Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

that clock. I think this we can start. [Applause] Okay, if everyone's ready. Uh this is the regular meeting of the Garden City Planning Commission. It's Thursday, April 10th, 2025 at 6:30 p.m. I'd like to call the meeting to order. And our first order of business, if everyone would stand to say the pledge of allegiance to the flag. 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. Thank you. Be seated. Would the secretary take the roll call, please? Chair, here. Commissioner Steberg, here. Commissioner Walls, Commissioner King here. Commissioner Williams here. Commissioner Bosi, you have a quorum of four. Okay. Thank you. Uh, next item is approval of the agenda. We need a motion. I'll make a motion to approve today's agenda. Support. Motion and supported. Any discussion on the motion? Hearing none, take the roll call, please. Commissioner King. I. Mr. Williams. Hi. Mr. Steamberg I motion passes. Okay. Next we need approval of minutes for the regular meeting of March 13, 2025. Make a motion to approve. Support. Motion's made and supported. Any corrections or uh discussion on the motion hearing? None. Take the role, please. Commissioner Steamberg. I. Commissioner Williams. Hi. Commissioner King. Hi. Chair. I motion carries. Okay. Next item is public comment on non-aggenda items. If there's someone

here who wishes to speak on an item that's not on our agenda tonight, uh this is time where you can come forward and um and do that. Okay. Seeing no one, we will move on to our first business item. This is PPL25-00009 comma 0010 and 0011. It's a request for a special land use and site plan approval to establish an adult use marijuana grower, processor, and retailer at 323304 Road in the M1 Light Industrial Zoning District. And as I uh believe it's this uh even though there are three separate businesses at this location, we're treating this as one application. Is that correct? Yes, Mr. Chairman. That's correct. Okay. Well, then to start out, if uh Mr. Ortega, you would Yes. begin and get us started. Yes. Uh good evening everyone. Uh, as just introduced tonight, we're here to discuss the proposed adult use marijuana facilities uh located at um 30254 uh Ford Road. Uh so this site is approximately 3.2 acres in area uh located on the east side of Hubard Avenue north of Ford Road and it's occupied by an approximately 46, uh 634 ft in area. It's a one-story industrial building. Uh so the site is zoned M1 light industrial and in 2018 the site received special land use and site plan approval for a medical marijuana grower processor and

provisioning center actually under the opaces of the Michigan marijuana the Michigan medical marijuana facility licensing act the mmfla. Uh my my letter erroneously noted the the uh original approvals from back in long time ago that this most recent approval for this facility was under MMFLA to allow for medical marijuana uh growing processing and a provisioning center. So, right tonight, the applicant is proposing to operate this facility uh as in addition to the medical marijuana facilities on site to also be an adult use marijuana class B grower, an adult use marijuana processor, and an adult use marijuana retailer. Uh per the zoning ordinance, adult use marijuana establishments uh do require special land use review and approval uh prior to operating in the M1 zoning district. Uh and as just noted by by chairman May uh while they have applied for three separate uh applications for the individual uses uh as required by state law because they will be receiving if they're approved uh licenses for each individual facility uh the the adult grower, the adult processor, and the the adult uh retailer. Uh we're going to treat these all as one because the way the city's ordinances deals with these facilities is to stack them and turn into one uh one location. Uh so while I'll be making my comments throughout the evening on on majority of the site as a whole, there are some aspects where which deal with one particular use versus another. Uh but in the end uh if you were to make any motions this evening, we would we would ask that you make a motion on each individual uh proposed use. So going through uh as I mentioned this requires special land use review. We have special land use comments for

the entire that are in general for that apply to all special uses. There are some special land use criteria that apply specifically to adult use marijuana facilities and then a after that uh when we get to them we will have some comments on the site plan itself. Uh when we look at special land uses overall in the city we look for compatibility with adjacent uses. Uh as noted this this uh facility is located in the M1 zoning district. It's surrounded on the the uh west north and east side by industrial uh facilities. They are zoned industrial. To the south of the site, it is zoned C3 general commercial and it is currently occupied by vacant lot. Uh but it was previously operated as a uh auto sales dealership. So um you know the the the production aspect of this cultivation and processing uses you know is similar to adjacent industrial facilities where they're producing products on site. uh all of the facilities typically uh have activity that is intended that is in the interior of the building. This is also proposing to be all activities in the interior of the building. Uh and then while the southern portion of the building uh will have the retailer, the northern portion portion of the building will have the uh production, the cultivation and the processing. And this is similar to the other uses in the area. Uh the the industrial aspects uh of adjacent to the site are to the northeast and west whereas to the south it is commercial uh zoned commercial at least and we're hoping that there'll be used as commercial in the future. The southern portion of the building is what's going to be is proposed to be utilized for the retailer. So therefore the the commercial aspect of it will be directly adjacent to that commercial um land use. So we do believe uh that this

facility would be compatible with the adjacent land uses in the area. We also look at compatibility with the master plan. The master plan for this area has a similar uh land use uh development pattern proposed of keeping industrial on this site uh to the east, west and north and having commercial to the south. So this proposed configuration is consistent with the master plan. Um and it's also uh consistent with the uh the use of the property. Uh you know as I mentioned the the facility did receive um medical marijuana facility growing processing and provisioning center status. Uh they have obtained uh state approval and city licenses to operate the medical marijuana growing processing provisioning. Uh to the best of our knowledge, they do uh uh undertake medical marijuana growing on the facility. Uh we do believe they also conduct medical marijuana processing, but they do not currently have a provisioning center open on the site. Uh but the fact that they've been operating on the site uh would would tend to indicate that they've been capable of utilizing the facility for this uh marijuana use and it has not to to our best of our knowledge impacted negatively any adjacent uses. They've been able to operate without any uh impact on those uses. One other aspect for for special land uses we consider specifically is public services. Uh so the applicant is proposing a uh for one class B at this time uh growing and that's for a maximum of 500 plants. Uh this would occupy uh their grow facility which is approximately 19,000 square ft in the building. And you know based on our experience this is actually a moderate number of a modest number excuse me a modest number of plants uh given the overall size of the building. 500 plants

in that size facility is seems more than uh the facility seems more than capable of accommodating that number of of plants. Um however uh you know we also note that uh cultivation of marijuana does tend to utilize a lot of electricity and a lot of water for the cultivation activities. Uh so what the exact needs are for a facility of this size and whether the utility mains are sized appropriately is actually not known. Uh but we'll get to this in a moment in more detail when we talk about the specific requirements for marijuana uses. you do have an a aspect that they do are supposed to address this aspect of uh utility use. Uh specifically in general talking about the site and talking about traffic uh you know the the industrial facility actually uses a modest number of employees kind of like most modern modern uh excuse me industrial facilities there would be uh not a lot of employees are necessary. Um and when you're looking at the site here, uh Hubard is classified as a major street in the master plan. Uh and the site has three access points onto Hubard and th those a and then Hubard connects directly to Ford Road. So which is the major trunk line in in the city and it's the the one road that has the highest traffic volume. So it's designed and it's intended to handle as much traffic volume as the adjacent land uses uh generate. So um and then we also know just reiterate that the retail portion of the building is going to be on the south side of the site and the building. So therefore it's going to be in close proximity to Ford Road. They won't vehicles uh uh visiting the retailer are not going to be traveling the entire distance of Hubard. In theory, they would just travel that short distance from Hubard from excuse me from Ford to Hubard approximately

310 feet 320 feet to get from Ford to that curb cut for the retailer. So uh that that direct relationship between the retailer and that impact on traffic we don't feel is going to be very significant given the classification of Hubard and and the close proximity to Ford for these these uh retail customers that will be visiting the site. Um so those are the those are just a summary of the the general u special use can standard specifically when it comes to adult use marijuana facilities. Uh the uh site is in compliance with our our proposed stacking. Uh the city does has this requirement that a facility must be a grow can be a grower to be a grower. If you want to do anything if you want to be a processor you must be a grower. And then if you want to be a retailer, you must be both a processor and a grower. The this the applicant has done this with medical and they are proposing the same configuration with adult. So they're in compliance with that standard. The site is in compliance with our setback requirements from parks, from residential districts, from schools. Uh and it's all we have a special setback requirement from Ford Road. The site is in compliance with that. Um and this all activities will be done inside the building. So up to this point they are in complete compliance with all adult use marijuana requirements. We note that the ordinance does require for wastewater uh you know adult use marijuana facilities are must be designed and operated so as to minimize the amount of pesticides, fertilizer, nutrients, marijuana itself and any other potential contaminants. We want to prevent them from being discharged into the public wastewater and or storm water system. Uh the ordinance does require that the applicant provide a uh on-site wastewater u statement to provide details as to how they will they are treating any wastewater. Uh to this

point the applicant hasn't been hasn't yet submitted that. So we would recommend that the applicant must submit the required weight water and wastewater statement describing the information. Basically, this will give us uh some details as to how much water capacity they will need for the cultivation aspect and how they will treat uh any kind of uh effluent or gray water before it uh gets them. These facilities they they have sometimes they can be very uh eco-friendly if you will or they have certain aspects of growing but they all can have a different way to operate uh under state law. So we would just want to have those details as to how the the water and the wastewater the water use and then how the wastewater is treated if any. And then finally with regards to special land use uh we have some specific design requirements for marijuana facilities. The site is in compliance with uh what we believe is an appropriate site design. Uh the access and circulation plan as proposed uh as I discussed on page five um does we believe have a very uh efficient circulation system customer parking in general. There is parking spaces located directly south of the uh the building that has direct access to the retailers storefront and entrance. And then there are parking spaces on the both the east and west side of the building. uh and we believe the proposed circulation system it's functioned well so far and we do believe it's capable of uh handling the capacity of uh adult use marijuana retail clients. Um one la two last things with regards to uh special land use. We do uh have a requirement that any uh parking spaces, excuse me, parking lots for adult use marijuana facilities provide some screening from the adjacent uh public roads. The site, this isn't this

is a requirement for adult use. It wasn't required for medical marijuana. Uh and so the applicant uh will have to revise the site plan to provide the required screening of the parking lot along Hubard uh to meet that standard. It's a 3-ft tall um brick wall that shields the parking lot from the public right ofway. Does that also apply to Ford Road? I would probably say not only because technically it doesn't have any frontage on Ford Road. It does have a Ford Road address, but it doesn't have any frontage on Ford Road. It's got uh the the parking lot for the old metropolitan is there and and actually this site is located we also have a specific requirement to be set back away from Ford Road and so I don't I don't feel the the standard applies to that Ford Road line just beyond the east. Yes. Can this be complied with with dense shrubbery or landscaping? Uh technically it does say parking areas have a 3 foot high brick wall. I can uh check the ordinance language again to see if there's any provision for modification if this falls under landscape standards. Landing commission does have perview to modify that. Uh but if this is I believe this is a specific requirement under the medical adult use marijuana special land use requirements. So I think it's something that's actually required okay for under that under those under that section of the ordinance. So it's not subject to modification. Is that only required for uh recreational use marijuana? Not like any other business that would come in there? Uh we do require them in other locations in the city. Uh most notably in downtown we do require the brick screening walls if you notice there's some around here. I'm talking about like in the industrial complex where they're at. Yeah. Was still a industrial building doing machining. Would they be required to put in the same brick wall? No. It's only the meta, it's only the

adult use marijuana retailer that is required to put in the screening wall. It adds a sense of uh permanence and it screens the parking and it's a it's a aesthetically pleasing and that sort of thing. Is that is that one of our ordinances or is Yes, this is a city ordinance we the okay that we implemented. Mhm. Yeah. I was trying to figure out why. I think it was just an aspect to uh important for lighting to be blocked from adjacent traffic or the road, then why not for every business, not just this one? Well, I think in certain aspects there's just the idea of trying to have this designed in such a way that that's uh that's attractive. Uh and I think as one other aspect of that too is generally speaking adult use marijuana facilities throughout the state um do tend to have a higher quality of design but that's typically based on uh the actual owner and operators requiring or their own personal preference and some of some of them are required by the local municipalities. I think it's just one thing that the uh city ended up it ended up being put into the ordinance as a means of making sure that this was uh a high quality and and and attractive establishment not just something that was the back door to an industrial place kind of situation. One other aspect of the site design it finally is um we do have a requirement safe site design for community policing. Basically, it's the attempt to make sure that uh the the local police department has opportunity to take a look at the site, provide us any comments, and then also uh ensure that they're uh included with the coordination with state police because the state police does uh evaluate the security for these facilities. So, um so we would recommend that uh that the police department have the opportunity

to provide comments on this uh site in terms of the function of it. So in the end uh when it comes to uh this particular site based on the size and scale of the building uh the site design and layout and the proximity to Ford Road uh the site would appear to meet the special use requirements for such an adult use marijuana facility. So, if the planning commission determines the standards for approval have been met, uh we advise that any recommendation of approval to the city council be granted contingent upon uh the applicant receiving site plan approval. Uh the applicant submitting the required uh water/wastewater statement. The applicant submitting a revised site plan showing the installation of a 3-ft high brick wall that shields the parking lot. and uh a police department review of the uh of the facility. Those are our comments on special use. We can stop there and discuss special use or uh well, unless you have a anyone has a question. I I was wondering about on the uh several pages forward uh we have uh questions about the dumpster phototric plan, uh sidewalk signage. I follow on the fight plan though. Yeah. Okay. Yeah, that's a question. Yes. And I apologize if I missed it. Um, what is driving the special land use given that it's already is it because of the adult use? Yes, that's so so these this is a medical marijuana facil facility currently under MMFLA and so all their licenses previously were acquired under that and the original ordinances of the city uh when marijuana became legal in the state uh the city not to go back well to go back to the beginning the city did have an original ordinance attempting to uh regulate these

