I'd like to call to order a regular meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals for
Wednesday, April 8th at 7:00 PM. Please rise for the
pledge of allegiance.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to
the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Roll call.
Mr Safaya?
Present.
Mr Perry?
Present.
Mr Watts?
Present.
Mr Clift?
Present.
Mr Lindsey?
Present.
Mr Greens, absent.
Mr Assessor?
Present.
Mr Jersey's present. Chairman Stovitch?
Present.
Mr Chair.
Yes.
I'd like to make motion to excuse Mr Green tonight please.
Support that.
So we have a motion by Mr Assessor and support to
excuse Mr Green from today's meeting. All in favor?
Aye.
Anybody opposed?
Okay. Takes us to adoption of the agenda.
So since we are down one board member, and there are four use
cases on the agenda today,
a use variance requires six yes votes instead of five.
So I just wanted to offer any of the petitioners that have one of
the use variances, if they wanna reschedule,
indicate that now. Otherwise, I assume
we're proceeding with all of them.
Okay.
Not seeing any.
So do we have a motion to approve the agenda?
Mr Chair, I make a motion to approve the agenda as written.
Support.
We have a motion by Mr Jersey, support by Mr Watts to approve the agenda
as written.
All in favor?
Aye.
Is anybody opposed?
Agenda is approved.
Item five is approval of the minutes of February 11th and March 11th.
Mr Chair, I'd like to postpone the approval of the minutes of the regular
meetings of February 11, 2026 and March 11,
2026 to the April 22nd,
2026 meeting.
Support.
Okay, we have a motion by Mr Jersey, and I believe I heard Mr Assessor
has the support to postpone the minutes of February 11th
and March 11th to the April 22nd meeting. All in favor?
Aye.
Is anybody opposed? Okay. The minutes will be at the next
meeting. Takes us to item number six.
Item six. Applicant, Joseph Tringali. Representative, Joseph Tringali.
Common description, 22755
Groesbeck. Variance is requested.
Permission to: one, allow 8,044 square feet of open storage
when the gross floor area of the primary structure on the site is 1,800 square
feet. Two, waive the requirement that open storage areas shall be
screened from public streets for the open storage areas
indicated as areas B, C, and D on the site plan.
Three, allow open storage to the north and east property lines.
Four, allow a 15.20-foot
wide, two-way maneuvering lane behind the building along the west property
line.
And this goes for all petitioners today.
When you come up, make sure you start with your name, address, and then go into the
reasons for your petition.
Joseph Tringali, 22755 Groesbeck Avenue, Warren, Michigan
48089.
And we are here today to do... Oh.
Okay.
Yep, to-
Joseph Tringali also.
Senior.
Same address or is there-
Same address.
We're here today to ask the board to allow us for
more open storage,
to waive the requirement that open storage areas should be screened from
public streets.
We're here to talk about the location of our dumpster as well.
I believe that was supposed to be on here.
And for a variance for
the two-way alley in the back.
Okay. Thank
you for that explanation. This is a public hearing.
Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing anybody, I'll close the public portion of the meeting and turn it
over to the board for... Oh, wait, we do have
one from planning. We do have an impact statement
if Mr Jersey could read that one first.
Thank you, Mr Chair.
So per Ryan Wirth of the Planning Department.
After review of the request, the further review of the petitioner's site plan,
the following issues were found to impact the abutting local or general public.
After
review of the request, the further review of the petitioner's site plan, the
following issues were found to impact the abutting local or general public.
A marked-up version of the petitioner's site plan
has been attached for visual reference of the planning staff's following
recommendation. It is recommended that the continuous concrete curbing be
provided and located five
feet from the north property line, Nine Mile Road, and five feet from the east
property line, Groesbeck Highway.
This continuous concrete curbing shall replace the proposed concrete
parking bumper curbs in storage areas B and C.
This recommended change is illustrated in orange on the attached site plan.
The hard surfaced area located between the sidewalk and street curb
along Groesbeck Highway and Nine Mile Road, and in the northeast
corner of the site shall be removed and replaced with
grass along with the existing and proposed deciduous trees.
Additional shrubs should be placed in the area between the sidewalk and
the recommended concrete curbing.
This recommended grass area coverage is illustrated in green on the attached site
plan
Thank you for reading that in.
So the public portion of the meeting is closed, and it's over to the
board for their questions and discussion.
Mr. Chair, question-
Yes, Mr. Williams
... for anybody on the board. I don't see in my packet
this site plan. Does anybody else have it?
No.
I don't either. Okay.
You want this one here, sir?
Yes. The only site plan I have is the original from-
I have two more. Does anybody want one?
Oh, can we just pass one down?
We can share one down here if you want.
Would you like one?
Yeah, we can share.
Yeah. I don't need it, so.
Got it all on
memory?
I just think it's easier.
Pass it down.
I
just want all of my fellow board members look at that
site plan. I wanted to ask, you're
aware of what Planning put in their letter about what
areas they're talking about?
We just became aware of it with seeing that site
plan tonight. So is now a good time to speak on that?
I think we can wait.
Okay. I guess I'd like to hear what you wanted to speak on that.
Well, we looked it over, and
we agree with some things, we disagree
with some things.
And which things do you agree with, and which things do you disagree with?
The things that we agree with would be what we agreed upon in the last
meeting, which is a setback
on the corners of...
A setback on both sides and to
set a berm on both sides as well. But the part that we disagree with is
where our signage is. The grass area that they're
proposing kind of leaks into our property
quite a bit. We did agree to take the sign down, but we did not
agree to put that grass area
in the area that they had marked off for the sign.
Also, it was
talked about that there would be a bumper, there wouldn't be a
concrete line there.
That was another thing that we were questioning as well.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Jersey.
So, to Mr. Schulman.
Got a million questions rattling around my head right now.
Yes, sir.
First off,
how come we weren't made aware of the changes until day of the meeting?
I know this probably doesn't fall on you, but I need some kind of-
This came from the Planning Department.
They've sent this every time that this
item was
postponed,
and they just changed the date with an updated
date on it.
Was this available when we got our packets?
This site plan-
No, they don't do it
... this adjusted site plan? No.
When I prepare the packets, I send a copy to the board, and a packet
goes down to Planning Department.
And I know since it's been postponed so many times, I've
still held onto the original site plan,
just by
time on the job. So,
I've never seen this revised
site plan until right now.
That was their recommendations on it.
No, I understand. I get you. I was just trying to look for some kind of
clarity of why,
what, how, and why this-
Because I have an original copy of the letter dated November 12,
2025,
of the exact same letter.
Right.
All right. Thank you, sir.
Yes, sir.
I yield the floor.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Otz.
I guess I want to do a follow-up with
Paul.
You were questioning why we didn't get this letter ahead of time.
No. Why didn't we get a-
Or just a site plan.
Yeah, a revised site plan to look at.
All right. Fine.
We got the letter. That's
fine, but
you got site plan changes and especially after something's been postponed, it'd be
nice to have the revised site plan.
It's been postponed so many times. There's a site plan.
It's just showing up.
Got you.
So I guess I'll ask, when was this
site plan
submitted?
The original site plan was submitted prior to the November meeting,
probably by
a couple of weeks, I believe.
Do you want me to check?
No, we know about that. But what about this one, the one we just received?
I
haven't seen that until tonight.
Till tonight?
Yeah.
Yeah. In all fairness, as crazy as this is right now, I
feel like we need to move to suspend this till the next meeting
or
and not hear this.
Well,
so
you're in a disagreement with the continuous concrete curbing versus the
parking blocks?
No. That was just news to us.
Either would be fine, but just a determination as to how far
it comes into our property.
What we're in a disagreement with is the amount of grass before our
sign that comes onto our property.
We
agree with the berm going around the perimeter of the property, on city property,
but not before our sign.
That's a pretty big chunk of
grass that they want us to put there.
I'll relinquish my time for now.
Mr. Chairman?
Yes, Mr. Safaya.
So I'm just confused. The site plan was submitted, it went to the Planning
Department, and the Planning Department marked up the copy that Mr.
Jersey has,
and the petitioner didn't receive a copy of that-
Till now
... back yet. Okay.
Not until tonight.
Okay.
I'm in favor of postponing.
And I would agree with that because the petitioner should have time
to review that and not be put on the spot
here tonight, and it would be good if we could
actually make a request for us all to get a copy of that before the next meeting.
Let me ask a question.
Yes, Mr. Proch.
Because now I'm confused.
Is this revised site plan something that was revised
just now,
or is this a site plan that was revised
before the last meeting, and we don't have a copy of it?
I'm not sure because the letter from Planning that talked about
putting the green space is dated November 12th.
Right.
But I've never seen that site plan that Planning marked up.
So I would say we've never received that. Oh, wait. Yes, Nicole?
Yes. I found this within the-
This one? The new one?
Yeah, I
think
it was.
Mr. Chairman?
Yes, Mr. Safaya.
Has there been an approved site plan yet?
The original site plan was not approved,
right?
I commend that.
