Join the Movement to Care for the Land, and Our Neighbors 

What you can do:

Attend Tuesday, May 27th Planning Commission meeting at 7pm

Lodi Township Hall, 3755 Pleasant Lake Rd, Ann Arbor 

Please express your views to both the Planning Commission and the Board.

UPDATE:

The Final Site Plan for Arbor Preserve is now in front of the Lodi Township Planning Commission. After their vote, it goes to the Board. Please express your views to both the Planning Commission and the Board. If the Board approves the Final Site Plan, the large Toll Brothers development for 107 luxury homes will destroy the fields, forests, and critters that now occupy the site and impact the water and wells of nearby residents and neighbors - those in direct proximity Orchard Grove and Alex Drive, as well as many downstream neighborhoods and the City of Saline:  

As of February 4, 2025, Toll Brothers (applicant) is requesting site plan approval for a 107 unit luxury home development proposal (Arbor Preserve) with two sites: North, located on the east side of Wagner Rd between Scio Church Rd and Waters Rd, and South, located on the north side of Waters Rd between Wagner and Alex Drive. The sites are upstream of Stonebridge, which is in a flood plain and has experienced flooding issues. The sites border the existing Orchard Grove community and neighbors on Alex Drive, which have had concerns with existing wells drying up. The sites are also upstream of the groundwater recharge area of the Saline wellhead protection area. Downstream, this flow will additionally affect: Travis Pointe, Lake Forest, Maple Creek, East Horizons, Brookview

Highlands, Brookview Golf Course, Guenther Gardens and the Saline River and River Raisin.

There are no possible connections to municipal water/sewer. Two wastewater treatment plants are proposed to be built and privately managed and discharge effluent to the Rouse Drain. Stormwater runoff is proposed to be managed through the construction of diversion berms, swales, and detention basins.

Next up: possible agenda item on the Tues May 27th at 7pm, Planning Commission meeting

Meeting location: Lodi Township Hall, 3755 Pleasant Lake Rd, Ann Arbor 

On Tuesday, March 25 the Lodi Township Planning Commission met to consider the FINAL SITE PLAN submission for the two Toll Brothers luxury homes developments called Arbor Preserve North and South. 

SUMMARY from 3/25: The Planning Commission was disappointed in the submission that has gross inaccuracies in their own data as well as missing information, and Chair Strader told Toll Brothers to revise their plans and come back.  The agenda/packet for the April 22nd meeting is now available and this topic is not on it.  Check back for updates, the agendas are typically published the week prior to a meeting.  Listen to the recording of the past meeting:

Recording of 3/25 PC Meeting

Article in Sun Times

Note: The Sun Times article has two inaccuracies:

• Next Planning Commission meeting is April 22nd (not 29th)

• Tree data - a member of the public pointed out how the developer plans include summaries that are grossly underrepresenting the number of Landmark trees (large, old growth trees) to be destroyed. Toll Brothers did not state actual numbers in the plans, however a local data expert digitized those plans and summarized what the massive data Toll Brothers submitted on paper really says. Toll Brothers say 38 Landmark trees will be destroyed, when in actuality adding up the data in their own plans shows that they are proposing destroying 325 Landmark trees and destroying over 3300 trees total.  See actual tree data here.

If you want to have input about these development plans, please attend the meeting, write the Planning Commission (and Board of Trustees) or do both. We hope you will also look at the Livable Lodi letter, to EGLE, the state environmental agency, linked HERE, opposing the private wastewater treatment plants the developers propose. If you agree with the points made, please add your name to the letter (and share it with others). 

For detailed arguments against these developments, feel free to examine a document written by Livable Lodi, accessed HERE.

A few talking points you might consider in communicating with the Planning Commission and Board of Trustees are below.

Thank you.

Livable Lodi

Talking Points for communicating with township officials:

The developers missed the deadline for the Final Site Plan; the Preliminary Site Plan has expired.

Arbor Preserve was sold by Red Equities and is now owned by Toll Brothers who have a dreadful record of willing and widespread Clean Water Act (and other) violations.

The developers were granted a PUD zoning but are providing none of the community benefits required for fulfillment of a Planned Unit Development.

The developers ask for a deviation from the PUD open space requirement (to lessen the required amount). The open space they do propose is mostly land that has been bulldozed and replanted; it is not natural land that supports native plants and animals.

