ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Quality Services for a Quality Community MEMBERS Brian Laxton Chair Caroline Ruddell Vice Chair Konrad Hittner Patrick Marchman Eric Muska John Robison Travis Stoliker Alternate 1 James Bradley City Council Liaison and Alternate 2 Erik Altmann Staff Liaison Darcy C. Schmitt (517) 319-6941 City of East Lansing DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT 410 Abbot Road East Lansing, MI 48823 (517) 319-6930 www.cityofeastlansing.com AGENDA April 13, 2016 7:00 p.m. 54-B District Court, Courtroom 1 101 Linden Street 1) OPENING A) Roll Call B) Approval of Agenda C) Approval of Minutes February 3, 2016 2) COMMUNICATIONS A) Written B) Oral 3) NEW BUSINESS A) An appeal from TCT 1600, LLC for the property located at 1600 East Grand River Avenue, located in the RM-32, City Center Multiple-Family Residential District from the following requirement of Chapter 50 - Zoning Code of the City of East Lansing: a. Article V. Sec. 50-443(4)(g)(1) Building Setbacks, to allow the setback in the side (east) yard to remain 11 feet where 14 feet is required; b. Article V. Sec. 50-443(4)(g)(1) Building Setbacks, to allow the setback in the (south) rear yard to remain 11.8 and 18.8 feet where 20 feet is required; c. Article V. Sec. 50-443(4)(h) Minimum Distance Between Principal Buildings, to allow the existing buildings to be a minimum of 23 feet apart, where 31 feet is required; d. Article V. Sec. 50-443(4)(e) Ground Coverage, to allow 64.8% ground coverage where only 60% is allowed; e. Article VIII. Sec. 50-814(3) Residential Parking, to allow front yard parking where none is permitted; f. Article VIII. Sec. 50-816(1) Parking Space Size, to allow the existing parking spaces to all be smaller than the required nine feet wide and 20 feet deep. The size of the spaces varies throughout the site; and East Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda April 13, 2016, Page 1 of 2
g. Article VIII. Sec. 50-816(3) Yard Paving Restriction to allow the amount of front yard paving on the site to remain at 54% where 25% is permitted. The applicant is requesting the variances to allow the conversion of the existing extended stay hotel to a traditional apartment complex. B) An appeal of the Planning and Zoning Administrators interpretation; from Mark Grebner as it relates to the property located at 503 Park Lane, in the R-2, Medium Density Single-Family District, of the following sections of Chapter 50 - Zoning Code of the City of East Lansing: 4) OLD BUSINESS 5) STAFF REPORTS Sections 50-853(1) and (3): (1) A structure, the use of which does not conform to the use regulations for the district in which it is situated, shall not be enlarged or extended unless the use therein is changed to a conforming use. (3) A nonconforming use may be extended throughout any parts of the structure which were manifestly arranged or designed for such use at the time of the adoption of the ordinance from which this chapter is derived, provided this extension was made within one year after the date of such adoption. 6) BOARD MEMBER CONCERNS 7) ANNOUNCEMENTS 8) ADJOURNMENT East Lansing Zoning Board of Appeals Agenda April 13, 2016, Page 2 of 2
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. 2016 Members Brian Laxton Travis Stoliker Patrick Marchman John Robison Eric Muska Caroline Ruddell Alternate 1 James Bradley Erik Altmann Alternate 2 Darcy C. Schmitt, Secretary (517) 319-6930
Department of Planning & Community Development Staff Contact: Darcy C. Schmitt Phone Number: 517-319-6941 ZBA Agenda: April 13, 2016 STAFF REPORT April 5, 2016 1600 East Grand River Avenue Proposal TCT 1600, LLC is requesting a variation for the property located at 1600 East Grand River Avenue zoned RM-32, City Center Multiple-Family Residential District from the following requirements of Chapter 50 - Zoning of the Code of the City of East Lansing: a. Article V. Sec. 50-443(4)(g)(1) - Building Setbacks, to allow the setback in the side (east) yard to remain 11 feet where 14 feet is required; b. Article V. Sec. 50-443(4)(g)(1) - Building Setbacks, to allow the setback in the (south) rear yard to remain 11.8 and 18.8 feet where 20 feet is required; c. Article V. Sec. 50-443(4)(h) - Minimum Distance Between Principal Buildings, to allow the existing buildings to be a minimum of 23 feet apart, where 31 feet is required.; d. Article V. Sec. 50-443(4)(e) - Ground Coverage, to allow 64.8% ground coverage where only 60% is allowed; e. Article VIII. Sec. 50-814(3) - Residential Parking, to allow front yard parking where none is permitted; f. Article VIII. Sec. 50-816(1) - Parking Space Size, to allow the existing parking spaces to all be smaller than the required 9 feet wide and 20 feet deep. The size of the spaces varies throughout the site; and g. Article VIII. Sec. 50-816(3) - Yard Paving Restriction, to allow the amount of front yard paving on the site to remain at 54% where 25% is permitted. The applicant is requesting the variances to allow the conversion of a former extended stay hotel to a traditional apartment complex. Background The structures located at 1600 East Grand River Avenue were constructed for and are currently used as an extended stay hotel. The property is zoned RM-32, City Center
