August 10, 2011 Update:
Lori Chacos was the attorney representing Joseph Freed and Associates at his meeting. No residents of Daisy Square
or Union Street were present.
Freed has submitted several different plans for consideration by the city and the residents of Daisy Square that
would amend the PUD. All parties at the meeting seemed very open to being flexible and listening to everyone's
input on a decision for the new PUD.
Freed is asking for a 5 year extension in the new PUD. It is in everyone's best interest that a PUD be approved.
Without a PUD it will be very difficult for any of the lots that have not had new construction built to be sold to a new
party. Tonight's meeting is to discuss options and give a preliminary recommendation for a new PUD.
Chacos said that she had been in contact with Steven Hall, who is the attorney representing the Townhouse owners
association at Daisy Square. Chacos said that the owners of the Townhouse have not taken an official vote yet as to which
plan they prefer, but it is her feeling that they would like to "spin off" the proposed Windmill Building (also known as
Building 18). This would separate the Townhouse properties from the land that holds the "Daisy Wall." Not only would
2/3 of the condo owners and their mortgage lenders have to approve of this plan (which ever plan is ultimately chosen)
but so would Freed's lender, PNC Bank. Chacos commented that this will be a challenge because it would effectively
mean that the bank is foregoing any future construction on this land and thus they will be giving up any money that
could be made from the construction and sale of the four condo units originally planned for that land.
"Spinning off" the lot with the wall would effectively mean no new construction would be built on the property that holds
the Daisy Wall. The land would be designated as "green space." The first right of refusal would go to the PPN as to whether
or not the group would like to take on the project of raising 100% of the funds needed to transform the "Daisy Wall" into
the "Daisy Pavilion." If the PPN is unable to raise the funds needed, or for any other reason is not able to finish the Daisy
Pavilion project, the wall would be removed and the land would become "green space." That could be Freed's plan for
"Monument Park" or just open land. Chacos said that the feedback she has received from the residents and their lawyer is
that the Daisy Square residents do not want to be responsible for the maintenance of any park, whatever that may
ultimately turn out to be.
The Planning Commissioners commented that they would require the pavilion to be built by the PPN right away. Chacos
commented that the property that holds that wall would have to be deeded to the PPN. Both parties (Freed and PC)
agreed this would be the best course of action and that only after the pavilion project was completed and all of the
requirements of the city for donation had been met would the PPN be able to donate the park and pavilion to the City of
Plymouth. Chacos stated that the PPN always has the option to remove the wall and store it for a future project. She
further commented that Freed would be happy if they removed it tomorrow.
The PC asked Chacos how much her company had planned to spend on monument park. She replied after some
hesitation, $50,000-$75,000 originally, but that those funds are no longer available. Commissioner Parks said that she
recalled a previous figure of $80,000-$120,000 discussed for the creation of "Monument Park." Commissioner King
asked if it would be possible to include language in the new PUD that would require any new buyer to donate $50,000-
$75,000 to the pavilion project? Chacos commented that any stipulation like that would be a deterrent to purchasing the
property and it is not likely a new buy will be located anytime soon, so if the commission wishes the pavilion to be built
anytime soon, waiting for a new buyer would probably not be an option.
Commissoner Parks stated that she believed all of the new options presented by Freed for a new PUD effectively "Let's
them off the hook." She went on to say that she feels Freed is responsible for the current situation and poor condition of
the wall. Parks said that she is disappointed. Chacos replied that she feels that everyone has been disappointed with the
current state of the Daisy Square project, but there is nothing that can be done about the current state of the economy
and real estate market.
The Planning Commission then asked me to speak on behalf of the PPN. I first thanked all parties for committing to
flexibility and open mindedness as we move forward with the project. I said that it is difficult to move forward without
input from the residents (none were present) , but since this was preliminary, I was comfortable with everything except
the elimination of the language requiring "historic preservation" in the project. I said that was just about the only thing
we have to hold onto in the current PUD and would like to see that language remain. I asked for clarification on a few
points, first fulfilling the requirements of the city for donation, I asked if the city's requirement for "an accredited and
independent source that the land to be transferred has been found to be environmentally clean" could be fulfilled by
Freed's report that they cleaned up the soil prior to construction? Chacos stated that they had that report. But City
Commissioner Ron Loiselle (who was present as city liaison) stated that the city would like a more current report as the
Freed report was completed 5 years ago.
