They'll have to, but it won't mean anything. If the public's opinion meant anything, this wouldn't be taking so many years and they wouldn't be so uncoordinated in planning these things.
I don't understand this town, sometimes; it's so small-brained and myopic when it comes to basic planning. Something like this would have never been released to the public in a place like Madison - or even the sprawling hellscape that is most of Indy. It'd would be seen as so laughable the city gov would have sent the architects back to the drawing board.
This administration seems to have little imagination or taste when it comes to this plan. This reminds me of the State's "secondary complex" when the State moved a bunch of departments out to the unremarkable buildings out in the -brubs. Lansing in the past built public buildings that were beautiful as well as useful, I don't think it would cost more or be a bad investment if the city were to consider building attractive well planned public buildings and spaces.
Next week's Planning Commission agenda just dropped.
- The Lansing City Rescue Mission is looking for a (spot) rezoning and special use permit for moving its single men's and women's shelters from East Michigan Avenue and Cedar Street, respectively, to two buildings on West Kalamazoo, downtown, between Chestnut and Walnut. The Michigan Avenue location will be used to expand the kitchen for the organization; moving single women out of the Cedar Street location will open up more space at the Cedar Street shelter for women with children.
- The other item is something citykid spoke about, and it's reforming the Subdivision Regulations in the code so that property owners won't have to keep being held up by having to ask for variances for lot depth-width issues in town. Apparently, the current regime (2.5:1) is stricter than the state's regulations (4:1), and weren't really developed with urban areas in mind. It looks like the city also wants to get rid of lot width and depth minimums. This takes out the onerous process of having to go before the planning commission and then having to get the variances approved by the city council. The zoning administrator would get the sole responsibility to do this. All-in-all, it overturns the things that pressured the suburbanization of the city and returns it so that urban residential lots can be redeveloped in an urban manner by-right.
Citykid can correct anything I may have gotten wrong.
The Rescue Mission expansion isn't anything to get excited about but at least they're not expanding further on Michigan Ave, and I have at least some faith in the Mission to run things right. The buildings they're moving into appear fairly large, I imagine it will give them a good bit of room to expand.
I'm just glad because the Michigan Ave location is cramped for them, and this new location will still be centrally located, but have much more room for the Mission to house and deliver resources better. They will apparently develop a new structure on part of the parking lot portion of the new site in addition to the existing two buildings which it sounds like they'll linke with a bridge over the street. The "spot" zoning - it's an existing downtown zoning district - might get a bit of pushback because it sets a bad precendent. But apparently, shelters are not permitted in the downtown zone, so that's why they asking for the rezoning to an "adaptive reuse" zone. However, that zoning designation is usually only provided on existing sites that are/were old schools or instutitions.
I'm most excited about the land subdivision reforms. This will give property owners significantly more liberty to develop in an urban way. That said, I think planning office should consider further reforms to minimum lot size such as what's happened or is planned in places like Austin or Dallas:
Currently, in regular single-family neighborhood districts, it looks like the lot size min for Lansing is 4,000 sq ft, which is huge, unless you're going to allow ADUs (accessory dwelling units). We can't have Texas beating us. lol
RE: the Public Safety complex, I totally hear you all. The main reason it looks the way it does is because of potential threats against the police and the array of users. The developers visited quite a few newly built locations, namely one in metro Detroit (location escapes me at the moment) that did build a more urban layout and there was an overwhelming response about how exposed they were to vandalism, protests, or possible car ramming. I won't comment on how valid the Planning and Zoning Office thought of that. A more urban layout with the building along the frontage was seriously considered but at the end of the day I think the police dept. got the vote. The parking is dreadful. It did decrease a lot from what is actually proscribed in the zoning ordinance so minor "win" there, but eventually there will be six courts operating and the site will host multiple trainings for first responders from other municipalities. Allegedly this was the lowest they could go. By right INST-1 can have four aisles of front parking, or 120', which was meant to accommodate people needing an emergency room, not this type of use, so that will be a zoning edit in the future. I think there was as much compromising as possible so no one is super happy with it.
RE: subdivision regulations, not much to add. It is a dumb regulation and it is holding up a significant (for Lansing) plan for new single family homes. Should have fixed this a long time ago. I'll have to do some research on lot size <4,000 with minimum house size of 400-576 sq. ft. 1,500 feels too tiny to me but I need to find a visualization.
The rezoning for detached rental housing at Miller and Aurelius was approved. The rezoning for a quadplex on N Chestnut was denied.
An RFP is going out very soon for the city-owned parcels at the Cedar-Kalamazoo-Larch intersection. Fingers crossed for a cool proposal.
