This letter concerns the proposed development requested by Jeff Schmitz. I am opposed to this development for several reasons.

1. I don’t think Mr. Schmitz’s current four-story building should have been allowed or approved. This exceeded the height limit and now blocks our quaint downtown view from Lapeer Road. It towers over everything else and is not built in the same “style” as others in the downtown area.

2. Having said that, I don’t think another building of this height should be allowed based on his already having one, especially when there was opposition to his building in the first place.

3. I don’t think this proposed development on that site would “fit” with the surrounding business look – it’s too tall and too modern.

4. Where would the tenants and customers park for this proposed development? The 19 spaces he lists are likely not enough for the building occupants and business owners.

Twelve apartments alone, with a possibility of two people per unit equals 24 parking spaces. And what about employees working in the retail space, where would they park?

That doesn’t leave any considered space for shoppers of the commercial occupancies.

Our village has worked diligently (and spent considerable finances) to claim more parking for the business’s we already have. Where is their reward for being in town for a long time?

5. I take issue with the article in the paper that states: “Schmitz currently has donated the space to the village for public parking.”

This is not true. At all. The village is paying his property tax on that lot in exchange for allowing public parking. He has no expense associated with the property.

And, for the almost two years the village has paid his taxes, at least 15-20 percent of the space has been taken up by building materials for his first development. Has he refunded the village for that percentage that is not able to be used for parking?

6. It’s probably obvious, but I want to go on record saying I am not in favor of any tax leniencies. If he’s been that successful on his first downtown venture to propose another, then it’s possible he’s making money on his current building and doesn’t need a tax “break” or any incentives on whatever he might propose.

I don’t think this proposed development should be approved and Mr. Schmitz should not get his way. Again.

Thank you for considering my remarks.

Mary Chayka-Crawford

Lake Orion