Portfolio Seul Lee 15 xs by Seul Lee

SEUL LEE 2007-2015

SEUL LEE

SEUL@UMICH.EDU +1 734-545-2491

EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN I TAUBMAN COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE I MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 • GRADUATE CERTIFICATE IN REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT • LAND USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING CONCENTRATION KOREA NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF ARTS I SCHOOL OF VISUAL ARTS I BACHELOR OF ARCHITECTURE ‘12 • ROYAL INSTITUTE OF BRITISH ARCHITECTS [RIBA] PART 1 & 2 VALIDATION

WORK EXPERIENCE GENSLER I SAN FRANCISCO, CA I JUNE-AUGUST 2014 • INTERN I URBAN DESIGN UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN I ANN ARBOR, MI I APRIL-JUNE 2014 • GRADUATE STUDENT RESEARCH ASSISTANT I URBAN PLANNING LOKALDESIGN I SEOUL, KOREA I MARCH-MAY 2013 • RESEARCH ASSISTANT I ARCHITECTURE & URBANISM EUNKYUNGLEE METROPOLITAN ARCHITECTURE I SEOUL, KOREA I OCTOBER 2012-FEBRUARY 2013 • PROJECT ASSISTANT I ARCHITECTURE & URBANISM SOCIETY OF ARCHITECTURE I SEOUL, KOREA I JULY- SEPTEMBER 2012 • PROJECT ASSISTANT I ARCHITECTURE & INTERIOR ARCHITECTURE METROPOLITAN ARCHITECTURE RESEARCH UNIT I SEOUL, KOREA I MAY-JUNE 2012 • INTERN I ARCHITECTURE KENGO KUMA & ASSOCIATES I TOKYO, JAPAN I JUNE-AUGUST 2010, JULY-AUGUST 2011 • INTERN I ARCHITECTURE

AWARDS & EXHIBITIONS THE REMEMBRANCE OF A MOON VILLAGE I ANN ARBOR, MI I APRIL 2014 • HONORABLE MENTION I AGORA JOURNAL OF ARCHITECTURE & URBAN PLANNING THE MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF PLANNING STUDENT MAP CONFERENCE I YPSILANTI, MI I JANUARY 2014 • STUDENT SPEAKER STADIUM CROSSING I LANSING, MI I NOVEMBER 2013 • WINNER I THE UM/ULI REAL ESTATE FORUM URBAN RESTORATION CASE COMPETITION ANCIENT FUTURES I SEOUL, KOREA I NOVEMBER 2011 • HONORABLE MENTION I KOREA INSITUTE OF ARCHITECTS GENERAL COMPETITION A BORDER OPPORTUNITY: THE KOREAN DMZ I SEOUL, KOREA I AUGUST 2008 • PARTICIPANT I THE ARCHITECTURAL ASSOCIATION SUMMER SCHOOL SEOUL INTERNATIONAL BOOK FAIR EXHIBITION I SEOUL, KOREA I MAY 2008 • STUDENT DESIGNER

SKILLS SOFTWARE • ADOBE DESIGN SUITE, AUTOCAD, RHINOCEROS, SKETCHUP, V-RAY, ARCGIS, REVIT, MICROSOFT OFFICE LANGUAGE • ENGLISH, KOREAN, JAPANESE * full CV available upon request

SELECTED WORKS 2007-2015

04 ANCIENT FUTURES • SEOUL, KOREA 2011 • ADVANCED DESIGN STUDIO • INDIVIDUAL PROJECT • ARCHITECTURE + URBAN DESIGN • HONORABLE MENTION, KOREA INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS GENERAL COMPETITION

13 HOME SWEET HOME • SEOUL, KOREA 2008 • INTERMEDIATE DESIGN STUDIO • INDIVIDUAL PROJECT • ARCHITECTURE

16 ROOTS • NEW ORLEANS, LA 2015 • ULI HINES URBAN DESIGN COMPETITION • GROUP PROJECT • URBAN DESIGN • TEAM: JULIAN CHENG, CHRISTOPHER HERLICH, SEUL LEE, PANKTI SANGANEE, BRADLEY VOGELSMEIER

22 FRANKLIN GREEN • DETROIT, MI 2014 • UM/ULI URBAN RESTORATION COMPETITION • GROUP PROJECT • URBAN DESIGN • TEAM: CHRISTOPHER HERLICH, SEUL LEE, FRANK ROMO, BRADLEY VOGELSMEIER

28 THE REMEMBRANCE OF A MOON VILLAGE • ANN ARBOR, MI 2014 • AGORA JOURNAL OF URBAN PLANNING + ARCHITECTURE • INDIVIDUAL PROJECT, PUBLISHED • URBANISM

08 ISLANDSCAPE • JEJU ISLAND, KOREA 2010 • ADVANCED DESIGN STUDIO • INDIVIDUAL PROJECT • URBAN DESIGN

14 SEOUL MANIFESTO • SEOUL, KOREA 2008 • INTERMEDIATE DESIGN STUDIO • INDIVIDUAL PROJECT • URBANISM

18 STABILIZING MORNINGSIDE • DETROIT, MI 2015 • INTEGRATIVE FIELD EXPERIENCE PROJECT • GROUP PROJECT • URBAN PLANNING + DESIGN • TEAM: JOSH BAILS, SARAH CLARK, FAN FAN, NICHOLAS FAZIO, SEUL LEE, EVAN MARKARIAN, JAMIE SIMCHIK, XIANG YAN

24 DRAWINGS & OBJECTS • 2007-2012 • INDIVIDUAL PROJECT • ARTWORKS

33 WRITING SAMPLE • ANN ARBOR, MI 2013 • LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE PLANNING PROCESS • INDIVIDUAL PROJECT • INSTRUCTOR: RICHARD NORTON, JULIE STEIFF

ANCIENT FUTURES

METROPOLITAN HOUSING FOR 1,000 RESIDENTS

DESIGN STRATEGY HOUSING UNIT

VARIATION OF SOCIAL ENTITIES

L-Shaped unit has advantages of the sunlight, ventilation, and spatial relation between inside and outside of the unit 100m2 4 PERSON 4TH FLOOR 25m2 /PERSON

