Good evening, ladies and gentlemen.
Welcome to the City of Warren Planning Commission meeting,
May 11th. Please stand 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.
Commissioner Ansari?
Present.
Commissioner Heide?
Heide.
Yes.
Commissioner Heide?
Present.
Commissioner Holowaty?
Present.
Commissioner Hawk?
Present.
Commissioner Duza?
Present.
Commissioner Moriarty is present. Commissioner Boniecki?
Present.
Commissioner Smith?
Present.
I'll move my mic closer. I'd like to welcome our new commissioner, Commissioner
Herbert Heide, to the commission.
Good evening, sir.
Good evening.
Maybe.
Trial by fire.
Welcome.
Item number four, approval of the agenda.
So moved, Mr. Chairman.
Support, Mori.
There's a motion by Commissioner Duza, support from Commissioner Mori.
All in favor?
Aye.
Any opposed? Approval of the minutes of April 13th, 2026.
Chair, I make a motion to approve the minutes from April
13th.
And April 20th.
Oh, we can do them-
I'm going to do them separate.
That's where I thought.
So I need the support for that one.
Support. Mr. Chair, I support it.
That was a motion by Commissioner Holowaty, support by Commissioner Duza.
All in favor?
Aye.
Any opposed? Now I need approval of the minutes for April 20th,
2026.
Make a motion that we approve the minutes from April 20th.
There's a motion by Commissioner Duza, supported by...
Mr. Chair, I support it.
Mr. Hawk. There's a motion by Commissioner Duza, supported by Commissioner Hawk.
All in favor?
Aye.
Any opposed?
Item number 6A.
Item number 6A. An ordinance to amend the code of
zoning ordinance, Appendix A, to add Article
4H pertaining to overlay districts.
The proposed amendment to Article 4 of Appendix
A of the City of Warren Code of Ordinance to add Article
4H will create special public purpose overlay districts on
certain special areas of land and to adapt the
development and use standards to shifting housing,
economic, and demographic trends.
PANAP-260001. Thank you.
Thank you. Is the representative here for this?
Good evening, sir.
Good evening, commissioners.
And tell us a little bit about the project.
Yes, absolutely. I prepared a statement.
I didn't have time to commit it to memory, so you'll have to forgive me if the
delivery is not quite what it should be.
But
I'm ready if all of you are as well.
I'm ready.
So good evening, Chairman, Commissioners, planning staff,
and to the members of the public.
Tonight before you is a coordinated set of overlay districts intended to address a
series of longstanding development barriers that have impacted the southern
portion of the city for decades. While these overlays are distinct in
purpose and application, they are deeply connected in
intent. Together, they represent a targeted effort to modernize
portions of our zoning ordinance in a way that reflects the realities of today's
housing market, development environment, and economic conditions
while remaining consistent with the goals established in the city's adopted master
plan and corridor planning efforts.
The first overlay before you, the Missing Middle Overlay District, focuses
primarily on residential development.
It seeks to allow housing types that historically existed in many American
communities, but which over time became increasingly difficult or
impossible to build under current zoning standards.
Duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, and smaller scale multi-unit
developments provide an opportunity for attainable housing, workforce housing,
senior housing, and incremental reinvestment into aging residential
areas. The overlay does not eliminate standards or
oversight. Rather, it recalibrates standards such as setbacks, parking
requirements, lot coverage, and dimensional regulations that have
unintentionally prohibited reinvestment and infill construction within these
neighborhoods.
The second overlay, the Van D**e Mixed-Use District Overlay,
addresses the commercial corridor itself.
Van D**e Avenue remains one of the most historically significant commercial
corridors in the region.
Many of its buildings still reflect the traditional urban development pattern that
once defined the corridor. Brick storefronts built to the sidewalk,
active commercial frontages, and a strong relationship between businesses,
neighborhoods, and pedestrian activity.
Over time, however, development patterns shifted towards increasingly
auto-oriented site layouts, driven in large part by zoning requirements that
prioritized excessive setbacks and oversized parking fields over
walkability, mixed-use activity, and cohesive urban form.
The result is a corridor with tremendous potential, but one that has struggled to
attract the type of reinvestment envisioned by the city's master plan.
The overlay district seeks to correct this imbalance by allowing greater
flexibility for mixed-use buildings, adaptive reuse, residential
integration, reduction of parking burdens where appropriate,
and
site designs that better support pedestrian activity,
small businesses, housing diversity, and long-term economic
sustainability.
Importantly, these overlays were not developed in isolation.
They're the product of months of discussion between multiple city departments,
planning and zoning officials, legal review, developers, community
development, and economic development departmentsThe concepts reflected
within these ordinance are consistent with modern best practices being utilized
across Michigan and throughout the country in communities seeking to revitalize
aging commercial corridors and expand housing opportunities while
maintaining local character.
These overlays also directly support broader investments and initiatives that are
already underway within the city.
Planned streetscape improvements, infrastructure investments, redevelopment
efforts, and corridor revitalization initiatives all rely upon a
zoning framework capable of supporting the type of development the city has stated
it wishes to encourage.
Without the corresponding zoning reform, many of these goals remain difficult
or impossible to implement in practice.
At its core, this effort is about creating the conditions necessary for
reinvestment. It is about allowing development that fits the historic
form and fabric of the corridor, while positioning Warren to compete for new
residents, new businesses, and private investment.
Often when changes such as these are introduced, people will follow it with, "This
can be the next Ferndale, Royal Oak," or any other city that comes to mind with
revitalization. Critics will argue that this is Warren, not any of
those places. In this regard, the critics are right.
This is not Ferndale or Royal Oak. This is Warren.
What these overlays achieve is what the intention always was and should have been
for this portion of the city. It is taking modern best practices and applying them
to the historical foundation that has always existed there.
Thusly, this is about ensuring that the zoning ordinance reflects not only the
city's past, but also builds for the future.
This ordinance will not radically transform the community overnight, rather is
intended to provide a practical and flexible framework for gradual,
thoughtful redevelopment over time.
Redevelopment that aligns with the city's adopted vision in response to changing
economic and demographic realities.
Thank you for your time and consideration this evening.
I'd be happy to take any questions that anyone might have.
Thank you. Thank you, sir. Correspondence?
Correspondence. Land Bank to Planning Director Ron Wirth
from Mindy Moore, Acting Director and Chairperson, Warren Land Bank
Authority, regarding support for
proposed zoning ordinance amendment overlay district.
Director Wirth, as Acting Director and Chairperson of Warren Land
Bank Authority, I write to express strong support for the proposed zoning
ordinance amendment establishing overlay districts within the order
sections of the City of Warren. The Warren Land Bank has acquired and
intends to continue acquiring vacant residential infill lots throughout
the city. These lots are within older established
neighborhoods where lot sizes are typically smaller and
predate the adoption of the city's zoning ordinance.
The City of Warren itself owns hundreds of vacant residential lots in these
same areas, and the Land Bank mission is to
strategically
assemble and enable the redevelopment of these properties.
A primary goal of the Land Bank is to partner with developers to
return vacant lots to active use by reselling them
for infill housing development, utilizing available tools and
incentives, including workforce housing development incentives.
However, the current regulatory framework presents substantial barriers to
achieving this objective.
At present, most vacant lots in these neighborhoods cannot be redeveloped
without obtaining zoning variance due to lot widths,
lot areas, or setbacks requirement that are inconsistent with the
historical development patterns of these areas.
This creates unnecessary expense, delay, and uncertainty for
developers, while also placing an ongoing administrative
burden on the Zoning Board of Appeal.
These cases may not always present true hardship, but rather the simple
fact that lots were platted and developed long before modern
zoning standard existed. At the same time, the housing market
faces significant challenges. Rising construction material cost,
labor shortage, persistent inflation, and higher interest rates
have made it unnecessarily difficult to build new homes that are
affordable or even feasible at current market rates.
Without regulatory flexibility, it is doubtful that meaningful infill
development on these lots could occur in the foreseeable future.
The proposed overlay district represents a measured, thoughtful
solution to these challenges by tailoring development standards to
reflect the reality of Warren's older neighborhood.
The overlay will do the following.
Number one, enable redevelopment of long-vacant residential lots.
Number two, reduce reliance on variance
while preserving the integrity of the zoning ordinance.
Number three, provide needed flexibility for developers without
compromising neighborhood character.
Number four, support the creation of quality infill housing that
strengthens and stabilizes existing neighborhoods.
Importantly, the overlay district does not promote
incompatible development. Rather, it allows new homes
to be constructed in a manner that is context
sensitive, consistent with existing
patterns, and supportive of neighborhood investment.
New construction on currently vacant lots will enhance surrounding
blocks, increase property tax base, and improve public safety
and aesthetics. The Warren Land Bank Authority strongly
supports maintaining the role of the Zoning Board of Appeal as
intended, which is granting variance only where a
true hardship exists. This ordinance achieves that goal by
addressing systematic issues through
legislative action rather
than placing pressures on the ZBA to solve them on a case-by-case
basis. For these reasons, I support the proposed zoning ordinance
amendment. This change is a critical step toward unlocking
infill development, addressing housing challenges, and
reinvesting in Warren's older neighborhood.
Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions or wish to
discuss the Land Bank's perspective further.
Respectively submitted by Mindy Moore, Acting Director and
Chairperson.We also have an attached
residential correspondence that we'll be reading.
So this was sent on May 6th,
2026. "Dear members of the Planning Commission, my name is
Paul, and my family and I live in Warren, and I wanted to take a moment to thank
you for the proposed overlay district ordinance.
I love that this is happening. A common goal made explicit in this
ordinance to adapt faster to housing and economic trends, moving
away from the static zoning and single-use suburban
rigidity, a real reform, low risk, and high return that allows
organic natural growth.
As a parent raising young children here, I truly appreciate the direction this is
going. We finally legalized missing middle housing that
is a structured shift allowing duplex, triplex, and
quadruplex, reducing minimum
size, lot size barriers to build more starter
family housing down to 3,000 to 6,000 square feet,
and it applies across a large area of the city.
It is reducing prohibitively large parking minimum
barriers quietly, yet significantly, to one
space per unit and allowing tandem parking and driveway
parking. This matters more than it looks, and it makes more project
financially viable. It reduces land waste on asphalt and
enables incremental infill.
Project less than four units bypass site plan review, and staff can
grant setback reduction, parking
reduction, lot size flexibility.
This will cut time and cost, unlocking small developers and
reduces political friction. I love the Van D**e overlay,
a real mixed use corridor. It allows mixed use, residential,
retail service, and has low
front setback allowed. Urban form allows for parking
reduction and gas station, car washes, auto uses,
and are prohibited. This encourages walkability
and an active streetscape form design.
This will turn destroyed corridors into places to love and
provide more value per acre, avoiding low productivity land
use in our valuable city center area.
This feels like a thoughtful and practical response to today's housing and
economical realities. It gives families like ours more options to
stay in the community as our needs change over time.
We have
rising house cost, limited options for younger families and seniors,
and a lot of unused land, especially along
our main corridor. I also appreciate that the proposed focus on
incremental change rather than drastical transformation, that
approach feels appropriate for a city like Warren.
I would encourage the city to think about a path to expand this more broadly over
time. I did want to respectfully
offer a few suggestions that could strengthen the impact of this
ordinance while keeping its spirit intact.
Number one, allow significantly more flexibility for
small mixed use and multi-family buildings.
For example, up to six to eight units along major corridors and
major road intersection where infrastructures
already exist. The current limit makes sense inside neighborhoods,
but along major roads like
the mile roads, Ryan, Hoover, Van D**e, we already have
infrastructures designed for higher intensity.
This will support local businesses and still remain compatible
in scale. This is not high-rise development.
It's still neighborhood scale, just in the right locations.
Number two, make it easy for small builders to participate.
One of the biggest opportunity here is not large developers, but small
local
builders and even homeowners. A fast-track approval
process would reduce cost, reduce delays, and make these
projects actually happen, not just
be legal on paper.
Number three, encourage adaptive reuse of older commercial
properties like vacant strip malls, car wash, gas stations, or
banquet halls into housing or mixed use spaces.
We have a lot of aging commercial properties that don't match
today's economic or feel abandoned.
If we make it easier to convert those
into housing or mixed use, we can increase the tax base for the
administration, reduce vacancy, and improve
the look and feel of our corridor for all of our residents.
This is one of the lowest risk ways to grow, and I believe everyone
would support that. I share these ideas with
respect and appreciation for the work already done.
This proposal feels like a strong step in the right direction, and I
hope the city continues building on it.
Thank you for your time and for your service to our community.
Sincerely, best regards, Paul Bontek."
Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Secretary.
Planning Commission's recommendation.
Mr. Chairman, before we continue, can we get his
name and address for the record,
and position?
Apologies. Hunter Manikis, economic development with the City of Warren,
One City Square.
Thank you.
Yes.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, sir.
The purpose for the public hearing is for the Planning Commission to receive
public comment. The Commission, in turn, recommends the Planning
Department and City Attorney for any suggested changes.
Therefore, it is recommended that the proposed amendments to Article 4 of
Appendix A of the City of Warren Code of Ordinances and to
add Article
4H to create the following special public purpose overlay
districts, Missing Middle Overlay District, and the Van D**e Mixed-Use
District on certain specific areas of land and to adapt the
development and use standards to shifting housing, economic, and
demographic trends be approved conditionally with additional
changes and then forwarded with the Commission's final recommendation to City
Council for approval.So I'll read off some of the changes that
we had
when reviewing the different sections of this ordinance.
So number one, Section
4H0.06, Permitted Uses, to
add also one-family dwellings, that's single family as well,
in addition to the duplex, triplex, and quads.
Number two, Section 4H.07,
remove the section with the strikethrough from the ordinance.
Number three, Section
4H.08,
Setbacks. So we want it to be changed from
side yards 10 feet combined as measured from the leading edge,
the overhang, less than five feet from the property line, will need to meet
MBC 2021 fire-resisting construction, and we want to change that
to 10 feet combined as measured from the leading edge
overhang, less than five feet from the property line, and will need to
meet Michigan Building Code fire-resisting construction as adopted by the
City of Warren.
Number four, Section 4H.08, Setbacks.
We want it to change from street side yard
and change to corner lot clear vision area.
Number five, Section 4H.08, Setbacks.
We want this to be added to the end of this section.
The planning director or building director may require an increase to the front,
rear, or side yard setbacks upon making a written finding that
one or more of the following conditions applies.
Number one, tree preservation. A setback increase is necessary to
protect the critical root zone of an existing tree regulated
under Chapter 38 of the Code of Ordinances,
as determined by the Urban Forestry Committee or its designee.
For purposes of this section, a regulated tree is any living
tree of six inches or greater in diameter at breast height,
DBH, measured four and one half feet above grade,
located on the subject lot or within five feet of the subject lot line.
Or number two, physical encroachment impact.
The proposed structure would, due to its proximity to an existing
structure on abutting lot, foreseeably prevent
required egress, block access to required mechanical
equipment, or violate fire separation requirements under the Michigan Building
Code.
Any setback increase required under this section shall be the
minimum necessary to address the identified condition.
Then number six, Section 4H.09, Building Height.
We want to remove the bolded section beginning with rooftop mechanical
equipment.
Number seven, Section 4H.10, Lot Coverage.
So we want to change from, "All structures combined shall meet a 40%
lot coverage," and change that to, "All structures combined shall not
exceed a 50% lot coverage."
And then number eight, Section 4H.13, Design
Standards.
And actually, we do have this on the screen also.
So change from no snout homes to change to no front garage
homes or snout homes.
And number nine, Section 4H.13, Design
Standards. So we just want to replace the image that we had in the draft
ordinance to a new image, which is on the screen.
Number 10, Section 4H.16, Site
Plan and Administrative Review.
So we want to just remove this third paragraph.
And this is the paragraph that begins with, "The planning director, building
director for lots outside of purview of site plan review,"
and it goes on. So we just want to remove that whole section.
And number 11.
Now, these begin at the Van D**e Mixed-Use District.
So this is where these changes are from.
So that completed all the changes we had for the Missing Middle overlay
section, and now this is the Van D**e Mixed-Use section.
So number 11, Section 4H.20, Permitted
Uses. So we want to add certain uses under these different categories.
So we want to add retail service centers specializing in shipping,
packaging, printing, and business support services under Permitted Uses,
Professional Services. Add screen printing under
Permitted Uses, Professional Services.
Add specialized small-scale entertainment business, for
example, karaoke, escape rooms, under Entertainment.
We want to add art studios and classes under Permitted Uses,
Fitness/Arts. We want to add tailor and seamstress
services under Permitted Uses, Personal and Business Services.
And number 12, Section 4H.22, Maximum Height.
This is the same
section that we added to the Missing Middle district.
So we want to add this to the end of the section.
The planning director, building director, or planning commission may require an
increase to the front, rear, or side yard setbacks upon making a
written finding that one or more of the following conditions applies.
Number one, tree preservation. A setback increase is necessary to protect the
critical root zone of an existing tree regulated under
Chapter 38 of the Code of Ordinances, as determined by the Urban
Forestry Committee or its designee.
