On Jan. 19, 2009, Lombardo Homes withdrew their original site plan modification proposal for Lots 1-15 and served notice that they intend to re-submit a different site plan modification request to the Planning Commission, asking for permission to build "a ranch style home that will reasonably match the character and appearance of the existing ranches in the Manors".
At the Annual Meeting of Manors Co-owners on Jan. 21st, Richard Sable asked to be placed on the agenda so that he could present what his partner (Lombardo Homes) intends to re-submit, plus answer any questions we had. At the meeting, Mr. Sable passed out a few color copies of exterior elevations and floor plans which he indicated would be the basis of Lombardo Home's revised proposal. He indicated that the first floor exteriors would be fully bricked and that the three model floor plans would fit within the originally planned building footprints on Lots 1-15. He also discussed his intention to modify the Manors Master Deed with regards to these fifteen lots and indicated that he would provide more information that could be posted here on this blog by the end of January.
You can view a scanned version of his handout by going to this web page.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Friday, January 23, 2009
Snow piles
Based on the concern that was raised at the Annual Meeting about the size and locations of some of the large snow piles on our property, Ryan Dorner of Kramer-Triad contacted the owner of GM ProLawn (our snow removal contractor). As a result (and at no additional charge to the Association), they came in today and cut some of the snow piles down to size and dumped the excess snow on nearby vacant lots .
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Annual Meeting of Co-owners
The 2009 Annual Meeting of the co-owners of the Manors at Central Park was held on Wednesday night, Jan. 21, 2009.
A quorum of co-owners were in attendance for this meeting, of which the main order of business was to elect one co-owner to the Board of Directors of the Manors at Central Park Condominium Association.
Michael Grobbel was the only co-owner who was nominated for the position and he was unanimously re-elected for a one-year term.
Following the election portion of the agenda, Mr. Richard Sable was permitted to speak on behalf of the revised site plan proposal for Lots 1-15 that will be submitted to the Shelby Twp. Planning Commission by Lombardo Homes.
You can read the "unapproved" minutes of last night's meeting by clicking here.
A quorum of co-owners were in attendance for this meeting, of which the main order of business was to elect one co-owner to the Board of Directors of the Manors at Central Park Condominium Association.
Michael Grobbel was the only co-owner who was nominated for the position and he was unanimously re-elected for a one-year term.
Following the election portion of the agenda, Mr. Richard Sable was permitted to speak on behalf of the revised site plan proposal for Lots 1-15 that will be submitted to the Shelby Twp. Planning Commission by Lombardo Homes.
You can read the "unapproved" minutes of last night's meeting by clicking here.
Monday, January 19, 2009
Lombardo withdraws his proposal
Late this afternoon, Anthony Lombardo withdrew his proposal for two-story units on Manors lots 1-15. Therefore, there is no need to attend the Jan. 20th Township Board of Trustees meeting. I will try and contact as many folks as possible by phone and e-mail this evening so they do not needlessly attend the Tuesday night meeting.
Above is a copy of Lombardo's withdrawal letter (click on it to enlarge it). Note that they intend to re-submit a new site plan modification request to the Planning Commission, asking for permission to build "a ranch style home that will reasonably match the character and appearance of the existing ranches in the Manors".
I also received the e-mail message below from the Shelby Twp. Clerk.
----- Original Message -----
From: Terri Kowal
To: Mike Grobbel
Sent: Monday, January 19, 2009 3:55 PM
Subject: RE: January Work Session meeting on SP #02-55 (PUD-1) The Manors at Central Park
Mr. Grobbel,
Great news for you and your neighbors – YOU WON!!!!!! Mr. Lombardo is withdrawing his application, it is coming off the agenda, and he is starting all over again at Planning. Can you please let your neighbors know so that they can save some effort and time tomorrow night?
Once again, it is OFF the agenda and WITHDRAWN!!!!!
Congratulations to all of you.
Terri Kowal
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Reminder - two meetings this week!
UPDATE - Jan. 19th
The Lombardo agenda item has been withdrawn from the Tuesday night meeting of the Shelby Twp. Board of Trustees.
