Legal questions surround proposed development near Bay City

According to Planning Commission Attorney Christopher Drummond, the case will “almost certainly” be appealed by developer Land Bridge, LLC.

Legal representatives for the Land Bridge company were not immediately available for comment.

When asked to explain their denial – a formality designed to put the commissioners’ reasoning on the record in the case of an appeal – the four commissioners cited the “overwhelming opposition” from Bay City residents as a point of concern, as well as the community’s traffic and drainage issues, the latter of which has led to several floods.

Planning Commission Vice-Chair Tom Leigh also suggested that because of environmental impacts to wetlands and the area’s increasingly stressed sewage capacity – the development received sewer allocation several years ago, according to Land Bridge attorney Michael Foster – the area’s infrastructure may not be able to handle another ten homes.

“It certainly seems from my chair that this is being squeezed into a space that maybe isn’t appropriate for this type of development,” he said.

The 1.165 acres that would have gone into parcel 38, the tentative location for the neighborhood, comes from parcel 300, which sits just East of parcel 38 and beneath the corner of the two roads.

Previous attempts to develop a neighborhood in the area – the project, with different developers along the way, dates back to the mid 2000s, according to Lane Engineering’s Rob Gunter – were halted after no susceptible entry way into the community could be established. Suggestions that a road branch off of state Route 8 were not viewed favorably by the State Highway Administration, according to attorney Michael Foster, representing Land Bridge.

With guidance from county officials, including Planning Commission Attorney Christopher Drummond, the subdivision proposal presented to the commission included an entry point into the neighborhood from Victoria Drive, a road the county, in multiple opinions, deemed public.

However, in an effort to stop the development, the Bay City Property Owners Association (POA) challenged the legality of that claim, saying that the Victoria Drive entry point is actually based off of Stafford Road, a private road owned by Bay City.

“This is more than just an issue of legal title – who owns this piece of road and who doesn’t own this piece of road,” said attorney David Blitzer, representing the Bay City POA. “This has real impacts on the community itself.”

Blitzer, who was allotted more than three minutes of public comment time after residents forfeited their slots to him, made the argument that because there are no dedications in land records claiming the corner section of Victoria Drive to be public, the entry point for Placek’s Place branches off the private Stafford Road, not the maybe public Victoria Drive.

In addition to a 2017 plat from the POA, the claim was supported by a road improvement report from the State Highway Administration that defined Victoria Drive as being between Stafford and Bay City roads.

“Without that actual dedication of the road to become a public right of way, all the infrastructure in this community is owned and maintained and used by the community,” Blitzer said.

Though there is no legal record pertaining to this specific section of road, Todd Mohn, the former director of the county’s public works department and current county administrator, determined that the entry point on Victoria Drive, even without a specific claim, branched off public road.

“You would look in vain for a deed to the county,” Drummond said. In a 2016 letter, the attorney also concluded that Victoria Drive ended at the Placek’s Place property line. “Most county roads aren’t owned by the county, or I should say, the dirt below the asphalt. But they are nevertheless public.”

“I think all the work that could be done has been done,” Drummond said earlier in the meeting, referring to any timely course of action that could be made to define the cut off points between Victoria Drive and Stafford Road. “We have a difference of opinion, and there’s nothing, I’m afraid, [further] to be done, absent some court being asked to render a judgement regarding it.”

While Blitzer acknowledged in an interview that he could not divulge any specifics concerning a potential lawsuit, he said that he did not believe the POA would quietly allow the development to proceed. He did say, however, that legal action would only be pursued if Placek’s Place received a final approval from the Planning Commission.

“Unfortunately, this project has popped up several times over the last several years. And each time, Bay City, the HOA, the residents, we check the development,” said Michael Dreiseidel, vice president of the community’s home owners association. “We simply do not want that development there.”

Beyond legal authorities and community representatives, several Bay City residents testified before the commission to voice their disapproval of the development. Among their greatest concerns were the influx of traffic the development would cause – the two entryways into the Bay City community, according to Blitzer, are an “already congested and taxed infrastructure system” – and the drainage stress additional neighbors would have on the community’s susceptibility to floods.

“It takes my heart away,” said Keith Hutchins. Telling the Planning Commission that he struggled to pay his mortgage after addressing two cases of flood damage in his home, Hutchins warned officials of the potential environmental and economic impact adding another development could have on his community.

“If you guys allow this to happen, it’s going to be devastating to Bay City.”

Luke Parker is a journalist and award-winning film critic covering government, schools, crime, and business. To send a tip or question, email lparker@chespub.com. For updates, follow him on Twitter: @lparkernews