I asked for clarification on the city's requirement of an endowment fund to pay for future maintenance. Loiselle
stated that is it his understanding that the endowment would be for future maintenance of the pavilion structure and that
the city would "mow the grass." I then explained that the PPN has been talking to potential, large donors, but the feedback
has been that there are currently too many questions yet to be answered. Issues such as ownership and who will be
responsible for maintenance will have to be finalized before anyone is comfortable with pledging large sums of money
towards the construction of the Daisy Pavilion.
The Planning Commission stated that they would like to see the PPN write a business plan for the Daisy Pavilion project.
Commissioner Philips stated that he would like to see all groups involved report back at every planning commission
meeting as they move forward with a 6 month extension of the PUD.
The Planning Commission voted in favor to extend the PUD for 6 months, with the recommendation that the land that
holds the Daisy Wall be separated from the rest of the properties at Daisy Square with a proviso that historic preservation
be given the top most consideration for any future project with regards to keeping the historic Daisy Wall standing (not
all commissioners voted affirmative on this resolution, but it passed).
I personally see this as a positive step in the right direction. We now await the votes of the Daisy Square residents and
PNC Bank. I have received several comments to the effect that residents are sick of this problem and tired of looking at
the "eyesore." I ask for patience from anyone that feels this way. We are navigating uncharter waters with this project.
The city has never been involved in a situation like this where a PUD project was not completed and this is the largest
project the PPN has ever taken on. Thank you. –PPN Chairperson Wendy Harless
June 8, 2011 Update:
Over two months ago the City of Plymouth Commissioners said that they would be willing to accept the parcel of land
that holds the Daisy Wall as a donation to the city. At the June meeting of the Planning Commission the lawyer for
Joseph Freed and Associates said that they did not have an answer to the question of donating the land. Joseph Freed
and Associates is waiting for their lender to comment on the issue. Further more, they stated that "Daisy Square, LLC"
is bankrupt and they do not anticipate contributing to the construction of any type of park to honor the legacy
of the Daisy Manufacturing Corporation at Daisy Square.
There are other issues at hand, besides the Daisy Wall, for the renewal of the PUD and all of these issues must be
resolved before the PUD can be changed. The Planning Commissioners expressed their disappointment that Freed had
not brought more infomation for their plans to the June 2011 meeting. Freed is basically asking for a PUD extension
based on their plan that was submitted back in October of 2011.
The Planning Commission voted to extend the PUD as it stands for 90 days.
April 18, 2011 Update:
The City Council members unanimously voted to accept a donation of land for the purpose of becoming a city park.
with a few provisos (I may have missed some, I was trying to write quickly, but we'll get all of the provisos from the
city). The city will not accept a donation if certain criteria are not met:
this step in the project.
Proposed plans to create a picnic pavilion using the facade of the old Daisy Factory. March 22, 2011 Update:
This factory was one of Plymouth's most important historical buildings. Sadly, only the front wall of the oldest
building (constructed in 1882), out of an entire complex of buildings still stands. We wish we had more, but we
are working with the cards that have been dealt to us.
Now we need your help to give this piece of Plymouth history new life. We are asking that you contact the city officials to
tell them you think this project is important and hope that they will do everything possible to bring the Daisy Pavilion
plan to life. If you could express support to the City Commission and City Manager for the plan to save the Daisy Wall
and turn it into Daisy Pavilion, it would greatly improve our chances for bringing the plan to furition. You can view the
entire proposal made to the Planning Commission on March 9th by clicking here. While there are funding and other details to be worked out with the developer (Joseph Freed and Associates), the
Planning Commission has asked the City Commission to consider taking over Daisy Pavilion (when completed) and
making it a City Park. The City also has a potential influential role regarding Freed's cooperation. Freed wants to amend
their contract (PUD) with the City involving development of the rest of the Daisy site. This would be the perfect
opportunity for the City to introduce wording in the contact (PUD) that would require Freed to participate in the
construction of the Daisy Pavilion. There was a large and supportive turn-out at the Planning Commission review. Now we need to communicate with the
City Commission. Please take a few minutes soon to send them a brief email. It could be as simple as the following:
This is to let the City Commission and City Manager know that I (or we) strongly support the plan for Daisy Pavilion
and ask you to support this historically significant Plymouth legacy by influencing the developer's financial
contribution to the project and by making the completed Pavilion into a City Park.