On Tuesday night, Jan. 20, 2009 at 7:00 PM, the Shelby Township Board of Trustees will hold their regular meeting in the Board Room at the municipal offices at 24 Mile and Van Dyke. During agenda item #7 in the "Planning Commission" portion of their meeting, the Board is scheduled to make a decision on the request by Lombardo Homes to build two-story units on Manors Lots 1-15 instead of ranch style units similar to what is already built to the west along North Central Park. During this agenda item, the petitioner as well as the public are invited to speak on this matter. I intend to speak and present the survey results (see the prior post, below). Please join us at this meeting, even if you do not wish to speak.
The following evening, Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2009, the Annual Meeting of the Co-owners of the Manors at Central Park will be held at Utica High School, in Room 160 (park and enter at the rear of the building, the room is on your left just inside the rear entrance). Registration begins at 6:00 PM and the meeting will start promptly at 6:30 PM.
In order to legally hold this meeting, we need at least 35% of the co-owners to be in attendance, either physically or through their proxy. Failure to attain a quorum will cause us to have to re-schedule the meeting. If you cannot attend, please fill out the General Proxy form you received in the Jan. 7th mailing and send it to the meeting with a neighbor or call me and I will pick it up from you and take it to the meeting.
Here is the agenda for our meeting:
A) Call to Order (6:30 PM)
B) Introductions
C) Establish that 35% Quorum has been met
D) Comments - Board of Directors and Property Management Group
E) Nominations to Board of Directors
F) Introductions of candidates
G) Selection of Election Inspectors
H) Cast Ballots
I) Guest Speaker - Mr. Bob Hambright, Alcos Insurance Agency
J) Announce Election Results
K) Open Discussion
L) Motion to Adjourn
We intend to end the meeting no later than 8:30 PM. Note that we will have a guest speaker - please bring any condo insurance related questions you may have.
The Lombardo agenda item has been withdrawn from the Tuesday night meeting of the Shelby Twp. Board of Trustees.
On Tuesday night, Jan. 20, 2009 at 7:00 PM, the Shelby Township Board of Trustees will hold their regular meeting in the Board Room at the municipal offices at 24 Mile and Van Dyke. During agenda item #7 in the "Planning Commission" portion of their meeting, the Board is scheduled to make a decision on the request by Lombardo Homes to build two-story units on Manors Lots 1-15 instead of ranch style units similar to what is already built to the west along North Central Park. During this agenda item, the petitioner as well as the public are invited to speak on this matter. I intend to speak and present the survey results (see the prior post, below). Please join us at this meeting, even if you do not wish to speak.
The following evening, Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2009, the Annual Meeting of the Co-owners of the Manors at Central Park will be held at Utica High School, in Room 160 (park and enter at the rear of the building, the room is on your left just inside the rear entrance). Registration begins at 6:00 PM and the meeting will start promptly at 6:30 PM.
In order to legally hold this meeting, we need at least 35% of the co-owners to be in attendance, either physically or through their proxy. Failure to attain a quorum will cause us to have to re-schedule the meeting. If you cannot attend, please fill out the General Proxy form you received in the Jan. 7th mailing and send it to the meeting with a neighbor or call me and I will pick it up from you and take it to the meeting.
Here is the agenda for our meeting:
A) Call to Order (6:30 PM)
B) Introductions
C) Establish that 35% Quorum has been met
D) Comments - Board of Directors and Property Management Group
E) Nominations to Board of Directors
F) Introductions of candidates
G) Selection of Election Inspectors
H) Cast Ballots
I) Guest Speaker - Mr. Bob Hambright, Alcos Insurance Agency
J) Announce Election Results
K) Open Discussion
L) Motion to Adjourn
We intend to end the meeting no later than 8:30 PM. Note that we will have a guest speaker - please bring any condo insurance related questions you may have.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Survey Results - Lombardo Proposal
Below are the results of the survey I distributed to all 86 occupied units on Jan. 10th. As of 2:00 PM, Jan. 19th, I have received a total of 40 responses. I wish to thank all who took the time to respond and I will include the survey results in my remarks at the upcoming Shelby Township Board of Trustees meeting on Jan. 20th. Continue reading past the results for my opinions on this subject.
The Board of Directors of our Condo Association has declined to take an official position on Lombardo's proposal. This is because the other two Board members also happen to have a fiduciary responsibility to the Carpenters Pension Trust Fund which owns the majority of the unbuilt lots in the Manors at Central Park Condominiums and which has a on-going business relationship with Lombardo Homes that is unrelated to this site plan modification request.
