park. The eastern segment proposed
for vacation is 33' by 247.5' (approx. 0.25 acres), and lies
between Bancroft and the improved portion of David Street,
which extends westward off Wood Road.
The Board owns the vacant land (former gravel pit)
immediately north of the subject ROW, and outside the City
Limits. This property has access from Lake Lansing Road .
The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan identifies David
Street as a local street that extends from Vermont to Wood
Street. Land within the city is identified as Parks/Open
Space on the Proposed Land Use Map. The western
segment is currently maintained by the Parks Department,
except the eastern side which is wooded and natural.
The west 60' of David Street, north of the property at 1922
Vermont, provides needed access into Porter Park and to a
BWL substation. Any vacated right-of-way abutting Porter
Park would be attached to City of Lansing's Porter Park,
which is dedicated park land.
The western segment, which abuts Porter Park, is an
undeveloped 33' ROW, and is inadequate in constructing a
road to current standards. Public Service has no current
plans to develop this ROW into a road. If utility easements
are retained, there would appear to be no public purpose in
retaining the western segment of David Street.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 17
The eastern segment requested for vacation includes part of
Groesbeck Golf Course property which according to the city
plat map is owned by the city with only an easement to the
Ingham County Road Commission (30' x 123.75') for
roadway purposes.
Staff recommends approval, with modifications, of
Act-3-2002 as follows:
1. Vacation of David Street between the east property
line of 1922 Vermont Street (NW corner of Porter
Park) and Bancroft Park, retaining easements for any
current and future utilities within the vacated ROW.
The addition to Porter Park would become dedicated
parkland.
2. Retention of David Street east of Bancroft Park.
Based on its review of Act-3-2002 in accordance with its Act
285 Review procedures, the Committee found that:
1. the 33' segments of David Street are City streets. No
documentation of a north half in Lansing Township
has been found,
2. there is no public purpose for retaining David Street,
provided that easements for utilities are reserved,
3. the vacated portion of David Street would become an
addition to Porter Park,
4. the eastern segment proposed for vacation would still
be used as a street, under the jurisdiction of the
Ingham County Road Commission.
In Committee it was moved, seconded and carried
unanimously (4-0) to recommend approval of Act-3-2002,
with modifications, as follows:
1. Vacation of David Street between the east property
line of 1922 Vermont Street (NW corner of Porter
Park) and Bancroft Park, retaining easements for any
current and future utilities within the vacated ROW.
The addition to Porter Park would become dedicated
parkland,
2. Retention of David Street east of Bancroft Park.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend approval of
Act-3-2002, David St. E of Vermont, Vacate ROW as recommended with the
conditions that (1) vacation of David Street between the east property line of 1922
Vermont Street (NW corner of Porter Park) and Bancroft Park, retaining
easements for any current and future utilities within the vacated ROW. The
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 18
addition to Porter Park would become dedicated parkland, and (2) retention of
David Street east of Bancroft Park.
Frederick . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Keene .Ave Patrick Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
C. Act-9-2002, N. Washington Sq. - Shiawassee to
Schoolcraft, LCC Request for ROW Vacation.
Lansing Community College requests that the City of
Lansing vacate the N. Washington Square ROW, from
Shiawassee to Schoolcraft, for future expansion of the LCC
campus and anticipated resulting increased in pedestrian
traffic on the N. Washington Mall.
In 1973, the City Council, by resolution, approved the
vacation of Lapeer and Genesee Streets, and the closure of
N. Washington Avenue between Shiawassee and Saginaw
Streets, subject to the construction of a service road (i.e.
Schoolcraft). The improved ROW is used by LCC primarily
as a pedestrian mail for students, staff and visitors.
The Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan (1999) and the
Lansing Community College Campus Master Plan (2001)
disagree with regards to the use of the N. Washington
ROW.
The proposal to vacate N. Washington Avenue between
Shiawassee and Schoolcraft Streets, as presented, will:
1. result in an irrevocable decision;
2. require full-width easements for access to and
maintenance of existing public services unless they
are relocated;
3. affect pedestrian, non-motorized and potential transit
corridor connections between Old Town, downtown,
and S. Washington Avenue commercial districts;
4. a visual and physical barrier will continue at the north
terminus of the N. Washington Mall disconnecting the
Old Town and downtown commercial districts;
5. may have an undetermined (i.e. without the
completion of Two-way Street Study) impact on
circulation;
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 19
6. affect opportunities for students and staff residing in
the areas adjacent to a trolley route (i.e. north and
south of the campus) to reduce their commute time
and parking requirements to the LCC campus and
other downtown jobs; and
7. eliminate future opportunities to open the N.
Washington Mall if LCC and City administrations
change along with priorities, or LCC moves its
campus out of the urban center.
Staff recommends approval, with modifications, of Act-9-02,
the LCC request for vacation of the N. Washington ROW
from Shiawassee to Schoolcraft. The "partial vacation"
alternative, retaining a 10' ROW for pedestrian and non-
motorized purposes, and reserving utility easements,
provides the minimal assurances to protect both City and
LCC interests, and may open the door to future collaboration
regarding mall development as Lansing's downtown
revitalization efforts continue.
Based on its review of Act-9-02 in accordance with the Act
285 Review procedures, the Committee found that:
1. the Central Lansing Plan and the Lansing Community
College Campus Master Plan disagree with regards to
the use of the N. Washington ROW,
2. the Campus Plan does not indicate the necessity for
the City to vacate the ROW in order to implement the
planned expansion,
3. the Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan identifies a
future public purpose for the N. Washington ROW
that would not be fulfilled by either the LCC proposal
or the staff recommendation.
In Committee it was moved, seconded and carried
unanimously (4-0) to recommend denial of Act-9-2002, the
request that the City vacate the N. Washington Mall ROW
from Shiawassee to Schoolcraft Streets.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend denial of
Act-9-2002, N. Washington Sq. - Shiawassee to Schoolcraft, LCC Request for
ROW Vacation.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Keene . .Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 20
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
DENIED.
d. Act-10-2002, Purchase of Foreclosed Properties from
DN R.
The City has received last-minute notification about State-
owned properties available to the City for the minimum bid
price prior to selling them at auctions. If the City wishes to
purchase any prior to the auction, it must apply with cash in
hand, on or before July 15, 2002. Otherwise, the City can
purchase properties during a two subsequent auctions, or for
a nominal cost if the properties remain unsold. The City
would receive a quit-claim deed for any properties it
purchases.
The Parks and Recreation Department has indicated its
interest in two properties, listed in priority order below, along
with summary information:
Parcel 1 (PPN 3301-05-06-351-200)
A 0.74-acre rectangular parcel west of and abutting Gerald
W. Graves Park off Wayfarer Lane in the Coachlight
Commons area, near Miller and Waverly Roads. Minimum
bid: $948.99. This parcel is in an "A" Residential zone,
surrounded by single-family residences, with vacant land to
the north.
Parcel 2 (PPN 3301-01-21-328-392)
A 0.22-acre trapezoidal, landlocked parcel with Grand River
frontage off Reo Ave., north of Moore's River Drive, west of
Washington Avenue, and east of Moores Park. Minimum
bid: $599.27. This parcel is also in a residential area, zoned
"C" Residential, with "DM-3" Residential immediately to the
south.
Staff recommends the purchase of both parcels.
Based on its review of Act-10-02 in accordance with its Act
285 Review procedures, the Committee found that both
parcels present opportunities for the City of Lansing, and
their acquisition for parks and open space fulfills a public
purpose.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 21
In Committee it was moved, seconded and carried
unanimously (4-0) to recommend approval of Act-10-2002,
the purchase of the two properties from DNR, as proposed.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend approval of
Act-10-2002, Purchase of Foreclosed Properties from DNR.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Keene .Ave Patrick Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
e. Lansing Planning Board Comments Regarding
"Amendments to the Dimondale/Windsor Land Use
Plan."
Recent changes in the Michigan planning statutes require
that local units submit proposed plan amendments to
adjacent Planning Commissions for review and comment.
In Committee it was moved, seconded and carried
unanimously (4-0) to recommend approval of the staff
comments regarding the proposed amendments to the
Dimondale/Windsor Land Use Plan.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to support staff comments made
on the "Amendments to the Dimondale/Windsor Land Use Plan."
Frederick . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Keene . .Ave Patrick . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
SUPPORTED.
Next meeting, Tuesday, July 23, 2002, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 22
3. Committee of the Whole - None.
4. Executive Committee - None.
C. REPORT FROM PLANNING MANAGER
Mr. Ruff interviewed an applicant for the Board and is awaiting their
determination as to whether or not they want to accept his
recommendation for their appointment. The applicant applied for Historic
District Commission and Planning Board, and would make an excellent
addition to the Planning Board as a Third Ward member. He expects to
hear from the applicant by the end of the week.
D. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St., "H"Light Industrial District to"G-1" Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. Z-5-19981 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-15-2000,301 W. Lenawee Street, Professional Office to"G-1" Business
District(Tabled January 17, 2001)
e. P-1-2001,Tentative Preliminary Plat,Wexford Woods (Tabled June 13, May 9,
2001)
f. PRD-2-2001,"Crystal Woods", Planned Residential Neighborhood (Tabled
August 15,2001)
g. SLU-6-2001, 517-519 E. Grand River Ave., Church in"F-1"Commercial District
(Tabled November 14,2001)
h. SLU-8-2001, 3000 W. Miller Road,Additional Parking for an Existing Church
(Tabled November 14,2001)
i. SLU-3-2002,2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J"Parking District(Tabled May 15,2002)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000,201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27, 2000)
b. Act-2-2002, Lansing Housing Commission Property, 310 Seymour,Acquisition
for public purposes (Tabled February 26, 2002)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
8. NEW BUSINESS - None.
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON
Mr. Frederick stated that Ranney Skate Park is now opened and is immensely
popular. He commented that lights may need to be added because the kids stay
until the very last flicker of light from the sun is left. It is really too dark for the
kids to be skateboarding there but they love it. He recommends that the Parks
Department install lights.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 23
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS - None.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS
Ms. Patrick requested an update on the two items from a previous meeting (CVS
Pharmacy parking lot and Auto Zone). She stated that the trucks disappeared
from the parking lot. Mr. Ruff stated that the trucks were from the packed garden
shop down the street, and that the CVS building is being remodeled.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the fluttering strings at Auto Zone, and stated that it
has not been addressed. Mr. Ruff stated that he would do a follow up.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
James A. Ruff, Secretary, Planning Board
PB Minutes.070202.wpd
Draft to Clerk July 10,2002
Approved 2002
To Clerk 2002
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, July 2, 2002
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Frederick.
A. Roll call. Present: Frederick, Cordill, Keene, Patrick.
B. Staff Attending: Ruff, Stachowiak, Rieske, Stanich.
C. Excused absences: Foster, Ruge.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Ruff stated due to vacancies and absences that are expected on July 161h
there would not be a quorum. It is suggested that the regular Planning Board
meeting be cancelled and that the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meet at
7:00 p.m. with the members that are expected: Cordill, Frederick, Ruge. This
would be a change to the Committee Report under item 7B.
It was moved by Ms. Keene, supported by Ms. Cordill to approve the agenda as
amended. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Letter of opposition from Mr. Robert Kimball regarding SLU-6-2002.
B. Letter of opposition from Ms. Jana Nicole regarding SLU-6-2002.
C. Interoffice Memo from Mr. Andrew Kilpatrick recommending conditions for
SLU-6-2002, if recommended for approval.
D. Letter of opposition from Adam and Danielle Droste regarding SLU-6-2002.
E. Letter of opposition from Mr. James Nobel regarding SLU-6-2002.
F. Letter of opposition from Mr. John Mertz regarding SLU-6-2002.
G. Letter of support with request for conditions from Ms. Nancy Parsons,
Eastside Neighborhood Organization regarding SLU-6-2002.
H. A petition of opposition with 146 signatures from R. Eberbach regarding
SLU-6-2002.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 2
4. HEARINGS
A. SLU-05-2002, 2710 S. Washington Avenue, Special Land Use -
Surface Parking Lot in an "A" Residential District
This is a request by Mr. George W. Abraham for a Special Land Use
permit to develop a parking lot at 2710 S. Washington Avenue (Lot 5 of
Assessor's Plat No. 53) in conjunction with the City of Lansing. The
property that is proposed to be used for parking is 100 feet wide by 130
feet deep and adjoins Washington Park. The property is zoned "A"
Residential. This is not a matter of rezoning.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Mr. Ruff stated that in the ACT 285 that was approved for the vacation of
Willard in this section west of Washington, one of the conditions was to
deed block 5 over to the Parks Department as recommended by the Parks
Department so that they could use it for parking for the ice arena. In
doing so, it was deemed that it would be probable and fit into certain
conditions that would be a better alternative to retain ownership and then
provide easement to that so the property would stay on tax rolls and be
able to be used by the Parks Department. If approved, it would require a
change to the ACT 285 resolution that Council passed previously on the
vacation of Willard. This has not been consummated to this point where
Willard is still City property. There had to be a number of conditions met
before the transaction took place and this is resolving one of those issues
the City has been working toward.
Ms. Patrick inquired about a referral to the Old Everett Neighborhood
Organization. Ms. Stachowiak stated a referral had been made to the
organization.
George Abraham, resident of 4143 Barton Road, stated that he is the
owner of the property and that an offer has been made on the property by
Ingham Medical. In his discussions with Ingham Medical when the project
began five years ago, Ingham Medical wanted to build a dialysis center
with medical offices. The whole thing depends on Ingham being able to
construct a building of 20, 000 square feet. In order for him to do that with
the amount of property available, the parking would need to be shared.
Parking would be shared with the Parks Department. This lot is directly
across from the ice arena. The people from the Parks Department were
very satisfied with the arrangements proposed allowing them to have the
lot and he would get an easement for parking. As Mr. Ruff explained,
there is now an alternative that he maintain the lot and the City would
have an easement to use it for unlimited parking. The situation lends
towards the Parks Department using the lot mostly in the evening on
weekends and he would use it during the week during the day. It is a
good situation for all involved. By him allowing the City an easement, he
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 3
would have to maintain all the property. This would allow him to construct
a building of 20,000 square feet, which is what the hospital needs for this
facility.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on this matter, Mr. Frederick referred
SLU-5-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee scheduled for
Tuesday, July 16, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., 124 W. Michigan Ave., City Council
Chambers.
B. SLU-6-2002, 300 Elvin Court, Special Land Use Permit - Surface
Parking Lot in the "B" Residential Zoning District
This is a request by Sparrow Health Systems for a Special Land Use
permit to construct a temporary surface parking lot at 300 Elvin Court
containing approximately 677 parking spaces. The parking lot would be
used for 2-3 years and would have a gravel surface. The property is
zoned "B" Residential District which permits parking lots, if a Special Land
Use permit is approved by the Lansing City Council. This is not a matter
of a rezoning.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
A discussion ensued regarding a cut off time for special land uses.
Ira Ginsburg, Vice President of Sparrow Hospital, 1215 E. Michigan
Ave., stated that Sparrow Hospital's proposing to use this armory parking
lot, and has been sized down since the original application to less than
600 vehicles. Approximately six acres of the lot would be used and about
two and a half acres would be left as natural as it is now between the
garden area. Additional green space has been added to leave green
space in the area. There would be 100 feet easement between the
houses and the east fence line of the parking lot. Sparrow is proposing to
do this for two years. It will be vacated June of 2004. The Christmas
trees will continue to be sold on the lot if Sparrow has permission to use it.
For the tree sales, Sparrow has already negotiated with the Scouts to do
so on the property. The lot will be used Monday through Friday, 6:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m. It will be lighted during the winter months for those hours
when the vehicles are there. It will be petrolled by hospital security. The
purpose of this lot is to move employees and associated on a temporary
basis while Sparrow constructs an approximately 1100 to 1200 car
parking deck on the visitor lot at the hospital. When this is completed,
between 12 and 18 months, Sparrow will be able to have all the
associates move back and actually improve the neighborhood parking and
get more people out of the neighborhood that are currently parking there.
Sparrow will then have adequate parking on the premises. Sparrow is
approximately 200 to 300 cars short on current usage which was done by
a traffic study. Sparrow needed to create this parking lot in order to ease
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 4
the congestion for both patients, associates, and visitors to the facility.
Sparrow is leasing the property from the armory for two years. There are
some requests that Sparrow will try to buffer the lighting. The lighting will
face west when the lighting is put in. Sparrow will be limiting the usage of
the lot until 6:00 p.m. and the lights will be turned off shortly thereafter,
probably around 7:00 p.m. There will be no night use of the lot by the
hospital at this point.
Ms. Keene inquired about the construction of the lot, if approved by City
Council. A discussion ensued. Mr. Ginsburg stated that Sparrow would
like to have the lot in use by September.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the State of Michigan preparing the surface for
the lot and if it was part of the agreement. She also inquired about
Sparrow having plans to return the lot to its original condition. Mr.
Ginsburg stated that the State of Michigan is not preparing the lot.
Sparrow is doing this at their expense. The only thing the State of
Michigan is doing is leasing Sparrow the property. As far as returning the
lot its original condition, Sparrow would be willing if the State of Michigan
is. They are moving from that site. That site is up for development at
some point in time. He thinks the City will have first rights to that property.
Sparrow will not know in two years if it will be turned over to the City or if
the armory would want Sparrow to do anything with it. Sparrow would be
willing to do it but the State of Michigan right now says they may not be
interested in Sparrow taking it back down. They will be vacating the
property and it will probably be up for sale some time in the future.
Ms. Keene inquired about Sparrow's discussion with the State of Michigan
and if the State of Michigan affirmatively stated that there is no interest in
having the land returned to its original state. Mr. Ginsburg stated correct.
Ms. Keene inquired about the neighbors anticipating dust from the gravel
lot and the chemicals used to control the dust. Mr. Ginsburg stated that
Sparrow would control the dust but not with an oil base substance at all. If
the is dust, Sparrow built a similar lot across from the hospital on Jerome
Street, which was the old Eastern High School football field. There was
not a dust problem. There were pot holes but no dust. Sparrow kept that
lot for approximately one and a half years before it was paved as a
permanent lot. Sparrow is planning on making sure that there will not be
a dust problem on Marshall and Saginaw.
A discussion ensued regarding the six acres being used for parking.
Mr. Frederick inquired about the route of the shuttle bus. Mr. Ginsburg
stated that the shuttle busses will go down Marshall Street to Michigan
Avenue, and then to the hospital.
Mr. Frederick inquired about the traffic flow of the associates who will be
using the lots. A discussion ensued.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 5
Mr. Frederick inquired about when the shuttle busses will run. Mr.
Ginsburg stated that the busses would run from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.
continuously. A discussion ensued.
Mr. Frederick inquired about the drop off point for the passengers. Mr.
Ginsburg stated the drop off point is behind Sparrow Hospital on Jerome
Street.
Ms. Keene inquired about the size of the shuttle busses. Mr. Ginsburg
stated the shuttle busses are 21 passenger.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the afternoon shuttle run. Mr. Ginsburg stated
between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the staff shifts. Mr. Ginsburg stated that most
of the staff who would be parking in the lot would not be twelve hour
shifts. These will mostly be people working eight hour shifts and maybe
some who will be working ten hour shifts.
Susan Fapier (sp?), resident of 1808 Jerome Street, stated no for this.
She realizes the need for parking but this will be eighteen months of pure
chaos on the street with the children. She inquired about who will be
taking care of the dust when Sparrow leaves. Would it become the City's
problem to chemically or otherwise treat the area? There is a huge
population of children in this area, and it is a beautiful neighborhood. She
recently moved in the neighborhood and would hate to leave Lansing so
soon after graduating. This is a very bad idea. Sparrow obviously is
trying to make concessions for the neighborhood but she cannot see that
it is worth it. There is going to be an increase in traffic, and she does not
want to see that in the neighborhood.
John Mertz, resident of 330 N. Clemens, stated that the proposal is on
its face and is unable to meet the conditions for the special land use
permit simply because it does so much damage to that particular plot of
ground as well as the neighborhood around it. This temporary lot is going
to take 8" of the soil off. All of the grass will be taken off and all the soil
remove. Then sand and gravel will be added with a huge 6' security fence
and lights all around it. This is a major green feature in the neighborhood.
It is a grassland and has quite a bit of wildlife. There are a lot of people
who use this as recreational, and has been used like this for over 53
years. He has been a life long resident on the east side and remembers
using this when he was a youngster. This is not going to be temporary. It
will be a permanent lot. The military is not planning on taking this out and
there are no plans to restore it whatsoever. Instead of having what was
14 acres of grassland, there are now going to be 2 acres of grassland.
While this may be nice for Sparrow, it has no benefit for the rest of us who
live there and use it. Having that nice park space inside a neighborhood
is an enhancing feature to the east side and to lose it, even temporarily is
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 6
bad enough, permanently is a great tragedy. He would hate to see this
happen.
He calls it Our Eastside Central Park. It really is this to those people who
get out and about in the neighborhood. He hopes the Board will seriously
take a look at this. He realizes Sparrow does need some space but this is
not the answer to Sparrow's problem. It results in too much loss in the
neighborhood, too much loss of open space, and it is not really a
preferred use. When you look at the way property is being used right
now, any "B" residential district is being used for what it ought to be.
Belinda Fitzpatrick, resident of 224 S. Holmes Street, stated that this
property is on her walking route for her dog and that she was just over at
the 119th Park around 6:00 p.m. this evening. She noticed a lot of other
people out there with their dogs and now the gardens are there so there is
less places for people with their animals. This is important civic and social
space. She goes over there to see her friends and it is relaxing to have
that much open green space. If Sparrow was talking about 100 or 200
cars on Saginaw, that might not be such a loss. This is such a proportion
that it would be devastating to the community. This is an integral part of
the community. That space, which is community and civic space, which is
has an established use, owned by the armory, somebody has designs on
it, is some sort of future development. What is being overlooked is its
established use, and its importance to the community. She has been over
in the area in the evenings and has seen beautiful fire flies. She has been
there with friends after the grass was mowed. One memory was a friend
sitting in the grass with a little girl. They were throwing the straw at each
other and sitting out there being social. Lansing needs to be more than
just a place where people come to work and they leave. She cannot
believe that Sparrow Hospital cannot find other places to park. She
believes it is time if the City of Lansing wants to be a residential
community, the residential use needs to be first. Put the Lansing
residents first. Do not make the residents of Lansing take second place to
those who want to drive to Lansing and leave at night. It is very important
at this point that if the City wants to have viable residential communities,
the residents need to come first.
Dr. wallandishnowski, resident of 420 N. Fairview Ave., stated that she
is concerned with the shuttle busses that will be running between 3:00 to
5:00 p.m. Every 15 minutes there will be shuttle busses running in the
area. She would like for the Board to consider the proximity of this
proposed parking lot to Fairview School. When Sparrow employees are
returning to their cars between 3:00 to 5:00 p.m., tired from their long day
at work and anxious to return home, are they going to consider the safety
of the children and the dogs in the area.
Brian Smith, resident of 1007 Woodbine, Chairman of Citizens for a
Better Lansing, stated that even though he does not live on the east side
now, he grew up on the east side. Until he was 28 years old, he lived on
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 7
the east side and his grandmother, 86 years old, still lives on South
Hayford Avenue. He is here tonight to encourage the Board to deny this
request and not to consider it. Twenty-four to thirty-six months is a long
time. Sparrow started this in the early 1970's, bit by bit, piece by piece. It
started out with the Eastern High School football field and have gradually
taken over little parts of the east side. When the City is losing green
space like this, and this will be encroaching into the 119th Armory Park,
he hopes the Board will put a stop to this. Once you lose zoning or
change zoning, you cannot go back on it. He stated that he will be
attending the meeting on July 161h and Citizens for a Better Lansing will be
actively involved in opposing this request.
