Kentwood Committees & Boards
Planning Commission (Back to index)
Minutes for 07/22/2008APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE KENTWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
JULY 22, 2008, 7:30 P.M.
COMMISSION CHAMBERS
A. Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
B. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Dan Holtrop.
C. Roll Call:
Members Present: Betsy Artz, Dan Holtrop, Abed Itani, Nancie McIntyre-Evenocheck, Laurie Sheldon, Frank Vander Hoff, Don Yokom, and Chris Winczewski.
Members Absent: Johngerlyn Young (with notification)
Others Present: City Attorney Jeff Sluggett, Community Development Director Terry Schweitzer, Economic Development Planner Lisa Golder, Planner Joe Pung, Staff Secretary Monique Collier, the press and five citizens.
Motion by Secretary Sheldon, supported by Commissioner VanderHoff, to excuse Commissioner Young from the meeting.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
- Young absent -
D. Approval of the Minutes and Findings of Fact
Motion by Vice Chair Winczewski, supported by Commissioner Itani, to approve the Minutes of July 8, 2008.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
- Young absent -
E. Approval of the Agenda
Motion by Commissioner VanderHoff, supported by Secretary Sheldon, to approve the agenda for the July 22, 2008 meeting.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
- Young absent -
F. Acknowledge visitors wishing to speak to non-agenda items.
There was no public comment.
G. Old Business
Case #17-07 ? Menard?s-Special Land Use Open Air Business Garden Center/Outside Yard Area and Site Plan Review located north of 28th Street, midway between East Paris Avenue and Patterson Avenue
Golder stated the applicant has requested tabling to the August 12, 2008 meeting. She stated they are trying to work out a drive access on 28th Street and working with MDOT.
The Commission indicated a desire to review this item with staff and the City Attorney at the end of the meeting.
H. Public Hearing
Case #15-08 ? The Landings ? Special Land Use Apartments and Site Plan Review for the Landing Apartment located at 4505 Walma/ 2780 ? 44th Street
Planner Pung introduced the request. He stated the request is for a 51 unit apartment complex divided into 2 buildings; 24 units and 27 units and 1 office on 6.61 acres. He stated the planning commission conditionally approved this development in 2003. Pung stated the major change since 2003 is that in 2006 the city acquired some additional right of way in anticipation of the improvements of the widening of Walma and that further reduced the area for the property and therefore reduced how many units they can have per acre. Pung stated the proposed unit is consistent with the master plan recommendation, it would allow up to 8 units per acre, but it is inconsistent with zoning ordinance that restricts it to 7 units per acre (46 units). Planner Pung stated the applicant has submitted a variance request to the zoning board of appeals for the higher density. Pung discussed the 70:30 policy that was included in the packet. Pung stated he is recommending conditional approval of the special land use with conditions 1-4 and basis points 1-5 and conditional approval of the site plan with conditions 1-6 and basis points 1-6.
Dave Visser was present to represent the request. He stated they changed the site plan and now the site plan is up to speed and also the new right of way is depicted.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck opened the public hearing.
Carolyn Heston lives at Cobblestone. She stated she has noticed a problem with the apartments. She stated she has had to call the police numerous times. She stated Kentwood has so many apartments in the area already. She stated the traffic is bad and does not want to see another apartment complex.
Motion by Commissioner Artz, supported by Commissioner VanderHoff, to close the public hearing.
- Motion Carried (8-0)-
- Young absent ?
Commissioner Yokom stated he?s not real crazy about additional apartments in Kentwood, but it is designed, set up and zoned to do such.
Vice Chair Winczewski stated he doesn?t have a problem with the density. He stated that he does have a problem because they are rental units and believes strongly in the 70:30 policy. He stated until we get to the 70% we should not entertain new apartment buildings. He stated without 70% we should not vote for more apartments in Kentwood.
Commissioner VanderHoff stated he is concerned with the letter from the Midwest Development Partners who own the 30 acres on 44th Street. He stated they are zoned C4 but feels like if this project is approved; they will come and ask for the same approval.
