Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents ask Kentwood City Commission to delay vote on 3125 44th Street PUD change; commission tables plan
Summary
After residents voiced traffic and safety concerns about a proposed mixed residential-commercial revision to the 2004 PUD at 3125 44th Street, the Kentwood City Commission voted to table the major-change request and directed staff to coordinate a meeting with the developer and neighbors to resolve outstanding issues.
Mayor Kepley closed a public hearing June 16 on a major change to the planned unit development (PUD) for 3125 44th Street and the commission voted to table the matter while staff arranges additional coordination between the developer and residents.
The request would modify a 5-acre parcel originally reserved for commercial use in a 2004 PUD to allow townhouse condominiums, two single-family detached condominium units and two retail buildings. Planning staff told the commission the change required a major-change review because the owner added a residential component; planning recommended conditional approval with 11 conditions.
Residents who live in the adjacent Cobblestone community urged the commission to delay action. “We were sort of blindsided by it,” said Henry Umrick, who said only a portion of approximately 250 families were notified under the city's 300-foot requirement. He described concerns about additional traffic entering private roads, emergency access and long-term maintenance obligations for condominium document provisions. Darlene O'Neil, president of the Cobblestone central board and a former Grand Rapids city clerk, asked for time so the neighborhood could convene, present consolidated concerns and work with the developer on mitigations.
Rob Lamer, the civil engineer representing the owner, told the commission the developer responded to staff's suggestion by adding residential uses to make the site more walkable. Lamer described the site layout, said only one access point on 44th is proposed (with one access to Blair View Drive), and acknowledged a traffic study could be required at the site-plan stage or as a condition of approval.
Commissioners discussed options that could address neighbors' concerns, including closing a small internal cut-through to discourage nonresident traffic, clarifying condo documents and requiring a traffic study. Legal counsel reminded the commission that statutory time limits apply to major-change reviews but noted the body could renotice a new hearing if needed.
Commissioner Arts moved, with support from Commissioner Coughlin, to table the major-change request and direct staff to coordinate a meeting with representatives of the developer, the residents and city staff "as expeditiously as possible" to resolve outstanding issues; the motion carried on voice vote and the public hearing was closed.
Next steps include staff'facilitated meetings among the developer, residents and city departments; planning and a traffic study were discussed as likely components of follow-up review. The commission did not approve the PUD change at the meeting.