For purposes of this section, a regulated tree is any living tree
of six inches or greater in diameter at breast height,
measured four and one half feet above grade, located on the subject lot or within
five feet of the subject lot line. Or number two, physical
encroachment impact. The proposed structure would, due to its proximity to an
existing structure on an abutting lot,
foreseeably prevent required egress,
block access to required mechanical equipment, or violate fire
separation requirements under the Michigan Building Code.
Any setback increase required under this section shall be the minimum necessary
to address the identified condition.
Okay, number 13, Section 4H.23, Prohibited Uses.
It's a word change, change from car washes and change to
auto washes.Number 14, Section
4H.24, Setbacks.
We want to add a Section E, Corner Site Clearance and
Building Design. And this begins with, "At the
intersection of two public streets, a clear vision area shall be established
and maintained in accordance with the following.
Number one, a clear vision triangle.
A triangular clear vision area shall be established by measuring
15 feet along each lot line from the
intersection of the street right-of-way lines and connecting those
points. Within this area, no building, structure, wall, fence, sign,
landscaping, or other obstruction exceeding 30 inches in height
shall be permitted except as otherwise provided in this section.
Number two, permitted building encroachments.
Notwithstanding the above, buildings within the Van D**e mixed-use
district may be constructed at or up to the
front and side property lines, including within the clear vision triangle, provided
one or more of the following design treatments are incorporated to
maintain adequate visibility at the intersection.
A, a chamfered or angled building corner.
B, a recessed corner entrance or setback at the ground floor.
C, a visually permeable corner design incorporating glazing,
open air space, or similar architectural treatment.
D, structural support columns in accordance with subsection three
below.
Number three, structural columns.
Structural columns may be located within the clear vision area
provided A, no individual column exceeds 24
inches by 24 inches, which is 2 feet by 2 feet,
as measured at its widest point. B, columns are limited in number
and spacing such as that they do not collectively create a continuous or
near-continuous visual obstruction.
C, the area between columns remains open and unobstructed to preserve
visibility for motorists and pedestrians.
And D, columns are integrated into the building design and do not function
as a solid wall or screening element.
Number four, prohibited conditions.
The following shall not be permitted within the clear vision area.
A, solid building walls or facades without openings or transparency.
B, multiple structural elements arranged in a manner that creates the effect of a
continuous wall or visual barrier.
C, any design that in practice obstructs visibility for vehicles or pedestrians at
the intersection. Five, the intent.
The standards of this section are intended to allow buildings to be constructed at
or near zero-foot setbacks in a manner consistent with a
pedestrian-oriented mixed-use environment while maintaining adequate sight
lines for safe vehicle and pedestrian movement and intersections."
And number 15, Van D**e mixed-use district comments
Section 4H.17, Purpose A through
Section 4H.23, Prohibited
Uses. Section 4H.17, Purpose A, change the
last sentence to, "This overlay zone shall supersede the
existing underlying zoning districts."
Then add the following sentence at the end of the paragraph, "When residentially
zoned parcels existing within the boundaries of the Van D**e
mixed-use district are subject to development or redevelopment changes, the
missing middle overlay district regulations shall be applied."
Section 4H.17, Purpose B, add
"avenue" at the end of the second sentence.
Section 4H.17, Purpose H,
end the paragraph at the word corridors and remove, "To
allow flexible development centered on promoting a vibrant atmosphere."
Section 4H.22, Maximum Height, relocate
the last sentence between the second and third paragraphs.
Section 4H.23, Prohibited Uses, remove the
bolding from the last three bullet-pointed items,
and then remove the bolding from the word expansion and add the word only at the
end of the sentence. So planning staff recommends the above changes are necessary
after further review of the document by the planning and economic development
staff.
And this ends the recommendation.
Thanks, Ms. Michelle.
Thank you.
This is a public hearing, but before we get into it, I want to introduce our ex
officio
Councilman Newman.
Thank you.
Welcome to the meeting.
Thank you.
This is a public hearing. If you want to speak on this item, come up, state your
name and address for the record, and you'll have three minutes to speak.
Hello. Um-
Uh, excuse me, ma'am. One second.
Do you... He has the slides, yeah. Okay.
Okay.
Give me a timer that doesn't work.
No. It's under three minutes, right? I'll be quick.
Okay.
But they're putting that on.
I'll be kind of quick.
Can you drop the mic a little bit-
Okay
... so you're talking into it?
Is that better?
I think.
Okay.
I hope so.
My name is Nicole Ross. I'm with Spear Partners,
and I want to thank everybody for their time this evening.
Just kind of in support of the overlay,
if you can go to slide two, we are
currently developing homes
on a small scale within the city
with the purpose of bringing workforce housing back and also putting
vacant land back into productive use.
These two houses here,
they're proof of concept of what this zoning overlay can do for the city of
Warren. They're real homes. They're built in South Warren with a great
partnership, and we're not theorizing about how this can work.
We're already doing it. Can you go to the next slide?
When we looked at the housing problem in South Warren, we worked backwards from one
basic question, why did this type of housing stop getting built?
South Warren was built through a combination of small, repeatable floor plans,
30-year mortgages, stable employment, and permissive zoning that allowed
smaller lots and smaller homes. Construction costs, taxes, fees, and
zoning constraints all compounded together which allowed naturally
affordable housing at scale. As mentioned prior before, the
auto-centric standards with the deeper setbacks, the larger lot
minimums, and parking mandates
really kind of ironically hurt
those and builders being able to do things.
Builders... walked away from these small lots, not because the demand
disappeared. It just made these lots and
homes illegal to build with the new zoning.
So our approach has focused on reducing friction in four areas:
lowering the construction costs,
reducing the zoning barriers,
using low-cost city-owned land, and using tax tools to improve the
feasibility.
No single piece solves it alone, but together they create a workable path.
Can you go to the next? Thank you.
One of the things that has been a concern for many people
is the rental housing. What we're proposing
is not an absentee investor model.
These homes will be locally owned, locally managed with an accountable
party to the city of Warren. Build to rent, in this case, is also a
sequencing strategy. In neighborhoods where appraisals and financing have
been suppressed for years, professionally managed rental housing helps
establish new comparables, stabilize blocks, and attract additional private
investment. Over time, this creates the conditions for more for sale
housing and more owner occupancy.
In fact, we're integrating that product as well.
You can go to the next one. Since we have instituted this in
late 2025, we were able to get a pilot approved.
We started the zoning discussions.
The first homes were delivered, those two that you saw on the first slide, and we
have since applied for four additional permits that we are working
on. Next one.
The four ingredients to make this work is the modular construction, the low
land basis, the reduced taxes and fees, but most importantly, the permissive zoning
through the overlay. If any one of those pieces disappears,
things break down quickly. Is that my three minutes?
Okay.
You can go through the next couple of slides
real quick. But more or less, it's a three-bedroom, two-bath home.
Honestly, putting a modest home under these
standards that we have now was a big issue.
We also, on the setbacks in most of these existing neighborhoods,
they vary significantly anyway.
Requiring a rigid
modern setback doesn't preserve neighborhood character.
In many cases, it actually conflicts with the historic development pattern that
already existed.
Really, at the end of the day, we're urging
the planning commission to adopt this
so that we can continue to bring Warren back to where it
needs to be, like it was mentioned with other cities.
And we
know that Warren can be the model for practical workforce housing done the
right way. And we urge the planning commission to recommend approval to
council tonight.
Thank you, ma'am.
Thank you.
See, you missed it. I got connection.
One second, please.
Okay.
All right. Does anyone else like to speak on this item?
Come upstate your name and address for the record and you have three minutes to
speak.
Seeing none, we'll turn over to commission.
Chair,
I make a motion to approve a discussion.
Support.
There's a motion by Commissioner Holowaty, supported by Commissioner Doucette.
Go with discussion?
Yes. Can that young lady from Spears step forward again?
She's not the petitioner.
Oh, she's not?
Oh, okay then. My mistake. Hunter, can you step forward then?
I didn't know who to direct this question to. I apologize.
Got to fix this again. Me and Nicole aren't exactly the same height.
Okay. Well, she did mention a couple things in her
nice presentation.
As far as the cost per the homes, do you have any ideas?
I know a lot of this is focusing in the south end of Warren-
Mm-hmm
... this overlay district. But, do you have any ideas what the
cost per home is going to be?
Idea. Ballpark.
Yes. There's a few different ways that these modular homes can be designed.
So,
there's various models that could be implemented.
I would say the standard is about
$225,000 per home.
And typically, unfortunately in the area, if you build a
home for 230, 235, it'll only sell for about
200,000. So it's very much so economically
infeasible to build in the area.
Mm-hmm.
And a- as was mentioned, that's why the pilot program was approved by
council, which gives some tax incentives, forgoes some of that
tax revenue to get this reinvestment that's much needed.
Because unfortunately, just right now, to just build and sell, you would actually
be losing money, is the state of the market.
I understand. So these are going to be rent to buy or for
sale?
Right now, there's two proposed models.
One of them is going to be build to rent, which will
just be for rentals. And then there's also,
we're exploring the rent to sell as well.
Or sorry, build to sell as well. And there's been cooperation with the
state,
and MSHDA, the Michigan
Housing... I forget the whole acronym, but MSHDA-
Right
... works in housing.
And they're trying to find some funding to make this work for South Warren
as well, where then we could have a for sale model
Okay. So you're saying for rent, would that be just local?
Can I just clarify one thing?
Sure. Yeah, thank you.
But the ordinance itself would allow for anybody who wants to even build their
own home, it-
Okay
... or somebody else to. It's not contingent on...
That's one model for a local developer, how they're planning
to put those homes in. But the text amendment, it could be
anybody-
Okay
... financing their own home and that sort of thing.
So that's not part of the ordinance necessarily.
That's the economic strategy of how they could be
developed.
Okay. Thank you.
Okay. Chair, I yield the floor.
Anyone else like to speak?
Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Dusek.
It wouldn't be a meeting without it.
A couple of questions. First of all, have you
run this Van D**e mixed-use district past the TIFA
board?
Yes. So pretty much everything that's called for within the Van D**e
mixed-use district is in the city master plan, as well as the Van D**e Corridor
plan and the Van D**e Corridor implementation plan, which we
had designed last year by some MSU students.
They presented it to the TIFA board, and all of our conversations, they're
incredibly excited about this.
A formal approval I don't think has been given, but they have all expressed their
support for it,
either at the meetings during comment or just in conversations.
So they're all very supportive of it, yes.
I think it would behoove all of us to get
TIFA on board with this.
I served on the TIFA board for a rather long time, and
we had a number of developments that if they would've gone in, would've been
gorgeous. But they pulled at the last minute.
And as far as the houses now, Baker is building
houses down there that are just terrific.
Now I'm hoping those are to sell as opposed to rent.
Yes. Those ones, she's been able to garner some support from the state and
MSHDA, as well as tap some Brownfield funds for tax
abatements. And so hers are a for-sale model.
Very good.
Next, easements. How does this
overlay, does it affect easements, to get rid of an
alley, to
split an alley between two lots? How does that work?
I believe it would be the same. I don't think that it really addresses that.
Michelle could probably speak on it. I'm no expert in that area.
Thank you, Michelle.
Yeah. Sorry.
There would be no effect. Yeah. If somebody wished to vacate an
alley, the same process would apply.
So this-
Oh, so the overlay won't affect that at all?
No. If an alley is already existing as a public alley, that would remain a public
alley. It doesn't have any effect on that.
All right.
Last but not least,
it was mentioned that removing
rooftop
HVAC units?
It was just the section. Just remove that section, because it
had to do with
screening on the roof, but that probably wouldn't really apply.
So we just wanted to remove that one section-
Okay
... from the
missing middle overlay.
All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, sir. Anyone else like to speak? Mr. Hoeck?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Okay. I would like to ask you,
so what will be the impact
of changing the
existing ordinance to the new ordinance?
What
benefit will get the citizens?
Yeah. So it wouldn't affect anyone that's there right now.
This wouldn't change anyone's existing home to being in a
state of
illegal noncompliance or anything like that.
What this would do would be to allow for new people to build
on these lots, as right now I believe you need a 60-foot
wide lot, in our current zoning, to be able to
legally build on it. The vast majority, there's about 250
vacant residential lots specifically in this area that we're
addressing, and the vast majority of them, probably
66%, are smaller than 40 feet, or 40 feet.
So that unlocks the ability for buy right developers to be able
to come in, or anyone looking to build a home at all, to come in
and build on these lots that right now it's strictly not
allowed. They would need to go to ZBA and get variances to
do so.
Okay. So it looks like lots are going to be smaller, right
now?
So the lots are already existing as 40 feet,
so it won't decrease any lot sizes already.
We have a large inventory of vacant lots that are
a smaller size than is allowed to build on, and this will unlock the
ability for people to build on these lots.
So what will be the impact on the taxes?
Because there is a big issue on taxes, people talking in Warren
especially.
Mm-hmm.
So taxes will be reduced, increasing or decrease?
I would say it's a net neutral. But in my opinion, I think that because
you're adding more people to the tax base, more money to the schools from the
state, all that, I believe that it would reduce taxes in the long term.
But that would be a more macro view of things rather than on
each individual home that's built isn't going to have any effect on that.
But when you look at the big picture and adding all of these new houses,
all these new residents, there's going to be more of a tax base to draw from, and
it would have a net neutral. And in the long term,
essentially, there would be more tax money to draw from, so you
wouldn't need to have as high of taxes.
But that's big picture, down the road, so...
Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much.
Anyone else like to speak on this?
Mr. Chair, may I please?
Commissioner Ansar?
Yes.
So this district, I just want to clear that the district started from Van
D**e and all the way Hoover, and 8 Mile to Stevenson,
right?
I believe it starts at Sherwood and runs all the way to...
So there's the two different overlays.
I believe that the missing middle, which is the residential, runs from Sherwood
all the way to Eastpointe,
and along Stevens Road.
So it goes...
Perhaps Michelle can specify here.
I have a map.
Sherwood, right?
On the west.
Yeah. Okay.
Yeah.
Yes. So that's Sherwood on the west, which is
pretty close to Van D**e-
Yeah. Sherwood
... but still to the west, and all the way over to Eastpointe. Correct?
Eastpointe.
And then-
Beechwood, I think, is the last
... north will be Stevenson, right? Stevenson Road?
Yep. Stevens is the northernmost boundary, correct.
Yes.
So my question was, I see that article section
4H23. So I was a little bit confused about that.
Section 423, I see that a few of the business is going to
be prohibited. So existing business, all of those
business, they still will be there, and new will not be
allowed in near future in this district.
So it won't affect the existing businesses.
Yes.
This is for new businesses that would come in.
So any existing business wouldn't be affected by this.
Any existing, like a gas station, auto sales, car wash, still will be
there, but-
Correct. Yeah. They're totally fine
... if new coming, any gas station, car wash, vehicle
repair shop, firearm shop, sales, those will
not be approved there anymore-
Correct
... after we approve this.
Correct.
Okay. I just wanted to clear this. So that will be prohibited after we approve
this, city council approve this. All those prohibited list,
they cannot be in this district anymore.
In that specific district.
Specific district.
Not citywide, just this-
I know. That specific district
... yeah. The specific district. Yeah.
All right. Thank you. Thank you for clearing all those.
Anyone else like to speak on this?
I have a couple questions, Michelle.
I was going through it again, and
I noticed that because the overlay and missing middle, that it's article
4H.
But then what I'm reading down in division one is
4-A is general.
So shouldn't that be maybe
4-HA? Because keeping-
In between... Oh, I'm so sorry to cut you off.
I was going to say that some of those types of things, the
numbering, assuming this is approved,
if it's recommended for approval, those types of edits and the addition of
these additional recommendations will be fixed prior to it
being sent to city council. So these are some changes that the attorney's
office work the numbering in, and they'll fix any of those numbering
issues-
Okay
... and letters.
All right.
And they'll be cleaned up before it moves further.
All right. Very good.
Yeah. Thanks.
Thank you.
Okay. Anyone else? No?
That was a motion by Commissioner Halawati, supported by Commissioner Douze.
Roll call.
Commissioner Halawati?
Yes.
Commissioner Douze?
Yes.
Commissioner Ansir?
Yes.
Commissioner Hayde?
Yes.
Commissioner Hawk?
Yes.
Commissioner Mori votes yes. Commissioner Meineke?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Smith?
Yes, to approve.
Good evening. Good luck with the project, and I know it was a
mouthful for everybody to speak everything, but at least we have a better
understanding of what you're trying to do. And thank you.
Happy to help, and thank you all for your time this evening and consideration.
Really do appreciate it.
Thank you.
Good work.
Item number 6B.
Item number 6B, site plan for new marijuana adult use
retail establishment located on the east side of Dequindre Road,
approximately 977.37 feet
south of 11 Mile Road. 26620 Dequindre
Road, Section 19, Marjin Samona and Dequindre,
26620 LLC PSP
260017. Thank you.
Thank you. Good evening, sir. You want to state your name and address for the
record, and tell us a little bit about your project.
Good evening. My name is Robert Zora, on behalf of 26620 Dequindre
LLC.
Address is 1100 West Maple Road, Troy, Michigan.
This project is an adult use marijuana establishment.
It's located at 26620 Dequindre Road.
And
I did have an opportunity to review...