Staff Report 1600 East Grand River Avenue Page 2 April 5, 2016 Multiple-Family Residential and fronts on Grand River Avenue to the north and is bound by the Red Cedar River to the south. The surrounding properties to the east and west along Grand River Avenue are also zoned RM-32 with similar multi-building developments along the south side of Grand River Avenue. The property immediately to the west is an office use, located at the intersection of Hagadorn Road and Grand River Avenues. West of Hagadorn Road is the B/A Florist and several apartment complexes located within the EV, East Village Zoning District. To the south is Michigan State University's campus zoned U, University. Across Grand River Avenue to the north is the West Brookfield neighborhood consisting of entirely single-family detached homes, and zoned R-1, Low Density Single-Family Residential. The neighborhood is also located in an R-O-3, Residential Rental Restriction Overlay District which prevents any new rental licenses in the neighborhood, with the exception of a roomer license for an owner-occupied dwelling. The subject site includes three, two-story buildings which house the hotel use and a one-story maintenance building at the south portion of the property. Parking is located along the north and west property lines. The complex was constructed in 1984 for a Residence Inn Extended Stay Hotel. Sometime in 2009, it lost its Flag as it no longer met the standards required to continue operating as a Residence Inn Extended Stay Hotel. It was later purchased and became the Gatehouse Suites where it has continued as an extended stay hotel. The owner of the property recently applied for a modified site plan to change the use of the property from a hotel use to a multiple-family residential use which is allowed under the RM-32 zoning district. However, since the property was constructed for a hotel use it will require several variances to meet the requirements of a multiple-family use. On, February 24, 2016 the City Council voted unanimously to approve the modified site plan application contingent upon the property receiving variances as requested above. There are a total of 44 studio suites of which 16 are two-bedroom units. The units and parking layout are not proposed to change. The applicant has a current rental license for 136 persons on the property which will remain valid if the variances are granted for the new use since hotels and apartment buildings have the same Class of license under the City s code. No major exterior changes are proposed at this time. Standards of Review In order to grant a variance, the Zoning Board must first find that the application satisfies certain required conditions stated in Section 50-64(3)(a) of the Code, as follows: (1) The variance shall not be contrary to the public interest or the general intent and purpose of the Zoning Code;
Staff Report 1600 East Grand River Avenue Page 3 April 5, 2016 (2) The variance shall not permit the establishment of a use within a given district which is prohibited therein; (3) The variance shall not be a variance so commonly recurring as to make reasonably practical the formulation of a general regulation by the City Council; (4) The variance shall not cause substantial adverse effect to properties in the immediate vicinity or in the zoning district where the variance is located; and (5) The variance shall relate only to property that is described in the application for the variance. In addition, the Zoning Board must find that the application meets one of three special findings stated in Section 50-64(3)(b) of the Code, as follows: 1. 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; 2. Special Finding (2), that there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions which apply to the property in question that do not apply to other properties and which have not resulted from any act of the applicant subsequent to the adoption of the Zoning Code; 3. Special Finding (3), that such variation is necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right possessed by other properties within the same zoning district. Additionally, in granting a variance the Board may specify in writing such other conditions regarding the location, character, landscaping, or other treatment that will, in the Board's judgment, be reasonably necessary to the furtherance of the intent of the Zoning Code and the protection of the public interest. The breach of any such condition shall automatically invalidate the permit granted. Staff Comments The 1984 structures which were once utilized as a thriving extended stay hotel have outlived their functional use, essentially becoming nearly obsolete as designed for an extended stay hotel. Staff feels the application satisfies certain required conditions stated in Section 50-64(3)(a) of the Code if the variance were to be approved. It is not contrary to the public interest or the general intent and purpose of the Zoning Code and it would not permit the establishment of a use within the RM-32 district which is prohibited. The variances are requested in order to change the existing use as an extended stay hotel to a multiple family use. The RM-32, City Center Multiple-Family Residential District allows for hotel and multiple-family uses. The property is located in an area which could equally handle either a hotel use or multiple-family use.