facilities under the original state law MMA or excuse me mm M A I know it's a lot of word soup. Yeah. Um the city did have did go through an approval process. Uh back then in my opinion that state law was horrible when it came to granting authority for local municipalities and having these facilities. That's why you saw them all over the place and there wasn't any consistency. But the city did attempt to have some. And the in my opinion the city's attempt was always to try them as a medical because the idea when it was originally approved by the state was let's try medical uh let's try marijuana as a legal legal substance because it provided medical benefits. The city agreed with that and they had the original law and then the state adopted the second statute the mmla which codified more specific standards for medical marijuana facilities. these type of growing processing provisioning and those it it was much better laid out the groundwork. it was much more clear. And then this facility did receive it under MMFA for medical. And then after that 2018, the state uh through initiated law one passed uh adult use marijuana or recreational marijuana. And then under the MRTMA, which what they're trying to do, uh that they're having specific standards for adult use. So basically the state sees them as two different things right now. medical marijuana and adult use marijuana or recreational. Um, and this uh is the process that they have to go through because the city we we stayed with medical for a long time, but the city through through planning commission and then eventually through city council did adopt recreational marijuana as a use provided going through this process. So, in order for them to receive state licenses, they first must have received local approval

and this is the process we set up. If I could do one other f just one followup. So functionally today as medical use marijuana to having presumably there's processing there's growing and processing going on today. In the future I get I get that there's a retail aspect to it but functionally to the residents not much is changing but the but there's now a retail entrance basically. Yes. Okay. All right. Thank you. Mhm. Okay. Was there anything else you wanted to add at this time? All right. Is there a um is the applicant here? Yes, sir. Yes. Would you introduce yourself, please? Good evening. My name is Craig Aronov from Law. I'm the attorney that represents the applicants. Um and we're privileged and pleased to finally come back and talk at Belu. It's been a long time. My clients have made a massive investment in this building. If you've driven by it on Hubard, it's beautiful. It's the nicest building in the area over there right now. um really proud of what they've done. We've been operating as a licensed medical grow and medical process, although we have a licensed store for medical provisioning center. It's business malpractice to run a medical store right now under today's economy in Michigan. So, that's remained closed while we've been waiting out this ordinance to come through and to finally be able to request and hopefully receive these licenses. Um it's been a pleasure working with Mario again. Um, we've worked together in the past on some other projects as well. And, um, I don't think that what we're being, you know, asked to do and what we're looking at here is any real consequence or concern. The 3-foot wall would have been built if we had this ordinance passed a slight bit sooner. Um, it kind of ran into the winter and here we are at the back end and it's April 10th and snowed. So, go figure. Um but we will be working on that and certainly add it to the site plan and make sure that's uh to

everyone's satisfaction. Um our hope is is to you know get open as soon as we can at the same time and maybe have this conditioned on allowing us to move forward but at the same time allow time to lapse for us to get to the warmer weather where this can be done more efficiently and nicer. Um I the sidewalk was another request that was in there too and same same concern. This will all be done at the same time. um you know, right along Hubard where that uh parking lot is. Um at least the parking spaces. Um on the front side of the store is where the old um car lot used to be and there's fences there and a lot of blockage from the street already from Ford Road back. So yeah, really as you come in, you'll see that from Hubard as you pull on to Hubard and and move forward there. But um store looks beautiful. It's got some nice green um wood grain on the front doors and stuff. It's really, we're really proud of it and it looks great and we look forward to having customers come and enjoy it with us. Um, as far as the the use in the facility, I mean, uh, the the 500 plant grow is a is a small grow. We don't need much more as far as that goes. We're just looking to have it be adult use and allow that to transition. The way the law works for the plant side of it, when you're growing, it's easy to move the medical plants into the adult use market as long as you have an adult use license at the facility. So they're no longer really while they're separately tracked on the two sides of medical and AU, they can move within the facility between the licenses. So we don't really need more capacity as much as we just need the permit and license to do AU. Um we've been there this whole time growing and you haven't noticed us as far as smell and concern or complaints or anything like that and nothing's going to change in that respect. So Mr. King, as as you were asked about that, it's nothing's going to be different. Um the processing is modestly the same as well. Um with AU we might do a few more things and a few more activity. It's only a thousand

square feet of this building. So there's already not a lot of space to that. It's more of inventory management. Um and you know these facilities especially on the retail side can interact with other licenses and purchase products and materials from other places. So we don't really need as much processing as we do need the grow and then some space for that. And then of course the retail that takes up the front where a lot of the activity will be. Um from a police perspective, there's cameras all over it. It's probably the safest three acres in around this area next to the banks and the jewelry stores and whatnot. But as you drive around the building, it's noticeable. Camera, camera, camera. We don't miss an inch on this facility as we're required to indoor and outdoor, but outdoor as well. So it's a real deterrent for anyone that's looking at it. It's beautifully built industrial building cleaned up from what was a horrible site. Uh the remediation cost on this was tremendous. Um my clients made that massive investment and then built the grow on over that. So they had to clean it up for millions of dollars first and then spend millions of dollars to have an operating facility. So again, we're super proud of of all of what it is. But in the same vein, um, you know, we're hoping that we can kind of move forward without too much additional cost given what we've already done there. Um, it is a beautiful site. I know the f the the three-foot is required under the ordinance. I don't know that it makes any of it any better or safer, Mr. Bosy, I think you're asking or is it Williams? Mr. Williams, I'm sorry. Um, you know, I it's required, so we'll we'll deal with it. Although, um, you know, we were a little disappointed it was required in the first place. We're not on the main trunk line of Ford. It's Hubard. All these buildings along Hubard are, you know, industrial in nature. So, this will be the outlier as you drive up that street right now. Um, notwithstanding, again, we're happy to get it done and

move forward. Um, the wastewater plan, one thing we should talk about our grow is we are really high-tech. We have basically a system where everything is pulled back in and reused and reused. So the water is basically staying in the building and we're basically putting a little bit into each pot at a time. As it drains through, it's recollected, brought back in, split apart from the water and the nutrients, and then reused. So we really don't have a water or wastewater impact. We'll provide the statement, but that's what the statement's going to say. Um, minimal cost as far as per plant. We're not just spraying for the sake of spraying. It's getting just enough water and just enough nutrient to make it a beautiful plant and nothing more. So, the science behind it and the thinking behind it is all designed around how to mitigate environmental, you know, changes and use of utilities and things like that that aren't necessary. Use higherend lights that will not pull as much energy as the old lights do. So, all of these things are factored in and there's no expense spared in this building to that regard. So we're really again, you know, I don't think those impacts will show much. We'll provide what what's requested, but a lot of this is, you know, things that we went through in the medical side and this was built for this purpose. So the AU doesn't change any of that. It just allows us to sell it into a different market now that actually is thriving versus one that is um really not thriving. It's something to the tune of $270 million in the AU in total sales for the state against like $5 million in medical. So, you can see why there's no store there. There's no nobody to buy anything. So, um I think I covered most of everything there. If there's any other questions you have, I'd be happy to address them. Sure. Hey, Burke. Yeah. Um remind me, uh when did you guys open originally? Um, I believe it's been about two years that we've had the licenses there. I

think we've renewed them now twice with the state, their annual licenses. So, and took about a about two years before that to clean it up and build it. So, we've had the permit now for quite some time, but it's taken a long time from the remediation of the property to then build it out to then the lensure. So, it's it's been a long process. And your current hours are what for the grow and the um in the process I think they're like 9 to5 daily. Is that right? Yeah. 9 to5 daily. Um the store is not open so there are no hours for the store but um it would be within the ordinance whatever the ordinance requires. The store will probably try to stay open as long as it possibly can. What does our ordinance currently require on that? Is it 8:00 p.m.? Do I recall? I believe so. I will have to check that too. Yeah, it is in the application. Good evening. Uh, my name is Mike Delora. I am the chief corporate officer of House of Dank. We are the proposed retail operator at this site. And since your question was specific to retail, um, I believe your ordinance is actually fairly unique throughout the state, uh, believe it or not, as to operating hours. Um, if I'm recalling correctly, it is Monday to Thursday, uh, where we are 9 to 9 and then on Friday and Saturday 9 to 10. And this is the unique part. Uh there are no sales allowed on Sunday. Um and that is certainly something that I've noticed in my projections. Um if we uh if we take a look at the business model, um that actually cost me 52 days out of the whole year of sales. So that puts me um almost two full months behind my competitors in Westland or otherwise. And this uh limits my ability to expand, hire workers or otherwise. So uh certainly not something that I intended to bring up today. I'm glad you brought it up, but I I hope that perhaps in the future when we demonstrate our commitment to the community or otherwise, we're able to uh to perhaps take a look at that. Again, I know we had a job fair recently last week and

the uh the response was overwhelmingly enthusiastic uh from people looking for work and in addition really excited that, you know, we're going to be joining the community and that we're excited to be here as well. So, but if you have any other questions regarding retail, um let me know. But, you know, Craig, take over. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Do you have anything else? I'm good. Okay. Any questions? Just two things. Um, so you had talked about uh the medical marijuana sales going down and that's why you want to get into retail. So is the is there incremental volume, incremental plants or is it just a shifting from one to the other? It's a it's a shifting. Right now there's no inventory, there's no effort to make any medical sales from the retail perspective. Uh there there's literally no market for it in the state of Michigan. um you would lose money by being open every day just trying to service the handful of patients you'd be lucky to get if they showed up. Um with that in mind, it's been closed. The goal would be is to open as a recreational facility and to the extent that there are patients in the area that are looking for medical product, they would be given the appropriate um I I think there's either going to be a discount that they're offered or the the store covers the cost of sales tax or something to that event in most instances. um the the way the two licenses work, there's a whole separate accounting, a whole separate requirement with the state of Michigan on annual financial statements and such like that. And if we don't have any activity, we don't need to participate in that part of it with the state because it's just a cost. It just costs a lot of money to get no upside. On the other side, the recreational sales, um we have a lot of hope for the store. As Mike described, he's got a proform. He's got, you know, they're excited to get going here. Um, and we feel like we'd be able to service the community better on the rec side. And your client is Mr. Riiffken, correct? And so he's a resident of Indiana. He is. And just curious, what is his connection to Garden City or does

he do this all over the country and we just happen to be selecting? They were looking to diversify their investments. Um, and they came to Michigan when the market changed and they made this investment. this is something they're excited to be a part of. They do have and will be bringing on local partners that are related to Michigan and we'll be helping them operate. Um, but you know, this all has to happen for that waterfall to occur. Okay. For example, we're one of those local partners. Um, again, this would be our uh our 14th store across the state. We are entirely self-funded. Uh, born all here in Detroit, a familyrun company. Um, and we are, you know, just trying to to slowly be very disciplined. We've been working with the Rifkins now for several years to in preparation for this moment to ultimately try to to bring a viable business to the community. Um so uh you when we talk about local I think that that that's where we come in I think more than anything else. So absolutely the face facing the street and the public is will be the house of dank. Thank you. Any other questions? Okay. Uh did you have anything else you wanted to tell us before we open this up to the public? No, not at this time. Thank you. Okay. Well, have a seat and if we have anything, we'll get back to you. You got it. Thank you. [Applause] Okay. Uh we're going to open this up uh open the public hearing up and uh allow people to come up one at a time. if you would, since there's quite a few people here, I don't know how many are going to be speaking, limit your uh comments to about 3 minutes. And uh so I'll open the public hearing at 7:05 and if anyone's interested in making a comment or they want to say something about the

application, come forward to the podium. No, is this in regards to Yes. This is only this is only for the marijuana application. Uh no one's interested in coming up to uh comment. Okay, we have one gentleman. You come up and uh tell us your name and Uh, my name is Nicholas Shrock. I'm a licensed real estate broker and I also own a licensed cultivation facility in Hazel Park. Um, I'm trying to I want to know when the official green zone is going to be released. When what when are we going to know when what the official green zone is going to be for adult use? Uh, if you're referring to a specific location in the city in which adult use marijuana would be located. Uh, so we already passed a zoning ordinance and a regulating ordinance. We don't call it a green zone. It's just that adult use marijuana facilities are required this special use process in the M1 zoning district. And then there are specific setback requirements from residentially zoned properties, uh, schools, child care centers, daycare centers, uh, parks, and, uh, Ford Road. So provided a a location meets those setback requirements within the M1 district then it then they could apply then someone could apply for an adult use facility. But uh we do as noted we do require the st our our unique level of stacking. We allow growers. If you want to be a processor you must first be a grower. If you want to be a adult use marijuana retailer you have to be both a grower and a processor. Okay. And where can I find the ordinance for? Uh, it's online. Uh, it's it's chapter 124 of the zone of the general law ordinance and then it's chapter

154.165 of Arizona and I can give you those. You don't have anything to write it down. I can tell you those facilities kind of grandfathered in in this ordinance. What what we have is there there were our previous ordinance was allowing for up to three medical marijuana facilities. There were three sites that were adopted, excuse me, granted approval. They were at some point went through and received their approval. They were uh went through and began each in their own level the u building permit process. Two of those facilities have uh have basically been determined by the building official to indicate that they're no longer in compliance with the with their building permit because they've not completed the requirements. M so right now at this time this facility uh we're discussing tonight is the only licensed medical marijuana facility. Okay. So we technically could have two others. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else wish to come forward with a comment or question? Okay. Uh do we have any written communications? We do. Yes, I have one. Um, this is from a resident Paula Barker states, "I am sending this in regards to the public hearing to be held on April 10th, 2025. As to the first hearing, I am against it as having a marijuana grower, processor, and retailer this close to my home is not something I want for myself nor my grandchildren that I am raising. This is not something I want them to be around. and it feels and feel it defeats my teachings of no drug use. You already see underage kids smoking in middle school, so what's to stop them from getting the marijuana? I am also concerned about the possible smell of processing the marijuana going into the air along with the smell of growing it.

