Council - Regular Meeting

welcome everyone uh to the east lansing city council regular meeting of september 8th 2026 uh it is 6 34 p.m the meeting will come to order could we have the roll call please council member whalen here council member meadows here council member sing here mayor progen grigsby here mayor altman here is there a motion to approve the agenda Move by Meadows.

Second.

Second by Grigsby. Any discussion of the agenda? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. The agenda is approved. Is there a motion concerning minutes of previous meetings?

I move to approve the minutes for special counsel August 10th, 2026 and the minutes for regular counsel August 11th, 2026.

Motion by Grigsby. Second by Singh. Any corrections to those minutes? Seeing none, the vote is on the minutes as presented. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries, those minutes are approved. Which brings us to item 2.1, a special presentation, special tribute for Larry Cross, former Building Board of Appeals Commissioner, Mayor Pro Tem.

Thank you. I believe Tim Schultz is going to speak before myself here for a brief moment. Mr. Schultz.

Hello, everybody. I'm Tim Schultz. I'm the Planning, Building, and Housing Building Administrator. Just have a few words about Larry. Larry's many years of service of the City of East Lansing Building Board of Appeals left a lasting impression on the community. His deep knowledge of building codes paired with his thoughtful and steady judgment helped guide the city through countless important decisions. Larry approached every case with professionalism and faithfulness. Larry's dedication, integrity, and willingness to share his expertise made him a trusted voice on the board. We are truly grateful for many contributions he made and the care he showed in serving East Lansing. His work will be remembered with great appreciation and respect.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you, Tim. I have the honor of reading the proclamation honoring the life and service of Larry Cross. The city of East Lansing pauses to recognize and honor the life of Larry Cross, a respected and well-known member of our community who passed away in March, leaving behind a legacy of professionalism, generosity, and friendship. Larry Cross was a highly accomplished architect and a structural engineer whose skill, insight, and dedication shaped the environment of East Lansing and surrounding region through numerous structural design projects. He shared his expertise, generosity with the public, serving for many years on the East Lansing Building Board of Appeals, where he offered steady guidance and deep understanding of building structures and codes. Larry's practical knowledge, thoughtful perspective and commitment to safety and best practice to strengthen every deliberation of the board and contributed significantly to the development and wellbeing of our entire community. His leadership professionalism and long record of service have left a lasting impact on the city of East Lansing, making it a safer and a better place for all who live and work here. On behalf of the residents of East Lansing, I, the Mayor Pro Tem, along with members of the East Lansing City Council, extend our heartfelt condolence to the family, friends, and colleagues of Larry Cross. The City of East Lansing offers its deepest gratitude for Larry's many years of dedicated service and his enduring contributions to our city. And witness whereof I here unto set my hand and cause the seal of City of East Lansing to be affixed this eighth day of September 2026. I'll move to adopt the resolution CR 2026-51.

Motion by the Mayor Pro Tem. Second. Second by Councilmember Singh. Would anybody care to address the motion? or the memory of Larry Cross?

I will. I had a short, brief time working with Larry. I just got on. And as I said before, he was the brightest face there that greeted me. And I felt welcomed. I just knew that I was going to be able to learn a lot from him and the board in regards to my new assignment as a liaison. And I just appreciated my short time that I had with him professionally. Um, and I've heard nothing but great things about Larry and, um, as his family will miss him and his dedication to city of East Lansing.

Thank you. Any further comments? I will say that when I got elected in 2015, Building Board of Appeals was my assignment. And one of the first things I learned was that when somebody's termed out on a board or commission, you have to write a letter in support of reappointing them because they were termed out. And we try to rotate people on our boards and commissions. but members of the building board of appeals have certain qualifications that they need to meet they need to be architects or structural engineers and there's a limited pool of people who are willing to do that work and so Larry had been willing to be reappointed decade after decade after decade and so I learned something procedurally from that and I always enjoyed my my connection to the Building Board of Appeals. And then that was also my assignment from 2023 to 2025. And so I think we are all very grateful to Larry's family for sharing him with us over the decades. All right, we have a motion on the table. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion carries. And that tribute is adopted. Thank you, Mr. Schultz, and thank you, Mayor Pro Tem. Item 2.2, presentation of fiscal year 2026 downtown beautification projects. Ms. Sylvester Rowan, we have others with us tonight, I believe.

Yes, we sure do.

Great. The floor is yours.

Hi everyone.

Thank you so much for having us tonight. My name is Wendy Sylvester Rowan. I'm the programming and placemaking specialist for the city. I work in community and economic development and I've been here for about five years. I would also like to introduce my colleague.

Good evening. I'm Dr. Sarah McGerr and I've been with CED for about one year.

Yeah, and we would like to share with you our presentation of the beautification projects that we did over this past fiscal year, so fiscal year 26, from June 30th to July 1st. I should say July 1st to June 30th, my apologies. Okay, so this first slide up here, if we could go to the next slide. Sarah and I are going to take turns going back and forth so you can know what you're looking at here. This is a mural painted by Ben Duke, who's a professor in the Art, Art History and Design Department at MSU. And it's on the interior wall of the Grove Garage. The remarkable part about this mural is that it's all done with spray paint. And the detail on it is absolutely mind boggling. If you get a chance to see that, it's definitely worth taking a look at. Next slide, please. I also have, if you can see here on all the slides, there is a before and mixed in with the after pictures to show you the difference between the two. This community weaving, this is the second weaving that we did. This was done with all repurposed and recycled banners and recycled fencing as well. and it was done during the art festival downtown and the East Lansing Library facilitated the project with us and it's great and it looks very bright and brightens up that white wall at the entrance exit of the Mack parking garage. Next slide.

And I hope many of you have seen what is one of our favorite installations of the year. The Color Walk is the name. It was a collaboration with MSU assistant professor Barbara Pearsall, a name you'll see come up several times in this presentation. And students in her color and design course put together these very cool striped designs out of transparent vinyl film and then installed them in the Skywalk windows. So at certain times of day you may have seen rainbow lights adorn different sides of the street and sidewalks in that space. So it really made that space magical. Next slide. Another exciting collaboration was an event held in collaboration with the City of East Lansing Public Library, and the Seen Metro Space Gallery downtown. We hosted an event called Read for Your Rights, EL, and it was focused on celebrating freedom of expression and centered around highlighting banned books. So one of the pieces of that event was completed in collaboration with former MSU professor Allison Dobbins. who created, in collaboration with her students, amazing giant projection mapping animations that are pictured here that contained visualizations of quotes from banned books, such as George Orwell's 1984. And it was such a magical thing to see that on the side of the division garage. Really cool installation. Next slide, please.

This is the Honeycomb Gallery. It was installed around the corner from Scene Metro Space on the 400 block. And this was, again, another collaboration with Barbara Pearsall and another professor by the name of Rafael Villarez. And it was their Intro to Sculpture course. This was a phenomenal piece that the students did to house small artworks. And it was going to be an advertisement of sorts for Scene Metro Space, as it was right around the corner. The unfortunate thing is that the paint of the primer actually failed, um, on the wood. So, um, that is the sad news, but the good news is it's going to be repurposed and placed inside the library. So instead of housing artwork, it will now house, um, books. So that'll be exciting. And we're hoping to get that installed soon. Next slide please. Okay, the K-12 pop-up is an exhibit that began in COVID times as a way to try to bring community members down to our local businesses. We've done this collaboration for six years now, and we hang, basically, it's anywhere between 300 to 400 pieces of artwork in the businesses. And the thinking is community members will come down to look at the artwork and hopefully patronize the businesses as well. And it's a real sense of pride for the students to be able to see their artwork out in public. Next slide, please. Um, this was an unusual night at, um, seeing Metro space again. It was a media happening. Um, it was a very visually stimulating evening and it was a collaboration between MSU theater, MSU dance and music students. And it was, it was a mashup of sorts of dance music and projected artwork.

Next slide, please. This slide highlights a program that's been going on for several years now called the rotating art display program. So we, it contains an open-air gallery of panels like those you see pictured here, four panels that are double-sided, and each quarter, so every three months, we work with a different gallery, museum, student art group, et cetera, to bring reproductions of art into downtown. And this year we worked with MSU Museum, we worked with AP art students at East Lansing High School, as well as Reach Studio Art Center in Lansing School District students to bring amazing artwork into that open-air gallery that's under the overhang on the division garage on Albert Street. If you haven't seen it yet, go check it out. And once those pieces have had their three months in the sun, we move them into frames that we install in parking garages downtown. So you may have seen them in the stairways, lighting up the alleyways, just trying to make downtown a brighter and more creative space in those otherwise kind of gray canvases. And so this year we were able to install eight more frames And we now have a total of 62 downtown. Next slide, please. And a new window mural installation was completed at Grove Garage that was titled The Community Canopy. And this was an amazing collaboration with MSU Sustainability, Arts and Humanities, as well as City of East Lansing Sustainability folks. And it was a huge grant celebrating the tree canopy of East Lansing. And one of the pieces of this larger grant was this art installation created by Barbara Pearsall and her students. One of the panels in the in the parking garage highlights what the tree canopy looks like in spring and the other panel of windows and the film installed there highlights what the tree canopy looks like in fall. So it's a little playful moment next time we are driving down Grove. Check it out. Bonus points if you can find the blue squirrel.

It's huge. Better Together is the name of this artwork. It was installed in the alley behind Target. It was done by a member of Gamma Epsilon Tau, which is MSU's art and design fraternity. This is the second piece that we've done with the fraternity in this manner. You can see another piece hiding right behind the pink pillar there. That was last year's piece, and this is a vinyl graphic mural that's installed, and it was an internal competition with the fraternity. And we are going to continue this year as well.

And that brings us to the final piece that we want to talk about tonight, which was ultimately named Critter Corner. This was a collaborative mural that was... I apologize. We skipped two slides. I apologize.

I see... Can it go back or no? If we can't go back, it's OK. No? It's all good. Thank you.

Keep going. So Critter Corner was a participatory process wherein we brought students from MSU's art and design fraternity, Gamma Epsilon Tau, as well as some fantastic late elementary age Girl Scouts from Troop 30418 here in East Lansing. And had those folks come together for kind of an intergenerational collaboration So they worked together to around this idea of the earth Sky and water of East Lansing and the creatures that can be found there And so they sketched their ideas for what they'd like to be in the mural they gave The students designed it and brought and got feedback from the Girl Scouts they all collaborated in doing the painting on the side of Of the parking garage kind of behind Jackson National in their entryway there And yeah, it really came to life through this fantastic collaboration and we have some very special guests with us tonight Who took part in this? we have Sarah Haller who's one of the Girl Scout troop leaders. The other leaders are, the other leader, Amanda wasn't able to make it tonight. But the real stars of the show are Lizzie Pike, grade six, and Mila Holler, grade five. So they're going to share with us just a couple of thoughts about what it was like for them to get to make their mark in East Lansing in a positive way.

Thank you.

Okay, so, like, it was, like, really fun to, like, be a part of trying to, like, make this Critter Corner mural. It's, like, really cool that we got to work with those college students. And, like, it's, like, really cool, like, if I was to, like, walk by there with, like, a friend or something, I would say, like, hey, I helped painted that and, like,

it was just like really cool and it was fun so yeah basically the same thing as what Lizzy said it was a really fun experience but I think that There were some college students that really helped us work through this project, and they're really nice. And yeah, I hope I get to see them soon.

Thank you. So as you can see, the intergenerational kind of opportunity to bring together these MSC students with the Girl Scouts is something that we hope to kind of continue in doing participatory murals moving forward with different community groups and students. So it's been a real joy. Next slide. Oh, there you go.

This is our mobile micro gallery, similar to the Honeycomb Gallery, only these are mobile, meaning they can be moved in and out, but they are not being permanently installed. They were done with a collaboration with MSU professors again, and they were debuted at the East Lansing Art Festival this year.

Next slide.

And last but not least, this mural by Ami Amaret was installed. It's enormous. It's 16 feet by 20 feet. And it's installed at the entry to the Mack parking garage. And unfortunately, due to the low light, it was very difficult to see all the beautiful details on this piece. But we had two new spotlights installed down at the base, which have illuminated the details much better. So we're quite happy about that.

