ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Quality Services for a Quality Community

Transcription

1

2 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Quality Services for a Quality Community MEMBERS Chair Chris Wolf Vice Chair Nathan Mitchell John Cahill Nicholas Kipa Brian Laxton Caroline Ruddell Travis Stoliker City Council Liaison and Alternate Ruth Beier Staff Liaison Darcy C. Schmitt (517) City of East Lansing DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT 410 Abbot Road East Lansing, MI (517) AGENDA June 4, :00 p.m. 54-B District Court, Courtroom Linden Street 1) OPENING A) Roll Call B) Approval of Agenda C) Approval of Minutes January 8, ) COMMUNICATIONS A) Council Liaison B) Written C) Oral 3) NEW BUSINESS A) An appeal from Lingg Brewer of the Planning and Zoning Administrators interpretation as it relates to the property located at 500 Albert Avenue, in the B-3, City Center Business District, of the following sections of Chapter 50 - Zoning Code of the City of East Lansing: 1. Section 50-94(b)(4)(a); and 2. Section B) An appeal from DTN Management of the Planning and Zoning Administrators interpretation of the following section of Chapter 50 - Zoning Code of the City of East Lansing: 1. Section C) 613 Gunson One Year Extension of Variance Approval 4) OLD BUSINES East Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda June 4, 2014, Page 1 of 2

3 5) STAFF REPORTS 6) BOARD MEMBER CONCERNS 7) ANNOUNCEMENTS 8) ADJOURNMENT East Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda June 4, 2014, Page 2 of 2

4 East Lansing Zoning Board Review Process The Zoning Board meets the first Wednesday of each month. The Board is composed of six citizen volunteers selected by the City Council. The Board is empowered to authorize upon an appeal specific variances from such dimensional requirements as lot area and width regulations, building heights, bulk regulations, yard width, side and depth regulations and off-street parking requirements. All of the Board meetings are open to the public and use the following process: 1. Board Secretary reads the public notice which describes the location, applicant, zoning district and subject matter of exception request. 2. Applicant's presentation - applicant may speak on his/her own behalf or may be represented. 3. Public comment - comments are taken from all who are interested, including any written comments. 4. Rebuttal/additional comments by applicant. 5. Questions by Board members. 6. Closing of public portion, deliberative phase. 7. Closing of hearing followed by Board's discussion and action. The concurring vote of four members is necessary to grant any variance or to decide in favor of the applicant on any matter upon which they are required to pass. Guidelines for Public Comment 1. If you are interested in speaking on an agenda item, please state your name, address and the specific concern or question you wish the Board to consider as clearly and concisely as possible. 2. To minimize redundancy, if previous speakers have already raised similar concerns or questions, simply note that you concur with them. 3. Direct your comments to the Board. Dialogue with the applicant or the audience is discouraged. 4. Written comments submitted to the Board automatically become part of the public record. It is not necessary to also read them. You may give a summary of the comments Members John Cahill Brian Laxton Caroline Ruddell Chris Wolf Nicholas Kipa Nathan Mitchell Travis Stoliker Alternate Ruth Beier Darcy C. Schmitt, Secretary (517)

5 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Quality Services for a Quality Community MEMBERS Chair Chris Wolf Vice Chair Nathan Mitchell John Cahill Nick Kipa Brian Laxton Caroline Ruddell Travis Stoliker City Council Liaison and Alternate Ruth Beier MINUTES January 8, :00 p.m. 54-B District Court, Courtroom Linden Street Present: Absent: Cahill, Kipa, Laxton, Mitchell, Stoliker, and Wolf Ruddell Staff Liaison Darcy C. Schmitt (517) Staff Present: D. Schmitt City of East Lansing DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUIL.DING & DEVELOPMENT 410 Abbot Road East Lansing, MI (517) ) OPENING A) Roll Call D. Schmitt called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. At the calling of the roll, member Ruddell was absent. B) Election of Chair and Vice Chair It was moved by Laxton and seconded by Stoliker to elect Wolf as Chair and Mitchell as Vice Chair. Vote: All yeas. Motion carried unanimously by a vote of 6 to 0. C) Approval of Agenda Motion: It was moved by Cahill and seconded by Laxton that the agenda be approved. Vote: All yeas. Motion carried unanimously by a vote of 6 to 0. D) Approval of the Minutes Motion: It was moved by Mitchell and seconded by Stoliker that the minutes of November 6, 2013 be approved as changed. Vote: All yeas. Motion carried unanimously by a vote of 6 to 0. 2) COMMUNICATIONS A) Council Liaison None East Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes January 8, 2014 Page 1 of 5

6 B) Written None C) Oral None 3) NEW BUSINESS A) 627 Ardson Road APPEAL from Vince and Nicole Nystrom for the property located at 627 Ardson Road, in the R-2, Medium Density Single-Family Residential District from the following requirements of Chapter 50 - Zoning Code of the City of East Lansing: a. Article III. Section Table and lot requirements, to allow for a 14.2 foot rear yard building setback where 20 foot is required. The applicant is requesting the variance to allow construction of an addition to the west side of the dwelling. D. Schmitt presented the Staff Report noting the location and zoning of the property and the surrounding area. Vince Nystrom, the applicant, addressed the Board and explained the variance request. Wolf asked for clarification from the written description asking for a setback of 14.2 feet from the west property line and the first CAD drawing of Section 6 which says 13.4 feet to the property line. Mr. Nystrom replied that they would modify the plans to meet the requested setback of 14.2 feet. Motion: It was moved by Wolf and seconded by Stoliker to grant variance approval for the request from Vince and Nicole Nystrom for the property located at 627 Ardson Road, from the following requirements of Chapter 50 Zoning of the Code of the City of East Lansing: a. Article III. Section Table and lot requirements, to allow for a 14.2 foot rear yard building setback where 20 foot is required. The Board finds that under Special Finding (1), that there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships resulting from the physical characteristics of the property in question which make it unfeasible to carry out the strict letter of the Zoning Code; based on the following grounds: 1. The house is setback an unusually large distance from the front lot line. 2. The lot does not meet the minimum lot depth requirement as it was platted prior to the standards for the zone; thus making it difficult to maintain the required setback. Laxton commended the applicant for a thorough application submission. Vote: All yeas. Motion carried unanimously by a vote of 6 to 0. East Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes January 8, 2014 Page 2 of 5

7 B) 603 Evergreen Avenue APPEAL from Brian Hagan, LLC for the property located at 603 Evergreen Avenue, in the R-2, Medium Density Single-Family Residential District from the following requirement of Chapter 50 - Zoning Code of the City of East Lansing. a. Article VIII. Section (4), to permit an addition to the existing driveway that would be setback zero (0) feet from the side yard property line, less than the required three (3) feet off the south property line (side yard). The applicant is requesting the variance to add a 54 square foot addition to the existing driveway. D. Schmitt presented the Staff Report noting the location and zoning of the property and the surrounding area. She stated that the applicant is not requesting more parking but rather increasing the nonconformity on the property. Mitchell asked if the request would not resolve the licensing issue but would resolve the parking issue. D. Schmitt replied affirmatively. Brian Hagan, the applicant, addressed the Board and explained the variance request. He continued that the additional paving would not create any changes to the licensed occupancy of the property. Wolf asked if the neighboring driveway directly abutted the applicant s driveway. Mr. Hagan replied affirmatively. Wolf asked if they would be willing to angle the additional paving away from the lot line to create the required setback. Mr. Hagan replied that angling would be impractical as the rear porch, along with the gas meter, is immediately adjacent. He continued that angling the concrete would create a safety issue with cars hitting the porch and/or gas meter. The Board discussed nonconforming uses and grandfathering of occupancy licenses. Mitchell stated that he views the variance request as bringing the parking more into conformance for a four (4) person rental license. Motion: It was moved by Mitchell and seconded by Wolf to grant variance approval for the request from Brian Hagan, LLC for the property located at 603 Evergreen Avenue, from the following requirements of Chapter 50 Zoning of the Code of the City of East Lansing: a. Article VIII. Section (4), to permit an addition to the existing driveway that would be setback zero (0) feet from the side yard property line, less than the required three (3) feet off the south property line (side yard). The Board finds that under Special Finding (1), that there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships resulting from the physical characteristics of the property in question which make it unfeasible to carry out the strict letter of the Zoning Code; based on the following grounds: East Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes January 8, 2014 Page 3 of 5

8 1. Existing driveway already abuts the property line. 2. The location of the house to the property line makes it difficult to add to the driveway in other locations. Stoliker stated that Mitchell s rationale clarified the variance request for him and he would be voting in favor of the motion. Kipa stated that he is in favor of the motion given that the property has a license for four (4) and will most likely remain for many years and granting the variance will make life easier for the occupants. Wolf stated that he feels the request is consistent with other variances that have been granted previously and will be supporting the motion. Laxton stated that he too would be supporting the motion given the close proximity that four (4) vehicles would need to park in order to fit without trespassing on the neighboring property. Cahill stated that he is somewhat torn given that the driveway would not be allowed today but the property is grandfathered. He continued that he is torn whether to approve something that would lock in a nonconformity for an even longer period of time. Mitchell stated that he agrees with Cahill but there have been numerous instances of variance approvals to increase driveways that are on the property line. Laxton stated that whether the four (4) person rental license would continue or not continue is somewhat separate from the paving; therefore, he feels it is in the best interest of the property to use it as its best highest use. He continued that he feels that the additional paving does not prohibit the City from being able to offer a horse-trade of rental licenses in the future. Wolf stated that the best case scenario would be for the license to disappear and the property to become a single-family home, in which case the new owner would most likely request a variance to add a garage which would also need a variance to increase the ground coverage; thereby making the property even less conforming. Vote: All yeas. Motion carried unanimously by a vote of 6 to 0. 4) OLD BUSINESS None 5) STAFF REPORTS D. Schmitt stated that the ZBA Bylaws ordinance will be on the Council Work Session shortly. 6) BOARD MEMBER CONCERNS None 7) ANNOUNCEMENTS None East Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes January 8, 2014 Page 4 of 5

9 8) ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:18 pm. Chris Wolf Chair Darcy C. Schmitt Secretary East Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes January 8, 2014 Page 5 of 5

10 Department of Planning, Building & Development Staff Contact: Darcy C. Schmitt Phone Number: ZBA Agenda: June 4, 2014 STAFF REPORT May 28, Albert Avenue Proposal An appeal of the Planning and Zoning Administrator s interpretation from Jack Davis legal counsel for Lingg Brewer, as it relates to the property located at 500 Albert Avenue, in the B-3, City Center Business District, of the following sections of Chapter 50 - Zoning Code of the City of East Lansing: a. Section 50-94(b)(4)(a) b. Section Background The following four items are being referred to the Zoning Board of Appeals for an appeal of the Planning and Zoning Administrators interpretation of Chapter 50 as written in the applicant s memo: The First issue which the City s [sic] has thought was open for interpretation, concerns Code 50-94(b)(4)(a). The Staff has asserted that only commercial uses should be permitted on the first floor of any project in the B-3 District. We assert that a reasonable balance of residential and commercial uses is allowed on the first floor. This issue requires an interpretation, and we respectfully request one. Staff has not asserted that only commercial uses should be permitted on the first floor of any project in the B-3 District, but have quoted the Code which states: at a minimum, the first floor of any building shall primarily be used for principal permitted business uses Since the applicant has proposed no commercial uses on floors other than the first floor, staff feels that 12% of the first floor of 500 Albert Avenue being proposed as a commercial use does not meet the intent of primarily be used as stated in Section 50-94(b)(4)(a) whether it were considered as the first floor of one building or as part of all three structures. The second issue for interpretation is how projects are analyzed under Code It is our position that the proposed project is either 1) an extension of 500 Albert, or 2) is three buildings which the Staff is required to consider in combination under the B-3 zoning ordinance because Code

11 500 Albert Avenue Page states that [t]he following uses of buildings [plural] and premises, individually or in combination, shall be permitted in the B-3 district. Code This issue requires and [sic] interpretation, and we respectfully request one. Staff has interpreted the three buildings under the proposed application as separate buildings for the purpose of considering the adequate business uses of the first floor. The building at 500 Albert Avenue is an existing legal nonconforming structure as it currently has no business uses on the first floor as required in the B-3 District. The applicant is proposing to attach a new structure to this building to allow the shared use of an elevator. The new building is proposed to be developed in two phases. If Staff were to look at the buildings as one entire unit for the purpose of considering a balance of business use to residential use, hypothetically the applicant could propose the third building to be predominantly commercial in nature to be counted toward the approval of all three structures. However, since the third building is proposed for Phase II there is no guarantee that this phase will be constructed. Our third issue for interpretation involves Code 50-94(b)(4)(a). The Staff claims that the project does not conform to the definition of a reasonable balance between principal permitted commercial and residential uses in a building in the B-3 District, while admitting that there is not set definition for what constitutes a reasonable balance between commercial and residential uses in a building or combination of buildings in the B-3 Disrtict [sic]. We believe that our project has a reasonable balance of the principal permitted uses of commercial and residential. This issue requires an interpretation, and we respectfully request one. See attached legal opinion from City Attorney Tom Yeadon Further, we request an interpretation of whether the reasonable balance concept applies to Code 50-94(b)(4)(a) and whether this section applies exclusively to the relationship between residential and commercial uses in an individual building. The Staff claims that the term reasonable balance in Code 50-94(b)(4)(a) applies to other sections of the Code dealing with the occupancy level of individual apartments in the context of the surrounding neighborhoods. This issue requires and interpretation, and we respectfully request one. Staff maintains that the following excerpts from Section 50-94(b)(4)(a) clearly refer to the individual unit occupancy when determining reasonable balance : at a minimum, the first floor of any building shall primarily be used for principal permitted business uses, and the number of multiple-family dwelling units and the permitted occupancy of the units shall be limited

12 500 Albert Avenue Page 3 to maintain a reasonable balance between the business and residential uses on the property consistent with the purpose of each business district. Possible Actions The board of appeals has the following powers and duties. (1) Review. The board shall review, hear, and decide upon appeals from any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by the building official or the planning and zoning official in the enforcement or application of this chapter. (2) Interpretation. The board shall have the power to review, hear, and decide upon appeals which request the following determinations: a. Requests for the interpretation of the provisions contained within any section of this chapter; b. Classify a use into a comparable use category which is not specifically mentioned by this chapter; c. Determine the off-street parking and loading space requirements of any use which is not specifically mentioned in article VIII of this chapter.

