Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992 Planning Board Minutes FINAL 4, ��► CITY OF LANSI NG INTEROFFICE COMMUNICATION PLANNING OFFICE 12-13-93P03 : 01 DATE: December 10, 1993 TO: Dixie Gilmore, City Clerk' s Office FROM: Eleanor K. Love, Planning Manager.,,'- 1-���� RE: 1992 Planning Board Minutes as listed on your memorandum of November 8, 1993 Following up on our memorandum to you dated November 15, 1993, the minutes for the Planning Board meeting of September 1, 1992 , are enclosed, the Board having approved them at the meeting of December 7, 1993 . The approved minutes of the May 5, 1992, meeting were sent to your office November 15, 1993 . These two sets of minutes complete the filing with the Clerk' s Office of Planning Board minutes for the calendar year 1992 . Thank you for your assistance. EKL:LC Enclosure (Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 ) c : \wp\planbd\moclerk. 2 aF ' �► CITY OF LANSING INTEROFFICE COMMUNICATION PLANNING OFFICE 1 1 -19-9 3 P 01 :3 7 R C V D DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT James A. Crawford, Mayor DATE: November 15, 1993 TO: Dixie Gilmore, City Clerk's Office r FROM: Eleanor K. Love, Planning Manager RE: 1992 Planning Board Minutes Thank you for your memorandum of November 8, 1993, regarding 1992 Planning Board Minutes, and for the list of minutes on file in the City Clerk's office. We have checked the list against dates on which the Planning Board held meetings. The enclosed minutes of the meeting of May 5, 1992, approved on May 19, 1992 and noted as sent on June 30, 1992, apparently were never received in your office. An additional set for the meeting of September 1, 1992, was never approved by the Planning Board. In the turmoil surrounding early retirement last year, these minutes evidently were overlooked and never scheduled for approval. They will be placed on the agenda of an upcoming meeting and forwarded to your office at the earliest opportunity. Thank you for your quick response to our request. EKL:LC c:\wp\data\moc1erk.e1 0I®7f Qq s ®Q� CITY of LANSING '„° INTEROFFICE COMMUNICATION ?� b• "' J ��aa. . mini gas 117,8793- TO: Eleanor Love, Planning Department DATE: FROM: Dixie Gilmore, City Clerks Office SUBJECT: 1992 Planning Board Minutes In response to your request of this date, the following 1992 Planning Board minutes are on file in this office: January 7, 1992 January 22 , .1992 February 4, 1992 February 18, 1992 March 3 , 1992 March 18, 1992 April 7, 1992 April 21, 1992 May 19 , 1992 June 2 , 1992 June 16, 1992 July 7 , 1992 August 5, 1992 September 15, 1992 October 6, 1992 October 20, 1992 November 4, 1992 November 17, 1992 December 1, 1992 /dlg Regular Meeting LAIITSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers L 1(E4 Floor, Lansing City Hall December 1, 1992 The Chairman, Emly Horne, convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with eight members present: Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, LeBlanc, Monteith, Thelen, Witherspoon, Wright Staff in Attendance: Eleanor Love, Jim Ruff PUBLIC HEARING: Z-21-92, 5700 Aurelius Road H and J to H The proposal is to rezone property in the 5700 block of Aurelius Road from "H" Light Industrial District and "J" Parking District to entirely "H" Light Industrial. The property is located in the southeast corner of the city by the railroad tracks and the drain. There's a triangle of property that runs south of the Mudd Lake Drain and runs through Midway Industrial Park. The surroundings are basically commercial or industrial type uses; entirely non-residential. They propose to remove the "J" Parking District on the frontage of this property so the property could be better used by a company. Ms. LeBlanc asked; along Aurelius because of the soil types there is an increased vulnerability for ground water contamination--would there be an increase with the "J" Parking being removed from the site. Mr. Ruff responded, there shouldn't be with all the things that have been taking place with ground water protection that we are plugging into the building permit process as much as possible. The Fire Marshal's office looks at all these building permits for chemicals, protection of hazardous materials of all sorts. Not only for environmental sake, but for Fire Department personnel in case they have to battle a fire there. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE BUSINESS SESSION: Committee Reports Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright, Chairman, reported that a tentative agenda had been prepared for the next meeting of Wednesday, December 9, 1992 at 2:30 p.m. in the Planning Division Planning Board Minutes December 1, 1992 Page 2 Conference. Urban Development Committee Garry Goolsby, Chairman, stated the Committee would cancel its previously scheduled meeting for December 15, 1992 and therefore they will not be meeting again until January 12, 1993. Executive Committee: Discussion was held on the Board's get together for Planning Department retirees to take place in the Council's Conference Room, 10th floor of Lansing City Hall on Wednesday, January 20, 1993 at 6:30 p.m. New Business: Mr. Goolsby moved to cancel the December 15, 1992 regular Board meeting, and Mr. Barnhart seconded. The Board concurred because if any actions were taken, nothing would be acted on by the Council until January. APPROVED Communications: Letters were received from MARY JENKS and CHERYL MC ALLISTER regarding the revised plans of Immanuel Temple Community Church (SLU-17-90) . There were no neighborhood objections. The concerns that had been brought up previously by the neighbors were all responded to. We appreciate the helpful response by Reverend Owens and to Donna Wynant for setting up our meetings. Comments from Chairperson: I. For the persons who are retiring the Department is having an informal reception December 17, 1992 at the Radisson Hotel Capitol Ballroom from 5 to 8 p.m. Spouses are included and family, friends and acquaintances are welcome to purchase tickets to attend. Mr. Tubbs is planning a short special recognition for each of the retirees. Mr. Goolsby will be out of state and expresses an apology for not being able to attend. 2. The Board is having a retirement reception also for the people they have worked with to be held on Wednesday, January 20, 1993 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Conference Room. Planning Board Minutes December 1, 1992 Page 3 Board Member Comments: Mr. Goolsby invited everyone to his annual Christmas party on Saturday, December 12, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. (he will do the cooking) with a Louisiana theme. We do ask for you to bring a hearty appetite and a contribution to the Food Bank. Adjournment: The regular December 1, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Eleanor Love, Senior P anner for James N. Foulds, Director Lansing Planning Division WC APPROVED: 020293 TO CLERK: 110293 Regular Meeting LANS.IZIG PLANNING BOARD 7 : 30 City Council Chambers 10tll2gr, Lansing City Hall November 17 , 1992 Chairman, Emly Horne, called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 p.m. and stated that the Planning Board was created and defined by Public Act 285 of the State of Michigan in 1931 . It consists of eight citizens of this community who serve without pay and who are appointed by the Mayor and approved by City Council . The Board makes recommendations to the City Council on all matters affecting land ,use in the City. Tonight there are eight members present: Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, LeBlanc, Monteith, Thelen, Witherspoon, Wright Staff in Attendance: Foulds, Fountain, Ruff, Spackman, Love There are no public hearings this evening. Comments from the Audience: MARY MARGARET WOLL, President Eastside Neighborhood Organization, regarding Z-9-91, 110 South Clifford Street rezoning request from "C" Residential to "J" Parking. The Eastside Neighborhood Organization does not wish to interfere with owners using their property, however, the Organization requests that the Planning Board approve the zoning change of Z-9-91 from "C" to "J. " Residents are frustrated with the demolitions, unexpected vacancies, and prospects of drugs, and ENO objects to instant demolitions and rezoning requests after the fact. Rezoning should come before demolition. We also request that the East Michigan Avenue study be completed soon because we believe the completion and the ensuing zoning definitions will assist us in defining neighborhood limits and in accommodating commercial development, if possible. ENO fosters preservation of the neighborhood quality of life. CYNTHIA STAJOS, K Realty Champagne Properties . Speaking on behalf of the Seven Block Area Development Plan for clients interested in the commercial development portion of the Plan, they intend, when Council adopts and approves the Plan, to develop a 40, 000-ft. service center. They hope adoption and approval will occur soon. JERRY O'NEIL, 616 Orchard Street in East Lansing. Regarding my rezoning request for 110 South Clifford Street. The application was made June 17, 1991, eighteen months ago today. The lot is located inside a strip of zoning for parking at the rear of the commercial buildings that front Michigan Avenue. The purpose of my rezoning request is to provide additional parking for my building PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 2 to lessen congestion in the present parking area. I have been taken to task over the manner in which the building was razed. I followed City requirements and obtained approvals from the City Building and Zoning sections . If the site is rezoned, I intend to beautify the site to improve the area somewhat. Of course, that too is a debatable point. Ms . Horne : Have you resubmitted a site plan for screening and buffering or are you talking about the one from 1990? Mr. O'Neil : I appeared before this Board in 1991 . No, I am staying with the same one originally submitted. RICHARD LOTT, Walnut Neighborhood Organization, 1107 North Capitol. Mr. Lott requested additional time in order to discuss four issues . The Board concurred with the request. This neighborhood has continually compromised in its conflict between the Emanuel First Lutheran Church' s wish to expand and the neighborhood' s desire to protect residential character. In 1967, the church requested more parking space. In the process to save houses they purchased a house on North Seymour Street that was paying approximately $1300 a year in taxes (House #1) . They demolished it for their current parking lot but also agreed to park on the street on Sundays, thereby saving more neighborhood houses . The church then purchased the current day care house at 1012 North Seymour, a one family residence which would be paying $1356 in taxes (House #2) . Later in ' 83 the church bought and demolished another house known as 1015 North Capitol, just north of the church, which is now part of the parcel they wish to build their church school addition on. It was a one family residence. Taxes today would be $2 ,210 (House #3) . A few years later a fire destroyed a house at 1022 North Capitol . The church bought the vacant lot, removing it from the tax rolls, thereby preventing a house from being rebuilt on the parcel . The house, or one like it, was a three unit and would be paying about $1779 in taxes today (House #4 ) . The church then purchased the house next to the vacant lot known as 1026 North Capitol . The tenants were evicted. The house is now empty, destined for demolition because the church refuses to do the moderate rehab to make it livable, hoping the City will then make them demolish the home so that they can tell the neighborhood that the City made them destroy the home, and their hands are clean. This house is a one family residence bringing $1356 a.year in taxes (House #5) . It is interesting to note that around the corner in the 100 block of West Maple Street there are also three city tagged-houses "Make Safe or Demolish. " They were owned by private individuals, all of which are being worked on to make them livable again and protect their investments, not destroy it. This year the church purchased a house on the west side of Capitol Avenue known as 1023 North Capitol, a three unit; a house paying $2124 in taxes (House #6) . They then demolished it. PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 3 Here we are in 1992, 25 years after the first compromise that was going to save houses . How does the church's past record of dealing with the neighborhood look? The church now has a new plan for the neighborhood. They want to demolish the current day-care house on North Seymour (which was House #2) , also a two unit house paying $1607 in taxes north of the current parking lot on Seymour Street known as 1022-24 . That ' s House V . In addition, two houses on West Maple Street--225, a two unit paying $1779 in taxes (House #8) and 221 West Maple, a two unit paying $1442 in taxes (House #9) . Also, the church is still looking into buying more houses on Maple for their new plan. What then, if the church has its way, what will the City of Lansing, School District and neighborhood lose? I count sixteen living units , $14, 953 in taxes a year. Can the City afford this? We feel this is a substantial compromise on the part of our neighborhood. Who is the aggressor in this situation? In the last 25 years, for all practical purposes, the church congregation has left the neighborhood, not only in numbers, but in the support of the neighborhood. The church has demanded more parking lots, created a day care business, gobbled up houses, and wants to expand their school business into our neighborhood. What has the neighborhood done to be treated so unfairly in all this? We were not invited to a meeting concerning a related issue with a different board of the City. We haven't been given an updated staff report until after the meeting. We have been labeled unyielding, uncompromising and for what, trying to protect our housing stock, our property values , our school and the area businesses and in the long run the City of Lansing. Isn't this a case of making the victim a victim all over again? We hope the Planning Board now understands how the Walnut Neighborhood has been treated in the past and how this affects the current issues . We hope also that you now understand what kind of neighbor the church has been. Should the church be allowed to continue this greedy, destructive and self centered behavior, we feel the resulting effect would be the destruction of a neighborhood that has many good people working so very hard to make it a good place to live. Please, through your votes, enforce the current zoning and preserve our neighborhood. Thank you. TERRI GUSMAN, 1114 North Capitol . A couple of issues have really bothered me about this particular situation. For all of us who have participated, whether we've been involved with the Neighborhood Organization or whether involved with the church, it certainly . has been a difficult situation. We are dealing with competing values and goods and with the church and institutions and what is good for the church and the neighborhood. That 's why it ' s so difficult for all of us; because we are dealing with these institutions and with two goods . The church has a lot of connotations that go along with the institution and church and 3 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 4 generally, because that is a valued institution' to us, it raises a number of other issues . After the last plan was presented, I asked the architect about the green space because the primary concern is we don't want the houses torn down. The architect said the real reason for the green space was to go along with the day care center. I really see the day care center as a business and I hate to lose housing stock because of that. It is not being utilized for the church or even the school, only the day care. Another issue that bothers me very much: I teach community development and program evaluation planning out on campus at State, and I always try to stress to students the importance of process . We have been involved a long time and attended a number of meetings . I was upset that the plan had been changed and we had no knowledge of it and we couldn't get a copy of it. After the first house was torn down, we had a meeting at Walnut School with Alan Tubbs, and one of the statements he made was he believes that a mix between a private and public school really makes a neighborhood viable. I wonder how much our input has been considered and how much the early retirement is playing into this . Is this a real process or is it just a rubber stamp? It gets back to the church as an institution--does that mean that everything that institution does is good, and how does that shape and frame our perception? Thank you. JULIE TUBBS LOTT, 1107 North Capitol, Secretary of the Walnut Neighborhood Organization. At the recent Urban Development Committee meeting where the Seven Block Plan was being presented, it was stated that there were two churches in the area that had to be moved. One was rebuilding on six acres on Logan/King. The other church had bought houses on one side of their church in the hopes of one day expanding. That church was told not to expand onto the property they had purchased because the block face across the street from them was all residential . The residential area could all be lost if the church were allowed to expand. On North Seymour Street in the block across from Emanuel First Lutheran Church and the proposed parking lots, all the houses are owner- occupied. Why then aren't those same criteria being applied to this situation? Could someone in the Planning Dept. please respond? Also on the agenda tonight is a proposal to establish a residential care facility at 224 West North Street. The Zoning and Ordinance Committee voted four to zero to deny this request because it did not conform with the rest of the residential neighborhood. Later in the same meeting, when .the Walnut Neighborhood church issues were acted upon, the fact that it was not conforming to a residential neighborhood had no impact on the Committee ' s vote on 4 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17 , 1992 PAGE 5 the final issues . Where is the consistency in enforcing the current zoning regulations? Thank you. TOM PAPERNIK, 3609 David Lane, owner of Tom's Shop Rite, 312 West Willow. I have been in the store since 1976 and I have seen many changes happen over there. It was a tough neighborhood when we moved in, and there has been a major improvement. The people in the neighborhood are good, honest, hard-working people and are striving to try to improve themselves . Through the years, the State has bought so much property of people who used to be my customers and used it for parking lots . That does not bring in revenue to the local area. If we keep thinking like this, we won' t have much of a downtown business section. That is something we need to think about. The church is not a tax base. We need to look at where our revenue is coming from, not only as a house owner, but as a business person. JOHN ZUMBRICK, 1502 Dennis, East Lansing, owner of Willow Plaza in the neighborhood and also operator of a coin laundry in that Center. We have lost a lot of housing already, and if you continue as the plans are requesting, it will do nothing but make the problem worse . We look at the neighborhood as almost members ourselves . As Tom said, they are good people. If you continue to let the neighborhood disintegrate, there will be no need for a coin laundry nor a food store. I pay $14 , 000 in taxes a year to the City for the Center and yet you can take away housing at $1, 000 to $2, 000 a clip and think nothing of it, and then you' ll come back to me and ask for more taxes . So I ask you tonight to consider, if you do drive through the area, what it is going to do to the services that Tom and myself and , Ingham County are providing to these people. I find it frustrating to have our base of customers eroding. I hope you will give us some serious consideration. ELEANOR DILLON, 328 North Walnut, President of the Downtown Neighborhood Association. The Walnut area is within our boundaries . The DNA' s first priority is to preserve, maintain and increase housing in the downtown area. For that reason, we oppose the demolition of good housing stock. We know occasionally there' s a house that cannot be rehabilitated, but that is not the case with the houses you are considering tonight. I hope you will keep in mind these are good houses, and we need those houses in Lansing. ALEX CRUZEL, 1027 Seymour. My two neighbors and I have concerns . First, at the last meeting the change proposed was proposed to you and somehow it got out into the back corridor where some people saw it. I did not see it. Within a day or two the Pastor came to my door, which is the first time since we 've lived there, and wanted to show the plan to me for my opinion. I said I would be happy to share my ideas at the next opportunity we have to discuss this plan. I am against the destruction of housing, against parallel 5 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 6 parking (that has since been denied) , and I am also against the possibility of losing trees and then looking at a parking lot which is rarely totally occupied for the purpose it was intended, which is Sunday mornings . It is occupied on Sunday mornings from 8 until about 12 or 12 : 30 and the rest of the time lays barren. And who looks at it? Not the people who participate in church activities, but my neighbors and myself. We are concerned about looking at what I consider a wilderness when you don't have any activity. Secondly, my wife and I looked at our mortgage, and with the rates coming down, we ' thought we would be wise to get a less costly mortgage. In going through that process, the appraiser, who was amazed at the kind of housing stock that was in our neighborhood, made his appraisal . We asked if the properties across the street were to be taken down and a parking lot put in, would that affect our property assessment. He said definitely it would, you would automatically lose ten percent of your value because of the parking lot. That is ten percent I would have to give for the support of a church of which I am not a member. It is already costing us $15, 000 a year in lost taxes by the properties acquired--those torn down and those potentially being torn down by the church. We would not have $15, 000 as a basis for , incoming taxes , which means the payment of the revenue lost is going to be redistributed and accepted by other taxpayers, namely myself. I 'm already going to give 10 percent if those properties are destroyed. I am also going to be paying a percentage of the $15, 000, and I don' t even belong to the church. Today I got an invitation in the mail from the church to come in and participate, the first information I have received since I 've lived here, two and one-half years . One neighbor has lived there 20 years and has not received this; another neighbor who lived there for 7 years did receive an invitation. The invitation does indicate they intend to have a courtyard and a gymnasium with five new classrooms as originally proposed. Nothing is indicated about the change that is occurring or has been proposed. Your staff has said certain policies should be .encouraged; ( 1) residential blockfaces on both sides of the street (by destroying the properties there will be no blockfaces) , (2 ) encroachment of parking lots into residentially designated areas should be discouraged, ( 3) housing should be maintained and upgraded as alternative to removal . The policies that you 've initiated should be part of your decision-making process . I also ask you on behalf of myself and my neighbors who are not members of the church to not ask us to pay an additional amount of money to support the church. CHRISTOPHER STEELE, 1118 North Walnut Street. I am opposed to the proposed zoning changes for the First Lutheran Church. They are a Class B nonconforming use which means they do not conform to the 6 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 7 requirements of the Code. Specifically, they don' t meet the lot size requirements of two acres for a church and their parking does not meet Code requirements either. Code would require 233 spaces, and at present off-street parking amounts to only 60 spaces . The neighborhood has been forced to accommodate the needs of the church, specifically, the "J" parking granted in 1967 . The City Council resolution called for screening and buffering of that parking. The parking has existed for more than ten years, and the screening has not been provided. The lot is bare asphalt out to the sidewalk in a residential neighborhood. We have had to live with this because of the unwillingness of the church to even meet the zoning changes made for them in 1967 . I ask you support the spirit and letter of the Code and deny these requests . LYNN O'CONNOR, 1101 North Capitol . There were three meetings where the neighbors were involved. The first was at Walnut Street School with people from the neighborhood and City Planning Department. There were no people from the church. The plans were brought to US . The second meeting was at Lynn Martinez ' s house; she' s the County Commissioner for our area. Again there were people from the neighborhood and Planning Department and no one from the church. I was told they had been invited. Third attempt at negotiation was in the late spring at my house and at that time we did have some people from the church, several people from the neighborhood and three people from the Lansing City Council . You all were invited to that meeting but none of you came. It was a long meeting that night. We tried to come to some agreement. It was stated clearly by the minister as representative of the Emanuel Lutheran Church that he was not there to negotiate so much as to see if the City would be willing to buy back the houses as rehab houses because the church has invested a lot of money in those houses . The second statement was that the church would only do for the neighborhood what the City required. The last thing that was fairly apparent was that there was no further interest in meeting to negotiate. I want that on the record that we were willing to negotiate. The second issue is the slick, high glossy brochure we got today. Unfortunately, a part of that letter is the picture which shows they've already torn down two of the houses . I think that ' s bizarre that they sent it out to us on the very night you're going to vote to probably let them tear down the houses . The last thing is for the group as a whole to raise hands if they oppose what the Lutheran Church proposes to do. PASTOR JOHN VOGT, 226 West Kilborn Street. I would like to respond to a couple of things . The brochures mentioned were ordered back in August, and sent in the mail this last week. As you know, the 7 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 8 change in the site plan is a very recent development. The issue of tax money--the community need to remember also that there at least two other sources of tax money; the income tax from jobs in the school and day care, and the fact that the Christian day school represents a donation of $500, 000 to the community because there are 100 students in that school who do not use the $5, 000 per student of public education they are entitled to. Our architect informs us that the site plan presented represents 2 . 8 acres of land and easily surpasses the two acre minimum. The church has never turned down an invitation to come to any kind of session. We must not have been invited to the ones we weren't present at. On behalf of Emanuel Lutheran First Evangelical Church, I ask you to approve the recommendations of the Planning Division staff and the Zoning and Ordinance Committee. We feel these recommendations offer a fair compromise between the needs of our congregation and the planning objectives of the city. These recommendations have come as the result of a considerable amount of study and negotiation over the past eight months . Out of our desire to cooperate, our congregation has made a considerable number of changes . Our original plan called for the purchase and demolition of an additional house on Maple Street. We stopped that acquisition and reduced the size of the plan. Secondly, our architect redesigned and compacted our plan so the parking lot will not go out to Maple. Instead, we will save most of the present parking lot and place a landscaped playground and green space out on the Maple-Seymour corner. This compact plan also considerably reduces the amount of parking we originally requested. Third, we have agreed to discontinue our efforts to place a small parking lot on the east side of Capitol Avenue and have requested in writing that you will allow us to withdraw special land use SLU-13-92 . We thank you for all your patience and help in working through this request. We truly believe that what is before you this evening is a fair compromise and the result of cooperative efforts on the part of management. We request you give your approval . Thank you. BILL BLACK, 203 West North Street, regarding SLU-16-92, Teen Challenge. I understand they have people that are not professionally trained in any way and they are going to have people with life-threatening problems that are going to pretty much come and go as they want. Nobody is going to be watching them at night. They don' t lock their doors ,and if the clients leave, they call the Probation Department. It' s not a neighborhood thing and it' s not going to help with neighborhood problems; clients will come from out of the City. We are concerned about what kind of people are going to be there, and about the park where a lot of kids play next door to people with life-threatening problems . The house is too small . I have been in there and it' s not big enough for ten people. There is insufficient parking--no parking on North Street at any time. 8 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 9 I hope the Board does not recommend approval . Mr. Scott asked for a show of hands in support of denial of the petition. PAUL F. SCOTT, 412 West Kilborn. From the Willow-Pine Plan, Future Development, page 80; Overall Willow-Pine area. "Removal of residential structures should be done only on an extremely selective basis in accordance with the goals and objectives of this plan in reducing overcrowded conditions and eliminating blight and health and safety risks to an area. " Thank you. ELEANOR DILLON, 328 N. WALNUT addressing the Board a second time on Emanuel Lutheran Church. Motion LeBlanc to allow three minutes; second Monteith; approved. In my job, I am intimately involved with school finance . I work on the state aid budget. I would like to take issue with the church saying it was saving the school district a half million dollars because they were educating 100 students that the School District did not have to educate. First, I don' t know if all 100 students are from the Lansing School District, but if they were all from one school, they might be saving a considerable amount of money. However, schools have to have buildings, custodians, teachers, and computers . So if there were two or three students from each of Lansing' s schools going to the Lutheran Church School, it would not save the Lansing School District a dime. Thank you very much. Floyd Wright requested a 20 minute recess so the Zoning and Ordinance Committee could have discussion. BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of October 20, 1992 Minutes . Minutes were not available for consideration. Committee Reports Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright, Chairman. The Zoning and Ordinance Committee met Thursday, November 12 at 3 : 30 p.m. , a change caused by the Veterans Day Holiday. Z-20-92, Allegan/Washtenaw/Pine/Walnut DM-3/F to G-1 This issue was tabled at the last Committee meeting and tonight we had more information so are able to remove it from the table and take action. This is a request initiated by Alan Tubbs, Director of the Department of Planning and Municipal Development, representing the City of Lansing, to rezone property in the block bound by Allegan, 9 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 10 Pine, Washtenaw and Walnut Streets , more specifically the Lansing Civic Center site, from "DM-3" Residential and "F" Commercial Districts to "G-1" Business District. The proposed change will allow for the development of office and/or retail uses . The site contains approximately 6 . 8 acres and includes that portion of vacated Chestnut Street. A motion was made in committee to approve the request and require the developer to submit a conceptual plan showing how the property might be redeveloped since the eventual removal of the Civic Center structure is intended. The motion was approved in committee. Mr. Wright moved that this request be approved subject to the stipulations of the Letter of Agreement between the Heart of the City Associates and the City of Lansing (see attachments as part of the agreement) . Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED Ms . Monteith moved to attach a statement from the Planning Board to Mr. Ferguson stating that the Planning Board is interested in redeveloping a healthy downtown. We recognize that a healthy downtown means people living downtown, and we would like to urge Mr. Ferguson to consider a multi-use building which would include apartments . That ' s a conceptual recommendation, but I feel the Planning Board is serving its citizens by making these recommendations to the developers . Chairman Horne observed that the recommendation cannot be included with the rezoning but could be included in the Board' s letter to Mr. Ferguson, emphasizing the City-Wide Goals and Objectives along that line. Mr. Goolsby supported the Ms . Monteith' s amendment; APPROVED Vote on the original motion as amended was by roll call . Yeas : Goolsby, Horne, LeBlanc, Monteith, Thelen, Wright, Barnhart; Nays : Witherspoon. Approval was by a vote of 7 yeas-1 nay; APPROVED SLU-16-92, 224 West North Street--Residential Care Facility This is a request by Reverend Jeff Pakone for approval of a special land use for property at 224 West North Street for the purpose of developing a residential care facility that would house up to ten ( 10) men, to be known as Lansing Teen Challenge. The property is zoned "A" Residential and measures 111 by 175 feet and contains 19,227 square feet. Development on the site consists of a residential type structure with an attached garage. The site fronts on West North Street and backs up to Reasoner Park, a public park. Development in the vicinity is predominantly single family 10 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 11 residential with home ownership. Planning Staff recommendation is for denial . Mr. Wright moved and Ms . Monteith supported that this request be denied; voice vote for denial DENIED LS-26-92 , Southwest Corner Northrup/Washington Avenue This is a request by Warren Tanner for approval of a lot division for the property located on the southwest corner of South Washington Avenue and Northrup Street. The division will create two ( 2) lots . The corner lot has a width of 71 feet and the interior lot has a width of 61 feet; however, each lot will only have 9.9 feet of depth, which is contrary to the Subdivision Control Regulations that require 100 feet of depth. The easterly part of the lot contains a residential structure. The westerly portion to be divided off will provide for the construction of a residential home. The property is zoned "A" Residential District. The Committee was satisfied, based on testimony and evidence that the proposed division will be in keeping with the general intent of the Master Plan and will promote development of the property consistent with development in the area. Therefore, Mr. Wright moved and Ms . Monteith supported approval of the lot split request. Voice vote by a 7 yeas, 1 nay vote; APPROVED Z-11-92 ; 1001 North Capitol Avenue, "J" to "C" This is a request by Theodore Reuschel, Trustee, representing the Emanuel First Evangelical Lutheran Church, to rezone property at 1001 North Capitol Avenue from "J" Parking to "C" Residential District. The portion of the property at this location to be rezoned measures 106 by 65 feet and contains approximately 6,890 square feet. The change Iof zoning will facilitate the expansion of an elementary school and the continued use of the balance of the property for off-street parking. The Committee was satisfied, based on testimony and evidence that the zoning change conforms to the Master Plan, and the plan illustrated shows more parking than currently exists, adequate for the proposed child care and school facility. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Ms . LeBlanc seconded; vote was by roll call as follows : Yeas : Monteith, Thelen, Witherspoon, Wright, Barnhart, Horne, LeBlanc, Nays : Goolsby. Approval was by a vote of 7 yeas-1 nay; APPROVED 11 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 12 SLU-11-92 , 1001 N. Capitol Ave, 1012, 1022-24 Seymour St. and 221 and 225 West Maple Street This is a request by Theodore Reuschel, representing Emanuel First Evangelical Lutheran Church, for approval of a special land use to allow the establishment of a child care facility to accommodate a maximum number of 75 children in the new educational facility to be constructed at 1001 North Capitol Avenue. In the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, it was moved to approve subject to : 1 . That this child care facility provide the Code required outdoor play space based upon the maximum occupancy of the facility. 2 . On-site parking be provided as required by Code that is exclusive of combined parking/recreational area for the elementary school . Approval was based upon subject to the above two conditions provided in the staff report. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Ms . Monteith seconded. The vote was 2 yeas, 6 nays, therefore motion was, DENIED Mr. Goolsby called for a roll call vote. Mr. Wright said it would be wise though not required to have a roll call vote on each item. Roll Call : Thelen, No; Witherspoon, No; Wright, Yes; Barnhart, No; Goolsby, No; Horne, Yes; LeBlanc, No; Monteith, No. SLU-12-92 , 1012/1022-24 Seymour Street and 221-225 W. Maple Street This is a request by Theodore Reuschel, representing Emanuel First Evangelical Lutheran Church, for approval of a special land use to allow for the development and the expansion of off-street parking for Emanuel First Evangelical Lutheran Church on property located at 1012 and 1022-1024 North Seymour Street and 221-225 West Maple Street. The property under consideration contains two residential structures fronting Maple Street, one fronting Seymour Street and one which is utilized as a day care center at the present time. All of these structure would be removed to facilitate the parking expansion. Mr. Wright remarked that it was the staff recommendation and also the Committee recommendation that the request be denied as filed because the Committee felt that parking should not be allowed in this area but that removal of structures should be permitted to 12 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 13 establish a green space as a playground for the school children. He asked for further clarification from Mr. Ruff. Mr. Ruff explained that the original request was to have parking all the way from 1012 , the current child care facility, to the intersection of Maple and Seymour. The original request showed the church building pushed farther into the existing parking lot. The revised request places the . building farther to the east, eliminating the interior courtyard play area originally proposed, and placing the play area and green space to the intersection, thus reducing the parking lot to include only from 1012 to 1022-24 , which is basically the existing parking lot from between those two structures . The proposed parking lot would be including those two structures, plus the rear portion of the property at 221 West Maple, where the garage currently stands . So there is parking in this area and this area, including the existing parking lot. The houses on Maple would be removed to make room for green space and playground and open space. The plan is not to code so there would be some changes but the houses would still be removed. Mr. Wright said the Committee recommends that the request be denied as filed but further recommends that a special land use for parking expansion be approved for the property known as 1012 North Seymour, 1022 and 1024 and that the rear south 42 feet of 221 West Maple with the following conditions : 1 . Landscape screening and buffering be installed in accordance with an approved site plan. 2 . Storm water detention be provided for in accordance with the requirements of the Public Service Department. Based upon these statements, the Committee recommends approval of this special land use based upon the content of the staff report. Motion by Mr. Wright, supported by Mr. Goolsby that this request be denied as filed but further recommends that a special land use for parking expansion be approved for the property known as 1012 North Seymour Street and 1022-24 North Seymour Street and the rear south 42 feet of 221 West Maple Street with the conditions as in the staff report. Mr. Wright requested a roll call on the motions . A yes vote is for denial . Mr. Wright moved and Mr. Goolsby supported that this request be denied as filed: Roll Call : Witherspoon, Yes; Wright, Yes; Barnhart, Yes; Goolsby, Yes; Horne, Yes; LeBlanc, Yes; Monteith, Yes; Thelen, Yes; UNANIMOUS; DENIED AS FILED Revised SLU-12-92 . A yes vote is for approval of green space. Roll Call : Witherspoon, No; Wright, Yes; Barnhart, No; Goolsby, 13 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 14 No; Horne, Yes; LeBlanc, No; Monteith, No; Thelen, No . Six nays; 2 yeas DENIED SLU-13-92 , 1026 North Capitol Ave and Vacant Parcel formerly known as 1022 N. Capitol Avenue This is a request by Theodore Reuschel, Trustee for the Emanuel First Evangelical Lutheran Church for approval of a special land use for the property at 1026 North Capitol Avenue and 1022 North Capitol for the purpose of developing an off-street surface parking lot at this location. The property measures 107 . 5 by 165 feet and contains approximately 17,737 square feet. One of the lots within this request is vacant; the other contains a residential home that would be removed to facilitate the proposed off-street parking expansion. The Committee had voted that this special land use request be denied with the understanding that the owner has the option to withdraw the application. If this is done, the Committee would consider the request to withdraw, however, the request would have to be made in writing. This has been done; Ms . Horne read the letter from Mr. Reuschel stating in part, Emanuel First Evangelical Lutheran Church would like to withdraw SLU-13-92 , 1022 and 1026 North Capitol Avenue. Our congregation will discontinue its attempts to use this property for parking. Thank you for your help and patience in working toward a solution which will be in the best interests of our community. Mr. Wright moved and Ms . LeBlanc supported that the request for withdrawal be accepted, and by a vote of 7 yeas, 1 nay it was; ACCEPTED Mr. Barnhart then made a motion and Ms . LeBlanc supported to deny SLU-13-92 be denied as filed. Mr. Wright called for a roll call vote, noting that a yes vote is a vote for denial . Roll Call : Wright, No; Barnhart, Yes; Goolsby, Yes; Horne, Yes; LeBlanc, Yes; Monteith, Yes; Thelen, Yes ; Witherspoon, Yes; by a vote of 7 yeas, 1 nay, approved to deny as filed APPROVED Z-9-91, 110 South Clifford Street C to J This is a request by Jerome O'Neil to rezone property at 110 South Clifford Street from "C" Residential to "J" Parking District for the purpose of utilizing the site, which measures 40 by 80 feet and contains approximately 3,200 square feet, for off street parking in conjunction with his business fronting on Michigan Avenue, commonly known as 1430 East Michigan Avenue. REMAINED TABLED 14 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 15 Next meeting of the Zoning and Ordinance Committee Wednesday, December 9 , 1992 at 2 : 30 in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby, Chairman Seven Block Development Plan Pages 43-46 contains the CDC ' s role and City' s role in this project for the next few years, and we have had public hearings and a lot of discussion on it. The Committee reviewed this plan last Tuesday and then again tonight before our regular meeting. Via separate letter, we will be addressing some of the issues in the document that we feel merit some change. For the most part we think it' s an improvement. We did inform representatives of the CDC about these changes . Essentially the changes are, if you recall last year, we voted to allow the removal of a pedestrian overpass over King/Logan with the understanding that there would be a study conducted, and perhaps it would be reinstalled at some point. The Committee felt circumstances had changed with commercial development in the area and we recommended reinstallation after study, the same as the Seven Block CDC recommended. Additionally, the CDC is recommended that this district be granted a community police officer. We don't disagree with the concept, if the City does not approve a community police officer, we would encourage police officers to live in the area. Mr. Goolsby recommends that the Planning Board approve the final draft plan for the Seven Block Area and the Financial Plan for submission to the Mayor and City Council . It is further recommended that the Plan be given immediate affect and, upon Council adoption, to keep the interest and momentum going with both the neighborhood and the Seven Block Committee. Ms . Witherspoon seconded; APPROVED Goals and Objectives This is the final draft by the UDC to the Board regarding Citywide Goals and Objectives . The process is for the Board to recommend the Goals and Objectives Statement to the Mayor and City Council . The Mayor and City Council should hold a public hearing and distribute these Goals and Objectives to all neighborhood organizations and business groups' in the community. Once the City Council adopts the Goals, the Planning Department can proceed with the revision to the Master Plan. A couple of last minute changes : air rights, and joint use of old buildings such as the School for the Blind police unit into the Public Service section. We are going to recommend in our letter to Council that this be reviewed and updated at least every ten years . 15 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 16 Mr. Goolsby moved for adoption of the Goals and Objectives for the City of Lansing and submit them to the Mayor and City Council for public review and adoption. Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED Annexation on Willoughby Road This is a request from the City Parks Department to consolidate their park land within the city limits . There is a 22 .4 acre parcel of land donated to the city by Rollie Stebbins in 1981 . The property is "L" shaped, has frontage on Willoughby Road, is vacant and is bordered on the south, east and north by the City of Lansing. The Committee recommended that the City annex the City-owned property located south of Willoughby Road, south of Miller Road and adjacent to Willoughby Park. Further, that Delhi Township and Ingham County be notified by the City. Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms . Witherspoon seconded; APPROVED Act-41-92 , Irvington Avenue--Alley Vacation This is a request by the City Assessor to vacate a city alley on Irvington Avenue, most of which is unimproved. The City has no plans to improve the alley, but there is a sewer line running along the alley centerline from Glenbrook to Irvington. It continues to be used for public utilities . Therefore, Mr. Goolsby moved for denial and Ms . LeBlanc supported; DENIED Act-39-92 , 2500 East Mt. Hope Ave.--Property Option This is a request by the City Parks Department to acquire an option to purchase or option of first refusal to purchase for the property at 2500 East Mt. Hope Avenue. The Fenner Arboretum borders the subject property on three sides and by obtaining an option, the City could guarantee preservation and environmental protection for the park. The Committee recommends that the City Parks Department be authorized to negotiate an option to purchase the property at 2500 East Mt. Hope Avenue for future use and incorporation with Fenner Arboretum Park. Mr. Goolsby so moved and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED Next meeting scheduled for Thursday, December 10, 1992 at 4 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room Report from Planning Director 16 PLANNING BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1992 PAGE 17 I would like to say goodbye to two close friends, Mr. Spackman and Mr. Fountain, who are leaving city employment and going on to better things this Friday, and I would like to thank you both for your loyalty, support and dedication to this community. Two finer professionals I have never had the opportunity to work with and am sure I never will again. Comments from Chairperson We have an excellent staff and an dedicated board which is incomparable. Thank you, board members, for your excellent and professional work and our hard working staff members . Retirement is exciting and challenging. Board Member Comments Adjournment Respectfully submitted, James N. Foulds, Director Lansing Planning Division WC 17 Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7 : 30 City Council Chambers loth Floor, Lansing City Wednesday, November 4 , 1992 The Chairperson, Emly Horne, called the meeting to order at 7 : 30 p.m. with eight members present: Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, LeBlanc, Monteith, Thelen, Witherspoon, Wright Staff in Attendance: Vern Fountain, Zoning Administrator, and Donna Wynant PUBLIC HEARINGS: Z-20-92 , Allegan/Washtenaw/Pine/Walnut--Civic Center DM-3 and F to G-1 Presented by Mr. Fountain. This is a request initiated by the City of Lansing to rezone the block bound by Allegan, Pine, Washtenaw and Walnut Streets, which is currently occupied by the Lansing Civic Center and the off street parking lot, for the purpose of changing the zoning of that property from 11DM-3" Residential and "F" Commercial to "G-1" Business District. The eventual use of that land would be for office use. The property itself contains approximately 6 . 8 acres and the sketches in your book indicate the surrounding land use, which is predominantly state office buildings . REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE SLU-16-92, 224 West North Street--Residential Care Facility Presented by Donna Wynant, Senior Planner. This is a request by Reverend Jeffrey Pakone to establish a residential care facility for 8 to 10 male residents sponsored by Lansing Teen Challenge. The location is 224 West North Street and is zoned "A" . Residential single family. The surrounding properties include single family to the east and west; to the north is Reasoner Park. The property is about one-half acre in size. Mr. Goolsby remarked upon reading the correspondence of interested people, there are really four questions : 1. The clients ' ages; 2 . Existence of fire exits; 3 . Adequate property size size with adequate bedroom and bathroom facilities; 4 . Available on-site parking or street parking, and also determination of parking needs . PLANNING BOARD MINUTES NOVEMBER 4, 1992 PAGE 2 Ms . Wynant added, we received numerous communications on this proposal. Reverend Pakone held a meeting at the house at 224 West North Street this past Monday night. Information was given at that meeting as well . In response to the questions; the ages are 17 to 40 . The structure itself will be housing and building code issues, as are fire exits, which I think will be addressed later. Parking arrangement--only resident cars and potentially three to four staff would be allowed at the facility. There is a garage with two parking spaces and a "T" turnaround shown on your site plan for maneuvering. Ms . Wynant added that to the best of our knowledge there is no other facility of this type or of this size within 1500 feet. Ms . Monteith questioned, why are these men in this facility? Ms . Wynant said this is an induction center where people are taken into the program. The inductees stay for 30 days and then are sent to facilities in other cities for longer-term residential care. They are people with life controlling problems; alcohol and drug addiction. I would defer to Mr. Pakone on these questions . REVEREND JEFF PAKONE, 1825 Peppertree Lane. I have a copy of our brochure, a basic outline about the supervision, property values, location concerns, purpose and use of our program, and rules . The person who would be living there full time as house supervisor and I met with the neighborhood community at 224 West North, and they had opportunity to ask questions . Lansing Teen Challenge is a nonprofit, Christian ministry for men from ages 17 to 40 . We are not a drug rehab center, nor a homeless shelter, nor a halfway house . We are a Christian growth and development center. Our clients have to see a need in their own life for change. Our rules are very strict; we do not allow smoking or cursing. Use of drugs, alcohol or cigarettes is cause for dismissal . We will have two or three live-in staff and six to eight students as clients . We have several volunteers working with us currently. Our daily schedule includes wakeup at 6 a.m. , then study and work assignments throughout the day, activities in the evening, and bedtime at 10 p.m. These men are supervised 24 hours a day, and they have a schedule. The lot and site plan show a two car garage and two parking spaces on a concrete slab and a gravel turnaround. The space in the garage would be for parking our Teen Challenge vehicle overnnight. It is basically a one year program; almost like a Bible institute. All the Teen Challenges within the State of Michigan work together, and they are all under the umbrella of the Assemblies of God. No meetings will take place with large numbers of people not living at the center. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES NOVEMBER 4, 1992 PAGE 3 Ms . Witherspoon, expressing a concern about the four parking spaces, asked if the students are allowed to have visitors . Rev. Pakone explained the Teen Challenge visitation policy. Within the first three weeks, no visits are allowed; clients will not be there long enough to receive visitors . Clients will be allowed one phone call after the three-week period when they would be transferred elsewhere. Mr. Thelen asked about the size of the structure, because it would be crowded with eight to ten people. Rev. Pakone had room dimensions from the realtor; he agreed to provide a copy for the Board. Rev. Pakone previously checked with the Housing Code regarding numbers of persons per structure and square footage per bedroom. We do meet the criteria. The 8-10 figure includes staff members . Ten would be the top figure. Ms . Horne asked, regarding the intake program, is the screening process followed by a referral either to Detroit or Muskegon? Rev. Pakone said yes . Ms . Horne asked when a new group arrives, where will the volunteers park, plus your staff, yourself, and possibly one or two others? Rev. Pakone said he did not foresee that many vehicles . The ministry has only one vehicle, a passenger van holding nine persons; he owns one vehicle. The staff has none. Even if two other vehicles were there, two visitors could park and still only four cars would be there. Chairman Horne called for audience comment. AL SCHIABLE, 2401 Delta River Drive. I am a life-long resident of Lansing. I grew up in the area; have lived there all my life, used Reasoner Park, and have owned businesses in the area for the last 25 years . I own a business at 5245 North Grand River Avenue across the street from a LASER project for teenage offenders . On any given day last week, there were three police cars cruising the LASER project parking lot. The traffic problem of people coming and going has not helped my business nor my neighborhood. I have had one car stolen by LASER residents, and problems with vandalism. Regarding this petition, it supposedly is not a half-way house; it is not a drug rehabilitation center. But it is going to have people coming and going. The clients will have problems with drugs , or alcohol or are ex-prisoners . The building at 224 W. North Street is a residence designed for residential occupancy. Parking is a problem because there is no parking on the street. Regarding Reasoner Park, supposedly they will .be supervised in the park. If they need supervision in the park, what kind of people are they? What about children in the park? Regarding property values, my property has not increased in value with LASER across the street. I have had a chance to sell, but when prospective buyers found out about LASER, they don't want to move there. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES NOVEMBER 4, 1992 PAGE 4 BILL BLACK, 203 West North Street. I have lived there for about ten years, almost directly across the street . When the house was up for sale, my wife and I looked at it with the idea of moving there with our two small children. The house does have four bedrooms, but they are small . Regarding property values, the house was on the market for $65, 000 and the price has now dropped to $50, 000 . What will these men do all day long and how will the staff keep them occupied in free time? Only a fence separates the back yard from the park. The back yard is the park. What is the success rate of the program? If the program is on-going and half of them don't make it all the way through, people will be coming and going at different stages; there will be a succession of people. If they don't get visitors for the first three weeks, there is always going to be somebody in their fourth week, so there will always be more visitors coming. RICHARD LOTT, Walnut Neighborhood Organization. I live at 1107 N. Capitol Avenue. They said they are located in Lansing now, but where in Lansing? What kind of program will be run there? What is the success rate? Is it comparable to other programs that are similar to this? How will the neighborhood be protected? Have other neighborhoods where these programs are located had any problems? What kind of problems will the residents have? What is basic "confrontational evangelism" (quoting from literature) ? If this is basic, is there an advanced form? How many programs are already in the area? What is the church connection of Teen Challenge, because the same church, the Assemblies of God, is attempting to buy a church on the corner of Seymour and Saginaw. Are they creating their own need for their services in the neighborhood? Walnut St. School uses Reasoner Park for special activities, picnics . In addition to being used by the neighborhood, we would have a concern with our school children being there, separated by a thin fence. How many of these houses are next to their church or the home of the Reverend himself? DR. BILL CASKEY, 900 Long Blvd. , #353 . I am a member of the Board of Directors of Teen Challenge and serve as secretary to the organization. I have been a short-term house supervisor. This program will house young men with life-controlling problems, for a period up to thirty days . Our program is one of discipline and supervision. We emphasize that because we find that the attribute most lacking in clients is discipline in their own lives . That is the primary reason why we supervise the men 24 hours a day, not to see what they are doing, or to control behavior but for feedback on their need to develop more discipline in their lives . The best analogy for this program would be military boot camp. The schedule is rigid, from morning to night. Camaraderie develops with each student helping others, and that reduces the overall need for PLANNING BOARD MINUTES NOVEMBER 4, 1992 PAGE 5 supervision. We do not allow loitering or hanging out. Our rules are strict. Regarding LASER, U.S . Dept . of Health statistics show that such secular programs have a 25 to less than 50 percent success rate. Teen Challenge is a network of over 110 centers in the U. S . , and a Department of Health survey of student graduates of the program, measured five years after program completion, showed an 86 percent success rate. It is the highest of any program. We receive no funds, except contributions by churches and interested individuals, and no state or city funding. We focus on students who want help. An often-overlooked benefit of full residency in the program is a slate of chores to instill a work ethic within them. We also make these young men available in the neighborhood for people who are unable to shovel their own walks, rake or mow grass . It is a benefit to the local community and provides an opportunity for the men to help out their neighbors, and it is part of Christian maturity. Mr. Wright asked if a Teen Challenge center is currently located in Lansing. Dr. Caskey said it is at 430 Pearl Street in a rented house . We operated on Willow Street for four years . Chairman Horne asked if there were any criminal offenses on the part of the clients--drugs, alcohol, probation? People come to Teen Challenge because it is a viable option to probation. The clients come from the whole spectrum of society. Chairman Horne confirmed that struggling in life might mean all the problems a young person might encounter in life. Regarding scheduling, the clients adhere to a rigid regimen that schedules all their waking hours . Chairman Horne confirmed that no problems occurred with the Pearl Street neighborhood and that at present, Lansing functions as an intake center for clients to be referred to other locations in the state. Right now, only 2 staff are in residence. DAVE NICLELSEN, Combined Van Lines , United Van Lines, 1900 North Washington St. , directly across Reasoner Park from the property in question, warehouse business in the 1900 block of North Washington for military personnel baggage and household goods . I have a question regarding supervision of house occupants between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. Will there be security regarding people coming or leaving during that nighttime period? The second question pertains to the training of the staffers, and how well they are prepared to handle that many people. MARY PATENGE, 126 West North Street. The neighborhood consists of a very few streets and we worked very hard to clean it up. I think this is an insult to our clean-up work. People with these problems should not be this small residential area. Chairman Horne asked about staff supervision. Rev. Pakone replied, regarding the 10 p.m.-6 a.m. period the staff is there; each staff person is allowed one evening away from the facility. We have a PLANNING BOARD MINUTES NOVEMBER 4, 1992 PAGE 6 rotating shift. Someone is always on call. Residents leave bedroom doors open during the night. Rev. Pakone gave the experience, education and training background of the staff and supervisors . GEORGE WALT, 228 WEST NORTH STREET. I live next door. I appreciate the information provided by Rev. Pakone; the rules are the strictest I ever saw. Are these people guilty of violent crimes--assault, robbery, etc. ? Rev. Pakone said Teen Challenge would not be an alternative used by the courts for habitual perpetrators of violent crimes . These people would be first-time offenders . They would not be violent. Sometimes they are in the one-year Teen Challenge program longer than they would be in jail if they were incarcerated. We also have the opportunity of rejecting unfit referrals . LYNN MARTINEZ, . 1119 N. WALNUT. There is a large and growing network of people trying to provide alternatives to incarceration. Most of them are monitored by public agencies, state or city. Who is responsible if anything goes wrong with the program? Who is supervising the program and making sure it is working right? Are the referrals from Lansing? It seems like they are going to places in Muskegon or Detroit. How are they ending up in Lansing if they are bound for Muskegon or Detroit? Rev. Pakone said Lansing is a pre-induction center helping people from Lansing or in the Tri- County area. They start in Lansing and go either to Muskegon or Detroit to finish the full year term program. Detroit has a waiting list. We can help with that process, getting them on the waiting list and housing them for a month. We are accountable to Assemblies of God Michigan District in Dearborn. We are part of a national network. Each Teen Challenge is autonomous but yet it is a cooperative fellowship in that we are under authority of a district. Each particular state has a district. We fall under the immediate supervision of the Presbytery of the Michigan District in Dearborn. The national office is in Springfield, Missouri . If we accept a court referral, we are under the jurisdiction of the referring judge, and we have to report. We have a reputation to maintain. Teen Challenge has been in existence since 1958 and is now international in scope. PAUL SCOTT, 412 West Kilborn. I am a member of the Board of Directors of North Lansing Community Association. I must inform you that the letter from Mrs . Osteen represents her own views . This is not a matter that was voted on by the Board or the membership. Chairman Horne reviewed communications received: Letters in support from Sigurd C. Langenberg, 8438 West Willow Highway, Grand Ledge; from LaClaire G. Bouknight, MD; Ms . Thelma Osteen, President, North Lansing Community Association, 313 East Grand River Avenue; Delta Charter Township. Letters in opposition PLANNING BOARD MINUTES NOVEMBER 4, 1992 PAGE 7 Cameilia Hart, 1718 North Capitol; Darlene A. Kittle; Ellen Woodcock, 105 East Dwight, on behalf of her brother, Floyd Fergason; Maxine M. Howe, 1715 North Capitol Avenue; John and Mary Patenge, 126 West North Street; Dora E. Walt, 228 North Street; Bill Jenkins, 216 East Dwight St. ; Patricia Troub, 119 East Dwight Street; Jack Gunther, 211 Black Court; Frank McLean and Roderick McLean. Also have a petition with 47 names . REFERRED TO THE ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE. LS-26-92 , Southwest Corner Northrup/Washington Avenue This is a lot split request by Warren Tanner for property located on the immediate southwest corner of Northrup and South Washington Avenue. Both properties will meet the minimum width requirements; however, the depth requirement on a new lot is a minimum of 100 feet. The lot he intends to split off (Parcel B) would be divided, and the 61 feet will be for single family homes . The corner lot will be 71 feet wide, and the interior lot will be 61 feet. On a corner, the minimum lot size is 70; on an interior lot it has to be at least 60 feet. So the frontage is maintained. However, the depth has to maintain at least 100 feet. WARREN TANNER, petitioner, 11900 West Holt Road, Dimondale, representing Tanner Construction, Incorporated. I purchased this land about a year ago. The house at 5600 South Washington was in terrible shape and didn't meet building safety requirements of the city. Therefore, I did remodel the house inside and out, and it now has an appraisal of $38,000 . I provide several housing units for lower income residents of the City of Lansing and intend to continue that practice. I would like to move in a small house on Parcel B, which is 61 feet wide--one foot short in depth. We plan to construct a small three bedroom ranch 24 by 40 feet, but no garage, that would front Northrup Street and go 40 feet back. I request approval on this lot split to allow me to build a house on Parcel B. Thank you very much. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE There were no comments from the Audience this evening. BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes : Ms . Witherspoon moved to approve the minutes of October 6, 1992 and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED PLANNING BOARD MINUTES NOVEMBER 4, 1992 PAGE 8 Committee Reports : Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright, Chairman, explained that the next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, November 12, 1992 because the usual Wednesday is the Veterans Day Holiday for City staff. The time will be changed to 3 : 30 p.m. and this is held in the Planning Division Conference Room. The Board concurred. