HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 Planning Board July-Sept Minutes FINAL Approved as written 11-7-07 Draft to Clerk October 11, 2007
Approved November 7, 2007
To Clerk December 7, 2007
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
1. OPENING SESSION
C
The meeting was called to order at 7.-00 p.m. by Mr. Frederick, Acting Chair.
A. Roll call: Present: Frederick, Ruge, Bruch, Williams.
B. Staff Attending: Stachowiak. rti
C. Excused absences: Cordill.
D. Absent: None.
Dr. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge to approve an excused
absence request from Ms. Cordill for tonight's meeting. On a voice vote, the
motion carried unanimously (4-0).
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Williams made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge to approve the agenda. On
a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Letter from Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP regarding Z-5-2007
concerning spot zoning.
B. Five letters of support from churches and neighbors regarding SLU-3-
2007.
4. HEARINGS
A. Ordinance Amendments — Contract Zoning
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Ann Andrews, representative of Annabelle & Associates, Inc.,
stated that they do support the ordinance and it is a very good change not
just for their project but it will add flexibility for future development of other
City projects. There are several cities who have already adopted this:
Flint, Brighton, Lincoln Park, Flat Rock, Dexter and Ann Arbor is
considering it. It is certainly something that has been supported by a wide
variety of diverse interest groups (i.e. environmental groups, Board of
Realtors, developers, Michigan townships). Overall, there has been
support and she urged the Board to pass the ordinance. She also urged
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 18, 2007 Page 2
the Board to approve the request for Annabelle's use under the conditions
of the proposed ordinance.
Ms. Marchelle Smith, representative of the City of Lansing Economic
Development Corporation, stated that early on this year her office began
working very closely with the owners of doggie day stop and they were
very excited about their business concept. Ms. Andrews and her partners
are taking careful consideration and thought in to bringing a unique type of
business that is becoming popular in many urban cities. The proposed
building is underutilized and outdated. The doggie day spa presence and
proposed renovations will bring a high end urban design and unique
image to the downtown area. The combination of a retail pet store can
offer a variety of services by creating job opportunities, business attraction
and improve the overall quality of the community. The EDC supports the
application for the rezoning and encourages the Board to act favorably.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Frederick closed the public
hearing for the Ordinance Amendments — Contract Zoning and was
referred to the Committee of the Whole for this evening.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (3 minutes each)
Seeing no one wishing to address the Board, Mr. Frederick closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was not taken by the Board.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Consent Items
1. Minutes for Approval: (Minutes will be presented for consideration
at a later date)
B. Committee Reports
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee, Mr. Ruge, Chair
a. Z-7-2007, 1030 S. Holmes Street, "B" Residential District
to "D-1" Professional Office District
This is a request by Spartan Internet Consulting Corp. to
rezone the property at 1030 S. Holmes Street, more
specifically described as:
Lots 1 through 13 inclusive & Lots 21 through 34 inclusive,
Block 11 Manufacturers Addition No 2, City of Lansing,
Ingham County, MI
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 18, 2007 Page 3
from "B" Residential District to "D-1" Professional Office
District. If approved, the applicant intends to utilize the
building at this location for an internet consulting service
(office use).
Staff recommended approval of Z-7-2007, 1030 S. Holmes
Street, "B" Residential District to "D-1" Professional Office
District.
Mr. Williams asked if there were any comments from Spartan
Internet on the partial rezoning.
Mr. Ryan Vartoogian, President of Spartan Internet Consulting
located at 115 W. Allegan Street, stated that he would like
clarification of the Parks system taking over that segment of
the property and asked if this would be maintenance or
ownership. Ms. Stachowiak stated that the Board has
recommended that from 20 feet from the existing asphalt area
that it remain zoned "B" Residential District. The Board is
stressing that not necessarily all but a good portion of that
property be donated to the City's Parks and Recreation
Department so it can remain a park for the neighborhood. She
stated that this is not a condition of the rezoning but a
recommendation from this Board.
Mr. Frederick asked what if the Parks and Recreation
Department do not take ownership of the land. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that the president of the neighborhood
association, Adam, had talked with Mr. Vargoogian about the
possibility of may be the neighborhood taking over a portion of
it. Mr. Vartoogian stated the company's intentions are to
retain all of the green space and to look at potentially moving
or extending the play equipment further from the parking area.
This is both from a safety perspective as well as an area
perspective.
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Dr. Bruch, to recommend approval of
Z-7-2007, 1030 S. Holmes Street, "B" Residential District to "D-1" Professional
Office District.
Frederick Ave Ruge. Ave
Bruch Ave Williams Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 18, 2007 Page 4
b. SLU-3-2007, 209 N. Walnut Street, Special Land Use
Permit— Church
This is a request by Samina Shahabuddin for a Special Land
Use permit to utilize a portion of the building at 209 N. Walnut
Street for church services. The proposed church would
accommodate up to 20 parishioners. Churches are permitted
in the "D-1" Professional Office district, which is the
designation of the property at 209 N. Walnut Street, if a
Special Land Use permit is approved by the Lansing City
Council.
Staff recommended approval of SLU-3-2007, 209 N. Walnut
Street, Special Land Use Permit — Church, with the following
conditions:
1. The occupancy of the church is limited to 20 individuals;
2. All church activities, meetings, classes and services occur
only during those hours that the office(s) in the building
are not in operation; and
3. That there be 2 street trees in front of the building.
Mr. Williams asked if the street trees would be facing Walnut
Street. Mr. Ruge said yes and that they would be between the
curb and the sidewalk.
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Dr. Bruch, to recommend approval of
SLU-3-2007, 209 N. Walnut Street, Special Land Use Permit — Church, with the
following conditions: 1) The occupancy of the church is limited to 20 individuals;
2) All church activities, meetings, classes and services occur only during those
hours that the office(s) in the building are not in operation; and 3) That there be 2
street trees in front of the building.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge. . . Ave
Bruch Ave Williams Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
Next meeting, Wednesday, October 10, 2007, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Cordill, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, September 25, 2007, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 18, 2007 Page 5
Mr. Williams made a motion, seconded by Dr. Bruch to dissolve into the Committee of
the Whole. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
3a. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
a. Z-5-2007, 600 S. Capitol Avenue, "D-1" Professional Office
District to "F-1" Commercial District
This is a request by Annabelle & Associates, Inc. to rezone the
property at 600 S. Capitol Avenue, more specifically described
as:
Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block 159 Original Plat, City of Lansing,
Ingham County, MI
from "D-1" Professional Office District to "F-1" Commercial
District. If approved, the applicant intends to construct an
addition to the building, improve the parking area and
establish a day care center for dogs with some rooms
available in the lower level for overnight care of dogs.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that the Board's recommendation is
that this request be approved under the contract zoning. If
City Council does not accept the contract zoning, then the
Board's recommendation is to deny the rezoning without the
contract.
Dr. Bruch stated that she visited the site and there is a
retaining wall on the northwest wall, issues with trees, a shed,
and it is a whole sea of asphalt out there. She asked if any of
these things will be dealt with during site plan review. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that it will have to go through site plan
review because the applicant is proposing a huge addition on
to the building. In this case, the only buffer requirements will
be along the street frontage.
Mr. Ruge asked if a building of this size and this use needs to
have all that parking. Ms. Stachowiak stated that there will be
so many different activities in this building: daycare, overnight
care, grooming and the pet store. With the addition, they will
probably need it just to meet the City's requirements and there
is a little bit of flexibility in the ordinance from a staff
standpoint. If the applicant is willing to convert some of these
parking spaces to landscape islands, the Planning Office
would be willing to make that exchange.
Dr. Bruch strongly recommended that landscape islands be
added and some of the asphalt be removed.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 18, 2007 Page 6
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Williams to recommend approval of
Z-5-2007, 600 S. Capitol Avenue, "D-1" Professional Office District to "F-1"
Commercial District under contract zoning for this use only, with the
recommendation that the applicant work with staff to reduce parking in exchange
for landscaping. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
b. Ordinance Amendments — Contract Zoning
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview and stated that all
proposals will have to be reviewed by the Planning Board.
Mr. Frederick is pleased to see this happening and it will give
the Board a lot more flexibility in the business that they have
done. It will certainly untie their hands in a lot of the things the
Board has had to address.
Dr. Bruch stated that her concern is that this would sit with the
Law Office. Ms. Stachowiak stated that it will not because this
is a hot issue with the EDC and the administration regarding
the rezoning case at 600 S. Capital. Since the two have to
progress together, this will move quickly.
Mr. Williams asked if the Mayor's Office is in support of this
ordinance amendment. Ms. Stachowiak said yes.
Mr. Williams made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to recommend approval of
Ordinance Amendments — Contract Zoning. On a voice vote, the motion carried
unanimously (4-0).
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge to arise from Committee of the
Whole. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (4-0).
3b. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
a. Z-5-2007, 600 S. Capitol Avenue, "D-1" Professional Office
District to "F-1" Commercial District
This is a request by Annabelle & Associates, Inc. to rezone the
property at 600 S. Capitol Avenue, more specifically described
as:
Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block 159 Original Plat, City of Lansing,
Ingham County, MI
from "D-1" Professional Office District to "F-1" Commercial
District. If approved, the applicant intends to construct an
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 18, 2007 Page 7
addition to the building, improve the parking area and
establish a day care center for dogs with some rooms
available in the lower level for overnight care of dogs.
Dr. Bruch gave a brief overview.
Dr. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Mr. Williams, to recommend approval of
Z-5-2007, 600 S. Capitol Avenue, "D-1" Professional Office District to "F-1"
Commercial District.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge. . . Aye
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Bruch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried, unanimous.
Approved.
b. Ordinance Amendments — Contract Zoning
Dr. Bruch gave a brief overview.
Dr. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Mr. Williams, to recommend approval of
Ordinance Amendments — Contract Zoning.
Frederick . . Aye Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Bruch . . Aye Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 4; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
4. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
C. Old Business — None.
D. Report from Planning Manager— None.
E. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-2006, 310/312 Chestnut
b. Z-3-2006,W. Edgewood
c. Z-17-2005, Polly& Benjamin
d. Z-12-2006& SLU-7-2006 2727 Lyons Avenue
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Master Plan Project
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 18, 2007 Page 8
8. NEW BUSINESS — None.
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON — None.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Dr. Bruch asked about the status of the letters from the last meeting. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that she would check with Mr. Rieske.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS — None.
a. Dollar Store-Willow Street&MLK Blvd.- landscaping&buffering (May 20, 2003)
b. Grovenburg property-dumpster in ROW(July 1, 2003)
c. 2714 W. Jolly Road-church with large statue in front yard (January 20, 2004)
d. W.Willow Street- Grace Tabernacle Church-no landscaping (May 4, 2004)
e. Michigan Ave& Shepard Street-sign business-several banner signs nailed to the outside of building
(May 4, 2004)
f. 2702 S. Cedar Street-no landscaping (May 18, 2004)
g. 2410 S. Pennsylvania Ave.-no landscaping (November 3, 2004)
h. 2200 W. Holmes Road- Bad Habits-excessive signs(May 3, 2005)
i. 2618 Cavanaugh Road. - registered rental&front yard paved, used for parking (October 4,2005)
j. Keeps Party Store-Aurelius Road-illegal signs (July 5, 2006, July 18, 2006& September 5, 2006)
k. Clarion Hotel—two big signs advertising Great Lakes Condominiums (December 5, 2006)
I. The Firm—review requirements for fenced outdoor patio(December 5, 2006)
m. 928 Pacific Ave.—6 foot fence in front yard on a corner lot(February 6, 2007)
n. 4311 S. Cedar Str.—barber shop in a residential neighborhood& illegal signs (April 3, 2007)
o. 1409 Eureka Str.—large hole in roof of the porch (July 17, 2007)
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
William C. Rieske, Secretary, Planning Board
PBMinutes.091807.doc
Approved as written 11-7-07 Draft to Clerk October 3,2007
Approved November 7, 2007
To Clerk December 7,2007
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers -'
Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, September 4, 2007 �...:?
1. OPENING SESSION
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mr. Frederick, Acting Coair.`:' -
N
.: CJ
A. Roll call: Present: Frederick, Ruge, Bruch, Cordill, Williams.
B. Staff Attending: Stachowiak, Rieske.
C. Excused absences: None.
D. Absent: None.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Dr. Bruch to approve the agenda. On a
voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Letter of opposition from Vernon J. & Grace M. Andrews regarding
SLU-3-2007
4. HEARINGS
A. Z-7-2007, 1030 S. Holmes Street, "B" Residential District to "D-1"
Professional Office District
This is a request by Spartan Internet Consulting Corp. to rezone the
property at 1030 S. Holmes Street, more specifically described as:
Lots 1 through 13 inclusive & Lots 21 through 34 inclusive, Block 11
Manufacturers Addition No 2, City of Lansing, Ingham County, MI
from "B" Residential District to "D-1" Professional Office District. If
approved, the applicant intends to utilize the building at this location for an
internet consulting service (office use).
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Dr. Bruch asked if the issue of losing the play space and open space had
been figured out. Ms. Stachowiak stated that the neighborhood
association president is in the audience tonight. 'To her knowledge, the
neighborhood has not come forward to the school district asking to
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2007 Page 2
purchase this property. They have worked with this particular applicant or
at least are aware of this applicant's plans for this property and are
supportive of the proposal. Dr. Bruch stated that she dislikes the passing
of the open space into private hands rather than public hands. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that the City does not have the resources to maintain
its existing parks let alone take on any others. As far as the neighborhood
is concerned, the property is available to them for purchase just as it is to
Spartan Internet Consulting. Dr. Bruch asked if there is anything that the
Board can do to have the City look into this issue because this will happen
more and more as schools continue to go this route of getting redone as to
separating the open space from the building and splitting the lots.
Whether it stays school property and the school district continues to
maintain it without having the building. Ms. Stachowiak stated that she
does not believe that the school district is really interested in doing it. Dr.
Bruch stated that this may actually be the best use for the public. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that she could talk with the school district and see if
they are receptive to this. She can do this before the next meeting.
Mr. Rieske stated that the open space issue would be able to be
addressed under a contract zoning situation and that another possibility is
to have that open space remain "A" Residential District. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that it still does not make it available to the public. It keeps it as a
fenced in green space.
Mr. Ryan Vartoogian, President of Spartan Internet Consulting,
located at 115 W. Allegan Street, stated that they are in the process of
working with the City of Lansing Economic Development Corporation,
faculty from Michigan State University and the neighborhood association
to help develop the Holmes Street School into the future headquarters of
Spartan Internet Consulting. They are also developing a technology
center for the mid-Michigan region as an outreach program to youth within
the City to educate them on the fields of information technology as well as
career opportunities. This is in response to a growing shortage in
enrollment within computer science and computer engineering fields
nation wide. This is a win situation for the City of Lansing.
Mr. Vartoogian added that he had already purchased the property and that
the purchase agreement has been approved with the school district.
Mr. Adam Pitcher, resident of 1052 Parker Street and President of the
Holmes Street School Neighborhood Association, stated that the
neighborhood has come together with overwhelming potential since they
last talked with the Board. The neighborhood wants to ensure the growth
and productivity. The neighborhood association's request with the Holmes
Street School is to require a purchaser who will enhance the area and
protect the precious green space. They believe that Spartan Internet
Consulting will do both. He stated that Spartan Internet Consulting has
agreed to work with the neighborhood on developing creative solutions to
help this area along with the surrounding areas. They have assured the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2007 Page 3
residents that the green space can be worked out so that most of it can be
preserved for its original intent. The City of Lansing has assured the
residents that they too are committed in finding a way to retain the green
space for the neighborhood use. The neighborhood is very excited about
this endeavor and support this purchase.