Chris Townsend, resident of 325 N. Fairview, stated that she is
opposed to the make over of the current green space into a parking lot.
She has used the field every day that she has resided on the east side.
She has lived on the east side for 12 years. She and her dogs have met
friends there. She would not be so opposed to this if she had not thought
about how many of the lots are 33' wide. There is very little space for the
children, animals, and families to get out and have a good run. This is
one field that is used very much for that purpose, and it is such a
wonderful space to visit. She has regular dates that she goes out there,
meets people. People walk and run out there. With the lot being used,
even if it is only 6 acres, it will significantly curtail the beauty and the
usability of the green space as it is being used now.
Gladys Collison, resident of 2711 Delta River Drive, stated that she
has moved into Lansing within the last 2 years from the suburbs. The
things she has heard after she moved into Lansing has been get rid of the
green space in Lansing, put in more parking lots, and put in more office
buildings. She wondered how Sparrow's program, Buy a House in
Sparrow Neighborhood, operated. Now she knows, and she believes it
was a failure. Sparrow is asking the citizens of Lansing, the ones who pay
taxes and live in the City, to spend their tax money to give up the
grassland and green space so that people can drive into the City, park,
and be shuttled to their place of employment. Obviously not using any
commuter parking lots, not using the City CATA system, and totally
ignoring anything the citizens of Lansing are trying to do to make the City
a place where people want to live. As someone who has recently been to
San Francisco, California and seen the beautiful Golden Gate Park, and
the beautiful areas in a neighborhood, the City could have built a
$500,000 house. Instead, there was a park with beautiful flowers that
covered an area no larger than an office cubicle at work. Coming back to
the City, Lansing wants to be a world class city. What does the City do?
It turns all of the green space into parking lots. This does not make it as a
world class city. Then again, if someone who had to park working
downtown in the City of Lansing from the State government for six years
from the parking lot and watching the people having push their cars out of
the ice covered mud holes in the winter, she cannot believe Sparrow
employees would say yes to something that is not a tarred parking lot.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 8
She believes that if the Sparrow employees had one winter, there would
be tar found out there. It would not be recoverable as anything that would
be desirable for the City of Lansing.
Nancy Parsons, President of the Eastside Neighborhood
Organization, stated that the organization sent a letter of support with
conditions for this special land use. She understood that there were other
conditions that may be considered for the beautification surrounding the
area (i.e. adding bushes and trees). She believes this is a waste of time
and money. If these are added, they will be taken out at the end of the
lease. They will be adding places where someone can hide and for trash
to build. The organization has talked quite lengthy regarding this issue.
The organization believes it is a positive thing that Sparrow is trying to do,
and that it would eliminate the traffic in and out of the neighborhoods.
The frequent parking that goes on day after day. She spent 3 days
visiting and talking with the neighbors on Clemens Street whose
properties abutt this area. Out of the 42 homes visited, 30 were in support
of this request with the conditions listed in the letter, 9 had no one home,
and 1 home that said absolutely nothing in there. At the time of the
organization's survey, the proposed lot was larger. She did not know the
lot was made smaller until Mr. Ginsburg announced it this evening. She is
here tonight to support the request.
Michelle Johnson, resident of 206 Rumsey Avenue, stated that she
recently moved into the area. Because of this open area, she is just now
beginning to meet her neighbors. She firmly believes that one of the main
reasons Lansing is not having the same fleeing reaction that is happening
in a lot of cities towards urban sprawl is because of these green areas,
especially where she lives on the east side. It is beautiful to be able to
share this community space. One of the greatest assets the people have
is the fact that we can leave places open. She hopes that the
neighborhood can keep this property for people to meet, so people do not
have to travel to the country in order to find grass for their dogs run,
gardens can be planted without fear of getting run off from a parking lot
coming into it, and to live with nature.
Colonel Lanczy, Facility Management Officer for the Department of
Military and Veteran Affairs, 2500 S. Washington, stated that he
represents the State Military Board and the Department of Military and
Veteran Affairs. They are responsible for the management of nearly
200,000 acres of land in the State of Michigan. He was interested in
listening to what the petitioner had to say, how the community feels about
the building, and give comments or answer questions the Board may have
when talking earlier with Mr. Ginsburg. There are 52 armory properties
spread throughout the State of Michigan. Several are in the Lansing area.
The property in question at the 119th armory used to be larger. This
property at the end of World War II was actually used as pastures for the
animals that pulled the artillery pieces. If some one were to look at the
Army Reserve Center, Marshall Park, American Red Cross, Greek
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 9
Church, Naval Reserve Center, Lansing Catholic Central, these used to
be pastures. The land was formerly managed by Department of
Management and Budget, City of Lansing, and State of Michigan for what
they felt was best for the community. In 1992, the law changed and the
Department of Military and Veteran Affairs was granted the authority to
manage its own lands. They still provide the properties to the public for
public use. Armories are rented out for wedding receptions. They support
car shows and carnivals, and also allow the Boy Scouts to sell
merchandise on the corner. The use of the land is vested in the Military
Board for military use, and is a tertiary use to allow the public to walk the
dogs and to use as a social gathering place. Artillery park is military
property. There is no written agreement between the State of Michigan
and the City of Lansing that makes this property a legitimate park.
However, it has been established and they understand that. This was
agreed to back in 1947. They are a people of their word, and they stand
behind that. When they were approached when the Boys Training Center
was closed and the garden needed to be removed, the request came from
the Parks and Recreation Department was granted free of use for that
purpose. When they were approached by Sparrow Hospital for the
potential of using this property as a parking lot and just as they were
approached by the contractors doing the City sewer and water separation,
they provided as a service. As long as it does not preclude the military's
need on that piece of property for anything that may come up for security
reasons. To develop the property and then what is done afterwards is an
argument that was brought up, and he would be willing to address it.
What he is hearing is some real conflicting data about people who would
like to see that area left green and never mow it when he is constantly
receiving notices of violation by the City telling them to mow it and then
mowing it and sending them the bill. He received the notifications in the
spring to pay for cleanup from the trees that are left behind or from
contractors who have worked on public projects. We pay it. In this issue
with allowing Sparrow to build the parking lot, they looked at this as an
opportunity for them not to have to deal with all the notices of violation that
have been received, and provide a public service to the Planning
Commission to allow the development of a ramp that apparently has been
approved for downtown.
Ms. Patrick inquired about Department of Military and Veteran Affairs
discussing with the City and other interested parties flexibility of the
property after the special land use has been completed. Colonel Lanczy
stated that they want to be good neighbors. They are exempt from the
City's zoning and ordinance codes. By allowing this property for use other
than military use, they require whoever the user is to comply with all local
codes and ordinances. If the City would like to restore the property to
green space, they can look at it as returning to green space, but they
would be looking at some compensation to allow them some relief from
the constant problems they have of people parking cars, putting for sale
signs on the cars, and the department getting notified of running illegal
parking lots. They are not the department's cars, Christmas trees, or
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 10
electrical products. It is not their autonomous payment left behind but
they pay to clean it up continuously. By putting this area into a parking lot
and having it managed with a security force, they looked at the situation
as resolving many complaints that their department has had to deal with
on an ongoing basis.
Mr. Frederick thanked Colonel Lanczy for the flexibility of the property.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on this matter, Mr. Frederick referred
SLU-6-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee scheduled for
Tuesday, July 16, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., 124 W. Michigan Ave., City Council
Chambers.
C. SLU-7-2002, 1219 N. Walnut Street, Special Land Use - Child Care
Center in an "A" Residential District
This is a request by Juanita Castillo for a Special Land Use to utilize the
property and existing building at 1219 N. Walnut Street and the vacant
property at 1218 N. Chestnut Street for a child care center that would
serve approximately 50 children.
D. Z-11-2002, 1219 N. Walnut Street, Rezoning from "C" Residential
District to "A" Residential District
This is a request by Juanita Castillo, representing Small Folks
Development Center, to rezone the property located at 1219 N. Walnut
Street, more particularly described as:
LOT 3 & W 2 R OF S Y2 LOT 2 BLOCK 28 ORIG PLAT, City of
Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan
from "C" Residential District to "A" Residential District.
SLU-7-2002 and Z-11-2002 were combined. Sue Stachowiak gave a brief
overview on both cases.
Ms. Cordill stated that the daycare expects to have 30-50 children, and
inquired about the size of the house. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the State of Michigan determining the square
footage requirements per number of children. A discussion ensued.
Juanita Castillo, Director of Small Folks Development Center and
resident of 3031 S. Washington Apt. D6, stated that the center has
been in operation since 1974 and is currently located in the North
Presbyterian Church. They had started with model cities monies and then
moved on to community development monies. In 1982, the center was
de-funded and has been on their own. They are looking for a new
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 11
location. Their lease was not renewed with North Presbyterian Church.
They have been looking and have found the home on Walnut Street.
They are figuring the home has 1,800 square feet and by measuring the
square footage, the State licensing should allow them to have between
40-50 children at the home. It would be very convenient for the center
because they would be able to have their playground in the same area.
Currently, the children are walked to Willow Street, behind the Capital
Area Community Services building. It is City property that they utilize for
their playground. This home is what the center has been looking for.
Ms. Keene inquired about the square footage. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the center not having 50 children all at once.
Ms. Castillo stated that she is not sure if she will be licensed for 50
children. The State has to look at the home and decide how many
children the center can have. The center would not have 50 children at
one given time.
Reverend Stephanie Spangler, resident of 1019 N. Chestnut, stated
that she lives approximately two blocks from the property. She is the
Pastor of North Presbyterian Church where Small Folks Development
Center is presently located. Small Folks has been around for
approximately 30 years in the community. It is unfortunate the church
cannot physically take on the daycare center and expand the ministries in
the life of the church at the same time. The church shares a lot of the
space for napping. The daycare center spends a good amount of time
moving items around for the children to play on if it is a rainy day, and
moving items so that the children are provided the adequate space that
they need for their napping that is required by the State. This property
would allow Small Folks to remain in the community where the church can
still participate and support them. It also allows Small Folks to continue
with the reputation they have had in the community where parents and
people know they are there. Small Folks is the only developmental center
in the Lansing area that provides for bilingual daycare arrangements. It is
a significant gift to the community, and she hopes that the Board will
approve the special land use so Small Folks can stay in the relative
neighborhood where they have been.
Mr. Ruff inquired about the lease ending in September 2002
A discussion ensued regarding the lease ending in September and the
timing for the processing of the application.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Frederick
referred SLU-7-2002 and Z-11-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance
Committee scheduled for Tuesday, July 16, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., 124 W.
Michigan Ave., City Council Chambers.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 12
E. LS-6-2002, 3316 & 3326 Aurelius Road
This is a request by Jim Jones to divide parcels located at 3316 & 3325
Aurelius Rd., and more particularly described as:
Commencing at the SE corner of Sec. 27, City of Lansing, Ingham
County, Michigan, T4N R2W; Th. N 124', W. 795. S 124' E 792' to
P.O.B., and Commencing at the SE corner of Sec. 27, City of
Lansing, Ingham County, T4N R2W, Th. N 124' to P.O.B.; Th. N
205', W 792', S 205', E 792' to P.O.B.
The request is to create three parcels from the two existing parcels. Two
existing houses would occupy two of the parcels. These parcels would be
approximately .5 acres in size. The other parcel, (Parcel 3), would be 5
acres in area and represents most of the interior land of the original two
parcels.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Pete Holloway, of Coldwell Banker Hubbell Real Estate and
representing the applicant, stated that there are two existing parcels
with houses. They would like to create a third split or a "flag" lot. Their
intentions are to leave enough room between the second parcel and the
far edge of the land to have access to the rest of the land so they would
be able to provide more housing in the City of Lansing. This property has
been owned by the Jones family since 1954 at 3326 Aurelius Road. In
1975, the family purchased the property at 3316 Aurelius Road. They are
requesting the Board's approval for the lot split.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the number of houses the applicant is
proposing to build on the property. Mr. Holoway stated there could be up
to 30 units based on the leftover land for the third split.
Ms. Cordill inquired about access to get back to the property. A
discussion ensued.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Frederick
referred LS-6-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting
scheduled to meet during the recess.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
Monica Zuchowski, President of the Downtown Neighborhood Association
and resident of 320 N. Walnut, stated that did not have a quorum at the DNA's
meeting earlier this evening. The DNA has not taken a position regarding the
request from Lansing Community College to the City to vacate the right-of-way
on Washington Avenue. From this evening's meeting, the DNA Board is
concerned about the ultimate ownership of the land. She believes they will be
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 13
encouraging and trying to find a way for LCC to continue to use the property as
part of the campus for someone throughout the term of a 99 year lease but to be
able to continue so that LCC knows the campus will remain as is or at least
within a footprint allowing LCC to make investments they feel are necessary to
the campus. This also reserves the ownership with the City so that at some
point down the road if something happens with LCC and they had to leave for
various reasons the ownership of Washington would stay with the City and not
become part of that mass of land. She wanted to share this with the Board with
the understanding that it is not a formal position of the DNA. It has been
discussed on several occasions and she believes the DNA Board will support
trying to find something that will address the concerns of LCC and the property
ownership of the City.
Seeing no one wishing to address the Board, Mr. Frederick closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was taken by the Board. During the recess, the Zoning and Ordinance
Committee met to discuss LS-6-2002.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval
Ms. Keene moved; seconded by Ms. Patrick to approve the minutes of
June 18, 2002 without corrections. On a voice vote, motion carried (4-0),
the minutes of June 18, 2002 were
APPROVED.
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Ms. Patrick, Acting
Chair
a. LS-6-2002, 3316 & 3326 Aurelius Road
This is a request by Jim Jones to divide parcels located at
3316 & 3325 Aurelius Rd., and more particularly described
as:
Commencing at the SE corner of Sec. 27, City of
Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan, T4N R2W; Th. N
124', W. 795. S 124' E 792' to P.O.B., and
Commencing at the SE corner of Sec. 27, City of
Lansing, Ingham County, T4N R2W, Th. N 124' to
P.O.B.; Th. N 205', W 792', S 205', E 792' to P.O.B.
The request is to create three parcels from the two existing
parcels. Two existing houses would occupy two of the
parcels. These parcels would be approximately .5 acres in
size. The other parcel, (Parcel 3), would be 5 acres in area
and represents most of the interior land of the original two
parcels.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 14
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
LS-6-2002, 3316 & 3326 Aurelius Road as recommended with the conditions that
(1) any development of Parcel 3 will be in accordance with platting procedures for
the City of Lansing, Chapter 1234 of the Subdivision Regulations, or the
Condominium Act, Act 59 of 1978 of the State of Michigan, and (2) a deed
restriction shall be placed on Parcel 3 describing the terms of condition 1 and
registered with the Register of Deeds Office for Ingham County, subject to the
City Attorney's acceptance and a certified copy to be delivered to the Planning
Office within 5 days of its registration.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Keene . .Ave Patrick . . Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED WCONDITIONS.
Next meeting, Tuesday, July 16, 2002 at 7:00 p.m.
City Council Conference Room, Tenth Floor, City Hall
124 W. Michigan Avenue.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Patrick, Chair
a. Act-1-2002, Alley in Block 67 Orig. Plat, Sale of
Encroachment Area.
Lansing Community College wishes to acquire a portion of
the City's "L" shaped alley located in Block 67 of the Original
Plat to correct an encroachment caused by the 1981
construction of a mechanical room at the southwest corner
of the Academic and Office Facility (AOF).
The N-S "leg" of the alley is 14' in width, and is in good
condition. The E-W "leg" is 12' wide and in rough shape.
The "L" shaped alley has an additional 25' x 44' rectangle
located inside the elbow of the alley. The College proposes
to purchase the east 18.5 ` x 44' portion of this rectangular
area.
The alley provides access to LCC, Gentilozzi Real Estate,
and the Michigan Economic Development Corporation
(MEDC), and serves as a loading zone for the AOF building.
Representatives from Public Service, Transportation, and
these entities agreed that:
1. the alley is navigable by emergency vehicles,
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 15
2. the primary problem with alley traffic is that truck
loading behind the AOF conflicts with access to the
Gentilozzi and MEDC parking facilities, and
3. the subject portion of the alley could be sold to LCC
without affecting the functioning of the alley.
One possible solution is an agreement between LCC and
Gentilozzi Real Estate, owner of the property at 320 N.
Washington, for the use of the drive aisle on that property to
circumvent parked and loading vehicles within the alley.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend approval of
Act-1-2002, Alley in Block 67 Orig. Plat, Sale of Encroachment Area as
recommended with the conditions that (1) the subject area is the minimum
amount necessary to remove the encroachment, and does not extend into the
main part of the alley, (2) the mechanical room is in good condition, and the
encroachment is longstanding and does not restrict movement within the alley,
(3) the primary problem with alley traffic is that truck loading behind LCC's AOF
building blocks the alley conflicts with access to the Gentilozzi and MEDC
parking facilities, and (4) the City has no current or anticipated future use for the
area proposed to be acquired by LCC.
Frederick . Ave Cordill. . . Ave
Keene . Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
b. Act-3-2002, David St. E of Vermont, Vacate ROW.
The Lansing Board of Water & Light requests that the City
vacate the David Street Right-of-Way (ROW), located east
of Vermont Street, and north of Porter Park and Groesbeck
Golf Course.
David Street is a discontinuous unimproved ROW
(interrupted by Bancroft Park). The western segment is 33'
by 1,009' (approx. 0.8 acres), and lies between Vermont
Street and Bancroft Park. The eastern segment proposed
for vacation is 33' by 247.5' (approx. 0.25 acres), and lies
between Bancroft and the improved portion of David Street,
which extends westward off Wood Road.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 16
The Board owns the vacant land (former gravel pit)
immediately north of the subject ROW, and outside the City
Limits. This property has access from Lake Lansing Road .
The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan identifies David
Street as a local street that extends from Vermont to Wood
Street. Land within the city is identified as Parks/Open
Space on the Proposed Land Use Map. The western
segment is currently maintained by the Parks Department,
except the eastern side which is wooded and natural.
The west 60' of David Street, north of the property at 1922
Vermont, provides needed access into Porter Park and to a
BWL substation. Any vacated right-of-way abutting Porter
Park would be attached to City of Lansing's Porter Park,
which is dedicated park land.
The western segment, which abuts Porter Park, is an
undeveloped 33' ROW, and is inadequate in constructing a
road to current standards. Public Service has no current
plans to develop this ROW into a road. If utility easements
are retained, there would appear to be no public purpose in
retaining the western segment of David Street.
The eastern segment requested for vacation includes part of
Groesbeck Golf Course property which according to the city
plat map is owned by the city with only an easement to the
Ingham County Road Commission (30' x 123.75') for
roadway purposes.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend approval of
Act-3-2002, David St. E of Vermont, Vacate ROW as recommended with the
conditions that (1) Vacation of David Street between the east property line of 1922
Vermont Street (NW corner of Porter Park) and Bancroft Park, retaining
easements for any current and future utilities within the vacated ROW. The
addition to Porter Park would become dedicated parkland, and (2) Retention of
David Street east of Bancroft Park.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . Ave
Keene . .Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 17
C. Act-9-2002, N. Washington Sq. - Shiawassee to
Schoolcraft, LCC Request for ROW Vacation.
Lansing Community College requests that the City of
Lansing vacate the N. Washington Square ROW, from
Shiawassee to Schoolcraft, for future expansion of the LCC
campus and anticipated resulting increased in pedestrian
traffic on the N. Washington Mail.
In 1973, the City Council, by resolution, approved the
vacation of Lapeer and Genesee Streets, and the closure of
N. Washington Avenue between Shiawassee and Saginaw
Streets, subject to the construction of a service road (i.e.
Schoolcraft). The improved ROW is used by LCC primarily
as a pedestrian mall for students, staff and visitors.
The Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan (1999) and the
Lansing Community College Campus Master Plan (2001)
disagree with regards to the use of the N. Washington
ROW.
The proposal to vacate N. Washington Avenue between
Shiawassee and Schoolcraft Streets, as presented, will:
1. result in an irrevocable decision;
2. require full-width easements for access to and
maintenance of existing public services unless they
are relocated;
3. affect pedestrian, non-motorized and potential transit
corridor connections between Old Town, downtown,
and S. Washington Avenue commercial districts;
4. a visual and physical barrier will continue at the north
terminus of the N. Washington Mall disconnecting the
Old Town and downtown commercial districts;
5. may have an undetermined (i.e. without the
completion of Two-way Street Study) impact on
circulation;
6. affect opportunities for students and staff residing in
the areas adjacent to a trolley route (i.e. north and
south of the campus) to reduce their commute time
and parking requirements to the LCC campus and
other downtown jobs; and
7. eliminate future opportunities to open the N.
Washington Mall if LCC and City administrations
change along with priorities, or LCC moves its
campus out of the urban center.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 18
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend denial of
Act-9-2002, N. Washington Sq. - Shiawassee to Schoolcraft, LCC Request for
ROW Vacation.
Frederick . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Keene . Aye Patrick . Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
DENIED.
d. Act-1 0-2002, Purchase of Foreclosed Properties from
DNR.
The City has received last-minute notification about State-
owned properties available to the City for the minimum bid
price prior to selling them at auctions. If the City wishes to
purchase any prior to the auction, it must apply with cash in
hand, on or before July 15, 2002. Otherwise, the City can
purchase properties during a two subsequent auctions, or for
a nominal cost if the properties remain unsold. The City
would receive a quit-claim deed for any properties it
purchases.
The Parks and Recreation Department has indicated its
interest in two properties, listed in priority order below, along
with summary information:
Parcel 1 (PPN 3301-05-06-351-200)
A 0.74-acre rectangular parcel west of and abutting Gerald
W. Graves Park off Wayfarer Lane in the Coachlight
Commons area, near Miller and Waverly Roads. Minimum
bid: $948.99. This parcel is in an "A" Residential zone,
surrounded by single-family residences, with vacant land to
the north.
Parcel 2 (PPN 3301-01-21-328-392)
A 0.22-acre trapezoidal, landlocked parcel with Grand River
frontage off Reo Ave., north of Moore's River Drive, west of
Washington Avenue, and east of Moores Park. Minimum
bid: $599.27. This parcel is also in a residential area, zoned
"C" Residential, with "DM-3" Residential immediately to the
south.
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 19
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to recommend approval of
Act-10-2002, Purchase of Foreclosed Properties from DNR.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Keene . .Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
e. Lansing Planning Board Comments Regarding
"Amendments to the Dimondale/Windsor Land Use
Plan."
Recent changes in the Michigan planning statutes require
that local units submit proposed plan amendments to
adjacent Planning Commissions for review and comment.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Keene to support staff comments made
on the "Amendments to the DimondaleMindsor Land Use Plan."
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Keene . .Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
SUPPORTED.
Next meeting, Tuesday, July 23, 2002, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
3. Committee of the Whole - None.
4. Executive Committee - None.
C. REPORT FROM PLANNING MANAGER
Mr. Ruff interviewed an applicant for the Board and is awaiting their
determination as to whether or not they want to accept his
recommendation for their appointment. The applicant applied for Historic
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 20
District Commission and Planning Board, and would make an excellent
addition to the Planning Board as a Third Ward member. He expects to
hear from the applicant by the end of the week.
D. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St.,"H"Light Industrial District to"G-V Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. Z-5-1998,401-407 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-15-2000, 301 W. Lenawee Street, Professional Office to"G-1" Business
District(Tabled January 17,2001)
e. P-1-2001,Tentative Preliminary Plat,Wexford Woods(Tabled June 13, May 9,
2001)
f. PRD-2-2001,"Crystal Woods", Planned Residential Neighborhood (Tabled
August 15, 2001)
g. SLU-6-2001, 517-519 E. Grand River Ave., Church in"F-1" Commercial District
(Tabled November 14,2001)
h. SLU-8-2001, 3000 W. Miller Road,Additional Parking for an Existing Church
(Tabled November 14,2001)
i. SLU-3-2002,2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J" Parking District(Tabled May 15, 2002)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000,201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27,2000)
b. Act-2-2002, Lansing Housing Commission Property, 310 Seymour,Acquisition
for public purposes (Tabled February 26, 2002)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
8. NEW BUSINESS - None.
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON
Mr. Frederick stated that Rainey Skate Park is now opened and is immensely
popular. He commented that lights may need to be added because the kids stay
until the very last flicker of light from the sun is left. It is really too dark for the
kids to be skateboarding there but they love it. He recommends that the Parks
Department install lights.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS - None.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS
Ms. Patrick stated that she wanted to check on the two items from a previous
meeting (CVS Pharmacy parking lot and Auto Zone). She stated that the trucks
disappeared from the parking lot. Mr. Ruff stated that the trucks were from the
PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES July 2, 2002, Page 21
packed garden shop down the street, and that the CVS building is being
remodeled.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the fluttering strings at Auto Zone and stated that it
has not been addressed. Mr. Ruff stated that he would do a follow up.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
James A. Ruff, Secretary, Planning Board
PB Minutes.070202.wpd
Draft to Clerk August 29,2002
Approved 2002
To Clerk 2002
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, August 20, 2002
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Chairman Frederick.
A. Roll call. Present: Frederick, Cordill, Foster, Keene, Patrick, Ruge.
B. Staff Attending: Ruff, Stachowiak, Wynant.
C. Excused absences: None.
Mr. Ruff stated that in the audience from the Parks and Recreation Department
is Mr. Murdock Jemerson and Mr. Phil Dorland of Parks Administration,
Representatives from Landscape Architects and Planners Consulting Firm, and
Mr. John Coleman from the Tri County Regional Planning Commission.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
It was moved by Ms. Keene, supported by Mr. Ruge to approve the agenda. On
a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (6-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Letter from Jim and Judy Sturdevant supporting the proposed expansion
of the RiverTrail.
B. Letter from Mr. Ron Whitmore supporting the proposed expansion of the
RiverTrail.
C. Letter from Mr. Rick Kibbey supporting SLU-6-2002
D. Letter from E.T. MacKenzie Company addressing construction issues for
SLU-6-2002.
4. HEARINGS - None.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
Kellie Dean, Owner of Dean Transportation located at 4812 Aurelius Road,
stated that their property is approximately 19 acres and is owned by Dean
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 2
Investment Properties, LLC. Over the last several years as the concept of
expanding the RiverTrail has arisen, he enthusiastically approached the City of
Lansing about the possibility, as a property owner and citizen, of participating in
some form or fashion. As the RiverTrail expansion appears to be growing to the
south, his property is a prime location to connect the Hawk Island Park off
Cavanaugh and go south towards the Ingham County Soccer Complex. He is
addressing the Board this evening as an enthusiastic participant with the City
and the Planning Board to commit anywhere from 500 to 1,000 feet of property
which would be very scenic along Sycamore Creek which is on the southern-
most and western-most border of his property to help link those properties
described, Hawk Island and the soccer zone to the south, if in fact, that is the
direction that it appears the trail is heading. Through his commitment, he speaks
very enthusiastically about the City's commitment to extend the property to the
south and he looks forward to participating in any fashion that he can.
Kerrin Olbrien, resident of 804 Downer Avenue, stated that she is on the
board of the Mid Michigan Environmental Action Council (MMEAC) which has its
office right on the river walk. She personally rides her bike on the river walk
whenever she has the opportunity and she enjoys it very much. She is an
advocate and supporter of the river walk and any extension to the trail to
connect it to the outer regions that are beyond the City of Lansing. The MMEAC
is an advocate and supporter and will be working very hard within the community
to generate support for these activities. They will also be working with their
contacts in the region and around the City to start to link and connect the trails
that are outside the City.
Jon Coleman, Executive Director of the Tri County Regional Planning
Commission located at 913 W. Holmes Road, Suite 201, stated that he came
before the Board some time back to discuss the regional growth project that has
been ongoing for 3 years and is nearing completion. There are elements of the
growth project that are very well connected to the plans that will be presented
tonight. He would like to point out some of them. He noted that these are not
final and that they are still in draft form. They are approaching final approval
sometime this fall on the regional plan. On the Principles for the long range
growth plan, there are two that specifically deal with this. Principal 21 called
Green Ways and Walk Ability reads "pathways, sidewalks, trails and bike lanes
should be developed to provide alternatives to motorized transportation and
improve recreational opportunities to the residents of the region." Principal 22
deals with park and recreation expansion and linkage. It reads, "Based upon the
preferred vision, parks and recreation expansion should occur with an emphasis
on linkage of the facilities through green ways." In addition to those kind of
general principles, there are several specific objectives that are incorporated into
the growth project. He will touch on those quickly. One goal is to encourage and
identify funding for physical linkages such as bike, pedestrian and equestrian
path ways that connect important regional assets such as parks and community
services. Specifically, an objective would be to create a regional green way plan.
Secondly, to create a regional non-motorized transportation plan. Non-motorized
simply meaning bikes, pedestrian walkways, etc. Another goal is to create a
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 3
regional system of parks that preserve regional natural corridors and open
space. An objective area is to identify natural corridors and open space
conducive for parks within the region. Finally, a goal is to identify, promote and
encourage public access points to rivers, lakes, that have water quality suitable
for recreational use. Again, specific objectives would be to identify water bodies
that are suitable for recreational use and inventory land suitable to provide public
access to water. These principles and objectives came out of 12 forums that
were held across the region over the last year. There were approximately 1,500
people involved in this process. Clearly the preservation of the recreational
quarters and parks, and linking these together through non-motorized pedestrian
and bike paths was a top priority of the people who attended the forums. They
actually voted on some of these objectives and principles. He believes that part
of the regional plan that the Tri County Regional Planning Commission put
together tries to work together with multiple governments. He stated that the City
needs these inner connecting linkages that go not only within the City of Lansing
as planned here, but well beyond into other communities linking together some
of the natural resources that are available. He thanked the Board for the
opportunity to speak. He again reiterated the draft plan. Clearly Tri County
Regional Planning Commission has had a lot of input and support for this type of
a project that the City of Lansing is undertaking.
Nancy Krupiarz, State Director of the Rails to Trails Conservancy Michigan
Chapter located at 416 S. Cedar Street, Suite C, and a resident of Haslett,
stated that she works at the Blair building which is right on the RiverTrail. She
uses the RiverTrail quite a bit to get from home to work and enjoys it a lot. She
believes that Mid Michigan really deserves an expanded trail system like the
ones already developed in similar size cities around the state. The City seems to
have lagged behind a little bit in making those Mid Michigan connections. Places
like Grand Rapids, Muskegon, Kalamazoo, Battle Creek, Midland, Flint and Bay
City are all rolling with their own trail systems and they are beginning to realize
the economic benefits of such amenities. It is really a big answer to many of the
questions that plague our City these days. How do we build Lansing's quality of
life? How do we realize more tourism revenue? How do we get more people
from the suburbs to come to downtown Lansing and experience all that the
downtown area has to offer? She believes that expanding the RiverTrail would
answer a lot of those questions and bring a lot of people downtown. Be able to
lessen that doughnut affect that happens in so many of our cities as people
move out and there is not enough to keep them coming back to the downtown.
However, she does believe that the Lansing RiverTrail has not done everything
that it can to experience a lot of the benefits that other trails have experienced.
Part of that is because it does a really good job of preserving nature. It is a
beautiful trail but there is not a lot to have it interact with the City in terms of ice
cream shops or business, places that people would want to go to bring them
down along the trail to be able to integrate it with the City. There is a lot that
could be done. There has been some remarks over the years about putting too
much into the trail. More needs to be put into the downtown. She believes that
there is a lot that could be done with the trail. The City should be able to have
signage to bring people downtown, have easier access from the trail to the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 4
downtown area, be able to develop along the trail itself, have places for trail
users to go, and make it a really enjoyable place to visit, spend the day and
spend money. Michigan State University did an extensive study regarding the
Pier Marquette Trail in the Midland area. She would be glad to share the results
of that study. She has an executive summary of the study available in case
anyone is interested. MSU embraced the trail and used it in different ways
between all the user groups (i.e. seniors, children, education, businesses,
employees). MSU has done an excellent job of examining all the benefits there
are to a trail. Rails to Trails Conservancy stands ready to help in any way
possible to provide their experiences from across the state and across the nation
to make the best use of the RiverTrail. Expanding the trail is the way to go to get
the best benefit from it.
Dave Goodman, resident of 605 Birchwood Street, Dewitt, stated that he is
not a Lansing resident but he is a regional area resident. He is a member of the
North Country Trails Association. This is a trail that runs from New York State to
North Dakota. Currently, it is in the building process. Maybe some people know
about it. The Trail runs through the Grand Rapids area in Jackson. Other
people were talking about a regional trail system. He believes that this would be
the perfect opportunity for bikes to link to other rail trails. The bigger the trail
network, the better. He wanted to share some information with the Board. He
has enjoyed using the trail and he would like to see it become as big as possible.
Jessica Yorko, resident of 316 N. Sycamore, Apt. #1, stated that she works at
the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality and she is on the Board of
the Mid Michigan Environmental Action Council. She frequently uses the trail to
travel to East Lansing and prefers to travel by bike than by car whenever
possible. She would be very enthusiastic to see the trail expand to other areas
of the region so that she could travel by bike more often. She would enjoy
having more businesses along the trail.
Patricia Prince, resident of 1030 Garfield Avenue, Delta Township, stated
that she is a regular rail trail user. She was not sure how to improve on Ms.
Nancy Krupiarz comments. They were the same as hers. She is employed with
Lansing Grand River Assembly, a world class facility. She would like to see
Lansing have a world class trail. The David Trail is an excellent trail on the west
side of the state as is the White Pine Trail. These trails are a way to get from
one community to another. She has seen all kinds of people on these trails (i.e.
young, old, differently abled). She sees people who really enjoy being on the rail
trail and having a good time. She brought some materials for the Board to
review. She also went to Wisconsin to a town that sponsored a recumbent rally,
which is a different type of bicycle. The town reminded her of Lansing. It has a
nice river, Wisconsin River, with a huge park and pavilion. It hosted
approximately 300 people who were interested in these bicycles. Ms. Krupiarz is
right about revitalizing the downtown communities. In the Wisconsin community,
the store fronts were restored. She is old enough to remember when
Washington Avenue was something grand and she would like to see it that way
again. She would like to see people downtown. She believes that this would
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 5
definitely give it a kick start. It may not be the cure but it would certainly help.
She lives within 3 miles of her place of work. She has attempted to ride her bike
to work but when she crossed Saginaw Street, she was pretty intimidated. She
went back to driving her car. She has also spoken with coworkers who live in the
Grand Ledge area. If the trail reached Waverly Road, they might see a chance
of the trail extending to Grand Ledge and other communities around Lansing.
People could take their bikes to work and maybe alleviate some of the traffic
congestion downtown. There are several things to review when making a
decision to implement something like this. She believes that linear trails are
going to be something that is as vital to a community as a traditional park. She
has envisioned that someday maybe there will be a link nation wide and people
will be using these trails to get from one state to another. There is no end to the
possibilities of what could happen once this is implemented. If this is not done in
Lansing, someone else will. Someone else will reap the benefits and she would
hate to see the City lose out. This is a nice community and she sincerely hopes
that people will think ahead.
Christina Riddle, resident of 2049 Hamilton Road, Okemos, stated that she
has worked downtown for ten years for the Veterans Trust Fund. She has been
living in Okemos for five years. She has recently been moved out of the
downtown area to the westside of Lansing. She has no way of easily getting
back to the downtown area without using an automobile. One of the things her
job has shown her is the number of people, for a variety of reasons, who do not
have a car. Getting from one place to another without an automobile is a
challenge in this society. To have an opportunity to have trails that go
someplace is exciting. She encouraged the Board to do whatever they need to
do to make it happen. As a representative of Region 6 for the League of
Michigan Bicyclists which includes Lansing, she is surrounded by her fellow
representatives from other parts of the state who route their trails. She cannot
show off a trail system. She can show a trail but not a trail system. Some of the
other communities are kind of showing up Lansing and she does not like that.
She would like for Lansing to be in the front of this and she thinks that this is a
wonderful step. From the heart of someone like Mr. Kellie Dean to be endorsing
this is very exciting. She received an email letter, in response to the notice that
was mailed regarding this meeting, that was addressed to the Board. This was
from a resident on Desoto Street, Ms. Joanne Creede. She presented a copy of
the letter to the Board. Ms. Creede used the trail daily to train for a 60 mile
walking event, and has kept on using the trail after that event. Ms. Creede
describes the dynamics of the trail in terms of wildlife. It is very exciting to
conceptualize what Ms. Creede is saying. Ms. Creede also stated that if there
are people that like to object to a trail in their yard, encourage the people to
move because there are a lot of others who would like to come and move in
there.
Lucinda Means, Executive Director of the League of Michigan Bicyclists
and resident of 1136 Burcham, East Lansing, stated that Ms. Christina Riddle
is one of her Board members. She believes that the river trail is a tremendous
asset to the community and that it can be even more of an asset to the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 6
community if the proposed extensions are implemented. She wanted to briefly
discuss some of the benefits that the community is already realizing. There are
economic benefits that are being realized now. She stands at the window of the
conference room of her work when she is taking a break and she sees all the
people who are state workers, city workers, and people who work in businesses
downtown pouring onto the trail. Either they are running, walking, or even roller
blading. One can tell that the people are actually having what she calls vertical
meetings as they walk down the river trail. Having a break or having this trail as
an amenity available to the employees that work in the various businesses, state
and city agencies downtown is a tremendous benefit. It can be turned into
dollars and cents because having this amenity makes it more likely that the City
would be able to retain quality employees, and offer perspective employees an
exciting place to work. There are also health benefits. She knows that the
Board is probably aware of the very grim statistics that the state is facing in
terms of obesity. Michigan has the dubious honor or distinction of being tied with
Mississippi for second place of obesity in the country. The winner she believes
is Louisiana. It is unconscionable that Michigan is in that state. Having a river
trail, whether it is the length it is now or even better extending it, means that
people want to get out and get healthy. Whether roller blading, walking, strolling
with their babies, jogging, bike riding or doing winter sports, the City needs this
as a public health benefit. The City needs to have this opportunity for people to
use the river trail to get healthy. Otherwise, Michigan's obesity statistics will
continue to sky rocket. The community and the state cannot afford that because
everyone knows that it translates into very expensive health care costs (i.e. heart
attacks and other cardiopulmonary problems). One suggestion that she would
like to make to the Planning Commission and City Council is that some sort of
non-motorized transportation advisory committee be created if the City has none.
Take this up from the point of view of people who are knowledgeable about non-
motorized transportation. This system that is being built needs to have a holistic
approach. It cannot be just piece meal. This is one of the problems that she has
had in the past. Having a committee that can help the City and the Tri County
region integrate this system into a regional plan, and having interested experts
and citizens who are knowledgeable about non-motorized transportation would
be very adventagous. It just so happens that there are an enormous number of
people in the Tri County Bicycle Association, the League of Michigan Bicyclists,
the Rails to Trails Conservancy and other like-minded groups that have the
expertise. The League of Michigan Bicyclists, which shares office space with
Mid MEAC and with the Rails to Trails Conservancy, has quite of bit of a growing
resource library that has an enormous amount of information regarding
specifications, designs, innovations, and trail design, resolving user conflicts, and
a variety of information. The League of Michigan Bicyclists would love to make
this available to the City. Yesterday, she was on the river trail from 6:00 p.m. to
8:00 p.m. doing an observation for a project that she is currently working on with
the Department of Community Health. Even though she works in the building
and looks at the river trail daily, she was awe struck by the diversity and sheer
quantity of people who use the trail (i.e. black, white, Hispanic, Asian, young
couples, small children, seniors, disabled, bicyclists, skate boarders, roller
bladers, all ages, all genders, all degrees of abilities). Because the Tri County
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 7
Bicycle Association had a table there and were offering cold water, a lot of
people stopped to talk. Almost every single person said how much they value
the river trail and how much they really want Lansing to continue to expand and
improve the trail. They see it as the crown jewel.
Tom Hardenbergh, resident of 1522 Osborn Road, stated that in 1975 or 1976
he was in a similar meeting when the original portion of the Lansing RiverTrail
was opened. He is glad to be here tonight at another planning meeting for a
river trail. He hopes that he is alive when this segment is completed. His only
complaint about the whole thing, as he has watched trails be implemented in
Grand Rapids, MI; Midland, MI; Coleman, MI; Zenia, Ohio; and all over the
country, is that it has taken Lansing so long to get to this point. He does not feel
the need to say anything about the assets that the trail has to offer. He just
wants to be sure that this will not result in internaval waiting because it will be put
on the ground. Two years ago, he was contacted by Ling Brewer to attend a
meeting for a trail extension from Hawk Island to Mason. No one knows when
that will be realized. He was on a trail in Zenia, Ohio and it took them about 22
years to get this trail going. These things take a long time. Let us not wait
forever. Let us get going on this and get it done. Let us get it, as people have
said, connected. The Lansing RiverTrail has a lot of short comings. As good as
it is and as valuable as it is, it has a lot of short comings, one of which could be
easily remedied. He has been to a lot of other trails in other towns. The one
thing that he finds lacking is sign boards that show people where they are and
what surrounds them. One can get to a point on the trail and wonder if there is a
rest room or a place to eat. The City's trail lacks this information. As the trail is
extended there will be other issues of this type. He would be glad to assist the
Board anytime. He has ridden a lot of trails and is experienced with the
development of trails.
Bill Castanier, resident of 1801 Tecumseh River Drive, stated that he has
lived along the Grand River for 23 years. He has run along the river for about 25
years and has recently biked along the river. He uses the trail almost everyday,
at least 6 days a week. He is a fervent user of the river trail. One tends to start
catching people over time and saying hello to them. He stated that he agrees
with all the bikers who are in attendance about using the trails. He wishes that
people would use the trail more often. He spoke about using caution when
entering neighborhoods. No one will get to his house because he lives high on a
bank, however, there are lots of neighbors that could be affected. He believes
that the neighborhoods are very fragile in Lansing. He has observed for the past
20 years in using the river front that when you get to the fringes of the river front,
it draws a very unsavory crowd. It also draws that crowd when people are not on
it after 8:00 p.m. If someone would like to take a trip on the river front, both ends
have lots of graffiti, and broken windows in some of the places in Old Town. He
has an office in Old Town and bikes to Old Town everyday. Right across from
his office, someone broke all the windows in a building. The river trail is the only
way to access that building. He hopes that the Board carefully considers the trail
going behind private home owners. Those homes, in some instances, are less
than 100 feet from the river trail. If he lived there, he would say that he is not so
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 8
fond of it. If he had a child under the age of 10 years old playing outside
continually, especially after he had seen the people on the trail today at the
Grand River Assembly plant, he would not want them in his back yard. If that
make him a NIMBY, than he is a NIMBY. He does not want them in his back
yard. There are a lot of people and that section of the trail goes through maybe
one backyard home that is 200 feet on a bluff. There was no one on the trail
today except for 3 runners when he was there. That is all he ever sees and he
stated that he was on it for quite a lengthy time because he ran slow. He also
believes that the City needs to continue to dedicate themselves to better
maintenance of the trail. There are still many areas on the trail that need a lot
better care and maintenance. There are some dangerous areas that still exist.
He sees them everyday. Before the trail is expanded, there needs to be a plan
in place for ongoing maintenance. The trail stretches too long before one
catches something. By the Lansing Center for almost 2 weeks there was a hole
that someone could have put their foot it. The day after an article appeared in
the newspaper about maintenance, the hole was fixed. That is not "A" typical
after 25 years experience of being on the river trail. When someone talked
about signage, if one has ever been on the river trail and looked carefully, there
is a lot of signage. Most of it is damaged. It has been ripped, torn down, or
destroyed. The Planet Walk which the downtown science museum did, most of
those markers have been damaged in some way. Many have been replaced
several times. The quarter mile markers have at one point or another been
destroyed. Be very careful because this does not need to be brought into the
neighborhoods especially fragile neighborhoods which is generally most of
Lansing.
Tim Carr, resident of 4825 Thurlby, Mason, stated that he lives south of 1-96
and that he is quite a ways from the proposed trail. He is supportive of the trail
and is also on the Parks and Recreation Commission. The Commission is
submitting their 5 year plan to implement a trail within his community that would
connect with this trail. Someone else mentioned the Mason trail which would
potentially connect to this trail. He would be interested in this as well.
Philip Wells, resident of 450 West Street, stated that he has worked downtown
for almost 28 years and works for the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) in
the Trails Program. He works across the state, mainly working in the Rails to
Trails area, trying to convert the old railroad lines into trails. He is a river trail
user here in Lansing. From this perspective, he has seen much of what has
been happening all around the state in developing and expanding the trail
systems. He would like to congratulate Lansing for being one of the pioneers in
this. He has been working for the state and he knows how long things take. He
stated that Lansing has done a remarkable job over a period of time. There are
a lot of real tough issues to deal with in extending the trail to where it currently is,
and he hopes to see this continue. He has also seen around the state the very
common and legitimate concerns of people who live in areas through which a
trail is proposed. It is very important to listen carefully to those concerns, take
them seriously and make sure that they are addressed. As he has seen time
and time again the concerns of negative impacts on neighborhoods and
communities are simply not realized if the trail is properly designed, the concerns
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 9
of the people are taken into account, proper maintenance, and responding to
concerns when they arise. It can be a tremendous asset and an increase in
property values. On the Paint Creek trail in Oakland County people are building
half a million dollar home on the trail just because they want to be on the trail.
This is something that Lansing could certainly wish for. He hopes that DNR will
continue to expand the trail and he believes that it is one of the finest assets of
the community.
Brad Garmon, resident of 122 Stoddard Avenue, Apt. B, East Lansing,
stated that he works in downtown Lansing. He offers the opposite approach to
the proposal. He has been in Michigan less than year. One of the first things
that he did was ride the river trail to work. He took pictures along the way and
sent them home to people in Kansas. Kansas is probably one of the strongest
anti-trail states there is and it is very frustrating for him to look back on that
knowing what trails do for communities. He has been around the state this past
year and has biked the river trail here. He has studied river trails and trails in
general through his place of work. He has seen that all the considerations heard
here tonight are true. All the pros are there as well as some of the concerns that
have been raised. He believes that from his perspective what the City needs to
do is work together as a community. He represents the Mid Michigan
Environmental Action Council and tries to do his part to become involved in
community affairs. All the residents need to be involved in the happenings of
their neighborhoods. Those are legitimate concerns. What will not help is the
idea that trails breed fear and things of this sort. What the City needs to do is
look at the positives of trails in terms of what they do for communities in getting
business, and seeing the people that one interacts with on a daily basis. He has
been out there and he does recognize those people that he sees on a regular
basis. That is what is going to make the communities a better place to live and
the neighborhoods a safer place. It is not trying to stay away from them but
getting out there. These kind of trails do that. These trails are around the
country and around Michigan. He encouraged the Board to go forth with the
proposed plan and stated that it is a great plan. He encouraged more
involvement. He asked the Board to consider looking at the businesses and see
what could be done about getting businesses along the trail. He also mentioned
to look at what it would do for health and the children in their understanding of
their environment, nature, and their neighbors. Trails do great things. Coming
from Kansas, he knows that property rights are a big deal. It is not the only deal.