Usually don't these items go to Planning and have the site plan approved before it
moves to Zoning? Why are we still
negotiating the site plan?
It's because they need variances for the site plan approval.
So it hasn't fully been approved. They need variances first before it can be
approved.
Okay. I understand. A lot of times, though, the site plan will be...
I guess I don't know if it's conditional approval or if it's fully approved,
and then it comes to us for whatever
variances they need.
On the second page with the attachment from Planning, it does have that
it was approved at the May 12th Planning Commission meeting.
Okay. Thank you. We just have a copy of the top page right in front of us here.
With those conditions.
With the conditions that are being proposed, the revised
site plan, are the conditions-
No, there's a whole list of conditions.
The whole packet from Planning Department.
With that letter, there was a whole packet that has all the conditional
items-
Completely separate-
... that they must take care of
... completely separate from the items they're proposing now on
the modified site plan.
No, that's some of the items.
Some of those items plus additional items on the-
Yeah. Planning requirements-
Okay
... and stuff like that.
So they've been before Planning, correct?
Yes.
Okay.
The site plan was approved on May 12, 2025.
Is the list too long that you could read the
stuff?
Yeah.
Oh,
okay.
Yeah. That was the attachment that she was talking about that got sent out on April
2nd.
And if you had them from the previous scheduled meetings,
it would've been the same list of items.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Clifton.
So is it fair to say that the one with all the fancy colors
on it is just a reflection of
the impact statement that I'm reading since it kind of outlines things
for colors and-
Correct.
Okay.
All right.
Of which the petitioner stated earlier that they're not in quite
agreement with the terms of
what the impact statement is.
Okay.
Yeah, so I also question whether we should move on, whether
postpone it and let them guys go back and hammer out whatever they need to hammer
out.
I yield the floor.
Mr. Chairman?
Yes, Mr. Safaya.
I move that we postpone this item
due to-
So we have a motion to
Is it giving it a date or are we-
I think we just leave it open-ended for them so they have enough time with
planning, but I'll leave it to your discretion.
Okay, we have a motion made by Mr. Safaya, support by Mr.
Clift, to postpone this item to
allow the petitioner time to re-engage with planning
regarding what their
recommendations are.
Discussion.
Okay. Yes, Mr. Watts.
I think we should put a time frame on it,
because looking at all the documentation here,
we've had at least two postponements
and he's been operating without a certificate of compliance since
'22,
and there's also been court hearings on this.
And I have a problem with leaving it open-ended.
Would the April 22nd meeting give you time to
look at the recommendations from planning and see if
you agree with them?
Yeah. Shouldn't be a problem.
Okay.
April 22nd.
That'd be in two weeks.
Okay.
I just want you to know, we canceled these meetings because my wife is
ill. So
I just want you to know that.
Okay. Understand.
I don't think I was delaying.
Understood.
Understood. Okay.
Yeah. April 22nd should be fine as long as we can
schedule a meeting with planning and,
like you said, hammer everything out with them, and we'll come back to you guys
with a revised site plan.
Okay. So a question then for...
You want to amend your motion?
I make an amendment to postpone to the April 22nd meeting.
I still second.
Okay, so we have a motion by Mr. Safaya, support by Mr.
Clift, to postpone this item to the April 22nd meeting.
Do we want to do a roll call or just-
Do all in favor.
All in favor?
Aye.
Anybody opposed?
Okay. This item is going to be heard on the 22nd.
This is the only
notification for the public and everything that this is going to be heard on that
day. There's not going to be any new mailing, so just wanted to let everybody know
that.
Okay.
Let me ask you a question.
What if planning can't meet with us prior to-
Then contact Nicole
in the council office.
I'll call. Yeah.
Okay.
No problem.
Thank you guys. Have a good night.
Thank you.
Takes us to item number seven.
Item seven. Applicant, Surabhi Banik, representative Mohammed
Aziz. Account description 8310 Dodge.
Variance has requested permission to...
Variance has requested permission to, sorry about that, one, retain front setback
to within 16 feet of the north property line along Dodge in order to restore a
non-conforming residence with fire damage, just over
60% of its valuation. Two, retain
870 square feet of overall accessory structure floor area, which
includes a 529 square foot garage with a 115
square foot addition, a 190 square foot shed
attached to the side of it,
outside of the side building lines of the principal building and up to the
edge of the rear easement, as well as 36 square feet
covered porch.
Okay.
So beginning to start with your name and address and...
Yeah. My name is Mohammad Aziz. The address is Dodge
8310. Thank you for letting me
tell my side of the thing.
So my
friend, Surabhi Banik, had purchased this
property, and
she did not know about the
zoning violations. It came to our notice
only when
it was fire damaged, and we tried for a building
permit
to
fix the property, reconstruct the fire damage.
And
the only reason why we are asking for
this variance is because
all the said
violations is
not fire damage. That is outside of the damage area, number one, and number two
is those are...
For
example, the storage
and the shed and the garage all are in the same
structure. So if, for example, I
keep the garage and I
destroy the shed area, the
integrity of that building
will be not
maintained, and
it will also not look uniform.
And also the overall
area of the plot is much bigger. So
it is far from any
of the side of the
neighbor and I
think that
it would do more harm
to the community if, for example, if we
destroy a part of it.
And
it's not
a lot. I
think it's
100 some square feet more than what is
allowed.
First of all, I wanted to mention that it was not intentional,
and I think that if we destroy some part of
it,It will actually
diminish the beauty and integrity of that structure.
All the
rules are for betterment of the things, but I think in this case,
it will be probably counterintuitive.
And regarding the
distance of the
front porch,
at the end of the stairs to the
sidewalk, it
is
fenced. And it's not an open
thing.
So there is no opening
directly to the sidewalk from the front porch.
There is actually a fence. The driveway is
from the side of
the house.
And front
porch and the stairs, from the end of the stairs,
the distance is 16 feet,
and it is not open
directly to the sidewalk. It's kind of
secluded in that way. So, I
hope that you would understand
that probably I
would request you to allow us to keep it this way.
I
should have actually put a video to
show, or maybe you have seen, some of you,
the building. So I think that the way it
is right now, if
we destroy them,
it will not really be helpful.
If you
find it otherwise, you can let me know.
I can think of some other way to make it
better. But irrespective of the decision,
because of this thing, we are not getting the building permit to
actually
start the work.
And just at the side of the school,
keeping that property like it is right now is
not good. So I
will
conform to whatever decision you give
me, but irrespective of the decision, whether you deny
or allow,
give us permission to start working. Give us the building permit.
Because if you
say deny, then I know that I have
to destroy those part of it. But I
should start
work, otherwise, we are not getting the electricity,
we are not getting the gas, and we cannot start the
work, and which is actually making the
house vulnerable and
making it worse.
So
that's my side of the-
Okay. Thank you for that explanation. This is a public hearing.
Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing any, I close the public portion and turn it over to the board.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Clift.
Yeah. So
what the petitioner's coming and looking for,
to me, just seems like we're going through some motions.
It was a non-conforming use before the fire even happened.
They just want to
repair the home, repair the house, put it back to-
As is
... livable, habitable condition.
And I know that area a little bit, and
I'm pretty confident that I've seen that garage and shed
structure for a little while.
I don't think that's just a Johnny-come-lately kind of thing.
I think that that's been there for
a little bit of time. And
we're looking at maybe 100 or 110 square feet over what's
allowed.
My gut instinct is to kind of support this and not
get too deep in the weeds on things.
I'd made an attempt to drive by there, but it was
twilight going into dusk, and I couldn't see up the driveway to the backyard very
well. But I know some people in that neighborhood, and I know I've seen
that setup in that yard before.
I don't think it's going to be
a harm or a detriment to let this guy and his family move
on along to fix that.
That place needs to be fixed, so I'd like to see him get it
fixed and taken care of. I yield the floor with that.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Watts.
So I have a couple questions to our zoning inspector.
I drove by there,
and I think the variance on the house is because it was
built in 1940.
So I couldn't understand why it was so close to the front.
But I know the questions on the
garage, and I would call it an extension of the garage, not
a shed, but I guess that's what it'd be considered.
But do we know what the records show when that was built?
Because I would assume that's been a long time.
I did some research looking at historical photos.
The garage has been there at least since the '60s.
Then there was a shed
built next to it, but notattached to it.
Okay.
There was some space between it that showed in 1972,
and then
in 1980,
all three of those, they attached it, so it was three
structures.
So it's been that way for 40 plus years.
Yes. In the shed, it was almost like they built a breezeway between the
garage and the shed.
Makes sense.
So-
I don't think it looks bad.
I mean-
No. And I did inspect it with him at the property, and he let me
in to look at it, and I understand what he's saying structurally.
If he were to tear that down, the
rest of the garage would probably have to come down with it, I'd imagine.
Right. And the brick home, they don't build them like that
anymore, so.
Right.
So I guess the problem I have is when I drove by there
was the blight in the yard,
junk laying around. It's not cleaned up.
