Residents pack Superior Township meeting as board mulls land purchase
Frederick Lucas, an attorney for Superior Township, discusses a consent judgment regarding the purchase of township land approved during Tuesday's meeting.
The Superior Township Board of Trustees unanimously voted to approve a $200,000 land purchase at its meeting Tuesday evening, which trustees say will help protect the piece of property from future development.
But the decision was contentious as more than 100 residents packed the township hall at one point in the meeting, many protesting the move. They argued the purchase would lead to the exact opposite of protecting the land, located at the corner of Geddes and Prospect roads, by encouraging the development of future municipal and agricultural buildings.
They also claimed the purchase would set a precedent that would open the township up to future lawsuits over development.
But not all residents in attendance opposed the township's decision.
Some expressed their support for the measure, adding they believed the possible addition of a local agricultural business might be a welcome addition to local residents who have livestock and agricultural practices.
Aside from township politics, the issue centers on a consent judgment regarding a 77-acre parcel of property in Superior Township at the northwest corner of Prospect and Geddes Roads.
A developer sued the township when the board rejected its proposal to rezone a piece of property to allow a residential development at that intersection.
Township officials said they believed they would win the lawsuit. But they were considering the consent judgement, similar to a settlement, with the current owner Hummana, LLC, to protect future development on the property, said Frederick Lucas, an attorney representing the township.
The settlement called for the township to purchase the development rights and land on the parcel in question to protect it from future challenges to township zoning on the property, Lucas said.
Under the agreement passed, the township will purchase eight acres of the parcel.
The township will also purchase the development rights of a 40-acre portion of the property. The remaining portion of the property, which already has a horse stable and riding facility on it, will continue to be used as an equestrian facility.Â
There is also be the possibility of adding an agricultural-based business on the parcel, which officials said is allowed under current zoning on the property.
That particular parcel is important to the township because it is located at a significant intersection. Officials say they believe the property will retain a rural character, while possibly providing a future location for a fire station.
Still, questions remain about whether commercial buildings of any kind should be allowed under current zoning on the property. Residents opposed to the passage of the consent judgement said they believed the township board's decision goes against the township's own master plan and may open up the possibility of future lawsuits from developers.
Tina Reed covers health and the environment for AnnArbor.com. You can reach her at tinareed@annarbor.com, call her at 734-623-2535 or find her on Twitter @TreedinAA.
Comments
Votekeeper
Sat, Jan 23, 2010 : 4:21 p.m.
During the meeting, very few people were able to follow the changes the Township's insurance attorney presented in the plan, including the reporters. His use of a powerpoint presentation which had the wrong numbers did a lot to mislead the audience. The complexity of the plan belies its stupidity, and the fact that the Township Board members voted for something they have no understanding of. The plan is virtually unenforceable and may be part of a scam. There have been two Consent Judgment documents posted on the Superior-Twp.Org website and discussed during the meeting. The link in your article is to the Public Notice which, in turn, has a link to an older version of the Consent Judgment. The version of the Consent Judgment linked to the Public Notice does indeed say that the purchase of 8.1 acres will cost $200,000. This is the "Fire Station" parcel. The second parcel relates to the purchase of development rights on the 40 acres referenced as the "Conservation Easement" parcel. The first Consent Judgment version and the attorney's presentation said the purchase of development rights for the Conservation Easement parcel will cost $200,000. The third parcel is 29 acres and is not being purchased by the Township. However, the Township Board agreed to a special exception to the zoning, namely the construction of buildings (not to exceed 61,000 square feet--including the 30,000 square feet already in use as a horse arena and stable). The exception allows the construction and use of an additional 31,000 square foot building as a commercial "agricultural supply" building. Such an exception does not exist anywhere else in the township on agricultural land (zoned A1 or A2). In the Board Packet there is a different version of the Consent Judgement with different prices for the land. You can download the packet, which is in PDF format, at: http://superior-twp.org/officials_boards_commissions/board_of_trustees/board_packets/2010/index_html In that version, the 8.1 acres will cost $300,000 ( $37,000 per acre for no perc, no sewer, no water) and the Conservation Easement will cost $100,000. That version of the Consent Judgment was apparently what the Township Board voted to accept on Tuesday night. Look on pages 112-117 for the "Terms of Settlement.") Superior Township committed itself to spend $400,000 of our tax money on Tuesday night, not $200,000. Finally, if we needed some more confusion, there is another part to the deal. Another part of the parcel, six acres, which was not identified on the maps provided. The Consent Judgment includes a provision for the repurchase of the development rights from the Township by the property owner of the six acres for $40,000. In response to a question, Mr. Lucas said that the six acres was not included in the map, but he understood that they bordered on Geddes Road. This was and is a bad deal for the Township. The case against the Township had already been dismissed. The Township should just walk away. By negotiating an unnecessary Consent Judgment, the Township is setting an informal but nonetheless obvious precedent for other developers: namely that Zoning and the Master Plan can be bypassed by going to court and getting their own Consent Judgments, allowing them secret and unlimited land uses that can be modified in secret and in perpetuity.
Jack
Thu, Jan 21, 2010 : 3:27 a.m.
The Superior Township Board voted to purchase 8.1 acres at the NW corner of Prospect and Geddes Roads for $200,000. This property will be split off from the 77-acre parcel. The Township will also pay an additional $200,000 to purchase a conservation easement over a separate 40-acres in the southern portion of the 77-acre property. The easement will allow up to 15,000 sq. ft. of agricultural-related buildings. The land covered under the easement could also be reduced to 34 acres, in which case 6 acres would simply be subject to local zoning. The remaining 29 acres of the property will be subject to the terms of the Consent Judgment, which include allowing construction of a commercial feed store and allowing buildings with a total ground floor space of up 61,000 sq. ft. However, future Boards could change that restriction and future Boards could rezone the 29-acres for more intensive use.
tlb1201
Wed, Jan 20, 2010 : 1:44 p.m.
The article is missing the approved purchase price. Was one set? Also, it was mentioned that "The settlement called for the township to purchase the development rights and land in question". Usually a land purchase includes all of the typical bundle of land use rights. Did the township vote to separate the development rights in some way? Or did it approve a simple purchase with all of the typical rights left intact? I see no need for the township to separate the two, since it would have the ultimate power of protecting the property as the owner without separating the development rights and making things more complicated for purely political reasons. If the land is to be owned for the benefit of the township residents for future generations to come, why make it potentially more complicated for the future with development rights gyrations? Set a policy for the property and stick to it. As to future zoning challenges, I don't get it - if the township owns the property outright and also sets zoning and use policy and regulations, that seems like a moot point. Does the township have to be protected from itself?!