TEST - PC Streaming TEST

Development Center City Planning Commission 1120 Monroe Ave NW Meeting Full Grand Rapids, MI 49503 August 11, 2022 City Commission Chambers I. 12:00 p.m. - 12:30 p.m. - Lunch - Conference Room 901, City Hall, 300 Monroe Ave NW II. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 12:30 PM by Board Member Kyle Van Strien PRESENT: Van Strien, Bersche, Joseph, Behler, Wallace, Williams ABSENT: Rozeboom, Shannon, Germain STAFF: Kristin Turkelson, Elizabeth Zeller, Sarah Behmlander, Deputy City Attorney Phil Strom, and recording secretary Carol Gornowich III. Approval of Minutes A. Approval of Minutes from July 28, 2022 RESULT: ACCEPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Kristine Bersche, Board Member SECONDER: Adrienne Wallace, Board Member YEAS: Van Strien, Bersche, Joseph, Behler, Wallace, Williams ABSENT: Paul Rozeboom, Susan Shannon, Christopher Germain IV. Business A. Planning Director's Report  Laura Wahamaki provided a brief introduction to the use of the new iPads  Laura Wahamaki related that the Planning Commission retreat on 8/25/22 will be held at 1120 Monroe  Ms. Turkelson related that the City Commission voted 4-3 in support of adjustments to the cannabis policy social equity commitments. The social equity commitments helped prioritize who was heard by the Planning Commission first. The commitments have not been satisfied, with a few exceptions. The question was whether to initiate enforcement or stay the course. Ultimately, the decision was to amend the policy to allow for companies to transfer their points. If they made commitments in local ownership and are no longer able to meet that, they could move their commitments over to supplier diversity or into the community reinvestment fund. The community reinvestment fund would be managed by a new, City formed, non-profit and the non-profit’s work will focus on supporting existing organizations that are already doing work in that same area. The outcomes, in their opinion, would be the same or better. Ms. Turkelson explained further that the commitments made have an annual renewal and they can choose to transfer their points into the fund every year but every year restarts with their original commitments. Feedback from the industry has been relatively supportive of the changes. The option has been provided for the payments to be made over the course of the year. Generated 8/14/2022 4:17 PM City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 2 August 11, 2022  Ms. Turkelson related that the City Commission also supported the zoning amendments and two weeks ago they approved the contract with Planning Next for the Master Plan work.  Agenda items were briefly reviewed.  Ms. Turkelson advised that there will be three open Planning Commission seats at the end of the year. V. Public Hearings beginning 1:00 p.m. or soon thereafter in City Commission Chambers, City Hall A. Conflict of Interest B. 701 Ann St SW - Demolition Address: 701 Ann St NW Applicant: Profile Films Properties LLC (Steve Ehmann) Requesting: Approval to demolish vacant industrial buildings without a replacement use in preparation for future redevelopment. Zoning: SD-IT Special District – Industrial Transportation Requirements: Article 7 Special Districts 5.2.03. Alterations, Enlargements and Demolitions 5.12.08. Site Plan Review 5.12.09. Special Land Use Case Number: PC-SLU-2022-0067 Staff Assigned: Elizabeth Zeller ezeller@grand-rapids.mi.us Type of Case: Special Land Use Effective Date: August 27, 2022 Ms. Zeller introduced the request for approval to demolish improvements on the site. She explained that demolition without approved plans for redevelopment require Planning Commission approval. The applicant is requesting to demolish the building and, while they do intend to redevelop the site, timing may be such that they may not be able to rebuild immediately. The zoning map was displayed. The property is located in an industrial zone district. The property is approximately 12 acres in area and is improved with a building of approximately 230,000 sq. ft. with several outbuildings, parking, asphalt and sidewalks. The building is currently vacant and in very poor condition. Per the application, because it is so large it is difficult to keep secured, it has been vandalized, and people have been entering the building on an unauthorized basis. Ms. Zeller displayed an aerial view noting that the property is located at the northerly city limits adjacent to Walker. There is a small portion of the property located just north of the city limits with improvements that are in both jurisdictions. The applicant is proposing to demolish all of the improvements and proposes to redevelop the property in the future for use by Profile Films, which is located to the north in Walker. Following the demolition, the property will need to be stabilized with top soil and seeded, which is part of the plan. Ms. Zeller displayed their conceptual redevelopment plan, which has not been vetted for zoning in any way. City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 3 August 11, 2022 Ms. Turkelson noted that the site may look familiar to the Planning Commission. A few years ago it was approved for a cannabis grow facility. The Ordinance did change and it was under Planning Director authority to issue a site plan amendment. The cannabis facility is actually going to be moving to the SD-IT vacant area along Ann St., which freed up the subject property for additional industrial purposes. Jacey Shachter, representing Profile Films, stated that the parcel was 12 acres and they now have approximately 10 acres. During the transaction the cannabis grower received 2 acres and they have 10. She referred to the conceptual plan noting the 2-acre area for the grower. The existing building has been added on to a few times and is approximately 250,000 sq. ft. It has 37 encroachments on the survey so there are obviously a lot of zoning issues as it exists. They will be taking down the entire main structure and most of the outbuildings. They will be preserving the historic smoke stack and historic water tower, both of which are on the Walker parcel. With respect to the conceptual plan, they have had several meetings with Ms. Turkelson as well as the City of Walker’s Planning Department. They will be seeking a zoning variance for height but in most respects, they will be compliant with the zoning regulations. Ms. Shachter commented on the demolition schedule relating that the intent is to begin this project yet this year. It is a very unsecure building. There is evidence of drug use and new intrusion on a regular basis. They have full time security at night that costs approximately $1,200 a week and full-time security on site. It is a big responsibility in terms of keeping it safe for the community. There are also large rat colonies that they will be eradicating prior to the demolition. Ms. Shachter stated that the building has been vacant for at least the last 20 years and underutilized for 40-50 years. The existing improvements span into the Walker parcel but the future plan is to have all structures on the Grand Rapids parcel. Ms. Joseph asked if there are environmental mitigation efforts they will be undertaking as well. Ms. Shachter replied affirmatively. They hope to be going to the Brownfield Authority in the next couple of months. The abatement expense will be approximately $1.5 million. The entire roof is asbestos, they have a serious vapor intrusion on the site; one of the highest samples she has ever seen. It is very contaminated and the previous owner didn’t mitigate much. The original boiler room remains intact with the coal burning furnace and the coal silos are still there. The entire boiler is asbestos wrapped. Mr. Van Strien opened the public hearing and invited public comment; there was none. The public hearing was closed. Ms. Joseph stated