Secretary Sheldon stated she respects the fact the commission approved the request last time, but feels we need to follow the 70:30 policy. She stated her concern was with the letter from Midwest Development as well and she is not in favor of the request.
Commissioner Holtrop asked if apartments are allowed in R3. Pung stated it is a special land use.
Commissioner Artz stated she is having a tough time with the request.
Commissioner Itani stated he is in favor of the project. He stated that it was approved before and it is only fair that it is approved again. Commissioner Itani stated since the developer stated the apartments will be for professional people then this is desirable, less traffic, less noise and he supports the project.
Director Schweitzer stated with the exception of about 5 to 6 acres along Division Ave this represents the last zoned piece of property that you could build apartments.
Vice Chair Winczewski stated there are three policies, the zoning ordinance, the master plan and the 70:30 policy; he questioned which one should be followed more closely than others. Attorney Sluggett stated the zoning ordinance isn?t a guideline, it is the law. He stated with respect to the master plan, a court would think it is reflective of the current intentions and goals of the city. Sluggett stated what he wants to make clear to the planning commission if they are inclined to do something other than staff?s recommendation they need to focus on the special land use and not the site plan. He stated they will be guided by the standards that are in the zoning ordinance for special land use review and approval. He stated they need to look at the standards and the special land use coupled with the general guidance provided by the master plan.
Commissioner Artz asked if Federal Section 8 subsidized housing vouchers will be accepted in the apartment complex.
Dave Visser stated that he has operated and built apartments in Kentwood for over 20 years. He stated they have worked very hard with this project to combine two pieces of property at Kentwood?s disposal to have one project on the corner and not two. He stated they have delayed for about three years because of the road improvements. He stated he has had no problem working with the city to attain seven feet to make the road work for the improvement. He stated the only request was that it is imperative that they don?t lose any density over this issue and this is what the commission is talking about. He stated he is hurt to hear these kinds of comments based on all the work they put in to accommodate everybody?s concerns. He stated his biggest mistake was delaying the project to wait for the road improvements. He stated he would appreciate the commissions approval and the project to move forward. He stated as far as the government subsidized section 8 they do not do that at all, they have no history with that.
Commissioner Artz asked if there is something that can be done to ensure high end apartments. Attorney Sluggett stated in terms of the authority the commission has available to them, no. He stated his understanding that the property owner or landlord has to agree to be a part of that Section 8 program, they don?t have to accept Section 8.
Dave Visser stated all of their units are designed to look like a condo. He stated they will have their own laundry and garage facility. He stated they were planning beyond a typical rental unit and a lot of time and money was put into the project.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated when she first looked at the project back in 2003 she was the lone dissenter because of the 70:30 policy. She stated in light of Schweitzer?s comment stating this is the last zoned piece in Kentwood for multi family she changed her mind. She stated she will be voting for the project.
Motion by Commissioner Holtrop, supported by Commissioner VanderHoff, to grant conditional approval of the Special Land Use Multi-Family Housing as described in Case 15-08 The Landings. Approval is conditioned on conditions 1-5, and basis points 1-5, as described in Pung?s memo dated 7/16/08.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
- Young absent -
Motion by Commissioner Holtrop, supported by Commissioner VanderHoff, to grant conditional approval of the site plan dated July 15, 2008 as described in Case 15-08 The Landings. Approval is conditioned on conditions 1-6, and basis points 1-6, as described in Pung?s memo dated 7/16/08.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
- Young absent -
Planner Pung added one of the conditions of the special land use was planning commission approval of the building elevations. He asked if the commission would like them to come back when they are finalized or are they happy with what was presented at the work session. The commissioners wanted to see them again.
Dave Visser presented the blueprint. The commission expressed satisfaction with the elevations.
