View the PDF version Google Docs PDF Viewer
CITY OF MUSKEGON
PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
MINUTES
June 15, 2006
Chairman J. Aslakson called the meeting to order at 4:05 p.m. and roll was taken.
MEMBERS PRESENT: B. Larson, B. Turnquist, S. Warmington, B. Mazade, J. Aslakson,
L. Spataro, T. Michalski
MEMBERS ABSENT: T. Harryman, excused; B. Smith, excused
STAFF PRESENT: L. Anguilm, D. Leafers
OTHERS PRESENT: J. Martinez, 213 Washington; J. Milanowski, Ruddiman Associates,
3239 Clover Pkwy; D. Malear, 2731 Peck St.; R. Wilkins, 2305 5th;
M. Fuller, Prein & Newhof, Grand Rapids; D. Lanier, Great Lakes
Shuttle, 3174 S. Getty St.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A motion to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of May 11, 2006 was made by B. Turnquist
supported by B. Larson and unanimously approved.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
S. Warmington arrived at 4:07 p.m.
Hearing; Case 2006-16: Request to vacate the East/West alley between Fifth and Sixth Streets,
running parallel to Washington and W. Grand Avenues, by Jana Martinez. L. Anguilm presented
the staff report. The alley in question is part of an “H” alley located between Fifth and Sixth Streets
running parallel to Washington and W. Grand Avenues. All homes abutting this alley have
driveway access to their homes or access one of the cross alleys running between Washington and
W. Grand. The applicant states that there has been a problem with people parking in this portion of
the alley and illegal dumping has been taking place. Fire, and DPW have no issues with vacating
this alley. As always, staff recommends that utility rights be retained. Staff recommends approval
of the request.
B. Turnquist asked if there was a lot of high school traffic through the alley. J. Martinez stated that
there was, and it was mostly foot traffic, with a lot of garbage being dropped. The high school
students seemed to like the alley because they were out of sight of school personnel. She felt that
vacating this alley would provide additional safety for her kids that play in the yard, and would
contribute to the cleanliness of the neighborhood. B. Turnquist asked what her plans were if the
alley were vacated. J. Martinez stated that she would like to fence the yard.
Planning Commission Minutes – 06/15/06 1
A motion to close the public hearing was made by T. Michalski, supported by B. Larson and
unanimously approved.
J. Aslakson reminded board members that the City generally vacated alleys when feasible. T.
Michalski lived in the area and was aware of the problems in the alleys and side streets.
A motion that the vacation of the East/West alley between Fifth and Sixth Streets, running parallel
to Washington and W. Grand Avenues, be recommended to City Commission for approval, based
on compliance with the City’s 1997 Master Land Use Plan, with the condition that all utility
easements will be retained, was made by T. Michalski, supported by S. Warmington and
unanimously approved.
Hearing; Case 2006-17: Request for final Planned Unit Development approval for Phase V
(condominiums) of the Park Terrace Development north of Woodcreek Avenue off the intersection
with Rosewood Street, by Ruddiman Associates. L. Anguilm presented the staff report. The
subject property is part of the Park Terrace Development (former Hackley Glen site, on Hackley
Avenue, west of Barclay Street), which has an approved preliminary PUD for the entire former
Hackley Glen property. Phases I, II and IV of the project have already received final PUD and site
plan approval and have been constructed. Phase III is not being developed at this time. This
request is for final PUD and site plan approval for Phase V. The property is located north of
Woodcreek Avenue off the intersection with Rosewood Street. There will be 46 condominium
units, to be constructed as duplexes. Each unit will have an attached 2-stall garage and driveway,
providing the minimum of 2 parking spaces required. There will be a 5 ft. sidewalk constructed on
the inside of the Rosewood Street loop. No additional signage is proposed for the site. The site
plan appears to be very detailed and staff is not aware of anything missing from the plans. The
landscaping plan is also extensive, and appears to preserve most of the existing trees wherever
practical. Many new trees and shrubs will also be planted as part of the plan. All setbacks are well
within the requirements for RM-1 zoning. Engineering had no comments regarding the site plan.
The Fire Department had the following comments: Fire flow test shall be conducted prior to
approval. International Fire Code – Section 508. Project shall comply with NFPA 1141 fire
protection for planned building groups. Designated fire lanes shall be established through the area.