While I do not have a potential conflict of interest that prevents me from taking a position on this proposal, in this situation I am in the minority on this Board and therefore can only speak for myself. For the purpose of this survey, I am "neutral". However, until we can get some assurances that the Township Board of Trustees would protect the Manors from any further changes of this type on lots 33-167, I will remain publicly opposed to this proposal. If we can get those assurances from the Township Board on the 20th (and I think we will), I will drop my opposition.
I personally believe that the loss of visual and architectural continuity can be tolerated in this isolated area of the Manors, that any impact to our property values will be minimal and that our Board of Directors can manage any incremental maintenance costs resulting from this change. As a member of the Board of Directors, I believe that the petitioner's interest in building single detached condos in this specific location, even though they would be different from those in the original plan, is a positive development in a market that has been on "life support". If this proposal is approved with appropriate conditions and the proposed two story units are successful in the marketplace, they will contribute to the viability of our Association and bring in other shoppers who might be inclined to buy elsewhere in the Manors at Central Park. Also, Lombardo has promised the Township and the residents of the adjacent Kensington Condos that if this is approved, he will build only the low rise ranch-style clusters on Walter and Stebbins Courts (which are just to the north of Manors lots 1-15).
The Shelby Twp. Board of Trustees received plenty of input at their Jan. 7th work session on the Lombardo Homes proposal to build two-story units on Lots 1-15 instead of ranch style units similar to what is already built to the west along North Central Park. The Board is now scheduled to take action on this proposal at their Regular Meeting of Jan. 20, 2009 at 7:00PM in the Township municipal offices. Please plan to attend this important meeting.
In preparation for this next (and final) meeting and recognizing that not everyone from the Manors can attend and speak on this manner, I would like to survey all co-owners for their opinion so I can present the results to the Board of Trustees.
Please read and provide a response for both sections 1 and 2.
Section 1
1. Based on what I know so far about this proposal, I am
(a) _29__ opposed to the Lombardo proposal for Lots 1-15
(b) __4__ in favor of it
(c) __7__ neutral
(d) __0__ need more information
Section 2
The property taxes on Lots 1-15 are delinquent and if this proposal is denied on Jan. 20th, there is a very high likelihood that the County will foreclose on them and that ownership of the 15 lots will change hands by the March 31st deadline. Since the Carpenters Pension Trust Fund (owners of unsold Manors Lots 33 and up) is not interested in acquiring these lots, possible outcomes include:
• an entirely new builder could become involved in the development of this part of the Manors and build on Lots 1-15 according to the original site plan
• the new builder could instead have different ideas on what style of single detached condos to build on Lots 1-15 and we would be faced with another round of Planning Commission and Board of Trustee meetings
• these 15 lots could sit vacant for a very long time.
2. Based on what I know about this proposal including the above information, I am
(a) _21__ opposed to the Lombardo proposal for Lots 1-15
(b) _10__ in favor of it
(c) __9__ neutral
(d) __0__ need more information
The Board of Directors of our Condo Association has declined to take an official position on Lombardo's proposal. This is because the other two Board members also happen to have a fiduciary responsibility to the Carpenters Pension Trust Fund which owns the majority of the unbuilt lots in the Manors at Central Park Condominiums and which has a on-going business relationship with Lombardo Homes that is unrelated to this site plan modification request.
While I do not have a potential conflict of interest that prevents me from taking a position on this proposal, in this situation I am in the minority on this Board and therefore can only speak for myself. For the purpose of this survey, I am "neutral". However, until we can get some assurances that the Township Board of Trustees would protect the Manors from any further changes of this type on lots 33-167, I will remain publicly opposed to this proposal. If we can get those assurances from the Township Board on the 20th (and I think we will), I will drop my opposition.
I personally believe that the loss of visual and architectural continuity can be tolerated in this isolated area of the Manors, that any impact to our property values will be minimal and that our Board of Directors can manage any incremental maintenance costs resulting from this change. As a member of the Board of Directors, I believe that the petitioner's interest in building single detached condos in this specific location, even though they would be different from those in the original plan, is a positive development in a market that has been on "life support". If this proposal is approved with appropriate conditions and the proposed two story units are successful in the marketplace, they will contribute to the viability of our Association and bring in other shoppers who might be inclined to buy elsewhere in the Manors at Central Park. Also, Lombardo has promised the Township and the residents of the adjacent Kensington Condos that if this is approved, he will build only the low rise ranch-style clusters on Walter and Stebbins Courts (which are just to the north of Manors lots 1-15).