And then the other problem I had was reading through the documents to see that
there was a stop work order put on it, and they violated a stop work
order, and they got a second one. So I did a little bit of
research on the applicant to find out that they
own a few other rental homes in the city, so I'm assuming this is going to become
a rental home.
Which I got a problem with rentals, but I rather see this
home refurbished and
have somebody living in it. My question to the
petitioner is, can you get the yard cleaned up?
If I lived in the neighborhood and I had to look at the garbage laying around in
the yard-
Yeah, of course. I'm really sorry about that.
The weather was very bad, but there
was a lot more to that.
I have put four
dumpster one after another, but I am sorry
that it is
like...
But there's like a bed laying up against the house and stuff like that.
That's not acceptable. And my concern is you had a stop
work order, and then you violated that, and you did it again and get another stop
work order. And I'm concerned that if we approve this, are you going to
follow the building code and get the building permit and do this in a timely
manner?
Although my client have multiple
rentals, but they are inexperienced.
They did not know
how to deal with
and stop...
I
think that when the stop work
order...
That is what I came to know, that when the stop work order is
given, the inside of the property was very
bad with all the burned items and everything.
So,
I think that they wanted to clean it up
and start doing... I have talked to him, and
I think that the main intention was to make it in a
better way when all the inspectors can come.
So I think they wanted... I know that they started...
They actually cleaned out all the garbage
and the
ashes from the things, and they broke all the
drywalls.
Okay.
But the more work that they did
was the,
for example, they changed the window and
the electric work also was started.
But-
My only point is, I just want to make sure if we approve the variance that this is
going to be done right in a timely manner.
That's all I'm concerned about.
Yes.
Okay. I trust you'll get it cleaned up. Thank you.
Yes, I will.
I yield.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Jersey.
To the petitioner, do you
physically own this house?
No.
You're the renter. Okay.
No. I'm not the renter. I am a friend.
Because Surbhi Wani and Devanjan Deep, her husband,
both of are my friend, they cannot come today.
That's why they wanted me to come.
So are you the property manager or...?
I am the
property manager in couple of other
houses.
Are you the property manager in this property?
I am not yet. He said that he will put me on-
Okay
... a property manager-
All right
... on this after it is done.
That answers my question. Mr. Schulman, real quick.
When you were doing your deep dive researching, did you find any permits pulled on
the sheds or anything on this property over the years?
There was a permit on the garage itself.
It's just the garage? Nothing else?
Nothing on that, so-
So they absorbed the property with all this already on there without being
permitted and all that other stuff, so.
Correct.
All right. The other thing I've got a
serious contention with is
property owners not coming and fighting for their variances.
This guy sends property manager or friend.
That's not a good way to do business in my opinion.
You own the property and you have these violations and all that, and you just
send your friend,
to me is extremely unprofessional and a slap in the face to this board,
honestly.
We've had renters come and have to fight before
on certain properties too, and have the property owners just
not even involved. This guy
doesn't really have any
attachment to the property one way or the other.
So,
to me, that's got to change going forward.
We got to have these property owners here.
They want the variance, they should be here fighting for it.
Don't send a renter, don't send a friend, don't send the guy you just met at the
corner. I don't-
I don't know if it was a language barrier.
I know there was some difficulties at the counter and-
He started coming in and helping them out.
So I'm guessing that's why they named him representative.
He can at least be here standing side by side with him. That's all I'm saying.
I'm not blaming you, I'm just kind of venting to the city as a whole and just...
This is kind of a crazy way to do business.
So, thank you for the information about the permit sales order, sir.
I yield the floor.
Would you be entertaining a postponement to get the owner here?
It's not going to do any good. I mean, who's to say he'll even show for that?
All right.
Mr. Chairman?
Yes, Mr. Safaya.
My only comment, I don't have a problem with the reduced setback at the front.
I understand that the home was there for a long time, and the need for
that. But my problem with this is the footprint of the home looks like it's
34 by 22. If my math is correct, that's about
770 square feet, when the accessory structures
are 870 square feet. So I have a problem with the
accessory structures being
over the size of the main living area.
So this will be a no vote for me personally.
Any other questions, or discussion, or motions?
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Clift.
If my colleagues have no other further comments, I'll put a motion up on this item.
I'd like to grant permission to a...
Sir?
Can I
say something?
Oh, there's no question really directed to you.
No, there's no question posed to you at this time, sir.
We're going to go ahead and put a motion on the floor and vote on your item.
Grant permission to, one, retain front setback within 16
foot of the north property line along Dodge in order to restore a
non-conforming residence with fire damages over 60% of its
valuation.
And number two
, retain 870 square feet of overall accessory structure floor
area, which includes 529 square foot garage
with a 115 square foot addition,
a 190 square foot shed attached to the side of it
outside of the building lines of the principal building and up to the edge
of the rear easement, that was in parentheses,
as well as a 36-foot covered porch.
I don't feel it to be a detriment in the area and able to
be able to retain a non-conforming setback with existing buildings on the
property for over 40 years.
I reluctantly support it.
Okay, we have a motion by Mr. Clift, a support by Mr.
Jersey to approve the request for the reasons stated in the motion. Mr.
Clift.
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Jersey votes yes for the reasons stated in the motion. Mr. Assessor.
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Lindsay.
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Watts.
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion, and I hate to see a structure like that
get torn down. I think it's savable.
Mr. Perry.
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Safaya.
No, I believe the accessory structures are a detriment.
And Chairman Ostovich. Yes.
So your request has been approved.
Thank you.
Takes us to item number eight.
Item eight, applicant Warren Lions Club, representative Al Lindsay, account
description 3001, 13 Mile.
Granting us a request of permission to conduct the Warren Lions City Fair as
follows: Wednesday, June 17th, 4:00 PM to 11:00
PM, Thursday, June 18th, 4:00 PM to 11:00 PM,
Friday, June 19th, 4:00 PM to 11:00 PM, Saturday, June
20th, 1:00 PM to 11:00 PM,
and Sunday, June 21st, 1:00 PM to 10:00 PM.
Hello, my name's Al Lindsay, and I'm a member of the Warren Lions Club, and I'm
one of the chairmen of the Warren City Fair.
Here with me today is Jeff Becker, a Warren resident
and Lions Club member, and Mark Wire, also a Warren
Lions Club member and
a Warren resident.
I think I forgot to tell you my address, didn't I?
Yes.
3642 Wakefield Drive, Troy, Michigan.
Okay.
We're here today to ask for permission to have our
Warren City Fair, which has been going on for over 60 years,
and our hardship is that we need Zoning Board
of Appeals approval to
have our festival.
Okay.
Thank you for that explanation. This is a public hearing.
Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing any, I close the public portion and turn it over to the board for
discussion.
Mr. Chair-
Yes.
... this is kind of an every year repeat.
You gentlemen agree with shutting off the music as stipulated as
previous years?
Yeah, I forgot to say that.
No, that's okay.
10:00 PM-
Yeah
... we shut the music off.
All right, sounds good.
Sorry.
That's okay. So just wanted to give you a friendly reminder to see if that was
still okay.
So,
if nobody else has anything else to say, I'll make a motion to grant the
petitioner's
request
to conduct the Warren Lions City Fair as follows: Wednesday, June
17th, 4:00 PM to 11:00 PM, Thursday, June 18th, 4:00 PM to
11:00 PM, Friday, June 19th, 4:00 PM to 11:00 PM, Saturday,
June 20th, 1:00 PM to 11:00 PM,
Sunday,
1:00 PM to 10:00 PM, with the agreement that
the... I'm gonna put a stipulation saying an hour before closing
since you have a 10:00 closing on the last night.
Yeah, that's fine.
Is that fine?
That's fine.
With the stipulation that the music will be shut off an hour prior to closing each
of those nights, due to the fact it's a-
Needed by this board for approval to run the fair.
It's not a detriment to the area.
Support.
I have a motion by Mr. Jersey, and I heard support by Mr.
Clift to approve the request for the reasons stated.
Roll call.
Mr. Jersey votes yes for the reasons stated in the motion. Mr. Clift?
Votes yes for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Lindsay?
Yes, for the reasons stated.
Mr. Assessor?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Watts?
Yes, for the reasons stated.
Mr. Safaya?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
And Chairman Stovich?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion. Your request is approved.
Thank you.
Good luck, guys.
Thanks.
Takes us to item nine. Applicant, Thrifty Florist of Warren, number one.
Representing Nicole Agbay. Account description
29010 Shaner. Grant's request of permission to
conduct a seasonal outdoor sales operation in a P district from March 31st,
2026 through January 31st, 2027.
788 square feet to no less than 16 feet from the Shaner Road
property line, and 50 feet from the north property line per site plan, and same as
last year.
Yes, sir. Hi. My name is Nicole Agbay, and I reside in
Warren there at 29010 Shaner Road.
And, as you stated, we're here again, same as last year, asking
for outdoor sales permit to sell seasonal
flowers and such. We're asking for a seasonal sales
permit. It's in the P district from the end of March to the end of January for
cleanup. 788 square feet, no less than 16 feet from the Shaner line,
and 50 feet from the north property line per the site plan, and the same as last
year.
