Portage Planning Commission Meeting – April 16, 2026

The Portage Planning Commission met on Thursday, April 16, 2026, at 7:00 PM (presumed start). The agenda included a final site plan for a mixed-use development, a public hearing on the proposed Residential Unified Development Ordinance (RUDO, Chapter 44), and a capital improvement plan presentation. The commission approved the site plan unanimously and recommended the RUDO to City Council by a vote of 7-1.

Consent Calendar

• Approved the minutes from the March 19, 2026 meeting unanimously.
• Approved an agenda change to move the site final plan to the front of the meeting.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Mary Villa Polski (8836 East Shore Drive) proposed three changes to the RUDO: (1) define RN single-family as detached homes with ADUs and some duplexes; (2) exclude duplexes from mapped flood areas, wetlands, and forested lands; (3) limit tri- and quadplexes to residential mixed zones only. She argued a single clause in the master plan (“consider permitting duplexes and/or multiplexes”) conflicts with the rest of the plan.
• Unnamed speaker (East Shore Drive) opposed the reduction of side setbacks to 5 feet, citing fire safety, privacy, and the example of nearby Oakland Commons/Creekside Commons where homes are 10 feet apart with no sunlight.
• Luster Minor (2514 East Shore Drive) expressed opposition to high-density development in the Austin Lake area, concerned about water runoff, traffic, and impact on property values. He questioned the city’s simultaneous push for more housing and narrowing of Portage Road.
• Ken Norris (9246 East Shore Drive) asked about the proposed 70-30 split of single-family vs. multifamily housing in new developments and requested the current split in adjacent areas. He noted unanswered questions from the prior meeting.
• Leonard Bennett (9044 East Shore Drive, read by another speaker) asked four questions about who changed Austin Landing’s zoning, why it was changed, and requested the property remain single-family. He argued the city prioritizes developers over residents.
• Unnamed speaker asked if the commission can amend staff recommendations, specifically to keep Austin Lake area as residential estates/single-family.
• Perry Wilman (10400 East Shore Drive) urged protection of nature and water resources, emphasizing Portage’s slogan “a natural place to move.”
• Vanessa Messenger (9220 East Shore Drive) read a statement for Richard Nellums (9240 East Shore Drive) supporting the citizen proposal to retain single-family expectations and asking how much of the proposed Austin Landings development would be allowed by right under the RUDO.
• Dave Savoy (3520 East Shore Drive) raised concerns about road safety, water runoff, and tree removal along East Shore Drive during trail construction. He supported keeping the area single-family.
• Speaker for Jim Bodine (8645 Belmoral Street) asked about school capacity, sewage treatment capacity, and the impact of narrowing Portage Road while adding housing. He urged a no vote.
• Carol Newkirk (5113 Midfield Drive) questioned the wisdom of narrowing Portage Road and asked where the new residents would come from.
• Eric (last name likely) supported removing the conservation option from RN zoning and restricting multiplexes to RM zones, echoing Mary Villa Polski’s proposal.
• Martha Dollinger (Shelpin Avenue) expressed support for the housing plan, noting the need for affordable housing for workers and praising the plan’s treatment of short-term rentals and safety regulations.
• Jim Hemingway (9000 East Shore Drive) listed five points: the ordinance removes familiar standards, is adopted before full public understanding, enables development intensity that does not fit Austin Lake, is being used to implement the Lake Center sub-area plan without separate approval, and weakens neighborhood stability.
• Sue Garvey (2514 East Shore Drive) asked about public access to the lake via right-of-ways and expressed concerns about water on Zilman Road and tree removal.
• Mark Alexander (2630 East Shore Drive) noted the wetland area on Zilman/Cox looks like another lake and questioned water management.
• Beth Hinsey (9036 East Shore Drive) highlighted the ecological value of wetlands and surrounding forests (water quality, flood control, wildlife, carbon storage) and urged preservation.
• Faith Ackert (9702 East Shore Drive) argued the ordinance is too large and overbearing, asked the commission to listen to residents, and criticized the narrowing of Portage Road along with adding housing.
• Jeff Messinger (9220 East Shore Drive) echoed the position that single-family zones should not allow multiplexes.
• Mary Villa Polski (final comment after vote) expressed disappointment that the commission did not close the “loophole” in the conservation option allowing multiplexes in single-family zones. She argued duplexes are acceptable but multiplexes belong in mixed residential zones.
• Faith Ackert (after vote) repeated disappointment, stating the commission had the opportunity to fix the loophole and should have listened to residents.
• Ken Ackert (9702 East Shore Drive) decried the tree removal along East Shore Drive for the trail, calling it a shame.

