Jump to content

Icon on Bond

torgo

By torgo
in Grand Rapids

Recommended Posts

RustTown City

RustTown

Posted
Posted

Well, when all else fails you can always put the blame on Granholm, right? She's the easiest target. It would have been funny if both Granholm and Sikkema had decided to show up. lol

I'm disappointed to now learn that this is only one tower. I was under the impression they were building them simultaneously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
GaryP Burg

GaryP

Posted
Posted

I think you mean Joe. And if this would have been some other developer they never would have had much of a problem. Noone in the city takes him seriously because of his reputation. I think if he completes this project without many extra hiccups he may restore part of his rep, but he'll never get it all back after getting disbarred the way he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
designcritic Whistle-Stop

designcritic

Posted
Posted

BTW, does Joe Moch have an public email address, or at least the project?

Also, did I totally miss this or is anyone else surprised that that link keeps saying "building" instead of "buildings?" I must have missed where this was reduced to only one tower.

Only one of the towers is going to be built right now. Next week Thursday Joe goes before the planning commission to ask for a recess line variance for the north tower. I can only imagine the fireworks that will go off at that meeting. Last time the planners had huge problems with the street level facade and were calling him to the carpet on it. I can only imagine some of the same. If he wants a variance the planners should make him fix the street level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
allbusiness Whistle-Stop

allbusiness

Posted
Posted

I think you mean Joe. And if this would have been some other developer they never would have had much of a problem. Noone in the city takes him seriously because of his reputation. I think if he completes this project without many extra hiccups he may restore part of his rep, but he'll never get it all back after getting disbarred the way he did.

Is the "reputation" connected only with Joe Sr.? Is that why Joe Jr. seems to be "fronting" this whole project? I keep hearing "reputation" problems and I was wondering how a 27 year old kid already had a bad reputation. Now I understand it's his dad you're talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GaryP Burg

GaryP

Posted
Posted

I thought he was waiting to see how the south tower went before working on the North one? Or did the South tower's recess line not yet receive approval? This zoning/planning approval process has my head spinning.

Is the "reputation" connected only with Joe Sr.? Is that why Joe Jr. seems to be "fronting" this whole project? I keep hearing "reputation" problems and I was wondering how a 27 year old kid already had a bad reputation. Now I understand it's his dad you're talking about.

I guess I should be more clear about this. You are right, Sr. has a bad rap. I don't think anyone has ever had an issue with Jr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
designcritic Whistle-Stop

designcritic

Posted
Posted

I thought he was waiting to see how the south tower went before working on the North one? Or did the South tower's recess line not yet receive approval? This zoning/planning approval process has my head spinning.

I guess I should be more clear about this. You are right, Sr. has a bad rap. I don't think anyone has ever had an issue with Jr.

Apparently Sr. bought someone off to bypass the requirement on the south tower. The ordinance says a recess line is required at 85 feet but he never had a hearing about it. I'm not sure how that works. He has to get a variance for the north tower because there is an adjacent building present. The meeting is at about 1:00 in case anyone wants to try and convince the planning commissioners that the street lavel needs to be designed better. Unfortunately, the City Commission never seems to back up the Planning Commissions decisions so everything always gets appealed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
allbusiness Whistle-Stop

allbusiness

Posted
Posted

Apparently Sr. bought someone off to bypass the requirement on the south tower.

That's a pretty serious allegation to be tossing around -- suggesting that the entire planning commission, board of appeals or city commission would bend to some sort of bribe.

You know, sometimes city staff makes a recommendation and board and commission members make decisions to grant a variance or make an exception simply to remove barriers to what otherwise looks like a pretty good project. It doesn't mean anyone bribed anyone. sheesh!

Why do people think that as soon as a person volunteers to serve on a local board or commission that all of their moral values suddenly disappear and they'd be willing to accept a bribe? With very few exceptions, these people put in thousands of hours of volunteer time for little or no pay just to make their community a better place to live.

Unless there is legal evidence that someone has bribed a local official I'd suggest you keep your wild musings on this type of thing to yourself. Better yet, why not run for office or volunteer to serve on a lcoal board or commission and find out how difficult it really is to make these decisions -- rather than just sit at your computer and libel others! :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
terra firma Whistle-Stop

terra firma

Posted
Posted

That's a pretty serious allegation to be tossing around --

Agreed, but his allegation fits within the scope of Moch's reputation historically. Moch was suspended from legal practice for bad conduct and was later dis-barred for tampering with evidence.

I've yet to hear someone say they like the guy.

He threatened to sue me for something I had no involvement in; just completely absurd.

He screwed a friend of mine on a Ferrari deal and all of this kinda stuff is just kinda his MO from what I have heard from entirely too many really good sources.