Next slide. Yeah. Well that brings today's presentation to an end, but we just wanted to say that Wendy and I view our role primarily as collaborators and linkagers to really bring together all these fantastic artists and public servants and community members to be able to help make our community a beautiful place. And we've mentioned many partners in our presentation today, but there are many more that we haven't named that provide funding, artistic expertise, logistical support, including but certainly not limited to parking. It's been a huge supporter. the East Lansing Arts Commission, the DDA, the DMB, Parks and Rec, as well as our fantastic director of our department, Heather Pope, who's our greatest champion. So thank you so much for your time, and we look forward to sharing more projects in the future.

Questions or comments for our panelists? Mr. Whelan.

Just a fantastic production and displaying our local artists and collaboration with MSU and the thousands of people really probably went into all this. It just kind of brightens all of our day. Thank you so much for each person that was part of it. Thank you for coordinating. Thank you.

their comments council members yeah I just want to thank you it's great to see the holistically some of the projects you've been able to bring to light literally and it's such an important place to develop place here in the city of East Lansing and it's a draw to our community and Wendy I want to especially thank you as well because I know as you've come to some of the Arts Commission meetings over time to help bridge and talk about some of

collaboration as you mentioned so just really appreciate that in making East Lansing spectacular place to be I think we're stronger together certainly when all of our departments work together and it's really it's really amazing to see you know everybody leaving their mark on East Lansing on East Lansing and it makes East Lansing a unique and engaging place to live

Mr. Grigsby.

Yeah, I just am absolutely pumped. I just think this is great. I really do. You know, it just, it gives us that veil of culture in our city, and it really brightens those spots up that we have downtown and some other areas that have done these projects, and I support you guys wholeheartedly in any way that I can. Please let us know, and continue the good work. Continue good work.

All right.

Thank you.

Any comments, Mr. Meadows? I'll just say that we've thought of the city of the arts for as long as I've lived here, and I appreciate all the work that goes into making sure that that means something with this community. This is all great work, and it really brightens everybody's day when we see that on the street and in the parking garages and everywhere else. Thanks for all your hard work.

Thank you.

I'll just add thanks for your enthusiasm and inspiration and also the work bringing people together. Art brings people together when they come to see it, but you're also bringing together in the process of producing it. You've reached into every imaginable corner of our community that I can think of. That's a way to make it successful. I think I found the Orwell quote that was projected. Can you tell me if I'm wrong? The horrible thing about the two minutes hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but on the contrary that it was impossible to avoid joining in. Maybe that was it, I don't know, but just based on the key words in the song. Alright, thank you very much. OK, we are now at communications. Item 3.1, all written communications received by council are posted online on the agenda packet. We receive the communications as they come in. They are distributed to the council and the city manager. And then at the end of the afternoon on the day of a business meeting, they're all uploaded onto the website. So even if you don't see them up there, we will have received them as they come in. And emails to the council at cityofeastlansing.com are a good way to reach us. Communications from the audience. So our new time limit took effect September 1st. We are now at three minutes per speaker for public comment and public hearings. We made that decision earlier in the year, delayed implementation to give people a chance to adjust. We've advertised it in our city publications and on social media. I've made announcements at the past couple of meetings, so I hope no one's caught unawares. The timer will still be there, it will indicate, it will start at three minutes and count down from there, and there will still be a 30 second warning to help speakers budget their time. So with that, our first speaker tonight is Richard Lawrence.

Right there. You can sit there.

Okay, I've been, can you hear me? We can. I've been given three minutes and I'm going to try to get through this fast. I'm here to protest what I consider a bad idea to install a roundabout traffic construction in front of my house at 1572 Cahill Drive where I have lived for 56 years, 1970 to 2026. I personally do not see the use for this traffic circle. I know it stems from the prior project which I also consider not a good idea of converting Hagedorn Road, the major East Lansing north-south highway, from four to a three lane which increases the traffic there and leads to people trying to get other streets, including the street I live on, to get home on or go where they want to go. So I think the idea for the traffic circle there is a bad idea because where my house and my next door neighbor, Bruce and Becky Watson live, we're not on a two, that's what I wanna say, Cahill and John are the two streets that intersect. It's not a crossroads there, but one road runs into the other. It's a three-way corner rather than a four-way. And putting the traffic circle there blocks my highway, excuse me, my driveway by about a fourth and makes it difficult to get out. So blocking the driveway is a problem, particularly I think in the snow. The snow is going to pile up in that area and make it even more difficult. The project also, I understand, reduces the value of my house and the one next door, which I think is very unfair. The solution I see in the long run would be, of course, restoring Hagedorn to four-lane drive through that section, but I'm not going to argue on that right now. It's I think there would be a better way to deal with it by not constructing the roundabout there in front of my house and driveway and then my next door neighbor.

Sir, could I ask you to conclude your comments? Sir, Mr. Lawrence?

I think... Mr. Lawrence? If it's speeding is the problem, I don't think that's the real problem. One more minute? Okay.

No, no, no, no, no, no. Sir, your time is up. I think the police department. Your time is up. Am I through? You're through. Thank you for your comments.

Okay, all right. Now I just want to say the last word. If nothing is done to deconstruct this, I will support legal action, a lawsuit to end the project for devaluing my house. Thank you, sir. Sir? Without just cause.

Sir, your time has expired. Thank you for your comments. Next speaker is Patricia Lawrence. No, please take them with you.

Can you hear me?

Yep, move it up a little bit. Move it up. Thank you.

Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Okay, my name is Patricia Lawrence and I live in the same house as Richard does, 1572 Cahill right where the proposed traffic circle would be. We've lived there for many years and our family has been part of this neighborhood for decades. I'm here tonight to ask the City Council to stop the proposed traffic circle and reconsider how the City plans to address speeding on Cahill. We certainly understand the City's concerned about speeding, but we strongly believe this traffic circle is the wrong solution for several reasons. First, it is unsafe. The circle will obstruct the view of our driveway and make access to and from our property more difficult. I've already tried to back out several times this week and it's very difficult for me. Second, it is unnecessary. Cahill and John R. are not a congested intersection. There is no traffic problem at this location that requires a traffic circle. Third, we are concerned about the process by which this decision was made. As neighbors living on this street, we would like our voices to be heard. Fourth, snow removal is a serious concern. A traffic circle in this location will make snow removal more difficult, potentially blocking our driveway and others. Snow plows could also damage the circle, creating additional maintenance and repair costs for the city. And finally, the circle will be an eyesore directly in front of our home. It could negatively affect the property values of our home and the next door neighbor without any demonstrated benefit to the city or the neighborhood. We are not asking the city to ignore speeding. We are asking you to find a solution that actually addresses it. Strategically placed speed bumps, for example, could slow traffic along Cahill without obstructing residents' driveways or creating these other problems. I respectfully ask the Council to halt this project before construction proceeds, take another look at the engineering and safety considerations, and work with the residents to find a better solution. Thanks for listening.

Thank you for your comments. James Holden?

Hi. I want to talk about 201 . My wife and I grew up in East Lansing and bought that property there at the corner of Ridge and Grove with plans to build a single-family house and move there because we wanted to get back to the city that we really enjoyed growing up in. Sorry, I'll get closer to the mic. We went all the way through design, got pricing back, and the cost was excessive. So we pulled the plug on that plan. kind of held onto the property thinking maybe something would change, and ultimately decided to sell the property. And a potential buyer discovered that there was a deed restriction from 21 years ago limiting the use of the property from R2, which is the zoning of all the other adjacent properties. There's fraternity houses, sorority houses, tons of multifamily, limited to a single family, only occupied by the family that lives there. So we're not asking for anything, any exception. We just would like it set back to R2 so we can sell the property to the potential buyer.

Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Tim Roselski.

Tim Rosowski, 613 Grove. Thank you for those comments, by the way, because one of the, I think, the issues I wanted to speak about the Ridge Road property there is because there's no public hearing. There's really no information other than what we saw in the agenda packet. So as far as I know, there was no attempt to reach out to the neighborhood to kind of talk about what the issues were. And so I reviewed the staff report, which is very brief. Basically, it offered you two motions, one to deny and one to approve. And I think one sentence that said the city couldn't find any records of why the condition was placed on the property. And then I also reviewed the letter by Mr. Holden. and then the deed. I don't see any compelling reason to change this at this time. As an architect, I've looked at that property several times. This might be one of these rare cases where I think that the value of that land may be more valuable for owner-occupied without seeing the plan that they did, there may be other plans, then it would be as a rental. I think as a rental, it would be restricted to two, to a family or two unrelated. The site, because of its slope and conditions there, I think is not easy to build on. And I think that actually if there was an investment plan done, it might prove out that a home licensed for two people will not pay for the construction on that site. I think there's no compelling reason to change it at this time. If you are going to change it, it would seem like it would be fair to see what the plan is, what's proposed to be built there, that they should kind of go hand in hand to see what really would happen. So at this point, just in its current form, I'm not in favor of this. I wanted to take the last minute to talk about a different subject, which is I think we're entering into maybe litigation over the Metzger Fabian property. I don't know if any of you have ever thought of, and this is my idea, the only person I've actually mentioned it to is my wife, Rita, and she said it was a good idea. But have you ever considered providing air rights over the city portion of the parking lot? allowing a project that planted columns in the parking lot, then considering a six to eight story over the entire parcel, including the city property. Here I think you preserve the parking, and you get a project that's in a scale that would be much more palatable. I think the developer, if they could go horizontal, could probably get the same number of units that they were proposing, and I don't know if it's ever come up, But that's my idea. And as you enter into some sort of mediation or negotiation, I would hope that somebody on council would kind of think about that as a solution. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Nick Wright.

Yeah, you can hear me great. Hey guys, thanks for hosting this and thanks for doing all the work that you guys do in our community. I just want to say thanks for that. I come here along with Richard and Pat actually to talk about the Cahill solution. It's a whole neighborhood, Southeast Marble. When I was the president of the Southeast Marble Community Association, this was a common topic. I mean, went back to Mark and Eric, too. We would talk about these things and how, like, traffic was an issue and also, like, this speeding. And I really appreciate, too, how responsive everyone in the council is trying to do to help make that a solution so we can actually reduce a lot of that anxiety and stress that people are having in that area. I do agree with Pat and also with Richard, as well as some other neighbors that are on Cahill, but also different areas of the neighborhood where the traffic circles I get, it's a solution. I understand we're trying to create solutions, but it's also going to possibly create more problems than we're actually creating solutions. Back when I was the president, we would try to come up with different ideas. And I remember at the time it was like, hey, these would cost too much. Such as like the speed limit signs where they actually track your speed limit. Since that's been put up on KHEL, I have actually seen that actually be a behavioral change. So things like that actually do help. I do appreciate that DPW has gone out there and reduced the circle. They're a very responsive grid team. I always really enjoy working with DPW. So thanks, Ron. I think you're here. Hey, Ron, good job, man. You're doing great. So the problem with that circle, it's like Pat said and also the other neighbors, is the reversing is going to be a difficult thing on there. What I'm trying to say is I can't come up with a good solution, and we have experts on this, and we're going to try to come up with ideas. I've heard people say like temporary speed bumps, you know, because as we've talked in the past with DPW, they've been worried about long-term concrete speed bumps being a problem for the plow trucks. Makes total sense. I've heard people say temporary speed bumps. You know, there's other ideas, too. Put in the columns of the yield signs, you know, where we can just put a reflector inside that empty space to at least attract more attention while people are driving to at least see something reflective. Don't know. I mean, I know we're trying to come up with something quick because we as you can tell there's a lot of stuff in the community It's not just out these marble But overall what I'm trying to say is you guys are doing a great job Just kind of try to consider what's being implemented now and what harm that will actually do not only just property value But if we have other people like Pat and Richard have said they've lived there for years So it's difficult for them as they age to reverse and lose a quarter of their driveway to reverse but let's say we've got other people like someone with you know they're focused on reversing and they're not thinking they run into it because that's going to turn into the same thing like bailey where it's got that above ground round circle so someone's going to ram their car into that that's going to cost more infrastructure costs too so i got 30 seconds i'm not going to hold any longer i hope you guys all have a good night you guys are doing great thank you for your comments karen jennings

Let me pull this down a little. Hi, I'm Karen Jennings. I live on Hitching Post in East Lansing. I come here tonight to thank the council and specifically you, Mark, for moving forward with the Red Cedar Roots Festival in August. I attended both nights. I think that hiring Micah to schedule the music and Julie Levi-Weston to manage everything else was brilliant. They worked really hard in a short amount of time and got it done. I think the attendance was pretty good. It wasn't full, but it was pretty good. The music was very enjoyable. I think the people that were there really enjoyed it. I'm here tonight to encourage you as a council if you want to move forward with this that We sort of started like two weeks ago, but I don't think it's realistic to try to pull it together every year in six weeks' time. So I hope that the council will consider moving forward with the festival, trying to bring in more funding, and have a little more time to plan it, and also to promote it. But again, thank you for the 2026 Festival. It was really fun.

