Development affecting wetlands on hold

FARMINGTON HILLS — A development proposal that caused a stir among some residents last year has yet to be resolved.

At a Planning Commission meeting last February, more than 15 residents voiced concerns about a proposed development on the south side of Folsom Road, between Parker Avenue and Lundy Drive. Folsom is a service drive for the M-5 highway, and runs from Farmington Road to Orchard Lake Road.

Forest at Riverwalk Development LLC has proposed 16 parcels for construction of single-family homes, with a one-family cluster option.

The size of the land is 16.29 acres. According to Stuart Michaelson, who is one of the developer’s partners, they want to develop 38 homes, which would be between 2,000 and 2,700 square feet.

The meeting last February was to determine if the developer’s plans meet the qualification criteria for cluster development. It was referred to as the “qualification stage.”

At that meeting, Planning Commission members unanimously approved the first stage of the developer’s proposal.

What the developers hope to eventually get is site plan approval from the Planning Commission.

If that is accomplished, their next step would be to try to get approval from Farmington Hills City Council members.

However, before all of that, the Michigan Department of Great Lakes and Energy has a say.

The proposed development is located on wetlands, and according to Michaelson, a few months ago the developer submitted a request for a permit from EGLE.

Michaelson explained the significance of getting approval for the permit.

“(It) permits us to develop the land the way we have designed,” he said.

EGLE is accepting public comments about the permit request until Oct. 10.

According to Michaelson, the process to get an EGLE permit is a slow one.

“We’re waiting for the permit from EGLE,” he said. “It takes a while, so maybe another month or two we should get the permit. Then we go back to the city after we get the permit for the site plan approval.”

Michaelson, of Forest at Riverwalk Development LLC, is listed as the applicant for the proposed project.

“The applicant proposes to place 1,465 cubic yards of fill in 0.5886 acres of State-regulated wetland to facilitate construction of an access road and residential lots,” a  public notice posting from EGLE states.

Michelle Gala is one of the residents in the area who is protesting the potential development.

“If he gets the permit he’s pretty much got the green light to go back to the city and get it approved,” Gala said. “If he doesn’t get this permit, it’s (going to) pretty much stop him, because he can’t do anything with filling in the wetlands or digging underneath the stream or any of that kind of stuff, because that’s where the road and some houses are. So our thing is, we just gotta stop this permit.”

The impact to wildlife and the potential for water runoff at the site were among the concerns expressed by residents at the Planning Commission meeting last year.

Those issues were again voiced by Gala.

“We have such a huge diversity of wildlife that’s in balance, basically,” she said. “So we have that part of it, with the streams and that kind of thing – with the wildlife. There’s infrastructure there because of all the water. We already have a high water table, so several neighbors already have extra drainage and stuff in their basements, because when it does rain, that water’s coming in.”

According to Gala, “Water’s always been a problem.”

The potential for an increase in traffic, along with developing new, larger homes near smaller ones that are in the area also doesn’t sit well with Gala.

“My house is 100 years old, and it’s only just over 800 square feet, and you (want to) put some huge house behind me – two stories, garage, and all of that kind of stuff on a lot that’s pretty much the same width as mine,” she said. “It doesn’t fit; doesn’t make sense, and it’s more damage than positive. … This does not make any sense to go through and clear out woods and then fill in three different wetlands to even put the houses on.”

Getting feedback from residents who push back against development projects is nothing new for Michaelson.

“It’s the typical complaint that anybody has on land that they live adjacent to,” he said. “They come up with what they think is an issue because they don’t (want to) see the woods go away or see new housing. I’ve been facing this for 40 years. It’s pretty typical complaints.”

Michaelson cited having new taxpayers in the community with children who attend local schools as an advantage of development.

He also said that a “huge” shortage of housing is a national problem.

“We’ve built in Farmington Hills and enjoyed a good relationship and a good reputation for the quality that we built, so we’re looking forward to another one,” Michaelson said. “Once we build, people are usually very, very happy.”

Comments about the permit application that was submitted to EGLE can be sent to mienviro.michigan.gov/ncore/external/publicnotice/search.

“What I told EGLE was, ‘You have all these cities and counties and states and even countries adding back in all these green spaces. They’ve learned not to clear out all this, and here we still have this guy wanting to take it away,’” Gala said.