I had like to call to order a regular meeting at the
zoning Board of appeals for Wednesday, February 11th
at 7:00 PM Please rise for the Pledge
of Allegiance, my pledge of allegiance
To the flag in the United States of America,
and to the Republic for which it stands.
Nation, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
Justice for all. All.
Item three. Roll call.
Mr. Assessor. Present.
Mr. Lindsey? I am here. Mr. Green. Present. Mr. Clifft?
Present. Mr. Watts? Here. Mr. Perry Present. Mr.
Aya is absent. Mr. Jersey's present. Chairman Stevi.
Present. Mr.
Chair, I'd like to make a motion to, uh,
excuse Mr. Sia. Support.
Support. Okay. Uh, we have a motion in Mr. Jersey.
Support with Mr. Watts to excuse No, Mr.
SFA from today's meeting. All in favor? Aye. Aye.
Anybody opposed? Okay.
He is, he's excused.
Takes us to item number four, adoption of the agenda.
Mr. Chair, I'd like to make one change to the agenda.
I'd like to make, uh, a motion to cha
to move item seven on the agenda to the April.
It would be the April 8th meeting.
And then re keep the rest of the agenda as written.
Support, discussion, Mr.
Chair discussion? Okay. Sure. Okay. Uh, yes. Discussion.
First I heard Mr. Watts and I heard Mr. Green.
So this has been adjourned
or postponed at least two times.
And looking back at the records on BSNA,
this has been going on since 20 May of 22.
It's been in court, he's been ticketed,
and now we're gonna play the shuffle game of postponing.
I know it's only two months, but if I was a business in
that area and had to look at that
i'd, it's disgusting.
And I think we're, I think we're doing a disservice
to the rest of the people by letting this continue
to go on. It's my comments.
Okay, Mr. Green. So try to clean this.
I, this type of item up. I've been thinking about it.
So I, so it brings up a couple questions.
First of all, it's been rescheduled till April.
It, and I'm wondering why.
I'm just wondering why it's not
rescheduled till the next meeting.
Is that something you can answer, Mr.
Or No, it was resch.
This particular item was rescheduled till April,
and I'm just curious why it wants it scheduled
to the next meeting, April.
Okay. So that, that, that verifies. Okay.
They asked for April. So I
guess we, the only way to solve this problem is we need
to go to our bylaws and our rules.
I people who reschedule meetings continuously.
I mean, once in a while there's gonna be a legitimate reason
because something happened or something like that.
But this isn't the case here. In a lot of these situations.
It's not the case if you look at that particular piece
of property or when to get into it.
But you can see what the reason is.
So I think that if people,
I think we should make a, I'm gonna give you guys a chance
to think about this, and I'm
gonna make a motion at the next meeting.
I think we should have our bylaws read
that You can do one rescheduling
and then the rescheduling has to be the next meeting,
if at all possible, based on numbers of items
and whatever the situation might be.
We'll leave that up to Nicole
and maybe the rule should state that if they don't meet
that criteria, that the item is withdrawn
and then they have to reapply.
And that might be a motivation to get people
to stop rescheduling.
Again, taking into consideration there could be a reason
that's out of their control.
But in most cases, we're seeing this used as a tool.
So think about how many reschedulings you think would be,
uh, fair to a petitioner.
And I think our rules should reflect that we're going
to use that number.
And if they're not, let's say they reschedule once the next
meeting is on the agenda,
we're gonna move whether they're here or not.
Okay. Or if they don't want that,
they can withdraw their item and reapply.
So I'll have that written up.
Yeah, because I was gonna say, so Mr. Green Yeah.
If you could make a stab of a potential rule to be added
to our bylaws, we could add it under
new business for next meeting.
Yes. Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Chair? Yes. Mr. Cliff.
Uh, I'm curious as to the reason I gotta stand up.
I can't see her. I'm curious as to the reason they gave you
for the rescheduling this time.
No reason.
We're gonna change something.
We don't like what we got. We're gonna make a change.
I'm on vacation. Nothing. We got nothing. Nope.
So this will give us a tool then that we can use. Right?
Right. That's all. I'll
withdraw my support from that motion.
Yeah. So, um, yeah,
I'm not gonna support that motion either.
I think we should go ahead and hear it. I'll yield the
Floor. Well, Mr. Point of order. Richards
shere.
I I think it's already even pulled off the agenda,
so I just made a motion to change the agenda motion,
but we haven't, we haven't voted on
That. There was no votes, sir, on
pulling this off the agenda
tonight, because somebody calls
and asks for a reschedule, doesn't necessarily mean
that they'll be granted a reschedule.
Okay. So we had a,
Did you confirm that, that it would be moved to April?
Yes. Okay. It, so I, I,
I appreciate the board's thoughts,
but unfortunately this time, unfortunately,
I think we're gonna have to grant it
and we can address the rules
of procedure, um, moving forward.
Okay. So we have a motion by Mr. Jersey with support.
I withdrew my support. You withdrew your support,
but support, okay.
And support by Mr. Green to approve the agenda as modified.
All in favor?
Aye. Aye. Is anybody opposed? I'm
Opposed. I'm
Opposed. Okay. So you have Mr. Lindsey
and Mr. Cliff. Were opposed?
Mr. Green. Mr. Watts? Mr. Watts?
No, I'll pay your, okay. Okay. So the agenda is adopted.
Takes us to item number five,
which is approval of the minutes.
So move.
Okay. What was that
Table? Him, right?
Yeah. I didn't see his 14th. Yeah.
So do we have a motion to table him?
Uh, I make a motion, Mr.
Chairman, I'll make a motion, uh, to, uh, uh,
table the approval of the minutes for both, uh,
the January 14th
and the January 28th, 2026. Meetings
Support. Okay. So
we have a motion by Mr. Cliff, support by Mr.
Assessor to table the approval
of the minutes from January 14th and January 28th.
Uh, all in favor, aye. Aye. Is anybody opposed? Okay.
So the minutes will be reviewed at the next meeting.
Thanks us. Item number six.
Item six, applicant, global sign and awning.
Representative i zito.
Description, 1 3 6 2 5 12 mile branch requested permission
to retain a ground sign with an overall height of 17.4 feet,
a 9.39 foot under clearance overall sign area of 96 inches
by 96 inches.
64 square feet, which includes a, which includes a three,
three foot by eight foot 24 square foot.
Electronic message center setback six feet from the sidewalk
in place of previous variance for ground sign,
dated 8 22 2012.
And just, this is just also for everybody
that comes up when you start, if you could give your name
and address before you do your presentation. Yeah.
My name is Ed Ciro from Global Science and Honoring.
We represent Finn, the store.
And your address. 13 6 2 5 West 12 Mile. Okay.
And I am Jennifer.
Okay. Do you wanna take us through your,
what your request is?
I'm sorry, go up. Yeah.
So the pole sign is existing.
It was hit by a car, um, two years ago.
Little over two years.
And there was a police, um, report stating that.
So the sign was replaced, the digital sign was replaced
because it was damaged
and it was replaced to the three by eight.
And also there was a pole sign that had two lights
that sign, that pole was hit.
So those two lights were installed where the sign post is.
But three months ago, there was a ticket issued to them
because of those two lights
that were installed on the pole sign, we got hired
to obtain a permit for them.
So when we applied for a permit prior to issue a ticket
for them, two days after they got a ticket for those lights.
So we had to bring down those lights for them.
But also the sign, the permit was not approved
because the, it had exceeded, the digital sign
exceeded the 25%,
and now they are at 24 square feet rather than
16 square feet.
So we applied for a variance for them.
Unfortunately, last meeting, we did not receive a letter
that there was a meeting that day scheduled for them.
So we could not attend that.
Okay. Um, thank you for that explanation.
Um, this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone in the audience
wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing any, or close the public portion
and turn it over to the board for questions and discussion.
Mr. Chair? Yes, Mr. Jersey?
Um, so regarding the sign, I, I don't have a problem
with the initial sign that was there.
I do have a problem with the LED
that you did install without, without a permit.
Um, I do also take, take, um, take exception to the,
to the lights that you put on the, on the side
of the building, which is a separate issue.
It's probably a site plan issue.
Um, but I think it's, um, it,
it causes tremendous amount of light pollution.
I think the LED, the LED, um, display
that you currently have on, on, on the sign is too bright
and doesn't fit our ordinance as well.
On top of it being out, out of spec, I think it's too, it's,
it's way too bright and the brightness is a factor as well.
Um, that corner, that,
that liquor store's been there forever, I don't think
that any additional needed for signage, um, other than
what you currently have on the building
and on the pole sign is needed.
That's my opinion. And I'll yield the floor. Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Lindsay? Uh, I would echo some
of those same, same comments.
Uh, you know, when we look at the sign,
I don't have any issues with, you know, the sign, uh,
itself, the size of it, really,
the setback, anything like that?
Um, I, I have an issue with the, the LED as well.
Um, I don't see that there's any unreasonable impact
or burden, uh, to maintain compliance
to the, the ordinance here.
Uh, it's clearly self-imposed.
Uh, there's nothing unique about the property that,
that we need, uh, additional signage, uh,
with LEDs and things like that.
Uh, I do think it's gonna be a detriment.
And, and clearly the, the reason
for an LED sign is going to be economic.
So I don't see any reason, uh, why we should approve this.
It, it's, there's no reason that we need a variance here.
I'll yield
Mr. Chair. Yes,
Mr. Watts.
So I got a couple que questions. The sign was hit?
Yes. And it was 16 feet.
And when you replaced, when it was replaced,
it went to 24 foot? Is that what you said?
Yes. So it was two by six and I was three by, I'm sorry.
Uh, two by eight. Now it's three by eight.
Okay. They Lowered the brightness when, um,
Dave mentioned it to me, I called them
and they did lower it.
So, and We're talking about an existing sign, you know,
like two and a half years.
It's not like we're installing it right now.
Hold on now, hold on. So, when the sign was replaced
after the accident, was there a permit
pulled to replace that?
No, because their insurance company replaced it.
And it's the same frame. They did not touch the frame.
So it was just inside that frame
Is So to Mr.
Watchpoint, is that re is there,
was there a permit required to replace it?
Sorry. No problem.
Yes, there's always a permit required
for signage in the city of Warren.
Any changes, anything like that, we usually work
with them under this situation,
but there wasn't a permit pulled at all.
Okay. So, so we have a permit issue that wasn't followed
and then they increase the sign size of the sign.
Correct. And then at some point in the last year,
they added those two humongous spotlights
that were blinding everybody on 12 Mile.
Correct. Plus
the LEDs are too bright.
Uh, we didn't measure that, but it, they appeared
To be. Okay.
All right.
I, I have, I have, I have problem
with not getting a permit to replace it and,
and then increasing the sign
and then come in here and plead a hardship.
And I think what drew a lot of attention
to it was the spotlights that were put on top
that was blinding people a half mile down 12 mile.
And yes, I happened to come by there and see it too.
And I, I go by that way every day.
And I know, I knew they were, they were just put up. So I,
They Got, it's too much for the,
it's too much for the neighborhood.
If it's blinding people on 12 mile,
it's blinding people across the street at the homes over
there, the homes be, uh, next to it to the, to the east
and then to put up a sign without a permit.
I just have a problem with that and people coming in
and crying that, that they didn't know
I I'm gonna be a no vote on this. Thank you. Okay.
I have three police report that there was a theft I,
you know, in that area, so that,
that's why those lights were there.
And when the post was hit, they didn't allow him to put on
Back on. Ma'am,
I'm not gonna Argue sound a question.
It's like, I don't know if Mr. Watts has a question for her
Or, well, let me just, I'm not gonna argue the point about
what the police reports are got hit.
I understand that. And do I feel bad?
Yeah, I do because it costs money.
But to not get a permit and follow the city ordinance
and then to increase the size of the sign
and create the problem, that's not our fault.
Okay. That's the business owner's fault. Or whoever.
If you guys did the sign for not following the city
ordinance, that's end the story.
I'm not gonna debate it with you.
Thank you, Mr. Wats. Any other questions or discussion?
Mr. Chair? Yes, Mr. Green.
So, which part of this request are,
my understanding is we're gonna grant some of it.
So, which this to clear this up for me then.
So are we going to, uh, allow them to retain the
overall, the main sign?
I, I would be in favor of, you know,
retaining the current sign that's there.
Just losing the LED, losing the LED component on that sign.
I'd be in favor of that.
So now I guess a quick follow up question to Steve, um,
going through the packet and looking there is,
there's a current, is there a variance granted on,
I thought I saw a variance currently granted on that sign,
the pole sign, the 17.4
There, there was a variance
before, I believe the actual signage minus the EMC
was the same size.
Um, and that previously had a variance.
I was trying to do that research
before you asked the question.
I haven't gotten there, but I believe that that's
what it was from prior looking.
Yeah, I mean, I am looking at 8 12 98, um,
the variance grant at 8 12 98.
This is, um,
So why is it okay for them matter?
Why is it like half a mile away?
They went and got a variance. Okay.
Why we're here And, and it was approved at that time.
So they,
In 2012, that one has the sign up to 66. And
Can I say something?
Oh, unfortunately, it's like,
only if there's somebody has a
question directed towards you at this moment.
'cause uh, I have one more. Okay, go
Ahead. I'll yield the floor.
So
It looks like as far as in reference to a permit,
it looks like in 23 that there was a permit
required and the permit was, and you've got the permit.
So was it your understanding then,
when you got the permit in 23,
because this sign was only damaged that you didn't have
to get another permit?
So we were just hired right now
because there was a violation sent to them.
So their insurance companies the one that replaced
that digital sign, Uhhuh.
So that's why I am following up right now.
And I already drove around.
And there is other signs less than quarter mile from them
that they have 75% of their
Sign area. The, the only problem
with that is, is,
And this sign is existing, as I said, we're not putting
Something new.
You can, you can get up, everybody can get up here
and say, uh, this, you know, there's a lot
of examples in the city
of Warren of what we're trying to do.
I mean, that's an understandable argument,
but it's not, it doesn't really hold a lot of water
because just
because everybody else has it doesn't mean that
someone else can have it.
That's why we applied For 'cause we're asking.
I get, that's why I'm giving the opportunity to say that.
And I appreciate that. And it's, uh,
I can see where, I can see where it get confusing.
So that was it. Thank you.
That yield back to my yield. Thank you Mr. Green.
Mr. Chair? Yes. Mr. Cliff? Yeah.
So kind of following in the footsteps of, uh,
the secretary's comment.
It looks, it looks like that variance granted in August
of 1998 covers everything that's there except for the, uh,
increased square footage of the, uh, message board
In 98, August 12th of 98.
I'm gonna read that Vanessa Food Store granted permission
to add a three foot by eight foot 24 square foot panel
to an existing six foot by eight foot,
48 square foot ground sign erected in the P zone,
17 foot high, no less than four feet from the sidewalk
with an eight foot under clearance to grade
the requested 72 square foot zoning board
of appeals approved in 63.
Uh, 47 square foot ground signed,
16 foot eight high four feet from the sidewalk.
So how does that mash up? We're,
I think It's, we're we're 0.4 feet taller.
Mm-hmm. And
64 Square feet.
9.39 foot under clearance. Where's our under clearance?
Eight foot. So it sits higher.
The under clearance is a one and a third foot higher.
The overall height of the sign is a half a foot taller than
what the, what the variance granted in 98 talks about.
And, uh, sign area 96 by 96,
which is 64 square feet. It's
The same That that appears to be.
It's the same 64
And I'm not quibbling over a half a foot.
My issues with the addition, I guess my issue is
with the addition of the LED message board
that exceeds the allowable, uh,
limit by permit.
I just wanted to point that out.
Oh, you good Look
Mr. Chair? Yes. Mr.
Jersey.
Um, so Steve, real quick,
so the initial sign
for finesse was that one damaged during,
during this traffic accident, they replaced that sign.
So I'm guessing, so lemme see
if I got this whole story straight.
So they, the accident takes out the sign,
they put a new sign up without a permit.
Correct. The sign is a little bit outta whack from the
current variance that's granted.
