You are viewing this article in the AnnArbor.com archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see MLive.com/ann-arbor
Posted on Thu, Jan 13, 2011 : 12:30 p.m.

State Supreme Court refuses Chelsea's appeal of nearly $3 million award in development lawsuit

By Lisa Allmendinger

Heritage_Pointe_subdivision_Chelsea.jpg

The entrance to the Heritage Point subdivision on Dexter-Chelsea Road. An investment group sued the City of Chelsea alleging breach of contract over what it said was the city's failure to provide adequate water and sewer service for the development.

Lisa Allmendinger | AnnArbor.com

The Michigan Supreme Court has refused to hear Chelsea’s appeal of a $3 million judgment brought against it by an investment group over a housing development.

Chelsea Investment Group LLC sued the city and former City Manager Mike Steklac in 2006 claiming breach of contract when problems with the city’s sewer and water system halted the building of additional phases of the Heritage Pointe subdivision along Dexter-Chelsea Road.

In September 2008, Circuit Court Judge David Swartz awarded the investment group about $2.8 million in damages plus interest and taxes. Swartz also ruled that Steklac was entitled to governmental immunity on the claim of gross negligence.

The city appealed the decision to the Michigan Court of Appeals, claiming it didn’t breach its agreement with the investment group and contesting the amount of damages.

On April 27, 2010, the appeals court upheld a majority of the lower court decision but said the interest needs to be recalculated. The city then appealed the case to the Supreme Court.

On Dec. 20, 2010, the Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal.

"Finding the words to emphasize our disappointment and frustration with the verdict is virtually impossible," said City Manager John Hanifan via e-mail. "The city was dealing with this issue for more than five years and it's a bitter consolation that there is closure to the process."

Hanifan said the Chelsea City City Council will decide at its next regular council meeting on Jan. 25 "the specific strategy to pay the judgment" but the city "won't raise taxes" to do it.

The city manager said the city will "likely use a combination of fund balance and judgment bonds." Chelsea Investment Group bought 157 acres on a land contract in 2000 and agreed to pay $5 million for the property. In May 2004, the investment group and Pulte Land Company signed a purchase agreement to build a development with 352 single-family homes in several phases.

According to the suit, the developer had finished the first phase of the development in August 2004 and was ready to begin construction of the second phase in May 2005 when “the city informed him that the wastewater treatment plant lacked sufficient capacity for the development.”

Several months later, according to the suit, the city learned it had a water capacity issue, and subsequently the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality issued a moratorium on any development in the city until the issues were resolved.

Chelsea had installed a $10 million water treatment plant and a reverse osmosis system and experienced numerous problems with the new system including malfunctioning membranes and pumps. The suit states that the development agreement between the plaintiff and the city stipulated that the city would expand the existing water capacity “in sufficient time so as not to interfere with or delay the development of the property.” The suit claims that the city didn’t provide those utilities in a timely fashion, which caused Pulte to terminate its agreement with the investment group, and pull out of the project, costing the investment company revenue.

The city’s appeal contends it was able to provide access to sewer and water capacity within “a reasonable time,” and did not break its contract with the developer.

In March 2006, the city resolved its water and sewer issues and the state lifted the moratorium, but the investment group claimed it lost money when it sold some of the undeveloped lots to another builder at a lower price.


View Heritage Pointe in a larger map

Lisa Allmendinger is a reporter with AnnArbor.com. She can be reached at lisaallmendinger@annarbor.com. For more Chelsea stories, visit our Chelsea page.

Comments

richard watkins

Sat, Jan 15, 2011 : 9:58 a.m.

Congratulations on a well-organized, cogent and readable story on a fairly complicated news item. These, regrettably, are rare descriptions of an annarbor.com item.

zip the cat

Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 5 p.m.

Where does it say anything about Dexter Township in the article? I believe they are talking about Chelsea. Lets stick to the story at hand and quit complaining about another issue. I own a business in dexter township and have never had any trouble with them.

Heady99

Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 9:57 a.m.

You should hear all the bull that goes on in Dexter Township. If you are a new business wanting to startup in this area they just drown them with fees, etc... or if you are already established here and want to improve your business more fees, delays, and downright difficult to work with (many have given up). Then you have people just wanting to improve their own property again more fees, delays, and then they say no after taking your money. I think we need to clean house and get people in our area that want to encourage businesses to come and/or home owners wanting to improve their own property. Wake up we voted you in and we can vote you out.

russellr

Fri, Jan 14, 2011 : 8:09 a.m.

I'm sorry for the resident's of Chelsea if they have to pay, but I'm so sick of the townships making these builders jump through hundreds of hoops and costing them more money. Scio Township is the worst offender, no builder wants to even attempt going there because of there ridicules rules they change at a whim. Just like tracter suppley that went in. They told them to go in under a different zoning then when the meeting comes they change it on them You have 7-8 people on a board and they can't agree on anything

Macabre Sunset

Thu, Jan 13, 2011 : 5:34 p.m.

I see the liability from the city, but the damages seem more punitive than realistic. In this marketplace, the city manager's incompetence may have actually saved the holding company millions. Maybe the residents of Chelsea should sue the lawyer arguing the city's side to recoup the costs of this suit.

Macabre Sunset

Thu, Jan 13, 2011 : 5:34 p.m.

I see the liability from the city, but the damages seem more punitive than realistic. In this marketplace, the city manager's incompetence may have actually saved the holding company millions. Maybe the residents of Chelsea should sue the lawyer arguing the city's side to recoup the costs of this suit.