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby, Chairman, reported the next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, November 10, 1992 at 4 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Board Member Comments Helen LeBlanc requested an excused absence from the January 5, 1993 meeting. Adjournment: The regular meeting of November 4, 1992 adjourned at 9 :25 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Eleanor Love for James N. Foulds, Director Lansing Planning Division WC Regular Meeting L LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers 10th Floor, Lansing City Hall October 20, 1992 Emly Horne, Chairman, convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with seven members present: Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, LeBlanc, Thelen, Witherspoon, Wright Excused Absence: It was moved by Ms. LeBlanc, supported by Ms. Witherspoon to excused Beth Monteith. Staff in Attendance: Foulds, Fountain, Spackman Agenda stands as printed. There are no public hearings to be held this evening. Comments from the Audience: MARY CLARK, 223 South Eighth Street, regarding the several Sparrow proposals under Zoning and Urban Development. I have serious concerns about both the resolutions that came out of committee and what's being proposed. The concept resolution approved the campus-like development. I do not know the extent of what that means. Some phases of this concept could have massive negative impacts on Pattengill, Eastern and Bingham. My concern is someone will come back five years from now and say this was approved. I would like some clarification of what you are approving before you approve it. In terms of the overhead walkway, I understand that is a solution for Sparrow's circulation problems and certainly makes sense in terms of their development. My concern is still, how are the children getting back and forth to school, particularly the Bingham children. My secondary concern is that if you look at the old pictures of Michigan Avenue when the trolley cars were running, Michigan Avenue was incredibly ugly. I am concerned that an overhead walkway will set a precedent for additional intrusion into that air space. I see it as having a negative aesthetic impact. In terms of the rezoning, I see it as logical whether you decide on F-1 or DM-4. That would bring it into a more reasonable designation. Once that designation is given, I assume the property owner will be able to develop anything on that parcel that is in keeping with the Code, whether it is in keeping with the concept or not. As a Planning Board or City we may be approving a concept that's having negative impact on surrounding property or land uses. If the development occurs as presented without some real attention paid to the circulation on Jerome Street in particular, I see it creating a massive problem around those schools. This may cause problems without trying to resolve them first. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 2 MARY MARGARET WOLL, President, Eastside Neighborhood Organization. I agree with what was just said, but have an additional concern in the fragmentation of the acceptance of the plan of Sparrow. Talk has been of the whole concept. I am extremely concerned about the crossing of Michigan Avenue and I don't consider that removing lights is going to solve anything for children. The pedway is a specific use. I don't think anyone ever saw it as helping children cross the street. With the amount of territory Bingham School serves, they deserve every consideration. RICHARD LOTT, Walnut Neighborhood Organization. I would like to address the Emanuel Lutheran Church issues; Z-11-92, SLU-11-92, SLU-12-92, SLU-13-92. We ask for support of our neighborhood in a way which does not demolish houses, damage trees that are as old as the church, create large parking lots that lower property values around them and vastly change the character of the residential neighborhood. We urge you to remember that the Master Plan, the Willow-Pine study and the City Planning staff recommend maintaining the residential character of the neighborhood. The church is out of compliance now; grandfathered in. We ask you to remember the last time this Board encouraged an out of compliance business to become even more out of compliance. We feel the Board's job is to make sure the church complies with zoning, not circumvent it. We are tax paying residents of the City of Lansing, working hard in our own neighborhood to make it a better place to live. We feel we have the right to have the character of our neighborhood protected, not abused. Thank you. JOHN MEYER, Architect for Emanuel Lutheran School and Church. I would like to make a brief presentation for the Board. (Charts were presented.) We have requested four different items; one is a rezoning of a parcel that is currently parking lot that is "J" zoning. We have requested that be changed to a "C" zoning. We are requesting that the special land use be allowed for the day care that is currently in a residence on Seymour Street, to be located in the existing school/church building and that we be allowed to develop parking along Seymour Street all the way up to Maple. Fourth is the development of a parking lot on the east side of Capitol Avenue. After meeting with the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, we have tonight a compromise plan. 1) Withdraw the request for parking, the SLU-13 on the east side of Capitol Avenue. 2) Continue to desire the change in zoning on the present parcel zoned "J" changing that to "C" which allows us to build a school facility on that property through special use. 3) We ask that the special land use for the day care be granted. Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 3 The only one that is different than what was discussed and recommended by the Planning staff is, we ask that the parking special land use be allowed to extend to the one residence on Seymour Street north of the present parking lot. That allows us to gain fifteen (15) additional parking spaces and allows us to have on site playground area. We meet all other requirements placed as caveats on the staff recommendations and those adopted by the Zoning Committee. We are showing green area to the north of the parking. It would probably be appropriate if this was tabled to allow staff time for more consideration. We have made significant compromises in this plan. We would withdraw the rezoning request for the east side of Capitol Avenue. Thank you. LYNN O'CONNOR, 1101 North Capitol. You need to hear the word "neighborhood." I am concerned that it keeps getting lost in the shuffle. For people to want to stay, there has to be a mutual contribution from neighbors, businesses, churches-- everybody. Presently the church is not making a 'mutual' ,contribution. The parking lot variance granted the church 20 years ago for screening and buffering has never been done and the lot was surfaced right to the sidewalk, which is another violation. They don't honor what they agreed to. There is not room for the church to expand in that neighborhood. Houses and trees will have to be torn down. I urge you to give serious consideration to the fact that the church probably needs to look some place else to do their expansion. There just is not room on Capitol Avenue. Thank you. ALEX CRUSEL, 1027 Seymour Street. With the new compromise projected and the prospect of tabling these items, I am concerned about being informed when the new documentation and plan is to be prepared and that I, as a resident, be given an opportunity to see the plans however they are presented to the Committee and Board so I can have input. In the past there was only communication through the Walnut Neighborhood Association. Thank you. Ms. Horne suggested, at any time you may call the Planning Division at 483-4066 to ask for the status of pending items. Also it is the first and third Tuesdays that we have our public meetings and the second week on Wednesdays we have Zoning and Ordinance Committee. If you will call in, we can give you that information. PAUL M. SCOTT, 412 West Kilborn. I am pleased to hear the word compromise. I continue to be concerned about what happens with the property on the east side of North Capitol. Also that any type of parking lot or other development other than of a residential character will have the effect of busting that block. I do not want to see the type of development that has crawled up North Washington to crawl up North Capitol. Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 4 I would also like to speak on the Sparrow overpass. I believe the third floor is too low. They must consider a fourth or fifth floor so a view of the Capitol is not impeded. Thank you very much. BUSINESS SESSION: Committee Reports Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright, Chairman SLU-15-92, 2613 Hillcrest Street--Parking - The applicant wishes to construct off street parking on the property. The City of Lansing assisted the Cooperative in purchasing and removing the buildings at 2613 Hillcrest with the goal of providing parking. The request was made by Joan DeRose, resident manager for the Colonial Townhouses Cooperative, Inc. , of 2202 South Wadsworth Drive, Lansing, Michigan, for a Special Land Use to allow the construction of a surface parking lot containing 13 parking spaces on property formerly known as 2613 Hillcrest Street. The property is zoned "A" Residential, measures 61 feet by 111 feet and contains 6,771 square feet of lot area. The structures at 2613 Hillcrest have been removed because of poor soil conditions. The Committee, found, based on testimony and evidence, that the Special Land Use request would be in substantial conformance with the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan and would be consistent with the intent and purposes of the Zoning Code. The Site Development Plans include appropriate and conforming setbacks, landscape screening and buffering, as well as site drainage. Excess ingress and egress is from an existing driveway for the townhouse property. In making their decision, the Committee considered the following: 1. Is the special land use designed, constructed, operated and maintained in a manner harmonious with the character of adjacent property and the surrounding use? 2. Will the proposed special land use change the essential character of the surrounding property? 3. Will the proposed special land use interfere with the general enjoyment of adjacent property? 4. Will the special land use represent an improvement to the use or character of the subject property and the surrounding area in general, and will the use be in keeping with the natural environment of the lot? Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 5 5. Will the special land use be hazardous to adjacent properties or involve uses, activities, materials or equipment which are detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of persons or property through the excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, odor, fumes or glare? 6. Can the special land use be adequately served by essential public services and facilities or is it demonstrated that the person responsible for the proposed special land use is able to continually provide adequately for the services and facilities deemed essential to the special land use under consideration? 7. Will the special land use place demands on public services and facilities in excess of current capacity? 8. Is the special land use consistent with the intent and purpose of the zoning code and the objectives of the current comprehensive plan? 9. Will the special land use meet the dimensional requirements of the district in which the property is located? Mr. Wright moved that the special land use request be approved and Ms. LeBlanc supported; APPROVED Z-18-92, 1100-1106 West Ionia Street B to D-2 This is a request by Fred Johnson to rezone property at 1100-1106 West Ionia Street from "B" Residential District to "D-2" Residential/Office District. The property is currently developed with a building that was formerly used as a convenience/retail market, built in 1918, and has more recently been used for residential purposes. The property lost its nonconforming Class B status in the mid 1900s when it was vacant for several years. It is presently used as a single family dwelling. The property measures 68 by 66 feet and contains 4,488 square feet of lot area. Approval of the request would allow the petitioner to develop the first floor of the existing structure into office use and the second floor into a three bedroom apartment. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the rezoning would not be in keeping with the surrounding land uses; would not be in keeping with the adopted Master Plan; would cause the property to become nonconforming, therefore, limiting its future maintenance; would substantially exceed lot coverage limitations that would produce overdevelopment of the site; would not be aesthetically in keeping with the general visual environment; and would, lastly, set a negative precedent for future land use patterns on the west side of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd./Logan Street. Mr. Wright moved for denial of the request as filed and Ms. LeBlanc seconded; DENIED Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 6 Z-19-92, 1222 E. Michigan Ave. DM-3/D-1/F/F-1 & J to F-1 This is a request by Sparrow Hospital Association, represented by William Vincent, to rezone the property in the block bounded by Michigan Avenue, Holmes Street, Eureka Street, and Jones Street to "F-1" Commercial District for the purpose of developing the land within this block with a five-level parking facility and a building for ambulatory care patients that will include physicians' offices on the upper level. The proposal for this block is Phase I of the five to six year development plan for Sparrow Hospital. The development of this block is proposed to be integrated with the existing hospital facility north of Michigan Avenue by connecting the two with a pedway extended over Michigan Avenue. The rezoning request, if approved,'will facilitate the development of Phase I of the proposed hospital expansion. The property is irregular in shape and contains all of the property bounded by the streets stated above with the exception of the FISCA gas station property. The Committee's recommendation was to deny the petition as filed for the "F-1" zoning and instead recommend the zoning be to a "DM-4" Residential District. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the "DM-4" Residential District would allow hospital expansion, as proposed, and at the same time allow greater control of the land use intensity within this block, secondly, that it would allow for the development of building heights, as proposed, without seeking a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals, and thirdly, that it would require increased building setbacks, especially in those areas where there are low intensity residential uses adjacent to the property. Further, the Committee found that the "DM-4" Residential District is the more appropriate zoning district for the implementation of this development plan since it is specifically spelled out in the Planning and Zoning Code, where hospitals are first intended to be permitted in the district by special condition. This district also more appropriately satisfies the dimensional requirements for Sparrow's expansion plans in regard to setbacks, building heights, and use requirements. Additionally, and to further satisfy 'some of the concerns expressed by residents in the area, the Committee recommended that a Site Coordination Committee be established of any interested party from the neighborhood or the businesses along Michigan Avenue, the school district, and any others, to help in the development of the plans for the specific buildings and the sites in an effort to satisfy the needs of the hospital expansion while not overlooking the concerns of the area that they will be placed. Mr. Wright moved to deny this request as filed; but that a zoning substitution to include the "DM-4" Residential District be approved. Ms. LeBlanc seconded and discussion followed. Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 7 Mr. Foulds responded to Ms. Clark's question, what the Board is approving in terms of zoning. What is before the Board is to establish a 11DM-4" District which permits the hospital as a principle permitted use in that district and all uses associated with the hospital. That means all uses in 11DM-4" are permitted within that district with certain conditions, which are; prior to the time of a building permit being issued by the City of Lansing, a site plan process must be applied and all agencies and organizations which will have a review of this proposal will have a chance to make their comments back'to the City. Those comments will be incorporated as either legally required or reasonably added to the proposal. We will go through that requirement. That is in place in the Ordinance to address the very concerns that you raised dealing with circulation, pedestrian movement, landscaping, building setbacks, etc. I firmly believe we have a process in place that can address those issues as as they deal with the zoning that is currently on the table. Secondly, to allow this proposal to proceed as conceptually proposed, other approvals are needed; such-as, closure of the street--whether Jerome or Jones-- those proposals must come back before this Board in the form of another Act 285 for a review. Additional appeals may be necessary to implement the plan as proposed by Sparrow Hospital. This begins the process for the municipality to start its review of the proposals and insure that all rules, regulations and principles of good design are followed. The last issue is the establishment of the site coordination committee, which is directly aimed at getting at all the issues you raised in terms of the School District, the neighborhood issue, users of the area so that we can, if we miss something in the initial reviews, pick them up in a general lay review of the public proposals and provide input in the process. I feel comfortable, as far as the zoning is concerned, that we have a process in place that will address the concerns you raised, which are all legitimate concerns. Mr. Goolsby: What is the legal responsibility once we rezone the property? Does Sparrow have to participate or is this more for input into the city so the individuals considering street closures, impact on Bingham and such, more what this site committee is designed to address? Mr. Foulds: It is designed to address the latter. It is not legally required. We cannot attach conditions to the zoning and this is certainly a condition. It is something I'm sure Sparrow will gladly participate in, as they've worked with us on other expansion plans. It is aimed at addressing the issues you just described and that I explained, but it is not legally required. It's a sensible, reasonable approach to solving problems that will arise from this enormous expansion. Mr. Goolsby: Have we received any comment from the school system? Mr. Foulds: As far as the zoning is concerned, it is probably difficult for them to respond in any constructive way until we can all sit around the table and they can Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 8 begin to see exactly where the building footprint is going to be and what type of screening is proposed. That's exactly why we are setting up this coordination committee. As a staff, we wouldn't approve a building permit for this project without having something signed, sealed and delivered from the School District on this project, I assure you. Mr. Wright: How will the site selection committee be implemented? Foulds: It would be implemented through appropriate staff, I would think through this Department, and staff would be support to that committee. Horne: I have concerns regarding this zoning issue and am the one who voted nay. I still feel that we have always spoken to Sparrow Hospital expanding to the west. Motion restated, moved by Mr. Wright and seconded by Ms. LeBlanc that this request be denied as filed, and instead be rezoned to 11DM-4" Residential District; DENIED AS FILED APPROVED FOR DM-4 ZONING NCU-10-92, 901 East Oakland Avenue This is a request by Richard Speirs, owner of the property at 901 East Oakland Avenue, for Class "A" Nonconforming Status for the residential structure that is located in the "H" Light Industrial District. The existing two-family dwelling has been damaged by fire and the applicant wishes to repair the structure, but the repair costs exceed the 35 0; therefore, the Class "A" status is required. The property is 34.33 feet by 135 feet and contains approximately 4,634 square feet in area. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the residential use restored will have the least impact on adjacent properties, meet minimum parking standards, and have no adverse impact on the environment. The Committee recommended if the Class "A" request is approved, that the work must be completed within a twelve (12) month period from the date of approval, in compliance with all applicable zoning and building codes. If the improvements are not completed within the twelve month time period, the Class "A" would then be subject to revocation. Mr. Wright moved to approve this request and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 9 Z-11-92, 1001 North Capitol Avenue J to C SLU-11-9211 1001 N. Capitol Ave, 1012, 1022-24 Seymour St. and 221 and 225 West Maple Street SLU-12-92, 1012, 1022-24 Seymour St, 221 and 225 W. Maple St. SLU-13-92, 1026 N. Capitol Ave and Vacant Parcel formerly known as 1022 N. Capitol Avenue HELD IN COMMITTEE Z-5-92, 118, 122, 124-126 N. Eighth St. DM-3 to J This is a request by Sparrow Hospital, represented by William Vincent to rezone the properties at 118, 122, 124, and 126 North Eighth Street from 11DM-3" Residential District to "J" Parking District to allow the construction of a surface parking lot following the removal of the vacant residential structures. The property, in total, measures 66 by 165 feet, is rectangular in shape and contains 10,890 square feet of lot area. The parking lot would be used by employees and customers of the Sparrow Medical Supply Company, as well as the Pain Clinic, which is located in an adjacent building. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the change in zoning would be consistent with the policies and goals for hospital expansion to the west.of the main campus even though the Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan recognized the existing residential uses. The Committee further found that the additional 27 spaces would allow the building which they serve to meet all of the parking requirements without relying upon the shuttle parking that has been established by Sparrow Hospital. Mr. Wright moved for approval with the understanding that all necessary steps will be taken to integrate the proposed development with the existing land use development of the neighborhood and that this shall be accomplished in such a manner to least affect the established land uses. Mr. Barnhart supported. Mr. Thelen: There are a number of items on this issue that I have questions about. The change to the essential character of the neighborhood will be impacted in a negative way. I also feel that surrounding land use will not be compatible and is not in conformance with the Master Plan because that area was for residential use. When you tear out one block face of houses, that will change the character of the neighborhood and that's a strong point with me. Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 10 They bought up houses a couple of years ago and tore them down, so the character has already changed. I will be voting for this zoning because it was agreed by Sparrow Hospital and the Neighborhood Organization that the best use of that land and area would be to the west of Pennsylvania Avenue because of that impact being less than going to the east. That is the only reason I will be voting positively on this. Ms. Horne: I agree that it is only because of the agreement. Mr. Goolsby: I would vote no on this tonight, except for the agreement. Ms. LeBlanc: I also agree. Mr. Barnhart: When this first came before us in public hearing, I was opposed to the concept of putting a parking lot in the neighborhood because it was not consistent with some of our other decisions from not too long ago. But during public hearing the Neighborhood Association said they did not have a problem with it. We're left with what people will contend with in their environment. Therefore, I will not vote against it. Mr. Wright: I would like to clarify that the expansion we are talking about at this time is not hospital expansion. This parking is for operations not directly related to the hospital; not essential to the hospital. They are; a weight management center, child care center, a pain center and durable medical equipment center, a tissue bank and a storage area in the old State Library building--old John Deere corporate office at one time. So these items are not directly connected to the hospital. Ms. Witherspoon: I'm glad Mr. Wright cleared this up and I appreciate comments from other Board members to better understand this issue. Ms. Horne: We do need to have the buffering and screening. Motion restated; APPROVED Z-9-92, N. of 2505 E. Kalamazoo St. B to F The Planning Division received a letter from the petitioner for this case, Jack Schafer for Farmington Auto Wash, Incorporated, withdrawing his request for rezoning. The rezoning request was not initiated for the purpose of adding on to the structure but only to unify the zoning of the property that was owned by the same company. Mr. Wright moved to accept withdrawal of this petition, Mr. Thelen supported; WITHDRAWN Next meeting Thursday, November 12, 1992 at 3:30 in the Planning Division Conference Room Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 11 Urban Development Committee:. Garry Goolsby, Chairman Sparrow Hospital Concept Plan Jim Spackman made a presentation of the Sparrow Hospital Development Plan to the Committee and stated a report will be included with the staff report highlighting the Concept Plan and the impacts on circulation, neighborhood and school. Concerns raised about the concept and future development included: 1) How school kids would travel from the Vine Street area to Bingham School. 2) Parking structures and having large buildings on three sides of Bingham School. 3) Parking decks are not a good transition between the hospital and residential neighborhood. 4) Traffic circulation involving Jerome and Jones Streets, as well as Michigan and Pennsylvania. Mr. Goolsby moved that the Sparrow Hospital Development Concept Plan be endorsed by the Board with the notation of the above described concerns for the Site Coordination Committee's consideration, and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED Act-8-92, Pedestrian Overpass, 1200 Blk E. Michigan Ave This is a request by Sparrow Hospital to construct a pedestrian overpass in the 1200 block of East Michigan Avenue to connect the facilities on the north and south sides of Michigan Avenue. Staff recommends that the City of Lansing grant permission to use air rights over Michigan Avenue only for significant public benefit. Given the historic nature of this gateway approach to the Capitol complex, utilization of this air space only be permitted if three threshold requirements are met: 1) If benefits can accrue directly to individual residents of the community and region who use the proposed facilities. 2) If benefits can collectively accrue to the community within which it is constructed. 3) There exists no other reasonable option for the project. It is the opinion of staff that the request to construct the pedestrian bridge, when viewed within the context of the proposed hospital complex, meets these threshold requirements and could be approved with certain specific conditions. Benefits will Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 12 clearly accrue to patients utilizing the facility as well as the economic benefit impact of the proposal on the Lansing community. The feasibility of an underground option should be documented. The following conditions should be attached to any approval: 1. Documentation must be submitted to the City of Lansing in the form of a qualified professional engineering report, that the below grade tunnel option is not a reasonable alternative in terms of cost and/or construction feasibility. 2. The City shall prepare and adopt a policy prohibiting or severely restricting significant encroachments within the Capitol Center District or public rights- of-way which represent major visual approaches to the State Capitol. This proposed policy shall include air rights as well as ground encroachments. 3. After the first two steps are done, and prior to the issuance of any construction permits for the pedestrian bridge, the Mayor and City Council shall establish a design review committee. That Committee then would help design a pedway that would not obstruct the Capitol. All Committee expenses, including salaries, for the design professionals shall be reimbursed by Sparrow Hospital. 4. Recognizing that East Michigan Avenue represents the most significant visual approach to the State Capitol and, recognizing that if the proposed pedestrian bridge is approved and constructed, it will negatively change public enjoyment of this view, then the general public should benefit in some other manner from the proposal. It is the East Michigan Avenue Corridor which will focus on establishing an agenda for public and private sector improvements. The following landscaping, lighting, signage, street furniture, pedestrian movement and circulation issues. The consultant for the study shall be selected by the City of Lansing and work with the Planning Board, the Eastside Neighborhood Organization, the Eastside Commercial Club and Sparrow Hospital. The objective of the study will be to establish specific design policies which can be practically implemented by the City of Lansing and private property owners within this critical corridor. Once the first two steps are completed, a report shall be submitted to the Planning Board for its consideration. Horne: I fully agree with the first two, but 3 and 4 we need to clarify for the Council. Mr. Goolsby moved that the City Council approve the four step process for the examination of the Sparrow Hospital request to use the Michigan Avenue air rights for constructing a pedestrian overpass and once the first two steps of this process are completed, a report on this matter shall be submitted back to the Planning Board for its consideration and recommendation and that Sparrow Hospital fund a revitalization study for the East Michigan Avenue Corridor which will focus on Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 13 establishing an agenda for public and private sector improvements. The elements to be addressed are; design improvements such as landscaping, lighting, signage, street furniture, pedestrian movement and building facade restoration, as well as parking and traffic circulation issues. The consultant for this study should be selected by the City of Lansing and work with the Planning Board, Eastside Neighborhood Organization, the Eastside Commercial Club and Sparrow Hospital with the objective being to establish specific design policies which can be practically implemented by the City of Lansing and private property owners within this critical corridor. Ms. LeBlanc seconded the motion and discussion followed. Mr. Foulds explained, the intent is not to have the Committee do the design work. It is a review and comment Committee. In other words, Sparrow would hire a professional to bring design alternatives to the Committee for review and comment. The motion was restated; APPROVED Act-16-92, 1532 Lyons Ave.--Offer to donate land This is an offer by the owner, William Messeroll, to donate land to the City. The duplex on the site was destroyed by fire and had to be completely removed. The owner offered the lot to the City rather than rebuilding. The property was offered to a number of nonprofit housing groups, none of which have expressed interest in the site. Mr. Goolsby moved that the City turn down the offer of the lot at 1532 Lyons Avenue and supported by Ms. Witherspoon; DENIED Act-18-92, Edgewood at S. Washington--Sale of City land This is a piece of property at South Washington Avenue and Edgewood Road and the request is designed to dispose of excess City owned land. The property is remaining land from the Edgewood Boulevard project which consists of three parcels; the old Sawyer Road right-of-way between South Washington and Edgewood, the triangular parcel at the end of these two streets and the third being a large 1.1 acre irregular shaped parcel south of Edgewood to the I-96 freeway. Mr. Goolsby moved and Ms. Witherspoon supported that, A) The Sawyer right-of-way parcel and the triangular parcel at the intersection be retained in City ownership and used for public utility easements and passive public open space. Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 14 B) The City retain a triangular parcel for Public Service use that runs 50 feet west of the Cooper Road right-of-way extended to the I-96 freeway. C) The remaining irregular parcel consisting of portions of parcels 9 through 12 of Supervisor's Plat of Radio Estates be sold for residential housing developmjent in low density consistent with adjacent development. Floyd Wright: Could you tell us who initiated Act-18-92 originally? Mr. Goolsby answered, Harold Brown and Bob Reedy went to purchase City property adjacent to their land for new development. Mr. Spackman added, Mr. Brown's property on South Washington Avenue backs up to this triangular piece of land. Mr. Goolsby: The 50 feet west of Cooper, should be retained for right-of-way for Public Service because there's a drain in the area. In regards to the rest of the property, the Committee does not want that property overbuilt, that's why the recommendation is that it be compatible with surrounding development. Motion restated; APPROVED Act-33-92, 100 Blk Baker St.--Use of City land This is a request by Michigan Bell to construct a fiber optic communications building on City owned property. However, the soils in the area are suspected of being polluted and any disposal by the City would require immediate testing and clean up. This area is not a priority for disposal or development at this time. Mr. Goolsby moved that the City retain its land holdings and the request by Michigan Bell be denied. Mr. Barnhart supported; DENIED Act-36-92, 319 Hill Street--Vacate Alley This is a request by Donald Behrens, owner of 319 Hill Street, to vacate an alley right-of-way adjacent to his property. The intent is to use the area to expand his building and place mechanical equipment for his business. The entire alley was considered for vacation since it is unused. The Committee recommended that the entire alley be vacated from Prospect south to its terminus at the south line of Lot 25 of A.O. Bements replat and an addition on Block 17, Green Oaks Addition. The administration is to notify the adjacent propety i owners of the action. Mr. Goolsby so moved and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 15 Act-40-92, River Street Park--Rename Park The Cherry Hill Neighborhood Association submitted a letter with an attached petition requesting the name of River Street Park be changed to the Cherry Hill Park. The petition request was forwarded to the Parks and Recreation Board for their action. At their meeting of August 12; 1992 the Parks and Recreation Board voted to recommend the name changes for the park, but the boat ramp retain the name "Boat Ramp." The Neighborhood Association agrees with this decision. The Boat Ramp will retain its original name becaue it has longstanding identification for location and serves the community at large. The Park, on the other hand, is treated as a neighborhood park and more appropriately can be renamed to Cherry Hill Park. The Committee recomends that the name change to Cherry Hill Park approval and also recommends that River Street Boat Ramp remain unchanged and Mr. Goolsby so moved; Ms. LeBlanc supported; APPROVED Citywide Goals and Objectives The Committee proposes that all Board members look at the information submitted and if there are recommendations, we are interested in those comments. The Committee's next meeting is schE(=aled for Tuesday, November 10, 1992 at 4 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room Executive Committee The Executive Committee did meet to make appropriate recommendations on the retiring Planning staff. Report from Planning Director I would like to comment on the church/school amendment. I would like you to think about if the amendment meets the spirit and intent of the policies laid out in the Willow-Pine Plan. The residential use is on opposing block faces. You can make the argument that open space and/or recreational use is a type of residential use as it is permitted in the Zoning Ordinance. I guess the question is, are we looking at i residential use only or at the range of uses that would be permitted in a residential district meeting the intent of the policy. Planning Board Minutes October 20, 1992 Page 16 New Business Emly Horne reported, Helen LeBlanc and I did attend the MSPO Conference and learned many new things. The articles of interest to me were in the American Planning Association for October, 1992. Adjournment: The regular October 20, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, James N. Foulds, Director Lansing Planning Division WC Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers 10th Floor, Lansing City Hall October 6, 1992 Emly Horne, Chairman, convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with eight members present: Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, LeBlanc, Monteith, Thelen, Witherspoon, Wright Staff in Attendance: Foulds, Fountain, Ruff The agenda was accepted as submitted. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Staff will make a presentation followed by the petitioner and the audience. All of these petitions will be referred to the appropriate committee for further study. Vern Fountain, Zoning Administrator, will present these cases. SLU-15-92, 2613 Hillcrest Street--Parking This is a request by Joan DeRose, Resident Manager for the Colonial Townehouses, located at 2202 South Wadsworth Drive, adjacent to 2613 Hillcrest Street for approval of a special land use to allow the lot located at 2613 Hillcrest to be developed as an off street parking lot for parking expansion for Colonial Townehouses. That lot is currently developed with a single family home. The existing home would be removed for the off street parking. This home is in such a deteriorated state that it has actually settled on one end and is basically uninhabitable. They need more parking because in the mid 60s they developed off street parking at the ratio of 12 per unit, which was required by Code at the time. Of course, it's not enough these days. They have been short of parking for several years. They have expanded a couple of times internally and see this as an opportunity to add overflow. JOAN DE ROSE, 2202 South Wadsworth Drive, Resident Manager is present to answer questions. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Z-17-921 5139 Balzer Street A to F and J Presented by Vern Fountain This is a request by Howard Soldan, representing Soldan Feed Stores requesting rezoning of property at 5139 Balzer Street, which is directly behind 5200 South Logan Street, for the purpose of changing the zoning on this property to "F" Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 2 Commercial to allow for the expansion of the feed store that fronts on Logan, located at 5200 Dr. M.L. King/Logan Street, and adding off street parking on some of the property. The zoning would change from "A" Residential to "F" Commercial and "J" Parking. The property in question has its primary frontage on Balzer Street and contains a residential home. It's a long, narrow, deep lot that extends back and abuts the Soldan Feeds Store property which has its access off M.L. King/Logan Street. This rezoning, if approved, would allow the expansion of the existing storage building and some additional employee parking at the rear. Predominant land use on Balzer Street is single family residential. The M.L. King/Logan frontage is mixed commercial uses on both sides. There is fencing around that property in terms of the residences on Balzer, but nothing real intense along there now. It will have to be re-evaluated. HOWARD SOLDAN, 5200 South Logan Street, petitioner. I am the owner of Soldan Feed and Pet Supplies. I would appreciate rezoning some of our property so we can continue to expand in the greater Lansing area. We have been in business at this address since 1955 and have strived to improve our property with better parking and more spacious, easily accessible buildings. We have grown so we need to add storage space. With the 125 feet we are requesting, we will be able to extend our existing buildings an additional 75 feet; with the remaining 50 feet to be used for parking. The entire lot at 5139 Balzer is 300 feet deep. With this rezoning, the residential property will still have to be 175 feet deep lot. The 125 feet that we are requesting will line up with existing commercial property to our south. Should this rezoning go through, we are prepared to do all buffering and grading this fall. The additional storage space will be the same type of construction and colors as on the existing building and since it is four stories only, will not increase the traffic flow in and out of Logan Street. By having the additional 50 in the rear for employee parking it will free up the parking lot so our customers move in and out. Thank you very much for your consideration. MARY JENKS, 5208 Balzer Street. Neighbors have called to ask me to represent them in this matter. They are concerned about the change in zoning. I have gotten two letters from all but three neighbors on Balzer and Ferley Streets. One letter gives me the role of neighborhood representative. The other letter shows objection to this matter. Their main concerns are traffic and noise. Across the back are several beautiful trees and pretty landscaping. The houses most affected by this have been kept up very well. That won't be the case if this goes through. Another objection is what it does to real estate property values in the area. I am afraid they would go down, especially on those three pieces of property that would be most involved. We are also concerned that if this is allowed, who will say that in another year they will come back and want to use the existing driveway going into that home to get to the employee parking lot. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 3 On my blueprint it shows truck parking, not employee parking. It looks like they will not have a lot of property left with the house setting on it. We are concerned that eventually they will discover the turns are too sharp going into that parking lot and want to come up Balzer Street and use the existing driveway and extend it into the parking area. The existing fence is approximately six feet tall and the existing building is considerably higher than that fence. I am sympathetic with Mr. Soldan's dilemma and understand what he wants to do. I use the store a lot. But at the cost of our elderly neighbors having the fence right by their houses and the problems it might cause them, I speak against it. LUCILLE MACRASS, right next door, and a letter from the neighbor at 5133 Balzer, NELLIE BREWER on the other side. We wonder why he wants to take his commercial and come into our residential and mess up our yards and the property around there. So we are very against it. The property value will go down. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Z-18-92, 1100-1106 West Ionia Street B to D-2 This is a request by Fred Johnson to rezone property at 1100 and 1106 West Ionia Street from its current "B" single family residential classification to "D-2" Residential/Office District. The purpose of this request is to allow the first floor of the existing structure to be converted to office use and the second floor be utilized as a three bedbroom apartment. The property in question measures 66 by 68 feet and contains approximately 4,488 square feet. It is located on the immediate corner of West Ionia and M.L. King/Logan Street and has its primary access now from Ionia Street. FRED JOHNSON, 2572 West Mt. Hope Avenue, Okemos. I brought a sketch which better clarifies what I am trying to do. It shows the original designation of the property and pictures of how it is now. There are strong indications that certain interest groups do not want the property rezoned. I canvassed the area and over half of the owners are in agreement with what I am trying to do and were not aware of the organizations who say it's a bad idea. Rezoning the property would (1) allow me to remodel to fit the topography of the neighborhood in line with the Capitol and the expressway coming through there. It would also allow me an opportunity for the first time since 1979 to have the property earn its way.- I now have 1800 square feet of floor space that is unusable and has been for some time. It was built as a commercial property and ran from '33 up through the 60s and due to non-use, it lost its zoning rights. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 4 When I bought the location June 12, 1969, I began to get letters indicating the property was zoned illegally. The bottom property could not be used in single family residential--1800 square feet that cannot be used. By rezoning, I would be able to modernize the building and make it a beautiful approach from the south. Without rezoning the building I can remodel the upstairs, which would not change the outside of the property at all. JUDY MARKS, 1515 Spencer Street. I have recently moved from Virginia and bought this house in March because the area is nice. The property in question is an eyesore. If he goes to office buildings, it would be what I call spot zoning. Let's keep this area residential single family homes so our children have a place to play and don't have to worry about traffic. Thank you. CHRIS CAMPBELL, 417 North Jenison. That place has been a dump and Mr. Johnson admits to owning it since 1969. He has had a long time to make it into the "beautiful approach." It has been either out of conformance with the City or red tagged. Now there's a 'make safe or demolish' order from City Council and is scheduled to be torn down before the end of the year. The Neighborhood Association, Housing Coalition and Lansing City Building Inspectors have worked hard to improve the neighborhood and there are visible results. The house immediately behind this structure is a nice brick single family, well kept house. Next door is a well kept frame house. People deserve to have their neighborhood preserved as single family, as the River Island Master Plan called for. The Westside Neighborhood Association opposes the rezoning. I am the chair of the Housing Committee, but am speaking for myself tonight. We do oppose the rezoning. The place should be torn down and the lot turned back into residential use as it should be and we hope that is what will happen. Please recommend denial of the rezoning request and help us protect our neighborhood from the outside interests that would exploit it. Thank you. MARY JAMES, 303 North Jenson. I have had a lot of involvement with this property and in the eleven years I have lived here, I have never seen this property be anything but a dump and eyesore. In 1985 I took Councilmembers by this property and you could take your arm and stick it between the two walls and tenants were living in the building with kids. That was the kind of concern being displayed for the people of the west side. In 1986, as part of a major story on neighbors trying to improve their area, this picture was taken of me in front of some of the junk in front of Mr. Johnson's property. This is a hugh pile of carpet. Mr. Johnson used 1100 West Iona as a staging area for all the junk from his other properties. In 1989 the drug dealers burned down the house next door, lessening eyesores; now there's only one. In '89 Mr. Johnson asked you to rezone this as a commercial property. He was,going to put in a party store. You turned it down. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 5 In 1990 I took time off work to speak at Mr. Johnson's sentencing hearing. He had been cited repeatedly because he refused to clean up his property and bring it up to Code. I asked Judge Cherry to put him on probation, a reasonable request, so the City has some grip on him if he decides not to follow through and be a good neighbor. Instead he was fined $250. Within two months Mr. Johnson had asked the City to come and red sticker the house because drug dealers were living in it and raw sewage in the basement. For two years it has been vacant. That was 7z years of my time spent. Now with the make safe/demolish order, Mr. Johnson is playing cat and mouse again. He's asking you to believe him one more time. When pigs have wings this will be a beautiful something. Thank you. CAROL RALL, 1608 West Shiawassee Street. Ionia is a residential street. The structure is an old storefront type building that's long passed it's usefulness. We hope for the demolition of this unsightly building. We also worry because of the mushroom affect this residential street will toward the other adjacent streets and King/Logan. This is not part of the Capitol Loop. This is west of that and considered a residential neighborhood and should be that. I would caution you of safety hazards of the building. There is no room for buffering, the building abuts the sidewalk. Also it blocks vision when I go up to the light. In case you are taking a right turn, you have to come out further to see. For the safety element, I caution you to look carefully at the sketches because they are not accurate. I am also concerned about the mushroom affect of how this will affect other houses on the block. Thank you. YVONNE JOSEPH, 1509 Spencer. I have viewed this montrous autrocity of Mr. Johnson's property. I am begging you to please take into consideration the fight we are up against to maintain our neighborhood to turn it back to something we are proud of. Often the west side is given bad publicity. It is discouraging to try to bring these things to City officials and be turned down. I ask you to not approve this request. Thank you. SABRINA LEWIS, 114 Lahoma. I have been a resident here for over 25 years. The tenants he has had are undesirable. They are usually drug dealers, obnoxious, loud, etc. and it is to the point where if you have ever dreaded coming to a stop, you would feel that way here. People stop your car and beg--general harassment. I cannot see the feasibility of this project because he's talking about leasing office space to highly paid professionals such as doctors and lawyers. But with the state Ionia Street is in in that vicinity it is not feasible. It would reflect negatively on that business. That location is not considered "prime." Ideas for beautification I am in favor of, but in terms of this proposal, I cannot see it. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 6 FRED JOHNSON, JR. , 701 Logan, Grand Rapids. I am a former resident of Lansing and attended Cooley Law School. I lived in the upstairs apartment of this home for five years which is a nice apartment. Contrary to what's been said this evening the apartment was much nicer than most of my cohorts in law school. There seems to be not much cooperation working together here. First, as far as spot zoning is concerned, this property was originally zoned partially commercial. So it is not an entirely new use for this property. There are other commercial properties in this general neighborhood. In my view the problem is the use it is at this point. As everyone has said, the people who have inhabited have been lower income people who have not taken responsibility to take care of their own trash. These things about the aesthetics and trash pickup are true. Understand if the zoning variance isn't granted, then there is only one use for that facility--to rent it to the same people you want out of there. If a facility is not new and changed, my father has no option other than it being boarded up. Consider on the other hand if the zoning variance is granted, you have a new clientele; professionals that will demand the facility live up to the professional image. That is what we want, not to look at the building as an eyesore. To have it as an asset to the community. The other streets in this area have lots of offices and these people as tenants are assets. That would increase the property values. The parking is there. If this is refurbished, if doctors and lawyers are allowed to practice there and if it meets the aesthetic values of the community, this is an asset that brings tax revenue to the community. If my father is not even given the opportunity to make this change, then everybody's happy. If not, he has an argument that he has not been given the chance. He has financing lined up and we would like to make this project an asset to the community as opposed to an eyesore. Thank you very much. Communications were received from: RICK GAMBER and IRENE KAZIECZKO, 1213 W. Shiawas see--oppose the rezoning. The property has outlived any useful purpose. When commercial or office activity is placed in a residential area, adjacent properties deteriorate. PAUL NOVAK, President, Westside Neighborhood Association--strongly urge you deny the request. There have been no significant improvements to the structure. It will not be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. GERALD SPAGNOLLY, Assistant Transportation Engineer--Depth of parking module is shown as 30 feet. Should be 41.5 feet for 90 degree angle parking. Consideration should be given to installing 60 degree angle parking with one-way circulation, with an "entrance only" on Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard/Logan Street and an "exit only" on Ionia Street. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 7 WILLIAM C. HARTWIG, State Department of Transportation--The Department's position remains the same as it was in 1989; that is, to not support the rezoning request. It is not compatible with the mutually agreed upon goal established between the City of Lansing and the MDOT. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Z-19-92, 1222 East Michigan Avenue DM-3, D-1, F, F-1 and J to F-1 This is a request by William Vincent, Director of Engineering at Sparrow Hospital, requesting rezoning change for the property bound by Michigan Avenue, Holmes Street, Eureka Street and Jones Street from its current classifications, which are very mixed ranging from F and F-1 Commercial, single family residential, multifamily residential and office. The intent is to put the entire property they own in that block into one consistent zoning district and the petition is for "F-1" Commercial District. In addition we are going to consider the public hearing on Act-8-92. Act-8-92, Pedestrian Overpass, 1200 block East Michigan Avenue This consists of a pedestrian overpass in the 1200 block of East Michigan Avenue which will connect this first phase of development for Sparrow with the existing Hospital on the north side of Michigan Avenue. JOE DAMORE, President of Sparrow Hospital and Health System. It is a pleasure to be with you to share the fruition of two years of a lot of hard work and thoughtful planning so we can move forward with our efforts to better serve the people of mid- Michigan. Our purpose is threefold. First is to request the property be rezoned south of Michigan Avenue to F-1 . The second is to request a height variance up to 100 feet and third is to request air rights for a pedestrian overpass across Michigan Avenue to connect from an outpatient center to the main Hospital. As a result of developing this plan, the City requested of us a long range facility plan and we are going to share that 20 year plan with you tonight. It provides a blueprint of how we would develop this site over the next 20 years. This process began in October of 1990 through development of a long range strategic plan for Sparrow. The development of our Mission Statement provides our commitment of purpose. We are here to improve the health status of the people of mid-Michigan. Last year we Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 8 provided $10 million of uncompensated care to people who could not afford to pay. We have a great commitment to training and educating future health professionals; both at Michigan State and with Lansing Community College and Davenport College. Lastly, we want to live the values of excellent service, people responsibility, innovation and teamwork. In the summer of 1991 we began to translate that plan into a master site plan, to continue that 96 years of heritage Sparrow has provided this community. We are very excited about the long range plan. This plan has been endorsed by all of our constituent groups. We estimate this regional center will create a couple hundred new jobs, revitalize the downtown area, create a positive campus we can all be proud of and is done in a way that respects our neighbors. MICHAEL K. GRADY, 5888 Bayonne, Haslett. My daughters have had positive results from pediatric care at Sparrow Hospital and Sparrow has grown and excel in areas in medical care. Sparrow has shown excellence in expanding its medical care and if this facilitates better medical care to mid-Michigan, I am all for it. One practical aspect--if you have ever pushed a child through snow in a wheelchair on Michigan Avenue, I am in favor of the overpass. Thank you for your time. TONY VIVACQUA, Sales representative from WITL radio, best in the country, and am here to represent GREG CAPOGNA General Manager of WITL and BILL PACELLI, General Sales Manager of WITL. Both asked me to pass along their support for the project. Anything for building and creating more jobs and services, more facilities, better medical care is certainly something we would appreciate having here. As community minded organizations, which WITL is, we are very much in favor of it. Thank you. DON COLLIZI, 1695 South Steward Road, Charlotte, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Davenport College's Lansing Campus. Although I don't live in Lansing, Davenport College employs over 200 people and serves over 1500 students. Many of these individuals live in Lansing and are very interested in health care facilities that are available to them. Davenport College is equally concerned about the health and welfare of our employees. Even though I live in Charlotte, Sparrow Hospital is our hospital when a major illness arises. The concerns in the Lansing business community include investment in the city, containment of health care costs and educating our youth to lead us into the future. I believe Sparrow's expansion project addressess all three of these concerns. I firmly believe this project will serve our community in many ways and for many years. It is a visionary plan that prepares us for the future as well as for today. I urge you to show Sparrow Hospital that the City of Lansing is ready and willing to make the same kind of commitment that Sparrow Hospital is prepared to make to Lansing. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 9 KEN GRUBER, 1974 Cimmeron, Okemos, Executive Director of Impression 5 Science Museum. I support Sparrow Hospital's expansion plan. I believe the city is on the verge of substantial growth and the Sparrow expansion is just one of the many aspects for the new future for Lansing. Along with the expansion of the Lansing Center, added parking and clearing of old buildings in the Michigan Corridor, the Michigan Capitol Loop, development of Pere Marquette, upgrading of beautiful neighborhoods through growth of neighborhood associations and the completion of the State Capitol renovation, when Sparrow completes its expansion, it will be one of the most dramatic medical complexes in Michigan. I received as part of a different matter some information on Wichita, Kansas and was struck knowing that I was going to come tonight with the similarities between what this letter said about what Wichita was doing and the issues we are faced with in the growth of Lansing. If you visualize what a tremendous complex Lansing could draw from in the State as the hub of automotive productions, state government, arts and culture, education and now a medical facility such as Sparrow, I think you get a little better vision of what we could be in the next 10 to 15 years. Thank you very much. CHRIS HOLLMAN, owner of several downtown area businesses (Greater Lansing monthly magazine) . Sparrow's project brings with its square foot, employment, expansion of services, cohesiveness and athletics. I and my staff are very supportive and I think I speak for a good deal of the business community in saying this project will incredibly enhance our area. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. -PATRICK BRIDGES, 5720 West Willow Highway, Executive Director of the Boy Scouts of America, 4000 West Michigan Avenue. One important thing is that Sparrow in their leadership is a great corporate citizen in this community. We are fortunate to have their vision and what it does for our youth as they grow up to be part of this great community and what Sparrow has to offer in their long range plan. I thank you for your time. BOB SETTER, 1240 Tannanger Lane, East Lansing. I am partners with my wife Lynn in businesses and properties we own on East Michigan.Avenue. Those sites are at 825, 827, 912 and are tenants in the building at 1408 East Michigan Avenue and owners of a rental home and property on North Eighth Street, a block north of Michigan Avenue. I endorse everything that has been said about Sparrow tonight. It is a great organization and neighbor. As a business owner I wanted to give support on behalf of Lynn and myself to all of the plans presented here. We have a personal involvement to see the corridor is enhanced and becomes what we all want it to be. We want to participate in that. We hope this does go from the Capitol to East Lansing. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 10 ARBOR NICHOLS, 1630 Woodside, East Lansing. I was previously the Executive Director of the American Red Cross. I can attest to the expenditure of a great deal of Sparrow money to serve those who had no insurance or no means of financial assistance for medical care. Red Cross continued to refer to them people who were seen by volunteer physicians in this community and they provided not only hospital care, but arranged for anesthesiology and surgical care. They are an excellent corporate citizen. I think the plan they have identified is forward looking and will be an asset to this community and, therefore, endorse it. MAX TANNER, 5723 Delta River Drive. I am in support of the proposal. I retired about a year ago and shortly afterwards had a heart attack. The ambulance took me to Sparrow and they don't have the capability of dealing with that situation so it was necessary to go to another hospital. I would.like to see Sparrow's proposal approved and give the necessary medical care for people in the area. I urge you to support their proposal. Thank you. CURTIS LICHTE, Physician in Obstetrics and Gynecology, live in East Lansing at 1130 Farwood Drive. I am currently Chief of Sparrow Hospital Medical Staff and speak in support of Sparrow Hospital's request for zoning variances for the master facility site plan. The Sparrow Hospital Medical Staff Executive Committee, which represents the chairpersons of each medical staff department, unanimously endorses this plan. As you have heard many physicians and others have worked with hospital administrators.and other Sparrow associates to develop the best long term plan for health care services and facilities. We believe to provide efficient and top quality health services for our community we need better coordination of inpatient and outpatient services, expanded capacity and a research and education effort to maintain a supply of well trained health care providers including technicians, nurses and physicians. The proposed Sparrow site plan offers a great opportunity to plan these facilities for the next 20 years in a logical, coordinated and cost effective manner. Outpatient health services continue to increase as the number of inpatient hospital days decrease. By having this large ambulatory care facility, outpatient surgical facility and physician offices directly across the street south of the main hospital buildings, these outpatient facilities would be easily accessible to our patients and to hundreds of Sparrow Hospital associates. A parking garage and the pedestrian overpass will reduce the need for hundreds of people to cross the street. The plan is aesthetically appealing and will improve the landscape along Michigan Avenue approaching the State Capitol. As a bonus it will add employment opportunities to our community. For these reasons the medical staff leadership at Sparrow Hospital enthusiactically endorses the master facility site plan and supports the requested zoning variances. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 11 LESLIE HOOVER, 400 Everett Drive, Nurse Manager of Pediatrics at Sparrow and am here to express my support for the Sparrow Hospital proposed building plan. As an associate at Sparrow, I see the health care needs of our community on a daily basis. Our efforts at Sparrow are focused on healing the sick, educating the community and preventing disease. Sparrow needs more space to meet these community needs. Currently there is an inappropriate mix of inpatient and outpatient pediatric services. Expanded facilities are needed to more appropriately meet the special needs of families and children, both from a technical point of view and from a psycho-socio perspective. In pediatrics it's also important that we provide more primary and urgent care for the underserved in the city. As a resident, I also support this proposal. I believe a community like Lansing needs the services of a comprehensive regional medical center. When my family needs care, I do not want the further disruption of having to leave town to receive the necessary care. I have also lived and worked within the city limits of Lansing since 1975: The reason I live in Lansing is because I want to be close to my employment--I value a ten minute commute. I think Sparrow should be praised in planning and expansion in their present site rather than proposing to move to another location, as is happening in other communities such as Flint. I urge you to support Sparrow's proposed expansion. Thank you. JOELLEN BANCROFT, 1834 Delevan Avenue. I feel there is an urgency in this nation and this community to begin the work of getting our economy back on its feet. America is in economic recession. Many health care providers are moving out of urban settings into suburban and rural areas. Yet, Sparrow is ready and willing to stay and invest in Lansing. For nearly 100 years Sparrow has been a major part of the Lansing community. Sparrow provides the highest percentage of charity care of any health provider in Lansing, spending over $10 million last year alone. If Sparrow's leadership has a motive, it is how to best serve the community, now and in the future. Finally, Sparrow is not about buildings and equipment. It is about people serving people. To be able to meet the challenges of the future, the people of Sparrow have spent an intense year meticulously planning. The master site plan offers better, more efficient service, high quality, cost effective care, better traffic flow, enchancement and beautification of the neighborhood, educational and research opportunity and new jobs. All created to help the people of Sparrow better serve the people of mid-Michigan. I ask for your support. Thank you. MARC CORY, representing Dr. Richard J. Hallik, Superintendent of Schools, in support of the Sparrow project and to support their vision and long range plan. It is our feeling that the plan offers the greatest amount of potential for increased educational opportunities to the students in the Lansing area through cooperation and collaboration with Sparrow, Community College and the University. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 12 BOB METZGER, representing the American Red Cross mid-Michigan Chapter and Great Lakes Blood Region, located at 1800 East Grand River Avenue. I speak in support of Sparrow Hospital's proposed plan for growth. Red Cross and Sparrow Hospital have worked together for many years. Sparrow is the third largest consumer of Red Cross blood products in the Great Lakes region and they hold many successful blood drives for us throughout the year. That is only part of the very strong partnership we have. Sparrow and the Red Cross share two very important things in common. Both are vitally important parts of the Lansing area health care scene and our community. At the Red Cross we consider ourselves fortunate that in the pursuit of our goal of helping people, we are able to depend on the people and resources of Sparrow Hospital. Our community benefits from having a strong Red Cross and a strong Sparrow Hospital. The expansion makes our community strong. By looking into the future and seeing the need for a comprehensive medical center, Sparrow is showing all of us that we have an opportunity to be a part of the growth the future holds for health care, human services and our community. On behalf of the American Red Cross, I support and endorse Sparrow Hospital's request for rezoning and for the pedestrian overpass. Thank you. KAREN BREEDEN, 616 Hine Avenue, Registered Nurse. I would like to urge all the members on the Planning Commission to support Sparrow's master site plan. I view this plan as a great opportunity for our community to benefit economically to revitalize Lansing's east side, to create new jobs and to enjoy the advantages of having a comprehensive medical center in our city. This is a great opportunity for the City of Lansing. I totally endorse Sparrow's plan and hope that you will too. Thank you. MOHAMMED MOHSENIAN, Physician and live in East Lansing, 864 Pebblebrook. I practice across the street from Sparrow on Michigan Avenue. I am here to support Sparrow's efforts for expansion. Sparrow Hospital is the only center in the State of Michigan that has successive pregnancies from their infertility technology and that includes Wayne State University and University of Michigan. There are other technically advanced programs in terms of lazer surgery and other procedures. This expansion will help Sparrow Hospital not only to remain in the forefront of technology, but also to make it more affordable because of the ambulatory center. I would like to support Sparrow for this expansion and hope it has the support of all of you. Thank you. LEE CLARK, Clinical Pharmacist. I live at 735 Maycroft Road. I cannot add anything new to what everyone has said even though I had a nice little speech prepared. I think you should support this. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 13 DENNIS ALBERT, 1208 Eureka. I definitely recognize the importance of Sparrow Hospital to community health care. As a local neighbor, I would like to point out that in going to all the local neighborhood meetings, it was evident that the local neighborhood did not have a lot of input into the present Sparrow plan and that there is a lot of concern about traffic, welfare for children, property values and quality of living from immediate neighbors. Many of Sparrow's proposed changes will impact neighbors; for myself it will be the parking structure. Hopefully, Sparrow will honor its pledge to consider the local neighborhood as well as Lansing as a whole. Sparrow's neighbors hope that Sparrow's success will not be at the expense of us. DWAYNE VERNON, 4315 Wagonwheel, Chairman of Michigan Parades into the 21st Century. We are concerned with the thoughts of many people on Michigan Avenue. The aesthetic value of what we will be creating, if Sparrow Hospital is permitted to proceed with their plan, will enhance the beauty of Michigan Avenue and stimulate other businesses and people locating along Michigan Avenue to beautify their businesses; thereby beautifying Michigan Avenue, the gateway to the Capitol. From my beloved Michigan State University to the Capitol should be known as "the gateway to the Capitol" and I think this will enhance and perhaps make Michigan Avenue the Avenue of Michigan. Thank you. JAY CORDISS, 660 Snyder Road, East Lansing, physician working in the Department of Radiology at Sparrow Hospital. I just wanted to add that I was raised in this community. When I completed my training, I came back to work in this community because I consider it home. When I look at how we're doing, particularly in my Department--the goal standard I like to use is, what would I want if the service was going to be provided to my daughter, father or friends. I believe this vision is created with that in mind. We are trying to create the best possible health care services we can. I hope that you support this plan. JOHN RUCKS, 201 Lathrop Street, Vice President of the Eastside Neighborhood Organization, on behalf of Mary Margaret Woll, the President. Sparrow presented their plan to our Board last month and I have not heard any negatives. While the whole organization has not had a vote, I believe we would favor the plan. We appreciate Sparrow's sensitivity to the neighborhood. However, we do have concerns, especially with the zoning. We are concerned there be adequate buffering in the areas where Sparrow Hospital does contact with neighborhoods; especially with the parking ramp. Along with that is a concern for the height of the buildings. I hope the five stories will not be any higher than their present building. They also mentioned a height variance of 100 feet--it looks like that would be in the middle of the complex away from neighborhoods and houses, but that is a concern. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 14 Another concern raised is parking ramps, which we have asked for and been concerned about for many years and we are glad to see they are planning to build several ramps in this project. We hope the ramp would come in the earlier part of the development rather than the end. Finally, we also share the concern about safety on Michigan Avenue. It's great the complex is expanding but it will draw more traffic and it seems to be dangerous to the school kids crossing at Holmes Street where there is no light. Thank you. MARY CLARK, 228 South Eighth Street. I have two concerns; the continued existence of a healthy residential area around the Sparrow proposal about the continued existence of our area schools. I am a parent with children at Bingham, Pattengill and Eastern and am concerned about the safety of the traffic, especially at Bingham. Many of them do cross Michigan Avenue and we need to find a safe way. I am also concerned about the traffic flow issues connected with the Eastern/Pattengill area--how parents would be dropping off and picking up children. Decisions made by you will impact area schools and I do see these schools as an anchor for the east side. I would hate to see anything jeopardize them. There are many positive things connected with this project. A lot of time and effort has been spent buffering the Vine Street neighborhood. The Ronald McDonald concept, which is on the eastern edge of Sparrow property, is a wonderful transition into that neighborhood. My concern is with the neighborhoods to the south and west. This is a regional center, obviously, but I don't want it to be at the expense of Lansing residents. Specifically in terms of the rezoning, I have questions; such as, if the property is rezoned, I assume then Sparrow has the ability to build anything they want that is in conformance with the rezoning. These buildings are just conceptual, architects have not been involved, and I would like to see when they are doing specific structures and locations, the neighborhood have input into that process. As Vice President of the Bingham P.T.A. , some parents have concerns for children safety getting to and from the school during the construction process and the noise levels involved. Thank you. CHERYL VALLEAU, 226 South Eighth Street. I would like to address the issue of exactly what the potential of this overpass is going to mean to us in terms of setting a precedent. There are some things in terms of what the Board of Water and Light wants to do that could cause us grief. If we open the overpass, it is open to other things allowed to go across too. Personally, I live three blocks from the Hospital and they don't accept my health insurance. So, it's beneficial to everybody but the local residents. Most of our people are poor working people who don't have health care, who don't have the ability to go to the hospital. I would have us remain with the zoning issues, rather than worry about whether it's a good thing or bad thing, but what the rules are and how we deal with it. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 15 JULIE BAXTER, 6220 South Balfour. I think the crosswalk is definitely necessary. I also work at Sparrow as a nursing assistant in the South Annex. It is incredibly difficult to maneuver patients across that street as it is now. Currently Sparrow buildings are surrounded by beautiful greenery and flowers. Children come up behind the South Annex and pick the tulips and daffodils in the spring. That is how concerned Sparrow is about its appearance. I think this is not only going to be beneficial to the community, but will look good for Lansing as well. REZAR TOVARCOLI, 2220 East Grand River. Everything that I was prepared to say has been said, but I have a story I would like to share with you. Nearly two years ago we had a baby girl with a long list of problems. She needed a lot of care. With all the care she received at Sparrow they were able to fix most of her needs. Later we found in order to seek more medical attention, we had to start traveling to Ann Arbor, which we have to do once a month. There are a lot of people who have to travel all over the state for medical attention. That is why I think Sparrow's plans_. are so important and it is in the interest of our community. Thank you. SALLY CHIRIO, 1110 East Hazel Street. I am in favor of the proposal for Sparrow Hospital's expansion. In particular I like the idea of separating the traffic for the school children. I live on the south side of Michigan Avenue and my children have to walk up Holmes Street or Pennsylvania to get to Pattengill and Eastern. The boulevard idea will slow down the traffic in that area. If we could do something at the corner of Holmes Street and Michigan to help with the kids crossing, that would be an advantage and a safety issue. RICK KIBBEY. Details count. This is an interesting conceptual plan. I would be in favor and hope the Planning Board could, as it has in the past, find an opportunity for us to sit down in an informal setting and come to some agreements as to the actual details and get commitments on paper and make that part of the zoning agreement. I know Sparrow requires some assurances before going ahead with further planning. I would like details on what level of commitment they require to do that, not architectural drawings, but I urge you to look for a process that allows us to get away from these 29 people waving flags at you and actually sit down with maps in front of us and magic markers and figure out what needs to be done in this situation so we can go forward with this opportunity. I will be glad to participate in that process. Thank you. JANE CARL. I would like to express my support for Sparrow's zoning project. I have two children that were born at Sparrow and attend school at Resurrection and I would support a continuing education opportunity for them once they reach high school. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 16 ALAN SIMMONS, 861 Beechlawn, District Manager for the Marriott Corporation, who Health Care Services. Marriott Corporation works in partnership with Sparrow Hospital and _we agree with their mission and vision. One of Marriott's goals is to increase and bring about more employment and opportunities here in mid-Michigan, especially in Lansing. One thing we look at for our associates is comprehensive health care and I think the master site plan gives that comprehensive total health care we need for the Lansing area. Beautifying Michigan Avenue is a great thing, but the main interests of the Marriott Corporation are (1) jobs and (2) comprehensive health care. We are in support of Sparrow's plan. Thank you. VIRGINIA HAMBRICK, 218 Jones. I see a lot of value in the plan and a lot of work gone into it. I have concerns with traffic in terms of what it will do to Jones Street, which is already busy between Kalamazoo and Michigan. I support the comments of the Eastside Neighborhood Organization to allow for more community input into a detailed plan. Thank you. Communications were also received from: MRS. BATTENDORFF, 1401 Eureka Street--If the overpass is constructed and the street level crosswalk and light are eliminated, then there will be a need for a way to get children across the road in this area and a way to slow traffic to allow vehicular access onto Michigan Avenue from neighborhood streets. ART KELLOGG, owner of 300 Ferguson Street--The overpass is o.k. if this improvement will result in better patient care and the improvement of the Hospital business, but only if paid for privately and not with public funds. DICK NELLER, President, Walter Neller Enterprises, Inc. Our concern about the master plan is fair taxation on the 70,000 square foot physician office building and its required parking if it is actually constructed. JOE WALD, Director of Marketing at Sparrow Hospital. BETTY GARDNER, 300 Western Avenue--in favor of the overpass due to bad injuries from a passing bicyclist while crossing the pedestrian crosswalk. CURTIS A. LIECHTY, M.D. , Capital Area OB/GYN Associates, P.C. , endorsing the plan. LARRY SMITH, Lansing City Magazine, approve Sparrow's plan. AUBREY RADCLIFFE, Ph.D. Counsellor at Sexton High School, expresses support for the plan. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 17 THOMAS C. GALYON, President and Chief Executive Officer. With the expansion plans at Sparrow, it would have a positive impact on the area's hotel industry. Z-19-92, 1222 East Michigan Avenue petition, is REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Act-8-92, Pedestrian Overpass is REFERRED TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NCU-10-92, 901 East Oakland Avenue This request is by Richard Speirs for approval of Class A nonconforming status for property at 901 East Oakland Avenue, on the north side of Oakland just west of Pennsylvania Avenue, for the purpose of rehabilitating the existing residential dwelling, which is in an industrial district, as a duplex. He will be investing more than 35% of the fair market value. The property contains approximately 4,634 square feet. Many surrounding properties are zoned industrial. Mr. Barnhart: Is there something unusual with this request? We don't generally have public hearings on NCUs. Mr. Fountain: It is in an industrial district, in an area with other residents and we felt other people should know what's going on with that structure. It was fire damaged and there is an attempt to fix it up and the public hearing would solicit support or opposition. RICHARD SPEIRS, 1900 South Ionia Road, Vermontville. In August of 1981 I acquired 901 East Oakland Avenue. Since then the structure has functioned as a two unit residential. On June 6 of this year the second story suffered extensive fire damage. Without the granting of a Class A nonconformity, the structure must be demolished. If this demolition should occur, there would be a decreased number of low income rental units in the area. There will be a decrease in tax revenue from the property and we also feel that a vacant lot in the middle of a residential area could become a potential dumping site. With granting a Class A nonconforming status I feel as Don Clark that we could restore the building to be used as a two unit residential once again. With increased tax revenue to the city, a potential for increased rental units in the area and a cleaner, healthier look to the neighborhood, it would be an asset, not a liability. Thank you for your consideration. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 18 Comments from the Audience: None A five minute recess was taken by the Board. BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Ms. Witherspoon moved for approval of the minutes of September 15, 1992 and Ms. LeBlanc seconded; APPROVED Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright, Chairman reported there may be an attendance problem for the Committee meeting. Ms. Horne and Ms. LeBlanc stated they could attend. Mr. Thelen said he would be there also. The next meeting will be Wednesday, October 14, 1992 at 2:30 in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby, Chairman, reported the Committee will meet next Tuesday, October 13, 1992 at 4 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Executive Committee: A meeting will be held October 20, 1992 at 7 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room. Report from Planning Director: Staff will endeavor to have a report and recommendation on the Sparrow rezoning at your next Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting, assuming we get feedback from all the various agencies. Planning Board Minutes October 6, 1992 Page 19 Communications: Ms. Horne received a letter from Priscilla Holmes, Lansing Neighborhood Council. We ask for your support for the CDBG funding for the fiscal year 93-94. The request was for $49,000 to run the office. New Business: Emly Horne and Helen LeBlanc will attend the Michigan Society of Planning Officials conference on Thursday and Friday. No excused absences are requested for the next Board meeting. Board Member Comments: Ms. LeBlanc: Last year we had a meeting on ground water with Tri-county. Since then the Ingham County Health Department has started writing a ground water ordinance covering the County. They are going to ask someone from the Planning Department to be on the Committee they are organizing of people, government and business people to work out the details. I also have been asked to be on that committee and I will be on it. Adjournment: The regular October 6, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Res ectfully mitted, Ja N. F ulds, Director L sing Pl nning Division WC Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers 10th Floor, Lansing City Hall September 15, 1992 r•__, Emly Horne convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with seven members present: Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, LeBlanc, Monteith, Witherspoon, Wright co Ron Thelen requests an excused absence. Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms. LeAranc seconded; APPROVED Staff in Attendance: Foulds, Fountain, Spackman Approval of Agenda: A request was made to allow a presentation to.be made of the proposed development plan for the Hospital. APPROVED JAMES PRISTER, Vice President of Support Services for Sparrow Hospital. I would like to expound on our long term development plan. A few years ago we began purchasing property in the neighborhood and have spent a long time looking at this plan and developing options and ideas. This is the culmination of about two years of work. We were also sensitive to the BTS development. We would like to give you the brief overview that we gave at the Council Committee of the Whole meeting. This is not a short term goal, but we do not want haphazard development. We don't want to focus on only a hospital. We want to focus on a campus. South of Michigan Avenue we are suggesting outpatient ambulatory physician offices to separate them and not mix patients or traffic and staff will be separate and distinct. Between Jerome and Michigan we are suggesting high tech, high acuity for inpatient zone and some clinical services we have and are developing. The area to the north will be an educational, research and support function with parking at some point in the future consistent with the BTS development. We also want to consider Bingham Street School, which is still a neighborhood school with no buses going to it. We are suggesting a 750 car parking deck on the south side that would contain the traffic for the physician offices development and would free up and simplify traffic congestion. Our parking is now all over the place. Our family practice services would need to be relocated. We want some city endorsements first that this overall directional plan is something they can support and you can endorse. We do not have detailed design drawings on any of these. We suggest that Michigan Avenue can become a boulevard. We would like to start the Planning Board Minutes September 15, 1992 Page 2 approach to the Capitol at Sparrow. We are talking about $80 to 100 million. We will need to eliminate parking on both sides of the street and create a green space island in the middle of Michigan Avenue. Traffic consultants have endorsed this plan. We are also suggesting, as part of the overpass, that we eliminate that light. We have also done a count of pedestrians going back and forth. From a low of between 6 and 7 in the morning, about 8 to 10 to a high of 200 plus at peak times. We have been asked to create a Ronald McDonald House for families to stay overnight in this location. We would try to retrofit and upgrade some current housing units and create a 'village' to stimulate further investment and development into the neighborhood. Mr. Foulds; Thank you for bringing your concept to the Board and Staff. Hopefully it will help us do our jobs better. BUSINESS SESSION: Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee--Floyd Wright Chaired At the September 9, 1992 regular meeting of the Committee elections were held for officers. Floyd Wright was elected Chairman for the 1992-1993 fiscal year. Ron Thelen was elected as Vice Chairman of the Committee; both by unanimous vote. Z-15-92, 229 North Pine Street D-2 to D-1 This is a request by James P. Hallan, President of the Michigan Retailers Association to rezone property at 229 North Pine Street from "D-2" Residential/Office District to "D-1" Professional Office District. The current use of the structure is office use on the first floor and the second floor is a vacant apartment. The applicant proposes to utilize the entire building for professional office use. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed change is in substantial conformance with the River Island Master Plan as amended, which designates this area for professional office use. It was further found that the use of the property will be in substantial conformance with the established land use pattern in the area, which is predominantly office development. Mr. Wright moved for approval of this request and Ms. Monteith supported; APPROVED Planning Board Minutes September 15, 1992 Page 3 Z-16-92, 4305-4311 South Cedar Street A, F and J to D-1 This is a request by Judith Stegman to rezone property at 4305-4311 South Cedar Street from "A" Residential District, "J" Parking District and "F" Commercial District to "D-1" Professional Office District. The property at 4305 South Cedar is currently developed with an office housing Simplified Bookkeeping and Tax Service Company. The applicant proposes to expand this use into the structure located at 4311 South Cedar. A site plan has been submitted indicating that the property would be utilized essentially in its current state with the exception of removing the existing garage and extending the driveway to provide for four (4) parking spaces at the rear of 4311 South Cedar Street. The Committee found that the proposed change is in substantial conformance with the Master Plan, which designates this property for commercial purposes. The Committee further found that the applicant is requesting to change the zoning of their properties to "D-1" Professional Office District. The Committee believes this is in the best interests of the neighborhood since the change of zoning will decrease the use intensity of the property if any proposed change of use occurs in the future. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Ms. LeBlanc supported; APPROVED SLU-14-92, 1825 Sunset Avenue--Parking This is a request by Jay Harter and Owen Faust representing the owners, Michael and Valorie Guthrie, for approval of a special land use for property at 1825 Sunset Avenue for the purpose of establishing an off street surface parking lot which will be utilized by Trumark, Incorporated, an industrial firm directly across the street. The property in question contains 2.2 acres and is proposed to be developed with approximately twenty-six (26) parking spaces. Mr. Wright moved, and Ms. Witherspoon supported, for approval of the request subject to three stipulations: 1. That landscape, screening and buffering requirements be adhered to. 2. That dimensional requirements of the "A" Residential District are met. 3. That the applicant submit a site plan acceptable to the Public Service Department. APPROVED Planning Board Minutes September 15, 1992 Page 4 Z-9-92, North of 2505 East Kalamazoo Street B to F This is a request by Jack Schafer, President of Farmington Auto Wash Incorporated, to rezone property north of 2505 East Kalamazoo Street from "B" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. The Committee understood that the petitioner was going to submit more information, which has not been received to date. Therefore, this matter will continue to be held in Committee for further stu4EhUWjG0 iMITTEE# SLU-8-92, 221 West Saginaw Street/618 Seymour Avenue This is a request by the Mount Hope Church for approval of a special land use for the purpose of allowing the operation of a church in the existing structure located at 221 West Saginaw Street and 618 Seymour Avenue. Following considerable discussion within the Committee and decided more time was needed. Therefore, this request will remain tabled for further study and report, specifically as it relates to the requirements for off street parking for the proposed use. HELD IN COMMITTEE Mr. Goolsby commented that the letter received by Vern Fountain on September 9 seemed to say they are only the applicant for a short period of time. It seems that the special land use permit would expire if they are no longer the applicant. Mr. Fountain responded that Mt. Hope, being the parent church, will give way to the new church and structure, if any, when they establish there. You can make the special land use site and use specific, but not necessarily applicant specific. You can recommend conditions for any church that may come in there. Mr. Fountain added, we did have the understanding with them that the final contract was going to be named with the adjoining property owners. There should be language, from the City Attorney's office, that should be incorporated into those contracts. The next meeting of the Zoning and Ordinance Committee will be held on Wednesday, October 14, 1992 at 2:30 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Planning Board Minutes September 15, 1992 Page 5 Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby, Chairman Act-25-92, 408 Kalamazoo Plaza This is a request by the Christman Company for an easement to clear up an existing use of land where Christman's parking lot encroaches onto city land adjacent to the Grand River. The parking lot arrangement was approved as a result of the final site plan review process for their site improvements. Mr. Goolsby moved that the request be approved and in addition the Board recommend the city seek an easement from the Christman Company for the twenty feet (201) of land between the parking lot and the river for future rivertrail expansion. Mr. Barnhart seconded the motion; APPROVED Act-35-92, 111 East Willow Street--Offer to sell to City This is an offer by the Michigan Bell Telephone Company to sell property at 111 East Willow Street to the City of Lansing. The property is in need of improvements and is a single family residential structure. The property abuts the Grand River and is adjacent to city owned land at 101 and 107 East Willow, which are used by Capital Area Community Services. Mr. Goolsby moved that the City acquire the property and structure and offer it to the Franklin Street Co-op or other nonprofit in an effort to preserve the structure and promote home ownership for this neighborhood. Ms. LeBlanc secorAMnOVED The next meeting will be held Tuesday, September 22, 1992 at 4 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Report from Planning Director James Foulds I would like to ask if it would benefit the Board in their studies if I have the City's recycling coordinator come to make a presentation on our recycling program. Last time there were questions about composting. The Board concurred that it would be good information. Planning Board Minutes September 15, 1992 Page 6 Comments from Chairperson: A reminder to.mark your calendars for December 17 for the retirement gathering for some employees. Board Member Comments: 1) Mr. Wright asked if anyone plans to be absent from the Wednesday, October 14 meeting. Ms. Monteith will be. Ms. LeBlanc offered to sit in for her. Mr. Goolsby made himself available if it was impossible for Mr. Thelen to attend. 2) Ms. LeBlanc reported receiving a letter from the Citizen Leadership Team Workshop. This is for ground water education and they are holding a meeting October 3 to form ground water study teams across the state. Adjournment: The regular September 15, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 9:55 p.m. R pectfully s bmitted, a es N. Foulds, Director using Planning Division WC APPROVED 120793 TO CLERK 120993 Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers 10th Floor, Lansing City Hall September 1, 1992 Emly Horne, Chairperson, convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with eight members present: Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, LeBlanc, Monteith, Thelen, Witherspoon, Wright Staff in Attendance: Jim Foulds, Planning Division Director introduced his staff; Donna Wynant, Senior Planner and Jim Spackman, Deputy Director The agenda stands as printed. PUBLIC HEARINGS: The first three scheduled hearings were addressed by Jim Spackman and Emly Horne. Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS)--FY 1993 Ms. Horne stated; Title I of the National Affordable Housing Act establishes the requirement that local governments that apply for direct assistance under certain federal programs have a Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) that has been approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The CHAS is a comprehensive planning document that identifies a community's overall needs for affordable and supportive housing and outlines a strategy to address those needs. A five year strategy plan establishes priorities for meeting housing needs and identifies resources anticipated to be available to fund strategies. A one year or annual investment plan is submitted each year to outline a more specific use of resources over a twelve month period. The purpose of the public hearing this evening is to obtain the views of citizens, public agencies and other interested parties on the housing needs of the jurisdiction. Any information received at or subsequent to this hearing will be considered in the formulation of the annual component of the CHAS for 1993. A summary of the 1993 component of the CHAS will be published in the Lansing State Journal on or about September 12, 1993. A complete document will be available for review at that time. After a 30 day comment period, the annual CHAS plan for Lansing will be submitted to HUD for review and approval. REFERRED TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 Page 2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (FY 1993-1994) Emly Horne: This is the time for a public hearing which will provide an opportunity for citizens to comment on the proposed Statement of Objectives and the Proposed Community Development Block Grant Activities for Fiscal Year 1993-1994, including the Rental Rehabilitation Program, The Urban Homesteading Program and/or The Cranston-Gonzalez Act and The Capital Improvements Program Needs for future years. A Draft Statement of Objectives and Projected Uses of Funds has been published in the Lansing State Journal and is available as a handout near the entrance to this room. Each member of the Planning Board has a copy of this information before them. The Draft Statement has been prepared and this public hearing is being held in accordance with the provisions of the Citizens Participation Plan for the Community Development Program, as adopted by the Lansing City Council on June 11, 1984. REFERRED TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM (CIP)--FY 1994-1999 The Capital Improvements Program is the Six Year listing of Physical Development Programs, projects or studies having a cost of more than $10,000 and a life expectancy of at least ten years. This includes; land acquisition, construction of buildings and other structures including additions and alterations, construction of streets, installation of equipment, landscaping and similar expenditures as the City's utility streets, parks and other facilities have deteriorated, costs have continued to rise and the revenue impact is decreasing in ability to keep pace with the rising costs. Therefore, the City must set priorities identifying, assessing and determining the critical needs for capital improvements throughout the City. REFERRED TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Z-15-92, 229 North Pine Street D-2 to D-1 Presented by Donna Wynant The rezoning at 229 North Pine Street is to rezone from "D-2" Residential/Office District to "D-1" Professional Office District the purpose of which is to convert the second floor of the building for office use. The "D-2" zoning district allows for office and residential mix. This would allow them to use the structure fully for office purposes. Surrounding zoning consists of residential and office to the east, west and north and office use to the south. The property contains 3,388 square feet. The Master Plan for the area designates that as office use. Ms. Wynant presented a map showing the "D-2" and "D-1" zoning districts for the downtown area. Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 Page 3 LARRY MEYER, 2923 Kirkwood in Lansing, Vice Chairman of Michigan Retailers Association, who own the property in question. Our organization is growing. Presently we have 30 employees and are crowded in the building at 221 and including the lower level of 229 North Pine. That is why we wish to use the upper level also for office space. We have been in the area over thirteen years and have rehabilitated all four structures we own at the corner of Ionia and Pine Streets. Our investment in that area is in excess of$2 million for acquisition costs, remodeling and upkeep. We also purchased a lot to the west that goes into Sycamore Street. Parking is in excess of 47 spaces. Mr. Foulds added, you will have to provide the Committee with a site plan showing how parking would be met. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Z-16-92, 4305-4311 South Cedar Street A, F and J to D-1 This is a petition by Judy Stegman to rezone property described as 4311 South Cedar Street from 'IF" Commercial District to "J" Parking District and takes in the property at 4305, which is a residential structure to the south. The surrounding zoning is predominantly residential to the east, south and north, with the exception of a business to the north zoned 'IF" Commercial. Properties on the other side of Cedar Street are all zoned commercially. The property is. currently used as an accounting firm and they would like to have additional parking and utilize the structure to the south for their accounting business. The Master Plan designates this area for commercial use. JUDITH STEGMAN, 1840 Sun Hollow, Haslett. I am a property owner of Simplified Bookkeeing and Tax Service at 4305 South Cedar. I have an option to purchase 4311 South Cedar contingent on the rezoning. I also own a small CPA practice separately which is leasing space on Waverly. We are requesting rezoning at 4311 mostly for convenience reasons to share computer usage, save travel time and share employees. Simplified has been at that 4305 location for 38 years. It has been well maintained and been a good neighbor to the surrounding businesses and neighbors. We plan to entirely maintain the residential character of 4311. We would be renovating only internally, which I have building plans for, in order to use it for offices. The garage will be torn down, parking will be placed behind the residential homes. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE J Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 Page 4 SLU-14-921 1825 Sunset Avenue--Parking The property is addressed at 1825 Sunset Avenue and is a little over two (2) acres in size. The surrounding zoning is a combination of things. It sits on a residentially zoned parcel and residential uses and land use exist to the north, "H" Light Industrial zoning to the east with the Trumark business and immediately to the south is "A" Residential zoning and single family land use. To the south is an animal cemetery and shelter--so there is a variety of zoning and land use in the area. The request is to use the lot for 26 parking spaces to get some Trumark employees off the street. MICHAEL GUTHRIE, 4239 Sandridge Drive, Okemos. My wife and I are in partnership with my brother, owners of the metal stamping business located across the street. Trumark employs approximately 275 people. We are on an aggressive growth track that will cause us to hire 60 people within the next six months. At present our parking facilities are entirely occupied and employees are required to park on the streets adjacent to the property, particularly along the residential area. In addition we have approximately 40 to 50 semi trailers which visit the site daily and have difficulty making the turns around the corner to get onto the premises when cars are parked on the street. As a result, it was our intention to acquire any available properties which were near the property in order to provide off street parking for employees. In addition off street parking would not require them to proceed farther up Sunset and onto Melvin Court where there are more residential properties. It is for that reason that we acquired 1825 Sunset and seek permission to have a land use which would permit adding 26 parking spaces. There is one residence that would be isolated by that action. That is, it would be bounded by the proposed parking lot on the north and the Humane Society's present structure and the Wastewater Treatment Plant on the south. We had a meeting and invited neighbors in and I spoke with the home owner of that property. She has advised me she has no objection to the structure as long as we "landscape it nicely." Mr. Thelen: Will the house on that property be torn down? Mr. Guthrie: No. In fact we will be using it. Our long term plans would be best served by tearing that house down and putting additional parking there. Of course, that is an issue we will come back to the Board with at that time. BRIAN CARTER, 4115 Barton Road. I am in favor of this proposal. I attended the meeting that Mike sponsored at his factory and I thought he thoroughly answered all of my questions. I own the property at 1827 Sunset, which is just north of his lot, but I do not reside there. Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 Page 5 ARTHUR ROUSE, 1827 Sunset Avenue. I am also for the parking lot. They had a meeting showing us an idea of what the landscaping and fencing was going to be like. He said the noise really wouldn't be a problem if he had to put a foreman out in the lot. So I am in favor of the parking lot. Thank you. Ms. LeBlanc: I called an area resident who knows all the neighbors, Helen Fitzgerald who lives on Kaplan, and her remarks pretty much repeated what the other two speakers said; that they viewed the parking lot as positive because it is south of the residential area but will keep cars away from where kids are playing. Ms. Fitzgerald said she does want trees, but doesn't really want a fence. I hope you would consider that in the site plan review. The other comment I had was that she expressed her appreciation, I would like to do so for the Board, to Mr. Guthrie for meeting with the neighbors before this came before us, making our job much smoother. A letter was received from JAMES F. ANDERTON, from the Louis Padnos Iron and Metal Company, 1714-1720 Sunset Avenue, supports Trumark Incorporated in this request. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Comments from the Audience: LISA MURPHY, Planning Consultant for Dr. Joyce Heideman, Benson Animal Hospital, veterinary clinic at 5134 South Logan Street, who is in opposition to the Z- 12-92 request for zoning of 5133 South Logan Street. A handout was presented to Board members and read in its entirety (on file in the Department) . Changing from D-1 to F opens the area to a lot of different uses. In the staff analysis it is stated, "The uses permitted in the "F" Commercial District, other than the proposed animal hospital, include a comparison retail store, restaurant, etc. Such businesses would also be consistent with the existing development along South King and Logan." A critical issue is what "F" zoning could offer in this location if the petition from the zoning change should go through. A D-1 zone could include businesses such as those found on the last page of my handout, both positive and negative uses. Thank you very much for your time. DR. JOYCE HEIDEMAN, also regarding Z-12-92. I depend on the viability and continued growth of the neighborhoods which my clinic serves. Therefore, I Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 Page 6 support and share the concerns of the residents of Bogart Street regarding the potential increase in nighttime activity and noise. I am equally concerned about the potential uses for this land if the proposed use fails. Once this site is zoned commercial we will have little input on its use. We already feel influences from businesses in the area which do not protect and support the growth of this area. Establishing an emergency veterinary clinic is a large financial risk anywhere. Compound that with these facts: 1. This clinic will be the fourth veterinary facility in a three mile radius. 2. Three of these facilities will provide emergency care. 3. Michigan State Veterinary Clinic, which provides state of the art facilities and board certified espertise, is less than 20 minutes away. In light of this the cards seem stacked against the long term success of an emergency veterinary facility at this location. It is important to note that my concerns and many of the practitioners with whom I spoke are not based solely on the threat of competition. In fact emergency and after hours care represents less than 100 of a private practitioner's yearly income. In that respect this proposed clinic will provide little financial threat. We are, however, committed to preserving the high quality of care and professional standards provided to our clients and community. Most of us would not hesitate to encourage and even participate in establishing an emergency veterinary facility capable of augmenting the quality of care already provided. To be viable as an emergency clinic a veterinary facility should at least provide standard intensive care equipment, in house laboratory and diagnostic capabilities, as well as continuous monitoring capabilities. With Michigan State's emergency expertise and capabilities easily accessed, the standard for emergency care in this area is even higher. To my knowledge the qualifications, equipment and plans intended by Dr. Hoschek's facility are no more specialized, nor advantageous than those.already provided by area practitioners. Lastly, there already appears to be a scarcity of medical and professional office space in the area of the proposed rezoning. With several large neighborhoods needing medical, dental and health care facilities in this area, there must be a need to support the current zoning. According to several residents in the area the need is great enough that Dr. Lopez, a general practitioner one mile down the road, added onto their building last year and are now accepting no new patients. That seems to indicate some need for the current zoning. Thank you very much. A recess was taken by the Board. Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 Page 7 BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Ms. Witherspoon moved for approval of the minutes of August 5, 1992 and Ms. Monteith seconded; APPROVED Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Z-7-92, 3405-3405 a South Cedar Street A to F This is a request by John R. Benson to rezone the property at 3405-34051 South Cedar Street from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District for the purpose of bringing the zoning into conformance with the use of the property. The property has remained in an "A" Residential classification since it was annexed to the City of Lansing in 1949. The most current proposal for the property was to erect a wall identification for one of the commercial uses in the building. The property measures 110 by 150 feet and contains approximately 16,500 square feet. There is off street parking in front of the subject property and also to the rear. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the Southeast Area Master Plan designates this property for commercial use. It was further found that the property has been utilized for commercial purposes for many years and prior to annexation. The change of zoning will bring zoning into conformance with the use of the property. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Mr. Goolsby seconded; APPROVED Z-8-92, 515 West Hillsdale Street DM-4 to D-1 This is a request by Jay Gupta to rezone property at 515 West Hillsdale Street from "DM-4" Residential District to "D-1" Professional Office District. The property in question measures 822 feet by 66 feet and contains approximately 5,445 square feet. It is currently developed with a residential structure which the applicant proposes to convert for office use with minimal changes to the building. The balance of the property, which is vacant and located to the west, will be utilized for off street parking. It was moved by Wright and supported by Goolsby that this rezoning request be approved with the understanding that a final site plan will be submitted to and Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 Page 8 approved by the Planning Division prior to the conversion of the property for office use. By a vote of 3 yeas and 5 nays the MOTION FOR APPROVAL FAILED. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed change of zoning is in conformance with the River Island Master Plan, which designates this area for office use. Mr. Thelen, the member of the Committee who voted against the request, indicated his concern about the amount of residential uses within this block and the impact changes may have on the established residential development. Z-9-92, North of 2505 East Kalamazoo Street B to F This is a request by Jack Schafer, President of Farmington Auto Wash, Incorporated, to rezone vacant land just north of 2505 East Kalamazoo Street, from "B" Residential District to "F" Commercial District for the purpose of expanding the existing car wash which is located immediately to the south. Neither the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, nor the Planning Division is clear on Mr. Schafer's plans to utilize this property in conjunction with his car wash and believe this matter should be placed on the table for further study and report. HELD IN COMMITTEE Z-10-92, North of 131 Regent Street J to DM-3 This is a request by Dave Muylle for N&D Investments to rezone property which is vacant land just north and adjacent to 131 Regent Street from "J" Parking District to "DM-3" Residential District for the purpose of developing an eight (8) unit apartment building on the site. This site will be developed in conjunction with 131 Regent Street where there is currently a multi-family residential building. The reason for developing the properties together is to integrate the off street parking so that it may be more efficiently used. The property in question measures 75 by 132 feet and contains approximately 9,900 square feet. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the site is designated for commercial parking in the Northeast Master Plan. However, the Committee further recognized that the lot is not efficiently used for commercial parking and recognizes this change as having a positive impact on the neighborhood in that it will promote a transition between the more intense commercial uses along Michigan Avenue and the residential area to the south along Regent Street. The Committee does not believe that the proposed use of the property will have any adverse impact on the residential area from the standpoint of increased traffic and activity since the site does have ease of access to Michigan Avenue, a principle arterial. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Ms. Monteith seconded; APPROVED Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 Page 9 Z-12-9217 5133 M.L. King Blvd/Logan Street D-1 to F This is a request by John D. Tilden to rezone property at 5133 M.L. King Blvd/Logan Street from "D-1" Professional Office to "F" "Commercial District for the purpose of allowing the existing building on the site to be utilized as a 24 hour veterinary emergency animal hospital. The property in question was previously used for professional office purposes. The property measures 174 feet wide, is 273 feet deep and contains approximatly 47,502 square feet. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the property in question is identified on the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan as commercial. Therefore, the proposed change is in substantial conformance with the Master Plan. It was further found that the property abuts commercial uses from all sides and, therefore, any commercial use or activity on this site should have little or no adverse impact on residential development in the vicinity. It was also found that the lot is 273 feet in depth and there is approximately 60 feet beyond the property boundary before residential development exists. Mr. Wright moved to approve this request and Mr. Goolsby seconded; by a 7 yeas, 1 nay vote. APPROVED Z-13-92, 500-600 Blocks American Road D-1 to F This is a request by Richard Neller, President of Walter Neller Entrerprises, Incorporated, to rezone property in the 500 and 600 blocks of American Road from "D-1" Professional Office District to "F" Commercial District. The property in question is irregular in shape, is vacant and contains approximately ten (10) acres. The site has approximately 850 feet of frontage on American Road and the southerly edge of the property abuts the I-96 freeway. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the Master Plan designates this site for non-residential uses. It was originally placed in the "D-1" Professional Office District for the purpose of providing a transition from the more intense commercial uses to the east and, southeast from what is proposed as a professional office park to the north and northwest. The Committee recognizes that this transition will be preserved since there is office zoning directly to the north and northwest of the property. Mr. Wright moved for approval of this rezoning request and Ms. Witherspoon supported; APPROVED Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 Page 10 Z-14-92, 5001 N. Grand River Av/3300 Blk Sheffer Av A, E-2 & J to F This is a request by Todd Vandergalien to rezone property at 5001 North Grand River Avenue and vacant land in the 3300 block of Sheffer Avenue from its current "A" Residential, "J" Parking and "E-2" Local Shopping Districts to "F" Commercial District for the purpose of allowing the construction of a 4,000 square foot building which will be utilized for a motorcycle dealership showroom and sales. The property in question contains approximately 20,718 square feet and is currently developed with two older structures which will be removed. The site will then be redeveloped with a new building with off street parking. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the Northwest Comprehensive Plan calls for commercial use of this site. Therefore, the proposed change is in substantial conformance with the Master Plan. The Committee indicated their concerns about site development and requested that adequate landscape screening and buffering be provided along the west and south property lines so that the existing residential- development in the vicinity is adequately protected. Motion was made by Mr. Wright for approval and Mr. Goolsby supported; APPROVED The next Committee meeting will be held Wednesday, September 9, 1992 at 2:30 • p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee--Garry Goolsby Act-23-92, Mifflin Street Park This is a request by Mr. and Mrs. Tom Emmons of 723 South Francis Avenue to purchase Mifflin Park to improve the maintenance and function of the property. The City has no plans for the Park. Mr. Goolsby made the motion that the City dispose of the entire parcel or any portion of the land not required for a general utility easement and a storm water pump station. Ms. LeBlanc supported; APPROVED Act-24-92, 906 West Barnes Avenue This is a request by James A. Young, II, owner of the property, to leave his six foot fence in the public right-of-way along Delevan. A building permit is not required as long as it does not exceed six feet (61) in height. The South Central Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 Page 11 Neighborhood Organization has no opposition and are satisfied with the appearance of the fence. Mr. Goolsby moved that this request be denied and the fence be removed. Mr. Barnhart seconded; DENIED Act-26-92, 702 West Barnes Avenue This is a request by Cynthia Stajos, representing the owner John Morlock, to retain the angle parking arrangement at 702 Barnes Avenue to continue use of the property for commercial and apartment uses. The Committee recommends that the request to continue angle parking at his location be denied. The property owner could continue to use the area at the curb for parallel parking using the existing bay style curb inset. Additionally, the Committee recommends that the owner be encouraged to remove the paving between the walk and the building along the Beal frontage and plant grass to improve the landscape of the property. Motion was made by Mr. Goolsby to deny the request for angle parking; however, the parallel parking could continue to be used. Motion seconded by Mr. Barnhart; DENIED Act-29-92, 151 Garden Street This is a request by David Powell; owner, to obtain a drive easement across City property for access to parking along the east side of the house. Mr. Goolsby moved that the City authorize Mr. Powell, of 151 Garden Street, to obtain a permit from the Public Service Department for the purpose of constructing an access drive to the east side of his property and that the original easement request be denied as filed. Ms. Witherspoon seconded. ACCEPTED Act-30-92, Lansing Avenue Lots This is a request by Neil Simon, owner of Lots 420 to 424, to donate five vacant lots to the City. Mr. Goolsby moved that the City accept the donation of the five lots on Lansing Avenue and provide Mr. Simon a statement of value in exchange. Also, the property should be assigned to the Public Service Department and an environmental Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 Page 12 assessment be made on the lot. Further, the future use be considered recreational consistent with the Willow/Pine Plan. Ms. Monteith supported; APPROVED Act-32-92, Pine Tree Road This is a request by the Stockwell Real Estate Group to exchange land areas to improve access, development and land use patterns. Mr. Goolsby moved that the proposal to exchange parcels on Pine Tree Road be approved and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED Act-34-92, 1223 Turner Street--Estes Warehouse This is a bookkeeping matter to correct a situation where all parties considered the subject 20 by 20 foot alley under the Estes Warehouse at 1223 Turner Street be vacated, yet.it was never recorded. Mr. Goolsby moved to accept that the north twenty-two (22) feet of the subject alley be vacated and Ms. LeBlanc seconded; APPROVED Willow/Pine Development Plan The Committee accepted and Mr. Goolsby moved to have the Board accept the Willow/Pine Development Plan as a Master Plan revision with the amended text recently reviewed by the Committee; Ms. LeBlanc supported the motion. ACCEPTED Report from Planning Director: James Foulds 1) I would like to thank Donna Wynant on her efforts to work with the Committee in developing the Willow/Pine Development Plan. Mr. Barnhart moved that a Board resolution be presented to the Willow/Pine citizen group and Mr. Goolsby seconded. This motion was APPROVED unanimously. 2) BTS was approved by City Council as a Master Plan amendment to the Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan. It outlines a disposition process for the City's recommendation to the State. Planning Board Minutes September 1, 1992 Page 13 3) Sparrow Hospital expansion is developing a strategic plan. 4) Z-43-87, the east end of Paulson Street is going to trial next month and issues will be decided. Comments from Chairperson: Ms. Horne commented that the retirement reception for Don Hanna, Planning Graphics Coordinator, was very nice. Also she attended and informational session at Cherry Hill on L.A.S.E.R. (Lansing Area Sentencing and Enhancement Rehabilitation) which appears to be a challenging issue. Adjournment: The regular September 1, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 10:10 P.M. Respectfully submitted, James N. Foulds, Direct Lansing Planning Division WC LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers 10th Floor, Lansing City Hall Wednesday, August 5, 1992 Emly Horne convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with seven members present: Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, LeBlanc, Thelen, Witherspoon, Wright Excused Absence: Beth Monteith r Staff in Attendance: Foulds, Fountain, Ruff, Spackman The agenda stands as printed. a, PUBLIC HEARINGS: As the following five requests revolve around one development proposal, Emanuel First Evangelical Lutheran Church, the Board will hear all five cases at this time and will be presented by James Ruff. Jim Ruff, Senior Planner. This is a proposal to expand the existing school facilities for the Emanuel First Evangelical Lutheran Church at 1001 North Capitol Avenue and in doing so there are a number of actions required by the Planning Board to approve this overall development. A quick overview is the Church proposes to expand their school facilities by constructing an addition, creating additional off street parking and relocating their child care facility. This proposal necessitates the following five Planning Board actions: Z-11-921 1001 North Capitol Avenue J to C involves rezoning a portion of 1001 North Capitol Avenue which fronts North Seymour and is currently used for parking, this is in the middle of the block of North Seymour. They propose to build a portion of the addition onto this property and since the property is currently zoned "J" Parking that would be prohibited; thus the request for rezoning that parcel like the other parcels around it to "C" Residential. SLU-11-921 1001 North Capitol Avenue, 1012, 1022 and 1024 North Seymour Street and 221-225 West Maple Street allows relocation of the child care facility into the new expansion area and the existing facility. Under our current Code requirements, it involves a special land use that will accommodate a maximum of 65 children at 1001 North Capitol Avenue. The child care facility is currently located in a structure on the site known as 1012 North Seymour Avenue, which will be removed with the proposed redevelopment and become part of the surfaced parking area. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 2 SLU-12-92, 10121 1022 and 1024 North Seymour Street and 221-225 West Maple Street involves a portion of property that will be created into a surface parking lot, which is allowed in the "C" Residential District if a special land use is granted. This surfaced parking lot is proposed to take the place of the structures at 1022-24 North Seymour Street, 221 and 225 West Maple Street as well as 1012 North Seymour. This parking lot will have a total of 66 spaces on one side of the building. SLU-13-92, 1026 North Capitol Avenue and vacant parcel formerly known as 1022 North Capitol Avenue this also is a parking request on property that is also "C" Residential, but the structure is across at 1022 and 1026 North Capitol Avenue. The structure at 1022 has been removed previously. This will supply an additional 26 parking spaces for the use of the educational facility as well as the Church. Normally we don't hold public hearings on Act 285 reviews, but this is part of the Emanuel proposal and allows private use of the public right-of-way. Act-27-92, 1001 North Capitol Avenue This request is to construct additional parking in the public right-of-way on Seymour, Capitol and Kilborn Streets and as such would involve moving some sidewalk areas and rearranging the curbline of those streets in the area. That brings us to all five of the proposals together. So you are aware of it, the Board of Zoning Appeals, not under this proposal, is also hearing a portion of this development process. That will take place later this month. This area is residential with these two institutions; number one being the Emanuel Church and School, and two, across Seymour is Walnut Street School property. Mr. Ruff presented videos of the general site and explained which structures would be removed and which would remain. Mr. Goolsby made motion that, considering that we are going to hear all five of these requests together, I move we allow the petitioner 15 minutes for presentation of his proposal and then grant members of the audience five minutes to respond. Mr. Wright seconded; APPROVED RICHARD BOWMAN, 1740 Nottingham Road, elder at Emanuel First Lutheran Church. Emanuel First Lutheran Church was founded in 1855 and has always been located in the block it stands. Emanuel has 1,234 communicate members and a total of 1,599 baptized members. During the 137 years of our existence the governing bodies of Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 3 our congregation have adopted budget that provided for the proper maintaining of its property and buildings on the block. In fact, just during the past ten years, we have spent in excess of $400,000 to maintain and improve our existing facilities. We believe these decisions and expenditures have been an important factor in preserving the condition of the neighborhood in the blocks immediately around the Church. We have provided stability, well maintained property and know that we have attracted some families to move into our neighborhood to be near our church, school and day care. Emanuel serves the community in numerous ways. We support and are members of the association that owns the Martin Luther Holt Home. We have given over $100,000 in the past 20 years to that association. We provide a weekly radio broadcast of our Sunday services for shut-ins. We support and send many of our teenagers to Michigan Lutheran Seminary, a church run, boarding high school. We also support the Greater Lansing Food Bank and during the past year over 200,000 items and over $3,000 in cash has been given. Our school children have supported the American Heart Association with over $9,600. Emanuel has operated an elementary school for more than half of its history. Its first school was opened in the 1860s and continued until it was closed in 1927. Nine years ago the school was reopened. Last year it had an enrollment of 95 students, taught in five temporary classrooms. Four years ago our congregation decided to offer a christian education to preschoolers. By opening a fully licensed day care center, licensed for 23 preschoolers, both our school and day care have experienced steady growth. The services provided these two facilities are extremely important to the many families of this community who have children enrolled in their programs and Emanuel certainly has an obligation to provide permanent facilities for them. These critical needs prompted the members of Emanuel to formulate a proposed facility improvement program that is on the agenda for discussion this evening. This expansion will enable us to return the areas which are presently being used by the school on a temporary basis to congregational use such as Sunday school, pioneers and other organizations. We hope to provide through this facility improvement adequate facilities so future building will not be necessary for generations. Our Board for parish education has informed the congregation that enrollment in our school would be capped when it reaches a capacity of these new classrooms and not be allowed to grow beyond that. Our intentions are not a major expansion of our school and day care. Nor is it our intention to substantially increase the size of our congregation. But this plan is our response to the blessings God has given to our school and day care. We are undertaking this project in the hope that Emanuel will remain a healthy congregation and that it will serve our community for generations to come. I thank you. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 4 JOHN MYER, from Wigen Tincknell Myer Architects, 815 Coolidge Road, Lansing. I have been working for several years with the Emanuel Lutheran Church on development of this program being presented to you this evening. I have been involved in historic preservation for over 20 years, serving currently as one of the implementing architects at the Michigan State Capitol restoration. I have underway right now, just west of here, a nice rehabilitation project at the Blue Cross/Blue Shield building at Pine and Ionia. I am currently finishing a project similar to this in Mason where we have done a new office building for the County that went through the very same types of concerns that this project is going through. We are now moving into the next phase, the final restoration of the Ingham County Courthouse. The video Mr. Ruff showed illustrated the fact that Emanuel has done a very nice job of maintaining its facilities over the years. The graphics I have (presented to Board) were also given to all of the audience members so they can follow along and each of you have reductions as well. The plan we propose is an expansion is for a one story building for school use only. The day care operation will be in the existing building. The rest of the building is kitchen, gymnasium, locker rooms and five classrooms and the principals office on the east side of the building. We create a courtyard which will be used for playground area for the day care students. We propose creation of nine (9) parking spaces by modifying the curb lines so that we can have drop off space for the day care facility which operates from 6:30 a.m. until 6 p.m. with children being dropped off and picked up during various times of the day. There is no major rush during any particular time of the day. On the west side of Seymour we propose removal of that one story wood frame which is currently used for the day care and is inadequate. The proposed facilities will be much better. We also propose parking be expanded on the west and northwest sides of the proposed new addition and that angle parking be provided along Seymour Street; a total of seven spaces. We feel the impact is minimal because we have the institutional use across Seymour and there is currently parking in that location, so it is not a major change. On the northwest corner we are proposing removal of three structures to expand parking and then there would be a drive from the parking lot onto Maple. If you divide the 66 spaces by the three approaches to that parking lot, you can see you are getting approximately 22 vehicles out of each drive. That is primarily for Sunday services. We are not anticipating a great deal of activity during the week, but primarily on Sunday morning. During the day there would be drop off of those students who are not immediate neighborhood students. There are three remaining parcels and a considerable amount of green space between those parcels and the proposed development. The north side of Maple is currently all residential. On Capitol Avenue we propose the school entrance be located in the new addition and the church office be located in the existing facilities. Obviously the main church entrance is off of Capitol Avenue now. We are proposing 15 spaces of parking perpendicular to Capitol Avenue by modifying the curb cut and sidewalks to allow that. We have worked that Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 5 totally around the existing trees on Capitol Avenue. We are not taking any trees out for parking. However, we are losing two trees on Seymour Avenue. There are very small trees on Kilborn that would be relocated to the other side of the sidewalk. So a very minimal negative affect along Capitol Avenue with what we are proposing. The congregation owns a stretch that has been condemned by the City with major deficiencies cited. The proposal is to remove that structure creating 26 parking spaces that would be available to the church and school. You will notice in this and the proposed parking lot that we have provided landscape screening around the parking for a buffer to the adjacent properties. What we propose we think is an advancement for the neighborhood. We don't consider it negative. The Church has been there a great many years. As a preservationist, I am not excited about losing structures but at times it becomes necessary for the health of more significant structures. Thank you. FOREST KELSEY, 1602 North Canal Road, Chairman of Emanuel's Long Range Planning Committee. I would like to respond to some questions we have received. The reason we do not wish to relocate is that Emanuel has been located in the block for nearly 140 years. Also to relocate to other facilities, we are looking at 4 z million dollars to reconstruct. Moving houses was considered but is a no win situation. Third, the Willow-Pine Plan calls for green space, off street parking, removal of substandard housing and upgrading of existing parking and buildings in the area. We feel our plans are compatible with this Master Plan. We are not in a quiet and secluded area. Both Capitol and Seymour Avenues are major streets which carry heavy volumes of traffic. Therefore, we feel the impact of our project is not particularly disturbing. Finally, it is our intent to build a facility that will serve this generation and the next with no future expansion plans or acquisition intentions. We don't feel we are disrupting the block that much. We are leaving three owner occupied dwellings and we feel we have enjoyed a mutually beneficial relationship with the neighborhood for 137 years and hope this all continues. Thank you. Mr. Bowman responded to questions from the Board. (1) school population--there would be five classrooms at 30 per classroom, 150 or less. There are now 95 students enrolled there. (2) parking--The two off street lots and on street parking with modifications to the curb, totals 137 I believe. On a Sunday morning we have upwards of 600 to 700 of the congregation attending. Obviously some come together. There are three services, the biggest at 10:30, probably 450 members during that service. Parishioners are in the Lansing area, including East Lansing, Waverly and the surrounding area. Sidewalks--we propose offsetting the sidewalk in front of the parking in each of these cases. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 6 RICHARD LOTT, 1107 North Capitol, President of the Walnut Neighborhood Organization. I will summarize for our group. We are against the expansion and rezoning requests for Emanuel First Lutheran Church. Our neighborhood group has been formed as a positive influence on our community. Our members contribute directly in many ways. They are active and responsible for keeping Walnut School open, starting and running the school P.T.A. , starting summer recreation programs for neighborhood kids, baseball teams for the neighborhood, adopting and cleaning Comstock Park and recruiting members in the Franklin Street Community Housing Cooperative which works at renovating and renting homes to area residents and with new programs to promote home ownership which helps stem the tide of absentee landlords. Thereby, helping to stabilize housing in the area. Our neighbors are active in area churches. They work, run businesses, maintain their homes, vote and pay taxes for the City and schools for services which will support and enhance the appearance of living in our neighborhood. The Organization was also formed in reaction to pressure to degrade the quality of life here. The expansion of the Church is not a new issue with use. We have had to deal with encroachment into our residential neighborhood for years. Years ago Consumers Professional Credit Union demolished many homes to build their Credit Union. This is against the Master Plan the City had at the time. Now, eleven years later, they are still acquiring homes to demolish. Once you allow an expansion it continues with a ripple effect. The State of Michigan demolished old houses on Maple Street by the School for the Blind for a dirt parking lot surrounded by a cyclone fence--so they'd be safe I suppose. Lansing Community College, which not only uses our neighborhood for a parking lot, started demolishing homes for parking. The Central Free Methodist Church at 828 North Washington and Oakland has been buying and demolishing homes for parking. Now it's Emanuel First Lutheran Church's turn. In our early meetings with the City, the neighborhood and the Church, it was extremely enlightening for us to hear the Church's view of our neighborhood. I felt they were genuinely surprised when residents actually showed up at these meetings. We were told the Church needed more parking because their congregation didn't feel safe walking a block or two in our neighborhood, but they want to build their school more. They were so out of touch with our neighborhood that they thought they would be doing us a favor by demolishing housing stock that we had been fighting so hard to save. We were also amazed to learn that the Church had never considered going off site for their school/day care. Choosing instead to attempt to destroy part of our neighborhood. We were also disappointed by the head of the Planning Department's involvement in the Church's expansion plans--seemingly encouraging the Church to abuse instead of helping our neighborhood stay a residential neighborhood. Years ago the Church served and met the needs of the neighborhood in which it was located. Sadly, with the advent of expressways and suburbs, this is no longer the case. The neighborhood and our Organization have never, never objected to a zoning variance allowing parking on the street during church services because of lack of parking spaces. It was preferable to demolishing homes. Nor Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 7 have we ever objected to the Church, its current day care facility or school being located in our neighborhood. With the Church's current plans and request for rezoning and a blatant disregard for the neighborhood, we feel we must oppose the expansion and all the rezoning and special land use requests for the following reasons. The kitchen is for the Church only. It will serve functions in their new gymnasium. We were told the children would bring their lunches to school. Why a new kitchen? The heating unit for the Church has been moved to the new addition. The Church has a gym--why a new one? ' The classrooms we use for Sunday School, a Church activity and all the increased parking--which is only about one-third of what they would need if they built that church today. By demolishing houses there is a loss of property taxes that support our public school; the school we've had to fight several times to keep open and we know what happens to a neighborhood when their public school disappears. The disappearance of affordable housing; housing for families that attend our public schools and increase taxes for the rest of the tax paying owners in the neighborhood. Two of the families the Church has evicted so far had children attending Walnut Street School. The creation of more parking lots create more problems for the neighborhood. It's heat in the summer, noise from traffic, broken glass, litter. Rezoning to pave up to the sidewalk even though the zoning says it should be set back 20 feet. That's ugly. My kids have to walk on a narrow sidewalk with angle parking now coming from the street and paved parking coming from the Church's parking lots. That's ridiculous. The parking lots mean more police protection, which costs us homeowners more. The Church was grandfathered in because of inadequate parking and with the expansion, we will need more later--we have seen this with the Credit Union, we have seen it all over our neighborhood--and that sets the stage for future confrontations with the neighborhood. Off site parking on Capitol Avenue. We were told by the City this wasn't to be allowed, but yet they submit it. The size being inadequate for church use, it will sit there empty all during the week. Maybe L.C.C. students will use it. Only for a Sunday when they drive into our neighborhood from the suburbs. We feel that is ridiculous. The Willow-Pine study recommends that the area remain residential. The Church's plans also show no outdoor recreation area for the schools. We were told 300 children and they're telling you 150. I have petitions that state, "We the undersigned do not support the request of Emanuel First Lutheran Church to expand their Church, school, day care, demolish houses and create more parking lots." All the property owners left on the block that the Church owns have signed our petition. The vast majority of the property owners facing the Church on all four sides of the block have signed our petition. It is not our fault that the Church site is inadequate for the grand vision the Church has for our area. We feel we should not have to pay for the Church's problem with our neighborhood. We, therefore, request that all rezoning and special land use requests be denied. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 8 CARRIE GUZMAN, 1114 North Capitol. I chose to move to a downtown neighborhood and raise my family there. I teach community development at Michigan State University. One of the major issues in dealing with this expansion that we are struggling with is that we are dealing with the good of the Church and the good of their school in contrast with what the neighborhood sees as their good. That is a difficult situation. It is, though, a national problem. One of the major criteria that some other cities have used and that is starting to show up is the concept of mutuality. That is looking at how can we evaluate the exchange and interchange and impact between the institutional question and the neighborhood. In this particular instance as society has changed, the Church is drawing from a much larger congregational area than the immediate neighborhood. Most of the people do live outside the neighborhood and that is not atypical for downtown churches. When you look at that in the light of mutuality or what that means for those of us who live in the neighborhood, that raises part of the question. In some informal meetings comments were made that we were anti-Christian or anti- Church because we had some questions about this expansion. That is not the case and we certainly are not denigrating either the church or school as institutions, but rather questioning what the impact is on our immediate neighborhood. If you look at the exchange between the neighborhood church and the school, it is a lovely building and a beautiful site; though I do think it would be possible to sell and move to the land in DeWitt. It is a nice site I think somebody would purchase it. But the items they talked about as far as community service; the Food Bank was the only thing that touches much on our neighborhood. We are multi-level income, multi- ethnicity, a mix of residential, apartments, owner occupied and rental units. In trying to build a sense of community that is done on a person by person, family by family, task by task, whether it's cleaning up Comstock or calling the landlord when you call the police if it's a drug house--trying to make the changes you want to make in your neighborhood. In trying to objectively examine what we receive from the church, the Church does not provide Bible school, does not participate in Loaves and Fishes or the shelters that many others in our neighborhood use. Unlike some other churches, like North Presbyterian that offers a lot of programs and done boys' clubs and outreach programs to the community. So the aspect of mutuality, with the exclusion of the fact that it is a beautiful and well maintained structure, is certainly one I hope you would look at in making your decision. Another issue relates to the Willow Pine study that another person will address. When the homeowner that lived at the house adjacent to the corner house designated historic on Capitol Avenue was extremely upset to find that that house was demolished because there was no knowledge the sale was directly to the church. The sale of that home was to someone else and then to the church. I suspect that's how some of the other purchases happened also. That leads me to question the good faith of the neighborhood. I am hesitant to see the demolition of houses for parking that is only going to be used for a certain time on Sunday when there are so many people who don't have anywhere.to live. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 9 LYN O'CONNOR, 1101 North Capitol. One of the things that happened over the last two or three years was members of that church did buy many houses in our neighborhood; houses that never went on the market. They approached owners independently. What happened then that in good faith people sold the homes and then found them demolished. I have a problem with the presentation tonight in that it is somewhat slanted in the statements, presentation and answers that you are getting from people representing the Church. There are six children in our neighborhood that go to that Church. The rest go to Walnut, a public school. I have taken a count the last three Sundays of how many people attended the 10:30 service. Including the cars in the parking lot there were less than 50 at 10:30 which they said was their busiest service. On the. first Sunday of Lent there were less than 100 cars parked in the lot and on the road for the 10:30 service. They may have 1234 members but not very many are hitting the 10:30 service and I know the earlier services have even fewer cars. The gentleman who lives on Canal Road, which is not in the City of Lansing, said that God puts us here, referring to the Church. Well God put the people in the neighborhood too. I have lived in the neighborhood for 17 years. The people across the street have lived there over 60. The Conrad sisters around the corner have lived there 46 years. I feel we have some rights also in the neighborhood. When they cited their only reason not to relocate as one of monetary value. I find that appalling that is the attitude that a church would take. A church should not make its first method of decision making a dollar in their pocket. They should think of the integrity of the neighborhood. Very carefully in this presentation every owner occupied house across the street from all they showed is not included. I didn't think I needed a video of my neighborhood to show it's a viable neighborhood that most of us keep our houses in good repair and in fact they said this would be a historic statement. I think we already have a lot there. We have homes over 100 years old that are very well maintained. We have some that need improvement. Most of those are owned by absentee landlords and that's a problem the entire city faces. The other reference made was for substandard housing. The house that they want to demolish on Capitol Avenue east of the Church is owned by the Church. It was rented by the Church and allowed to fall into disrepair by the Church and has set empty for over a year. One of the houses on Maple Street next to the corner I saw the Minister stand on the front porch while the Police Department evicted a tenant out of the apartment. I do not feel these are actions of a Church looking out for the best interest of the neighborhood. I encourage you to deny all of these requests and think of the integrity of our neighborhood and help us try to preserve it. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 10 JULIE TUBBS-LOTT, 1107 North Capitol, Secretary of the Walnut Neighborhood Organization. I am here to urge you to not support the rezoning request, three special land use requests and the proposed curb and sidewalk modifications by Emanuel First Lutheran Church. The Church is requesting to expand their building, parking, school and day care facility by destroying our neighborhood. They have already demolished housing for their parking lot, two houses which are now vacant lots and want to demolish five more houses to make room for their "improvements." This Church is operating with a zoning variance now for lot size and parking and is requesting more changes to city ordinances to expand their school, day care, parking lot. There is a reason the city has ordinances to follow. To have to break so many is not keeping the intent of the zoning designations for our neighborhood. The City has had the foresight and progressiveness to have developed plans for different areas in the city to be followed in any development. For our neighborhood the Willow-Pine Area Development Plan has stated that, "This area, being predominantly residential in nature, is one of stately old homes with many built in the late 1800s and early 1900s relatively close to downtown Lansing. The majority of recommendations made are more preservation oriented rather than based on a redevelopment approach. Program and policy recommendations are, therefore, designed to enhance, strengthen and stabilize the area." This quote means to me and to others that the intent of the Plan is to keep our neighborhood as a neighborhood with residential homes filled with people that live there. Not expand businesses, school, church with people that come in for just a few hours once a week. Our esteemed Mayor wrote in his Lansing State Journal on Sunday, June 28, 1992 that, "Lansing is concerned about the quality of life in our city and is working very hard to revitalize our older neighborhoods." This is exactly what we are trying to do in our neighborhood. We do not want houses demolished and parking lots constructed. He continues to say, "Recently our city launched the Lansing Housing Partnership, which is a cooperative effort between citizens, financial institutions, nonprofit housing corporations, neighborhood organizations and local, state and federal government to develop and carry out a plan to revitalize Lansing's older neighborhoods." I do not believe that what the Church is proposing to do is at all a partnership to revitalize our neighborhood. I implore you to follow the guidelines that are already in place and deny the request from the Church. Thank you very much. CHERYL TULLOCH, owner and occupant of the property at 933 North Capitol, which is also a three unit so I have two units I rent out; also the property at 825 North Seymour which my daughter occupies. As this property is located on the corner of Capitol and Kilborn it is directly adjacent to the Emanuel Lutheran Church separated only by Kilborn Street. I also appear before you this evening as a banker servicing an eight county area including Ingham County. In my profession I review many residential appraisal reports and as a result am very familiar with the term "economic obsolescence." What the Church is proposing would represent economic obsolescence Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 11 to my property and all those in close proximity to the Church. To propose demolition of residential properties and replace them with surface parking would be a travesty. The impact on property values cannot be measured except to state it would have a negative affect. I have worked hard to restore the properties I own and would not choose to see the values eroded by being adjacent to a property which consisted of primarily surface parking. The Church has been a good neighbor throughout the years. They seemed to have operated with little or no difficulty as it relates to parking, as on street parking is permitted in our area. It is not metered, therefore, parking is available most any time except the early hours of the mornings. Many of the Church members seem to be driving in from areas outside of downtown Lansing. Therefore, they won't be around to live with the surface parking they are proposing. Those of us who live in downtown Lansing will. We need housing in downtown Lansing and to demolish homes which are part of our heritage to make way for parking lots would be a grave injustice to those in need of homes, not to mention the injustice we the present homeowners would endure through decreased property values. I ask you to consider this proposal very carefully and decide if we want to demolish downtown Lansing or restore it. It is my feeling that unless and until the Church comes forth with a proposal compatible with the neighborhood, you must arrive at a decision which would not permit this plan to go forward. Thank you. MINDY STAHL, 1105 North Capitol. I too do go to church. The church that I attend outgrew its facility so they relocated. They have a beautiful building, have all the room they need and are in a good location. The is a good option for the Church in our situation. I think that a church in a neighborhood is very good. It has a good influence on the neighborhood. They help with the moral upstanding of the neighborhood. But when you start pushing the people out of the neighborhood, you are undoing all the good that you did in the beginning. Thank you. CAROL HILTS, 1117 North Chestnut. My husband was on the School Board when they bought the property for DeWitt High School, Junior High and Middle School. It was out of the city limits at that time, but has been annexed. We have seen that school go from K through 12 in 1953 to that school holds the 4th grade. We cannot have that in our neighborhood. Thank you. CHARLES BAUER, 721 Seymour, representing the membership and Board of Directors of the Downtown Neighborhood Association and have a statement prepared by the organization for the purpose of addressing all issues concerning the Lutheran Church proposed expansion. "The Downtown Neighborhood Association opposes the demolition of viable housing stock and supports home ownership in our neighborhood. For that reason we oppose any plan the Emanuel First Lutheran Church might have to demolish a number of houses in its area to increase parking. We would, however, support a compromise plan to block off Seymour between Kilborn and Maple to provide the needed parking space. This would have several positive benefits; (1) the area would be made safer for the children at Walnut School and the Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 12 Emanuel Day Care Center. (2) Seymour would remain a neighborhood street and Capitol Avenue would remain a major traffic arterial, as designated in the Master Plan. (3) This plan would allow an established church housed in a historic building to expand without having to demolish good houses which would be a major disruption to the families living in the houses and to the neighborhood. Old neighborhoods are fragile but Lansing city government has long recognized this and supported neighborhood efforts to maintain stability and viability. We hope that the Planning Board will recommend this or another compromise plan which will be beneficial to both the neighborhood and to the Emanuel First Lutheran Church." Thank you. LYNNE MARTINEZ, 412 West Grand River, here to raise some concerns about the proposed expansion of the school and day care and the demolition of housing by Emanuel First Lutheran Church. The issues for the neighborhood are several. First, we are trying to protect what we believe to be valuable and viable housing. The video showed something of the quality of housing that is being discussed for demolition, particularly on that block face on Maple. I respectfully request that before you folks consider allowing these demolitions that you would do the neighborhood the favor of taking a drive by those properties. These are big historical, beautiful homes that can well serve families who need housing in this city and could be brought back to be very beautiful contributions to our neighborhood also. A couple of points I wanted to make very clear; this proposal is not separate from the Willow-Pine study that you are also being asked to consider in the neighborhood. I hope that as you're looking at this that you will be looking at the Willow Pine study also and noting that the neighborhood is very strong in its support of our commitment to maintain a viable residential community there. If you look at a map of the area we are talking about, it's hemmed in by the Grand River on the east and north, the School for the Blind on the west and the Saginaw and Oakland boundary on the south and a very small, contained little neighborhood that tries to support a school and take care of itself and build some sense of community. But every time we lose housing we are diminishing that base that can live there and pretty soon there won't be a base that can support itself. We are getting very close to that and ask that you take our concerns seriously. The only other thing I wanted to mention is that everybody is looking for some ground for compromise. We talked to the Church for a long time looking for a compromise and asked if they'd look at the school or day care being somewhere else or both being on another property nearby. We've been told time after time that that just isn't possible. That the commitment of that synod is that their church and school will be connected so we tried to propose things we felt would work for the benefit of all concerned. We are very confused as to what is or is not possible. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 13 PENNY BACKER, owner of 915 Seymour. I moved into this neighborhood three summers ago only because of the Emanuel Lutheran Church, day care and school. I would never have considered it otherwise. Emanuel Lutheran Church has been our family's church since my great grandfather went there. I am very proud of the work the school is doing. I really would appreciate a vote for expansion because we need this. The children now are in a classroom which is in the only gym we have and we need the extra space. I would appreciate a vote in our favor. Thank you. LOREEN EDWARDS, 933 North Chestnut. I have lived there since 1955 and have five children that were confirmed in the church. I also have four grandchildren that go there. It is a wonderful church. They have done a lot for the neighborhood. It has been an asset to the community for a long time and I say welcome to the addition in our neighborhood because it's well maintained. There are a lot of houses that need to be fixed, on Maple Street and Kilborn. So I say good luck I hope they make it. CARROLL SHOEN, 1108 North Capitol. I would like to express surprise at the compromise of the Downtown Neighborhood Organization. My observation is of the construction, expansion and demolition as desired by the Church has an extra dimension not addressed previously. In this package are diagonal parking spaces in the tree lawn area of Capitol, Kilborn and Seymour. Not only will these create added traffic congestion, but be an extreme safety hazard to students and employees of Michigan School for the Blind. The School's instructors utilize Maple and Kilborn and cross streets as trading grounds. Many graduates return to the School to teach and live in our neighborhood. So the proposed street parking is totally unacceptable. By the way, who will maintain this proposed parking? ALEXANDER KRUSELL, 1027 Seymour. I must say when my wife and I first considered purchasing something in the downtown area we were living in East Lansing and wanted something that had substance, a neighborhood, people and safety. We did visit and walk about and when we first considered this house the neighbor came out to say "hi" and that indicated there were people there. I said hello to parishioners coming in on Sunday morning. I got no response from them. When I worked outside and saw people walking along, it was on our side of the street rather than on the Church side. These are only insights I gleaned in two years. I built a home and a farm and then it became a neighborhood and a community and a city so I know what real estate development is. You never purchase or do something just for the immediate use. There is always something beyond. When the Church says they are not seriously thinking of expanding any further and are capping with 95 students, if the community of the Church grows, 95 students is not going to be what they are working towards. The amount of money they are spending, $400,000 over the last ten years; divided by the 224 communicants they said would amount to $30 per year to maintain the property. I spend significantly more in putting plants out so the people who come and use the neighborhood are greeted with a friendly, aesthetic kind of community. $30 a year is not much. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 14 I also look at the fact that when we first moved in we found a neighborhood, a society, a collection of people who interacted with each other. We have had rumors that it is unsafe to walk about. I have had people from out of town, Madrid, Spain, and they had no feeling of not being safe. Safety is not a concern, but it will be with the parking lot. It will be a wasteland. We want a neighborhood and want it to remain as it is. Thank you. PAUL F. SCOTT. I first became aware when I joined the North Lansing Community Association two years ago and our representative gave regular reports. When we considered buying property on West Kilborn, I became more involved and attended a meeting in March at North Presbyterian that I found a bit distressing. I was told I should be concerned about 427 West Kilborn being a crack house and a source of trouble. But I was more concerned about the enmity present in the basement of North Presbyterian Church that evening. I believe there are compromises that can be achieved that can benefit the needs of the Church and desires of us who live there to maintain a very pleasant neighborhood. JOAN SHELDON, Downtown.Neighborhood Association are trying to do things to decrease traffic on Seymour and I see two openings from a parking lot onto Seymour as doing nothing to enhance their efforts. I am very concerned about the placement of surface parking on the east side of Capitol at 1022 and 1026. That will do nothing to enhance the quality of rental structures south of that parking lot. In truth we will probably wind up having a creeping of professional and commercial uses that have come up North Washington and Capitol between Saginaw and Oakland and further intrude into that neighborhood and perhaps fully blind Capitol on one side. While the structures may be maintained on North Washington, the sense of neighborhood, of people being there on a regular basis, will be foregone. This will be difficult and time consuming but I hope you will consider areas where we all may compromise and concerns of the neighborhood. Thank you. YVONNE MARTEMUCCI, 934 Seymour. I have spent a year living there and will be very disappointed to see this proposal take place. I bought it because I like the neighborhood as it is now and I hope you listen to the outcry of discontented neighbors for this proposal. Thank you. LLOYD TEETS, 116 East Elm Street. I do not live in this immediate neighborhood so it does not affect me personally. I am disturbed about what the purpose of a church is. The purpose, I think, is to serve the community. We have a problem with this church because its community is so diverse and they have no sense of community to that neighborhood. A church a neighborhood does not make. People make a neighborhood. As an outsider listening to comments and plans, I came to one conclusion, that this particular church had no regard for the immediate neighborhood in which it sets. If it did, a compromise could, or should, have been reached. A hand should have been extended to their immediate neighbors. It Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 15 appears this church had the attitude that this neighborhood was no longer good enough to live in, but it's good enough for us to come down Sunday morning and worship because we built the church. I have a problem with that because it seems so unchristian. I am sure that every member of that congregation feels they are a good christian. It appears to me that these houses were bought, and I have seen this in the City time and time again--a business will buy a house and then deliberately neglect it and then it's substandard and must be knocked down. A lot of the fault lies with the City. I am not a big fan of Councilmember Canady, but he often says something at Council about things being a "bad precedent." Of all the five proposals, this idea of putting angled parking in to accommodate additional parking for the church would be an extremely bad precedent. I don't know where else it's done in the city. I would be opposed. The idea of knocking down a couple of houses in the center of a block to put in a parking lot doesn't make sense to me and is detrimental to this neighborhood. We have lots of parking lots and structures that this church could have their congregation park at and bus the people in without making a big parking lot in the center of a neighborhood that will only be used one day a week. I believe some of their proposal should be approved. This is a hard decision. What the Church wants goes beyond the balance of the scale between the concerns of the Church and concerns of the neighborhood. I hope you can forge some kind of compromise, something the Church and neighborhood can both live with. Thank you very much. MARY HAUSER, 6 Lawler Court, approximately two blocks away from Emanuel Lutheran, which I am a member of. I don't think the Church intentionally decided they would just buy up houses and tear them down to expand. I am for the expansion. I am also for the blocking of Seymour which was a proposal to begin with that neighbors did not want as an alternative. I do not approve of demolishing these houses, but I am for the expansion because it is good for the community. I believe my daughter has learned morals going to this school through the 8th grade that she may not have had in a public school. I do understand concerns for parking because they were upset on Sunday mornings because of the on street parking. I think there can be an alternative and I ask this Board look at that and also that the Church is an asset to our community and expansion is badly needed. GERALD CARNE, 211 West Maple. I am concerned about the possible removal of the houses at 221 and 225 West Maple, which is a lovely tree lined street now and when we have asphalt and sidewalk it won't be that way any longer. I recently had an acquaintance stop by my house and commented what a pretty street I live on and didn't expect to see anything like that downtown. As far as the Church needing the parking, I don't understand in that the 200 block of Maple there is no parking except Sundays and holidays to provide for church parking. I never see anybody see anyone parking there on Sundays. The only time is on major holidays, Christmas or Easter. I am upset about a parking lot at the end of Maple Street and having an entrance coming in and off of Maple Street. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 16 M.L. MUNK, 915 North Capitol. As far as I know I am the only remaining resident of the 900. The Church is the only other person in the 1000 block; the 800 block might even be so. The gentleman asked about traffic on Capitol. I guess I may be close to any expert witness being an ex police officer and having lived there for 32 years. Also I have never seen an accident in the 900 and 1000 block of Capitol caused by church traffic. It has never been a problem in and out of my drive. I attend another church so on Sundays it is important that I get out. I have seen my area shift drastically from middle class professional and business owner occupied homes. Now it has become a mix of both owner occupied and absentee landlord properties. As is true in many cases, the absentee landlord properties are now bordering on slum conditions in spite of efforts by many of the owner occupied homes to upgrade and improve their area. Many people have tried and spent money but we have a lot of absentee owner property and it is going down. During this 32 years Emanuel Lutheran Church has been a positive force in the neighborhood, providing a church, a preschool nursery and a day school program for families. To the credit of Emanuel, rather than abandoning the inner city as many other churches have done, they have elected to stay. They have maintained an excellent property. They are a good program and have grown to the place where they would like to expand to make a permanent facility out of a temporary situation. The gymnasium for instance is divided into classrooms. Some of the Sunday school rooms are dual purpose. I think they would be much more efficient on a permanent basis. We don't have to look any further than Detroit to see what happens when large blocks of run-down unoccupied houses are allowed to exist. I would recommend approval of this property because from past performance, once this project is completed and landscaped it will be a benefit to our neighborhood. JOYCE WICK. Mr. Smith and myself have lived for 21 years at 1035 Seymour in a very large, older home that we have spent an enormous amount of money preserving. I get many people complimenting us on what we have done to our neighborhood. The proposals are going to destroy the aesthetic value of our tree lined street that we have worked so hard to preserve. I am disturbed because I will sit on my front porch and be looking at a tarvia parking lot and angle parking. I believe the statement was made that parking would be minimal but may times during the year there are church services that are not only Sunday and holidays, but there are weeknights and they do take advantage of our street for parking. That's parking Maple, Seymour, Kilborn, etc. Nothing is ever said when the little papers, tissues and sacks are dropped out right in front of my home. No one speaks to me. I think I have shown a christian attitude with the Walnut Street School, Mr. Davis and the children. All of the children are taken care of by both Mr. Smith and myself when school is released. We make sure the children get along. They do a fine job and Mr. Davis is a marvelous principal. We have a lovely neighborhood and I hate to see what is about to happen. I think it is underhanded. We did not know about Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 17 a lot of this until the President of the Neighborhood Association told us. I am very disturbed and hope you will take into consideration what we have all worked for. Twenty-one years is nothing to throw away, please. Thank you very much. MARY JO PURKAS, 612 West Madison Street, President of the P.T.A. at Walnut Street School. I sit on the Advisory Board of Walk for Warmth with CACS. This month I will be appointed to the Executive Board of the Michigan P.T.A. I am Vice President of the Walnut Neighborhood Organization. In those capacities and my private capacity as a volunteer with childrens' groups in the neighborhood with the Walnut Wildcats baseball team, Comstock Park cleanup, Cub Scouts, Girl Scout Troops we've organized with numerous activities. I submit a list of the things we have done because we pitch-in in our neighborhood. I am truly concerned that what is being planned is in the adverse interests of Walnut Street School. I do not see the practicality of putting a school of very nearly the same capacity literally across the street from a public school with 300 plus students. I truly do not believe that the inherent problems built into that are solvable. We do not have enough space at Walnut Street School as it is. We need more playground. We don't have the space at the School. We are working with the School District on this. This plan would landlock Walnut School so we would have no potential for movement. Four of these cases; Z-11-92, SLU-11-92, SLU-12-92, SLU-13-92 REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE The last portion of this plan, Act-27-92 will be REFERRED TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Z-7-92, 3405 South Cedar Street A to F This is a request by John Benson, owner of the property, to rezone property at 3405 South Cedar Street from its present nonconforming status of "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. It is directly across the street from the old Everett School. The property is at the corner of Holmes Road and South Cedar Street. The building has been used commercially for approximately 50 years and there are residences upstairs so the "F" Commercial District would bring it in conformance with its use. JOHN BENSON, 3021 Westchester Road and own the buildings from 3405 to 3417 South Cedar. This building is odd because the lower part is commercial, all the rest of the buildings are commercial so the only residential is upstairs. World Carpets wants to put a different sign on it and since it was listed as residential they could not do it. It has been used as a commercial building for probably 50 years so I thought it was time to ask you to change it. Thank you. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 18 Z-8-922 515 West Hillsdale Street DM-4 to D-1 This is a request by Jay Gupta, property owner of 515 West Hillsdale, to rezone the property from "DM-4" Residential District to "D-1" Professional Office District. The property is 821 feet wide by 66 feet in depth and in an area recommended by the River Island Master Plan for office use. The property holds a two story structure. JAY GUPTA, P.O. BOX 23121, Lansing. I have a site plan that I submitted to staff. I have an existing house and vacant lot next to it. I wish to improve the existing vacant building. I bought it to use as on site parking so clients don't have to park on the street. The existing building will be improved. The landscaping is going to be improved and parking provided for clients. Future land use for this property does call for the "D-1" Professional Office. It is desirable for office use and some neighbors, twelve of them that have signed a petition, agree with office use for the property. Thank you for your time. Mr. Wright: Do you plan to change the exterior of the structure? Gupta: The exterior will need painting and basic repair, but I will maintain the basic character of the house. Communications were received and read by Ms. Horne: DALE GOODRICH, 534 South Chestnut, MASON BEASLY, 651 South Pine Street and JAMES R. RILEY, SR. , 426 .West St. Joseph Street. We positively support the zoning change to professional office due to the following reasons; (1) This area is desirable for professional offices. (2) This property can be used as a professional office with adjacent vacant land for on site parking. (3) This property will look improved and increase the positive image of this block. (4) This property is in close vicinity to other office buildings. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Z-9-92, North of 2505 East Kalamazoo Street B to F This is a vacant parcel of land just north of a car wash at 2505 East Kalamazoo. The petitioner, Jack Schafer, President of Farmington Auto Wash, Incorporated. wishes to rezone this property to the north of their facility from "B" Residential to "F" Commercial District in order to expand their existing car wash. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 19 JACK SCHAFER, petitioner, 209 East Miller Road. They wanted to annex the 33 feet in with the car wash. At that time we would like to expand the car wash one bay, maybe two. I own the next piece of property with the house at 209. It is a rental house. I'd be happy to put up a buffer to separate that. We hadn't thought of adding on until they approached us to annex the property and make it one taxed piece. It's been vacant a long time, just a grassed area really. I don't see a problem with expanding the car wash. I don't have any site work done because I wasn't sure you would approve the zoning. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Z-10-92, North of 131 Regent Street J to DM-3 This is a request by Dave Muylle for N&D Investments to rezone property just north of 131 Regent Street from its present "J" Parking to a 11DM-3" Multiple Residential classification for the purpose of constructing an eight (8) unit apartment building. This would be developed in conjunction with 131 Regent where there is an apartment building. Mr. Wright; is the proposed structure related in any way to the present apartment building at 131? Mr. Fountain; they will tie those two properties together for parking purposes. Mr. Wright; there are no doors on the parking space. It is a convenient way to provide parking having the dwelling units up in the air and parking underneath. Mr. Fountain; they will still retain the lower level parking under the existing building, but the balance of parking for those two buildings will be a surface lot along the back, primarily along the east property line. DAVE MUYLLE, 301 Rumsey Avenue, presented and described a site plan. N&D Investments is actually myself and my uncle. We bought 131 Regent in February and since have been renovating the apartments and the outside of the building. The parking lot became available and seemed to be consistent with the possible development of that property. That is why we are pursuing this rezoning. Instead of tearing down buildings to make a parking lot, we would like to eliminate the parking lot for housing. The gentleman had a question about the style of the building. We have the same architect, Howard DeWolfe, who will be designing this building. It will not have the same design in terms of parking because costs are too great to elevate a building. We can get the parking on site within the parameters of square footage requirements. This will be a smaller and lower building. The setback is an average of the residential houses and the building is set back further than standard. We moved the building up for a couple of reasons; one is to get parking in the back and also it will screen the HC Berger a little more from the neighborhood. We intend to put a Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 20 wooden fence along the lot line as well. The circulation of the traffic will be in one- way with angle parking. We haven't got a formal landscaping plan yet but there will be green space between the two buildings. TERRANCE CONKLIN, 138 Regent. At the moment the existing apartment building is kind of an anachronism. Apparently built about 40 years ago and is a little strange to have it right in the middle of a residential street. It has been a problem in the past but since it has been taken over by Dave, it has gotten quite reasonable. However, with the proposed building, it will block HC Berger Company and I don't have any complaints about that company and like the open look of the street because Regent has a pleasant row of rather large trees on both sides of the street. I believe with another apartment building the nature of the street will change. HC Berger has a nice clean slate that does not impact the street nature and it's interesting to note that Regent has a street nature because it doesn't have a stop sign in the middle. So there is a unity. We also have a unique situation in tearing down a parking lot to create a building. Well, we need a parking lot. We have serious parking problems on Regent now. Last year a significant number of people parked illegally on the other side of the street because the street is that full. The apartment complex has been kind in that if you are in a pinch and need space, we have occasionally put a car over in that parking lot overnight. We have occasionally had problems with drugs in the past, but citizens moved quickly and they have pretty much gone. There had been problems with the existing apartment complex, some serious. Those have ceased to exist with the new management. However, this is planning for the future and we cannot be sure this will be the same management. I have asked people what they think of having another apartment building. I believe the value of my house will drop because no matter how nice it is the street will not change because of more building--rather the opposite. There aren't many fences. We like it open. Obviously an empty parking lot in the middle of nowhere is a strange thing. I don't know if an apartment building making use of it is necessarily an improvement. Ideally, we could use a park; a mini park would help. It cannot have a terribly negative impact on my street, but Regent is dangling on the edge by a renter street and is a fight. If that becomes commercial property and we get more people on the street, I will probably turn my house into rental and go elsewhere too. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Z-12-92, 5133 M.L. King Blvd/Logan Street D-1 to F This is a request by John Tilden to rezone property at 5133 South M.L. King Jr. Blvd./Logan Street from "D-1" Professional Office District to "F" Commercial District. The purpose of the change is to allow the building to be used for a 24 hour veterinary emergency animal hospital. Currently it is vacant. The property itself' Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 21 has 174 feet of frontage on Logan and a depth of 273 feet and contains just over an acre of land. The Southwest Comprehensive Plan designates this area for future commercial use, for which it has been used. It has been used as non-residential in the past. It is located in an area on ML King/Logan predominantly developed with residential uses just north of the site, south is Metro Bowl bowling alley and across the street are mixed commercial uses. JOHN TILDEN, petitioner, 6171 Cottage Drive in Haslett. I practiced as a general surgeon from '62 to 185 at that address and the property was rented from '86 through '88 to other physicians. It has been empty for three years. We have always been told that it was commercial property. The opportunity presents itself to turn it into a 24 hour veterinary clinic, which seems advantageous to everyone. There will be no changes to the building on site. Perhaps more parking lot lighting because it would be 24 hours. I can't tell you anything about the aspects of being a veterinarian. Dr. Hoschek is here tonight if you have questions. DR. JOHN HOSCHE K 1810 South Holly Way, Lansing. It will not be a 24 hour operation. It will be basically what we call after hours, nights weekends and holidays. It won't be around the clock. Renovations to the site will be inside; no outdoor kennels, no outdoor animal treatment areas. We are just painting, maybe widening a door. The outside will stay the same for now. All medical waste will be handled in accordance with the Medical Waste Regulatory Act of 1990, #368 of Part 138 so everything will be disposed of, anything that would be a potential health hazard to the general public. It is a unique business there is no other such emergency care in Lansing. It's based similar to emergency hospital rooms, ready care centers that are a human hospital where you come in, take care of your problem, go home or get referred to another veterinarian specialist. So we won't have anybody staying in the building long term. Noise and odor will be minimal. We don't expect a tremendous amount of people at one time. Anywhere from two to four employees at a time. Clients will be hard to predict, but probably not more than five or six at a time. There seems to be ample parking. Most will be one or two persons per car so we shouldn't be attracting a large crowd of people sitting outside making a large amount of noise. We also have other businesses in the area open at those times; Metro Bowl, Shop Rite, DeJa Vu, so we are not bringing traffic into a very quiet area. Proposed hours will be 6 p.m. to 8 a.m. , on Saturday 3 p.m. to 8 a.m. Sunday morning, and 24 hours on Sunday and holidays. This type of facility functions in other areas of Michigan and nationwide very successfully. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 22 Communications were received and read: RESIDENTS OF BOGART_STREET submitted a petition stating; "we urge you to retain the current zoning for this property as the best use and least likely to add to the nightly commotion with which this neighborhood must contend." JOYCE A. HEIDEMAN, D.V.M. , Benson Animal Hospital. I would like to state my disagreement with this premise, along with other area veterinary practitioners; JOSEPH LAPPMAN, 5438 South Pennsylvania MARGARET BERRY, 2835 East Mt. Hope Avenue STEPHEN SAGE, 2909 East Mt. Hope Avenue LISA HASSINGER, 721 North Larch KATHLEEN WILLIAMS, 914 Elmwood MARY SEAGER, 2643 East Grand River Avenue, East Lansing THOMAS M. HITCH, Attorney at Law, 601 Abbott Road. I indicate my client's (Joyce Heideman) opposition. All of the veterinary clinics within a three to four mile radius, including my client, provide emergency services on an as needed basis. CHARLES D. BENSON, D.V.M. , 4228 Barton Road. The building is directly across the street from my Southside Benson Animal Hospital. The site is not suitable; it is a converted residence on a small lot much too close to the busy street. KATHLEEN L. WILLIAMS, D.V.M. , Benson Elmwood Animal Hospital. I believe gaining prior support and cooperation of the local veterinary practitioners is an essential first step in establishing a true veterinary emergency service. Such clinic cannot be economically viable without this support. STEVEN J. PETERS, First of America Trust Officer, is concerned about the negative impact of spot zoning and concentration of veterinary hospitals in one area seems shortsighted from a business standpoint and a community planning standpoint which would benefit from having veterinary services spread over a larger geographic area. LINDA VAN KOEVERING, 5224 Bogart. I am concerned with noise, odor, etc. , but as far as having them in the area, I have no major objection. The building has been empty for a long time and it would be good to see somebody in there using it. JOYCE HEIDEMAN, 5134 South Logan, Southside Benson Animal Hospital. I submitted a written comment. I am a mixed commercial venture and the owner of a veterinary practice that's been there 25 years and we do offer 24 hour emergency service, along with about six other in the area. The residents' concern on Bogart are not given a lot of assessment. Their biggest concern is the activity and noise. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 23 I am concerned with the saturation. There are now three veterinarians within a 22 to 3 mile radius and two offer 24 hour full service emergency care. JULIE HOSCHEK, 1810 South Holly Way. I can understand concerns with noises, but these dogs and cats will be inside and will not be there for a long period. It's an after hours clinic so we will not be competing against other veterinarians. They can refer their calls to us. We look at their animals, treat them and refer them back to their original veterinarians in the morning. We're not taking clients from anybody. We will just work on a referral basis from other veterinarians and return their animals. Thank you. TERRANCE CONKLIN, 138 Regent. About three years ago I had a pet in emergency condition. We picked up the yellow pages and dialed ten different clinics and didn't get anyone from Michigan State. So I find it very peculiar that these veterinarians are claiming 24 hour service because I have tried to get it. This is very much at odds. The idea of an emergency vet clinic would be good. Thanks. DAVE VAN KOEVERING, 5224 Bogart. Recently a house in our neighborhood was sold. The neighbors discovered that this individual raises Rottweiler dogs; they are big. He has six in the back yard and every time some noise goes down Logan Street, those dogs commence barking and howling. I like to sleep with the window open. I don't want an emergency veterinary clinic with another dog in my back yard howling and setting off these other six dogs You have another veterinary clinic right across the street. I don't want the smell. They might have cages outside. Let them put it next to their residence. I don't want it next to mine. Thank you. MARGARET BERRY, General Practitioner, residing at 2909 East Mt. Hope Avenue and in partnership with another veterinarian at 2835 East Mt. Hope. We do offer 24 hour care and live directly next door. I can tell you when our cages are full, we certainly hear that at night. I am fortunate that my neighbors also own dogs that make noise too I guess because they've never complained. Although we do have outdoor runs to take care of the needs of our animals, they are not left out to cause distress to neighbors. But we all know that barking dogs can get quite noisy. In emergency situations these are not loud animals. I find it difficult to understand how a veterinarian trying to offer a 24 hour emergency care and work with veterinarians in the area hasn't taken time to introduce himself to area veterinarians and ask what the need is or work together with Michigan State. I am on about six committees right now through the Michigan Veterinary Medical Association and I haven't heard anything. I don't think it's good working practice to try to establish yourself right across the street from another veterinarian. Thank you. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 24 Z-13-92, 500-600 Blocks American Road D-1 to F This is a request by Richard Neller, President of Walter Neller Enterprises, Incorporated, to rezone property in the 500 and 600 blocks of American Road from "D-1" Professional Office to "F" Commercial District for the purpose of allowing some flexibility of development on this property as tenants may become available. The property currently consists of Lots 18 and 19 on the west side of American Road. American Road is more specifically located at the extreme south end of the city running south off Edgewood Boulevard and curves to intersect with South Cedar Street. Directly south and abutting the subject property is the I-96 freeway system. Directly east is a large developed commercial center all zoned "F" Commercial. Directly north is WILX TV Station and directly west the land is zoned professional office and is served by another short cul-de-sac street known as Edgewood Circle. DICK NELLER, petitioner. This is simply an adjustment in our overall master plan to increase some marketing flexibility. This is a large, about twelve acres, area. We don't have another commercially zoned area as large as 12 acres left out there. We also don't have a user for it at the present time. But this would permit us to market to that type of user as well as office users, which is permitted in the "F" Commercial zone. I'd be happy to answer any questions. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Z-14-92, 5001 North Grand River Avenue and 3300 Block of Sheffer Avenue A , E-2 and J to F This is a request by Todd Vandergalien to rezone property at 5001 North Grand River Avenue and vacant land in the 3300 block of Sheffer Avenue from "A" Residential, "E-2" Local Shopping and "J" Parking Districts to "F" Commercial District for the purpose of constructing an approximately 4,000 square foot building for a motorcycle dealership. The property in question has approximately 20,700 square feet. This change of zoning would allow a new building to be constructed on the property setting back a little further than the existing buildings on Grand River. There are mixed commercial uses along the south side of Grand River Avenue and then on Sheffer it's predominantly developed with single family homes. Directly north across the street along Grand River is made up of mixed commercial uses. We have a site plan on file that shows the location of the new building that would be developed and its associated parking with its access off of Sheffer. Planning Board Minutes Aug-List 5, 1992 Page 25 TODD VANDERGALIEN, 317 Rumsey, presented a sketch and explained; the buildings currently there will be removed. DUANE WELDON, 9108 South Creyts Road, Laingsburg, owner of the property next to that, which is the Yamaha Dealership that I would like to expand. Mr. Vandergalien; directly across is a non-residential use. We are not trying to change anything because it's commercial all down the road. With what we have and the way it's zoned, there is nothing we could get on it without going to the south a little. The setback is 25 feet and I will put a five or six foot berm there with trees for a 25 foot green area for buffer. It will be a showroom and for some storage. The shop would be the building I am now in. Communication was received from DONALD CRAIG, 2423 Newport Drive; a new building on that property will certainly be an asset to the area and the intended use is consistent with the other business activities along Grand River Avenue. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE There were no further comments from the Audience. A recess was taken. BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Ms. Witherspoon moved for approval of the minutes of July 7, 1992 and Ms. LeBlanc supported; APPROVED Committee Reports Zoning and Ordinance Committee--Floyd Wright reporting. NCU-8-92, 529 Cherry Street--Class A This is a request for Class A nonconforming status for the property at 529 Cherry Street, which is currently zoned "D-1" Professional Office District. The property is developed with a residential structure which is used as a two family residence. The site maintains a Class "B" nonconforming status because of insufficient lot size and off street parking. The applicant proposes to invest a substantial amount of money toward renovation of the property and maintain it as a two family residence. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 26 Off street parking will be provided on the adjacent lot. The current nonconforming Class "B" status limits the amount of money that can be invested so approval of Class "A" nonconforming status will not only allow further renovation of the property, but will also add to the owners' interest in the property. Mr. Wright moved for approval with the following stipulations: 1) Issuance of the required permits to allow for the renovation 2) That the entire renovation of the property be completed within one (1) year of Planning Board approval. Otherwise, Class "A" nonconforming status may be revoked or the owner will have the option of requesting an extension at that time. Mr. Goolsby supported the motion; APPROVED NCU-9-92, 218 Dwight Street and 1617-1619 Turner Street--Restoration This is a request by Chris Walter for approval of Class "A" nonconforming status for properties located at 218 Dwight Street and 1617, 1619 Turner Street. The applicant proposes to renovate a house at 218 Dwight Street and improve his investment status of the property at 1617 and 1619 Turner Street. All of these properties are zoned light industrial district and are developed with the following: 1617-1619 Turner Street--Single family homes 218 Dwight Street--Two (2) family home These properties currently maintain a Class "B" nonconforming status because they are located in the "H" Light Industrial District where the principal use as residential is not permitted. However, because these properties have existed for many years, they maintain a Class "B" nonconforming status. Class A status for 218 Dwight Street is approved for one year from the date of the Planning Board's approval and, providing all renovations are completed at the end of one year, Class A nonconforming status will continue. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Ms. LeBlanc seconded; APPROVED Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 27 Coachlight Manor East Final Plat, formerly P-3-92 This is a request by Scott Bohnet for the First National Acceptance Company for approval of the final plat of Coachlight Manor East, previously known as Coachlight Estates #3. The property proposed to be subdivided consists of 2.18 acres and will be divided into twelve (12) residential lots on Monticello Drive. The property is zoned "A" Residential District and is proposed to be developed with single family homes. Mr. Wright moved for approval of the final plat be approved subject to the following conditions: 1 . That the final plat be developed with all public improvements as required by the Lansing Subdivision Regulations and the Michigan State Plat Act. 2. That all lots be graded so surface water will drain therefrom so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties. 3. That the developer utilize an underground electrical distribution system as specified in Section 1238.08 of the Lansing Subdivision Regulations. 4. That the necessary easement be provided for the installation of utilities. 5. Compliance with requirements of all responding agencies. 6. That a Deed or Abstract of Title, accompanied by an attorney's opinion as to the marketability of the land, or a Certificate of Title Insurance, be submitted to the City Clerk prior to the signing of the plat and the affixing of the Municipal Seal. 7. That final security be posted in the amount specified by the Public Service Department and the Department of Parks and Recreation. Mr. Goolsby seconded the motion; APPROVED Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 28 SLU-9-92, Lansing Center Parking Expansion This is a. request by Snell Environmental Group, on behalf of the City of Lansing, for approval to construct an addition to the Lansing Center, which is located within the 100 year flood plain of the Grand River. The property in question is zoned "G- 1" Business District which allows the proposed use. However, since the site is located in the flood plain of the Grand River and exceeds one half acre of land it does require Planning Board and City Council approval. The site consists of eight (8) acres, is irregular in shape and is currently developed with the first phase of the Lansing Center. It was moved by Mr. Wright and supported by Mr. Goolsby that this request be approved subject to the following conditions: 1 . All permanent mechanical and electrical devices/equipment be elevated above the base flood elevation. 2. An evacuation plan be completed for all storage and personnel of the receiving/storage area. 3. Flood Hazard Insurance be carried by the Lansing Center as required by the National Flood Insurance Program. 4. Other regulations specified by either the City or the Department of Natural Resources be incorporated into the project. 5. Construction debris/materials be handled in such a manner as to prevent the deposit of such into the river. The Committee was satisfied, based on testimony and evidence that the existing and proposed development of the site is in substantial conformance with citywide goals and policies. However, the Committee did further suggest that the plan for redevelopment of this property take into consideration the design concept for East Michigan Avenue; i.e. , the Committee believes that the coordination of this project should be done in tandem with all other proposed redevelopment plans along East Michigan Avenue. Ms. LeBlanc asked; does the runoff go into a drainage or sewer system or into the river? Mr. Fountain responded; as far as I know they cannot drain directly into the river. Any runoff will be monitored. Mr. Barnhart: Would you explain condition #2. Mr. Fountain: They will go to the Board of Appeals to allow the main floor of the storage area to be approximately two feet below the flood plain because of the type of construction that's there. Anytime anything is below the flood plain we require Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 29 them to at least elevate the mechanical and electrical. If there's storage in that area and there is a threat of a flood, then they have an evacuation plan to get that material out of there to higher ground until the flood subsides. Motion restated and by a vote of 6 yeas, 1 nay; APPROVED The next meeting will be held August 12, 1992 at 2:30 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room Urban Development Committee--Garry Goolsby reporting. Act-20-92, 2130 Vassar Drive This is a request by the owner, Dan Marley, to encroach into or vacate a portion of the utility easement on the property for construction of a garage. The easement is the minimum width necessary to maintain the 54 inch storm drain located in the center of the easement. The Public Service Department wants to maintain the entire easement. The Committee recommended that the request for vacation be denied and Mr. Goolsby so moved, Ms. LeBlanc supported; DENIED The next meeting is scheduled for August 11, 1992 at 4 p.m.in the Council Conference Room Report from Planning Director 1) Mr. Foulds introduced Don Hanna, Graphics Technician, to the Board and reported he will be retiring August 21, 1992. We will have a ceremony to honor him and invite the Board members to attend. I would like to add that our success as a staff to a great measure has depended on Don's ability and we wish him well. Thank you Don for your dedicated service. Ms. Horne added; on behalf of the Board I also want to thank Mr. Hanna again because I have kept all of your artistic work through the years. He is a very capable man and never complains about all the work and changes we have. I hope your retirement is as busy as mine. Just keep giving your service to the community. We will miss you. Planning Board Minutes August 5, 1992 Page 30 2) Tonight we used a different technique for public hearing presentations with this video camera. I would appreciate your feedback. The camera does have a zoom feature we think we can use. 3) Regarding the Emanuel Church expansion. Due to the complexity of this request we will not be in a position to make a recommendation at the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee, but I will come to the meeting with the procedure to be used with the questions that were raised tonight and those we have. New Business The Seven Block meeting will be held August 13 at 5:30 p.m. for anyone interested in attending. Board Member Comments Mr. Wright reported elections will be held in our committee next month when our absent committee member returns. We apologize for the delay. Adjournment The regular August 5, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 11:17 p.m. spectfully s bmit d,I 6� Ja s N.. Foulds, irector La ing Planning Division WC Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 p.m. , City Council Chambers loth Floor, Lansing City Hall July 7, 1992 Emly Horne, Chairman, convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with eight members present: Barnhart, Goolsby , Horne, LeBlanc, Monteith, Thelen, Witherspoon, Wright Staff in Attendance: James Foulds, Division Director and Donna Wynant, Senior Planner Two newly confirmed Board members are present and welcomed by the Board: Ron Thelen and Doris Witherspoon. Election of Officers: By unanimous vote of the Board, serving for the fiscal year July 1 , 1992 thrro_ugh June 30, 1993 will be: Chairman--EMLY HORNE , - Vice Chairman, HELEN LE BLANC PUBLIC HEARINGS: Presented by Donna Wynant Cn SLU-8-92, 221 West Saginaw Street/618 Seymour Avenue This is a request by the Mount Hope Church for a special land use for property located at 221 West Saginaw Street and 618 Seymour Avenue to allow the operation of a church , community outreach and counseling facilities and other church related ministries. The buildings are presently used as office. The church will have a maximum seating capacity for 218 members and there will be 79 parking spaces provided. CHARLES BAUER , 721 Seymour, represented the Downtown Neighborhood Association in opposition of the special land use request. The proposed 79 space graveled lot layout is in question and parking may interfere with what Lansing Community College uses. Planning Board Minutes July 7, 1992 Page 2 M. CARLSON , Mount Hope Church member, offered support to the proposal. CHRIS STEELE , has his business at 618 Seymour and believes there is a parking shortage in the area. DEB MULCAHEY, owner of 608 Seymour, stated there are problems with parking , drainage, lighting and landscape screening and buffering. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE P-1-92, R E Olds Plat--Tentative Preliminary Plat This is a request by Snell Environmental Group, Incorporated for the City of Lansing to receive approval of the tentative preliminary plat of the R.E. Olds Plat to allow for an industrial subdivision. The property is vacant, zoned "I" Heavy Industrial District and contains 27.20 acres in an irregular shape. The City proposes to divide the currently vacant parcel into six lots for office, warehouse and light industrial development. A cul-de-sac off Baker Street will serve the proposed lots. The Southeast Master Plan designates the site for industrial development. The proposed lots are wide and deep enough to accommodate the type of development proposed and consistent with design criteria for industrial plats. On site circulation depends on access chosen and individual site design. South Washington Avenue and Baker Street are adequate to accommodate traffic flow in and around the property once developed. DONNA COLLINS, member of the South Central Neighborhood Organization, is concerned over what types of uses will be put in there and the quality of their development. DAVE STARR, Snell Environmental Group, reported that utilities have been extended to the site to service the individual lots. