Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. everybody um to the city of Grand Rapids Planning Commission meeting of May 14th, 2026. Um we're going to get started with public hearings here in a minute, but I'll just quickly go through kind of our our procedures. Um at the beginning of each case, um for each public hearing, we'll have staff come up and um provide a presentation. Um the applicant will then have an opportunity to come up and add any additional information that they'd like us to know. Um we'll then open the public hearing. Uh any member of the public that wants to speak to a case can come up to the mic, introduce themselves, and address um the commission with up to three minutes of comments. Um the applicant will then have an opportunity to address any comments that have come up and then we will um deliberate and make a decision. Um, as a reminder, the meeting is being streamed live on Facebook and YouTube and um, staff does provide some draft language for commissioners to consider when we're making motions. Um, and so if you see someone reading from a sheet, they are, but know that um, everyone has the latitude to um, modify any language and they do provide um, information both for and against. So no decisions have been made ahead of time. Um before we jump into our our public hearings, we do have um we do need to amend the agenda to add

um the 2011 market southwest site plan review ahead of our 2041 Eastern Avenue um public hearing case. So I will motion to amend the agenda. Second. Okay, I have a motion in support. Andrea seconded. Yep. All right. Any further discussion? All those in favor say I. I.

I. Any opposed? Motion carries. All right. Thanks, y'all. Hello, planning commissioners. Uh, our first case, this is going to relate to the Acer Amphitheater at 2011 Market. Oh, I'm so sorry. No, I did not do conflict of interest. I apologize. Does anyone have any conflict of interest that we need to talk about? All right, seeing none, thank you so much, Elizabeth. And thank you. Go ahead.

Thanks, chair. Uh, so we're at the Acasher Amphitheater at 2011 Market. Um, for a few of you on the commission, you may not have been a part of the planning commission that first go when they established a plan program. Um, so I'm going to talk a little bit about what a plan sign program is, what was approved at that last uh hearing that was last July, and then what's proposed for you today. Generally speaking, a plan sign program uh is a signed program that establishes some consistency uh relative to larger developments. So those would be your big box stores potentially, your stadiums, your amphitheaters, your arenas um and the like. And so because this is such a large complex with a lot of different entrances and a lot of moving parts uh plan sign program seemed appropriate here and you all uh approved it and that includes what you see on your screen here. So there were 22 signs. These uh related to entrance gates, they related to concessions and box office locations as well as the parking deck um and some directional signage relative to parking and um merchandise and things like that. Um the benefit of a plan sign program is it does allow a level of flexibility relative to the zone district sign requirements. So, for example, any zone district would regulate the size, the number of signs, the type of signs. Um, and a planned sign program kind of opens the door to allow you as the planning commission to evaluate the appropriateness of what's being proposed, which typically is um exceeding the limitations of a zone district. Um, so that last time we had a little bit of mix. We had some that met uh the TNC sign requirements. We had some that didn't. Um, but what brings us

here today is an amendment to what was approved. And, uh, an amendment doesn't necessarily mean that any of those previously approved signs are removed. Um, but it does mean that additional signs are now being proposed. The purple uh, boxes that you see on this map are the locations of the proposed signage. Uh I'll start you towards the top uh where my mouse is moving right now. That is going to be the Riverside Plaza/gate area um sign that we'll look at in a moment. As we come down to the bottom of the amphitheater property, this is along Market Avenue. We have a number of banner signs that are proposed. We have two wall signs proposed on the concessions building. And then this lower quadrant we can call it. This is the Market Avenue entrance gate area. Uh we have a number of wall signs, canopy signs, and a monument sign. Um again, you're going to be taking into consideration how the proposed signs fit in with that original approval. Um you're going to evaluate the appropriateness of the signs relative to the zone district requirements. That's the part that I'll help you with. Um, but right now we're going to get into what exactly is being proposed. And so this first sign is a wall sign located on the concessions building. If you can see where my mouse is moving back and forth here, um, that's facing Market Avenue. Um, and it's it's being classified as a wall sign. and it is a little bit higher placed than what's normally allowed in the zone district, but it aligns with the other wall signs that have also been placed higher. Uh relative to size and uh square footage, we're okay there. This is not illuminated. Um it's about

22 square ft. The other one, however, this is also along that same concessions building but off to the side. Um, this one is 22 square feet and does exceed that maximum allowed in the zone district relative to the width of the wall that it's on. So, it's coming in at 22 whereas it normally um would be I'm sorry, it's coming in at 20 where it would be allowed at 11 square ft. So, it's roughly double the size that would normally be allowed for this location of sign. Again, that's speaking to the Market Avenue Plaza. When we go back to the site map, it's this one here facing Market Avenue, but also internal to uh the plaza area. Moving along, this is um above that concessions area. This is an upper level bar. Uh this sign is facing Market Avenue as well. If you're across from the amphitheater, um it's it's going to be above where this purple box is up at that bar. So, when you're approaching the amphitheater, you can see it um to help identify where exactly that's located. Um moving on from that, this is at the Market Avenue entrance gate. You've already approved canopy letters on top of this gate for Acro Amphitheater. Uh this canopy signage would be along the facade of that canopy. These would be illuminated. And when we have signs on a canopy that are illuminated, we calculate the entire bandwidth of that facade as the sign.

Um and when they're not, we can kind of get a little more creative in how we measure those. But for this one, we're counting the entire uh side facade and front facade of these illuminated signs, which are um uh they meet the zone district requirements because again, if we're measuring that entire canopy, 142 square ft would be permitted and they're asking for 95 square ft. Um similarly, the letter height is 10 in maximum. They're asking for 8 in. So that's within the zone district requirements as well. just adjacent to the canopy. This is on the side of the box office building. Um, this again is a a gate entrance sign. Um, this is a non-illuminated sign. Um, it's slightly larger than what would be permitted, which is a 16 square ft sign. This is a 22 ft sign. Uh, so we're just slightly over what would normally be permitted in the zone district. Um, and then if you uh those of you that were here for the original approval, the box office and the Spanish translation for box office component was already approved. this new proposal uh roughly quadruples the size of that original approval. And so it's back in front of you today just to make sure that um this too aligns with the plan sign program and you feel is appropriate um to add to help with wayfinding of the box office. The these signs that are on the box office building are not illuminated. Um, if any of you have had the chance to go to the amphitheater property, um, we'll lean on you to kind of give us your perspective on the visibility of these at night or after a show and how that might play into the relationship of the sign package. Um, moving on from that, also by this gate, we have a monument sign proposed. Um, if we go to this next slide, it it

gives you a better idea of that setback distance, which is significant. and it's 42 ft from the back of the curb. Um, it's placed right next to a landscaping area. So, you want to take into consideration the appropriateness of that and the visibility of this sign because of that. Um, this one is going to be illuminated. You'll want to consider the appropriateness of that. Um, and as some of you may know, our monument signs require landscaping around the base of them. Uh, that's not proposed for this sign. So, you'll want to evaluate the appropriateness of that or if um less than 200 square ft would be appropriate. That's the standard amount required. Um we can talk about that in detail if needed. Closest to Market Avenue on that same entrance gate is another wall sign to identify the gate. Um this one's non-illuminated um and meets the requirements of the zone district. Um, we also have banners that are proposed along the light poles that are uh within the amphitheater property. Our sign ordinance currently doesn't allow signs to be on light poles. So, you'll need to evaluate the appropriateness of that as well as obviously the size and the quantity of these banners. We're going to go back to the river side of the property. That's where this sign is featured on top of the entrance gate. Um, this is to assist with wayfinding of the Riverside Plaza. And that again is going to be this top purple box facing the river. Um, again to help with wayfinding. Uh, the remainder of this presentation relates to the formal approval. And so I'm not going to touch on those items unless you need to reference them. Um, and so I'll pass it back to you, chair, and uh, be open for questions.

Thank you very much. Could you actually just go back to the the Riverside one? I was writing something down and I didn't see it. Oh, okay. Thank you. All right. Any questions at this point? Okay. No, thank you very much. All right. We'll have the applicant come up and add some details for us. Oh, thank you. My name is Richard McKean. I'm with the Convention Arena Authority. Uh, also work for Legends Global, the company that is managed hired to manage the facility. So, I didn't have any additional comments beyond what was referenced. I guess that the one thing that was referenced that maybe I would uh reinforce is this is a large venue and to be able to identify spaces for the venue so that you can meet people at the places you want to meet them without getting lost makes our lives a lot easier and hopefully our guests lives a lot easier so they're more apt to come back.

Okay. Yeah. Go ahead, Rich. I have one question. Is there is there more than one box office on the site? We've got uh the main box office is referenced. We also have a secondary box office closer to the stage house building. So there are two. Okay. The intent though uh is that the external one is the one that is primarily used. Okay. Is that so is that the one that would be labeled Winrust?

The Winrust box office would be the one that's primarily used on event days. Uh it is like a a satellite so it's a standalone facility. If we've got box office hours during non-event days we'd be operating it from the internal box office uh which again is part of the stage house facility stage house building. Thanks. There are two two different uh purposes for them being there. Thank you.

Hi uh Bill Cohane with Grand Action working with Rich and the team. Uh just wanted to add a few comments to to what Rich had noted. Um as we're continuing to do fundraising through Grand Action, continuing to to fill out the opportunities for donors to be part of this project. Um these are some of the donors that we have secured in recent days. uh they were not secured at the time of the plan sign program and so therefore uh the reason for the amendment um we appreciate the opportunity to come back and to share with you the the intent uh and we're excited about it because these are donors that have been added to the project that helps to to fill out the financing for for the venue. Um, and so I just wanted to add that as a as a point of clarification as we're working through this. Uh, apologies for not having a comprehensive program originally, but uh, but, um, as we continue to seek donors, we were able to secure these at this point. Um, and then, uh, it it this is also, uh, all the signs that we're aware of um, and all the signs that we have secured under this plan. So um so we don't have um uh we don't have any more. So if if that was a question.

Sure. Yeah. Can you so related to that and how so can you kind of articulate for us how these additional signs will improve wayfinding for folks? So the a lot of the donor signage internal to the facility is is loc is coupled with a donor. So the the main seating area has a donor name associated with it. So as you enter the facility on the east or west concourse there's a sign that says main seating area internally focused sign not visible from the outside and then it has a donor associated with it. There are concession stands on the east and west sides of the facility. Uh there are um multi-tered decks on either side of the burm. Uh those are identified through the wayfinding. Uh and then they have a donor associated with it. So So the the west plaza could be an area during a nonvent day when the amphitheater wasn't being used that Rich and his team might program for a reception or some type of outdoor activity. So you would go to, for example, you would go to the West Plaza or the or the David G. Fry West Plaza. Um, same thing with the Market Avenue concessions for the that's the Market Avenue concessions, David Caravan Andle Foundation, as well as the the Market Avenue um plaza area, which would be the the Warner Norcross. So So all of those donor names are associated with a wayfinding element within the amphitheater. Um, most of them are internal to the to the functioning of the amphitheater.

I'm sorry, sir. I have one I did have one question just Thank you very much. Um,

so you said currently signs are not allowed on light poles. Can you tell us why or how? Yeah. And so within the sign ordinance, there's a specific um code section that speaks to prohibited signs and um we also have a general provision section that kind of speaks to the same thing. And um snipe signs. So those are the ones you might put on a light post. Um or um human signs, so people holding signs, inflatable signs. Um there's a group of those that aren't permitted in the city. And so it's kind of a mixture of that and that we require them to be placed on a building or assigned structure themselves. Similarly, they're not allowed on fences. And so it's that same kind of logic that they belong on buildings or structures, not accessory items to a site.

So what about areas of the city where there are some on signposts? Like I think like right on Michigan Avenue, there's often some by Michigan State and um I've seen them for like the boat show and things like that.

Yeah. So those are those are city-owned light poles and that is a separate program through our street lighting department. Um they will rent out the light pole banner um spaces to interested parties for certain amount of times. these light poles are internal to the amphitheater property. Um, and so it it's slightly different, right? And that this isn't um maintained by the city. This is maintained by the private property owner. Okay. Thank you for that clarification,

Sarah. with the um in our packet with the kind of the chart on signs and the the you know how they may deviate or not from what's permitted. Are we taking into consideration there? Like these are each individual sign, but they're often next to signs that we just approved that are not really like I wish we had visuals of what these signs look like in addition to the signs, right? because now we're just getting just an individual sign, but there's also a huge sign next to it that we already approved and we don't get the whole picture.

Is there can you maybe talk about that? Like when when sign number one is, you know, exceeding maximum area and letting height does that there's also something about the the total overall facade signage that is usually tracked as well, isn't that? I'm hearing one question is can I can can I have a better way to see the signs compared to each other and then the other question I'm hearing relates to I'm unsure what what you're asking.

Well, yeah, they're sort of related. Like in this in this particular one, we we approved the Acer amphitheater lettering and now we have Winrust Gate right below it. So when you're looking at what's permitted, are we looking at all the signage on this facade as isn't it usually kind of a facade based? It's not individual lettering. But we're in a planned sign program and that's where the flexibility comes in and it's up to you and and the commissioners to decide that relationship and if it if it's cohesive.

Yeah. Yeah, I guess what I'm trying to understand is we're asked to approve this in this particular slide, the wind trust gate sign, and we have the information on whether that those particular letters and and square footages are with or without I understand it's a, you know, but within the normal guidelines, but what do we know about the fact that it's being combined with signs that are previously approved? And how far off is it from what might normally be approved? Yeah. So, the previously approved sign um those dimensions are also in the packet and so we could um calculate combined square footage if that's what you're looking to do. But I just want to be mindful that it the focus isn't um is it under a certain threshold. It's more do the proposed signs complement what's already been approved, right? Regardless of size or type.

