Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening everyone. I'd like to uh call to order the Chesterfield Township Planning Commission on May 5th, 2026. If you would please silence your phones, we'd appreciate it. I'd like to acknowledge uh some people that are here with us tonight. Robert Sebert, Township Attorney. Jonathan Palen, Township Planner. Ava Miller and Joe Bomb from Giffels Webster. And with that uh 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. Okay. Uh I'd like to do the roll call. Um Rick LaBelle. Here. Uh Richard Brokhart. Here. Brian Carr. Here. James Kolanowski.

Here. Mark Reno. Here. Eric Heider. Here. Carl Leonard is here, and we have Kathy Vosburg and um Ralph Jaworski are excused tonight. Uh so with that, um like to make a motion to approve the minutes from April 21st, 2021. Support. Have a motion by Carl, supported by Mark. Any questions or comments? None. All in favor? Aye. Motion carries. Uh opposed? Motion carries. I'd like to approve tonight's agenda. As submitted. Motion by Carl, supported by Eric, to approve the agenda. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Um we have uh uh public comments right now. If anybody would like to come up, and you got 3 minutes to talk about anything you'd want. Uh we do have a public hearing tonight. You'll be able to come up at that time for the public hearing. Um but if there's anything else anybody anybody would like to talk about? Nothing? Okay. Thank you. Um so with that, I'd like to We have a public hearing tonight. I'd like to make a motion to open the public hearing. Support. Motion by Carl, supported by Mark, to open public hearing for the various development group site plan 2026-05 special land use RM-2. It's 2.14 acres, north side of 23 Mile

Road, east of Sherborne Drive, parcel ID 15-09-14-400 -033 and 15-09-14-400-034. The address is 34855 23 Mile Road. Uh with that, we're going to have uh Ava Miller from Giffels Oh. Let me back up 1 second. Uh the public hearing um we didn't vote. So, sorry. Um you have a motion by Carl supported by Mark, to open the public hearing. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Public hearing is now open. So, circling back, uh we'll have Ava Miller from Giffels uh do a presentation. Thank you. Thank you. So, I'll be looking at our review letter dated April 24th, 2026. Uh the applicant is proposing one child daycare center in the RM-2 multiple family residential zoning district, which is a special land use. The proposed daycare building is almost 2,000 square feet, and has an outdoor play area that is around 6,000 square feet. The Planning Commission is tasked with reviewing the plans and deciding whether the site meets all zoning ordinance standards and their intent as applicable. Additionally, the Planning Commission must find that all eight standards for special land use have been met to grant the special land use approval. The applicant has provided a narrative explaining how the project complies with these standards. Looking at the bottom of page two at the dimensional standards, the street side yard and the interior side yard setback are deficient according to standards, but the applicant received variances for both of these. Uh and part of the approved part of the

approval required the applicant to provide land bank parking. Uh moving on to page three, standard L3, um regarding the 20 ft of landscaped yard, uh we have some corrections to this. So, because of the variance, um the landscaped yard to the east and the west um is deficient um in pavement and a part of the building encroaching to the buffer, but because of the approval of the variance, uh we believe that these do not qualify for this standard since it was approved. Uh and to the north, the applicant provided a 15-ft greenbelt that acts as a buffer for the residential properties. Uh and it appears there is room to expand this greenbelt, uh which would then meet the 20 ft of landscaped yard. And to the south, I wanted to clarify that there is a 10-ft wide sidewalk directly along the property line. Um this is within the 20-ft buffer, but the applicant has stated that this is due to existing utility poles on the site and the road curb location. Um however, a 23-ft wide buffer is provided between this sidewalk and the parking lot. Um moving on to page four, I'll go over building and surface materials. Uh the elevation sheet appears to be mislabeled, so we noted this in our review with the correct elevations I'll be referring to. Um the south and west elevations of the building that face the road are comprised entirely of brick. The north and east elevations have a 3-ft high brick impact barrier, and are otherwise composed of the pre-approved James Hardie lap siding. The proposed pre-approved Glen-Gery brick meets thickness specifications, uh and two brick colors are proposed. The proposed trim and siding are from the pre-approved James Hardie manufacturer that are factory finished in the color white and gray slate, and the siding meets thickness requirements,

but it is unclear what the warring warranty is, and and it shall be provided by the applicant uh for the brick and the siding. Uh the doors are noted to be factory primed and finished with a white paint color. The ordinance states that the exterior surface of all buildings are subject to the standards of this section, and that no materials are painted or require painting shall be permitted on any elevation of any building. Uh the Planning Commission may wish to discuss whether the building material standard should apply to doors, so as to whether they should be painted or not. Um Moving down to number six, screening minor screening is required to the north where uh single family parcels are located. The applicant is proposing a 15-ft wide greenbelt with a 4-ft tall chain link fence. This is compliant. Uh shrubs and ground cover or mulching is required, and are noted to be compliant on sheet C9 of the plans. Uh no shrubs are shown in this area, so this uh the applicant shall specify if the area is proposed to be mulched. Uh and then if land bank parking is needed in the future, the applicant would need to provide moderate screening to the north as opposed to the minor screening. Moving on to page six for off-street parking, uh one thing I wanted wanted to mention was the required uh five stacking spaces for a daycare use. These are included in the plans as part of the 90° parking spaces. Uh where it is assumed that the customers will park and walk their children in as opposed to having a drop-off style uh sort of system. Um but just something that the Planning Commission may wish to discuss if the stacking spaces provided meet the intent of the ordinance. As for 12 vehicular ingress and egress, um there are two driveways leading into the site. Uh both of these driveways are 20 24 ft wide. Um the

