A recent Facebook Group of a couple hours age dedicated to "Maritime Cottages and Resorts" in Ludington shows the schematic of what looks to be a Planned Unit Development in the shadow of the SS Badger (Bob Manglitz of LMC currently owns the lot a 602 S Rath).
Anybody hear of this development before? What do you think of the project, if it is legitimate? At $400,000 to $500,000 for these cottages, will they see a market in Ludington?
Not since it was part of the design of the marina.
High price except maybe for the marina view (9,8,7,6) and maybe others close by and view of PM Lake (10,11, 12). Others have a bad view (Rath) or too close to Carferry. All other condos in town are quite a bit less.
This property is grandfathered in as Commercial Use, but now is also waterfront zoned. This usage of that land is better than empty and vacant as it is now. But, the prices? Someone is going to make a LOT of Money if so, like $6-8 Million? WOW!
How come they didn't display the gate and guardhouse to keep the local peons from cruising the cul-de-sac gawking at the gentry?
28 x 28 isn't much of a house for $400,000 must have a couple Cadillacs furnished with it in the 22 x 22 garage
Not only guardhouse and garages galore, but also carferry kids to wash those houses/balconies off from the Badger, per the usual complaints from Hidden Harbor slip holders, lol.
As I was reading the latest posting on their web site ,they start off referring to their cottages but then slip in the wording " site condos " , could this be to side skirt some of the city housing regulations and about the use of homes as vacation rentals? I myself could care less what they build,just feel bad for the people who buy without looking into the problems that the car ferry causes with that coal smoke billowing out. Having to bring your balcony furniture inside every day would get old fast. Or I guess you could just wear black and don't set down when you go inside.
sutump Site condos are a condo made up of individual units each one separate as opposed to two or more units in a building. And yes by calling them condos they skirt the law and can be used as vacation rentals. And it will be the vacationing renters who will be putting up with the smoke and noise not the owners of the condos.
I wonder if they plan to haul in a bunch of fill and build them at a elevation higher than Rath street like they did when the marina was constructed. And what are the future plans for that oddball triangular piece of real estate between this "project" and Rath? Is it still going to be used for parking boat trailers or do they have future ideas?
I would guess that part of this would explain the upgraded infrastructure improvements that happened a few years on Dowland that we all are paying for. Without this upgrade these condos would not be possible. Now wait for them to request a tax abatement to make it possible.
Taxpayers are being played for chumps.
I heard that the triangle piece of property is state owned and is not for sale,something to do about a old road.
Sound like that flatiron piece of real estate would make a fine summer location for the tent city that homeless need when they have to vacate their winter accommodations. They can name it Shayville.
Homeless in that area wouldn't be tolerated for long, but it sounds like a great idea. Perhaps we can put up three big murals around that triangular area showing maritime themes and hide the homeless within them.
Stealing a theme from Hamlin Township, because for no other reason than the City of Ludington likes to do that, we can call it the Shayway Arts Barn.
Looking at the concept drawing I see that the cottages are 28 x 28 with a attached 22 x 22 garage. Reading their specifications on lot size it states 30 x 120. 2' side set back is not safe if there happened to be a fire. Nothing like close neighbors . Is this another reason the requirement of lot size was passed or does a development of this type throw everything out the window.
I thought the zoning codes called for 20' building setbacks and 20' between houses typically. This drawing says only 10', so it does not conform if so, and it looks like it will be quite a crowded situation if built to those measurements too. Also, per drawing, the parcel appears like it's 350' long, by 175' wide. That's longer than a football field, and as I drive by, it doesn't appear anywhere near that, is it?