Commission holds public hearings on three West Fulton and Godfrey development projects using Brownfield and NEZ incentives

City planning staff and development teams presented three separate development proposals and associated incentive requests during the commission's public hearings. The items were grouped for efficiency: items 1–2 (Fulton & Seward mixed-use project), items 3–4 (657 Fulton two-building project) and items 5–7 (Godfrey rehabilitation). Each project seeks combinations of Brownfield eligible activity reimbursement, neighborhood enterprise zone (NEZ) property tax abatements, and inclusion-plan contractor participation goals.

For the Fulton and Seward site, planning staff described demolition of two existing buildings and construction of a new four-story mixed-use structure with ground-floor commercial space and a parking structure behind the building. Planning staff said the proposal includes 106 apartments and "20 +1000000 in construction costs" (language as stated in the meeting record) and an inclusion-plan participation goal of about 17% for minority-, women- and locally-owned subcontractors. The item before the commission included a Brownfield plan and a 15-year NEZ exemption; planning staff said the total of Brownfield-eligible reimbursements over 14 years was represented in the packet as "3 +1000000" (verbatim as in the record).

Brent Gibson of Construction Simplified, the developer, told commissioners the project would provide mainly studio units for the growing west-side population, include a covered two-story parking deck to avoid neighborhood street parking impacts and establish three retail suites on the ground floor. Joe Gasanelli of Michigan Growth Advisors, the incentive consultant, said the project also seeks state assistance through the Michigan Economic Development Corporation and that the team expected a decision from the state "this week" (as stated in the meeting).

For the second Fulton site (items 3–4), the team described two- to three-story buildings with a connected walkway, proposing 23 one- to two-bedroom apartments and 21 studios. Planning staff and the developer said the project has roughly $4,400,000 in construction cost (discussed as "4 and almost 4 and a half 1000000" in the meeting record) and a Brownfield request tied to housing-eligible activities with identified financing gaps of around $959,000 (as described by planning staff).

The Godfrey project (items 5–7) proposes rehabilitating more than 500,000 square feet of former industrial buildings into a walkable employment center for creative, arts and nonprofit uses. Planning staff said the rehabilitation is expected to create about 190 new jobs and entail roughly $14,200,000 in rehabilitation costs with a 15% aspirational inclusion-plan goal (about $2.1 million). Developer Dennis Griffin described the area as a predominantly Hispanic neighborhood with a high youth population and asked the commission to support reuse that keeps rents and operating costs affordable for current tenants.

Public comment included supporters who praised the planning department and the corridor revitalization, neighborhood residents requesting more green space and tree plantings, and local commercial brokers noting interest from small and medium enterprises that could lease space in rehabilitated buildings. Several commissioners asked clarifying questions about retail vs. accessory dwelling units on ground floors and how NEZ requirements (including mixed-use ground-floor retail) apply; staff said NEZ statute requires mixed-use with ground-floor retail but the statute does not prescribe a fixed retail square footage, and that a project could retain some retail even if it altered the ground-floor program.

All three projects were referred to the Committee of the Whole for further review and final action; no final approvals or incentive grant decisions were made at this meeting.