Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council on senior‑center plans, Costick Center alternatives and local flooding
Summary
Public comment on March 23 focused on senior‑center planning (concerns about siting near I‑696, consultant selection, and potential duplication of pools), alternatives to a standalone senior center at the Hawk campus, and a homeowner pair who described repeated flooding from a shallow detention area at Heritage Park and requested drainage repairs.
Several residents used the public‑comment period March 23 to press the Farmington Hills City Council on senior programming, consultant selection and local stormwater problems.
Suzanne Dengis asked how the city selects firms for senior‑center planning and urged the council to verify consultants’ prior work building senior facilities and compliance with accessibility standards; she said a prior selection of a firm with inappropriate experience had cost the city in the past.
A number of speakers focused on the proposed replacement or relocation of the Costick Center. Leanne Rubchock urged the council to reconsider separating senior services into a standalone facility and instead expand integrated day programming at the Hawk campus, arguing a shared facility would avoid duplicative pools and infrastructure and better serve seniors with a one‑stop approach. Eric Schmidt urged more court space at the Hawk as a complementary investment that could support youth sports and generate revenue.
Public commenters also expressed public‑health and site‑planning concerns. Sue Homant summarized research from the EPA, the American Lung Association and peer‑reviewed literature about traffic‑related air pollution and argued that siting a senior center adjacent to expressway I‑696 could increase respiratory and cardiovascular risks for older adults.
Separately, Karen Toomey and Dennis Gregio described chronic flooding at the end of Heritage Park, saying a shallow, stagnant pond formed on city parkland has repeatedly overflowed onto their property. They estimated out‑of‑pocket damages approaching $100,000 and asked the city to dredge the basin, restore a previously removed pipe connection and install native filtration measures to reduce future flooding.
Council members listened to the comments during the public‑comment period but took no immediate policy votes; several speakers were invited to provide more documentation to city staff.
