Majorities of Planning Commission and DDA Support 530 Albert Ave. Affordable Housing Redevelopment

Despite substantial opposition from the public, majorities of both East Lansing’s Planning Commission and Downtown Development Authority voted this week to recommend the City Council approve construction of a proposed affordable housing development at 530 Albert Ave.

ELi counted between 85 and 100 attendees at Wednesday (Aug. 23) evening’s Planning Commission meeting at the Hannah Community Center. Twice during the meeting, staff had to secure extra chairs for the overflow crowd. Most who spoke were against the proposal.

The scene at the DDA on Thursday (Aug. 24) was radically different, with only one member of the public – a candidate for Council – coming forward, in that case to support the proposal.

Planning Commissioners and DDA Board members took time to deliberate and discuss the reasons for their decisions before roll-call votes. Ultimately, the Planning Commission voted 5-2 and the DDA voted 6-4 to recommend the project to City Council, while tacking on a few extra recommended conditions.

The project proposes to create 122 apartments to house individuals or households earning between 40% and 80% of the area median income (AMI). That currently equates to annual incomes of about $30,000 to $80,000.

Federal and state financial assistance for the project would limit how much rent can be charged. Based on current rates set by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), a tenant earning about $30,000 per year (40% AMI) would pay at most $656 for a studio apartment, $703 for a one-bedroom unit and $844 for a two-bedroom unit. Those rents include electricity, water and sewer, and garbage costs.

The scene at Wednesday’s Planning Commission meeting was tense.

Nineteen speakers rose for public comment, several of them business owners on the 500 block of Grand River Avenue. The objection wasn’t to affordable housing; it was to the loss of the parking lot.

Mike Krueger, owner of the Peanut Barrel and Crunchy’s and the chair of the DDA, was first to the podium. The parking lot is directly behind the Peanut Barrel. (Disclosure: Crunchy’s is a sponsor of ELi’s weekly newsletter.)

“Ultimately, this particular version of the development feels very short-sighted,” Krueger said. “Not only does it remove 90 spots of parking for all the businesses in the 500 block, making it the only block of businesses in the downtown without adequate parking for its customers directly behind and adjacent to the properties. But it completely hamstrings future development of the 500 block and even the 400 block.

“Requiring the development to lease up to approximately 120 spots [in the Division Street parking ramp] and also eliminating the 90 spots of the Bailey lot would put the Division Street garage very near capacity on a normal day,” Krueger said, “making it highly unlikely that it could ever support future development of either of those blocks. The parking study that was released by the city, although accurate for the particular Thursday in October [when counts were taken], is nowhere indicative of the reality of what parking looks like on weekends, game days or special days. These are the days that most of our businesses actually make money.”

But Interim Planning Director Tim Dempsey said at the DDA that those represent only about six days a year. He said the recent study to which Krueger was referring showed that on most days at most times, the parking system has at least a thousand spots available downtown. The city needs to see greater use year-round to pay for that system.

At the Planning Commission’s public comment period, Dave Bernath, owner of the second-floor record shop Flat, Black & Circular, said the lack of parking is going to hurt his business.

“Records are heavy,” Bernath said. “I don’t know if you’ve ever tried picking up 100 records. It’s difficult. And if people have to go several blocks, it’s going to hurt my business.”

Bernath suggested the decision be put off until after the coming City Council election.

“We need to wait, get an election [and] some real people on there from the city,” he said.

Jennifer Hayes owns Yoga State and appealed to the planning commissioners to think more about the community.

“What I’m hearing here from the last two [commission] meetings is money,” she said. “And I wonder what this city values. I talk to a lot of people. People need community. We need downtown East Lansing to prove that we’re a community that cares about hearts, about lifeforce, about each other.”

She said that requires preserving the parking lot near her business, as some of her customers can’t walk a few blocks.

“I believed in this city,” she continued. “I just signed another five-year lease right before I found out about this. What are we to do? This is my entire life savings.”

Only one local business owner supported the construction of the 530 Albert Ave. project.

“If we see a client holding a parking ticket, we give them a dollar or two to pay for their parking,” Roy Saper, owner of Saper Galleries and Custom Framing said, urging creative solutions by business owners to deal with local parking issues. “Additionally, we walk the item being purchased out to their car, be it a ramp or a metered spot, 100% of the time.

“If we discover they’ve been ticketed for being in the gallery longer than anticipated, we pay their parking ticket,” Saper said. “If they pick up a work of art or framing and we learn that they’re headed to a bus stop, we drive them home. Creative solutions keep customers, no matter what the parking situation is.”

Eric Mayhew, a resident of the Bailey neighborhood, also spoke in favor of the development.