It's, it's close, but it doesn't seem to be exact.
Yeah. The current variance is the one from 2012
that allows for, uh, 18 feet with a 10 foot under
Clear. So that would've been
for the old sign, the, the
Previous sign prior to the accident.
Sure. We weren't notified that there was an accident
or anything there that Right. Caused
It. So, so, so
here's my question.
If we grant, so if I, if I put a motion together,
I would put a motion together to retain the ground sign
with an overall height of 17.4 feet,
a 9.39 foot under clearance, overall signage area,
96 feet by 96 feet, or 96 inches.
96 inches, I'm sorry, by 96 inches equal 64 square feet.
And then rescind the one
for 8 12 98 to clear up the books.
So there's no confusion going forward.
Would that make sense?
That would, um,
Because then it would take away that variance for
that dimension of, of sign
and create a new dimension
for the current sign that's on the property.
That is that, if that's
what you guys do, that's what you guys do,
Then what happens?
It, it would, whatever stipulations you put
on there would be fine too.
But that wouldn't impact the current
sign that's, that's there. That
Wouldn't, Because they built, they put a new sign,
Current static sign.
Right. Okay.
You'd have to get the square footage
of the percentage of that led.
We would just eliminate the LED board.
Just grant the sign. Just cut it off at that
Sentence on.
So, all right. Did you, I don't, go ahead. The vari
The variance from 2012, which Mr.
Wapa said was the current one
From 8 22, right? Mm-hmm.
Uh, Yes. 8 22. I was just trying to
Make it. Yes. Gotcha, gotcha.
Okay.
Lemme think on this. I'll yield the floor for a second
Under
two
probably because of the message.
Hang on.
So while you're thinking, so the LEB sign was approved on
eight 12?
Yeah. Yes. For 16. For 16 feet.
And right now it's 24. 24.
They're, they're asking to go up to 24. Okay. Right now.
Is it 16? No, it's 24. Can new sign is at 24. Okay.
But they were only approved up to 16.
Do you have a comment, Mr. Watchpoint?
Yes. If you did not do anything
and left the previous variance the way it was,
if they shrunk the EMC,
the under clearance would grow at
that point in my calculation
and they fall under that, uh, 2012 variance.
That was my,
Okay. Mr.
Mr. Chair. Yes. Mr. Ratz,
I wanna clarify something here just for the heck of it.
The LED board was added underneath
the other sign, is that correct?
In the same frame, yes.
So original, the original sign was just above
the LED board, is that correct?
So it's one frame that has the original sign on top
and the, um, message board was on the bottom.
So now it's the same way.
Just the size of that message board had changed one foot.
So it's the same frame. Nothing has changed. Okay.
Mr. Chair? Uh, yes. Mr.
Cliff to the petitioner, when,
when the sign was damaged in the auto accident,
I'm trying to account for the difference in
the, uh, under clearance.
Um, was, was, was there anything taken off of the posts?
Were they shortened? No. Just re-erected? Yes. Okay.
Thank you. Because that's what it's now,
Mr. Chair.
Yes. Just a thought that I'm having is,
rather than trying to figure out how,
how we can work this new variance, I, I mean,
I don't know why we can't just deny the,
the variance requested
and allow them to operate under the existing variance.
Okay. So, I mean, that, that's kind of
where I'm at now, instead of trying to finagle to,
to make the sign fit what's there, they have a variance.
Granted, they should just be, instead
of getting new variances, use a
variance that's already existing.
So I'm, I'm prepared to make the motion.
Um, so I'd, I'd make a motion to deny permission
to retain a ground sign with an overall height
of 17.4 feet, uh,
a 9.39 feet under clearance overall sign area
of 96 inches by 96 inches, 64 square feet,
which includes a three feet by eight foot 24 square foot.
Electronic message center setback six feet from the sidewalk
in place of previous variance
for ground signage dated 8 22 of 2012.
Due to the fact, uh, that it is a detriment, uh,
to the area, uh, there's no unreasonable impact, uh,
or burden to maintain compliance itself imposed, uh,
the property's not unique, um, for those reasons.
Support,
There's a motion clarification.
What does that do to the LED site? Let's go on.
They would just be able to operate
under the various variance, under the
Current variances they're granted.
Is that 16? Mm-hmm.
Yeah. The current variance from 2012.
Right. Okay.
So there's a motion to deny by Mr. Lindsay, support by Mr.
Jersey, uh, for the reason stated in a motion.
So it'll be a yes vote to deny. And I just wanna clarify.
So with this motion,
existing sign would be fine
to just can't enlarge the
L-E-D-I-I
Believe the variance for the previous under clearance was
10 and this is 9.39.
Okay. So, okay.
Um, they're gonna have to make a few modifications. Yes.
Okay. So via Yes. Vote to deny a roll call
Mr. Lindsay. Yes.
To deny Mr. Jersey votes? Yes. To deny for the reason.
State in the motion Mr. Assessor.
Yes. To deny for the reason. State in the motion
Mr. Green. Yes.
To deny for the reason. State in the motion
Mr. Clifft.
Yes. To deny for the reasons stated in the
Motion. Mr. Watts.
Yes. To deny for the reasons stated in the
Motion Mr. Perry.
Yes. To deny for the reasons stated in the
Motion and chairman starve.
Uh, yes. To deny for the reason stated.
So unfortunately, the request was denied as submitted.
Um, but you can work with Mr.
Wa prompt to make sure the sign gets into fit
with the existing variances that were granted back in 2012.
Okay? Yeah. Okay. It takes us to item item eight.
Applicant National Construction Rentals.
Representative Mark Royer. Come description, 2 2 5 8 6.
Ryan Variance has requested permission to one,
install a temporary 12 foot high wire fence with windscreen
inside the concrete wall along the east property line
to provide visual relief until green space matures
for a period of one year.
For the time of, from the time of planning
to exceed the allowed 445 square feet of open storage
to a property that has a 890 square foot primary structure
by 15,072 square feet for a total
of 15,517 square feet of open storage with
14,658 square feet of it to be stored on a non hard surface.
Three, allow open storage in the East
125 feet of the property, which is zoned R one P
and R one C on a non hard surface.
That's a use for retain a 24 foot
by 315 foot gravel maneuvering lane on the
east side of the property.
And for the petitioner,
before you begin, uh, with your name
and address, I noticed that this is a use variance.
We're down one board member.
So, uh, use variance normally needs to have, uh,
six yes votes instead of the five.
So I just wanted to give you an opportunity if you wanted
to be wait to be here by a full board,
we could reschedule you or we could proceed as is.
Um, we'll try to go forward. Okay.
So my name is Mark Royer.
I'm with Nashville Construction Rentals, uh,
concerning the property at 22 5 86 Ryan
Road in Warren, Michigan.
Um, the zoning board appeals, uh, five items were read
that we're looking to have approved.
Uh, I'd be happy to take any questions.
Okay. Okay. Thank you. Um, this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone to audience wishing to talk on this item?
Not seeing any, or close the public portion
and turn it over to the board?
Oh, there's a impact statement if Mr.
Jersey, you could read that
In. Thank you Mr. Chair.
It's um,
from Mir, the planning director.
It says, after review of the request, no issues were found
to impact the budding local or general public.
The petition received site plan approval with conditions
for open storage of fencing materials on
November 17th, 2025.
The site plan indicates that in the rear
of the property along the east property line,
a six foot high brick
and boss poured concrete wall will be, will be
provided as well as four northern white cedar trees.
Evergreens the new screening as well
as a temporary 12 foot high panel fencing with windscreen
inside of the concrete wall to provide visual relief
as the trees grow in,
should sufficiently screen the proposed storage from the
residential properties to the east.
Okay, sir, close the public portion meeting.
Turn it over to board for, uh, questions
and discussion chair.
Yes, Mr. Green, to the petitioner, just
as a curiosity question, 'cause we see this a lot.
When you purchased the property, what gave
the purchaser the idea that the property was in compliance?
Because it says the belief was,
it was in compliance. I'm always curious,
The, the owner of the property
that we purchased it from was running a concrete
operation out of that location.
And that's how we assumed that the, so it was similar,
the normal storage area would come, come
with the property, the open storage.
So on surface, the 12 foot wall to cover the
other wall, to cover the green belt stuff,
I would, I'd be curious to hear
what other board members have to say about that.
Then the only other question I have then is
it says in your backup that the owner has agreed
to additional conditions
to satisfy neighbors at his own expense. What, what are,
What are those are the ones that were red.
Oh, those are those conditions that,
that's what we had come to with the
Neighborhood. So there's nothing more
than the 12 foot fence? There's
No, the green space, the, the brick gloss,
the 12 foot high, uh,
windscreen fence panels while the green space grows in.
Alright, thank you Mr. Chair.
Yes, Mr. Watts.
I'm gonna be right off the right, right off the get go.
There's no way I'm voting
for a 12 foot high wall temporary or not?
That's ridiculous. That was behind my house.
I wouldn't wanna look at it. But going back
to something else you said,
I know National Fence is a pretty large company.
Would you guys have thought
before you bought the property to move in there to find out
if you fit all of the ordinances or not?
We went through the permitting process with the, uh,
with the City of Warren and they came out
and said, Hey, here's a list of things that need
to be addressed via your site plan.
So we started going through the site plan
and worked through that process with the committee
and then said, Hey,
we gotta go get the zoning issues addressed.
But if I read this correctly, you didn't have a CFC
and you only applied for the CFC once they
had a complaint that you were there?
No, we, no, we went through the board,
the inspection process from all the different
departments at the city of Warren.
And that's what brought us to that point.
When the public hearing came up
by the site committee is when one of the neighbors, uh,
had some concerns and then we worked with that neighbor.
And one of the issues that she had requested was
that 12 foot high temporary, uh, fence from a a,
you know, a, a blockage.
Well the foliage grows in
I yield.
Okay. So I have, I have a quick question, so
I just wanna make sure I understand it.
'cause So there's gonna be a six foot high port
concrete wall installed?
That is correct. And then this 12 foot fence
would be stand on the inside of that?
That is correct. To just provide the screening
until the trees actually grew.
Okay. That was the, the request and then what we met.
Okay,
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Jersey, Um, to the petitioner real quick.
Um, so with the, with the buffer, with the zone, with the,
um, wall and the, uh, added green space, how much
of a buffer did that create between the, the property line,
um, with the residence, um, behind you?
Um, I'm, I'm estimating it's 60 feet.
Okay. So it's, it's significant.
It's not, it's not 12 feet or 10 feet.
So then that's where you're gonna start from
that point on your open storage from
that point on, so, okay.
Alright. Thank you sir. I'll yield the floor. Mr.
Chair. Yes, Mr. Green follow up on that,
from a cost standpoint for your business,
wouldn't, doesn't it make sense to put
mature trees in that are bigger at the get go
and then not have a 12 foot fence?
I mean, if you put 12 foot trees in, I mean,
is this a stupid line of question
of help me out here, but you see what I'm saying?
Not I understand what you're saying.
Uh, we're just basically the goal
basic of what the city had requested. Okay.
But the city Didn't for the green space,
The city didn't request they requested a green space.
Yes. So what I'm saying is, doesn't it make more sense
to put bigger green space pieces in there and
Then could certainly, could certainly look
at it and do a cost comparison.
Then you don't have to put a 12 foot fence in
because we, we, we recently have been beaten
around this thing where anything over the ordinances on
fence heights, we're trying
to stay away from whether temporary
or not just so happens to be that time.
So that would be something I would think
about, to be honest with you.
Thank you
Mr. Chair. Yes,
Mr. Cliff,
sir, what kind of,
What, what are we for the green belt?
What kind of trees or what kind
of shrubs are we gonna put in there?
I'm very curious to know what's gonna grow taller than six
feet or so within a year.
Um, it's, it's all in the recite plan,
sir, that we've submitted.
They listed the required
Okay. Cedars.
Yeah. And
that request came from the adjoining property neighbor about
the temporary 12 foot, um,
for better word, temporary screening.
The 12 foot was part of their request. Yes.
It isn't the neighbor that's behind us though.
It was a neighbor that's 10 houses up the road.
Hmm. Interesting.
Yeah. So I, I'm just gonna ex express some feelings here.
Um, I kind of like the idea that you're trying
to do something to Provide some relief from the neighborhood
to having to look at an, the back, the back storage area for
what's, you know, more
or less a, uh, commercial operation in
a residential neighborhood.
I am not a fan of granting use variances
on property that's surrounded by on a,
on a R one R two district, uh, zoned piece of property
and surrounded by those as well.
So I'm, I'm a little conflicted inward about
where my stance is and how I'm gonna vote on this.
Um, I I think it's a good presentation.
I think you, I think you are genuinely trying to work with
the neighborhood to meet their expectations.
But one of the things I have to worry about is, uh,
who's gonna come in here after you
and what are they gonna do if we set this precedent on
that R one zone piece of land?
I know that area, that whole area,
Ryan Roads got some mixed stuff in there, up
and down through there.
I'd curious to listen to some
of my other board members' feelings.
I'll yield the floor. Thank you for your answer, sir.
Mr. Chair? Yes, Mr. Lindsay.
So I, I have some comments.
I don't, I don't know if they're gonna be helpful
'cause I'm, I'm kind of stuck here too.
I don't think what the petitioner's asking
for is overly crazy.
Um, and it's like we look two, two properties down
and it's an absolute disaster what's going
on on that property.
Um, so I think this is like one of those issues.
Is this area even zoned the way that it should be?
The, you know, with all, all of this stuff going on
around it, um, in an industrial type setting.
So, uh, I share the sentiment
of approving a use variance and,
and seeing that in the future get out of control.
Um, so that's probably my main hesitancy.
You know, the, the temporary temporary fence, I mean,
12 feet's high, so I'm not really in favor of that either.
I would just plant bigger trees.
I mean, we're talking about $150 for, you know,
an eight foot arbor bity.
I mean, it's not, it's not an overly
expensive requests there.
So I'd be, I'd be scared, you know, to see, you know,
the $30 trees get, get put in
and it takes 15 years for those things to grow.
Um, and then we take the sign down
and we're not actually providing any,
any cover for the neighbor.
So I'm stuck. I don't know how I'm gonna vote.
So I would welcome any, any other comments too.
I'd like to piggyback on that if I can. Mr. Chair? Yes.
Mr. Cliff. Yeah. So for the amount of green space buffers
that have come
before this board to be approved in lieu of this
or in lieu of that, um,
and there's a few right on Ryan Road not too
far from this property.
Um, seems like for every 10 Arbor Vinings that get planted,
seven of 'em are dead in a year and they're not replaced.
And I have a problem with that.
So of course that goes back to enforcement.
If people aren't catching it,
they can't tell a brown tree from a green tree
and go in there and say, Hey, you got a bunch of dead stuff
that you agreed to maintain and you need to fix it.
You know, I guess that's what it is.
But, um, the, the, uh, the track record
for these are providing things
of late hasn't been very, very good.
Um, and I, and I drive that stretch of road every day to
and from work, and I'm just watching them die off one
by one over a period
of a few months here, a few months there.
And they're not in the ground that long.
You know, a month, two months, uh, same,
same thing on 10 Mile Road just east of, uh, mound Road.
Um, that, that green belt's got a lot
of issues going on in there too.
But, um, yeah, truth be told, in in,
I've got a real problem with the used portion
of, of this variance.
I like the idea he's willing
to put a 12 foot screening fence up
because I've lived next to some stuff
and I'm telling you, I wish I had a 12 foot fence up
sometimes, so I didn't have to look at some things.
I, I know a lot of you guys don't, you kind
of look down the nose on that.
But if people are requesting it
and they kind of want that, I take
that into high consideration.
I wish there was a letter or the resident who requested
that would've been here in the audience to speak on that.
Um, this evening, uh, I I I don't take a lot
of stock in the hearsay of what we agreed to
with the neighbors or didn't agree to with the neighbors.
When I don't have anything in my packet to kind of support
that, um, I'd sooner they submit a letter or show up.
Uh, and with that I'll yield the floor.
Mr. Chair, um, Mr. Green, if I could just add,
piggyback onto Mr.