PRIVATE TERRACE

SHARING LOGIC 2 households share one social entity (ground, garden, or green) 3RD FLOOR +

SHARED TERRACE: REGULAR SOCIAL ENTITY BETWEEN 2 HOUSEHOLDS

DEVIATION

2ND FLOOR

EXPANDABLE SOCIAL ENTITY

SOCIAL ENTITY UNIT

GROUND FLOOR EXPANDED SOCIAL ENTITY

PUBLIC TERRACE: EXPANDED SOCIAL ENTITY

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

market

shop

playground

market park

convinient store

market

market market

market

kindergarden

restaurant

market

cafe

clinic

senior citizenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s center

community center

market

institute

market market market

pharmercy shop

cultural center

market

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

shop

Planned Road

2011 I ADVANCED DESIGN STUDIO I INDIVIDUAL PROJECT HONORABLE MENTION, KOREA INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS GENERAL COMPETITION I INSTRUCTOR: EUNKYUNG LEE

URBAN INTERVENTION EMBRACING EXISTING SOCIAL ENTITIES

PHASING

EXISTING URBAN FABRICS

CURRENT: AREA - 93,785m2 DENSITY - 3.79 PERSON/100m2 NO. OF RESIDENTS - 1,350 AVE. BUILDING HEIGHT - 6m

PLANNED ROAD: THREATENING THE EXISTING SOCIAL ENTITIES

PHASE 1

THE DEATH OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD

THE FIRST STEP

PHASE 2

MUTATION: AREA - 91,000m2 DENSITY - 5 PERSON/100m2 NO. OF RESIDENTS - 4,800 AVE. BUILDING HEIGHT - 12m

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

ANCIENT FUTURES

METROPOLITAN HOUSING FOR 1,000 RESIDENTS

HOUSING PROTOTYPE INTERNAL SPACE VARIABLE x LIVINGROOM BEDROOM

F(x)

FACADE

BEDROOM KITCHEN + + BATHROOM BATHROOM

FLOORPLAN 15m

BEDROOM 16% OPENING

PANEL KITCHEN 25% OPENING

10m

POLY CARBONATE SLIDING WALL

WINDOW

LIVINGROOM 50% OPENING

CONTROLLABLE TRANSLUCENCY

TERRACE 100% OPENING

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

2011 I ADVANCED DESIGN STUDIO I INDIVIDUAL PROJECT HONORABLE MENTION, KOREA INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS GENERAL COMPETITION I INSTRUCTOR: EUNKYUNG LEE

STRUCTURE STEEL CONSTRUCTION (MAIN BUILDING) + REINFORCED CONCRETE (UNDERGROUND PARKING)

LONG SPAN TRUSS

VIERENDEEL TRUSS

STABILIZE

25m

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

ISLANDSCAPE

RETREAT VILLAGE MASTER PLAN IN UDO, JEJU ISLAND

CAPACITY ANNUAL NUMBER OF VISITORS IN UDO: 810,000

TOTAL POPULATION IN UDO: 1,584

• Purpose of Visiting Udo

• Residents’ Frequency of Going Out of Udo MONTHLY

45%

WEEKLY

30%

2-3 TIMES A WEEK TOURISM 80%

10%

EVERYDAY NEARLY

• Visitors’ Length of Stay in Udo

91%

6% 9%

• Reasons of Going Out

LESS THAN A DAY

68%

TWO DAYS

16%

THREE DAYS

12%

FOUR + DAYS

32%

SHOPPING

BUSINESS

VISITING GOVERNMENT OFFICES

LEISURE

VISITING RELATIVES

MEDICAL CARE

WORK

EDUCATION

• Demands in Udo

CULTURAL FACILITIES

MEDICAL CENTER 15%

RESORT

ALTERNATIVE ENERGY FACILITIES

ESTIMATED DAILY NUMBER OF GUESTS IN THE RETREAT VILLAGE: 118

PROGRAM ONE-DAY PROGRAM

YOGA

MEDITATION

COUNSELING

MEAL

STAYING

GYM

CLASS

SPA

STROLL

MEDICAL CARE

SOCIAL EVENTS

SHORT-TERM / LONG-TERM PROGRAM SAMPLE SCHEDULE FOR SHORT-TERM PROGRAM 12 AM

12 PM

12 AM

DURATION OF EACH ACTIVITY

HEALTH CARE CENTER

HEADQUARTER

ADMINISTRATION OFFICE

OUTDOOR CULTURAL CENTER MEDICAL CENTER

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

GUEST HOUSES

TYPES OF SPACES NEEDED IN THE RETREAT VILLAGE

2010 I ADVANCED DESIGN STUDIO I INDIVIDUAL PROJECT INSTRUCTOR: H-SEUNG SANG

FACILITIES HEADQUARTERS

MEDICAL CENTER

HEALTH CARE CENTER

RECEPTION

YOGA

RESTAURANT

• Capacity: 60

WAITING ROOM

• Capacity: 30

CLASSROOM

• Capacity: 40 • 92m2

REHAB SPACE

• Capacity: 25/unit • 6 units

GYM

• Capacity: 10/unit • 30m2 X 4 units

EXAMINATION ROOM

• Capacity: 6/unit • 5 units

SPA

CULTURAL FACILITIES

MEDITATION

LOUNGE

• Capacity: 85

NURSE STATION

• Capacity: 85

PARKING

AUDITORIUM

• Capacity: 150 • 200m2

AUDITORIUM

• Capacity: 25

GUEST HOUSE

COUNSELING

• Capacity: 12/unit • 6 units

CLEANING

• Capacity: 20

ADMINISTRATION • Office: 40m2 • Warehouse: 65m2 • Utility Room: 90m2

STAFF HOUSE

• Capacity: 24/unit • 3 units • Capacity: 24/unit • 3 units • Capacity: 400m2

• Residents Only • Capacity: 100 • Capacity: 85 • Type A (12mX6m): 40 units • Type B (6mX6m): 5 units • Capacity: 72

