Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Marijuana Overlay topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Luna Pier residents and plaza owners spar over marijuana overlay and downtown zoning
Summary
At a May 8 council meeting, residents and Luna Pier Plaza representatives debated a proposed marijuana facility overlay and a Downtown Mixed zoning change; concerns ranged from by-right land uses and enforcement to a proposed $15,000 annual donation tied to the application. Council will vote at a future meeting.
LUNA PIER, Mich. — Residents, business owners and city officials differed over a proposed marijuana facility overlay and changes to the Downtown Mixed District zoning during the Luna Pier City Council’s May 8 meeting.
Acting Planning Chair Megan Niner told the council she was concerned the Downtown Mixed zoning overlay could open “a large number of properties to by-right use,” meaning some uses could proceed without special land-use review, she said. Representatives of Luna Pier Plaza, including Andrew Haftkowycz and Scott Roberts, described plans for a dispensary that they said would operate from the plaza’s east side and would help finance façade and parking upgrades while retaining current businesses.
Several residents questioned public-safety and oversight implications. Amy Niedermeyer asked about proposed dispensary hours and whether the city would have sufficient police coverage. Owner Ashley Giles said she supports the overlay and the expected additional revenue. Joe Bozinski and other business owners said an anchor tenant is needed to fund improvements at the plaza.
Concerns about the process and influence on council surfaced in public comment. Councilmember Duy Hoang relayed a resident’s concern that Leaf & Bud’s stated pledge to donate $15,000 annually to the Freedom Festival could improperly influence council decisions; resident Dave Davison said the donation promise was “unethical.” City Attorney Phil Goldsmith responded that, "this doesn’t meet the definition of bribery under the law," but counseled council members to focus their review on public health and safety rather than on the pledge.
Goldsmith also explained a practical difference between the Master Plan and current zoning: the Master Plan is a long-term vision that requires planning and council action to change zoning, while current zoning controls immediate land use. He advised the council that the Downtown Mixed proposal could be returned to Planning with clearer definitions and standards, or the council could require a special land-use process that imposes additional review.
Councilmember Amanda Neiding asked for studies showing whether dispensaries increase traffic to nearby businesses; Neiding and others also raised concerns about potential rent increases for current plaza tenants if a dispensary opens. Several residents urged downtown revitalization to attract younger residents.
The council did not vote on the overlay or the Downtown Mixed District zoning at the meeting. Goldsmith reminded council that zoning ordinances must be introduced at one meeting and voted on at the next. Planning will hold a public hearing on the Master Plan on May 27 and the council indicated the zoning items are expected back for formal action at a subsequent meeting.