Cliff's comment and then you afterwards.
I, I would actually say, you know, I think I like the fact
that, you know, this, petitioner did try to work
to alleviate what the concerns of the neighbors were.
There's nobody here complaining about
it, which is a good sign.
And it does fit what our planning department had wanted.
I mean, I only wish that like some of the other neighbors
of the industrial properties on
that street would actually do the same kind of stuff.
'cause some of them are MS, Mr Chair or quick.
Oh, Mr. Green. Mr. Green. And then Mr.
So again, I'll be quick. This is,
and I've thought about this a lot the last month
when I talked about the rescheduling.
We're going after rescheduling the wrong way.
We need to change our rules and then apply our rules.
This is a perfect example.
We, we bring up zoning,
multiple zonings on one piece of property.
This is a zoning issue.
Now, I know to rezone is quite the process,
but it's not something that we've created in the south end.
In particular, the multiple zonings in one piece
of property sometimes is like hard to keep track of.
So this is really, this is not created
by the petitioner or a neighbor.
It's created by zoning and things are zoned,
they're not zoned properly.
So something that would be a regular variance
ends up being a use variance.
Can this, can this piece of property be used as it's zoned?
Well, I guess in theory you could say it could be,
but realistically it can't be.
So I I, I'm gonna vote, I'm gonna vote yes on this.
I would hope that the motion maker would say no 12 foot
fence because that was a neighbor wish.
Not that we don't listen to the neighbors, but,
and put in taller trees.
It just makes sense to me. So that's, that's my thoughts.
So I just want to say
that I'm gonna support the most the variance.
Mr. Chair, Mr. Mr. Lindsay? Yeah,
I just had one quick comment before any motions are made
and, and maybe this is more of a point of order
because I mean, we're, we're hearing this, this topic now,
but I think we've seen this,
we've had conversations around it.
You know, we get stuff from the planning department
that says there there's no issue, um,
with the surrounding neighborhood.
And we are, we're talking for 20 minutes about
all the potential issues.
And then it's like, it's up to us to, to grant a variance.
And, you know, it's again, just a point of order.
I mean, we're in the situation that we're in,
but this makes no sense to me that the, the city is,
you know, approving these businesses come in
to do these things and, and then saying that there's,
there's no issues at all to the abutting region.
I mean, we're talking about open storage
behind a house, that that's an issue.
It's obvious that's an issue that, so that's my comment.
Feel free Mr. Green if you have a motion. Nope.
Hold on Mr. Chair, real quick.
I have a quick question to the petitioner either side
of the business from north, north to south,
those houses occupied, I'm sorry, repeat that question.
To the north and south of your property line, where your,
your business is those houses on either side
of you the occupied?
Yes, they are. They're occupied the one two down,
because there's like three houses there.
I'm assuming the one that's on the Zuniga property is just
the business house or whatever.
But so you have the two on the other side of you
and then the other one, um, two down from you.
So those are all occupied. Yes.
So here, here, here,
here's, here's the problem.
I mean, even if we do zone this, it goes right back to
what Mr. Lindsay was saying.
It's a zoning issue. Who, who,
who in the hell would buy a house right there?
I mean, buyer beware, but I mean,
if we're gonna start doing commercial setups on R one Cs
and R one Ps and, and,
and bounce 'em, I mean, I would like
to see a lot combination.
Not a house, a residential house stuck
between two commercial properties.
That's the first problem I got.
Secondly, this whole thing, I mean, if you, if you wanted
to do it right and just do, make
that whole area one big commercial zone,
find those people someplace to live
and then just make that one big zone.
So now you're gonna run into the problem again
when the other properties get developed into this, when,
like Mr. Lindsey said, if we could have just made all
that one big, we've done that
before in this town where we bought up a
neighborhood to put a business in.
Mr. Watsons is very aware of that, you know, back on,
on the south end at Hoover and Hoover and Nine Mile.
But I mean, what are we doing?
I mean, I don't have a problem with your plan, sir.
I mean, I think it's, I think it's a great plan,
but from a city aspect, what are we doing?
You know, I mean we got commercial residential,
now commercial with, you know, hopefully it keeps the lot
as pristine as it looks on this overhead
and doesn't look like the one, two doors down.
But I mean, man, it it just lends to like
literally I'm scratching my head here.
So I, I don't, I'm not, I'm,
I'm not against it like Mr. Green said,
but I mean, we, we gotta do better.
I mean, how does this not be brought up in planning?
Say, Hey, why, why are you putting this in a
and you got three residences right there
and more disturbing that they didn't even show up to, to,
to speak on their own behalf.
But again, I, I'll probably get behind this,
but I, I, I caution the city
with doing projects like this going
forward. I'll yield the floor.
Okay, Mr. Watts.
Okay, let's go back. I want to get clarify something.
Which neighbor said that they were good
with 12 foot high fence?
I wanna clarify what you said.
The neighbor who had requested the 12 foot high fence
is on, I believe it's Lowes Road, which
Is Lowe Gap. Yep.
Okay. And there are about 10 residences to the north.
So they're not right behind you. Right behind you.
No, no. Well, just,
Just, just information.
We provided, um, mailings
and had an open, uh, at the library, had an open evening
for any other type of feedback from the neighborhood.
And that one person was the only person who was really,
And I didn't, I didn't check the addresses behind there.
They may be rentals. That may be why.
Um, I don't know, sir,
but here, so here I, I agree
with everything that was said here tonight.
Yeah, I've known this area for years and years and years.
So, but here's, here's where I'm at.
If they would've went to the city
before they purchased the property
to find out if they could do this there,
they wouldn't even be here asking this
because the city would said, no, you can't do that.
That, that's what boggles my mind.
And then they buy the bay, they buy it for their business,
and then they move in
and then they find out there's a problem.
And then here we are. Let's give a whole bunch of variances
that could affect the rest of the neighborhood on top of
what everybody else has said.
You know, there's other issues,
but I, I can't get behind this at all.
So I yield
I Any other questions, discussion,
or any motions or, well,
I'll make a motion and then we'll see where it goes.
Okay? Okay.
So I move to approve the variance requested
to exceed the allowed 445 square feet of open storage
to a property that has a 890 square feet primary structure
by 15,072 square foot for a total
of 15,517 square foot of open storage
with 1406 58 square foot of to be stored
on a non hard surface.
The used part is allow open storage in the east 125 feet
of the property, which is zoned R one
PR one C on a non hard surface, retain a 24
by 315 gravel maneuvering lane
on the east side of the property.
And there's no concrete wall right now, right?
No, it, it, it have a concrete wall,
six foot concrete wall along the east property line
to provide visual relief.
No, uh,
allow a six foot concrete wall along the east property line
with, uh, plants
and foliage to
block neighboring houses.
Is that, is that where did right
Go with the green space?
Jennifer? I don't believe that they need a variance
for the, the green space.
So if you wanna do two motions to approve two, three,
and four and then a separate motion
to deny the 12 foot fence, I think that would,
so my motion probably be clearer motion.
So my motion would include two, three, and four.
Uh, can't be used as zone. It's not a detriment.
That's what I just said. Yes.
Okay. What's set
Make a motion to separate Oh,
To separate. Okay.
Make a motion to separate item one.
One and from two, three, and four. Yeah,
We Need to do, we have, so we have a motion
by Mr. Green, support by Mr. Lindsay to separate item one
from items two, three, and four.
So yes, vote would be for items two, three, and four.
Well, to separate, Well first we have to, well,
First to separate, So,
or just say all in favor of separating.
Aye. Aye. Aye. Anybody opposed? Aye. You're opposed. No.
Oh, aye, you, okay. So there's one person opposed Mr. Cliff.
Uh, but it did pass then item one was
separated from two, three, and four.
So now Mr. Green, your motion, original motion is,
your original motion would be two, three.
And the approval of two, three,
and four not at detriment, then can be used.
Can't be used as zone. Do we have a support?
Support. Support? Okay.
So we have a motion by Mr. Green, support by Mr.
Jersey to approve items two, three,
and four for the reasons stated in the motion
Recall. Mr. Green?
Yes. For the reasons stated in
The motion. Mr. Jersey votes Yes.
For the reasons stated in the
motion. Mr. Assessor?
Yes. For the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Clifft? No, I oppose the
Use portion of that proposal.
Mr. Lindsey? No,
I think the use variance is a detriment to the area.
Mr. Perry? Yes. For reason stated under motion.
Mr. Watts? No, I think it's a detriment.
And Chairman sta Uh, I have no chance.
So that's 1, 2, 3. He got it.
So, okay, so items, so items two, three,
and four were approved.
And then is there a motion? Yes.
You need six. Need six for got five.
It did not Pass. So it did not pass. So two, three.
So now do we need to make a motion to deny
and vote on that or does it just not pass the the Yes.
Goal number one doesn't pass?
Yes, since we separate, we should still take
a vote on number one.
Okay. Anybody wanna make a motion?
So a motion, uh, Mr. Chair? Yeah.
So I move that we, that we, uh, request
or, uh, approve the variance
for a six foot concrete wall
along the east side of the property.
No, 12. I'm leaving the 12 foot out.
He doesn't need a, he doesn't need a variance
to do the six foot concrete wall or plant.
Okay. He just needs the variance
for the 12 foot high fence. Right?
Okay. So I variance, so I'm not,
I'm not the six foot, no.
Uh, I think, uh, concrete wall is a requirement
and allowed in the ordinance.
So,
So you make, you make a motion to deny.
I, I I understand that, but it's
listed as a variance request.
So I, I'll make a motion to deny
that temporary 12 foot high wire fence
with a windscreen green reasons, uh,
detriment to the area.
Support. Support.
So there's a motion to, to deny by Mr. Green
for the 12 foot high fence support by Mr. Watts
for reason stated in a motion roll call
Mr. Green.
Yes. To Deny Mr. Watts Yes.
To deny based on the, uh, reason on the motion Mr. Lindsay?
Yes. To deny for the reason to stay in the motion.
And I'm gonna also add that it's, uh, not necessary.
Mr. Cliff, thank you.
I kind of like the idea. I'm gonna vote. Uh, no.
Mr. Perry. Yes.
To deny for the reinstated and the motion.
Mr. Jersey votes? Yes.
To deny for the reason State and motion Chairman Stevi
I also vote yes to deny.
So actually, so item number one
for defense was denied. Uh, hold
On Mr. Assessor. I
apologize.
Yes. To denied for the reasons stated
A motion. Thank you sir. Apologize.
So the 12 foot high fence was denied.
Um Mm-hmm Votes.
Okay. So unfortunately your use variance also got denied
because it didn't have, it only had five yes votes.
Um, if you work with MR for next steps,
Just so we're clear, one and three were denied.
Two and four were approved, yes.
No? Yes.
Yeah, because two and
Four, I believe the portion that's not a part
of the storage would be allowed so he can go up to
that number.
Um, for open storage that's not in the R one C
or R one p, I believe some of it does go into that area.
Just so I understand. So those two get
approved because there's five?
Yeah. Okay, gotcha. Understood. Thank you. Which two,
Two and four. Two or
four? Yes. Got it.
Oh 'cause it's not the used for, sorry. Got it. Okay.
Okay, I think we're good to go. Continue
Takes us to item nine, applicant.
Julian Zeki, representative Julian Zeki.
Common description, 2 2 8 1 5 Lafe appearance.
Requested permission to construct a second floor addition
to a residential dwelling
with a non-conforming front setback
that is no closer than 24 feet
to the front east property line
and the existing front porch, no closer than 15 feet,
three inches from the front east property line.
Hello everyone. Uh, my name is Julian Dki
and uh, I'm here today for the, uh,
variance that was requested.
Uh, I also applied for the building permit
and uh, they told me I had to come for the variance,
which is why I'm here tonight.
And, uh, 'cause the existing setback right now as is,
is 24 feet, which the new build
for the second story would also stay existing.
The house isn't moving forward at all.
There is actually an existing second story as is now,
but, uh, it's, the interior is a pitch,
it's like a bungalow style,
so it's got like a cathedral type ceiling.
So we were just planning to make it more functional
for the family and, uh, add a couple bedrooms
and open it up more.
But, uh, like I saying,
the front setback is staying the same.
It's not moving forward at all.
Thank you for your explanation.
Um, this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone else in the audience
wishing to speak on this item?
And I'm not seeing any.
I will close the public portion
and turn it over to a board
for questions and discussions.
So I just wanna make sure, 'cause I know it's a,
it's a single family home currently.
Yep. And it's gonna remain a single family home.
Yes. Right now it's a two bedroom.
So like the upstairs is like, just kind
of like a open loft area, I guess you would say.
Okay. So the plan was to add three bedrooms,
another bathroom, and just to open it up.
'cause right now the ceilings, like I was saying,
goes from like three, four foot to like the eight,
nine foot, you know, in the pitch.
So we just want to make it all, you know,
the same eight foot everything, open it up,
make it more functional, you know,
they have a couple family members and stuff like that. So
Yeah.
Okay. Actually I like that plan
because I mean, it setbacks existing as it is
and it actually enlarges the house.
It makes it more livable and
Yeah, exactly.
'cause the house was built in 1953, so, you know, I
that's 70 years.
So something that none
of us could control, I guess you could say. Mm-hmm.
Mr. Chair. Yeah. Mr. S
Um, yeah, I, I don't see anything wrong
with this, this proposal.
Um, nothing really stands out.
Um, I think it would obviously increase the value
of the house as well and probably increase the value
of houses in the neighborhood as well once
the addition's put on and, um, it gets resold, um,
at some point in the future.
So I, I think this is a good request I'd get
behind if anybody else has anything
else to say. Let's make a
Quick comment. Sure. Yep.
So my,
my only concern about which the petitioner answered, um,
that this isn't turning into a, a two person family home.
Um, I'm fine with the single family, uh,
enlarging the properties.
I'm, I'm gonna support to
Mr. Wats. You had
a question.
So that's my concern. I'm looking at the, uh,
a blueprint or drawing here.
Mm-hmm. And I'm looking at the second floor,
and it surely looks like a second floor apartment
to me in
Here. It's staying a single
family home, sir.
It's, yeah, it's the whole floor plan.
On the lower level, staying the same.
We're just adding the, the rooms
and opening it up, like I was saying.
So it's still single family and everything.
It's not converting to
Anything else. Now, the other
thing is I drove, I drove
around the neighborhood and I look at
what you're proposing here.
And it doesn't fit it
From the neighbor. It doesn't,
it is not gonna fit to the neighboring homes.
And I have a concern about that too.
'cause that could be a detriment to the other neighbors,
you know, and, and,
and building it like this, it looks to me, I I mean
with all due respect, I, I, I understand what you're saying,
but if you sell this house in six months
after you do this, there's nothing to stop the other one
to turn it into a rental.
And, and that'd be like a duplex in a
neighborhood or an apartment building.
That's not right. That's not right to the neighbors.
We have to do what's right for the whole neighborhood.
So I, I have a real concern with this at this point.
Unless somebody can convince me, I'm gonna be a no vote
Chair. Yes.
Mr. Greens, just outta curiosity.
So what are the two
pipes coming outta the side of the building?
Uh, there's a wood burner in, uh, the basement right now.
In the basement? Yeah.
So, which the homeowner wants that actually removed, so
that wouldn't even be there.
But as of now, there is a wood burner in the basement.
Huh. Interesting. Yep.
Nobody else says Any comments.
I'm prepared to make a motion, make a motion to, um,
grant the petitioner's permission
to construct a second floor addition
to a residential dwelling
with a non-conforming front setback
that is no closer than 24 feet
to the front east property line
and the existing front porch, no closer than 15 feet,
three inches from the front East property line due
to the fact the size and shape it a lot.
And it's not a detriment to the area.
Support. We have a motion by Mr.
Jersey Super support by Mr.
Assessor to approve the request
for the reason stated support.
Mr. Jersey votes. Yes.
For the reasons stated in the motion. Mr. Assessor?
Yes. For the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Lindsay? Yes. For the reason stated in the
Motion. Mr. Green?
Yes. For the reason, stated the motion.
