Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission approves Schaeffer Development site plan for townhomes, subject to technical conditions
Summary
The commission approved a site plan by Schaeffer Development/Mi Homes for a 4.55‑acre townhome PUD with roughly 63% open space, contingent on resolving Giffels Webster, city engineer and fire marshal comments and finalizing landscaping and utility easements.
The Farmington Hills Planning Commission on Nov. 20 approved a revised site plan submitted by Schaeffer Development LLC, with MI Homes as the builder, for a 4.55‑acre planned unit development of townhomes and multi‑unit buildings along 12 Mile Road.
Proponent Aaron Schaeffer told the commission the project had previously moved through PUD option, site‑plan review and a July City Council public hearing and that the current submission responds to five conditions council set in July. Schaeffer said the team met with affected neighboring property owners (the Levy and Payne families) about fencing and additional landscaping, moved a pocket park to the 12 Mile frontage, and included an easement next to the stub road to allow future utilities and road extension. He said the development will have approximately 63% open space, that grading will avoid disturbance to an adjacent natural area and that stormwater will outlet to Pebble Creek at an agricultural rate.
Staff and consulting reviewer Giffels Webster noted a range of technical items previously requested; the proponent represented that all five council conditions had been met and provided updated elevations, floor plans and landscape plans for planning to retain in its file. Commissioners asked clarifying questions about whether the commission was approving only the site plan or broader PUD elements; city staff and the city attorney said the PUD agreement and elevations were already approved by council and the commission’s role was to confirm consistency with the approved PUD and site plan.
A motion to approve site plan 65‑10‑2025 as revised (submitted 10/14/2025 by Schaeffer Development LLC) carried with conditions that outstanding items identified in the Giffels Webster review, the city engineer’s comments and the fire marshal’s interoffice correspondence be addressed to the satisfaction of the respective departments. The motion included determinations about required tree replacement: 195 required replacements, 118 may be counted toward replacement, leaving 77 trees to be paid into the tree‑replacement fund at $400 per tree.
Next steps: the proponent must finalize responses to technical review comments, coordinate any remaining engineering adjustments (including the shared‑access agreement and potential cul‑de‑sac language), and submit any final landscape plan revisions for staff review prior to council or administrative sign‑off.