Well, I guess I'll start with, it's about a 4,400 square foot building,
with a drive-through, and then surrounded by
parking,
as depicted on the site plan.
I did have a chance to review the staff recommendations and comments.
And many of them are pretty easy to
address within the site plan. I did have a couple
questions regarding some of the more substantive changes that the
staff requests, and we'll take the lead from the commission on whether the
planning commissioner prefers that we submit a new application or whether this
could be addressed administratively after the fact with a submission.
But,
mostly, I think the staff recommendations call
for elimination of
the parking
both along the northern side of the property, the western side of the property, and
then immediately right
in front of the building, on the western side of the building,
to allow for a 30-foot basically escape lane
around the drive-through there.
And so, I think we'd like to preserve some of that parking.
We can eliminate some of it. We'd like to prever-preserve some of it just obviously
for traffic, but then also in the event this location is used
for
something else in the future if the establishment doesn't succeed financially.
So
my question really is, are we able to,
administratively after the fact,
remove that barrier along the
drive-through there to allow for that
30-foot escape
lane along the lane for the drive-through?
But other than that, I'll answer any of the commission's
questions.
Thank you, sir. Correspondence?
Correspondence. Taxas current building.
Building requires building permit, plan review
application for proposed scope of work, engineering.
Preliminary review of this site yielded the following comments from the engineering
division. Number one, show and identify the location of all existing and
proposed underground utilities in the vicinity of the project, including their
sizes and connection. Number two, show how you intend to drain the
parcel. Number three, site shall comply with current City of
Warren Storm Water Ordinance. Detention and
pre-treatment shall be required. Provide a stormwater narrative.
Four, 30-foot ROW dedication shall be required and
formally recorded.
Number five, the outside perimeter of all paved and parking spaces shall be
minimum six-inch concrete curb and gutter.
Number six, provide accurate dimensions on engineering scale.
Number seven, dumpster pad shall be minimum eight-inch concrete.
AT&T. AT&T does not object to the proposed facility.
We do have facilities across the property, but we do not
expect them to be affected, including major lines feeding the
adjacent cell site. Please advise the petitioner to
contact us as soon as possible if any conflicts arise.
Comcast. We have no conflicts with this proposal, but we have aerial and
underground facilities in the area. DTE.
DTE Electric Company has reviewed the site plan for new marijuana
retail facility. DTE has no objection to this request
impacting 26620 Dequindre Road, Section 20, per the
site plan.
However, the applicant should contact DTE new business group
at 1-800-338-0178
before construction starts to create a work order to be
assigned to a DTE planner to assist with the planning process.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at
586-783-1978.
MCPWO. The Macomb County Public Works Office,
MCPWO, has reviewed the site plan for the project referenced
above and has determined this site is under the jurisdiction
of MCPWO. This project is impacting and/or
discharging to a county asset, including one or more of the following:
a county drain, county road right away, or other.
See Table 1.1 in the MCPWO's Procedures and
Design Standards Manual for Stormwater Management,
revised on March 1st, 2024, for further explanation.
Any site disturbance over one acre will require the proposed site to
conform with the MCPWO's Procedure and
Design Standards Manual for Stormwater Management,
revised March 1st, 2024.
Review Section 5 for stormwater detention and drain
easement requirements prior to the site plan approval.
It is highly recommended that the design consultant and land
owner schedule an engineering meeting with this office
to discuss how our standards may apply by contacting
Heather Morin at
heather.morin@macombgov.org
or
586-307-8280. Thank
you.
Thank you, Madam Secretary. Planning department's recommendation.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The recommendation , excuse me, is as
follows. It is
recommended that the site plan for new marijuana adult use
retail establishment
be approved with the standard conditions of the planning commission,
and more specifically, number one, five copies of revised
site plans shall be submitted indicating the following.
A, add the existing two communication towers
and facilities as well as the access
easement to the site plan and to the site chart.
Include the access easement description on the plan.
1B,
add proposed height
of the new building to the site plan.
1C,
a note shall be provided stating all outdoor retail sales of
items shall be prohibited on the site.
1D,
location. The location of the order board shall be
indicated on the plan. 1E, the
five-foot wide, six-inch high concrete barrier
that separates the drive-through lane from a two-way
maneuvering lane shall have the following
modifications. And number one, an escape
lane shall be provided in the corner
turn area of the barrier for those persons who change their
minds about an order.
And number two, the barrier shall have a raised
six-inch concrete curb line along
its entire perimeter. Not a slab,
but a curb along the entire
perimeter.The area in the middle shall be
landscaped with shrubs to be maintained no higher than two
feet.
1F, a note shall be provided
stating open storage of materials shall not be permitted on
the site.
1G, in areas where concrete curbing
is proposed around the parking lot, the parking bumper
curbs shall be removed.
1H, provide the following changes to the parking and
maneuvering lanes on the site.
Number one, the planning staff recommends that the west
11 parking spaces in the front setback
along Dequindre Road
are eliminated, and that the area be redesigned as a
landscape area
approximately 25 feet wide in width,
with a 30-foot wide maneuvering lane abutting
along the east edge,
as you can
see there on the picture
of the site plan.
Number two, all of the parking spaces along the north
property line shall be removed. The 30-foot wide maneuvering
lane will abut
the five-foot wide barrier along its
entirety. And on there you can see the little green
dots showing the shrubbery line, but that's also where that
barrier is for the drive-through.
Let's see. Number three, the area along the north line shall be
approximately 12 feet in width
and follow the north edge of the 30-foot wide
maneuvering lane. This area shall be landscaped.
Number four, the double banked parking area
east of the building shall,
as a system,
be relocated nine to 10 feet.
Be relocated east.
I used the phone.
Nine to 10 feet.
Remove the bumper curbs in the middle.
Number five.
Okay, that's the maneuvering
lane to the east of the system
in number four above shall be reduced
from 40
feet seven inches to 30 or 31 feet in
width.
Number six, the front setback line of 25 feet
shall be carried
through to the south side of the driveway to
Dequindre Road, eliminating one parking space
and replacing it with landscaping.
That's in the far corner
as you're looking right there. Thank you.
And number seven, the corner area in the southwest corner of the building,
okay, that green pie-shaped piece, just
simply should be landscaped and be provided with
landscaping.
Okay. 1I, the site data chart indicates
86 parking spaces, including four
accessible. However, the plan shows
101 parking spaces.
With the redesign suggested by the planning staff,
32 parking spaces would be eliminated.
However, 69 parking spaces would remain,
including four accessible.
1J,
the concrete base of a light pole
located on the north property line, approximately
82 feet from the west property line, shall be removed and noted
on the site plan.
1K, as part of the parking lot redesign, the planning staff
recommends the curbing and landscaping
to be extended into the southwest corner of the
property in the area of the driveway.
1L, a note shall be provided stating
the four-foot high fencing located along the west
property line shall be removed. The west
50 feet of the chain link fence along the south
property line
shall be removed.
1M, a trash enclosure with walls, bollards, and a
concrete base exists along the north property
line next to the communication
facility fence.
The enclosure
shall be removed because the petitioner is proposing a
new trash enclosure near the southeast corner of the parcel.
The petitioner may consider repairing and
reusing the existing
trash enclosure,
and indicating it on the site plan.
Condition number two, two copies of revised landscape
plans shall be submitted indicating the following,
and that is, additional landscaping shall be provided in the following
areas: A, along the north property line,
B, in the middle of the concrete curbed
drive-through area or barrier,
and two, C, in the area southwest of the
southeast corner of the building.
Condition number three, the following variance may need to be
obtained from the Zoning Board of Appeals prior to the release of the
site plan to the building division, and that is to hard
surface
25 feet from the west front property line.
That's Dequindre RoadThat's supposed to be a
minimum front setback of 50 feet.
And so, if approved, the variance shall be
added to the revised site plan. And
number four, a performance bond in the amount of
$84,000 be posted according to the estimated
cost of $2,800,000
by the petitioner. So with that, Mr.
Chair, the recommendation is submitted.
Thank you, Mr. Ward.
Thank you.
This is a public hearing. If anybody would like to speak on this item, please come
up, state your name and address for the record, and you'll have three minutes to
speak.
Seeing none, we'll turn it over to the commission.
Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion to approve this with discussion.
A lot of discussion.
Support Beneke.
There's a motion by Commissioner Ducey, supported by Commissioner Beneke.
Discussion?
Mr. Chairman,
a couple of things.
Where's the petitioner?
He's hiding behind the council person.
Do you understand all the requirements that have been laid out,
first of all?
Yes.
Okay.
My fellow commissioner, Heidi,
and I were looking at the lines that are right over
your
drive-through, if you will.
Are you moving all those lines?
Because if you look up, there's no way in the world you can put much of
anything past there.
You're going to have to move a whole bunch of lines that are along the north
edge of your property.
Did you mean the power lines?
Yes.
Yeah.
I believe the
building height is reflected in the elevation plan that was
submitted. My understanding is that they don't conflict, but certainly, if they do
conflict, we'll have to address that and move them.
They're pretty low.
Are they?
They're hanging pretty low. I don't know the last time you took a look at it.
Yes, I've been to the site, but I apologize, I'm not remembering the lines.
Most people don't have a tendency of looking up.
Sure.
No, certainly, if it's an issue, we'll have to address it.
I think it is, and you will.
Did you buy some of the Crash Landing property, or
all of it, or what?
I don't know what the property was before we purchased it.
The property that was north of there.
No, I think this is the one parcel.
It's one parcel that was purchased, and then there used to be a building
on the lot that was raised at one point.
That's Crash Landing.
Okay.
That's the one I'm asking about.
Sure.
Something doesn't look right to me anyway,
because you have that building, and if you take a look
at this,
you're going around that building in red and
then you're going north of that.
If it's one parcel, then I'm surprised about it.
I believe there's currently a fence that sits, which one of the rec-
There is
... There is. One of the recommendations was to remove the fence line, but there is
a fence that divides those two properties currently.
But if you take a look at this and the other picture that you just
had up of the
print,
are you cutting down the building or what?
I'm sorry, I'm not following. Sorry.
The Steka building that you've got there.
I just want to clarify. This is the Crash Landing parcel.
Doesn't look like it, but it is. It was all parking
at one time. If you want to go on-
Yeah
... Google Earth and look at it 10 years ago, it was still there,
and it's the same property. Those-
What's the-
... facilities, the communication facilities, were part of the property.
Right. No, and I agree with that. But if
it's the Steka restaurant, the old Steka restaurant,
you're
going north of that.
No, this is the property. The Pho restaurant to
the north was there,
and there's nothing more.
This is the property.
All right, then.
Absolutely.
Then I'm somewhat confused, but okay.
All right.
We'll take it from there. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, sir. Anyone else like to speak on this?
Just for clarification's sake.
Mr. Heidi.
We're speaking of the vacant lot then, correct?
The vacant lot that the Crash Landing-
Was on.
Yes.
Okay, so that's where it's going to be a new construction.
That's right. It's currently a vacant lot.
The-
Okay.
It's on the register.
Okay. Thank you.
So the old Steka restaurant has nothing to do with this?
I misunderstood what you were saying.
The Steka restaurant, zero to do with it.
Okay. That's what I thought.
Thank you.
You might not be able to see that from the screen.
And then I was looking at something totally different.
Yeah.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, sir. Don't feel bad, I did the same thing.
I went over and looked at it and I said, "Oh, this building's here," and then after
we get the new photos-
I thought that building was the portion that we're looking at.
That's what I thought, too, but then I found out it wasn't, so.
All right. I just want to clarify something.
Initially, you had
some photos, I think, that you were looking at-
Yeah
... that were incorrect.And we replaced those, and we
sent everyone
copies of the new site, which is the vacant site.
And that's what it was. That's what it was.
I apologize for that.
No, that's fine. Thank you very much.
Thank you, sir. Anyone else like to speak on this?
Okay. That makes more sense.
Good evening, sir.
Thank you.
So are you okay with all the recommendations?
I think I addressed them in sort of my opening statement there.
It is a lot of parking that we'd be eliminating with the staff recommendations.
I believe
we'd be eliminating almost 30 or so parking spots.
And so,
my thought is, if it might require...
Because we just received this on Friday, so we haven't really had an opportunity to
digest it with our construction team and our project managers.
But
if we
do make substantive revisions
to the application, I suspect that would require a new application,
including perhaps even shifting the building back because that would allow for the
50-foot setback that was recommended in the staff recommendations.
But
I'm trying to think of ways that would allow us to preserve that parking
and create sort of that escape lane,
without having to eliminate some of that parking, and I'm
just thinking that perhaps moving that building back might
address a couple of those issues that are
in the report.
The other question I have is,
you've got a drive-through,
so
how much parking are you really going to need?
Because a lot of your traffic's going to be drive-through.
They're not going to really be parking.
And the people that are parking there, they're going to come in and buy supplies.
Is that what that is, or?
Correct. It's going to be sort of dual service.
It is 4,400 square feet, the building, so there will be a lot of traffic in
and out,
in addition to the drive-through.
So it's not a small building,
and there will be an in-store service component.
So people will be coming in and browsing and seeing what they want to get, and-
That's correct. Yep
... what are your hours of operation?
We'll, of course, comply with any city ordinance.
Our other locations close,
depending on which municipality, but they close 9 or 10:00 PM.
But we'll comply with whatever the city ordinances are with respect to hours of
operation.
All right.
Thank you, sir. Does anyone else have anything?
Seeing none, that was a motion by Commissioner Duza, supported by Commissioner
Binecki. Roll call.
Commissioner Duza?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Binecki?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Ansir?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Hady?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Halawati?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Hawk?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Moribot, yes. Commissioner Smith?
Yes to approve. Good luck with the project, sir.
Thank you.
And if you've got any issues, you can always work them out with the planning
commission and see.
Thank you. And if we do want to redo it, we'll submit a new application and-
Well, you may not have to. You talk to the planning department-
That would save me a lot of time
... and be able to work something out.
Okay. Thank you.
All right. Thank you, sir. Have a good evening. Good luck with your project.
Item number 6C.
Item number 6C, site plan for open storage of commercial vehicles
located on the south side of 14 Mile Road,
approximately 1,250.4 feet
east of Mount Road, 650014 Mile Road,
Section 4, IN Quint and 14 Mac
LP, Delin Shabo, and AA Parking,
PSP 260021. Thank you.
Thanks, Madam Secretary. Is the petitioner here this evening?
Yeah.
Good evening, sir.
My name is Jeffrey Graham. I'm the project architect.
I'm with Kevteq and Associates. This is the owner of
the business leasing this area,
Dylan Shambo. And I just want to start off with
a little bit of history. This used to be, I believe, the Art Van building-
Yeah
... warehouse, giant warehouse. And what they did, and when they first
built this property,
that use has never changed. It's always been a truck
storage area or parking area, and that's where Art Van kept all their
trucks.
When Art Van went out of business, somebody bought the
property. That person then divided up...
Nobody had any need for that big of a building,
so the landlord broke up the building into
four or five businesses. Nobody wanted the parking of the
trucks, so he leased that out separate,
and that's where my client came in.
And so it's always been a truck place.
And then there's a piece of land directly,
the green area right there, which is on the property.
They never developed that for the parking because that's a
giant, 20-foot-tall berm that
separates the truck parking lot from the park next
door.
Right.
So, what we're asking is that we continue the use of it, that it's
always been used for, which is trucking.
We've met with the planning department, and they came up with some
recommendations. We have on site...
And as you know, it's gravel. Gravel is what you use for trucks,
big trucks, because big trucks will
destroy asphalt.
But as far as gravel goes, every six months, you bring out
a bulldozer, and you smooth out all the ruts, and you
start off from fresh. So that's why gravel is
almost used exclusively for large truck parking like this or
truck maneuvering.
What we have, the
one structure that we're putting on there is a-Mobile
office.
What they want us to do is put a footing underneath it,
which is fine. We have no problem with that.
And then there's also some trash dumpsters on the side.
Now, keep in mind, this is behind a huge industrial building, and it's hidden.
It's completely surrounded by industry or
a berm-
Right
... or a park. It's the skate park
to the other side of it.
So,
what we'd like to do is just maintain what we have right there, and we'd be more
than happy to add the footings to the
office trailer, because they want security guard in there over the weekends,
that kind of thing, and then also put two dumpster
enclosures for each dumpster.
All right. Thank you, sir. Correspondence?
Correspondence. Taxes, current. Building. Building has no issues.
Engineering. Preliminary review of this site yielded no comments from the
engineering division. Police. The Warren Police Department has reviewed the
submitted site plan and does not foresee any issues at this time. AT&T.
AT&T does not object to this proposal for open storage. Comcast.
We have aerial and underground facilities in the area, but we have no
conflicts with the proposal.
DTE. DTE Electric Company has reviewed the site plan for open storage of
commercial vehicles. DTE has no objection to this request
impacting 6500 14 Mile Road, Section 4, per
the site plan provided. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me at 586-783-1978.
MCDR. Macomb County Department of Roads, MCDR, has received
and reviewed the enclosed preliminary plan for the above-mentioned site.
MCDR has no objection to proposed development at the above-mentioned
site. If you have any questions, please feel
free to contact me at
586-463-8671.