uh the entrance off of 23 Mile Road has a concrete island kind of separating the ingress and the egress. Uh and then the other one doesn't. Uh since these are both uh ingress and egress entrances, they are required to be at least 30 ft wide according to the standards. Uh the applicant shall increase the width of the Sherborne Drive entrance. Um but the planning commission may wish to discuss if the driveway on 23 Mile Road meets the intent of this section. Uh since there is that um concrete separator. Uh additionally, the applicant may wish to show that the circulation and flow of cars is safe and doesn't cause backups at peak times. Regarding pedestrian circulation, number 14. Uh given the amount of vehicular circulation in the parking lot, additional sidewalk striping for pedestrians should be added for additional safety since all of the driveways um have the have different directions going not just one way.

[snorts]

For number 15, waste management and the bollards. The plans note that the trash enclosure enclosure gate will be painted to match the main building trim and that the bollard that encloses a steel pipe uh is also proposed to be painted. Um the applicant shall update the plans to not have painted materials for this. And then lastly, 16, fences. A white PVC fence is provided around the play area and along the sides of the building. On the sides of the building, the fence is 4 ft tall and the fence around the play area 6 ft tall. The planning commission may wish to discuss whether the proposed fences are acceptable according to the standards. And then of course, if there are any questions, we'll be happy to answer. Thank you. Um is the I assume the applicant's here. Would you like to come up and speak on this? Hi. Yes, my name is uh Reed Cooksy with Stonefield Engineering Design here representing the applicant Bear Development Group. Um really do appreciate Eva kind of giving you guys a run down of everything that we've been working on the past uh few months with the township here. Um I'll give you guys a high-level overview of you know, why this development works, how the how it works operationally, and then kind of address some of the uh the conditional items that that were mentioned. So, one of the reasons we got attracted to this site was this is the same developer that did the Starbucks next door that just started construction. And obviously, they wanted to help control what was brought in here. Um we understand in the past that this site um people wanted to do commercial here and that was met with a lot of pushback from the neighbors and things like that and um based on the unique shape, you know, how long and uh narrow it is, it really was difficult for us to um do something with a multi-family uh focus, you know,

whether it's townhouses or or something like that. It didn't really fit on this piece of property. And that's when uh the learning experience uh became involved. Um we do a lot of work with uh daycare users, not just this one, but one of the things that we look for most in a site is that perfect transitional use. You know, if you look at the ordinance, you want you want to find a good blend from your residential to your commercial uses. And 23 Mile is is just that. It's very difficult to put multi-family up on a a road of that size. And this allows uh the customers for this um property um to be able to bypass it on their way to work, out shopping, things like that. We're envisioning the residents, the young residents that are moving to Chesterfield Township that live in the neighborhood behind us, that live close on 23 Mile, that are driving to and from work, this is on their route and they don't have to go out of their way. That's the perfect customer for us and that's what makes this piece of land um very desirable for us. Um as far as operationally goes, um one thing that's really changed over the years is kind of how um daycares work and operate. Um you know, 20, 30 years ago, they operated more in a public school drop-off bell system. Everyone's got to be here by 8:00 a.m. You got to pick them up by 3:00 p.m. and that's really not the model anymore. Our hours are 6:30 to 6:30, so 12 hours. But we've done plenty of studies that show what that incorporates. It's in the uh the operational memo that we provided. But what that allows us to not have a bell system is while we do have a peak time right around 7:30, 8:00 when most people are going to work, um pick up and drop-off usually takes about 4 to 6 minutes. And we have a a a uh the most people we usually have, most vehicles we have on site is around 17. That's not including staff. That's

17 parents dropping off at one time. And they come and go throughout the day. And then towards the end of the day, we see a much longer stretch in that peak time just cuz people are leaving work early, they're picking their kids up early, they have a different um different schedule in the afternoon than they do in the morning. So, um the parking, like it was mentioned, we did get a variance for it, but the five stacking spaces, this should not be an issue. And then because of the rolling um drop-off and pick-up time, we also have rolling uh employment. You'll see on the plans we say 23 employees. We're never at peak employees. That's the maximum number of employees we have. We only the staffing is there just for who's there at the time. Generally, we see 80% of um 80% of students each day, whether that's illness, whether that's vacations, things like that. 80% of students are there each day. And then we also have a lot of siblings that come to the facility. So, when you're talking, when you're breaking the numbers down, we really um minimize the amount of cars that are actually on this site at one time, um which really helps us with the uh the parking number we have here. Um the last thing I wanted to mention is just how uh the playgrounds operate. I know it's in the letter about playground size. We have about 6,000 sq ft. Um you'll see there's three different playground areas and they all have sidewalks to different doors. What that allows us to do is it gives each individual classroom internally direct access to an external sidewalk to get to their designated play area. That way there's not congestion in the hallways, there's not confusion in the hallways getting back and forth, and the teachers can lead them to and from. As well as the different age groups go out there at different times. We never have all students outside at once and therefore we meet the requirement there for the amount of square footage per per child because we generally have two or three groups outside at a time and those are very limited numbers to to utilize the the playground. Um other than that, you know, operationally, that's that's really what