He believes that the Board recognizes that as a Planning Commission. What is
good for a bunch of people is something that needs to be taken into
consideration. He hopes the Board will do that. He is in great support of the
river trail and he will send more pictures back to Kansas as the trail gets bigger.
He presented the Board with a letter.
John Mertz, resident of 330 N. Clemens, stated that he is here tonight to
comment briefly on SLU-6-2002. He asked the Board to deny the request or cut
it in half. He suggested to the Board the last time he was before them that there
are some studies that indicated greenery cuts crime. He printed some
information from the internet. Compared with apartment buildings that had little
or no greenery with those that had high levels of greenery, those that had high
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 10
levels of greenery had 52% fewer total crimes including 46% fewer property
crimes and 56% fewer violent crimes. Buildings with medium amounts of
greenery had 46% fewer total crimes and 40% fewer property crimes, 44% fewer
violent crimes. It is clear at least from the study which was done in Chicago,
apartment building or places that are landscaped with greenery are less prone to
crime than barren ones. One of the findings in the conclusions done by the staff
which he has disputed on a prior occasion was that somehow security was going
to be increased by having the Armory turned into a big parking lot with all sorts of
security lights. The Ohio State University bulletin stated that "recently there has
been evidence showing that the presence of vegetation especially trees and
urban areas encourages positive interactions among people. It is associated
with lower crime rates." The University of Illinois study also found that "residents
living near green spaces enjoy more social activities. The very fabric of a healthy
neighborhood." The New York times today, Managing Planet Earth science
section, a special issue examines scientists growing convictions that humans
have become the dominant influence on the ecosystem's world wide and that
choices made now could determine the health of the environment for decades.
The study also found that "mental health was improved by greenery." Prior to
this summer, there were 10 acres of green space. There were 16 acres of green
space in the armory. Two of the acres were turned into a garden and the now
the rest of the acres will be turned into a parking lot. That is a shame. It is
contrary to the best interest of the neighborhood and the citizens who live in the
neighborhood. This is not the best use for this land. Unfortunately the decision
is being based on who is asking for the variance and not the criteria that is set
out in the ordinance. This is what was pointed out in his last memo. This is his
third argument to the Board. He stated that the Board needs to think about the
people who will be affected by this request. This land's preferred use is green
space, open space or maybe single family housing. It is not a parking lot. That
is one of the lowest, conceivable possible uses that should be used in this case,
and only if Sparrow can justify doing this. Not just because parking space is
needed. There have been demonstrations of available parking spaces to
Sparrow. He has been told directly that Mr. Sam Eyde would deal with Sparrow
to allow them to use the parking that is located by the railroad, which is easily
accessible as the Armory. Mr. Pollard has identified 1,600 alternate parking
spaces that are available on the eastside. If Sparrow needs temporarily parking
than a permanent change to this ecosystem should not be allowed. This would
be a permanent change, not temporary. Sparrow's use is temporary. The
military has made it very clear that the lot will not be restored to green space. If
the Board allows Sparrow to turn all the remaining green space that is left in the
Armory, then in one year, 5/6 of all the total green space in this neighborhood
has been taken away. He hopes that the Board will deny the request or cut the
acreage in half.
Brian Smith, President of Citizens for a Greater Lansing and resident of
1007 Woodbine, stated that he is doing everything he can to preserve green
space and trying to save paradise against another parking lot. He was proud of
the Planning Board at the last meeting when they voted unanimously to table
SLU-6-2002 when Mr. Pollard came forth and presented over 1,600 alternative
spaces. He was hoping the Board will find some kind of compromise so the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 11
green space does not become demolished. At the last Eastside Neighborhood
Organization meeting, Mr. Mertz got Mr. Ginsburg to say that Sparrow is under
no legal obligation to return the property to green space. The military has made
it very clear that they do not plan to restore property either. He believes that it is
wrong to say that this places an excessive burden and not a workable alternative
on Sparrow. There is always alternatives when something is wanted. He
believes that Sparrow will not pack their campus and take it to Delhi Township,
Eaton Rapids or wherever. He reiterated a comment made by Mr. Ginsburg
regarding the parking lot on the other side of the railroad track and how the
employees would get caught behind a train in the morning and mess up
everybody's hospital schedule. If the bus driver saw that there was train, why
could the driver not take Cedar Street to Saginaw Street and backtrack to
Pennsylvania Avenue? He did not think that this would be going much out of the
way. He is looking forward tonight to seeing what kind of alternatives the Board
has agreed to, and for everyone coming together to see what can be done
without having to destroy the corner of Marshall and Saginaw Streets.
John Pollard, resident of 1718 Blair Street, stated that he is vehemently
opposed to Sparrow Hospital taking 6 to 8 acres of green space at the corner of
Marshall and Saginaw Streets when it is totally unnecessary. He would love for
someone, whether it be the Board or Sparrow, to give him the cost estimates of
what Sparrow is trying to do. Picture coming in with a bull dozer, removing three
to six inches of top soil, replacing 6 to 8 acres with three to six inches of sand,
lay rock, build a fence around the lot, add green netting like it is a tennis court,
add lighting, implement a security system, and in two years do a reversal of this.
There is one other problem and that is environmental problems because there
would be 588 cars leaking gas, oil and other fluids on the property. Then the
environmental clean up would be completed. Then there would be three to four
inches of topsoil added to 6 to 8 acres, grass would need to be replanted, and
then someone would need to water the grass to keep it from dying. At the North
Precinct on Prudden Street, the distance from Sparrow to Marshall Street is one
mile. Everything on the sheet that he had given to the Board of over 2,200
available paved parking spaces are within a one mile distance. What is safer
than being next to a police station? Even if it is not safe everyone's conception
is that it would be no safer than to be next to a parking lot. There is enough
space. They are willing to sell the spaces and re-stripe the parking lot for
Sparrow. Lights will be implemented and the cost will be eaten. The gated
entrances will be closed off so that Sparrow can take care of the other concerns.
Then Sparrow will be charged $20.00 per parking space which Sparrow is
currently charged $45.00 per parking space at Clara's. He would like to see a
cost estimate as to why Sparrow is set on following through with this request.
The City is already planning on taking 25 acres of green space of BTS property
and turning it into a development. No one seems to be concerned with run off or
environmental conditions. What about the health, safety, and well being of all
those citizens who live in that neighborhood who absolutely positively need some
green space? They purchased their homes and thought they had access to the
green space. He does not understand this. He presented the Board with a
proposal where all of the parking spaces are in one place. He identified the
Eyde property and other properties on the eastside from churches to businesses
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 12
who are willing to rent their parking spaces, to even Eastern High School,
Pattengill Middle School and Lansing Catholic Central, which lists another 600
parking spaces. These parking spaces may not be used all winter because the
kids have returned to school but they can be used during the summer. When
there is an alternative with parking spaces or parking lots already striped, why
would someone go and do what is heard tonight? At the City Council meeting on
July 22"d, a city employee went through his neighborhood and gathered 146
signatures from the residents who want to keep this property as green space.
Why cause these problems? Has Sparrow explored their options? Have they
discussed things with Mr. Hepler like he did to obtain number about what he is
willing to do? He reiterated that he believes in the preservation of green space.
Once it is taken, it is never restored. There is no reason for this. He asked the
Board to deny the request because there are more than enough parking spaces
available. It is economically feasible and it would even save Sparrow money.
Belinda Fitzpatrick, resident of 224 S. Holmes Street, stated that Mr. Pollard
does not understand. She would like to share some of her observations. She
has seen Sparrow work before. She believes that Sparrow does a strategy.
Even if it is not done with intent, it works as if it was done with intent. The
strategy is to turn something into an eye sore and then there would be
neighborhood support to put in the residential parking that someone would like to
have. She concluded that somehow there is a link between what the City wants
with the BTS plan and what goes on at Sparrow Hospital. She believes that
there is a link between whoever is behind the BTS plan. It is a strategy to make
the lot into an eye sore. Once made into an eye sore, the community would ask
to develop a residential neighborhood and get rid of the ugly parking lot. She
strongly opposes this request because there is alternative parking. It would not
be good for the neighborhood. It is as if Sparrow is asking the Board to rezone
the 8 acres for commercial use or professional office use and that it is parking
not to be used by residential properties. It is parking to be used by professional
office space. She asked the Board to consider in terms that it is not just a
request for a special residential land use, it is actually a request for a significant
rezoning from residential to professional office zoning.
She loves the river trail and that it is one of the best things in the City of Lansing
for aesthetic reasons (i.e. walking, civic space, socializing). She thinks it is great.
She believes that one of the challenges in the world is to manifest dreams in
harmony with the dreams of other people. Trying to look for a way that everyone
can get what is wanted when it was possible. She reiterated an earlier comment
that if there were people who lived along the river trail and did not like it, they
should move because there are other people who would want to move there.
She finds this disturbing because she believes that people should have a deep
respect for others who are attached to their homes and properties. She believes
that in the Board's position it is very important to look at both sides: the affect on
the communities and the homeowners, and the potential for the river trail and the
assets it would bring to the community. One of the things that is most important
is to try to get passed the myth of what public space does to private homes and
that it brings crime.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 13
Rick Kibbey, Chairman of the BTS Committee and resident of 1614
Lindbergh Drive, stated that the action the Board is asked to take this evening
is an action that the Board has taken twice before where Sparrow has asked for
temporary use of green space. Sparrow has used it and has restored it. One of
the instances where Sparrow did this is the very site being talked about. The site
in question was used as a staging area. There were concrete beams on that site
that were longer than this room. If one looks at the site now, none of the people
that were talking about green space have said a word about it. Sparrow restored
that site the way it needed to be restored and he is very confident they will do it
again. If the Board is familiar with the site, there are several dozen trucks, tanks
and armored personnel carriers, parked less than 100 feet from this site. If one
speaks to the old timers on the street, that area used to be the bivouac area
when the National Guard was in transition from Indiana to Camp Grayling. They
would have hundreds of guys camped there. There were privies and trucks all
over the site. Story Olds had their tent sales there. He is far more concerned
about the ammonia plume coming from 200 feet straight down. The ammonia
plume is leaking from the motor wheel site that is a threat to the aquifer. The
idea of someone's leaky Taurus contaminating the site is going to have to go
through a plume of poisonous ammonia to get to the aquifer. He thinks that this
is all much ado about nothing. This is something that was handled before.
Sparrow has handled this well in the past and he is confident that they will do it
again. As for creating an eyesore, the architectural firm is one of the most noted
architectural firms in the country. The last two buildings that Sparrow has built,
the standards of architecture and the design that they have used plus the work
that they have done on Michigan Avenue to install street lighting and street
furniture are not an eyesore to him. He remembered what Michigan Avenue
looked like in the 1970s and he knows what it looks like now. He would dare to
make an issue with the idea that Sparrow is creating an eyesore. He has
appreciated the Board's help in the past and he hopes that the letter explains
itself. He looks forward to continue working with the Board on the development
of this property.
Michelle Johnson, resident of 206 Rumsey Avenue, stated that she is
vehemently opposed to turning this property into a parking lot. It seems like
Sparrow got a deal. They found someone else to do their footwork in finding
other parking spaces. It makes no logical sense to let other spaces go empty
while Sparrow is building their parking lot. The City has been developed all over
and people are living in Lansing because there are parks and areas where kids
can play, dogs can run, and gardens can be grown. It makes no sense to tear
up this lot and abandon the other spaces. Sparrow did not have to look for other
spaces. She asked the Board to not let the green space behind her home be
turned into a parking lot.
Seeing no one else wishing to address the Board, Mr. Frederick closed the
public comment period.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 14
6. PRESENTATION FOR RIVERTRAIL
Murdock Jemerson, Director of the Parks and Recreation Department
(PRD) for the City of Lansing, gave introductory comments and recognition to
those who were present for their support of the proposed expansion.
Bob Ford, Landscape Architects and Planners, gave an overall presentation
of the RiverTrail expansion.
Mr. Ruge expressed his concern about Cooley Gardens not being on the river
trail and thought it would be a good asset that the City should show off more
because it is kind of hidden. At that time, Mr. Eric Reickel assured the Board
that this would be the next step on the river trail. He was disappointed that it was
not included on the proposal. Mr. Ford stated that he did remember the
discussions about making that connection to Cooley Gardens and Scott Center.
There is a formidable grade there that would have to be negotiated and it would
be a costly adventure. At the same time, for Master Planning, that might be a
comment that he needs to get some advice about. Mr. Jemerson stated that
PRD has access to Cooley Gardens from the street and that is the access point
where people are referred. It is a very beautiful facility and they do need to do
more in terms of advertising that facility. Right now, the plans for the trail are to
continue to use the street access for Cooley Gardens.
Mr. Ruff stated that one of the things discussed through the River and Waterfront
Board years ago was the idea of Moores River Park possibly implementing a
hand operated lock or some sort of lock system, whether motorized or self
propelled, to allow boats to travel around the dam.
Ms. Foster inquired about the time table. A discussion ensued. In terms of the
development costs, the on-land portion of the trail is somewhere between $70.00
to $85.00 a linear foot and is pretty much for the asphalt, base and things of this
nature. There are amenities that will add to this such benches, signage and all
those other types of costs which are outside of that. When one is out on the
river and under the bridges, the price could be as high as $400.00 a linear foot.
Again, it does not include the amenities referred to earlier. A discussion ensued
regarding the time line of the grant process.
Mr. Ruge stated that the overall river trail project is a great idea especially
expanding it to the edges of the City. Putting signs along the trail indicating the
locations of where restaurants and other amenities are off the trail, would be a
great idea. It would seem like that could be a way of receiving a little extra
funding. He inquired about the changes occurring on Aurelius Road. A
discussion ensued. He commented in the area where Aurelius Road reduces to
two lanes, that additional greenery be included along with grass strips to help
shade trail users. A discussion ensued.
7. RECESS was taken by the Board.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 15
8. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval
Ms. Patrick moved; seconded by Ms. Cordill to approve the minutes of
August 6, 2002 with corrections. On a voice vote, the motion carried
(6-0), the minutes of August 6, 2002 were
APPROVED WCORRECTIONS.
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
a. SLU-8-2002, 2107 W. Holmes Road, New Church in an
"F" Commercial District
This is a request by Reverend Rickey Smith of New Life
Community Church of Christ for a Special Land Use permit
to use an existing vacant building for a church at 2107 S.
Holmes Road. The property is zoned "F" Commercial
District which permits churches with a special land use
permit, if approved by the Lansing City Council. This is not
a matter of a rezoning.
Staff recommended approval of the Special Land Use permit
with the following conditions:
1. An 8-foot landscape buffer strip be provided between
the subject property and the adjacent "A" Residential
zoning area to the south,
2. A site plan, that includes dimensions of the proposed
parking lot, be provided for review by the Planning
Office and Transportation Office,
3. The seating capacity be determined by the number of
legal parking spaces that can be accommodated on
the site.
The Committee members discussed the exterior lighting on
the site. Ms. Foster stated that the lighting needs to be
shielded to prevent glare on adjacent properties.
Ms. Patrick stated that the church is using chairs rather than
pews and there would be nothing preventing the church from
putting in more chairs than what the parking area can
accommodate.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that, if this happens, it would be a
violation of the Zoning Ordinance and Special Land Use
permit.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 16
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster to recommend approval of
SLU-8-2002, 2107 W. Holmes Road, New Church in an "F" Commercial District
with the conditions as reported by the Zoning and Ordinance Committee.
Discussion ensued regarding the conditions and they were amended to read as
follows: (1) An 8-foot landscape buffer strip be provided between the subject
property and the adjacent "A" Residential zoning area to the south, (2) A site
plan, that includes dimensions of the proposed parking lot, be provided for
review and approval by the Planning Office and Transportation Office, (3) The
seating capacity be determined by the number of legal parking spaces that can
be accommodated on the site, and (4) The existing lighting and any future lighting
be shielded to prevent glare on the adjacent properties.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Foster . .Aye Keene. . . Ave
Patrick . . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
b. Z-12-2002, 3001 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential,
"F" Commercial & "J" Parking Districts to "D-1"
Professional Office District
This is a request by Robin Slaton of Yurple & Jojo's Fun
Time Palace Inc. to rezone the property at 3001 N.
Washington Avenue, more specifically described as:
Lots 4, 5 and the east 90 feet of Lot 6, Holmsdale
Subdivision, City of Lansing, Ingham County,
Michigan.
from "A" Residential, "F" Commercial and "J" Parking
Districts to "D-1" Professional Office District. The purpose of
the request is to expand the population of the existing child
care facility and the size of the parking lot at 3001 S.
Washington Avenue.
In Committee, Ms. Foster stated that street trees should be
added along Dunlap and S. Washington. Ms. Foster also
asked the applicant if it would be possible to lease some
parking from the church to the south to avoid having to put in
new parking. Robin Slaton, 3001 S. Washington Avenue,
stated that it would not be possible to lease parking from the
church because she has a 24-hour, 7-days per week
operation.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 17
In Committee, Ms. Foster suggested that the applicant use
grass crete for the new parking area so that it could still be
used as play space when it is not being parked on.
Ms. Foster stated that maybe the ordinance requires too
many parking spaces for the child care and inquired about a
change to the ordinance. Ms. Stachowiak stated maybe this
would be something to discuss during the Zoning and
Ordinance Committee meeting and if the Committee feels
led that the ordinance needs to be changed, it can initiate a
new amendment at the level. A discussion ensued.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster to recommend approval of
Z-12-2002, 3001 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential, "F" Commercial & "J"
Parking Districts to "D-1" Professional Office District.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Foster . .Ave Keene. . . Ave
Patrick . . Ave Ruge. . . Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 6; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
C. Z-13-2002, 4410 S. MIL King, "C" Residential District to
"F" Commercial District
This is a request by Allen Miller and Errol Johnson,
representing the Capital Area CEF (Child Evangelism
Fellowship), to rezone the property located at 4410 S. ML
King Blvd., more particularly described as:
N. 45 Ft. of Lot 46, Supervisor's Plat of Prosperity
Farms No. 1, Being a part of the S Y2 Section 32,
T4N, R2W, City of Lansing, Ingham County, MI
from "C" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. The
purpose of this request is to bring the zoning into
conformance with the property's commercial use.
In Committee, Mr. Ruge stated that the committee should
make a finding as to whether this case warrants another
review since the same request was acted upon in 1973.
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster, to
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 18
reconsider the rezoning of 4410 S. ML King, based upon the
finding that the following conditions have changed which
warrant another review: (1) The establishment of the school
directly to the west, and (2) the rezoning of the property
directly to the south of the subject lot. On a voice vote, the
motion carried (4-0).
In Committee, Ms. Patrick stated that she was concerned
about the potential impact on the neighborhood to the west if
the property were to be rezoned to "F" Commercial. She
suggested that "D-1" Professional Office zoning would be a
more appropriate designation for the subject property.
Linda Chavez, representing the applicant, stated that "D-1"
would be too restrictive.
In Committee, there was discussion about the required
landscaping along the north border of the property and the
narrow width of the lot which will limit the number of parking
spaces on the site. There was also discussion about the
potential uses that could be located on this site if the
rezoning were to be approved.
Ms. Keene stated that she agreed with Ms. Patrick and that
she would be voting against this request. She had some
concerns about the potential impact on the neighbors, the
petition they submitted and some of their comments from
the public hearing. While she agreed that residential
probably was not the appropriate zoning, she believed that a
good compromise would be the "D-1" Professional Office
District.
Ms. Foster that she feels more comfortable now after seeing
the surroundings and walking around the neighborhood after
seeing the spacing between the residential area versus
commercial area. There seems to be enough of a buffer in
the back area to protect the residents, and the Martin Luther
King Blvd. area is all commercial buildings surrounding it.
She was quite hesitant about whether or not to go to a
higher density. In her mind that area seemed to be heading
in that direction yet it seemed to still be protected.
Ms. Keene stated that she is concerned about the direction
of some of the development along Martin Luther King Blvd.
While there is commercial in that area, she does not want to
see the area become so expansive that anything could
occur. She would be more comfortable with the "D-1"
zoning in that area in addition to the concerns of the
neighbors.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 19
Mr. Ruge stated that his view of the area at least in this
block is that it would benefit from this being "F" Commercial
and somebody coming in and tearing all the junk down and
putting in something that would unify the block instead of all
the hodge podge that is there now. With the zoning code,
there could be more buffer than there is now. He believes
that if the Board could unify the zoning along this face, there
would be potential for some larger redevelopment to come
in. He believes it should be demolished and then develop
something more unified.
Mr. Frederick stated that he agreed with Mr. Ruge and that
he might be a little more concerned at this point with making
the property commercial, however, the lot is so small that
most of the intensive commercial development that would
ordinarily be allowed in an "F" Commercial lot simply will not
be able to locate there without variances because of
violating setback requirements and so forth. That would give
the Board of Zoning Appeals an opportunity to deal with the
intensity of the use of the property.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster to recommend approval of
Z-13-2002, 4410 S. ML King, "C" Residential District to "F" Commercial District.
Frederick Ave Cordill. Ave
Foster .Ave Keene. Nay
Patrick Nay Ruge. Aye
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 2; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
Mr. Ruff stated that the motion carries but lacks 5 votes to form an official
recommendation. It will be sent to the Mayor and City Council with the vote and
comments as well as the petition that was presented.
d. SLU-6-2001, 517-519 E. Grand River Avenue, Church in
the "F-1" Commercial District (Tabled November 14,
2001)
In Committee, a motion was made to accept the withdrawal
of SLU-6-2001. On a voice vote, the motion carried (4-0).
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 20
It was moved by Mr. Ruge, supported by Ms. Foster to accept the withdrawal of
SLU-6-2001. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (6-0).
Next meeting, Tuesday, September 11, 2002 at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Patrick, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, August 27, 2002, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
3. Committee of the Whole - None.
4. Executive Committee - None.
C. REPORT FROM PLANNING MANAGER - None.
D. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St.,"H"Light Industrial District to"G-1"Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. Z-5-1998,401-407 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. P-1-2001,Tentative Preliminary Plat,Wexford Woods(Tabled June 13, May 9,
2001)
e. PRD-2-2001,"Crystal Woods", Planned Residential Neighborhood (Tabled
August 15, 2001)
f. SLU-6-2001, 517-519 E. Grand River Ave., Church in "F-1" Commercial
District(Tabled November 14,2001)
g. SLU-8-2001, 3000 W. Miller Road,Additional Parking for an Existing Church
(Tabled November 14,2001)
h. SLU-3-2002,2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J" Parking District(Tabled May 15, 2002)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000,201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27,2000)
b. Act-2-2002, Lansing Housing Commission Property, 310 Seymour,Acquisition
for public purposes(Tabled February 26,2002)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
a. SLU-6-2002,300 Elvin Court, Surface Parking Lot in the"B" Residential
Zoning District(Tabled August 6,2002)-ACTION EXPECTED
It was moved by Ms. Patrick, supported by Ms. Cordill to remove SLU-6-2002, 300
Elvin Court, Surface Parking Lot in the "B" Residential Zoning District from the
table. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (6-0).