Yeah. And I think what I was looking for when I first started looking this over, what I was looking for is particularly on the concessions area that's on market where we have the large sign that is on the door that drops down, right? Um that was originally approved. And then we have the two additional ones. like it it it would have been nice to be able to see all that together rather than just the individual pieces. Um but I don't think we have that illustration.

That's it. Any other questions for either Sarah or the applicants? Going to wait and see what's happening here. Good. We're great.

Okay, then I guess we'll discuss. Thank you so much, folks. I wasn't here for the last play on sign program, but um having been to the venue, I realize that a lot of these are internal and you're never going to see them from the street. Um, I don't I I think some of them are uh, you know, they're a little bit larger than what our normal requirements are, but I think in the scope of the size of this facility, I think they're okay. Um, I don't um, like as far as like the monument sign and the landscaping around it, I don't have um, I don't have huge concerns with that one. were given the placement of it and um I I think adding landscaping in there would inhibit pedestrian flow at that point. Um and then the what was the other one I was thinking about? Oh, the the yeah these these light posts ones like I guess because I as a citizen I've never differentiated I guess between like what is a city-owned light post and what would be an internal one and had not ever thought about that difference before. So I I and I see them in other places so I and I generally don't have a problem with them. Um I

think it adds some vibrancy sometimes to the street. So, I also wouldn't have a problem with those. Those are are my initial thoughts. Thank you. Yeah, I'd love to hear from anybody else who has been there. I have not yet had the pleasure.

I have been uh to the amphitheater and I echo the same comments as my fellow commissioner. Um the venue is incredibly large. Excuse me. So the wayfinding signage is uh absolutely necessary. I also know the nature I'm so sorry the nature of the project has been a community effort and so it is uh vital to uh the project that these opportunities for sponsorships are there too. So that makes logical sense to me as to why we would recognize um those from the community that are supporting the project overall. Um, and the conditions that have been recommended to us of waving the landscaping requirement, allowing the light pole banners, and asking the illumination to end at the end of the day all make sense to me as well. And I support. The one area that I'm a little worried about is the the plethora of signs at the gate. that is like there are like six of the same sign and I understand that a couple of them are facing kind of internal for folks to meet up after an event some to meet before but it seems like some of the areas where there are two signs maybe one in the middle would have sufficed like I just I just I don't want to have like an excess of what is beyond and what might be necessary for wayfinding. That's my one kind of question and obviously I'm only one person here. So if if folks feel differently or can help me understand why that makes sense, please do.

I echo what you say. I we're we're saying okay the purpose of this we're saying is wayfinding. The purpose is to make this site more accessible. And I just imagine standing there trying to get my friends like I'm under the Windrest sign. I don't know is no wind trust sign. I'm under like there's like seven of them right there and it does seem inconsistent with what we're being told is the purpose of the signage. I can understand the different faces, but to your point, I believe that's the north face that's viewed. Actually, it's the north and south face that both have multiple signs. I don't think that there's that much of a confusion there, but I also question the necessity to give a special provision for for one property for those signs particularly. Everything else I'm not too concerned about. It makes sense. I guess my only push back on it is like imagine the queuing of 12,000 people. When it's bare like this, it does perhaps feel like an overabundance of repetition, but when you think about being in a sea of thousands and thousands of people, perhaps it's helpful. I guess I would sort of echo that just in that I do a lot of events through my work and the amount of information I send out in emails and people still email me like what did what where am I going for this or what am I doing for this like I like I've told you this multiple times like it it has to be repeated and I sort of feel like this is kind of that situation like there's going to be there are going to be people like those that ground sign for instance is going to be covered blocked you know, um I think the other ones are l likely they're above people's heads, so I don't

think those will be blocked as much, but um if you're trying to meet up with somebody, I think it is going to be helpful just to like I think this these wind trust signs are all identifying that gate. And if I don't know where the wind trust gate is, being able to see it from multiple spots would be helpful to me, but have a a question for the applicant bill.

Um so um are these are these uh sponsorships this advertising is this forever? So is this going to be the wind trust gate forever or is it going to switch in six years to the fifth third gate or something like that? I'm gonna ask Sean to do that. Sean's been working with a lot of the uh fundraising. Good afternoon. Sean Wright with DP Fox Sports. Um the sponsorships are for a minimum of five years with an extension into potentially seven uh per year or per sponsorship. Okay.

So then from city staff, we would approve this plan. So they would just have to fit back into the same sign height. Yeah. Okay. Very good. Um, I think regarding the number of wind trust signs, I I appreciate the concerns for the number of them. Um, but I think overall if you're looking at the overall impact and the perception of them, uh, I don't think that there's going to be a noticeable difference or like any detriment to having a couple more wind trust signs. So, um, I'm inclined to support it as it is because I don't know that there's going to it's I don't think it's going to be a remarkable improvement to reduce it by a couple of signs would be my opinion.

Well, it sounds like most of us are on the same page. Would someone like to make a motion? Yeah, I can make a motion. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the planning commission approves the request of DP Fox Shawn Wright for an amendment of the to the plan sign program for the Ashure Amphitheater at 2011 Market Avenue Southeast for the following reasons. One, the applicant has demonstrated that the proposed plan sign program amendment would result in a more attractive aesthetic setting, improve safety, provide more convenient identification for planned users or other similar purposes because proposed signs allow for adequate and effective identification for the Market Avenue entrance gate. And the proposed signs are clearly needed to support patron wayfinding upon entering and exiting the Market Avenue entrance gate. to the location and or the physical characteristics of the applicant's property or the need or the needs for identification are unique when compared to other similarly situated parcels in the same zone district and in the same vicinity because the overall scale of the development requires further way finding support relative to the location of the entrance gate. Large entertainment v venues such as this may require an elevated level of identification and wayfinding in order to best serve patrons. Number three, the applicant has demonstrated that the proposed plan substantially furthers the purposes and intent of section 5.15.01 01 because of the proposed because the proposed amendment would protect the need to provide directional awareness for users of the development and clarify the appropriate function of this area of the amphitheater property to patrons, emergency services and other users of the property. Number four, the applicant has demonstrated that the approval of the plan sign program amendment would not

create any adverse impacts on one or more properties in the vicinity because the proposed amendment reinforces the support and supports the character of the surrounding development by considering building scale and massing in nearby travel speeds and pedestrian visibility. balances the need to and right to communicate with needs to promote orderly communication, promote community aesthetics, and prevent a proliferation of signs and sign structures that can be confusing and distracting. Be it further resolved that the following conditions of approval shall apply to this project. Standard condition set a approvals on the screen. the applicant that the applicant and plan submitted by the applicant and signed and dated and stamped by the planning director shall constitute the approved plans except if plan elements do not meet ordinance requirements and/or as amended in this resolution. Two, that the use shall operate according to the application and per applicant testimony as recorded in the planning commission minutes. striking three number four that a land use development services leds permit building permit and all other required permits be obtained from the city of Grand Rapids prior to construction, demolition or operation. striking five uh number six that the proposed use shall comply with all other applicable city ordinances and policies and all state laws. And striking number seven um and then also number one that the required landscaping at the base of the ground sign be less than 200 square feet or entirely waved. I

just say entirely waved. Uh, number two, that the light pole banners uh shall not be illuminated or relocated onto the existing amphitheater structure or supporting buildings. Number three, that all existing and proposed illuminated signage be terminated upon daily property closure to prevent unnecessary illumination and glare for adjacent residential uses. and number four that the approval shall have immediate effect. Support. Okay, we have a motion and support. Any additional discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Good luck on installation this afternoon.

Okay. Okay. Our next case is our first public hearing, 2041 Eastern Avenue Southeast. And Laura will take us through this.

Yes. Our next case is a request for approval to modify an existing drive-through bank facility for a drive-thru coffee shop. This case was presented and a public hearing was held. um a planning commission in April. And the commission after um reading through the case and and considering the request um asked the applicant to go back to the drawing board and come back with some dimensioned plans, some additional information on the drive-thru ordering process, landscaping details, and some ideas about um how to enhance the pedestrian experience and connections on the site. Um, drive-throughs are a special land use requiring planning commission consideration. And to sum up, uh, for any of you who weren't here at the original, um, hearing, um, this location is on the west side of Eastern, south of Burton Street in the TNTBA, traditional business area zone district. Surrounding property is traditional business area on the north and west, mixed density residential to the south, and lowdensity residential to the east. The property is um about 3,000 square ft located um within a Seymour Square surface parking lot area. And the property has frontage on Eastern Avenue. The property is improved with a small building, 387 square feet, and um a 644 square foot canopy that covers three drive-thru lanes that were used for the bank. And this is a view from the from the south, excuse me, from the north.

This was the site plan that was previously prevented to the to the planning commission. It shows vehicles entering the former ATM drive-thru lane from the south, making a U-turn around the building, then to um the the west side of the building to the pickup window, and then exiting the site from there. The applicant has submitted some additional information, including a plan with some dimensions and some additional detail about the drive-thru um circulation and ordering. This site concept plan will look similar to the the previously submitted plan. It does show vehicles entering from the south and circling around the building with some additional um dimensions added. This is the preferred site concept for the applicant and the engineering firm that prepared the traffic analysis uh for the applicant. This plan shows a larger landscape area on the north side of the building. and um the south side of the building. Removal of that landscape area to allow for a concrete landing pad for any pedestrians visiting the the property to pick up their order in person, not in a vehicle. So these images show before, you know, current um how the property is currently situated on the right side of the screen on the left side with the painting added to show the drive-through lane. And the applicant has also added some a rendering illustration of what could could happen in the future. Um, this isn't proposed today, but this shows a potential concept of where some additional outdoor seating areas could be located. If the planning commission uh were amendable to this planned concept of site circulation, um, the

applicant would be required to submit for a LUDS permit for the site changes to allow for the drive-thru and landscaping areas. And if outdoor seating and this pergola were added at some point in the future, another um permit and staff review would be required to ensure that this concept would meet all all requirements at that time. Alternatively, and based on planning commission discussion, the applicant has provided this second site plan concept with showing vehicles entering from the north and driving um past the menu board and then continuing south through the drive-thru lane. This plan shows allows for queuing of five vehicles where the previous plan um allows for queuing of at least six vehicles. And I will defer to the applicant to provide some additional explanation about the process of coming up with both these plans and um his rationale for his preferred plan. The city traffic engineer has reviewed both plans. Oh, I will say that this alternative plan um would allow for a seating area between the public sidewalk and the building in the former ATM drive-thru lane. So, the city transportation engineer reviewed both plans and um submitted comments related to this north concept plan and identifying that the the travel of vehicles coming from the north would flip the driving lanes from being on the right side to the left side, which might cause some confusion because that is not consistent throughout the parking lot

development. and um does not allow for enough queuing. A sixth car in this queuing lane would prevent exit from the drive into the shopping center and an additional vehicle beyond that would prevent both exit and entry into the parking lot. So in some we are asking the planning commission to consider the site configuration that would best support the use that would best provide safe well- definfined um vehicular bicycle and pedestrian circulation and the site configuration that would provide safe and efficient movement within the site and its access points. Are there any questions for me?

Wonderful. Thank you. Any questions? Lar, can you repeat again what you said about the the traffic engineers in the queueing with the the northbased entrance? Uh um it just appears to me that the the cars in this visual description are much further apart than the cars in the description that favor the the layout that the applicant wishes to do.

That could be um there are some measurements here. I did not I did not perform my own calculation. The traffic engineer that that helped to prepare um this plan, this alternative queuing um plan also responded to both concepts. And so that letter is included in your packet. And both the the traffic engineer that was hired by the applicant and the city transportation engineer um echoed similar um comments about if additional cars did queue in that lane, it would present a problem for vehicles entering or exit exiting the the shopping center. Okay. Thank you.

You're welcome. Questions? Okay. Thanks, Laura. All right. have the applicant come up. You can use

commissioners. Good afternoon. So again, I appreciate the opportunity that we can continue this discussion what we had last time. Um and going forward, I pull up a couple of slides which I want to show today. Um one I think Lara already explained um the concept. So I don't go through this one anymore. I want to go through this one. Um, we seriously reconsider this and you know the the entrance from the north we try to come up with a reasonable plan which you see here. Um, yes I mean I put these cars in here. So that's to the comment of they looking a little bit more apart than the other one. I put them here in Nevertheless if you would add a force car here it would be in the entrance of the parking lot. So that's why I had it like this. And these ones they are very close together. But in fact um you know you you cannot squeeze another car in here. So what we have is two cars um at the pickup and three cars at the order board. That's um this one we already have seen. What I want to do is I want to little bit talk about more about the pros and cons about both solutions. So give you a better picture on on later how to how to decide. So for the pros um when you look at this uh this site plan the orderboard will definitely face now the parking lot as this was a discussion what we had last time that it would face the road. Um so it would face the parking lot. We would have um the long landscaping here but you see we would remain it unchanged. So it will have the whole length. Nevertheless we would add some landscape because we would have the otherboard. We would have to place it in somewhere not on the concrete. So, we would add some landscaping to to put that. And then for pedestrians, I think that was the comment last time as well. It's easier to access um the the operation rather than coming from the parking lot. So,

these are the pros. The cons actually there are really only two points. So, one one I want to start with is and we didn't talk about this one yet. If we place here a seating area for pedest for pedestrians to eat their ice cream or you know enjoy their coffee, it will be in my opinion not a pleasant experience because they're sitting just right next to the road and trucks and cars passing by. So I was proposing and you saw the the picture. I was proposing a seating area under the roof which is first covered by rain which is secondly also covered by the building itself. So you have the street noise. you will not have um the street noise and you can enjoy your ice cream if you if you will. The second one which I think is the is is really the the important one is if cars coming here from the south they they they stop here they want to turn. If the drive is full somehow this will create um the side circulation will be impacted by that because you cannot you cannot pull in then cars will wait here and then if the traffic light turns green on burden and cars coming down the road you know they they will go first into the drive into the parking lot so they go first in and these cars they probably wait forever I don't know so this is I think one of one of the major reasons why we we that um it would be better to move um you know ahead with the south configuration just because of the safety of this site circulation here in this in this particular area. So these are pros and cons for the north concept. If you look at the south concept we mentioned it now um the traffic engineering said we we need to provide three stacking spaces. So queuing need to have three cars three on the orderboard. So we have to uh provide three here. We provide six. So when you