The development devastates a complex ecosystem with massive tree removal, cut-and-fill construction that alters naturally hilly topography, bulldozing of large swaths of animal habitat, and degrading dozens of wetlands. This type of development grossly violates the principles expressed in the Lodi Master Plan, which represents a contract with Lodi residents.

The proposal deviates from the Amended Consent Judgment, Zoning Ordinances, Master Plan, as well as other massive environmental concerns and federal and state level concerns.  

The developer has many inconsistencies within their own submitted plans, for example, in the tree summaries they provide of their own data, they are grossly underrepresenting the number of landmark trees they are proposing destroying. What else are they misrepresenting?

The development impacts the great majority of 36 documented state-protected wetlands as well as the Rouse Drain and tributaries. No on-site mitigation is proposed.

The treatment plants will pollute the Rouse drain, which feeds the Saline River and River Raisin.

The treatment plants run the risk of creating noxious odors and are located close to the township’s most densely populated neighborhood. This siting represents environmental injustice.

The treatment plants and the seven stormwater detention ponds will have no governmental management; neither the township nor the developer will have responsibility or liability. Those obligations will rest with a homeowners’ association (HOA) of questionable expertise and financial resources. Who will bear the consequences if they mismanage the plants, have accidents, or run out of operational funds?

The treatment plants will discharge a great quantity of (polluted) water into a fragile forested ecosystem that will be badly degraded by the changes in water volume. These forests are rare and are classified as ‘imperiled’ at the state and global level. They are called Wet-Mesic Flatwoods. Some of the affected woodlands are on the development site, some on private land. The seven detention ponds also discharge water into this shallow stream system, which is often dry. Flooding, death of native plants, and winter icing are likely.

No outside agency has responsibility for managing the seven detention ponds. Will these create mosquito breeding sites? Will mosquitoes be controlled with toxins that affect people and wildlife in the area?

State law requires that the woodlands on the site be regarded as the home to two varieties of endangered bat, due to many historical records of their presence and 100 recently documented bat roosting trees. The developer has the responsibility to demonstrate that these bats are not present and has not done so.

The development requires 107 new wells which will deplete already-taxed aquifers.

The development requires many permits that have not been received—eg, soil erosion control, stormwater management, wetlands disturbance—thus final approval would violate the conditions of the amended consent judgment and is entirely inappropriate.

Related Public documents from Lodi Township website:

Plans for Arbor Preserve

ARBOR PRESERVE NORTH
ARBOR PRESERVE SOUTH
Engineering Review of Presented Plans
Planner Review of Plans

Planning Commission

When: March 25, 2025 @ 7pm 

 Where:  3755 Pleasant Lake Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48103

CLICK HERE FOR AGENDA
CLICK HERE FOR COMPLETE PACKET

Public Record: Amended Consent Judgment 2023 - Parts 1 and 2

The above and below images show the natural beauty of the land that is at risk.

Concerns about the Wastewater treatment plants being proposed: Extended Aeration Plants:

Extended aeration plants, while effective for wastewater treatment, have limitations including the inability to achieve denitrification or phosphorus removal without additional processes, limited flexibility to adapt to changing effluent requirements, and higher energy consumption due to longer aeration periods. EPA

Here's a more detailed breakdown of the problems associated with extended aeration plants:

• Limited Capabilities:

  • Denitrification and Phosphorus Removal: Extended aeration plants, as a standard process, are not designed to remove nitrogen (denitrification) or phosphorus efficiently. These removals require additional unit processes. 

  • Flexibility: The fixed design of extended aeration plants can limit their ability to adapt to changing effluent requirements resulting from regulatory changes. 

• Operational Challenges:

  • Energy Consumption: Extended aeration plants require a longer aeration period compared to other activated sludge processes, leading to higher energy costs. 

  • Sludge Bulking: If not properly managed, extended aeration systems can experience sludge bulking, where the sludge becomes too light and fails to settle properly in the clarifier. 

  • Foaming: Excessive aeration can also lead to foaming in the aeration basin, which can be difficult to control and can negatively impact the operation of the plant. 

• Other Considerations:

  • Safety: Sewage treatment plants, including those using extended aeration, present safety risks such as exposure to hazardous gases (like hydrogen sulfide), infectious diseases, and working in confined spaces. 

  • Cost: While extended aeration can be cost-effective for certain applications, the initial investment and ongoing operational costs can be significant.