I wanted to talk about. As far as the um items for review, um the ins- the increased landscape yard width to the rear, you know, we call it 15 ft, but really we're 150 ft. It's all grass, landscaping, and our our detention pond. So, that's already met. We'll just change the how it's called out on the on the plan. That rear area is going to be a combination of mulch and grass. Um so, it'll meet the ordinance in there. We'll make sure that's identified in that in that uh rear green belt area. And then as far as the trash enclosure and painted, I actually already have We already changed revised the plans. Um we're we going to submit them to the township this week. Um that was an oversight on our end calling those it painted. We understand there's no painting in uh the township. So, we are perfectly comfortable making sure that um there's nothing painted, that it's sleep bollards and everything like that. So, um with that, we'd be happy to answer any questions you guys may have um for the plans. We're really excited about this project. We think it brings a huge need that that all townships in this area are having, child care, to the uh community to help with the uh the younger parents in the neighborhoods directly adjacent here. And uh we think it really helps kind of bridge the gap between the rest of the commercial that's on 23 Mile and the residential we see right off of Sherborne. Thank you much. Um we're going to hit see if anybody from the public wants to come up. And then we'll close the public hearing, bring back up here, and uh then we can get into some discussions. Is there anyone from the uh public that would like to talk on this? Thank you. Uh please state your name and address, and uh you have 3 minutes. Thank you. Mark Furtaw, 51319 Brush Road Drive. I do live in the uh subdivision directly behind where they're talking

about building. Um at the zoning commission, I heard a lot of this is a very tight site. This is a very tight site. I agree. I think the uh granting of the variance of their parking was wrong, but that's what they did. Um I feel that there's going to be a lot of traffic issues there. We already have the problem when we try to turn left out of our subdivision with the Kroger traffic coming out. They not only turn in front of you when you're trying to pull into our subdivision, when you're in the turn lane, they'll pull just right in front of you. But when you're trying to turn out and you have the right of way, they pull in front of you also. Now add in the Starbucks, when they turn right out of there, they're going to do the same thing. They're going to turn right in front of us trying to turn into our subdivision. There's going to be traffic and accidents there. Now you add this daycare where people are going to start pulling out of our that turning right onto 23 from the one exit right on 23, and they're going to do the same thing. They're parents. They're in a rush. They're picking up their kid, they're dropping off early in the morning. People turning in or even turning out, they're not going to pay attention to us and there's going to be even more accidents for that. My other concern on top of that is if there's no parking in there because they reduce the parking size, they're going to start parking on the street, on Sherborne. Which if you get a car parked on both sides of that street, it's tough to get through. It's one traffic one car can get through there. And so now if you have people parking there, if you're trying to get out of there or pull in, it's going to be nothing but a traffic jam and it's going to start stacking up on 23. Is my feeling. Now, I appreciate the daycare because it's not going to operate on the weekends compared to the Culvers which yes, there was a lot of

pushback on that. I'm kind of surprised more of my neighbors aren't here today, but anyways, um I just feel that that traffic on that intersection is going to be increased especially when you get that Starbucks operating and that just concerns me. And I don't know if anybody else has thought about this, but I know it's in New Baltimore, but there's two marijuana grow houses right over there in New Baltimore or is there one? One. Okay, you're putting that close to a daycare center. I know they don't sell, but then there's also the mental health facility right there in the that we've had problems in the past where people have left there and I think that New Baltimore police and even Chesterville police respond there quite a bit for incidents because the staff can't handle people in that facility. And there was actually a time three or five years ago where somebody got out and they went into someone's house. They broke into someone's house. So now you got a daycare facility there. That's okay. Thank you for your time. I appreciate it. Is there anyone else like to come up and speak? Well, um does the applicant have anything to add to that or you want to wait until it comes back up to the board? Yep, we we understand, you know, there's there's a concern with, you know, any development coming into that into that piece of property, you know, what is the traffic going to be, you know, you know, compared to what Culvers was going to bring in or any other commercial development, you know, we're considerably less, you know, we're only open 5 days a week and it's very typical traffic. It's reliable traffic because everyone at that center knows

what their drop-off times are. They understand how operationally pick up and drop-off works. So we have a very knowledgeable base of customers if you'll you'll will that they come to the facility. We've done studies. It was part of the operational memo of how many children on average are are picked up during different 30-minute increments. The average pickup time takes 8 minutes. We see pickup times lasting a little bit longer than drop-off times. It's just the nature of parents in the morning are trying to rush them out to get on with their day and the pickup they've very much completed their work day and are a little bit more more relaxed. So in the morning drop-off like I said is closer to 5 or 6 minutes where pickups are around 8 minutes, but we've done plenty of parking studies and that's where that data comes from that at the peak of it, I think for a facility over 183 students, which we are less than that, we have 45 kids being picked up in any one 30-minute increment at 8 minutes a pop, you know, we're less than 20 cars in any given any given time. That's that's the maximum amount of cars are there or kids being picked up and that doesn't account for parents that are picking up two kids at a time, which, you know, if you look at the breakdown of of our type of use, like I said, we have 80% of on any given day only 80% of the occupancy is there on average and then of that, you know, enrollment about 70% No, sorry. About 30% are siblings. So of the 30 of the 100% occupancy, 30% of those are are parents that have multiple kids at the facility. So um we're pretty confident in our in our traffic. We've done plenty of studies. We would never want to be under parked and then that is why part of the motion for ZBA was to make sure we had that land bank parking. If for some reason