look at at at this one we provide only three. So any additional car will will create confusion or side circulation issues whether here we can easily stack more cars and we can talk about the distances here but at least I can stack five cars in here and four cars in here. So it it will definitely have um no impact on on Eastern E. And I was thinking about if you run like a coupon action or activity or like a you know special promotion and really at a certain time you have three or four cars then from the north you you definitely have an issue with stacking. So this um I think um then for another pro um pros easy access from the south and from the north because cars here the the traffic is much more diluted as here here is more concentrated and you have also the the red light here. Um that's one the other one we mentioned already. Order board faces the car not eastern A. So we will turn the orderboard around. It will not face eastern A but it will face and you see that in another picture later. It will face the car at this at this time. Um I move forward. This was this this is in your package like Lara mentioned the addendum from the traffic study where where they um mentioned a couple of things what I already mentioned. The one was the stacking. The other one is that the drive-thru should be designed according to the primary user group. And the primary user group in my case is really the coffee and bakery and not the ice cream shop. What we what we had discussed. Um so finally yeah I from my point of view and all the arguments what I brought up is I really want to move forward um ex accessing from the south and going ahead with the U-turn um

operation the mocha picture we saw already and here I want to mention this is the orderboard what you see here so it faces the cars what we have to do and that's what the drawing what Lara showed before um we have to reduce this here by 6 ft that's what we discussed last time. Um because otherwise this the circle around um going into the pickup will just not work well and they will end up somewhere some somewhere over here or even cannot make this the the turn. Um what we also want to do is obviously then um increase this landscape here in front because um we want to put the orderboard um in the landscape and we also want to make sure that people are forced to take the right turn because if you don't do it they will you know maybe turn already here and then they they cannot make it back into where they should go. That's this one. Um this was the other picture where I was suggesting um instead of having people sitting on eastern a having them sit here and then in case they want to you know order they use the crosswalk go in order something and come back and enjoy the ice cream here. So these were the pictures before after and I think that was the last picture what Lara showed. What we want to do is I mean one thing is decrease the landscape here by 10 ft but on the other hand increase the landscape on this side to force the turn but also make it more nice rather than the orderboard stuck in the in the concrete. And um we will have here a pad with some pavong on it um to have pedestrians when they walk in they they are protected by rain and and sun. So this is the total concept and um I'm here for your questions, discussions.

Wonderful. I I have one to start. I think last time we talked about um as a result of having to narrow that landscape buffer um on the eastern side that there might be an opportunity to extend it a little longer. Um so I wonder if that was still was on the table given that you you are adding other landscaping for the turn. that

yeah I mean what I originally thought now is to add instead of really making it much longer I mean this is an option I we can certainly discuss but instead of making it much longer to increase here this landscape to force the turn and will be a significant bigger pad of landscape um but I'm also open to you know add whatever um more landscape yeah I think some of the that landscaping would fall on the adjacent property though Oh, okay. So, while I appreciate your offer, it might not be I I don't know what your relationship is with the um surrounding property owner, but it it might have a layer of complexity that we uh are not yet aware of. That makes sense.

I thought it all shared common ownership even though it was separate parcels. Is that correct? Yeah, I think that's the same owner. Oh, it is all the same ownership. Oh, I apologize. Okay. It is a different parcel though, so Okay, cool. Thank you for that. Other questions? No, I do want to say that I really appreciate you going back and considering everything we said and putting a lot of thought into this. So, thank you so much for the extra work and the extra time. Sure.

Um, all right. If you have a seat, I will open up the public hearing on this. If you are here and would like to speak to this case, head on up to the microphone. Okay, seeing none, I will close the public hearing and turn to commissioners. Uh yeah. Um yeah, having grown up in this neighborhood and I'm I'm excited to see this happen in here in this spot and I'm excited to see a business come into a building that has kind of struggled over the last decade or so. uh add some life to the space and an asset to the community. And I think that it will be um while maybe the analysis of the different options is maybe less technical than I would have hoped for um I think overall I'm comfortable with it and I think um it's a it's a reasonable approach. Um and uh yeah, I'm I'm comfortable approving it. I don't have an Yeah, I I I don't have any further issues. I maybe just one comment. I I noticed on here where you're putting your air conditioner compressor, and that seems like a pretty precarious location for snow plows and cars and things like that. So, I you know, I know that's out of our purview, but just might be something you want to consider.

Yeah, I had it here in this picture. Um but as I have more space now if I move the you know the landscape six feet I have six feet next to the building so I will place it somewhere next to the building it's much more reasonable. Yeah. Uh so since I brought up the alternative circulation previously I thought I should comment. I think ultimately based on Mobile GR's comments and the engineers comments, um, we're being told what the appropriate solution is. Um, so from that standpoint, I support it. Um, I based on this drawing in front of us and a bunch of other things, I'm not sure I actually believe it. Um, and I'm sad that there's not a way to um, engage with pedestrians more effectively or more appropriately. I think that that would I think there's like said all of the things previously because I was genally genuinely trying to be helpful. I think it would be great for a business in this location to focus on the neighborhood and not just cars. Um, but and then also just from an urban design standpoint, there's really nothing wrong with having outdoor seating adjacent to the sidewalk. Um, especially as compared to having outdoor seating in the middle of a parking lot. So um but given mobile GR and um professional opinion I'm in support of the recommendation. Anybody else? Does anyone desire to make a motion?

Would anyone be willing to?

I can do it. Okay. Now therefore, be resolved that the planning commission approves a special land use and site plan review request of Organo USA LLC, Christian Fritz, to modify an existing drive-through bank facility to establish a drive-through coffee shop at 2041 Eastern Avenue Southeast for the following reasons. One, the proposed use will be consistent with the purpose and intent of the master plan and zoning ordinance, including the zone district, because the proposed use will support the recommendations of the Southtown BSAP and ASAP for smallcale ground floor retail uses and transit friendly environments and reflect the purpose and intent of the TNTBA zone district to encourage a mix of small-scale retail uses and appropriate locations to enhance the vitality of the areas and encourage additional investment in the area. to a the proposed use will meet the site plan review standards of section 5.12.08 E because yield to pedestrian signs will be provided to define safe pedestrian circulation within and to and from the site and the site will be appropriately landscaped. 3A. The proposed use will be compatible, harmonious, and appropriate with the character and uses of the neighborhood adjacent properties and natural environment because the proposed use will support the desired mixeduse character of the neighborhood and the proposed use will not be significant a significant change from the previous drive-through use. 3B. The proposed use will not have adverse effects on the neighborhood because the intensity of the use is appropriate to its surroundings and the reduced landscape as proposed will adequately buffer the vehicle drive-thru aisle from the public sidewalk. 3C. The proposed use will not be detrimental, hazardous, or disturbing to existing or future uses or to the public welfare by reason of excessive traffic or noise because the reuse of a drive-through is not anticipated to significantly alter the operations of the site. 3D. The proposed use would not adversely affect the walkability of the

neighborhood, impair pedestrian circulation patterns, disrupt the continuity of the urban street wall, or otherwise hinder the creation of a pedestrian-oriented environment. because the proposed use does not exacerbate the existing conditions on the site which are already audio autooriented in nature by B. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the financial stability and economic welfare of the city because the proposed use will encourage additional investment in the neighborhood. Be it further resolved that the following conditions of approval shall apply to this project. the standard condition set a approvals on the screen and oh those are maybe the ones that haven't been read.

Oh boy, now I got to remember which ones weren't read. Uh yeah, what do we have? Uh all right, I will read the ones that were not previously read. Three, that this approval does not include any proposed signs and any future signs shall be subject to the requirements of article 15 of the ordinance and permits received prior to installation. Thank you. Five. That the that this approval shall take effect 16 calendar days after the date of the planning commission's decision. There is one other one. The expans Oh, wait. No.

Expansion of the approved special land use. Okay. Uh, okay.

That any expansion that propose propose approved special land use requires an additional special land use review and approval by the planning commission. And then I'll read seven, that this approval should take effect 16 calendar days after the date of the planning commission's decision. And then two, that the drive-thru plan with vehicles entering from the south shall constitute the approved plan. Three, that the landscape area on the east side of the property may reduced may be reduced up to a width of 10 feet to allow for a wider drive-through lane. Four, that the new curb concrete curb shall be installed to define the modified landscape bed. Five, that pavement marking shall indicate the location and direction of the drive-through lane. Um, I just have a brief question. Uh, I would like to make sure that the the additional landscaping that the cars traverse around is added as part of that. Is that in included in the site plan of number two?

Yeah, because it's shown on the uh approved site plan. It's part of your approval if your approval is per plans. Yeah. Okay. Perfect. Then stands that. Okay. Go ahead. Yep. Does number four the approval shall have immediate effect negate number seven. That'll be 16 days till it is in effect. I don't think there is one that says it has immediate effect. That's for the um I think that's a different Oh yeah.

Along those lines then since we did table this once is there a reason why we would delay it 16 days when we almost approved it in the last meeting? it it's a requirement of a special land use that your approval cannot become effective uh prior to that 16 day. So you don't have the authority uh to modify that. Great. So is that related to appeals? We unofficially informally we call it the appeals period so that if someone is agreed by the decision they have that opportunity um to make application to the court. Thank you. Kendall probably has better words but that's the gist of it. Okay. We have motion and support. Any other discussion?

I number the number three seems a little confusing to me. Like I'm not like it seems like it could be reduced up to 10 ft. So, but I thought we were taking out out six feet. So, like it should be you know you know what I'm saying? It seems like it could go it could technically then go down to six feet. Yeah. I think it the way you would want to word it is that the landscape area on the east side of the property may be reduced to a width of 10 ft. Oh, so just up to 10 ft because the the the buffer is going to be 10 feet, right? Yeah, we we want it to be at least 10 feet, right? Okay. Yeah.

Yes. So, I would accept that modification to remove the word up from three of the conditions. All right. Still support? Yes. Okay. Anything else? All those in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Okay. Our next case is 2071 East Belt Line Avenue Northeast. And Avery will walk us through this. All right. This next item on the agenda um involves a former IHOP restaurant. Um it's located at the northwest corner of Nap and East Belt Line. In the early 2000s, the property was annexed from the Grand Rapids Township and at that time it was zoned PRD. The site, as you can see before you, is part of a twot planned redevelopment district or PRD. And it also includes a Makatawa bank to the south here. And there are shared driveway and cross access agreements um between the subject property before you and that southern property. There are also other PRDs in the area with Celebration Village to the north and west and village at Knaps Crossing um across Bel East Belt Line to the east. Um because the original PRD approval was tied specifically to the IHOP restaurant use, a major amendment is before you today to allow for the proposed credit union and drive-thru use. Um staff has reviewed this request against the standards of the east beltline overlay district and the PRD use layout and building element regulations that I will talk about in my presentation today. So the existing site is approximately 1 and a half acres and is largely

developed with impervious surface of approximately 70 parking spaces. Um the northern area of the site, as you can see, contains slopes that is associated with a Kent County drain on the site. Um the city's stormwater engineer has completed a preliminary review of the project and has no concerns um as the redevelopment is expected to improve site conditions um by um removing some of that imperous area and the building will also be relocated to be more centrally um located on the site and farther away from that sloped area. So, as you can see from what's existing to what is proposed, um the 7100 ft² building will be surrounded by 26 parking spaces and that meets the parking requirement. The project also includes a drive-thru ATM and video teller machine along the west building elevation. There will be pedestrian connections to the public sidewalk along east belt line. um landscaping improvements and um shared access will continue with the bank property to the south. For the overall um site layout comparative to the overlay district, it does require a minimum building and parking lot setback requirement from the drive lane along east belt line. Both of these requirements will be met with the proposed plan. Um, as I stated previously, the plan will increase green space um on the site to about 49%. Um, tree canopy will also exceed what is required, and both the parking lot and drive-thru use will have landscaping and screening requirements that meet the zoning ordinance. relative to the building.

The zoning ordinance measures a single story between nine and 15 feet in height. And this singlestory building is proposed to be 17 ft. Um, however, it is still under what is the maximum height allowed within a PRD at 55 ft. So, staff asked that the planning commission consider the appropriateness of the story height um that is proposed today. Um, another item to add on to that is that this entry feature shown here at the southeast corner of the building um has a parapit that exceeds the 4T um height that's allowed in the zoning ordinance as it's proposed at 5T. So we ask that you also consider that the parapit height of this um enhanced entryway feature um would be in addition to that story height that is proposed. The building is consisting primarily of glass on the front facades and exceeds the transparency requirement and some other building elements that are included are brick um metal panels and vertical wood siding. Um the planning commission should consider whether the proposed materials are appropriate for this development relative to the drive-thru use. Um, it also meets dimensional standards for the lot size and depth. The proposed hours of operation for the business do comply with the zoning ordinance and the city's traffic or excuse me, transportation engineer has determined that the proposed vehicle stacking capacity is adequate. Um, and I will go back to the site plan so you can see that circulation pattern there on the west elevation. And then moving forward to signage, um staff has recommended that the East

Beltline Overlay district standards are formally applied to this PRD since the original PRD with the IHOP um approved did not have clear signage regulations assigned. Um, and although the size sign dimensions um, and heights are not included in the plans, um, it does appear that with the story height and the height of this entry feature here that the signs would exceed the maximum height of 16 ft. It would also I would also like to note that this feature here is an internally illuminated lighting feature um, that will also be considered as a sign. Um so overall signage will either need to conform to the east beltline overlay district requirements or um the applicant will need to come back for a plan sign program. Um there's no testimony um in support or in opposition of this project before you today. Um and lastly, I'd just like to go over the key considerations one more time. So, this project um before you today will need to be considered um based off of the compatibility of the proposed used and the site changes um with what was already approved within the PRD, the impacts of the drive-thru use, concentration of similar uses within the area, compliance with site plan review standards, clarifying the PRD regulations relative to the use and site and building design, And lastly, ensuring that signage standards align with the East Belt Line Overlay District. Do you have any questions for me at this time before I turn over to the applicant?