13 CITY OF EAST LANSING AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH Albert Avenue Charles Street Grand River Avenue Division Street Planning Commission Quality Services for a Quality Community

14 DIVISION 4. CITY CENTER COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, B-3 Sec Purpose. (a) (b) The purpose of this district is to provide for a wide range of commercial and high density residential land uses designed to serve the residents and shoppers of the East Lansing City Center. Because of its proximity to the Michigan State University campus and nearby residential neighborhoods, a major characteristic of the City Center is its intense core of pedestrian activity. This activity helps to create a unique social environment where people can gather and enjoy the festive atmosphere of a university downtown, attractive landscaping and greenery, and the diversity of retail shops. The provisions of this district are intended to encourage the planned development of pedestrian amenities and public and private open space, and closely regulate the need for direct automobile access to each establishment. Also important in the future development of the City Center is the concept of mixed-use development promoted by this district and the East Lansing Comprehensive Plan. Mixed-use development for purposes of this district is defined as the combination of commercial and residential land uses within the same building. Since the City Center contains only limited geographic area for expansion, intensifying development through a mixture of uses within the same building is of major importance to the city's efforts to expand the tax base and broaden the housing and shopping opportunities available in the City Center. Sec Permitted uses. The following uses of buildings and premises, individually or in combination, shall be permitted in the B-3 district. (1) Principal uses permitted subject to an approved site plan as set forth in section of this chapter. a. Any retail business except those uses which tend to detract from or interfere with a high intensity of pedestrian shopping activity including automobile sales facilities, auto service centers, drive-in restaurants and similar uses which rely on regular direct vehicular access to serve a significant portion of their customers; and except establishments licensed for the sale at retail of alcoholic liquor, as defined by section 105(2) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1998,

15 MCL (2), including specially designated merchants and specially designated distributors as described at MCL b. Any personal service establishment such as barber and beauty shops, dry cleaners and laundries, shoe repair shops, photographers, and service establishments of a like nature. c. Any office use or establishment, including but not limited to, general and professional offices, medical and dental offices, banks and financial institutions, automatic teller machines, real estate offices, travel agencies, and offices of political, professional, or civic organizations or associations. d. Restaurants, except restaurants licensed for the sale of alcoholic beverages or alcoholic liquor as defined by section 105(1) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1988, MCL (2), cafes, and similar establishments, including such establishments that may offer outdoor dining areas and walk-up service windows. e. Hotels. f. Theaters, public assembly halls, concert halls, meeting rooms, clubs, lodges, churches or similar places of assembly. g. Public and semipublic uses including government and public utility offices, museums, and art galleries. h. Colleges, universities, business or trade schools or similar education or training facilities. i. Radio and television studios and broadcasting facilities, excluding transmission, and receiving towers. (2) Principal uses permitted subject to an approved special use permit as provided by article II, division 3, of this chapter. a. Parking lots and structures available to the general public.

16 b. Recreational uses and facilities which do not serve alcoholic beverages, including but not limited to, video game arcades, billiard or pool parlors, spas, health clubs, and indoor or outdoor court facilities. c. Restaurants licensed for the sale of alcoholic beverages or alcoholic liquor as defined by section 105(1) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1988, MCL (2). d. Multiple-family dwellings, providing dining, social, or recreational facilities for persons residing off-site such as sororities or fraternities. e. Establishments licensed for the sale at retail of alcoholic liquor, as defined by section 105(2) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1998, MCL (2), including specially designated merchants and specially designated distributors as described at MCL f. Multiple-family dwelling units provided within a building which also contains one or more of the principal uses permitted in subsection (1) of this section; except, that an application for a special use permit may be approved for multiple-family dwelling units as the sole principal use of a building where it has been deemed by city council that: 1. Provides unique housing opportunities which are not otherwise available in the City Center; or 2. Provides a transition from mixed use development to a lower density residential use where a unique characteristic is present on the edge of the district. g. Uses with drive-in facilities, such as banks and financial institutions, automobile service businesses, including carwashes, and uses which rely on short-term on-site parking to serve their customers which exist at the time of adoption of the ordinance from which this division is derived or at the time the property is zoned into this district, may continue to operate in accordance with the provisions of article IX of this chapter; except, that such uses may be

17 reconstructed or modified when such uses are designed and operated to promote public safety by minimizing conflicts with pedestrian flow and congestion on public streets and alleys, and to reduce the visual impact of parking areas and driveways. (2) Permitted accessory uses. In addition to uses customarily incidental to the main use of the building or lot, the following uses shall be permitted as accessory uses: a. Class A home occupations. b. Video games, pool tables, and other similar amusement games, provided that, the total number of games or machines contained within the building shall not exceed one game for every 400 square feet of gross floor area. c. Automatic teller machines which are enclosed within or attached to the principal building. d. In conjunction with a major commercial establishment or attractor which promotes a high intensity pedestrian environment, offers a variety of goods or services, and has a minimum of 25,000 square feet of floor area, such as a large retail establishment or department store, a major office headquarters, or a hotel, limited drive-in or parking facilities may be provided to allow customers to drop off goods to be serviced, to pick up previously ordered goods, to drop off or pick up passengers, to be used in conjunction with a valet parking system or to be used for short-term delivery vehicle parking, provided that such drive-in or parking facilities are designed and operated to promote public safety by minimizing conflicts with pedestrian flow and congestion on public streets and alleys, and to reduce the visual impact of parking areas and driveways, and subject to an approved special use permit as provided by article II, division 3, of this chapter. e. Recreational uses and facilities such as swimming pools, indoor or outdoor court facilities, and weight or training rooms for the use of the patrons or tenants of a hotel or

18 apartment use, provided that, such uses do not exceed 20 percent of the gross floor area. f. Automobile appearance reconditioning, performed by hand or with handheld equipment, including washing, vacuuming, polishing, paint touch-up and decaling, when provided within an enclosed parking structure and occupying no more than five percent of the total floor area contained within the parking structure, and subject to an approved special use permit as provided in article II, division 3 of this chapter. Sec Development standards. (a) No use conducted on any premises within this district shall be permitted to occupy or use space within the public right-of-way, or operate a business which would restrict the use of a public street, sidewalk, or alley unless the proper authorization is first granted by the city council or its agent. (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) Minimum front yard depth: None. Minimum rear yard depth: None, except if the rear yard abuts any residential district, in which case the minimum setback shall be ten feet. Minimum side yard width: None, except if the side yard abuts any residential district, in which case the minimum setback shall be ten feet. Minimum floor area requirement. The minimum floor area of any proposed building, exclusive of basement areas used for mechanical or storage purposes, shall be determined by a ratio of 1.25 times the area of the site. Any building existing at the time of adoption of the ordinance from which this division is derived shall be allowed to expand without regard to this standard. Small, separately held lots of less than 10,000 square feet that abut a residential district may also be exempted from this requirement if the planning commission determines that the development potential of the lot is limited because of its size, configuration or location and that the proposed design and use of the lot would provide a desirable buffer between adjacent uses. Maximum building height shall be four stories or 64 feet; except buildings may be up to eight stories or 112 feet in height, subject to an approved special use permit as provided by article II, division 3, of this chapter; and

19 except further, that within that portion of the area zoned in this district bounded by Grand River Avenue, Bailey Street, Albert Avenue, Grove Street, Linden Street, Abbot Road, City Parking Lot 15, the north-south alley west of Abbot Road and 200 West Grand River Avenue (The Peoples Church), the city council may, upon an affirmative vote of threefourths of all members of the city council, permit an increase in stories or a maximum building height of up to 140 feet for a building deemed by the city council to be of significant public benefit subject to an approved special use permit as provided in article II, division 3 of this chapter. (g) Maximum building and ground coverage. The percentage of total site area allowed to be covered shall be determined according to the following schedule: Base Ratio Base Allotment Maximum Permitted Building coverage 80% + (*) = 100% Ground coverage 85% + (*) = 100% *Bonus allotments of building and ground coverage may be granted, provided that, the proposed use, its site or its relationship to adjacent properties incorporates certain architectural or site design features which allow for public or private open space, free movement of pedestrian traffic, abundant light and air, and other related elements. Qualifying features may include, but are not limited to, atriums, arcades, enclosed walkways, rooftop gardens, landscaped areas, plazas, and outdoor dining areas. (1) For buildings and sites where the principal use is any commercial use identified in section , bonus coverage shall be allotted on the basis of one and one-half square feet of added building and ground coverage for every one square foot of site area occupied by qualifying features. (2) For buildings and sites where the principal use is a major commercial establishment or attractor which promotes a high intensity pedestrian environment, offers a variety of goods or services, and has a minimum of 25,000 square feet of floor area, such as a large retail establishment or department store, a major office headquarters, or a hotel, bonus coverage shall be allocated on the basis of three square feet of added building and ground

20 coverage for every one square foot of site area occupied by qualifying features. (3) For buildings and sites where the principal use is a combination of any commercial use identified in section and housing, bonus coverage shall be allocated on the basis of five square feet of added building and ground coverage for every one square foot of site area occupied by qualifying features. (h) (i) (j) Any portion of a site not occupied by a building or covered by paving necessary for adequate ingress and egress, off-street loading or parking, or qualifying bonus features shall be landscaped with a combination of living deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs in an attractive manner. Loading requirements. Off-street loading areas shall be provided as required by article VIII of this chapter. On-premises parking. Consistent with the purposes of this district and the city's policies to optimize use of its consolidated parking facilities in the City Center commercial district, on-premises parking facilities intended as accessory uses to serve one or more uses on the same lot shall be prohibited, except where: (1) The applicant has demonstrated that the parking is necessary for the residents or customers of the proposed use and the municipal parking facility cannot accommodate the use; or (3) The applicant has demonstrated that the parking is necessary for increased accessibility for handicapped persons. If it is demonstrated that on-premises parking is necessary, the planning commission may stipulate conditions on the arrangement and operation of such parking to ensure that it is used for the purposes for which it is intended and approved or to ensure that it does not cause disruption of pedestrian or vehicular circulation. (k) (l) Off-premises parking. To ensure accessible parking for all uses in the district, the standards of subsection (d) must be met. Applications for a building and/or occupancy permit to construct or expand a building or to convert or extend the use of a building which would result in

21 an increased parking demand, as determined from the standards in section , shall first be submitted to the planning and zoning official for review. (1) To determine the number of parking spaces available, the planning and zoning official shall yearly prepare a report on the utilization of parking spaces within the district which specifies the number of spaces available by location, price, and tenure rates, and time of day. The report shall be presented to and approved by city council. The planning and zoning official shall also keep a record of all new, expanded, and converted uses which generate increased parking demands. The planning and zoning official shall not approve an application when the total amount of additional parking demands approved under subsection (l)(2) and subsection (l)(3) of this section within a one-year period would exceed a figure equal to 75 percent of the total number of parking spaces determined to be available in the annual report. (2) If the application would result in an increase of ten or fewer spaces for a use within a two-year period, the planning and zoning official shall approve it, if there are adequate and appropriate parking spaces available to serve the use, as defined by the following standards: a. The price and tenure rates for available parking spaces must be consistent with the expected parking habits of customers, employees, and tenants of the proposed use. b. The parking spaces must be available at all times consistent with anticipated peak parking demands of the proposed use. c. The parking spaces must meet the standards of subsection (d). (3) If the application would result in an increase of more than ten spaces within a two-year period or would exceed the limit of 75 percent of available spaces described above, the applicant shall submit a parking plan to the planning commission for review at a public hearing. The parking plan shall indicate where customers, employees, and tenants of the proposed use will be expected to park; the estimated number of employees and tenants; the anticipated time(s) of peak customer loads; the location and

22 arrangement of all existing or proposed on-site parking spaces as may be permitted under subsection (j) of this section; evidence of any arrangement(s) made by the applicant to use other offpremises parking spaces; and evidence of any proposed action(s) by the applicant to control or limit the parking demand generated by the proposed use. The planning commission shall approve the parking plan if it determines that the proposed use would not adversely affect surrounding properties and public facilities and that one or more of the following conditions exist: a. Because of the particular characteristics of the proposed use, it would not be expected to generate a significant increase in parking demand. b. Existing or proposed on-site spaces or other private offstreet parking facilities, as may be permitted under subsection (j) of this section, would meet the parking needs of the proposed use. c. The parking demand would be adequately accommodated within the municipal parking system due to the availability of spaces appropriate to serve the proposed use, as defined in the standards in subsection (l)(2) of this section. d. The parking demand would be adequately accommodated within the municipal parking system by directing customers, employees, and tenants to available spaces through validation policies, leasing arrangements, promotional programs, providing bus tokens, or other actions of the applicant. The commission may, at its discretion, condition approval of a parking plan to ensure the parking needs of the proposed use are adequately met without adversely impacting other property or causing congestion on public streets or within the municipal parking system, including mandatory validation policies, mandatory parking space leasing arrangements, and/or other mandated actions. Sec Standards for review.

23 (a) All uses. Except as may be provided elsewhere in this section or chapter, each special use permit application shall meet each of the following standards: (1) The proposed use shall be consistent with the purpose of the use district in which it is located and the purpose and provisions of this division. (2) The site plan for the property shall be approved in accordance with the provisions of section of this chapter. (3) The proposed size, height, architectural character and placement of new or expanded structures on the site shall be reasonably compatible with the existing or anticipated buildings on adjacent properties. (4) Streets and access facilities serving the site shall be able to safely accommodate the expected traffic generated by the proposed use; the use shall not cause excessive traffic congestion or delays, obstruct access to adjacent properties, or imperil the safety of motorists, pedestrians or bicyclists. (5) The proposed use shall not adversely affect the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties by generating excessive noise, vibration, light, glare, odors or any other form of pollution or nuisances. (6) The proposed use shall not materially diminish the economic value of adjacent properties or the city as a whole. (7) The proposed use shall not materially diminish the privacy, safety, security or enjoyment of any residential dwelling or residential neighborhood within the vicinity of the site. (8) The proposed use shall be located with direct access to and frontage on a major street as designated in the major street plan, or within an area designated for adaptive reuse in the city center element of the comprehensive plan.

