Memo in support of Mtn for Entry of Consent Judgment FOR FILING

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Case 1:10-cv-00210-PLM Doc #135 Filed 07/26/11 Page 8 of 20 Page ID#1761D. The Proposed SettlementAgreement and Consent JudgmentConcurrently with the ongoing discovery and briefing, representatives of theparties have continued their efforts to resolve their dispute through a negotiatedagreement. The parties negotiated a settlement agreement that resolves all claimsin this matter and provides for entry of a Consent Judgment. The ConsentJudgment would allow Plaintiff to propose a site plan for a residential andwaterfront community on the Subject Property, centered around re-use of the oldindustrial site. The key features of the potential project are a 66-slip marina, anadjacent 25-suite hotel, residential dwellings, a “walker’s only,” environmentallysensitive, 9-hole golf course, and an equestrian center.The parties were assisted in this Consent Judgment by Hank Byma, a landplanner retained by Plaintiff with extensive experience regarding Great Lakes landuse. His firm has done a complete analysis of the land over a series of years,including wetlands, topography, soils, access routes, flora and fauna (includingthreatened species), viewshed, historical resources, and overall site context withinthe broader community. He provided his analyses to the Township and public, andhe also provided an extensive set of responses to key questions regarding his work.A copy of those questions and answers is appended as Exhibit 2. The proposed usesin the Consent Judgment are informed by Mr. Byma’s analyses and provide for themost intense uses to be made in the land that has been under industrial use fordecades, thereby allowing the more sensitive acreage to be left as open space. TheTownship also consulted with its outside planning and zoning expert, Mark Sisson.8
Case 1:10-cv-00210-PLM Doc #135 Filed 07/26/11 Page 9 of 20 Page ID#1762The Consent Judgment does not displace the Township zoning ordinance orrezone any of the Subject Property. And the Consent Judgment does not authorizethe issuance of any building permits or allow any construction activity to commence.Rather, the Consent Judgment sets forth the terms and conditions under whichPlaintiff might submit a site plan to the Township Planning Commission for itsreview and approval. 6The Permitted Uses and Special Approval Uses that may be included in this siteplan are set forth within seven zones, delineated A – G, with the specific uses andlimits for those uses specified for each zone. There is an overall cap of 100residential units 7 on the entire 307 acres, and most of the acreage, approximately80%, would remain as open space with no buildings or roadways.The Permitted Uses and Special Approval Uses that make up the developmentauthorized by the Consent Judgment are not a new or wholly different set of usesfor the Subject Property. Instead, the Permitted Uses and Special Approval Usesare generally a subset of the Permitted Uses and Special Approval Uses that wouldbe available if Plaintiff were to prevail in this litigation, as summarized in the tablebelow:6The Consent Judgment also has no effect on the authority of other regulatoryagencies, such as the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, which regulatescritical dune areas on the Subject Property.7The number increases to 115 if no hotel is constructed.9
Page 2 and 3: Case 1:10-cv-00210-PLM Doc #135 Fil
Page 20: Case 1:10-cv-00210-PLM Doc #135 Fil

Memo in support of Mtn for Entry of Consent Judgment FOR FILING

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?