Okay. Thank you for that explanation. This is a public hearing.
Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing any.
We do have a planning letter impact statement. Mr.
Jersey, if you could read it in.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Per Ram Worth at Planning Department, after review of the
request, no issues were found to impact the abutting local or general public.
Okay, thank you. So with that, we're closed the public portion and turn it over
to the board for questions and discussion.
Mr. Chair.
Yes, Mr. Watts.
So,
I looked at both places. I live near the 12 and Shaner location.
Yes, sir.
And
the dumpster is never inside the dumpster enclosure.
I don't know what ha- We got a new dumpster company.
I was there this last month, and I was like, "Why is the dumpster in
almost in the middle of the parking lot?" It's taking up two parking spaces.
I mean, it was bad. So I told her, "We need to call
the dumpster company. They need to just take the dumpster, like, 15 feet
further where it's supposed to be." It's always been there.
So I noticed the same thing you did this month.
I, I-
Like, two weeks ago.
Yeah.
And the problem is,
I mean, I'll say it, it's coming up on the next one, but last year we requested the
same thing at the 13 Mile location, and it never got put back into the
location after they was promised that they would take care of it.
It never got back into the, um-
13 and Ryan-
13 and Ryan
... it can't go
into the enclosure because the enclosure is turned sideways, and the
parking spots. So it can't really go back in there.
It goes to the back of the parking lot just outside the dumpster behind the store.
That's why the enclosure's there, though.
So we'll cover that.
It doesn't work, yeah.
So,
and then the other thing is
the
stands that you put the flowers on outside.
Mm-hmm.
With the
cinder blocks, concrete blocks-
Yes, sir
... and the wood. I mean, I know they make better stands than that that would look
more appealing to the neighborhood.
It just doesn't look good. And
if you guys are gonna do this every year...
I mean, I looked at how many
times you guys have had a variance for this, and I guess I kinda got a
problem with that. I don't know why we have to do this all the time.
But I'd like to see something that looks more appealing to the public, to the
neighborhood, to dress it up a little bit.
And perhaps I could ask a question to Mr. Schuman there.
H-How could we resolve this issue with them coming back every year and,
you know...
It's in the ordinance for seasonal outdoor sales that they have to come
before the board for it.
Okay.
If I may, through the Chair, I remember at 13 and
Mound, there was a flower stand that would apply for a tent every year.
And somehow they went to planning and were able to get a permanent approval for
that outdoor
seasonal sales.
Can we figure out how they were able to
do that?
Yeah, we could look into that.
Okay.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Clift?
Yeah. So,
I kinda brought this recommendation up to numerous petitioners over the last
couple of years.
Seek a revision, do a site plan, take it to planning, get your approvals.
Then you don't have to keep rinse and repeating, coming here year after year after
year. You could be set up
the way it needs to be. But,
some people took the advice and some people didn't.
And going back to what I said. And I get it. You're a flower shop.
You gotta put the grave blankets out there, you put the Easter flowers, you put the
Christmas stuff out. I get all that.
I would just like to see it a little more,
um,
appetizing to the neighborhood, so.
Um,
and make sure you get that dumpster taken care of, 'cause I'll be watching.
Yeah. It's just the dumpster man just drive a little bit farther,
put it where it needs to go. We would rather have it there.
Takes up two parking spots for customers.
Okay. Let me guess.
Not good.
It's Priority Waste.
Yeah. You know what? It's a new company-
Yeah
... so I'm not real sure. We've only had them a few, like, less than six months.
I'm not sure. Maybe.
All right.
Okay. Thank you. Mr. Chairman.
Yes, Mr. Jersey?
So to the petitioner, good to see you again.
Thank you.
So I know we discussed last year, if you recall, I think one of my
colleagues, I think it was Mr. Green, who wasn't here, was talking about just what
Mr. Safaya spoke to. You're going back to the
powers that be and maybe trying to revise the site plan.
So I-
Did that-
I think I went back and maybe you obviously might know
better than me because it's in my long-term memory now.
I think I went back, I made a couple phone calls, and it's a ton of money
to get a permanent whatever, like a lot of money.
It's more advantageous for a small business like this to just come every year, pay
our $500 or whatever, those few hundred dollars, and have me come here and do this
than it is to pay, I think it was thousands.
To do a site plan?
Yeah.
Okay.
No, to get a permanent... It's very, very expensive.
So I'll do this forever if I have to, to not have to pay all that money.
It would take all the profit for years to get something like that, I'm
almost positive. I remember calling and being like, "Forget that."
Okay.
"There's no way we're going to be able to pay that."
Okay.
So coming here every year and asking for permission and doing it the same
way is more cost-effective for us.
Got you. The other problem I have too with the
site especially,
it seems like
to me, I didn't pay that close attention, but it seems like we're going past
the January
deadline.
So this year-
I've been seeing tents into the winter, past your deadline.
I'm seeing ripped tents. I'm seeing-
I was out there
... still cinder blocks set up. Yeah.
Yeah.
So can you speak to that?
Freezing. Yeah. The snow really
was bad this year. I don't know if you guys remember.
We got snow early in December, and that hasn't happened for years
where we had so much snowfall, and everything was frozen to the
ground. I was there personally myself out there hammering, kicking, and
trying to get it up,
and did at Warren 1 at 12 Mile and Shanor.
But yes, it was a difficult freezing project, and we haven't had
that problem in years. So it was a problem.
We're all talking about it,
because we have to have big, heavy cement buckets there-
Sure
... to hold the tents down, and they did not want
to go away this year.
Okay.
So yes. That was the only reason this year we were unable to get
out there before. We want it up before Valentine's Day
also every year. Valentine's Day is our biggest flower holiday of the
entire year. Every parking spot needs to be used.
So we have to have it up by the end of January because that's-
Okay. Fair enough.
Yes, sir.
I'll yield the floor to my colleagues who have anything else to say.
I just wanted to ask you for one comment,
because I know
there are shelving units that certain companies
make for outdoor type sales and stuff, and I
understand, yes, if you have to replace both stores, do everything, that is
a capital outlay.
But maybe that's something you can look into, what are the choices of something
that would look better than the concrete panel?
Brick and board?
Yeah. There are
stuff, and even if you did one store one year, the next store the other year
or something.
It's storage also. When you take that down, where do you
store all of that? Where does it go?
That's the problem, is we don't have somewhere else for it to go.
Okay.
So it would have to stay there.
That's true. Okay.
And the brick and board can be easily taken down. We can stack.
Next to the
dumpster area, there's a little corral that they can be stacked up in, and the wood
is stacked up nice and neat on the other side of the pylon.
So it can go in places that are out of the way, taken, broken down small.
Okay.
And then when it's put back up, it's large.
Okay.
We did once buy, and we do still have them at our warehouse just
sitting there,
black plastic units, pieces that are
pipe and
shelving units.
But they're light as a feather, and you
couldn't display this product on it well.
Water drips on things and kills the things below it, where you need to have it
tiered the way that we build them to keep the flowers alive, not
to water on top of each other, and it didn't work.
So we did purchase something at some point, but it didn't work.
Okay.
Trust me, I have to move all that brick and board.
And it's not fun. So I wish there was something easier myself.
Okay.
Mr. Chair, if nobody else has anything else to say or add,
I'd like to make a motion. I'd like to make a motion to grant the petitioner's
request to conduct a seasonal outdoor sales operation in a P district from March
31st, 2026 through January 31st, 2027,
788 square feet to no less than 16 feet from the Shanor Road property line
and 50 feet from the north property line per site plan.
It's the same as last year due to the fact, size, and shape of the lot.
It's not a detriment.
Support.
I have a motion by Mr. Jersey, and I heard support by Mr.
Safaya to approve the request for the reason stated.
Mr. Jersey votes yes for the reason stated in the motion. Mr. Safaya?
Yes, for the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry?
Yes, for the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Watts?
No, I think it's a detriment.
Mr. Clift?
Yes, for the reason stated.
Mr. Linzey?
Yes, for the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Sesser?
No, I think it's a detriment.
And Chairman Stovitch?
Yes, for the reason stated in the motion. Your request is approved.
Thank you very much.
Okay.
This is item 10.
Item 10, applicant Thrifty Florist of Warren Number 2, and representative Nicole
Agbay. Account description 30975 Ryan.
Variances requested permission to conduct a seasonal outdoor sales operation, 20
feet by 30 feet, 600 square feet, from March 31st,
2026 through January 31st, 2027, to no less than
50 feet from the Ryan Road property line and 45 feet from the 13 Mile property
line.
Yes, sir. My name is Nicole Egbe, and my address here is
30975 Ryan Road in Warren. And as you
stated, we're asking to conduct seasonal outdoor sales, 20 by
30, an area that's 600 square feet, from the end of March
through the end of January to clean up.
No less than 50 feet from the Ryan Road property line and 45 feet
from the 13 Mile property line.
Okay.
Thank you for your explanation. This is a public hearing.
Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak?