MCPWO. The Macomb County Public Works Office,
MCPWO, has reviewed the site plan for the project referenced above
and has determined the proposed site disturbance is less than one acre
and will not require stormwater review from this office.
If a no objection letter is required, please forward your request to
wesley.jonick@macombgov.org. Prior to construction,
a soil erosion permit may be required from this office.
Contact our soil erosion department at
586-469-5327 for
more information regarding same.
We also have an attached residential correspondence that I'll also go ahead and
read. This was sent from Jacob Superior
on May 11, 2026.
"Dear Planning Commission members,
as the owner and property manager of Warren Village Apartment at
6380 East 14 Mile Road, we are stewards
of a community of 48 one and two-bedroom
homes located just to the west of the proposed site.
On behalf of our residents, we submitted this letter to share how the adjacent site
affects our residents.
Our buildings have been here since 1989.
While our residents accepted the industrial activity is part of this
neighborhood, the formal addition of open commercial vehicle storage,
in addition to other current unapproved uses
immediately adjacent to the residential boundary, represents a
meaningful infestation of use that deserves
careful conditioning by the commission.
Our residents have already been affected by a noticeable change in
truck traffic on the subject property.
Trucks have been routinely using the western entrance of
6500 East 14 Mile Road, which runs directly along our
shared property line, instead of the main entrance.
The current site plan includes a gatehouse intended to prevent truck
traffic from using this entrance.
However, the gatehouse has been disengaged.
The route that trucks use was site planned and constructed as a
parking lot.
This western entrance was not designed as a primary truck access
point under the previously approved site plan, and the current pattern
of use was neither anticipated nor mitigated in the
original planning.
We respectfully urge the commission to require the applicant
under any site plan amendment to address these concerns by
constructing buffers and/or use restrictions.
Should staff or the applicant wish to discuss the matter
directly, we welcome the opportunity to collaborate on a solution
that serves all parties. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely, Jacob Shapirio, Event Home Management Company
owner and property manager, Warren Village Apartments."
And for the berm-
That's it. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Secretary. Planning department's recommendation?
Mm-hmm.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The recommendation is as follows.
It is recommended that the site plan for open storage
of commercial vehicles be approved with the standard conditions
of the Planning Commission, and more specifically, number 1, five
copies of revised site plans shall be submitted indicating the
following.
A, plans ASP.1,
overall site plan, and ASP.2,
enlarged site plan,
shall be used in conjunction with the site plan for this project.
1B, provide the dimensions on the
elevation plan.
Condition number 2, the following variances may need to
be obtained from the Zoning Board of Appeals prior to the
release of the site plan to the building divisionAnd they
are to, A, to construct a building five feet
from the west property line when 20 feet is
required.
To, B, to allow
313,659 square
feet of open storage area
on the site. And to, C, to retain the
gravel surface.
If approved, the variances shall be added to the revised
site plan.
And number three, the performance bond in the amount of $1,000 be posted.
So with that, Mr. Chair, the recommendation is submitted.
Thank you, Mr. Worth. This is a public hearing.
If anyone would like to speak on this item, please come forward, state your name
and address for the record, and you'll have three minutes to speak.
Good evening. Roger Zlatov,
6900 East 14 Mile Road.
I own and operate the Warren RV Storage,
have for
almost 10 years now, in full compliance with all the
ordinances of the City of Warren. This
location has been operating for years as an outdoor
truck storage without proper site plan approval.
I brought this to the attention of the Planning Commission several years
ago when the owner wanted to do a lot split, and at that time,
that was denied. I speak in opposition to this because
I don't think it's fair
that someone can operate
a competitive property to my property without being in compliance with the
ordinance for years. Now, I certainly understand the argument
that maybe it's better to have them come into compliance now,
but I don't think the Planning Commission or any city department should
condone
properties that operate without proper approval
for years
that are a nuisance to the apartment complex,
and also
compete against my property unfairly.
We're all for fair competition. We welcome
competition,
and we are under strict supervision from the
City of Warren code enforcement all the time, and
that's fine. I have no problem with that, and I think if you look at our record at
Warren RV Storage, we don't have any code violations.
But that property there has been operating as an outdoor
storage without proper site plan approval for
many years, and I think it's time now for someone to take
a stand, and that's why I'm here to speak in opposition.
All I can do is ask you to think about it and say, "That is
not something that this city should allow." Because if you allow it for
some people to do it, then it sets a precedent that other people can
operate without the proper approvals. Thank you for your consideration.
Thank you, sir.
Sir.
Sure.
Oh, one second. Hmm?
Go ahead. State your name and address for the record.
Yes. Michael Spencer, Local 1700, 6440
14 Mile Road. First thing, thank you, Commissioner and the board for having me up
here. I was just up here a year ago in front of you guys.
So we are new to the neighborhood, but I'm not speaking necessarily in opposition,
pending the approval of this board, but I am asking for some consideration
as you guys consider the matter.
There is a couple of safety issues that I have become aware of since I've been a
tenant there, and we do own the property there at
6440.
There's a high volume of traffic that comes through that
west side of the road that goes back to the area that's been proposed, right?
And with that high volume of traffic, which also borders the
apartment complex that they are speaking of,
this caused quite a bit of vibration to our building, and our
building itself is a meeting hall that we do actually banquets for our members.
It creates a safety issue there. Outside of that, we have come back to
this board and have asked for consideration and some changes as it relates to our
easements and our interest for parking gates, which we're in the process of putting
up due to the traffic from the trucks parking on our property, which is a
direct conflict to what's going on towards the back.
So I do ask for those considerations from the
petitioner of this to utilize
the east road, which is on the barriers to the
railroad tracks, and the whole building itself, which is a big warehouse
building, for the truck traffic, which will alleviate my issue,
along with probably the apartment complex issue because the road is broad enough to
get semi-trucks down back and forth.
With that consideration, I beg rest.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you.
Anyone else like to speak on this item?
Seeing none, we'll turn it over to the commission.
Need a motion. Wake up. Hello.
Motion to approve with discussion, Mori.
Mr. Chair, I support it.
Pimentel?
Yes. Mr. Chair, I support it.
Okay.
There's a motion by Commissioner Mori, supported by Mr. Hoke.
Discussion?
Yes, Mr. Chair. Actually, I was going to ask a question to our attorney real quick,
too. Can you speak a little bit more about if the
site plan has been in compliance with the ordinance, or just
a little bit more on the history of it?
Because I know there was some questions that was risen that they were
operating without following the ordinance.
I think this evening's item is to bring them into compliance.
So they have been operating? So does that mean-
I do not-
... that they are-
I don't know the history
If you're asking if it was a legal non-conforming, I'd have to look at the
facts. I don't recall, but it was years when this first came before
us.
Okay.
But I don't know if they were legally non-conforming.
That's what I wanted to confirm. Okay.
With that, I have a quick question for our petitioner, if we may have the
petitioner up.
Yeah.
The
petitioner never got compliance when he first leased the
property, and it's only been like what, three years?
Because it was already a truck
storage area for decades. Ever since they built
the property. And they were in compliance then for the
simple reason that the truck storage
lot was part of the
main building. And when that happens, you're allowed to have
open storage for less than half
of your square footage of your building.
Well, they're like one tenth of what their building was.
So they were in compliance when they built it.
Then what happened was the breakup.
And
you also keep in mind that we're not the only trucks on the site.
There's like four or five other industrial buildings that bring in trucks every
day.
And we would
be willing to
talk to the landlord because we have no control over the gates.
That's somebody else's property.
And we could talk to the landlord and make
them come through the center entrance rather than the...
Come through here, which a lot of the people do come through this way rather than
here. So, they can put speed bumps down and all
kinds of things to discourage the use.
But keep in mind that a lot of these trucks
are parked over the weekend,
and they come in, they pick them up, and then they take them wherever they do
across country, whatever. And when they come home, the owners of the
trucks, where they park. All these trucks are owned by individual people.
And what they do is they'll take their truck and leave their cars.
So that's how it works. But
my client was unaware that it was out of compliance only because it's been used for
decades as this exact use.
So
just for my understanding and for the public too, so for my understanding, what I
got from you is that your client has been operating in that area
for the past three years?
Yes.
And you were not aware of the fact that it was not in compliance?
That's true, because it's always been a truck stop.
It's always been a truck parking lot, for decades.
With that, I know there were some issues about the way the trucks are going, and
that's-
Mm-hmm
... been a concern through the resident too.
Is there an hours of operation with the truck parking, or it's just they can
come in any time, or what does that look like?
No, they can come in any time.
Some of them may come in late night. But that's not every time, though.
It depends on when they arrive to the state.
Yeah, they're not unloading anything.
Yeah, no.
They're just parking.
Did any resident or did any neighbor come and try
to talk about an issue that they have been having?
For example, I think one of the member who just spoke, they mentioned
the fact that they have a banquet hall, and every time the trucks are going, it
vibrates their building.
Yes.
Did they try reaching out to you?
Not to me, but they did reach out to the property management.
There
was speed bumps right
near the apartments. And every time the truck used to come, they used to
hold a brake there by the speed bumps, and that's how there was a noise there.
So what they did is they took the speed bumps off recently,
so now,
hopefully it should be much better.
There's no need to brake right by the apartments to go in and without making any
noise.
Okay.
Now we do have another entrance that we can also enter from.
So it's not just one entrance that we have. We have the main entrance.
So what's the reason other entrance hasn't been used till now?
They're both being used.
Okay.
It's not just one. It depends on just where the trucker just enters.
Well, the main reason is because I think you find that if you go to
the southern, it's a straight run to here.
And that's also easier.
Whereas if you come through here, there's semi-trucks all
across here, all across here, unloading into these warehouses.
Docks, yeah.
So they want to avoid the congestion.
Yeah.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Anyone else like to speak on this item?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
You said you've been using the place for three years, right?
Yes.
Without any complaints.
No complaints that I have received.
They're not the landlord, though.
So you're leasing?
Yep.
Okay. So you've been using for three years, and
now you have come for
submit the
site plan. So why?
The city requested it.
City requested it, and when we took over, there was already trucks parked there, so
it was already approved for... We thought it was approved.
Yeah.
First of all, the landlord may
be at error here too, by not informing us that
it was
compliance.
But
at the same time, it's been used for a truck
stop, like trucks
parking for decades. So why would somebody all of a sudden
think that they would need to get compliance if it's been in compliance for
decades?
Because this is outdoor-
Sir. Sir.
Okay, so
are you parking the truck and trailer both or no?
Yes. Truck and trailer.
Trailer. There is any speed limit
in this area or no?
Just the-
Because the complaining neighbor complaining there is a big
vibration.
If that's happening, like I said, I
know where they're talking about where the guard shack is.
There used to be a couple bumps there.And that's where that vibration is
happening. They're holding-
Mm-hmm
... a brake there, and that's what's happening.
So the property manager
recently took all the bumps out, so now there's no need to brake by the apartments
to help out with the noise
or the vibration.
So, okay. I would like to ask planning department.
So can you response about using without
any permission?
Been using the place without it.
If you put the image up there, the site plan,
David.
All right.
Not that one. Yeah.
The other one that was... You had a better one.
The overhead.
The overhead view.
The Google.
Yep.
Yeah, that.
Okay. And
there's the main entrance. Can you see
what you're looking at?
Yeah.
There's the main entrance.
Show where that is.
Not... Okay. Here.
Stop. Don't move.
Stop, David.
Okay, David.
No,
it's not there.
It's east of that.
Circle. Right there.
Yeah.
That's the main entrance.
Yes.
And then the other entrance is to this
site right here. That's a retail strip
that aren't being purchased and had for a
long time, many years, and recently they sold it
to a union group, and they
came through us with site plan approval.
And one of their problems was that people were coming in, again,
that's trucking. Okay, guys?
Mm-hmm.
Trucking. They were coming in that west
entrance and cutting through their front
parking lot to go through the
main
driveway to go across the road.
That's what they were doing. There is a light there,
and these people really, they don't want to get backed up on the
main road to go north.
Everyone who enters and
exits that site
should know that it's the main entrance. That's where they should be coming.
So the point here
that I want to make is that no trucks should be going down
that
west
line.
Yes.
None whatsoever. They need to go...
Excuse me, they're going to have to take their time and go through the site and go
out the main entrance.
Everyone.
And that's what we should write into the-
Yes
... rules, okay, and into the recommendation.
Yes.
That those trucks do not come down and just go straight out.
I know it's a nice straight shot. No, it's right beside
those
residential
condos. You can't have it.
They got to go out the front. And so
that's my recommendation.
Thank you, Mr. Wery.
Are you
finished?
Yes.
Okay. Commissioner Dusek.
Mr. Chairman,
a number of things.
First of all,
this
was in front of Zoning Board of Appeals in 2013.
There's ZBA in 2014,
Planning Commission approval at '15,
2015, 2018,
2019, 2023,
and I think there's one for 2024.
So I think that
operating without knowledge or whatever
is maybe a little incorrect.
It's all in our findings, and it's going back quite a ways.
So as far as them operating without anybody
taking a look at it, I disagree with that.
I think the city has been very attentive and looked at a whole
bunch of these things. Now,
that's one. Two, I think we should make it a
point on the recommendation to close the west
gate, the
west entrance and so on.
We concur.
If we can close that-
Okay, I'm saying we concur. The problem is we don't own
that, so you'd have to talk to the landlord.
I'm sure that if
you get in touch with the planning department and talk to the landlord,
then we can all come to a happy conclusion on all this.
We don't care how they get into the property.
Well, yeah, you kind of do because it makes
these people nuts.
No, we don't mind them taking the center one.
And I understand. But I think if
all of us, the city, and everybody else closed down that west
entrance,
that would alleviate their problems, that would alleviate some of the
problems about halls and the rest of it.
Sure.
So,
I
don't know if we can make a recommendation for the planning department to
go talk to the landlord or whatever,
but they've been coming in and out of the city quite a bit
between planning and zoning board of appeals,
so saying that they haven't been-
But I don't think that those items that you just recorded, they were
probably for the other portions of the buildings.
You know what? That's in the ear and so on.
Yeah, but I think you'll find out it's for the other building.
But after everything's said and done, the city has been involved here.
Sure.
So saying that the city hasn't been involved and you're operating without
any
helter-skelter is not a really fair statementBut I'd like
to see that west driveway closed.
And that's that. Now, if what we have to do to do it,
I don't know who the landlord is. It used to be Art
Van, now it's Gardner White.
So that was number two. Number three, you have Lipari
Services in there.
You've got how many truck wells in there?
210, 220?
I don't know.
My client hired me just for that parking lot
that-
Okay
... they lease from.
Fair enough.
The rest of the building is done by somebody else and different clients.
Okay. The only comment that I really have to make
is that if there are any trailers with
freezers on them that are left running overnight,
that should not be allowed. And you have to police it, I
can't.
You have to police it.
Running that at night is totally
out 24/7,
no matter what. I've had my share
of problems with the freezer trucks running all night
next to residential, and nobody was happy.
Mm-hmm.
So I want your assurance that we're not going to have that kind of
problem with any of this.
And Lipari does not...
You're right, Lipari have freezers, but they don't belong to us, so I have nothing-
Well-
They don't lease from us. I mean, we just-
If you have the ability to influence Lipari or
whoever else has got refrigerated trucks,
do not allow that to run 24/7. That's all.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, sir. Anyone else?
To the petitioner, good evening, sir.
Oh.
I agree with the...
Sir?
Oh, I'm sorry.
Where you going?
I thought you said goodbye.
No, I said good evening.
Oh, good evening. Okay.
I thought it was like goodbye.
I concur with the commissioner as far as trying to close that, because they
had a gate up there. The gate's not in operation, because they did have the
bumpers. But like I say, trucks vibrate.
I don't know what kind of
equipment or materials they're carrying on it.
The heavier they are, the more they're going to vibrate.
And like I say, it's next to a hall where they have banquets, and then you got the
residential. So if we could close the driveway and have them go down the other
driveway to the back,
and even if it gets to the point that we put up a sign or a barricade that says,
"No trucks allowed down this driveway."
Right.
Because I don't know who else uses the same driveway or not.
A lot of them.
So this way, if you can't do anything, maybe we can do something to
where we can barricade it off and just have a sign that says, "No truck
traffic."
Yeah.
So they have to go to the other driveway.
Yeah. We would have no problem with that.
Okay.
Are there any other questions?
Mr. Chair?
Yeah.
So are we adding this as a recommendation to this plan,
or this is something the planning commission is going to run down?
Or-
We can add it to this recommendation as part of the recommendation.
Mr. Chairman, I don't know if we can add it.
If it's not on his property,
then how can we add it as a recommendation?
Well, we can still add it as a recommendation to be considered to close
it.
We could add it on the drawing to say that the
tenants will seek from the landlord to have this
closed if possible.
I mean, we can't control it, but we can try to use our influence
to get it closed.
If we can get our director back up here,
please.
Put him on the spot.
The knees aren't as young as they used to be, are they?
Me?
Yeah, you.
I'm just thinking about basketball right now.
Okay.
Keep me whole.
Yeah.
Anyway,
okay.
The property,
this is one large property.
Yes.
They lease part of it,
so the site plan is also the responsibility of
Gardner White.