SITE PLAN GUEST HOUSE 1,600m2 STAFF HOUSE 1,400m2

GYM 400m2

PARKING 1,150m2

MEDICAL CENTER 600m2

HEALTH CARE CENTER 500m2

RESTAURANT + LOUNGE 280m2 UTILITIES 150m2

HEADQUARTER 520m2

TENNIS COURT

SPA 500m2

CULTURAL CENTER 200m2

HEALTH CARE ANNEX 300m2

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

ISLANDSCAPE

RETREAT VILLAGE MASTER PLAN IN UDO, JEJU ISLAND

INFRASTRUCTURE VACANT VERNACULAR HOUSES

VACANT HOUSE

NEW BUILDING CONSTRUCTION TO EXPAND CAPACITY EXISTING BUILDINGS

NEW BUILDINGS

NEIGHBORHOOD EMBRACING THE RETREAT VILLAGE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD

RETREAT VILLAGE

ROAD HIERARCHY MAIN ROAD

RESIDENTFRIENDLY

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

GUESTFRIENDLY

2010 I ADVANCED DESIGN STUDIO I INDIVIDUAL PROJECT INSTRUCTOR: H-SEUNG SANG

CIRCULATION: SHORT-TERM GUESTS 3PM GOING HOME

2PM MEDICAL CARE 10AM MEDITATION

12PM LUNCH 11AM SPA

CIRCULATION: LONG-TERM GUESTS

7PM CULTURAL ACTIVITIES

8AM BREAKFAST

6PM DINNER

1PM STROLL

2PM COUNSELING

3PM GYM

4PM LEISURE

5PM CLASS 12PM LUNCH

9AM YOGA

10AM MEDITATION

8PM SOCIAL EVENT

10PM SPA

CIRCULATION: RESIDENTS 5PM NEIGHBORHOOD HANGOUT 3PM DOWNTOWN HANGOUT

1PM MEDICAL CARE

8PM SOCIAL EVENT 8AM WORK

7PM SPA

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

ISLANDSCAPE

RETREAT VILLAGE MASTER PLAN IN UDO, JEJU ISLAND

DESIGN TYPOLOGY: TRANSFORMING VERNACULAR HOUSES TYPE 1: 2 HOUSES

ADDITION COURTYARD COURTYARD

1-A

1-B

1-C

1-D

2-C

2-D

TYPE 2: 3 HOUSES

COURTYARD

2-A

2-B

TYPE 3: 4 HOUSES

3-A

3-B

APPLICATION 1-D

2-B 1-C 2-A

2-C

1-A

1-A 2-D

2-B

1-C 1-B

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

3-A

HOME SWEET HOME

LEVEL +10m PLAN

2008 I INTERMEDIATE DESIGN STUDIO I INDIVIDUAL PROJECT INSTRUCTOR: CHRISTIAN SCHWEITZER

WEST SECTION

LEVEL +5m PLAN

EAST SECTION

LEVEL +1.5m PLAN

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

SEOUL MANIFESTO

FUTURE SCENARIO FOR SEOUL

Although there are many critical redevelopment issues in Seoul, people still prefer to build brand-new, higher and better-quality a worst dystopian city. In this project. It is a manifesto for redefining the meaning of home and house in a metropolitan city.

HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL

STACKING & FLOATING SOCIAL ENTITY Let each social entity stack and float in a chronicle order so that they could keep their original shape and function. Existing high-rise apartments would be cores connecting the social entities; people could live together within diverse social entities.

2020s

2000s

1980s

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

2008 I INTERMEDIATE DESIGN STUDIO I INDIVIDUAL PROJECT INSTRUCTOR: CHRISTIAN SCHWEITZER

apartments for the sake of real estate investment; however, aggressive redevelopment would eventually destroy Seoul, making the

HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL

SOCIAL ENTITY

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

ROOTS

3 25

4 23

3 5

21 15

2 6

16 11

28 20

6 17

12 3

4 3

11 10

9 26

SITE PLAN

1/16 mile

1 University Medical Center + VA Hospital 2 Mixed Use (MU) Medical Office + Retail 3 Market Rate Housing

7 “Urban Lounge”

13 Veteran Rehabilitation Center

19 Jazz Walk

25 K-8 Charter School

8 New Orleans Public Library

20 Lafitte Greenway

26 Iberville Housing Development

10 Commercial - Restaurant

21 Greenway Retail + Equipment Rental 22 Industrial + Flex Space

27 Fire Station

4 Workforce Housing

14 Medical Research + Hospital Support 15 Youth Music School + Music Therapy 16 Charter School

5 Affordable Housing

11 Neighborhood Retail

17 Gallery Space (Historic Building) 23 Structured Parking + Green Wall 29 St. Louis Cemetery

6 MU Residential + Retail

12 Start-Up Commercial

18 Student Initiated Retail

NEIGHBORHOOD STABILITY Ensuring a secure future by engaging local anchors.

9 Job Training Center

VETERAN SERVICES Upholding New Orleans’ commitment to provide for its veterans by giving them the tools they need to grow in place.

CONNECTING AMENITIES

24 Community Church

SOCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE Providing North Claiborne community members with the resources to come together and shape their future.

28 Louis Armstrong Park

30 Faubourg Lafitte Development

TALENT RETENTION

HEALTHY LIVING

Inspiring people to stay in the North Programs and facilities that bring Claiborne neighborhood and enliven people outside and encourage them the metro New Orleans area. to engage with each other and the built and natural environments in active, mindful ways.