Mr. Mike Jones, resident of 1222 Climax Street, stated that he was in
favor of the previous proposal by Teen Challenge. He is disappointed and
he comes as a resident of a neighborhood that is not supportive of this
proposal. He thinks that people were intimidated by the Mayor's Office the
last time. He stated that it was the Mayor's Office that held up the
purchase of this property until the purchase offer was expired and Teen
Challenge chose not to go through that process a second time. He was
disappointed that the Mayor's Office held up the request after the Planning
Board and majority of the City Council members showed support of the
proposal. He is still quite troubled about how the past proposal fell by the
wayside. He wished that the Planning Board or City Council had
challenged the Mayor's Office after what appeared to be deliberately
holding up the request until after the offer had expired. If there is going to
be an integrated response to green space, he has not seen it sorted
through yet. He wished that it would have been thought of ahead of time
and presented instead of residents wishing that the City would do one
thing or another. They would like to see something more concrete
presented. He hopes that the Board can set the pace for it and the
residents can read that as more encouraging for the future direction of
projects like this.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Frederick closed the public
hearing for Z-7-2007, 1030 S. Holmes Street, "B" Residential District to
"D-1" Professional Office District and was referred to the next Zoning
and Ordinance Committee meeting scheduled to meet September 18,
2007 at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room at 124 W.
Michigan Avenue.
B. SLU-3-2007, 209 N. Walnut Street, Special Land Use Permit - Church
This is a request by Samina Shahabuddin for a Special Land Use permit
to utilize a portion of the building at 209 N. Walnut Street for church
services. The proposed church would accommodate up to 20
parishioners. Churches are permitted in the "D-V Professional Office
district, which is the designation of the property at 209 N. Walnut Street, if
a Special Land Use permit is approved by the Lansing City Council.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Dr. Bruch asked if the Board could get information when they next meet
regarding other churches in the area and local bars in the area. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that this church is nowhere near any bars and that she
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2007 Page 4
could have this information for the next meeting.
Reverend Carin Bowes, applicant, stated that this zoning would be most
appropriate with the services being offered. Although they do have twelve
other centers around the country, most of those properties are zoned
commercial and residential because they have people who live in them
and they also offer classes to the public. She stated that this has worked
well too, and the church is a more appropriate zoning for the services that
they offer. They have classes on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday
evenings and these classes are all outside of their office hours, typically
starting between 7:00 p.m. and 7:30 p.m., and services on Sunday
mornings outside of office hours. This would not conflict at all with any
parking situations and they have already spoken with the renter of the
social equity office who rents below their office. They are fine with what
the church has and it will not be conflicting with their work. She sees this
a being a win-win situation and with being around other churches in the
area that they are only bringing light and opportunities for people to
deepen their experiences with having peace in their lives. It is all for the
purpose of helping people.
Mr. Ruge asked if the church will have pews or seats. Reverend Bowes
stated that the church will have seats and would accommodate up to 20
people.
Ms. Monica Zuchowski, resident of 320 N. Walnut Street and
President of the Downtown Neighborhood Association (DNA), stated
that the DNA is not taking a position on the proposal but does have some
questions. She asked about the Sunday morning services and if the
spaces on Walnut Street will be packed for St. Mary's. She stated that
this will be a parking conflict on the street on Sunday mornings. With the
site description, there are seven off street parking spaces to the rear and
two more along the north side of the building. The letter shows that there
are nine parking spaces in the back of the building and three extra one
rented from the building from 215 N. Walnut. She stated that the DNA
would like to know how many spaces there are.
She mentioned getting input from the churches within the two block radius
(i.e. St. Paul's Christian United Methodist, St. Mary's Catholic Church, the
Baptist Church and the Presbyterian Church). She stated that it would be
interesting to hear their comments and also if anyone has commented on
the color of the building. She has heard from a number of people in the
neighborhood that it is the most vivid blue color and it really stands out. It
does not blend in with the neighborhood which has more subdued colors.
She stated that there are some people in the community who are not
thrilled with the color of the building.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Frederick closed the public
hearing for SLU-3-2007, 209 N. Walnut Street, Special Land Use Permit
— Church and was referred to the next Zoning and Ordinance Committee
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2007 Page 5
meeting scheduled to meet September 18, 2007 at 6:30 p.m. in the City
Council Conference Room at 124 W. Michigan Avenue.
Mr. Ruge asked if the other churches would have been notified. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that the churches within 300 feet would have been
notified and this included the First Presbyterian Church and St. Mary's
Catholic Church.
Ms. Cordill asked if state-owned parking lots were available for those
coming into the downtown area for parking on Sundays. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that they can get a lease from the State of Michigan to use it.
Ms. Zuchowski stated that the State parking lots are generally open in the
evenings and on the weekends. The Legislative parking lots are closed if
the Legislature is still in session. This would mean the Capitol lot, the
Ferris parking lot and the Roosevelt Building. The Capitol lot is open if the
legislature is not in session after 5:00 p.m. and the Roosevelt Building is
open primarily for the use of the three churches in that block. They were
the only three churches (St. Paul's, Central United Methodist Church and
the Baptist Church) that wanted to enter in an agreement with the State of
Michigan. Those three churches are allowed to use the Roosevelt
Building parking structure in the evenings and on the weekends. She
believes that building is locked down at either 10:00 p.m. or 10:30 p.m.
St. Mary's church was not interested in entering into an arrangement.
Those parking do pay a nominal fee to the State of Michigan for using the
Roosevelt building structure. If the gates are up, people can use the
parking lots.
Mr. Frederick inquired about the number of parking spaces that are
actually on the property and if the applicant meets the requirements. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that the applicant does not meet the requirements. It is
currently non-conforming and can remain this way. Staff would need to
figure out if the applicant would meet the requirements with the 20 parking
spaces plus the residential units they have there. The applicant would
need 6 to 7 parking spaces just for the church itself. Staff will need to
figure out how many bedrooms are in each one of the residential units
because they will need to have their own parking spaces. These parking
spaces will need to be in addition to what the church needs. What usually
happens in these situations is they are capped on their occupancy for the
church at the available parking.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (3 minutes each)
Ms. Sahrina Shahabuddin, representative of Center of Light, stated that with
the current parking situation, there are nine parking spots: seven in the back and
two on the side. They are renting three parking spots from the building next door
at 215 N. Walnut. This gives the church 12 parking spots. The two residential
units that are currently there, they are in the process of renovating and converting
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2007 Page 6
them into a one unit where the ministers are going to be living. It is not another
two or more rental spaces that are going to need parking spots. It is the church.
Seeing no one else wishing to address the Board, Mr. Frederick closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was taken by the Board.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Consent Items
1. Minutes for Approval: (Minutes will be presented for consideration
at a later date)
2. UDC Report
a. ACT-12-2007, Flowage Easement for Soundwall Project
Dr. Bruch asked about having the soundwall only on the west
when all the sound is now going to bounce to the east side.
Now the ease side will be noisier. Mr. Rieske stated that
would be a question for MDOT. Dr. Bruch asked if MDOT
could answer it. She stated that the sound walls do not get
rid of the noise. The noise bounces and now the middle of
the neighborhood will hear more of it.
Ms. Cordill stated that she wondered why MDOT stopped the
sound wall further to the north and did not go south of
Saginaw Street. It does not immediately impact her but she
knows that there are streets, Fernwood Avenue and Lee
Blvd, where a ramp is right there. She was wondering why
MDOT did not address that one. Mr. Rieske stated that he
could ask for some information regarding that project and
provide this at the next meeting.
Dr. Bruch asked if the Board is supposed to receive
information before the projects begin. Mr. Rieske stated that
this is an issue. In this case, they found that they were
putting water on to the Board of Water and Light property and
they wanted an easement. They have the right to do that.
This is not much of a Planning issue because the planning
has already been done on the project. MDOT is not
responsible to the City for submitting the plans. He stated
that it would be nice to have coordination all around but it
does not always happen.
Mr. Williams stated that this was an appropriate time to let the
Board know that, as an employee of MDOT and working in
the Executive Office, he will refrain from discussion and
abstain from voting on this matter.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2007 Page 7
Mr. Frederick stated that since this is a consent item, the only
way to have a vote is if there would be an objection and he
has not heard any objections to allowing MDOT to let water
flow on BWL property. It is going to be a control flow and not
a flood. They just want the right to drain the water from one
side of the property to the other.
Dr. Bruch stated that she had an objection to the letter MDOT
sent and that it said MDOT has the right to remove trees as
necessary. The part not added back in is replacing those
trees. She stated that the minute a tree is cut it impacts the
area. She requested that if trees are cut down, they be
replaced to mitigate that impact. Mr. Rieske stated that the
Planning Office will forward this request as a further
recommendation.
APPROVED w/o Objections.
b. Michigan School for the Blind Historic District Study
Committee Preliminary Report
APPROVED w/o Objections.
C. Riverbend/Whitehall Neighborhood Enterprise Zone (NEZ)
APPROVED w/o Objections.
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, September 18, 2007, at 6:30 p.m.
124 W. Michigan Avenue, City Council Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Cordill, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, September 25, 2007, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
3. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
4. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2007 Page 8
C. Old Business — None.
D. Report from Planning Manager— None.
E. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-2006, 310/312 Chestnut
b. Z-3-2006,W. Edgewood
c. Z-17-2005, Polly& Benjamin
d. Z-12-2006&SLU-7-2006 2727 Lyons Avenue
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Master Plan Project
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
8. NEW BUSINESS — None.
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON — None.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Ms. Cordill stated that it was brought up in the public hearing about the reuse of
the Holmes Street School and the Mayor postponing a decision. She would like
for it to be clear that the Board did not influence that request. The Planning
Board held a hearing, made a decision and forwarded the recommendation to the
City Council Office. It almost sounded like it was a little tainted and she did not
want any appearance of that.
Mr. Williams stated that with the special land use permit for the church on Walnut
Street, he asked if there was a mechanism in place to solicit comment from the
other neighborhood churches that have not already been informed of this
proposal. Mr. Rieske stated that the Planning Office will need to ask them and
make that connection. Mr. Williams stated that as someone who used to live in
that neighborhood and spent time downtown on Sundays, there are parking
issues from time to time, and he would like to hear some comments from the
other churches in the neighborhood. They may not have anything to add but he
would like to give them the option to make a statement.
Dr. Bruch asked about notification to the Law Office regarding the Board's
outstanding issues. There are some issues over a year old that have not been
addressed. Can the Board respectfully write a letter to request that these issues
be addressed and continue until there is progress. She stated that the Board
needs to move forward on these.
Dr. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to continually connect with the
Law Office regarding the Board's outstanding requests and that these requests
be addressed. Mr. Ruge suggested that the letter should have a list of the items
that the Board is interested in. He is hesitant to send the Law Office two letters a
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2007 Page 9
month because it would be intolerable. He recommended sending one letter
every six months because it would be much more effective. Mr. Williams asked if
it would be appropriate to ask someone from the Law Office to make presentation
before the next Board meeting as to an update on outstanding issues. Mr.
Rieske stated that the idea of putting repeated requests dilutes the Board's
credibility and effectiveness. The Law Office attends City Council meetings and
having someone attend a Planning Board meeting may not be effective, but he
can certainly ask. Mr. Williams asked about a written update. Mr. Rieske stated
that a written update may be possible. This was accepted as a friendly
amendment. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Dr. Bruch inquired about additional Board members and asked if the hold up was
in the Mayor's Office or if diversity is not currently available in the pool of
applicants. Mr. Rieske stated that the Board appointments are basically at the
purview of the Mayor's Office and he has talked with them about it.
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Dr. Bruch to request a written update
from the Mayor's Office regarding miscellaneous items including ordinances and
the status of filling Board vacancies. On a voice vote, the motion carried
unanimously (5-0).
Dr. Bruch asked about an update on the Master Plan. Mr. Rieske stated that it
can be done at the Urban Development Committee or during Committee of the
Whole meetings.
Dr. Bruch stated that she will not be able to attend the Zoning and Ordinance
Committee meetings because she teaches until 6:00 p.m. on Wednesdays.
Dr. Bruch inquired about how many schools are currently vacant and how many
in the future may be going through this. There are five playgrounds that are no
longer available to the neighborhoods and Lansing was already short of
playgrounds in neighborhoods. In the past, the planning was well done to make
sure that there were playgrounds in neighborhoods. Mr. Rieske stated he would
have to look into the matter.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS — None.
a. Dollar Store-Willow Street&MILK Blvd. -landscaping&buffering (May 20, 2003)
b. Grovenburg property-dumpster in ROW(July 1,2003)
c. 2714 W. Jolly Road-church with large statue in front yard (January 20, 2004)
d. W.Willow Street-Grace Tabernacle Church-no landscaping (May 4, 2004)
e. Michigan Ave& Shepard Street-sign business-several banner signs nailed to the outside of building
(May 4, 2004)
f. 2702 S. Cedar Street- no landscaping (May 18, 2004)
g. 2410 S. Pennsylvania Ave. -no landscaping (November 3, 2004)
h. 2200 W. Holmes Road- Bad Habits-excessive signs(May 3, 2005)
i. 2618 Cavanaugh Road. - registered rental &front yard paved, used for parking (October 4,2005)
j. Keeps Party Store-Aurelius Road-illegal signs(July 5, 2006, July 18, 2006& September 5, 2006)
k. Clarion Hotel—two big signs advertising Great Lakes Condominiums (December 5, 2006)
I. The Firm—review requirements for fenced outdoor patio (December 5, 2006)
m. 928 Pacific Ave.—6 foot fence in front yard on a corner lot(February 6,2007)
n. 4311 S. Cedar Str.—barber shop in a residential neighborhood & illegal signs (April 3, 2007)
o. 1409 Eureka Str.—large hole in roof of the porch (July 17, 2007)
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES September 4, 2007 Page 10
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
t
William C. Rieske, Secretary, Planning Board
PBMinutes.090407.doc
Approved as written 11-7-07 Draft to Clerk September 19, 2007
Approved November 7, 2007
To Clerk December 7,2007
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers ``' c71
7,0
Lansing City Hall c ` ' r
Tuesday, August 21, 2007 < — r7"i
1. OPENING SESSION
r-�
The meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Mr. Frederick, Acting Chair.6.)
A. Roll call: Present: Frederick, Ruge, Bruch, Cordill, Williams.
B. Staff Attending: Stachowiak, Rieske.
C. Excused absences: None.
D. Absent: None.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Dr. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to approve the agenda as
amended. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Ms. Stachowiak stated that under the Committee of the Whole, ACT-4-2007
should be removed because the case is under the Urban Development
Committee and will have action taken at that time.
