Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

you

All right, welcome everybody to the City of Grand Rapids Planning Commission meeting for August 13th, 2026. We have several public hearings. But before we jump into that, I'm just going to quickly go over kind of the procedure that we go through when we do these cases. So initially, staff will come up and give us a presentation on the staff report. We then have an opportunity for the applicant to add additional information they'd like the Commission to know. We'll then open up the public hearing. If you're here from the public and want to speak to the case, you're welcome to come up to the mic and address Planning Commission with up to three minutes of comments. We'll ask that you state your name just for the record. And then after we close public comment, The applicant will have an opportunity to address any public comments that were made and then commission will deliberate and make a decision. There are one thing I want to mention is that we do get draft resolutions from our draft resolution language from staff that has findings both kind of for and against for us to consider when we're making motions. So you see if you see whoever's making the motion a resolution reading they they might be but know that no decisions have been made ahead of time and commissioners are free to modify any of that language as they see fit. A reminder that this meeting is being streamed live on Facebook and YouTube. And with that, we'll get back to the agenda. First thing we have here is a request for an extension for 1225 and 1237 Lake Drive Southeast.

The first request is for an extension of a special land use that was granted by the Planning Commission in September of 2025. The use is at 1225 and 1237 Lake Drive Southeast for construction of a new three-story, 30-unit multiple family residential building. The effective date of the approval was September 27, 2025, and a special land use is valid for up to one year, provided the property is used as approved or work has substantially commenced in that period. and up to two extensions of six months each may be granted if the Planning Commission finds that an extension is warranted to circumstances beyond the control of the applicant. The applicant has submitted a letter of the request identifying that the work on the architectural plans is still underway and also they are in the process of seeking financing with plans to Commence project in early in spring 2027 And should this six-month extension be granted today the app it would give the applicant until March 27 2027 Does the Planning Commission have any questions?

Thank You Laura any questions for Laura Seems pretty straightforward Common reasons for us to grant extensions in the past would anyone like to make a motion?

Will I would move to give them an extension for six months?

second all right motion and support any discussion all those in favor say aye aye any opposed Motion carries. Thanks Laura. All right now conflict of interest anyone have potential conflicts of interest We need to discuss before we move into public hearings. I No? Okay. Then let's go. Oh, then our first. Yeah, go ahead, Kristen.

You tackle that. The first item on your agenda, 3127 Plainfield Avenue Northeast. That item, we are requesting that that be postponed by the Planning Commission. The applicant has requested you to postpone it to September 24th. and they believe that they will have the necessary information that planning staff and MDOT have requested prior to that. But at minimum, we would ask that the Planning Commission postpone this item. It is simply not ready after communication with and from MDOT. So it would be up to the Planning Commission whether you feel that postponing it to a date certain is appropriate. If we do not have the information by that date, So sorry. If we did not have the information by that date, on that date, we would come back before the Planning Commission and request an additional postponement. And so that would save an additional noticing cost from us and or the applicant. So that is helpful.

Great. Thoughts on that? Anyone want to make a motion here?

Move to move the proposal of the meeting to September 24. Okay. Support.

All right. We have motion and support to postpone 3127. Who supported that? Matt. Sorry. Yes. Any discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Okay. Thank you. Now we'll go to 1555 Knapp Street Northeast. Elizabeth will walk us through this.

Okay, let's see here, let's get to the right item. Okay, so this item is a request from the Greenhouse Ministry. They are requesting approval to establish a residential rehabilitation facility in a residential zone district. This is before you today because group living, of which residential rehabilitation facilities are a type, require special land use approval. The subject property is in an MCN LDR zone district, mid-century neighborhood, low density residential zone district. It is... next to Huff Park. It is also surrounded by a number of multiple family residential to both the north and south as well as low density residential uses. The property is located at the corner of Ball and Knapp. It is approximately 1.82 acres in area and it's improved with a two-family residence. These are photos from a recent listing that we took, or that the applicant submitted to us. So the building is almost 5,000 square feet. It's a two family. It has a total of six bedrooms and four full bathrooms. There are two attached garages and each unit has a separate driveway, one from Knapp, one from Ball. Each unit has a separate door and the door is connected to the driveway by an internal walkway. Here are a few slides of what it looks like. So I'll talk first about proposed improvements. So the two units will be converted to a single family and they'll do that by removing an internal bedroom, the one that I'm showing here. It's in the westerly unit. They'll remove the walls to that bedroom and By doing that, they will connect the two units. Of course, they'll also eliminate one of the two kitchens as well. The remaining main floor bedroom will be repurposed as a private meeting room for mentoring, counseling, life skills instructions, and other confidential conversations. There is an office in the Easterly unit. I would like the applicant to address how that would be used. I'm not clear how that office would be used. And then, oops, this is the basement. And then upstairs, three of the bedrooms will be used to accommodate up to six residents. And then one of the bedrooms will will be used as needed for like if a resident is ill or for quiet personal space. The garages will not be used for vehicular storage. They'll be used, one of them will be used to store maintenance equipment, seasonal items, and the like. and the other garage may be repurposed in the future as a fitness and wellness area. No other exterior changes are proposed. Relative to the operation, The ministry is proposing to operate a faith-based residential home for four to six adult women transitioning from incarceration. One of the questions that we would like answered is the duration of the stay. And although I believe that the residents will be coming from jail based on conversations, I didn't see that in the application. So if the applicant could clarify that, jail as opposed to prison. I think it should also be clarified if there are restrictions, there would be restrictions on the nature of the crimes that the residents may have committed. I did notice that that was a question that came up in some of the correspondence that we received. A program manager will supervise daily operations between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m. weekdays and 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. weekends. No staff will remain on site overnight. Remote monitoring will be utilized. According to the application, family visits will occur during scheduled visitation hours. And if the applicant could confirm when that may be, that would be great. The application states that two staff members will generally be on site at any time, plus a service provider if there is one visiting at that time. Relative to parking, group living requires a half parking space per resident plus one space per employee. Assuming a maximum of six residents and two employees and one additional service provider on site at a time, six parking spaces would be required. The applicant does not indicate that the residents would likely have vehicles and would most likely be using public transit or other forms of transportation. So given that there won't be vehicles for the residents, that it would be limited to employees and service providers who would be parking in the residential driveway. So that might be something, although the number of parking spaces should be adequate, the Planning Commission might wish to consider the residential nature of this and the fact that folks would be using the driveway versus the garages for parking and whether that tandem parking arrangement would be appropriate. The applicant has indicated, well, they provided a summary of their outreach activities that is in the packet, and I'll let them describe that. They did send us a few photos of a neighborhood meeting that they held, and we included some photos here. We have received a total of three letters of opposition. One was included in the packet last week and we just received two additional letters of opposition. Folks are concerned about the nature of the use in their neighborhood as well as lack of information about the nature of the crimes that the residents may have committed. So in sum, we're looking at a residential rehabilitation facility for no more than six occupants. The Planning Commission should look at potential impacts of the use on adjacent and nearby residential properties, whether the use would affect the stability of the neighborhood, the loss of a dwelling unit, since we'd be converting from a two-family to a single family, and the conversion of that dwelling unit to a single family without fully undertaking the requirements for that conversion. And what I really mean by that is the fact that we're ending up with two garages and two driveways on two separate streets. So with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions and then turn it over to the applicant.

Great. Thanks, Elizabeth. Any questions for Elizabeth at this time? Nope. All right. Then we'll have the applicant come up and add what you'd like.

Is there any particular slide you'd like? That's fine. I'll keep that one up already.

Yeah. Hi. Thank you, Elizabeth. Appreciate it so much. And I just want to even say thank you to them. grateful we are as they walked us through this process, kind of being new at this. So good afternoon. Just thank you for giving us the opportunity to be here this afternoon and also just thank you for your service and doing this role for our city. We appreciate that too. And so my name is Barb Casper. I'm the Executive Director of the Greenhouse Ministry. With me today we have Mary Lucas and Heather Baez. They're also part of the ministry too with vision, the purpose, some of the staff and so forth. We also have here our corporate attorney just here for the record of any questions regarding zoning or anything legal that I'm unable to answer and so forth. It's going to be productive here. So you've already received a great deal of information in the application and materials of record. So rather than repeat that all today, I thought I'd like to focus on the actual proposal before you. Who we are, the life at what 1555 Knapp would look like, and how we operate the home safely and responsibly in the kind of neighbor we intend to be. So the Greenhouse Ministry is a Christ-centered residential, I'm sorry, Christ-centered residential restoration ministry for adult women rebuilding life after incarceration. So our name, the Greenhouse, it's actually quite intentional. Like when you think about a greenhouse, I don't know if you guys are gardeners or not, but you think about this like protected place where something that's fragile or maybe even broken can be given the right conditions to take root and grow. A greenhouse doesn't actually do the growing for the plant, it just provides the environment. the protection, the nourishment, the light, the structure that allows growth to happen. And this is what we want this home to be. We believe that we have a God who restores lives, and we also believe that restoration requires responsibility. The women who come to us, women who are motivated by change, but need a safe, structured place to heal and develop healthy patterns, take responsibility for their choices, and prepare for independent living. So our goal isn't simply to have the woman successfully live at the greenhouse. Our goal is to prepare her to successfully live outside of the greenhouse, to contribute to the community, to maintain sobriety, restore health relationships, take responsibility for her life, and move forward with character and integrity. So the home, right? At its heart, we're proposing that 1555 NAP here is a home with a maximum of six adult women. And what much of that will happen there will look actually very ordinary. You guys have homes too, I'm guessing. And the women will cook, they'll share meals, they'll do laundry, they'll do yard work. They'll participate in classes, perhaps. They'll go to AA, attend church, maybe Bible studies. They'll have time spent with mentors or even family members. They'll learn how to keep commitments and resolve conflict and manage responsibilities and live well with other people. Because we're not trying to teach these women how to live in an institution. We're preparing them to successfully live in a home and a family and a community. Even the physical layout, as Elizabeth talked about, reflects the nature of what we're trying to achieve here. We're opening up that main living area to create more shared space for cooking and meals and talking and fellowship and things like that. There will also be quieter spaces, as Elizabeth talked about, right? A place, an office-type setting area where people can come in and have a private conversation with staff and be mentored. maybe some counseling and so forth. And that east office that she had mentioned too, that also is a private space. Just like my home and maybe your homes, there's times we want to have a conversation away from the larger group. And this space will allow that rhythm to happen in this home. So the first stage of 1555 NAP on this greenhouse ministry is a 12-month program. That's called the first step, as we call it. And we have a long-term goal of transitioning residents into a second step housing, where they can experience even greater independence. So that future housing is not a part of this request for you today. Now, we do understand that women transitioning from incarceration and moving into a neighborhood, there are questions about safety. We get that. Those are very reasonable questions, too. And we share that concern, too, and the safety begins with the women even before they enter the home. You see, no court or jail or any program is going to simply place a woman into the greenhouse ministry. Every woman will voluntarily agree and apply. They go through our own screening process. Our leadership team makes the final decision on who gets to live in that home. That includes a criminal background check, personal interviews, a review of her history and circumstances, recovery needs, willingness to participate, and whether she can safely and successively live in a particular shared environment. Criminal history is considered on an individual basis, including the nature and severity of the offense, its circumstances, how long ago it occurred, and the women's circumstances today. So we are not looking to house violent criminals, and we are not looking to house sex offenders. That's a decision we're making for the safety of the home, the safety of the community, and so forth. So we're not simply just looking to fill beds. If we don't believe that someone is appropriate to fit this home, she will not live there. The greenhouse, though, is not a detox center. It's not a rehab, so to speak. Or it's not even a mental health treatment facility. If a woman requires that kind of level of care, this is not the appropriate placement for her. Now, once admitted, though, that structure and accountability that we do at the interview process continues in the home. Like I said, the first phase is about 60 days. During that time, they can't leave the property without a chaperone, right? They're pretty fragile, like that plant that goes into the greenhouse. They're pretty fragile there. We're focusing them on stability, routine, trust, and following the expectations of the home. Just like, you know, as I raised my kids, they needed to know the expectations of the home here too, right? And so during that initial phase, the residents won't leave without an approved chaperone. This greater independence is earned and gained as time goes on, and they demonstrate responsibility. Our house manager will provide daytime coverage, followed by an assistant house manager in the evening, and separate weekend coverage. Residents will also have a 24-hour access to a designated on-call team member. We are engaging in a professional security company for monitored exterior cameras and a security system using their advice on how best to keep this home secure and the community safe too. Along with appropriate exterior lighting as needed and established response protocol. Medications are secured, visitors are approved and have sign-ins. There's no visitation that has an open end or unapproved time. There'll be no drop-in or overnight guests. There's no romantic partners coming to this house either. Drugs, alcohol, weapons will not be permitted, and random drug testing is a part of our protocol. Now, when rules are broken, we will progressively use the accountability, right? Serious or repeated violations, particularly those involving safety, will or can and will result in dismissal. We don't believe that safety comes from promising that nothing difficult will ever happen. It comes from careful screening, appropriate supervision, clear expectations, strong accountability, and having a plan when something does happen. Our responsibility also extends well beyond the walls of the house. As you saw from that aerial view, we're in a neighborhood here, right? And the record details the outreach that we've completed already. Our door-to-door conversations, our mailed invitations, our open house, and our tours of the home. along with meeting with Creston Neighborhood Association. So I won't repeat all of that in detail. You have that in front of you. But I do want to tell you why we did it. We didn't want our neighbors to know the greenhouse simply as a name on a city notice or a zoning application. We wanted them to know us and we wanted them to explain what we're proposing, what we're proposing. We wanted to invite them in to our home and give them an opportunity to ask the hard questions. And many of them did ask us the hard questions. And we want to make sure they know how to reach us, too. Now, we know there's been some letters. I found out a couple more today of opposition. And we respect the neighbor's right to raise concerns. We expect that. We hope today that what we're sharing demonstrates how seriously we take the concerns of safety when it comes to this home. And our communication doesn't end with that process. We are not only asking ourselves to be a good neighbor, but also our women, too. So I want to finish this by kind of just bringing it back to the actual proposal we have here in front of us. We're asking for approval for a maximum of six women to live at 1555 Knapp. One home, carefully screened residents, a structured Christ-centered environment, staff support, professional security, clear expectations and accountability, increasing independence as each woman demonstrates that she is ready for it. At the Greenhouse, we do believe that restoration and responsibility go hand in hand. Our faith teaches us about grace and hope and second chances, but grace doesn't mean the absence of accountability. Genuine restoration requires women to face their past honestly and take responsibility for their choices and learn in a different way. The women who are coming here need a safe place to root, and our prayer is that they will leave these doors prepared to stand on their own, rooted in Christ, growing in hope, and they will contribute to their families and to the community as they grow in faith themselves. We understand this approval also entrusts us with the responsibility to the neighborhood, and we do take that very seriously. We want you to know that. So we respectfully ask that you approve our special land use for the greenhouse ministry at 1555 Knapp. And just with that, I'd like to thank you for our time, and if you have any questions for us.

Thank you. Any questions?

Do you currently operate other homes of this nature in the community?

No, we do not.

Is this your first one? Do you work with any other organizations in town that are working with returning citizens?

Yeah, that's a great question. We do. We work with Wings of God. They're actually in Paw Paw, Michigan. They're a very similar program. They've been around for 16 years. We have engaged in a consulting agreement with the founder of Wings of God, and I'll be with her on a weekly basis, and she has helped us to develop the program and protocol.

couple of questions as well. One of the neighbors mentioned that you're a for-profit. Are you a for-profit or non-profit?

We are an LLC, but we are not making a profit.

Understood. Okay, thank you. In your narrative, you mentioned that overnight safety measures and remote monitoring will be utilized. Can you describe what overnight safety measures are?

Yeah, that's a great question too. So we're going to engage with a security company that's going to place the cameras and lights and different things We have in-home monitoring also. We've been kind of consulted to do that, not in bedrooms and bathrooms, but like around the house and so forth. We'll have alarms and systems like that. So we will have an on-duty staff member, so to speak, if something were to happen the night or if someone needed to talk or whatever that would be. As far as working for the protocol for like a true safety concern, we're working with the experts on that and the company that we're going to be hiring as far as You know, this is the protocol that would be a 911 call. This is a protocol that would maybe sound an alarm and then someone would arrive or something like that. And so we're still unfolding some of those, but we're going to rely on the experts to help us develop that. And Wings of God has guided us through what that looks like, Not an on-site staff because they don't have on-site staff at night either and part of it is that Honestly, I mean we the women come in here want to be here. They want to be here. They are applying for this They're volunteering for this they want to be here and at some point I mean they're gonna be all eyes on almost all the time all day long and everything and this is an Opportunity even as they're sleeping to have a rest and so forth with still being safe with the security system We have around them and also for the community to be safe, too So I hope that answered your question.