Attorney Sluggett suggested to the planning commission to have a motion to rescind the special land use approval and then reapprove but approving specifically the building elevation plans. He stated to reference the plans presented at tonight?s planning commission meeting
Motion by Commissioner Holtrop, supported by Commissioner VanderHoff to amend previous conditional approval of the Special Land Use Multi-Family Housing as described in Case 15-08 The Landings. Approval as amended is conditioned on conditions 1-5, and basis points 1-5, as described in Pung?s memo dated 7/16/08 with condition 5 modified to read that the ?Building elevations for the project shall be consistent with those presented to the Planning Commission at its July 22, 2008 meeting.?
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
- Young absent -
I. Work Session
Case #13-08 ? Cascade Winery ? Special Land Use Restaurant and Site Plan Review located at 4665 Broadmoor SE
Planner Golder introduced the request. She stated this is a special land use in an industrial district because it is considered a restaurant. She stated the facility will be providing food for on site consumption. She stated the reason they are providing food for on site consumption is because it falls into the category of small wine maker and micro brewery. She stated the new ordinance requires 30-50 seats if wine and/or beer is consumed on site. She stated it meets all the criteria and parking is not a problem.
The commissioners were okay with the request and had no concerns.
Case #16-08 - Zoning Ordinance Text Amendments
Director Schweitzer introduced the request. He discussed the Assisted Living facility, the Electronic message board and Open Air Business Vehicle Sales. In regards to the Assisted Living Facility, he presented a table to contrast the building setback requirements if the proposed change is implemented as well as contrasting it with the Adult Foster Care Family facilities. Schweitzer showed illustrations/examples of Carestone, Guardian Angels, Clark Home and Hope Network. In regards to Electronic Message Centers he stated we need to be able to proportion the size of the sign. In regards to Open Air Business vehicle sales parking requirements, he stated they have looked at other communities who gauge their parking requirements for vehicle sales to be a function of the size of the showroom building as opposed to the lot area where the vehicles are stored.
Commissioner Holtrop asked about the electronic sign at Walgreens wondering if they fit the 60%. Holtrop stated he is trying to envision what is considered part of the sign, the post, the message board. Schweitzer stated a free standing sign and a ground sign you have to look at the structure that forms the total sign area. Schweitzer stated between now and the public hearing he will verify whether they are conforming and will report back.
VanderHoff stated regarding the electronic message centers within existing signs, if the businesses are out of compliance will they be protected by being grandfathered. Schweitzer suggested to not create a regulation that creates nonconformities if it can be avoided. Discussion ensued.
Sheldon asked if Guardian Angels will reappear if this changes. Schweitzer stated he is not sure. He stated last year they got the SLU approved and the site plan change approved, but they were not able to secure the variance they were seeking on front yard, rear yard, and parking; even with the change in regulations they would still have to secure a variance.
Winczewski stated he thinks 100 square feet is the limitation we should have on the signs. He stated provision 3 states they have to have ambient light monitors. Pung stated this is common and a lot of ordinances require it, during the day it can be bright and at night it has to be dimmed down. Winczewski asked if we need to define the change better of the message on the sign. Schweitzer stated he will talk to the City Attorney before the public hearing.
Winczewski asked about the assisted living and wondered whether or not the sub-committee talked about spot zoning. McIntyre-Evenocheck stated spot zoning was not talked about, but there was a lot of input from the neighbors and their concern was mainly Guardian Angel Homes. McIntyre-Evenocheck stated she wanted to make sure she knew what staff was talking about as far as assisted living, assisted living group facility and adult foster care homes. McIntyre-Evenocheck stated there were just a few minor changes overall and she is comfortable with what she has learned and feels they have accomplished what they wanted.
McIntyre-Evenocheck stated before the public hearing they would like clarification on the sign space, also should we change 60% to 100 square feet.
Referring back to the Old Business Case #17-07 Menards
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated regarding Case #17-07 Menards she questioned if it should be taken off the agenda and start a new case and allow them to come back and not pay a fee and to bring it back to the commission once they have a resolution.
