City Commission rejects conditional rezoning for 205 Washington

The Mount Clemens City Commission voted on and rejected a conditional rezoning for property at 205 Washington, leaving the parcel zoned light industrial.

The ordinance presented on first reading would have rezoned the site from I-1 (light industrial) to R-M1 (multiple-family residential) under a conditional rezoning agreement that staff said was limited to an adult foster-care use. Developer Joe Nehas, who identified himself at the meeting, said the change was needed because single-family redevelopment is not economically feasible. “It it can't happen and the numbers don't work,” Nehas said, adding that the proposed use would provide 16 beds and that the project would include on-site parking and additional spaces on the Parkview side.

Why it mattered: Planning staff noted the Planning Commission recommended the conditional rezoning by a 3–2 vote. Several commissioners voiced concern about changing the character of the neighborhood even as they acknowledged the current industrial zoning allows uses the applicant described as potentially more disruptive than the proposed project. One commissioner said the situation felt “like a lose-lose situation” whether the site remained industrial or became conditioned residential.

Key details: Staff and the applicant clarified the conditions tied to the rezoning. The conditional agreement would restrict the site to the specified use (adult foster-care facility) and require construction to begin within two years of issuing a building permit or the property would revert to industrial zoning. Nehas described the planned interior as 12 rooms (four with double beds) for up to 16 residents and said the facility would have about three full bathrooms plus a half bath.

Commission action: After discussion the commission took a roll-call vote that was recorded as a three–three split (Yes: Bunton, Dempsey, Ford; No: Hill, Kropp, Campbell). The motion failed, and the property remains zoned I-1 (light industrial). Commissioners noted that, if the developer chooses to try again, the rezoning process must be restarted from the beginning.

What’s next: Because the motion failed on first reading the ordinance did not advance; any future rezoning effort would require a new application and the requisite Planning Commission and city commission consideration.