Staff Report 1600 East Grand River Avenue Page 4 April 5, 2016 The variances requested relate only to the property described in the application and they are not variances so commonly recurring as to make reasonably practical the formulation of a general regulation by the City Council and would not cause a substantial adverse effect to properties in the immediate vicinity or in the zoning district where the variances are located. The proposed use being residential in nature is considered less intense than a commercial use as it has been used in the past. Possible Actions Following the public hearing on this appeal, if the Zoning Board finds that the application satisfies the required conditions stated above, it could grant the variance in accordance with, Special Finding ( ), (language of special finding) ; based on the following grounds:
Hagadorn Road CITY OF EAST LANSING AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH Grand River Avenue 1600 East Grand River Avenue Planning Commission Quality Services for a Quality Community
CITY OF EAST LANSING ZONING MAP Planning Commission Quality Services for a Quality Community
Department of Planning & Community Development Staff Contact: Darcy C. Schmitt Phone Number: 517-319-6941 ZBA Agenda: April 13, 2016 STAFF REPORT April 4, 2016 503 Park Lane Appeal Mark Grebner is appealing the decision of the Planning and Zoning Administrator which is summarized in the attached letter addressed to Ms. Casey dated February 8, 2016. The focus of Mr. Grebner s appeal is described in his attached letter dated March 7, 2016. Background As stated in the letter addressed to Ms. Casey, her property located at 503 Park Lane is zoned R-2, Medium Density Single-Family Residential District. Under the City s current zoning requirements the property is eligible for a Class III rental license which allows for a maximum occupancy of a family or two unrelated persons. These requirements were put in place in 1997 under Ordinance 900. However, this property was licensed under a Class II rental license prior to 1997 allowing an owner-occupied home to have up to four persons which was lawful at that time. Ordinance 900 changed the Code making it unlawful; therefore, the use was considered to be a lawful nonconforming use. Under the City s Zoning Code, if you have a structure with a lawful nonconforming use, Section 50-853 applies to your property. The follow excerpt is only part of this section 50-853 and will be the only part relevant to the report discussion. Sec. 50-853. Nonconforming use of a structure. (1) A structure, the use of which does not conform to the use regulations for the district in which it is situated, shall not be enlarged or extended unless the use therein is changed to a conforming use. (2) 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. (3) A nonconforming use may be extended throughout any parts of the structure which were manifestly arranged or designed for such use at the time of the adoption of the ordinance from which this chapter is derived,
Staff Report 503 Park Lane Page 2 April 4, 2016 provided this extension was made within one year after the date of such adoption. So when we look at Section 50-853(3) the term extended means to expand spatially and the nonconforming use means the occupancy and the location in question to mean the basement under the current circumstance. The work description on the building permit application submitted on January 29, 2016 referring to bathroom remodel described what I believed to be a bathroom that was partially installed without a building permit in the basement. It was my understanding that the owner was interested in completing the build-out of the bathroom. In order to determine whether the project met the requirements of Section 50-853(3) back in 1997, I pulled the rental file to discover that on November 8, 2000, a Class II License was reissued for the property that states the cellar is not habitable. Exhibit A further defines a room that is non-habitable as one that is not allowed to be used for human habitation. Therefore it is reasonable to say that a part of the structure that was not arranged or designed for human habitation. With this document we can establish that the basement was not habitable in 1997 when the property s current license became nonconforming. (See Exhibit A) The nonconforming use under this particular circumstance is the rental license occupancy or rental occupants. Proceeding with the build-out of the basement bathroom will extend spatially the nonconforming use within the structure where it was not arranged or designed for habitation in 1997 and thus is prohibited by Code unless the use is changed to a conforming use. As a result, proceeding with the build-out of the basement bathroom will result in the loss of the current nonconforming Class II rental license. This means the owner would only be eligible for a Class III rental license which allows for a family or two unrelated persons to occupy the property. Staff Comments The applicant provided a basement floor plan that describes the previous building permits that were approved for the basement. During this period there were issues with permits being issued without sign-off from the Planning Division as required by City Code. Exhibits B and C are evidence that a building permit was issued in error without review and sign-off from the Planning Division. The first is a copy of the application highlighting there was no signature on the Zoning approval line and the second is the actual building permit as indicated on the applicant s floor plan. Also attached is Exhibit D, a memo written to the Building Official in charge during that period stating that there were still problems with getting the appropriate sign-off on permit applications. These issues have since been resolved.