24 (b) Specific uses. In addition to the standards above, to address their unique characteristics, certain uses shall also meet the applicable standards below. (1) Churches. a. Standards set forth in items (3) and (8) of subsection (a) above do not apply to churches. b. The minimum yard requirements of the use district in which the church is to be located shall apply except that in no event shall the yard requirement be less than 0.5 feet of yard to each foot of building height (excluding steeples) as applied to rear yard or side yard depth. (2) Businesses selling alcoholic beverages. The following additional standards shall apply to restaurants and businesses licensed or to be licensed for the sale of alcoholic beverages or alcoholic liquor for consumption on or off the premises. a. The establishment shall not be located within 500 feet of a church, elementary or secondary school, child development center, or community center or in such proximity so as to annoy, injure, offend, disrupt, disturb, or interfere with the activities conducted thereon or the persons conducting, attending, or traveling to or from such premises. This restriction may be waived by city council at the request of the church, school district, child development center or community center whose location would otherwise prohibit the proposed use or, if there is an objection to the waiver of this restriction by the church, school or development or community center, city council may waive this restriction only after hearing and good cause shown that the proposed establishment will not be in such proximity so as to annoy, injure, offend, disrupt, disturb, or interfere with the activities of the particular church, school or development or community center. b. The establishment shall not cause, add to or continue an undue concentration of similar uses in the neighborhood

25 such that liquor establishments and trade become a dominant influence or feature of the district or neighborhood. (3) Fraternities and sororities. a. The standard set forth in item (8) of subsection (a) above does not apply to fraternities and sororities. b. In addition to the parking requirements for such uses specified in section , fraternities and sororities shall provide and maintain a parking access and management arrangement sufficient to serve the parking and access demands associated with chapter meetings, formal and informal social activities, or other on-site events which include the attendance of persons other than those who reside on the property. Such parking and access arrangements may include, but are not limited to, the provision of additional on-site parking, the use of private offpremises parking, the use of public parking in municipal lots or on-street spaces, and the availability of bus or shuttle service or carpooling arrangements. (4) Multiple-family dwellings in business districts. Where multiple-family dwelling units are provided in conjunction with business uses on a property in a business district, the following additional standards shall apply. a. Except where multiple-family dwelling units may be permitted as the sole principal use of a building to provide unique housing opportunities which are not otherwise available in the city center, at a minimum, the first floor of any building shall primarily be used for principal permitted business uses, and the number of multiplefamily dwelling units and the permitted occupancy of the units shall be limited to maintain a reasonable balance between the business and residential uses on the property consistent with the purpose of each business district. b. The number of multiple-family dwelling units, the permitted occupancy of the units and the height and size of structures

26 containing such units shall be limited to be compatible with adjacent development patterns and any nearby residential districts. c. Reasonable amounts of yard areas and open space shall be provided where necessary to be consistent with surrounding use and development patterns and to provide for the privacy and enjoyment of the residents. d. The design, type and operational characteristics of the business and residential uses on the property shall be compatible with one another. e. The residential units shall be designed and marketed to diversify housing opportunities in the neighborhood and shall not increase existing high concentrations of similar housing units in the neighborhood.

27 Sec Standards for review. (a) All uses. Except as may be provided elsewhere in this section or chapter, each special use permit application shall meet each of the following standards: (1) The proposed use shall be consistent with the purpose of the use district in which it is located and the purpose and provisions of this division. (2) The site plan for the property shall be approved in accordance with the provisions of section of this chapter. (3) The proposed size, height, architectural character and placement of new or expanded structures on the site shall be reasonably compatible with the existing or anticipated buildings on adjacent properties. (4) Streets and access facilities serving the site shall be able to safely accommodate the expected traffic generated by the proposed use; the use shall not cause excessive traffic congestion or delays, obstruct access to adjacent properties, or imperil the safety of motorists, pedestrians or bicyclists. (5) The proposed use shall not adversely affect the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties by generating excessive noise, vibration, light, glare, odors or any other form of pollution or nuisances. (6) The proposed use shall not materially diminish the economic value of adjacent properties or the city as a whole. (7) The proposed use shall not materially diminish the privacy, safety, security or enjoyment of any residential dwelling or residential neighborhood within the vicinity of the site. (8) The proposed use shall be located with direct access to and frontage on a major street as designated in the major street plan, or within an area designated for adaptive reuse in the city center element of the comprehensive plan. (b) Specific uses. In addition to the standards above, to address their unique characteristics, certain uses shall also meet the applicable standards below. (1) Churches. a. Standards set forth in items (3) and (8) of subsection (a) above do not apply to churches.

28 b. The minimum yard requirements of the use district in which the church is to be located shall apply except that in no event shall the yard requirement be less than 0.5 feet of yard to each foot of building height (excluding steeples) as applied to rear yard or side yard depth. (2) Businesses selling alcoholic beverages. The following additional standards shall apply to restaurants and businesses licensed or to be licensed for the sale of alcoholic beverages or alcoholic liquor for consumption on or off the premises. a. The establishment shall not be located within 500 feet of a church, elementary or secondary school, child development center, or community center or in such proximity so as to annoy, injure, offend, disrupt, disturb, or interfere with the activities conducted thereon or the persons conducting, attending, or traveling to or from such premises. This restriction may be waived by city council at the request of the church, school district, child development center or community center whose location would otherwise prohibit the proposed use or, if there is an objection to the waiver of this restriction by the church, school or development or community center, city council may waive this restriction only after hearing and good cause shown that the proposed establishment will not be in such proximity so as to annoy, injure, offend, disrupt, disturb, or interfere with the activities of the particular church, school or development or community center. b. The establishment shall not cause, add to or continue an undue concentration of similar uses in the neighborhood such that liquor establishments and trade become a dominant influence or feature of the district or neighborhood. (3) Fraternities and sororities. a. The standard set forth in item (8) of subsection (a) above does not apply to fraternities and sororities. b. In addition to the parking requirements for such uses specified in section , fraternities and sororities shall provide and maintain a parking access and management arrangement sufficient to serve the parking and access

29 demands associated with chapter meetings, formal and informal social activities, or other on-site events which include the attendance of persons other than those who reside on the property. Such parking and access arrangements may include, but are not limited to, the provision of additional on-site parking, the use of private offpremises parking, the use of public parking in municipal lots or on-street spaces, and the availability of bus or shuttle service or carpooling arrangements. (4) Multiple-family dwellings in business districts. Where multiple-family dwelling units are provided in conjunction with business uses on a property in a business district, the following additional standards shall apply. a. Except where multiple-family dwelling units may be permitted as the sole principal use of a building to provide unique housing opportunities which are not otherwise available in the city center, at a minimum, the first floor of any building shall primarily be used for principal permitted business uses, and the number of multiple-family dwelling units and the permitted occupancy of the units shall be limited to maintain a reasonable balance between the business and residential uses on the property consistent with the purpose of each business district. b. The number of multiple-family dwelling units, the permitted occupancy of the units and the height and size of structures containing such units shall be limited to be compatible with adjacent development patterns and any nearby residential districts. c. Reasonable amounts of yard areas and open space shall be provided where necessary to be consistent with surrounding use and development patterns and to provide for the privacy and enjoyment of the residents. d. The design, type and operational characteristics of the business and residential uses on the property shall be compatible with one another. e. The residential units shall be designed and marketed to diversify housing opportunities in the neighborhood and shall not increase existing high concentrations of similar housing units in the neighborhood.

30 (5) Additional building height. a. Where a special use permit is required to permit building height above the base level permitted in any use district, the compatibility of the building shall be determined in part by the extent to which the use of the building and the building design, its setbacks and its orientation on the site successfully mitigate negative impacts upon neighboring uses, the natural features of the site and public facilities and services. Such buildings may be approved only if they comply with subsection (a) of this section and all of the following additional standards: 1. The building shall not be located in such proximity to a single-family or two-family neighborhood so as to cause excessive noise or shadowing impacts, or substantial reductions in personal privacy or property values. The planning and zoning administrator may require the applicant to submit a solar angle diagram and shadow analysis prepared by a registered architect or engineer showing the extent of shadowing caused by the proposed building on adjacent properties and structures. 2. The portion of the building extending above the base level permitted in each use district shall be located no closer to the property line of a residentially zoned property than a distance equal to the amount of the height in excess of the base level. 3. The building shall not result in traffic generation which exceeds the carrying capacity of adjacent streets, exceeds the parking capacity of on-site spaces or nearby municipal parking facilities, causes excessive congestion or risks to public safety, or causes or substantially contributes to excessive volumes of traffic through residential neighborhoods. 4. The building shall not generate demands which exceed the capacity of public utilities and services necessary to serve the site. b. In addition, the city council may further increase the maximum permitted building height to the extent and for that area in the B-

31 3 district as specified in subsection (f) for a building deemed to be of significant public benefit. The city council shall find, upon an affirmative vote of three-fourths of all members of the city council, that such buildings meet subsections (5)a.1. through 4., of this subsection and all of the following standards: 1. The building, through its proposed use, shall contribute substantially to the mix of desirable commercial, residential, social, cultural or employment opportunities or public amenities or open space available in the business district to achieve one or more public goals or objectives, as specified in the comprehensive plan or other strategic plan of the city, to benefit the business district, the adjacent residential or public areas, and the city as a whole. 2. The applicant demonstrates that additional building height is necessary in order to make the proposed development economically feasible for the intended use and no reasonable alternative to additional height exists. 3. The additional building height will cause no significant additional negative impact on adjacent properties, public streets and parking facilities, or public utility and services. (5) Dispensaries and primary caregiver operations. The following additional standards shall apply to dispensaries and primary caregiver operations: a. They shall comply at all times and in all circumstances with the Medical Marihuana Act and the General Rules of the Michigan Department of Community Health and/or the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs. b. They must be located outside of a 1,000-foot radius from any school, including any licensed facility with after school programs, child care centers, or day care centers, to insure community compliance with federal "Drug-Free School Zones" requirements. c. No more than five primary caregivers may operate from a dispensary.

32 d. All medical marihuana shall be contained within an enclosed, locked facility, inaccessible on all sides and equipped with locks that permit access only by the registered caregivers, as reviewed and approved by the building official and the police department. e. All necessary building, electrical, plumbing and mechanical permits shall be obtained for any portion of the structure which contains electrical wiring, lighting and/or watering devices that support the cultivation, growing or harvesting of marihuana. f. Any portion of the structure where energy usage and heat exceeds typical residential use, such as a grow room, and the storage of any chemicals such as herbicides, pesticides, and fertilizers shall be subject to inspection and approval by the fire department to insure compliance with the Michigan Fire Protection Code. g. They shall not be operated from a business which sells alcoholic beverages. h. The establishment shall not be located in such proximity to churches or community centers so as to annoy, injure, offend, disrupt, disturb, or interfere with the activities conducted thereon or the persons conducting, attending, or traveling to or from such premises. i. The establishment shall not cause or continue an undue concentration of similar uses in the neighborhood such that dispensaries and medical marihuana paraphernalia trade become a dominant influence or feature of the district or neighborhood and no caregiver operation or dispensary shall be located within 500 feet of another caregiver operation or dispensary. j. The establishment shall be designed, operated, and maintained at all times consistent with responsible business practices and so that no excessive demands shall be placed upon public safety services, nor any excessive risk of harm to the public health, safety, or sanitation, interference with vehicular or pedestrian traffic or parking, or the continuance or maintenance of any unlawful conduct, public nuisance, or disorderly conduct either within the establishment or on or about the adjacent businesses and public streets, alleys, parks, parking facilities, or other areas open to the public. The establishment shall make reasonable effort to report to

33 authorities any unlawful conduct that is observed from the premises. The requirements of this section shall be a written condition of each special use permit issued to a dispensary or caregiver operation. k. No drive-through facilities shall be permitted. l. They may not be operated out of a residence or residential structure. m. All transfers and deliveries of medical marihuana to qualifying patients must occur within the structure out of public view or inside the patient's residence. n. The consumption of medical marihuana on the premises is prohibited. Sec Permitted uses. The following uses of buildings and premises, individually or in combination, shall be permitted in the B-3 district. (1) Principal uses permitted subject to an approved site plan as set forth in section of this chapter. a. Any retail business except those uses which tend to detract from or interfere with a high intensity of pedestrian shopping activity including automobile sales facilities, auto service centers, drive-in restaurants and similar uses which rely on regular direct vehicular access to serve a significant portion of their customers; and except establishments licensed for the sale at retail of alcoholic liquor, as defined by section 105(2) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1998, MCL (2), including specially designated merchants and specially designated distributors as described at MCL b. Any personal service establishment such as barber and beauty shops, dry cleaners and laundries, shoe repair shops, photographers, and service establishments of a like nature. c. Any office use or establishment, including but not limited to, general and professional offices, medical and dental offices, banks and financial institutions, automatic teller machines, real estate offices, travel agencies, and offices of political, professional, or civic organizations or associations.

34 d. Restaurants, except restaurants licensed for the sale of alcoholic beverages or alcoholic liquor as defined by section 105(1) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1988, MCL (2), cafes, and similar establishments, including such establishments that may offer outdoor dining areas and walk-up service windows. e. Hotels. f. Theaters, public assembly halls, concert halls, meeting rooms, clubs, lodges, churches or similar places of assembly. g. Public and semipublic uses including government and public utility offices, museums, and art galleries. h. Colleges, universities, business or trade schools or similar education or training facilities. i. Radio and television studios and broadcasting facilities, excluding transmission, and receiving towers. (2) Principal uses permitted subject to an approved special use permit as provided by article II, division 3, of this chapter. a. Parking lots and structures available to the general public. b. Recreational uses and facilities which do not serve alcoholic beverages, including but not limited to, video game arcades, billiard or pool parlors, spas, health clubs, and indoor or outdoor court facilities. c. Restaurants licensed for the sale of alcoholic beverages or alcoholic liquor as defined by section 105(1) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1988, MCL (2). d. Multiple-family dwellings, providing dining, social, or recreational facilities for persons residing off-site such as sororities or fraternities. e. Establishments licensed for the sale at retail of alcoholic liquor, as defined by section 105(2) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1998, MCL (2), including specially designated merchants and specially designated distributors as described at MCL f. Multiple-family dwelling units provided within a building which also contains one or more of the principal uses permitted in subsection (1) of this section; except, that an application for a special use permit may be approved for

35 multiple-family dwelling units as the sole principal use of a building where it has been deemed by city council that: 1. Provides unique housing opportunities which are not otherwise available in the City Center; or 2. Provides a transition from mixed use development to a lower density residential use where a unique characteristic is present on the edge of the district. g. Uses with drive-in facilities, such as banks and financial institutions, automobile service businesses, including carwashes, and uses which rely on short-term on-site parking to serve their customers which exist at the time of adoption of the ordinance from which this division is derived or at the time the property is zoned into this district, may continue to operate in accordance with the provisions of article IX of this chapter; except, that such uses may be reconstructed or modified when such uses are designed and operated to promote public safety by minimizing conflicts with pedestrian flow and congestion on public streets and alleys, and to reduce the visual impact of parking areas and driveways. (3) Permitted accessory uses. In addition to uses customarily incidental to the main use of the building or lot, the following uses shall be permitted as accessory uses: a. Class A home occupations. b. Video games, pool tables, and other similar amusement games, provided that, the total number of games or machines contained within the building shall not exceed one game for every 400 square feet of gross floor area. c. Automatic teller machines which are enclosed within or attached to the principal building. d. In conjunction with a major commercial establishment or attractor which promotes a high intensity pedestrian environment, offers a variety of goods or services, and has a minimum of 25,000 square feet of floor area, such as a large retail establishment or department store, a major office headquarters, or a hotel, limited drive-in or parking facilities may be provided to allow customers to drop off goods to be serviced, to pick up previously ordered goods, to drop off or pick up passengers, to be used in conjunction with a valet

36 parking system or to be used for short-term delivery vehicle parking, provided that such drive-in or parking facilities are designed and operated to promote public safety by minimizing conflicts with pedestrian flow and congestion on public streets and alleys, and to reduce the visual impact of parking areas and driveways, and subject to an approved special use permit as provided by article II, division 3, of this chapter. e. Recreational uses and facilities such as swimming pools, indoor or outdoor court facilities, and weight or training rooms for the use of the patrons or tenants of a hotel or apartment use, provided that, such uses do not exceed 20 percent of the gross floor area. f. Automobile appearance reconditioning, performed by hand or with handheld equipment, including washing, vacuuming, polishing, paint touch-up and decaling, when provided within an enclosed parking structure and occupying no more than five percent of the total floor area contained within the parking structure, and subject to an approved special use permit as provided in article II, division 3 of this chapter.