Schweitzer stated there is a sense this is a good use for this location. He stated the property has been vacant and a detriment to the surrounding area. He stated the issue has been the access from 28th Street. Schweitzer stated the developers have been working very hard. He stated we should have some communication with the developer and suggested the commission withhold denial of the site plan unless we have dialogue with them. At that time the commission can decide to deny the site plan or have them voluntarily withdraw their application and come back when they have a resolution.
Winczewski stated his concern is it has been deferred at every meeting and the public doesn?t know when we are going to talk about this for the final time. He stated he would like to be able to have a work session again and a notice in the paper.
Commissioner Itani asked if it could be tabled indefinitely until they ask to bring it back.. Attorney Sluggett stated he would like to have a letter in the city files from the developer asking to table indefinitely and then the commission can decide whether they want to notice it out again.
McIntyre-Evenocheck stated she wants staff to meet with them and let them know the commissioners concerns. She stated she doesn?t want them to have to pay a fee again.
Discussion Ensued.
Motion by Commissioner Holtrop, supported by Commissioner Itani, to table Case #17-07 Menard?s to August 12, 2008.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
- Young absent -
J. New Business
There was no new business.
K. Other Business
1. Commissioners? Comments
McIntyre-Evenocheck stated the Luz Committee will be meeting August 12 at 7p.m.
McIntyre-Evenocheck stated she was able to attend a neighborhood meeting on Christie Avenue with Yokom to discuss some issues in the neighborhood. Yokom stated there were about 50 people that attended. He stated the neighbors were concerned about violations in the area and are upset with the code enforcement not taking care of issues and not writing warnings for the violations. He stated boats are sitting in driveways, couches sitting by the street, lawns not being cut, appliances left out and they are getting frustrated. He stated the citizens are going to start showing up at the meetings and demanding some action. He stated they are aware of being able to go online to file a complaint but some people do not have access to the internet. Discussion ensued.
Winczewski was wondering if something could be done for more enforcement out in the community. Schweitzer stated we are looking to be more proactive. Schweitzer stated we have been equipped with better tools to make more efficient use of staff time.
Winczewski asked if we should change our bylaws to wait and take action on site plan reviews until the zoning board of appeals(ZBA) handles the variance request. He stated he is concerned if the planning commission (PC) passes site plan reviews it give the impression they are endorsing the variance request. Attorney Sluggett stated other communities do have it where you have to go through your ZBA variance first before you are permitted to proceed to the planning commission for site plan review. Pung stated in many cases the ZBA wants to wait for the PC to act on it to make sure they are okay with the use. Discussion ensued. Schweitzer stated staff cab confer with the City Attorney and provide the commissioners with some feedback at the next meeting.
Winczewski asked if we could not grant a Certificate of Occupancy until the site plan is met. He stated he has noticed some properties don?t reflect what is on their site plans. Attorney Sluggett stated they have to base the certificate of occupancy decision based on what is in the building code. If they meet the building code requirements and the plan that was approved as part of the building permit application then they would have to issue the certificate of occupancy. McIntyre-Evenocheck asked if we have anything in place to go back a year from now and look at the site plan and visit the properties. Schweitzer stated we don?t have anything in place, but suggested a performance guarantee. Attorney Sluggett stated we can require a performance guarantee, there should be a section added to the staff recommendation as a performance guaranteed is warranted. Discussion ensued.
Winczewski stated part of the role of the planning commission is to worry about the image of the city and he is concerned with the 70:30 policy, another apartment may be portrayed as another apartment complex in Kentwood. He stated he doesn?t think you can keep apartments high end. Discussion Ensued
McIntyre-Evenocheck reminded commissioners to vote August 5th and that is also National Night Out.
2. Staff?s Comments
Schweitzer stated in the next packet there will be an item for a request for a one year extension on a site plan approval.
L. Adjournment
Motion by Commissioner VanderHoff, supported by Commissioner Itani, to adjourn the meeting.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
- Young absent -
Meeting adjourned at 8:53 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Laurie Sheldon, Secretary
411502.1
|