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Planning Board Minutes July 7, 1992 Page 3 Willow-Pine Area Master Plan The Willow-Pine Neighborhood is that area bounded by the Grand River on the north and east, Oakland Avenue on the south and Dr. M.L. King Jr. Blvd/Logan Street on the west. The proposed amendments include recommendations regarding the future use of land in the neighborhood, and improvements recommended for the residential and commercial areas , improvements to community facilities and repair and replacement of curbs, sidewalks, streets and other public facilities. A copy of the Willow-Pine Area Development Plan will be available for review at the City Clerk's Office on the 9th floor of City Hall and the Planning Division Office, 2nd floor of the City Hall Annex. JULIE TUBBS-LOTT , 1107 North Capitol Avenue, submitted a letter stating that there was an incorrect statement in the Plan; in that it stated "two of three houses were saved from demolition." In fact, there were a total of nine houses that were removed from the site. Two were saved and moved, but seven were demolished. LYNNE MARTINEZ , spoke in favor of the Plan with respect to the down zoning and the traffic proposal. Concerns are for a transitional area and that Chestnut Street remain residential. Concerns expressed about Emanuel Lutheran (reference Z-11-92 et al) are that the Church proposal does not fit, housing should not be removed and another location should be found for the school. MARY HAUSER , hb Lawler Court, does not want the area south of Maple Street to be forgotten for public improvements and housing conditions. She feels the City should purchase the vacant lot owned by the D.N.R. GLADYS GILSON stated she is in favor of Grand River and Seymour being renamed Franklin Street. CAROL SHULL agreed it should be renamed and added that more housing should not be removed. Planning Board Minutes July 7 , 1992 Page 4 MARK LATTERMAN , explained Consumers Power Credit Union history of rezoning and added that there are no present plans to expand east of Chestnut Street. However, he feels the Credit Union's plan should contain a transitional area. REFERRED TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE A short recess was taken by the Board to allow the Zoning and Ordinance Committee a discussion on the proposed plat of R.E. Olds (P-1-92) . BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Corrections noted to the Board minutes included; the last paragraph of page 8 had Mr. Witwer's name misspelled, and an addition to page 9. Motion was made and supported for approval of the June 16, 1992 minutes as amended; APPROVED Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee: P-1-92, R.E. Olds Plat—Tentative Preliminary This is a request by Snell Environmental Group, on behalf of the City of Lansing Planning and Municipal Development Department, for tentative preliminary plat approval for the proposed R.E. Olds Plat to allow for an industrial subdivision. The City proposes to divide the parcel into six (6) lots for office, warehouse and light industrial development. The property is currently vacant. A cul-de-sac off Baker Street will serve the proposed lots . The proposed lots are wide and deep enough to accommodate the type of development proposed and are consistent with design criteria for industrial plats. Planning Board Minutes July 7, 1992 Page 5 On site circulation depends on access chosen and individual site design. South Washington Avenue and Baker Street are adequate to accommodate traffic flow in and around the property once developed. It is recommended that the sections of both streets adjacent to the Reo site be included as part of the final plat. All other requirements or recommendations included in the agency response section of the review should be addressed during the final plat process and/or as development proceeds. It was moved and supported that the tentative preliminary plat for the Diamond Reo site be approved subject to the following conditions: 1) That the final plat be developed with all public improvements as required by the Lansing Subdivision Regulations and the Michigan Plat Act. 2) That all utility easements be established and provided as needed. 3) That all requirements and modifications of public agencies involved with review and development of the site be met as directed and all issues should be resolved prior to submission of the final plat. 4) That public pedestrian walkways in and around the site be shown on the final plat. 5) That the street name for the cul-de-sac be cleared as appropriate. 6) That sections of South Washington Avenue and Baker Street directly adjacent to the Reo property be included as part of the final plat. 7) That this tentative preliminary plat is effective for a period of twelve (12) months. APPROVED The next meeting of the 'Zoning and Ordinance Committee will be held Wednesday, July 15, 1992 at 2:30 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Planning Board Minutes July 7, 1992 Page 6 Urban Development Committee: Act-20-92, 2130 Vassar Drive—Drain Easement Encroachment This case will be held in Committee for further study. TABLED The next Committee meeting will be July 28 at 4 P .M. in the Planning Conference Room. Comments from Chairperson: Board members had been questioned as to their preference in committee assignments and times. After consideration the following were selected: To Urban Development Committee--Garry Goolsby, Helen LeBlanc, Merle Barnhart and Doris Witherspoon To Zoning and Ordinance Committee--Ron Thelen, Emly Horne, Beth Monteith and Floyd Wright. It is requested that the committees select their chair and vice chair persons as soon as possible. Adjournment: The July 7 , 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at approximately 9:30 p .m. Respectfully submitted, ��kl_ J m s N. Foulds , Director L sing Planning Division WC Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers loth Floor, Lansing City Hall June 2, 1992 Emly Horne, Chairperson, convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with seven members present: Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, LeBlanc, McNutt , 'Monteith, Wright Staff in Attendance: Foulds, Fountain , Spackman, Winnicker cry Ca N) i PUBLIC HEARINGS: _ F co River Point Master Plan -- Presented by Emil Winnicker, Senior Planner~ Also speaking on behalf of the Plan were members of the Committee: Suzy Cook-Stark, Howard Hart and Dale Johnson. N3 co The River Point Neighborhood is located north of the Grand Trunk Railroad tacks between the Grand and Red Cedar Rivers. The proposals have been prepared^y a committee made up of area residents , business owners, property owners and other interested parties. The amendments are intended to help improve the area and guide future growth and development in the area . Those amendments include future use of land in the neighborhood as well as recommended improvements for the residential and commercial areas, development of River Point Park and repair or replacement of curbs, driveways , sidewalks , street lights and other public facilities. Proposals for the improvement of the residential area, commercial area and River Point Park were presented by the River Point Committee. SHIRLEY MURRAY, President of South Central Neighborhood Organization, spoke in support of the Plan. HARRY EDWARDS , 1134 Platt Street, spoke in favor of the proposal in the Plan to close Platt and Grand Streets at South Street to increase security in the area. REFERRED TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Planning Board Minutes June 2, 1992 Page 2 The following four rezoning and lot split requests were presented by Vern Fountain, Zoning Administrator. Z-5-92, 118, 122, 124-126 North Eighth Street DM-3 to F This is a request by William Vincent for Edward W. Sparrow Hospital to rezone property at 118, 122, 124-126 North Eighth Street for the purpose of allowing construction of a surface parking lot. The applicant plans to demolish three residential structures and construct a surface parking lot with approximately 27 spaces. The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates the area north of the Michigan Avenue frontage for residential use. However, on subsequent discussions with Sparrow Hospital and the Eastside Neighborhood Organization, it was agreed that Sparrow expansion should only be encouraged to the west. Mr. Barnhart pointed out that we are holding action on other rezonings along Michigan Avenue. Mr. Foulds added that consideration of hospital needs must be reviewed. Mr. Barnhart asked, will this serve the clinic adjacent to the site? Jim Prister advised that it did and gave a short history of development in this block. He indicated they intend to expand into the second floor of the clinic if this rezoning is approved. JIM PRISTER, representing Sparrow Hospital, indicated they are assessing their parking needs and will continue to do so, but are also waiting for final approval of the BTS Study and how they may or may not benefit from additional land in the study area. He indicated their future needs may include a parking ramp . MARY MARGARET WOLL , President of the Eastside Neighborhood Organization, read her letter; the Eastside Neighborhood Organization does not object to Sparrow's demolition of the three houses on Eighth Street south of Jerome Street. In the winter of 1989 the Organization consented to demolition as part of an agreement in which Sparrow limited their expansion to the west of Holmes Street. It is important to note that Sparrow did not purchase these houses and let them deteriorate until they had to be demolished. The houses were dilapidated when purchased. Several Planning Board Minutes June 2, 1992 Page 3 months ago Sparrow approached this Organization and offered the houses to be moved to another site. Unfortunately , no one was able to take advantage of the opportunity." (Letter dated June 2, 1992 submitted and on file) . Ms. Woll added that costs of removing the homes is almost prohibitive. Ms. Monteith indicated concern about the endorsement of additional parking expansion on a piecemeal basis. She believes Sparrow should develop more of a comprehensive plan prior to expansion. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Z-6-92, 226 West Genesee Street DM-3 to D-1 This is a request by Mary Schropp for The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, to rezone property at 226 West Genesee Street from "DM-3" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District to convert the building for use as headquarters offices. The proposed request is in conformance with the River Island Master Plan. No one was in attendance to speak in behalf of the applicant. SHARON KELLOGG, representing the seller, wished to listen to the applicant's presentation. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE LS-5-92, Southwest Corner Picardy Street and Bliesener Street This is a request by Lyle Bliesener to divide two parcels of property at the southwest corner of Bliesener and Picardy Streets into three (3) lots for construction of single family homes. The applicant did not appear on behalf of this request. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTED', Planning Board Minutes June 2, 1992 Page 4 LS-6-92, Northeast corner of Miller Road and Picardy Street This is a request by Lyle Bliesener to split one lot into two (2) for the purpose of constructing two new single family homes. No one appeared on behalf of the applicant' s request. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Mr. Barnhart moved to approve the minutes of May 19, 1992 as corrected and Ms. McNutt seconded. A correction was noted for page one for altered verbage. A correction was requested to page 8, under Z-4-92, for clarification on the vote. APPROVED Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright, Chairperson, reported that the next meeting will be held on Wednesday , June 10, 1992 at 2:30 p.m. Beth Monteith is unable to be present . Urban Development Committee: Capital Improvements Plan The Urban Development Committee recommends that the Planning Board endorse the Capital Improvements Program for 1993 to 1998 and forward the Plan to the Mayor and City Council. It is also recommended that the Mayor and City Council be requested to provide a list of project priorities for Capital Improvements Planning Board Minutes June 2, 1992 Page 5 programming and scheduling . Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms . McNutt seconded; APPROVED Act-14-92, Grand Woods Park This is a request from Delta Township for the city to deed Grand Woods Park to the Township . Grand Woods is a valuable resource for open space and public park land to the citizens of the Lansing area. It provides an extensive amount of frontage along the Grand River. The Committee recommends that the ownership of Grand Woods Park be transferred to Delta Township for perpetual use as a public open space and park land. This transfer is to be conditional on the following: 1 ) The park ownership automatically reverts back to the City of Lansing if the Township ceases to utilize the land for park purposes or attempts to dispose any portion of the park for any purpose. 2) The City of Lansing may utilize the river frontage for the extended river Hiking/Biking Trail. 3) This matter be placed on the ballot and receive a favorable vote of the citizens of Lansing . Mr. Goolsby moved to approve the transfer and Ms. McNutt supported; APPROVED The next Committee meeting will be June 9 at 3:30 p.m. in the Council Conference Room. Committee of the Whole: Mr. Goolsby moved to accept the full minutes of the Walsh Street Jurisdictional Hearing on May 19, 1992 before the Lansing Planning Board and that they be fowarded to Don Hines, Attorney for David Nussdorfer, petitioner. Ms. LeBlanc supported; APPROVED Planning Board Minutes June 2, 1992 Page 6 Report from Planning Director: Jim Foulds , Planning Division Director, submitted a March 1992 copy of the "Boys Training School Property, Planning and Development Study" to the Board. Mr. Goolsby moved to accept that report and forward it to the City Council with the recommendation that they adopt this Study. Ms. McNutt seconded; APPROVED Board Member Comments: Ms. Monteith will be unable to attend the June 10 Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting . She also was given an excused absence from the August 5 meeting . An excused absence is approved for Ms. LeBlanc from the June 16, 1992 Board meeting. Adjournment: The regular June 2, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 9:33 p .m. ectfully sub fitted, C Ja es . Foul Director La ng Planning Division WC Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers loth Floor, Lansing City Hallc:` ,j i l'1 54 j une 16, 1992 w Emly Horne convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with six members present: Barnhart , Goolsby , Horne, McNutt , Monteith, Wright Excused Absence: Helen LeBlanc Staff in Attendance: Vern Fountain , Zoning Administrator, introduced staff. Donna Wynant, Senior Planner, representing some of the matters under the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, as well as the Willow—Pine area. Marcus Romanos, intern from Germany, assisting in special studies with East Michigan Avenue for the summer. There are no scheduled public hearings this evening . Comments from the Audience: RICK KIBBEY , regarding 112 Allen Street and 1230 West Ottawa Street. I am available if there are any questions on these cases. BRUCE STARK, 1147i South Washington Avenue, and I am prepared to answer questions about 226 West Genesee if you have any. The Board received a letter from MARY ANN SCHROPP , petitioner representing the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine withdrawing their interest in that location. However, further stated that Kellogg Realty, via Bruce Stark, should proceed with the rezoning for tneir purposes. KEN BROCK, Westside Neighborhood Association. I serve on the Housing Committee and chair an ad hoc committee that has worked on the question of 1230 West Ottawa. The neighborhood strongly supports this project. We worked closely with the Greater Lansing Housing Coalition and are very excited about their participation in housing renovation efforts in our neighborhood. There are documents in your packet that attest to our support and the agreement we have worked out with the Housing Coalition. I too will be available for questions or comments regarding 1230 West Ottawa . Planning Board Meeting June 16, 1992 . Page 2 Floyd Wright reported; at our Zoning and Ordinance Committee we discussed the property at 112 Allen Street, which is a request for Class A status, NCU-7-92. The proposal was presented at the June 10 meeting and the Committee agreed to give further consideration to this request. He requests approximately 15 minutes for further discussion on this matter. Therefore, a recess was taken by the Board. BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes Mr. Goolsby moved for approval of the minutes of June 2, 1992 with corrections. Support was given by Mr. Barnhart. Corrections noted were; (1) Under the public hearing for the River Island Master Plan. Two people are listed as speaking , but I remember two others; one was the proprietor of the bowling alley and one who spoke on the park. (2) Under Act-14-92, Grand Woods Park, there was a third item which should have been added to the two stated conditions, which is that the issue be placed before the voters. It is required to be so because it is dedicated park land. Vote taken, APPROVED Committee Reports Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Chaired by Floyd Wright Z-5-92, 118, 122, and 124-126 North Eighth Street DM-3 to F This is a request by William Vincent, representing Edward W. Sparrow Hospital to rezone property at 118, 122 and 124-126 North Eighth Street from "DM-3" to "J" Parking District for the purpose of establishing an off street surface parking lot that will be utilized by Sparrow Hospital in conjunction with the adjacent retail and clinic use. The Committee felt more information was needed and, therefore, the item was Planning Board Meeting June 16, 1992 Page 3 tabled for thirty (30) days. Staff is requested to determine the parking requirements for the adjacent clinic and how this proposed parking lot fits into their needs . TABLED IN COMMITTEE Z-6-92, 226 West Genesee Street DM-3 to D-1 This is a request by Mary Schropp to rezone property at 226 West Genesee Street from "DM-3" Residential to "D-l" Professional Office District. The purpose was to establish a professional office at this location for the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. A public hearing was held on June 2, 1992, at which time no one appeared on behalf of the request. It has since been found that the applicant has withdrawn interest in this request. A letter dated June 10, 1992 (copies provided to the Board) from Bruck Stark, Sales Associate for Kellogg Realty, Incorporated, acknowledges the withdrawal and further indicates his interest in proceeding with the rezoning to professional office. However, it was the opinion expressed the Realty Company that since they had paid the fee for this request, they wished to follow through with it. The property in question measures 66 by 66 feet and contains approximately 4,356 square feet. The existing structure on the site is used for residential purposes. It has two driveways; one off Genesee and the second off of Seymour. Available parking is approximately four (4) spaces. Mr. Stark recognizes the limited parking on this site and understands that if the property is utilized for anything other than residential purposes, it will require a change of occupancy as well as meeting all other Code requirements, which include required off street parking for whatever new use is established at this location. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed change is in substantial conformance with the River Island Master Plan, which designates this site as professional office. It was further found that the proposed use of this site for office use would -be in substantial conformance with the established land use pattern in this block , which consists of predominantly professional office uses. The Committee wished to have approval subject to three items of understanding: Planning Board Meeting June 16, 1992 Page 4 1 ) A proper site plan shall be available prior to the issuance of building permits or the change of occupancy. 2) That a letter be submitted from Mr. Stark indicating that the applicant (who have withdrawn their interest for this request) does not object to the continuation of the rezoning process. 3) The applicant be encouraged to preserve the structure in its current residential character and explore the possibility of establishing a historic district for the site. Mr. Wright so moved and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED LS-5-92, Southwest corner Picardy and Bliesener Streets This is a request by Lyle Bliesener for approval of a lot division for property on the southwest corner of Picardy Street and Bliesener Street. The property consists of two lots which he proposes to divide into three (3) lots; one of which is a corner lot which will be two feet short of the minimum width requirement . The property is zoned "A" Residential district. The Subdivision Control Ordinance requires corner lots to be not less than 70 feet wide. The proposed corner lot will be 68 feet wide. The two interior lots will be 60 feet in width. All three lots will have a depth of 150 feet. The Committee found , based on testimony and evidence, that the size of the lots created will meet the minimum lot area of the zoning district in which they are located, which is "A" Residential District, and that the proposed use of the property for the development of single family homes is consistent with the "A" Residential zoning district. Further, that the proposed land use is in conformance with the Master Plan. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Mr. Barnhart supported; Mr. Goolsby: Since this is not the minimum width requirement, will they have to get a variance? Mr. Fountain clarified; that is what this is for, the Board could recommend the variance be approved and this subsequently would have to be Planning Board Meeting June 16, 1992 Page 5 approved by Council. A different procedure than the usual lot split actions. Vote taken; APPROVED LS—(i-92, Northeast corner Miller Road and Picardy Street This is a request by Lyle Bliesener for approval of a lot division for property at the northeast corner of Picardy Street and Miller Road. The applicant proposes to divide one lot into two (2) residential lots. The property in question is zoned "A" Residential District. The purpose is to divide the site into two (2) lots for the development of single family homes. While the individual lots will meet the lot area requirements of the "A" Residential District , both are .4 of a foot short of the minimum depth requirement of the Subdivision Control Ordinance which requires a minimum depth of 100 feet. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the size of the lots created will meet the minimum lot area of the zoning district in which they are located, which is "A" Residential, and that the proposed use of the property for the development of single family homes is consistent with the "A" Residential zoning district. Further, that the proposed land use is in conformance with the Master Plan. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED NCU-6-92, 1230 West Ottawa Street—lass A This is a request by the City of Lansing Department of Planning and Municipal Development for approval of Class A nonconforming status for property located at 1230, and including 1226 West Ottawa Street. The property is zoned "B" Residential District. The purpose is to allow the restoration of the existing four unit building located at 1230 West Ottawa. The structure at 1230 is currently vacant and has previously been used for as many as five dwelling units . The property maintains a Class B nonconforming status because the number of units exceed what is allowed in the zoning district. The amount of money for restoration Planning Board Meeting June 16, 1992 Page 6 as a four (4) unit building will well exceed the maximum allowed by the Planning and Zoning Code. Approval should be subject to: 1) Approval being on a provisional basis for a period of one (1 ) year. At the end of one year if the project is complete, the provisional status shall be removed. If, however, the project is not complete at the end of one year, the Planning Board may require reapplication or revoke the Class A status. 2) The rehabilitation shall not exceed 2 two bedroom units and 2 one bedroom units. 3) The development of required parking (as shown in the site plan) . 4) Provision of landscaping, screening and buffering as well as the provision for proper drainage as required by the Public Service Department. The Committee was satisfied, based on testimony and evidence, that approval of this request will be consistent with the overall goals and policies for this neighborhood. A letter was received from Paul Novak, President of the Westside Neighborhood Association, supporting renovation of this structure as a four unit apartment building . Mr. Wright moved for approval and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED NCU-7-92, 112 Allen Street-Class A This is a request by Rick Kibbey for the Community Builders Association for approval of Class A nonconforming status for property at 112 Allen Street. The property in question is irregular in shape, contains approximately 3,762 square feet and is developed with a single family home and detached garage. The proposal is to rehabilitate this structure and continue the use as a single family. The property maintains a Class B nonconforming status because it is a single family home in an F-1 Commercial district. Class A nonconforming status will allow a substantial amount of money to be invested in the property for its continuation as a single family residential. Planning Board Meeting j une 16, 1992 Page 7 This proposal was presented to the Committee who agreed to give further consideration to this request at the meeting of June 16, 1992 with the understanding that a staff report would be submitted to them outlining the overall proposal and the staff recommendation for this property . This , of course , was what we met on during the Board's recess. The President of the Eastside Neighborhood Organization notified us that they are in support of the request. Mr. Wright, on behalf of the Committee, moved for approval with conditions: 1) That all improvements be completed within one (1 ) year of the approval of this request. 2) Adequate landscape and screening be established along the north and west property lines to assure separation from the non-residential activity . Mr. Barnhart supported; "PROVED The next meeting of the Zoning and Ordinance Committee will be on July 15, 1992 at 2:30 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee Chaired by Garry Goolsby River Point Development Plan A public hearing was held on this matter June 2, 1992. The Committee recommends that the River Point Master Plan amendment to the Southwest Area Comprehensive Development Plan be approved and sent to the Mayor and City Council for adoption . Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms . McNutt seconded; "PROVED Planning Board Meeting June 16, 1992 Page 8 Act-17-92, Turner Street Property This is a request by AT&T Communications for an easement across City land to extend its fiber optic lines. The Committee recommends that the 20 foot easement requested by AT&T Communications, Incorporated across the south portion of the City owned land known as the Upper Property be approved as a general public utility easement. It is further recommended that AT&T be responsible for planting grass and replacing the grade of the lot following installation of their cable. Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms. McNutt supported; APPROVED Act-20-92, 2130 Vassar Drive DEFERRED TO NEXT MEETING The next Urban Development Committee meeting will be Tuesday, June 30, 1992 at 4 p.m. in the Council Conference Room. Mr. Goolsby moved to convene in Committee of the Whole for discussion on case SLU- 3-92, and Mr. Wright supported; APPROVED SLU-3-92, Walsh Street Jurisdictional Hearing Discussion No word from Mr. Hines has been received by either the Board or staff. Ms. Horne reported; I went to the Dictionary to find the actual meanings of: substantial could mean considerable, ample or large. significance could be importance or momentous Mr. Wright: At the Council hearing a year ago, the next door neighbor to the east of the property in question, Mr. Robert Witwer, pleaded with Council to allow the house at 1016 to be removed because the house was in terrible condition. He couldn't sit in the yard because of the awful stench coming from that house. Betty Bosler, who spoke at the hearing , Mr. Witwer told me hadn't lived in the neighborhood for a number of years. We heard a lot of testimony from one side and not the other. A friend of his was considering purchasing that house at 1018. He examined the house on the outside and discovered the foundation crumbling in several places and the financial risk was too great. Planning Board Meeting June 16, 1992 Page 9 We have been told that the petitioner bought these houses and allowed them to deteriorate. The amount of deterioration I saw did not occur over a span of a few years. It had to take several years for that much to occur. I urge you go and look at them before you make a decision. Mr. Barnhart questioned, what are the options regarding this matter? Are we even going to recognize it as, a petition? Mr. Goolsby: My understanding of this jurisdictional hearing and what we must decide at some point, whether or not we will let them proceed with this application. Tonight the question before us is whether there has been a "substantial" change in that property since the original application. Mr. Goolsby made a motion to move,out of Committee of the Whole and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED It was moved by Mr. Goolsby and supported by Mr. Barnhart to accept the resolution of the Committee of the Whole that based on the City Attorney's advice , the Planning Board is not required to give further consideration to the special land use request, SLU-3-92 for properties at 1012, 1016 and 1018 Walsh Street , for the purpose of developing an off street surface parking lot. It has been found, based on testimony and evidence, that there is no change from the initial proposal that was denied by the Planning Board at their meeting of April 16, 1991 and subsequently denied by the City Council on June 24, 1991. Nor was there any substantial changes indicated by the applicant from the original proposal at the Jurisdictional Hearing held before the Planning Board May 19, 1992. While it is true that two of the housing units have been removed from the property , there are no changes to the applicant's proposal for the use of this land as an off street surface parking lot. Nor has there been any change or changing conditions to land development in the vicinity that would warrant the Board reconsidering this matter as proposed. Motion restated and by a vote of 5 yeas and 1 nay; DENIED Planning Board Meeting June 16, 1992 Page 10 Communications: Emly Horne 1 ) You have a document before you regarding the extension of the Lansing Center so be sure to read this through for a discussion on July 7 , 1992. 2) A reminder that those who are still interested in attending John Salmons' retirement party must have reservations in by tomorrow. Mr. Wright: I have known Mr. Salmons in the Planning Department and followed his activities somewnat since he has been with the Building Safety Division and we are certainly going to miss him. Being a Code Enforcement officer is certainly not the most popular guy in Lansing and his nerves must be raw. But life can be better. I am somewhat troubled by the fact that there is nothing we can .do about people retiring . This window of opportunity extends from July through November and I understand there will be quite a few famous names parting the scene. It will be Lansing's loss. Ms.. Horne added, John has done a lot for the City. Code Enforcement is a basic need of the City . When you look at the affordability and the nomes in good condition that we rank third in the nation, some of that credit has to go to Jonn. Comments from Chairperson: A Certificate was presented to Margie McNutt expressing appreciation for her two and one-half years of service to the Board. Ms . Horne added that she will be missed. Her insight has been a wonderful asset to the Board and Urban Development Committee. Adjournment: The June 16, 1992 meeting adjourned at 9 p .m. tZespectfu y submit ed �G Vernon C. Fountain for James N. Foulds, Director Lansing Planning Division Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers loth Floor, Lansing City Hall June 2, 1992 C=- , Emly Horne, Chairperson, convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with seven members present: Barnhart , Goolsby , Horne, LeBlanc, McNutt , Monteith, Wright N Staff in Attendance: Foulds, Fountain , Spackman, Winnicker r) AWW PUBLIC HEARINGS: River Point Master Plan -- Presented by Emil Winnicker, Senior Planner Also speaking on behalf of the Plan were members of the Committee: Suzy Cook-Stark, Howard Hart and Dale Johnson. The River Point Neighborhood is located north of the Grand Trunk Railroad tracks between the Grand and Red Cedar Rivers. The proposals have been prepared by a committee made up of area residents , business owners , property owners and other interested parties. The amendments are intended to help improve the area and guide future growth and development in the area. Those amendments include future use of land in the neighborhood as well as recommended improvements for the residential and commercial areas, development of River Point Park and repair or replacement of curbs , driveways, sidewalks, street lights and other public facilities. Proposals for the improvement of the residential area, commercial area and River Point Park were presented by the River Point Committee. SHIRLEY MURRAY , President of South Central Neighborhood Organization, spoke in support of the Plan. HARRY EDWARDS, 1134 Platt Street, spoke in favor of the proposal in the Plan to close Platt and Grand Streets at South Street to increase security in the area . REFERRED TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Planning Board Minutes June 2, 1992 Page 2 The following four rezoning and lot split requests were presented by Vern Fountain, Zoning Administrator. Z-5-92, 118, 122, 124-126 North Eighth Street DM-3 to F This is a request by William Vincent for Edward W. Sparrow Hospital to rezone property at 118 , 122, 124-126 North Eighth Street for the purpose of allowing construction of a surface parking lot. The applicant plans to demolish three residential structures and construct a surface parking lot with approximately 27 spaces. The Northeast Area Comprehensive Plan designates the area north of the Michigan Avenue frontage for residential use. However, on subsequent discussions with Sparrow Hospital and the Eastside Neighborhood Organization, it was agreed that Sparrow expansion should only be encouraged to the west. Mr: Barnhart pointed out that we are holding action on other rezonings along Michigan Avenue. Mr. Foulds added that consideration of hospital needs must be reviewed. Mr. Barnhart asked, will this serve the clinic adjacent to the site? Jim Prister advised that it did and gave a short history of development in this block. He indicated they intend to expand into the second floor of the clinic if this rezoning is approved. JIM PRISTER , representing Sparrow Hospital, indicated they are assessing their parking needs and will continue to do so, but are also waiting for final approval of the BTS Study and how they may or may not benefit from additional land in the study area. He indicated their future needs may include a parking ramp. MARY MARGARET WOLL, President of the Eastside Neighborhood Organization, read her letter; the Eastside Neighborhood Organization does not object to Sparrow's demolition of the three houses on Eighth Street south of Jerome Street. In the winter of 1989 the Organization consented to demolition as part of an agreement in which Sparrow limited their expansion to the west of Holmes Street. It is important to note that Sparrow did not purchase these houses and let them deteriorate until they had to be demolished. The houses were dilapidated when purchased. Several Planning Board Minutes June 2, 1992 Page 3 months ago Sparrow approached this Organization and offered the houses to be moved to another site. Unfortunately , no one was able to take advantage of the opportunity." (Letter dated June 2, 1992 submitted and on file ) . Ms. Woll added that costs of removing the homes is almost prohibitive. Ms. Monteith indicated concern about the endorsement of additional parking expansion on a piecemeal basis. She believes Sparrow should develop more of a comprehensive plan prior to expansion. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE, COMMITTEE Z-6-92, 226 West Genesee Street DM-3 to D-1 This is a request by Mary Schropp for The Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, to rezone property at 226 West Genesee Street from "DM-3" Residential to "D-l" Professional Office District to convert the building for use as headquarters offices. The proposed request is in conformance with the River Island Master Plan. No one was in attendance to speak in behalf of the applicant. SHARON KELLOGG, representing the seller, wished to listen to the applicant' s presentation. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE LS-5-92, Southwest Corner Picardy Street and Bliesener Street This is a request by Lyle Bliesener to divide two parcels of property at the southwest corner of Bliesener and Picardy Streets into three (3) lots for construction of single family homes. The applicant did not appear on behalf of this request. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Planning Board Minutes June 2, 1992 Page 4 LS-6-92, Northeast corner of Miller Road and Picardy Street This is a request by Lyle Bliesener to split one lot into two (2) for the purpose of constructing two new single family homes. No one appeared on behalf of the applicant's request. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Mr. Barnhart moved to approve the minutes of May 19, 1992 as corrected and Ms. McNutt seconded. A correction was noted for page one for altered verbage. A correction was requested to page 8, under Z-4-92, for clarification on the vote. APPROVED Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright, Chairperson, reported that the next meeting will be held on Wednesday, June 10, 1992 at 2:30 p.m. Beth Monteith is unable to be present. Urban Development Committee: Capital Improvements Plan The Urban Development Committee recommends that the Planning Board endorse the Capital Improvements Program for 1993 to 1998 and forward the Plan to the Mayor and City Council. It is also recommended that the Mayor and City Council be requested to provide a list of project priorities for Capital Improvements Planning Board Minutes June 2, 1992 Page 5 programming and scheduling . Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms . McNutt seconded; APPROVED Act-14-92, Grand woods Park This is a request from Delta Township for the city to deed Grand Woods Park to the Township. Grand Woods is a valuable resource for open space and public park land to the citizens of the Lansing area. It provides an extensive amount of frontage along the Grand River. The Committee recommends that the ownership of Grand Woods Park be transferred to Delta Township for perpetual use as a public open space and park land. This transfer is to be conditional on the following: 1 ) The park ownership automatically reverts back to the City of Lansing if the Township ceases to utilize the land for park purposes or attempts to dispose any portion of the park for any purpose. 2) The City of Lansing may utilize the river frontage for the extended river Hiking/Biking Trail. 3) This matter be placed on the ballot and receive a favorable vote of the citizens of Lansing . Mr. Goolsby moved to approve the transfer and Ms. McNutt supported; APPROVED The next Committee meeting will be June 9 at 3:30 p.m. in the Council Conference Room. Committee of the Whole: Mr. Goolsby moved to accept the full minutes of the Walsh Street Jurisdictional Hearing on May 19, 1992 before the Lansing Planning Board and that they be fowarded to Don Hines, Attorney for David Nussdorfer, petitioner. Ms. LeBlanc supported; APPROVED Planning Board Minutes June 2, 1992 Page 6 Report from Planning Director: Jim Foulds , Planning Division Director, submitted a March 1992 copy of the "Boys Training School Property , Planning and Development Study" to the Board. Mr. Goolsby moved to accept that report and forward it to the City Council with the recommendation that they adopt this Study. Ms. McNutt seconded; APPROVED Board Member Comments: Ms. Monteith will be unable to attend the June 10 Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting. She also was given an excused absence from the August 5 meeting . An excused absence is approved for Ms . LeBlanc from the June 16, 1992 Board meeting. Adjournment: The regular June 2, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 9:33 p .m. ectfully sub itted, C Ja es Foul Director La ng Planning Division WC Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers loth Floor, Lansing City Hall May 5, 1992 Emly Horne , Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p .m. with six members present: Goolsby, Horne , LeBlanc, McNutt, Monteith , Wright Excused Absence: Merle Barnhart c� Staff in attendance: Foulds , Fountain, Spackman c_ The agenda stands as printed. E..o TI PUBLIC HEARING: ry Z-4-92, 4301 South Pennsylvania Avenue E-2 to F Vern Fountain , Zoning Administrator, presented this case. This is a request by Chris Baryames to rezone property on the immediate southeast corner of Pennsylvania Avenue and Cavanaugh Road, which is commonly known as 4301 South Pennsylvania Avenue, from its present "E-2" Local Shopping District to "F" Commercial District. The property measures 132 by 153 feet, contains approximately 20,000 square feet and was formerly used as a gasoline service station site . The building on the property is still in existence and used for other types of commercial activities. Land use to the north, east and south is residential. The immediate southwest corner of Cavanaugh and Pennsylvania is vacant and south of that there is a professional office district strip which consists of several credit unions and professional office uses . Then on the northwest corner of Pennsylvania and Cavanaugh is a Quality Dairy convenience store . North of that is an apartment building , as well as just to the west of that. They do want to put up a new sign advertising their business. We indicated we have to treat the present one as an abandoned sign. We will work with them to establish new identification for that property so that pole would have to come down. Planning Board Minutes May 5, 1992 Page 2 CHR IS BARYAMES, petitioner, 1731 Nottingham Road. This request to "F" Commercial is to give me a little more flexibility. The people want to come in and sell cars and cannot do it under E-2. It is restrictive . There are various other things I could put in such as a muffler shop . We had the gas tanks removed . REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Ms . LeBlanc moved for approval of the minutes of April 21 , 1992 and Ms . Monteith supported; Mr. Foulds pointed out that Rose Killips' letter of resignation had been dated prior to this Board meeting and therefore is not absent as indicated. APPROVED Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright , Chairperson, reported the next meeting will be held on Wednesday, May 13 , 1992 at 2:30 p .m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby, Chairperson, stated there is no report and the next meeting will be on Tuesday, May 12 at 4 p .m. in the City Council Conference Room. Planning Board Minutes May 5, 1992 Page 3 Report from Planning Director: Jim Foulds 1 ) The Seven Block Development Plan is currently in the Physical Development Committee of City Council. Our original intent, following the procedures laid out in Public Act 344, was to have that document referred back to the Board and Citizens' District Council so they could do detail work and we could put the financial plan together and resubmit it to Council . •We felt it was best putting a plan together that would be the most meaningful document to have Council address those policy issues you forwarded to them clearly laying out what direction they wanted that neighborhood to go. We felt we would not be doing an effective job if it were simply referred back to this committee and Citizen District Council not having endorsement of the Council . We are getting full and open discussion in the Committee. The strong elements of the plan , rehabilitation versus redevelopment , will prevail but political process takes time. We had a bus tour last Thursday and four Board members attended. We also had discussion after with residents and Mr. Ferguson. 2) The Council did approve , on a 5/3 vote, the parking lot expansion for the Deja Vu facility on Jolly/King-Logan. Given the sensitive nature of that particular land use issue the Council did an excellent job trying to avoid the emotional nature of the issue and dealing with it as a land use topic. It is a difficult situation, however, we are bound by federal law, state enabling legislation and our own ordinance . The product will be better than we have now. 3) Walsh Street (SLU-18-90) . We had a request for a special land use from Mr. Hines , Attorney for the property owner. You and Council last year denied the rezoning of that property at 1012, 1016 and 1018 for a surface parking lot. The City Attorney is still researching the issue but has informed me verbally of a recommendation to you and I have drafted a letter to Mr. Hines stating; "This communication is in response to your special land use application SLU-3-92 concerning a proposed off street surface parking lot. As you are aware, the Planning Board and City Council denied a similar request in 1991 . Asa result of Planning Board Minutes May 5, 1992 Page 4 the new application, the Planning Board requested legal opinion from the City Attorney advising whether the Board is obligated to act on the new application when it has made a recent official recommendation on a similar request. Based on a recommendation from the City Attorney , the Planning Board has scheduled a jurisdictional hearing at their regularly scheduled meeting on May 19, 1992. The purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony and evidence that material and substantial change has occurred to the facts of this matter that would cause the Planning Board to reconsider this special land use request and formally process the new application. Therefore, the Planning Board respectfully requests that you attend their May 19 meeting . . . submit information clarifying what has materially or substantially changed concerning this request." The City Attorney suggested you allow Mr. Hines to present physical evidence or verbal testimony and you should ask questions to make sure you have all the information you need to make a decision . While we are not obligated to notify the neighborhood, we will notify the association so they can have a representative present. We will also provide you with background information . If the applicant can demonstrate that material or substantial change has taken . place in the request and you feel that's true based on the evidence submitted, you can decide to go through the process. Comments from Chairperson: The Physical Development Committee will meet Thursday at 3 p .m. on the Seven Block Plan . Board Member Comments: 1 ) Ms . LeBlanc: Last year I attended a workshop on Groundwater Protection and subsequent to that we had a presentation to this Board . Since then I have received a communication on suggested site plan review standards. They were good suggestions. Staff members explained; at some point we are going to discuss an ordinance amendment dealing with our potential groundwater polluter in Eaton County. Planning Board Minutes May 5, 1992 Page 5 Communication has been received from DNR indicating they are moving ahead with soil borings to test the extent of pollution on the site. To get five or six test drops , they will probably have to take significant measures to move some equipment out of the way. We have assembled Eaton County , Department of Natural Resources , Board of Water and Light and Consumers Power for coordinated action . In addition steps have been taken to get an application for a junk yard. BWL is very concerned about wellhead protection, since Lansing receives all of its groundwater from a well system. We have to make sure the ground handles substances or fluids that could contaminate. Tri-county Regional Planning Commission is our clearing house for all that effort. 2) Ms . Horne welcomed the students in the audience and thanked them for their interest . Adjournment: The regular May 5, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board stood adjourned at8:08p .m. Respectfully submitted, L ' J N. Foulds , irector sing Planning Division WC Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers 10th Floor, Lansing City Hall May 19, 1992 CJ L:J Emly Horne called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with seven members present: Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, LeBlanc, McNutt, Monteith, Wright Staff in Attendance: Jim Foulds, Division Director. Vern Fountain, representing the Zoning and Ordinance Committee items. Jim Spackman, representing the Urban Development Committee items. PUBLIC HEARING: Jurisdictional Hearing, SLU-3-92, 1012, 1016, 1018 Walsh Street Ms. Horne prologued: The purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony and evidence that material and substantial change have occurred to the facts of this matter that would cause the Planning Board to reconsider this special land use request and form and process the new application. ELLEN BEAL, First Ward Councilmember. As representative to Ward One, I presented a letter to the Council from the President of Ingham Medical, Ed McCree, indicating we should not grant the zoning change based on the fact that Ingham Medical would stay for any extended length of time or that parking needed to be extended for their purposes. I am dismayed that once again the Planning Board has to deal with this. I am getting calls from the people on Walsh Street who are very concerned and upset. It is this kind of thing where you have special interests who can afford to hire slick counsel to come in and lobby people and bring things back again and again that disheartens and dismays the residents of the city who work hard to maintain their neighborhoods. This was just turned down months ago and the desires of the neighborhood are very clear. The Planning Board's intent of preserving the neighborhood was very clear, to not let this issue go any further than tonight. Because I think it's important to send a message to citizens that they can live and enjoy their house and family and not constantly be mired in a struggle where they have to come to meetings like this to simply protect their neighborhoods. I appreciate your consideration and look forward to your prompt response in favor of our first ward neighborhood. Thank you. BETTY BOSLER, 1015 Walsh. They haven't even cleaned up all the debris from when they tore down the two houses; haven't reseeded--nothing. They even knocked Planning Board Minutes May 19, 1992 Page 2 down a city light post and had to have the Board of Water and Light replace it. I took pictures this morning at 11:05 with the parking lot only 2/3 full. What they told us before was the north side of the parking lot would be for staff and the Hospital said they were only putting on six to eight more staff. Why the additional parking area? They do not own one of those three lots; they don't even have an option to buy. So how can they put the proposal before the Planning Board if they have no vested interest in the lot. They did this before and then threatened if they could not have it, they would put the parking lot on the other side of the house and use it as a squeeze play. Who wants to live in between two parking lots, let alone look across at it. (Pictures of the site were submitted to keep on file. ) Mr. Wright stated, according to record you, on March 9, 1991, signed a petition expressing no objection on the proposed development. Ms. Bosler: That's because they told us we had no choice, it was going through. The only choice we had was on the location of the entrance or if there would be an entrance from Walsh Street. They told us nothing about the ten year plan. They just told us 'it's going in.' Mr. Wright: Who do you mean by "they"? Ms. Bosler: The architect for the parking lot. Mr. Wright: The petitioner? Ms. Bosler: Yes. They misled us totally. Mr. Wright: You have a prerogative to change your mind but I notice you did testify at the public hearing held by City Council against it. Ms. Bosler: They came to us in December with that petition. They told us they needed the space on the north side of the building for staff. Yet, the Hospital said there would only be six to eight more staff. It is not consistent with what the owners and representatives have told us. Ms. Horne asked, when did you get your information on the house at 1018? Ms. Bosler: My neighbors said that as of this winter the option had lapsed. In fact they put their garden in so I doubt if they're moving this spring. Mr. Barnhart: For my own information, I have been on the Board since 1971 and I don't recall ever seeing anything called a jurisdictional hearing. Why are we having this now? I thought we would not have to go through this again. Mr. Foulds: At the direction of the Board I submitted a request for an attorney's opinion after this petition was refiled this year for opinion on if the Board is mandated to reconsider a rezoning, or any other, petition within the last year--in this case six months. If something substantial has changed, then the Board probably should process it. The purpose of this hearing is to put facts in the record as to what has changed prior to the time the Board would make a decision to reconsider it or not. You are right we have not considered one of these before. Planning Board Minutes May 19, 1992 Page 3 MARY MARGARET WOLL, Eastside. We are against the demolition of housing and for reasons not either crucial to the welfare of someone or something that is just not safe to have around. I understand they are beginning renovation, which I wonder if it is presupposing additional parking. PAUL SCOTT, 1223 Larned Street. I would like to echo the comments of Ellen Beal and Mary Margaret Woll regarding Walsh Street. I think it's unfortunate that it has to come back. I think the Planning Board and City Council made reasonable decisions the first time around and I hope you are able to again. I would also like to speak in favor of the Zoning and Ordinance Committee reports. Having attended those meetings they were both well thought out proposals and should be accepted favorably. Thank you. DONALD HINES, 1000 Michigan National Tower, Lansing. I am hear to speak for Mr. David Nussdorfer, the applicant in this request. We processed a request for special land use over a year ago that eventually was acted upon by the Lansing City Council in June of 1991. We talked extensively with members of City Council and your staff in the latter part of 1991 to let them know our intent to come back and file a new request since there had been some changes to the property. One of the things I particularly checked on was to see whether there would be any objection from a legal point of view to our filing this request less than a year after the previous request had been denied. As you know, I've done work in the land use planning area and am- quite familiar with the requirements in some zoning ordinances. The ordinance in Lansing as it relates to special land use permits has absolutely nothing that puts any prohibition against coming back at any time. I did discuss that with staff and it was confirmed that I was right. We then put together the application and filed it on January 22 of this year. The matter was routinely referred to the Planning Board by the City Council. The matter was not set for public hearing. A letter had been sent by the Planning Board to the Lansing City Attorney asking for an opinion as to whether it was appropriate for you to process this request since less than a year had gone by prior to the previous request being denied. Until I received the letter dated May 1, 1992, I never received any communication telling me anything was amiss. There have indeed been significant changes on the property, which in my opinion constitute a "change of circumstances" which would justify processing this request. The request, as you recall, is one asking for a special land use permit that encompasses three lots located at 1012, 1016 and 1018 Walsh Street. The client wants to use that property as an addition to the off street parking facility adjacent to that area. When we were here a year ago, each of the three lots had single family dwellings located on them. Now two of those lots are vacant. The houses have been removed. One house remains and is presently occupied by the owner of the property Planning Board Minutes May 19, 1992 Page 4 and the one that will be acquired by Mr. Nussdorfer as a part of this transaction. When the owner moves out and Mr. Nussdorfer takes possession, he will move that house to another piece of vacant property that he owns in the area. The thing that has changed is that two-thirds of the property has now been vacated. We feel this is a substantial change from the way the land was at the time we were here the first time. I can assure you that this is a rather drastic change in circumstance. We have presented adequate evidence to show that the circumstances .have changed enough to justify your at least permitting us to continue to process this request. If you don't want us to do it, you could give us our application back and hopefully the money we paid for a fee since nothing has occurred and we could wait until the latter half of June to file a new request because the old one will have been denied more than a year before. I think that's a waste of time, but that is an alternative tactic could be used. I would be happy to respond to any questions, but I think that adequately covers the presentation of what the facts are and why we're here again this evening. Mr. Goolsby: Are there any options currently on the property? Mr. Hines: It is my understanding there are, although a lot of time has gone by and I have not talked with my client in the last few weeks to ask specifically about that question. Mr. Goolsby: Who initiated the removal of those homes? Mr. Hines: David Nussdorfer, owner of the property and applicant in this matter. Mr. Goolsby: Essentially you arguing that a petitioner who creates a 'substantial change' should be able to turn around and reap the benefit of the definition of a substantial change that he himself has created by removing the two homes. Mr. Hines: It was always his intention to remove those buildings since both were in very poor condition. Letters had been sent to Mr. Nussdorfer by the City of Lansing saying that the buildings were in such poor condition he was going to have to either show cause why they should not be destroyed, or take action to improve the property so they could pass code inspections. It was always his intention to remove those three houses and expand the parking facility there. In fact, that was the intention of the previous owner, Mr. Ernie Fox. I believe he stated that at public hearing. I think the fact that the petitioner is the one who changed the circumstances is not unique at all. Of course the land owner is going to bring about those changes. Ms. Monteith: Were the houses vacant at the time of your previous petition? Mr. Hines: Yes, the two that were destroyed. They were vacant and some minor incidences had occurred and he was fearful that criminal activity could occur and give rise to liability to him. Planning Board Minutes May 19, 1992 Page 5 Ms. Monteith: When you came before, the request had to do with changing the potential use of that land but didn't really have anything to do with houses standing on it or not. Mr. Hines: I disagree. It was my understanding both here with the Planning Board and definitely at the City Council that the presence of those houses was a very significant factor. The question came up; should there be a removal or destruction of houses in the Lansing area at a time when some people were saying 'we need more low income housing. ' We filed with you a letter dated March 6, 1991 from Mr. Rick McKire, who is the Community Developer for the Potter Park United Methodist Church, telling about efforts through him to see if those two houses could be moved to some other site by his church or another organization. Mr. Nussdorfer specifically offered to give the houses free of charge and also to give some money toward the expense of moving the houses to other sites if Mr. McKire's church or any other organization might be able to use those houses. Ms. Monteith: The previous request stated it was to be used for off street surface parking. Your argument had nothing to do with houses. Mr. Hines: Absolutely. Even though the houses shouldn't have had anything to do with the request, ultimately they not only came to have a lot to do with the request, I'm certain they defeated the request. Ms. Horne: What are the future plans of Hager and Fox? Mr. Hines: Ingham Medical Center already occupied a substantial part of the building but indicated no way would they take this additional 5,000 square feet of space in the building unless there was additional off street parking provided. No matter who is occupying the building, it is going to be necessary to have additional parking space because he has 5,000 square feet of the building that is not being used by tenants now. Yet, the parking he does have is being used and is filled up enough that there definitely would not be adequate off street parking to take care of any tenant. Ms. Horne: For the past two months I have noticed at various times of the day that the lot facing Walsh Street might have eight or nine cars in it. I cannot figure out how the 5,000 square feet of office space would take up all of this parking lot. Mr. Hines: I am told by Mr. Nussdorfer that he must have additional space in order to attract tenants to fill up the rest of the building. Knowledgeable business clients who have to spend a great deal of money to acquire land and improve it to put in off street parking facilities do not put in more than they think they really need. They don't do that for the fun of it. Do you have a City Attorney opinion letter saying you cannot handle this within one year unless you have a change in circumstance? Mr. Foulds: The Board would expect some response from the City Attorney either in writing or verbally at their June 2 meeting. Mr. Hines: I will be out of the state June 2 so I will be unable to be here. After waiting six months I would not mind.waiting another two weeks if you would be good enough to have that at your mid-month meeting perhaps or the first meeting in July. Planning Board Minutes May 19, 1992 Page 6 MARY MARGARET WOLL, Eastside Neighborhood Organization. I am going to reaffirm our 'create grassy space' philosophy. If a parcel of property is zoned for housing, I do not believe we have any right to tell a homeowner what to do with their house. I request we maintain control over the ground it's sitting on and that if you choose to take down your house because you don't like it any more, that the house may go down and then you have created a scenic, grassy knoll that can get mowed. If you choose to take your house down in the hope that people will say now that you have this house down, we've got to have a parking lot there. We have some rights to protect neighborhoods from having people knock down houses for a parking lot. We have watched it happen and fortunately I have a few grassy knolls on the east side. It doesn't matter to me whether they are churches, doctor offices or anything else, you do not have a right to tell me I am going to have a parking lot sitting next to me. You can tell me I don't have a house there, but you certainly don't have a right to put a parking lot in next to me. This parking lot is creeping right up the side of that hill and going into the neighborhood. Right across the street are some very nice homes and I don't think these people need it. We will continue to protect the right of people to do what they want. Thank you. PAUL SCOTT, 1223 Larned Street. In reviewing the video tape of the Council meeting where this request and petition were denied, it was my feeling that this new request and the removal of the housing violates the sense that the Council had in denying the original petition. At that Council meeting I discussed with two qualified housing providers on the east side whether approaches had been made to them in the possibility of moving houses. These people are known for redeveloping some housing and have built new housing. They had not. I submit that perhaps Potter Park Methodist Church is not a qualified known housing provider in the City as far as rehab and moving of dwellings. Seeing the building has gone through extensive rehab or changes in the past five to eight years--does the parking that surrounds the building cover any present and future use under parking regulations? Thank you. Mr. Foulds: That information is in the file. I cannot give you a definitive answer, but it is available and I will provide it to the Board. HAROLD LEEMAN, 529 North Francis. I remember the Council decision in late June because Lucile practically had a stroke. She was so upset about what happened she had to take several weeks off of Council because she was in bad shape. If Mr. Hines wants to wait a year to the day and forget you folks having these committees, I would hope that he would just wait until the first of July to bring this back up. Were these houses ever registered with the City as rental? If they are rentals, why did they get in that bad of shape? What kind of penalty does the landlord, the owner of these properties pay when he gets in this shape? Someone messed up by not Planning Board Minutes May 19, 1992 Page 7 getting these registered and up to Code. I don't know how many other houses around town are not registered, not up to Code, but somehow you have to have a penalty. BETTY BOSLER, 1015 Walsh. The house at 1016, up until Hager Fox bought it, was owned by the original owner. It was well maintained and there was no problem. Hager Fox and Nussdorfer let the property go downhill fast as a rental property. I worked for a landlords' association for about seven years so I am well aware of the problems landlords have and the problems of tenants. It was just plain neglect. I also saw what happened to the houses where the existing parking lot is. Hager Fox let two of those three houses deteriorate so he could get his parking lot. He finally bought the third house, it was owned and occupied by a family with seven children. They have done the same thing with these two properties. We have to put up with the parking lots growing, the additional heat in the summertime, the kids using it as an attractive nuisance when it's not used for business purposes. Plus the danger of the kids going through there and cutting up onto Pennsylvania Avenue and trying to jump whatever is in the way for adventure. We have had problems with drugs in those houses. If we have a screened off parking lot, we will have even more of a drug problem because it will not be easily seen from the street. We have had problems with water on that street. We are at the same level that Pennsylvania underpass used to be. Even lowering Pennsylvania underpass, it's still getting flooded when we have heavy rains. We don't need more blacktop surfaces. We have a problem with runoff now. I would much rather see a grassy knoll across my way than more blacktop. They made the choice to let the properties deteriorate. They made the choice to tear it clown to get their ultimate plan put through. I don't think that should be approved. Thank you. Mr. Goolsby: I would like to know if they have sufficient number of parking spaces right now per the square footage of the building. The second thing I would like to know is, did the enforcement department attempt to take action against these homes as Mr. Hines indicated? Mr. Fountain: We will get that information for you. I think we did conclude at one point that the parking that is already there is sufficient to accommodate the uses. The parking they're asking for is in addition to that based on what the clinic was negotiating with the owner. We will verify that. REFERRED TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Comments from the Audience: HAROLD LEEMAN, 529 North Francis. I've heard we are going to have a lot of retirements throughout the City and the Planning Division will have several. I wonder what affect that will have on running the Department. Planning Board Minutes May 19, 1992 Page S Mr. Foulds responded, I have no requests for retirement on my desk from anybody in the Planning Division. That doesn't mean that there will not be some through December first, which is the deadline date as I understand it. Once I know specifically how many people are going to retire, then I will inform this Board and the Mayor and Council as to what I think that impact is on the planning function in this community. BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Mr. Barnhart moved for approval of the May 5, 1992 minutes and Ms. McNutt supported; APPROVED Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright, Chair Z-4-92, 4301 South Pennsylvania Avenue E-2 to F This is a request by Chris Baryames to rezone the property at this location from "E- 2" Local Shopping District to "F" Commercial District. The property is currently developed with a building that was formerly used as a gasoline service station and is now being used as an office for the sale of small storage buildings. The property measures 132 by 153 feet and contains approximately 20,000 square feet of surface. Ingress and egress are from both Pennsylvania Avenue and Cavanaugh Road. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the change would be in substantial conformance with the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan. The District 9 Plan considered this area for future use as commercial. It was further understood by the Committee that site development factors will be considered upon site plan review when building permits are issued for any change of use. These site development plans will include; landscape screening and buffering, removal of a nonconforming sign on the northwest corner of the property, and possible revision to ingress and egress to the site. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED The motion passed with a 5 yeas, 2 nays vote, however, in order to pass a zoning request six votes are needed so this will be forwarded with a denial. Planning Board Minutes May 19, 1992 Page 9 SLU-5-921 330 Cloverland Drive This is a request by Gary Helfmann for approval of a special land use for property located at the rear of 330 Cloverland Drive. The applicant proposes to construct a nine (9) space off street surface parking lot to accommodate parking for his commercial business which is adjacent and located at 4916 South Cedar Street. The property in question measures 50 by 90 feet and contains approximately 4,500 square feet. The Committee recommended that the special land use be approved subject to the following conditions: 1 . That the parking lot be used for nine (9) spaces and that the display, storage and/or repair of equipment be prohibited. 2. That on street parking be limited to the north side of Cloverland Street a distance of 150 feet west of the intersection with Cedar Street. 3. That the temporary storage trailer be removed to provide additional parking. 4. That landscape screening and buffering requirements be adhered to. 5. That the applicant extend storm sewer service or submit an acceptable plan for water detention on site. In making this recommendation the Committee considered the following: Compatibility with Surrounding Land Use The proposed parking lot, if appropriately landscaped and screened, should be compatible with the surrounding area. Properties to the north, east and south are non-residential. To the west is a single family neighborhood which must be adequately buffered. The present business at 4916 South Cedar Street generates traffic which is usually of short duration; either picking up or returning rented equipment. Large items are rented from the rear of the building. Vehicles often park along Cloverland to access the back door of the building. The new parking lot would accommodate these parkers and get them off the street while loading and unloading as well as supplying spaces for employee parking. The lot is designed only to be used for parking, not for the display or repair of equipment. Compatibility can be better assured if only parking is allowed. Change to Essential Character of the Area The use of this property for parking should not change the essential character of the area. General patterns of land use development would continue. The subject Planning Board Minutes May 19, 1992 Page 10 property is in a transitional location between types of uses. As long as the use remains no more intense than parking, no negative impact on essential character is anticipated. Interference with Use of Adjacent Property As a well buffered parking lot, no interference with adjacent properties is anticipated. The additional space should relieve the pressure for on street parking on Cloverland. If parking on street continues because customer parking in the new lot is occupied by display or repair of equipment, then the negative impact which presently exists would not be alleviated. To further insure adequate on site parking, the temporary trailer storage along the north side of the building should be removed. If additional storage is needed, excess land not utilized by the Clark Gas Station should be purchased to legitimately expand to the south along South Cedar Street. This action should ensure that adequate parking is available to the site without interfering with the neighborhood's access to their homes. Potential for Increase in Pollution Hazards The development of the parking lot should not increase any potential for pollution if the runoff from the parking lot is done in accord with Public Service requirements and if all small engine repair and testing is done within the building. Adequate Public Service and Facilities Storm sewer is not directly available to the site. According to Public Service engineers the fifteen inch storm sewer would have to be extended to this site or all storm water would have to be retained on site. A plan submitted by a professional engineer would have to be approved by Public Service detaining all water on site or extension of the sewer would be necessary to assure adequacy of this facility. All other public facilities and services are generally available to the site. Public Service and Facilities Capacity With the exception of storm sewer the capacity of no facility should be exceeded. The storm sewer can handle the increased capacity if it is extended. It may also be possible to detain on site, which would not impact any public facility or service. Planning Board Minutes May 19, 1992 Page 11 Compliance with Master Plan As was mentioned previously, the subject piece is in a transitional location for which a parking lot could be well suited. The Master Plan stands mute on this particular piece while generally recognizing commercial uses along Cedar and single family residential uses along Cloverland. A parking lot, as a transitional use would appear appropriate as long as it is well buffered and screened. Conformance with Zoning Code Requirements The proposal will conform with the requirements of the Zoning Code with installation of landscape screening and buffering and compliance with all other conditions set forth in the recommendation. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Ms. LeBlanc supported; Mr. Fountain pointed out that a meeting was held to inform the petitioner of these conditions and the only concern is removal of that trailer so the Committee did allow them more time to phase that out. Vote taken and by a 5 yeas, 1 nay; APPROVED The next Zoning and Ordinance Committee meeting will be held on June 10, 1992 at 2:30 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby reported that two items from their Committee meeting will remain in Committee for further study. They are; Act-14-92, Grand Woods Park HELD IN COMMITTEE Capital Improvements Plan HELD IN COMMITTEE Act-7-92, 300 Block East Maple Street This is a request from the Public Service Department, Friedland Iron Company and O'Leary Paint Compnay, to vacate this one block of public street. This area has been an eyesore, an enforcement problem for the City and a potential liability for Planning Board Minutes May 19, 1992 Page 12 Act-14-92, Grand Woods Park HELD IN COMMITTEE Capital Improvements Plan HELD IN COMMITTEE Act-7-92, 300 Block East Maple Street This is a request from the Public Service Department, Friedland Iron Company and O'Leary Paint Compnay, to vacate this one block of public street. This area has been an eyesore, an enforcement problem for the City and a potential liability for several years. Also, the right-of-way is no longer essential for access to Burchard Park. The Committee recommends that the portion of the 300 block of East Maple Street be vacated to the interests of O'Leary Paint Company and Friedland Industries, Incorporated. It is also suggested that the zoning on the vacated right-of-way be designated as light industrial zoning district in conformance with the adjacent zoned. It is requested that the property owners place barricades at the west end of their vacated right-of-way and the City install signs to inform motorists that there is no through street. Finally, the two businesses are encouraged to either keep the property cleared up or obscure the area with an opaque fence along the park and Center Street. Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms. McNutt seconded; Ms. LeBlanc: Maybe there should be a 'no through' sign on Factory Street and maybe a cul-de-sac. Mr. Goolsby stated, I understand there will be signs on both streets to show there is no outlet. Vote taken; APPROVED The Committee will have a short meeting at 7 p.m. June 2, 1992 prior to the regular Board meeting. Also there will be a meeting at 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday, June 9 in the Council Conference Room. Report from Planning Director The Mayor's office has invited the Planning Board to the first public presentation on the Lansing Center expansion on May 21 at 4 p.m. at Dart Auditorium at L.C,C. The Lansing Center expansion is being handled by the Economic Development Corporation, who will be filing a special land use for construction in the Flood Plain to allow that expansion to take place. That will probably be before this Board in July or August. Planning Board Minutes May 19, 1992 Page 13 Comments from Chairperson: The question was raised about members' summer schedules. Ms. Monteith will be unable to attend the June 10 Zoning and Ordinance Committee, but will be present for both Board meetings in June. On July 21 Mr. Barnhart will not be in attendance. Ms. Monteith will be away the entire month of August. It was felt that one meeting in July and August would sufficiently handle upcoming items. Therefore, the July 21 and August 18 meetings will be cancelled. Board Member Comments: 1) A letter was received from Margie R. McNutt stating she did not wish to be considered for reappointment at the end of her term (June 30, 1992) . 2) Pictures were submitted from Mrs. Cook regarding 110 Clifford Street (Z-9-91) . These will be placed on file. 3) Ms. LeBlanc reported she had gone to the meeting in Grand Rapids on Quality and City Design and it was very worthwhile. I wish more people from the City could have gone. I heard the phrase repeated "demolition through neglect," which is something we are facing in this city. It was a very apt description. Adjournment: The regular May 19, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board stood adjourned at 9:17 p.m. Respectfully submitt , 60 7mes Foulds,eirtor ng Planning Division WC APPROVED 051992 TO CLERK 111593 Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers loth Floor, Lansing City Hall May 5, 1992 11 -22-93P12 : 07 RCVD Emly Horne, Chairperson, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p .m. with six members present: Goolsby, Horne, LeBlanc, McNutt, Monteith, Wright Excused Absence: Merle Barnhart Staff in attendance: Foulds , Fountain, Spackman The agenda stands as printed. PUBLIC HEARING: Z-4-92, 4301 South Pennsylvania Avenue E-2 to F Vern Fountain, Zoning Administrator, presented this case. This is a request by Chris Bar-yames to rezone property on the immediate southeast corner of Pennsylvania Avenue and Cavanaugh Road, which is commonly known as 4301 South Pennsylvania Avenue, from its present "E-2" Local Shopping District to "F" Commercial District. The property measures 132 by 153 feet, contains approximately 20,000 square feet and was formerly used as a gasoline service station site. The building on the property is still in existence and used for other types of commercial activities. Land use to the north, east and south is residential. The immediate southwest corner of Cavanaugh and Pennsylvania is vacant and south of that there is a professional office district strip which consists of several credit unions and professional office uses. Then on the northwest corner of Pennsylvania and Cavanaugh is a Quality Dairy convenience store. North of that is an apartment building , as well as just to the west of that. They do want to put up a new sign advertising their business. We indicated we have to treat the present one as an abandoned sign. We will work with them to establish new identification for that property so that pole would have to come down. Planning Board Minutes May 5, 1992 Page 2 CHRIS BARYAMES, petitioner, 1731 Nottingham Road. This request to "F" Commercial is to give me a little more flexibility. The people want to come in and sell cars and cannot do it under E-2. It is restrictive. There are various other things I could put in such as a muffler shop. We had the gas tanks removed. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Ms. LeBlanc moved for approval of the minutes of April 21 , 1992 and Ms. Monteith supported; Mr. Foulds pointed out that Rose Killips' letter of resignation had been dated prior to this Board meeting and therefore is not absent as indicated. APPROVED Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright, Chairperson, reported the next meeting will be held on Wednesday, May 13, 1992 at 2:30 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby, Chairperson, stated there is no report and the next meeting will r be on Tuesday, May 12 at 4 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room. Planning Board Minutes May 5, 1992 Page 3 Report from Planning Director: Jim Foulds 1 ) The Seven Block Development Plan is currently in the Physical Development Committee of City Council. Our original intent, following the procedures laid out in Public Act 344, was to have that document referred back to the Board and Citizens' District Council so they could do detail work and we could put the financial plan together and resubmit it to Council. We felt it was best putting a plan together that would be the most meaningful document to have Council address those policy issues you forwarded to them clearly laying out what direction they wanted that neighborhood to go. We felt we would not be doing an effective job if it were simply referred back to this committee and Citizen District Council not having endorsement of the Council. We are getting full and open discussion in the Committee. The strong elements of the plan, rehabilitation versus redevelopment, will prevail but political process takes time. We had a bus tour last Thursday and four Board members attended. We also had discussion after with residents and Mr. Ferguson. 2) The Council did approve, on a 5/3 vote, the parking lot expansion for the Deja Vu facility on Jolly/King-Logan. Given the sensitive nature of that particular land use issue the Council did an excellent job trying to avoid the emotional nature of the issue and dealing with it as a land use topic. It is a difficult situation, however, we are bound by federal law, state enabling legislation and our own ordinance. The product will be better than we have now. 3) Walsh Street (SLU-18-90). We had a request for a special land use from Mr. Hines, Attorney for the property owner. You and Council last year denied the rezoning of that property at 1012, 1016 and 1018 for a surface parking lot. The City Attorney is still researching the issue but has informed me verbally of a recommendation to you and I have drafted a letter to Mr. Hines stating; "This communication is in response to your special land use application SLU-3-92 concerning a proposed off street surface parking lot. As you are aware, the Planning Board and City Council denied a similar request in 1991 . As a result of Planning Board Minutes May 5, 1992 Page 4 the new application, the Planning Board requested legal opinion from the City Attorney advising whether the Board is obligated to act on the new application when it has made a recent official recommendation on a similar request. Based on a recommendation from the City Attorney, the Planning Board has scheduled a jurisdictional hearing at their regularly scheduled meeting on May 19, 1992. The purpose of this hearing is to receive testimony and evidence that material and substantial change has occurred to the facts of this matter that would cause the Planning Board to reconsider this special land use request and formally process the new application. Therefore, the Planning Board respectfully requests that you attend their May 19 meeting . . . submit information clarifying what has materially or substantially changed concerning this request." The City Attorney suggested you allow Mr. Hines to present physical evidence or verbal testimony and you should ask questions to make sure you have all the information you need to make a decision. While we are not obligated to notify the neighborhood, we will notify the association so they can have a representative present. We will also provide you with background information. If the applicant can demonstrate that material or substantial change has taken place in the request and you feel that's true based on the evidence submitted, you can decide to go through the-process. Comments from Chairperson: The Physical Development Committee will meet Thursday at 3 p.m. on the Seven Block Plan. Board Member Comments: 1 ) Ms. LeBlanc: Last year I attended a workshop on Groundwater Protection and subsequent to that we had a presentation to this Board. Since then I have received a communication on suggested site plan review standards. They were good suggestions. Staff members explained; at some point we are going to discuss an ordinance amendment dealing with our potential groundwater polluter in Eaton County. Planning Board Minutes May 5, 1992 Page 5 Communication has been received from DNR indicating they are moving ahead with soil borings to test the extent of pollution on the site. To get five or six test drops, they will probably have to take significant measures to move some equipment out of the way. We have assembled Eaton County, Department of Natural Resources, Board of Water and Light and Consumers Power for coordinated action. In addition steps have been taken to get an application for a junk yard. BWL is very concerned about wellhead protection, since Lansing receives all of its groundwater from a well system. We have to make sure the ground handles substances or fluids that could contaminate. Tri-county Regional Planning Commission is our clearing house for all that effort. 2) Ms. Horne welcomed the students in the audience and thanked them for their interest. Adjournment: The regular May 5, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board stood adjourned at8:08p.m. Respectfully submitted, l ` 9J N. Foulds, irector . sing Planning Division WC Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 p.m . City Council Chambers loth Floor, Lansing City Hall April 21 , 1992 Emly Horne convened the meeting at 7:32 p .m. with six members present and Beth Monteith arrived at 7:35 p.m . Barnhart , Goolsby , Horne , LeBlanc , McNutt , Monteith , Wright Staff in Attendance: Foulds , Ruff BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: I Mr. Barnhart moved for approval of the minutes of April 7, 1992 as printedcrr Ms. LeBlanc seconded; APPkViD Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright, Chairperson Z-2-92, Waverly Road/Glenburne Boulevard A to D-1 This is a rezoning request for vacant property located on the northwest corner of Waverly Road and Glenburne Boulevard from "A" Residential District to "D-1" Professional Office District . The request is by Mr. John Boles who has indicated his intent to develop a professional office building on this site. However, no specific plan has been submitted. The property in question consists of seven (7) platted lots that are part of the Glenburne Subdivision and were intended for single family development . The surrounding area has been developed with predominantly single family homes . These lots did not develop because of substandard soil conditions. However, this would have to be confirmed with soil testing . Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 2 The Zoning and Ordinance Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed change is not in conformance with the Southwest Area Master Plan , which indicates residential development at 0 to 7 units per acre. It was further found that conditions have not changed in this area since the adoption of the Master Plan that would justify a change of zoning. Mr. Wright moved for denial of this request and Mr. Barnhart supported; Mr. Goolsby: There is a car wash across the street and I wonder how long it has been since a house has been built in this area? Is this property ever going to develop residential? Given the traffic patterns on Waverly, it is not an inviting place to locate a single family house. It seems professional office would be the most compatible use for the property . Mr. Wright: The Committee discussed this at great length. Three parcels are close to Limerick Circle and the other four are on the opposite side next to Glenburne. It was suggested in Committee that there would be no objection to locating a structure on Waverly and Glenburne away from Limerick Circle, a predominantly residential street. But we had to choose between approval or denial. Ms. Monteith: The plan backed up to a building right into the single family. Our sense was that was unsatisfactory to go in where people had purchased homes content that it was a single family area. There is probably a way to develop this to satisfy everyone that would not infringe on the single family area. Ms. McNutt: I wonder why it couldn't have been tabled to give him time to alter his plan? Mr. Wright responded, staff did not make that recommendation at our meeting so our only option was to deny the petition as filed. Perhaps something could transpire in the future. Mr. Foulds: Staff didn't have a proposal before us to make that recommendation . Since it hasn't developed with single family, as true with a lot of platted lots that have development problems; whether locational or environmental problems , or perhaps both , that does not mean the City should not provide single family platted lots for someone to build a home on in the future. We have single family homes up Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 3 and down Waverly Road on the right-of-way and I think if you are going to provide alternative housing types, you need to have vacant land so people can build on it . Jim Ruff added, this is seven lots , but there are a number of lots further back in the neighborhood that also have remained undeveloped. I don't think it's all because of their location. Other surrounding houses have been sold and purchased and are lived in currently. I think the Committee was looking at some way to help push the area if there was another proposal , which there was not. Ms. McNutt: How long has the car wash been there? Mr. Foulds responded; the car wash was zoning , basically a spot zone , recommended by Council in opposition with Planning Board recommendation, which was support of residential zoning for the south side of Glenburne , basically a spot zone. It is not a good use of that location. DENIED Z-3-92, 620 South Capitol Avenue J and D-1 to D-1 A portion of this is already rezoned zoned "D-1" but there is a small portion which is "J" Parking and the request is to rezone the entire parcel to "D-1" Professional Office. The request is by the Michigan Manufacturers Association to rezone property at 620 South Capitol Avenue from "J" Parking and "D-l" Professional Office Districts to "D-l" Professional Office District, The purpose of this request is to allow construction of a new office building that will have its primary access from Capitol Avenue and Hillsdale Street . The property in question contains approximately 1 .3 acres and is irregular in shape . A public hearing was held on this request before the Planning Board at their meeting of April 7, 1992, at which time Joe Gentilozzi spoke on behalf of the request and presented proposed development plans to the Planning Board and people in the audience. One other communication was received opposing ingress and egress from Capitol Avenue and two other persons spoke indicating their concerns about the displacement of the off street parking with this new office building . Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 4 The Zoning Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed change is in substantial conformance with the Master Plan, which designates office development for the site. The Committee further found that the required off street parking for this new office building will be provided on site and that arrangements will be made to allow dual use of this off street parking in conjunction with the Days Inn Motel immediately to the north . Mr. Wright moved for approval and Ms. LeBlanc supported; Mr. Goolsby has a concern with egress onto Capitol Avenue that could be made better with signage. Mr. Foulds reported that has been discussed with the Transportation Engineer. Mr. Ruff clarified, the egress point meets the general tense of what the Transportation Division tries to achieve and yet because of the size of Capitol Avenue, concern was raised. Fortunately, Capitol Avenue is a one-way street and you don't have opposing traffic and you cannot turn left on St. Joseph so there's not a need to immediately get into the far left lane. Because of traffic movements , it is not as high of concern to the Transportation Division as has been expressed. They could encourage use of the Hillsdale Street exit. Mr. Goolsby suggested there could be a "no turn 3 or 4 to 6 p .m." sign for the heavy travel time. Roll was called on the motion APPROVED SLU-4-92, 430-"0 North Larch Street This is a request by the Volunteers of America , Incorporated for approval of a special land use to allow for the establishment of a residential care facility for men, women and children in the existing building located at 430-440 North Larch Street. The property is currently developed with a non-residential structure, of which a portion will be converted for the proposed use. It is located on a lot measuring 198 by 198 feet and contains approximately 39,204 square feet. Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 5 A public hearing was held on this request by the Planning Board at their meeting of April 7, 1992, at which time Colonel Patricia A. Dowell spoke on behalf of the request and indicated the program that would be developed for this site as a residential care facility. The Zoning Committee recommended this special land use be approved for up to 39 individuals with the understanding that capacity beyond 39 may be allowed provided the 1 ,000 square feet of lot area per person requirement is waived by the Board of Zoning Appeals and subject to the following: 1 . Compliance with all Building , Health Department and Fire Code requirements . 2. Approval of a site plan showing access , parking and any site changes. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Ms . Monteith seconded; APPROVED SLU-5--92, 330 Cloverland Drive After much discussion in our Committee meeting , staff indicated they would meet with the applicant for further discussion. HELD IN COMMITTEE NCU-3-92, 621 East Michigan Avenue—Substitution This is a request for approval of a substitution of use for property located at 621 East Michigan Avenue , which is nonconforming . Whenever it is nonconforming and the use changes , it requires action by the Board. This property is zoned "H" Light Industrial District. It was previously used as a commercial party store selling beer, wine, liquor and other party store items. The site does maintain Class B nonconforming status because there is no off street parking associated with the land and building . Section 1294.07(e) of the Zoning Code indicates that the Planning Board may permit the substitution of Class B nonconforming status if the Board determines that the new use is within the same type of nonconforming uses and no more intense than the former use. Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 6 The Committee was satisfied, based on testimony and evidence, that the new use of this property is no more intense than the previous use and, therefore, approval of this substitution of use is in keeping with the general intent of the Code. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Ms . Monteith supported; Mr. Barnhart stated he will be voting against the proposal because of the introduction of beer and wine so close to the Rescue Mission. For groceries only , he would not object . Vote was taken and by a 5 yeas , 2 nays vote was; APPROVED NCU-5-92, 716 North Walnut Street—Restoration This is a request by Lucy Esmay for approval of Class A nonconforming status for property located at 716 North Walnut Street for the purpose of investing over 35% of the market value of the building into restoration of the structure. The property contains three residential units , is zoned "C" Residential and maintains a Class B nonconforming status because records show that it was converted to three .residential units in the year 1941 . The Committee was satisfied, based on testimony and evidence, that approval of this request will allow continued use of the property in substantial conformance with the established land use pattern, which consists of a mixture of one, two, three, four and five family homes within the block . The Committee also believes that this change will facilitate upgrading of this structure, which is in keeping with development policies for this area. The Committee also recommends that a one year time policy be made a provisional condition so that progress can be monitored and on time. If the project is not completed within one year, the Planning Board may require reapplication or revocation of Class A status. Mr. Wright so moved and Mr. Barnhart seconded; APPROVED Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 7 t. The next Committee meeting will be Wednesday, May 13, 1992 at 2:30 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby, Chairperson Act-20-91, 100 Block South Grand Avenue This is a request by the Board of Water and Light for an easement on City property on the north end of the South Grand parking ramp. This request will formalize a utility easement currently used by the Board. The Committee recommends that the Board approve the requested easement with the stipulations that all equipment, poles , wires , appurtenances and lines be either underground or affixed to the abutting structures in order to maintain safe and unimpeded pedestrian access. Mr. Goolsby moved for approval and Ms. McNutt supported; APPROVED Act-1-92, Wellington Road Manor This is a request by the City Assessor to vacate the two pedestrian walkway rights-of-way connecting Wellington Road with what is now the Lansing Country Club . These rights-of-way are unimproved and each contains a storm sewer line. The adjacent property owners maintain the rights-of-way. An easement for the sewer line would have to be retained. It is recommended by the Committee that the pedestrian rights-of-way be retained and remain unimproved. Essentially, we don't know what the future of the Country Club is , so this is premature to vacate the rights-of-way at this point. Mr. Goolsby moved to retain the pedestrian right-of-way and that it remain unimproved and Ms . McNutt supported; DENIED Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 8 Act-6-92, 1151 Haco Drive This is a request from Barnum and Tenny Auto Body Shop to encroach ten feet (10' ) into the Haco Drive right-of-way to place a security fence. The Board of Water and Light and the Hager Fox building owners have both been granted encroachment rights . The Public Service Department expressed concern over liability for damage to the fence and stored automobiles that would be within five feet (5' ) of the street because of the snow plows. The Committee recommends that the Barnum and Tenny request for placing a security fence ten feet (10' ) into the public right-of-way of Haco Drive be denied. Further, that Barnum and Tenny be permitted to use a five foot encroachment into the public right-of-way through a permit issued by the Public Service Department . The Barnum and Tenny Company is to assume full responsibility for fence maintenance or repair resulting from City operations and removal when it is no longer required or the City mandates its removal for use of this area for public purposes. Miss Dig , service contractors may call throughout the State where the underground utility lines can be identified, must be consulted prior to installation of the fence to avoid contact with underground utility lines . Mr. Goolsby added, they wanted a ten foot encroachment, which would have brought them within five feet of the roadway. So we are denying them the 10 foot public right-of-way but stating they are allowed to get a five foot right-of-way from Public Service. In other words, their encroachment will be five feet, leaving ten feet between the fence and the street . Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms. McNutt seconded: DENIED Act-9-92, Grand River Avenue This is a request from the M.S.U . Water Ski Club for a license extension to place buoys and jump ramp in the Grand River in the vicinity of the Lansing Boat Club and Frances Park. This is a routine request which is renewed each year. The Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 9 Parks Department indicated last year that a water utilization study would be conducted. This study remains incomplete at this time; therefore, the renewal of this license appears appropriate. The Committee recommends that the license be extended to cover the 1992 season. Also that the Ski Club must have a DNR permit to set out buoys and insurance which protects the City from liability costs for damage or injury. These appurtenances must be maintained and removed by the Ski Club at no expense to the City. There was some discussion about the removal of these buoys and the ramp at times the City needed to use that waterway for other purposes, and apparently the Club has always been cooperative in the past in removing them. Mr. Goolsby moved for approval and Ms. McNutt seconded; Mr. Barnhart: Why are we getting involved in licensing now? They put these out every year and we've never been involved before. Mr. Foulds explained, our ownership of the river extends out into the river and they are using it. The Attorney has advised administration that all clubs using that piece of property and as indicated there are several deed licenses and leases. In the event of a tragedy, who is liable? Motion restated; APPROVED Act-10-92, 1620 Sunset This is a request by Padnos Iron and Steel for an easement across vacant City land for the purpose of constructing an industrial access road. This road will relieve traffic disruption on Willow Street. The Company proposes to pave the street to minimize the amount of dirt tracked to city streets. The Committee recommends that the Company's request to obtain a 50 foot easement across City land be approved. It is further recommended that Padnos be required to perform daily inspections of Sunset and remove metal scrap or dirt that is deposited from this access point to Willow Street. Also, Padnos needs to agree that Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 10 with appropirate notice their improvements in the easement will be removed at their expense. There should be no cost to the City for granting this easement. Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms . McNutt supported; APPROVED Act-11-92, 500 Block East Michigan Avenue This is a request to vacate the alleys . This site was recently purchased by the City and cleared for constructing city parking lots . The property between the alley and Michigan Avenue is proposed for a pedestrian plaza . There is no overall development plan for the site so it may be premature to vacate the alley right-of-way. This request ties in with Act-12-92. The Committee recommends that the alleys not be vacated at the present time and Mr. Goolsby so moved. Ms. McNutt supported; DENIED Act-12-92, 111 South Cedar Street This is a request by the Board of Water and Light to purchase the property at 111 South Cedar Street to construct a water pumping facility. The parcel was recently purchased by the City as part of a redevelopment project for the entire block. There is no overall or long range development plan for the rear; therefore, it may be premature to sell this parcel . It is also located to be highly visible to Michigan Avenue and any development here could set the pattern for the area. The Committee recommends that the request be denied and the Board of Water and Light consider an alternative site for their water pumping facilities , which would be less visible to the Capitol Loop and Michigan Avenue . Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms, McNutt seconded; DENIED Mr. Goolsby pointed out that the Board of Water and Light request is just south of the alleys requested previously to be vacated. It is a very visible corner at Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 11 Michigan Avenue and Cedar Street . The Committee believes until there is some development for that area, nothing should be committed to at present. There are viable alternatives . The Committee will meet again on Tuesday, May 5, 1992 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Conference Room before the regular meeting and the regularly scheduled meeting will be Tuesday, May 12 at 4 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room. Our goal is to complete the Goals and Objectives for the City and have those back to the Board by perhaps the second meeting in May or at least the first meeting in June. Report from the Planning Director Jim Foulds 1 ) Clarification on Z-2-92, property at Waverly and Glenburne. Staff is willing to meet with the applicant, Mr. Boles, for an alternative development concept before we forward this to Council . I would like to extend this courtesy to him . The Board stated consensus that Mr. Boles should be contacted before this item was sent on to City Council. 2) The Seven Block Plan is being seriously debated in the Physical Development Committee of City Council. It is receiving full discussion. There is a field trip planned for a week from this Thursday into the neighborhood. I will have staff send the information to you. They will look at specific homes recommended for acquisition and commercial development area. We suggested they look at the Chestnut Street area where we have worked with the nonprofit and have rehabilitated many structures in the area to show what is possible, as well as looking at the Capitol Commons development. Initially we thought this would bounce right back to the Citizen District Council, who would do their work. We . really need from Council direction on where we are going before they put a financial plan together that we may not agree with. Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 12 3) Willow-Pine Neighborhood Plan. Staff has been directed to prepare the two concepts that were presented to the neighborhood meeting about three weeks ago. We will take those to the Committee for a vote and then get the document to this Board for deliberation. 4) BTS Plan. The final documents are in from Howard Dierdorf and we will bring them back to you for review and then forward them to Council. Communications: A letter of resignation, effective immediately, from the City of Lansing Planning Board was received from Rose Killips. Comments from Chairperson: If anyone has someone from Ward 1 or Ward 2 that would like to serve as a member of the Planning Board, please let Mr. Foulds or the Mayor know about them. Board Member Comments: 1 ) Mr. Barnhart requested an excused absence from the May 5, 1992 Board meeting . Ms. LeBlanc moved for approval and Ms . McNutt seconded; APPROVED 2) Mr. Goolsby; I wonder on this public hearing scheduled for May 5, where is the property actually located? Mr. Ruff reported, that is on the southeast corner of Cavanaugh and Pennsylvania Avenue where there was a Drakes Refinery Gas Station. It is zoned for local shopping , which would allow for gas station/convenience type uses . The request is to general Commercial District. Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 13 Adjournment: The regular April 21 , 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 8:37 p .m. Respectfully submitted, jam, s N. Foulds , Director r-..ansing Planning Division WC Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 p .m. City Council Chambers loth Floor, Lansing City Hall April 21 , 1992 Emly Horne convened the meeting at 7:32 p .m. with six members present and Beth Monteith arrived at 7:35 p .m . Barnhart , Goolsby , Horne , LeBlanc , McNutt , Monteith , Wright r'o ; Staff in Attendance: Foulds , Ruff =a cam: BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: to W Mr. Barnhart moved for approval of the minutes of April 7, 1992 as printed. Ms . LeBlanc seconded; APPROVED Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright , Chairperson Z-2-92, Waverly Road/Glenburne Boulevard A to D-1 This is a rezoning request for vacant property located on the northwest corner of Waverly Road and Glenburne Boulevard from "A" Residential District to "D-1" Professional Office District . The request is by Mr. John Boles who has indicated his intent to develop a professional office building on this site. However, no specific plan has been submitted. The property in question consists of seven (7) platted lots that are part of the Glenburne Subdivision and were intended for single family development. The surrounding area has been developed with predominantly single family homes . These lots did not develop because of substandard soil conditions . However, this would have to be confirmed with soil testing . Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 2 The Zoning and Ordinance Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed change is not in conformance with the Southwest Area Master Plan, which indicates residential development at 0 to 7 units per acre. It was further found that conditions have not changed in this area since the adoption of the Master Plan that would justify a change of zoning . Mr. Wright moved for denial of this request and Mr. Barnhart supported; Mr. Goolsby: There is a car wash across the street and I wonder how long it has been since a house has been built in this area? Is this property ever going to develop residential? Given the traffic patterns on Waverly , it is not an inviting place to locate a single family house. It seems professional office would be the most compatible use for the property . Mr. Wright: The Committee discussed this at great length. Three parcels are close to Limerick Circle and the other four are on the opposite side next to Glenburne. It was suggested in Committee that there would be no objection to locating a structure on Waverly and Glenburne away from Limerick Circle, a predominantly residential street. But we had to choose between approval or denial. Ms. Monteith: The plan backed up to a building right into the single family. Our sense was that was unsatisfactory to go in where people had purchased homes content that it was a single family area. There is probably a way to develop this to satisfy everyone that would not infringe on the single family area. Ms . McNutt: I wonder why it couldn't have been tabled to give him time to alter his plan? Mr. Wright responded, staff did not make that recommendation at our meeting so our only option was to deny the petition as filed. Perhaps something could transpire in the future. Mr. Foulds: Staff didn't have a proposal before us to make that recommendation. Since it hasn't developed with single family, as true with a lot of platted lots that have development problems; whether locational or environmental problems, or perhaps both , that does not mean the City should not provide single family platted lots for someone to build a home on in the future. We have single family homes up Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 3 and down Waverly Road on the right-of-way and I think if you are going to provide alternative housing types, you need to have vacant land so people can build on it . Jim Ruff added, this is seven lots , but there are a number of lots further back in the neighborhood that also have remained undeveloped. I don't think it's all because of their location. Other surrounding houses have been sold and purchased and are lived in currently. I think the Committee was looking at some way to help push the area if there was another proposal, which there was not . Ms. McNutt: How long has the car wash been there? Mr. Foulds responded; the car wash was zoning, basically a spot zone , recommended by Council in opposition with Planning Board recommendation, which was support of residential zoning for the south side of Glenburne , basically a spot zone . It is not a good use of that location. DENIED Z-3-92, 620 South Capitol Avenue J and D-1 to D-1 A portion of this is already rezoned zoned "D-1" but there is a small portion which is "J" Parking and the request is to rezone the entire parcel to "D-l" Professional Office. The request is by the Michigan Manufacturers Association to rezone property at 620 South Capitol Avenue from "J" Parking and "D-l" Professional Office Districts to "D-l" Professional Office District. The purpose of this request is to allow construction of a new office building that will have its primary access from Capitol Avenue and Hillsdale Street. The property in question contains approximately 1 .3 acres and is irregular in shape . A public hearing was held on this request before the Planning Board at their meeting of April 7 , 1992, at which time Joe Gentilozzi spoke on behalf of the request and presented proposed development plans to the Planning Board and people in the audience. One other communication was received opposing ingress and egress from Capitol Avenue and two other persons spoke indicating their concerns about the displacement of the off street parking with this new office building . Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 4 The Zoning Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed change is in substantial conformance with the Master Plan , which designates office development for the site. The Committee further found that the required off street parking for this new office building will be provided on site and that arrangements will be made to allow dual use of this off street parking in conjunction with the Days Inn Motel immediately to the north. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Ms . LeBlanc supported; Mr. Goolsby has a concern with egress onto Capitol Avenue that could be made better with signage. Mr. Foulds reported that has been discussed with the Transportation Engineer. Mr. Ruff clarified, the egress point meets the general tense of what the Transportation Division tries to achieve and yet because of the size of Capitol Avenue , concern was raised. Fortunately, Capitol Avenue is a one-way street and you don't have opposing traffic and you cannot turn left on St. Joseph so there' s not a need to immediately get into the far left lane . Because of traffic movements , it is not as high of concern to the Transportation Division as has been expressed . They could encourage use of the Hillsdale Street exit . Mr. Goolsby suggested there could be a "no turn 3 or 4 to 6 p .m." sign for the heavy travel time. Roll was called on the motion APPROVED SLU-4-92, 430-440 North Larch Street This is a request by the Volunteers of America, Incorporated for approval of a special land use to allow for the establishment of a residential care facility for men, women and children in the existing building located at 430-440 North Larch Street. The property is currently developed with a non-residential structure, of which a portion will be converted for the proposed use. It is located on a lot measuring 198 by 198 feet and contains approximately 39,204 square feet. Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 5 A public hearing was held on this request by the Planning Board at their meeting of April 7, 1992, at which time Colonel Patricia A. Dowell spoke on behalf of the request and indicated the program that would be developed for this site as a residential care facility. The Zoning Committee recommended this special land use be approved for up to 39 individuals with the understanding that capacity beyond 39 may be allowed provided the 1 ,000 square feet of lot area per person requirement is waived by the Board of Zoning Appeals and subject to the following: 1 . Compliance with all Building , Health Department and Fire Code requirements . 2. Approval of a site plan showing access , parking and any site changes. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Ms . Monteith seconded; APPROVED SLU-5-92, 330 Cloverland Drive After much discussion in our Committee meeting , staff indicated they would meet with the applicant for further discussion. HELD IN COMMITTEE NCU-3-92, 621 East Michigan Avenue—Substitution This is a request for approval of a substitution of use for property located at 621 East Michigan Avenue , which is nonconforming . Whenever it is nonconforming and the use changes , it requires action by the Board. This property is zoned "H" Light Industrial District. It was previously used as a commercial party store selling beer, wine, liquor and other party store items. The site does maintain Class B nonconforming status because there is no off street parking associated with the land and building . Section 1294.07(e) of the Zoning Code indicates that the Planning Board may permit the substitution of Class B nonconforming status if the Board determines that the new use is within the same type of nonconforming uses and no more intense than the former use. Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 6 The Committee was satisfied, based on testimony and evidence , that the new use of this property is no more intense than the previous use and, therefore, approval of this substitution of use is in keeping with the general intent of the Code. Mr. Wright moved for approval and Ms . Monteith supported; Mr. Barnhart stated he will be voting against the proposal because of the introduction of beer and wine so close to the Rescue Mission. For groceries only , he would not object . Vote was taken and by a 5 yeas , 2 nays vote was; APPROVED NCU-5-92, 716 North Walnut Street—Restoration This is a request by Lucy Esmay for approval of Class A nonconforming status for property located at 716 North Walnut Street for the purpose of investing over 35% of the market value of the building into restoration of the structure. The property contains three residential units, is zoned "C" Residential and maintains a Class B nonconforming status because records show that it was converted to three residential units in the year 1941 . The Committee was satisfied, based on testimony and evidence, that approval of this request will allow continued use of the property in substantial conformance with the established land use pattern, which consists of a mixture of one, two, three, four and five family homes within the block. The Committee also believes that this change will facilitate upgrading of this structure, which is in keeping with development policies for this area . The Committee also recommends that a one year time policy be made a provisional condition so that progress can be monitored and on time. If the project is not completed within one year, the Planning Board may require reapplication or revocation of Class A status. Mr. Wright so moved and Mr. Barnhart seconded; APPROVED Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 7 The next Committee meeting will be Wednesday, May 13, 1992 at 2:30 p.m . in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby, Chairperson Act-20-91, 100 Block South Grand Avenue This is a request by the Board of Water and Light for an easement on City property on the north end of the South Grand parking ramp . This request will formalize a utility easement currently used by the Board. The Committee recommends that the Board approve the requested easement with the stipulations that all equipment, poles , wires, appurtenances and lines be either, underground or affixed to the abutting structures in order to maintain safe and unimpeded pedestrian access . Mr. Goolsby moved for approval and Ms . McNutt supported; APPROVED Act-1-92, Wellington Road Manor This is a request by the City Assessor to vacate the two pedestrian walkway rights-of-way connecting Wellington Road with what is .now the Lansing Country Club . These rights-of-way are unimproved and each contains a storm sewer line. The adjacent property owners maintain the rights-of-way. An easement for the sewer line would have to be retained. It is recommended by the Committee that the pedestrian rights-of-:-way be retained and remain unimproved. Essentially, we don't know what the future of the Country Club is , so this is premature to vacate the rights-of-way at this point. Mr. Goolsby moved to retain the pedestrian right-of-way and that it remain unimproved and Ms . McNutt supported; DENIED Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 8 Act-6-92, 1151 Haco Drive This is a request from Barnum and Tenny Auto Body Shop to encroach ten feet (10' ) into the Haco Drive right-of-way to place a security fence. The Board of Water and Light and the Hager Fox building owners have both been granted encroachment rights . The Public Service Department expressed concern over liability for damage to the fence and stored automobiles that would be within five feet (5' ) of the street because of the snow plows. The Committee recommends that the Barnum and Tenny request for placing a security fence ten feet (10' ) into the public right-of-way of Haco Drive be denied. Further, that Barnum and Tenny be permitted to use a five foot encroachment into the public right-of-way through a permit issued by the Public Service Department . The Barnum and Tenny Company is to assume full responsibility for fence maintenance or repair resulting from City operations and removal when it is no longer required or the City mandates its removal for use of this area for public purposes. Miss Dig , service contractors may call throughout the State where the underground utility lines can be identified, must be consulted prior to installation of the fence to avoid contact with underground utility lines. Mr. Goolsby added, they wanted a ten foot encroachment, which would have brought them within five feet of the roadway. So we are denying them the 10 foot public right-of-way but stating they are allowed to get a five foot right-of-way from Public Service. In other words, their encroachment will be five feet , leaving ten feet between the fence and the street. Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms. McNutt seconded: DENIED Act-9-92, Grand River Avenue This is a request from the M.S.U. Water Ski Club for a license extension to place buoys and jump ramp in the Grand River in the vicinity of the Lansing Boat Club and Frances Park. This is a routine request which is renewed each year. The Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 9 Parks Department indicated last year that a water utilization study would be conducted. This study remains incomplete at this time; therefore, the renewal of this license appears appropriate. The Committee recommends that the license be extended to cover the 1992 season . Also that the Ski Club must have a DNR permit to set out buoys and insurance which protects the City from liability costs for damage or injury. These appurtenances must be maintained and removed by the Ski Club at no expense to the City . There was some discussion about the removal of these buoys and the ramp at times the City needed to use that waterway for other purposes, and apparently the Club has always been cooperative in the past in removing them. Mr. Goolsby moved for approval and Ms. McNutt seconded; Mr. Barnhart: Why are we getting involved in licensing now? They put these out every year and we've never been involved before . Mr. Foulds explained, our ownership of the river extends out into the river and they are using it. The Attorney has advised administration that all clubs using that piece of property and as indicated there are several deed licenses and leases . In the event of a tragedy, who is liable? Motion restated; APPROVED Act-10-92, 1620 Sunset This is a request by Padnos Iron and Steel for an easement across vacant City land for the purpose of constructing an industrial access road . This road will relieve traffic disruption on Willow Street . The Company proposes to pave the street to minimize the amount of dirt tracked to city streets . The Committee recommends that the Company's request to obtain a 50 foot easement across City land be approved. It is further recommended that Padnos be required to perform daily inspections of Sunset and remove metal scrap or dirt that is deposited from this access point to Willow Street. Also, Padnos needs to agree that Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 10 with appropirate notice their improvements in the easement will be removed at their expense. There should be no cost to the City for granting this easement. Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms . McNutt supported; APPROVED Act-11-92, 500 Block East Michigan Avenue This is a request to vacate the alleys . This site was recently purchased by the City and cleared for constructing city parking lots. The property between the alley and Michigan Avenue is proposed for a pedestrian plaza. There is no overall development plan for the site so it may be premature to vacate the alley right-of-way. This request ties in with Act-12-92. The Committee recommends that the alleys not be vacated at the present time and Mr. Goolsby so moved. Ms. McNutt supported; DENIED Act-12-92, 111 South Cedar Street This is a request by the Board of Water and Light to purchase the property at 111 South Cedar Street to construct a water pumping facility. The parcel was recently purchased by the City as part of a redevelopment project for the entire block. There is no overall or long range development plan for the rear; therefore, it may be premature to sell this parcel. It is also located to be highly visible to Michigan Avenue and any development here could set the pattern for the area . The Committee recommends that the request be denied and the Board of Water and Light consider an alternative site for their water pumping facilities , which would be less visible to the Capitol Loop and Michigan Avenue . Mr. Goolsby so moved and Ms . McNutt seconded; DENIED Mr. Goolsby pointed out that the Board of Water and Light request is just south of the alleys requested previously to be vacated. It is a very visible corner at Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 11 Michigan Avenue and Cedar Street . The Committee believes until there is some development for that area, nothing should be committed to at present. There are viable alternatives. The Committee will meet again on Tuesday, May 5, 1992 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Conference Room before the regular meeting and the regularly scheduled meeting will be Tuesday, May 12 at 4 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room. Our goal.is to complete the Goals and Objectives for the City and have those back to the Board by perhaps the second meeting in May or at least the first meeting in June. Report from the Planning Director Jim Foulds 1 ) Clarification on Z-2-92, property at Waverly and Glenburne. Staff is willing to meet with the applicant, Mr. Boles, for an alternative development concept before we forward this to Council. I would like to extend this courtesy to him. The Board stated consensus that Mr. Boles should be contacted before this item was sent on to City Council. 2) The Seven Block Plan is being seriously debated in the Physical Development Committee of City Council. It is receiving full discussion. There is a field trip planned for a week from this Thursday into the neighborhood. I will have staff send the information to you. They will look at specific homes recommended for acquisition and commercial development area. We suggested they look at the Chestnut Street area where we have worked with the nonprofit and have rehabilitated many structures in the area to show what is possible, as well as looking at the Capitol Commons development. Initially we thought this would bounce right back to the Citizen District Council, who would do their work. We really need from Council direction on where we are going before they put a financial plan together that we may not agree with. Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 12 3) Willow—Pine Neighborhood Plan. Staff has been directed to prepare the two concepts that were presented to the neighborhood meeting about three weeks ago. We will take those to the Committee for a vote and then get the document to this Board for deliberation. 4) BTS Plan. The final documents are in from Howard Dierdorf and we will bring them back to you for review and then forward them to Council. Communications: A letter of resignation, effective immediately, from the City of Lansing Planning Board was received from Rose Killips. Comments from Chairperson: If anyone has someone from Ward 1 or Ward 2 that would like to serve as a member of the Planning Board, please let Mr. Foulds or the Mayor know about them. Board Member Comments: 1 ) Mr. Barnhart requested an excused absence from the May 5, 1992 Board meeting . Ms. LeBlanc moved for approval and Ms. McNutt seconded; APPROVED 2) Mr. Goolsby; I wonder on this public hearing scheduled for May 5, where is the property actually located? Mr. Ruff reported, that is on the southeast corner of Cavanaugh and Pennsylvania Avenue where there was a Drakes Refinery Gas Station. It is zoned for local shopping , which would allow for gas station/convenience type uses . The request is to general Commercial District. Lansing Planning Board Minutes April 21 , 1992 Page 13 Adjournment: The regular April 21 , 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 8:37 p .m. Respectfully submitted , j an),es N. Foulds, Director r�ansing Planning Division WC Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 City Council Chambers 1 n 10th Floor, Lansing City Hall April 7, 1992 Emly Horne convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with six members present Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, McNutt, Monteith, Wright Excused Absence: Helen LeBlanc. Mr. Goolsby moved to excuse the absence of Rose Killips and Ms. McNutt seconded; APPROVED Staff in Attendance: Spackman, Fountain PUBLIC HEARINGS: Vern Fountain, Zoning Administrator presented these cases. Z-2-92, Waverly/Glenburne A Residential to D-1 Professional Office District This is a request by John Boles to rezone property on the immediate northwest corner of Glenburne Boulevard and Waverly Road from its present A Residential classification to D-1 Professional Office. The property in question consists of seven (7) platted lots, which were originally subdivided in Glenburne Subdivision, having frontage on both Limerick Circle and Glenburne Boulevard. I believe the plat has a restriction that it cannot have access onto Waverly Road. Adjacent zoning is single family to the north and west. Directly south is a 22 acre parcel zoned commercial. The balance of land to the north and west are single family. Directly across the street, on the east side of Waverly, there's a church. The balance of the land use south along Sumpter and Waverly is single family also. There are no specific development plans presently. Mr. Goolsby asked for clarification that access to this property would be off Glenburne and not Waverly. Mr. Fountain, yes, that is part of the plat restriction. JOHN BOLES, petitioner, representing Advance Development Realty Company, the entity that would like to develop the site on Waverly Road. No access is being requested off of Waverly Road. We are requesting it be off of Glenburne. There are seven lots that consist of basically an acre and one-half. The site has a lot of exposure off of Waverly and a very high traffic count there. No request for residential has been made. We advertised it and spent a lot of money promoting it and there is no interest in having a residence there. Compounding the problem we have a commercially zoned car wash to the immediate south and the parcel that surrounds the car wash is zoned multi-family--I believe it's. six acres. Several requests have been made for office space in that area. We have pursued no negotiations until we could get the zoning in place. Planning Board Minutes April 7, 1992 Page 2 The reasons for supporting the rezoning, I feel, are; Waverly Road traffic and it is non-residential in character. The commercial car wash is to the south and the development of an office building would make a smooth transition into the neighborhood. The type of building we are considering would be residential in nature and fit into the neighborhood and would more or less be a buffer if another commercial operation were to come in. Therefore, I am requesting D-1 Professional Office to move forward on planning. Ms. Horne questioned what types of businesses have asked about that piece of land? Mr. Boles stated, we have one from a rehabilitation center and a small dentist office. It would be a combination of several. Communications received were from: JEANETTE ROUSER and CHRISTIAN ROUSER, 3923 Lauderhill Circle. We feel this would add more vehicle traffic to the area, specifically the corner of Waverly and Glenburne Boulevard, which has had several accidents over the past few years. Also, we would like a traffic light on the corner and would like the entrance and exits off of Glenburne Boulevard, not off Waverly. If and when a building is put up, we would appreciate wooden barriers around any dumpsters. FAITH UNITED METHODIST CHURCH, 4301 South Waverly Road, Dr. Kenneth W. Bensen, Pastor. We do not object to a zoning change, but do object to a change without a plan for use being made known. Comments from the Audience: JEROME FOX, 3925 Limerick Circle. I would like the property to remain as is or have single family dwellings. Traffic is bad and with a commercial building our property values will be even less desirable. Limerick Circle is a dead-end street with kids playing there all the time. It is a very desirable neighborhood for growing families and a commercial building will destroy the neighborhood. Thank you. PATTY MORLOCK (it was Campbell) , 3931 Limerick Circle--Lot 11. We have many young families there. It is zoned residential and we would like to keep it that way. In the past 10-15 years we have seen many developers try to buy that property to develop either commercial or residential. The property did not perk. It is a sink hole. Water is retained there constantly and we are after the City and/or any previous owner to fill that in. It is an eyesore but we would like to see it kept up and kept vacant for traffic conditions, for the kids playing in the area and for market value deterioration. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes April 7, 1992 Page 3 CANDACE MELVIN, 3922 Limerick Circle. My first property is across the street from the vacant land. I am concerned about this being rezoned to commercial use. It is single family and we bought in expecting it would stay that way. There is a lot of traffic flow from Waverly onto Glenburne Boulevard. There is a lot of congestion in that area. If that is the only egress to the property, there will be nothing but further problems. I am concerned with the appearance of a building such as this going in there and how it will affect the residential area. I have no objection to development of the area as single family. Thank you. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Z-3-92, 620 South Capitol Avenue J Parking and D-1 Office to D-1 This is a request by the Michigan Manufacturers Association to change the zoning of the property located at 620 South Capitol Avenue. It is an "L" shape that has frontage on Capitol Avenue as well as St. Joseph, Hillsdale and Townsend. The portion that fronts Townsend and Hillsdale is zoned "J" Parking. The proposal is to change that to make the zoning consistent with zoning to the south, having the entire parcel zoned "D-1" Professional Office for the purpose of constructing a new office building on site. The balance of the property in that block is zoned "D-1" Professional Office and occupied currently by professional office. Directly north on the north side of Hillsdale are mixed office and residential uses, as well as residential uses directly to the west on Townsend. Directly south is St. Joseph Street and then the I-496 freeway system. Directly to the east across Capitol are other mixed office and residential uses, but predominantly office uses. This entire site would be developed with off street parking and multi-story office building. JOE GENTILOZZI, 5525 West St. Joseph and business address 201 North Washington Square, Suite 900. This building is for the Michigan Manufacturers Association, who will be moving from their existing location through condemnation by the City. It will be a three story, 32,000 to 33,000 square feet and 50 0 owner occupied, 50 0 lease space. It will be visible from I-496 which I believe will make it more attractive for downtown Lansing when people pass through. (An elevation sketch was presented. The site plan presented showed building, parking and means of ingress and egress. ) This will be 86 parking spaces. I have a survey plan for your review and there are other plans on file in the Planning Department. Ms. Horne read a communication received from JAMES H. SAKER, M.D. and CLYDE R. FLORY, M.D. , PROGRESSIVE PROPERTIES of 600 South Capitol Avenue, opposing this development. Such a development allows ingress and egress on Capitol Avenue. At the present time traffic has a difficult time egressing from Lots 1 and 2 of block 159 because of traffic backup from a full block to the junction of Capitol and Hillsdale. We also believe a traffic hazard would be created on Townsend if Planning Board Minutes April 7, 1992 Page 4 traffic were allowed to ingress and egress off of Townsend at any point close to St. Joseph. These concerns are very real. RALPH BAKER, 105 South Jenson, representing as co-owner property at 535 Townsend, right across the street. Right now, as all downtown, we have a parking problem. They will remove most of the parking--people are parking without permission--but we are still going to throw 50 to 75 cars onto the streets and create congestion. When Days Inn have the womens' bowling tournament, their parking needs increase. Where are all the cars going to park? Mr. Fountain responded that people parking there illegally will be removed, they will have to find other places. As far as the Days Inn is concerned, there's a signed agreement that they will be able to use approximately 60 spaces and that will satisfy their requirements. Mr. Baker: People rent to Cooley law students during the day. I assume with 35,000.square feet there would be a number of people during the daytime. Parking is dear down there. State Senators park in the Porter until they get towed. It's a zoo. Thanks. JEFF HIB B S, 224 South Grace, Lansing Township. I am representing someone who lives on West Hillsdale. My concerns reflect that of the man who just spoke, the parking situation. My concern is not the development of South Capitol, but that over the last few years there have been a number of issues in development and parking and whether there would be enough parking and what would be done. If this land is going to develop, I feel that issue should be directed by the Planning Board before anything is decided. If access is going to come to South Capitol and St. Joseph, I would be concerned about safety and feasibility. Thank you very much. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE SLU-4-92, 430-440 North Larch Street--Volunteers of America This is a request for approval of a special land use by the Volunteers of America, Incorporated, for property located on the east side of Larch at 430-440 North Larch Street just north of Shiawassee. The property is zoned Light Industrial, as is property to the north and south, which are developed with mixed office, warehouse, industrial type uses, as is the land on the west side of Larch. Directly to the east the land is vacant and just beyond that are railroad tracks. The proposal is to establish a shelter facility for men, women and children who are being displaced from River Street and choose to renovate a portion of the lower level of the old warehouse. Planning Board Minutes April 7, 1992 Page 5 t. COLONEL PATRICIA A. DOWELL, petitioner, 4363 Lee Street in Holt, business at 430-440 North Larch Street, Volunteers of America. We appreciate consideration in granting this request. The City purchased our 327 River Street domitory, which presently has 34 beds. We are running over capacity for the last 22 months trying to shelter all people we can--men only right now. We have served 9,752 meals this first quarter, compared to 5,066 a year ago. There are 2,525 beds, compared to 982 a year ago. We are trying our best to keep people off the streets. We are open 24 hours a day and would remain that on Larch Street. There is 24 hour supervision. We are trying to help the business people and persons in our community to try to keep the crime rate down. This is greatly needed in Lansing. Thank you. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE SLU-5-92, 330 Cloverland Drive--A-1 Rental This is a request by Gary Helfmann for approval of a special land use to establish an off street surface parking lot for approximately nine (9) vehicles on property located at the rear of 330 Cloverland Avenue, measuring 90 by 50. Access to the parking area would be across the commercial zoned land from Cloverland in back of the existing Rental property, which is on the immediate southwest corner of Cedar and Cloverland. The property is a portion of what is attached to the first residential home immediately to the west, on the south side of Cloverland. Adjacent land uses consist of single family homes along Cloverland, west as well as northwest. Directly north is an office building. Directly south is a gasoline service station. South of that and beyond the residential street is a U-Haul storage. Directly east of Cedar Street are mixed commercial uses. GARY HELFMANN, petitioner, 525 Rose Lane, Howell. This will allow us to get employee parking off the road behind the building. The nature of our rental business, 90 0 of our customers that come in know already what they want. People will be able to pick up at the back door as well as the front door. Ms. Horne: What are you planning to do with the outside items? Mr. Helfmann: That comes in the building every night. Basically it's outside so pick up can take place as people drive in. Mr. Fountain: You own 330 but there is a "for sale" sign on the property. Mr. Helfmann explained, we were planning to keep it, but have another family addition and it's too small. BRUCE HEDGLEN, 301 Cloverland, representing a few concerned citizens and our biggest question is what it will be used for; vehicle, parking or equipment storage? If storage, please consider a privacy fence. Mr. Fountain clarified, the special land Planning Board Minutes April 7, 1992 Page 6 r�- use request is strictly for off street parking and will not allow equipment storage. Mr. Hedglen added, I intend to put a fence up. Ms. Horne read a communication from SUSIE M. FORD, 329 Cloverland Drive. It stated in part, Cloverland is already congested by traffic from the office. Why can't he have parking in front of his building on a circle drive? At least with on street parking the patrons are headed east or west. I do not approve of turning any part of Lot 15, Cloverland Square Subdivision into a parking lot. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Comments from the Audience: B UEL WILLIAMS, 3944 Glenburne. Why can't we keep those lots for homes. I am interested more in homes than office buildings that would depreciate our property. BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Mr. Barnhart moved for approval of Minutes of March 18, 1992 as printed and Ms. Monteith supported; Ms. Horne requested that the last three paragraphs of page 2 be reviewed for exact verbage. Also on page 6 there was an incomplete sentence. APPROVED with the stated corrections. Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee Floyd Wright, Chairperson Z-1-92, 228 North Chestnut DM-3 to D-1 This is a request by Dave Fleming of Dabbert and Fleming Architects, Incorporated representing the owner, Michigan Community College Association to rezone property ! at 228 North Chestnut Street from "DM-3" Residential to "D-1" Professional Office District. The owners propose to construct a two story office building containing Planning Board Minutes April 7, 1992 Page 7 approximately 7,200 square feet with associated parking. The total lot is irregular in shape and contains approximately 15,048 square feet. The subject property measures 63 by 66 feet and contains 4,158 square feet. The location of the building proposed for the site does require approval by the Board of Zoning Appeals. At their meeting of March 12, 1992 the variance requested by the petitioner was granted by the B ZA. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed change in zoning is in conformance with the River Island Master Plan which designates the property for professional office use. It was further found that the property is located in a block where the predominant use is office and therefore the proposed new construction will be in substantial conformance with the established land use pattern. Mr. Wright so moved that the proposal Z-1-92 be granted and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED SLU-18-91, NW Corner Aurelius/Jolly This is a request by Condelco for approval of a special land use to allow the development of a retail building within the 100 year flood plain of the Sycamore Creek. The property is located on the immediate northwest corner of Aurelius and Jolly Roads. The subject property is vacant, measures 208 by 208 feet and contains approximately 43,265 square feet. The site is zoned "I" Heavy Industrial District and the proposal is to construct a convenience retail store on the site. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed use of the property is in conformance with the zoning of the land and, that the DNR has issued a permit to build and fill in the flood plain on this site. The Committee is satisfied that there should not be any adverse impact on the flood plain and, providing the building is elevated as proposed, the requirements of the Flood Plain Ordinance have been met which specifically take into consideration the protection of life and property. The Committee recommended that this special land use request be approved with an expiration date of December 31, 1993, which is the time frame placed by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources for their flood plain permit. If construction has not commenced as of this date, the applicant will be required to request an extension or possibly re-apply for a new special land use. On behalf of the Zoning and Ordinance Committee Mr. Wright moved for approval of SLU-18-91 and Ms. Monteith supported; '. Planning Board Minutes April 7, 1992 Page 8 Mr. Goolsby reported, I will reluctantly vote for this. I realize it fits within the parameters of zoning but I am getting very concerned about the number of convenience stores located in this town. There is a Seven-Eleven just up the road, within walking distance and there's also a Quality Dairy not too far. There's a store up Aurelius, which I would call convenience, about a mile to the north and several on South Pennsylvania. I am concerned about the proliferation of convenience stores. Ms. Horne stated she shares the same feeling. Mr. Goolsby added, being a Seven-Eleven I assume it will be a 24 hour operation and this is a very isolated area. Vote taken; APPROVED NCU-2-92, 328 West Lapeer Street--Class A Status This is property located at 328 West Lapeer Street and this is a request for approval of a nonconforming Class A status for the property at this location. request by Dale Goodrich, of the Lansing Reinvestment Corporation. The property in question contains a residential building with three (3) units and is located on a lot that measures 66 by 115 feet. The property is zoned "C" Residential District and currently maintains a nonconforming Class B status because three living units are not permitted in the "C" District. However, the units were existing before the amendments to the Code. Approval of nonconforming Class A status will allow substantial improvements to be made to the structure. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed use for the site is in substantial conformance with the Master Plan and, further, that the property has historical significance which was accepted by the Historic District Commission and was found to be acceptable for a historic preservation loan. In summary, the Committee believes that this approval is in keeping with the general intent of the Zoning Code and the policies and goals for development of the area. The Committee has recommended that at the end of one year, if the restoration is complete, the provisional status will be removed and permanent status granted. If, however, the project is not completed, the Planning Board may require reapplication for or revoke Class A status. On behalf of the Committee Mr. Wright moved for approval of NCU-2-92, Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED Planning Board Minutes April 7, 1992 Page 9 6�- NCU-3-923% 621 East Michigan Avenue Mr. Fountain reported, this request came in after the Committee meeting. It came as a request for a building permit to renovate what used to be Baldino's Market at 621 East Michigan with the idea of re-establishing a party store in there very similar to what was there before. However, he does not intend to sell adult or pornographic material from that property. It will be strictly a party store selling liquor, beer, wine and other party items. The property is nonconforming and has been for years because there is no parking associated with it. When it maintains a Class B status there are provisions in the nonconforming section of the Code where the Planning Board can consider a substitution providing the reuse of that will not be any more intense than the previous use. In this case it is almost a lateral transfer of uses. There is no increase in intensity, therefore, we suggest approving the substitution so he can proceed with development of the party store at that location. No public hearing is required, but it does require review in terms of intensity of land use and type of use. We were satisfied with those two things. The next meeting of the Committee will be April 15, 1992 at 2:30 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee Garry Goolsby, Chairperson We will not discuss the Six Year Capital Redevelopment Plan 1993-1998 this evening, however, we will meet for this discussion on: Tuesday, April 14 at 4 p.m. in City Council Conference Room New Business: An election will be held August 4. Therefore, regular meeting will be held Wednesday, August 5 in City Council Chambers. Ms. McNutt said she has Wednesday commitments. Ms. Horne added that in the Summer vacation months often one meeting is canceled. Comments from Chairperson: Emly Horne I would like the Board to participate Thursday with the Seven Block group to tour renovated homes on North Walnut and Saginaw, particularly if you did not have an opportunity the first time. They will meet at 5:30 at the Trinity Lutheran Church parking lot and we will walk to this area, tour the buildings, return and have `. refreshments before starting the meeting at 7 p.m. Planning Board Minutes April 7, 1992 Page 10 Adjournment: The regular April 7, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 8:44 p.m. Respectfully submitted, James R. Spackman, Deputy Director for James N. Foulds, Director Lansing Planning Division WC LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 PLANNING DIVISION CONFERENCE ROOM 2nd Floor, Washington Square Annex Wednesday, March 18, 1992 iT 7 �, cra Emly Horne convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with four members present: Barnhart, Horne, LeBlanc, Wright �- Absent: Goolsby, Killips, McNutt, Monteith ca Un Ms. LeBlanc moved to excuse these absences and Mr. Barnhart supported; to APPROVED Staff in Attendance: Foulds, Spackman, Fountain Comments from the Audience: DIANNE CLARK, 921 West Lenawee, Seven Block Citizen District Council. When was a decision made on this? Ms. LeBlanc answered that the Urban Development Committee had met last night and made a recommendation to be taken to the Board. MARY BARNES, member Seven Block CDC. I am interested in what this document will be included in. Mr. Fountain explained what was in the Committee motion would be forwarded to the Mayor and subsequently to City Council as the Planning Board's recommendation. Ms. LeBlanc stated, the Committee's motion, if passed, says we approve concepts one through six. There are still some particulars in the Plan that need to be worked out. However, the Urban Development Committee wanted to express satisfaction with the general concept. FRED JOHNSON. Is this document subject to change? Mr. Foulds explained that the Plan certainly can be changed after Monday night's Council public hearing when it will come to the Citizen District Council for further review and then you will forward it back to the Board for their final recommendation to Council, who will make the final decision. So nothing will be locked into the Plan until then. We are following state law holding these hearings and getting input from neighborhood residents and other people. Your Committee, this Board and Council will take that into consideration. For example item number one that you are recommending emphasizes rehabilitation and selective acquisition. That impacts certain financial strategy that the City then would undertake. If your recommendation had been for total acquisition, that would impact a completely different strategy for putting a financial package together. That's a long answer to your question, Fred, but we are going to need a lot of time to get all- of those details together and the firmer this policy/concept becomes the better we can do that job. Planning Board Minutes March 18, 1992 Page 2 Jim Spackman stated in response to the question of whether you could take action tonight to send it forward, Act 285 is kind of mute on that point. It indicates requirement for adoption of a plan does require six members be present. It does not address conducting general business to transmit. Mr. Fountain added five are needed for action on the special land use. Motion was made by LeBlanc and supported by Mr. Barnhart for a brief recess. A brief recess was taken by the Board. Jim Foulds: Since we have four members of the Board present, I would like to ask that we forward the recommendation of the Urban Development Committee onto Council to Bold the hearing on the guidelines that were in the recommendation. For that you can convene as a Committee of the Whole of the Board (Section 3.4 B of your Policies and Procedures) and take action on the recommendation from the Urban Development Committee. Ms. LeBlanc so moved and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED Committee of the Whole Convened According to Public Act 344 the time the Citizen District Council has to act after the hearing is, "Within ten days after the completion of the public hearing as provided in this section, the Citizens District Council for the district within which the proposed development area is located, shall notify a local legislative body, which is the City Council, in writing of its approval or disapproval of the development plan." "If the Citizens District Council approves the plan or fails to notify the local legislative body of its approval or disapproval of the plan, the local legislative body is free to act on the plan." "If the Citizens District Council approves the plan and so notifies in writing the local legislative body, the local legislative body shall not adopt the plan for at least thirty (30) days after receipt of the notice." That means you have ten days to act after the hearing to approve or disapprove. If you chose not to do that as a committee, basically we can take all the time we want. So your two options are either act within ten days or work with us to work out the details and take as much time as we want to answer all these questions and put the financial plan together and then forward it back to the Planning Board. However, if you took two years to work out details, the funds now reserved probably would not be there. If you approve it or take no action, the local legislative body is free to act. You might want to send a letter to the Planning Board stating you are taking more time. Planning Board Minutes March 18, 1992 Page 3 r. BUSINESS SESSION Approval of Minutes: Mr. Barnhart moved for approval as printed of the March 3, 1992 minutes and Ms. LeBlanc supported; APPROVED Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee--Floyd Wright, Chairman, reporting. We cannot vote on any of these items, but I would like to pass on some information to you. Z-1-92, property at 228 North Chestnut Street. The location of the building proposed for the site does require approval by the Board of Zoning Appeals, who considered this matter at their meeting on March 12, 1992. They voted unanimously to grant the variances requested by the petitioner. At the BZA hearing the only concern was saving as many trees as possible. The developer is willing to meet with the neighborhood in that regard. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed change in zoning is in conformance with the River Island Master Plan which designates the property for professional office use. It was further found that the property is located in a block where the predominant use is office and therefore the proposed new construction will be in substantial conformance with the established land use pattern. So the Committee voted unanimously for approval. Mr. Fountain added that three neighbors had shown up for the meeting and indicated they wanted to see what was summarized on the site plan presented indicating parking area and elevations. Regarding SLU-18-91, Northwest corner of Aurelius and Jolly Roads. As indicated in your Committee Report, this issue also was voted on for approval with an expiration date of December 31, 1993. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed use of the property is in conformance with the zoning of the land and, that the DNR has issued a permit to build and fill in the flood plain on this site. The Committee is satisfied that there should not be any adverse impact on the flood plain and, providing the building is elevated as proposed, the requirements of the Flood Plain Ordinance have been met which specifically take into consideration the protection of life and property. NCU-2-921P 328 West Lapeer Street is a request by Dale Goodrich, of the Lansing Reinvestment Corporation, for approval of nonconforming Class A status. You will Planning Board Minutes March 18, 1992 Page 4 f� recall this is one of the properties before us approximately a year ago when Lansing Community College planned to demolish buildings for parking lots on property from Lapeer to Saginaw on the east side of Walnut Street. This is property on the northeast corner of Lapeer and Walnut Streets. Mr. Goodrich is very capable and has renovated several properties in Lansing. The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence, that the proposed use for the site is in substantial conformance with the Master Plan and, further, that the property has historical significance which was accepted by the Historic District Commission and was found to be acceptable for a historic preservation loan. The Committee voted unanimously that Class A status be granted for a period of one year to insure there will not be any delay on the part of the petitioner during renovation. The next meeting of the Committee will be April 15 at 2:30 in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee--Reported by Helen LeBlanc The Committee wishes to recommend acceptance of the general concept of the Seven Block Development Plan, which includes and endorses the following six points: 1) The housing strategy, which emphasizes rehabilitation where feasible, with selective acquisition to remove structures for overcrowding and/or poor conditions, as well as to facilitate development of public purpose projects. 2) An economic development strategy which endorses a neighborhood commercial center at the northeast corner of Kalamazoo and King/Logan to the north of south boundaries of properties fronting Allegan, east to the westerly property lines of the properties fronting on Butler; continued and expanded commercial use along St. Joseph and residential/office uses facing the new state park and museum. 3) A community facilities strategy which locates Union Missionary Baptist Church in the triangle, establishes a new neighborhood park and a neighborhood services center in the old existing church building. 4) A circulation strategy which focuses non-local traffic onto major streets by closing both Lenawee and Washtenaw Streets. 5) A public services strategy which will provide the physical amenities such as street lighting, curb and gutter, sidewalk and street resurfacing to improve the general aesthetic appearance and functioning of the neighborhood. 6) An overall strategy which will retain a residential character that is compatible with the many surrounding uses, enhance the appearance and quality of life for residents and improve the physical structures and establish support services and Planning Board Minutes March 18, 1992 Page 5 amenities which will stabilize future development. While there are issues, such as the financial package which remain to be resolved at an operational level, the philosophical concepts and general land use patterns are supported. This support is subject to the understanding that subsequent to the public hearing before City Council, the draft plan be referred back to the Planning Board for preparation of the financial package and for additional review and discussion with the Citizens District Council prior to final adoption of the Plan. Ms. LeBlanc so moved for approval, Mr. Barnhart seconded. Mr. Foulds suggested an addition in the last paragraph to read, "This support is subject to the understanding that, subsequent to the public hearing before City Council, 'in accordance with Public Act 344,' the draft plan be referred back to the Planning Board. . etc. " P.A. 344 is the document which mandates through this process. Ms. LeBlanc moved that be added to her motion and Mr. Barnhart supported. Ms. LeBlanc added that the Committee did emphasize that they are endorsing the 'concept' of this Plan. There are particulars that still need to be worked out, but they are very happy with the philosophy and idea. AMENDMENT APPROVED AMENDED ORIGINAL MOTION APPROVED Ms. Clark suggested the Plan should say "rehabilitation and/or redevelopment." We don't want to be restricted. We want the option of redevelopment. Mr. Foulds proposed adding a sentence to item # 1, after 'public purposes projects' stating, "Where housing rehabilitation is not feasible, new housing development will be encouraged in conformance with the Plan." Ms. LeBlanc moved to include that addition to amend the sentence and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED The original motion was stated as amended and Ms. LeBlanc moved for support. Mr. Barnhart seconded; APPROVED The Urban Development Committee will meet on April 14 at 4 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room to consider the Six Year Capital Redevelopment Plan for 1993-1998. Report from Planning Director: Jim Foulds We have a Willow-Pine Neighborhood Meeting tomorrow night. There are two issues; Planning Board Minutes March 18, 1992 Page 6 one is the Consumers Power Credit Union minority position paper, and the other is the church. We have been working with Immanuel Lutheran Church on their school expansion plans. There have been a lot of rumors about exactly what's going on. 1) Consumers Power Credit Union had a rezoning controversy in the mid 80s where the City helped set up the Franklin Street Co-op and moved two homes prior to development of the Credit Union. Rezoning was put in place to zone the area west of Pine Street for office use, with the understanding in Planning Board's recommendation to Council, that the rezoning be approved given there would be residential facing residential on Chestnut Street. Other recommendations were; a rehabilitation fund set up by the Credit Union. Second, the Master Plan amendment be undertaken to look at land use strategies for this neighborhood. Staff has tried to force the issue on this. When the rezoning was passed the homes were there. At that time we felt the Credit Union agreed to the bargain of leaving those homes in place. They didn't. They bought a vacant lot and purchased two other properties. Unfortunately, there is nothing in Michigan law to condition rezoning. We were acting in good faith. Now as part of the planning process we are faced with a scenario of a plan containing a minority report which says, certain members of the Committee think non-residential use is appropriate for this block face. My concern is that if the Credit Union purchases 1225 (they already have control of 1217) , they have a legal right to remove those structures. We now have a vacant land situation on the west side of Chestnut and in two years the Credit Union comes before this Board for rezoning and you turn the petition down because the Neighborhood Plan says single family residential development and you forward that to Council. Let's assume Council concurs. The City's position is not a good one. We are telling the Credit Union they can only use this land for residential development. They will bring in appraisers and contractors and say that in the northern half of the block two-thirds is used as office and you are telling us we cannot use this for anything but single family use. It is impossible for me to defend that position. We would assume a liability position. I have worked with staff to get a fallback position, similar to the BTS planning process. Ms. Horne: I could agree to go up to that line, but not include 1217. They could whack away the whole block. Mr. Foulds reported their attorney said they didn't have any plans. The most the land would be used for is parking. We recognize this is a transitional buffer space to the neighborhood and that there be a fallback position for land use in the plan because it protects the single family area to the east and to the south. Mr. Wright questioned; originally they indicated adding a Chestnut egress. Is that Planning Board Minutes March 18, 1992 Page 7 Mr. Wright questioned; originally they indicated adding a Chestnut egress. Is that still the plan? Mr. Foulds said, .their attorney said there are no plans to expand at all now. In fact they can't lease the space they have now but they want the option in ten to fifteen years so if the market is there, they want to take advantage of it. If you follow the judicial climate in this country of taking, we're getting very conservative about government taking property. The U.S. Supreme Court has a new case before it that they are going to make a decision on this summer, which is Lucas versus the South Carolina Coastal Council, on two lots fronting on the Atlantic that the South Carolina Coastal Council has said you will not develop. Unfortunately, every lot north and south of this property is developed with million dollar homes and they're telling this guy who has two lots left in the subdivision not to develop because a hurricane may cause flood displacement throughout the subdivision. It seems to me that the Coastal Commission is going to lose that case. If they had made the decision ten years ago not to develop, there would not be a problem. That will make every case harder to defend because everybody will file a lawsuit. 2) Regarding SLU-2-92, 1518 South Washington Avenue, Ms. Horne reported that South Baptist's new pastor is proposing more services and dividing Sunday School into two sessions. Board Member Comments: 1) Helen LeBlanc requests an excused absence from the next (April 7) meeting. Mr. Barnhart moved for approval of the request and Mr. Wright second; APPROVED A brief discussion ensued on absences and changes in meeting dates; this one being unexpected when the dates were approved in January. 2) Helen LeBlanc reported that Priscilla Holmes and Mary James, Neighborhood Council President, met with Mayor McKane and Councilmember Beal, who is planning to introduce a moratorium on housing demolitions. This is appropos to what we've been talking about tonight. Ms. Beal's main concern is demolition for parking. This would not interfere with dilapidated structures or overcrowded conditions. Mr. Fountain added, I understood they wanted to suggest going through a hearing process with the exception of those being used for thinning out crowded housing conditions and those just in a shape they couldn't be restored. Planning Board Minutes March 18, 1992 Page 8 Adjournment: The regular March 18, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted C �� —k Ja es N. Foulds, Dire for L nsi g Planning Division WC Regular-Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 p.m. , City Council Chambers 10th Floor, Lansing City Hall March 3., 1992 The meeting was convened at 7:40 p.m. by Emly Horne. There were seven me%bers present: C Goolsby, Horne, Killips, LeBlanc, McNutt, Monteith, Wright r� Excused: Merle Barnhart Staff in Attendance: Foulds, Fountain, Love j co PUBLIC HEARINGS: W Z-1-92, 228 North Chestnut Street DM-3 to D-1 This case was presented by Vern Fountain, Zoning Administrator. This is a request by the Architects on behalf of Michigan College Association to rezone property on South Chestnut Street to D-1 Professional Office District for the purpose of developing an office building on site. The property in question is located on the east side of Chestnut Street, between Ionia and Ottawa Streets. The subject of rezoning is this small crosshatched area that fronts on Chestnut Street and part of the property is an "L" shaped vacant lot to the south that will be assembled and an office building will be built fronting Chestnut Street on the north portion and parking area will be developed on the narrower part extending further back into the block, just south of the proposed building. The Master Plan designates this block as professional office. Petitioner, DAVE FLEMING, President of Dabbert and Fleming Architects, Jackson, Michigan, 2499 West High Street. We are representing the Michigan Community College Association on behalf of Mr. Tom Burnthall, Executive Director. We have received a tremendous amount of help from staff, particularly Mr. Jim Ruff, and I have brought additional boards that may clarify the intent and scope of the project and maybe illustrates better how the "L" shaped parcel is currently split into two separate zoning districts. The request for D-1 Office would put it all in the same zoning classification. Mr. Fleming answered questions. Initially the second floor was to be tenant lease space. They have a potential lessee with a staff of six people. Michigan Community College Association has seven, with eight part time people, and plan to grow to a maximum of 15. As indicated on the site plan, 21 parking spaces will be provided, which is in accordance with the gross square foot area requirement for off street parking. They have two annual meetings where all Boards and administrative staffs of the 18 community colleges around the Planning Board Minutes March 3, 1992 Page 2 state, a very large meeting that cannot be accommodated by this building and would be held off site. Mr. Goolsby stated, my primary concern is large meetings requiring parking on the r , street. Communications received were read by Ms. Horne from: WILLIAM MESSEROLL, owner of 427 and 429 West Ionia (property directly north) , is not opposed to the request. Law firm for LEGAL EAGLE LAND COMPANY, 412 West Ionia, has no opinion at this time. ELEANOR DILLON, President of the Downtown Neighborhood Association, reported that the Association has no objection to the rezoning request. WALTER MANER, owner of 212 North Chestnut Street, is not opposed to rezoning or variance. The proposed development is compatible with the area. WILLIAM KING, Owner of 216 North Chestnut--the property immediately south of 228. I am not opposed to the project and I'm glad the old red house is gone The major concern I have is what the southern border of that property would look like. I rent the office building and the northern side of my building is the tenant entrance. The plans don't show it, but there is an overhang on my property that takes it to about a foot that is part of the architecture of my building. We would like a natural barrier, like columnar pines, between traffic and parking right outside the door. There's a rotting old fence laying along that edge that should be cleaned up. Drainage is not a problem. If we can have agreement on that, we would agree. Mr. Foulds said the screening issue would be looked carefully at and we would work with the architect to deal with the southern boundary issue. SHARON KELLOGG, owner of 421 West Ionia. My back property line abuts their parking area. My property is zoned office, but I have an office on the first floor and live on the second. I support this rezoning. My main concern is the trees. This is a block northwest of the Capitol Building and is unique because it has a lot of trees. I want to save as many as possible. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Seven Block Development Area Ms. Horne prefaced the presentation reporting the upcoming meeting dates and the Planning Board Minutes March 3, 1992 Page 3 members of the Citizen District Committee subcommittees who will have reports this evening. Eleanor Love will make the presentation from staff and also has available the draft copy of the Seven Block Development Area Plan for Board members. ELEANOR LOVE, Senior Planner, Lansing Planning Division. This planning effort began in December of 1989 with the creation of the Seven Block Area under Act 344 of the Public Acts of 1945 as amended, commonly known as the Blighted Areas Act. City Ordinance 811 created the area bounded by Allegan on the north, Butler Boulevard on the East, St. Joseph on the south and the southbound lanes of Martin Luther King/Logan Street on the west. The five blocks presently developed in the two vacant blocks in the "triangle" comprise the seven blocks we refer to. City Ordinance 814, in February of 1990, created the composition of the Citizen District Council with fifteen members; at least eight of which must reside in the district. We have met over 30 times in the last year. On May 31, 1990 the Committee met for the first time. The Plan they are forwarding to you tonight was adopted by the majority of the members. They have developed a workable, productive and coordinated plan which is a solution to a number of complex issues. There are approximately 29 acres in this Seven Block Area. Of that, approximately seven is a large vacant parcel. Of these 22 acres, 76 percent is in residential development; primarily one and two family dwellings--88 single family dwellings, 24 duplex dwellings, 1 three unit and one four unit. The second major land use in this area is institutional; primarily comprised of two churches, representing 9.7% of the land area. The third major land use is vacant land (9.6 0) . The remaining land use is commercial, which comprise 4.3% of the land area. There is presently no general office in the Seven Block Area. The zoning is primarily consistent with general land uses. "C" is a predominant zoning classification. "F" Commercial is located along the entire frontage of St. Joseph and also at the corner of Kalamazoo and Butler. .The zoning classification is primarily consistent with the land uses there. We have a population that has a significant portion of elderly on fixed incomes and many other persons with low and moderate incomes who are either long time residents or extremely transient. The development plan being presented tonight is for goals and objectives, as well as concrete strategies to help eliminate problems and emphasize the positive elements of the Seven Block Area. The land use goals adopted by the Council in December, 1990 states, "the primary development goals are to strengthen and improve the existing residential character including rehabilitation and new construction where appropriate, create local shopping and convenience amenities, support existing community facilities, improve the physical infrastructure and enhance the overall quality of life for residents." The location of the Seven Block Area places it in a strategic position to support itself while enhancing the overall revitalization of the Central City through mixed use Planning Board Minutes March 3, 1992 Page 4 development. It is a cornerstone which sets the tone and announces the Capitol City from the west. DIANNE CLARK, Chairperson of the Seven Block Area District Council. This Plan is a representation of many hours of discussion, thought, disagreement and research. This process has allowed us to absorb the neighborhood's diverse heritage. We believe that given additional financial resources, a better plan for redevelopment of the Seven Block Area is possible. However, given the constraint of dollars available, this Plan represents our best effort to develop the community for the low-moderate income individuals as well as provide amenities for residential stability. It is our hope that additional resources could be found to improve on this Plan. We are pledged to work toward improvements deemed necessary during the implementation of the Plan. We submit the Plan conditioned upon the ability to amend the Plan prior to Planning Board approval or disapproval. I would like to thank the Department of Transportation for laying out conditions which to work from. Ms. Clark introduced the CDC members: James Ballard, Paul Novak, Reverend Jones, Fred Johnson, Mary Barnes, Equator Williams, Mary Wrigley, Grady Porter, Elizabeth Duncan, LeDora Gary and Larry Leatherwood. Ms. Monteith asked, who is acquiring the property and from whom? Ms. Love: The City would be acquiring property from private owners. Then it could be sold to a nonprofit that would rehabilitate it as a rent-to-own. HULON BENSON, 1018 West St. Joseph. I have been in Lansing over sixty years in this area so I think I know the housing patterns. I have watched them tear down houses for the freeway, Martin-Logan and Joel Ferguson's housing. A lot of these houses are over 100 years old. The youngest house is 31 years old, which is old nowadays. To move into a new or rehabilitated house taxes will go up. I would like to see a freeze on taxes for senior citizens. If we don't, in a few years they will not be able to pay the taxes as they rise. I like this Plan to "provide safe, decent, sanitary housing in order to attract and retain diverse population which reflects mixed age income, ethnic and family sizes." "Promote home ownership through innovative financing and cooperative ownership mechanisms." "Develop mechanisms to relieve economic hardship to home owner occupants." That means they will keep their house up. This will be one of the best areas in Lansing. "Freezing taxable real property at pre-improvement levels for a certain number of years." I would like that to be specified; a certain number of years could be only two. Of the 30, 2/3 will be reserved for low income and the remaining 1/3 for moderate income families and/or individuals. I keep harping on this tax thing because I don't want people from Okemos to come downtown after it's fixed up. I would like to see everyone in that area stay there. Ms. Love: The member who was going to explain circulation could not be here, so Planning Board Minutes March 3, 1992 Page 5 I will briefly explain the circulation proposals. The first was that in the final development of the Capitol Loop, there has been no decision about the location or actual function of Allegan Street. It could be either a very minor street--in which case it would only serve the stretch of Allegan between Butler and King/Logan--or it would be a very major street. In either case it's a Committee position that the roadway itself be moved as far north as possible in the right-of-way in order to give additional front yard space to the properties along Allegan. We are looking at a proposal to consolidate their parking in the rear and eliminate driveways. In order to enhance green space, we would want to move the street as far north as possible. Secondly, we propose the closure of Washtenaw between King/Logan and approximately 200 feet west of Butler. This would allow a single large parcel to be developed for a neighborhood commercial center. Once the commercial center is established, the Committee would like reinstallation of the pedestrian overpass if studies of-foot traffic warrant such reinstallation. The Committee endorsed the Capitol Loop Plan and the aesthetic development proposed in the Johnson-Johnson-Roy development plan. Also they would close Lenawee Street and create a cul-de-sac with the land being redeveloped for a neighborhood park. A section of Hillsdale would be closed between the north and southbound lanes to allow for a single site development. The last major circulation proposal is the redesign of the intersection of St. Joe and northbound King/Logan and the entrance ramp from the expressway. This is a difficult, busy intersection and we felt something needs to be done, but we are not exactly sure what it is. PAUL NOVAK, President of the Westside Neighborhood Association. With Saginaw/Oakland on the north, Waverly on the west, Mt. Hope on the south and I'm not sure on the east--pretty far--in that entire area there is not one mainline grocery store to serve a huge area of Lansing's population. A commercial center is a predominant concern. First with a full-line grocery store and hopefully, laundromat, drug store and some additional services. We selected having it along King/Logan with Kalamazoo on the south, Washtenaw on the north. If you look on a block by block basis at the properties in the Seven Block Area in terms of rehabilitation costs, the area where most acquisition is occurring for purposes of developing the commercial center, are those houses that would be the highest cost to rehabilitate. Hopefully as a result of implementation of this Plan we will be able to address the citizen needs and people in downtown Lansing. MELVIN JONES, regarding community facilities. Currently the Union Missionary Baptist Church is located in the community at Hillsdale and Logan Street. The Church has been within this area for about ten years, which makes it a very important part of the community. In developing this Plan we looked at this parcel for possible relocation of the Church facility. Given the fact that if the Church was to relocate in this area, it would call for the reduction of housing stock in the community. We saw that as negative. Our Church has experienced growth over the last seven years. The area the Church exists has negative zoning and was found to Planning Board Minutes March 3, 1992 Page 6 be inadequate. We deduced we needed about 12.5 acres of land for a facility to seat approximately 2,000 people. We were able to consolidate our needs and our plan does fit in the guidelines for the eight acres the church occupies here. The present church building would be taken over by the City and become a community of buildings to house programs keyed to the continued upkeep and liveability of this area; educational services, child care services and a possibility of health services could be housed in this building. This area is being recommended as a natural buffer for noise from a major artery. An area designed as a community park area that would not have broad parking amenities. This would provide cohesiveness as well as aesthetic beauty coming into the Capitol Loop area. The Church's plans are extensive and will add aesthetic beauty to the entranceway. MS. DUNCAN, 921 West Hillsdale. My husband built a fence around the yard to keep our children in. Later they went to Moores River Park and sometimes St. Joe, which is a far way to let small children go. Smaller children need a place to go and we need a neighborhood park. Thank you. Ms. Love: In terms of public services, they include resurfacing of most streets and sidewalks, planting of street trees, insulation of underground wiring and new street lights--to be compatible with those in the Capitol Loop, replacement of curb and gutter in conjunction with resurfacing the streets, repair of the parkway--that space between curb and sidewalk and paving of driveway approaches. The other public service element we would add would be the existing street would be removed and a new major pedestrian entrance to the mall would be located in the existing right-of-way of Washtenaw. That would include street lighting, street furniture and possibly brick paving. That would be a major entrance from the east for pedestrian entrance to the commercial center. JAMES BALLARD, own a property in this area. MARY BARNES. I grew up in this area and have a very strong interest in the west side community. James and I are going to talk to you about the urban design issues. When we started this plan our major interest in the urban design of the area was to maintain the flair and design of the area as it currently is. A major goal was to insure we have a very liveable environment. We hope to do this by restructuring and improving the land used. We want to create compatibility within the neighborhood and with the Capitol Loop area. The compatibility of design, among housing structures and the ability for everyone to adjust and live in the community together. We felt a strong need to reduce noise through natural buffering, such as an embankment. We wanted to put street furniture in both aesthetically appealing and very useful. We want trees, mature trees eventually, for a shady area. Planning Board Minutes March 3, 1992 Page 7 The State has talked about putting in a parking ramp, which we felt important because there is a lot of parking on the street, especially on Butler. We would like to give the streets back to the neighborhood for an even flow of traffic. We wanted to get rid of unsightly structures and the trash and debris. We want this to be a liveable community. We hope to do this through the development of a neighborhood association that would take up some issues in the area, insure neighbors took care of their property and have a strong interest in the community. We needed to rearrange lotting patterns. Many lots were long and narrow on Lenawee Street between Hillsdale and Kalamazoo. They need to be restructured and eventually put in a cul-de-sac where the houses would all face it and it would allow greater back yards. In the cul-de-sac and near the commercial development we want to put in colonial style street, add victorian lighting and cobblestone sidewalks to maintain current structures. I believe the same lighting has been suggested for the Capitol Loop area. In order to insure these changes in the area are made, we propose that a design review committee be established and consist of people living in the community with the purpose and intent of reviewing proposals for the area. This commercial center would be adorned with green areas, pedestrian walks and we would try to insure adequate lighting as a safe area to be used by everybody in the community. The pedestrian overpass we have not made decisions on but there is a need to study the issue. MARY WRIGLEY. We are changing or keeping much of it residential. We are taking away one commercial site on the corner of Kalamazoo and Butler. Zoning to D-2 will be a change. It will be residential and office and we will have off street parking. Ms. Horne stated she had received communications from JAMES E. BALLARD submitting written comments on"Changes/Revisions to the 7 Block Area Development Plan" which is on file. LARRY LEATHERWOOD, 812 Canton Drive in Delta Township, Deputy Director of the Michigan Department of Transportation, who owns the triangle properties. The Committee did an excellent job in their presentation. We did a survey to see what could be done to benefit the community. The results were pretty much the same as the City's in determining what the people define as their needs. We wanted to know if it would be possible to establish a commercial property on the triangle. We later found that Union Baptist Church had an interest in that parcel and if there was a way to work out an agreement that it would be an area they desired to locate in. We agreed that if something could be done where neighborhood people would benefit, we would support it by making the triangle parcel available to the City of Lansing to acquire. The Mayor appointed citizen committee has been meeting for some time. I decided it was not our role to tell the people of the area what they should have. Planning Board Minutes March 3, 1992 Page 8 They should be the ones to define what they should have. JOEL FERGUSON, 1341 Cambridge. I have serious reservations about this plan. We are probably the most active property owner in this area. I am proud of what we have done in Capitol Commons. The one parcel we never had control of, the Linway Apartments, we just bought and are rehabbing. I am pleased with Capitol Commons because we are 100% occupied, the people are very happy, it's an aesthetically pleasing development and it works. The way I got started doing housing was a nonprofit conversion because years ago the Housing Authority and HUD came to the decision that nonprofits really don't work because there is no staying power. The greatest mistake that could happen on this property is all of a sudden make it a nonprofit so after the housing is all up and the ribbon cutting, individuals lose interest to where the property is not properly managed. When the City made a decision to clear the property for Capitol Commons and not go to Logan, they created a strip island and predetermined who is going to live there. The only people who come down there will have no choice. Especially in a scattered site housing or detached housing where either a nonprofit or different individuals own the housing. The flaw in this project is the church should not be in the triangle. It should be in the block expanding down Lenawee and Hillsdale and should have adequate open space and green space and if we feel the need for commercial--which I seriously question--we put that in the triangle and have multi-family housing covering the rest of the area. I feel strongly that people are going to go to the City Market no matter where it's located, that's prime property and should be for something to rejuvenate the City. The same-with the church. If you decide the triangle is prime property and you feel it's the best piece of property, the church should be a catalyst to help develop housing that is difficult to rehab or where you are only going to move one family in and it will be rental housing. Major chains are not going to put a store to service the area being talked about. People will drive an extra two or three miles for the best price. I think we should just buy the people out and make certain that the way we program the housing we come back with a new plan in a few years. The property on Lenawee and Hillsdale is where nobody is ever going to come. Your responsibility is not just to that neighborhood or the church, it's to all the citizens of Lansing. Downtown we have spent millions of dollars on a pedway no one walks to artifically connect something. They killed the site that should have been another office tower and you now have two white elephants staring at each other; a hotel that has to come back for refinancing, can't pay back the UDAG grant and doing nothing and you have an exhibition hall that is poorly planned too. I think this plan is smart, an excellent presentation and I think the people over there should be bought out but the reuse planned does not make sense. Thank you. Planning Board Minutes March-3, 1992 Page 9 Mr. Benson: I have nothing against Mr. Ferguson, but it's strange to me that Mr. Ferguson would come here now. I think we have a good plan and I don't want to live in no high-rise apartment. I wish he would leave this project alone. MARY WRIGLEY, my husband has rental property in the area on Allegan. When you look at the triangle where the church is going to be and, looking at the Church Plan, it's quite elegant. It fits in the neighborhood. If you have a commercial center or apartments for students, you will have a lot of cross traffic on Logan Street. The Committee feels that because the Church has different hours of operation, they could have adequate parking that will not make excessive demand on Logan at peak times. We might have some restaurants and the walkway could bring people over from the Library and Museum and they would be better served. We tried to come up with the best plan and I think it's defensible. GRACIE ANSLEY, lived on St. Joe before the highway came. I have sold three houses in the area. I am for the same thing that Joel Ferguson said. Ms. Clark: What we have presented is under the dollar constraints we have been led to believe we have. I cannot wholeheartedly support the Plan as it is. I think we have to be looking at Joel's plan. We need to be looking for more than a nonprofit, private development, multiple dwellings were among out plans and would have housed some people to be displaced. Our survey showed that people enjoy the geographic area, however, not as it currently exists. We primarily have tenants and I have serious concerns on how we will promote home-owner occupancies when we are talking the rehab we are talking. It is not an incentive to have a home owner come into the area and take a risk. Folks who can afford home ownership are not attracted to the area. VANESSA CUNNINGHAM SANDERS, 901 Clayton Street, which is not in the area. I am representing my parents who live at 420 South Butler. I support what Mr. Ferguson said and to applaud the Committee on a fantastic job. JOYCE SHARP, 206 South Butler. I understand the City would be responsible for repair. There are 38% of home owners in the area, I don't know who they are. It will be hard to see significant rehabilitation. I am curious how the Committee proposes to carry that off in terms of individual structures. The structure I'm in has severe foundation problems. It doesn't have much future unless somebody with knowhow rehabilitates those structures. Thank you. PAM PARKS, 412 West Ionia. I was in Glass House for treatment and then moved to Pine down on Ionia. I don't drive and I was interested in what was presented here. Who will decide who can move in and who can't? I am interested in staying in this Planning Board Minutes March 3, 1992 Page 10 area so I want to know how long this will take. I wonder if the City is putting this much money towards this, I think it's a great desire for most people to own their own houses, and I think people are interested in getting back to parks in their area and walking on safe streets. If these elderly people pass on ten years from now, who will decide who is coming in? I think this is great and would like to see more of Lansing become this way. MELVIN JONES, Pastor of Union Missionary Baptist Church. I have a great respect for Mr. Joel Ferguson and his business acumen. However, I resent that he had the opportunity to work with this committee and share his sense of direction throughout this process and that did not happen. The fact that there is opposition tonight, with stern resentment in my mind, I would like to suggest that this idea is workable because of the spirit of this community. It is a creative idea that has potential and can live. The people in this community want to see this area revitalized. It can be a vital strip but I would suggest that people of character that live in this community that deserve to have better places to stay.. I do not think the community is isolated and can certainly be contiguous to everything in that community. The efforts into this planning process; time, toil and labor of citizens that have given their best thinking to developing a plan that is certainly not flawless, but in the absence of no plan, is certainly an adventure in the right direction and, hopefully, will result in your support and subsequent political support of City Council. CHARLES WRIGLEY, 5349 Slate Road and also have owned property in both Allegan and Washtenaw Streets with plans of my own, which I have put into abeyance. Ms. Monteith: I recognize your vision and applaud it and thank you. Ms. Horne: I was impressed and called Ms. Love this afternoon to say how pleased I was with this document. I have been on the Board for 20 years and have been waiting for this document from citizens for vision and hope, but people make this. REFERRED TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Ms. LeBlanc moved for approval of the minutes of February 18, 1992 and Ms. McNutt supported; comments followed. LeBlanc: On page 5 in the 4th paragraph it should say "equipment in them" rather than 'income. ' Also on page 7 43, clarification that Ms. Horne would be unable to attend the 'Willow-Pine' meeting because of the BTS meeting. Planning Board Minutes March 3, 1992 Page 11 With corrections those minutes were; APPROVED Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright reported there are only three items on the agenda at present for the Wednesday, March 11, 1992 at 2:30 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby reported the next meeting will be Tuesday, March 10 in Council Chambers at 4 p.m. and the only agenday item will be the Seven Block Development Plan. Report from the Planning Director: James Foulds I would like to pass out the Capital Improvements Needs list for the next six years. Part of staff and Board responsibilities is to prepare a Six Year Capital Improvement Program, which gets difficult when capital improvement expenditures in the City of Lansing are basically minimal. I would like to summarize where we are. On page 2, which is a summary of funding levels for 1991, 1992 and 1993, it gives a history of where the City is going in terms of Capital Improvement expenditures. In Fiscal Year '91 funding.requested from various departments was $6.6 million. As you can see, the funding requests in 1992 jumped to $17 million, while the percent funded dropped to 15%, or $2.6 million, most of which was not general funds. We have a needs list submitted from various departments of $18.6 million. Currently the Mayor and Budget staff are reviewing that list which is incorporated in this document. Planning staff will ask them to prioritize based on the six year needs list which has an astronomical figure attached and try to pare that down to an amount which is at least fundable either through a bond issue or other fiscal approach the City might undertake. It has been Council budget policy in years past to allocate half a mil to Capital Improvements specifically and that has not been followed recently. The problem is realized, the question is how to address it. Communications: Ms. Horne reported a letter was received from the Mayor reporting that on Monday, April 27, 1992, in recognition of National Volunteer Week, would be set aside to honor an outstanding volunteer member from each Board, Commission or Department. Nomination can be one who has served or is currently serving and this special meeting will be held in their honor prior to City Council meeting. Please submit nominations by the deadline date of April 10 to Brenda Hull. Also from the Economic Development Information System, MSU. Quality and City Planning Board Minutes March 3, 1992 Page 12 Design by the Michigan Historic Preservation Network, which is more conferences. Two of Downtown in the 1990s, focus on service. So these are some of the workshops available. Adjournment: The regular March 3, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board stood adjourned at 9:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ri I Ja sr , Dir for L nsinning Division WC Regular Meeting, LANSING PLANNING`BO'ARD 7:30 p .m . , City Council Chambers loth Vloor, Lansing City Hall February 18 , 1992 Emly Horne convened the meeting at 7:30 p .m. with six members present: Barnhart , Goolsby , Horne , LeBlanc , McNutt , Wright Mr. Goolsby moved to excuse the absences of Rose Killips and Beth Monteith as requested . Ms . LeBlanc seconded; APPROVED Excused Absences: Killips, Monteith Staff in Attendance: Spackman , Fountain There were no scheduled public hearings this evening . The Chairperson accepted comments from the audience . LAURA SIMONS , Klein & Shafer , P .C. , representing Cin-Lan, Incorporated, applicant for SLU-19-91 and SLU-20-91 . I would like to submit an alternative site plan (number two) for SLU-20-91 , which is a condition to the report and motion passed out of Zoning and Ordinance subcommittee. We have submitted a letter withdrawing SLU-19-91 . The alternative site plan provides for 123 parking spaces , which is required for that building and site. The prior plan submitted with SLU-20-91 requested 171 spaces; with 104 spaces on the "A" Residential area and 67 on the area already zoned "F" Commercial and "J" Parking . The new alternative plan has 123 parking spaces . There are still 67 in the existing commercial and parking zoned areas . The "A" Residential parking proposal dropped down to 56 spaces . This is the proposal recommended and submitted to the Zoning and Ordinance subcommittee after reviewing Planning staff's addendum in this matter. They listed several conditions for approval . We respectfully request the full Planning Board pass and forward the modified alternative site plan two for SLU-20-91 onto City Council for consideration . If there is additional information or questions , I will address those. Planning Board Minutes February 18 , 1992 Page 2 c'- Mr. Wright asked , are you prepared to make a commitment on behalf of the petitioner to relocate the fence on the north parcel (SLU-19-91 )? Ms . Simons: We are prepared to work with staff on that . The biggest concern we have is the neighbors behind have a fence on their property line . If you want to box off the area , it would cause safety problems . We will make all best efforts in good faith to work with staff in site plan review to see what needs to make that fence work for everybody . BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Mr . Barnhart moved for approval of the February 4, 1992 minutes as printed and Mr . Goolsby supported; APPROVED Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee , Floyd Wright , Chairperson NCU-1-92, 1501 East Grand River Avenue Substitution This is a request by Greg Domagalski for approval of a substitution of use for property located at 1501 East Grand River Avenue for the purpose of establishing a photographic studio with two employees . No significant interior or exterior modifications are planned for the building . Two parking places will be established in the rear yard and any type of signage will have to meet the requirements of the Sign Code. This property was previously used for commercial purposes which were more intense than the proposed use as a photo studio; consisting of a grocery store , fabric store, etc . , all of which were retail in nature . The Committee was satisfied that this proposed substitution of use will be less intense than previous uses and , therefore , approval is in keeping with the general intent of the Code . Mr. Wright moved for approval of NCU-1-92 and Ms. LeBlanc supported; APPROVED Planning Board Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 3 SLU-19-91, Vacant parcel North of 1000 West Jolly Road A letter has been sent by the petitioner (copies provided) which is a request that SLU-19-91 be withdrawn . The Committee accepted the request to withdraw this petition . Mr. Wright moved that the request for SLU-19-91 to be withdrawn be accepted and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED SLU-20-91, Land East of 1000 West Jolly Road This is a request for expanded parking . At the hearing we were presented with a tentative site plan for parking .on the east side. The petitioner has submitted a revised site plan for SLU-20-91 . The Committee denied the original petition as filed and further recommended that the revised site plan , which would yield 72 additional parking spaces , be approved. These 72 spaces , in conjunction with the existing 51 on site , will yield 123 spaces which is the minimum required for the existing use. This motion of approval as modified was adopted by a vote of 4 yeas and 0 nays and is subject to the following: 1 . That the applicant submit a written letter withdrawing any interest in pursuing SLU-19-91 . 2. Establish opaque fence along the south property line of the SLU-19-91 subject parcels to prohibit any parking on that property. 3 . Modify in writing the SLU-20-91 application to substitute Alternate 2 instead of the initial submission . 4. Approval of this request does not condone the expansion or intensification of the use in the future. 