Thank you for your comments. Lisa Hominuck.

Hi. Good evening. Lisa Hominuck. I live on Ridge Road, kitty corner to the lot that we're talking about with the Restrictive Covenant. Just a quick, are you all familiar with Ridge Road? Yes? Yes? No? Yes? Maybe? Okay. Well, if you're not that familiar, there are only nine houses on Ridge Road. Of those nine, seven are owner occupied. And two of those seven have been in the family for longer than I've been on this earth. So seven are owner-occupied. One of them is a rental, which is right next to me. And the other one, which is adjacent to the property in question, the vacant lot on the corner there, is owned by an out of town owner and their MSU student offspring live there while they're in school. So there's no rental going on there. The only rental on our nine House block is right next to me. I just want to ask you to take some time to think about this and don't rescind this right away as was already spoken about. We need to bring in more single families into East Lansing. The plot may not look like it's, you know, it sounds like it's prohibitive to build on, but there are some deep pockets around. We all know that. And if someone will come in and build and keep it a single family and not turn it into a rental, it would be very much appreciated by those of us there.

Thank you for your comments.

Also, real quickly, I also second Karen's talking about the Red Cedar Roots Festival. Thank you and get a move on it.

Thank you. Anthony Harrington.

Good evening, Council. I'm here from 1560 Cahill Drive. I am right next door to Mr. Lawrence, and then Mr. Wright is right across the street. I'm equally as concerned with the traffic circle. I think maybe for slightly different reasons, but I don't know why a three-way stop wouldn't work just as well. Also, the kickouts have been placed on one side of the street, and personally, I've witnessed three to four cars in the past couple days just take a left right onto John Street and cut underneath it. And my concern is doing that with the kids I know that play right across the street from there and there's a kid that plays like stickball. I'm just worried about someone doing that too fast and I think people are trying to already subvert what the traffic circles set there to do. So I'm not going to spend any more time, but I am fully supporting what Patricia and Richard have said, and also hopefully you guys can reconsider that. I know, like Nick said, there's no easy way, because we were hashing out earlier. I'm like, if you do this, then this, and then this. The biggest thing also would be the accumulation of snow. And for our neighborhood, I don't know if you guys didn't know anything about that, but we're dealing with flooding already. And any type of putting snow that's going to melt and put it all against our house, hopefully that wouldn't be the effect. But if it was, that would be another thing that we have to deal with. So I'm just proposing maybe do a three-way stop or something more economical. Also doing a traffic circle at a T intersection. I've only seen that they had to take out part of the curb just so they have extra room to go around because they're running into that exact issue that Patricia was talking about. She's like having trouble backing out and then having that with the two kickouts right there as well. I can't imagine what you're dealing with every day. So I just want you guys to reconsider that. Maybe there can be some more support somewhere else, but I'm just going to thank you for my time and keep doing the right thing. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Lee Cody.

Good evening, Lee Cody. I'm here representing the Graduate Hotel in East Lansing. First off, just want to take a moment to say thank you to Alicia and the team at Planning Commission, the DDA for all the time spent working through the proposal that we have on tonight's agenda and their support. Quickly wanted to touch on also operationally the commitment that our team has made to continue to increase total headcount and staffing level with our valley operation to put that in the highest levels that it's been since I've been in place. reiterate that commitment and just again thank you all as well for your consideration and support of the proposal we have before you as a part of that best case scenario at that intersection in front of the building so thank you so much I appreciate it thank you for your comments Gail last name starts with a B Burke I'm sorry

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen of the East Lansing City Council. Thank you for this opportunity to meet with you tonight. My name is Dr. Gail Burke, and I'm a member of the East Lansing Arts Commission. Tonight, I'm happy to provide you with an update on two of the Art Commission's main projects this year. The first is the City of East Lansing Annual Cultural Arts Grant Program, the goal of which is to enrich our public places through creative placemaking, to build community through art, and basically to educate our young residents about the value, magic, and power of art, encouraging them to pursue it in their lives. Through the Arts Grant program, we promote cultural diversity of our residents from around the globe, both as our neighbors and as our students and professors at Michigan State University. This enriches all our lives, not just the grant recipients. We also develop invaluable working partnerships and learn more about each other by working together, such as with MSU. Due to the success of the community arts grant program, the number of talented applicants has grown each year. And accordingly, our city council has increased funding from initial funding of $17,500 in fiscal year 2023 for up to $49,000 in this fiscal year 2027. Another marker of success is the expansion of the Vision of the Arts program. At the beginning, we funded permanent pieces of art for the community, but now eligible art objects include dance, theater, performances, and micro galleries that move through the community over the course of the year. Applications for this are due October 6th at 5 p.m. Our commissioners will have the opportunity to review them from October 7 through 29. We will do this independently. Then we will meet on November 19 to discuss our ranked choices and make the awards based on top scores. The projects will begin January 1. For me personally, it is a highlight of being a City Arts Commissioner to review these applications and to see the exceptional talent and creativity here. And it's very gratifying to play a role in selecting the winners. The Arts Council is committed to selecting arts which will benefit our city, attract visitors who will increase revenue for our businesses, and educate all members of our community about the value of art in our lives. 30 seconds remaining. Thank you. The second project is new to East Lansing this year. The Arts Commission Chair Allie Siarto visited Lubbock, Texas last year when she heard the song Whole Lotta Lubbock. The tune inspired Siarto to pitch an idea to the rest of the commission. East Lansing needs a song. We agreed. So now we're going to have our first annual songwriting contest and everyone is at the community is invited to a community music festival set the night of September and we've got some posters here, so everybody is welcome. Thank you so much.

Thank you for your comments. Carrie Freeman.

Thank you so much, Carrie Freeman. I'm an attorney and a resident here. And Mayor, thank you so much for the information about the written communication. Forgive me for the SOS, everybody. I just really feel super passionate about making sure that you guys have seen my comments. I've been studying this for like over a year now, working with the people affected by it through the protest petition that I gathered signatures on. And even before that, I've talked to so many property owners and people who've lived here for generations, and Vic Loomis, he's been the mayor and seen things from way back when to now, and I just really feel like I have a well-developed opinion on the effects of potentially adopting 1576 and 1384, which is the original diverse housing requirement ordinance, 1559, which you're going to be looking at tonight to see if you guys want to amend. 1384, which was brought actually kind of by me. And I appreciate you all for looking at it. And now I've honestly changed my opinion on that, which I've told you that before, too. So I submitted this rezoning protest petition letter to you all. And it sounds like you have seen it, which is fantastic. But I'm just going to point out some of the highlights today. certain things that weren't actually in the staff's report today, which I just wanted to remind you of is that if we have 20% or more of the area of the land proposed to be altered or by the owner or if at least 20% of those people sign this protest petition that then it requires a four out of five vote for the council members to adopt 1576 tonight. That wasn't in this staff's memo, but I know that I've actually confirmed that with your attorneys that that is what is going to be required for 1576. We actually have 175 signatures on the protest petition now. I've continued to get signatures from people who just have been sending them to me and calling me and asking me about this and wondering why they don't know anything about it. So we have more than 33% of the landowners Zones B 1 through 5 in East Village who are directly affected by it and I haven't had any constituents of whom I'm aware that support this petition at all I have anybody I've talked to nobody support or forgive me who support the adoption of Ordinance 1576 they've all supported my petition so far so I think all of you know that the adoption of Ordinance 1576 applies the diverse housing requirement to, which is in- 30 seconds remaining. 1384 to the mass timber ordinance and B1 through five in East Village. And I think one of the main things I wanna make sure you all know is that if you apply it to the mass timber ordinance, we're gonna stop any future mass timber development that would fit because it's already a premium project to build. And I just want you to all remember that, that I don't think it was supposed to be included in there to begin with. But overall, we're demanding that you not adopt 1576. Your community is telling you, please don't adopt 1576, at least as it relates in any way of extending the diverse housing requirements.

Thank you for your comments.

And we're hoping that you do not adopt it tonight.

Thank you all.

Karen Honey?

Good evening. I'm here on a couple different topics. First of all, on August 21st at the last regular council meeting, many community members came forward and spoke about their concerns about the incident involving Myanna Collins downtown and multiple council members committed to demanding the release of the body camera footage and it's now a month later and we have seen nothing and I don't see it on the agenda tonight, so I'm hoping that someone will use their council comments to address and give us an update on what's happening with that. I am opposed to the flock cameras. I know that the Lansing City Council voted seven to one to oppose flock cameras, their contract with flock in Lansing. I think that there are alternate methods available to ensure parking safety and regulation that do not involve AI generated cameras. There is a huge concern about privacy and I know that many community members share our concerns. I want to address the use of police on horseback at Welcome Weekend last weekend. I know that I have heard that following a lot of issues with racist comments by police officers and such that there was going to be ongoing training in racial equity. And I think that this was a big miss on the part of everybody. I don't know if it crossed anybody's mind, but I heard from several black friends and community members that seeing those police on horseback was very triggering and traumatizing to them because it brings back visions and images of the old slave patrols in which white slave catchers rode around on horseback as an intimidation technique to catch slaves. And I don't think it was worth it. And so I'd like you to consider not doing that next year. And then finally, this is in regards to the limiting of the Human Rights Commission's investigative powers. Today I had a meeting with a gentleman who feels that he is being discriminated against in housing. by a housing complex in East Lansing. He has a very legitimate concern. His concerns are based on his disability and because of the new ordinance, and I don't even know if you all realized this when you were voting on it because it was rushed through so quickly without any input at all from any of us on the Human Rights Commission. Thank you. We are not able to investigate this. We're not able to help this gentleman in any way because he has also, based upon recommendations by many people he reached out to, filed a complaint with the Department of Civil Rights. And now, because of the new restrictions under our ordinance, which again, I don't even know if you guys realize, we are no longer able to open an investigation. So I basically had to tell this gentleman, I'm sorry, there's really nothing we can do for you. The Michigan Department of Civil Rights has many things to investigate, and I don't know if they're going to get to his. Thank you. I'm done.

Thank you for your comments. Alan Kreitzberg.

Good evening.

My name's Alan Kreitzberg. I live at 758 Collingwood Drive. I just felt it important, I wanted to make a brief statement as to my experience with the flooding in the Bailey area in April. After four months of reconstruction in my basement, which had been completely finished and livable, It was done yesterday. What I found out is for years I thought I had a perimeter problem with groundwater. And as I engaged a structural engineering firm, they indicated to me that it's entirely city sewage backflow. So we had a complete reconstruction of our internal piping, two backflow valves. And so $30,000 later, it's completed as of yesterday. But I guess the cap around that was that after having contractors, plumbers, carpenters for four months, Pace decided to drive by my house yesterday when my 70-year-old carpenter was finishing up and gave him a ticket. which I'm dealing with with respect to Paul Weidner, etc. But I just, it's been an incredible experience and not entirely a good one, I can assure you. So I hope the city is doing what it can with respect to the sewage infrastructure. And that's my comment. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments. Is there anyone else in the audience who would like to address the Council? Do we have any callers?

No.

We have no callers. Then that concludes communications from the audience. Communications from Council. Council Member Whalen.