Mr. Cliff? Yes. For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Watts? No,
I think it's a judgment to the neighborhood.
Mr. Perry? Yes. For the reason stated in a motion
Chairman Stevi, Uh, yes.
For Rein State in a motion. Your request is approved.
Thank you everybody.
Item number 10. Item 10.
Uh, applicant Albert Tiano, representative Albert Tiano.
Common description, 3, 2, 4, 3 3. Cambridge variances.
Requested permission to retain the widen portion
of driveway, nine feet from the edge
of the garage towards the north
property line in the front yard.
Hello, my name's Albert Tiano. Three, two, property owner.
3 2 4 3 3 Cambridge Drive.
I'm here to express my hardship about, uh,
removing my nine foot extension on the
right side of my driveway.
Which, uh, no.
Oh, which has a four foot green belt from the property line.
Okay. Uh, Um,
Anything else you wanna say about your request
Or, uh, yeah, I did.
Um, At least I did my best
to take the correct steps to go to the city.
I've talked to a lot of people from the zoning boards.
Got a lot of good information.
I was told I could do 18 inches without a permit
to the front door.
You can't go any, any further past 18 inches.
'cause after that it just gets into the front yard.
Um, on the other side, I was told, um, I, I have like,
in the little packet I put together, there is pictures
of my driveway, but on one of them
it's about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 pages in.
I took this to the zoning board and I took a lot of stuff in
because I didn't want to be in this situation,
um, to where they were.
I have written on here, and I know it looks tacky.
It, it shows 18 inches this way.
And then I said, uh, okay, three feet off property line.
I did four to be safe.
I did look for guidance from the city being a resident
and warn, and it's what I was told.
After the job was completed,
then caused problems.
And so I'm asking to keep it
because it would be a hardship on ripping
it out, the expenses.
And I,
other driveways in my neighborhood, they're very similar.
You know, we are a bus route.
We do have smart buses that come down our street there.
My neighbor's property.
I can't park behind their driveway
because our streets, it, it's wide.
It's just, you know, with everyone having a pickup truck
and third row SUVs
and kids, you know, it is hard to park
behind someone's driveway without
backing into someone's car.
And it has happened in the 30 years I've lived in Warren.
I've lived here my whole life.
I've owned two houses in Warren.
Um, I'm just asking to be able to
keep my, my driveway.
And I, I did have someone from the city walk my whole
property with me and sign off on it.
And I don't know e exactly what the, you know,
correct steps would be in, in your guys' terms.
But I thought as a citizen of Warren,
I was doing the correct things.
And I I'm just asking to please let me keep my driveway.
Can I say a word? And I did get my,
this is my father. He lives,
I went along with you on
The whole time, but you have to state your
Name and address. My
name is, uh, Albert Franklin Tiano Jr. He's a third.
I lived directly across the street.
Albert owned a home on Adams, uh, for four years in Warren.
And stayed there for five years, four or five years.
And then bought this house from a neighbor that he used
to shovel the driveway and do everything for 'em.
But anyway, so we did go to the city,
to the building department.
Building department directed us to
the engineering department.
Engineering department approved all this.
And, um, I guess, you know, we, we did the right procedures
and tried to do everything the best we can.
Uh, you know, I don't do this everyday poor driveways do
that, but it wasn't like we were trying to
avoid going to the city.
What's the date on that? I'm sorry? What's the date on that?
The date? This was, this was three years ago.
This was approved and now it's came up again
and the date is 5 3 23.
And the one, I can close that in there.
And the one thing I would like
to add is I replaced the sidewalks.
It wasn't needed, but when I went there, I was,
because I spent a lot of money on that driveway.
To be fair, they told me, because like a garbage truck
or a bigger truck to back into your driveway, you need
to pour your sidewalk thick enough so they're able
to back up onto it without you, you know, it has
to be thicker than the, I think it's five inches.
I, I can't recall. I, I, I really can't.
But it's the same thickness as my approach,
all the sidewalk right in front of my house.
Um, and I, I, I did everything that I had thought
and I I, everything was good for a while.
And then out of nowhere it kind of,
Yeah, arose. We
just got start getting letters, you know.
And so we did also walk past the 300 yards
that you sent a letter to.
And I don't know how many you received of emails
from our neighbors.
I've been in the neighborhood for 33 years. Okay.
And, and I know multiple driveways are
conforming with this house.
His house, if you look at the pictures,
was in pretty poor shape on the outside.
We cut down trees. I mean it, we made it beautiful.
It's definitely an enhancement to the neighborhood.
I made him change his front door, Mr.
Chair, because I got tired of looking at
The old door point of order.
Thank you. Shouldn't we be hearing from the homeowner
and not somebody else?
Well, I did give him permission to speak up, speak.
They're Both, both here Together.
But I won't speak no
more. I've said enough. That's fine.
Okay. I just, uh, you know, if that's the case.
Okay. Well thank you for that explanation.
Uh, this is a public hearing.
So is there anyone audience wishing to speak on this item?
I Do. If you can approach the podium
and start with your name and address and then your comments
and the condition.
I could just, um, my name is, uh, Carrie Tiano.
I lived right across the street from my son Albert Tiano.
And we lived in that neighborhood for 30 years.
And the woman across the street could not also fix up her
house all the time and make it gorgeous.
But we, we, we looked at it, we just, we did.
But then when my son got in there, he started doing
so many improvements that, you know, if, if my,
his grass wasn't cutting, my husband was calling, Hey,
cut your grass, get this together, making sure
that everything looked nice.
But I'm glad he's in the neighborhood
and we've been there 30 years
and it's an, it's a big improvement.
And then the last thing I would just like to say is,
if you look at the very last picture I supplied you with
that driveway is obnoxiously huge.
And I'm not here to be that neighbor.
Like, 'cause you know, as long
as you keep your property clean, which I do.
I understand. Unfortunately, it's like the public portion
of the meeting because, uh,
if we have any questions, we'll come back to you.
But I wanna know if there's anybody else in the audience
wishing to speak on Ms item.
Okay. Okay.
Not seeing any or close the public portion of the meeting.
And, um, there's no impact statement on this
or anything. Just all those.
No. Everybody get comfortable?
Well, no, I'm, but I still gotta read the addresses.
So hold on. So we've got
Mr. Chair. Yes.
Mr. SI have a problem with this.
If people have a wanna speak, they should be at the meeting.
Not a, not a stack of emails.
Put order if I can. City Attorney. Yes.
So just from a time standpoint, do we, do we have to
read all the addresses into the record?
How, how would be the best way to expedite the number of,
'cause we just, we just got these
first five minutes before the meeting.
Well, I, I mean the, the,
the name and address are required.
If they were here in person, they'd be required to,
to state that at the podium. Um,
Well, I could've already got halfway through this, but
The, the, the fact of the matter, I'm, I'm not,
I'm just making it longer now.
Names and addresses aren't required by law.
So, and I'm not, I'm not, I'm just saying
maybe this is the case where we don't have
to use it, but it's your call.
You're your boss.
And again, the, our department had a,
a detailed conversation about this.
And, um, I mean, unfortunately, I think a lot
of the other boards and commissions except emails
and read them into the record.
So if that's been our past practice
and standard, then I, I mean, I think we should continue it
until I can find something concrete that says it's
against the Open Meeting Act.
Okay. Thank you. So
Good enough.
Okay. Hey, Mr. Jersey.
So the, all these are in favor.
I haven't, I haven't seen anything that,
that was not in favor.
So I'll just read the, the addresses
and the statements, um, you know,
or the people if they, if is provided.
Um, so, uh, Mr. And Mrs. Michael McCarthy on 3 2 4.
Three three, Newcastle.
Um, there's a David Pa Ick, um,
that, that sent one in.
Um, he's in favor of, it doesn't give an address.
Must be within the 300 feet.
Um, a lucky, um, Felix Washington,
who lives at 3, 2 5, 2 3 Cambridge.
Um, Christine
Ireland, that lives at 3 2 4 0 9 Cambridge.
Um, Mr.
Tiano, um, who's here lives at 3, 2 4, 3 3 Cambridge.
Um, Diana Amato, who lives at 3, 2, 5, 3 6.
Cambridge, Evan and Mike.
Evan and Michelle GaN Ganti, who, um,
live at 3, 2 4 3 4 Cambridge.
Um, Stan
and Donna sbe, um, who live at
does not provide their address.
Um, so Stan
and Donna sbe, Mike rents
who, um, Mike
and Sandy rents who live at 3, 2 0 4 0 Cambridge, Tom
Captor, who lives at 3, 2, 3, 4, 4 Cambridge.
Rob La Forest, who lives at 3 2 0 2 8 Cambridge.
And Pamela
Slosky, who lives at,
doesn't provide an address for Mrs.
Uh, Ky.
And then I also have a, a letter from
looks like John, um, from 3, 2, 4, 3 3 Cambridge.
Um, also in favor of, of, of the, the project.
That's all I have, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Jersey.
Nancy, any other comments are close the public portion
and turned over to a board for questions and discussion.
Mr. Chair, Mr. Lindsay, and then Mr. Wats? Yes.
So I appreciate the,
the comments from the petitioner.
You guys seem like great residents.
I understand all that you're moving into the house,
you're making a lot of improvements,
unfortunately in, in my seat.
It really has no bearing on, on
what I'm here to approve tonight.
Um, we're looking at a driveway
and we, we have been, as a board and,
and me specifically, I can't be in favor of,
of widening these, widening these driveways.
Um, it's unfortunate.
I'm sure it is a hardship for you to,
uh, you know, remove that.
That's, I feel bad for that.
Um, but when I look at, you know, the, the requirements
of the variance when we, when we say a hardship,
it's a hardship to, to not be able
to use the property as it's designed.
Um, and that's why you would need a variance if you would've
gone through the permit process, you would've come
before the board, before, you know, pouring the cement.
Um, and I'm not sure that you'd have the support to do that.
Um, so we, we see these over and over
and over, uh, in the city
where we constantly have these driveways
and we're asking, you know, permission to retain.
And I feel bad, uh, voting no.
'cause I know that it's a, it's, it's money wasted.
But it, it's not, it's not an improvement as much
as you might want it to be.
Um, I really do think it is a detriment.
Um, so again, I,
I appreciate you guys are a good resident fixing up the
property, but that,
that doesn't weigh in on my mind when I'm,
I'm voting on the driveway, you know, the inside
of the house has nothing to do with, with the driveway.
Um, that's my comments.
I mean, you guys know how I feel about Widen driveways.
We've been over this a lot. So when I don't see this
as being any different, um, so it's a,
it's a hard no vote for me.
Thank you, Mr. Lindsey. Uh, Mr. Watts, you had a comment,
Okay?
I drove by there and I took a look
and I did a deep dive on all the documents.
I did a deep dive on the city's B-N-B-S-N-A site.
And, um, I got a lot of questions
on, you were told by the city
on
five three to not pour
that you needed to go to the ZBA.
And it says you were ticketed on five five.
Do you know what time that phone call was?
It's not a phone call. It said they
ticketed you. So they were out there.
Okay. 'cause I didn't, I,
they gave me the approval on five three
and my concrete was poured at
five four at seven in the morning. I have
On five three on five three it says
that they told you not to pour.
That's, that,
That's what the records say
that, isn't that what you just said?
No, that's what the records say. Five three.
And then, then you give us this other slip
that says it's okay to pour right
From the city And,
or now it doesn't say okay to pour, it just says inspection.
Okay. So I'm, I'm thinking that inspection,
they were probably okay with what you had dug out.
Well, the whole, I have pictures from like
their timestamped and
When he Came, he walked the driveway with me. And
I'm just, I'm, I, I got a lot of questions, so for sure.
I apologize. I'm gonna follow up first.
So, Steve, do you have something you can add to this? I,
I can add some clarity to this.
The zoning inspector was out there on five three
that you see that report where he was told, spoke
to him personally that it wasn't allowed.
And the inspection report
and everything else was an engineering report
or inspection for the approach
and the sidewalk, which engineering does not go into the
actual, um, driveway itself.
Okay. It's only the approach
and the sidewalk for clarification.
Okay. Thank you. Now, uh, Steve, why don't you stay there?
'cause you might have to answer some more questions. Okay.
So the next question is, you poured,
if I seen it right when I drove by
and when I looked at Google Maps, you poured all the way
to the back property line
In the back. Yeah.
Correct. Goes all the way to the back. Yeah.
Steve, is that in the permit?
Uh, permit's not required for,
For the backyard, rear Side and rear yard.
Okay. Now, when I drove by the other day,
is there a shed at the back of the property?
There is. And there's no permit
shown online for the shed?
Correct. And is there a rat wall underneath it?
Um, no. I, I am not gonna lie
To you guys, sir. I, I,
I, I have a huge problem with this.
I drove around the neighborhood twice.
I looked at the other driveway.
There's a lot of various forms of concrete.
But when I look at the other various forms of concrete,
there may be some that are in violation
and who knows, they might be getting a violation.
But on the other half of the coin, there's a lot
of houses there that are odd shaped
where the garages are different.
You know, they're not straight
on, they come off to the side.
So they were, they were built
different with different concrete.
We can't do anything about that.
But this is an excessive amount of concrete.
This is excessive. Um, and,
and I mean, I don't know how else to say this,
but you were told not to pour
and you're stretching, you're trying
to stretch the truth here to get a variance.
I I, no, this, this is not right.
It, It's just too much. It's too much.
We're having problems with this around the city
and we're denying 'em left and right,
and especially when you were told not to do it.
And then you're gonna come back here
and gonna, you're gonna cry and say it's a burden.
I'm sorry. I,
I, I can't I,
'cause it's not true. Only
if there's a question. Mr. Ross have
Any questions? You, I'm just saying No,
I, I'm,
I, he answered my questions.
He's, he's out of compliance
and I will not be voting for this. Okay.
Any other questions or discussions? Comments?
Alright, Mr. Chair? Yes, Mr. Green.
So I've also been given this saw,
'cause we've been on this process of trying to,
it's been the understanding that these in increase,
the increase in the width of the driveways has been
to accomplish possibly one of two things.
One, to run a business and two
multi-families living in, on property in,
in one house than R one C.
And that's obviously there's more,
but that was part of the reason we started
to address these driveways.
And then it got to a point where,
and the, the sad part for every for you is this enforced,
it, it's complaint enforced.
There could be one next door to you
and there is one next door to one that we did, uh,
make comply directly next door.
That guy wants to call, make a complaint there.
It'll be the same thing. We've had people take driveways
out that were just bored.
I, I'm concerned about a couple things.
Number one, this is not the first time we sat up here
and somebody's came up here
and said, somebody told me I could do it.
That's the problem.
Ordinances are online.
People can see what the ordinances are.
I can understand where people sometimes who aren't familiar
with that stuff wouldn't know,
but it would seem like they would look into it.
So here's where we're at. I I think it's the same
as the rescheduling issue.
The rescheduling issue is not the rescheduling, it's
that we don't have a rule for it.
And so I started thinking about this driveway thing
and I started thinking, so are we gonna go backwards
and just get everybody,
or are we just gonna start here and you can have it?
'cause you did it yesterday, you can't have
it 'cause you're doing it tomorrow.
And then I started thinking about what Mr. Cliff said.
And I started thinking about the zoning stuff
where we have all this stuff zoned five
or six different things for one piece of property.
The problem is created by the city and the administration
because we're not addressing, we're need to address
and get things properly zoned.
Not as easy as it sounds, but it can be done.
And the same thing is true with these driveways.
So we've got this rule,
and I think it's ornamental is the word
where on these front driveways, they can only be so far.
And everybody can drive down any street
and see five driveways that have been widened.
And some of 'em don't look that bad.
So now, so I, I'm starting to think, so what is the issue?
The issue is our ordinance.
So we're beating, I think we're beating
around in this circle
and all we're doing is digging ourselves into a hole.
'cause they're gonna be a lot of people p****d off.
And that's not the intent.
The intent is to do what's best for the city.
So maybe this is the juncture
where we say, okay, the problem's been created by the city
and we need to sit down in the next couple meetings and,
and direct whoever we direct to come up with a new,
new zoning ordinance for driveways.