Not seeing any. We do have a public impact statement
from planning, if you could read that in.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, Per Ramworth of the Planning Department.
After review of the request, no issues were found to impact the abutting local or
general public.
Thank you. With that, I'll close the public portion and turn it over to the board
for questions and discussion.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Safaya.
The more I think about this, I know it's an inconvenience for the petitioner to
come here every year. But really for the city, having this as a temporary,
so to speak... In my mind, it's
hard to say temporary because it's almost the entire year, but at least we're able
to police this yearly, and we're also able to get a little bit of revenue
for the city.
So if there's no other comments, I'd like to make a motion to approve.
Mr. Chair, I got questions.
Actually, Mr. Watts has a comment first.
Okay.
And then Mr. Sessar.
Mr.
Chair.
To the zoning inspector.
So let's talk about this dumpster problem over there.
She says it can't go in there because of the parking, but yet there was a
dumpster there all these years. I look back at it, it was, I believe, a muffler or
radiator shop and a gas station, so it had it there.
So it had to be in there at some point.
Where is the zoning department on this? Because it's a requirement.
Yeah. It would have to be located in the dumpster enclosure.
I don't know if there's... Is there parking blocks or-
Yeah, it's like the wheels
... something from the shopping center?
I don't know if they put the parking blocks in there and-
We'd have to rebuild a new dumpster.
Obstructed it.
We'd have to tear it down and rebuild a new one, yeah.
Because I know we brought it up last year. Mr.
Green brought it up last year, and he asked me to bring it up again because he
couldn't make it tonight. And I mean,
we're trying to keep
things clean,
and it's the same way with the displays.
It just doesn't look good. And I get it. I understand.
I used to be a small business owner, but I understand the other half of the coin.
You're not a small business owner. You have 16 locations.
That's not small. You guys can do better.
We got to take care of that dumpster.
You drive by there, it just doesn't look good,
and I've had this discussion with our public service director about
dumpsters, and so we need to look at that.
Last year, you guys promised you'd take care of it, and you didn't do it.
I think the sign. When I was here-
I know there was a sign question, too
... I think the sign came down.
Yeah. And that got taken care of.
Yeah. It got taken care of.
Yep.
And a new sign is purchased, paid for. We came, did planning, everything.
A new sign is-
Yep
... a big, a nice, good reader board sign is going up.
I seen the
building permit online.
Yes, sir.
I looked that up. I always do my homework.
Okay, I yield.
Mr. Sessar, you had a question?
Yeah. Mr. Schumann,
question.
Yes, sir.
Good evening.
With this one, this is not a use variance like the other one
was. What's the difference?
Because the other one, a portion of the sales is in the P zone.
And that's not permitted in a P zone, so that makes it a use-
Oh, okay
... variance.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Any other questions? Or I believe, Mr.
Safaya, you wanted to make a-
I'll make a motion if there's no other comments.
I'd like to make a motion to grant permission to conduct a seasonal outdoor sales
operation, a 20 by 30 600 square foot
tent from March 31st, 2026 through January 31st,
2027 to no less than 50 feet from Ryan Road
property line and 45 feet from the 13 Mile property line, due to the size and the
shape of the lot, and it's not a detriment to the area.
Support.
So we have a motion by Mr. Safaya, support by Mr.
Perry, to approve the request for the reasons stated. Mr.
Safaya?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Watts?
No.
I think it's a detriment.
Mr. Jersey votes yes for the reasons stated in the motion. Mr. Clift?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Lindsay?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Sessar?
No.
And Chairman Starovich? Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Your request is approved.
Thank you very much.
Takes us to item 11.
Item 11, the toughest name on the agenda.
I've been trying to practice this all week, so I
apologize if I butcher it. Applicant, Morgan
Rafishomali.
Hope I got close. Representative, Blair Hollis.
Common description, 3878 Jarvis.
Variance requested permission to waive 4 of 16 required parking spaces for the
proposed use.
How you doing? My name is Blair Hollis, and this is Morgan.
We are at 3878 Jarvis, and
we're requesting a variance to remove four parking spaces due to site constraints
and overall layout efficiency. Eliminating these spaces actually
improves circulation, safety, and the usability of the property.
Based on
the expected demand and the comparable sites around, these spaces
are not necessary to support the use.
We believe this adjustment results in a better designed site that fully
serves the community and the users while aligning with the city's planning
goals. We're a small fitness, personal
training
... studio. We will have no more than six to eight people in the group
sessions. And personal training-wise, that's one to two
people. So we will never really exceed more
than 12, which we have. So I think 16 would take
away from everything that we have going on.
Okay.
Thank you for your explanation. This is a public hearing.
Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this item?
Not seeing any, we do have a impact statement from planning, if Mr.
Jersey could read it in.
Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Per Ron Worth of the Planning Department, after
review of the request, no issues were found to impact the abutting local or general
public. The petitioner
received site plan approval with conditions for a new fitness training center on
February 9th, 2026.
Okay. With that, I'll close the public portion and turn it over to the board for
discussion.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Watts.
I did a drive-by over there, and I remember you being in front of the planning
commission.
Yes.
You're building a building on that vacant lot, correct?
Yes.
Okay.
Because when I went by there, I was like, "Wait a minute, something doesn't match
up here." Because there was a building next door.
So you're going to build a building on the lot between that
building and-
Yes
... what used to be a-
Open lot.
Okay.
It's gated right now.
Okay.
And then also, I wanted to add that we are planning to add
bike racks as well because this is something for the community.
So we are
planning to add bike racks as well-
Okay
... to exceed those couple of parking spaces, or a few.
Yeah. I don't see a problem with this.
Thank you.
I think it's nice that you're building, you're investing in the community, and I
wish you well. Thank you.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair.
God bless you.
Yes, Mr. Jersey.
I have to echo Mr. Watts' sentiment, too.
I looked at this project, looked at the area.
This couldn't be more perfect, I mean, to be honest with you.
From what I've seen over the years that's come across the desk,
we're rehabbing a vacant lot with a great use,
not really intensive use.
It's not very far from the residence, so it should have a pretty good
chance at success. So,
I could definitely get behind this and fully support waiving the
four parking spots to help you jumpstart your business, and I
hope you have great success.
Thank you.
This looks like a great project. It's a great site plan, really thought out and
very professionally done. So thank you, and I'll yield the floor.
Thank you.
If there's nothing further, I'd be happy to make the motion.
Go ahead, Mr. Watts.
Make a motion to waive four of the 16 required parking spaces for the
proposed use. I think it's a wise move.
I think it's going to be good for the area.
Support.
So have a motion by Mr. Watts, support by Mr.
Jersey to approve the request for the reasons stated.
Mr. Watts?
Yes, for the reasons stated.
Mr. Jersey votes yes for the reasons stated in the motion. Mr. Safaya?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Clift?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Lindsay?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. assessor?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
And Chairman Stovitch? I yes for the reasons stated in the motion.
Your request is approved.
God bless you.
Good luck.
Takes us to item 12, applicant Baso Construction, and
Representative Sarah Myson. Account description
32941 Mound. Variances requested permission to, one,
allow two 36-inch by 100-inch, 25
square foot signs on the canopy. Two, allow 898
square feet of design element on the canopy.
These two items are to replace only item three from
variances granted on 7/26/1989. The other
variances granted on 7/26/1989 will remain.
Total canopy signage 948 square feet.
Hello.
Hi.
My name is Sarah Myson. I'm here on behalf of Baso Construction.
The property address is 32941 Mound Road in Warren, Michigan.
We're just here asking permission from the board to basically
refresh the gas canopy image at this location.
It is an existing Mobile gas station, and it's staying a Mobile gas station.
However, it is extremely outdated and is in dire need of
an upgrade.
And so that's why we're here, to relinquish the previous variances to get
the new image approved.
Okay. Thank you for that
description. This is a public hearing.
Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak?
Not seeing any, I'll close the public portion and turn it over to the board.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Jersey.
With this being right on the corner,
I don't see the necessity for the
898 square feet of design element.
But I would be in favor to allow the two canopy signs, just for
normal branding sake.
That gas station sticks out kind of like a sore thumb
into the neighborhood. So,
having
the excessive branding, just to have it
on a high-profile corner, to me seems to be excessive.
But I would be inclined to grant the first one but deny the second one.
That's my opinion. I'll yield the floor.
Actually, I wanted to actually chime in.
I actually don't see a problem with the design element because the design
element is that blue stripe across the awning, which is what
most Mobile gas stations have. And I thought there's already
one there. It might be a different size or something.
I-
I mean,
I think it would look odd if you had just, let's say, mobile and
just have the rest of it being white with no coloration on
it.
To the petitioner, is the design element illuminated?
No.
I yield the floor.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Lindsey.
I kind of look at this the same way, too. I'm thinking about it.
If you don't have the design element, it almost looks, to me,
more odd,
and probably looks worse than I think it does with the design element.
So it's a gas station. I think this is what gas stations look like.
So I have no issues with this.
If there's no other comments, I'll make a motion.
Okay.