3. COMMUNICATIONS
A. Letter of support from Addiss and Associates regarding Z-6-2007 &
PRD-2-2007
B. Letter of opposition from Sandi Finley regarding Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-2007
C. Letter of opposition from Judith D. Hill regarding Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-2007
D. Letter of opposition from Ann Kostin-McGill regarding SLU-2-2007
E. Letter of opposition from Amy & Joe Johnson regarding Z-6-2007 &
PRD-2-2007
F. Letter of opposition from Paula Houseman regarding Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-
2007
G. Letter of opposition from Robert Nelson regarding Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-2007
H. Letter of opposition with attachments from Sandi Finley regarding
Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-2007
I. Letter of opposition from Kathleen Pease regarding Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-
2007
J. Letter of opposition from Virginia Sue Johnson regarding Z-6-2007 &
PRD-2-2007
K. Letter of opposition from Nancy Wireman regarding Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-
2007
L. Letter of support from the Lansing Economic Development Office
regarding Z-5-2007
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21 2007 Page 2
M. Letter of opposition from Clark Hill on behalf of Michigan Manufacturers
Association regarding Z-5-2007
N. Letter of opposition from Linda Appling regarding Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-2007
O. Letter of opposition from Judith Terbrack regarding Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-
2007
P. Letter from Lawrence Franklin requesting information regarding Z-6-2007
& PRD-2-2007
Q. Petition in opposition to Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-2007
4. HEARINGS
A. Z-4-2007, Vacant Lot - Trudy Lane, "A" Residential District to "C"
Residential District
This is a request by Robert Beagan to rezone the vacant lot located
directly north of 2724 Trudy Lane, more specifically described as:
Commencing 360 Feet West & 200 Feet South of Northeast Corner
of West % of Southeast 114, Thence South 100 Feet, West 29 7.3 7
Feet, North 100 Feet, East 297.37 Feet to Beginning; Section 26 T4N
R2W, City of Lansing, Ingham County, MI
from "A" Residential District to "C" Commercial District. If approved, the
applicant intends to construct a duplex on the subject property.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Mr. Robert Beagan, resident of 1850 Dennison Road, East Lansing,
stated that he did not have anything and would be willing to answer any
questions the Board may have.
Mr. Al Diaz, resident of 2900 Forest Road, stated that he has concerns
with the size, 100 ft. wide by 300 ft. deep, and is not sure how the
applicant will fit this particular building in this area. There are three homes
on this street and this building would be a good divider between the
condominiums and the neighborhood. He believes that the duplex will be
too tight for this particular area as far as parking. He asked if the applicant
will build a dividing fence. He stated that it is just nice to have that divider
between the houses and the condominiums. He is concerned about
privacy, getting the building to fit properly on the parcel, and drainage. He
stated that he is opposed to the proposal.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Frederick closed the public
hearing for Z-4-2007, Vacant Lot - Trudy Lane, "A" Residential District
to "C" Residential District and referred it to the Committee of the Whole
for this evening.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 3
B. Z-5-2007, 600 S. Capitol Avenue, "D-1" Professional Office District to
"F-1" Commercial District
This is a request by Annabelle & Associates, Inc. to rezone the property at
600 S. Capitol Avenue, more specifically described as:
Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block 159 Original Plat, City of Lansing, Ingham
County, MI
from "D-1" Professional Office District to "F-1" Commercial District. If
approved, the applicant intends to construct an addition to the building,
improve the parking area and establish a day care center for dogs with
some rooms available in the lower level for overnight care of dogs.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Dr. Bruch asked about other uses permitted under the "F-1" Commercial
District, if the applicant decided to sell the property. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that the "F-1" District would allow a lot of other uses: any type of
restaurant including fast food, any type of office and retail, gas stations
and car sales.
Ms. Ann Andrews, resident of 1390 Haslett Road, Williamston, stated
that she and her partners, Angela Brown and Robin Hiar, are proposing to
build a downtown, very high end daycare and spa, kind of like a Douglas
J. Academy for dogs. This is the atmosphere they are trying to create.
She believes that the business is good for the downtown for three
reasons: 1) They will add at least 15 jobs to the downtown area; 2) They
will invest on a corner that needs beautification. They will put $1.7 million
into this project. She has a photo of how the site will look when it is
finished. She believes that this will improve property values in this area;
and 3) They intend to offer evening seminars, training and other types of
events (i.e. guest speakers who will draw people to the downtown area in
the evenings and on weekends and make the City a more lively spot).
She believes that this is important because it adds to the "big city" attitude
and lends some sophistication to City.
She stated that doggie daycares and spas are sprouting up all over and
they have been very, very successful in many parts of the country. She
thinks Lansing deserves one and ought to have one.
She stated that the market that is available for bringing people downtown
is huge. There are about 28,000 people who work in the downtown area,
and according to national statistics, 44.8 percent of them have dogs. This
means that just for people who work downtown, the market is 12,500
people. If all of Ingham County was included, there would be about
277,000 people, with 44.8 percent of them have dogs. This would mean
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 4
there are 124,050 people who would be drawn to events happening
downtown. This would certainly improve downtown's economy.
She stated that the pet industry is growing by leaps and bounds. The
recent Pet Manufacturers Association puts the industry as a whole at
$40.8 billion. The national market for just high end care is $2.7 billion.
She does see this as a boom for downtown Lansing.
She stated that there are concerns about noise, odor, traffic and
aesthetics. With respect to the noise, they have a three part plan to abate
any noise that would be coming from the facility. They will use sound
absorbing materials and keep the dogs occupied. The space downstairs
that will be used for the suites are large, at least 80 square feet and each
of them will have a television which does keep the dogs occupied and not
barking. They will also have a security wall around the building that will
buffer any further noise that might emanate. On Sunday, they had a bark
fest in the parking lot. There were nine dogs and they got them riled up
and barking. They took the decibel readings very close up and it was at
approximately 94 to 95 decibels which is pretty loud. By the time
someone gets to the MMA and stands outside their front door, the decibel
reading was about 64 to 65 without the security wall. This is about normal
conversation. Their building is up high and the MMA building is down low
and therefore, there is a natural barrier right there. With St. Joe Hwy.,
every time a car or truck went by, the decibel meter hit between 72 and 74
decibels. This was more noise than what nine barking dogs would cause.
The protection that they have already put there will more than abate any
noise problems that could possibly exist.
She stated that she does not believe that there will be a problem with
feces. She is a member of the American Boarding and Kennel
Association and the standard is double pack all the dog droppings and put
them in a dumpster. They will do better than that. They will double bag all
of the feces and go into a sealed container within their security area and it
will only be trolleyed out at the time the dumpster will be picked up. In any
event, they calculated that they would only be generating about 3.3
gallons a day which is not that much to take care of.
With traffic, they have a very innovative way to move people in. There will
be a drop off service and they will take care of each car as it comes
around. They will have plenty of time during the rush hour to get 40 to 50
dogs in without any trouble.
Lastly, the new zoning statute, MCL 125.3405, allows this body to
recommend and the City Council to adopt conditions that they volunteer.
They will volunteer to have the City put conditions on their property that it
can only be used for this doggie daycare and spa and other than that, it
will revert back to Professional Office. They will also allow the City to add
any recommendations regarding the ambient noise levels so that it will not
exceed the regular ambient noise levels of the neighboring properties.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 5
Mr. Roger Thornburg, resident of 3961 Raven Circle, Okemos, stated
that he supports the proposal. His office is located at 611 S. Capitol and
has been there for over 30 years. There are apartments in the area with
tenants who have dogs. He has had this property for lease for offices for
over two years. They need the kind of innovative, adaptive re-use and
planning that helps them to be more like Old Town, ReoTown and more
like the Stadium District. They need a lot of help in this neighborhood.
There are four out of five buildings for sale on his block and have been
vacant for years in some instances. What is being proposed is not only
good for the neighborhood but very good for Lansing.
He stated that he just ran into Pat Gillespie, developer for the Prudden
building. Mr. Gillespie indicated that they have a number of
condominiums selling for $297,000 and apartments renting for $1,200. To
him, this is staggering in Lansing. These residents are pet people and
have pets. They need and want these kinds of services. He stated that
these are the sorts of things that he thinks are innovative, like Ann Arbor
and Grand Rapids. These are places that have really built a city. He has
lived and worked downtown for a really long time and he is proud to be
from Lansing. The City needs help, particularly on south Capitol Avenue.
They have tried a lot of things. He believes that the applicant will make
this area better for the neighborhood and bring a lot to the City. These are
amenities that the downtown people need. They don't just want people
downtown from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The City has had this for a long
time. There is currently an inordinate amount of office vacancies. When
people who are as innovative as Ms. Andrews and try to help this City and
put this kind of time and effort in to it, he certainly thinks that not only is it
good for the City, they are to be commended for what they are doing. No
one is closer to this building than he is. He has looked at it for 26 years.
He is looking forward to what Ms. Andrews is contemplating and the
improvement to the neighborhood and the community.
Mr. Paul Novak, resident of 1132 S. Genesee Drive and representative
of the Michigan Manufacturing Association (MMA), stated that he is a
proud Lansing resident and dog owner. He stated that the MMA would
like to register their objection to the proposal. This is a spot zone. The
adjacent properties to the north, south, east and west of this property are
zoned "D-1" Professional Office District and what is being proposed is a
more intensive use of an "F-1" designation for this particular property. The
MMA has essentially four concerns: 1) Disposal of waste and the
potential odor issues that will be associated with this type of use; 2) Noise
issues; 3) Safety; and 4) Traffic.
There will be outdoor dog areas. The adjacent property, MMA, is
designed to be a welcoming center for various industries not only
throughout the country but throughout the world who would be coming to
Lansing to hear how the city has a business environment that is conducive
to manufacturing and business investment. What they are looking for is
some indication of what the regulatory climate is like in Michigan and
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 6
whether they would be able to invest in this state and bring jobs to this
state. What they will be by is an adjacent land use with barking dogs and
particularly in these hot summer months, a very nasty odor issue.
Irrespective of whether conditions could be placed on the proposal and he
questions whether they would be enforceable, the damage would have
been done when those entities and individuals come into the MMA's
facility and get that type of enduring, mental impression of the city of
Lansing.
With safety, there is a concern considering there are approximately 43
dogs on average per day that are projected to be coming in to the facility
and the possibility of one or two dogs getting loose.
There are traffic considerations that could be associated not only with this
facility but with any use from an expanded and more intensive "F-V use
for the property.
In section 1268.03 of the City's ordinance, it has specific setback
requirements for the operation of a kennel. He thinks that this would be
an operation of a kennel. Among those, there would be at least 400 feet
from any lot line. If there is an outside exercise run, that the property be
not less than 10 acres. He thinks that this violates both of those
provisions as well and would consequently constitute a non-conforming
use. He looks forward to have more discussions with the applicant about
the proposal. The MMA's position is that this particular rezoning proposal
should be opposed.
Mr. Brigham Smith, resident of 314 Memphis Street, stated that he
forwarded a recommendation letter from the EDC Office. He spoke with
Mr. Bob Trezise and the EDC Office is on board and in favor of this
proposal. Mr. Bob Johnson and Mr. Bob Trezise have been excited about
the prospect of redevelopment along this cooridor and seeing something
new develop here. He wanted to make sure that the Planning Board took
a look at the EDC's recommendation as it considers this application.
Mr. Don Morrison, resident of 9920 Sunrise Drive, Pinckney, MI,
stated that stated that he is a business owner in Lansing and have been
for the past 10 years. He has been in and out of the city for the last 20
years. He stated that the doggie daycare is not really in the vocabulary
here. It is a spa. Doggie spas are all over Ann Arbor, MI and the
residents here in Lansing should be accepting this with open arms.
As a business owner, he feels that it will draw in people to the downtown
area. Downtown Lansing needs to be revitalized. His business is in
downtown Lansing and it is a shame at 5:00 p.m. when you do not see
people walking down the street. It is this type of thing that he firmly
believes is another aspect of the business of downtown and it will help
revitalize the area. In Ann Arbor, when they talk about spas, people come
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 7
from miles and mile to bring their animals there. He thinks this is real
important.
He spoke with Mr. Gillespie, people are spending $297,000 for a
condominium in downtown Lansing and they have pets. As someone
looks at Lansing as a whole, he would love to see it like Ann Arbor or
Grand Rapids. It is another way of life and it is a great, solid aspect to the
business in revitalizing downtown Lansing.
Ms. Robin Hiar, resident of 6233 Peck Road, Eaton Rapids, stated that
she is one of the partners for this proposal. Part of the concept of coming
up with this was to have a place where they would like to take their own
pets. They are very committed to their animals and they are her children.
Part of the concept was to provide safety for the employees and the pets.
If the Board would like to take a closer look, they would be more than
happy to show it to them. It demonstrates that registered pet owners will
be able to pull up and drop off their pets. There are some chutes that the
animals will be directed to for safety and efficiency. Their biggest concern
is having someone lose their pet and they tried to provide that in their
plan. This is something that they definitely would want to help. They
would be more than happy to speak to the Board and would love for the
Board to view the design.
Mr. Robb Munger, P.O. 408, Caledonia, MI, stated that Michigan needs
jobs and this lady is looking at investing $1.7 million in to Lansing. He has
been all over the country and parts of the world and have watched these
doggie daycares. He could not believe that somebody could make a
business out of it and actually succeed. It is extremely successful. He
applauds people who are willing to invest. He thinks that manufacturing
associations with the case of China and where Michigan's jobs are going
to (North Carolina, South Carolina). We need to support people like this.
He is saying this as a citizen of MI. He is in real estate and has watched
interest rates at 17%, 18% and 19% and for someone to invest money in
Michigan right now with the jobs that are needed, we need to applaud
ladies like this.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Frederick closed the public
hearing for Z-5-2007, 600 S. Capitol Avenue, "D-1" Professional Office
District to "F-1" Commercial District and referred it to the Committee of
the Whole for this evening.
C. Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-2007, 28.47 Acre Parcel - West end of Hunter's
Ridge Drive, Rezoning from "CUP" Community Unit Plan to "A"
Residential District, Planned Residential Development
Z-6-2007 is a request by Robb Munger, DuRay Development, to rezone
the vacant 28.47 acre parcel of land at the west end of Hunter's Ridge
Drive, more specifically described as:
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 8
PART SE 1/4 COM SW COR HUNTER'S RIDGE SUB, TH W
1236.99 FT TO CITY LIMITS, N 155.04 FT TO E'LY BANK GRAND
RIVER, N'LY ON BANK TO POINT DUE W OF NW COR HUNTER'S
RIDGE CONDOMINIUMS, E 1098.09 FT TO SAID NW COR, SLY
ALONG W'LY LINES ABOVE PLATS TO POB; EXC LANDS TO
BANK OF SAID RIVER LYING WLY OF A LINE COM S 89DEG
37MIN 30SCD W 2105.24 FT AND N OODEG 22MIN 30SCD W 50
FT AND N 09DEG 13MIN 45SCD E 199.06 FT FROM SE COR SAID
SEC, TH NE'LY 195 FT ALONG 596.57 FT RAD CURVE TO RT
CHORD BEARING N 28DEG 11 MIN 50SCD E 194.13 FT, N 247 FT,
W 310 FT +/- TO E BANK GRAND RIVER & POE; SEC 25 T4N
R3W, CITY OF LANSING, INGHAM COUNTY, MI
from "CUP" Community Unit Plan to "A" Residential District. The purpose
of the rezoning is to permit a Planned Residential Development (PRD-2-
2007) on the subject property. The proposed development consists of 123
single family detached condominium units.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Dr. Bruch asked about the river trail and if this development will allow the
trail to continue. Ms. Stachowiak stated that it has been planned and the
Parks and Recreation Department did not make any comments. Mr.
Rieske stated that he does not believe that any easements or property
acquisitions have taken place in that area. He has worked with the Parks
and Recreation Department extensively on the river trail and issues
related to it. Thus far, this has not come up as being a possibility at of yet.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that the river is far enough away that if they wanted
to put the river trail through here, they easily could. Even the units are
outside of the flood plain area along the river. It could accommodate it.
Dr. Bruch asked if the Board can add a setback of 25 feet or more. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that it does not matter because those are not lot lines.