there are issues, which we're very confident there won't be, the township can come and ask us to implement that rear parking area, which we will gladly put in and then we'll make sure that has the the full adequate screening of the major screening requirements, which would also be required. Thank you. Um So I'd like to make a motion to close the public hearing. Support. Motion by Carol supported supported by Rick to close the public hearing. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Um with that, we'll bring it up to the the board and let everybody have a shot at it. Eric. I got a couple questions. If you might come up. Thanks for coming out. I think it's overall it's a well thought out plan. Explain a little more about the stacking and dropping off relationship to, you know, the percentage and the demographics because, you know, of course with parents dropping their kids off, how many parents are going to actually park their cars to drop the kids off and they actually stay in the car, drop it off and the stacking becomes 20 parking spaces, then you're again we have a parking issue on the corner even though we do have one way and one way off 23 mile. That's a great question. So to kind of give a little bit more color there. So 100% of parents will be parking and bringing their kids in. This is the model. There are no teachers outside waiting for kids as in a public school system where they'd walk off the bus and there's teachers and teachers aids that are helping them find their classroom. All parents are required to take their kids, get out of the car, bring them into the facility and bring them to their classroom. Um So every every parent will be parking for the five or six minutes. They will then get back in their car and they will drive and leave. So when we say the five stacking spaces are accounted for in the parking, we're we're really not even considering

stacking because we're only looking at the amount of parking we need and this facility has um 43 parking spaces and in the mornings and in the afternoons, we're around 13 to 15 staff members and then like I said, we only need about 15 to 20 parking spaces for drop-off in that time frame. So we need at a minimum 35 and our our comfort zone is 40 to 45 spaces. Anything over 45 in in our eyes is over parked and unnecessary for our operations. So that was the reason for the size of the parking lot is your demographics and having the land bank in the back. Yep, absolutely. And where the actual building is in instead of creating a lot of Yeah.

wanted to make sure that we had sufficient parking for our operations, but keep but also keeping it as far away from the residents as we could. You know, we didn't want to put any unnecessary parking out there. That's why we sought the variance and you know, said we would land land bank them if it became an issue, which you know, again, the learning experience. We've got hundreds of facilities across the country. We're very confident that our uh Okay. you know, what we need. And you answered a couple of my other questions on the painting, which is good. Um the the difference of the fence height between 4 and 6, what's the reasoning for that? Yep, so the external fences are 6 ft and that's just to provide some some additional screening. The internal fences are 4 ft, which allow teachers to look over the fence by keeping the division between the the different age groups. Yeah, other than that, good plan. Thank you. Really appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. James.

[clears throat] Yeah, nice plan, nice setup. Looks very good. Uh the only thing I'd like to point out, I did see some signage on the south and east elevations. That'll have to be addressed. That's not part of the site plan. So

Yeah, absolutely. You know, that's just the prototypical signage there. We understand that that'll need to get approved as, you know, in a separate sign package. So Okay, thank you. Thank you. Rich. I'm a little confused about your your ingress and egress. I saw in the Giffels-Webster report that if it's going in one way, 24 ft width is okay, but if it's in and out in that same opening, it should be 30 ft. Can you help me understand what you've got Yeah, so we went

mile road and the crossroad? Yeah, absolutely. So what we showed was the prototypical entrance size for both MDOT, which is 23 mile, and then RCOC, which is Sherborne. You know, they prefer the smaller entrances. They don't want these big wide entrances out there, but we understand talking with Ava and and Jonathan that is the the township standard. So we're committed to widening the driveway especially on Sherborne and then you know, we will widen it on 23 mile as well, but that is a right in right out. So you know, if you guys decide that we don't need to widen it, we'd prefer to keep it narrower. Just facility like this one doesn't get deliveries. We don't have large semis or things like that trying to get in and out of the site that may need a larger commercial style entrance. So but we're open to to widening both to 30 ft if if that's what the the commission wants to see. That's what I'm going to want to see. It's good to hear that you'll do that. That's all I have. Thank you. Thank you. Mark. My issue was just covered so I'm good. Thank you. Brian.

[clears throat] Yeah, just a couple things. Um So, back to the parking just to to understand it. So, 43 spots, 13 employees. So, that leaves 30. And then I noticed in a couple of your peak windows you have 43 and 45 students respectively within a 30-minute window. So, are parents like phased within that 30 or can in theory like if their window to pick up their kid is from 4:00 to 4:30, you're not they can all show up at 4:00 technically. Right, they're given a half-hour window to get their kid, but there really isn't any staging of that 30 minutes. It's there's So, in theory

clarify that. So, nobody's given a window to pick up their child. That is just what we see on average when people are coming to pick them up. So, it is staged. So, just in that 30 minute window we see 43 kids getting picked up, but on average pick up takes 8 minutes. So, you know, we'll have starting at the on the hour 15 kids will get picked up the next and that'll take 8 minutes and then the next kind of time frame maybe seven kids get picked up. So, that's just a rolling amount through that 30 minutes. No parent is actually assigned a time to come pick them up. So, it's not a bell system in that. That's just a very average and then like it says, you know, general pick up time takes 8 minutes. You know, and if you you know, look at these studies we generally need about 17 or 18 parking spaces to accommodate 43 kids getting picked up in a in a window. But we have 30. Even like on the day before holiday when parents are getting off early they want to get them. No, I'm just I'm only asking the questions cuz I'm curious. I mean obviously the ZBA already approved it, but I'm just trying to understand the the the numbers. That's all. So,

