Planning commission reviews Pinnacle of Troy concept; no action taken pending zoning variance

The Troy City Planning Commission reviewed the preliminary site plan for the Pinnacle of Troy, a proposed 36-unit single-family attached development on roughly five acres at the southwest corner of Crooks and Wattles, and provided design and circulation feedback without taking action. Commissioners and staff noted the application requires a zoning variance for building height before the plan may return for action.

Planning consultant Carlisle Wortman Associates summarized the proposal: 36 units in 12 buildings, a mix of two- and four-unit buildings, five acres of undeveloped land, three existing houses to be removed and proposed access from Crooks Road with three internal dead-end drives. Carlisle noted the project was discussed in the recently updated master plan and that the applicant seeks front-yard setback relief (relief from a 10-foot build-to line) and a height variance (the proposal seeks 33 feet where the ordinance maximum is 30 feet). Carlisle told the commission that because the height variance is decided by the zoning board of appeals, the commission could not take final action on the site plan until the variance is decided.

John Houser of PEA Group, the civil engineer on the project, introduced the applicant team and emphasized that the developer had met with the adjacent Stonehaven homeowners association and reduced the project density during that process. Houser and developer Kamal Shahib said the plan was revised from earlier submissions and said the team had coordinated with staff and the Stonehaven HOA on access and design.

Discussion focused on circulation, parking, landscape screening and open space. Commissioners expressed concern that three internal dead-end drives and mid-street turnarounds create awkward circulation for guests, deliveries and emergency response; several commissioners asked the applicant to evaluate a continuous loop drive by flipping some building orientations or reducing the western green-belt setback in exchange for enhanced screening. Staff noted a standard 20-foot green belt on the west property line but said the planning commission has discretion to reduce that setback in exchange for compensating screening. Commissioners asked the applicant to explore whether reorienting buildings could allow a looped drive and better pedestrian/vehicular flow, and urged clearer amenity programming for the on-site open space above the underground detention area.

Landscape and tree-placement was another area of concentrated feedback. Carlisle said the plan meets total replacement-tree requirements but that many replacement trees were located along Crooks and Wattles at the frontage; commissioners questioned whether those locations would offer viable long-term tree survival near salted roadways and whether using the trees as front-door screening met the intent of the neighborhood-node zoning to “engage the street.” Commissioners asked the applicant to re-evaluate tree placement to balance street engagement and long-term viability, and to provide 3D renderings and aerial context showing adjacent neighborhoods when the plan returns.

Traffic and engineering questions were raised; staff and the applicant said fire, engineering and traffic reviewers had found the proposed turnarounds met minimum code requirements, but commissioners asked for more explanation of the traffic study assumptions and for follow-up with the city traffic consultant. Public comment included neighboring homeowners who said they had worked with the developer and voiced conditional support, and other residents who asked for greater setbacks and greenspace.

Because the applicant seeks a height variance from the zoning board of appeals, the commission did not vote on the site plan. Staff requested formal feedback and recommended changes be addressed before the plan returns after the ZBA decision.