Signage shall be posted and comply with IFC appendix C 103.6. DPW comments were as follows:
Contact Kelly DeFrench regarding looping water main between Woodcreek Drive and Rosewood.
Staff has received no comments regarding this request and recommends approval of the Final PUD
for Phase V request based upon staff review of the “Standards for Approval of PUD Plans”, subject
to the condition that all requirements listed by the Fire Department in number 10 shall be met.
J. Milanowski stated that when the original PUD was approved there were 57 units, but they have
now decided to have 46 units, resulting in decreased density. Also, there would now be only
duplexes, when before there were triplexes proposed. All utilities would be underground, and the
street would be built to City standards and deeded to the City upon completion. S. Warmington
asked if the new units would be the same size as the existing ones. J. Milanowski stated that it was
his understanding that they will be no smaller than the others; however, they may not be as large as
what was shown on the drawings. B. Mazade asked if the new section of Rosewood Dr. would have
sidewalks on both sides. J. Milanowski stated that only one side would have a sidewalk, similar to
Woodcreek Dr.
A motion to close the public hearing was made by B. Larson, supported by S. Warmington and
unanimously approved.
Planning Commission Minutes – 06/15/06 2
A motion that the final PUD and associated site plan for Phase V (condominiums) of the Park
Terrace development north of Woodcreek Avenue off the intersection with Rosewood Street be
recommended to the City Commission for approval pursuant to the determination of compliance
with the intent of the City Zoning Ordinance and City Master Land Use Plan based on the condition
that all requirements listed by the Fire Department in number 10 shall be met, was made by S.
Warmington, supported by B. Mazade and unanimously approved.
Hearing; Case 2006-18: Request for preliminary Planned Unit Development approval for 444
Irwin Avenue for mixed use, commercial, office, and religious uses, by Douglas Malear, Hope
Lighthouse Church. L. Anguilm presented the staff report. The property that is the subject of this
request was formerly occupied by Fitzpatrick Electric, which operated a wholesale business in the
building for many years. It has been vacant for 1-2 years. The request is for a preliminary PUD for
mixed-use commercial, office and religious uses. A final approval for Phase I of the PUD is the
subject of the following case. The property is 3.2 acres and has 4 connected buildings totaling
99,421 sq. ft. The exact amount of space allotted for each use has not been determined at this time,
although areas for office, commercial and religious uses are defined in Phase I. The zoning of the
property is I-1, Light Industrial. Property to the west is I-1 and R-1, One Family Residential. To
the north the zoning is I-1, to the east is OSR, Open Space Recreation, and to the south is R-1
(Evergreen Cemetery). The site plan provided includes certain information regarding Phase I of the
plan, and could be approved as part of that request. At some point, parking will become an issue for
this site. Presently there appears to be adequate parking for Phase I, but additional parking will be
needed to accommodate additional uses in the future. This property is located very close or
adjacent to residential neighborhoods. The Master Plan’s Future Land Use Map doesn’t support an
industrial use for this property, and further use as an industrial building doesn’t fit with the
neighborhood. A PUD will offer a less intense use to be located close to these residential areas.
The Master Land Use Plan also speaks to the need for a community center in the area. Perhaps
further development by the Church would allow for that type of use in the future. Engineering had
no comments regarding the request. DPW had no issues with the proposed site plan. The Fire
Department had the following comments regarding the site plan: Owner shall provide access
through gates where property is fenced. Key box shall be installed for Fire Department access to
building. Signage required for Fire Department connection. Staff has received no comments
regarding this request. Staff recommends approval of the Final PUD for Phase V request based
upon the above staff review of the “Standards for Approval of PUD Plans”, subject to the conditions
listed in the motion below.
T. Michalski asked if a portion of the complex would be tax exempt. L. Anguilm stated that the
church owned the entire parcel. T. Michalski asked if it would be tax exempt if they used it for
commercial purposes. B. Mazade stated that it was his understanding that only the portion used for
religious services was tax exempt. J. Aslakson asked if parts of the second floor were occupied. L.
Anguilm stated that it was previously used by Fitzpatrick Electric, so it was already developed as
offices.
Applicant D. Malear stated that he had been at their Muskegon Heights location for over 10 years,
and their mission was mainly to feed and clothe the poor. They would like to have a thrift shop at
the new location and lease other offices to non-profit organizations in the human services area.