Okay, that's the only one. That's the only one. All right. If no one else wishes to come forward, then we'll close the public hearing at 7:10 and we'll move on to planning commission discussion and recommendations. Chairperson. Yes. Can I just suggest given that we have a resident who asked about the distance to a residential area, Mr. Ortega, could you just cite the distance and that it it it we did check the ordinance? Yes. Um any any facility is required to be 500 ft from a residentially zoned piece of property and that's measured from the closest point on a on a piece of property uh intended to be a marijuana facility to the closest point of a residentially zoned property. And so basically in this area what you find is the closest residences are on the north side of block and and so typically a lot of the uh all of the properties along block that are zoned M1 technically don't meet that setback. So you basically find them along industrial along Park Lane and then in this location on Hubard. Thank you. We have uh Paula Barker's u address. Uh we do uh 31457 Crowder. Any other discussion on the uh applications? Well, it it appears that the applicant has met most of the uh regulations and with a few exceptions that we can I

believe uh recommend with those items as in contingent. Uh unless someone has uh a problem uh I think we should uh entertain motions to uh recommend approval. You said you wanted a separate motion for the growing the processing and the retail. I believe that's correct. Is that correct? Yes. Yeah. If we could start with the uh the way we have it listed, the grow processing and then finish with the retail. Okay. Prior to moving on, anyone care to make a motion? I would just like to make a comment. I'm happy to make a motion. I I just think um generally obviously marijuana use may be a controversial topic, but I think our job is to look within the ordinances and see if the application and the recommendation is within our ordinances, not to personally weigh in on what you think about marijuana use. Um so although I appreciate the president's letter, were within the ordinance. Um, so I'm happy to make a motion uh for recommendation to city council for special land use uh to establish an adult use marijuana grower facility at 32330 Ford Road in the M1 light industrial zoning district with the recommendations noted in the McKenna letter items 1 through 4. I'll second motion made and supported. Any discussion on the motion? Take the role, please. Um, Commissioner King, I. Uh, Commissioner Williams, I. Commissioner Steamberg, I. Chairperson May, I. Motion passes 40. Uh, now we need one for provisioning.

Before processing or processing. Yes. Okay. care to make a I'll make a a motion on the processing side to approve. Recommend approval. Recommend approval. Yes. And including these uh continue including the four items as mentioned before on page five. Support. Okay. Motion made and supported. Any discussion? Take the role, please. Commissioner Steamberg. I. Mr. King. Hi, Mr. Williams. Hi, Chairperson. May I? Passes 40. And then this final would be for retail. Okay. Need another motion for retail application. I'll make a motion to uh suggest the council to approve the special use land for 30254 for retail use. with those contingencies 322 30254 with the contingencies provided in the mechano report support made and supported any discussion on the motion take the role please Mr. Williams I Mr. King I Mr. Steamberg. Hi. Chairperson may I. Motion passes 40. [Applause] Okay. Next, you have to go before the council to get their approval on the uh special land use and uh you can get together with Mr. Ortega to uh take care of these items that need to be included in our final uh application. Could I could I just Yeah, forgive me. Chair. Yeah. I'm sorry. All right. I I just noticed and maybe there's two addresses. There is an address on our agenda of 32

330 and on the McKenna letter it's 30254. I was about to make that same point. Yeah, forgive the letter the the cover letter missed that one change. So the address of the site is actually 32330. Okay. So there's that. And then the second thing um you've made your recommendations for special use approvals. Technically there's still a site plan approval. Yes. That needs to be granted. Uh, and I can go over those real quick if you like. Yes, if you would. Yeah. So, really quick, basically the site has been designed and constructed uh in compliance with our medical marijuana facility act uh standards. And you know, the existing building, it's compliance with all our setbacks and dimensions. Uh, the the existing building's architecture and design is actually been renovated. They've added some additional facade elements to the site. They've renovated the the southern part of the site, made it much more attractive, added new new paint and new materials. Um, and then when it comes to parking, the site actually exceeds parking based on the current configuration of the of the uh existing building. And actually, this technically the site could the parking lot could be reconfigured if for some reason they wanted to expand on the uh the grow operation of the building. If you'll note on the site plan that they did submit, uh the central portion of the building does have a un undeveloped an an unutilized uh portion of the floor at this time. So in theory they could come back later to do more grow licenses or processing or whichever. In theory they could do that. Um, so the plan the pl the parking lot does have the configuration accommodation to that, but if they were ever to come and make any changes to what's in front of you, they would have it would have to come back to you. So, this will be operating and be approving as is on that site plan until such a point in time they submit a revision that goes back to to you and the council. Um, and then with regards to landscaping, I I put the screening

wall under the landscaping issue, but that's um uh once again a requirement of the special land use to have that 3-foot screening wall. We threw it in there. So, we got past you guys. I mean, it's a something that they'd like to see happen. Uh that is a requirements of the ordinance, I should say. Uh and then other things, uh you know, normal improvements that we require for a facility. they've actually constructed and it's in compliance. The dumpster enclosure actually uh is in compliance with our standard. They built one on the east side of the building. The lighting plan, while they haven't submitted one, the lighting plan that was submitted for medical marijuana facility was in is in compliance with the site plan, it does have all the standards. So, while you don't have one as part of this packet, the site was developed and constructed and is in current compliance with our lighting uh facility plan uh requirements. Uh and then one other aspect uh during a site v visit I noticed there was a a some part of the sidewalk along Hubard that was covered with debris. It might have been actually damaged due to installation of a I believe uh some type of utility underground because there's a the hard surface from the right ofway into the building was uh was covered with gravel currently. That's usually typical of a upgrade in the uh utility connection. Uh so we would recommend uh that the sidewalk condition be addressed. So we would recommend site plan approval contingent upon construction of the screening wall and uh construction uh any u a note stating that the sidewalk will be evaluated and repaired to provide a uniform level of surface. Yes sir. I have a question regarding the screening wall. Can you look into if uh bushes or some sort of greenery would be acceptable in the M1 district outside of just requiring it for a adult use medical marijuana facility or adult use

facility? So, so if we could break it up and give it some greenery instead of a just a three foot brick or block wall stretching a couple hundred feet. Right. So uh if this normally the land the screening walls are under the landscape section of the ordinance and you would have the ability to require to allow for modifications. Technically this standard is under the adult use marijuana standards uh spec for special use. So that's why it's required the treatment wall. There's nothing to say the applicant can't can't put uh some nice shrubs in front of it to to break up the mass of that wall. Uh and also a three-foot screening wall could also you know be a modification of that could be you have uh p uh pillars uh as at at corners and at a certain distance maybe like 20 foot intervals and then between that you can have a landscape excuse me a um row iron fencing or actually a lot of aluminum and then have landscaping in front of that. Uh I can talk to the development director to see if the that would meet the intent of the ordinance if we're allowed to do that modification. We're working with the applicant. We can see what's what's allowed. Uh could you just site what is the subsection where the wall is referenced? It is in section I'm in 154.165 154.165A. Yeah. So we can look at that and see what the actual verbiage is.

So it says parking area shall have a 3-ft high as measured from grade brick walls that shield the parking lot from the public right ofway. So whether those walls are a consistent distance or whether they're broken up with shrubs and and rod iron fence, I guess that could be open to interpretation by uh development directory. You said it was I A. I'm sorry. Yeah. Uh F I then five and then A. Yeah. Sub sub. Sorry. Okay. Well, we we already have trees in front of it. Uh possibly some shrubs would Yeah. It could break up the mass of it because it is a long wall along Hubard right there, but it doesn't go the full length of the building. No, only where the parking is. So, so it' be like a I know 15 foot length wall on the south side of the curb cut and then whatever distance it is on the north side of the curb cut. It the parking is a little substantial on the northern portion of the site. Well, the it's on the west side of the wall that be put on the west side of the building. Correct. Here. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Just along Hubard. Yeah. Yeah. And it's where the parking is too. So there there's portion of that that western half of the parking lot that is just here uh circulation. Oh well actually it goes all the way to the end. Never mind. I don't I don't really see that the wall is a problem. It can be made a little more

decorative. Yep. vote and it is required in the the ordinance. Yes, it's about 170 foot long wall but it can be made decorative and the massing can be be broken up. Okay. Uh were you done with your Yes. Okay. Uh, one thing I I did notice was that uh while you had noted that there was a lack of equipment screening, that uh equipment screening wasn't added to your uh Yes, that that was some original language I had on the site and after I did the site visit, I noticed that they actually did put screen their equipment is screened. Oh, there is already screening. There is already screening. Okay. It's something that is there on site. It's on It's on the west side of the building behind stockade fence screening. So, okay. Uh did the applicant care to make any comment on on the site plan review? No, just uh same comments before getting required. I like the concept of not having to do it, but um certainly uh it will be done. And then I was going to comment on the equipment is all screened. We did that when we built up the medical stuff. So we should be in compliance as that goes. So we just really appreciate the u the opportunity to get moving on. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. I just want to jump in on this wall real quick too because I think you guys are confused as to why it's there and like I I have a general idea. It's tied into your your your COP TED program, right? Of crime pro prevention through environmental design. So I've seen this in other municipalities as well. even though it's only a three-foot brick screening wall, um it creates this sort of fiction that the site is more secure

at that point. It's harder for a car to ram it or otherwise. Now, there is no rash of dispensary break-ins across the state. So, this is certainly overdoing it a little bit. Um but I am familiar with this requirement in in other cities. So, the logical tieback is is part of this this cop plan which is referenced in the SLOU and that again it's crime prevention through environmental design. So by adding that, you're in essence creating a more secure facility. So again, uh if it wasn't there, we wouldn't build it, you know what I mean? But like here we are. I'm definitely going to build it, you know, along that parking stream. But I just wanted to kind of hang that kind of logic for you so you know where it's coming from. So again, thank you very much. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any public comments or questions on the site plan review? Okay, hearing none, we'll move on. Uh we need a motion for again for each uh so for site plan we'll just it'll cover just the one for the site plan approval overall. Overall okay so we don't need separate ones. Okay, good. someone. I'll make a motion uh to approve the site plan uh located at 32330 Ford Road in M1 Light Industrial Zoning District with the condition of following through on the McKenna recommendations items 1 A through C. Support. Motion's made and supported. Any uh comments on the motion discussion hearing? None. Would you take the role? Commissioner King. I. Commissioner Williams. Hi. Commissioner Steamberg. Hi. Chair Person May. Hi. Passes 40. Okay. All set then. Thank you for coming in.

[Applause] [Applause] All right, moving on. Our next item, EPL25-000012, a request for special land use and site plan approval to construct a gas station and convenience store building with a drive-thru restaurant at 31406 Ford Road in the C3 General Business Zoning District. Mr. Ortega. Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh this site is uh proposed uh uh this use, excuse me, is proposed on a site at the northwest corner of Ford and Marman. Uh it's comprised currently of two adjacent lots at this location. Uh the combined site is 29,125 ft in area and it's currently an unimproved vacant grass lot. Uh the site was recently reszoned to our C3 general business. The entire property is now reszone zoned as C3. And the applicant is proposing to construct a gas station convenience store building with a drive-through restaurant window and an associated uh uh gas station pump canopy with the C bumps underneath. Uh so with regards to the the uses, gas stations and drive-through uh windows for restaurants are permitted in the C3 uh after receiving special land use approval. And so I will be first going over the special land use requirements, the special land use requirements that apply to all uses, special land use requirements for gas stations, and special land use requirements for uh drive-through windows. And then separately we can talk about the site plan issues on this facility. Um so once again the first thing we look

at is compatibility with the adjacent uses. Um the majority of this site is adjacent to property zoned and used as commercial on the east uh the south and then a portion of the western boundary. Um but of course uh because this is at at an intersection that those eastern properties are on the other side of Marramman and the southern property is on the other side of Ford. Uh so it's only adjacent to one uh commercial piece of property on the southwest side. So uh the property to the north is actually across Crowder Avenue which is zoned R3 uh multif family residential. The properties are zoned R3. Um the immediate lot at that corner uh on the other side of Crowder is actually a vacant lot and then there is a lot that is occupied by a single family structure. It's a single family structure in the R3 district. Similarly on the on the directly west of um this site is a property that is zoned R3 but it is uh occupied by a single family structure as well. So, um based on this proposed, uh building layout on the site plan in front of you, uh this the drive-through window will be directly across from the rear corner of the adjacent residence. Uh as proposed, there's uh the the single family the single family residence. They are proposing to construct the 6ft highmasonry screening wall and then there's a 13 12 to 13 foot wide drive aisle for the drive-through window and then the window itself. Um, so whether in this configuration that that six foot high wall window would be sufficient to screen the activity and the uh noise from an associated uh drive-through window remains to be seen whether that's sufficient. However, we note one key