Your email should be sent to the following:
ddwyer@ci.plymouth.mi.us
mwright@ci.plymouth.mi.us
jbarrett@ci.plymouth.mi.us
ehingelberg@ci.plymouth.mi.us
rloiselle@ci.plymouth.mi.us
gsabatini@ci.plymouth.mi.us
dworkman@ci.plymouth.mi.us
psincock@ci.plymouth.mi.us
Thanks very much for your help. And please pass this on to others and ask them to help! What are they saying in the press?
Plymouth Preservation Network Presents Plan to Turn 'Daisy Wall' into 'Daisy Pavilion'
March 9, 2011 Update:
The City Planning Commission voted to send the issue of the Daisy Wall
and its future ownership and maintenance to the City Commissioners.
The Power Point presented by the PPN to the Planning Commission. Thank you to everyone who showed up at this meeting!
March 1, 2011 Meeting of the Daisy Square and Union Street Residents
February 15, 2011 Meeting of the Daisy Committee
January 25, 2011 Update:
Notes from meeting with Daisy Square and Union Street residents
January 12, 2011 Update:
At tonight's meeting of the city planning commission, we presented our one page plan that states our objective:
To develop and pursue a creative, practical, effective approach that addresses and fixes the "Daisy Wall"
situation during 2011 in a manner that brings near-term and long-term benefits
to all key stakeholders and the citizens of Plymouth.
We stated that we are setting up a Daisy Wall task force to spear head this project. That night we had Meg Dooley,
Planning Commissioner; Jim Mulhern, Planning Commissioner; City Commssioner David Workman and
City Commssioner John Barrett volunteer to be on the task force. We plan to meet with the
residents of Daisy Square and Union Street as soon as possible to gather their input for the plan.
Much to everyone's surprise, Mark and Patty Malcolm pledged to donate $10,000 to the project if
it is approved by the Planning Commission! THANK YOU!
December 8, 2010 Update:
The results of last night's meeting were very interesting. We requested an extension of the PUD for 12 months. After
hearing from a lot of residents, the commissioners decided to extend the PUD for 6 months, but in a strange twist, they
were prepared to vote on whether or not to give Freed permission to tear down the wall last night!
All of the commissioners spoke on the topic with only the last two expressing a wish to save the wall. Commissioner Meg
Dooley was really the key to giving the wall a chance. She talked about how it was a shame that no one had done
anything for the last seven years and that if people truly wanted to save it, something should have been done a long time
ago (so true!). She expressed a wish to see some options explored for ways to preserve the wall.
The representative from Joseph Freed and Associates agreed to meet with the city and concerned citizens to look at
options and possibly contribute, if a viable plan can be developed.
The other commissioners consented to give the community (and our group) 90 days to come up with a viable plan to
save the wall. That gives us a deadline of March 8th. So we need to get a group together, develop a plan, figure out costs
and come up with a fund raising plan.
A BIG thank you goes out the City of Plymouth Planning Commission for giving us the chance to save
this Plymouth treasure.
Let's get to work
November 11, 2010 Update:
The City of Plymouth Planning Commission voted against accepting the proposed amendment to the Daisy Square PUD.
Though this amendment was turned down, many commissioners commented that it was not necessarily to save the wall.
They objected to other parts of the request, namely the proposal to split the development in to three parts. If you are
concerned about saving the Daisy Facade, please plan to attend the next meeting of the Planning Commission on
December 8th.
What are they saying in the press?
Planning Commission Denies Developer's Plan for Daisy Wall Site
October 14, 2010 Update:
Once again, Joseph Freed and Associates is requesting that the City of Plymouth amend their PUD and allow them to
demolish the Daisy Facade.