“I moved to East Lansing a couple years ago because it’s thriving and bright,” he said. “More people would help improve the vibrancy of this community. At the last meeting, several speakers raised the issue that we’re losing parking. I am very sympathetic to the businesses downtown that are subject to the loss of surface parking, but I’d also point out that the residents of this development don’t need to drive to downtown East Lansing. They’re able to step out their door and support local businesses.”

Attorney Andrew Moore spoke on behalf of the owners of the site, the Metzger and Fabian family.

“The family believes development of affordable housing is one of the most important opportunities for the community in many years and [are] proud to be part of the project,” Moore said. “There has been discussion about the project resulting in the loss of surface parking within the Albert Street lot. It should be noted that the lot is currently owned 71% by the Metzger Fabian family and 29% by the City [of East Lansing]. For over two decades, the family has leased its portion to the City for operation of the parking lot.

“However, about a year ago, the Metzger Fabian family decided the highest and best use of the site was for development,” he said.

Moore was jeered and laughed at during his statement, quickly departing the meeting room as soon as he was finished speaking. Chairperson Joseph Sullivan called for civility from the audience.

As public comment ended, the commissioners posed questions to Chris Young, the Vice President of American Community Developers (ACD), and ACD architect Paul Webber, who are leading the 530 Albert project.

Commissioner Lauren LaPine asked why residents and businesses affected by the development weren’t more closely considered during the planning stages.

There’s a lack of trust, apparently,” she said, “between the community and you as the developer. Can you tell me how you plan to work with the community to refine this design to meet the needs that they’re speaking to? I mean, we’ve heard from a lot of folks that are older and have concerns about safety and mobility. Do you plan to make any changes to what you’ve proposed based on what you’ve heard tonight?”

“We came to the DDA in May,” Young said, “and we did talk to a lot of the stakeholders there and actually met with some of them, and some of their ideas we did put into it. We did attempt to do that.”

Webber added they were unaware of any community dissatisfaction with the project until the last Planning Commission meeting. At the DDA meeting, Young said the first he heard of serious opposition to the project was when he was contacted by an ELi reporter for a story, not from the dozens of people he had spoken to personally to ask for input. (He said only DDA member Greg Ballein, who owns SBS Bookstore on Grand River, had told him to his face he didn’t like the project.)

“It’s hard for us to do our job with no feedback,” Webber said in answer to LaPine’s questions. “We like to have that feedback loop. And to be here having this conversation is challenging.”

LaPine offered her understanding, but again asked whether the community feedback at that night’s Planning Commission meeting would lead to any changes to their development plans.

Webber spoke about other projects the company is working on and the stress of ballooning construction costs.

“When we looked at [suggestions for] some of the taller buildings,” he said, “the cost was completely unbearable. It wasn’t going to happen. In fact, Chris and I both recommended to the owner to not pursue this. And we’re here today.”

Young defended his business against accusations by community members, explaining his company is dedicated to providing people affordable housing all over the country. He said the company manages 14,000 units of housing “for 50,000 Americans.”

He told the DDA the company was trying hard to be transparent and responsive.

“I want to clarify what our role is and what our purview is,” Chair Sullivan said at the Planning Commission meeting after Vice Chair Dan Bollman made a motion to recommend the construction to City Council and it was seconded by Commissioner Thomas Hendricks.

“We recommend land use proposals, of course,” he said. “We do not determine the timeline of city staff reviews of things. We do not determine when City Council acts on things. We don’t determine the timing or projects. We only review proposals in front of us. We cannot block projects, greenlight projects. We simply make a recommendation to Council.”

Commissioner Cynthia Williams said there is no doubt there’s a need for affordable housing in East Lansing, but also acknowledged “the passionate opposition of the citizens and of the businesses that are adjacent to this proposed site and have significant investments….But I do believe this proposal is consistent with the City’s master plan and the goal and objectives that are laid out there and that’s the outcome of a lot of citizen input…and that’s our job, to look at a proposal and whether or not its consistent with the master plan. And I do believe it is.”

“It appears this property is going to be sold, one way or another,” Williams added. “So our question isn’t do we support the as-is status of this property or do we support this proposal. Our job is to decide if this proposal is consistent with what our role is.”

But Commissioner Ed Wagner noted one of the conditions for approving a proposed land use is that it “shall not materially diminish the economic value of adjacent properties or the city as a whole.”

“We’ve heard from a lot of business people here saying it will,” he said.

Before the final vote on the recommendation, with the support of the commission, Bollman and Sullivan added conditions to the list of 20 already in place. Bollman asked that the parking already in place and owned by the City of East Lansing (approximately 33 spots) stay in use. Sullivan asked for a clarification of where rideshare and delivery parking would be.