They are just unit lines. If they wanted to come through and do an
easement, the lot lines are not going to be relevant at that point. Ms.
Stachowiak stated that her concern would be if the buildings were any
closer to it that there would be a building obstruction in the way. This is all
proposed to be raw land back there. There would be more than adequate
room. It would be easy as such time that the river trail did come through
there for them to grant an easement to the City or even dedicate land to
the City for use for the river trail. Dr. Bruch asked if this could be added
now. Ms. Stachowiak said that it could.
Mr. Frederick asked about this property, regardless, something can go
here. Ms. Stachowiak stated that what could go there by right without
even having to go before the Board even for a planned residential
development, is a continuation of the existing development along Hunter's
Ridge. This would only need to go through the site plan approval and
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 9
there would be no public process like this.
Mr. Rick Pulaski, Nederveld Planning and Engineering, stated that this
is a 28.47 acre site and to the west is the Grand River. To the east is
Waverly Road and that access is off Hunter's Ridge. This will be site
condominiums with private roads and 123 units. This is significant
because they are 4.3 units per acre. This will be serviced by sanitary
sewer, water main and underground utilities (phone, gas, electric and
cable). Before they start any plan, they basically look for the opportunities
that the land presents to them. They look for opportunities to preserve
and in this case, they are right along the Grand River, and they do want to
preserve the Grand River frontage. They do not have any kind of key
holing of lots that go up to that. Looking at the plan, it is all going to be in
a common area right there along the flood plain. To the south, there are
some wetlands and a drain. They are not touching those and are leaving
them as preservation areas. They look for spots where there can be
practical connections. In this case, it is not very practical to go to the west
because there is a river. It is not very practical to go to the north because
there is an existing development. They cannot cross to the south because
of the stream, flood plain and more development to the south. There are
not any areas for connection there. There is one logical point and that is
Hunter's Ridge connection.
They also look at where they are in the whole context of land development
and density. They are not in a real urban area and as designers, they
really like to do a lot of urban design, urban planning and urban
revitalization. But they recognize that this is more of a suburban area and
an area that needs to be protected and have a little bit of a different design
than the typical cityscape. Mr. Munger wanted to preserve as much
natural character as practical, and wanted to create and basically
encourage a sense of community. This design needs to be one that
fosters interaction and the gathering of people. Mr. Munger wanted them
to try for a coved approach. This really struck a cord with him because it
makes a lot of sense for this site. With the coved approach, the elements
are winding streets and this helps to slow down traffic and make it safer
for pedestrians. It gives more of a quaint and peaceful feel.
The Board agreed to give Mr. Pulaski three more minutes.
Mr. Pulaski stated that the first aspect of a coved development is winding
streets. There is a nice rural feel as you go through the streets. They are
quaint.
They want to encourage pedestrian travel and keep kids safe so they do
put sidewalks in. They create little pockets in a safe place where kids can
play under the watchful eye of their parents. This is seen throughout the
development. There are little pods of backyard areas where kids can go
and be watched by parents and babysitters.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 10
They try for connectability. There are no long cul-de-sacs. The whole
project connects itself as you wind your way through there.
Because they want to keep the trees as much as possible within this site,
they are no looking to create a bunch of walk out lots and really scoop up
the dirt. The approach that Robb is taking on this one is to go with a slab
on grade design. This really helps to preserve and protect the character
of that whole area and you can preserve a lot of trees this way by not
basically recreating what the earth looks like right there.
Finally, there is the variable home setback idea. As you look across the
streetscape, you can see that when they go on outside curb, they tend to
push the houses further back. On the inside of a curb in some places, the
houses come closer to the street. This is kind of a non linear approach
and it creates these little coves or pocket areas that just make it inviting
and an interesting streetscape that is lined with sidewalks and street trees.
He stated that the Master Plan does call for up to 14 units per acre and
the zoning calls for up to 7 units per acre. They are at 4 units per acre.
They want to be judged on the merits of their plan along and not just the
fact that they are not as bad as what they could be. They really think that
they have brought to the Board a good plan, sound design, good
connection, and a good addition to the community of Lansing.
Ms. Cordill asked if this development was intended to be a phased
development. Mr. Pulasky stated that the development would be phased
and as they work through a lot of the engineering details and the site plan
process, they will have to bring the site plan back before the Board as
well. The Board will be able to see what those phases are going to be.
There would probably be two to three phases as this point.
Mr. Pulasky stated that they would be willing to provide a right-of-way
easement for any kind of walkway.
Mr. Homer Lartigue, Jr., resident of 4143 Thackin Drive, stated that he
is opposed to the proposed development which would be to the north of
his residence. There is Rivers Edge to the east of him, Arbor Pointe to the
south, Hunter's Ridge to the northeast, and now a new development is
being proposed. With the development, it really does not enhance the
property value of where he lives. He stated that they really do not need to
have another set of apartments or condominiums, attached or detached,
in the neighborhood. He does not know if these condominiums are going
to be sold out right or leased. The only access that he sees is from
Waverly Road going through the Hunter's Ridge subdivision. There is
quite a bit of traffic that will be on Waverly Road entering and exiting that
particular area. If each household had one adult, there would be 123
vehicles. If there are two adults in the home, there would be 246 vehicles
going in and out of the Hunter's Ridge subdivision. He does not know if
data has been collected about the demographics concerning the amount
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 11
of traffic that this is going to generate in that area. There are stop lights at
Sheffield Blvd., Shepard Street and Waverly Road, Holmes and Waverly
Roads, and the only alternative is to put in another stop light to handle all
the traffic coming from both Hunter's Ridge and also for the proposed
development. There is going to be quite a bit of congestion in the area.
The winding roads only pertain to the development itself not when
someone is trying to access Waverly Road, which is currently a busy
street.
He is concerned about the noise level that is going to be produced. The
applicant talked about a buffer. His residence is just past the Smith Evan
drain and he is not going to have much of a buffer there. He is not sure if
the applicant intends to take the woods out of that area or not. There is
also quite a bit of wild game in that area and they will be disturbed. The
new development that is going on to the north of him has deer trying cross
hills.
Mr. John L. Ardison, resident of 3500 Seaway Drive, stated that he
lives in the area of the proposed development and he moved there in
1982. There are a lot of creeks in the area and underground creeks.
Sometimes the water rises up to about 14 feet high and comes right up to
the back of his neighbor's patio. A few years ago, the City had to come in
there and take out one of the drains because it had burst. They had to put
in a new drain system because it was flooding. A lot of times when the
water got in there it would plug up the drain and the sewer would shoot out
the top. He does not think that apartments should go back there because
there is too much water that backs up from the Grand River and it goes
past his house. That area should be a natural park. If the woods gets
taken out, the water will take out his house. If you care about the animals,
then do no approve the request. Currently the animals do not have much
of a place but back in that area, they do. It is not a very large area but it is
a nice place for the animals to be. There was a lady killed up on Hunter's
Ridge and she was buried right along the creek. The police came and he
told them that they came too far. The police found her later. The
residents do not want any more of this and they need their neighborhood
to stay clean and healthy for the children.
Ms. Patricia Amato, resident of 4138 Thackin Drive, stated the woods
are directly behind her property and she purchased her home in 1969
before any of the developments were there. She had plenty of plans when
she bought her house and the whole area was supposed to be a golf
course, tennis courts, nature trails and it was supposed to be beautiful. It
was rezoned by Francis Fine to multiple dwellings. There were a lot of
meetings and it went before the City and was approved because there
were no objections. She was concerned about transients and the overflow
of the people. All of her concerns have come true. The transits in
Glenburne are in and out and do not care about the houses. Even though
they are purchasing them, they do not care about them and they are run
down. With Canterbury Commons, they were supposed to be very nice
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Auqust 21, 2007 Page 12
but ended up being low cost housing. Arbor Pointe (formerly Canterbury
Commons) has police there constantly. At Glenburne, there are shootings
and she can hear the guns.
The applicant is talking about constructing 123 more units there and
currently they are over abundance. She has talked to LPD and everything
from the north is coming to the south to the whole area there. Traffic wise,
this is a very bad place to have traffic. Look at the statistics of the
accidents. When the 7-11 was there and since then, there are at least 2
to 3 accidents within a two-week span. It is to close to Holmes Road to
add another traffic light. Traffic would be continuously stopping.
She is not sure what the cost of the new units would be and if they can be
purchased or rented. She has not heard anything about them and needs
more information. She stated that the Board has to look at the whole
picture. They are trying to clean up the City and the Board is making it
more to where there are drugs, killings and shootings. It's getting worse.
If more apartments are put it there, this is what the neighborhood is going
to have. Talk to the police and they will tell you. It is all moving to the
south. Her neighborhood was promised what it was going to have when
all the other buildings went in. It turned out exactly like her neighborhood.
She asked the Board to think seriously about this proposal.
Ms. Emma Jackson, resident of 3510 Seaway Drive, stated that she is
directly behind the proposed site. She purchased her property in 1976
and was told that no one could build behind her. It was owned by the City
and was a nature park. She is concerned about the traffic, drug traffic and
the noise. They do have wildlife in this area. She is opposed to this
proposal.
Ms. Sandra Finley, resident of 3936-3 Hunters Ridge Drive, stated that
she has a map marked with all of the residents who are handicapped,
elderly or otherwise not able to walk great distances. She brought in
pictures that she took this past Sunday of Hunter's Ridge Drive. Hunter's
Ridge Drive is a boulevard that is one block long. There are 116
apartments, 72 condominiums and the people are driving there every day.
The only time the streets get cleaned during the winter is when people
complain or when a school bus almost gets hit pulling out from this area.
There is still construction and the work is not done. She is concerned that
if Hunter's Ridge is the only access, is the City going to come in and make
sure the streets are in good repair for the thousands of tons of vehicles
and equipment that will be going back to that area. Will the City make
sure that those vehicles are not going to tear up the streets so that the
residents cannot get in and out of their homes? She has trouble walking
and neighbors who cannot walk at all and how are they going to get out of
their homes? She does not want to have to worry about somebody not
being able to get out because an ambulance cannot get in to get them.
She does not want to worry about the noise pollution from the construction
work that starts at 6:30 to 7:00 a.m. or be doing this for the next four or
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Pane 13
five years because of the various phases. She asked the Board to
consider this very carefully. She stated that Hunter's Ridge is a wonderful
place to live and is a very quiet street.
Mr. Frederick asked for the pictures and asked Ms. Stachowiak if she
could forward them on to the Transportation Department regarding the
condition of Hunter's Ridge Road.
Mr. Lawrence Franklin, resident of 3524 Seaway Drive, stated that he
is three doors down from the proposed development. He does not agree
with the proposed development. He has been a part of other
developments and he thinks that applicant of this proposal did not take in
to consideration the people in the community. He is concerned with the
size of the lots of the proposed condominiums and the medium price
range of those homes. He would hate to see that development 20 years
from now turn in to something like Arbor Pointe. There are problems in
Arbor Pointe and with 123 units being proposed, it is not a good situation
for that area. This area is a gem and Lansing is a beautiful city. He
moved to Lansing approximately 20 years ago and fell in love with it. He
does not think that he will ever leave. He stated that the proposed project
does not do any justice. Maybe the Board could review it and scale it
back some. Thackin and Seaway Drives are not good for this project.
Ms. Beverly Rhodes, resident of 4144 Thackin Drive, stated that the
reason she purchased her house was because it was on a dead end
street and there was nature in the back. Her kids could grow up, be safe
and play. In the neighborhood, the residents know each other and note
that type of thing. All of the reasons for her purchasing the property will
change now. If there is going to be an exit out of the area other than
Hunter's Ridge, it will come right by her house and this will reduce her
property values. She does not believe that her neighborhood should pay
for someone else to profit and she has a real problem with that. She does
not have anything against the developer and she thinks the development
is a beautiful thing. But, the developer needs to think about what they are
putting on the residents who have been there the longest.
Ms. Delores Body, resident of 3920-1 Hunters Ridge Drive, stated that
she just moved into the condominiums this past March and has been a
City resident all of her life. She commends business, jobs and bringing
money into the City. She does not commend over populating it to the
extent where she wants to consider schools outside of Lansing for her
three year old. She is glad that the City is going to look at her road and
see the condition of it. She has worked around construction and it is loud
and they are going to go late with trying to get houses done on time. She
does not care what is done to make the river accessible. People are not
going to want them walking down their sidewalks to get to the river.
Currently, there are deer that walk through their back yards. Her daughter
does not get to see this in some parts of Lansing. To her, it is really
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 14
important that the wildlife be preserved and this area be preserved. She is
not against building houses. Two houses could probably be built back
there and not have all the damage that will be done with 123 units. She
asked what will happen to it down the line. She can understand these
starting out at as a $100,000 house but it will not end up being like that.
What if people do not want to purchase them. With safety, her daughter
can go out the front door without her being right behind her and having to
watch her. When she purchased the condominium, she bought it for the
long term. She really hates to think that she will have to start looking at
Holt, Grand Ledge, Eagle, Wacousta or something other than Lansing just
so that she can be proud of where her daughter is living and the people
she has for neighbors. She does not know if the new development will be
a gated community. She wants to preserve the wildlife and environment
around the area. This development will mess with the sewer, Grand
River, and add all kinds of run-off to the river. They cannot get the City to
fix the streets now. She stated that there are too many units and to scale
back the units. She wants to be proud of Lansing.
Ms. Alice Phiffer, resident of 3924-1 Hunters Ridge Drive, stated that
she has lived here for the past 25 years and this area has been a
peaceful, quiet and friendly community for most of that time. There have
been a few skirmishes and finally are getting to the point where the
apartment management is improving the situation. This is a very pleasant
neighborhood. There are 20 to 30 deer that come out to sleep and eat on
their lawns. There is a huge flock of turkeys and any other kind of wildlife
anyone can imagine. She sits there and watches it from her windows.
There main home and hideaway is back in that field. She has walked the
field and woods for the past 25 years. She stated do not tell her that there
will not be heavy equipment coming in because they are going to need
about 3,000 cubic yards of dirt just to put in one great big gulley back
there if they want to build in it. The heavy equipment is going to destroy
the streets for Hunter's Ridge and will destroy the peace and the life that
she has worked for 25 years and earned. The noise will be horrendous in
Hunter's Ridge and there will be no such thing as peace. Fixing the street
will not help it. This would make it so that the residents can go out of the
gated community and immediately get passed the gates, stomp on the
accelerator because it is a straight shot to Waverly Road. She hears this
every day and every night as people come out of the last driveway of the
apartment complex.
As for the sewers, she stated that they are over burdened. When the City
sanitary sewer backs up because of the overloading in the apartments, it
comes up in her basement and that has not been repaired yet. She can
see it with 123 more houses. There are just too many things to mention.
There residents were not told any of the truth from the beginning and they
have gotten several stories from the developer or associates of the
developer. She asked why the residents could not have been told
everything up front. What is the value going to be for these units? No one
has given any clues to the residents. The developer could put up little
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 15
shacks and the residents would have no say in the matter because it is
zoned for that many houses per acre.
Ms. Linda Appling, resident of 4010 Thackin Drive, stated that she is
concerned with the selling of the new homes and is not sure how the
developer is going to sell any of them. Michigan is already one of the top
three states for home free closures and within this state, one out of every
three hundred homes is in the process of foreclosure. The major
employers in the Lansing area (i.e. State of Michigan, General Motors)
have been decreasing the number of employees. In the case of General
Motors, they have been closing plants. With this back drop, place an
additional 125 units for sale and expect them to sell. This is simply
unrealistic. Where does the developer plan to get these people from? If
these 125 units go on the market, they will ultimately be used a rental
property. It is her belief that this will increase the number of rental units,
crime and traffic, and will cause a general decrease in property values for
the current residents. She stated that a significant number of houses are
currently for sale and people have been unable to sell them. There are a
number of condominium units for sale that have not been able to sell.