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I get it on an average day, but I mean there are peaks, right? They're on the holidays or

and that's what that is trying to show is 3:00 to 3:30 there's only going to be seven or eight kids getting picked up and that peaks at 4:30 to 5:00 and then, you know, obviously on holidays maybe that peak skews a little bit earlier cuz everybody's getting out, but um you know, we also the day before holidays generally have less students there cuz some people are taking days off of work. So, um we've we've looked at this. We would never put our operations in a uh you know, hardship. Um you know, we would we would add the parking if we absolutely needed it and that's kind of what we articulated with the operational narrative and and everything like that with ZBA. Yeah. Okay, understood. My other question is um the the dumpster enclosure. I was a little confused on just the you know, when I look at the dumpster enclosure, you have a 5-ft walkway that is dead ends right in the middle of your dumpster enclosure, which I thought was a little odd. Um you know, just because again in theory employees are walking out with bags of trash and you got a 5-ft walkway that only about 2 and 1/2 ft of it is, you know, open to actually the other 2 and 1/2 ft is kind of running right into a brick wall. So, I didn't have a I had a I was curious why that's not pushed back farther to the east for two reasons. One, obviously there's an interference with the sidewalk, which again is kind of goofy. But the other thing was from a traffic perspective and in particular the parking space that's right to the south of it, that person's going to be backing up and then a person in the other corner that's just to the north of it's going to be backing up and that person's not going to be able to see around a, you know, 6-ft high brick wall. So, I was just curious from a safety perspective, vehicular safety perspective, you know, again why that's not pushed farther to the east

to try to create some, you know, clear um vehicular, you know, sight lines. Yeah, no, it's a great question. There's actually a uh a DT Sorry, DTE easement that runs along that that provides um I believe electricity to a transformer at the rear of our site for the residents. So, we are keep we are keeping the trash enclosure out of that easement cuz DT won't allow us to put it in there. Um generally what we see is obviously parents are going to try to use the 13 spaces up front and then they'll use the middle spaces. We generally will try to tell our employees to park in those spaces and then the 10 spaces farthest away just to keep the spaces closest to the building open for for parents. So, you know, that's something that we will, you know, implement is making sure that those eight spaces are more for employees to park there and that way there's not cars coming and going during, you know, general pick up and drop off. Yeah, no, I understand. It just it is a it but I get it what you're saying, but it is, you know, a technically a vehicular um issue just because again that that person parking in those spots has a blind spot they can't see when they're trying to back out. Yeah, I I

in those two spots they do converge right at a 90 and so I get why you pushed it out because I saw the easement as well and I'm I worked for DT for years. So, I'm familiar with all of the requirements of DT. I just it's it you're you're you're shoehorning things into your site to make it fit, which is fine for your benefit, but again from a vehicular pedestrian safety perspective it it to me that area doesn't fit cuz it doesn't flow correctly and it does create uh sight line issues for the parking. So, I just again, I'm just sharing with you my observations on on, you know, on just that to me is a concern. Um I mean, but that's just my thoughts. Otherwise again, I I also thought your plans overall were really well done. And I thought your storm water management was really well done as all. Uh well done as as well. Um And then the last thing just with the storm water management though was done well done, but I was curious So, I noticed on the property um

[clears throat] just to the east, I noticed you had a like an overflow going to the adjacent property. Um which is where the Starbucks is. Like is that something that the the county required? I was just curious.

No, it's a good question. Like I mentioned, the ownership between the two properties is the same and they we're also implementing an above ground grass basin back there and instead of having to do redundant pipe to get everything up to 23 mile cuz that's where everything goes, um we've been working with um DOT on just hydraulically connecting those basins and then modifying the outlet structure um to basically make it more of a regional pond for the two two sites um if you will. So, you're not going to tie into the storm actually at 23 on this property. No. We're going to flow to the east and then you're going to let them flow to We're going to put a we're going to put a blanket agreement over it to Okay. Yeah, cuz that's what I noticed cuz that's what I thought was kind of odd because you flow everything to the north into the pond and then you flowed, you know, you said,

Yeah, I mean it works. I just didn't I didn't know you own the property next to it.

Yeah, yeah, it's the same ownership and and currently everything actually drains to the east there. There's a drainage swale that runs along that property. So, you know, talking with both Macomb County Roads and MDOT, we need to maintain the existing drainage pattern. So, again just trying to avoid redundant pipes, multiple connections to 23 mile, which is a kind of a challenging uh storm water system to tie into. Um it behooved us to kind of create more of a regional facility for these these two lots and you know, we'll have, you know, the correct maintenance agreements between them. Okay, understood. Thank you. Yeah, absolutely. Thank you. Uh Rick. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um quick question about again, the the children getting to and from the facility. Does this facility provide um latchkey per se after school if a kid if a child's in first grade, a bus would bring them to the facility um until mom and dad can get there at 5:00 or 6:00 to get them. You know, sometimes with their sibling might be already be there. Do they offer that as well? Some of the facilities do. I'm not sure if this is one of them. I don't believe it is just due to the the smaller size of the facility we have, but I do know some facilities have that in other other areas. Okay, is it something you could find out because they do bring them by bus and I was just wondering how you're going to get a bus through that parking lot. Um I I I've experienced it. I'm just, you know, I'm wondering if um if if that is a possibility. And secondly, I I and I know that our our ordinance doesn't call for this, but it's kind of making my heart sink. Is there going to be any protection around the detention pond? Children are curious. If they escape, they're going to go right to that pond. Man, if they if they escape the fence, we've got some bigger issues. But um uh no, the idea was not to put a fence

around it. The grades of that pond are actually uh 6:1 slope. So, it's actually very gentle and it's a dry pond. It's not going to stay wet. So, um there's going to be no actual protection. We do have quite a bit of trees back there and then um students are never outside of the actual facility. You never have to leave the front door. Students and um teachers never leave the front door. Everything is just when you walk out of the classroom, everything is fenced in in the facility they would be in. The only time they're outside would be walking through the front door only with their parents, never in the rear. Okay, I just wanted to be assured. Yeah. Cuz I would never forgive myself if I didn't ask that question. I understand. Thank you so much.