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 21
This is a request by Sparrow Health Systems for a Special
Land Use permit to construct a temporary surface parking lot
at 300 Elvin Court containing less than 600 parking spaces.
The parking lot would be used for 2-3 years and would have
a gravel surface. The property is zoned "B" Residential
District which permits parking lots, if a Special Land Use
permit is approved by the Lansing City Council.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the Special Land Use request
by Sparrow Hospital with the following conditions:
a. The interim parking use is approved until June 30,
2004, at which time this SLU will automatically expire
and terminate, unless prior to said date the City
Council has granted an extension.
b. The parking lot surface is maintained in a dust
controlled condition, without the use of hazardous
chemicals.
C. Lighting be shielded to prevent glare onto adjacent
properties and turned off by 8:00 p.m.
d. The applicant is responsible for making any
necessary changes to restore the site to meet or
exceed its current condition. Such restoration shall
take place within 6 months after the parking lot use is
terminated.
e. Lights and fence will be removed at the end of the
lease agreement.
f. The parking area is patrolled for security purposes.
g. Christmas tress sales be allowed to continue.
h. Automobile contamination is controlled.
i. All traffic laws are observed and the traffic using the
lot be encouraged to not cut through the
neighborhood.
j. All requirements of the City's Transportation Office
are met.
k. Appropriate landscape, screening & buffering be
added to the site as soon as possible.
I. No barbed wire be used on the fence.
M. An appropriate number of trees be added around the
perimeter of the property and remain on the site after
the parking lot use has been terminated.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 22
Ira Ginsburg, Vice President of Sparrow Hospital, 1215
E. Michigan Avenue, stated that he did not receive anything
in writing from Mr. Hepler until 5:59 p.m. tonight. Mr. Hepler
had written a letter and basically indicated that he could
lease Sparrow 400 spaces at $25.00 a space and that he
would commence working on them October 1'. This is a
problem for Sparrow. In the letter Mr. Hepler stated he
could try to get 580 parking spaces. He has other parking
spaces in the area, referring to the spaces west of the
railroad tracks, which does present a problem. Again, it
would be the issue of crossing the railroad tracks. Sparrow
believes that there would be some operational expenses
because even though the Police Department is there and
people will argue that it is a safe area, it is perceived not to
be as safe because it is the Marshall Street area. Because
this area is hidden and is not as open as Marshall Street, the
employees do not feel that this is a safe area. Sparrow
would have to place more security in this area and their
operational cost would be higher. Sparrow also believes
that the traffic light at Pennsylvania Ave. and Saginaw Street
would slow down their operation even though it is the same
distance plus the option of the train slowing down the
operation. Sparrow does not have a guarantee that Mr.
Hepler would have the 580 parking spaces and that the
spaces would be available by October 1". Sparrow has had
their parking ramp approved by the Zoning Board and will be
starting on that project. Sparrow needs parking spaces by
October Vt. In Sparrow's previous experience with Mr.
Hepler, they have not been able to come to a conclusion on
a deal that has been satisfactory to both parties. Mr.
Ginsburg has concerns that this will end up in limbo and
Sparrow will not be able to get this operation. He believes
that Sparrow meets all the legal requirements and has done
everything the Board has asked for this property. He stated
that Sparrow is obligated to the Board to restore the property
back to its natural state. Sparrow cannot control the Armory
if the Armory decides not to allow this to happen. The
Armory has stated openly to the Board that for various
reasons they did not want the property restored because of
City ordinances and some Code Compliance issues. If this
could be settled with the Armory, Sparrow would gladly
restore the property back to its natural state. That is not an
issue with Sparrow.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the length of time for the contractor
to complete the job from start to finish. Mr. Ginsburg stated
approximately 4 weeks.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 23
Ms. Patrick inquired about when Sparrow formally requested
information from Mr. Hepler regarding the availability of his
lot. Mr. Ginsburg stated that he and Mr. Hepler did not
connect and that Mr. Hepler was aware of the request. They
did not speak to one another until the end of last week.
There was no problem with Mr. Ginsburg receiving Mr.
Hepler's letter tonight. That was when it could be done. Mr.
Ginsburg stated that it was going to be done this morning
but it did not work out.
Ms. Foster questioned if it looks like there is some
negotiation that could happen to make the space work so
that Sparrow would have confidence in the spaces being
ready on October 1s`. She stated that it would improve the
area so that when Sparrow leaves it, Lansing has gained
something, where it is no longer as blighted. It seems like
that area needed to be repaired and the addition of lighting
that Sparrow would have had to do could become
permanent. It would become a safer. Instead of having to
put something down and take it out, there would be
something to put down so that Lansing could gain from it.
Mr. Ginsburg stated that Sparrow has no control over Mr.
Hepler and that his proposal is a good proposal. In past
dealings with Mr. Hepler, Sparrow has spent a lot of money
and has gained nothing.
Mr. Ruge stated that if Sparrow could work with Mr. Hepler
to get a parking lot, it sounds like it is possible that he can
meet all of Sparrow's needs with 580 spaces. He would
prefer this over seeing a parking lot on the corner of
Marshall and Saginaw Streets. It sounds like there are
some lose ends that need to be tied up and his preference
would be to wait and see if this could be done. At the
September 41h meeting it would still give Sparrow enough
time to squeeze in the parking lot. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Keene does not like the idea of removing green space
to put in a temporary parking lot when there are potential
alternatives out there. Sparrow has been a good neighbor
and the Neighborhood Association apparently supports
them. She inquired about the North Grand Ramp and stated
that she has noticed since the renovations last summer the
third floor of the ramp is vacant on any given day. There
would be maybe 10 cars parked on the third floor. She was
not sure about how many spaces there were in the ramp
and if these would be potential spaces for Sparrow to lease.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 24
Ms. Foster stated that she would prefer that Sparrow use
existing parking. She is a little concerned that if the Board
passes this request, the option to evaluate existing parking
would have been one of the things Sparrow would have
done. It seems like Sparrow would prefer something that
they can control and that would be easiest for them.
Because of this, she is hesitant to pass the request. She
wished Sparrow would have looked at this option earlier.
Apparently the neighborhood had tried to tell Sparrow that
this was an available option but it was not looked upon until
the Board forced the issue by tabling the request. She
understands that Sparrow is in a time crunch but did not
know if this was by their own doing.
Mr. Frederick stated that Mr. Hepler has brought 3 other
requests before the Board that sounded like great proposals
but none of which have come to fruition. One of Mr.
Hepler's request was to develop the Prudden property into
loft style residences, apartments, co-ops, etc. It sounded
like a great idea but all that he has seen Mr. Hepler
accomplish since he brought that idea several years ago
was to get more broken windows. He agreed with Mr.
Ginsburg regarding the hesitancy to deal with Mr. Hepler.
Mr. Ginsburg's assessment probably from personal
experience is in agreement with his. The property that Mr.
Hepler has would be a useful situation. He believes that
Sparrow Hospital would have a better idea of what would
happen if the Board voted against the proposal tonight than
if the Board expected Mr. Ginsburg to deal with Mr. Hepler.
Tabling the proposal would not be appropriate. He will not
say outright that he thinks Mr. Hepler would fail; he may not.
He wondered from Mr. Ginsburg if knowing of all the
opposition that has been heard the last few weeks on this
proposal would Sparrow be willing to amend their project if
Sparrow could come up with an alternative that would be
workable for Sparrow Hospital with Mr. Hepler or with some
of the other areas that have been suggested? Would
Sparrow be willing to commit to backing out of the Armory
project if they could make some of the other ideas work
within a reasonable time frame for Sparrow Hospital to
complete their work? He had an opportunity to spend a few
days at Sparrow Hospital because of a family member. The
quicker the parking structure is built, the better off it would
be for a lot of patients, the people visiting the patients, and
for the overall benefit of whole lot more people. When he
left before vacation, he said that he would never go along
with this if Sparrow were proposing a permanent lot, but they
are not. Sparrow is committing to remediating. Granted we
have no control over the military whatsoever; they can do
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 25
whatever they want. He believes that these issues can be
worked out with the City. He has absolute confidence that
when Mr. Ginsburg stands before the Board and says he will
remediate it, he will. If he does, Mr. Frederick believes it will
end up better than it is now. From what Mr. Frederick has
seen, the property is none to attractive at this point.
Although the rain that the City has had the past few days
may have helped, the property does not really look like his
idea of green space. Mr. Ginsburg and Sparrow Hospital
have come before the Board in the past with proposals and
they have made commitments and have always followed
through with them. Sometimes it took a little longer than he
liked but nevertheless they followed through and did what
they said they were going to do. He has no reason to think
that Mr. Ginsburg is not going to do what he says he will do
this time. He does not know if it will make the Board feel
more relieved if Mr. Ginsburg would commit to another
alternative if it were workable. Mr. Ginsburg stated that he
does not know how he can commit to another alternative if
he does not know if it will be workable. He stated that there
would have been Sparrow parking there if they had worked
out their first deal several years ago with Mr. Hepler.
Sparrow would have been parking there at this time and
probably not before the Board requesting another variance.
Mr. Ginsburg stated that what he is willing to do is to say
before this goes to City Council, if Sparrow could come up
with a deal with Mr. Hepler, then he will withdraw this
request. He will try and work a deal with Mr. Hepler in the
next couple of weeks and see if Sparrow can get one. If
Sparrow does, then he will withdraw the request. The price
is not an issue. If Mr. Hepler stays at $25.00 and does all
the preparation and can provide Sparrow with 580 parking
spaces, Sparrow can live with that if Mr. Hepler can do it by
the October 1st deadline. That is Sparrow's big crucial date
because that is when Sparrow would like to start some
ground work and moving their heliport and things like that.
They would have to be done for the parking lot. This is
where he is concerned. If it cannot be worked out in the
next couple of weeks, then Sparrow has a problem with their
contractors too because they cannot give them the four
weeks to complete it.
Mr. Ruge stated that it does not seem like even if the Board
passed the request tonight that City Council would be done
with this by September 1 st. It looks like Sparrow will be
pushed beyond the October 1st deadline anyway. He
inquired of Mr. Ginsburg about the Board voting on the
proposal tonight and letting the chips fall where they may.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 26
Mr. Ginsburg stated yes, he would prefer that the Board vote
on the request.
Ms. Cordill stated that it seems like a compromise if Sparrow
were to go forward with negotiations on the May and
Prudden parking. It was suggested to table the proposal to
the first meeting in September. That would throw things too
late in the calendar. A discussion ensued.
THE MOTION FROM THE AUGUST 6T" MEETING WAS:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Foster to recommend approval of
SLU-6-2002, 300 Elvin Court, Surface Parking Lot in the "B" Residential Zoning
District with the following conditions: (1) The interim parking use is approved
until June 30, 2004, at which time this SLU will automatically expire and
terminate, unless prior to said date the City Council has granted an extension, (2)
The parking lot surface is maintained in a dust controlled condition, without the
use of hazardous chemicals, (3) Lighting be shielded to prevent glare onto
adjacent properties and turned off by 8:00 p.m., (4) The applicant is responsible
for making any necessary changes to restore the site to meet or exceed its
current condition. Such restoration shall take place within 6 months after the
parking lot use is terminated, (5) Lights and fence will be removed at the end of
the lease agreement, (6) The parking area is patrolled for security purposes, (7)
Christmas tress sales be allowed to continue, (8) Automobile contamination is
controlled, (9) All traffic laws are observed and the traffic using the lot be
encouraged to not cut through the neighborhood, (10) All requirements of the
City's Transportation Office are met, (11) Appropriate landscape, screening &
buffering be added to the site as soon as possible, (12) No barbed wire be used
on the fence, and (13) An appropriate number of trees be added around the
perimeter of the property and remain on the site after the parking lot use has
been terminated.
Frederick . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Foster . Nav Keene. . Nay
Patrick . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nax
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 3; Nays: 3; the motion did not carry.
Mr. Frederick requested that the conditions recommended by the Zoning and Ordinance
Committee be communicated to City Council.
9. NEW BUSINESS - None.
10. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 20, 2002 Page 27
11. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Mr. Ruge inquired about how often City Council overturns the Planning Board
decisions. Mr. Ruff stated rarely.
Ms. Patrick inquired if the City could obtain a commitment from the Federal
Government to return the gravel Sparrow lot to its present state.
Ms. Cordill inquired if fences are allowed in front yards. Ms. Stachowiak gave a
brief overview of the fence standards.
Ms. Foster stated that she will not be able to attend Zoning and Ordinance
Committee meetings but would be able to attend Urban Development Committee
meetings. Ms. Cordill stated that she would be able to attend the next Zoning
and Ordinance Committee meeting on September 111h.
12. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS
Mr. Ruge stated that the church on Cavanaugh Road near Aurelius Road is
using gravel parking.
Mr. Frederick stated that the "Walk" light at the intersection of Pennsylvania
Avenue and Michigan Avenue does not work from any direction.
13. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 10:33 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
James A. Ruff, Secretary, Planning Board
PB Minutes.082002.wpd
APPROVED WITH CORRECTIONS: Draft to Clerk August 15,2002
PAGE 7, 11 LINES FROM THE BOTTOM, Approved August 20,2002
DEVELOPMENT S/B DEVELOP To Clerk August 21,2002
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, August 6, 2002
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Mr. Ruge, Acting Chairman.
A. Roll call. Present: Cordill, Foster, Patrick, Ruge.
B. Staff Attending: Ruff, Stachowiak, Stanich.
C. Excused absences: Frederick, Keene.
It was moved by Ms. Patrick, supported by Ms. Foster to approve excused
absence requests for Mr. Frederick and Ms. Keene. On a voice vote, the motion
carried unanimously (4-0).
In the absence of Chairman Frederick, it was moved by Ms. Foster, supported by
Ms. Patrick to approve Mr. Ruge as Acting Chairman for the evening. On a voice
vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was approved as written.
3. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Informational letter from Sparrow Hospital regarding SLU-6-2002.
B. Rivertrail Proposals.
C. City of East Lansing Northern Tier Land Use Plan Revisions.
4. HEARINGS
A. SLU-8-2002, 2107 W. Holmes Road, New Church in an "F"
Commercial District
This is a request by Reverend Rickey Smith of New Life Community
Church of Christ for a Special Land Use permit to use an existing vacant
building for a church at 2107 S. Holmes Road. The property is zoned "F"
Commercial District which permits churches with a special land use
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 2
permit, if approved by the Lansing City Council. This is not a matter of a
rezoning.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Foster inquired about resolution regarding the ordinance to change
the church location of 500 feet from any business district. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that the Law Office has not completed its review and has not
forwarded the information to City Council. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Patrick inquired if a notification letter was sent to the neighborhood
organization. Ms. Stachowiak stated that there were no neighborhood
organizations listed on the coding sheet.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Ruge referred
SLU-8-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting
scheduled for Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 4:00 p.m., 316 N. Capitol
Ave., Department Conference Room.
B. Z-12-2002, 3001 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential, "F"
Commercial & "J" Parking Districts to "D-1" Professional Office
District
This is a request by Robin Slaton of Yurple & Jojo's Fun Time Palace Inc.
to rezone the property at 3001 N. Washington Avenue, more specifically
described as:
Lots 4, 5 and the east 90 feet of Lot 6, Holmsdale Subdivision, City
of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan.
from "A" Residential, "F" Commercial and "J" Parking Districts to "D-1"
Professional Office District. The purpose of the request is to expand the
population of the existing child care facility and the size of the parking lot
at 3001 S. Washington Avenue.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Foster inquired about the parking requirements. A discussion
ensued.
Mr. Ruge inquired about code requirements. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that the Old Everett Neighborhood Organization
was supportive of the rezoning request. The Old Everett Neighborhood
Organization would like to see the applicant obtain the property directly to
the east and maintain it as green space to add more buffer between this
use and the neighborhood.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 3
Robin Slaton, applicant and owner of the property, stated that the
Child Care Center currently has 8,000 square feet of outdoor play space.
This request would cut the square feet almost in half so that additional
parking could be added. The state licensing requirement for outdoor play
space for a daycare center is 1,200 square feet. The City's requirements
are more strict. The Child Care Center is considering and has placed
calls to some realtors and her business partner about purchasing the
house next door to the property. There have not been any final decisions
made at this point.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the hours of operation changing with the
expanded operation. Ms. Slaton stated the hours would not change and
that the Center operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Ms. Foster inquired about the maximum number of employees the Center
would have on one shift. Ms. Slaton stated 11.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Ruge referred
Z-12-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting
scheduled for Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 4:00 p.m., 316 N. Capitol
Ave., Department Conference Room.
C. Z-13-2002, 4410 S. ML King, "C" Residential District to "F"
Commercial District
This is a request by Allen Miller and Errol Johnson, representing the
Capital Area CEF (Child Evangelism Fellowship), to rezone the property
located at 4410 S. ML King Blvd., more particularly described as:
N. 45 Ft. of Lot 46, Supervisor's Plat of Prosperity Farms No. 1,
Being a part of the S '/2 Section 32, T4N, R2W, City of Lansing,
Ingham County, MI
from "C" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. The purpose of
this request is to bring the zoning into conformance with the property's
commercial use.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Mr. Ruff stated that when this area was annexed into the City of Lansing,
the ordinance required that all properties be zoned "A" Residential. Even
commercial buildings were "A" Residential upon annexation. The
ordinance was changed in 1983 to accommodate an appropriate zoning
that fit with the use of the property. Along the commercial strips on the
south end of the City there are commercial buildings zoned "A"
Residential. This property was zoned "C" Residential because under an
old ordinance, there was an allowance for church related organizations or
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 4
religious organizations to be in a "C" District. This is currently an office for
a mission organization, and it is a commercial building. There was a
rezoning that occurred on the property prior to 1983 to accommodate its
previous use as it was originally envisioned. CEF has outgrown the facility
and is relocating. CEF desires to sell the building, and it appears
nonconforming because it is a commercial building.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the surrounding zoning. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Foster inquired about the business use to the south of the property. A
discussion ensued.
Mr. Allen Miller, Treasurer of Capitol Area CEF, stated that CEF is
interested in moving their operation to another building. This property is
currently zoned residential but the facilities inside the building are not set
up for residential. This is why CEF was advised to get the property
rezoned to commercial so it could be sold, and CEF could move to
another location. There is parking available in the back. Sometimes CEF
parks 8 or 9 cars behind the building. It is a gravel parking area but there
is plenty of room for several vehicles. He does not recall anyone living in
the building directly to the south. There are sales occasionally. There is a
big garage but no one uses it. No one parks in the yard. To the best of
his knowledge, it is used for commercial use.
Pamela Eaton-Champion, owner of Pam's Preschool Program and
Pam's Academy of Champions, stated that her property directly abuts
the CEF building. She was approached by her neighbors who expressed
their concerns when the notice of hearing came out to the people in the
area regarding the rezoning of this property from "C" Residential to
Commercial. Because she built such a big structure in the area, parking
is a real concern. There are other issues that she is having with the
building on the corner next door to CEF. Although that does not shed light
on this, that is part of the neighbors' concerns with what type of
commercial activity would be going into the building. She is concerned
because the parking lot runs all along her playground area. There are
over 21 applicants who signed a petition saying that they were not in favor
of the rezoning and have some concerns. She has spoken with Tony
Benavides in regards to those concerns. The community has met and
would like some other answers. She stated that she has had a wonderful
relationship with CEF, and that she is a product of them. Ms. Canary
Brown, who is 82 years old, came out and ministered to her as a little girl,
and has always been helpful and supportive in any project that she has
had with variances or zoning. She is not here as being opposed to CEF
selling the building. However, there are concerns with parking. When
there is a school or a center in a residential area, it does cause a lot of
problems and hostilities in regards to having appropriate parking, and still
have it look like a neighborhood area. She believes that many of the
Board members are aware of her building and the different things she
went through to have the building erected. She immediately called CEF,
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 5
and explained to them that her neighbors had approached her with their
concerns and were going to fight this issue. She understands CEF's
dilemma in regards to the need to sell the property. It would be very
important if the Academy and the Preschool could have the extra parking
so that there would not be as much street parking as there is now. This
would not disrupt the residential area. She has asked to purchase the
property before but was not able to offer the asking price. She has been
very prayerful about this situation and she did offer the same amount to
CEF if they would keep the residence zoned as it is. This would alleviate
a lot of the parking problems that would arise when the school has special
events. A huge center in the neighborhood can cause problems. She
stated that she is trying to be a neighbor to the residents and continue to
be a friend to CEF who have been so good to her.
Mr. Ruge inquired about other problems in the neighborhood besides
parking. Ms. Eaton-Champion stated that there are lots of problems. The
neighbors are really concerned because before they were told that the
property on the corner next to the Preschool was rezoned for commercial
use, and that it was going to be a studio. There is a lot of drug trafficking
going on there. This is something that does need to be addressed. There
is a new teen night club in the building she previously owned, and it has
been sprawling down into the neighborhood. The neighbors are really
concerned about this. She has spoken with a representative from CEF
and was informed that they cannot be responsible if someone selling
drugs has buyers. This can happen at any time. She is concerned that
there would be this type of business going on at this property. It is a small
place and there are residents surrounding it. There is a variety of zoning
in this area and to help alleviate the problems that CEF and the neighbors
are having, this would be a solution. There is a big problem on the corner
of Martin Luther King Blvd. and Pierce Road. There is a particular
recording studio, and many people are concerned and afraid of the kind of
late night activities that are going on in and around the studio. She was
told it was going to be one thing when it was rezoned to be there and it did
not happen. Her school services over 170 families in the Lansing area,
and she has interest in that property abutting her Academy and the
children's playground.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Ruge referred
Z-13-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting
scheduled for Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 4:00 p.m., 316 N. Capitol
Ave., Department Conference Room.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the rezoning of the property to "F" Commercial
and if buffering would be a requirement. Ms. Stachowiak stated that the
minimum requirement for buffering is an 8 feet strip adjacent to all
properties zoned "A" Residential, which means all along the north and
west borders.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 6
Ms. Cordill inquired about the parking requirements for the "F"
Commercial District with the buffer added. Ms. Stachowiak stated that the
parking lot would be 60 feet across, with parking spaces being 18 '/2 feet
in length. Even if the applicant has an angled layout, there still needs to
be a way for traffic to turn around and exit. It is 45 feet wide and if the
buffer is 8 feet, now there is 37 feet of workable space. It may be difficult
but there is always a chance for easements with an adjoining property
owner as an option.
Mr. Ruff stated that there are other options for layouts. Parking does not
have to be perpendicular or angled. There can be a drive in with parking
at the end and a few spaces further down. The parking requirement for
the property is 5 to 7 spaces. The property is not very wide but has depth
that will allow 60 feet with an access onto the property. The
Transportation Engineer can become involved when there is less depth
than 41 feet which would be one-sided parking on a drive isle. There
would be an option to go with wider spaces to maneuver in a space with a
narrower drive isle. These can be reviewed by the Transportation
Engineer to accommodate some of the issues.
