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

UPDATE: Per the Lodi Township website:

The September 2nd Board of Trustee Meeting will include
Arbor Preserve North & South Final Site Plan. Toll Brothers has submitted a resubmittal package of the Final PUD for Arbor Preserve North & South.

CLICK HERE for Arbor Preserve North Final Plans
CLICK HERE for Arbor Preserve South Final Plans
CLICK HERE for the Submittal Package 

The meeting is at 6:30pm at the Lodi Township Hall

Reminder: On July 22nd, the Lodi Township Planning Commission recommended denial of the Toll Brothers May 2025 Arbor Preserve site plans, 7-0 vote.

Next Step it will go to the Board of Trustees, at the 

Tues Sep 2nd 6:30pm meeting

While this is an important good step, note that in 2023 the PC unanimously voted to deny and yet the Board approved 5-2.

EGLE has issued draft permits and has Public Notice open through July 30th for comments, and will be deciding whether there is "sufficient public interest" to hold a public hearing.

Support transparency and the rights of residents. 

This proposal continues to offer NO public benefit and plenty of harm and health concerns. 

DEMAND a Public Hearing, COMMENT directly to EGLE: 

Click --> South (MI0060383 – Arbor Preserve South WWTP)

Click --> North (MI0060385 – Arbor Preserve North WWTP)

Comment on both North and South.

To support easier access, all the EGLE files can also be found HERE

What you can do:

Comment to EGLE and REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING, BEFORE July 30th:

"NO to private wastewater treatment plants, YES to healthy living conditions and to a Public Hearing."

Comment on SOUTH  MI0060383 – Arbor Preserve South WWTP:

Comment on NORTH   MI0060385 – Arbor Preserve North WWTP:

Attend Tuesday, September 2nd Board meeting at 6:30pm 

Arbor Preserve will be on the agenda

Lodi Township Hall, 3755 Pleasant Lake Rd, Ann Arbor 

Help Distribute the Flier

Flier HERE & Second Flier in Español y English

Please also express your views to both the Lodi Township Planning Commission 

and the Board of Trustees.

Talking Points for communicating with township officials:

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 will be 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 Feb 2025 plans, the tree summaries they provided 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, a natural creek 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 potentially causing neighboring wells to fail. Digging deeper wells is the developers proposal, yet doing so is not a sustainable solution as deeper aquifers don't recharge overnight, some took thousands of years to develop and would take lifetimes to rebuild : See the Groundwater Crisis.

As the groundwater is taxed by more wells, what could happen with the Gelman Plume just over a mile away?  We don't want carcinogenic dioxins in our wells.

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.

Public Documents from Lodi Township Website:

Plans for Arbor Preserve, reviewed at July Planning Commission mtg and likely on September Board of Trustees mtg

(5/22/25 Submission)

July 22 Planning Commission Information

Arbor Preserve North Plans
Arbor Preserve South Plans
Arbor Preserve resubmittal letters
Arbor Preserve Traffic Study
Wetland Study Part 1
Wetland Study Part 2
Open Space Easement
Access Easement 

Additional Information – SAFD

Engineer Review

Planner Review

(Feb 2025 Submission)

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 

(includes Planner/Engineer Reports and letters from Public)

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.