that even without knowing there is a redevelopment plan, she is comfortable approving the demolition for environmental and safety reasons. She wondered if safe mitigation practices needs to be part of a condition of approval or whether it is already required. Ms. Turkelson advised that that is already required and built into other permitting processes at both the City and State levels. Ms. Behler noted that the draft resolution includes a condition that the property be stabilized with top soil and grass seed. She asked if that is something required regardless of their redevelopment time frame. City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 4 August 11, 2022 Ms. Turkelson explained that an approval is valid for one year. There would be time they would have to top soil and seed it through the LUDS permitting process. However, if the project is actively moving forward and reconstruction is pending, they wouldn’t have to go through that process. It is more a matter of getting the site stabilized in the event their redevelopment doesn’t begin immediately after demolition. Ms. Turkelson added that in addition to the contamination and the Commission being comfortable with the building being demolished, the fact that it has been vacant for 20 years and under utilized for 40-50 years clearly shows that the market isn’t here to support this kind of structure. That is one of the key components they consider when you don’t want to see existing structures demolished. If it’s not feasible for utilization, it really isn’t serving as a benefit. If anything, it is likely more of a hindrance. Ms. Joseph MOVED, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission approves the Special Land Use request of Profile Films Properties LLC (Steve Ehrmann) to demolish vacant industrial buildings without a replacement use in preparation for future redevelopment at 701 Ann St NW, for the following reasons: 1. 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 promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the City by removing a vacant structure that is in poor condition and will provide reasonable accommodation for growth and development. 2. The proposed use will meet the Site Plan Review Standards of Section 5.12.08.E. because the site will be rehabilitated and stabilized with appropriate landscape material as required if redevelopment does not begin immediately after demolition. 3. 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 prepare the site for future redevelopment consistent with current zoning, Master Plan designations, and surrounding uses. 4. 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, smoke, odors, glare, and visual clutter because the removal of the dilapidated building will mitigate the dangerous conditions on the site and will improve the health and safety of the neighborhood. 5. The proposed use will retain as many natural features of the landscape as practicable, particularly where the natural features assist in preserving the general character of the neighborhood because there are currently few natural features on site and the proposed use will temporarily add greenspace to the area. 6. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the financial stability or economic welfare of the City because the demolition will reduce the possibility of calls for emergency services or code compliance issues. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following conditions of approval shall apply to this project: 1. Standard Condition Set A. Approvals: City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 5 August 11, 2022 i. That the application and plans submitted by the applicant and signed, dated and stamped by the Planning Director, shall constitute the approved plans, except if plan elements do not meet ordinance requirements and/or as amended in this resolution. ii. That the use shall operate according to the application and per testimony as recorded in the Planning Commission minutes. iii. 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. iv. That a Land Use Development Services (LUDS) permit, building permit, and all other required permits be obtained from the City of Grand Rapids prior to construction, demolition, or operation. v. That any expansion of the approved Special Land Use requires an additional Special Land Use review and approval by the Planning Commission. vi. That the proposed use will comply with all other applicable City ordinances and policies and all State laws. vii. That this approval shall take effect 16 calendar days after the date of the Planning Commission’s decision. 2. That the property shall be stabilized with topsoil and grass seed, or other appropriate vegetative material. SUPPORTED by Ms. Behler. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. RESULT: APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Laurel Joseph, Board Member SECONDER: Stacie Behler, Board Member YEAS: Van Strien, Bersche, Joseph, Behler, Wallace, Williams ABSENT: Paul Rozeboom, Susan Shannon, Christopher Germain C. 1439 Eastern Ave SE - Social Club Address: 1439 Eastern Ave SE Applicant: Sophisticated Gentlemen and Ladies Auxiliary Club Requesting: Approval to relocate a social club, to include alcohol sales, live entertainment, and outdoor activities, to a different building on the property; and Jeffery Kimbrel is requesting approval for offices and storage associated with a painting business. Zoning: TN-TBA Traditional Neighborhoods – Traditional Business Area Requirements: Article 6 Mixed-Use Commercial Zone Districts 5.9.05. Alcohol Sales, Service, or Consumption 5.9.07. Auditorium, Theatre and Banquet Hall 5.9.12. Live Entertainment 5.9.24. Outdoor Seating Area 5.9.33. Social or Service Clubs; Motorcycle Clubs 5.12.08. Standards for Site Plan Review City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 6 August 11, 2022 5.12.12. Special Land Uses Case Number: PC-SLU-2022-0070 Staff Assigned: Elizabeth Zeller ezeller@grcity.us Type of Case: Special Land Use Effective Date: August 27, 2022 Ms. Zeller presented the request for approval to relocate a social club that was formerly on the site, as well as approval for offices and storage associated with a painting business. The applicant is the Sophisticated Gentlemen and Ladies Auxiliary Club. They have been on this site for a number of years. The site is located in a TN-TBA Traditional Business Area Zone District at the southwest corner of Oakdale and Eastern. Ms. Zeller displayed a current aerial view of the site as well as an aerial view from 2000. As seen in the image, the roof of the building is fire damaged. The fire occurred February 18, 2020. That was the building primarily used by the social club. The applicant is proposing to relocate the club to another building on the site. Ms. Zeller displayed an image noting the location where the social club was located and that the restrooms were in the storefront portion of the building at the corner. The building on the west was used for a painting business. The club is now proposing to move into the building to the west. Ms. Zeller displayed a Google Streetview image from September 2019, 6 months prior to the fire. At the corner the building is a two-story storefront building with two residential units on the second floor. The parking lot on site was also identified. A photo of the building from July, 2021 was displayed. The fire damaged portion of the building was demolished but the foundation remains. Another image from February, 2022, was displayed depicting a small outdoor area that has been enclosed and is utilized by the club. The portion of the building at the corner remains useable and they have been using the ground floor of the storefront space for their club activities. Ms. Zeller displayed an image of the Oakdale side of the building noting the presence of overhead doors and some parking spaces, which are