Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Multifamily Development Concepts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers present two high‑density multifamily concepts; planning commission raises traffic and density concerns
Summary
Lynn Properties and Roth Professional Solutions presented concept plans for two multifamily developments (Henry Drive and New Pinery/Lennon Street). Commissioners requested changes to access and cautioned that density at New Pinery could spur pushback; no action was taken.
Lynn Properties presented concept plans June 16 to the Portage Plan Commission for two separate multifamily projects: a Henry Drive extension site (Parcel 3101.01, 7.39 acres) and a New Pinery/North of Lennon Street site (Parcels 2477/2478/2481.01, approximately 5.4 acres). The presentations were informational; no approvals were sought or granted.
Robert Roth of Roth Professional Solutions and Richard Lynn of Lynn Properties outlined conceptual layouts that show each site with two four‑story buildings and up to 194 units per site (97 units per building). The firm said combined construction costs for the two concepts are estimated at about $48 million and that the developments would offer one‑, two‑ and three‑bedroom market‑rate units, with on‑site parking and underground garage options.
Commissioners and staff posed several concerns and recommendations. Commissioner Matt Egan and others said the density figures (26 and 36 units per acre as presented) were likely to draw community pushback, particularly at the New Pinery site. The commission repeatedly urged developers to avoid adding direct new driveways onto New Pinery Road and recommended exploring ingress/egress alternatives such as a connection to Collins Street, shared access with Madison College, or other configurations that would not place new high‑volume entrances directly across from the school.
City staff and the mayor noted that the Henry Drive parcel is adjacent to existing multifamily and airport‑area uses and may be a better fit for higher density than the New Pinery site, which fronts a busier arterial. The Fire Chief (summarized by staff) said the proposed Henry Drive access would need to meet emergency access requirements, and staff said the city would likely require a secondary access easement for long internal drive lengths.
Several commissioners also reminded the developers that both sites—if pursued at the presented densities—would likely require rezoning to R‑5 and submission as a Planned Unit Development (PUD), which entails additional public hearing requirements and City Council approval. Developers were encouraged to return with a preliminary site plan and further traffic and stormwater analysis for review.
No action was taken; commissioners instructed staff to work with Lynn Properties on next steps and suggested the developer bring a refined preliminary site plan addressing access and density concerns.
