Kentwood Committees & Boards
Planning Commission (Back to index)
Minutes for 08/14/2007APPROVED MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
OF THE KENTWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION
AUGUST 14, 2007, 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 Artz.
C. Roll Call:
Members Present: Betsy Artz, Laurie Sheldon, Dan Holtrop, Abed Itani, Nancie McIntyre-Evenocheck, Ed Swanson, Frank Vander Hoff, and Chris Winczewski.
Members Absent: None (Holtrop arrived late)
Others Present: City Attorney Jeff Sluggett, Community Development Director Terry Schweitzer, Planner Joe Pung, Planner Debargha Sengupta, Staff Secretary Monique Collier, the press and 20 citizens.
D. Approval of the Minutes and Findings of Fact
Motion by Commissioner Artz, supported by Commissioner Itani, to approve the Minutes of July 24, 2007.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
E. Approval of the Agenda
Motion by Commissioner VanderHoff, supported by Vice-Chair Swanson, to approve the agenda for the August 14, 2007 meeting.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
F. Acknowledge visitors wishing to speak to non-agenda items.
There was no public comment.
G. Old Business
There was no Old business
H. Public Hearing
Case #5-07 Broadmoor Center ? Site Plan Review for Shopping Center located at 3450 & 3460 28th Street SE Kentwood ? Public Hearing tabled to August 28, 2007
Case #6-07 Broadmoor Center ? Special Land Use for a Parking Facility in a Floodplain located at 3450 & 3460 28th Street SE Kentwood ? Public Hearing tabled to August 28, 2007.
Case #8-07 - Bretonfield ? Rezoning of approximately 102 acres from R1-C Single Family Residential to R-PUD-2 Low Density Residential Planned Unit Development and Site Plan Review of a Preliminary PUD Plan located at 60th Street west of Wing Ave. ?
Planner Pung introduced the request.
Introduction
a. Request to rezone 102 acres from R1-C Single Family residential to R-PUD-2 Single Family PUD.
b. Proposed for 311 lots with 32.41% open space (private trails, gazebos & play structures).
c. Smallest lot at 6500 sq. feet.
d. Applicant recently purchased property with intent to develop either under the existing R1-C classification or as a PUD. The applicant subsequently submitted for a PUD development after several months working with staff and the LUZ Subcommittee.
Changes from Last Meeting
e. Extended cul-de-sac to Breton Avenue.
f. Added trail connection between 2 cul-de-sacs.
g. Shortened a cul-de-sac.
h. Extended cul-de-sac to lot line.
i. Made changes to the draft PUD Agreement.
Some Benefits Over Conventional Zoning
j. Preservation of open-space and wetlands.
k. Private internal trail system connecting open-space & with Paul Henry Trail.
l. All lots landscaped with sod & a spruce tree in the rear yard.
m. All homes with a minimum 2-stall garage.
n. All homes with an egress window in the basement.
o. All homes to have a distribution trunk and cold air return trunk installed to basements.
p. All homes to include central air conditioning.
q. Minimum finished living area of 1,500 sq. feet (44% over min. of 1,040 sq. feet).
r. Preservation and relocation of existing trees.
s. Concrete curb and gutter.
t. Provision of amenities (gazebos & play structures).
u. Condominium ownership and maintenance of private usable open-space.
Planner Pung outlined the conditions and basis in the planning staff recommendation for the Preliminary PUD site plan review for a residential planned unit development and conditions and basis for the rezoning of 102 acres from R1-C to R-PUD-2.
Applicant Troy Stahl thanked staff for their hard work. He stated they are fully behind the staff?s report and recommendation and will comply with all the conditions.
Commissioner McIntyre-Evenocheck opened the public hearing.
Commissioner VanderHoff excused himself from the discussion due to conflict of interest.
Residents with concerns were, Roger Perham, 2224 Bentbrook Ct, Steve Dabrowski 5490 Discovery, Jackie Wondolowski 2301 Charleston Ct. and Ron Heerdt 2605 60th Street. Their main concerns were: why the area needed to be rezoned to a PUD; if there is an urgency economically to build 311 homes; what will be enhanced; what will be diminished; and what will be replaced because of the changes. They were concerned about losing green space and quality of life in Kentwood. They were concern about where Kentwood is headed regarding the expansion in the number of 1,000 square foot homes. They feel there will be safety concerns as far as pedestrian traffic due to the elementary school. They feel it doesn?t fit with the character of that area. They feel the overall income level of the residents in the area will go down. They indicated there are a lot of homes in Kentwood that have gone up for sale and are still for sale. They feel the commission needs to think about this project before approving.
