Ben Garbacz/Daily Mining Gazette The Houghton Planning Commission was attended by several citizens voicing their concerns at the public hearings regarding the two zoning ordinances on East Lakeshore Drive and Waterworks Drive.

HOUGHTON — The Houghton Planning Commission met Tuesday to go over two rezoning requests within the city, one on East Lakeshore Ave and the other on Waterworks Drive. The two areas’ potential developments were aimed to produce additional housing, though many residents came to hearings prior to the commission’s decisions to voice their concerns over the ordinances. The Commission ended up recommending rezoning the parcel on Waterworks Drive from R-1 to R-3 to the City Council but did not recommend rezoning a parcel on Lakeshore Drive from RSV to R-3.

The parcel on Waterworks Drive is owned by the Houghton Housing Commission, which is looking to create multifamily housing. The Commission added to the ordinance addressing community concerns, which resulted in a revised ordinance compared to the one presented to the Commission in August. Buildings planned for the area include duplex and quadplex homes with income requirements aimed at an about $84,000 household income. This requirement reflects households making up to 120 percent of Houghton’s median household income.

Residents had concerns of the buildings devaluing nearby properties, but Planning Commission member Ben Ciavola brought up that construction in Marquette within the past 10 years has not reduced property values there.

“It just caused them to go incredibly higher, which is pushing people into other locations like here,” Ciavola said. “You see it throughout the Upper and Lower Peninsula. And we have really two mechanisms for us to increase housing and to potentially increase affordability. One is market rate housing, and the other is subsidized housing, like the kind of project that we’re just trying to lay some of the groundwork for if this gets going again.”

The City Council decided to wait for the Planning Commission’s report before approving the ordinance during Wednesday’s Council meeting.

During the hearing preceding the Planning Commission’s meeting, several residents spoke up regarding safety concerns and the impact of a nearby trail. Many residents believed the rezoning would bring more traffic to the area which could cause hazards. The initial plan for the area was development of condominiums in which the developer Brian Kangas indicated he did not want them to become rentals. While Planning Commission members appreciated that, Ciavola did bring up it cannot be guaranteed and also had concerns with the cost being too high.

“I think what we’re likely to see in any sort of market development is going to be prices that are relatively high compared to what they used to be. I don’t know that it’s necessarily a good bet that property close to the waterfront is going to come in less expensive than any other given property that’s being developed in the area, and there is no guarantee of it not being purchased by somebody who would then rent it out in a long or short term fashion under this particular rezoning proposal,” Ciavola said.

“I think what we’re looking at with this is the pure R-3 zoning and I have other questions about this that were brought up that I don’t know that I’ve had a great answer to yet, such as the actual buildability of this parcel. And [it] sounds like there’s some varied utilities there that may be difficult, somewhere between difficult and impossible to remove, I’m not exactly sure. And would be also interested in proposals that do keep development away from that path.”

The vote to not recommend rezoning East Lakeshore Ave was 6-3, with Eric Waara, Tom Merz and Dan Liebau voting yes to the ordinance.