I'd like to make a motion to grant permission to, number one, allow
two 36 inches by 100 inches, totaling
25 square feet of signs on the canopy.
And number two, allow 898 square feet of design element on the
canopy. These two items are to replace only item number three from
variances granted on July 26, 1989.
The other variances granted on July 26, 1989
will remain. Total canopy signage 948 square
feet.
Due to the fact of the size and shape of the lot, it's not a detriment to the area.
Support.
We have a motion by Mr. Lindsey, supported by Mr.
Perry, to approve the request for the reasons stated. Mr. Lindsey?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Safaya?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Watts?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Clift?
No. 908 square feet in excess of what the ordinance allows.
Mr. Assessor?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Jersey votes no. I believe it's also a detriment to the area. Chairman Stavich?
I vote yes for the reasons stated in the motion. Your request is approved.
Thank you.
Mr. Chairman,
before you begin item 13, I'd like to recuse myself.
I wanted to disclose to the board I'm one of the new owners of the former Kelly's
Sports Bar, which we've rebranded to Eastside Lucky's.
So I'm going to step out for this item. Thank you.
Okay.
Do we need a motion on that?
I think we should have a motion to... Oh, excuse me.
I'd like to make a motion to
excuse Mr. Safaya from hearing item thir- or
abstaining from item 13.
I'll support.
Support.
So we have a motion by Mr. Jersey, supported by Mr. Watts, to excuse Mr.
Safaya for this item. All in favor?
Aye.
Any opposed?
Okay. He's excused and if you could read item...
This takes us to item 13. Applicant, Ed Phillips, Phillips Sign And
Lighting Incorporated, representative Ed Phillips.
Account description 26615 Ryan. Variances requested permission to:
one, install a 51.68 square foot wall sign on the east elevation
of the building. Two, install a 35.49 square foot wall
sign on the north elevation of the building to replace the 53 inch by 53 inch
19.51 square foot wall sign that was granted as
item two of the variances granted 08/13/2025.
In addition to the previously granted nine foot by
22.6 foot, 203 square foot mural
sign on the south elevation for a new total of
290.17 square feet of wall signage and 32 square feet of
ground signage.
Good evening. My name is Ed Phillips, Phillips Sign And Lighting,
40920 Executive Drive, Harrison Township, Michigan.
Here this evening representing Anthony Mancini and David
Safaya, new owners of Kelly's Sports Bar, which is
now rebranded as Eastside Lucky's, located at
25515 Ryan Road, Warren, Michigan.
Our hardship is public safety, as we mentioned in our application.
Our building is an older structure built right on the property line.
Building visibility is not so much the challenge.
Identifying what's in the building in time before
customers pass us by and then turn around and come back.
We're trying to cut down traffic. With a single
drive on the north side of the building and parking behind,
good, clear identification is imperative at this site.
We know a slightly larger sign on our east, in other words, our Ryan
Road elevation, requiring only 18.75 square
feet variance would be very beneficial.
We have worked hard on the design and feel the added area will enhance the
brand of our rather plain building.
On our north side, this
is a non-illuminated aluminum sign identifying our entrance,
requiring 15.98 square foot variance.
This will assist our patrons and the fire department
should the need ever arise, as that is our entrance to the building, as some
of you probably know.
In conclusion, we know this is an old building that has been part of
Warren for many years. We are already improving the very old
and ugly infrastructure. We've done a new roof and
HVAC in the first month of ownership.
More improvements are planned. Our goal is to
tastefully breathe some life into her and be a
valued part of Warren for many years to come.
Your approval tonight would be much appreciated. I can answer any questions.
Thank you for your consideration.
Okay. Thank you for your explanation.
This is a public hearing. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this
item?
Not seeing any,
I will close the public portion and turn it over to the board.
Mr. Chair.
Yes, Mr. Jersey.
To the petitioner,
what went behind the rationale of keeping the
Kelly's sign on the
south side of the building?
The rationale was that the building is really
rather ugly.
We're just trying to dress it up. The thought is to refresh that
and do something much more, if nothing more than just a simple
lettered name on that elevation.
To me, if you're starting a new business, one of the biggest
detriments to a new business would be having an old business name attached to your
new
business.
Well, that will certainly be modified anyway.
So,
I
could get behind the rest of the sign package except for trying to
keep the
Kelly sign on the south
side of the building. Everything else seems to be tastefully done.
I appreciate the non-illuminating
signs on the north end of the building and on the front.
But to me,
when you change a business over,
I would think you'd want to just eliminate any
reminiscence of past
ownership and start anew.
That's just me thinking out loud, but I would like to see
that changed going forward, but everything else seems fine.
I was just kind of curious about why
we'd want to keep any kind of old signage on the building when you're coming and
applying for new signage. I'll yield the floor.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Lindsey.
I would share those same sentiments.
When we're looking at the monument sign and the wall sign,
I think it's tastefully done. I have no issue granting the variance for the
additional sizes.
My concerns are going to still be around that mural.
I understand you're probably going to swap out with the new name,
but that's still sign square footage that you guys would
have, and I think we're starting to get quite a bit of it.
So I think I stand with Mr. Jersey. I'm in favor,
but I'd like to see the variance that we gave for that mural to
be removed.
That's where I stand right now.
Any other questions or are there any motions?
May I
jump in?
There's no question directed towards you at the moment, but...
So if I make a motion to approve the wall
signage.
I got a question.
Okay, Mr. Clift.
Contention seems to be with that wall mural a little bit.
I just wanted to clarify, did I hear you say, sir, that you're going to refresh
that wall mural?
Thank you for the opportunity. I would like to suggest, hopefully the board could
approve. We'll cut that. That's a 203 square foot mural.
Okay.
We'll cut that in total half, which would be a gross reduction in square
footage, even with your approval on the wall sign.
It'll be a gross reduction of 38 square feet
of signage on that property.
So it would be limited to 100 square feet.
So nothing more than the name, possibly lettered on that side of the building, very
tastefully done.
I appreciate that input, so that clarifies.
Simple yes or no, was you intended to refresh that mural
somehow or another?
Yes, sir.
Okay, and you're willing to cut that by half?
Half. More than half.
Okay.
All right. Thank you for the comment, sir. I appreciate it. I'll yield the floor.
Okay.
Mr. Lindsey, did you still want to make a motion at this time?
I'd be in favor of reducing that. I'm trying
to word it appropriately. So if we look at the bottom, in
addition to a previously granted 9 feet by 22.6,
23 square feet, what are the
sizes? Sir, what was the dimension of the mural that you'd be willing to cut down
to?
Pardon me?
What was the size of the mural that you-
100 square feet. Presently, it's 203 square feet.
Do you have the dimensions on it?
Would it be a 50 by 50?
Yes, I do. Nine
foot high, 22 and a half feet wide.
That's the 200-
That's what we have right now for 203.
What would be the reduced size?
I don't know. 100 square foot in some configuration.
And you could word it that way, limited to 100 square feet.
Okay.
So how do I need to word it? So do we have to remove the variance or just
approve a variance for
100 square feet mural sign on the south elevation?
If I could speak.
You got something to add?
Yes, I just wanted to say, they're not asking for anything additional on that side.
That was previously approved. We're not asking to change anything on that.
So they could
reconstruct it as a Lucky's, just change the name on that.
But
they didn't ask to rescind that.Previously
approved variance
Right, I understand, but I think that the problem that the board has is we're
granting additional wall signage with
an already existing variance, and we're looking to reduce the total
number of square foot that we have available on it.
And we are willing to compromise. It's a fair compromise. Thank you.
Yeah.
I do appreciate that, Brian.
So if my math checks out, so we have in addition to a previously
granted,
I'm going to strike that.
So I'll also say 100 square feet mural sign on south elevation
for a total of 187.17 square
feet of wall signage and 32 square feet of ground signage.
If anybody has any-
I think you have to resend that previous variance-
Okay
... and grant a variance for 100 square feet
mural on the south.
No, I don't think so, because it's going down.
It's not being increased.
So I think if the motion just says that it's going to be limited to
100 square feet.
Help us out, lawyer. Help us out.
Yes, sir.
That's correct, yeah, because even making it smaller, it's still within the
variance parameter. So you don't have to address it unless
they are requesting to make it larger.
So just put a limitation on the total of it?
Yeah. I would just make a record of the whatever specification.
Okay.
And I'm having trouble hearing you over here. Just saying.
I will speak into the microphone then.
Thank you.
That's better.
Yeah.
There you go.
Okay. I am going to make an attempt here.
Stop me if I'm messing up. So I'd like to make a motion to
grant permission to number one, install a
51.68 square feet wall sign on the east
elevation of the building. Number two, install a
35.49 square foot wall sign on the north
elevation of the building to replace the 53-inch by
53-inch, 19.51 square feet
wall sign that was granted as item number two of the variances
granted on August 13th of 2025.
And to allow a limited of 100 square
feet mural sign on the south elevation
for a new total of 187.17
square feet of wall signage and 32 square feet of ground signage,
due to the fact it's not a detriment to the area and the size and shape of the lot.