Any questions? I I have one. So, the last time this was approved was for a specific IHOP use. Now we have under consideration a recommendation related specifically to a drive-thru financial institution. Like is there

any part of this that would allow any additional flexibility for future like if for some reason this isn't a financial institution in the future will just every person have to come back? Yeah, I guess it depends on how you approve it today. If it's specific to this use and not general uses within the PRD allowed use table, then they would need to come back, for example, like this one does. Um, so, okay, great. Go ahead.

Is this is this use allowed without special use in the general just zone district? Is this use allowed in in the general MC zone district? The drive-thru special? Yes, the drive-thru.

To your point, I think it would be easier to just resend some of these PUDs, especially for one that has one parcel, and just allow. So, I think that's a separate conversation outside of this, but I think in general that's the conversation that we're having as part of the larger zoning ordinance update to determine what PUDs might be able to fold into a um a standard zone district. But, um that's not something we I don't really want to take that on indiv based on individual developments at this point, but I don't disagree with you. Thanks. Any other questions for Avery? Did you say something about a parapit height requirement?

Yes. Yep. Do you want me to go over that again? Say that the number one more time. Is it five feet? That is what's proposed. What is allowed would be four feet. Okay. Thank you. Thanks. Awesome. All right. Thanks, Avery. We'll have the applicant come up.

Thank you, Jack with Neaterbeld. Uh here with me today is Aaron and Luke with MSUFC FCU as well as Josh with Newman Smith Architecture. They can speak to hours of operation, functions of the building, other locations they have. They do have a location on 28th Street in Kentwood that has been if you've been over that neck of the woods in front of Home Depot, uh the flavor of this architecture and building mass is going to be similar. Josh can answer questions about the building height and that entrance feature. Um we haven't decided yet on the signage if we're going to do the plan sign program or um comply with the ordinance. So um more to come on that but uh we're excited to the existing IHOP building and the entire pavement around it is very tired and so everything on that site will be scraped and be starting over. The only thing that we will remain is the entrance so we don't have to deal with MD dot. Happy to answer any questions. Okay. Any questions for the applicant? No. Seeing none. Okay. We will open the public hearing. If you are here and would like to speak to us about this case, come up to the microphone and give us your thoughts. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing. Commissioners, uh, so I'm generally in support of it. I'm a little confused about the height requirements and how they're can be met. Um the I mean so there's a number of like building construction related things. If this was going to come down 5t to meet the height requirement, you're going to have ceilings in there that are 9 or 10 foot tall. So um it's going to end up it's going to start to be a pretty tight space really quickly just to meet that 15t height requirement. I think similarly this parapit probably still exceeds the 4 foot requirement but if

you're going from I'm assuming US deck is underside of deck. Um that's the bottom of the roof deck. So the roof deck has thickness and then there's almost certainly a bunch of insulation on top of that. So the parapit height the way I would measure it from the top of the roofing to the top of the parap pit is probably more than four feet but not by much. So the um I don't so I don't know if all of those height requirements are even can be met well. Um so they don't concern me at all. Um I think as far as like ve vehicle circulation and its presence on the east belt line um I think all of those things are appropriate. I'm glad it's has a lot of clear glass and isn't just a big blank facade. Um, and that also per the zoning ordinance appropriately locates the drive-thru. So, no, I agree. And I I also am glad to see that there will be more pvious surface as a result of this red or impervious surface, excuse me. impervious. Sorry, I was right the first time. Um I questioned myself here. Um but yeah, I'm excited that there'll be more green space on the site as a result of of this redevelopment as well. Okay, go ahead. Yeah,

I just wanted to clarify if the planning commission was interested in that flexibility because I I I don't see that we added a condition to allow for us to default to the use table of the PRD. Um, so is that something that the planning commission would like to Okay.

So, if someone starts the motion to approve, please read a little bit slowly so we can make sure we get the section references um done accordingly. I'll make a motion now. Therefore, be it resolved that the planning commission recommends approval of the request of MSUFCU Aaron Baell for a major amendment to an approved planned redevelopment district for construction of a new financial institution with a drive-thru at 2071 East Beltline Avenue Northeast for the following reasons. 3A3B. The mix of uses, density of development, and design of the proposed PRD are consistent with the master plan and the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance because the proposed site plan is consistent with the northeast Beltline Overlay district. The project is identified as a community activity center intended to provide places to live, work, and shop around key intersections and along corridors to evolve areas into well-connected walkable places within a 15-minute walk, bike, or transit trip of surrounding neighborhoods. 3D. The proposed PRD will ensure efficient development on the property and will result in a logical and orderly development pattern in the neighborhood because the existing vehicular connections to the public street and the adjacent development will remain. All queuing will be accommodated on the subject property. Two, go from three to two. The proposed use will meet the site plan review standards of section 5.12.08.e because all elements of the design are harmoniously and efficiently organized in relation to topography, character of

the neighborhood and adjoining property and the type, size, and proportions of buildings. 4 A. The proposed development will be compatible, harmonious, and appropriate with the existing or planned character and uses of the neighborhood, adjacent properties, and the natural environment. Because the use will enhance the mix of uses and vitality of the development, the proposal will result in increased green space with effective screening. 4. B. Potentially adverse effects arising from the proposed development on the neighborhood and adjacent properties will be minimized through adequate vehicular stacking and on-site parking. Appropriate orientation of buildings, structures and entrances and landscape screening. The proposed development will not be detrimental, hazardous, or disturbing to existing or future adjacent uses or to the public welfare by reason of excessive traffic, noise, or visual clutter because the uses are not anticipated to result in increased traffic and drive-thru use and screening requirements will be met. 4 D pedest pedestrian and vehicular connections will be provided between buildings, uses, and amenities within the property, as well as connections to and from the surrounding properties because adequate connections to existing walkways and public sidewalks exist and will remain and thoughtful pedestrian and vehicular connections will be provided. 5A. The proposed development will retain as many natural features of the landscape as practicable because additional green space and landscaping are proposed. 6A adequate public or private infrastructure services will be provided

at no additional public cost and will safeguard the health, safety and general welfare of the public because the site has already been developed and not negative no negative impacts are anticipated. 6B. The proposed development will not be detrimental to the financial stability and economic welfare of the city because the project will bring a vacant property back into productive use and the development will result in additional tax revenue. Be it further resolved that the following conditions of approval shall apply to this project. standard condition set A approvals striking numbers five and seven that the building story height and entry feature parapet height as proposed are approved. Number three that this approval shall take effect upon city commission approval. And number four,

that the SDPRD regulations be assigned for the purposes of use, site layout, and building elements for any future development. And number six, uh that the East Belt Line Overlay district regulations be assigned for the purposes of signage. We indirectly talked about that, so I hope that was okay to Okay. Yeah. All right. We have a motion. Support. All right. We have support. Um, any additional discussion? All those in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much.

Okay. Our next case is Does anyone need a break? Are we good? Our next case is 617 Fulton Street West and 17 Seward Avenue Northwest. This next request is for approval of a drive-through lane associated with a retail coffee shop located within a new mixeduse development. Um, as you know, drive-through lanes are a special land use. This this particular development is comprised of two properties located on the west side, excuse me, the north side of West Fulton Street between Seward and Lexington Avenues in the TNTBA zone district. Um, mixed density residential zone district is to the north and a traditional transitional city center zone district is to the east and to the south. You may recognize this property is the former Adobe In-N-Out restaurant and drive-thru. Um, there is a mixeduse uh there mixeduse development to the south and west, residential to the north and a surface parking lot to the east. The building on the property located on Seward is a currently um vacant building. The subject properties are located in the U to the zoo area specific plan that was adopted in 2012 designated as gateway with mixeduse required storefronts. Um firstf flooror retail is desired as fourstory buildings are allowed um as a recommendation of that plan. The 2024 community master plan designates the property as neighborhood center which is intended to reinforce a

transit and pedestrianoriented environment. And the city's vital street plan um classifies Fulton and Stocking Streets as urban as an urban center street um in which um pedestrian experience is prioritized. The development project is a fourstory mixeduse development with 109 dwelling units, three commercial tenant spaces, and a twostory parking deck. I will mention that the development is permitted by right. No special approval or consideration is required except for the drive-thru. All structures and paving on both properties will be removed in preparation for development. The buildings will be constructed to be oriented at the street with parking behind. The coffee shop will occupy the 1,800 square foot retail space at the corner of West Fulton and Seward. The driveway north of the building on Seward will provide one-way entrance for the drive-thru. Vehicles will enter the site, wrap around the building, stop at the menu board on the west side of the building, and proceed to the pickup window close to the one-way right turn exit onto Fulton Street. the the development will also have an additional um entry and exit point on Lexington Avenue for the other uses within the development. The intersection at the on north on Seward at the intersection of Veto um is also um going to be the median will be closed um or extended to close that intersection

after review of the traffic impact study. the the city transportation engineer found this closure to be necessary to prevent vehicles from traveling north on Seward, making a U-turn at that intersection to enter the drive-thru entrance. So on this uh slide, you can see the vehicles queuing on the site. There's room for about 10 to 12 vehicles to queue on the property. And the zoning ordinance use requirements for a drive-thru um are intended to minimize potential adverse effects of the drive-thru activity on surrounding res residential properties, pedestrians, and traffic flow. A 10 yards 10 foot sideyard landscape buff buffer is required. Um the ordinance allows that buffer width to be reduced by 1/3 um with the installation of a 6-ft privacy fence or wall along the lot line. Along the north lot line, the applicant is proposing a six-foot privacy fence along with a 6.6 foot wide landscape buffer. And uh at the west property line, there's a grade change. The residential property to the west is much at a much higher elevation than the subject property and there is about a 5-ft retaining wall concrete retaining wall that already exists on the property. This wall will be preserved will will not be re removed and um so with that five- foot concrete retaining wall a 7.3 foot wide landscape buffer is proposed on the west side. Currently there is a 6 foot um tall privacy fence a top that uh retaining wall. I do not know if that is

intended to also be saved or will will remain there or if it will be replaced or just removed. I'll defer to the applicant on that detail. Pedestrian circulation will be provided on the public sidewalks. And um this slide shows the floor plan for the proposed coffee shop and the outdoor seating area that will be um located on the public sidewalk on Fulton Street. Hours of operation will be 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. daily. And um regards to neighborhood engagement, both John Ball Area Neighbors and the West Fulton Business Association have submitted letters of support that are in your packet. And um this morning we also received two letters from neighboring residents expressing some cons concern about both the coffee shop and the drive-through use impacting traffic in the neighborhood. And those letters are also in your packet. In some we are asking the planning commission to consider whether the reestablishment of a auto oriented use this drive-thru meets the intent and purpose of the TBA zone district and the UD to the zoo area specific plan whether the use aligns with the design and function of an urban center street in the vital streets plan and whether the site configuration site review site plan review standards specifically for the landscape buffers and site circ circulation are met. Are there any questions? Any questions for Laura?

I do have a question around the intersection at Seward and Veto. Um, and I don't know if we have anybody from traffic here, but recommending that that be closed. That has an impact for lots of different things. Um, what is the process that would go through to to have that closed? Like, is there a public process? If I live there on veto, I might really be disappointed if that's closed. That's a really good question. We we do have uh our assistant mobile GR director here if you'd like to hear from her. Sure.

On this Ariana. So something such as this um kind of a geometric change of this nature, something that is still kind of relatively small. It's not necessarily a large project. It's something that we would coordinate with the applicant to have them do the work. Um there's not necessarily a public um information process given that we kind of will restrict turns and other movements through intersections as we see fit through study and other kind of um other work that we do. And so this would be in that similar vein of, you know, like no right turn on red or any other kind of geometric restriction

except for this is in response to a new business going in in a in a street corner and it's a change in traffic conditions which is something that if we looked at a different intersection kind of what would be going on there. Okay. Sorry. Um and and can you maybe talk about um I mean if if in in this current condition if I'm going north on Seward and I want to do a you around that thing I I can do that and that's legal. Um why would we want to close it off now?

Just given the volume that of vehicles that may want to go that way. Um we anticipate more vehicles wanting to enter. Um say Fulton's kind of more of a major street. So we would expect vehicles coming north. Um, at this point the U-turn is not necessarily a legal maneuver. Um, depends on how you, it's not recommended as that point. You could get an impeding traffic depending on how you execute that maneuver. So, it's not something that we kind of build that into our legal moves at an intersection.

So, okay. So, let's if that's closed and I want to get coffee here, I either have to come in from Lake Michigan Drive or go around the block around and transverse through the residential neighborhood to get to that entrance, right? Because I'm most likely I'm I'm having to exit on Fulton Street going west. So, most likely I'm coming down Fulton Street from one side or the other. I mean, I I I hesitate to believe if I'm traveling along Lake Michigan, I'm going to detour down to get a cup of coffee and then go all the way back north, perhaps, but either way, I'm directed through residential streets. Um, I guess it's hard for me. But those are the impacts of that particular layout. Yeah.