Just a few things. I do think that the city has done an excellent job with the different festivals this summer. Each and every one had something different to offer. I really appreciate all of your staff and everyone that made a huge difference on that in bringing life downtown. Also, officially welcome our community from MSU back. I know we have, it's a completely different town without you, and we are glad that you are back. To address, and maybe the city manager can address this better, I believe that incident that happened a few weeks ago is still at the Ingham County Prosecutor's Office. County prosecutors today. Okay, so that's why we're still waiting on that also just Welcome to Michigan State week on week. It's not welcome week anymore. I guess it's welcome to Michigan State I would happen to be out several of those evenings and I just really appreciated the collaboration between many different parties, Advance Peace, the Police Department, the Fire Department, Liquor Law, so many different people really came together with that. I sat on RHC, Responsible Hospitality Commission today, and they report that it was a really good start to the year. It's great to have everyone back. Lastly, I also just had my whole basement dug up and secured, so now we've had some very large water incidents and we've not gotten wet. So that is a continued concern and I appreciate all the work that Public Works has done on that. I'm just glad that we're back. I think East Lansing is an amazing place to live and work and I want to continue to Sing that song Thank You councilmember Meadows

Couple of things. One, I feel for Alan, and if it is sewage backflow, I know that we addressed this issue, seems like it was back 2015 to 2019, and looking at sewage backflow protection, for a lot of homes within the community, and I'm not sure whether we provided that or we gave them the opportunity to get the information, but you might want to pass that on to him. With regard to the Cahill Road issue, I don't know what we're doing over there. I haven't been on the streets, so I'm kind of guessing here, but I want people to know that we've tried a variety of things. to slow down traffic. We have on Stoddard, we've got a traffic island that pushes traffic out to slow it down a little bit. On White Hills Drive, we've got a couple of traffic circles that sound like they're very similar to what we're thinking about on Cahill, and I think they have functioned pretty well. I don't know about this because I don't know how it impacts the driveways with regard to that. And then, famously, on Spartan Avenue, we have speed undulations. So that was the word that Dennis McGitty, a former city attorney, gave to what we did there. But basically, you can go across those at 25 miles an hour, and you barely feel like you're going across. If you go 35 miles an hour... your car is going to probably hit the ground. So those are other options that we have within the community, and I think they've been developed in consultation with the neighborhoods. So hopefully that's how we came up with this. Yes, post-Labor Day, we're scheduling a meeting to sit down and talk about next year's Red Cedar Roots Festival and that, you know, and hopefully with 12 months or so in advance, you know, we're going to be able to maybe have some additional stages and have another day involved in that. So that's the game plan there and I'll have more on that at some point in the future. And then in response to one of the comments. I think every member of council has been an advocate for release of the videos but our advice is that when the you know instead of influencing the county attorney in his decision that we We let him look at him on his own, make his decision. And we're advised that because of some trials that are taking place at the county level, that that has delayed his. So we expect it at any moment in time.

Okay.

And then finally, you know, I've been around now about 30 years involved with council or involved with the city. And I'll just say that we've had horseback at virtually every event that we've had here. So I hope people who were concerned with regard to it recognize that this is a very standard process for us to have officers on horseback when we know that there's going to be a big crowd around.

So that's it. Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem. Thank you. I have nothing to report. Council Member Singh.

Just wanna highlight, as we heard during public comment, that the Arts Commission has September 19th, this is the poster that was referenced, September 18th from six to nine, so there's eight finalists that will be competing, and the audience also gets to vote, so you should check that out, should be fun, as well as the Cultural Arts Grant poster, which another dynamic fancy job by the East Lansing staff. Again, about $49,000 can be obtained through micro grants to help support a thriving artist community. So I wanted to highlight that. I think outside of that I want to mention that work is continuing on use of force and training policy with the LAPAC subcommittee which is meeting again the policy subcommittee I believe this Thursday evening and hopefully that will be talked in front of this body later this month. So just wanted to offer an update there. And that is it.

Thank you. I have just a couple of comments. One is I want to thank Chief Brown from ELPD and her team for the work that they put into the preparations for Welcome Weekend. I want to thank all the outside agencies that contributed personnel and resources. It was all hands on deck and things went smoothly and people seem to appreciate the police presence, which they told me when I was down there. I also want to highlight some data we got recently on our recycling program. Last fall, DPW put a compactor in at the recycling center on State Road, which probably many people know. We now have data on how that's working, and it turns out to reduce the number of trips. the city makes hauling that material to the recycling facility by a factor of three, because the material is more compact by a factor of three. And that, it turns out, saves us an awful lot of drive time, which adds up to half an FTE, so half a position we are saving by this installation. And that's just drive time that's on top of fuel savings, reduced emissions, and reduced vehicle wear. So that is all money that we can spend in more useful ways. And the compactor was funded by a grant. So I wanted to cite this as another example of a smart investment that we've made in sustainability, which pays for itself. And I want to thank Cliff Walls for his work on these projects and for collecting the data that we need to be able to talk about them. I did want to add just a comment about stormwater. I think the backflow prevention program has been pretty popular. The neighbors seem to know about it. And next week at our discussion only meeting, I believe we will be talking about the wet weather resiliency plan that's been in development for a couple of years. And that will be a pretty extensive presentation. So if people are interested in this issue, I encourage them to tune in next week. It's a presentation that we've had in small meetings.

uh but this is going to be a presentation for the record for the whole community and the council to to view and with that uh city manager's report miss irwin yes thank you i just wanted to bring up to all of our residents that they should have received what we call the dialect now so that is a combination of our dialogue and connect newsletter together this kind of a something that was put together by two of our departments, Carrie Sampson in Communications and Justin Drinke in the Parks and Recreation and Arts Department. So we're hoping that it meets with residents enjoying having one you know, newsletter coming to you with all of the information versus a couple. And again, it is a savings of, you know, not having separate mailings, kind of combining our resources together. And again, also finding some resource savings from putting those two together. And so why the name? I will ask that you open your dialect and our communications director gives you information as to how that name was developed. So also Friday evening, September 11th is 80s night at Anne Street Plaza and Albert right there downtown. That has been a very popular event in our community, usually held more in the summer months. However, we had a rain event the last time it was scheduled. So it has been rescheduled till now. Star Farm, which is a very popular group, will have music from 7 to 9 p.m. There will be pinball on the streets, as there has been in the past couple of years, so if you're a fan of pinball, if you miss your days of Ms. Pac-Man, It probably will be out there. And the street will be closed, just so everyone is aware, from 2 p.m. to 9 p.m. because we have to close the street early to prepare and set up. And then we will open the street back up again. do want to report a bit about extravaganza although that was a couple of weeks ago so as the students come back to welcome Spartans we do the city has held for the last few years an event called extravaganza which brings students downtown we have giveaways that are very nice prizes there's a A way to introduce them to the downtown, a scavenger hunt. There's lots of games and giveaways, takeaways. And it was a successful event. We had good participation. And that morning I would also like to mention that we had over 250 participants for Pilates at Valley Court. Overwhelmingly popular event that they had. So I'm assuming that will be coming back again next year. Kind of on the other end of the area here is Primetime Senior Program. If you are interested, please take a look at what they are offering this fall. There's a continuous learning collaborative. Some folks may remember what MSU used to have as evening college, and there were some classes really of an interest to a wide variety of folks, and this is somewhat based on that a little bit, but a collaboration with MSU Retirees Association and Faculty Association in the spirit of the evening college. So I would say look at Prime Time's newsletter to learn about what classes are being offered. And lastly, and maybe I think Public Works may be speaking later, so if you have questions about this, you can ask them maybe, but Meridian Water, East Lansing Meridian Water and Sewer Authority, if you didn't see, did read, receive an award for the two million gallon water storage tank that they have installed and they really won this award for the meaningful impact on the communities that it serves and of course our infrastructure clean water all of that is vitally important to our communities although sometimes kind of overlooked and doesn't get the attention that it should So I did want to highlight that they were recognized for that. And that is what I have for this evening. Thank you.

Thank you. City attorney's report. Nothing to report at this time. OK, thank you. Which brings us to the consent agenda. Ms. Irwin.

Yes, thank you. Okay, so we have 4.1 to approve the following appointments or reappointments to boards or commissions. Jordan Aliff to the Human Rights Commission for a full term ending December 31st, 2028. Kathleen Levy to the Human Rights Commission for a partial term ending December 31st, 2026. Zachary Olson to the University Student Commission for a full term expiring August 31st, 2027. Ryan McClendon to the University Student Commission for a full term expiring August 31st, 2027. Shanna Karimi to the University Student Commission for a full term expiring August 31st, 2027. Harrison Cornell to the University Student Commission for a full term expiring August 31st, 2027. Gavin Polisnik to the University Student Commission for a full term expiring August 31st, 2027. 4.2, approve a contract with Lakeshore Concepts LLC for $20,870 to replace the pedestrian bridge in Henry Fine Park. Approve a 15% project contingency of $3,130 and authorize the interim city manager to sign. 4.3, approve a contract with Weatherwise Foam Insulation for the installation of foam wall insulation at the Department of Public Works administration building in the amount of $77,650 with an additional 15% contingency for a total authorized amount of $89,300 and authorize the interim city manager to sign. Approve a resolution recognizing October 2026 as community planning month in the city of East Lansing. Approve a resolution establishing September 15 as national voter registration day in the city of East Lansing. Approve a resolution recognizing Hispanic heritage month in the city of East Lansing. Approve a resolution recognizing October 5th, 2026 through October 11, 2026 as active aging week. Approve a resolution to adopt the 2027-2032 Capital Improvement Program. 4.9, approve a resolution establishing amended and restated rules and procedures for membership of the Downtown Management Board. 4.10, approve a resolution to approve Amendment No. 2 to Natural Resources Trust Fund Grant Agreement TF22-0175 for a one-year time extension for the Northern Tier Trail Extension Project. 4.11, approve several street closures for the East Lansing High School Homecoming Parade on September 18, 2026, starting at 4.30 p.m. and ending at 6.30 p.m. 4.12, approve a lane closure in East Lansing for the Capital City River Run on September 20th, 2026 from 8 a.m. to 9.30 a.m. 4.13, approve of several street closures throughout East Lansing for the MSU Homecoming Parade on October 9th, 2026, starting at 2.30 p.m. until approximately 7.15 p.m. Lastly, 4.14, approve scheduling a public hearing on September 22nd, 2026 to consider appeal of an unauthorized tree removal violation issued for 2982 East Coleman Road. And that is the end of the consent agenda.

Thank you. Would any council member like any items removed from the consent agenda to the business agenda? Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented?

I move to approve.

Moved by the Mayor Pro Tem, second by Council Member Meadows. Any discussion of the consent agenda?

Mike, one comment, uh, related to the change at the DMV, which I've been the assigned council member for many, many years. I think they did a really great job of looking at this originally. My feeling was we don't need a council member, uh, to be a voter on that. We needed liaison to that and it would give an additional. business owner, perhaps in the downtown, the opportunity to serve as well. But that is impossible. So very supportive of this. I just wanted to indicate that.

Any further discussion of the consent agenda?

So the motion is on the consent agenda as presented. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. The consent agenda is approved. That brings us to item 5.1 of the business agenda, consideration of proposed ordinance 1559, an ordinance to amend chapter 50 zoning, article 2, division 3, titled special use permit. of the Code of the City of East Lansing to amend Section 50-94 by amending the regulations for diverse housing. Director Hodges, Principal Planner Bartley.

Thank you.

This ordinance would modify the city's diverse housing requirement. At the last, or I should say in the June meeting, the city council had requested the staff make a couple of changes to this ordinance. We have a brief presentation to outline those changes.