37

38

39

40

41

42 Department of Planning, Building, & Development Staff Contact: Timothy R. Schmitt Phone No.: PC Agenda: March 12, 2014 STAFF REPORT March 6, 2014 Site Plan and Special Use Permit Application 500 Albert Avenue and 122 Division Street (Lingg Brewer) SUBJECT An application from Lingg Brewer for Site Plan and Special Use Permit approval for the properties at 500 Albert Avenue and 122 Division Street. The applicant is proposing to construct a four-story, mixed-use building containing 14 apartment units and approximately 3,200 square feet of non-residential space, in two phases and to convert approximately 270 square feet of the existing 500 Albert building to office space. The property is zoned B-3, City Center Commercial District. EXISTING CONDITIONS The proposed project includes an apartment building located at 500 Albert Avenue, a single-family detached house at 122 Division Street and the vacant property between the two structures. The brick apartment building at 500 Albert Avenue is two stories tall, with six (6) dwelling units and a rental license with a total occupancy of 19 persons. The house at 122 Division has a rental license for up to four (4) persons and is one of the last single-family structures in the downtown. Both of the properties are zoned B-3, City Center Commercial. The properties to the east (The Wild Goose Inn and Parking Lot 11), south (several one- and two-story retail buildings), and to the west (the Division Street ramp, several one- and two-story commercial buildings) are all also zoned B-3 as part of the City s downtown. Further to the north, on the opposite side of Albert Avenue, are a number of rental properties that are zoned RM-32, City Center Multiple-Family Residential. To the northwest, there is a small area of properties that are zoned B-3, including Saper Galleries and a small retail building. Further north is the Bailey residential neighborhood. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The applicant has modified the plans several times from their original design and submittal. The plans under review call for the construction of a new, four-story building, in two phases, that would be attached to the 500 Albert structure. The house at 122 Division would be demolished in the second phase, pursuant to a tentative development agreement that the applicant is proposing. Phase I would be built on the vacant land between the existing structures and would include approximately 1,362 square feet of retail space on the first floor, and seven (7) total apartments (one 2-bedroom unit and six 3-bedroom units). The second phase would be similar. It would have approximately 1,865 square feet of retail on the first floor, along with seven (7) total apartments (one 3- bedroom unit and six 4-bedroom units). Additionally, the applicant is proposing to

43 Staff Report 500 Albert and 122 Division March 6, 2014 Page 2 of 12 convert approximately 270 square feet of existing first floor residential space in the 500 Albert building to office space. In total, the project would have approximately 3,200 square feet of newly built non-residential space, 270 square feet of converted nonresidential space and 14 apartments, with a total of 47 beds. Building Summary: Non-residential space 3,200 square feet new, 270 square feet converted Efficiency apartments 0 One bedroom apartments 0 Two bedroom apartments 1 Three bedroom apartments 7 Four bedroom apartments 6 Five bedroom apartments 0 Six bedroom apartments 0 STAFF REVIEW Site Plan A site plan application must meet the specific use and dimensional standards of the zoning district in which it is to be located and a number of other required conditions for development specified in the Zoning Code. A site plan application must substantially comply with the general standards of review specified in Sec of the Code. A site plan must also comply with other applicable local ordinances and state and federal statutes and be consistent with the objectives of the City s Comprehensive Plan. A site plan may be approved subject to certain conditions or modifications necessary to bring the plan into conformance with these requirements, including the approval of any variance that may be granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals. The proposal for new construction that has been submitted requires the parcels containing 500 Albert and 122 Division to be combined for construction purposes. The buildings being proposed would straddle property lines if not combined, which is not permitted under the Zoning Code or the Building Code. The applicant has acknowledged the need for bike parking on the site, but the location of the actual racks is yet to be determined. The main issue for discussion remains the use/modification of the existing building at 500 Albert. It is proposed to be modified under this proposal by converting one bedroom in the building to approximately 270 square feet of office space that is accessible either through the existing apartment unit, through the apartment building entrance/elevator, or through the proposed retail space. Currently, the building at 500 Albert is a single-use, non-conforming building in the downtown. A determination will need to be made as to whether or not the token addition of office space changes the character of the 500 Albert building enough to meet the requirements of Section (2)(f) of the Zoning Code, which allows multiple-family units only in buildings with one or more principal permitted uses. The building has approximately 2,460 square feet on the first floor. The conversion of 270 square feet (including bathrooms) to office space represents only 11.0% of the floor area. Phase I of the new construction would be 74.4% non-residential

44 Staff Report 500 Albert and 122 Division March 6, 2014 Page 3 of 12 and Phase II would now be 76.1% non-residential, after the applicant revised the plans to remove an apartment unit from the first floor. Zoning District Standards The B-3 District is intended to provide for a wide range of dense commercial and residential land uses to serve residents and shoppers from the City and the University and to act as the City s downtown core area. It aims to foster a unique social environment, interesting pedestrian scale spaces, and strong diversity of uses. Given the small land area associated with the downtown, emphasis is on providing multiple uses in a single building, with taller building heights than are permitted elsewhere in the community. A full review of the technical standards can be found on the last page of this report in the Zoning Analysis. A. General Standards of Review for Site Plan Approval (1) General site conditions. The site shall be designed and developed to provide a logical relationship between functional elements, to effectively serve the purposes for which it is to be developed, and to be reasonably compatible with surrounding properties. The newly constructed buildings are proposed to be placed to the south of the existing structure at 500 Albert, but still north of the public alley. The retail space will be slightly disconnected from the rest of the downtown, especially with only the first phase built and the house at 122 Division still in place. In terms of compatibility, this building will be larger than the surrounding buildings, with the exception of the City parking ramp. Until the building at 122 Division is removed, there will not be a coherent design on the site, as the three buildings will each be a different height and architectural character. (2) Natural features. The site shall be designed and developed to minimize the disruption or loss of its desirable natural qualities and to enhance its overall appearance. There shall be no net loss in either wetland area or wetland benefits due to development of the site. There are no natural features on the site, as it is an already disturbed site. The applicant will be removing existing lawn and some trees along the rear of the property. The lawn area east and west of 500 Albert will remain in place, as no construction is proposed for these areas. (3) Traffic Access. The site shall be designed and developed to provide safe and efficient access for all forms of travel and to minimize impacts on adjacent public facilities. There are no curb cuts proposed for the site, as there is no parking on the site. The maximum increase in cars resulting from this project (assuming each new occupant would have their own vehicle) would be 47 cars, along with some

45 Staff Report 500 Albert and 122 Division March 6, 2014 Page 4 of 12 additional traffic from the retail, which would be minimal and would rely more on foot traffic. This amount of traffic does not rise to the level of requiring a traffic study, nor is it expected to create any traffic issues for the surrounding roads and properties. (4) Utilities and public services. The site shall be designed and developed to facilitate the efficient provision and maintenance of adequate public services. Public storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water are available for the site. The additional units will not put an undue strain on the existing system. (5) Environmental protection. The site shall be designed and developed to minimize any risk of pollution of natural resources and to protect the public health, safety and welfare. No pollution is expected as a result of this proposal and the public health, safety, and welfare will be protected. B. Other Applicable Local Ordinances and State and Federal Regulations Prior to the approval of final plans and the issuance of any construction permits, the final plans will have to comply with all applicable local construction standards and specifications. C. Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive Plan calls for mixed uses on the site, up to 10 stories in height. The proposed building is considered mixed-use and is four (4) stories tall, which is higher than many of the buildings in the area, but within the area that the Comprehensive Plan calls for taller buildings. D. Other Department Review The Planning, Building and Development Department routed a copy of the proposal to the Fire, Building, Police, and Engineering Departments. Comments from those departments that have been received are attached. Further reviews will be performed when the applicant submits for building permits to do the physical work in the space. STAFF REVIEW Special Use Permit A Special Use Permit application may be approved if it meets the requirements for Site Plan approval reviewed above and if the City finds that the application meets the following additional standards of review specified in Sec of the Code. A Special Use Permit may also be approved subject to reasonable conditions or certain modifications necessary to ensure that the use conforms to all applicable requirements.

46 Staff Report 500 Albert and 122 Division March 6, 2014 Page 5 of 12 A. All uses. Except as may be provided elsewhere in the Zoning Code, each Special Use Permit application shall meet each of the following standards: (1) The proposed use shall be consistent with the purpose of the use district in which it is located and the purpose and provisions of this division. From the Zoning Ordinance, the purpose of the B-3 Zoning District is: (a) The purpose of this district is to provide for a wide range of commercial and high density residential land uses designed to serve the residents and shoppers of the East Lansing City Center. Because of its proximity to the Michigan State University campus and nearby residential neighborhoods, a major characteristic of the City Center is its intense core of pedestrian activity. This activity helps to create a unique social environment where people can gather and enjoy the festive atmosphere of a university downtown, attractive landscaping and greenery, and the diversity of retail shops. (b) The provisions of this district are intended to encourage the planned development of pedestrian amenities and public and private open space, and closely regulate the need for direct automobile access to each establishment. Also important in the future development of the City Center is the concept of mixed-use development promoted by this district and the East Lansing Comprehensive Plan. Mixed-use development for purposes of this district is defined as the combination of commercial and residential land uses within the same building. Since the City Center contains only limited geographic area for expansion, intensifying development through a mixture of uses within the same building is of major importance to the city's efforts to expand the tax base and broaden the housing and shopping opportunities available in the City Center. The B-3, City Center Commercial District, is intended to foster the development of a vibrant downtown. This includes student and mixed-market housing types, retail space, office space, and open spaces. The new buildings being proposed would include both retail and residential space, along with a small amount of office space in the existing building at 500 Albert. The residential units would be student rentals. (2) The site plan for the property shall be approved in accordance with the provisions of section of this chapter. The submittal was made properly and the plan has been presented in accordance with Section The Zoning Analysis at the end of this report identifies any issues with respect to the standards of the Zoning Ordinance. (3) The proposed size, height, architectural character and placement of new or expanded structures on the site shall be reasonably compatible with the existing or anticipated buildings on adjacent properties. The buildings are proposed to be four (4) stories tall, with a half basement in both buildings. The buildings are 45 feet tall to the midpoint of the peak of the roof.

47 Staff Report 500 Albert and 122 Division March 6, 2014 Page 6 of 12 The two phases are mirror images of each other in terms of exterior design. The surrounding buildings, both immediately adjacent and further afield, are all substantially shorter. The exception is the parking structure across Division Street. The scale of the building is somewhat out of character with the surrounding buildings; however, they do represent the first major redevelopment in this block of the downtown. (4) Streets and access facilities serving the site shall be able to safely accommodate the expected traffic generated by the proposed use; the use shall not cause excessive traffic congestion or delays, obstruct access to adjacent properties, or imperil the safety of motorists, pedestrians or bicyclists. Given the small amount of additional vehicular traffic that is expected to be generated, no additional congestion is expected from this request. (5) The proposed use shall not adversely affect the use and enjoyment of adjacent properties by generating excessive noise, vibration, light, glare, odors or any other form of pollution or nuisances. The City has previously had conversations with the owner of the Wild Goose Inn, who indicated that noise has been an occasional problem over the years. The applicant has not sited any patios, decks, or balconies adjacent to the Wild Goose Inn, which are items that would be expected to generate substantial noise in a college setting, when adjacent to a different type of use. Other issues, such as vibration, light, glare, odor, or any other nuisance or pollution are not expected from a proposal of this nature. All applicable City ordinances related to soil erosion, noise, lighting, etc. will be enforced through construction and operation of the project. (6) The proposed use shall not materially diminish the economic value of adjacent properties or the city as a whole. We would not expect that the addition of a revenue generating property would diminish the economic value of the neighboring properties or the City as a whole. (7) The proposed use shall not materially diminish the privacy, safety, security or enjoyment of any residential dwelling or residential neighborhood within the vicinity of the site. The height of the buildings will not be able to be readily screened and the applicant is building three (3) feet off the east property line, shared with the Wild Good Inn. The property to the north is owned by the applicant, so concerns about privacy and safety are not as immediate. (8) The proposed use shall be located with direct access to and frontage on a major street as designated in the major street plan, or within an area designated for adaptive reuse in the city center element of the comprehensive plan.

48 Staff Report 500 Albert and 122 Division March 6, 2014 Page 7 of 12 The site has no curb cuts; therefore, no need for direct access. It is in an adaptive reuse area, given that it is in the downtown. B. Specific uses. In addition to the standards above, to address their unique characteristics, certain uses shall also meet the applicable standards below. (4) Multiple-family dwellings in business districts. Where multiple-family dwelling units are provided in conjunction with business uses on a property in a business district, the following additional standards shall apply. a. Except where multiple-family dwelling units may be permitted as the sole principal use of a building to provide unique housing opportunities which are not otherwise available in the city center, at a minimum, the first floor of any building shall primarily be used for principal permitted business uses, and the number of multiple-family dwelling units and the permitted occupancy of the units shall be limited to maintain a reasonable balance between the business and residential uses on the property consistent with the purpose of each business district. The first floor of phase one of the new construction is almost entirely retail in nature, including only common areas serving the upstairs and downstairs residential units as other uses on the first floor. The second phase is also largely retail on the first floor, with some common area for the upstairs and downstairs units. The changes being proposed to the 500 Albert building will convert approximately 270 square feet of floor area to non-residential space, leaving approximately 2,190 square feet of floor area on the first floor of the building as residential. b. The number of multiple-family dwelling units, the permitted occupancy of the units and the height and size of structures containing such units shall be limited to be compatible with adjacent development patterns and any nearby residential districts. The height of the structure will be four (4) stories, which will be the tallest structure in the area, outside of the parking structure. The types of units being proposed are consistent with student housing in the area. c. Reasonable amounts of yard areas and open space shall be provided where necessary to be consistent with surrounding use and development patterns and to provide for the privacy and enjoyment of the residents. There is a small amount of yard area being retained on the 500 Albert property. Michigan State University's campus is less than one block away, which provides ample open space for residents in the downtown.