Yeah. I I share Aaron's concern or I mean I'm I find myself wondering why the landscape barrier on Seward can't just be shortened to allow a direct left turn in to the driveway versus closing off the entrance at veto. I mean it it it and I understand this is policy and probably not in our purview, but it does seem to me to be a pretty big deal for those people who live on veto and if this is being going to be done without their input or anything like that, that that seems like it's a pretty big deal. Uh we would be looking at kind of the left turns that would be queuing into the development and making sure that those do not impede or kind of flow down to Fulton Street um before we would uh shorten that nose median. We did not have them model that because it's not the existing conditions. It's something that we could ask their traffic engineer to look at. But we would want to see based on kind of demand how many left turns would be waiting in that live lane to go in. So, I have an additional question while you're here. Um, I'm wondering if there's any concern about the traffic volume using the drive-thru and the sidewalk, especially with all this additional housing. So, we have potentially have a lot more walkers on this, a lot more people utilizing that sidewalk. It's a much more walkable environment, but there's a lot more cars associated with a drive-thru than there would be a parking lot or um trips. So, I'm want I'm curious if there's any concerns about that.

It would definitely be more intense at certain times of the day. Um as you look at overall volume, it may not be that different from kind of the housing uh from the amount of units there. Um, it's something that we kind of look more at the geometry that there is space between the building and the back of curb so that there are people can see and with this one having it be a oneway people are entering kind of from the street which has more visibility for everybody. It's not necessarily like you're coming out of a parking garage where you're inching up to a wall and trying to look out. There's more visibility as people come in and the sight distance there is adequate for that. Arian, is the change in the landscape island in front of or west of of or excuse me, east of Veto um a certainty or is it something that could be a delayed installation upon review of of traffic flows or is it an outright if the drive-thru is approved that must be modified?

It is highly recommended by our departments in the same way that we recommend a right in or right out kind of a geometric approach. Okay. Anything else for Ariana? Okay. Thank you so much. Okay. We'll have the applicant come up.

Good afternoon. Uh Brent Gibson, president Construction Simplified and managing member of Abode Fulton LLC. Um, I got a a handful of things to address, but I think I'll start with maybe the conversation that just took place. Um, understanding the timeline of how we arrived. This has been a three-year project in conversation, two years in design, uh, working with John Bartlett. Um, we're relocating the existing Adobe drive-thru capacity, about 13 car stack, 13 car stack on our current plan. Um, when I first started this, uh, being involved in the west side a lot, we know we want to build community and I knew that retail is really important, although we could put multif family on the entire first floor. So, taking the risk to say we have to have a key tenant space and we have to drive that to make sure that this a desirable place to to move and create community. Uh, so we approached uh a first large national coffee chain which was Starbucks. Uh they had some interest because currently if you know where their only westside Starbucks is, you drive through neighborhoods to get to it. You drive through one ways. It's not convenient. Uh they were very interested in coming to this location. Uh in speaking with Kristen and then John Bartlett, uh traffic study, I think because of the experience on Fuller and 196 Starbucks is challenging at times, and that would be kind. Uh we worked through that and got John's approval to do a traffic study using Progressive on the Burton and Breton Starbucks, which is more of a neighborhood uh Starbucks with a drive-thru. So the traffic study is based upon that uh density, that capacity, trip study, all that good stuff. I am 100% pushing for if I can I've kind of dealt with it the non-closure at veto but understand that John said that needs to happen but that was predicated purely on the traffic study which is predicated on the

Starbucks since then Starbucks um is no longer because they um it didn't work out they wanted too much and continued wanting too much uh we have a different tenant locallyowned franchise um certainly we don't expect the capacity uh of or the density. So, I would love to ask the commission if able to uh if we get to approval delaying the installation, if there's a possibility, I have it planned for we're we're planning on doing the work of that blockout at veto. Uh to the same point, I asked John with the new change in use, could we actually push the southern end north so we can turn left into it? and his response was I don't want I'll paraphrase I have it in writing somewhere was let's see how it goes. So I think there's room on the table with with John and I appreciate the comments from his assistant um to understand maybe what that that the assistant I'm sorry the

assistant director

assistant director sorry about that. So just covering that topic, I think I'm certainly willing to work. Um I don't I don't know if it will drive traffic pattern around there currently is is different obviously with there's a little project to the north um which is changing the traffic of Seward coming south. Um I think it's important to note we are bumping out the uh right turn only north on Lexington uh out into the road. So we're closing it, we're slowing it down. Uh you see the right turn lane. We have three parking spots in front of the retail. We're trying to calm and slow down the neighborhood. This is kind of the opposing sign of a gateway of the of West Fulton corridor. Uh it's also important to note, you'll see in the lower left there's a gateway arch. If you guys are familiar with the $400,000 sign that's going to span the road. So this is really impactful to I would say to uh somebody's comment of um how much traffic becomes on the sidewalk with drive-thru. I think that's the intention is slowing things down because right now it is a very busy corridor and I think um we've found a good solution here to add density but create walkability. So um there are no coffee shops with drive-thrus on West Fulton or the west side because everything has changed because we can't get a tenant because there's not the density. So trying to trying to solve all those problems. Um that's a little bit of the history of the drive-thru. I think when Chris and I probably first spoke two to three years ago and envisioning this project, we didn't know exactly the process and the layout of the drawing. So, uh, we're pretty happy with this. I think, uh, to some of Laura's comments on the buffer, I've met with the property owners directly north, uh, their investment properties, they would actually prefer not to have the fence in the buffer. Um, I understand their concern. I'm probably either way, whatever makes everyone happy. Um, the retaining wall there certainly is a five- foot grade. The fence is on top of that. So, you

probably have 11 foot of of block from the houses to the north looking south. Certainly, my landscaping and our 10-ft buffer will be there. You just will never see it from the neighboring houses to the north. It's it's 10 foot. It's 5 foot down below a sixoot fence. So, um, parking, there are two entrances to the development itself. one at grade which Laura referenced there at the the parking lot underneath the deck. Directly south of that, there's a two-way ramp that goes up to second floor parking that goes up and comes back down. So, all of the development traffic will go west to Lexington and then the only access for uh delivery andor drive-through exiting is directly south to Fulton. I'm happy to address any other questions. I would just say that uh we're really excited about this project. We are geared to go um Rowan said I could get a demo permit once hopefully this gets approved and start um we are fully supported by economic development with NEZ and Brownfield and we also secured $5 million low interest loan through the MEEDC. So there's a lot of in investment and interest behind this and uh this certainly would um be a great addition to the west side and I'm proud to to help create that westside gateway. All right. Any questions for the applicant? Seeing none. Oh, yeah. Go ahead.

Sorry, I do have one. Um, Brent, can you please confirm that when you presented to the various organizations, was it was did the plan reflect that landscape um island being extended through that intersection? Uh, definitely West Fulton Business Association. Uh, John Ball area neighbors. I think I included two letters, one from a year and a half ago. Okay. Which would have but they've gone through some leadership change. Uh so they the new board that sent me the letter today would have seen that as well. Would have seen these plans that were before us today. That's correct.

Thank you. So Brent, just out of curiosity, I don't know that outside of internal frustrations for people operating in the building, um, is there a reason why if the drive-thru lane is dedicated to the drive-thru, which based on its layout makes a lot of sense. Is there a reason why it's connected to the parking?

Um, John, initially the drive-thru was wider than 12 ft. Uh John was very clear that he liked the idea of a I'll call it a bailout area um of the drive-thru that you could exit into the parking if that makes sense. If you got in the drive-thru and you need to get out. Um but we also are prepped if we need to control access. We have plans for a a gate closure kind of where those two hashed areas are if need be if we see traffic is trying to exit through the drive-thru. I think I think it's important to note as well this drive-thru is about 15 feet west of the current right or left turn exit of the drive-thru of Adobe. I was we would prefer to have this a right or left, but understand that uh John's department said it'd be best if it was right turn only. So we're we're not only moving it west, we are making it right turn only. I'm assuming um planning commission would like to hear back from uh Ariana about the the vendor discussion between Starbucks and the new vendor.

Yeah.

Thanks. Um, so materially like when we are looking at a traffic study, there is actually the Institute of Transportation Engineers publishes data on various land uses. And so if we were going with this one would be a drive-through coffee shop. Um, there's kind of variations on that if there's a sitdown area or not. And so when in the absence of local data, we will use that. um it is kind of summarized from all over the US and Canada. It tends to lean a little more suburban kind of into newer development. And so when we can have local data of how people work with a coffee shop and so it's something that it's not a huge material difference between one vendor versus the other. Um I think if you had a drive-through mad cap where they brew your cup of coffee individually, it would be a different kind of service um uh rate. And that's what we look at when we look at that Q study. So what has been showing there is kind of what you would expect from a coffee chain anywhere that is available.

Thank you for that added context. And to that I think it's important the floor plan that's included. Certainly this is a very resident forward use uh with the outdoor seating. We've designed this in a way that uh it's engaging with the lobby u whereas the previous vendor wanted to be very closed off and purely retail. So the drive-thru is an accessory. It is not the sole intention of the traffic of this use the store. So

great. Thanks. Any questions? All right. We'll have you take a seat. I will open up the public hearing. If you are here on this and would like to give us some comments, come on up to the mic. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing. Commissioners, what if anything are we allowed to decide about veto? Do you specifically mean the traffic island? Um, so I I think your decision is if your decision is to approve it, then it's understood with with the understanding that the landscape island would need to be closed. So the planning commission doesn't have specific authority over the island whether it can or can't be, but understand it would be a consequence, if you will, of your decision, similar to other uh traffic safety measures that would be consequential or, you know, resulting from a development decision.

Makes sense. Thank you. I Yeah, I don't love the the closing of the the landscape or the um boulevard there. Uh but in general, I support the project. I think it's great. I think it adds density. I think it helps divine define that street wall there. Um I think it will add vibrancy to the area. Um and I don't have a problem with with the drive-thru. Um especially since I understand that the intensity may be greater, but um I I think probably only at certain times of the day. Um like I think Adobe's probably very busy at lunch and this will probably be busier very during the morning. So, I yeah, I don't have a problem with it overall and I appreciate that. It adds housing to um the city. Yeah, I I I I'm generally in favor. I I like the I like the overall design. I like the reuse of the property. Um, you know, if nothing else, just to once again express my frustration about the closure of of that access at veto, it just seems it seems in my opinion that that's very shortsighted right out of the gate without understanding what the the full impact true impact is. Um, and it it just it begs the question, what would be required if there was no boulevard landscape island there? Uh would we be requiring that street to be closed somehow if that was just a a normal 66

foot wide street? um just seems I I I'm just thinking of the people who live on that street and you know we do these things in the city that impact people and just to be able to do that without informing anyone seems and I understand it was on the plans that were shared with the neighborhood associations but so those are my comments.

Yeah. So, I mean, I I think to answer maybe attempt to answer your first question about what would happen if there was no boulevard. I mean, there there could very well be implications to what could be allowed from a site design perspective and where driveways may or may not be allowed. So, I I don't think it's as simple as saying that, and you didn't say this, but it wouldn't be as simple as saying that, well, then a landscape boulevard would have to be added. it would likely implicate more of the design uh considerations of the site itself. Um, and quite honestly, when we first started uh talking about this with Brent, uh I think John Bartlett and I started with a oo I don't know if this is going to work. Uh a drive-thru at this location of the intensity that he was initially suggesting, we're really going to need to dig into the traffic study to figure this out. Um, so this was an evolution of that that starting point that John Bartlett and I had with Brent and in order to facilitate uh or support get to the place where traffic safety could support the the design and recommend a support to the planning commission. These are the measures that had to be taken with this particular site layout with this particular traffic volume that has been given to us. And and I want to be clear, I I understand all that and I don't necessar it's I'm not even saying that I necessarily disagree with the closure. It's just that it can be done without like we don't have any,

you know, uh interaction with the people who actually live on that street who it's going to affect. I mean, it would be nice if I I I'm know we've we've met the the letter of the law with notification, but to to hear from some of those folks directly would have been great.

Yeah, I I don't know. I struggle with that as well. I mean, the Adobe drive-in was different because you're entering in on Lexington. We're not routing traffic in and around residential streets in order to get into the coffee shop. We're not just going to go the other 75 ft down Seward until there's a next break in the island to make our U-turn. Um yeah, so I I struggle with it. And candidly, I I I don't I feel the same way about um urban drive-through coffee shops that I do about urban self storage. Um it's just I I just don't really care for it. Um, and honestly, I don't think I've ever in once in my life used a drive-through coffee shop. So, that's could be why. Uh, I don't have that need uh or desire. Um, and yeah, so I I struggle with a bit. Um, also disappointed in the the way the traffic pattern changes happen. Uh, apparently um generally really appreciate our traffic teams here in the city. Um, yeah. So, I'm I don't know. Uh, not super excited about it. Um, love the development, but that's not what we're here to talk about. A drive-thru here on this corner um with a new configuration that pretty dramatically alters traffic patterns is a struggle for me. I don't know the So, I have similar feelings about veto. I I know that we don't get to say it. I would um or we don't have a say. Uh, but I would absolutely hope that we could have the foresight as a city or the we could plan as a city like we do with deferred parking and the developer is committed to providing it, but and

the funds have to be there, but we're not going to just do it. So, wait a year, wait six months and see what happens. as long and if if those funds have to be in escrow or something weird, that's somebody that's something somebody else can figure out. Uh but I would love to see an approach like that, especially with a situation like this. Um and then it would be a lot easier to support. I think um given the current layout, uh my only real concern is cars leaving. My concerns from a drive-through perspective outside of um the impacts to the intersection of veto are strictly how cars are going to like the number the sheer number of cars that are going to potentially be a problem uh for the sidewalk just to the south. Um, and then I can't stop thinking about how this circulation pattern is a problem that can only be signed or can only be solved with a significant amount of signage. So, or familiarity. So, this place is a place where if you go there all the time, you're going to get it. You're going to either be driving down Seward already because you know, or if you're on Fulton, you're going to go down Lexington and then Veto and then Seward. If this is the first time you try to drive through that drive-thru, you're going to see it on Fulton because you're going to be using Google Maps and then you're or whatever your whatever mapping software you prefer. You're going to see the coffee shop. You're going to drive past the coffee shop. You're gonna turn right in Lexington and then you're probably going to turn right into the parking lot unless there's signage that says that's obvious enough that says you have to keep going straight for the drive-thru and then there's like a detour sign at veto. So like there's the circulation. Um

I don't know if I specifically care because it doesn't it's not going to affect me and for the most part it's not going to affect neighbors. that's going to affect some of the people that are using the grade level parking. Um it's it's just one of those situations where people there's a high chance for people being confused and usually those are solved with signage requests or just installing signage after the fact. So I um but that being said, I this there was a drive-thru here. So if there was a method that was a little lower impact on the neighboring circulation, I think I would be fine with it. Obviously appreciate the density of the development and appreciate uh the coffee shop serving the lobby and its existence on the corner and holding that corner. I think all of those are good things. And um I guess I similarly if somebody told me right now we could just try and see with a veto open I would be much more open to supporting it completely. I I did have one question. I did want to know the fitness center that's on site. Is that only for the residents or is that that's not open to the public?