Staff Report 503 Park Lane Page 3 April 4, 2016 We have maintained that we will except that other permits have been issued and those improvements may remain without issue to the existing nonconforming licenses; however, we cannot overlook the City Code because of past mistakes. Mr. Grebner s claim that Section 50-853(3) is not a restriction but only a permissive provision is inaccurate. There would be no need for this provision if it only permitted something that was not otherwise restricted. That is contrary to the rules of statutory construction and contrary to the City s interpretation. The language is clearly limiting circumstances and the time frame the nonconforming use could be extended as described in subsection (3).
CITY OF EAST LANSING ZONING MAP Zoning Board of Appeals Quality Services for a Quality Community
CITY OF EAST LANSING EXHIBIT A Zoning Board of Appeals Quality Services for a Quality Community
CITY OF EAST LANSING EXHIBIT B Zoning Board of Appeals Quality Services for a Quality Community
CITY OF EAST LANSING EXHIBIT C Zoning Board of Appeals Quality Services for a Quality Community
EXHIBIT D PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Quality Services for a Quality Community MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Howard Asch, Director CENC Annette Irwin, Assistant Director CENC Darcy C. Schmitt, Planning and Zoning Administrator DATE: June 27, 2012 City of East Lansing PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 410 Abbot Road East Lansing, MI 48823 (517) 319-6930 www.cityofeastlansing.com SUBJECT: Planning and Zoning Division Permit Sign-off There has been tremendous progress made in streamlining and coordinating the City s multi-disciplinary review process for new construction projects. However, there is still some confusion about what review and sign-off is needed from the Planning and Zoning Division when a permit application is submitted to the Code Enforcement & Neighborhood Conservation Department (CENC) for an existing structure or developed site. All Building and Paving Permit applications should be reviewed and signed-off by the Planning and Zoning Division prior to issuing a permit. All Building Permit applications should be reviewed and signed-off on by the Planning and Zoning Division before a permit is issued per the following section of the Zoning Code: Sec. 50-35. - Building permits. (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. The Planning Division does not need to sign-off on electrical, plumbing, or mechanical permits. These permits may be associated with a Building Permit application but they are not relevant to the Planning and Zoning Division sign-off. To assure that the proposed paving meets all of the requirements of the Zoning Code the Planning and Zoning Division should sign-off on all Paving Permit
Memorandum - Planning and Zoning Division Sign-off June 27, 2012 Page 2 applications for private property regardless of whether they are residential or commercial in nature before a permit is issued. Requests for paving within the right-of-way should be directed to the Department of Public Works which has a separate Paving Permit application. A Paving Permit for private property is required per the following Sections of the Zoning Code: Sec. 50-815. - Paving permit. No part of any yard or premises shall be paved or repaved for the purposes of providing vehicular parking or access unless a paving permit is first issued by the building official as described in this section. (4) Nonconforming paving. A paving permit may be issued to reconstruct a driveway or paving space which legally exists at the time of adoption of this provision. When such paving, or any portion thereof, can feasibly be done in greater conformity with the zoning ordinance in the opinion of the planning and zoning official, the building official shall so require in any paving permit. In determining such feasibility, the following provisions shall apply: a. The reconstruction shall not increase or extend any existing nonconformity; b. The reconstruction shall not cause or permit a change in the occupancy or use of the property; and c. The reconstruction shall not increase the number of parking spaces provided on the property. Sec. 50-816. - Parking and access design standards. The Code sections listed determine the need for a permit and required parking and access design standards but there are numerous sections of the Code that also need to be reviewed to determine whether a proposed paving application is in compliance with the City Code.