Placing these additional units on the market is simply going to decrease
the value of the current houses. Given the problems outlined, she urged
the Board to reject the proposal. However, if the Board elects not reject
the proposal, she suggested that this matter be placed on the ballot so
that people may vote.
As an alternative to building more housing units, she suggested that the
land be turned into a nature conservatory for local species of plants, trees
and birds. This would improve the overall quality of life in Lansing and
reduce the amount of pollution and heat entering the air.
Mr. Warren Timothy Beam, resident of 3940-1 Hunters Ridge Drive,
stated that he has lived there since 1978 and about half of that land is a
flood plain. There are so many properties around Lansing standing
empty, people are losing jobs and the City is losing industry. There should
be more concern for building things like something that is going to employ
someone rather than some place to stay that is going to devalue the rest
of the properties. One thing that has not been mentioned about Hunter's
Ridge, for the last few years there were a couple of bald eagles living in
there. There are not very many Lansing neighborhoods who can make
that claim. They get all kinds of different species of owls and hawks.
They have white tail deer and it is beautiful. His wife was concerned
about sewage and someone addressed that issue. Being able to get out
of Hunter's Ridge Drive will have to be addressed. They have called since
1978 to have the road repaired. Normally they are told that because it is
in the City of Lansing but because it is in Eaton County, they are not City
residents. So, nothing gets done about it and when they do get around to
repairing the roads, it has never been repaired properly at least since
1978.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 16
Ms. Iris Beach, resident of 3333 Moores River Drive, stated that she
was originally told that this was going to be a complex for senior citizens.
Later on, a gentleman was talking about how they wanted to have a safe
place for their children to play. She hears disconnect.
Mr. Merritt Norvell, resident of 4236 Pine Tree Lane, Lansing
Township stated that he lives to the east of the proposed development
and no one has informed him about this development. He has been
aware for several years that the developer has been trying to get a right-
of-way through his development to build this project. For those who have
not been down Pine Tree Lane and the area being discussed, it is
probably the most beautiful location on the Grand River. There are all
kinds of wildlife in this area and the wildlife is pretty comfortable with the
residents. He stated that 123 units in that area is going to create a density
in that neighborhood that would be unbelievable. The City cannot handle
it and the streets cannot handle it. The streets currently are in ill repair.
There are no sidewalks up and down Waverly Road and it is very difficult
for all of the residents to get onto Waverly Road any time during the day.
It is very dangerous exiting on to Waverly Road with the traffic and the
density there. There are apartments to the south of this area that are high
density. Kids and the river do not go together. There are kids all the time
running around the back and they have to shoo them out of there because
there have been children who drowned in the rock pile lagoon right there
beside his development. If there are little kids and a river, then you have a
problem. As far as he is concerned, there are only seven houses in his
development. All of the residents take great pride in those houses and
have invested a lot of their lives and resources in to those houses. They
would not like to see their property values reduced.
Ms. Jennifer Smith, resident of 3938-4 Hunters Ridge Drive, stated
that she has lived there over three years and it is a beautiful, breathtaking
place. She loves her home and waking up, drinking coffee as she
watches the deer and listens to the birds sing. She would really hate to
see this development happen. She has a new stepson who is twelve
years old and likes to play outside. She is afraid for his safety and that if
he rides his bike outside, he will have to contend with the construction
vehicles. What kid wants to be cooped up in the house all summer or
anytime during the year? She asked that the proposal be reconsidered.
She is definitely opposes the proposal.
Ms. Judy Grewett, resident of 3944-4 Hunters Ridge Drive, stated that
she has lived there more than 20 years and is very happy. With the fees,
the buildings have been constantly upgraded and have vinyl siding. They
are now getting re-roofed. She asked if these units will be tract homes
and what the sizes would be for the homes. She wants to see what these
homes will look like. She asked about the square footage of these homes.
These units will not have basements. Will these homes be sold for
investments so people can rent them? There are some conscientious
renters but we know how renters are. They have run into a lot of non-
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 17
conscientious renters in their own complex who have destroyed a building
once it has been foreclosed on. They are angry and they take it out on the
condominium. There are so many properties between her and these
wonderful complexes built down the street closer to Moores River Drive.
There are $500,000 homes built in this area and now the developer wants
to build down the street behind her development and ruin all of their
foliage and trees. This would destroy everything that the residents hold
dear. She stated that there is so much property, why their area?
Ms. Rosemary Glast, resident of 3963-1 Hunters Ridge Drive, stated
that she lives on the rental side of Hunter's Ridge Drive and she is
opposed to the development.
Ms. Judy Hill, resident of 3936-1 Hunters Ridge Drive, stated that she
is opposed to the development.
Mr. Henry Hill, resident of 913 E. Saginaw Street, stated that he is
supportive of the requests by DuRay Development. He owns the property
in question and stated that it is private property even though some of the
area residents have used it for other things.
Hilda Burroughs, resident of 3934-2 Hunters Ridge Drive, spoke in
opposition to the request citing concerns with traffic, wildlife preservation
and impact on surrounding property values.
Mr. Robb Munger, P.O. 408, Caledonia, MI, spoke in support of the
request. He stated that the proposed development will be much lower in
density than the surrounding area and that the homes will be stick-built in
the $100,000 - $130,000 range.
Ms. Susie Oliver, resident of 3920-3 Hunters Ridge Drive, spoke in
opposition to the request citing concerns about increased traffic on the
deteriorating Hunters Ridge Drive.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Frederick closed the public
hearing for Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-2007, 28.47 Acre Parcel - West end of
Hunter's Ridge Drive, Rezoning from "CUP" Community Unit Plan to
"A" Residential District, Planned Residential Development and
referred it to the Committee of the Whole for this evening.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (3 minutes each)
Ms. Mary Chesley, resident of 3121 Glasgow Drive, spoke in opposition to
SLU-2-2007. She stated that the cell phone tower will be incompatible with the
surrounding residential neighborhood and that it will create a safety hazard for
children in the area.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21 2007 Page 18
Ms. Joan Wright, resident of 2735 Trudy Lane, spoke in opposition to
Z-4-2007 and stated that she would prefer to see a single family home built on
this lot.
Ms. Ann Kostin McGee, resident of 2513 Skye Road, spoke in opposition to
SLU-2-2007 and stated that the proposed location of the cell tower is
inappropriate because of its close proximity to the neighboring homes. The
children in the area will be attracted to the cell phone tower which could
present some serious safety hazards.
Mr. James Davis, resident of 2400 Skye Road, spoke in opposition to
SLU-2-2007 and stated that he will have to look at the tower from his windows
which is an aesthetically pleasing view.
Mr. Joe Swanson, resident of 3226 Glasgow Drive, spoke in opposition to
SLU-2-2007 and stated that there are other locations in the area that could be
considered for a cell phone tower. This particular location is right in the middle of
a residential neighborhood.
Ms. Ruth Joan, resident of 3232 Glasgow Drive, spoke in opposition to
SLU-2-2007 citing concerns with aesthetics and safety.
Seeing no one wishing to address the Board, Mr. Frederick closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was taken by the Board.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Consent Items
1. Minutes for Approval: July 17, 2007
The minutes of July 17, 2007 were
APPROVED.
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, September 18, 2007, at 6:30 p.m.
124 W. Michigan Avenue, City Council Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Cordill, Vice Chair
a. ACT-4-2007, Groesbeck Drain, Disposition of BWL
Property
This is a request by Patrick Lindemann, Ingham County
Drain Commissioner for an easement for the continued use
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 19
of the Groesbeck drain. There are three (3) issues that need
to be addressed in approval of the ACT 285 Review for the
easement:
- Storm Sewer Easement (Exhibit A)
- Ponds Easement (Exhibit Al)
- Covenant Deed (Exhibit A2)
The easement will allow the Ingham County Drain
Commission to construct and maintain the storm water
system and filter containments from the storm water run-off
in the creation of a wetland area. The storm sewer easement
will have a 36" outlet pipe in the easement area which will
release water from the detention pone to Lake Lansing Road
and eventually to the Grand River. The purpose of the
easement is for the construction, operation, maintenance
and improvement of the county drain in the existing roadway
and to access the grantee, the Groesbeck Park Drain
Drainage District, the parcel located to the east of the
easement area. In addition, the ponds easement, similar to
the storm sewer easement includes settling ponds, water
quality improvement and wetland habitat mitigation. In
reference to the covenant deed, the Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality requires that a covenant deed is
issued in granting this easement to allow the grantee
permission on the property in order to clean, maintain, etc.
This area consists of 6.833 acres.
Ms. Foster inquired about the need for fencing around the
detention area. Ms. Stachowiak stated that it will not be
deep enough to necessitate a fence.
Mr. Rieske stated that Lansing Township is aware of this
proposal and is supportive.
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Dr. Bruch, to recommend approval of ACT-4-
2007, Groesbeck Drain, Disposition of BWL Property
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Bruch Aye Cordill. Ave
Williams Aye
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
Next meeting, Tuesday, August 28, 2007, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 20
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge to dissolve into the Committee of the
Whole. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
3a. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
a. SLU-2-2007, 3215 W. Mt. Hope Avenue,
Telecommunications Facility
This is a request by Haley Law Firm on behalf of T-Mobile
Central, for a Special Land Use permit to construct a 125-foot,
monopole, telecommunications tower at 3215 W. Mt. Hope
Avenue. The property is commonly known as Grand Haven
Manor and the tower will be located at the south end of the
site. The property is zoned "DM-Y Residential District which
permits public/private utility facilities, with a special land use
permit, if approved by the Lansing City Council.
The Planning Board held a public hearing on July 17, 2007 at
which time the applicant's representative spoke in favor and
seven individuals spoke in opposition to the request.
Dr. Bruch expressed concerns about the removal of trees on
the site. Mr. Frederick accepted a friendly amendment to
require that trees be replaced on a 1 to 1 ratio. Mr. Williams
also accepted the friendly amendment.
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Williams to recommend approval of
SLU-2-2007, 3215 W. Mt. Hope Avenue, Telecommunications Facility with the
following conditions: 1) With the exception of the lease area and the driveway, all
mature trees be preserved and the root balls protected during construction; 2)
The proposed monopole tower provide for a co-location of antennas; and 3) The
tower shall not interfere with telemetry communications of local hospitals and
emergency services. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
b. ACT-8-2007, 425 S. Grand Avenue, Acquisition
This is a request by the Planning and Neighborhood
Development Department to acquire the Center for the Arts
property at 425 S. Grand Avenue for temporary parking and
eventual redevelopment. The site would provide parking as
needed during the rehabilitation of the South Grand ramp, and
the building could be leased to a tenant until the property is
redeveloped.
Mr. Frederick recommended, as a friendly amendment, that a
letter from the Planning Board Secretary be sent to the Public
Service Director and the Transportation & Parking Office
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 21
Manager requesting traffic calming (e.g. raised pedestrian
crosswalk) on S. Grand Avenue at the intersection of S. Grand
Avenue and Lenawee Street. Mr. Ruge accepted the friendly
amendment.
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to recommend approval of
ACT-8-2007, to acquire the Center for the Arts property at 425 S. Grand Avenue
for temporary parking and eventual redevelopment. On a voice vote, the motion
carried unanimously (5-0).
c. ACT-13-2007, 1215 E. Mt. Hope Avenue, Sidewalk
Easement & ROW use
This is a request by DLZ Michigan Inc., on behalf of the
Lansing School District, to utilize the Harding Avenue road
right-of-way, east of 1215 E. Mt. Hope Avenue, for a
bus/parent pick-up and drop-off lane. The proposal will result
in the city sidewalk being relocated outside of the road right-of-
way to the school property. The applicant is proposing to
provide an easement to the city of Lansing, as depicted and
described on the attachments, to accommodate the sidewalk.
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to recommend approval of
ACT-13-2007, 1215 E. Mt. Hope Avenue, Sidewalk Easement & ROW use. On a
voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
d. Z-4-2007, Vacant Lot - Trudy Lane, "A" Residential District
to "C" Residential District
This is a request by Robert Beagan to rezone the vacant lot
located directly north of 2724 Trudy Lane, more specifically
described as:
Commencing 360 Feet West & 200 Feet South of
Northeast Corner of West % of Southeast 114, Thence
South 100 Feet, W est 29 7.3 7 Feet, North 100 Feet, East
297.37 Feet to Beginning; Section 26 T4N R2W, City of
Lansing, Ingham County, MI
from "A" Residential District to "C" Commercial District. If
approved, the applicant intends to construct a duplex on the
subject property.
The Planning Board held a public hearing this evening, at
which time one individual spoke in opposition to the request.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 22
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Williams to recommend approval of
Z-4-2007, Vacant Lot - Trudy Lane, "A" Residential District to "C" Residential
District. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
e. Z-5-2007, 600 S. Capitol Avenue, "D-1" Professional Office
District to "F-1" Commercial District
This is a request by Annabelle & Associates, Inc. to rezone the
property at 600 S. Capitol Avenue, more specifically described
as:
Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block 159 Original Plat, City of Lansing,
Ingham County, MI
from "D-1" Professional Office District to "F-1" Commercial
District. If approved, the applicant intends to construct an
addition to the building, improve the parking area and
establish a day care center for dogs with some rooms
available in the lower level for overnight care of dogs.
The Planning Board held a public hearing this evening, at
which time the applicants and four individuals spoke in favor of
and one individual spoke in opposition to the request.
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
Z-5-2007, 600 S. Capitol Avenue, "D-1" Professional Office District to "F-1"
Commercial District. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
f. Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-2007, 28.47 Acre Parcel - West end of
Hunter's Ridge Drive, Rezoning from "CUP" Community
Unit Plan to "A" Residential District, Planned Residential
Development
Z-6-2007 is a request by Robb Munger, DuRay Development,
to rezone the vacant 28.47 acre parcel of land at the west end
of Hunter's Ridge Drive, more specifically described as:
PART SE 114 COM SW COR HUNTER'S RIDGE SUB,
TH W 1236.99 FT TO CITY LIMITS, N 155.04 FT TO
E'LY BANK GRAND RIVER, N'LY ON BANK TO POINT
DUE W OF NW COR HUNTER'S RIDGE
CONDOMINIUMS, E 1098.09 FT TO SAID NW COR,
S'LY ALONG W'LY LINES ABOVE PLATS TO POB; i
EXC LANDS TO BANK OF SAID RIVER LYING W'LY '
OF A LINE COM S 89DEG 37MIN 30SCD W 2105.24 FT
AND N OODEG 22MIN 30SCD W 50 FT AND N 09DEG
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 23
13MIN 45SCD E 199.06 FT FROM SE COR SAID SEC,
TH NE'LY 195 FT ALONG 596.57 FT RAD CURVE TO
RT CHORD BEARING N 28DEG 11 MIN 50SCD E
194.13 FT, N 247 FT, W 310 FT +/- TO E BANK GRAND
RIVER & POE, SEC 25 T4N R3W, CITY OF LANSING,
INGHAM COUNTY, MI
from "CUP" Community Unit Plan to "A" Residential District.
The purpose of the rezoning is to permit a Planned Residential
Development (PRD-2-2007) on the subject property. The
proposed development consists of 123 single family detached
condominium units.
