On a bluff high above Suttons Bay, a handful of spec houses with stunning views (clear over Stony Point all the way out to West Bay) sit in various states of disrepair.

These aging hulks are surrounded by dozens of lots once planned as part of a massive housing development dubbed BayView. Work began in 2004, with promises of condos and hundreds of state-of-the-art homes.

The first phase was successful, resulting in the BayView condos and marina down along M-22. The village even went so far as to expand its sewer system to meet anticipated demand and annex a portion of Suttons Bay Township land for the developent. But about 20 years and many twists and turns later, the bluff phase of the project – situated just north of M-204 and sometimes called Leelanau Hills – seems just as dead as ever.

Despite the lengthy delay, village officials are hopeful that something will eventually materialize with the long-simmering development and its vacant acres.

Central to the project’s future is a PUD (planned unit development) approved by the village in connection with the initial project. The village takes the position that development either needs to follow that initial PUD (which outlines the number, size and configuration of lots), or all current stakeholders must agree on revisions to the PUD.

“(The PUD) requires all the owners to come forward in a collaborated effort to propose a change to the PUD, whether it's a small change or a large change,” Village Manager Rob Larrea tells The Ticker. “We would be happy to see that piece of property be improved, but it has to be within the confines of the law.”

The problem is the land included in that PUD is now owned by multiple parties – including Bob Kuras, developer of The Homestead resort – and it seems unlikely the various owners will agree on a new plan anytime soon.

Who owns it?

The initial project, spearheaded by downstate developer Marcus Yono, went bankrupt within a few years. Kingsley surveyor Bob Mitchell ended up with the bluff property after Yono didn’t pay for his surveying work. Mitchell kept about half the property and let the rest go into foreclosure, and Kuras bought the rest (including almost all of the individual lots) at a tax auction.

The PUD also includes land owned by the Roth family, owners of longtime fruit processing company Frigid Foods. Most of the land involved in the project was once owned by the Roth family via Frigid, a major local employer that had a large processing plant along M-22 where the BayView condos now sit and a big chunk of acreage behind it.

Finally, local attorney Jeff Slocombe owns a few lots he purchased from Mitchell prior to the foreclosure auction.

A path forward?

Larrea acknowledges the current PUD is not ideal, mostly because the lots are small and close together.

“As a planner, I know ways to help them adjust this,” he says. “I’d like to see a different design, but it’s not up to me…and (this is what’s) approved. I think all it takes is getting everyone to the table to see what everyone wants out of this.”

The Ticker spoke with Slocombe, Kuras and Mitchell, none of whom were hopeful about everyone agreeing on a singular plan. The Roth family could not be reached for comment.

Slocombe points to Kuras as the “roadblock” to any plan, saying Kuras is unwilling to discuss it.

“What Bob told me is that he’s elderly and he’s just going to let his kids deal with it, and to not count on anything happening until his death,” Slocombe says.

The Ticker spoke with Kuras before Slocombe and could not reach Kuras again so he could respond directly to Slocombe’s assertion. Kuras did say that his son was the driving force behind his initial purchase of land within the development.

“The only reason we went in is my youngest son was very, very outspoken at the time about the fact that he thought it was a scar on Leelanau County and that something should be done to restore it the best one could,” Kuras says. “It seemed to me that my son had a good point of view and we should follow it.”

Kuras says the current PUD layout is an “unfortunate use of property,” and he’d like to see significantly less density. The Homestead, he points out, was only built to about 70 percent of allowable density.

“Our family has always been interested in land planning that is compatible with God’s creation, and I think the planning (used here) is very much dated to the 40’s or so,” he says. “It just didn’t seem to fit as a high-density, linear layout…it should have been more of a natural setting.”

Legal action?

Especially since a plan agreed upon by all parties seems unlikely, Slocombe and Mitchell are frustrated with the village’s inflexibility on the PUD. Both say they may consider legal action in an effort to force the village to nullify the PUD and allow something outside of the plan to happen up on the hill.

“There’s so many ways to amend these things, and the village I believe has the authority to do that, but they’re just worried about getting sued,” Slocombe says. "This whole thing is ridiculous. It could be and it should be on the tax rolls (at a much higher, improved value)."

Mitchell tells The Ticker he tried to get permission to improve his portion of the property in the form of wells and septic (large-scale sewer infrastructure was completed on certain areas, but not on Mitchell’s chunk, he says) but the village ignored his request.

He says he really doesn’t want to sue, but thinks he has a good chance of success if he does.

“The village has done a lot of things that tells me the PUD could be shot down,” he says. “If I (sue), I don’t think I’ll have much trouble prevailing.”

Just this week, however, a judge tossed out a lawsuit that challenged the PUD, or more specifically a lack of development action pursuant to the PUD.

The lawsuit was filed by an LLC that claims to be the successor developer to the initial developer and claims that the development agreement/PUD has “terminated or expired due to inaction, lack of any progress and/or the failure to commence any construction.”

Larrea reiterates the village’s position that the PUD is legally binding until modified by all parties, but adds that, for a variety of reasons, he hopes a path to development is found.

“Let’s get together and get something built,” he says.