By Scott Sullivan
Editor
Nick Wikar has been fired as Douglas planner and zoning administrator, leaving both the city and neighbor Saugatuck seeking new help at that position.
Wikar, who replaced Lisa Imus as planner/ZA in March 2020, left after an Aug. 15 city council meeting at which some developers and residents criticized him for being overly-stringent and hard to reach, while others praised his “letter-of-the law” type strictness.
Wikar, who holds a Bachelor of Science in city and regional planning from the Ohio State University, previously worked in planning and development in Detroit, Cleveland and Columbus, Ohio. He was a member of Central Ohio and Michigan planning associations and had worked with Imus in Douglas City Hall for four months before filling her spot.
A blind Douglas email sent Aug. 16 directed planning and zoning inquiries to the city hall phone or email. In his Aug. 18 weekly Manager’s Report on the city website Rich LaBombard noted, “Staff coordinated this week to chart out a plan for handling the duties of the planning and zoning administrator. The city will work with Williams and Works of Grand Rapids to provide interim services.
“Anyone seeking zoning review may contact City Hall for contact information for the assigned planner,” LaBombard said.
Next Door
Neighbor Saugatuck also seeks a new planner/ZA after Cindy Osman, six years in that role, resigned from the city effective Aug. 5. Five nights she stepped down also as Saugatuck Township Supervisor to take a newly-created full-time post as township building official/assistant zoning administrator for $55,000 to $65,000 yearly.
She will assist current contract ZA Lynee Wells, a Williams and Works employee who before starting with the township helped Douglas articulate its waterfront master plan.
Saugatuck seeks to replace Osman with a combined full-time zoning administrator/project manager for a listed $87,500 salary.
Back to Center
Developers Jeff Kerr, Scott Fraser and Kevin Einfeld were among those at the Aug. 15 Douglas City Council meeting questioning Wikar. So was former planning commission chair Robert Kenny, a 46-year Chicago area land-use lawyer and city resident.
A video of that meeting listed on the city’s website as “8 15 22 CC Meeting Trimmed 1” went silent at one point and in others is hard to make out. Technical issues happen.
On March 24, 2020, Kerr — a veteran real estate professional who at one point was North America’s largest developer of outlet malls — was listed as principal of a team looking at retail, office, restaurant and personal service commercial shops at 324 W. Center St.
They presented their proposal to the planning commission that night at a public hearing that also heard developer Dave Barker’s plans for what he called Beachside Village on the 7.11-acre now-leveled Haworth plant site at 200 Blue Star Hwy. plus two neighbor parcels, all three totaling 75 acres. The mixed-use venture would include more-moderately-priced housing than can now be found here. Barker was also present at the Aug. 15 council meeting. More on that one later.
Kerr’s 324 W. Center St. land is zoned C-1 Commercial along West Center and R-2 Residential backing up to St. Peter’s Drive on its north and east sides.
His then-listed project partners included son Christopher; general contractor Doug Damstra of 42 North Custom Homes; realtor Bill Underdown at Century 21 Affiliated of Douglas; project manager Kelly Kuiper of the Nederveld Inc. engineering firm; architect John Blair of r2 Design Group; plus senior project engineer Timm Appleton and designer-landscape architect Josh Molnar, also of Nederveld
The group’s proposed development, as applied for through a Planned Unit Development (PUD) application, included multi-family residential condominiums atop the commercial space, plus attached and detached single-family residential condos.
Roughly 45 percent of the development would be devoted to open space, most near the center of the site, said their project narrative.
“The green space,” it went on, “will provide an amenity feature (pool) and large, unprogrammed open space for residents, but also a parklike setting for pedestrians passing by and commercial customers.”
Kerr projected meeting commercial, multi-family residential and attached single-family residential parking space requirements in his application. “A significant portion of the northwest corner,” he added, “will be maintained a stormwater detention basin.
“Last, both the cottage and villa units, as traditional condominiums, will include green space (general common element) throughout and be maintained by the master deed and association.”