So the intent we don't have a signed lease. Uh the intention is that is the only fitness area in the development. Um the intention is to give a local um fitness uh entrepreneur room to to make a studio but also give them responsibility to the to the development to provide fitness for them. So trying to drive that community. uh ironically have conversations started with a retail tenant in the 616 directly across the street for a cycle studio. So uh the plan's coming together uh to do that if

okay if I may add to Aaron not to disagree with the the drive-thru entrance for Adobe is directly south of the current drive-thru. It's right where they turn left just in front of the southern nub. You can see the curb cut infill there. That is where the drive-through pattern. Now, I didn't check the previous SLU from 2000, but that is where the drive-through stack. So, anyone that exits Lexington or enters from Lexington, drives over a curb, over a rock, loops the parking lot, it's a mess. We see it all the time. Yeah. I think the difference there is you have all the stacking on site versus you won't have stacking on Seward, which is what the traffic folks are worried about here, right? Because

So, we have the same stacking on site. We're essentially moving the window southeast from where it's currently at and the drive northeast. We're just stretching out the the snake, if you will. Now, John Bartlett did say, cuz I asked him about the U-turn way back when, and he said, "Well, if they go up to California, I think to some the next street up, sooner or later, they're just going to get annoyed and learn the pattern." And I and I understand what he's saying. You do that once or twice, you're like, "Oh, I go this way if I'm a drive-through guy."

Yeah. Yeah. And I I guess I think we're some of us here are expressing some disappointment that we can change traffic patterns that affect residences in order to you know to to obviously support a development or a new a new element in the city without any resident input on that. It was what it feels like to us. It's not your fault.

Yeah. So my office is there on the north southeast corner of Lexington Fulton. The white building I will tell you Lexington is a truck drive north. It connects to Stockbridge and goes directly northwest. Seward obviously is Seward. Um if you look at that multif family development on the southeast corner of north of Veto, um that's a oneway south. Everything else is I mean I met with the property owners today that own three4s of the projects on Veto. Went through the plans with them. It's it's it's not a concern. I think to Kristen's point, um this has been talked about in the neighborhood for some time. it hasn't been a concern. I don't I don't like it. I'll enter into whatever agreement we can, but I also respect Bartlett's suggestion that it's needed. So,

I think Commissioner Yunker, though, I I did specifically ask Brent if this if the landscape island or boulevard extension was included in the plans he presented to the community, and he said yes. So, per testimony, they have been presented to the community at a number of meetings. um and through the public hearing process and the planning commission's expectations that engagement uh must take place prior to the planning commission meeting or hearing. Um I guess I I don't think that we do allow for traffic pattern modifications that are resulting from a proposed development without the opportunity for neighborhood engagement. I understand and I will say I am I am a civil engineer and when I looked at the prints which I usually do before I read the reports because that's the prints sort of give me a graphic design of what's in the in the report I didn't notice it. So if it wasn't highlighted in a public hearing we're thinking about this development going on here not the the four lines up in the corner. That's just my concern. I you know anyway that's enough. Okay. All right. Yeah. I mean, I I too hope that in general that the drive-thru is actually accessory to the the rest of it just because I mean, the sentiment about being very intentional about including retail on that ground floor instead of having it all be residential and the idea of supporting retail there. I'm not sure the drive-thru actually is helpful to that because people will be driving past all the other potential retail um tenants that are in that space. Um, but yeah, I do wonder if there's an opportunity to kind of wait and see what happens related to that closure of the

Beto Island, understanding that it very well likely will be needed and but just kind of having more of that ground truthing um if that's possible. Yeah, and I hadn't thought about the confusion of the traffic circulation until Brian mentioned that. And I do, yeah, there is a high possibility that someone will enter from Lexington and then wonder where they're can order their coffee and then have to go back around this whole now larger block to get to where they're supposed to be. So, but I guess you live could park and

get out of their car. Well, not if they want to use the drive-thru. Sure.

That was kind of why I was concerned about the fitness center because is it going to be a full parking lot? Is it is the timing going to be right? Cuz yeah, I probably my desire for coffee would probably outweigh my laziness to go through the drive-thru. And at that point, I would just park. But again, we're just talking about, you know, my coffee patterns, which some of my colleagues don't have the same addictions that I do. So, I I I think that I would, you know, think that people would probably park. And I do also not want to just see empty storefronts like to me giving a little bit more of concessions especially like I like to be a purist be like everything should be walkable and we should make everything work but I also know that at times we've pushed for too high uh percentages of of retail and then we end up with empty storefronts and I want a viable project. So that's why I'm leaning towards voting yes.

Appreciate that for sure. Yeah. And I do want to say that I'm very excited about the development. I think it's going to be great to kind of restore the um the street wall here. So, yeah. Okay. Does anyone want to make a motion?

I have one more question for staff, and this is probably too far reaching, but Foxtail does have drive-through locations nearby. So, can we get local data from similar establishments or the same establishment and then leverage that? I mean, if the numbers are considerably less, le leverage that to adjust plans associated with this. I mean, I guess the problem there though is that we're approving the drive-thru, not the use could come. Yeah. So, I I think maybe I answered my own question already. Yeah. It would have to have a drive-through use. Yeah.

Whether whether I provide this or not, um Foxdale does have a drive-thru in Granville. Their stack is seven, right? They're just not as intense as Starbucks. Um but again, it would dynamically change the development to reduce the drive-thru, and I don't I think that would go against what the traffic study and everything

would show. uh it doesn't work this way because of we're not approving the foxtail, right? And that's the conclusion that I got to. My point was if there's considerably less traffic volume at a local Foxtail that's a drive-thru um like the one in Granville, then maybe we don't have to have a veto conversation or maybe we're not causing the same traffic problems that we're dreaming up at the moment. Is is there a way Kristen to I mean certainly on schedule we could do this at the beginning of the project at the end of the project um approving this as drawn and if that means we got to come back for another special land use for removal of it if we provide more data I would certainly be an advocate to to help provide that to John Bartlet and

well I I think you know I think the record is pretty clear that the planning commission is not the uh driving force behind the boulevard extension And so ultimately this is under the authority of the uh mobile GR department uh with the caveat that the planning at this point with the information we have and with the position um that the city has meaning staff uh and mobile GR's expertise as as traffic engineers. If the planning commission approves a drive-thru that boulevard extension must be made. if there are uh separate future conversations and um I I don't want to suggest that mobile GR will will change that position but if that's something that takes place and there is a different conclusion um which again I want to be clear I'm not promising it would not be expected to come back before the planning commission because based on this record that is not a material uh distinction or material item for their approval. If anything, it sounds like the planning commission would prefer it not to be extended. However, they understand that their approval would require that extension at this point. Does that make sense?

Yep. And just for the record, I'm I'm either way our my tenant ex is either way. It would be ideal for us, but understand um there's two other parties to planning commission and mobile GR to make happy. So, I don't want to be the impedance here. All right. Now, therefore, it be resolved that the planning commission approves the special land use and site plan review request of Abode Fulton LLC, Brent Gibson, for a drive-through lane associated with a retail coffee shop to be located in a new mixeduse development at 617 West Fulton Street and 17 Seward Avenue Northwest for the following reasons. One, the proposed use will be consistent with the purpose and intent of the master plan and zoning ordinance, including the zone district because the proposed use will support the recommendations of the U to zoo area specific plan for gateway properties to incorporate firstfloor retail in a four-story mixeduse development and reflect the purpose and intent of the 2024 community master plan neighborhood center and the TNTBA zone district to encourage a mix of small-scale retail uses in appropriate locations. s to enhance the vitality of the areas and encourage additional investment in the area. 2. A the proposed use will meet the site plan review standards of section 5.12.8E because safe, convenient, and well-defined vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian circulation with and to and from the site are provided and the proposed landscape buffers are adequate. 3A. The proposed use will be compatible, harmonious, and appropriate with the character and uses of the neighborhood, adjacent properties, and natural environment because the proposed use will support the desired mixeduse character of the neighborhood, and the proposed use will not be significant change from the previous drive-thru use. 3B. The proposed use will not have adverse effects on the neighborhood because the intensity of the use is appropriate to its surroundings and the

landscape buffers will adequately buffer the adjacent residential uses from the vehicle drive-thru aisle. 3C. The proposed use will not be detrimental, hazardous, or disturbing to existing or future uses or to the public welfare by reason of excessive traffic or noise because the site has been designed to accommodate vehicle stacking for the drive-through use and safe turning movements exiting onto Fulton Street. 3D. The proposed use would not adversely affect the walkability of the neighborhood, impair pedestrian circulation patterns, disrupt the continuity of the urban street wall, or otherwise hinder the creation of a pedestrianoriented environment because the proposed use is accommodated entirely on site with adequate pedestrian walkways provided and the outdoor seating area will promote a pedestrian forward environment. 5B. The proposed use would not be detrimental to the financial stability and economic welfare of the city because the proposed use will encourage additional investment in the neighborhood. Be it further resolved that the following conditions of approval shall apply to this project. Standard condition set a approvals as written on the screens.

Second. All right, we have a motion and support. Any additional discussion? All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much.

Okay, let's take a five minute break. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat.

Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Okay,

I think let's reconvene here.

We have two more cases. So, our next one is 522 Stocking Avenue Northwest. Go ahead, Laura. This next case is a request for a membershipbased DIY auto repair facility. Um the applicant will will likely provide most of the details about how that business operates, but I'll give the my usual overview before they they speak. Um this use will include vehicle repair, a vehicle showroom and members lounge, and events with live entertainment with alcohol service. The vehicle repair as well as live entertainment and alcohol service require special land use approval. The property is located on the east side of Stocking Avenue between 1 and 2 street in the TCC transitional city center zone zone district. Surrounding property is TCC to the norththeast and west and traditional business area to the west. Adjacent uses include a restaurant to the north, surface parking to the east, an office building, a tiny little office building to the south. Um, and to the west there's a tire shop and residential use. This property is included in the westside area specific plan designated as a traditional business area with retail recommended as the preferred ground floor use. The property is about half an acre and it is improved with a approximately 12,400 square foot off warehouse building and a 16 space surface parking lot. The west side of the building fronting stocking avenue has storefront windows and a large building entrance. The windows are currently covered with decals that obscure visibility into the

building. And the applicant has indicated that if approved, they would be removing the window coverage to restore transparency into this area of the building. I will also mention that, you know, you'll see when when I go over the floor plan, but this area of the building will be the vehicle showroom and members lounge. That's what the windows will look into. The south side of the building facade facing the surface parking lot has an entrance door. This door here, it looks tiny on this large wall and an overhead door for vehicle entrance along with several windows there. On the right side of this page, there is a second overhead door that um enters to a small building addition that also faces the parking lot. So no site changes are proposed. Um they you will and notice that there's no separation between the subject property and the property to the south. The parking areas kind of flow into one another. I will also mention that both properties are under common ownership. The um the man door and the overhead door on the south side of the building facing the parking lot will serve as the main entrances into the building and the door on the front facade along stocking will be a secondary entrance door and emergency egress. Um this is although the zoning ordinance does um require building to be oriented to the street with entrances also oriented to the street. The uh the use of this door on the south side of the building is a continuation of the previous use that was there. Interior changes to the building will

include installation of five vehicle hoist bays. Two new restaurant restrooms, physical separation of the showroom and the repair area. As I mentioned, the showroom will be located on the west side of the building and the repair area on the east side of the building. And additional modifications will be required to meet building code for the vehicle repair use. The vehicle repair will be by members on their own vehicles and by appointment only. The hours of operation will be 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. daily. And the zoning ordinance for vehicle require vehicle repair requires the lot size to be at least one acre. Um the planning commission does have the authority to wave or modify zoning ordinance requirement use requirements. In this case, this property is just under one acre. It's very close. There are also screening uh requirements uh requirements that all activities be enclosed within the building and no storage of vehicles outside the building. Um the the site is existing screening um there's no need for screening from residential properties. The um overhead door is appropriately oriented um based on zoning ordinance requirements and um the applicant has indicated that all activities will be in the building and no storage of vehicles will be permitted in the parking lot. The showroom and lounge will be approximately 3,845 square ft in area and will provide room for vehicles to be parked there to be um shown to anyone who wants to to be there

and seating for up to 20 members. Um part of the application is a request to allow events um both indoor and outdoor. These events would be club organized events open to members only and um the indoor events may include live entertainment such as a DJ or a band and will be limited to fewer than 50 attendees. Um alcohol will be served at these events by a licensed caterer. Also, events will end no later than 8:00 PM. Um, and a temporary use permit would be required. Um, the because of the alcohol use, an operations management plan is required. In this case, vehicle repair does not normally require an operations management plan, but there are um the city of Grand Rapids has lots of activities and has the city has been experiencing in certain locations some vehicle um oriented activity late at night and early in the morning. um that is not legal activity. And it as a result of just the nature of this use and the the members based um the the the member-based um business and some of the vehicle activity that's already occurring um around the city. The Grand Rapids Police Department um requested a meeting with the applicants and as a result of that meeting um an enhanced operations management plan has has was prepared and submitted. It's in your packet and that plan addresses the um management of both the vehicle repair and the member um member expectations along with the alcohol use associated

with events. Um staff is recommending a condition of approval that this operations management plan be reviewed by the Grand Rapids Police Department um and um approved as a condition of approval. I will defer to the applicant to provide information about neighborhood engagement. Um there have been several letters that were submitted in support of the project and the community-based model, business model. And uh we also were in receipt of one letter from a neighboring resident with concerns about whether or not parking would be adequate for the events that will be held. In sum, we are asking the planning commission to consider whether the autooriented use meets the intent and purpose of the TCC zone district and the westside area specific plan, whether the proposed operations of the membershipbased vehicle repair meets the zoning ordinance requirement for the use and whether the operations management plan adequately addresses concerns. Are there any questions? Thank you, Laura. Any questions for Laura? Okay, thank you. All right, we'll have the applicants come up. Ladies and gentlemen of the commission, good afternoon. It's an honor to be here and see some of the inner workings of the city my partners and myself love dearly and a privilege to participate in the shaping of its continued growth. I am Coleman Brooks Senior, one of the founders of French Club, joined today by my partners Mike Zandstra and Adrien Hooerhyde. Our fourth partner Derek Brower could not attend but is no doubt watching the live stream as we speak.