So when
the planning commission says they want that driveway closed,
it also affects the rest of the site.
Notice, we have an overall plan-
Okay
... and we have a larger plan that shows that
leased area. All right? So
this affect-
If it's legit-
This is affecting...
You're saying you want that either closed or
monitored, but I think you're saying you want it closed.
Prefer it closed, yes.
And
then that's what you're going to do.
There's another option maybe by that
retail building. There's a gate put there.
Okay.
Can you see that picture?
Yeah.
Yeah. All right, see where the black image is? Yeah, the L shape.
Yeah.
And right at the
corner of it.
All right, here.
You know what I'm talking about? See the building-
Right
... that looks south, west corner.
Yeah, this building right here.
Yep, right there. Put a gate there. Trucks can't...
It's gated off, they can't use it. But the people out front there
need that driveway for that. Yeah, for there.
So they're not going to come in, and
they're not supposed to come in there to begin with because they also will
have gates to their property.
Either close it off, close it off, or put maybe a gate there.
But that's going to stop everybody-
Yeah
... who goes onto the site with
trucks.You can use all the
signage that you want, "No through trucks, ends by path."
It isn't going to make a difference.
And
certain
officers of the law will have a lot of fun trying to
monitor that.
Okay.
Mr. Chair?
Go ahead.
Yes.
Okay.
Is the driveway used by any other companies or just
the-
It is
... truck companies?
That's what I'm talking about here.
Yeah.
It is used by-
So if-
... the union hall.
Yes
See that drawing?
If this driveway is used by
any other company besides the
trucking company, so we have to leave it open.
But we can say, "No truck."
Well-
We can-
... that is a ground thing.
Let's go over there.
Let's try.
I hardly think anyone will pay any attention to the
signs.
Yes.
I'm being real here.
All right? So that's why I'm saying maybe the gate, there should be a gate at
that point right there,
and then those people who have that property can use
their
driveway.
But they themselves were going to put gates leading into
their front
parking area.
That was part of their site plan. So
whoever pulls in there, they're going to have to back out.
And that would-
And they'll learn real quick not to go that way
... that would be awful. That would be awful
to back up all that way with a semi.
Well, there can be signage out front, "No through trucks,"
but
if you don't
stop them from leaving the site by way of
a gate, I think...
Okay, at the corner of the building or somewhere down...
They used to have a-
Yeah, one in the back
... a little shed there that somebody monitored-
I think they still do
... traffic control.
Yeah, I think it's still there
Well, anyway,
so it's a concern.
If they're going to put it in, if you're going to put a gate or
whatever in, I'd do it on the north side because backing up
a semi-
Well-
... once you got past that building would be...
Commissioner Duza, all right. The trucks come in, they'll pull right up to the
gate, and then they'll have to back up again, won't they?
Yeah.
Well, good point.
Even leaving is going to be tough.
All we're trying to do is funnel everybody to the front.
Yes.
It'd be great if
this
person who's leasing the property can control how these
people come in and how they leave.
And the same with everyone else who's on that site,
how they come in-
Right
... how they leave.
Okay.
And that's a
trouble spot over there.
Yes, it is.
Fair enough.
Mr. Wirth.
One second.
Sorry.
Because of the-
Yes, Mr. Chair
... number of trucks that have to drive down through there,
there's buildings, the apartments are right behind that.
Do they go in next to the hall there and go to the back, or do they use
that same driveway?
Okay.
Where the red line-
Yeah
... connects in right there?
Yeah, right behind that.
I think they do have access through there.
To the same driveway?
They may have an ingress, egress.
Somehow you're going to have to control that.
But
maybe this gets postponed, and the
person who leases has a conversation with
the owner and we can have perhaps a meeting
at City Hall and talk about this.
Because I don't know that we're going to solve this problem tonight.
There's no-
I agree.
I agree with that, because we need to get
pretty much everybody involved with-
Yeah, I do
... getting their trucks down through there.
Yeah, we've got to-
To get-
I think
... an idea of somehow how we can control it.
Yeah. They want to postpone this.
Okay.
We went the whole sh-
We actually can control our
tenants from using that entrance. Basically, we tell them not to.
If they're caught doing it, then they would lose their lease.
So we do have the ability to have control over our trucks.
We don't have the ability to control anybody else's truck.
And you got to remember, there's a million square feet of warehouse space there.
Yeah.
My only concern with that is, you control your trucks, but what about
the other trucks that go in there?
I guess I'm-
You don't have any control over that, so we have to have some way to regulate all
the trucks.
But that really... If we can cure our
problem in that episode, then the
problem by other peoples,
would that surely be part of this site plan approval process?
Right?
If we can control our trucks, we can just simply tell the tenant...
You got to remember, our guys are coming in, they're bringing in their empty trucks
and parking there. They're not carrying heavy loads or anything
like that. We can tell them, "Use the middle lane, or
your lease will be voided if you're caught going down the side
lanes."
And then-
Yeah
... you can work on
getting that lane. Then at least you got
50 trucks solved.
Then the
issue now won't be between us
and the city or anybody else, it'll be the city
andMillion square foot of industrial space
that has trucking going to it. That will be that battle.
You guys have that battle, but we will be out of it because our guys won't be
affecting you at all.
Okay.
Councilman Newman?
Yeah.
Newman.
I have a question on it.
Sure.
Who would enforce that?
We would by
telling our people they can't use it, and if they're caught-
Right
... because we have a security guard at the back.
I'm not sure how that would be done with-
You have video cameras that-
We don't have right now, but I mean, that's something that we could work on
to...
He's fairly confident that he tells his guys to use the center lane,
otherwise we get closed down.
Okay.
Then they'll use the center lane.
I know.
Mr. Chair?
Enforcement seems like a problem. I yield.
None of your comments have been recorded.
Okay.
Talk around it.
Sure.
Okay.
That's all right. But I yield if anyone else wants to-
Okay, fair enough
...
follow up.
But I think
we might want to postpone this to allow you to get with the
other, or allow Art Van or Gardner White to
get the other people that-
Yeah
... bring their trucks in there.
Okay. My question to that is what happens if they say no?
I guess-
I mean, we're doing it-
Well-
... we're not going to be the problem
... but then you got the other question.
You could say no, but how many people are going to listen to you?
Well, if-
And they'll still bring their trucks in there.
His people will listen to him.
But I'm saying the other people that are going in there-
Mm-hmm
... which could be causing part of the problem,
how are you going to deter them from not going down through there?
I guess that-
So it's not just the one-
Is that really our job, though, is to deter?
No, it's not your job, but what I'm saying it's still an issue though-
Mm-hmm
... that would have to still be resolved.
What if we did put a camera at that corner, and any of our
tenants come that way, then they'll get a couple of warnings and then
they'll be kicked out.
If we put a camera, we can put a camera on anything nowadays.
And we have a security guard that stays in the...
We have an office in there.
Is that office open 24/7?
I don't know if it's open 24/7, no.
Because you said trucks can come in and out 24/7.
Right. It's mainly the weekends that we're concerned about security-
Okay
... people breaking into the trucks on the weekends.
Okay.
Because they can just come over from the skate park.
Yeah. Okay.
And there's nothing stopping them-
All right. Excuse me one second
... except the swamp.
Go ahead.
If I may, Mr. Chair. Site plan conditions must relate to the site plan
before the board.
Yeah. Right.
So please, yes, consider it in that realm. Thanks.
I don't understand what that means.
That means if the commission imposes a condition, it has
to apply to your petition, your site plan, proposed site plan,
not the other site plans-
Oh, okay
... for the other properties.
So
really, we should be looked at as an isolated incident.
So if you think you can put up the cameras or have the guards or-
Can I talk to-
... have some way to prevent your trucks from going down through there.
Can we do it?
Yeah, for sure. Sure.
Okay.
We can maintain our own customers. We can for sure.
Okay. Okay.
Commissioner Juse, what do you think on that?
We have to find the landlord and go
have a discussion with the landlord.
Okay. We still have to do that.
But holding him up-
Yeah
No, the property manager-
... it makes very little sense.
Right. I understand.
Okay, sir.
Great. Thank you.
Don't... Where are you going? Hello?
You're not done.
Are you trying to get to the basketball game?
Trying to, yeah.
Okay, that was a motion by Commissioner Morey, supported by Commissioner Hawk.
Mr. Chair, I have a question before that.
So are we adding this in the recommendation that the petitioner's coming up with
the way to track the trucks for you guys,
or is that being added in the recommendation?
Because I know we're just going with the word of mouth, and it's not in
the site plan.
Yeah.
So what are we adding in the site plan?
Richard, you want to commit to the camera?
I will-
You'll be having cameras, and what about the person who's monitoring the cameras?
We will
monitor the cameras.
But-
But I can assure you-
... do you have a security guard 24/7?
We do have a security guard there
that we can...
Normally, they're in the back. We have nothing to do in the front.
But we can possibly find a way, if we can get them-
So what are we committing to? I think I would be interested in having this
in the site plan, so at least-
You and your guys-
... from this site plan, we don't have any issues going forward.
For sure, yeah. I mean, we-
Well,
if you ever go hunting, there's these video cameras that
when they see some activity, they click on, and my buddies were...
I'm playing poker the other night, and my buddy, "Well, there's a six-point
buck just went through my yard."
We could do the same thing there. A truck comes up, then it can go to somebody's
phones, whosever is on duty.
That's the best way, and then we can
tell our trucks
for sure from far away. I mean, our trucks are different than the Lapari
or the other trucks that come in.
Okay. If we can put all of what you're discussing about the cameras or whatever
to do where you can control your site plan-
Okay
... then we can have that put in the recommendation.
Sure.
Correct.
Sure.
Okay.
Yes. Mr. Chair, so it is our understanding
that they are not using this driveway, right?
Well, we can't-
Same as-
We have, because their property is in the back,
and there's other trucks that use it for the properties in the
frontIt doesn't deal with theirs.
So all they can do is monitor what their trucks are doing
for this particular site plan.
Their trucks only.
Just their trucks only.
Yes. Yeah, we will tell them, warn them, and then we will have a
camera that activates.
And then there's a lot of different ways you can do it.
You can also do GPS controls. There's tons of different systems they
use.
And then also, I don't think we would really need to enforce it that much.
Once you put the cameras up and you tell them and you show them, "Hey, we can see
you coming in," I think that's more than enough.
And if you get three warnings, you're out.
We can terminate the lease?
We can terminate the lease, yeah.
Okay. We can try that and see for now.
Yep.
And if it doesn't work, you may have to do something different.
Well, you may be successful
getting the other driveway stopped, in which case, the whole problem goes
away.
Yes.
Okay. All right.
For sure.
All right, sir. There was a motion by Commissioner Mori, supported by Commissioner
Hawk. Roll call.
Okay.
Commissioner Mori, I vote yes.
Commissioner Hawk?
Yes to approve.
Commissioner Ansara?
Yes to approve.
Commissioner Heide?
Yes to approve.
Commissioner Holowaty?
Yes to approve.
Commissioner Douze?
Yes to approve.
Commissioner Bonecki?
Yes to approve.
Commissioner Smith?
Yeah. Where'd he go?
And it's still Commissioner Heide.
Yeah, it is Heide.
It's Heide.
Sorry.
That's okay.
Yes to approve.
Whatever you can do to eliminate-
Heide
... the situation, we appreciate it.
Sure.
All right?
Sure.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Have a good evening.
Thank you.
Okay.
Heide.
Item number 6D.
All right, 6D.
Okay.
6D, site plan for addition of covered patio located on the
southwest corner of 12 Mile Road and Burnett Road,
14300 12 Mile Road, Section 13,
Castrio Perjoni and Chris & Frank Properties
LLC, Ron Isaku,
PSP260019. Thank you.
Thanks, Ma'am Secretary. Good evening, sir.
You want to tell us a little bit about your project?
Good evening. Thank you.
So this project is a
very small outdoor seating addition to the
Milestone Grill restaurant.
Can we get your name and address into the mic, please?
Yes, forgive me. Yeah. My name is Ron Isaku, 4851 Haddington
Drive from Bloomfield Hills.
And I'm here representing the owner of the property, Castrio Perjoni.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
So yes. As you can see there, that is the addition
that we are proposing.
It's meant to have these garage doors that
open up
so you can have a sort of outdoor dining experience
during the warm weather.
And that is basically it. And we
thought it would be as quick as getting
building permits for this project. Right.
However,
we're obviously having to go
through the site plan approval process, right?
And
I did see the recommendations,
thank you, from Ron's office. And
they basically
will require... Again, just backing up a little bit,
this is meant to be modest in cost as well for the owner,
for the business. And
the recommendations
include basically restriping the entire site,
as well as some significant
addition to an island that's on the property.
And
that is actually the highest cost item that,
if possible, we would like to challenge or push back on-
All right
... and see if we can get away without that particular item.
All right, sir.
Thank you. Correspondence?
Correspondence, taxes, current building.
Building has no issues with site plan-
Don't leave, sir. Come back up to the mic.
Thank you.
Engineering, preliminary review of this site indicates that Planning Commission
approval should be contingent upon the petitioner's compliance with the following
conditions. Number one, the provided legal description does not match the
existing records. Number two, all the existing utilities needs
to be called out within the vicinity of the parcel.
Number three, it appears that existing businesses to the south
is using the driveway or proposed site.
If so, mutual ingress and egress agreement should be required.
Police, the Warren Police Department has reviewed the submitted site plan and does
not foresee any issues at this time.
Comcast, we have area facilities in the area, but we have no
conflicts with the proposal. DTE, DTE Electric Company
has reviewed the site plan for addition of covered patio.
DTE has no objection to this request impacting
14300 12 Mile Road, Section 13, per the site plan
provided. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me
at 586-783-1978.
MCDR, Macomb County Department of Roads, MCDR, has
received and reviewed the enclosed preliminary plan for the above-mentioned
site. MCDR has no objection to proposed development at
the above-mentioned site. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact
me at
586-463-8671.
MCPWO, Macomb County Public Works Office, has reviewed the
site plan for the project referenced above and has determined the proposed
site disturbance is less than one acre and will not require a
stormwater review from this office.
If a no objection letter is required, please forward your request to
wesley.jonic@macombgov.org.Prior to
construction, a soil erosion permit may be required from this office.
Contact our soil erosion department at
586-469-565327
for more information regarding same. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Secretary. Planning department's recommendation.
It is recommended that the site plan for the building addition of a covered patio
to the existing Milestone Grill be approved with the standard conditions of the
planning commission, and more specifically, number one, five copies of
revised site plans shall be submitted indicating the following.
1A, the shed measuring 9.3 feet by
17.4 feet and containing 161.87
square feet, located in the southwest corner of the building, was
constructed without a permit. The shed isn't indicated on Google Earth
imagery dated July 2022. The shed shall be added to the
overall square footage. The parking shall be recalculated to include the
shed and the freezer square footage for the total existing
square footage. 1B, the planning staff calculated the
existing building, freezer, and shed square footages together at
4,954.70 square feet.
The site data chart shall be changed for the existing structure and for the
proposed gross structure of
5,854.70
square feet. The requirement based off the square footage is 29 parking
spaces. The site data chart shall be updated.
1C, the existing and proposed setbacks in the chart shall be
updated to match the site plan drawing.
The north and east dimensions shall be corrected.
1D, include the setback dimension of six feet from the parking
area to the east property line. That's Bonnet Road.
1E, add the setback distance from the building addition to the north
12 Mile Road property line.
F, add the following variance approval to the site plan.
On August 12th, 1992, the Zoning Board of Appeals granted the
petitioner permission to retain the existing hard
surface parking lot located six feet from the property line along Bonnet Road.
G, label the freezer on the south elevation of the
building.
H, the east line of parking spaces along Bonnet Road can be
measured with the two-foot overhang.
Therefore, the effective length will be 20 feet and shall be indicated on the site
plan. I, the parking spaces along the east elevation of the building
abutting the seven-foot wide concrete slab can also include the two
foot of overhang for an effective length of 20 feet and shall be
indicated on the site plan. J, the spaces set back and
parallel to the north property line, 12 Mile Road, and the maneuvering
lane need to be readjusted. Between the two measurements provided,
there should be sufficient room to provide a 22-foot maneuvering lane and an
18-foot in length parking stall with two-foot
overhang for an effective length of 20 feet.
If this is not achievable, a variance may need to be required from the Zoning Board
of Appeals. K, the plan indicates the relocation
of the accessible parking spaces from the north property line.
However, the plan shall show the replacement parking spaces in
this area.
L, the parking spaces and maneuvering lanes west of the building shall be
updated. The parking spaces along the west elevation of the building
abutting the seven-foot wide concrete slab can also include the two-foot
overhang for an effective length of 20 feet and shall be indicated in the site
plan. The parking spaces along the west property line shall measure
22 feet as measured at the property line.
The parking spaces in the middle section shall measure 20 feet.
There is sufficient room to meet the maneuvering width, which shall be a minimum of
22 feet.
M, the required front setback along 12 Mile Road is 15
feet. Most of the site meets this requirement.
However, the northwest corner of the property only measures nine feet in
width. The landscaped island shall be increased roughly up to the
existing brick wall and provided with lawn and new concrete curbing.
