Proposed 80-Home Garfield Development Runs Into Road, Tree-Clearing Concerns

A proposed new development with 40 duplexes – or 80 individual homes – at the southwest corner of Lone Tree and Harris roads raised questions from Garfield Township planning commissioners Wednesday about connections to the neighboring Lone Tree subdivision and tree clearing on the property. 

White Pine Ridge is the latest in a series of proposed housing developments for the site in recent years. A previous development team proposed a 40-unit single-family subdivision for the property in 2020, which was approved but never built. Last summer, planning commissioners held a conceptual review to give informal feedback on a new duplex development eyed for the site.

Concerns the board flagged at that meeting arose again this week when the latest iteration came to them for discussion. Overseen by Vistara LLC, White Pine Ridge would encompass nearly 20 acres at the Lone Tree/Harris intersection, with additional access from the north end of Zimmerman Road (pictured, outlined in blue). The Grand Traverse County Road Commission is looking at extending Zimmerman to Harris and has discussed the new subdivision, with developers saying they have no problem with the road extension plans. The 40 duplexes would equate to about four housing units per acre.

Any new neighborhood on the property has long been envisioned to connect to the adjacent Lone Tree subdivision. Township staff noted that previous approvals for Lone Tree’s buildout were in fact conditional upon future connections being made to properties to the east, including the White Pine Ridge site. However, both Vistara LLC and the homeowners associations of Lone Tree II and III told township officials they don’t want the connection.

The HOA boards wrote in a joint letter that additional traffic from White Pine Ridge “could cause a safety hazard for our residents.” Lone Tree has a trail system that connects to TC West Senior High School, but does not have neighborhood sidewalks. Accordingly, “our residents use the roads to walk, exercise their pets, and walk with their small children,” the boards wrote. The associations have taken past measures “to reduce the speeds that drivers travel when they use Lone Tree’s roads as a cut-through from Harris Road to Long Lake Road,” they wrote, adding they were “not in favor of additional traffic in our subdivision.”

The associations also said that neighborhood residents had to pay to maintain their subdivision roads, with additional traffic requiring “accelerated maintenance” and more “costs to our residents.” White Pine Ridge already has its two required exits/entrances and doesn’t need the Lone Beech Drive connection for access, the boards argued. White Pine Ridge representative Jeff Cockfield of Grand Traverse Engineering agreed, saying “we just don’t think it’s necessary” and that emergency authorities had given a preliminary sign-off on a design without the connection.

However, planning commissioners adamantly disagreed. With the connection expressly called for in the township’s zoning ordinance as well as in prior project conditions, the board said they couldn’t waive the requirement simply because the neighborhoods don’t like it. “Nobody wants that connection, but we’re saying the connection is the right thing for the community in general for our neighborhoods,” said Vice Chair Cara Eule. Chair Chris DeGood agreed, saying a letter of opposition is “nothing for us to hang our hat on as a planning commission” to violate “our own ordinance and our own previous approvals.”

“Not having a connection is a non-starter for this planning commission,” DeGood flatly told Cockfield.

Planning commissioners flagged one other area of concern. Significant tree buffers on the western and southern edges of the property are planned to be removed for the neighborhood buildout. The township’s ordinance states that natural features are to be retained as much possible, “particularly where they furnish a barrier or buffer between the project and adjoining properties.” Township Planning Director John Sych said the applicant hadn’t demonstrated why the buffers couldn’t be preserved.

Cockfield acknowledged tree removal was a key part of the plans. “The reality is that we are going to pretty much clear cut everything in order to mass grade it and make the road system work and make the units work,” he said, adding that the “undulating” topography made development challenging otherwise. Cockfield said developers would create a landscaping plan to put back in buffering where possible, but that keeping the existing trees “isn’t feasible under this layout.”

Planning commissioners pushed back, asking developers to revisit the buffers. “There's no documentation to support why we should accept this,” said DeGood. The board also hoped to see more neighborhood amenities in the plans, like parks and sidewalks/walking trails. DeGood said that ultimately, developers may need to decrease the number of units or compromise on layout in order to create a plan that’s more community friendly and addresses township concerns.

“We’re really excited about this development and these homes coming to our community, but I think we’d like to see maybe a balance struck,” he said. Cockfield said the project team would “huddle up” and work on updating plans, which would then be reviewed at a future meeting.