The Planning Board held a public hearing this evening, during
which the applicant and two individuals spoke in favor of and
six individuals spoke in opposition to the request. Other
individuals cited concerns regarding drainage, the sewer
system, safety, traffic, noise, street maintenance, drug
trafficking, wildlife preservation and property values.
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Williams to recommend approval of
Z-6-2007, 28.47 Acre Parcel - West end of Hunter's Ridge Drive, Rezoning from
"CUP" Community Unit Plan to "A" Residential District. On a voice vote, the
motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Mr. Williams to recommend approval of
PRD-2-2007, 28.47 Acre Parcel - West end of Hunter's Ridge Drive, Planned
Residential Development, 123 Single Family Units, with the following conditions:
1) The developer retain as many of the existing mature trees on the site as
possible and protect the drip lines during construction; 2) Pedestrian scale street
lighting be utilized throughout the development; 3) The buildings be designed so
that the garages do not project closer to the street than the front wall of the
houses; and 4) The applicant provide an easement, 25-feet in width, along the
entire frontage of the Grand River for future use by the city for the riverwalk. On a
voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (5-0).
Mr. Williams made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to arise from the Committee of
the Whole. On a voice vote, (5-0), the motion carried unanimously.
3b. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
a. SLU-2-2007, 3215 W. Mt. Hope Avenue,
Telecommunications Facility
This is a request by Haley Law Firm on behalf of T-Mobile
Central, for a Special Land Use permit to construct a 125-foot,
monopole, telecommunications tower at 3215 W. Mt. Hope
n
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 24
Avenue. The property is commonly known as Grand Haven
Manor and the tower will be located at the south end of the
site. The property is zoned "DM-3" Residential District which
permits public/private utility facilities, with a special land use
permit, if approved by the Lansing City Council.
Dr. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Mr. Williams, to recommend approval of
SLU-2-2007, 3215 W. Mt. Hope Avenue, Telecommunications Facility with the
following conditions: 1) With the exception of the lease area and the driveway, all
mature trees be preserved and the root balls protected during construction; 2)
The proposed monopole tower provide for a co-location of antennas; and 3) The
tower shall not interfere with telemetry communications of local hospitals and
emergency services.
Frederick . . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Bruch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
b. ACT-8-2007, 425 S. Grand Avenue, Acquisition
This is a request by the Planning and Neighborhood
Development Department to acquire the Center for the Arts
property at 425 S. Grand Avenue for temporary parking and
eventual redevelopment. The site would provide parking as
needed during the rehabilitation of the South Grand ramp, and
the building could be leased to a tenant until the property is
redeveloped.
Dr. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Mr. Williams, to recommend approval of
ACT-8-2007, 425 S. Grand Avenue, Acquisition.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Bruch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . Ave
Williams Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
c. ACT-13-2007, 1215 E. Mt. Hope Avenue, Sidewalk
Easement & ROW use
This is a request by DLZ Michigan Inc., on behalf of the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 25
Lansing School District, to utilize the Harding Avenue road
right-of-way, east of 1215 E. Mt. Hope Avenue, for a
bus/parent pick-up and drop-off lane. The proposal will result
in the city sidewalk being relocated outside of the road right-of-
way to the school property. The applicant is proposing to
provide an easement to the city of Lansing, as depicted and
described on the attachments, to accommodate the sidewalk.
Dr. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill, to recommend approval of
ACT-13-2007, 1215 E. Mt. Hope Avenue, Sidewalk Easement & ROW Use.
Frederick . . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Bruch Aye Cordill. Ave
Williams Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
d. Z-4-2007, Vacant Lot - Trudy Lane, "A" Residential District
to "C" Residential District
This is a request by Robert Beagan to rezone the vacant lot
located directly north of 2724 Trudy Lane, more specifically
described as:
Commencing 360 Feet West & 200 Feet South of
Northeast Corner of West % of Southeast 114, Thence
South 100 Feet, W est 29 7.3 7 Feet, North 100 Feet, East
297.37 Feet to Beginning; Section 26 T4N R2W, City of
Lansing, Ingham County, MI
from "A" Residential District to "C" Commercial District. If
approved, the applicant intends to construct a duplex on the
subject property.
Dr. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Mr. Williams, to recommend approval of
Z-4-2007, Vacant Lot - Trudy Lane, "A" Residential District to "C" Residential
District.
Frederick Ave Ruge. Aye j
Bruch Ave Cordill. Ave
Williams . . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 26
e. Z-5-2007, 600 S. Capitol Avenue, "D-1" Professional Office
District to "F-1" Commercial District
This is a request by Annabelle & Associates, Inc. to rezone the
property at 600 S. Capitol Avenue, more specifically described
as:
Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block 159 Original Plat, City of Lansing,
Ingham County, MI
from "D-1" Professional Office District to "F-1" Commercial
District. If approved, the applicant intends to construct an
addition to the building, improve the parking area and
establish a day care center for dogs with some rooms
available in the lower level for overnight care of dogs.
Dr. Bruch stated that Z-5-2007 was tabled during the
Committee of the Whole discussion.
f. Z-6-2007 & PRD-2-2007, 28.47 Acre Parcel - West end of
Hunter's Ridge Drive, Rezoning from "CUP" Community
Unit Plan to "A" Residential District, Planned Residential
Development
Z-6-2007 is a request by Robb Munger, DuRay Development,
to rezone the vacant 28.47 acre parcel of land at the west end
of Hunter's Ridge Drive, more specifically described as:
PART SE 1/4 COM SW COR HUNTER'S RIDGE SUB,
TH W 1236.99 FT TO CITY LIMITS, N 155.04 FT TO
E'LY BANK GRAND RIVER, N'LY ON BANK TO POINT
DUE W OF NW COR HUNTER'S RIDGE
CONDOMINIUMS, E 1098.09 FT TO SAID NW COR,
S'LY ALONG W'LY LINES ABOVE PLATS TO POB;
EXC LANDS TO BANK OF SAID RIVER LYING W'LY
OF A LINE COM S 89DEG 37MIN 30SCD W 2105.24 FT
AND N OODEG 22MIN 30SCD W 50 FT AND N 09DEG
13MIN 45SCD E 199.06 FT FROM SE COR SAID SEC,
TH NE'LY 195 FT ALONG 596.57 FT RAD CURVE TO
RT CHORD BEARING N 28DEG 11 MIN 50SCD E
194.13 FT, N 247 FT, W 310 FT +/- TO E BANK GRAND
RIVER & POE; SEC 25 T4N R3W, CITY OF LANSING,
INGHAM COUNTY, MI
from "CUP" Community Unit Plan to "A" Residential District. i
The purpose of the rezoning is to permit a Planned Residential
Development (PRD-2-2007) on the subject property. The
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 27
proposed development consists of 123 single family detached
condominium units.
Ms. Cordill mentioned to avoid cobra head street lighting. Dr.
Bruch accepted this as a friendly amendment. Mr. Ruge
asked if it would be better to say that pedestrian scale street
lighting is required. Ms. Cordill stated that she liked that
because it was more specific.
Dr. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Mr. Williams to recommend approval of
Z-6-2007, 28.47 Acre Parcel - West end of Hunter's Ridge Drive, Rezoning from
"CUP" Community Unit Plan to "A" Residential District.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Bruch . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . ... ... . Ave Cordill. . . Ave
Williams . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
Dr. Bruch made a motion, seconded by Mr. Williams to recommend approval of
PRD-2-2007, 28.47 Acre Parcel - West end of Hunter's Ridge Drive, Planned
Residential Development, 123 Single Family Units, with the following conditions:
1) The developer retain as many of the existing mature trees on the site as
possible and protect the drip lines during construction; 2) Pedestrian scale street
lighting be utilized throughout the development; 3) The building be designed so
that the garages do not project closer to the street than the front wall of the
houses; and 4) The applicant provide an easement, 25-feet in width, along the
entire frontage of the Grand River for future use by the city for the riverwalk.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave
Bruch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Cordill. . . Ave
Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . Aye
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 5; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
4. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
I
C. Old Business — None.
D. Report from Planning Manager— None.
E. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-2006, 310/312 Chestnut
b. Z-3-2006,W. Edgewood
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES August 21, 2007 Page 28
c. Z-17-2005, Polly& Benjamin
d. Z-12-2006&SLU-7-2006 2727 Lyons Avenue
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Master Plan Project
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
8. NEW BUSINESS — None.
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON — None.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Dr. Bruch asked when the Board will get to some of the zoning items (i.e.
modifying of the zoning for the contract). Ms. Stachowiak stated that the Board
will have that right away. Dr. Bruch stated that she would like to see some of
these items on the next Zoning and Ordinance agenda.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS
a. Dollar Store-Willow Street& MLK Blvd.-landscaping &buffering (May 20, 2003)
b. Grovenburg property-dumpster in ROW(July 1,2003)
c. 2714 W.Jolly Road-church with large statue in front yard (January 20, 2004)
d. W.Willow Street-Grace Tabernacle Church-no landscaping (May 4, 2004)
e. Michigan Ave& Shepard Street-sign business-several banner signs nailed to the outside of building
(May 4, 2004)
f. 2702 S. Cedar Street-no landscaping (May 18, 2004)
g. 2410 S. Pennsylvania Ave. - no landscaping (November 3, 2004)
h. 2200 W. Holmes Road- Bad Habits-excessive signs (May 3, 2005)
i. 2618 Cavanaugh Road. - registered rental&front yard paved, used for parking (October 4,2005)
j. Keeps Party Store-Aurelius Road-illegal signs(July 5, 2006, July 18, 2006& September 5, 2006)
k. Clarion Hotel—two big signs advertising Great Lakes Condominiums (December 5, 2006)
I. The Firm—review requirements for fenced outdoor patio(December 5, 2006)
m. 928 Pacific Ave.—6 foot fence in front yard on a corner lot(February 6,2007)
n. 4311 S. Cedar Str.—barber shop in a residential neighborhood & illegal signs (April 3, 2007)
o. 1409 Eureka Str.—large hole in roof of the porch (July 17, 2007)
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 10:57 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
G�
William C. Rieske, Secretary, Planning Board
PBMinutes.082107.doc
Approved as written 8-21-07 Draft to Clerk July 27,2007
Approved August 21,2007
To Clerk August 22, 2007
Minutes of the Regular Meeting _
LANSING PLANNING BOARD
7:00 p.m., Tenth Floor, Council Chambers
Lansing City Hall
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
1. OPENING SESSION `=
The meeting was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Mr. Frederick, Acting Chair. c-rt
A. Roll call: Present: Frederick, Ruge, Cordill.
B. Staff Attending: Stachowiak, Rieske.
C. Excused absences: Czekai, Bruch
D. Absent: None.
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge to approve the agenda. On a
voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0).
3. COMMUNICATIONS
4. HEARINGS
A. Z-2-2007, 6040 S. ML King Blvd., "A" Residential District to "F"
Commercial District
This is a request by Besco Water Treatment Inc. to rezone the property at
6040 S. ML King Blvd., more specifically described as:
Lot 18, Also Lot 19 except the southwesterly 17 feet thereof, Webster
Farm Subdivision No. 1, City of Lansing, Ingham County, MI
from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. The purpose of
the rezoning is to bring the commercial use of the lot into compliance with
the zoning ordinance.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Frederick closed the public
hearing for Z-2-2007, 6040 S. ML King Blvd., "A" Residential District to
"F" Commercial District and referred it to the Committee of the Whole
for this evening.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 2
B. Z-3-2007, Vacant Lot East of 401 Fenton Avenue, "F" Commercial
District to "A" Residential District
This is a request by Frazier Builders to rezone the vacant lot located
immediately east of 401 Fenton Avenue, more specifically described as:
South 110.3 Feet of Lot 82, Jessop's Home Gardens Subdivision
from "F" Commercial District to "A" Residential District for the purpose of
constructing a single family dwelling on the subject property.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Katy Frazier, resident of 2511 Doane Hwy., Charlotte, and Chief
Financial Officer (CFO) of Frazier Builders, stated that Frazier Builders
bought the property and would like to build a single family home on the lot.
It is probably not large enough to construct anything commercial. The rest
of the street has a lot of homes as well.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Frederick closed the public
hearing for Z-3-2007, Vacant Lot East of 401 Fenton Avenue, "F"
Commercial District to "A" Residential District and referred it to the
Committee of the Whole for this evening.
C. SLU-4-2007, 3215 W. Mt. Hope Avenue, Special Land Use Permit -
Telecommunications Tower
This is a request by Haley Law Firm on behalf of T-Mobile Central, for a
Special Land Use permit to construct a 120-foot, monopole,
telecommunications tower at 3215 W. Mt. Hope Avenue. The property is
commonly known as Grand Haven Manor and the tower will be located at
the south end of the site. The property is zoned "DM-3" Residential
District which permits public/private utility facilities, with a special land use
permit, if approved by the Lansing City Council.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Mr. Frederick stated that the Public Service Department's last comment is
that the gravel access drive already exists and asked if it would be able to
be built in to the site plan. Ms. Stachowiak stated that is does already
exist and that it will be included in the site plan.
Mr. Waley Haley, representative of T-Mobile, stated that when he went
to the Committee of the Whole meeting, he was having some issues with
the landlord. The landlord was having second thoughts about potential
future developments and adding additional Grand Haven buildings in the
back. The landlord was afraid that the location that was picked for the
tower would potentially impede them from adding an extra building. To
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 3
accommodate the landlord, T-Mobile moved the tower a little bit to the
southeast. T-Mobile kept the tower tucked back up into the woods to the
south of the drainage easement. One of the comments that was made
was relative to the setback to the south. That whole setback is all woods
from the south to the abutting neighborhood.
Mr. Jonathon Solis, resident of 5901 Richwood Street, Apt. #12,
stated that he is opposed to the cell phone tower. He lives by a tower and
he stated that there is a lot of debris that piles up. The owner does not
come out there to clean the area. He stated that it also causes a hazard.
He lives in an apartment area and there are a lot of kids. Even though
there might be a fence around the tower, kids do climb on fences and they
kick right through the gate and could play around the tower. There are no
adults supervising the area and things could happen. A cell tower is not a
good thing to have in a neighborhood. If T-Mobile wants to build a tower,
they can move further south of the City out in the woods where there is
lots of green space and trees. This is a nice neighborhood and there
should not be a tower there.
Mr. Frederick asked about the location of the tower. Mr. Solis stated that it
is between Pennsylvania and Cedar Street, further down from the fire
station and close to the Meijer store. Mr. Solis stated that there is
currently a lot of debris on the site and no one cleans the area. Even
though the tower is gated, kids can get through it. There are a lot of
problems.
Mr. Frederick asked Ms. Stachowiak to refer the trash incident to the
appropriate authority.
Ms. Ann Cassengill, resident of 2513 Skye, stated that her property
abuts the proposed site. She chose to live in Lansing and she loves it.
She loves the location of her home. This is a residential area and is a
wonderful neighborhood. She stated that this is no place for a cell phone
tower. This would be a huge eye sore. She is concerned with her
property value because she has put a lot of money into her home and she
would like to expand her home. Should she ever wish to sell her home
and move, she would chose to stay in Lansing.
She is concerned about health issues with this. She has done a lot of
research on-line about the cell phone towers and they do emit radiation.
