I think with more people living downtown soon those few blocks will have one of the ingredients for an urban neighborhood village. S. Washington could have vehicle lanes, I know they would not really want to be totally pedestrian "mall". I don't know if it is because the brick paved street is not great for driving on, but there is not much traffic on the street, I just think if it were more pleasant to be down there, people and businesses would come, I don't think we will ever have a big retail district, or a restaurant row but we could have a much nicer downtown than we do now. thanks for responding!
The new Chevy dealership building going up on E. Michigan Ave. is a pretty nice-looking building and quite large. I could see a similar building as a new passenger terminal building out at the airport. [like that would ever happen] I would have liked it better if it were located at the front of the lot next to the street but of course that is where the new cars will be displayed. There seems to be some sort of activity going on in the surface lot right next to Howard St., it would be nice to see something built on the corner.
Not much new information but it does mention that Hepler's Prudden Wheel project is under way and that the Wheel District will be completed by 2028. They also state the city denied the PILOT for the LHC projects which I wasn't aware of.
The "ground breaking" for environmental remediation is definitely amusing, but perhaps is also indicative of the significance of the clean up. I just hope it spurs something positive with the property.
There was some concern on the council about the LHC projects, particularly LHC's poor track record. I have concerns about 100% rent assisted housing generally, even moreso putting two buildings close to each other, and also with putting family housing in a downtown building (there will be some three bedroom units). In the neighborhood meeting with LHC they spoke as if they were moving forward, they may not be using PILOT anymore.
RE: BZA - H Inc wasn't able to submit all of their materials in time for the meeting so it was pulled from Thursday's meeting but will be on a special meeting soon. I can't comment but we'll have to wait on the details to be published.
I was looking at google maps for a possible pedestrian way from the Motor Wheel area perhaps to the river trail along May Street or Monroe Street. Maybe a wide sidewalk along Saginaw Street with some sort of protection or separation pillars and a four-way traffic stops at Larch and Cedar. I think Lansing could do something like that without State approval
I think it boils down to a test project of the greater vision, but again some big details on site layout and massing are missing.
There were discussions for a pedestrian overpass to Oak Park, either over Saginaw St. or along the train tracks, but yeah MDOT is the sticking point. I'm not sure where those discussions are today, but given how many new residents are expected it is definitely still a goal, to help activate the park and get more eyes on the neighborhood.
Connectivity is such a huge part of these "DT-2" zone developments, (Stadium North) and how the State consistently won't come to the table. Professionally, I think all of their talk about a culture change at MDOT and their active transportation planning is a joke.
I'm 100% against those changes to the ADU ordinance. Does this restrict the property to being owner-occupied in perpetuity? If an investor buys a property with a pre-existing adu do they have to leave it vacant? It's a dumb change that will not help the city add to its housing stock, it will make the ordinance vastly less impactful. This kind of stuff is incredibly disheartening, we just can't seem to accomplish any significant positive change here.
I really hope H Inc can pull off something interesting with the Wheel District, Hepler did a good job with JI Case Lofts along with the MW Lofts and he seems to have done a good job managing the properties in years since. But I gotta say, as of now I'm not seeing a lot of positive signs, the plans were incredibly vague and the rendering looked like it was borrowed. Then take into account the 3+ iterations of proposed apartment projects for the parking lot between May & Oakland that never materialized and the proposed Prudden Wheel Lofts that don't seem to be moving too fast... I'm not sure how optimistic to be. I was surprised to see them do the demolition that they did. I couldn't agree more on wanting to see some commercial space and some denser residential, at least in parts. If all goes well this could be a really cool and transformative project.
I don't think I mind Kost as president. I've definitely disagreed with Kost on local politics, and I'm sure we're far apart on many bigger issues, but he seems like someone who genuinely cares about Lansing and will take the job seriously. Hopefully that's the case.
Sorry about the map, yes it is out of date. A previous update undid all of the rezonings of the last two years. We were waiting for the second amendment to pass which would consolidate all of the districts to reflect both changes, and I thought that it would be done by now. We're about to process the annual lot splits/combinations so one way or the other we'll get it current. Anyway, about half of the May-Saginaw-Pennsylvania block was approved for DT-2 in 2023. H Inc. is still working on additional property purchases and ultimately another mass rezoning.