Coleman Jr. could not maintain his attendance because his nap schedule was planned prior to uh my friend Mr. McKegan's insertion into the agenda. I have uh I have lived in the greater Grand Rapids area for over 20 years and downtown proper for the last seven. I love living downtown and continue to enjoy everything this amazing city has to offer. But as a car guy, I have slightly missed my old garage in the suburbs. This feeling has echoed back in conversations with my business partners and other downtown neighbors. And that shared sentiment is what fueled us to spend the last 16 months fleshing out a rough idea into a full business plan, culminating in our attendance here today. We are not just trying to build a business. We are trying to add a missing amenity to a city uh to city living that we ourselves would want to use. a place to meet other gear heads, work on our own cars, and educate others who want to learn more to do the same. Our goal is to provide to our community both a third space for like-minded individuals to commune with one another uh through a shared interest and also be a tool empowering individuals to expand their autonomy over their own mobility. As new business owners uh who have little familiarity with navigating red tape uh in procedures such as this, I'd like to say Laura in the GR planning office has been excellent to work with. Uh and her thorough and informative communication has made this all feel a little less daunting. We thank you commissioners for your time and consideration towards what we aim to add to our incredible city and look forward to being a part of its growth.

Thank you very much. Do folks have questions for the applicant? It was noted that one of the letters had concerns about parking. Do you just want to speak to that neighborhood concern?

Uh, yes. Actually, I'm uh excited to uh share that one of the letters of support we received was from the small office Laura showed in our parking lot. uh and they expressed support of our business model in general, but also expressed their willingness to work with us uh to use their parking, expanding our available parking from 16 to I believe 27 or 28 spaces uh as we coordinate them with them for these special events. Great. Thank you. Um one other question. We're we're being asked to consider um how many outdoor events to approve today. Do you have a sense of how many you may have in a year's time?

Uh, our operation for that would definitely be seasonal. Uh, you know, car people have a a season uh before things go into storage. Uh, we've loosely talked about maybe five events per year. Uh, it's definitely something we want to do occasionally um, and not not something very frequently. Very good. Thank you. As a follow-up to that, would those be five one-day events or would it be like five weekend events? because we also have the consideration of whether we approve the number of events or the number how that in how many days per year that is. So yeah uh yeah we consider them five individual day events. Okay. Thank you.

As an avid do-it-yourself car wrencher myself uh who's never had a garage other than the small one I have in the city, this is Yeah, I think it's a great opportunity. I appreciate what you're trying to do here. Um, I do have a question though, and as a do-it-yourselfer, I know what happens is I I I rent my bay and something happens that I didn't anticipate or things don't quite as go as I hope. Um, and maybe my car is now immobile uh, and I need a part that I can't get for another day or two or something like that. And how does my car then not end up in your parking lot? Like, what happens in that scenario? And I know you talked about no external car storage, but it does seem like if you're working with folks who are enthusiasts, they're they're doing projects. It's not a 4hour project. It's a four-week project. And what am I doing with my my vehicle during that time? Uh how does that how do you anticipate that works?

Uh yeah, so because the majority of repairs would be done within their normal time frame and not be left in the shop overnight uh as members take their cars home. uh the rare instances where something like that would happen, there's plenty of space in both the shop area or the showroom to figure out uh either an overnight or long-term storage within the building. So, um yeah. So, then this would not potentially be an option for a longerterm project then if I you know, for instance, would you say is that is that correct?

Uh no. So, we are offering you know bulk rates on the bays themselves. Uh so there would be an option for a member who does want to tackle a longer project to be able to rent one of those service bays uh for an extended period of time. Gotcha. Okay. Thank you.

All right. Seeing none, I'll have you take a seat and then um I will open up the public hearing. If you would like to speak to this case, please make your way to the microphone. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing. All right, commissioners. This is a new one.

Yeah, I um I don't repair cars myself and I've never tried. Uh but I would I appreciate that there's um folks uh like our applicants who are willing to um add an amenity like this to the city. think it's a good fit, especially where I think the I think it's appropriate in the location, too. Um, and it seems like they've done a lot of work trying to get uh neighborhood support and that type of thing. So, I yeah, I would be in support of it.

Go ahead. Yeah, I'm in support. Uh, very much so. So, I I really love the concept, the location, and um and all the work that has been done to get them here today. I know they're conceptualizing thinking five events. I'm worried we may be restricting them too much. So, I I don't know if we want to be a little more um uh give them a few more. If you would want more than five, I I guess just let me know us know where where are you at. If we say five, that's where you're at. So, do you want us to consider more? Maybe before you answer that, I wonder I do have a point of clarification. So if um we were to approve five events, for instance, um how do I guess maybe broader question, how do events work? If this is an existing business and they they came to the city and said, "Hey, we'd like to do a tent party in the summer or something like they just to make an application, go through that process, right?"

Yeah. And the um temporary event permit would be limited to four days, four times per year. So four events effectively. So without this stating a five or something different, they would be limited to four if like in a normal case. Yeah. I want to be careful that an event is not always an event. So it it there's some limitations as to types the types of events but if it's sort of incidental to their business um then they would be limited to four under the current uh zoning ordinance whereas this approval would allow them at five. Okay. To add five or five

I would say up to five. Um, we wouldn't stack the five on top of the four because as part of your planning commission consideration, I would sort of uh default to the you felt five was appropriate, therefore it's five maximum. Okay. Uh, so to answer uh, Commissioner Jen's question, apologies, I'm not going to try to pronounce your last name. No problem.

Uh, we would definitely, you know, be immunable to to more events. We really want to be community focused and community centric and and as we continue to grow uh the opportunity to to find additional opportunities for programs uh or programming uh you know reaching out with neighborhoods uh yeah we would we would enjoy more freedom uh in that regard. So, as a car guy, what is your season, if there was a monthly event that you held, you know, and the weather was potentially good, what would that look like?

As a car guy, I would say uh the season is normally April to November. Uh I I would say this past winter, I kind of changed my my thoughts on what the normal car season is, or if there even is one. Uh but yeah, I would say traditionally it's um you know between seven and eight months of of warm weather that you can keep your car clean and uh keep salt off of it. I apologize if this is in some of the materials, but how many members are you are you targeting? Would you hope for roughly? Uh so we are targeting uh 150 members uh by the end of you know our first 12 months in business. Okay. And your events would be four members only. Correct.

Correct. And so if if you would have those events, how do you envision parking working for an event like that? Like I see there's a large parking lot off to your east. I don't know where the access if there's access to that or um would it just be street parking at that point? Yeah. So there is not access to that parking lot uh to the east. That is specifically Rockford Constructions employee lot. Uh that actually that entire road is is gated off and not accessible to anyone. Uh, but there is street parking available on Second Street, uh, just north of Firebird Bar. Uh, and one of the letters of support we received was also the owner of Firebird Bar, uh, who who would love to find ways to collaborate in in broader programming, uh, with his parking lot possibly as well.

And did you say in your materials that events would be limited to 50 people? Uh, 50 people inside the inside. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Uh Mike has something just gonna add for for context too. I part of what our ideas are for these members events would be probably car shows, cars and coffee events. So the cars are going to be the shows themselves. So you know whether in our parking lot in the building as we're showing things off um you know parking is going to kind of consolidate within the event itself too. So um that's all I had to add.

Just a question for city staff just from my understanding. So let's say we approve eight and they want 10 eventually what happens they come back here. Yes. Okay. Thank you. We are scrambling to try to figure out um a different what what other um facilities have maybe been granted different permissions um to see if there's some level of consistency. Great. Um so okay talk slow. Thanks. Anyone else?

No I agree. I think this is a really exciting opportunity. Um I also my limited experience is changing my own headlight. So um but I think this is super cool and um a great opportunity for for folks to find community here. So kudos. And I want to say that I really appreciate the willingness to meet with GRPD and the thorough operations plan that y'all developed as a result of that meeting. and also like your member bylaw um booklet too. So thanks for that work. Would anyone like to make a motion? Oh, you have

So so far we um have ascertained that gimmies and speciation uh were allowed up to 10 events per year. Okay. 10 10 I remember that for gimmies. I I know that we had Gilda's club had a specified number of events I believe. Um but it was it was a long time ago. So, but there's at least two more recent examples where the planning commission felt that 10 was the appropriate number. Um, which if it's a eight-month season, that would give them at least one event per month. That would be in support. Okay.

Um, I can make a motion. Now therefore be it resolved that the planning commission approves the special land use and site plan review request of Wrench Club LLC Coleman Brook for a membershipbased Is that Coleman Brook senior? Yes.

For a membershipbased auto repair facility to include vehicle repair, a vehicle showroom and members lounge and indoor and outdoor special events with alcohol service at 522 Stocking Avenue Northwest for the following reasons. Number one, the proposed use will be consistent with the purpose intent of the master plan and zoing ordinance, including the zone district because the proposed use will support the desired development character of the neighbor of a neighborhood center by contributing to a mix of uses to enhance the vitality of the surrounding neighborhoods and promote an active envir mixed use environments in appropriate location and intensity and uh provide uh a service that's not currently uh available in city. Uh the number two, the proposed use will meet the site plan review standards of section 5.12.08.e because the site layout is already established and designed to accommodate an autoor oriented use and no site changes are proposed. 3A. The proposed use will be compatible, harmonious, and appropriate with the character and uses of the neighborhood adjacent properties. And the proposed use will support the desired mixeduse character of the neighborhood and the memberbased use is oops I missed a sentence uh at the beginning there. So the proposed use will be compatible, harmonious and appropriate with the character and uses of the neighborhood adjacent properties and the natural environment because the proposed use will support the desired mixeduse character of the neighborhood and the member-based use is intended to meet a service need while also building a sense of community. Events are attended to are intended as an amenity for members and will be limited in size and frequency ending in no later than 8:00 p.m.

3B. Potentially adverse effects arising from the proposed use will be minimized because adequate parking will be provided. All equipment, vehicle park parts, tires and other materials and supplies uh will be located and stored within the building. 3C. The proposed use will not be detrimental, hazardous, or distributing to existing or future uses or to the public welfare because all auto repair activities will incur occur inside the building by appointment only. Hours and frequency of events will be limited. 3D. The proposed use will not adversely affect the walkability of the neighborhood, impair pedestrian circulation patterns, disrupt the continuity of the urban street wall, or otherwise hinder the creation of a pedestrian oriented environment because the existing building is located at the sidewalk. And the window coverings on the front of the building facing Stocking Avenue will be removed, restoring transparency into the building. 5B. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the financial stability or economic welfare of the city because the use is not anticipated to result in nuisances that require excessive code enforcement actions given the proposed scale and hours and plans have been put in place. E1. Given the character, location, development trends, and other aspects of the neighborhood, the proposed location for alcohol consumption will demonstrabably be an asset to the neighborhood because the alcohol use is associated with an occasional membersonly events and will be not be part of daily operations. E3. The use or change in use as constructed and operated by the applicant is compatible with the neighborhood because support for the proposed establishment including special events as an amenity for members has been expressed. E5. The use as proposed will be operated by to be operated by

the applicant will minimize or eliminate negative secondary effects on the neighborhood because the establishment has an adequate operations management plan and the proposed duration of events will be limited. Be it further resolved that the following conditions of approval shall apply. Standard condition set a approvals as on the screen. Number one, that the alcohol service occurring during wrench club sponsored event member events shall be served by a licensed caterer. Number two, that indoor and outdoor events shall end no later than 8:00 p.m. with a property vacated by 9:00 p.m. Number three, that the number of events shall not exceed 10 events or 10 days per year. Is that

you want some help with that? What's that? Did you want a suggested condition for that or no? Uh, a different condition other than three. I I was going to I was going to help you. I was asking if you wanted to suggest Go for it or try to um that the outdoor events shall not exceed 10 events of a maximum two days per event per year. Okay. But then so they could still do 10 single day events. Yes. Okay. I was just thinking if it were like a Friday, Saturday, Saturday, Sunday event that that might be okay as well.

