Commission approves duplex with parking reduction at 740–742 Clancy Ave; ADU noted for later permitting

The Grand Rapids City Planning Commission on Jan. 23 approved a special land use and site plan for Spitzley Group LLC to construct a two‑family dwelling at 740 and 742 Clancy Avenue (applicant Patrick Spitzley). The approval allows a reduction from three required on‑site parking spaces to two and includes conditions requiring a lot combination application and compliance with zoning standards at permit.

Why it matters: The site is in the traditional neighborhood low density residential (TNLDR) zone and falls within the Belknap area‑specific plan, which recommends residential infill in the form of single‑family, duplex and triplex housing. The commission found the proposed duplex consistent with the neighborhood plan and the 2024 community master plan’s housing goals for increased infill and housing variety.

Planning staff (Laura) said the combined lots total about 5,500 square feet with a width of roughly 46 feet, dimensions that meet minimums for a two‑family dwelling in the zone. The proposed main building would contain two separate four‑bedroom units, with bedrooms split between basements and second floors; the site plan also includes a detached accessory structure with a one‑bedroom accessory dwelling unit above the garage. Staff noted ADUs are permitted by right in the zone and that the ADU itself was not part of the special land use review. The commission asked the applicant to ensure the required front setback (RBL) aligns with neighboring properties and staff and applicant confirmed they will resolve that in permit review.

Applicant representatives David Max (Max Architecture) and Patrick Spitzley said they had surveyed the block to confirm setback calculations and had engaged neighborhood stakeholders. Spitzley said the project team met with the Belknap Lookout Neighbors and their board, and the group provided letters of support; the board held a vote and returned a supportive recommendation with one dissenting vote concerned about rental vs. ownership.

Commission discussion noted the project’s compatibility with the block and the neighborhood area plan, the proximity of transit (Rapid Route 11) and nearby on‑street parking, and the presence of alley access for the garage. Some commissioners asked for a more realistic streetscape rendering at permitting to better show how the pair of buildings fit with adjacent development. The public hearing produced no outside speakers.

Resolution conditions require submission of a lot combination application prior to permits and that site and building components meet zoning requirements including front setback, transparency, and building materials. Staff and the commission removed a previously listed Land Use Development (LUDS) permit requirement and confirmed standard building permit procedures will apply.

Votes at a glance: The motion to approve passed by voice vote; the transcript records the motion, support and “aye”s but does not include a numerical roll call tally.