Discussion Items

1. Final PD Site Plan – River Caddis (Paisley at Portage Creek)

• Planner Eric Felt presented the final plan for a mixed-use development at 412 W Center Ave & 7860 Shaver Rd. The project has evolved from 228 units (2023) to 180 units (amended) to 178 units (final). The plan includes three-story buildings, live-work units, stormwater management changes (above-grade basins and a daylighted stream per state preference), and reduced wetland impact. Staff recommended approval with eight conditions addressing utility easements, state approvals, and parcel combination. Developer Jessica DeVone (River Caddis) and engineer Eric Barkovich thanked staff. Commissioners had no questions. Commissioner Corradini commented on the long process and praised the revision. Motion to recommend approval to City Council passed unanimously (aye).

2. Public Hearing on RUDO (Ordinance 25/26-3)

• After public comments, staff responded to questions. Eric Felt clarified that the ordinance is citywide, not targeted at any single property like Austin Landings. He explained that the master plan supports a variety of housing in single-family classifications, that wetlands remain protected by the state, and that stormwater management is required. He answered that the number of duplexes citywide is in the hundreds but specific splits are hard to isolate. For Austin Landings, no specific plans exist yet; any development would go through a public process. The city attorney noted that the commission’s vote is a recommendation; City Council holds final authority.
• Commissioners then gave statements:
  • Commissioner Adams supported the ordinance, citing the need for diverse housing and noting that duplexes can be desirable (e.g., Whispering Rock, Moore’s Bridge).
  • Commissioner Ladd had no comment.
  • Commissioner Cobb (Matt) – lives on East Shore Drive – said he studied the ordinance and found that similar conservation development in the adjacent Woodlands (30% duplexes) did not harm property values. He noted that developers in high-value markets tend to build quality units. He stated he would vote no, but offered nuanced support for the process.
  • Commissioner Purry supported the ordinance, arguing that zoning must evolve, that fears about density are debunked by studies, and that healthy communities require balance and growth.
  • Commissioner Baldwin supported the ordinance, noting Portage’s history of growth and the need to provide housing options (townhouses, low-maintenance homes). He emphasized that zoning must look to the future.
  • Commissioner Freiman supported the ordinance, citing the variety of housing in his own neighborhood (Woodbridge) and stating he is not fearful of change.
  • Commissioner Crowwell supported the ordinance but urged the city to require professional management of multifamily developments. He noted existing duplexes in his neighborhood and highlighted the need for diverse living situations.
  • Chair Corradini (Dan) gave a lengthy statement: he thanked all involved, noted the process took longer than planned but was necessary, and emphasized that the ordinance modernizes zoning and implements the master plan. He acknowledged concerns but expressed confidence in the plan. He voted yes.
• Motion to recommend adoption of the RUDO to City Council passed 7-1 (Commissioner Cobb dissenting).

3. Capital Improvement Plan (FY26-32) Presentation

• Peter (Finance Director) presented the six-year capital improvement plan (CIP), available on the city website. The first year (FY26) includes $23 million, with a major project being phase 2 of the Portage Road reconstruction (from South Shore to Forest Drive) including utility undergrounding, new lighting, and pedestrian improvements. The CIP is based on PASER ratings and asset management. The finance director noted that the first year’s budget will be approved by City Council in May. Commissioners accepted the presentation with a motion and unanimous voice vote.

Key Outcomes

• Final PD Site Plan (River Caddis): Motion to recommend approval to City Council passed unanimously. The conditions include maintenance agreements, easement vacations, state approvals, and parcel combination.
• RUDO Ordinance (Chapter 44): The commission voted 7-1 (Commissioner Cobb opposed) to recommend adoption to City Council. The ordinance will now go to City Council for a public hearing and final decision.
• CIP Presentation: Accepted by unanimous voice vote. The FY26 budget and CIP will be presented to City Council in May.
• Next regular meeting is scheduled for May 21, 2026 (no absences noted).