Motion by Commissioner Swanson, supported by Commissioner Itani, to close the public hearing.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck asked what it would take to have a moratorium on new housing built in the city. City Attorney Sluggett stated communities do adopt moratoriums if there are some changes going on in the community and they want to make adjustments. Sluggett stated if the City was interested in pursing a moratorium on some types of developments that would be done at the city commission level. The planning commission could adopt a motion recommending that the city commission to take under advisement the imposition of a moratorium. Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck questioned whether it could be done based on economic viability within in the city. Sluggett stated property owners have the right to develop their property within the confines of the law. Sluggett stated that as a community we have a right to say what the law is, but at the same time we have to allow for reasonable development. Sluggettt stated that putting a moratorium in place because the Commission thinks the market doesn?t support further development would not be a strong position. Community Development Director Schweitzer stated when moratoriums are put in place it is for a limited specified period of time.
Vice-Chair Swanson stated that the applicants have gone above and beyond everything that was asked for. He stated he is in favor of the project as shown.
Secretary Winczewski stated this development is difficult for him. He stated he loves the amount of work that the developers put into the plan and how they are open to incorporating some of the changes suggested by the Commission. He also stated that a lot of time has been spent by staff and commissioners on the planning of section 34. He noted that the northwest section of this portion of the plan was to be a city park. He stated without that section, the two city-owned properties can not be joined. He stated that by rezoning the entire section 34 and not just the neighborhood as a PUD, may allow the Commission to better apply the goals of the plan for this section. Secretary Winczewski stated he realizes the concerns with the residents regarding the amount of open space in Kentwood and how it is starting to make them think about what is happening in Kentwood. He stated that unfortunately the planning commission can only do so much and suggested measures that the community could take to influence decisions. Winczewski stated he is torn because he is in complete agreement with the residents, but this is also a very good developer. He stated that compliance with the plan for the northwest part of the development is required to approve the site plan.
Commissioner Sheldon stated she is pleased with the revised plan. She stated she likes the flow of the streets now that the plan has been revised. She stated she does agree with what has been envisioned and what we would have like to have seen, but it is their property and they can develop it how they like. She stated she likes the plan and appreciates all the work that has been done.
Commissioner Itani stated he likes parts of the plan, but after listening to the neighbors and looking at the area he thinks the density of the development doesn?t fit. He stated he thinks it is 50-60 units to much. He stated that he would like to have less built and bigger lot sizes. He would like for the applicant to work with the neighbors and try to come up with a plan that is a better fit for the neighborhood.
Commissioner Artz stated the planning commission has spent a lot of time looking at concepts for section 34. She stated we were looking for higher end homes in this area. She stated she doesn?t think these homes look any different than anything else in Kentwood.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated a letter was received in their packets from Howard Systma with regards to the project. He lives in homes built by Allen Edwin and he cautioned the commission on the quality of the homes Allen Edwin builds.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck had concerns on how staff plans to manage the decision regarding if the City finds the drive design creates problems with on-street parking, vehicles being driven across or parked on the grass. She wondered how the City can require that all future homes be constructed using the optional lot detail, as depicted on the site plan, with a wider drive opening at the street. Planner Pung stated they can strengthen the condition to make it more explicit or have it reviewed after each phase. Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck would like for staff to come up with a condition. Schweitzer stated if we are seeing evidence that they are driving across the grass city ordinances give authorization to require them to put concrete down and that would be the homeowners responsibility. Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated she wants to prevent that happening to the homeowner because it?s not fair; it is something that could be prevented now.
Scott Sanderson, Allen Edwin homes stated the goal was to eliminate the amount of concrete that everybody looks at. He stated they have tried to limit the impact of what the garages look like by setting them back off of each other and using single car garage doors and trying to get curves in the concrete. He stated that they have reduced the road frontage that is driveway from 40% to 20%. He stated it will create a better community for them and their customers and the greater community. He stated the goal was to create it to look better not worse and to make sure it is functional. He stated that monitoring them on the drives would be fine.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck asked about the trees. Scott Sanderson stated there will be more trees added than being removed and according to staff?s recommendation that will be held to the minimum. Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated an issue in Pung?s memo was the impact of the side walls and the back of the houses that everyone will see from the trail. She would like to see more architectural features on the back of the homes as well as a few more ranch style homes dispersed appropriately to improve the streetscape. Pung stated the building varieties gave them architectural diversity and as an option this aspect of the PUD could be re-assured after phase 1 was completed or at least under way.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated in regards to the cul-de-sacs to the north, she suggested interconnecting and thus eliminating these cul-de-sacs as well as providing for a larger park in the northwest part of the site. She estimated that would only give up about 5to 10 homes. She stated that would make more sense to do something like that if they are willing to work on it. She wouldn?t otherwise have a problem with the plan. She stated as it is now she has a problem with the northern part because the COD that was work on for so long has that piece preserved as natural park for the trail system. She stated if they are willing to work on that piece of it she is willing to accept a motion to table for two weeks in order to come up with something they could possibly get a unanimous vote on.