CONNECTING PEOPLE + NEIGHBORHOODS

1 MILE TREMELAFFITE

0.5 MILE 0.25 MILE TULANEGRAVIER

IBERVILLE

CBD

Pedestrian Only

Canal St. Streetcar

Neighborhoods

Canal St. Streetcar

Pedestrian Friendly

Anchoring Institutions

Location of Veterans

Public Transit

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

FRENCH QUARTER

2015 I ULI HINES URBAN DESIGN COMPETITION I GROUP PROJECT TEAM: JULIAN CHENG, CHRISTOPHER HERLICH, SEUL LEE, PANKTI SANGANEE, BRADLEY VOGELSMEIER PHASE 1: PLANTING

RESIDENTIAL 148,380sf

PHASE 2: TAKING HOLD

COMMERCIAL 147,400sf

RETAIL 90,400sf

MIXING OLD + NEW

INDUSTRIAL 133,440sf

Legacy Industrial

Medical Tourism ECONOMIC GROWTH

RESIDENTIAL 182,480sf

New Orleans Public Library

COMMERCIAL 50,445sf

RETAIL 22,000sf

Medical Research Facilities

RESIDENTIAL 183,430sf

INSTITUTIONAL 109,900sf

CONNECTING THE LANDSCAPE Veteran Rehabilitation Center

Charter School Campus

Lafitte Greenway

EQUITABLE + INCLUSIVE

PHASE 3: GROWING

SOCIALLY INCLUSIVE

A WALKABLE COMMUNITY

RETAIL 10,200sf

DENSIFYING Renovated THE Existing NEIGHBORHOOD Homes

Workforce + Low-Income Housing

Jazz Walk

BUILDING A MIXED-INCOME COMMUNITY

Urban Lounge Start-up Commercial Space

SPACE BECOMES A PLACE

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

STABILIZING MORNINGSIDE FINAL PLAN PREVIEW Please visit http://issuu.com/seul0923/docs/stabilizing_morningside_final_plan/ for more information. Project Management: Seul Lee Graphic Design: Nicholas Fazio, Seul Lee Copy Editing: Josh Bails, Jamie Simchik GIS: Xiang Yan

SECTION 1

INTRODUCTION STABILIZING MORNINGSIDE This plan builds upon the assets of the MorningSide neighborhood to stabilize its residential core and once again make it a neighborhood of choice. The mortgage foreclosure crisis weakened MorningSide resulting in an increase in blighted structures, newly vacant land, investor-owned properties and a continued decline through the current tax foreclosure crisis. This plan is designed to provide residents and local organizations as well as city, county and state officials with tools to begin addressing these issues. The strategies outlined in this plan apply to MorningSide but can also aid similar neighborhoods across Detroit.

GOALS Prevent Tax Foreclosure

Renovate Existing Homes

Turn Vacant Land into Assets

Build Neighborhood Capacity

While these four goals focus on stabilizing housing and keeping residents in MorningSide, other goals such as building infill housing and assuring neighborhood safety need to be addressed in the future to strengthen the neighborhood.

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

Stabilizing MorningSide

2015 I UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN INTEGRATIVE FIELD EXPERIENCE PROJECT I GROUP PROJECT TEAM: JOSH BAILS, SARAH CLARK, FAN FAN, NICHOLAS FAZIO, SEUL LEE, EVAN MARKARIAN, JAMIE SIMCHIK, XIANG YAN

Prevent Tax Foreclosure: Josh Bails, Jamie Simchik, Xiang Yan Renovate Existing Homes: Fan Fan, Evan Markarian Turn Vacant Land into Assets: Nicholas Fazio, Seul Lee Build Neighborhood Capacity: Sarah Clark

MORNINGSIDE The MorningSide neighborhood is located on the eastside of Detroit, Michigan. It is a 1.5-square mile area bounded by I-94 and Harper Ave. to the north, Whittier Dr. and E. Outer Dr. to the east, Mack Ave. to the south, and Alter Rd. and E. Outer Dr. to the west. The East English Village neighborhood is adjacent to the east, the Chandler Park neighborhood is adjacent to the west; and the City of Grosse Pointe Park is adjacent to the south.

Figure 1.1: The MorningSide neighborhood in the City of Detroit Source: United States Census Bureau, 2013; City of Detroit Planning and Development Department, 2012 b. See Appendix for full citations. Section 1 I Introduction

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

STABILIZING MORNINGSIDE VACANT LAND REUSE BOOK PREVIEW Please visit http://issuu.com/seul0923/docs/vacant_land_reuse_book/ for more information. Project Management: Seul Lee Graphic & Book Layout Design: Nicholas Fazio, Seul Lee Copy Editing: Josh Bails, Jamie Simchik GIS: Xiang Yan

THE VACANT LAND REUSE MATRIX A vacancy reuse matrix suggests reuse possibilities for vacant land (see Figure 5.3). The possibilities are divided into short-term, mid-term and long-term according to the time, labor and amount of vacant land they require.

SHORT-TERM Short Time

CLEAN and CLEAR

Mimimum Work

SIDE LOT

Mimimum Vacancy

ART SPACE

PATHS

NATURAL LAND

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

GREEN VENTURES

PLAZA

NEIGHBORHOOD PARK

MID-TERM Moderate Time

COMMUNITY GARDEN

Moderate Work

GREEN PARKING

Moderate Vacancy

TRAILS

LONG-TERM Longer Time

CARBON FOREST

Longer Work

URBAN FARM

Excessive Vacancy

GREENWAY

Figure 5.3: The vacancy reuse matrix by complexity, labor and amount of vacant land for implementation 84

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

Stabilizing MorningSide

2015 I UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN INTEGRATIVE FIELD EXPERIENCE PROJECT I GROUP PROJECT TEAM: JOSH BAILS, SARAH CLARK, FAN FAN, NICHOLAS FAZIO, SEUL LEE, EVAN MARKARIAN, JAMIE SIMCHIK, XIANG YAN

THE VACANT LAND REUSE BOOK Each of the 15 programs identified in the vacant land reuse matrix (Figure 5.3) are detailed in the reuse book, available separately. The 15 programs each have three application options, providing a total of 45 different application options for vacant land in MorningSide. This Vacant Land Reuse Book encourages MorningSide homeowners to focus on promoting reuse of vacant land. The book includes suggestions for using vacant land with cost estimates, materials, plantings and images.