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Residents, developer clash over style changes
Residents, developer clash over style changes
KRISTYNE E. DEMSKE C & G Staff Writer
Published: December 31, 2008 in the "Shelby-Utica News"
SHELBY TOWNSHIP - Dozens of residents descended on the Dec. 16 Board of Trustees meeting, angered at proposed changes to the condominium development they live in that could bring about a totally different style of housing for the last 15 of more than 150 units. "The board needs to address the residents' fears that this proposal is going to further damage the already shrunken value of our homes," said Mike Grobbel, a member of the board of directors for the condo association and a resident in the development. "Those of us who have purchased a condo in the Manors (at Central Park) bought there on your promise that it was to be a collection of 167 two-and three-bedroom, visually similar, all ranch-style condos."
The township Board of Trustees announced that it would hold off on a decision to approve building modifications to the Manors at Central Park until after a January meeting they're planning between the board, Lombardo Homes and residents of the Manors who are not pleased with how the development is proceeding.....
[read the full article by clicking here]
KRISTYNE E. DEMSKE C & G Staff Writer
Published: December 31, 2008 in the "Shelby-Utica News"
SHELBY TOWNSHIP - Dozens of residents descended on the Dec. 16 Board of Trustees meeting, angered at proposed changes to the condominium development they live in that could bring about a totally different style of housing for the last 15 of more than 150 units. "The board needs to address the residents' fears that this proposal is going to further damage the already shrunken value of our homes," said Mike Grobbel, a member of the board of directors for the condo association and a resident in the development. "Those of us who have purchased a condo in the Manors (at Central Park) bought there on your promise that it was to be a collection of 167 two-and three-bedroom, visually similar, all ranch-style condos."
The township Board of Trustees announced that it would hold off on a decision to approve building modifications to the Manors at Central Park until after a January meeting they're planning between the board, Lombardo Homes and residents of the Manors who are not pleased with how the development is proceeding.....
[read the full article by clicking here]
Monday, December 22, 2008
Board of Trustees Work Session set for Jan. 7th
The Shelby Township Board of Trustees will hold their promised Work Session on Wednesday night, January 7, 2009 at 6:00 PM in the Shelby Twp. municipal building.
The board will hold a discussion concerning the request by Lombardo Homes modify the Manors at Central Park Planned Unit Development site plans (#02-55 PUD-1). The public, the petitioner and several members of the Planning Commission have all been invited to attend and will have the opportunity to speak when recognized during the Work Session.
The Township Clerk will be sending out a copy of the meeting notice in tomorrow's mail to all of those who received a notice of the Planning Commission meeting. I will also distribute a flyer to all homes in the Manors sometime in the next few days.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Board of Trustees pospone decision on Lombardo proposal
Prior to the Shelby Twp. Board of Trustees Regular Meeting at 7:00 PM tonight, the Board conducted a Work Session meeting at 6:00 PM, during which they were briefed on the Regular Meeting agenda items by the various Department Heads. While discussing the Lombardo request to revise the Manors site plan for Lots 1-15, the Board decided that they would not be in a position to make any decision at tonight's Regular Meeting. Instead, the Board wants to have a special Work Session Meeting limited to just this proposal, to which the petitioner, a couple of Planning Commission members and the public would be invited. The petitioner, the Planning Commissioners and the public will all be allowed to speak at this meeting and the Board indicated that they wanted to be able to ask as many questions as needed and to be able to hear our concerns in a more conducive setting.
The special Work Session Meeting will be scheduled for sometime in January and the Board said they would mail out a meeting notice to everyone who had received a notice for the Nov. 24th Planning Commission meeting. I will also post the date, time and place of the meeting on this blog and also distribute a flyer to each door in the Manors.