Yeah, definitely. Thank you. Lastly, you mentioned talking to the Crested Neighborhood Association. Did you ask them to submit a letter to us?

They actually, we kind of missed the mark as far as the timing, but they would have, if I'm not mistaken, there was approval for moving forward what we were doing.

Thank you. Appreciate that.

During your presentation, you had mentioned not wanting violent or sex offenders. Can you clarify if that's a policy based on background checks or if it's more loosely?

As far as we will not be accepting violent criminals or sex offenders. Okay. Is that clear? Okay.

Thanks.

And then could you confirm or clarify whether it'll be folks coming from jail or folks coming from prison or both?

So most likely jail. I mean, we're working with the county jails. They're going to be the people who are going to be helping choose individuals. Just real quick, this is kind of spawned from the fact that a couple of us have worked in jail ministry for many years, reached a forgotten in county jail, right around here somewhere. And so just the heart we have for those women and seeing those women who just really wanted to have significant change. At this time, we're not anticipating those coming from prison, but I can't say that it wouldn't happen. It's just not likely that it would happen. More likely, they'd be coming directly from jail.

And then I wonder, do you have, in your presentation right now, you really kind of walked through the full operations plan, which I really appreciate. I'm wondering if you have that kind of written out and could kind of submit it as part of the, kind of the record for. Yeah, we can. Okay, cool, thank you.

Go ahead. Is this the first of others? Will you be expanding? Because, you know, six is a small number. Are you looking to do this in other neighborhoods and try and grow your organization to reach out to more women?

Wow, that's a really great question. I mean, we're focusing right now on what we have in front of us as far as what God's brought us in this home and for the women. But it would be amazing if it grew to the point where we could have more homes. Absolutely. But at this point, we don't have that plan.

All right, any other questions? Oh, I guess one thing that was in the staff report that we the one in clarity on was like the parking arrangements for how many staff and yeah that arrangement.

Yeah I'm glad you asked that because I wanted to clarify that also so the women don't have cars I mean so they're not going to be having cars so that minus six right there so it's even off a ball it's like a normal kind of a little bit longer than normal residential driveway and really we anticipate like one staff member I was a little generous with the two in the application but it's like one staff member being there per day, I mean, I'm sorry, nothing concurrent more than one. Occasionally we'll have a mentor be coming in or another volunteer and so forth. So as far as the parking, it's a home. So at my house, my driveway, at different times I could have a few more cars, and other times there's not a lot of cars. It's a home. This is a house. This is a residential home that these women are living in as a family. It may not look like a lot of families. Families look very different nowadays. But this is gonna be a family. So we don't anticipate, you know, screeching in, screeching out type of cars. It's just gonna be normal daily rhythm of life.

All right, thank you. Any question, additional questions? Okay, we'll have you have a seat. I will open up the public hearing. If you're here from the public and would like to give us your thoughts on this case, feel free to come up to the microphone, introduce yourself, and give us your thoughts. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing. Okay. Any additional questions or move on to discussion?

I have one.

Yeah.

So you list in the information about the residential rehab facilities, 5.9.29, talking about an organization that provides care and supervision on a 24-hour basis. It doesn't really... differentiate between whether that's in person or remote. So how do we know that that meets the criteria for that?

Yeah, I think in our review process, and Elizabeth please supplement here if I've missed something, in our review process we looked at the ordinance holistically and a number of Group living, types of group living are permitted by special land use in that zone district. Residential rehab felt like the most appropriate, but I think there could have been some additional transitional housing because there's six individuals. Sorry, I missed that piece of it. because there's six or less individuals residing there I think it could reasonably also fit under the transitional housing except for the length of stay and so we looked at the remote monitoring the overnight remote monitoring as being adequate considering it was six or or less individuals residing here so I think ultimately that's a a matter for the Planning Commission to determine whether or not you feel like that is an acceptable route for us to consider. Alternatively, if you do not agree with the remote monitoring and or seek more information about what would be adequate remote monitoring, you could require on-site supervision 24 hours.

I have a similar question regarding the section of the ordinance. It says in the ordinance, a government agency or private nonprofit organization. And does this fit that?

Does it fit that? We looked at the LLC... Excuse me. LLC...

not sure how to best answer this on the spot here based on our meetings with the applicant we understood that they were a not-for-profit organization and I think it was only, it was later when we realized that the property was owned by an LLC. Even so, we still felt that given the operations, it felt, it fell into this group living, this supervised group living program. And... better than any other use. And so that's why we proceeded with it as we did.

So again, it goes back to an interpretation of the nature of the use that it is most similar to a residential rehab facility. And because it is less than six individuals, I think we could go multiple ways with how we classified it. In the end all were use consideration, excuse me, special land use and therefore putting it before the Planning Commission with perhaps a use that might fit multiple definitions of our ordinance. If these are larger sticking points, we can certainly have some additional conversation. I don't think we talked with Kendall prior about some of these interpretations, so we can come back to the Planning Commission at a future date if we feel like we need to think through these things a little bit differently.

If I may, just briefly, That's fine. Yeah, go ahead. Welcome any research. Jim Waring, I just work with them as counsel. But I looked at 5-9-29 and I see the language that was pointed out as well, I think, by you, Matt. I took it as it doesn't explicitly require nonprofit status. I don't see that there. And I think the response has been made by a couple of individuals here is to say that was the category that it seemed to fit most closely with, but isn't necessarily boxed into that. I just keep coming back to the special land use standards. I believe we're meeting those standards. Classification becomes a little bit hard to pigeonhole, but even with that one classification, 5.9.29, I don't see it as an explicit requirement. And I'll say the reason why it's done, it's been done mostly for the The organizational structure, the ease of maintenance of that type of structure, and frankly, the anonymity of generous people who kind of don't want to take credit, if you will, and don't really care if they're giving up a tax write-off. They're essentially functioning as a for-profit, non-for-profit, if that makes any sense. And I admire that. I'm really grateful to be associated with these generous people. So for what it's worth, that was my look at it.

Thanks for that clarification. Any other questions otherwise? We'd love to hear everyone's thoughts.

I think the location of this property is kind of interesting for this use because while there are other homes along Knapp Street there, they are fairly, they're not like butting up right next to them. It's not like it's in the middle of a compact neighborhood There's a park behind it. I know there was concerns in one of the letters about this being next to a park But the closest I mean, there's a there's a wetlands and a woods between this and any pathway in the park and I just I guess having worked at Calvin with their prison initiative and knowing the need for this type of thing and the difficulty that it can be for a returning citizen just to come right back into life outside of a jail, this type of thing is needed. And so I think If this were gonna happen this day, I think it's kind of in a good location for it, given that it's on a fairly busy intersection and fairly isolated from the neighbors.

But also part of a community.

Yeah.

Other thoughts?

So I think by and large I don't. I'm in support of this application. I think it helps to have. So certainly listening to letters of opposition concerns about whether or not there are going to be violent criminals or sex offenders and their ability to answer that through background checks and policy that prevents that. And then. I understand, you know, one of the concerns was about, we're always talking about more housing availability and this reducing that by eliminating a unit, but it's also technically providing housing opportunities for these individuals that need it. So I appreciate the concerns of the opposition, but I feel like they were addressed in the application and the presentation today, so.

Yeah, I agree. I think in addition I would say that especially if we get the operations plan as like part of the submittal to have kind of as part of a condition that that is something that can be pointed to if there are questions about how it operates. I also am comfortable with the way they're approaching overnight supervision and service. I think to require someone to be in person there overnight is potentially overly burdensome, and especially when we're talking about the screening process they'll be going through, that the folks that are gonna be living here are gaining independence as coming back into kind of regular, into the community and so I'm comfortable with the overnight situation.

Before the Planning Commission considers a motion, we just had a couple of questions in the draft resolution specific to whether the Planning Commission felt like there should be a cap on the number of employees or service providers that would be at the premise at any given time and also whether or not there should be a limit on when families, visitors can be received at the property. And then the other thing that I think was asked in the staff report was a little bit of clarification on, was it admission procedures, Elizabeth, of when individuals might move in, move out, be dropped off?

Like when they're graduating from the program, is there a process to ensure that they're not just left?

Yeah, I think maybe with larger facilities there has been challenges by the neighbors experiencing the drop-off and discharge procedures and where do the individuals go? How do they safely get to their next destination? So we're asking for a little bit of clarification on that and then the two items I highlighted in the resolution.

Okay, so that final one and then when family visits and visitation hours will be and how that's processed. And then I guess the other question is just for us, whether there's a limit on the number of service staff, which I wouldn't think would be necessary based on testimony, but please, yeah.

Yeah, I'll provide some more clarity hopefully. Regarding visitation, yeah. So we're looking at probably like a Sunday afternoon, like one to four. We'd be looking at staggering that too. So we're not just having all these, like again, all these cars in the driveway. We hope that we have that as a problem. Unfortunately, I heard a couple of people who are familiar with this type of ministry. It may not be a problem, meaning the parking and anything like that, because a lot of the women, one of the reasons they're coming here is they really don't have anywhere else to go. But part of our goal through our program is for them to develop and restore relationships with their family. So at some point, we're hoping they will utilize that time working with our house manager to set up a time pre-approved to come and have family there. So like one to four on Sundays, it'll be staggered, it won't be everyone all at once. Regarding, I think the other one was dismissal. Okay, so we have graduation, which is a good dismissal, right? And so a dismissal with graduation, they have then now gone through the program, have had demonstrated over and over, like everything from increased financial stewardship to accountability, whether it's a job or school or some other proactive plan that we have in place for them, have demonstrated this thoroughly, and they're ready to step out into semi-independent, and that's where the second step housing would come in at that point, which, again, is not part of this approval process. So that's like a celebration, and they're moving into that and then continuing on. At this point, we've also built a community for these women. They're involved in their church. They're involved in their Bible studies. They're involved with maybe friends and things like that. So this is a community. Okay, so what have it, Doesn't work out. What does that look like? As part of the application process and interview process is identifying what support system is in place, if any, even if it's just minor, but some sort of support system in place. We also are, meaning, when it comes to that, we're not putting someone just on the street, go, good luck, you know. It's being able to have the protocol of, you know, what support system we would rely on, but also partnering with other organizations and ministries, because some of that dismissal might be due, who knows, like to a relapse. Well, we have relationships with different rehabs in Grand Rapids that they could go to, or there's other ministries that have like more true transitional housing that might be able to help them in that moment. But yeah, we definitely will have protocols set up because we care for them. We don't want to just put them out in the street. So was there anything else? Was that...

I was also thinking more specifically about when a resident does graduate or move on, is it 6 o'clock in the morning or is it 4 o'clock in the evening? Yeah, really specific, okay. Yeah, and when they come to you, what time do they arrive, things like that.

Yeah, and that's still unfolding, but we would anticipate it, typically what we have found from working in the jail, it's going to be a late morning time. So that's when they're released, isn't it? Yeah.

So would it be fair to say that generally your intake and move out discharge would take place during the hours that a program manager would be on site? Absolutely. Okay. Absolutely. We can guarantee that.

Thank you.

And then visits also happen only when the house manager is there as well. Yes. Okay. Okay. Any additional questions?

And all that will be included in your operation plan that you submit as well? Okay, thank you.

Yeah, I did draft a couple of conditions that I think were speaking to your conversation or your comments that the operations plan consistent with testimony be provided to the planning department and then visitors to the property shall only occur during the times when the program manager is on site. And I thought the intake discharge felt more of an operational item. So I was thinking that that would be covered in the operations plan that could be submitted.

Oh, that makes sense to me. Is someone willing to make a motion? Or it looks like Matt might be doing, ready.

You're a better reader than I am. He's really good at reading.

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Planning Commission approves the special land use and site plan review request of the Greenhouse Ministries LLC, Barbara Casper, to establish a residential rehabilitation facility in a residential zone district at 1555 Knapp Street Northeast 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 use will protect the established development pattern of the MCN LDR zone district consisting predominantly of low density residential development on individual lots and will contribute to a greater variety of housing types in a low density residential zone district 2024 Community Master Plan Great Neighborhoods 1.B.2. Two, the proposed use will meet the site plan review standards of Section 5.12.08.E because only interior building improvements are proposed and all elements of the site design are harmoniously and efficiently organized in relation to topography, the size and type of lot, character of the neighborhood and adjoining property, and the type, size, and proportions of buildings. 3A, 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 be residential with residents living as a household in a cooperative manner And a house manager will be on site between 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. weekdays and 7 a.m. to 4 p.m. I think weekends got left out, but is that what it should say?

For visitors? I may second your motion, but I don't think we should limit. I feel like it's restrictive to limit.

Well, we can discuss after our food. We're not there yet.

Yeah, it was weekdays 7 to 9 p.m. and 8 to 4 on weekends.

Okay, and 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. on weekends. 3B, the proposed use will not have adverse effects on the neighborhood because adequate on-site parking will be provided for staff and visitors and residents will not have personal vehicles and will instead rely on other means of transportation. 3C, the proposed use will not be detrimental, hazardous, or disturbing to to existing or future uses or to the public welfare by reason of excessive traffic, noise, or visual clutter because the program is largely an indoor program. Outdoor activities are limited to customary residential uses including recreation, gardening, outdoor meals, and scheduled family visits. 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 home, driveway, parking areas, and landscaping are appropriately situated on the site and in compliance with the MCN neighborhood requirements. 5A. Public or private infrastructure exists and will safeguard the health, safety, and general welfare of the public because no additional burden is expected with the establishment of this use. 5b. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the financial stability and or economic welfare of the City because the intent of the program is to result in placement of financially stable independent individuals that will contribute to the economic welfare of the city. Five C, the proposed use will comply with all other applicable city ordinances and policies and all applicable state laws. Be it further resolved that the following conditions of approval shall apply to this project. One, standard condition set A approvals. One, that the testimony, application, and plans submitted by the applicant and signed, dated, and stamped by the planning director shall constitute the improved plans, except if plan elements do not mean ordinance requirements and or as amended in this resolution. Two, that the use shall operate according to the application and per testimony as recorded in the planning commission minutes. 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. 4. That a Land Use Development Services permit, building permit, and all other required permits be obtained from the City of Grand Rapids prior to construction, demolition, or operation, Five, that any expansion of the approved special land use requires an additional special land use review and approval by the Planning Commission. Six, that the proposed use will comply with all other applicable city ordinances and policies at all state laws. Seven, that this approval should take effect 16 calendar days after the date of the Planning Commission's decision. Two, no more than six individuals shall reside in the dwelling at any given time. are we three are we striking that one the limitation on employees i didn't hear any commissioners having a specific preference for how many providers so i guess i would strike it unless you feel differently for family visits shall occur during scheduled visitation hours of sundays from one no

Would you like me to reread the draft? Yeah, sorry. No, that's okay.

No, I just, I didn't take a good note.

Visitors to the property shall only occur during times when the program manager is on site. Okay, perfect.

I like it. And then did you have additional?

I had one more additional for your consideration, that an operations plan consistent with testimony be provided to the planning department.

Great.

Okay.

I'll second that motion.