Support.
So I have a motion by Mr. Lindsey, support by Mr.
Assessor to approve the request for the reasons stated. Mr.
Lindsey?
Yes, for the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Assessor?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Cliff?
I still have to vote no. It's 4.5 times the allowed amount of
signage on a building in relation to our ordinances.
Mr. Watts?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Jersey votes no.
I believe it's a detriment to the area with the
way the
motion was read.
And Chairman Mestovich? I vote yes for the reasons stated in the motion.
Your request is approved.
Thank you.
Item 14.
All right, takes us to item 14.
Applicant, Sheets Incorporated.
Account description 2003-12 Mile.
Variances requested permission to,
one, allow two
1 foot
7
5/8 inch by 8 foot
13.08 square feet wall signs, one on the
west elevation of the canopy and one on the south elevation of the canopy.
Two, allow two 1 foot 10 inch by 9 foot
16.50 square feet wall
signs, one on the west elevation of the building and one on the south
elevation of the building. Three, allow 12.48
square feet
valance signage area, 12.125
square feet skirt signage area, 24.6
square feet total per gas pump on seven gas pumps, for a total
of 172.20 square feet of pump signage.
Total of 231.36 square feet of wall signage.
Four, change of use, allow a 20-foot high,
73.33 square foot ground sign with a 13-foot
under clearance in a P zoning district to within
15.05 feet of the west property line.
Five, install 290 feet 6 inch of exterior
rope lighting around the top perimeter of the building.
Six, install 72 feet of exterior rope lighting under the
perimeter of the two awnings at the entrances.
And seven,
install 416 feet 6 inches of exterior rope lighting under the
perimeter of the gas canopy. Total rope lighting, 779
linear feet.
Hi, my name's Rebecca Green, and I
work with Sheets, and my mailing address is 84 Skyline
Drive, Asheville, Ohio.
We are here talking about the proposed Sheets location at
the corner of Dequindre and 12 Mile.
This particular variance is for basically three different
things. I brought a presentation.
I don't know, can you see it on the computer?
I'm just not familiar with your system.
Yep, it's on.
It's on now.
Okay, great. So I'll have someone help me out.
So I'll just move on to
two.
Basically, we're looking at three
types of variances. One is for the wall
signage, which constitutes the signage on the building, signage on the
canopy, and then
signage for the fuel pumps, which is a
typical requested signage variance for gas
stations. The second is for ground sign placement,
and the third is the lighting around the building
and the canopySo I'll just go ahead and move on to
number three. Obviously, this is a busy intersection
there at
Dequindre and
Twelve Mile. And so this is a typical corner gas
station with all the kinds of traffic problems that are
part of that location.
So here's an aerial of the site itself.
As you can see, there's a business
on the corner, and the
site that we're proposing has three different curb cuts that are part
of the redevelopment of this area.
The site plan that is proposed is this one
here. You can see we've eliminated one curb cut
and that
the canopy is on one side and then obviously
the convenience store on the other.
We have certain constraints with respect to our
placement of our ground sign.
And if you look at this particular slide, you will see some of those
constraints. One is that
just the need for our underground storage tanks and other
things. We have a very narrow area between the
P district and
the main site itself. We also have a
stormwater easement that we have to deal with.
And then, of course, we have a side setback
from this intervening property as well that we have to
deal with when we come to placing a ground sign.
The ground signs we're proposing is to be placed
15 feet from right of way,
and
that placement does put it within the
P district.
But there are very few other locations that we can put that
ground sign
on this particular site. Obviously, we have, as you can see, the
bottom is the P zone. It's this strip there at the very
bottom.
And again, we have the stormwater sewer easement that
constrains where we can place it.
There aren't
just that many locations to place it.
The sign that we're proposing is
one that you've seen at some other locations
in Warren. It's a 20-foot sign. It is
73 square feet, so it's within the compliant
guidelines of the zoning code.
It has
two gas price numeral sections on it.
And as you know, the gas price is the most important factor for
every consumer who is purchasing.
Gas stations are not generally the primary place people go.
It's a secondary place people go. They get gas on the way to something.
So making sure that we can have our gas prices seen is an important
part of it. And placing this particular sign on
this particular property is somewhat problematic.
If you look at this next slide, you can see that
visually, the
gas price is
at a 15-inch high numeral, which is what we have here,
is calibrated to be exactly 150
feet to the intersection.
Visibility is about one inch per 10 feet.
So that is why these are 15
inches high numerals, and that is why it's 150 feet from the
intersection. We need that visibility in order to get people
into this lot safely without doing
additional turns or
reroutings. We want to make sure people see that gas price and they move
there safely.
I know that other uses have been allowed within the P district.
I just took a quick look at some of your agendas and minutes,
and these are some of those that I was able to locate just in
those minutes. There was a canopy, some bucket
truck parking, and some permanent outdoor sales.
So we're just asking for the same thing that we would be
allowed to place this particular sign within the P district
at the 15-foot setback. The sign itself is compliant with your code,
and we are very constrained on where to place the sign as we
redevelop this lot.
The next group of variances are related to wall
signage. Typically, a Sheetz store has four wall signs on
the building. We knew that Warren had very specific
limitations on wall signage, so in this case, we're only proposing
two wall signs
on the building.
Same with the canopy. The canopy will usually have
three signs on the canopy that say Sheetz.
In this case, we'll have only two.
And
staff recommended that we include both the skirt and the valance on the
pump signage.
We do not place
words on the skirt. It's just sort of a red graphic.
I wouldn't consider it a sign because it doesn't have any language on it or a
logo. We only place the name Sheetz on the
valance itself. But we are asking for both the valance and the skirt
as staff recommended.
And those are
our wall sign variances. Again, I took a quick look through
your minutes and found some other
similar fuel pump sign variances that were
allowed by
this board.And then the last group
of variants have to do with a classification that
are strip lights.
And these are strip lights that we put under our fascia,
they're like LED strips, that they had been classified
as rope lighting. And rope lighting is
evidently not a type that is allowed under your zoning
code.
This strip lighting that we use, these LED strips,
are put
underneath the edge of our
canopy and underneath the edge of our building so that it washes straight
down. It does not migrate far from the
building. It's
merely a light wash.
And if you go to the next slide here, you can see
this is a
cutaway from
the building set itself. And so this is the wall on the
building, and you can see that there's just, where the yellow line is
pointing, that is where the LED strip is installed, behind
a cover.
It's recessed up so that it only washes down and not
out.
And again, these are not like Christmas
lighting or lighting that you would see that's exposed
to view. This is LED lighting
that's tucked up under
a fixture that prevents it from
shining out. It only washes down the side of the building.
Those are the three groups of variances we're asking for.
I'd be happy to take any questions you might have.
Okay. Thank you for that detailed explanation.
This is a public hearing. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak on this
item?
Not seeing any, I close the public portion, turn it over to the board for
discussion. I just have just one question because
this is similar to the other two Sheetz stores that
have recently opened up in our city, correct?
It's very similar.
Yes.
Yeah. And looking at the past history of that property
back from when it was Perry Drugs and even older when it
was Arnold's Drugs, there's a number of sign
variances that those businesses had.
So if we approve this package,
just to help clean up the record, would you give up
previous signs that were approved on that property?
Yeah. Yes, we would.
Okay.
Thank you for that.
Mr.
Chair?
Yes, Mr. Watts?
Mr. Chair.
I have one question about the signage.
Yes.
Was the signage a problem...
How do I want to put this?
Because of the used car lot there, was that a problem?
There is an intervening business there-
Right
... that is a used car lot.
So my question is this: if they decide to bail out and Sheetz was
to acquire the property, is that going to require you have to redo the
signs?
Or-
My understanding is that it would not.
It would not? Okay.
All right. I don't have any problem with this.
The other two locations you've done have been outstanding, and
this'll clean up their corner pretty good with the
exception of one problem. So
thank you.
Understood. Thank you.
I yield.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Jersey.
Good evening, ma'am. Good to see you again.
Thank you.
So the one thing I take exception to, and
even though your explanation and how it's going to
ultimately turn out will probably be good, but I believe it's going to
set a dangerous precedent in town for other people to do
lighting around their canopies,
is I can't get behind items five, six, and seven.
I know you've done a professional job of trying to get the lighting to
wash down the building. I think if other businesses and gas stations
in town see that, it's going to give them
the A-OK to do what they want with their properties,
too. I think it's going to,
me personally, set a dangerous precedent going forward,
because I don't think anybody else would probably do it as professionally and as
tastefully as you've outlined
in your proposal.
So everything else I could get behind.
One, two, three, four seem fine to me.
Just the rope lighting seems to be something additional on
this request from the other two sites.
So that's
my concern on it. But even though you did do a great job explaining it, and
I can get behind it, but I can't get behind it,
if that makes sense.
Yes, I understand. And again, what we're trying to do is
keeping that light-
Sure
... directed down.
Absolutely. I understand that. I yield the floor.
Any other questions or any motions?