Although most wetland pockets on the site are unregulated, Kerr said, the proposed plan would limit impact as much as possible. “Any regulated wetlands that will be disturbed will be permitted and mitigated as required.”
He said at the Aug. 15 council meeting, two years and six months later, “I am frustrated with Mr. Wikar. He has made the project very expensive to us.” Fraser and Einfeld voiced similar concerns.
Counter
A letter to the city last month from 2020-2021 planning commission member and now part-time resident Linda McIntyre praised Wikar, noting he had come under criticism from a permit applicant and partners who “intend to develop land on Center Street, west of Blue Star Highway and south of the St. Peter’s.
“I would like to assure officials and others involved in response to this complaint that the application was brought through the (review portion process) during which I was a participant in a wholly professional manner,” her letter continued.
“The proposal, brought before the commission more than once during my tenure, was complicated and the applicant team seemed unfamiliar with many requirements of the zoning ordinance.
“An applicant can seek guidance from municipal planning staff on how to effectively present an application … My understanding from our discussions during meetings was such guidance was repeatedly given …
(Wikar) “is completely professional and a tremendous asset to the community … Douglas is fortunate to have its own planner and especially as talented and dedicated as Mr. Wikar,” McIntyre’s letter said.
Letters included in last week’s council packet included ones from residents Tracy Shafroth, Olaf Huebner and some Summer Grove Association board members praising Wikar’s efforts.
“My experience over the last few years with Nick Wikar, wrote Shafroth Aug. 1, “has been positive. We have not always agreed on issues, but he has always been respectful, and knowledgeable about the law and its requirements.
“I believe the investment the city has put into training him was well spent and he has grown in his position. He knows the community and will be helpful as we move forward,” Shafroth said.
“It is evident to me,” wrote Huebner, “that that our community has lacked a firm hand in enforcement of city zoning ordinances in the past.
“Too often,” he went on, “small communities are steamrolled by developers. It is important that development proceed while intentionally and respectfully complying with the city zoning ordinances.
“We are lucky to have a planner as capable as Nick Wikar to look out for the city and public interest. It would be easy to make (him) a scapegoat for failed applications or unfavorable outcomes. But the community should understand that Nick Wikar does not set the rules, that is the responsibility of the public and its elected officials. It is Nick’s responsibility to administer city law.
“Douglas should recognize they have a very talented and capable city planner. I encourage the city to retain Nick Wikar,” Huebner said.
Summer Grove
The Summer Grove board letter, dated Aug. 10 and included in the Aug. 15 council agenda packet, bore names of members Louise Pattison, also a city planning commission member, Sherry White and Dennis Brinker.
White at the Aug. 15 council meeting voiced disappointment that “Louise wrote it and didn’t show it to Dennis or me. I take issue with it.
The letter praised Wikar’s work to correct past building issues with their 72-home development.
“Summer Grove,” it went in part, “started as a PUD in 1997 and then when Dave Barker went bankrupt it fell into tough times.”
Barker objected to that at last week’s meeting. “I’m disappointed one of your planning commission members outright fabricated a claim. I never filed for bankruptcy and this was included in your public packet. I intend to seek legal action.”
“There are libel issues here,” added his attorney, whose name was difficult to make out from the meeting audio. “Mr. Barker has investors flying in. This needs to be corrected but the damage has been done.”
“Several years later,” Pattison’s Summer Grove letter continued, “AllenEdwin came on board as a builder, not a developer. There is a huge difference in the responsibility of a developer compared to a builder.
“That being said, the development is now built out, but without Mr. Wikar’s expertise in ordinances and PUD’s we would have had serious ongoing issues.”
A website for Portage-based Allen Edwin Homes notes it serves 28 southern Lower Peninsula county communities and Builder Magazine has listed it as a Top 100 Builder in the Nation for 12 years in a row.
“The builder damaged infrastructure,” the letter said, “did not connect house drains to Allegan County drains and tore up common property but did not repair.