After more than two and a half hours, the Commission voted 5-2 to recommend the construction to City Council, with Sullivan, Bollman, Williams, Hendricks and Chelsea Denault voting in favor, and LaPine and Wagner voting against.

At the DDA, the debate again centered on parking.

Taking questions from the DDA, Young and Webber made clear they understand no one in East Lansing is objecting to the idea of housing lower-income people at the proposed location. And that, Young said, made East Lansing different from some places ACD seeks to build. Young said he understood the people objecting to their East Lansing proposal are not against equity or diversity.

His team understands, he said, the chief objection is to the loss of the parking lot.

“I get that it’s a lifeblood for your businesses,” Young said. But, he added, “We believe affordable housing should be a human right for people.”

He also reiterated that the Fabian/Metzger family intends to redevelop the land into some type of building whether or not this project is ultimately approved and built.

The only person to speak at public comment at the DDA was Rebecca Kasen, who is running for City Council. (Kasen has been speaking frequently at public meetings on a wide variety of topics since deciding to run for election.) Kasen said the nonprofit women’s center she operates in Lansing can’t afford to pay some of its staff very much, and yet those staff would like to live in East Lansing.

Interim City Manager Randy Talifarro said MSU has indicated this kind of housing is needed near campus.  DDA member Jeff Smith seconded that. Smith said MSU has been trying to find affordable housing for visiting faculty and this project could provide that.

DDA member Jacqueline Babcock said she knew young couples who would love to live in downtown East Lansing if they could afford it. A resident of Newman Lofts (a rental building restricted to seniors age 55 and up), Babcock said downtown has student and senior-citizen renters now, but not young professionals of the sort who could live in the proposed building.

DDA members asked whether the developer had expressed interest in buying the part of the parking lot owned by the City. Talifarro confirmed they had, but told DDA the sale of the land would require approval by East Lansing voters. That process would take longer and add uncertainty, which makes it less interesting to the developers as an option, he said

While most DDA members wanted to make sure the city portion of the lot remains a parking lot, DDA member Robert Aydukovic objected to the idea of “designing around the car.”

“When you design around the car,” he said, “you get very generic and boring places….Surface parking on a downtown space like this is a pretty smiling face with a missing tooth.”

DDA member Justin Hewson agreed, calling the “parking question…one of those older ideologies.”

Aydukovic attempted a motion to recommend Council seek to redevelop the city’s portion of the lot, too. But it failed for lack of a second.

Instead, the DDA voted unanimously to recommend the city limit permitted-parking in the Division Street lot for this project’s tenants to the upper decks of the parking ramp. That would leave parking closer to the street level available for people coming downtown to shop and dine.

The DDA also voted unanimously to recommend the city not allow its part of the parking lot and the alleyway to be used for construction staging for this project.

The developers have said this project will be “very difficult” to do without use of the city’s part of the lot for construction. But DDA members are concerned that closing the lot for that use will crush nearby businesses.

When it came to the main question of whether to recommend Council approve the project, DDA member Luke Hackney voted against, saying he had to consider “the actual taxpayers of the DDA and how it affects them.”  Ballein also voted against, saying, “I want the housing, but I think you’re sacrificing way too much.”

DDA member Dave Ledebuhr voted against the proposal and said he would vote in favor if the project had on-site parking, but it does not. DDA Chair Krueger concluded the project would simply be too harmful, including for nearby businesses like his own (the Peanut Barrel).

Talifarro, Smith, Aydukovic, Hewson, Babcock and Reuben Levinsohn voted in support.

Mayor Ron Bacon, a member of the DDA by virtue of his office, did not attend the meeting. Bacon’s signed a support letter for the project in the name of the city without presenting it to the rest of Council, and this has been criticized by some public commenters at Planning Commission. ELi reported earlier this month about Talifarro’s and Dempsey’s internal concerns with providing the letter.

At Thursday’s DDA, Krueger asked Young how that letter was obtained for ACD’s application to the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSDHA). Young responded that the letter was just part of the normal development process and he understood the letter did not constitute approval of the project by the city.

Asked by email for his reaction to the votes by Planning Commission and the DDA to recommend the project to Council, Young expressed gratitude for their support.

“Affordable housing is a key human right,” Young said. “It makes a community more equitable and diverse when all people are allowed to have high quality housing that does not cost-burden them and is located in all areas of the city.”

See all of ELi’s reporting on this project here. Just a reminder that, this week, ELi established a special new Investigative News Fund to support our investigative reporting for East Lansing. Read more here.