What are they saying in the press?
Historic Wall or Eyesore?
The structure that was to become known around the globe as the Daisy BB Gun Factory was built in 1882.
This brick building with tall windows, high ceilings and wide wood plank floors that were full of BB pellets
(workers must have been testing the rifles as they came off the assembly line)
was recently demolished to make way for this new Daisy Square development.
The facade of the old factory still stands.
On September 2, 2003 the developer of Daisy Square, Daisy at Plymouth LLC, entered into an agreement
with the City of Plymouth to preserve the four walls of the oldest part of the factory:
"4. Conditions Developer agrees to the following conditions governing the use of the property:
a. Preservation of the facade and existing walls of the former Daisy Building (center portion
on Union Street) and construction of seventeen (17) detached condominium buildings and one three-story
loft condominium building as depicted on the Site Plan and Final PUD Plans as aforementioned in
section 3, CONTENTS OF DEVELOPMENT, above..."
On the 21st of November 2005, the city agreed, at the request of the developer,
to amend this agreement to preserve only the facade of the original building:
"4. Conditions Developer agrees to the following conditions governing the use of the property:
a. Preservation of the facade and existing wall of the former Daisy Building (center portion on Union Street),
incorporating said wall into a four unit condominium, ..."
The developer proceeded to demolish everything from this historic building except the oldest part
of the facade. It was proped up with metal braces and left exposed to the elements for over two years.
The developer is now asking the City of Plymouth for permission to demolish the facade.
Notes from June 12, 2008 Notes from the City of Plymouth Building Planning Commission:
The city attorney opened by giving a synopsis, he stated that the developer Joseph Freed claimed they cannot
preserve the wall. That the wall detracts from the appearance of the site. The city attorney was disappointed overall
with the condition of the building site. The city attorney feels that the wall cannot be saved. He recomends:
Lori Chacos was the attorney representing Joseph Freed and Associates at his meeting. No residents of Daisy Square
or Union Street were present.
Freed has submitted several different plans for consideration by the city and the residents of Daisy Square that
would amend the PUD. All parties at the meeting seemed very open to being flexible and listening to everyone's
input on a decision for the new PUD.
Freed is asking for a 5 year extension in the new PUD. It is in everyone's best interest that a PUD be approved.
Without a PUD it will be very difficult for any of the lots that have not had new construction built to be sold to a new
party. Tonight's meeting is to discuss options and give a preliminary recommendation for a new PUD.
Chacos said that she had been in contact with Steven Hall, who is the attorney representing the Townhouse owners
association at Daisy Square. Chacos said that the owners of the Townhouse have not taken an official vote yet as to which
plan they prefer, but it is her feeling that they would like to "spin off" the proposed Windmill Building (also known as
Building 18). This would separate the Townhouse properties from the land that holds the "Daisy Wall." Not only would
2/3 of the condo owners and their mortgage lenders have to approve of this plan (which ever plan is ultimately chosen)
but so would Freed's lender, PNC Bank. Chacos commented that this will be a challenge because it would effectively
mean that the bank is foregoing any future construction on this land and thus they will be giving up any money that
could be made from the construction and sale of the four condo units originally planned for that land.
"Spinning off" the lot with the wall would effectively mean no new construction would be built on the property that holds
the Daisy Wall. The land would be designated as "green space." The first right of refusal would go to the PPN as to whether
or not the group would like to take on the project of raising 100% of the funds needed to transform the "Daisy Wall" into
the "Daisy Pavilion." If the PPN is unable to raise the funds needed, or for any other reason is not able to finish the Daisy
Pavilion project, the wall would be removed and the land would become "green space." That could be Freed's plan for
"Monument Park" or just open land. Chacos said that the feedback she has received from the residents and their lawyer is
that the Daisy Square residents do not want to be responsible for the maintenance of any park, whatever that may
ultimately turn out to be.