With the research she has done and with what the conclusive evidence is,
there has not been 20 years of research because cell phone towers are
fairly new. She asked if all of the parents of the Lewton School children
been notified. Their kids will be directly exposed to this because the tower
is not that far away. She stated that this case has come up once before
and it seems like this keeps going over and over again. She would like for
this to be over and done with. She opposed the request before and she is
now back here again. She loves her neighborhood and it is a beautiful
neighborhood. The tower will be a huge eye sore and a health concern.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 4
She is definitely opposed to the proposed tower. She canvassed the
neighborhood on Sunday. A lot of the neighbors were not aware of the
proposal and were concerned about it. They do not want the tower.
Mr. Frederick asked Ms. Stachowiak to advise the audience on the
notification process. Ms. Stachowiak stated that the notification
requirement is 300 feet surrounding the entire parcel. This is a large
parcel and it took in a lot of area. Because this is a cell phone tower, at
the request of the Planning Board and Board of Zoning Appeals, the
requirement was extended further to almost 500 feet.
Mr. Paul Chesley, resident of 3121 Glasgow Drive, stated that the
woods are 18 feet wide and it is a strip of land that goes from Deerfield to
Waverly Road. As far as the meetings and the community getting
together to hear the pros and cons for this proposal, three years ago he
attended a meeting and has not heard anything sense. He is opposed to
the request. There are a lot of children in this neighborhood and he is
raising a great-grandchild in this area. The gentleman across the street
lives right on the corner and has five children under the age of 16. He
does not want the tower in their neighborhood.
Ms. Mary Chesley, resident of 3121 Glasgow, stated that when the
zoning was approved for Grand Haven, the idea was to put in a walkway
back through the area. Nothing has ever been done with it. She is
concerned about health issues. She plans on living there a few more
years and she has lived there since the 1960s. She thinks that something
can be done in the area where people are not living full time. There are
industrial areas where people come and go maybe eight hours a day. It is
a different amount of exposure than what someone is getting at their
residence. She is opposed to the request.
Mr. James Davis, resident of 2400 Skye Road, state that his residence
is directly across the street from the proposed tower. His property abuts
Grand Haven as well as Summerhill Estates and his neighborhood has not
had any success with the promises made by developers. They only do
what will corporately benefit them but will do nothing for the neighborhood.
When Grand Haven was built, they did not do the correct sewer
connection and there was a major flood through the neighborhood. They
ended up digging a huge catch basin that is directly adjacent to his home.
There is a fence that now runs the length of that home. This used to be all
woods that protected the residents from the view of all of that area. In two
days, they brought bull dozers in and demolished the entire woods. What
is left is a very small area. A 120 foot tower will not be covered by these
woods. There is not even a tree that is 60 feet tall there. The tower would
be right in the middle of a residential neighborhood. There is not a
neighborhood in this city that is willing to have a cell phone tower sifting
right in the middle of the neighborhood. With the aesthetics of it, the
property values will be affected by it. With the current real estate issues
that the neighborhood has, who would be willing to come into a
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 5
neighborhood and see a cell phone tower on a cul-de-sac that is
supposed to be there for a peaceful view? This is not what the
neighborhood has. The neighbors have had issues with both of the major
developments not mowing the weeds right along the fence on the
property. He does not believe that any corporate entity that is going to
benefit financially cares about what is happening to his neighborhood.
They care about whether or not they are going to make a profit on the
venture. This is a business venture and there is nothing that is going to
benefit the neighborhood. The residents want to live in a nice
neighborhood where it is quiet and the kids can move around the
neighborhood safely. The neighbors all get along and they walk through
all of these different areas. They do not want to be walking through or
near a cell phone tower right in the heart of their neighborhood.
Mr. Ken Jones, resident of 3026 Sunderland Road and a Board
Member for the Lansing School District, stated that he is not in favor of
the tower because he thinks it is going to really lower the residential rates
in that area. Lansing is already struggling to keep kids in the school
system. He thinks that this would be a further push to eliminate families
from moving into the area. This is a very nice, quiet residential area for
the kids attending Lewton School. He is not in favor of the tower being
placed in that particular location for this reason. He knows that there are
health concerns that have not been brought up yet. He has a problem
with a tower being placed that close to a school and where residents live.
He stated that there may be other areas where the tower could be
relocated. With the new apartment buildings, it has really made the area
look less like a country setting and more of an urban setting. He has lived
in this area for 20 years and there has been a lot of changes in that
particular area. He is not in favor of this tower for the reasons of young
families moving into the neighborhood and keeping the school system
viable.
Ms. Arvella Garcia, resident of 2308 Bedford Road, stated that her
property abuts the Grand Haven property. She is opposed to the tower for
all of the reasons heard tonight (i.e. health concerns, property concerns).
She thinks there is already a tower situated on Pleasant Grove by a
church and a wooded area. Why do we need another tower so close to
her neighborhood?
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Frederick closed the public
hearing for SLU-4-2007, 3215 W. Mt. Hope Avenue, Special Land Use
Permit - Telecommunications Tower and referred it to the Committee of
the Whole for this evening.
D. ACT-6-2007, 201 S. Grand Avenue (S. Grand Parking Ramp Property),
Public Sale of City Property and ACT-7-2007, 200 Block, S. Grand
Avenue (City Parking Lot 18), Public Sale of City Property
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 6
These are requests by the City of Lansing Department of Planning and
Neighborhood Development to market for or negotiate the sale of the City
owned parking ramp (S. Grand Parking Ramp) located at 201 S. Grand
Avenue and the City owned surface parking lot (Parking Lot 18) located
directly to the south, more specifically described as:
LOT 4 & S 22 FT LOT 3 BLOCK 112 ORIG PLAT, VACATED
ALLEGAN ST E OF GRAND AVE ALSO LOTS 1, 2 & N 4 FT LOT 3
EXC THAT PART LOTS 2 & 3 COM SW COR LOT 2, TH E 31 FT, N
10 FT, E 65.07 FT, S 03DEG 05MIN E TO A PT 4 FT S OF N LINE
LOT 3, W TO W LINE LOT 3, N 4 FT TO BEG; BLOCK 113 ORIG
PLAT
to a private developer for a mixed use development (i.e. residential, office,
commercial).
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Cordill inquired about the 25 foot easement along the river that the
parking garage overhangs and asked if there was a feasible easement
there. Ms. Stachowiak stated that there would be an easement and the
City would like to retain actual ownership of 25 feet along the river so the
City can do that where the parking lot is concerned. There would be a
parking ramp where the City owns at least 25 feet of it. This would mean
that they would pay taxes on everything but 25 feet of this parking ramp
building. The City would have to maintain its 25 feet of it. It is impossible
to maintain 25 feet of the parking ramp and have the rest of it be privately
owned. The best that the City could do is get an easement on that parcel.
Ms. Cordill asked if there would be a continual river easement on the west
shore that the Parks Department is concerned about or is it piecemeal as
a result of the parking ramp sitting over that 25 foot section as it is now.
Ms. Stachowiak said there would not be one because the City would still
have the ramp over this 25 foot portion. Ms. Cordill asked if the river trail
extends there. Ms. Stachowiak stated that the river trail is below the
parking ramp. Mr. Rieske stated that it is not in service right now. The
current situation is that the parking ramp encroaches over the river. While
the property ownership is in place for a river trail through there, the river
trail really is not installed on that side of the river. What would happen
upon sale is that this easement would be retained and the parking ramp
could get a face lift and could remain for the duration of its useful life. It
could then become a redevelopment site for a mixed use development
which could include parking. This would eradicate the building and the
City would have this easement protecting our rights along the 25 feet
shoreline such that the City rights would be maintained for public access
and for the installation of public improvements related to the river trail.
The remainder of the site would be redeveloped in a mixed use kind of
situation. This would afford the development along Grand Avenue to have
a continuous sort of retail frontage which is in conformity with the Central
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 7
Lansing comprehensive plan. The development of this is in two stages.
As it is currently proposed, the City Club site and the parking lot behind it
would be developed with the parking ramp getting a face lift. Upon the
parking ramp ending its useful life, it would be reconstructed and be a
another mixed use facility including parking.
Mr. Frederick asked Mr. Rieske if he knew what the remaining life of the
parking structure is. Mr. Rieske stated that he does not know because it
can be maintained and that maintenance has something to do with it. It
could be 10 years or so.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak, Mr. Frederick closed the public
hearing for ACT-6-2007, 201 S. Grand Avenue (S. Grand Parking Ramp
Property), Public Sale of City Property and ACT-7-2007, 200 Block, S.
Grand Avenue (City Parking Lot 18), Public Sale of City Property and
referred it to the Committee of the Whole for this evening.
5. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE (3 minutes each)
Seeing no one wishing to address the Board, Mr. Frederick closed the public
comment period.
6. RECESS was taken by the Board.
7. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Consent Items
1. Minutes for Approval: June 5, 2007
The minutes of June 5, 2007 were
APPROVED.
B. Committee Reports
1. ZONING AND ORDINANCE COMMITTEE, Mr. Ruge, Chair
Next meeting, Wednesday, August 15, 2007, at 4:00 p.m.
124 W. Michigan Avenue, City Council Conference Room.
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, Ms. Cordill, Vice Chair
Next meeting, Tuesday, July 24, 2007, at 4:00 p.m.
316 N. Capitol Ave., Department Conference Room.
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Mr. Ruge to dissolve into the Committee of the
Whole. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0).
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 8
3a. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
a. Z-2-2007, 6040 S. MIL King Blvd., "A" Residential District
to "F" Commercial District
This is a request by Besco Water Treatment Inc. to rezone the
property at 6040 S. ML King Blvd., more specifically described
as:
Lot 18, Also Lot 19 except the southwesterly 17 feet
thereof, Webster Farm Subdivision No. 1, City of Lansing,
Ingham County, MI
from "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial District. The
purpose of the rezoning is to bring the commercial use of the
lot into compliance with the zoning ordinance.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview and stated that the
request is not quite consistent with staff's recommendation.
The ultimate recommendation is to rezone the property to "E-
2" Local Shopping District. The applicant is aware of the
recommendation, has a copy of the report and is in agreement
with it. The applicant's purpose for this rezoning is to bring the
use of the property in to compliance with the ordinance.
Besco Water Treatment is primarily an office operation. They
do some retail work where people can come in to the store
and purchase salt for their water softeners. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that the "E-2" Local Shopping District would
accommodate this use. The reason staff did not recommend
the "F" Commercial District is because of the potential types of
uses that could be put in this location should Besco Water
Treatment decide to close its business or relocate and another
use would take over. The concerns with the "F" Commercial
District are used car lots, fast food restaurants and billboards.
The Master Plan included in the packet shows office zoning
and this is the plan designation up and down MLK Jr. Blvd.
This property has never been rezoned as such and has
always been legally non-conforming. The applicant is trying to
make it legal.
Mr. Ruge asked about the parking lot to the south and if it was
connected to this business. Ms. Stachowiak stated that it is
owned by this business and the applicant did not include that
in this request. He may come back to the Board with another
rezoning request for that parcel.
Ms. Cordill asked for clarification for notification to include all
of their property. Ms. Stachowiak stated that it would but it
cannot be done at this time. It was not included in the original
notification.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 9
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
Z-2-2007, 6040 S. ML King Blvd., "A" Residential District to "E-2" Local Shopping
District. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0).
b. Z-3-2007, Vacant Lot East of 401 Fenton Avenue, "F"
Commercial District to "A" Residential District
This is a request by Frazier Builders to rezone the vacant lot
located immediately east of 401 Fenton Avenue, more
specifically described as:
South 110.3 Feet of Lot 82, Jessop's Home Gardens
Subdivision
from "F" Commercial District to "A" Residential District for the
purpose of constructing a single family dwelling on the subject
property.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview.
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to recommend approval of
Z-3-2007, Vacant Lot East of 401 Fenton Avenue, "F" Commercial District to "A"
Residential District. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0).
C. SLU-4-2007, 3215 W. Mt. Hope Avenue, Special Land Use
Permit - Telecommunications Tower
This is a request by Haley Law Firm on behalf of T-Mobile
Central, for a Special Land Use permit to construct a 120-foot,
monopole, telecommunications tower at 3215 W. Mt. Hope
Avenue. The property is commonly known as Grand Haven
Manor and the tower will be located at the south end of the
site. The property is zoned "DM-3" Residential District which
permits public/private utility facilities, with a special land use
permit, if approved by the Lansing City Council.
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview and stated that there
are public services available to it and it complies with the
Master Plan. It is capable of any dimensional requirements.
The neighbors who attended tonight did express some good
concerns. The City has dealt with tons of towers and the
radiation is really not a concern. The radiation from the towers
is less than a microwave in your home. This is not a concern.
However, the concerns raised about the view of the tower from
the homes on Skye Avenue deserve some real consideration.
There is more than adequate woods to protect the view of the
tower. The tower is going to be a good distance from the
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 10
residents on Bedford Avenue. This property does not back
directly up to the residents on Bedford because there is a wide
parcel between the proposed site and those residents.
Looking at the proposal from the standpoint of the residents on
Skye Avenue after hearing the comments tonight, Ms.
Stachowiak stated that she is a little concerned that the woods
would not adequately protect the view from Skye Avenue.
She does not want to glance right over that. Based on the
drawings and a quick site visit, it did appear that it would be
protected but she is concerned that it may not adequately
protect the neighborhood.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that the proposed tower meets all of
the criteria and the Planning Office was prepared to
recommend that the proposed tower be approved tonight with
a few conditions just as a matter of procedure.
Mr. Frederick stated that he understands the issue. However,
in remembering the propagation chart shown to the Board of
Zoning Appeals, this is the ideal location for this tower. The
propagation chart is a computer generated drawing that shows
where the signal will cover and where the signal is weakest in
the area. The placement of this tower happens to fit right in
the middle of one of the weakest spots that T-Mobile has. He
understands why they chose this location because it is going
to provide them with the most coverage for their customers
that they can get at that area. It is one of the main thing that
people are demanding these days with their cell phones is that
they get a good strong signal inside their houses. That is what
this is going to give to T-Mobile.
Mr. Frederick asked if there was a way that this issue could be
taken back and discussed with T-Mobile to at least make this
cell phone tower look better. Ms. Stachowiak stated that she
is not suggesting based on the comments here tonight that
this request should be denied. It seems like an appropriate
location given the other locations of cell phone towers in the
City. She thinks there may need to be quite a substantial
amount of buffering especially on the west side of the site if
this request is to be approved. Mr. Frederick stated that he
does think there are other things that can be done to beautify
these towers that would not be as onerous as making it look
like an ugly fake tree.
Mr. Frederick asked if staff would entertain a suggestion that
they go back and meet with the applicant to see if there is
something that could be done to make this look better for the
neighborhood, and it might set a precedent for future towers.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 11
Mr. Frederick stated that he is a little concerned about the
adequacy of the fencing and maybe this needs to be looked at
too.
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to table SLU-4-2007, 3215 W. Mt.
Hope Avenue, Special Land Use Permit - Telecommunications Tower to allow staff
additional time to meet with the applicant and review some things that could mediate the
view for the neighborhood. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0).
d. ACT-6-2007, 201 S. Grand Avenue (S. Grand Parking
Ramp Property), Public Sale of City Property and ACT-7-
2007, 200 Block, S. Grand Avenue (City Parking Lot 18),
Public Sale of City Property
These are requests by the City of Lansing Department of
Planning and Neighborhood Development to market for or
negotiate the sale of the City owned parking ramp (S. Grand
Parking Ramp) located at 201 S. Grand Avenue and the City
owned surface parking lot (Parking Lot 18) located directly to
the south, more specifically described as:
LOT 4 & S 22 FT LOT 3 BLOCK 112 ORIG PLAT,
VACATED ALLEGAN ST E OF GRAND AVE ALSO LOTS
1, 2 & N 4 FT LOT 3 EXC THAT PART LOTS 2 & 3 COM
SW COR LOT 2, TH E 31 FT, N 10 FT, E 65.07 FT, S
03DEG 05MIN E TO A PT 4 FT S OF N LINE LOT 3, W
TO W LINE LOT 3, N 4 FT TO BEG; BLOCK 113 ORIG
PLAT
to a private developer for a mixed use development (i.e.
residential, office, commercial).