5 • No expansion or change which increases the intensity of the use in the building will be endorsed or encouraged. The existing uses and operation are as documented on the building plan dated December 9, 1991 and filed December 11 , 1991 . Planning Board Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 4 C 6 . Under no circumstances is this recommendation to be construed as setting a precedent for other similar uses. This is a unique situation where a clear line of demarcation is being established for the protection of the neighborhood. In making this recommendation the Committee considered that the modified proposal and recommendation will; (1 ) create minimal intrusion into the neighborhood with the expectation that certain negative features of the existing situation can be rectified; (i .e, fence to eliminate parking on property zoned "C" and "DM-1" ) . (2) still be consistent with the intent of the Master Plan . (3) assure that the parking would be installed in a timely manner in conjunction with the landscaping and proper fencing . The Committee analyzed this request on the basis of a land use issue and believes that the above recommendations and conditions will have a positive impact on land use relationships and, therefore, believe that the recommendation as modified is in the best interests of the neighborhood . Mr. Wright moved for approval of the revised plan for SLU-20-91 and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED SLU-1-92, 1315 South Pennsylvania Avenue Potter Park Flood Plain This is a request by Lansing Parks and Recreation Department for approval of a special land use to allow for the continual development of structures for Potter Park Zoo located within the 100 year flood plain of the Red Cedar River. A site plan has been submitted, which is on file . This plan reflects those buildings that will be constructed in the 100 year flood plain . The plan is part of the 1984 Master Plan for zoo development . The Committee wishes to recommend approval of this special land use to further develop Potter Park Zoo in the 100 year flood plain of the Red Cedar River subject Planning Board Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 5 to obtaining all necessary approvals from responding agencies , which includes the Michigan Department of Natural Resources . It was further understood that all new development of this facility which will include structures that will have equipment in them that could be destroyed by flood waters, will be developed at or above the 100 year flood plain . In addition it was understood that those buildings constructed for cover of zoo animals may be below the flood plain elevation . However, there will be filed an evacuation plan for the birds and animals that could be impacted by flood waters . Mr. Wright moved for approval of SLU-1-92 and Ms . LeBlanc supported; Ms . LeBlanc offered amendments to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee report . At the end of the third paragraph , "all new development which would include structures that have income . . .". In the fourth paragraph evaluation to evacuation . This was ACCEPTED by the Committee . The original motion was voted on and, APPROVED The next meeting of the Zoning and Ordinance Committee will be on March 11 , 1992 at 2:30 p .m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby, Chairperson Community Development Block Grant--Objectives and Use of Funds Mr. Stonehouse , Mr. Tubbs and Mr. Foulds were present for this document discussion, which includes approximately $4 million and something over$1 million coming in May under a new federal program for housing funds—HOPE/HOME , two different funds which are not part of the CDBG. We discussed the objectives and projected activities for the use of the funds for the coming year and had good discussion on ongoing programs including the Mayor's Housing Task Force that is divided into four main committees and will be forwarding recommendations. The objective of that committee is to develop a long-range strategy for the development of housing in the City , working with both the private and public sector. Planning Board Minutes February 18, 1992 Page 6 We requested more knowledge of the Community Development Block Grant Program . We also talked about the nonprofits becoming more involved in housing reconstruction within neighborhoods . Mr. Goolsby recommended , on behalf of the Committee , that the Board accept the CDBG Draft Statement of Objectives and Projected Use of Funds and forward it to the Mayor and City Council for use during the current budget process , and so moved. Ms . McNutt supported; APPROVED Boys Training School Development Plan We had a public hearing at Eastern High School on this plan on January 22, 1992. The plan had been previously reviewed, but may take a long time to complete . Mr. Goolsby moved that the Board adopt the BTS Planning Development Study Consensus Plan as a Master Plan amendment to the Northeast Area Comprehensive Development Plan. Further, that this Plan and Amendment be forwarded to the Mayor and City Council for their adoption when the final plan is completed; Ms . McNutt seconded; APPROVED The Committee also met this evening to finish the preliminary review of the Goals and Objectives and hope to have a finalized document to the Board by April and will forward the draft to you in time for review. The next Urban Development Committee meeting will be Tuesday March 10 , 1992 at 4 p .m. in the City Council Chambers . Report from Planning Director: Jim Spackman , Deputy Director We have evaluation forms back from most Board members and I am compiling responses to that , probably for your next meeting . Planning Board Minutes February 18 , 1992 Page 7 Communications: 1 ) Articles on Groundwater Resources were received. 2) Mr. Wright reminded Board members of a letter from Donna Wynant concerning Willow-Pine meetings . The next will be Thursday, February 20 at 7 p .m. at the North Presbyterian Church located at 108 West Grand River Avenue--corner of Grand River and Washington Avenue . We will review recommendations for rehabilitation of structures and rezoning of properties in the target area and a schedule of when this will go to public hearing before the Planning Board and City Council . 3) Ms. Horne will be unable to attend the Willow-Pine meeting because I and Beth Monteith will attend the BTS Site Plan meeting at 6 p .m. at Foster Community Center. Board Member Comments: Mr. Barnhart requested an excused absence from the March 3, 1992 meeting . Ms . LeBlanc so moved and Ms. McNutt seconded; APPROVED Adjournment: The regular Lansing Planning Board meeting of February 18, 1992 stood adjourned at 8:06 p .m . Respectfully submitted, James R . Spac man, Deputy Director for James N. Foulds, Director Lansing Planning Division LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 p.m. , City Council Chambers 10th Floor, Lansing City Hall February 4, 1992 N E v Emly Horne convened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. with six members present: Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, Killips, LeBlanc, Wright. Ms. Monteith arrived i at 8 p.m. 3 Mr. Goolsby moved to approve the absence of Ms. McNutt and grant a temporqW �7 excuse for Ms. Monteith who will be here shortly. Ms. Killips seconded; APPROVE Staff in Attendance: Foulds, Fountain, Winnicker SLU-2-92, 1518 South Washington Avenue--Parking Expansion Vern Fountain, Zoning Administrator, presented this case with slides and a verbal description. This request is by Lewis Wood, Associate Pastor, South Baptist Church, for approval of a special land use for the purpose of expanding off street parking in conjunction with South Baptist Church located on the southwest corner of Woodlawn and South Washington Avenue. This lot is approximately 40 feet wide and 100 feet deep, adjacent to existing off street parking owned and occupied by the Church and just off the west end of the existing church building. North of Woodlawn is zoned "C" Residential and is predominantly developed with one and two family residential homes. There are mixed commercial uses along the Washington Avenue frontage north of the subject church. Present off street parking is west of the Church. DALE HANSEN, 220 Iris Avenue, President Board of Trustees. We have a color drawing of the slides Mr. Fountain showed. We purchased this property adjacent to the church approximately five years ago from Mr. Gannoway, who was a member of South and requested that the property be sold if possible to the Church and the Church picked up the option and purchased it. The money went to the heirs of Mr. Gannoway. We have parking to the west. Currently they are putting snow on it. Sue Eby, who owns the two houses in the lot area, indicated a possibility of having water in the basement so we moved the snow to another area. This would give us about eight parking places. Bob is better qualified to answer questions about the lot than I am. We are going to lose parking beautifying this area but this will help us gain it back. Ester Wood, Bob and myself have met with the Organization and with Jim Ruff of City Planning so we would be in compliance with rules and regulations. We are trying to be a good neighbor. Planning Board Minutes February 4, 1992 Page 2 Horne: With the growth of your congregation, have you looked elsewhere to accommodate parking instead of taking down houses on Woodlawn and Moores River Drive? v Hansen: We have approval from the City to use the parking lot on Baker Street. There are many spots there but it is not striped, which we would like to do. Our new Pastor has made an appeal to our congregation to park on Baker Street to alleviate the problem we have on the west side of the Church. He has requested that the only people to park in the west lot are elderly and handicapped people and those with small children and requests the rest of us park to the east. A number of years ago the person who owns the barber shop was approached about purchasing that property and at the time he was not interested. Probably that avenue will be pursued. That's not the only reason for our request. Because of the way this slopes, a number of our members have slipped and fallen on the ice. Beautification is definitely a part of it. Mr. Foulds: Since we have two members of the Board of Trustees with us, I wonder if you could share your thoughts on long range plans for the church facility; specific expansion plans, any additional property acquisitions in mind? The Board takes these things into consideration when they make any change in land use. Hansen: I have heard we do not want to go to the west and the City also indicated they did not want us to go any further west. We would like to purchase the two houses. Sue indicated she was not interested in selling. We have not made an offer, only inquiries. We indicated to Sue, John Dougherty and Priscilla Holmes that this would really help us in here because of the whole flow of traffic. It would be much better for us if we could have that property. As far as purchasing anything else, I have been on the Board almost three years and Bob much longer, but have heard nothing other than those two houses. Thank you. BOB RINK, 852 West Thomas L. Parkway, member of Trustee Board at South Baptist and also a principal in the firm that redesigned the parking lot. Our new minister is exploring how to address the fact we are pressed for space for accommodating the number of people in the congregation. We are looking at accommodating two Sunday services in the main auditorium as opposed to the chapel and main auditorium. We are looking at Baker Street as an excellent opportunity to provide the few spaces we will lose with this modified plan and also long range, if numbers do increase as we anticipate they will. We have a person who has accepted the responsibility to get volunteers for patrolling the area on Baker Street during services. HOWARD JONES, 426 West Barnes, since 1963. I have seen eight homes removed by the church, which has had a detrimental effect on the residential character of the neighborhood. Showed a video of this area on Sunday, February 2, 1992. ) These homes are well maintained. It is a stable residential area. The illegal parking Planning Board Minutes February 4, 1992 Page 3 situation could be alleviated if parishioners would walk about two blocks from the Moores Park School parking lot. I'm sure when the Diamond Reo site is developed, the owners will let South Baptist use their lot. The south side of Baker would be available for parking by parishioners. MARY MARGARET WOLL, President of the Eastside Neighborhood Organization. Parking for the church is used one day a week. The people living there look at the lot seven days a week. The two houses there deserve a little grass to look at on one side. I have been down here with the same subject on my own church. Create a grassy area, mow it and enjoy it. It helps the ozone and takes out some gas fumes, but don't let them put more parking in. They could go up two stories and it wouldn't be any higher than the church. It wouldn't be any more obnoxious looking at a building than a flat parking lot seven days a week. If they need parking they should get it the best way they can without infringing on neighborhoods, which is for only one day a week. Those people do not need to have their street parking taken away from them. They are going to put in another curb cut and take away street parking. I don't think this is the way things should go. DONNA COLLINS, 225 Moores River Drive, read a January 4, 1989 Lansing State Journal article with the headline "Neighbors protest as Church razes house for parking." It stated in part; "The South Baptist Church demolished at house at 125 Woodlawn Avenue to ease parking problems but the South Central Neighborhood Organization said Lansing needs housing not parking lots. It was the eleventh house the Church has removed in recent years. It cannot become a parking lot until City officials approve a rezoning. The group thought it won an agreement in 1979 that the Church would destroy no more houses. South Baptist said the 179 agreement only promised not to expand the parking lot further west on Moores River Drive. Two houses are surrounded by the parking lot. The Church paid $22,000 for the house but said it was in poor shape and would have been expensive to renovate. 'If they paid $22,000 in that neighborhood, it is difficult to believe it required demolition' Councilman Creamer said general Council policy is not to allow parking to encroach into residential areas. The City is dealing with a similar situation involving Lansing Community College property." Ms. Collins continued, I used City of Lansing Assessor's records for the remaining houses in the first two blocks of Woodlawn and Moores River Drive to obtain an average. There are a total of 17 houses with a total state equalized value of $330,200. I reached an average of $19,400 per house. If I multiply that by the eleven houses taken out, $213,400 was removed from the tax roll to date. If I apply the July '91 tax rate of 44.95 and apply the December 191 tax rate of 33.43, in 1991 alone the lost revenue to Lansing was $16,726 and this drain from tax rolls has hurt the City and County, as well as our schools and has been going on for many years. On May 19, 1966 the City of Lansing vacated the alley between Woodlawn and Moores River Drive and that is now part of the Church property. The alley contained 4,084 square feet. The parcel in question tonight only contains 3,300. It's only 8/10 the Planning Board Minutes February 4, 1992 Page 4 size of the vacated alley. By enjoying a tax exempt status they never give back to the neighborhood or the community. They receive all services; sidewalk, street maintenance, snow removal, sewer service, police and fire protection without paying for them. Maybe some of the parishioners are residents, but the property taxes they pay are for the services they receive at their own residences. We have been informed by church members that the long term goal is to extend the parking lot to cover the entire 100 and 200 blocks of the south side of Woodlawn and north side of Moores River Drive. That would remove 17 more homes from the neighborhood and tax roll. The SEV for those homes is $330,200. Acquisition of those homes would devastate the houses facing that blacktop lot and their assessed value is $463,300. I pointed out state equalized values involved totally $1,006,900. How can the taxpayers of this city, county and school district be expected to make up for all of that lost revenue in order to provide a few more parking spaces to be used for a couple of hours on Sunday? There are only 52 Sundays in a year. If it appears that I'm exaggerating about the future goals, please look again at the past. The Church bought the house at 125 Woodlawn in 1989 and waited three years to ask for the special land use permit. Now it's only a small vacant lot. Please help us save our neighborhood. Don't help propagate the selfish, irresponsible attitude toward other peoples'neighborhoods and homes. Please deny the special land use permit. Thank you. EUNICE WOOD, 217 Woodlawn. In late summer or early fall Priscilla and I met with some Board members at the Church to talk about this demolition of houses. They assured us that the only thing they were interested in was the subject property. In late October or early November the property at 127 Woodlawn was for sale and I had had my eye on it. A nice little single unit with an extra bedroom for my grandchildren. Mr. Badawah asked me to promise not to sell this property to the Church." He said the elderly Mrs. Badawah had been badgered on a weekly basis. I have no desire to look out on a church parking lot for the rest of my life. I also own 225 and 227 Woodlawn. So representatives of the Church have blatantly lied to US. SUE EBY, owner of the two houses in the middle of the South Baptist Church parking lot. I also own 14 other houses in the neighborhood. I request that you deny the special use permit for the lot bordering South Baptist Church and that you don't approve the revisions to their current lot. I further request that this is a citywide issue and you need to deny special use permits in cases where houses have been torn down until the City has a process for a demolition hearing before the permit is issued. Otherwise we would be here arguing about a house instead of a lot and that would be a lot easier. I pay over $24,000 a year in taxes on this property to the city and I believe it would be devalued by your action of approving this permit. In addition the city channeled over $2 million worth of Community Development Block Grant into this neighborhood and none of us that worked on the Committee, and I personally, didn't have a plan of having a poorly screened and buffered parking lot as a centerpiece to our neighborhood. One of the negative Planning Board Minutes February 4, 1992 Page 5 effects of a parking lot to any neighborhood is visual. We automatically lose the two story screening and buffering that a house provides. The new screening and buffering ordinance requires that green space be allowed similar to the house v setbacks in the neighborhood. That means that the parking lot should be set back that far, also to my back yards and to my side yards. I hope you realize when the church presented revised plan that they are not doing any of those setback requirements. Particularly, back yard requirements would set them 35 foot back into their lot. While the plan may look pretty and they have some trees on there, it doesn't meet screening and buffering ordinances. It's grandfathered in as it always has been. The setback they are adding is only off of the city property. Right now they are paved on to city property lines so the five foot setback on Moores River Drive is only to move back to exactly their property line. If you would actually put those setbacks back, my two houses in the middle of the lot would be houses again. They would have a 35 foot green space behind my back yard. I have a new tenant at 133 Woodlawn. She told me that a snowplow operator thought it was a good idea to plow the parking lot at 2 a.m. and the snow pile is right next to her bedroom window. None of the setback requirements are met. I don't consider my two houses in the middle of their lot a problem. I would like to show you this aerial view map to show the houses that have been taken down. The order they were taken down indicates the process that South Baptist Church uses to take down lots. Number one was in the middle of the parking lot, just as I am now. Number two house taken isolated number four house. Then they took three houses at once. The basic approach is to take the properties they can buy, surround good housing whether it's owner occupied or not then that house is isolated in the middle of the lot. This will continue as long as you let them do it. West on Woodlawn toward the school are some houses owned by absentee landlords. If they wish to go in and purchase them, they could surround the owner occupied homes. We have been following this for 15 years and while now it looks to you like a square parking lot, to us it's a square getting bigger all the time. At every step of the process we were told no more would go down. If all those houses go down, all the houses I own are isolated into a neighborhood too small to be a neighborhood. Those 14 at the end of the block tie us into the other neighborhood and make us a viable place where people can live. Even if you don't think this is going to happen, there needs to be something in the process that any resident that feels that their properties are being impacted by tearing a house down need the chance to talk while the house is still there. 122 Woodlawn--South Baptist is giving misinformation if they say that guy wanted that house to go to the church. He told me many times he didn't want it to go to the South Baptist Church but his daughter wanted the $23,000 in cash. This permit is not just for that one lot; the eight parking spots don't mean a thing to them. What it means is they will have a green light to purchase other houses to tear down. I believe it's a green light to go into the 100 block of Moores River Drive. Now after that Planning Board Minutes February 4, 1992 Page 6 purchase, everything on Barnes backs up to that and face the same situation that I do. There is no end to the blight they can cause with that. It's dishonest to come down and present it the way it was tonight. 7 GARY HEUER, 1511 South Washington. I don't think we should take out any more residential property for church parking. Lansing needs moderate to low cost housing. I don't think just because they tore down a house we change rezoning on it. They should look at alternative parking because they've got a long term problem coming up. The area behind the barber shop I tried to buy for commercial development. The City can't sell it because of DNR problems there. I think I would stand a better chance on buying it for commercial development and put a tax base back in there. Thank you for your time. PAT MURRAY, 1720 Bradley. For seven years I lived at 216 Moores River Drive. Unlike the petitioners, I do live in the City of Lansing. I would not be surprised if you were a little curious as to why so many people would come down here and try to keep you from allowing South Baptist Church to pave a very small piece of grass in an existing parking lot. When I moved in one of the first sights I saw was my 89 year old neighbor shoveling a pile of snow that the South Baptist snow plow had pushed onto his sidewalk. That summer my 89 year old neighbor had to go out and cut down the bushes growing along the fence right beside his house because what he did for pleasure was look out his window that overlooked that parking lot. His son had asked the church to cut those down just to the top of the fence level so he could see out his window. My 89 year old neighbor was climbing a ladder to cut those bushes down because the South Baptist Church refused to do that. My last year there the snow plow bashed into and killed two of the buffering and screening trees there and it's now been a year and a half and nothing has been done to replace those. As you can see the South Baptist Church has a long history of abuse of this neighborhood. We have been promised a number of times that they would acquire no additional parking spaces. They made a verbal commitment that they would not turn that into parking space. They thought they could outwait us. This is a message you can send to them that they can no longer acquire houses, tear them down, wait a little bit until the neighborhood doesn't care so much about it, then come in and say to you, "it's just a little plot of grass, why shouldn't I be able to pave it"? We would like you to stop that now with that plot of grass. I am also concerned about the proposed parking lot plan. Having lived two houses away from it for seven years and try to walk down that sidewalk on Sunday morning with my two little children is one of the most amazing things you could ever think of doing. The South Baptist Church parishioners have been parking over that sidewalk. There is no setback, their parking lot goes right up to the sidewalk. Their proposed plan has them put in maybe a cinder block between the sidewalk and parking lot. The setback average is 13 feet in that neighborhood. We need a grassy space between the parking lot and the road. They will not commit to whatever their change will be. Planning Board Minutes February 4, 1992 Page 7 The other argument I have with their proposed plan they are going to move it right next to the existing house, which is about 40 feet away from that driveway and they plan that driveway right next to the house. v The last thing is South Baptist is again breaking a promise to our neighborhood. They use the tactic of changing leadership. Now you have an opportunity to tell them it doesn't matter who's in charge. It doesn't matter who's on the Planning Board, if you tear houses down, we're not going to allow you to just turn them into parking lots. We need that housing in Lansing and need South Baptist to commit itself to being an honest neighbor. Thank you. LARRY HEUER, 119 Garden Street. The church for the last 20 years has done nothing but rape the neighborhood. They continue parking in front of people's houses blocking their driveways. They park in other business parking lots without permission of the owners; namely, the Mug and Brush Barber Shop, Total Gas Station and Quality Dairy parking lot. They don't take care of the parking lot on Baker Street they do use. It's filled with trash. They are the only ones who use it, they should clean it. I too have a problem with the way they remove snow. It happens about 2 a.m. and lasts about three or four hours on the Baker Street lot with an old truck that sounds terrible. They don't care about the neighbors. It is a bigger eyesore than Quality Dairy. Thank you. JOHN DOUGHERTY, 229 Moores River Drive, President of South Central Neighborhood Organization. I know you have heard a lot of anger and spent a lot of money on their property and live there all the time. I hope you can understand that anger. I have no new arguments but would like to leave you with a couple of thoughts. First is the question, where do we draw the line? When do we draw the line? It is a very valid concern that the neighborhood has no guarantees. They are unable to guarantee what future needs and plans will be. But the neighbors' point of view is that the church isn't going to continue in this same process and the neighborhood will not continue to erode. That's a serious threat. A second thing, we need a long term solution. Eight parking spaces is not a long term solution. We have heard components of long term situation and ways of putting it together. Al Tubbs was very positive about the use of the Baker Street lot and it's easy to understand why it's not nice to park now, the asphalt and other things that make it unattractive but it's a lot of space and interest on the part of the City. It is an existing parking lot and it wouldn't hurt to use that space. There are other parking spaces like the Moores Park School. I would like to strongly suggest to you tonight, the long term solution to this parking problem and maintaining the neighborhood's integrity is not to grant eight more parking spaces. It's to work together to find an approach to this problem and to put our foot down and say no, we cannot take more houses down. We cannot turn more land into parking spaces. Thank you. REFERRED TO THE ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Planning Board Minutes February 4, 1992 Page 8 Mr. Wright, Chairman, added, for information, the Committee will meet next on Wednesday, February 12 at 2:30 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room located on the second floor of the Annex, southwest corner of Washington Square and Ottawa Street. You are welcome to attend but it is riot a public hearing, it is a business meeting for the Committee. The room only holds 40 people so send representatives. Ms. Horne added, we thank you for your time and effort coming down so we could hear all sides to this petition. You are welcome to stay but not participate as we go into our Business Session. Thank you. BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Ms. LeBlanc moved to approve, with corrections, the minutes of January 22, 1992. Mr. Barnhart supported; Ms. Horne noted corrections to be made; page 4, the teacher to student ratio should state "1 to 29.11 Included in members in attendance was the Catholic Central representative. Mr. Goolsby pointed out his Ward number was incorrect. Ms . LeBlanc wished to clarify; on page 2, second full paragraph--I suggest deleting"and how to dispose of it." Also page 4, Ms. Beal was referring to "overcrowded" school, not in general. On page 6 the additions should be stated to the second and third "floor." APPROVED Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright, Chairman repeated the time, date and location of the next meeting. A tentative agenda was submitted to the Board. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby, Chairman, reported the next meeting will be Tuesday, February 11 , 1992 at 4'p.m. but in the Planning Division Conference Room. We are also going to meet Tuesday, February 18 at 4 prior to Board meeting. Report from the Planning Director: Jim Foulds 1) The progress of three neighborhood plans staff are currently working on; Riverpoint Neighborhood Planning effort, which Mr. Winnicker is working on. The Seven Block area on the east side adjacent to King-Logan Boulevard north of I-496 in the downtown area--Eleanor Love is working on that plan. Willow-Pine Plan Donna Planning Board Minutes February 4, 1992 Page 9 Wynant is working on. Within the next two months we will be setting hearings for each of those plans before the Board and presenting the recommendations from those respective Committees. They are wrapping up their committee work and will be making their recommendation to the Board. v In terms of scheduling it looks like Riverpoint will be ready for April. The Seven Block area will be in March. Willow-Pine also some time in April. So we will bring that information to the Board so you can make a decision and recommendation to the Council on those documents and efforts. 2) A new rezoning application has just been filed and I wanted to go over that with you. Specifically it has to do with the Walsh Street rezoning. If you recall that's the effort to expand the surface parking lot on Walsh Street and Pennsylvania Avenue on the east side. Within the last six months you've made a negative recommendation to the Council and that was upheld by them and denied. Now it's back dealing with the same petition. I would like to suggest the Board ask the City Attorney for an opinion as to the legal status of applications filed nearly one after another when we have responded to the original question when there has been no change in substance on the part of either the property or property owner or situations in the neighborhood. Goolsby: Anytime you have a situation that is denied, I would just as soon not deal with it and certainly would like to know if I'm on sound legal grounds in so doing. I would feel if there are no changed circumstances, there is no change and not a prudent request.. I support your suggestion. Horne: I am thinking of the request Council had on Thompson Street (referencing Z-2-90) , regarding procedure and due process, just acting on it and not allowing the neighbors to comment. LeBlanc: I agree we should have a legal opinion. Citizens don't want to keep coming down over and over. Wright: Is there a precedent and what is the time frame? Foulds: There is precedent on other properties, but the difference is something had changed; either the essence of the proposal, the development, itself had changed, the design, something happened to the neighborhood and you could say the substance of the request was different and therefore it deserved new attention. I don't see that here. Wright: Have they ever rendered an opinion like this? Fountain: The closest they came was a case with the Board of Appeals when they had an applicant come in two or three times. They concluded that if the Board wanted, they could refuse to hear it again because it was essentially the same thing that they had already ruled on. Planning Board Minutes February 4, 1992 Page 10 Foulds: I have reviewed the file several times and my opinion is there is absolutely no change from the original request to this one. Mr. Goolsby moved to have the Board Chairperson communicate a request for opinion to Mr. Knot, Lansing City Attorney, regarding hearing these petitions for the second time within six months or so. Ms. LeBlanc seconded; APPROVED If the opinion is that it must be processed, I suggest Board direct staff that they not act on the petition until the neighborhood land use plan is done, looking at the residential and non-residential area so we could ascertain the issues prevented before us again. Fountain: The way the Thompson Street issue went, it was one the staff and Board didn't support and Council chose to go a different direction with him. They zoned the south half of that property to parking and the north half of the property to commercial. That affords him an opportunity to put development on the north half of a commercial nature and access the property off of Thompson Street, which we never agreed with. The southern triangle is parking. No access off the ramp and he has no holdings on the land to the north. Communications: A letter was received from Mary Margaret Woll on the feeling of the ENO regarding Walsh Street, which was very well written and will be on file. Adjournment: The regular February 4, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 9:05 P.M. Respectfully submi ted, Ja erN. ulds, irector L nsnning Division WC Regular Meeting LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30, Social Room , Lansing Eastern High School 220 North Pennsylvania Avenue cc Y Wednesday , January 22, 1992 N 7-1 Emly Horne called the meeting to order at 7:30 p .m. and introduced the other siix members present and staff support present . N Garry Goolsby , Ward 4, and Chairperson of the Urban Development Commte Beth Monteith , Ward 1 Helen LeBlanc , Vice Chairperson and from Ward 4 Floyd Wright , Ward 3 and Chairperson of the Zoning and Ordinance Committee Merle Barnhart , Ward 3 Marge McNutt , Ward 3 Absent this evening is Rose Killips,from Ward 1 . James Foulds , Director of the Planning Division Jim Spackman, Deputy Director, Lansing Planning Division Vern Fountain , Zoning Administrator Jim Ruff, Senior Planner John Ruge , Eastside Neighborhood Organization , Chairman of the BTS Study Committee introduced those members: Elaine Bannasch, representing ENO Jim Prister, Vice President representing Sparrow Mary Margaret Woll, President of ENO Marc Cory, Lansing School District Nancy Parsons , Eastside Neighborhood Organization Cheryl Risner, ENO Florence Findsen , ENO Rick Kibbey,, ENO Mitch Adelman Bill Jakovac , Lansing Catholic Central Mr. Foulds explained , this public hearing culminates a twelve month planning process that the BTS Planning Committee has undertaken . The Committee selected Howard Deardorff Associates from Lansing to be our design consultants for this project . Howard is a graduate of Penn State University , has a Masters Degree from the University of Michigan where he is currently an adjunct professor, in addition Lansing Planning Board Minutes January 22, 1992 Page 2 to having thirty years of experience in design issues . Howard will make a presentation and answer questions from the audience. HOWARD DEARDORFF presented slides and explained this was a team study, our firm and Soils and Materials Engineers for Lansing . The second firm prepared an environmental audit of the BTS property to see if there were constraints in terms of toxic materials . They found none , the property seems clear. The property in question is enclosed essentially beginning at Pennsylvania , along Orchard Street and out to Saginaw. We looked at several alternatives and came up with a concept that involved organizing park or open space around which were clustered Sparrow Hospital and educational institutions; Catholic Central High School , the Lansing public schools and the residential neighborhoods on Orchard, Vine , Clemens Streets. We looked at three or four options for the BTS property and focused on this "consensus plan" that includes the disposition of Property A as an expansion of athletic fields and recreation facilities that would be displaced by expanding Sparrow Hospital across Jerome Street . Properties B and C we propose be designated for residential development; likewise with Site E . Property D south we propose to continue as office or become a part of Lansing Catholic Central and D north is proposed as office development in the long term future. We talked about creating a sign system for the east side as an organizing element . We envision Rumsey Street being an entrance into that green space. Some of you had questions about retention ponds . A retention pond has a fairly steep edge and storage of water from a storm so there is water in this most of the time . There would be a barrier, then a storage area and the water level would not just drop off so a small child could walk into it and drown; one foot deep for every five feet up . If you go more shallow, you will get weed growth. We think these plans are creative in bringing the neighborhood together and have a lot of flexibility. Emly Horne indicated the people working with the Committee are: Ellen Beal , Ward 1 , with City Council Two from the Planning Board; Beth Monteith , Ward 1 and Emly Horne, Ward 2 Lansing Planning Board Minutes January 22, 1992 Page 3 Mr. Goolsby asked how many units of housing are we talking about? Mr. Deardorff: Approximately 240 additional homes in the area . That option for new housing was an emphasis of many Committee members . MITCH ADELMAN , 501 North Clemens, would both storm water retention areas have water year-round? Mr. Deardorff answered , yes , on sites B and C. The retention area south of site E will have a dry basin to prevent damage to surrounding homes . Rick Kibbey: The gate at Rumsey Street--somewhere there needs to be an entrance . Howard Deardorff: All dead-end streets will have some sort of pedestrian entrance to the park but parking won't be on residential streets . RICHARD A. IMGRUND , 129 Lathrop Street . If you could move some older homes and mix them in with new development so you didn 't get a pristine project--something more neighborly . What kind of home owner would you think it would be? Mr. Kibbey stated, there are a lot of people on the east side we would like to retain these for their second home so we tried to target these in the $70,000 range . Mr. Deardorff clarified, we were talking about 1200 to 1300 square feet , two story , three bedrooms , two baths and a garage . It would be designed as a planned residential development not a subdivision with private lots . We would have difficulty meeting the neighborhood density if the land were subdivided . There would be controls and stipulations regarding architectural image and the developer may be required to assist financially with the greenway within the development and connect into the overall system . There would be signs and gateways from their neighborhood into that system too. Mr. Imgrund: I am concerned about my neighbors after I sell my home and it increases rental density on my street . I don't want to do that to the people I leave . Mr . Kibbey reported there are other activites that address this and I will be glad to talk to you after the meeting . HAROLD LEEMAN, 529 North Francis . Would the Lansing School District building be used by the State of Michigan as a carpenter shop . Mr. Deardorff, do you mean the paint shop? Lansing Planning Board Minutes January 22, 1992 Page 4 r Marc Cory responded , we have a contract with the State for those buildings through 1995. We are willing to look at development in the area and make it compatible with whatever happens here . We have concerns about the use in those buildings . We have let the State carry on , but at some point will have to discuss their exiting the site. Mr. Leeman ased, is there environmental damage on that site? Mr. Cory: We have registered with the state regards our underground storage tank that has been replaced on that site. We know of no other. Mr. Leeman then asked , where the garden is was once used as a dump--did anybody do research? Mr. Deardorff answered, we had an environmental audit by Soils and Materials Engineers and they identified some dumping immediately to the west of the garden area , private , unauthorized dumping of old appliances and such , but we have no record of any toxic material in there. Before housing could go in , we would have some subsurface investigation . ELLEN BEAL , 227 Custer. I want to commend the Committee and Mr. Deardorff on the wonderful Plan you have come up with. My concern is soon there will be 240- 300 new housing units and perhaps be children in them. There are not east side elementary schools to deal with an additional population of children. Bingham, Fairview and Allen Street are full . The School District must be aware that the east side needs another elementary school . Perhaps they need to consider reopening Foster and relocating the Community Center. We must not continue to put children in overcrowded schools. For example Bingham is a 1 to 29 ratio of teacher and students . It 's a wonderful concept but we must recognize our educational state. KATE BARRIER , 412 South Magnolia . What information exists about housing on the east side--vacant units and if there really is a need for 240 units of housing? Where will these kids play if they don't have a yard? Most of the houses the City is going to condemn you would not want to move into. This will take the property value down; not stabilize it or increase it . Most homes in this area would not be $70,000 homes . Howard Deardorff: We found a demand for $75,000 housing . In five years the absorption is not here , but over time it will fill in . The east side is a great place Lansing Planning Board Minutes January 22, 1992 Page 5 v to raise kids . Developers indicate they want to do develop here . We are developing a long term land use plan for market feasibility. DICK INGERSOLL , 124 Rumsey. Will Sparrow Hospital expansion ever happen? Howard Deardorff, it' s a health/education collaborative between Eastern , Lansing Catholic Central and Michigan State University . Jim Prister added , Michigan State University is currently reinitiating master facility planning to plot out our next five to ten years of development . The Greater Lansing Area Health/Education Collaborative is one thing we have talked about to create educational space. REFERRED TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Comments from the Audience: DWIGHT HUSKEY, Capitol View Nursing Home (NCU-19-91 ) would like to answer any questions you may have. RAY STEPHENS, Stephens Consulting Services (P-2-91 and P-3-91 ) available for any questions . BUSINESS SESSION: Approval of Minutes: Ms. LeBlanc moved for approval of the January 7, 1992 minutes and Mr. Barnhart seconded; APPROVED Committee Reports: Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright reported. Lansing Planning Board Minutes January 22, 1992 Page 6 NCU-19-91, 707 Armstrong Road—Nursing Home This is a request by Dwight Huskey of M.H .B. Group , representing Wisconsin Health Services , Incorporated, for approval of Class A nonconforming status for property at 707 Armstrong Road. The property in question is currently developed with a nursing home containing 234 beds on land that contains approximately 3.4 acres. Access to the development is off Armstrong Road . The property maintains a Class B nonconforming status because it does not meet the land area requirements for the number of beds in the facility. This became a nonconforming Class B use with the adoption of the Zoning Code Amendments in 1983. The applicant proposes to construct an addition to the food freezing unit, second and third floor sun room additions and a primary addition to the east which will include eight (8) new beds replacing eight beds from the existing facility for private care . The addition will also include a physical therapy room and conference room. The overall changes will not intensify the use in terms of the number of beds . However, Class A status will allow for the proposed building expansion . The Committee recommended approval with the following conditions: 1 ) The requirements of all public agencies being met, and further that the development of a landscape screening and buffering plan be submitted to and approved by the Planning Division prior to the issuance of building permits . 2) The Class A designation be provisional for a one year period. At the end of the year if the project is complete, the provisional status will be removed and the Class A status made permanent. If, however, the project is not completed, the Planning Board may require reapplication or revoke Class A status . The Committee was satisfied, based on testimony and evidence , that the Southeast Area Comprehensive Plan recognizes this site as a community facility and, therefore , the existing and continued use of this property is in conformance with the Master Plan. The Committee does not believe that the proposed additions will have any adverse impact on adjacent properties. The change will initiate review of landscape screening and buffering that can and will improve the overall land use relationships . Planning Board Minutes January 22, 1992 Page 7 P-2-91, Coachlight Estates #2 Subdivision—Tentative Preliminary Plat This is a request by Larry D . Stephens , Stephens Consulting Services , P .0. to plat a residential subdivision adjacent to Graves Park in Lansing 's southwest corner of the city . The plat , Coachlight Estates ##2 contains four (4) lots containing a total of .721 acres . Access is provided by the existing street network to the northeast off the Waverly Road and Miller Road instersection. These lots are located specifically along Wayfarer Lane , just north of Coachlight Commons Boulevard . The property is zoned "A" Residential , which is appropriate for the proposed single family residential development. The Committee has moved for approval of this request subject to six conditions: 1 . That the final plat be developed with all public improvements as required by the Lansing Subdivision Regulations and the Michigan State Plat Act . 2. That all lots be graded so surface water will drain therefrom so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties . 3 . That the developer utilize an underground electrical distribution system as specified in Section 1238.08 of the Lansing Subdivision Regulations. 4. That the necessary easement be provided for the installation of utilities . 5. Compliance with requirements of all responding agencies. 6 . That this tentative approval of the preliminary plat is effective for a period of twelve (12) months . The Committee found, based on testimony and evidence , that the property is zoned "A" Residential District and the applicant proposes to develop single family homes , which is consistent with the Southwest Area Comprehensive Plan to establish land use development in the area . Mr. Wright moved , on behalf of the Zoning and Ordinance Committee , for approval of P-2-91 and Ms . LeBlanc supported; APPROVED Planning Board Minutes January 22, 1992 Page 8 P-3-91, Coachlight Estates #3—Tentative Preliminary Plat This is also a request by Larry Stephens similar to the previous request only Coachlight #3 contains twelve (12) lots and a total of 2.81 acres . These lots are located specifically along Monticello Drive, just north of Coachlight Commons Boulevard . This property is also zoned "A" Residential District , appropriate for the proposed single family development . The Committee moved for approval of this request subject to the following conditions: 1 . That the final plat be developed with all public improvements as required by the Lansing Subdivision Regulations and the Michigan State Plat Act . 2. That all lots be graded so surface water will drain therefrom so as not to adversely affect adjacent properties . 3. That the`developer utilize an underground electrical distribution system as specified in Section 1238.08 of the Lansing Subdivision Regulations. 4. That the necessary easement be provided for the installation of utilities . S.. Compliance with requirements of all responding agencies. 6. That this tentative approval of the preliminary plat is effective for a period of twelve (12) months . Mr. Wright , on behalf of the Zoning and Ordinance Committee, moved for approval of Coachlight Estates Subdivision #3 and Mr. Barnhart supported; APPROVED The next Zoning and Ordinance Committee will meeting will be February 12, 1992 at 2:30 p .m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby reported that there would be a meeting Tuesday, January 28, 1992 at 4 p .m . in City Council Chambers to discuss the Goals and Objectives for the Planning Board Minutes January 22, 1992 Page 9 City . We will not deal with the Community Development Block Grant until the meeting of February 11 , 1992. Planning Director's Report: Jim Foulds thanked everyone for their participation in the BTS Development Plan. New Business: Margie McNutt moved to excuse the absence of Rose Killips , and Helen LeBlanc seconded; APPROVED Adjournment: The regular January 22, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 9:20 p.m. ectfully submitt , Ja e N. Foulds , D rector La ing Planning Division WC LANSING PLANNING BOARD 7:30 p .m. , City Council Chambers loth Floor, Lansing City Hall January 7, 1992 C!� c Emly Horne convened the meeting at 7:30 p .m. with eight members present: Barnhart, Goolsby, Horne, Killips , LeBlanc, McNutt, Monteith , Wrig� ".. E - 00 ' c; Staff in Attendance: Jim Fouids , Planning Division Direc-Lor Vern Fountain , Zoning Administrator Ron Stonehouse , Development Division Director PUBLIC HEARINGS: Community Development Block Grant Draft Statement--Objectives and Projected Use of Funds--1992-1993 Emly Horne: The Draft Statement has been prepared and this public hearing is being held in accordance with the provisions of a Citizens Participation Plan for the Community Development Block Grant Program as adopted by the Lansing City Council on June 11 , 1984. ROSE NORWOOD , Executive Director of the Housing Resource Center, a private nonprofit serving not only the City of Lansing but also tri-county. We request funding under rehabilitative support activities . The Housing Resource Center does a variety of housing counseling; home ownership, landlord tenant and homeless prevention activities . Specifically for this funding proposal we are working with local nonprofit groups in Lansing in their goal of providing home ownership activities by counseling potential home owners to be prepared to be adequate home owners at the time they receive the housing . I will be available to answer any questions . RICK KIBBEY, 300 Shepard Street , regarding operating support for nonprofit community development corporations in the city of Lansing. The 1990 Affordable Housing Act recognizes the role of community organizations and rewards it . Federal money for housing has actually gone up this year. This new legislation Planning Board Minutes January 7, 1992 Page 2 under the provisions of the HOME legislation includes a 15% set aside explicitly designated for community based housing development organizations. Given Lansing's allocation, this set aside is worth approximately $150,000. Strengthening the roles of community groups requires a substantial commitment to funding . Two of the three community development organizations in Lansing working in older neighborhoods are trying to solve these problems working in their spare time. Nonprofits have a great record for leveraging volunteers , but the whole operation cannot be volun-Leers. These groups have done an ad-irable job in obtaining both private debt financing and support of the communities in which they work. Approximately March first the City will have an allocation of a little in excess of one million dollars in new money under the provisions of the National Affordable Housing Act. We would like to see a clear definition of who is eligible as a nonprofit. In other cities as well as here, the availability of money for nonprofits have attracted for-profit developers disguised as nonprofits and also some institutions going forward as nonprofits . Based on discussions and a review of successful CBOs around the State, I suggest that the set aside be used in the following way. (1 ) An operating grant for each eligible CBO , $30,000 to be used for operational and administrative support. Eligible use would be used for staff. Use of those would be determined by CBO, but obviously that would have to be part of the contracting process . (2) A grant of $2,000 per unit for up to ten units per CBO to cover the cost of holding during rehab prior to lease up or marketing unit. With this array of funds , you've got enough money in the set aside to work with three groups . If more than three groups are eligible for this sort of funding , consider tapping Community Development Block Grant funds to make up the difference. These groups will continue to use the other sources of housing funding available as part of their financial packaging , as well as continuing to access other private and public funding sources . Thank you very much for your attention. REFERRED TO URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE NCU-19-91 , 707 Armstrong Road Nursing Home--Class A Nonconforming Status Vern Fountain presented this case . This is a request by Dwight Huskey ,, representing the Wisconsin Health Services , Incorporated , for approval of Class Planning Board Minutes January 7, 1992 Page 3 A nonconforming status for property located at 707 Armstrong Road, formerly known as Roselawn Nursing Manor. It is still a nursing home containing approximately 234 existing beds . The proposal is to achieve a Class A status to allow expansion of this existing facility on the east as well as expanding the existing off street parking . The Class A status would allow minor expansion in the building , based on its intensity now, as well as the cooler facilities and the sun roof. It was approved b_v special land use several years back. DWIGHT HUSKEY, Architect at 985 Parchment Drive, Grand Rapids , petitioner, introduced Larry Banks , representing the owner's son. I have a site plan. There is less than two foot of grade change anywhere in that area . We want to add two new parking areas to help facilitate parking for the project as occupancy comes back up to 100%. There is a shortage of parking right now. We anticipate a landscape buffer on the east property line. We would like to control automobile headlights from the residents on the east. Expansion is a reallocation of beds . Now on the third floor there are eight four bed wards. The beds being .freed up will be put into an acute care type facility. There is quite a distance between the east end of the building and the first property line to the east . With this expansion , we will have to reevaluate screening and buffering because of the closeness of both and, hopefully, get something a little more intense in there . Larry Banks: The reason for additional parking is people do a lot more visiting and the staff number is higher. The additional eight beds would be used for a traumatic brain injured unit, which there is a great need for in this community. I think we want to go with shrubbery, as opposed to deciduous trees . REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE P-2-91 , Coachlight Estates #2—Tentative Preliminary Plat This is a request by Larry Stephens , engineer representing the owner, for approval of a tentative preliminary plat to be known as Coachlight Estates Subdivision #2. The proposed subdivision plat consists of four residential lots lying along the east side of Wayfarer Street, located in the extreme southwest part of the City . It intersects with Coachlight , which subsequently intersects with South Waverly Road near Miller Road. The area around this site to the west, south and southeast is developed with single family homes . Directly adjacent to the east Planning Board Minutes January 7, 1992 Page 4 is a public park . Directly north is vacant land that at one time was proposed to be subdivided as a continuation of this Coachlight Subdivision. Directly northwest there is a church site having direct access to Waverly Road. To the west and south are single family homes . The proposed development is single family homes and the lots meet the minimum size requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance . P-3-91 , Coachlight Estates #3--Tentative Preliminary Plat Coachlight #3 is a twelve (12) lot plat that extends along the west side of Monticello, which dead ends into the vacant land to the north. This was all part of the initial Coachlight Subdivision. What is developed is all single family homes and zoned residential. Lying between these two subdivision plats is Gerald W. Graves Park, a public park. Just south of Lot #1 there is an entryway to the Park. The two subdivisions having hearing tonight; one is a four lot plat, the second a twelve lot plat. Both are zoned single family and proposed development is single family. They are both serviced by existing public streets that were put in with the initial subdivision, which was only developed on one side. LARRY STEPHENS, Stephens Consulting Services , the engineer on the project. Scott Wenier is here representing Ronbar Corporation . I would be glad to answer any questions you have. MICHAEL COLE , 3424 Rayborn Drive, acting President of the Coachlight Action Group . A few residents have some concerns . We enthusiastically welcome any developer who has interest in our neighborhood. Several years ago we went through a process of trying to get a park. The original developers of the property twenty years ago had serious problems and had to discontinue development. We are concerned about housing being constructed there, as to compatibility and upgrade. We do not feel that housing that looks the same and has the same problems as the current neighborhood will be an advantage. Now we suffer from not enough driveway space, drainage problems in some areas , other little things not taken care of in the original development. Planning Board Minutes January 7, 1992 Page 5 We realize Lansing has a housing shortage and would be glad to welcome new development, which we want to be very involved in. I applaud the developers not opening up the streets right now; that's a positive for us. One other concern is the sewage--how will it be accomplished? What will be the market range of these homes? Coachlight has a very difficult problem keeping anybody in the homes . We have to get in touch with landlords to do something and with Code Compliance . We don't want manufactured homes . We don't want rental property in a family neighborhood. We want to protect these people. We would be interested to see how we can become eligible for some of the Block Grant money for those who cannot upgrade on their own. We would like to work with the developer as much as possible. Mr. Foulds clarified: this neighborhood is not in the target area for Block Grant funds directly, but there are other forms of assistance through the Block Grant program which may apply to your area. Mr. Fountain added, we do not have an official response from Public Service on the sewers , but we should have by the committee meeting . When development went in there was only one parking space per unit and the Code has changed to require at least two parking spaces per residential unit , which is an improvement . Gradings will be addressed at the time of platting . The type of housing you may want to ask the developer. SCOTT BOHNET, with Ronbar. As far as size and construction of the house, we don't have any plans to do that. We will sell the property, possibly to another developer, maybe individually. Thank you. Mr. Fountain reported that DONALD COLLIN , 3562 Coachlight, called in objection to the proposal and we will be in touch with him. REFERRED TO ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE Planning Board Minutes January 7, 1992 Page 6 BUSINESS SESSION: - Approval of Minutes: Mr. Goolsby moved for approval of the December 17, 1991 minutes with one correction of the support to a motion on page 2. Mr. Barnhart seconded; APPROVED Zoning and Ordinance Committee: Floyd Wright reported that the Committee will meet Wednesday, January 15, 1992 at 2:30 p .m. in the Planning Division Conference Room. Urban Development Committee: Garry Goolsby reported that this Committee will meet at 4 p.m. Tuesday, January 14, 1992 in the Council Conference Room. Executive Committee: Ms . Horne reported the Committee did meet on January 6, 1992 with Mr. Foulds and went page by page and item by item over the Work Program for July 1 , 1992 through June 30, 1993. Corrections were mostly verbage and were minor. Mr. Wright moved for approval of the 1992-1993 Work Program as printed , which has been discussed by the Executive Committee. Ms. LeBlanc supported; APPROVED Report from Planning Director: Jim Foulds 1 ) My first item deals with the Cin-Lan request for the Deja Vu proposal. At your last meeting the Board determined that it be taken back to the Zoning and Ordinance Committee for their next meeting in January based on a revised plan from the applicant. We did receive that revised plan today. We will do our best Planning Board Minutes January 7, 1992 Page 7 to get our analysis ready for the Committee meeting , but we don't want to rush this issue. 2) BTS Development Plan. We are doing this because several years ago the State of Michigan, which owns sustantial acreage on the east side of Lansing , decided to sell that property known as parcels A, B , C and D , excluding the Naval Reserve , Army Reserve and the National Guard facilities . Appraisals were done on those parcels . The Bill in the State Legislature which would authorize the sale of this property to the private sector was basically sidetracked. In the interim an agreement was worked out based on the policy set forth in the Lansing Master Plan to develop only under the guidelines of the land use policy adopted by the City of Lansing . That policy and the interest on the part of the State of Michigan to sell this property resulted in a grant application from our Division, representing the City of Lansing , with the assistance of the Eastside Neighborhood Organization to obtain funds from the State to do a development plan for this 42 acre plus area . We hired a consultant , Howard Deardorff, Deardorff Design Associates , a Lansing based firm . The plan was developed under the auspices of a neighborhood committee appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by Council. The Committee consisted of 15 individuals composed of several groups. The first is a subcommittee of the Eastside Neighborhood Organization called the BTS Subcommittee. In addition two members of the Planning Board, the Chairperson and representative from the East Side. Also the Ward Councilman, Patrick Lindemann , plus several institutional representatives from the Lansing School District, Sparrow Hospital, and Lansing Catholic Central. The BTS Planning Committee has been meeting for twelve months to address this issue . Tonight I would like to highlight the plans and some issues the Board may be confronted with. The problem we had before us was how to allow development within this area that would benefit all stakeholders. (A presentation with graphics was given. ) The first thrust is residential housing. In addition the Plan provides for expansion possibilities under certain circumstances for Sparrow Hospital. A working group has been created called the Greater Lansing Health Education Collaborative between the City, Neighborhood, Sparrow Hospital, Lansing School District , Lansing Community College and Catholic Central . There is some joint development possibility to allow additional educational opportunities I Planning Board Minutes January 7, 1992 Page 8 for Lansing students in a facility that would exist within the Hospital complex and result in a configuration that Mr. Deardorff sketched for us. We have an expansion of facility north of Jerome onto the tennis court area and track/football/band practice area , approximately 42 acres to allow hospital functions as well as its educational functions . The thought for the district was health/career oriented programs they could target for students . The Hospital would gain space to grow and the School District would gain additional programs. The third thrust of the Committee's recommendation comes from a desire to retain as much open space in the area as possible and is an east/west pathway system to follow the green areas along the existing 100 foot right-of-way currently owned by the Lansing School District through the existing neighborhood park behind the Armory on Marshall Street through the new development, back to Shiawassee Street and eventually out to the Riverwalk system. There would be a north/south pedestrian connection system tied in with Marshall Field for pedestrian movement through the project area. The fourth component of the Plan is additional physical space that can be utilized by the Lansing School District. Parcel A, just off Pennsylvania Avenue , can be allocated to Lansing School District for recreational space that they may lose if Sparrow Hospital expands; tennis courts , softball, soccer areas, etc. Internally they will have to ask themselves if this is functionally going to work. We suggested the five year lease the School District entered with the State of Michigan be terminated. The existing building that used to be part of the Boys' Training School facility now has a state paint shop, storage area—uses that are not conducive to to what is happening there today. Eventually, our recommendation is to remove those and reuse that area either recreationally for the neighborhood or School District or allow some future expansion of School District facilities . One of the circulation recommendations made by the Committee impacts Jerome Street. The Committee suggests , and staff supports, that Jerome Street through traffic from Holmes Street east be stopped so any traffic associated with Hospital or School use be forced to use either Michigan or Pennsylvania Avenue or the streets designed to carry that traffic in the first place. That would keep non- residential traffic out of the residential area . One of the controversies was a recommendation that a portion of Lansing Catholic Planning Board Minutes January 7, 1992 Page 9 Central recreational area be developed. Several meetings were held with Lansing Catholic Central staff and their feeling was if they were going to lose playfields and that was going to be developed residentially, those playfields be replaced. The position the Committee took is if residential development is not an option , parcel C (the low area) , that residential development would be explored with Lansing Catholic Central with a possibility of relocating their playfields . So we would have a 100 foot buffer between the residential area on the south , additional housing development in the area that is currently used for Catholic Central playfields . Our feeling , from looking at costs worked out by Howard and our staff, is that no residential developer will ever want to absorb those costs . Housing development is too tough today without assuming something you don't have to. The third alternative is to allow pathway systems to be enhanced, basically to remain open space. The purpose of the hearing is to solicit input from the neighborhood. ENO is assisting us in passing out flyers . It has been advertised today. So our consultant is going to go through a slide presentation at the hearing and then we will conduct a hearing as with any master plan amendment before the Board. Then it will be referred for a recommendation of the Committee. Then we will have to take it to the BTS Planning Committee to formally transmit the document to the Board, who will refer it to the Urban Development Committee. Ms. LeBlanc questioned, are there any provisions for the community gardens to the west of Catholic Central? Mr. Foulds answered, it was the position of the Committee that if community gardens were displaced, it would be the obligation of the City to relocate those gardens somewhere reasonably within the area with a water supply. Oak Park was suggested as a possibility. There was a question as to whether the soil would accept it. Delores Wood stated: ENO has been meeting with Sparrow Hospital for over ten years about their invading our neighborhood with vehicles. Has Sparrow said anything about building a ramp? Mr. Foulds responded, I prefer to look at Sparrow Hospital as an asset for the community and neighborhood. If we can build on that asset , we're better off. Parking is a problem. They prefer surface parking . That's why they have expanded on East Michigan Avenue, purchased all that property and started the shuttle system , because it's cheaper for them to do that . Planning Board Minutes January 7, 1992 Page 10 However, if they are going to continue to thrive and be a functioning organization, they are going to have to commit to a permanent parking structure. It could be part of this building , or go west—Pennsylvania Avenue north of Michigan. The problem with it going west of Pennsylvania is it's too far away from their central function to be advantageous . Sparrow committed to putting a parking plan together in concert with the City and neighborhood prior to any action taking place north of Jerome. Board Member Comments: Helen LeBlanc: (1 ) I heard last night East Lansing decided to keep Kalamazoo Street where it goes over the Red Cedar bridge two lanes but add a pedestrian and bike lane. 2) The Michigan Historic Preservation Network spring conference is being held May 8 and 9 in Grand Rapids and is jointly sponsored by the Michigan Society of Planning Officials and the Michigan Municipal League. The topic is quality and city design. Basically they are showcasing what has been done in Grand Rapids in their historic preservation network , what they've been doing with their neighborhoods and commercial areas . Adjournment: It was moved by Ms. LeBlanc and supported by Mr. Goolsby to adjourn the meeting . The regular January 7, 1992 meeting of the Lansing Planning Board adjourned at 9 p .m. Respectfully submitt d, Jame N. Foulds, Di ctor Lanrin Planning Division WC 1