Ms. Eaton-Champion stated that the property is very narrow and that it is
currently hard to turn around. It would be interesting to see how the
property can be manipulated to allow for parking.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
John Mertz, resident of 330 N. Clemens, stated that he is not excited about the
Sparrow Hospital parking lot. He has obtained and reviewed a copy of the staff
report. He read the ordinance and he finds it difficult that the staff report looks at
this in the manner that it does. It simply glosses over all the changes that are
going to occur as a result of this lot. He does not want to be known as totally
opposed to the Sparrow parking because he suggested that Sparrow might use
some of the armory lot thinking it would be available. The problem is that
Sparrow, as the report clearly indicates, needs 300 spaces but they went whole
hog. Instead of getting 300 spaces which would take 3 acres, Sparrow decided
to take over the whole armory. He urged the Board to reduce the acreage to
what Sparrow needs now. This is not a place for Sparrow to all of a sudden
decide to use all the parking needs that they could come up with for the next
three years until their ramp is built. This is not a temporary use of the lot. This is
not temporary because it will last a lot longer than a few days or weeks. It is not
temporary because the military has no plan whatsoever to revert the lot. It is not
temporary because if the condition was added that Sparrow has to restore it, the
military can stop that from happening and they will stop it from happening. Once
the top soil is stripped away, it will never be replaced. This is the concern of the
neighborhood. There are no conditions that can be placed on the property that
will make that lot smaller and allow people to continue to use it. It is not just a
vacant piece of property; it is a grass land. Part of the problem is that the
property has been misused. He has spoken with Pat Lindeman, who indicated
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 7
that he has the equipment to maintain the property at a much lower cost if the
military has trouble maintaining it. The problem has been that people do not
communicate with one another in trying to manage things properly. People
come out and say the grass needs to be cut so the environment that is there
becomes destroyed for the sake of cutting grass as opposed to managing it the
way it should be managed which would be proper and benefit everyone
concerned. He is not against the lot but if the lot were half the requested size,
the objections would melt away. The size of the lot is a problem just as much as
the lot itself. He urged the Board that if the request is approved, downsize the lot
to what Sparrow is actually losing when their own parking lot is removed. The
Board may find that there may not be a real problem. It would take
approximately 3 acres instead of 8 acres, and still leave plenty of grass space.
He has spoken with both parties privately, listened to what the military men who
manage the lot have said, and hear all the public statements, he stated that
there is a big disconnect happening. This lot is a very important green space.
He appreciates the BTS Committee having major plans for making the lot into a
huge housing development. What happens on the eastside is that it is a very
closed loop. There is a small group of about 10 people who are purporting to
speak for the whole eastside. They come in without asking anyone else. No one
in the neighborhood was notified. He spread the notice around the
neighborhood. The Eastside Neighborhood Organization and the BTS
Committee did not do this. This was a big surprise item that people were trying
to pass. That is why there are negative reactions from people. It really does not
involve most of the neighborhood. Someone else went around and did a poll
asking the neighbors if they want this type of development. Overwhelmingly the
citizens who live around this lot were opposed to it and for very valid reasons.
Most of the green space that has existed for years is being developed. Last
night he had watched the news and they were talking about a study that was
done on two housing developments; one with green space and one without. The
crime rate is four times higher in the housing development without green space
as it is with the housing development with green space. He believes it is almost
a scientific fact that when green space is destroyed, the quality of life is
destroyed. This is why he is opposed to removing all the green space from this
area. He stated that it is really vital. The Board needs to know that the green
space will not be recovered. This is the last virgin green space left on the
eastside. It is extremely valuable and far more valuable as green space than it
could ever possibly be as a parking lot. There is no way to compare the two
values. Blow it away and blow away the neighbors "because it is Sparrow." The
City would not allow him or anyone in the neighborhood to develop
a parking lot at this site. It should not be done just because it is
Sparrow. The neighbors would help Sparrow if Sparrow would work with them to
find more spots. Mr. John Pollard told him that there are 1,600 parking spots
that would be available to Sparrow. If Sparrow needs more than 300 spots, they
can get them very easily without additional expenses and within reasonable
distance. Some of the parking spots are within walking distance of the hospital.
It takes more than just simple laziness, slapping a fence up, and running a
couple of security vehicles out to the parking area to accomplish this. This is
something that people are willing to work together with Sparrow, but Sparrow
needs to bend a little. Originally, some of the neighbors said no parking lot at all,
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 8
and were asked to come up with a compromise. The compromise is 3 acres and
no more. He hopes that the Board will restrict the acres so the people can
actually live there.
Sally Burns, resident of 124 N. Magnolia, stated that the Eastside
Neighborhood Organization never contacted her or any of her friends who also
live on the eastside regarding this request. She did hear about this through other
folks. She stated that her lot is 33 feet wide. All the eastside has minuscule lots
but also has green space. It is a kind of compromise. There is a common space
that is used by everyone. Some neighborhoods have bigger yards. They have
tiny yards. A lot of people barely have a driveway between their home and the
home next door. She has a friend who has less 6 feet between her house and
the house next door. If there is no green space, people will go nuts. She does
not need to live in Lansing. If Lansing becomes uglier, she will leave. She has
heard a lot of talk about how Lansing wants to keep people from leaving the City.
The City wants to keep the property in good shape and keep the property taxes
flowing. This is going to make the neighborhood go straight down and make the
area ugly. Who is going to want to live there? There is a tiny lot with no place to
walk the dog or go play with the kids. She hopes that the Board will consider
this. The long term economic effect on the neighborhood is this would wreck it.
She has nothing against Sparrow. Sparrow helped save the life of one of her
best friends last year. She has an aunt on the Board at Sparrow. She feels that
Sparrow should not be allowed to do this. Less than 10 years ago, Sparrow built
another parking structure, and tore down some houses on Michigan Avenue.
She used to live close to there off of Holmes Street. Since then, a cul-de-sac
was implemented, and the neighborhood on Holmes Street was cut off. The
neighborhood on Holmes Street is not doing as well as it was. It is taken over by
young teenagers riding around, and using the "F" word whenever they feel like it.
They just kind of hang out there. That action by Sparrow did not help the
eastside south of Michigan Avenue. She hopes that this action by Sparrow does
not deteriorate the northside of Michigan Avenue, and that in honor of Hiroshima
Day, the City does not drop a bomb on the eastside.
Karen Quinn, resident of 124 N. Magnolia and a Social Worker for Cristo
Rey, stated that the biggest resource available in the world is people. She
hopes that everyone will keep looking at and caring for each other as people.
She lives on the eastside, and it bums her out if this area becomes a parking lot.
She visits a place called "The Drain" - a Lindeman project over in Groesbeck
where some people took some property and made it into a beautiful park. She
walks over there and loves it so much. She wishes that something like this could
be done with the Sparrow piece. This is where she lives. If the Board lived in
this area where she lives, would they want that big parking lot by them? It would
be a bummer. She thinks that everyone can use their minds to come up with an
alternative. If everything is turned into concrete, it will really stink living in
Lansing.
John Pollard, resident of 1718 Blair Street, presented copies of a memo to be
distributed to the Board regarding parking areas surrounding Sparrow Hospital.
He stated that he attended the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting, and
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 9
mentioned that one of Mr. Ruge's comments was to find some additional parking
spaces, maybe come to a compromise, and not use this particular green space.
He is a little confused because he has heard different numbers about what
Sparrow need. He has heard 677, 588, and 300 parking spaces. When green
space disappears, it is never replaced. No more is being made, and this is why it
needs to be protected and defended. Other options need to be looked at rather
than taking green space. He referred to the memo distributed to the Board
members. He personally has gone around and tried to find some alternatives.
The first alternative to the property in question which is 119`h Street Armory is
that it is approximately 9/10 to 1 mile from the door of Sparrow Hospital on
Michigan Avenue. From the same door to Option A, the North Precinct, located
on Prudden & May Streets, is the exact same distance: 1 mile. Already over
there, owned by H., Inc., on the westside of the Police Station. Sparrow is
concerned about the safety and well being of their employees, as he was glad to
hear. What could be safer than to park next to the Police Station? There is a
parking lot currently west of the Police Station and is already paved. There is
another dirt lot that could be turned into a parking lot just like the other. Sparrow
is talking about the property by Marshall, taking 6 to 8 acres of land, removing
the topsoil and disposing of it somewhere, and then laying sand and gravel.
Then they will put a fence around the acres and using a tennis net as a buffer
zone and maybe planting some trees. After two years, Sparrow will come back,
take down the fencing and buffering zone, remove the gravel and sand, replace
the topsoil, and then plant some grass seed. They will have to water it like crazy
to try and get it to come back to green space. Sparrow will also have to do some
environmental cleanup because after parking 500 cars for two years, with gas,
motor oil, windshield wiper fluid, and break fluid leaking all over, it will be a toxic
dump. Now let us create a win-win situation where the neighbors can keep their
green space, and Sparrow can get what is needed, maybe cheaper than what is
being planned out on Marshall. What is cheaper than moving into a place that is
already a parking lot that is right down the street with the same amount of
distance? If this does not work out, there is Option B. Option B is a space
identified but he is not sure of the owner. This is right where Perre Marquette
dead ends at Shiawassee Street. At Marshall Park, he estimated 80-85 spaces.
Two days later the Park Director estimated 82 parking spaces. He believes
there are spaces available that are 7/10 of a mile from Sparrow, right across
from where Sparrow currently shuttles people. There is a lot on the corner that is
fenced on 2.5 sides so this saves on fencing. Sparrow would still need to
remove the top soil and lay gravel. He is not sure if that property would need to
be reverted back to green space. If additional spaces are needed, he found 82
spaces at Marshall Park 2/10 of a mile from where Sparrow is planning on
shuttling people. He still believes that 1191h Street Armory has approximately
106 paved and fenced lots available. Maybe these lots are needed in the
summertime when the military has maneuvers, and that is why he indicated in
his memo that right across the street is Lansing Catholic Central. With schools
hurting, he would bet that they would be willing to rent the space. He also
identified some churches in the area. He stated that there are approximately
1,600 parking spaces within a mile radius of Sparrow that are already parking
lots. Why take the green space? He would like to see these options explored.
He gave a copy of the memo to Mr. Harold Leeman in hopes that Mr. Leeman
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 10
would work with Sparrow and the neighbors. There needs to be something that
makes some sense. To do otherwise, is to threaten the neighborhood, the
safety of the children, and increase traffic congestion. Already the City wants to
take 25 acres of BTS property and turn it into some upscale development. Now
the City wants to take this piece of property and continue runoff. This property is
on the edge of the flood district in Groesbeck. This needs to be stopped
because it does not need to be done. He is asking the Board to deny Sparrow's
request, explore the options listed in the memo which may be cheaper for
Sparrow, create a win situation so Sparrow build their parking ramp, and all the
people when they become old enough and need Sparrow can go to Sparrow and
be treated. Let the neighbors have a little bit of green space with what they have
left because they are losing 25 acres. Let us do something else besides paving
over paradise to build another unneeded parking lot. He hopes the Planning
Board will live up to their end of the bargain.
Brian Smith, resident of 1007 Woodbine, asked the Board not grant this
special land use in its current form. He understands that Sparrow needs the
parking spaces but he believes that all the available and possible alternatives
should be explored before making a decision. The Zoning and Ordinance
Committee meeting a few weeks ago was basically silly. Some of the
statements by Mr. Frederick were very callus in regards to preserving green
space. Looking for alternatives is not placing an excessive burden on Sparrow.
He believes there that there are workable alternatives as Mr. Pollard has just
demonstrated. He has read the staff evaluation, and has a problem with the
Eastside Neighborhood Organization (ENO) supporting Sparrow's request. The
Genessee Neighborhood Association (GNA) does not have more than 20 to 25
people attending their meetings. The GNA was in favor of selling Genessee
Park. Mr. and Mrs. Klink who live across the street from the park went around
the neighborhood and collected 230 signatures opposing the sale of the Park.
The neighborhood organizations do not necessarily represent the views of
everyone in the area. He stated that is was very duplicitous of the ENO when
their newspaper reflects enjoy the neighborhood parks but yet they want to strip
a green space. This is very disheartening. He reiterated that he is not against
Sparrow, and he knows that they need parking. Green space is a precious gift
left for future generations, and it needs to be left in better condition then the way
it was received. He hopes that there can be a workable compromise. He
mentioned that at the July 15`h City Council meeting there was a gentleman, who
lives on Horton Street, who presented City Council with a petition with 146
signatures opposing this request.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the Planning Office receiving a copy of the petition. Mr.
Ruff stated that the Planning Office had a copy prior to City Council receiving a
copy. Ms. Stachowiak stated that copies were distributed before the public
hearing on the case.
Gladys Collison, resident of 2711 Delta River Drive, stated the question to
ask as the Planning Board for the City of Lansing is why so many Sparrow
Hospital employees do not live in the city. The City has a population that is
decreasing. She moved to the City of Lansing from East Lansing. At one time
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 11
she lived in the upper peninsula out in the country with trees, rivers, lakes, and
green space. She moved away to attend college, and when she returned there
was open pit mining and everything within the area has now turned to copper
color, and is iron or dust covered. The roads are now red from iron dust. If
green space is taken and turned into a parking lot or anything else that is not
naturally put on this earth, it will never be recuperated or recovered. There will
never be anything to make it better than what it once was when it was left
natural. If it is not enhanced or not left in the natural state, the environment
would be destroyed. If people want to preserve the City of Lansing as it is, every
green space available needs to be left or enhanced. If Sparrow would like to
burden the citizens by taking away green space, the only alternative is for the
citizens to move out of the City.
Nancy Parsons, President of the Eastside Neighborhood Organization
(ENO) and resident of 430 N. Fairview, stated that the ENO supports
Sparrow's request because it is military property. The military is not governed by
any State or City ordinance. The ENO meets the first Wednesday of every
month at Foster Community Center in Room 213 at 7:00 p.m. In April 2003, the
ENO will be 30 years old. The ENO paper is published twice a year, which also
has the date, time, and place of the ENO meetings for anyone on the eastside to
attend. Sparrow has attended the ENO meetings, and have thoroughly
expressed their views on the need for the parking lot. When the ENO had
questions and concerns about the parking lot, Sparrow answered them. Once
the ENO found out the property was of the military, it was not an issue. This
particular corner has been used for a parking lot for over 20 years. The only
difference is that there is no fence. There were car dealerships who have
parked vehicles there. This lot was also used for tent sales and carnivals. The
CSO project used this corner lot for their parking. As for the petition, it referred
to this lot as the 119'h Park. This request was not for the 1191h Park. She had
received numerous phone calls from the individuals who signed the petition
because they thought the park was going to be destroyed. When she explained
to these individuals which corner the request referred to, there was a letter
written by a few of the people who signed the petition. She was here tonight to
express the ENO's support of this lot.
Belinda Fitzpatrick, resident of 224 S. Holmes Street, stated that she would
like to reiterate her opposition to this development. She has seen a picture of
the proposed parking lot, and this lot would take up a lot more space than the
corner that is currently used for parking. If the parking was limited to the one
corner instead of wiping out the green space, people would look at it differently.
Who knows what the boundaries are of the 119t' Park. She has socialized with
the people over there, and she does not think that anyone has clear in their
minds what the boundaries are of the 1191h Park. That lot is civic and social
space used by the community. It provides esthetics and environmental services.
She agreed that it was much different to limit the development to the corner that
has been used for parking and is in a degraded state. She appreciates the
people who are a part of the ENO, and she attends their meetings. These
people put a lot of work into what they do. There seems to be an expectation
that if one does not attend the meetings, then the opinion somehow becomes
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 12
diminished. It is like one is supposed to participate or their opinion in the
neighborhood would not hold weight. This is her impression, and that is why she
has repeatedly said that the ENO does not represent the eastside. She believes
the petition affirms that the ENO only represents itself and does not represent
the eastside. Even if the ENO has existed for 30 years and extends an open
invitation to everyone, one should not be disenfranchised because they choose
not to socialize with a group of people or become involved in the meetings.
People pay taxes, and perform their public duties in their jobs by raising their
families. Just because people do not have time to attend a neighborhood
meeting and become involved, she does not think that they should have a lesser
voice in the neighborhood. She believes it would be degradation to the
neighborhood to convert more green space to parking than what is currently
used. She encouraged the Board to stick to the ordinance. The is the highest
use in a residential neighborhood is supposed to be open space, and the least
desirable is supposed to be the parking lots. She recommended to the Board
that they deny the request.
Seeing no one else wishing to address the Board, Mr. Ruge closed the public
comment period.
5. RECESS was taken by the Board.
6. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval
Ms. Foster moved; seconded by Ms. Patrick to approve the minutes of
July 2, 2002 without corrections. On a voice vote, the motion carried
(4-0), the minutes of July 2, 2002 were
APPROVED.
Mr. Ruge appointed Ms. Foster as temporary Chairperson.
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
a. SLU-5-2002, 2710 S. Washington Avenue, Surface
Parking Lot in an "A" Residential District
This is a request by Mr. George W. Abraham for a Special
Land Use permit to develop a parking lot at 2710 S.
Washington Avenue (Lot 5 of Assessor's Plat No. 53). The
property that is proposed to be used for parking is 100 feet
wide by 130 feet deep and adjoins Washington Park. The
property is zoned "A" Residential. This is not a matter of
rezoning.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 13
Mr. Ruge stated that he did not believe the park itself needs
parking spaces. There are a ton of parking spaces in the
park. There are a couple of acres of parking that nobody
uses. He understands that Mr. Abraham needs parking for
his building. He is not opposed to Mr. Abraham having
parking for his building. It would be preferable to him that
Mr. Abraham use some of the excessive parking in the park.
If that is not possible, he believes that Mr. Abraham should
have Lot 5. He sees no reason for all the cars to be driving
through Washington Park and that by doing so it does not
make the park more user friendly. It would be the workers
driving through the park a minimum of two times a day or
four times a day maximum. It adds up, and the road through
the park is not in great shape. He has problems with the
current plan. He feels that if Mr. Abraham needs the parking
and if the City is willing to give him Lot 5, then he sees no
reason for it to be connected to the park at all.
Mr. Ruff gave a brief overview of the vision of access.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the park needing more parking. If
not, would Mr. Abraham be able to lease parking spaces
from the park to use for his building. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Foster inquired about the design of the building, the
connection to the park, where the uses for the park were,
and development of the property. A discussion ensued.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
SLU-5-2002, 2710 S. Washington Avenue, Surface Parking Lot in an "A"
Residential District with the conditions as reported by the Zoning and Ordinance
Committee. Discussion ensued regarding the conditions and they were amended
to read as follows: (1) ACT-4-2002 which approved the vacation of Willard Street
be amended to allow the applicant to retain ownership of the subject property
(Lot 5), purchase the Willard Street right-of-way, and give easement, in perpetuity,
to the City Parks and Recreation Department for use of the parking area in the
evenings, (2) The applicant submit a site plan and landscaping plan for review
and approval by the City, (3) The applicant preserve as many of the existing,
mature trees as possible, (4) The applicant be responsible for any costs involved
in relocating the Board of Water & Light equipment, and (5) The applicant give a
permanent easement to the Board of Water and Light for any retained water
mains and services in the Willard Street right-of-way.
Foster. Ave Cordill. Ave
Ruge .Aye Patrick Ave
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 14
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED WCONDITIONS.
b. SLU-6-2002, 300 Elvin Court, Surface Parking Lot in the
"B" Residential Zoning District
This is a request by Sparrow Health Systems for a Special
Land Use permit to construct a temporary surface parking lot
at 300 Elvin Court containing approximately 677 parking
spaces. The parking lot would be used for 2-3 years and
would have a gravel surface. The property is zoned "B"
Residential District which permits parking lots, if a Special
Land Use permit is approved by the Lansing City Council.
This is not a matter of a rezoning.
A general discussion ensued regarding the parking lot.
Mr. Ira Ginsburg addressed the Board regarding the
Prudden parking lot. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the churches, Holy Trinity and
Plymouth Congregational, having surplus parking spaces. A
discussion ensued.
Ms. Foster inquired about the 300 parking spaces required
during the construction period. Mr. Ginsburg stated that the
existing surface lot with a new parking deck is about 390
spaces. On Jerome Street, north of the hospital, there is a
parking lot that has 380 to 400 parking spots. Sparrow will
move the visitors who cannot be shuttled to this lot. Sparrow
has to eliminate approximately 40 to 50 spaces of that lot to
make room for the Helopad that Sparrow is displacing in
their current parking lot. The brings the parking down to 360
which is 30 less than where they originally were. Plus
Sparrow is displacing 400 people who park in that lot. To
build the parking deck, Sparrow will have 150 or more
contractors on site at some given time. This totals
approximately 580 parking spaces. This is how Sparrow
came up with the current number of needed parking spaces.
URS Health Care Group, an architectural engineering group
from Grand Rapids, conducted a study from January to April
2001 that showed Sparrow is 500 to 526 cars short currently
with the existing parking. This is where the overflow
appears. After 11:00 a.m., there are no parking spaces
available on campus Monday through Friday. On the
weekends, this is not the case. The construction will not
occur on the weekends. Sparrow does have some access
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 15
to the school lots on the weekends, and Sparrow does try to
use them. Most of the business functions on the campus
are closed on the weekends. There are hardly any routine
surgeries on Saturday and Sunday. Sparrow has less
families and physicians on the campus. Sparrow does not
have the same problem. It looks like Sparrow will have to
maintain their shuttle at the 703 E. Michigan lot, which is not
done currently. It is possible Sparrow will have to maintain a
shuttle on the weekends in order to handle the loss of the
big lot behind the hospital. On the weekends, this is where a
lot of the 400 people park.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the lot size and if it could be
downsized. Mr. Ginsburg clarified that the construction
workers would park on site, and the displaced employees
would park on the lot.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the amount of green space
remaining if the lot was built to the proposed specifications.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that the lease was for 8.2 acres out
of the overall 27 acre parcel. Out of the 8.2 acres, only 6
acres would be used for parking. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the gravel lot and how it would be
protected from automobile fluids. Mr. Ginsburg stated that
Sparrow has spoken with a contractor. Originally 12 inches
of topsoil would be removed, and then gravel and sand
would be added. Sparrow has been informed of a fiber
mesh that could be put under the surface but it has to be
approved. Normally this fiber mesh is used on road work. In
using it, Sparrow would only need to remove 6 inches of
topsoil. He is not familiar with the fiber mesh. The fiber
mesh would make a better surface and a little less porous.
There will be less topsoil removed. Ms. Foster stated that a
fiber mesh is generally used to stabilize the site so it is
easier for construction and that not as much soil needs to be
removed. The fiber mesh does absolutely nothing to contain
all the chemicals that will be leaking from the cars. Actually,
it will be worse because now the chemicals will be leaking
into topsoil that will not be removed and therefore leaving
hazardous waste that will need to be stripped away. Mr.
Ginsburg stated that the surface Sparrow plans to use is a
crushed type surface that the Transportation Department
recommended because it does seal after a certain amount
of time. The chemicals would not go through. This was in
the Transportation Department report. He stated that the
crushed concrete would become a more solid surface. Ms.
Cordill inquired about the surface sealing, and how Sparrow
would manage storm water. Mr. Ginsburg stated that
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 16
Sparrow would be implementing storm drains. The lot would
be sloped so that drains could be implemented. Sparrow
would make sure that the storm water runs off into the storm
drains.
Mr. Ruge inquired about Mr. Harry Hepler wanting to charge
Sparrow so much for his parking that it is worthwhile for
Sparrow to do all this work. Mr. Ginsburg stated that it will
cost Sparrow a lot of money to do this lot. Sparrow is not
doing this lightly. They want to do it the proper way. The lot
will be restored. The armory can stop Sparrow from doing
this lot. Sparrow does not have control over what the
armory can and cannot do. The armory can do what they
want with the lot. He stated that he armory may be moving
from this area. That whole plot of land could be available for
any use at any time. Sparrow would like to use the property
for about 18 months. Sparrow plans on being finished with
the lot sometime at the end of 2003. It may not even be
used in the spring of 2004.