The Planning Commissioners commented that they would require the pavilion to be built by the PPN right away. Chacos
commented that the property that holds that wall would have to be deeded to the PPN. Both parties (Freed and PC)
agreed this would be the best course of action and that only after the pavilion project was completed and all of the
requirements of the city for donation had been met would the PPN be able to donate the park and pavilion to the City of
Plymouth. Chacos stated that the PPN always has the option to remove the wall and store it for a future project. She
further commented that Freed would be happy if they removed it tomorrow.
The PC asked Chacos how much her company had planned to spend on monument park. She replied after some
hesitation, $50,000-$75,000 originally, but that those funds are no longer available. Commissioner Parks said that she
recalled a previous figure of $80,000-$120,000 discussed for the creation of "Monument Park." Commissioner King
asked if it would be possible to include language in the new PUD that would require any new buyer to donate $50,000-
$75,000 to the pavilion project? Chacos commented that any stipulation like that would be a deterrent to purchasing the
property and it is not likely a new buy will be located anytime soon, so if the commission wishes the pavilion to be built
anytime soon, waiting for a new buyer would probably not be an option.
Commissoner Parks stated that she believed all of the new options presented by Freed for a new PUD effectively "Let's
them off the hook." She went on to say that she feels Freed is responsible for the current situation and poor condition of
the wall. Parks said that she is disappointed. Chacos replied that she feels that everyone has been disappointed with the
current state of the Daisy Square project, but there is nothing that can be done about the current state of the economy
and real estate market.
The Planning Commission then asked me to speak on behalf of the PPN. I first thanked all parties for committing to
flexibility and open mindedness as we move forward with the project. I said that it is difficult to move forward without
input from the residents (none were present) , but since this was preliminary, I was comfortable with everything except
the elimination of the language requiring "historic preservation" in the project. I said that was just about the only thing
we have to hold onto in the current PUD and would like to see that language remain. I asked for clarification on a few
points, first fulfilling the requirements of the city for donation, I asked if the city's requirement for "an accredited and
independent source that the land to be transferred has been found to be environmentally clean" could be fulfilled by
Freed's report that they cleaned up the soil prior to construction? Chacos stated that they had that report. But City
Commissioner Ron Loiselle (who was present as city liaison) stated that the city would like a more current report as the
Freed report was completed 5 years ago.
I asked for clarification on the city's requirement of an endowment fund to pay for future maintenance. Loiselle
stated that is it his understanding that the endowment would be for future maintenance of the pavilion structure and that
the city would "mow the grass." I then explained that the PPN has been talking to potential, large donors, but the feedback
has been that there are currently too many questions yet to be answered. Issues such as ownership and who will be
responsible for maintenance will have to be finalized before anyone is comfortable with pledging large sums of money
towards the construction of the Daisy Pavilion.
The Planning Commission stated that they would like to see the PPN write a business plan for the Daisy Pavilion project.
Commissioner Philips stated that he would like to see all groups involved report back at every planning commission
meeting as they move forward with a 6 month extension of the PUD.
The Planning Commission voted in favor to extend the PUD for 6 months, with the recommendation that the land that
holds the Daisy Wall be separated from the rest of the properties at Daisy Square with a proviso that historic preservation
be given the top most consideration for any future project with regards to keeping the historic Daisy Wall standing (not
all commissioners voted affirmative on this resolution, but it passed).
I personally see this as a positive step in the right direction. We now await the votes of the Daisy Square residents and
PNC Bank. I have received several comments to the effect that residents are sick of this problem and tired of looking at
the "eyesore." I ask for patience from anyone that feels this way. We are navigating uncharter waters with this project.
The city has never been involved in a situation like this where a PUD project was not completed and this is the largest
project the PPN has ever taken on. Thank you. –PPN Chairperson Wendy Harless
June 8, 2011 Update:
Over two months ago the City of Plymouth Commissioners said that they would be willing to accept the parcel of land
that holds the Daisy Wall as a donation to the city. At the June meeting of the Planning Commission the lawyer for
Joseph Freed and Associates said that they did not have an answer to the question of donating the land. Joseph Freed
and Associates is waiting for their lender to comment on the issue. Further more, they stated that "Daisy Square, LLC"
is bankrupt and they do not anticipate contributing to the construction of any type of park to honor the legacy
of the Daisy Manufacturing Corporation at Daisy Square.