49 Staff Report 500 Albert and 122 Division March 6, 2014 Page 8 of 12 d. The design, type and operational characteristics of the business and residential uses on the property shall be compatible with one another. Staff cannot identify any major concerns with respect to the proposed new retail space and the residential units being proposed. The proposed office space in the 500 Albert building is awkwardly located in the building and appears to only be accessible through the retail space in Phase I, through a residential unit, or through the entrance to the residential space on the upper floors. e. The residential units shall be designed and marketed to diversify housing opportunities in the neighborhood and shall not increase existing high concentrations of similar housing units in the neighborhood. PROPERTY HISTORY The proposed unit mix consists of three- and four-bedroom units (with one two-bedroom unit). This is typical for student rental projects and can be found in many buildings in the nearby neighborhood. The applicant has indicated that the units will be marketed to undergraduate and graduate students. The development history of this property is lengthy. In 1988, City Council approved a plan to allow the brick structure to be moved to its current location (it was previously on the site of the Division Street parking ramp). As part of this approval, the building at 122 Division was required to be demolished 18 months after the Division Street ramp was constructed and open. There was a commercial component to this plan. Due to difficulty in securing financing, the applicant applied for a modification six (6) months later, in This request was for a three (3) story addition on the south side of the brick structure, after it had been moved, adding additional bedrooms and removing all commercial space from the project. The applicant also requested that the structure at 122 Division, and its parking, be allowed to be retained for a period of three (3) additional years. Although the Planning Commission did not recommend the request, the City Council ultimately approved it. In 1992, due to difficulty in obtaining financing, the applicant requested a modification to the 1989 approval to allow the structure at 122 Division to remain until the note on the property was fully paid off. City Council ultimately approved an additional two (2) year extension, along with a condition that would require the parking area to be removed, when the City reconstructed the alley. In 1994, due in part to financial conditions, the applicant again made a request to modify the condition of approval regarding the house at 122 Division. This was a two part request, with either that the condition of approval which required the house at 122 Division be demolished be removed or a plan of development for a new five (5) story building, incorporating the existing house, be approved. The new construction would

50 Staff Report 500 Albert and 122 Division March 6, 2014 Page 9 of 12 have essentially 'wrapped around' the house. City Council ultimately allowed for the retention of the house, and the modification of the condition removing the parking south of the house. In 2005, a new submittal was made that covered the entire area south side of 500 Albert. This proposal proposed a six (6) story addition on the vacant property between the buildings in Phase I, while Phase II would demolish 122 Division and replace it with another six (6) story building. Both were planned for mixed-use, commercial on the first floor, with residential above. At the time, Staff recommended denial of the plans and the Planning Commission agreed with the recommendation. The City Council chose to refer the plan back to the Planning Commission (rather than denying it outright) and asked the applicant to make several changes. These changes were considered in 2006, when the applicant came back with a fourstory building, with slightly more retail space on the first floor. It included 7 two-bedroom apartment units with no basement uses. After some additional changes were made (notably, moving the building off the east property line), City Council ultimately approved the plan subject to a number of conditions. Due to financial conditions, the building was never built and 122 Division was never demolished. SUMMARY COMMENTS The proposed plans include an infill building abutting and structurally connecting to an existing building, adding new retail and residential space in the downtown, and abutting to an existing single-family home that is a licensed rental. Should the second phase of the project come to fruition, the single-family home would be removed. Additionally, the terms of the development agreement that the applicant is offering would allow the City to remove the house under certain circumstances, should the project not advance to Phase II. Staff's main concern at this point revolves around the nature of the first floor use in the buildings. Phase I of the project is acceptable and what would traditionally be seen in a downtown project. However, it structurally connects to the 500 Albert building, which is a non-conforming building as a residential only building. Therefore, this building would also need to convert a portion of their first floor to non-residential uses. As currently shown, a modest amount of office space is proposed, only accessible through Phase I's retail space, an existing residential unit, or a shared access for residential units. The Building Department has noted a number of concerns with this approach that will need to be analyzed in much more detail moving forward. Even absent those concerns, the converted space represents only 12.2% of the floor area of the first floor of the building, going against the intent of the district, which aims to have a vibrant mixed-use district, not just the token addition of non-residential space to facilitate construction of an apartment building. In the long term, the Comprehensive Plan calls for mixed-uses in all downtown buildings. The second phase of new construction and the modifications to 500 Albert only partially meet this goal. The applicant does appear to have partially addressed the concerns with respect to the single-family home through the terms of the development agreement, but the house will remain for a number of years, at a minimum, before its

51 Staff Report 500 Albert and 122 Division March 6, 2014 Page 10 of 12 demolition under the terms of the development agreement. At this time, Staff cannot recommend approval of the proposed building, due to the nature of the first floor uses in the existing buildings. A sample motion has been provided for the Planning Commission to utilize in discussing the proposal and making a recommendation to the City Council. Sample findings have also been provided should the Commission determine that the proposal should not be passed. In the matter of the request from Lingg Brewer for Site Plan and Special Use Permit approval for the properties at 500 Albert Avenue and 122 Division Street to construct a four-story, mixed-use building containing 14 apartment units, approximately 3,200 square feet of non-residential space, in two phases and to convert approximately 270 square feet of the existing 500 Albert building to office space, motion to recommend approval to the City Council for the Site Plan approval for the following reasons (Insert specific Planning Commission reasons here) Subject to the following conditions (Insert specific Planning Commission conditions here) 1. The applicant shall install plant materials and/or hardscape along the eastern property line adjacent to the 500 Albert Avenue building to screen the existing building on the site from the building to the east. Such plantings shall consist of arborvitae or other dense evergreens, sufficient to reduce light and noise pollution between the properties. 2. Trash collection shall be handled through a private agreement between the property owner and a neighboring property owner. 3. Construction activity on the site shall not begin prior to 8:00 AM, Monday through Saturday. Sunday construction shall not be permitted. 4. Water and sanitary sewer extensions and connections shall be approved by the City Engineer in accordance with all applicable State and local regulations. 5. Final grading, soil erosion control, paving and utility plans for the site shall be approved by the City Engineer in accordance with all applicable local requirements. 6. The applicant shall construct a 10 foot wide sidewalk along Division Street adjacent to the newly constructed buildings 7. Bike racks shall be installed sufficient to accommodate at least 37 bicycles for both the proposed new buildings and the existing 500 Albert building. 8. Site lighting shall be installed in accordance with the requirements of section of the Zoning Code.

52 Staff Report 500 Albert and 122 Division March 6, 2014 Page 11 of Recycling containers shall be provided in accordance with section of the City Code. 10. The required permit(s) shall be obtained from the Department of Planning, Building and Development for all exterior signs, in accordance with the City Sign Ordinance. 11. The project shall be designed and developed in accordance with all applicable state and local statutes, codes and regulations. Sample Finding should the commission fail to recommend approval of the special use permit The conversion of two bedrooms in an existing apartment building does not meet the intent of the B-3 district's mixed-use provision given that it represents only 12% of the first floor area.

53 Staff Report 500 Albert and 122 Division March 6, 2014 Page 12 of Albert and 122 Division Apartment Building Zone: B-3 Standard Proposed Conformity Min. Site Area: N/A 8,973 sq. ft. Yes Min. Floor Area Ratio: Yes Max. Building Height: 140 feet 1 4 stories/45 feet Yes Max. Building Cover: 80% 71.1% Yes Max. Ground Cover: 85%+ bonuses, up to 100% 76.7% Yes Min. Bldg. Setbacks: Front Yard (West) 0 feet 3 feet Yes Side Yard (North) 0 feet 3 feet Yes Side Yard (South) 0 feet 0 feet Yes Rear Yard (East) 0 feet 3 feet Yes Parking Spaces: Min. Required None permitted 2 0 N/A Max. Small Spaces None permitted 0 N/A Min. Barrier Free Spcs. None permitted 0 N/A Min. Bike Spaces Unclear Min. Parking Setbacks: Front Yard (South) N/A None proposed N/A Front Yard (East) N/A None proposed N/A Front Yard (North) N/A None proposed N/A Side Yard (West) N/A None proposed N/A Notes: 1 Height above 4 stories or 64 feet requires a Special Use Permit to be approved. 2 A project of this type has a parking demand of 61 spaces. In the B-3 district, none are permitted on site without special permission of the Planning Commission. The parking for the project is proposed to be accommodated in the City parking ramp on the other side of Division Street.

54 Department of Planning & Community Development Staff Contact: Darcy C. Schmitt Phone Number: ZBA Agenda: June 4, 2014 STAFF REPORT May 29, Victor Street and 233 River Street Proposal DTN Management is requesting an appeal of the Planning and Zoning Administrators interpretation; for the property at 1128 Victor Street and 233 River Street (Attachment A Location Map) zoned EV, East Village District of the following Section of Chapter 50 - Zoning of the Code of the City of East Lansing: Background a. Section Nonconforming Use of Buildings The following item is referred to the Zoning Board of Appeals for an appeal of the Planning and Zoning Administrators interpretation of Chapter 50, Section (Attachment B Section and ). The applicant is proposing the modification of dwelling units within a multiple-family structure in the East Village Zoning District. Currently the units include two bedrooms and one bathroom for each unit and are licensed for four persons, a license which is considered a legal nonconforming use, since the current code would only allow for a Class I or Class III rental license allowing, at the most, a family or two unrelated persons. The applicant is proposing to upgrade the kitchen, add a bedroom, bathroom, and laundry area in each unit (Attachment C Plans). Under the nonconforming use clause, improvements to nonconforming properties with upgrades to kitchens and bathrooms may be approved. Additionally, a closet for a washer and dryer may be approved. However, the addition of a bedroom or bathroom or both would increase and extend the desirability of these units for the nonconforming use of four unrelated persons living within a single dwelling unit and is likely the reason for the proposed addition. The applicant has, as stated in the application, been able to do these improvements previously in the same apartment complex. However, these building permits were issued in error as they were never approved by the Zoning Official. As stated in the attached excerpt of of the Zoning Code (Attachment D) all applications that need review and approval of the Zoning Official shall not receive a building permit until the Zoning Official has advised the Building Official. The attached building permit applications that the applicant is referring to did not receive the appropriate approvals prior to being issued (Attachment E). While this is not the fault of the applicant, it was an employee error and not a precedent setting action.

55 May 29, 2014 Page 2 It is important to know the history of the area and the reason behind the change in the zoning for the area within the East Village boundary. The area bound by Hagadorn Road, Bogue Street, Grand River Avenue and the Red Cedar River is commonly referred to as Cedar Village and it has had a long history of celebratory events which involved significant public disturbance and property damage. These disturbances drew large crowds and required significant police and fire resources. The following depicts the magnitude of the most recent disturbances: Year Event Crowd Size # of Officers # Arrested 1999 Final Four Loss 10, Elite Eight Loss Final Four Loss Facebook Invite NCAA Basketball 3000 (not available) NCAA Basketball 2500 (not available) Big Ten Football In 2003 the City entered into a partnership with Michigan State University to study the area over a three year period for potential redevelopment. This process was, in part, initiated as a result of the ongoing problems that appeared to result from the unique geographic and demographic make-up of the area. The intent was to change the overall character of the area to make it more appealing to residents in a broader demographic group and make it less appealing for the celebratory events of the past. The attached East Village Area- Analysis and Findings of Fact Concerning Designation as an Area of Community Rehabilitation, Revitalization, and Renewal, (Attachment F) summarizes the characteristics of the current scene. At the completion of the study, the City developed a form-based code for the area to encourage redevelopment that would slowly change the mix of uses and the demographic makeup that led to the issues discussed in the East Village Area-Analysis and Findings of Fact Concerning Designation as an Area of Community Rehabilitation, Revitalization, and Renewal. The intention of the East Village District is to change the existing culture of the district by encouraging a change in the demographic make-up through new development. Allowing additional bedrooms and bathrooms to be constructed in these units will encourage and extend the nonconforming uses of these structures, undermining the intent of the East Village Master Plan and the East Village District Code.

56 May 29, 2014 Page 3 Currently the residential component within this boundary is made up of 100% student rental units. In 2012, data was collected from Michigan State University on the demographics of students in East Lansing. Within the data set, a sample size of 1057 persons, for the East Village area approximately 8.5%, of the students reported freshmen class status, 34.3% sophomore, 33.6% junior, and 23.6% senior. The area was composed of only 41.5% female residents compared to 58.5% male residents. Overall the rental licenses for the properties in the District would allow up to 3381 persons. (Attachment G Occupancy Map) When large areas of land are rezoned by a city, it is done so to improve or correct a problematic land use. This typically renders properties that are rezoned nonconforming in use. State law provides protection for the property owner under these circumstances but at the same time provides tools to meet the goals of the city. When amendments are made to a zoning code that render a structure or use within a structure nonconforming, the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act (MZEA) requires that the use of the structure or a structure be allowed to remain as it had in the past. However, the Act allows a city to place restrictions on a nonconforming use of a structure or structure relative to their completion, resumption, restoration, reconstruction, or extension. Furthermore, Article II, Section (4) of the MZEA states the following: The elimination of the nonconforming uses and structures in a zoning district is declared to be for a public purpose and for a public use. The City treats a nonconforming building - which is a building or structure that does not meet the dimensional requirements of the Code, and nonconforming use of a building - which is a use of a building or structure that is no longer conforming to the Code, differently. But typically desire that a nonconforming building or a nonconforming use eventually become conforming to meet the intent of the master plan that initiated the city-initiated rezoning. The regulations for the nonconforming use of a structure in the East Village District are only slightly different than those for the rest of the zoning districts. Since the East Village District had several multiple-family structures with flat roofs that were being reconstructed to a pitched roof to increase their longevity, the city chose to eliminate the following language because that felt these modifications were reasonable: Such nonconforming structure shall not be structurally altered or reconstructed unless such alterations are required by law, provided, however, that such maintenance and repair work as is required to keep a nonconforming structure in sound condition shall be permitted. City Council has had a number of public discussions about nonconforming properties generally in the past two years. At their May 13, 2014 meeting, City Council directed staff to organize a Steering Committee of landlords and residents to discuss potential compromises to the current nonconforming use regulations. This will occur in the next several months. Regardless of what the Board determines in this application, the Planning Commission and City Council should revisit the East Village District Form-Based Code to determine whether

57 May 29, 2014 Page 4 changes have occurred since the adoption of the Code in 2006 which warrant changes to the overall code. In conclusion, Section (1) states as follows: Except for sororities and fraternities, a use or building which does not conform to the regulations of this district shall not be enlarged or extended unless the use and building are changed to comply with the regulations of this district. The property is nonconforming in use since under the current code, the property would only be able to be licensed for a family or two unrelated persons and it is licensed for four persons. The units currently have two bedrooms and one bathroom to accommodate the occupancy of four persons. Overtime it is expected that this configuration will less likely appeal to four persons and the unit will eventually reduce its occupancy and become closer to compliancy with the current code. The addition of a bedroom or a bathroom would extend the nonconforming use of the property. It would turn a two bedroom, one bathroom unit into a three bedroom, two bathroom unit which would be more appealing to four persons extending the life of the nonconforming use. Possible Actions The board of appeals has the following powers and duties. (1) Review. The board shall review, hear, and decide upon appeals from any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by the building official or the planning and zoning official in the enforcement or application of this chapter. (2) Interpretation. The board shall have the power to review, hear, and decide upon appeals which request the following determinations: a. Requests for the interpretation of the provisions contained within any section of this chapter; b. Classify a use into a comparable use category which is not specifically mentioned by this chapter; c. Determine the off-street parking and loading space requirements of any use which is not specifically mentioned in article VIII of this chapter.