Instead of holding the planned agenda item tonight, the Board allowed Lombardo Homes and myself to each briefly address the Board. I gave the Board members, the Planning Director and Mr. Lombardo a copy of my prepared remarks and then delivered an edited version of those planned remarks. My prepared remarks can be read in their entirety by clicking here (bolded text represents the edited portions which I verbally presented). During the petitioner's abbreviated presentation to the Board, I heard them say that the Planning Commission had included in their recommendation a "condition of approval that Manors Lot 124 was not included". Here is the Planning Commission's Motion to recommend approval, judge for yourself:
Also contrary to what some people are being told by the petitioner, the Detroit Carpenters Pension Trust Fund (represented by Fifth Third Bank) has no financial interest in Manors Lots 1-15 and the Bank did not request Lombardo Homes to petition for this site plan modification. Sable Realty Ventures is the owner of record for Lots 1-15 and Lombardo Homes likely has an agreement to purchase them that is conditional on receiving approval from the Township Board for the site plan modifications. On March 1, 2008, those lots were forfeited to the Macomb County Treasurer due to non-payment of property taxes by the owner of record. A PDF file containing copies of the notices for the upcoming Jan. 13, 2009 Show Cause Hearing and Feb. 6, 2009 Judicial Foreclosure Hearing on these lots can be viewed here.
Click here to view a web page with the Dec. 16th Board meeting agenda, plus the background information packet that was prepared for use by the Township Board members at that meeting, including the minutes of the Sept. 10th and Nov. 24th Planning Commission meetings on this subject. Here are my prepared comments that I gave at the Nov. 24th Planning Commission public hearing.
Click here to view an earlier post on this subject, which contains links to a map, the petitioner's proposed models, elevations and site plan modifications, plus the Feb. 27th Planning Commission meeting minutes.
The special Work Session Meeting will be scheduled for sometime in January and the Board said they would mail out a meeting notice to everyone who had received a notice for the Nov. 24th Planning Commission meeting. I will also post the date, time and place of the meeting on this blog and also distribute a flyer to each door in the Manors.
Instead of holding the planned agenda item tonight, the Board allowed Lombardo Homes and myself to each briefly address the Board. I gave the Board members, the Planning Director and Mr. Lombardo a copy of my prepared remarks and then delivered an edited version of those planned remarks. My prepared remarks can be read in their entirety by clicking here (bolded text represents the edited portions which I verbally presented). During the petitioner's abbreviated presentation to the Board, I heard them say that the Planning Commission had included in their recommendation a "condition of approval that Manors Lot 124 was not included". Here is the Planning Commission's Motion to recommend approval, judge for yourself:
Also contrary to what some people are being told by the petitioner, the Detroit Carpenters Pension Trust Fund (represented by Fifth Third Bank) has no financial interest in Manors Lots 1-15 and the Bank did not request Lombardo Homes to petition for this site plan modification. Sable Realty Ventures is the owner of record for Lots 1-15 and Lombardo Homes likely has an agreement to purchase them that is conditional on receiving approval from the Township Board for the site plan modifications. On March 1, 2008, those lots were forfeited to the Macomb County Treasurer due to non-payment of property taxes by the owner of record. A PDF file containing copies of the notices for the upcoming Jan. 13, 2009 Show Cause Hearing and Feb. 6, 2009 Judicial Foreclosure Hearing on these lots can be viewed here.
Click here to view a web page with the Dec. 16th Board meeting agenda, plus the background information packet that was prepared for use by the Township Board members at that meeting, including the minutes of the Sept. 10th and Nov. 24th Planning Commission meetings on this subject. Here are my prepared comments that I gave at the Nov. 24th Planning Commission public hearing.
Click here to view an earlier post on this subject, which contains links to a map, the petitioner's proposed models, elevations and site plan modifications, plus the Feb. 27th Planning Commission meeting minutes.
Hold this date
The 2009 Annual Meeting of the Manors at Central Park Condominium Association will be held on Wednesday evening, January 21, 2009 at Utica High School. Sign-in will be from 6:00 PM until 6:30 PM, with the meeting beginning promptly at 6:30 PM.
You will receive a mailing shortly with full details and an agenda.
You will receive a mailing shortly with full details and an agenda.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Dec. 16th - Township Board to decide on the Lombardo Request
On Tuesday, Dec. 16th at 7:00 PM, the Shelby Twp. Board of Trustees will make their decision on the Lombardo Homes request to build two-story units instead of one-story ranch units on Manors Lots 1-15. While this is not a formal public hearing like the Planning Commission held, Mr. Wynn, (the Shelby Twp. Planning Director) assures me that the public will be permitted to speak during this agenda item prior to the Board making their decision.
Click here to view a web page with the meeting agenda, plus the background information that has been prepared for the Township Board members.
This weekend, I plan to distribute copies of this flyer to every door of the Manors with the details about this meeting.
Click here to view a web page with the meeting agenda, plus the background information that has been prepared for the Township Board members.