There are other issues at hand, besides the Daisy Wall, for the renewal of the PUD and all of these issues must be
resolved before the PUD can be changed. The Planning Commissioners expressed their disappointment that Freed had
not brought more infomation for their plans to the June 2011 meeting. Freed is basically asking for a PUD extension
based on their plan that was submitted back in October of 2011.
The Planning Commission voted to extend the PUD as it stands for 90 days.
April 18, 2011 Update:
The City Council members unanimously voted to accept a donation of land for the purpose of becoming a city park.
with a few provisos (I may have missed some, I was trying to write quickly, but we'll get all of the provisos from the
city). The city will not accept a donation if certain criteria are not met:
- The property must be DONATED by the legal owner-at this time, no formal offer of a donation has been made.
- The city will not contribute any funds to the construction or improvement of ANYTHING/KIND on this
property i.e. pavilion, historical marker, landscaping, barb-B-Que pits, picnic tables etc. - A title search will have to be conducted to determine legal ownership.
- The property MUST be determined to be "clean"-- free of heavy metals, chemicals etc.-the city will
not pay for any needed clean up. - A trust or endowment must be set up to pay for the future maintenance of this property and anything on it.
this step in the project.
Proposed plans to create a picnic pavilion using the facade of the old Daisy Factory. March 22, 2011 Update:
This factory was one of Plymouth's most important historical buildings. Sadly, only the front wall of the oldest
building (constructed in 1882), out of an entire complex of buildings still stands. We wish we had more, but we
are working with the cards that have been dealt to us.
Now we need your help to give this piece of Plymouth history new life. We are asking that you contact the city officials to
tell them you think this project is important and hope that they will do everything possible to bring the Daisy Pavilion
plan to life. If you could express support to the City Commission and City Manager for the plan to save the Daisy Wall
and turn it into Daisy Pavilion, it would greatly improve our chances for bringing the plan to furition. You can view the
entire proposal made to the Planning Commission on March 9th by clicking here. While there are funding and other details to be worked out with the developer (Joseph Freed and Associates), the
Planning Commission has asked the City Commission to consider taking over Daisy Pavilion (when completed) and
making it a City Park. The City also has a potential influential role regarding Freed's cooperation. Freed wants to amend
their contract (PUD) with the City involving development of the rest of the Daisy site. This would be the perfect
opportunity for the City to introduce wording in the contact (PUD) that would require Freed to participate in the
construction of the Daisy Pavilion. There was a large and supportive turn-out at the Planning Commission review. Now we need to communicate with the
City Commission. Please take a few minutes soon to send them a brief email. It could be as simple as the following:
This is to let the City Commission and City Manager know that I (or we) strongly support the plan for Daisy Pavilion
and ask you to support this historically significant Plymouth legacy by influencing the developer's financial
contribution to the project and by making the completed Pavilion into a City Park.
Your email should be sent to the following:
ddwyer@ci.plymouth.mi.us
mwright@ci.plymouth.mi.us
jbarrett@ci.plymouth.mi.us
ehingelberg@ci.plymouth.mi.us
rloiselle@ci.plymouth.mi.us
gsabatini@ci.plymouth.mi.us
dworkman@ci.plymouth.mi.us
psincock@ci.plymouth.mi.us
Thanks very much for your help. And please pass this on to others and ask them to help! What are they saying in the press?
Plymouth Preservation Network Presents Plan to Turn 'Daisy Wall' into 'Daisy Pavilion'
March 9, 2011 Update:
The City Planning Commission voted to send the issue of the Daisy Wall
and its future ownership and maintenance to the City Commissioners.
The Power Point presented by the PPN to the Planning Commission. Thank you to everyone who showed up at this meeting!
March 1, 2011 Meeting of the Daisy Square and Union Street Residents
February 15, 2011 Meeting of the Daisy Committee
January 25, 2011 Update:
Notes from meeting with Daisy Square and Union Street residents
January 12, 2011 Update:
At tonight's meeting of the city planning commission, we presented our one page plan that states our objective:
To develop and pursue a creative, practical, effective approach that addresses and fixes the "Daisy Wall"
situation during 2011 in a manner that brings near-term and long-term benefits
to all key stakeholders and the citizens of Plymouth.