COMMUNITY GARDEN VISION Lots that have raised beds for produce or flowers. PLANTINGS TOMATO

PEPPER

LETTUCE

EGGPLANT

PEAS

BASIL

PARSLEY

OREGANO

GROW + PLAY

VEGGIE GARDEN

HERB GARDEN

Tomato QTY: 10

Eggplant QTY: 10

Basil QTY: 20

Pepper QTY: 10

Beans QTY: 3

Parsley QTY: 3

Lettuce QTY: 3

Peas QTY: 3

COSTS + MATERIALS Site Cleanup Trash/Debris

Topsoil (2 ea for 0.75 cu ft) Raised Beds (4’x8’x10’) (4)

Soil Testing Total Project Cost ($0.88 per sf)*

$900.00 $56.50 $56.50 $20.85

Tomato (10) Pepper (10) Lettuce (3 Packs)

MID TERM

BEANS

$4,300.00 $400.00

$15.00 $5,748.00

Oregano QTY: 3

COSTS + MATERIALS Site Cleanup Trash/Debris Eggplant (10) Beans (3 Packs) Peas (3 Packs)

Topsoil (2 ea for 0.75 cu ft) Raised Beds (4’x8’x10’) (4)

Soil Testing Total Project Cost ($0.81 per sf)*

$900.00 $56.00 $14.84 $20.85

$4,300.00 $400.00

$15.00 $5,292.20

COSTS + MATERIALS Site Cleanup Trash/Debris

$900.00

Basil (20) Parsley (3 Packs) Oregano (3 Packs)

Topsoil (2 ea for 0.75 cu ft) Raised Beds (4’x8’x10’) (4)

$49.83 $17.85 $11.90

$4,300.00 $400.00

Soil Testing Total Project Cost ($0.88 per sf)*

$15.00 $5,694.58

*Based on (65’X100’) 6,500 sf lot Vacant Land Reuse Book

Figure 5.4: A page from the Vacant Land Reuse Book Section 5 I Turn Vacant Land into Assets

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

FRANKLIN GREEN

SITE ANALYSIS EMPLOYMENT CORRIDORS

CO-WORKING SPACE DENSITY

VICINITY MAP

9 7

8 5 6

4 3

2 1

This site falls along many of Detroit’s paths to growth. It is directly south of Jefferson Avenue, which serves as a main connector to the major job clusters in the city including many of the co-working and flexible spaces that are becoming a major player in Detroit’s revitalization. With 270+ units coming on line immediately to the east at Orleans Landing, this site is well positioned to offer several place-based amenities including dining and café options, specialty and pop-up retail in addition to the residential living units with stunning views of the riverfront and downtown. This development has great pedestrian connectivity with the Dequindre Cut and Riverwalk located within 1/4mile and next-door neighbor Steve’s Soul Food and The Outdoor Adventure Center both serve as regional draws. ENVIRONMENTAL RESILIENCY Ensuring a safe, sustainable, and affordable future for Franklin Green’s residents and visitors

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Providing economic opportunity for a wide range of talents and passions • Rivertown Detroit Association

1 Wheelhouse Detroit

6 Steve’s Soul Food

2 Riverwalk Cafe

7 Dequindre Cut

Riverwalk + Milliken State Park

4 Outdoor Adventure Center

8 Greening of Detroit Park 9 Lafayette Plaisance Park

5 Orleans Landing

ROBUST COMMUNITY Complementing the character of existing neighborhoods while cultivating a healthy and flourishing community

• Smart Buildings Detroit

• Detroit Food & Ag Network

• Revolve Detroit Retail Evolution

• Detroit Riverfront Conservancy

• Eastern Market Farm Stand

• Detroit Business to Business Corp

• Brownfield Redevelopment Authority

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

• Detroit Economic Growth Corporation

2014 I UM/ULI REAL ESTATE FORUM URBAN RESTORATION CASE COMPETITION I GROUP PROJECT TEAM: CHRISTOPHER HERLICH, SEUL LEE, FRANK ROMO, BRADLEY VOGELSMEIER

PROPOSAL DEMOLITION

PHASE 1

USER PROFILES Jason, 28 • Young Artist & Entrepreneur • Uses co-working space • Frequents cafe and riverwalk for inspiration

NEW CONSTRUCTION

PHASE 2

Kate & Michael • Married couple • Attend weekly farmer’s markets • Enjoy bike rides on the Dequindre Cut Michelle, 34

RENOVATION

• Lives in rental housing on the riverfront

PHASE 3

• Works downtown • Appreciates short commute to work ROI

12% EQUITY SOURCES

IRR

14%

DEBT SOURCES

• Michigan Community Revitalization Program • Brownfield Redevelopment Authority • Community Development Block Grant • Federal/State Historic Tax Credits • Developer Equity

ROE

128%

$1,000,000 $3,900,315 $150,000 $2,599,331 $800,000

• Michigan Community Revitalization Loan • Michigan Brownfield Tax Credits • Real Estate Loan - Invest Detroit • Detroit Investment Fund • Permanent Construction Loan

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

$2,000,000 $2,437,697 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $1,614,232 23

DRAWINGS & OBJECTS

A PLACE OF ENTRANCE, A PLACE OF GATHERING, A PLACE OF SOLITUDE, 2009 108”X42” Color Pencil Drawing on Parchment Paper

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

2007-2012 I KOREA NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF ARTS, SCHOOL OF VISUAL ARTS I INDIVIDUAL PROJECT

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

DRAWINGS & OBJECTS

RELIEF MODEL 1, 2009 8.5”X11” Engraving on Paper FULL-SIZE VIOLIN, 2007 14”X8.5”X3” Crafting with Cardboard

FULL-SIZE VIOLIN PLAN, 2007 45”X45” Pen Drawing on Cardboard 26

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

2007-2012 I KOREA NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF ARTS, SCHOOL OF VISUAL ARTS I INDIVIDUAL PROJECT

BORDER VEHICLE FOR DMZ, 2008 60”X60”X55” 20” Bicycle, Industrial Pipe

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

THE REMEMBRANCE OF A MOON VILLAGE AGORA 8: ALTERNATIVES Please visit http://issuu.com/agora_michigan/docs/agora8_final/56?e=8997836/8297575 for more information.

The Remembrance of a Moon Village

Seul Lee

Master of Urban Planning 2015

Lee

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

This article describes one of urban renewal projects in Seoul in 1990s that caused severe tragedies in the area based on the writer’s experience. Despite the criticisms of the “slum clearance” approach to urban renewal in the U.S. after the 1960s, Seoul adopted the concept to redevelop slum areas during 1970-1990s since the city government had to figure out the middle-class housing shortage as soon as possible. The urban renewal project abused the civil rights of slum residents by destroying their living foundation.