Yeah, just wanted to give a brief overview of how we got here. We started out with the AMI fee-in-lieu model through research and planning commission and staff input. We ultimately got to, and the housing commission as well, weighed in. We ultimately got to the motion that was made on June 16th at the city council meeting that would change the diverse housing requirement from 25% to 10%. It would add a 5% residential construction cost fee in lieu option, one-to-one transfers south of Saginaw Highway, and create a staff-administered fee in lieu fund that supports diverse housing. Go ahead. Really broke it down here, very simple, try to keep it as easy to understand as possible how that calculation would work. You take the building cost divided by the number of floors and the building cost is located on the building permit and that's how you get the price per floor and then you times that by the residential floors to get your residential construction costs and then take that calculation and times it by 5% and that's how you would get the fee in lieu. We did provide here a table to show previous developments, what if a fee in lieu had existed at the time of their development, what their fee in lieu would have been. Council Member Meadows did ask at the June meeting to also include calculation for total construction costs. So those calculations have been included there to see what the fee would be. Next slide. And then what we did here is taking, again, those developments that were previously approved, but if they were built today in 2026, we increased the construction costs by 35%, which is still pretty conservative. Talking with our building official, Tim Schultz, he said the reality is probably closer to 45% increase in construction costs post COVID, but we used a conservative 35%. And so if those projects were developed today, using that estimation, the fee in lieu are outlined there. I also added here the Howard project, which we don't know the full cost yet, but the projection and what's been reported is that it will be a $100 million project, and ultimately that fee in lieu would have been, if we had a fee in lieu, would be a 4.1. a million dollar fee in lieu. So those are the calculations. One of the components of the motion was a fee in lieu fund and how that would be administered. So city council and what's outlined in the ordinance for you today is city council would adopt a resolution that would outline the eligible uses requirements, application procedures, all the details of that fund. Staff recommend that the Department of Community and Economic Development oversee that fee in lieu fund. as they administer our CDBG fund already, and it would be a very similar process that they already use for those federal dollars. One potential amendment that we would like to propose, and we did propose a somewhat similar amendment in the June meeting, is a 1% reduction of the fee in lieu for providing public parking. This does require a waiver to provide public parking downtown, but it seemed, after the fact and all the discussions that have happened over the summer, that public parking is a desire of the community, and so incentivizing that in some way as a 1% reduction is still something we just wanted to throw out there as an option. So questions?

Questions for staff? No questions for staff? I have a question. The parking, the 1% for parking, does that mean that if they put in one space versus 100 spaces, it gets you to 100% or gets you to 1% either way?

That's a great question. I guess we didn't outline that. we would have to make that specific of in the ordinance. If you wanted to see that, we could come back with an amendment of what that calculation would be like. Yeah.

So... The answer is we would need to elaborate the ordinance more to figure out. So now it would, if we, so there's two motions, right? One is without the 1% for parking. The other one is with the 1%. If we adopt the second motion, it would be, then you would modify the ordinance to create that incentive, right? And it would be that if you provide any parking on site, it would cut the fee in lieu to 4% or some minimal threshold of parking?

It could be.

I guess if I may, I would suggest that you could use a somewhat objective measure that might be the requirement in different districts. I would suggest maybe not any other district though, but maybe look at the RM32 that requires 50% of other districts. We certainly have a lower sort of I think that the ordinance that was established when it was to say essentially you need a waiver for new parking downtown was recognizing sort of the availability or the number of spaces that are downtown, perhaps a reduced demand. I think that you could look at other districts like that if you wanted to set a baseline for setting this incentive.

You could also, using the calculation in our code already, we do have a calculation of what would be required and that went through the parking plan as well as they have to show how they're gonna get to those spaces. You could outline that you have to accommodate a percentage of that requirement in the code. I can't remember the exact code number, 58. something, a percentage of that to meet the requirement to get the incentive, if that makes sense. So for example, if the Howard needed 500 and so spaces, if you said the ordinance, if you provide 10% public parking based on that calculation, that's what, that would give the incentive.

So here's my question. If we adopt that motion, what's the ordinance language going to be for that provision?

we'd have to change the motion.

To give specific ordinance language?

To give specific ordinance language, yes.

OK. Mr. Meadows?

Yeah, let me ask a couple of questions on that.

What you've identified as sort of like the parking plan, what it would show in the parking plan if one were proposed, does that generally relate to a percentage of the number of units or the so if this were to say a 1% reduction of the fee in lieu if the project provides public parking equal to say 20% of the number of units that are there or 10% would that be the way for us to proceed with this that doesn't require an ordinance change that basically says this is what the requirement is.

How you get to that calculation, yeah. So it is based on the bedroom. So in the code, it's based on if you have so many efficiencies, this is how many parking spaces you would need. There is a proposal in our green code coming at the end of the month that would change those calculations a little bit to reduce them, I think, slightly. But it is based on a bedroom calculation in the code currently. So you would do a percentage of that total calculation

So would 20% be the good percentage, 10%? I mean, what's your opinion?

That's a council decision. I think from what we've experienced over the summer and with these two big developments, it seems like any parking is good parking, um, to provide, and especially as public parking and not necessarily just development specific. Um, knowing that that will be consumer based, I would recommend maybe a 10%, um, requirement, um, to accommodate the public. And then if they provide additional parking for their residents, that wouldn't be necessarily incentivized. But, um, that public component seems to be the big draw for the community right now.

Okay. I'll do it. Any further questions? Okay. Are there any motions?

Yeah, I'll make a motion. I move to adopt Ordinance 1559, an ordinance to amend Chapter 50, Zoning Article 2, Division 3, titled Special Use Permit of the Code of the City of East Lansing to amend Section 50-94. By amending the regulations for diverse housing with an additional amendment that allows a 1% reduction of the fee in lieu if the provide if the project provides public parking equal to 10% of the number of bedrooms in the project and Which would also delete the word neighborhood in section 50-94, paren B, paren 4, paren lowercase e, in the second and third line and replace those, the word neighborhood in those two locations with the word district.

Okay, motion by Meadows. Is there a second? I'll second. Second by Grigsby. Would you care to address your motion?

Yeah. When we looked at the existing ordinance, I'll start at the bottom here, which is the last thing I said. When we looked at the ordinance, we realized that while it makes a reference to neighborhood, that isn't really what fits into the game plan here, that instead this is about actions within a neighborhood. And so that's why that language would be replaced with the word district. And as far as the 1% reduction, I think based on the conversation that we just had with staff that I'm supportive of the idea of 10% of the bedrooms available for public parking. I think that that's a good way for us to proceed. If it becomes something that doesn't seem to work out in the future, we'll take a look at it again.

So I just want to make sure I've got the motion so that substituting district for neighborhood is pretty clear. I want to make sure that I got the other part right. So the motion is to adopt ordinance 1559 in order to amend chapter 50 zoning article two division three title special use permit of the code of the city of East Lansing to amend section 50-94 by amending the regulations for diverse housing with additional with an additional amendment that allows a 1% reduction of the fee in lieu if the project provides public parking equal to 10% of the bedrooms in the project available for public parking. Is that the motion?

Can I ask for clarification? Because we, bedrooms or units? Because we, I think the code right now goes by, does it go by bedrooms or units? We license by unit, I guess this is by...

Yeah, I thought you said bedrooms. Bedrooms, maybe it is.

Is it based on the number of bedrooms? It is based on the number of bedrooms.

Okay, so we're all set.

Any questions on the motion? Are we clear on the motion? Any further discussion? Roll call vote, please.

Yes. Council Member Singh? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Grigsby?

Yes.

council member Meadows yes mayor Altman yes that motion carries and ordinance 1559 is finally adopted thank you thank you for everybody's work on this this has been a long road this brings us to consideration the proposed ordinance 1576 amendments to chapter 50 of the city code the zoning ordinance to clarify whether site plan or special use approval is needed for multifamily residential units in business and certain other districts, clarify requirements for retail sales of alcohol for offsite consumption, and add requirements for use of certain building incentives. Mr. Landon.

Thank You mayor Landon Bartley principal planner so yes as you stated this is sort of a three-part ordinance there's been a lot of discussion and questions about the different parts of the ordinance and sort of different versions and so for clarity in your in this in the agenda item report I talked about three amendments within the ordinance or which would be amendment a B and C a talks about the upper story residential regulations and B would talk about alcohol sales, and C would talk about that building incentive that applies to many districts across the city. So I think that the big question and work that council has asked staff to work on has been about the Amendment A, talking about the upper story residential and various business districts. So I have three versions of the ordinance. one, two, and three. And in all of those, amendments B and C are the same. So those versions really just make a change to how we approach upper story residential uses in business districts. Version one would make, is essentially what the ordinance was that was introduced and sent to Planning Commission, the initial ordinance that would make upper story residential uses in all business districts, that's B1, B2, B3, B4, B5, and EV, East Village. It would make those a special use. Version 2 would make those upper story residential uses a special use only in the B3 district. So in the B1, B2, B4, B5, and EV districts, those upper story uses would require a site plan review when they're new construction and a building permit if it's conversion. And that's it. But upper story residential uses would be, as new construction, would require special use in the B3 zone district. And then finally version three essentially keeps existing regulations and clarifies them to just clarify that site plan review is required for new construction of upper story residential uses in all business districts and a building permit would be required for conversion. So an existing building being converted to have upper story residential uses. Does that make sense? Can I answer any questions about the different ordinance parts or the different versions? Questions for staff? Mr. Will.

Sure. So thank you for all you do and I appreciate our attorneys. I have been studying and trying to get my head around this. Okay. So version 3 of 1576 still requires a site plan review.

That's correct. For new construction, site plan review would be required.

How does 1576 version 3 interact with 1559? How do those two interact with each other?

As just adopted ordinance 1559 would require diverse housing where there is special use Where there's a special use requirement for upper story residential?

Version 3 would have no requirement for such residential So version 3 would mean right now The diverse housing requirement would not be included Yes, that's correct Further questions

Okay, for this item, before we take action on the ordinance, we need to address the protest petition that was filed against the ordinance. Are there motions concerning that? I do have a couple of motions on those.

I do. I've got a motion.

Council Member Whalen.

I'm sorry.

Why don't I do the first motion, you do the second motion.

You can go for both of mine.

No, no, just keep looking. Okay, I'll move the first motion, which is to acknowledge, a motion to acknowledge that as filed the protest petition submitted to the city council by email on September 3rd, 2026, entitled rezoning protest petition. regarding the City of East Lansing proposed ordinance 1576 and accompanying letter also dated September 3, 2026 and titled Rezoning Protest Petition City of East Lansing Proposed Ordinance 1576 unquote.

Motion by Meadows. Is there a second? Second. Second by Grigsby. Any discussion of the motion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. And we have acknowledged as filed the protest petition. Council Member Whalen.

Got a motion. We're calling it number two. Motion finding that the rezoning protest petition for ordinance 1576 does not meet the minimum signature threshold under MCL 125.3403. of the Michigan Zoning and Enabling Act, MZEA, or section 50-31A, subsection A, of the city zoning ordinance based on the following findings and determinations. Number one, the protest petition was submitted with 175 signatures in support of the protest petition. According to the letter submitted, With the protest petition, the signatures were from landowners in the B1 through B5 and the East Village zoning districts of the city. Based on a review of the signatures and associated parties identified in the petition, the total area of the land reported to be owned by all 175 petitioners does not add up to at least 20% of the area of land included in the proposed change under ordinance 1576. Or at least 20% of the area of the land included within the area extending outward 100 feet from any point of the boundary of the land included in the proposed change. Number four. Because the minimum signature requirement is not met, the two thirds voting requirement under both MCL 125.3403 of the MZEA and section 50-31 subsection A of the city zoning ordinance to adopt ordinance 1576 is not required.

Before there's a second, Council Member Whelan, could I ask you to reread the sentence starting based on a review?

Sure. Did I misspeak? Based on review of the signatures and associated properties identified in the petition, the total area of land purported to be owned by all 175 petitioners does not add up to at least 20% of the area of land included in the proposed change under Ordinance 1576. Or at least 20% of the area of land included within the area extended outward 100 feet from any point on the boundary of the land included in the proposed change.

Thank you. Motion by Whalen. Second. Second by Meadows. Any discussion of the motion? Okay, seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion carries. And the finding is made that the petition does not meet the minimum signature threshold. Which brings us to the main action item, which is consideration of Ordinance 1576. Are there any motions?

There is, I've got a motion.