Okay, we have motion and support. Andrea. any discussion all those in favor say aye aye any opposed motion carries thank you very much okay our next case is 1554 kalamazoo avenue southeast

Hi, commissioners. The next item on the agenda is a request to sell beer, wine, and distilled spirits until 2 AM in association with a new convenience store. The applicant currently runs Oliver's Market, a convenience store with alcohol sales directly north of the subject property. The request before you today is to move those operations to 1554 Kalamazoo Avenue. The applicant currently controls both properties and has volunteered to relinquish the special land use status at their current location if this application is approved, meaning that alcohol sales at the current location will end. The subject property is located in the South Town Business Area Specific Plan. The property is an L-shaped lot at the southeast corner of Kalamazoo Avenue and Ramona Street and is located in and is surrounded by the TN-TBA Zone District. And this is a, excuse me, the property consists of a 2400 square foot single story commercial building on the lower western portion of the site facing Kalamazoo Avenue and a paved area that has historically been used as parking to the rear and north. Vehicle access is currently granted by a curb cut on Ramona Street where entry is controlled by a fence. There has been a significant amount of recent development in this area. On this map, you can see the subject property highlighted in green. In particular, Amplify has built Hub 7 across the street in this large white building just north of the subject property, which houses nonprofit offices, a Corwell clinic, and a daycare. The daycare's outdoor play area is at the northeast corner of the hub near Fuller, indicating here with my mouse. Amplify is also building several mixed use buildings with commercial and retail space and affordable housing just north of the hub. And you can see the construction site on this slightly old photo along Kalamazoo. And for reference, Adams Park Apartments is just one block north along Fuller in the upper right hand corner of this photo. Directly north of the subject property is Oliver's Market, the convenience store that sells beer, wine, and distilled spirits, which the applicant currently operates. There's a consumer's energy power station to the east, a Shell gas station and Johnny's Market, which sells beer and wine to the south, here at the corner of Kalamazoo and Fuller, and a collection of commercial storefronts, including a community center and a restaurant and bakery across Kalamazoo to the west. This is a photo, a site plan of the subject property where you can see the existing 2400 square foot building and the back and north paved area. This is a recent photo taken by staff in the last few weeks. You can see the building from across Kalamazoo looking southeast towards the front facade. And this is the rear paved area which has been historically used as parking and the back of the building. There are two more curb cuts in addition to this main one off of Ramona along Kalamazoo. And street access for both is blocked by fencing, which you can see on this image in black and white stripes. The applicant is proposing to remove the southernmost curb cut, restore the sidewalk and curb in that location to city engineering standards, and maintain the associated fence, which is recessed from the sidewalk about half the depth of the building. This area creates a kind of alley space between the building and the south property line, where I'm gesturing with the mouse. They are also proposing to remove the fence along the northern curb cut to restore vehicle access to the site from Kalamazoo Avenue. This picture shows the south alleyway, which is currently served by the curb cut that will be removed, and the fence between the building and south property line, which the applicant is proposing to keep. The Planning Commission may wish to ask the applicant about their planned use for this alleyway. The parking requirement for the proposed retail use is consistent with the parking requirement for the previous retail and personal service uses, and the absence of off-street parking is therefore considered non-conforming. The location is served by the Rapid 2 bus route, which has a stop on the east side of this block on Fuller Avenue. The route is shown here in blue, with the stop highlighted in green. There is also street parking along Kalamazoo Avenue. Under today's standards, a retail establishment of this size requires six parking spaces. The applicant is proposing to add two parallel parking spaces along the north side of the building for staff, highlighted here in yellow, bringing parking closer to conformance with the current zoning ordinance. The proposed building renovations will restore the front windows facing Kalamazoo Avenue, depicted here in the top rendering. The entry door will also be moved to the middle of the street-facing facade. One window on the south-facing wall will be restored, shown here in the bottom rendering. These windows on the front and south sides of the building were partially or fully covered by previous owners, and the proposed changes will bring the building's transparency up from 30% to 49%, moving closer to conformance with the current requirement of 60%. The store will occupy 1,400 of the 2,400 square foot single-story building, with the back section used for storage. In addition to beer, wine, and spirits, the convenience store will offer food and beverage options, including packaged snacks, dairy products, soda, canned goods, and produce, as well as household items, tobacco products, ATM and bill paying services, and lottery sales. The applicant is requesting hours of operation from 8 a.m. to 2 a.m. daily. The operations are expected to require one to two employees at a time. This image highlights where alcohol will be displayed. On the floor plan and according to the applicant, the four shelves labeled beer on the main sales floor, here in the middle of the image, will actually display wine. Five of the 15 cooler doors will display beer in the lower part of this image, and distilled spirits will be displayed on approximately 39 feet of shelving behind the sales counter. There will be four security cameras monitoring the interior of the store, one in each corner circled here in yellow. There will also be security cameras on each exterior corner of the building facing the sidewalk, parking spaces, rear paved area, and south alleyway. New LED lighting is proposed on each facade, and a new canopy above the main entrance will also be lit with LEDs. With the proposed security cameras, lighting, and transparency improvements, The site appears to meet CPTED requirements, assuming that the front windows are not obstructed by more than 25% by any posters or fixtures. The application has been reviewed by the city's CPTED specialist, who found that the subject property is a better location for alcohol sales than the current location of Oliver's Market, based on CPTED standards of transparency and lighting. They also made recommendations for lighting, visibility, and landscape maintenance. Within the vicinity, there are three other establishments that sell alcohol for offsite consumption. Oliver's Market, indicated here as a red star directly north of the subject property highlighted in green, at 1548 Kalamazoo, is currently operated by the applicant and sells beer, wine, and distilled spirits until 2 a.m. Monday through Saturday and midnight on Sunday. Alcohol sales will cease at this location if the request before you is approved. Johnny's Markets, in association with the Shell gas station directly south of the subject property at 1562 Kalamazoo, and shown here as a purple star, sells beer and wine until 10 p.m. daily. And Walgreens, the blue star on this map at 1601 Kalamazoo, also sells beer and wine until 10 p.m. daily. With respect to neighborhood input, the applicant indicated that they conducted outreach to nearby businesses via email and phone in June of this year and received no responses of concern or support. The applicant submitted a Good Neighbor Plan along with their application, which outlines measures to prevent and mitigate crime, employee training related to alcohol sales and crime reporting, property maintenance, security surveillance and lighting, and communication with neighbors. The Good Neighbor Plan was not developed in partnership with neighborhood groups or residents. I will defer to the applicant to tell you more about their engagement efforts. More than 20 letters of opposition were submitted, citing observations of activities associated with Oliver's Market, which create a negative relationship between the business and nearby residents, businesses, and organizations. The city is aware of a pattern of nonviolent crime within a two block radius of the subject property, particularly drunk and disorderly conduct and loitering, which is not necessarily directly associated with the current operation. With respect to this request, the Planning Commission should consider potential for the use to be detrimental or disturbing to adjacent uses or the neighborhood relative to the proposed use and hours of operation in this location, whether the Good Neighbor Plan adequately details procedures to minimize or eliminate negative secondary effects on the neighborhood, and any concerns raised during the public hearing. Do you have any questions for staff before the applicant presentation? Thank you very much. Any questions?

I have one. So outlined in the staff report is the approximate square footage of what's proposed to be operating and like the number of shelves and cooler doors. I'm wondering if we know how that compares to the current, like those same parameters with the current location.

So the current Oliver's Market is 1,100 square feet. So the new location will be 300 additional square feet of sales floor. But I'll defer to the applicant about how many shelves are currently displaying alcohol.

OK, thank you very much.

Any other questions for staff?

Yeah, go ahead.

Just want to clarify what is labeled in the packet as the operations management plan. That's what's being referred to as the good neighbor plan in the staff recommendation?

I believe the original application

Included an operations management plan and there's an additional good neighbor plan in the packet Okay, I'm maybe does anybody else I'm not seeing the good neighbor plan in my packet Please hold, okay Yes, I did see the operations plan by yeah There was a separate document submitted that said good neighbor plan, correct

I believe the title was Good Neighbor Plan, but let us confirm on the staff side before it.

We can print it out.

I have a few questions about process. Was the operations plan created and submitted before the septet officer did a review of the property and did any modifications that the septet officer suggested get implemented into the

Operations plan I'll defer to Elizabeth about the process for accepted requirements And the operations plan sorry Okay

So I think the question was whether or not the SEPTED recommendations have already been incorporated into the operations plan or do we still need to be updating that?

I believe the most recent recommendations from the SEPTED specialist came after the applicant submitted their good neighbor plan. So they were not incorporated in the original document or application.

Okay. So we did not get an updated operations plan that incorporates those recommendations. Correct. Thank you.

Any other questions for staff? Okay, thank you so much. We'll have the applicant come up and please add additional information for us.

Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you, Chair and Commissioners, for giving me the opportunity to speak tonight. My name is Arvinder Pal Singh, and my family and I have owned and operated Oliver's Market since October 2025. I want to begin by saying something very simple. I'm not asking you to ignore the concerns raised by members of the community, and I'm not asking you to take a chance on someone who has no plan. I'm asking you to consider what I have already done since taking ownership what I am proposing to do at 1554 Kalamu Avenue and whether those actions demonstrate that I am committed to operating this business responsibly. I am husband and a father. My wife helps me with the business and my children who are in high school sometimes help as well. I personally spend approximately 12 to 15 hours a day at the store. This business is not something I manage from a distance. I'm there every day working with my employees, speaking with customers, maintaining the property. and dealing directly with the challenges that come with operating a neighborhood market. When I took ownership almost 10 months ago, I understood that there were parts of the business and property that need improvement. I did not ignore those things. I did not assume they would correct themselves. I began addressing them. One of my first priority was security. We replaced the old black and white camera system with a modern high-definition security system. We now have cameras providing comprehensive coverage inside and outside the building. The cameras monitor entrance aisles, the sales counter, alcohol displays, the lottery, ATM areas, back rooms, dumpster, exterior walls, and other areas around the property. The image quality is clear enough to capture important details when an incident occurs. We have cooperated with detectives and provide camera footage whenever it's needed. We also have direct contact information that allows us to report concerns and communicate with law enforcement. We upgraded the old register system as well. Our current point of sale system helps employees Verify identifications and records. Restricted product sales. Employees are trained to check identification and to refuse a sale if someone is underage, appears intoxicated, or otherwise not legally permitted to make the purchase. Cleanliness and property maintenance have also been priorities. Our employees clean around the building throughout the day and again at closing. We also have a part-time employee whose specific responsibility is to perform a more detailed cleanup around our property and the surrounding area several times each week. There is a city-owned trash receptacle near the corner that frequently comes full of overflows. Even though it is not our receptacle, I have picked up trash around it and placed it in our dumpster because I do not want the area around my building to look bad and the neighborhood looks neglected. We are also purchasing additional trash cans for the front of the store so that we can empty and maintain them ourselves. We have had people go through our dumpster and throw material onto the ground. At the proposed location, the dumpster would be placed within a taller, secure, lockable enclosure to help prevent unauthorized access and keep waste contained. We have also made physical improvements to the current property. These have included relocating the dumpster, improving the available parking area, pressure washing the building, and improving the overall appearance. I'm not saying that everything is perfect. I'm saying that when I see a problem within my control, I take responsibility for addressing it. I also want to respond honestly and respectfully to the serious concerns described in the letter submitted to the Commission. Since my family took ownership, neither I nor my employees have personally observed the most serious activities described in those letters, occurring inside our store or on our property. We also have not personally had to call the police because of a fight or similar incident at the business. I cannot tell you what may have happened before December 2025 because I was not the owner at that time. I do not want to dismiss anyone's experience, but I also do not want events that may have occurred before my ownership to be treated as evidence of how my family operates the business today. What I can speak about is what I have done since becoming responsible for Oliver Market and what I am prepared to do moving forward. The proposed move to 1554 Kalamazoo is not simply about making the existing business larger. It is about creating a better neighborhood market in a space that allows us to serve more of the community's everyday needs. Our current store is very small. We have other products such as milk, cheese, bread, and other basic groceries household needs, but we do not have enough shelving or storage capacity to maintain the selection our customers request. We regularly run out of common products because there is not enough room to stock them properly. The additional space at 1554 Kalamji would allow us to offer a broader selection of food, beverages, household necessities, and other everyday products. We are also exploring opportunities to carry locally made goods which could give small business and members of the community another place to sell their products. This relocation is not intended to increase the amount of space dedicated to alcohol. Based on what we have learned our customers during first months of ownership, our plan is to reduce the amount of shelving devoted to beer, wine, spirits and use more of the store for groceries, household products and other items the neighborhood needs. The proposed location would also provide much better opportunity to serve customers with disabilities. The current building has physical access limitations At 1554, we can provide a direct accessible entrance and a more convenient path into the store so customers do not have to rely on employees to bring their purchases outside to their vehicle. The proposed site improvement would benefit the appearance and function of the property as well. Our plans include removing an unnecessary curb cut to improve parking capacity, removing the chain link fencing and barbed wire, installing bicycle racks, improving and maintaining the landscaping, skewing the dumpster, and renovating a vacant building that currently does not contribute to the neighborhood. We recognize that this is a small existing site and that on-site parking is limited. We are willing to continue working with city staff to determine what additional steps can be taken. We also believe the location can serve nearby residents who walk or bicycle to the store. but we are not presenting a walkability as a substitute for addressing parking we are trying to make the best responsible use of a sustained neighborhood site once all your markets relocates we also intend to improve the existing storefront so it can eventually support another business and continue contributing to the neighborhood I understand that trust is not created by one speech or one planning commission meeting. It is earned over time through consistent actions. I am willing to listen to residents, neighbourhood organisations, city staff and the Commission. I am willing to discuss reasonable operational conditions, maintain clean-up and security procedures and continue to improve the business when the estimated concerns are brought to my attention. I'm not asking for special treatment. I'm asking for a fair evaluation of our proposal and opportunity to demonstrate that this reaction can create a cleaner, safer, and more accessible and more useful neighborhood market. For me, this is not only about the business. I want my wife and children to see that sacrifices we have made can lead to something positive. I want my children to see their father work hard accept responsibility and build something they can be proud of. I want the people who live and work around Oliver's Market to eventually feel proud of what we build as well. I know I cannot earn the community's trust only by what I say here today. I have to earn it through what I do every day after today. I'm asking for the opportunity to continue proving that through my actions. Thank you for listening and for considering our request. I'm happy to answer any questions.

All right, thank you so much. I do want to confirm something that you said here during your testimony that the number of the amount of shelving and cooler doors that you're proposing in this current location or this new location is smaller than what is currently offered in your current location. You're shrinking the amount of shelf space for? Yes. Okay, great. Yeah, go ahead.

Did you previously have a good neighbor plan on file with a city at your current location?

Yes, I sent that.

And how much does that reflect what's in your plan for the new location? I'm sorry? How similar is that to what's in your new plan?

Like the operational or the...

Well, both of them.

Both of them? Yeah.

I just want to interject for a moment, excuse me, that you don't have a good neighbor plan currently on file for the current location. That was not a requirement up until more recently, within the last 10 years. Okay. I'm not sure we have an operation plan on file at the city for the current location either, not to suggest that he doesn't have one as a business, of course.

Okay. That helps. Thank you.

I just, so are you eliminating, you're eliminating dry shelving for beer and alcohol? Are you also eliminating, are you going down on the number of refrigerated doors?

Yes, we're giving more space. Right now we don't have enough space to give to the soda, pop juices, so we're increasing that in amount.

Could you detail your outreach to the community and when you started and what your methods were and how they spoke to this good neighbor plan that you submitted?

My architect, they did that community outreach.

evening or afternoon everyone my name is Jesse I'm a project manager with Schley Nelson architects down in Kalamazoo so for the good neighbor plan for the community outreach we did make phone calls in June I didn't really connect with anybody and so we sent emails out to some of the local Boston Square neighborhood association and amplify gr and I never heard anything back from them. The first we heard from them was when we received the letters of opposition, when Elizabeth sent out the notice of our proposal. If you'd like me to speak about the architectural portion of this, I'd be more than happy to.

Yeah, a couple of things in particular in our staff report. that we requested to get some additional clarification on are the intent of the use of that south alleyway kind of space and then any relocation of the ice chest and propane.