Provide additional plantings such as meadowsweet or arrowwood
viburnum. N, provide the width of the existing driveways as
measured at the property line.
Number two, the petitioner shall provide a recorded document for ingress,
egress, and shared parking with the owner of the property abutting to the south.
That's
13-13-129-003,
28853 Bonnet Road. This document shall be approved in draft
format for form by the city attorney prior to it being recorded
at the Macomb County Register of Deeds.
A copy of the document shall be provided to the planning department.
Number three, the following variance may need to be obtained from the Zoning Board
of Appeals prior to the release of a site plan to the building
division. If the plan cannot be adjusted to meet the 20-foot
long parking spaces or 22-foot wide maneuvering lanes,
this requirement, then they may seek
relief from the Zoning Board of Appeals.
And if approved, the variance shall be added to the revised site plan.
Number four, a performance bond in the amount of $450 shall
be posted according to estimated cost of $15,000 by the
petitioner. Note, the planning staff believes the proposed
bond amount is too low given the fact that the recommendation includes an expansion
of the landscape island in the northwest corner of the property with additional
landscaping as part of the improvements, resulting in the bond in the amount of
$1,000. And this ends the recommendation.
Thanks, Ms. Michelle.
This is a public hearing. If anyone would like to speak on this item, please come
state your name and address for the record, and you have three minutes to speak.
Seeing none, we'll turn it over to the commission.
Chair, make a motion to approve with discussion
Mr. Chair, I support it.
There's a motion by Commissioner Halawaty, supported by Mr. Hawk. Discussion?
Okay, can the petitioner step forward now, please?
First off,
I definitely do like the idea. I've been to your restaurant many a
time.
It used to be another name, wasn't it previous?
Yes. My name is Castillo Perogoni.
I'm the owner of-
Yeah, but was it called something else? You took it over from a previous owner?
And before, way in the beginning, it was Dimitri's.
Yeah.
From that became Andrea's Garden.
It was-
And Gary's. That's the one I remember
... Andrea's Garden for 30 years.
Yeah.
And in October 2020, we purchased it-
Yeah
... from Andrea.
Well, good. Because-
And now it's Milestone Grille.
Yeah, but-
It's the existing building.
I know I heard the freezer, the hot and whatever, all
that has been there. It's-
Right
... when I purchased it, it was as far as the building outside, it
was existing.
Ex-
Just like that.
Yeah.
As far as inside,
because we have a liquor license, we expanded, we made a bar.
Mm-hmm. Yeah.
Lost a lot of seats. Now it's crammed.
Been there .
People want more space.
Yeah.
We think having a patio, especially for-
I think it's a good idea
... spring, summer, and fall-
Think it was a good idea. Yeah, actually I was there for Christmas
... it would help a lot with parties and people have more-
I was actually there for Christmastime.
And-
I appreciate it
... I don't know if it was your host or somebody, you had
some entertainment there that night, and the Santa and everything.
We walked in-
Yes
...
and we went to a movie, came in,
walked into a Christmas party.
We said, "Whoa, that was nice."
Well, we try to keep it as family-oriented-
Yeah. I give-
... and let people have parties, uh-
Okay
... graduation parties, family events, and all that.
That's why by expanding, it will give us a way to
put the parties over there, so-
Right
... everything run smoother and-
Well, so, but
basically, any problems with any of the recommendations from our planning
department?
Well,
the problem,
two are the problems.
Okay.
Basically, they want us to
expand the grass on northwest
side, if I'm not mistaken, on that corner over there, which means we have to
cut the parking lot, replace it with dirt and all that.
That's got a little bit of problem with financial, because we
thought we just going to build an outdoor
seating area, and now this bring us to a whole different...
And another thing is with the driveway, I contacted the
owners, which we share one driveway-
Right
... with the-
Of a but-
... plaza behind us.
Yeah. Yeah.
There's four businesses there. They don't have-
Yeah, I'm familiar with that
... their own driveway.
That's going to be a bit of a thing. We need to come to
an agreement with
the owner over there, because they don't want any responsibilities as far
as maintaining or anything like that.
But they want to use it, you know what I mean?
Oh, boy.
So I don't have a problem as far as them using it, but the problem is
that, let's say I have to fill a pothole or something,
if we share the driveway, we should share the finances.
Finances.
Now the city comes to me and says, "Hey, your driveway is bad.
You got to fix it," I have to fix it.
So we need to sit down with him, come to an agreement how we're going to
handle this. He can use the driveway or he can have
his own. I mean, it's-
Yeah.
I'm con-
All right.
I yield the floor. Thank you, Chair.
Okay, anyone else?
Mr. Chair?
Yeah.
Do we have any easement agreement with them or no?
No, there was no. I checked with the
records, and there is no... The only thing I found was
the side on Banner.
Andrea Garden had
an agreement, I mean, with a board of appeals or whatever.
The grass is not 15 feet on that side.
It is six feet, if I'm not mistaken.
Yeah.
But city has that on record as far as...
Now, another thing is the parking lots
being longer, basically the-
The spaces
... the spaces. That's going to affect us because I don't think we can reach...
Right now they're 18, they're perfect.
There's no problems in and out or anything like that.
But if we have to do
20 feet, if I'm not mistaken, it was-
Right
... recommended.
Or 20 feet in one side, I mean, two feet extra on one side and two on the other,
that's four feet. I don't think the-
That's especially
a problem with the parking just to the north of the
building
since there isn't significant drive space to
allow that.
Yeah, that's it.
Well, worst case scenario, you go to the ZBA. Excuse me.
I think it's because it was grandfathered like that.
Yeah, I'm sorry.
And that's what I was going to mention.
Both of those items, they could potentially apply to the zoning board of appeals
for the front setback or for the parking-
Mm-hmm
... space lengths. But they would have to
appeal to the zoning board of appeals their hardship, and that would be an option
they could try.
All right.
So is it required now?
Well, we put in our-
According to code
... recommendation the sizes that are required, the
setback width, and the spaces, and the maneuvering
lanes. That is the zoning ordinance.
That's why we put that in the recommendation.
However,
an option is to go to the zoning board of appeals,
and that's something any owner could try,
to ask for that relief or a
waiver from the ordinance.
All right.
Anyone else?
I noticed on my information it says that the patio will be
constructed along the west side of the existing restaurant, which it's
not. It's on the east side of the existing restaurantAnother thing it
says on exclusion, it says, "No HVAC scope." So are you
going to be conditioning that space, or?
No, negative. We are not. There may be some heaters out there,
perhaps in the fall or early springs.
One of those gas-powered heaters that are portable,
but that is it.
Right.
So that's the only way you're going to condition it then.
So otherwise,
if it gets too hot in there in the summertime, no air conditioning, they just open-
Well, there are no-
... open up the windows, eh?
It'll be open to-
Okay
... to nature.
All right.
I like the idea,
but like I say, our zoning ordinance regulates the parking.
Mm.
And therefore,
I make a suggestion, go before ZBA and
see if they will allow you to keep the parking the way you want it.
But like I said, when you bring a site plan to us, we have to go over what pertains
to the ordinance at this particular time.
Okay?
Yep, understood.
Commissioner, can I ask?
Sorry.
Go ahead.
Commissioner. Yeah. I'm seeing, um-
You just got to get up to the mic.
You can, yes.
Oh, yeah. I'm Councilman Noonan, and I'm
reading,
present use commercial Milestone Grill restaurant.
Note one, the shed measuring 9.3 feet by
17.4 feet and containing so many square feet, located in
the southwest corner of the building, was constructed without a permit.
And then that note one ends with the
parking shall be recalculated to include the shed and the freezer
square feet for the total existing square feet.
Right.
Maybe a way where maybe we'll need to recalculate the parking
if they remove the shed that never got permitted.
I don't know.
I don't-
I just thought I'd throw that out there.
By removing the shed, I don't think it's going to make that much difference in the
parking.
Oh.
Shed-
Well, if it caused the parking to be
recalculated...
Well, it's recalculated because of the floor space of the shed.
Right.
So if they-
I don't think it's going to change it that much.
They have enough parking lots
Oh, well.
It doesn't matter.
It's not going to change it that much.
Okay.
Yeah, it requires 29 parking lots. We have 60.
So it's not affecting, the building
being bigger, it's not going to affect the number of parking lots.
It still has enough parking lots.
So like I say, these are the requirements that we require.
Right.
If you still have an issue with the parking, which it seems like you've got plenty
of space to do all the things you need to do as far as the parking goes.
But like I say, you can always go before ZBA and try to get a
variance for it.
Okay. Yes. That was my question.
Yeah. Okay.
Can we build it
before-
Well, I-
Now I understand that maybe we have to do it, and then we can do it later,
because this is going to set me back-
Well, I would-
... waiting for-
I would still try to go before ZBA, a meeting with ZBA-
No, that will do
... Board of Appeals, to see if they're going to allow you to do
what you want, keep your spaces and stuff like that.
Mm-hmm.
Okay.
I know you're in a hurry to build it.
It's like
you're ready to get out of here because I see you moving back and forth, but-
No.
We got to try to follow the ordinance when we're doing these-
Yeah
... site plans.
Mary wants to speak.
Pardon me?
I think Mary wants to speak.
I was just going to say, if the parking doesn't affect the building, they can move
forward with that part and address parking later.
Okay.
That's what we're trying to see. Can we-
Right. I don't want to hold you up
... can we build it, and then if you guys decide, even if
we go in front of them, they say, "No, you got to do it," then we have to do it.
We understand that part.
Okay.
Exactly.
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you for that.
The city attorney says that you can build it, but we don't want you to forget, you
still have to go with the parking.
We will not forget. We'll get on it right away.
All right.
I think... Yeah.
I mean, they still have to have all the recommendation met, the approved site
plans, and those have to be for just a building prior to, and
any variance they do need,
before they can build. I just want to make sure they understand-
Yes
Right
... that. Okay.
You understand that, sir?
Yes, I understand.
So-
So
... we can't build the building until we go through the ZBA and get
site plan approval?
Yes.
All right.
Okay.
If I may, for clarification, the variances recommended by the
planning commission, planning department, yes, you have to get those.
But what I'm hearing is parking is separate.
You might not need it.
And you might want it, but don't need it.
Okay.
So it's not clear.
They would need it. Right now they're measuring under the
size that they would need. They're 18.
They need to be 20 feet, 22 feet for maneuvering,
22 along the... So they would need variances for
that.
Yes. All right.
So they need to go to ZBA first.
Yeah.
ZBA has to approve, then they can build.
Yeah. Right.
Yes.
And if just whatever they determine along that front, that's not
15 feet.
Right.
Right. We can approve conditionally.
Mm-hmm.
Yes.
Okay.
Yes. Okay.
Okay.
Okay, so if we approve this, it'll be on the condition that you go to
ZBA and get that part handled-
Okay
... so that meets the ordinance.
Okay. Sounds good.
Okay.
Thank you.
That was a motion by Commissioner Halawati, supported by Mr.
HawkRoll call.
Commissioner Holowaty? Motion to approve. Commissioner Hawk?
Yes to approve.
Commissioner Ansir?
Yes to approve.
Commissioner Heidi? Yes to approve. Commissioner Dizay?
Yes to approve.
Commissioner Maury votes yes. Commissioner Bonacki?
Yes to approve.
Commissioner Smith?
Yes to approve with the conditions that they have to still go by ZBA for a
variance.
Thank you, sir. Good luck with the project.
Herbs.
To the commission, do we need to take a five or 10-minute recess?
Hello?
Yes. Yes.
Sure.
Yes, please.
And everybody's losing their minds on a basketball game.
Five.
10 minutes.
Five minutes?
Five.
Five minutes?
So we can stand up.
We'll take a five-minute recess.
Good evening.
Planning Commission is getting ready to resume.
Item number 6E.
Yep.
We're missing somebody.
I'm sorry.
Told her five minutes.
Where'd he go?
Item number 6E. We got to keep going.
Item number 6E, site plan for a community center and K to 12
religious education center located on the east side of Ryan
Road and the south side of 11 Mile Road,
26688 Ryan Road, Section 20. Mani
Muzamman Khan, Perveen Munir Khan Islamic Center,
Hisham Turk and Turk Architects,
PSP260018. Thank you.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Good evening, sir. You going to tell us a little bit about your project?
Hello. Yes. My name is Taha Sohrwardy.
I'm a representative of
Turk Architects.
So the project here is
an existing retail site
and commercial building. And the nonprofit
here, the Perveen Munir Khan Islamic Center,
is intending to turn this
space inside this building into a
set of programs for underprivileged Muslim immigrant youth, through
education, physical activity, and health and wellness programs.
So there's three
portions of the building.
There's three tenants. So the first one
and second one are now vacant. The third one is currently a Dollar
Tree that will remain as is.
So the tenant one space, 10,000 square feet, that would
be mostly classroom space or some physical activity
space
for children that are K to 12.
And
the tenant two space will be
converted into a community banquet hall
type of a space for educational seminars and community events to generate
revenue for the center's operations.
So
originally, there were no proposed changes to the exterior elevations or
the project site,
but we've received recommendations where we will have
to change a few things to be able to get the approval.
Just generally, the project aims to serve the, I think
as I mentioned, the underprivileged Muslim immigrant youth
in the area.
A lot of the wording
that's been thrown around has been
religious education center, but it's really more of after-school
programming for children,
with the theme of religion and culture and
that sort of thing.
All right. Thank you, sir. Correspondence?
Correspondence. Texas Current, "Building
requires building permit and plan review application for
proposed community center and K to 12 religious education center.
Fire, regarding the proposed site plan,
PSP260018, for the property located at
26688 Ryan Road, there are existing fire hydrants
located within the alley that must be brought into
compliance prior to disabling the fire suppression
system.
The city of Warren is currently operating under the 2021
International Fire Code, IFC, which references
NFPA 24. Chapter 7
of NFPA 24 governs the installation of
private fire hydrants and requires the central line of
the discharge port to be 18 inch above
grade, along with the minimum 36-inch clearance
around the hydrant. The hydrant currently do not meet these
requirements. These are set too low and do not maintain the
required clearance due to the installation of
bollards."These hydrants are required by code to
remain in their current location to provide fire protection for the
building. As a result, the hydrants must be
repaired and reset in compliance with code
requirements prior to the fire suppression system being
disabled for renovation. Police.
The Warren Police Department has reviewed the submitted site plan and does not
foresee any issues at this time. Water.
I will go ahead and read water at the end. AT&T.
AT&T does not object to the proposed use plan for the community and
education center. AT&T does have facilities on the
property and serving the building.
Please advise the petitioner to contact us if there are any conflicts.
Comcast. We have no conflicts with this proposal, but we have aerial and
underground facilities in the area. DTE.
DTE Electric Company has reviewed the site plan for community center and K to
12 religious education center. DTE has no objection
to
this request impacting 26688 Ryan Road,
Section 20, per the site plan provided.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at
586-783-1978.
MCPWO. The Macomb County Public Works Office,
MCPWO, has reviewed the site plan for the project referenced
above and has determined the proposed site disturbance is less
than one acre and will not require stormwater review from this
office. If a no objection letter is required, please forward your
request to wesley.janek@macombgov.org.
Prior to construction, a soil erosion permit may be required from this
office.
Contact our soil erosion department at
586-469-5327 for more
information regarding same. MDOT.
The applicant's site plan appears to have work in MDOT's right of way.
Any work, water main taps, sanitary sewer
taps, drainage, or driveway modifications in MDOT's right of
way, or changes to the drainage system that may impact
MDOT's storm system will require a permit.
So from the water department,
"Dear Mr. Khan,
it has come to our attention that the fire hydrants located on the
property at 26688 Ryan Road are currently
inoperable for fire protection purposes.
These hydrants are supplied by
an eight-inch water main situated along the east property
line, which provides both fire protection and portable water
services to the site. At the time of the property's original
construction, the water main serving these
hydrants was installed without an easement granted to the city.
Consequently, this system is classified as a private water
system. As the property owner, you are responsible for raising or
repairing the hydrants to the appropriate elevation and
ensuring they are fully operational for use by the fire
department in the event of an emergency.
Specification for the required work may be obtained from
engineering division or water division.
All repairs must be performed by a licensed contractor,
and a permit must be secured through the engineering division prior to
the commencement of any work. Please contact my office if you
require further information. Thank you.
David Koss, superintendent, City of Warren Water
Division." Thank you.
Thanks, Madam Secretary. Planning director's recommendation.
All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The recommendation is as follows.
It is recommended that the
site plan for the community center and K12
religious education center be approved with the
standard conditions of the planning commission, and more
specifically, number 1, five copies of revised site
plans shall be submitted indicating the following.
1A, a note shall be provided on the site plan
stating all outdoor retail sales of items
shall be prohibited on the site. 1B,
update drawing note number two and replace
City of Troy with the City of Warren.
1C, add the dimensions of the existing building
and the entire parking area to the site plan.
1D, provide the parking space dimensions on
the site plan. Internal parking spaces shall measure
9 by 20, and the parking spaces along
the property line shall be measuring
9 by 22. The maneuvering lanes between
parking rows shall be 22 feet in width.
1E, a note shall be provided on the site plan
that existing metal shopping cart corral
will be removed.