We stated that we are setting up a Daisy Wall task force to spear head this project. That night we had Meg Dooley,
Planning Commissioner; Jim Mulhern, Planning Commissioner; City Commssioner David Workman and
City Commssioner John Barrett volunteer to be on the task force. We plan to meet with the
residents of Daisy Square and Union Street as soon as possible to gather their input for the plan.
Much to everyone's surprise, Mark and Patty Malcolm pledged to donate $10,000 to the project if
it is approved by the Planning Commission! THANK YOU!
December 8, 2010 Update:
The results of last night's meeting were very interesting. We requested an extension of the PUD for 12 months. After
hearing from a lot of residents, the commissioners decided to extend the PUD for 6 months, but in a strange twist, they
were prepared to vote on whether or not to give Freed permission to tear down the wall last night!
All of the commissioners spoke on the topic with only the last two expressing a wish to save the wall. Commissioner Meg
Dooley was really the key to giving the wall a chance. She talked about how it was a shame that no one had done
anything for the last seven years and that if people truly wanted to save it, something should have been done a long time
ago (so true!). She expressed a wish to see some options explored for ways to preserve the wall.
The representative from Joseph Freed and Associates agreed to meet with the city and concerned citizens to look at
options and possibly contribute, if a viable plan can be developed.
The other commissioners consented to give the community (and our group) 90 days to come up with a viable plan to
save the wall. That gives us a deadline of March 8th. So we need to get a group together, develop a plan, figure out costs
and come up with a fund raising plan.
A BIG thank you goes out the City of Plymouth Planning Commission for giving us the chance to save
this Plymouth treasure.
Let's get to work
November 11, 2010 Update:
The City of Plymouth Planning Commission voted against accepting the proposed amendment to the Daisy Square PUD.
Though this amendment was turned down, many commissioners commented that it was not necessarily to save the wall.
They objected to other parts of the request, namely the proposal to split the development in to three parts. If you are
concerned about saving the Daisy Facade, please plan to attend the next meeting of the Planning Commission on
December 8th.
What are they saying in the press?
Planning Commission Denies Developer's Plan for Daisy Wall Site
October 14, 2010 Update:
Once again, Joseph Freed and Associates is requesting that the City of Plymouth amend their PUD and allow them to
demolish the Daisy Facade.
What are they saying in the press?
Historic Wall or Eyesore?
The structure that was to become known around the globe as the Daisy BB Gun Factory was built in 1882.This brick building with tall windows, high ceilings and wide wood plank floors that were full of BB pellets
(workers must have been testing the rifles as they came off the assembly line)
was recently demolished to make way for this new Daisy Square development.
The facade of the old factory still stands.
On September 2, 2003 the developer of Daisy Square, Daisy at Plymouth LLC, entered into an agreement
with the City of Plymouth to preserve the four walls of the oldest part of the factory:
"4. Conditions Developer agrees to the following conditions governing the use of the property:
a. Preservation of the facade and existing walls of the former Daisy Building (center portion
on Union Street) and construction of seventeen (17) detached condominium buildings and one three-story
loft condominium building as depicted on the Site Plan and Final PUD Plans as aforementioned in
section 3, CONTENTS OF DEVELOPMENT, above..."
On the 21st of November 2005, the city agreed, at the request of the developer,
to amend this agreement to preserve only the facade of the original building:
"4. Conditions Developer agrees to the following conditions governing the use of the property:
a. Preservation of the facade and existing wall of the former Daisy Building (center portion on Union Street),
incorporating said wall into a four unit condominium, ..."
The developer proceeded to demolish everything from this historic building except the oldest part
of the facade. It was proped up with metal braces and left exposed to the elements for over two years.
The developer is now asking the City of Plymouth for permission to demolish the facade.