Ms. Foster inquired about where the topsoil will be stored.
Mr. Ginsburg stated that the old topsoil will be disposed of
and new topsoil brought in when the lot is restored. A
discussion ensued.
Ms. Foster inquired about restoration of the site and what
would happen with the materials that were added to the site.
Mr. Ginsburg stated that the materials would need to be
disposed of properly. Sparrow would probably have an
environmental check done on the materials. If the materials
are clean, they may be taken to a land fill. The
contaminated soil would need to be disposed of properly.
A general discussion ensued regarding pollution of a gravel
lot.
A general discussion ensued regarding the BTS plan.
Ms. Foster stated that besides the amendments as to the
automobile contamination being controlled, she would like to
see how Sparrow could accommodate this. Mr. Ruff stated
that Sparrow would like to be able to construct a lot in
September and this would be a part of the construction. A
discussion ensued regarding the planting of trees.
It was moved by Mr. Ruge, supported by Ms. Foster to table SLU-6-2002, 300 Elvin
Court, Surface Parking Lot in the "B" Residential Zoning District for two weeks
for the purpose of exploring the availability of the Prudden parking lot. On a voice
vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 17
C. SLU-7-2002, 1219 N. Walnut Street, Child Care Center in
an "A" Residential District
This is also a request by Juanita Castillo for a Special Land
Use to utilize the property and existing building at 1219 N.
Walnut Street and the vacant property at 1218 N. Chestnut
Street for a child care center that would serve approximately
50 children.
Mr. Ruge stated that he was concerned with the adjoining
driveway. The Child Care Center clarified that the children
would be dropped off and picked up throughout the day.
The vehicle traffic would be one or two cars at a time as
opposed to 30 cars waiting in line. Mr. Ruge agreed that this
was not the ideal site but does not believe there would be a
big traffic problem.
Ms. Cordill stated that the Church was probably a better
place for parents to drop off and pick up their children, and
that maybe the Board should allow the variance procedure
to take place if it has not already done so. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that the variance request will go before the Board of
Zoning Appeals Thursday night of this week. A discussion
ensued.
A discussion ensued regarding a daycare center in the
neighborhood.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Patrick to recommend approval of
SLU-7-2002, 1219 N. Walnut Street, Child Care Center in an "A" Residential
District with the conditions that (1) Appropriate signage is used throughout the
site, and to protect pedestrians on the sidewalk, (2) The site be buffered as much
as possible to reduce noise, (3) The applicant satisfy the requirements for
parking and landscaping, through the variance process, or some other method,
and (4) The crosswalk between the building and play area be striped.
Foster. . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge . .Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 18
d. Z-11-2002, 1219 N. Walnut Street, Rezoning from "C"
Residential District to "A" Residential District
This is a request by Juanita Castillo, representing Small
Folks Development Center, to rezone the property located at
1219 N. Walnut Street, more particularly described as:
LOT 3 & W 2 R OF S '/z LOT 2 BLOCK 28 ORIG
PLAT, City of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan
from "C" Residential District to "A" Residential District.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
Z-11-2002, 1219 N. Walnut Street, Rezoning from "C" Residential District to "A"
Residential District.
Foster. . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge . .Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
Mr. Ruff stated that this will go to City Council without an official recommendation but
with all the information of a vote.
e. NCU-2-2002, 1803 S. Washington, Class A
Nonconforming Status
This is a request by Brian Trahey for Class "A"
Nonconforming Status for the single family residential
structure located at 1803 S. Washington Avenue in the "F"
Commercial District. The property is nonconforming for use
since the "F" Commercial District only permits residential use
as a secondary use to a primary commercial use. The
property does not have a separate driveway, but shares one
with the property immediately to the south at 1807 S.
Washington Ave. which is also owned by the applicant.
Section 1294.11(d) of the Zoning Code restricts restoration
of a Class B nonconformity to 35 percent of the fair market
value of the structure. According to the Assessor's records,
the valuation of the structure at 1803 S. Washington Avenue
is $18,722. Therefore, the maximum rehabilitation allowed
at 35% of the structure, without approval of a Class "A" is
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 19
$6,553. The applicant intends to invest $11,000 initially in
rehabilitation work if a Class A Nonconformity is approved.
Mr. Ruge stated that the Master Plan indicates residential
use and that the property is being used residentially. A
discussion ensued.
Mr. Ruge believes it would be better to rezone the property
to residential. A discussion ensued.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
NCU-2-2002, 1803 S. Washington, Class A Nonconforming Status with the
conditions that (1) The applicant provide an easement across 1807 S. Washington
for continued use of the driveway to access the rear parking at 1803 S.
Washington, and (2) The common driveway and parking areas must be hard
surfaced with Portland Concrete or Bituminous Asphalt in conformance with
Sections 1284 & 1286 of the City of Lansing Zoning Ordinance (6-24-97), (3) The
applicant file for rezoning within one year, and (4) The initial rehabilitation work
proposed be completed within one year.
Foster. . . Aye Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Ruge . .Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
f. NCU-3-2002, 1807 S Washington, Class A
Nonconforming Status
This is a request by Brian Trahey for a Class "A"
Nonconforming Status for the single family residential
structure located at 1807 S. Washington Avenue in the "F"
Commercial District. The property is nonconforming for use
since the "F" Commercial District only permits residential use
as a secondary use to a primary commercial use. There is a
driveway at 1807 S. Washington that is shared with the
property at 1803 S. Washington Ave. which is also owned by
the applicant. Section 1294.11(d) of the Zoning Code
restricts restoration of a Class B nonconformity to 35 percent
of the fair market value of the structure. According to the
Assessor's records, the valuation of the structure at 1807 S.
Washington Avenue is $21,998. Therefore, the maximum
rehabilitation allowed at 35% of the structure, without
approval of a Class "A" is $7,699. The applicant intends to
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 20
invest $11,000 initially in rehabilitation work if a Class A
nonconformity is approved.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Patrick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
NCU-3-2002, 1807 S Washington, Class A Nonconforming Status with the
conditions that (1) The applicant provide an easement across 1807 S. Washington
for continued use of the driveway to access the rear parking at 1803 S.
Washington, and (2) The common driveway and parking areas must be hard
surfaced with Portland Concrete or Bituminous Asphalt in conformance with
Sections 1284 & 1286 of the City of Lansing Zoning Ordinance (6-24-97), (3) The
applicant file for rezoning within one year, and (4) The initial rehabilitation work
proposed be completed within one year.
Foster. . . Aye Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge . .Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
Next meeting, Tuesday, August 14, 2002 at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Patrick, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, August 27, 2002, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
3. Committee of the Whole - None.
4. Executive Committee - None.
C. REPORT FROM PLANNING MANAGER
Mr. Ruff stated that he had Lugnuts tickets for the Board members.
He also stated that he will be interviewing two people for Planning Board
membership. Both applicants are Third Ward and he hopes to be making
a recommendation to the Mayor's office within a week or two.
He gave an brief overview of the Planning Development Committee
meeting regarding their action taken on cases.
D. Pending Items: Future action required
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 6, 2002 Page 21
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-1998, 1223 N.Turner St.,"H"Light Industrial District to"G-1"Business
District(Tabled February 11, 1998)
b. Z-5-1998,401-407 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. P-1-2001,Tentative Preliminary Plat,Wexford Woods (Tabled June 13, May 9,
2001)
e. PRD-2-2001,"Crystal Woods", Planned Residential Neighborhood (Tabled
August 15,2001)
f. SLU-6-2001, 517-519 E. Grand River Ave., Church in"F-1"Commercial District
(Tabled November 14,2001)
g. SLU-8-2001, 3000 W. Miller Road,Additional Parking for an Existing Church
(Tabled November 14,2001)
h. SLU-3-2002,2710 N. Grand River Ave., Church in the"F"Commercial District&
"J" Parking District(Tabled May 15, 2002)
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Act-9-2000, 201 E. Grand River Avenue, Proj. Sign Over ROW (Tabled
June 27, 2000)
b. Act-2-2002, Lansing Housing Commission Property, 310 Seymour,Acquisition
for public purposes (Tabled February 26,2002)
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
8. NEW BUSINESS - None.
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON - None.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Ms. Foster stated that her fall semester schedule leaves Tuesdays open but not
Wednesdays. This will start August 261n
Mr. Ruge inquired about the church on Willow Street. Mr. Ruff stated that the
Pastor of the church stopped by recently and discussed things. The church has
experienced some mechanical or plumbing problems internally and is not
occupying the building. Things are in process. Once the church is given
occupancy, they have 90 days to finish what needs to be done.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS - None.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
James A. Ruff, Secretary, Planning Board
PB Minutes.080602.wpd
Draft to Clerk August 15,2002
Approved 2002
To Clerk 2002
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, August 6, 2002
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Mr. Ruge, Acting Chairman.
A. Roll call. Present: Cordill, Foster, Patrick, Ruge.
B. Staff Attending: Ruff, Stachowiak, Stanich.
C. Excused absences: Frederick, Keene.
It was moved by Ms. Patrick, supported by Ms. Foster to approve excused
absence requests for Mr. Frederick and Ms. Keene. On a voice vote, the motion
carried unanimously (4-0).
In the absence of Chairman Frederick, it was moved by Ms. Foster, supported by
Ms. Patrick to approve Mr. Ruge as Acting Chairman for the evening. On a voice
vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
The agenda was approved as written.
3. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Informational letter from Sparrow Hospital regarding SLU-6-2002.
B. Rivertrail Proposals.
C. City of East Lansing Northern Tier Land Use Plan Revisions.
4. HEARINGS
A. SLU-8-2002, 2107 W. Holmes Road, New Church in an "F"
Commercial District
This is a request by Reverend Rickey Smith of New Life Community
Church of Christ for a Special Land Use permit to use an existing vacant
building for a church at 2107 S. Holmes Road. The property is zoned "F"
Commercial District which permits churches with a special land use
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 2
permit, if approved by the Lansing City Council. This is not a matter of a
rezoning.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Foster inquired about resolution regarding the ordinance to change
the church location of 500 feet from any business district. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that the Law Office has not completed its review and has not
forwarded the information to City Council. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Patrick inquired if a notification letter was sent to the neighborhood
organization. Ms. Stachowiak stated that there were no neighborhood
organizations listed on the coding sheet.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Ruge referred
SLU-8-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting
scheduled for Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 4:00 p.m., 316 N. Capitol
Ave., Department Conference Room.
B. Z-12-2002, 3001 S. Washington Avenue, "A" Residential, "F"
Commercial & "J" Parking Districts to "D-1" Professional Office
District
This is a request by Robin Slaton of Yurple & Jojo's Fun Time Palace Inc.
to rezone the property at 3001 N. Washington Avenue, more specifically
described as:
Lots 4, 5 and the east 90 feet of Lot 6, Holmsdale Subdivision, City
of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan.
from "A" Residential, "F" Commercial and "J" Parking Districts to "D-1"
Professional Office District. The purpose of the request is to expand the
population of the existing child care facility and the size of the parking lot
at 3001 S. Washington Avenue.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Foster inquired about the parking requirements. A discussion
ensued.
Mr. Ruge inquired about code requirements. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that the Old Everett Neighborhood Organization
was supportive of the rezoning request. The Old Everett Neighborhood
Organization would like to see the applicant obtain the property directly to
the east and maintain it as green space to add more buffer between this
use and the neighborhood.
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 3
Robin Slaton, applicant and owner of the property, stated that the
Child Care Center currently has 8,000 square feet of outdoor play space.
This request would cut the square feet almost in half so that additional
parking could be added. The state licensing requirement for outdoor play
space for a daycare center is 1,200 square feet. The City's requirements
are more strict. The Child Care Center is considering and has placed
calls to some realtors and her business partner about purchasing the
house next door to the property. There have not been any final decisions
made at this point.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the hours of operation changing with the
expanded operation. Ms. Slaton stated the hours would not change and
that the Center operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Ms. Foster inquired about the maximum number of employees the Center
would have on one shift. Ms. Slaton stated 11.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Ruge referred
Z-12-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting
scheduled for Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 4:00 p.m., 316 N. Capitol
Ave., Department Conference Room.
C. Z-13-2002, 4410 S. MIL King, "C" Residential District to "F"
Commercial District
This is a request by Allen Miller and Errol Johnson, representing the
Capital Area CEF (Child Evangelism Fellowship), to rezone the property
located at 4410 S. ML King Blvd., more particularly described as:
N. 45 Ft. of Lot 46, Supervisor's Plat of Prosperity Farms No. 1,
Being a part of the S Y2 Section 32, T4N, R2W, City of Lansing,
Ingham County, MI
from "C" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. The purpose of
this request is to bring the zoning into conformance with the property's
commercial use.
Sue Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Mr. Ruff stated that when this area was annexed into the City of Lansing,
the ordinance required that all properties be zoned "A" Residential. Even
commercial buildings were "A" Residential upon annexation. The
ordinance was changed in 1983 to accommodate an appropriate zoning
that fit with the use of the property. Along the commercial strips on the
south end of the City there are commercial buildings zoned "A"
Residential. This property was zoned "C" Residential because under an
old ordinance, there was an allowance for church related organizations or
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 4
religious organizations to be in a "C" District. This is currently an office for
a mission organization, and it is a commercial building. There was a
rezoning that occurred on the property prior to 1983 to accommodate its
previous use as it was originally envisioned. CEF has outgrown the facility
and is relocating. CEF desires to sell the building, and it appears
nonconforming because it is a commercial building.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the surrounding zoning. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Foster inquired about the business use to the south of the property. A
discussion ensued.
Mr. Allen Miller, Treasurer of Capitol Area CEF, stated that CEF is
interested in moving their operation to another building. This property is
currently zoned residential but the facilities inside the building are not set
up for residential. This is why CEF was advised to get the property
rezoned to commercial so it could be sold, and CEF could move to
another location. There is parking available in the back. Sometimes CEF
parks 8 or 9 cars behind the building. It is a gravel parking area but there
is plenty of room for several vehicles. He does not recall anyone living in
the building directly to the south. There are sales occasionally. There is a
big garage but no one uses it. No one parks in the yard. To the best of
his knowledge, it is used for commercial use.
Pamela Eaton-Champion, owner of Pam's Preschool Program and
Pam's Academy of Champions, stated that her property directly abuts
the CEF building. She was approached by her neighbors who expressed
their concerns when the notice of hearing came out to the people in the
area regarding the rezoning of this property from "C" Residential to
Commercial. Because she built such a big structure in the area, parking
is a real concern. There are other issues that she is having with the
building on the corner next door to CEF. Although that does not shed light
on this, that is part of the neighbors' concerns with what type of
commercial activity would be going into the building. She is concerned
because the parking lot runs all along her playground area. There are
over 21 applicants who signed a petition saying that they were not in favor
of the rezoning and have some concerns. She has spoken with Tony
Benavides in regards to those concerns. The community has met and
would like some other answers. She stated that she has had a wonderful
relationship with CEF, and that she is a product of them. Ms. Canary
Brown, who is 82 years old, came out and ministered to her as a little girl,
and has always been helpful and supportive in any project that she has
had with variances or zoning. She is not here as being opposed to CEF
selling the building. However, there are concerns with parking. When
there is a school or a center in a residential area, it does cause a lot of
problems and hostilities in regards to having appropriate parking, and still
have it look like a neighborhood area. She believes that many of the
Board members are aware of her building and the different things she
went through to have the building erected. She immediately called CEF
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 5
and explained to them that her neighbors had approached her with their
concerns and were going to fight this issue. She understands CEF's
dilemma in regards to the need to sell the property. It would be very
important if the Academy and the Preschool could have the extra parking
so that there would not be as much street parking as there is now. This
would not disrupt the residential area. She has asked to purchase the
property before but was not able to offer the asking price. She has been
very prayerful about this situation and she did offer the same amount to
CEF if they would keep the residence zoned as it is. This would alleviate
a lot of the parking problems that would arise when the school has special
events. A huge center in the neighborhood can cause problems. She
stated that she is trying to be a neighbor to the residents and continue to
be a friend to CEF who have been so good to her.
Mr. Ruge inquired about other problems in the neighborhood besides
parking. Ms. Eaton-Champion stated that there are lots of problems. The
neighbors are really concerned because before they were told that the
property on the corner next to the Preschool was rezoned for commercial
use, and that it was going to be a studio. There is a lot of drug trafficking
going on there. This is something that does need to be addressed. There
is a new teen night club in the building she previously owned, and it has
been sprawling down into the neighborhood. The neighbors are really
concerned about this. She has spoken with a representative from CEF
and was informed that they cannot be responsible if someone selling
drugs has buyers. This can happen at any time. She is concerned that
there would be this type of business going on at this property. It is a small
place and there are residents surrounding it. There is a variety of zoning
in this area and to help alleviate the problems that CEF and the neighbors
are having, this would be a solution. There is a big problem on the corner
of Martin Luther King Blvd. and Pierce Road. There is a particular
recording studio, and many people are concerned and afraid of the kind of
late night activities that are going on in and around the studio. She was
told it was going to be one thing when it was rezoned to be there and it did
not happen. Her school services over 170 families in the Lansing area,
and she has interest in that property abutting her Academy and the
children's playground.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak on these matters, Mr. Ruge referred
Z-13-2002 to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting
scheduled for Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 4:00 p.m., 316 N. Capitol
Ave., Department Conference Room.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the rezoning of the property to "F" Commercial
and if buffering would be a requirement. Ms. Stachowiak stated that the
minimum requirement for buffering is an 8 feet strip adjacent to all
properties zoned "A" Residential, which means all along the north and
west borders.
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 6
Ms. Cordill inquired about the parking requirements for the "F"
Commercial District with the buffer added. Ms. Stachowiak stated that the
parking lot would be 60 feet across, with parking spaces being 18 '/2 feet
in length. Even if the applicant has an angled layout, there still needs to
be a way for traffic to turn around and exit. It is 45 feet wide and if the
buffer is 8 feet, now there is 37 feet of workable space. It may be difficult
but there is always a chance for easements with an adjoining property
owner as an option.
Mr. Ruff stated that there are other options for layouts. Parking does not
have to be perpendicular or angled. There can be a drive in with parking
at the end and a few spaces further down. The parking requirement for
the property is 5 to 7 spaces. The property is not very wide but has depth
that will allow 60 feet with an access onto the property. The
Transportation Engineer can become involved when there is less depth
than 41 feet which would be one-sided parking on a drive isle. There
would be an option to go with wider spaces to maneuver in a space with a
narrower drive isle. These can be reviewed by the Transportation
Engineer to accommodate some of the issues.
Ms. Eaton-Champion stated that the property is very narrow and that it is
currently hard to turn around. It would be interesting to see how the
property can be manipulated to allow for parking.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (5 minutes each)
John Mertz, resident of 330 N. Clemens, stated that he is not excited about the
Sparrow Hospital parking lot. He has obtained and reviewed a copy of the staff
report. He read the ordinance and he finds it difficult that the staff report looks at
this in the manner that it does. It simply glosses over all the changes that are
going to occur as a result of this lot. He does not want to be known as totally
opposed to the Sparrow parking because he suggested that Sparrow might use
some of the armory lot thinking it would be available. The problem is that
Sparrow, as the report clearly indicates, needs 300 spaces but they went whole
hog. Instead of getting 300 spaces which would take 3 acres, Sparrow decided
to take over the whole armory. He urged the Board to reduce the acreage to
what Sparrow needs now. This is not a place for Sparrow to all of a sudden
decide to use all the parking needs that they could come up with for the next
three years until their ramp is built. This is not a temporary use of the lot. This is
not temporary because it will last a lot longer than a few days or weeks. It is not
temporary because the military has no plan whatsoever to revert the lot. It is not
temporary because if the condition was added that Sparrow has to restore it, the
military can stop that from happening and they will stop it from happening. Once
the top soil is stripped away, it will never be replaced. This is the concern of the
neighborhood. There are no conditions that can be placed on the property that
will make that lot smaller and allow people to continue to use it. It is not just a
vacant piece of property; it is a grass land. Part of the problem is that the
property has been misused. He has spoken with Pat Lindeman, who indicated
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 7
that he has the equipment to maintain the property at a much lower cost if the
military has trouble maintaining it. The problem has been that people do not
communicate with one another in trying to manage things properly. People
come out and say the grass needs to be cut so the environment that is there
becomes destroyed for the sake of cutting grass as opposed to managing it the
way it should be managed which would be proper and benefit everyone
concerned. He is not against the lot but if the lot were half the requested size,
the objections would melt away. The size of the lot is a problem just as much as
the lot itself. He urged the Board that if the request is approved, downsize the lot
to what Sparrow is actually losing when their own parking lot is removed. The
Board may find that there may not be a real problem. It would take
approximately 3 acres instead of 8 acres, and still leave plenty of grass space.
He has spoken with both parties privately, listened to what the military men who
manage the lot have said, and hear all the public statements, he stated that
there is a big disconnect happening. This lot is a very important green space.
He appreciates the BTS Committee having major plans for making the lot into a
huge housing development. What happens on the eastside is that it is a very
closed loop. There is a small group of about 10 people who are purporting to
speak for the whole eastside. They come in without asking anyone else. No one
in the neighborhood was notified. He spread the notice around the
neighborhood. The Eastside Neighborhood Organization and the BTS
Committee did not do this. This was a big surprise item that people were trying
to pass. That is why there are negative reactions from people. It really does not
involve most of the neighborhood. Someone else went around and did a poll
asking the neighbors if they want this type of development. Overwhelmingly the
citizens who live around this lot were opposed to it and for very valid reasons.
Most of the green space that has existed for years is being developed. Last
night he had watched the news and they were talking about a study that was
done on two housing developments; one with green space and one without. The
crime rate is four times higher in the housing development without green space
as it is with the housing development with green space. He believes it is almost
a scientific fact that when green space is destroyed, the quality of life is
destroyed. This is why he is opposed to removing all the green space from this
area. He stated that it is really vital. The Board needs to know that the green
space will not be recovered. This is the last virgin green space left on the
eastside. It is extremely valuable and far more valuable as green space than it
could ever possibly be as a parking lot. There is no way to compare the two
values. Blow it away and blow away the neighbors "because it is Sparrow." The
City would not allow him or anyone in the neighborhood to development a
parking lot at this site. It should not be done just because it is Sparrow. The
neighbors would help Sparrow if Sparrow would work with them to find more
spots. Mr. John Pollard told him that there are 1,600 parking spots that would be
available to Sparrow. If Sparrow needs more than 300 spots, they can get them
very easily without additional expenses and within reasonable distance. Some of
the parking spots are within walking distance of the hospital. It takes more than
just simple laziness, slapping a fence up, and running a couple of security
vehicles out to the parking area to accomplish this. This is something that
people are willing to work together with Sparrow, but Sparrow needs to bend a
little. Originally, some of the neighbors said no parking lot at all, and were asked
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 8
to come up with a compromise. The compromise is 3 acres and no more. He
hopes that the Board will restrict the acres so the people can actually live there.
Sally Burns, resident of 124 N. Magnolia, stated that the Eastside
Neighborhood Organization never contacted her or any of her friends who also
live on the eastside regarding this request. She did hear about this through other
folks. She stated that her lot is 33 feet wide. All the eastside has minuscule lots
but also has green space. It is a kind of compromise. There is a common space
that is used by everyone. Some neighborhoods have bigger yards. They have
tiny yards. A lot of people barely have a driveway between their home and the
home next door. She has a friend who has less 6 feet between her house and
the house next door. If there is no green space, people will go nuts. She does
not need to live in Lansing. If Lansing becomes uglier, she will leave. She has
heard a lot of talk about how Lansing wants to keep people from leaving the City.