aspect of the uh requirements for drive-thru uh for these special uses is that uh the zoning orders does require actually a 40ft minimum setback for structures from any property zoned or used for residential purposes. Uh so the building as proposed is in violation of that 40oot setback. So, but the building could be uh revised uh and basically turned or renov or or reduced in size or some um revision to comply with that 40ft setback. Uh and so while in theory that reconfiguration uh will then provide that that buffer, uh the setback will locate some of that commercial activity further away from the residential. But we do feel that the majority um so in summary about compatibility the majority of the site is compatible with the adjacent commercial uses on the on the east south and portions of the portions of the west. Uh and if the site plan is revised to provide the required 40-foot setback then a greater amount of associated commercial activities will be further from those residences on the west. But in the city most of our most common shared boundaries between residential uses and commercial uses is a shared rear line. Uh you know the residential un uses benefit from having their rear yard acting as that buffer uh as an additional buffer uh from the commercial activity on the other side of that rear line and the other side of that screening wall. Um given that this site is proposing a shared sideyard relationship uh you know the planning commission uh we suggest you should determine what is appropriate uh in this particular configuration. Uh is providing the required 40ft setback sufficient? uh is

providing additional buffering between the uses uh required or necessary or are the proposed special land uses appropriate in this location in compliance with that 40ft setback. Uh basically what this is is it's a good question because this is a special land use. Special land use gives planning commission purview as to these type of issues with regards to compatibility. Um it does appear looking at it when based on my experience there could be a configuration of the site that complies with the setback uh that has the feature of a drive-through window and that provides an additional buffering to the uh residents. Uh that that's a potential that could happen. But uh it's a matter of what your opinion is as the planning commission as to what level of buffering needs to occur. You know the site is zone commercial. It is intended to be developed as commercial but how does that relationship with the single family exist and that's a main crux of this issue in front of you tonight in terms of special land use. Looking at our other things that we talk about generally speaking compatibility with the master plan. uh this is compatible with the master plan as proposed these uses and that's in speaking to the point that's why we res it it was reszoned in theory this can be designed in such a way to be used for commercial use and be adjacent to residential because we do have that relationship throughout the city it's a matter of whether this side to side relationship needs some additional buffering basically with regards to that uh so we look also always look at you know paragraph C on page three the use of adjacent property you know once again the close proximity of the proposed commercial improvements to the residential use to the north and northwest, you know, that could impact the continued use of those properties um as it is designed today. Uh the conclusions, so we recommend these conclusions and discussions you have

about compatibility would impact your determination of whether having a compatible design will allow those adjacent properties under North and West to function as as residential. Um stepping back from the compatibility issue for a second, the impact on traffic. Uh you know, the applicant is proposing uh one entrance exit drive on the Ford Road and then two entrance exit proposes on the Marman Road uh rightway. Uh Ford Road is MD DOT jurisdiction. Marman Road is Wayne County jurisdiction. Uh, as proposed, the Ford Road uh driveway is 51 feet from the intersection of Ford and Marman and it's 23 feet from on on Marman uh from from well one intersection's 51, the other one's 23. So, in other words, it's very close. I am not a traffic engineer. Uh, but colloally speaking, we know that the Ford and Marman intersection is very heavy heavily traveled. and has a lot of turning movements on that site. And MDOT and uh Wayne County Road Commission, well the road division, um they have spe specialists that are intended to determine where turning movements go in because the property does have the right to be accessed. They they but that configuration needs to be as safe as possible. we would defer to uh traffic engineers and specifically MDOT and uh War Wayne County to determine what is that appropriate configuration. Uh but in our in my experience, generally speaking, what you're probably going to find is that that Ford Road rightway may be a restricted movements. It might be right in and right out only. Uh and the Marman Road rightway uh access curb cuts may be reduced or shifted and that sort of

thing. And so while it's not also it's not necessarily advantageous, another option is technically having some type of access off a crowder uh once again it's not advantageous from a residential residential standpoint but in theory that might create safer conditions on uh Marman because then any traffic movement every any traffic accessing Marman would exit the site, go on to Crowder and then then attempt to get onto Marman just like every other piece. other traffic currently does by utilizing crowder. But once again, that's just a planner's opinion. We would need transportation engineers uh and to to take a look at that uh with regards to that. So that's always been a big issue and that's honestly, you know, honestly that's one of the reasons why this site is one of the more difficult sites to one of the last sites to be developed in the redeveloped in the city because of these uh these these conditions. One other aspect we note as we'll discuss later on in the evening is whether there's a need for this proposed use. Um that's one of the standards of criteria for special land use that you have to uh discuss. Uh briefly getting into uh the the specific requirements for gas stations. I already noted that there's the 40 foot setback required for from residential property. Um the applicant still needs to provide uh uh the details on the canopy because there is a requirement that the canopy be set back 20 feet from the right ofway. Uh and it must be uh so the canopy is going to have to be shifted in order to meet that minimum setback. Technically our ingress and egress requirements wants a wider driveway for these uh gas stations. We want a 31 foot minimum wide driveway. So, we'll have to see how that requirement uh lines up with the requirements of uh MDOT or or Wayne County. That's going to

be an issue possibly. Uh with regards to that, we do we do have some notes here that they need to make sure that on the site plan, there's a note about no outside storage on the site and no vehicle sales are permitted on the site. And then finally looking at the drive-through restaurant aspect of the entire site. Um we also have some minimum requirements for the driveways. As I mentioned the the ingress and ingress point uh must be no located no closer than 25 ft from the intersection of Ford and Marman. So that southern Marman road access drives needs to be shifted to the north already by our standards up to at least 25 feet. Uh we also have some standards with regards to the control of the sound level. We need details on the menu ordering station where that's going to be located in relation to the adjacent residences. And then uh there is a stacking space requirement for uh the drive-through lane. They need to show 10 parking spa 10 spaces from the window around the building in whatever configuration is is proposed. Um, so just on the special land use aspect of this, uh, once again, it's a difficult site to design. Uh, I'm sure they probably came up with several different alternatives and they've they've approached us with this one. Uh, but I do, but based on the at a minimum the 40 foot setback from the residential property, this the site will have to be reconfigured. Um so in the end if you uh after your deliberations tonight if you feel there is any type and is a potential to make a motion to recommend any kind of approval for this uh I do have a list of uh four different items and one two three eight eight different issues that need to be addressed on a revised site plan. Question two about the access to the dumpster enclosure. Yeah. So there's additional issues under the site plan. I left those for under the site plan. But

the dumpster enclosure is access to that access to the uh proposed loading zone is is an issue. So circulation and access is an issue. Just to jump into that for a minute, uh parking circ uh config, excuse me, the parking configuration on the site seems a little uh we a little it's not consistent with what we normally have. for example, for they they're proposing uh angled parking lot parking spaces on that west side, but typically angled parking spaces are have a are done in com combination with a one-way access lane. So when you pull in uh you pull out and then you keep going either northbound or along the the the way based on its configuration directly adjacent to the the um g the fuel pumps. You might have people wanting to to turn uh southbound. So go contrary to those vehicles exiting the spaces. People exiting the spaces might want to try and keep on doing a circular motion to exit south on the site. And so it's just it's a very there's a lot of conflict points that that result from that from park from cars exiting those spaces and every other car traveling the site. Not to mention that the fueling uh circulation the circ they have provided circulation plans but a lot of those circulation plans show either a a position of the fuel truck that's not even in close proximity to where the tanks are or it shows those fuel trucks with the rear end of the truck hanging on the the u the u driveways that are exiting the site. Um, and we've had some issues with this in other sites. Uh, you know, the the configuration of the circulation is proposed on the site

plan, but then I've noticed in practice they aren't done. Uh, we we're having some truck drivers, and it might be because they're not used to the site yet, but some of these fuel delivery drivers are backing up into Ford Road. So, that's something that we can't have on on the Ford and Marman location. Yes, sir. Maybe this just my personal opinion, but I think the way this being presented tonight, there's too many inconsistencies and conflicts for me to even consider site plan approval. I'm kind of I think I think a lot of us are feeling that way, but why don't we wait and uh let the applicant um make his comments and we'll have a public hearing and then we can uh discuss it after that. Okay. And as I mentioned the I I'm sure that the applicant has considered different configurations and and because another issue is uh there's a DTEment straight through the middle of the site. Uh and the but the applicant is aware of that and they've they've positioned things that they felt out of that because initial site plans that I did see unfortunately had the the dumpster enclosure directly underneath the overhead lines and that's obviously not going to work. So they have been trying to come up with something that that works. uh I believe uh you know but they wanted to uh have uh their opportunity to speak and I also think uh that you benefited from your experiences of what your preferences would be with regards to this compatibility issue because it's something that I think is important and last thing with regards to all this I do believe that uh the number of parking spaces required on site is due to the size of the building uh and the amount of the uh the size of that building and the size of the uh the restaurant storefront. If the building was reduced in size, the number of parking spaces on site would be reduced and then there would be more space for vehicles to

circulate safely. So, that's another option to consider. Chamber. Um I have a similar concern as yourself, although we want the applicant to be able to speak to us tonight and see what we can do here. But I'm wondering if we wouldn't all be better served by getting input from MDOT uh andor Wayne County to see what their thoughts on ingress and egress for the property because we're not only looking at vehicles going in and out. We're looking at uh garbage trucks which are fairly significant size and have a reduced turning radius than a passenger car or truck would have and also in conjunction with uh fuel delivery. Uh those are generally pretty significant vehicles and the constraints of the site although something can be figured out here. Uh, a a lot of little a lot of little things here. Um, but I wonder if we wouldn't be better served by getting MDOT's 10 cents on this. To let you know, I have mentioned that to to the applicant and I've mentioned that to other applicants because MDOT and and Wayne County are an issue and uh I have noticed lately that MDOT and Wayne County have been more forthright lately in providing comments on plans informally. So that way the applicant doesn't have to go through the review and approval process officially putting the cart for the horse as you will but they they've been had the opportunity to receive informal comments from both MDOT and Wayne County because I know the cost of drawings and time and everything is very significant and we can sit here and debate all the ins and outs of getting

garbage trucks in and fuel trucks and and people buying food and fuel in and out of this site. Uh, but if we do all that and then MDOT throws it up in the air and says you can't possibly put a driveway this close to whatever whatever then I'm wondering if it wouldn't be for nod. So, okay. Well, let's um Okay. Uh, did you have anything else, Mr. Ortega? No. Okay. Is the applicant present here to come up and make Good evening. Good evening design. I'm representing uh Dr. Fetty Musardeem for Flex um and his associates. Uh it seems like there's a lot of concerns. I didn't know. This is a surprise to me because we went back and forth before we got to this point for about 3 months. Yeah, I'm very surprised. As you can see that the site um the site can't be configured in so many different ways. The site in the toward the front for fronting the for fronting for road. I mean there's no possibility that we're going to put any uh uh building there and the pumps are not allowed to be toward the back on on on the side street toward the back. I forgot the name of the the side street for a second. Crowder Crowder Crowder. Yeah, always forget that. Um, so the only possibility for me to to design this building was to forward the back and the intention for the owner uh designing many of these in many cities and one is one is already in your city on uh Ford Road in Henry Ruff. He's having a gas station and he can't have min he he needs minimum of 3,000 square feet for the store in order to fit

everything that he needs. I mean, he already experienced this many times for so many years. And um and then as far as the uh the carry out restaurant, which uh if he's going to put Eureka Deli again or he's going to choose something else, I'm not sure yet. Um but most likely Eureka Deli. Um he needs minimum of 1500 square feet. So in that sense, we had to fit the building um according to that square footage. And then along alongside that, I mean, when you go to other buildings um and other drive-thrus um and and and and also uh big shopping centers away from residential, you'll see that they don't have more than, you know, uh 11 12 ft of uh of drive-thru. We were providing um a setback. I think it was uh toward Cro Cro crows. Um I didn't have a copy of the big plans. I just had the copy of the small plans. But uh we have something like uh I think it's almost 20 ft. I mean 16 ft or something like that to the north. That's 16 feet in the back. Uh then the then the landscape another five. This is 13 feet. Oh 13 feet. 13 feet. And then there there's the landscape of uh like 5 ft and then 13 ft uh on the west side. I mean it's a little more than the 12 ft usually that I put, you know, just one more foot more. Um there might be a couple inches uh extra there. Um I mean where where the site is more wide toward the back is the more logical place for me to put it. I can't put it anywhere else. If he's going if if you're allowed if he's going to be allowed to meet his expectations, the owner's expectations. Um if not, then he's going to shrink that building considerably, and he's not going to be able to even have a decent store in order to sell a certain amount

of items to survive on uh these days. Uh when you have when you have a um you know, when you have a gas station and things, you have to sell many many things in order to really make it over there. not just gas but with all the other things you take a little bit from all items then that's how you have a prosperous business. Um we are providing I could say a 6ft high buffer screen wall on the west side for that portion of of the residential. Um, the menus are going to be on the opposite side where we chamfered the building in order when they enter the drive-thru, the oneway coming off of Marramin and then and then circling around. We chamfered the building in order to provide a menu in that area. The engineer didn't show it, but that's where that menu will will will be. Mhm. Um, we're allowing uh like uh I know the park the I didn't show me and the engineer didn't show the the the parking uh I'm sorry the the car stacking, but I did lay it out right before I came to this meeting because I didn't get this review until this morning to tell you the truth. I think you emailed it LA yesterday to the associates. So, I didn't have much time to really revise certain things. So, I can come and prove those what I thought was minor issues, but I know there's some major issues that you're concerned of. And you just um also uh uh mentioned the concern of the in a in a more concerning way, but I don't know. I'm going to try to prove to you that, you know, it shouldn't be that concerning um if you compare this layout to a lot of other gas stations that have a site much, you know, smaller than this site. So, um, so when we when we mentioned that we were going to put a screen wall and we we know we that's required anyways for, you know, um, adjacent to a residential, we thought that was that we were

complying with with being in, you know, the the building being close, you know, with with the drive-thru and everything wasn't really a concern. We didn't see that in your previous comments in that sense, and we appreciate all your comments before we even got to this point. Don't get me wrong, my um so um so we didn't know this is a surprise to us right now. We are buffering the site with landscaping all the way around the site. So that's a plus. We are providing a 6ft high screen wall on the west side, you know, buffering the portion of uh residential that's in that area. Um we can hire it to 8 foot. There's some city there's maybe a couple cities uh that require 8 foot in in other cities. if if that would help. Um but that wall, not not the vinyl fence wall that some cities uh um um they they they allow. But um but the block wall or the brick brick wall that could match the building that looks nice and it really does buffer a lot of that noise or any of that site that's that would be coming from our our side uh from the the commercial uh aspect of it. Um, so I thought that would be sufficient enough. The menu being on the opposite of the the side of the the building toward Mirramman, I thought that would that would help. Um, um, as far as uh, you know, we we always keep in mind not to do most of the activities toward the residential. and the rest of the sites that besides that portion of the residential are surrounded by mostly commercial. Um so in that aspect we were we were thinking that you know because we were limited on where we can put that building but we thought this would be passed a lot easier than than expected uh what you know from everything that