Yeah. Thank you. Um everything's been asked that I had thought, so I don't have anything to add. Um normally we uh we would have uh we'd postpone a vote. I think you had a couple things to change on your plans. Um does anybody else any of the commissioners have anything to add and then uh we can uh make a motion to vote and postpone it up up to a couple meetings at least. If you need it longer, we can do that. Did you have something? I have one more comment. All right, enough. Uh you said you're willing to possibly uh increase the approach and drive to 30 ft. Yes, that's the

Okay, now that would work on Sherborne cuz you have a space for it there's no parking, but if you increase the the approach and the drive off 23 Mile where it's 24 ft, I think you might lose a parking space and an aisle. I don't I think we might want to keep that at 24 ft. Cuz now you're losing more parking. If you can kind of see that. Cuz it's especially it's one way in, one way out. If you go to 30, that's 6 ft. You're already at 20 ft for your parking spaces on the uh east and then you would lose your aisle. Uh and possibly one parking space and I think we're tight there, so I would say maybe leave uh 23 at 24 and then Sherwood at the 30 ft. Maybe we compromise on that if you're willing for that. Yeah, we we can we can do that and I I agree with you. That's what we'd prefer. Actually, I just had a question about that if if you could um answer cuz I know you uh in the write-up it actually mentions that there's the ingress egress and ingress egress there, but there's the uh the divider between that. Is that distance included in that 24 ft or are the are the driveways measured separately, independently of that? Uh so you're saying if like where they're measured from basically? Yeah, cuz there's that there's that divider separating the inbound outbound. I didn't know if that was included in the measurement, but I I'm actually in agreement with Eric. I think it should stay the way it is with the has the divider in there. I'd much prefer it to stay that way, but I was just curious how the measurement was made. Mhm. Um Yeah, so it looks like it's 24 ft wide. Um but since there was the divider there, I believe and this is up to the planning commission to decide whether the intent of the ordinance is to have enough space for ingress and egress for cars. Um

and so that's why that was there, but since they provided the like separator, that was kind of my question to you all if you believe that that is appropriate according to that standard. Did did you put the island in there uh so that people don't make a left? Is that the idea?

Yeah, it's right in, right out. Um we we worked with MDOT early and they said, "Hey, we're not going to give you full movement here, especially with access on Sherborne." So we we committed early on to doing the pork chop where it's no left in or no left out onto 23 Mile. Yeah, no I I agree with no left turn. I was just um just so MDOT saw that design. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. No, understood. All right, is everybody satisfied? I'm satisfied with the applicant, but I actually was going to take the opposite approach of you cuz I know sometimes we have the 2-week delay, but I'm just looking at the site plans and with the things that do need to be modified, I think our uh planning department is more than uh capable of signing off and reviewing those and I just assume uh waive the 2-week waiting period this week. So I'd like to make a motion to do that if we could uh take a vote of the board here.

[snorts] Jonathan, are you okay with uh anything that would be a minor administrative uh Yeah, I'm I'm good with all that. I can work with with them. Um does everybody want to vote tonight? Well, poll the board for that then. Okay, so who wants to make a motion?

Well, I'm I'm going to make a motion to forgo the 2-week waiting period. And I'll support that motion. Okay, we have a motion by Mark, supported by Rich to um approve the Nope, nope. Just this just the for this is just to waive the 2-week waiting period. I have a separate motion for the the uh the waiting period. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Got one nay. Motion carries. So with that, um somebody wants to make a motion for the vote? Yep, I have a motion, Mr. Chair.

[clears throat]

I'd like I'd like to move to recommend approval of the special land use for the child care center. And give me just a minute cuz I have information to you from different spots here. Uh for the special land use uh RM2, 2.14 acres, north side of 23 Mile Road, east of Sherborne Drive, parcel ID 150914 400033 and 150914400034. The address 34855 23 Mile Road. Okay. Planning Commission finds that the proposed use meets the eight special land use standards as follows. Number one, the proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses and provides a transitional use between adjacent commercial and residential developments. Standard two, vehicular and pedestrian traffic associated with the use will not be more hazardous than normal for the district given the proposed access points and subject to final engineering and agency review. Number three, the site has been designed to minimize potential nuisance impacts through this through setbacks, buffering, screening, and operational controls. Number four, the development will not interfere with or discourage the appropriate use of adjacent properties. Number five, the use is consistent with the physical and economic character of the area and supports the existing development pattern along the corridor. Number six, the use serves a public convenience by providing child care services in proximity to residential neighborhoods along a major roadway. Number seven, the site plan and operational characteristics demonstrate that public health, safety, and welfare will be protected. And number eight, the use is not expected to cause substantial injury to surrounding property values or be detrimental to the nearby land uses. Planning Commission further acknowledges that the required dimensional variances have already been reviewed and approved by the Zoning Board of Appeals and the site plan reflects those approvals. Now this this comes with a couple conditions. Number one, the applicant shall revise