1F, a note shall be provided on the site plan
stating
open storage of materials shall not be permitted on the site.
1G, one parking space shall be
removed that has a large
sign pylon
within it along the west property line. That's Ryan Road.
The space shall be cross-hatched and noted on the site.
1H, a note shall be provided stating all lighting on the
site shall be shielded and not encroach upon abutting properties.
The light fixture's pole and base shall
be no higher than 20 feet as
measured from the top of the light fixture to the bottom of the base at
the ground level.All glare shall be eliminated
from the light fixtures. Upward-directed lighting shall not
be permitted.
1I, the east driveway on 11 Mile Road
shall have the west concrete radii
increased in width by two feet from the street curb
to the public sidewalk
and be indicated on the site plan.
1J,
the existing three or four-foot-high wall
along the east property line shall be
replaced to match the existing six-foot-high
brick embossed poured concrete wall along the
south property line. The existing wall is in poor
condition.
Okay.
1K,
a section of the poured concrete wall measuring eight
feet in length and three feet in height located at the west
end of the six-foot-high brick embossed poured
concrete wall along the south property line projects
into the side setback area,
and that's along Ryan Road. The wall section shall be removed
and noted on the site plan.
1L, all landscaping, that's all trees and grass,
shall be indicated on the plan. 1M, each
trash enclosure shall be provided with gates and
noted on the site plan.
Condition number two, per an inspection of
the site, the planning
staff observed two fire hydrants near the east
wall area that were sunken into the ground.
The fire marshal, Daniel Doherty, responded as follows.
And I get to read all this, but I think Mahmud has already talked about
the fire. I'll read it.
Regarding the proposed site
plan
for the property located at 26680
Ryan Road, there are existing fire hydrants located
within the alley that must be brought into compliance prior
to disabling the fire suppressant system.
City of Warren is currently operating under the
2021 International Fire Code, IFC, which
refers with references NFPA
24. Chapter 7 of NFPA
24 governs the installation of private
fire hydrants and requires the centerline of the
discharge port to be 18 inches above
grade, along with a minimum 36-inch
clearance around the hydrant.
The hydrants currently do not meet the requirements.
They are set too low and do not maintain the required
clearance due to the installation of bollards.
These hydrants are required by code to remain in their current
locations to protect fire protection for the
building. As a result, the hydrants must be repaired
and reset in compliance with code requirements
prior to the fire suppressant system being
disabled for
renovations. David Koss, the superintendent of the water
division, was contacted regarding the fire hydrant
concerns. Mr. Koss in turn
quickly had the hydrants inspected on May
7th, 2026. It was found that the hydrants are privately
owned and irregardless of ownership, the hydrants shall
be adjusted to code requirements.
It is the property owner's responsibility to bring the
hydrants into compliance.
Mr. Koss is checking with the city
if help may be offered for
necessary adjustments, and he found out there
will not be any
help in that regard.
Condition number three, the following variances may need to be obtained from the
Zoning Board of Appeals prior to the release of the site plan to
the building division.
That is, A, to retain the driveway approaches
on both Ryan Road and 11 Mile Road, less
than 500 feet from the major intersection of 11
Mile Road and Ryan Road, per
section 5.11,
number three.
Note,
planning staff has considered the fact that all three
driveways are not in compliance with section
5.11 (3) . The initial design of this
site was for a retail strip center that
required the now existing driveways.
It is
the proposed use that requires
driveways to be 500 feet from the major
intersection on a parcel to reduce traffic
congestion.
The petitioner should remove the two
driveways closest to the major intersection
on each roadway, leaving the remaining driveways
that will still both require a variance.
B, retain 31% lot
coverage when 30% maximum is allowed per section
511, number seven.
And C, to retain the existing parking lots
that are located nine feet from the north, that's
11 Mile Road property line, and 15.4 feet
from the west, that's Ryan Road property line.
If approved, the variances shall be added to the
revised site plan.And
number four, a performance bond in the
amount of $15,000 shall be posted
according to the estimated cost of $500,000
by the petitioner. So with that, Mr.
Chair, the recommendation has been submitted. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ward. This is a public hearing.
If anybody would like to come and speak on this item, please come up, state your
name and address for the record, and you'll have three minutes to
speak.
My name is-
Good evening
... Susan Heath, and I live at 26760 Daniella
Drive, in the condos right behind where they want to put this
school and banquet center.
And I
guess I want to know how my taxes are going to be
raised because of the school. If they
have a bond issue or whatever, my taxes are going to go up.
So I already pay enough taxes, I don't want to pay more taxes.
So I have an issue with taxes
potentially going up even more because of this community
center and the school education center.
And then I'd like to know about parking.
If you're having a banquet center, do you have adequate parking now?
Because part of that parking lot, is it going to be maintained for
the Dollar Store? Is it still going to be there?
Yes, ma'am.
So, do you have enough adequate parking?
Because if not, then it's going to overflow into my street, into my neighborhood,
so I have an issue with that.
And then I'd like to know how traffic is going to be impacted in my
area now because of the banquet center and the school.
Those are my issues.
Thank you, ma'am.
Thank you.
May I please come down?
Would anyone else like to speak on this item?
Good evening.
Hi, my name is Evangela Irvin, and I'm at
4305 John Paul Court.
And to add to taxes, I would like information about
how we think it might affect our taxes and parking.
In addition to that,
I'm concerned about
if they're planning on having school buses, traffic.
I'm talking about
trash in the area,
and I'd like to know how large it's going to be.
How many
students
are we looking at?
And what grade levels? And are you going to have an outdoor
play area? Okay, so school buses, trash, noise,
and an outdoor play area. Those are my concerns.
All right. Thank you, ma'am.
Anyone else like to speak on this item?
Seeing no one, turn over to commission.
Motion to approve with discussion, Mori.
I support it. Mr. Chair, I support it.
We have a motion by Commissioner Mori, supported by Commissioner Holt. Go ahead.
If I may have the petitioner come up.
I know you mentioned the fact that this is an after-school program, so can you walk
me a little bit more on what are the hours of operation for the after-school
program's going to look like?
Yes. So
it's going to be open
excuse me,
from 4:30 PM to about 8:30 PM. During
weekends and holidays, then the intended
program would be about 11:00 AM to about 7:00 PM.
Okay.
And there's no
school buses or anything like that, just parents coming off, dropping their kids
for a couple of hours.
That's about it.
What about the parking situation? So the parents are dropping them off.
I'm assuming the kids are not driving there, unless it's 11th and 12th
graders, which might not be. So, do you have enough
parking for that facility?
We do, yeah. It's on our site plan, actually.
But that is
assured that the parking has been thoroughly calculated according
to the zoning and the use.
And we actually have quite a bit more than we need, I think.
Yeah. So 132 required parking spaces.
We have 205, including 10 ADA.
Okay. What are the hours and operations going to be for the banquet hall?
Well, that I imagine would
be something that
changes.
It's not something that's running on a regular schedule.
But the events that are intended to be in that space would
be things like birthday parties,
interscholastic competitions for the kids,
things of that nature.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you.
Yes.
Commissioner Hawk.
Yes.
Mr. Petitioner, do you understand all the requirement by the planning
department?
Yes.
So are you agree with all of them?
Yes. Yeah, we do. The only two things that, as
that was mentioned in the recommendation was the variances on the
parking and the removal of the driveways, which we'll
have to pursue that with the ZBA to try to get variances on those.
So are you agree with the planning department?
So you want to go for ZBA hearing, right?
Yes.
Okay.
Yep.
Are you done, Commissioner Hawk?
Yes. As
long as they are okay with all the recommendation, so they're
agree
and-And so there is no buses,
right?
No buses.
No buses, and
student will drop off by their parents, right?
Yes.
Okay.
And I have a question about some neighbors
raised concern about the taxes. So I don't know, what is
the issue related to the taxes of the school?
Why the taxes are going to be raised, I have no idea.
Well, if there's a bond issue-
Ma'am. Ma'am.
Yes. I can ask-
The commission has to-
... the planning department. So do we have any-
Have to handle that part.
Oh, okay
Can you give us little explanation on anything?
I don't think there is.
There is no bond.
There is no bond issue at that school.
No. The planning department doesn't have anything to do
with taxes or how they're dispensed.
You'll have to get someone from the assessing department
to answer that question.
Yeah. I believe there is no impact on the taxes, the
school area.
Mayor.
Hold on.
This would be a private?
Right.
It's a private educational center, correct?
This is private. It's not-for-profit, so
it's just free programming for kids.
Private, so legally you cannot go out to the voters for a bond proposal.
No.
So there wouldn't be any increase-
Exactly
... through any proposal.
Thanks.
Mr. Chair.
So to answer your
question, there shouldn't be any taxes increase for that.
Plus, it's a private
organization that's doing it. You're not really changing the building too much,
you're just adding some educational area and some banquet areas,
and therefore...
There's a couple of... I don't know if anybody else has something to say.
I'll let them say that as I make my other questions.
But
would anybody else have anything else to say?
Mr. Chair,
may I please?
I can't hear you.
Mr. Chair, can I please?
Go ahead.
From my understanding,
so far I know that only public school, they
get that tax
from the residents. But as a nonprofit and private, so I don't think
it'll be impact any neighbors for the tax issue.
So that is my understanding, if I'm not wrong.
And I have a question for planning department director.
A few question, please.
Yes, sir.
Yes, sir. I see that a variance is there,
variance number A
for, what you call,
500 feet, we have a two driveway. Is there any other option that if we close
one driveway on 11 mile side, so this
variance will be removed from that recommendation?
No.
Okay.
All four driveways need a variance separately.
All four of them.
And the only reason we're asking for the two,
it'll reduce
it from four to two variances on
driveways, and
those two are closest to the intersection.
As a matter of fact, the one on Ryan Road-
Yeah
... is particularly bad.
Yeah.
But
anyway, so that was our suggestion.
But if they want to try to get a variance for all four,
they can do that.
Is the chicken strip staying there?
Ma'am, the public hearing part is over, so
all the questions have to be directed to here.
Also, I'm trying to understand
variance B, to retain 31% lot
coverage when 30% maximum is allowed
per section 5117. Can you please explain me
little more about it? Is there any way can we remove this one from variance?
You'd have to reduce part of the building
to a certain amount of...
1% of the building would have to be removed to make it
30%, which would be
the maximum you can possibly have on a site.
I don't know that they're going to be doing that.
Yeah. Thank you.
Thank you. Anyone else like to speak on this?
Mr. Chairman, if I may?
Go ahead, Mr. Casey.
I was on this board when we approved Oak Ridge to go into that
area, and we were thrilled about it.
I was hoping
some sort of grocery, retail shop would come in there
after. But the questions that I have,
this says a community center, and you're
saying that you're going to have a banquet center.
So
I don't think it's the same thing,
but are you putting
stoves and freezers and the rest of it in there
to do your own cooking or what?
So the answer to that is no.
Let me clarify. When I say banquet hall, it's just sort of a hall.
There's no commercial kitchen
or freezers in the building.
They're just pantries, I think, and that's what they'll be
kept as.
And then your other point was... Yeah.
So it is a community center because they're supposed to kind of feed off each
other. So the kids that are coming to the afterschool programs, there's a community
there, and they're going to be having whatever events in the hall next door.
Okay. So all this is inside. You're
not going outsideOther than maybe a walk around the
building with the kids
Nothing's happening outside. So actually, we thought that it would just be
a
building department kind of a change, because nothing on the site, nothing on the
building is changing on the exterior.
Okay.
But just because of the use change.
So the use change is triggering the kind of driveway situation that we talked
about-
Well, yeah, I understand that.
That's, yeah.
And that goes with the 500 feet and so on and so forth.
Yeah.
And the one on Ryan, I
hope if you're going to change any of them, change the one on Ryan first.
Because the amount of times that I see people going into that driveway instead of
the chicken shack driveway is ridiculous.
But that being said,
are you going to have any
speakers outside?
No.
To either produce noise, to call people to whatever.
No speakers will be outside.
Okay.
Well, I wish you luck.
I'm not a fan of this, but I wish you luck, and we'll leave it at that.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, sir. Anyone else?
To the petitioner. Good evening again, sir.
One of the concerns I had about the fire hydrants, because they're private fire
hydrants-
Yeah
... and they have to be brought up to code.
I don't know what the expense would be for that, but you're going to be obligated
to do that.
And we already got a note from the city saying that they're not going to
help with that. So,
I don't know if the bond may have to be
redone,
because I don't know how much more expense that would be.
So that's something we'd have to look into.
Because when you're dealing with the underground water systems and bringing
everything up-
Yeah
... it could get, I'm not saying it could, it is, but it could get expensive.
The other thing is,
when you have in the banquet center or the hall where...
Is
there a capacity on the number of people who could be in there?
In terms of the code? The building code?
Yeah.
Yeah, we have it somewhere.
It's on the plan here.
I think
it's 1,300 people. 1310.
800.
800, okay. 800.
800 people?
Yes. 800 people. Yes, I got it. Yep.
So if they have an event there, and being the dollar store is next door,
is
your parking for the event going to affect the dollar store's
operation as far as their customers?
No. Again, it shouldn't, because we have an abundance of parking.
More than what's required.
Okay. Well, I'm just saying, you say you may have 800 people.
That might take up 400 spaces. So I'm just
trying to get an idea and make sure that the dollar store's parking doesn't get
shorted-
Yeah
... because you have a banquet or something like that.
Sure. I
think that 800 number is just from
what comes from the code.
Okay.
But the community's not going to be planning for an 800-person event.
Okay.
Very good.
Mr. Warrick, can you come up?
Would you have an idea what it might cost for those fire hydrants to be
readjusted,
so that we could maybe change the bond a little bit or...?
No, I don't. I was
just told it's going to be expensive.
So I'd have to get that cost from the water director
or water superintendent.
Okay.
I don't know what it is.
We can do that and reassess
what
should be the bond.
Okay.
All right.
All right, then. I think I have another question.
Thank you, Mr. Warrick.
Okay.
Petitioner, can you come up again, please?
All right, so Mr. Warrick's going to check and see,
get an idea what it might cost to do the fire hydrants.
So that means that your bond might end up going up.
So if that does, we'll have to let you know what the increase is going to be.
But for right now, the bond is set at a certain amount.
Mm-hmm.
And what we'll do,
we'll keep it at that for now, and based on what he finds out,
we'll put a condition in the recommendation that the bond may change a little
bit for that.
Okay?
Mm-hmm.
The neighbors were talking about possibly
people
parking on their street
in their neighborhoods.
How are you going to control that?
Can
I open an ear to the-
Sure.
State your name and address for the record, sir.
Yes. This is Mushfigar Raman.
This is Mushfigar Raman.
Address.
Address, 2501 Bloomfield Hills,
Bloomfield Crossing, Bloomfield Hills, Michigan.
Okay.
So actually, the parking,
according to the city law, we have enough parking.
According to the requirement, we have more than that.
So actually, there is no chance or there is no possibility that
somebody will park on the road or somewhere elseI think.
Okay.
We just want to make-
And sir, one thing, sir, just I can tell you, sir, that actually
here the maximum student will be 150 only, sir.
Okay.
The school we are providing, it's like a
knowledge-sharing or learning center like that.
As city telling like that the K12, that is a kindergarten to
12, is not like that, sir.
And we set up here only though for 150 students,
75 girls and 75 boys.
So there is three classes for the boys and three classes for the
girls. That's it. And the maximum is the 150
students, sir.
Okay.
All right. Thank you, sir.
Okay, sir. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much.
Okay. If there's no other questions...
Mr. Chair?
I have a
question regarding the fire hydrant.
So since the other property owner is Dollar Tree, shouldn't they
also incur some of the cost for the fire hydrant, or how does that
work?
Well, I don't know if the Dollar Tree...
Is Dollar Tree the same owner as you?
Actually, sir, Dollar Tree
actually, Dollar Tree, the building belongs to us, and
just we give the rent to the Dollar Tree.
So regarding the fire hydrant and anything
till we
make it up to the mark, then just we'll have to do that.
Dollar Tree will not share with us.
Okay.
We are responsible to do that.
Okay. Very good, sir. Thank you.
Answer your question?
That's my question. Thank you.
All right. Very good.
Go ahead. Commissioner.
Mr. Chairman, I just thought of it.
When we were driving around it, are you going to use all
those dumpster locations? Because I think
there's at least four of them, and the doors on
the front of them are all busted out all over the place.
There's one on the north side. There's one
and there's two... No, there's two on the south side.
That's one.
And there's another one over from it.
There's another one closer down by-
Yeah
... the end of the building.
Are you going to get rid of most of those dumpsters?
Are you going to fix up the
dumpster enclosures?
So actually, the closer one, we should close it, and
the farthest one, just we'll keep.
Okay, because you're going to need to fix those up.
Because-
Yes
...
all of them are a mess.
So that we'll do that according to city
rules and city requirement.
Okay. Well, I'm just bringing it to your attention.
Sir, one thing just I would like to say, sir.
Actually, according to the city rules, we have to have the
distance from the major section to my
driveway that is 500. It should be more than 500.
So actually, sir, we have 456 or something like that.
By very
marginal
distance just we stacked here,
and just we
have to go
to the variance.
Okay.
For variance. So if we'll consider this 40
feet, then
...