Notes from June 12, 2008 Notes from the City of Plymouth Building Planning Commission:
The city attorney opened by giving a synopsis, he stated that the developer Joseph Freed claimed they cannot
preserve the wall. That the wall detracts from the appearance of the site. The city attorney was disappointed overall
with the condition of the building site. The city attorney feels that the wall cannot be saved. He recomends:
- Reuse of historic materials
- Meeting with the current owners of units in Daisy Square development
- Develop a modified PUD that includes reuse of historic materials in the "Windmill Building"
-*Note Daisy started as a windmill company in 1882, the iron windmills were not selling so they had a
marketing idea to give away a free air rifle with every windmill purchase. The guns were very popular,
and so the company switched their product to air rifles. - Provide additional information about specifically which historic materials can be saved
- Have the Joseph Freed Company construct historic displays that tell the Daisy Story
- Landscape the property-remove weeds, and any dead or dying vegetation Next a representative from Joseph Freed gave a presentation outlining the reasons why they would
- Mortar is missing from between the fieldstone foundation
- Failure of brick units
- Built in 1883 of common bricks "sand bricks", they are very soft
- Outside bricks are also erroding
- Long ago, some of the mortar joints were tuck pointed with inappropriate mortar that was not compatible with the original mortar from 1882
- At some point in history, the windows on the ground floor were "shortened, at which time it appears
the original sill was removed - Almost all of the sills are cracked
- The ornate window lintels are OK, one is cracked
- From materials and construction, it is believed the third story was an ad-on
- Bricks on the window arches "could fail at any time."
like permission to demolish the wall. The following is a list of items presented by their structural engineer,
NTH Consultants:
He stated that they could reproduce the historic lintels and reconstruct the facade on the new condo building.
They feel the lintels are the most important features and the red bricks are not important.
The representative stated that if they are given permission to dismantel the wall and reconstruct it on
the new building, the "...building will not look any different."
The commissioners asked if a structural report was conducted on the wall at the time that the rest
of the building was demolished?
The reply was that no report was done at that time. The developer stated that they did not think
that the condition of the wall was much different today than it was in 2003.
Commissioner asked if the structure has not changed much, why was repair of the wall not
in their original budget? The rep from Joseph Freed responded that they had not been able to pre-sale
enough units in the "Windmill Building" to begin construction. The bank would not release funds for
construction to begin. The original asking price for units in the "Windmill Builing" was $800,000 each.
Public Comments:
Jennifer Philpot-Munson spoke on behalf of the Plymouth Preservation Network. She presented
the city with 215 signatures of City of Plymouth residents on a petition asking the city to hold
Joseph Freed to their promise to save the historic wall. She requested that the city begin to hold developers
accountable for their stewardship of our historic buildings. She requested that if, ultimately, the wall could
not be saved, that they city require Joseph Freed to numberically catalog the bricks in the wall so that they could
be accurately reconstructed. Some residents of Daisy Square and Union street feel that the wall has become an eyesore. Some stated they
would just like for the project to be finished as soon as possible.
Commissioner Comments:
Commissioner Philips commented that the Loft building was constructed just 60 feet behind the facade
if the developer was going to incorporate the wall, it should have been built into the Loft building.
The commissioners asked the representative from NTH if she had ever saved a wall in this type of condition?
She replied that they had not ever saved a wall that was this damaged on both sides, but with
enough money, you can do anything.
The rep from Joseph Freed stated that he thought the roof of the old building must have leaked.
The commissioners replied that the building was occupied as offices almost right up to the time of demolition
in 2005. The building had only sat empty for any amount of time immediately after Daisy moved out in 1958,
it was not empty in the recent past.
Commissioner Phillips noted that the water run off from the Loft Building drains to the base of the historic facade.
This has not been good for the foundation.
Commissioners also commented that reconstructing the wall was not the same as the authentic, Daisy Factory wall.
A second rep from Joseph Freed commented that the historic windows were very narrow and not desirable in
living quarters of today.
Overall, three commissioners said that they would like to see the wall saved and Joseph Freed held to their
end of the PUD agreement. Four commissioners said that they wish it could have been used in
the new development, but the wall is so damaged they don't see how it can possibly be saved.
The commission moved to table a vote. They requested that Joseph Freed supply the commission
with estimated costs to restore the wall.