They would utilize the truck bays for deliveries for area food pantries, but there would be no food
storage on the premises. J. Aslakson asked where the sanctuary entrance was. D. Malear stated that
Planning Commission Minutes – 06/15/06 3
there would be entrances in the front and rear. S. Warmington asked if this development would be
an extension of the Muskegon Heights facility or if it would be their main location. D. Malear
stated that this would be their main location. They were moving more towards a human service type
of organization and away from a formal church. They wanted to be a non-denominational agency
open to all. S. Warmington asked that D. Malear discuss his plans with other non-profit entities in
the community so that there was no duplication of services. He was concerned that too much
duplication of effort could result in putting another program out of business. D. Malear stated that
they were looking to collaborate with other area agencies, such as Love Inc., with whom they
currently have a partnership.
A motion to close the public hearing was made by B. Larson, supported by S. Warmington and
unanimously approved.
A motion that the Preliminary PUD for mixed-use commercial, office and religious uses for 444
Irwin Avenue be approved pursuant to the determination of compliance with the intent of the City
Zoning Ordinance and City Master Land Use Plan based on the conditions that 1) final approval of
a complete site plan for each phase of the development be granted by the Planning Commission and
City Commission, and 2) all Fire Department requirements listed in number 12 a-c. are to be met,
was made by S. Warmington, supported by B. Turnquist and unanimously approved.
Hearing; Case 2006-19: Request for final Planned Unit Development approval for Phase I
(commercial, office and church) for 444 Irwin Avenue, by Douglas Malear, Hope Lighthouse
Church. L. Anguilm presented the staff report. The properties in question at 444 Irwin have
received approval for a Preliminary PUD (see former case) from the Planning Commission. The
applicant would like final approval on certain portions of the building at this time, and will move
forward in the future with other additional phases as funding becomes available. This phase of the
development is for the church sanctuary, fellowship hall, and classroom space for Hope Lighthouse
Church, as well as a retail space for a used merchandise sales outlet. The sanctuary is approximately
3,000 square feet, the fellowship hall is 3,015 square feet, and there are 3 classrooms to be used for
Sunday school. In addition, there is a room for a nursery, reception area, hallway and restrooms.
The retail space is 2,536 square feet. This totals approximately 11,150 square feet on the first floor.
The second floor is already developed for and used by the previous owner for offices. There is
12,812 square feet of usable office space, including 7 offices and a classroom that will be utilized
by the Church, and the remaining office and meeting rooms will be leased, probably to other non-
profit organizations. Staff received the following comments regarding the site plan: A landscaping
plan is included on this site plan. There are challenges because of the existing building and paved
areas, and it is almost impossible to meet the landscape ordinance requirements; however, by using
the existing landscaping and adding trees and shrubs wherever possible the site should be much
more attractive. It appears that some additional trees and shrubs or bushes could be added to the
green spaces along Irwin presently marked for top soil and seed or with grass. The applicant can
work with staff on this issue and submit a revised landscaping plan if Planning Commission agrees.
Parking spaces need to be defined with curb stops or rolled curbing. All parking spaces must be
striped. Minimum size for parking spaces is 8 x 18 ft., and must be indicated on the site plan.
There are 105 parking spaces shown on the site plan. Approximately 80 spaces would be needed,
considering the fellowship hall and church would be sharing approximately 30 spaces. This is
adequate for the present uses in the building. However, the applicant needs to be aware that
additional uses of the building may require additional parking or shared parking agreements with
other properties in the area. Any additional lighting installed must be 100% cut-off. Show snow
Planning Commission Minutes – 06/15/06 4
storage areas, or indicate if snow will be removed from the site. Show location of any Dumpster,
along with screening that will be provided. Indicate fire lanes and location of fire lock box. If any
additional signage will be requested, indicate location. Sign permits are required and must be
approved prior to installation. Staff has received a comment from M. Amrhein in favor of this
request. Staff recommends approval of the Final PUD for Phase I request based upon the above
staff review of the “Standards for Approval of PUD Plans”, subject to the conditions that 1) an
amended site plan addressing the staff concerns listed above in #5 be submitted and approved by the
Planning Department, and 2) no other uses be allowed on the site until further phases of the PUD
are approved. L. Anguilm stated that she had been working on the site plan with T. Bosma and D.
Malear, and they had been very cooperative.