Okay. Um, number four, the applicant shall apply for a temporary use permit for each outdoor event and work with staff to ensure that adequate parking plan is in place. Five, that outdoor live entertainment associated with event shall be permitted with no amplification. Six, that the doors shall be closed during times of live amplified sound associated with indoor events. Seven, that an operations management plan for both the vehicle repair use and events with alcohol service be submitted for review by the Granitz Police Department support. All right, we have a motion and support. Any additional discussion? Yeah. Oh. Oh, sorry. All those in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Good luck. Okay, our last case here is 7051 Street Northwest and Avery will walk us through this one. All right. The subject property is located at the northwest corner of Davis Avenue and 11th Street. It is improved with a twostory 5-unit building that was unfortunately damaged by fire in April of 2025. Um the site is located in the TN LDR zone district along link residential street types and may um accommodate up to six units by right with its current configuration. However, the property does not meet the minimum lot width of 90 ft that is required for a multiple family development of above six units. And so the applicant is requesting to split the lot um that you see here. this is existing lot and split it into two new lots to facilitate greater density on each site. Um and although the proposed density of four units and six units on each lot is permitted, um they are before you today asking special lane use approval for an additional third story to each proposed building. Um I'm going to dive in a little deeper to the west or the interior lot here. Um the applicant is proposing a four-unit building on this lot. Um the first floor will include a two one-bedroom units. So here there will be two one-bedroom units and then the second and third stories will be composed of two additional units each with three bedrooms. Back to the site layout, there is a

sixspace parking pad located off the alley with bicycle racks and trash carts um just north of the parking spaces. Um there's also going to be a 6ft tall um wood privacy fence located along this north property line. And then for the eastern or the corner lot, this is proposed to be a sixunit building. Um, while the property could support up to four dwelling units, the applicant is utilizing the zoning ordinances accessible housing bonus, which allows the lot area per dwelling unit to be reduced when at least 25 of the units are accessible. And so, two of the units are meeting this requirement and six units overall are proposed. Um, I'd just like to take a moment to note that although each lot again can support this density and the unit of mixes that are proposed, um, the applicant is requesting that additional story on each structure to get to this density that's proposed. And so for the overall height in the TNLDR zone district, again, just as a reminder, two and a half stories is permitted or 35 ft overall. Um you as planning commissioners can allow up to three stories or 45 feet um with the special land use approval. Um and what is proposed is three stories and 30 ft in height. So we just ask you to consider the overall neighborhood context um scale massing and compatibility of the proposed structures within this um neighborhood. relative to the required building line um along 11th Street to the south here. The buildings are proposed or the RBL is established at about 25 ft and the

buildings are proposed um at around 28 ft and this is driven by the requirement of the front porches to be set back at least 5T from the sidewalk. Um and this is consistent with what is existing on the block. And then along Davis Avenue here to the east, um the RBL is established at around 32 and a half feet. And the proposed setbacks range um from 22 1/2 to 26 ft. Um staff has found that this is sufficient due to um you can see the buildings are um oriented towards 11th Street and the property lines are angled um not at 90° angles. Um and so we just asked the planning commission to consider whether this setback is appropriate considering that additional height that is being requested today. A compliant landscaping plan will be required at permitting. However, all other um development um site layout and building requirements are being met with this plan. Um, I'll note that the West Grand Neighborhood Organization has submitted a letter of support for the project and I will just have the applicant speak to any other engagement that they've done. Um, so overall, the planning commission should consider the whether the additional height is necessary to support the proposed density and the unit mix proposed today and whether the scale and massing is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Any questions for me?

All right, thanks Avery. Go ahead. So, they're allowed two and a half stories. They want three. With the two and a half stories, how high can it go? 2 and 1/2 stories or 35 ft. And they're proposing three stories at 30 feet tall. So, really the height is they're requesting is 5t less than under two and a half. Okay. I just want to be No, thank you for clarifying. Yep.

Any other questions? Um, maybe this isn't the place for this question, but I just it looks like the proposed sidewalks, which I know have to be removed to do the development, are are at 5T in width, which is typical, but it it doesn't look like they match the existing. I guess it would make sense to me that they do match the existing width. I'm just looking at the drawing where the uh the previous drawing you had up, Avery, where Yeah. were the new sidewalks. Nope. One more. Nope. this one. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

So, like in the lower left by the existing tree, it just looks like there's maybe a six or eight inch difference in sidewalk width and it just would make sense to me to match existing. Is that Do you know if that's a requirement or is that something we should be talking about here or? Yeah. Right there in this area here. Yeah. You see how that existing sidewalk appears to be wider and then they drew in a five foot wide sidewalk which is kind of traditional standard, but it looks like the existing might be wider. That was just a question I had if that would be a natural piece of the approval that it would match or if we should Yeah. Was there was there any specific conversation from engineering that said four feet? I I thought it would be five feet typically.

It is five. It's labeled as five. The new sidewalk, but it looks as though the existing in both sides is probably, you know, just by visual 5 and 1/2 ft or something. And I don't know why it would be drawn that way if it wasn't. I think all those details will be resolved. Okay. Yeah, I was going to say the same thing. Really, you know, um we should have caught that. We we didn't, but really we're really focusing on that additional Yeah, I understand. Everything else will need to meet other requirements. All right. Thank you. Yeah, agreed. Our our plan reviewer, I'm sure, is watching and those kinds of details absolutely should be corrected and will be adjusted during permitting. Okay. As long as it will be, that's all.

All right. Thanks, Avery. Um, we'll invite the applicant up.

Uh, thank you, Avery, and good afternoon. My name is Jeremy Skellyy, and thank you for your time uh to allow me to present my project before the board. And the project that I'm proposing consists of, like Avery was saying, the two buildings and with one building with four units and the other building uh consisting of the six units. And I am submitting for the special land uh use permit approval to allow for the buildings to be the three full stories instead of the currently permitted 2 and 1/2 stories. And like she was getting into and like you were talking about to where you could go to 35 ft, but I'm going to um we're going to stick with the 30 ft mostly because we're doing um type B accessible units on the main floor. So you're going to have a little drop down there. So that saves you some height uh as well. So, um, and then for the, uh, community engagement, I've, uh, with the West Grand, um, over there, the executive director, um, Annette Vandenberg, I've been talking with for a while now, and and, um, showed her all the prints and layouts and site plans, and told her what I was doing, and as you saw the letter, that they were in approval with it. And one of her concerns was um you know making sure we have the bike racks in there and um we were going back and forth on um as you see the the dumpsters you know for a site like this. Do you use a dumpster or do you use the trash bins? And we're going back and forth to where she was saying that, you know, they would probably prefer trash bins over the dumpster, for example, because for dumpsters, they see issues with the neighbors throwing trash in there, mattresses in there. Um that doesn't that people that aren't allowed to use it. But we were talking to the um actually the the trash company in Grand

Rapids trash company, and they're saying, "Well, for something like this, it does seem like a lot of bins. why don't you, you know, think about doing the um dumpster enclosure as well. So, something like that. I don't know if that has to get approved or what we do today, stick with it or do we have more talks with the neighborhood and the trash company because they're both saying one thing to the other. And I'm open to both because we could still get the six parking spaces in there. Uh we had site plans shown that the engineer drew it up with a dumpster and we were still able to get it in there out the alley. um and save the six spaces. So, um yeah, other than that, I'm open for questions and thank you.

Thank you. Um one one question. So, did you say that both buildings on the first floor will have accessible units? They will. Oh, okay. Yeah. So, both will be type B cuz technically two anything over believe it's four units you do need the type B. So, okay. Y

any other questions for him? No. All right. I will open the public hearing. If you are here and would like to give us your thoughts, come on up. Hi, my name is Daniel Mulling. Uh, I live on Davis A, just a few houses uh up the street. My house with my where I live with my wife and newborn son is in the aerop photo. So, yeah. Um he's with his my they're with their his aunt right now. So that's why I can be here today. Um yeah, so generally I wanted to express support for the project. I think it looks really nice. Um yeah, I was kind of made aware of this a few days or a few weeks ago with the flyer, so decided to come in. I've long been interested in the work of the planning commission, so I thought this was a good opportunity to just come in uh sit on a meeting and give a comment. Um yeah, again second again repeating uh I like the project. I think it looks great. Um the specifics of it that seem to be the big questions of the three stories. Um you know as has been noted uh I I have no problem with that at all and it's it's not um a very out ofplace height compared to the other buildings across the street. Um you know the marcado across the street is I would imagine a similar height. Um yeah, and I don't have too much more to say uh on the specifics of the units. Um the setbacks also fine with u currently there's essentially zero setbacks. Um which I also didn't really have a problem with, but the setback plan also see no issues with that. Um the location specific location makes sense to me. Um 11th Street is kind of a main entryway into the neighborhood. Um, so it seems like a good uh location to add some additional density to the neighborhood, which I like to see. Um, you know, I've been very happy with the development the

past few years along Leonard Street. Um, and this type of uh building will help support the new businesses that have been popping up lately along Leonard and um I think help bridge the um help connect the the you know Leonard Street area corridor and the Bridge Street corridor. And I think because of those two um neighboring corridors, this my neighborhood, this neighborhood seems like a good uh location for some higher uh infill density. So yeah, that's all I had to say. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Anyone else? All right. I will close the public hearing. Um, commissioners,

I I like it. I think it's a, you know, it's kind of what we're looking for in fill of some some lots that are, you know, designed for this type of use. Um, I don't I don't have an issue with the height. I I I'm familiar with the area and I was just looking on street view and I think there's enough separation from um lower height residential properties that I don't think there will be much of an impact personally. Um, I I would say about the dumpster enclosure versus bins, I would encourage you to stick with the bins because as someone who lives on a street that there's a multi-tenant uh building at the end of my street that my house is very close to that has a dumpster, um, when the trash truck comes to pick it up at 5 in the morning, it's not it's not nice. So, um, and and I know there's rules about that, but the trash companies don't care. So, that's those are my comments.

Yeah. I also uh uh I was through this building after it burned and so I'm excited to see something happen here. Um, uh, and would also encourage and in fact would encourage directly the use of the city services and trash bins. I've uh built multif family and um seen them used in much larger developments than this and I think it can be effective and and um the city never shows up at 5 in the morning to pick up the trash. Uh and it works really it does work really great. So uh encourage that. But um no, I'm very much in favor uh love what is going on here. Creative way to to get some density on this site. So appreciate it.

Yeah, I completely agree. Um, as we've already talked about, even though it's three stories, it's still lower than what would be permitted for height. Um, and I am really excited to see some additional development of accessible units. So, I think that's this is great. Um, one thing we might consider as a condition um that I think we've been thinking about more and more lately is, especially since it's in the middle of a residential area, maybe we limit construction hours to 7 between 7 a.m. and 7 or is it 7 to 7? Is that what we typically do or 7 to 10? I don't remember. 7 to Sorry. Don't apologize. We do 7 to 7 typically, right?

7 to 7. Okay, great. Thank you. Anyone want to make a motion? Last one of the day. Jump on it. All right, I'll make a motion.

Will you put your microphone down? Now, now therefore, be it resolved that the planning commission approves the special land use and site plan review request for JL Equity Group LLC Jeremy Scully to add three stories to it to two proposed residential buildings of four and six units that can otherwise be constructed by Wright at 70511th Street Northwest for the following reasons. The proposed use will be cons consistent with the purpose and intent of the master plan and zoning ordinance including the zone district because the development will contribute to a greater variety of housing types in lowdensity residential zone districts. Uh 2024 community master plan great neighborhood recommendation 1B2. The proposed project supports infield development at an appropriate scale. uh vital business district uh goals 2A3. The site the proposed building and site will meet all standards of section 51208e because the site has been harmoniously and and efficiently organized in relation to the size and type of lot character of the neighborhood and adjoining structures. The site and building components have been designed to meet all zoning regulations. The proposed use will be compatible, harmonious, and appropriate with the character and uses of the neighborhood adjacent properties and the natural environment because the proposed buildings are consistent in scale and orientation with what is desired in the TN neighborhood classification and the additional height accommodates appropriate density for the size and nature of the site. The proposed use will not have adverse effects on the neighborhood because the buildings structures and entrances are appropriately oriented on the site and

building setbacks are met meet the minimal uh minimum zoning requirements. The proposed use will not be detrimental, hazardous or disturbing to existing or or future uses or to the public welfare by reason of excessive traffic, noise, odor and vis visual clutter because vehicular vehicular access for the west parcels will be from the alley and the landscape buffer will provide will be provided to mitigate glare, noise and disturbance to abuing residential properties. The proposed use will not adversely affect the walkability of the neighborhood, impair pedestrian circulation patterns, disrupt the continuity of the urban street wall, or otherwise hinder the creation of a pedestrianoriented environment because the building setbacks will be consistent with neighborhood properties, maintaining the street wall and and bringing the east building closer to compliance. The placement of the structure, entrance and alley parking reflect a pedestrianoriented site. The uh public or private infrastructure already exists and will not safeguard wait will not will safeguard the health, safety and general welfare of the public because the infill development and provisions of additional housing units will support and complete a stable neighborhood. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the financial stability and economic welfare of the city because the additional dwelling units will contribute to the tax base and support the nearby business district and the proposed development will encourage additional investment in the neighborhood. Be it further resolved that the following conditions of approval shall apply. standard conditions set A as seen on the screen and uh condition two that

construction be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 700 p.m. Do we usually say um all days of the week? Great. Support. All right, we have a motion and support. Any additional discussion? All those in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Okay. Do we have anything for planning commission discussion? No. All right. I will open up the public comment period. If you would like to address commission, now is your time. I will clo close the public comment period and we are adjourned. Thanks everyone.