2014 I AGORA JOURNAL OF URBAN PLANNING + DESIGN I PUBLICATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN I TAUBMAN COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE + URBAN PLANNING

ast fall, I first faced the concept of urban renewal as a planning student. However, the concept seemed really familiar to me, as I had involuntarily experienced urban renewal in my childhood. I realized that the things that I had seen or heard about as a child had already happened in the U.S. a long time ago. Among the many urban renewal projects in the U.S. conducted during 1950s, the detrimental slum clearance in Detroit especially caught my eye because it reminded me of the neighborhood I lived in during the late 1990s. This neighborhood had replaced the largest moon village, a lower-income slum area, in Seoul. In spite of decades of time between them, the two cases closely resembled one another. I was astounded and wondered why Seoul planners followed the path of slum clearance that had clearly failed in the United States.

30 Years Later In the summer of 1995, my family moved to a brand-new apartment located in the northern part of Seoul. The apartment complex, which was one of the massive redevelopment constructions in the city, had 4,516 households in an area of 47 acres. My new apartment was the replacement of a neighborhood called “Daldongne,” a moon village. People called those kinds of neighborhoods moon village because most of the lower-income residents paid monthly rents, as they could not afford to purchase a house, and because the neighborhoods were often located on hillsides, where people could see the moon up close. In response to Seoul’s rapidly increasing population, the city designated an existing moon village as a redevelopment area and applied urban renewal methods similar to those used in the U.S. in the 1950s. Despite criticisms of the slum clearance approach to urban renewal in the U.S. after the 1960s, Seoul implemented the concept for several neighborhoods during the 1970s through the 1990s, eventually causing severe tragedies in those areas including social injustice, declining quality of life, poor public services and maintenance, and enforced displacement. Admittedly, the urban renewal redevelopment did bring some benefits to the city, such as providing more middle-class housing by building high-density apartments in the squatter settlements that had been scattered in the mountainous area of Seoul. However, the city should not have adopted the outdated method of urban renewal due to its severe equity ramifications. Although the government expected the new developments to resolve issues of equity, it failed to save the moon village residents.

Donam Slum Clearance In the early 1970s, the Seoul Metropolitan Government designated a large moon village in Donam, the northern part of Seoul, as a redevelopment area. Through slum clearance, the government sought to refurbish the area and supply affordable housing to middle-income families. Thomas and Hwang (2003) reported that to replace slums with clean and massive apartment complexes, the city contracted private developers to proceed with the plan and approved their proposal for redevelopment (p. 14). However, developers did not demolish the moon village until 1990, and then began construction in 1993. Multiple layers of conflict prolonged the village redevelopment, including long-term conflict between the private developers and the moon village residents and internal conflict between owners and renters in the village. While the owner-occupied households banded together against the forces of eminent domain to demand compensation, renters and squatters had no assets for bargaining. The developers decided to build public housing in the new town to accommodate these residents; however, they offered only homeowners, not renters, priority to purchase the public housing units. This caused a conflict between the owners, who wanted to conclude negotiations with the developers quickly, and the renters, who did not want to negotiate because they had nowhere to go. This conflict delayed the redevelopment and caused unrest. In one case, the disagreement among residents drove a homeowner to commit murder. Neighbors who had once helped each other in times of need became foes. Additionally, even though homeowners had priority in purchasing units, most of them could not afford the developers’ units. They had no choice but to leave the village, selling their priority to speculators who could actually afford to buy the units. Meanwhile, in 1990, the developers tried to raze the village faster than initially promised to shorten the redevelopment period, which led to a protest by the rest of residents who had not yet found alternative places to live. Despite a riot that caused injuries to some protestors, the private developers proceeded with the demolition. In so doing, the urban renewal project abused the civil rights of lower-income residents in the moon village. It took only two years to complete the construction of thirty-one high-rise apartment buildings. Wide and well-paved concrete roads covered all traces of the moon village; the twenty-two story modern buildings

AGORA 8

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

THE REMEMBRANCE OF A MOON VILLAGE

accommodated a large number of middleincome families. This functional apartment complex with a fascinating panoramic view of the city was seen as exemplary for other redevelopments occurring at that time. The short construction period was also helpful to middle-income households, who suffered from a housing shortage in Seoul. The new town had excellent amenities such as a mall, a gathering space for seniors, and a playground that residents could enjoy. Moreover, the town was easy to access by public transportation, providing additional convenience for commuting workers. Unlike the slum residents, the newcomers were the sole beneficiaries of this urban renewal project. In the U.S. and Seoul, urban renewal provided a desirable aesthetic but brought unforeseen

When I transferred to a primary school near the new town, a small part of the moon village remained between the new town and my school, which most children of the apartment complex attended. We schoolchildren had to walk to school along a narrow path through a district with old, shabby houses. Since the alleyways were not paved, I complained about my shoes getting dirty during the rainy season and encountered “bottlenecks” on my way to school because many children hesitated before climbing down the slippery alleyway. In spite of these small inconveniences, I never thought this neighborhood should be destroyed because the community had existed for a long time and I had a couple of classmates who had lived there for their whole lives. I also appreciated the older neighborhood residents. Whenever I passed by the alleyway, an old lady sitting in front of her house generously welcomed me, which would make me feel warm for the rest of the day. However, the “old urban fabric” in the area was devastated in a moment: the small village was cleared out after the new town residents demanded “a safe school zone,” and the apartment children eventually got dry asphalt pavement on their walk to school. Needless to say, my friends at the moon village were forced to move out, and I never saw them again.

Isolation and Discrimination

Fig. 5.1. Source: Soobin Park

consequences. In Seoul, those unforeseen consequences threatened the very safety of the city’s residents. In the rainy season, after all the new residents had settled into the area, the embankments supporting one building’s foundation suddenly collapsed, causing ten casualties. It was disclosed that the accident occurred because the construction company did not adhere to building and construction safety standards. In order to increase profits, the construction company used cheap and unsafe materials to reduce per-unit costs and create more housing units. This sparked a controversy among Seoul citizens, revealing other dishonest construction practices throughout the city. Urban renewal was threatening public safety for all residents.