Because I think all of us could sit up here
and say, Hey,
I got no problem if someone widens it a little bit
to put a basketball hoop in it.
Can you put basketball hoops in? I don't know.
But you know what I'm saying? And then
we can start from that.
And at least we've given some leeway
because it looks like people wanna do it
to have a little bit more room.
Maybe cars are bigger now. I don't know.
But I, I've given this a lot of thought
and it seems like we're going about it backwards.
'cause this is gonna continue to happen all the time.
And then I thought about what Mr. Cliff had said.
It's our zoning.
It's, it's the, the way we've got
things, is that the right word?
Not zoning, but it's our, it's our ordinances.
It's our zoning ordinances
that aren't fitting what people want to do.
So I don't, I don't know where we start.
'cause I don't want multi-families living in a house.
I don't want, uh, I don't want people
running businesses outta the house.
And that was a, that was a product
of COVID people said, Hey, this is pretty easy.
I get up and go in my driveway and get my stuff.
So this one particularly has a lot of cement.
I'll give you that. But too much.
I don't, uh, that's my thought.
I I'm thinking we're looking at this backwards.
I think we need to get the ordinances changed to fit
what the community's asking for within reason.
That might take a lot of these away
from the, from our table.
That's my comment. Mr. Chair.
Yes. Mr. Jersey.
Um, I, I, I think you,
I think you hit the nail kind of on the head there.
Um, Mr. Green. Um,
'cause in that neighborhood, um,
there's legitimate parking lots on, on, on Newcastle.
I mean, I mean, you got cars parked on the front.
I mean, you guys know, you
know which house I'm talking about.
I'm not gonna name off the addresses.
So they park 'em sideways.
So it becomes, it becomes an issue.
Like, again, where does this start and where does it stop?
I mean, what, what's the latitude?
Um, I mean, if we go right to the teeth of the ordinance,
um, you know, I think we,
you, we are gonna point, point ourselves into the corner.
And I think, uh, you know, I think on top
of the ordinances being, you know, out of date as far as
that, all that stuff goes to some degree
it becomes a staffing issue.
Yet again, we don't have enough staff to oversight all these
things that have just developed
and popped up, you know, concrete's being poured, nothing's,
nothing's, nothing's followed up on.
Um, so where do you start? Where do you stop?
Um, my thing is, I think, you know,
we bring up a good point about how this process developed
with this property that's concerning in, in its own right
and maybe a, a topic for another day.
But, um, I think the, the residents that
is in question here, I I do believe it's tastefully done.
I don't understand the, the concrete in the backyard.
I think that's excessive. But I think this project is
actually tastefully done.
It, it is a little bit,
but I'll tell you what, there's a whole lot more
concrete in this town and a whole lot more properties than
what this gentleman has.
And it's a problem. It's an enforcement problem.
We can't, we can't police it.
Um, and when we start policing it,
other things are gonna fall through the cracks
because we're just focusing on
concrete driveways in the, in the front.
Not to say that we shouldn't be,
but, um, it becomes a manpower thing
and an ordinance thing, I think, I think you've hit,
hit the nail kind of on the head there.
Um, so that's, that's my 2 cents on it.
Um, I think this one's tastefully done,
but again, I have a problem with the, the process
of which it was, it was done.
Um, why this house got targeted, um, is
beyond me when there's other parking lots in the
neighborhood that should be
addressed, probably should be ripped out.
Um, but I, again, I I kind
of share the same sentiment with Mr. Green.
You know, where did we start? Where do we stop with this?
Um, and I'll yield the floor.
Mr. Chair. Yes, Mr. Cliff.
So, uh, to the, uh, to the petitioner, um,
you put together a good packet.
Um, you came up in your pledge, your case with, with, uh,
passion and try to put facts into play.
But the very evidence that was submitted in our backup kind
of contradicts some of the things that, that you're,
you were asserting, I'm not pointing
fingers, I'm not calling names.
I actually, I actually admire the fact that
you tried to be proactive in your project
and perhaps you weren't quite clear
or quite understanding on, um, what it was
that was being told to you.
So I I'm not trying to demean you in my commentary.
Please don't take it that way. Educational moment, okay?
I'm not offended. Anytime you talk
to anybody about anything, anywhere
and they tell you that it's okay to do something, you want
to know who that person is.
Grab a business card, whatever.
Because the first thing people, like, I'm a code,
I'm a code enforcer in another municipality,
the first thing I ask is who, who told you?
And man, if you can show me that carries an awful lot
of weight, it changes the whole dynamic of the situation.
But if you can't, then you can.
As far as, uh, the engineering department goes,
I'm a little concerned that they're gonna
post a uh, okay tag.
Where's the camera? I'm gonna post an okay tag.
It's got a name scribbled in there and a date
and the address, no permit number, no narrative.
He did the right thing.
He kept it and he kept I I or asked for it. Whatever.
Somehow or another. You No, I have the original.
Yeah, you presented it as backup information
to support the ascertain of your case.
However, it's completely useless to me
because I don't really know what it's for.
I applaud you for keeping it.
If you ever do anything again, what are you gonna ask them?
Please? I print your name, put your permit number
and tell me who you are and print your name.
If you've got commentary, this is
where it should have went in at.
So the permit that you drew, I just want you to understand
that was strictly for the sidewalk.
The approach and the curb cutout.
That's the only thing that requires permits in
Warren, above the sidewalk.
Flat work doesn't really require permitting,
but you still have to ask those important questions.
'cause there are do's and there are don'ts as
as you're learning here this evening.
So, but I, I'm glad you put it in,
but right away I understood that this was
for the sidewalk down towards the road.
It had nothing to do with your project
upward of the sidewalk.
Some narrative in our backup talks about somebody came out
and told you don't pour past your garage line.
That, that if you would've stopped at your garage line,
you would've been within ordinance.
Can I Well, I'm just teachable moment for sure.
I already understand. You heard things
or you interpreted things that you heard.
I, I I get all that.
At the end of the day, you were either given erroneous
information or you didn't pry hard enough
to verify your fact on that.
Okay? And as a board, this board has been very, very
stringent on these kind of activities of late
because they're an epidemic.
As you heard, some of my other board members comment
that it's an epidemic around the city right now.
And, and, and there's not a lot of support for this kind
of thing going on, especially after the fact.
'cause we don't know. We don't, you can express to me
as much as you want that you try to do things the right way.
I'm listening to what you're telling us.
I I have no reason to doubt that you didn't try
to be proactive in your project,
but you overstep what the, what the ordinance requires
and somebody's calling us, calling you out on it.
And here we are tonight. So, um,
I don't require any rebuttal to my commentary.
I appreciate you providing everything that you, that you've
provided and I appreciate that your neighbors piped up
and stood up for you in the multitude
of emails that we have gotten.
Thank you. And with that, I'll yield the floor. Mr.
Chairman,
Mr. Chair, there's
no other comments. I make a
Motion after Mr. Watts, did you
Have comments still and done.
So just to my colleagues, we, to be clear,
we have an ordinance can't go
past either side of the garage.
It's pretty plain and simple. Yards are yards.
They're not parking lots.
I don't care if other people have done it in the
neighborhood, then if they get a
complaint, it's gonna get dealt with.
And maybe we'll have enough people at some point to go
around and do the enforcement
and get this place straightened out.
But, you know, to put that much concrete in a yard
is a detriment to the neighborhoods hoods, you know?
And, and I gotta be honest with you, I drove by there.
I looked at the, I looked at the,
the past pictures of the house.
The house looks better. I agree.
But we have an ordinance to follow
and it's our job to follow those ordinances.
And if we let one go here,
we're gonna have to let everything go.
We've already been turning them down.
We know that it's wrong and we have to stick with that.
Otherwise we're gonna have a problem in this city.
We all live here and we all have to have to hold
that to that standard.
And I, I feel bad for him that he's getting a,
a learning experience here.
Like, like Mr. Cliff said,
but he was specifically told not to pour
and he should have followed up on that.
I, I mean, a little piece of paper
with a scribble name doesn't mean it's okay, you know?
So I I, I'll be honest with you,
here's the way I feel about it.
I'll do it and I'll ask for forgiveness and I'll get my way.
And I don't play those games
'cause we're getting too many of those.
Thank you
Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a motion.
Mr. Lindsey.
Uh, I'd make a motion, uh, to deny permission
to retain the widened portion
of driveway nine feet from the edge
of the garage towards the north property
line in the front yard.
Uh, due to the fact, uh,
petitioner's not met the practical difficulty standard
for variance, um, there's no unreasonable burden
or impact to maintain compliance.
It is self-imposed.
There's nothing unique about the property.
I think it is a detriment to the area
Support.
There's a motion by Mr. Lindsay, support by Mr. Watts
to deny the request for the reason stated
as though it's a yes vote to deny during the roll call
Mr. Lindsay. Yes.
To deny for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Watts? Yes. For the reasons stated the motion
Mr. Perry Yes.
For the reason stated in the motion
Mr. Assessor
Yes. For the reason stated in
the motion.
Mr. Green? Yes. For The reason stated in the
Motion. Mr. Cliff
Reluctantly I have to vote yes to deny for
The reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Jersey votes? No,
I believe this is a city issue. Chairman starch,
I also vote no.
'cause um, I think the city needs to decide
what direction they want to do in this kinda case.
So unfortunately, um, let's
See's denied.
Your request was denied today.
So you could talk, so deal with Mr.
Maybe we contact Mr. Walker Pond's office
and discuss the next steps. So what do we have to do?
Contact them. Next steps would be talk
to Steve about your next steps of what, what you have
to do. Okay,
So, and can I just clarify something?
I mean, I, I asked like everyone,
I did everything and I was told eight, you know,
leave four foot a green belt.
So I printed those. This wasn't done to
Understand Do and ask for
Understand For forgiveness.
I mean, this is a, quite honestly, um,
I do park my, like, I don't know if you're allowed
to park a trailer in the back, but I do ice fish.
We live next to the, one of the best fisheries.
I I understand. We understand.
It's, um, unfortunately it's like at this point you can just
contact Mr. Roger Brown and his office
and figure out what next steps would be.
Thank you. Let's leave it out there.
Texas Item 11, applicant Ziada Rabo
represented Ziada Rabo common description.
8 3 6 0 13 mile.
Your answer requested permission
to retain the existing front setback of 29 feet, one
and one quarter foot for a religious center
To Good evening.
Hello. Good evening.
If you could start with your name
and address, uh, for the record
and then explain what your request is.
Today
I am representing Z Design Build
and with me is the owner representative.
Can you state your name and your
Address? Mr.
Hain. Okay. And your address?
My name is Yogi Anand,
3 0 8 Longford Drive, Rochester Hills, Michigan.
Okay. And if you wanna explain your
request, what you're asking for.
So if you could explain your request.
Like what, what, what is the
variance that you're trying to get?
Can you take us through your request?
So, Okay, we have a situation
where one corner of the property
does not meet the setback requirement of 30 feet.
We are short by 10
and three quarters of an inch, uh,
from the setback requirement on the 13 mile road.
This is a situation that we inherited
with the existing building.
Okay. Um, thank you for that explanation.
Um, this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone else in the audience
wishing to speak on this item?
We're not seeing any audience members.
Um, or close the public portion.
And there is the impact statement from planning. If Mr.
Jersey was,
This is Mr. Chair from,
uh, planning director.
The petition received, uh, site plan approval
with the conditions for an Islamic center
for Worship on November, on November 3rd, 2025.
Provided that the provision practitioner complies
with the planning commission's approved conditions,
which shall be required in order for the site plan
to be released to the billing division.
Review of this request finds no issues
to impact the budding local or general public.
Thank you Mr. Um,
so the public portion of the meeting is closed
and it's open to the board for questions and discussion.
Mr. Chair? Yes, Mr. Green. I have a couple questions.
Uh, First,
again, this is a, this is an ordinance
that I think was written in 1960
and it it reflected the, uh, complexion
of the community in 1960 where, uh, the original plan was
to have one square mile.
And in that square mile you had a school
and everybody walked to the school.
And that was, that was part of the plan.
And it, it, as part of that plan there was, you know,
a church in every square mile, three six square miles.
That was part of the original 1960 information.
And that's where this, this, uh, this ordinance
and these requirements were generated from.
So we get ourselves in a situation again where we have,
uh, a situation where it, what
what we're trying to put in is
not fitting the neighborhood.
So we've got, uh, existing residentials on both sides.
And if you look at the,
the numbers on the site plan,
the numbers on the site plan may,
maybe I get clarification from you.
So it says there are 37 parking spaces.
Do you know if that's the correct number? Yes.
37. Yes.
So there's 37 parking spaces.
And that was calculated for, uh, God,
I want to use the right terminology.
Uh, three people for each space
in on the rug or on the floor.
I think that's how it said in the site plan.
That's how they calculated the parking area.
37 parking spaces, three people
for each three parking spaces,
one parking space for each three people.
So again, I'm,
and I know the variances for the, the one inch or whatever,
but again, being proactive
and trying to get in front of it, it, it would appear
as though it just, it it's not gonna fit.
And I have a concern for the 37 parking spaces,
and I can see, based on my experience from some
of these existing sites,
that there's a pretty large parking lot across the street.
So it, that's the kind of problems that we create
by not speaking up right off the get go
and saying what the concerns are.
Even though the variance is the one inch,
so 37 parking spaces,
there's no way not even close that can be,
uh, advantageous to that neighborhood.
I mean, 37, there might be 10 or 15 employees.
I, I don't know. Adequate number traffic. Yeah.
And it's not, I don't think it's adequate for the project.
So that is a concern of mine.
And, uh, it's gonna put a burden on the neighborhood
because there's some brand new construction there.
And I'm always concerned when I see these, uh,
and I looked at the site plan as close as I could.
Any, I'm, any, anything I approve for any of these projects,
there is a condition that there cannot be any
outside speaker systems.
'cause we've run into this with some various, uh, uh, other,
uh, moss that have been put up.
And it, it always gets to the point
where they wanna put speakers outside.
So that would be,
that's gonna be a condition if this does move forward.
So those are my concerns with the project in general
and with the, the variance risk.
We're here for tonight,
Mr. Chair?
Yes, yes, yes. Mr. Jersey.
So, initially looking at, at the, at the print, um, I kind
of gotta echo the same sentiment as Mr. Green.
I mean, we have, to me this,
and again, I'm gonna go on the record saying we need
to do a better job as a city, finding better places
and better land to provide
the adequate space that they need for worship centers.
I feel that time
and time again, I don't know who's cutting deals to,
to sell you guys property that, you know,
that's a whole nother animal.
Um, but I feel like they're giving you, they're,
they're telling you you can do stuff with land
that just doesn't fit at the end of the day.
So here's my concern with the project.
It's not that I'm against having
a religious center there at all.
Um, you know, I think it's a good, a good idea.
But given that neighborhood,
you have residents on both sides,
you only have 37 parking spots.
This is gonna be a place of worship.
Is that, is that correct? Am I safe to assume that
you're gonna, it, it, there's gonna be,
there's gonna be worship there, right?
Yes. Okay. So you're gonna have more than 37 cars.
Gentlemen, you know this
and I, where,
where are we gonna put the overflow of parking?
Have you have, have you had any concerns about that
or any kind kind of thoughts about that?
We're gonna end up with cars parked up and down old 13 mile.
Um, are we going to, are they going
to be going across the street to the, the banquet center
to park causing them un unfair burden
or maybe another potential problem with, you know,
do you have any shared parking agreements with,
with any additional businesses in the area?
Maybe the strip mall that's adjacent across the street?
Um, I just don't think that this is
an adequate enough area to do what you need to do.
Now, mind you, you know, there was a nice,
nice lot with trees and everything.
He went in there ripped everybody.
Somebody went in there, ripped every, all the trees down
and, and just started building just thinking, okay,
we're gonna do this without any kind of
afterthought about the impact.
It would be not only on your property,
but the adjacent neighborhood and, and community.
