Victoria Mullen is suing the Chinese restaurant soon to re-open next-door to her seventh-floor condo in downtown Grand Rapids. She's asking the Kent County Circuit Court to stop the restaurant's remodeling project until it agrees to install "air scrubbers" on its ventilation equipment to eliminate the cooking odors of Chinese food she believes will otherwise emanate from the restaurant and stink up her place.

Well, we shouldn't be surprised such disputes arise where the City of Grand Rapids has mandated "mixed-use" zoning -- or in other words, no zoning. In downtown, commercial, institutional, and even industrial uses of property jostle up against residential apartments and condominiums. These uses, of course, conflict even under the most congenial of circumstances. Then again, that's always been the case downtown. There's no way to separate out these competing uses of the cheek-by-jowl spaces of the city center. Nor should there be any such expectation in a dense urban environment.
So a "mixed-use" zone is the only solution. While I hope Ms. Mullen doesn't experience the problem she fears, I don't think her complaint is reasonable. If you want fresh air, move out into the country, not next to a Chinese restaurant right smack in the heart of the city. That said, I thought Suzanne Schulz, an employee of the City's planning department, was a bit cavalier about the brouhaha. Her take was basically "like it or lump it" if you live or work in a "mixed-use" zone.
That attitude might be fine for a city planner regarding an environment that is naturally mixed-use like the core of downtown. It's another thing entirely when the City, on behalf of favored developers, imposes a "mixed-use" zone upon a coherent district like the Monroe North industrial zone and proceeds to drive out and destroy the original uses of the properties. (Click here for the story of how this helped to ruin an important part of the City's taxbase.)
RE: ZANY ZONING
Hi,
I stumbled upon your web site and this article and wanted to clarify and update you on the situation. The lawsuit is currently in the discovery phase. I am not asking for damages. I am asking that the restaurant install a scrubber to greatly diminish the odors.
While the weather was still warm, I came home from a long day at school one day and encountered a huge stench of Chinese food in my closet. My building's air conditioning unit's fresh air intake is located right above the restaurant's roof. So not only will I not be able to open my window, I will have that stench even with the window closed.
Also, I want to clarify that I did not move next door to the restaurant. Rockford Development specifically bought out Yen Ching because of its stench, then turned around and sold the building next to mine to the current restaurant owners, who borrowed the money to open their restaurant from the owners of Yen Ching.
In short, Rockford Construction/Development pulled a fast one and while it was certainly not illegal, it was shifty and underhanded. And now, as the "beneficiary" of this transaction, I must put up with the stench that Rockford Construction paid so dearly to remove so that it could sell high-priced condos minus the stench.
I am trying to work with the City to institute an ordinance for FUTURE restaurants that would solve this problem. However, I have encountered an incredible display of inertia (and they call it the "Neighborhood Improvement Department"). With a bit of cooperation, I think the City could provide a solution that benefits everybody and doesn't place an undue burden on the restaurants.
The City is being incredibly shortsighted and I see no proactivity whatsoever. It seems as though no one wants to deal with any negatives (even though there are solutions).
Regarding moving out of downtown, I am doing just that next fall. It's a pity because I truly enjoy being right downtown. But for the stench.
Kind regards,
Victoria Mullen
Posted by: Victoria Mullen | December 18, 2005 at 06:12 PM
Hello, Ms. Mullen.
I understand your enjoyment about living downtown. My wife and I live at the edge of downtown in Heritage Hill. I agree that the City is shortsighted and incompetent regarding planning and zoning. I think our disagreement over this issue is not that your problem isn't a genuine one, but rather its resolution should be political not legal. Therefore, I think your effort to get a new ordinance in place is correct and admirable. I wish you luck.
Regards,
Bill Tingley
Executive Director
Posted by: The Executive Director | January 02, 2006 at 10:47 AM