Sure. So in regards to the south alleyway, talking with Elizabeth, they were more interested in us opening up that sort of south-facing window that is currently filled in. While we were entirely open to it, we would prefer to actually keep it enclosed. That way we could have more refrigerator cases on the inside of the store for refrigerator products. to really expand their capacity to be able to sell perishable goods. If that's sort of a conditional approval and it's required, we'd be more than happy to, but the reason why they are wanting to expand into this space is really to be able to offer a lot more products that they can't get from the Walgreens there or the Johnny's Market that they have to go to Meijer or they actually have to drive somewhere else rather than walk to you know that their local convenience store on the corner. Sort of like that exist in a lot of other little communities here in Grand Rapids. So currently specifically with this photo there is a little bit disrepair with that wood fence. What we're currently proposing is either to just repair and retain that fence and potentially put bike racks within that small corridor or shift the bike racks to the front sort of landscaping area in front of the store and actually enclose this alleyway and remove that chain link fence and place a full wood fence sort of surrounding into that front of the store. That sort of coincide with removing or keeping that removal of that window and enclosing that whole little alleyway with a wood fence, similar to what the ordinance requires for fencing. And then in regards to the alcohol per the last question, in regards to the spirit shelving, we're looking at more just transferring over those shelves. While that whole wall is close to 40 feet, and that's twice as long as what's currently in that space, that is more of a merchandise shelving that's for more just restricted right they're not looking to actually expand the amount of liquor that's being sold in the store that's actually just being shifted over there's a lot of other products that's you know that they might want to restrict or have restricted access to like tobacco products lottery tickets or other types of products that they want back behind the counter and so that's why there's you know a much longer portion, the actual portion that's select to spirits is much more reduced than that. And then currently they have, I believe, 10 refrigerator doors in their existing store that are dedicated to beer. And so we're actually looking to reduce that to five and have up to four potential locations for wine on the shelves. That all really just depends on how product moves and how they might want to flow the potential product that they're offering. The interior layout is very preliminary at the moment in regards to the product shelving in the center of the floor. We haven't finalized the whole design yet. That's sort of the next phase once this, or if this, you know, is approved for special land use.

Are there any plans to move the ice chest and propane exchange?

Thank you. I missed that. We have not talked about where those would be potentially located. We would want to sit down with Elizabeth and figure out where the best spot for that would be and where they would feel comfortable with that.

Thank you. And then is the dumpster enclosure, is the dumpster location changing or will it just be enhanced with a

The dumpster enclosure will be changing. Currently, it sits at the, I'm pointing on the screen, it sits on the northeast edge of the existing site, sort of within the chain link fence nook. We will be shifting it to the southeast corner and building a trash enclosure down there that is taller and secured. Okay, thank you.

So I think during testimony there were improved landscaping was mentioned. I'm curious if there's any other site improvements. It looks like existing pavement is in pretty poor condition, so.

It is in poor condition. They have gone through and they've cut down sort of the grass within the cracks between the concrete and the asphalt. They have plans to replace all the pavement within that property when the funds become available to do such of a project. They're doing this in stages, the first being the updating of the front entryway, replacing all of the existing glazing with a new storefront system to increase that glazing transparency to 49%. in filling that with safety glazing rather than the single pane thin glazing that currently exists within that space. Regarding the whole transparency and the displaying or covering of those windows, the reason why we didn't expand farther and go to the two full ends, on either side of the storefront was predominantly so they could actually display advertisements. So instead of covering the windows and sort of impacting that visibility, they have space on either side of that storefront that they could sort of display product images and whatnot that you would typically see associated with a convenience store, limiting the amount that's there.

Other questions? Go ahead.

I have a couple of clarifying questions. It was indicated in the staff report that it was our understanding that the southernmost curb cut on Kalamazoo, where I believe the alley, if you will, is located, will be removed and replaced. So that is a site enhancement that will be done as part of phase one?

Yes, ma'am.

Okay. And then I perhaps misunderstood you, but our It was indicated initially that the 39-foot shelving system that will be behind the sales counter will be dedicated to alcohol merchandise, and that's what's showing on the floor plan. But I thought you just said that not all of that space will be used for alcohol display.

That is correct. Okay, but your plan shows it, so... We can revise that for final approval. They will provide the same amount, if not slightly less, than what currently exists in their store currently.

And what currently exists in the store?

It's roughly 20 feet of shelving. Okay, so... And intermixed in that is actually tobacco products as well.

Okay, so approximately half of that... 40-foot shelving system that's currently shown or labeled as alcohol merchandise shelving will actually be used for alcohol. The remainder would be for other products.

Correct.

Okay. Thank you. Other questions? I did have one question. Can you please talk about, and maybe this is not for you, I'm not sure, talk about the hours of operation and it looks like the other alcohol sales stores are more of a 10 p.m. closing. Can you speak to the necessity of staying open until 2 a.m.? After 12 to 15 hour days, I think you mentioned as well.

Thank you. Actually, I'm just trying to stay competitive, like how in the areas other stores are doing, so that way we can take care of all the bills and stuff. Everyone in the area likes staying that many hours, so we want to compete that. Otherwise, if we lose customers for those couple hours, they'll stop coming in daytime too. So that's all it is, just staying competitive with all stores around.

Thank you. Anyone else at this time? Okay, we'll have you take a seat. I will open up the public hearing. If you're here for the public and want to speak to this case, please approach the microphone, state your name, and address the commission with your comments.

Good afternoon, Chair, members of the Planning Commission. My name is Victor Williams. I'm a 29-year resident of Boston Square, as well as the founder and president of the Boston Square Neighborhood Association. I want to begin by saying something very clearly. This is not about anti-business. We want businesses to succeed in Boston Square. We want investment. We want commercial activity. We want entrepreneurs to be successful. But we also believe that businesses have a responsibility to be good neighbors. And that is where our concern with this application begins. For more than a decade, we've asked Boston Square residents what they want to see improved. We've had surveys, we've had neighborhood meetings, we've had listening sessions, we've had countless conversations with residents, and one message comes up again and again. Residents want to see and change the conditions surrounding Oliver's Market. That's not something that we've manufactured for this Planning Commission hearing. That's a concern that has been communicated to us over many years. And I can speak to this personally as the window to my office sits directly across the street from Oliver's. We're literally 50 feet away across the street. I personally observed on a daily basis, on almost a daily basis, loitering, littering, fighting, solicitation, what appears to be drug transactions and numerous vehicle accidents in and around the area. I've also heard repeated complaints from residents and customers about how they have been treated. in and around the business, including reports of racial slurs and other derogatory language. I'm not here to suggest that Oliver's causes every problem in Boston Square. I'm also not here to accuse every customer of Oliver's of wrongdoing. That's not what this is about. The question before you is much simpler. Has Oliver's demonstrated that it is a good neighbor to Boston Square? And based on my experience, I don't believe that it has. Now we're being asked to approve a relocation into a space approximately 2,400 square feet, more than twice the size of the existing 1,154 square foot location. If the current operation has struggled to effectively manage problems residents have experienced around much smaller location, what assurances do we have that moving into a substantially larger space will produce better outcomes? The proposed site has different characteristics and that brings cause for concern. We're concerned about visibility, lighting, sight lines, natural surveillance, and the ability to effectively manage activity around the property. So I'm asking you not to simply look at whether the building can accommodate Oliver's, I'm asking you to look at whether Oliver's can be a good neighbor in this location. Because Boston Square is changing. Residents are investing here. Businesses are investing here. Property owners are investing here. The city is investing here. And we're trying to build a neighborhood where people feel safe, where businesses can thrive, where families can build a future. We don't want to push businesses out of Boston Square. We want businesses that help move Boston Square forward. So my request to the commission is straightforward. If the applicant cannot demonstrate that this relocation will improve the existing condition and be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods, I ask you deny this special land use request. And if you believe the applicant can...

Thank you, sir. Your time is up.

Oh, thank you.

Thank you for this use. Hello, Planning Commission and everyone else that's here. I'm Pastor Kenneth Hoskins, a local pastor. I've been in ministry 42 years, pastoring 27 and a half as senior pastor. But I also live in the Boston Square neighborhood. I've been there all my life. I think Vic City is a 25-year resident. I've been there 67 years. I also run Oakdale Neighbors, which is a neighborhood association. located at 1260 Kalamazoo, right on the corridor that we're speaking of. I remember, I want to take you back, I remember years ago, Boston Square, thriving neighborhood. Boston House Restaurant, Gene Myers Pharmacy, Kingman's Produce, A&P Grocery Store, Central Michigan Bank. And as we have formed a committee, a team together in Boston Square, it's called Boston Square Together. It's not just one association, it's not just one resident. But we're together. And as we've done that, we are currently working hard to get back to that type of community and even more. With our current nine and a half acre project between Ramona and Adams Street right on Kalamazoo, we have the state of the art facility, the Hub 07 Community Center. We have coming into the community a credit union. That's coming real soon. Affordable housing being built on Kalamazoo Avenue between Ramona and Adams. A variety of businesses right along Kalamazoo Avenue. We have a CPA, a community partnership agreement. There's four signers on that, myself as executive director at Oakdale Neighbors. The gentleman just came before me, Victor Williams, Boston Square Neighborhood Association, John Epple of Amplify GR in the city of Grand Rapids. We hold each other accountable to make sure that what we're building in Boston Square continues for years to come. But there is, however, this market, Oliver's Market, where currently there is consistent solicitation. I can walk in. I don't go in there too often because I can walk in there and I'm consistently harassed. It's drug usage. I live on Evergreen. I can see Oliver's Market from where I live. There's a number of things that are negative. I know he said he hasn't owned it but about 10 months, but I've yet seen trash going up and down the street on Ramona and Kalamazoo. I've yet seen what I think is drug activities. I've yet seen solicitation right there since his ownership. I don't know how they sent the emails out, but I never received one at Boston Square. Never received, Oakdale neighbors never received a phone call. I stand here to vehemently say that I'm against, I'm opposed to this, to moving forward with this. And if we do, if you do move forward with it, I believe there should be some accountability held. But I'm vehemently opposed against the move. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon Planning Commission, my name is John Ippel with Amplify GR and I'm here today to express my respectful opposition to Oliver's Liquor Store's proposed relocation expansion. The city's state of purpose for a special land use review requires any special land use permit issuance require additional consideration because of their potential impact on adjacent properties, the neighborhood and the community. And the standards specifically say that this is intended to protect the health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of the community. And I think that is exactly why we believe this application deserves serious scrutiny. Special land use approval shall be issued when certain conditions and considerations are adequately taken into account. And we would say that many of those considerations are not satisfactorily have been met. We with Boston Square Together partners and hundreds and hundreds of other residents and other community organizations are really trying to create something special in Boston Square where we have a walkable, thriving, and inclusive commercial district with Hub 07, housing, and many of the other things that Reverend Kenny Hoskins has said. And that's what I think is making Boston Square special. But this proposal isn't simply a relocation, it's an expansion and an intensification of an operation that has already created significant problems for the surrounding neighborhood. In the City's Special Land Use Code 5.1209, it specifically defines what neighborhood effects the Planning Commission should consider when approving this request. Number one, adverse effects on the neighborhood. Two, ensuring that the proposed use is not detrimental, hazardous, or disturbing to existing and future uses. And three, the general public welfare. Our experience includes persistent litter and trash, loitering, fights and disturbances, excessive traffic, and many other things such as drug activity and prostitution. In fact, earlier this spring, so after the new owners of WeHead have extensive conversations with GRPD regarding drug and other types of illicit activity that's happening, adjacent to Oliver's Liquor Store. Most concerning, there's been a shooting that hit Hub 07 earlier this year, right? And so this was directly the response because of things and activities that were happening and put the lives of people, including Corwell Health Clinic staff, at risk. And so again, These are the types of things that are just daily challenges here in Boston Square. So the application says that expansion is not expected to increase this disorderly conduct. I think we would respectfully disagree. And we want to point out that the special land use process exists exactly for the circumstances. The question isn't whether Oliver's can operate somewhere in the neighborhood. The question is whether this proposed expansion satisfies the city's neighborhood effect standards within the special land use provisions. And so we would respectfully request that you would deny that request. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, I'm Kimberly Williams and I am also a over 25-year resident in Boston Square. And one of the things I heard today from one of the other applicants was that there was an intentional effort to seek community engagement, to knock doors, to inform neighbors, to educate them and gain support from them. You might be surprised, but you may be just, if you recall, Mr. Williams just mentioned, we are a stone's throw, the neighborhood association, from Oliver's. We are their direct neighbor to the west. There's nothing but the street of Kalamazoo in between us. Amplify GR is a direct neighbor of Oliver's Market. They are directly to the south. Nothing but the street of Ramona between them. However, we did not receive communication engagement from Oliver's Market with regards to this. You'd be surprised as well, some of the other people that signed on in opposition. Boston Square Church, Oakdale Neighbors, Fuller Church, we're all within a quarter of a mile in this location, did not receive engagement. I believe this speaks directly to the intentionality of being a good neighbor. And I believe that you have a good neighbor plan that should have been submitted that was not, that community has not seen. So I ask that you consider these things as you are making your decision. That literally, you did not walk across the street to your neighbor, to say, hey, we wanna do this. We wanna bring you along with us. We want your support in doing this. That makes no sense. That is because they have not been a good neighbor. We have two cleanups a year. Even while the new owner has been in place, they have refused to participate. I would advise you that as we clean up Kalamazoo Street, we find more one-shot bottles than we find anything. Walgreens don't sell those. Johnny's does not sell those, but Oliver's do. We have asked them about participating. We have asked them about keeping the area and a little bit extended area for which we know that they know their customers are littering. They will not. We are constantly sweeping up broken glass that they don't sweep up, picking up trash that they do not pick up. And so it absolutely is a concern for neighbors, not to mention other safety things. But I see my time dwindling, so I want to say to you that in lieu of the lack of the good neighbors plan, in lieu of their needing to update their operational plan, in lieu of the overwhelming issues, number of access points for beer and wine already in the neighborhood, that you do not support this at this time. Thank you.

Others? Come on up.

Good afternoon. My name is Belton Shumpert. I'm also a member of the Boston Square Neighborhood Association, and I stand in agreement with my previous members that have been here before and Mr. Hipple and Pastor Hoskins that I do not, I ask that you do not approve this as far as the good neighbor plan or policy that has been discussed. I don't see any evidence of being a good neighbor. We do summer celebration at Boston Square across from Modern Hardware. We do different things multiple times. We have had people go over to Oliver's and ask them would they care to donate to help with any of the things that we were doing in the community. Never once have we had a donation from them to help with anything that we were sponsoring in the neighborhood. So I mean, if you're gonna be in business, we understand that it's a business. But if you're doing business and you're making money in a business, Don't you want your neighborhood, the business where your neighborhood, to be successful, to be good? Don't you want to contribute to that? How can you call yourself a good neighbor when you ignore the things that are being put on by the people who are there to serve the community? You know, it's like you say, we got Boston Square together. We got Oakdale neighbors. We got Amplified G.I.R. We got Boston Square neighborhoods. We got the churches. We're all working together. Oliver is not working with any of us. They say they can't reach us. We're a stone's throw away. If you can't reach us, I mean, we come there asking you for donations and asking we put up a flyer or something over there. I mean, if you couldn't reach us, if you hadn't heard anything, just come across the street. We meet every Friday from 8 until 11. 8 a.m. Friday morning for coffee and conversations. We've had everybody in there. We've had people from the police department. We had the mayor. We had politicians. We had people from all types of RX kids was in there. We have all kinds of people. The Grand Rapids Library. Everybody comes in. Our good neighbors have never been there. What more can I say? I do not support this. And I don't believe they have a good neighborhood plan, and I don't think that was part of their agenda. They know that we're building, we're bringing people in, and they wanna take advantage of that and expand. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? Okay, thank you. I will close the public hearing. I do want to acknowledge before I ask the applicant to come up and address whichever comments y'all would like to that we did receive all the letters that were submitted by the community that was included in our packet for planning commission to review. So we have those as part of the consideration as well. So I wanted to acknowledge that too. All right, if you can come on up and

First of all, I'm sorry. I heard the concerns. And the first thing, I'm not that old in American system. So the thing I could not reach to my direct neighbors. So I had that in my mind. I was just not sure. Like, should I just go by myself or is there any official way to do so? So I just requested Jesse, my architect, like, what should we do for that? And even like when I met the city office before, so I asked them, like, can we get information? Where are the neighborhood associations? So the only thing I missed that things because I'm new in the system. I exactly don't know. But I'm there's there's no reason like I won't do that. I'm happy to do that. And I can these these things I can fix those easy. And for the donations, always welcome. They said, like, they came up. Really, I didn't know when that happened. I refused them, or my employee just didn't answer right. But in future, I can fix all that things, and I'm willing. Even my other current business, I have donated in community. I have letters from my community. It's in the Kalamazoo area. And I do make donations. The only thing, like I've been here for a few months and just could not make that communications. And now I know I can make those things better. And I'm sorry whatever happened in past. Of course I can make that better.

Okay, thank you. Any follow-up questions for the applicant while we have them up here?

Occasionally we see people with requests like this that have timelines attached to them as far as so it being detrimental if say the application gets tabled. Do you have any deadlines? Like are there any purchase agreements or anything else that would be reason that we would need to make a decision today?