58 Attachment A Location Map

59 BOGUE STREET CEDAR STREET RIVER STREET WOODMERE AVENUE CITY OF EAST LANSING LOCATION MAP GRAND RIVER AVENUE Zoning Board of Appeals Quality Services for a Quality Community

60 Attachment B Section and

61 Sec Permitted land uses. Uses permitted shall be in accordance with the objectives of the East Village Master Plan. The following uses of buildings and premises shall be permitted in the East Village zoning district: (1) General requirements. a. Except as provided in subsections (2)(m) and (3)(e) below, at least 75 percent of the first floor of each building in the district along Grand River Avenue shall be used for retail or office uses, and at least 50 percent of the first floor of each building in all other areas of the district shall be used for retail or office uses, as listed in this section. Any remaining space on the first floor of a building may be used for public/semi-public spaces as listed in this section, except that limited portions of the first floor space may be used for residential amenities, lobbies, hallways, elevators or stairways necessary to access uses on other floors of the building or for entrances to parking facilities provided within the building. b. Floors of any building above and below the first floor may be used for any of the uses listed below, singularly or in combination. c. In order to achieve a balance of owner-occupied, mixed-market rental, and student-oriented rental housing in the area over time, consistent with the goals of the East Village Master Plan, for all development plans that contain housing, at least 50 percent of the dwelling units included shall be marketed, rented, and/or sold as mixed-market rental units, as defined in section 50-7 of this chapter, or condominiums. This provision shall apply until owneroccupied condominium dwelling units comprise at least 25 percent of the total number of dwelling units present in the East Village District. This provision shall not apply to hotel dwelling units. d. The occupancy of a condominium dwelling unit shall be limited to a family as defined in this chapter, except that an owner-occupant may lease to no more than one unrelated individual (Class I license), and a non-owner occupant may lease to a family or no more than two unrelated individuals (Class III license). (2) Principal uses permitted subject to an approved site plan as set forth in section of this chapter.

62 Retail a. Retail business, except those uses which tend to detract from or interfere with a high intensity of pedestrian shopping activity, including automobile sales facilities, auto service centers, drive-in restaurants and similar uses which rely on regular direct vehicular access to serve a significant portion of their customers; and except for establishments licensed for the sale at retail of alcoholic liquor, as defined by Section 105(2) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1998, MCL (2), including specially designated merchants and specially designated distributors as described at MCL b. Shops for making articles or products to be sold at retail on the premises, such as leather goods, jewelry, prepared food or a bakery, provided that the conduct of such business is not objectionable as being odorous, unsightly, or noisy. c. Personal service establishments such as barber and beauty shops, dry cleaners and laundries, shoe repair shops, photographers, spas, health clubs, and service establishments of a like nature. Office d. Restaurants, except restaurants licensed for the sale of alcoholic beverages or alcoholic liquor as defined by Section 105(1) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1998, MCL (2), cafes, and similar establishments, including such establishments that may offer outdoor dining areas and walk-up service windows. Residential e. Office uses, including, but not limited to, general and professional offices, medical and dental offices, banks and financial institutions, automatic teller machines, real estate offices, travel agencies, and offices of political, professional, or civic organizations or associations. f. Hotels. Public/Semipublic

63 g. Theaters, public assembly halls, concert halls, meeting rooms, clubs, lodges, churches or similar places of assembly. h. Government and public utility offices. i. Museums and art galleries. j. Colleges, universities, business or trade schools or similar education or training facilities. k. Radio and television studios and broadcasting facilities, excluding transmission, and receiving towers. l. Publicly owned parks, recreation buildings and facilities. (3) Principal uses permitted subject to an approved special use permit as provided by article II, division 3 of this chapter. Retail a. Recreational uses and facilities which do not serve alcoholic beverages, including, but not limited to, video game arcades, billiard or pool parlors, and indoor or outdoor court facilities. b. Restaurants licensed for the sale of alcoholic beverages or alcoholic liquor as defined by Section 105(1) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1998, MCL (2). c. Establishments licensed for the sale at retail of alcoholic liquor, as defined by Section 105(2) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1998, MCL (2), including specially designated merchants and specially designated distributors as described at MCL d. Uses with limited drive-in facilities, such as financial institutions, dry cleaners and drugstores, uses that provide valet parking and uses which provide limited short-term on-site parking to serve their customers, provided that such drive-in or parking facilities are designed and operated to promote public safety by minimizing conflicts with pedestrian flow and congestion on public streets and

64 Public/Semipublic Residential alleys, and to reduce the visual impact of parking areas and driveways. e. Parking structures provided to serve the parking needs of surrounding buildings in the district may be constructed as the primary or sole use of a building or parcel, provided that such structures shall be located and designed to minimize adverse visual impacts on the streetscape and disruptions to pedestrian flow and activity, and provided further, that whenever practicable, the first floor of such structures facing a public street shall provide space for retail uses as listed in this section. f. Class A and Class B multiple-family dwellings section 50-6 of this chapter. (4) Permitted accessory uses. In addition to uses customarily incidental to the main use of the building or lot, the following uses shall be permitted as accessory uses: a. Parking facilities provided within or under a building. b. Class A home occupations. c. Video games, pool tables, and other similar amusement games located within a restaurant or other business, provided that the total number of games or machines contained within the building shall not exceed one game for every 400 square feet of gross floor area of the restaurant or business. d. Automatic teller machines which are enclosed within or attached to the principal building. e. Recreational uses and facilities such as swimming pools, indoor or outdoor court facilities, and weight or training rooms for the use of the patrons or tenants of a hotel or residential use, provided that such uses do not exceed 20 percent of the gross floor area. Sec Nonconforming uses and buildings.

65 Uses and buildings legally existing within the East Village zoning district at the time this division is adopted may be continued, although such uses or buildings do not conform to the standards of the district. The following provisions shall apply to nonconforming uses and buildings in this district: (1) Except for sororities and fraternities, a use or building which does not conform to the regulations of this district shall not be enlarged or extended unless the use and building are changed to comply with the regulations of this district. (2) Except for sororities and fraternities, a nonconforming building shall not be converted in use in a way which would result in a higher parking requirement according to the ratios in section , regardless of the number of parking spaces present; except, buildings deemed to be culturally or historically significant by the city council may be converted in use consistent with the goals and objectives of the East Village Master Plan, subject to an approved special use permit as provided by article II, division 3, of this chapter. (3) A nonconforming use may be extended throughout any parts of the building which were manifestly arranged or designed for such use at the time of the adoption of this district. (4) If any nonconforming building ceases to be used for any reason for a continuous period of more than one year, then any future use of the land and any building or improvements upon it shall be in conformity with the regulations of this district. (5) If any nonconforming building is moved or removed, the subsequent use of the land on which such building was located, and any subsequent building or improvements thereon, shall be in conformity with the regulations of this district. (6) Where a nonconforming building is damaged or destroyed by fire, explosion, wind, flood, or other catastrophe, it may be rebuilt and the use continued, but not to any greater extent than in the previously existing building. Such reconstruction shall be accomplished in accordance with the site plan review requirements in section of this chapter and shall, to the maximum practicable extent, comply with the current

66 standards of the zoning district that applied to the property immediately preceding the adoption of this article. Such reconstructions shall not increase the occupancy, floor area, seating capacity or any other feature that increases the density or intensity of the former use of the property. (7) Except for sororities and fraternities, existing parking areas, access driveways and other site improvements may be maintained as necessary to keep them in sound and usable condition; however, such facilities shall not be expanded, unless such expansions are required to support the adaptive reuse of a culturally or historically significant structure as provided for in subsection (2) above. (8) Renovations or additions to a sorority or a fraternity which will not increase occupancy or the building footprint by more than 50 percent may be permitted, if submitted for approval prior to June 14, 2014.

67 CITY OF EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN ORDINANCE NO Showing 2012 Amendments to the Original Ordinance AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND ARTICLE VI, DIVISION 6 AT SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 50 ZONING OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF EAST LANSING TO AMEND THE PERMITTED LAND USES THE CITY OF EAST LANSING ORDAINS: Section of Article VI, Division 6 of Chapter 50 Zoning of the Code of the City of East Lansing is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec Regulating plan. The East Village District has fourthree form-based zones (Fig. 2): A. Grand River Avenue/Bogue Street Area B. Grand River Avenue Area I C. Grand River Avenue Area II DC. Water's Edge Area (See Attached Graphic) Note: Exact boundaries for each zone are subject to change based on development plans that are consistent with the district master plan. (a) Intent of Form-Based Code [No Change] (b) East Village District Zones. (1) Grand River Avenue Area I and Grand River Area II Zones. a. Theseis areis the primary zones that will be used to implement concepts from the 2000 East Grand River Avenue Study and any future plans that may be developed from, or any revisions to, the study. Theseis two zones areis unique to the other two zones because of its shallow depth, high visibility along Grand River Avenue, and premium river frontage (Fig. 4). Sec Building Envelope Requirements (a) General Requirements [No Change]

68 (b) Building Height All Zones (See Attached Graphic) Sec Permitted land uses. Uses permitted shall be in accordance with the objectives of the East Village Master Plan. The following uses of buildings and premises shall be permitted in the East Village zoning district: (1) General requirements. a. Except as provided in subsections (2)m and (3)e below, at least 7550 percent of the first floor of each building in the district along Grand River Avenue shall be used for retail or office uses, and at least 50 percent of the first floor of each building in all other areas of the district shall be used for retail or office uses, as listed in this section. Any remaining space on the first floor of a building may be used for offices and public/semi-public spaces as listed in this section, except that limited portions of the first floor space may be used for residential amenities, lobbies, hallways, elevators or stairways necessary to access uses on other floors of the building or for entrances to parking facilities provided within the building. b. Floors of any building above and below the first floor may be used for any of the uses listed below, singularly or in combination. c. In order to achieve a balance of owner-occupied, mixed-market rental, and student-oriented rental housing in the area over time, consistent with the goals of the East Village Master Plan, for all development plans that contain housing, at least 50 percent of the dwelling units included shall be marketed, rented, and/or sold individually as mixed-market rental units, as defined in section 50-7 of this chapter, or condominiums. This provision shall apply until owner-occupied condominium dwelling units comprise at least 25 percent of the total number of dwelling units present in the East Village District. This provision shall not apply to hotel dwelling units. d. The occupancy of a condominium dwelling unit shall be limited to a family as defined in this chapter, except that an owner-occupant may lease to no more than one unrelated individual (Class I license), and a non-owner occupant may lease to a family or no more than two unrelated individuals (Class III license). (2) Principal uses permitted subject to an approved site plan as set forth in section of this chapter. Retail

69 Office a. Retail business, except those uses which tend to detract from or interfere with a high intensity of pedestrian shopping activity, including automobile sales facilities, auto service centers, drive-in restaurants and similar uses which rely on regular direct vehicular access to serve a significant portion of their customers; and except for establishments licensed for the sale at retail of alcoholic liquor, as defined by Section 105(2) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1998, MCL (2), including specially designated merchants and specially designated distributors as described at MCL b. Shops for making articles or products to be sold at retail on the premises, such as leather goods, jewelry, prepared food or a bakery, provided that the conduct of such business is not objectionable as being odorous, unsightly, or noisy. c. Personal service establishments such as barber and beauty shops, dry cleaners and laundries, shoe repair shops, photographers, spas, health clubs, and service establishments of a like nature. d. Restaurants, except restaurants licensed for the sale of alcoholic beverages or alcoholic liquor as defined by Section 105(1) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1988, MCL (2), cafes, and similar establishments, including such establishments that may offer outdoor dining areas and walk-up service windows. e. Office uses, including, but not limited to, general and professional offices, medical and dental offices, banks and financial institutions, automatic teller machines, real estate offices, travel agencies, and offices of political, professional, or civic organizations or associations. Residential f. Class A and Class B multiple family dwellings (see sections ) for definition of classes). fg. Hotels. Public/Semipublic gh. hi. ij. Theaters, public assembly halls, concert halls, meeting rooms, clubs, lodges, churches or similar places of assembly. Government and public utility offices. Museums and art galleries.

70 jk. kl. lm. Colleges, universities, business or trade schools or similar education or training facilities. Radio and television studios and broadcasting facilities, excluding transmission, and receiving towers. Publicly owned parks, recreation buildings and facilities. (3) Principal uses permitted subject to an approved special use permit as provided by article II, division 3 of this chapter. Retail a. Recreational uses and facilities which do not serve alcoholic beverages, including, but not limited to, video game arcades, billiard or pool parlors, and indoor or outdoor court facilities. b. Restaurants licensed for the sale of alcoholic beverages or alcoholic liquor as defined by Section 105(1) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1988, MCL (2). c. Establishments licensed for the sale at retail of alcoholic liquor, as defined by Section 105(2) of the Michigan Liquor Control Code of 1998, MCL (2), including specially designated merchants and specially designated distributors as described at MCL d. Uses with limited drive-in facilities, such as financial institutions, dry cleaners and drugstores, uses that provide valet parking and uses which provide limited short-term on-site parking to serve their customers, provided that such drive-in or parking facilities are designed and operated to promote public safety by minimizing conflicts with pedestrian flow and congestion on public streets and alleys, and to reduce the visual impact of parking areas and driveways. Public/Semipublic e. Parking structures provided to serve the parking needs of surrounding buildings in the district may be constructed as the primary or sole use of a building or parcel, provided that such structures shall be located and designed to minimize adverse visual impacts on the streetscape and disruptions to pedestrian flow and activity, and provided further, that whenever practicable, the first floor of such structures facing a public street shall provide space for retail uses as listed in this section. Residential f. Class A and Class B multiple-family dwellings section 50-6 of this chapter.