I do not think it is likely that he bribed anyone at the City level, but lets face it this guy is an A-hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
designcritic Whistle-Stop

designcritic

Posted
Posted

That's a pretty serious allegation to be tossing around -- suggesting that the entire planning commission, board of appeals or city commission would bend to some sort of bribe.

You know, sometimes city staff makes a recommendation and board and commission members make decisions to grant a variance or make an exception simply to remove barriers to what otherwise looks like a pretty good project. It doesn't mean anyone bribed anyone. sheesh!

Why do people think that as soon as a person volunteers to serve on a local board or commission that all of their moral values suddenly disappear and they'd be willing to accept a bribe? With very few exceptions, these people put in thousands of hours of volunteer time for little or no pay just to make their community a better place to live.

Unless there is legal evidence that someone has bribed a local official I'd suggest you keep your wild musings on this type of thing to yourself. Better yet, why not run for office or volunteer to serve on a lcoal board or commission and find out how difficult it really is to make these decisions -- rather than just sit at your computer and libel others! :angry:

My point was. How does a building get approved at 120' tall without a recess line when the ordinance clearly states a line is required at 85'. The issue never even went in front of the Planning or City Commission for this issue. The issue lies more with paid city staff than that of the volunteer Planning Commission. I agree that they put in a ton of time for very little respect. However, when you deviate from the code don't you need a variance? Please tell me how one goes about getting approvals behind the scenes without the required variences?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
designcritic Whistle-Stop

designcritic

Posted
Posted

Moch was denied variances by the PC for the first design but was later approved the variances by the CC. That approval expired after one year. After that point he did the redesign and went back to the Planning Commission. They gave him a really hard time because of the ground floor design and he somehow managed to avoid all of the variance requests and got the south tower approved without a PC hearing. It still baffles me how he managed to get away with that. It sure seems like any project of that scale should have to be reviewed by the commission and not just city staff. Why does one person have the power over what is good design and good for the city?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Prankster Burg

Prankster

Posted
Posted

Moch was denied variances by the PC for the first design but was later approved the variances by the CC. That approval expired after one year. After that point he did the redesign and went back to the Planning Commission. They gave him a really hard time because of the ground floor design and he somehow managed to avoid all of the variance requests and got the south tower approved without a PC hearing. It still baffles me how he managed to get away with that. It sure seems like any project of that scale should have to be reviewed by the commission and not just city staff. Why does one person have the power over what is good design and good for the city?

In addition, I remember him saying that he did the redesign to help accomodate the wishes of the residents in the neighboring buildings. What a nice guy, don't you wish you had a nice neighbor like that? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
torgo Town

torgo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The Planning Commission has legislative power for certain things, like preliminary site plan approval, but not others, such as granting variances or rezoning property, which can only be done by the board/commission/council or the ZBA. Usually the powers of the PC and ZBA are spelled out in the ordiance or other public ordiance/document. In those instances, the PC recommends approval, denial based on whatever, but the actual legislative action can be taken only by the commission, and they are not bound to what the PC recommends. If they were, they would simply rubber-stamp everything that came across their desk from the PC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
designcritic Whistle-Stop

designcritic

Posted
Posted

Apparently in this city, if the Planning Director says the building meets all requirements there is no further review. I'm glad we give one person all the power even if he can't read. Below is taken from the city ordinance. Please tell me how the south tower was given approval without a variance. Icon is in Zone A

"Upper Level Development Standards. A Recess Line (RL) is established above which the facade of a building must set back a minimum of twelve (12) feet from the face of the facade below. The height of the Recess Line shall be determined by the following criteria:

(a) The RL shall only apply to property lines adjacent to the public right-of-way.

(b) The RL shall be equal to the height of tallest building adjacent to the development project on the same block as the development project or, if there is no building adjacent to the development project on the same block, the height of the tallest building on the block directly across the street from the development project. In no case shall this subparagraph require a Recess Line of less than forty (40) feet.

Without regard to the provisions of subparagraph (b), the height of the RL shall not exceed the height indicated below:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
designcritic Whistle-Stop

designcritic

Posted
Posted

You can read better than our city staff. It's spelled out pretty clearly to me. I think rooftop patios would have been okay at the 85' level but abouv that any building element would have had to be 12' back. Now tell me how he got out of going before the Planning Commission for a variance.

Now if you consider the north tower the rules change because there are adjacent buildings present. Then the recess line has to be at the height of the adjacent building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
designcritic Whistle-Stop

designcritic

Posted
Posted

I know I may be getting in the way, here, but does anyone know if the height of Tower One is the 105' that was listed in the Grand Rapids Press back at the beginning of the year? I'd like to see exactly all that was approved for this site.

I think it is 105' but that doesn't include any mechnical penthouse spaces that might be on the roof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.