This weekend, I plan to distribute copies of this flyer to every door of the Manors with the details about this meeting.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Planning Commission Votes 7-1 for Lombardo
At the Nov. 24th Shelby Township Planning Commission meeting, a public hearing was held on Lombardo Home's request to modify the Manors site plan to permit two story units on Lots 1-15 instead of ranch style units. Click here to read the remarks I gave during the public comment portion of the public hearing. After closing the public hearing, the Commission voted 7 to 1 (with 1 abstention) to forward a favorable recommendation to the Shelby Township Board of Trustees.
From my video recording of the meeting, the motion to recommend approval was made by Commissioner Jerry Moffitt and seconded by Michael Thornton. They recommended approval based on their findings that the proposal is consistent and compatible with the existing Central Park PUD and that their recommendation was subject to the following conditions:
1) the future development of cluster units on Walter and Stebbins Courts will be limited to the Kensington one-story model that was approved with the original PUD
2) the Master Deed for these units (on Manors Lots 1-15) will be modified to insure appropriate yard and exterior building maintenance
3) the petitioner will be limited to offering only five of the six model floor plans listed in his proposal, (excludes "The Madison"); each of the various exterior elevations shown for those five remaining model floor plans will be permitted.
4) patio/deck sizes and appearances will be limited based on a design standard; no patio/deck shall extend more than 5 feet beyond the rear building envelope
5) sidewalks will be provided on both sides of Walter Court to facilitate pedestrian access.
Roll Call Vote:
Mr. Moffitt - Yes
Mr. Thornton - Yes
Mr. Frame - Yes
Mr. Deyo - Yes
Mrs. Hodge - (abstain)
Mr. Kassab - Yes
Mrs. Dearlove - Yes
Mr. Viar - No
Mr. Toia - Yes
I am not surprised by the Planning Commission's decision but I am very disappointed by the fact that the Commission chose to ignore my comments
a) requesting that a condition be included in any favorable recommendation preventing applicability to Lot 124
b) concluding that changes to our By-laws and Master Deed were not necessary to address the yard/exterior maintenance concerns.
I found it amazing that the Commission accepted without question the petitioner's primary supporting data, which was that Lombardo's Year-To-Date sales have been 160 homes, 138 which were single family homes. That data is irrelevant, since the real issue here involves changing the plan for single family detached condos on Lots 1-15 from ranch style to two-story style buildings. The petitioner failed to provide any data showing an increasing demand for two-story homes as compared to ranch style homes.
I also found it amusing that in response to my voiced concern about this possibly being used as a precedent to justify future changes elsewhere in the Manors, we were told by Commissioner Moffitt that their actions cannot be used to set a legal precedent. A legal precedent is different than the planning precedent I told them we are concerned about. As if to make our point, the discussion among the commissioners then focused at length on the details surrounding the ranch versus two-story approvals previously granted on the adjacent Kensington property. To address my concern about keeping their approval confined to just these 15 lots, all the Planning Commission had to do was include a sentence in their recommendation noting that since Lots 1-15 are geographically separate from the remaining Manors lots, the loss of visual/architectural continuity is more acceptable there than it would be elsewhere in the Manors at Central Park. Since they apparently didn't want to add that kind of conditional wording to their recommendation, they could have at least had some public discussion among themselves as to why this change made sense for only those particular lots. If faced with another Manors site plan modification request in the future, then the members of that future Planning Commission could read the Nov. 24, 2008 meeting minutes and understand the reasoning and limited intent behind the prior Commission's recommendation for approving the request.
Unfortunately, since the public comment portion of the hearing was over, I was unable to make these points to the Commission during their discussion.
The Planning Commission's recommendation will now go to the Township Board of Trustees, who will make the final decision on it at an upcoming regular meeting. As soon as I find out, I will let everyone know when this meeting will be held. At the Board meeting, we still have one more chance to voice our concerns and hopefully get a more favorable outcome. You can be sure that I will raise the issues noted above when I speak at the Board meeting.
I doubt that the Township can force us to change our Association's Master Deed to redefine exterior maintenance responsibilities or any other parts of the document unless we as an Association also agree to do so. Furthermore, the wording of the Planning Commission's condition is very ambiguous, to the point that it is almost meaningless, since our Master Deed already defines the Association as being responsible for the yard and exterior maintenance of these proposed units. However, if it appears that the Board is inclined to approve the proposed site plan modifications we can still request that they eliminate the Master Deed condition and also ask them to add language to their motion to make it clear that
a) none of the five approved models can be built at a future date on Lot 124
b) Lots 1-15 are geographically isolated enough to accept the loss of visual/architectural continuity with the other Manors units.