I'll make a motion. Okay, go ahead. I move to adopt ordinance 1576 version three as included with the September 8, 2026 agenda item report amendments to chapter 50 of the city code. The zoning ordinance to clarify whether site plan or special use approval is needed for multiple family residential units and business and certain other districts. clarify requirements for retail sales of alcohol for offsite consumption, and add requirements for use of certain building incentives.

Motion by Meadows. Second. Second by Singh. Any discussion of the motion? Okay. Seeing none, the motion is to adopt version 3 of ordinance 1576. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Version 3 of 1576 is adopted. Thank you. This has also been a long road, Mr. Bartlett. This brings us to item 5.3, which is consideration of a request from James and Jill Holden to remove a previously applied condition of approval of a lot split at 201 Ridge Road. Mr. Bartley.

Thank you. So this property was split in 2005 from the property of 205 Ridge. It was split into 205 and 201. At that time, the split was brought before council for approval. And as an earlier speaker in public comment mentioned, I hadn't been able to find the minutes, but I was able to actually during this meeting. And it turns out that in October of 18th of 2025, The applicant, there had been a council member who had said that they would not support the split unless there was such a deed restriction. And then council voted on that amendment to require such a condition if the lot split happened, which was adopted. then action was deferred for a couple of weeks to have the attorney confirmed that such a condition was legal. Two weeks later on November 21st, 2005, the applicant said that they would self-impose the deed restriction to facilitate approval. So that was done so at sort of the urging of the city council. But now the current owners, as you heard during public comment, are seeking to sell the property and would like to remove that restriction. which council can do with a motion if you determine that's appropriate today.

Sorry, questions for staff. Okay. Comments? Motions? Mr. Whalen.

In researching this, I found an overwhelming amount of the neighborhood very concerned about this new change. It's people that live right there.

Is there a motion?

I'll make a motion. I move to deny the request of James and Jill Holden to remove a previously applied condition of approval from a lot split approved in 2005, which prohibits the use of the property as a rental.

Motion by Whalen. Second. Second by Meadows. Discussion? Mr. Meadows?

Talk about your motion, please. I have been up and down this street many times, and I do know that there are issues involving that single Rental that is on that on that block But this has been a unique block within the city with a school district property Directly adjacent to it. You know a few a much more I guess dedicated rental area also to the south of it and But there are a lot of people who have spent decades living within that, on that street, and I'd hate to do anything, and I don't think we should, to disrupt it in any way whatsoever. Adding another potential rental property to that location I think would ultimately start sort of a push to make changes there. This is the way it's operated for a number of years. I know that when that lot split took place, I was curious about whether it actually could sell, simply because if you look at the property, I mean, it is like a bowl down there. I don't know how you would build in there. So I think it would be something that would be an error for the City Council to do to change that in any way. So I'm strongly supportive of the motion.

Mr. Whelan. I am sympathetic to the property owners of this lot. But I'm also, that is a very unique little street. It's a very residential street that's got more multi-housing near it. But they've held on to this very unique characteristic of a neighborhood that they've held on to for many years, so that's my concern.

No, I'm sorry. No, public comment is closed at this point. Thank you. I will simply say that The public benefit of this deed restriction has only grown over time as the proportion of owner-occupied in the city has dropped. This is also an important owner-occupied pocket neighborhood that deserves our protection. And all the owners, since the deed restriction was put in place, have bought the property knowing that the deed restriction was there. Deed restrictions are not uncommon. I also can't support changing it just for one potential buyer. I think a speaker suggested that there may be multiple potential buyers might be inclined to not treat this as a rental. So I will also be supporting the motion. Any further discussion? Okay. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries and that request is denied. Item 5.4, consideration of a request from the Graduate East Lansing to reconfigure an existing plaza space at 133 Evergreen Avenue by adding five parking spaces and one van accessible space. Ms. Wrighton, Ms. Bartley, Mr. Bartley.

Good evening, Alicia Wrighton, Planning Department. As stated, the graduate has proposed a modification to their existing plaza area to add five valet or temporary loading and unloading parking spaces, which would be dedicated to the public, one of van accessible as well. City Council doesn't typically hold or does not hold a public hearing for site plans, so this is the opportunity for presentation of the request. On April 9th, 2019, City Council had approved a modification request for the project for allowing the courtyard to be used for outdoor seating and mural panels as a substitute for retail storefronts. On July 21st of 2026, City Council approved a modification to the existing special use for alcohol service on the 10th floor rock bar to allow for 199 patrons up from 96 patrons. The proposed parking will be metered temporary loading and unloading street parking for the use of the public. The cost of the meters and posts along with the installation costs will be sorted out during the, if approved during the parking agreement process. The landscape plan from 2019 included three streetlights, one of which will have to be relocated as a part of this project just outside of the proposed area for the new spaces. The Transportation Commission recommended approval of the plaza conversion to allow for six parking spaces at their June 1st, 2026 meeting. The recommendation included raised crosswalks on both ends of Evergreen Avenue. The applicant has not included raised crosswalks as part of their proposal. The discussion leading up to that recommendation included consideration of a two-lane, one-way southbound conversion of Evergreen Avenue to Grand River Avenue with various options for locating the valet vehicles along the sides of the road. The engineering department had requested that the graduate obtain written approval from the adjacent impacted properties to support the one-way conversion. The applicant obtained support from adjacent property owners, but with the exception of support from the Abbott. The city engineering staff were able to connect with the Abbott and found that they were against the conversion to one-way. The fire marshal also provided a memorandum that the minimum road width for aerial apparatus or ladder truck for buildings exceeding 30 feet in height, that the immediate access road must feature an unobstructed width of at least 26 feet. The current width of Evergreen Avenue is approximately 26.5 feet, therefore prohibiting use of the sides for valet. The landscape plan from 2019 also provided for three private trees, three street trees and a planner box on Albert Avenue, which will be modified as part of this project. They are proposing two street trees to flank the proposed parking and one private space. I'm sorry, private tree and committed to working with the city to relocate the remaining three trees in an area that will allow for their survival. Um, the, There are additional plantings that are proposed for this project, which will reduce the runoff by 144 square feet because of the reduction of impervious surface. So they are reducing the water runoff. Comments from different departments, including environmental, was concerns related to the replacement trees and their survival, which the applicant has committed to. Engineering department has provided that they meet the standards for curb, gutter, sidewalk, and that the reconfiguration of the plaza must be ADA accessible, as well as the ramp, which also complements the comments from the building department. Fire marshal commented on the road width, but also related to the PIV valve. And then the police department provided the information related to the safety sticks, that those are intended to focus on areas for no parking zones. The DDA, at their August 27, 2026 board meeting, unanimously recommended approval of the request to city council. And on August 12, 2026, the Planning Commission voted 4 to 1 to recommend approval to city council subject to conditions. I can answer questions.

Questions for staff?

Mr. Whalen. In this, maybe also as Mr. Clayton, in the Transportation Commission, the suggestion was to have possible raised crosswalks. Was that discussed with the developer? I know one is a problem because it's MDOT, but can you tell me about that dialogue?

Do you want?

Steven Clayton with the engineering department.

The developer presented and discussed the raised crosswalks as part of the transportation commission. That was a recommendation of the transportation commission, so they were aware of that request from the commission. They opted not to include that in their final design. So they were aware and decided various concerns with ice and limited other reasons, and they opted not to include that.

Further questions? I have a couple of questions. One is, I did not, I was not able to find in the AIR, I was not able to find a sample motion. While somebody's looking for that.

It is there. It is there? Yeah, motion to approve is.

Okay, great. Perfect.

It was the fifth item.

It's an attachment.

It's an attachment. It's not in the staff report.

As long as somebody's found it, that's great. Okay. Thanks. It's on page 23. Page 23. Okay. Great. Question about the costs. Is a developer going to foot the bill for the reconstruction? That went by a little fast. You said something about we would work out who's going to pay for it?

It's anticipated that the applicant would be responsible for those costs, but We hadn't discussed it. I had only included the information because it would have to be sorted through council and the applicant when it comes to the agreement portion.

So we will have a further opportunity to make a decision on an agreement that would specify who's paying for what? Yes. Okay, so this vote doesn't commit us to anything in terms of covering the cost? No. Okay, thank you. You said the developer's committed to making sure the trees survive. What if they don't? What's their mechanism for enforcement?

It's under the ordinance requirements for landscaping that section 50 dash. I don't know the exact section, but the landscape requirements are in the zoning ordinance, which if they don't survive, there is the recourse for enforcement to ensure that they get put back.

So the standard mechanism for enforcement with landscaping requirements? Yes. Okay. I have a couple of questions for the applicant, if he's here. Can you tell us how far along you are with increasing the valet staffing and where you need to be?

Yeah. So I think last time we spoke, or maybe it was that planning commission, Our team with the valet operation had given us kind of an updated data number that said that their ideal total staffing, total headcount was 35 bodies. As of this past Friday, they were at 36 active. At the time that they gave me that number, knowing that More is better in this situation. We came back to them and said, let's set a new target at 45. And all that your data for operations saying 35, our target internally is going to be 45. As of Friday, they had the 36 active and nine in the onboarding stage to get us to that 45 number. And then on top of that, I think we also had mentioned, I believe last time at Planning Commission as well, that for some of our busiest operational days, one that was brought up at that meeting, that being able to get to a number upwards of a dozen people on staff at one time, that we were able to achieve that this past weekend. So 12 on the morning shift, 12 on the evening shift, there for sure would be days that potentially would have needs above that, but that 45-person headcount allows us and them to consistently do that.

So I guess my question is, why did it take so long to figure out that you needed that many valets to make it work?

Sure. I've been at the property now for about two and a half years. I think getting that hiring process pushed through to the number that we all know is fully needed took some change in leadership for who was operating. We still have the current company that's operating, but we had to make some changes with the leadership not only on property, but the support that we have regionally to get that done. So it took us some time to kind of push back with that group to say this is a non-negotiable and even if that means that leadership changes, these are the numbers we need to get to.

So my memory is when you were before us a while ago and then there was like a year in between before you came back with the rooftop expansion. My memory of that discussion is that there are issues with continuity of leadership. So you've been with that property for two and a half years. But before that, there had been turnover in your position, I think. And also there might be turnover in terms of the valet companies. Am I right in my memory of that?

So I can't speak to the time prior to that I was there as far as the valet operator. My understanding is that that operating company has been the same since the inception of the building and them taking on Valley. It definitely has been the same group since I've been there. And then as far as leadership at the hotel itself, the building being opened, you know, very closely post-COVID, summer of 21, again, a time prior to me. But at that time, due to some of the uncertainties with business levels, there was a regional oversight between the Ann Arbor location and the East Lansing location. So I actually have been the first on-site full-time general manager in place at that location. Previously there was a regional overseeing both sides and then a hotel manager at both locations.

So we can expect reasonable continuity from now on in terms of your position and also the valet company in terms of their commitment to upholding these numbers?

Yeah, absolutely. I mean to speak for myself, I think I've spoken a bit before you guys in the past about My connections to the university, being an alumni myself, both my parents are alum, I grew up in the area. attended Michigan State's hospitality business program and kind of came up in my career with a lot of travel that was related to that growth. But now this has been an opportunity for me personally to come home, set down roots with my young family, be associated again with my alma mater. So continuity in my position, absolutely. That's my full intention. And with the group that we have leading valet currently and the additional support that we have, I feel comfortable with that as well.

And then a different type of question. So my one concern with this reconfiguration is that you're going to end up people parking in those stalls and then people parking behind them in the roadway where they park now in the no parking zone, no stopping zone, but now they're going to be blocking in other cars. How are you going to handle that if and when it happens?

So ultimately we see that communication of those spaces and their intention, of course, enforcement would rely on the city and pace and that team, but that our team from the valet side, would be working to communicate the intended use of that space, monitor it to some extent, and if we're in a position like that where those spaces have been utilized for their intent for short term, loading, unloading, and additional vehicles are coming up to be processed specifically with valet, that we would have the option of circulating those vehicles back around the block to return as the space opens up.

So you're going to have somebody standing there saying, no, you can't park here because you're going to block somebody in.