not striped. That area provided ingress and egress to the painting business. Ms. Zeller related that the subject property is located in the Southtown Area Specific Plan. It is identified as a transition area between the core TBA areas and the adjacent residential areas. Ms. Zeller displayed a combination site plan/floor plan of what is proposed on the site. There is a parking lot with approximately 15 spaces. No changes are proposed to the parking lot. The club is proposing to occupy the middle portion of the building on the westerly side of the site; approximately 2,500 sq. ft. A small addition is proposed for restrooms. The painting business will utilize some of the office space and the south portion of the existing building. That business is existing on site and is being incorporated into this request to ensure the use will be legal, as well as the proposed new location of the club. There is an alley to the west and a residential use to the south. The club is proposing to utilize the foundation of the former building for an outdoor area. As previously noted, they are currently using a small portion of that foundation. They anticipate using a larger area for outdoor seating and they anticipate installing artificial turf over the concrete and landscaping with potted plants. No other site changes are being proposed. Ms. Zeller explained that the club has a Club Liquor License. It is a type of license issued by the Michigan Liquor Control Commission. They are in good standing with the MLCC relative to their license. They wish to continue to use that license. Ms. Zeller is not aware of the number of club members but the application indicates that, at a maximum, they’d need a capacity of City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 7 August 11, 2022 approximately 125. The area they propose to occupy has been calculated to accommodate 130 occupants. Ms. Zeller stated that the club is typically active at the end of the week, Wednesday through Saturday from 8 to 2 a.m. but that can vary depending on scheduled events; there could be events on other days of the week. Ms. Zeller indicated that they aren’t proposing to make any changes to the corner storefront building. The more industrial style building they propose to rehabilitate for their club purposes and they are proposing an entry feature. The space faces a street in a TN-TBA zone district, it doesn’t appear that it meets the 60% transparency requirement. The Planning Commission may want to consider that this building is set back. The transparency is something that should be taken into consideration as part of the approval and would be an acknowledgement that the transparency would be reduced. On the Oakdale side they are planning to close up some of the overhead doors and install a man door to facilitate ingress and egress to the club building. Ms. Zeller commented on parking. There are several uses on the site; residential uses, the painting business, and the club. The total parking requirement is 53 spaces and they have approximately 18 spaces on site. Therefore, a parking waiver is needed. The Planning Commission may wish to keep in mind that not all of the uses will be operating at full capacity all the time. 130 would be the capacity of the club and the parking requirement is based on that. The applicant can likely address how many are in attendance on a more regular basis. For larger events that could include up to 130 people, the applicant has reached out to neighboring property owners to arrange after hours parking for their special events and they have agreements with three entities in the immediate vicinity. There is also bus service on Eastern. Ms. Zeller related that the applicant has walked the neighborhood and has included a petition in support of this use. Ms. Zeller summarized the consideration as the impacts of a social club with alcohol and assembly uses in a commercial zone district in close proximity to a residential zone district and uses. The Planning Commission is also considering the impacts of ground floor office, as well as a contractor use in a commercial zone district. Waivers requested include a parking waiver and a transparency waiver acknowledging the proposed elevations that have been included. Ms. Joseph asked if the Oakdale elevation would also typically require 60% transparency since it is on a corner. Ms. Zeller replied affirmatively. She doesn’t know when the structure was built but this condition has been that way for a number of years. In this case there are openings but they aren’t windows. The applicant is proposing a new door in lieu of one of the existing overhead doors. Ms. Joseph asked if this type of use would typically require a CEPTD review. Ms. Zeller replied that it would. It can be forwarded to the CPTED inspector for review to ensure CPTED elements such as parking lot lighting and entrance lighting are met. They have submitted a security plan that includes a security system/cameras as part of their security plan. City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 8 August 11, 2022 Jeff Kimbrel, President of Sophisticated Gentlemen’s Club and owner of Painting by Jeff, was present on behalf of the request. Mr. Kimbrel related that Painting by Jeff has been on this site for 30 years and the club has been there for 20 years. Their membership is currently at 70. Sophisticated Gentlemen is not a gentlemen’s club. The name came from a movie back in the ‘70’s and they were business men. They later decided to add women to the club and it became known as Sophisticated Gentlemen and Ladies Auxiliary Club. Most of their members are professionals. They are proud to have as one of their members the lead legend Mr. Walker. Many of their members are business owners. What the club does for the community is block off the street and give to the kids. Not a day goes by that someone doesn’t knock on the door and ask for help with gas, homelessness, or needing something to eat and they open their doors to them. They are very involved with churches and support approximately seven churches in the city. The neighborhood loves them. Mr. Kimbrel related that they circulated a petition and could have gotten more signatures but they walked the area around 1:00 vs. later when people were home from work. He related that the club has not had any serious police matters. They constantly give back to the community. Their theme is based on senior citizens and the young people of the community. Approximately 20 years ago they would open their doors to feed the children from Evergreen School cereal in the morning, before the school closed. They have opened their doors to many community events and have held funerals as well as funeral luncheons/dinners. That has been going on for 20 years. Mr. Kimbrel commented on parking indicating that they never have an overflow. They are typically open on Thursday through Saturday and some Sundays. During the week they open around 9 and close between 12 and 2 a.m. The only time they may open on a Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday is if they get a call from a funeral home looking for a place to hold a funeral repass. Mr. Kimbrel stated that their standard is “in the community, for the community”. Some people didn’t even know the club was there; that’s how quiet and low key they are. Even after the fire they stood on the corner and passed out basket and personal items to those in need. They pass out school supplies to the children. Those efforts never stopped after the fire. This past winter they went to the dollar store with plans to spend about $300 for those in need and spent $700+. Mr. Kimbrel stated that they don’t call it a bar; it is their social club. They believe in what they stand for and believe in what they do. Mr. Kimbrel commented on the patio area. They are hoping to plant something that will be eye catching. It will just be a