Maria just said regarding some of the other issues that I want to speak up speak about too. Also, as far as the dumpster, I did have the dumpster wrapped around um in another location where there was overhead uh wiring and I had to move it because yeah, the dumpster truck is going to have a hard time um picking up the the the garbage can and stuff like that. We did meet DTE on site. We do have planning and uh discussion and we do have a plan for that. Uh so they're they're able to um move that pole from the middle of the site and we can put it really close to the landscape island near the approach um north on on the northern approach uh coming off of Marramman. Um there's a dot there and there's a and we're you know there's a note that shows where that post will be but it'll be um in a landscape island in that in that in that sense. So that will be buffered in that in that sense. You won't be able to tell where that uh electric post will be just like on other sites. You know it's always on the site but it's buffered with landscaping and stuff like that. Um, so and he's and uh so there there it'll be free of any post or anything like that, but the the lines the the electric lines are still going to remain, but he's able to lift them up. I forgot he he was going to look into how much he can lift them up in order to help, but it still won't help enough for the garbage truck uh mentioned from DTE planner. But nonetheless, I I moved the location of the dumpster um where we where where we're providing angle parking where that one way that you've mentioned and then everyone's going to get confused.

They're going to still use it as two-way and stuff like that. I have a solution for that, but that's something that maybe the owner can sacrifice, but I'm going to get to that after, you know, after a couple other things. Um, so when when we when we had angle parking, that's why and you know the the the the dumpster truck truck when it comes when the when the trucks comes and you know pick up the dumpsters and stuff like that, they want to come in and they want to come in on a on a certain angle 30° 45°ree whatever is, you know, comfortable for them. So I thought they would come in from Ford Road. They can come in from Marman and circle around, but it's easy for them to angle in, pick up the dumpster, and back up and then and then keep going forward toward the the building and then circle around on Marman and leave. I mean, they they're going to if they start that routine, they're going to keep doing that same routine all the time. And if it's comfortable for them, it's comfortable. I mean, I don't know how else um or where else to to put that dumpster. I don't want to put it in front of the building. I can't put it uh toward the the fronting Ford Road or Marramman. Um it's hard to to to put toward the residential uh side uh where where Krauss is. Um, and it was hard for me to put in that corner that uh um where where the west, you know, uh the west side, I don't know how to describe it exactly, but where there's there's this little corner when you come out of the the the drive-thru, you know, in front of that where I created more parking spaces because we needed more parking spaces and that's where I put the loading unloading uh in that area. I I tucked it in there. I like it to put I like that to be next to the dumpster, but I was trying to uh create more space for for us to have more parking spaces. Um we can we can relocate that next to the dumpster and create one more parking

spot in that corner. Um along with uh eliminating one more barrierfree uh parking space in front of the building. That'll give us two more parking spots because we're required only one of 25. So that would help. So before I give you that solution that I was telling you about where the the angle parking will turn into straight parking so we can have two-way which I had a sketch at one time I think I don't know if you've seen it or not but you know working between me and my engineer sometimes you know he he's a little bit stubborn on how thing he he he wants things done too but um I went along with that but what what what what the what the dilemma is is and I kind of shared that with the owner and that's really the backlash Um, and I don't know if he's going to they're going to like me saying this, but they have double pumps. We can have single pumps, four instead of eight. And that will free up some more space in order to go back to that straight parking on the west side. And that will give me enough parking, the circulation for the two-way without restricting anybody on a oneway. Um, so that's a big suggestion right there and it's an easy fix and I had it like that before, but because he he he he insist the owner really insisted on it. Uh, this is the why why I I I I gave him what he wanted first and see what we can do. Uh, what what your comments will be, I guess. So, that was really the biggest thing. Um, as far as the approaches, you know, every gas station owner would like to see always the more appro the most approaches so this the the vehicles can come right into their their place. If they miss one approach, they're going to come in from the second. This is the sense that they're always thinking, but it's not always they can always circle around uh Ford Road from Marramman and uh and go up the next approach. That's

how I kind of uh answer their question in that sense. But nonetheless, um I have a different view about the traffic, you know, when it comes to you can probably, you know, correct me on it and stuff like that and give me insight, but and I said and I and I said it recently to another city. You know, you guys are always concerned about these uh approaches and I'm only advocating because of the owners that want it all the time. Um, and we can still move that up another uh 2 feet in order to comply with the city ordinance, even though contingent upon Wayne County or MDOT, you know, if you give us a chance, you never know, we might get approved, you know, but if we don't, we're going to just have to close it. Um but in in in in that essence uh um you know when you have more approaches I thought you know it doesn't create more of a of a traffic uh jam like um like traffic uh stacking huh the stacking. Yeah stacking and stuff. Well, you have that stacking problem. I know you're going to answer me on that. Uh when you turn out, right? Yeah. Um, but most people are logical to to use that second approach if they really want to turn back into that part or you can restrict it to just the right in right right in from Marramman into there. Like you said, we can probably restrict that. But yeah, this is what the the the owners really want is any way of entrance for them to come back into the entrance if they miss that other other entrance. Um, so when you take cars off the road, that would help, you know, lessen the congestion on the road. That's the the only logic that I had, you know, uh, but is it really uh, is it really right? I'm not sure. Nobody really answered me when I when I brought it up at another city. He looked at me like but but he didn't really give me an answer, but he did say something about stacking. I think maybe he mentioned stacking, you know, in that sense. Um, so So that's that's one concern. Now, as

far as the fuel uh when they when they want to um you know uh provide fuel for the tanks, I thought it would be easy for that the the fuel tank to come off of Mirramman and and and stop at that corner and then unload their their gas and then they can just leave from Ford Road or the opposite come in from Ford Road and then leave from Marramman. Um, so that's why we left the tanks way in the in the south um east corner of the site. And I thought that was a an easy area away from all the traffic that's happening, the circulation that's happening with the customers. Um, because you see some other gas stations, you know, they kind of clutter that whole site sometimes right in front of the building or in a in a sense where a lot of the the the vehicles can't even come into the site um because the sightes are maybe too small. So, and you got you have to understand that those fuel fuel trucks only come in for like 20 minutes, I think. I mean, that's how fast. You don't you don't probably realize it, but if you just sit and wait and time them, it's like 20 minutes. They unload and they and they go, "Here, we got some people that are really more logical." Does it take longer than that? They take 45 minutes. 45 minutes. I don't know. But that one I It was a question mark there, too. That's magic. But I mean, it's a very it's a it's a large site, but it's hard to um configure things a lot different than what what we have. And if we if we lose 40 ft, like I said, from the residential, um I'm I'm only going to be left with maybe 2,000 foot building. And the guy's not going to be able to ever put an addition or anything else. And I don't think he'll go uh go along with the project. That's what I that's my opinion. Um, uh, I don't know. I I think I I probably answered all the concerns and about DTE

and, uh, and MDOT and and and Wayne County. We worked with them before. Uh, the only thing I we want it contingent, but the only thing that we we possibly knew in the back of our mind, but we're going to we wanted to give it a chance that approach uh, which is is near that intersection, if they're going to approve it or not. And if they don't, we can close that. He can the owner can live with that. Um but other than that, uh we don't foresee any other problems with MDOT and and um and and Wayne County. Um with that, maybe with the questions, uh uh if I missed anything, then I can answer any questions that you have. Okay. Well, if we have any we'll come back to you later. Okay. Thank you. Sue, do you want to say anything? Okay. Okay. Um, next we'll move on to the uh public hearing. I'll open the public hearing at 8:05 if anyone wishes to come forward and comment one at a time. Thank you. I'm not very good at public speaking. I just um I hope I can get my point across. Um take your time. So, I'm coming speaking actually as an employee of gas stations for several years and also as a resident of Garden City. So, um we know that uh Ford Road is a mile road. It's very busy. It not it's uh people come off of Ann Arbor Trail to get to Ford Road. They come from Telegraph. They come So, So actually what I'm trying to say is um aside from the um like the the city

codes and you know where the entrance is where the you know this or that or whatever if we think of it uh more on a level of safety because of the traffic um the more I listened the more things that came to my mind that I thought about being a um an employee of a gas station and also as a resident. I live at the corner of Marman and Ford Road. So, even when they put the checkers in with their drive-thru, I saw the traffic change just with that with that coming there. So, I don't know if you guys know this or not, but Ford Road in Middle Belt is named the most danger one of the most dangerous intersections in Garden City. and with the um with the traffic and not only with the development that's coming and I understand that development is a good thing. It's I'm not opposed to people owning businesses and I'm not opposed to um it generating money for our city, but um but we have to think of safety again and and because um if the development is trickling down to Marman and Ford Road, which is already a busy intersection, and also I take public transportation. That's how I get back and forth to work. So, um I know like he was the gentleman was saying and you guys were also saying with um on the on the northwest corner is a bus stop. On the southeast corner is another bus stop and the buses come every hour. And not only that, Ford Road being a mile road is a mile road also for our um police department, our fire department, our EMS there. I live over there. I hear it every single day. It's not just once every 3 hours. It's once an hour an ambulance or a firet truck or a police officer is using that road. So even 20

minutes or it's not 20 minutes. It's actually more like 45 minutes for a tanker to fill up uh to pull in and back out. Just them pulling in to a gas station and out of a gas station takes time. that I just feel like that corner, our city would be better uh served with something else on that corner. I just feel like it it's not a very good match. That corner is too busy of an intersection um for that type of business. You know what I mean? Anyway you put it and it sounds like it already has a lot of things not going for it already to begin with. So, it kind of sounds like it's a disaster waiting to become a bigger disaster, you know, and being a resident also. Um, like someone might think a garbage truck coming and picking up garbage. It's just the garbage truck coming and picking up garbage and maybe they have to watch for the DTE wires. That's not it. I live over there. There's an alley by where I live. When the garbage trucks come, they don't always come at the same time. They don't always take the same route. They're so loud. It sounds like the neighborhood is blowing up. It's bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang. And that poor person that lives over there, like you said, reszoned. Your time's about up. So, it's just not a good match, I don't think. I would just want you to take that into consideration. Thank you. Thank you for listening. Next, please identify yourself, please. Timothy Buckman. I I agree with her. The the way that that lot is set up and the way the traffic flows around Marman and Ford is already dangerous enough. If you're trying to get, you know, as the gentleman said, you're going to have a fuel tanker coming in in a garbage truck. Well, what about the food deliveries, the drink deliveries, the people trying to turn the wrong way coming in or going out of the store?