Correct. That we would connect with those vehicles as we do currently. Tell them, hey, we're ready to intake you as a part of the valet process. If you can circle back around, we have one of these spaces available for loading, unloading that we process at that time.

Okay. All right. Thanks for addressing my question.

Yeah, of course.

I've got one additional. Please. So I really love the idea of the public-private aspect of this. And I do think there's just a lot of needs for parking there. But if somebody wants to get a donut, they can pull in there and they can use that spot, correctly, for the 15 minutes or whatever the time?

Correct.

Right. So other people from other businesses in the area could use those spots and the time-limited spot.

Correct.

OK.

I just want to confirm that we're going to be taking a look at this again. This is just the start of our review of this. Is that right?

It's your purview. You can vote tonight or see it again.

No, I mean, I guess I'm asking the question I thought that the mayor had asked earlier. But the way I look at this and the idea of a B3 district, so no private parking. We insist on public parking or city-owned parking within that area. This is... If this has meters, is that what I heard? Then there are people who are going to pull in there and think they're plugging the meter and they're staying there. And that's what I'm concerned about. Because unless there is some prohibition against that, people will begin, at some point, somebody will park their car in there and go wandering off to do whatever they're going to do. And I want to make sure this is used for the purpose that we have it here. And so if there is signage that is required to say you can't really park here, this is just valet parking.

It's actually going to be metered loading and unloading temporary parking for the use of the public. 15 minutes, you can't add more money. So it will come down to an enforcement aspect that it is just intended if someone wants to stop and run in and get a donut or if somebody is doing their intake, outtake with the valet. but it will have signs as well as the meters and it will be public because there has to be As indicated there'll be an easement That's part of the process which will work with the city attorney and City Council and then an agreement related to the cost of the installation and how those meters will be Governed by the parking department and pace for enforcement

Yeah, and I'm good with the idea of us having an agreement with them that they will install at their own cost and maintain at their own cost at that location. What I'm still concerned about is people just parking their car there. Okay, the 15 minutes go by. Then, you know, how long is it going to take for a cop to come by and start to write a ticket or pace? And that's another sort of an expense for the city. I'd much prefer this to be dedicated parking that the hotel controls. Because if you, you know, I've used valet parking in Chicago and D.C. and other places. Basically, you roll up. unloading your bags, somebody's already out there, they're putting a little sticker, giving you half a sticker, sticking something on their windshield, and you're in the hotel when it's taken away. That's the way I assume you plan on operating this, but with those meters on there, I just think we've got an issue. Is there a way for us to waive the private parking requirement for something like this? Then it's all at their expense, I might add.

I'm not aware of anything in the code that would allow for waiver of that parking requirement. I know there are certain provisions in the code where it explicitly allows for waiver as it relates to the parking issue. I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH A WAIVER BEING THERE. IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COUNCIL WOULD, YOU KNOW, WE CAN ALWAYS LOOK AT THAT AND PROVIDE A RESPONSE SO THAT COUNCIL'S AWARE OF WHETHER THAT'S EVEN AN OPTION. BUT AS WE SIT HERE TODAY, I DON'T KNOW.

OKAY. IT'S JUST A CONCERN OF MINE. IT'S NOT GOING TO STOP ME FROM VOTING FOR THIS. BUT THE, I AM, concerned and it also highlights we really we have to get working on parking down in this area you know we need additional parking down there for our businesses but also to make it a little more convenient for you guys to to use the the um you know, the parking that you have. So I appreciate the answers and your comments with regard to it. We'll look at the contract when we actually see it.

Just one other point to note that part of the property is private, but part of it is public-owned property, which is why we have to have a public parking and an agreement.

Okay, so the design there included public property. Okay, gotcha. Thank you.

We have similar meters right there, 15 minutes long MAC.

They're throughout the town, yes.

Yeah. So it's not unique, per se.

There was a discussion about this issue at the DDA, whether they should be dedicated or public, and I think there was some pretty good arguments that said that this could actually help, for example, help rent out the space at the base of the Abbott, which is vacant now, because if a broker is gonna show that to prospective tenants. They're gonna do a tour of the area looking to see whether there's parking and there isn't any. And so knowing that there's public parking could actually help on multiple dimensions. So I thought that there was some good arguments that the public good here is actually substantive. Further discussion, Mr. Whalen?

I just think we've talked. I appreciate I've gotten quite a few presentations on this.

I'd love to try to land the plane as much as possible. Would you like to make a motion?

So here's the motion. Is it motion to approve or motion to support the motion? I motion to approve the site plan request from Lee Cote, that's how you pronounce, on behalf of G-E-M-I-C, S-E-L-L-C, to reconfigure an existing plaza space by adding five parking spaces and one van accessible space located at 133 Evergreen Avenue. The decision is based on the findings and determinations to approve the site plan for 133 Evergreen Avenue and for the conditions of approval dated August 12th, 2026, which is attached to the AIR for the agenda item and incorporated into this motion by the reference City Council. Do I stop there?

Motion by Whelan. Second. Second by Singh. Any discussion of the motion?

So this is, from my understanding, going to help create or de-escalate some of the congestion, some of the issues in that area.

Is that correct? Is that the intent? Theoretically.

Then I think I'm with Council Member Mark about enforcement and just how that works and the concerns there. I'm understanding there's good intent in making sure that that's going to be resolved so that situation doesn't become worse but actually gets better, which I think were concerns from some people who were opposing some of these issues down there. And I had asked about enforcement in that very first presentation and just how that works and I just know that pace is involved and that's going to be important relationship to maintain with communication and making sure that that area is a good area in regards to that it's not going to be abused outside the 15-minute allotments that we have so that's my main my main deal with that

And I'll just follow up on that with a question for staff. My understanding from your comments is that the safety sticks aren't actually going to work here, right? Because they are for no stopping zones.

For the actual cutout, it would not work. But for any area, if someone parked in front of them or in front of any of the city signs that say no parking, they would work.

Okay. Would they work for cars that park behind the cars that are in the slots?

No.

Okay, it's good to know. I wanna echo the comment about enforcement and the question of whether this could make it better or worse. I hope it makes it better. I think we are gonna have to keep an eye on it to see whether it actually works. I'm not sure it's a slam dunk, but it's more parking in the area, more public parking at the area, and if it's at the expense of the developer, then let's try it is my view. Any further discussion? Okay, motion by Whalen, second by Singh. Thank you. Any further discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion carries and that site plan is approved. On to the next step. Thank you. Bringing us to item 5.5, consideration of a contract with Michigan Paving and Materials Co. for the Southeast Marble Resurfacing Phase 1 project in an amount of $874,580.82 with an additional 15% contingency for a total authorized amount of $1 million. and authorize the interim city manager to sign. Further, approve the related budget amendment to the fiscal year 2027 local street budget. Fund, Director Lacoste, Mr. Clayton.

Council, what you have before you is kind of one of the final steps in a very long process coming up with some solutions in this neighborhood and as you know at the same time we were working through our neighborhood action plan for to address cut through and speeding issues so it kind of this project kind of ran in tandem with that effort and this is our local street resurfacing project in the southeast marble neighborhood this is kind of phase one of it which is the southern half south of melrose and we have a section on melrose we hope to do next year which includes the water main replacement and then another section drive to finish off the neighborhood we're hoping to complete those sections next year but the traffic calming plan um Is this on? Oh, I think you are. Oh, sorry. That's better. So the traffic calming plan actually is throughout the entire neighborhood, but this is just phase. The stuff will be constructed under phase one of this only. So this is part of an effort with the neighborhood with traffic calming. As you know, the neighborhood came to us with a petition to install stop signs through concerns with cut through and speeding traffic. The petition was for stop signs. Since it's a traditional block type neighborhood, we picked two of the intersections and did warrant analysis for stop signs and neither of the intersections met the warrants for stop signs. So we presented that to the Transportation Commission who motioned not to approve the stop signs but wanted staff to take a more holistic review of traffic calming measures throughout the neighborhood. which is what kicked off this process. And we followed that traffic calming action plan that we were working through at the same time. This was kind of a guinea pig of that process as we went through it. It's an eight-step process and we followed that fairly closely. We held two public meetings with the neighborhood, invited the whole neighborhood to come and first one kind of speak about what the concerns are, what the proposed solutions are. We had some maps out for people to sketch some comments on and measures. and then we gathered that data and and came up with you know as as I mentioned before through the traffic calming process this there's never consensus on this stuff it's you know the Sun doesn't doesn't come out in the clouds part for everybody on traffic calming that's just the nature of this kind of stuff so we tried to gather what was the the most popular choices for traffic calming and then we tried to position those measures throughout the neighborhood to where you know if you put traffic calming on Cahill then you're just gonna push the traffic further north so we tried to scatter them throughout the neighborhood that there isn't a route you can pick to avoid traffic calming which is why we picked the locations that we did in conjunction with where there's already existing stop signs So the proposed layout was created based on those comments, and we presented that at the second neighborhood meeting to hear further comments. And from that, the ballot was created, which is included in your packet, and sent out to all the residents in the neighborhood. It was sent out May 8th. And it involves six traffic circles placed throughout the neighborhood, as I discussed, and also some raised crosswalks at John R and Mount Vernon. And that's just due to the proximity of the school and the number of parents that drop off in there and kids that traverse that area. So that intersection is going to get raised crosswalks. The rest of the measures are the traffic circles. And then also on Cahill Drive, because that's one of our historically speeding and cut through traffic locations, we're also pairing that with a couple of permanent speed radar signs in between the traffic circles we're putting there. We sent out 553 ballots. Again, tried to make it easy, put self-addressed stamped envelopes in there, so they just had to fill it out and stick it in the envelope. And we got 211 responses, which is about 38%. And of the responses, 70% were supporting and 30% were opposed. So I think the action plan is 51% means we move forward. So that was well above the threshold that was established in the action plan. So we put the design together and bid the project and received two bidders, Michigan Paving and Reith Riley. And we're here to present the contract to Michigan Paving. And with that, I'm here to answer any questions. And Stephen was much more involved finalizing some of the discussions with the neighborhood and with the Transportation Commission. So he's here also to answer any of those questions.

Questions for Steph?

I'm just curious. I think it's great how the approach to surveying the neighborhood to help collect their desires on approach. Is there any weight when we've... weight to direct property owners like right out we've heard from some that are gonna have a traffic circle versus You know the hundred people that live at the other end of the neighborhood do we have any consideration on that?

There is I mean obviously the the boundaries or the impact is is difficult to to consider I mean how far is it directly in front or is it one or two properties either side and If it's an isolated incident, a single intersection, then we would try to isolate that vote to more people impacted there. In this case, it was the neighborhood that put together the petition with concerns kind of throughout the neighborhood. primarily John R and Cahill, but again, if you only address speed and traffic on John R and Cahill, then you risk pushing the problem somewhere else in the neighborhood, and then you're back chasing the problem. So we like the Transportation Commission's view of kind of looking at the neighborhood holistically to try not to do that. um so in this case it was kind of more neighborhood facing but yes if somebody came forward and said i have a problem here then we would isolate that voting to to the more specific area i mean it's you know it's not unusual for it's it's you know we want to fix the problem but not in front of my house it's that's that's not an unusual thing that we hear and i understand it but it's it's got to go somewhere and and again we've talked about this none of these measures are impact free Will it reduce snow and ice at the intersection? Absolutely. It's going to slow us down. We'll be able to get around the circle. We have a different crew that comes in with regular pickup trucks and kind of cleans up areas where we have islands and circles and things. If you put in speed humps, then you get complaints that trailers with stuff on it rattle when they go over it and the people adjacent to those don't like it. So there is no impact-free options here. So that's just the nature of traffic calming. So it's unfortunate, but that's the nature of it. And I will say we've gotten most of the feedback we've got has been very positive in the field, I'm told by the staff that was out there laying it out. We have gotten some comments back from people. We made some adjustments to the temporaries just exactly for that reason. Police and fire are not concerned. They've gone out there with their rigs and are not concerned about access. Our plow and rubbish trucks, typically bigger trucks making left turns is going to be a challenge because if you make it big enough for a truck to make a left turn, then you effectively would make it ineffective for cars. to slow traffic but our plows you know plowing straight lines are not usually plowing left same with our trash trucks they're picking up a whole street so they'll be going through these you know more straight not turning left at them so we're not concerned about the operational aspects of these.