seating area for club members or someone who may get tired standing at the bus stop. They won’t have entertainment outside. Ms. Joseph clarified that the outdoor space will have seating but there are no plans for amplified music or shows. Mr. Kimbrel agreed. They have had entertainment inside in the past but they don’t have any plans for entertainment outside unless it is a neighborhood gathering or something for the kids like they have been doing. They are aware that if they do something big like that, they need to obtain permission from the City, which they have done before. City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 9 August 11, 2022 Ms. Joseph understands that the club operates until 2 a.m. inside. She asked if they have a request for the outside hours. It is typical that the Planning Commission limits those hours a bit more. Mr. Kimbrel replied that they aren’t really outside. The existing patio area seats approximately 20 and there is no loud talking or anything of that nature. There have been no complaints. They govern themselves and ask their family members and guests to govern themselves the same. Ms. Turkelson advised that the current ordinance permits 10 pm on week nights and 11 pm on Friday and Saturday for outdoor seating. The Planning Commission has typically adhered to those hours of operation with few exceptions. If that is agreeable to the applicant, she would recommend the Planning Commission apply those hours to an approval so that there is an enforcement mechanism should there be issues in the future, likely not with this operator. Mr. Kimbrel explained that they only use the patio now because the interior capacity is 55 persons and at times they have 60-65 present. They don’t plan to have a lot of outdoor seating for the simple fact that the club they are proposing is a lot bigger inside. It is just a place for getting fresh air and for a smoking area. There won’t be any music pumped outside unless they have a special event. Mr. Van Strien opened the public hearing and invited public comment. Percy Crawford, Vice-president of the club, related that he has been with the club since the beginning, 20 years ago. They are a 401.3 without the accolades of the legal process. They do a lot in the community. These types of places are needed in the community for balance. Mr. Kimbrel has a huge heart and gives, gives, gives. He may holler a lot at the members about what they are supposed to get done. As a whole, in 20 years they’ve not had any major problems. Mrs. Kimbrel related that the club is unique. They have a sign on the door that they only allow those 35 and over. The club tailors to those over 35. When they have outside events, they have arranged with the City to block off Oakdale for a block and they hold a back to school block party. They don’t have things going on every week. The patio that is currently set up is for people to come in and out for air or to smoke and they did receive approval for that space. With respect to parking, the City put in a lot of bike lanes which has reduced a lot of the available street parking. However, they have received approval from other business owners in the area to utilize their parking lots after hours. That will actually be an improvement because those locations aren’t on the main street. Mrs. Kimbrel asked if it would be a problem to put a sign on the front building since the subject building is set so far back from the street. Ms. Zeller replied that staff can work with them on what signage is permitted. Theresa Jones related that she has been a club member for over 14 years and is also a 30-year resident on Oakdale. She was aware of the club prior to becoming a member and there were always good things coming from the club. She never heard the club, which was a good thing that prompted her to become a member. She also supports the black-owned business, Painting by Jeff, in her neighborhood and community and would support that business remaining in the community. City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 10 August 11, 2022 Johnny stated that he is a former baseball player. He has older friends that like to come to visit and enjoy a drink and he didn’t have any place that he felt comfortable taking them until he joined the club. Now, when they come to town, he is happy he has a place to take them. The club is for those 35 and older. He doesn’t have any problems when he goes in and he is very happy. Johnny stated that they also help high school and college students when they graduate. Tasha Taylor related that she and her husband Fred are likely the youngest members of the club. They grew up in the community. Growing up you can’t wait to turn 21 to go to the bar and see what goes on. This isn’t a bar, it’s more like a social club. As they got older, they became business owners. When it comes to the weekend, she looks forward to being able to go out because she takes care of children all week. She gets to be an adult on the weekend and the club gives her somewhere to go, talk to adults, learn from the older adults and have a good time. When she leaves, she feels even better than when she arrived because she is laughing to a different tune. She giggles with Cocomelon all day and in the evening she giggles with her family at the social club. Fred Taylor related that he rushed from work to be here. When Mr. Kimbrel stood up and said he helps the community, Mr. Taylor has seen that first hand. He has seen him giving things to children on Halloween or at Christmas time giving handouts, even with the club burned down. He really does what he says he does and he keeps the members active in those efforts as well. Mr. Taylor stated that they are new members yet they are treated as family. It is a nice place to get away and it isn’t loud. It is a mellow atmosphere. It is a good place to be. The fire hurt them and when Mr. Kimbrel said he was rebuilding they were so anxious. When learning about the meeting, Mr. Taylor definitely wanted to take time out of his day to say these are good people that treat them like family. Mr. Taylor has watched Mr. Kimbrel help families that have lost loved ones and allow the use of his building for families to mourn together. Melissa Sims related that she is one of the first female members. She doesn’t like being in clubs where the younger people are. Mr. Kimbrel has the biggest heart. She likes being a part of something that is a group and she wouldn’t want to be part of anything else. She hopes they are able to rebuild. Ms. Sims related that Mr. Kimbrel took 40 members on a trip last weekend and swiped their card for the hotel, bus and everything. They are ready to rebuild and let his heart extend even more. He doesn’t miss an opportunity to do things for the kids. Mr. Van Strien closed the public hearing. Ms. Behler felt the testimony was excellent. As to parking, with the three different agreements, off-street parking, and being on a bus line she is comfortable with the parking waiver. Acknowledging the transparency concerns she appreciates staff clarifying that the building is further off the road, which makes the transparency deficiency more acceptable. This is an important part of the community and she is supportive of the application. Mr. Williams related that he wishes he was 35. He appreciates what the business is doing in the community and helping the kids. He was one of those kids in the community that needed help and support systems. It’s a good thing to know there are still good people in the world. Mr. Williams is very much in support. City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 11 August 11, 2022 Ms. Behler MOVED, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission approves the Special Land Use request of Sophisticated Gentlemen and Ladies Auxiliary Club to relocate a social club with alcohol sales, live entertainment, and outdoor activities, to a different building on the property; and the request of Jeffery Kimbrel for offices and storage associated with a painting business, at 1439 Eastern Ave SE, for the following reasons: 1. The proposed use will be consistent with the purpose and intent of the Master Plan and Zoning Ordinance, including the Zone District, because the proposed use will support the purpose and intent of the TN-TBA Zone District to encourage a mix of uses in a commercial area; support the goals of the Southtown Business Area Specific Plan to be a more stable and thriving business community without displacement by encouraging supportive reuse of underutilized spaces and be a more vibrant place to work, shop, play, learn, live and do business; and supports the Southtown Business Area Specific Plan’s designation of the area as TBA Transition, which supports a broad range of uses including office. 