My perception of the development concept is that it is just a mini-subdivision akin to East Village further down the street. I know retail/commercial, is what it is these days, but this is such a major intersection of the eastside and if you are planning on 300+ new households, it would be prime for an urban mixed-use neighborhood. I know the three other businesses at Saginaw/Penn do not do it any favors but a different configuration could have spurred some change.
I believe a big hold-up was financing. H Inc. was marketing the Lofts for ~$36m last year and he was trying to unload the Pere Marquette building to jumpstart this new project, but I haven't seen any assessing records to suggest it ever happened.
ADU amendment - yes, it is an owner-occupancy restriction. Either the principal dwelling or ADU has to have the property owner. Planning Commission voted against recommending CM Hussain's amendment 5-2 (one member absent). I think his version will go to the floor no matter what but I think the vote sends a message to the other Council members. I completely agree it is an unnecessary barrier. Staff is against it for the same reasons - it is difficult to track and it involves the City with future land sales. The City would have to investigate and confirm who is living where and then issue correction notices if there are violations. The majority of communities I have researched that start off with the same requirement eventually remove it to encourage construction. The path remains to be seen, but I'm at least encouraged the city will allow ADUs in some form, and the second amendment changes, here soon.
Comments
Not much new information but it does mention that Hepler's Prudden Wheel project is under way and that the Wheel District will be completed by 2028. They also state the city denied the PILOT for the LHC projects which I wasn't aware of.
There was some concern on the council about the LHC projects, particularly LHC's poor track record. I have concerns about 100% rent assisted housing generally, even moreso putting two buildings close to each other, and also with putting family housing in a downtown building (there will be some three bedroom units). In the neighborhood meeting with LHC they spoke as if they were moving forward, they may not be using PILOT anymore.
There were discussions for a pedestrian overpass to Oak Park, either over Saginaw St. or along the train tracks, but yeah MDOT is the sticking point. I'm not sure where those discussions are today, but given how many new residents are expected it is definitely still a goal, to help activate the park and get more eyes on the neighborhood.
Connectivity is such a huge part of these "DT-2" zone developments, (Stadium North) and how the State consistently won't come to the table. Professionally, I think all of their talk about a culture change at MDOT and their active transportation planning is a joke.
I really hope H Inc can pull off something interesting with the Wheel District, Hepler did a good job with JI Case Lofts along with the MW Lofts and he seems to have done a good job managing the properties in years since. But I gotta say, as of now I'm not seeing a lot of positive signs, the plans were incredibly vague and the rendering looked like it was borrowed. Then take into account the 3+ iterations of proposed apartment projects for the parking lot between May & Oakland that never materialized and the proposed Prudden Wheel Lofts that don't seem to be moving too fast... I'm not sure how optimistic to be. I was surprised to see them do the demolition that they did. I couldn't agree more on wanting to see some commercial space and some denser residential, at least in parts. If all goes well this could be a really cool and transformative project.
I don't think I mind Kost as president. I've definitely disagreed with Kost on local politics, and I'm sure we're far apart on many bigger issues, but he seems like someone who genuinely cares about Lansing and will take the job seriously. Hopefully that's the case.
My perception of the development concept is that it is just a mini-subdivision akin to East Village further down the street. I know retail/commercial, is what it is these days, but this is such a major intersection of the eastside and if you are planning on 300+ new households, it would be prime for an urban mixed-use neighborhood. I know the three other businesses at Saginaw/Penn do not do it any favors but a different configuration could have spurred some change.
I believe a big hold-up was financing. H Inc. was marketing the Lofts for ~$36m last year and he was trying to unload the Pere Marquette building to jumpstart this new project, but I haven't seen any assessing records to suggest it ever happened.
ADU amendment - yes, it is an owner-occupancy restriction. Either the principal dwelling or ADU has to have the property owner. Planning Commission voted against recommending CM Hussain's amendment 5-2 (one member absent). I think his version will go to the floor no matter what but I think the vote sends a message to the other Council members. I completely agree it is an unnecessary barrier. Staff is against it for the same reasons - it is difficult to track and it involves the City with future land sales. The City would have to investigate and confirm who is living where and then issue correction notices if there are violations. The majority of communities I have researched that start off with the same requirement eventually remove it to encourage construction. The path remains to be seen, but I'm at least encouraged the city will allow ADUs in some form, and the second amendment changes, here soon.
Good to hear about all the planning goings-on's, at least there's efforts being made to move things in a positive direction.