Lee

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

As many urban renewal advocates claimed, the city government believed that clearing out problematic regions to build modernized and functional communities would resolve most of the city’s social problems. But these city improvements failed to resolve the complex social issues as expected. As noted above, the private developers built only one public housing unit in the apartment complex and gave priority to moon village residents as compensation for demolishing their homes. However, most of the residents could not afford to move into the building. Those who did move in faced severe discrimination in the new community. Even the site plan reflected such discrimination: their building was located at the end of the apartment complex, farthest from the main entrance and isolated from other apartments. In addition, the construction company scheduled a later move-in for the public housing residents than for the other residents of the complex. Therefore, public housing residents had little opportunity to integrate with the rest of the households in the new town.

2014 I AGORA JOURNAL OF URBAN PLANNING + DESIGN I PUBLICATION UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN I TAUBMAN COLLEGE OF ARCHITECTURE + URBAN PLANNING

Inherited Segregation This kind of tension in the community also carried over to the primary school. To deal with the rapid increase in the student population, the school created additional classes dedicated to incoming students from the apartment complex. As a rite of passage, students had to state their building number to classmates. Since the new town consisted of apartments in different areas, a building number identified a resident’s income class. When a newcomer introduced himself or herself as a resident of 301, a public-housing building number, he or she had difficulty making friends in the class. Even if the classmates started to get along, the parents advised their children not to hang out with children from 301. The social and economic polarization between residents of 301 and others worsened with time; one 301 resident even committed suicide in the building. Nonetheless, nobody made an effort to discuss the problem or find a solution. Rather, the new town residents became even more inclined to avoid the lower-income residents of 301. It seemed that social equity was nowhere to be found in this neighborhood.

and preserve the character of the neighborhood. If they had preserved some of the slum area, renovated the infrastructure and old houses incrementally, and held public discussions with residents, while simultaneously pursuing the high-density housing plan, Seoul would have had diverse types of neighborhoods with unique characteristics. Baeksa Village, a New Challenge

One of the last moon villages in Seoul, Baeksa Village, has the potential to incorporate some of these alternatives, as developers are currently attempting to create a sustainable and vibrant neighborhood. Created by the expelled residents who had lived in the inner-city slum area that was cleared in the 1970s. The village had been designated as a green belt for 47 years,

An Alternative Way Urban redevelopment in Seoul was inevitable given the radical population explosion of the 1960s and 1980s. However, Seoul should not have redeveloped the inner city by simply clearing out slum areas. First, the relocation of slum residents should have been a long-term project so they could have had adequate time to prepare to move to other regions. In the Donam redevelopment case, it took only three years to force residents out and completely raze the whole town. This was not enough time for lower-income people to adapt to new circumstances, as it was hard for them to find affordable new housing in the city. Also, the government should have had a more concrete and comprehensive compensation policy. Though the city gave some slum residents the right to move into new public housing in the new town, they could not afford to pay the rent and many left the area after selling their rights to those who had more money. The lower-income households in the slum therefore did not benefit from compensation. Moreover, instead of bulldozing the entire designated region and erecting high-density buildings, the city and private developers should have considered a mixedincome and mixed-density redevelopment in order to intermingle a variety of social classes

so the neighborhood has kept its original topography and the shape of the lots. When the government lifted the green belt regulation of the area in 1998, the demand for redevelopment increased, and developers proposed a typical plan to bulldoze the neighborhood and build high-density, market-rate apartments. Voicing their concern, local architects insisted that the developers consider sustainable development and keep the neighborhood’s unique topography and shape in order to respect and preserve the residents’ lifestyles. Eventually, the government accepted the local architects’ proposal, and the architects are currently working on the new site plan for a mixed-income, mixed-density, ecofriendly neighborhood.

Fig. 5.2. Source: Soobin Park

AGORA 8

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

THE REMEMBRANCE OF A MOON VILLAGE

Learning from the Past While reading about the urban renewal project in Detroit, I became preoccupied with memories of the new town where I had spent my childhood. As a child, I had a vague sense that something was wrong with the apartment complex, but I did not realize the extent of the issues. I now realize that the type of urban renewal pursued there was not suitable for comprehensive neighborhood improvements. Fortunately, people are now more aware of social justice issues, so Seoul citizens have questioned this kind of result-oriented

redevelopment plan and have tried to find better ways to improve the remaining moon villages. Although it might be difficult to make a moderate redevelopment plan that appeals to all residents and developers, plans like those for Baeska represent a step in the right direction that may enhance the quality of life for all residents of Seoul. This work is dedicated to the memory of Jong-ho Yi, my undergraduate professor at the Korean National University of Arts, who loved Seoul and was involved in the Baeksa Village Redevelopment Project.

References

Thomas, J. (2013). Redevelopment and race: planning a finer city in postwar Detroit. Paperback ed. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.

Cho, S., Fulton, B. (2006). The dwarf. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press . Kim, K. (2011). Tosi kaebal, kil ŭl ilt’a: Yongsan, Nyu t’aun, Kadŭn p’aibŭ, Han’gang rŭnesangsŭ [Urban development, lost its way: Yongsan, New-town, Garden-five, Hangang renaissance]. Seoul, Korea: Sigongsa.

Thomas, J., & Hwang, H. (2003). Social equity in redevelopment and housing: United States and Korea. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 23.

Kim, K. et al. (2001). Sŏul 20-segi konggan pyŏnchŏnsa [Seoul, twentieth century, growth and change of the last 100 years]. Seoul, Korea: Sŏul Sijŏng Kaebal Yŏnguwŏn.

Scott, J. C. (2012). Authoritarian high modernism. In S. Feinstein, & S. Campbell (Eds.), Readings in Planning Theory (3rd Ed.). (pp. 54-71). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

Hanguk Tosi Yŏnguso [Eds.]. (1996). Tosi sŏmin ŭi sam kwa chumin undong [The life of urban working classes and their movement]. Seoul, Korea: Tosŏ Chulpan Parŏn.