“We are a front porch community … Mr. Wikar required AllenEdwin to repair issues and follow the City of Douglas ordinances …
“The residents of Summer Grove appreciate the efforts of Mr. Wikar and the community is finally issue free …
“He is professional, knowledgeable, respectful and a by-the-book administrator. The Summer Grove Board is appreciative of his expertise in ordinances, zoning and PUD’s,” the letter said.
“I’m disappointed,” White told council Aug. 15, “in the timing of Louise’s letter and it does not reflect my views. Mr. Wikar does not have competency or knowledge. Developers are very frustrated,” she said.
Another Center
Kenny wrote the city Aug. 1 that his planning commission experience with Wikar was “quite the opposite” of McIntyre’s during the early phases of the 324 W. Center project.
“In my opinion,” he wrote, “one of the reasons any required information was not provided to the city or planning commission was Mr. Wikar was either asleep at the switch or not familiar enough with the zoning ordinance to know the submittal requirements for a PUD application.
“One crucial requirement for PUDs is a test plan (which Kenny explains in depth later, see his complete letter in the Aug. 15 council meeting packet) which Mr. Wikar did not require before he scheduled the project for a public hearing …
“A cursory look would have made it clear that the residential portion of the project was too dense for underlying R-2 zoning” (which only allows for single-family uses). “A rezoning to R-4 or R-5 was required for this project.
“I remember having conversations with Mr. Wikar about this,” Kenny’s letter went on. “I did not understand how he accepted as being complete until an application to rezone to R-4 or R-5 was included, along with the test plan.”
A pre-application conference with the developer, which Kenny cites Ordinance 27.05 requiring as the first step to applying for a PUD, was not held until May 27, 2020, more than two months after the public hearing. “In my opinion,” Kenny said, “Mr. Wikar never clearly advised the applicant of all the requirements, or if he did, the information he provided to the developer was woefully incomplete.
“The bottom line is that without a rezoning application and test plan, the application could not have been considered complete and the project should not have been scheduled for the optional advisory hearing scheduled and held June 24, 2020.
“I spoke to Mr. Wikar about the rezoning and test plan more than once during that time, and even emailed him July 13, 2020, asking if he had told the developer about these requirements,” Kenny’s letter went on.
“Apparently Mr. Wikar finally figured this out when he personally filed, on behalf of the city, an application to rezone the developer’s property to R-4.”
City council June 7, 2021 adopted an ordinance rezoning the West Center property to R-4 “without any mention, to my knowledge,” said Kenny, “that Mr. Wikar was helping out the developer and fixing his earlier failure …
“The pre-application Mr. Wikar and I attended was on May 27, 2020, and the rezoning approved by council was not until more than one year later. That meant the developer was literally spinning his wheels …
“The record will show that I wrote a long letter to the planning commission objecting to this project. I am not writing this because I support the project (but) as a resident who wants the planning and zoning process in the city to be done fairly and according to our zoning ordinance provisions.”
Kenny further described the former Haworth plant/Barker project’s submittal “incredibly deficient” it should never have been put on the PC agenda. “I’m concerned if we don’t know our history we are destined to repeat it,” his letter said.
Kenny added in spoken comments to council Aug. 15 he was appointed to the commission in 2017, then became chair and in October 2020 resigned “when I ran out of energy trying to work with Nick.
“It was apparent when he replaced Lisa (Imus) that he didn’t have the experience to run a one-man planning department.
“Word gets out about experiences developers have in a city,” the former PC chair said.
“I’ve seen ZAs come and go,” said longtime resident and former council member Dan Urquhart. “Some cost the city hundreds of thousands of dollars.
“It is the zoning board of appeals’ job, not the ZA’s, to interpret ordinances. When was the last time the ZBA met?” Urquhart asked.
City records show the last ZBA meeting not canceled due to lack of business was an organizational one July 27, 2021, at which officers were elected and bylaws reviewed for amendment. Minutes of its previous meeting Aug. 27, 2020, were scheduled also to be approved.