The only thing I have MLCC application. So I exactly don't know what is their timeline, otherwise I don't have any purchase agreements. I already bought that building. Okay, thank you. Thank you.

Kristen, could you remind us the requirements related to the Good Neighbor Plan for this kind of use?

Sure, so a Good Neighbor Plan for alcohol sales is not required, correct, Elizabeth? A good neighbor plan is not a required document. So it is required for some uses, specifically marijuana, cannabis uses. It has been highly encouraged as part of planning commission considerations. So if we go way back in time to when the State changed the alcohol sales requirements for convenience stores, for gas stations specifically. A lot of the feedback we heard from the community was about being a good neighbor, picking up trash, meeting with the community, understanding who was the point of contact, what were the expectations by the business to be a good neighbor. And so those conversations are what led to the specific language in the zoning ordinance. and that is in article 12. Let me just flip to it. Article 12, section 5.1206, neighborhood meeting. There is a good neighbor plan section. Staff has consistently expected Expansion of or new locations that are selling alcohol to submit a good neighbor plan Because we have come to anticipate that that is what the Planning Commission would also expect So a good neighbor plan its purpose. I sort of already described looks to reduce neighbor negative impacts to have that coordination and collaboration of the owners and operators and with individuals and or entities that are already working in the neighborhood. It would include details about their crime prevention and training on the handling of state regulated substances, litter control, loitering control, trespass enforcement, landscape maintenance, neighborhood communication, statements regarding the city's anti-discrimination policies and compliance with those of course. Mitigation measures that could be taken to ensure that there wouldn't be adverse effects on the neighborhood. It would be expected that a good neighbor plan would come with some sort of neighborhood meeting with the community, and then it references back to what does a neighborhood meeting mean, how long in advance would it be noticed, how would individuals know to come to the meeting, making sure it's an accessible location. Importantly, there is a record of good faith. So a good neighbor plan must be accompanied by written verification of the owner where that they attempted to in good faith to meet with the organization that is working in the neighborhood. and or adjacent property owners, any corridor improvement authorities. We'd be looking for details of that communication. So that is not the same thing as saying that the neighborhood must sign off on the Good Neighbor Plan, but that efforts are made to ensure that a collaborative process would take place. And then a good neighbor plan would also include a statement attesting to the community engagement efforts by the applicant associated with the creation of the good neighbor plan. And that would ideally be something that would be signed off by organizations, typically neighborhood associations, business associations, and or corridor improvement authorities that are operating in that area that agreed to say, yes, we've met, efforts were made. Again, not asking that there always is... approval of that plan. We understand that that's not reasonable. We're not delegating our zoning authority with this, but that it's pushing that collaborative process to take place. So that's a very, perhaps more detailed than you needed, but that was a detailed description of what the Good Neighbor Plan is, what it should entail, why we have it in place, and what the expectations are. I think that was super helpful. Thank you so much.

Go ahead. Yeah, I'm not going to question anyone's intention. I hear where everyone's coming from, and I can say, me personally, I'm not opposed to an alcohol use continuing in this space. But I think it's clear from this meeting, This is a very engaged, intentional neighborhood that has worked really, really hard on the commercial and residential side to grow this neighborhood. And I think you have the opportunity to get some really good feedback from the neighbors on the operation of this plan. So I think that making a decision on this is not timely today. And I think that you know what you have to do and that the work can be done. And I know that this is a very accepting group that will give you positive feedback and will help you to hear what the community wants and help you with the business operation at this location.

I agree. I think my head is leaning towards we should table this and give the applicant more time to share their good neighbor plan with the community organizations. I know there's a corridor improvement authority for this area. It would just be good to see more community engagement on the applicant's part.

I'm in the exact same place. I've really held two tensions. The first one for me is that on the one side, denial does not mean that operations cease. And so there is an opportunity in eventually moving this project forward for better. And I definitely see that, especially in response to what the neighbors are asking for. I also hear you, Mr. Singh, that you don't know. You don't know what you don't know. And you didn't know how to engage with the neighborhood. And so this is an opportunity now for us to give you that time to learn and to meet your neighbors and hopefully neighbors for you to bring Mr. Singh along so that he can understand how to be a part of Boston Square, which is Community development on steroids over there like you guys are doing really good long hard work in Boston Square So that one tension is I want to see better in this than this Property and there is an opportunity to do that eventually I think through an approval and then the other tension is that the neighborhood has changed so much and And when the special land use was granted, there wasn't the hub there. There wasn't medical and child care. And this gives us as a planning commission an opportunity to really look at this use and say, is the operation in its current standard what we want? One of those things for me is the hours and wondering if we should be talking about reducing the hours of operation maybe not until 2 a.m. but also allowing Mr. Singh to stay competitive and have some hours beyond some of his competition there so anyway that's my tension you know where I stand which is that I think we should table and let there be more work in the community and come back.

I have to agree with most all of that I mean I do like the septet fact that this would actually be a better location, you know, that had better security and better safety. So there are positives about this. I liked hearing that they wanted to reduce the overall dominance of alcohol in favor of more of the local neighborhood market to go around and get some fresh food or something without having to get into a car and drive a half hour somewhere else. So I see positives there. Obviously, The big glaring hole here is the lack of connectivity between all these very passionate community members and the applicant in not having some commonality, be able to sit down and find common ground because there's probably a lot of common ground there to be had based on the testimony. I'm not crazy about anything that has to stay open until 2 in the morning, especially in the neighborhood that's maybe not a stone's throw but maybe a four iron from actual houses and neighbors. And so I would concur that I would like to see maybe that visited a little bit. I understand staying competitive in business, but everybody else is not selling after 10. So maybe not two in the morning, but maybe a compromise again, you know, sitting down with the community around you, you guys might be able to come up with some. So I'm inclined to agree with the rest of the commission on postponing this at this point.

I agree with everything that everyone has said. I think tabling is the best idea. My only additional comment would be that once it's tabled, this time period is a great time to implement the good neighbor plan that you've developed thus far while you work on it with the community. making sure that things are picked up and trying to deter the kind of behaviors that the neighbors are concerned about so that this is a time that you can show your commitment to the neighborhood while you're working with the neighborhood and show improvements as a new owner in that location, which is something that we've discussed on previous applications that have come before us as well.

I agree. I think the one other thing and maybe this is specific for the architect to think about during this time is trying to give us a more final picture of the floor plan because per testimony it seems like you're hoping to finalize that for some final approval but essentially this would be final approval. So having some certainty as part of our approval of where those shelves and doors are that are dedicated to alcohol, what exactly is the shelf length that's dedicated to this versus other things, I think being able to tie that to any approval would be helpful.

I think to build on that too, seeing, you mentioned landscaping, seeing some of those, not that you have to hire a landscaper, but it'd be nice to see a landscaping plan with some of those details, with that closed curb cut, some of those elements baked into the submitted plan the next time we see this.

Yeah, I mean, I don't think I could have said it better. I want to thank all the neighbors for engaging in this process and for the applicant to be willing to also engage now that you have more information. I agree that a table seems appropriate here. In addition to what everyone has said related to part of what we'd like to see when we come back, I would like to see the applicant collaborate with staff or work with staff a little bit on kind of finalizing what's in that kind of alleyway set up just to make sure we have a clear picture of what's going to be there as part of the overall kind of more final site plan that would be good to have when we come back. And yeah, otherwise I think everything has been covered well.

Would you like to give a motion? Yeah. I will make a motion to table the Planning Commission decision on 1554 Kalamazoo Avenue SE.

I think that should we articulate would you articulate what you heard us say we need I was I was working on that so what I what I think I heard was a table or would be a motion to table to allow time for the applicant to meet with the community to further develop the good neighbor plan finalize the floor plan submit a landscape plan final plans for the South Alley integrate sept head recommendations from the city's septet specialist.

And as Commissioner Swem said, start implementing what they've already written down as a good neighbor plan and putting it into practice.

And to allow time to demonstrate an ability to follow the draft good neighbor plan. I think that actually is consistent with what we expected of Matthew's house as well.

Yep, so moved.

Still support? Second. Okay. All right, Commissioner Hendrick. All right, we have motion support. Any additional discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much. Thank you all very much.

Mr. Singh hearing that you weren't sure who to contact please lean into city staff Elizabeth or Laura Or myself are more than happy to connect you with the community members We work with frequently and have constant relatively consistent communication And I think we can we can help you bridge that gap All right.

Thank you all we're gonna take a five-minute break

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, I think we're ready to get started again. Let's move to 1018 Warden Street Southeast.

All righty, the next item on the agenda is 1018 Warden.

This is a request for approval to establish a transitional housing program for up to six young women experiencing homelessness or housing instability. As we discussed previously for that 1555 NAP application, group housing in residential zone districts requires special land use approval. And I do want to point out that the operator is a non-profit. So this is in a TN LDR zone district and It's in a TNLDR zone district. It's on the south side of Warden. The property is about 5,800 square feet, and the house is about 1,200 square feet. It's a single-family home, has a driveway with a detached garage, The residence contains four bedrooms and one full and one half baths. The four bedrooms could accommodate a maximum of six individuals. There are no interior or exterior changes proposed to accommodate this use. The applicant is, pardon me, intending to operate a small residential support program for young women ages 18 to 24 who are transitioning out of foster care. Staff will include one full-time and one part-time staff member on site for a minimum of 12 hours a day, and the program director will be on site multiple times each week. Like that last application, no staff will remain on the property overnight, and the property will be supported by 24-hour monitored surveillance. Residents will generally remain in the program for 12 to 18 months, and residents may participate in off-site employment, education, or appointments independently. Residents may visit approved family and friends after 30 days subject to program guidelines and No visitors or overnight guests will be permitted. I There will be no medical, clinical, or therapeutic services to be provided on site, although the application did indicate that there is an expectation that participants will participate in therapy. Let's see here. The applicant did provide details about an intake process, programming, and a good neighbor plan, which actually is a requirement for transitional or emergency housing. And that's why we required it for this one rather than, and not the NAP application. Relative to parking Let's see here about four parking spaces are required for the residents plus the supporting staff again the Residents will not have personal vehicles. They will actually not be permitted to have vehicles. So vehicles are anticipated to be few. That would be only the employees, the staff supporting the use. So that would be one or two. one or two vehicles. The applicant did conduct outreach and I will let her detail how that was conducted and what kind of input that she received. Do you have any questions for me?

Any questions for Elizabeth? No.

Okay, I'll turn it over to the applicant then.

Thank you.

Good afternoon everyone. My name is Sabrina Cruz and I am the founder and the program director of Daughters of Purpose Foundation. I would like to thank you all for allowing me the opportunity to speak with you today. We are partners housing LLC and Daughters of Purpose Foundation are partners in in this project. We are partners owns the property and Daughters of Purpose operates the residential support program within the home. This home is personally meaningful to me. I lived here as a young child for two years and it was a place of safety and stability during an important time in my life. That experience is a key part of why we chose this home, because we want our residents to feel that same sense of comfort, security, and belonging. Our program is a small, fully residential transitional housing program for young women aging out of foster care. Housing is important, but the program itself is the heart of what we do. We provide structure, mentorship, daily living guidance, and life skills development to help these young women build productive, confident, and meaningful lives. This home, as Elizabeth stated, has four bedrooms. And our resident placement was very intentional. Bedroom one would have two residents. Bedroom two will house one resident, and bedroom three, one resident. And then there's a flex space slash the fourth bedroom, and that will have two residents. This creates a total capacity of six young women. Inside this home, we are structuring the interior to support growth and learning, not altering the structure of the house in any way. The family room is used for open dialogue and supportive conversation. The finished lower level serves as a quiet library space. An adjacent room is set up as a computer room for job searching, education, and skill development. All activities occur inside the home and the property remains fully residential in character. Our environment is calm, structured, and predictable. Residents do not have a personal vehicle, which keeps traffic and parking impact extremely low. Staff will park in the driveway, and street parking will be rarely needed. We maintain quiet hours. We do not allow visitors or overnight guests. We do not hold gatherings or outdoor programming, and the home blends into the neighborhood exactly as a single family resident should. Safety and accountability are central to our operation. We have staff present daily. We'll also have the 24 hour interior and exterior surveillance focus only on entry points and clear rules that support and respect responsibility and peaceful living. Our team is trained in trauma, informed care, de-escalation, and supportive communication. We take pride in maintaining this home, the yard, and the overall appearance of the property. Most importantly, commissioners, our mission is about impact. We are preparing young women for adulthood, teaching them life skills, financial literacy, cooking, career readiness, emotional intelligence, confidence. We are helping them build stability. avoid homelessness, and stepping into the future with purpose. When these young women leave or when these young women succeed, our community becomes stronger, safer, and more stable. We are committed to being excellent neighbors and responsible operators. We value transparency, communication, and respect for the neighborhood. We do believe this program will be a positive asset to Grand Rapids and will operate in full alignment with the residential character of the area. Thank you for your time, and this will be your opportunity to ask me questions.

Thank you very much. Does anyone have questions for the applicant?

Go ahead. Can you repeat for me? You said no visitors will be allowed, is that correct? No. Okay, thank you. You're welcome. Go ahead.

How are individuals selected for your program, and are you working with other housing organizations in the community?

Yes and yes. I have a great relationship right now with HUD. In fact, I have other property and they are receiving vouchers through HUD right now. So I have been in close communication with them about my program. In fact, on Monday of next week I am meeting with Wedgewood and I have a great relationship with a couple of individuals on staff there.

um who is eager to uh help me with the housing a few of their residents right now so you they we sit i i'm sorry let me just actually say a sentence or a word here um we have here that the property would be supported by 24-hour um surveillance at night is there anyone on call Yes, absolutely.

It will be my husband and myself. So he's in charge of security, which is what he does already just in his normal day to day. But yes, so there will be actually three people because I also have one volunteer that will give me 10 hours a week just because they just recently retired and they just don't know what else to do with their time. Thank you very much.

Yeah, so I'm not sure I quite heard your question, but I had a question about the visitors, because I'm reading in your policy about visitors will not be permitted inside the home, but then it was mentioned that visits would be available after 30 days.

Yes, they will be able to obtain a pass. to go out and perhaps spend time with family if they have family. I do not believe most of my residents will, but I want to give that opportunity. I do not want to operate our program like it is a prison. We want them to feel I mean, they're family. We want them to feel as though they are able to, but they'll have to earn that privilege.

So it's their visit would be them leaving the property to do something else. Absolutely. So no one, no visits at the property. Not at all. Because the state's in here, visitors will not be permitted inside the home. And I thought, where are you going to meet? On the porch or in the backyard? What do you do in the winter? No. So you're talking about leaving.

Absolutely no visitors at all.

Gotcha. Okay.

Thank you for clarifying that.

You're welcome.

How long do you expect the residents to be in the program or to live in the house? I mean, I'm just curious.

No, 12 to 18 months.

12 to 18 months, okay.

Yes.

Any other questions for the applicant? You submitted very complete information. I appreciate that. Thank you.

I appreciate it. I did want to touch on the Good Neighbors program. I went out canvassing the neighborhood, and my husband can attest to this. I am. I was so nervous, and I did not want him to come with me. I'm like, I've got my big girl pants on. I got this, right? And I have to say, I was overwhelmed by the positive feedback. More than four individuals and families offered to assist. I think I put that in there. I filled out a card and indicated. And I did not paraphrase. I gave you verbatim as to what they were saying. Just lending their hand or lending their support from a chef. One of our neighbors owns a dance studio and they're like, oh, I'll come down and I'll help whatever, you know, with just whatever you guys need. And they were very, very welcoming.

Yeah, it's clear you did your work and we appreciate that.

Thank you. I appreciate it. I wanted to thank Elizabeth and Avery as well. Everyone has been so amazing. Any questions that I had, even from the first day we went down, I went down and met with Elizabeth and Avery. Everyone was just amazing.

Thank you for that. We have good staff for sure. Yes. Okay, I'll have you have a seat and we'll open up the public hearing. Thank you. If anybody is here and wants to speak on this case, come on up to the mic. You may. Yep.