Ms. Stachowiak gave a brief overview and stated that the
Central Lansing Comprehensive Plan as well as the Grand
Vision Plan that is being developed, the Cool Cities program,
and every other vision for the downtown area, this fits in
perfectly with everything. This is exactly what the City,
Principal Shopping District and all of these committees have
been looking for this type of mixed use building, with
retail/commercial/office on the first floor and residential up
above. There is plenty of additional parking downtown and
there are under utilized parking ramps downtown as well.
There are ways to deal with the parking that will be lost at this
location. It is just a matter of redistributing it. This private
developer may lease out some of the parking in this ramp.
She cannot say for certain that it is even going to be cut off to
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 12
every one totally.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that there are some good developers
who are currently interested in this property and they would do
a quality job. These developers have a good track record in
the City and the City has no reason to believe that they would
not do what they say they are going to do. They would put a
face lift on this parking ramp and make it look nicer, and
connect it to the future building. She stated that this would
really help the Grand Avenue corridor altogether. The
commercial is all concentrated along Washington Avenue and
a little bit on Michigan Avenue. Grand Avenue is a sea of
surface parking lots and vacant buildings. This would help to
get some development going along that corridor especially
right along the river bank. This fits right in with the Grand
Vision project.
Mr. Rieske stated that the sale of property along the river
requires a vote of the people. The parking ramp will probably
need to go for a vote of the people at a future election as a
ballet proposal. The last time this happened it was the Ottawa
Power Station which is still a work in progress. The voters
supported that overwhelmingly. The easement does protect
the City's interest and the whole motion of the provision of
parking, river front access, and that this has to be done by the
public by the City. It is being reviewed because there can be
private parking ramps (i.e. Ellis Parking Ramp). There can be
easements along the river such that it can maintain the City's
rights. The concern about the continuity of the river trail is
certainly valid. The City has an easement going down from
Michigan Avenue, the parking ramp, lot 18 and further down is
the Grand Tower with easements there. There is also the
triangle property which the City recommended retaining the 25
feet. Across Kalamazoo Street, there is an old ROW for either
Kalamazoo Street or River Street that slants northward near
Christman. The City has an easement across Christman and
further down there is River Point Park. There is a river trail
running all the way to Elm Street. The City is making progress
on the acquisition of the river front property or the retention of
it.
Mr. Frederick asked for a definition of reasonable period of
time for condition number 3. Mr. Rieske stated under five
years.
Mr. Frederick stated that the corner of Grand Avenue and
Allegan Street is a real dangerous corner with a lot of traffic
and a lot of risk to pedestrians. A lady pedestrian was killed
there. He would like to see traffic calming installed and all of
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 13
Grand Avenue becoming a two-way street. Mr. Rieske stated
that Grand Avenue is owned by the City. Between Allegan
and Ottawa Streets, it is owned by the Capital loop and owned
by the State of Michigan. North of Ottawa Street, it is owned
by the City. The City is working with the State and with
developers along this area to propose a two-way traffic
system. To recommend that all of Grand Avenue be two-way
is a smoother recommendation that is probably going to be
more implementable. Mr. Rieske stated that the CSO is going
through there next year and the geometrics of the street are
being designed to accommodate two-way traffic. Mr.
Frederick stated that as long as the developer plans for it
because it makes a difference with the entrances of the
structure.
Ms. Cordill asked if a vehicle could still make a left hand turn
there on a red light after the accident. Why not make it where
someone can only turn left when there is a green arrow. Mr.
Rieske stated that is another possibility. Mr. Rieske stated
that it would be good if the Board was to further recommend
no turn on red from Allegan Street on to Grand Avenue.
Mr. Frederick stated that he would like to see landscaping and
buffering enhanced beyond the minimum requirements.
Currently, there is no landscaping and buffering there, except
for a small area down by the parking lot that the State calls the
triangle property. Mr. Ruge asked what kind of buffering is
required on this property. Ms. Stachowiak stated nothing in
the "G-1" Business District. Mr. Frederick stated that if nothing
is required and the City is doing it, let the City put in some
landscaping and buffering along there. Have something nice
and make it look like it is residential. Ms. Stachowiak stated
that street trees could be put in and some buffering can be
done along the river trail.
Mr. Frederick asked about adding a condition requiring a face
lift for the parking structure and to add that it should contain
commercial development on the first floor. Mr. Rieske stated
that it would be a further recommendation but upon
redevelopment, it contain commercial development on the first
floor.
Ms. Cordill asked what type of street lights were currently in
place there and if they were like the ones along Michigan
Avenue. Mr. Ruge stated that Michigan Avenue has the cobra
heads and Mr. Rieske stated that further down by CATA the
lights have the double globes with the grey pole. Ms. Cordill
stated that if you are trying to tie in all of the urban designs,
you do not want to fall short of the other area.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 14
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to recommend approval of
ACT-6-2007, public sale of 201 S. Grand Avenue (S. Grand Parking Ramp), with
the following conditions: 1) An 25 foot wide easement be retained along the
entire frontage of the Grand River at 201 S. Grand Avenue for public access; 2)
The ramp be given a facelift; 3) Upon redevelopment of the parking ramp, the first
floor be developed into commercial uses and the facade improved to minimize
the appearance of a parking ramp; and 4) The city enter into a development
agreement with the future buyer that contains a reverter clause, should the
necessary permits for the new building not be obtained and construction
commenced within two years of approval of this request. On a voice vote, the
motion carried unanimously (3-0).
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to recommend approval
of ACT-7-2007, Public Sale of the Parking Lot 18, with the following conditions: 1)
A strip of land, 25 feet wide, be retained in ownership by the city along the entire
frontage of the Grand River for the Parking Lot 18 property located south of 201
S. Grand Avenue; and 2) The city enter into a development agreement with the
future buyer that contains a reverter clause, should the necessary permits for the
new building not be obtained and construction commenced within two years of
approval of this request. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0).
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to further recommend that
Grand Avenue be made into a 2-way street that incorporates traffic calming
measures; left turns on red from Allegan onto Grand Avenue be prohibited; and
pedestrian scale street lights and enhanced landscaping be installed along Grand
Avenue between Michigan Avenue and the CATA bus station. On a voice vote,
the motion carried unanimously (3-0).
Mr. Frederick made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill to arise from Committee of the
Whole. On a voice vote, the motion carried unanimously (3-0).
3b. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
a. Z-2-2007, 6040 S. ML King Blvd., "A" Residential District
to "F" Commercial District
This is a request by Besco Water Treatment Inc. to rezone the
property at 6040 S. ML King Blvd., more specifically described
as:
Lot 18, Also Lot 19 except the southwesterly 17 feet
thereof, Webster Farm Subdivision No. 1, City of Lansing,
Ingham County, MI
from "A" Residential District to "E-2" Local Shopping District.
The purpose of the rezoning is to bring the commercial use of
the lot into compliance with the Zoning Ordinance.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 15
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill, to recommend approval of
Z-2-2007, 6040 S. MIL King Blvd., "A" Residential District to "F" Commercial
District.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge. . . Ave
Cordill. . . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 3; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
b. Z-3-2007, Vacant Lot East of 401 Fenton Avenue, "F"
Commercial District to "A" Residential District
This is a request by Frazier Builders to rezone the vacant lot
located immediately east of 401 Fenton Avenue, more
specifically described as:
South 110.3 Feet of Lot 82, Jessop's Home Gardens
Subdivision
from "F" Commercial District to "A" Residential District for the
purpose of constructing a single family dwelling on the subject
property.
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill, to recommend approval of
Z-3-2007, Vacant Lot East of 401 Fenton Avenue, "F" Commercial District to "A"
Residential District.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge. . . Ave
Cordill. . . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 3; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
c. SLU-4-2007, 3215 W. Mt. Hope Avenue, Special Land Use
Permit - Telecommunications Tower
This is a request by Haley Law Firm on behalf of T-Mobile
Central, for a Special Land Use permit to construct a 120-foot,
monopole, telecommunications tower at 3215 W. Mt. Hope
Avenue. The property is commonly known as Grand Haven
Manor and the tower will be located at the south end of the
site. The property is zoned "DM-3" Residential District which
permits public/private utility facilities, with a special land use
permit, if approved by the Lansing City Council.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 16
Mr. Ruge stated that this item was tabled during the
Committee of the Whole discussion.
d. ACT-6-2007, 201 S. Grand Avenue (S. Grand Parking
Ramp Property), Public Sale of City Property and ACT-7-
2007, 200 Block, S. Grand Avenue (City Parking Lot 18),
Public Sale of City Property
These are requests by the City of Lansing Department of
Planning and Neighborhood Development to market for or
negotiate the sale of the City owned parking ramp (S. Grand
Parking Ramp) located at 201 S. Grand Avenue and the City
owned surface parking lot (Parking Lot 18) located directly to
the south, more specifically described as:
LOT 4 & S 22 FT LOT 3 BLOCK 112 ORIG PLAT,
VACATED ALLEGAN ST E OF GRAND AVE ALSO LOTS
1, 2 & N 4 FT LOT 3 EXC THAT PART LOTS 2 & 3 COM
SW COR LOT 2, TH E 31 FT, N 10 FT, E 65.07 FT, S
03DEG 05MIN E TO A PT 4 FT S OF N LINE LOT 3, W
TO W LINE LOT 3, N 4 FT TO BEG; BLOCK 113 ORIG
PLAT
to a private developer for a mixed use development (i.e.
residential, office, commercial).
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill, to recommend approval of
ACT-6-2007, 201 S. Grand Avenue (S. Grand Parking Ramp Property), Public Sale
of City Property with the following conditions: 1) An 25 foot wide easement be
retained along the entire frontage of the Grand River at 201 S. Grand Avenue for
public access; 2) The ramp be given a facelift; 3) Upon redevelopment of the
parking ramp, the first floor be developed into commercial uses and the facade
improved to minimize the appearance of a parking ramp; and 4) The city enter
into a development agreement with the future buyer that contains a reverter
clause, should the necessary permits for the new building not be obtained and
construction commenced within two years of approval of this request.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ave Ruge. . . Aye
Cordill. . . Ave
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 3; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
Mr. Ruge made a motion, seconded by Ms. Cordill, to recommend approval of
ACT-7-2007, 200 Block, S. Grand Avenue (City Parking Lot 18), Public Sale of City
Property with the following conditions: 1) A strip of land, 25 feet wide, be
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 17
retained in ownership by the city along the entire frontage of the Grand River for
the Parking Lot 18 property located south of 201 S. Grand Avenue; and 2) The city
enter into a development agreement with the future buyer that contains a reverter
clause, should the necessary permits for the new building not be obtained and
construction commenced within two years of approval of this request.
The Planning Board further recommended that Grand Avenue be made into a 2-
way street that incorporates traffic calming measures; left turns on red from
Allegan onto Grand Avenue be prohibited; and pedestrian scale street lights and
enhanced landscaping be installed along Grand Avenue between Michigan
Avenue and the CATA bus station.
Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye Ruge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
Cordill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Aye
On a roll call vote, there were: Ayes: 3; Nays: 0; carried; unanimous.
Approved.
4. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
C. Old Business — None.
D. Report from Planning Manager— None.
E. Pending Items: Future action required
1. Zoning and Ordinance Committee
a. Z-1-2006, 310/312 Chestnut
b. Z-3-2006,W. Edgewood
c. Z-17-2005, Polly& Benjamin
d. Z-12-2006& SLU-7-2006 2727 Lyons Avenue
2. Urban Development Committee
a. Master Plan Project
3. Committee of the Whole
4. Planning Board
8. NEW BUSINESS — None.
9. COMMENTS FROM CHAIRPERSON — None.
10. COMMENTS FROM BOARD MEMBERS
Ms. Cordill stated that with the cell phone tower it would be helpful to see where
the proposed site fits in to the overall neighborhood and immediate lot, and where
the vegetation is placed. Ms. Stachowiak stated that it is only the residents on
Skye Avenue who will be seeing the tower and she should have studied more on
their view of it. The residents to the south will not be able to see the tower and
the residents to the east will not be affected by the tower either. Ms. Stachowiak
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 18
stated that she will be more comfortable being able to view the site again and see
if maybe more conditions are needed to protect their view. Ms. Stachowiak
stated that the residents on Glascow are very protected by the wooded area back
there and they will not be affected by it. The residents to the west could be
affected by it.
Ms. Cordill asked if there is a way to show what advantage point they will have
from the west. Ms. Stachowiak stated that it is a distance away but if it is
completely open, most lots along Skye Avenue are pretty shallow and do not
have existing vegetation.
Ms. Stachowiak asked about attendance for the next meeting. Mr. Frederick
stated that he will be available. Mr. Ruge stated that he and his family will be
leaving this Saturday and will be gone for three weeks. He will be able to attend
the second meeting in August.
Mr. Ruge asked for an excused absence for the August 7th meeting.
Ms. Cordill made a motion, seconded by Mr. Frederick to approve an excused
absence request from Mr. Ruge for the August 7th meeting. On a voice vote, the
motion carried unanimously (3-0).
Mr. Frederick suggested that the cell phone tower may need to be decorated.
Ms. Stachowiak stated that the applicant has to be careful with blue because the
FAA has requirements. Mr. Frederick stated that it would be nice to see
something aesthetically pleasing, maybe some geometric shapes and it would be
a good precedent.
11. BOARD MEMBER CODE ENFORCEMENT NOTIFICATION REPORTS — None.
a. Dollar Store-Willow Street&MLK Blvd.-landscaping &buffering (May 20, 2003)
b. Grovenburg property-dumpster in ROW(July 1, 2003)
c. 2714 W.Jolly Road-church with large statue in front yard (January 20, 2004)
d. W.Willow Street-Grace Tabernacle Church-no landscaping (May 4,2004)
e. Michigan Ave&Shepard Street-sign business-several banner signs nailed to the outside of building
(May 4, 2004)
f. 2702 S. Cedar Street-no landscaping (May 18, 2004)
g. 2410 S. Pennsylvania Ave.-no landscaping (November 3, 2004)
h. 2200 W. Holmes Road-Bad Habits-excessive signs(May 3, 2005)
i. 2618 Cavanaugh Road. -registered rental &front yard paved, used for parking (October 4,2005)
j. Keeps Party Store-Aurelius Road-illegal signs (July 5,2006, July 18, 2006&September 5, 2006)
k. Clarion Hotel—two big signs advertising Great Lakes Condominiums (December 5, 2006)
I. The Firm—review requirements for fenced outdoor patio(December 5, 2006)
m. 928 Pacific Ave.—6 foot fence in front yard on a corner lot(February 6, 2007)
n. 4311 S. Cedar Str.—barber shop in a residential neighborhood & illegal signs (April 3, 2007)
Mr. Ruge stated that at 1409 Eureka the owner has a huge hole in the roof of the
porch and if something does not happen the whole porch will be coming down.
He stated that it might be a rental house.
12. ADJOURNMENT - Meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 17, 2007 Page 19
Respectfully submitted,
L
William C. Rieske, Secretary, Planning Board
PBMinutes.071707.doc