A motion to close the public hearing was made by S. Warmington, supported by B. Larson and
unanimously approved.
A motion that the Final PUD and associated site plan for Phase I mixed-use commercial, office and
religious uses for 444 Irwin Avenue be recommended to the City Commission for approval pursuant
to the determination of compliance with the intent of the City Zoning Ordinance and City Master
Land Use Plan based on the conditions that 1) an amended site plan addressing the staff concerns
listed above in #5 be submitted and approved by the Planning Department, and 2) no other uses be
allowed on the site until further phases of the PUD are approved, was made by B. Larson, supported
by B. Mazade and unanimously approved.
Hearing; Case 2006-20: Request for a Special Land Use Permit, per section 2203 of Article XXII
of the Zoning Ordinance, to allow an expansion not exceeding 30% of a nonconforming structure at
3351 Thompson Avenue, by Tina Noll. The applicant withdrew her request. B. Mazade asked why
the request was withdrawn. L. Anguilm stated that the ZBA had approved her variance request, so
the SUP was no longer needed.
Hearing; Case 2006-21: Request for a Special Land Use Permit, per Section 1301 (#11) of Article
XIII to allow for a taxi service in a B-4, General Business zoning district, by Nicholas Green, Great
Lakes Shuttle, Inc. L. Anguilm presented the staff report. Great Lakes Shuttle is currently operating
outside of the City of Muskegon and wishes to move into and operate out of the building at 993 W.
Laketon Avenue. The primary access to the property is from Dowd Street, which has two access
points to the parking area. The property was formerly used as a trailer sales, but has been vacant for
1 to 2 years. Great Lakes Shuttle has a fleet of 9 taxi cabs and approximately 12 employees. Repair
and maintenance of their vehicles only would be conducted in the two service bays. The repair of
vehicles would only take place between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday. They operate
2 shifts per day, those being 4 a.m. to 4 p.m. and 4 p.m. to 4 a.m. Great Lakes Shuttle will be
leasing only the rear 1,650 sq. ft. building at this time, but may lease the remainder of the building
in the future. Future use of that space would be for vehicle washing and interior cleaning. The site
requires a minimum of 9 parking spaces and 12 are provided, which is the maximum. The spaces
must have rolled curbing or curb stops provided, and that is shown on the site plan. The request
complies with the Master Land Use Plan Future Land Use Map. Robert Mooney, 1848 Dowd
called staff to say he is opposed to the request. He feels that a 24-hour operation at that location
will increase traffic and noise on Dowd Street. Chris Plichta, 1935 Hudson called and said she is in
favor of the request. Staff recommends approval of the request with certain conditions, as listed in
the motion for approval, below.
Planning Commission Minutes – 06/15/06 5
B. Mazade asked about how far this property extended from Laketon Avenue into the
neighborhood. L. Anguilm stated that it appeared to be about 266 feet, and showed board members
a map of the area showing the lot. B. Mazade asked if the applicants owned the property. L.
Anguilm stated that they did not. If they changed locations, the SUP would be dissolved. B.
Turnquist asked about the other businesses at this location, as there was a sign indicating that the
Chunky Monkey was housed there. L. Anguilm stated that they had a trailer parked there, but the
business was not run from there. D. Lanier was part-owner of the taxi service and stated that they
intended to be good neighbors. Several agencies in town use their service, including MAISD,
Goodwill Industries, and the airport. J. Aslakson asked if there would be a walk-in facility on the
site. D. Lanier stated that there would not be. The only person there most of the time would be a
dispatcher, so it would be a very low key operation.
L. Spataro arrived at 4:50 p.m.
B. Turnquist asked if the applicants had any intention of sealing the parking lot or repairing the
fence. D. Lanier stated that they did have an option to buy the building, and they could make those
items a condition of the sale. L. Anguilm presented board members with a letter from B. Wakefield
opposing the request. S. Warmington noted that there was no signature or return address on the
letter. L. Anguilm stated that she had checked with the City Clerk’s office and found that Great
Lakes Shuttle was in compliance with all necessary requirements.
A motion to close the public hearing was made by S. Warmington, supported by B. Larson and
unanimously approved.
A motion that the Special Land Use Permit and associated site plan, per section 1301 (#11) of
Article XIII of the Zoning Ordinance, to allow a taxi service in a B-4 zoning district at 993 W.