From my video recording of the meeting, the motion to recommend approval was made by Commissioner Jerry Moffitt and seconded by Michael Thornton. They recommended approval based on their findings that the proposal is consistent and compatible with the existing Central Park PUD and that their recommendation was subject to the following conditions:
1) the future development of cluster units on Walter and Stebbins Courts will be limited to the Kensington one-story model that was approved with the original PUD
2) the Master Deed for these units (on Manors Lots 1-15) will be modified to insure appropriate yard and exterior building maintenance
3) the petitioner will be limited to offering only five of the six model floor plans listed in his proposal, (excludes "The Madison"); each of the various exterior elevations shown for those five remaining model floor plans will be permitted.
4) patio/deck sizes and appearances will be limited based on a design standard; no patio/deck shall extend more than 5 feet beyond the rear building envelope
5) sidewalks will be provided on both sides of Walter Court to facilitate pedestrian access.
Roll Call Vote:
Mr. Moffitt - Yes
Mr. Thornton - Yes
Mr. Frame - Yes
Mr. Deyo - Yes
Mrs. Hodge - (abstain)
Mr. Kassab - Yes
Mrs. Dearlove - Yes
Mr. Viar - No
Mr. Toia - Yes
I am not surprised by the Planning Commission's decision but I am very disappointed by the fact that the Commission chose to ignore my comments
a) requesting that a condition be included in any favorable recommendation preventing applicability to Lot 124
b) concluding that changes to our By-laws and Master Deed were not necessary to address the yard/exterior maintenance concerns.
I found it amazing that the Commission accepted without question the petitioner's primary supporting data, which was that Lombardo's Year-To-Date sales have been 160 homes, 138 which were single family homes. That data is irrelevant, since the real issue here involves changing the plan for single family detached condos on Lots 1-15 from ranch style to two-story style buildings. The petitioner failed to provide any data showing an increasing demand for two-story homes as compared to ranch style homes.
I also found it amusing that in response to my voiced concern about this possibly being used as a precedent to justify future changes elsewhere in the Manors, we were told by Commissioner Moffitt that their actions cannot be used to set a legal precedent. A legal precedent is different than the planning precedent I told them we are concerned about. As if to make our point, the discussion among the commissioners then focused at length on the details surrounding the ranch versus two-story approvals previously granted on the adjacent Kensington property. To address my concern about keeping their approval confined to just these 15 lots, all the Planning Commission had to do was include a sentence in their recommendation noting that since Lots 1-15 are geographically separate from the remaining Manors lots, the loss of visual/architectural continuity is more acceptable there than it would be elsewhere in the Manors at Central Park. Since they apparently didn't want to add that kind of conditional wording to their recommendation, they could have at least had some public discussion among themselves as to why this change made sense for only those particular lots. If faced with another Manors site plan modification request in the future, then the members of that future Planning Commission could read the Nov. 24, 2008 meeting minutes and understand the reasoning and limited intent behind the prior Commission's recommendation for approving the request.
Unfortunately, since the public comment portion of the hearing was over, I was unable to make these points to the Commission during their discussion.
The Planning Commission's recommendation will now go to the Township Board of Trustees, who will make the final decision on it at an upcoming regular meeting. As soon as I find out, I will let everyone know when this meeting will be held. At the Board meeting, we still have one more chance to voice our concerns and hopefully get a more favorable outcome. You can be sure that I will raise the issues noted above when I speak at the Board meeting.
I doubt that the Township can force us to change our Association's Master Deed to redefine exterior maintenance responsibilities or any other parts of the document unless we as an Association also agree to do so. Furthermore, the wording of the Planning Commission's condition is very ambiguous, to the point that it is almost meaningless, since our Master Deed already defines the Association as being responsible for the yard and exterior maintenance of these proposed units. However, if it appears that the Board is inclined to approve the proposed site plan modifications we can still request that they eliminate the Master Deed condition and also ask them to add language to their motion to make it clear that
a) none of the five approved models can be built at a future date on Lot 124
b) Lots 1-15 are geographically isolated enough to accept the loss of visual/architectural continuity with the other Manors units.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