It's very disappointing that the quite silly "safety and security" argument was given so much credence at the public safety complex, I fail to see how public parking lots in the front even help with that, something similar to what the state police did would of seemed more appropriate. If the police/fire hq and courts are really at risk of being attacked by the public then we have much bigger issues that need addressing, I'm tired of seeing fortress-like architecture on public buildings, it's unnecessary. I'm sorry to say it but I believe this is ultimately the result of weak leadership and lack of direction up at the top.
The Kalamazoo-Larch-Cedar RFP is exciting, I do think it should be considered as a back up option for a new city hall if a more prominent location near the Capitol isn't feasible. I don't expect anything huge here but I do hope for something at least a little above average architecturally, the old Kalamazoo Gateway proposal was kinda cool.
I was going to mention the old Kalamazoo Gateway proposal. It's funny, though, because I don't expect anything that nice, anymore. It's interesting around that time how nice the architecture being planned was; even the Gillespie's were putting up stuff like Stadium District. And, now, everything is like Midtown or Block600.
Why was rezoning for the Chestnut rows turned down? I know there was pushback from the residents, but that's usually the case and it didn't seem particularly organized.
Notice some more work going on at QD's headquarters building down on Mt. Hope and Washington. Property assessor page shows a few projects permitted, but most appear to have been completed/expired, so I'm not sure what's going on. The Lansing Industrial Center behind it also appears to be undergoing some kind of renovation. Again, project permits listed, but all of those are listed as having been completed/expired. Apparently, there is a grow operation going on in at least part of the building? Just down Mt. Hope, the old Walter French school renovation is going ahead full steam. Going to be beautiful to drive by at night and see lights on in the windows. Finally, I had no idea that the state was constructing a sound wall for the Cherry Hill neighborhood, downtown, but that looks just about completed, too.
I'll have to get by there and check out the QD property, that has been of interest to me since I did my own concept rework of the site awhile back.
That sound wall for for Cherry Hill has been nice for me, they really do make a difference. There will be more sound walls coming as part of the 127 rebuild.
Comments
I don't understand this town, sometimes; it's so small-brained and myopic when it comes to basic planning. Something like this would have never been released to the public in a place like Madison - or even the sprawling hellscape that is most of Indy. It'd would be seen as so laughable the city gov would have sent the architects back to the drawing board.
- The Lansing City Rescue Mission is looking for a (spot) rezoning and special use permit for moving its single men's and women's shelters from East Michigan Avenue and Cedar Street, respectively, to two buildings on West Kalamazoo, downtown, between Chestnut and Walnut. The Michigan Avenue location will be used to expand the kitchen for the organization; moving single women out of the Cedar Street location will open up more space at the Cedar Street shelter for women with children.
- The other item is something citykid spoke about, and it's reforming the Subdivision Regulations in the code so that property owners won't have to keep being held up by having to ask for variances for lot depth-width issues in town. Apparently, the current regime (2.5:1) is stricter than the state's regulations (4:1), and weren't really developed with urban areas in mind. It looks like the city also wants to get rid of lot width and depth minimums. This takes out the onerous process of having to go before the planning commission and then having to get the variances approved by the city council. The zoning administrator would get the sole responsibility to do this. All-in-all, it overturns the things that pressured the suburbanization of the city and returns it so that urban residential lots can be redeveloped in an urban manner by-right.
Citykid can correct anything I may have gotten wrong.
I'm most excited about the land subdivision reforms. This will give property owners significantly more liberty to develop in an urban way. That said, I think planning office should consider further reforms to minimum lot size such as what's happened or is planned in places like Austin or Dallas:
Currently, in regular single-family neighborhood districts, it looks like the lot size min for Lansing is 4,000 sq ft, which is huge, unless you're going to allow ADUs (accessory dwelling units). We can't have Texas beating us. lol
RE: subdivision regulations, not much to add. It is a dumb regulation and it is holding up a significant (for Lansing) plan for new single family homes. Should have fixed this a long time ago. I'll have to do some research on lot size <4,000 with minimum house size of 400-576 sq. ft. 1,500 feels too tiny to me but I need to find a visualization.
The rezoning for detached rental housing at Miller and Aurelius was approved. The rezoning for a quadplex on N Chestnut was denied.
An RFP is going out very soon for the city-owned parcels at the Cedar-Kalamazoo-Larch intersection. Fingers crossed for a cool proposal.
The Kalamazoo-Larch-Cedar RFP is exciting, I do think it should be considered as a back up option for a new city hall if a more prominent location near the Capitol isn't feasible. I don't expect anything huge here but I do hope for something at least a little above average architecturally, the old Kalamazoo Gateway proposal was kinda cool.
Why was rezoning for the Chestnut rows turned down? I know there was pushback from the residents, but that's usually the case and it didn't seem particularly organized.
That sound wall for for Cherry Hill has been nice for me, they really do make a difference. There will be more sound walls coming as part of the 127 rebuild.