New plan for City Center II to be discussed
Tweet
As the City Center II development hits the East Lansing Planning Commission’s agenda for a public hearing, city officials and committee members expect a long conference, as commentators come to the 7 p.m. Wednesday meeting at 54-B District Court, 101 Linden St., to discuss the $116.4 million project.
Although the commission will consider an amended site plan to a five-story building in the project to allow office space in a parcel originally slated for residential and commercial use, bringing the entire proposal back to the open forum format could make for a lengthy meeting.
Still, planning commission member Sheryl Soczek said she hopes more people will be satisfied with the accommodations made for office space in the development that is bounded by Abbot Road, Grand River Avenue and Valley Court Park.
“I would hope the opposition to it won’t be as great as before because we adjusted it to be more offices instead of housing,” she said. “A lot of opposition was to housing.”
The five-story building is a mixed-use space with commercial area on the bottom floor. It was supposed to have 25 rental units, but that number could be less if the planning commission and then City Council approves the new site plan.
The City Center II project has been marred by financial difficulty, including delinquent taxes and the developer’s woes with projects in other cities.
Despite this, Scott Chappelle, president of City Center II developer Strathmore Development Co., said in an e-mail he expects to begin construction this summer, and he is working with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to secure a $28 million loan.
Phil Bellfy, an MSU associate professor of writing, rhetoric and American cultures, said the city missed an opportunity to re-evaluate the entire project when its site plan and special use permit expired Dec. 17, 2009. By allowing Strathmore a second chance, Bellfy said the city made a major mistake.
“We warned the city this developer has all kinds of problems,” he said. “We don’t think he can carry this project, and we were right.”
Sally Silver, a Bailey Community Association board member and East Lansing resident, said the site plan amendment shows the city lacks foresight for the development, as it is responding to immediate market concerns even though the project will take several years to complete.
“The City Council and people acting on these have been changing their view depending on the circumstances of the day,” she said.
East Lansing Community Development Analyst Tim Schmitt said given the success of the Technology Innovation Center, 325 E. Grand River Ave., the city’s new IBM facility, and the addition of the Facility for Rare Isotope Beams project, there has been an increased demand for office space in the city’s downtown.
East Lansing City Manager Ted Staton said the project won’t have to go through the same channels of approval — such as an environmental and traffic analysis — the original application had to maneuver, which will accelerate the bureaucratic aspect of the process.
He also said that since the project remains intact aside from the potential amendment, the planning commission will have fewer elements to consider, which would expedite decision making.
“Every board and commission either unanimously or near unanimously supported the project as it was planned,” he said. “I said 18 months ago that it was the most thoroughly vetted project in the history of East Lansing and probably deserved to be because of the size and scope of the project.”






Commentary
Add your $0.02, go to the comment form or follow the comment feed
students
(02/24/10 12:04am)Report
Let’s get this off and running.
G. River
(02/24/10 6:16am)Report
At a minimum, the developer should be required to raze those buildings, pronto. They are an eyesore and empty space would be a big improvement.
Eliot Singer
(02/24/10 7:48am)Report
The objection is not just to residential space, although building residential space when there is a glut on the housing market with declining property values and an assessor who admits so few homes have sold over the last year he is guessing, is incredibly stupid. But so is building office space, when there is plenty of office space available and the need for office space in general, except a few things that require physical contact (like medicine) is declining with increased use of the internet—for all the hype coming out of city hall about “technology,” the new Hannah center is desperately searching for anybody (and I don’t think has anyone doing actual technology or research) and there is nothing involving software development, web design, internet content, etc. that can’t be done from a laptop in a coffee shop, so anyone wasting money on overhead is a fool. As to retail space, in addition to the commercial real estate bubble being about to burst (massive foreclosures coming soon), East Lansing has never supported upscale shopping or restaurants (or even a decent bakery) and even if they keep building more unused parking ramps, driving to a downtown to shop is a hassle and not worth it even at $20 gas.
These people decide to build first, then try to come up with excuses for what the building will be used for. That is not planing.
And should I mention Strathmore? When I see Vic Loomis putting up five million of his own money to back Strathmore, then I’ll believe City Center II is a legitimate project not a speculative boondoggle putting taxpayers at risk.
spartan12
(02/24/10 7:57am)Report
I think this project is getting closer to being a viable one. There is still the fact that Strathmore isn’t 100% trustworthy to follow through. Is there a tenet lined up for the building or is it just assumed that the space will be used?
Realistic
(02/24/10 12:43pm)Report
Seems like they need to scale down more. Raze the buildings, dump some gravel to make a parking lot, and bring in some used mobile homes to rent as offices or student slums.
Eric F.
(02/24/10 12:56pm)Report
Why do citizens think a Plan Commission can control a development? If the site plan meets zoning requirements, it HAS to be approved. The only discretionary approvals deal with zoning. I’m sick of citizens and board or commission members thinking they can development something better than a developer.
kill it
(02/24/10 4:26pm)Report
Kill this project already. It is one of the most unimaginative, poorly designed, projects out there. It could be so much more — look to Europe for examples — dense, high rise, with a mix of business and residential that people would actually want.
Phil Bellfy
(02/25/10 9:21am)Report
It appears that everyone is still living in a dream-world. If Strathmore wants to develop ITS properties and build some office space, more power to them. But the city should not be selling him the land on which that office building will sit (the parking lot just south of Dublin Square) —especially when they need a 60% vote of the people to do so.
On the finance side of this issue: it’s a virtual certainty that HUD will NOT guarantee a loan to this developer —that is, assuming any bank would give him a loan in the first place, especially when he couldn’t find one to loan him the money to pay his taxes.
Bottom line: if he has tenants lined up, develop the property he already owns to suit those tenants (period).