Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council denies reconsideration for Forest at Riverwalk; neighbors cite flooding and emergency-access fears
Summary
After hearing a developer's revised plan (grass-paver emergency connector and revised drainage) and extensive neighborhood comment opposing construction near wetlands, Farmington Hills City Council declined to reconsider its Nov. 10 denial of the Forest at Riverwalk cluster site plan.
Farmington Hills City Council on Nov. 24 declined a motion to reconsider its Nov. 10 denial of cluster site plan 54-4-2025 (Forest at Riverwalk), leaving the prior denial in place.
Planning director Charmaine Kettler Schmalt summarized the applicant's submitted modifications: an unpaved grass-paver emergency connection to Parker with a breakaway gate, and a drainage design that the applicant said would capture and contain site runoff (Charmaine Kettler Schmalt, SEG 2499–2531). The engineering department told council it had received the revised plan late in the week and would need additional time (roughly two weeks, staff said) to complete a formal review.
Neighbors told council the revised measures were insufficient to address persistent flooding, high groundwater and the vulnerability of nearby septic fields and wells. Michelle Gala said the site has a "huge water issue" and argued that the developer's claim of self-contained drainage does not address groundwater and septic-field impacts (Michelle Gala, SEG 2783–2796). Tammy Trinca told council her sump pump runs continuously and that removing hundreds of trees would raise the groundwater table and risk basement flooding: "My biggest concern... my sump pump running continuously... My house is gonna flood" (Tammy Trinca, SEG 2968–2976).
The applicant and a supporting speaker argued the cluster plan would preserve more open space than the by-right alternative and that engineering review could resolve technical questions. The applicant described the proposal as having "over 40%" open space and asserted that if the cluster plan is denied the alternative by-right plan (80-foot lots) would require more extensive clearing and roadway changes.
Council action: a motion to reconsider the Nov. 10 denial was made and seconded but failed on roll-call vote, so the council's earlier denial remains the council's action on this application. Staff will notify the applicant of the denial and outline next steps; the applicant retains procedural options under the zoning and application process.