If there were no other comments, I'd like to make a
motion.
I'd like to make a motion to grant permission.
Should I read this into the record, or can I just say as presented and on the
agenda?
You can just say as stated.
I'd like to make a motion to grant permission
To item 14 as read by Secretary Jersey.
Due to the fact the size and shape of the lot, it's necessary, and it's not a
detriment to the area.
Support.
Okay, so we have a motion by Mr. Safaya, support by Mr.
Perry, to approve the request for the reasons stated.
Mr. Safaya?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Watts?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Clift?
No. Over excess for the amount of wall signage allowed in the ordinance.
Mr. Lindsay?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Assessor?
Yes, for the reasons stated in the motion.
Mr. Jersey also votes no,
due to the fact that we included the last three items.
I have a problem with that. I believe it'll be a detriment to the area.
Chairman Nistorovich?
I vote yes for reasons stated in the motion.
So it is approved.
Yes, it's approved.
Your request is approved.
Okay.
And I hate to be a stickler-
Oh
... but my understanding is I needed six votes for
my
P district.
Is that right? I just wanted to make sure that I'm getting-
Correct. Yes.
She needed six.
You did.
And I got six.
You got six. And you got it because there are two no's.
One, two, three, four. Yeah, you got six.
Yeah, you got six.
Yeah. You got the six.
So it works out.
Yes.
Okay. Thank you, I appreciate it. I just wanted to make sure. Thanks again.
Item 15. Applicant, Ron Englehart, representative, Joe Scott, account
description 2277 11 Mile. Variances requested permission
to install solar arrays in an O
zoning district to within 30 feet of the front property line, and allow
up to 850 lineal feet of fencing between the front
building line and the front property line around the solar arrays.
Yeah. My name is Ron Englehart. I'm with Development Solutions
Midwest. I'm here. My address is 2495
Ashford, Rochester Hills, Michigan.
I'm here on behalf of the Detroit Electrical Industry Training Center,
located at 2277 East 11 Mile Road.
The Detroit
Electrical Industry Training Center has approval through their
board to install a 416-panel solar array,
supported by grants from the State of Michigan.
That solar array is located in the drawings that you should see,
you should have in hand.
This is a unique opportunity for the Detroit Electrical Industry Training
Center to not only have a solar array to supplement power to the
building, but also as a training tool for all the
industry training
employees coming out of that location.
So this is a unique opportunity for multiple reasons.
Currently, when we had our initial discussions
with the Planning Commission and Zoning Board,
we knew that this was... How do you treat a solar array?
And the closest thing was that it was a substation.
And that's the first time
in a solar array that I've seen it treated as a substation.
For that reason, it couldn't fit into the O district, and we're here for that
zoning variance. We also recognized that the fencing
requirements
as part of the zoning variance, being in the front of the building,
obviously I can see where fencing in the front of the building would
potentially be an issue. One thing I will say is there is a
berm
that runs north of 11 Mile in between
11 Mile Road and the actual solar array itself that really
obstructs visibility to either see the fence or the solar
array. But the fence would be required for protection purposes of
that solar array.
And I would just
like to introduce myself. I'm Joe Scott.
I am the Electrical
Training Center's Training Director.
So I am here on behalf of, with Ron, to answer any
questions that you may have about our center and our program.
Okay. And if you could just add your address for the record.
The Training Center address is 227 East 11 Mile.
Okay, thank you.
Okay, thank you for that explanation.
This is a public hearing.
Not seeing any members, I will close the public
portion. And we do have an impact statement, if Mr. Jersey could just read that in.
Yes, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Per Ryan Worth of the Planning Department, after review of the request, no issues
were found to impact the abutting local or general public.
Petitioner received site plan approval with conditions for a solar array system for
the Electrical Industry Training Center on January 12th,
2026.
Okay. So the public portion is closed, and I turn it over to the
board for any questions and discussion.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Jersey.
Good evening, gentlemen.
I was looking at the site plan. I took a
drive by there too, and I don't see this being any kind of a
problem and,
whatsoever.
Luckily, you have the ability to do this with the amount of space you have
on the property.
But I don't see how this could possibly be a detriment
at all now or going forward with that property.
So I yield the floor.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Watts.
I got a few questions. So
you're talking about the sign and the berm
If you're driving down 11 Mile, are you going to be able to see these solar panels?
It would be very difficult to see it.
So they're going to be fairly low to the ground.
Yes.
They will mimic the grade of the property itself.
But we also have foliage, we also have trees, shrubbery
on our property as well as some on the
south side of the sidewalk.
And there's going to be 400 and some odd panels, you said?
416 panels.
Okay.
In three rows.
All right.
Now my next question,
how much heat is this generating over there?
Heat or electric?
Well,
I know it's generating electric, but I'm concerned
about the heat and maybe a grass fire or
killing insects or anything like that. That's what I'm concerned about.
The solar arrays are angled up in the air.
Okay.
They're not faced towards the ground.
Okay. Well, all right.
I'm kind of opposed to this just because I don't think it fits the
area. I appreciate what you guys do and all that kind of stuff.
I'm just not a fan of these solar panels being out
like that. So I appreciate it. Thank you.
Mr. Chair?
Yes, Mr. Lindsay.
I don't see any issues with this. I think you guys are doing a
good thing.
It's tastefully done. It's not like it's out in the open.
I do see a site plan. You have foliage and shrubs to cover it up.
So I think whatever we see, it is going to be
minimal. So I'm in favor of this. I'll make a motion unless
anybody else has any comments.
Does anyone else have any comments or questions, or...?
Okay. I'm going to make a
motion to grant permission to install solar arrays
in an O zoning district to within 30 feet of the front property
line and allow up to 850 lineal feet of fencing
between the front building line and the front property line around
the solar arrays due to the fact that it's not a detriment to the area and the
size and the shape a lot supports it.
Support.
We have a motion by Mr. Lindsay, support by Mr.
Jersey to approve the request. For a reason stated. Mr. Lindsay?
Yes, for the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Jersey votes yes for the reason stated in the motion. Mr.
Safaya?
Yes, for the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Perry?
Yes, for the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Watts?
Yes, for the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Clift?
Yes, for the reason stated in the motion.
Mr. Assessor?
Yes, for the reason stated in the motion.
And Chairman Stovitch? Yes, for the reason stated in the motion.
Your request is approved.
Thank you.
Thank you, board. Thank you, Mr. Watts.
Thank you.
Appreciate it.
So takes us to item 16, which is new business.
I just wanted to make one announcement to the board, because April
22nd is our last meeting here in this
auditorium.
Starting with May, I believe we'll probably be moving to the cafeteria due
to construction or renovation that's going to be going on in this
room.
I just wanted to let everybody know.
May the 22nd.
Yeah.
Is this going to be the room where we had that special-
Yes
... meeting in? Okay, got it. Thank you. I was unaware.
Make sure I park on that side.
Yeah.
Unfortunately, I'll be absent next meeting. April 22nd is my birthday.
I'll be out to dinner with my family.
Oh.
Happy birthday.
We shall go.
Happy birthday.
Yeah.
Make a motion to suspend the meeting so that-
It's going to be at East Side Lucky's.
Well, I look forward to that bar.
Yes, Mr. Clift?
So-
I try not to be there
... I don't know if it fits with new business or what.
Couple of things.
I wanted to go on the record and wish my wife happy birthday.
It's her birthday today. She's stuck working. She couldn't be with us tonight.
Happy birthday.
So
we had a little bit of discussion
in depth about a few things our last meeting,
and I was amazed to get the
draft of the overlay district
ordinance in the email. Man, that was lightning fast.
I can't believe how quick that got done.
Mm-hmm.
And I'm anxious to see what all that's going to entail and how that goes.
But having read through it, I thought it was a pretty good piece of
upcoming legislation. I think it answered a lot of questions that
some of us had leading up to that.
I thought it was some pretty good work in there.
I read through it like three times. Yeah.
Fast, fast, fast. It's amazing what we can get done when we want to get stuff
done. I hope they can do that with some of the other ordinances that are archaic
and way out of date in this town to make everybody's life a little bit easier.
I think that covers it. There's a couple of little...
Oh,
I'm also going to go
on record here tonight, and I'm going to say I don't really appreciate some of the
commentary that came out of
some people on the planning commission meeting before last, I think it was.
I watched. I didn't like some of the inferences that came out
directed toward
either several people on this board or the board in general.
I agree.
I
pondered the idea of appearing at one of their meetings and voicing my opinion
during
public comment, but I think I'll leave
that for you to chair people to kind of maybe hash out a
little bit. But I wanted to go on the record and just say that I
absolutely did not appreciate some of those comments
angling toward us,
harassing a certain segment of the population or however it is.
I'm paraphrasing. So
with that, I just wish everybody a good evening.
Okay.
Any other new business or
item 17 is adjournment. Any motion?
Motion to adjourn.
We have-
Support
... a motion by Mr. Lindsay, support by Mr. Jersey.
All in favor of adjournment?
I.
Meeting adjourned at 8:51.