The City wants to keep the property in good shape and keep the property taxes
flowing. This is going to make the neighborhood go straight down and make the
area ugly. Who is going to want to live there? There is a tiny lot with no place to
walk the dog or go play with the kids. She hopes that the Board will consider
this. The long term economic effect on the neighborhood is this would wreck it.
She has nothing against Sparrow. Sparrow helped save the life of one of her
best friends last year. She has an aunt on the Board at Sparrow. She feels that
Sparrow should not be allowed to do this. Less than 10 years ago, Sparrow built
another parking structure, and tore down some houses on Michigan Avenue.
She used to live close to there off of Holmes Street. Since then, a cul-de-sac
was implemented, and the neighborhood on Holmes Street was cut off. The
neighborhood on Holmes Street is not doing as well as it was. It is taken over by
young teenagers riding around, and using the "F" word whenever they feel like it.
They just kind of hang out there. That action by Sparrow did not help the
eastside south of Michigan Avenue. She hopes that this action by Sparrow does
not deteriorate the northside of Michigan Avenue, and that in honor of Hiroshima
Day, the City does not drop a bomb on the eastside.
Karen Quinn, resident of 124 N. Magnolia and a Social Worker for Cristo
Rey, stated that the biggest resource available in the world is people. She
hopes that everyone will keep looking at and caring for each other as people.
She lives on the eastside, and it bums her out if this area becomes a parking lot.
She visits a place called "The Drain" - a Lindeman project over in Groesbeck
where some people took some property and made it into a beautiful park. She
walks over there and loves it so much. She wishes that something like this could
be done with the Sparrow piece. This is where she lives. If the Board lived in
this area where she lives, would they want that big parking lot by them? It would
be a bummer. She thinks that everyone can use their minds to come up with an
alternative. If everything is turned into concrete, it will really stink living in
Lansing.
John Pollard, resident of 1718 Blair Street, presented copies of a memo to be
distributed to the Board regarding parking areas surrounding Sparrow Hospital.
He stated that he attended the Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting, and
mentioned that one of Mr. Ruge's comments was to find some additional parking
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 9
spaces, maybe come to a compromise, and not use this particular green space.
He is a little confused because he has heard different numbers about what
Sparrow need. He has heard 677, 588, and 300 parking spaces. When green
space disappears, it is never replaced. No more is being made, and this is why it
needs to be protected and defended. Other options need to be looked at rather
than taking green space. He referred to the memo distributed to the Board
members. He personally has gone around and tried to find some alternatives.
The first alternative to the property in question which is 119th Street Armory is
that it is approximately 9/10 to 1 mile from the door of Sparrow Hospital on
Michigan Avenue. From the same door to Option A, the North Precinct, located
on Prudden & May Streets, is the exact same distance: 1 mile. Already over
there, owned by H., Inc., on the westside of the Police Station. Sparrow is
concerned about the safety and well being of their employees, as he was glad to
hear. What could be safer than to park next to the Police Station? There is a
parking lot currently west of the Police Station and is already paved. There is
another dirt lot that could be turned into a parking lot just like the other. Sparrow
is talking about the property by Marshall, taking 6 to 8 acres of land, removing
the topsoil and disposing of it somewhere, and then laying sand and gravel.
Then they will put a fence around the acres and using a tennis net as a buffer
zone and maybe planting some trees. After two years, Sparrow will come back,
take down the fencing and buffering zone, remove the gravel and sand, replace
the topsoil, and then plant some grass seed. They will have to water it like crazy
to try and get it to come back to green space. Sparrow will also have to do some
environmental cleanup because after parking 500 cars for two years, with gas,
motor oil, windshield wiper fluid, and break fluid leaking all over, it will be a toxic
dump. Now let us create a win-win situation where the neighbors can keep their
green space, and Sparrow can get what is needed, maybe cheaper than what is
being planned out on Marshall. What is cheaper than moving into a place that is
already a parking lot that is right down the street with the same amount of
distance? If this does not work out, there is Option B. Option B is a space
identified but he is not sure of the owner. This is right where Perre Marquette
dead ends at Shiawassee Street. At Marshall Park, he estimated 80-85 spaces.
Two days later the Park Director estimated 82 parking spaces. He believes
there are spaces available that are 7/10 of a mile from Sparrow, right across
from where Sparrow currently shuttles people. There is a lot on the corner that is
fenced on 2.5 sides so this saves on fencing. Sparrow would still need to
remove the top soil and lay gravel. He is not sure if that property would need to
be reverted back to green space. If additional spaces are needed, he found 82
spaces at Marshall Park 2/10 of a mile from where Sparrow is planning on
shuttling people. He still believes that 119th Street Armory has approximately
106 paved and fenced lots available. Maybe these lots are needed in the
summertime when the military has maneuvers, and that is why he indicated in
his memo that right across the street is Lansing Catholic Central. With schools
hurting, he would bet that they would be willing to rent the space. He also
identified some churches in the area. He stated that there are approximately
1,600 parking spaces within a mile radius of Sparrow that are already parking
lots. Why take the green space? He would like to see these options explored.
He gave a copy of the memo to Mr. Harold Leeman in hopes that Mr. Leeman
would work with Sparrow and the neighbors. There needs to be something that
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 10
makes some sense. To do otherwise, is to threaten the neighborhood, the
safety of the children, and increase traffic congestion. Already the City wants to
take 25 acres of BTS property and turn it into some upscale development. Now
the City wants to take this piece of property and continue runoff. This property is
on the edge of the flood district in Groesbeck. This needs to be stopped
because it does not need to be done. He is asking the Board to deny Sparrow's
request, explore the options listed in the memo which may be cheaper for
Sparrow, create a win situation so Sparrow build their parking ramp, and all the
people when they become old enough and need Sparrow can go to Sparrow and
be treated. Let the neighbors have a little bit of green space with what they have
left because they are losing 25 acres. Let us do something else besides paving
over paradise to build another unneeded parking lot. He hopes the Planning
Board will live up to their end of the bargain.
Brian Smith, resident of 1007 Woodbine, asked the Board not grant this
special land use in its current form. He understands that Sparrow needs the
parking spaces but he believes that all the available and possible alternatives
should be explored before making a decision. The Zoning and Ordinance
Committee meeting a few weeks ago was basically silly. Some of the
statements by Mr. Frederick were very callus in regards to preserving green
space. Looking for alternatives is not placing an excessive burden on Sparrow.
He believes there that there are workable alternatives as Mr. Pollard has just
demonstrated. He has read the staff evaluation, and has a problem with the
Eastside Neighborhood Organization (ENO) supporting Sparrow's request. The
Genessee Neighborhood Association (GNA) does not have more than 20 to 25
people attending their meetings. The GNA was in favor of selling Genessee
Park. Mr. and Mrs. Klink who live across the street from the park went around
the neighborhood and collected 230 signatures opposing the sale of the Park.
The neighborhood organizations do not necessarily represent the views of
everyone in the area. He stated that is was very duplicitous of the ENO when
their newspaper reflects enjoy the neighborhood parks but yet they want to strip
a green space. This is very disheartening. He reiterated that he is not against
Sparrow, and he knows that they need parking. Green space is a precious gift
left for future generations, and it needs to be left in better condition then the way
it was received. He hopes that there can be a workable compromise. He
mentioned that at the July 15`h City Council meeting there was a gentleman, who
lives on Horton Street, who presented City Council with a petition with 146
signatures opposing this request.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the Planning Office receiving a copy of the petition. Mr.
Ruff stated that the Planning Office had a copy prior to City Council receiving a
copy. Ms. Stachowiak stated that copies were distributed before the public
hearing on the case.
Gladys Collison, resident of 2711 Delta River Drive, stated the question to
ask as the Planning Board for the City of Lansing is why so many Sparrow
Hospital employees do not live in the city. The City has a population that is
decreasing. She moved to the City of Lansing from East Lansing. At one time
she lived in the upper peninsula out in the country with trees, rivers, lakes, and
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 11
green space. She moved away to attend college, and when she returned there
was open pit mining and everything within the area has now turned to copper
color, and is iron or dust covered. The roads are now red from iron dust. If
green space is taken and turned into a parking lot or anything else that is not
naturally put on this earth, it will never be recuperated or recovered. There will
never be anything to make it better than what it once was when it was left
natural. If it is not enhanced or not left in the natural state, the environment
would be destroyed. If people want to preserve the City of Lansing as it is, every
green space available needs to be left or enhanced. If Sparrow would like to
burden the citizens by taking away green space, the only alternative is for the
citizens to move out of the City.
Nancy Parsons, President of the Eastside Neighborhood Organization
(ENO) and resident of 430 N. Fairview, stated that the ENO supports
Sparrow's request because it is military property. The military is not governed by
any State or City ordinance. The ENO meets the first Wednesday of every
month at Foster Community Center in Room 213 at 7:00 p.m. In April 2003, the
ENO will be 30 years old. The ENO paper is published twice a year, which also
has the date, time, and place of the ENO meetings for anyone on the eastside to
attend. Sparrow has attended the ENO meetings, and have thoroughly
expressed their views on the need for the parking lot. When the ENO had
questions and concerns about the parking lot, Sparrow answered them. Once
the ENO found out the property was of the military, it was not an issue. This
particular corner has been used for a parking lot for over 20 years. The only
difference is that there is no fence. There were car dealerships who have
parked vehicles there. This lot was also used for tent sales and carnivals. The
CSO project used this corner lot for their parking. As for the petition, it referred
to this lot as the 119`h Park. This request was not for the 1191h Park. She had
received numerous phone calls from the individuals who signed the petition
because they thought the park was going to be destroyed. When she explained
to these individuals which corner the request referred to, there was a letter
written by a few of the people who signed the petition. She was here tonight to
express the ENO's support of this lot.
Belinda Fitzpatrick, resident of 224 S. Holmes Street, stated that she would
like to reiterate her opposition to this development. She has seen a picture of
the proposed parking lot, and this lot would take up a lot more space than the
corner that is currently used for parking. If the parking was limited to the one
corner instead of wiping out the green space, people would look at it differently.
Who knows what the boundaries are of the 1191h Park. She has socialized with
the people over there, and she does not think that anyone has clear in their
minds what the boundaries are of the 1191h Park. That lot is civic and social
space used by the community. It provides esthetics and environmental services.
She agreed that it was much different to limit the development to the corner that
has been used for parking and is in a degraded state. She appreciates the
people who are a part of the ENO, and she attends their meetings. These
people put a lot of work into what they do. There seems to be an expectation
that if one does not attend the meetings, then the opinion somehow becomes
diminished. It is like one is supposed to participate or their opinion in the
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 12
neighborhood would not hold weight. This is her impression, and that is why she
has repeatedly said that the ENO does not represent the eastside. She believes
the petition affirms that the ENO only represents itself and does not represent
the eastside. Even if the ENO has existed for 30 years and extends an open
invitation to everyone, one should not be disenfranchised because they choose
not to socialize with a group of people or become involved in the meetings.
People pay taxes, and perform their public duties in their jobs by raising their
families. Just because people do not have time to attend a neighborhood
meeting and become involved, she does not think that they should have a lesser
voice in the neighborhood. She believes it would be degradation to the
neighborhood to convert more green space to parking than what is currently
used. She encouraged the Board to stick to the ordinance. The is the highest
use in a residential neighborhood is supposed to be open space, and the least
desirable is supposed to be the parking lots. She recommended to the Board
that they deny the request.
Seeing no one else wishing to address the Board, Mr. Ruge closed the public
comment period.
5. RECESS was taken by the Board.
6. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Minutes for Approval
Ms. Foster moved; seconded by Ms. Patrick to approve the minutes of
July 2, 2002 without corrections. On a voice vote, the motion carried
(4-0), the minutes of July 2, 2002 were
APPROVED.
Mr. Ruge appointed Ms. Foster as temporary Chairperson.
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
a. SLU-5-2002, 2710 S. Washington Avenue, Surface
Parking Lot in an "A" Residential District
This is a request by Mr. George W. Abraham for a Special
Land Use permit to develop a parking lot at 2710 S.
Washington Avenue (Lot 5 of Assessor's Plat No. 53). The
property that is proposed to be used for parking is 100 feet
wide by 130 feet deep and adjoins Washington Park. The
property is zoned "A" Residential. This is not a matter of
rezoning.
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 13
Mr. Ruge stated that he did not believe the park itself needs
parking spaces. There are a ton of parking spaces in the
park. There are a couple of acres of parking that nobody
uses. He understands that Mr. Abraham needs parking for
his building. He is not opposed to Mr. Abraham having
parking for his building. It would be preferable to him that
Mr. Abraham use some of the excessive parking in the park.
If that is not possible, he believes that Mr. Abraham should
have Lot 5. He sees no reason for all the cars to be driving
through Washington Park and that by doing so it does not
make the park more user friendly. It would be the workers
driving through the park a minimum of two times a day or
four times a day maximum. It adds up, and the road through
the park is not in great shape. He has problems with the
current plan. He feels that if Mr. Abraham needs the parking
and if the City is willing to give him Lot 5, then he sees no
reason for it to be connected to the park at all.
Mr. Ruff gave a brief overview of the vision of access.
Mr. Ruge inquired about the park needing more parking. If
not, would Mr. Abraham be able to lease parking spaces
from the park to use for his building. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Foster inquired about the design of the building, the
connection to the park, where the uses for the park were,
and development of the property. A discussion ensued.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
SLU-5-2002, 2710 S. Washington Avenue, Surface Parking Lot in an "A"
Residential District with the conditions as reported by the Zoning and Ordinance
Committee. Discussion ensued regarding the conditions and they were amended
to read as follows: (1) ACT-4-2002 which approved the vacation of Willard Street
be amended to allow the applicant to retain ownership of the subject property
(Lot 5), purchase the Willard Street right-of-way, and give easement, in perpetuity,
to the City Parks and Recreation Department for use of the parking area in the
evenings, (2) The applicant submit a site plan and landscaping plan for review
and approval by the City, (3) The applicant preserve as many of the existing,
mature trees as possible, (4) The applicant be responsible for any costs involved
in relocating the Board of Water & Light equipment, and (5) The applicant give a
permanent easement to the Board of Water and Light for any retained water
mains and services in the Willard Street right-of-way.
Foster. . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge . .Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 14
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED WCONDITIONS.
b. SLU-6-2002, 300 Elvin Court, Surface Parking Lot in the
"B" Residential Zoning District
This is a request by Sparrow Health Systems for a Special
Land Use permit to construct a temporary surface parking lot
at 300 Elvin Court containing approximately 677 parking
spaces. The parking lot would be used for 2-3 years and
would have a gravel surface. The property is zoned "B"
Residential District which permits parking lots, if a Special
Land Use permit is approved by the Lansing City Council.
This is not a matter of a rezoning.
A general discussion ensued regarding the parking lot.
Mr. Ira Ginsburg addressed the Board regarding the
Prudden parking lot. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the churches, Holy Trinity and
Plymouth Congregational, having surplus parking spaces. A
discussion ensued.
Ms. Foster inquired about the 300 parking spaces required
during the construction period. Mr. Ginsburg stated that the
existing surface lot with a new parking deck is about 390
spaces. On Jerome Street, north of the hospital, there is a
parking lot that has 380 to 400 parking spots. Sparrow will
move the visitors who cannot be shuttled to this lot. Sparrow
has to eliminate approximately 40 to 50 spaces of that lot to
make room for the Helopad that Sparrow is displacing in
their current parking lot. The brings the parking down to 360
which is 30 less than where they originally were. Plus
Sparrow is displacing 400 people who park in that lot. To
build the parking deck, Sparrow will have 150 or more
contractors on site at some given time. This totals
approximately 580 parking spaces. This is how Sparrow
came up with the current number of needed parking spaces.
URS Health Care Group, an architectural engineering group
from Grand Rapids, conducted a study from January to April
2001 that showed Sparrow is 500 to 526 cars short currently
with the existing parking. This is where the overflow
appears. After 11:00 a.m., there are no parking spaces
available on campus Monday through Friday. On the
weekends, this is not the case. The construction will not
occur on the weekends. Sparrow does have some access
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 15
to the school lots on the weekends, and Sparrow does try to
use them. Most of the business functions on the campus
are closed on the weekends. There are hardly any routine
surgeries on Saturday and Sunday. Sparrow has less
families and physicians on the campus. Sparrow does not
have the same problem. It looks like Sparrow will have to
maintain their shuttle at the 703 E. Michigan lot, which is not
done currently. It is possible Sparrow will have to maintain a
shuttle on the weekends in order to handle the loss of the
big lot behind the hospital. On the weekends, this is where a
lot of the 400 people park.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the lot size and if it could be
downsized. Mr. Ginsburg clarified that the construction
workers would park on site, and the displaced employees
would park on the lot.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the amount of green space
remaining if the lot was built to the proposed specifications.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that the lease was for 8.2 acres out
of the overall 27 acre parcel. Out of the 8.2 acres, only 6
acres would be used for parking. A discussion ensued.
Ms. Patrick inquired about the gravel lot and how it would be
protected from automobile fluids. Mr. Ginsburg stated that
Sparrow has spoken with a contractor. Originally 12 inches
of topsoil would be removed, and then gravel and sand
would be added. Sparrow has been informed of a fiber
mesh that could be put under the surface but it has to be
approved. Normally this fiber mesh is used on road work. In
using it, Sparrow would only need to remove 6 inches of
topsoil. He is not familiar with the fiber mesh. The fiber
mesh would make a better surface and a little less porous.
There will be less topsoil removed. Ms. Foster stated that a
fiber mesh is generally used to stabilize the site so it is
easier for construction and that not as much soil needs to be
removed. The fiber mesh does absolutely nothing to contain
all the chemicals that will be leaking from the cars. Actually,
it will be worse because now the chemicals will be leaking
into topsoil that will not be removed and therefore leaving
hazardous waste that will need to be stripped away. Mr.
Ginsburg stated that the surface Sparrow plans to use is a
crushed type surface that the Transportation Department
recommended because it does seal after a certain amount
of time. The chemicals would not go through. This was in
the Transportation Department report. He stated that the
crushed concrete would become a more solid surface. Ms.
Cordill inquired about the surface sealing, and how Sparrow
would manage storm water. Mr. Ginsburg stated that
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 16
Sparrow would be implementing storm drains. The lot would
be sloped so that drains could be implemented. Sparrow
would make sure that the storm water runs off into the storm
drains.
Mr. Ruge inquired about Mr. Harry Hepler wanting to charge
Sparrow so much for his parking that it is worthwhile for
Sparrow to do all this work. Mr. Ginsburg stated that it will
cost Sparrow a lot of money to do this lot. Sparrow is not
doing this lightly. They want to do it the proper way. The lot
will be restored. The armory can stop Sparrow from doing
this lot. Sparrow does not have control over what the
armory can and cannot do. The armory can do what they
want with the lot. He stated that he armory may be moving
from this area. That whole plot of land could be available for
any use at any time. Sparrow would like to use the property
for about 18 months. Sparrow plans on being finished with
the lot sometime at the end of 2003. It may not even be
used in the spring of 2004.
Ms. Foster inquired about where the topsoil will be stored.
Mr. Ginsburg stated that the old topsoil will be disposed of
and new topsoil brought in when the lot is restored. A
discussion ensued.
Ms. Foster inquired about restoration of the site and what
would happen with the materials that were added to the site.
Mr. Ginsburg stated that the materials would need to be
disposed of properly. Sparrow would probably have an
environmental check done on the materials. If the materials
are clean, they may be taken to a land fill. The
contaminated soil would need to be disposed of properly.
A general discussion ensued regarding pollution of a gravel
lot.
A general discussion ensued regarding the BTS plan.
Ms. Foster stated that besides the amendments as to the
automobile contamination being controlled, she would like to
see how Sparrow could accommodate this. Mr. Ruff stated
that Sparrow would like to be able to construct a lot in
September and this would be a part of the construction. A
discussion ensued regarding the planting of trees.
It was moved by Mr. Ruge, supported by Ms. Foster to table SLU-6-2002, 300 Elvin
Court, Surface Parking Lot in the "B" Residential Zoning District for two weeks
for the purpose of exploring the availability of the Prudden parking lot. On a voice
vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 17
C. SLU-7-2002, 1219 N. Walnut Street, Child Care Center in
an "A" Residential District
This is also a request by Juanita Castillo for a Special Land
Use to utilize the property and existing building at 1219 N.
Walnut Street and the vacant property at 1218 N. Chestnut
Street for a child care center that would serve approximately
50 children.
Mr. Ruge stated that he was concerned with the adjoining
driveway. The Child Care Center clarified that the children
would be dropped off and picked up throughout the day.
The vehicle traffic would be one or two cars at a time as
opposed to 30 cars waiting in line. Mr. Ruge agreed that this
was not the ideal site but does not believe there would be a
big traffic problem.
Ms. Cordill stated that the Church was probably a better
place for parents to drop off and pick up their children, and
that maybe the Board should allow the variance procedure
to take place if it has not already done so. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that the variance request will go before the Board of
Zoning Appeals Thursday night of this week. A discussion
ensued.
A discussion ensued regarding a daycare center in the
neighborhood.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Patrick to recommend approval of
SLU-7-2002, 1219 N. Walnut Street, Child Care Center in an "A" Residential
District with the conditions that (1) Appropriate signage is used throughout the
site, and to protect pedestrians on the sidewalk, (2) The site be buffered as much
as possible to reduce noise, (3) The applicant satisfy the requirements for
parking and landscaping, through the variance process, or some other method,
and (4) The crosswalk between the building and play area be striped.
Foster. . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge . .Ave Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED w/CONDITIONS.
PLANNING BOARD ACTIONS August 6, 2002 Page 18
d. Z-11-2002, 1219 N. Walnut Street, Rezoning from "C"
Residential District to "A" Residential District
This is a request by Juanita Castillo, representing Small
Folks Development Center, to rezone the property located at
1219 N. Walnut Street, more particularly described as:
LOT 3 & W 2 R OF S Y2LOT 2 BLOCK 28 ORIG
PLAT, City of Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan
from "C" Residential District to "A" Residential District.
PLANNING BOARD ACTION on the motion was as follows:
Ms. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
Z-11-2002, 1219 N. Walnut Street, Rezoning from "C" Residential District to "A"
Residential District.
Foster. . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Ruge . .Aye Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a Roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
APPROVED.
Mr. Ruff stated that this will go to City Council without an official recommendation but
with all the information of a vote.
e. NCU-2-2002, 1803 S. Washington, Class A
Nonconforming Status
This is a request by Brian Trahey for Class "A"
Nonconforming Status for the single family residential
structure located at 1803 S. Washington Avenue in the "F"
Commercial District. The property is nonconforming for use
since the "F" Commercial District only permits residential use
as a secondary use to a primary commercial use. The
property does not have a separate driveway, but shares one
with the property immediately to the south at 1807 S.
Washington Ave. which is also owned by the applicant.
Section 1294.11(d) of the Zoning Code restricts restoration
of a Class B nonconformity to 35 percent of the fair market
value of the structure. According to the Assessor's records,
the valuation of the structure at 1803 S. Washington Avenue
is $18,722. Therefore, the maximum rehabilitation allowed
at 35% of the structure, without approval of a Class "A" is