2. The proposed use will meet the Site Plan Review Standards of Section 5.12.08.E. because use of the site will not impede the normal and orderly development or improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The proposed uses will be compatible, harmonious and appropriate with the character and uses of the neighborhood because the proposed social club use will be consistent with the desired mixed-use nature and will maintain a long-standing neighborhood institution; the proposed contractor use will support the desired future character of the neighborhood by providing a mix of service uses within the district; and a mix of small- scale retail, service, entertainment, civic, office and residential uses are encouraged in the TN-TBA Zone District to enhance neighborhood vitality. 4. Potentially adverse effects arising from the proposed use will be minimized because adequate parking will be provided for normal operations, and additional parking has been arranged through agreements for larger events. 5. The proposed uses will not be detrimental, hazardous, or disturbing to existing or future uses or to the public welfare by reason of excessive traffic, noise, and glare because the outdoor seating area will be oriented towards Eastern Ave and the building will provide buffering from the adjacent residential uses. 6. 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 rehabilitation of the building as proposed could bring additional pedestrian traffic to this area of the neighborhood and establishment of the outdoor seating area will result in additional vitality in the district and reestablish the street wall. 7. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the financial stability or economic welfare of the City because the conditions of the Special Land Use approval will limit nuisances that require Police or code enforcement actions and the use will encourage other investment in the area. 8. The proposed use will comply with all other applicable City ordinances and policies and all applicable State laws because the social club has an active club liquor license with the State of Michigan. City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 12 August 11, 2022 9. Given the character, location, development trends and other aspects of the neighborhood, it is demonstrated that the area is underserved by the proposed use and that the proposed location for alcohol sales will demonstrably be an asset to the neighborhood because, as proposed, the use will be unique as compared to existing uses in the neighborhood and a number of surrounding neighbors have expressed support for the proposed use. 10. The use or change in use as constructed and operated by the applicant is compatible with the neighborhood because the use is located on Eastern Avenue, a main commercial corridor, where such uses are appropriate. 11. Adjacent or nearby parks, playgrounds, religious institutions, or schools will not be adversely affected because there will be no sale of alcohol for off-site consumption. 12. The use as proposed to be operated by the applicant will not have any, or minimal, negative secondary effects on the neighborhood because the applicant has procedures prepared so that the use will be operated in a manner that has the potential to minimize or eliminate negative secondary effects on the neighborhood and the use has already operated responsibly on the site for a number of years. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following conditions of approval shall apply to this project: 1. Standard Condition Set A. Approvals: i. That the application and plans submitted by the applicant and signed, dated and stamped by the Planning Director, shall constitute the approved plans, except if plan elements do not meet ordinance requirements and/or as amended in this resolution. ii. That the use shall operate according to the application and per testimony as recorded in the Planning Commission minutes. iii. 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. iv. That a Land Use Development Services (LUDS) permit, building permit, and all other required permits be obtained from the City of Grand Rapids prior to construction, demolition, or operation. v. That any expansion of the approved Special Land Use requires an additional Special Land Use review and approval by the Planning Commission. vi. That the proposed use will comply with all other applicable City ordinances and policies and all State laws. vii. That this approval shall take effect 16 calendar days after the date of the Planning Commission’s decision. 2. That the following conditions shall be applicable to the social club: a) That the club may operate indoors until 2 a.m., and outdoors until 10 p.m., Sunday through Thursday, and 11 p.m., Friday and Saturday. b) That live music and dancing incidental to a private event may be permitted, but there shall be no concerts or ticket sales to the general public. c) That the operator or his/her designee shall be on the premises during special events/assembly uses. City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 13 August 11, 2022 d) That occupancy shall be limited to 130 occupants, subject to determination by the City’s Building Official. e) That the club shall operate in accordance with its submitted bylaws. f) That any applicable licenses shall be obtained from the Office of the City Clerk. SUPPORTED by Dr. Wallace. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. RESULT: APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Stacie Behler, Board Member SECONDER: Adrienne Wallace, Board Member YEAS: Van Strien, Bersche, Joseph, Behler, Wallace, Williams ABSENT: Paul Rozeboom, Susan Shannon, Christopher Germain D. 1253 Prospect Ave SE - Transitional Housing Address: 1253 Prospect Ave SE Applicant: C & D Ministries (Carl Rumsey) Requesting: Approval to establish transitional housing in an existing single- family home. Zoning: TN-MDR (Traditional Neighborhood-Mixed Density Residential) Requirements: Article 5 Residential Zone Districts 5.9.36. Transitional or Emergency Shelters 5.12.08.E. Standards for Site Plan Review 5.12.09. Special Land Uses Case Number: PC-SLU-2022-0072 Staff Assigned: Sarah Behmlander sbehmlander@grand-rapids.mi.us Type of Case: Special Land Use Effective Date: August 27, 2022 Ms. Behmlander introduced the request of C & D Ministries to use an existing single-family home as a transitional home for individuals and families in need of assistance. The target demographic for the project includes those experiencing homelessness and, in the future, potentially those recently released from incarceration. Ms. Behmlander explained that transitional housing or emergency shelters require Special Land Use approval in the TN-MDR (Mixed-Density Residential) Zone District, which is where this property is located. Ms. Behmlander displayed an aerial image noting that to the west of the property there is actually an alley and Lafayette is further west. Ms. Behmlander displayed photos of the