Laketon Avenue by Great Lakes Shuttle, Inc., be approved based on compliance with the City’s
Master Land Use Plan and conditions set forth in Section 2332 of the City of Muskegon Zoning
Ordinance based on the following conditions: 1) screening needs to be provided between the site
and adjacent residential properties. This may be accomplished either with a fence or solid wall, or
landscape buffer with berming, 2) repair on any vehicles other than those taxis owned by the
business would be prohibited, 3) repair work on said vehicles will only take place between the hours
of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m., Monday through Saturday, 4) the owner/applicant shall permit the zoning
administrator or other zoning staff in the premises at reasonable times to review compliance with
this permit, 5) the special land use permit shall become null and void within one year of the public
hearing if the use has not been established or there is a violation of conditions 1-4, and 6) the
Special Land Use Permit document shall be recorded with the register of deeds prior to occupying
the building, was made by S. Warmington, supported by B. Mazade and unanimously approved.
Hearing; Case 2006-22: Request to vacate a portion of “old” Ottawa Street located southwest of
the “realigned” Ottawa Street, by Mike Fuller, Prein & Newhof. L. Anguilm presented the staff
report. When the eastern leg of Shoreline Drive was developed, a portion of Ottawa Street was cut
off and realigned. Currently a portion of Ottawa Street that is no longer needed is located adjacent
to the Muskegon County Wastewater Management site. This property is needed as part of the
replacement project for the wastewater pump station. In addition, the City is selling Muskegon
County the additional property required for the project. Included in the packet is a drawing of the
area in question, which shows Parcel D as the section of “old” Ottawa Street to be vacated. Parcels
A, B and C are being sold by the City to the County for their project. The City Engineer had the
following comment, with DPW concurring: “As long as this section of the road is maintained as a
Planning Commission Minutes – 06/15/06 6
surface parking area as shown on their site plans, and the City’s right to retain an easement and
unlimited access to maintain, repair, replace existing utilities and/or necessary future ones without
the responsibility of replacing the surface with other than standard trench repair elements, I have no
objection.” Staff has received no comments regarding this case. Since there is no further need for
this section of Ottawa Street, staff recommends approval of the request, with conditions listed in the
motion for approval below.
T. Michalski disclosed that he worked for the County of Muskegon but received no personal gain
from this project. L. Spataro stated the same. B. Mazade asked if any comments were received. L.
Anguilm stated that she had met with R. Wilkins regarding her property in this area, and she seemed
satisfied that access to her property would not be cut off. R. Wilkins stated that hers was the only
property in this vicinity that was not purchased by the City for Shoreline Drive or the County, and
she cannot do anything with it.
A motion to close the public hearing was made by S. Warmington, supported by B. Larson and
unanimously approved.
A motion that the vacation of the “old” Ottawa Street located southwest of the “realigned” Ottawa
Street, be recommended to the City Commission for approval, based on compliance with the City’s
Master Land Use Plan, with the condition that all utility easements be retained, was made by S.
Warmington, supported by L. Spataro and unanimously approved.
Case 2006-23: Request for site plan review for replacement of the existing Muskegon County
sewage lift station at 635 Ottawa Street, by Mike Fuller, Prein & Newhof. L. Anguilm presented
the staff report. The property is presently the site of the Muskegon County sewage lift station. This
is a legal nonconforming use in a Waterfront Marine district. The County has plans to build a new
facility on the site. Once the new lift station is up and running, the present one will be demolished.
A portion of the property included in this site plan is a portion of “old” Ottawa Street recommended
for vacation in the previous case. Also included are three other City-owned parcels which are in the
process of being obtained by Muskegon County for their project. Properties to the north and west
are zoned WM, Waterfront Marine, and to the east and south are zoned B-4, General Business. A
portion of the drive entering the site from the northeast will remain part of the public right-of-way.