If it's right in, right out, people aren't going to follow that. It's It's a bad thing. And then how many gas stations does this city need? You know, just on Thor Road from Ingster to Benoy, I can count five off the top of my head. I don't I don't see why need more gas stations. Then we got the chance of more pollution, tanks leaking. That's I don't think it's a good fit. Hey, thank you. Next. Good evening. Good evening. Um, my name is Steve Hamadi. I'm well known to the architect here. Uh, I've been in business in Garden City since 1991. I've owned a gas station and I have uh a chain of gas stations. Actually, I strongly oppose this uh project for many many reasons that I've sent a letter to Mr. Ortega. He can share with you. I tried sending you. Uh, number one, there's five gas stations within a mile radius. The owner, Mr. Nasser, who is on the DDA board, understands he has one. He just built it. It's a nightmare for, if you notice, there's no cars can't stack. Two cars can't be behind each other. That's the same thing going to happen here. MD dot will never approve this. on Ford Road because it's it's going to be a a nightmare of safety. There's no deceleration lane for vehicles to turn in. Vendors when they pull in, how are they going to pull? They pull in constantly. Time bombs, which is the fuel truck. Uh I for one when I built my gas stations and when I bought my gas stations they they were designed by oil companies some oil company uh BP so they

put a lot of thought mobile oil they put a lot of thought of ingress egress where the truck is going to be where it's how long it's going to park how fast it's going to download into that thing. This site is is a huge hardship for neighbors, for traffic, for policing, for safety, for environmental. Not to mention the fumes that gas stations put out when in close proximity to neighbors in the summertime with with their vents that go on on on stacking. So, I didn't have the opportunity to to take a look at this. I just learned about this today. Otherwise, I would have had many, many people coming in here to oppose this. There's no need for a gas station. The owner has one down half a mile from here with an ery in it. There's no You guys were gracious enough to give him that huge building with sea store and not enough parking for it. But that's fine. Look at the one on four road in Ingster. The shell, that's a nightmare. Look how they go in and go. Look at the truck how it goes in the the customers. They can't even you can't even stack two cars. The industry is supposed to at least stack two cars as a dive in pumps. He knows that. Mr. Ortega knows that. So, if there's anything I can say is as a local businessman and other business owners in the area, we need we need to have our voices with with the residents heard um regarding this because there's no need for a gas station. the owner I know for a fact from the realtor had other venues who were interested in

putting a much low impact use for that for retail like a a coffee uh uh shop um anything if you put a a car wash in there it'll create a nightmare as as well it's it's nonconforming site so knows the setbacks that he's just mentioned and you can't compromise safety. You can't compromise the neighborhood for for an owner who wants to uh gain. And uh I really appreciate hearing my comments. Thank you so much. Thank you. Have a good evening. Anyone else wish to comment? How you doing? My name is Sean Esau. I'm an owner of a gas station. Next to that gas station, uh they want to build. Uh it's really not about um business or anything but it's about the traffic and then uh make um more dangerous uh stuff happening since uh I've been 7 years and garden city and for road on Benoi there's a gas shell gas station we have over 170 accident a year so how much more accidents. We going to have a they going to build a gas station and then we're going to get more traffic. And as he was saying the trucks, it's not only the gas trucks. If you uh count it and look at it uh a week, there's almost seven, eight trucks that comes from different companies to deliver stuff and they're going to take much times to back up and um like as she was

saying about the garbage, that's really um makes bad noise for the neighbor And it's it's not a good idea to put put a gas station in there. It's it's a really bad idea. And it's we're talking more for safe. We're not talking about the business is he's going to hurt my business, of course, but we're talking more for safe for people to be safe and all that. Thank you. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to come forward and make a comment? Yes, sir. Hi, my name is Max. I've been a gas station employee for about six years and I can count off the top of my head about 10 to 15 delivery trucks we get throughout my the various stations that I've worked at and this is constant throughout the week. Throughout the week, you have about two to three delivery trucks a day. And these are long semi-truckss, longer than a gas uh gas delivery uh semi-truck, you know, and the amount of traffic it causes in the station when one of the entrances are blocked off from these delivery trucks, it's chaos. I don't think it's necessary for another gas station. There's about 20 in this three, four block radius. I can count three this way, five this way. It's just unnecessary for this amount of gas stations in the area. It's not beneficial to the residents. It's actually harmful for the residents with all the fumes and the the traffic it brings. It's a safety concern. You know that there's many intersections that all the traffic coming in and out. Today I was at the gas station on Warren Road in Inkingster and a car coming out hit a car in the turning lane. You know, it's it's just unnecessary that and that's going to cause a lot more accidents than that one today. So, I just think that

it's unnecessary. I don't think that it's going to provide any benefit to the community, to the residents, and it's definitely going to be a very big safety concern. Thank you. Thank you. Does anyone else wish to come forward and speak? Do we have a chance to just answer? Pardon me. Can we can we can we come back and answer any of the concerns that that was brought up? Yeah, you can step up and uh take a couple of minutes. take that long. Um so to address uh some of their concerns um of course all the concerns are always uh important for for me as an architect to answer and what I think is going on and my experience is when I go to gas stations I don't I I haven't experienced u that much congestions in gas stations to tell you the truth I build a lot of gas stations and when I'm there building additions actually not new construction um I see how many deliveries come in there and stuff while I'm building that addition I don't see the commotion that everybody's uh exaggerating. Not at all. I mean, the the trucks that come, the Dorito trucks or the Pepsi trucks and stuff, they're Pepsi trucks may be a little bit longer than uh Dorito trucks or or some other chips trucks or what whatever uh products that they bring in, but they're all box trucks, okay? And they all kind of come in right after each other. There might be two that came at the same time if it might be congestion for for for a little bit, but it's not that long. Their their deliveries are are quick. That's my experience. I know they're experienced in in the business and they have their their vendors that come in and stuff like that. I experienced it, you know, right on um while I was doing construction with a lot of other vehicles of my people in there. And we didn't have this congestion that they're talking about. And this site is a lot larger than other sites that I've seen.

I mean, double the size. So, I don't see that all that congestion that that that everybody's exaggerating. That's number one. Number two, we are zoned C3. We are allowed to put a gas station there. So, I know it's special use. I know you we got to we we have to get permission, but at the end of the day, if he does end up putting a a thousand foot building and if he wants to do it, he's allowed to do it as long as we uh um comply with um some of the cons some of the concerns that have to do with code, not the concerns that other people think that there's going to be so many tra so much traffic in that intersection. And there's a lot of intersections that have a lot of traffic. I mean, that's why that's why it's good for business. Uh, but if they don't want to see it because of other reasons that to me, um, they're not they're not really uh, you know, um, real real reasons for them to to object. You know, I don't I don't see why they're objecting that much. We are on a commercial side. the the the the pumps and the islands are um where he mentioned that there's going to be gas fumes and stuff. Gas stations don't give that, you know, smell, right? You know, the high technology right now and stuff like that where the tanks are underground are all inspected by the state. Uh if anything's smelling to that point, believe me, the state will be running there closing them down. Um everything's regulated to a certain certain extent. Um, as far as uh need my glasses again. Uh, he was saying about um Steve was talking about stacking um of vehicles. I think he what what he was referring to was uh there should be two stacking of cars while one is pumping there's another person behind it. Well, the intention of the owner, I think that's where his good intention was, was to uh double the pumps uh uh you know, you know, uh back back to back

and um in order to accommodate people to come in and out quicker. So, you lessen that um congestion or uh vehicles staying there for too long and leaving the site. Uh, so that would have helped, but the circulation that Mario is bringing up is also some something that we should comply with that I I I understand. Um, so and it there's no code that says that there's has to be stacking spaces unless you guys could show me that um on the gas pumps. As far as the stacking spaces for the for the carry out, I I I mentioned and I can show show to you there. I 15 seconds. I fit 14 uh 14 parking spaces. With that said, thank you for your time. Okay. Thank you. Is there anyone else that wishes to come forward and make a comment? I'm sorry, ma'am. Just just one per person. No, miss. No, ma'am. Only allowed to come up once. Oh, I only need a second. I just I just know. Okay. No, please hold it down. All right. Do we have any uh written communications about this? Uh we have many many bear with me here. Um to begin um Paula Barker again from Crowder. Uh she writes, "I'm sending this in regards to the public hearing to be held on April 10th, 2025. As to the second hearing of the gas station and drive-through restaurant, I am also against this as I feel this corner is already busy enough and I live on the next street. I'm concerned with the added noise of garbage trucks emptying early morning dumpsters, delivery trucks, and gas tankers. This along with the smell of gasoline. The early and late hours of this business will be disrupted to a quiet neighborhood. I'm also afraid that my street will become busier with traffic trying to get on to

Ford Road and taking a shortcut down my street. This already happens too often and they do this at a fast speed to avoid the light. As I have already stated, I have grandchildren living with me that I want to keep safe along with the others on the block. Um, next comes from Sean. He writes, "It's Sean from 32271 Ford Road, Garden City. We don't want another gas station and Garden City. We have enough gas station and it's really going to hurt my business. Thank you. We need to stop it. Next is from Sher Childs on Henipin. This is concerning the gas station proposal at Ford Road and Marman. We do not need another gas station, nor do we want it. That corner is congested bad enough as it is. And yes, I am a resident of Garden City. Please do not allow with this. Um, next subject is just gas station build from an unknown. Please do not build another gas station in front of the existing one in Garden City, Michigan. Our community already has enough gas stations to meet our needs, and adding another one right across the street is unnecessary and excessive. It would not only create more traffic and safety concerns, but also hurt the local environment and potentially harm small businesses that have been serving our area for years. Instead of repeating what we already have, let's focus on bringing in something new and beneficial that our community actually needs. Please reconsider this decision for the sake of our neighborhoods and our future. Next from Dave Jenkins. Attention planning board. This is Dave

Jenkins. I heard there was another gas station going up next to my family's gas station in Garden City, and I truly believe that's a wrong thing to do being after that station being there for the many years. I don't agree with it whatsoever. Um, he did provide an address that is not in Garden City. However, states 37627 Dorchester Drive, Garden City. Again, that's not Garden City, Michigan. But um next we have Michael Shamas says, "Dear members of the planning commission, I am ready to express my strong opposition to the proposed addition of another gas station in our community. As a resident of Garden City, I am deeply concerned about the negative impacts this development will have on our area. Firstly, the introduction of another gas station will exab exacerbate the already significant traffic congestion in the vicinity. The increased vehicular movement associated with a new gas station will lead to longer wait times, higher risks of accidents, and overall frustration for commuters. Our roads are not equipped to handle the additional traffic load, and this will only worsen the current situation. Moreover, the presence of numerous gas stations in Garden City has already saturated the market. Adding another gas station will create unnecessary competition among existing businesses, potentially leading to financial instability and closures. This is not only detrimental to the business owners, but also to the employees who rely on these jobs for their livelihoods. Additionally, the environmental implications of constructing and operating another gas station cannot be overlooked. Gas stations contribute to pollution through fuel spills, emissions, and increased carbon footprint. Our community should be moving towards sustainable and eco-friendly initiatives rather than expanding fossil fuel

infrastructure. The environmental degration associated with another gas station is a step backwards in our efforts to protect and preserve our local environment. In conclusion, I urge the planning commission to reconsider the approval of this new gas station. The adverse effects on traffic, local businesses, and the environment far outweigh any potential benefits. I hope that you will take these concerns into serious consideration and prioritize the well-being of our community. Thank you for this matter. Almost wrapped up here. The next one is from Dion Westfall. Dear members of the city planning commission, I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the proposed construction of a gas station approximately one quarter mile from my business. I am the mobile at 322221 Ford Road located at as a local business owner who has proudly served this community for 15 years. I strongly believe that this development poses a direct threat to the viability of my business and could ultimately force me to close my doors. My business relies heavy My business relies heavily on local traffic and loyal customers who have chosen to support a neighborhood establishment rather than larger corporate run stations. The introduction of a new gas station so close to my location, likely operated by a large chain, will not only saturate the market, but will also shift customer traffic away from my store. This kind of competition is not just difficult, it's potentially devastating, particularly at a time when small businesses are already working hard to recover from the challenges of recent years. In addition to the economic impact, the presence of another gas station within such a short distance raises concerns about traffic congestion, environmental implications,

and a redundancy in services that do not seem in the best interest of the community as a whole. I respectfully ask that the planning the city planning commission reconsider or at least more thoroughly evaluate the long-term implications of this proposed gas station, not just for my business, but for the overall economic health and balance of the neighborhood. I am more than willing to meet or speak further to discuss this matter and provide any additional information that may help illustrate the significance of this issue from a local business owner's perspective. Thank you for your time and consideration. Uh finally we received I believe there's four two there's five uh five copy and pasted emails all from different email accounts. However, saying the same thing. They said and I quote, "We don't want no gas station in Ford Road and Maramman. We have enough gas station. Please stop this." Again, that's five different email accounts, but all the same message. That concludes the communications. Thank you. Okay. At 8:30, we'll close the public hearing and move to discussion from the commission. A couple things. Yes. Uh, I understand it's zoned to put a gas station here. My concerns are none of the approaches re meet our current ordinance. I think our it's 31 ft. We had them all at 30. Correct. In terms of the width. Yes. Correct. So, none of the approaches meet the ordinance. Uh, the second don't meet our current

ordinances. An average tanker that does fuel is between 40 and 53 feet. 72 72 feet 8 1/2 ft wide 13 1/2 ft tall average weight 80 plus,000 lb. Even so, between 40 2t if they put the tanker to fill that on an angle, they could possibly block two approaches at the same time. Um, and outside of that, we have we we haven't even got to the like the lighting plan if it goes past this. How is that going to affect with not having a 40 foot setback to the neighbor with the lighting with as close it is could be right in their backyard even with depending where they put it. Even with the 6ft high prep fence I think that's going to be an issue. Um, I'm not saying it can't be done, but I think it would require a lot smaller building and redesign. There's too many current conflictions with ordinances we have. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else have comment? Um, I got a a question to the architect. Could you um help me with the uh distance? Um, let's see. That would be the south end of the uh the uh driveway that's closest to Ford Road. Um what is the uh distance from that south end to Ford Road there? 23 ft. So, the closest distance from the approach to the intersection or to Ford Road, uh, to Ford Road that goes to the center of the island. From the property line to the approach is 23 ft. Okay, I see that. That gets us to the edge of