the site plans to address any outstanding landscaping deficiencies or otherwise bring the site into compliance with the Township landscaping requirements subject to review and approval by the Township. Number two, final site plan approval shall incorporate any required modifications related to the driveway design as determined by the Township engineers and uh planning commission with the exception of the driveway on 23 Mile Road will remain at the 24 ft as listed on the plans currently. Number three, the applicant shall obtain all required approvals and permits from MDOT, Macomb County, and other applicable agencies prior to construction. Number four, any pedestrian uh safety improvements including sidewalk connectivity and internal circulation shall be reviewed and enhanced as determined necessary by the Township, the planning department. And number five, all represent all representations made in the application, site plan, and operations narrative shall be incorporated as conditions of approval and shall be adhered to by the applicant. We have a motion. We have to separate those, I believe. Don't we have to have a vote for the special land use, then we have to have a site plan? We can't vote those together, I don't believe. Let's get some clarity from uh Mr. Mr. Chair, the the motion that was made was fine [clears throat] in the sense that you did go through the eight standards, but recent decisions by the Court of Appeals has indicated that simply um reading off the standards and indicating that they've been met does not satisfy the judicial um standard requirements or the requirements of the Michigan Zoning Enabling Act. After you've read the standards, you have to give some facts as to why that particular standard has been met or not. And some of them it looked like they were simply a recitation of the standards. If you think there's sufficient sufficient facts, then go ahead and vote on it.

I'm just telling you what the courts require. So we can just do one vote on this? No. They have to be separated? You have a special land use, then you have a site plan approval. Okay, so we're doing the special be different. Vote on the special land use and then vote on the site plan.

Okay, so this this is for the special land use. So we have a motion. Uh we need uh somebody to support that. I'll support it. We have a motion by um Mark, supported by Rich to um approve it based on the special land use, approve the the special land use eight points. With that, all in favor? I. Opposed? Motion carries. So Looking for a motion uh Then I'll I'll actually then I'll then I'll make my motion again for the second part for conditional site plan approvals. Uh So I'll start with again. I'll make a motion uh to approve the site plans for uh site plan 2026-05 special land use RM2 2.14 acres north side of 23 mile east of Sherborne Drive parcel ID 15 0914400033 and 150914400034 address 34855 23 Mile Road. I move to approve the site plan with following conditions. Uh this the applicant shall revise the site plans to address outstanding landscaping deficiencies or otherwise bring the site into compliance with the township landscaping requirements subject to review and approval by the township. Final plan approval shall incorporate uh any required modifications later to the um the driveway redesign in particular on Sherborne that will be increased to 30 ft and reviewed and approved by the planning department. The applicant shall obtain all required approvals and permits from MDOT, Macomb County, and other applicable agencies

prior to construction. Pedestrian shall uh excuse me. Um Uh any pedestrian safety improvements including sidewalk connectivity and internal circulation shall be reviewed and enhanced as determined necessary by the planning department. And all representations made in the application, site plan, and operations narrative shall be incorporated as conditions of the approval and shall be adhered to by the applicant. I have a motion. Support. I have a motion by Mark, supported by Jim to approve the site plan. Um with the conditions mentioned mentioned in the motion. All in favor? I. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you guys so much for your time. We're very excited about this one. Thank you. We have uh regular agenda item uh Hidden Creek two site plan number 2025-08 final review site condominium R1B It's on 14.165 acres west side of Chesterfield Road north of 23 Mile Road. Parcel ID is 15-09-18 -426-014. Um With that, I will let uh Ava do her uh review. Thank you. So I'll be looking at our review letter from March 30th, 2026. Uh this project is the second phase of

two for the Hidden Creek Estates development. The first phase was the construction of 56 single family detached site condos which were approved in 2018 and has since been completed. Phase two of the development went to the planning commission for preliminary review that same meeting and is now requesting final site plan approval. This second phase is proposing to construct 26 single family detached site condos and the planning commission is tasked with reviewing the plans and deciding as to whether the site meets all zoning ordinance standards and their intent as applicable. Moving on to page two for the proposed use, the applicant is proposing to construct 26 single family detached site condos with multiple designs. The planning commission may wish to ask and confirm with the applicant on which designs they will be using for their development as multiple renditions of the plans have been sent and just for clarification, uh the designs vary in stories from one uh from one to one and a half to two stories. Um they all have basements. Access to the site is from Chesterfield Road and is currently vacant. Moving on to page four now at the very bottom uh standard F for landscape easement uh 20-ft wide landscape easement is noted at the south property line abutting the two parcels zoned M1 light manufacturing. Uh the applicant did identify this easement as a common area. Uh so they did provide that note. Additionally, uh the easement should also contain another statement um being the entire common area subject to a private easement dedicated to the ownership association for where landscaping. Um the landscape plan shows a complete plant list, plant details and notes there will be a landscape contractor for 1 year to adjust the irrigation system as needed. Uh the applicant proposes 31

red maple trees and 11 Norway spruce trees. Uh the planning commission may wish to discuss whether a greater variety of tree species should be used. Uh and the applicant shall add the note as specified. Uh lastly, uh standard H design standards um one of the standards is that a dwelling shall not have shall not have less than two exterior doors with the second door being in either the rear or side of the dwelling. Steps shall connect to such exterior door areas or to porches connected to such door areas where a difference in elevation requires the steps. The Fairchild and one and a half story elevation A and C designs are compliant and have a door on their rear elevation that exits out onto a patio. The Lincoln design offers an optional entry door on its left elevation and the rear elevation provides a door but it has a guard on it until a future deck is in place. The St. Clair design has no side doors but a door on the rear elevation. This also has a guard on it. Uh the applicant shall provide steps or a porch for the rear doors uh or put in the optional side door on the left elevation for the Lincoln style. Uh so that was just a brief overview but if there are any questions, I'd be happy to answer. Thank you. Uh is the applicant here? Yes. Like to come up and Yep, I'm here. Please uh state your name and address if you could sign in, please. Thank you. Buzz Palazzolo, 3737 Cherry Creek Lane, Sterling Heights. Jeff Rizzo, Fanning Associates, 14933 Commercial Drive, Shelby Township. We're the land surveyors and civil engineers.

