The city leadership has been working with Veridea on a plan to sell and develop the area currently occupied by the large parking deck between Lakeshore Drive and Bridgeview Park.

“Okay, before we get to the opportunity for the public to address the council, I would like to read a statement,” Mayor Robert Backon said.

His statement reminded the public that there was a five-minute limit on an individual’s comments, and that it was not to be a question-and-answer session. He said questions would be collected and answered.

“What we saw last night is a concept, that’s all,” he said. “There are a lot of details that need to be worked out in the future.”

Veridea development proposal Veridea is proposing replacing the parking that currently exists between Huron Street and Isle Royale Street with a small park.

He said some forums will be scheduled to gather input and answer questions starting in January.

“We saw it for the first time last night, too,” said Backon.

He said the council has been following a process and will continue to do so, and opened the floor for comment.

The first to comment was Jim Hertel, who has been working with a citizen’s group who has been requesting more citizen input and control over the project from the council.

“In my view, it would have very clear winners and losers,” he said.

Veridea development proposal This diagram shows the different planned uses of the proposed buildings. The development plan is ‘mixed-use,’ with commercial and residential areas including convention and hotel space.

He named the city’s management as the first winner.

“It’s an easy solution to what I definitely believe is a difficult problem,” Hertel said. 

He said the Veridea Group was the biggest winner, getting prime waterfront property to develop with few restrictions. He said residents, on the other hand, would lose out on ample parking.

“Veridea will need the 270 that they proposed to build if they’re also building the residences and the hotel and conference center,” he said.

A study by Walker Consultants commissioned by the city found there was a large surplus of parking spots across the downtown area and a new development was unlikely to change that, but based their calculations on a development replacing the “Big Deck” containing at least 306 parking spaces. The Veridea proposal only contains 250 spots, which they say adequately supports the new development and daily public use. The Walker study projected that the development alone would require between 124 and 219 additional parkings spaces, and that current demand for “Big Deck” parking peaks around 180. The study also recommended shifting parking away from the waterfront.

Hertel said that existing downtown businesses would also suffer.

“One or two of the existing hotels will have to close,” he said. “Where do you park when you need those four bags of quickcrete from Marilyn at Swift’s Hardware? Do the canoes and kayaks from Down Wind Sports need to go out the front door?”

He continued to say that he thinks a win-win solution is possible, but only if the council moves beyond public comments at council meetings and engages more closely with citizens and stakeholders in exploring options other than selling to a single private developer.

Edward Cole, a downtown property owner, echoed some of Hertel’s concerns, and criticized Veridea’s presentation and the council for what he described as going out of their way to protect Veridea.

“Veridea is a big, bad multi-million dollar developer, and they should be pushed and pressed to the max, not coddled and courted or pandered to,” he said.

Other questions were asked about the jobs Veridea claimed their development would create, and whether Mattila Square – the parking surrounding the U.P. Kids building – is part of the project and who would pay for those changes. Several people thanked Veridea and the council for their work so far and acknowledged the need for development while offering criticism. They echoed concerns about the walk to businesses for senior citizens, the loss of uniqueness and character in the downtown area, access to covered parking, the refusal by the council to alter the decision-making process to include more residents, the height of the buildings, and the competition for already-existing businesses.

Other downtown business owners said they weren’t consulted as Veridea had promised.

Scott MacInnes, former city manager for Houghton, said not replacing the deck would be costly to the downtown businesses and image, but doing so without new development would mean a large increase in the city’s millage rate. He said the new development would also increase tax revenue for the city. He supported working with Veridea Group.

Jeff Ratcliffe, executive director of the Keweenaw Economic Development Alliance, spoke in support of the development process as well. He touted the achievements of the development community so far, and said continuing would mean small business growth, reinvestment in existing buildings, and growth in middle-market housing.

“Team Peninsula” also submitted a letter in support of the redevelopment project on behalf of the City of Hancock, Western  U.P. Planning and Development Region, Copper Country Intermediate School District, Chassell Township Planning Commission, Keweenaw County EDC, Michigan Technological University, Portage Health Foundation, Chamber of Commerce, Mainstreet Calumet, KEDA, City of Houghton and the MTEC SmartZone.

Later in the meeting, City Manager Eric Waara made a statement reviewing the history of the 42-year-old deck.

“From the time I started, I’ve told people that it is a foregone conclusion that someday those big decks are going to have to come down,” Waara said. “We’re approaching that time.”

He described the current condition of the area below the deck as dirty and littered, and dark despite new LED lighting.

“Just take a walk down there, it is time we did something about that,” he said.

He said millions of dollars worth of maintenance repairs on the big parking deck are draining money from funds meant for other things because the roughly $200,000 parking fund is used mostly for plowing and parking enforcement.

“The taxpayers have subsidized those decks, and most of it to the big deck, because our parking fund and DDA simply cannot generate enough income to be of meaningful help,” Waara said. 

He said replacing the decks with something similar would cost as much as $8 million. He said grant money is uncertain and it would be difficult to afford without raising taxes or charging regular users of the lot.

He said selling the property to a developer would, on the other hand, add a large property to the tax rolls and increase the value of the DDA.

He said the decision comes down to whether the property owners pay to address the parking structure, or work with a developer willing to purchase the property, i.e. Veridea.

He then asked the city council for authorization to move forward with the attorney in defining the property, getting an appraisal, and putting together draft purchase and development agreements with Veridea.

A motion was made by Councilor Mike Needham and seconded, but there was dissent among the board.

Councilor Jan Cole was first to speak, and said that while the work Veridea had done was appreciated, she didn’t want to vote on anything and did not think the council had engaged with taxpayers sufficiently.

“People understand that they cannot stay in the state that they currently are,” Cole said. “So let’s do something about it, but let’s do something about it as a community, not a developer’s plan.”

She suggested the vote be tabled while more questions are answered, more options explored, and more participation is offered to the public.

“And if you want any buy-in on anything that goes on that waterfront, that is absolutely essential,” she said. “They need to be the people that come to this table first.”

Councilor Joan Suits said she agreed that there had been no significant public input.

“Last night, we heard that they had spoken to hundreds of people,” Suits said. “I don’t know who these hundreds of people were. I wasn’t spoken to.”

She said she did not think the developer’s plan was the right choice, and that the city should work with an expert planner who can moderate the different interests and facilitate better public input.

Needham said that he thought the city should continue to engage with Veridea to see how their plan can be changed, and get more questions answered and public engagement during the planned question-and-answer sessions.

Councilor Robert Megowen agreed.

“This is step one,” he said. “There’s at least 20 more steps.”

Councilor Brian Irizarry read a short statement.

“A single entity with cash reserves that towers over the cash reserves of our existing businesses would create something of a company town, where such an entity would wield outsized political power and economic influence,” he said, in part.

He said right now, in a year where many small businesses are struggling, is a bad time to introduce new competitors to Houghton.

“Who should the city council be representing, our local businesses or the Veridea group?” he asked.

Shortly thereafter, he motioned to table Needham’s motion. As a point of order, the council has to vote on the original motion before the motion to table.

After some discussion, the council agreed that while Waara could move forward with arranging the things he had requested, the council did not need to, and would not, vote to approve anything yet.

Both motions were retracted, and the meeting adjourned.