Ford Road there. No, from the property line to the edge of Ford for Ford Road. There's not a dimension here, but it looks like another 30 ft. So between the approach and the actual intersection, you're talking about 53 ft. Okay. And uh looking at the distance from the edge of Marramman over to the driveway on Ford Road, uh what is the nearest distance there uh to the approach on Ford Road? Yeah. Yeah. Um, we're allowed every every every site is allowed an approach on both sides of the road. One on Marman. I I like your I I like your setup a lot on um Henry Ruff. Of course, it's got a different shape to it, but your configuration allows for very easy ingress and and uh we have a lot more space over here. We have a lot more length to the property. I mean, this one is going to be so much more safer than the one on Henry Ruff. Um, but we're we're 50 50 from the property line to the ed uh from the property line of Marman heading westward to the approach beginning of the approach on Ford Road, you have from the property line to there um 5 uh 1 ft and 11 in. Uh, so almost 52 feet and then for the right away you have probably an extra 20 feet. So you're talking about 70 feet if that's what you're referring. Yeah. So that's normal. I mean it's more than normal. So I I not you know those kind Yeah. I don't have my wife and I I was wondering where the u where the dumpster enclosure

um with the average garbage truck if they're going to be able to to navigate these turns. I mean, as far as the approaches, if they don't come in from Ford Road, I I'm I'm wondering if they'd be able to make that right-hand turn with the angled parking spaces being there. Yeah. If there's cars parked there, that's if there's cars parked there, I I don't see how he could possibly do that. And and one aspect of 20 ft. Sorry to interrupt Mike, but one aspect of the dump trucks is that typically the drivers go in, they they have the arms, they grab the the the dumpster, but then they back up and then they unload it into their into their truck and then they go forward. Yeah. To get it out of the enclosure. So you typically have a distance that's equal to the truck length plus what six foot in front of it for the for the arms. So, the issue here might be the proximity to the uh gas station canopy. By the time a truck, even if a truck can turn to get into the and grab the dumpster, by the time they back up, it's going to be real close to be really close to that dumpster that gas station. You can't back up straight there very well. No, because you'll be hitting the cars at the pump. And and once again, the credit to the to the architect that that I'm sure they went over a lot of different configurations. It's a tough site. is a challenge. But I but uh so I so that's the only reason why I thought it was important to have this here tonight to get public opinion as well to see what their concerns are and also to get your experience and your concerns so that way they can have an opportunity to revise it because typically what we do um is have uh the planning commission look at the the set that you've had and then have you look at our you know my my comments, look at their comments and then together take them so you come up

with a solution because it is it's going to be a tough solution if it was to move forward. So I uh I have some issues with the whole thing myself u after the comments here tonight and all of the written comments. Uh it kind of makes me wonder if we really need the proposed use. That's one thing. Then the other big issue to me is the fact that we're not meeting the 40ft setback on the uh west property line there and there's no way with this configuration I think that can be done. This has to be completely changed if that's going to happen. So, if we're going to go ahead with this, I think we should probably table it and give them an opportunity to reconfigure this so it will meet our requirements and uh take care of some of the other issues that were pointed out in your review. How does everybody feel about that? I just before we uh Go ahead. Well, I I just agree with you on the setback being problematic. Um I mean this probably goes without saying, but this is the property line, the west wall that's on the property line. Correct. Yeah, that is the property line on the Yes. So, uh so I agree with you on this about we're almost 30 ft short of medium. Exactly. Exactly. Just the other question I had, the design of this drive-thru, you're trapped once you get into it. Yeah, there's only one lane. I mean, do you don't see that as being a problem for people who [Music]

you're you're going to have a lot of cars that are trapped in this ring. You get one car up by the window that breaks down here and everybody behind them is trapped. Yeah. So I I mean you don't have to respond to that, but this this design does concern me for many reasons. Yeah, I I didn't think it was nice to have an approach by the residential uh street. Okay. Well, we don't generally allow businesses to dump onto side streets like that. So, we wouldn't probably wouldn't want an approach going out to Crowder. Yes, Mike. Um, when we talked about the uh setback there, yeah, there's not enough distance there. Uh, we talked about the potential for a higher wall in some cities that may be allowed. I don't think it is in Garden City. I think the police limit the height of any wall in the city to 6 foot for safety reasons, thinking that an officer in an emergency could stand on his tiptoes or something and look over the wall without having to scale it to see what's So, I'm not sure if that's a a possibility. I don't think we have an ordinance limiting it. I thought it was six feet. We have a minimum of six feet as far as I know. Oh, I thought it was a maximum. Maybe I'm wrong with that. But uh uh also I I checked with SEMCOG with is Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. And the busiest intersection on

M153, which starts at Wyoming and goes to US23, is Middleb Belt currently. And the second busiest intersection is Marman. And um I'm really wondering if MD DOT andor Wayne County would really want uh these approaches so close to that. They're very close to the corner corner. Uh we've been asked over the last several years, probably the last what, four, five, six years to to start to look at ways to limit uh ingress and egress approaches onto Ford Road. Um, we've been able to do that in a few instances where there were other opportunities to that aren't necessarily available here, but I'm thinking they might have a real real hard problem with this configuration. I know why you did it. I can I can see looking at your drawings, which are very detailed. I like them. Um, but I I I'm just wondering with the fuel truck coming in from Ford or coming in from Marman, uh, it it just seems like he's going to block off both of those, uh, uh, uh, ingress egress points right there. Um, 72 is the minimum length of most fuel trucks, and they say it can exceed 80 depending if it has a um, a sleeper box or whatnot. in conjunction with the fuel truck. So, I'm I'm looking at that distance. There's not enough space for him to deliver his load of fuel and not block off these entrances. And I'm thinking that in conjunction with MDOT

andor Wayne County, I'm thinking they're not going to want to see this that close. I'm not sure what you can do different, but I'm just looking at the things that I think will be possible concerns. Will you be okay if that one entrance closer to the intersection the same way that you can't come up road circle around the pump and then unload and then keep going down that lane and then and then exit north. the the concern I I hear what you're saying. Yeah. The concern is when he's dropping off his fuel though, you go from three uh ingress and egress points to one. And uh I don't know how often fuel needs to be delivered, what the average consumption or any of that is, but um it just seems like we have a drive up restaurant, we have a um uh small store, and then we have a a a lot of gas pumps. it it just seems like an awful lot in this location. I I think all of those three things could coexist, but maybe not in the quantity that they currently are. Um I'm just curious all the gas stations that are a lot smaller. We have 29,000 ft. The sites that are down the road on average on average 16,000 plan. So, and that and how are they accommodating? And you're telling me 29,000 foot of

land is not going to Well, you got me you got me wondering and I'm going to be checking some of those out in the very near future um to to see how they move around in in that. Um, personally, I usually fill up at Costco or your gas station at Ford and Henry Roof because I live around the corner and it's very easy to get in and very easy to get out and it doesn't matter what time of day it is. It doesn't matter how much traffic there is. I I love the one on Henry Ruff and Ford. It's just very accessible from a lot of different angles, whether you're coming down Ford or coming up or going down Henry Ruff. And I'm just trying to picture this one in that same light and I can't picture it. You know, the pumps are not facing the building, but they're facing uh Maryland in a sense. U but you know, this this configuration is called like a dive in pump. We couldn't provide the dive in pump because of the lock wasn't as much uh facing the building. Okay. Because we didn't have that width. So we have to face it marriage mar but it's the same uh perception you know you're gonna you're gonna just it's going to be a lot more easier going to dive into your your position you fill your pump and you want to buy something it's a little walk to the store but and then you circle out if you came in from road you pump your gas pick up your local bread and then and then and then you leave off or you just circle back and leave for but the lane that are in between the the you know if you if we minimize what uh diamond pumps with one island instead of two islands that'll give us a little wider of a of an idle weight because the idle weight between the diagonal um parking spaces

to the ft which I think in garden city we're meeting that uh that goal but um and the flight back up and they do have enough it takes five minutes for them to come in and out and they usually do it early in the morning um in most cases. Uh but nonetheless once if we eliminate one row of those uh pump items I think we will release some of that congestion that is on on on the way parallel narrowing and the Iowa uh parallel on the other side of the pumps. It'll it'll give us a lot more breathing breathing room for the car to circulate back and forth in just 20 ft. It'll probably give us maybe 24 ft on both sides and Those items are almost 8 ft wide. Okay. Thank you. I just I don't think the biggest problem is the pumps. The biggest problem you're going to face is you're 28 ft short on egress on the west side of the building. Yeah. You're set back. You're set back. You're so far off. You're you're not asking for 10 feet. You're asking for 28 feet. I I think that is going to be one of your biggest hurdles. And we can't really ignore the ordinance because you're not meeting it. Basically, I think uh I think what we should do is table the application and allow him to come back with the configuration that will meet all of these concerns before we go any further. You making a motion to that effect? I can. Are you looking second? Just to be clear, are you looking for a motion on special land use and and site plan both or Well, I think it's appropriate. I don't

think we should look at a site plan for something we are asking to be changed. I agree. I say so the motion is just on the special land use. No. And the site plan. So both tableabling them both. Yes. Okay. Yeah. I think that makes I don't think one can exist without the other. And we have questions on both. So Yep. Yeah. Somebody want to make a motion? I'm happy to make a motion uh regarding the request for special land use and site plan approval to construct a gas station and convenience store building with a drive-through restaurant at 31406 Ford Road in the C3 General Business Zoning District uh with a motion to table both proposals. I'll second. Motion made and supported. Any discussion? Take the role, please. Commissioner King I. Commissioner Steamberg I Mr. Williams Hi. Chairperson I. Motion passes 40. Also you can come back and talk with Mr. Ortega and uh see if we can resolve some of these issues. We would like some of your also something over there along with the next time that you consider wasting more time. No, we don't like wasting time either. So if you don't think you can do it, then let us know. I think the biggest thing is you need to comply with as many ordinances as you can. You have to comply with all the ordinances, not just a few. But we've adjusted setbacks for other people. Not at 28 ft. We we can't adjust that setback. That's 40 ft. We can't adjust that. We don't change the ordinances. So don't go in front of

zoning and they can't they can do it in front of the ZBA, but we can't do that. Yeah. It makes it especially problematic because there's a drive-thru there. I all I'm saying is we have adjusted not maybe not us zoning DBA whoever has adjusted some setbacks. So ju just uh to let you know in terms of a couple things that were said tonight. So um with regards to this um it is a C3 district. Uh gas stations are permitted in the district compliance with the special land use standards. Now the different now as mentioned there are definitely when it comes to site plan if the site complies with everything every ordinance requirement then yes technically the planning commission has to approve it. However as a spe special land use the special land use gives the planning commission some uh ability to interpret the ordinance for those specific approval criteria. So like the specific criter approval criteria listed compatibility with adjacent uses compatibility with the master plan the need for the use those are all things that the planning commission it's not a quantitative thing that they must be met they can they can determine make a determination of whether qualitatively the proposal meets that standard. So it's up to you in your interpretation of that. When it comes to a variance technically any person could ask to apply for a variance. However, the issue will be uh the first thing that one of the criteria that the ZBA looks at is whether the site whe the issue is self-created given the fact that no no improvements have been been done on the site uh a requirement to modify that standard. It would be be tough to to try and meet. I'm not saying it hasn't been done uh but it but it's something that you know it'd be it'd be tough to to come up with. Um but but generally speaking when it's new construction uh you have to come up with a very uh substantive reason based on the the

specific criteria listed in the ordinance that the ZBA looks at to determine whether a uh a variance could be granted. But uh it's it's it's a possibility. One thing I will say is that we did uh the ZBA did grant one for the Hollywood Sound uh development project. It was a 40ft setback on that north property line. They granted it for 30 feet, but the key aspect of that was that there was no openings along that rear wall and then it was it's completely landscaped that 30 ft and that it's completely it was an enhanced with extra landscaping. So, those are things that could be considered, but I get the feeling given the size of the site and the size of this that they uh might need to do um the applicant might be looking to utilize that 40 ft behind the behind the building or on that side of the site. But it all depends. Once again, it's a tough site to design and I want something that just needs to be to be looked at. Okay, moving on. [Applause] Our next item under other business is housing readiness grant master plan amendment. Uh Mr. Ortega, you have something? Uh well, basically I just want to provide an update. We have been uh working on the next phases of the master the actual uh master plan document uh that will uh event should be before you. Uh we're intending to have a first draft or you of it in front of you potentially next month. Um because I mean I know that the planning commission is concerned uh about moving along on that issue. Um, and one of the things that we'll be uh be addressing, I wanted to run through an exercise with you this evening. I don't know if you feel the need. I didn't bring the the right um maps, but

basically we've talked about the types of uses that I'm excuse me, the types of housing alternatives that could be done in the city. The next step that we're looking at right now is where in the city uh various additional uh housing types could be created. So, we're looking at areas of uh that are long-term vacant properties. Uh we're looking at areas of uh some of the some schools that might be going vacant. We're looking at different locations that where where alternative housing could be be located such as town houses or or senior housing or something to that effect. Um, so we might be asking you to uh next time to go through an exercise of looking at the zoning map, looking at the master plan, where could we see zoning districts. So it'd be similar to how we talked about and we eventually implemented the mixeduse overlay. You know, the master plan showed the mixeduse overlay on Ford, on Middle Belt, on north and south of Ford, and on the east side of Ford. So we'd be looking at provide to you for some of your initial input as to where that is or we might provide you with a draft of a map and then you provide your input on whether you feel those locations are appropriate. So that's where we are right now. We're moving forward quickly and then uh we're hope like I said we're hopeful to get that in front of you very soon. Okay. Uh, next item, schedule of public hearing uh for to consider a PUD resoning for mixeduse building at uh 29317, 29299, and 29217. This is, if I'm not mistaken, this encompasses the old orange jeweler building all the way down to the old theater building. That is correct. And