Motion by Vice Chair Swanson to recommend to the City Commission conditional approval of the request to rezone 102 acres from R1-C Single Family Residential to R-PUD-2 Single Family Residential Planned Unit Development Approval is conditioned on conditions 1-8 and basis points 1-13 per Pung?s memo dated 8/10/07.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck asked the developer before the motion is accepted whether they would be willing to table two weeks and work on one more time. She stated she wants to see something that will be acceptable. Vice Chair Swanson stated we have gained so much with the PUD versus the provisional plan. Swanson stated the applicant has worked with and given the commission everything that was asked for and the commission didn?t ask for this a few weeks ago. Vice Chair Swanson stated we asked them to explain why the cul-de-sacs could not be tied together and they did an adequate job in doing that.
Motion by Vice Chair Swanson, supported by Commissioner Sheldon, to recommend to the City Commission conditional approval of the request to rezone 102 acres from R1-C Single Family Residential to R-PUD-2 Single Family Residential Planned Unit Development. Approval is conditioned on conditions 1-8 and basis points 1-13 per Pung?s memo dated 8/10/07.
- Motion failed (3-4) ?
- Swanson, Sheldon, and Holtrop in favor -
- McIntyre-Evenocheck, Artz, Itani and Winczewski opposed -
Secretary Winczewski stated he wouldn?t mind if the development got started but the contention points are in the northern area. Winczewski suggested changing the northern part of the project to phase 4 and approving phases one, two and three with the northern section as phase four to be deferred to a later time.
Discussion ensued regarding the northern section of the site.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck asked the applicant if they would be willing to make the northern section phase 4. Scott Sanderson stated that losing ten lots is a big deal. He stated just to go to the two stall garages was a big issue. He stated they are not willing to enter into a PUD agreement that they become committed where all the rules can change behind them. He stated he doesn?t think it is fair.
Director Schweitzer stated that rather than approve the three phases and identify the other area to be phase 4 to be determined later another alternative to consider would be to table the project for two weeks to see if any changes could be made to the northern portion of the site that would be agreeable to all. Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated that she is willing to entertain a motion to table; she feels phase 4 needs to be preserved.
Scott Sanderson stated they are ready to bring this to a vote. He stated he would like for them to approve it or not approve it so that they may move on. He stated they have worked as closely as they have ever done before and they still have to make it work where the potential buyers will see value in the project.
Motion by Commissioner Artz, supported by Commissioner Itani, to table Case #8-07 Bretonfield to the August 28, 2007.
- Motion Carried (8-0)-
I. Work Session
There were no Work Sessions
J. New Business
Motion by Commissioner Holtrop, supported by Commissioner Itani, to set the public hearing date of September 11, 2007 for: Case #9-07 Clark on Keller Lake ? Major Change to an approved PUD Site Plan located at 2451 Forest Hill Avenue SE.; Case #10-07 Clark on Keller Lake ?Special Land Use for the Housing for Elderly Independent Living Facility located at 2451 Forest Hill Avenue SE
- Motion Carried (8-0) -
K. Other Business
1. 22-06 Sam?s Club ? one year extension for SLU and SPR for Sam?s Car Wash
Motion by Commissioner Swanson, supported by Commissioner Itani, to approve the one year extension for Sam?s Club Car Wash.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
2. Commissioners? Comments
Vice Chair Swanson announced he is the proud grandfather of Karen Nicole weighing in at 7lbs. 11oz and 19 inches long. Swanson also encouraged the commissioners to sit down with Howard VandenToorn and talk to him to gain his new perspective on development issues.
Secretary Winczewski stated this was a very difficult meeting and that the commissioners can only do so much. If Kentwood feels strongly about their city they need to take a hard look at this plan and determine if stronger action is required.
Commissioner Sheldon announced she is expecting a baby on February 29, 2008.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated CBS site plan denial was overturned by the city commission. She also asked the commissioners to think about anyone who will be interested in serving as a planning commissioner and submit their names to the Mayor.
Chair McIntyre-Evenocheck stated she is not opposed to the PUD but thinks Bretonfield?s plan should envision more of what the commissioners had in mind for the COD. If the COD needs to be included in the zoning ordinance then she feels we need to make sure that gets done.
Commissioner Itani stated regarding Bretonfield if we want to preserve the nature of the area why give them 3 units per acre. He stated he thinks we need to do the right thing for this undeveloped area and make sure it is developed correctly.
Commissioner Artz stated she doesn?t think a developer will develop the alternate plan with the economy the way that it is and we shouldn?t worry so much. She stated we want to hold it out until it is like we want.
Commissioner Holtrop wants to make sure that staff contact Bretonfield to work with them in the next two weeks. McIntyre-Evenocheck stated she hopes staff can talk to them and take a look at the northern section.
3. Staff?s Comments
None
L. Adjournment
Motion by Commissioner VanderHoff, supported by Commissioner Holtrop, to adjourn the meeting.
- Motion Carried (8-0) ?
Meeting adjourned at 9:17p.m
Respectfully submitted,
Chris Winczewski, Secretary
|