I have the privilege. Hello, everyone. I'm sorry. I have the privilege of being married to this wonderful woman. And I don't know why God has blessed me like this, guys, but he did. But for years, my wife has always said, I want to help young women. Like for years, and I was just in one ear, out the other. But over time, I've watched countless people come to her, need her help, her guidance. Young women, even a few younger men, have asked for her support and guidance. And then when she said, I wanna do something, Now, I said, well, let's go. This is your passion. This has been your passion. You've always spoken about it, so let's do it. If you want to do it, I support it. And so I stand here as a supportive husband, letting you guys know that the decision you make today it won't fall by the wayside because she's an eye daughter and a T crosser. And if she says she's going to do something, it's, it will be done. Um, and that's all I want to say because she's phenomenal. She really truly is. She's a woman of God, a woman of character, a woman of honesty. Um, and for me, she's the best thing that ever happened to me. So, You guys, yeah. Thank you.

Thank you. And now you have all of that on the public record for any future conversations that y'all are going to have.

It's on video, too, so she can go back and watch it. That's right.

Pull it right back up. Okay. Well, thank you for that. I'll close the public hearing. Any other questions or move on to discussion here?

Thoughts? I am very much in support. I have a question. It's just my lack of knowledge between the first case and this one. And maybe because they're different, it doesn't matter. But in the first case, we did cite staff programming hours in the conditions. And I'm wondering if that's important with this use.

I think it's how the different uses are regulated by the zoning ordinance, where the residential rehabilitation facilities, the regulatory framework has very specific language around the expectation that there's programs, whereas I don't believe transitional housing has the same expectations, so we don't You could, but we don't have that same regulatory framework between the two uses. Okay, that's really helpful. Thank you.

I think it's a great use. I love that she has a history with this place and wants to use it to further helping other people. I love that she's done her work with the neighborhood. And I... Think it's appropriate here, and I think it goes to help solve a solving some one of the problems that our city is facing so I'm in support, and I would be willing to make a motion unless others would like to comment I

I was really touched by the outreach and the passion that you got a response. It makes it easy to support something like this. But to be honest, I don't know if I'd ever been close enough to you know, the foster program to know that there was a gap that needed to be filled. You know, when they're done with foster, what happens? You know, and it's interesting to learn about that today, that you're meeting a need that, you know, is out there, but, you know, it's hidden. So, anyway, I would do the motion as well, but go ahead, Rick. No, you may. Go for it. Oh, all right, well. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Planning Commission approves the special land use and site review request of We Are Partners Housing, LLC, Daughters of Purpose Foundation, Sabrina Cruz, to establish a transitional housing program for up to six women transitioning out of foster care at 1018 Worden Street Southeast for the following reasons. One, 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 protect the established development patterns consisting predominantly of medium-low density residential development in the form of detached single-family houses and two-family dwellings sited on individual lots of the TN LDR zone district, and the proposed use will contribute to a greater variety of housing types in a low density residential zone district, 2024 Community Master Plan, Great Neighborhoods Recommendation 1.B.2. 2. The proposed use will meet the Slight Plan review standards of Section 5.12.8.E because the proposed use will utilize an existing residential home without significant building or site changes. 3. The proposed use will be compatible, harmonious, and appropriate with the character and uses of the neighborhood. adjacent properties in the natural environment because the proposed use will be residential with residents living as a household in a cooperative manner and the establishment of the proposed use is not anticipated to be a high impact use and programming will occur onsite during daytime hours. 3B, the proposed use will not have adverse effects on the neighborhood because adequate onsite parking will be provided for staff and permitted visitors. Actually, we should scratch permitted visitors because we're not going to do that, right? provided for staff and residents will not have personal vehicles and will instead rely on other means of transportation. 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 noise or visual clutter because no visitors or overnight guests are permitted outdoor activities are limited to customary residential uses including recreation gardening outdoor meals and scheduled family visits which we will also scratch. and outdoor meals, period. 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, parking area, and landscaping are appropriately situated. appropriately situated on the site and in compliance with the TN neighborhood requirements. 5a, public or private infrastructure already exists and will safeguard the health, safety and general welfare of the public because no additional burden is expected with the establishment of this use. 5b, the proposed use will not be detrimental to the financial stability or economic welfare of the city because the intent of the program is to result in placement of financially stable independent individuals that will contribute to the economic welfare of the city. In 5C, the proposed use will comply with all other applicable city ordinances and policies and all applicable state laws. Be it further resolved that the following conditions of approval shall apply to this project. Standard condition set A approvals on your screen. Number one and number two, no more than six individuals shall reside in the dwelling at any given time.

Support. Okay, we have a motion and support. Any additional discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you very much.

I just thought I'd note that I think in 2024, we updated the zoning ordinance to allow for transitional housing to be considered in more areas beyond the commercial zone districts. And I'm pretty sure that this is the first one that's been considered under that six or at least the six or fewer, if not all of them. So I think that's a testament to the work that the planning commission did to provide more housing types for individuals to live in and be part of our community. Awesome.

Good to know. Thank you.

Okay, our final case, 1440 Butterworth Southwest.

The last case for consideration today is a request for approval to demolish an existing building to facilitate expansion of outdoor truck storage. The 19-acre subject property is located on the south side of Butterworth at the terminus of Wealthy Street between Garfield and 196. The property is zoned special district industrial transportation and is surrounded by special district open space or John Ball Zoo to the north, TNLDR, low density residential, and a small business district just to the north as well. As I said, John Ball Zoo is to the north. There's a residential neighborhood also to the north with that small business district and Kent Trails runs along the south and west of the subject property. The 2024 Community Master Plan identifies the future use of this area as manufacturing and logistics. The property is just outside the Butterworth area-specific plan that was adopted in 2024 with the Community Master Plan. However, the community's vision for the future of the neighborhood and future land use, housing, economic development, transportation, and public space are relevant for consideration. The Butterworth Street is currently in a state of transition, serving as a commercial corridor, light industrial center, a residential street, and a truck route. It's a lot of uses on one street. And so the area-specific plan identified a need to determine how all of these uses would coexist. Butterworth in the area specific plan is also a street identified as a priority street for increased density. People smarter than me have put together a map that shows some development activity, both public and private, within the last six years. You can see Butterworth runs diagonally, kind of in the middle of the screen here. And it's a heat map, so the larger the bubble, the larger the investment. So there has been, you can see that there is a trajectory of investment that's happening along the Butterworth corridor. including on the subject property, which I didn't mention earlier, is the Coca-Cola bottling plant. It's such a huge property, you really can't miss it. The reconstruction of Butterworth from Marion to Front is expected to commence in 2027. This is a large public project and the reconstruction will include water main replacement, new storm water catch basins and green space, raised bicycle lanes and updates to parking, pedestrian crossing movements and planting of new trees. There's a lot happening in the area. So, as I mentioned, this is a large plan. This is the survey that was provided. This is the west half of the property. You can see it's improved with a large industrial building. And this is the east half of the property. You can see it is parking lots and large pavements. And there are two auxiliary buildings on the east side of the property. And then this square here, that is a guard shack and that identifies the truck entrance off of Garfield. This is the aerial image of most of the subject property. The far ends are cut off of this image. You can see pavement surrounds the main building and the bottling facility on all sides. Most of the staff and guest parking is located in front of the buildings or along Butterworth Street. And trucks are stored generally east of the main bottling facility and south of the building as well. The 7,147 square foot two-story brick office building located at the northeast corner is proposed to be demolished. After demolition, the area will be paved and striped to add 23 truck storage spaces. The curb cut access you can see to the staff and visitor parking lot off Butterworth will be removed and replaced with sidewalk curb and gutter. I've provided a few images of the building. This is the view of the building from Butterworth. And then looking east from Butterworth, you can see the visitor parking lot that will be removed with this plan. And then this is looking west from Butterworth as well. And then the view from Garfield Avenue. This is the proposed demolition plan. Along with the building, some of the existing pavement will be removed. And then I will show you in the next image, there's currently an existing eight foot high cement block wall that will be extended along Butterworth and Garfield to provide screening to the truck transportation storage area. And then landscaping is proposed. I'll go into more detail on that in a minute. The zoning ordinance storage and screening requirements are storage areas are generally not to be in the front yard unless it is determined that there is no substantial detriment to surrounding properties. Adequate screening is provided and a minimum setback of 15 feet from the property line. The new storage area for trucks is proposed in the front yard, technically speaking, but no closer than the auxiliary building You can see in the top left corner of this screen that it will be no closer than the existing auxiliary building and the existing truck storage area. You can see in this image, this is the wall that will be extended and the new storage area will be no closer to Butterworth than the existing wall. Storage areas shall be completely screened from view from the public right of way. And a solid eight to 10 foot wall or fence is required. This is an image of the existing eight foot high cement block wall that will be extended along Butterworth and Garfield. It is currently 25 feet from the property line. and small trees are proposed, you can see in this image here. The zoning ordinance requires a minimum of 10 shrubs and two trees for every 50 linear feet. We ask that the Planning Commission consider whether this proposed treatment or the minimum landscaping requirement meet the extent of the screening necessary for the use given the setback and the width of the green area between the wall and the sidewalk. and whether additional screening may be required or whether irrigation may be required to ensure the life of the plants that are placed there. If we talk for a minute, well, here's an image that the applicant submitted as an example of what the renovations might look like without the landscaping And here are images of the existing plan and the overall plan. And I will defer to the applicant to speak more about the truck operations. I'll talk a little bit about parking. Due to the extent of pavement on the property, there are both formal parking spaces that I discussed earlier along Butterworth and informal unstriped parking areas around the building. The new truck storage area will result in the removal of 83 staff and visitor parking spaces within the area of work to provide for that 23 truck parking storage area spaces. The remaining 210 parking spaces for staff and visitors exceeds the minimum allowed by 80 parking spaces. The Planning Commission may wish to discuss with the applicant the extent of the need for that parking and whether there's any opportunity to explore A reduction of the personal vehicle parking spaces to allow for some additional truck storage area or if there's other area within the property to allow for additional truck storage without the demolition of a building. The applicant has reached out to John Ball Area Neighbors, that's the neighborhood organization in this area, and they submitted a letter expressing no objection to the request with some considerations for the Planning Commission to think about. They requested that the expanded truck area not be used for loading purposes, for idling vehicles, and not be used between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. Additionally, JBAN requested that the solid wall and landscape screening be provided with additional landscaping to fill in the existing gaps. In sum, the Planning Commission is asked to consider whether the proposed use aligns with the trend of development and community goals and recommendations of the Community Master Plan and Butterworth Area Specific Plan, whether the proposed truck storage expansion To consider the expansion relative to the existing site layout and parking needs and impacts on adjacent properties Uses in the public right-of-way Particularly with the adequacy of landscape screening. Are there any questions?

Thank You Laura any questions for Laura No, all right, we'll have the applicant come up

Hi I'm Eric Mark. I'm with Coca-Cola. I'm essentially tasked with this project. I've got the civil engineer with us today and I've got the plant manager here today. I'm the one presenting everything for the project. This is something that we've internally mulled over for several years. It's something that we've looked at every kind of possible option. Out of all of the options, this is our best option. As a company that likes to maintain good community relations and likes to maintain a good image of everything and try to support everyone, The demolition of a building is always a hard topic. I think to to discuss It is one that we just we were at that point. We need to do it. The building has structural issues the building has It's it's it's got maintenance issues now because it's been vacant for several several years At this point it is cheaper to tear it down than it is to maintain it. Um, even if we were to lease it, to get it back to a point where, uh, we could do that, um, it, it there's, you know, there's, there's much more desirable locations around grand Rapids and the beautiful, beautiful community here that, you know, you guys, uh, enjoy every day that I think you guys, you know, there, there's much better options I think for tenants at this point, than that specific one and I think that's why we're at where we're at. As far as the parking spots, we're adding 23 spots which is almost a 30% increase on the truck parking. It's something that we need for the safety and well-being of our staff. The staff is something that we take very seriously and their safety and well-being is something we look at every day and as you guys can all probably understand that the more room we have to move trucks, the safer it's going to be. The intent here is to move trucks and that we can leave in place for a day or two or whatever it may be. We're not going to be loading anything there. We're not going to be doing activities there. It's more short storage, whether we park them there and then move them up to the front. We have loading docks to load trucks. We don't do that activity in the yard. I do have the plant manager, if you guys have specific operation questions of how we do that. I would say, too, in my discussions with JBAM before they submitted their letter yesterday, we specifically route our trucks away from the community there. We do activities to make sure that we're not imposing noise outside of normal hours. When I had a call with them, nobody could name a time when people complained. We don't have trucks driving through the community. We don't have them beeping horns and driving through the school area and everything there. With that said, I'm happy to answer any questions you've got and I think I've got the experts here too to answer anything else.

Awesome, thank you. Does anyone have a question? Yeah, go ahead. Oh, go ahead, please.

In the pictures, it looks like trailers are sitting in all those spots, but do you call those trailers trucks? Is that just industry terminology? Correct.

I use them interchangeably. Okay. Yes, and so whether there's the cab on them or it's just a trailer, I refer to them as trucks, yes.

Right. Okay. And so you're like checking off the J-band issues from that letter. You know, you're not going to be loading there. It looks more like long-term or maintenance level storage just to give you flexibility to move things around elsewhere. You're not going to have vehicles idling there for long periods of time. They're just going to park and go. Correct. What are your operating hours? Is the seven to seven thing an issue or does this truck usage fall in that time frame that they mentioned in the letter?

To your point, the plan is 24 hours. So there is staff in that facility 24 hours a day. We do have some early morning activities, but those activities are at the dock itself. We specifically move those away from the community to make sure that there's nothing happening up there. But to your point, the 7 to 7 and that that corner or that location is not an issue. I don't think that's something that we're worried about. Just having that room and that is something that'll help out a lot. All right, thank you.

Well, Paul took most of my questions, but one more listed in the J-BEN letter is they're hoping that any holes in the existing landscaping be replaced. Do you know what they mean?

I do not specifically. Um, but that that's been something that I think that the, the, the team did raise is, is that a long wall like that is, is something that is a little harder to, to look at. Um, additional landscaping is something we're not opposed to. Um, you know, the, What we proposed is what we thought we needed to do for code. If there was a condition that we needed to do like a chain link screen fence with ivy, we could definitely do that too. After going back and forth with teams and wondering what we could do there, that's the current belief is that that would be the softest look from the street is basically an ivy covered screen fence. At this point, we were just, the talking point was match existing, right? Everyone knows what that looks like. There's no questions, there's no concern, but we'd be open to additional landscaping if that was desirable.

Great, thank you. And no pressure to know the answer to this. I'm just curious, do you know the history of this building?

The J-Ban board actually did discuss it with us. And if I remember right, it was built in the 40s or 50s because there was an oil company here and this was their headquarters. So really where our truck parking lot is used to be where their giant oil tanks were, if I'm not mistaken. And then J-Ban actually went through every company that's owned it since them. But yeah, the history though, as someone that works in construction and buildings, it's it's always an interesting topic.

Thanks. Laura mentioned in her overview that there is an access of personal vehicle parking and sounds like that that's not used regularly or not used completely. Can you speak to the fact why that wasn't considered some of that space versus this?

So to your point, it's with the way that the road curves, the Butterworth curves, um, it, it helps, but it doesn't, it's not going to give us as much space. We, we could move some of the, the 19 priority positions up there, but then you're, you're going to lose them and from where they're currently at. So, um, maximizing the parking, we, we get a lot more in this corner. Um, is kind of where that was at. We could gain a couple, but nowhere near what we're doing here for this one.

Yeah, I guess similarly, or following up that question, you said you talked about a lot of different options, and just for our education, could you let us know what some of those other options were that y'all considered before coming to this conclusion?

So different parking layouts are kind of like that where we took some of that lot. We were looking at... I don't know if you guys see it, but in the middle there's a house there too. That's someone's property. That's one that would have been nice to connect the two. When we looked at it, it was more or less of... just truck parking and how to fit that in there. Making employees walk from the corner and then kind of putting the truck at the top too, it didn't seem feasible. Where they'd have to walk through a truck lot to get to work in the morning and for a lot of the warehouse employees that just seemed dangerous.

Thank you. Other questions? Go ahead, yeah.

You mentioned that you were open to additional landscaping and I think I heard you say that you were willing to increase landscaping in front of the existing block wall. Did I understand that correctly, that you were willing to add landscaping?

I think so, yeah. From our side, we're We don't see an issue with it. I mean, it's it's landscaping is something we know it helps soften everything. And it's something with with all the investment in the community and everything else. I from our side, it's it's a small piece that I think we can we can help. Right. So, OK.

