TRAVERSE CITY Hot

City Government Reporter

TRAVERSE CITY — Zoning changes that Traverse City planners say will allow for more housing variety are facing serious pushback as city leaders continue to debate them.

City commissioners on Monday will review and discuss the changes at a study session where no final decision will be made, Interim City Manager Nate Geinzer said. The date will mark 42 days since he defended the process behind the recommendations against criticism that it had been rushed and was about to be “ram-rodded” through the city commission.

For one, some of the same types of proposals were in a framework the city commission unanimously agreed to implement in 2008, so zoning changes to address housing needs is nothing new, Geinzer said at a July 17 meeting.

For another, he’s read through every email he’s received on the subject before and after planning commissioners recommended the changes in June.

“Public comment is data, data that is used during the thoughtful and complete analysis of policy and data that is currently being used,” he said. “I think it’s fair to say that everyone up here appreciates the complexity of the proposed zoning changes and empathizes with some of the concerns, but also the hope being expressed that what is proposed can have a positive impact on the housing challenges being faced in this community.”

Geinzer said Friday that he wanted to let people know their input wasn’t falling on deaf ears. He also wanted to be clear that the city commission will analyze the changes before making any decision on them.

The proposed changes would eliminate a 15-per-year cap on new accessory dwelling units, and remove a requirement that the property owner live in either the main or accessory dwelling. Other changes would shrink lot minimum sizes, allow two residences on oversized one-family lots where dimensions permit, and eliminate the need to split that lot if another property line would create unworkable setbacks.

The changes would also permit up to four dwellings in two structures on two-family lots, add definitions for duplex, triplex and quadplex housing, make it easier to split a house into a duplex and shrink the acreage requirement for cluster housing where several houses are built on one oversize lot to one acre from five.

While some city residents voiced support, citing their potential to create new housing that could help young adults in particular, others aren’t so sure. Critics called the changes an unnecessary experiment that could alter the feel of city neighborhoods and exacerbate issues such as traffic and absentee landlords.

In the aftermath of the planning commission’s 7-2 vote to recommend the changes, both Commissioner Heather Shaw and board Chairman David Hassing resigned. Hassing said he believed he failed to communicate with the public about the proposals, and Shaw faulted what she called a failed process that amounted to a “rubber stamp.”

Linda Koebert serves on both city commission and planning commission. While she agreed with Geinzer’s defense of that process, she believes the city fell short in educating the public about the proposals. That allowed fears to fester — one estimate put the new housing units resulting from the changes at 70, while Koebert recalled seeing a false claim that they would quadruple the city’s population.

”That’s just nowhere near correct, but that impression is out there right now and I don’t know how we can change that easily,” she said.

Koebert said she voted against recommending the changes because she wished the planning commission had separated out the non-controversial changes and taken more time to educate people on those that stirred public outcry.

Now it might be too late, she said, and the controversial aspects might have to be dropped altogether.

Removing owner occupancy requirements has been the most controversial aspect of the draft amendments, with city residents arguing this would be a boon to investors. City Planner Shawn Winter previously countered that the city requires almost no other housing types to be owner-occupied (tourist houses in residential neighborhoods have that requirement, among others).

Mayor Pro Tem Amy Shamroe said she’s not comfortable with making any changes to owner occupancy and believes that provision is “dead in the water.”

”That one in particular is already sticking out to me like a sore thumb,” she said.

Other proposals might need further discussion, such as where duplexes, triplexes and quadplexes would be an appropriate fit for a neighborhood, Shamroe said. It’s something she’s talked about with a few neighborhood residents, and many neighborhoods already have these types of homes sprinkled throughout.

Shamroe said zoning decisions are left up to the city commission for a reason. While city planning commissioners go on planning standards, it’s up to elected city commissioners to determine if they’re a good fit for the city even if they follow planning standards.

Monday’s discussion seemed likely to Shamroe to be the first of several times city commissioners will study the proposals to determine if they are right for Traverse City.

”I don’t think anybody’s in any rush to say at the study session, ‘Yep, this is all great, let’s vote on it in a week,’” she said. “That’s just not the intention of the discussion.”

What: Traverse City Commission study session

When: Following special meeting at 7 p.m. Monday

Where: Governmental Center, 400 Boardman Ave.

How to watch: Cable ch. 191 or online at www.tacm.tv/GovTVNow.asp

City Government Reporter

Sorry, there are no recent results for popular commented articles.