Though the council was in clear support of the motion, some residents had requests and concerns.

One of the requests was to change the north-facing balconies on the building to juliet-style, so as to minimize possible noise travel that would occur from students moving in and out constantly.

Staff resource Darcy Schmitt said the west-facing balconies have already been changed to Juliet-style. She said other recent site plan changes included the removal of a right in-lane off Grand River and the reconfiguration of the site so everything would be completely within the property line.

“These items were very important to the residents and the applicant provided that modified application,” she said.

Council member Kathleen Boyle, who supported the plan, said she personally wouldn’t be a stickler for Juliet-style balconies on the north side of the building. She also commended the West Village community’s cooperation with the developer. She noted the site plan has improved tremendously since it was first presented.

Mayor Pro Tem Diane Goddeeris said she thinks having balconies on the north side, facing against the park, would be an asset.

“I believe it doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s just going to be a student housing complex,” she said. “There are young professionals that may want to live here with the park across the street from them, it just depends on how it’s marketed and what the market rates are.”

Goddeeris also said she thinks the site plan is the best possible project for the area.

Council member Susan Woods said she agreed with Goddeeris’ thoughts.

“I think this is going to add an enormous amount of sort of excitement and traffic and business for...all of those enterprises...in that area, which hasn’t had that much activity so I will be supporting it,” she said.

Woods also said she thinks it is great a solution was found for the traffic that was occurring in the parking lots without stepping outside property lines.

Mayor Nathan Triplett concluded the discussion by saying he agreed with the comments his colleagues made. He said he was voting in favor of the plan because of the willingness of both sides to offer suggestions and also the applicant’s willingness to respond to the suggestions.

Triplett also clarified the last portion of the motion, which states that the two parties need to reach a mutual agreement on a few different issues no later than three weeks after today’s date. As long as that happens, the plan is approved. Triplett said the motion is only intended to make the plan’s process of moving forward clear.