So, you know, typically when we've had these worship centers
that we, we've had as many, we've heard as many
as 200 people coming to, to, to worship, you know, um,
in, in a building that's, you know, you know,
it becomes like a fire issue, a fire,
a fire hazard issue if you have too many people.
And it's such a small building.
So my concern isn't, um, for the project
as a whole, um,
looking at the site plan is just a numerous, numerous things.
Um, first off is just the parking.
I know maybe that's another thing that needs
to be changed in our ordinance, but the parking,
parking issues in regarding religious institutions
and stuff, I, I don't know where
where we start stop with that.
But I personally think
that this is an overbuild for the property.
I don't think it it's going to fit that neighborhood.
Um, I think you're gonna really upset the neighbors.
Um, but I'll let the, I'll let the petitioner speak to that.
If he, if he had had any conversations with any
of the neighbors or any, any of the concerns
that I just expressed.
Good evening. Uh, I'm one of the owner, my name is Lain.
I live in 3 1 1 2 7 Land Avenue, Warren, Michigan.
So in the last meetings we had
with the planners in the, uh, city commission,
and we had the neighbors also, they asked us
to communicate with the neighbors.
Uh, we also personally send the letters to neighbors.
And, uh, we had few neighbors, uh, they came out
and they were happy with it
and they didn't have any concern about it.
And, uh, for as far, uh, for the parking lot, uh,
as you see, this is a very small house.
And, uh, 37 parking spots is enough for no, those people
who are gonna come for worship.
And if not, then the, the Banco Hall owner,
she was there on the planning, uh, commission meeting,
and she personally, she went to us, she came to us
and said, if you need any parking spot, just let me know.
And, uh, I'll deal with it and I'll provide you guys,
but just ask for my permission.
And so hopefully we, we think we do not,
we'll not have any problem, the parking and uh,
and, uh, as you can see,
the building is not gonna fit that much.
People, even if they come by, we can't let them in.
Well, here's the problem there, we have other buildings
that don't, don't quote unquote fit much people,
but we end up with 350 people showing up.
You know, you just can't, I mean,
if you have religious institution
or church, you can't turn people away to come worship
or pray, you know, that's not right.
You know, so you have to make it accommodating
to whoever wants to come.
You know, you might end up with 51 weekend one week,
and then, you know, once people realize it's there
and it's easily accessible
and the parking's a little bit better, I could see
that place growing versus it not growing.
So, um, you know, you know, the, the road
to hell was paved within good intentions,
but, you know, it's just, I think,
I still think it's an overbuild for the property.
Now do you have a, do you have a shared parking agreement
with a signed letter from the lady from Lars,
the owner from the, from there
I do not have any.
She just told me personally.
So because, uh, we did not open the place yet.
And, uh, we don't know how much people are expecting,
but, uh, I don't think we'll be, we have met Met, yeah.
Whatever requirements there, we have met it.
And, uh, we got the permission from the planning. Uh, so
Unfortunately it says
Parking space, 37 parking spaces.
I understand that, sir. But did, did you understand
what I just said though about this, this being Yeah.
Becoming too big to, for too big to handle in essence,
you know, which would be a good thing for you,
but it's gonna be a bad thing for the community.
And how long does that, does that last
with the neighbor across the street?
She might be okay with a little bit of overflow,
but now if you got enough people to fill that place
and fill her parking lot on the regular,
that might be become a problem down the road.
So I would, I wish you would've had something in writing
from her, you know, come and brought it
and said, Hey, you know, she's got,
we got some kinda shared parking agreement with,
with Lars across the street,
and does that, how does that work?
If they sell, will the new owners for them be just
as accommodating with the parking space?
You know, you can't, you can't rely on your neighbors.
I mean, I don't park my ne my car in my neighbor's driveway
just because I got people coming over.
So it, it, it, you know what I'm saying,
it becomes a slippery slope.
I understand. But, uh, we are not relying on her.
I even, I didn't even ask her, she just came to me
and said, said this if you need,
but I don't think we need it now
because, uh, as, as I told you, uh, mentioned earlier
that this is a small property is gonna fit maybe, uh, 40
to 50 people, max, uh, 60 people.
And for 60 people, 37 spots should be enough
and we should not bother the other neighbors, uh,
as we have this property
and we have don't have anything else.
So you're gonna build a building on two properties.
That's so, you know, you got, you got the lot combination
with the front, with the front, you know the one, you know,
the two lots piggybacked on on,
Yeah. We have applied, applied
for the land
Combination, the lock combination, Right?
Yeah, we have and we have
the parking lot there. Right.
So you're telling me the building
that you're gonna build on, that's gonna require the lot
combination of two lots is only gonna be adequate enough
for 60 to 80 people? No, no.
In that building, we are talking about the
current building that we have.
We are not building anything, uh, any new, uh, property.
We are just having the parking lot.
So the house is just,
the house is gonna be the building per se.
Yeah. So there's not gonna be a new structure built on
No, I'm looking at clear land on the plan.
So it's all Mr. Chair, it's yield before. Go ahead.
Yes, Mr. Green, real quick. So the, the problem with the,
the shared parking though,
and this is, we're just trying to give you our experience
because we've, we've seen it now
and it becomes a problem for parishioners
and it becomes a problem for, uh, a lot of people.
So our experience has been, there's two centers in the city
where people actually get out in the
middle of the street and stop traffic.
So other people who are at the worship center can get across
the street and it becomes really unsafe.
And it's happened at these two facilities
and we've talked to 'em about it,
and it's just not shared parking sounds good.
But when you're going across the old 13 mile, it's, it's a,
it's a tough, it's a tough take. Well,
As that mentioned that this is not a shared
parking, she just, that
Wasn't a question. He was
just men mentioning, do you have any contact?
That's why I was saying I get it.
Chair, she came to me and uh, said to me, chair,
if you need parking, then just come to me and I'll No,
I understand. No, I understand Mr.
Chair. I'm just trying to share
where our experience, the other thing is, uh,
anyways, so it does, it does become a,
it has become a problem for us, for, for the city at,
at this particular time.
Now you made me forget. I'm an old man.
You can always come back. Mr. Watts had a comment first.
So real quick, I just want real, real quick.
I, I apologize.
I thought there was gonna be another building
Being built property.
No, we're using the same building. Use the same building,
and we need just, no,
Uh, that makes more sense to me.
10 15, a 10 inch. That
Makes more sense. That makes more
sense to me. Okay, I'll yield the floor.
Mr. Was Mr. Perry or Mr. Watts I thought heard you? Yep.
Here, I'm in there too somewhere.
Okay, so after Mr. Watts. So
This is, this is another one of those situations,
you know, It doesn't
fit the neighborhood and we don't
know, I mean, I look through here
and I don't see any fire department stuff that tells me
what the capacity of the building is.
And I'm told in some research they did, if you figure
one car per person, um,
so that means they're only gonna put 37 in there.
I don't know what the capacity is for the building.
I'm concerned about that. You know, I don't, I don't know
what their capacity's gonna be.
Um, and it just, it doesn't fit.
You got residential on both sides.
And I don't care if they have a written parking agreement
or a verbal parking agreement.
If you're gonna build something
and you're gonna, you're gonna put it in there.
You're required to have the necessary parking for it.
You're, you're not supposed to be relying on the neighbors,
the parking lot across the street,
the shopping center across the street.
That's not fair to any of those people.
And I look at Lars, what if it's a, a, um, you know, a day
that they're having prayer
and they're having a party at Lars
and the parking lot's full, where are they
gonna park on the side of the road?
This, this is not right.
It's not this, this is not fit the area.
Um, and, um,
Sir, I have a, so we are here for like, uh, eight,
If I could just stop You, if I could just stop you
for a second, unless there's a question
Directed to you By, so I understand what you're here
for, but we have to make sure that it fits the area.
Everything has to fit.
If you give a variance, then it creates other pro some,
it could create problems in the rest of the area.
That's the problem. So we have to be very careful.
We're not even required to give you a variance.
We could just flat out turn you down, you know,
but we give a lot of variances
and honestly, I'd prefer not to give any,
but I just, I just don't feel this is gonna gonna fit.
Um, I, I see what's going on in other areas
with the traffic problems
and, uh, I'm just concerned about it.
And I'm concerned that you'll be back here in another year
for another variance and another variance in another year
and another year that, that's my concerns. So
Thank, thank you Mr. Watts.
Thank you Mr. Cliff.
Good evening, gentlemen.
I'm, I'm looking at your site plan.
A couple of questions I just want to ask about.
I, I see that small corner of, uh, of the house
that causes the predicament.
Um, but also I see, uh, anticipated drawing on this,
on this as, uh, looked like a porch structure
with a, with a ramp.
Um, and I, I haven't been by this,
I haven't been by this property.
It's one of the few up, up this week
that I didn't get a chance to go by and look at.
So is there currently a handicap access, a DA access ramp,
a porch area, and steps on what would be, I guess, the, uh,
southwest side of that house
Currently? Yes, we
have all the, uh,
we have met all the zoning ordinance, just this, uh,
eight foot to eight inch, uh, set setbacks.
That's all we need.
We are here for, and we have the planning commission.
My question, sir, was does the porch in the a DA ramp
currently exist?
No, it doesn't exist. It does not exist, no.
So that, that extends out into this setback.
We just have to had to approve how many porches
that were two feet into the front setback.
There's a big blank area on my print.
My question to you is,
is it in your intent in the future sometime
to build a structure in that big blank area
that I'm looking at on this, on this site plan?
Excuse me. Uh, can I ask for Something Yes or no?
Can I ask for something Yes or no, sir?
My question is, are you anticipating on building a building
in that big white blank area on your site plan?
Uh, we might in the future.
So then, uh, we will accept that as a yes.
So to my fellow board members, I think I kind
of like it better when a complete site plan comes
before us so that we can see everything that's gonna go on
in either currently
or anticipated that that can be easily spelled out with,
with the intent or their plan on, on what people want
to do on parcels of property.
And I don't think that's an unreasonable request.
I think that these piecemeal little bit here,
a little bit there, variance things is absolutely
what gets us into trouble
and things that we have to hear about
5, 10, 15 years down the road from neighboring residents
because certain things are starting to occur
that nobody really anticipated occurring.
But this board has seen enough evidence of this kind
of activity in the not so recent past.
And I'm not comfortable with approving variances on a parcel
of land or a piece of property, especially when the,
the wealth of information is provided to me.
That allows me to kind of look out a little bit into
that near or far future, which is part of our responsibility
as a board to do, to see whether things work in our
neighborhoods or not.
I'll yield the floor. I have no further
Comment, Mr. Chair. Okay.
Thank you Mr. Cliff. Mr. Lindsay?
Yeah. So when I'm looking at this to, so this is
to the board, I understand that the, you know, the variance
that they're asking for is, is less than a foot.
I get that, but that's because it's a house, right?
So now, now we are looking at granting a variance
for the existing property,
but it's gonna be made into something
that it's not intended for.
So if it's a house I don't have a problem with,
with the reten retention of, of the setback,
but we're trying to make now an existing structure that's a,
currently a house and then making it into an Islamic center.
We know that that detriment that
that's caused in the areas before.
We've seen these a few times.
We see that we're continue seeing these variances come up
for these properties that are not intended to be used, um,
for the size lot that they have.
Um, so when I look at this, I don't see, um,
that the petitioners actually met the practical difficulty
standard in order for us to, uh, grant this variance.
So it's gonna be a no vote for me.
I'm prepared to make a motion
unless there's any other comments.
Let's see. Are there any other comments or questions?
Yeah, so I, I will make a vote, a motion
to deny the petitioner permission to retain.
Can I ask something? No, I'm actually making a motion, sir.
Question. So, so, um, so I'm going to, excuse me,
I'm, I'm interrupted now.
So I'm gonna make a motion to deny permission
to retain the existing front setback of 29 feet, one
and a quarter inches for a religious center.
Uh, due to the fact that there's,
there's no unreasonable impact
to maintain strict compliance with the area.
Um, the property's not unique.
Uh, it is a detriment
and I think it's gonna be a, a personal
or economic situation.
Support. Support. Okay.
So we have a motion by Mr. Lindsay department, Mr. Watts,
to deny the request for the reasons stated in the motion.
So it's a yes. Vote to deny
Objection Mr. Lindsay.
Yes. To deny for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Watts. Yes. To deny For the reasons stated the
Motion. Mr. Cliff
Yes. To deny for the
reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Green Yes. To deny for the reasons stated in
The motion. Mr. Assessor
Yes. To deny for the
reasons stated in the motion,
Mr. Perry Yes.
To deny for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Jersey votes. Yes.
To deny for the reasons stated
in the motion. Chairman Stevi,
I vote yes to deny for the reason stated in the motion.
Uh, unfortunately your request today was not approved,
so we can deal with the building department
and find out what your next steps could be.
Thank you. Item number 12. Item
12. Item
12. Applicant Asad soba representative Asad soba.
Common description, 3 2 4 8 0 mound, suite two.
Variance requested permission to performed the C two use
of photography business in a PB zoning district.
And that's a use variance.
Good, good evening, Sova On behalf
of 3 2, 4 8 0 Mound Road, suite two.
My name is Jesse Spielman. I live at 5 9 6 8 BB Avenue.
Oh. So, uh, before you begin, I just wanted to say,
'cause uh, this is a use variant,
so you'd need six yes votes.
We are down one person.
Um, I just wanna make sure that you do want
to proceed today, or if you wanted to try
to reschedule it to have a full board.
We have confidence in you. Okay.
If you can continue now. I'm sorry.
I said you can continue then.
I was in front of you about a month ago,
and the problem I'm having with this building just the size
of it, they're small units, 840 square feet,
and we've had a lot of different
applicants that came forward.
And Mr. Jesse lives in the city of Warren and,
and, uh, we feel that this is something
that would fit the area.
Uh, it's mainly as an office use.
They don't do anything on site where they're mainly, uh,
wedding photographers.
Uh, and NetSuite was a variance issued in 2019
for a retail store.
Um, so this is something, uh, I, I feel would serve no harm
for the community.
The neighboring, uh, there's no resale on site.
It's very short hours by appointment only.
And we're here to answer any questions you might have.
Okay. Thank you for that explanation.
Um, this is a pub is a public hearing.
Are there any members in the audience
wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing any or close that portion. Mr. Jersey?
Did it say, uh, impacts?
Uh, yes, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Um, so per round worth the planning director, um,
after review of the request, no issues were found
to impact the budding local or general public.
Okay. So with that, our close the public portion
and turn it over to the board for questions and discussion,
Mr. Chairman?
Uh, yes, Mr. Cliff To the, uh, to the board's attorney,
um, being it's a use variance,
this one gives me a little conflict,
but being it's a use variance, I wanted to inquire whether
or not we would be proper in providing a, uh,
sunset on this.
For example, when this particular, um, tenant leaves
and his business leaves, if it would revert back to, uh,
it's a original CC two
or PB use, um,
and retaining the previous variance for the retail outlet.
If we elect not to reject it. I'm just, I'm just curious.
I, I, unfortunately, I don't think you can. No.
So it's a put a thumb on it
To the petitioner then, sir.
Um, can you run me through
what your daily activity would kind of look like,
uh, at this location?
Uh, we just taking orders here, doing office work,
maybe processing your, your digital formatting
or whatever, putting things together.
Um, is there gonna be any actual shooting of,
of photographs on site?
Uh, yes. Uh, majority of the work
that will be done there is editing.
Okay. So it's me sitting at a computer in an office.
I'll also, um, have photo shoots of individuals
and families, but that's by appointment only.
There won't be any products sold in the unit.
Um, it won't be open to the public commercially,
so you can't walk in Okay.
And schedule a photo shoot.
Typically, I have perhaps one photo shoot a week.
I'd like for that to be more.
But, um, as Assad stated, I'm a wedding photographer, so
that's the majority of my business.
I live just a few blocks away.
I walk to work and I just like to have a place
to focus rather than working outta my house with my toddler.
Okay. I appreciate that.
I appreciate that information, sir.
It, it's just, I, I personally have issues
with use variances.
However, two things come to mind to me.
Um, one, it looks like you're gonna be kind
of a low impact tenant there.