71 (4) Permitted accessory uses. In addition to uses customarily incidental to the main use of the building or lot, the following uses shall be permitted as accessory uses: a. Parking facilities provided within or under a building. b. Class A home occupations. c. Video games, pool tables, and other similar amusement games located within a restaurant or other business, provided that the total number of games or machines contained within the building shall not exceed one game for every 400 square feet of gross floor area of the restaurant or business. d. Automatic teller machines which are enclosed within or attached to the principal building. e. Recreational uses and facilities such as swimming pools, indoor or outdoor court facilities, and weight or training rooms for the use of the patrons or tenants of a hotel or residential use, provided that such uses do not exceed 20 percent of the gross floor area. Sec Nonconforming uses and buildings. Uses and buildings legally existing within the East Village zoning district at the time this division is adopted may be continued, although such uses or buildings do not conform to the standards of the district. The following provisions shall apply to nonconforming uses and buildings in this district: (1) Except for sororities and fraternities and as provided in subparagraph (9), aa use or building which does not conform to the regulations of this district shall not be enlarged or extended unless the use and building are changed to comply with the regulations of this district. (2) Except for sororities and fraternities, aa nonconforming building shall not be converted in use in a way which would result in a higher parking requirement according to the ratios in section , regardless of the number of parking spaces present; except, buildings deemed to be culturally or historically significant by the city council may be converted in use consistent with the goals and objectives of the East Village Master Plan, subject to an approved special use permit as provided by article II, division 3, of this chapter. (3) A nonconforming use may be extended throughout any parts of the building which were manifestly arranged or designed for such use at the time of the adoption of this district. (4) If any nonconforming building ceases to be used for any reason for a continuous period of more than one year, then any future use of the land and any building or

72 improvements upon it shall be in conformity with the regulations of this district. (5) If any nonconforming building is moved or removed, the subsequent use of the land on which such building was located, and any subsequent building or improvements thereon, shall be in conformity with the regulations of this district. (6) Where a nonconforming building is damaged or destroyed by fire, explosion, wind, flood, or other catastrophe, it may be rebuilt and the use continued, but not to any greater extent than in the previously existing building. Such reconstruction shall be accomplished in accordance with the site plan review requirements in section of this chapter and shall, to the maximum practicable extent, comply with the current standards of the zoning district that applied to the property immediately preceding the adoption of this article. Such reconstructions shall not increase the occupancy, floor area, seating capacity or any other feature that increases the density or intensity of the former use of the property. (7) Except for sororities and fraternities, eexisting parking areas, access driveways and other site improvements may be maintained as necessary to keep them in sound and usable condition; however, such facilities shall not be expanded, unless such expansions are required to support the adaptive reuse of a culturally or historically significant structure as provided for in subsection (2) above. (8) Renovations or additions to a sorority or a fraternity which will not increase occupancy or the building footprint by more than 50% may be permitted, if submitted for approval prior to June 14, (9) Renovations or additions to an existing principle building, which will not increase occupancy or the building footprint by more than 50% may be permitted, if submitted for approval prior to June 14, By Diane Goddeeris, Mayor By Marie E. McKenna, City Clerk

73 Attachment C Proposed Plans

74

75

76 Attachment D Section and 50-35

77 Sec Administrative officers. (a) To administer and enforce regulations and restrictions hereafter set forth, there are hereby established the offices of planning and zoning official and building official to be filled by appointees of the city manager, subject to approval by the city council. (b) The planning and zoning official and building official may delegate clerical, filing, and recording work to the clerical employees of the city. They shall be responsible for the enforcement of all the provisions of this chapter as described hereunder; and they and their authorized assistants, where properly identified, shall have the authority to enter any premises, at any reasonable time, for the purpose of investigating or inspecting any building conditions. It shall be the duty of the planning and zoning official and/or building official to receive and examine all applications for approval and/or permits as required by this chapter and to approve or reject such applications as described hereunder. They shall collect all special fees established hereby and turn them in daily to the city treasurer. They shall make such inspections as are necessary, and they shall have authority to revoke a permit as hereinafter provided. (c) Authority given to any person or board under this chapter shall be construed as adding to and not taking from the authority held under any other chapter or ordinance of the city. The powers and duties contained in this chapter shall be construed as separate and distinct from authorities or duties required of any official or board under any other chapter or ordinance of the city, and shall not be construed as conflicting therewith or limiting the scope thereof. Sec Building permits. (a) Before proceeding with the erection, alteration, repair, moving, or removing of any building, or part thereof, an owner or his/her or its authorized agent shall obtain a permit from the building official. The applicant for a permit must file with his/her or its request a set of plans and written specifications sufficient to indicate clearly and fully the nature of the contemplated work and the kind and quality of materials to be used therein, together with an estimate of the cost. Drawings shall be made to scale not less than oneeighth inch equal to one foot, and shall indicate clearly the size of structural members, walls, and openings, the position of the building on the site with reference to property and street lines and adjacent buildings, and such other

78 information as may be necessary to provide for the enforcement of these regulations. It shall be the duty of all lot owners to have located accurately all corners and boundaries of their properties prior to building thereon. (b) A record of such applications and plans shall be kept in the office of the building official for such period of time as the city manager deems necessary. (c) For applications for permits for activities which require review and approval by the planning and zoning official, the zoning board of appeals, the planning commission or the city council under the provisions of this chapter, the building official shall forward the application to the planning and zoning official for review and processing. When such review has been completed, the planning and zoning official shall advise the building official of the actions taken before any building permit may be issued. (d) When the plans submitted have been found to conform with the requirements of this chapter, the building official shall issue a permit and affix to the plans an official stamp of approval. (e) When alterations begin or when the footings of a building have been constructed and before the completion of the foundation walls and also at the time of the completion of the frame and skeleton construction, the owner, contractor, or his/her or its agent shall notify the building official in writing in order that the inspection may be made at each of those times. (f) The building official shall make a final inspection of all buildings after completion, before occupancy begins, upon receiving notice from the owner, contractor, or his/her or its agent, that said building is ready for such final inspection. If such buildings or alterations comply with the statements in the application, plans, working drawings, and specifications, a certificate of occupancy shall be issued as hereinafter provided. (g) Whenever it is found that a permit has been issued in violation of this chapter or any other chapter of the City Code or state law, or in consequence of a false statement or misrepresentation of conditions, or whenever it is found that work is not being performed in accordance with the plans and specifications on which the permit issued is based, the building official shall notify the person to whom the permit was issued to appear before him/her at a stated time and place and show cause why the permit shall not be revoked. If after such a hearing it shall appear that the permit

79 was improperly obtained or that the work is being improperly done, or if the holder of the permit, or his/her or its authorized agent fails to appear at the stated time of the hearing, the building official shall issue a written order revoking the permit. The posting of a copy of such order upon the premises shall constitute service thereof upon the owner, or the contractor, or his/her or its agent in charge of the work. No other permit shall thereafter be issued to any person held to be violating any provision of this chapter or any other chapter of the City Code or state law until all conditions prompting the revocation of the initial permit have been satisfactorily corrected. Failure of the building official to serve notice of any violation at the time of occurrence shall not relieve the holder of the permit from responsibility for such violation. (h) Permits for structures on which work has not started within six months following the date of issue, or on which all permitted work has not been completed within 24 months following the date of issue and permits for structures upon which work has been abandoned for a period of six months, shall lapse and cease to be in effect. The building official shall notify the person to whom the permit is issued of the expiration date of the permit. The building official may for good cause authorize a single extension of the time period to complete for not more than 12 additional months. If the building official does not authorize a request to extend the time period of the permit prior to the expiration date, the person to whom the permit was issued may appeal to the zoning board of appeals and show cause why the permit should not lapse. Following a public hearing the zoning board of appeals may grant an extension of the permit for a period not to exceed 12 additional months for good cause, and upon finding that the extension would not unduly affect neighboring properties or the public health, safety, or welfare. An appeal to the zoning board of appeals prior to the expiration date shall stay the expiration of the permit until final action by the board. Where a building permit has lapsed and a structure does not meet the minimum structural requirements of chapter 6 or where a premises does not meet the grading and soil erosion requirements of chapter 34 of this Code, the structure or premises shall be deemed a public nuisance and an unsafe or dangerous building within the meaning of chapter 6 and the building official may proceed to abate the condition in the manner provided by chapter 6. For permits issued prior to the effective date of the ordinance from which this chapter is derived, the time limits specified above shall apply commencing on the effective date of such ordinance.

80 Attachment E Examples of Permit Applications

81

82 'j- - o TRAFFIC 1M PACT: Closure of any traffic lane during construction for one hour or more shall be approved by e City in advance of the closure. All traffic lane closures, regardless of duration, shall be signed in accordance with the recommended guidelines described in the current edition of the Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Closures of a public sidewalk shall be barricaded to insure pedestrians are protected from injury, and signed to provide adequate advance warning of the closure and to indicate the direction fot an alternative pedestrian route. o NOTE: Separate permits are required for electrical, plumbing and mec anical work. PermIts shal lapse and cease to be in e ect when authorized work has not started within 6 months following the date of issue, when work has not been completed within 24 months following the date of issue, or when work has been abandoned for a period of 6 months (as evidenced by failure to make substantial progress or lack of ins tions. I HEREBY CERTIFY I ave read an examined this application. Granting of a permit does not presume to give aut ority to violate or z cancel the provisions of any slate or local law or ordinance regulating construction or the performance of construction. Section 23a of the State o Construction Code Act of 1972, Public Act 230, as amended, MCL A, prohibits a person from conspiring to circumvent the licensing l= requirements of this State relating to persons who are to perform work on a residential buijdmg or a residential structure. Violations of Section ~ 23a are subject to civil fines. ~ APPH""'t,~ 0 MOMt''''E".'"''_r-.<- /_ o Other: Signature: 4-~L&...o:~:R.'L-tL-~~k:::Z~"I:::::.~~~:::::1=-_J_-J~~~~ Print Name: -'---=~ _::::;;oo...=.--'-~-::::..=.--'"..-.--i'-j Date:_ -"""'.J-- L--!...L _ 1. Two (2) complete sets of plans signed and sealed by a licensed architect or engineer (as required by State of Michigan P.A. 299 Of 1980, as amended) shall be submitted with a completed application. 2. Projects requiring additional parking, site development or structure expansion may also require Site Plan and Grading Plan approval. The process for these reviews is contained in separate documentation. 3. The Valuation of Work (project cost) will be required on this application prior to issuance of the building permit. The plan review fee is included in the building permit fee. All plans shall contain the following information: Site plan Project address or location Property owner address Architect/engineer name, address, phone number and license number Construction code used All design live, dead, snow and wind loads Occupancy classification Type of construction Total floor area and floor area for each use group classification and level. Larger projects may also require: Height and area computations, to include allowable floor area, allowable area increases, maximum height increases and automatic fire sprinkler increases. Number of means of egress, capacity of egress calculations and travel distances Fire rated assembly details and fire resistive requirements Structural design calculations Soil, footing, foundation, masonry and concrete minimum bearing capacities and design standards Other information may be required based on complexity or size of building project. Revised-October 20, 2009

83

84 Closures of a public sidewalk shall of the closure and to indicate the, work has not been ",~,ph,i~ within 24 months following ;. c::""',,-c'evidenced by failure substantial progress Of lack DOwner o Architect/Engineer ~raclor o Other: p"" N~,,_~&'==''=''n'--~''-' -k:''''''-''' ''''-'-'/j---' O''''--<.:..<G,-,-IiL..,4!-L'II,--{ I. Two (2) complete sets of plans signed and sealed by a licensed architect or engineer (as required by State of Michigan P.A. 299 Of 1980, as amended) shall be submitted with a completed application. 2. Projects requiring additional partong, site development or structure expansion may also require Site Plan and Grading Plan approval. The process for these reviews is contained in separate documentation. 3. The Valuation of Work (project cost) will be required on this application prior to issuance of the building permit. The plan review fee is included in the building permit fee. All plans shall contain the following infonnation: Site plan Project address or location Property owner address ArchitecVengineer name, address, phone number and license number Construction code used All design live, dead, snow and wind loads Occupancy classification Type of construction Total floor area and floor area for each use group classification and level. Larger projects may also require: Height and area computations, to include allowable floor area, allowable area increases, maximum height increases and automatic fire sprinkler increases. Number of means of egress, capacity of egress calculations and travel distances Fire rated assembly details and fire resistive requirements Structural design calculations Soil, footing, foundation, masonry and concrete minimum bearing capacities and design standards Other information may be required based on complexity or size of building project. Rnlsed-Oc:lobeT 10, 2009

85

86

87 Z [J C P : C osure 0 any tra IC ano ng construchon or one our or more sac approved by the City in advance of t e closure. All traffic lano closures, rogardless of duration, shall be signed in accordance with the recommended guidelines described in the current edition of the Michigan Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. Closures of a public sidewalk shall be barricaded to insure pedestrians are protected from injury, and signed to provide adequate advance warning of the closure and to indicate the direction for an alternative pedestrian route. [J : eparate permits are requ or 0 ectrtca, p um ng an mcc: amca work. PermIts s a lapse an cease to m effect w en authorized work has not started within 6 months following the date of issue, when work has not been completed within 24 months following the date of issue, or when work has been abandoned for a period of 6 months (as evidenced by failure to make substantial progress or lack of in tions. HE C ave r an examm t IS app Icatlon. Grantmg of a permit oes not presume to give onty to VlO ate or n el the provisions of any state or local law or ordinance regulating construction or the performance of construction. Section 23a of the State Q Co struction Code Act of 1972, Public Act 230, as amended, MCL 12S.1S23A, prohibits a person from conspiring to circumvent the licensing ~ requirements of this State relating to persons who arc to perform work on a residential buildmg or a residential structure. Violations of Section ~ 23a are subject to civil fines. ;1 _ ~ ; Appt;"",, 0 Cwo.. 0 O 'he"_-etq-'-t-=tc...:~ =-..LI.o"" S ignatul" ~b4..00c=='=:...l.~+:oo""iiw.e~~~~~~ Print Name :-# Ja..:::rq..'--='~r ~Ir""""':.&.~...a=::;...~ Date: l ll~ / /4= 1. Two (2) complete sets of plans signed and sealed by a licensed architect or engineer (as required by State of Michigan P.A. 299 Of 1980, as amended) shall be submitted with a completed application. 2. Projects requiring additional parking, site development or structure expansion may also require Site Plan and Grading Plan approval. The process for these reviews is contained in separate documentation. 3. The Valuation of Work (project cost) will be required on this application prior to issuance of the building permit. The plan review fee is included in the building permit fee. All plans shall contain the following information: Site plan Project address or location Property owner address Architect/engineer name, address, phone number and license number Construction code used All design live, dead, snow and wind loads Occupancy classification Typeofconstruction Total floor area and floor area for each use group classification and level. Larger projects may also require: Height ~d area computations, to. include allowable floor area, allowable area increases, maximum height increases and automatic fire'sprinkler increases. Number of means of egress, capacity of egress cal~ulations and travel distances Fire rated assembly details and fire resistive requirements Structural design calculations Soil, footing, foundation, masonry and concrete minimum bearing capacities and design standards Other information may be required based on complexity or size of building project. Revlsed--October 20, 2009

88 Attachment F East Village Area Analysis and Findings of Fact Concerning Designation as an Area of Community Rehabilitation, Revitalization, and Renewal