Mr. Whaler. I absolutely applaud your approach. You have had so many meetings, so many discussions. You've gotten so much input from the community. I really, really, really appreciate that. And I think your plan, as I saw it, was this is the neighborhood we used to walk in, our old neighborhood. So I really, really appreciate that. And I know Cahill has been a traditional concern for the speeders. I've driven a lot of the streets in the last week, kind of seeing the different things, and I was coming down south on John R., making a left, and that is awkward. But then I drove White Hills Drive, and those circles don't have, I think the yards are bigger there, so there's really not as many driveways that are affected by the circles on White Hills Drive. Because I'm a huge, I love the circles.

But I understand the plight of this, specifically one homeowner, if not one and a half.

So, and I also live right now at a T with a stop sign and no one stops there. It's Stonegate and Applegate. It's almost, it's very, very interesting. So I'm not sure where to go with this, but I really do hear his concerns. And if it's going to be great for the whole community and an inconvenience for one person, I understand. But if it's going to really mess up that person's life, does the rest of the benefit outweigh that? I know that's what you've been contemplating. So... I don't think it was a question. I think it was more of a speech.

Welcome to our room.

I don't know. Where do you think you may go with this? Is it like all or nothing? Or can there be some adjustment maybe at that one place?

I mean right now what's the current plan is what's been approved by the neighborhood. I think to go back we would have to go and re-vote for a change because right now 70% are in favor of what's there.

And it says specifically traffic circle at that intersection.

Yes, you have the letter that went out that shows the locations and traffic circle, and there's pictures on the letter that show what it meant. But I understand. I mean, it's not that we can't go back, but it would delay the project until spring.

And right now, it's kind of a hard thing. circle, right? But then when you put that in, is there gonna be soft circles that could actually back up and touch that circle?

And that's a good point. I mean, if you drive John R. and Cahill, the temporaries are out there. It's pretty much what it's gonna look like as far as the size goes. So drive it and see for yourself how it affects speed. But look at the one at Portage Path and White Hills Drive as to how it'll be constructed. It's going to be a rolled curb. It's going to have a two-foot concrete apron because some of those bigger trucks are going to roll up on the edge a little bit. That's expected. So you're not going to be running into a curb face if you back into it or run it over. So it'll be constructed like the one at Portage Path and White Hills Drive. The size will be what's out there now. We did two examples, one on KO, one at John R. Do you remember the other intersection? Two intersections north of there. Lyndon and John R. Lyndon and John R, to give an example of what these are going to look like.

So once you have the rolled curves, it's going to be more tolerable, I think.

Yes, if you roll up on the edge making the left turn, it's not going to jolt your tire off or anything.

I admit it was a bit awkward just to go through there, but maybe that would really improve. Correct.

Yeah, and I'll just say that having a driveway at an intersection is difficult in general. I imagine that they probably have a little bit of difficulty navigating that. I don't know if there will be impact with that traffic circle. I don't know if the added speed reduction will be a help in that, or it just won't maybe outweigh the hindrance of that circle. But yeah, there's always the trade-offs that Ron mentioned.

Further questions?

No, I just, I mean, it's a challenge. I think the neighborhood holistic approach to that, it's unfortunate that you have... one uh issue there you know i just i know they're they're i just want to make sure as far as a legal liability per se when it comes to something like this that we're all it makes sense in regards to going forward with that and appreciating the challenge there with the particular homeowner and the residents that came and spoke tonight so

further mr meadows just a comment on the cahill issue so i looking at the map there really is one lot and i'm not sure whether it's there a lot or not that seems to back out their driveway would back out right into the circle and my question is only is there a way for us to widen the apron a little bit on there their driveway so that it would make it easier for them to to back out left or right as they come out so that's just a question I'm not asking you to commit to anything but I think that's something to look at and I think the At the other one, it looks like the driveways would be on either side of it. If that's another apron issue, then I'd ask you to take a look at that as well. Everything else, this has been, you've gotten a lot of pressure. Over the last two years about Southeast Marble. So this is a huge advancement for us to actually, it takes time to put together a plan that will really do the job and to get the money. So I really applaud you for sticking with it and staying with it for this period of time. Thank you.

Further comments? So yeah, thanks for all your work on this. I think how far we've come since three years ago when we heard a lot from the podium about traffic calming in Southeast Marble. And then it was clear from all that conversation that we needed a broader look, and you guys did it. And 38% is a pretty high response rate, I think, for surveys, and 70% is overwhelming in terms of being in favor. which means that the process that's designed to get buy-in all sort of worked, so it looks great to me. You did mention sort of challenges for the big trucks. Is this going to increase our costs over time to have those traffic circles in there? You said that a separate crew has to come in and clear snow.

Yeah, I mean, it will certainly add to that route, but there generally isn't a traffic calming measure. I mean, a long straight street is what's most efficient to clear, but unfortunately, a long straight street is also the easiest to speed on, so it's the reality of trying to balance that. So, I mean, you can... I can say Bailey's great too, but it's narrow and there's parking and we have a hard time doing that as well. So there's always challenges no matter what you're looking at. But yes, it'll increase cost and the time to plow a little bit. A little bit. Yeah, nothing I'm concerned about. We'll still provide the service we have.

Okay. That was all that I had. Is there a motion?

I'm sorry, before that. Yep, please. Could we approach, not to change a whole law for one person, but to possibly offer, so from the sidewalk to the street is public property. So if we widen that, could we offer to at least negotiate and talk with that resident to widen that? curtain, or I'm not sure what that's called, between the sidewalk, so they could possibly, while we're doing it, to possibly have more of an exit. I'm not sure what side of the driveway he's on, but at least have the conversation with that homeowner.

Certainly, yes, we can reach out to the homeowners if the other intersection has similar concerns and see if there's anything that we can do to lessen the impact for them, certainly.

That could possibly be a city expense because that's city property.

Correct.

Between the sidewalk.

Mr. Grigsby, did you have? Yeah, I can make a motion. Okay, great.

I'll make a motion to approve the contract with Michigan Paving and Materials Company for the southeast marble resurfacing phase one project in the amount of $874,580. dollars 82 cents with additional 15% contingency for a total authorized amount of 1 million 6,000 and authorized the interim city manager to sign further approve the related budget amendment to fiscal year 2027 local street fund budget motion by Grigsby second by Meadows any further discussion

Everybody's got their mics on for the vote. All right. Thanks all those in favor say aye aye any opposed motion carries And that contract is approved. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much That brings us to item 5.6 review and approval of a RFP to engage a firm slash consultant in the national search for a city manager for the city of East Lansing. Ms. Irwin.

Yes, thank you.

At the last meeting, of course, I had discussed this with city council to get your feedback on how you wanted us to go ahead and proceed. And based on that, I have put together an RFP for you to take a look at and to consider us issuing for a search to to look for a search firm to do a national search for the city manager position. Pretty much all the details are on here. Just to give you some background, I did look at the last RFP that went out. I used it as a basis, but I would say this is not the same document. I made some different changes. I worked with our HR department, some other staff and others who weighed in on this and gave some suggestions and incorporated some of those. The other parts that I would direct your attention to would be at the very end, I do have a tentative schedule outlined and again this is just a tentative outline and to give us a place to begin working on this and to give some parameters here and give you an idea of maybe what we're looking at. I'm happy to answer questions, take suggestions for edits to this document.

Questions for the city manager?

So I see that. You've given us about a month on this RFP, right? Request for proposals, September 15th, October 13th, RFP review and award decisions made. Do you feel that that's going to be enough time for us to do all this and have at least introduced candidates to, although this would just be Well, the award decisions. So that would just be the search. Just the search firm. Okay. Got it. You know, I was worried about us having public meetings with regards to this. Okay.

And then they will, whoever is chosen, I anticipate them holding meetings with the community, with council, with the community, getting feedback for community profile and et cetera.

Okay, good.

for the questions I guess my tags are out along with that I just want to make sure we get this right fast is good but right is better is that really enough time to get the right firm so what I will say is this is a tentative you know schedule so we

can certainly put this out. If that's not enough time, we can extend our time. You know, if we need more time to review the proposals once they're received, I'm sure we can do that. So it's something there to get us started. I certainly can, based on your feedback, if you want dates altered, I can certainly do that. But that is just, and again, I kind of base that tentative schedule on what was in the schedule for the last search.

And you're saying right now they're due on September 29th.

Which we could extend that to another date, but I had to give you a place to start.

We can always bump it out if we don't have responses back.

As long as you're comfortable with that and rather than feeling pressured. to lock in when we're not quite ready to lock in. I'm good as long as we can extend it out.

This doesn't have the force of law. This is your plan for getting this done so we can alter it at any time. Is that right?

Right. OK. It's not a motion.

A motion would be in order. Oh, it is a motion. A motion would be in order if somebody would like to make one.

TO AUTHORIZE, A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER TO PROCESS THE RFP? DOES THAT DO IT?

I COULD RESTATE THE MOTION AS FOLLOWS. THERE'S ONE WRITTEN OUT HERE. MOVE TO PROCEED WITH THE ISSUANCE OF THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL TO ENGAGE WITH THE FIRM TO PERFORM A NATIONAL SEARCH FOR A CITY MANAGER FOR THE CITY OF EAST LANSING. SECOND. THAT WOULD BE THE MOTION BY MEADOWS, SECOND BY WHALEN. Further discussion. I'm going to, for discussion purposes if nothing else, I'm going to move to amend the proposal due date from September 29th, 2026 to October 13th, 2026. And to amend the tentative award decision date in the tentative schedule from October 13th, 2026 to October 20th, 2026. And if I get a second, I'll explain myself. OK, motion by Altman, second by Meadows. So we use 30 days for city attorney RFP. I'm not sure I see a reason not to use 30 days in this case. The other thing is the timeline. So October 13 is the current award date in here, previous to the amendment. But that's a discussion only meeting. So we ordinarily wouldn't take action that day anyway. Our next business meeting is October 20. If we get the proposals in by October 13th, which would be my suggestion for the RFP close date, then that gives us a week to review those proposals and make a decision if we are ready at that point, if we have enough information. If we are not and we want to invite the firms in for interviews, then we have a window before our next business meeting on November 17th to do that. So I think this actually gives us more time to collect proposals and it doesn't really delay the decision if we're willing to review and potentially decide within a week. So that's the justification.

Further comments, discussions council members saying, yeah, I'll be voting against, uh, the amendment. Uh, I think these firms are used to responding to RFPs of this nature. And I think it is more appropriate to establish, get the RFP out, see who responds. have the flexibility to extend the date out again if we don't have enough responses in by the 29th without having to do something specific. to guide it. Again, I think it's important to hire the firm because the most important part of this is gonna be the community and staff engagement process and we need to get the firm selected and move forth in that process. So, that's my rationale for voting against the omitted.

Further discussion. Okay, so,

So just to make clear, so the original motion doesn't say a date, right?

But it's just more the intention of the country. Well, the in within the proposal, it's got a date within the AIR within Yes, within the RFP, it has a date of issuance, and it has a date and time that the proposal is due. And that's what I'm moving to amend by adding two weeks. So everybody's clear, we're moving to amend the dates by adding two weeks to the proposal due date and then kicking the tentative award date. Any further discussion on the motion? Okay, let's do a roll call vote.

Council Member Singh? No. Council Member Whelan?

Did you say me? She said me. I'm pausing. Yes.

Mayor Pro Tem Grigsby.

Yes.

Council member Meadows. Yes. Mayor Altman.

Yes. So the motion carries and the RFP is amended. Now we're back to the main motion on the RFP as amended. Any further discussion on that?

Okay.

Uh, seeing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Motion carries that RFP is authorized. And I don't know what we're going to do with ourselves the rest of the evening, but it's 914, and I would entertain a motion to adjourn. I'll move. Moved by Grigsby, seconded by Meadows. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? We are adjourned.