And two, um, I,
I can't pronounce your last name, sir.
Assad has gone above
and beyond to try to bring somebody else
before us to try to find a, a,
a viable use for his property.
And, and I, and I want to thank you for that.
I think that's commendable.
Um, both of those, both of those kind of weigh heavily
in my being able to state to you
that I don't think I'm gonna have a real issue
with being a yes vote on this particular use variance.
And that is very rare for me.
So with that, I'll thank you gentlemen.
And I'll yield the floor.
Mr. Cliff. Oh, can I just add a comment? Yeah. So Mr.
Cliff, I know you asked about a sunset,
but the thing is, is this use is only gonna be tied
into photography use.
So it's not like any other use would be there.
And that's where some of those ordinances are so outdated
because the photography stuff is based on, uh,
you know, the dark room and developing a film and all that.
So Mr. Now it's all digital. Mr.
Chair, Mr. Chair, please.
Um, the first probably 26 years of my young adult
and adult life was based around photography.
And I, I'm not gonna deny the sediment that you lay forth,
um, he's not gonna have them nasty caustic chemicals running
around like I used to have
to dip my fingers into and things.
And, uh, I'm sure that being a wedding photographer,
he shouldn't have so much, uh, unsavory activity at
that location that unfortunately I was kind of subject to,
because at the time my father wasn't very, uh,
discriminating on what he took photographs of.
And with that, I'll yield the floor.
Mr. Chair. Yes. Mr. Jersey,
Um, to Madam Attorney.
Um, so if we, if we granted this, could we,
could we put a provision on it to include, um,
you know, perform the C two use
of photography business in a PB zoning district?
Um, with the exception with, um, except for the use
of a tattoo studio or tattoo parlor, you know,
'cause that since that was a, an issue with the last one,
or, I mean, can we stick, like can we put like
a stipulation like that on us? I would think, I mean,
You wouldn't be, you, you don't have the power to rezone
if you don't mind.
No, by all means, go ahead.
You don't have the power to rezone
and that would be a rezoning to rezone it to a seat.
What the use variance is asked is can he
specifically run a photography studio
in this PV zone?
The C two has nothing to do with this. Gotcha.
It's only the use. Okay.
And that's strictly the only use that can be in there.
Um, and go
Forward. I gotcha. Stop yelling
at me. Right.
So, um, I mean, I I think I could get behind this too.
I agree with it's a low impact, uh, low impact use
and, um, you know, the, the applicant
and the building owners done some really good hard work
trying to find a tenant for his, for his property.
And I think he's failing. Maybe find found one.
Um, so I could get behind this. I'll yield the floor.
Mr. Chair? Yes. Mr. Lindsay.
Uh, quick question for the petitioner. Good evening, sir.
Good to see you again. Good
Evening to You. Thank
you. Um, and I apologize, it's been a long night.
It is This, is this the same same property
that we saw just a month ago?
Yes sir. Mm-hmm. Okay. So I'm trying just to remember.
'cause it was with the other other use. Yes, sir.
Is this just one building
or is there multiple units within the building?
It's, it's one building four units.
The first one is a travel agency.
The second one would be this.
And we got three and four still vacant.
Okay. So, so you're requesting a variance in just the
one unit then? Yes, sir.
Just for suite Two. Okay.
And then madam attorney, so if we grant the use variance,
is it particular to just the, the one unit
or does it apply to the whole building property?
The, the request is for the one unit.
So, um, it would be
applicable to that unit only. Okay. Not the whole building.
Okay. Thanks for clarifying
Mr. Lindsay. I,
we, we we're just asking for this tenant.
If he vacates in three years in, in the lease
and the next person comes,
he would have to come in front of you. That's not something
No. So if we, if we do grant
the variance, it's gonna,
it's gonna remain and that, that's why we're so diligent
with our, with our decision making is, you know,
'cause it, it's not just the one tenant.
It, it's going to affect that property for the lifetime.
Um, and,
and that's why we are so careful
on the decisions that we're making.
Okay. Um, that does clarify my question.
I don't have an issue with this.
I don't, I don't think photography's gonna be an issue,
so I would support this. Okay.
Any Other questions or Discussions?
I'll make a motion
if you guys don't have anything else
to say, I'll go forward.
Go ahead. Okay. I'd like to make a motion, uh, to grant, uh,
the petitioner permission, uh, to perform the C two use
of a photography, photography business in a
PB zoning district.
Uh, due to the fact that it's not a detriment to the area.
Um, and it seems like for, for what we've done
with this property so far
and what we've seen, um, that there is a, an a burden
to use the property as, as zoned.
So I have no issues.
So support board.
So you have a motion by Mr. Lindsay,
and then I heard support by Mr.
Susser to approve the request for the reason stated
Mr. Lindsay Yes.
For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Assessor? Yes. For the reasons stated in the
Motion. Mr. Green?
Yes. For the reasons stated in the motion. Mr. Cliff? Yes.
For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Watts? Yes. For the reasons stated motion, Mr. Perry?
Yes. For the reason stated in the motion Mr.
Jersey votes? Yes. For the reason stated
in the motion. Chairman Vic?
Uh, yes. For the reason stated in the motion
your request is approved? Yes, sir. Thank
You Very much. Good luck, sir.
Thank you
Very much. You have a great night.
Thank you. Good night. Thank you.
Takes the item 13. Applicant.
Mark, mark, g Gini
and Ur Kasha Representative Mark Gini
and Zora Kasha.
Hopefully I got that right. Common description.
3 9 3 0 10 mile variance requested permission to one,
retain existing building two within 15 feet
of the front setback along 10 mile road.
Two, allow open storage on non hard surface. Three.
Allow 2,240 square feet of open storage on a property
where the primary structure on the site is
2,880 square feet.
If you could start with your name and address
and then take us through your request.
Mark.
Mark Janney.
Uh, address 39 30 East Andile Road, Warren, Michigan,
4 8 0 9 1.
I'm Michelle Perry with John Tagle Associates.
We're the architect. 3 0 9 North Main Street, suite two 13,
Royal Oak 4 8 0 7 1.
Um, so we are here, we've been, the owners have been working
with planning and zoning department for about a year
to clean up the property and to bring it into compliance.
Um, we do have, uh, site plan approval
subject to us coming in front of you
for these three variances.
I can go through each variance if you'd like,
or if you wanted to ask questions first.
It's up to you.
Why don't you just go through them and explain them.
Okay. So the first variance that has to do
with, uh, the setback.
The building is located 15 feet from the front property
line, which is the north side of the property.
Um, it was built in 1950.
So this is, um, we assume
that at the time this was built in compliance.
The properties to the west that are adjacent
to it are about the same setback.
So this is probably more of a
put it on record variance.
Um, the, it's, I believe the ordinance now says 50 feet from
the front yard setback, which is basically be
more than half of the building.
Um, number two and number three are for the same area.
There's an existing fenced storage area that, um,
is gravel right now.
The business, there are two businesses at this location
and high tech collision,
previously stored repair vehicles on the property.
Um, Mr. Gini is in the process
of transitioning into retirement.
So his business has gone way down.
He only services about one
or two cars at a time at the most.
Those are stored inside the building.
The other business, a one parking lot maintenance
has vehicles that they use daily.
And there's about five to seven trucks
and trailers that they store would like to store
behind in the secured fenced area,
which is what they've been doing.
They'd like to maintain that.
Um, the front part north of that fenced area,
the common parking area is slated to be, um,
paved with hard surface and storm water management.
Added to that, the back part that is fenced in,
that's currently gravel,
has had no drainage issues over the years.
It's been like that for 20 plus years.
And they're requesting that they maintain it that way.
They, they, they'll keep it well maintained.
And like I said, it's for the vehicles, it's daily use.
So they leave in the morning, come back at the end
of the day and are stored overnight there.
Okay. Thank you very,
thank you very much for that explanation.
Mm-hmm. Um, this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone the audience wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing any or close the public portion of the meeting
and, and turn it over
to the board for any questions and discussion?
Here's a impact statement. Yeah.
And Mr. Chair from, uh, round Worth Planning Director, um,
after review of the request, no issues were found
to impact the budding local or general public.
The petitioner receive site plan approval
for a revised parking lot layout, adding new parking spaces
and landscape landscaping boulders on December 15th, 2025.
Okay. So the public portion of meetings close.
So it's up to any questions or discussion from the board
or comments, Mr.
Chair? Yes. Mr. Green.
So this parcel is parcel 2 2 7 0 0 3.
If you look at this aerial picture photo.
So, and this was photo was taken at
8 25 25.
If it still looks like that,
where are they gonna put anything?
If it's the picture, it looks,
I'm, I'm sorry to interrupt.
It looks like it backyard. It does not look like
that anymore, Mr.
Um, we've, we had a meeting with, um, zoning
and planning and we looked at the Google Earth
and that is not what it looks like anymore.
Um, I don't know if anyone had a chance to drive by it,
but that's all cleared out.
And the only thing back there now is the, um,
business vehicles that come in and out.
Yeah. And Mr. Green, that lot is actually cleaned up that,
I'm sorry, that lot is actually cleaned up.
Yeah. It's not like this photo, uh, legitimate question.
It also says, uh, no six foot high chain link fence
with obscuring slats installed in lieu of masonry wall
is a masonry wall of, uh, requirement.
Six foot masonry wall is a requirement. Right.
We just went over that tonight.
Yeah. So, and it says it was, uh, verified by the
planning department, be it to be able
to put a chain link fence in.
I thought that was us.
It depends on the use adjacent to it
and everything else, whether a wall is required or whether
or not, um, the planning commission has the right
to waive that.
It's, it's one of the things that is not a hard vest.
Um, if it was residential, it would require it.
Um, other than that, there is some discretion in that.
So if it's what if it's residential, if it's
Something, if, if it, if it abuts,
if commercial abuts residential,
it has been required to have
The, so anything else planning can, can
Approve, would, would have some discretion,
Can planning could improve anything else.
Then if it's not residential, I
Just want for future, it still has to have,
if it's non resident, if it's the same use,
it doesn't need a wall fence
or anything, it could be open at that point.
Okay. That would be up to the,
the neighbors on what they did to separate. Got
It.
Mr. Chair? Yes, Mr. Watts.
Um, question to the petitioner.
If you're, you're getting ready
to retire and good for you, by the way.
Uh, don't look back.
Um, is the plan that maybe the,
is it a one or whatever?
They may just take over the whole property?
Rent the whole property?
I, I didn't,
I didn't understand. Can say it one more time?
Do you, so is it if,
if you're gonna retire Yeah, potentially.
And you know, the building would be empty.
Is it the thought that the company
that's there renting the property
to store trucks will probably take over the whole
building and rent Possible.
Very possible. Okay.
All right. That's the only question I have. I, okay.
Thank you. You're welcome.
Mr. Chair. Yes, Mr. Cliff.
I'm a neighbor of yours. I live in that neighborhood.
Thank you for cleaning that up.
And it looks good over there. Thank you.
Congratulations on your impending retirement.
I echo his sediment. Don't look back.
Um, if nobody else has anything, I'd like
to put a motion on the floor for this item.
Okay. I'd like to, uh, I'd like to grant permission
to retain an existing building within 15
feet of the front setback.
A long 10 mile road. That building's been in existence there
for a long, long time.
Um, it's a circumstances zoning, uh, number two
to allow open storage on an Earnhardt surface.
Uh, based on the explanation here tonight, I don't think
that that's going to be an issue.
Um, number three, allow 2,240 square feet
of open storage on a property
where the primary structure on the site is
2,880 square feet.
Um, it's not a detriment to the area.
The area's looking very good now
and I think it'll help us retain an active business
within that piece of property
Support.
We have a motion by Mr. Cliff, support by Mr.
Jersey to approve the request
for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Cliff? Yes. For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Jersey votes? Yes. For the reasons.
Stay in the motion Mr. Assessor?
Yes. For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Lindsey? Yes. For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Green? Yes. For The reasons stated motion.
Mr. Watts? Yes. For the reasons stated in motion.
Mr. Perry? Yes. For the reason. State of the motion
Chairman Salvi? Uh,
yes. For the reason state
and the motion, your request is approved. Thank
You very much. Thank
you very much.
Six to item 14. Applicant.
IBB Petroleum Services, incorporated representatives,
representative Raffa
and Fazi.
Sorry, I apologize. Ami Ami description
2 1 3 5 0.
Ryan, I know I butchered it. I'm sorry. I apologize.
It's okay. 2 1 3 5 0.
Ryan Variances requested permission to one U
This the use allow 1,623 square feet
of open storage in R one C zoning.
District two allow a total of two 900 square feet
of open storage on a property where the gross floor area
of the primary structure is 5,610 square feet.
Good evening. Good evening.
Before you begin, I just, um, wanted to state,
'cause this is a use variance for at item one
where you need six yes votes.
And I know we're down one board member.
Are you wanting to proceed
or did you want to reschedule
for when you have a full board?
Uh,
We'll proceed. Okay.
So if you can just start with your name and address
and then explain your request.
Air, uh, representing IBB petroleum
and we would like to, uh,
2 1 3 5 0 Ryan Road, Warren, Michigan for 8 0 9 1.
We specialize in, uh, building and service gas stations.
We are ing the variance to allow limited outdoor storage
for equipment necessary for our con construction operation.
This includes Bobcat, many excavators, work trucks, mt drums
for cleaning water from under grounds
and, uh, construction sites.
And, uh, drums is always empty in our, uh, property.
We just, you know, sometimes just keep it
to go into the construction site, clean whatever we in, uh,
when we do, uh, gas work, but it's always only for water.
We call buck oils to suck it out at the site
and then we bring it back to the, to the job.
Okay.
My name is Rafi and I'm a
An address? Yeah.
You have your address also.
Yeah. I'm, uh, going to present, uh, 2 1 2 5 Ryan Road.
And, uh, I just wanted to add this thing that the,
the variance we are looking for, the extra space is
that those
Speak into the microphone. Okay. Thank, thank you.
We, we are using this, uh, we,
we are requesting this variance
because, uh, we have these big trucks and big, uh, excavator
and all those things is, we use daily use.
I mean, like, we don't use it, uh,
like a permanently park there though.
They, every day, the, the technician, the, the labor,
they, they come early morning,
6:00 AM take the truck according
to the job need and day to day tasks.
Uh, when they're done at the nighttime, they come
and park there though, like, it's, it's not a permit
and it's already a fence though.
I'm like, they already put, we already put a fence
and everything is secure and that,
but, uh, anything gets, uh, the community want to go
for like a secure fence
or like, uh, to be, uh, make sure that it's,
the green belt is, although the green belt is,
everything is secure, everything is on this position.
And also I wanted to add that the property behind the same,
on the same property is owned by the same owner though.
Okay. Thank you for that explanation. Yeah.
Uh, is this a public hearing?
Is there anyone in the audience
wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing any. Um,
we have an in fact statement from planning Mr.
Jersey, if you could read that in.
Yes, Mr. Chair. Um, per round worth the planning director
and the planning department, um,
the petitioner received site plan approval with conditions
for open storage of petroleum equipment, containers,
and materials on December 2nd, 2024.
The planning staff provides the following notes,
although the residential dwelling to the south is legal,
nonconforming, and zoned M1 planning staff would recommend
screening along the south property line
where it abuts residential use.
Planning staff recommends a six foot high privacy fence
or six foot high chain link fence with slats along
with the maintained tree lines such as Arbor Bides.
This recommendation was approved by the planning commission
to be included on the petitioner's revised site plan.
An eight foot wide green belt
or six foot high concrete wall would be required
where the proposed open storage buts,
the R one C zoning districts to the north and south.
Either the green belt
or wall shall be indicated on the site plan.
This condition was also approved by the planning commission
to be included on the petitioner's revised site plan,
provided that the petitioner complies
with this conditions listed above,
which shall be required in order for the site plan
to be released to the building division.
Review of this request finds no issues
to impact the a budding local or general public.
Thank you Mr. Jersey.
Uh, the public portion is closed
and it's open to the board for any questions.
Discussion and comments Mr. Chair? Yes, Mr. Watts.