Buzz Palazzolo, 2725 Sugar Maple Drive, Sterling Heights, Michigan. Thank you. Did you want to make any statements or add anything? No, we're anxious to get get this going. It's taken us a while to get this uh final site plan approval. So Okay. It's a continuation of the other phase. Okay. If you just hang there for a minute, we'll see if any of the commissioners have questions and Okay. we'll uh get through this. Uh Eric. Are you going to be using all the uh designs for the houses uh or is it going to be left up to the the owner? Uh the applicant

be building all the houses. Yeah. Palazzolo. What? No, you're building all the houses with the the options that have been presented to us. Correct. Uh is that going to be based on the options of the potential uh owner of the house? Cuz there's you got a lot of different options here. Yes, they'll be able to pick A, B, C elevations and then we mix them up um throughout the site. We don't put the same house, same elevation next Okay. Just need a little variety, so. Yep. All right. I I I don't have too many other questions at the moment. Yeah, they're they're going to be the same homes that we built in the first front 56 homes. Yep. Same. Thank you. James. Yeah, the uh the the steps on the rear doors as it mentioned by the planner Yes. Obviously, you are are you going to put those in? Yes. Where where applicable. Mhm. Absolutely. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Yep. Thank you. Rich. No questions. Well done, guys. Great. Thanks. Mark. Nope, I'm good. All set. Brian. No questions. Rick. I have one question, please, before you all before you take off. Hold on. Don't take off. Here we go. Sorry. You're not getting off that easy.

[laughter]

I know the Pistons are on but we're not we're not going home yet. I noticed you guys were walking kind of fast. Not fast enough, though. This is a condo complex? Yes. Is there any common areas? Yes. There's quite a few general common element areas. Is there a common I I I was looking at the drawings. I didn't see any common areas. There's some you know, like the detention basin areas. Uh you know, along the perimeter, you know, the landscape common element areas. There's a decent amount. Yeah, there's a long drive from the from Chesterfield Road. It goes along the existing pond. There'll be some street trees in there and some sprinklers and landscaping in there. And then around the pond in the front, I don't know if that's considered the phase one, but there'll be some additional landscaping. Once we fix the or finish up the entrance the pump station and mailbox area in the front there. Okay, Chris, that'll be the common area up from phase one is going also going to be the common area for phase two. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. It's all I have, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Thank you. Uh chair doesn't have anything to add. Um if you're all set, I know you want to turn around and leave, so I won't ask you if you have anything else to add.

till you vote if you like. No, we're all set. I'll bring it back to the board and entertain a motion. Okay. Mr. Chair, I'll make I'd like to make a motion. I'd like to make a motion to approve Hidden Creek 2 site plan 2025-08 final review site condominium R1B 14.165 acres west side of Chesterfield Road north of 23 Mile parcel ID 15-09-18-426-014.

[clears throat]

And it will be uh subject to the following findings and conditions. Uh for my findings, I have the proposed development of 26 single family detached site condominiums is permitted use within the R1B zoning district and is consistent with the township zoning ordinance. The site plan complies with all applicable dimensional and developmental standards of the R1B district including lot size, setbacks, building height, and floor area requirements. The layout of the development includes uh street design, sidewalk, utilities, and drainage is consistent with township subdivision and site condominium design standards. The proposed development represents a continuation of an existing approved residential development and is compatible with surrounding land uses. The site plan as conditioned meets the intent of the township zoning ordinance and site plan review standards. Now, for conditions of the approval, the applicant shall revise the site plan to include required notes within the landscape easement and ensure compliance with section 58-56 requirements. The applicant shall provide steps, porches, or compliant access for rear or side doors on all applicable home models including the Lincoln and South and St. Clair designs to meet ordinance requirements for secondary egress. The applicant shall obtain approve approval from the township or DPW as applicable for proposed tree species not currently listed as permitted or revise the landscape plan to include compliant species. The applicant shall address any outstanding engineering, utility, and drainage requirements as determined by the township staff prior to construction. The applicant shall provide a clarification on Oh, hold on one sec. No, sorry. I don't need that one. And and the while not required, the planning commission does encourage the applicant to consider increasing the diversity of tree species within the development. With that, I make a motion to approve. We have a motion to approve. Do we have support?

I'll support. We have a motion by Mark supported by Rick to approve the Hidden Creek site plan uh number two. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. You're all set. Thank you. Uh next thing on the agenda um we were supposed to have uh somebody to come in to do a presentation on the data centers. Uh Jonathan uh wants to say something about what happened on that. Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. We did have a representative from DTE scheduled to come in uh this evening. Um he unfortunately had to cancel uh earlier today. Um so we're going to reschedule that and then also we're working on finalizing um uh retainer for Mr. Darren Brown um who will come in and uh be our expert for the sound and acoustics. So, uh we'll work on getting that scheduled and then pick up at a future meeting. Okay, thank you. Um bring it back to the board here. If you've got anything, you got 3 minutes. Eric, James, Rich, I'm okay, thank you.

Mark, Brian, I'm good. I'm good. So, with that, we will join the meeting um tonight's meeting at 8:03 p.m. Support. Have a motion by Carl supported by Mark to adjourn tonight's meeting at 8:03. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Meeting's adjourned. Thank you.