89 East Village Area Analysis and Findings of Fact Concerning Designation as an Area of Community Rehabilitation, Revitalization, and Renewal Prepared by the Department of Community & Economic Development City of East Lansing, Michigan November 12, 2004

90 INTRODUCTION The following report is an assessment of the East Village Redevelopment Area s (the Area ) potential to be designated an area of community rehabilitation, revitalization and renewal pursuant to the criteria established by Public Act 344 of 1945, Section 2(a). East Village is defined as being bounded by the Red Cedar River, Bogue Street, East Grand River Avenue, and Hagadorn Road (see Attachment A Area Map). The Area is approximately 35 acres and contains 67 properties constituting a mix of residential and commercial properties. The 2000 Census population was 2, Public Act 344 of 1945, also known as the Blighted Area Rehabilitation Act, specifies the criteria for designating an area and outlines the requisite steps that must be followed for rehabilitating any area so designated. This report is a follow-up to the initial report presented to the City of East Lansing Council in May of The report represents the first step in redesignating the East Village a targeted area of community rehabilitation, revitalization, and renewal; and moving forward with redevelopment efforts. This report is divided into two sections. The first section, Criteria Evaluation, provides an assessment of the Area s condition under criteria established by the Public Act 344. This assessment is followed by a Conclusions section that makes recommendations regarding designation of this Area as an area of community rehabilitation, revitalization and renewal. CRITERIA EVALUATION There are a number of criteria that must be examined under P.A. 344 of 1945 in order to determine an Area s current condition, those include: 1. Physical deterioration of structures 2. Functional or economic obsolescence 3. Substandard building or facility conditions 4. Improper or inefficient arrangement of lots, streets, and open spaces 5. Inappropriate mixed character 6. Deterioration of public facilities 7. Other characteristics which endanger the health, safety, and general welfare of the municipality Each of these criteria have been reviewed and evaluated based on a variety of qualitative and quantitative factors. 1 U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census 1

91 CRITERIA 1: PHYSICAL DETERIORATION OF STRUCTURES The Project Area consists of a mix of single-family homes converted to rentals, multi-family rental properties, and commercial buildings. The most significant deterioration is evidenced by the numerous single-family homes that have been converted into student rental housing. These properties have been subject to extensive wear and tear by student occupants since the early 1970 s when they first became licensed rentals. This wear and tear has combined with an inherent lack of ownership by their respective tenants to create additional problems such as poorly kept yards, litter complaints, and parking pressures (i.e. need to park 4 or more vehicles on lots designed originally for one or two vehicles). Physical deterioration is not limited to visible structures. There has been documentation of contaminated facilities along East Grand River. 2 The 7-11 store was formerly a gas station with leaking underground storage tanks. There are other existing facilities and uses that have been historically associated with environmental contamination. Efforts are currently underway to secure EPA grant funding for an area wide environmental assessment to better assess environmental issues. CRITERIA 2: FUNCTIONAL OR ECONOMIC OBSOLESCENCE Conditions of functional or economic obsolescence are most easily evaluated by thoroughly and systematically examining individual properties. Due to limited resources to undertake such an exhaustive assessment, broader factors related to the redevelopment of properties have been evaluated, primarily the impact of the flood plain upon development and recent changes in State Equalized Value. Functional Obsolescence One of the most significant factors negatively impacting potential redevelopment is the presence of the Red Cedar River floodway and floodplain. A total of 16 acres of land in the Area is currently classified as floodway or 100-year floodplain (see Attachment B - Floodplain Map). Development of habitable structures within the floodway is strictly prohibited and strictly regulated within the 100-year floodplain. 3 These regulations were not in place when most of the current structures were built. Any building undergoing renovation, whereby the cost of the work would exceed property value by 50%, must adhere to floodplain guidelines. These requirements, including compensation for any loss of floodplain storage capacity and meeting Base Floodplain Elevation requirements, severely restrict the economic feasibility of extensively rehabilitating the properties that lie within the floodplain. The floodplain compensation requirement is particularly burdensome in the Area since most lots are too small to compensate onsite and thus require a collective compensation strategy, i.e., multiple property owners could simultaneously redevelop and create a single compensation area that would economically address physical requirements. 2 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, compiled file for 918 East Grand River. 3 Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, Floodplain Management Quick Guide,

92 Economic Obsolescence Economic obsolescence is a factor that can be difficult in quantifying on an aggregate basis since each property has its own economic value. However, one broader quantitative indicator of economic obsolescence is State Equalized Value (SEV) and the rate of change that occurs over time. Substantial increases in SEV can be an indicator of economic growth, while sluggish or decreasing SEV can indicate economic stagnation or decline. While the correlation is not always direct, SEV is one of the few quantitative measures readily available. The following chart illustrates the rate of SEV growth since East Village SEV Growth 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% Annual % Change Although SEV has increased, the rate of growth in the Area has been declining steadily since Stagnation in growth can be the result of a number of factors. One possible factor is the addition of several thousand rental units to the East Lansing market in recent years. Older properties such as those in the Area are experiencing competitive rental pressure. It has been reported by some landlords that they have lowered rents in East Village for the current year. Landlords have also added amenities in recent years to remain competitive and maintain occupancy rates. CRITERIA 3 SUBSTANDARD BUILDING OR FACILITY CONDITIONS As indicated under Criteria 1, the buildings throughout the district have been under substantial stress over the past several decades. This decline is evidenced by two general indicators of facility condition - the average age of the buildings and the number of building permits. Average Age of the Housing Stock The average age of the housing stock in the Area is 77 years old while the average age of for the entire City of East Lansing is approximately 45 years old - a more than 30 year difference. Not all older properties are automatically assumed to be in worse condition than newer properties; however, it is generally accepted that many older properties require 4 City of East Lansing property assessment records. 3

93 more ongoing maintenance, face higher repair costs, and are generally more difficult to redevelop. Number of Building Permits The City of East Lansing requires building permits for new construction or repair work to mechanical, plumbing, or electrical systems. The number of permits is a general indicator of whether or not investment within an existing property is occurring. During the period commencing January 1, 2001 until present (August 27, 2004), a total of 102 permits were issued in the Area. This equates into 1.7 permits per building for the 61 structures. However, when the five properties with the most permits are removed from consideration, there was less than one permit per building over a nearly four year period. Given the average age of the properties, this relatively low permit rate may be indicative of insufficient maintenance. CRITERIA 4 IMPROPER OR INEFFICIENT ARRANGEMENT OF THE STREETS, LOTS, AND OPEN SPACE A major physical limitation of the Area is the current lot configuration. Many of the lots within the Area are small and narrow, the result of being platted for single-family lots several decades ago. On an individual basis many of the lots are not sufficient for redevelopment. It would be difficult to accommodate substantial new structures and the required parking lot consolidation. Another major physical limitation of the Area is the lack of open space and access to the Red Cedar River. There is no dedicated public space within the Area. Access to nearby open space is limited by the physical boundaries that isolate the Area. Private open space consists of only a scattering of small yards. Most of the open space has been converted to parking lots. The Area also lacks any public access to the Red Cedar River. All the adjoining properties are private and public access is prohibited. This stretch of the river is critical to the City of East Lansing since it is the only portion that does not lie completely within the Michigan State University campus. SECTION 5 INAPPROPRIATE MIXED CHARACTER The Area is predominantly student rental housing with commercial activity along East Grand River. There are nearly 700 rental units in the Area, with no owner-occupied housing. All 2,000 plus residents are primarily student renters; the median age of these renters was just over 21 years old in the 2000 Census. The predominance of this single use and homogeneity of residents creates a seasonal neighborhood; i.e., a large percentage of the housing is vacant during summer months. The transient nature of the residents also creates a lack of long-term stakeholders with a true ownership interest in neighborhood affairs. This concentrated, single use has been a factor in related social problems (see Section 7). 4

94 The commercial uses in the Area are predominantly arranged for serving automobile based traffic and not pedestrians. While most of the residents are within easy walking distance to the commercial facilities, safe pedestrian access is limited. The presence of this type of commercial activity also exacerbates the physical isolation of the Area from the rest of the community. Redevelopment is required to improve both pedestrian activity and better integrate the Area with the surrounding community. SECTION 6 DETERIORATION OF PUBLIC FACILITIES One of the concerns with public infrastructure is the presence of a two inch water main along Cedar Street. Current standards require eight inch mains. The smaller main currently limits water pressure in the area, negatively impacting the ability to redevelop existing properties into higher density uses. Future redevelopment would result in replacing the old mains to meet present standards. Another issue with public facilities is the storm water runoff in the Area. While all the properties along the Red Cedar River are private, there are a number of parking lots that serve these properties and also abut the river. Since most of these lots were designed several decades ago, storm water runoff is not contained in a flood event. Any new redevelopment project will be required to provide adequate storm water retention which may include a retention basin or similar facility. SECTION 7 ENDANGERING THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE MUNICIPALITY Endangering the health, safety, and welfare of the municipality is arguably the most significant factor impacting the East Village Area. The Area has been the source of numerous riots over the past twenty years. A separate history of recent riots was compiled and is included as Attachment C History of Cedar Village Civil Disorder Incidents. Past riots have threatened the safety and welfare of students, residents, public safety employees, and the community as a whole. The associated violence and property destruction has a clear and definitive financial impact. For example, as part of legal action taken to recoup financial losses, costs were thoroughly researched and determined to be $238,433 for the 1999 riots. 5 At various riots since 1998, costs have been incurred by law enforcement agencies of East Lansing, Michigan State University, Meridian Township, Lansing, Ingham County Sheriff, Clinton County Sheriff, the State of Michigan, DeWitt Township, and City of Dewitt. Costs have also been born by private individuals, primarily through the destruction of automobiles. The riots also create a negative national image for the City of East Lansing, Michigan State University, and the State of Michigan. The riots have been covered by the national media, immeasurably damaging the area s reputation and efforts to attract visitors and business investment. 5 Memorandum of Law in Support of Restitution to the City of East Lansing for the March 27, 1999 riots. 5

95 While numerous solutions have been employed, including additional police patrols and enforcement, it is recognized that these approaches address the symptoms and not the causes. The causes of the riots are linked to many complex social issues, but they are exacerbated by the physical configuration of the rental properties in the area. The density of such housing, without a diversity of other residential types and other types of uses, creates an isolated environment in which social discord can easily arise without early resistance. In order to diversify the uses and reconfigure the Area into a safer physical environment, a substantial physical redevelopment of the Area is necessary. Redevelopment efforts must provide for a mix of uses and users that mitigate the negative impact that an overconcentration that any singular use might encourage. CONCLUSIONS Public Act 344 states the following: It is expressly recognized that blight is observable at different stages of severity, and that moderate blight unremedied creates a strong probability that severe blight will follow. Therefore, the conditions that constitute blight are to be broadly construed to permit a municipality to make an early identification of problems and to take early remedial action to correct a demonstrated pattern of deterioration and to prevent worsening of blight conditions. (MCL ) Given the severity to which blight is viewed by Michigan law and the conclusions drawn from assessing the key blighting criteria, it is concluded that the East Village Area should be declared a designated area of community rehabilitation, revitalization, and renewal. Furthermore, the City of East Lansing should pursue rehabilitation efforts in the Area pursuant to the requirements of Public Act 344. Undertaking redevelopment activities within the Area will achieve the goal of stemming existing blight and preventing future blight. It is further recognized that given the substantial factors contributing to blight within the Area, only a coordinated, Area-wide effort will be sufficient to rectify current issues. 6

96 Attachment A Area Map EAST VILLAGE MSU SANFORD NATURAL AREA BOGUE ST

97 Attachment B Floodplain Map 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN 16.3 ACRES

98 Attachment C History of East Village Civil Disorder Incidents 1983 to Cedarfest On the third Saturday in October and the third Saturday in May, Cedarfest would occur in Cedar Village. This was an unsanctioned party that attracted several thousand people. Twice a year, the streets were taken over, large bon fires were lit, cars were rolled over, windows were broken, and several people were injured from bottles and rocks being thrown into the crowd. Injured people had to walk or be carried to Grand River, because emergency equipment would have been destroyed by the crowd. In 1983, the East Lansing Police Department had the windows of most of the patrol fleet smashed. In May of 1987, Judge Carolyn Stell issued an injunctive order against the party, the area was blocked by over 400 police officers and Cedarfest was stopped. May Munn Field Riot A protest on University property concerning the right to consume alcohol on Munn Field became mobile and moved to East Lansing. The intersection of Abbott and Grand River was taken over by a large crowd, which moved to Cedar Village. Fires were lit in the streets. The riot lasted all night, finally breaking up at 5:30 a.m. The crowds were estimated at several thousand. March 21, NCAA Riot The Michigan State basketball team defeated Kentucky in the NCAA Tournament, taking them to the NCAA Final Four. After the game, a crowd formed in Cedar Village. At about midnight, the crowd had grown to nearly a thousand people. A large fire was lit at the intersection of Cedar and Watersedge. Police in riot gear moved the crowd back and ELFD moved in a pumper to put out the fire. The crowd was then disbursed. March NCAA Riot Immediately after an MSU loss to Duke, thousands crowded into Cedar Village and began destroying and burning property. The riot spread to other parts of the City and University. There were 61 reported fires through out the night. Two-hundred and thirty police officers were on duty. Eight cars were burned, including a marked police car. An East Lansing Fire Department vehicle had the windshield smashed by a brick. A crowd attempted to roll over an ambulance carrying a patient, and was moved away by officers on horses. Over 300 canisters of tear gas were used for crowd control. The crowd was estimated at 10,000. March 28, NCAA Riot After an NCAA Sweet 16 victory by the MSU Basketball team, a crowd of approximately 2000 took over the streets in Cedar Village. Bottles and cans were thrown into the crowd and at officers. Instigators attempted to light fires, which were quickly stomped out by police or crowd members. March 30, NCAA Riot After a loss by the MSU Basketball Team in the NCAA tournament, a crowd of a few thousand blocked the street at Cedar Village. The crowd became mobile and moved to University property and the downtown area. They rolled over 2 vehicles, smashed windows on campus and lit a very large fire in front of the Library. Newspaper machines were smashed and the newspapers were used as kindling to light fires downtown and on Grand River Ave. Tear gas was used to disburse the crowd. Prepared by Tom Wibert, Deputy Chief, City of East Lansing Police Department

99 Attachment G Occupancy Map

100 Bogue Alley GRAND RIVER Frye HAGADORN River Cedar Spartan Milford Stoddard Gunson Lexington Auditorium Durand Waters Edge Kenberry Old Canton Victor Roseland Kedzie Woodmere Dormitory Oakland Stoddard City of East Lansing Rental Classes Class I Class II Class III Class IV Class V Class VI PERMITTED OCCUPANCY FOR 3381 PERSONS WITHIN THE EAST VILLAGE DISTRICT BOUNDARY

101

102

103

104

105

106