And then do you think that there could, knowing that this building anchors that corner and in some ways almost, it's just highly visible, right? Coming in and out of the community, the business district further to the east, would you be open to looking at maybe utilizing some landscaping or something to help anchor that corner a little bit better than maybe the couple of trees that are showing today? I think something more robust, I guess, is what I'm asking.

Yeah, I think so. I mean, there is a, as you can see in the photo, there is a large tree that's there. Our intent is to keep that. When we do the demolition, I don't, it may die. And if it dies, it's, there's nothing we can, we think we can do about it. The intent is to leave that there. So there is, there is, you know, intent to, to, soften that corner as much as we can and i think to your point we're we're open to more robust you know bushes and trees and whatever we need to do there okay um you know it's it's one of those things we if we lived in across the street kitty corner we'd want something there too and as members of the community we we want to do that yeah so i i

The tree appears like it could be in the public right-of-way. Regardless, certainly there's some protection measures that should be made to protect it so that it has a chance of surviving. I think the tree might be kind of the bare minimum, so I was hoping that it sounds like you're willing to create something more robust at that corner on your property to really serve more as a gateway. Okay.

Thank you.

Other questions? Okay. Seeing none, we'll have you take a seat. I'm going to open up the public hearing. If anyone from the public wants to, or anyone wants to speak as a member of the public, feel free to approach the microphone. Seeing none, I will close the public hearing. I guess I did want to give you an opportunity. You came up As the plant manager, is there anything you wanted to add?

I just thought there was a question that I needed help with. Okay, all right. I'm good.

Great, okay. All right, let's discuss, folks.

Yeah, I don't love getting rid of the building, but given the state that it's in, and I understand the costs and things like that, so... And I do appreciate that they at least tried to look at other alternatives. And I would, if we do go ahead with approval, I would agree with the line of questioning that Kristen had around more robust landscaping at the corner there, as well as continuing it to the existing wall as well, so that it all gets tied in and softened a lot more for that neighborhood. especially with all the work and the improvements that have been going on at the zoo as well.

I too am saddened by the loss of a beautiful building, that era of architecture with the limestone and the red brick. It's just, I love that look. I question the thought of a a chain link fence where there's a bunch of brick and mature growth. I mean, if you could guarantee that the chain link was gonna always be covered by a thick foliage of evergreen ivy or something, that'd be one thing, but I think chain link and that beautiful brick wall and those buildings, I see a mismatch there, so I'm not really thrilled about that solution. Hate to lose the building, would hate to see a chain link fence. But I think there's room for compromise there and if they're willing to look at other options, I could support it.

So I think the current application was, it looks like it's a block wall to match the existing. And so I would say that's much more preferable than a chain link fence with ivy growing on it. Mostly because anytime people try to do that, you end up with half a chain link fence that's open and some stuff growing on it. So I think matching the existing makes the most sense. Hate getting rid of that building. I think historically demolishing buildings like that has proven to be a bad idea over the course of the city's history, even though we got rid of a lot of them at one point. But then at the same time, I question myself, would I feel the same way if it was like a pre-engineered metal structure on the corner? Would I have the same thoughts? And I probably wouldn't. So as much as I hate to see it go, yeah, I think that an appropriate condition would be that the wall matches the existing to the best of their abilities and that they work with staff on a landscape plan that holds the corner and meets or exceeds landscape requirements across the entire frontage of the existing and the proposed wall.

I have a history in Grand Rapids Public Schools and we've had to close a lot of schools and so I have this history coming here with thinking about honoring buildings more than I ever thought I would think about honoring buildings in my life. So I just want to encourage you to be creative and thoughtful about replacing, or not replacing the building, but I guess honoring the building. What I mean by that is could there be a plaque on the wall that shows the history of this building in the past and what was to continue to anchor that piece. We can't force you to do that. I'm just encouraging you to be creative knowing that this truly is a landmark that will be leaving the city.

So I've heard a couple of commissioners talk about the building and I appreciate that. It is architecturally beautiful, but I also want to make sure that the replacement of the building for truck storage is also, that's really the material request here. So if we could hear a little bit about that, I think that would be helpful about whether that's appropriate.

Yeah, that's really what I'm struggling with because Essentially, where the building is is 11 or 12 parking spots, and since there was testimony given by Laura that there's an excess of personal vehicle parking that's not always fully utilized, I'm just struggling to see how it's more affordable to demolish a building completely for 12 spots versus looking at repurposing some personal vehicle parking. I understand the circulation constraints, but I think that's a constraint that exists for any industrial property in the city right now just because of historical usages. I'm really struggling with it personally.

Yeah, I could see, in looking at the, I don't know, one of the, over the site, someone can move the picture to, not the aerial, but the site plan that shows the proposed, yeah, this one. So I guess when I look at it, and I too am very sad about this building, I drive by this corner very often, But I could see, like, especially as you're going around that curve going further west on Butterworth, that curve would have geometric limitations, I think, for truck parking. But I do see kind of the eastern edge of that that's still on that same angle as where it's proposed to be truck parking, where wondering what options y'all had thought about that section that kind of deeper parking area that has like the four rows of single occupancy vehicle parking versus so yeah maybe I guess if you could come up and yes thank you yes right there so I guess that I'm wondering what y'all considered as far as that goes or what I guess what percentage of your personal vehicle parking is utilized and maybe if you could give us some testimony for that.

Definitely. So I think the key there is the trailer length. So to your point, there's the four rows. If we took the two bottom rows and we just moved the 18 up there, to your point, we would... Essentially move that to truck parking. But there's not enough room for that third row of truck parking. So the priority spots would essentially go away. And you would create a bottleneck on the right where they'd have to drive and then do a U-turn to get to the dock, if that makes sense. And so we could create a drive aisle on the left, but then you've got multiple drive aisles kind of going, and then you've gotta have stop signs, and then we gotta have striping and other things like that. Part of what you're seeing here is kind of a long run of truck parking. Part of what that's doing is it's not creating intersections. It's creating these long runs where you've got one truck and he can see everything. Nobody's popping out. You're not getting three or four guys trying to cross in one spot. That's kind of the thought process of going longer and over to the edge. To your point, Definitely going up, it could save, but it's not. We're only gaining a couple spots, whereas here we're getting almost 30% more parking.

To the parking spot from, sorry, maybe it helps if I step to the microphone. Just to articulate more about the employee parking as well. It's accurate. Most days at 200 parking spots, there's an element that's probably underutilized. But on site we have over 220 employees. So there's times where we've all employee meetings and those spots do get filled. So I'm very cognizant when we have those employee meetings that we are using our parking spots and not filling up the neighborhood parking. as well on the street side parking from a operational perspective. And then Eric Mark, you know, referred accurately when it talks about the truck layout as well. Also to the earlier conversation about the traffic on Butterworth as well, outside of the construction on wealthy, All of our truck traffic follows wealthy to 131. We very rarely are using Butterworth as a thoroughfare for our truck traffic as well. Right now we are because of the construction on wealthy where that's the only way to get to the highway. But hopefully that answers some of your questions as well.

Thank you for that.

I'm going to add another one little thing. The building that's being torn down that parking lot there was used for that building and if you Kept that parking lot there and put the truck traffic closer to the other building You would have a long way to walk to where the new people that are parking there are going to work and There's that just doesn't seem to make sense and if you think about all types of weather and that's why And I appreciate I don't like tearing down buildings either, and I'm not a structural engineer, but my understanding is that this building's in disrepair, and it's been vacant, and it's not going to get better sitting there. So, you know, the building has to come down if that's what the case is, and so we're just trying to... improve what's there now, keep everything in operation the way it is, successful business, no complaints from neighbors, keep it moving. Yeah, there we go. Thanks.

Thank you.

So we keep hearing that the building is beyond repair. Has it been evaluated and officially determined that it's beyond repair or is that just a statement?

No, it's visually, if you stand outside of it, you can see cracks running up. You can see bricks ready to fall off. We've actually put in a barrier so that people can't park there, so that it's visibly, you can see it from the street. To your point, we've had some structural engineers look at it, but we haven't put any formal... plans together. We've gotten some rough estimates from structural engineers, but nothing but formal with plans and actually going through the design phase.

Okay. And then for fear of Making people grumpy. Is this about demolishing a building or is it about finding more spaces for trucks?

To your point, we need the truck space. It is something that genuinely we are approaching. We're at capacity, I would say, for what we can accommodate there and we need truck parking just for the safety and well-being. The fact that this building is in the condition it's in is allowing us to use this. It's if if we had a use for this if we had 50 or 100 employees that were that needed to operate out of there for the operation of the plant i think this would be a different story and i agree with you there at the same time this is one of those ones it i i think it's it's progress it's not the progress everyone wants to see but it it is progress as the plant in grows in capacity and and production so

So while you're up there, the J-band letter spoke to the fact that the property had been marketed but not received any interest. Is that true?

Yes.

How long was it on the market?

Do you know how long it was on the market?

You're talking about listed for sale?

Or for rent?

For rent, it was. I can't speak to how long it was, but we were in active conversation with John Balzu a few years ago, and they were trying to use it for kind of remote office for them.

So was it listed with a real estate broker?

No, we never officially listed with a real estate broker, no. That's the question, sorry. Thank you. And just to give more operational context about the need for the trailer parking, not the truck parking, to further clarify, just to, you know, and I'm kind of a history, so the plant itself that exists at 1440 has been in the neighborhood since 1949. So actually, if you go in our plant down the main hallway where the employees come in, we actually have pictures from 1949 that we got from the historical, Grand Rapids Historical Library. And it's celebrating the heritage. That plant's been in operation for 75, over 75 years now. And the plant itself has reinvented itself over the years. So in the matter of less than a decade, this plant went from being one of two plants in the state of Michigan that produces you know, the amazing brand Coca-Cola and Dasani that some of you have in front of you as well, to be in the only plant. So Grand Rapids should be proud. If you drink a Coca-Cola in the state of Michigan, it's coming from the city of Grand Rapids. And this plant's grown in over two exits capacity in the last six or seven years. So that's where moving within the four walls of that 19 acres becomes more critical with those trailers as well. Because now we're not even in the state of Michigan, we're shipping into Chicago, into Minneapolis with some of our products as well. So just gives you more operational context as well.

While you're up there, can I ask how many trucks, what's your truck traffic like hourly count at peak hours?

We average over about 110 trucks per day, so I'd have to do the math in my head, which I'm not that quick, so four to five trucks we're turning an hour. But we have a lot of dropping hooks, and that's where that trailer's like where you can load a truck when it's coming off the line, put the trailer over there, that over-the-road carrier comes, picks up, and goes from an efficiency standpoint.

Okay, thank you. I had a question about your circulation plan. It looks like the trailers will be parked in the most northern-ish 60 feet of the new storage area. And then there's 81 feet. I don't know if you can flip to the site plan, Laura or Elizabeth. Not that one. The civil. Then there's about 81 feet. Oh, you just passed it. Yep. Between what presumably would be the edge of the truck and the circulation area, is 81 feet the minimum necessary to be able to hook a truck up and pull the trailer?

If you're talking about like this here, there's a little bit of stuff that you gotta look at here. One is, this is a little bit lower grade here, so the vehicles are gonna come in and then back in.

Could you come up and use the mouse to show us? I'm sorry.

I didn't know I had a mouse. Awesome. Sorry. All right. So if you have a vehicle come in and try to back in here, it's a little bit different because it's got to almost do a U-turn here. in order to be able to get, because they're not backing it in from back here all the way in, right? So this is a, that is a tight turn when you're starting to talk about, yeah, 80 feet is not much. In fact, I would generally say from a truck dock, 90 degrees, a lot of times I say from wall to the The 90 degree turn, you need about 125 feet. Now this is a little more than that because you've got 80 feet plus the truck length. But you're doing a U-turn to get to that space. And it really is dependent on the length of the truck a bit. I don't know what length trucks you guys have out there, but I would imagine they pick their truck lengths. The longer ones are going to be back over here where they don't have to do the U-turn. And the shorter ones get put but that's all a function of what we're looking at. And maybe some of this stuff will turn 90 degrees or not be as tight. If they're wider spaces, then they can get back in a little bit different.

So the trucks, Laura, could you go to the aerial perhaps? I'm not sure if it shows. The trucks that are, yeah, perfect, along that southern edge adjacent the trail. Over here? Yeah, especially the ones that would move further to the west. How is that different in terms of the approach? I'm still struggling to understand.

If somebody's taking a truck from here and they're going to park it over here, they're going to go here and then back in. If you come over here and you're going to go over here, you're going to pull this way, do a U-turn, and then you've got to get that trailer to straighten out so that you can back it up 90 degrees.

So you're saying the 81 feet is the minimum necessary?

Yeah.

Thank you.

Okay. Any truck drivers up here?

Clearly not. Okay. Thank you very much. Yeah. I agree. As I said, it's a real big bummer to lose this building, but With the additional information we've gotten and looking at the site circulation and considering employee safety as well, I can support this project. I would definitely want the applicant to work with staff on a more robust landscaping plan to soften that corner as well as the pedestrian experience along Butterworth. Would someone like to make a motion? Is there anything else? Yeah, go ahead.

I just, to that point, had a couple of draft conditions that I think would address that concern should there be a motion to approve, and I just thought I'd put that out there as you think. that the landscape plan shall be provided shall be revised to provide irrigation as well as a landscape buffer equal to 200% of the requirements specified in the zoning ordinance applied to the full length of both the existing and proposed masonry wall. Second that the landscape plan shall be revised to include a substantial landscape feature at the southwest corner of Butterworth Street and Garfield Avenue to visually anchor and define that corner. Maybe a little bit of wordsmithing there, but.

I'll do it. Never mind. Are there any rules about demolition by neglect? the city or like the fact that we can just own a building and wait until it falls apart to the point where the reason we are tearing it down is because we let it fall apart like is there I'm just I'm struggling with you Brian yeah so that there are property maintenance so I think the easy answer to your question is

that there are property maintenance codes that do require buildings to be maintained. I believe, although I'd need to verify, that the majority of those requirements apply to the exterior, not the interior. So there's certainly rules in place if the building were to be occupied, but unoccupied, I don't believe that there is a substantial amount of regulation. we've struggled with this in the past as well, I know.

I guess I also, I mean, I know that our building department, our building officials can and do review buildings for like whether or not they qualify for demolition because of their condition. I mean, is that something that needs some additional proof that the building is now useless and needs to be torn down because it's unsafe, or how does that work?

I mean, you could certainly require some sort of structural analysis or have the building official provide some sort of... inspection and determination of whether it meets the requirements for condemnation, which then moves to demolition if it were to be condemned. So that's different than whether or not truck storage is an appropriate use here.

To that point, I can say that I don't feel like I have enough information that The building is, you know, it was, I'm looking on Google Street View, it was occupied in 2022. So that was only four years ago. I'm not comfortable with just approving extra parking for, you know, so that we don't do it for shopping malls for Christmas and the day after Thanksgiving. So why would we then allow all this extra parking for employees to show up for an employee meeting on a day or two. I don't want to make a denial, but the last time that we had a parking lot that wanted to be expanded, we gave them some conditions to do some extra stuff, and they're still welcome to come back if they would like to do that extra work. review and prove to us that it's necessary. And I'd like, in this situation, to maybe require that some additional review and proof that the building and the turning radii are, you know, the condition of the building and the turning radii are absolutely necessary. Again, we're saying, like, we don't want to design it this way because we'd have to put a stop sign in, and we want to just make it bigger because there'd be traffic that interacts with each other, but we're still talking about only 110. I don't want to say only. That's a lot. But we're still talking about maybe six or seven trucks moving around each other within an hour. Maybe my math is off a little bit on that. But it's not impossible. It's just easier to do this. I don't love it. I don't really want my name on approval to tear that building down for a parking lot.

Yeah, I'm with Commissioner Hendrick. To your point, Kristen, if I'm answering the question about whether this spot is appropriate for truck or for trailer parking, given that it is kind of a neighborhood landmark and a business district landmark, and I understand that they own it and they can use it how they want, but at the same time, my answer is no. I don't think it's appropriate for trailer parking. I think there's other ways to slice this up to get the trailer parking they need.

So, Kristen, because of your question, could you clarify what, or just reiterate what, we should be talking about here, like whether or not we're focusing too much on the demolition of a building or if it's really the land use and the demolition's not really part of it. Just to help clarify.