everything in between. That is correct. So, because there's a couple other addresses in there that weren't included in this. That is correct. So, the property addresses in front of you are the actual property addresses. There are some unit addresses on the buildings that because some of those buildings are multi-tenant buildings, but basically we're talking about the old Orin properties. So the southwest corner, excuse me, southeast corner of Ford and Middle Belt, the Orin building, uh Orin Jewelers building, uh the building next to that, the multi-tenant building that basically I believe the last viable use in there was the uh Gro store, salon, hair salon, the gearos, a uh Coney Island. Yes. Oh, I'm sorry. You're right. Coney Island and then also uh the Mazone building, the entirety of the Mazone building that site. So all the way over to the property line with the All State building and then it incorporates uh from Ford Road down to Partardo. So that whole block with the parking lot and everything. So they're proposing PUD. Uh they're looking at a multi- They're looking at uh the possibility of constructing a brand new four-story building. That would be mixed use. Yes. With uh commercial on first floor and residential above or Yes. Mhm. Okay. Well, that sounds promising. Uh we will be getting a uh site plan at Yes. time. be nice to get to site plan a little before the usual time. Okay. If we could. Okay. Well, we need to uh set a public hearing for that. Need a motion. I'll make a motion to schedule a public hearing uh regarding the consideration of a PUB

reszoning for mixeduse building at 29317 29299 and 29217 Ford Road. support. Motion's made and supported. Any questions or comments on the motion or uh take the role, please? Mr. King. Hi, Commissioner Williams. Hi, Mr. Steamberg. Hi. Person. I passes 40. Okay. Uh, Mr. Ortega, you have anything else for us? So, I actually do, if you bear with me for a second, because we had some in uh Interesting things happen always in the building department. It seems things that come up you wouldn't think you're going to have to deal with and then have sometimes you have to. I had uh some in inquiries from some residents uh concerned and wanting to basically pave their entire rear yard. So right now there's nothing in the zoning ordinance with regards to a limit on hard surface in in the ordinance. Um there is no technically no requirement even because I've incurred I've I've dealt with this on another on a different site uh where someone wanted to utilize their front yard for planting crops not not just you know tomato plants but crop like yeah crops because they were going to utilize farming techniques to to grow I mean it wouldn't be a large amount of land, but it given the amount of uh given the size of some lots and the size of some front yards, it could be interesting. Uh we were able to utilize some other ordinances in that instance with along with the ordinance enforcement department to ensure that things like uh garbage bags weren't utilized as canvas for sort of for aow field in front in the front yard of this

house. Um, so with that in mind and knowing that there are no uh standards currently, I I was wondering about uh because to back up for a second, we've been talking about residential parking. I know I owe you some graphics on residential parking. My my my graphics department. Uh I wanted to refine those graphics. So that's one aspect of our zoning amendment. I was wondering about uh so this issue could be the issue I just brought up with the lack coverage could be done two ways. One we could make a requirement regarding the specific uh that that landscaping and and a seed lawn is required and come up with some percentage of the lot. Uh that has to at least remain that or we could look it could open up into the broader issue of lot coverage in general and including uh hard surface with lot coverage. Right now, a residential lot can have 30% coverage with buildings. So, garage, uh, home, uh, sheds and decks. So, those kind of things count towards the 30% lot coverage maximum. And then technically any paved slab doesn't count as a deck. Right now, a paved slab doesn't count as that. That's a patio. It's it's not even the same permit. It's a flatwork permit. It's not a building permit. So technically anybody could come in and pave over their entire yard. They want to make a parking lot or they don't like I didn't want to get into too much specs of it but they basically the maintenance of that that area because of either because of sun or because it doesn't grow and so they're trying to find some solution and their animal their dogs are causing problems on that portion of the lot too. So they're just they just want to pave over the whole thing. Turf turf will be cheap. Well, you know, so well that's another aspect of it, too. Like some of them were saying that in terms of that, what about um uh some of the initial solutions were astroturf outside.

So, if we're going to consider that, then we have to consider what Wayne County says about non-permeable surfaces. If we're requiring it for businesses and somebody actually has the money to pave their whole lot, then they may have to start looking at swailes or retention ponds or yeah, you know, might be a way to approach it. So that is that is right now how I'm approaching it with them saying that if we receive a flat work permit that there where there's an extensive amount of coverage normally the way it works is whenever you have a flat surface a patio or a concrete slab uh it's number number one we do have it on the ordinance books right now you can't create any kind of improvement that's going to flood your neighbor. Okay. So, but normally when it comes to flat work, then people have to pitch their patio in such a way that it goes towards their lawn area. Well, if there's no lawn area, where are they going to pitch it to? So, the issue then becomes in theory what it would be is we would make them go to the city engineer and h have a requirement to make sure that they come up with some other solution whether it's a connection to existing storm water or they provide some type of underground storage intention, have to have drains in it, have it have drains in it and that sort of thing. So that is currently the approach to this kind of request. Uh but the the applicant is undeterred with regards to that request. Seems like the 30% rule covers it. Well, that's the issue. 27,000 residents, 11,000 houses. How often do you see this? That is correct. Something that we really need to create another ordinance to address this. Well, that's why I'm saying that in there's a different options. One could be a very simple option where we just choose a percentage of a minimum lot area that has to be grass and that's it. Uh, one could be we could open it up into looking at the broader issue as Mike mentioned about lot coverage because we talked about it a little when we talked about residential parking but

I kind of strayed away from it. The idea of lot right now lot hard surfaces driveways patios don't count towards lot coverage. Uh, as a result, that's why sometimes you have a lot of flooding because there's just sheet flow off of a lot of the lots that that just flood into the street and then it floods the entire city. Um, so it becomes an issue and floods basements. Uh, so yes, could we just consider um like non-permeable surfaces or something like give people let people do whatever they want, right? But you can't cover your yard more than 50% of a non-permeable. Exactly. And then that would be the simple sol the simplest and most easiest solution and give people a lot of options. Yeah. So I guess my question if we're going to increase let's say it's 50%. Right now we're at 30% for buildings. Are people getting they could increase their building size to 50%. That's a nonp permeable surface. So then paid we can craft the same thing. We can know we can craft the language specifically to say that there's lot coverage requirement for the lot coverage requirement only addresses buildings and structures and then we can have something that says a minimum of the lot area shall be living material that allows for or or other permeable surfaces that allow for infill of drainage. And so in theory, we could even if we wanted to, you know, add a language that says if they create some kind of underground detention that does take that water and allow it to infill. Technically, it allows for infill. I guess my question is out of all the residents we have, 27,000 11,000 homes, do we have one person asking to do this? I mean, are we really going to make an ordinance over one issue? I agree. Well, let's stick to the 30% rule and if they come to you again suggest they go to Wayne County

and have it run past Wayne County and see what county but that's why but but Kelly that's why I brought it up like whether we want to have that or not. Personally, I I don't think I think it could be a simple solution that would just be another thing that I could hang my hat on that could easily tell people what they what they want. But it once again it doesn't have to be if you don't want it. It's just that would be something for the building department to easily address with the that you can't flood out your neighbors. Well, it is concrete the whole backyard. Obviously, the water if it's not going into the storm drain is going to flood out the neighbors. So, the there have been multiple times in the past several years in which construction in which just normal grading on adjacent lots where that neighbor floods out the other neighbor and the city has tried to develop a policy where that where we address that. We have to involve we we involved DPW. We involved ordinance enforcement. We involved police chief. We involved the city engineer. And they all had to get together to try and figure out neighbor's been flooding me for a long time. And the city came out once, right? And nothing was done. Kind of. That's what happens sometimes too. It's still flooding. So that unfortunately sometimes that's what's happens in the past too because if if all of these different departments don't have an ordinance they can officially hang their hat on and say this is what the ordinance is they they deal with it on a case by case basis and then sometimes nothing gets done. I think the problem is too Fred where yours I'm sure they're flooding you with a permeable surface because they just raise the elevation of their backyard or whatever to where the water will go to the lowest spot. Right. So it's like that the the permeable surface or the hard surface would even address that. Well, but but that's the key. That has nothing to do with this situation. I'm just saying. But whether it's permeable or not, if somebody raises their yard or their neighbor, what the city's Well, that's the issue though is like what happens is the ordinance the way it's written right now and what we would hang their head on and what I would tell this person, anybody

that's trying to pave their surface is you're not allowed to flood your neighbor. you have to give us a plan that's going to res prevent that. But that's even if it's just grading. Even some of these instances where this occurred was just landscape grading. Somebody wanted a retaining wall, but then it ended up sh flooding their neighbor and then what happened is nothing because we were trying to address it and then then nothing came it. Officially what's supposed to happen is whenever anybody moves an 200 square ft 200 ft of soil, they technically are supposed to submit a grading plan that shows how how they do exactly how they do the swailes on adjacent to their on the on the side lots so that they're put a swale basically on their side lot so that way the water collects on their property and not flood their neighbor. But in order to do that effectively, you basically have to be an engineer to calculate the volume of water at a 100red-year storm event, two consecutive 100-year storm events in terms of the permeability of the soils in order to see the volume to know what the soil slope is to collect the water. And I can't do that. I just think as a as an ordinance, it would almost for us to change it or amend it. It would be almost impossible. The average homeowner, if they're flooding out, they're going to bring in 20 yards of top soil. They're going to seat it and you're not going to know about it till it's too late and it's brought to you six, eight months later. And then how are you going to prove or how are we going to prove that they change the elevation or their yard to create this? Well, we in other instances where it's occurred that there has been some a ability to find out whether other neighbors knowing when trucks come in and asking the neighbor and finding solutions. But once again, there's nothing on the books that anybody can hang their hat on that they can officially deal with. And I do agree that it could get very murky. It could get very long and extended if we involved this as a lot coverage issue. I do think there's a simpler solution, just a simple lot percentage. It would be a couple lines that could be changed.

Uh but I wanted to bring it to your attention to see if it's something that you'd want me to present that as a simple solution and see if that's even just to look at to see if you something you want to consider. I just think with that we'd have to be really careful on the smaller lots in your city, right? Absolutely. nine foot driveway, 24 foot garage in the back, right? And they got to have a permeable surface that's required. They might not even be able to build a garage then. You know what I'm saying? The thing is the smaller lots are going to have less work, less yard to work with. So, they're going to suffer where somebody with a big lot can do a lot more. And what we can do is because I've been thinking about this a lot with regards to ordinances and this issue and other issues. Maybe they need to be different standards. Maybe there needs to be a different zoning district for smaller lots versus larger lots. And maybe there needs to be different standards for them to allow for the the smaller lots to not have to meet requirements that larger larger lots could easily accommodate. But anyway, so like I said, that's just one issue I wanted to bring up in terms and if you you permit me, I can bring very simple language just keeping it simple and clean to to at least for you to react to to see if it's even something that we can take a look at it. Okay. And then the other thing uh that we came in, one other site that came in today that was looking at doing coming back is the old nights of Columbus site. Uh they're in the mixeduse overlay. They want to do a mixeduse building there as well. One thing I noticed when we created the mixuse overlay is we didn't include some standards such as how high they can go. Uh and so it could be the normal wall right right now it'd be normal at 2 and 1/2 stories and uh yeah two and a half stories and 35 ft. Um so I wasn't sure if it's something you'd want to consider allowing that to be uh like a

everybody's asking for three stories basically. So, I wasn't sure if that's something in addition to not just the height, but there are some other missing standards that I think we need to put in there. So, that way we might have missed. So, I was wondering it would be appropriate to bring you some modifications to the mixeduse standards and then you you can say which ones we only have certain areas that are mixed use, right? And they're most they're commercial. What we're doing is we're just elevating from an old restriction and uh liberalizing it a little bit to great allow for greater height. Exactly. And and and uh since you were talking about after the open house, you know, we'd like to look at changing the ordinance to allow for these taller buildings. This would be a simple way do very modest modification in an area that we already were thinking about having uh residential commercial on the ground floor and two stories of residential above. It's just basically a lot of the builders are telling me with a two and a half foot two and a half story requirement putting a pitch roof on that third on that half story they don't get enough living space underneath it. I've tried to compromise with them trying to tell them about mansid roof something like that but they are to use a lot more dormers but they just they're they're really thinking having that third floor might be an issue and then there I can't remember off the top of my head but there are other some other standards in the mixeduse district I'd like to at least present to you and once again you can react and if you think it's inappropriate we just won't do them but uh at the next meeting I just bring that text so you can consider it. I'd like to I'd like to see that change because it would open up a lot more opportunities. If somebody can put one retail on the first floor and put two residential above it, uh that sounds a whole lot more lucrative than one in one because we've already been told that they can't make money like that. Yeah. When they

turned down the thing over here on Marman, they walked away. We said, "Hell with it. can't we we we we can't make money at two and a half stories because nobody wants to live half underground anymore. So they said they couldn't do it and they walked away. And that's really what it is is like you a lot of people the previous half story. Nobody wants to do garden units anymore. They put a lot of them in Westland but not anymore. So, if you permit me, I I can I can bring that very simple language. And once again, it's just something for you to react to. And if you like it, we can move forward. If you don't, then we don't do it. Okay. Okay. That's all I have. Mike, do you have anything? No. Thank you. I'm good tonight. Good. 9:30. We're trying to set a record here. We're pushing now. Jake doesn't care. He's on. I just feel like he's more historic back in the day. Hey Mike, I'm just filling [Laughter] in to convenient. I heard about all the letters you had to read tonight. So Matt took a very convenient vacation. Thank you, Mario. Okay. Next uh regular meeting will be Thursday, May 8th, 2025. I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. Ajourn. support. Support. All in favor? I meeting's adjourned. Uh we may we may still be in Florida.