existing property. The home is a 1,820 sq. ft., 4-bedroom, single-family home. The applicant has indicated that they intend to renovate the basement, to include an additional bathroom, bedroom, and living space. This would make the residence a total of five bedrooms and two bathrooms. No exterior improvements are proposed as part of this application. The site is located near the Department of Human Services, a grocery store, library, and several banks to serve the occupants. The applicant has indicated that although many of the tenants won’t have vehicles, likely none will, he is willing to provide services to help transport them as needed. There are also several transit lines and scooters and bicycles nearby for rent as well. City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 14 August 11, 2022 Ms. Behmlander explained that the applicants of the potential housing will be vetted and sign a 12-month lease. The applicant is providing housing for up to five unrelated tenants to occupy the dwelling at any given time. However, if some are related, there is a maximum proposed of eight people. C & D Ministries also plans to partner with local organizations to provide housing cost subsidies to the lessees until employment is attained, as well as other beneficial service that might be needed. At the end of an assistance term, which will be determined by the applicant, tenants there will learn to maintain the housing unit and begin to pay the entire portion of rent without the assistance of subsidies. The applicant has indicated that a portion of the floor plan will be reserved for a manager to check on the property and handle any snow, grass or other maintenance the property may need. Ms. Behmlander displayed an image of the rear of the property. There is currently a six foot tall solid wood fence. The use requires three parking spaces. There is currently no garage or driveway for the site. While there is plenty of parking on Prospect, the applicant has indicated that he is willing to remove a portion of the fence in the rear yard to facilitate the installation of a parking pad, contingent upon review of Planning staff during the permitting process. The applicant has reached out to neighbors on Prospect Ave and was able to acquire 29 signatures in support of the project. Three different local organizations, including Community Rebuilders, Red Project, and Freed Men reached out to the applicant in excitement to work together with him for this project. Ms. Behmlander displayed the floor plan. There is one bedroom on the main floor with quite a few areas of living space and a covered porch off the back. On the second floor there are three more bedrooms with an attic and storage space. Ms. Behmlander identified key considerations as the compatibility of the proposed use with adjacent uses and suitability of the subject property for the proposed use. Carl Rumsey was present on behalf of his request. He related that he has always wanted to help people. He has a heart that loves to give. He thought you could buy a house and put people in it because it is your house. He found out you have to do everything the right way, which is what he is doing. He has met many men who are doing it the wrong way and he doesn’t want his shut down. He wants to help people and not have any issues. He didn’t know about zoning maps and those things that determine where such a house could be. He has looked at houses all over Grand Rapids and didn’t want to place residents in a home he wouldn’t stay in. His first inclination was nice neighborhoods but there are only certain pockets where you can have transitional space. Mr. Rumsey related that he grew up on this street. As the realtor was giving them a number of different listings, they came to this home and that was the first sign. The second sign was when he parked his jeep and prayed before doing the community outreach. He asked God to show him favor as he went out to talk to people about putting unhoused or even people transitioning from being formerly incarcerated. Mr. Rumsey stated that he is from this community and all of his friends have either been incarcerated or passed away. After praying for favor, not one person he spoke with opposed his plans. Mr. Rumsey stated that he is bi-racial. His mother is white and was the only white woman in the entire neighborhood. When he goes back and sees the gentrification of the neighborhood it surprised him and gave him hope as to placing people in a community that is mixed, one that can help and give different flavors. Mr. Rumsey related that City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 15 August 11, 2022 he lives on the northeast side and when he travels down Division it is disheartening to see all the people that are unhoused seeking services from Mel Trotter, Guiding Light and other places clumped together. Mr. Rumsey would like to take a few people who have jobs, that just need a place, and help them. He hates the idea of clumping everyone in one space. He wants to put them in real communities with real people. Even those that live in the community that were somewhat hesitant became supportive once they talked to him. He assured them that it could potentially be a family and not just a bunch of guys or women. It is meant to give them a step up. The neighborhood allowed him to join their Facebook group as a homeowner in the area and he saw the comments posted about his plans; it was refreshing. He has been invited into people’s homes and has had dinner in their homes just by proposing this idea. It has given him hope that he isn’t the only person wanting to help. Mr. Rumsey related that he also has employment for anyone that needs employment. He can shuttle them to work and they get a sign on bonus. It feels so good when he drives the hi-lo around and he sees all the people he has placed there. There is no better feeling than adding to the life of another person. He would like to begin with this house and duplicate it elsewhere. He acknowledged that this is hard after working all day but he wants to make it work so he can do it again and again and help as many as possible. Dr. Wallace asked about the parking situation. Mr. Rumsey explained that Prospect is currently being torn up. However, there is enough room in front of the home for approximately 3 cars. The alley provides access to the rear of the property where there is enough room for 2 spaces very comfortably. There are 4 bedrooms currently and he is proposing one more in the basement. Most people that are unhoused don’t have transportation, which is why he was so pleased with the transit lines on all of the adjacent streets. If need be, he will cut the fence out, grade the ground, and install a parking pad. He has been learning to do things on his own to keep the cost down so he can transfer more of what he wants to do to the people, such as furniture. Mr. Rumsey doesn’t feel the parking in the back will be necessary but if required, he will install it. Mr. Van Strien opened the public hearing and invited public comment. Denise Rumsey related that she is the applicant’s wife. They came to this together because this is something he has talked about for years; wanting to help other people in the community. When they came across this property they are stepping in and getting their feet wet. They are learning as they go and they are meeting a lot of people that are willing to help. To have the community help the residents also helps them because that gives them the support to be able to continue on and be able to help people get ahead. They have also helped people that have been incarcerated. They needed clothing, a way to get to Secretary of State to get their IDs so they can learn how to drive, etc. This would be the second part of being able to help those people. Mr. Van Strien closed the public hearing. Ms. Joseph feels this type of housing is so important. The location for the use is appropriate. It is close to a lot of resources and close to transit in a mixed-density neighborhood. She is in full support. Ms. Bersche agreed. City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 16 August 11, 2022 Ms. Turkelson asked that the Planning Commission have a discussion on the parking. Does the Commission feel parking on site is important or is the on-street parking and proximity to transit sufficient. Ms. Joseph didn’t feel it was necessary to require the on-site parking but if there is a desire on the part of the applicant to do so then it could be improved. Dr. Wallace indicated that she is comfortable with it as proposed. Ms. Bersche MOVED, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission approves the Special Land Use request of C & D Ministries (Carl Rumsey) for approval to establish transitional housing in an existing single-family home, for the following reasons: 1. 