Han’guk Konggan Hwan’gyŏng Yŏn’guhoe [Eds.]. (1993). Sŏul yŏngu: yuyŏnjŏk sanŏphwa wa saeroun tosi, sahoe, chŏngchi [Seoul research: Flexible industrialization and new urban, society, and politics]. Seoul: Hanul.

Kim, H. (2012, April 13). The Seoul Daldongne redevelopment affair. Hankyoreh. Retrieved from http://www.hani.co.kr

NRP Corporation. (2013). Hanshin & Hanjin Apartment Complex in Donam. In NAVER Real Estate. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/K9JxYx.

Son, C. (2003). Sŏul tosi kyehoek iyagi: Sŏul kyŏktong ŭi 50-yŏn kwa na ŭi chŭngŏn [The Seoul city planning story: My testimony to the tumultuous 50 years of Seoul] (Vols. 4-5). Seoul: Hanul.

Lee

SEUL LEE 2007 - 2015

Lim, J. (2014, January 22). Baeksa Village, the architectural experiment with a sensible approach to redevelopment. Hankyoreh. Retrieved from http://www.hani.co.kr

WRITING SAMPLE

2013 I LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE PLANNING PROCESS INSTRUCTOR: RICHARD NORTON, JULIE STEIFF

MEMORANDUM To: Stella Potts From: Seul Lee Date: Sept 6, 2013 Re: Zoning change issues in Western Township This memo addresses your questions regarding Western Township’s zoning change issues. Unfortunately, it is legal for Mr. Durham to compel a zoning change because the zoning ordinance should consider the public good. In accordance with this change, the township provided you with a proper notice by newspaper publication, so you cannot sue the township for improper notification. However, you and your neighbors who have properties that were recently rezoned by the township are able to undertake a referendum for this issue. To force a referendum, you should notify intent to submit a petition to the township by Wednesday, September 11. Mr. Durham could sue the township for not conducting a rezoning as he proposed. According to Michigan Zoning Enabling Act (MZEA), “the planning commission must review the master plan at least every five years and determine whether to consider the amendment or creation of a new master plan.”1 Also, if the zoning ordinance would not be in the public interest as “conditions have changed since the last zoning,” a property owner could initiate rezoning.2 The rezoning should have reasonable grounds to allow a certain property of a more intensive use, and should “benefit the public health, safety or general welfare.”3 Given that your property zoning has not changed at least 20 years, we can assume that the township would be likely to amend the zoning ordinance if Mr. Durham asked the township for rezoning. In accordance with the recent housing study conducted by the county, which shows that there is a significant demand for higher-density, lower-income residential development throughout the county, it would be possible for Mr. Durham to initiate a rezoning of his property to develop mobile home parks, a form of higher-density housing. Unless the Western Township would accept his proposal and perform rezoning under the recent circumstance, Mr. Durham would be likely to win the lawsuit against the township. As a procedure of amending Western Township Zoning Code, we can assume that the township provided general notice to you and your neighbors, by “newspaper publication,”4 so that you would be unlikely to sue the township. According to MZEA, “the notice must be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality at least 15 days before the date of the hearing” before the planning commission.5 Also, it states, “if 11 or more adjacent properties are proposed for rezoning, the requirement for notice by mail or personal delivery does not apply.”6 In your case, since the township had to publish a notice for rezoning of 15 separate parcels of the land and the notice was posted on August 2, 22 days before a public hearing, a publication in the local newspaper was a proper notice. Therefore, it would not be possible for you to sue Western Township for an improper notice. As your neighbor noted, however, residents of Western township are able to use a referendum to “veto zoning changes,”7 and the likely date to notify your intent to the township is Wednesday, September 11. A referendum is a citizen’s direct vote on an issue that has already been enacted by the legislative body. “Citizens who disagree with an approved upzoning must petition to place the issue on the ballot, hoping to rescind the rezoning at the polls,” stated Juergensmeyer and Roberts.8 By using a referendum, people could “prevent growth that the legislative body would otherwise allow.”9 According to MZEA, a property owner who has a parcel of land within the zoning ordinance can notify intent to file a petition to the township “within seven days of publication of the notice of adoption of the zoning ordinance amendment.”10 At least 15 percent of the total registered voters in the township should sign the petition to hold a referendum.11 Then they have to submit the petition to the clerk of the township “for review both as to the legal sufficiency of the petitions and to determine if the required number of signature has been secured.”12 If the clerk proved the petition that was submitted “within 30 days of publication of the notice of adoption” legal, the voters have the right to approve the rezoning ordinance.13 Therefore, the initial steps for forcing a referendum are as follows: first, you should notice intent to file a petition to the clerk of Western Township by Wednesday, September 11. Then, with a number of resident’s sign, you should have a “careful drafting of a referendum” and submit the petition by Friday, October 4, within 30 days of publication of notice of the rezoning. If the clerk of the township would confirm your petition legal, the township would proceed the election for deciding the amendment. To sum up, Western Township can change the zoning ordinance as Mr. Durham proposed because of the reason we have mentioned above, and it also made a proper notice to you so that it would not be possible to claim against the township for an inappropriate notification. Nevertheless, you can take a referendum if you notify intent to file a petition by next Wednesday, September 11 and submit the petition by Friday, October 4. Thank you for consulting Dewey Cheatem & Howe, and we would be happy to give you further assistance if you need help. ENDNOTES 1. Mich. Comp. Laws § 125.3845(2). 2. Julian Juergensmeyer and Thomas Roberts, Land Use Planning and Development Regulation Law, 3rd ed. (St.Paul, MN: West Group, 2013), 133. 3. Id., 135. 4. Juergensmeyer and Roberts, 134. 5. MCL § 125.3103(1). 6. MCL § 125.3202.

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

Juergensmeyer and Roberts, 129. Id. Id. MCL § 125.3402(1). MCL § 125.3402(2). MCL § 125.3402(3). MCL § 125.3402(3)(c).

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MASTER OF URBAN PLANNING ‘15 SEUL@UMICH.EDU

EEL LUES 5102-7002