Mr. Chairman.
We've gotten into arguments about two feet, so.
Yeah, all right. But you know you got to go to the zoning board for the variances-
Yes
... for the driveways anyway. So all four of them.
And like I say, we want two of them eliminated because of
what the use is because, the
use for it. All right?
Yes, sir.
Okay.
That was a motion by Commissioner Maury, supported by Commissioner Hock.
Roll call.
Commissioner Maury, I vote yes. Commissioner Hock?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Ansir?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Heidi?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Halawati?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Duse?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Benecke?
Yes, to approve.
Commissioner Smith?
Yes, to approve. Good luck with your project, sir.
Thank you.
Item number seven, correspondence.
Item number 7A, letter from the planning director to the members
of the Zoning Board of Appeals. This letter is a response and
clarification of facts regarding public comments made by the ZBA in
reference to the planning department's impact statement for agenda item
6, 22755 Grosbeck Avenue at the April 8,
2026 ZBA meeting. Thank you.
Mr. Worth or Michelle, do you want to speak on this letter, or are we just going to
receive and file?
Receive and file.
Okay. Need a motion to receive and file.
Chair, I make a motion to receive and file.
Support, Benecke.
That is a motion by Commissioner Halawati, supported by Commissioner Benecke.
All in favor?
I.
Any opposed?
Item number 7B.
Item number 7B, site plan for a gas station with convenience
store located on the northeast corner of Mount and 13 Mount Roads,
31104 Mount Road, Section 4, Michael Wiegand and
Gazebo Real Estate, Josh Barton, Agree Convenience Number
1 LLC, PSP250050. Letter to
petitioner, denied by the Planning Commission on April 13,
2026.
Need a motion to receive and file.
So moved, Mr. Chairman.
Support, Chair.
There's a motion by Commissioner Dusek, supported by Commissioner Holowaty.
All in favor?
Aye.
Any opposed? Item number 7C.
Item number 7C, site plan for auto repair shop, parking lot
expansion, and open storage of repair vehicles located on the
southwest corner of Groesbeck Highway and Nine Mile Road,
22755 Groesbeck Highway, Section 35,
Joseph Triangle, JNT Investments,
PSP250017. Letter to
petitioner, approved with conditions by the Planning Commission on May 12,
2025. The required variants were denied by the Zoning Board of
Appeals on April
22nd, 2026. As a result of the variance denials, the
current site plan is no longer valid. Thank you.
Thank you.
Because the site plan is no longer valid, I need a motion to receive and file.
I bring motion,
Mr. Chair.
Support, Chair.
There's a motion by Commissioner Hope, supported by Commissioner Holowaty.
All in favor?
Aye.
Any opposed?
Item number
7D.
Item number 7D, request to vacant easements, vacant the
existing north and south eight
feet wide utility easement located on the rear of lots
1065, 1066, and 17
feet north of lot
1067, and vacant the existing east and
west five feet wide utility easement, east
8.5 feet of Piper's Van D**e Subdivision
number 5, located on the southwest corner of Van D**e Avenue
and Topfer Road, 21647 Van D**e Avenue, Section
33, Valentino Halada,
PEV230002. Letter to City
Council regarding expiration.
I need a motion to receive and file this letter.
So moved, Mr. Chairman.
Support, Bunek, support, Moray.
Support. Motion, Mr. Chairman.
What'd you say?
He made a motion.
I know, I heard that.
She didn't hear it through the mic.
Oh, okay.
There's a motion by Commissioner Dusek, supported by Commissioner Moray.
All in favor?
Aye.
Any opposed? Item number 8A, old business.
Minor amendment to the site plan for parking lot and site
rehabilitation located on the north side
of 10 Mile Road, approximately 355.46
feet east of Ryan Road, 4225 Ten Mile Road, Section
20, Terry Messina, Comerica Bank,
Sonia Varania, At Well LLC,
PMA260003.
Thank you.
Good evening.
Good evening. We received notification that they would like
to postpone this until July 13th.
Additionally, there are some legal description discrepancies that we're working
with the assessing and Macomb County land file to resolve before that time.
Okay. Thank you, Michelle.
All right. Thank you.
So I need a motion to postpone this item till July 13th.
Motion to postpone, Mr. Chairman.
Support,
Commissioner Ansar.
There's a motion by Commissioner Dusek, supported by Commissioner Ansar, to
postpone this item to July 13th.
Roll call.
Commissioner Dusek?
Yes.
Commissioner Ansar?
Yes.
Commissioner Heide?
Yes.
Commissioner Holowaty?
Yes.
Commissioner Hawk?
Yes.
Commissioner Moray votes yes. Commissioner Bunki?
Yes.
Commissioner Smith?
Yes to postpone to July 13th. Item 8B.
Item number 8B, minor amendment to site plan for industrial building for
modification of truck wells located on the southwest corner of Tank
Avenue and George Merilees Drive, Section 16,
27767 George Merilees Drive.
Kerry Easterday, Warren Industrial Investor,
LLC, Dan LeBlanc, Android Assembly,
PMA240001. The minor amendment is to
modernize the current truck wells approved on
April 22nd, 2024. The petitioner is requesting a
one-year extension to April 22nd, 2027.
Thank you.
Thank you. First of all, I'd like to recognize this as a minor amendment.
Need a motion.
Motion to recognize as minor amendment, Moray.
Support, Bunki.
There's a motion by Commissioner Moray, supported by Commissioner
Bunki, to recognize as a minor amendment. All in favor?
Aye.
Any opposed?
No.
Good evening, sir.
Hold it.
Quick note of order. This is for an extension.
It was a minor amendment, but it is just an extension.
And he is here to-
I know, I know.
Oh, okay. I just wanted-
I'm going to call him. I just wanted to recognize it as a minor amendment because
it was a minor amendment, but now it's going to have him come out.
I'm not getting rid of him yet.
Good evening, sir.
Good evening.
Just state your name and address for the record.
Dan LeBlanc.
Address is 27767 George Merilees Drive, Warren,
Michigan.
It's Avance Assembly. We do
value-added service for Stellantis.
We are very close to fulfilling everything
that the city wanted us to fulfill,
and I'm just simply asking for an extension.
I don't believe I need a year, but I'm very close to
completing everything that's been requested
on the site plan.
I just have a couple open items that we didn't get finished.
Okay. Very good, sirAll right.
The petitioner's asking for a one-year extension-
Yes
... on this project. And so I need a motion.
So moved, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chair, I support it.
There's a motion by Commissioner Doucette, supported by Commissioner Hawk.
Roll call.
Commissioner Doucette?
Yes.
Commissioner Hawk?
Yes.
Commissioner Ansir?
Yes.
Commissioner Heidi?
Yes.
Commissioner Holowaty?
Yes.
Commissioner Morey votes yes. Commissioner Bonecki?
Yes.
Commissioner Smith?
Yes. Approve a one-year extension to April 22nd, 2027.
Thank you. I appreciate it.
Thank you, sir. Sorry for the delay this evening.
Hey, don't worry.
Have a good evening.
I'm good. Thank you.
You're earning your pay today.
Item number
8C.
Minor amendment to site plan for building addition located on the west
side of Hoover Road between Hupp Avenue and Topfer
Road, 22105 Hoover Road, Section 34,
Daniel Morrell and Ajax Metal Processing, Inc.,
PMA-250003. The minor amendment is
for a building addition, relocation of a storage tank, and pavement
replacement. Approved on March 24, 2025.
The petitioner is withdrawing their minor amendment application. Thank you.
Okay, I need a motion to withdraw their application for the
minor amendment.
Chair, I make that motion.
Support Moray.
There's a motion by Commissioner Holowaty, supported by Commissioner Moray.
All in favor?
Aye.
Any opposed?
Number nine, bond released.
Number nine, minor amendment to site plan for building addition located on the west
side of Hoover Road between Hupp Avenue and Topfer Road,
22105 Hoover Road, Section 34, Daniel
Morrell and Ajax Metal Processing, Inc.,
PMA-250003. The minor amendment is for a
building addition, relocation of a storage tank, and pavement replacement.
Approved on March 24, 2025. Cash bond posted in the amount
of $28,500. Minor amendment withdrawn,
release the bond.
I need a motion to release the bond.
Chair, I make a motion to release the bond.
Mr. Chair, I support it.
There's a motion by Commissioner Holowaty, supported by Commissioner Hawk.
All in favor?
Aye.
Aye. To release the bond.
Item number 10, new business. Seeing none.
Item number 11, citizen participation.
Anybody would like to speak?
You all up,
Duke.
Item number 12A, planning director's report.
This has been a long one, needless to say.
Far longer than I thought.
To start off with,
just a few things that I was part of, but I was in a
PUD
meeting.
Maybe
Mr. Doucette will want to expound upon that, but that was on
the 23rd, April 23rd. After
that,
I was
at the
American Planning Association
conference,
downtown Detroit for four days.
What an experience that was, and
it's all new to me,
believe it or not, after all these years.
But that conference,
it's different in the scale,
what we experience, what you've been to,
Delmar.
But I have to say our Michigan conferences are-
Yeah
... a lot better, needless to... Much better.
So
anyway, not as many things, different sessions that you can take.
But,
it was a learning experience, needless to say.
So I
enjoyed that.
I attended a meeting with Mr. Spiller, he's the parks and
recreation director. That had to do with a
new master plan for the parks and rec
department, and so we discussed that with their
consultant.
I'm on
their
committee to review that and get
things going.
And so
I attended that meeting.
What else here, if I can read my own writing.
Okay.
I'll tell you, primarily that's it, other than getting all the
findings and recommendations together with
Michelle. We worked really hard
on all this.
So that's about all I have, if you have any questions.
Thank you, sir. Anybody have any questions for Mr. Warych?
Chair?
Yeah.
Okay.
I hope I'm not out of place, but has the budget for the city been finalized
yet?
I can't understand you. You're-
Okay. Has the budget for the city been finalized?
Tomorrow night it will be going before the city
in the city council meeting.
So watch the meeting, and you'll find out.
Okay. Thank you, sir.
Okay.
Any other questions for Mr. Warych?
Item number 12B, planning commission discussion and concerns.
Recons--
I'll go ahead and read?
Go ahead.
Okay.
Do, okay.
Reconsideration of excused absence for Commissioner Ansar.
On April 20, 2026, the Planning Commission
unanimously excused Commissioner Dilawar Ansar absence from the
evening's Planning Commission meeting.
On April 21, 2026, Chairman Warren Smith contacted the Planning
Department to request a reconsideration of his vote to excuse the
absence of Commissioner Ansar at the April
2026 Planning Commission meeting.
Chairman Smith has rescinded his vote to excuse Commissioner Ansar
due to not receiving proper notification ahead of the scheduled meeting.
Thank you.
Any discussion on that?
I wasn't here.
Yes.
Okay.
Commissioner Dziedzic, do you have something you wanted to say?
No, I wanted to make a comment about the planned unit
development meeting that I went to.
Go ahead.
No, no, no, that's in the middle of this. No.
Do it after. Yeah, do it after.
Okay. All right.
Mr. Chair, I do have a... I think I was
sick, and I informed the last moment.
Today also I'm sick, but I thought I should
be here, and that's why I came here.
Other day, I was really sick probably.
I thought it's going to be bad to be in the meeting.
That's the reason, at the last moment, I had to say I
cannot make it, because I don't want to make a situation embarrassing for other
people, and other people can get sick, too.
Okay. But normally, if you're going to be sick and you think you can't make
it, then I know if you're sick, you don't want to-
Some of the situation, you cannot.
Pardon me?
Like today, you see that I'm still coughing, but I made it.
But other day, the situation was not like that.
You can
tell two weeks before that you are getting sick.
But I understand that. All I'm just saying is just let somebody know.
You can text somebody.
I think I emailed.
No. We got no email or anything.
That's the reason we did it as unexcused.
Oh. I did not?
No.
Oh, then that was probably completely I missed it-
No
... somehow.
But we accept your excuse now, but
it's already been unexcused, so.
Mr. Chairman.
Just let us know next time.
Okay. I'll wait.
Okay.
Then probably I completely missed it.
All right. Very good. Thank you, sir.
Commissioner Dziedzic?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On April 23rd, we had a
planned unit development committee meeting.
This was in regarding to putting an
EV charging station with canopy
behind the gas station at the Meijer on
Mound Road,
south of 13 Mile Road.
They're going to put in for
EV charging for cars there,
and I think
they're putting that in, but what I walked away from
is that we in Warren do not have any
ordinance or any way to control
handicapped. We all paint them blue.
There is no ordinance, no law to paint them blue
for handicapped.
And I think that it would make sense for the planning
department to take a look at if we're doing
handicapped blue, if we're doing
EV, possibly do the paint in
green
to signify EV.
But there are no rules for colors on any of this, either from the
city or the state,
or the county that I know of.
And that was the one thing that I was very surprised about. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Mr. Chair? That is correct. There's no state law regarding the
color of striping.
Right.
I think there's a concern from city council
to just make the accessible spaces blue,
and I'm not sure. Right now, there's not an ordinance.
Yeah.
Right now.
That was the part that-
But that was the only-
... that I thought I should report to this committee and say something
because, frankly, I couldn't believe it.
But it is what it is. And I think going forward,
if Warren took a step in the direction of
color-coding some of this stuff,
we'd be further ahead in the long run.
That is correct. That's the direction that things might
be heading. But for that particular development, there was
an ancillary
development on the property.
Right.
And when council made the approval, there was reference to
blue striping.
Okay.
So I think that's how it came about.
And that's fine. But I think that we should look into and
possibly have different striping for different reasons within the city.
That's it.
Well, as we have more and more of these EV stations, then that might-
That's right
... be something that will be put in-
Or something close to it.
Right.
That being said, I'll make a motion that we adjourn.
No, I'm not done.
Can't do that. Can't do that.
We can adjourn, but I'm not done.
Should've kept going.
I'll second that.
It's... No. Yeah? Yeah. We have to come up with-
I can second that.
We have one more thing we have to go over. I know it's getting late.
I got a email from the council commissions. They want a nomination form.
Our representative from the council commissions is Merrill.
You still wanted to be on the commission for that?
Sure.
They also want to know the name of alternative, if alternate
wanted to be on it
Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chair. I want to bring something up regarding that real quick, and I don't
mean to interrupt, but it is regarding that conversation.
What's this one?
Yeah. So, with the award ceremony the mayor is holding
next week,
is it next week or two weeks?
I emailed them. This is something I have been bringing up almost every single year
ever since I joined, is that they don't have halal food options, nor do they
have seafood or vegetarian options in any of those venues for the
past four years that I have attended.
With that, there is quite a significant amount of people that attend
those that are not able to enjoy the food that is being hosted for
everyone. So when I emailed Jeff again, when he
invited everyone in those emails, I emailed, and I asked,
"What's the scenario going to look like for food this year?" Again, because
this is actually my fourth email to him in every single year.
He mentioned the fact that, and this is one of the reasons I want to bring it up,
he mentioned the fact that a representative from the Planning
Commission hasn't attended any of the meetings, and that might not be true.
So I just wanted to bring that up and ask that question, is
that why
is that email coming back?
Most of the meetings they have conflict with our meetings.
Oh, okay.
Okay.
Oh, that works. Yeah, that's...
Okay.
That's definitely-- So,
this is actually my fourth time bringing to the mayor, the previous mayor
and this mayor, that we don't have any...
For example, I can't have any food that's not halal.
So if there's not seafood options, there's not vegetarian options, that really
limits for me. There's no point in me going.
I don't know why I'm even going there at this point.
But I wanted to just bring that up, and I would like to be an alternative to that,
if possible. Thank you.
Okay.
All right then. So what we're going to do, I'm going to put Ms.
Moray down, Commissioner Moray.
Okay.
And Commissioner
Benecke, Commissioner Moray down here as an alternative.
Fine.
And
we'll fill out the form. You can submit it to Jeff.
Uh-oh.
Any other nominations?
Planning staff would be glad to look into that
and talk to the mayor directly, and talk to Jeff
and talk to Mr. Wiegand, and see if we can get the
proper food that you're able to
consume. All right?
Thank you.
We'll check into it tomorrow.
You're welcome.
He has the form.
Already Moray mentioned that I had same experience.
I was going to say the same thing. Every year, we don't enjoy the food.
Oh.
Who's going to be a substitute for Benecke?
Okay. Let me have that one back first, Gary then-
Yeah
... I'll give you this one.
She's going to fill everything out on that one, then she can give it to
you.
Any other discussion or concerns?
Mr. Chairman?
Yes.
Before the adjournment, I want to thank our newest member, Commissioner Heidi,
on
lasting three and a half hours.
Yeah.
And I will be surprised if he comes back.
But thank you for being here, and thank you for joining.
Thank you, Commissioner Heidi.
The pleasure is all yours.
Correct.
Chip off the old block.
He's been hanging around you too long.
We go back a ways, so
I can tell.
Item number 11, calendar pending matters.
Seeing none, motion to adjourn.
So moved, Mr. Chairman.
Support.
We have a motion by Commissioner Dusek, supported by Commissioner Holloway.
Have a good evening, everyone.
Thank you.
You too. Thank you.
Oh, bye. Thank you