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 protect the character and quality of the established mixed-density residential neighborhood and preserve the overall quality of life for the surrounding neighborhood by providing shelter and stability for prospective residents. 2. 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 establishment of the proposed use is not anticipated to be a high-impact use and the residents will be living as a household in a cooperative manner. 3. The proposed use will not have adverse effects on the neighborhood because the building and site will not be discernably different from other houses in the vicinity and no major building or site improvements are proposed on the property. 4. 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, and visual clutter because the residents are not anticipated to own personal vehicles and the number of employees and support services and other anticipated visitors will be limited. Weekly gatherings will consist of a limited number of attendees that live within the home. 5. The health, safety, and general welfare of the public will be safeguarded by adequate public or private infrastructure, or will be provided at no additional cost, because the applicant will be responsible for necessary building upgrades required due to the change of use. 6. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the financial stability and/or economic welfare of the City because the use is not anticipated to result in calls for service or code compliance issues. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following conditions of approval shall apply to this project: 1. Standard Condition Set A. Approvals: i. That the application and plans submitted by the applicant and signed, dated and stamped by the Planning Director, shall constitute the approved plans, except if City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 17 August 11, 2022 plan elements do not meet ordinance requirements and/or as amended in this resolution. ii. That the use shall operate according to the application and per testimony as recorded in the Planning Commission minutes. iii. 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. iv. That a Land Use Development Services (LUDS) permit, building permit, and all other required permits be obtained from the City of Grand Rapids prior to construction, demolition, or operation. v. That any expansion of the approved Special Land Use requires an additional Special Land Use review and approval by the Planning Commission. vi. That the proposed use will comply with all other applicable City ordinances and policies and all State laws. vii. That this approval shall take effect 16 calendar days after the date of the Planning Commission’s decision. 2. That a building permit for the change of use shall be obtained prior to occupancy of the building. 3. That an appropriate fire suppression system be installed within the homestead as required by Building and Fire Code. 4. That not more than five (5) unrelated tenants or up to eight (8) tenants with relation may occupy the house at any given time, as outlined in the submitted and approved application. SUPPORTED by Ms. Joseph. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. RESULT: APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Kristine Bersche, Board Member SECONDER: Laurel Joseph, Board Member YEAS: Van Strien, Bersche, Joseph, Behler, Wallace, Williams ABSENT: Paul Rozeboom, Susan Shannon, Christopher Germain VI. Site Plan Review I. 3445 28th St SE - Amendment of Planned Sign Program Address: 3445 28th St SE Applicant: JPMorgan Chase NA (Jennifer L. Carr) Requesting: Approval for an amendment to the Planned Sign Program for signage exceeding the limits of the MON-C Zone District. Zoning: MON-C Modern Era Neighborhood - Commercial Requirements: Article 6 Mixed-Use Commercial Zone Districts Article 15 Signs 5.12.14. Optional Plan Review Procedures 5.15.08. Planned Sign Program 5.15.12. Signs in Mixed-Use Commercial Zone Districts City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 18 August 11, 2022 Case Number: PC-OPR-2022-0066 Staff Assigned: Sarah Behmlander sbehmlander@grand-rapids.mi.us Type of Case: Optional Plan Review Effective Date: August 27, 2022 Ms. Behmlander recalled that this site was before the Planning Commission in late June for Special Land Use review of a drive-through ATM for Chase Bank. They are present today seeking approval for an amendment to the Planned Sign Program. Ms. Behmlander indicated that it is a new building so it is not present in aerial images. She displayed an aerial view noting that the former Toys R Us building has recently been demolished to make room for a new restaurant. The Chase Bank is to be constructed just east of that building. The property will have street frontage along 28th St. and will have internal access via the roadways within the Shops at Centerpoint. The parcel is located in the MON-C Zone District and is entirely surrounded by that district. To the south is the City of Kentwood. Ms. Behmlander explained that they won’t be discussing internal or directional signage because that can be reviewed at the staff level. Today the Planning Commission will be considering the four wall signs they proposed for a total of 147 sq. ft. Ms. Behmlander displayed a view of the proposed signage. On the south elevation facing 28th St. they are proposing 36.9 sq. ft., which appears to be in conformance with the recommended Planned Sign Program designation. However, on the west and east elevations, based on recommendations from both the Planned Sign Program and the Zone District, 33 sq. ft. per wall sign is preferred; 36.9 sq. ft. is proposed on each elevation. Finally, on the north, an additional sign would not be afforded through the Planned Sign Program or the Zone District. The applicant is proposing a sign of 36.9 sq. ft. for an additional wall sign. Although the overall proposal is under what would typically be permitted, it is due to the quantity of the signs and the fact that a few are over the square foot allowance based on elevations. Ms. Behmlander displayed renderings of the building with the signage as proposed. The south elevation is the front facing 28th St. The west, east and north elevations are all facing internal roadways and commercial buildings within the Shops at Centerpoint. All of the signs appear to be placed appropriately in terms of height. However, there is some question regarding the south elevation. It appears to be a few feet higher than what is typically approved. However, there may be some architectural elements that have been worked out through the various permitting processes that may impede the sign placement. Ms. Behmlander summarized that the consideration for the Planning Commission is whether the number of proposed wall signs are appropriate based on building location and orientation. There was no applicant or representative