Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors say they were not notified after Waddles Crest item pulled; concerns raised about density, pickleball court and blighted corner
Summary
Residents told the Troy Planning Commission they learned about a proposed nearby development only on the city portal and raised concerns about density, parking, a proposed pickleball court and a boarded house; staff said the proposal was a by-right site plan that does not require mailed notice.
Several neighbors told the Troy City Planning Commission on June 9 that they were unaware the Reserve at Waddles Crest was on the agenda before the applicant asked the commission to remove the item.
"I was not duly notified of the intention to present here tonight," said Dan Robbinger, a Woodlands of Troy resident, explaining he learned of the agenda item only after checking the planning portal. Robbinger said adjacent lots he owns were platted as 25-foot, non-buildable buffer parcels and that the proposed plan—he said a 54-unit, high-density approach—clashes with the master plan and neighborhood character. He also raised tree-preservation concerns at the end of Penrose Drive.
Paul Bis, who said he lives roughly 100 yards from a planned pickleball court, told the commission the court would be "in my front yard" and that the facility’s size and intensity "are not really consistent with the neighborhood next door." Bis also urged action on a boarded, vacant house at the corner that he described as an "attractive nuisance" and flagged missing sidewalks near Troy High School.
Planning staff responded that the Waddles Crest submission is a by-right site-plan application and therefore does not trigger statutory mailed-notice requirements that apply to rezoning or special-use requests. "This is a byite application... it doesn't require an extra notice," staff explained, while adding the city posts agendas on the portal and tries to circulate notices via an email list when feasible.
Commissioner Hudson asked that a letter from Gerald Ro and an email from Christy Rancelli opposing the project be entered into the record and included in the packet for when the item returns to the agenda. The item was not considered tonight and will be revisited when it is reactivated on a future agenda.
The discussion underscores recurring neighborhood concerns about the limits of required notification for by-right development and the difference between legal notice requirements and residents' expectations of outreach.