Staff has the following comments regarding the site plan: A landscaping plan is provided, which
shows 62 trees to be planted in the front setback along Shoreline Drive. Muskegon County has
indicated that they are willing to work with the City to create a park or inviting entryway into
Muskegon in this area. Further discussions will be held at a later date as to what sort of landscaping
will be provided for this area. Shrubs and understory trees shown on the northeast side of the
building should be clustered so as to screen the equipment facing Ottawa Street. The canopy trees
and some other shrubs shown on the northeast side of the building are outside of the property line
and need to be moved onto the Muskegon County property. The parking area provides adequate
parking as well as a maneuvering area for large trucks. They need either curb stops or rolled
curbing to be shown on the site plan. The site plan meets all other requirements. The Engineering
Department had no comments regarding the site plan. The Department of Public Works has no
issues with the site plan. The Fire Department had the following comment regarding the site plan:
Fire Department connection shall be accessible and identified with signage indicating such. Staff
has received no comments regarding this request. Staff recommends approval with conditions listed
in the motion below.
Planning Commission Minutes – 06/15/06 7
J. Aslakson asked if the big tank would stay or go. M. Fuller stated that it would go. B. Mazade
asked if all the property acquisition was complete. M. Fuller stated that there were ongoing
negotiations with the City, but all others were complete.
A motion that the site plan for the replacement of the existing Muskegon County sewage lift station
at 635 Ottawa Street for Mike Fuller, Prein & Newhof, be approved, based on the following
findings and conditions: An amended site plan be submitted and approved by the Planning
Department addressing the issues in #5 a-d, Fire Department requirements will be followed, and a
sign permit is required for any new or additional signage for the site, was made by L. Spataro,
supported by B. Mazade and unanimously approved.
Case 2006-24: Staff-initiated request for site plan review for the Muskegon Fire Station, at the
corner of Western Avenue and Terrace Street. L. Anguilm presented the staff report. This City-
owned property has formerly been identified at the “Terrace Lots”. The site plan is for the
southeast 1.56 acres. It is zoned B-2, Convenience and Comparison Business. Properties to the
north are zoned B-2, Convenience and Comparison Business, and to the west and south the zoning
is B-3, Central Business. Properties to the east are zoned B-4, General Business. The City wishes
to construct a new Central Fire Station on the site. The site plan is quite complete with just a couple
of concerns: the location, type and design of all outdoor lighting needs to be provided, all lighting
must be 100% cut-off type, the location of snow storage must be shown, and the landscaping plan
needs some fine-tuning. A revised site plan that meets the requirements agreed upon by the
Planning Department must be submitted. The Fire Department has accepted with the following
conditions: Project shall comply with NFPA 1141 Fire Protection I Planned Building Groups and
International Fire Code Chapter 5, Fire Service features. Hydrant requirement shall comply with
IFC appendix C for location and distribution. Location of hydrants shall also be approved by the
Fire Chief to accommodate on-site training and maintenance of hoses. The Department of Public
Works and the Police Department have no issues with the site plan. Staff has received no
comments regarding this site plan. Staff recommends approval with conditions listed in the motion
below.
B. Mazade asked about the placement of the dumpster. M. Fuller stated that it was by the parking
lot, not the building. B. Larson was concerned about the proposed height of the fire station as
related to the rest of the site. S. Warmington stated that the developers would take the architecture
of the fire station into account when designing the other buildings on the site. B. Mazade stated that
the City had shared the preliminary fire station designs with the developer.
A motion that the site plan for the new Muskegon Central Fire Station at the corner of Terrace
Street and Western Avenue for Hooker DeJong on behalf of the City of Muskegon be approved,
based on the following findings and conditions: An amended site plan be submitted and approved
by the Planning Department addressing Staff Observations #4, not including item 4c, and all Fire
Department conditions shall be met, was made by L. Spataro, supported by B. Larson and
unanimously approved.
OTHER
Discussion regarding window signage Staff and board members discussed the memo from M.
Cameron regarding the City’s window signage ordinance language. S. Warmington stated that he
had requested a review of the ordinance, as he felt that the language needed clarification. Members
Planning Commission Minutes – 06/15/06 8
discussed how much of a window should be covered, and also what constituted a “window”. B.
Larson stated that he would like to see what other cities allowed in their ordinances. L. Anguilm
presented a memo from the City Attorney on the subject. S. Warmington stated that the board
needed to look at the ordinance and give staff direction on enforcement. Board members decided to
form a sub-committee to review the ordinance.
A motion to nominate J. Aslakson, B. Larson, and T. Michalski to work with staff on this issue was
made by S. Warmington, supported by L. Spataro and unanimously approved.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:55 p.m.
dml
6/15/06
Planning Commission Minutes – 06/15/06 9
Sign up for City of Muskegon Emails