present. Ms. Behmlander explained that it was related to her yesterday that a representative of the sign company would be present today. Ms. Turkelson advised that if there are outstanding questions that can’t be answered by staff, it would be up to the Planning Commission as to whether they wish to table the request for an applicant to be present. City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 19 August 11, 2022 Ms. Joseph doesn’t understand why they can’t make the sign 3 sq. ft. smaller to meet the requirements. She can understand that they want signage on more than one side since it is internally facing but she doesn’t understand why they can’t shrink it a bit. Ms. Behmlander felt that was a great point. She also noted that two adjacent parcels, Chik-fil-A and Krispy Kreme, came to the Planning Commission for an amendment to the Planned Sign Program. Chik-fil-A was approved for 176.25 sq. ft. and Krispy Kreme was approved for just over 100 sq. ft. The subject request is within the range of those two overall square footages. BJs restaurant had over 300 sq. ft. of signage due in part to the artistic panels. Mr. Van Strien asked if Ms. Behmlander knows the length of the walls the Chik-fil-A signs were on because that can impact the allowable square footage. Ms. Behmlander replied that she doesn’t know the exact dimensions of the walls but it is a larger building than the Chase Bank building. Mr. Van Strien asked if she recalled if their approval would have been outside of the normal size allowance. Ms. Behmlander replied that it was outside of the typical allowance. Ms. Behler understands why they want to have a sign on all four sides of the building. The variance is 2.1 ft. per sign. She doesn’t understand why it couldn’t be smaller but she also isn’t horrified by the slight increase in the number of square feet. Because the total is under the maximum square footage, she feels it is appropriate given its location. Mr. Van Strien stated that, in honor of Commissioner Rozeboom, he would suggest they stick to the ordinance. Ms. Joseph feels that allowing the sign on the north elevation so they have signage on all four elevations is giving enough. Ms. Behmlander added that they have proposed other signage, some of which is on the north side of the building, including a fairly large ATM canopy. There will be Chase signage on that side of the site. Obviously, what they are requesting is to have a wall sign that is visible. They are surrounded by a lot of larger buildings and are a bit further away from some of the other stores internally located on the site. Mr. Van Strien asked if the City Attorney has any recommendations for what actions they should or should not take at this point, in the interest of balancing the desire for their input and likely their desire to install signage once the building is complete. Mr. Strom replied that in reviewing the Standards it seems that it is within the Commission’s discretion. He doesn’t have a strong opinion as to whether or not the timing of the Commission’s decision and their dereliction of their attending today should be weighted for or against them. If there are meaningful questions that really need to be answered, the Commission should do their due diligence and table and ask them to come back. If those concerns are generally non- City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 20 August 11, 2022 substantial and the Commission can work through the standards for approval and feel comfortable making a decision, given the area and some of the prior decisions, then there is no harm in making a decision today. Mr. Van Strien doesn’t feel the concerns are substantial and that they can make a decision today. It doesn’t make sense to postpone this. Ms. Behler clarified that there is no permissible wall signage on the north elevation under the Planned Sign Program. Ms. Behmlander agreed. However, when the Planned Sign Program was established this new building wasn’t listed. She based that off of the Chik-fil-A and Krispy Kreme cases that came to the Planning Commission a few years ago and went with that same model of decision making. Ms. Bersche stated that she is comfortable making a decision. She tends to be okay with this as proposed because of the signage in this location. She doesn’t believe that 3 sq. ft. is going to be a detriment in this space but she also doesn’t feel that strongly if they are required to work within the Ordinance. Mr. Van Strien is comfortable with the request as proposed. Ms. Bersche MOVED, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission approves the request of JPMorgan Chase (Jennifer Carr) for an amendment to the Planned Sign Program of Shops at Centerpoint for a proposed Chase Bank branch to be located at 3445 28th Street, for the following reasons: 1. The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed Planned Sign Program amendments would result in a more attractive aesthetic setting, improved safety, provide more convenient identification for planned users, or other similar purposes because the proposed amendments will allow signage already permitted by the underlying MON-C zone district and allow for adequate and effective signs for identification and appropriate commercial speech. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed plan substantially furthers the Purposes and Intent of Section 5.15.01. because the proposed amendments would protect the need to promote new businesses within the Shops at Centerpoint development. 3. The applicant has demonstrated that approval of the Planned Sign Program amendments would not create any adverse impacts on one or more properties in the vicinity because the proposed amendments reinforce and support the character of the surrounding commercial district by taking into account building scale and massing, and nearby travel speeds; balance the need and right to communicate with needs to promote orderly communication, promote community aesthetics, and prevent a proliferation of signs and sign structures that can be confusing and distracting; and will ensure that signs are located, designed, constructed, installed, and maintained in a way that protects life, health, property, and the public welfare. City Planning Commission Meeting Full Page 21 August 11, 2022 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following conditions of approval shall apply to this project: 1. Standard Condition Set A. Approvals: i. That the application and plans submitted by the applicant and signed, dated and stamped by the Planning Director, shall constitute the approved plans, except if plan elements do not meet ordinance requirements and/or as amended in this resolution. ii. That the use shall operate according to the application and per testimony as recorded in the Planning Commission minutes. iii. 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. iv. That a Land Use Development Services (LUDS) permit, building permit, and all other required permits be obtained from the City of Grand Rapids prior to construction, demolition, or operation. v. That any expansion of the approved Special Land Use requires an additional Special Land Use review and approval by the Planning Commission. vi. That the proposed use will comply with all other applicable City ordinances and policies and all State laws. vii. That this approval shall take effect 16 calendar days after the date of the Planning Commission’s decision. SUPPORTED by Dr. Wallace. YEAS: 5. NAYS: 1 (Joseph). MOTION CARRIED. RESULT: APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS [5 TO 1] MOVER: Kristine Bersche, Board Member SECONDER: Adrienne Wallace, Board Member YEAS: Van Strien, Bersche, Behler, Wallace, Williams NAYS: Laurel Joseph ABSENT: Paul Rozeboom, Susan Shannon, Christopher Germain VII. Planning Commission Discussion VIII. Public Comment IX. Adjournment The meeting was closed at 2:40 PM