I think it's a little bit of both, that there's certainly within our community master plan a heavy preference on preserving existing buildings, especially buildings that have some historic significance, architectural significance, and But this is not a historic district. There is not a code in place that would explicitly prohibit the demolition of the building. The Planning Commission's focus is on the new use. And so while I think it's completely valid for you to question the need and the appropriateness of the demolition, I think the majority of your emphasis needs to be on whether the truck the expansion of the truck storage in this location of the site in lieu of having buildings, generally, whether that is appropriate.

I think I agree with what you're saying, but I also think that part of the decision logic that was given in testimony for using this space where the building is was because the building was beyond repair, and because they had tried to lease it out and weren't successful, and then we find out that, well, the Beyond Repair is based on visual observations, and their attempt to lease it out was talking to John Balzu, and they didn't list it for, you know, to try and get.

I think that's fair to question the information that you're basing a decision on. I'm just saying that there would be nothing in our code if they wished to demolish this building and build a new building because it's not a protected structure. So I just want to make sure that we're clear as to what we're considering. Does that make sense?

Yeah. I do think that given the nature of the site and that this site is industrial and it's a longstanding business and other things, I'd be willing to say that we could replace the car parking lot adjacent to the building with trailer parking right now and add 10 or 12 more trailer parking spaces. So to Kristen's statements and clarifications, Do I think that trailer parking is better than having a building occupy that corner? No, but it's pretty consistent with the neighboring use and among other things. I do have a question about, and all of this deliberation made me think of it, but I think there was a colored site plan that showed trailers that need to be repaired are on the corner so I do have a question about what repair looks like or means like are are those repairs visible to the neighborhood or is it just the undercarriage of the trailer and it's hidden by the wall so I mean that could change my opinion about the organization because putting like severely damaged trailers on the corner probably isn't the best thing but I don't know what So I guess I'm curious what needing repair is also or major repair is what it says on the plan.

Could you address that in terms of like the the storage of trailers out of service and needing major repair on that corner?

So we have another facility in the area in Caledonia. The facility in Caledonia has a full truck shop. So basically the idea there is that anything we can't do in a quick repair here in the maintenance facility, like, for example, fill up a tire or whatever is kind of the plan here. If we have to do all new tires or all new brakes or something like that, we would park it there. Until they come and pick it up. The intent is not to leave damaged trailers there for extended periods of time or anything like that. It's really trying to move trailers that need service to the end of the lot so that we can get it out to Caledonia and get it over there without impacting the operations in the central part of the property.

Thank you.

Okay, well we have, go ahead, yeah. So I'm not getting a great feeling for what majority of commissioners are leaning towards. I think at my left here, I heard that there might be a need for some additional information to make a more informed decision. So what I think I heard is having better documentation to define what was just said regarding what is major repair truck damage mean. some data to understand the need for the increased truck storage, perhaps some better understanding of utilization of the existing parking areas, perhaps some sort of analysis about the building condition or structure, and then turning movements to ensure minimum necessary. And I think, I'm sure you had made a comment about the, oh goodness, the history about how the applicant has gone about trying to lease and or, I think it was just lease and sell the facility. So a more detailed description on the efforts that were taken.

I'm only struggling a bit with requiring the applicant to get their report on the structural soundness of the building, not because I don't want it, but because I know that's financially burdensome. And if it's not necessary material to our decision, I'm just not sure that's the right thing to ask them to do, since they can demolish the building whether or not they want to.

So they can only demolish the building if there's going to be a replacement of a new building. Okay, okay. So they could demolish it. I misunderstood. Even perhaps say by right, I might check myself on that, but they could demolish the building and rebuild it for any use that is allowed on that site. Because they're demolishing it to expand the storage, that is the piece where we have a special land use deposit to say, Is it appropriate, even though there is adjacent truck storage, having truck storage in the front yard at a visible intersection like this in lieu of buildings, is that necessary? Is that appropriate? Okay. I better understand. Thank you. So it could be that the condition of the building is less critical to your decision in light of the new use that is being asked, which is the storage.

And I will like recognize, too, this is a really weird spot because we have these like established neighborhoods, a weird little industrial pocket, all of these mines that are now turning into parks and golf courses, which usually happens with mine land uses as they finish mining and make them into cool things. And this is like smack dab in the middle of it. And you've been operating there for a really long time. So it's hard to look at all of those things. And there's a highway in between that. So there's a lot of weird factors. But I still just feel like I want more information. OK.

Let's take a pulse on that. Would more information help others make a decision?

Right, I got two. We got two, yeah. This is what happens when you put us together. No. Others.

I'm not sure that it will help me. I feel like it'll just cause probably undue expense for the company it is a unique area I will agree but like there's a lot of also kind of industrial stuff along wealthy street there like with the recycling plant and all that type of thing a lot of trucks coming in and out of there and I think that Butterworth landfill is now going to become a parking lot is that accurate permits have not been issued that's still under a discussion but all that being said yes I I would... I lament losing that building, but I also understand these folks are doing business and they're doing it for the whole state and then some. And I kind of don't want to interfere with that either. So I... Given the information that they have provided to me, I would, yeah, I hate losing the building, but I would be okay granting... The building's not gonna be repaired. It's not gonna come back. And so I would, I guess I would be okay if we can get more robust landscaping around there and make the corner as appealing as possible. I would support the additional use of parking here.

I am also ready to move for approval, but I respect my commissioner's desire for more information, so I'm not making a move yet because of that. The two of you.

It's hard to take the emotional loss of the building out in the decision, but in listening to the director say that that's not really under purview here. This is about them... turning a building into a parking lot, which we've frequently railed against. But the diagrams don't really show a whole lot of option. So I'm kind of stuck on whether to ask them to, you know, have traffic engineer go in there and try and figure out a better way to get things around. Because if it's just a stop sign or two that we could do and maintain a building without creating another parking lot, that would be a good thing. Or how necessary is it to have an all company meeting when you could meet somewhere else with those 200 people? instead of having that extra parking lot. I mean, I don't know. There might be some other options to consider before tearing down a building, but... I don't know. I'm not really in favor of tearing down buildings of any nature for a parking lot. Fair.

Did our engineering staff look at... I mean, I know that Let's see if Arianna has anything to add here. You waited this long. You had to come up and say something.

So close to making it all the way. Sorry.

I mean, there are programs and other things that can be run. It's called AutoTurn, which is a fairly common industry. program that you can essentially drive your truck through the site and things like that. You can create custom vehicles and things like that. So I don't know if that has been done. It's something that we generally on kind of like an industrial site or something to that effect, we generally let people kind of determine their own operations where if they were talking about needing a bigger driveway or something where they interact with the public right of way, that's where we would want to see like, show us that turning movement. You need to see that like it's gonna cut over the curb. So Generally internal to a site, we would not have that level of discretion or investigation, we'll say.

Thank you very much. And I saw when you were speaking that some nodding that this program has been.

So AutoCAD, we have that in our office. We run that all the time. That's where I'm getting that 120, 125 feet from the back of a parking spot to turn out. That is what you need. If you think about it, it's a 53-foot trailer. There's 53 feet of the 125, and so you only have left 125. You've got 70-something. And then that's if you're turning 90 degrees. If you're turning a U-turn, you're probably even kind of a little tight. But then you'd put in a shorter trailer. or you get some of these things on site for these. I do Michigan turkey stuff. They're moving trailers all over the place on that site too. They have smaller cabs and they can turn sharper corners. You don't park them as close together so maybe you make wider spaces and if you look at the site it's not striped and there's a reason for that is because they have certain peak times when they have more trailers on site when they're selling more product or you know getting ready for a season where maybe you're drinking more coke I don't know but that that's all internal process stuff and as much as you ask for a traffic engineer they're their traffic engineers they're driving it all day every day and and if you start micromanaging how a company does their business you you're getting into probably some weeds you don't want to get into. But that changes things just everywhere if you start looking at They understand safety. They understand the skill of their drivers. Some companies, they have guys moving trucks or people moving trucks on their site like Michigan-Turkey that aren't over-the-road drivers. They are just driving semi-trucks on their property. That's different. They recognize the skill level of those drivers and that's how they determine why they're on-site and not other places. They need wider spaces. They need more movement. You also look at the way these things are loaded. I bet if you talk to the operations person here, he'll say, yeah, they start from one end and they move over. They don't have blank spaces. There's probably all of that stuff that you and I that I don't want to get into that traffic stuff. From a movement standpoint, this works. We don't have extra space. It makes sense for a site to be more efficient. That's how you make profit, how you increase the number of product that you can make. I know where you're coming from. I love architecture. I love it. But yeah, I mean, we've submitted a Leds permit already to demo that building and build this site. And we need the special land use to keep moving because of timing too. You lose a month, you lose, you know, there you go.

Rob, can I ask you this?

Sure. Oh, sorry.

I mean, you're saying that. I'm not asking for a traffic engineer, but did you use that and did you actually measure the turning radius?

Yes, yes.

Kristen asked, what is the minimum?

Well, it's a variable question because it depends on the length of truck. What's the length of your trucks that you have? Are they 53?

53-footer would be the longest we have. Yeah, but you have shorter ones, right? 48-footers, yeah.

It depends what truck you're parking where, and that's going to be your turning radius.

So what's the minimum turning radius for the maximum size truck?

125 feet to go from a 90 degree turn from park back end of truck to turn out. You need 120, 125 feet. Maybe it's 123. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Right. So what,

And what I heard in our previous discussion, at least relating to utilizing some of that lot that has the 130 parking spots, is that if that was used, then the 19 priority positions would be lost. Is that correct?

As far as I know, and these guys can answer better than me because they talk internally, we've never looked at as Xcel Engineering to remove more parking over here. Why? Because they're doing internal and they're hiring me to look at how do you put the parking here. But that's, to me, you know, the parking spaces are closer to the building. He's saying we fill the parking lot at times. You got two shifts. You have to be able to flip shifts or probably three shifts, but you have times where you have multiple shifts there and they got to flip. So one's got to be available. That's very common when you're working industrial that you got to have twice the parking or close to it because shifts overlap and you got to, Yeah, so there's all that. But, I mean, I haven't been asked to design parking over there. They've stated why they don't want it there. It's closer to the building. It's harder to get into some of these other positions. They use those parking spaces at times. Where am I supposed to go? Thank you.

fear of making this worse I think so do I think building should be on that corner yes the industrial use across Garfield is parking trailers right next to the sidewalk with no screening no landscaping So it's an existing, I mean, I know it's not, I mean, it's already an existing condition on that corner for the industrial uses. And if I'm being honest, if the building was completely out of the question, this business has been operating here forever. I have a hard time making problems I guess.

Okay I'm gonna make a motion. Now therefore it be resolved that the Planning Commission approves the special land use and site plan review request of Lone Oak Grand Rapids LLC Mike Manfred to demolish an existing building to facilitate expansion of outdoor truck storage at the Rise Coca-Cola Bottling RCCB plant at 1440 Butterworth Street Southwest 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 recommendation 3.b.2 excuse me of the 2024 community master plan to ensure land remains available for employment uses and aligns with the intended future character of the area and will allow for the reasonable use of an existing industrially zoned property Two, the proposed use will meet the site plan review standards of section 5.12.8.e because the site will be developed so as to not impede the normal and orderly development or improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted by the zoning ordinance and all elements of the site design are harmoniously and officially organized in relation to the size and type of lot, character of the neighborhood and adjoining property and the type, size and proportions of the buildings. 3a. 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 be consistent with the current industrial character of the SD-IT zone district and appropriate screening will be incorporated to provide reasonable protection of adjacent land and public right-of-way. 3B, the proposed use will not have potentially adverse effects on the neighborhood because an 8-foot high wall and landscaping will be provided to ensure the proposed use is adequately buffered from surrounding public and private property. 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, noise, odor, glare, or visual clutter because trucks and trailers intended to be stored will utilize the existing drive to access the site and excessive noise, glare, visual clutter, or odor is not anticipated or will be mitigated by the wall and landscape buffer. 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 hinder the creation of a pedestrian-oriented environment because landscaping and screening will improve the street wall and enhance the walkability of the public sidewalk. Four, the proposed use will retain as many natural features of the landscape as practicable because the minimum requirements for tree canopy and green space will be brought closer to conformance with the minimum requirements, which we're going to change that one. Is that right? Because it's 200% of minimum. That was proposed. That is the condition that has been proposed. Okay. It would be 200%. So then should I just strike that element four since it'll be a condition or item four? Or is it okay?

I would say that the tree canopy and green space will be enhanced to meet the purpose and intent of the screening requirements

the zoning ordinance better than I could ever say it thank you 5b the proposed use will not be detrimental to the financial stability or the economic welfare of the city because no additional burden is expected with the establishment of this use be it further resolved that the following conditions of approval shall apply to this project one standard conditions set a and two

That the landscape plan shall be revised to provide irrigation as well as a landscape buffer equal to 200% of the requirements specified in the zoning ordinance applied along the full length of both the existing and proposed masonry wall. That the applicant shall revise the landscape plan to include a substantial landscape feature at the southwest corner of Butterworth Street and Garfield Avenue to visually anchor and define that corner. Thank you, so moved.

Support.

Motion and support. Any additional discussion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Those opposed?

Aye.

Okay.

Three opposed. I was in favor. You were in favor.

Okay. All right. Yeah. You want to raise hands?

Oh. Opposed? Okay. Motion carries. Thank you very much. Okay. Any Planning Commission discussion? Or is there public comment first? It's discussion first, then public comment.

No, just to, I guess Commissioner Swem's point earlier too, and like it's something that's always kind of bothered me when we've had to tear down a building. due to lack of maintenance and the owner has owned the building for a long time and it's their own lack of maintenance. I wish there was a way to prevent that from happening and I don't know if that's a city code thing or what, but it has always bothered me and I don't know what to do about it.

I hear you along with several other commissioners so I'm happy to work with our legal department as well as our code compliance and perhaps building department to see what if any additional measures or requirements could be considered but that is a pretty significant policy discussion for the city generally so I don't have a solid answer for you at this point accept a commitment to raise the question.

No, I appreciate that. And I like, I know there's not an easy answer, but it has, it is something that's always bothered me and it doesn't seem fair to reward people for not taking care of things. So.

So I'm sure this isn't possible legally, but it'd be really fun if you figured out how much it would take to get the building, to bring the building back if they've owned it for more than however many years seems appropriate and they let it fall apart. and it needs to be demolished, if you could take whatever amount of money it would take to bring it back and put it into a facade improvement program or something else that improves the city elsewhere, like some kind of incentive to, because right now it's a great, demolishing by neglect is a great way to just sit on a building until it's garbage and then you get to demolish it without any hassles because you didn't take care of it, which just seems, you know, we have lots of programs where we're actually occasionally quite hard on homeowners for not keeping up their properties. It seems like we don't do as good a job with corporations who, in theory, have more money to put towards their infrastructure than probably some homeowners do.

I agree with that. If I came and asked if I could demolish my house to build more parking, it would be a, I know what the answer would be.

And it would be on a different site, in a different circumstance, in a different zone district, et cetera, et cetera, right? Case by case basis. Okay.

Yeah. Everyone's thought process on that was logical and thoughtful. I could have. I did want to mention, though, that, you know, we had three of these items on the agenda that, you know, two of them, which were residential uses, had good neighbor plan requirements, and then we had the alcohol one that didn't have a good neighbor plan. And I don't know the discussion on what requires a good neighbor plan and what doesn't, but it would be maybe not for, like, restaurants with alcohol uses, but some of those, like, liquor store, you know, sales of alcohol if there was some kind of good neighbor plan requirement.

Yeah, I think that that's definitely valid and something that we should strongly consider when we update our zoning ordinance is to expand the use of the good neighbor plan. I think that those have been really successful in terms of forcing a more collaborative conversation between the business or the operator and the neighborhood that they're in. with both the two residential cases, those were relatively new amendments, right, in 2024, where we did say, if we're going to be more permissive in where we allow for more types of group living facilities, let's require a good neighbor plan. So it was a very intentional decision that the city made to expand the use of those good neighbor plans, and I could see that expanding again in the future. I did want to take a moment to thank Lillian for her service, internship, and also just in general. Thank you for today, but also for supporting the planning department during your internship. She's been a well-loved member of our department for this summer. and is extremely intelligent, and we will miss her. Hopefully there's some opportunities in the future, but she's going to go back to Michigan to finish her master's degree. So we wish her well.

Thanks. Okay, anything else? Yep. Okay, I will open up public comment. Seeing none, I will close public comment. And we are adjourned. Thanks, everybody.