Council approves Towns at Woodcreek PUD with conditions after neighbors raise access and safety concerns

Farmington Hills City Council on July 14 approved Planned Unit Development (PUD) application PUD 1‑2025 (Towns at Woodcreek), a proposed 24‑unit, two‑story townhouse development on a 4.55‑acre parcel at 29150 12 Mile Road, subject to conditions addressing buffering, emergency access and additional engineering review.

The developer, Schaefer Development, presented a clustered plan of six buildings (four units each) with two vehicle garages per unit. The proposal seeks modest exceptions from the underlying RA‑1A district: a lot coverage of 37.5% (the RA‑1A limit is 35%) and the possibility of up to 112 rooms if optional third‑bedroom upgrades are exercised; staff noted the baseline plan totals 94 rooms. The project dedicates roughly 62.8% of the site as open space, includes a stormwater detention basin in the northern portion of the property, and proposes sidewalks only along 12 Mile Road rather than within the interior of the development.

Why it matters: The site borders single‑family lots to the east and north and AIM High School to the west. Neighbors raised concerns about safety, privacy and the location of a proposed stub road and a proposed pocket park near an adjacent backyard. Council balanced those neighborhood concerns against the developer’s claim that the PUD layout preserves more open space and better manages steep slopes and stormwater than conventional subdivision development.

Key project elements and developer statements: The project includes clustered townhome footprints with 24 total units, walkout basements on buildings that face the steep northern slope, and a proposed secondary emergency access to AIM High School based on an existing 2001 recorded shared‑access agreement. Project representative Aaron Schaefer said the clustering preserves open space and noted outreach with adjacent homeowners and AIM; he also read a letter from the Wood Creek Homeowners Association that stated in part, “Wood Creek has no objections or issues with the proposed Schaeffer development PUD proposal.” The developer said the project would provide curbside waste pickup, dawn‑to‑dusk lighting with photocell controls, and landscape buffering along neighboring property lines.

Neighborhood concerns and public comment: Resident David Levy (referred to in the transcript as Mr. Levy) spoke during public comment, saying the wooded area behind his house has been a private, quiet area where he is concerned about people wandering on his property and that additional cars and movement could feel intrusive. He asked that the developer maximize vegetation and provide strong buffering along the shared property line. The council directed the developer to continue direct conversations with the neighbor and to include either additional natural buffering or a fence if needed.

Conditions placed by council: Council approved the PUD but attached multiple conditions to the approval. Those conditions, which will be folded into the PUD agreement and the site‑plan review, include: (1) compliance with Planning Commission recommendations and Giffels Webster review items; (2) compliance with the city engineer and fire marshal review items to their satisfaction; (3) additional buffering or a fence along the eastern property line, to be finalized in consultation with the adjacent homeowner (Mr. Levy); (4) relocation of the proposed pocket park so it is not immediately adjacent to Mr. Levy’s yard; (5) a road and utilities easement extending to the eastern property line so future connection remains possible if adjoining property is developed; (6) review of the traffic study with the engineering department and accommodation of engineering recommendations (for example, any decel lane or other traffic controls); and (7) meetings with the fire marshal and engineering staff about a proposed 50‑foot turning‑radius cul‑de‑sac at the eastern dead end — if the fire marshal and engineer determine a cul‑de‑sac is required at that location, the PUD approval will be negated and the project must return to council for further consideration.

Planning and technical details: Planning staff and consultant Joe Tangieri noted the site’s steep northern slope and the presence of Pebble Creek. The northern third of the site will be preserved as open space and stormwater detention to provide a buffer to the single‑family neighborhood to the north. The developer told council that the parking layout provides two‑car garages for each unit and that the club‑style indoor recreation uses were not part of this PUD; the interior of the development will not include sidewalks in order to maximize the preserved open space, though a sidewalk will remain along 12 Mile Road. Planning staff indicated that final building elevations, landscaping and lighting will be reviewed during the site‑plan process.

Vote and next steps: Council approved the PUD plan by roll call (unanimous). City staff will incorporate the council’s conditions into a draft PUD agreement and the project must return for final site‑plan approval by Planning Commission and PUD agreement execution before building permits can be issued.

Evidence: The approval referenced a recorded shared‑access agreement dated February 2001 among the city, the then‑property user and prior landowners; the developer produced letters of support from adjacent property owners and the Wood Creek HOA during the hearing.