Um, only question I have is,
if I understood you correctly, the barrels are
to bring back contaminated water
from the construction sites? No.
No, just to clean, clean, you know, sometimes you,
you know, you clean the outside, so we take the water
from the site, not from cleaning the site over there,
but it's not contaminated.
If it's contaminated, we take it to a to buck oil.
That's the one they, uh, take the con contaminated water.
Okay. That's the only question I had. Thank you,
Mr. Chair. Yes,
Mr. Lindsey? Just
A comment that I would make, you know, we kind of saw one
of these earlier today,
and it's like you look at, at the petitioner's property,
what they're trying to do with the property is, is not
so much of an issue, but then
it's zoned right next to a house.
And that, that's the problem that I have.
Um, and obviously that's why we're here for a variance.
Um, but it just puts us in awkward, awkward position now
because we're, we're looking to grant a use variance.
Um, but it's like the, the property is,
why is this property next to houses?
Like, it just doesn't make any sense to me.
This is obviously an issue we're gonna continue to see.
Um, but, but this is the problem
with, with the city of Warren.
Um, I don't have so much of an issue
with the petitioner's request.
Um, it's commercial property,
but it's, it's,
if you didn't build it there, it exists there.
So, um, and I, I could get behind it,
but I mean, this is just the problem I have with with
how it's zoned I'll yield
Mr. Chair.
Yes, Mr. Jersey. Uh, so to the petitioner, you, you,
you stated, um, you have trucks coming
and going 6:00 AM Um, what kind, what kind
of trucks are we talking Big diesel trucks?
Uh, what, what, what kind of
No, it's just a small, um,
the only one big we have is the dump truck,
but it's not like big, big, it's just a small dump truck.
Okay. Uh, but the rest is just like a regular
truck, like a box truck.
Like Oh, just regular bike. Two 50, yeah,
two 50, uh, three 50. You know,
It's not, so my concern would be, you know,
having diesel trucks sitting there running No.
You know, so. Okay.
That's the only thing I kind of, I just wanted to clarify.
Okay. Um, but no, I, I, again, um, you're here,
you're, you've probably been here all night.
You heard my statement about the, the initial property.
Yeah. It, it's just, I kinda scratched my head with
what the city's doing, but I mean, this,
this project isn't as bad.
Um, you know, as long as you just implore, you just,
just keep up your property, you know,
just like you do any other,
any other business owner coming into town.
And, um, thank you for taking, taking this lot
and transforming it into something too.
Um, you know, the other thing is, it is,
it's almost impossible to try
to find a use with these, these things.
Um, with the residential, which again,
I'm gonna go on the record saying I wish the city would take
maybe more steps of trying
to consolidate these parcels into one commercial
use zoning district.
I know I can't change zoning districts up from up here.
I was just taught that today.
So, but I mean, I,
I just think going forward when we're putting commercial use
in, in a residential and a commercial, um, it's just going
to, um, add to problems down, down the road.
Um, but I think this is a, a good project.
Um, your site plan's really good
and, um, I, I think I can, I, I can probably get
behind this one, so I'll yield the floor.
I just have one quick question.
So basically the back half of your property is gonna stay
like the grass and and stuff,
or how far back are you using the property?
It's the property itself. It's all painted new grass.
Okay. Behind, uh, the fence only.
I mean, only behind the fence is grass,
but in front of the fence all pavement.
Okay. I have no other questions. Mr.
Chair? Yes, Mr. Ross? Nobody else has anything.
I'm prepared to make a motion,
Okay? Please.
Okay. Um, give permission to one
use, uh, use variance to allow 1,623 square feet
of open storage in a R one C zoning district.
And two, allow a total of 2,900 square feet
of open storage on a property where the gross floor are.
The primary structure is 5,610 square feet.
Um, I don't see any reason why this would be a problem. So,
Support.
So we have motion by Mr. Wa per by Mr.
Cliff to approve the request for reasons stated.
Mr. Watts? Yes. For the reasons stated motion. Mr. Cliff?
Yes. For the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry? Yes. For the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Green? Yes. For the reasons stated in
The motion. Mr. Lindsey? Yes.
For the reasons stated in the
motion. Mr. Suer
Yes. For the reasons stated
in the motion,
Mr. Jersey votes? Yes. For
reason
sustain a motion Chairman Stover?
Uh, yes. For reason, sustain a motion.
Your request is approved. Thank
You very much. Good luck gentlemen.
Luck Takes us to item 15.
Uh, applicant Brett dresser,
representative Brian Brian Leming.
Kevin Description, 1 2 5 0 0 9 mile variance.
Requested permission to construct a 21 foot
by 16 foot 336 square foot shed nine feet in height
to within three feet, five inches
of the front property line along nine mile road to house,
require to house required fire suppression system pump.
Thank you. Um, I'm Brian Leming with FA Studio, uh,
2 6 2 6 1 Evergreen Road, suite 1, 2 3, Southfield,
Michigan 4 8 0 7 6.
Um, representing, uh, Brit dresser with Artis Endeavor, um,
located at 12 509 Mile Road in the city of Warren.
Um, we're here to request a variance
to allow the construction of a 21 foot
by 16 foot fire suppression system pump enclosure, uh,
which is approximately 336 square feet and nine feet
and height, uh,
which will be located within three foot five inches from the
property line along nine mile road.
This structure is required
to support the fire protection system
for the existing industrial buildings on the site.
Um, due to the layout of the property, uh, location
of the existing buildings
and operational constraints, there's uh, not really any, uh,
practical location outside of the front setback
that would allow the system to function properly.
Um, also the location we're requesting is where the current,
um, underground incoming water, um, enclosure is.
Um, so this would be right on top of that.
Um, granting this, uh, variance allows the property
to meet current fi fire safety requirements while
maintaining, uh, the intent of the zoning district.
Um, the request is driven by necessity.
Um, it does not pose any impact to the health
or safety or welfare of
the current sites and the occupancy of the site.
Okay, Thank you for that explanation.
Uh, this is a public hearing.
Is there anyone audience wishing to speak on this item?
Not seen any or close the public portion of the meeting?
And Mr. Jersey? There's an impact statement,
Believe so, Not no, there isn't clue nothing
On this item. Okay,
Mr. Chair? Yes. Sorry. I was mistaken.
So in that case, I turn it over to the board
for any questions or discussions
or comments, Mr.
Chair? Yes, Mr. Watts?
Um, I don't know that I have any problem with this,
but I guess my question is, how big is this fire pump
for the fire suppression?
That seems awfully big.
Uh, it's the size that the, uh, suppression, uh,
contractor sized
and also they are required to have a certain, um,
accessibility around the pump itself for servicing, right?
So that's what drives the size
and I believe they pared it down from the original design
was they wanted 30 by, uh, 18 or something like that.
So, um, we've got it reduced to as small
as we can possibly get it to be able
to meet the requirements needed
to service the two buildings.
Hi, I'm Brit Dresser. 1 2 5 0 0 East nine Mile Road.
Um, so the, the pump that we
are installing
to update the system will feed both buildings on our plot.
Um, the 1 2 500
and the 1 2 800 can be concurrently serviced
by the same pump, but the, I'm trying to think
of the the right word.
Um, essentially in order to get the proper
volume needed, right?
Yep. Um, for the type of work that we do
that would allow it to be fully compliant, requires a,
a pretty robust pump
That makes, that makes sense to me.
Alright, thank you.
And a robust in investment too. Yeah, guys. Yeah, man.
Just tell you, um, Mr. Chair. So yes, Mr.
Ing, um, it's kind of a no brainer.
I think it's, you know, um, it's necessary obviously for,
for the safety of, of the building
and, um, you know, the, the occupants within it.
Um, so I don't, man, sorry you have to spend all my money,
but I mean, it's constant doing business, I guess.
So, um, I don't see anything else, any problems with this.
Anybody else has anything to say?
I'll make a motion to, uh, make a motion to approve, um,
make a motion to approve the variance requested,
which is permission to construct a 21 foot
by 16 foot 336 square foot shed nine feet in height,
two within and three feet, five inches
of the front property line along nine mile road
to house required fire suppression system pump due
to the fact the size and shape of the lot.
And it's also not a detriment to the area
Support.
We have a motion by Mr. Jersey. It'll support by Mr.
Mr. Lindsay, Mr. Lindsay
to approve the request for the reason stated
Mr. Jersey votes. Yes. For
the reason stated a motion
Mr. Lindsay Yes.
To, uh, excuse
Me. Yes. For the reason stated
of the motion.
Mr. Assessor? Yes. For the reason stated in
The motion. Mr. Green? Yes.
For the reason stated Of the motion. Mr. Clifft? Yes.
For the reasons stated in the motion. Mr. Watts? Yes.
For the reason stated the motion
Mr. Perry?
Yes. For the reason stated the motion
and Chairman Stevi? Uh,
Yes. For the reason stated motion,
your request is approved.
Thank you. Thank you for sitting
through this whole, whole night too.
Appreciate it. I read a lot of my books, so,
So item six is 16 is new business.
So I just wanted to remind board members that I'll have a,
an assignment for next meeting
and that's Mr. Green will come up with a sample, um,
change for the bylaws regarding rescheduling
and for everybody else to think about what they would like
to see and we could discuss it next month
and vote on it at that time.
Yeah, I would also ask board members
to think about this driveway issue
and maybe some ways to look at the ordinance,
but might fit the city better.
We can talk about that the next meeting. Mm-hmm.
Mr. Chair, I, oh, go ahead Mr. Lindsay.
I was just gonna, my comment to the driveways is I,
I think the city's, you know, it has an ordinance,
so I would say that that's what the city wants.
And the ordinance is don't extend
your driveway past the garage.
Uh, you know, so we're, we, we see over
and over, we don't ever see requests
for me to install the driveway.
We see request to retain the driveway. Right.
And that, that's the problem I'm having. Right.
Let me see the plan. Let's talk about it.
Um, so I mean that's, that's my thought.
So we can talk about it next time too,
But, but if I, if I could just repeat.
Well, in all due respect, we, we, we drive down the streets
and see driveways that are everywhere.
So what we're doing is not working.
I mean, it sounds good to say that
what we're doing is not working right, so maybe we need
to do a change so that, that, so,
so some thought I appreciate that. Here.
Here's the danger with that.
And like I said earlier, we're gonna wind up
with yards being parking lots.
This is dangerous. Very dangerous.
What's dangerous? We're gonna, we're gonna wind up
with yards being parking lots.
You know, you have a two car garage
and in most cases, well,
in most cases you have a two car garage, you have places
for two cars in the front.
So you should be able to get four cars in your driveway
and you should be able to park car two in front
of your house if you got six people.
If you got six cars in the house.
I mean, I had four cars in my house at one time
and we parked two on the street.
No big deal. I don't, I don't understand why people think
that they're going to gonna do this.
And, and we're, we're winding, winding up with people.
I mean, Mr. Green made a good point.
We got a lot of people running businesses
and we got people putting five and six families in a home.
That's why they're winding up with all these cars.
And everybody thinks that it's okay to just do it
and then ask for forgiveness and we gotta stop that.
And I, and I don't care without due respect to our,
our friends there in the zoning department.
I don't care if they're understaffed, I don't care.
That's not my problem. The city council
and the mayor need to budget that.
Mm-hmm. And get the people in there.
We know they've been understaffed for a long time
and that's not fair to them.
But I can tell you this, just, I've talked
to Steve about this, leaving my house at Common and Hayes
and driving the 14 mile, I can give you 25 violations.
25. So,
and part of 'em are parking between the curb and the sidewalk.
And the other part is the,
the expanded concrete that was never got a permit.
Some of us fairly new, you know,
and just multiply that we should be dealing with that.
I, I watched these Facebook pages for Sterling Heights,
Roseville, east Point and all that.
Lemme tell you something. People are blowing their minds in
Sterling Heights and Roseville about getting
tickets and violations.
I don't see people, many people complaining and Warren,
because we're not doing it, you know,
and we just gotta stop.
They ask for forgiveness stuff.
You mean you can't park your car? And it's like, what?
Yeah. Or in the grass, I gotta go, you know?
But I mean, I don't wanna prolong it,
but like I say, it's just a, it makes the city look like it,
it gives it a trashy look, you know,
and we just gotta clean it up.
It's getting, you know, for those of us
that have been here forever and ever,
and you know, maybe we were here when it was horse
and buggies, the place is not looking like it used to
because people, we let people get by with this, you know,
and we gotta, we gotta take care of it.
We gotta clean it up. So, and that's our job to clean it up.
I just wanted to add, quickly add,
because speaking of Sterling Heights, uh,
we don't hit, we don't,
Warren doesn't have to recreate the wheel.
Sterling Heights, actually, I forget, a couple number
of years ago they actually, like the city council,
they voted where people that had existing
expanded driveways basically got
grandfathered in and approved.
So they wouldn't be going to somebody saying,
you gotta tear it out now.
But then they made very clear directions of
what they do allow, and they're like,
and going forward, you have to have the permit.
Yeah. If you don't have the permit, then you tear it out.
Good point. But the thing is, is like those people
that had it in for, you know, years
and stuff, they grandfather those in and,
but the thing is, is you need the city to take a direction.
Mm-hmm. 'cause there are,
I guess Sterling Heights has certain conditions
where they allow expansions of the driveway,
and I don't remember all of them right this moment,
but it's, that's the kind of direction we need in this city.
So, Mr. Chair, real quick, um,
following up from last meeting when we talked about the
middle, the, the overlay district,
I didn't know if any board members had any comments
or concerns that maybe we want to, um, send over to council
or recommendations to vote on, um,
what we might wanna see changed, um, regarding that
and just kind of like our recommendations.
Can't say they're gonna implement it,
but at least as a board, maybe we have some kind of, um,
you know, um, say what, what we, we feel about the matter
and the direction we would like to, to, to take it.
Well, I, I could say if we wanted to try
to put something together, if people wanted to, like,
let's say email their comments, I could try
to consolidate everybody's comments into one document
and then we can actually look at
that under new business next month. Okay. Also,
I, I think it's a matter of, as a board figuring out yeah,
what direction do we, what, what do we want to see, um,
come that, do we want to continue to, do we want to continue
to have to look at every little single thing that that kind
of goes around just so that it manages to fit into the
city's vision of these overlay districts?
Or do we turn up the heat a little bit on the administration
and go, yeah, you know what you guys just need
to make your ordinances fit
what it is you think you guys want to see happen.
I mean, uh, that's what it put, I, I, I'm, I'm,
I just, I don't understand how we want
to talk about bringing something kind of new
or different in to fit in with our master plan,
but not legislate it properly
or put the ordinances in place properly.
It just, it just kind of baffles me, um, a little bit.
And, uh, you know, you're gonna keep hearing it from me
as long as I sit up here.
Um, I'd really like to see some meaningful progression
and change to reduce the burden of what it is
that this board has to execute once or twice a month.
Um, that realistically a lot of our neighbors don't have to
endure or go through
because they've kind of kept up a little more with the times
with their, with their zoning and,
and actually allowing some administrative decisions
to be made to take it off at the table.
Um, and with that, I'd like
to see a little bit more interaction with the actual
planning commission to express some of the things
that we're seeing here, uh, to them
to ask some more pointed questions.
Um, this board's come a long way since
I first sat down here.
How many years ago? Four. Three or four? Four.
I mean, it used to just be somebody stood there,
they said their story and things happened.
Now people are asking questions and, and that's good.
That's all good stuff. But I think we're to the point now
where the, the administration has to go.
Yeah, you know what? There is a lot of stuff going on here
that a lot of other places don't have to deal with.
And maybe we need to kind
of get caught up just a little bit.
So I, I, I enjoy discussing those, kind
of, those kind of things.
Where do we want to go? But how much impact are we going
to actually have by requesting versus our actions up
here has yet to be seen.
So with that, I'll yield the floor.
Okay. Uh, motions for adjournment. Motion to adjourn.
Motion to adur. Motion by Mr. Jersey and Mr. Lindsay.
All in favor. A aye, uh, meeting adjourned at, let's see,
9 55.